Q. Do you ever get impatient with Bungie, the developers of Halo 2, the sequel to your flagship title Halo? A. Software development is part science and part art. I have a lot of faith in those guys to execute and produce on time, just like they did for Halo for the Xbox launch.
Because Bungie can always be relied on for release dates. I'm still waiting for my Q1 2001 Halo PC release.
They're scared because sooner or later people are going to take notice that most of the money they pay for a CD goes to a few at the top of the company, and not the artists and engineers who actually made the album. And not put up with it.
They're scared because the distribution channel they control (CD) is becoming less relevant with new standards such as Ogg Vorbis, Flac and mp3.
They're scared because much of their mega-expensive equipment (that ensures artists must use their resources) is becoming obsolete, next to a commodity computer with a 24-bit sound card, a bit of external hardware, and decent mixing software.
They're scared because soon no one will need them. An artist will be able to hire a sound engineer with a sub-$10,000 studio (complete with Linux PC), and immediately distribute/market their own music. Whether this means charge per download or rely on 'suggested donations' per copy is up to the artist/manager.
One for example: If you have written a decent open-source package that is useful to a business, they may be inclined to 'sponsor' you to add extra functionality. Sure, they can do this in-house (OSS, after all), but it may be more cost-effective to pay someone with prior knowledge of the project.
In other news, the once monolithic software giant Microsoft has been forced to make good on prior rulings by the US supreme court, which declared Microsoft an illegal monopoly and a threat to national security. The groundbreaking trial lasted three months, as witness after witness presented evidence on the 874 claims made against the corporation, ranging from freelance programmers whos works had been stolen, to governments and schools who had been forced to submit to Microsofts "bully tactics" with software licensing.
The judgement was effective immediately: All trading by Microsoft is to cease and the company is to be completely dissolved. At 9am eastern time, all assets held by Microsoft and subsidiaries, including reserves, were confiscated and distributed to the beneficiaries of the Gates Foundation and other charities.
All patents and other Intellectual Property owned by Microsoft Corporation and its subsidiaries which were issued under the old "stop-people-using-it" system are to be released to the Free Software Foundation under the new GPL Patent, preventing the withholding the technology from other developers.
The board of directors and lead programmers of Microsoft, now unemployable in the technology industry, have been offered positions in parking lots and soup kitchens around the country. All other employees have been given redundancy of 1 years salary, and some have already started rebuilding their former businesses which were bought out or squashed by Microsoft over the last twenty years.
This news follows eight years of steadily dwindling interest in Microsoft, as the corporation has not managed to adapt to new markets, insisting on an archaic business model. Their policies on such software as their legacy flagship "Windows" has steadily been replaced with the Open Source business model. Their latest offering, "Windows SX", released six months ago, sold a mere 400 copies.
William Henry Gates III, who has been under house arrest since June for attempting to bribe the Chief Justice with a large Hawiian island, was unavailable for comment.
Disclaimer: I prefer widescreen. Anti-disclaimer: But I can see why not everyone would.
For low-resolution formats such as VHS, full-screen may still be preferrable, since you've only got so many pixels[*] to play with, and using up a third of the picture with black bars further lowers the effective vertical resolution of the actual picture.
Of course I realise that strictly it's not 'adding black bars' but zooming out to see the full picture, but the result is the same.
The big advantage with widescreen is being able to see the 'whole' scene, not just the centre of attention. There are some movies where what's happening at the periphery of the screen just isn't important (mainly chick flicks, I guess), but you want to see as much detail as possible in the foreground (auch as characters faces, or writing on surfaces). In these circumstances full-screen may be preferrable to widescreen.
Another case is when you're a poor student and only have a 14" telly. Suddenly screen real-estate becomes paramount, and wide-screen just isn't an option unless you want to park your chair 1 metre from the set.
[*] I realise that in the video industry the term 'pixels' is discouraged since measurements are done in 'lines'. Video signals are stored and transmitted in pixels nonetheless.
I find it deeply concerning that a chip maker has to seek permission from an illegal software corporation in order to develop for a piece of hardware.
I wonder what Transmeta had to do to get it okayed? Perhaps Linus had to sign some document saying he wouldn't write or accept any kernel patches which would allow Linux to support the display.
No, Halo made by Bungie long before they were bought out my Microsoft. PC version was close to release at that time until ordered to shelve it and develop for XBox instead.
Why is the violation of somebody's elses rights considered any more immoral than anything else?
After all, conquering and wiping out 'lesser' species is considered vital to evolutionary models, which may support violating anothers 'rights' being perfectly moral.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that we must put consideration to where our morals come from, and why we hold them.
Slashdot Mirror
Q. Do you ever get impatient with Bungie, the developers of Halo 2, the sequel to your flagship title Halo?
A. Software development is part science and part art. I have a lot of faith in those guys to execute and produce on time, just like they did for Halo for the Xbox launch.
Because Bungie can always be relied on for release dates. I'm still waiting for my Q1 2001 Halo PC release.
How quickly we forget.
And a pancake?
GPL is not the virus.
GPL is the cure.
I guess you aren't familiar with some of the hills around where I live.
Even the fitness elite struggle to cycle up them, much less the rest of us.
You mean like PanIP, Rambus or Caldera?
Caldera (owner of the "SCO" brand) are just peeved that Linus described them as "a parasite".
They're scared because sooner or later people are going to take notice that most of the money they pay for a CD goes to a few at the top of the company, and not the artists and engineers who actually made the album. And not put up with it.
They're scared because the distribution channel they control (CD) is becoming less relevant with new standards such as Ogg Vorbis, Flac and mp3.
They're scared because much of their mega-expensive equipment (that ensures artists must use their resources) is becoming obsolete, next to a commodity computer with a 24-bit sound card, a bit of external hardware, and decent mixing software.
They're scared because soon no one will need them. An artist will be able to hire a sound engineer with a sub-$10,000 studio (complete with Linux PC), and immediately distribute/market their own music.
Whether this means charge per download or rely on 'suggested donations' per copy is up to the artist/manager.
Yes, they are scared, and with good reason.
Great call.
But you know, I'd be very surprised if the disc didn't play in Ogle, mplayer or Xine.
Perhpas we should start 'returning' crap DVD software too.
I hope you didn't include your return address on the envelope...
As far as I can tell:
In August 2000, the company known as SCO became Tarantella Inc.
The SCO tradename was bought by Caldera (now a subsidiary of Microsoft)
So this lawsuit isn't from the original SCO at all, but the new company using the SCO tradename.
That would be 110% love/sex/romance, -5% plot, and -5% music.
A further breakdown of that 110%:
105% sex
5% romance
0% love
Consider different business models.
One for example: If you have written a decent open-source package that is useful to a business, they may be inclined to 'sponsor' you to add extra functionality. Sure, they can do this in-house (OSS, after all), but it may be more cost-effective to pay someone with prior knowledge of the project.
I would consider installing Linux onto an XBox akin to repairing it.
Delphi.
In other news, the once monolithic software giant Microsoft has been forced to make good on prior rulings by the US supreme court, which declared Microsoft an illegal monopoly and a threat to national security. The groundbreaking trial lasted three months, as witness after witness presented evidence on the 874 claims made against the corporation, ranging from freelance programmers whos works had been stolen, to governments and schools who had been forced to submit to Microsofts "bully tactics" with software licensing.
The judgement was effective immediately: All trading by Microsoft is to cease
and the company is to be completely dissolved. At 9am eastern time, all assets held by Microsoft and subsidiaries, including reserves, were confiscated and distributed to the beneficiaries of the Gates Foundation and other charities.
All patents and other Intellectual Property owned by Microsoft Corporation and its subsidiaries which were issued under the old "stop-people-using-it" system are to be released to the Free Software Foundation under the new GPL Patent, preventing the withholding the technology from other developers.
The board of directors and lead programmers of Microsoft, now unemployable in the technology industry, have been offered positions in parking lots and soup kitchens around the country. All other employees have been given redundancy of 1 years salary, and some have already started rebuilding their former businesses which were bought out or squashed by Microsoft over the last twenty years.
This news follows eight years of steadily dwindling interest in Microsoft, as the corporation has not managed to adapt to new markets, insisting on an archaic business model. Their policies on such software as their legacy flagship "Windows" has steadily been replaced with the Open Source business model. Their latest offering, "Windows SX", released six months ago, sold a mere 400 copies.
William Henry Gates III, who has been under house arrest since June for attempting to bribe the Chief Justice with a large Hawiian island, was unavailable for comment.
... that I long ago stopped using any and all Microsoft products.
This site (linked to from widescreen.org) seems to be a bit more fair, even if the quality of the captures aren't as high (VHS, after all :)
Disclaimer: I prefer widescreen.
Anti-disclaimer: But I can see why not everyone would.
For low-resolution formats such as VHS, full-screen may still be preferrable, since you've only got so many pixels[*] to play with, and using up a third of the picture with black bars further lowers the effective vertical resolution of the actual picture.
Of course I realise that strictly it's not 'adding black bars' but zooming out to see the full picture, but the result is the same.
The big advantage with widescreen is being able to see the 'whole' scene, not just the centre of attention. There are some movies where what's happening at the periphery of the screen just isn't important (mainly chick flicks, I guess), but you want to see as much detail as possible in the foreground (auch as characters faces, or writing on surfaces). In these circumstances full-screen may be preferrable to widescreen.
Another case is when you're a poor student and only have a 14" telly. Suddenly screen real-estate becomes paramount, and wide-screen just isn't an option unless you want to park your chair 1 metre from the set.
[*] I realise that in the video industry the term 'pixels' is discouraged since measurements are done in 'lines'. Video signals are stored and transmitted in pixels nonetheless.
Ah, I get what you mean.
So they're a bit like senators in that respect?
I find it deeply concerning that a chip maker has to seek permission from an illegal software corporation in order to develop for a piece of hardware.
I wonder what Transmeta had to do to get it okayed? Perhaps Linus had to sign some document saying he wouldn't write or accept any kernel patches which would allow Linux to support the display.
Is Gartner a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft or what?!
No, Halo made by Bungie long before they were bought out my Microsoft. PC version was close to release at that time until ordered to shelve it and develop for XBox instead.
So, Halo good, Microsoft still bad.
Now your handheld has access to 80GB storage at all times, at no size/weight/cost.
As does the hacker sitting two seats in front of you.
What difference does that make?
Why is the violation of somebody's elses rights considered any more immoral than anything else?
After all, conquering and wiping out 'lesser' species is considered vital to evolutionary models, which may support violating anothers 'rights' being perfectly moral.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that we must put consideration to where our morals come from, and why we hold them.
Rape and cannibalism are also quite common in animals.
Can we not call them immoral either?