Some would say it's idiotic to release a game that uses a current conflict in which you can kill the soldiers of your largest market and expect it not to have some backlash and economic consequences.
If you can generate enough support around the cause I'm sure they will. Not really sure why people are so upset about this. It's the free market. Obviously EA decided it would cost them more money in potential loss of sales (either in sales of this game, or people boycotting the company in general) than they would make with it. Nobody held a gun to there head to remove it.
Virtually anything related to space has a huge development cycle. Contract bid to delivery is easily 5+ years. One of the first things you do is source your suppliers so you will never deliver anything state of the art. It'll be at least 5-10 years old. At pretty much the same time you have to also deliver most of your spares for the near or distant future. And there probably is no money in the contract for hardware upgrades. It is what it is until it's replaced.
The last 20MHz RAD6000 flight board we bought was around $250k. A flight FPGA runs about $5k each. 10 times is actually quite an understatement for radiation hardened.
Imagine an application that only logs key strokes. Which would you rather run on from a power stand point? Extreme and silly example, but point is this is probably geared toward things that are interaction bound with plenty of idle time. And their belief seems to be that it saves them power to run on a slower more power efficient core.
Is he even collecting one? I think all of his money is in the form of stocks and investments and he's probably already bought about anything he'll need big ticket item wise. Does this tax include capitol gains? I'll fully support a 75% tax on the rich a year after you give me $50M. I wonder what his position would have been 15 years ago.
That would be because at no point did I argue that it hurt more or less than anything. I simply stated that this model is not all rosy and issues will arise because of it.
The difference is the entire line dies. Apple lives or dies by it's own hands, and it's alone. Android lives or dies by anyone that wants to release a product, be it good or bad.
Or, look at it this way. There are people out there who may never consider Linux again because they hated it when they tried distribution A. Had they started with distribution B that may not be the case. But they now have a sour taste in their mouth and won't bother again.
For one thing that'd be illegal. For another where anywhere does anyone mention kill Android? If you believe that a bad experience with an Android related to a bad product might not influence consumers from never buying another unrelated Android phone you have no understanding of consumerism.
Take a look at Toyotas sales numbers despite the fact that 90% of their drop was from people who don't even want a Prius.
All it takes is a few vendors to drop the ball with bad implementations, or go out of business dropping support to create a bad association with Android. That's the real issue. Bad PR goes a lot further than good. At some point someone will put out a really terrible version that will in some respect hurt the label.
If nothing else he's a rude little wanker who by the mere fact of calling an elder this shouldn't be allowed to visit anywhere but his bedroom for a while.
The last few years I've been calling about once a year just to see if they've installed a closer office and every time I've gotten a reduced price instead.
ITAR simply means it's not exportable (easily). The primary use/intent is military or national security items. For example, the entire F35, or B1, or Ohio class submarine programs falls under ITAR. Or in cases such as Space (Constellation program for example) it may be because the US gov't has invested heavily in the research and it simply doesn't want to now give it away to foreign nations so they can easily play catchup and not have to invest the billions that the US put into it to get there. Has nothing directly to do with competing in the market place. Or with saving jobs, that's merely a side effect.
No. For the vast majority of ITAR items the US is and will be for the near future the largest customer. Primarily the government by $ value. A US company cannot produce an ITAR item outside the US thinking it can circumvent restrictions. In order to do that you would have to export information from the US on how to make it.
Are there some businesses that are starting up overseas because what they wish to produce may fall under itar? Probably. But dollar value wise that is piddle compared to the job loss that would occur the second ITAR disappears.
Let's see, we do about equal shares military and commercial products. Number of foreign nationals local or offshore working on a military program? 0. Number working on a commercial program > 0.
Hopefully the same number twice will satisfy your need for numbers.
But ITAR is responsible for keeping a lot more US jobs than it loses thanks to it's prohibitions. In a lot of places it's the only thing keeping engineering and manufacturing from being outsourced.
Slashdot Mirror
Some would say it's idiotic to release a game that uses a current conflict in which you can kill the soldiers of your largest market and expect it not to have some backlash and economic consequences.
If you can generate enough support around the cause I'm sure they will. Not really sure why people are so upset about this. It's the free market. Obviously EA decided it would cost them more money in potential loss of sales (either in sales of this game, or people boycotting the company in general) than they would make with it. Nobody held a gun to there head to remove it.
But not enough to give them money.
Lack of demand, lack of suppliers, customers with big budgets.
Virtually anything related to space has a huge development cycle. Contract bid to delivery is easily 5+ years. One of the first things you do is source your suppliers so you will never deliver anything state of the art. It'll be at least 5-10 years old. At pretty much the same time you have to also deliver most of your spares for the near or distant future. And there probably is no money in the contract for hardware upgrades. It is what it is until it's replaced.
The last 20MHz RAD6000 flight board we bought was around $250k. A flight FPGA runs about $5k each. 10 times is actually quite an understatement for radiation hardened.
Imagine an application that only logs key strokes. Which would you rather run on from a power stand point? Extreme and silly example, but point is this is probably geared toward things that are interaction bound with plenty of idle time. And their belief seems to be that it saves them power to run on a slower more power efficient core.
Heh, guess so. So who even cares then? All he wants to do is make sure the new Senior Center remains funded and the Bingo games keep running.
Is he even collecting one? I think all of his money is in the form of stocks and investments and he's probably already bought about anything he'll need big ticket item wise. Does this tax include capitol gains? I'll fully support a 75% tax on the rich a year after you give me $50M. I wonder what his position would have been 15 years ago.
No way. It's from The Post!
Anything going that high is guided by ground radar. And I'd imagine this thing probably has a huge radar signature.
That would be because at no point did I argue that it hurt more or less than anything. I simply stated that this model is not all rosy and issues will arise because of it.
The difference is the entire line dies. Apple lives or dies by it's own hands, and it's alone. Android lives or dies by anyone that wants to release a product, be it good or bad.
Or, look at it this way. There are people out there who may never consider Linux again because they hated it when they tried distribution A. Had they started with distribution B that may not be the case. But they now have a sour taste in their mouth and won't bother again.
For one thing that'd be illegal. For another where anywhere does anyone mention kill Android? If you believe that a bad experience with an Android related to a bad product might not influence consumers from never buying another unrelated Android phone you have no understanding of consumerism.
Take a look at Toyotas sales numbers despite the fact that 90% of their drop was from people who don't even want a Prius.
These are consumer products where 95% of the people with them have no idea what you are talking about, nor should they have to.
All it takes is a few vendors to drop the ball with bad implementations, or go out of business dropping support to create a bad association with Android. That's the real issue. Bad PR goes a lot further than good. At some point someone will put out a really terrible version that will in some respect hurt the label.
When you hang a man, you better look at him.
If nothing else he's a rude little wanker who by the mere fact of calling an elder this shouldn't be allowed to visit anywhere but his bedroom for a while.
The last few years I've been calling about once a year just to see if they've installed a closer office and every time I've gotten a reduced price instead.
ITAR simply means it's not exportable (easily). The primary use/intent is military or national security items. For example, the entire F35, or B1, or Ohio class submarine programs falls under ITAR. Or in cases such as Space (Constellation program for example) it may be because the US gov't has invested heavily in the research and it simply doesn't want to now give it away to foreign nations so they can easily play catchup and not have to invest the billions that the US put into it to get there. Has nothing directly to do with competing in the market place. Or with saving jobs, that's merely a side effect.
No. For the vast majority of ITAR items the US is and will be for the near future the largest customer. Primarily the government by $ value. A US company cannot produce an ITAR item outside the US thinking it can circumvent restrictions. In order to do that you would have to export information from the US on how to make it.
Are there some businesses that are starting up overseas because what they wish to produce may fall under itar? Probably. But dollar value wise that is piddle compared to the job loss that would occur the second ITAR disappears.
Let's see, we do about equal shares military and commercial products. Number of foreign nationals local or offshore working on a military program? 0. Number working on a commercial program > 0. Hopefully the same number twice will satisfy your need for numbers.
But ITAR is responsible for keeping a lot more US jobs than it loses thanks to it's prohibitions. In a lot of places it's the only thing keeping engineering and manufacturing from being outsourced.
The good dancer is all over the place. Obviously a better dancer. Couldn't this be summed up by saying women like men who don't suck at dancing?
You don't sound very happy. So this appears to be pretty accurate.