Maybe you should have checked the "spam filter" checkbox. I get maybe one spam message a week ending up in my Hotmail inbox, and dozens appearing in my spam box.
A commercial PSX emulator. At the time it first came out, the best such emulator available, far from complete, but pretty cheap. A lot of people bought it, having been given the impression that it would continue to be developed until it was finished.
It didn't work, of course. Development continued for a fair while, and there was a fair bit of improvement, but then the releases dried up, and the product was still nowhere near as good as had been promised. And by that time, the free alternatives were catching up.
A lot of people got left with a bitter taste in their mouth over that one.
Yes, these people are entitled to charge for their work. But buying into an unfinished bit of software doesn't buy you any guarantees, and it does increase the pressure on the people being paid considerably.
Frankly, the existing model - either you release your software for free, or you charge for it when it's finished - seems better all round.
Not everyone reads Slashdot 24/7. You may have seen a previous article; a lot of people didn't. Perhaps you could simply ignore articles which seem redundant to you, and leave them to the people they interest?
The "higher resolution = smaller controls" setup is pretty silly, really. What we should have is a system where the text and the user interface are sized independently of the screen resolution, and merely get more detailed as resolution increases past the point where they would become too small to use.
(I know you _can_ do this sort of thing for text and so on in most operating systems, but it doesn't work automatically, or at all for icons, pointers, scrollbars, and the like - and it should.)
People have been renting flats for centuries. More aptly, they've been renting cars for decades. In fact, don't most cars these days have planned obsolescence built in?
The obvious solution is for Microsoft to offer their software on a hire-purchase scheme...
Remember, the software industry in the US has enough clout to get laws passed in its favour - and to block laws it doesn't like. And in such a case it'd be certain to use it.
The challenge he accepted was to produce "a compressor and several COMPRESSED files whose
total file size [was] less than the original uncompressed file and from which [he could] regenerate the original uncompressed file".
(Emphasis mine.)
The files he produced were not compressed. They contained blocks of the original data unchanged. Ergo, he failed the challenge, even under the modified terms.
As you should be aware, a trademark is only valid for similar uses. If Mastercard has trademarked "priceless", it has ONLY trademarked "priceless" in the context of a credit card (advertisment?). You're still free to describe a diamond as priceless (as long as you're not planning to buy it with Visa).
Product placement? Fine.
Billboards? Fine.
But sports games already try to mimic the TV experience (probably because game players watch more than they play); they could argue that fully fledged commercial breaks "added to the realism"...
Slashdot Mirror
The letter 'h' is a letter, which is sometimes used to represent the sound [h], sometimes other sounds, and sometimes is silent.
The sound [h] is usually considered a consonant.
Maybe you should have checked the "spam filter" checkbox. I get maybe one spam message a week ending up in my Hotmail inbox, and dozens appearing in my spam box.
Be fair - at least they're trying.
(Very.)
If you're seriously worried about a heatsink falling off, you could always try positioning your case so that your motherboard is horizontal.
Frankly I think people are being just a little too paranoid about this whole issue. It's like monitor implosion. Possible != likely.
Did you ever hear of Bleem!?
A commercial PSX emulator. At the time it first came out, the best such emulator available, far from complete, but pretty cheap. A lot of people bought it, having been given the impression that it would continue to be developed until it was finished.
It didn't work, of course. Development continued for a fair while, and there was a fair bit of improvement, but then the releases dried up, and the product was still nowhere near as good as had been promised. And by that time, the free alternatives were catching up.
A lot of people got left with a bitter taste in their mouth over that one.
Yes, these people are entitled to charge for their work. But buying into an unfinished bit of software doesn't buy you any guarantees, and it does increase the pressure on the people being paid considerably.
Frankly, the existing model - either you release your software for free, or you charge for it when it's finished - seems better all round.
Not everyone reads Slashdot 24/7. You may have seen a previous article; a lot of people didn't. Perhaps you could simply ignore articles which seem redundant to you, and leave them to the people they interest?
"The price of freedom is $1bn every four years."
(attr. G. W. Bush)
The "higher resolution = smaller controls" setup is pretty silly, really. What we should have is a system where the text and the user interface are sized independently of the screen resolution, and merely get more detailed as resolution increases past the point where they would become too small to use. (I know you _can_ do this sort of thing for text and so on in most operating systems, but it doesn't work automatically, or at all for icons, pointers, scrollbars, and the like - and it should.)
They're prettier than AOL CDs. You get what you pay for.
I'd say that was realistic enough. See also "England last autumn".
People have been renting flats for centuries. More aptly, they've been renting cars for decades. In fact, don't most cars these days have planned obsolescence built in? The obvious solution is for Microsoft to offer their software on a hire-purchase scheme...
y?
Remember, the software industry in the US has enough clout to get laws passed in its favour - and to block laws it doesn't like. And in such a case it'd be certain to use it.
The challenge he accepted was to produce "a compressor and several COMPRESSED files whose
total file size [was] less than the original uncompressed file and from which [he could] regenerate the original uncompressed file".
(Emphasis mine.)
The files he produced were not compressed. They contained blocks of the original data unchanged. Ergo, he failed the challenge, even under the modified terms.
As you should be aware, a trademark is only valid for similar uses. If Mastercard has trademarked "priceless", it has ONLY trademarked "priceless" in the context of a credit card (advertisment?). You're still free to describe a diamond as priceless (as long as you're not planning to buy it with Visa).
RTL.
Product placement? Fine.
Billboards? Fine.
But sports games already try to mimic the TV experience (probably because game players watch more than they play); they could argue that fully fledged commercial breaks "added to the realism"...