However, your exemplary slashbot behavior is sure to be rewarded, as from your post it's entirely obvious that you managed to avoid getting anywhere near the article, never mind reading it.
Because these days, there are only two things I keep my Windows box for: Gaming, and Office (No.. OpenOffice unfortunately doesn't quite cut it yet.. why? Because I make heavy use of the revision tools to pass group work around. OpenOffice's implementation of these are painful to use and often don't seem to even work when it comes to style changes)
Kill the Windows PC gaming market and that's half my reason for Windows gone right there.
Following through on your analogy, perhaps the best means of getting you off of JIF would be taste-tests. You know, free samples.
Well, one thing Linux does well.. free samples.
Now what we need to do is make sure the quality of those samples are good enough to even overcome the "But it doesn't taste like what I'm used to" objections.
Ah. So then you have no problem if I name my next OS "Operating System", trademark it, and then try to sue the pants off of any company or manufacturer that calls something they make an operating system?
Guys at CIA were having some fun around Christmas time. When it came time to release the documents, they decided they'd rather not look like they were assing around on government time, so redacted it.
No offense but as soon as LucasArt steps out of the starwars zone, they are plain aweful.
I realize when trolling it's always best to throw in at least one typo to hook all the spelling nazi's but there's such a thing as pride in your work. By making such an obvious mistake, your trollish intent becomes clear. Far better to misspell using a homonym or some such whenever possible.
I mean, come on.. everybody knows it's "into" not "out of"
Wait.. are you saying Andromeda had character, dialog, or plot?
tum-te-tum.. this is my fast typing line. It's what I type when Slashdot is too stupid to realize that not everybody is a two-fingered hunt and peck typist.
Thanks for telling me about revision tracking. That's a deal-breaker on my end. Working on a council and passing around documents through multiple people, provinces and countries, I *need* revision tracking to be flawless.
Close.. but too specific and too general. The web is not fundamentally anything (or to be more accurate, can be anything we want it to be from text to pictures to music to whatever). Most people don't just want some text. Images are also important. We're a very visual species, after all.
Part of the problem with VRML lay in a bad choice of applications it was applied to. When I go to an online store, I have no need to be able to "walk through" a virtual mall. Hell, that's why I'm on the online store in the first place, the 2d format has greater ease of use for that application.
VRML was trying to shoe-horn 3D experiences in where they weren't required. I'd love to have a 3D rotatable/scalable graphic of something I'm looking at purchasing. That's a good idea. What I don't need is a storefront and product listing that requires me navigating a 3D environment.
3D chat rooms? Perhaps cool. Not a huge improvement over standard 2d interfaces though, and again, having to navigate in a 3d environment to find a particular person is simply a pain.
The trick is, use 3D for where it's useful, and discard it where it's not. VRML was lousy at that.
This whole argument, to me, is kind of silly because people are either uninformed or just angry that they can't get as much of a free lunch as they once did.
Huh?
Let's see.. I'm required to work hours beyond my normal work week. Yet according to you, by expecting to get paid for that additional time I'm looking for a free lunch?
The exact figures don't matter. It's the philosophy behind it.. I always thought that America was built on the notion of getting paid for the work you do -- you do more, you get more.
Maybe that's just my silly notion being up here in Canada, however.
Companies are not in business to do good or to pay people x% of their revenues; a company is solely in business to profit.
Thanks for playing. Please re-read some of the initial justifications for allowing the legal entities of limited liability corporations to exist.
In short, their negative effects were widely recognized and understood, but it was also understood that they stood a good chance of benefiting the general public more than not having them.
A company is a privilege granted by the government, for the purposes of bettering the society. While the goal of profit is often seen as the way to best ensure this (as profit gets spread around) it should always be remembered that the reason the company is *allowed* to exist is to better the society.
See that train pulling out of the station? That'd be the clue train, and you just missed it.
The previous poster wasn't talking about running a business, he was talking about the larger issue of the effects of a cash hoarding business (such as Microsoft) in the general economy.
Microsoft's ridiculously huge war-chest is a serious drag on America's economy. Why? Because those are dollars that have been, more or less, taken out of circulation from the general public. When money isn't in circulation, it's not benefitting the people who need it most. How many jobs or companies could have been started with that 47 billion dollars MS is just sitting on? How far advanced could computing be if truly innovative people got their hands on some of that money?
Instead, Bill Gates, in his paranoia about not knowing whether he'll be at the top of the heap tomorrow, cowers on that slush pile.. doing immeasurable damage to the general economy, when as the lead stockholder in Microsoft he could instead be directing the company to be doing actual innovative research in a thousand different areas.. most of which admittedly wouldn't pan out, but if a couple did it could well take Microsoft even further - and all of which would help out the economy while he was at it.
Sadly, though the richest man in the world, Mr. Gates is, when it boils down to it, a coward and a poor strategic thinker. Excellent tactician, yes, but definitely not a long-term thinker.
His first key deal came not because of the inherent worth of his product (of which there's some dispute even today whether he's the actual author) but because of his connection through his mother. As a result, I don't think that Mr. Gates ever actually believed in the worth of his own product. He has maintained his wealth primarily by sabotaging his competition (whether through restrictive OEM deals, secret APIs, or even more directly illegal means such as found in the DR-DOS case, or anti-trust cases) rather than outperforming it, and by amassing this huge rainy-day fund because he's afraid of the inevitable rainy day happening.
To his credit, he has been right in this before, as nearly happened with Netscape and the internet strategy. Unfortunately, this simply reinforced those tendancies of hoarding.
What amazes me is that the shareholders seem to have little problem with this. 47 billion dollars in the bank. Put that into R&D. Come up with the next super-killer app. Yeah, maybe you spend 40 billion of it in stuff that dies, but if you take the next market (be it quantum computing, cybernetics, AI development, whatever..) by storm, you stand to recoup all of that plus.
I used to be angry at Microsoft because of their various illegal shennanigans and tactics that served more to hurt their competition than create something better for consumers.
Slashdot Mirror
..of the lesson: You get what you pay for.
Too bad it applies to Television Programming as well.
See that thing passing way over your head there?
That was the sarcasm in the line you quoted.
However, your exemplary slashbot behavior is sure to be rewarded, as from your post it's entirely obvious that you managed to avoid getting anywhere near the article, never mind reading it.
Because these days, there are only two things I keep my Windows box for: Gaming, and Office (No.. OpenOffice unfortunately doesn't quite cut it yet.. why? Because I make heavy use of the revision tools to pass group work around. OpenOffice's implementation of these are painful to use and often don't seem to even work when it comes to style changes)
Kill the Windows PC gaming market and that's half my reason for Windows gone right there.
Yeah, but some of us have to work during the day. Why do you think I'm here?
where the hell 7334 speak came from.
The author's point was that Microsoft is not really innovating anymore.
I think you meant to say "at all".. anymore implies there was some done previously.
Hey, you should send out some email about this service, I bet people would love the chance to buy in.
Why, I think I know a place where you can send email to up to 2 million addresses for only...
Close, but no cigar.
System Shock came out in 1994 with full 3D play.
Of course, it didn't have multiplay until the patch came out some time later.
Following through on your analogy, perhaps the best means of getting you off of JIF would be taste-tests. You know, free samples.
Well, one thing Linux does well.. free samples.
Now what we need to do is make sure the quality of those samples are good enough to even overcome the "But it doesn't taste like what I'm used to" objections.
Ah. So then you have no problem if I name my next OS "Operating System", trademark it, and then try to sue the pants off of any company or manufacturer that calls something they make an operating system?
Fairly easy.
Guys at CIA were having some fun around Christmas time. When it came time to release the documents, they decided they'd rather not look like they were assing around on government time, so redacted it.
Read the articles in Cosmo.. ..it's like reading one of those Penthouse Letters digests with some fashion articles and recipes thrown in.
This is because they have a monopoly or cartel.
Hell, they were even busted for it, though it doesn't make the news here like Microsoft does.
But this is the natural outgrowth of monopolies. They are almost emphatically anti-consumer.
No offense but as soon as LucasArt steps out of the starwars zone, they are plain aweful.
I realize when trolling it's always best to throw in at least one typo to hook all the spelling nazi's but there's such a thing as pride in your work. By making such an obvious mistake, your trollish intent becomes clear. Far better to misspell using a homonym or some such whenever possible.
I mean, come on.. everybody knows it's "into" not "out of"
What they aren't saying, however, is if what I've purchased is a license:
1. Where are the terms?
2. Where's my signature?
3. Where's my replacement if my current media breaks or is damaged in some way?
Yeah. The words First Post will automatically get you modded down.
I'm not sure why Valentia would have said that though.
Wait.. are you saying Andromeda had character, dialog, or plot?
tum-te-tum.. this is my fast typing line. It's what I type when Slashdot is too stupid to realize that not everybody is a two-fingered hunt and peck typist.
Fair enough.
But that still doesn't explain why the scripts sucked.
Ouch.
Thanks for telling me about revision tracking. That's a deal-breaker on my end. Working on a council and passing around documents through multiple people, provinces and countries, I *need* revision tracking to be flawless.
Isn't it obvious to you that the other poster doesn't understand what that actually means?
Monopolies have to play by different rules. That's the price for being allowed to have a monopoly.
Close.. but too specific and too general. The web is not fundamentally anything (or to be more accurate, can be anything we want it to be from text to pictures to music to whatever). Most people don't just want some text. Images are also important. We're a very visual species, after all.
Part of the problem with VRML lay in a bad choice of applications it was applied to.
When I go to an online store, I have no need to be able to "walk through" a virtual mall. Hell, that's why I'm on the online store in the first place, the 2d format has greater ease of use for that application.
VRML was trying to shoe-horn 3D experiences in where they weren't required. I'd love to have a 3D rotatable/scalable graphic of something I'm looking at purchasing. That's a good idea. What I don't need is a storefront and product listing that requires me navigating a 3D environment.
3D chat rooms? Perhaps cool. Not a huge improvement over standard 2d interfaces though, and again, having to navigate in a 3d environment to find a particular person is simply a pain.
The trick is, use 3D for where it's useful, and discard it where it's not. VRML was lousy at that.
You also don't know your rights.
Just because you're on salary doesn't mean you become the boss's personal bitch.
Get some cajones, and do some reading at the local law libray.
This whole argument, to me, is kind of silly because people are either uninformed or just angry that they can't get as much of a free lunch as they once did.
Huh?
Let's see.. I'm required to work hours beyond my normal work week. Yet according to you, by expecting to get paid for that additional time I'm looking for a free lunch?
The exact figures don't matter. It's the philosophy behind it.. I always thought that America was built on the notion of getting paid for the work you do -- you do more, you get more.
Maybe that's just my silly notion being up here in Canada, however.
Companies are not in business to do good or to pay people x% of their revenues; a company is solely in business to profit.
Thanks for playing.
Please re-read some of the initial justifications for allowing the legal entities of limited liability corporations to exist.
In short, their negative effects were widely recognized and understood, but it was also understood that they stood a good chance of benefiting the general public more than not having them.
A company is a privilege granted by the government, for the purposes of bettering the society. While the goal of profit is often seen as the way to best ensure this (as profit gets spread around) it should always be remembered that the reason the company is *allowed* to exist is to better the society.
See that train pulling out of the station? That'd be the clue train, and you just missed it.
The previous poster wasn't talking about running a business, he was talking about the larger issue of the effects of a cash hoarding business (such as Microsoft) in the general economy.
Microsoft's ridiculously huge war-chest is a serious drag on America's economy. Why? Because those are dollars that have been, more or less, taken out of circulation from the general public. When money isn't in circulation, it's not benefitting the people who need it most. How many jobs or companies could have been started with that 47 billion dollars MS is just sitting on? How far advanced could computing be if truly innovative people got their hands on some of that money?
Instead, Bill Gates, in his paranoia about not knowing whether he'll be at the top of the heap tomorrow, cowers on that slush pile.. doing immeasurable damage to the general economy, when as the lead stockholder in Microsoft he could instead be directing the company to be doing actual innovative research in a thousand different areas.. most of which admittedly wouldn't pan out, but if a couple did it could well take Microsoft even further - and all of which would help out the economy while he was at it.
Sadly, though the richest man in the world, Mr. Gates is, when it boils down to it, a coward and a poor strategic thinker. Excellent tactician, yes, but definitely not a long-term thinker.
His first key deal came not because of the inherent worth of his product (of which there's some dispute even today whether he's the actual author) but because of his connection through his mother. As a result, I don't think that Mr. Gates ever actually believed in the worth of his own product. He has maintained his wealth primarily by sabotaging his competition (whether through restrictive OEM deals, secret APIs, or even more directly illegal means such as found in the DR-DOS case, or anti-trust cases) rather than outperforming it, and by amassing this huge rainy-day fund because he's afraid of the inevitable rainy day happening.
To his credit, he has been right in this before, as nearly happened with Netscape and the internet strategy. Unfortunately, this simply reinforced those tendancies of hoarding.
What amazes me is that the shareholders seem to have little problem with this. 47 billion dollars in the bank. Put that into R&D. Come up with the next super-killer app. Yeah, maybe you spend 40 billion of it in stuff that dies, but if you take the next market (be it quantum computing, cybernetics, AI development, whatever..) by storm, you stand to recoup all of that plus.
I used to be angry at Microsoft because of their various illegal shennanigans and tactics that served more to hurt their competition than create something better for consumers.
These days I'm just sad for them.. and for Bill.