" Do I feel shafted, hell no! I got a kickass program for free, I spent a little bit of money on this book and now I need to spend my time learning how to take advantage of this program. Of course, if this bothered me I could easily pay through the nose for the commercial tools -- but hey, those are the tradeoffs in life."
I have a very insightful suggestion that totally devastates your point, but you have to figure it out or pay for it. $100. Take it or leave it.
"OK. Give me all your art for free. You must also provide step-by-step instructions on how you created the art. "
That's already what I do. I create art for people to view free, and then I critique their work so that they can improve their skills. If somebody asks me how I did something, I tell them, even provide a tut as necessary.
But if I were to produce artwork for this community and then be close lipped about how I went about making it, I'd be a real ass. I wouldn't be providing a service to anybody. "Here's something neat, but you can't get any use of it. Sorry. I'll tell you which codec you need to watch that.AVI if you pay me $5."
Sorry, but if you're going to contribute to a community, you have certain obligations to fill. It's one thing to sell information on techinque, it's another to charge for basic use of the product. That is not ethical and it's counter productive to the community. If everybody makes an obscure interface for their app just so they can make a few bucks on a manual, then who's going to adopt it? What'll happen is you'll reach a point where paying for the documentation isn't the issue, but rather how useful is it if nobody can make sense of it?
"Get off your ass and write some documentation, help other people like the Gimp authors helped you."
And what am I supposed to document?
"First hit new, then move this thing around. And then.. uh.. well that's as far as I got because I don't have any documentation."
I'm all for people sharing their ideas on techniques, but basic functionality of a product MUST be documented. It doesn't matter if the price tag is 'free' or not. How can you possibly expect free software to succeed if people can't use it? That problem alone could kill open source.
"The SOURCE CODE IS AVAILABLE! If you have a problem, USE THE SOURCE! If you can't read the source code, do you feel the spirit of open source software is that a programmer somewhere must interpret it for you? Because that's what I hear you saying..."I can't read the source so they have to provide documentation for free."
Hi. I'm an artist. I want to use Gimp. I can't read its source code. Your attitude sucks.
It's one thing to sell information on technique, it's another to render it unusable until the documentation is purchased. It's counter-productive if the people who use it can't or won't improve it if they lose interest.
"This property means that diamond chips can work at a much higher frequency or faster speed and be placed in a high-temperature environment, such as a vehicle's engine..."... or an Athlon machine.
"with calligraphic lights you hit the screen with an extra, independent electron beam. This produces intense light points. These light points are useful in flight simulations, and I believe, required for some levels of certification of a sim."
Interesting. Thanks for taking the time to answer.:)
"A good example of the failure of mips is to look at the nintendo64, a video game system developed which uses a mips processor. It was so slow and underpowered that the playstation, which has been out for 2 years before the n64, still had better and smoother graphics. The n64 should have been the final nail in sgi's coffin."
Are you kidding? The reason that the PS seemed 'smoother' than the N64 was that it had almost no graphic features turned on. Don't believe me? Fire up Ridge Racer and watch the road beneath you. Notice that it turns all zig-zaggey when it gets close enough to you? That was one of the limitations of the PS hardware. It wasn't doing anywhere close to the number of calculations per pixel that the N64 was doing.
The real reason that the PS appeared 'smoother' was that it used minimal graphics tricks and pumped around 300k triangles on the screen. The N64 had all the features turned on and was getting around 100k triangles. So the result was that the N64 had fewer triangles to work with, but much MUCH better texture quality.
As for being a nail in SGI's coffin, I agree with you, but not for the reason you suggest. The N64 was both quite powerful and quite popular. The PS may have done better, that doesn't mean that the N64 didn't do well. The SGI processor did just fine, but they pretty much designed themselves out of business. Why are they charging a premium for their hardware when they can get a slimmed down system crammed into $150 box? In reality, that may or may not have directly affected their credibility. But it did significantly lower the value of the effects they were able to accomplish. Suddenly, consumer hardware can do what SGI does. Hrmm Why do I want this expensive box again?
"PC's running bsd are still a far greater value than expensive sgi hardware."
No argument here. Though I believe SGIs have their place, I think your comment's right on the ball. SGI didn't isn't doing enough to wow customers. Let me give you an example, when they launched the Intel based NT Line, there was only one real major difference between that machine and any other PC on the market was that it had a much faster bus between the RAM and the graphic chip. The problem is, what do you do with that when everything's designed around a 1x AGP bus? (this was 2-3 years ago..)
My company has a particular application today (but not back when we had the machines) to get ludicrious amounts of data to the graphics processor, but that's a very specific need. Not something you can build a whole company around. They should have done more than just having the fast graphic bus if they were going to cater to the Wintel crowd.
So yeah, I basically agree with what you said, but your details about the N64 were significantly wrong.
riiiight, unless you think E&S and Quantum3D are selling regular pc's, enlighten me on: - memory bandwith - dynamic resolution - genlocking - multi channel displays - hard real-time update rates - calligraphic lights
I got most of that, but could you please explain 'calligraphic lights'?
" It seems to me that SGI is used mainly in the graphics industry, and there it seems to be losing ground quickly to Linux and BSD based solutions."
It lost to Windows, believe it or not. Lots of FX houses have sprung up in recent years running Lightwave on Wintel platforms. Are they as fast? Nope, but they're much cheaper. And that's what counts in the TV FX industry.
I'm not saying you're wrong though, just adding a little more info to what you said. Today Linux is getting wide-spread use all over the graphics world. Maya runs well on it and is the program of choice. Want to render faster? Throw on another render node.
I doubt SGI's even on the radar with 3D people anymore. If they want to cater to that market, what they'll have to do is create hardware that's really really really tuned to rendering and gets the job done much faster. I doubt they're really going that way though. If Nvidia keeps up with their support of the Cg programming language, we may find ourselves upgrading video cards instead of processors. That will be an interesting day.
"How about going back to the store and asking for a replacement? It depends on where you got it, but when I purchased some GameCube games from Electronics Boutique, they said if a game cracks or breaks or whatever I can get a replacement from them for free."
Huh. I did not know that. Even if it's my own fault it broke?
"Another option is to get a pirated/cracked copy. I think this is one of those "gray" areas where you might feel it's morally okay to do this."
That's what I'm probably going to do. (Or find a used copy...)
The way I see it, if they're going to lock up their product with a lock and key, and then make it a federal offense to break the lock, then they should at least make replacement media dirt cheap if I have the original media to return. I feel like the *AA and to a lesser extent the Game Industry are being given power to extort the consumers. I don't know if I'm being particularly rational or not, I'm not very happy about this. I just want to play my game. I've already put $50 into it.
Wow.. never thought I'd see the day where Linux replaces an entire governing body. That should make for an interesting deomcracy. Everybody can write their own laws!
"I just find it very funny that you bought something from a company that produces a product that promotes theft..."
Ooooookay. I didn't even bother reading the rest of that paragraph. You got some funny ideas about the difference between advertising and playing games. I suppose you think playing a Ninja Turtles game means I'm prone to hanging around in sewers. Maybe you need a smack from the reality stick?
"I see no reason the game producer even had to offer you a replacement of their product at a reduced price. You bought it, you broke it, you should have to buy a new one."
Because they refer to my use of the game as a license? Because they prevent me from backing it up for fear of piracy? Because the cost of the CD is negligible, so it's the content they're really selling? Derr.
"To one-off send you a replacement disk, one that has to be pulled from stock, packaged and mailed to you will cost the about $25 in labor."
Hardly. Even if somebody made $20 an hour the cost wouldn't come close. Never mind that I've already given them $50. You have some funny ideas about customer service. Perhaps people who wreck their cars should be forced to buy a new car instead of getting it repaired for a fraction of the cost?
"I suspect that you may have been playing GTA too long and really believe that it represents a valid and acceptable world view. Just so you are clear on it, Theft is wrong."
What does 'theft' have to do with wanting a replacement media for a reasonable price? Are you feeling okay?
You win the award for the most absurd reply I've read today. Kudos!:)
So what you're saying is that the race is Roma or Romani, and their way of life is Gypsy. The dictionary definition of 'Gypsy' is a way of life. Go look it up if don't agree with me.
As for the 'some kind of idiot' remark, grow up. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Trivia does not reflect my total intelligence.
"Not to get too off topic but damn that is racist. You are correct that "gyp" comes from gypsie, or roma. But that stereotype of them is like saying that Jews have lots of money and are bankers and swindlers."
Seeing as how nobody today pictures gypsies when using the term 'gyped', it cannot be classified as a racist comment.
Besides, Gypsies really aren't a 'race' per se. It's a way of life.
This is slightly - OT, but at least it's a real life story as to how DRM is harmful to legitimate customers.
I moved a couple of months ago. My GTA 3 disk was damaged in the move through my own carelessness. I contacted the producer of the game to find out how much a simple media exchange would cost. Want to know how much it'll cost? $18 + S&H. That's just for the disk. They can't throw a copy on the burner for me and do it for $5?
I should have backed it up. I'm not sure if I could have or not. I didn't try with this particular game, but I've had to go to rather extreme measures to back up other games I have. You'd think I'd have the right to protect my $50 investment, but obviously I don't.
I find this infurating. It's either a copyright issue or it isn't. Either I'm holding an $18 lump of plastic, or I'm holding an $.05 key to content I have licensed. They can't have it both ways.
I can't believe that these industries are legally allowed to get away with customer gouging.
... to force record labels to change the term 'copy protection' to 'copy restriction'? (Note: Im not claiming to invent that term, somebody else on Slashdot coined the phrase and I have no idea who it is)
There's got to be a legal justification for doing so. If they advertise it as 'protection', it sounds like they're made a superior product that'll play in anything. That sounds like false advertising to me. If they use the term 'restriction', then it's clear there may be playback issues.
"Has anyone discovered that the new CD's found under the tree or in their stocking don't play on their brand new CD player?"
I wonder if the RIAA realizes that they're pushing me towards MP3's when they pull shit like this. I mean seriously, they'll have no trouble blaming P2P music trading for their downfall if the MP3 is higher quality!
Slashdot Mirror
" Do I feel shafted, hell no! I got a kickass program for free, I spent a little bit of money on this book and now I need to spend my time learning how to take advantage of this program. Of course, if this bothered me I could easily pay through the nose for the commercial tools -- but hey, those are the tradeoffs in life."
I have a very insightful suggestion that totally devastates your point, but you have to figure it out or pay for it. $100. Take it or leave it.
"No it MUST not. What is this some law of physics?"
I'd respond to that but I'm not obligated to. You can have an answer if you pay me $100. What I've said so far is just a teaser.
... an anti-spam conference. Nobody would want to exchange business cards at pro-spam conference.
"OK. Give me all your art for free. You must also provide step-by-step instructions on how you created the art. "
.AVI if you pay me $5."
That's already what I do. I create art for people to view free, and then I critique their work so that they can improve their skills. If somebody asks me how I did something, I tell them, even provide a tut as necessary.
But if I were to produce artwork for this community and then be close lipped about how I went about making it, I'd be a real ass. I wouldn't be providing a service to anybody. "Here's something neat, but you can't get any use of it. Sorry. I'll tell you which codec you need to watch that
Sorry, but if you're going to contribute to a community, you have certain obligations to fill. It's one thing to sell information on techinque, it's another to charge for basic use of the product. That is not ethical and it's counter productive to the community. If everybody makes an obscure interface for their app just so they can make a few bucks on a manual, then who's going to adopt it? What'll happen is you'll reach a point where paying for the documentation isn't the issue, but rather how useful is it if nobody can make sense of it?
"Get off your ass and write some documentation, help other people like the Gimp authors helped you."
And what am I supposed to document?
"First hit new, then move this thing around. And then.. uh.. well that's as far as I got because I don't have any documentation."
I'm all for people sharing their ideas on techniques, but basic functionality of a product MUST be documented. It doesn't matter if the price tag is 'free' or not. How can you possibly expect free software to succeed if people can't use it? That problem alone could kill open source.
"The SOURCE CODE IS AVAILABLE! If you have a problem, USE THE SOURCE! If you can't read the source code, do you feel the spirit of open source software is that a programmer somewhere must interpret it for you? Because that's what I hear you saying..."I can't read the source so they have to provide documentation for free."
Hi. I'm an artist. I want to use Gimp. I can't read its source code. Your attitude sucks.
It's one thing to sell information on technique, it's another to render it unusable until the documentation is purchased. It's counter-productive if the people who use it can't or won't improve it if they lose interest.
"This property means that diamond chips can work at a much higher frequency or faster speed and be placed in a high-temperature environment, such as a vehicle's engine..." ... or an Athlon machine.
"with calligraphic lights you hit the screen with an extra, independent electron beam. This produces intense light points. These light points are useful in flight simulations, and I believe, required for some levels of certification of a sim."
:)
Interesting. Thanks for taking the time to answer.
"A good example of the failure of mips is to look at the nintendo64, a video game system developed which uses a mips processor. It was so slow and underpowered that the playstation, which has been out for 2 years before the n64, still had better and smoother graphics. The n64 should have been the final nail in sgi's coffin."
Are you kidding? The reason that the PS seemed 'smoother' than the N64 was that it had almost no graphic features turned on. Don't believe me? Fire up Ridge Racer and watch the road beneath you. Notice that it turns all zig-zaggey when it gets close enough to you? That was one of the limitations of the PS hardware. It wasn't doing anywhere close to the number of calculations per pixel that the N64 was doing.
The real reason that the PS appeared 'smoother' was that it used minimal graphics tricks and pumped around 300k triangles on the screen. The N64 had all the features turned on and was getting around 100k triangles. So the result was that the N64 had fewer triangles to work with, but much MUCH better texture quality.
As for being a nail in SGI's coffin, I agree with you, but not for the reason you suggest. The N64 was both quite powerful and quite popular. The PS may have done better, that doesn't mean that the N64 didn't do well. The SGI processor did just fine, but they pretty much designed themselves out of business. Why are they charging a premium for their hardware when they can get a slimmed down system crammed into $150 box? In reality, that may or may not have directly affected their credibility. But it did significantly lower the value of the effects they were able to accomplish. Suddenly, consumer hardware can do what SGI does. Hrmm Why do I want this expensive box again?
"PC's running bsd are still a far greater value than expensive sgi hardware."
No argument here. Though I believe SGIs have their place, I think your comment's right on the ball. SGI didn't isn't doing enough to wow customers. Let me give you an example, when they launched the Intel based NT Line, there was only one real major difference between that machine and any other PC on the market was that it had a much faster bus between the RAM and the graphic chip. The problem is, what do you do with that when everything's designed around a 1x AGP bus? (this was 2-3 years ago..)
My company has a particular application today (but not back when we had the machines) to get ludicrious amounts of data to the graphics processor, but that's a very specific need. Not something you can build a whole company around.
They should have done more than just having the fast graphic bus if they were going to cater to the Wintel crowd.
So yeah, I basically agree with what you said, but your details about the N64 were significantly wrong.
I got most of that, but could you please explain 'calligraphic lights'?
" It seems to me that SGI is used mainly in the graphics industry, and there it seems to be losing ground quickly to Linux and BSD based solutions."
It lost to Windows, believe it or not. Lots of FX houses have sprung up in recent years running Lightwave on Wintel platforms. Are they as fast? Nope, but they're much cheaper. And that's what counts in the TV FX industry.
I'm not saying you're wrong though, just adding a little more info to what you said. Today Linux is getting wide-spread use all over the graphics world. Maya runs well on it and is the program of choice. Want to render faster? Throw on another render node.
I doubt SGI's even on the radar with 3D people anymore. If they want to cater to that market, what they'll have to do is create hardware that's really really really tuned to rendering and gets the job done much faster. I doubt they're really going that way though. If Nvidia keeps up with their support of the Cg programming language, we may find ourselves upgrading video cards instead of processors. That will be an interesting day.
"...the stereo comes on to your favorite cd..." ...a royalty bill is automatically sent to your house...
"How about going back to the store and asking for a replacement? It depends on where you got it, but when I purchased some GameCube games from Electronics Boutique, they said if a game cracks or breaks or whatever I can get a replacement from them for free."
Huh. I did not know that. Even if it's my own fault it broke?
"Another option is to get a pirated/cracked copy. I think this is one of those "gray" areas where you might feel it's morally okay to do this."
That's what I'm probably going to do. (Or find a used copy...)
The way I see it, if they're going to lock up their product with a lock and key, and then make it a federal offense to break the lock, then they should at least make replacement media dirt cheap if I have the original media to return. I feel like the *AA and to a lesser extent the Game Industry are being given power to extort the consumers. I don't know if I'm being particularly rational or not, I'm not very happy about this. I just want to play my game. I've already put $50 into it.
"The CDs that didn't work were Sony, moron. Last I checked, Sony was a Japanese company."
It's the RIAA that thinks it needs to cripple CDs, numb nuts. Sony's one of the companies responding to it.
"Ok, And I Should Caaaree......Why?"
Because it means all the PoS's at 7-11 will soon be running Linux.
At least, I think that'll be the biggest effect it'll have on you. Your hotdogs will no longer be pre-made.
"Indian Government Moves to Let Linux In"
Wow.. never thought I'd see the day where Linux replaces an entire governing body. That should make for an interesting deomcracy. Everybody can write their own laws!
"I just find it very funny that you bought something from a company that produces a product that promotes theft..."
:)
Ooooookay. I didn't even bother reading the rest of that paragraph. You got some funny ideas about the difference between advertising and playing games. I suppose you think playing a Ninja Turtles game means I'm prone to hanging around in sewers. Maybe you need a smack from the reality stick?
"I see no reason the game producer even had to offer you a replacement of their product at a reduced price. You bought it, you broke it, you should have to buy a new one."
Because they refer to my use of the game as a license? Because they prevent me from backing it up for fear of piracy? Because the cost of the CD is negligible, so it's the content they're really selling? Derr.
"To one-off send you a replacement disk, one that has to be pulled from stock, packaged and mailed to you will cost the about $25 in labor."
Hardly. Even if somebody made $20 an hour the cost wouldn't come close. Never mind that I've already given them $50. You have some funny ideas about customer service. Perhaps people who wreck their cars should be forced to buy a new car instead of getting it repaired for a fraction of the cost?
"I suspect that you may have been playing GTA too long and really believe that it represents a valid and acceptable world view. Just so you are clear on it, Theft is wrong."
What does 'theft' have to do with wanting a replacement media for a reasonable price? Are you feeling okay?
You win the award for the most absurd reply I've read today. Kudos!
"If you don't like the policy, don't buy from them. You really don't NEED to play GTA, sucka."
Thank you for the totally unhelpful reply. I'm surprised that you didn't post that anonymously.
So what you're saying is that the race is Roma or Romani, and their way of life is Gypsy. The dictionary definition of 'Gypsy' is a way of life. Go look it up if don't agree with me.
As for the 'some kind of idiot' remark, grow up. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Trivia does not reflect my total intelligence.
"Not to get too off topic but damn that is racist. You are correct that "gyp" comes from gypsie, or roma. But that stereotype of them is like saying that Jews have lots of money and are bankers and swindlers."
Seeing as how nobody today pictures gypsies when using the term 'gyped', it cannot be classified as a racist comment.
Besides, Gypsies really aren't a 'race' per se. It's a way of life.
This is slightly - OT, but at least it's a real life story as to how DRM is harmful to legitimate customers.
I moved a couple of months ago. My GTA 3 disk was damaged in the move through my own carelessness. I contacted the producer of the game to find out how much a simple media exchange would cost. Want to know how much it'll cost? $18 + S&H. That's just for the disk. They can't throw a copy on the burner for me and do it for $5?
I should have backed it up. I'm not sure if I could have or not. I didn't try with this particular game, but I've had to go to rather extreme measures to back up other games I have. You'd think I'd have the right to protect my $50 investment, but obviously I don't.
I find this infurating. It's either a copyright issue or it isn't. Either I'm holding an $18 lump of plastic, or I'm holding an $.05 key to content I have licensed. They can't have it both ways.
I can't believe that these industries are legally allowed to get away with customer gouging.
... to force record labels to change the term 'copy protection' to 'copy restriction'? (Note: Im not claiming to invent that term, somebody else on Slashdot coined the phrase and I have no idea who it is)
There's got to be a legal justification for doing so. If they advertise it as 'protection', it sounds like they're made a superior product that'll play in anything. That sounds like false advertising to me. If they use the term 'restriction', then it's clear there may be playback issues.
"I gave my sister coal for christmas as a joke."
Did you tell her the coal will turn into diamond? Are you engaged now? Heh.
(it's a joke, laugh.)
"Those sirry Americans think they'll sell more products if they make them defective!"
"Has anyone discovered that the new CD's found under the tree or in their stocking don't play on their brand new CD player?"
I wonder if the RIAA realizes that they're pushing me towards MP3's when they pull shit like this. I mean seriously, they'll have no trouble blaming P2P music trading for their downfall if the MP3 is higher quality!