And what do you mean by a few? Few is a small number. They would need to sell enough copies to offset the cost of implementing the DRM solution and any licensing fees associated with it, and then some. If they've sold only just a "few" copies more than what they normally would have sold, it was a less profitable venture in that regard. Unfortunately I doubt they could accurately predict these numbers. They can create a lot of smoke and mirrors to say, "See, see, if worked!", but they'd be bold faced liars.
Sympathize or don't. When you don't, don't expect any sympathy in return. Expect decisions like the ones Ubisoft has made.
Your entire position is ridiculous. The consumer shouldn't need to sympathize with a company. It's not a person. It's a thing. Companies exist to provide services. If their services aren't pleasing their existing customers, then they are doing something wrong. What other people do to them doesn't matter in a sympathy context. Even when people do sympathize with things, like faceless companies, they still fuck their customers in the ass. So again I ask why any person should sympathize with a thing.
Customers are people who pay.
Yes, and?
And if they don't pay enough to cover the cost of the trouble they cause, then they're not worthwhile, are they?
How are their customers causing trouble in this scenario? Is it due to their complaints about a broken product that hasn't been fixed after 3 weeks? Is that, "causing trouble"? Should they just shut up and silently take it like good little consumers?
Ogg/Theora+Vorbis provided a clearer image at a smaller compression. It's more noticeable in the upper right hand corner. At higher compression it's hard to tell a difference if one even exists at all.
I read a few of the other results that came up with this phenomenon. Other people are claiming one second it's there at the top, one second it's not. No one here is full of shit.
For shits and grins I thought I would try your experiment out.
Not that I was expecting any less from Microsoft, but you weren't fucking kidding. The first result in Bing is the sixth result on Google. I don't expect exact parity between the two, but I would expect results to be somewhat similar. I'm looking for something that's relevant to the topic, therefore I expect similar relevant results between the two. Mac's being expensive isn't relevant, at least not at first.
The first step is to stop being a pussy. Seriously. Only the most desperate woman will take a guy who has no cojones to at least make a modicum amount of effort to say hello. Sign up for any activity that doesn't include video games. Join a hiking group. Go to the gym. Take a dance class. Do something that involves meeting new people and interacting with them, but make sure you want to do it.
And while you're attempting to do that, if you want to spend money trying to find the right person, either use a dating site like eharmony or match, or go to a professional match making service. It's really quite that simple, but you first need to stop being a damn pussy.
You're kidding, right? The classic theme looks monumentally different in just the colors alone. The feel and the navigation are the same, but color scheme is way off. There is a noticeable difference.
My comment was geared towards larger things such as automobiles. For a lot of markets, my comment rings true. Sell to the rich first then once economies of scale kicks in, or you have the funds to develop a cheaper solution, sell to the less rich until it can be done in mass.
Software, which I'm assuming your solution is, can be entirely different beast in that regard. Also, what you described isn't uncommon. Some companies just outright over charge for their products and it ignores some basic rules of economics.
Oh, I totally agree. It does become a lot per person when a lot of them are failing or fail. However, not all subsidies, even ones that fail, are necessarily bad. This one for example has the possibility of good technology being developed that will better mankind as a whole. Even if it fails in the long run, we as a society win.
Whenever there becomes a time that you mature, I hope you realize in that point in time that subsidies are normally (but not always) for the betterment of society in the long run. The tech that Tesla is researching and developing may very well be the basis of a lot of future EV tech.
As far as your other complaints, cursory googling suggests that all of the problems were from test vehicles, the problems were being worked on, and the reason the problems occurred in the first place was because the testers were driving the car as hard as possible for as long as possible. - All of which are not necessarily normal circumstances.
As for the range itself, like any other vehicle, depends on how hard you drive it. My 2010 Camaro can potentially get more 20mpg on the highway, but since I like driving my vehicles hard, it gets less. Should I start saying bad things about the range because I abuse my vehicle?
People travel... over 300 miles each day? I call bullshit on this. I can see a hundred, maybe even 200 in some extreme cases, but to consider that the average person travels 300 miles or more a day is bullshit. They may do that once in a while, and in those cases they could just rent a gas powered vehicle for their weekend road trip.
I would think people would buy a vehicle based on their needs, and there are plenty of people who travel 100 miles or less each day of their normal routines. If your needs are such that you spend 4 hours or more each day driving, then no, an EV may not be for you.
If they fail to repay the loan, that's about $1.45 per person. If Tesla wants $1.45 right now from me, I'm fairly sure I could afford it. Don't get me wrong. That's a lot of money when added up, but in the grand scheme of things, it won't be all bad if Tesla fails. They've done a lot of good ground work for a start-up.
Part of your problem is that you're viewing this as a bailout, as if Tesla had somehow ran their company into the ground. This isn't the case. What they've asked for, and any good business person will do this in lieu of using their own money, is ask for a loan to expand their operations to forge ahead with their plans.
We have actually subsidized a lot in this country. Some of it has been for the betterment of society, some of it hasn't. This subsidy has that potential for the betterment of society. Any technology that is developed can be expanded upon in the future. But hey, being short-sighted is all the rage with average Joe angry American.
By the way, the previous administration gave our taxes to the wealthy too. Looks like you're fucked on both side of the fence, aren't you?
Nothing in those videos indicated that they didn't have those at some point. Much like any vehicle, if you break it and you want it to work properly, you fix it... Or you deal with the brokeness. Secondly, the AC never specified what they wanted in a vehicle besides a vehicle that was under $50k and was over 300 miles to the gallon. For all we know, they expect that at a price point of $49,999.99 all the way down to free. If people post stupid comments, they will get stupid responses.
Correction, they aren't an alternative to you, but then again most vehicles aren't an alternative for you anyway. I hear you have these things called legs and feet. The mileage seems nearly infinite, and it's free. Can't compete with free, right?
Well, if it was generally that easy, I'm sure they would have done it sooner. The fact of the matter is, for any startup, you need to target the rich to not only bring down the price of economies of scale, but to pay off for the R&D initially. Yes, there's still R&D going on, but their biggest hurdles are out of the way.
To suggest that they're just a boutique manufacturer for only the wealthy shows ignorance on your part. That isn't their primary goal. Their primary goal is eventually make an affordable electric car for everyone that has style, performance, and still have the vehicle give a good range. They've done the really expensive car. Now they're doing the sort of expensive car. Next they'll do the even cheaper version. This has been their stated road-map for quite some time.
Besides, the government subsidizes all sorts of things, some things I'm sure you couldn't initially afford until cheaper variants came out. Are you against that too?
Thanks for pointing out to everyone how lazy you are. There's nothing wrong with working 40 hours a week, but I somehow doubt it would seriously inconvenience you to work 45 hours a week once in a while. You are paid to do a job. If you're salary, you're expected to a do a little more sometimes because you have a few extra perks the hourly people don't have. If you don't like being salary, don't take salaried jobs.
I would venture to guess you got a "troll" mod because you didn't provide any relevant links. If it's well known in some part of the world, some part of the world as big as China anyway, I somehow doubt it wouldn't be on the Internet.
You're on the other end of the spectrum, the cheap ass gamer spectrum. Like I said, this service appears to be geared towards the average PC gamer.
Also, I bet you are experiencing plenty of system lag, whether you realize it or not. I had a friend like that, he thought his set up was fine on old hardware, absolute minimum settings possible. When I gave him my old parts to put in his box, he finally understood what I meant by his system lag.
Also, I don't believe people would settle for near the bottom in terms of graphical settings for a service like this. I'm not sure if they're expecting top of the line, but I don't see people being ok with low quality either.
Which, once again, may not matter to the average gamer. We're not talking about the hardcore gamer here. They already have and get what they want for serious gaming. The average gamer doesn't necessarily do this and is used to playing under sub optimal conditions anyway. Ever take a look at STEAM's hardware survey? Most people have older hardware, not newer hardware. They're already experiencing plenty of computational lag on their end. This service may not be any different than that,
Slashdot Mirror
And what do you mean by a few? Few is a small number. They would need to sell enough copies to offset the cost of implementing the DRM solution and any licensing fees associated with it, and then some. If they've sold only just a "few" copies more than what they normally would have sold, it was a less profitable venture in that regard. Unfortunately I doubt they could accurately predict these numbers. They can create a lot of smoke and mirrors to say, "See, see, if worked!", but they'd be bold faced liars.
Sympathize or don't. When you don't, don't expect any sympathy in return. Expect decisions like the ones Ubisoft has made.
Your entire position is ridiculous. The consumer shouldn't need to sympathize with a company. It's not a person. It's a thing. Companies exist to provide services. If their services aren't pleasing their existing customers, then they are doing something wrong. What other people do to them doesn't matter in a sympathy context. Even when people do sympathize with things, like faceless companies, they still fuck their customers in the ass. So again I ask why any person should sympathize with a thing.
Customers are people who pay.
Yes, and?
And if they don't pay enough to cover the cost of the trouble they cause, then they're not worthwhile, are they?
How are their customers causing trouble in this scenario? Is it due to their complaints about a broken product that hasn't been fixed after 3 weeks? Is that, "causing trouble"? Should they just shut up and silently take it like good little consumers?
Why should anyone have sympathy for any company? Trolling shill much? Ubisoft should care what their customers want. It's how they sell stuff. Duh.
It's actually pretty standard here in the states too, but I'm sure each company does some variation to it. I know mine does.
Ogg/Theora+Vorbis provided a clearer image at a smaller compression. It's more noticeable in the upper right hand corner. At higher compression it's hard to tell a difference if one even exists at all.
I read a few of the other results that came up with this phenomenon. Other people are claiming one second it's there at the top, one second it's not. No one here is full of shit.
For shits and grins I thought I would try your experiment out.
Not that I was expecting any less from Microsoft, but you weren't fucking kidding. The first result in Bing is the sixth result on Google. I don't expect exact parity between the two, but I would expect results to be somewhat similar. I'm looking for something that's relevant to the topic, therefore I expect similar relevant results between the two. Mac's being expensive isn't relevant, at least not at first.
I find it incredibly difficult to believe that geeks only like geeky things that keep them locked inside their nerd cave.
The first step is to stop being a pussy. Seriously. Only the most desperate woman will take a guy who has no cojones to at least make a modicum amount of effort to say hello. Sign up for any activity that doesn't include video games. Join a hiking group. Go to the gym. Take a dance class. Do something that involves meeting new people and interacting with them, but make sure you want to do it.
And while you're attempting to do that, if you want to spend money trying to find the right person, either use a dating site like eharmony or match, or go to a professional match making service. It's really quite that simple, but you first need to stop being a damn pussy.
You're kidding, right? The classic theme looks monumentally different in just the colors alone. The feel and the navigation are the same, but color scheme is way off. There is a noticeable difference.
The very end of the article suggests that they are harder than regular naturally occurring diamonds.
However, there is no way at the present to compare them to the artificial ultra-hard diamonds known as lonsdaleite and boron nitride, Ferroir said.
My comment was geared towards larger things such as automobiles. For a lot of markets, my comment rings true. Sell to the rich first then once economies of scale kicks in, or you have the funds to develop a cheaper solution, sell to the less rich until it can be done in mass.
Software, which I'm assuming your solution is, can be entirely different beast in that regard. Also, what you described isn't uncommon. Some companies just outright over charge for their products and it ignores some basic rules of economics.
Oh, I totally agree. It does become a lot per person when a lot of them are failing or fail. However, not all subsidies, even ones that fail, are necessarily bad. This one for example has the possibility of good technology being developed that will better mankind as a whole. Even if it fails in the long run, we as a society win.
Whenever there becomes a time that you mature, I hope you realize in that point in time that subsidies are normally (but not always) for the betterment of society in the long run. The tech that Tesla is researching and developing may very well be the basis of a lot of future EV tech.
As far as your other complaints, cursory googling suggests that all of the problems were from test vehicles, the problems were being worked on, and the reason the problems occurred in the first place was because the testers were driving the car as hard as possible for as long as possible. - All of which are not necessarily normal circumstances.
As for the range itself, like any other vehicle, depends on how hard you drive it. My 2010 Camaro can potentially get more 20mpg on the highway, but since I like driving my vehicles hard, it gets less. Should I start saying bad things about the range because I abuse my vehicle?
People travel... over 300 miles each day? I call bullshit on this. I can see a hundred, maybe even 200 in some extreme cases, but to consider that the average person travels 300 miles or more a day is bullshit. They may do that once in a while, and in those cases they could just rent a gas powered vehicle for their weekend road trip.
I would think people would buy a vehicle based on their needs, and there are plenty of people who travel 100 miles or less each day of their normal routines. If your needs are such that you spend 4 hours or more each day driving, then no, an EV may not be for you.
If they fail to repay the loan, that's about $1.45 per person. If Tesla wants $1.45 right now from me, I'm fairly sure I could afford it. Don't get me wrong. That's a lot of money when added up, but in the grand scheme of things, it won't be all bad if Tesla fails. They've done a lot of good ground work for a start-up.
Part of your problem is that you're viewing this as a bailout, as if Tesla had somehow ran their company into the ground. This isn't the case. What they've asked for, and any good business person will do this in lieu of using their own money, is ask for a loan to expand their operations to forge ahead with their plans.
We have actually subsidized a lot in this country. Some of it has been for the betterment of society, some of it hasn't. This subsidy has that potential for the betterment of society. Any technology that is developed can be expanded upon in the future. But hey, being short-sighted is all the rage with average Joe angry American.
By the way, the previous administration gave our taxes to the wealthy too. Looks like you're fucked on both side of the fence, aren't you?
Nothing in those videos indicated that they didn't have those at some point. Much like any vehicle, if you break it and you want it to work properly, you fix it... Or you deal with the brokeness. Secondly, the AC never specified what they wanted in a vehicle besides a vehicle that was under $50k and was over 300 miles to the gallon. For all we know, they expect that at a price point of $49,999.99 all the way down to free. If people post stupid comments, they will get stupid responses.
Correction, they aren't an alternative to you, but then again most vehicles aren't an alternative for you anyway. I hear you have these things called legs and feet. The mileage seems nearly infinite, and it's free. Can't compete with free, right?
Well, if it was generally that easy, I'm sure they would have done it sooner. The fact of the matter is, for any startup, you need to target the rich to not only bring down the price of economies of scale, but to pay off for the R&D initially. Yes, there's still R&D going on, but their biggest hurdles are out of the way.
To suggest that they're just a boutique manufacturer for only the wealthy shows ignorance on your part. That isn't their primary goal. Their primary goal is eventually make an affordable electric car for everyone that has style, performance, and still have the vehicle give a good range. They've done the really expensive car. Now they're doing the sort of expensive car. Next they'll do the even cheaper version. This has been their stated road-map for quite some time.
Besides, the government subsidizes all sorts of things, some things I'm sure you couldn't initially afford until cheaper variants came out. Are you against that too?
Or they need to retool their existing plants so they can start producing the model S.
Thanks for pointing out to everyone how lazy you are. There's nothing wrong with working 40 hours a week, but I somehow doubt it would seriously inconvenience you to work 45 hours a week once in a while. You are paid to do a job. If you're salary, you're expected to a do a little more sometimes because you have a few extra perks the hourly people don't have. If you don't like being salary, don't take salaried jobs.
Right, a balloon is not a machine. Way to be redundant.
I would venture to guess you got a "troll" mod because you didn't provide any relevant links. If it's well known in some part of the world, some part of the world as big as China anyway, I somehow doubt it wouldn't be on the Internet.
You're on the other end of the spectrum, the cheap ass gamer spectrum. Like I said, this service appears to be geared towards the average PC gamer.
Also, I bet you are experiencing plenty of system lag, whether you realize it or not. I had a friend like that, he thought his set up was fine on old hardware, absolute minimum settings possible. When I gave him my old parts to put in his box, he finally understood what I meant by his system lag.
Also, I don't believe people would settle for near the bottom in terms of graphical settings for a service like this. I'm not sure if they're expecting top of the line, but I don't see people being ok with low quality either.
Which, once again, may not matter to the average gamer. We're not talking about the hardcore gamer here. They already have and get what they want for serious gaming. The average gamer doesn't necessarily do this and is used to playing under sub optimal conditions anyway. Ever take a look at STEAM's hardware survey? Most people have older hardware, not newer hardware. They're already experiencing plenty of computational lag on their end. This service may not be any different than that,