But will they [HP] top AlienWare's commercial that airs on TechTV?
All HP has to do is throw in an AMD Athlon64 into the machine and they'll top *Dull* (err, Dell) since Dell is an Intel-only screwdriver operation, for now.
Speaking of Dell, has anyone seen the commericals to the NetFlix competitor starring the former *Dell Dude*?
"I remember sitting in the dorm watching the "Alien Autopsy" on Fox. It seemed obviously to be fake. I was the only one in a room of 8 to call out it as fake. I was called "close minded" and "brain washed" by the government."
Like many people, I like a good conspiracy theory. However, I felt the "Autopsy" show was a fraud from the start because the black & white footage was obviously shot with a video camera and not an 8mm or 16mm film camera. They makers of the "film" didn't even go back and add grain to the footage to give it an appearance of an old film either. It was terrible. I'd even venture to say the "film" was manufactured to bring ridicule to anyone suggesting any type of alien conspiracy on the part of the government. Terrible, yet typical of Fox, the same people who bring you Fox NEWS. I have to hand it to the X-Files, it was quite a laugh to hear Fox Mulder laugh at the "film."
"I have an Uncle who was absolutely convinced that the Mars rover had snapped a picture of a "Martian Cat" with big "martian-looking" eyes and then thought for sure the government was covering it up by removing all the copies of the "World Weekly News" from the stands before anyone else could buy a copy. The obvious fact that the store sold out is perhaps even more depressing though. Who buys that crap? Oh yeah, my Uncle."
Hmmm. Your uncle learned the *truth* from the original "Men in Black" (MiB) motion-picture.:)
"Thats if the people are teachable, you still have those people who think the moon landing was faked, and then some people do not trust the government all together. I realize that this may seem extreme, and maybe a lil OT, but honestly, I think a private corporation reaching space will do a better job of teaching. Like X-Prize for instance."
I think a private corporation verifying the lunar landing sites and various places on Mars would be of great value to all the planet.
Considering recent US history with things such as the Pentagon Papers, Operation Northwinds, and the whole issue of WMD in Iraq, it would be best for an outside company or agency to critically fact check NASA's claims and not take them for face value. Isn't that what skeptics are supposed to do? Its kinda funny how self-described skeptics go after the people shouting about "alien" conspiracies yet they take everything that NASA hands them verbatim. Without a doubt, the US Air Force has lied about Roswell three times now... First they said it was a weather balloon, then it was an atmospheric test for monitoring the Soviet Union's nuclear tests, and then it was a parachute test involving dummies that didn't even start for 3 years after the "incident." I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I sure know what happens after *three strikes* in a game of baseball.
Anxiously awaiting my "tin foil hat" mod points...:)
"Because Comcast is saying they'll monitor/control your use of the WAP, does that mean they'll take responsibility if someone parks outside my house, cracks my WEP, and starts up a file-sharing service that gets the RIAA more pissed than hornets?"
Don't look now, but I'm sitting outside running KisMac on my PowerBook and downloading all sorts of P2P goodies! Wait, no I'm not!:)
See, you really can learn stuff by watching The ScreenSavers on the soon-to-be-cancelled TechTV Network...:)
"Soon, VoIP capability is going to be added to the modem also."
Motorola is already enabling this in their new products. However, Motorola is only supporting Windows out of the box for their routers. I found this out as I was looking for a new pnp router for use with Vonage. The Motorola looked great but Netgear promised support for OS/X and Linux in addition to Windows, BSD, and Unix. Thus Motorola lost a sale. Its the same reason why I won't buy any more Linksys products.
"Alright here's a conspiracy theory. Sony could be the reason behind the hike. New player enters a market dominated by apple and apple's price per song increases? I bet sony would remain at 99c and isn't sony a major music label? Also Ipods were the main target of apple not pusing songs so i guess they won't care much now."
Doubtful. Sony internal divisional bickering is as legendary as AOL Time Warner's. Sony Electronics (Consumer) is always butting heads with Sony Music over things like this. So if Sony Music is pushing Apple for price increases, they'll be pushing Sony Electronics for a price increase as well. After all, remember that just before the Sony Playstation launched, Sony's VAIO computer division claimed their PCs would be compatible with the Playstation, but that never came to fruition thanks to the protests of SCEA (Sony Computer Entertainment of America - the Playstation division). Even better, just cut off the Sony name from Sony Music. Just think of them as Columbia Music (formerly known as CBS Records) - owned by Sony, just as Sony Pictures is Columbia Pictures. There is very little synergy.
"A lot of comments here seem to be bashing Comcast for getting rid of TechTV with various sinister reasons behind the show's demise, but I also a significant number of "haven't watched it in 5 months, if ever" type of comments too. Could it be that TechTV had really low ratings and wasn't cost-effective to keep going? Naa..."
TechTV and G4 BOTH have low ratings because neither channel are offered in the basic cable packages. I myself just got TechTV this past month when I upgraded to digital cable with the vile Comcast. DirecTV offered TechTV in their basic package, but didn't offer G4 at all. There are a lot of gamers and techies out there that don't feel like shelling out extra money on upgraded digital packages who would watch the channels if offered at a lower price point.
"I guess this is the last remnant of the dot-com boom:( I still think there is room for a technology-oriented television channel but not yet. I don't know about USA but here in Canada, Tech TV was a digital channel so until digital boxes are almost standard, I don't expect these digital channels to take off..."
I've been watching TechTV since last month when I upgraded to digital cable with Comcast. Of course, I had to pay $5 extra per month to add TechTV. Comcast gave away G4 in the standard digital package. The true reason why neither channel has a large audience is because the cable companies never dropped the channels down to the basic (analog) cable tier. I'm sure there'd be more viewers there than say the "Style" channel. As the British say, wankers!
TechTV and G4 should be kept separate, but share cross-promotion and the general staff. A major problem of both is the lack of strong partnerships. It seems like G4 is a sock puppet to EB Games's giant hand. They should enlist the other big video game retailers like Target, Best Buy, Circuit City, Toys R Us, Frys, and Wal*Mart too if they want that channel profitable. If there's a reason to have MTV AND Vh1, there is reason to have TechTV AND G4.
Wow, like Snake Plissken, I thought you were dead! (according to what a few people posted in a different thred today on Slashdot)...I'm glad to see the rumors of your demise were greatly exaggerated...:)
"You have to hand it to Steve Case though - how we managed to convince the world's most powerful and valuable media empire to sell its soul for a dialup ISP with a proprietary service is truly one of the great feats of negotiation in business history. AOL would be trading for $2 now if not for Case convincing Levin to impale TW shareholders."
Your statement lacks scope. Time Warner failed every attempt at getting the internet "right." The very expensive "Full Service Network" in Orlando was considered a failure. Time Warner's "Pathfinder" portal was not a top destination for web surfers. Not to mention you had the history of Atari's "failure" coming from the Warner side of Time Warner.
Compare that to AOL. AOL (or so they thought) understood the internet. This was the company Microsoft was scared of. They owned Netscape. Nullsoft WinAmp. ICQ and AIM. Digital Cities. Mapquest. Early investor in many technologies like TiVo, and shareholders in Amazon.com and eBay (and they had first right to acquiring both companies).
AOL had a problem getting into broadband because all the cable companies blocked them. AOL needed Time Warner Cable. Time Warner needed a coherent online strategy that AOL could provide them. The deal made absolute sense. And furthermore, AOL as an outsider who understood the new economy could go over the heads of the various fiefdoms that remained fiercely independent since the original Time and Warner merger, not to mention the acquisition of Turner Broadcasting shortly thereafter. AOL was to deliver the "synergy" that even Steve Ross could not deliver from the original merger from 1989/1990.
And what do we have now? Short-sighted Time Warner executives calling the shots. The very same executives who failed to encourage the FCC and FTC to force open Comcast's pipes during their acquisition of AT&T Broadband. So AOL is having to go after add-on services to other broadband customers because none of the cable companies will allow them first tier billing. Even Time Warner Cable shafts AOL and pushes RoadRunner which is co-owned by Microsoft. Lay the blame for the failure of synergy at the door of Time Warner, not AOL...
Standard Mac Reply(tm). "But you get more with a new version of OS/x than you do a windows service pack."
You fail to highlight the fact that OS X Panther operates faster than OS X Jaguar on the very same Mac thanks to optimizations made by Apple. Can you point out exactly which later release of Windows ran faster than the prior version on exactly the same hardware as before (and without a memory upgrade)? I doubt you can. As we all know on Slashdot, when WinXP Service Pack 1 was released, it caused the computers it was installed on to slow down and broke applications.
Richard, you brought up many interesting points, but to quote off-hand remarks the US State Department made to Prime Minister Heath's Government, "g**damn it, would you act like you are British?!" That was in response to Heath telling the State Department to go call the EEC (now known as the EU, of course) for foreign policy inquiries.
I seriously doubt the Romans would've apologized for advancing Western Civilization through ruthless conquest in their time. The whole world benefits today because of that ancient Roman bloodthirst. And I don't shed a tear for what Rome did to Carthage (they were baby sacrificers anyway). The British Empire spread western science, education, medicine, industrialism, capitalism, and various forms of Christianity throughout the world. Because of it, a large amount of people on the planet speak English - even if it isn't their primary language. Britain revived the idea of democracy and also spread that to places it never existed in. That's nothing to scoff about.
"not a single thought was given to equalising the African health and education to English standards"
But what were they before the British arrived? Who paid the money to cure tribal peoples of what we'd now consider pathetic diseases? Is Africa today investing in curing AIDS or Ebola? No. Its Western medicine that is leading the efforts. Without the history that got us all to where we are today, we would have no hope of curing all of humanity from such things in the future.
Its sorta like looking at England's conquest and rule of Ireland. Had England given up Ireland a long time ago, say before the attempted invasion by the Spanish Armada, we wouldn't have modern democracy today. Spain would've set up shop in Ireland and used the place as a second front in an invasion. England would've been conquerred, and presto, no English Bill of Rights (but the Inquisition instead!). You would still to this day have the strong institutional belief in the divine right of kings (aka "absolute monarchy") and no modern example of political liberalism. With no Parlimentary Supremacy in England, you wouldn't have ever had an Enlightenment and thus no Voltaire in France nor the French Revolution (which was caused by the French King's "Charles I" impersonation in terms of setting up a constitutional monarchy), thus no Napoleon marching throughout Europe for better or worse.
"Anyway, Mugabe may well be direct result of UKs failed policy in Africa."
No, Mugabe is the direct result of the failure of the colonials in Rhodesia (sic) who foolishly declared independence from the Empire because they felt Britain would unravel their priviledged status in order to raise the standard of living and political power of the disenfranchised blacks in the country. Its kind of like the modern "Irish Troubles" where British forces moved into Northern Ireland to actually protect the Catholic minority from the Protestants who didn't want to share power, but then the opportunistic IRA then decided to cry "imperialism" and then attack the very forces that were actually trying to prevent their slaughter. And then they got caught into the quagmire that still hasn't been resolved. It also happened in the British North American Colonies after the Royal Proclamation of 1763 that restricted further Western migration. The colonists were in an uproar over the Crown caring more for the Native Americans than them.
"Would you live for one second under the rule of people from thousands of miles away who consider you subhuman?"
Well, I do that today. Its called being a Californian and having our State government told what to do by the chuckleheads in Washington, D.C. at the Federal level. They steal half of each dollar that Californians send to them in the form of federal taxation so we get to pay for all the other states not carrying their fair share. Its what you in the U.K. will be doing soon enough, except you'll be venting at Brussels and Strasbourg equally, but not in the mother English tongue.
"The next one is probably Lynx. It goes well with their new eMacs."
That would be fitting of their modern tradition of naming their operating system point releases after codenames (and sometimes offical release names) for Atari game systems. Atari had the Lynx, the Panther (never released), and the Jaguar game systems.
However, since Apple is descended from the original Atari Inc. (a bastard lineage - they'd be FitzAtari if we were in Middle Ages England), I won't scream over it like Star Trek stealing the idea of the Cybermen from Doctor Who and using it as the template for the Borg.:)
The assertion that AOL is truly interested in Janus is severely lacking in scope. AOL is only interested in ensuring that they aren't locked out of a system that might become the preferred commercial method (of content providers) of distributing music and movies online. AOL has no interest in propping up a Microsoft technology that only strengthens Microsoft if there isn't a decent back-end for AOL.
Let's look at the facts. AOL is a partner in MusicNet with Real Networks and EMI, but AOL prefers Apple's iTunes, not only because it is the most popular online music distribution system, but also because it isn't Microsoft.
AOL signed an agreement with Microsoft back in the late 90s that AOL email could be downloaded to Microsoft Outlook. It never materialized.
AOL paid lip-service to instant messaging interoperability but has not made AIM or ICQ directly able to send and receive to MSN Messenger. At the same time, AOL partnered with Apple to ensure that iChat was based upon the AIM client.
AOL is still interested in Netscape although they have no full-time employees working on Mozilla. That was a Time Warner executive decision to cut the development team to "save" monies earmarked for salaries. If Time Warner loses interest and sells AOL back to Steve Case, this will be reversed.
On the Time Warner side of the business, they have no interest in Janus for music purposes since Time Warner sold off Warner Music Group to Edgar Bronfman's group. Perhaps they still have a minority stake (as does all historical sales done by Warner Communications, like the Atari Inc. divestiture of 1984) but that's about it. Bronfman will make any type of decision independently of what AOL or Time Warner proper wishes.
The bottom line is that AOL may be included in the press release, but for the most part, this is round-file material. It is only a survival option if Microsoft gets the upper hand in media.
"I work for the department that handles abuse calls, this letter is just a standard letter and comcast has nothing to do with it."
Hey Azuretek,
Do you handle abuse complaints regarding Comcast's own abuses? Like charging me $12 to pick up my analog set-top box when they delivered the digital box? The jerks told me it was a free installation over the phone and never told me I'd have to pay them $12 for them to "pick up" my old box instead of dropping it off at the local office. When I asked them why any user would drop off their analog box at the local office before receiving their digital upgrade, they could not explain it. That's abuse in my book, as well as fraud and misrepresentation.:)
"Well, it's unlikely that the Doctor will be snogging the girl again - in the UK this was widely seen as a very weird change in the character put there, like so many things in the 1996 TV Movie, against the wishes of the writer and director at the insiste3nce of the FOX network, and as an experiment that backfired."
The experiment didn't fail though. The Fox Television Network placed the telefilm in the absolute worst line-up possible. The Doctor Who telefilm was up against MLB Baseball, NBA Basketball, and a much hyped second-to-last-cliffhanger episode (for the season) of Roseanne. That was like programming against "The Cosby Show" or "Friends" at either of their zeniths. But the Doctor Who telefilm was still "the most recorded" show on television of that week according to the Nielsens. Had Fox programmed it the week before instead of the "Twister" ripoff starring everyone's favorite B Movie Actor Bruce Campbell entitled "Tornado", WHO would've gotten huge ratings and Fox would've ordered WHO as a decently budgeted series. Philip Segal did a good job producing it. The cast were great. The story was decent (although it wasn't up to a Robert Holmes level) and McGann merited. Unfortunately, it was impossible to be a success in America on the evening Fox chose to broadcast it. Its kind of like "Angel" being pitted against "The West Wing," which often has happened.
And you don't think the Doctor and Romana weren't linked? C'mon. It was underlying.
Thanks for all the info. Glad to see another passionate WHOvian here in/. Land.:)
"In the long run, the script is cheaper. Computer programs work like that: solve the problem once, and suddenly marginal costs dissapear."
You aren't factoring in the cost if something is buried in the script by the outsourced programmer. What if the script is crippled? Considering how many college educated Indians are looking for work, you could *always* find cheap replacements.
"That's super, but I have one option: Comcast. I'm nowhere near close enough to the CO for DSL, and unless they decide to run fiber to the small neighborhood in which I live (yeah, right), my only option for a long, long time is going to continue to be Comcast. I hate it, it sucks, and I'm annoyed by it. What can I do about it? Nothing."
As was shown on TechTV's (now Comcast owned) "The ScreenSavers" last week:
1. Buy an Apple iBook or PowerBook. 2. Download KisMac. 3. Stroll down to the local Starbucks
(be sure to buy some coffee, it really is better than most of the local options)
4. Run KisMac. 5. Wait a whole day. 6. Return to the Starbucks the next day.
Now you'll have free access to Starbuck's/T-Mobile WIFI Broadband.
Other options that might help with this is an Orinoco (sic) network card (TechTV is hot for them), and an external antenna (approx $35) if you want to aim it at the nearest coffee shop from a distance away.
"If they aren't smart enough to write a little script to do it for them, I'm less worried about my job being offshored."
Did you consider it might be cheaper to hire people to click the ads than to contract a company to write such a script? Its kinda like how the American military often threw up their arms after destroying various Vietnamese infrastructure during that conflict. They'd blow up a bridge, only to find it reconstructed a few days labor thanks to what the Pentagon defined as "ant labor." The Western business-minded viewpoint would factor in contracts, heavy industry, materials, and all the like into costs, whereas a more simple society would just get a ton of unskilled workers out there to assemble the project (instead of relying on earth moving equipment). Or maybe a better example would be the Minnonites and the Amish in terms of barn raisings.
Slashdot Mirror
But will they [HP] top AlienWare's commercial that airs on TechTV?
All HP has to do is throw in an AMD Athlon64 into the machine and they'll top *Dull* (err, Dell) since Dell is an Intel-only screwdriver operation, for now.
Speaking of Dell, has anyone seen the commericals to the NetFlix competitor starring the former *Dell Dude*?
"I remember sitting in the dorm watching the "Alien Autopsy" on Fox. It seemed obviously to be fake. I was the only one in a room of 8 to call out it as fake. I was called "close minded" and "brain washed" by the government."
Like many people, I like a good conspiracy theory. However, I felt the "Autopsy" show was a fraud from the start because the black & white footage was obviously shot with a video camera and not an 8mm or 16mm film camera. They makers of the "film" didn't even go back and add grain to the footage to give it an appearance of an old film either. It was terrible. I'd even venture to say the "film" was manufactured to bring ridicule to anyone suggesting any type of alien conspiracy on the part of the government. Terrible, yet typical of Fox, the same people who bring you Fox NEWS. I have to hand it to the X-Files, it was quite a laugh to hear Fox Mulder laugh at the "film."
"I have an Uncle who was absolutely convinced that the Mars rover had snapped a picture of a "Martian Cat" with big "martian-looking" eyes and then thought for sure the government was covering it up by removing all the copies of the "World Weekly News" from the stands before anyone else could buy a copy. The obvious fact that the store sold out is perhaps even more depressing though. Who buys that crap? Oh yeah, my Uncle."
:)
Hmmm. Your uncle learned the *truth* from the original "Men in Black" (MiB) motion-picture.
"Thats if the people are teachable, you still have those people who think the moon landing was faked, and then some people do not trust the government all together. I realize that this may seem extreme, and maybe a lil OT, but honestly, I think a private corporation reaching space will do a better job of teaching. Like X-Prize for instance."
:)
I think a private corporation verifying the lunar landing sites and various places on Mars would be of great value to all the planet.
Considering recent US history with things such as the Pentagon Papers, Operation Northwinds, and the whole issue of WMD in Iraq, it would be best for an outside company or agency to critically fact check NASA's claims and not take them for face value. Isn't that what skeptics are supposed to do? Its kinda funny how self-described skeptics go after the people shouting about "alien" conspiracies yet they take everything that NASA hands them verbatim. Without a doubt, the US Air Force has lied about Roswell three times now... First they said it was a weather balloon, then it was an atmospheric test for monitoring the Soviet Union's nuclear tests, and then it was a parachute test involving dummies that didn't even start for 3 years after the "incident." I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I sure know what happens after *three strikes* in a game of baseball.
Anxiously awaiting my "tin foil hat" mod points...
"What science needs is more Page 3 girls."
And I will lift my drink for a toast to that!
The closest thing to that here in the US are the ladies of TechTV. Damn Comcast, damn the Roberts family to hell for *pink slipping* the channel.
"Because Comcast is saying they'll monitor/control your use of the WAP, does that mean they'll take responsibility if someone parks outside my house, cracks my WEP, and starts up a file-sharing service that gets the RIAA more pissed than hornets?"
:)
:)
Don't look now, but I'm sitting outside running KisMac on my PowerBook and downloading all sorts of P2P goodies! Wait, no I'm not!
See, you really can learn stuff by watching The ScreenSavers on the soon-to-be-cancelled TechTV Network...
"Soon, VoIP capability is going to be added to the modem also."
Motorola is already enabling this in their new products. However, Motorola is only supporting Windows out of the box for their routers. I found this out as I was looking for a new pnp router for use with Vonage. The Motorola looked great but Netgear promised support for OS/X and Linux in addition to Windows, BSD, and Unix. Thus Motorola lost a sale. Its the same reason why I won't buy any more Linksys products.
"....is Canadian shareholders are wiser than the US ones?"
:)
Don't you mean "...are Canadian shareholders wiser than US shareholders?"
I was under the impression the Canadian educational system was superior to the US model. Hmmm...
"Alright here's a conspiracy theory. Sony could be the reason behind the hike. New player enters a market dominated by apple and apple's price per song increases? I bet sony would remain at 99c and isn't sony a major music label? Also Ipods were the main target of apple not pusing songs so i guess they won't care much now."
Doubtful. Sony internal divisional bickering is as legendary as AOL Time Warner's. Sony Electronics (Consumer) is always butting heads with Sony Music over things like this. So if Sony Music is pushing Apple for price increases, they'll be pushing Sony Electronics for a price increase as well. After all, remember that just before the Sony Playstation launched, Sony's VAIO computer division claimed their PCs would be compatible with the Playstation, but that never came to fruition thanks to the protests of SCEA (Sony Computer Entertainment of America - the Playstation division). Even better, just cut off the Sony name from Sony Music. Just think of them as Columbia Music (formerly known as CBS Records) - owned by Sony, just as Sony Pictures is Columbia Pictures. There is very little synergy.
"A lot of comments here seem to be bashing Comcast for getting rid of TechTV with various sinister reasons behind the show's demise, but I also a significant number of "haven't watched it in 5 months, if ever" type of comments too. Could it be that TechTV had really low ratings and wasn't cost-effective to keep going? Naa..."
TechTV and G4 BOTH have low ratings because neither channel are offered in the basic cable packages. I myself just got TechTV this past month when I upgraded to digital cable with the vile Comcast. DirecTV offered TechTV in their basic package, but didn't offer G4 at all. There are a lot of gamers and techies out there that don't feel like shelling out extra money on upgraded digital packages who would watch the channels if offered at a lower price point.
"where you could see them bantering ala the Howard Stern show (but for geeks)."
:)
That show already existed on TechTV. Its called "Unscrewed."
"I guess this is the last remnant of the dot-com boom :( I still think there is room for a technology-oriented television channel but not yet. I don't know about USA but here in Canada, Tech TV was a digital channel so until digital boxes are almost standard, I don't expect these digital channels to take off..."
I've been watching TechTV since last month when I upgraded to digital cable with Comcast. Of course, I had to pay $5 extra per month to add TechTV. Comcast gave away G4 in the standard digital package. The true reason why neither channel has a large audience is because the cable companies never dropped the channels down to the basic (analog) cable tier. I'm sure there'd be more viewers there than say the "Style" channel. As the British say, wankers!
TechTV and G4 should be kept separate, but share cross-promotion and the general staff. A major problem of both is the lack of strong partnerships. It seems like G4 is a sock puppet to EB Games's giant hand. They should enlist the other big video game retailers like Target, Best Buy, Circuit City, Toys R Us, Frys, and Wal*Mart too if they want that channel profitable. If there's a reason to have MTV AND Vh1, there is reason to have TechTV AND G4.
Wow, like Snake Plissken, I thought you were dead! (according to what a few people posted in a different thred today on Slashdot)...I'm glad to see the rumors of your demise were greatly exaggerated...
"You have to hand it to Steve Case though - how we managed to convince the world's most powerful and valuable media empire to sell its soul for a dialup ISP with a proprietary service is truly one of the great feats of negotiation in business history. AOL would be trading for $2 now if not for Case convincing Levin to impale TW shareholders."
Your statement lacks scope. Time Warner failed every attempt at getting the internet "right." The very expensive "Full Service Network" in Orlando was considered a failure. Time Warner's "Pathfinder" portal was not a top destination for web surfers. Not to mention you had the history of Atari's "failure" coming from the Warner side of Time Warner.
Compare that to AOL. AOL (or so they thought) understood the internet. This was the company Microsoft was scared of. They owned Netscape. Nullsoft WinAmp. ICQ and AIM. Digital Cities. Mapquest. Early investor in many technologies like TiVo, and shareholders in Amazon.com and eBay (and they had first right to acquiring both companies).
AOL had a problem getting into broadband because all the cable companies blocked them. AOL needed Time Warner Cable. Time Warner needed a coherent online strategy that AOL could provide them. The deal made absolute sense. And furthermore, AOL as an outsider who understood the new economy could go over the heads of the various fiefdoms that remained fiercely independent since the original Time and Warner merger, not to mention the acquisition of Turner Broadcasting shortly thereafter. AOL was to deliver the "synergy" that even Steve Ross could not deliver from the original merger from 1989/1990.
And what do we have now? Short-sighted Time Warner executives calling the shots. The very same executives who failed to encourage the FCC and FTC to force open Comcast's pipes during their acquisition of AT&T Broadband. So AOL is having to go after add-on services to other broadband customers because none of the cable companies will allow them first tier billing. Even Time Warner Cable shafts AOL and pushes RoadRunner which is co-owned by Microsoft. Lay the blame for the failure of synergy at the door of Time Warner, not AOL...
Standard Mac Reply(tm).
"But you get more with a new version of OS/x than you do a windows service pack."
You fail to highlight the fact that OS X Panther operates faster than OS X Jaguar on the very same Mac thanks to optimizations made by Apple. Can you point out exactly which later release of Windows ran faster than the prior version on exactly the same hardware as before (and without a memory upgrade)? I doubt you can. As we all know on Slashdot, when WinXP Service Pack 1 was released, it caused the computers it was installed on to slow down and broke applications.
"errr
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows Server 2003
All released in the last five years."
You either forgot or chose to ignore WindowsME from that list.
Richard, you brought up many interesting points, but to quote off-hand remarks the US State Department made to Prime Minister Heath's Government, "g**damn it, would you act like you are British?!" That was in response to Heath telling the State Department to go call the EEC (now known as the EU, of course) for foreign policy inquiries.
I seriously doubt the Romans would've apologized for advancing Western Civilization through ruthless conquest in their time. The whole world benefits today because of that ancient Roman bloodthirst. And I don't shed a tear for what Rome did to Carthage (they were baby sacrificers anyway). The British Empire spread western science, education, medicine, industrialism, capitalism, and various forms of Christianity throughout the world. Because of it, a large amount of people on the planet speak English - even if it isn't their primary language. Britain revived the idea of democracy and also spread that to places it never existed in. That's nothing to scoff about.
"not a single thought was given to equalising the African health and education to English standards"
But what were they before the British arrived? Who paid the money to cure tribal peoples of what we'd now consider pathetic diseases? Is Africa today investing in curing AIDS or Ebola? No. Its Western medicine that is leading the efforts. Without the history that got us all to where we are today, we would have no hope of curing all of humanity from such things in the future.
Its sorta like looking at England's conquest and rule of Ireland. Had England given up Ireland a long time ago, say before the attempted invasion by the Spanish Armada, we wouldn't have modern democracy today. Spain would've set up shop in Ireland and used the place as a second front in an invasion. England would've been conquerred, and presto, no English Bill of Rights (but the Inquisition instead!). You would still to this day have the strong institutional belief in the divine right of kings (aka "absolute monarchy") and no modern example of political liberalism. With no Parlimentary Supremacy in England, you wouldn't have ever had an Enlightenment and thus no Voltaire in France nor the French Revolution (which was caused by the French King's "Charles I" impersonation in terms of setting up a constitutional monarchy), thus no Napoleon marching throughout Europe for better or worse.
"Anyway, Mugabe may well be direct result of UKs failed policy in Africa."
No, Mugabe is the direct result of the failure of the colonials in Rhodesia (sic) who foolishly declared independence from the Empire because they felt Britain would unravel their priviledged status in order to raise the standard of living and political power of the disenfranchised blacks in the country. Its kind of like the modern "Irish Troubles" where British forces moved into Northern Ireland to actually protect the Catholic minority from the Protestants who didn't want to share power, but then the opportunistic IRA then decided to cry "imperialism" and then attack the very forces that were actually trying to prevent their slaughter. And then they got caught into the quagmire that still hasn't been resolved. It also happened in the British North American Colonies after the Royal Proclamation of 1763 that restricted further Western migration. The colonists were in an uproar over the Crown caring more for the Native Americans than them.
"Would you live for one second under the rule of people from thousands of miles away who consider you subhuman?"
Well, I do that today. Its called being a Californian and having our State government told what to do by the chuckleheads in Washington, D.C. at the Federal level. They steal half of each dollar that Californians send to them in the form of federal taxation so we get to pay for all the other states not carrying their fair share. Its what you in the U.K. will be doing soon enough, except you'll be venting at Brussels and Strasbourg equally, but not in the mother English tongue.
"The next one is probably Lynx. It goes well with their new eMacs."
:)
That would be fitting of their modern tradition of naming their operating system point releases after codenames (and sometimes offical release names) for Atari game systems. Atari had the Lynx, the Panther (never released), and the Jaguar game systems.
However, since Apple is descended from the original Atari Inc. (a bastard lineage - they'd be FitzAtari if we were in Middle Ages England), I won't scream over it like Star Trek stealing the idea of the Cybermen from Doctor Who and using it as the template for the Borg.
The assertion that AOL is truly interested in Janus is severely lacking in scope. AOL is only interested in ensuring that they aren't locked out of a system that might become the preferred commercial method (of content providers) of distributing music and movies online. AOL has no interest in propping up a Microsoft technology that only strengthens Microsoft if there isn't a decent back-end for AOL.
Let's look at the facts. AOL is a partner in MusicNet with Real Networks and EMI, but AOL prefers Apple's iTunes, not only because it is the most popular online music distribution system, but also because it isn't Microsoft.
AOL signed an agreement with Microsoft back in the late 90s that AOL email could be downloaded to Microsoft Outlook. It never materialized.
AOL paid lip-service to instant messaging interoperability but has not made AIM or ICQ directly able to send and receive to MSN Messenger. At the same time, AOL partnered with Apple to ensure that iChat was based upon the AIM client.
AOL is still interested in Netscape although they have no full-time employees working on Mozilla. That was a Time Warner executive decision to cut the development team to "save" monies earmarked for salaries. If Time Warner loses interest and sells AOL back to Steve Case, this will be reversed.
On the Time Warner side of the business, they have no interest in Janus for music purposes since Time Warner sold off Warner Music Group to Edgar Bronfman's group. Perhaps they still have a minority stake (as does all historical sales done by Warner Communications, like the Atari Inc. divestiture of 1984) but that's about it. Bronfman will make any type of decision independently of what AOL or Time Warner proper wishes.
The bottom line is that AOL may be included in the press release, but for the most part, this is round-file material. It is only a survival option if Microsoft gets the upper hand in media.
"I work for the department that handles abuse calls, this letter is just a standard letter and comcast has nothing to do with it."
:)
Hey Azuretek,
Do you handle abuse complaints regarding Comcast's own abuses? Like charging me $12 to pick up my analog set-top box when they delivered the digital box? The jerks told me it was a free installation over the phone and never told me I'd have to pay them $12 for them to "pick up" my old box instead of dropping it off at the local office. When I asked them why any user would drop off their analog box at the local office before receiving their digital upgrade, they could not explain it. That's abuse in my book, as well as fraud and misrepresentation.
"Well, it's unlikely that the Doctor will be snogging the girl again - in the UK this was widely seen as a very weird change in the character put there, like so many things in the 1996 TV Movie, against the wishes of the writer and director at the insiste3nce of the FOX network, and as an experiment that backfired."
/. Land. :)
The experiment didn't fail though. The Fox Television Network placed the telefilm in the absolute worst line-up possible. The Doctor Who telefilm was up against MLB Baseball, NBA Basketball, and a much hyped second-to-last-cliffhanger episode (for the season) of Roseanne. That was like programming against "The Cosby Show" or "Friends" at either of their zeniths. But the Doctor Who telefilm was still "the most recorded" show on television of that week according to the Nielsens. Had Fox programmed it the week before instead of the "Twister" ripoff starring everyone's favorite B Movie Actor Bruce Campbell entitled "Tornado", WHO would've gotten huge ratings and Fox would've ordered WHO as a decently budgeted series. Philip Segal did a good job producing it. The cast were great. The story was decent (although it wasn't up to a Robert Holmes level) and McGann merited. Unfortunately, it was impossible to be a success in America on the evening Fox chose to broadcast it. Its kind of like "Angel" being pitted against "The West Wing," which often has happened.
And you don't think the Doctor and Romana weren't linked? C'mon. It was underlying.
Thanks for all the info. Glad to see another passionate WHOvian here in
"I'll watch a few more episodes, maybe it will grow on me."
Get prepared for the theatrical release.
http://www.reddwarf.co.uk
"In the long run, the script is cheaper. Computer programs work like that: solve the problem once, and suddenly marginal costs dissapear."
You aren't factoring in the cost if something is buried in the script by the outsourced programmer. What if the script is crippled? Considering how many college educated Indians are looking for work, you could *always* find cheap replacements.
"That's super, but I have one option: Comcast. I'm nowhere near close enough to the CO for DSL, and unless they decide to run fiber to the small neighborhood in which I live (yeah, right), my only option for a long, long time is going to continue to be Comcast. I hate it, it sucks, and I'm annoyed by it. What can I do about it? Nothing."
:)
As was shown on TechTV's (now Comcast owned) "The ScreenSavers" last week:
1. Buy an Apple iBook or PowerBook.
2. Download KisMac.
3. Stroll down to the local Starbucks
(be sure to buy some coffee, it really is better than most of the local options)
4. Run KisMac.
5. Wait a whole day.
6. Return to the Starbucks the next day.
Now you'll have free access to Starbuck's/T-Mobile WIFI Broadband.
Other options that might help with this is an Orinoco (sic) network card (TechTV is hot for them), and an external antenna (approx $35) if you want to aim it at the nearest coffee shop from a distance away.
Happy Broadband Trails...
"If they aren't smart enough to write a little script to do it for them, I'm less worried about my job being offshored."
Did you consider it might be cheaper to hire people to click the ads than to contract a company to write such a script? Its kinda like how the American military often threw up their arms after destroying various Vietnamese infrastructure during that conflict. They'd blow up a bridge, only to find it reconstructed a few days labor thanks to what the Pentagon defined as "ant labor." The Western business-minded viewpoint would factor in contracts, heavy industry, materials, and all the like into costs, whereas a more simple society would just get a ton of unskilled workers out there to assemble the project (instead of relying on earth moving equipment). Or maybe a better example would be the Minnonites and the Amish in terms of barn raisings.