I just got around to "installing" MonMotha's iptables firewall. I'm really quite pleased with it considering I had it configured and running within 5 minutes. It's really just a configurable script to apply iptables rules, and I hardly had to make any changes. For example, I need NFS and FTP within my LAN, but I don't want the outside world to be able to see it. Easily done with this script. Plus it has other features, like protection from ping flooding. It's not the last word in security, but for someone on a little dialup system with a few computers connected, it's a hell of a lot better than nothing at all.
There's nothing wrong with doing your own thing, but when people ask, "Why should I switch from Windows to Linux?" they want to be able to see that they can do everything in Linux that they could in Windows, but better. There are lots of things that I use that don't emulate the Windows equivalent, like an email client. Compare Mutt and Outlook Express - they're worlds apart. On the other hand you need compatibility because of "standards" that have been imposed by Microsoft's dominance in the software market. I want to be able to use Excel spreadsheets in Linux and I want to do so in a way with which I'm familiar.
Lots of Linux software packages are, as you put it, "a poor imitation." I want a great imitation. I want all the features of Microsoft software without the bugs and frivolous add-ons and license agreements. There are certain Linux applications that I like better than the Windows equivalent (GAIM is one even using TOC, but would certainly be far superior if Oscar was still permitted). I like cdrecord and cdparanoia. I like NFS better than Windows Shares. LFTP rules. But when I need to type a formal document or do some browsing on a bloated website, I'm tempted to boot to Windows.
Unfortunately, I can easily hear the difference between a $1k and a $10k setup. This is depressing when I can't afford more than about a $300 system, so I just don't even try anymore.
I think I could piece together a system for $300 (provided that I'm allowed to find used pieces) that will sound better than the $1000 system that John Doe just bought at his local Circuit City. It truly isn't all about money with audio equipment. The other day I went up to my local hi-fi shop and listened to a rig that goes for about 60% more than my system. I thought I needed to upgrade something on my system, but listening just reassured me that I'm still happy with what I've got now.
When I graduate and have some disposable income, I probably will upgrade - carefully. Throwing money at the problem is not the way to go about upgrading a stereo. I don't listen to reviewers much, I find a dealer that I trust and who has similar tastes, and I listen to his suggestions. There's always the haunting fear in any audiophile's heart that there's something better out there. That's exactly why a good dealer is imperative.
Re:And I paid big $$$$ for my MIT degree
on
Open Courses at MIT
·
· Score: 2
An MIT degree will still be worth the same to you, this doesn't cheapen it at all. The difference between actually attending MIT and just reading the stuff online is night and day. Firstly, as a student you're expected to keep up with assignments, study for tests, etc. If you don't do that, you suffer the consequences (low grades). Your diploma and transcript reflect this achievement. If you fail or withdraw from a class, it shows up. Not so with people reading the material online. What proof is there that the individual comprehended the material?
Secondly, and probably equally important, when you went to MIT you interacted with others who are probably at least similar to your coworkers. Working in teams, study groups, and making friendships is a very underrated part of college.
If MIT follows through with this (and given the nature of the university I feel that they will, at least to an extent), it will really benefit the non-MIT student who wants to understand a little bit more about the material. I go to a public university, and it would be a tremendous help to be able to search MIT class materials for extra information.
I think that the people hypothesizing about this move creating a cheating problem haven't been in college for a few years; most (good) professors these days put old tests, notes, etc. online for students to use. When we're talking about MIT, we're not talking about slacker professors who are just going to reuse the same test semester after semester. Concerns about cheating shouldn't prevent this project from being realized.
The dragracer is an important ideographic image in American culture. He is defined by his sleek car and fast speeds, but he is also defined by the clouds of smoke that trail behind him as he burns rubber. Will a "clean" electric car cast the same fiery clouds of masculine brimstone in his wake? Will manufacturers be able to overcome the perceived impotence of electric vehicles?
Well, the "burning" of tires comes from the friction between the tires and ground. But more important is the sound of gas vs. electric cars. I consider myself a bit of an enthusiast, and the sound of a car's exhaust can make or break a driving experience. Car manufacturers put considerable import on the exhaust sound. Ferrari certainly doesn't hide this fact; there was an article in C&D a year or two ago about it. I'd be more than willing to bet that manufacturers are willing to sacrifice a few horsepower to get the sound of their exhaust just right.
... it would be a waste of money to go to college!
Excuse me? Aren't you forgetting a little something called "bandwidth?" Everybody knows that the only reason for living in the dorms (and going to school in the first place) is for Ethernet.
Everybody hates the commercialization of the internet when they have to close popup windows, download banners, and deal with spam. But everybody loves the commercial factor when they need a hard-to-find book and locate it by doing a quick search on Google or Ebay. Personally, I can do most all of my Christmas shopping on Amazon. And I like being able to put in my wish list and just email relatives about it.
I can deal with spam and banner ads. I get maybe one piece of spam a week and I use Junkbuster to filter most banner ads. But take away all commercial entities from the 'net and I might have to - gasp - go to the mall.
Banner ads as they exist today are much too small to effectively deliver a message. I think there is a point at which you have enough real estate to be effective.
I would argue that it's not the purpose of banner ads to deliver much of a message at all. Take the "Shock the monkey" (or whatever it is) ads. There's no message there, the company just wants you to click through to their page.
I'm beginning to suspect that the gorgeous models used to advertise just about everything under the sun are mostly there to get our attention. Think I'm on to something?
I can find statistics that imply CowboyNeal has sex with folding chairs. Statistics don't mean a damn thing unless they are given in full context. There are almost always hidden variables that have contributed to the statistics.
Nobody with a lick of thinking skills will take a statistic like "Record sales dropped by x%" and conclude that Napster is the cause. A cause, maybe. The cause? No way.
I realize that I'm preaching to the choir here, so it's a valid question to wonder why I'm even bothering. But the truth is there are thousands of people who will read a headline like the one we're referring to, and won't take a split second to reason it out.
I suspect there is some sort of database, because you can query "apt" (a bot) in #debian with a "find filename" and he'll tell you what package the file is found in.
By the way...
Moderating trolls and flames as "Offtopic" is Unfair and will be metamoderated as such.
This comes under the general category of "don't sweat the small stuff." "Interesting" and "Insightful" will have the same effect on the comment, and the difference between the two is basically just a judgment call. Rate the moderation "Fair," and move on.
I'm more concerned with the first 50 comments consistently receiving +3, +4, and even +5 bonuses when they really don't say anything of any substance. See the Napster Protection Scheme article for several examples. It seems like nobody reads the moderation FAQ or the metamod FAQ. I think the good moderators get fed up with the piss-poor moderators and quit, leaving only the bad moderators.
I don't think the point is that everybody and their grandma should be running a 1.6 GHz machine. Think of motorsports: companies invest a significant amount of money to make their car go around the track as fast as possible. They don't do this because they want to put an 800 horsepower turbo V8 in my Civic. But that racing technology certainly carries over to even practical cars.
I say overclock the hell out of those CPUs. And then give me one that runs faster and is more stable.
I could complain about gatech's OIT all day, but not the student side of it.
About a year ago I was a student at gatech, living in the dorms. I ran a FTP server (with only legal materials) off of my machine. There was a time when it got a little bigger than at first, and was using quite a bit of the dorm's resources. I got a letter from "JH" in OIT, and responded that I was not in fact serving illegal materials, but that I would tone down the bandwidth. A couple of months later when the bandwidth was back up to a level that OIT didn't like, I noticed that my total bandwidth dropped (I was watching it at the moment that it did). I didn't do anything for a couple of days other than trying out different solutions to see what was wrong, and after that didn't work I filed a trouble ticket.
"MB," a fella not much older than me, helped out after the ticket was open for a week with no resolution. He even came to my room to see for himself. From the very beginning I said, "I might have gotten my bandwidth capped, I have been running an FTP server." Everybody at the help desk insisted that a cap wasn't the issue, and MB said that it was unlikely.
Another week went by and after some more complaining to OIT I got an email from JH (a higher-up) saying that there was a cap placed on my account. I promptly replied as courteously as I could, but never got a reply (from that email or from any other email I sent JH). I also promptly sent MB an email apologizing to him because he had wasted his time through the fault of the full time employee. I was furious; partly because my bandwidth had been capped for over two weeks without any explanation, but mostly because of the resources that had been wasted in trying to provide a solution. The students at gatech know what they're doing for the most part, but I think most folks will agree that the same can't be said for full-time staff (I don't think I need to mention the parking situation pre-'99).
I'm probably a typical Windows > Linux convertee. Up until about 18 months ago I used Windows and Windows alone. A few months before I switched to Linux I started a private FTP server (for legal files, mind you) on my computer that was in my dorm. Well I got tired of rebooting every day, so I made the Big Leap. I started off dual booting, then moved to a Linux-only system about a year later. I recently got a laptop that dual boots, but only because I have to use certain Windows applications for school.
So I'm a Linux user. But I don't think Microsoft cares. The reason is simple: both of my copies of Windows (one 95 and one 98) are licensed, as they came with my computers (both Dell). Microsoft is getting paid even if I don't use their software. Most of you probably know the name this has been given: the Microsoft tax.
So I really don't think Microsoft gives a damn about the desktop market, for the most part; they've got it locked up. Server market is a different story. The article makes some good points. I don't think there's much of a market for "Linux companies," perhaps with the exception of the well-knowns like Red Hat. But does Microsoft really have to fear Red Hat? I don't think so.
...or do you also blame me for not reading the newspaper ads?
I agree with you 100%, but I don't think the analogy works. Maybe a better one would be someone with a Tivo who tapes his shows and watches them later, fast-forwarding through the commercials. I don't feel guilty about doing that and I don't think anybody should. I also don't feel guilty about using Junkbuster. At a site I like (like Something Awful, I'll sometimes click on the blank banners just to give that webmaster the clickthroughs as a kind of "thank you."
I'll tell you this, though: I don't go around to all my friends talking about how everybody should use Junkbuster. If proxies that eliminate banner ads become prevalent on the 'net, I think advertisers are just going to come up with sneakier ways to force ads on us.
It seems that all these highly-moderated comments have to do with specific equipment. I'm not going to name specific manufacturers, but rather suggest that you do a *lot* of shopping and research. This thread has so many anti-Bose posts it's overwhelming. Personally I'm not a Bose fan, but you might be. Listen to them, but listen to other speakers as well. But beware that there are a million variables involved in testing (especially at a store), so you can't make direct comparisons. An in-store audition should give you a general feel for a speaker's character, but when it comes down to crunch time, you'd do better to audition in your home. Of course, this is true for all equipment, not just speakers, but speakers are especially susceptible to changes in room acoustics.
Secondly, but equally importantly, a good high-fidelity system is about having components that sound good together. Maybe you like the sound of XXX speakers and YYY amplifier, but how do they sound together. Do not neglect this detail.
Too many people get caught up in "this brand is better than this brand." You're the one who has to live with your purchases, not the salesperson, and not a slashdot poster. Don't let someone tell you what sounds good to your ears.
Although it is more for the audio enthusiast (as opposed to home theater), I like goodsound.com both for equipment reviews as well as sound, generic buying advice.
This comment is much more "insightful" than many that I've seen already moderated as such. Ergo2000 is absolutely right about customers wanting convenience. CDs overtook cassettes due in part to better sound quality, but mostly because there was no more fastforwarding or rewinding. Even today most consumers don't have stereo systems that can reveal the differences between a (well cared-for) cassette and a CD. Aside from that, CDs are easier to store, hold up better, etc.
If it's better quality that everybody wanted, we'd probably all be buying turntables. I don't know any serious music enthusiast who would say that a CD sounds better than a record (although I'm sure there are some who enjoy the digital sound, for one reason or another).
I'm not exactly sure why there is a shortage on PS2s. I haven't really kept up with it since I certainly don't have $500 to spend on a game system and a few games. Barring a parts shortage, here's what Sony should have done:
For the sake of argument, let's say Sony would expect to be able to sell 5 million PS2s between release date and December 24. On the release date, they release 100,000; but there exists demand for at least 2 million. Now those 1,900,000 people who are willing to buy one but can't are just dying to be one of the few lucky ones.
Now fast forward to mid/late November. Sony could release several hundred thousand. These would be bought up quickly, but most importantly, it would keep the PS2 on everybody's Christmas (or whatever) list because they now think they can actually have a chance at getting one.
Now fast forward further to somewhere around December 10. Sony can suddenly release millions of PS2s and they'll sell like Brittney Spears pornos. The kids are happy because they got their PS2 (which they still think is very in-demand), and Sony is happy because they've sold hundreds of thousands of units more than expected.
Slashdot Mirror
I just got around to "installing" MonMotha's iptables firewall. I'm really quite pleased with it considering I had it configured and running within 5 minutes. It's really just a configurable script to apply iptables rules, and I hardly had to make any changes. For example, I need NFS and FTP within my LAN, but I don't want the outside world to be able to see it. Easily done with this script. Plus it has other features, like protection from ping flooding. It's not the last word in security, but for someone on a little dialup system with a few computers connected, it's a hell of a lot better than nothing at all.
Or, for that matter, for your co-workers or whoever inherits your systems. Obscurity can improve security, but at a dreadful cost: maintainability.
:)
That's what I like to call "job security."
Kind of like not commenting code. Make it impossible to interpret by anyone but yourself and you're simply increasing your value as an employee!
There's nothing wrong with doing your own thing, but when people ask, "Why should I switch from Windows to Linux?" they want to be able to see that they can do everything in Linux that they could in Windows, but better. There are lots of things that I use that don't emulate the Windows equivalent, like an email client. Compare Mutt and Outlook Express - they're worlds apart. On the other hand you need compatibility because of "standards" that have been imposed by Microsoft's dominance in the software market. I want to be able to use Excel spreadsheets in Linux and I want to do so in a way with which I'm familiar.
Lots of Linux software packages are, as you put it, "a poor imitation." I want a great imitation. I want all the features of Microsoft software without the bugs and frivolous add-ons and license agreements. There are certain Linux applications that I like better than the Windows equivalent (GAIM is one even using TOC, but would certainly be far superior if Oscar was still permitted). I like cdrecord and cdparanoia. I like NFS better than Windows Shares. LFTP rules. But when I need to type a formal document or do some browsing on a bloated website, I'm tempted to boot to Windows.
For those who don't know, Anne Tomlinson is the wife of George P. Burdell.
Unfortunately, I can easily hear the difference between a $1k and a $10k setup. This is depressing when I can't afford more than about a $300 system, so I just don't even try anymore.
I think I could piece together a system for $300 (provided that I'm allowed to find used pieces) that will sound better than the $1000 system that John Doe just bought at his local Circuit City. It truly isn't all about money with audio equipment. The other day I went up to my local hi-fi shop and listened to a rig that goes for about 60% more than my system. I thought I needed to upgrade something on my system, but listening just reassured me that I'm still happy with what I've got now.
When I graduate and have some disposable income, I probably will upgrade - carefully. Throwing money at the problem is not the way to go about upgrading a stereo. I don't listen to reviewers much, I find a dealer that I trust and who has similar tastes, and I listen to his suggestions. There's always the haunting fear in any audiophile's heart that there's something better out there. That's exactly why a good dealer is imperative.
An MIT degree will still be worth the same to you, this doesn't cheapen it at all. The difference between actually attending MIT and just reading the stuff online is night and day. Firstly, as a student you're expected to keep up with assignments, study for tests, etc. If you don't do that, you suffer the consequences (low grades). Your diploma and transcript reflect this achievement. If you fail or withdraw from a class, it shows up. Not so with people reading the material online. What proof is there that the individual comprehended the material?
Secondly, and probably equally important, when you went to MIT you interacted with others who are probably at least similar to your coworkers. Working in teams, study groups, and making friendships is a very underrated part of college.
If MIT follows through with this (and given the nature of the university I feel that they will, at least to an extent), it will really benefit the non-MIT student who wants to understand a little bit more about the material. I go to a public university, and it would be a tremendous help to be able to search MIT class materials for extra information.
I think that the people hypothesizing about this move creating a cheating problem haven't been in college for a few years; most (good) professors these days put old tests, notes, etc. online for students to use. When we're talking about MIT, we're not talking about slacker professors who are just going to reuse the same test semester after semester. Concerns about cheating shouldn't prevent this project from being realized.
The dragracer is an important ideographic image in American culture. He is defined by his sleek car and fast speeds, but he is also defined by the clouds of smoke that trail behind him as he burns rubber. Will a "clean" electric car cast the same fiery clouds of masculine brimstone in his wake? Will manufacturers be able to overcome the perceived impotence of electric vehicles?
Well, the "burning" of tires comes from the friction between the tires and ground. But more important is the sound of gas vs. electric cars. I consider myself a bit of an enthusiast, and the sound of a car's exhaust can make or break a driving experience. Car manufacturers put considerable import on the exhaust sound. Ferrari certainly doesn't hide this fact; there was an article in C&D a year or two ago about it. I'd be more than willing to bet that manufacturers are willing to sacrifice a few horsepower to get the sound of their exhaust just right.
... it would be a waste of money to go to college!
Excuse me? Aren't you forgetting a little something called "bandwidth?" Everybody knows that the only reason for living in the dorms (and going to school in the first place) is for Ethernet.
I'm with the AC above. The fact that this isn't a +5 funny shows that all moderators should have to undergo 3 months of Simpsons quote training.
She'll want socks too, I-I'll get socks.
Pardon the sweeping generalizations...
Everybody hates the commercialization of the internet when they have to close popup windows, download banners, and deal with spam. But everybody loves the commercial factor when they need a hard-to-find book and locate it by doing a quick search on Google or Ebay. Personally, I can do most all of my Christmas shopping on Amazon. And I like being able to put in my wish list and just email relatives about it.
I can deal with spam and banner ads. I get maybe one piece of spam a week and I use Junkbuster to filter most banner ads. But take away all commercial entities from the 'net and I might have to - gasp - go to the mall.
Banner ads as they exist today are much too small to effectively deliver a message. I think there is a point at which you have enough real estate to be effective.
I would argue that it's not the purpose of banner ads to deliver much of a message at all. Take the "Shock the monkey" (or whatever it is) ads. There's no message there, the company just wants you to click through to their page.
I'm beginning to suspect that the gorgeous models used to advertise just about everything under the sun are mostly there to get our attention. Think I'm on to something?
"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
I can find statistics that imply CowboyNeal has sex with folding chairs. Statistics don't mean a damn thing unless they are given in full context. There are almost always hidden variables that have contributed to the statistics.
Nobody with a lick of thinking skills will take a statistic like "Record sales dropped by x%" and conclude that Napster is the cause. A cause, maybe. The cause? No way.
I realize that I'm preaching to the choir here, so it's a valid question to wonder why I'm even bothering. But the truth is there are thousands of people who will read a headline like the one we're referring to, and won't take a split second to reason it out.
By the way...
Moderating trolls and flames as "Offtopic" is Unfair and will be metamoderated as such.
From this section of the metamod FAQ:
I'm more concerned with the first 50 comments consistently receiving +3, +4, and even +5 bonuses when they really don't say anything of any substance. See the Napster Protection Scheme article for several examples. It seems like nobody reads the moderation FAQ or the metamod FAQ. I think the good moderators get fed up with the piss-poor moderators and quit, leaving only the bad moderators.
I don't think the point is that everybody and their grandma should be running a 1.6 GHz machine. Think of motorsports: companies invest a significant amount of money to make their car go around the track as fast as possible. They don't do this because they want to put an 800 horsepower turbo V8 in my Civic. But that racing technology certainly carries over to even practical cars.
I say overclock the hell out of those CPUs. And then give me one that runs faster and is more stable.
I could complain about gatech's OIT all day, but not the student side of it.
About a year ago I was a student at gatech, living in the dorms. I ran a FTP server (with only legal materials) off of my machine. There was a time when it got a little bigger than at first, and was using quite a bit of the dorm's resources. I got a letter from "JH" in OIT, and responded that I was not in fact serving illegal materials, but that I would tone down the bandwidth. A couple of months later when the bandwidth was back up to a level that OIT didn't like, I noticed that my total bandwidth dropped (I was watching it at the moment that it did). I didn't do anything for a couple of days other than trying out different solutions to see what was wrong, and after that didn't work I filed a trouble ticket.
"MB," a fella not much older than me, helped out after the ticket was open for a week with no resolution. He even came to my room to see for himself. From the very beginning I said, "I might have gotten my bandwidth capped, I have been running an FTP server." Everybody at the help desk insisted that a cap wasn't the issue, and MB said that it was unlikely.
Another week went by and after some more complaining to OIT I got an email from JH (a higher-up) saying that there was a cap placed on my account. I promptly replied as courteously as I could, but never got a reply (from that email or from any other email I sent JH). I also promptly sent MB an email apologizing to him because he had wasted his time through the fault of the full time employee. I was furious; partly because my bandwidth had been capped for over two weeks without any explanation, but mostly because of the resources that had been wasted in trying to provide a solution. The students at gatech know what they're doing for the most part, but I think most folks will agree that the same can't be said for full-time staff (I don't think I need to mention the parking situation pre-'99).
I'm probably a typical Windows > Linux convertee. Up until about 18 months ago I used Windows and Windows alone. A few months before I switched to Linux I started a private FTP server (for legal files, mind you) on my computer that was in my dorm. Well I got tired of rebooting every day, so I made the Big Leap. I started off dual booting, then moved to a Linux-only system about a year later. I recently got a laptop that dual boots, but only because I have to use certain Windows applications for school.
So I'm a Linux user. But I don't think Microsoft cares. The reason is simple: both of my copies of Windows (one 95 and one 98) are licensed, as they came with my computers (both Dell). Microsoft is getting paid even if I don't use their software. Most of you probably know the name this has been given: the Microsoft tax.
So I really don't think Microsoft gives a damn about the desktop market, for the most part; they've got it locked up. Server market is a different story. The article makes some good points. I don't think there's much of a market for "Linux companies," perhaps with the exception of the well-knowns like Red Hat. But does Microsoft really have to fear Red Hat? I don't think so.
I got most of what I have by working for it, ironically, as a sysadmin...
...and I had a lot of expertise already when I came into college, ironically, that is the one place that my parent's having a computer DID help me.
...I'm a senior now, graduating a year ahead...
How is that ironic? You're a computer science major. Working as a sysadmin seems like a logical job.
Your parents had a computer before you entered college, and because of that you had computer experience. Again, why is that ironic?
I'm a computer science major... graduating early.
I get the message, but it sounds like you need to rehash English 101 (or at least the definition of irony).
-----
The above message has been sent in the traditional, I'm-better-than-you-are style that defines Slashdot.
...or do you also blame me for not reading the newspaper ads?
I agree with you 100%, but I don't think the analogy works. Maybe a better one would be someone with a Tivo who tapes his shows and watches them later, fast-forwarding through the commercials. I don't feel guilty about doing that and I don't think anybody should. I also don't feel guilty about using Junkbuster. At a site I like (like Something Awful, I'll sometimes click on the blank banners just to give that webmaster the clickthroughs as a kind of "thank you."
I'll tell you this, though: I don't go around to all my friends talking about how everybody should use Junkbuster. If proxies that eliminate banner ads become prevalent on the 'net, I think advertisers are just going to come up with sneakier ways to force ads on us.
...hot nano-grits that still retain their pourability.
At least we wouldn't see any "how is this News for Nerds?" posts.
Let's just not leave to Florida to decide who has the better OS. ;-)
That gives an even more literal meaning to the phrase "an OS my grandmother can install."
It seems that all these highly-moderated comments have to do with specific equipment. I'm not going to name specific manufacturers, but rather suggest that you do a *lot* of shopping and research. This thread has so many anti-Bose posts it's overwhelming. Personally I'm not a Bose fan, but you might be. Listen to them, but listen to other speakers as well. But beware that there are a million variables involved in testing (especially at a store), so you can't make direct comparisons. An in-store audition should give you a general feel for a speaker's character, but when it comes down to crunch time, you'd do better to audition in your home. Of course, this is true for all equipment, not just speakers, but speakers are especially susceptible to changes in room acoustics.
Secondly, but equally importantly, a good high-fidelity system is about having components that sound good together. Maybe you like the sound of XXX speakers and YYY amplifier, but how do they sound together. Do not neglect this detail.
Too many people get caught up in "this brand is better than this brand." You're the one who has to live with your purchases, not the salesperson, and not a slashdot poster. Don't let someone tell you what sounds good to your ears.
Although it is more for the audio enthusiast (as opposed to home theater), I like goodsound.com both for equipment reviews as well as sound, generic buying advice.
This comment is much more "insightful" than many that I've seen already moderated as such. Ergo2000 is absolutely right about customers wanting convenience. CDs overtook cassettes due in part to better sound quality, but mostly because there was no more fastforwarding or rewinding. Even today most consumers don't have stereo systems that can reveal the differences between a (well cared-for) cassette and a CD. Aside from that, CDs are easier to store, hold up better, etc.
If it's better quality that everybody wanted, we'd probably all be buying turntables. I don't know any serious music enthusiast who would say that a CD sounds better than a record (although I'm sure there are some who enjoy the digital sound, for one reason or another).
Laptop users like myself.
I'm not exactly sure why there is a shortage on PS2s. I haven't really kept up with it since I certainly don't have $500 to spend on a game system and a few games. Barring a parts shortage, here's what Sony should have done:
For the sake of argument, let's say Sony would expect to be able to sell 5 million PS2s between release date and December 24. On the release date, they release 100,000; but there exists demand for at least 2 million. Now those 1,900,000 people who are willing to buy one but can't are just dying to be one of the few lucky ones.
Now fast forward to mid/late November. Sony could release several hundred thousand. These would be bought up quickly, but most importantly, it would keep the PS2 on everybody's Christmas (or whatever) list because they now think they can actually have a chance at getting one.
Now fast forward further to somewhere around December 10. Sony can suddenly release millions of PS2s and they'll sell like Brittney Spears pornos. The kids are happy because they got their PS2 (which they still think is very in-demand), and Sony is happy because they've sold hundreds of thousands of units more than expected.