As far as anyone who actually played the game is concerned, it closed when they did the combat upgrades and new game enhancement bullshit that basically turned it from fun to boring.
When they decided to cater to the lowest common denominator and let anyone be a Jedi, it was already over for SWG.
Not everyone values being 'bleeding edge in browser compatibility' over 'working with the apps we have and require our employees to use'.
And a lot of companies don't really care that IE8 doesn't have all the new gizmos as they really don't want their users dicking around with it anyway. The HTML5/CSS3 battle cry appears to the general IT population to be a 'no flash needed to fuck around and waste time on the Internet' update, so nothing of value is lost by not having it. Doesn't matter that there are other things it brings that are good. What does matter is that its hardly used at current and its probably not in use by them internally... and IE8 doesn't require quarterly replacement in order to keep getting security fixes.
OSS always fails to get the reality that is actually being in business and having priorities that differ from 'ooooh shiny software!'
I have lots of software that I've written that run on the 'commonest' OS... but much like the direction FF is going, people would rather use something else instead.
Security fixes break plugins because they have to.
Version number changes break plugins because Mozilla thought it was a bright idea to disable plugins for older versions.
Many common and useful plugins don't get updated frequently.
End result: They went to a retarded numbering scheme which they change every few months which breaks ALL installed plugins rather than MAYBE SOME as a security patch would. The only fix for most people will be to wait for the plugins to get updated... if they do, or disable version checking of plugins completely, if they can find out how.
No matter how you look at it, from a user perspective, there is absolutely nothing redeeming about what Mozilla is doing at this point in time, their just hanging themselves.
No, actually they didn't... Until the goverment started fining the ever living shit out of them about a year ago... Had this happened last summer, the plants barriers would already be underwater and it's still rising.
I'm not anti nuke, I'm pro actually, but had they not have been spanked hard over the last year, they'd be in trouble.
It's how engineers speak, in absolute, Globally discrete values, not localized relative ones. Well, except the ocassional NASA engineer, and we know how it turns out for them.
Sea level is used so everyone is on the exact same page.
Three feet over flood stage at location A maybe 9 feet above flood at Location B, just a few miles down stream. 1010 feet above sea level however will be 1010 feet above sea level anywhere on the globe.
Our local rivers and lake operate at 216 feet above sea level normally, and at 247 feet you hit flood stage and it starts going over the spill way bypass.
No, I didn't have to go look that up, I already knew it as I boat on that resevoir rather often so I know it's numbers so I know what to expect when go out there during spring flooding or late summer dry spells, and which boat ramps will still work... Which are also marked by high and low altitude relative to MSL.
You can't measure it relative to anything else and have a meaning that's useful.
Pretty much all measurements of bodies of water are measured relative to MSL, Mean Sea Level.
As long as you know YOUR altitude above MSL, you know where you stand. Rather than 6 feet above normal at Joes Ferry Bridge, which is only useful if you know where the bridge is, how it's elevation relates to yours, and what they are considering 'normal'
Yes, since the collapsing hrung destroyed it long before the supernovea will. His planet is already destroyed, the supernova won't do anything to whats left that matters to Ford, especially if he's stuck in another reality again.
It has already been destroyed, in Sidereal year 03758. Did you not read the book at all? A collapsing Hrung destroyed it, hence he never learned to pronounce his name in his native tongue and his father died of shame soon after.
That doesn't mean that unobservable object/thing/essence/whatever doesn't exist, but it makes no scientific sense to talk about it.
Really? It would appear that a lot of astrophysicist should be told this then cause they seem to have no problem talking about shit we've never observed like its fact.
When someone shows me the video of the big bang, and proof that they were there when it happened, I believe it, until then its just someones imaginary friend. Anything you speculator on without direct observation is pure speculation. They seem to forget that any number of things may have occurred before our observations started that could completely and totally change the perception of history because we simply don't have the knowledge of them and what they do.
For instance (and I realize I'll get called a nutter for this statement) there is absolutely no proof that carbon dating works long term. It is entirely possible (admittedly unlikely) that some sort of stellar event occurred 10k years ago, or during the last meteor impact, or solar flare hurricane or whatever, which completely messed with the decay rate of carbon14 for some short period of time that causes the ratios to change in a non-linear fashion. Do we know of anything that would cause this? Well, I don't, but until this year I didn't realize life could survive miles under ground for millions of years without sunlight or oxygen, and neither did most other scientists... and now that we know it can happen, it can effect all sorts of theories about the evolution of life, right down to... when did life REALLY start on planet Earth? Due to plate tectonics, its entirely possible life evolved before anything we've ever found, yet has been carried back to the mantle and there is no trace left for us to find. Continents and crust don't last forever. Does that mean it didn't happen, or that we're just morons for thinking we know what happened without actually having the full picture?
Interestingly enough, but ignoring the possibility, you're already being a completely shitty scientist for making assumptions that you (if you have a clue) know you can not possible prove or even have a educated guess on seems pretty standard for these guys... they have no problem talking about shit they've never observed.
What's even crazier is that we know more about outer space than we do about our oceans.
Wrong. We THINK we know more about space than our own oceans.
The reality of it is, almost everything we think we know about space is highly speculative theory based on very bad observations, and we regularly find out that our theories are not only wrong, but were so far from right that its mind blowing that anyone came up with them in the first place.
Most of our space knowledge, ESPECIALLY about how stars work is based entirely on someones imagination in inventing some formulas that appear to match reality... sometimes... occasionally even most of the time, but scientists regularly talk about 'how supernovea work' but we've only observed a VERY VERY small number of them in our entire history, and for all intents and purposes none with modern equipment. The ones we have observed... we speculate on what the data actually means based on more theories. In short, most of our knowledge of the universe is imaginary crap we made up and shoehorned into looking like reality matches.
Until VERY recently, the entire world thought their couldn't possibly be life anywhere else in our solar system because none of the planets/moons matched what we KNEW was how life worked... then we find out... even here on Earth... we have life that 'could not possibly exist' according to most people in the field.
Then all of the sudden someone realized... hey... you know what... life as we know it might... just maybe... NOT be the ONLY WAY it can happen.
We may not know shit about our oceans in the grand scheme of things, but we know billions of times more about them than we do about space, regardless of what any theoretical physicist or astrophysicist tries to make you believe. Try to remember what theory means. And then add onto that what most scientists talking about space call theories are actually nothing more than completely untested and often unbased hypothesis on the idea, they haven't even made it to theory yet, even though thats what they call it.
We've assumed until the last couple of years that all live was carbon based, must have water, needs oxygen or carbon and some other highly reactive element, and a hole bunch of things... then we go find something in a mine, miles underground, that completely proves every accepted theory of live wrong, overnight, yet we still pretend we have a clue.
The problem is... that even if you held it incorrectly, it was STILL in the top 3 of reception quality and ability to not drop calls.
Meaning that yes, it drops calls more often if you hold it like you normally would... however... it STILL DOES BETTER THAN THE COMPETITION on its baad days.
So from a practical perspective... if on the iPhone 4's shittiest of days, it STILL does better than most of the other phones in its class, which means its a non-issue from a practical perspective. So even if people report the bad reception quality when holding an iPhone 4 normally... they STILL made less reports than pretty much everyone else.
So... if you want to talk issues, lets talk about all the phones that drop calls regardless of how you hold them... go ahead, get some stats for whichever device you're fanboying it up that shows it doing better under any condition than the iPhone4 does under the worst conditions (i.e. holding the antenna in a way that shorts it).
Don't worry, I'm not going to wait, I've seen the stats.
If by real message you mean, message spun like a politician was talking, than sure.
Nobody takes incomplete or factually incorrect data and spins it into a good thing like a politician, so therefore I must assume that you and the GP post are also politicians since there is no logical way you would have come to such a conclusion without making things up along the way.
No, its not, it illustrates a point, and provides you information that you should be able to recognize.
Buyer beware when buying android based devices because some of them are most certainly in the race to those bottom of the barrel.
You're probably safer (probably) when buying a RIM, Apple or Win7Mo device as on average they seem to work better.
What you are seeing is Android becoming like the previous major phone OSes. Its like buying a phone with Symbian on it... sure its got Symbian, but that doesn't mean jack shit because a full spectrum of hardware runs Symbian, and its all been customized and tweaked in such ways that calling it compatible is a lie. So I have an old nokia dumb phone that runs symbian... can't run anything else on it than what it came with, but by god its a Symbian phone! Replace all occurrence of Symbian with Android and you'll have the same thing, except it costs less to get your hands on SOME of the source to your phone, in most cases you won't be able to get all of it with either OS.
Saying 'it runs android' means nothing, as that doesn't specify anything else about what it allows or disallows, what kind of hardware it is, or what you can expect from it.
On the otherhand, I know what I'm going to get from a RIM or Apple device, and I can make some safe assumptions about Win7Mo due to its resource requirements at baseline (which is still a shitty device, don't get me wrong). You simply can't make assumptions when someone says Android.
You'll be happy to claim android is more popular than other device OSes because you group all android devices together to show marketshare... but you don't want to do that when it comes to the shitty parts eh? Fanboy much?
Yahoo always thinks they can get ahead by buying whatever they think is 'cool and hip' except that they then proceed to suck those qualities right out of it because they, as a company, are not and never will be again.
Considering they throw company parties with strippers, I'd guess they are a cool/hip place to work, and I can see how they get sucked dry. All in all, I'd work there for those perks regardless of how people outside the company saw me;)
When I first found hulu, I thought: 'Its about damn time' but then, after using it for a slight amount of time, I realized it pretty much sucked. Sure you can watch shows... with ads... but if you want to watch it anywhere other than a PC you gotta pay... and if you want a queue... you gotta pay... and if you want XXX... gotta be a Hulu plus member... and YOU STILL HAVE TO WATCH ADS.
Then there are the times when you get redirected to the content producers website... with a completely different flash based noisy (as in makes sounds for no fucking reason) website to try and dig around and find some episode I want to watch... in 320x240 because cbs.com is a shitty website... using some other completely retarded flash player.
So... I rapidly learned hulu could go fuck themselves. Now, instead I just DVR it on my Windows media center box, and have it transcode to iPhone/iPad and XBox360 compatible formats after the fact... auto removing commercials in the process.
This is what happens when you make your product so absolutely freaking annoying to use that people would rather spend the effort to just figure out a way to not use you.
So no, I can't randomly watch some random show from last season of Stargate Universe because they decide they'd put it up on Hulu this week. Instead I watch whatever one scifi decided to air this week... without the commercials... without paying more than I'm already paying for scifi shows... you know, since the cable company is already paying them for me out of my cable bill... which of course, cable was originally supposed to be sans-ads as well... Even if you watch the ads on cable versions, you at least generally don't see the same ad 4 times during one show... with Hulu its rather common to see the same commercial at EVERY FREAKING commercial point.
And of course I can queue up shows/movies to play back to back, on the devices I want to watch them on... doesn't matter if its my TV, iPad, PC, or phone...
Hulu was a good idea that the content producers fucked up and made so most people wouldn't bother. Now they are trying to dump it on someone else before its a total wash.
Yea, cause that won't cause any suspicions and will never get found out and you know, its not like the other end of their pipes can't be sniffed or anything.
Are you really that stupid? Do you also think people who run meth labs in their basements can't possibly get caught as well?
If you can't download them to home, what good are they?
Great, you've got a massive bunch of torrents stored on a box in India.
That was cool 20 years ago when I was 15 and warezing was something I did for fun, not to actually get software. If you want to actually GET the software, they're going to see it. So your solution only helps people who just warez for the fun of it, which is all 100-150 people on the planet.
Hint: once someone gets word that your little india box is a hub, it'll be blocked or intentionally throttled or the like, and you think they can't find your box, then you need to look at DNSBLs and the fact that they regularly catch botted machines sending only one or two messages a day.
You aren't nearly as cleaver as you think you are, what I listed above is the simplest ways you'd get caught if they were looking, they wouldn't even have to put effort into it. There are literally hundreds of slightly more difficult but far more effective ways to catch and stop you. You don't need DPI for traffic pattern recognition. Encryption might stop me from seeing the actual data, but I can infer what it is from your usage patterns.
Also, fair use is not simply a defense, it's also an exception to copyright law (see 17 U.S.C. s 107, "the fair use of a copyrighted work...is not an infringement of copyright")
Uhm, of course its not 'simply a defense' because the 'defense' only exists because its not illegal to use certain things in certain ways.
'fair use defense' should really be called 'application of the law defense', with the exception to that being that it should be called the 'fair use defense' in situations like this one, where it clearly wasn't fair use, but the fair use exception is what they're trying to claim.
if the do enter it given how cut throat that market is with regards to price.
The same way they do every other market they've entered. By producing a quality product that people are willing to pay for rather than catering to the lowest common denominator like everyone else?
Some people understand that you get what you pay for, and when you go to buy a TV in that cutthroat market, its that way because everyone is trying to sell the absolute cheapest pile of shit they can, and thats what most ignorant people want. Forget the fact that they're screwing themselves over in the long run, most people don't think about tomorrow, only cost today.
On the other hand, some of us know that quality does matter, when you learn that, you'll find you spend a lot less by spending a little more.
IE had nothing to do with the antitrust law suit directly. IE was not the issue. The illegal part was the bullying they did to prevent bestbuy, dell, compusa, joes computer shack and the like from also including netscape with the PC. If you wanted to include another browser, you don't get OEM pricing, you get FULL PRICE + YOU PISSED US OFF tax. And since you'd more or less be unable to sell a PC without Windows, then it turns into using a monopoly for an unfair advantage.
Apple could give a flying fuck if you bundle cakewalk with a mac. Go ahead, buy a bunch of macs, add cakewalk, apple won't cut your discount for doing so. And historically, Apples 'freebie' products have been significantly less powerful than the competition, so its not like anyone buying cakewalk is going to consider using garageband.
IE bundling, in the US was never deemed illegal, and it would be utterly retarded to try and imply it would be illegal for you to bundle stuff in. You don't get to define their products, no one but them does, not even the government, they aren't breaking the law by bundling IE.
They did break the law when they used OEM and retailer price breaks to force businesses to NOT include other browsers. They used the fact that it is essentially a requirement to live (at the time anyway) in the personal computer business that your PCs come with Windows installed, which means you have to pay for Windows.
Now if you didn't bundle any other browsers, OR did various things to break other browsers on your websites, then you could get cheap ass OEM licenses for Windows. On the other hand, if you didn't want to make your websites broken in other browsers and you wanted to include other browsers when you shipped your PCs... well, in that cause you're going to pay full price or more for a license of Windows.
Since a PC maker is more or less out of business without Windows, and Microsoft was using THAT leverage to force other browsers to stay off new PCs... well that where the problem begins.
There was never anyone 'forcing' IE to be bundled, its just retarded to remove it since Trident (the rendering engine, and the mass of IE) is used throughout the entire Windows OS for many things other than straight forward web browsing. So you can remove iexplore.exe, but if you'd bothered to notice its a tiny little exe stub you might have realized how silly it is to remove it.
Now if you want to talk about Europe, there were different results from the court battles and those WERE related to bundling, which is why you can get versions of windows (the K or N varients, depending on what you don't want) that don't come with IE and/or media player, and I know nothing about the reasoning behind that.
Its not illegal in america to give away free stuff, which is what MS did and that is perfectly acceptable, and thats not what MS was in court for. They went to court for trying to use their influence to force other businesses to not use their competitors products, and that IS illegal in America when you have a monopoly.
By that measure, you can say that at a few points in time, both Intel and AMD didn't make processors, they sold someone elses... you know, since occasionally fabrication gets done in someone elses plant for any number of reasons.
Apple engineered, designed, and produced the specifications, they also make sure the manufacturing process and specifications are followed to ensure their quality requirements.
The problem is... these plants that do the 'building' don't have the 'engineering' side to match. Sure they have engineers, qualified ones too, but they are fabrication engineers, and their main job is to make sure the robots work right, which is entirely different than designing a new chip or an entire device.
I guess Ponoko.com makes a bunch of shit and none of the people who design it are makers at all? They have nothing to do with the process?
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously?
I hope my kid doesn't end up with Downs Syndrome, missing a limb and still born as well, but that doesn't mean I can't have a sense of humor as well.
Stop being such an over sensitive pansy. Words don't actually hurt you.
As far as anyone who actually played the game is concerned, it closed when they did the combat upgrades and new game enhancement bullshit that basically turned it from fun to boring.
When they decided to cater to the lowest common denominator and let anyone be a Jedi, it was already over for SWG.
Not everyone values being 'bleeding edge in browser compatibility' over 'working with the apps we have and require our employees to use'.
And a lot of companies don't really care that IE8 doesn't have all the new gizmos as they really don't want their users dicking around with it anyway. The HTML5/CSS3 battle cry appears to the general IT population to be a 'no flash needed to fuck around and waste time on the Internet' update, so nothing of value is lost by not having it. Doesn't matter that there are other things it brings that are good. What does matter is that its hardly used at current and its probably not in use by them internally ... and IE8 doesn't require quarterly replacement in order to keep getting security fixes.
OSS always fails to get the reality that is actually being in business and having priorities that differ from 'ooooh shiny software!'
Yes, but is anyone going to continue to use it?
I have lots of software that I've written that run on the 'commonest' OS ... but much like the direction FF is going, people would rather use something else instead.
Security fixes break plugins because they have to.
Version number changes break plugins because Mozilla thought it was a bright idea to disable plugins for older versions.
Many common and useful plugins don't get updated frequently.
End result: They went to a retarded numbering scheme which they change every few months which breaks ALL installed plugins rather than MAYBE SOME as a security patch would. The only fix for most people will be to wait for the plugins to get updated ... if they do, or disable version checking of plugins completely, if they can find out how.
No matter how you look at it, from a user perspective, there is absolutely nothing redeeming about what Mozilla is doing at this point in time, their just hanging themselves.
No, actually they didn't ... Until the goverment started fining the ever living shit out of them about a year ago ... Had this happened last summer, the plants barriers would already be underwater and it's still rising.
I'm not anti nuke, I'm pro actually, but had they not have been spanked hard over the last year, they'd be in trouble.
It's how engineers speak, in absolute, Globally discrete values, not localized relative ones. Well, except the ocassional NASA engineer, and we know how it turns out for them.
Sea level is used so everyone is on the exact same page.
Three feet over flood stage at location A maybe 9 feet above flood at Location B, just a few miles down stream. 1010 feet above sea level however will be 1010 feet above sea level anywhere on the globe.
Our local rivers and lake operate at 216 feet above sea level normally, and at 247 feet you hit flood stage and it starts going over the spill way bypass.
No, I didn't have to go look that up, I already knew it as I boat on that resevoir rather often so I know it's numbers so I know what to expect when go out there during spring flooding or late summer dry spells, and which boat ramps will still work... Which are also marked by high and low altitude relative to MSL.
You can't measure it relative to anything else and have a meaning that's useful.
Pretty much all measurements of bodies of water are measured relative to MSL, Mean Sea Level.
As long as you know YOUR altitude above MSL, you know where you stand. Rather than 6 feet above normal at Joes Ferry Bridge, which is only useful if you know where the bridge is, how it's elevation relates to yours, and what they are considering 'normal'
Yes, since the collapsing hrung destroyed it long before the supernovea will. His planet is already destroyed, the supernova won't do anything to whats left that matters to Ford, especially if he's stuck in another reality again.
It has already been destroyed, in Sidereal year 03758. Did you not read the book at all? A collapsing Hrung destroyed it, hence he never learned to pronounce his name in his native tongue and his father died of shame soon after.
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Great_Collapsing_Hrung_Disaster_of_Galactic_Sidereal_Year_03758
That doesn't mean that unobservable object/thing/essence/whatever doesn't exist, but it makes no scientific sense to talk about it.
Really? It would appear that a lot of astrophysicist should be told this then cause they seem to have no problem talking about shit we've never observed like its fact.
When someone shows me the video of the big bang, and proof that they were there when it happened, I believe it, until then its just someones imaginary friend. Anything you speculator on without direct observation is pure speculation. They seem to forget that any number of things may have occurred before our observations started that could completely and totally change the perception of history because we simply don't have the knowledge of them and what they do.
For instance (and I realize I'll get called a nutter for this statement) there is absolutely no proof that carbon dating works long term. It is entirely possible (admittedly unlikely) that some sort of stellar event occurred 10k years ago, or during the last meteor impact, or solar flare hurricane or whatever, which completely messed with the decay rate of carbon14 for some short period of time that causes the ratios to change in a non-linear fashion. Do we know of anything that would cause this? Well, I don't, but until this year I didn't realize life could survive miles under ground for millions of years without sunlight or oxygen, and neither did most other scientists ... and now that we know it can happen, it can effect all sorts of theories about the evolution of life, right down to ... when did life REALLY start on planet Earth? Due to plate tectonics, its entirely possible life evolved before anything we've ever found, yet has been carried back to the mantle and there is no trace left for us to find. Continents and crust don't last forever. Does that mean it didn't happen, or that we're just morons for thinking we know what happened without actually having the full picture?
Interestingly enough, but ignoring the possibility, you're already being a completely shitty scientist for making assumptions that you (if you have a clue) know you can not possible prove or even have a educated guess on seems pretty standard for these guys ... they have no problem talking about shit they've never observed.
What's even crazier is that we know more about outer space than we do about our oceans.
Wrong. We THINK we know more about space than our own oceans.
The reality of it is, almost everything we think we know about space is highly speculative theory based on very bad observations, and we regularly find out that our theories are not only wrong, but were so far from right that its mind blowing that anyone came up with them in the first place.
Most of our space knowledge, ESPECIALLY about how stars work is based entirely on someones imagination in inventing some formulas that appear to match reality ... sometimes ... occasionally even most of the time, but scientists regularly talk about 'how supernovea work' but we've only observed a VERY VERY small number of them in our entire history, and for all intents and purposes none with modern equipment. The ones we have observed ... we speculate on what the data actually means based on more theories. In short, most of our knowledge of the universe is imaginary crap we made up and shoehorned into looking like reality matches.
Until VERY recently, the entire world thought their couldn't possibly be life anywhere else in our solar system because none of the planets/moons matched what we KNEW was how life worked ... then we find out ... even here on Earth ... we have life that 'could not possibly exist' according to most people in the field.
Then all of the sudden someone realized ... hey ... you know what ... life as we know it might ... just maybe ... NOT be the ONLY WAY it can happen.
We may not know shit about our oceans in the grand scheme of things, but we know billions of times more about them than we do about space, regardless of what any theoretical physicist or astrophysicist tries to make you believe. Try to remember what theory means. And then add onto that what most scientists talking about space call theories are actually nothing more than completely untested and often unbased hypothesis on the idea, they haven't even made it to theory yet, even though thats what they call it.
We've assumed until the last couple of years that all live was carbon based, must have water, needs oxygen or carbon and some other highly reactive element, and a hole bunch of things ... then we go find something in a mine, miles underground, that completely proves every accepted theory of live wrong, overnight, yet we still pretend we have a clue.
No, its an issue of course.
The problem is ... that even if you held it incorrectly, it was STILL in the top 3 of reception quality and ability to not drop calls.
Meaning that yes, it drops calls more often if you hold it like you normally would ... however ... it STILL DOES BETTER THAN THE COMPETITION on its baad days.
So from a practical perspective ... if on the iPhone 4's shittiest of days, it STILL does better than most of the other phones in its class, which means its a non-issue from a practical perspective. So even if people report the bad reception quality when holding an iPhone 4 normally ... they STILL made less reports than pretty much everyone else.
So ... if you want to talk issues, lets talk about all the phones that drop calls regardless of how you hold them ... go ahead, get some stats for whichever device you're fanboying it up that shows it doing better under any condition than the iPhone4 does under the worst conditions (i.e. holding the antenna in a way that shorts it).
Don't worry, I'm not going to wait, I've seen the stats.
If by real message you mean, message spun like a politician was talking, than sure.
Nobody takes incomplete or factually incorrect data and spins it into a good thing like a politician, so therefore I must assume that you and the GP post are also politicians since there is no logical way you would have come to such a conclusion without making things up along the way.
No, its not, it illustrates a point, and provides you information that you should be able to recognize.
Buyer beware when buying android based devices because some of them are most certainly in the race to those bottom of the barrel.
You're probably safer (probably) when buying a RIM, Apple or Win7Mo device as on average they seem to work better.
What you are seeing is Android becoming like the previous major phone OSes. Its like buying a phone with Symbian on it ... sure its got Symbian, but that doesn't mean jack shit because a full spectrum of hardware runs Symbian, and its all been customized and tweaked in such ways that calling it compatible is a lie. So I have an old nokia dumb phone that runs symbian ... can't run anything else on it than what it came with, but by god its a Symbian phone! Replace all occurrence of Symbian with Android and you'll have the same thing, except it costs less to get your hands on SOME of the source to your phone, in most cases you won't be able to get all of it with either OS.
Saying 'it runs android' means nothing, as that doesn't specify anything else about what it allows or disallows, what kind of hardware it is, or what you can expect from it.
On the otherhand, I know what I'm going to get from a RIM or Apple device, and I can make some safe assumptions about Win7Mo due to its resource requirements at baseline (which is still a shitty device, don't get me wrong). You simply can't make assumptions when someone says Android.
You'll be happy to claim android is more popular than other device OSes because you group all android devices together to show marketshare ... but you don't want to do that when it comes to the shitty parts eh? Fanboy much?
Yahoo always thinks they can get ahead by buying whatever they think is 'cool and hip' except that they then proceed to suck those qualities right out of it because they, as a company, are not and never will be again.
Considering they throw company parties with strippers, I'd guess they are a cool/hip place to work, and I can see how they get sucked dry. All in all, I'd work there for those perks regardless of how people outside the company saw me ;)
When I first found hulu, I thought: 'Its about damn time' but then, after using it for a slight amount of time, I realized it pretty much sucked. Sure you can watch shows ... with ads ... but if you want to watch it anywhere other than a PC you gotta pay ... and if you want a queue ... you gotta pay ... and if you want XXX ... gotta be a Hulu plus member ... and YOU STILL HAVE TO WATCH ADS.
Then there are the times when you get redirected to the content producers website ... with a completely different flash based noisy (as in makes sounds for no fucking reason) website to try and dig around and find some episode I want to watch ... in 320x240 because cbs.com is a shitty website ... using some other completely retarded flash player.
So ... I rapidly learned hulu could go fuck themselves. Now, instead I just DVR it on my Windows media center box, and have it transcode to iPhone/iPad and XBox360 compatible formats after the fact ... auto removing commercials in the process.
This is what happens when you make your product so absolutely freaking annoying to use that people would rather spend the effort to just figure out a way to not use you.
So no, I can't randomly watch some random show from last season of Stargate Universe because they decide they'd put it up on Hulu this week. Instead I watch whatever one scifi decided to air this week ... without the commercials ... without paying more than I'm already paying for scifi shows ... you know, since the cable company is already paying them for me out of my cable bill ... which of course, cable was originally supposed to be sans-ads as well ... Even if you watch the ads on cable versions, you at least generally don't see the same ad 4 times during one show ... with Hulu its rather common to see the same commercial at EVERY FREAKING commercial point.
And of course I can queue up shows/movies to play back to back, on the devices I want to watch them on ... doesn't matter if its my TV, iPad, PC, or phone ...
Hulu was a good idea that the content producers fucked up and made so most people wouldn't bother. Now they are trying to dump it on someone else before its a total wash.
Yea, cause that won't cause any suspicions and will never get found out and you know, its not like the other end of their pipes can't be sniffed or anything.
Are you really that stupid? Do you also think people who run meth labs in their basements can't possibly get caught as well?
If you can't download them to home, what good are they?
Great, you've got a massive bunch of torrents stored on a box in India.
That was cool 20 years ago when I was 15 and warezing was something I did for fun, not to actually get software. If you want to actually GET the software, they're going to see it. So your solution only helps people who just warez for the fun of it, which is all 100-150 people on the planet.
Hint: once someone gets word that your little india box is a hub, it'll be blocked or intentionally throttled or the like, and you think they can't find your box, then you need to look at DNSBLs and the fact that they regularly catch botted machines sending only one or two messages a day.
You aren't nearly as cleaver as you think you are, what I listed above is the simplest ways you'd get caught if they were looking, they wouldn't even have to put effort into it. There are literally hundreds of slightly more difficult but far more effective ways to catch and stop you. You don't need DPI for traffic pattern recognition. Encryption might stop me from seeing the actual data, but I can infer what it is from your usage patterns.
Actually, it probably was published as a dup, but it was probably a week to a year later and he didn't notice it.
Also, fair use is not simply a defense, it's also an exception to copyright law (see 17 U.S.C. s 107, "the fair use of a copyrighted work...is not an infringement of copyright")
Uhm, of course its not 'simply a defense' because the 'defense' only exists because its not illegal to use certain things in certain ways.
'fair use defense' should really be called 'application of the law defense', with the exception to that being that it should be called the 'fair use defense' in situations like this one, where it clearly wasn't fair use, but the fair use exception is what they're trying to claim.
If you're going into a legal battle with 'it seems possible' than you've already lost, you just don't realize it yet.
If its not clearly fair use, its not fair use. You can tell pretty quickly if its fair use or not, if you have to question it, it probably isn't.
if the do enter it given how cut throat that market is with regards to price.
The same way they do every other market they've entered. By producing a quality product that people are willing to pay for rather than catering to the lowest common denominator like everyone else?
Some people understand that you get what you pay for, and when you go to buy a TV in that cutthroat market, its that way because everyone is trying to sell the absolute cheapest pile of shit they can, and thats what most ignorant people want. Forget the fact that they're screwing themselves over in the long run, most people don't think about tomorrow, only cost today.
On the other hand, some of us know that quality does matter, when you learn that, you'll find you spend a lot less by spending a little more.
IE had nothing to do with the antitrust law suit directly. IE was not the issue. The illegal part was the bullying they did to prevent bestbuy, dell, compusa, joes computer shack and the like from also including netscape with the PC. If you wanted to include another browser, you don't get OEM pricing, you get FULL PRICE + YOU PISSED US OFF tax. And since you'd more or less be unable to sell a PC without Windows, then it turns into using a monopoly for an unfair advantage.
Apple could give a flying fuck if you bundle cakewalk with a mac. Go ahead, buy a bunch of macs, add cakewalk, apple won't cut your discount for doing so. And historically, Apples 'freebie' products have been significantly less powerful than the competition, so its not like anyone buying cakewalk is going to consider using garageband.
Actually no, that isn't what it was about.
IE bundling, in the US was never deemed illegal, and it would be utterly retarded to try and imply it would be illegal for you to bundle stuff in. You don't get to define their products, no one but them does, not even the government, they aren't breaking the law by bundling IE.
They did break the law when they used OEM and retailer price breaks to force businesses to NOT include other browsers. They used the fact that it is essentially a requirement to live (at the time anyway) in the personal computer business that your PCs come with Windows installed, which means you have to pay for Windows.
Now if you didn't bundle any other browsers, OR did various things to break other browsers on your websites, then you could get cheap ass OEM licenses for Windows. On the other hand, if you didn't want to make your websites broken in other browsers and you wanted to include other browsers when you shipped your PCs ... well, in that cause you're going to pay full price or more for a license of Windows.
Since a PC maker is more or less out of business without Windows, and Microsoft was using THAT leverage to force other browsers to stay off new PCs ... well that where the problem begins.
There was never anyone 'forcing' IE to be bundled, its just retarded to remove it since Trident (the rendering engine, and the mass of IE) is used throughout the entire Windows OS for many things other than straight forward web browsing. So you can remove iexplore.exe, but if you'd bothered to notice its a tiny little exe stub you might have realized how silly it is to remove it.
Now if you want to talk about Europe, there were different results from the court battles and those WERE related to bundling, which is why you can get versions of windows (the K or N varients, depending on what you don't want) that don't come with IE and/or media player, and I know nothing about the reasoning behind that.
Its not illegal in america to give away free stuff, which is what MS did and that is perfectly acceptable, and thats not what MS was in court for. They went to court for trying to use their influence to force other businesses to not use their competitors products, and that IS illegal in America when you have a monopoly.
By that measure, you can say that at a few points in time, both Intel and AMD didn't make processors, they sold someone elses ... you know, since occasionally fabrication gets done in someone elses plant for any number of reasons.
Apple engineered, designed, and produced the specifications, they also make sure the manufacturing process and specifications are followed to ensure their quality requirements.
The problem is ... these plants that do the 'building' don't have the 'engineering' side to match. Sure they have engineers, qualified ones too, but they are fabrication engineers, and their main job is to make sure the robots work right, which is entirely different than designing a new chip or an entire device.
I guess Ponoko.com makes a bunch of shit and none of the people who design it are makers at all? They have nothing to do with the process?