I disagree. Facebook has outlived all of those services. Now, the network effect is just too strong with Facebook (and to a lesser extent, Twitter).
The last statistic I've seen says there are about 2 billion people online. Around a third of those people use Facebook regularly (ie this isn't counting dormant accounts). Is there even a challenger?
Compare it to Twitter. There are countless Twitter clones and most of them have more features and better reliability. Twitter is much simpler and should be easy to supplant, yet every challenger has failed. Facebook is far more entrenched than Twitter (and likely to end up owning Twitter). How do you take on Facebook?
I don't blame them for trying to get paid, I just think the way they go about it is counter productive. A big part of it is out of their hands because of the way viewers are counted and advertising value is determined. The entire industry needs to be dragged into the 21st century.
Content producers may want to put up artificial barriers, but it's a disservice to everybody else. What they are doing is stifling innovation and competition and in the long run, that isn't good for anybody.
Google tried to organize what was being published by the content owners. The content owners want to negotiate different types of deals for different clients which seems a bit silly to me. Do you think it makes sense to stream to Flash clients that report themselves as a IE plugin but deny streaming to Flash running on a PS3 (for example)?
The GP expected his settings to be backed up in the cloud. I also thought this to be true. Resetting the phone (which doesn't reset the hardware id numbers) should restore from the cloud, no?
Extremely professional? What does that even mean? Professional is one of the most meaningless labels to apply to a programmer. It would apply perfectly well to some idiot working for a Fortune 500 company sitting in a cubicle relying on wizards to get them through their day as it would to John Carmack.
And do you really have that much trouble moving between C# and Java? They are roughly equivalent with Java's biggest problem being Oracle. They are far more similar than they are different.
The big problem with developing for Windows Phone 7 is the missing audience. Microsoft has actually lost market share since launch of their most recent mobile OS despite their $100 million ad campaign (only because Apple, RIM, and Google sold so many phones in the last 30 days).
If you think Android is a big fragmented mess, then what do you think of developing for the various versions of Microsoft's phone operating system? Good luck with that. As always, you have to pick the minimum platform that your app needs and that's what you develop for. This is true for any operating system and platform.
A rich ecosystem of hardware vendors is a PITA for developers, but for consumers it means choice. Traditionally this has been what Microsoft has excelled at. This round, Google is taking over this territory and Microsoft is following Apple.
We were talking more about capitalism from the perspective of a consumer in the system. In the morning when I'm deciding if I want to make coffee at home or pick some up on my way to the office, I'm not trying to generate revenue or necessarily keep my costs down. Convenience, quality, and social factors enter in to the equation. Different businesses satisfy those goals in different ways, and the lowest cost option (make at home) isn't always going to win.
I do agree though that the current IP laws have created a system where patents are more stifling than encouraging to innovation.
I don't understand how an efficient market would curb demand for Rowling's talent? Since supply is fixed (there's only one of her) and the demand is enormous, she can dictate the terms of her publishing contracts. I don't have a problem with that.
BTW, when I was a child, a 4.77 MHz computer was $2,000 and a cup of coffee at a cafe $0.25. Now, the coffee is 10x more expensive and the computer is 1000x less expensive. Inflation baselines are just averages. Expect half the things in the world to exceed the baseline rate, and the other half to be lower.
Nope. But in this situation, the local book store has some serious advantages. First, the shopper is in the store. Chances are, they want to leave with something. Second, the condition of the book at the store is known whereas the on-line supplier is more of a gamble. Third, a good book shop will have a knowledgeable and friendly staff who can help the shopper and clinch the sale.
Books are inexpensive enough (well, not textbooks) that they are easy impulse buys for lots of people. If Starbucks can get a premium price for coffee, a book store should be able to do the same.
I'm not sure what the answer is, but a pure-capitalism, only-the-price-matters approach certainly isn't it.
Capitalism is about the best value, not price. For you, that means shopping at a local B&M. Like the last sentence of the summary says, retailers need to provide a better experience to prosper.
> if something else would be more profitable then it can be made as well
This would be true if there were was more money, actors, studios, editors, etc... available. You said shows "get cancelled because something else could be more profitable on the same time slot". This is true, but it's actually more general than that. Shows get cancelled because the resources that go into creating some show can get a higher return if they are used to create something else. The time slot is only one of the scarce resources.
You're conflating the GUI layer (Aero) with the operating system (Win7). The OP mentioned a suitable gui shell would be required. Presumably, this wouldn't be Aero.
There is an easy way to fix the problem - disintermediate Apple. Develop their digital version for the web. They would get the side benefit of a much larger pool of potential customers.
What fantastic value does the app format provide that makes publishers put up with these shenanigans?
Do you really think the hardware is on par with iPhone? I played with a WP7 phone for a few minutes and it felt pretty cheap in my hand. The newest iPhone feels very solid. I realize Microsoft doesn't design the hardware, but it would be nice if somebody other than Apple paid attention to industrial design. The iPhone has it's flaws for sure, but the parts they have perfected should be copied by others.
I think as long as you are in the same system as the individual, then that's true. If you can sit outside of the system, I don't think it's true anymore. It would be like saying my computer is responsible for the BSOD that happened this morning.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. Facebook has outlived all of those services. Now, the network effect is just too strong with Facebook (and to a lesser extent, Twitter).
The last statistic I've seen says there are about 2 billion people online. Around a third of those people use Facebook regularly (ie this isn't counting dormant accounts). Is there even a challenger?
Compare it to Twitter. There are countless Twitter clones and most of them have more features and better reliability. Twitter is much simpler and should be easy to supplant, yet every challenger has failed. Facebook is far more entrenched than Twitter (and likely to end up owning Twitter). How do you take on Facebook?
I don't blame them for trying to get paid, I just think the way they go about it is counter productive. A big part of it is out of their hands because of the way viewers are counted and advertising value is determined. The entire industry needs to be dragged into the 21st century.
Content producers may want to put up artificial barriers, but it's a disservice to everybody else. What they are doing is stifling innovation and competition and in the long run, that isn't good for anybody.
Google tried to organize what was being published by the content owners. The content owners want to negotiate different types of deals for different clients which seems a bit silly to me. Do you think it makes sense to stream to Flash clients that report themselves as a IE plugin but deny streaming to Flash running on a PS3 (for example)?
The GP expected his settings to be backed up in the cloud. I also thought this to be true. Resetting the phone (which doesn't reset the hardware id numbers) should restore from the cloud, no?
Extremely professional? What does that even mean? Professional is one of the most meaningless labels to apply to a programmer. It would apply perfectly well to some idiot working for a Fortune 500 company sitting in a cubicle relying on wizards to get them through their day as it would to John Carmack.
And do you really have that much trouble moving between C# and Java? They are roughly equivalent with Java's biggest problem being Oracle. They are far more similar than they are different.
The big problem with developing for Windows Phone 7 is the missing audience. Microsoft has actually lost market share since launch of their most recent mobile OS despite their $100 million ad campaign (only because Apple, RIM, and Google sold so many phones in the last 30 days).
If you think Android is a big fragmented mess, then what do you think of developing for the various versions of Microsoft's phone operating system? Good luck with that. As always, you have to pick the minimum platform that your app needs and that's what you develop for. This is true for any operating system and platform.
A rich ecosystem of hardware vendors is a PITA for developers, but for consumers it means choice. Traditionally this has been what Microsoft has excelled at. This round, Google is taking over this territory and Microsoft is following Apple.
We were talking more about capitalism from the perspective of a consumer in the system. In the morning when I'm deciding if I want to make coffee at home or pick some up on my way to the office, I'm not trying to generate revenue or necessarily keep my costs down. Convenience, quality, and social factors enter in to the equation. Different businesses satisfy those goals in different ways, and the lowest cost option (make at home) isn't always going to win.
I do agree though that the current IP laws have created a system where patents are more stifling than encouraging to innovation.
I don't understand how an efficient market would curb demand for Rowling's talent? Since supply is fixed (there's only one of her) and the demand is enormous, she can dictate the terms of her publishing contracts. I don't have a problem with that.
BTW, when I was a child, a 4.77 MHz computer was $2,000 and a cup of coffee at a cafe $0.25. Now, the coffee is 10x more expensive and the computer is 1000x less expensive. Inflation baselines are just averages. Expect half the things in the world to exceed the baseline rate, and the other half to be lower.
Nope. But in this situation, the local book store has some serious advantages. First, the shopper is in the store. Chances are, they want to leave with something. Second, the condition of the book at the store is known whereas the on-line supplier is more of a gamble. Third, a good book shop will have a knowledgeable and friendly staff who can help the shopper and clinch the sale.
Books are inexpensive enough (well, not textbooks) that they are easy impulse buys for lots of people. If Starbucks can get a premium price for coffee, a book store should be able to do the same.
Capitalism is about the best value, not price. For you, that means shopping at a local B&M. Like the last sentence of the summary says, retailers need to provide a better experience to prosper.
So, are you saying your sandbox code (which is probably not bug free) could be the source of some fruitful exploits?
Maybe you can explain this to me: what's the Chrome store other than a bunch of bookmarks?
> if something else would be more profitable then it can be made as well
This would be true if there were was more money, actors, studios, editors, etc... available. You said shows "get cancelled because something else could be more profitable on the same time slot". This is true, but it's actually more general than that. Shows get cancelled because the resources that go into creating some show can get a higher return if they are used to create something else. The time slot is only one of the scarce resources.
You're conflating the GUI layer (Aero) with the operating system (Win7). The OP mentioned a suitable gui shell would be required. Presumably, this wouldn't be Aero.
There is an easy way to fix the problem - disintermediate Apple. Develop their digital version for the web. They would get the side benefit of a much larger pool of potential customers.
What fantastic value does the app format provide that makes publishers put up with these shenanigans?
The bit about Canadians being less violent than Americans is pure myth.
What myth? Haven't you ever watched any hockey?
Go on...
Yes. And please remind him that he should be including this income on his 1040. :)
I'll just leave this here.
Do you really think the hardware is on par with iPhone? I played with a WP7 phone for a few minutes and it felt pretty cheap in my hand. The newest iPhone feels very solid. I realize Microsoft doesn't design the hardware, but it would be nice if somebody other than Apple paid attention to industrial design. The iPhone has it's flaws for sure, but the parts they have perfected should be copied by others.
Nobody? Well, I guess you must be that one guy.
Heh! I'll drink to that.
I'm not a physicist either and I would get it terribly wrong if I tried to explain it (mostly because I don't really understand it).
Google for "locality determinism" and check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohm_interpretation
If an individual has a choice, then by definition they have free will and so I would agree with you that they are responsible for their choice.
If the universe turns out to be deterministic, then there is no choice to be made. What does "choice" mean in the context of a giant DFA?
I think as long as you are in the same system as the individual, then that's true. If you can sit outside of the system, I don't think it's true anymore. It would be like saying my computer is responsible for the BSOD that happened this morning.
Locality is the only thing stopping me from concluding the universe is entirely deterministic and free will doesn't exist.