The hype surrounding this offering is going to overvalue their stock, Dutch Auction or no. It would be wise to wait for the market to determine the stock's worth and then purchase your investment.
Now that Microsoft is going to try keep ahead of the curve in terms of features in web browsers, should we be concerned about Microsoft patenting those features?
If Microsoft's IE team comes up with a nifty new feature that makes surfing the net easier, I can see two possible scenarios:
1) Microsoft patents the feature making it exlcusive to IE
2) the feature is quickly copied into Firefox by either the MozDev team or an enthusiastic extenstion developer.
Without patenting features, how can Microsoft keep Internet Explorer superior to its competitors feature-wise? I suppose plug-ins exist for IE to include mouse gestures and tabbing and such, but are these as much of a threat to Firefox and Opera?
While there may fantatics online, they are not readers of slashdot it would seem.
It seems like this mystery is finally laid to rest. As one of those Earthbound fanatics, I just ate up this in-depth for no reason article.
Christian Bale is actually a very talented actor who excels in playing very complicated characters with serious internal battles. Just look at American Psycho, Empire of the Sun, and (to a lesser extent) Equilibrium. Bruce Wayne's internal struggle between the man and the bat is one in which every movie tried to grapple with but never really succeeded because the action was always top priority. Christopher Nolan, an expert of the psychological, directing this movie gives it the best chance in succeeding in profiling Batman's psyche.
I'm not turning it into a religious issue by bringing in the Passion. I consider the Passion a violent movie rather than a religious movie, and it seems that most people see it the other way around. What I meant is that movies in general seem to be allowed more leeway in the violence thay can show. I would think that seeing Christ crucified in the Passion, a woman getting decapitated by an elevator in Final Destination 2, and 88 people getting dismembered in Kill Bill would be just as psychologically damaging to kids as shooting imps with a BFG, running people over with cars in GTA, and impaling zombies with wooden stakes in Painkiller. Why regulate one violent form of expression more harshly than the other?
How is a violent videogame any worse than Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ? Christ getting whipped and crucified was much more graphic and mind warping than shooting a lizard man in the head with a rifle. To specifically target violent videogames, as opposed to violent movies, seems hypocritical to me. Why not make a special R-rated section at Blockbuster so little Billy doesn't accidentally see the cover to Die Hard and become horribly scarred for life?
They're already supposed to card people for buying M-rated games. Why not enforce that before doing anything more extreme?
If Nintendo is able to infuse this new Paper Mario game with the diverse gameplay and humor of Mario & Luigi for the GBA, then the game will sure to be a hit. Also, wouldn't it be nice if they included the original game as a pre-order bonus bonus?
Slashdot Mirror
The hype surrounding this offering is going to overvalue their stock, Dutch Auction or no. It would be wise to wait for the market to determine the stock's worth and then purchase your investment.
But the A in EULA means agreement. A contract is an agreement.
One step closer to a working holodeck.
If Microsoft's IE team comes up with a nifty new feature that makes surfing the net easier, I can see two possible scenarios: 1) Microsoft patents the feature making it exlcusive to IE 2) the feature is quickly copied into Firefox by either the MozDev team or an enthusiastic extenstion developer. Without patenting features, how can Microsoft keep Internet Explorer superior to its competitors feature-wise? I suppose plug-ins exist for IE to include mouse gestures and tabbing and such, but are these as much of a threat to Firefox and Opera?
While there may fantatics online, they are not readers of slashdot it would seem. It seems like this mystery is finally laid to rest. As one of those Earthbound fanatics, I just ate up this in-depth for no reason article.
Christian Bale is actually a very talented actor who excels in playing very complicated characters with serious internal battles. Just look at American Psycho, Empire of the Sun, and (to a lesser extent) Equilibrium. Bruce Wayne's internal struggle between the man and the bat is one in which every movie tried to grapple with but never really succeeded because the action was always top priority. Christopher Nolan, an expert of the psychological, directing this movie gives it the best chance in succeeding in profiling Batman's psyche.
I'm not turning it into a religious issue by bringing in the Passion. I consider the Passion a violent movie rather than a religious movie, and it seems that most people see it the other way around. What I meant is that movies in general seem to be allowed more leeway in the violence thay can show. I would think that seeing Christ crucified in the Passion, a woman getting decapitated by an elevator in Final Destination 2, and 88 people getting dismembered in Kill Bill would be just as psychologically damaging to kids as shooting imps with a BFG, running people over with cars in GTA, and impaling zombies with wooden stakes in Painkiller. Why regulate one violent form of expression more harshly than the other?
How is a violent videogame any worse than Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ? Christ getting whipped and crucified was much more graphic and mind warping than shooting a lizard man in the head with a rifle. To specifically target violent videogames, as opposed to violent movies, seems hypocritical to me. Why not make a special R-rated section at Blockbuster so little Billy doesn't accidentally see the cover to Die Hard and become horribly scarred for life? They're already supposed to card people for buying M-rated games. Why not enforce that before doing anything more extreme?
If Nintendo is able to infuse this new Paper Mario game with the diverse gameplay and humor of Mario & Luigi for the GBA, then the game will sure to be a hit. Also, wouldn't it be nice if they included the original game as a pre-order bonus bonus?
I've always liked this gag. Now if we can just find that question...
I want to play the newest games. Linux can't do that, so I don't use it.