...claiming that Opt Out is not a viable model for telemarketers.
Since when do the rights of US citizens depend on whether or not an industry
whose entire business model is based a dubious technology get to have unpopular
laws passed to protect their pitiful existence? Oh...wait...
One sneaky trick some universities tried to do was grade on a 5.0 scale rather than 4.0. I've never gone to a school that had this kind of grading scale, but I remember reading about all the disclaimers when transfering your grades from one university to another. So, while colleges wouldn't count your B average as an A, I seriously doubt an employeer would know the difference.
Sad to see the article's author flat-out claim that '... a proliferation
of free music-swapping services on the Internet has led to a decline in CD
sales.'
Why is that sad? It's probably true to a degree. The good news is
that these companies are trying to embrace a new distribution model.
What's sad is that they may not be successful when a 100% free alternative
exists with as much consumer perceived add-value to the product.
First Karma burn!
on
Tuxedo Park
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Fuck it, it's Friday! Tuxedo? Wasn't that Jackie Chan?
i think what screwed it was that ps2 was LIGHT YEARS ahead of DC tech-wise
- the first-mover advantage was simply negated this time
Hell no! The PS2 was NOT light years ahead of the Dreamcast. The
problem with the Dreamcast were its controllers and the lack of software for
it. What helped kill sales for Sega was the PROMISE by Sony that the PS2
would be light-years ahead of the Dreamcast. So people hung onto their
PS1s and waited before shelling out any cash for the Dreamcast since the PS2 was
right around the corner. When the PS2 came out, it was marginally better
than the Dreamcast, but by then it was too late.
Considering that a number of half-assed
programming attempts at a software-only PSX emulator were almost successful, the behemoth force of Microsoft could have
easily created a software-based emulator for PS1 titles that would be run on the
XBox and look even better than the PS1. Then of course, they would have
ended up helping undo the DMCA when defending the inevitable lawsuits from
Sony. Ah well.
And on the day after the copywright runs out when you release your own Mario game, you'll still go to jail for Trademark infringment which really is perpertual.
So even on "inferior" hardware, Nintendo's software is so great, it makes it worthwhile to buy the platform...and I agree. So if the software is so great, why would they need to create and sell a platform at a loss to get people to buy their software, which is allegedly how they make ALL their money?
I hope for their sake they have a realistic plan for designing the hardware and consider it a contender to go head-to-head against Sony. The GameCube is great, but it's not nearly as good (from a hardware standpoint) than the X-Box or what's in store for the PS3. Either way, they MUST be planning on making a PROFIT from the console. Why else would they want to go through the trouble of spending mucho dollars of R&D? Anyone who keeps the myth of "platform makers losing money on the hardware" can finally shut the hell up!
One of the required classes for my Engineering degree was a course in the mathematics behind networks. It was without a doubt one of the most difficult coursework I have ever experienced. Even with all of the work we performed to create mathematical models of network nodes, etc., they were still unrealistic due to the overall complexity of "real" networks. For example, basic router queuing assumes the packets have an incoming probability Poisson distribution and outgoing has an exponential distribution. This is just an approximation used to allow us to get our arms around the problem. If you examine this model closely, you will find out that it implies that the packets that enter aren't necessarily the same size when they leave! Other issues like probabilistic routing rather than trying to model "smart" routers that adjust based on traffic patterns, etc. aren't usually modeled either.
Don't forget to add the $60-$70 modchip, and the $100 for a bigger hard drive to the cost of the xbox. Oh, and remember that the XBox still only has 64 MB of RAM and poor driver support.
They just openly defined the file format, not the tools to create graphics.
This is a nice thing for them to do since they did have to put time and money to come up with this format standard. However, it's not that much of a charitible contribution to the software community. They had to come up with this format anyway, so why not release it to everyone?
It was easy for you. However, don't underestimate the amount of R&D Microsoft has put into hardware support since Windows 95. Plug and play works very well in the newer versions of windows. The only thing even close to it was the Knoppix CD (and it even bombed out on a few systems).
That's somewhat true, however what's the other option? Come up with your own OS? Why? Who needs it? Besides, I don't think these companies are offering open source software. They're offering closed-source software on an open OS. Big difference.
The reason Linux is seeing this recent resurgence is due to the natrual evolution of the operating system's relevance to the overall picture. If programming languages are at a high enough level such that porting applications (i.e., the real moneymakers) is easy between different OSes, then why not go with the one that costs zero? Mind you, I said "relevance" of the OS, not "importance." For example, deciding which CPU and chipset to use is important, but has no (little) relevance to OS and application selection.
Slashdot Mirror
Why was the car riding on top of a motorcycle?
...these bandages would make effective tampons?
I got karma, baby!
...claiming that Opt Out is not a viable model for telemarketers.
Since when do the rights of US citizens depend on whether or not an industry whose entire business model is based a dubious technology get to have unpopular laws passed to protect their pitiful existence? Oh... wait...
Don't gimme any FLAC, either!
One sneaky trick some universities tried to do was grade on a 5.0 scale rather than 4.0. I've never gone to a school that had this kind of grading scale, but I remember reading about all the disclaimers when transfering your grades from one university to another. So, while colleges wouldn't count your B average as an A, I seriously doubt an employeer would know the difference.
Whatever you do, be sure to take ANY class taught by "Stuart Rojstaczer"! You'll get an "A"!
The two are not mutually exclusive since something can be made out of spite AND love.
Therefore... You sir, are a cockgobbler. QED.
...most open source projects are created out of love, but many more, out of spite.
Sad to see the article's author flat-out claim that '... a proliferation of free music-swapping services on the Internet has led to a decline in CD sales.'
Why is that sad? It's probably true to a degree. The good news is that these companies are trying to embrace a new distribution model. What's sad is that they may not be successful when a 100% free alternative exists with as much consumer perceived add-value to the product.
Fuck it, it's Friday! Tuxedo? Wasn't that Jackie Chan?
i think what screwed it was that ps2 was LIGHT YEARS ahead of DC tech-wise - the first-mover advantage was simply negated this time
Hell no! The PS2 was NOT light years ahead of the Dreamcast. The problem with the Dreamcast were its controllers and the lack of software for it. What helped kill sales for Sega was the PROMISE by Sony that the PS2 would be light-years ahead of the Dreamcast. So people hung onto their PS1s and waited before shelling out any cash for the Dreamcast since the PS2 was right around the corner. When the PS2 came out, it was marginally better than the Dreamcast, but by then it was too late.
Considering that a number of half-assed programming attempts at a software-only PSX emulator were almost successful, the behemoth force of Microsoft could have easily created a software-based emulator for PS1 titles that would be run on the XBox and look even better than the PS1. Then of course, they would have ended up helping undo the DMCA when defending the inevitable lawsuits from Sony. Ah well.
And on the day after the copywright runs out when you release your own Mario game, you'll still go to jail for Trademark infringment which really is perpertual.
So even on "inferior" hardware, Nintendo's software is so great, it makes it worthwhile to buy the platform...and I agree. So if the software is so great, why would they need to create and sell a platform at a loss to get people to buy their software, which is allegedly how they make ALL their money?
It's got nothing to do with raw CPU power (regardless of the clock speed). Rather than rehash it all, read this.
How do you figure the ps2's hardware is better? Have you loooked at the specs? Get real.
Uh, have you looked at the post your responding to?
I hope for their sake they have a realistic plan for designing the hardware and consider it a contender to go head-to-head against Sony. The GameCube is great, but it's not nearly as good (from a hardware standpoint) than the X-Box or what's in store for the PS3. Either way, they MUST be planning on making a PROFIT from the console. Why else would they want to go through the trouble of spending mucho dollars of R&D? Anyone who keeps the myth of "platform makers losing money on the hardware" can finally shut the hell up!
One of the required classes for my Engineering degree was a course in the mathematics behind networks. It was without a doubt one of the most difficult coursework I have ever experienced. Even with all of the work we performed to create mathematical models of network nodes, etc., they were still unrealistic due to the overall complexity of "real" networks. For example, basic router queuing assumes the packets have an incoming probability Poisson distribution and outgoing has an exponential distribution. This is just an approximation used to allow us to get our arms around the problem. If you examine this model closely, you will find out that it implies that the packets that enter aren't necessarily the same size when they leave! Other issues like probabilistic routing rather than trying to model "smart" routers that adjust based on traffic patterns, etc. aren't usually modeled either.
Don't forget to add the $60-$70 modchip, and the $100 for a bigger hard drive to the cost of the xbox. Oh, and remember that the XBox still only has 64 MB of RAM and poor driver support.
They just openly defined the file format, not the tools to create graphics.
This is a nice thing for them to do since they did have to put time and money to come up with this format standard. However, it's not that much of a charitible contribution to the software community. They had to come up with this format anyway, so why not release it to everyone?
Jar Jar in my own home! Thanks Lucasfilm!
It was easy for you. However, don't underestimate the amount of R&D Microsoft has put into hardware support since Windows 95. Plug and play works very well in the newer versions of windows. The only thing even close to it was the Knoppix CD (and it even bombed out on a few systems).
That's somewhat true, however what's the other option? Come up with your own OS? Why? Who needs it? Besides, I don't think these companies are offering open source software. They're offering closed-source software on an open OS. Big difference.
The reason Linux is seeing this recent resurgence is due to the natrual evolution of the operating system's relevance to the overall picture. If programming languages are at a high enough level such that porting applications (i.e., the real moneymakers) is easy between different OSes, then why not go with the one that costs zero? Mind you, I said "relevance" of the OS, not "importance." For example, deciding which CPU and chipset to use is important, but has no (little) relevance to OS and application selection.
Same here. It got rejected ages ago, too. Slashdot stories are like wine...they get better with age...or at least they think so.