Some lesser-appreciated games have my attention right now. Like "Yin and Yang" (a silly little Flash from MTV games), or Line Rider (another, even simpler flash game), or the Pirates CCG. For the big ones, Rock Band, Mario Galaxy, and Portal all struck me as fascinating, but I haven't played any of them at length.
I believe that Sir Ian McKellen has said that he would be overjoyed to play Gandalf-- but not if Peter Jackson wasn't involved. I would say he's likely to reprise the role, which is more important than Ian Holm (who would clearly be too old) in terms of continuity. I'd say the other big role to worry about would be Gollum.
We are seeing the same problem with comic books / graphic novels. Most people assume that these products are for kids, so even the large segment of the market that is actually for grown-ups is scrutinized with the assumption that someone is targetting kids with sex, violence, etc. People are going to jail for selling products to adults meant for adults, because some idiot associates the medium with kids.
What is it with the climate change trolls on tech boards lately? I've been seeing a comment, totally off topic, trying to make the case that human-caused climate change (global warming) is bas science, will be proven wrong, makes no sense, and so forth. Is this some sort of bizarre astroturfing campaign, some joke that I missed, or what?
This is idiotic. Seriously. The "product" in question is a rumor. No details are confirmed about how it will work, what advertising hooks there will be, what features it will have, or whether it will ever see the light of day. You know what criticizing it at this point makes you? Not an analyst, not an expert, not a technologist. It makes you a guy with a guess and a blog.
"but in the end, termination of the writer was all they could do"
That's funny. I would have thought journalistic integrity could have been on the table. Tell the advertiser "no, you can't influence our reviews, take your business elsewhere".
I believed you. I just thought it might be pointing out that your anecdotal commentary wasn't particularly relevant, since a huge number of people do have QuickTime installed.
If you have a Mac, then you have QuickTime. If you have iTunes, then you have QuickTime. That may not apply to you, but its fair to say it covers a huge chunk of marketplace overall. (I believe people who download Safari 3 Beta for Windows, and Bonjour for Windows, also have QuickTime by default, but they are bound to be a very small group.)
As long as there is a cost of entry-- Even $1-- to buy the device, Amazon should not be charging more for DRMed "books" than the equivalent paperback would cost. Novels at $9.99 and blogs at $0.99 is just insane, unless they are paying me to take home the reader device.
You have understood me almost exactly incorrectly. I am not talking about a single home, I am talking about the market. Specifically, that the market can easily bear all three products, because there are different kinds of consumers (homes) that want each. The cases where someone wants more than one are just gravy towards my argument.
I might even go so far as to say that you made the very error that is causing this discussion. You're confusing "I don't want to buy all three" with "people, collectively, won't buy all three". It's a bit self-centered, really, and not all all how markets work.
I really think that the whole idea of a console war is dated.
There was a time when this was an issue. When disposable incomes were lower. When gaming was mostly for kids. When there weren't multiple demographics interested in different kinds of gaming. When a console wasn't also an Internet device and a media (music and movies) device as well.
Now, the game has changed. There is room for an inexpensive console with novelty appeal, health-conscious appeal, and appeal to kids-- and still room for a midrange console with testosterone games for the fratboy crowd-- and still room for a high-end machine with a scary sticker price but very impressive graphics, a blu-ray player, and the occasional hit exclusive game.
Slide out keyboards add greatly to the thickness of the device. I'm happy with the trade off of choosing the touch-screen, gaining a slim device that fits comfortable in my hand and pocket, over the full keyboard. Others who feel differently may not want the same phone I do.
I had a Treo 650. Now I have an iPhone. You're right about one thing... I will never go back.
This keeps coming up. Apple made a conscious decision to use an all touch-screen face, and the reasons are pretty obvious. A physical keyboard takes away from screen space and/or thickness. I wouldn't give up either, especially the screen size, to be able to type 10% faster. This device is primarily a phone, an iPod, a widget dashboard (maps, calculator, other mini-apps), an email reader, and a web browser. I just don't type on it that much, and when I do (quick emails, texts, filling in online forms, logins, etc.) the keyboard works great for me.
Unrelated story... The other day, I tripped on a curb while answering my phone. I went down pretty hard, and instinct kicking in led to most of my weight hitting the concrete via my iPhone. Yes, I landed from a solid fall, with most of my weight on my hand, in which I was holding my iPhone. The glass screen broke my fall. It's fine, with just a few dings to the chrome rim. Try that with any other phone. I'm happy with how I spent my $600.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. I was using those numbers to show that the scale of the aquisition is perfectly reasonable. There would, for that kind of buyout, need to be negotiatons with the board and shareholders. However, Apple is definitely large enough to absorb a company the size of Adobe. From what I have seen, buyout plans rarely raise stock more than about 10%, and companies can "buy" (stock-based merger) other companies over half their own size, if it is agreed.
At today's market price, Apple absolutely could buy more than half of Adobe. Apple's recent financials reveal how much cash they have in the bank, and looking up Adobe's market cap is trivial. What problem do you see with the numbers I posted?
Apple has something like $16 Billion in cash in the bank, and a market capitalization of over $160 Billion. Adobe has a market capitalization of about $27 Billion. In other words, Apple could buy 50+% of Adobe for cash, and it would be easy to buy the rest by making it a "cash plus stock" deal or "merger". Either way, Apple could control Adobe as soon as it passed the regulators, if it decided to.
We had an XServe at a previous (small) employer, mostly for testing, but it seemed like a very slick implementation. Things like monitoring, remote configuration, and so forth were all managed very slickly. It meant less time farting around with the server. It also provides Apple's proprietary software and protocols, and a good package of standards-complient stuff set up to be easier to use. Plus it is (when updated) a nice, powerful, well-engineered 1U box, that compares favorably in pricing to the competitors.
Slashdot Mirror
Some lesser-appreciated games have my attention right now. Like "Yin and Yang" (a silly little Flash from MTV games), or Line Rider (another, even simpler flash game), or the Pirates CCG. For the big ones, Rock Band, Mario Galaxy, and Portal all struck me as fascinating, but I haven't played any of them at length.
I believe that Sir Ian McKellen has said that he would be overjoyed to play Gandalf-- but not if Peter Jackson wasn't involved. I would say he's likely to reprise the role, which is more important than Ian Holm (who would clearly be too old) in terms of continuity. I'd say the other big role to worry about would be Gollum.
We are seeing the same problem with comic books / graphic novels. Most people assume that these products are for kids, so even the large segment of the market that is actually for grown-ups is scrutinized with the assumption that someone is targetting kids with sex, violence, etc. People are going to jail for selling products to adults meant for adults, because some idiot associates the medium with kids.
I was there in the 90s. The poor market share was because of bad hardware products, and too many of them to choose from.
What is it with the climate change trolls on tech boards lately? I've been seeing a comment, totally off topic, trying to make the case that human-caused climate change (global warming) is bas science, will be proven wrong, makes no sense, and so forth. Is this some sort of bizarre astroturfing campaign, some joke that I missed, or what?
TFA introduces the term "Security War Room", not Slashdot. (It's clear from the article that Microsoft has a less silly name for it.)
This is idiotic. Seriously. The "product" in question is a rumor. No details are confirmed about how it will work, what advertising hooks there will be, what features it will have, or whether it will ever see the light of day. You know what criticizing it at this point makes you? Not an analyst, not an expert, not a technologist. It makes you a guy with a guess and a blog.
"but in the end, termination of the writer was all they could do"
That's funny. I would have thought journalistic integrity could have been on the table. Tell the advertiser "no, you can't influence our reviews, take your business elsewhere".
I believed you. I just thought it might be pointing out that your anecdotal commentary wasn't particularly relevant, since a huge number of people do have QuickTime installed.
If you have a Mac, then you have QuickTime. If you have iTunes, then you have QuickTime. That may not apply to you, but its fair to say it covers a huge chunk of marketplace overall. (I believe people who download Safari 3 Beta for Windows, and Bonjour for Windows, also have QuickTime by default, but they are bound to be a very small group.)
My point is just that you can't price both the razor and the blades at a premium. One of the two should be cheap. I don't much care which.
As long as there is a cost of entry-- Even $1-- to buy the device, Amazon should not be charging more for DRMed "books" than the equivalent paperback would cost. Novels at $9.99 and blogs at $0.99 is just insane, unless they are paying me to take home the reader device.
What price difference? Both devices cost $400.
I might even go so far as to say that you made the very error that is causing this discussion. You're confusing "I don't want to buy all three" with "people, collectively, won't buy all three". It's a bit self-centered, really, and not all all how markets work.
I really think that the whole idea of a console war is dated.
There was a time when this was an issue. When disposable incomes were lower. When gaming was mostly for kids. When there weren't multiple demographics interested in different kinds of gaming. When a console wasn't also an Internet device and a media (music and movies) device as well.
Now, the game has changed. There is room for an inexpensive console with novelty appeal, health-conscious appeal, and appeal to kids-- and still room for a midrange console with testosterone games for the fratboy crowd-- and still room for a high-end machine with a scary sticker price but very impressive graphics, a blu-ray player, and the occasional hit exclusive game.
Slide out keyboards add greatly to the thickness of the device. I'm happy with the trade off of choosing the touch-screen, gaining a slim device that fits comfortable in my hand and pocket, over the full keyboard. Others who feel differently may not want the same phone I do.
This keeps coming up. Apple made a conscious decision to use an all touch-screen face, and the reasons are pretty obvious. A physical keyboard takes away from screen space and/or thickness. I wouldn't give up either, especially the screen size, to be able to type 10% faster. This device is primarily a phone, an iPod, a widget dashboard (maps, calculator, other mini-apps), an email reader, and a web browser. I just don't type on it that much, and when I do (quick emails, texts, filling in online forms, logins, etc.) the keyboard works great for me.
Unrelated story... The other day, I tripped on a curb while answering my phone. I went down pretty hard, and instinct kicking in led to most of my weight hitting the concrete via my iPhone. Yes, I landed from a solid fall, with most of my weight on my hand, in which I was holding my iPhone. The glass screen broke my fall. It's fine, with just a few dings to the chrome rim. Try that with any other phone. I'm happy with how I spent my $600.
The original SimCity was black and white. I used to play it on a Mac Plus.
"Seriously...who has SEVEN CHILDREN? On PURPOSE?"
Someone wealthy enough to have a stay at home wife and hired help, I'm guessing.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. I was using those numbers to show that the scale of the aquisition is perfectly reasonable. There would, for that kind of buyout, need to be negotiatons with the board and shareholders. However, Apple is definitely large enough to absorb a company the size of Adobe. From what I have seen, buyout plans rarely raise stock more than about 10%, and companies can "buy" (stock-based merger) other companies over half their own size, if it is agreed.
At today's market price, Apple absolutely could buy more than half of Adobe. Apple's recent financials reveal how much cash they have in the bank, and looking up Adobe's market cap is trivial. What problem do you see with the numbers I posted?
Apple has something like $16 Billion in cash in the bank, and a market capitalization of over $160 Billion. Adobe has a market capitalization of about $27 Billion. In other words, Apple could buy 50+% of Adobe for cash, and it would be easy to buy the rest by making it a "cash plus stock" deal or "merger". Either way, Apple could control Adobe as soon as it passed the regulators, if it decided to.
It's so people won't fight over whether they won,because their watch was 9 minutes off.
Bully, Bribe, Ballmer, Bastard, Backpedal
We had an XServe at a previous (small) employer, mostly for testing, but it seemed like a very slick implementation. Things like monitoring, remote configuration, and so forth were all managed very slickly. It meant less time farting around with the server. It also provides Apple's proprietary software and protocols, and a good package of standards-complient stuff set up to be easier to use. Plus it is (when updated) a nice, powerful, well-engineered 1U box, that compares favorably in pricing to the competitors.