The people at MacRumor need to work on their reading comprehension. From TFA:
aren't allowed to subsidize the cost of the phone relative to your contract (i.e. you won't save more by signing a longer contract
Emphasis in the original.
This doesn't say Rogers/Cingular can't subsidize, it says Rogers/Cingular can't change the subsidy based on contract length, meaning they can't charge one price for a one-year contract and another for a two-year contract. That still lets them subsidize the phone overall, and sell it cheaper than it's "street" price
How would Oblivion be different if there were more than just Rag-Doll physics, if bad guys reacted to the swing of your sword, or if mist realistically moved around you as you walked.
It would run at 1 FPS, everyone would be toast 5 seconds into the first fight, and it would sell 2 copies instead of 2 million.
Printers like this don't just print fast, they print all the time. As in 24x7 (or near enough). You don't have to stop them to add toner or paper, and compared to your average laser printer, they don't break down very often.
You could, I suppose, take the Google approach, and buy enough printers so that you can have a bunch off line at any one time, but you've still got the problem of employing enough operators to keep feeding paper & toner (and freeing up jams!), plus a full-time repair guy/gal, plus software good enough to not only route the initial printouts around all those printers, but also smart enought to do re-prints when a printer jams or dies, etc. etc. etc.
Add it all up, and US$1M starts to look pretty good!
Linux (the kernel) may not be essential to the community, but it is essential to the continued commercial success of open source. If the Linux kernel goes "poof" tomorrow, all those IT managers aren't going to download Hurd and keep on going. RMS may not like it, but it's that kernel that has brought such tremendouse success and fame to free, open source, software.
For the price of some of these packages, you can hire 2 developers (or more!) for a year and get them to code an application that does EXACTLY what you want
Bunk! 2 (or 10, or 20) engineers are going to recreate Oracle in a year? Tell that to the MySQL team! Most business software is a lot more complex than you seem to think.
And, even if true, that year cost money. What am I supposed to do while I wait for you two geniuses to get done? One the main reasons people buy off-the-shelf software is to save time.
I've been a software Product Manager at some of the biggest software producing companies in the world since 1995. I'm the guy an awful lot of you coders seem to dislike so much. You know, the one always asking for just one more feature to be squeezed into the release, and, oh, can we get it two months early?
There is great truth in this article, and a great lie. Software companies publish buggy, bloated product all the time, but not because it's fun and not because we marketing weenies think it's such a good idea. It's because that's what the market wants. The idea that customers are asking us to stop is a load of crap created by journalists looking to write about the latest backlash.
Sure, as the article points out, Oracle 11i was bug-ridden, but how many millions did Oracle make off it? Claiming a 11% drop in revenue in 2002 is just a tad misleading--who *didn't* see a drop in revenue in 2002? Didn't some bubble burst or something? Bottom line, customer's bought the software, bugs and all. And you can bet an awful lot of them were screaming at Oracle to get the software out as soon as possible. So where's the motivation to do it any different?
Every customer will tell you he wants just one more feature, or just one critical (to him!) bug fixed, and then he'll be happy. Bunk. Fix the bug, add the feature, and get ready for the next demand. And since what Customer A wants isn't always what Customer B wants, we get lots and lots of features, many of them aimed at a very small subset of users. Add to that all the customers screaming since the customers want it *right* *now*, and we ship software with way too many bugs, and lots of silly features. Which customer pay for.
Slashdot Mirror
Printers like this don't just print fast, they print all the time. As in 24x7 (or near enough). You don't have to stop them to add toner or paper, and compared to your average laser printer, they don't break down very often.
You could, I suppose, take the Google approach, and buy enough printers so that you can have a bunch off line at any one time, but you've still got the problem of employing enough operators to keep feeding paper & toner (and freeing up jams!), plus a full-time repair guy/gal, plus software good enough to not only route the initial printouts around all those printers, but also smart enought to do re-prints when a printer jams or dies, etc. etc. etc.
Add it all up, and US$1M starts to look pretty good!
"Poorly choosen passwords lead to insecurity."
Well, duh. I didn't need three pages of dense, TLA-obscured claptrap to tell me that.
Linux (the kernel) may not be essential to the community, but it is essential to the continued commercial success of open source. If the Linux kernel goes "poof" tomorrow, all those IT managers aren't going to download Hurd and keep on going. RMS may not like it, but it's that kernel that has brought such tremendouse success and fame to free, open source, software.
Bunk! 2 (or 10, or 20) engineers are going to recreate Oracle in a year? Tell that to the MySQL team! Most business software is a lot more complex than you seem to think.
And, even if true, that year cost money. What am I supposed to do while I wait for you two geniuses to get done? One the main reasons people buy off-the-shelf software is to save time.
I've been a software Product Manager at some of the biggest software producing companies in the world since 1995. I'm the guy an awful lot of you coders seem to dislike so much. You know, the one always asking for just one more feature to be squeezed into the release, and, oh, can we get it two months early?
There is great truth in this article, and a great lie. Software companies publish buggy, bloated product all the time, but not because it's fun and not because we marketing weenies think it's such a good idea. It's because that's what the market wants. The idea that customers are asking us to stop is a load of crap created by journalists looking to write about the latest backlash.
Sure, as the article points out, Oracle 11i was bug-ridden, but how many millions did Oracle make off it? Claiming a 11% drop in revenue in 2002 is just a tad misleading--who *didn't* see a drop in revenue in 2002? Didn't some bubble burst or something? Bottom line, customer's bought the software, bugs and all. And you can bet an awful lot of them were screaming at Oracle to get the software out as soon as possible. So where's the motivation to do it any different?
Every customer will tell you he wants just one more feature, or just one critical (to him!) bug fixed, and then he'll be happy. Bunk. Fix the bug, add the feature, and get ready for the next demand. And since what Customer A wants isn't always what Customer B wants, we get lots and lots of features, many of them aimed at a very small subset of users. Add to that all the customers screaming since the customers want it *right* *now*, and we ship software with way too many bugs, and lots of silly features. Which customer pay for.
Microsoft only hires the best & brightest engineers, putting canidates through rigiourous testing and many rounds of interviews before hiring them.
Micorsoft releases horribly bloated software riddled with bugs and security problems.
Discuss.