>>people my age don't go to the cinema for the product, they go for the social experience.
It's no different to what I was doing 20 years ago and what I still do now. If I just went to see films I *wanted* to see, I would go maybe once or twice a year - I probably go once a month with friends and have a meal before the movie and a few beers afterwards. I may be old but I can still socialise:-)
>>But if my experience is typical (which it may not be) this money doesn't effectively advertise individual movies.
Of course it does. "Hollywood" doesn't give a damn about whether or not you treat a movie as a social occasion - it just cares about selling as many cinema seats as possible on release and as many DVDs and other merchandising bits as possible afterwards. That's why "Hollywood" is totally stale - less so twenty years ago but now it's really stuck in a rut of sequels and poor quality remakes.
>>there's more forces at work than just "those ignorant tasteless kids" buying up whatever schlock you splat at a screen for them.
If you're contributing on here, you're probably not an "ignorant tasteless kid", not that I used the words anyway in the first place. However, the popular music scene is stale, the charts are filled with boy bands and pop idols that look good on video (in their eyes, not in mine I might add!) but have the musical talent of a slug, and there is absolutely no sign of any change from that on the horizon.
Personally, it doesn't bother me because I've never really followed the mainstream music scene anyway but I feel sorry for the others in your generation that view fashion and "fitting in the crowd" as more important than exploring their personal tastes and expression properly. If you yourself don't fall into that category, then I applaud you.
Rather than stripping out bits, I'll take your (well-reasoned) argument as a whole.
"Timeliness"? That doesn't follow as an argument. There are timeless movies and timeless pieces of music that always have some value to somebody. I do agree that a 30-year old album by Led Zeppelin, say, should not cost as much as a 2003 CD by, say, Limp Bizkit because with the 30-year old album, the recording costs, (most of the) band royalties have been paid, etc., etc. The "fair" price for a 30-year old album might therefore be half the price of the modern one - but that will *STILL* not stop people copying the Led Zeppelin album if they can get it for nothing.
"DVD regions"? A totally pointless practice that stems from about 50 years of outdated film distribution practice. There's no reason why a film or DVD cannot be released simultaneously over the globe, now that we have electronic distribution means. However, to kill the practice of DVD regions, you buy a region 1 player and import region 1 DVDs - if everybody does that, the film industry has to change as a result.
"Small dicks"? They're in charge of record and film companies and they also copy and distribute warez. Both types do what they do for entirely selfish reasons (to make money or to avoid spending money), nothing more.
"Piracy"? A morality issue, not a legal one. Like I already stated, you don't like the price of something then you don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it, the seller will feel it in his wallet and start to question the price he/she's charging. I'm not excluding myself from that either, but if I've copied a piece of software or music, it's because I couldn't be bothered to pay for the real thing, not because I'm trying to fight some moral cause on the behalf of the repressed masses.
If you recognise that you're being screwed by these big companies a lot of the time, then I applaud you for being more aware than Mr Average Joe in the street. However, piracy won't stop you being screwed in the future, it'll just give those companies more justification and a legal argument to take more of your rights away from you by putting more regioning and CD protection on than there was previously.
I'm sorry, if you believe there is a moral crusade through piracy then you are your own worst enemy - your rights will be eroded even more in the future.
The only difference between a liquidator and a vulture is that the sh*t from a vulture goes back into the soil as nutrients and helps other things to grow.
Unfortunately, you're entirely correct and I don't know how things in the movie & music industry will change until the consumers themselves become more discerning in their tastes.
With the software industry & the Open Source movement, the whole "Linux or Windows" thing is happening because there is a "change in taste". The people driving the Open Source movement are more than likely those that have been in the industry for years and are just not satisfied with the commercial, mass-market offerings. (That's a statement of fact, not an attempt to start a Linux v Windows argument in this thread).
The movie & music industry is targetted at the "eighteen to twenty somethings" who desire nothing more than to be "part of the pack" and are generally therefore happy to accept the same old recycled plastic pop & bland movie sequels simply because "everyone else is doing it". It's an ideal situation for the media companies, a group of customers that will happily buy anything that's churned out if it's cool enough. Unless they change their tastes, I don't see smaller music artists or low budget films ever getting the popularity they deserve.
As someone in his early 40s, I actually don't mind this too much in many respects. As a big fan of classic rock music from the 70's and 80s, because the stuff I like is a minority taste, I get to see bands now in 1000 seater venues that, 10 to 20 years ago, were "ants" on a distant stage in an 80,000 capacity stadium - and because I'm too old now to care about fads and fashion, this suits me perfectly.
Well I was the same in the heady days of the Amiga - the downloading "because it's there" mentality...
I think the problem with software, specifically in a commercial environment, is that it genuinely does cost a lot of initial outlay to develop an application which always looks to the potential user as *just* a CD and manual that could cost anything up to a few hundred dollars/pounds/Euros, etc.
And with the "need for rebellion" nature of kids anyway, they think they're fighting "the big bad software industry" by piracy when all they are really doing is harming the end users (probably themselves in later years) who'll just get charged a premium as a result.
>>No, every such such product is priced according to the maximum that the market will bear.
But most music is owned by about 5 big music publishers and movies by a few major film studios. Go into any music/movie store and every new release CD/DVD is priced about the same. That's as a result of monopolistic price fixing by the manufacturers and the retailer. The market "bears" those fixed prices because most people are too stupid and mindless to NOT pay those prices.
>>On the one hand, (piracy) helps to keep the movie/music/software industries on their toes, making sure that the consumer gets value for >>money, and that the product purchased is worth more to the consumer than a copy.
Piracy pisses off the industry to the point where the industry is prepared to spend some money to wipe it out and reap more profits as a result.
It does not reduce prices because, as I stated above, average Joe Bloke is too stupid to use an Internet connection to download stuff free anyway and instead pays over-inflated prices at the local store.
Even if there are 100,000 illegal copies of a movie (probably an inflated figure anyway), what percentage of movie goers and DVD buyers is that globally?
The fact is, the publishers *believe* they can make more money as a result of stamping out piracy than they spend on trying to kill it.
That means that normal users have to put up with being treated like criminals, do not get fair use of a product due to CD protection and DVD regioning, all because of piracy.
>>This can (probably does) lead to some problems. e.g. some smaller production companies closing due to lack of sales.
No, because the model I have stated above states that people will flock to buy a product if it does what they want it to at a fair price. It's nothing to do with size of a company, it's just about quality and reasonable pricing.
If you don't believe me, look at the number of small games companies charging a *REASONABLE* price for downloadable games on the Internet - there seem to be an increasing number of these (Small Rockets, BigFish Games, etc.) implying that this is a burgeoning industry based on the Shareware model that worked so well for companies like ID, Apogee, etc.
Films are out of the league of small companies due to the costs of making them but there is also a *growing* industry of musicians that publish their own music.
All this happens *DESPITE* piracy, not because of it...
>>Piracy and the industry keep eachother in check.
No, they do not, they are mutually exclusive. Film companies originally added extras to DVDs to encourage the consumer to ditch their VHS video collection and replace it with DVD. Extrass, now, have become the norm because everyone expects extras on DVDs they buy.
Again, as I said in an earlier post, I'm not going to moralise on piracy - what pirates do is up to them - but please don't try to tell me that pirates are doing ME a big favour by doing what they do - they do it because purely for reasons of saving a few bucks/pounds/Euros and for notoriety, nothing more.
Oooh! Quick everyone! We have a *REAL* L33T HAX0R here!..and he's not just a spotty teenager with a PC, he's a *COURIER*, jetting around the world in Business Class with a briefcase full of CDRs......he even knows how to use a little known TCP/IP utility called FXP...
4)DO NOT use Internet Chat Rooms - all chat rooms are filled with paedophiles, even those that claim to be discussing "The Merits Of The Make Command" in #linux_kernel_compilation. 5)REMEMBER that the letters "A, O & L" also appear in the word "asshole". 6)DO NOT email us telling us you have the "Worms Blast" virus - that is a computer game.
Don't laugh - I've seen an Outlook user do this with WinRAR and a hundred or so emails......what was worse, it was Vin Diesel's "xXx" that person was sending! I'd have gladly *GIVEN* that person my DVD of it if asked...
(Note to self: Never buy subsequent movies by an actor you quite liked in "Pitch Black".)
To be fair, there is some excuse to ripping your own DVDs (not that I can be bothered to do it myself) - you get portability and the ability to play the movie on a PDA or other small device, just like you can with MP3.
Perfectly reasonable fair use of something you've purchased...
Erm, I'm in my (early) 40s and can recall staying at work late at night to dial into US BBSes at *300 BAUD* to download the latest Amiga warez:-)
It's nice being this age and being grown up enough to not give a sh*t about competing with my peers and not giving much of a damn about *HAVING* to have a particular CD, piece of software or movie *AT ALL COSTS*!!!!
a) People want something for nothing. b) People want something before it's officially made available. c) People want to impress other people with something they have but the other's don't.
It's nothing to do with competition - just the opposite. Every audio CD, piece of software or DVD that is released these days is done so at a price that *takes into account* the fact that "x" number of copies of it will probably be pirated - that means we all pay more as a result.
Competition results from not being a pathetic consumer, nothing more.
If you don't like CD protection, then don't buy protected CDs... If you think a retailer charges too much for a product, don't buy from them... If a movie isn't released on DVD quick enough, email the studio and don't buy any of their other films... If enough people do the above, the vendor or producer has to relent.
I'm neither condoning or criticising piracy - I just wish people that do it would admit they do it for one of the reasons above, rather than trying to justify it as though they are acting as modern day "Robin Hoods".
I can see why people might want to download "warez" to get an *identical* copy of a piece of software free of charge...
I can see why people download good quality MP3s that are a *near* identical copy of a piece of music freed of charge...
But downloading a movie that's been taken by a shaky handed teenager with a hand camera in a cinema purely to avoid paying a few dollars/Euros/pounds for a cinema ticket or to avoid waiting a couple of weeks until it's released at a local cinema??? Sorry, a few people need to go get themselves a proper hobby...
Why do we continually allow governments and corporations to treat the 99.99% of us that are law-abiding citizens like the 0.01% minority of criminals?
I get VERY annoyed with these people in high places that assume that just because the possibility is there that I *might* use something to commit a crime, that same something should be denied from me because I have no concept of morality myself.
How long before they stop selling knives in dinner cutlery because potentially I could stab someone with one?
In the case of software, and particularly commercial software (where there's always the focus on getting a new product on the store shelves before checking it fully), we get these unnecessary new "features" that add more bloat and bugs to a product *AND* end up paying more for those features to be added because of the increased development costs.
I'm no Communist but if there is one reason to support Open Source software development, it's to ensure that that we keep our freedoms to do what we want with software and to ensure that our the majority's own ability to discern "right from wrong" acts as our guide, not the imposed restrictions of a few "high power" individuals.
When the Windows supporters here can argue about Linux as intelligently as the mainly ex-Windows Linux users can argue about Windows, then we'll talk about bias.
Jeez, and there I was doing spreadsheets, presentations and letters in OpenOffice, all my photomanipulation stuff in GIMP, all my email and calendaring in Evolution, browsing the web with Mozilla and Opera, playing games like Unreal Tournament 2003, Quake 1,2 & 3, Heroes Of Might and Magic etc., playing DVDs in Xine and MPlayer, burning and ripping CDs, developing C programs, and YES!!! You're RIGHT!! It hasn't got a START button!! Linux cannot be ready for the desktop because I can't find my menus because I haven't got A START BUTTON!!!!!!!
...there are 40% more letters in the word "Windows" than in the word "Linux"......"Bill Gates" sounds like your friendly, neighbourhood policeman, "Linus Torvalds" sounds like a pillaging and raping viking......You can get an MCSE just by doing a few CBTs while sitting in a chair with a nice coffee and the answer sheets, you have to actually make and fix a dirty grubby server to get an RHCE......Windows always reminds you of what year you are in (95, 98, 2000, etc,) while Linux uses dirty, smelly dotted decimals that only mathematicians with poor sanitary habits can understand (2.4.22, 2.6.0)......Windows was written for families by the Microsoft family, Linux was designed by dirty, smelly, pot-smoking, conscietious objector hippies...
...Linux has never needed huge advertising campaigns to get the penetration that it has got so far.
Consequently, Microsoft mentioning Linux can only serve to bring Linux into the minds of those that don't already know about it's capabilities.
Surely, a lot of CEOs reading their IT publications with "Microsoft vs Linux" advertisements in them are going to be intelligent enough to realise that if Microsoft are scared of Linux enough to place the adverts in the first place, then Linux must be worth investigating.
Maybe Microsoft will succeed in spreading some FUD about Linux but I don't see them achieving much overall with the ad campaign.
Erm, isn't the "mindless drone" the person that continues to curse at their computer screen and smash hard on their keyboard each and every time their computer crashes without doing something about it?
Isn't the "mindless drone" the person that endlessly parts with their hard earned money for upgrade after upgrade knowing full well that their PC will *STILL* not do quite what they want it to after the upgrade?
Is a "mindless drone" someone who spends time and effort looking at the alternatives they have and choosing to use software that is simply *RIGHT* for the job they want to do, whether it's a commercial or free package?
Notice that I have not once mentioned specific operating systems here because all OSes and applications have usability issues that someone somewhere won't like.
However, it does strike me now that the Linux / BSD / OS X / Open Source advocates here always seem to also be knowledgeable and well-informed (ex-) Windows users also without the reverse being true...
Slashdot Mirror
>>people my age don't go to the cinema for the product, they go for the social experience.
:-)
It's no different to what I was doing 20 years ago and what I still do now. If I just went to see films I *wanted* to see, I would go maybe once or twice a year - I probably go once a month with friends and have a meal before the movie and a few beers afterwards. I may be old but I can still socialise
>>But if my experience is typical (which it may not be) this money doesn't effectively advertise individual movies.
Of course it does. "Hollywood" doesn't give a damn about whether or not you treat a movie as a social occasion - it just cares about selling as many cinema seats as possible on release and as many DVDs and other merchandising bits as possible afterwards. That's why "Hollywood" is totally stale - less so twenty years ago but now it's really stuck in a rut of sequels and poor quality remakes.
>>there's more forces at work than just "those ignorant tasteless kids" buying up whatever schlock you splat at a screen for them.
If you're contributing on here, you're probably not an "ignorant tasteless kid", not that I used the words anyway in the first place. However, the popular music scene is stale, the charts are filled with boy bands and pop idols that look good on video (in their eyes, not in mine I might add!) but have the musical talent of a slug, and there is absolutely no sign of any change from that on the horizon.
Personally, it doesn't bother me because I've never really followed the mainstream music scene anyway but I feel sorry for the others in your generation that view fashion and "fitting in the crowd" as more important than exploring their personal tastes and expression properly. If you yourself don't fall into that category, then I applaud you.
Rather than stripping out bits, I'll take your (well-reasoned) argument as a whole.
"Timeliness"? That doesn't follow as an argument. There are timeless movies and timeless pieces of music that always have some value to somebody. I do agree that a 30-year old album by Led Zeppelin, say, should not cost as much as a 2003 CD by, say, Limp Bizkit because with the 30-year old album, the recording costs, (most of the) band royalties have been paid, etc., etc. The "fair" price for a 30-year old album might therefore be half the price of the modern one - but that will *STILL* not stop people copying the Led Zeppelin album if they can get it for nothing.
"DVD regions"? A totally pointless practice that stems from about 50 years of outdated film distribution practice. There's no reason why a film or DVD cannot be released simultaneously over the globe, now that we have electronic distribution means. However, to kill the practice of DVD regions, you buy a region 1 player and import region 1 DVDs - if everybody does that, the film industry has to change as a result.
"Small dicks"? They're in charge of record and film companies and they also copy and distribute warez. Both types do what they do for entirely selfish reasons (to make money or to avoid spending money), nothing more.
"Piracy"? A morality issue, not a legal one. Like I already stated, you don't like the price of something then you don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it, the seller will feel it in his wallet and start to question the price he/she's charging. I'm not excluding myself from that either, but if I've copied a piece of software or music, it's because I couldn't be bothered to pay for the real thing, not because I'm trying to fight some moral cause on the behalf of the repressed masses.
If you recognise that you're being screwed by these big companies a lot of the time, then I applaud you for being more aware than Mr Average Joe in the street. However, piracy won't stop you being screwed in the future, it'll just give those companies more justification and a legal argument to take more of your rights away from you by putting more regioning and CD protection on than there was previously.
I'm sorry, if you believe there is a moral crusade through piracy then you are your own worst enemy - your rights will be eroded even more in the future.
Still got a higher score than you though :-)
"Scrabble and Twister"???
So how do you keep hold of the little piece of wood holding the letters then?
The only difference between a liquidator and a vulture is that the sh*t from a vulture goes back into the soil as nutrients and helps other things to grow.
Unfortunately, you're entirely correct and I don't know how things in the movie & music industry will change until the consumers themselves become more discerning in their tastes. With the software industry & the Open Source movement, the whole "Linux or Windows" thing is happening because there is a "change in taste". The people driving the Open Source movement are more than likely those that have been in the industry for years and are just not satisfied with the commercial, mass-market offerings. (That's a statement of fact, not an attempt to start a Linux v Windows argument in this thread). The movie & music industry is targetted at the "eighteen to twenty somethings" who desire nothing more than to be "part of the pack" and are generally therefore happy to accept the same old recycled plastic pop & bland movie sequels simply because "everyone else is doing it". It's an ideal situation for the media companies, a group of customers that will happily buy anything that's churned out if it's cool enough. Unless they change their tastes, I don't see smaller music artists or low budget films ever getting the popularity they deserve. As someone in his early 40s, I actually don't mind this too much in many respects. As a big fan of classic rock music from the 70's and 80s, because the stuff I like is a minority taste, I get to see bands now in 1000 seater venues that, 10 to 20 years ago, were "ants" on a distant stage in an 80,000 capacity stadium - and because I'm too old now to care about fads and fashion, this suits me perfectly.
Well I was the same in the heady days of the Amiga - the downloading "because it's there" mentality...
I think the problem with software, specifically in a commercial environment, is that it genuinely does cost a lot of initial outlay to develop an application which always looks to the potential user as *just* a CD and manual that could cost anything up to a few hundred dollars/pounds/Euros, etc.
And with the "need for rebellion" nature of kids anyway, they think they're fighting "the big bad software industry" by piracy when all they are really doing is harming the end users (probably themselves in later years) who'll just get charged a premium as a result.
>>No, every such such product is priced according to the maximum that the market will bear.
But most music is owned by about 5 big music publishers and movies by a few major film studios. Go into any music/movie store and every new release CD/DVD is priced about the same. That's as a result of monopolistic price fixing by the manufacturers and the retailer. The market "bears" those fixed prices because most people are too stupid and mindless to NOT pay those prices.
>>On the one hand, (piracy) helps to keep the movie/music/software industries on their toes, making sure that the consumer gets value for >>money, and that the product purchased is worth more to the consumer than a copy.
Piracy pisses off the industry to the point where the industry is prepared to spend some money to wipe it out and reap more profits as a result.
It does not reduce prices because, as I stated above, average Joe Bloke is too stupid to use an Internet connection to download stuff free anyway and instead pays over-inflated prices at the local store.
Even if there are 100,000 illegal copies of a movie (probably an inflated figure anyway), what percentage of movie goers and DVD buyers is that globally?
The fact is, the publishers *believe* they can make more money as a result of stamping out piracy than they spend on trying to kill it.
That means that normal users have to put up with being treated like criminals, do not get fair use of a product due to CD protection and DVD regioning, all because of piracy.
>>This can (probably does) lead to some problems. e.g. some smaller production companies closing due to lack of sales.
No, because the model I have stated above states that people will flock to buy a product if it does what they want it to at a fair price. It's nothing to do with size of a company, it's just about quality and reasonable pricing.
If you don't believe me, look at the number of small games companies charging a *REASONABLE* price for downloadable games on the Internet - there seem to be an increasing number of these (Small Rockets, BigFish Games, etc.) implying that this is a burgeoning industry based on the Shareware model that worked so well for companies like ID, Apogee, etc.
Films are out of the league of small companies due to the costs of making them but there is also a *growing* industry of musicians that publish their own music.
All this happens *DESPITE* piracy, not because of it...
>>Piracy and the industry keep eachother in check.
No, they do not, they are mutually exclusive. Film companies originally added extras to DVDs to encourage the consumer to ditch their VHS video collection and replace it with DVD. Extrass, now, have become the norm because everyone expects extras on DVDs they buy.
Again, as I said in an earlier post, I'm not going to moralise on piracy - what pirates do is up to them - but please don't try to tell me that pirates are doing ME a big favour by doing what they do - they do it because purely for reasons of saving a few bucks/pounds/Euros and for notoriety, nothing more.
Oooh! Quick everyone! We have a *REAL* L33T HAX0R here! ..and he's not just a spotty teenager with a PC, he's a *COURIER*, jetting around the world in Business Class with a briefcase full of CDRs... ...he even knows how to use a little known TCP/IP utility called FXP...
WE'RE NOT WORTHY!!!
A few points you forgot to mention:
4)DO NOT use Internet Chat Rooms - all chat rooms are filled with paedophiles, even those that claim to be discussing "The Merits Of The Make Command" in #linux_kernel_compilation.
5)REMEMBER that the letters "A, O & L" also appear in the word "asshole".
6)DO NOT email us telling us you have the "Worms Blast" virus - that is a computer game.
Don't laugh - I've seen an Outlook user do this with WinRAR and a hundred or so emails... ...what was worse, it was Vin Diesel's "xXx" that person was sending! I'd have gladly *GIVEN* that person my DVD of it if asked...
(Note to self: Never buy subsequent movies by an actor you quite liked in "Pitch Black".)
To be fair, there is some excuse to ripping your own DVDs (not that I can be bothered to do it myself) - you get portability and the ability to play the movie on a PDA or other small device, just like you can with MP3.
Perfectly reasonable fair use of something you've purchased...
Ah, *THAT'S* what "FTP" stands for!!! I always thought it meant "Films To Pirate"...
Erm, I'm in my (early) 40s and can recall staying at work late at night to dial into US BBSes at *300 BAUD* to download the latest Amiga warez :-)
It's nice being this age and being grown up enough to not give a sh*t about competing with my peers and not giving much of a damn about *HAVING* to have a particular CD, piece of software or movie *AT ALL COSTS*!!!!
Wrong. Piracy happens because:
a) People want something for nothing.
b) People want something before it's officially made available.
c) People want to impress other people with something they have but the other's don't.
It's nothing to do with competition - just the opposite. Every audio CD, piece of software or DVD that is released these days is done so at a price that *takes into account* the fact that "x" number of copies of it will probably be pirated - that means we all pay more as a result.
Competition results from not being a pathetic consumer, nothing more.
If you don't like CD protection, then don't buy protected CDs...
If you think a retailer charges too much for a product, don't buy from them...
If a movie isn't released on DVD quick enough, email the studio and don't buy any of their other films...
If enough people do the above, the vendor or producer has to relent.
I'm neither condoning or criticising piracy - I just wish people that do it would admit they do it for one of the reasons above, rather than trying to justify it as though they are acting as modern day "Robin Hoods".
It's even more basic than that though...
I can see why people might want to download "warez" to get an *identical* copy of a piece of software free of charge...
I can see why people download good quality MP3s that are a *near* identical copy of a piece of music freed of charge...
But downloading a movie that's been taken by a shaky handed teenager with a hand camera in a cinema purely to avoid paying a few dollars/Euros/pounds for a cinema ticket or to avoid waiting a couple of weeks until it's released at a local cinema??? Sorry, a few people need to go get themselves a proper hobby...
...an article that tells me that the Internet is used for distributing pirated warez and movies...
The phrase "No shit, Sherlock" springs rapidly to mind.
Why do we continually allow governments and corporations to treat the 99.99% of us that are law-abiding citizens like the 0.01% minority of criminals?
I get VERY annoyed with these people in high places that assume that just because the possibility is there that I *might* use something to commit a crime, that same something should be denied from me because I have no concept of morality myself.
How long before they stop selling knives in dinner cutlery because potentially I could stab someone with one?
In the case of software, and particularly commercial software (where there's always the focus on getting a new product on the store shelves before checking it fully), we get these unnecessary new "features" that add more bloat and bugs to a product *AND* end up paying more for those features to be added because of the increased development costs.
I'm no Communist but if there is one reason to support Open Source software development, it's to ensure that that we keep our freedoms to do what we want with software and to ensure that our the majority's own ability to discern "right from wrong" acts as our guide, not the imposed restrictions of a few "high power" individuals.
Sssshhhh! Don't shout it out or they'll all want one...
When the Windows supporters here can argue about Linux as intelligently as the mainly ex-Windows Linux users can argue about Windows, then we'll talk about bias.
Windows - Been there, done that, got the Penguin.
Wow! You're ABSOLUTELY right!!!
Jeez, and there I was doing spreadsheets, presentations and letters in OpenOffice, all my photomanipulation stuff in GIMP, all my email and calendaring in Evolution, browsing the web with Mozilla and Opera, playing games like Unreal Tournament 2003, Quake 1,2 & 3, Heroes Of Might and Magic etc., playing DVDs in Xine and MPlayer, burning and ripping CDs, developing C programs, and YES!!! You're RIGHT!! It hasn't got a START button!! Linux cannot be ready for the desktop because I can't find my menus because I haven't got A START BUTTON!!!!!!!
...there are 40% more letters in the word "Windows" than in the word "Linux"... ..."Bill Gates" sounds like your friendly, neighbourhood policeman, "Linus Torvalds" sounds like a pillaging and raping viking... ...You can get an MCSE just by doing a few CBTs while sitting in a chair with a nice coffee and the answer sheets, you have to actually make and fix a dirty grubby server to get an RHCE... ...Windows always reminds you of what year you are in (95, 98, 2000, etc,) while Linux uses dirty, smelly dotted decimals that only mathematicians with poor sanitary habits can understand (2.4.22, 2.6.0)... ...Windows was written for families by the Microsoft family, Linux was designed by dirty, smelly, pot-smoking, conscietious objector hippies...
...Linux has never needed huge advertising campaigns to get the penetration that it has got so far.
Consequently, Microsoft mentioning Linux can only serve to bring Linux into the minds of those that don't already know about it's capabilities.
Surely, a lot of CEOs reading their IT publications with "Microsoft vs Linux" advertisements in them are going to be intelligent enough to realise that if Microsoft are scared of Linux enough to place the adverts in the first place, then Linux must be worth investigating.
Maybe Microsoft will succeed in spreading some FUD about Linux but I don't see them achieving much overall with the ad campaign.
No, he's saying that it is bad to support a cause you believe in if there is no money to be made from it...
Erm, isn't the "mindless drone" the person that continues to curse at their computer screen and smash hard on their keyboard each and every time their computer crashes without doing something about it?
Isn't the "mindless drone" the person that endlessly parts with their hard earned money for upgrade after upgrade knowing full well that their PC will *STILL* not do quite what they want it to after the upgrade?
Is a "mindless drone" someone who spends time and effort looking at the alternatives they have and choosing to use software that is simply *RIGHT* for the job they want to do, whether it's a commercial or free package?
Notice that I have not once mentioned specific operating systems here because all OSes and applications have usability issues that someone somewhere won't like.
However, it does strike me now that the Linux / BSD / OS X / Open Source advocates here always seem to also be knowledgeable and well-informed (ex-) Windows users also without the reverse being true...