"MOD chips on the playstation were only good for circumvention. Sony itself released a linux pack for the PS/2, so running linux is definitely not an argument."
I'm not a big fan of current modding efforts because they're negative-ruling-bait. However, I must argue with this point. Sony's release of the Linux pack for the PS2 is certainly not the end of that argument. It is limited, you cannot distribute Linux apps to other PS2 owners unless they have the $200 kit as well. Worse, you have limited access to the hardware.
What's really hurting the MOD development for the PS2 is that there really isn't a whole lot of reason to do it. Play any region DVD? Well the law's not going to side with that. Play MAME? Nope, law's not going to side with that either. Play MP3s or DivX videos? That area's a bit gray, but there's the issue of how those Mp3s or DivX vids are acquired.
I agree with your first point, but the second one is probably what earned ya the troll rating. Pity the dude with the mod point didn't just respond, its not like you were out to be a jerk. There's a difference between trolling and having an unpopular opinion.
" However, his Honour said that on the evidence he would have held that the chips had only a limited commercially significant use other than that of circumventing or facilitating the circumvention of Sony's device. Accordingly, if that device had been a "technological protection measure", the chips would have been circumvention devices."
I saiditbefore, I'll say it again: Come up with the legitimate reason before making large-scale attempts to mod game systems!
Now ya'all got a legal precedent against you. Sorry to sound inflammatory but man, choose your battles wisely, seriously.
"I've always wondered why the Borg would refer to Earth as sector 001. Since they're from the Delta quadrant wouldn't they have devised their own map/coordinate system or does everyone use the Federation's? "
Because this conversation would have been strange:
"Resistance is futile. You will sescort us to sector 14982342, 28283750239, 12302.05."
"You buy a Maxima. It has it's list of features. Then the new one comes out with new features (better speakers? better seat adjustments? better cup holders?). We don't expect Nissan to say "bring your car in and we'll 'upgrade' to all the new features for free". You can buy the new Maxima. You can buy a better stereo and install it. You can be happy with the features that came with your car. Your 2001 Maxima is still better than the 2002 Sonatas that are out there. "
I am really sick of people using metaphors like this to explain something in the digital world. I don't mean to be down on your post here, I think you make a good point, and I agree with it. However, I have seen this type of reasoning used all the time.
But man I'm just sick of the comparisons to 'real-world' business. The reason why people expect software stuff for free is:
a.) Computer-related hardware, despite the cost, has a very limited lifetime. It's hard to spend $500 for something and feel the need to spend it again a year from now.
b.) Computers run software. Want your computer to do something new? Use new software. You don't need to drill holes in your iPod to make it do new things.
c.) If the core of the iPod is software, then why need to buy a new one a year from now just to get new features?
I'll say again, I respect and agree with your point. But you (and everybody else who uses these lame metaphors) need to realize that the digital world is not the same as the physical world. The perceptions are always going to be different. Apple is probably doing the right thing, but they really need to do a better job of communicating that to their users.
"The real question here is why block MSN? What about people who use instant messaging for legitimate business purposes?? People chat on telephones, and I don't see many offices rushing to ban them. Fire unproductive people, and let the rest of us communicate."
Gotta say, I agree. I've visited a number of large corps and all of them had computers using Im of some sort. Beats the heck out of walking to another building or even making a phone call. (Phones are so annoying.)
What really bugs me is that if they weren't using MSN, they'd probably be using email. It's futile, really.
Okay, I'm haven't really added anything new to the parent post. It's just a topic I feel strongly about. The CEO of my company hates chat programs with a passion. (he hates games too, though he has played golf out of town in the middle of a work day...) I remember he was in my office just after I installed ICQ. I wanted to try it out so I could use it for tech support. Neat idea really. I could send files back and forth between people, plus they could easily copy/paste stuff I send them to enter into the app we sold. The real time communication would have been nice since it could take 5 mins or so to get an email to them. Nope, that idea got axed. Within moments of going on line, this voice comes on and says "INCOMING CHAT REQUEST". I was immediately ordered to remove it without explanation. Grr. That idea died a quick death.
If he didn't have such a nasty attitude about it, I could have been more productive, plus saved money on long distance calls. What really bothers me is that there are PLENTY of managers who have similar opinions about the topic.
"does Sony really think that all the motion picture studios are going to line up to release films in this proprietary format when you can already buy DVD players at Wal-Mart for $70? "
... when Sony was sued by... uh.. I think it was Atari over vibration inside of controllers? Something about Nintendo not getting sued because the N64's vibration feature was a peripheral and not built into the controller.
This ring a bell with anybody? Now I'm kinda curious what happened.
"I will respond with a critique on your intelligence, and then correct some pedantic misunderstanding you've had of the German legal system, while missing entirely the fact that the basis for your argument was flawed."
I will jump in and use a metaphor that sounds like your point is doomed. I will get modded up as +5, Insightful.
... but it'd be nice if they covered input, sound, and networking like DirectX does. Arguably that'd make porting games to Linux much easier. Plus, it'd give developers an alternative to DirectX that's more portable.
Just a thought, but I don't expect to get a lot of attention for it because I'm hinting that MS did something right.
"Sorry, but it appears that most people didn't find it funny, only a few other Microsoft trolls."
2 moderations does not reflect the opinions of the general populace. Nice try.
"Go back to Bill, Microsoft fanboy."
Yeah yeah, I'd say something like that too if I didn't have any real type of rebuttal to offer. Musta been some truth to what I said to get you to be so hostile.
"How about the crap that MS pulled by placing the minimize/maximize right next to the close button (whereas in previous UIs the close button had been on the left so that it would be nearly impossible to exit an app accidentally while trying to minimize)?"
You mean like KDE does?;)
The problem I have with this argument is that there is no good place to put the close button. Put it in the upper left, and when somebody goes to file/open they could miss and close the app. Put it in the lower left and they could hit it when going for the scrollbar, same for lower right. Then there's the whole matter of where people resize from.
Actually, Apple did have a solution to this problem, but it's not as great as some people have made it out to be. If you open an app like IE, the titlebar is maximized to the top and your browser window is a child of that titlebar. If you switch to another app, then the titlebar is replaced with the bar of the new app. Result? Closing an app always means going to the upper left in the exact same spot.
Your problem is solved here, but a new one emerges: Closing the wrong app. You no longer have positional reference to specify which app you are closing. You could end up closing Photoshop while you really intended to kill IE. How would ya know without reading what the bar says?
To make a long story short, the problem you are describing has no easy solution. Nobody's solved it without creating a new nasty problem. You just have to rely on accuracy of the mouse pointer. And you know what? One has to be accurate with the mouse anyway. The same argument for clicking the wrong window box could be made for clicking on the wrong file to copy or clicking on the wrong menu choice. At some point, the input has to be accurate for the computer to work at all.
So no, I don't feel that MS has 'pulled any crap'. I don't feel that they've made a better solution than anybody else either.
"and at least I didn't reply to a fucking post saying essentially the same god damned thing!"
My saying that wasn't what made that funny. What was funny was that your behaviour made that comment fit. In other words, nobody would have found it funny if I had just said it to any old joe hanging around here. YOU made it funny.
"The irony is the fact that Nanogator was blasting KDE/Gnome for copying Windows, and then he turns around and recycles the anonymous parent's joke. He can't even skip a post before ripping another poster off for a rebuttal. "
Psst, that doesn't fulfill the dictionary definition of irony.
Anyhoo, we all know you're the same guy I zinged earlier. Maybe now you'll think twice now before you run around flaming people?
" Linus has nothing to do with KDE, vi, Glibc, GCC, Gnome, etc, so fuck off and get back under Billy's desk before you make him angry."
Oh please, we all know you think Linus is the greatest guy to come around since Mitnick.
" and you turn around and respond with the same thing. Copycat! "
Speaking of copycats, you're still using the same old "oh you don't hate MS, so you must be romantically entangled with Bill" joke that nobody ever really found funny. I'm not copying you, it's just a derivitive work of the public domain. Pity you couldn't come up with a real rebuttal.
"Yeah, it was a huge blunder for MS to do all the R&D for KDE and Gnome to copy and give away free."
I'm a little disappointed with the negative mods I've recieved on this comment while parent poster got a +5, Funny for an overcooked joke. I guess it's fun to troll against MS until somebody points out the glass house they're living in.
He's got a point. Microsoft has gone and done a lot of things, not everything was a success.
I guess this story does sever an overlooked purpose, though. It proves that MS can't just go an take over aything it wants. The market has to decide it wants the product. I remember all the jabber here about the XBOX before it was released and how MS was going to take over the game market next. My favorite was somebody seriously thinking MS was going to port Office to the XBOX and all'd be over, heh.
I agree with parent poster, though, I think most are going to see this as an opportunity to make fun of MS instead of illuminating themselves to the idea that MS can't take over anything it damn well pleases.
Slashdot Mirror
"MOD chips on the playstation were only good for circumvention. Sony itself released a linux pack for the PS/2, so running linux is definitely not an argument."
I'm not a big fan of current modding efforts because they're negative-ruling-bait. However, I must argue with this point. Sony's release of the Linux pack for the PS2 is certainly not the end of that argument. It is limited, you cannot distribute Linux apps to other PS2 owners unless they have the $200 kit as well. Worse, you have limited access to the hardware.
What's really hurting the MOD development for the PS2 is that there really isn't a whole lot of reason to do it. Play any region DVD? Well the law's not going to side with that. Play MAME? Nope, law's not going to side with that either. Play MP3s or DivX videos? That area's a bit gray, but there's the issue of how those Mp3s or DivX vids are acquired.
I agree with your first point, but the second one is probably what earned ya the troll rating. Pity the dude with the mod point didn't just respond, its not like you were out to be a jerk. There's a difference between trolling and having an unpopular opinion.
" However, his Honour said that on the evidence he would have held that the chips had only a limited commercially significant use other than that of circumventing or facilitating the circumvention of Sony's device. Accordingly, if that device had been a "technological protection measure", the chips would have been circumvention devices."
I said it before, I'll say it again: Come up with the legitimate reason before making large-scale attempts to mod game systems!
Now ya'all got a legal precedent against you. Sorry to sound inflammatory but man, choose your battles wisely, seriously.
"I've always wondered why the Borg would refer to Earth as sector 001. Since they're from the Delta quadrant wouldn't they have devised their own map/coordinate system or does everyone use the Federation's? "
Because this conversation would have been strange:
"Resistance is futile. You will sescort us to sector 14982342, 28283750239, 12302.05."
"Where?"
Yeah, that would have been dramatic.
"You buy a Maxima. It has it's list of features. Then the new one comes out with new features (better speakers? better seat adjustments? better cup holders?). We don't expect Nissan to say "bring your car in and we'll 'upgrade' to all the new features for free". You can buy the new Maxima. You can buy a better stereo and install it. You can be happy with the features that came with your car. Your 2001 Maxima is still better than the 2002 Sonatas that are out there. "
I am really sick of people using metaphors like this to explain something in the digital world. I don't mean to be down on your post here, I think you make a good point, and I agree with it. However, I have seen this type of reasoning used all the time.
But man I'm just sick of the comparisons to 'real-world' business. The reason why people expect software stuff for free is:
a.) Computer-related hardware, despite the cost, has a very limited lifetime. It's hard to spend $500 for something and feel the need to spend it again a year from now.
b.) Computers run software. Want your computer to do something new? Use new software. You don't need to drill holes in your iPod to make it do new things.
c.) If the core of the iPod is software, then why need to buy a new one a year from now just to get new features?
I'll say again, I respect and agree with your point. But you (and everybody else who uses these lame metaphors) need to realize that the digital world is not the same as the physical world. The perceptions are always going to be different. Apple is probably doing the right thing, but they really need to do a better job of communicating that to their users.
"The real question here is why block MSN? What about people who use instant messaging for legitimate business purposes?? People chat on telephones, and I don't see many offices rushing to ban them. Fire unproductive people, and let the rest of us communicate."
Gotta say, I agree. I've visited a number of large corps and all of them had computers using Im of some sort. Beats the heck out of walking to another building or even making a phone call. (Phones are so annoying.)
What really bugs me is that if they weren't using MSN, they'd probably be using email. It's futile, really.
Okay, I'm haven't really added anything new to the parent post. It's just a topic I feel strongly about. The CEO of my company hates chat programs with a passion. (he hates games too, though he has played golf out of town in the middle of a work day...) I remember he was in my office just after I installed ICQ. I wanted to try it out so I could use it for tech support. Neat idea really. I could send files back and forth between people, plus they could easily copy/paste stuff I send them to enter into the app we sold. The real time communication would have been nice since it could take 5 mins or so to get an email to them. Nope, that idea got axed. Within moments of going on line, this voice comes on and says "INCOMING CHAT REQUEST". I was immediately ordered to remove it without explanation. Grr. That idea died a quick death.
If he didn't have such a nasty attitude about it, I could have been more productive, plus saved money on long distance calls. What really bothers me is that there are PLENTY of managers who have similar opinions about the topic.
I can't wait until my generation is in charge.
... that it's a clamshell design. I'm not sure how else they can make it work.
"So if millions of people decide to walk out of restaurants without paying, it should be made legal? "
If all the restaraunts agree to charge $100 a meal, then try to get laws changed to protect their oligopoly, then yes.
"does Sony really think that all the motion picture studios are going to line up to release films in this proprietary format when you can already buy DVD players at Wal-Mart for $70? "
Don't forget about the other divisions of Sony...
... when Sony was sued by ... uh.. I think it was Atari over vibration inside of controllers? Something about Nintendo not getting sued because the N64's vibration feature was a peripheral and not built into the controller.
This ring a bell with anybody? Now I'm kinda curious what happened.
"I will respond with a critique on your intelligence, and then correct some pedantic misunderstanding you've had of the German legal system, while missing entirely the fact that the basis for your argument was flawed."
I will jump in and use a metaphor that sounds like your point is doomed. I will get modded up as +5, Insightful.
... but it'd be nice if they covered input, sound, and networking like DirectX does. Arguably that'd make porting games to Linux much easier. Plus, it'd give developers an alternative to DirectX that's more portable.
Just a thought, but I don't expect to get a lot of attention for it because I'm hinting that MS did something right.
"Sorry, but it appears that most people didn't find it funny, only a few other Microsoft trolls."
2 moderations does not reflect the opinions of the general populace. Nice try.
"Go back to Bill, Microsoft fanboy."
Yeah yeah, I'd say something like that too if I didn't have any real type of rebuttal to offer. Musta been some truth to what I said to get you to be so hostile.
"How about the crap that MS pulled by placing the minimize/maximize right next to the close button (whereas in previous UIs the close button had been on the left so that it would be nearly impossible to exit an app accidentally while trying to minimize)?"
;)
You mean like KDE does?
The problem I have with this argument is that there is no good place to put the close button. Put it in the upper left, and when somebody goes to file/open they could miss and close the app. Put it in the lower left and they could hit it when going for the scrollbar, same for lower right. Then there's the whole matter of where people resize from.
Actually, Apple did have a solution to this problem, but it's not as great as some people have made it out to be. If you open an app like IE, the titlebar is maximized to the top and your browser window is a child of that titlebar. If you switch to another app, then the titlebar is replaced with the bar of the new app. Result? Closing an app always means going to the upper left in the exact same spot.
Your problem is solved here, but a new one emerges: Closing the wrong app. You no longer have positional reference to specify which app you are closing. You could end up closing Photoshop while you really intended to kill IE. How would ya know without reading what the bar says?
To make a long story short, the problem you are describing has no easy solution. Nobody's solved it without creating a new nasty problem. You just have to rely on accuracy of the mouse pointer. And you know what? One has to be accurate with the mouse anyway. The same argument for clicking the wrong window box could be made for clicking on the wrong file to copy or clicking on the wrong menu choice. At some point, the input has to be accurate for the computer to work at all.
So no, I don't feel that MS has 'pulled any crap'. I don't feel that they've made a better solution than anybody else either.
"and at least I didn't reply to a fucking post saying essentially the same god damned thing!"
My saying that wasn't what made that funny. What was funny was that your behaviour made that comment fit. In other words, nobody would have found it funny if I had just said it to any old joe hanging around here. YOU made it funny.
BURN.
"The irony is the fact that Nanogator was blasting KDE/Gnome for copying Windows, and then he turns around and recycles the anonymous parent's joke. He can't even skip a post before ripping another poster off for a rebuttal. "
Psst, that doesn't fulfill the dictionary definition of irony.
Anyhoo, we all know you're the same guy I zinged earlier. Maybe now you'll think twice now before you run around flaming people?
" Linus has nothing to do with KDE, vi, Glibc, GCC, Gnome, etc, so fuck off and get back under Billy's desk before you make him angry."
Oh please, we all know you think Linus is the greatest guy to come around since Mitnick.
" and you turn around and respond with the same thing. Copycat! "
Speaking of copycats, you're still using the same old "oh you don't hate MS, so you must be romantically entangled with Bill" joke that nobody ever really found funny. I'm not copying you, it's just a derivitive work of the public domain. Pity you couldn't come up with a real rebuttal.
"Shut up and get back under Bill's desk, boy."
I'm surprised Linus lets you talk with your mouth full.
"Yeah, it was a huge blunder for MS to do all the R&D for KDE and Gnome to copy and give away free."
I'm a little disappointed with the negative mods I've recieved on this comment while parent poster got a +5, Funny for an overcooked joke. I guess it's fun to troll against MS until somebody points out the glass house they're living in.
"This would be +99 Flamebait."
He's got a point. Microsoft has gone and done a lot of things, not everything was a success.
I guess this story does sever an overlooked purpose, though. It proves that MS can't just go an take over aything it wants. The market has to decide it wants the product. I remember all the jabber here about the XBOX before it was released and how MS was going to take over the game market next. My favorite was somebody seriously thinking MS was going to port Office to the XBOX and all'd be over, heh.
I agree with parent poster, though, I think most are going to see this as an opportunity to make fun of MS instead of illuminating themselves to the idea that MS can't take over anything it damn well pleases.
"You forgot to mention Windows. "
Yeah, it was a huge blunder for MS to do all the R&D for KDE and Gnome to copy and give away free.
And a handful of gamers rejoice!
"Think Geek is selling 20 Gb USB 2.0 solid state drives for $199."
Solid state? $200? $20 gigs? You sure about that?
"Why not stick a 2gb drive or something small in there just for the OS? That way the CD drive would be free for people to play music CDs, etc. "
Cost + the concept that something could go corrupt? At least with a Read-Only media for the OS, a virus is wiped out with a reboot.
", although I am sure that one would be useful for such things as cookies ( debate me on that point if you wish )"
Well Linux is known for having impressive up-times.
"with an x86 for a server/renderer."
What kinda rendering are ya doing? Just curious, I'm a Lightwaver and they only recently have Linux support.