While this is obviously a necessary step in creating the next internet revolution since the world-wide web, I have serious doubts that it will be based upon the Second Life software.
Most likely, the honor for create the virtual internet "world" will come from either an industrial thinktank (AT&T, IBM, etc...), the game industry (EA with an evolved form of The Sims merged with Spore and SimCity) or the porn industry (as a quality product with tons of cash behind it, complete creative freedom and a self-sustaining internal economy).
This rush to start an open protocol for interconnecting these "worlds" is most likely a last-ditch effort to keep Second Life running a couple years longer before it gets completely replaced by a far-superior product. After which, it'll erupt into an all-out patent war between Linden Labs and whoever wins the race for the first globally accepted virtual world system.
In the meanwhile, there are some other pressing issues involved, such as making the tools necessary for creating and managing these virtual worlds (and their respective data/database content) intuitive enough for anyone to use. The open-source community alone probably won't be enough to accomplish this. (Interface design consultants, anyone?)
This is one title I'd really like to see a modern version of. It was a bit like battlebots / robot wars, except you literally built them to be autonomous using a complex wiring system as the programming language. (Think dynamic flow-charting...)
Of course, now that actual robotics are becoming more consumer-friendly, there may not be much demand for virtual robotics competitions when faced with real-world competitions for anyone with a couple-hundred bucks to spend on a Lego Mindstorms or VEX kit.
Still, had Cognitoy waited until now to introduce Mind-Rover, it could have become the next Pokémon or Spore, given enough flexibility.
You can still find TIM in a combo pack (crazy contraptions / even more crazy contraptions) on the cheap in the right places. A local walmart had a few copies for $10 about a year ago. (Even had Mac / PC compatibility...)
Still a great game even today. Though, I wouldn't mind a modern update to it. Perhaps an isometric 3D version to add an extra level of difficulty...
Rulings such as this could create some frightening situations in the future if left unchecked. If someone were phobic enough to encrypt their system's memory on the fly (sort of like how Connectix's RAMDoubler did its compression in the 90's), could they somehow invoke the DMCA, citing it as a "copy prevention mechanism" in itself?
"Kids like things that are for "grownups". It's just the way things work, across the board. They think "I'm too grown up for the little kid stuff, give me the big kid stuff!" It's human nature."
It's not so much that they want it because the adults have it, they want it because they are being told they can't have it. It's the same reason adults buy lottery tickets and envy guys like Bill Gates for managing to strike it rich. Conversely, how often do guys like Bill Gates end up being bored because they've finally "done" or "own" everything?
You only want until you can have it, and once you have it the less interesting it becomes. Son the next big thing comes along and you want that instead. (Xbox 360, PS3, Nintendo Wii, iPhone, etc... the list goes on)
Bet Nintendo will be absolutely thrilled over the fun this is going to cause them. This almost sounds like the kind of site where you'd go to watch videos encoded specifically for the Wii.
This sounds an awful lot like the concept presented in the 1980's children's book The Gadget Factor by Sandy Landsman.
In the story, two college students develop a computer program that models every aspect of the earth down to the most minute detail and runs simulations based on added conditions the user presents into the simulated environment. Later in the book, one of the students manages to crack the theoretical physics needed to achieve time travel and performs a series of test runs with them on their simulated earth, which ultimately results in the completely annihilation of all life on the planet almost instantly. Fearing that their research could land in the wrong hands and potentially lead to similar instantaneous destruction in the real world, the set out to destroy it, only to find a corrupt instructor had stolen their work, intent on taking credit for it himself. Eventually, this leads to a race against time to sabotage the stolen information before the instructor manages to use it to test a real-world prototype of the device introduced into the original similation.
Actually, I believe Alexey Pajitnov is actively employed at Microsoft. If you own an XBox 360, you've probably played one of his newest games... Hexic.
The issue is more likely the conditions this user has subjected these game consoles to, rather than the consoles themselves all being flawed from the start. For example, is he running the consoles in a filthy area with lots of airborne particles, such as dust and hair/fur? Is he using the consoles in a confined area, preventing proper ventilation or using third party cooling devices like clip-on fans?
Granted, these aren't generally issues one would associate with devices like a VCR, but these next-gen consoles are atypical for entertainment appliances in that they require extra considerations just like any modern desktop computer. Interruptions in air-flow can be a death sentence for these kinds of devices. Many times, it's not always obvious what can cause such interruptions. For example, running a high-end desktop computer without the casing properly enclosed can prevent an adaquate circulation of air to many vital areas, simply because there's no longer a definite path for it to follow. (Even placing an external desktop fan blowing directly onto the exposed areas may not work.)
It's extremely unlikely these systems all just "went bad" without some kind of human intervention involved... such as someone at microsoft's repair center intentionally messing with the guy for sending in too many systems, or more likely, improper use at the user end.
For what it's worth, I have a launch date 360 that continues to function perfectly despite regular use with games like Crackdown and Oblivion. (Most likely due to the fact I keep the system in a clean, well-ventilated area...)
Sure... "cyber-bullying" is a faceless, cowardly act of passive-agressive asshats with too much time on their hands, but where does the definition of it end where the definition of "cyber-terrorism" begins? At the rate things are going, the act of being a jerk toward those who piss you off will become a felony offense that could land you in a PMITA prison for a few decades while convicted killers still end up walking free after serving sentences that are only a fraction of that.
(Of course, that's assuming you aren't hauled off to a secret prison in some other country to be professionaally "persuaded" into talking about you're real intentions...)
Microsoft's stance regarding virtualization is pretty interesting once you consider the fact they bought VirtualPC from Connectix a few years back. They even started giving the PC version of it away as a free download from their website.
Sure, Apple *did* spread their resources thin considering the initial goals they set out for. But that was not the only issue involved. The fact is, they never *achieved* those goals before they started concerning themselves with the superficial areas of the OS, such as the goofy new themes ("Hi-Tech", "Gizmo", "Drawing Board") that would use non-square windows and large isometric icons, among other things.
Mac OS X has been development for nearly a decade now and Apple still doesn't have something as simple as a unified user interface implimented yet. However, they seem to have no problem changing the window designs and shinier icons with every other major release of the OS.
If Apple put half as much effort into what's going on under the hood as they put into making the OS shinier, maybe we'd have machines that are better at getting a job done rather than acting as a "my computer is prettier than yours" conversation piece. Dumb "innovations" like a transparent menubar aren't going to improve the efficiency or usefulness of the user interface.
"It would be possible for Vista's DRM to be (relatively) secure if the virtualization software also supported DRM; this potentially opens the way for Microsoft to specify some virtual environments as "acceptable" for use with the Vista home versions."
Most likely, this could be defeated by simply adding an additional layer of virtualization beyond the said "approved" virtual machine hosting the OS in question. This is actually not unlike some theoretical viruses proposed a while back that would install themselves between the bootloader and the primary OS on a computer and then host the OS within their own VM while they execute whatever malicious tasks they're designed for, completely transparent from the hosted OS and the end user.
Personally, I think Apple has finally lost it after several years of producing innovations that have changed much of the world. The fact that they are touting a transparent menubar as a major feature suggests their idea pool for MacOS X development is starting to collapse in the same way Copeland did in the mid 90's. They've become too focused on presentation and eye candy, rather than improving what goes on under the hood.
Of course, that isn't to say MacOS X hasn't been a mess in terms of the Human Interface Guidelines (on which the Mac OS was based) since the earliest public releases, but making the one visual concept that has remained consistent and immediately recognizeable in all versions of the Mac OS almost completely invisible has to be the single worst offense to date. The menubar was supposed to be a fixed (and always visible) reference point for the user to rely on while the rest of the desktop evironment continually changes during each session of use. It's the one part of the OS that keeps everything else organized and easily understood.
Aside from Leopard, we'll soon have the iPhone to contend with, which is sure to be a nightmare once the early adopters get past the hype and Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field and start to realize just how confining the device really is due to all the red tape that comes with it. It will probably sell as expected, but in the end, it may go down in history as on of the worst products in Apple's history, next to the Lisa, as a result of all the artificial limitations imposed upon it that kept it from being the killer product everyone really wanted it to be.
By the time this all plays out, Steve Jobs may get ousted for both 10.5 and the iPhone, much like Gil Amelio was due to Copeland and mac cloning.
Why should I have to change my website when the iPhone is capable of accessing "the real internet" using its full-featured Safari web browser, like Apple claims in the ads? Let's just wait and see just how "real" the "internet" is on the iPhone and AT&T's data services before we start making potentially expensive and time consuming concessions for a single device they may very well fail.
Actually, the first one wasn't that bad, as long as it wasn't the crappy Nintendo DS version. If you ever were a fan of "Stock Trader" on the Apple II, Big Mutha Truckers does have decent replay value with the right audience. Anyone playing it specifically for the brief "larry the cable guy"-style humor will get fed up with the repetativeness pretty quickly.
This article is making some serious, speculatory remarks about the RIAA and their former host without any real evidence to back it up. Something like that could be grounds to sue the author and SlashDot for libel. The RIAA would probably love an excuse to make an example out of members of the open-source community, given the opportunity.
They seem to think Apple's reasoning for releasing Safari on Windows is to somehow take on Internet Explorer on its own turf. However, this is not the case.
Most likely, Safari was released on Windows to promote the iPhone. Sort of a way of saying "this is what you *could* be getting if you had an iPhone". Also, Apple knows Windows-based iPhone developers are going to want to take advantage of their so-called "sweet solution" for 3rd party apps. Safari provides these developers with the necessary runtime environment.
Besides, Apple would rather have Windows users buying Macs instead of having these users mooch the freebie software off them.
... the number of users who re-downloaded the beta following the recent security fix? The legitimate figure is probably closer to 500,000 users who downloaded it twice.
From what I gathered from the EA stuff, they are only going to support the intel Macs in this movement. The problem though, is how exactly they plan to execute the deployment of these Macintosh versions. Are they still going to require six months to a year or longer to perform the conversions from DirectX to a Mac compatible format, like we had with the PowerPC macs? Will they delay the Windows versions of these games to allow for a simultaneous release of these titles?
If these issues still remain a constant problem for games ported to the Mac, then why both making the Mac versions at all when just about every intel mac user who cares about gaming probably already have Windows installed under Boot Camp?
Ever since the Mac went to intel processors, a number of previously major Mac-specific game sites, such as MacGamer, have been dead silent for several months now. Unless we start getting simultaneous releases on the Mac, most of us are just gonna continue to tolerate the annoyance of booting into Windows to avoid a lengthy wait for the next big thing in PC gaming.
But it doesn't have to be "just a phone"... Apple has simply choosen to let it be "just a phone".
Sure, those of you spouting "it's just a phone" now might be happy to spend over $1,000 on your "just a phone" iPhone now, but after the novelty of the web browser and the iPod functions wears off (and it will), "it's just a phone" will become "it's not enough", without third party support.
There are numerous ways Apple could have approached this other than redundantly telling us that their web browser does what any other web browser already does now. (Ok, so they didn't say it that bluntly, but instead left it up to the more intelligent of us to explain the obvious to you...)
For example, what would stop them from releasing a devkit for iPhone that only runs 3rd party apps on iPhones equiped with a special SIM chip dongle, and then allowing developers to submit their apps for certification and eventual deployment through iTunes Music Store? Apple could then collect a commission off every app sold.
Instead, forcing developers to go the Web 2.0/AJAX route is going to result in extremely mediocre apps that all look exactly the same, or semi-featured apps that run slowly using the iPhone as a dumb terminal across AT&T's mediocre cellular data network to a server hosted by the developer that does all the processing and spews the result back to the iPhone. Depending on the complexity of these "apps", small time developers won't be able to afford on-going support for them for very long, unless they charge subscription fees... something that won't go over well with iPhone users already paying a premium just to use the network itself.
Either way, third party development is going to be less than impressive, no matter which end of the iPhone you're on... all because Apple is limiting otherwise good hardware to being nothing more than "just a phone".
Isn't the kind of situation where the RIAA send their own militia to "assist" in raids like these a dangerous conflict of interest? If there are enough of these goose-stepping RIAA gestappo guards running around during the raid, misdirecting the actual law enforcement officers around them, what would prevent any additional RIAA guys from walking in during the chaos to plant evidence (like the duplication machine they mention), ensuring they can detain at least one person to make an example of before the public?
It's almost like giving the ok to a rape victim's family to participate in the bust of the suspect and trusting that none of them would throttle the guy before the police got to him.
The iTunes-compatible motorola phones were always intended to fail from day one. They were severely crippled compared to most low-end MP3 players at the time. The only purpose these phones served was to see if there was a market for phones with iPod-like integration, but only with features so excessively limited that Apple could crush it at any time by entering the phone manufacturing business themselves.
Comparing the Motorola phones to the Lisa probably has every Lisa in the world rolling over in their mass-grave.
It's hard to consider it a fault of Microsoft that the system appeals mostly with hard-core gamers when we already know hard core gamers in the PC world are more than happy to spend a hefty premium to have the fastest hardware available. The power of the hardware and the bragging rights that come with being privileged enough to own such hardware is often far more important to a hard-core gamer than the games themselves.
On the other hand, people who are planning to buy mostly kid-friendly games aren't going to care what system they buy just as long as it's not too expensive. Most kids who'd play these games aren't going to care about how good the graphics of a game are, just as long as they can still play the game in question. For people like this, the PS2 works just as well as the 360. The 360 would simply be unnecessary overkill for playing the latest kids movie turned game of the week.
If Microsoft truly wants to have the 360 appeal to this area of the gaming market, they shold price the 360 competatively with the PS2 (or at least the Wii), rather than trying to force the system's legitimacy with games like Viva Pinata (which could have ran on the PS2 by trading the model complexity for a few texturing tricks).
Slashdot Mirror
While this is obviously a necessary step in creating the next internet revolution since the world-wide web, I have serious doubts that it will be based upon the Second Life software.
Most likely, the honor for create the virtual internet "world" will come from either an industrial thinktank (AT&T, IBM, etc...), the game industry (EA with an evolved form of The Sims merged with Spore and SimCity) or the porn industry (as a quality product with tons of cash behind it, complete creative freedom and a self-sustaining internal economy).
This rush to start an open protocol for interconnecting these "worlds" is most likely a last-ditch effort to keep Second Life running a couple years longer before it gets completely replaced by a far-superior product. After which, it'll erupt into an all-out patent war between Linden Labs and whoever wins the race for the first globally accepted virtual world system.
In the meanwhile, there are some other pressing issues involved, such as making the tools necessary for creating and managing these virtual worlds (and their respective data/database content) intuitive enough for anyone to use. The open-source community alone probably won't be enough to accomplish this. (Interface design consultants, anyone?)
This is one title I'd really like to see a modern version of. It was a bit like battlebots / robot wars, except you literally built them to be autonomous using a complex wiring system as the programming language. (Think dynamic flow-charting...)
Of course, now that actual robotics are becoming more consumer-friendly, there may not be much demand for virtual robotics competitions when faced with real-world competitions for anyone with a couple-hundred bucks to spend on a Lego Mindstorms or VEX kit.
Still, had Cognitoy waited until now to introduce Mind-Rover, it could have become the next Pokémon or Spore, given enough flexibility.
You can still find TIM in a combo pack (crazy contraptions / even more crazy contraptions) on the cheap in the right places. A local walmart had a few copies for $10 about a year ago. (Even had Mac / PC compatibility...)
Still a great game even today. Though, I wouldn't mind a modern update to it. Perhaps an isometric 3D version to add an extra level of difficulty...
Rulings such as this could create some frightening situations in the future if left unchecked. If someone were phobic enough to encrypt their system's memory on the fly (sort of like how Connectix's RAMDoubler did its compression in the 90's), could they somehow invoke the DMCA, citing it as a "copy prevention mechanism" in itself?
"Kids like things that are for "grownups". It's just the way things work, across the board. They think "I'm too grown up for the little kid stuff, give me the big kid stuff!" It's human nature."
It's not so much that they want it because the adults have it, they want it because they are being told they can't have it. It's the same reason adults buy lottery tickets and envy guys like Bill Gates for managing to strike it rich. Conversely, how often do guys like Bill Gates end up being bored because they've finally "done" or "own" everything?
You only want until you can have it, and once you have it the less interesting it becomes. Son the next big thing comes along and you want that instead. (Xbox 360, PS3, Nintendo Wii, iPhone, etc... the list goes on)
Bet Nintendo will be absolutely thrilled over the fun this is going to cause them. This almost sounds like the kind of site where you'd go to watch videos encoded specifically for the Wii.
This sounds an awful lot like the concept presented in the 1980's children's book The Gadget Factor by Sandy Landsman.
In the story, two college students develop a computer program that models every aspect of the earth down to the most minute detail and runs simulations based on added conditions the user presents into the simulated environment. Later in the book, one of the students manages to crack the theoretical physics needed to achieve time travel and performs a series of test runs with them on their simulated earth, which ultimately results in the completely annihilation of all life on the planet almost instantly. Fearing that their research could land in the wrong hands and potentially lead to similar instantaneous destruction in the real world, the set out to destroy it, only to find a corrupt instructor had stolen their work, intent on taking credit for it himself. Eventually, this leads to a race against time to sabotage the stolen information before the instructor manages to use it to test a real-world prototype of the device introduced into the original similation.
Actually, I believe Alexey Pajitnov is actively employed at Microsoft. If you own an XBox 360, you've probably played one of his newest games... Hexic.
The issue is more likely the conditions this user has subjected these game consoles to, rather than the consoles themselves all being flawed from the start. For example, is he running the consoles in a filthy area with lots of airborne particles, such as dust and hair/fur? Is he using the consoles in a confined area, preventing proper ventilation or using third party cooling devices like clip-on fans?
Granted, these aren't generally issues one would associate with devices like a VCR, but these next-gen consoles are atypical for entertainment appliances in that they require extra considerations just like any modern desktop computer. Interruptions in air-flow can be a death sentence for these kinds of devices. Many times, it's not always obvious what can cause such interruptions. For example, running a high-end desktop computer without the casing properly enclosed can prevent an adaquate circulation of air to many vital areas, simply because there's no longer a definite path for it to follow. (Even placing an external desktop fan blowing directly onto the exposed areas may not work.)
It's extremely unlikely these systems all just "went bad" without some kind of human intervention involved... such as someone at microsoft's repair center intentionally messing with the guy for sending in too many systems, or more likely, improper use at the user end.
For what it's worth, I have a launch date 360 that continues to function perfectly despite regular use with games like Crackdown and Oblivion. (Most likely due to the fact I keep the system in a clean, well-ventilated area...)
Sure... "cyber-bullying" is a faceless, cowardly act of passive-agressive asshats with too much time on their hands, but where does the definition of it end where the definition of "cyber-terrorism" begins? At the rate things are going, the act of being a jerk toward those who piss you off will become a felony offense that could land you in a PMITA prison for a few decades while convicted killers still end up walking free after serving sentences that are only a fraction of that.
(Of course, that's assuming you aren't hauled off to a secret prison in some other country to be professionaally "persuaded" into talking about you're real intentions...)
Microsoft's stance regarding virtualization is pretty interesting once you consider the fact they bought VirtualPC from Connectix a few years back. They even started giving the PC version of it away as a free download from their website.
Sure, Apple *did* spread their resources thin considering the initial goals they set out for. But that was not the only issue involved. The fact is, they never *achieved* those goals before they started concerning themselves with the superficial areas of the OS, such as the goofy new themes ("Hi-Tech", "Gizmo", "Drawing Board") that would use non-square windows and large isometric icons, among other things.
Mac OS X has been development for nearly a decade now and Apple still doesn't have something as simple as a unified user interface implimented yet. However, they seem to have no problem changing the window designs and shinier icons with every other major release of the OS.
If Apple put half as much effort into what's going on under the hood as they put into making the OS shinier, maybe we'd have machines that are better at getting a job done rather than acting as a "my computer is prettier than yours" conversation piece. Dumb "innovations" like a transparent menubar aren't going to improve the efficiency or usefulness of the user interface.
"It would be possible for Vista's DRM to be (relatively) secure if the virtualization software also supported DRM; this potentially opens the way for Microsoft to specify some virtual environments as "acceptable" for use with the Vista home versions."
Most likely, this could be defeated by simply adding an additional layer of virtualization beyond the said "approved" virtual machine hosting the OS in question. This is actually not unlike some theoretical viruses proposed a while back that would install themselves between the bootloader and the primary OS on a computer and then host the OS within their own VM while they execute whatever malicious tasks they're designed for, completely transparent from the hosted OS and the end user.
Personally, I think Apple has finally lost it after several years of producing innovations that have changed much of the world. The fact that they are touting a transparent menubar as a major feature suggests their idea pool for MacOS X development is starting to collapse in the same way Copeland did in the mid 90's. They've become too focused on presentation and eye candy, rather than improving what goes on under the hood.
Of course, that isn't to say MacOS X hasn't been a mess in terms of the Human Interface Guidelines (on which the Mac OS was based) since the earliest public releases, but making the one visual concept that has remained consistent and immediately recognizeable in all versions of the Mac OS almost completely invisible has to be the single worst offense to date. The menubar was supposed to be a fixed (and always visible) reference point for the user to rely on while the rest of the desktop evironment continually changes during each session of use. It's the one part of the OS that keeps everything else organized and easily understood.
Aside from Leopard, we'll soon have the iPhone to contend with, which is sure to be a nightmare once the early adopters get past the hype and Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field and start to realize just how confining the device really is due to all the red tape that comes with it. It will probably sell as expected, but in the end, it may go down in history as on of the worst products in Apple's history, next to the Lisa, as a result of all the artificial limitations imposed upon it that kept it from being the killer product everyone really wanted it to be.
By the time this all plays out, Steve Jobs may get ousted for both 10.5 and the iPhone, much like Gil Amelio was due to Copeland and mac cloning.
Why should I have to change my website when the iPhone is capable of accessing "the real internet" using its full-featured Safari web browser, like Apple claims in the ads? Let's just wait and see just how "real" the "internet" is on the iPhone and AT&T's data services before we start making potentially expensive and time consuming concessions for a single device they may very well fail.
What's even more amazing is that some exec in Atari changed the order size for the game to an incredible 4 million units!
Too bad they forgot that there weren't that many Atari game consoles in existence...
Actually, the first one wasn't that bad, as long as it wasn't the crappy Nintendo DS version. If you ever were a fan of "Stock Trader" on the Apple II, Big Mutha Truckers does have decent replay value with the right audience. Anyone playing it specifically for the brief "larry the cable guy"-style humor will get fed up with the repetativeness pretty quickly.
This article is making some serious, speculatory remarks about the RIAA and their former host without any real evidence to back it up. Something like that could be grounds to sue the author and SlashDot for libel. The RIAA would probably love an excuse to make an example out of members of the open-source community, given the opportunity.
They seem to think Apple's reasoning for releasing Safari on Windows is to somehow take on Internet Explorer on its own turf. However, this is not the case.
Most likely, Safari was released on Windows to promote the iPhone. Sort of a way of saying "this is what you *could* be getting if you had an iPhone". Also, Apple knows Windows-based iPhone developers are going to want to take advantage of their so-called "sweet solution" for 3rd party apps. Safari provides these developers with the necessary runtime environment.
Besides, Apple would rather have Windows users buying Macs instead of having these users mooch the freebie software off them.
... the number of users who re-downloaded the beta following the recent security fix? The legitimate figure is probably closer to 500,000 users who downloaded it twice.
From what I gathered from the EA stuff, they are only going to support the intel Macs in this movement. The problem though, is how exactly they plan to execute the deployment of these Macintosh versions. Are they still going to require six months to a year or longer to perform the conversions from DirectX to a Mac compatible format, like we had with the PowerPC macs? Will they delay the Windows versions of these games to allow for a simultaneous release of these titles?
If these issues still remain a constant problem for games ported to the Mac, then why both making the Mac versions at all when just about every intel mac user who cares about gaming probably already have Windows installed under Boot Camp?
Ever since the Mac went to intel processors, a number of previously major Mac-specific game sites, such as MacGamer, have been dead silent for several months now. Unless we start getting simultaneous releases on the Mac, most of us are just gonna continue to tolerate the annoyance of booting into Windows to avoid a lengthy wait for the next big thing in PC gaming.
But it doesn't have to be "just a phone"... Apple has simply choosen to let it be "just a phone".
Sure, those of you spouting "it's just a phone" now might be happy to spend over $1,000 on your "just a phone" iPhone now, but after the novelty of the web browser and the iPod functions wears off (and it will), "it's just a phone" will become "it's not enough", without third party support.
There are numerous ways Apple could have approached this other than redundantly telling us that their web browser does what any other web browser already does now. (Ok, so they didn't say it that bluntly, but instead left it up to the more intelligent of us to explain the obvious to you...)
For example, what would stop them from releasing a devkit for iPhone that only runs 3rd party apps on iPhones equiped with a special SIM chip dongle, and then allowing developers to submit their apps for certification and eventual deployment through iTunes Music Store? Apple could then collect a commission off every app sold.
Instead, forcing developers to go the Web 2.0/AJAX route is going to result in extremely mediocre apps that all look exactly the same, or semi-featured apps that run slowly using the iPhone as a dumb terminal across AT&T's mediocre cellular data network to a server hosted by the developer that does all the processing and spews the result back to the iPhone. Depending on the complexity of these "apps", small time developers won't be able to afford on-going support for them for very long, unless they charge subscription fees... something that won't go over well with iPhone users already paying a premium just to use the network itself.
Either way, third party development is going to be less than impressive, no matter which end of the iPhone you're on... all because Apple is limiting otherwise good hardware to being nothing more than "just a phone".
Isn't the kind of situation where the RIAA send their own militia to "assist" in raids like these a dangerous conflict of interest? If there are enough of these goose-stepping RIAA gestappo guards running around during the raid, misdirecting the actual law enforcement officers around them, what would prevent any additional RIAA guys from walking in during the chaos to plant evidence (like the duplication machine they mention), ensuring they can detain at least one person to make an example of before the public?
It's almost like giving the ok to a rape victim's family to participate in the bust of the suspect and trusting that none of them would throttle the guy before the police got to him.
The iTunes-compatible motorola phones were always intended to fail from day one. They were severely crippled compared to most low-end MP3 players at the time. The only purpose these phones served was to see if there was a market for phones with iPod-like integration, but only with features so excessively limited that Apple could crush it at any time by entering the phone manufacturing business themselves.
Comparing the Motorola phones to the Lisa probably has every Lisa in the world rolling over in their mass-grave.
It's hard to consider it a fault of Microsoft that the system appeals mostly with hard-core gamers when we already know hard core gamers in the PC world are more than happy to spend a hefty premium to have the fastest hardware available. The power of the hardware and the bragging rights that come with being privileged enough to own such hardware is often far more important to a hard-core gamer than the games themselves.
On the other hand, people who are planning to buy mostly kid-friendly games aren't going to care what system they buy just as long as it's not too expensive. Most kids who'd play these games aren't going to care about how good the graphics of a game are, just as long as they can still play the game in question. For people like this, the PS2 works just as well as the 360. The 360 would simply be unnecessary overkill for playing the latest kids movie turned game of the week.
If Microsoft truly wants to have the 360 appeal to this area of the gaming market, they shold price the 360 competatively with the PS2 (or at least the Wii), rather than trying to force the system's legitimacy with games like Viva Pinata (which could have ran on the PS2 by trading the model complexity for a few texturing tricks).