That hasn't stopped them from publishing games for Linux or Android. An Open Source console doesn't have to be any different.
The big question is: what's in it for the developer? Low entry cost? They already have that on the PC.
If you were somehow able to get market penetration, then the developers would follow. But since you can't get market penetration on a pure gaming device without any games, it needs to be something more than just a console. Like a harddisk recorder, or something. An affordable MythTV box with a market where you can buy games.
The US also has plenty of laws that Americans don't agree with.
Yes, but Americans blame their own politicians for it. Europeans instead blame EU bureaucrats and the US, and European politicians just love that because they can shift blame for their own bad decisions and say "the EU made us do it" or "the US made us do it".
That's definitely true. European politicians do have a tendency to introduce nationally impopular laws at EU level, so they can blame someone else for it. The French 3-strikes law was a very clear example of this.
Oh, that old canard of the "US bullying Europe". Is Europe some impotent banana republic? Of course not. Europe has nearly twice as many people and a bigger economy than the US. How exactly do you think the US is forcing Europe to do anything European governments don't want to do? By what magical means is this "bullying" supposed to happen?
You're forgetting one vital weakness of the EU: it's divided. The US has one central government, the EU has lots of national ones. Individual countries can be bullied. Maybe not Germany and France, but the others can and will, if necessary. Remember Romsfeld's talk about "old" and "new" Europe: the western European countries that were willing to defy the US, and the eastern European ones, relatively new members of the EU, who were much easier to bribe.
If European governments enter treaties with the US that Europeans don't like, there are only two explanations: (1) Europe's diplomats and politicians are totally incompetent or (2) we have a case of policy laundering. Either way, take your complaints to European governments, don't blame the US.
There's a third: the EU isn't all that democratic. Besides, when do politicians ever listen to the people? The US also has plenty of laws that Americans don't agree with.
As for TFA this is just damned smart business and if it were Apple or Google doing this the fanbois would be lining up to defend it.
If Google was suing people over something as stupid as software patents, and if they were charging money for products that they didn't make, then they wouldn't have so many fanboys. Part of the reason why Google is so popular is that they're one of the few giants that admit that software patents are a stupid and harmful idea.
How much has MSFT spent on buying up patents this decade? How much have they spent on the patents they've filed? all this does is allow them to get a ROI
Just the fact that MS has wasted money on stupid and harmful ideas means they're entitled to a ROI?
What you're saying is that MS is basically a patent troll now. They buy patents on technology that they didn't invent, charge money for products that they didn't make, and sue the companies who do make popular products that MS can't compete with. It's a retarded business model.
Oh and Proptip: Linux DOES infringe on MSFT patents, because it would be mathematically impossible for it NOT to with the sheer number of patents MSFT has,
That just proves how stupid and unproductive patents are. If you can't innovate without accidentally infringing on numerous patents that you couldn't possibly know about, if you have to pay a patent tax to the industry giants in order to be allowed onto the market in the first place, in order to be allowed to innovate, then patents are very obviously detrimental to competition and detrimental to innovation. They need to be abolished.
In the end it isn't MSFT's fault you don't have the money to buy patents like everyone else, it isn't MSFT's fault you want to give your product away for free.
You're right. It's the law's fault for allowing such a travesty to exist in the first place. But it is Microsoft's fault that they are abusing that system and trying to sue the companies that produce superior products into paying a buggy whip tax. Sure, there may be worse companies out there, but MS is definitely not on the side of Good here.
It's not just hard with solar and wind; nuclear and coal are also useless for dealing with variations in demand. Gas and hydro do that best, as far as I understand.
However, at the moment that's still plenty of room for renewables to grow. And coal just needs to disappear completely. (It's still the biggest source of energy, and by far the biggest source of a wide variety of pollution.)
Seems to me the sensible thing is to cut down the forest before you flood them. Then burn them in a biomass plant or build furniture out of them. Either way, everybody wins.
Perhaps, but open source doesn't have to be small-scale geeky DIY. Take Firefox, Linux, Android, for some examples of open source software that do compete with the proprietary software.
Is there room in the market for a console that's more open than Xbox, PS3 or Wii? I certainly hope so, but also you want proprietary game developers to publish games for it, and that's not going to be easy. You need a big player base to draw them in, and you need to have lots of games to get players interested. And in the end, everybody already has a PC, which is plenty open as a platform. Developers who want to be less at the mercy of MS, Sony and Nintendo can always just publish there.
On the other hand, I love Google+, because a lot of friends are on it that never were on Facebook. And most of my favourite and more active Facebook contacts have also migrated already. So for me, it's a big win already.
Actually, publishing ebooks directly on Amazon can be pretty profitable. It's the major publishers that are ruining that market, but for writers it can be a pretty sweet deal.
And also because you can pay money for an app that Amazon knows doesn't work on your device yet offers anyway because they fail to filter on that, and then you won't be able to get a refund.
For a consumer, it's pretty fucking important to know that a shop will rip you off.
Here's some news for you: you're not the only person in the world that matters. This matters to a lot of people. It matters to Android developers, and by extension, it matters to Android customers, because Amazon Appstore will serve you apps that don't work on your phone, you won't be able to receive a refund for that, and informed developers will avoid Amazon Appstore like the plague.
Of course if you don't use Android at all, this isn't relevant for you. If you do use Android but never considered using Amazon Appstore, then you can ignore this too. But the same is true for every single article on Slashdot. Not every article is relevant to every single person. Pick the ones relevant to you, and ignore the ones that aren't. Commenting on every single story how it doesn't concern you is a waste of everybody's time, especially yours.
Slashdot Mirror
> Disclaimer: I'm at the front.
No, you're not. You're on Slashdot, preaching.
To the choir, even. Go out and convince some people on national TV!
It's a wolf that turns into a piece of illegal software?
I'm no MS fan either, but getting paid to move away from Lotus Notes is a sweet deal no matter how you spin it.
That hasn't stopped them from publishing games for Linux or Android. An Open Source console doesn't have to be any different.
The big question is: what's in it for the developer? Low entry cost? They already have that on the PC.
If you were somehow able to get market penetration, then the developers would follow. But since you can't get market penetration on a pure gaming device without any games, it needs to be something more than just a console. Like a harddisk recorder, or something. An affordable MythTV box with a market where you can buy games.
Yes, but Americans blame their own politicians for it. Europeans instead blame EU bureaucrats and the US, and European politicians just love that because they can shift blame for their own bad decisions and say "the EU made us do it" or "the US made us do it".
That's definitely true. European politicians do have a tendency to introduce nationally impopular laws at EU level, so they can blame someone else for it. The French 3-strikes law was a very clear example of this.
Isn't the point of the cloud that nobody really knows where information is stored anymore?
Oh, that old canard of the "US bullying Europe". Is Europe some impotent banana republic? Of course not. Europe has nearly twice as many people and a bigger economy than the US. How exactly do you think the US is forcing Europe to do anything European governments don't want to do? By what magical means is this "bullying" supposed to happen?
You're forgetting one vital weakness of the EU: it's divided. The US has one central government, the EU has lots of national ones. Individual countries can be bullied. Maybe not Germany and France, but the others can and will, if necessary. Remember Romsfeld's talk about "old" and "new" Europe: the western European countries that were willing to defy the US, and the eastern European ones, relatively new members of the EU, who were much easier to bribe.
If European governments enter treaties with the US that Europeans don't like, there are only two explanations: (1) Europe's diplomats and politicians are totally incompetent or (2) we have a case of policy laundering. Either way, take your complaints to European governments, don't blame the US.
There's a third: the EU isn't all that democratic. Besides, when do politicians ever listen to the people? The US also has plenty of laws that Americans don't agree with.
Yeah. Socialists think that food is more important than guns. How silly of them!
It's why Obama is effectively a Republican. The change is that now Democrats differ even less from Republicans than before.
This is not a matter of underselling. This is about competitors producing a superior product. It's about stifling competition and innovation.
Google has plenty of cash.
As for TFA this is just damned smart business and if it were Apple or Google doing this the fanbois would be lining up to defend it.
If Google was suing people over something as stupid as software patents, and if they were charging money for products that they didn't make, then they wouldn't have so many fanboys. Part of the reason why Google is so popular is that they're one of the few giants that admit that software patents are a stupid and harmful idea.
How much has MSFT spent on buying up patents this decade? How much have they spent on the patents they've filed? all this does is allow them to get a ROI
Just the fact that MS has wasted money on stupid and harmful ideas means they're entitled to a ROI?
What you're saying is that MS is basically a patent troll now. They buy patents on technology that they didn't invent, charge money for products that they didn't make, and sue the companies who do make popular products that MS can't compete with. It's a retarded business model.
Oh and Proptip: Linux DOES infringe on MSFT patents, because it would be mathematically impossible for it NOT to with the sheer number of patents MSFT has,
That just proves how stupid and unproductive patents are. If you can't innovate without accidentally infringing on numerous patents that you couldn't possibly know about, if you have to pay a patent tax to the industry giants in order to be allowed onto the market in the first place, in order to be allowed to innovate, then patents are very obviously detrimental to competition and detrimental to innovation. They need to be abolished.
In the end it isn't MSFT's fault you don't have the money to buy patents like everyone else, it isn't MSFT's fault you want to give your product away for free.
You're right. It's the law's fault for allowing such a travesty to exist in the first place. But it is Microsoft's fault that they are abusing that system and trying to sue the companies that produce superior products into paying a buggy whip tax. Sure, there may be worse companies out there, but MS is definitely not on the side of Good here.
And for how long will they require it? You know, to store the nuclear waste.
Only temporarily, until it rains down as acid rain. Really not a terribly attractive trade-off.
Aren't most houses made from concrete nowadays?
It's not just hard with solar and wind; nuclear and coal are also useless for dealing with variations in demand. Gas and hydro do that best, as far as I understand.
However, at the moment that's still plenty of room for renewables to grow. And coal just needs to disappear completely. (It's still the biggest source of energy, and by far the biggest source of a wide variety of pollution.)
Seems to me the sensible thing is to cut down the forest before you flood them. Then burn them in a biomass plant or build furniture out of them. Either way, everybody wins.
Perhaps, but open source doesn't have to be small-scale geeky DIY. Take Firefox, Linux, Android, for some examples of open source software that do compete with the proprietary software.
Is there room in the market for a console that's more open than Xbox, PS3 or Wii? I certainly hope so, but also you want proprietary game developers to publish games for it, and that's not going to be easy. You need a big player base to draw them in, and you need to have lots of games to get players interested. And in the end, everybody already has a PC, which is plenty open as a platform. Developers who want to be less at the mercy of MS, Sony and Nintendo can always just publish there.
Bananas are berries? I'll take your word for it. So are there any true fruits that aren't berries? Or are "true fruit" and "berry" synonyms?
Why would they? Those might well be their biggest sponsors.
On the other hand, I love Google+, because a lot of friends are on it that never were on Facebook. And most of my favourite and more active Facebook contacts have also migrated already. So for me, it's a big win already.
Really, only the 2 weeks and the https thing were lame complaints. The rest of TFA was extremely valuable information.
Actually, publishing ebooks directly on Amazon can be pretty profitable. It's the major publishers that are ruining that market, but for writers it can be a pretty sweet deal.
And also because you can pay money for an app that Amazon knows doesn't work on your device yet offers anyway because they fail to filter on that, and then you won't be able to get a refund.
For a consumer, it's pretty fucking important to know that a shop will rip you off.
Why does that concern me?
Here's some news for you: you're not the only person in the world that matters. This matters to a lot of people. It matters to Android developers, and by extension, it matters to Android customers, because Amazon Appstore will serve you apps that don't work on your phone, you won't be able to receive a refund for that, and informed developers will avoid Amazon Appstore like the plague.
Of course if you don't use Android at all, this isn't relevant for you. If you do use Android but never considered using Amazon Appstore, then you can ignore this too. But the same is true for every single article on Slashdot. Not every article is relevant to every single person. Pick the ones relevant to you, and ignore the ones that aren't. Commenting on every single story how it doesn't concern you is a waste of everybody's time, especially yours.