You're going under the assumption that everyone who uses a computer not only has the Internet, but has broadband.
This is still not true in some places - especially here in the UK.
This would provide an incredibly easy way for people getting online for the first time to pick up essentials (like cheap legit anti-virus software) conveniently.
Hell, now if MS would get off their hig-horse and use something like this to distribute their service-packs and Windows Updates.
And so far, Microsoft's ClearType anti-aliasing technology is subjectively better than anything I've seen on MacOS or Linux.
Well, I'm finding Gnome 2.4's sub-pixel smoothing to be more or less as good.
More importantly, ClearType is XP-only, and MS seem to have no desire to backport it to Win2K. And I currently find Win2K more than adequate for my needs, so I see no need to pay over the odds for a few graphical advantages that come as standard in a free GUI.
Shame that I still need to run under Windows, as most of what I do at home doesn't currently have a viable Linux alternative. (Though it's getting closer all the time)
Google has been very up-front about what they will or will not be willing to do with the cookie "trifecta" (Google-Orkut-Gmail, as mentioned in the Register article) that they are gunning for. Not only is it spelled out quite clearly in the Gmail Privacy Statment, the co-founder is going on recrod saying "Hey, that's not such a bad idea."
You raise a very good point here, and one that I think people are missing.
Sure, their Privacy Policy may not be what many of us would desire, but they're being open about it - more open than many places are at times. At least with Gmail, should you go with them, you know exactly what they will do with your data - as long as you bother to read the policy anyway. With some services even if you read through the small print, you can never be too sure what they're going to do with it.
I guess in one way I'm actually impressed with their policy. Maybe not with the contect, but with the fact that they are choosing not to hide some of the more controversial aspects.
So many companies would be more likely to avoid mentioning these issues in case they put people off using their service.
Actually no, he's right. 1000Gb DOES == 1Tb. You probably have the decimal mutiples that hard drive manufacturers use mixed up with the binary multiples that everyone wishes they used.
Actually, I'd be more inclined to say "...the binary multiples everyone else uses in that context."
Plus, even if the Gb/GiB conventions do end up being followed, it still will be just as confusing when the HD-manufacturers measure in Mb whilst most Operating systems measure in MiB. It may be less misleading, but it still requires irritating conversions when hard-drive manufacturers give decimal multiples for capacities where people need to know the binary multiples.
Posting anonymously for fear of mod retaliation from those who still think the sun revolves around the earth.
I've never understood posting as "Anonymous Coward" for anything other than the "This could get me fired" (and equivalent) route.
Either something's important enough to say, or it's not.
(Minor gripe out of the way, an actual reply follows...)
Anyway, it's one of those things where the convention has stuck, regardless of the inconsistency.
How many meters are in a kilometer?
1000
How many grams are in a kilogram?
1000
How many bytes are in a kilobyte?
1024
Regardless of the fact that the kilo- prefix (and others) were meant to be used consistantly, people started using a term in the wrong context and it stuck.
It happens - usually to the chagrin of companies whose brand-name gets used as a generic term for anything similar - even if made by a rival company.
True a "kilobyte" should be 1000 bytes. But, rightly or wrongly, everyone with any technical knowhow (except the HD manufacturers) will automatically think 1024.
And the fact that some people use the "correct" terms doesn't stop the fact that they're then using them out of context and in a confusing manner. Plus it means that although buyers won't get the "gigabyte hard drive" that they were paying for, the manufacturers can correctly say that they didn't lie on their specifications - even fi the actual clarification was in tiny letters where no-one looks, rather than next to the term which has definite connotations in people's minds.
Oh, I know several. It isn't necessarily the advantage you'd wish it could be.
One has catagorically stated she'd never be interested in me that way. One lives the wrong side of the UK. And another is [a] too young and [b] lives in New York.
Part of how they can strongarm the OEMs is that WMP and IE are bundled with with OS.
If they have to have an unbundled version of Windows, then OEMs can supply other software instead. Imagine being able to buy a PC that might run Windows, but not comes with Mozilla and WinAmp (or Opera & Realplayer or Quicktime), but doesn't even have WMP and IE anywhere near it to hijack the User settings.
Opening up their formats and interface hooks can also help stop them being anticompetitive, as having to keep up with people who use Microsoft platforms won't automatically require having to use one yourself.
Plus, if nothing else, it shows Microsoft that they can't get away with being anticompetitive and automatically assuming that they'll be supported by the government.
That's part of what the grandparent post was trying to address. At least, that's how it looked to me.
Though rather than looking at how people will try to avoid the rules, they were looking at why.
The "how" isn't possible to deal with. Someone will always be able to code their way around something. In a way that's the way it should be. Of course it's annoying from a business opint of view, but the only way that technology can really be pushed to it's limits is if people are constantly trying to both strengthen and break it at the same time.
If you look at the "why" then you come up with the reason that the grandparent stated, as well as the most simple answer - "There's always someone who don't want to work within the rules". These are a lost cause, and teh you add this to the "how" from above, the simple fact is that you won't stop everyone.
But if you adress the "why" factors from the grandparent post and come up with a system that tries to address those factors, then you come up with something that will at least reduce the amount of "illegal" filesharing. And maybe even get some money back into the system.
Not the answer that the **AA want, but surely better for them that what they see as the corrent "problem".
You ask:
How well would this work for those who don't want to play by someone elses rules?
Answer:
It won't. "You can't please all of the people all of the time" - simple fact. Many people will always go by what's more convenient - not what's strictly legit. But the closer that "someone else's rules" correspond to people's own, the more people will no longer fall into the above category. So all you can really do is make your rules more convenient, and breaking them less convenient.
Why are you proposing "solutions" here? Aren't you and the *AA supposed to work it out yourselves? I am suspecting you're an *AA supporter, or a wannabe.
But the **AA "working it out themselves" is why a lot of it doesn't work.
Maybe the grandparent was posting here to try to guage the opinion of the average Slashdotter as to how one possible method of modified P2 would work.
Think about it...
It doesn't matter how well the **AA think something out. If it doesn't suit the needs of the average geek, someone's eventually gonna find a way around it. Hell, they will anyway, but the more tech-savvy people you have on-side the more chance you have of them doing stuff for you rather than against you.
The problem at the moment is it's seen very much as a "Them vs Us" situation. Of course, maybe that's because it is. But part of what needs doing is to try and change that situation. Bring an idea to a **AA organisation saying "Not only does this idea bring some money in, but it actually has support from some of the people who you're trying to target, and they'll be paying you instead of hacking your DRM" and there's a slight chance they might pay attention.
To be honest, the old methods of distribution probably are on their way out. But right now the choice will decide whether the **AA bow out quietly, or go down fighting. And much as I don't like their practices, I don't think them going down guns blazing is going to do anybody any good - musicians, fans, or anyone else.
You raise a valid point that any comparison between Bush and Hitler is exagerrating the problems with the bush Administration by a very large amount, and is simply trying to draw parallels in the most sensationalist method possible.
But it's still raising some rather worrying things in my mind.
I don't know what more worrying, that fact that people are trying to compare Bush with Hitler, or the fact that one or two of the parallels are scarily accurate.
Personally I don't think Bush is anywhere near as dangerous as Hitler was. Or at least, not yet. (I'm not saying he will get worse, just that it's not an impossibility.)
But some of Bush's policies are rather worrying. Hell I (and many others) thought so even before the "Hitler parallels". And just because comparing Bush to Hitler is going too far doesn't mean that the issues raised aren't disturbing.
To be honest, my opinions haven't changed too much since a year ago. Getting rid of Saddam was necessary (my opinion, not a fact - and just 'cos I agree with the end doesn't mean I'm impressed with many of the means on any side). But... now Bush should take a very large step backwards or run the risk of being the next target.
Global-scale politics is a dangerous game where the line between "right" and "wrong" is very fine (and often a matter of opinion).
Not totally "with" the whole development scene myself, but I think what it means is that they're about to freeze any feature development for this version of Theora. So it'll be into a few rounds of testing and bugfixing, without any new stuff to muddy up the waters.
Wouldn't that break Virtual Hosting under the cuppernt implementation of IP?
'Cos from how I understand it (please correct me fi I'm wrong) it allows different domain names to map onto the same IP address. Meaning that you can host several sites from once server-IP without having to add extra pathnames just to map to the correct directory.
Maybe 'cos some non-IE people use Browsers other than Mozilla?
It means you can mix-and-match. You can use Opera, or Konqueror or even Internet Explorer, but without being tied to their particular mail-client. And then use a Moz-based e-mail/news client without being tied to the Browser.
Personally I mainly use the Mozilla suite. Although Firefox is fast reaching the point where I'll want to use it at work - where I need a standalone browser. But just 'cos I always use the browser and mail client together doesn't mean I don't know that some people want/use them seperately.
Plus if they do develop Thunderbird seperately, it's still based on the Mozilla codebase IIRC. So if they suddenly find some major optimisations for the mail/news side of things, they can probably be ported across to the full suite.
I guess it was only a matter of time. Seeing that MasOS these days is built on a BSD base, it was inevitable that that it received a port of that old gag.
The article clearly states that anyone who keeps their system up-to-date with critical hotfixes will not be troubled by this virus.
This is perfect in theory, but the practice simply isn't as viable as it could be.
(Hell, it's not as viable as it should be!!)
There's still the problem that some people simply don't trust Microsoft's "Critical Updates". The fact that it has been known in the past for hotfixes (Microsoft and otherwise) to introduce new problems or break other functionality when they fix stuff.
Understandably people are going to wait until the bug reports come out before even thinking of deploying the latest fix.
Add to this the fact that large businesses are probably worse for viruses like this to spread. Many near-identical boxes, so if one's vulnerable chances are most are.
But especially in a large organisation it's always vital to test any new software or patches before rolling them out. But then what happens if the latest virus or exploit comes out in the time between the latest hotfix being release an CompanyX's tech-team finishing testing it with their internal systems?
You're probably right here. Whether legal or illegal, downloads of music can enable you to cut out the middle-man - at least to an extent anyway.
This is great news for musicians and also for music-lovers.
However, understandably, the companies whose strength and profits come from a business model built around being the middle-man owing to lack of infrastructure to do without one are less than enthusiastic about the prospect.
They want their market-share. Fair enough.
They work for their market-share. Fair enough. But the work they're doing is based on an old paradigm that's fast becoming irrelevant - or in trying to keep the status quo based on an increasingly-obsolete tech-level.
But their market-share is based on being a middle-man in a world where the middle-man is seen as less relevant. The Internet makes it easier to do things with less (visible) intermediate assistance.
... and trying to say that p2p increases appetite for music is just entering into a falacious discussion.
Of course it doesn't increase the appetite for music. however, it does (or at least can) increase one's chances of finding stuff that actually interests you.
I don't like more music than I did before finding P2P, but I have found more of the kind of music that I already did (or would) like. And that's the key here.
If albums represent a good deal they will buy them. When music all feels shit, they won't.
Exactly. But sometimes your opinion of which group an album will fall into will change depending on how much you've heard of the album.
Plus "Ten Songs You Know And Love" will quite often seem a better deal than "Two Songs You Like, And Eight You've Never Heard Of".
I have purchased more CD's because of file sharing. I get to preview artists I have not heard, and dont get much airplay. With the high prices of disks in the UK its the only way to go!
The other reason for more sales would be online music shops that keep prices low. However as soon as you go into a high street shop the prices are rediculous for none chart stuff! You looking at 16GBP - 18GBP for a single studio album - this is the record industrys problem else where in the world OTT prices!
The price here really is the issue. Not only the fact that it's GBP15+ per album, it's the fact that within 6-12 months it's often dipped to just below the GPB10 mark.
I don't think the companies realise quite how much the high prices are hated. The post-Christmas sales bring prices down to what most people are generally prepared to pay. if this wasn't true, the places wouldn't be quite so damn packed at the time.
With prices that high, the only way you're going to buy the album is either if you're a die-hard fan of the band or artist, or if you've already heard the album. 'Cos there's no way I'm spending over a tenner on a blind music purchase.
And currently the only cheap way of previewing music is by downloading from the internet. Certianly it's the only way to find out if a band's non-radio-played tracks are any good.
And even then, so many times I've held off on buying an album (whether I have it on MP3 or not...) until the price has dropped. if the price doesn't go down, I spend my money on a different artist instead.
"But is anti-trust law really good for most people in the long run?"
And then you got the wrong answer, in spite of reasoning close to the real issues.
I'm not sure there is a "right answer" to this. In fact, in most situations I'm not sure there ever can be one answer that will truly suit everyone.
The problem is it's all too easy to see "Microsoft Slapped with Antitrust Ruling" and then just be all happy and stuff about that.
But there are deeper issues here.
For one thing, I'm always wary of politicians tryinhg to deal with even partially-technical issues. They simply don't have the knowledge. (Same as why i try to keep my head out of politics - I might have opinions, but politics is way outside my area of expertise)
Yes, Microsoft needs taking down a peg or two(-hundred). But it has to be over the right issues. Plus both the long and short term effects have to be considered.
And there is the simple fact that there probably is no way to get it 100% right. There's always going to be someone disadvantaged by majing a ruling either direction - and the casualties will be from both the big and small interests.
Also the fact that the whole thing was AFAIK raised by other companies with vested interests (and who don't exactly do wonders for the consumer side of things themselves) certainly doesn't help.
Still can't really see what effect this will have. More pre-installed drek for me to lose as soon as I can, if I ever need to buy a Windows PC.
Also if there's one thing I trust less than Microsoft, it's the software that gets pre-installed by such OEMs.
I can't help but thinking that it's less a step in the right direction, but a step away from the wrong direction - but not one that's necessarily going in one that's better.
Actually, these companies may well end up forcing MS to comply.
Sure, their interests are tied up with MS, but surely up to a point the opposite is also true.
Surely a lot of MS's income comes from Windows being bundled with PCs. So if the companies worry about losing 90% of their European sales, they might lean on MS. And at that opint MS might worry a little bit about ticking off companies who bundle their OS worldwide.
I have to say that much as I am anti-Microsoft and think they've got a monopoly that needs dealing with, I am rather worried about what this will mean.
Well, slightly worried, anyway.
If Windows is deemed anticompetitive in the media-stakes, well all that can really be done is to force MS to allow WIndows to come with alternatives installed. That's not really gonna affect them. It sure ain't gonna affect me, as should I ever buy another Windows PC then the first thing I'll do (like with my current one) is to repartition and reinstall to my tastes. So if Real & Quicktime are included, they won't be for long.
And there's no easy way they can force MS to include them on an installation disc, at least not wtihout clearing the licensing with Apple and Real.
And in all honesty, I can't see MS being forced to break up and open up any time soon. It just isn't going to happen.
This is what I personally liked about Enter the Matrix.
It certainly wasn't the greatest game ever made. It wasn't even that ground-breaking, gameplay-wise. But it took what must have been a pretty risky step. Rather than focusing on the main characters, you played a couple of otherwise minor characters. But, they were certainly involved in the plot.
Yes, the game could have been better. But if they'd gone the standard route of You Play The Main Characters And Follow The Movie Plot As Closely As We Can then chances are it'd have been a lot worse.
And I guess it's the same with License-based MMO games. If you can't play The Heroes, then a game has to make sure you really feel like you're a contributing part of the world.
Slashdot Mirror
You're going under the assumption that everyone who uses a computer not only has the Internet, but has broadband.
This is still not true in some places - especially here in the UK.
This would provide an incredibly easy way for people getting online for the first time to pick up essentials (like cheap legit anti-virus software) conveniently.
Hell, now if MS would get off their hig-horse and use something like this to distribute their service-packs and Windows Updates.
Well, I'm finding Gnome 2.4's sub-pixel smoothing to be more or less as good.
More importantly, ClearType is XP-only, and MS seem to have no desire to backport it to Win2K. And I currently find Win2K more than adequate for my needs, so I see no need to pay over the odds for a few graphical advantages that come as standard in a free GUI.
Shame that I still need to run under Windows, as most of what I do at home doesn't currently have a viable Linux alternative. (Though it's getting closer all the time)
tiggsYou raise a very good point here, and one that I think people are missing.
Sure, their Privacy Policy may not be what many of us would desire, but they're being open about it - more open than many places are at times. At least with Gmail, should you go with them, you know exactly what they will do with your data - as long as you bother to read the policy anyway. With some services even if you read through the small print, you can never be too sure what they're going to do with it.
I guess in one way I'm actually impressed with their policy. Maybe not with the contect, but with the fact that they are choosing not to hide some of the more controversial aspects.
So many companies would be more likely to avoid mentioning these issues in case they put people off using their service.
Actually, I'd be more inclined to say "...the binary multiples everyone else uses in that context."
Plus, even if the Gb/GiB conventions do end up being followed, it still will be just as confusing when the HD-manufacturers measure in Mb whilst most Operating systems measure in MiB. It may be less misleading, but it still requires irritating conversions when hard-drive manufacturers give decimal multiples for capacities where people need to know the binary multiples.
TiggsI've never understood posting as "Anonymous Coward" for anything other than the "This could get me fired" (and equivalent) route.
Either something's important enough to say, or it's not.
(Minor gripe out of the way, an actual reply follows...)
Anyway, it's one of those things where the convention has stuck, regardless of the inconsistency.
Regardless of the fact that the kilo- prefix (and others) were meant to be used consistantly, people started using a term in the wrong context and it stuck.
It happens - usually to the chagrin of companies whose brand-name gets used as a generic term for anything similar - even if made by a rival company.
True a "kilobyte" should be 1000 bytes. But, rightly or wrongly, everyone with any technical knowhow (except the HD manufacturers) will automatically think 1024.
TiggsAnd the fact that some people use the "correct" terms doesn't stop the fact that they're then using them out of context and in a confusing manner. Plus it means that although buyers won't get the "gigabyte hard drive" that they were paying for, the manufacturers can correctly say that they didn't lie on their specifications - even fi the actual clarification was in tiny letters where no-one looks, rather than next to the term which has definite connotations in people's minds.
Oh, I know several. It isn't necessarily the advantage you'd wish it could be.
One has catagorically stated she'd never be interested in me that way. One lives the wrong side of the UK. And another is [a] too young and [b] lives in New York.
TiggsPart of how they can strongarm the OEMs is that WMP and IE are bundled with with OS.
If they have to have an unbundled version of Windows, then OEMs can supply other software instead. Imagine being able to buy a PC that might run Windows, but not comes with Mozilla and WinAmp (or Opera & Realplayer or Quicktime), but doesn't even have WMP and IE anywhere near it to hijack the User settings.
Opening up their formats and interface hooks can also help stop them being anticompetitive, as having to keep up with people who use Microsoft platforms won't automatically require having to use one yourself.
Plus, if nothing else, it shows Microsoft that they can't get away with being anticompetitive and automatically assuming that they'll be supported by the government.
That's part of what the grandparent post was trying to address. At least, that's how it looked to me.
Though rather than looking at how people will try to avoid the rules, they were looking at why.
The "how" isn't possible to deal with. Someone will always be able to code their way around something. In a way that's the way it should be. Of course it's annoying from a business opint of view, but the only way that technology can really be pushed to it's limits is if people are constantly trying to both strengthen and break it at the same time.
If you look at the "why" then you come up with the reason that the grandparent stated, as well as the most simple answer - "There's always someone who don't want to work within the rules". These are a lost cause, and teh you add this to the "how" from above, the simple fact is that you won't stop everyone.
But if you adress the "why" factors from the grandparent post and come up with a system that tries to address those factors, then you come up with something that will at least reduce the amount of "illegal" filesharing. And maybe even get some money back into the system.
Not the answer that the **AA want, but surely better for them that what they see as the corrent "problem".
Answer:
TiggsIt won't. "You can't please all of the people all of the time" - simple fact. Many people will always go by what's more convenient - not what's strictly legit. But the closer that "someone else's rules" correspond to people's own, the more people will no longer fall into the above category. So all you can really do is make your rules more convenient, and breaking them less convenient.
But the **AA "working it out themselves" is why a lot of it doesn't work.
Maybe the grandparent was posting here to try to guage the opinion of the average Slashdotter as to how one possible method of modified P2 would work.
Think about it...
It doesn't matter how well the **AA think something out. If it doesn't suit the needs of the average geek, someone's eventually gonna find a way around it. Hell, they will anyway, but the more tech-savvy people you have on-side the more chance you have of them doing stuff for you rather than against you.
The problem at the moment is it's seen very much as a "Them vs Us" situation. Of course, maybe that's because it is. But part of what needs doing is to try and change that situation. Bring an idea to a **AA organisation saying "Not only does this idea bring some money in, but it actually has support from some of the people who you're trying to target, and they'll be paying you instead of hacking your DRM" and there's a slight chance they might pay attention.
To be honest, the old methods of distribution probably are on their way out. But right now the choice will decide whether the **AA bow out quietly, or go down fighting. And much as I don't like their practices, I don't think them going down guns blazing is going to do anybody any good - musicians, fans, or anyone else.
TiggsYou raise a valid point that any comparison between Bush and Hitler is exagerrating the problems with the bush Administration by a very large amount, and is simply trying to draw parallels in the most sensationalist method possible.
But it's still raising some rather worrying things in my mind.
I don't know what more worrying, that fact that people are trying to compare Bush with Hitler, or the fact that one or two of the parallels are scarily accurate.
Personally I don't think Bush is anywhere near as dangerous as Hitler was. Or at least, not yet. (I'm not saying he will get worse, just that it's not an impossibility.)
But some of Bush's policies are rather worrying. Hell I (and many others) thought so even before the "Hitler parallels". And just because comparing Bush to Hitler is going too far doesn't mean that the issues raised aren't disturbing.
To be honest, my opinions haven't changed too much since a year ago. Getting rid of Saddam was necessary (my opinion, not a fact - and just 'cos I agree with the end doesn't mean I'm impressed with many of the means on any side). But... now Bush should take a very large step backwards or run the risk of being the next target.
TiggsGlobal-scale politics is a dangerous game where the line between "right" and "wrong" is very fine (and often a matter of opinion).
Not by 9am GMT it hadn't.
TiggsNot totally "with" the whole development scene myself, but I think what it means is that they're about to freeze any feature development for this version of Theora. So it'll be into a few rounds of testing and bugfixing, without any new stuff to muddy up the waters.
TiggsWouldn't that break Virtual Hosting under the cuppernt implementation of IP?
'Cos from how I understand it (please correct me fi I'm wrong) it allows different domain names to map onto the same IP address. Meaning that you can host several sites from once server-IP without having to add extra pathnames just to map to the correct directory.
TiggsMaybe 'cos some non-IE people use Browsers other than Mozilla?
It means you can mix-and-match. You can use Opera, or Konqueror or even Internet Explorer, but without being tied to their particular mail-client. And then use a Moz-based e-mail/news client without being tied to the Browser.
Personally I mainly use the Mozilla suite. Although Firefox is fast reaching the point where I'll want to use it at work - where I need a standalone browser. But just 'cos I always use the browser and mail client together doesn't mean I don't know that some people want/use them seperately.
Plus if they do develop Thunderbird seperately, it's still based on the Mozilla codebase IIRC. So if they suddenly find some major optimisations for the mail/news side of things, they can probably be ported across to the full suite.
TiggsI guess it was only a matter of time. Seeing that MasOS these days is built on a BSD base, it was inevitable that that it received a port of that old gag.
TiggsThis is perfect in theory, but the practice simply isn't as viable as it could be.
(Hell, it's not as viable as it should be!!)
There's still the problem that some people simply don't trust Microsoft's "Critical Updates". The fact that it has been known in the past for hotfixes (Microsoft and otherwise) to introduce new problems or break other functionality when they fix stuff.
Understandably people are going to wait until the bug reports come out before even thinking of deploying the latest fix.
Add to this the fact that large businesses are probably worse for viruses like this to spread. Many near-identical boxes, so if one's vulnerable chances are most are.
TiggsBut especially in a large organisation it's always vital to test any new software or patches before rolling them out. But then what happens if the latest virus or exploit comes out in the time between the latest hotfix being release an CompanyX's tech-team finishing testing it with their internal systems?
You're probably right here. Whether legal or illegal, downloads of music can enable you to cut out the middle-man - at least to an extent anyway.
This is great news for musicians and also for music-lovers.
However, understandably, the companies whose strength and profits come from a business model built around being the middle-man owing to lack of infrastructure to do without one are less than enthusiastic about the prospect.
They want their market-share. Fair enough.
TiggsThey work for their market-share. Fair enough. But the work they're doing is based on an old paradigm that's fast becoming irrelevant - or in trying to keep the status quo based on an increasingly-obsolete tech-level.
But their market-share is based on being a middle-man in a world where the middle-man is seen as less relevant. The Internet makes it easier to do things with less (visible) intermediate assistance.
Of course it doesn't increase the appetite for music. however, it does (or at least can) increase one's chances of finding stuff that actually interests you.
I don't like more music than I did before finding P2P, but I have found more of the kind of music that I already did (or would) like. And that's the key here.
Exactly. But sometimes your opinion of which group an album will fall into will change depending on how much you've heard of the album.
TiggsPlus "Ten Songs You Know And Love" will quite often seem a better deal than "Two Songs You Like, And Eight You've Never Heard Of".
The price here really is the issue. Not only the fact that it's GBP15+ per album, it's the fact that within 6-12 months it's often dipped to just below the GPB10 mark.
I don't think the companies realise quite how much the high prices are hated. The post-Christmas sales bring prices down to what most people are generally prepared to pay. if this wasn't true, the places wouldn't be quite so damn packed at the time.
With prices that high, the only way you're going to buy the album is either if you're a die-hard fan of the band or artist, or if you've already heard the album. 'Cos there's no way I'm spending over a tenner on a blind music purchase.
And currently the only cheap way of previewing music is by downloading from the internet. Certianly it's the only way to find out if a band's non-radio-played tracks are any good.
And even then, so many times I've held off on buying an album (whether I have it on MP3 or not...) until the price has dropped. if the price doesn't go down, I spend my money on a different artist instead.
TiggsI'm not sure there is a "right answer" to this. In fact, in most situations I'm not sure there ever can be one answer that will truly suit everyone.
The problem is it's all too easy to see "Microsoft Slapped with Antitrust Ruling" and then just be all happy and stuff about that.
But there are deeper issues here.
For one thing, I'm always wary of politicians tryinhg to deal with even partially-technical issues. They simply don't have the knowledge. (Same as why i try to keep my head out of politics - I might have opinions, but politics is way outside my area of expertise)
Yes, Microsoft needs taking down a peg or two(-hundred). But it has to be over the right issues. Plus both the long and short term effects have to be considered.
And there is the simple fact that there probably is no way to get it 100% right. There's always going to be someone disadvantaged by majing a ruling either direction - and the casualties will be from both the big and small interests.
TiggsAlso the fact that the whole thing was AFAIK raised by other companies with vested interests (and who don't exactly do wonders for the consumer side of things themselves) certainly doesn't help.
Still can't really see what effect this will have. More pre-installed drek for me to lose as soon as I can, if I ever need to buy a Windows PC.
Also if there's one thing I trust less than Microsoft, it's the software that gets pre-installed by such OEMs.
I can't help but thinking that it's less a step in the right direction, but a step away from the wrong direction - but not one that's necessarily going in one that's better.
TiggsActually, these companies may well end up forcing MS to comply.
Sure, their interests are tied up with MS, but surely up to a point the opposite is also true.
TiggsSurely a lot of MS's income comes from Windows being bundled with PCs. So if the companies worry about losing 90% of their European sales, they might lean on MS. And at that opint MS might worry a little bit about ticking off companies who bundle their OS worldwide.
Yep. Definitely.
Weapons of mass Procrastination
Known to some as MineSweeper and Solitaire
I have to say that much as I am anti-Microsoft and think they've got a monopoly that needs dealing with, I am rather worried about what this will mean.
Well, slightly worried, anyway.
If Windows is deemed anticompetitive in the media-stakes, well all that can really be done is to force MS to allow WIndows to come with alternatives installed. That's not really gonna affect them. It sure ain't gonna affect me, as should I ever buy another Windows PC then the first thing I'll do (like with my current one) is to repartition and reinstall to my tastes. So if Real & Quicktime are included, they won't be for long.
And there's no easy way they can force MS to include them on an installation disc, at least not wtihout clearing the licensing with Apple and Real.
And in all honesty, I can't see MS being forced to break up and open up any time soon. It just isn't going to happen.
TiggsThis is what I personally liked about Enter the Matrix.
It certainly wasn't the greatest game ever made. It wasn't even that ground-breaking, gameplay-wise. But it took what must have been a pretty risky step. Rather than focusing on the main characters, you played a couple of otherwise minor characters. But, they were certainly involved in the plot.
Yes, the game could have been better. But if they'd gone the standard route of You Play The Main Characters And Follow The Movie Plot As Closely As We Can then chances are it'd have been a lot worse.
TiggsAnd I guess it's the same with License-based MMO games. If you can't play The Heroes, then a game has to make sure you really feel like you're a contributing part of the world.