I hadn't thought of that, but now that you mention it, here are a couple more software companies that embed ads into their products: Blizzard: ads in Battle.net chat areas Hotline: Ads in the new v1.5 client
One: Apple introduced banner ads into its operating system with the launch of Mac OS 8. The Sherlock search function displays ad banners when conducting an Internet search. This was to placate the owners of the search engines that Sherlock uses so that Yahoo, Excite, etc. wouldn't lose out on revenue that would have been generated from the hordes of Mac users who could suddenly by-pass their gold mine. I'm not sure if the money from those ads is split between Apple and the search engine(s) or if it goes to the engines exclusively.
Additionally, you can search various web sites through Sherlock plug-ins, so I guess those ads would also be shown for sites such as MacOSRumors.
Two: I used to work for a major entertainment website who realied heavily on ads and sponsorships to be profitable. Over the past two years, the number of ads that ran continued to increase, while the cost per ad continued to decrease at the same rate. This meant sponsorships were needed to maintain the revenue stream. Increasingly content was created to match sponsorship opportunities and was plastered with the sponsor's logo wherever possible. Because this leads to less-than-enticing content, the number of visits is likely to drop, further damaging the ad revenue tally and making it more difficult to attract more sponsors.
You prove my point exactly. I said the OS community is vilifying ALL new OpenSource/FreeSource licenses, blindly comparing them to what has come before. It just happens that Apple is the context of my comment, but it applies to every new OS licensor. It is possible, even probable, that the GNU license and its variants are not the best ways to go, especially in a situation where a commercial coporation is involved. We have to figure out what will work for the future, and the rigidity of GNU won't serve us well there. The future is definitely in the cooperation between OS and commercial endevours.
RE: Has apple decided to become a hardware company
Apple had ALWAYS been a hardware company and will continue to be one. The vast majority of its profits come from selling hardware, not from sales of the MacOS. In every business comparison, Apple is lumped into the hardware column, competing against Compaq, Dell, etc., not Micro$oft. In light of this fact, Steve Jobs and company have made a concerted effort to shift to using standardized PC parts (IDE drives, USB ports, etc.) in order to drive their costs down and equalize price/performance ratios.
Because of these facts, some have speculated that Apple will NEVER release MacOSX for Intel hardware because that would lead to cuts in their own hardware sales. Perhaps if the days got really gloomy, they'd switch just to save their butts at the very last minute, but it doesn't look like that senario is going to happen any timesoon.
Nevertheless, that doesn't stop one of us from porting Darwin to Intel iron. It'll be interesting if enough developers get on board to do just that.
Exactly how does the emulator make it easier to pirate games? The VGS reads games directly from the CD Drive, so to create warez versions of games you need to have a CD-R drive, to burn new copies. How many people with an iMac have this sort of set-up? Very few. Heck, USB burners are just beginning to arrive on the shelves. And the Mac market is hardly large enough to make a dent in Sony's PStation sales.
I don't advocate boycotting Sony. In fact, it appears that there is little that WE as a community can do. It's all in the hnands of a judge who likely doesn't understand technology very well, as are a lot of decisions like this. Ignore it, continue to use the VGS if you have it.
Or could we consider using the pirated copy a form of civil disobedience?
It's fine but I notice a few strange things....
on
APSL 1.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
I suppose AAPL is being substituted for APSL.
APSL = Apple Public Source License AAPL = NASDAQ symbol for Apple Computer, Inc.
It's possible that the Linux community is in danger of becoming calcified by OS bigotry and not considering new opportunities and possibilities. The overwhelmingly negative reaction Apple's overtures is one evidence of this, but the constant infighting about which distrib is the best is another.
How many programmers actually have read and completely understand the GPL or other copyleft agreements? Probably damn few. All this nit picking about the Apple license is pointless since those who are griping are never going to work on Apple's stuff no matter what is actually in the APSL.
Certainly Apple has a history that says we shouldn't trust them. They've gone back o their word many many times, broken promises and changed directions at the drop of a hat. But, that was the old Apple and the old Steve Jobs. Things are different now, there is a solid group of guys running the Apple colored show and everyone knows that one more screw up now spells the end for the company. Of course, there is always the remote possibility that Steve J. could leave and then everything would go to hell in a handbasket. Still, the fact that Apple is spending good money on lawyers to bang out this APSL and revise the thing with input from Bruce Perens and ESR should be considered evidence of their good faith.
Where I think the Open Source/Linux community has the biggest problem is that they perceive the Mac OS as a toy, a lusers OS. However, with all this talk of "world domination" Linux users should be more attentive to the fact that Apple is taking (stealing?) the power portions of the open source movement (BSD, etc.) and adding the luser-friendly interface most of the world craves. This points to the possibility of Mac OS X eventually overshadowing Linux as the powerful consumer network OS. We can look at this as competition, or a partner/helper in bringing truly powerful computing to everyone, not just the linux monks.
This is exactly what the Gov's lawsuit against Microsoft is all about. And it is an excellent example of how M$ intends to weild its monoploy power once Netscape is completely out of the race.
That said, I think if M$ takes this route, they will be immediately challenged by a new free browser. Who, I don't know. I mean, that's the exact tactic they took to destroy Netscape, so what's to stop someone else from trying the same thing. M$ will then be forced make its browser free once more.
Unless you don't think that any browser is free. Those morons purchasing copies of Windows, or boxes with Win already on them are subsidizing the free browsers everyone else is using.
The same lawyer quoted in this press release said on the Today show this morning that although the kid had only been to a rifle range once the exposure to video games had given him a rifle shotting ability "at the highest Army ranking." If he makes a similar case in court, any competent defense attorney for the video game manufacturers should be able to get this case dismissed in under five minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it was IBM. But I've heard the updated version much more frequently these days.
There's an old saying that goes, "Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft."
May the guy at EDS be the first of many...
I hadn't thought of that, but now that you mention it, here are a couple more software companies that embed ads into their products:
Blizzard: ads in Battle.net chat areas
Hotline: Ads in the new v1.5 client
One: Apple introduced banner ads into its operating system with the launch of Mac OS 8. The Sherlock search function displays ad banners when conducting an Internet search. This was to placate the owners of the search engines that Sherlock uses so that Yahoo, Excite, etc. wouldn't lose out on revenue that would have been generated from the hordes of Mac users who could suddenly by-pass their gold mine. I'm not sure if the money from those ads is split between Apple and the search engine(s) or if it goes to the engines exclusively.
Additionally, you can search various web sites through Sherlock plug-ins, so I guess those ads would also be shown for sites such as MacOSRumors.
Two: I used to work for a major entertainment website who realied heavily on ads and sponsorships to be profitable. Over the past two years, the number of ads that ran continued to increase, while the cost per ad continued to decrease at the same rate. This meant sponsorships were needed to maintain the revenue stream. Increasingly content was created to match sponsorship opportunities and was plastered with the sponsor's logo wherever possible. Because this leads to less-than-enticing content, the number of visits is likely to drop, further damaging the ad revenue tally and making it more difficult to attract more sponsors.
You prove my point exactly. I said the OS community is vilifying ALL new OpenSource/FreeSource licenses, blindly comparing them to what has come before. It just happens that Apple is the context of my comment, but it applies to every new OS licensor. It is possible, even probable, that the GNU license and its variants are not the best ways to go, especially in a situation where a commercial coporation is involved. We have to figure out what will work for the future, and the rigidity of GNU won't serve us well there. The future is definitely in the cooperation between OS and commercial endevours.
Apple had ALWAYS been a hardware company and will continue to be one. The vast majority of its profits come from selling hardware, not from sales of the MacOS. In every business comparison, Apple is lumped into the hardware column, competing against Compaq, Dell, etc., not Micro$oft. In light of this fact, Steve Jobs and company have made a concerted effort to shift to using standardized PC parts (IDE drives, USB ports, etc.) in order to drive their costs down and equalize price/performance ratios.
Because of these facts, some have speculated that Apple will NEVER release MacOSX for Intel hardware because that would lead to cuts in their own hardware sales. Perhaps if the days got really gloomy, they'd switch just to save their butts at the very last minute, but it doesn't look like that senario is going to happen any timesoon.
Nevertheless, that doesn't stop one of us from porting Darwin to Intel iron. It'll be interesting if enough developers get on board to do just that.
I don't advocate boycotting Sony. In fact, it appears that there is little that WE as a community can do. It's all in the hnands of a judge who likely doesn't understand technology very well, as are a lot of decisions like this. Ignore it, continue to use the VGS if you have it.
Or could we consider using the pirated copy a form of civil disobedience?
APSL = Apple Public Source License AAPL = NASDAQ symbol for Apple Computer, Inc.
It's possible that the Linux community is in danger of becoming calcified by OS bigotry and not considering new opportunities and possibilities. The overwhelmingly negative reaction Apple's overtures is one evidence of this, but the constant infighting about which distrib is the best is another.
Certainly Apple has a history that says we shouldn't trust them. They've gone back o their word many many times, broken promises and changed directions at the drop of a hat. But, that was the old Apple and the old Steve Jobs. Things are different now, there is a solid group of guys running the Apple colored show and everyone knows that one more screw up now spells the end for the company. Of course, there is always the remote possibility that Steve J. could leave and then everything would go to hell in a handbasket. Still, the fact that Apple is spending good money on lawyers to bang out this APSL and revise the thing with input from Bruce Perens and ESR should be considered evidence of their good faith.
Where I think the Open Source/Linux community has the biggest problem is that they perceive the Mac OS as a toy, a lusers OS. However, with all this talk of "world domination" Linux users should be more attentive to the fact that Apple is taking (stealing?) the power portions of the open source movement (BSD, etc.) and adding the luser-friendly interface most of the world craves. This points to the possibility of Mac OS X eventually overshadowing Linux as the powerful consumer network OS. We can look at this as competition, or a partner/helper in bringing truly powerful computing to everyone, not just the linux monks.
This is exactly what the Gov's lawsuit against Microsoft is all about. And it is an excellent example of how M$ intends to weild its monoploy power once Netscape is completely out of the race.
That said, I think if M$ takes this route, they will be immediately challenged by a new free browser. Who, I don't know. I mean, that's the exact tactic they took to destroy Netscape, so what's to stop someone else from trying the same thing. M$ will then be forced make its browser free once more.
Unless you don't think that any browser is free. Those morons purchasing copies of Windows, or boxes with Win already on them are subsidizing the free browsers everyone else is using.
The same lawyer quoted in this press release said on the Today show this morning that although the kid had only been to a rifle range once the exposure to video games had given him a rifle shotting ability "at the highest Army ranking." If he makes a similar case in court, any competent defense attorney for the video game manufacturers should be able to get this case dismissed in under five minutes.