"See? I can kill a prostitute, then drive over her with my car. The game rewards this. It's totally immoral."
"...It is a crime-based gangster game, but those old ladies and prostitutes you just killed... that's you doing that. You're choice. The game does not say 'kill old ladies to win'."
I just had this discussion with a coworker this morning. My point was a little different. Here's the gist of what I said:
"Yes, you do get a few bucks for running over pedestrians. Unfortunately, we're not talking huge sums of money here. You would have to run over a LOT of people to buy the most basic weapon in this game.
Does that mean you're encouraged to kill people in this game. No! You're really being rewarded for the risk you're taking by getting the cops attention. You see, running over people (and killing/assaulting them in other various ways) gets the attention of the cops. When they start chasing you, you have to run like hell. This counters the point of the game. It's a good deal harder to complete a mission (the actual point of the game...) when you have numbers of cops trying to run you off the road.
You do not advance in the game by beating up old ladies. Believe it or not, you win by saving the girl. Heh."
I think my coworker understood my point. I'm a little sick of accusations based on assumptions.
The point you quoted is a lot more interesting than mine on a fundamental level. The reality is you can do bad things in this world. A lot of the time, you think you can get away with it. If this game teaches you anything, it's that you can't get away with hurting people. As I said before, you reflexively learn NOT to hurt people in it.
I appreciate you quoting that person. Something new to think about.:)
"ohhh, a game whose commercials show people beating each other up with a baseball bat or something... "
No, that's not what this game is about. Though I'm curious how you could mistake a game called "Grand Theft Auto" for a game where the point is to beat people. *eyeroll*
One should know what they're talking about before telling people to grow up. If you had actually played the game, you'd know that senseless violence is the fastest way to lose in that game. Run over a pedestrian, the police chase you. Fight the police, more chase you. Etc.
I find it hard to accuse it of glorifying violence when playing it trains my reflexes to avoid hitting people.
The reason that GTA3 is controversial is because a lot of parents (mothers mostly) have no clue what their kids find in video games. So when some jackass politician *cough*Joe Liberman*cough* comes along and says "the style of entertainment you're uneducated about harms your children", suddenly their fears get voiced. They say stuff like "GTA3 makes prostution a good thing! Just watch, the woman gets in the car, and his health goes up when they have sex! That's immoral!!" And the mothers are like "My babies would never have sex! That's wrong!"
The reality of that aspect of GTA3 is a little bit different. The prostitute does get in the car. The car does shake around. The health of the player goes up. None of that is in dispute. However, they are not actually depicting sex. If you turn the camera a bit, you'll see that both the driver and the prostitute are sitting in their seats staring out the window. They're not touching in any way, that's unmistakable. The car's just shaking around, it's not clear why. The point? If the player doesn't know what a prostitute is when they play this game, they're not going to find out by playing this game. For somebody to understand what's happening here, they'd also have to be educated on the dangers of sex with prostitutes. It's called innuendo. Nothing new here that a child isn't exposed to by watching a little TV, even the news. (ZipperGate comes to mind...)
In any case, the point of this post is not to defend GTA3 specifically, it's to point out that just because you've heard a compelling side of an argument that does not mean you really know what you're talking about. There's always other points of view. If you're going to run around calling people immoral without understanding the other side of an issue, then you shouldn't be telling people to grow up. Finding information supporting your point of view is easy. Complete understanding of an issue, that's a grown up method of debate.
It occurs to me that with a city-wide lan, anybody who wanted to make their own movie would have an effective way of delivering it. Not sure how many film students you have there, but the ability to broadcast video would at the very least be entertaining. I'm curious to see what would come of that.
All for only $200. You can't get a PC with the same specs for near that price.
- The XBOX processor isn't that powerful.
- The memory is pretty weak by today's standards.
- DVD drive isn't that interesting. DVD writers are not quite main stream yet (they will be soon, though) and your XBOX can play DVDs without Linux.
- Your high end graphics card is limited by two factors: 1.) A maximum resolution of 720 by 480 @ 60hz, provided you have a progressive scan TV. 2.) Software to use it. What, do you really think games using that card will come? I haven't seen a PC Open Source project do that yet, this isn't going to change the playing field.
And more? Your computer is only as good as your ability to communicate with it. A TV monitor is a horrible interface for a computer. The text is fuzzy and game controllers are not ideal for computer usage. What you get is less of a computer here. The only distinct advantage to it (besides it's footprint, which I'll half-concede on) is it's TV out. I personally would like to have it so I can play DivX movies at near DVD quality. This cannot easily be done with a PC and it's Tv-out that doesn't do the right resolution and color saturation.
Give us applications, not specs. If it had a TV tuner card on it, you might be on to something interesting here. Home-brew PVR! Nope. Don't have that. So please, give me a valid application that the XBOX running Linux would be ideal for.
I'm normally all for this type of stuff, but in this case a better reason is needed than that. These guys are wandering into DMCA smackdown territory, and their only real defense is going to be "there's plenty of legitimate reasons why I'd want to do this." Unfortuantely, these reasons don't appear to exist. The only interesting one I've heard of was playing DivX movies. Given the XBOX's TV hardware that's unique to it (PC's, even with TV out, aren't the same quality) that's a semi reasonable excuse. (Pity the DMCA says DivX DVD rips are illegal...)
The question 'why' in this case cannot be answered by "because it's there". It needs to be something like "because the XBOX has a unique capability that we should be allowed to tinker with.
If somebody can enlighten me as to that use for the XBOX running Linux, then I'd be happy to be a proponent of it. But right now, what I see are people picking a fight with Microsoft and hoping the community will defend them. Sorry. Not supporting that. Throw me a frickin bone here.
"...it sounds like the real issue here is that you work for Microsoft, and know for a fact that my little slight on MS is completely valid, and I have in some way bruised your fragile, pathetically weak ego. Well, I'm sorry if your company can't get their product launches right the first time "
"Only Hitler would be so intolerant of people with opposing views!"
For the record, I work with AnonV, and no we're not at Microsoft. We're not even using Microsoft products much anymore. He's right, though, a lot of the 'flaws' involving Microsoft products are a result of creative thinking, not a result of flaws that could have been flushed out with testing. Argue with me if you want, but was the sysadmin here up until 4 months ago. If MS products were half as bad as people make-believe it is here, I wouldn't have had time for over 2,000 posts on Slashdot.
His point is quite valid, your comment did not deserve it's moderation. It's really quite formulaic. You took Microsoft, a company everybody here hates, and said they should make perfect products. Well golly gee, what a precious gem of insight that was! Of course, if you had said that about the Open Source Community and the software they write, you'd be modded as troll because people'd see what you're really doing. Never mind that it's just as valid. We've all downloaded free apps that had some sort of flaw or defect. They're not exempt from your commment, but common sense dictatates that it'd be nice if they made perfect stuff to begin with.
If you really were a software engineer, you'd understand this. You cannot anticipate every single thing people are going to try. The problem is a lot worse for Microsoft because a lot of their software hits the mass-market audience. Worse, their targets are people that aren't saavy enough to understand what's going on. Double worse is that MS has a bad rep so people intentionally try to find mischevious exploits. How come you don't know all this mr Software Developer?
I have to admit, though, accusing him of working for Microsoft and then flaming him for it was quite the dramatic touch. I agree with him, I think you're lying about being a software developer. I've never met a Software Engineer with such a desire to engage in malice like this.
"Frankly I'm suprised a CPU made of wood would work at all."
Hey man, don't knock wood.
This technology is actually quite fascinating. Not only is it very reliable, but it's also low voltage and resistant to random bit flippings caused by radiation etc.
"Give me a break! If I offer you a free beer or a 50 cent beer (same brand, same born on date) which one are you going to take? Even if the the the beer was discounted 49 cents, most people would take the free one."
BTW, pirated games are not very popular on Kazaa, especially in contrast to ripped DVDs etc. Coicidentally, most pc games have a demo download available, legitimately. I think the reason that game piracy's not so high on Kazaa is because game companies have realized that people want to know if the game works or not. So they fulfill that need. Who'd wait days for a possible game download when they can download the demo and get their questions answered?
"Give me a break! If I offer you a free beer or a 50 cent beer (same brand, same born on date) which one are you going to take? Even if the the the beer was discounted 49 cents, most people would take the free one."
I'd get the $.50 beer.
1.) $.50 is quite reasonable for beer. 2.) I don't know that the $.01 beer hasn't been tampered with. (ever download a song that has a glitch in it? Yuck.) 3.) I could get the $.50 beer really fast, vs. the $.01 beer would take an hour to pour. 4.) If I'm a fan of that particular brand of beer, I'm going to keep buying it from it's source instead of waiting for somebody to show up with it at $.01.
The only way I'd take the $.01 beer is if I had never had that brand before.
"when you spend lots of money producing an intellectual property, then some retard comes along and copies it to a million of his friends for free, should he be held responsible for committing some (perhaps new variety of) theft? "
Well there's really not enough information to answer this question, but I'll take a stab at it. No. Simply put, I trust that most people are honest. I'm going to treat them that way. If somebody makes my content available, and somebody else picks it up, then I instantly have exposure that I didn't have previously. $20 is a lot to spend if you don't like something that you can't return.
I don't think most of the people who would acquire my content for free would pay for it in the first place. At least then I'd have my foot in the door. If they don't like it, they're not going to download anymore. No harm done. I didn't get my $20, but at the same time they didn't get satisfactory service. If they do like it enough that they'd download it (bored perhaps?) but not enough to pay for it, then it means my prices are too high or my content just isn't good enough for them. Sorry, but I can't make everybody like anything I make. So no harm done either, especially when their acquisition of my content didn't cost me anything personally. All that's left are the people who download it simply because they don't want to pay for it. Should they be thrown in jail? I don't feel strongly they should. I can't imagine I would have gotten money from them if I had some perfect protection mechanism. At least that way there's the benefit of them sharing it with other people and getting their interest in it. Again, no losses or damage done to me here.
If it reached a point where more people were acquiring my content than paying for it, then I think that's more of a reflection of my price tag or quality than I do of people needing the law to hammer them down. It means that I need to provide more or provide cheaper. That's easy, create an incentive for people to buy it. "Buy this DVD, and you get a statue of the main character for free." Etc. Or, make more content that'd be hard to send with it. "This DVD also contains a High Definition 1080p version of the content" (like in the earlier article about MS and Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition.) Maybe they don't want the media, maybe they want an electronic version they can store on the hard drive? Well in that case I should provide it instead of causing them to seek other methods to doing it.
For the record, I'm an artist. That's what I do for a living. Copyright's very important to me, but jail time for somebody downloading or distributing a copy of my work is ridiculous. I'd rather just figure out a way to work with them on it. If they're willing to redistribute my work, then maybe there's a deal that can be made there. "At least advertise my deal for purchasing stuff."
The only time I'd be really worried about somebody redistributing my stuff is if they're making money off it illegally. That's really what copyright law is for. It's not about suing America's future.
"Yeah, competition really sucks, duddn't it? Now the Linux Community will have to develop a competing prodcut that's better. Bummer. "
I resent the flamebait moderation here. The Slashdot Community is quick to say that competition is wonderful, but when Microsoft does it it's bad? Wake up guys, when MS makes a move, it gives the Linux Community a better direction to go in. This is not a bad thing!
Man, maybe I should just pick up my pitchfork and hate everything MS just like everybody else here. Then I'd be popular.
Re:I actually tried to check this out...
on
HD DVD Coming Very Soon
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
"I would be a lot less anti-Microsoft if they actually put forth any effort at all to be compatible and/or interoperate with other OSes. I too am sick to death of the, "if you want to do this you have to run Windows" crap."
I'd be a lot less anti-Konqueror if they'd actually put forth any effort to be at all compatible and/or interoperate with other OSes. I'm sick to death of the, "if you want to do this you have to run Linux" crap.
My website's broken with Konqueror and now I have to %@#$'ing install Linux to fix it.
My dad invented the automatic lawn mower. The project was concieved on a rainy night in 1978. It had voice recognition, anger avoidance, and would even refill the gas tank! It took a little over 10 years to develop, but once perfected I got paid $10 every two weeks to keep the lawn trimmed.
"Microsoft, instead of trying to develop something that is truly better, is designing their software with a "roach motel" mindset; forcing people to use Microsft software even when there is an equivalent Linux solution. "
Roach Motel mindset? I think it has more to do with trying to provide a better end-user experience, and they cannot possibly guarantee that in places they have no control over.
Hell, I'm having that problem right now. I have a website right now. It works great in IE. It works great in Opera. And then I took it over to my friend's computer running Linux. Surprise surprise, it's broke. Somebody in the mix isn't supporting style sheets correctly. That's pretty sad considering I'm not even being fancy with them. Half the text is green. Lovely.
I'm not surprised MS takes steps like that. I'm tempted to myself. I'm sick of every browser out there being stupid about how to interpret the same code. I can't wait until a Linux user running Konqueror shows up to my site and says "man, this guy's an idiot, doesn't he know how to test his code?"
Slashdot Mirror
"... but what about the SMELL of that many computer nerds gathered in an area like that! I hope the place has proper ventilation. "
What about the roar of laughter that'd ensue if soembody let one of those smells out? Deafening.
"As I write this the worlds largest computerparty is going on in Hamar, Norway. The Gathering 2003 is in action with over 5.000 participants!"
They'd have 10,000 participants if they brought datess!
" You forgot to mention that instead of paying the prostitute, you can club her to death afterwards."
You haveta choose to do that the same way you would have to in real life.
"...It is a crime-based gangster game, but those old ladies and prostitutes you just killed... that's you doing that. You're choice. The game does not say 'kill old ladies to win'."
I just had this discussion with a coworker this morning. My point was a little different. Here's the gist of what I said:
I think my coworker understood my point. I'm a little sick of accusations based on assumptions.
The point you quoted is a lot more interesting than mine on a fundamental level. The reality is you can do bad things in this world. A lot of the time, you think you can get away with it. If this game teaches you anything, it's that you can't get away with hurting people. As I said before, you reflexively learn NOT to hurt people in it.
I appreciate you quoting that person. Something new to think about.
"But can I play a gay male prostitute? "
No, but you can play Morpheus dressing up as Cowboy Neal.
"ohhh, a game whose commercials show people beating each other up with a baseball bat or something... "
No, that's not what this game is about. Though I'm curious how you could mistake a game called "Grand Theft Auto" for a game where the point is to beat people. *eyeroll*
"senseless violence glorifying immoral crime. grow up."
One should know what they're talking about before telling people to grow up. If you had actually played the game, you'd know that senseless violence is the fastest way to lose in that game. Run over a pedestrian, the police chase you. Fight the police, more chase you. Etc.
I find it hard to accuse it of glorifying violence when playing it trains my reflexes to avoid hitting people.
The reason that GTA3 is controversial is because a lot of parents (mothers mostly) have no clue what their kids find in video games. So when some jackass politician *cough*Joe Liberman*cough* comes along and says "the style of entertainment you're uneducated about harms your children", suddenly their fears get voiced. They say stuff like "GTA3 makes prostution a good thing! Just watch, the woman gets in the car, and his health goes up when they have sex! That's immoral!!" And the mothers are like "My babies would never have sex! That's wrong!"
The reality of that aspect of GTA3 is a little bit different. The prostitute does get in the car. The car does shake around. The health of the player goes up. None of that is in dispute. However, they are not actually depicting sex. If you turn the camera a bit, you'll see that both the driver and the prostitute are sitting in their seats staring out the window. They're not touching in any way, that's unmistakable. The car's just shaking around, it's not clear why. The point? If the player doesn't know what a prostitute is when they play this game, they're not going to find out by playing this game. For somebody to understand what's happening here, they'd also have to be educated on the dangers of sex with prostitutes. It's called innuendo. Nothing new here that a child isn't exposed to by watching a little TV, even the news. (ZipperGate comes to mind...)
In any case, the point of this post is not to defend GTA3 specifically, it's to point out that just because you've heard a compelling side of an argument that does not mean you really know what you're talking about. There's always other points of view. If you're going to run around calling people immoral without understanding the other side of an issue, then you shouldn't be telling people to grow up. Finding information supporting your point of view is easy. Complete understanding of an issue, that's a grown up method of debate.
Maybe there's a really really weird dimension where you're better looking than me!
" I never could figure out how to get good output with DivX"
:)
I might be able to help you. Try changing the 'Maximum Qunatizer' to 8 or 4. The lower the better. Mininum Qunatizer should be one or two.
I think what it does is it sets how big an area to compress, but the default's a bit high.
Note: Im not quite an expert here, I just picked htis up a few days ago. Your milage may vary.
"Why does everyone think DivX and associated codecs is only good for ripping DVDs? "
Who said DivX is illegal? I said Divx rips of DVDs.
Don't blow up at me about it, I do animation for a living. DivX is the best codec I've used to share my work with the community.
It occurs to me that with a city-wide lan, anybody who wanted to make their own movie would have an effective way of delivering it. Not sure how many film students you have there, but the ability to broadcast video would at the very least be entertaining. I'm curious to see what would come of that.
- The XBOX processor isn't that powerful.
- The memory is pretty weak by today's standards.
- DVD drive isn't that interesting. DVD writers are not quite main stream yet (they will be soon, though) and your XBOX can play DVDs without Linux.
- Your high end graphics card is limited by two factors: 1.) A maximum resolution of 720 by 480 @ 60hz, provided you have a progressive scan TV. 2.) Software to use it. What, do you really think games using that card will come? I haven't seen a PC Open Source project do that yet, this isn't going to change the playing field.
And more? Your computer is only as good as your ability to communicate with it. A TV monitor is a horrible interface for a computer. The text is fuzzy and game controllers are not ideal for computer usage. What you get is less of a computer here. The only distinct advantage to it (besides it's footprint, which I'll half-concede on) is it's TV out. I personally would like to have it so I can play DivX movies at near DVD quality. This cannot easily be done with a PC and it's Tv-out that doesn't do the right resolution and color saturation.
Give us applications, not specs. If it had a TV tuner card on it, you might be on to something interesting here. Home-brew PVR! Nope. Don't have that. So please, give me a valid application that the XBOX running Linux would be ideal for.
"Because it's there! "
I'm normally all for this type of stuff, but in this case a better reason is needed than that. These guys are wandering into DMCA smackdown territory, and their only real defense is going to be "there's plenty of legitimate reasons why I'd want to do this." Unfortuantely, these reasons don't appear to exist. The only interesting one I've heard of was playing DivX movies. Given the XBOX's TV hardware that's unique to it (PC's, even with TV out, aren't the same quality) that's a semi reasonable excuse. (Pity the DMCA says DivX DVD rips are illegal...)
The question 'why' in this case cannot be answered by "because it's there". It needs to be something like "because the XBOX has a unique capability that we should be allowed to tinker with.
If somebody can enlighten me as to that use for the XBOX running Linux, then I'd be happy to be a proponent of it. But right now, what I see are people picking a fight with Microsoft and hoping the community will defend them. Sorry. Not supporting that. Throw me a frickin bone here.
"...it sounds like the real issue here is that you work for Microsoft, and know for a fact that my little slight on MS is completely valid, and I have in some way bruised your fragile, pathetically weak ego. Well, I'm sorry if your company can't get their product launches right the first time "
"Only Hitler would be so intolerant of people with opposing views!"
For the record, I work with AnonV, and no we're not at Microsoft. We're not even using Microsoft products much anymore. He's right, though, a lot of the 'flaws' involving Microsoft products are a result of creative thinking, not a result of flaws that could have been flushed out with testing. Argue with me if you want, but was the sysadmin here up until 4 months ago. If MS products were half as bad as people make-believe it is here, I wouldn't have had time for over 2,000 posts on Slashdot.
His point is quite valid, your comment did not deserve it's moderation. It's really quite formulaic. You took Microsoft, a company everybody here hates, and said they should make perfect products. Well golly gee, what a precious gem of insight that was! Of course, if you had said that about the Open Source Community and the software they write, you'd be modded as troll because people'd see what you're really doing. Never mind that it's just as valid. We've all downloaded free apps that had some sort of flaw or defect. They're not exempt from your commment, but common sense dictatates that it'd be nice if they made perfect stuff to begin with.
If you really were a software engineer, you'd understand this. You cannot anticipate every single thing people are going to try. The problem is a lot worse for Microsoft because a lot of their software hits the mass-market audience. Worse, their targets are people that aren't saavy enough to understand what's going on. Double worse is that MS has a bad rep so people intentionally try to find mischevious exploits. How come you don't know all this mr Software Developer?
I have to admit, though, accusing him of working for Microsoft and then flaming him for it was quite the dramatic touch. I agree with him, I think you're lying about being a software developer. I've never met a Software Engineer with such a desire to engage in malice like this.
"Frankly I'm suprised a CPU made of wood would work at all."
Hey man, don't knock wood.
This technology is actually quite fascinating. Not only is it very reliable, but it's also low voltage and resistant to random bit flippings caused by radiation etc.
Check out this extreme closeup image of the processor, you'll see what I mean.
So, how many of you are now driving new Honda Station Wagons?
"What an inconvenience."
You want to inconvenience those on your side? Yeah, brilliant move.
"Give me a break! If I offer you a free beer or a 50 cent beer (same brand, same born on date) which one are you going to take? Even if the the the beer was discounted 49 cents, most people would take the free one."
BTW, pirated games are not very popular on Kazaa, especially in contrast to ripped DVDs etc. Coicidentally, most pc games have a demo download available, legitimately. I think the reason that game piracy's not so high on Kazaa is because game companies have realized that people want to know if the game works or not. So they fulfill that need. Who'd wait days for a possible game download when they can download the demo and get their questions answered?
"Give me a break! If I offer you a free beer or a 50 cent beer (same brand, same born on date) which one are you going to take? Even if the the the beer was discounted 49 cents, most people would take the free one."
I'd get the $.50 beer.
1.) $.50 is quite reasonable for beer.
2.) I don't know that the $.01 beer hasn't been tampered with. (ever download a song that has a glitch in it? Yuck.)
3.) I could get the $.50 beer really fast, vs. the $.01 beer would take an hour to pour.
4.) If I'm a fan of that particular brand of beer, I'm going to keep buying it from it's source instead of waiting for somebody to show up with it at $.01.
The only way I'd take the $.01 beer is if I had never had that brand before.
Here's my nomination for the icon.
"when you spend lots of money producing an intellectual property, then some retard comes along and copies it to a million of his friends for free, should he be held responsible for committing some (perhaps new variety of) theft?
"
Well there's really not enough information to answer this question, but I'll take a stab at it. No. Simply put, I trust that most people are honest. I'm going to treat them that way. If somebody makes my content available, and somebody else picks it up, then I instantly have exposure that I didn't have previously. $20 is a lot to spend if you don't like something that you can't return.
I don't think most of the people who would acquire my content for free would pay for it in the first place. At least then I'd have my foot in the door. If they don't like it, they're not going to download anymore. No harm done. I didn't get my $20, but at the same time they didn't get satisfactory service. If they do like it enough that they'd download it (bored perhaps?) but not enough to pay for it, then it means my prices are too high or my content just isn't good enough for them. Sorry, but I can't make everybody like anything I make. So no harm done either, especially when their acquisition of my content didn't cost me anything personally. All that's left are the people who download it simply because they don't want to pay for it. Should they be thrown in jail? I don't feel strongly they should. I can't imagine I would have gotten money from them if I had some perfect protection mechanism. At least that way there's the benefit of them sharing it with other people and getting their interest in it. Again, no losses or damage done to me here.
If it reached a point where more people were acquiring my content than paying for it, then I think that's more of a reflection of my price tag or quality than I do of people needing the law to hammer them down. It means that I need to provide more or provide cheaper. That's easy, create an incentive for people to buy it. "Buy this DVD, and you get a statue of the main character for free." Etc. Or, make more content that'd be hard to send with it. "This DVD also contains a High Definition 1080p version of the content" (like in the earlier article about MS and Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition.) Maybe they don't want the media, maybe they want an electronic version they can store on the hard drive? Well in that case I should provide it instead of causing them to seek other methods to doing it.
For the record, I'm an artist. That's what I do for a living. Copyright's very important to me, but jail time for somebody downloading or distributing a copy of my work is ridiculous. I'd rather just figure out a way to work with them on it. If they're willing to redistribute my work, then maybe there's a deal that can be made there. "At least advertise my deal for purchasing stuff."
The only time I'd be really worried about somebody redistributing my stuff is if they're making money off it illegally. That's really what copyright law is for. It's not about suing America's future.
... my new nickname will be Mooner.
"Yeah, competition really sucks, duddn't it? Now the Linux Community will have to develop a competing prodcut that's better. Bummer.
"
I resent the flamebait moderation here. The Slashdot Community is quick to say that competition is wonderful, but when Microsoft does it it's bad? Wake up guys, when MS makes a move, it gives the Linux Community a better direction to go in. This is not a bad thing!
Man, maybe I should just pick up my pitchfork and hate everything MS just like everybody else here. Then I'd be popular.
"I would be a lot less anti-Microsoft if they actually put forth any effort at all to be compatible and/or interoperate with other OSes. I too am sick to death of the, "if you want to do this you have to run Windows" crap."
I'd be a lot less anti-Konqueror if they'd actually put forth any effort to be at all compatible and/or interoperate with other OSes. I'm sick to death of the, "if you want to do this you have to run Linux" crap.
My website's broken with Konqueror and now I have to %@#$'ing install Linux to fix it.
My dad invented the automatic lawn mower. The project was concieved on a rainy night in 1978. It had voice recognition, anger avoidance, and would even refill the gas tank! It took a little over 10 years to develop, but once perfected I got paid $10 every two weeks to keep the lawn trimmed.
"Microsoft, instead of trying to develop something that is truly better, is designing their software with a "roach motel" mindset; forcing people to use Microsft software even when there is an equivalent Linux solution. "
Roach Motel mindset? I think it has more to do with trying to provide a better end-user experience, and they cannot possibly guarantee that in places they have no control over.
Hell, I'm having that problem right now. I have a website right now. It works great in IE. It works great in Opera. And then I took it over to my friend's computer running Linux. Surprise surprise, it's broke. Somebody in the mix isn't supporting style sheets correctly. That's pretty sad considering I'm not even being fancy with them. Half the text is green. Lovely.
I'm not surprised MS takes steps like that. I'm tempted to myself. I'm sick of every browser out there being stupid about how to interpret the same code. I can't wait until a Linux user running Konqueror shows up to my site and says "man, this guy's an idiot, doesn't he know how to test his code?"