Re:What's good for others apparently is no good fo
on
Break Microsoft Up
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
they haven't come up with anything good on their own for a long time
I'd say that they at least deserved credit for Kinect. While it was obviously released in response to the unforeseen success of the original Wii and its novel control methods, the fact remains that it went beyond being just a "me too" product and was genuinely innovative in its own right.
That said, it was arguably the exception rather than the rule, probably because it came from the XBox division and wasn't a threat to the entrenched interests and politics of the main Windows and Office divisions that have crushed so much potential innovation within MS.
Many other people do too, which is why they became dominant on the desktop.
MS became dominant on the desktop because they were placed in a dominant position when they first got the contract to supply the OS for the IBM PC, (*) then were smart enough to leverage that advantage to retain and build on their dominant position in the market.
For us, they were all of the things that you claim they aren't.
Again, you say something, but don't explain- let alone provide support- for this opinion.
(*) This was an unremarkable machine in terms of design- most built from off-the-shelf-parts, but was guaranteed to sell because it had the IBM nameplate on it. (Back then "no-one ever got fired for buying IBM".) MS bought in a 16-bit workalike/knockoff of the 8-bit 1970s CP/M OS called QDOS ("Quick and Dirty Operating System") and that became the first version of PC-DOS (later MS-DOS); just as unremarkable as the hardware, and dated even then.
Since I graduated from college in 1986, Microsoft has been a place where great minds go to die. They were the hottest employer, and it sickens me to see how little Microsoft has allowed their amazing talent to produce.
Considering how well diamonds sell despite the fact that their scarcity is also artificial, that may not be a good way to make your point.
If the above is news to anyone- or something you hadn't thought much about- this article and this article (both from "The Atlantic") are very enlightening. Note that the first is from 2006, and the second from 1982, but still very informative. From the latter:-
The [..] idea that diamonds are rare and valuable, and are essential signs of esteem—is a relatively recent development in the history of the diamond trade. Until the late nineteenth century, diamonds were found only in a few riverbeds in India and in the jungles of Brazil, and the entire world production of gem diamonds amounted to a few pounds a year. In 1870, however, huge diamond mines were discovered near the Orange River, in South Africa, where diamonds were soon being scooped out by the ton. Suddenly, the market was deluged with diamonds. The British financiers who had organized the South African mines quickly realized that their investment was endangered; diamonds had little intrinsic value—and their price depended almost entirely on their scarcity. [.. They..] realized that they had no alternative but to merge their interests into a single entity [De Beers] that would be powerful enough to control production and perpetuate the illusion of scarcity of diamonds. At its height -- for most of [the 20th] century -- it not only either directly owned or controlled all the diamond mines in southern Africa but also owned diamond trading companies in England, Portugal, Israel, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland.
if made radioactive enough it will kill in short order both the pirates and their families, fences, collaborators and everybody else that comes into contact with the illegally begotten cash
And after a while and a few more exchanges, anyone else who happens to use that particular currency, which is kind of bad news if it's dollars or something.
And if you think that's only going to be "rich" people, you haven't thought very far. Or maybe you had.
Either this is a somewhat tasteless joke, or you're a psychopath.
Robots to look after old people? Are they mad?! Everyone knows they steal old people's medicine to keep themselves going, and then there's the problem of them attacking them with their metal claws.
Someone needs to offer seniors insurance against that sort of thing.
TFA was likely penned by a nostalgic baby boomer. the kind that force nat king cole over the PA systems of every major retailer in november
Nat King Cole was mainly popular with adult audiences during his heyday of the late-1940s and the 1950s, i.e. mainly the *parents* of the baby-boom generation, and they'll be long-retired (and very elderly if they're still around).
Unless you were thinking of the second-hand nostalgia that seems to see a lot of 40s and 50s American tracks still associated with Christmas (and which I find cliched and boring- give me Slade any day!)
Those things were dead when I was a little boy, 30 years ago.
Indeed... as I commented elsewhere in the thread, Wikipedia claims that they've been in serious decline since their heyday in the late-50s and early-60s, i.e. for the past 50 years!
Drive-ins are one of those things that people associate with tail-finned cars of the late 50s. Indeed by the early-1970s they were *already* being invoked as a nostalgic symbol of that past era in David Bowie's retro-futuristic Drive-In Saturday. Listen to the start of the song, which is pure late-50s doo-wop pastiche.
According to the Wikipedia article, they've been in decline since their peak in the late 1950s and early 60s due to daylight savings time and colour television and- later on- the advent of video recorders and rentals.
Oh, goodness no, if they deleted the Geocities data then they did a laudable favor to future generations. I had a Geocities site, it was stupid, and if it's totally gone then I'm glad.
Well, I agree that Geocities was full of godawful rubbish, but that could be ignored- and probably would be these days- and there *was* enough worthwhile stuff in there to be worth keeping.
The access costs would have been negligible (and probably still lower than the potential profit from showing ads) and the storage costs for unaccessed sites would have been sub-negligible (as in tens of sites for under a penny).
Besides which, I'd rather have left the deletion option to the site creators. The idea I suggested in my linked comment would have allowed you to remove your sparkly graphics and non-scrolling starry background atrocity to the best boyf ever!!!!1111 from 1999 if you'd wanted to. In the meantime, there was no reason for Yahoo to deprive us of the opportunity to laugh at its dated awfulness:-)
Yep. The "game industry glow" wears off pretty damn quick when you're working non-stop 80 hour work weeks. I don't really miss having a sleeping bag by my desk, the perpetual deadlines, low pay, crap benefits, vacations you were never allowed to take, and all the other crap from the game industry. Yeah, it's cool to see your game on the shelf and if you're lucky, good game reviews but that is a small consolation for basically being a sweatshop slave.
You don't actually say it, but this relates to what- as I understand it- is the biggest problem with the games industry in general. In general, it's a "dream job" for young people who've grown up with computer games, and now have the opportunity to be involved in "making" them. Of course, the reality- as others have mentioned- is that a lot of computer game development is monotonous, separated from the design side and poorly paid for what it requires. But the fact is that there will always be college/uni-age students who want to do that, regardless.
Being young, they're also likely to accept longer hours and put up with more bullshit and manipulation, because they're young and can afford to dedicate themselves like that, but also because they're (in general) likely to be less confident about standing up for themselves, as well as being naive to the cynicism of the industry. They'll also tolerate the low pay and long hours because they're getting a chance at following their dream career.
Eventually, as with you, the novelty wears off, they realise it's not what it was cracked up to be. But, of course, there are always masses of recent graduates in your earlier position willing to tolerate it (as you once were). So, if you're sick of the low pay, long hours and generally not willing to accept the BS, the problem is that you're competing against your "younger selves" who *are*.
I know that there are people who *do* continue working in the games industry and really enjoy it, but I suspect they're people who know the ins and outs well, know what they're doing and/or have found a niche that serves them well within the industry.
Remember: it's Ya-"let's delete early Internet history because keeping 1TB around is too expensive"-hoo we're talking about.
Never trust Yahoo. Ever.
You're talking about Geocities? Well, actually it was *several* terabytes, so it would have cost them two or three *hundred* dollars to store all that. Quite a lot for a small company like Yahoo. *cough*
In all seriousness, I agree with you- I guessed at the time of the shutdown that the storage requirements would be in the ballpark of the low-terabytes (slight underestimate, but not by much), and- more importantly- that the cost of the traffic would (by modern standards) be negligible. Indeed, the profit or loss- either way- at that time would have been small by Yahoo's standards, but I figured out that they should still be able to easily turn a profit it by making it archive-only. *If* they'd been that bothered about it, that is.
There's a slight complication here, in that *if* this is a case of Betteridge rather than a legitimate question, then the answer the headline is implying is already "no". It's not "Is Europe's recession over?", it's "Is Europe's recession *really* over?" (as in, other people have already said that and *this* is the note of doubt implying a "no").
In this case, then, *if* one assumes this is a case where Betteridge is relevant, then, the "correct" answer should be "yes"!
Of course, Betteridge only applies in cases where the would-be assertion in a headline has been obviously rephrased as a fake "question" (*) purely because the story (and evidence) would be too flimsy- or nonexistent- to support it otherwise. It's not clear that this is the case here.
(*) It does not, as too many Slashdotters have assumed in the past, automatically apply to any headline in the form of a question
There are those in broadcasting that still view the Internet as "the enemy" and that even program listings somehow deserve "copyright" - even after 31 years of TCP/IP Internet.
Ironically, up until the early 1990s, the Radio Times itself had a monopoly on BBC TV- and radio!- listings beyond the "same day" ones newspapers were allowed to carry. (There was also another publication called TV Times that had a similar monopoly the remaining two TV stations (ITV, and later Channel 4). This meant that you'd have to buy *two* magazines if you wanted complete programme information more than a day in advance).
Firstly, the parent and grandparent had it asterisked out. Secondly, while I'm quite happy to use that word in the right social grouping the fact remains that- rightly or wrongly- it's considered highly offensive by many people (*) and I'm happy to moderate my own language of my own volition in that context.
whereas without batting an eye a man will refer to his dick or his rod or his Johnson.
A misleading comparison; "dick" is more on the level of "pussy" in terms of offensiveness (or otherwise). "Johnson" is so inoffensive they got it twice into the name of a major medical supplies company.;-)
The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Cunt.
And you being able to say it like that makes you a Big Man. Congratulations! (Thinks: What a c**t...)
(*) And let's not get into that pseudo-logical rationalisation that some geeks try to use when discussing swear words; the fact is that the human brain and social behaviour are quite complex, and trying to reduce it to a purely dictionary definition level is misleading. If that were the case, why does swearing have a painkiller effect on the human brain? This shows that whether or not the words are arbitrary and theoretically the same as other "less offensive" words, they *do* have socially wired associations that can't be ignored.
I put all my devices in my pants so it looks like I have a really big genitals. All the hot women want a piece of the action! I reccommend it. I am 100% percent serial.
Woman: Is that an iPhone in your pocket, or is your penis just an extremely odd shape?
Slashdot Mirror
they haven't come up with anything good on their own for a long time
I'd say that they at least deserved credit for Kinect. While it was obviously released in response to the unforeseen success of the original Wii and its novel control methods, the fact remains that it went beyond being just a "me too" product and was genuinely innovative in its own right.
That said, it was arguably the exception rather than the rule, probably because it came from the XBox division and wasn't a threat to the entrenched interests and politics of the main Windows and Office divisions that have crushed so much potential innovation within MS.
I always liked Microsoft
Care to elaborate on your reasons for this?
Many other people do too, which is why they became dominant on the desktop.
MS became dominant on the desktop because they were placed in a dominant position when they first got the contract to supply the OS for the IBM PC, (*) then were smart enough to leverage that advantage to retain and build on their dominant position in the market.
For us, they were all of the things that you claim they aren't.
Again, you say something, but don't explain- let alone provide support- for this opinion.
(*) This was an unremarkable machine in terms of design- most built from off-the-shelf-parts, but was guaranteed to sell because it had the IBM nameplate on it. (Back then "no-one ever got fired for buying IBM".) MS bought in a 16-bit workalike/knockoff of the 8-bit 1970s CP/M OS called QDOS ("Quick and Dirty Operating System") and that became the first version of PC-DOS (later MS-DOS); just as unremarkable as the hardware, and dated even then.
Since I graduated from college in 1986, Microsoft has been a place where great minds go to die. They were the hottest employer, and it sickens me to see how little Microsoft has allowed their amazing talent to produce.
Yep- it's been observed many times over the years that MS have countless smart people working for them, yet little of that ever translates into real innovation. A while back, I cherry-picked a very insightful 2010 article which touched on MS's key failures in this area.
Most people are idiots
Why is it that every goddamn time I see people making this statement, they immediately follow it up with an(other) idiotic claim?
Well, statistically, most of them are likely to be idiots, aren't they? :-)
Considering how well diamonds sell despite the fact that their scarcity is also artificial, that may not be a good way to make your point.
If the above is news to anyone- or something you hadn't thought much about- this article and this article (both from "The Atlantic") are very enlightening. Note that the first is from 2006, and the second from 1982, but still very informative. From the latter:-
The [..] idea that diamonds are rare and valuable, and are essential signs of esteem—is a relatively recent development in the history of the diamond trade. Until the late nineteenth century, diamonds were found only in a few riverbeds in India and in the jungles of Brazil, and the entire world production of gem diamonds amounted to a few pounds a year. In 1870, however, huge diamond mines were discovered near the Orange River, in South Africa, where diamonds were soon being scooped out by the ton. Suddenly, the market was deluged with diamonds. The British financiers who had organized the South African mines quickly realized that their investment was endangered; diamonds had little intrinsic value—and their price depended almost entirely on their scarcity. [.. They ..] realized that they had no alternative but to merge their interests into a single entity [De Beers] that would be powerful enough to control production and perpetuate the illusion of scarcity of diamonds. At its height -- for most of [the 20th] century -- it not only either directly owned or controlled all the diamond mines in southern Africa but also owned diamond trading companies in England, Portugal, Israel, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland.
Sorry, but Mission Impossible is an entirely different series, not based in space at all.
Though, ironically Leonard Nimoy *did* appear in it.
if made radioactive enough it will kill in short order both the pirates and their families, fences, collaborators and everybody else that comes into contact with the illegally begotten cash
And after a while and a few more exchanges, anyone else who happens to use that particular currency, which is kind of bad news if it's dollars or something.
And if you think that's only going to be "rich" people, you haven't thought very far. Or maybe you had.
Either this is a somewhat tasteless joke, or you're a psychopath.
Robots to look after old people? Are they mad?! Everyone knows they steal old people's medicine to keep themselves going, and then there's the problem of them attacking them with their metal claws.
Someone needs to offer seniors insurance against that sort of thing.
Don't like it don't use
I do believe that's exactly what the OP was suggesting.
made the app store....rotten to the core! LOL
You're entitled to a free pair of sunglasses and a "YEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!" for every pun like that you make.
TFA was likely penned by a nostalgic baby boomer. the kind that force nat king cole over the PA systems of every major retailer in november
Nat King Cole was mainly popular with adult audiences during his heyday of the late-1940s and the 1950s, i.e. mainly the *parents* of the baby-boom generation, and they'll be long-retired (and very elderly if they're still around).
Unless you were thinking of the second-hand nostalgia that seems to see a lot of 40s and 50s American tracks still associated with Christmas (and which I find cliched and boring- give me Slade any day!)
Most drive ins are now flee markets
Well, if people are actively trying to get away from them, that'd explain why they're in trouble.
Those things were dead when I was a little boy, 30 years ago.
Indeed... as I commented elsewhere in the thread, Wikipedia claims that they've been in serious decline since their heyday in the late-50s and early-60s, i.e. for the past 50 years!
Drive-ins are one of those things that people associate with tail-finned cars of the late 50s. Indeed by the early-1970s they were *already* being invoked as a nostalgic symbol of that past era in David Bowie's retro-futuristic Drive-In Saturday. Listen to the start of the song, which is pure late-50s doo-wop pastiche.
According to the Wikipedia article, they've been in decline since their peak in the late 1950s and early 60s due to daylight savings time and colour television and- later on- the advent of video recorders and rentals.
Oh, goodness no, if they deleted the Geocities data then they did a laudable favor to future generations. I had a Geocities site, it was stupid, and if it's totally gone then I'm glad.
Well, I agree that Geocities was full of godawful rubbish, but that could be ignored- and probably would be these days- and there *was* enough worthwhile stuff in there to be worth keeping.
:-)
The access costs would have been negligible (and probably still lower than the potential profit from showing ads) and the storage costs for unaccessed sites would have been sub-negligible (as in tens of sites for under a penny).
Besides which, I'd rather have left the deletion option to the site creators. The idea I suggested in my linked comment would have allowed you to remove your sparkly graphics and non-scrolling starry background atrocity to the best boyf ever!!!!1111 from 1999 if you'd wanted to. In the meantime, there was no reason for Yahoo to deprive us of the opportunity to laugh at its dated awfulness
Yep. The "game industry glow" wears off pretty damn quick when you're working non-stop 80 hour work weeks. I don't really miss having a sleeping bag by my desk, the perpetual deadlines, low pay, crap benefits, vacations you were never allowed to take, and all the other crap from the game industry. Yeah, it's cool to see your game on the shelf and if you're lucky, good game reviews but that is a small consolation for basically being a sweatshop slave.
You don't actually say it, but this relates to what- as I understand it- is the biggest problem with the games industry in general. In general, it's a "dream job" for young people who've grown up with computer games, and now have the opportunity to be involved in "making" them. Of course, the reality- as others have mentioned- is that a lot of computer game development is monotonous, separated from the design side and poorly paid for what it requires. But the fact is that there will always be college/uni-age students who want to do that, regardless.
Being young, they're also likely to accept longer hours and put up with more bullshit and manipulation, because they're young and can afford to dedicate themselves like that, but also because they're (in general) likely to be less confident about standing up for themselves, as well as being naive to the cynicism of the industry. They'll also tolerate the low pay and long hours because they're getting a chance at following their dream career.
Eventually, as with you, the novelty wears off, they realise it's not what it was cracked up to be. But, of course, there are always masses of recent graduates in your earlier position willing to tolerate it (as you once were). So, if you're sick of the low pay, long hours and generally not willing to accept the BS, the problem is that you're competing against your "younger selves" who *are*.
I know that there are people who *do* continue working in the games industry and really enjoy it, but I suspect they're people who know the ins and outs well, know what they're doing and/or have found a niche that serves them well within the industry.
Remember: it's Ya-"let's delete early Internet history because keeping 1TB around is too expensive"-hoo we're talking about. Never trust Yahoo. Ever.
You're talking about Geocities? Well, actually it was *several* terabytes, so it would have cost them two or three *hundred* dollars to store all that. Quite a lot for a small company like Yahoo. *cough*
In all seriousness, I agree with you- I guessed at the time of the shutdown that the storage requirements would be in the ballpark of the low-terabytes (slight underestimate, but not by much), and- more importantly- that the cost of the traffic would (by modern standards) be negligible. Indeed, the profit or loss- either way- at that time would have been small by Yahoo's standards, but I figured out that they should still be able to easily turn a profit it by making it archive-only. *If* they'd been that bothered about it, that is.
The conclusion I came to was that the reasons for shutting down Geocities "probably had more to do with either indirect legal issues (tax write-offs, accounting and the like) or some executive who wanted to be seen doing something that looked more significant than it actually was." Things I read later pretty much confirmed I was right on this.
Both the iOS and Android apps are written by Google. They are free to do whatever they want.
And others (MS included) are free to call them out on it.
That's not to say that this is anything other than sheer hypocrisy coming from the monopoly-abusing and self-serving MS, but the principle stands.
No.
There's a slight complication here, in that *if* this is a case of Betteridge rather than a legitimate question, then the answer the headline is implying is already "no". It's not "Is Europe's recession over?", it's "Is Europe's recession *really* over?" (as in, other people have already said that and *this* is the note of doubt implying a "no").
In this case, then, *if* one assumes this is a case where Betteridge is relevant, then, the "correct" answer should be "yes"!
Of course, Betteridge only applies in cases where the would-be assertion in a headline has been obviously rephrased as a fake "question" (*) purely because the story (and evidence) would be too flimsy- or nonexistent- to support it otherwise. It's not clear that this is the case here.
(*) It does not, as too many Slashdotters have assumed in the past, automatically apply to any headline in the form of a question
There are those in broadcasting that still view the Internet as "the enemy" and that even program listings somehow deserve "copyright" - even after 31 years of TCP/IP Internet.
Ironically, up until the early 1990s, the Radio Times itself had a monopoly on BBC TV- and radio!- listings beyond the "same day" ones newspapers were allowed to carry. (There was also another publication called TV Times that had a similar monopoly the remaining two TV stations (ITV, and later Channel 4). This meant that you'd have to buy *two* magazines if you wanted complete programme information more than a day in advance).
No, but saying the word "cunt" bothers some men.
Firstly, the parent and grandparent had it asterisked out. Secondly, while I'm quite happy to use that word in the right social grouping the fact remains that- rightly or wrongly- it's considered highly offensive by many people (*) and I'm happy to moderate my own language of my own volition in that context.
whereas without batting an eye a man will refer to his dick or his rod or his Johnson.
A misleading comparison; "dick" is more on the level of "pussy" in terms of offensiveness (or otherwise). "Johnson" is so inoffensive they got it twice into the name of a major medical supplies company. ;-)
The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Cunt.
And you being able to say it like that makes you a Big Man. Congratulations! (Thinks: What a c**t...)
(*) And let's not get into that pseudo-logical rationalisation that some geeks try to use when discussing swear words; the fact is that the human brain and social behaviour are quite complex, and trying to reduce it to a purely dictionary definition level is misleading. If that were the case, why does swearing have a painkiller effect on the human brain? This shows that whether or not the words are arbitrary and theoretically the same as other "less offensive" words, they *do* have socially wired associations that can't be ignored.
Good grief... I strongly suspect that the guy was making a joke, and that he didn't *actually* want to say "c**tbag". :-)
I put all my devices in my pants so it looks like I have a really big genitals. All the hot women want a piece of the action! I reccommend it. I am 100% percent serial.
Woman: Is that an iPhone in your pocket, or is your penis just an extremely odd shape?
There isn't enough cocaine in the world to make me click on that link.
Then you'll never know what it *actually* was (^_^)
I have 24 k items, mostly lossless audio
You have "24 k" items? I guess you could say that your music collection was...
(puts on sunglasses)
...solid gold.
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!