Er. I guess the police do the same thing during sting operations. Kind of gives me a dirty slimy feeling to know that they are out there, watching us. Monitoring our every move.
It's funny, becuase at a $1,000,000 budget to develop a software package, they only need to sell 20,000 copies @50 to break even.
Now, look at, oh, lets say, Adobe Photoshop:
Adobe sells 20,000 copies @ $600 a pop, that's $12,000,000. only 20,000 copies. And how many people in the united states?
285,710,587, now, lets say, only 10% of those actually care computers, and may want photoshop... That's 28,571,058 people, wanting to by Photoshop. At 600 a copy that brings in $17,142,634,800. Oh, gee, a paultry 17 BILLION dollars, now lets set a more reasonable price... Lets say, $50 a copy. 1,428,552,900. Still a paultry 1.4 billion dollars. That's way too little, dontcha think?
Food for thought, at $100,000 per programmer they could pay a team of 14,285 programmers to work on the project for 1 year. Say it takes 10 years to develop photoshop.... They could pay a team of 1428 programmers to work on photoshop for 10 years with that money.
Now, what's the reality of it? They probably have 10 programmers at 50,000 and it takes 3 years to develop photoshop.
That's a cost of 1,500,000. Figure another million for misc. expenses.... 2.5 million. And how many copies at $50 a copy would they need to sell to turn a nice profit, of say, $97,500,000?
2,000,000. That's less than 1% of the US population. Ok.. lets say, 500 a copy. Just 200,000 copies.
100 mil is alot of money, folks. Believe me, coders are able to make a living. The top execs of the company are making a killing.
Piracy isn't the problem, overpriced software is. These piracy raids are not prompted by starving software company execs. They're prompted by greed.
This list has nothing to do with toys being "dangerous"
Story Submitter: you've read more into the list than is actually there.
This list has no bearing on the saftey of the toys. Rather, it's a way for some bad parent to push their political agenda, porporting the site as a list of dangerous toys is irresponsible.
C'mon, Foam Missles?? What harm can those cause. Oh, yeh they've got some subconcious message to turn your kids into killing machines...
Right, and I'm the president of the united states.
"Violent" games and toys have nothing to do with real violence. Suprise! It's bad parenting. That's right! There's a plethora of irresponsible lazy parents.
If you actually teach your kid how to behave properly, then you have nothing to worry about.
Becuase they want to force everyone into a controlled activation scheme.
They'll come out with some whiz-bang superduper freebie widget that, while it should work just fine under w2k, it requires XP.
Isn't it funny that they terminated 95 with a version of directx required by the latest games, which doesn't work with 95, just after the release of the activation-managed XP?
I'll bet you that was no coincidence, nor an accident. What they've done is force more people into XP. Once they have all of the licenses under their control, they can now force people to shell out more money at their whim.
I don't feel that I should have to "check with" Microsoft, the all controlling central authority of Windows XP licenses every time I install their OS.
Our country was founded on the premise of "Innocent until proven guilty." Microsoft has now adopted a policy of "Guilty until proven innocent". It's a violation of my constitutional rights!
This is just their way of moving the flock toward their "Software as a service" model. That's right-- you wanna user Word 2003? Ok, but for $50/hr.
I'm surely not buying into any scheme that requires me to check with the writer of the software to make sure it's okay that I use it. I'm not buying into the scheme of paying a subscription fee for software I use.
I have a bit of a problem with the 1 license per PC bit, also. If I pay for something, I should be able to use it as I please. If I have a computer, and I bought XP. I own the software. If I build another computer, I'd expect that I could use my copy of XP on that computer. But, no, I must fork over $200 to Microsoft for the privelege of using another piece of software. No way! I won't stand for this kind of consumer abuse.
As for the planned obselecense of Win98, it's one more step to forcing the users into XP, by the time Windows 2000 is shoved out, I think it's high time to look for an alternative operating system. The word Linux comes to mind...
Remember, folks, the XP licensing system is not about money, It's about control. MS is profitable without that. They just want to contol their consumers, now.
What happened is the inverse of the old Ivory soap story: Upon going to lunch one day, somebody forgot to turn off the mixer. An ordinary accident. The result was soap that floated: A good, marketable, accidental discovery. NAT turns out to accidentally be a bad, unmarketable discovery. Its intentions were good; but one portion of its reality is clearly not so good.
Ok...
This really chaps me, here...
Sooo.... Something that is useful to a consumer is a bad, unmarketable discovery, and something, while fun to watch it float is a good, marketable discovery, but hardly useful to a consumer, aside from doing what other similar products alredy do, except they don't float, is absoulutely useless.
I don't understand the logic here. Exactly what oriface is this individual talking out of?
Sorry, but, at least I know that I can get a device that will easily allow me to share an internet connection among 2 computers in my house. To me, that's good. It's marketable, too!
What an absolutely asanine analogy!
Oh, I get it, it's bad for the consumer because it keeps the cable companies from digging deeper into a consumer's pockets.
What's next? The phone company charging me $5 a month to have a phone in my bedroom?
Our solution has been "drink rationing." Before a party, we each get two tickets. This is plenty for some harmless social drinking, but not enough to get any sort of buzz. It avoids the whole legal mess, and prevents certain photo oppurtunities from occuring.
Of course, there are those that collect a multitude of tickets from the "lightweights" that only want 1 drink.
Sounds to me like they've agreed to not send anymore junkmail. (Provided you give them the information on which sponsors were sending the junkmail, since, as stated in the letter they personally don't send junk.)
You should have traced the mail back to the sponsor, not neopets, or at least deal with NeoPets' sponsors by way of neopets, as they were offering.
They were fairly condencending in their reply, however.
I'd call it a partial success. But, it looks almost like you jumped to conclusions, and assumed they personally sent you the spam, and that obviously wasn't the case.
I agree, this isn't the best implementation of the device, but if they had a recombant bike connected to an interesting sim, I would definitely spend lots of time on it.
There was a time when I had no regard for whatever shape I was in. That was until I looked at a picture of myself and realised what a pig I was. Now I do the standard 3 days a week exercise thing, but man... to make pedaling an indoor bike more fun? That would be great.
Of course the alternative would be to get a real bike and actually ride it around, but I live in an apartment and the city sucks.
I'm sick and tired of the "you shouldn't have let the domain go", "you already own xxx domain, what's your problem?"
1) I think it's pretty apparent the taker of the longer domain name, sits and waits for domains to expire, and snatches them up before the legitimate owner has a chance to re-register the domain.
2) It shouldn't matter. The name is similar to his shorter domain and he previously owned it (probably to prevent porn sites to show up like this)
I think he should go for it and sink his talons into them as deep has he can.
-- Another hapless victim of kdhxfm88.org and it's inifite trap popups.
Wow. Really funny, especially considering XP has probably the least user-demanding installation process of any Windows OS. Hahahah, THAT IS VERY FUNNY! You suck at TEH IRONEY.
Umm. While it's easy, I think it's pretty damn user demanding! No, you can't install XP without someone's help becuase of that friggin identification key they force you to hand over to an M$ represenative.
Nah. I'm not pissed. really... I'm not. I promise.
Every time I drive by a geek's house and see that blue glow. It lowers my opinion of that person, for they are a slashdot reader.
I know they are huddled over their little computer monitor thinking of their next great troll.
Beh. What's wrong with those that watch TV? Nothing bad ever came out of a little TV viewing.
And-- I would disagree with those that say it will kill the need for Linux/Unix.
If anything, it will feed the need.
Why? That obnoxious "check with Mr. Gates" licensing scheme. I'm sorry, but I do not feel that when I install software I should report in to the manufacturer that I've used their product-- or that I've used their product again on a different machine.
Keep in mind: I like Windows. I'm not a Linux zealot. I've been pro-Microsoft in the past, but this is just the straw that broke the camel's back. I cannot believe they are abusing consumers in a way never thought of before. As W2k gets older, and Linux gets better I will probably be more inclined than ever to put Linux on my machine as it's only OS.
They force you to pay per machine for windows, but they still keep the price stratospheric. Unbelievable!
Mod me down as being off topic, but I had to get that off my chest.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't that entrapment?
Er. I guess the police do the same thing during sting operations. Kind of gives me a dirty slimy feeling to know that they are out there, watching us. Monitoring our every move.
It's funny, becuase at a $1,000,000 budget to develop a software package, they only need to sell 20,000 copies @50 to break even.
.... 2.5 million. And how many copies at $50 a copy would they need to sell to turn a nice profit, of say, $97,500,000?
Now, look at, oh, lets say, Adobe Photoshop:
Adobe sells 20,000 copies @ $600 a pop, that's $12,000,000. only 20,000 copies. And how many people in the united states?
285,710,587, now, lets say, only 10% of those actually care computers, and may want photoshop... That's 28,571,058 people, wanting to by Photoshop. At 600 a copy that brings in $17,142,634,800. Oh, gee, a paultry 17 BILLION dollars, now lets set a more reasonable price... Lets say, $50 a copy. 1,428,552,900. Still a paultry 1.4 billion dollars. That's way too little, dontcha think?
Food for thought, at $100,000 per programmer they could pay a team of 14,285 programmers to work on the project for 1 year. Say it takes 10 years to develop photoshop.... They could pay a team of 1428 programmers to work on photoshop for 10 years with that money.
Now, what's the reality of it? They probably have 10 programmers at 50,000 and it takes 3 years to develop photoshop.
That's a cost of 1,500,000. Figure another million for misc. expenses
2,000,000. That's less than 1% of the US population. Ok.. lets say, 500 a copy. Just 200,000 copies.
100 mil is alot of money, folks. Believe me, coders are able to make a living. The top execs of the company are making a killing.
Piracy isn't the problem, overpriced software is. These piracy raids are not prompted by starving software company execs. They're prompted by greed.
And, oh yeah, I'd buy Photshop if it were $50.
I get it now.
This list has nothing to do with toys being "dangerous"
Story Submitter: you've read more into the list than is actually there.
This list has no bearing on the saftey of the toys. Rather, it's a way for some bad parent to push their political agenda, porporting the site as a list of dangerous toys is irresponsible.
C'mon, Foam Missles?? What harm can those cause. Oh, yeh they've got some subconcious message to turn your kids into killing machines...
Right, and I'm the president of the united states.
"Violent" games and toys have nothing to do with real violence. Suprise! It's bad parenting. That's right! There's a plethora of irresponsible lazy parents.
If you actually teach your kid how to behave properly, then you have nothing to worry about.
Rant Over!
Becuase they want to force everyone into a controlled activation scheme.
They'll come out with some whiz-bang superduper freebie widget that, while it should work just fine under w2k, it requires XP.
Isn't it funny that they terminated 95 with a version of directx required by the latest games, which doesn't work with 95, just after the release of the activation-managed XP?
I'll bet you that was no coincidence, nor an accident. What they've done is force more people into XP. Once they have all of the licenses under their control, they can now force people to shell out more money at their whim.
Not quite ...
I don't feel that I should have to "check with" Microsoft, the all controlling central authority of Windows XP licenses every time I install their OS.
Our country was founded on the premise of "Innocent until proven guilty." Microsoft has now adopted a policy of "Guilty until proven innocent". It's a violation of my constitutional rights!
This is just their way of moving the flock toward their "Software as a service" model. That's right-- you wanna user Word 2003? Ok, but for $50/hr.
I'm surely not buying into any scheme that requires me to check with the writer of the software to make sure it's okay that I use it. I'm not buying into the scheme of paying a subscription fee for software I use.
I have a bit of a problem with the 1 license per PC bit, also. If I pay for something, I should be able to use it as I please. If I have a computer, and I bought XP. I own the software. If I build another computer, I'd expect that I could use my copy of XP on that computer. But, no, I must fork over $200 to Microsoft for the privelege of using another piece of software. No way! I won't stand for this kind of consumer abuse.
As for the planned obselecense of Win98, it's one more step to forcing the users into XP, by the time Windows 2000 is shoved out, I think it's high time to look for an alternative operating system. The word Linux comes to mind...
Remember, folks, the XP licensing system is not about money, It's about control. MS is profitable without that. They just want to contol their consumers, now.
What happened is the inverse of the old Ivory soap story: Upon going to lunch one day, somebody forgot to turn off the mixer. An ordinary accident. The result was soap that floated: A good, marketable, accidental discovery. NAT turns out to accidentally be a bad, unmarketable discovery. Its intentions were good; but one portion of its reality is clearly not so good.
Ok...
This really chaps me, here...
Sooo.... Something that is useful to a consumer is a bad, unmarketable discovery, and something, while fun to watch it float is a good, marketable discovery, but hardly useful to a consumer, aside from doing what other similar products alredy do, except they don't float, is absoulutely useless.
I don't understand the logic here. Exactly what oriface is this individual talking out of?
Sorry, but, at least I know that I can get a device that will easily allow me to share an internet connection among 2 computers in my house. To me, that's good. It's marketable, too!
What an absolutely asanine analogy!
Oh, I get it, it's bad for the consumer because it keeps the cable companies from digging deeper into a consumer's pockets.
What's next? The phone company charging me $5 a month to have a phone in my bedroom?
We've done this a few times.
Our solution has been "drink rationing." Before a party, we each get two tickets. This is plenty for some harmless social drinking, but not enough to get any sort of buzz. It avoids the whole legal mess, and prevents certain photo oppurtunities from occuring.
Of course, there are those that collect a multitude of tickets from the "lightweights" that only want 1 drink.
Hm.
Sounds to me like they've agreed to not send anymore junkmail. (Provided you give them the information on which sponsors were sending the junkmail, since, as stated in the letter they personally don't send junk.)
You should have traced the mail back to the sponsor, not neopets, or at least deal with NeoPets' sponsors by way of neopets, as they were offering.
They were fairly condencending in their reply, however.
I'd call it a partial success. But, it looks almost like you jumped to conclusions, and assumed they personally sent you the spam, and that obviously wasn't the case.
Meh. What do I know, anyway?
Apparently, nerds like competitive cooking.
Who knows?
I thought they were talking about MS being the 800lb Gorilla.
Did I misread?
Adobe had him arrested
There's just something oddly chilling about that.
The article said some interesting things in relation to the DMCA, specifically how it impedes innovation, rather than promotes it.
If this isn't a crystal clear example of that, I don't know what is!
Yes, but, not quite ...
Not all C code is valid in C++.
In C, for example, this code is perfectly valid:
void main()
{
int *pi;
void *pv;
int i = 31337;
pv =
pi = pv;
}
You must cast pv to an int in C++
C++ is really just a superset of C. Not the other way around.
What's wrong with being in shape or thin?
I agree, this isn't the best implementation of the device, but if they had a recombant bike connected to an interesting sim, I would definitely spend lots of time on it.
There was a time when I had no regard for whatever shape I was in. That was until I looked at a picture of myself and realised what a pig I was. Now I do the standard 3 days a week exercise thing, but man... to make pedaling an indoor bike more fun? That would be great.
Of course the alternative would be to get a real bike and actually ride it around, but I live in an apartment and the city sucks.
That's why you get an attorney to sue for the fee to dispute the domain. He can get that fee back, plus attorney's fees and probably more.
Of course, he'll have to pay the attorney some, but, it's worth it IMO.
You know,
I'm sick and tired of the "you shouldn't have let the domain go", "you already own xxx domain, what's your problem?"
1) I think it's pretty apparent the taker of the longer domain name, sits and waits for domains to expire, and snatches them up before the legitimate owner has a chance to re-register the domain.
2) It shouldn't matter. The name is similar to his shorter domain and he previously owned it (probably to prevent porn sites to show up like this)
I think he should go for it and sink his talons into them as deep has he can.
-- Another hapless victim of kdhxfm88.org and it's inifite trap popups.
Wow. Really funny, especially considering XP has probably the least user-demanding installation process of any Windows OS. Hahahah, THAT IS VERY FUNNY! You suck at TEH IRONEY.
Umm. While it's easy, I think it's pretty damn user demanding! No, you can't install XP without someone's help becuase of that friggin identification key they force you to hand over to an M$ represenative.
Nah. I'm not pissed. really... I'm not. I promise.
-- a former ProMSer.
Hasn't this been done before, or is it just a different means of water cooling?
No matter how well-sealed they say it is, I don't trust water flowing around my machine. Call me old-fashioned, but...
Arg...
:)
then you have to make the thought process so difficult
I think I agree with you and the other reply here.
Ok, ok, another slant on it... Many people don't readily sniff gasoline... er, well, Gasoline doesn't have any pleasing side effects.
Hmmm. Point well taken, It's just not practical.
Hm... I guess filling stations will have to adopt a policy of "don't huff the fuel?"
There's a way around this. You would definitely need to do it with hydrogen:
Only trained fueling technicians are permitted to fill cars.
In some states in the northeast, this won't be a problem (they can't pump their own gas anyway)
Other states, the people will have to adjust.
Go play with yourself.
IDIOT!
This sets a particularly tricky prescident for anyone writing emulators for any sort of processor.
I guess the big question that looms over my mind is "Why are they fighting this so hard?"
Besides, didn't AMD, Cyrix and such win becuase their clones of the x86 processors were legal?
Maybe I've missed the boat, here.
Yup-- you can clearly see he is a Karma whore.
Look at his witty, insightful, genious comments to everything you (the Anonymous Coward) write.
Gawd, some AC's have a major chip on their shoulder. Phbbt
I know they are huddled over their little computer monitor thinking of their next great troll. Beh. What's wrong with those that watch TV? Nothing bad ever came out of a little TV viewing.
it really smokes!
If anything, it will feed the need.
Why? That obnoxious "check with Mr. Gates" licensing scheme. I'm sorry, but I do not feel that when I install software I should report in to the manufacturer that I've used their product-- or that I've used their product again on a different machine.
Keep in mind: I like Windows. I'm not a Linux zealot. I've been pro-Microsoft in the past, but this is just the straw that broke the camel's back. I cannot believe they are abusing consumers in a way never thought of before. As W2k gets older, and Linux gets better I will probably be more inclined than ever to put Linux on my machine as it's only OS.
They force you to pay per machine for windows, but they still keep the price stratospheric. Unbelievable!
Mod me down as being off topic, but I had to get that off my chest.