Apple competes with the rest of the PC market, and while its market share is low, its profits are high.
They fill a comfortable niche, a position that Gateway, Micron and other PC makers look at very enviously.
Apple doesn't consider IBM's servers to be a threat. Nor does it consider these poorly conceived, overpriced PPC motherboards to be a threat. I dare you to provide any evidence that proves otherwise.
I guess it's "cognitive dissonance" when the American people decide something that is counter to your beliefs.
You might want to start thinking why most people don't think the "free market" is a panacea like you do. Why most people think national and personal security is an activity that should not be centered on profit. Why they are inclined to trust their government more often than they do large corporations. Maybe you'll experience a little cognitive dissonance yourself.
Apple won't allow clones, period. And without the promise of Mac OS X, current PPC motherboards are too expensive to both with (if you just wanna run Linux, you can do it much cheaper on x86).
IBM made the CHRP spec publicly available in 1998, and I don't know of any production motherboards that have been made from this design. It's just too expensive for a small company to produce PPC in bulk.
I seriously doubt that IBM will be releasing the motherboard spec for the 970 anytime soon. Because people might actually go for the 970 (with its truly 900mhz bus, not this quad-pumped 133 garbage) to run Linux.
And since IBM will be selling it in very expensive machines running Linux, they don't want you to be able to get approximately the same effect from a machine down the street.
So...Apple will probably be the cheapest place to get a PPC motherboard. If IBM and Apple's motherboard designs are similar enough, it's conceivable that you could run Mac OS X on the IBM, but it wouldn't be very useful.
'Shareholders and consumers' are moneyed interests. They provide no incentive for an organization to act for the common good. Why was airport security quickly federalized after September 11th? Because people don't want their lives compromised by airline cost cutting measures.
The government is a meaningless abstraction. Getting involved in politics means communicating with people! At the local level it's not difficult. Hell, even influencing a large governmental organization like the FCC is not impossible. Thanks to grassroots efforts, the FCC denied the merger of Echostar with DirecTV. They also opened up the microradio spectrum. That's right, those "faceless bureaucrats" listen to ordinary citizens, you just have to take the effort to make your voice heard.
And all that "government naturally expands at the expense of freedom" crap might sound poetic, but let's face it. People don't want the "freedom" to die from diseased food. They don't want the "freedom" to risk their lives every time they decide to get on airplane.
Do you honestly think people were more free in 1800 than they are now? I guess you can conveniently ignore slavery, indentured servitude, the Alien and Sedition acts, etc. since they don't fit into your libertarian revisionist view of history. I wish you could actually travel back in time to 1796, I'm sure you'd love it there.
Good job focusing on the joke at the end of my comment. It helps to ignore the serious points beforehand.
And doubly good job pedanticizing the difference between a democracy and a republic. It doesn't have anything to do with the discussion, but I'm proud that someone knows their civics.
You say that nothing belongs to people, only individuals. Then you say that the government owns public parks? I'm a little confused.
The government runs national parks, which have rules designated by state and local authorities. These rules are designed by ELECTED OFFICIALS. Yes, accountability, what a concept. Where is the accountability to US citizens in a privately-held organization? Answer: there isn't much!
You conclude with some statement about nature abhorring a power vacuum, and I guess you're trying to say that the mechanisms of government naturally gravitate towards less, rather than more, freedom. Doesn't really coincide with reality, but hey, it'd make a nice bumper sticker.
If the FCC refuses to follow its charter, then it's time to elect legislative officials who will reform the structure. But it seems to me that you'd rather chop down some trees.
In the US, broadcast media (AM, FM, UHF, VHF) belongs to the people, much like our national parks do. This is what the FCC Charter actually states. However, nobody knows this, and the commercial media interests that have infested TV and radio aren't gonna tell anyone.
The only reason that the FCC started issuing licenses is because of the limitation of spectrum. If we use modern technology to modulate the signal, these limitations are lifted, and there's no need to regulate who should be on the air and who shouldn't. If the FCC was acting in accordance its charter, I should be able to broadcast a stream of curse words over the air 24/7. The way it is now, I'm limited to a megaphone and my vocal chords (until they give out). Obviously, this is counter to free speech and democracy.
Long, long ago (early 1910's to be exact) the US parcelled out its radio frequencies. They were/are supposed to be resources dedicated to the benefit of us all, like our national parks.
Of course that ideal has eroded considerably over the years. The commercial US media has proven time and time again that it can't be relied upon for substantial news or even decent entertainment content. To all my laissez faire friends, look no further than Clear Channel to see how this actually hurts the market...
After the FCC relaxed ownership regulations, the radio industry is actually smaller, less jobs are available, and musicians' barriers to radio play are higher than ever.
PBS and NPR are merely bones thrown out to the public, a meaningless gesture. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has no more interest in providing decent news than FOX or CNN-look no further than the 2000 Presidential debates, where Jim Lehrer supported the blocking of third-party candidates from the discussion for proof.
So what needs to happen? A lot of people have noted that the amount of spectrum available through digital 'modulation' makes it possible to broadcast an almost unlimited number of radio channels...and this technique could be applied to television as well, to a lesser extent. With limited spectrum a thing of the past, public and commercial interests can share the media, each supporting the other. Here's what I'd like to see happen:
1)Corporation for Public Broadcasting/PBS/NPR dismantled. Public funding allocated for those organizations should be used to build a strong public access infrastructure. This new public access project awards grants to budding television producers. This public access network could also serve as a 'farm league' for larger commercial interests. Successful public-access producers could be picked up by the larger networks-allowing risk-free, cost-free market research for Big Media. Everybody wins!
2)FCC laws limiting media ownership strengthened. Let's limit how many media outlets, and what kind of outlets each corporation can own. Media outlets should be required to report their owners, as well as what other media outlets are owned by their owners, on "public service announcements" several times per day. You'd be surprised at how many people don't know that AOL owns CNN, Time Magazine, many local cable companies, etc.
3)Classrooms teach semiotics/media literacy. Knowing how to dissect and critique popular media is very important for a free-thinking society. As (somebody? Gramsci?) said, "The power of ideology is that it presents itself as normal." People need to know that 'objective' news is impossible, and how to spot astroturfing, shilling, and other forms of deception.
So...that's my long-winded take on how to 'fix the media'. Appoint me as FCC chairman in 2004!
Okay I posted this because this thing has been posted 4 times and no human progress is being made! So here's a story I just thought up off the top of my head.
The Guy Down the Hall Smells Weird By: Gizzmonic
There's this guy down the hall from where I work who smells damn weird. He's always eating peanut butter and banana sandwiches (ugh that shit is ripe) or sometimes exotic Pakistani food (smells both spicy and ripe). Luckily I don't share an office with him, but every once in awhile I have to go in there and do stuff like check the bulletin board.
Anyway, one day I was in there checking the bulletin board while this guy (let's call him 'Steve' was eating away at his sandwich. Anyway, Steve looked a little funny that day. He didn't say "hi" when I came in, but I guessed that he was engrossed in his sandwich.
Anyway so I'm looking at the bulletin board and all off a sudden I hear this growling noise. And I think to myself, "Man, Steve sure is enjoying his sandwich!" Then I feel this hot breath on my neck, and I turn around, and Steve's face looks all weird. He's drooling, and his complexion is really pale...and he yells, "MUST....HAVE...BRAINS!!!!" which causes the peanut butter and banana sandwich he was eating to drip out the side of his mouth.
So anyway, I tried to ignore him, and keep checking the bulletin board, but you know how people are. When they suddenly turn into bloodthirsty zombies after eating a diseased sandwich, you can't get them to leave you alone!
So anyway, I clubbed Steve with my coffee cup, then I deftly manuevered towards his filing cabinet, which has a blowtorch and some other goodies in it (I work for a nonprofit). Anyway, I toasted Steve and then my boss comes and and she's like, "What the hell are you doing? Now who's gonna finish the payroll?"
And I was like, "Well, he ate those damn sandwiches and turned into a zombie, what was I supposed to do?" And she was like, "Well, I see your point, but clean it up!"
I'm not gonna clean it up. The damn custodians can do that. They got an easy job anyway.
I think Adobe has been very lazy about optimizing Mac code for OS X. They get at least 50% of their sales for Photoshop and Illustrator on the Mac platform.
True, there have been some designers that pulled a switch to Windows after Win2000, but there are far more that would give up their Mac "when you pry it from my cold, dead, fingers."
Look what happened to Quark when they decided to give Apple the finger...they lost a lot more customers who switched to InDesign instead of trashing their computers.
Adobe's not gonna abandon the Mac anytime soon. But I think their Carbon apps will take a few revisions before they reach the quality level of the OS 9 applications (besides Illustrator, which is total crap on any platform).
So you could play your games and take pictures too! But waitaminute...there's also the Game boy Camera!
This 'digital convergence' stuff gives me fits! I'm off to duct tape a bunch of live grasshoppers to my back, masturbate, and proclaim myself the Messiah!
That's interesting. You know, I bet if Kirt Kobain was alive, he'd probably have a Dig Dug ringtone, and maybe even play Monkeyball from Sprint PCS. I know I would!
PS. This site has gone down faster than my dog on a juicy, well marbled steak. Any retreads?
it's not the severity of punishment that dissuades people, it's the chances of getting caught. if the chances of getting caught (no matter what the punishment is) are high, then most people will not commit the crime.
if the punishment is very high, but the chances of getting caught are low, people will do it anyway. Look at the amount of drug use that takes place in the US, this is a perfect example.
Why isn't Final Fantasy just a DVD? You could easily play it by just clicking up or down on the menu. I predict the next step for Final Fantasy is a DVD, so you don't have waste time walking around and fighting monsters to get to those awesome FMV's!
I'd like to see "both arrows on both ends" on Mac OS X scrollbars, and the old Mac OS 9 method of file navigation in Open/Save dialogues. Other than that, OS X is cool with me.
Arcades have been dying quicker than *BSD, for a number of reasons:
Arcade machines are friggin expensive.
Arcade machines have expensive, proprietary parts.
Arcade machines break. A lot.
Games have become increasingly greedy with their "Continue" function.
Games are too difficult and inaccessible for most people.
Home versions are usually better. (My, what a turnaround that is from the early days of arcades!)
Arcade hardware that uses a console for the base is a good step towards lowering the price. Yes, it's been done before, but the Xbox uses commodity parts like the Celeron and GeForce, so it could potentially be a lot cheaper.
A cabinet redesign to make arcade machines easier to carry would help. Perhaps with LCD technology making strides, we might see that. More durable joysticks wouldn't hurt either.
It's still possible for arcades to make money. Look at the success of DDR...it's a simple, accessible game that doesn't munch your quarters, and the arcade version is MUCH cooler than the home version.
Accessibility is such an important factor, too. I think you could make more money with an arcade full of Ms. Pac-Man and Tetris machines than with the latest Street Fighter clones. Just my opinion, of course...
Slashdot Mirror
Apple competes with the rest of the PC market, and while its market share is low, its profits are high.
They fill a comfortable niche, a position that Gateway, Micron and other PC makers look at very enviously.
Apple doesn't consider IBM's servers to be a threat. Nor does it consider these poorly conceived, overpriced PPC motherboards to be a threat. I dare you to provide any evidence that proves otherwise.
I guess it's "cognitive dissonance" when the American people decide something that is counter to your beliefs.
You might want to start thinking why most people don't think the "free market" is a panacea like you do. Why most people think national and personal security is an activity that should not be centered on profit. Why they are inclined to trust their government more often than they do large corporations. Maybe you'll experience a little cognitive dissonance yourself.
Apple won't allow clones, period. And without the promise of Mac OS X, current PPC motherboards are too expensive to both with (if you just wanna run Linux, you can do it much cheaper on x86).
IBM made the CHRP spec publicly available in 1998, and I don't know of any production motherboards that have been made from this design. It's just too expensive for a small company to produce PPC in bulk.
I seriously doubt that IBM will be releasing the motherboard spec for the 970 anytime soon. Because people might actually go for the 970 (with its truly 900mhz bus, not this quad-pumped 133 garbage) to run Linux.
And since IBM will be selling it in very expensive machines running Linux, they don't want you to be able to get approximately the same effect from a machine down the street.
So...Apple will probably be the cheapest place to get a PPC motherboard. If IBM and Apple's motherboard designs are similar enough, it's conceivable that you could run Mac OS X on the IBM, but it wouldn't be very useful.
'Shareholders and consumers' are moneyed interests. They provide no incentive for an organization to act for the common good. Why was airport security quickly federalized after September 11th? Because people don't want their lives compromised by airline cost cutting measures.
The government is a meaningless abstraction. Getting involved in politics means communicating with people! At the local level it's not difficult. Hell, even influencing a large governmental organization like the FCC is not impossible. Thanks to grassroots efforts, the FCC denied the merger of Echostar with DirecTV. They also opened up the microradio spectrum. That's right, those "faceless bureaucrats" listen to ordinary citizens, you just have to take the effort to make your voice heard.
And all that "government naturally expands at the expense of freedom" crap might sound poetic, but let's face it. People don't want the "freedom" to die from diseased food. They don't want the "freedom" to risk their lives every time they decide to get on airplane.
Do you honestly think people were more free in 1800 than they are now? I guess you can conveniently ignore slavery, indentured servitude, the Alien and Sedition acts, etc. since they don't fit into your libertarian revisionist view of history. I wish you could actually travel back in time to 1796, I'm sure you'd love it there.
Good job focusing on the joke at the end of my comment. It helps to ignore the serious points beforehand.
And doubly good job pedanticizing the difference between a democracy and a republic. It doesn't have anything to do with the discussion, but I'm proud that someone knows their civics.
You say that nothing belongs to people, only individuals. Then you say that the government owns public parks? I'm a little confused.
The government runs national parks, which have rules designated by state and local authorities. These rules are designed by ELECTED OFFICIALS. Yes, accountability, what a concept. Where is the accountability to US citizens in a privately-held organization? Answer: there isn't much!
You conclude with some statement about nature abhorring a power vacuum, and I guess you're trying to say that the mechanisms of government naturally gravitate towards less, rather than more, freedom. Doesn't really coincide with reality, but hey, it'd make a nice bumper sticker.
If the FCC refuses to follow its charter, then it's time to elect legislative officials who will reform the structure. But it seems to me that you'd rather chop down some trees.
In the US, broadcast media (AM, FM, UHF, VHF) belongs to the people, much like our national parks do. This is what the FCC Charter actually states. However, nobody knows this, and the commercial media interests that have infested TV and radio aren't gonna tell anyone.
The only reason that the FCC started issuing licenses is because of the limitation of spectrum. If we use modern technology to modulate the signal, these limitations are lifted, and there's no need to regulate who should be on the air and who shouldn't. If the FCC was acting in accordance its charter, I should be able to broadcast a stream of curse words over the air 24/7. The way it is now, I'm limited to a megaphone and my vocal chords (until they give out). Obviously, this is counter to free speech and democracy.
Long, long ago (early 1910's to be exact) the US parcelled out its radio frequencies. They were/are supposed to be resources dedicated to the benefit of us all, like our national parks.
Of course that ideal has eroded considerably over the years. The commercial US media has proven time and time again that it can't be relied upon for substantial news or even decent entertainment content. To all my laissez faire friends, look no further than Clear Channel to see how this actually hurts the market...
After the FCC relaxed ownership regulations, the radio industry is actually smaller, less jobs are available, and musicians' barriers to radio play are higher than ever.
PBS and NPR are merely bones thrown out to the public, a meaningless gesture. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has no more interest in providing decent news than FOX or CNN-look no further than the 2000 Presidential debates, where Jim Lehrer supported the blocking of third-party candidates from the discussion for proof.
So what needs to happen? A lot of people have noted that the amount of spectrum available through digital 'modulation' makes it possible to broadcast an almost unlimited number of radio channels...and this technique could be applied to television as well, to a lesser extent. With limited spectrum a thing of the past, public and commercial interests can share the media, each supporting the other. Here's what I'd like to see happen:
1)Corporation for Public Broadcasting/PBS/NPR dismantled. Public funding allocated for those organizations should be used to build a strong public access infrastructure. This new public access project awards grants to budding television producers. This public access network could also serve as a 'farm league' for larger commercial interests. Successful public-access producers could be picked up by the larger networks-allowing risk-free, cost-free market research for Big Media. Everybody wins!
2)FCC laws limiting media ownership strengthened. Let's limit how many media outlets, and what kind of outlets each corporation can own. Media outlets should be required to report their owners, as well as what other media outlets are owned by their owners, on "public service announcements" several times per day. You'd be surprised at how many people don't know that AOL owns CNN, Time Magazine, many local cable companies, etc.
3)Classrooms teach semiotics/media literacy. Knowing how to dissect and critique popular media is very important for a free-thinking society. As (somebody? Gramsci?) said, "The power of ideology is that it presents itself as normal." People need to know that 'objective' news is impossible, and how to spot astroturfing, shilling, and other forms of deception.
So...that's my long-winded take on how to 'fix the media'. Appoint me as FCC chairman in 2004!
Okay I posted this because this thing has been posted 4 times and no human progress is being made! So here's a story I just thought up off the top of my head.
The Guy Down the Hall Smells Weird
By: Gizzmonic
There's this guy down the hall from where I work who smells damn weird. He's always eating peanut butter and banana sandwiches (ugh that shit is ripe) or sometimes exotic Pakistani food (smells both spicy and ripe). Luckily I don't share an office with him, but every once in awhile I have to go in there and do stuff like check the bulletin board.
Anyway, one day I was in there checking the bulletin board while this guy (let's call him 'Steve' was eating away at his sandwich. Anyway, Steve looked a little funny that day. He didn't say "hi" when I came in, but I guessed that he was engrossed in his sandwich.
Anyway so I'm looking at the bulletin board and all off a sudden I hear this growling noise. And I think to myself, "Man, Steve sure is enjoying his sandwich!" Then I feel this hot breath on my neck, and I turn around, and Steve's face looks all weird. He's drooling, and his complexion is really pale...and he yells, "MUST....HAVE...BRAINS!!!!" which causes the peanut butter and banana sandwich he was eating to drip out the side of his mouth.
So anyway, I tried to ignore him, and keep checking the bulletin board, but you know how people are. When they suddenly turn into bloodthirsty zombies after eating a diseased sandwich, you can't get them to leave you alone!
So anyway, I clubbed Steve with my coffee cup, then I deftly manuevered towards his filing cabinet, which has a blowtorch and some other goodies in it (I work for a nonprofit). Anyway, I toasted Steve and then my boss comes and and she's like, "What the hell are you doing? Now who's gonna finish the payroll?"
And I was like, "Well, he ate those damn sandwiches and turned into a zombie, what was I supposed to do?" And she was like, "Well, I see your point, but clean it up!"
I'm not gonna clean it up. The damn custodians can do that. They got an easy job anyway.
let me guess...you read it for the articles, right?
No.
I post best, you uncivilized plebians! Go back to your tick-infested horse blanket of a computer and get out of my face!
I think Adobe has been very lazy about optimizing Mac code for OS X. They get at least 50% of their sales for Photoshop and Illustrator on the Mac platform.
True, there have been some designers that pulled a switch to Windows after Win2000, but there are far more that would give up their Mac "when you pry it from my cold, dead, fingers."
Look what happened to Quark when they decided to give Apple the finger...they lost a lot more customers who switched to InDesign instead of trashing their computers.
Adobe's not gonna abandon the Mac anytime soon. But I think their Carbon apps will take a few revisions before they reach the quality level of the OS 9 applications (besides Illustrator, which is total crap on any platform).
However, did you know that MAME has been ported to several digital cameras?
So you could play your games and take pictures too! But waitaminute...there's also the Game boy Camera!
This 'digital convergence' stuff gives me fits! I'm off to duct tape a bunch of live grasshoppers to my back, masturbate, and proclaim myself the Messiah!
Because I care! And because the rest of you are filthy hobosexuals!
Will I lose weight, feel more confident, and make the "big sale?"
Because if not, I'm not buying it!
That's interesting. You know, I bet if Kirt Kobain was alive, he'd probably have a Dig Dug ringtone, and maybe even play Monkeyball from Sprint PCS. I know I would!
PS. This site has gone down faster than my dog on a juicy, well marbled steak. Any retreads?
it's not the severity of punishment that dissuades people, it's the chances of getting caught. if the chances of getting caught (no matter what the punishment is) are high, then most people will not commit the crime.
if the punishment is very high, but the chances of getting caught are low, people will do it anyway. Look at the amount of drug use that takes place in the US, this is a perfect example.
Why isn't Final Fantasy just a DVD? You could easily play it by just clicking up or down on the menu. I predict the next step for Final Fantasy is a DVD, so you don't have waste time walking around and fighting monsters to get to those awesome FMV's!
So, removable optical media containing this operating system would be called...?
the back part is concave. show all your friends when you eat at IHOP, they'll be amazed!
And what does a "good post" have?
Show Desktop. Works for me.
I'd like to see "both arrows on both ends" on Mac OS X scrollbars, and the old Mac OS 9 method of file navigation in Open/Save dialogues. Other than that, OS X is cool with me.
Ineptitude is a killer!
Arcade hardware that uses a console for the base is a good step towards lowering the price. Yes, it's been done before, but the Xbox uses commodity parts like the Celeron and GeForce, so it could potentially be a lot cheaper.
A cabinet redesign to make arcade machines easier to carry would help. Perhaps with LCD technology making strides, we might see that. More durable joysticks wouldn't hurt either.
It's still possible for arcades to make money. Look at the success of DDR...it's a simple, accessible game that doesn't munch your quarters, and the arcade version is MUCH cooler than the home version.
Accessibility is such an important factor, too. I think you could make more money with an arcade full of Ms. Pac-Man and Tetris machines than with the latest Street Fighter clones. Just my opinion, of course...
Yes! The argumentatron, or whatever it's called! Someone please post a link to this nifty babblin' bot!
This could reinvigorate old arcades!
Think about how many moon games there are/were:
Lunar Lander
Asteroids
Moon Patrol
Miner 2049er
and of course,
Michael Jackson's Moonwalker (the arcade version, not the crappy genesis version)
China could be immortalized on many a high score screen for years to come!