This has been pointed out before, but some people never get it. The mere existance of a competing product does not define whether someone has a monopoly not. What defines a monopoly is the amount of market share, and possible how difficult (b/c of practices by the monopolistic company) a new competiter would have entering the market. MS is a monopoly, even though there are many competiters (unix, linux, macos, vms, etc).
Anyway, the problem with gracenote is not whether it is a monopoly at all. It is with their belief that they 'own' the data. I don't see how they have any claim to individual records, nor do i understand how they can say the db as a whole is thiers. Even if that is possible, freedb probably don't have all the records cddb does, so how can they claim freedb is allowing access to cddbs content? I don't even know how anyone that puts together a pile of information and claim it as their own. It seems to me that if someone else can easily compile such data, no one person/company can lay claim to it.
Before the arguement was between murder and attempted murder. In both cases, the intent was to murder; the only difference there was whether the person actually succeeded.
Now you are talking about the difference between murder and manslaughter. One is a purposeful attemp to end someone's life (which, if muder has succeded), the other is the accidental killing of another. There is not 'attemped manslaugheter' because your intent in a manslaughter case was not to kill anyone, and therefore almost killing someone BY ACCIDENT is not a crime.
B/c, fortunatly i survived, and thus less harm was done then had i actually died.
You point out a big problem with current 'punishment' system. 5 years or 20, you need to be rehabilitated. But the emphasis is on punishment, not actually making prisoners better people. If we did try for rehabilitation, i don't think we'd see as many repeat crimials.
I dunno about that. I think the problem intel is having with AMD is that AMD is making better, faster chips, for a lower cost. I'm not sure the RAM part of it effects the processor battle.
That alone is not what won that suit however. It was the fact that the McDs in question had done reseach, and knew that A) coffee at that temp. would cause 3rd degree burns and B) they knew thiers was hot enough to cause such burns, but did nothing to correct it.
Well what i find most appaling is the fact that the games ALONE are being blamed. Do they really think they have evidence to support that? There are millions of kids that are not turned into 'monsters' as the article so nicely claims. It seems to be that the ones that are turned into 'monsters' are the ones being harrassed everyday.
I don't think spam or telemarketers are covered by free speech. True they have every right to say what they want to say, but i also have the right not to listen to it, or be bothered with them in the first place. Their right to free speech does NOT give them the right to harrass me.
I have yet to meet anyone that HASN'T seen that movie...well T2 at least.
Anyway, while i know that this post is supposed to be a joke, it is something that needs to be considered. Once something thinks for itself, there's no reason to believe that it won't come to the conclusion that it would be better off without us. It might simply see the 'tendancy to destory ourselves' in us, and decide to destroy us before we can take it down with us.
Fortunatly, that kind of AI is probably still far off into the future. But there are many issues that sci-fi stories seem to address, even though those issues might not present themselves for a few years.
The AI turned on human is found not only in T2, but 2001, Star Trek (Data's 'brother' Lore), the Matrix, the list goes on. If you can get past the bad acting, every week the Outer Limits seems to address some techno-nightmare issue.
Most of the useless mail i get is actually from the company itself. Instead of emailing only a few people, they email a list instead. Sometimes i could see why i might care, but if i don't, it just wastes time.
Re:We definately need some education reform
on
Sean In The Middle
·
· Score: 1
I categorically reject that statement.
Yes, schools should stop bullying, and most schools do a pretty poor job of preventing the tormenting of "outcast" kids, but this is moral equivalence of the worst kind. Bullying kids are not "just as responsible" as those who pulled
the trigger.
There are millions of bullied teens who manage to get through high school without massacring their classmates.
Anyone who places less than 100% of the responsibility for Columbine on Klebold and Harris is just plain wrong.
I'd say you've probably never been bullied before. I'm not talking about once or twice, or for a week. I'm talking everyday, every chance the bully gets, for years.
What the hell do you really expect to happen under those conditions? Do you realize that such behavior ANYWHERE else would result in the 'bully' being arrested?
Lets try an experiment shall we. Tell me where you live, and i'll torment and beat the crap out of you everyday while you're at work. The people at work will do nothing to stop me, except maybe say don't do it again. Or i can't come back for 3 days. We'll see how you feel, and what you do to stop if then.
As for the 'millions' of bullied kids (not just teens, since these things start way before HS), you're right alot of them get through it without killing their classmates. Those are the ones that are strong enough to handle it, or just can take more then the others. As for those that can't handle it anymore, there are two solutions.
They hate their life, it is torment everyday. There seems to be only two ways to stop the torment, since the schools seem to want to do nothing. The only way to stop the torment FOREVER (not just for a 3 day suspection..) is to remove the bully, or themselves. I take it you place no blame on someone that drove another person to suicide either.
That kind of thinking works out really nice if you think about it. So a black slave in the 1800s would be wrong for killing the slave owner? The slave owner doesn't deserve any of the blame for his own death?
Its not so different from a kid being bullied in school. Both live in fear of someone with power over them, both are abused, one more mentally then physically, but the damage is the same. Neither can appeal to authorities for help, nor can they escape (i HAD to go to school). Yet you blame not the person doing the torment, but the victim of that torment?
The problem with bullies in school is that most of the abuse is mental, and alot of people don't even believe there is such a thing. I guess you'd think differently if you had been abused like that.
Re:We definately need some education reform
on
Sean In The Middle
·
· Score: 1
The problem with punishing bullies, is that often they have been provoked, usually verbally. "Target" kids are frequently "wise-guys"; if they can't defend themselves physically then they attempt to compensate verbally.
Ok, that is just utter bullshit. I personally had never done anything to the kids that picked on me (well except being the new kid in 7th grade, sorry i didn't know that was such a crime), yet they did it anyway. If someone really is a bully i'd think most people know enough not to start making wisecracks against them. Maybe you didn't figure it out, but i'm willing to beat most kids do. So anyone else that was picked on here, did you guys actually start it??
So any "solution" has to include not only the bullies, but the kids who respond, and the kids who provoke verbally
Like i said, the kid to usualy start things is the bully. The ones being picked on usually just want to be left alone. I know i wanted nothing more then to be invisible. The solution is to teach these bullies to respect other people. The solution DOES NOT include me, since i had done nothing wrong.
If someone is harrasing you or assalting you, you do have the right to fight back with appropriate means. And i believe every kid being picked on should fight back. Here's why; the kids that just take it have feelings of hatred and revenge building up in them...those are the ones that will eventually snap. And believe me when i say that, i came damn near close to it myself.
And the solution is not just a matter for the schools. Kids repeat what they see in the home, and schools can't fix that. It's got to be a concerted-effort between schools and parents.
Maybe thats true, i don't know for sure, i never got to know the bullies home life. But part of the solution does rest on the school. Any student that harrasses or assults another student should be thrown out. In my HS i believed they were transfed to a juvy/school kind of deal. But this policy was too little, too late for me. But schools to have a responsibility to protect the physical and mental wellbeing of thier students. Not removing students that harrass or assult other students if failing in this duty. Removing them is the first step, b/c once removed there will probably be quite a few students who's lives will greatly improve...then there is only one more person to help (or lock up, as the case may be).
Parents who cop-out and simply blame the public schools are probably the biggest part of the problem.
Do you really believe the school is completely innocent in all of this? They routinely ignore reports of harrasement and assult, but as soon as a victim meantions the word gun he is out before he can blink. The school is doing something wrong here, they are not stopping the bullies! So yes, while a parent needs to teach his child not to beat up other kids, the school is responsible to remove that threat from the student body.
There's a difference between thought and action, lets not forget that. I personally would hate to have thought police around.
So let us realy look at what the school did. They suspended a kid for saying something, that was all. Furthermore, what he said was in direct response to harrasment from other students. One of the kids even stole some disks out of his bag just before he made the comment. It seems to be that students harrasing another student, verbally and physically, should be the ones in trouble. Sean has every right to stand up for himself it someone is attacking him. Trying to instill this take whatever they dishout attitude will not help Sean through life.
For those blaming Sean's father, consider this. How much of what went on in HS did you really tell your parents? I didn't tell them much, thats for sure. Usually i went and played nintendo to work my frustrations out. But did i tell my parents if i got punched in the arm a few times today? Nope...b/c i knew if they reported it to the school, virtually nothing would have been done to the kid hitting me, and as a result i'd just be hit more.
It seems to me that if one kid hits another kid, they should be out of there no questions asked. There is NO excuse for attacking someone (unless you are fighting off an attack). Had that bully been removed from school as soon as i said he was hitting me, i bet my HS would have been alot nicer.
Re:We definately need some education reform
on
Sean In The Middle
·
· Score: 1
I agree. Whats worse is that the kids harrasing someone don't get punished at all. I can't blame anyone for fighting back once they got sick of torment. One problem is that alot of parents don't take such torments seriously enough...it sounds like silly name calling to them. But to the student on the recieving end, its much more hurtful then that. As far as Colimbine goes, the ones that made the shooters feel like outcasts were just as responsible for the deaths as the shooters themselves. What do you really expect to happen when you make someones life a living hell?
If you want to stop school violence, crack down on the bullies and other instigators. I doubt there'd be any shootings (or suicides) if those kids were just left alone.
Well...here in upstate NY, and back near philly, that is the norm. Kinda stupid if you ask me. The phone companies are immune if their systems are used for illegal purposes anyway.
Anyway, i don't think the payphone is dying. Sometimes its cheaper to use then a cell phone, and not everyone has one yet.
I especially use payphones alot when my car is in the shop:-)
Key difference; i don't think if the rental company were to go under, that they would immediatly kick you out, and NOT refund the portion of the rent that covers time you havent' spent there yet. If i remember correctly, you 'rent' software a year a time.
The problem is, all of your examples seem like they would require alot of bandwidth to work correctly. Backups to a server somewhere? Well, i've only got 2GB of data...it shouldn't be that long on a 56k modem right?
As far as processes that require large resources is concerned, i doubt many, if any, home users have such processes. Except perhaps games, but i don't see this model of doing things better then the current one. Some games played on the internet are slow enough without off loading some of the processing.
Interesting...we actually did find it used less energy to keep the A/C on in a video store a worked at then turn it off every night. Of course it wasn't a window unit like the article is talking about.
Actually i do think thats resonable. If i pay cash, what records do they even have?
As far as the credit cards go, i believe they send in the signed slip and the CC company sends them the money (in a lump some of course). I highly doubt the store can request what other purchases i have made, or request my address. If they can, i'd be very worried!
Are you starting to see the parallels with renting movies and renting software?
Actually no i'm not. I don't pay a monthly fee whether i rent movies or not. And i usually use my computer for many more things then word processing and web browsing. But even those things i do quite frequently. I guess in your comparison, i'd want to watch the movie whenever i want, hence i'd buy that movie, not rent it.
Well, no not ALL the processing. As I understand it, this type of technology wants some of the processing on your end -- such as the handling of user events, typing, clicking buttons, and what have you, but the data storage and processing to be done on the server end.
What processing, exactly, would be quicker to do on a server then on my own machine? Clicks and what not are handled on my screen. Does bolding get done by the server then? Table creation? Even things like image or sound processing would be pointless to have a server do, since the time it takes to upload the original and download the finished piece is much greater then the time it takes for my computer to do it. I would think most people don't want their personal data stored away on some distant server. Just like i don't use the library to file my personal love letters.
A typical example is a word processor. I write maybe three documents a year. I'd rather pay a small fee each time I create a document, rather than $50 for the whole word processor, which I may never use more than once before upgrading to the next version of Office.
Actually i'm betting people word process more then you think. But the only reason to upgrade currently is b/c you need to keep file formats compatable. If MS saved documents as something like HTML by default, you would never upgrade your word processor. IMHO, it has too many 'features' as it is. Nothing has really changed in Word for the past 5 years i'd say.
It also maintains flexibility. Use Word from any of your desktops, at home, at work, etc. Download it when you want it. (Kind of like Pay-Per-View, to keep the movie watching analogy.)
Your analogy is flawed. I have cable here, but if my parents don't, i can't order pay per view now can i? Even if i did, THEY get charged for it, not me. I also can't order ppv on any TV that doesn't have a cable box with it. I can already word process where ever there is a computer; thats a pretty standard thing. I may not be able to play the latest game i'm enjoying anywhere, but so what? I doubt many people are like 'damn, i wish i could use this software on anyones computer.' And if there are, they typically bring the CDs with them...
You're thinking about this all wrong... these people don't want to sell you the use of their server resources for number crunching. They want to rent you lightweight software that can be built with web technology (DHTML, XML, Java, etc), where the programs are stored on the server, and possibly even your data. The idea that the server is going to be doing most of the work is just wrong.
Sounds good, but i want 100% reliability. Whenever i need to use the applications, i want to be able to. But i doubt MS servers will never crash, or even that the best/only route to the MS servers will always be up. I remember a few short years ago one of Worldcoms fiber optic lines was cut, and it brought the internet in the Easter US to a halt basically. It was almost impossible to get anywhere. I sure hope that doesn't happen if i need to type a letter and send it out by a certain date.
That makes no sense. Either people are going to pay to rent Word (pay-per-use), or they aren't. If you don't use Word, then you don't pay for it, therefore what do you care if it's better than the last version?
Actually it makes perfect sense. This is what MS has been doing all along. A few of the companies i worked for have upgraded, even though they didn't want to. They knew there was no point, but someone (client, supplier, whatever) upgraded and can't figure out how to save as an older version. So we upgraded, just to be able to read the new file format.
Well you've got that choice as a consumer, but it seems kind of close-minded to make that decision before you have all the facts, let alone a trial of it...
Just b/c he's decided not to try it at all does not mean he is being closed minded. Maybe he just doesnt think the pitfalls (or potential pitfalls) are worth looking into this further. Don't call him close minded b/c he's made a decision on the facts currently available.
Slashdot Mirror
This has been pointed out before, but some people never get it. The mere existance of a competing product does not define whether someone has a monopoly not. What defines a monopoly is the amount of market share, and possible how difficult (b/c of practices by the monopolistic company) a new competiter would have entering the market. MS is a monopoly, even though there are many competiters (unix, linux, macos, vms, etc).
Anyway, the problem with gracenote is not whether it is a monopoly at all. It is with their belief that they 'own' the data. I don't see how they have any claim to individual records, nor do i understand how they can say the db as a whole is thiers. Even if that is possible, freedb probably don't have all the records cddb does, so how can they claim freedb is allowing access to cddbs content? I don't even know how anyone that puts together a pile of information and claim it as their own. It seems to me that if someone else can easily compile such data, no one person/company can lay claim to it.
No, i fully agree with the judge.
You are mixing apples and oranges.
Before the arguement was between murder and attempted murder. In both cases, the intent was to murder; the only difference there was whether the person actually succeeded.
Now you are talking about the difference between murder and manslaughter. One is a purposeful attemp to end someone's life (which, if muder has succeded), the other is the accidental killing of another. There is not 'attemped manslaugheter' because your intent in a manslaughter case was not to kill anyone, and therefore almost killing someone BY ACCIDENT is not a crime.
The only contradiction here is in your thinking.
B/c, fortunatly i survived, and thus less harm was done then had i actually died.
You point out a big problem with current 'punishment' system. 5 years or 20, you need to be rehabilitated. But the emphasis is on punishment, not actually making prisoners better people. If we did try for rehabilitation, i don't think we'd see as many repeat crimials.
I"ve been intel free for about 3 years now.
I dunno about that. I think the problem intel is having with AMD is that AMD is making better, faster chips, for a lower cost. I'm not sure the RAM part of it effects the processor battle.
B/c you didn't actually kill anyone, so why would we punish you as if you did?
Actually you usually have the court case based in the state of sale.
True, but i think the point is that if she did spill it it shouldn't have caused her 3rd degree burns.
That alone is not what won that suit however. It was the fact that the McDs in question had done reseach, and knew that A) coffee at that temp. would cause 3rd degree burns and B) they knew thiers was hot enough to cause such burns, but did nothing to correct it.
Well what i find most appaling is the fact that the games ALONE are being blamed. Do they really think they have evidence to support that? There are millions of kids that are not turned into 'monsters' as the article so nicely claims. It seems to be that the ones that are turned into 'monsters' are the ones being harrassed everyday.
I don't think spam or telemarketers are covered by free speech. True they have every right to say what they want to say, but i also have the right not to listen to it, or be bothered with them in the first place. Their right to free speech does NOT give them the right to harrass me.
I know ALOT of people. I'd say you need to get out more, if you have nothing better to do then troll.
Haven't you seen Terminator?
I have yet to meet anyone that HASN'T seen that movie...well T2 at least.
Anyway, while i know that this post is supposed to be a joke, it is something that needs to be considered. Once something thinks for itself, there's no reason to believe that it won't come to the conclusion that it would be better off without us. It might simply see the 'tendancy to destory ourselves' in us, and decide to destroy us before we can take it down with us.
Fortunatly, that kind of AI is probably still far off into the future. But there are many issues that sci-fi stories seem to address, even though those issues might not present themselves for a few years.
The AI turned on human is found not only in T2, but 2001, Star Trek (Data's 'brother' Lore), the Matrix, the list goes on. If you can get past the bad acting, every week the Outer Limits seems to address some techno-nightmare issue.
Most of the useless mail i get is actually from the company itself. Instead of emailing only a few people, they email a list instead. Sometimes i could see why i might care, but if i don't, it just wastes time.
I categorically reject that statement.
Yes, schools should stop bullying, and most schools do a pretty poor job of preventing the tormenting of "outcast" kids, but this is moral equivalence of the worst kind. Bullying kids are not "just as responsible" as those who pulled
the trigger.
There are millions of bullied teens who manage to get through high school without massacring their classmates.
Anyone who places less than 100% of the responsibility for Columbine on Klebold and Harris is just plain wrong.
I'd say you've probably never been bullied before. I'm not talking about once or twice, or for a week. I'm talking everyday, every chance the bully gets, for years.
What the hell do you really expect to happen under those conditions? Do you realize that such behavior ANYWHERE else would result in the 'bully' being arrested?
Lets try an experiment shall we. Tell me where you live, and i'll torment and beat the crap out of you everyday while you're at work. The people at work will do nothing to stop me, except maybe say don't do it again. Or i can't come back for 3 days. We'll see how you feel, and what you do to stop if then.
As for the 'millions' of bullied kids (not just teens, since these things start way before HS), you're right alot of them get through it without killing their classmates. Those are the ones that are strong enough to handle it, or just can take more then the others. As for those that can't handle it anymore, there are two solutions.
They hate their life, it is torment everyday. There seems to be only two ways to stop the torment, since the schools seem to want to do nothing. The only way to stop the torment FOREVER (not just for a 3 day suspection..) is to remove the bully, or themselves. I take it you place no blame on someone that drove another person to suicide either.
That kind of thinking works out really nice if you think about it. So a black slave in the 1800s would be wrong for killing the slave owner? The slave owner doesn't deserve any of the blame for his own death?
Its not so different from a kid being bullied in school. Both live in fear of someone with power over them, both are abused, one more mentally then physically, but the damage is the same. Neither can appeal to authorities for help, nor can they escape (i HAD to go to school). Yet you blame not the person doing the torment, but the victim of that torment?
The problem with bullies in school is that most of the abuse is mental, and alot of people don't even believe there is such a thing. I guess you'd think differently if you had been abused like that.
The problem with punishing bullies, is that often they have been provoked, usually verbally. "Target" kids are frequently "wise-guys"; if they can't defend themselves physically then they attempt to compensate verbally.
Ok, that is just utter bullshit. I personally had never done anything to the kids that picked on me (well except being the new kid in 7th grade, sorry i didn't know that was such a crime), yet they did it anyway. If someone really is a bully i'd think most people know enough not to start making wisecracks against them. Maybe you didn't figure it out, but i'm willing to beat most kids do. So anyone else that was picked on here, did you guys actually start it??
So any "solution" has to include not only the bullies, but the kids who respond, and the kids who provoke verbally
Like i said, the kid to usualy start things is the bully. The ones being picked on usually just want to be left alone. I know i wanted nothing more then to be invisible. The solution is to teach these bullies to respect other people. The solution DOES NOT include me, since i had done nothing wrong.
If someone is harrasing you or assalting you, you do have the right to fight back with appropriate means. And i believe every kid being picked on should fight back. Here's why; the kids that just take it have feelings of hatred and revenge building up in them...those are the ones that will eventually snap. And believe me when i say that, i came damn near close to it myself.
And the solution is not just a matter for the schools. Kids repeat what they see in the home, and schools can't fix that. It's got to be a concerted-effort between schools and parents.
Maybe thats true, i don't know for sure, i never got to know the bullies home life. But part of the solution does rest on the school. Any student that harrasses or assults another student should be thrown out. In my HS i believed they were transfed to a juvy/school kind of deal. But this policy was too little, too late for me. But schools to have a responsibility to protect the physical and mental wellbeing of thier students. Not removing students that harrass or assult other students if failing in this duty. Removing them is the first step, b/c once removed there will probably be quite a few students who's lives will greatly improve...then there is only one more person to help (or lock up, as the case may be).
Parents who cop-out and simply blame the public schools are probably the biggest part of the problem.
Do you really believe the school is completely innocent in all of this? They routinely ignore reports of harrasement and assult, but as soon as a victim meantions the word gun he is out before he can blink. The school is doing something wrong here, they are not stopping the bullies! So yes, while a parent needs to teach his child not to beat up other kids, the school is responsible to remove that threat from the student body.
There's a difference between thought and action, lets not forget that. I personally would hate to have thought police around.
So let us realy look at what the school did. They suspended a kid for saying something, that was all. Furthermore, what he said was in direct response to harrasment from other students. One of the kids even stole some disks out of his bag just before he made the comment. It seems to be that students harrasing another student, verbally and physically, should be the ones in trouble. Sean has every right to stand up for himself it someone is attacking him. Trying to instill this take whatever they dishout attitude will not help Sean through life.
For those blaming Sean's father, consider this. How much of what went on in HS did you really tell your parents? I didn't tell them much, thats for sure. Usually i went and played nintendo to work my frustrations out. But did i tell my parents if i got punched in the arm a few times today? Nope...b/c i knew if they reported it to the school, virtually nothing would have been done to the kid hitting me, and as a result i'd just be hit more.
It seems to me that if one kid hits another kid, they should be out of there no questions asked. There is NO excuse for attacking someone (unless you are fighting off an attack). Had that bully been removed from school as soon as i said he was hitting me, i bet my HS would have been alot nicer.
I agree. Whats worse is that the kids harrasing someone don't get punished at all. I can't blame anyone for fighting back once they got sick of torment. One problem is that alot of parents don't take such torments seriously enough...it sounds like silly name calling to them. But to the student on the recieving end, its much more hurtful then that. As far as Colimbine goes, the ones that made the shooters feel like outcasts were just as responsible for the deaths as the shooters themselves. What do you really expect to happen when you make someones life a living hell?
If you want to stop school violence, crack down on the bullies and other instigators. I doubt there'd be any shootings (or suicides) if those kids were just left alone.
Well...here in upstate NY, and back near philly, that is the norm. Kinda stupid if you ask me. The phone companies are immune if their systems are used for illegal purposes anyway.
:-)
Anyway, i don't think the payphone is dying. Sometimes its cheaper to use then a cell phone, and not everyone has one yet.
I especially use payphones alot when my car is in the shop
No, youll just make it run at the speed its supposed to be running at.
Key difference; i don't think if the rental company were to go under, that they would immediatly kick you out, and NOT refund the portion of the rent that covers time you havent' spent there yet. If i remember correctly, you 'rent' software a year a time.
The problem is, all of your examples seem like they would require alot of bandwidth to work correctly. Backups to a server somewhere? Well, i've only got 2GB of data...it shouldn't be that long on a 56k modem right?
As far as processes that require large resources is concerned, i doubt many, if any, home users have such processes. Except perhaps games, but i don't see this model of doing things better then the current one. Some games played on the internet are slow enough without off loading some of the processing.
Interesting...we actually did find it used less energy to keep the A/C on in a video store a worked at then turn it off every night. Of course it wasn't a window unit like the article is talking about.
Actually i do think thats resonable. If i pay cash, what records do they even have?
As far as the credit cards go, i believe they send in the signed slip and the CC company sends them the money (in a lump some of course). I highly doubt the store can request what other purchases i have made, or request my address. If they can, i'd be very worried!
Are you starting to see the parallels with renting movies and renting software?
... these people don't want to sell you the use of their server resources for number crunching. They want to rent you lightweight software that can be built with web technology (DHTML, XML, Java, etc), where the programs are stored on the server, and possibly even your data. The idea that the server is going to be doing most of the work is just wrong.
Actually no i'm not. I don't pay a monthly fee whether i rent movies or not. And i usually use my computer for many more things then word processing and web browsing. But even those things i do quite frequently. I guess in your comparison, i'd want to watch the movie whenever i want, hence i'd buy that movie, not rent it.
Well, no not ALL the processing. As I understand it, this type of technology wants some of the processing on your end -- such as the handling of user events, typing, clicking buttons, and what have you, but the data storage and processing to be done on the server end.
What processing, exactly, would be quicker to do on a server then on my own machine? Clicks and what not are handled on my screen. Does bolding get done by the server then? Table creation? Even things like image or sound processing would be pointless to have a server do, since the time it takes to upload the original and download the finished piece is much greater then the time it takes for my computer to do it. I would think most people don't want their personal data stored away on some distant server. Just like i don't use the library to file my personal love letters.
A typical example is a word processor. I write maybe three documents a year. I'd rather pay a small fee each time I create a document, rather than $50 for the whole word processor, which I may never use more than once before upgrading to the next version of Office.
Actually i'm betting people word process more then you think. But the only reason to upgrade currently is b/c you need to keep file formats compatable. If MS saved documents as something like HTML by default, you would never upgrade your word processor. IMHO, it has too many 'features' as it is. Nothing has really changed in Word for the past 5 years i'd say.
It also maintains flexibility. Use Word from any of your desktops, at home, at work, etc. Download it when you want it. (Kind of like Pay-Per-View, to keep the movie watching analogy.)
Your analogy is flawed. I have cable here, but if my parents don't, i can't order pay per view now can i? Even if i did, THEY get charged for it, not me. I also can't order ppv on any TV that doesn't have a cable box with it. I can already word process where ever there is a computer; thats a pretty standard thing. I may not be able to play the latest game i'm enjoying anywhere, but so what? I doubt many people are like 'damn, i wish i could use this software on anyones computer.' And if there are, they typically bring the CDs with them...
You're thinking about this all wrong
Sounds good, but i want 100% reliability. Whenever i need to use the applications, i want to be able to. But i doubt MS servers will never crash, or even that the best/only route to the MS servers will always be up. I remember a few short years ago one of Worldcoms fiber optic lines was cut, and it brought the internet in the Easter US to a halt basically. It was almost impossible to get anywhere. I sure hope that doesn't happen if i need to type a letter and send it out by a certain date.
That makes no sense. Either people are going to pay to rent Word (pay-per-use), or they aren't. If you don't use Word, then you don't pay for it, therefore what do you care if it's better than the last version?
Actually it makes perfect sense. This is what MS has been doing all along. A few of the companies i worked for have upgraded, even though they didn't want to. They knew there was no point, but someone (client, supplier, whatever) upgraded and can't figure out how to save as an older version. So we upgraded, just to be able to read the new file format.
Well you've got that choice as a consumer, but it seems kind of close-minded to make that decision before you have all the facts, let alone a trial of it...
Just b/c he's decided not to try it at all does not mean he is being closed minded. Maybe he just doesnt think the pitfalls (or potential pitfalls) are worth looking into this further. Don't call him close minded b/c he's made a decision on the facts currently available.