If IE's Windows integration is a monopoly, then I'm all for the removal of Konqueror from KDE."
Microsoft signed an agreement not to bundle IE with Win9x. That's why bundling it with Win9x is illegal, while bundling a webbrowser with WinNT, KDE, MacOS etc. is not.
The complete and utter lack of any sense of justice is astonishing in the pro-MS department.
They really think that MS doesn't have to fullfill their agreements, they think that laws apply to everybody except MS and they also think that when MS just breaks the agreement with a vengeance (like bundling it in a way that it's hard to unbundle it again), the agreement ceases to exist.
If I manipulate my Ferrari to not go slower than 200, I also can't say later in court that they have to allow me to go faster than 200.
Maybe someone can explain why half the article is about mentioning this doesn't matter?
It's because they don't want to be freaky OpenSource-Commies.
Even on slashdot you are attacked when you dare to question the superiority of Windows on the desktop.
Re:Solution: XP behind a firewall?
on
XP, Phone Home
·
· Score: 2, Flamebait
What's the point?
Computers should be there to make life easier, not harder. All questionable usability improvements pale when you have to mantain a firewall to use it.- And you have to configure the firewall not to trust the own network. It's not trivial to do such a firewall configuration.
I know a lot people go incredible lenghts, just to run Windows. - Maybe they should start asking themselves if it's still the easiest/best thing to do?
i did not say that xbox will monopolise the game console market.
You said: "microsoft does not hold a monopoly on the game-console market. yet. "
How should I interpret the "yet"?
Looks like "Microsoft monopolization is inevitable. Resistance is futile, don't buy non-MS products unless you like being without support" for me.
please don't try to demonise people who have "morally wrong" standpoints in your opinion, and read my post carefully as i read yours carefully before reacting.
It's just plain wrong. XBox is such a pathetic failure that it's no longer funny and talking about "not holding a monopoly yet" is trashtalk without any objective base.
If company xy releases a product everybody takes a "wait&see" aproach, but as soon as MS releases *anything*, no matter how worthless and uninnovative, everybody starts screaming "monopoly" and creates a huge hype around the product.
What do you tell the poor buyers of an XBox who have bought it because they thought it would become the standard and will be stuck without any new games? Why should they give just another chance, and another chance and another while they should immediately dump ?
Sometimes I think that the whole Microsoft case is actually helping Microsoft. It has turned the once self-confident OpenSource community into a bunch of whiners.
Microsoft can hang in the game a lot longer than Sega had the resources to.
I think you are a bit misinformed. Microsoft couldn't even pay their employees without getting more and more money out of the stock market. (which allow also nice tax-tricks) They would endanger the whole company if they start to make losses because of XBox.
And then, Sony doesn't even feel much pain from Microsoft. Ironically, Playstation2 sales were 30% HIGHER in the XBox launch-week than one week before.
Seems like the Microsoft marketing huss about game consoles have sold more PS2 than XBoxes!!
How is Microsoft supposed to win this if their own marketing seems to work against them?
But you are right, Microsoft has the resources to hang around very long. They may "hang around" for 10 years, but they will never capture any significant marketshare and they won't ever see a profit from XBox.
hold your horses;-), i'd love to see the xbox fail. i'm just saying that it's too early to tell yet. never ever am i going to buy the thing, and i think that's what really counts, right?
OK, now I'll illustrate you how you Microsoft-whiners are the greatest marketing asset Microsoft has:
"XBox will monopolize the console market" (I don't know how often I've heard that)
Translation: Buy an XBox, soon you won't find any games for anything else.
(After the devastating sales figures show up) "It's too early to tell yet."
Translation: Buy an XBox, that sales figures doesn't matter, don't be worried.
microsoft does not hold a monopoly on the game-console market. yet.
(rolling eyes) And they never will have a monopoly on the game-console market. Never. They blew their only chance. People like you might cause the XBox to die a few months later than it would if it were produced by another company, but it will die and there won't be a second one.
XBox is dead, why is everybody so eager to revive it?
If Microsoft's history is anything to go by then the xbox was doomed to bite the bullet. The Xbox 2 or 3 will decide the market.
So you really think that anybody stuck in 2 years with a XBox without any new games will just do the same mistake again and buy a XBox2?
No chance. XBox was the only chance Microsoft had, both customers and game-makers won't support any Microsoft console unless it takes off. -> So XBox2 will have the classical Chicken-Egg dilemma.
This is exactly the kind of attitude that gives Microsoft an advantage in software. ("Let's buy it, it will be the standard", "don't assume it's a flop, give it another chance", "the next version will be better")
No other company has this great kind of grass-roots marketing.
And it's also ironic that most anti-MS folks don't realize how much they help Microsoft when they whine about monopolies.
LET'S FACE IT:
XBox is dead. It had it chance and blew it. And it won't come back because no gamer is going to make the same mistake again and shell out big bucks for a gaming console that might have no games a few months later. Game producers will not make the same mistake again and program games for a gaming console that might not have any new customers a few months down the road.
Contrary to common belief, once you get into millions of units, it doesn't get any cheaper.
The fact that AMD makes cheaper and better chips than Intel is the proof.
The PS2 chip (Emotion Engine) was sold about 25 million times, Celerons maybe 100 million times. But actually, XBox is using a hybrid Pentium/Celeron, so PS2 is actually moving more chips.
The funny thing is that they are losing money on XBox-games, too.
For example Halo has been delayed for over a year and it would have been a 100% hit on the PC-gaming market.
Now you can estimate how much it costs to keep a developer team on it for one year (unnecessarily) and how much money they miss because it's released so late on PC.
No way they are going to get that back with XBox software sales. No way.
However, as Netscape learned the hard way, don't ever count M$ out.
However, as Sega learned the hard way, don't ever count Sony out.
Just for your information: Sony is several times bigger than Microsoft.
And Sony can concentrate on consumer electronics, while MS is busy competing in 100 different markets.
Sony will win this battle and Microsoft will never come back. Unlike software, there is no second chance for a console. If XBox fails nobody will make the same mistake again and buy XBox2 and be left without games.
A 2 year old design (Playstation 2) is selling more than 7 times as many hardware as XBox in Japan, more than twice as much in USA and sales figures are so bad in Europe that Microsoft doesn't even release numbers. (Retailers slashed the price for an XBox by 80 Euros in the first 2 days! And they still didn't sell. Now a lot of stores don't even bother to display the XBox anymore, it's already dead in Europe.)
I always said that XBox has no chance but the "Microsoft is so great and strong" pro-MS folk were so busy praising it and the "Microsoft is so evil and strong" anti-MS folk were so busy whining about Microsoft "monopolizing the next market" (LOL), that nobody listened.
I also submitted several stories to slashdot, but slashdot refuses stories that question the invincibility of Microsoft.
Re:The difference is in the presentation
on
Unix Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 2
Marketing certainly plays a role, but I don't think you're giving Apple enough credit on the software side.
I own a PowerBook 400 and that's correct. I still got to see any real good Apple software. I have seen a lot of hype around Apple software, even about really inconsistent and bad designs like Quicktime.
The way I see it, Apple is optimizing their computers for the first day of usage - and sacrificing usability in the long term.
The first day a "buttonless" mouse will look very cool. But after 3 days it's just limiting your abilities and slowing you down.
Yes, I know that you can put a 3Button mouse on it, but it's not the same as programs and the OS rarely use the RMB and don't use the MMB at all.
It's not that big of a problem, it runs KDE/Linux (with a wheelmouse) just fine.
I was pretty blown away when I went into the "sharing" control panel, clicked on web sharing, and apache started up, all ready configured and eager to go.
Linux distributions include an already configured Apache (yes, with Perl, PHP & stuff) for years.
But when Apple does it, people are "blown away". I think it doesn't matter what Apple does, no matter what it is, people will say that it's 1) easy 2) user-friendly and 3) innovative.
The power of marketing.
If you actually want to run applications (gasp) on a computer, setting up a Linux-workstation is already a lot faster and easier than setting up any other OS and install every measly app afterwards. - Even if the OS itself is preinstalled....
Re:Actually, the UNIX market share is going down..
on
Unix Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 2
Well, Linux is just another Unix.
(Yes I do know that it's a rewrite and not the same codebase. So? Why should anybody care? Is every car other than Mercedes no car, just because they were designed independently from the first design?)
Unix and Linux run the same applications, look the same, feel the same, have the same philosophy and are run by the same people which the same skillset. I even use the ~/.alias file from an very old SunOS (yes, the OS before Solaris) on my Linux boxes right now.
(Try using any Win3.11 file on WinXP. Good luck. Linux and Unix are closer than the Windows variants, actually.)
Why anybody should artificially seperate Linux from the other Unix-flavours is beoynd me. It's the same in all respects that matter.
PS2 currently is the Saturn of the game industry right now, its powerful, but thats not what matters, no one can make use of this power but Sony, why is PS2 hard to use yet successful?
Because Sony has more money.
Wrong, because it's backward compatible to the bestsold console of all times.
Slashdot Mirror
The upgrade is available right now.
With the 400 billion $ from step 1) you don't have that much to worry.
Microsoft signed an agreement not to bundle IE with Win9x. That's why bundling it with Win9x is illegal, while bundling a webbrowser with WinNT, KDE, MacOS etc. is not.
The complete and utter lack of any sense of justice is astonishing in the pro-MS department.
They really think that MS doesn't have to fullfill their agreements, they think that laws apply to everybody except MS and they also think that when MS just breaks the agreement with a vengeance (like bundling it in a way that it's hard to unbundle it again), the agreement ceases to exist.
If I manipulate my Ferrari to not go slower than 200, I also can't say later in court that they have to allow me to go faster than 200.
What would hurt them much more than the billions bucks lost would be that people would no longer assume a failure of a MS-product unlikely.
Microsoft would actually have to produce more than vapourware to convince people.
Just look at all the .NET-hype.
It's because they don't want to be freaky OpenSource-Commies.
Even on slashdot you are attacked when you dare to question the superiority of Windows on the desktop.
Computers should be there to make life easier, not harder. All questionable usability improvements pale when you have to mantain a firewall to use it.- And you have to configure the firewall not to trust the own network. It's not trivial to do such a firewall configuration.
I know a lot people go incredible lenghts, just to run Windows. - Maybe they should start asking themselves if it's still the easiest/best thing to do?
You said: "microsoft does not hold a monopoly on the game-console market. yet. "
How should I interpret the "yet"?
Looks like "Microsoft monopolization is inevitable. Resistance is futile, don't buy non-MS products unless you like being without support" for me.
please don't try to demonise people who have "morally wrong" standpoints in your opinion, and read my post carefully as i read yours carefully before reacting.
It's just plain wrong. XBox is such a pathetic failure that it's no longer funny and talking about "not holding a monopoly yet" is trashtalk without any objective base.
If company xy releases a product everybody takes a "wait&see" aproach, but as soon as MS releases *anything*, no matter how worthless and uninnovative, everybody starts screaming "monopoly" and creates a huge hype around the product.
What do you tell the poor buyers of an XBox who have bought it because they thought it would become the standard and will be stuck without any new games? Why should they give just another chance, and another chance and another while they should immediately dump ?
Sometimes I think that the whole Microsoft case is actually helping Microsoft. It has turned the once self-confident OpenSource community into a bunch of whiners.
True, but with Sony selling twice as many PS2s in US and 7 times as many in Japan, the gap widens.
MS doesn't catch up, it falls behind.
How can soldout-within-24-hours and sold for twice as much on ebay be "not as strongly as expected"?
And Sony shipped also a lot more units on launch than MS.
I think you are a bit misinformed. Microsoft couldn't even pay their employees without getting more and more money out of the stock market. (which allow also nice tax-tricks) They would endanger the whole company if they start to make losses because of XBox.
And then, Sony doesn't even feel much pain from Microsoft. Ironically, Playstation2 sales were 30% HIGHER in the XBox launch-week than one week before.
Seems like the Microsoft marketing huss about game consoles have sold more PS2 than XBoxes!!
How is Microsoft supposed to win this if their own marketing seems to work against them?
But you are right, Microsoft has the resources to hang around very long. They may "hang around" for 10 years, but they will never capture any significant marketshare and they won't ever see a profit from XBox.
OK, now I'll illustrate you how you Microsoft-whiners are the greatest marketing asset Microsoft has:
"XBox will monopolize the console market" (I don't know how often I've heard that)
Translation: Buy an XBox, soon you won't find any games for anything else.
(After the devastating sales figures show up) "It's too early to tell yet."
Translation: Buy an XBox, that sales figures doesn't matter, don't be worried.
microsoft does not hold a monopoly on the game-console market. yet.
(rolling eyes) And they never will have a monopoly on the game-console market. Never. They blew their only chance. People like you might cause the XBox to die a few months later than it would if it were produced by another company, but it will die and there won't be a second one.
XBox is dead, why is everybody so eager to revive it?
Well, like Windows/PPC, Windows/Mips, Windows/Alpha, MS Bob, the Otto project, the proprietary MSN....
So you really think that anybody stuck in 2 years with a XBox without any new games will just do the same mistake again and buy a XBox2?
No chance. XBox was the only chance Microsoft had, both customers and game-makers won't support any Microsoft console unless it takes off. -> So XBox2 will have the classical Chicken-Egg dilemma.
Do people really have that bad memory?
"Internet will never be popular" - Bill Gates.
So, no, MS products don't automatically dominate a market.
Ask them again in 6 months when there are no new games anymore for XBox ;-)
No other company has this great kind of grass-roots marketing.
And it's also ironic that most anti-MS folks don't realize how much they help Microsoft when they whine about monopolies.
LET'S FACE IT:
XBox is dead. It had it chance and blew it. And it won't come back because no gamer is going to make the same mistake again and shell out big bucks for a gaming console that might have no games a few months later. Game producers will not make the same mistake again and program games for a gaming console that might not have any new customers a few months down the road.
Game over for Microsoft.
The fact that AMD makes cheaper and better chips than Intel is the proof.
The PS2 chip (Emotion Engine) was sold about 25 million times, Celerons maybe 100 million times. But actually, XBox is using a hybrid Pentium/Celeron, so PS2 is actually moving more chips.
For example Halo has been delayed for over a year and it would have been a 100% hit on the PC-gaming market.
Now you can estimate how much it costs to keep a developer team on it for one year (unnecessarily) and how much money they miss because it's released so late on PC.
No way they are going to get that back with XBox software sales. No way.
However, as Sega learned the hard way, don't ever count Sony out.
Just for your information: Sony is several times bigger than Microsoft.
And Sony can concentrate on consumer electronics, while MS is busy competing in 100 different markets.
Sony will win this battle and Microsoft will never come back. Unlike software, there is no second chance for a console. If XBox fails nobody will make the same mistake again and buy XBox2 and be left without games.
A 2 year old design (Playstation 2) is selling more than 7 times as many hardware as XBox in Japan, more than twice as much in USA and sales figures are so bad in Europe that Microsoft doesn't even release numbers. (Retailers slashed the price for an XBox by 80 Euros in the first 2 days! And they still didn't sell. Now a lot of stores don't even bother to display the XBox anymore, it's already dead in Europe.)
I always said that XBox has no chance but the "Microsoft is so great and strong" pro-MS folk were so busy praising it and the "Microsoft is so evil and strong" anti-MS folk were so busy whining about Microsoft "monopolizing the next market" (LOL), that nobody listened.
I also submitted several stories to slashdot, but slashdot refuses stories that question the invincibility of Microsoft.
I own a PowerBook 400 and that's correct. I still got to see any real good Apple software. I have seen a lot of hype around Apple software, even about really inconsistent and bad designs like Quicktime.
The way I see it, Apple is optimizing their computers for the first day of usage - and sacrificing usability in the long term.
The first day a "buttonless" mouse will look very cool. But after 3 days it's just limiting your abilities and slowing you down.
Yes, I know that you can put a 3Button mouse on it, but it's not the same as programs and the OS rarely use the RMB and don't use the MMB at all.
It's not that big of a problem, it runs KDE/Linux (with a wheelmouse) just fine.
Even better would be running MacOSX apps under KDE.
Is that possible?
Linux distributions include an already configured Apache (yes, with Perl, PHP & stuff) for years.
But when Apple does it, people are "blown away". I think it doesn't matter what Apple does, no matter what it is, people will say that it's 1) easy 2) user-friendly and 3) innovative.
The power of marketing.
If you actually want to run applications (gasp) on a computer, setting up a Linux-workstation is already a lot faster and easier than setting up any other OS and install every measly app afterwards. - Even if the OS itself is preinstalled....
(Yes I do know that it's a rewrite and not the same codebase. So? Why should anybody care? Is every car other than Mercedes no car, just because they were designed independently from the first design?)
Unix and Linux run the same applications, look the same, feel the same, have the same philosophy and are run by the same people which the same skillset. I even use the ~/.alias file from an very old SunOS (yes, the OS before Solaris) on my Linux boxes right now.
(Try using any Win3.11 file on WinXP. Good luck. Linux and Unix are closer than the Windows variants, actually.)
Why anybody should artificially seperate Linux from the other Unix-flavours is beoynd me. It's the same in all respects that matter.
Because Sony has more money.
Wrong, because it's backward compatible to the bestsold console of all times.