Who's gloating? Firefox has done well, but there's nothing to gloat about yet. Once use of FireFox get's over over 50%, then we'll be gloating:-)
If viruses and spyware keep popping up at their current rate and if Microsof sticks to it's guns about not applying the SP2 Internet Explorer fixes to platforms other than Windows XP, than I believe that Firefox may get there a lot quicker than you might expect. Longhorn keeps getting pushed back further and futher and I doubt we'll be seeing a whole lot of innovation in IE until Longhorn is released. Meanwhile Firefox keeps getting better and better and won't require that you upgrade your operating system to upgrade the browser.
For me it's all a moot point anyway, I've got a Mac Mini on the way and if I like it as much as I think I'm going to, then I'll have a dual processor G5 Powermac in 6 months and my Windows box will be for games only.
... is when I begin to question how much value XP really provides
Here's a quick test. Grab 5 or 10 of them and sit them down in front of a Linux box. If they can't be bothered to learn some basic common sense security practices when using Windows, an operating system they are already familiar with, then I'd love to see how quickly they can and/or are willing to learn Linux and the brand spanking new set of applications that they will have to use on the platform.
After your done hearing them bitch and moan about how things are different and don't work the way they are "supposed to", then you'll understand the innate value in sitting the user down in front of an OS and a series of applications that they are familiar with. Say what you will about Windows and some other Microsoft products, but there is some value in having an OS and series of applications that don't require serious retraining of your users. Especially if you have a lot of users, and the majority are apathetic and unwilling to learn.
As horrible as Windows can be sometimes from an admin's perspective, there can be real value in sticking with the platform on the client end (and in some rare occasions, the server end) depending on your user base and company requirements.
If you've got a smart user base who's generally willing to learn new things, then by all means get them to Linux if it's possible. If, however, you have a bunch of apathetic idiots, moving them all to a new platform can end up being more trouble than it's worth.
Look at the specs, and realize that when you take it to a LAN party, you'll get laughed at. 1.25 or 1.42GHz G4, 256MB (up to 1GB) RAM, Radeon 9200 with 32MB RAM.
You're missing the point. This is not the kind of system aimed at the hardcore gamer or any kind of avid computer user for that matter. This is the kind of system aimed at the casual computer user who uses his or her PC to browse the web, to send and receive e-mail, to create and edit office style documents and for managing digital media (photo's, home movies, music collection, etc.).
This system is also aimed at someone like me, who is a hardcore PC user who would like to try out a Mac, but who doesn't want to go the used route or shell out a whole lot of money. I just pre-ordered one of these suckers and I can't wait to get my hands on it. If I find that it is really as easy and fun to use as I think it will be, the next time one of my casual computer-user friends calls me up to ask me which system I'd recommend, I'll point them in this direction as well (while saving my money for a brand new PowerMac G5 with dual processors and a cinema display).
This is a system aimed at the casual computer user who until know, has only known the PC as some Dell or Gateway box with Windows installed. Someone who's fed up with Windows and all of the headaches that come along with it. It's aimed at someone who wants a system that is easy to use, secure and has software and hardware available that "just works", but who up until know could not afford (or simply didn't want to waste so much money taking a chance on) a Mac.
Even if I ultimately decided to stick with a PC, I know that Mac's are easier to use and more secure for the average computer user out there. The problem has always been the price. People want a deal. Now I can point them in the Mac direction and say goodbye to the bi-monthly trips to their house to fix their PC's (remove spyware, malware and occasionally just wipe the thing and reinstall everything because it's hopeless) or show them how to use the latest gadget they bought that comes bundled with software that is a pain in the butt to figure out how to use.
All I can say is "Thank you, Steve! What took so long?"
Think about it for a minute. Without fake breasts we would never have had Bay Watch. Without Bay Watch, David Hasselhoff would have been a has-been alcoholic actor rather than an alcoholic actor in the twilight of a mediocre career in television. What a crying shame that would have been.
2) Remove the "dirty slut" gene, replacing it with a modified version of the "obedient wife" gene (which morphs back into the "dirty slut" gene when she's in the sack with her husband). It might not hurt to genetically enhance her breasts while your at it so she won't have to pay for them later.
What continues to blow my mind are the numbers of users who do not have anti-virus software installed or kept up to date on their systems. I really wish that Microsoft would include some basic type of anti-virus / anti-spyware utility with the operating system.
Yes, there would probably be a huge outcry about antitrust violations, but I believe the bottom line is that Microsoft has a duty to ship an operating system that is as reasonably secure as possible without including so many features as to push other vendors out of the market. I think the firewall in Windows XP SP2 is a good example of a compromise. The firewall includes enough basic features so that users aren't completely hanging out there in the wind, yet does not provide such a robust feature set so as to push third party firewall vendors out of the market.
The disk defragmentation utility is another good example of a compromise. It has enough basic features to be useable, but not enough so as to push third party vendors out of the market.
Microsoft could do it if they wanted to, even if there was an outcry from vendors. Look at what they did with I.E. when they decided they wanted a piece of the browser market. For a more modern, post anti-trust trial example, look at what they are doing now with Windows Media Player. Yeah, the EU is calling them on it, but I think a real case could be made that a basic anti-virus / anti-spyware utility is as important a part of basic system security as a firewall.
Of course, if Microsoft just fixed I.E. and Outlook / Outlook Express, viruses and spyware wouldn't be as much of an issue, but we all know about how likely that is to happen.
The parent was correctly moderated as flamebait, but it provides an opportunity to correct a popular misconception. Al Jazeera is an excellent news organisation that tries to be fairly balanced. Most of the senior journalists were originally part of the BBC Arabic Service who started Al Jazeera when the BBC more or less discontinued a serious Arabic service. As individuals, they have their own viewpoints. They are also under tremendous political pressures (governments, including the current US one in Iraq, frequently try to prevent them reporting freely). That does not prevent them from doing their best to report honestly. Before running their coverage down, people should read and evaluate what they write and broadcast.
Point me in the direction of one Al-Jazeera article that talks about the good things that US troops are doing in Iraq and I'll retract my statement.
It's quite different when a service provider stops people from using its service than it is when some third group stops people from using said service.
If you don't believe that most EU countries have plans to do the same thing to the USA's GPS system if necessary your crazy. Every modern military has contingency plans for just about every scenario under the sun, no matter how unlikely that scenario might be. That includes, on the EU member side, contingency plans for war with the USA. What do you think is one of the first parts of that war plan? Taking out the GPS.
The bottom line is that the US government would be irresponsible if it did not have contingency plans on the shelf for taking out Galileo just as EU member states would be crazy to not have contingency plans on the shelf to take out GPS. It's not pretty, but it's reality because the number one job of any government is to protect it's own citizens. In military terms, that means have plan ready for every scenario imaginable, no matter how terrible.
IMHO, it's better to be up front with your allies about what you are planning than to say one thing while actually doing another. Honesty, when possible (which isn't always the case when it comes to national security), is always the best policy, especially with your allies.
also give IBM and Red Hat a boost by enlarging the pool of applications certified to run on Red Hat Enterprise Linux with IBM hardware and middleware
Great. So now we can go from a scenario where you can pick the hardware from any vendor, but your stuck with software from Microsoft to a scenario where you have to get your hardware from IBM and your software from Redhat. One of the major selling points of Linux is that your no longer dependent on a single vendor. I'd rather be dependent on a single vendor than dependent on two. At least with Microsoft, you know that they are going to support their operating system for a period of at least 5 - 7 years. With Redhat, who knows?
I hate replying to my own posts, but I feel like I left out this important element to put it into perspective.
I forgot to mention the MMORPG aspect. Take a game like Everquest or Star Wars Galaxies. You're actually worse off if you buy into something like that because of the monthly fee. Not only are you spending $40 - $50 bucks for the boxed product, but you've got to pay a monthly free of anywhere from $5 - $10+ to continue playing after the first month and you're in the same boat as you would be if you bought Half Life 2 from Valve in that if the software company goes belly up then you can't play the MMORPG that you paid for.
With Half Life 2 multiplayer (Counter-Strike: Source and Day of Defeat: Source), I spend $40 bucks up front, and can play as long as I like and never have to spend another dime. Let's say I spent $45 on it and played for 2 years and then Valve goes out of business. It cost me a total of $45, which comes out to about $1.66 a month to play the game. Now let's say I spend $45 on a boxed MMORPG game which includes one month of free play and then proceed to pay $5 a month for the next 23 months of play. That's a grand total of $160 bucks to play the game for 2 years, or about $6.66 a month.
Half Life 2 is the better deal. Especially when you consider that most hit MMORPG games cost more than $5 bucks a month.
When it comes to value, Half Life 2 with activation beats any MMORPG game out there hands down. Yeah you have to deal with product activation, but you're in a similar situation with a MMORPG and you don't have to deal with a monthly fee for each month you play Half Life 2's multiplayer games or Half Life 2 itself.
I know I'm probably alone here, but I actually don't mind the activation. I no longer have to worry about keeping track of the game media. Case in point, a month ago my hard drive crashed. Luckily I had my important data backed up and had recently purchased a new 160 GB hard drive to install but hadn't gotten around to it yet.
So I installed the new hard drive, re-installed the OS, restored the data I had backed up and started re-installing all of the software that I use. My Half-Life CD was gone. I have no idea where it went or at what point I lost it, but it had literally been years since the last time I had seen it. At first I was freaked because I love Counter Strike and Day of Defeat. Thanks to Steam, all I had to do was reinstall the Steam client, log in, and I could download and play the games again.
Basically, I see it as a fair trade off. My new position is that I'm willing to deal with a game that requires activation to run, provided the company allows me to re-download the content as many times as may be required should something happen to my PC, or should I be over at a friends and decide that I want to play the game.
Now, I understand the argument that you'd be totally S.O.L. if the company went under in the future, but I've got to be honest here, once I play a game and beat it number of times (which is usally within a couple of months after I buy it), I don't often find myself going back to it unless there's a multiplayer element. So, if 3 years down the road I can't play HalfLife 2 anymore because Valve goes belly up, I wouldn't be all that upset about it. I mean really, I can go out on any night of the week with friends and blow $40 or $50 bucks at the bar. If the game keeps me in for an evening or two when I otherwise would have gone out and partied, then the game has paid for itself. I know that I'll literally spend hundred of hours (maybe even in the low thousands of hours) playing HalfLife 2, Counter Strike: Source and Day of Defeat: Source over the next few years. To me, it's worth it, even if Valve goes totaly belly up after 3 years. The game will have paid for itself a million times over.
Import software, on the other hand, is a differnt story alltogather. There are times that I've had to go back and install an old version of a product to open up some document that I have saved. Product activation wouldn't work for me for that kind of software, but for games, if it allows me to redownload it as many times as I may need, then I don't really mind it.
I disagree. I think, most people, bought Tivo for its timeshifting and season pass features. Are commercials really so bad?
You made a good point. Time shifting and season passes are the reason that I bought Tivo. I was paying so much for cable and there was often nothing on that I wanted to watch. I was also tired of staying home certain nights to catch my favorite shows when something else was going on that I wanted to do as well. With time shifting and season passes, there's also something to watch and I can watch what I want, when I want.
As for commericals, sometimes when I'm watching a prerecorded show on Tivo I forget that it is prerecorded and that I can fast forward through the commericals and I end up sitting right through them anyway. Commericals really aren't that bad. Although, if they do insist on showing ad's while fast forwarding, I should hope they reduce the monthly fee they charge subscribers. Of course we both know that won't happen.
Just enable the 30 second skip and you'll never use fast forward to skip commercials again. When it's enabled, the -->| button becomes a 30 second skip button.
To enable:
1. Grab your TiVo remote.
2. Bring up any recorded program. (You have to be watching a recorded program rather than "Live TV" in order to enable the feature.)
3. On your TiVo remote, key in the following sequence: SELECT PLAY SELECT 30 SELECT
4. If you've successfully entered the code, you should hear three "bings" in succession to inform you that you've successfully enabled the 30 second skip.
The only down side is that any time your TiVo is rebooted (such as after a power outage or a software update) you'll have to re-enable this feature.
I wouldn't worry much about the bill. At least, not right now. We're now in a lame duck session of Congress and there are several other bills that both the House and Senate are trying to get through, get sent to committee and get finalized and signed by the President before this session is through. The intelligence reform bill comes to mind.
Anything that passes the Senate, in order to become law, would also have to be passed by the House. Then it would have to be sent to a conference committee where members from both the House and the Senate try to reconcile the differences between the bills passed in each chamber. Members of that committee would have to agree on a final form of the bill and then send the compromise back to House and Senate for an up or down vote. This in and of itself, is no small feat. There are plenty of bills that pass both the House and the Senate that never make it out of the conference committee.
If both chambers managed to pass it, the president would then have to sign it. The chances of all of this happening in a lame duck session of Congress are slim to none. Especially when you consider that they are trying to get this mammoth intelligence reform bill done. This copyright bill will then die when this session of Congress ends and the process will have to begin all over again. Don't worry about this bill, at least, not yet. Instead, focus your energy on getting the idiots that sponsored the bill and the idiots that ultimately voted for it out of office the next time they are up for reelection.
I think Opera's biggest problem is that it's hard to compete with free! When I finally decided to dump IE, I looked at Mozilla, Firefox and Opera. Although Opera was nice, I found that Firefox could do everything that I need it to do and it was free to boot. Sure you can run the free version of Opera, but those ads are annoying. In the end, it's just hard to compete with free unless your product has some kind of killer feature that the free alternatives lack. In Opera's case, I just didn't see any features that warranted shelling out the cash.
I'm surprized that here on Slashdot (the epitome of geekiness) more people don't use homebrew PVRs like MythTV or Freevo.
It all boils down to time. I looked into setting up a Linux solution, but I didn't have a whole lot of free time on my hands to put togather a box, figure out how to configure the software, test it, etc. Plus I've got digital cable, and I wasn't sure if the software you mention can work with the digital cable box. It took me a trip to Best Buy and about 10 minutes to install and configure TiVo. It's a more expensive way to go, but in this case I wanted something that just worked and I wanted it ASAP.
When Microsoft decides it's time to compete they always have the same MO:
1) Buy a company that is already doing it and doing it fairly well.
2) Rapidly make "improvements" to the software (including whatever adjustments necessary so that it only works well with other Microsoft products) without focusing on security issues.
3) Release it, giving it away for free if necessary.
4) Continue to update and improve it while you drive the competition out of the market.
4) Integrate it into the next version of Windows (again ignoring any potential security issues) to put a final stake in the heart of your competition.
5) Once the competition is gone, move the developers on to something else.
I don't care how good their desktop search product becomes; nobody who uses Windows should ever use it. It'll be crap when it's first released but get better and better. Eventually it will probably be better than the offerings from other companies but have no illusions. If Microsoft is able to gain market dominance, they'll stop working on the product. Of course, by that time it'll be integrated into the OS and there will be a whole host of security vulnerabilities just waiting to be exploited by the script kiddies.
We've been through this before with Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, Windows Media Player, Windows Messenger, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Who's gloating? Firefox has done well, but there's nothing to gloat about yet. Once use of FireFox get's over over 50%, then we'll be gloating :-)
If viruses and spyware keep popping up at their current rate and if Microsof sticks to it's guns about not applying the SP2 Internet Explorer fixes to platforms other than Windows XP, than I believe that Firefox may get there a lot quicker than you might expect. Longhorn keeps getting pushed back further and futher and I doubt we'll be seeing a whole lot of innovation in IE until Longhorn is released. Meanwhile Firefox keeps getting better and better and won't require that you upgrade your operating system to upgrade the browser.
For me it's all a moot point anyway, I've got a Mac Mini on the way and if I like it as much as I think I'm going to, then I'll have a dual processor G5 Powermac in 6 months and my Windows box will be for games only.
Isn't most "journalism" these days? At least most political journalism. Which raises as even better question. Was there ever a time when it wasn't?
Here's a quick test. Grab 5 or 10 of them and sit them down in front of a Linux box. If they can't be bothered to learn some basic common sense security practices when using Windows, an operating system they are already familiar with, then I'd love to see how quickly they can and/or are willing to learn Linux and the brand spanking new set of applications that they will have to use on the platform.
After your done hearing them bitch and moan about how things are different and don't work the way they are "supposed to", then you'll understand the innate value in sitting the user down in front of an OS and a series of applications that they are familiar with. Say what you will about Windows and some other Microsoft products, but there is some value in having an OS and series of applications that don't require serious retraining of your users. Especially if you have a lot of users, and the majority are apathetic and unwilling to learn.
As horrible as Windows can be sometimes from an admin's perspective, there can be real value in sticking with the platform on the client end (and in some rare occasions, the server end) depending on your user base and company requirements.
If you've got a smart user base who's generally willing to learn new things, then by all means get them to Linux if it's possible. If, however, you have a bunch of apathetic idiots, moving them all to a new platform can end up being more trouble than it's worth.
You're missing the point. This is not the kind of system aimed at the hardcore gamer or any kind of avid computer user for that matter. This is the kind of system aimed at the casual computer user who uses his or her PC to browse the web, to send and receive e-mail, to create and edit office style documents and for managing digital media (photo's, home movies, music collection, etc.).
This system is also aimed at someone like me, who is a hardcore PC user who would like to try out a Mac, but who doesn't want to go the used route or shell out a whole lot of money. I just pre-ordered one of these suckers and I can't wait to get my hands on it. If I find that it is really as easy and fun to use as I think it will be, the next time one of my casual computer-user friends calls me up to ask me which system I'd recommend, I'll point them in this direction as well (while saving my money for a brand new PowerMac G5 with dual processors and a cinema display).
This is a system aimed at the casual computer user who until know, has only known the PC as some Dell or Gateway box with Windows installed. Someone who's fed up with Windows and all of the headaches that come along with it. It's aimed at someone who wants a system that is easy to use, secure and has software and hardware available that "just works", but who up until know could not afford (or simply didn't want to waste so much money taking a chance on) a Mac.
Even if I ultimately decided to stick with a PC, I know that Mac's are easier to use and more secure for the average computer user out there. The problem has always been the price. People want a deal. Now I can point them in the Mac direction and say goodbye to the bi-monthly trips to their house to fix their PC's (remove spyware, malware and occasionally just wipe the thing and reinstall everything because it's hopeless) or show them how to use the latest gadget they bought that comes bundled with software that is a pain in the butt to figure out how to use.
All I can say is "Thank you, Steve! What took so long?"
Fake breasts ....
Think about it for a minute. Without fake breasts we would never have had Bay Watch. Without Bay Watch, David Hasselhoff would have been a has-been alcoholic actor rather than an alcoholic actor in the twilight of a mediocre career in television. What a crying shame that would have been.
I love Linux, but let's face the facts here. Most of the apps aren't pretty.
1) Make clones of Jenna Jameson.
2) Remove the "dirty slut" gene, replacing it with a modified version of the "obedient wife" gene (which morphs back into the "dirty slut" gene when she's in the sack with her husband). It might not hurt to genetically enhance her breasts while your at it so she won't have to pay for them later.
3) Sell clones as mail order brides.
4) Profit!
What continues to blow my mind are the numbers of users who do not have anti-virus software installed or kept up to date on their systems. I really wish that Microsoft would include some basic type of anti-virus / anti-spyware utility with the operating system.
Yes, there would probably be a huge outcry about antitrust violations, but I believe the bottom line is that Microsoft has a duty to ship an operating system that is as reasonably secure as possible without including so many features as to push other vendors out of the market. I think the firewall in Windows XP SP2 is a good example of a compromise. The firewall includes enough basic features so that users aren't completely hanging out there in the wind, yet does not provide such a robust feature set so as to push third party firewall vendors out of the market. The disk defragmentation utility is another good example of a compromise. It has enough basic features to be useable, but not enough so as to push third party vendors out of the market.
Microsoft could do it if they wanted to, even if there was an outcry from vendors. Look at what they did with I.E. when they decided they wanted a piece of the browser market. For a more modern, post anti-trust trial example, look at what they are doing now with Windows Media Player. Yeah, the EU is calling them on it, but I think a real case could be made that a basic anti-virus / anti-spyware utility is as important a part of basic system security as a firewall.
Of course, if Microsoft just fixed I.E. and Outlook / Outlook Express, viruses and spyware wouldn't be as much of an issue, but we all know about how likely that is to happen.
Point me in the direction of one Al-Jazeera article that talks about the good things that US troops are doing in Iraq and I'll retract my statement.
I bet that will be about as fair and balanced as a typical Al-Jazeera broadcast.
I didn't realize the that the French and the Germans were against the screensaver.
Relax people, it was a joke ... and a rather bad joke, I might add :-)
I wonder how this compares to the total sales of bricks and mortar retail giants like Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. Does anybody have any idea?
"Too much time on my hands...."
If you don't believe that most EU countries have plans to do the same thing to the USA's GPS system if necessary your crazy. Every modern military has contingency plans for just about every scenario under the sun, no matter how unlikely that scenario might be. That includes, on the EU member side, contingency plans for war with the USA. What do you think is one of the first parts of that war plan? Taking out the GPS.
The bottom line is that the US government would be irresponsible if it did not have contingency plans on the shelf for taking out Galileo just as EU member states would be crazy to not have contingency plans on the shelf to take out GPS. It's not pretty, but it's reality because the number one job of any government is to protect it's own citizens. In military terms, that means have plan ready for every scenario imaginable, no matter how terrible.
IMHO, it's better to be up front with your allies about what you are planning than to say one thing while actually doing another. Honesty, when possible (which isn't always the case when it comes to national security), is always the best policy, especially with your allies.
Great. So now we can go from a scenario where you can pick the hardware from any vendor, but your stuck with software from Microsoft to a scenario where you have to get your hardware from IBM and your software from Redhat. One of the major selling points of Linux is that your no longer dependent on a single vendor. I'd rather be dependent on a single vendor than dependent on two. At least with Microsoft, you know that they are going to support their operating system for a period of at least 5 - 7 years. With Redhat, who knows?
I hate replying to my own posts, but I feel like I left out this important element to put it into perspective.
I forgot to mention the MMORPG aspect. Take a game like Everquest or Star Wars Galaxies. You're actually worse off if you buy into something like that because of the monthly fee. Not only are you spending $40 - $50 bucks for the boxed product, but you've got to pay a monthly free of anywhere from $5 - $10+ to continue playing after the first month and you're in the same boat as you would be if you bought Half Life 2 from Valve in that if the software company goes belly up then you can't play the MMORPG that you paid for.
With Half Life 2 multiplayer (Counter-Strike: Source and Day of Defeat: Source), I spend $40 bucks up front, and can play as long as I like and never have to spend another dime. Let's say I spent $45 on it and played for 2 years and then Valve goes out of business. It cost me a total of $45, which comes out to about $1.66 a month to play the game. Now let's say I spend $45 on a boxed MMORPG game which includes one month of free play and then proceed to pay $5 a month for the next 23 months of play. That's a grand total of $160 bucks to play the game for 2 years, or about $6.66 a month.
Half Life 2 is the better deal. Especially when you consider that most hit MMORPG games cost more than $5 bucks a month.
When it comes to value, Half Life 2 with activation beats any MMORPG game out there hands down. Yeah you have to deal with product activation, but you're in a similar situation with a MMORPG and you don't have to deal with a monthly fee for each month you play Half Life 2's multiplayer games or Half Life 2 itself.
I know I'm probably alone here, but I actually don't mind the activation. I no longer have to worry about keeping track of the game media. Case in point, a month ago my hard drive crashed. Luckily I had my important data backed up and had recently purchased a new 160 GB hard drive to install but hadn't gotten around to it yet.
.....
So I installed the new hard drive, re-installed the OS, restored the data I had backed up and started re-installing all of the software that I use. My Half-Life CD was gone. I have no idea where it went or at what point I lost it, but it had literally been years since the last time I had seen it. At first I was freaked because I love Counter Strike and Day of Defeat. Thanks to Steam, all I had to do was reinstall the Steam client, log in, and I could download and play the games again.
Basically, I see it as a fair trade off. My new position is that I'm willing to deal with a game that requires activation to run, provided the company allows me to re-download the content as many times as may be required should something happen to my PC, or should I be over at a friends and decide that I want to play the game.
Now, I understand the argument that you'd be totally S.O.L. if the company went under in the future, but I've got to be honest here, once I play a game and beat it number of times (which is usally within a couple of months after I buy it), I don't often find myself going back to it unless there's a multiplayer element. So, if 3 years down the road I can't play HalfLife 2 anymore because Valve goes belly up, I wouldn't be all that upset about it. I mean really, I can go out on any night of the week with friends and blow $40 or $50 bucks at the bar. If the game keeps me in for an evening or two when I otherwise would have gone out and partied, then the game has paid for itself. I know that I'll literally spend hundred of hours (maybe even in the low thousands of hours) playing HalfLife 2, Counter Strike: Source and Day of Defeat: Source over the next few years. To me, it's worth it, even if Valve goes totaly belly up after 3 years. The game will have paid for itself a million times over.
Import software, on the other hand, is a differnt story alltogather. There are times that I've had to go back and install an old version of a product to open up some document that I have saved. Product activation wouldn't work for me for that kind of software, but for games, if it allows me to redownload it as many times as I may need, then I don't really mind it.
Flame away
Support from AOL? That almost an oxymoron.
You made a good point. Time shifting and season passes are the reason that I bought Tivo. I was paying so much for cable and there was often nothing on that I wanted to watch. I was also tired of staying home certain nights to catch my favorite shows when something else was going on that I wanted to do as well. With time shifting and season passes, there's also something to watch and I can watch what I want, when I want.
As for commericals, sometimes when I'm watching a prerecorded show on Tivo I forget that it is prerecorded and that I can fast forward through the commericals and I end up sitting right through them anyway. Commericals really aren't that bad. Although, if they do insist on showing ad's while fast forwarding, I should hope they reduce the monthly fee they charge subscribers. Of course we both know that won't happen.
Just enable the 30 second skip and you'll never use fast forward to skip commercials again. When it's enabled, the -->| button becomes a 30 second skip button.
To enable:
1. Grab your TiVo remote.
2. Bring up any recorded program. (You have to be watching a recorded program rather than "Live TV" in order to enable the feature.)
3. On your TiVo remote, key in the following sequence:
SELECT PLAY SELECT 30 SELECT
4. If you've successfully entered the code, you should hear three "bings" in succession to inform you that you've successfully enabled the 30 second skip.
The only down side is that any time your TiVo is rebooted (such as after a power outage or a software update) you'll have to re-enable this feature.
I wouldn't worry much about the bill. At least, not right now. We're now in a lame duck session of Congress and there are several other bills that both the House and Senate are trying to get through, get sent to committee and get finalized and signed by the President before this session is through. The intelligence reform bill comes to mind.
Anything that passes the Senate, in order to become law, would also have to be passed by the House. Then it would have to be sent to a conference committee where members from both the House and the Senate try to reconcile the differences between the bills passed in each chamber. Members of that committee would have to agree on a final form of the bill and then send the compromise back to House and Senate for an up or down vote. This in and of itself, is no small feat. There are plenty of bills that pass both the House and the Senate that never make it out of the conference committee.
If both chambers managed to pass it, the president would then have to sign it. The chances of all of this happening in a lame duck session of Congress are slim to none. Especially when you consider that they are trying to get this mammoth intelligence reform bill done. This copyright bill will then die when this session of Congress ends and the process will have to begin all over again. Don't worry about this bill, at least, not yet. Instead, focus your energy on getting the idiots that sponsored the bill and the idiots that ultimately voted for it out of office the next time they are up for reelection.
I think Opera's biggest problem is that it's hard to compete with free! When I finally decided to dump IE, I looked at Mozilla, Firefox and Opera. Although Opera was nice, I found that Firefox could do everything that I need it to do and it was free to boot. Sure you can run the free version of Opera, but those ads are annoying. In the end, it's just hard to compete with free unless your product has some kind of killer feature that the free alternatives lack. In Opera's case, I just didn't see any features that warranted shelling out the cash.
It all boils down to time. I looked into setting up a Linux solution, but I didn't have a whole lot of free time on my hands to put togather a box, figure out how to configure the software, test it, etc. Plus I've got digital cable, and I wasn't sure if the software you mention can work with the digital cable box. It took me a trip to Best Buy and about 10 minutes to install and configure TiVo. It's a more expensive way to go, but in this case I wanted something that just worked and I wanted it ASAP.
When Microsoft decides it's time to compete they always have the same MO:
1) Buy a company that is already doing it and doing it fairly well.
2) Rapidly make "improvements" to the software (including whatever adjustments necessary so that it only works well with other Microsoft products) without focusing on security issues.
3) Release it, giving it away for free if necessary.
4) Continue to update and improve it while you drive the competition out of the market.
4) Integrate it into the next version of Windows (again ignoring any potential security issues) to put a final stake in the heart of your competition.
5) Once the competition is gone, move the developers on to something else.
I don't care how good their desktop search product becomes; nobody who uses Windows should ever use it. It'll be crap when it's first released but get better and better. Eventually it will probably be better than the offerings from other companies but have no illusions. If Microsoft is able to gain market dominance, they'll stop working on the product. Of course, by that time it'll be integrated into the OS and there will be a whole host of security vulnerabilities just waiting to be exploited by the script kiddies.
We've been through this before with Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, Windows Media Player, Windows Messenger, etc.
Is it just me or do some people have way to much time on their hands?