I play Xbox Live Arcade as my primary gaming now.
I've been playing some stupid version of breakout (actually the best version I've ever seen) for a few months now...I think it cost $9.99 for me to download- and took about 1 minute to download and install.
After I started playing Xbox Live Arcade, I cancelled my subscription to Gamefly...because I finally found the games that will actually fit into my schedule...
Let's say you are a company. And you hire someone to do marketing- maybe hand out expensive brochures and free samples.
Well, your competitor keeps going back to the booth and taking your brochure and free samples. Then he throws them away, and goes back for more.
Do you sue the person you hired to work at the booth?
No...you figure out a better way to do it...or you fire the person at the booth and hire a big beefy guy who will make sure it is '1 per customer.' (Yet, he scares away all of the customers)
You know the business model going in...how can you sue?
I would pay huge money to have this connection, and not be blocked in any way.
I have 14 different hosting accounts through different services. Not a single service out there has lived up to what I expect. (Basically, decent response time on my pages, and limited downtime.)
One of the FORMER best hosting services - HostMySite - chokes on my site all the time, now that I get more than 30 hits per day.
I wonder how many sites they do run on a server...
I maintain servers at work (using the exact same hardware as HMS- Last time they advertised the hardware, they were using Dell 1650s with Dual Xeons) and I serve up about 500 dynamic sites on one server- with no problems whatsoever. The server sits at about 2-10% CPU capacity at all times. Somehow HMS dies when I get 2 or 3 concurrent users. I'm guessing they have multiple thousands of sites on the server which is probably a bit overloaded. Buy some new servers guys...they're cheap!
So having my own server at home is till just a pipe-dream with my current 384kbps/3Mbps DSL service. But as soon as I find a better option, I am going to dump HostMySite and do it myself.
(My sites use ColdFusion, and unfortunately it is not easy to find good ColdFusion hosting...)
The blogs don't bother me nearly as much as "those stupid parked domain search sites."
I don't know how many times I have done a Google search, and the 3rd or 4th result comes back with my exact phrase..yay!
Then I go to some stupid, totally lame site advertising domain names, or listing other sites, or something like that.
I never have figured out how they get listed in Google the way they do though- because my search phrase is not listed on the page...so evidently they know something I don't.
I use a combination of IP Sec, Windows Firewall, the Security Configuration tool, and of course, turning of un-necessary services.
All of these things are built right into Windows, so it is completely free.
I haven't had any problems with this set-up, and I've scanned it hundreds of times and there is not a hole to be seen. I've got 5 servers doing different tasks, and each is only visible to the outside world in a way that is necessary. Inside the subnet there is a lot more access- this is managed with IP Sec.
Of course someone here will tell me it isn't secure...because that is what some people do. But I have never heard of a configuration like this getting hacked- it is pretty damn tight.
So going to Free BSD is not necessary- some people will lead you to believe that- but it isn't true. Do a good job on your Windows security and you'll be locked down just as well.
Sadly, I spend my gaming time on Xbox Live Arcade. I am actually 'working through' a super-duper version of Breakout. I do this because it is easy to pick up, and easy to put down.
While I play it, I think to myself...my god, I've been playing this game for 30 years...it all comes back to where it started.
I'm an application developer, not desktop support. So it is my job to tailor the applictions to how people use them, not tailor their computers to the way I want them to work.
So...I had to make changes.
But cookies would have been sooooo much easier.
Hey look...I have a slashdot.org cookie on my computer right now...
Sure makes it easier for me since I don't need to log in to this site.
I design a lot of intranet based applications. And I *used* to use cookies a lot to keep user information. It was easy, convenient, and accurate. I never had problems.
Then some whack job at my company started to tell everyone that cookies were 'dangerous' and they should block them. Of course then I started to get complaints that my systems no longer functioned. (I had it set up to notify the users what the problem was...not just throwing stupid errors.)
It was a total pain to reconfigure the systems to deal with url/form variables everywhere, instead of just using cookies. And now a lot of the user-friendly functionality is gone. "Why doesn't it remember who I am?" "Because you turned off cookies..."
Hundreds of hours of wasted time because one dork thought that cookies were spyware...and this is on an INTRANET site.
I really wish they could understand what cookies really are...
An 8x10 costs a little under $2. Really good inkjet paper costs about $1 per sheet- then you have to factor in ink, and wastage.
And when it's all done, I would much rather have my pictures printed on photopaper (archival quality actually) than from an inkjet that will fade much quicker.
Microsoft's strength is in their homogenous platform. They want you to use a Microsoft operating system, a Microsoft Office suite, and a Microsoft browser.
Since they own at least 75% of the browser market, then they only need to design sites for their own browser.
Let's say User Joe uses Firefox- not for any particular reason, only because his brother in law told him to. Then he goes to the Bungie site, which performs poorly in Firefox. Well, there is a very good chance that Joe will follow the path of least resistance- which is switching to Internet Explorer to view the Bungie site, and possibly makingn Internet Explorer his primary browser. OR, let's say Joe already uses IE, but one day he tries out Firefox. He goes to see his stats on Bungie.net, and things just don't look right...well, he'll just switch back to Internet Explorer.
Either way, Microsoft gains, or keeps market share.
And if the IT press wants to get on their case about it, then they have the perfect answer, 'well, Firefox just needs to support these standards.' It's a win-win situation.
And I really doubt that they will lose any Xbox or Halo 2 sales because their site performs poorly in Firefox. People may not buy an Xbox or Halo 2 because they don't like Microsoft- but this one site won't affect that decision.
No...we understand that it is the 'expected result' (the Firefox bugs).
But there are two ways of thinking on that:
1- programming for/around these bugs is stupid. Program it the right way, and wait for the browsers to fix themselves. For instance, when Netscape 6.0 came out, I did not modify all of my pages to display in that piece of crap. Because 6.0 really was a piece of crap...Like the rest of the world, I realized that Netscape Navigator was a totally marginalized piece of software, and it was their problem to fix the bugs- which they mostly did in 6.1
2- If the company that you work for owns a huge chunk of the browser market, you make sure it works in your browser...and like I said before, if it makes your competition look bad- even better.
I don't think your verbal talent is lacking- I think it is your understanding of human motivation. What in the world would cause a Microsoft company to modify one of their sites to operate with a buggy browser, made by the competition? In this case they can even say 'well, we just designed it to the standards...'.
Do you really think they give a shit if they could fix it for Firefox? Why would they spend even 20 seconds on that?
And if you are thinking, "because then more of their customers could view the page" then you REALLY don't understand what is going on.
If you are a Microsoft company...and the bugs are in an open source browser...
No, it doesn't make any sense at all.
Have you read a CSS book lately? Every book (6 or 7) I have read in the past few months spends at least 10% of its pages complaining about Internet Explorer and the way it displays CSS (boxes are the favorite subject). Then each author recommends that you jump ahead with 'compliant' code- screw Internet Explorer!
Well this time it is the same thing in reverse...do you really think that Microsoft is going to pass up a chance to make Firefox look bad?
I guess that Sony is the only one who doesn't realize that as far as technology is concerned, the first Xbox wiped the floor with the PS2.
Yes, the Xbox 360 is going after the PS2- as far as sales numbers go. This whack job spouting Sony's poo has no interest in the actual reality as far as the technology is concerned...I'm sure he STILL thinks the PS2 is a great system.
Slashdot Mirror
'if found convicted...'
Well, aside from the fact that your statement doesn't make much sense...
He confessed (or possibly 'made his convictions known') to the 'crimes.'
So, he has already admitted his guilt, and is now waiting to see how wide to open up.
Like 'Federal Pound-Me-In-The-Ass-Prison' wide, or Goatse wide...
I play Xbox Live Arcade as my primary gaming now. I've been playing some stupid version of breakout (actually the best version I've ever seen) for a few months now...I think it cost $9.99 for me to download- and took about 1 minute to download and install. After I started playing Xbox Live Arcade, I cancelled my subscription to Gamefly...because I finally found the games that will actually fit into my schedule...
So the GPL is good because it keeps Microsoft from adopting open standards?
What if Microsoft incorporated more open software- would that be a good thing, or a bad thing?
Sir,
8 59483
You are a hypocrit and a blowhard. All one has to do is view your message history to see a long list of trolls and flamebait.
Or even better, this message of yours:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=153249&cid=12
Which is nothing more than one big analogy.
And I offer up the opinion that the clown who agreed with you is just as guilty of being a moron for agreeing with a putz like you.
Let's say you are a company. And you hire someone to do marketing- maybe hand out expensive brochures and free samples.
Well, your competitor keeps going back to the booth and taking your brochure and free samples. Then he throws them away, and goes back for more.
Do you sue the person you hired to work at the booth?
No...you figure out a better way to do it...or you fire the person at the booth and hire a big beefy guy who will make sure it is '1 per customer.' (Yet, he scares away all of the customers)
You know the business model going in...how can you sue?
I would pay huge money to have this connection, and not be blocked in any way.
I have 14 different hosting accounts through different services. Not a single service out there has lived up to what I expect. (Basically, decent response time on my pages, and limited downtime.)
One of the FORMER best hosting services - HostMySite - chokes on my site all the time, now that I get more than 30 hits per day.
I wonder how many sites they do run on a server...
I maintain servers at work (using the exact same hardware as HMS- Last time they advertised the hardware, they were using Dell 1650s with Dual Xeons) and I serve up about 500 dynamic sites on one server- with no problems whatsoever. The server sits at about 2-10% CPU capacity at all times. Somehow HMS dies when I get 2 or 3 concurrent users. I'm guessing they have multiple thousands of sites on the server which is probably a bit overloaded. Buy some new servers guys...they're cheap!
So having my own server at home is till just a pipe-dream with my current 384kbps/3Mbps DSL service. But as soon as I find a better option, I am going to dump HostMySite and do it myself.
(My sites use ColdFusion, and unfortunately it is not easy to find good ColdFusion hosting...)
The blogs don't bother me nearly as much as "those stupid parked domain search sites."
I don't know how many times I have done a Google search, and the 3rd or 4th result comes back with my exact phrase..yay!
Then I go to some stupid, totally lame site advertising domain names, or listing other sites, or something like that.
I never have figured out how they get listed in Google the way they do though- because my search phrase is not listed on the page...so evidently they know something I don't.
I maintain a few Server 2003 servers.
I use a combination of IP Sec, Windows Firewall, the Security Configuration tool, and of course, turning of un-necessary services.
All of these things are built right into Windows, so it is completely free.
I haven't had any problems with this set-up, and I've scanned it hundreds of times and there is not a hole to be seen. I've got 5 servers doing different tasks, and each is only visible to the outside world in a way that is necessary. Inside the subnet there is a lot more access- this is managed with IP Sec.
Of course someone here will tell me it isn't secure...because that is what some people do. But I have never heard of a configuration like this getting hacked- it is pretty damn tight.
So going to Free BSD is not necessary- some people will lead you to believe that- but it isn't true. Do a good job on your Windows security and you'll be locked down just as well.
Serving up un-popular opinions since 1968!
I used to be a 'hard-core' gamer. No more...
Sadly, I spend my gaming time on Xbox Live Arcade. I am actually 'working through' a super-duper version of Breakout. I do this because it is easy to pick up, and easy to put down.
While I play it, I think to myself...my god, I've been playing this game for 30 years...it all comes back to where it started.
Mr. AC-
Extremely well balanced post! I enjoyed your technical wisdom, and the way it was counter-balanced with the admission that you suck at real life.
I hate to say it, but *I* am that guy you hate at work. I am the jackass that takes the shortcuts, and doesn't follow best practices.
But, I try to balance that with the rest of my life, and I'm pretty happy with the results.
I would agree 100% on an internet site, but on an Intranet site I was hoping for a little more open-ness.
And if you really think that XML and CSS are standards, then you are a bigger fool. We have a TON of people who are still using Navigator 4.x.
Not trying to blow off your question...
I'm an application developer, not desktop support. So it is my job to tailor the applictions to how people use them, not tailor their computers to the way I want them to work.
So...I had to make changes.
But cookies would have been sooooo much easier.
Hey look...I have a slashdot.org cookie on my computer right now...
Sure makes it easier for me since I don't need to log in to this site.
I design a lot of intranet based applications. And I *used* to use cookies a lot to keep user information. It was easy, convenient, and accurate. I never had problems.
Then some whack job at my company started to tell everyone that cookies were 'dangerous' and they should block them. Of course then I started to get complaints that my systems no longer functioned. (I had it set up to notify the users what the problem was...not just throwing stupid errors.)
It was a total pain to reconfigure the systems to deal with url/form variables everywhere, instead of just using cookies. And now a lot of the user-friendly functionality is gone. "Why doesn't it remember who I am?" "Because you turned off cookies..."
Hundreds of hours of wasted time because one dork thought that cookies were spyware...and this is on an INTRANET site.
I really wish they could understand what cookies really are...
I get my pictures printed at outside services...
An 8x10 costs a little under $2. Really good inkjet paper costs about $1 per sheet- then you have to factor in ink, and wastage.
And when it's all done, I would much rather have my pictures printed on photopaper (archival quality actually) than from an inkjet that will fade much quicker.
We get it, we just don't agree.
Exactly-
Real information, rather than "ours will be better." (because we said so)
I think you are assuming the wrong things.
Microsoft's strength is in their homogenous platform. They want you to use a Microsoft operating system, a Microsoft Office suite, and a Microsoft browser.
Since they own at least 75% of the browser market, then they only need to design sites for their own browser.
Let's say User Joe uses Firefox- not for any particular reason, only because his brother in law told him to. Then he goes to the Bungie site, which performs poorly in Firefox. Well, there is a very good chance that Joe will follow the path of least resistance- which is switching to Internet Explorer to view the Bungie site, and possibly makingn Internet Explorer his primary browser. OR, let's say Joe already uses IE, but one day he tries out Firefox. He goes to see his stats on Bungie.net, and things just don't look right...well, he'll just switch back to Internet Explorer.
Either way, Microsoft gains, or keeps market share.
And if the IT press wants to get on their case about it, then they have the perfect answer, 'well, Firefox just needs to support these standards.' It's a win-win situation.
And I really doubt that they will lose any Xbox or Halo 2 sales because their site performs poorly in Firefox. People may not buy an Xbox or Halo 2 because they don't like Microsoft- but this one site won't affect that decision.
All around, it's a win for them.
So...why would they change it?
No...we understand that it is the 'expected result' (the Firefox bugs).
But there are two ways of thinking on that:
1- programming for/around these bugs is stupid. Program it the right way, and wait for the browsers to fix themselves. For instance, when Netscape 6.0 came out, I did not modify all of my pages to display in that piece of crap. Because 6.0 really was a piece of crap...Like the rest of the world, I realized that Netscape Navigator was a totally marginalized piece of software, and it was their problem to fix the bugs- which they mostly did in 6.1
2- If the company that you work for owns a huge chunk of the browser market, you make sure it works in your browser...and like I said before, if it makes your competition look bad- even better.
I don't think your verbal talent is lacking- I think it is your understanding of human motivation. What in the world would cause a Microsoft company to modify one of their sites to operate with a buggy browser, made by the competition? In this case they can even say 'well, we just designed it to the standards...'.
Do you really think they give a shit if they could fix it for Firefox? Why would they spend even 20 seconds on that?
And if you are thinking, "because then more of their customers could view the page" then you REALLY don't understand what is going on.
If you are a Microsoft company...and the bugs are in an open source browser...
No, it doesn't make any sense at all.
Have you read a CSS book lately? Every book (6 or 7) I have read in the past few months spends at least 10% of its pages complaining about Internet Explorer and the way it displays CSS (boxes are the favorite subject). Then each author recommends that you jump ahead with 'compliant' code- screw Internet Explorer!
Well this time it is the same thing in reverse...do you really think that Microsoft is going to pass up a chance to make Firefox look bad?
So are you saying that he is wrong for giving us his opinion?
And why is it that you jump directly to the 'slave labor camp' analogy?
It's like talking to someone who compares everything to the Nazis. It's annoying, and it marginalizes what actually happened.
"I think we should all wear uniforms.."
"Yeah, and the Nazis thought that too.."
"We should line this up straight."
"What are you, some kind of Nazi?"
As if lining stuff up straight, and wearing uniforms somehow puts a person in the same vein as the Nazis.
The Nazis weren't bad because they wore uniforms, or because they tried to achieve order.
They were bad because they tortured and killed millions of people. They attacked their neighboring countries, they treated people worse than animals.
But enjoying order does not mean that a person should be compared to the Nazis.
I guess maybe your didn't RTFA.
The article was all about the technology- that is the comparison.
The Sony guy was saying that the Xbox 360 technology was aimed at the PS2.
When in fact, the technology in the original Xbox was superior with the technology in the PS2.
Sorry that I was basing my comments on the subject at hand.
Oh come one now...don't get all logical!
I guess that Sony is the only one who doesn't realize that as far as technology is concerned, the first Xbox wiped the floor with the PS2.
Yes, the Xbox 360 is going after the PS2- as far as sales numbers go. This whack job spouting Sony's poo has no interest in the actual reality as far as the technology is concerned...I'm sure he STILL thinks the PS2 is a great system.
wow...someone gets a big allowance!
'guns blazing?'
This is Nintendo...
More like: 'With a giant bag of fairy dust to sprinkle on all the good boys and girls in rainbow land.'
Well, obviously if he designed a house...
The roof would cave in when more than 30 people knocked on the front door.