Why not? It's the price the market will bare. If it wasn't. they wouldn't be making a profit.
2.) Offer Direct Download and Direct Payment To Developers
See above.
3.) Don't butcher a game so that you can have an excuse sell DLC content. That turns off many buyers when they see this.
See above.
4.) Innovation... Notice the magic hallway is in almost all FPS games today.
Nope.
5.) Create a digital economy or digital items that can be purchased. Allow players to trade items and purchase from each other with credits bought from the game company, or earned through the game.
This is already happening.
Team Fortress and World of Warcraft are both very successful at digital and hybrid digital economies.
They are good at manipulating people to spend vast amounts of money for little return, yes. Something that you seemed to be against in the beginning of your comment, but as I pointed out, it's working out based on what the market will bare.
I don't see why the companies should listen to your advice so far.
Later, Sony. I, for one, will be dropping your future platforms as a source of entertainment. I have truly enjoyed my PS3, PS2 and yes, even my venerated and much-wobbly PS/One.
Cool story, bro.
But attempting to control a free-trade aftermarket by locking users into your wonky website as the sole provider of goods is right out.
You've been promoting the use of a fully closed development platform that explicitly locks out developers from producing and developing for the platform unless they meet very specific criteria that is constantly changing by these console producers. To be honest, the used game thing really isn't much of a issue compared to the software lock out that already exists in consoles today.
What do we do with those shiny new units when you decide to upgrade your hardware again - toss them in a landfill?
The obvious answer is to buy the next best thing that comes out, it's how the consumer market works.
I think this is where I get off the planned obsolescence bandwagon.
This is exactly why copyright should have been left at the previous very generous 20 years. Now some fans can't use an unpublished script written almost 55 years ago?
When you put it that way, it seems to me like a niche thing and not worth the time changing the law again.
I remember when slashdot used to cover tech stories before news outlets and definitely before I saw it on the evening news.
I remember when Slashdot used to cover stories years after they happened, post duplicates and had some of the worst summaries known to man. I don't know where you get this from.
You go go Google IO in 2010, you pay $300 and get two free devices. You go to a Blackberry conference in the same year at the same location, you pay $2000 and you get no device. So why am I not surprised that there's so few apps for blackberry, and RIM is struggling?
Those conferences were not the defining moment of success.
Yes. We should boycott APPLE and EVERY OTHER Foxconn customer until they come into compliance with the law.
So... Off the top of my head... Microsoft, HP, IBM, Apple, Acer, AMD, ASUS, Cisco, Dell, Intel, Motorolla, Nintendo, Nokia, Samsung, Sony, Toshiba... Whos left that doesn't do anything with Foxconn?
And you're saying that the company doesn't benefit at all from my going. If that was the case, they wouldn't have sent me in the first place.
No, I'm saying you're there on company time, not your own downtime. This attempt at twisting the circumstances I explicitly gave will not work.
Technically, the company is paying my salary while I'm on vacation, too. Does that mean that I owe them the salmon I caught?
That's downtime.
Does that mean that I owe them the salmon I caught?
You also ignored my 'valuable assets' comment to the company. You're doing a bad job of interpreting my post, but I suspect this is intentional on your behalf since your grammar and English don't appear to be anything close to illiterate.
This idea that everything is owed to the company is bullshit, and shows your own sense of entitlement.
I didn't say everything, I also gave very specific circumstances, stop misrepresenting what I said. I gave the exact circumstances, even mentioned it was not downtime, yet you attempt to twist it around.
It's the same shit that causes people like you to think that we should be "grateful" that we have jobs.
You couldn't be more wrong about that regarding my person. I don't care for your attempts at trying to make me out as someone I am not, let's get back to the subject at hand. I don't see why you are entitled to it due to the arguments I gave in my parent post. Your points you raised are based on a logical fallacy that does apply to my comment.
What self-entitlement? That device was given to me at the show. Not my employer.
You end up acquiring valuable assets from the organization that your company paid you to visit. You obtain said assets as a direct result of being there on company time from an event that the company have not only paid your trip for, but for the event, hotel and are still paying your salary while you are there (AKA: you are working, not having downtime).
The company in my mind by default would have say as to whether you could have it or not and I don't see how you would be entitled to it just because it was put in your hands based on these circumstances.
While Homosexuality gets a lot of discrimination and hate... For the most part they are living an above average standard of life, so they have money, so advertising targeted towards them is valuable.
Gay guys are likely closer to females in terms of frequent frivolous spending, i.e. spending on clothing and other accessories. Not that guys necessarily spend less, but their spending is more focused and comes in bigger chunks at less frequent intervals. Also, gay guys, like women, are more fashion and image conscious which means they'll buy into fads more readily and willfully overpay for products they fund appealing.
It's improving, slowly, but as the RFC says, the real solution is at the endpoints... you can only do so much in the middle with insecure endpoints.
Considering that webmail is becoming more prevalent than traditional mail clients. I don't think it matters too much where it's processed - Since it's all on the server because of webmail. I know for a fact that Yahoo won't accept mail from addresses unless they have at least SPF or DKIM records now.
Know anybody who uses digital signatures or PGP in regular e-mail conversations? I know exactly one, a geek celebrity who presumably doesn't want people making up quotes attributed to him.
I use domain keys and SPF to help ensure authenticity on my mail servers. I believe the major mail providers also use these technologies. Mail technologies have somewhat evolved over the years.
Now, having said that, you are your own worst enemy if you use the IMAP email protocol, rather than the older POP3, because IMAP inherently does put your email in control of the server
I own my server. If you want control over your data, own your end points. POP3 isn't going to stop your information from being stored - see gmail comment below.
and by default keeps copies of the emails on the server, even those that are "deleted".
Only Outlook does that. Thunderbird, Zimbra, kmail, siphed-claws etc. do not.
You can change those settings, but most people don't.
Mail servers like Zimbra actually do delete the e-mails when they get the 'marked for deletion' flag. As well as mail services like gmail. This is mostly because of Outlook.
To sum it up: there is no real sense in which electronic communications are "inherently recorded" by any middleman, at all, any more than a telephone conversation, unless you count temporary storage, which should be set up as just that... temporary, and wiped when a file is deleted.
Information tends to be replicated and stored for at least 30 days on services like gmail, despite being 'deleted'.
Emails need be no different from telephone conversations.
Regulations are different. There is clear law on retaining information for telephones, not so much for e-mail.
If you put your telephone number or address on Facebook, Twitter, Or Google + your not concerned with privacy. If later you decide that this was a bad decision and decide your privacy has been invaded your an idiot for sharing that much in the first place.
If you later decide your privacy was invaded, you are an idiot because you confused anonymity with privacy.
Think long and hard (Giggity) about what you decide to share with any of these services because it can come back to bite you.
I think the problem stems from the public expectation of privacy in the collection and sharing of data about one's self. It wasn't too long ago when people believed things they posted on usenet would only be accessed by academics and 'computer nerds'. Yet today, they're accessible to everyone.
Circumstances on how the information is distributed and collected change over time, making unforeseen consequences for what at the time was seem fairly harmless. Another example of this would be a social networking platform, which was originally only used by your friends, so you shared your 'bar drinking' pictures etc. with each other. Suddenly, that information became accessible to your employer and it was deemed inappropriate - despite the fact that the vast majority of the population do go out 'bar drinking'.
None of this is a replacement for software content creation tools like Flash CS5. It's not a mentality, it's fact. I don't see any high end tools that replace it. Video support is such a small part of flash player, I'm talking about actual applications.
So, admit it. You're just plain lazy. You don't WANT to have to learn a new way.
For some reason you think I don't know HTML5/javascript technologies. I've written my own HTML5 applications, I've used web sockets, I've used the backing storage system - Despite knowing this, I haven't found any tools close to as intuitive to high end software like Flash CS5.
Look when even Adobe stops pushing Flash in favor of HTML5, don'tcha think it's time to stop being a Flash Fan?!?
I don't see a migration plan here honestly. I don't see the highly polished tools to build HTML5 content just as well as flash content equivalents and there is no backwards compatibility - Seems to me there is something really lacking in these 'solutions' you're bringing up. I'm not convinced on the justifications of not supporting flash when there clearly isn't a viable alternative yet.
The other app stores I have encountered tend to be preinstalled on devices, those are from the particular vendors of those devices, so it would be unlikely in my opinion that they would list software that does not work on their own hardware. I have yet to try the 'alternative' markets for all phones for Android though because the Google marketplace pretty much covers all the applications anyway.
And who did the testing? The app developer?
Probably, with all the VMs provided in the development kit for the different software platforms, not hard to test either.
And you still need to check that you have enough memory.
If my phone didn't have enough memory, that model wouldn't be acceptable as an installation target, so, no, that wouldn't mean I have to check how much memory my phone model has.
A good OS gets out of the way. An iOS user does not need to know as much about their device as an Android user. "Hum, nice game, does my device have one of the supported graphics chips? Do I have enough memory or do I have too many 'will not install to SD card' apps?
I visited the marketplace website and I see this message "This app is compatible with your 3 Samsung Nexus S."
Have you even used an Android phone?
Is it a trojan?"...
Is this like "Is this website going to automatically jailbreak my phone and install something malicious?"
Slashdot Mirror
Why not? It's the price the market will bare. If it wasn't. they wouldn't be making a profit.
See above.
See above.
Nope.
This is already happening.
They are good at manipulating people to spend vast amounts of money for little return, yes. Something that you seemed to be against in the beginning of your comment, but as I pointed out, it's working out based on what the market will bare.
I don't see why the companies should listen to your advice so far.
Cool story, bro.
You've been promoting the use of a fully closed development platform that explicitly locks out developers from producing and developing for the platform unless they meet very specific criteria that is constantly changing by these console producers. To be honest, the used game thing really isn't much of a issue compared to the software lock out that already exists in consoles today.
The obvious answer is to buy the next best thing that comes out, it's how the consumer market works.
I'm sceptical that you will.
When you put it that way, it seems to me like a niche thing and not worth the time changing the law again.
I remember when Slashdot used to cover stories years after they happened, post duplicates and had some of the worst summaries known to man. I don't know where you get this from.
Those conferences were not the defining moment of success.
So... Off the top of my head... Microsoft, HP, IBM, Apple, Acer, AMD, ASUS, Cisco, Dell, Intel, Motorolla, Nintendo, Nokia, Samsung, Sony, Toshiba... Whos left that doesn't do anything with Foxconn?
What does Google groups use?
Fixed sentence.
No, I'm saying you're there on company time, not your own downtime. This attempt at twisting the circumstances I explicitly gave will not work.
That's downtime.
You also ignored my 'valuable assets' comment to the company. You're doing a bad job of interpreting my post, but I suspect this is intentional on your behalf since your grammar and English don't appear to be anything close to illiterate.
I didn't say everything, I also gave very specific circumstances, stop misrepresenting what I said. I gave the exact circumstances, even mentioned it was not downtime, yet you attempt to twist it around.
You couldn't be more wrong about that regarding my person. I don't care for your attempts at trying to make me out as someone I am not, let's get back to the subject at hand. I don't see why you are entitled to it due to the arguments I gave in my parent post. Your points you raised are based on a logical fallacy that does apply to my comment.
You end up acquiring valuable assets from the organization that your company paid you to visit. You obtain said assets as a direct result of being there on company time from an event that the company have not only paid your trip for, but for the event, hotel and are still paying your salary while you are there (AKA: you are working, not having downtime).
The company in my mind by default would have say as to whether you could have it or not and I don't see how you would be entitled to it just because it was put in your hands based on these circumstances.
What's with your self entitlement?
Fixed that sentence for you.
Cool story, bro.
Cool story, bro.
Considering that webmail is becoming more prevalent than traditional mail clients. I don't think it matters too much where it's processed - Since it's all on the server because of webmail. I know for a fact that Yahoo won't accept mail from addresses unless they have at least SPF or DKIM records now.
I don't have a problem using SSH, however, your advice may not actually work for some machines, like mine.
However, I assure you, SSH installed on my system:
I use domain keys and SPF to help ensure authenticity on my mail servers. I believe the major mail providers also use these technologies. Mail technologies have somewhat evolved over the years.
I own my server. If you want control over your data, own your end points. POP3 isn't going to stop your information from being stored - see gmail comment below.
Only Outlook does that. Thunderbird, Zimbra, kmail, siphed-claws etc. do not.
Mail servers like Zimbra actually do delete the e-mails when they get the 'marked for deletion' flag. As well as mail services like gmail. This is mostly because of Outlook.
Information tends to be replicated and stored for at least 30 days on services like gmail, despite being 'deleted'.
Regulations are different. There is clear law on retaining information for telephones, not so much for e-mail.
If you later decide your privacy was invaded, you are an idiot because you confused anonymity with privacy.
I think the problem stems from the public expectation of privacy in the collection and sharing of data about one's self. It wasn't too long ago when people believed things they posted on usenet would only be accessed by academics and 'computer nerds'. Yet today, they're accessible to everyone.
Circumstances on how the information is distributed and collected change over time, making unforeseen consequences for what at the time was seem fairly harmless. Another example of this would be a social networking platform, which was originally only used by your friends, so you shared your 'bar drinking' pictures etc. with each other. Suddenly, that information became accessible to your employer and it was deemed inappropriate - despite the fact that the vast majority of the population do go out 'bar drinking'.
Pervert. You just want to see people doing dirty things clearly.
None of this is a replacement for software content creation tools like Flash CS5. It's not a mentality, it's fact. I don't see any high end tools that replace it. Video support is such a small part of flash player, I'm talking about actual applications.
For some reason you think I don't know HTML5/javascript technologies. I've written my own HTML5 applications, I've used web sockets, I've used the backing storage system - Despite knowing this, I haven't found any tools close to as intuitive to high end software like Flash CS5.
I don't see a migration plan here honestly. I don't see the highly polished tools to build HTML5 content just as well as flash content equivalents and there is no backwards compatibility - Seems to me there is something really lacking in these 'solutions' you're bringing up. I'm not convinced on the justifications of not supporting flash when there clearly isn't a viable alternative yet.
The other app stores I have encountered tend to be preinstalled on devices, those are from the particular vendors of those devices, so it would be unlikely in my opinion that they would list software that does not work on their own hardware. I have yet to try the 'alternative' markets for all phones for Android though because the Google marketplace pretty much covers all the applications anyway.
Probably, with all the VMs provided in the development kit for the different software platforms, not hard to test either.
If my phone didn't have enough memory, that model wouldn't be acceptable as an installation target, so, no, that wouldn't mean I have to check how much memory my phone model has.
I visited the marketplace website and I see this message "This app is compatible with your 3 Samsung Nexus S."
Have you even used an Android phone?
Is this like "Is this website going to automatically jailbreak my phone and install something malicious?"
Funny enough, none of those people are people I would give a designation of 'friend' either. Now, back to the topic at hand...