Micro$oft based products generally work intuitively, most Linux products don't.
I guess this is true, but it's Microsoft's/Windows' strength, and it's weakness.
All of the basic functionality is intuitive. You can usually get it to do all the basic gubbins out of the box.
This is not always true with Linux software. Sometimes it can take a good few hours/days of doc-searching to get the basic functionality to work the way it should.
It's after this point that it turns around, though.
MS make their software so intuitive that it hides away all of the obscure stuff. Sadly they manage to hide it away rather too well at times. So once you've grapsed the basics, it can be hard to work out how to do anything more complex.
Linux software might have a steeper initial learning curve, but quite often I find that once you've mastered the basics, going into the more advanced functionality is quite easy.
Plus although more and more linux software is becoming GUI-based, it's still often able to be invoked at the command-line level, and will tend to spew rather useful error messages out that can be useful at times.
The real key to successful Linux software is, as stated in the article, making it work out of the box - or at least supplying sufficient documentation so that you can figure out more fo the problems before having to go anywhere enar the tech-support phone number.
Actually, that is a pretty good factor that is possibly overlooked.
Of course there are people around who want free software. I'd have to raise my hand and admit to being one of them. However, I like Linux and various FOSS software packages because not only are they free (or at least cheap to obtain), but they are legitimately so. No warez, no tracking down serialz or cracks. No wading through scores of pr0n popups to find a decent download.
Just free software that I can also recommend to others.
OK, I'll also buy software if I need to. But even then it tends to be either the commercial arm of something OS, or something with a decent (non-crippled) trial version. Oh, and these do often tend to be cheaper than the alternatives anyway.
I use that client for just that reason. When I'm sat at my PC and trying to use the Net, I'll somewhat limit my outgoing bandwidth. True, that'll also slow down my download rate, but it's better than having to cease downloading entirely just 'cos I'm trying to do something.
Plus, if I suddenly need to do something that requires me full bandwidth, I can simply pause the torrent, get full bandwidth for whatever else I'm trying to do, then unpause for immediate resume. (No CPU-intensive file-checking like when starting).
Then when I go to sleep, or out to work, I simply drop the restrictions and am able to both download and contribute at full capacity.
Surely, at least bandwidth-wise, using BitTorrent would (or at least could) be lighter on a Uni's bandwidth (the mai pipe bandwidth, anyway) than your more conventional P2P apps.
If several users on the same campus network were all downloading the same torrent, wouldn't they use tyhe closer ones as peers and/or seeds? So the number of times the entire data is downloaded onto the Uni network is reduced, and most of the rest of the sharing would be local traffic. both reducing the load on the main incoming traffic, and utilisting the (usually) faster internal network for the bulk.
And if not already in the spec, surely the open nature of the code would allow a client with such a LAN-friendly outlook on load to be written.
Villains, by nature, do dastardly, nasty, things that game developers (and the companies holding the license) don't want to give the characters freedom to do.
Existing MMORPGs DO have villians, and plenty of them. They are called griefers.
Again, that's part of the problem. Not only do the designers/license-holders not like people to play the real villains, it seems that neither do the other players.
But how do you deal, otherwise, if you're trying to play an evil character. And/or if rather than trying to me a Famous Hero, you want to eb an Infamous Villain.
If you go about it, it seems pretty much like all you'll do is raise the irritatin of your fellow-players. Being the Evil Git just won't work out - but sometimes it should, y'know?
After all, if you're in an RPG where Alignment counts, surely you're actually role-playing and in character (apparently important things to do in these RPGs...) - well somehow I think killing off a weaker character is going to be more realistic than helping or even ignoring them.
In a way, it's a double-edged drawback to these games. Most have a monthgly subscription, but you'll probably never be the Real hero, and aren't allowed to be a Real Villain. I'd rather same the money, and buy another offline game instead.
If anything, this might be the bigger concern about the whole issue. Forget the whole "the **AA is behind political denunciations of New Technology" angle - that's nothing new. At least, here on Slashdot it's widely assumed if not wholesale proven.
No. Metadata in your document files is getting mroe and more worrying.
Whether it can be faked or not, it's worrying enough to know that anything you write may well have a full change-history encoded somewhere into it. Today it might just be the username of the person who wrote it, but what's to stop any company writing an app which includes stuff like PC name and current IP-address in the last-modified data?
And if this data can be easily faked, that just makes it more worrying. Not only can anything I do write be traced back to me, but anything I don't write could be as well. So someone could conceivably write a terrorist threat and change the metadata so it looks like it was written by someone they want to frame.
Or, on the other side, they could alter the metadata to make it look as if someone other than you wrote something. And whether you're a strong believe of copyright or not, this is still somewhat worrying.
It's like so many other taxes and charges. They catch you coming and going.
In this case, you pay for the music, and you pay for blank media just in case you're going to pirate it.
Problem is, with copy-proofing that impairs playback on some devices, they often catch you standing still too.
Pick a method of charging, stick to it. Don't try and charge us every step of the way.
But on a more serious note, couldn't Apple argue that the main usage of the iPod is for their proprietary music format which you can only get by paying iTunes?
If iTMS was avaiable anywhere except the US, then that'd probably be a valid point. But as that's still held up with right issues apparently, that argument is somewhat weakened.
Hmmmm. Maybe Sacem think that the artists can get more money from the hard disk levy than from iTunes.
Did you really think that you Americans had the monopoly on dumbass politicians?
I'm of the belief that whoever's in charge will mess at least something up. All you can do is vote for whoever will limit the damage. But expecting total competance is impossible - if for no other reason that you can't please everyone, so someone will always be upset.
I'm in two minds about this. Not so much the actual cost, but the timing. Which to me always seems rather too convenient (for the parties charging) when they start charging a de facto market leader.
The levy came in in 2002, the iPod in 2001. Now to a point I can fully understand why Apple would be annoyed about this. Especially seeing they're appearing to target the more Luxury end of the Portable Music Player market. They're already priced at the top-end of the hard-disc music player market, and quite possibly they're at what Apple think it the maximum they can charge without losing sales. Those 20 Euros would either push the price even higher, or have to be covered by Apple. Neither are probably options they really want.
There's also the fact that the levy came in in 2002, and according to the article (yes, I actually read it, shame on me...) they're only just threatening to sue Apple in 2004. If Apple were consistently refusing to pay this levy, Sacem really should have threatened action sooner.
Waiting until the iPod has reached universal brand recognition does nothing except make the timing seem rather suspect. Chances are that there's nothing suspicious at all, but it can certianly look that way. Especially seeing there's a lot of the Wait Until They're Popular And Then Come Down Hard On Them For Money mentality going around at the moment. Sacem might well be innocent of this, but the timing just risks them looking like they're following the trend - even if this isn't true.
On the other hand, part of me thinks this is a step in the right direction for the various music companies. People are going to copy music, back it up, share it. It's convenient, it's (relatively) cheap, it's great publicity for music you haven't heard before. That, and the fact is that the models for traditional distribution stem from a natural limitation in the technology of the time that no longer exists. The Digital Age is here, and it ain't going anywhere.
So maybe levies on blanks, discs, and even bandwidth are the way forward. Musicians and artists deserve some financial reward for what they do. So maybe it should come from the methods of distribution that are used these days. Maybe the **AA still won't like having their old methods supplanted, but surely the artists themselves can only gain from this. Plus if the Industry actually gains from blank media and bandwidth usage, they can't really complain about file-swapping anymore. In fact they'd have a reason to encourage it.
*shrug*
It's been my opinion for a few years now that maybe the record companies should run ISPs. 'Cos if they want money from music distribution, profit from bandwidth is the only way it's gonna work in the future.
Then again, would we want the RIAA to profit from the/. effect?;)
If asked, I'd probably answer "Linux".[*]
This being despite the fact that the above-metioned chocolate biscuit is what I have with my lunch at work most days. I'm hooked on the things and would still associate Linux above them.
Things are still taking massive bounds forward. Another reply said Patents protect something for 20 years? Hell, in 10 years most inventions as they stand in that form have gone obsolete. What keeps them going is newer features and functionality (OK, and advertising).
But these, in turn, require multiple companies working at them. If it's locked into one company, it increases the chance of the idea dying on its ass.
Besides, aren't Patents supposed to "encourage innovation"? Problem is they dno't seem to. Innovation might be to do with creating something new, but surely it also covers improving upon existing technologies? Or finding new ways of using them?
Also Patents protect the right of the first people to come up with an idea, not those who could do it best. I could probably come up with a really cool idea, patent it, and maybe even make a woprking implementation. Does that mean I'd be able to make best use of my idea? I'd say not. True, i'd love if I could some up with an idea that could make money. But, personally, I'd rather come up with a useful idea that others could improve up. Money might be useful now (and rather important...), but having your name down as the first person to come up with a working implementation of something will go down in history.
Plus, from a consumer standpoint, Patents are a PItA. Someone creates something, and are allowed exclusive rights to make it. Fair enough. But it's often rather pricey. Other companies might be able to make something better and/or cheaper. But Red-Tape prevents them from doing so.
It is so rare to find a company who is reviled so much that slashdotters cheer Microsoft's attempts to crush it.
Well, at the very least you don't have to install a lot of agressive junk to play WMV/WMA files if you're running a Windows box...
...as the pre-bundled junk already handles it.;)
But all joking aside, as much as I hate WMP and don't like using platform-locked media software, at least I know that a basic Windows install can handle the format. I might need to update the players so something somewhat more bloated, and disable a few call-home options. But that's no big deal. Well, not compared to RealOne - with advert-related bloat and call-home options you can never quite stamp out altogether.
I guess the problem is that, like everyone else, Real still hasn't really found an effective revenue model that can work in the "Digital Age".
Advertising is all well and good, but it has its obvious drawbacks. One of which being it's damned irritating to be targetted with adverts that aren't relevant to yourself. And the problem with the alternative to this is that the tracking to see what you are interested is rather intrusive - plus many people (myself included) don't like the idea of people effectively snooping their activities.
Plus these days it's so much easier to find info out for yourself. Adverts are less relevant than they used to be. Once adverts were the only way I'd find out about products. Now they're merely way, if not the last way.
Subscription was a perfect model, once. Problem nowadays is it's more like oversubscription. You're paying for your Cable TV company. (If you're in the UK, you're also paying about 100 merely to own a TV). You're paying for your dialup/broadband connection.
It already feels like you're paying quite a lot of money already. Paying even more to access data over a connection you're already paying for just doesn't seem as enticing anymore.
In a way, it's just getting to a point where the consumers simply want to pay for what they want - and nothing more. The older revenue models are based around persuading people to buy more.
Of course this is going to affect companies like Real. These were, AFAIK, their main ways of earning money.
The next problem is the software. If your format is the de facto standard, then people are going to object to having to pay for the reader/player. But the obvious counterpoint to this is that if the free software does what's needed, people aren't really going to want to pay unless the functionality is really special.
Same with server/producer software. Improvements in technology mean that this year's proprietary system may well be overtaken by next year's open/cheaper/bundled solution.
Although it doesn't excuse the heavy-handed tactics, it's understandable why they'd try to do anything to protect their income. Especially seeing that these days your shareholders are more bothered about short-term profits than long-term viability.
I'm not sure there is an easy solution. But I'm equally unsure that the companies are going to look for anything other than easy solutions.
What exactly is it we're supposed to "understand"?
Sometimes it's not easy to figure out.
I'm honestly glad I don't do Tech Support where my mum's a secretary. So often she'll say to me "I'm having problems with my Microsoft at work".
A "What program?" will usually be met with an "I don't know. it's Microsoft."
Also, where I do work, I was left a message this week about an error message that had popped up overnight. The error message itself might have been useful - had the tutor jotted down which program had given the error. "This program has performed an illegal operation" is, strangely enough, less than helpful without a touch of detail.
What really worries me is that I'm fully aware of how much I don't know. I feel I should know a lot more than I do, so I really panic when the decisions are made by people who know less than I do.
(Clue: Decisions I don't feel I know enough to make...)
Plus it's when as a mere data-entry office-temp you end up fixing problems caused by the Manager in the next office doing the computer work for your floor.
My Line Manager at one job knew I knew about computers, so asked my why hers wasn't working after the Manager next door had moved it to a new desk.
Turns out the mouse and keyboard had been plugged into the wrong PS/2 ports. Bad enough, but the ports were colour-coded, and one of the plugs was too.
I've read a lot about this, and the reason they don't want people to have the ability to record high quality copies, and be able to post them on the Internet, is that most European Countries don't get American shows until 1-2 years later.
And once again their "solution" is actually perpetuating the "problem".
They could get away with such a long delay when no-one really knew about what was going on. but that time is past. Long past.
Between news sites and discussion forums, we know what the latest Season is supposed to be. Even before P2P was prevalent, it was damned annoying to know full well that we were a year behind what was supposed to be shown.
Plus it doesn't help that people probably don't really trust the TV Companies here. They air shows at the times they think suit their scedules, not the times that necessarily suit the subject matter of the shows.
A program aired at, say, 9pm in America would then get shown at 8pm on Sky One and at about 6pm on BBC 2, Channel 4 or five. This, of course, would require cuts. And, once again, the Internet means we know what we're missing.
Even in the late 1990s there were several shows that lost me as a viewer, as I soon got up to speed on episode synopses, but quickly got sick of waiting for the UK channels to catch up. Especially as they'd been known to drop shows, mess around schedules, and skip episodes - at least in reruns. (Highlander, Reboot, and Quantum Leap)
Once again it boils down to technology taking a massive leap forwards. And that's just purely on the basis of getting hold of the information. Before you even factor in the ability to download episodes, the Internet ruined the MPAA's old methods of "Keep the Brits Waiting", as even on dialup I could at least find out about what I was missing.
So if they want me as a viewer (though they probably don't...) they need to start showing stuff here in the UK within a month or so of the US broadcast date. Otherwise I'll either go P2P, or (more likely) just go without the show entirely.
Possibly 'cos if the comanies involved are trying to secure their own internal data (rather than stuff they're trying to "sell"...) then obviously they want to flag this up as being a Good Thing
The term DRM is fast picking up negatyive connotations, so it makes sense that they'd try to distance themselves from it. Especially if they're dealing with their private data and not "anti-piracy measures". They won't want it tarred with the same brush.
I saw that sketch. it's not just the GNOME Footprint, the other two examples have the KDE "K-in-a-Cog" symbol.
This one should be laughed out of the Patens Office...
...of course, chances are it'll just get approved instead. Though I wonder what the USPTO would do if they were sent screenshots of GNOME and KDE. Would that cast rather a shadow on MS's application?
The problem is how do those of us outside the US register a complaint? I can only assume that technically we non-Americans don't have a say when it somes to the USPTO. But some of the more bizarre patents are damaging on a wider scale, as the Internet doesn't really adhere to borders and boundaries - meaning that we should have a say, as it affects us.
Is there anyone that we can complain to - and actually get listened to by?
Although the MS guy overstates his case, it isn't always a good idea to release a patch for a system after an exploit is discovered internally that is not well known.
The problem is that there are several flaws that were well-known before an MS-Patch showed up.
The domain-spoofing one being one. And the 'hide file extensions by default' "feature" certainly counts in my book as a flaw that gets exploited. And that one's still not been "fixed".
The post doesn't even bother to explain the MS position, but instead just continues with the mindless MS bashing that I've come to expect here to insure that no meaningful disscussion ensues and nothing is learned from MS, since of course they can't possibly have anything usefull to teach us about computer use and misuse.
The article makes it look like this David guy is stating something that's quite ovbious, and using it to try and justify his side of the argument without looking at the other side.
That kind of attitude is meant to occur (kind of...) here on Slashdot, but does seem somewhat out of place for a stamenent by a company rep for a "Proper News Outlet".
Slashdot Mirror
I guess this is true, but it's Microsoft's/Windows' strength, and it's weakness.
All of the basic functionality is intuitive. You can usually get it to do all the basic gubbins out of the box.
This is not always true with Linux software. Sometimes it can take a good few hours/days of doc-searching to get the basic functionality to work the way it should.
It's after this point that it turns around, though.
MS make their software so intuitive that it hides away all of the obscure stuff. Sadly they manage to hide it away rather too well at times. So once you've grapsed the basics, it can be hard to work out how to do anything more complex.
Linux software might have a steeper initial learning curve, but quite often I find that once you've mastered the basics, going into the more advanced functionality is quite easy.
Plus although more and more linux software is becoming GUI-based, it's still often able to be invoked at the command-line level, and will tend to spew rather useful error messages out that can be useful at times.
The real key to successful Linux software is, as stated in the article, making it work out of the box - or at least supplying sufficient documentation so that you can figure out more fo the problems before having to go anywhere enar the tech-support phone number.
TiggsActually, that is a pretty good factor that is possibly overlooked.
Of course there are people around who want free software. I'd have to raise my hand and admit to being one of them. However, I like Linux and various FOSS software packages because not only are they free (or at least cheap to obtain), but they are legitimately so. No warez, no tracking down serialz or cracks. No wading through scores of pr0n popups to find a decent download.
Just free software that I can also recommend to others.
OK, I'll also buy software if I need to. But even then it tends to be either the commercial arm of something OS, or something with a decent (non-crippled) trial version. Oh, and these do often tend to be cheaper than the alternatives anyway.
tiggsI use that client for just that reason. When I'm sat at my PC and trying to use the Net, I'll somewhat limit my outgoing bandwidth. True, that'll also slow down my download rate, but it's better than having to cease downloading entirely just 'cos I'm trying to do something.
Plus, if I suddenly need to do something that requires me full bandwidth, I can simply pause the torrent, get full bandwidth for whatever else I'm trying to do, then unpause for immediate resume. (No CPU-intensive file-checking like when starting).
Then when I go to sleep, or out to work, I simply drop the restrictions and am able to both download and contribute at full capacity.
TiggsSurely, at least bandwidth-wise, using BitTorrent would (or at least could) be lighter on a Uni's bandwidth (the mai pipe bandwidth, anyway) than your more conventional P2P apps.
If several users on the same campus network were all downloading the same torrent, wouldn't they use tyhe closer ones as peers and/or seeds? So the number of times the entire data is downloaded onto the Uni network is reduced, and most of the rest of the sharing would be local traffic. both reducing the load on the main incoming traffic, and utilisting the (usually) faster internal network for the bulk.
TiggsAnd if not already in the spec, surely the open nature of the code would allow a client with such a LAN-friendly outlook on load to be written.
Again, that's part of the problem. Not only do the designers/license-holders not like people to play the real villains, it seems that neither do the other players.
But how do you deal, otherwise, if you're trying to play an evil character. And/or if rather than trying to me a Famous Hero, you want to eb an Infamous Villain.
If you go about it, it seems pretty much like all you'll do is raise the irritatin of your fellow-players. Being the Evil Git just won't work out - but sometimes it should, y'know?
After all, if you're in an RPG where Alignment counts, surely you're actually role-playing and in character (apparently important things to do in these RPGs...) - well somehow I think killing off a weaker character is going to be more realistic than helping or even ignoring them.
In a way, it's a double-edged drawback to these games. Most have a monthgly subscription, but you'll probably never be the Real hero, and aren't allowed to be a Real Villain. I'd rather same the money, and buy another offline game instead.
TiggsIf anything, this might be the bigger concern about the whole issue. Forget the whole "the **AA is behind political denunciations of New Technology" angle - that's nothing new. At least, here on Slashdot it's widely assumed if not wholesale proven.
No. Metadata in your document files is getting mroe and more worrying.
Whether it can be faked or not, it's worrying enough to know that anything you write may well have a full change-history encoded somewhere into it. Today it might just be the username of the person who wrote it, but what's to stop any company writing an app which includes stuff like PC name and current IP-address in the last-modified data?
And if this data can be easily faked, that just makes it more worrying. Not only can anything I do write be traced back to me, but anything I don't write could be as well. So someone could conceivably write a terrorist threat and change the metadata so it looks like it was written by someone they want to frame.
TiggsOr, on the other side, they could alter the metadata to make it look as if someone other than you wrote something. And whether you're a strong believe of copyright or not, this is still somewhat worrying.
May, but they're kidna useful. After a fashion...
Before I got a CD burner, AOL/CompuServe CDs were a regular srouce of coffee coasters for me.
It's like so many other taxes and charges. They catch you coming and going.
In this case, you pay for the music, and you pay for blank media just in case you're going to pirate it.
Problem is, with copy-proofing that impairs playback on some devices, they often catch you standing still too.
Pick a method of charging, stick to it. Don't try and charge us every step of the way.
Now if only they're listen...
If iTMS was avaiable anywhere except the US, then that'd probably be a valid point. But as that's still held up with right issues apparently, that argument is somewhat weakened.
Hmmmm. Maybe Sacem think that the artists can get more money from the hard disk levy than from iTunes.
TiggsDid you really think that you Americans had the monopoly on dumbass politicians?
I'm of the belief that whoever's in charge will mess at least something up. All you can do is vote for whoever will limit the damage. But expecting total competance is impossible - if for no other reason that you can't please everyone, so someone will always be upset.
TiggsI'm in two minds about this. Not so much the actual cost, but the timing. Which to me always seems rather too convenient (for the parties charging) when they start charging a de facto market leader.
The levy came in in 2002, the iPod in 2001. Now to a point I can fully understand why Apple would be annoyed about this. Especially seeing they're appearing to target the more Luxury end of the Portable Music Player market. They're already priced at the top-end of the hard-disc music player market, and quite possibly they're at what Apple think it the maximum they can charge without losing sales. Those 20 Euros would either push the price even higher, or have to be covered by Apple. Neither are probably options they really want.
There's also the fact that the levy came in in 2002, and according to the article (yes, I actually read it, shame on me...) they're only just threatening to sue Apple in 2004. If Apple were consistently refusing to pay this levy, Sacem really should have threatened action sooner.
Waiting until the iPod has reached universal brand recognition does nothing except make the timing seem rather suspect. Chances are that there's nothing suspicious at all, but it can certianly look that way. Especially seeing there's a lot of the Wait Until They're Popular And Then Come Down Hard On Them For Money mentality going around at the moment. Sacem might well be innocent of this, but the timing just risks them looking like they're following the trend - even if this isn't true.
On the other hand, part of me thinks this is a step in the right direction for the various music companies. People are going to copy music, back it up, share it. It's convenient, it's (relatively) cheap, it's great publicity for music you haven't heard before. That, and the fact is that the models for traditional distribution stem from a natural limitation in the technology of the time that no longer exists. The Digital Age is here, and it ain't going anywhere.
So maybe levies on blanks, discs, and even bandwidth are the way forward. Musicians and artists deserve some financial reward for what they do. So maybe it should come from the methods of distribution that are used these days. Maybe the **AA still won't like having their old methods supplanted, but surely the artists themselves can only gain from this. Plus if the Industry actually gains from blank media and bandwidth usage, they can't really complain about file-swapping anymore. In fact they'd have a reason to encourage it.
*shrug*
It's been my opinion for a few years now that maybe the record companies should run ISPs. 'Cos if they want money from music distribution, profit from bandwidth is the only way it's gonna work in the future.
Then again, would we want the RIAA to profit from the /. effect? ;)
TiggsOh Gods. I'm really a sad geek!.
If asked, I'd probably answer "Linux".[*]
This being despite the fact that the above-metioned chocolate biscuit is what I have with my lunch at work most days. I'm hooked on the things and would still associate Linux above them.
There is no hope for me...
[*] That or "caffeinated mints"
TiggsIf we did that over here, we'd get charged with possession of an unlicensed weapon. Even if the guy/gal we opened the door to was about to rip us off.
Nah. They need to get on the drugs. Relax. Chill out. And just leave us alone.
TiggsThe key is that eventually though.
Things are still taking massive bounds forward. Another reply said Patents protect something for 20 years? Hell, in 10 years most inventions as they stand in that form have gone obsolete. What keeps them going is newer features and functionality (OK, and advertising).
But these, in turn, require multiple companies working at them. If it's locked into one company, it increases the chance of the idea dying on its ass.
Besides, aren't Patents supposed to "encourage innovation"? Problem is they dno't seem to. Innovation might be to do with creating something new, but surely it also covers improving upon existing technologies? Or finding new ways of using them?
Also Patents protect the right of the first people to come up with an idea, not those who could do it best. I could probably come up with a really cool idea, patent it, and maybe even make a woprking implementation. Does that mean I'd be able to make best use of my idea? I'd say not. True, i'd love if I could some up with an idea that could make money. But, personally, I'd rather come up with a useful idea that others could improve up. Money might be useful now (and rather important...), but having your name down as the first person to come up with a working implementation of something will go down in history.
Plus, from a consumer standpoint, Patents are a PItA. Someone creates something, and are allowed exclusive rights to make it. Fair enough. But it's often rather pricey. Other companies might be able to make something better and/or cheaper. But Red-Tape prevents them from doing so.
Well, at the very least you don't have to install a lot of agressive junk to play WMV/WMA files if you're running a Windows box...
...as the pre-bundled junk already handles it. ;)
But all joking aside, as much as I hate WMP and don't like using platform-locked media software, at least I know that a basic Windows install can handle the format. I might need to update the players so something somewhat more bloated, and disable a few call-home options. But that's no big deal. Well, not compared to RealOne - with advert-related bloat and call-home options you can never quite stamp out altogether.
TiggsI guess the problem is that, like everyone else, Real still hasn't really found an effective revenue model that can work in the "Digital Age".
Advertising is all well and good, but it has its obvious drawbacks. One of which being it's damned irritating to be targetted with adverts that aren't relevant to yourself. And the problem with the alternative to this is that the tracking to see what you are interested is rather intrusive - plus many people (myself included) don't like the idea of people effectively snooping their activities.
Plus these days it's so much easier to find info out for yourself. Adverts are less relevant than they used to be. Once adverts were the only way I'd find out about products. Now they're merely way, if not the last way.
Subscription was a perfect model, once. Problem nowadays is it's more like oversubscription. You're paying for your Cable TV company. (If you're in the UK, you're also paying about 100 merely to own a TV). You're paying for your dialup/broadband connection.
It already feels like you're paying quite a lot of money already. Paying even more to access data over a connection you're already paying for just doesn't seem as enticing anymore.
In a way, it's just getting to a point where the consumers simply want to pay for what they want - and nothing more. The older revenue models are based around persuading people to buy more.
Of course this is going to affect companies like Real. These were, AFAIK, their main ways of earning money.
The next problem is the software. If your format is the de facto standard, then people are going to object to having to pay for the reader/player. But the obvious counterpoint to this is that if the free software does what's needed, people aren't really going to want to pay unless the functionality is really special.
Same with server/producer software. Improvements in technology mean that this year's proprietary system may well be overtaken by next year's open/cheaper/bundled solution.
Although it doesn't excuse the heavy-handed tactics, it's understandable why they'd try to do anything to protect their income. Especially seeing that these days your shareholders are more bothered about short-term profits than long-term viability.
I'm not sure there is an easy solution. But I'm equally unsure that the companies are going to look for anything other than easy solutions.
TiggsWhat exactly is it we're supposed to "understand"?
Sometimes it's not easy to figure out.
I'm honestly glad I don't do Tech Support where my mum's a secretary. So often she'll say to me "I'm having problems with my Microsoft at work".
A "What program?" will usually be met with an "I don't know. it's Microsoft."
Also, where I do work, I was left a message this week about an error message that had popped up overnight. The error message itself might have been useful - had the tutor jotted down which program had given the error.
"This program has performed an illegal operation" is, strangely enough, less than helpful without a touch of detail.
What really worries me is that I'm fully aware of how much I don't know. I feel I should know a lot more than I do, so I really panic when the decisions are made by people who know less than I do.
(Clue: Decisions I don't feel I know enough to make...)
Plus it's when as a mere data-entry office-temp you end up fixing problems caused by the Manager in the next office doing the computer work for your floor.
TiggsMy Line Manager at one job knew I knew about computers, so asked my why hers wasn't working after the Manager next door had moved it to a new desk.
Turns out the mouse and keyboard had been plugged into the wrong PS/2 ports. Bad enough, but the ports were colour-coded, and one of the plugs was too.
Solutions to this...
Apart from the headphones part, this is what I do anyway when the commercials/trailers come on.
And once again their "solution" is actually perpetuating the "problem".
They could get away with such a long delay when no-one really knew about what was going on. but that time is past. Long past.
Between news sites and discussion forums, we know what the latest Season is supposed to be. Even before P2P was prevalent, it was damned annoying to know full well that we were a year behind what was supposed to be shown.
Plus it doesn't help that people probably don't really trust the TV Companies here. They air shows at the times they think suit their scedules, not the times that necessarily suit the subject matter of the shows.
A program aired at, say, 9pm in America would then get shown at 8pm on Sky One and at about 6pm on BBC 2, Channel 4 or five. This, of course, would require cuts. And, once again, the Internet means we know what we're missing.
Even in the late 1990s there were several shows that lost me as a viewer, as I soon got up to speed on episode synopses, but quickly got sick of waiting for the UK channels to catch up. Especially as they'd been known to drop shows, mess around schedules, and skip episodes - at least in reruns. (Highlander, Reboot, and Quantum Leap)
Once again it boils down to technology taking a massive leap forwards. And that's just purely on the basis of getting hold of the information. Before you even factor in the ability to download episodes, the Internet ruined the MPAA's old methods of "Keep the Brits Waiting", as even on dialup I could at least find out about what I was missing.
So if they want me as a viewer (though they probably don't...) they need to start showing stuff here in the UK within a month or so of the US broadcast date. Otherwise I'll either go P2P, or (more likely) just go without the show entirely.
TiggsMy German "skills" are shaky, to say the least, but when I was reading that yesterday, I was laughing so hard that tears were rolling down my face.
I know just enough German, and enough about the whole case, that I could follow every punchline even if I couldn't follow every word.
Possibly 'cos if the comanies involved are trying to secure their own internal data (rather than stuff they're trying to "sell"...) then obviously they want to flag this up as being a Good Thing
The term DRM is fast picking up negatyive connotations, so it makes sense that they'd try to distance themselves from it. Especially if they're dealing with their private data and not "anti-piracy measures". They won't want it tarred with the same brush.
I saw that sketch. it's not just the GNOME Footprint, the other two examples have the KDE "K-in-a-Cog" symbol.
This one should be laughed out of the Patens Office...
...of course, chances are it'll just get approved instead. Though I wonder what the USPTO would do if they were sent screenshots of GNOME and KDE. Would that cast rather a shadow on MS's application?
TiggsYou have a point, up to a point.
The problem is how do those of us outside the US register a complaint? I can only assume that technically we non-Americans don't have a say when it somes to the USPTO. But some of the more bizarre patents are damaging on a wider scale, as the Internet doesn't really adhere to borders and boundaries - meaning that we should have a say, as it affects us.
Is there anyone that we can complain to - and actually get listened to by?
TiggsThe problem is that there are several flaws that were well-known before an MS-Patch showed up.
TiggsThe domain-spoofing one being one. And the 'hide file extensions by default' "feature" certainly counts in my book as a flaw that gets exploited. And that one's still not been "fixed".
The article makes it look like this David guy is stating something that's quite ovbious, and using it to try and justify his side of the argument without looking at the other side.
That kind of attitude is meant to occur (kind of...) here on Slashdot, but does seem somewhat out of place for a stamenent by a company rep for a "Proper News Outlet".
Tiggs