Okay no seriously, Sony just disabled a feature of their console to prevent possible piracy and you think consoles are going away? That's like +500 Helm of Charisma right there to the game industry. Sony cares about keeping a sound and safe platform for distributing their licensors' games, and that's going to count for a lot.
If you're a game publisher, you want to distribute your game on a platform that isn't going to turn into piracy central overnight. This kind of action matters.
The sheep are the people who keep saying Sony's evil because of some minor non-event that any company could've gotten themselves into.
Everyone's imperfect, everyone screws up, get over it -- what matters is how they handle it after the fact. Its highly unlikely that Sony set out to root your Windows PC at any time. What most likely happened (because its just damn reasonable) is that they hired a software company to make monitoring software that users wouldn't notice that could prevent copying. Doing such a thing required code that an existing root kit package already had, so that code was stolen to accomplish their anti-copying goals.
Big freaking deal. I was only upset because of the stolen OSS software at the time. My expectation of a big company to understand PC software? Nil.
You can use the PS3 as a network streaming video/music player from the XMB without installing OtherOS Linux. Trust me, I've done both, and the XMB version is much faster. Sure the UI isn't fantastic for browsing shows, but it works quickly and streams from multiple network boxes.
I have a fully updated original PS3 so I'm one of those allowed to complain. I paid full price, I got the extra card slots and USB ports and I've upgraded the hard drive myself since (to 320GB). The only feature I've lost is the one I stopped using after a month because 256MB of RAM isn't good enough for general computing.
The interesting bit to me from a legal perspective is that you agree to the updated EULA in order to get the latest firmware. Sony is forcing a new 'meeting of the minds' each time the firmware is updated in other words, and you can always opt out.
Of course, if you do, you lose PSN functionality and the ability to play any new games after that point that require the firmware in question.
I have no problem whatsoever giving Naughty Dog or Insomniac or Poliphony Digital my money for the games they make. They employ some seriously creative people and some great programmers.
Doing PC gaming would require paying the Microsoft tax and on the scale of grand evil companies in computing in the last ten years, I'll vote for not giving money to the OS Monopoly that couldn't deliver a functioning consumer 64-bit OS for years.
I'm sorry but do you think its a bad thing this bill got enacted? Who cares why... its now illegal for your employer or doctor or parents to force you to get an implant and it wasn't before.
Its not illegal to get one. Its illegal to FORCE someone to get one. Big difference.
Repos are FOR distros. Source is for compatibility.
If you want binaries AND compatibility you want statically compiled binaries which have very few or no dependencies, like the version of Firefox on mozilla.com.
So you have a multi-billion-dollar business and someone makes allegations about you. Do you (A) ask for random idiots off the street to respond, or (B) say nothing or (C) hire someone to make an intelligent response that won't get you into trouble?
Duh. Of course a paid spokesperson responded, what did you expect?
Difference being its not illegal to be anti-competitive unless you have a monopoly. Being anti-competitive as a small fry is just typically stupid for your business model.
If Apple wants to be stupid (as many have claimed with its prior issues like no-mac-clones), then so be it. You really don't have to use their products. I certainly don't.
However, almost everyone has to interact with Windows in one way or another these days. Annoying, but true.
What services do you believe Google has that its competitors don't have that would prevent them from competing?
With the exception of its book search service (which nobody else seems to have ramped up to that scale yet), there's nothing stopping you or I from trying to be the next Google in search or advertising or anything else.
Google has even made their competitors' jobs easier by documenting their sitemap format and not patent encumbering it, so anyone like Bing can use it to rapidly index areas of a website intelligently.
Google isn't to my knowledge being remotely anti-competitive. If anything they're helping their competition.
Right, bundling and promoting microsoft software, on microsoft software, that's pretty bad.
Context matters. The GP pointed out the monopoly status of Microsoft at the time and that customers weren't given choices.
Google promotes its own sites but if you search for Flickr (a direct competitor to Picasa), you'll find them no problem. In fact, many times I search for something, Flickr results come way before Picasa results do. They're certainly not abusing their monopoly here.
Okay now lets build a PC a few years ago. You're a major computer reseller and you have OEM contracts from Microsoft. You want to install Firefox and Thunderbird on the desktop for your users because they're more secure or have better functionality at the time. You can't. Microsoft won't let you. Period.
Neat difference huh? Google doesn't stop you from doing anything, nor does it encourage you not to use competitors' software. Microsoft did. Google also doesn't have any court orders against it to date calling it a monopoly, Microsoft does.
Try replying to the WHOLE point that was made next time. Context matters.
The difference between Microsoft bundling software and Apple doing it is the fact that Microsoft has a monopoly position for OS distribution.
If Microsoft had viable competitors in the OS space, this wouldn't be relevant.
This has been court decided over and over again, so argue it with them, not me. Microsoft shouldn't be using one monopoly to prop up another part of their business.
Apple on the other hand has no such monopoly, with such a low percentage of PC sales and constantly suing people who make clones. If they ever did, they'd be in the same position and should act accordingly.
Yeah, I'm quite certain (as are you I believe) that cloud storage of my E-mail which is obviously restricted to me via a password system would constitute my effects, just as much as a bank safety deposit box would.
First off this is a dupe of an old article about the same problem elsewhere in the USA... but whatever.
Here, its illegal to enter an intersection without having a clear exit path already guaranteed. However, its common practice and accepted that you will enter an intersection when in the left turn lane so as to leave the intersection easier, possibly at the red light.
While a few scenes were well-chosen to show off the 3D effects, they were also well chosen to show off the CGI and incredible vistas in the movie period. I saw the movie three times in the theatre, twice in 3D and once in 2D and it was very well filmed for both.
That said, make sure you sit near the centre of the auditorium for a 3D movie. The non-square screen will throw off the 3D depth perception if you are too high or too low. That is to say, as the screen gets wider or narrower to your sight, so does the 3D effect grow or shrink. Sitting near the bottom of the screen will give the sarge huge boots right in your face and a tiny head flat on the screen.
Slashdot Mirror
My many apologies to Sheldon, but 'bazinga'. :)
LMAO
Okay no seriously, Sony just disabled a feature of their console to prevent possible piracy and you think consoles are going away? That's like +500 Helm of Charisma right there to the game industry. Sony cares about keeping a sound and safe platform for distributing their licensors' games, and that's going to count for a lot.
If you're a game publisher, you want to distribute your game on a platform that isn't going to turn into piracy central overnight. This kind of action matters.
As a geek, I knew the PS3 had OtherOS support.
Can you find me any actual Sony marketing materials that tried to sell the unit as a Linux box though? Because I don't recall a single one.
Keep using it, ignore all this crappy advice and enjoy the games and video and music support on it.
Wonder to yourself "hey, umm, why's everyone complaining when it plays games like it should?"
Then go back to playing Uncharted or God of War or any other seriously excellent game the platform has to offer.
The sheep are the people who keep saying Sony's evil because of some minor non-event that any company could've gotten themselves into.
Everyone's imperfect, everyone screws up, get over it -- what matters is how they handle it after the fact. Its highly unlikely that Sony set out to root your Windows PC at any time. What most likely happened (because its just damn reasonable) is that they hired a software company to make monitoring software that users wouldn't notice that could prevent copying. Doing such a thing required code that an existing root kit package already had, so that code was stolen to accomplish their anti-copying goals.
Big freaking deal. I was only upset because of the stolen OSS software at the time. My expectation of a big company to understand PC software? Nil.
You can use the PS3 as a network streaming video/music player from the XMB without installing OtherOS Linux. Trust me, I've done both, and the XMB version is much faster. Sure the UI isn't fantastic for browsing shows, but it works quickly and streams from multiple network boxes.
I have a fully updated original PS3 so I'm one of those allowed to complain. I paid full price, I got the extra card slots and USB ports and I've upgraded the hard drive myself since (to 320GB). The only feature I've lost is the one I stopped using after a month because 256MB of RAM isn't good enough for general computing.
Then this EULA wouldn't affect you because you don't want to play games with it. Don't update and you're fine.
The interesting bit to me from a legal perspective is that you agree to the updated EULA in order to get the latest firmware. Sony is forcing a new 'meeting of the minds' each time the firmware is updated in other words, and you can always opt out.
Of course, if you do, you lose PSN functionality and the ability to play any new games after that point that require the firmware in question.
I have no problem whatsoever giving Naughty Dog or Insomniac or Poliphony Digital my money for the games they make. They employ some seriously creative people and some great programmers.
Doing PC gaming would require paying the Microsoft tax and on the scale of grand evil companies in computing in the last ten years, I'll vote for not giving money to the OS Monopoly that couldn't deliver a functioning consumer 64-bit OS for years.
Ignoring your theology for a moment ... +1 Paranoid? Wouldn't that be -1 Paranoid?
I don't want to read MORE paranoid rantings.
I'm sorry but do you think its a bad thing this bill got enacted? Who cares why ... its now illegal for your employer or doctor or parents to force you to get an implant and it wasn't before.
Its not illegal to get one. Its illegal to FORCE someone to get one. Big difference.
So if instead of displaying "Michael" I make my phone display "Mike" I'm deceiving someone? Just checking.
Repos aren't what you think they are.
Repos are FOR distros. Source is for compatibility.
If you want binaries AND compatibility you want statically compiled binaries which have very few or no dependencies, like the version of Firefox on mozilla.com.
Try CentOSPlus for starters. It throws in Kernels with drivers that aren't included by default by RedHat for example.
I'm not sure if they'll do XEN support for CentOS6 or anything, but its a thought.
I purchased all the ID games they ported to Linux, at retail no less.
I have my nice tin box of Quake III to prove it too.
Neverwinter Nights on Linux was a good investment as well.
Decent games were ported to Linux more then than now it would seem.
Facebook has pretty good security features if you turn them on.
That said, turning them all on makes the whole service pretty pointless.
So you have a multi-billion-dollar business and someone makes allegations about you. Do you (A) ask for random idiots off the street to respond, or (B) say nothing or (C) hire someone to make an intelligent response that won't get you into trouble?
Duh. Of course a paid spokesperson responded, what did you expect?
Difference being its not illegal to be anti-competitive unless you have a monopoly. Being anti-competitive as a small fry is just typically stupid for your business model.
If Apple wants to be stupid (as many have claimed with its prior issues like no-mac-clones), then so be it. You really don't have to use their products. I certainly don't.
However, almost everyone has to interact with Windows in one way or another these days. Annoying, but true.
What services do you believe Google has that its competitors don't have that would prevent them from competing?
With the exception of its book search service (which nobody else seems to have ramped up to that scale yet), there's nothing stopping you or I from trying to be the next Google in search or advertising or anything else.
Google has even made their competitors' jobs easier by documenting their sitemap format and not patent encumbering it, so anyone like Bing can use it to rapidly index areas of a website intelligently.
Google isn't to my knowledge being remotely anti-competitive. If anything they're helping their competition.
Context matters. The GP pointed out the monopoly status of Microsoft at the time and that customers weren't given choices.
Google promotes its own sites but if you search for Flickr (a direct competitor to Picasa), you'll find them no problem. In fact, many times I search for something, Flickr results come way before Picasa results do. They're certainly not abusing their monopoly here.
Okay now lets build a PC a few years ago. You're a major computer reseller and you have OEM contracts from Microsoft. You want to install Firefox and Thunderbird on the desktop for your users because they're more secure or have better functionality at the time. You can't. Microsoft won't let you. Period.
Neat difference huh? Google doesn't stop you from doing anything, nor does it encourage you not to use competitors' software. Microsoft did. Google also doesn't have any court orders against it to date calling it a monopoly, Microsoft does.
Try replying to the WHOLE point that was made next time. Context matters.
The difference between Microsoft bundling software and Apple doing it is the fact that Microsoft has a monopoly position for OS distribution.
If Microsoft had viable competitors in the OS space, this wouldn't be relevant.
This has been court decided over and over again, so argue it with them, not me. Microsoft shouldn't be using one monopoly to prop up another part of their business.
Apple on the other hand has no such monopoly, with such a low percentage of PC sales and constantly suing people who make clones. If they ever did, they'd be in the same position and should act accordingly.
Yeah, I'm quite certain (as are you I believe) that cloud storage of my E-mail which is obviously restricted to me via a password system would constitute my effects, just as much as a bank safety deposit box would.
The fact that due process frequently restricts the police to acting justly instead of going on fishing expeditions.
First off this is a dupe of an old article about the same problem elsewhere in the USA ... but whatever.
Here, its illegal to enter an intersection without having a clear exit path already guaranteed. However, its common practice and accepted that you will enter an intersection when in the left turn lane so as to leave the intersection easier, possibly at the red light.
While a few scenes were well-chosen to show off the 3D effects, they were also well chosen to show off the CGI and incredible vistas in the movie period. I saw the movie three times in the theatre, twice in 3D and once in 2D and it was very well filmed for both.
That said, make sure you sit near the centre of the auditorium for a 3D movie. The non-square screen will throw off the 3D depth perception if you are too high or too low. That is to say, as the screen gets wider or narrower to your sight, so does the 3D effect grow or shrink. Sitting near the bottom of the screen will give the sarge huge boots right in your face and a tiny head flat on the screen.