"If the games you wanted to play needed BEOS you would use that instead."
Nope.
"Or would you do without the game?"
Yep.
I like how everybody's correcting me even though what I said was very intentional. Think guys, if Windows was the piece of shit you all imagine it to be, wouldn't I own a PS2 or something?
"So...do you want to play games which happen to run under Windows, or do you really really want to run Windows?"
Yes.
".for my purposes Windows is completely a throw away OS which I won't even give a second thought about reinstalling if it starts acting up (ala blue screens...etc)"
I don't have the stability problems you problem imagine I'm having. I'm a 3D Artist. My computer has to be stable. It has to run in dual monitor mode. I have to be able to buy hardware from the store and get it up and running quickly. These are not things that Linux cannot do, but it is bonehead simple in Windows to get it all running. I do lots of rendering. I can't afford to lose time on a render. Niether Windows 2000 nor Lightwave has let me down. I don't come back on Monday to find that the render died on Saturday.
"Since I wouldn't run Windows if my games ran under linux, I wouldn't say I want to use Windows...I instead want to play my games and Windows happens to be the only vehicle that will allow me to do that."
Yes, you would say that. However, I have not found that Linux is quite there for me. Though it has become more attractive in recent months. I honestly feel I'll be running on it in 2004 or 2005. I'm not a Windows zealot, but I'm not going to switch to Linux just to flip off Microsoft.
"Until I remember the project we will refer to it as the X box."
Rejected. The X-BOX is designed to run apps, not to be a general purpose PC. Microsoft's not trying to prevent Linux specifically from running on it, they're trying to keep only licsensed software on it. Before you argue, consider that this is game console tradition. Nintendo does it. Sony does it. Microsoft is not doing anything unreasonable here.
Show me where Microsoft has done something to make the X-BOX more than a game machine, and you can have that one.
"It's close to a PC, using PC style hardware. It's more a PC whose only job is to play games."
No, it's not a PC. It's a game console.
"See my point above. Making a Business XBox that did nothing but run office apps wouldn't be that hard."
That's not a smoking gun, sorry.
"Nope, but we're talking about the desktop market, where MS has 90% of the software, not the console market where MS is the newbie."
The only possible way that Microsoft could end up in a 90% market share in the game industry is by making a console that 90% of the market wants, just like what happened with Windows. Microsoft can't just run around buying up monopolies.
"I think that MS believes that it is... I don't see any reason why they aren't attacking this market like any other, and attempting to be the best (read: only) player in it."
Microsoft is doing it's job, making money. Seeing as how their strategy isn't any different from Sony's or Nintendo's, I don't know how you can reach the conclusion that they're trying to maintain their Windows monopoly, or any sort of monopoly with it.
"Looks like there are at least a couple of moderators with bugs up their asses about something today..."
I've noticed they take 'off-topic' way too seriously. Had that happen the other day when there was that article about telemarketing execs signing up for the DNC list. Fortunately anotoher mod came in and fixed it.
I'm going to get modded off topic for this one as well, even though moderation of a post is very much on-topic.
.. afterall, they could burn fewer discs. My 7-disc DS9 set could be knocked down to 2 discs. Maybe even one. It's still worth $100, but they have a cheaper cost of goods.
"It will be interesting to see how many people call in sick on the release day..."
No, it wouldn't. Well I suppose in a dark, Jerry Springer-esque kind of way, it would be. Considering how badly the second movie stunk, I can only imagine the type of guy who'd be so antsy to go he'd call in sick.
" if they can sell DVDs profitably in India for the equivilant for $6 US, why are we paying $29 for the same thing."
Simple. Just because they can sell them for $6, doesn't mean they should. If people are paying $29 a DVD, what obligation does the movie company have to lower the price? They don't. Believe it or not, the American economy revolves around a lot of items getting a ridiculous markup.
(Note: I'm not defending them. I think they should lower the price if DVDs that low if they really think piracy is going to wipe them out.)
"So you want to ignore embedded systems in a embedded systems thread and talk about desktops because that's the only market Microsoft still looks good. "
Pardon me for narrowing the scope down to a scant tens of millions of machines. I'm such a slimeball.
" If I really wanted to play games on the go, I'd buy a Gameboy. "
No you wouldn't. I seriously doubt you'd carry it around with you. A cell phone, if you had one, would be with you all the time.
"I barely make any phonecalls"
Same. Which is why I have a cell phone. Sound silly? Not really. Why pay for something I can only use at home when for a little more I can have something at all times? I like the idea of being able to dial 911 if I witness an accident.
" Plus your phone being with you all the time is the biggest problem I have with cellphones."
Having a cell phone != being a slave to it. I usually let my voice mail get the the call. The nice thing about cell phones is that you get a neat little mailbox icon if you have messages. It's on vibrate so unless I'm nearby to get it, I won't feel the dying need to answer it, plus it doesn't bug anybody else.
"The only thing that really hasn't been mature on Linux until fairly recently is the desktop."
Though you are right, I wouldn't call it the 'only thing' as if they only have one more problem to solve. It's akin to saying "doctors only need to cure disease."
"I guess the thing I dont get, is why everybody seems to consider this to be an excuse for sloppy quality control."
No, it's not an excuse for sloppy quality control, it's an explanation of why shit happens.
"Imagine a scenario where Boeing released the next generation airplane with the attitude 'we will patch software problems after we see them crashing, and show us where the problems are'."
Sorry, I don't buy this argument. Boeing has complete control over every aspect of the manufacture of a plane. Microsoft does not, for example, control what Netscape or NVidia does. In this situation, it's not 'sloppy quality control' that's causing stability issues, the problem is that this type of architecture can never really be stable. Linux even has trouble with this.
" That's not what happens in Redmond. In Redmond, they hack together patches that 'sorta work' and then release it on the masses, to see what happens."
That's an ignorant view. Windows is very complex, and when other software gets thrown into the mix, the situation gets worse. When you change something, shit happens, something's going to break. You can't name a software developer this hasn't happened to.
" That's why there's such a thing as testing, design reviews, and all the other things that go along with 'Engineering'"
Microsoft goes through these processes, like it or not. Windows wouldn't be able to work on millions of machines if they didn't. Don't believe me? Ask anybody using Windows 2000.
"And I would argue that anyone who does not see the *potential* of Linux, both in terms of technology development and the bottom line, is an idiot."
Not necessarily. There are a lot of people out there who feel that there are highly overlooked weaknesses of Linux. Now, I don't hate Linux. I don't 'not see the potential' in Linux. But I do think that it's overrated in many ways. I also don't think that Microsoft will sit still and let Linux be better than them as a desktop OS. There's no reason why others wouldn't see it that way.
"What I mean here are the folks who, despite the staggering amount of evidence and press to the contrary, still think of Linux and OSS software as some sort of quaint ameature effort."
Yes, people are cautious of hype. As for OSS software being a 'quaint ameteur effort', wouldn't you agree that most OSS software is.. well... recognizable? The OSS community in general really needs to think more about UI design.
Slashdot Mirror
"Then, you want to play games. You happen to use Windows."
Nope. Windows has excellent hardware support. It's easy to go to the store, buy a new card or something, and get it running in Win2k.
Win2k (and even XP) are gaming friendly in terms of both hardware compatibility and stability.
Don't correct me, I said what I said rather intentionally. Give me a little credit, will ya?
"If the games you wanted to play needed BEOS you would use that instead."
Nope.
"Or would you do without the game?"
Yep.
I like how everybody's correcting me even though what I said was very intentional. Think guys, if Windows was the piece of shit you all imagine it to be, wouldn't I own a PS2 or something?
"So...do you want to play games which happen to run under Windows, or do you really really want to run Windows?"
Yes.
".for my purposes Windows is completely a throw away OS which I won't even give a second thought about reinstalling if it starts acting up (ala blue screens...etc)"
I don't have the stability problems you problem imagine I'm having. I'm a 3D Artist. My computer has to be stable. It has to run in dual monitor mode. I have to be able to buy hardware from the store and get it up and running quickly. These are not things that Linux cannot do, but it is bonehead simple in Windows to get it all running. I do lots of rendering. I can't afford to lose time on a render. Niether Windows 2000 nor Lightwave has let me down. I don't come back on Monday to find that the render died on Saturday.
"Since I wouldn't run Windows if my games ran under linux, I wouldn't say I want to use Windows...I instead want to play my games and Windows happens to be the only vehicle that will allow me to do that."
Yes, you would say that. However, I have not found that Linux is quite there for me. Though it has become more attractive in recent months. I honestly feel I'll be running on it in 2004 or 2005. I'm not a Windows zealot, but I'm not going to switch to Linux just to flip off Microsoft.
"Until I remember the project we will refer to it as the X box."
Rejected. The X-BOX is designed to run apps, not to be a general purpose PC. Microsoft's not trying to prevent Linux specifically from running on it, they're trying to keep only licsensed software on it. Before you argue, consider that this is game console tradition. Nintendo does it. Sony does it. Microsoft is not doing anything unreasonable here.
Show me where Microsoft has done something to make the X-BOX more than a game machine, and you can have that one.
"It's close to a PC, using PC style hardware. It's more a PC whose only job is to play games."
No, it's not a PC. It's a game console.
"See my point above. Making a Business XBox that did nothing but run office apps wouldn't be that hard."
That's not a smoking gun, sorry.
"Nope, but we're talking about the desktop market, where MS has 90% of the software, not the console market where MS is the newbie."
The only possible way that Microsoft could end up in a 90% market share in the game industry is by making a console that 90% of the market wants, just like what happened with Windows. Microsoft can't just run around buying up monopolies.
"I think that MS believes that it is... I don't see any reason why they aren't attacking this market like any other, and attempting to be the best (read: only) player in it."
Microsoft is doing it's job, making money. Seeing as how their strategy isn't any different from Sony's or Nintendo's, I don't know how you can reach the conclusion that they're trying to maintain their Windows monopoly, or any sort of monopoly with it.
"Did you forget about the Xbox?"
No because it's not relevant.
1.) It's not a PC.
2.) It only plays games. No apps have been ported to it.
3.) Nothing different going on here that Sony or Nintendo has going in their camps.
If you think the X-BOX is an attempt to secure MS's Windows monopoly, then you really need to get your head examined.
"But we do know that no one *wants* to use windows ;)"
I do. Then again, I'm a gamer.
"To Microsoft, Linux is an unauthorized device."
Based on what? Wouldn't Netscape have qualified as an 'unauthorized device'?
"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it..."
Yeah, remember the last time Microsoft tried to alter PC hardware so that it could only boot with... eh.. Actually I can't seem to remember...
"Looks like there are at least a couple of moderators with bugs up their asses about something today..."
I've noticed they take 'off-topic' way too seriously. Had that happen the other day when there was that article about telemarketing execs signing up for the DNC list. Fortunately anotoher mod came in and fixed it.
I'm going to get modded off topic for this one as well, even though moderation of a post is very much on-topic.
.. afterall, they could burn fewer discs. My 7-disc DS9 set could be knocked down to 2 discs. Maybe even one. It's still worth $100, but they have a cheaper cost of goods.
.. but I thought the Slashdot audience would appreciate Foxtrot today.
Again, sorry to be off-topic.
"Especially when you consider there are probably 100x that many embedded devices, it is a narrowing of scope. "
Like what?
"It will be interesting to see how many people call in sick on the release day..."
No, it wouldn't. Well I suppose in a dark, Jerry Springer-esque kind of way, it would be. Considering how badly the second movie stunk, I can only imagine the type of guy who'd be so antsy to go he'd call in sick.
" if they can sell DVDs profitably in India for the equivilant for $6 US, why are we paying $29 for the same thing."
Simple. Just because they can sell them for $6, doesn't mean they should. If people are paying $29 a DVD, what obligation does the movie company have to lower the price? They don't. Believe it or not, the American economy revolves around a lot of items getting a ridiculous markup.
(Note: I'm not defending them. I think they should lower the price if DVDs that low if they really think piracy is going to wipe them out.)
" scheduling the release time while working with time zone differences globally is actually pretty difficult to accomplish, i should think."
On the plus side, it lowers the need for people to download it off the net. The MPAA should consider that before blaming P2P on their woes.
" I'm really not impressed with the all in one appliances. They just never seem to be as good as if you buy all the components seperatly."
Though in a normal situation I'd agree, but in Sony's defense, they've built these things before. I wouldn't be surprised if this came out decent.
Now, if they were just building a new game machine, then I'd be concerned.
"No. That would be OSX "
Damn, OSX won't install on my 78 year old granny's machine.
"So you want to ignore embedded systems in a embedded systems thread and talk about desktops because that's the only market Microsoft still looks good. "
Pardon me for narrowing the scope down to a scant tens of millions of machines. I'm such a slimeball.
"In the embedded market? Are you kidding? "
Well if you want to limit yourself to such a narrow band, then okay. Windows XP is the best OS in the entire world for 78 year old grannies to use.
" If I really wanted to play games on the go, I'd buy a Gameboy. "
No you wouldn't. I seriously doubt you'd carry it around with you. A cell phone, if you had one, would be with you all the time.
"I barely make any phonecalls"
Same. Which is why I have a cell phone. Sound silly? Not really. Why pay for something I can only use at home when for a little more I can have something at all times? I like the idea of being able to dial 911 if I witness an accident.
" Plus your phone being with you all the time is the biggest problem I have with cellphones."
Having a cell phone != being a slave to it. I usually let my voice mail get the the call. The nice thing about cell phones is that you get a neat little mailbox icon if you have messages. It's on vibrate so unless I'm nearby to get it, I won't feel the dying need to answer it, plus it doesn't bug anybody else.
So no, I'm not a slave to my phone. Sorry.
I don't seem to recall the US threatening to nuke anybody.
"The only thing that really hasn't been mature on Linux until fairly recently is the desktop."
Though you are right, I wouldn't call it the 'only thing' as if they only have one more problem to solve. It's akin to saying "doctors only need to cure disease."
"I guess the thing I dont get, is why everybody seems to consider this to be an excuse for sloppy quality control."
No, it's not an excuse for sloppy quality control, it's an explanation of why shit happens.
"Imagine a scenario where Boeing released the next generation airplane with the attitude 'we will patch software problems after we see them crashing, and show us where the problems are'."
Sorry, I don't buy this argument. Boeing has complete control over every aspect of the manufacture of a plane. Microsoft does not, for example, control what Netscape or NVidia does. In this situation, it's not 'sloppy quality control' that's causing stability issues, the problem is that this type of architecture can never really be stable. Linux even has trouble with this.
" That's not what happens in Redmond. In Redmond, they hack together patches that 'sorta work' and then release it on the masses, to see what happens."
That's an ignorant view. Windows is very complex, and when other software gets thrown into the mix, the situation gets worse. When you change something, shit happens, something's going to break. You can't name a software developer this hasn't happened to.
" That's why there's such a thing as testing, design reviews, and all the other things that go along with 'Engineering'"
Microsoft goes through these processes, like it or not. Windows wouldn't be able to work on millions of machines if they didn't. Don't believe me? Ask anybody using Windows 2000.
"And I would argue that anyone who does not see the *potential* of Linux, both in terms of technology development and the bottom line, is an idiot."
Not necessarily. There are a lot of people out there who feel that there are highly overlooked weaknesses of Linux. Now, I don't hate Linux. I don't 'not see the potential' in Linux. But I do think that it's overrated in many ways. I also don't think that Microsoft will sit still and let Linux be better than them as a desktop OS. There's no reason why others wouldn't see it that way.
"What I mean here are the folks who, despite the staggering amount of evidence and press to the contrary, still think of Linux and OSS software as some sort of quaint ameature effort."
Yes, people are cautious of hype. As for OSS software being a 'quaint ameteur effort', wouldn't you agree that most OSS software is.. well... recognizable? The OSS community in general really needs to think more about UI design.