It's called Economics. I have NO problem with MS undercutting the competition. THey're a business, and they can do what they want as long as it's not monopolistic.
I did not know, however, that all Videogame Companies did this. That actually was helpful.:)
Well, I don't. With the internet, I'd rather sit and read news, websites, stories, etc than fry my brain watching TV. In fact, the most recent TV show I watched was an episode of Futurama I downloaded. As far as normal programming, I barely watch it.
I'd rather read, or exercise. I don't need no stinking TV.
And why would they be worried about this? Modchips exist. "Oh, MS, we're trying to help you, but if you don't cooperate we won't keep it to ourselves. It's out of our hands."
What the hell are you talking about? What will happen if I fuck with you? I can do it all on my own...and so can about 10,000 other people out there who could care less about your crusade.
B. It's real, they are missing the big picutre. MS looses money on every XBox sold. If they signed a Linux Bootloader that would be an endorsment of a way to loose money and I wouldn't doubt it to be against their own EULA for uses of the XBox.
ENOUGH with the "MS loses money for every Xbox sold". So, if we the/. readers are to read you comment, then MS doesn't want to sell Xboxes? Ludicrous.
MS sells Xboxes at a loss so they can gain an upper hand over the rest of the Videogame market. They have much larger profit margins than the rest (Sony, Nintendo), so they can lower prices to such a level where the rest can't compete. Then they don't need to worry about lowering prices because they'll have beaten out the other consoles.
AND, for every Xbox bought MS loses less money. There fore they want more sold, not fewer.
The "Buy an Xbox and MS loses money" argument is stupid stupid stupid. MS wants you to buy and Xbox. They lose more money for every Xbox on the shelves than every one brought home.
They really think MS would release an official LINUX bootloader?! Of course not.
THis is, plain and simple, a bluff. If they had a way to do it, they'd release it; why wouldn't they? Who needs an official bootloader if you can boot Linux without a modchip?
It's a bluff to bully MS into allowing Linux on the Xbox. And it isn't going to work.
Re:Why the XBox is bad for Microsoft
on
Hacking the XBox
·
· Score: 1
Dude, you best get you tinfoil hat back on before they read your mind! =p
Ok, so he's got a cool idea. The only problem (And it basically ruins the case, IMO) is that he had no rhyme or reason as to where he put parts. He didn't make it look symetrical, nor did he make it look nice in the layout; he just jammed shit wherever it fit into the case. Yes, it's a neat idea, but I think he needed to put more thought into where each piece went.
Or maybe not make it plexiglass. Anyways, 2.5 out of 4 stars.
What the hell are you talking about? Apple won't sue people over this. How is he profiting? How is he breaching IP laws? How is he stealing function/design? He made the design.
God, the computer on a subscription is for your beloved Windows and its pallidium. It's been stated that that will never befall the Mac.
Apple has CodeWarrier, which is better than their native GCC by about a magnitude of 20. Had they used that, their code would have been as good if not faster then the VC++ stuff.
He's actually right about the compiler hurting them. =p
OK, as with all the "Macs are too expensive" trolls, GO TO APPLE'S WEBSITE.
$799 for the cheapest desktop Mac, and $999 for a laptop, both of which perform extremely well. That is no more expensive than your beloved "cheap" x86s. And we're talking about good machines here, not P.O.S.es.
Although, I can see the trolls now: "Apple cheated! They used Windows!!!! of course the Mac looks better..."
That's exactly why he doesn't want to do it; he wanted to give Intel/AMD the best shot possible so noone would complain...seemed it kinda backfired though.
Slashdot Mirror
If you get a new iBook, OS X flies. Just sos ya know.. :D
Heh, I guess I need to :p
Parent's attempted joke just sucked, heh.
It's called Economics. I have NO problem with MS undercutting the competition. THey're a business, and they can do what they want as long as it's not monopolistic.
I did not know, however, that all Videogame Companies did this. That actually was helpful. :)
I'd rather read, or exercise. I don't need no stinking TV.
I'm too lazy to lay it out for you, so read this. be enlightened.
And why would they be worried about this? Modchips exist. "Oh, MS, we're trying to help you, but if you don't cooperate we won't keep it to ourselves. It's out of our hands."
Yea, right.
Hadn't thought of that, but now that I think of it you're right. Selling at a loss gets them more games too...
Good show! =p
Not that MS would pay attention anyways.
Err...
You do not keep my system up and running.
You do not do my backups.
You do not manage my data.
You certainly do not gaurd me while I sleep.
What the hell are you talking about? What will happen if I fuck with you? I can do it all on my own...and so can about 10,000 other people out there who could care less about your crusade.
ENOUGH with the "MS loses money for every Xbox sold". So, if we the /. readers are to read you comment, then MS doesn't want to sell Xboxes? Ludicrous.
MS sells Xboxes at a loss so they can gain an upper hand over the rest of the Videogame market. They have much larger profit margins than the rest (Sony, Nintendo), so they can lower prices to such a level where the rest can't compete. Then they don't need to worry about lowering prices because they'll have beaten out the other consoles.
AND, for every Xbox bought MS loses less money. There fore they want more sold, not fewer.
The "Buy an Xbox and MS loses money" argument is stupid stupid stupid. MS wants you to buy and Xbox. They lose more money for every Xbox on the shelves than every one brought home.
THis is, plain and simple, a bluff. If they had a way to do it, they'd release it; why wouldn't they? Who needs an official bootloader if you can boot Linux without a modchip?
It's a bluff to bully MS into allowing Linux on the Xbox. And it isn't going to work.
And image, it got modded up..
Or maybe not make it plexiglass. Anyways, 2.5 out of 4 stars.
What the hell are you talking about? Apple won't sue people over this. How is he profiting? How is he breaching IP laws? How is he stealing function/design? He made the design.
God, the computer on a subscription is for your beloved Windows and its pallidium. It's been stated that that will never befall the Mac.
Yes, on paper they look like crap I'll admit. But in practice (Read: daily use, games, etc) they fly. Even my iBook is damn speedy.
In fact, I run Maya on my iBook. And it runs well (The PLE). So, while it may look like shit on paper, it isn't in practice.
Plus the machines last for frigging ever.
Codewarrier anyone? It's about 20 times better than GCC, and most professional Mac OS X software is written with it.
HEY! So does Maya Personal! Ooh I gotta go download that!
Unless of course you're at a Univeristy doing particle physics or at a renderfarm.
Or trying to compile an OS. ;)
Apple has CodeWarrier, which is better than their native GCC by about a magnitude of 20. Had they used that, their code would have been as good if not faster then the VC++ stuff.
He's actually right about the compiler hurting them. =p
$799 for the cheapest desktop Mac, and $999 for a laptop, both of which perform extremely well. That is no more expensive than your beloved "cheap" x86s. And we're talking about good machines here, not P.O.S.es.
That's exactly why he doesn't want to do it; he wanted to give Intel/AMD the best shot possible so noone would complain...seemed it kinda backfired though.
First it's "They're too slow and too expensive."
Now it's "They're blazingly fast, but still too expensive"? Have you SEEN the $799 G4 eMacs?
But not at the speeds he's talking about.
Ohh, they prolly don't notice the L.