There's a few reasons why an IS department won't roll out Linux into an Active Directory environment.
First, is that they cannot control the desktop using policy. This is the biggest selling point of using Windows in a workgroup domain, and especially to manage as many servers and end users as they have. Active Directory, while not perfect, is awesome in its capabilities -- all stolen mostly from Novell's NDS:)
Next, is expertise. Why would you introduce something into an environment that nobody really knows how to use? Your executives aren't 100% sure but they know 100% that they need to hire staff that can take on Linux servers/desktops and supporting them. That means paying a premium for that labor, and it's not necessary when you can get Windows guys on the cheap.
Lastly -- companies are hesistant to change. Financial companies in particular go with the mantra, if it works, don't touch it. You will see lots of these smaller shops on NT 4 still because to them... it works. Larger corporations that have to meet with SOX compliancy issues are forced into upgrading. That's what happened where I work.
Anyways.. best of luck trying to introduce Linux into your environment. I am going to say that you will crash and burn trying, because a company that large doesn't likely have a *need* for Linux. And if's not a necessity, a good business decision is not to let it happen. Again the mantra, if it ain't broke...don't fix it.
You can mod me troll if you wish, but I find it entertaining that a person that's the advertising vice president for Google is saying that more businesses are going to go to online advertising because the returns are better.
Not a lie, as per the second thing. I'll agree with your first point, to a degree:)
The job market in the NYC Metro area (NY/NJ/CT) is lookign mostly for people that are experienced -- this is because a lot of people got let go a few years back and now they are re-hiring. Granted there are *some* openings.. but they come few and far between for entry level positions.
And even then, the people that get THOSE spots are those that have experience because they went and learned on their own:)
From the perspective of a recent IT graduate...
on
Recruiting IT Students?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Let's face the facts -- school does not teach you enough to make anything of yourself in the corporate world. This isn't true only for IT, but also in Finance, Marketing, Sales, etc. School gives you a groundwork and when you start a job, you build upon that when you get out of school and start working.
Now if you agree with what I've just said, take into consideration the following: the private sector does not hire IT workers without experience. The notion that there are 'more jobs' available is probably true -- but look at the requirements. This is not the dot-com era any longer -- it's impossible for a no-knowledge, just out of school, wet behind the ears college graduate is going to get an awesome job without the skills necessary to help the company they work for achieve their business goals (and this is a large reason why the dot-com era went as bust as it did).
Pick up a paper, or check Monster, CareerBuilder, Dice -- all the IT positions are looking for *seasoned* employees. "5-7 Years experience." "Senior level position." These are some of the tag words that will put college graduates out of business when it comes to looking for a job. And *that* is the reason why nobody wants to get into IT.
There was a recent article in Information Week that explained the HUGE age disparity between IT workers. The reason is, that *most* companies aren't changing things around every day -- it's very cost prohibitive and it requires way too much overhead. They stick with the same technologies, so companies continue to run Windows NT 4.0 and the like -- and as a result, the same people stay in their jobs. This creates no openings 'on the bottom', and it's the most glaring thing to me in the IT world.
If you want to solve the problem of low enrollment in IT programs -- it's not to do with the job market. It's to do with the lack of INTERNSHIPS and REAL EXPERIENCE that employers are looking for. Unfortunately for me, the career services center in my school was useless, and I had a VERY tough time, and after lying on my resume about experience in years, I finally landed a crappy IT job. I'm much better off now, but the fact remains -- how can you expect students to line up for IT programs in a school, if you don't teach them what BUSINESS needs are important to keep met, instead of teaching them about "blahblah theory of x and y". Those theories make you competent programmers, but the 'quick and dirty' method of coding is often what's used and in business, it's what people want -- results.
So as a college professor, you have to work with major companies to get REAL internships to these students. They have to become PART of the curriculum. The idea of going to college, completing X number of credits, and graduating to a great job is OVER. The year is 2005 -- and money talks. Numbers are what counts, and if that number is how fast they want you to complete a project, how often they upgrade, how many years of experience you have, or the retention length on IT workers it translates into only ONE number -- the paycheck you're going to be bringing home. And if you don't have the skills from college to make it in the BUSINESS WORLD, then the doors that open so infrequently for entry level IT workers simply won't exist.
It's amazing how keeping your mouth shut and not coming up with ANYTHING inventive at all over the past 3 or 4 years actually benefits Microsoft this time around.
Sony kept blabbing and then made their 'innovations' in DRM -- and screwed over a large portion of people. And gave themselves all the bad press they needed.
Besides, the benefit to Microsoft is that they came out first. So when people start buying the next generation games... they will be on XBox. Playstation will have to catch up to their lead from coming out first.
Who knows... I don't! I play games on the computer only. Xbox is for teh pansies:P
We just disabled the installation of any software from removable media.
The rootkit can't install unless you have rights to do it -- Domain Admins in our case:) While Windows isn't the greatest OS... it's pretty flexible and I admit, I have a soft spot for Active Directory and Group Policy:)
laughing my ass off. I am sitting at work reading this and busting out in laughter. Granted, I can't explain this idiocy to near anybody at work and it's a totally 'nerd' joke, but you know what... it's DAMN funny!
And then he could reinvest THAT money to fight DRM in his usual fashion.
Hopefully the CDs sold a LOT of copies so he gets a LOT of money and thus fuels the fight against DRM, and pushes for cheaper prices on music as a whole.
Either that or he can buy hookers and booze. I imagine with all that coding he might get a little bored.
Well if we push the notion of HD-DVD format for Microsoft's DRM, at least we know it will be cracked in a week and it won't really affect us that much:)
Because Google has been rumoured to be releasing an eBay competitor, as well as a PayPal competitor into the marketplace. Combining their ad program with a simple and easy to use auction site can only increase their ad revenue because of the way the content is generated and who's viewing -- all by end users. Thus the AdSense program can adopt and learn market behaviors, as well as track buying habits, and only create more targetted ads.
And since Google has released damn near everything (tm) for free -- including Picasa, WiFi, and today the Web Analyitics tools (which are awesome by the way) -- eBay is going to have to make their preemptive move against a Google entry. Google's name recognition and sheer dollar value will allow them to muscle their way into the market on this. But developers know that Google's API is lacking, especially compared to Yahoo and others, and eBay is already trying to capitalize.
Either way, I look at this as a precursor for eBay to lower their auction rates and PayPal rates. Win-win for me. If Google does release what they are 'rumoured' to, then there's only more competition for my money and since I have good history with both companies, the lower price will probably win.
Quake 4's multiplayer brings a breath of fresh air to a game I loved dearly -- Quake 3. Since the coming of age of games like Counterstrike, Day of Defeat, RTCW, Enemy Territory, UT2004, etc etc... it is a nice refresher to see a game that's FAST PACED again!
Quake 3 is still, to today, the fastest multiplayer experience there is online. It's ALL twitch based and it's AWESOME. I am glad to see that Quake 4 instead of 'reinventing' the genre just updated it, and kept the greatest things I loved about Quake -- the multiplayer.
Granted, this is not good for everybody. Some people like killing stupid monsters with stupid AI, some people want revolutionary changes in every game released, some people want amazing, breathtaking graphics and physics. But for a lot of us, we want to get online and frag the fuck out of as many people as possible in a given amount of time, so that instead of spending money on therapy that we dearly need, we take our aggressions out on virtual players the world over.
Okay maybe I've said too much about my personal life... Let me go bang my head against a wall now:)
Then I can only hope that Apple becomes a SOFTWARE company, and says 'screw the big margins' on their hardware when the sheer volume can make up for it when they start licensing their OS.
If they give 'home' users a 'site' license as well (install it on all your PCs at home), it's a HUGE boost for people to adopt, and further then push it onto their business counterparts. It's all about taking the first step.
Now in the back of my mind, I have a feeling it will be buggy and full of security holes. I think it might be real crap, have no real new features, still be bloated and insecure.
But... what if it's not? What if it's exactly what people want (or say they want)? What if the security on it is top notch? What if the user interface has gotten amazing -- to the point that even Apple says "Hey that's pretty nifty!"? What if the applications and device driver requirements that are written for Vista are top spec, and work flawlessly?
While it's not 100% likely, it's not improbably either. Microsoft has huge resources and aside from our 'preview' events of Vista, there's no telling what Vista may bring with it, and how it may challenge OS X on every front.
And that folks, is why Apple has to learn to stop going the way of the Betamax and integrate with other hardware vendors. Yes, I said it -- Apple has to become a software company if they want to survive. The next version of Vista could be (and I'm not cheerleading for anybody here) amazing -- and it could blow everything Apple touts -- ease of use, 'prettyness', stability, security -- out of the water. Then what can Apple retort with? What will their "Switch" commercials say? "Before I got an Apple, I didn't have a cool looking tower, but now, with the new iMac, I paid a premium price for an OS and hardware that is not as good as Windows Vista."
I know the Slashdot crowd generally love *nix, and that Apple has such a framework underneath it that encompasses those *nix environments, that Windows is automatically an antithesis to this -- and to some definate truth. However I'm a bit of a realist, and I know that Microsoft can go for the jugular this time around, because they know they need to compete not only with the ease of use of Apple, but the security of what is intruding into the server world with Linux.
Aside from ease of use NOW, what does Apple offer? Security can be had with a well-minded individual in Windows as well. And the fact that Windows runs on most anything lets me run applications faster and faster, and games better and better. Video editing, graphics manipulation, 3D processing -- it's all faster on PCs now. And that's where Apple had a great stranglehold yet, the latest Star Wars was rendered on a bank of AMD processors.
So in the immediate future, Apple will push its own hardware. And that's fine. But if Microsoft brings Vista to the table prepared, built well, and most importantly -- BETTER -- than OS X... Apple can't survive with their profit margins.
I must add a disclaimer, that I don't own a Mac yet -- still waiting until they are cheaper. But I am a huge fan having used my friend's PowerBook. There are some things Apple has that are small, ingenious touches that I really enjoy. But I can't bring myself to buy a laptop that costs more money, and does essentially less than a similar Windows machine. But they are so damn cool, I still will break down at some point, and buy one. Maybe when I get a tax return...
You are forgetting one important point -- that Steve Jobs has an ego the size of a mountain, and will break his back avoiding it to happen. It is very 'me me me' with him, and has been for many years. However since Apple is a publicly traded company, what will happen is that Jobs will get overridden for what is an obvious profit to investors and shareholders in the short AND long term.
I am glad that Jobs reorganized Apple in such a way to make it as great as it is now, but in the end the money always does the talking -- and that's a game that Jobs is going to have a hard time winning.
Can't agree enough with this. I am one of 'those' that is looking for a gaming company to start pushing the envelope not with technology, but with the GAMEPLAY. We know full well now, and of all people who know it -- Dvorak -- we are going to have photorealistic games in the near future.
But after that, then what? Photorealism doesn't make a game PLAY any better. It makes it look prettier.
I am looking for Nintendo to go completely about face from Sony and Microsoft and just push the envelope with the types of games they develop. Honestly, one of the most fun times I've had was when myself and a bunch of friends started to get wasted at somebody's house, and played Mario Party for about 4 hours. It was like playing a board game, but well... a lot more fun. The graphics were 'blah', but damn that was a fun game.
I just don't get the same excitement from the EA Sports games, or the countless first person shooters that are technically no different than Quake 1. You can look around with the mouse, shoot and jump. Everything else is just a slight addon, graphics and all.
That said, I find it still rather annoying that my main attraction in gaming is first person shooters but I blame that mostly on the fact that I am a loser who enjoys being good at those games:)
Because XXX class can always beat YYY class. There are exceptions, like total stupidity but generally rogues can kill mages easily, warriors can kill rogues, etc... It's not an overall balance where rogues, mages, warriors, etc are all balanced equally. But granted, that does make for a game that's much more bland in terms of character 'abilities' and not everybody wants something like that:)
That's a part of it -- yeah. However knowing how to conserve mana, when to 'flurry' (to borrow a boxing term), what spells to cast to counter, etc... that's the 'skill' I'm talking about. Also skill in a group setting when you're fighting with 20 others in a scaled battle... that's something that takes effort and skill in a different way.
Actually no, Guild Wars isn't what I want. Admittedly, it's a fun game in spurts. But the content is the type where you fight over and over in the arenas and don't accomplish anything -- and the matches are all 5 on 5 or whatever it is (it's been a while).
Anyways.. Guild Wars is not as 'scaled' as I'd like to see in a true MMO. The battles of 30 on 30 that I used to fight in Ultima Online YEARS ago were the best PvP experiences I'd ever had. The fact the game had no levels and that all characters were merely cookie cutters of the same type were helpful and for some it made the game very boring, but the action was extreme because the difference of one player to another was their skill. Lower 'leveled' characters could compete against higher ones if they fought smarter. It was a challenge to control (pre-Ventrilo/Teamspeak days here) a group of guys to focus an attack on one guy, or cross heal, etc... It was crazy fun.
I'm just looking for that warm fuzzy feeling again:)
It's a question, but as a gamer who only enjoys the game when it brings misery to others (hah!), how good is the PvP?
I am personally waiting for the game that takes into account the player's skill at the game itself instead of having XXX level will beat XXX-1 level, or YYY class will always defeat YZY class. It's idiotic and boring, and brings little to tactics in games of scale.
I am still watching for DarkFall Online as it seems to be the only game that will combine the elements of PvP I'm looking for, but still I'm curious... how does PvP in CoV stack up? I haven't played CoH since there was almost ZERO PvP, but now with the expansion I wonder how the combat system takes into account any type of player skill, or is it just another XXX and YYY game?
OS X is Apple's real core product yet, they are becoming more and more, instead of the Apple Computer Company, rather the iPod company. I know I may get modded troll, but I'd much rather see Apple making its sales off of OS X instead of on the iPod which is a relatively mediocre product in a sea of other mediocre products. Sure, the interface is great, the scroll wheel brilliant, but in the end it only does one thing -- play music (and videos now -- poorly).
The cost of entry to use a *nice* Apple is just too damned high -- and this coming from an Apple FAN! Microsoft is already seeing the consequences of its horrendous licensing schemes with the upstart of Linux use and development -- I am unsure why Apple cannot see the same thing.
There will be an iPod killer at some point -- when the iPod isn't as 'cool' as it is now. And just like the Windows 95 debut, the time will come that the all supreme market leader will be playing catchup. In Apple's case however, the fact that their business model is structured now around iTunes and iPods instead of the great OS they created is unfortunate and will put them in a predicament in the future.
The day Apple decides to put OS X onto a DVD and let you install it on your whitebox built computer is the day the grave is dug for Microsoft. With the closed environment of OS X right now, I liken it to Betamax and VHS. Betamax was a superior technology but because Sony wanted to keep the rights to themselves, they got beaten handily by VHS. In the future Betamax was a niche product -- and successful for video editors etc, but oh, what could have been?
I hope not to ask about Apple 5 or 10 years from now, "Oh, what could have been?" I worry more and more however, that I will wind up with a really nice and fashionable MP3 player and an OS that is used as a niche product, being better or not.
I am hard pressed to understand that a CD can cost me $20, but a movie that took $100 million to make can cost me $15.
That's why I just signed up for the Yahoo Music store, get unlimited downloads and don't think about it. And now with the modification I've done on my car to play my MP3 player thru the existing system, I don't even NEED to buy the $.79 or $.99 tracks.
If I was going to pay $.99 for a track, I'd buy the entire CD so I could have the physical disc in my hands along with album art etc. Though admittedly, I was severely pissed when the new Nine Inch Nails came without any lyrics inside the disc jacket!
Slashdot Mirror
There's a few reasons why an IS department won't roll out Linux into an Active Directory environment.
:)
First, is that they cannot control the desktop using policy. This is the biggest selling point of using Windows in a workgroup domain, and especially to manage as many servers and end users as they have. Active Directory, while not perfect, is awesome in its capabilities -- all stolen mostly from Novell's NDS
Next, is expertise. Why would you introduce something into an environment that nobody really knows how to use? Your executives aren't 100% sure but they know 100% that they need to hire staff that can take on Linux servers/desktops and supporting them. That means paying a premium for that labor, and it's not necessary when you can get Windows guys on the cheap.
Lastly -- companies are hesistant to change. Financial companies in particular go with the mantra, if it works, don't touch it. You will see lots of these smaller shops on NT 4 still because to them... it works. Larger corporations that have to meet with SOX compliancy issues are forced into upgrading. That's what happened where I work.
Anyways.. best of luck trying to introduce Linux into your environment. I am going to say that you will crash and burn trying, because a company that large doesn't likely have a *need* for Linux. And if's not a necessity, a good business decision is not to let it happen. Again the mantra, if it ain't broke...don't fix it.
Is stupid.
You can mod me troll if you wish, but I find it entertaining that a person that's the advertising vice president for Google is saying that more businesses are going to go to online advertising because the returns are better.
Vested interest in the statement, much?
The world is round.
Thanks Nokia, for stating what is already obvious to everybody.
Not a lie, as per the second thing. I'll agree with your first point, to a degree :)
:)
The job market in the NYC Metro area (NY/NJ/CT) is lookign mostly for people that are experienced -- this is because a lot of people got let go a few years back and now they are re-hiring. Granted there are *some* openings.. but they come few and far between for entry level positions.
And even then, the people that get THOSE spots are those that have experience because they went and learned on their own
Let's face the facts -- school does not teach you enough to make anything of yourself in the corporate world. This isn't true only for IT, but also in Finance, Marketing, Sales, etc. School gives you a groundwork and when you start a job, you build upon that when you get out of school and start working.
Now if you agree with what I've just said, take into consideration the following: the private sector does not hire IT workers without experience. The notion that there are 'more jobs' available is probably true -- but look at the requirements. This is not the dot-com era any longer -- it's impossible for a no-knowledge, just out of school, wet behind the ears college graduate is going to get an awesome job without the skills necessary to help the company they work for achieve their business goals (and this is a large reason why the dot-com era went as bust as it did).
Pick up a paper, or check Monster, CareerBuilder, Dice -- all the IT positions are looking for *seasoned* employees. "5-7 Years experience." "Senior level position." These are some of the tag words that will put college graduates out of business when it comes to looking for a job. And *that* is the reason why nobody wants to get into IT.
There was a recent article in Information Week that explained the HUGE age disparity between IT workers. The reason is, that *most* companies aren't changing things around every day -- it's very cost prohibitive and it requires way too much overhead. They stick with the same technologies, so companies continue to run Windows NT 4.0 and the like -- and as a result, the same people stay in their jobs. This creates no openings 'on the bottom', and it's the most glaring thing to me in the IT world.
If you want to solve the problem of low enrollment in IT programs -- it's not to do with the job market. It's to do with the lack of INTERNSHIPS and REAL EXPERIENCE that employers are looking for. Unfortunately for me, the career services center in my school was useless, and I had a VERY tough time, and after lying on my resume about experience in years, I finally landed a crappy IT job. I'm much better off now, but the fact remains -- how can you expect students to line up for IT programs in a school, if you don't teach them what BUSINESS needs are important to keep met, instead of teaching them about "blahblah theory of x and y". Those theories make you competent programmers, but the 'quick and dirty' method of coding is often what's used and in business, it's what people want -- results.
So as a college professor, you have to work with major companies to get REAL internships to these students. They have to become PART of the curriculum. The idea of going to college, completing X number of credits, and graduating to a great job is OVER. The year is 2005 -- and money talks. Numbers are what counts, and if that number is how fast they want you to complete a project, how often they upgrade, how many years of experience you have, or the retention length on IT workers it translates into only ONE number -- the paycheck you're going to be bringing home. And if you don't have the skills from college to make it in the BUSINESS WORLD, then the doors that open so infrequently for entry level IT workers simply won't exist.
As Sony loses them.
:P
It's amazing how keeping your mouth shut and not coming up with ANYTHING inventive at all over the past 3 or 4 years actually benefits Microsoft this time around.
Sony kept blabbing and then made their 'innovations' in DRM -- and screwed over a large portion of people. And gave themselves all the bad press they needed.
Besides, the benefit to Microsoft is that they came out first. So when people start buying the next generation games... they will be on XBox. Playstation will have to catch up to their lead from coming out first.
Who knows... I don't! I play games on the computer only. Xbox is for teh pansies
We just disabled the installation of any software from removable media.
:) While Windows isn't the greatest OS... it's pretty flexible and I admit, I have a soft spot for Active Directory and Group Policy :)
The rootkit can't install unless you have rights to do it -- Domain Admins in our case
laughing my ass off. I am sitting at work reading this and busting out in laughter. Granted, I can't explain this idiocy to near anybody at work and it's a totally 'nerd' joke, but you know what... it's DAMN funny!
And then he could reinvest THAT money to fight DRM in his usual fashion.
Hopefully the CDs sold a LOT of copies so he gets a LOT of money and thus fuels the fight against DRM, and pushes for cheaper prices on music as a whole.
Either that or he can buy hookers and booze. I imagine with all that coding he might get a little bored.
Windows *is* easier to use than Linux.
That said, Linux rocks Windows in every other arena.. security, stability, uptime, memory management, etc.
Well if we push the notion of HD-DVD format for Microsoft's DRM, at least we know it will be cracked in a week and it won't really affect us that much :)
Because Google has been rumoured to be releasing an eBay competitor, as well as a PayPal competitor into the marketplace. Combining their ad program with a simple and easy to use auction site can only increase their ad revenue because of the way the content is generated and who's viewing -- all by end users. Thus the AdSense program can adopt and learn market behaviors, as well as track buying habits, and only create more targetted ads.
And since Google has released damn near everything (tm) for free -- including Picasa, WiFi, and today the Web Analyitics tools (which are awesome by the way) -- eBay is going to have to make their preemptive move against a Google entry. Google's name recognition and sheer dollar value will allow them to muscle their way into the market on this. But developers know that Google's API is lacking, especially compared to Yahoo and others, and eBay is already trying to capitalize.
Either way, I look at this as a precursor for eBay to lower their auction rates and PayPal rates. Win-win for me. If Google does release what they are 'rumoured' to, then there's only more competition for my money and since I have good history with both companies, the lower price will probably win.
Quake 4's multiplayer brings a breath of fresh air to a game I loved dearly -- Quake 3. Since the coming of age of games like Counterstrike, Day of Defeat, RTCW, Enemy Territory, UT2004, etc etc... it is a nice refresher to see a game that's FAST PACED again!
:)
Quake 3 is still, to today, the fastest multiplayer experience there is online. It's ALL twitch based and it's AWESOME. I am glad to see that Quake 4 instead of 'reinventing' the genre just updated it, and kept the greatest things I loved about Quake -- the multiplayer.
Granted, this is not good for everybody. Some people like killing stupid monsters with stupid AI, some people want revolutionary changes in every game released, some people want amazing, breathtaking graphics and physics. But for a lot of us, we want to get online and frag the fuck out of as many people as possible in a given amount of time, so that instead of spending money on therapy that we dearly need, we take our aggressions out on virtual players the world over.
Okay maybe I've said too much about my personal life... Let me go bang my head against a wall now
Then I can only hope that Apple becomes a SOFTWARE company, and says 'screw the big margins' on their hardware when the sheer volume can make up for it when they start licensing their OS.
If they give 'home' users a 'site' license as well (install it on all your PCs at home), it's a HUGE boost for people to adopt, and further then push it onto their business counterparts. It's all about taking the first step.
Windows Vista.
Now in the back of my mind, I have a feeling it will be buggy and full of security holes. I think it might be real crap, have no real new features, still be bloated and insecure.
But... what if it's not? What if it's exactly what people want (or say they want)? What if the security on it is top notch? What if the user interface has gotten amazing -- to the point that even Apple says "Hey that's pretty nifty!"? What if the applications and device driver requirements that are written for Vista are top spec, and work flawlessly?
While it's not 100% likely, it's not improbably either. Microsoft has huge resources and aside from our 'preview' events of Vista, there's no telling what Vista may bring with it, and how it may challenge OS X on every front.
And that folks, is why Apple has to learn to stop going the way of the Betamax and integrate with other hardware vendors. Yes, I said it -- Apple has to become a software company if they want to survive. The next version of Vista could be (and I'm not cheerleading for anybody here) amazing -- and it could blow everything Apple touts -- ease of use, 'prettyness', stability, security -- out of the water. Then what can Apple retort with? What will their "Switch" commercials say? "Before I got an Apple, I didn't have a cool looking tower, but now, with the new iMac, I paid a premium price for an OS and hardware that is not as good as Windows Vista."
I know the Slashdot crowd generally love *nix, and that Apple has such a framework underneath it that encompasses those *nix environments, that Windows is automatically an antithesis to this -- and to some definate truth. However I'm a bit of a realist, and I know that Microsoft can go for the jugular this time around, because they know they need to compete not only with the ease of use of Apple, but the security of what is intruding into the server world with Linux.
Aside from ease of use NOW, what does Apple offer? Security can be had with a well-minded individual in Windows as well. And the fact that Windows runs on most anything lets me run applications faster and faster, and games better and better. Video editing, graphics manipulation, 3D processing -- it's all faster on PCs now. And that's where Apple had a great stranglehold yet, the latest Star Wars was rendered on a bank of AMD processors.
So in the immediate future, Apple will push its own hardware. And that's fine. But if Microsoft brings Vista to the table prepared, built well, and most importantly -- BETTER -- than OS X... Apple can't survive with their profit margins.
I must add a disclaimer, that I don't own a Mac yet -- still waiting until they are cheaper. But I am a huge fan having used my friend's PowerBook. There are some things Apple has that are small, ingenious touches that I really enjoy. But I can't bring myself to buy a laptop that costs more money, and does essentially less than a similar Windows machine. But they are so damn cool, I still will break down at some point, and buy one. Maybe when I get a tax return...
You are forgetting one important point -- that Steve Jobs has an ego the size of a mountain, and will break his back avoiding it to happen. It is very 'me me me' with him, and has been for many years. However since Apple is a publicly traded company, what will happen is that Jobs will get overridden for what is an obvious profit to investors and shareholders in the short AND long term.
I am glad that Jobs reorganized Apple in such a way to make it as great as it is now, but in the end the money always does the talking -- and that's a game that Jobs is going to have a hard time winning.
Can't agree enough with this. I am one of 'those' that is looking for a gaming company to start pushing the envelope not with technology, but with the GAMEPLAY. We know full well now, and of all people who know it -- Dvorak -- we are going to have photorealistic games in the near future.
:)
But after that, then what? Photorealism doesn't make a game PLAY any better. It makes it look prettier.
I am looking for Nintendo to go completely about face from Sony and Microsoft and just push the envelope with the types of games they develop. Honestly, one of the most fun times I've had was when myself and a bunch of friends started to get wasted at somebody's house, and played Mario Party for about 4 hours. It was like playing a board game, but well... a lot more fun. The graphics were 'blah', but damn that was a fun game.
I just don't get the same excitement from the EA Sports games, or the countless first person shooters that are technically no different than Quake 1. You can look around with the mouse, shoot and jump. Everything else is just a slight addon, graphics and all.
That said, I find it still rather annoying that my main attraction in gaming is first person shooters but I blame that mostly on the fact that I am a loser who enjoys being good at those games
Because XXX class can always beat YYY class. There are exceptions, like total stupidity but generally rogues can kill mages easily, warriors can kill rogues, etc... It's not an overall balance where rogues, mages, warriors, etc are all balanced equally. But granted, that does make for a game that's much more bland in terms of character 'abilities' and not everybody wants something like that :)
That's a part of it -- yeah. However knowing how to conserve mana, when to 'flurry' (to borrow a boxing term), what spells to cast to counter, etc... that's the 'skill' I'm talking about. Also skill in a group setting when you're fighting with 20 others in a scaled battle... that's something that takes effort and skill in a different way.
Actually no, Guild Wars isn't what I want. Admittedly, it's a fun game in spurts. But the content is the type where you fight over and over in the arenas and don't accomplish anything -- and the matches are all 5 on 5 or whatever it is (it's been a while).
:)
Anyways.. Guild Wars is not as 'scaled' as I'd like to see in a true MMO. The battles of 30 on 30 that I used to fight in Ultima Online YEARS ago were the best PvP experiences I'd ever had. The fact the game had no levels and that all characters were merely cookie cutters of the same type were helpful and for some it made the game very boring, but the action was extreme because the difference of one player to another was their skill. Lower 'leveled' characters could compete against higher ones if they fought smarter. It was a challenge to control (pre-Ventrilo/Teamspeak days here) a group of guys to focus an attack on one guy, or cross heal, etc... It was crazy fun.
I'm just looking for that warm fuzzy feeling again
It's a question, but as a gamer who only enjoys the game when it brings misery to others (hah!), how good is the PvP?
I am personally waiting for the game that takes into account the player's skill at the game itself instead of having XXX level will beat XXX-1 level, or YYY class will always defeat YZY class. It's idiotic and boring, and brings little to tactics in games of scale.
I am still watching for DarkFall Online as it seems to be the only game that will combine the elements of PvP I'm looking for, but still I'm curious... how does PvP in CoV stack up? I haven't played CoH since there was almost ZERO PvP, but now with the expansion I wonder how the combat system takes into account any type of player skill, or is it just another XXX and YYY game?
OS X is Apple's real core product yet, they are becoming more and more, instead of the Apple Computer Company, rather the iPod company. I know I may get modded troll, but I'd much rather see Apple making its sales off of OS X instead of on the iPod which is a relatively mediocre product in a sea of other mediocre products. Sure, the interface is great, the scroll wheel brilliant, but in the end it only does one thing -- play music (and videos now -- poorly).
The cost of entry to use a *nice* Apple is just too damned high -- and this coming from an Apple FAN! Microsoft is already seeing the consequences of its horrendous licensing schemes with the upstart of Linux use and development -- I am unsure why Apple cannot see the same thing.
There will be an iPod killer at some point -- when the iPod isn't as 'cool' as it is now. And just like the Windows 95 debut, the time will come that the all supreme market leader will be playing catchup. In Apple's case however, the fact that their business model is structured now around iTunes and iPods instead of the great OS they created is unfortunate and will put them in a predicament in the future.
The day Apple decides to put OS X onto a DVD and let you install it on your whitebox built computer is the day the grave is dug for Microsoft. With the closed environment of OS X right now, I liken it to Betamax and VHS. Betamax was a superior technology but because Sony wanted to keep the rights to themselves, they got beaten handily by VHS. In the future Betamax was a niche product -- and successful for video editors etc, but oh, what could have been?
I hope not to ask about Apple 5 or 10 years from now, "Oh, what could have been?" I worry more and more however, that I will wind up with a really nice and fashionable MP3 player and an OS that is used as a niche product, being better or not.
So it will DEPENDABLY crash... just takes longer?
Because you're stupid.
I am hard pressed to understand that a CD can cost me $20, but a movie that took $100 million to make can cost me $15.
That's why I just signed up for the Yahoo Music store, get unlimited downloads and don't think about it. And now with the modification I've done on my car to play my MP3 player thru the existing system, I don't even NEED to buy the $.79 or $.99 tracks.
If I was going to pay $.99 for a track, I'd buy the entire CD so I could have the physical disc in my hands along with album art etc. Though admittedly, I was severely pissed when the new Nine Inch Nails came without any lyrics inside the disc jacket!
To a whole new generation of Linux programmers and tinkerers right in Korea! And with their IT infrastructure so far ahead...
:)
Maybe it's not a good idea