Firstly, putting aside "illegal" music downloads, still by far the majority of legal music sales occur as a result of people buying CDs, not downloads. Therefore, if you're a scum-sucking greedy music corporation, or indeed a scum-sucking leech feeding off the back of the scum-sucking greedy music corps like the RIAA, it's logical to assume that the best way of filling your fat corporate coffers the quickest is to up the price of CDs.
Secondly, the first battle in the war over media has been won by the consumer - namely over protected CDs which Sony got a right good kicking over (and rightfully so). This has made a lot of record company execs very angry who wanted to stop Joe Public making MP3s of his CDs and, heaven forbid, giving those MP3s to someone else. So, to them, it makes sense to crowbar more money out of the people who are buying the CDs rather than those that aren't. (Incidentally, as a person who buys CDs, this, in my opinion, makes scum-sucking pirates no different to the scum-sucking RIAA.)
Thirdly, increasing the price of CDs means that Joe Public will give more consideration to spending money on every CD he buys meaning that he may choose to just download (legally) the tracks he wants. This pushes him towards buying downloadable content rather than CDs meaning that he then gets DRM pushed down his throat - and the music industry gets its protection/music rental model that it so dearly wants.
So whilst none of us agree with increasing the price of CDs, you can't argue the logic behind it.
Skype uses a proprietary protocol so it's not easy for programmer-types to reverse engineer those to get a working FOSS app. as a result.
I would imagine that any FOSS effort is going into SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) which is open and is already being used in the likes of the open PBX "Asterisk".
My guess is that SIP will eventually turn out to be for telecoms what TCP/IP is for datacoms - so the likes of Skype's proprietary stuff will probably disappear at some stage anyhow when they're forced to go the way of SIP.
I'm speaking from the perspective of a Brit but if I look back at what my parents had for disposable income, it was certainly a lot less than than I have now - and I suspect that they could say the same about the generation before them.
Additionally, compared to my parents again, consumer credit has (rightly or wrongly) gone sky-high to the point where a proportion of the population views living with credit card bills as completely the norm.
So whilst an economist might be able to show that in "real" terms, the prices of items have either decreased or increased over the years, in practice, it's more about how much money an individual has that determines how much that person would be "prepared" to pay for an item. And since a lot of us have "more" money than our parents did, the price we'd be prepared to pay for an item would be higher. This has nothing to do with the "value" of an item, just how far you can push the consumer into paying for it.
Here in the UK (and maybe it's the same in the US and the rest of the world), successive governments have slowly but surely piled on additional taxation on we citizens little by little over many years - the logic behind that approach is that the government knows that money is in our pockets and if they add the taxes on in a "stealthy" fashion, they'll get a few whines and moans from us but "they mostly want to be good citizens", we will begrudgingly put up with it.
It should therefore come as no great shock to anyone that big corporations also want a piece of that big "money pie" in the consumer's pockets.
If you're a big monopoly like Microsoft, you can charge just about what you want for your products because you "know" that most people have the ability to find the money to pay the prices you want.
What the RIAA and the music industry is doing here is no different - just trying to get their piece of the pie...
And the solution to this is for a whole lot more of the populace to be a lot more discerning about what they buy - not look at what an item costs as a proportion of the money they have but instead to create fixed ceilings as to how much money they are pay for specific items and to ***NEVER*** go over that price.
Then the RIAA would have to just shut the hell up knowing that the moment the prices of CDs increased, nobody would buy them...
You seem to forget that the private jets of $500,000+ salaried business executives use special Toorichtogiveashit patented non-global warming fuel unlike the economy class "Two or three times a year" passenger planes we prolls fly on.
As on old duffer in my mid-40s, I don't claim to be too fast on the old "trigger finger" these days - so I'm sure there are a few spotty youths out there will find it hilarious that an old-man FPS fan is having problems with this game. Never mind...
However, I'm playing it on "challenging" and spent most of an evening trying to take out a large group of mercenaries on a nearby island. (For anyone who has played the game, it's the bit in the "Research" level before you enter the mine.)
I had no bullets for my sniper rifle and anytime I started to approach them, via land or sea, I got cut to shreds.
In the end, I decided to swim some way around the back of the island and came across two guys in a gun boat - so I took them out, stole the boat and used it to totally strafe the mercenaries first, then picked off the remainder in the normal way.
I don't know if this was the recommended way of doing this but I would have been easy just picking them off with a sniper rifle had I had any ammunition. So it's nice to know that the game has been designed with at least two solutions in mind, if you are prepared to look a little for an alternative.
No game should rely on "pixel perfect jumping", which is my one and only criticism of the original Half-Life. I have literally given up some games because of having to try and retry unsuccessfully to get past a particular problem - there should always be the option of an alternative way through for players who "think outside of the box" a bit more.
How are all those Direct3D games working out for you?
Perfectly fine, thanks. Those that don't have native Linux ports or don't work under Cedega, I can just boot up XP.
How about the professional 3D design applications?
Having worked in telecoms/computer/UNIX/security support for 25 years, I've never had to design anything in 3D ever - either professionally or personally. Why do I give a sh*t?
Linux is losing miserably on the desktop for a reason.
You mean there's some kind of "Linux v Windows war" going on? I'm sorry, I hadn't noticed, far too busy enjoying my computer time I'm afraid - but drop me a line when you know the final result.
nobody cares about your geeky dweeb Linux jokes but you and the rest of these Slashdot ponces.
Geeky? Yep.
Dweeb? Yep.
Linux? Definitely?
Ponce? Not sure about that one, I'll have to get a second opinion from my wife of thirteen years.
You sound like you need a little anger management - have you considered firing up a Ubuntu Live CD to see what that does for calming your temper a little?
And what use is a 3D graphics card *WITHOUT* drivers??? One would assume that part of the cost of the card covers driver development for a certain amount of time anyhow...
Let's all go down to our local computer stores tomorrow, stand near the Microsoft Vista display and snigger quietly to ourselves whenever a Joe Average picks up a Vista box?
Please do not mock the Vista/Nvidia users - I can really sympathise with how they feel.
Having done a Linux kernel upgrade today, I had to type "emerge nvidia-drivers" at the command line and wait *A WHOLE THREE MINUTES* for the drivers to download and compile the module - during that time I had *NO* 3D acceleration on my Gnome desktop.
Entire worlds filled with smart-assed killer whales called "Shamu", "Namu" and other oriental-sounding made-up names ending in "u" who all think it's jolly hilarious to splash you with water...
Don't trust those sly, beady-eyed orcas - they've even got us all believing that they're mammals when we all *REALLY* know they're just bloody big fish!
Please define your usage of the word "reasonable".
To the level at which I personally use MS Office as a (non-Windows/MS) computer professional of some 25 years, OO has all the features that I need from a word processor and spreadsheet program. I also do quite a lot of training slides in Powerpoint and find that OO's Impress imports those pretty well, albeit with some minor adjustments afterwards. I have some simple databases in Access but have not yet checked OO's ability to import those. I therefore find OO a "reasonable" alternative to MS Office.
Furthermore, evidence suggests to me that 90% of the people I know who use MS Office would find OO a good replacement for everything that they do - the exceptions are those people who use macros and VB in Office who would probably find OO not to be suitable. I believe those same people would find OO a "reasonable" alternative to MS Office.
Your argument makes it sound as though the entire MS Office user base has tried to convert to OO but somehow rejected it when, in reality, because most people find MS Office meets their needs and they don't themselves have to pay for it, they have no reason to look at OO as an alternative.
I know of **ABSOLUTELY NOBODY** who has paid for a legitimate copy of MS Office for their own use yet most people I know use it. But I would imagine that if they were faced with paying the going price of several hundred pounds/dollars/euros for it, they would no doubt seek out a free or cheaper alternative.
I would suggest that you "watch this space" closely over the next year or so. If the talk of Vista is anything to go by, MS are seriously planning on alienating home/private users in favour of corporate licenses - this can only mean that they'll tighten up on their product licenses, fewer people will be able to use MS Office for free and they'll start taking a serious look at OO.
And then we **REAL** OO users will be laughing at the people like you who have never tried it and base all their opinions purely on hearsay.
And in case I am wrong, and you have used it, then just how many times have you dropped the development team an email explaining just **WHY** OO doesn't meet your needs?
1. Somebody who probably won't openly pay for a Windows OS but will probably use it if it's bundled in with their new PC.
2. If the end user can easily get a pirated version of Windows, they probably will do rather than paying for it.
3. End users like games so if you can tie in DirectX versions to specific Windows environments, you force them to upgrade their hardware and software when games start appearing that they can no longer play.
"I'm Linux and I'm free. And whilst you two have been busying yourselves arguing with each other, I've finished all of what I needed to do and I'm now off to the pub to spend the money I didn't spend on an operating system on a few pints of beer for myself."
"PC" stands for "Personal Computer" which could be running Windows, Linux, *BSD, MSDOS, FreeDOS, etc. etc.
Perhaps Apple's marketing consultants need to go on a quick computer course - after all, only a Windows PC is vulnerable to the "140,000 viruses" and whilst, using Crossover Office, it's possible to run MS Office on Linux, this is not the norm.
In the UK, we have an Advertising Standards Agency that should stop misleading adverts - this looks to be a prime example for them now...
I don't doubt that there are some excellent games within the Castlevania/Final Fantasy franchises (I've never played any of them) but if articles like this are trying to be taken seriously, then they need to also take a look *outside* of the obvious console market at some of the other great games that had an influence on modern gaming.
Sometimes, authors of such articles need to remember that the global gaming community is a *lot* more than Japan and the USA. During the pre-PC years in Europe, the main focus was on home computers, not consoles, and by far the majority of good games that were produced for the Commodore Amiga, Atari ST and ZX Spectrum (amongst others) were not "Officially Licensed" by the likes of Nintendo but happened because a few programmers in a bedroom somewhere came up with a good idea,
It could be argued that games like "Manic Miner" on the ZX Spectrum were a core influence for the Mario platformers and text adventures from the likes of Level 9 allowed graphical RPGs like Final Fantasy to come about.
Why no mention also of "Elite", "Dungeon Master", "Impossible Mission" or the Infocom adventures, all of which, in my opinion, had a much greater influence on modern gaming?
I've seen OS X running on someone else's Apple laptop & I'd have to admit that if I was starting from scratch with computers then I'd probably find it easier to pick up and use than Windows.
But personally, I never found a reason to want to go buy an Apple machine and/or run OS X. I run Windows XP about 20% of the time for a few games and for work/compatibility/Office reasons - the rest of my time is tinkering and programming in Linux. I've even got to the stage now where a Windows XP PC feels "dirty" to me because I can't rip it apart to the "nth" degree - I'm so used to compiling source code in Linux with as much optimization as I dare risk and tinkering with text config files, by now I know where every config file is that I need to know about on Linux; no, it's not always "plain sailing" with it but that (to me) is part of the fun and the charm of it.
Added to that, I find the Apple crowd a bit too "cliquey" for my liking and that puts me off even wanting to explore more with OS X. Yep, there's a whole heap of Linux zealots around also but me personally, I just feel more productive in Linux without wanting to "cut my nose off to spite my face". Yes, some day I'd like to wave goodbye to Windows for good but, for now, if I need to use Windows to get something done then so be it.
What about those of us forced to use Windows just to play the games we want
I am not aware of any games at this point in time that only run on Vista and not on XP so this is no excuse.
or required by jobs or development projects
Right. So as a developer, your company does not provide you with the hardware and/or software you need to complete your job. Instead you must make your own personal software and hardware up for use by your company who forces you to run Vista on it and has strictures in place to stop you dual-booting any other operating system. If the answer is "yes", then I will accede that you are *forced* to use Vista...
The best way to combat this thing is to try it out, and then let people know how bad it is.
That's probably the *third* best thing to do. The second best thing to do is to email Microsoft with your complaints, and the best thing to do is to not pay for any product until it fulfills what you require it to do.
So rather than sitting there moaning about it, take some direct positive action... go back to XP, try an alternative OS, email Microsoft with a complaint...
I really don't understand you people who look for "cool" points by bashing Microsoft but then just put up with a sub-standard quality of OS.
Nothing is going to change about the way Microsoft and/or media companies treat *YOU* until you stop throwing money their way - it's that simple.
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, putting aside "illegal" music downloads, still by far the majority of legal music sales occur as a result of people buying CDs, not downloads. Therefore, if you're a scum-sucking greedy music corporation, or indeed a scum-sucking leech feeding off the back of the scum-sucking greedy music corps like the RIAA, it's logical to assume that the best way of filling your fat corporate coffers the quickest is to up the price of CDs.
Secondly, the first battle in the war over media has been won by the consumer - namely over protected CDs which Sony got a right good kicking over (and rightfully so). This has made a lot of record company execs very angry who wanted to stop Joe Public making MP3s of his CDs and, heaven forbid, giving those MP3s to someone else. So, to them, it makes sense to crowbar more money out of the people who are buying the CDs rather than those that aren't. (Incidentally, as a person who buys CDs, this, in my opinion, makes scum-sucking pirates no different to the scum-sucking RIAA.)
Thirdly, increasing the price of CDs means that Joe Public will give more consideration to spending money on every CD he buys meaning that he may choose to just download (legally) the tracks he wants. This pushes him towards buying downloadable content rather than CDs meaning that he then gets DRM pushed down his throat - and the music industry gets its protection/music rental model that it so dearly wants.
So whilst none of us agree with increasing the price of CDs, you can't argue the logic behind it.
I would imagine that any FOSS effort is going into SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) which is open and is already being used in the likes of the open PBX "Asterisk".
My guess is that SIP will eventually turn out to be for telecoms what TCP/IP is for datacoms - so the likes of Skype's proprietary stuff will probably disappear at some stage anyhow when they're forced to go the way of SIP.
Additionally, compared to my parents again, consumer credit has (rightly or wrongly) gone sky-high to the point where a proportion of the population views living with credit card bills as completely the norm.
So whilst an economist might be able to show that in "real" terms, the prices of items have either decreased or increased over the years, in practice, it's more about how much money an individual has that determines how much that person would be "prepared" to pay for an item. And since a lot of us have "more" money than our parents did, the price we'd be prepared to pay for an item would be higher. This has nothing to do with the "value" of an item, just how far you can push the consumer into paying for it.
Here in the UK (and maybe it's the same in the US and the rest of the world), successive governments have slowly but surely piled on additional taxation on we citizens little by little over many years - the logic behind that approach is that the government knows that money is in our pockets and if they add the taxes on in a "stealthy" fashion, they'll get a few whines and moans from us but "they mostly want to be good citizens", we will begrudgingly put up with it.
It should therefore come as no great shock to anyone that big corporations also want a piece of that big "money pie" in the consumer's pockets.
If you're a big monopoly like Microsoft, you can charge just about what you want for your products because you "know" that most people have the ability to find the money to pay the prices you want.
What the RIAA and the music industry is doing here is no different - just trying to get their piece of the pie...
And the solution to this is for a whole lot more of the populace to be a lot more discerning about what they buy - not look at what an item costs as a proportion of the money they have but instead to create fixed ceilings as to how much money they are pay for specific items and to ***NEVER*** go over that price.
Then the RIAA would have to just shut the hell up knowing that the moment the prices of CDs increased, nobody would buy them...
You seem to forget that the private jets of $500,000+ salaried business executives use special Toorichtogiveashit patented non-global warming fuel unlike the economy class "Two or three times a year" passenger planes we prolls fly on.
However, I'm playing it on "challenging" and spent most of an evening trying to take out a large group of mercenaries on a nearby island. (For anyone who has played the game, it's the bit in the "Research" level before you enter the mine.)
I had no bullets for my sniper rifle and anytime I started to approach them, via land or sea, I got cut to shreds.
In the end, I decided to swim some way around the back of the island and came across two guys in a gun boat - so I took them out, stole the boat and used it to totally strafe the mercenaries first, then picked off the remainder in the normal way.
I don't know if this was the recommended way of doing this but I would have been easy just picking them off with a sniper rifle had I had any ammunition. So it's nice to know that the game has been designed with at least two solutions in mind, if you are prepared to look a little for an alternative.
No game should rely on "pixel perfect jumping", which is my one and only criticism of the original Half-Life. I have literally given up some games because of having to try and retry unsuccessfully to get past a particular problem - there should always be the option of an alternative way through for players who "think outside of the box" a bit more.
Perfectly fine, thanks. Those that don't have native Linux ports or don't work under Cedega, I can just boot up XP.
How about the professional 3D design applications?
Having worked in telecoms/computer/UNIX/security support for 25 years, I've never had to design anything in 3D ever - either professionally or personally. Why do I give a sh*t?
Linux is losing miserably on the desktop for a reason.
You mean there's some kind of "Linux v Windows war" going on? I'm sorry, I hadn't noticed, far too busy enjoying my computer time I'm afraid - but drop me a line when you know the final result.
nobody cares about your geeky dweeb Linux jokes but you and the rest of these Slashdot ponces.
Geeky? Yep.
Dweeb? Yep.
Linux? Definitely?
Ponce? Not sure about that one, I'll have to get a second opinion from my wife of thirteen years.
You sound like you need a little anger management - have you considered firing up a Ubuntu Live CD to see what that does for calming your temper a little?
A neat game with some nice noises that's good for the occasional 30 minute diversion.
But Austin Wintory has hid head up his arse and "The Blue Danube" in Manic Miner was much better!
And what use is a 3D graphics card *WITHOUT* drivers??? One would assume that part of the cost of the card covers driver development for a certain amount of time anyhow...
Let's all go down to our local computer stores tomorrow, stand near the Microsoft Vista display and snigger quietly to ourselves whenever a Joe Average picks up a Vista box?
Oh wait...
Having done a Linux kernel upgrade today, I had to type "emerge nvidia-drivers" at the command line and wait *A WHOLE THREE MINUTES* for the drivers to download and compile the module - during that time I had *NO* 3D acceleration on my Gnome desktop.
It was *NOT* pleasant, I can tell you!
Entire worlds filled with smart-assed killer whales called "Shamu", "Namu" and other oriental-sounding made-up names ending in "u" who all think it's jolly hilarious to splash you with water...
Don't trust those sly, beady-eyed orcas - they've even got us all believing that they're mammals when we all *REALLY* know they're just bloody big fish!
Wibble!
...how come you're not traded in those stupid-looking old-fashioned spectacles for some modern laser eye surgery?
What was that about not needing textbooks, Bill?
Faced with working at Microsoft or having to wear a "I have a very small willy" T-shirt for the rest of my life, I would choose the latter.
To the level at which I personally use MS Office as a (non-Windows/MS) computer professional of some 25 years, OO has all the features that I need from a word processor and spreadsheet program. I also do quite a lot of training slides in Powerpoint and find that OO's Impress imports those pretty well, albeit with some minor adjustments afterwards. I have some simple databases in Access but have not yet checked OO's ability to import those. I therefore find OO a "reasonable" alternative to MS Office.
Furthermore, evidence suggests to me that 90% of the people I know who use MS Office would find OO a good replacement for everything that they do - the exceptions are those people who use macros and VB in Office who would probably find OO not to be suitable. I believe those same people would find OO a "reasonable" alternative to MS Office.
Your argument makes it sound as though the entire MS Office user base has tried to convert to OO but somehow rejected it when, in reality, because most people find MS Office meets their needs and they don't themselves have to pay for it, they have no reason to look at OO as an alternative.
I know of **ABSOLUTELY NOBODY** who has paid for a legitimate copy of MS Office for their own use yet most people I know use it. But I would imagine that if they were faced with paying the going price of several hundred pounds/dollars/euros for it, they would no doubt seek out a free or cheaper alternative.
I would suggest that you "watch this space" closely over the next year or so. If the talk of Vista is anything to go by, MS are seriously planning on alienating home/private users in favour of corporate licenses - this can only mean that they'll tighten up on their product licenses, fewer people will be able to use MS Office for free and they'll start taking a serious look at OO.
And then we **REAL** OO users will be laughing at the people like you who have never tried it and base all their opinions purely on hearsay.
And in case I am wrong, and you have used it, then just how many times have you dropped the development team an email explaining just **WHY** OO doesn't meet your needs?
1. Somebody who probably won't openly pay for a Windows OS but will probably use it if it's bundled in with their new PC.
2. If the end user can easily get a pirated version of Windows, they probably will do rather than paying for it.
3. End users like games so if you can tie in DirectX versions to specific Windows environments, you force them to upgrade their hardware and software when games start appearing that they can no longer play.
"I'm Linux and I'm free. And whilst you two have been busying yourselves arguing with each other, I've finished all of what I needed to do and I'm now off to the pub to spend the money I didn't spend on an operating system on a few pints of beer for myself."
Perhaps Apple's marketing consultants need to go on a quick computer course - after all, only a Windows PC is vulnerable to the "140,000 viruses" and whilst, using Crossover Office, it's possible to run MS Office on Linux, this is not the norm.
In the UK, we have an Advertising Standards Agency that should stop misleading adverts - this looks to be a prime example for them now...
That's why it's a good idea to learn AWK at the same time...
I'll get my coat...
Sometimes, authors of such articles need to remember that the global gaming community is a *lot* more than Japan and the USA. During the pre-PC years in Europe, the main focus was on home computers, not consoles, and by far the majority of good games that were produced for the Commodore Amiga, Atari ST and ZX Spectrum (amongst others) were not "Officially Licensed" by the likes of Nintendo but happened because a few programmers in a bedroom somewhere came up with a good idea,
It could be argued that games like "Manic Miner" on the ZX Spectrum were a core influence for the Mario platformers and text adventures from the likes of Level 9 allowed graphical RPGs like Final Fantasy to come about.
Why no mention also of "Elite", "Dungeon Master", "Impossible Mission" or the Infocom adventures, all of which, in my opinion, had a much greater influence on modern gaming?
But personally, I never found a reason to want to go buy an Apple machine and/or run OS X. I run Windows XP about 20% of the time for a few games and for work/compatibility/Office reasons - the rest of my time is tinkering and programming in Linux. I've even got to the stage now where a Windows XP PC feels "dirty" to me because I can't rip it apart to the "nth" degree - I'm so used to compiling source code in Linux with as much optimization as I dare risk and tinkering with text config files, by now I know where every config file is that I need to know about on Linux; no, it's not always "plain sailing" with it but that (to me) is part of the fun and the charm of it.
Added to that, I find the Apple crowd a bit too "cliquey" for my liking and that puts me off even wanting to explore more with OS X. Yep, there's a whole heap of Linux zealots around also but me personally, I just feel more productive in Linux without wanting to "cut my nose off to spite my face". Yes, some day I'd like to wave goodbye to Windows for good but, for now, if I need to use Windows to get something done then so be it.
I am not aware of any games at this point in time that only run on Vista and not on XP so this is no excuse.
or required by jobs or development projects
Right. So as a developer, your company does not provide you with the hardware and/or software you need to complete your job. Instead you must make your own personal software and hardware up for use by your company who forces you to run Vista on it and has strictures in place to stop you dual-booting any other operating system. If the answer is "yes", then I will accede that you are *forced* to use Vista...
The best way to combat this thing is to try it out, and then let people know how bad it is.
That's probably the *third* best thing to do. The second best thing to do is to email Microsoft with your complaints, and the best thing to do is to not pay for any product until it fulfills what you require it to do.
So rather than sitting there moaning about it, take some direct positive action... go back to XP, try an alternative OS, email Microsoft with a complaint...
I really don't understand you people who look for "cool" points by bashing Microsoft but then just put up with a sub-standard quality of OS.
Nothing is going to change about the way Microsoft and/or media companies treat *YOU* until you stop throwing money their way - it's that simple.
Right. So, in other words, you will buy & use an operating system based on *brand name* rather than the capabilities it gives you as a user.
Well, I guess you deserve some credit for honesty, if nothing else.