I was thinking he meant they'd get the freedom to set the pace of development by gradually releasing better SDK and tools. But only to developers who released games on the ones they already have.
Quebecor, which owns Videotron is a huge media and content owner. Through subsidiaries, they're closer to being the "Time Warner" of Quebec(and they own some stuff west, just not dominating there like they do here) than just about anything else here.
If it let them snoop on who was traveling to their competitor's facilities during particularly hectic contracts, I'd say it would have made a difference.
Not that it's contracted out, but that it's contracted out to a large firm who already does a specific kind of business with the government. Contracting out to orbitz or american express for travel is one thing. Contracting to someone who has a corporate interest in knowing who visits Boing, is another.
When Ballmer says the word "open" in a sentence, it's "pot, kettle, black" all over again.
Maybe we need corporal punishment for every slashdot editor who posts this stuff without using a basic logic filter.
Microsoft's definition of "open" has always been "what allows us to 3E is open" "What doesn it isn't"
It's always been about them, not about the consumer. We need to actually punish them when they do this, or they will never learn not to do it again.
That's how a free market work, with pain for the pushy people who bother you.
Right now, Microsoft's been getting a free ride for about 12 years, and they will continue to do so. When the money they are being fined for illegal monopoly doesn't get funneled into funding the alternatives, the monopoly just gets blessed.
In fact Netflix may just be showing us the future of content monetization.
Offer, for a fee, media people are willing to pay for, not based on your technology choices, leave it, as much as possible, to them.
Netflix has the distribution platform, check, the client base, check, the mindshare, check. They are waiting for the MPAA licenses etc... But as long as they give more freedom to the consumer(not necessarily for free) and keep it as much a "I gave you my money, I just want it to work" experience, they will print money with it.
Just to clarify my own post since it seems to have been misunderstood.
I was talking about earth, the software, which while it has a presence in the metasphere, is somewhat distinct, as it is about the real world, and is much more strictly tied to it than the rest of the metaverse. You can access(and Hiro does) it from a desktop, completely disconnected... But you can't severe its link to good old Gaia...
Gibson in virtual light also brings a similar "information overlay to supplement reality" but it's not a software metaphor...
That ie7 rendered compliant sites incorrectly was the excuse. Lazy webdevs wanted it to work for ie7 and so broke it for everything else.
Microsoft wrote ie8, there is no reason for them not to be compatible with themselves... Except...
It keeps people using ie7, not 8.
People(noobs, sorry) upgrading would no longer see Microsoft as "better".
If microsoft.com had been "compliant" in the first place, instead of "patched as best as possible not to show bugs in other browsers where it causes us to lose mindshare", it would render fine in ie8.
There's also a lot of webdevs for whom "My browser, my web, my way" is a threatening notion, not the very reason there is an Internet "left" for us to use.
That micrsoft.com was not compliant was already true before ie8. Ie8 being compliant did not change that, it just made it more difficult to hide, especially for sufficiently strict values of compliant(braille web readers, cell phones, etc...)
Basicaly, anything for which "best viewed at a resolution of..." just means "you can't see all of the content, ever", is IMHO non-compliant. And let's not get to ajax(not that it's a bad idea, it's that it's bolted on).
Book publishers do sometimes let an editor veto some books for other than commercial reasons. The RIAA stopped doing that long ago, any look at pop charts will tell you that. It has nothing to do with book publishers being evil, it has to do with books being harder to sell.
But they didn't buy an OEM version of Vista, they bought "Vista-capable" equipment. Your idea works only if they had to buy vista seperately. All those customers were lied to simply because they were buying a bundle, of parts that was supposed to work together, and didn't. Now you're going to reimburse them the one part that didn't work, and tell them "well the other parts don't work together with A, so we refunded A" But I bought A and B together, because they were certified to work together. And on the other hand, the logo program is Trademark Microsoft, if Microsoft opposed the idea, they should have sued to get it taken off. They didn't so Microsoft was tacitly approving.
The whole point of the logo is to say that Microsoft, who makes Vista, says the combination of the hardware is sufficient to run Vista, so the people who see the logo know that they can buy it with a clear conscience.
Microsoft doesn't have to have a logo program, they choose to do so because it benefits them. When they mishandle it, they have to be punished. In a real customer-centric market, Microsoft would have to pay damages for the time spent reinstalling/restoring data too.
Oh, I'm sure there's a healthy bit of that... I haven't found too many exeptions to what I learned in pre-school french yet. A vowel is a vowel is a vowel... Semi-vowels?
Just in what other language(s) than english is Y a consonate? I keep wondering... I may be wrong, but I took for granted that in latin languages, it was a vowel, with no idea about where it came about..
I see it this way. They have a policy, they say naked breasts are offensive if the areolae is shown(this is hearsay about what the policy actually says). I expect them to
1) let people known in advance what the policy is That means nursing mothers should have know the pictures would be banned, before they were banned.
2) whatever they ban NOT be a matter of taste, unless they specifically say it's so(because they deserve what they get if they go that risky route) Because by web2.0(ugh I hate that word, but I can't find a better way to say it) standards, anyone saying that is saying "we're smarter than you, instead of allowing you to filter it for yourself, we'll filter it for you".
A much better system one that would actually "work" is a system that lets each facebook user say "I'm offended by this, so don't bother showing it to me", then just have their editors tagging for content.
Naked areolae check Cute baby check
Some people could in theory find both things not offensive, except when together, or not, why not let them choose?
As for Venus the Milo, reading the facebook policy as it stands, I expect it to be banned, despite the fact it's value as a work of art makes it safe to show in most workplaces.
Real democracy is the best political system we've been able to come up with in some time... say centuries. Unfortunately it involves WAY more work than is practical(real democracy would have a re-election if less than 90 per cent participation, not 30... for instance) It also means everyone gets involved in all the issues. Right now we have a whole bunch of freeloaders, and a small group of people who care about democracy. It's quite the unstable system.
Actually you're reminding me that comparing it to Solaris is the wrong comparison. It's closer to netscape/mozilla. Take commercial product tired of (maybe not-so) successfully competing with a Microsoft product, open source it, and get it in use everywhere. Bang, instant developer platform.
I'm talking about the advertising of the songs, by the label, not the artists(because if you're signing a label, you've already promoted your name yourself, to a degree). It's a critique of the whole "music radio stations are massive advertisement machines", not of advertisement in general.
As for buying albums solely on name recognition, I'd say there's a reason some artists want the ITMS to not offer every songs on their albums individually, wanting to force people to buy 10 songs a pack...
I think it's more of a case of failing to predict a tragedy of the commons. Just because all these others can take from the source and use it, most of the forks are built on the idea of "my way" and don't see a connect with MySQL's enterprise effort, which was Sun's gambit in this case. They felt their enterprise effort automatically added value because they had the original code, developers, trademarks. And there are a lot of third party plugins and storage engines out there. All requiring enterprise mysql. MySQL's licensing while certainly better than Oracle, is just built on "like oracle but less" not "This is open source, you can do it your way" and I'm sure it's driving away sales for that reason.
XP would cost them something to keep on producing and supporting, it's not zero like Coke. But on the other hand, Vista is not just a product that Microsoft sells, it's a "platform". As a platform, if enough people use it, it can stop supporting apis and softwares it sold, promised to support, and supported. As well some microsoft services and products are based on the popularity of Vista(if they are based on bits not available/compatible with XP. From the point of view of anyone high enough at Microsoft a sale of XP must be seen as "only slightly less bad" than someone buying Mac OS X. It diminishes their power in the market. Just keep in mind, it's not a "product" and noone buys Windows just to have Windows, you buy windows for all the third party software.
I object to your lumping any corn-produced fuel with "biofuel" the real biofuels are waste by-products(aka something that doesn't require "fields", except maybe junkyards) and restaurant grease is probably sufficient in most areas. Any crop used as a biofuel is just an attempt by that industry to get more subsidies, but intensive production is going the wrong way when it comes to energy efficiency.
Apple will "open up" its products, in the sense it will make them "more open" it will however, not "make them open". Both sides are right, just for some values of "open". As for AT&T, my gut feeling is that Android's too open for them.
Slashdot Mirror
I was thinking he meant they'd get the freedom to set the pace of development by gradually releasing better SDK and tools. But only to developers who released games on the ones they already have.
Quebecor, which owns Videotron is a huge media and content owner. Through subsidiaries, they're closer to being the "Time Warner" of Quebec(and they own some stuff west, just not dominating there like they do here) than just about anything else here.
If it let them snoop on who was traveling to their competitor's facilities during particularly hectic contracts, I'd say it would have made a difference.
Not that it's contracted out, but that it's contracted out to a large firm who already does a specific kind of business with the government. Contracting out to orbitz or american express for travel is one thing. Contracting to someone who has a corporate interest in knowing who visits Boing, is another.
When Ballmer says the word "open" in a sentence, it's "pot, kettle, black" all over again.
Maybe we need corporal punishment for every slashdot editor who posts this stuff without using a basic logic filter.
Microsoft's definition of "open" has always been "what allows us to 3E is open" "What doesn it isn't"
It's always been about them, not about the consumer. We need to actually punish them when they do this, or they will never learn not to do it again.
That's how a free market work, with pain for the pushy people who bother you.
Right now, Microsoft's been getting a free ride for about 12 years, and they will continue to do so. When the money they are being fined for illegal monopoly doesn't get funneled into funding the alternatives, the monopoly just gets blessed.
Exactly...
In fact Netflix may just be showing us the future of content monetization.
Offer, for a fee, media people are willing to pay for, not based on your technology choices, leave it, as much as possible, to them.
Netflix has the distribution platform, check, the client base, check, the mindshare, check. They are waiting for the MPAA licenses etc... But as long as they give more freedom to the consumer(not necessarily for free) and keep it as much a "I gave you my money, I just want it to work" experience, they will print money with it.
Just to clarify my own post since it seems to have been misunderstood.
I was talking about earth, the software, which while it has a presence in the metasphere, is somewhat distinct, as it is about the real world, and is much more strictly tied to it than the rest of the metaverse. You can access(and Hiro does) it from a desktop, completely disconnected... But you can't severe its link to good old Gaia...
Gibson in virtual light also brings a similar "information overlay to supplement reality" but it's not a software metaphor...
I think we've just hit the source of the problem.
That ie7 rendered compliant sites incorrectly was the excuse. Lazy webdevs wanted it to work for ie7 and so broke it for everything else.
Microsoft wrote ie8, there is no reason for them not to be compatible with themselves... Except...
It keeps people using ie7, not 8.
People(noobs, sorry) upgrading would no longer see Microsoft as "better".
If microsoft.com had been "compliant" in the first place, instead of "patched as best as possible not to show bugs in other browsers where it causes us to lose mindshare", it would render fine in ie8.
There's also a lot of webdevs for whom "My browser, my web, my way" is a threatening notion, not the very reason there is an Internet "left" for us to use.
That micrsoft.com was not compliant was already true before ie8. Ie8 being compliant did not change that, it just made it more difficult to hide, especially for sufficiently strict values of compliant(braille web readers, cell phones, etc...)
Basicaly, anything for which "best viewed at a resolution of..." just means "you can't see all of the content, ever", is IMHO non-compliant. And let's not get to ajax(not that it's a bad idea, it's that it's bolted on).
Nobody reads snowcrash anymore?
It's like so 1992.
Earth, the metaphor... for... all the information useful for people living on earth...
So simple... it's brilliant.
Book publishers do sometimes let an editor veto some books for other than commercial reasons. The RIAA stopped doing that long ago, any look at pop charts will tell you that. It has nothing to do with book publishers being evil, it has to do with books being harder to sell.
But they didn't buy an OEM version of Vista, they bought "Vista-capable" equipment. Your idea works only if they had to buy vista seperately. All those customers were lied to simply because they were buying a bundle, of parts that was supposed to work together, and didn't. Now you're going to reimburse them the one part that didn't work, and tell them "well the other parts don't work together with A, so we refunded A" But I bought A and B together, because they were certified to work together. And on the other hand, the logo program is Trademark Microsoft, if Microsoft opposed the idea, they should have sued to get it taken off. They didn't so Microsoft was tacitly approving.
The whole point of the logo is to say that Microsoft, who makes Vista, says the combination of the hardware is sufficient to run Vista, so the people who see the logo know that they can buy it with a clear conscience.
Microsoft doesn't have to have a logo program, they choose to do so because it benefits them. When they mishandle it, they have to be punished. In a real customer-centric market, Microsoft would have to pay damages for the time spent reinstalling/restoring data too.
Oh, I'm sure there's a healthy bit of that... I haven't found too many exeptions to what I learned in pre-school french yet. A vowel is a vowel is a vowel...
Semi-vowels?
And I thought french had too many exceptions *shakes head*
*edits my brain* Y is only a vowel in french it seems.
Thanks to you and all the other posters for clearing that up.
Just in what other language(s) than english is Y a consonate? I keep wondering... I may be wrong, but I took for granted that in latin languages, it was a vowel, with no idea about where it came about..
I see it this way. They have a policy, they say naked breasts are offensive if the areolae is shown(this is hearsay about what the policy actually says). I expect them to
1) let people known in advance what the policy is
That means nursing mothers should have know the pictures would be banned, before they were banned.
2) whatever they ban NOT be a matter of taste, unless they specifically say it's so(because they deserve what they get if they go that risky route)
Because by web2.0(ugh I hate that word, but I can't find a better way to say it) standards, anyone saying that is saying "we're smarter than you, instead of allowing you to filter it for yourself, we'll filter it for you".
A much better system one that would actually "work" is a system that lets each facebook user say "I'm offended by this, so don't bother showing it to me", then just have their editors tagging for content.
Naked areolae check
Cute baby check
Some people could in theory find both things not offensive, except when together, or not, why not let them choose?
As for Venus the Milo, reading the facebook policy as it stands, I expect it to be banned, despite the fact it's value as a work of art makes it safe to show in most workplaces.
Real democracy is the best political system we've been able to come up with in some time... say centuries. Unfortunately it involves WAY more work than is practical(real democracy would have a re-election if less than 90 per cent participation, not 30... for instance) It also means everyone gets involved in all the issues. Right now we have a whole bunch of freeloaders, and a small group of people who care about democracy. It's quite the unstable system.
Actually you're reminding me that comparing it to Solaris is the wrong comparison. It's closer to netscape/mozilla. Take commercial product tired of (maybe not-so) successfully competing with a Microsoft product, open source it, and get it in use everywhere. Bang, instant developer platform.
I'm talking about the advertising of the songs, by the label, not the artists(because if you're signing a label, you've already promoted your name yourself, to a degree). It's a critique of the whole "music radio stations are massive advertisement machines", not of advertisement in general.
As for buying albums solely on name recognition, I'd say there's a reason some artists want the ITMS to not offer every songs on their albums individually, wanting to force people to buy 10 songs a pack...
It's only advertising if you can't decide when they play, or if they have some annoying feature that reminds you their ads.
Otherwise, they're entertainment.
That's why you see advertisements inside video retrospectives. They're not "That" redundant, mostly because you know you're going to like the videos.
You can also embed links from youtube, bypassing some of the ads, and basically repurposing them under some circumstances.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I do think Warner should pay to show most of them. But I think your post failed the "ad test".
I think it's more of a case of failing to predict a tragedy of the commons. Just because all these others can take from the source and use it, most of the forks are built on the idea of "my way" and don't see a connect with MySQL's enterprise effort, which was Sun's gambit in this case. They felt their enterprise effort automatically added value because they had the original code, developers, trademarks. And there are a lot of third party plugins and storage engines out there. All requiring enterprise mysql. MySQL's licensing while certainly better than Oracle, is just built on "like oracle but less" not "This is open source, you can do it your way" and I'm sure it's driving away sales for that reason.
XP would cost them something to keep on producing and supporting, it's not zero like Coke.
But on the other hand, Vista is not just a product that Microsoft sells, it's a "platform". As a platform, if enough people use it, it can stop supporting apis and softwares it sold, promised to support, and supported.
As well some microsoft services and products are based on the popularity of Vista(if they are based on bits not available/compatible with XP.
From the point of view of anyone high enough at Microsoft a sale of XP must be seen as "only slightly less bad" than someone buying Mac OS X.
It diminishes their power in the market. Just keep in mind, it's not a "product" and noone buys Windows just to have Windows, you buy windows for all the third party software.
I object to your lumping any corn-produced fuel with "biofuel" the real biofuels are waste by-products(aka something that doesn't require "fields", except maybe junkyards) and restaurant grease is probably sufficient in most areas. Any crop used as a biofuel is just an attempt by that industry to get more subsidies, but intensive production is going the wrong way when it comes to energy efficiency.
that's PI activity, without a license.
I would have thought PI activity would have been worth a prison sentence...
Apple will "open up" its products, in the sense it will make them "more open" it will however, not "make them open". Both sides are right, just for some values of "open". As for AT&T, my gut feeling is that Android's too open for them.