Why not simply point to the Microsoft tool rather than your own? It would've eliminated any suspicion, because God forbid download.com makes a mistake...
This bit them in the butt before. MS is getting spanked in court for their "Vista Capable" nonsense. Maybe, just maybe, people will grow a clue and realize the pronouncement of the company selling you the OS shouldn't be taken into account when making a PC upgrade decision.:)
I don't have much faith in that, of course. Considering most people get their tech information from Andy Rooney.:)
While I think the PS3 could've been handled better, I think Sony fixed their screw ups with the PS2 failures (and the original PSX failures) and made a top notch product. The problem I have with the 360 isn't so much the quality of games (it's got some real gems), it's that Microsoft had a problem with their original XBox (of which I had a warranty repair done on the infamous "dirty disc" problem), and they did NOT learn from their mistakes. (I don't mind hardware dying.. sure it sucks, but the amount and breadth of 360 deaths is entirely too much of a clusterfuck to ignore.) I mean, my replacement elite came back and red-ringed THE VERY moment I turned it on? How's that for QC? It's a free repair, but sheesh!
Now having said that, I think in the long term view, Sony's gambles with the PS3 (I think price is their biggest risk) are not nearly as catastrophic. I think we saw enough of the Gamecube as a failure to wonder if anything was going to pull them out of the rut, since it seemed like ages that Nintendo had the console market by the throat. And like Sony, many people wrote them off as GBA producers and Pokemon franchise milkers.:) Now look at the Wii. It's Nintendo who got the last laugh. Sony's not much different... having come off a HUGE win last generation, Sony moved too slowly to halt Microsoft's momentum from the original XBox.
Sitting and playing "Rise of the Argonauts" (a fun game, albeit a bit short) on my PS3, or Valkyrie Chronicles, or Disgaea 3, or LBP, I don't see Sony as "blown it." They blew the chance to kick microsoft in the teeth once more, but they didn't utterly lay a dodo egg. The losses Sony is posting with the PS3 are not unlike the XBox losses (and we're taking their word for it that they're breaking even at this moment, or eeking a profit out of each unit sold), and consequently will be offset in the long term by the longevity of the console. That's just how I feel about it, and it's easy to dismiss Sony like we did Nintendo during the Gamecube/N64 era... but even a goliath like Sony isn't conceding the win to Microsoft just yet.:) Arrogance? Probably, but that's how you get ahead as a huge corporation. I'm okay with that.
I think the real problem this generation is the lack of a large stable of exclusives on any of the consoles. Factor that in with the expensive hardware, and you've got a loss-guaranteed generation. I can play most of the 360 games on my PS3 (if I chose to)... and the gameplay is always comparable, except the notable turd sandwich that was the Orange Box.:)
Not being a Sony diehard like you (I was a dreamcast man), I still can't help but think someone shot the fat lady, and until the generations fully in the can, we can't expect Sony to raise the White flag and back out of a gazillion dollar industry like gaming.:)
I read that review and came away with some objective insight. Of course by the headline here on Slashdot, you get the impression that the guy is literally dropping trou, and taking a steamy dump on the Macbook Pro. Of course that is not the case. Since I'm not a photographer, I don't count his criticisms as dealbreakers, but having said that... it is taking me a bit longer to fall in love with the beautiful, yet glossy, HP mini screen.:) But that's me... Im sure I'll warm up to it.
In the meantime, the trolls can put their pitchforks away, because this isn't the incendiary topic the headline makes it out to be.:) Is it truly ever, though? Heh.
Hindsight is 20/20, but consider the N64, then the GC, and you can see two generations where Nintendo didn't change course. Did we count them out then? Yes, but we were wrong... They still have a disdain for 3rd party developers, and that is something they really must address before they lose every possible avenue of software support, but they learned from the Gamecube and N64. Still, if they keep dicking around their 3rd party devs, the devs will assess next generation whether or not to even bother... super sales or not. (Look at Sony's 3rd party devs going whole hog into the 360 this gen... I'd chalk that up to the trend away from system exclusives, but not necessarily all of it. But not going PS3 then porting to 360 is very telling about how the gaming trends are changing yet again this generation.)
Sony's missteps this generation are a result of the wildly successful previous generation. I think they are learning, and with time, you'll see the Sony Console division turning around much faster than Nintendo. While you have a point if you were to assess them at this moment in the console cycle, I still believe they are going to turn things around. Remember how dismal 2007 was for the PS3, both software and sales-wise? 2008 was an improvement over that, and a handy one by comparison. Granted the 360's price cut and GoW2 title moved some consoles to squeeze out more of a lead, but it's still relatively close compared to where it _could_ be based on how shitty Sony's handled marketing and direction of the console.
I predict that Sony will divorce the "living room entertainment center" concept and go a more Xbox direction. Sure the Xbox can do other stuff (HD-DVD, streaming netflix, etc... but it's primary purpose has been to play games, and the attach rate confirms that.) Sony's got a fabulous Blu Ray player that also plays games. Next generation, Sony will have a console that plays games and... (whatever addons they decide to use).
Perhaps I'm optimistic, but I think we can safely assume every console maker will be doing things a little differently next gen (even Nintendo, since lightning in a bottle only happens once...) We just have to wait and see how it plays out. Don't count Sony out, because we all counted Nintendo out (twice!), and now look at them....
I don't think the PS3 is irrelevant for two reasons: 1. It's still a long ways off until we've got the bandwidth (and capacity) to stream HD movies directly to our TVs, so people are going to go and get themselves a blu-ray player at some point to go with their new-fangled LCD. Will it be a PS3? If Sony's smart it will be... and the price drop (inevitably) will solidify that and produce a sale for the PS3, even though it might not be for a lot of games (if any). 2. The PS3 is still a Japanese console, and in spite of the spurts and glubs of Microsoft in Japan, the PS3 will continue to be #2 behind the Wii. People who buy the wii (most, I should say) are not likely to buy even a 360, much less a PS3, so when we talk about a "2nd console", some people just don't look at either offering after their Wii, unless they get totally bored by the casual games... (unlikely considering how their tastes won't immediately go "hardcore" for say a Fallout 3 style time-sink.) Sony will sell respectable numbers over the console's lifetime, have reasonable 3rd party support, albeit ports (but decent ones, not like the Orange Box crapola), and a fairly good grip on the Blu-Ray market until we see the $50 player from China hit Wal Mart's shelves.:)
Like I said, I'm optimistic I suppose, but the two consoles I use most are my PS3 and my 360... but that's me.:) I like them both and think they are both going well in spite of some of their parent company's stupidity.:) We just have to realize the size of Sony and the "dug in deep" posture of their console division and realize they may be down, but they aren't out.. and that's not a white flag they're flying... in spite of what it looks like to the game bloggers and Cnet.:)
What I fail to understand is everyone counting out Sony this generation because the PS3 hasn't trounced the 360 or the Wii. Microsoft is still stinging (or damn well should be) for HORRIBLE QA, and lowering the prices of their consoles merely shows their desire to "win" even if it means missing the boat on Nintendo-style profit (everyone knows Sony nor Microsoft are raking in the dough Nintendo is this gen). Sony is being slower in the fire-sale mentality, planning their console to have a 10-year lifespan (the PS2 had nearly 9 years of gangbuster sales in the face of three new consoles), and yet people perceive them to be "on the ropes". Of course everyone said the same thing about the Gamecube (which I personally enjoy very much even now), and look at Nintendo now. They are STOMPING the "big 2" by a margin not even a $99 360 can topple.
While Sony has had a tough time marketing correctly this generation, they are far from out of it. And they are even farther from throwing in the towel. The articles I've read about Sony's missteps have always boiled down to price.... with some ignorant souls claiming Sony's console has "just now" caught up graphically with the 360 (I don't know what those idiots are smoking, but I think they need to lay off of it before they get TOO paranoid.) Price in this economy is going to be an issue for Sony, and unlike the rest of us armchair CEOs, Sony actually knows what their next move will be to shore up sales in the long term, as opposed to monthly spikes associated with price cuts and people replacing their consoles because they are tired of sending them to Microsoft for their hardware stupidity.
Put the torches down. I own all 3 consoles and play them regularly. My PS3 gets the bulk of the playtime some months, where my 360 gets the focus other times. (After 3 failed Elites, I bought a $200 Arcade Falcon, so I figure it'll survive marathon games of Fallout 3.) My Wii is the casual fun game system I play with friends over or when I want to play some old SNES shooters.
The bottom line is, don't count Sony out, and don't count the PS3 out. Microsoft isn't.... and neither should we. Will the PS3 "trounce" the 360 in sales? Why should it? Sell a respectable number and you don't have to. You also make an assumption that the next gen Nintendo and Microsoft consoles will be "more powerful" than the PS3. By what measure? It's a good assumption, but the Wii is less powerful than BOTH the current Sony and Microsoft offerings, and big N is eating their lunches. If we have seen ANYTHING with this console generation, it's that specs are NOT going to move the consoles. We are not seeing graphical leaps and bounds beyond previous generations like we did in the past. People are not going to be wowed by "more textural polygons and real-time lighting"... they are only going to be wowed by fun games. (That might exclude us, since we're geeks, but you get the general idea.)
Anyway, I'm rambling... suffice to say, the PS3 is not the abysmal failure the press (or Microsoft) wants you to think it is. And even Major Nelson realizes that Sony isn't done yet. In spite of Shit-tacular marketing, the PS3 is selling... it could be selling better sooner than we think. I for one would rather Sony and Microsoft duke it out than have one dominant player who bankrupts the rest. Competition makes games more fun.:)
Which is why Microsoft and the rest of them should be focusing on education rather than trying to sell another firewall/'internet protection suite.' Give the user the tools to discern the nasties around the 'net rather than seeing $$ by making yet another tool that won't stop someone who ALLOWS malware into their system.
You'd think with the nature of Windows itself, as a big target... always on the news... etc. etc... that people who USE windows would be a little less complacent than say Mac users who don't deal with the vulnerabilities on a daily basis.
"Mac-heads" are laughing at the thick skulls of Windows users... not necessarily their choice of OS, but their choice to ignore the avalanche of news surrounding them about what NOT to do on your PC. When the local news has tips on how NOT to get your windows PC compromised, you KNOW it's prevalent. Ignoring that is what makes people laugh.
and since no amount of OS security can protect someone from giving their password out, we're not looking at a vulnerability... unless you count the user himself/herself.:)
They don't encourage users NOT to install... they simply don't hawk the virus software as a crutch to avoid good common sense. That's not to say that Windows (or more specifically Microsoft) does, it's just the nature of the OS itself that dictates what might be vs. what might not be.
You can safely say that, out of the box, Apple's OS is safer than Microsoft's (and you can make up your own reasons why), and this particular "virus" (it's a trojan, not a virus) isn't related to a vulnerability in the OS. It's related to a vulnerability in a trusting user. It's vastly different than an exploit that antivirus programs are designed to watch for. No antivirus would protect someone from this, unless it was known already as a trojan (then an update would have to show up, etc.) But you begin to see the fallacy of blaming Apple for social engineering. Educating the novices of ANY OS is something we should be doing, rather than trying to have a pissing contest between Jobs and Ballmer.
It may have driven off the bridge, accidentally killed a hooker, and shot someone's dog, but thankfully their SLOW-ASSED support (I've still not received the validation to get the key to update the firmware on my 1TB drive) has actually saved my disk.:)
So, meh... this is one time the glacial support staff has actually BENEFITTED me.:)
one very good reason: Microsoft fudged (with the help of others) the requirements of "Vista Capable". How would you like to have bought a "Vista Capable" machine that was woefully inadequate to run the OS? (After you've been told how awesome it looks, etc.) Take away the Aero, etc, and all the visual tweaks, and all you have is XP+. THAT is why people are pissed about Vista. Technical folks have other reasons, but the grandmas, uncle Boogers and Cletus' of the world see it as a big, fat piece of shit.
Those are the people who are going to tell their non-techie friends how shitty Vista is... and that bad word of mouth isn't going to be affected by us on slashdot or other Windows tech blogs.
heheh. Good point. Well, I'll give them this much, they aren't claiming to only use their drive 6 hours a day.:) I couldn't believe that shit coming from IBM. Yeah, right, guys. I should hear from them by early next week.
I'd take issue with "readily". After reading about the drive's increasingly more common failure and Seagate refusing to acknowledge it was a problem, I think that Seagate was pressured (finally) into admitting it, and have been nothing but obfuscating regarding the subject until now.
At least they finally got bullied into admitting it. The same tactic didn't work for IBM, though.:) Their data recovery sounds like (wording wise) you have to be a business to be qualified for it. But that's just how I read it. We'll see. I am not willing to let Seagate get a free pass... this isn't over yet.:)
I'm just hoping it's not x86 centric. I've got my 1TB drive in my PPC Powermac... And there's not a windows or x86 machine in sight that can fit the bill of "firmware updater".:(
They apparently email you a "key" to get at the firmware. After reading all their comparable knowledgebase information regarding firmware, I can see why they don't just post it. Their policy is to avoid updating drives' firmware in the field at all costs.:)
I've not received my information yet, but I suspect early next week I'll get the key necessary to be able to access the firmware (and presumably a firmware program... it'll be interesting to find out what platforms it supports.:) It seems from their troubleshooting page that Seagate's windows-centric in its explanations.
Let's hope it's just as easy to update the firmware. Those of us who don't have x86 machines might have an issue, from what other commenters have said. Not to mention that little OS we like to refer to as OS X.:)
I was able to determine on my PPC Mac running Leopard that I did indeed have one of the drives in question. However, reading more about the firmware update programs that are increasingly windows-only among manufacturers, I certainly hope that Seagate doen't drink the Microsoft kool-aid.
yes, you hit the nail on the head... it DOES favor the big guys. Just about everything does these days. The problem I have with this sort of thing is that his implementation (though in terms of "antivirus" protection) is vague enough that file permissions that exist in every OS since NT 3.1 would qualify... meaning unauthorized use and/or modification of such is actually already accomplished (without implicitly saying "virus"), but in his mind, and I agree here, Windows didn't use to have this feature in their consumer level OS. Perhaps that's the rub after all. I still smell a troll, because the previous information is what I immediately thought of when reading about this patent (and the patent itself). Maybe I'm proceeding from a false premise, but it sure seemed that way to me. But I think we're in agreement on one thing... the big boys are too heavily favored in this process. East Texas or not (for most patent trolls), there needs to be more oversight in the granting of patents and the cleanup of said patents should start immediately before more of this gets flung around like so much shit. And I go one step further... patenting software is patently wrong.;)
Citation? Don't you read slashdot? Or are you living under a rock? Google is your friend.
Look, it appears you have decided that somehow it's your personal mission in life to make as big a deal about this as possible... Tell me where I said they had to have a prototype before they could patent something? I didn't mean to imply that. What I meant to fix is the group of people and companies who SIT on patents with NOTHING to show for them but the patent paper, allow someone ELSE (big or small) to make said implementation of the product, which based on MANY patent applications is something a little patent reform would've caught as PRIOR ART, and sue the other person. It's extortion no matter how you paint it. But I guess I wasn't entirely clear because we're talking about generalities and the current patent troll in the parent story. Those two ideas are sometimes intertwined, but for the sake of argument, I should've made it clear when I was referring to this particular patent and when I was being more general.
I know corporations patent things. I am against Software Patents. Sorry. The evidence is obvious, mountainous, and already out there. It's up to you to inform yourself if you're willing to discuss this further. Otherwise we're at an impasse. I assumed it would be obvious to someone who read slashdot, much less someone who posts responses here, that over the last 5 years or more, the arguments against software patents have been provided (and the arguments for...rather unconvincingly). It's not my job to be the RSS feed for someone unwilling to read a bit more.
And get a sense of humor... the "color blue" (which by the way, is really trademarked by Ford I believe in their engine block color.. but that's not a patent). I was referring to the most ridiculous sounding thing to patent off the top of my head. There is still such a thing as a sense of humor, or has that rock you've been living under sapped that out of you too?
And it appears Amazon MP3's do the same thing, but they're in the ID3 tags... it's some sort of associated # with I am guessing your purchase. It can be cross-referenced, I suspect. But, I also find this a tempest in a teapot. It's a MUCH nicer deal than DRM any day.
It's not the Slashdot kool-aid. Perhaps there's a disproportionate amount of people who believe in the danger of software patents here, but it's certainly not because it's somehow tied to the "groupthink" that sometimes appears on this site's comments section.:)
Just follow the EU's software patent battle and you'll see who it is who simply LOVE them, and it's not small inventors or small businesses. It's the big corporations that spend more time patenting the color blue than anything else (even the corporation I work for has a team of patent lawyers that rival some entire business' staff, and the company frequently begs us for "patentable stuff" if we've seen it or made it).
If a person or small business wants to patent something and then negotiate with a larger company to do the muscle work beyond a prototype, I have no problem with that, and there needs to be a bit more clarification and protection for those who choose to do so. I couldn't say where in that method we need improvement, but I can say that if a person sits on a patent waiting for someone else to come up with it so they can sue in East Texas, that person needs shot in the eye.:) That is what is torpedoing our patent system (besides the re-patenting of the obvious).
Corporatism is to blame for small business' lack of leverage, and this sort of patent we're discussing here is a poor example of the "little guy" trying to get leverage to bring something to market. (It reeks of troll.) Copyright isn't the solution because Corporate meddling has turned that into a farce as well, favoring only the giant copyright holders' portfolios rather than the guy who actually created the work(s). I don't advocate a complete abandonment of the patent system, all I really want is for it to be equitable, less prone to moronic patents of obvious prior art, and the East Texas Patent Trolls need to have their honeypot dry up so we can stop wasting time with this frivolous shit and work on the real patent system and how it needs to be saved before it becomes the next Copyright... useful only to those with deep pockets and armies of lawyers. None of us, not even the free software zealots, want to see that.
In response to WoW I never said there was a limiation on patenting products only, I was referring to your example of it as a product, not an idea or method (this patent we're talking about here is not a product, per se). We're talking about ideas and concepts in this particular patent that I don't agree are patentable in the realm of Software Patents. Many people more astute than I have given great arguments against Software Patents and their detrimental effect on innovation within software, so I leave that to you to go read if you're more curious. I don't expect people to use their patents, but I expect that if you're going to go to the trouble to patent something you should at least do a little something with it, otherwise you're simply hoarding an idea and stifling others, which is not what patents are all about. Sitting on a patent for nearly the entire length of it, then shooting out a lawsuit after you've done nothing to advance anything with your patent (or usefulness in general) and the Founders did not intend for that to happen.
It's not a strawman, when you're referring to the concepts behind the MMO, which are not Blizzard's to begin with, thereby not patentable, because they follow the same model the every other MMO uses. (which shows us prior art).
As for specifics, Let me reiterate google is your friend. If you want to know more, I'm sure you can find it. I'm not in the business of pointing out domain knowledge. (The bigger picture here w/r/t patent trolls leaves me less space to specify this particular patent, suffice to say it's a troll..) If you'd like to see specific implementations, I'm sure google can point you that way as well (or the USPTO). Regardless of this patent's validity or not, we see the implementation exercised in various ways to great effect in operating systems and embedded systems (particularly in my field, for sure) MANY years before this patent was even submitted, much less granted.
The concept here, that I don't think you're fully understanding, is that there are people who get patents that are obviously covered by prior art or are things that shouldn't be patentable to begin with, but because the system is so broken (and we insist on allowing software patents into the mix, even though the courts now are striking them down), these people are allowed to sue others which is to the detriment of the system and patents themselves.(they're not always big corporations... sometimes these trolls sue the little guy who is trying to make something useful). We need to get back to the basics, stop allowing this sort of nonsense to continue, and turn patents back into what they were meant for in the first place. When someone sues in the "Eastern District of Texas", it's most likely a troll, because they feel like their best shot is the courts in that area's lack of understanding (or perhaps kickbacks... depends on the size of your tinfoil hat.) And when that happens, I find the patent holder suspect all the time. This time is no different. But it's fairly easy to decide that this patent suffers from what most do... a lack of proper consideration w/r/t prior art. It's really that simple.
World of Warcraft is a product. It may be a "virtual" product (meaning it's not a widget). But, it builds on un-patentable (and common things) like communications protocols, graphics algorithms (from the makers of the video cards, etc)... It's not an "idea" or an "algorithm" unless you can prove to me that the ratio of Orcs to Dark Elves is somehow mathematically patentable. Contrary to popular belief, MMO's weren't invented by Blizzard. They just found a way to make a profit from them.
A prototype doesn't have to be elaborate, or even very eye-catching, but the scribblings on a napkin shouldn't be patentable without someone doing some work to get the first one running (because how can you assert that something's workable if you don't even get past the paper stage?) Give a time limit from patent to prototype (not the length of the patent), and limit the time suits can be brought when it becomes obvious that the inventor/troll is simply "slipping one past the patent office" and hoarding this sort of thing to go after deep pockets. Force those who are given patents to actually WORK for it.... person or corporation, it's just that simple, and it'd be equitable too (in spite of your assertion to the contrary.) This patent is a prime example of the "idea" stage and 0 prototype... which creates and breeds these patent trolls that make life difficult for _ALL_ of us, not just big companies. Your assertion is missing the bigger picture. Considering when the patent was issued v. the time they decided to sue should give anyone with half a brain pause, and wonder why they sat on this for so long and ultimately have nothing to show for it but the patent itself. I don't see them submitting their own parts to an OS, or anything like that. Seems fishy to me, as most patent trolls do.
Go look at the specs for Unix or any multiuser OS in the big iron days... I think you can google it.... it's enough common knowledge that citations are implied. These folks patented something in the 90's that we've seen implemented ages ago. You honestly think their patent is a new thing? I certainly hope not.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not simply point to the Microsoft tool rather than your own? It would've eliminated any suspicion, because God forbid download.com makes a mistake...
Bowing to pressure from the media conglomerates is your idea of their OWN decision?
Please tell me you don't actually BELIEVE the DRM in Windows has ANYTHING to do with Microsoft.
This bit them in the butt before. MS is getting spanked in court for their "Vista Capable" nonsense. Maybe, just maybe, people will grow a clue and realize the pronouncement of the company selling you the OS shouldn't be taken into account when making a PC upgrade decision. :)
:)
I don't have much faith in that, of course. Considering most people get their tech information from Andy Rooney.
Let's just hope it's not the Bolivian Navy on maneuvers.
Otherwise, we'll just have to watch "What's my Fruit?"
While I think the PS3 could've been handled better, I think Sony fixed their screw ups with the PS2 failures (and the original PSX failures) and made a top notch product. The problem I have with the 360 isn't so much the quality of games (it's got some real gems), it's that Microsoft had a problem with their original XBox (of which I had a warranty repair done on the infamous "dirty disc" problem), and they did NOT learn from their mistakes. (I don't mind hardware dying.. sure it sucks, but the amount and breadth of 360 deaths is entirely too much of a clusterfuck to ignore.) I mean, my replacement elite came back and red-ringed THE VERY moment I turned it on? How's that for QC? It's a free repair, but sheesh!
:) Now look at the Wii. It's Nintendo who got the last laugh. Sony's not much different... having come off a HUGE win last generation, Sony moved too slowly to halt Microsoft's momentum from the original XBox.
:) Arrogance? Probably, but that's how you get ahead as a huge corporation. I'm okay with that.
:)
:)
Now having said that, I think in the long term view, Sony's gambles with the PS3 (I think price is their biggest risk) are not nearly as catastrophic. I think we saw enough of the Gamecube as a failure to wonder if anything was going to pull them out of the rut, since it seemed like ages that Nintendo had the console market by the throat. And like Sony, many people wrote them off as GBA producers and Pokemon franchise milkers.
Sitting and playing "Rise of the Argonauts" (a fun game, albeit a bit short) on my PS3, or Valkyrie Chronicles, or Disgaea 3, or LBP, I don't see Sony as "blown it." They blew the chance to kick microsoft in the teeth once more, but they didn't utterly lay a dodo egg. The losses Sony is posting with the PS3 are not unlike the XBox losses (and we're taking their word for it that they're breaking even at this moment, or eeking a profit out of each unit sold), and consequently will be offset in the long term by the longevity of the console. That's just how I feel about it, and it's easy to dismiss Sony like we did Nintendo during the Gamecube/N64 era... but even a goliath like Sony isn't conceding the win to Microsoft just yet.
I think the real problem this generation is the lack of a large stable of exclusives on any of the consoles. Factor that in with the expensive hardware, and you've got a loss-guaranteed generation. I can play most of the 360 games on my PS3 (if I chose to)... and the gameplay is always comparable, except the notable turd sandwich that was the Orange Box.
Not being a Sony diehard like you (I was a dreamcast man), I still can't help but think someone shot the fat lady, and until the generations fully in the can, we can't expect Sony to raise the White flag and back out of a gazillion dollar industry like gaming.
I read that review and came away with some objective insight. Of course by the headline here on Slashdot, you get the impression that the guy is literally dropping trou, and taking a steamy dump on the Macbook Pro. Of course that is not the case. Since I'm not a photographer, I don't count his criticisms as dealbreakers, but having said that... it is taking me a bit longer to fall in love with the beautiful, yet glossy, HP mini screen. :) But that's me... Im sure I'll warm up to it.
:) Is it truly ever, though? Heh.
In the meantime, the trolls can put their pitchforks away, because this isn't the incendiary topic the headline makes it out to be.
Hindsight is 20/20, but consider the N64, then the GC, and you can see two generations where Nintendo didn't change course. Did we count them out then? Yes, but we were wrong... They still have a disdain for 3rd party developers, and that is something they really must address before they lose every possible avenue of software support, but they learned from the Gamecube and N64. Still, if they keep dicking around their 3rd party devs, the devs will assess next generation whether or not to even bother... super sales or not. (Look at Sony's 3rd party devs going whole hog into the 360 this gen... I'd chalk that up to the trend away from system exclusives, but not necessarily all of it. But not going PS3 then porting to 360 is very telling about how the gaming trends are changing yet again this generation.)
:)
:) I like them both and think they are both going well in spite of some of their parent company's stupidity. :) We just have to realize the size of Sony and the "dug in deep" posture of their console division and realize they may be down, but they aren't out.. and that's not a white flag they're flying... in spite of what it looks like to the game bloggers and Cnet. :)
Sony's missteps this generation are a result of the wildly successful previous generation. I think they are learning, and with time, you'll see the Sony Console division turning around much faster than Nintendo. While you have a point if you were to assess them at this moment in the console cycle, I still believe they are going to turn things around. Remember how dismal 2007 was for the PS3, both software and sales-wise? 2008 was an improvement over that, and a handy one by comparison. Granted the 360's price cut and GoW2 title moved some consoles to squeeze out more of a lead, but it's still relatively close compared to where it _could_ be based on how shitty Sony's handled marketing and direction of the console.
I predict that Sony will divorce the "living room entertainment center" concept and go a more Xbox direction. Sure the Xbox can do other stuff (HD-DVD, streaming netflix, etc... but it's primary purpose has been to play games, and the attach rate confirms that.) Sony's got a fabulous Blu Ray player that also plays games. Next generation, Sony will have a console that plays games and... (whatever addons they decide to use).
Perhaps I'm optimistic, but I think we can safely assume every console maker will be doing things a little differently next gen (even Nintendo, since lightning in a bottle only happens once...) We just have to wait and see how it plays out. Don't count Sony out, because we all counted Nintendo out (twice!), and now look at them....
I don't think the PS3 is irrelevant for two reasons: 1. It's still a long ways off until we've got the bandwidth (and capacity) to stream HD movies directly to our TVs, so people are going to go and get themselves a blu-ray player at some point to go with their new-fangled LCD. Will it be a PS3? If Sony's smart it will be... and the price drop (inevitably) will solidify that and produce a sale for the PS3, even though it might not be for a lot of games (if any). 2. The PS3 is still a Japanese console, and in spite of the spurts and glubs of Microsoft in Japan, the PS3 will continue to be #2 behind the Wii. People who buy the wii (most, I should say) are not likely to buy even a 360, much less a PS3, so when we talk about a "2nd console", some people just don't look at either offering after their Wii, unless they get totally bored by the casual games... (unlikely considering how their tastes won't immediately go "hardcore" for say a Fallout 3 style time-sink.) Sony will sell respectable numbers over the console's lifetime, have reasonable 3rd party support, albeit ports (but decent ones, not like the Orange Box crapola), and a fairly good grip on the Blu-Ray market until we see the $50 player from China hit Wal Mart's shelves.
Like I said, I'm optimistic I suppose, but the two consoles I use most are my PS3 and my 360... but that's me.
What I fail to understand is everyone counting out Sony this generation because the PS3 hasn't trounced the 360 or the Wii. Microsoft is still stinging (or damn well should be) for HORRIBLE QA, and lowering the prices of their consoles merely shows their desire to "win" even if it means missing the boat on Nintendo-style profit (everyone knows Sony nor Microsoft are raking in the dough Nintendo is this gen). Sony is being slower in the fire-sale mentality, planning their console to have a 10-year lifespan (the PS2 had nearly 9 years of gangbuster sales in the face of three new consoles), and yet people perceive them to be "on the ropes". Of course everyone said the same thing about the Gamecube (which I personally enjoy very much even now), and look at Nintendo now. They are STOMPING the "big 2" by a margin not even a $99 360 can topple.
:)
While Sony has had a tough time marketing correctly this generation, they are far from out of it. And they are even farther from throwing in the towel. The articles I've read about Sony's missteps have always boiled down to price.... with some ignorant souls claiming Sony's console has "just now" caught up graphically with the 360 (I don't know what those idiots are smoking, but I think they need to lay off of it before they get TOO paranoid.) Price in this economy is going to be an issue for Sony, and unlike the rest of us armchair CEOs, Sony actually knows what their next move will be to shore up sales in the long term, as opposed to monthly spikes associated with price cuts and people replacing their consoles because they are tired of sending them to Microsoft for their hardware stupidity.
Put the torches down. I own all 3 consoles and play them regularly. My PS3 gets the bulk of the playtime some months, where my 360 gets the focus other times. (After 3 failed Elites, I bought a $200 Arcade Falcon, so I figure it'll survive marathon games of Fallout 3.) My Wii is the casual fun game system I play with friends over or when I want to play some old SNES shooters.
The bottom line is, don't count Sony out, and don't count the PS3 out. Microsoft isn't.... and neither should we. Will the PS3 "trounce" the 360 in sales? Why should it? Sell a respectable number and you don't have to. You also make an assumption that the next gen Nintendo and Microsoft consoles will be "more powerful" than the PS3. By what measure? It's a good assumption, but the Wii is less powerful than BOTH the current Sony and Microsoft offerings, and big N is eating their lunches. If we have seen ANYTHING with this console generation, it's that specs are NOT going to move the consoles. We are not seeing graphical leaps and bounds beyond previous generations like we did in the past. People are not going to be wowed by "more textural polygons and real-time lighting"... they are only going to be wowed by fun games. (That might exclude us, since we're geeks, but you get the general idea.)
Anyway, I'm rambling... suffice to say, the PS3 is not the abysmal failure the press (or Microsoft) wants you to think it is. And even Major Nelson realizes that Sony isn't done yet. In spite of Shit-tacular marketing, the PS3 is selling... it could be selling better sooner than we think. I for one would rather Sony and Microsoft duke it out than have one dominant player who bankrupts the rest. Competition makes games more fun.
Which is why Microsoft and the rest of them should be focusing on education rather than trying to sell another firewall/'internet protection suite.' Give the user the tools to discern the nasties around the 'net rather than seeing $$ by making yet another tool that won't stop someone who ALLOWS malware into their system.
You'd think with the nature of Windows itself, as a big target... always on the news... etc. etc... that people who USE windows would be a little less complacent than say Mac users who don't deal with the vulnerabilities on a daily basis.
"Mac-heads" are laughing at the thick skulls of Windows users... not necessarily their choice of OS, but their choice to ignore the avalanche of news surrounding them about what NOT to do on your PC. When the local news has tips on how NOT to get your windows PC compromised, you KNOW it's prevalent. Ignoring that is what makes people laugh.
and since no amount of OS security can protect someone from giving their password out, we're not looking at a vulnerability... unless you count the user himself/herself. :)
They don't encourage users NOT to install... they simply don't hawk the virus software as a crutch to avoid good common sense. That's not to say that Windows (or more specifically Microsoft) does, it's just the nature of the OS itself that dictates what might be vs. what might not be.
You can safely say that, out of the box, Apple's OS is safer than Microsoft's (and you can make up your own reasons why), and this particular "virus" (it's a trojan, not a virus) isn't related to a vulnerability in the OS. It's related to a vulnerability in a trusting user. It's vastly different than an exploit that antivirus programs are designed to watch for. No antivirus would protect someone from this, unless it was known already as a trojan (then an update would have to show up, etc.) But you begin to see the fallacy of blaming Apple for social engineering. Educating the novices of ANY OS is something we should be doing, rather than trying to have a pissing contest between Jobs and Ballmer.
It may have driven off the bridge, accidentally killed a hooker, and shot someone's dog, but thankfully their SLOW-ASSED support (I've still not received the validation to get the key to update the firmware on my 1TB drive) has actually saved my disk. :)
:)
So, meh... this is one time the glacial support staff has actually BENEFITTED me.
one very good reason: Microsoft fudged (with the help of others) the requirements of "Vista Capable". How would you like to have bought a "Vista Capable" machine that was woefully inadequate to run the OS? (After you've been told how awesome it looks, etc.) Take away the Aero, etc, and all the visual tweaks, and all you have is XP+. THAT is why people are pissed about Vista. Technical folks have other reasons, but the grandmas, uncle Boogers and Cletus' of the world see it as a big, fat piece of shit.
Those are the people who are going to tell their non-techie friends how shitty Vista is... and that bad word of mouth isn't going to be affected by us on slashdot or other Windows tech blogs.
heheh. Good point. Well, I'll give them this much, they aren't claiming to only use their drive 6 hours a day. :) I couldn't believe that shit coming from IBM. Yeah, right, guys. I should hear from them by early next week.
I'd take issue with "readily". After reading about the drive's increasingly more common failure and Seagate refusing to acknowledge it was a problem, I think that Seagate was pressured (finally) into admitting it, and have been nothing but obfuscating regarding the subject until now.
:) Their data recovery sounds like (wording wise) you have to be a business to be qualified for it. But that's just how I read it. We'll see. I am not willing to let Seagate get a free pass... this isn't over yet. :)
At least they finally got bullied into admitting it. The same tactic didn't work for IBM, though.
I'm just hoping it's not x86 centric. I've got my 1TB drive in my PPC Powermac... And there's not a windows or x86 machine in sight that can fit the bill of "firmware updater". :(
They apparently email you a "key" to get at the firmware. After reading all their comparable knowledgebase information regarding firmware, I can see why they don't just post it. Their policy is to avoid updating drives' firmware in the field at all costs. :)
:) It seems from their troubleshooting page that Seagate's windows-centric in its explanations.
I've not received my information yet, but I suspect early next week I'll get the key necessary to be able to access the firmware (and presumably a firmware program... it'll be interesting to find out what platforms it supports.
Let's hope it's just as easy to update the firmware. Those of us who don't have x86 machines might have an issue, from what other commenters have said. Not to mention that little OS we like to refer to as OS X. :)
I was able to determine on my PPC Mac running Leopard that I did indeed have one of the drives in question. However, reading more about the firmware update programs that are increasingly windows-only among manufacturers, I certainly hope that Seagate doen't drink the Microsoft kool-aid.
yes, you hit the nail on the head... it DOES favor the big guys. Just about everything does these days. The problem I have with this sort of thing is that his implementation (though in terms of "antivirus" protection) is vague enough that file permissions that exist in every OS since NT 3.1 would qualify... meaning unauthorized use and/or modification of such is actually already accomplished (without implicitly saying "virus"), but in his mind, and I agree here, Windows didn't use to have this feature in their consumer level OS. Perhaps that's the rub after all. I still smell a troll, because the previous information is what I immediately thought of when reading about this patent (and the patent itself). Maybe I'm proceeding from a false premise, but it sure seemed that way to me. But I think we're in agreement on one thing... the big boys are too heavily favored in this process. East Texas or not (for most patent trolls), there needs to be more oversight in the granting of patents and the cleanup of said patents should start immediately before more of this gets flung around like so much shit. And I go one step further... patenting software is patently wrong. ;)
Citation? Don't you read slashdot? Or are you living under a rock? Google is your friend.
Look, it appears you have decided that somehow it's your personal mission in life to make as big a deal about this as possible... Tell me where I said they had to have a prototype before they could patent something? I didn't mean to imply that. What I meant to fix is the group of people and companies who SIT on patents with NOTHING to show for them but the patent paper, allow someone ELSE (big or small) to make said implementation of the product, which based on MANY patent applications is something a little patent reform would've caught as PRIOR ART, and sue the other person. It's extortion no matter how you paint it. But I guess I wasn't entirely clear because we're talking about generalities and the current patent troll in the parent story. Those two ideas are sometimes intertwined, but for the sake of argument, I should've made it clear when I was referring to this particular patent and when I was being more general.
I know corporations patent things. I am against Software Patents. Sorry. The evidence is obvious, mountainous, and already out there. It's up to you to inform yourself if you're willing to discuss this further. Otherwise we're at an impasse. I assumed it would be obvious to someone who read slashdot, much less someone who posts responses here, that over the last 5 years or more, the arguments against software patents have been provided (and the arguments for...rather unconvincingly). It's not my job to be the RSS feed for someone unwilling to read a bit more.
And get a sense of humor... the "color blue" (which by the way, is really trademarked by Ford I believe in their engine block color.. but that's not a patent). I was referring to the most ridiculous sounding thing to patent off the top of my head. There is still such a thing as a sense of humor, or has that rock you've been living under sapped that out of you too?
And it appears Amazon MP3's do the same thing, but they're in the ID3 tags... it's some sort of associated # with I am guessing your purchase. It can be cross-referenced, I suspect. But, I also find this a tempest in a teapot. It's a MUCH nicer deal than DRM any day.
It's not the Slashdot kool-aid. Perhaps there's a disproportionate amount of people who believe in the danger of software patents here, but it's certainly not because it's somehow tied to the "groupthink" that sometimes appears on this site's comments section. :)
:) That is what is torpedoing our patent system (besides the re-patenting of the obvious).
Just follow the EU's software patent battle and you'll see who it is who simply LOVE them, and it's not small inventors or small businesses. It's the big corporations that spend more time patenting the color blue than anything else (even the corporation I work for has a team of patent lawyers that rival some entire business' staff, and the company frequently begs us for "patentable stuff" if we've seen it or made it).
If a person or small business wants to patent something and then negotiate with a larger company to do the muscle work beyond a prototype, I have no problem with that, and there needs to be a bit more clarification and protection for those who choose to do so. I couldn't say where in that method we need improvement, but I can say that if a person sits on a patent waiting for someone else to come up with it so they can sue in East Texas, that person needs shot in the eye.
Corporatism is to blame for small business' lack of leverage, and this sort of patent we're discussing here is a poor example of the "little guy" trying to get leverage to bring something to market. (It reeks of troll.) Copyright isn't the solution because Corporate meddling has turned that into a farce as well, favoring only the giant copyright holders' portfolios rather than the guy who actually created the work(s). I don't advocate a complete abandonment of the patent system, all I really want is for it to be equitable, less prone to moronic patents of obvious prior art, and the East Texas Patent Trolls need to have their honeypot dry up so we can stop wasting time with this frivolous shit and work on the real patent system and how it needs to be saved before it becomes the next Copyright... useful only to those with deep pockets and armies of lawyers. None of us, not even the free software zealots, want to see that.
In response to WoW I never said there was a limiation on patenting products only, I was referring to your example of it as a product, not an idea or method (this patent we're talking about here is not a product, per se). We're talking about ideas and concepts in this particular patent that I don't agree are patentable in the realm of Software Patents. Many people more astute than I have given great arguments against Software Patents and their detrimental effect on innovation within software, so I leave that to you to go read if you're more curious. I don't expect people to use their patents, but I expect that if you're going to go to the trouble to patent something you should at least do a little something with it, otherwise you're simply hoarding an idea and stifling others, which is not what patents are all about. Sitting on a patent for nearly the entire length of it, then shooting out a lawsuit after you've done nothing to advance anything with your patent (or usefulness in general) and the Founders did not intend for that to happen.
It's not a strawman, when you're referring to the concepts behind the MMO, which are not Blizzard's to begin with, thereby not patentable, because they follow the same model the every other MMO uses. (which shows us prior art).
As for specifics, Let me reiterate google is your friend. If you want to know more, I'm sure you can find it. I'm not in the business of pointing out domain knowledge. (The bigger picture here w/r/t patent trolls leaves me less space to specify this particular patent, suffice to say it's a troll..) If you'd like to see specific implementations, I'm sure google can point you that way as well (or the USPTO). Regardless of this patent's validity or not, we see the implementation exercised in various ways to great effect in operating systems and embedded systems (particularly in my field, for sure) MANY years before this patent was even submitted, much less granted.
The concept here, that I don't think you're fully understanding, is that there are people who get patents that are obviously covered by prior art or are things that shouldn't be patentable to begin with, but because the system is so broken (and we insist on allowing software patents into the mix, even though the courts now are striking them down), these people are allowed to sue others which is to the detriment of the system and patents themselves.(they're not always big corporations... sometimes these trolls sue the little guy who is trying to make something useful). We need to get back to the basics, stop allowing this sort of nonsense to continue, and turn patents back into what they were meant for in the first place. When someone sues in the "Eastern District of Texas", it's most likely a troll, because they feel like their best shot is the courts in that area's lack of understanding (or perhaps kickbacks... depends on the size of your tinfoil hat.) And when that happens, I find the patent holder suspect all the time. This time is no different. But it's fairly easy to decide that this patent suffers from what most do... a lack of proper consideration w/r/t prior art. It's really that simple.
World of Warcraft is a product. It may be a "virtual" product (meaning it's not a widget). But, it builds on un-patentable (and common things) like communications protocols, graphics algorithms (from the makers of the video cards, etc)... It's not an "idea" or an "algorithm" unless you can prove to me that the ratio of Orcs to Dark Elves is somehow mathematically patentable. Contrary to popular belief, MMO's weren't invented by Blizzard. They just found a way to make a profit from them.
A prototype doesn't have to be elaborate, or even very eye-catching, but the scribblings on a napkin shouldn't be patentable without someone doing some work to get the first one running (because how can you assert that something's workable if you don't even get past the paper stage?) Give a time limit from patent to prototype (not the length of the patent), and limit the time suits can be brought when it becomes obvious that the inventor/troll is simply "slipping one past the patent office" and hoarding this sort of thing to go after deep pockets. Force those who are given patents to actually WORK for it.... person or corporation, it's just that simple, and it'd be equitable too (in spite of your assertion to the contrary.) This patent is a prime example of the "idea" stage and 0 prototype... which creates and breeds these patent trolls that make life difficult for _ALL_ of us, not just big companies. Your assertion is missing the bigger picture. Considering when the patent was issued v. the time they decided to sue should give anyone with half a brain pause, and wonder why they sat on this for so long and ultimately have nothing to show for it but the patent itself. I don't see them submitting their own parts to an OS, or anything like that. Seems fishy to me, as most patent trolls do.
Go look at the specs for Unix or any multiuser OS in the big iron days... I think you can google it.... it's enough common knowledge that citations are implied. These folks patented something in the 90's that we've seen implemented ages ago. You honestly think their patent is a new thing? I certainly hope not.