I can testify to this !! 2nd install of an equal or superior MS OS is always handy:) but dont insall the 64bit version off the cuff or your 32bit windows boot goes bye bye...
seperate file systems also are brilliant in windows for all the times I've had to reinstall and I DO have to do that every three months, even if I do try and drag it out till 6.
Sadly, I do still agree with the parent a little too:-| lack of an easy, fast and reliable way of resizing partitions always makes me have too much space on one drive and not enough on another (no matter what size hdisk you have) I have about just over 1TB of disk spread over multiple drives and I still have issues trying to fit a movie in a films partition thats only 100GB. So I have to create partition 'films 2' or whatever:-|
sorry... but thats my point !! its a box on wheels... a design other manufacturers left at the end of the 80's
I don't drive:P insurance costs etc put me right off... but that aside I wouldnt buy a volvo or rover or, damn, the other car I cant remember that weighs more than 3/4 of a metric ton..
my dad was a mechanic for over 40 years... and I've picked up bits and bobs from there... but if I could drive (to my dads annoyance that I cant), I wouldnt buy a volvo.
because its as asthetically shaped like a brick on wheels.. probably the same handling too.
JIMHO tho...
for £1500 I guess that is a bargin... but probably because nobody wants them for the above reason and they had to fill them full of 'toys aka gimmicks' to sell them in the first place.
a 'decent' BMW costs about 4k second hand these days too many on the road now to be as 'classy' as they used to be, atleast in the uk anyways..
so many cars, so little profit... so does it surprise me your volvo costs £1500? no, not really.
I'm sure the volvo is a good car for the price.. but you did ask.. and I say it has soul, but I dont know whose...
Ian.
again, rhese comments are jimho -- and if I could mod this post I'd make it OT.
no offence to the parent... but what he seems to forget is that radio stations pay massive amounts of money for licenses and royalties to the 'artist' what license or royalty does the file sharer provide? this is the same thing that hurt the popularity of shoutcast, when the RIAA demanded they bought a broadcasting license from them.
I think both your views are correct... but the above is the main reason -- remember they already tried to tax blank tapes and the kick up about tape recorders back in the 80s.. and that's without mentioning sony or betamax.
in reality the parent poster is only taking money from the coders if he makes money from vmware himself...
if he's just some script kiddie checking out new software then he's not costing then anything by warezing it. say its a perfect world, and there are no warez. The kid wont buy vmware just to fiddle with anyway so what money is vmware actually missing out on?
In fact maybe in a few years time he might become a vmware guru and advise his corporate clients to buy the software -- making them even more money !
Say your a 3d animation student.. and warez 3d max for 5 years during uni.. you come out of education and go to a studio... the management need a new tool and ask which one you'd prefer -- which one would you choose? the one you've warezed and learned so much on... or something that was never covered in your cheapo college course?
So tha animation studio buys studio max because of your experience and recommendation and autocad/discreet make even more money !
Where this argument doesnt work however is:
operating systems (although I bet if most folk couldnt warez xp they would just get linux on their old 98 machine or whatever -- boost for open source !!)
any form of entertainment -- something that you cant 'learn' or make money from... games or films for example.
OTOH: some people download films first to see if they are worth watching.. and if so THEN go see them in the cinema although I think the interview with Leo Laporte in a previous/. article covers that pretty well.
My philosophy is that if you can make money from software that you bought then the publisher has every right to ask for some of it. If your only using it to learn and have *no* commercial purpose for it then personal use should be free.
I have to agree here.... screw those with their MCSEs... they should have realised that before the government funded them (in the uk atleast)
It would have been a different scenario if the students in question were actually of any competence. I know of people who have interviewed MCSEs graduates that weren't capable of formatting disks! never mind administering systems.
In my walk of life... an MCSE can (almost) administer a Microsoft Windows system... a Linux or UNIX qualified admin can work *and script* both UNIX and windows and will still be doing so when the monopolist falls.
I guess it's quite similar to those that were MCSE qualified in Windows NT. Without going the Microsoft upgrade path to 2k and 2003 those graduates are now obsolete. If said graduate had bothered to get qualified in a generic 'server environment' qualification like a BSe in systems administration 20 years ago that would not have been a problem.
The same goes for RedHat and Cisco qualifications... although Cisco has became more of an industry standard as far protocols go.. than either RedHat or Microsoft will ever hope to be.
The point is: defacto standards do not come about because a government or corporation says so.. they last in our industry because they are reliably time and time again deliver the goods in question and don't need patched every day or upgraded every month. If you honestly thought otherwise... you wouldn't have been posting AC.
regardless of perfomance the Powerpc cpu gave *everyone* a choice... they could buy apple they could buy wintel... or AMD..... run windows x86, bsd or even Amiga OS on their powerpc4
I can understand why apple might want to got he intel route... admittedly IBM havent been able to ramp up the ghz...
but this last move removes the difference between apple and dell...
I bought a 2nd hand g4 cube last week.. planning on sticking in dual powerpc4 cpus in it maxing out the memory (small server)... I'm using more or less generic compenents... where is apples 'hardware' side in that? (SDram etc)
I doubt it will be too long before the DRM is cracked and I'll be running OSXi on my AMD box... after that I'll not ever need to buy an apple again...:(
the death of choice. the birth of comoditized hardware and the end of an era that was apple...
Theatres apparently make little money off the actual movies... hence why the food and drink is so damn expensive.. (as another poster stated)
You say that an intermission would waste time and time means money yet you forget about the (up to) 45 minutes of adverts beforehand. fortunately living in the uk, I dont believe we have so many adverts as the Americans do... but that doesnt mean I go to the cinema dead on time -- more like 20 minutes or so after to miss the crap on before.
So why not split these adverts in the middle? I mean the advertizers wont admit it but few of us enjoy sitting on our asses watching the damn things.. so why cant the cinema owners make some money out of selling icecream, drinks etc...
It kinda makes sense to me that way than the current setup they have.. I hate the idea of both personally.. I dont want any adverts period ! but what can you do? I guess this way I might actually have to watch one or two lol.
The people to blame I feel is the MPAA.. If they sold the cinema reels (licenses) at a reasonable price to the theatres then they wouldnt have to bump up the price of the food and drinks... people would buy more consumables (and tickets!) and the *Cash flow* for everybody would be much higher... Sadly this is not the case and the film consortiums ripp the pish out of everybody involved.
can you maybe relate super computers to Formula1 racing? After reading your post I had this thought and they seem quite similar...
Large companies spend millions to get into F1 racing, and hardly make a profit. Their prestige on the other hand sells their 'normal' range of cars and although within a couple of years they will be replaced at the top... since everyone has seen ferrari race like a bandit, they all want one! IBMs name sells servers and (used to be) Personal Computers this way.
F1 cars like supercomputers innovate industry but since only big governments and a handful of racing teams can afford them the market demand is tiny. the profit margin is even smaller
Supercomputers like Formula 1 cars are high mantenence in terms of reliability and also require special tools and experience to fix.
Once you run out of that innovation... everybody else in the bigger market below catches up. nobody wants to pay 100k for something you could get for 2k whither its a 180mph sports car, supercomputer, graphics card or windows license.
Sad reality as a parent suggested is that SGI no longer has the huge edge in terms of cpu and gpu markets. But if you have enough R&D/love to develop something fantastically new (apple) then you can rise to the top again and live back in a niche market.
I dont think Microsoft could live in this market these days, they have to sell big, fast and to lots of stupid people. The people might not be any brighter, but even they would rather be screwed by someone else. SGI I believe only have to do something that puts them in front of Sun & IBM to get back into the leading market and be king again. The Supercomputer market has so few players that you only get forgotten when you run out of both innovation and money.
Although Apple may have done this with the ipod, their operating system and processors will take years of catching on and marketing before they are close to the scale or Microsoft.
"The reason this ISO class system was created was because TFT screens were incredibally hard to make without dead pixels,"
time machines are hard to make too... does that mean we buy the ones that don't work until someone comes up with one that does?
I admit I've never heard of the class 2 argument... if it was up to me I'd have 'Class 2' pretty much stamped all over it!
but as the guy above stated -- they tried that once and look what happened.. misleading advertising?
so you would buy a sound system that played 3 minutes out of 4 minutes of music.... and had silence the rest... but cost you £50 cheaper?
Its all wrong -- maybe 3 years ago when a TFT display was in the thousands then yes -- fair enough as LONG as the they know what they are getting...
the technology isnt as old now commodities are moving in....
here are a few more points made...
[00:50] gordonthestewart: They'll all say in the small print what standard they conform to. I've seen group tests in my magazines that state the dead pixel standard the diplay conforms to. Losing a quarter of any track is a much bigger fault than a few dead or stuck pixels. No I wouldn't like any dead pixels at all of course but that's the way the world is. If only perfection was accepted in cpu and memory fabrication, for instance, then most of any batch, that could have been used with more limited functionality or at a slower speed, would be scrapped. Your Athlon 64 FX 53 processor could cost £10 million each...and as no one would pay that, AMD wouldn't put the money into developing it...and in fact probably wouldn't exist as there wouldn't be a viable market. [00:51] Nossie666: that's my point tho [00:52] Nossie666: the threshold for failure should be much higher because the chance of someone noticing it is also much higher [00:52] Nossie666: sound and visuals especially [00:53] Nossie666: I know my cpu has bugs... I know my motherboard has bugs [00:53] Nossie666: isnt that what revisions are for? [00:55] Nossie666: I'm not running something that needs an uptime of 100%.... I don't need 100% reliability or 100% perfect 'picture' [00:55] Nossie666: and if you do you pay through the nose [00:56] Nossie666: but with sound or visuals... if it doesn't work to a basic standard... then whats the fricking point in having it? [00:56] Nossie666: with monitors you play the lottery every time you buy one
In the UK atleast and if you buy online we have a legal right to return any bought product before 14? days have passed with no questions asked, as long as its still worth selling.
I have a 20" HP LCD which has no dead pixels... 1600x1200 of pure sexyness..
But I'd feel robbed if I thought I'd paid the money for that and got more than say 3 dead pixels in conspicuous places.
I laugh at Sony's PSP dead pixel policy and honour Nintendo's 0 tolerance offer...
woopy do how many pixels there are on a monitor -- it does not give companies the right to sell faulty products. If they cant sell them perfect they shouldnt be selling them at all.
In the uk I think I can legally return any product by law if I'm not happy with what I bought... but I also think you *need* to kick up the shit in the showroom you bought it from to do so. (trading standards would come down on them like a ton of bricks) And bad publicity usually makes any store stand down.
Rather than making it up to the consumer to put their own money up front to ensure satisfaction.. I believe it should be law that you recieve (for the same price) a product in the same condition someone else could. Because if I can get a TFT with no dead pixels... why the hell should I buy another that might?
Yes, dead pixels are hard to remove completely... but what if 1 of those pixels is smack bang in the middle of the screen? I doubt you'd be too happy to have that on your $400 piece of kit.
I agree that its not Sharps fault for dead pixels... some will go through QC undetected and passed on to Sony.
I think the problem lies on Sony's own quality control... they aren't giving a shit as to how many are dead as long as they get them out the door.. that IMHO is just wrong..
Since they only pay their staff $2 an hour, why don’t they have a few at the end of the production line glancing at the screen to check for dead pixels? I'd be much happier with a scratch on the case than one dead pixel on the display -- its the one thing that’s looked at the most!
I have a 20" 1600x1200 HP TFT monitor... not one dead pixel (yet)
If HP can do that on a much larger scale like a monitor then SURELY!!! Sony can properly test their own tiny weeny screens before they go out the door...
Don’t get me wrong sir, I agree with you 100% on your other points... but I think having dead pixels on portable machine is real downer -- and they shouldn’t be able to make people pay the price of a PS2+7 games for the privilege...
If they cant test machines properly and still sell them for $400... then they simply shouldn’t have brought it out in the first place.
Microsoft seems to have started the trend of using the consumer as the guinea pig... its a shame Sony seems to have taken this role too... we should be the ones being paid to be beta testers..
If I'm led to believe correctly... a rolex watch is a watch for life... with a 'lifetime warranty'
Now I'm not sure if its the life of the watch *grins*
but unlike your brand names and current designer fashions there are still companies out there that sell more than just 'style'. Sod Nike and their $5 sneakers... Armani(sp?) and the rest of the criminals.
I'd kinda compare Rolex to Ferrari or Austin Martin... Yeah sure, you pay through the nose for a 'hand built' machine... but its still far more than a ford with a bodyshell.
What you say might work with clothes, jewellery and 70% of your 'designer' watches but your off the mark on the rolex comment...
I hate designer names with a passion.. why on earth would you buy the same thing in two stores except one has a label and one doesn't... yet there is a 600% price hike?
Reason I said about rolex... is that I know someone who that happened to.. It was a reasonably 'cheap' watch but he took it into a watchrepair place on holiday abroad and they swapped the guts for a digital one.
He only noticed when he got back home, but the insurance by Rolex covered the replacement.
I admit, that more can go wrong with a mechanical piece. Some though, may consider it art.. or a craft long since forgotten...
But I think your wrong that all mechanical watches are inaccurate... or unreliable. In 100 years time, a grandson or daughter may have a rolex ticking away in their jewelery box. Which is more than I can say for your mass manufactured quartz crap.
If I had 60k to spend on a rolex..... I'd buy a few 8-way opteron clusters>:)
I had to delete mine from the quicklaunch because of that.... the pointer would click the icon before I'd even thought about it. So I replaced it with the firefox icon and have been safe since >:)
Sadly, if I really have to use IE... I have to go find the the windows update link, stop the redirect and go type in google or something... (That is when I dont have Firefox running and cant just right click and press "view this page in IE"
I think any company should have a right to enforce their own IP. I'd even support the RIAA/MPAA if they cracked down on marketstalls or websites profiteering from the distribution. Sadly they also abuse their consumers, and I think thats going too far.
Nintendo is doing nothing less than protecting its rights, and in a far more amicable way than some of the other corporations. Sure the emulation scene has been blasted by lawyers over the years. Although, considering they are still making a profit from the old games (classic handhelds etc) do you really blame them?
Systems to support this would be the Classic NES and snes converstions to the GBA
*** (I'm not suggesting constant remakes and re-releases is right either here btw ) ***
People are slating that guy in the link because he was miffed at recieving a counterfit product. I have to say I support him 100% for taking it back.
WE ALL know counterfit copies exist, some of us are even quite prepared to buy them *knowing* they are fake/stolen but not wanting to pay full price. It's a totally different story when a shop tries to sell such products and pretend they are legit.
how would you like to buy a $60,000 Rolex to find a quartz movement inside? OR a an athlon64 4000 to find its an overclocked 3800?
I think then, you might not be so jeering when it was you that had the wrong end of the stick.
Sony may have made a killing selling multitudes of games...(and a lot more if they hadn't been pirated) but the games did heavily subsidise the hardware. Costing them a lot of money in lost games revenue and hardware purchases
Nintendo may not have sold so many games... but most of the ones they did were their own and weren't copied. Instead of losing money on every unit sold, Nintendo profited far more than either Sony or Microsoft.
From a corporates point of view, I know which one I'd be happier having my stakes in.
I think the XBox would be gone now if they didnt have the backing of a monopoly.
Sadly it may simply have came down to Nintendo not putting the same amount of R&D into their generation than any other company but at the end of the day their figures arent hurting as much as the rest of the players.
Slashdot Mirror
I did :-| ... one of my closest friends is a dutchie...
:D
hmmmm hehe
I can testify to this !! 2nd install of an equal or superior MS OS is always handy :) but dont insall the 64bit version off the cuff or your 32bit windows boot goes bye bye...
:-| lack of an easy, fast and reliable way of resizing partitions always makes me have too much space on one drive and not enough on another (no matter what size hdisk you have) I have about just over 1TB of disk spread over multiple drives and I still have issues trying to fit a movie in a films partition thats only 100GB. So I have to create partition 'films 2' or whatever :-|
:D
seperate file systems also are brilliant in windows for all the times I've had to reinstall and I DO have to do that every three months, even if I do try and drag it out till 6.
Sadly, I do still agree with the parent a little too
The again, I too am not 99% of users
hate to tell you...
:P
:-|
:)
but this story was old before you
http://theinquirer.net/?article=25169
do a search for HDCP on the inq to see just *HOW* old... I've been eagerly waiting this conversation for ages and it only now gets posted
ahh well
---Except that it comes from 1996.---
:P insurance costs etc put me right off... but that aside I wouldnt buy a volvo or rover or, damn, the other car I cant remember that weighs more than 3/4 of a metric ton..
sorry... but thats my point !! its a box on wheels... a design other manufacturers left at the end of the 80's
I don't drive
my dad was a mechanic for over 40 years... and I've picked up bits and bobs from there... but if I could drive (to my dads annoyance that I cant), I wouldnt buy a volvo.
because its as asthetically shaped like a brick on wheels.. probably the same handling too.
JIMHO tho...
for £1500 I guess that is a bargin... but probably because nobody wants them for the above reason and they had to fill them full of 'toys aka gimmicks' to sell them in the first place.
a 'decent' BMW costs about 4k second hand these days too many on the road now to be as 'classy' as they used to be, atleast in the uk anyways..
so many cars, so little profit... so does it surprise me your volvo costs £1500? no, not really.
I'm sure the volvo is a good car for the price.. but you did ask.. and I say it has soul, but I dont know whose...
Ian.
again, rhese comments are jimho -- and if I could mod this post I'd make it OT.
I call that an 80s piece of shite...
but then most 80's cars were like that... volvo just remained there.
heh..
:-|
I do hope you dont believe I was taking a stab at windows there... or anything remotely malicious...
Just, when I thought of Microsoft Monad - I immediately thought of my childhood days "Buster Gonad" from the Viz..
<URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viz_comic/>
just couldn't help myself
I cant help but think of this...
Monads have no windows - Windows has no gonads...
oh so true *rolls his eyes*
no offence to the parent... but what he seems to forget is that radio stations pay massive amounts of money for licenses and royalties to the 'artist' what license or royalty does the file sharer provide? this is the same thing that hurt the popularity of shoutcast, when the RIAA demanded they bought a broadcasting license from them.
I think both your views are correct... but the above is the main reason -- remember they already tried to tax blank tapes and the kick up about tape recorders back in the 80s.. and that's without mentioning sony or betamax.
They said it not me... ??
:) and thats without looking into the Sony figures..
http://theinquirer.net/?article=24988
Interesting figures though -- things dont seem so bad now
To note another few companies the inq shows: Activision made a loss this quarter too -- it would appear that Q1 is always a bad year for VGs ?
I have to agree with you on this one...
I never bought XP but I did pay a $600 donation to Mandrake a year ago...
-- not that I'll do so again after the name change LOL
I *would* buy OSX for AMD if I could... but I think that will be a long road away..
bottom line is -- pay for what you believe in or make money from and warez the f*'king rest.
jimho
in reality the parent poster is only taking money from the coders if he makes money from vmware himself...
/. article covers that pretty well.
:D
if he's just some script kiddie checking out new software then he's not costing then anything by warezing it. say its a perfect world, and there are no warez. The kid wont buy vmware just to fiddle with anyway so what money is vmware actually missing out on?
In fact maybe in a few years time he might become a vmware guru and advise his corporate clients to buy the software -- making them even more money !
Say your a 3d animation student.. and warez 3d max for 5 years during uni.. you come out of education and go to a studio... the management need a new tool and ask which one you'd prefer -- which one would you choose? the one you've warezed and learned so much on... or something that was never covered in your cheapo college course?
So tha animation studio buys studio max because of your experience and recommendation and autocad/discreet make even more money !
Where this argument doesnt work however is:
operating systems (although I bet if most folk couldnt warez xp they would just get linux on their old 98 machine or whatever -- boost for open source !!)
any form of entertainment -- something that you cant 'learn' or make money from... games or films for example.
OTOH: some people download films first to see if they are worth watching.. and if so THEN go see them in the cinema although I think the interview with Leo Laporte in a previous
My philosophy is that if you can make money from software that you bought then the publisher has every right to ask for some of it. If your only using it to learn and have *no* commercial purpose for it then personal use should be free.
but hey, thats jimho
I have to agree here.... screw those with their MCSEs ... they should have realised that before the government funded them (in the uk atleast)
It would have been a different scenario if the students in question were actually of any competence. I know of people who have interviewed MCSEs graduates that weren't capable of formatting disks! never mind administering systems.
In my walk of life... an MCSE can (almost) administer a Microsoft Windows system... a Linux or UNIX qualified admin can work *and script* both UNIX and windows and will still be doing so when the monopolist falls.
I guess it's quite similar to those that were MCSE qualified in Windows NT. Without going the Microsoft upgrade path to 2k and 2003 those graduates are now obsolete. If said graduate had bothered to get qualified in a generic 'server environment' qualification like a BSe in systems administration 20 years ago that would not have been a problem.
The same goes for RedHat and Cisco qualifications... although Cisco has became more of an industry standard as far protocols go.. than either RedHat or Microsoft will ever hope to be.
The point is: defacto standards do not come about because a government or corporation says so.. they last in our industry because they are reliably time and time again deliver the goods in question and don't need patched every day or upgraded every month. If you honestly thought otherwise... you wouldn't have been posting AC.
I can agree with you 100% on this...
..... run windows x86, bsd or even Amiga OS on their powerpc4
:(
:-|
regardless of perfomance the Powerpc cpu gave *everyone* a choice... they could buy apple they could buy wintel... or AMD
I can understand why apple might want to got he intel route... admittedly IBM havent been able to ramp up the ghz...
but this last move removes the difference between apple and dell...
I bought a 2nd hand g4 cube last week.. planning on sticking in dual powerpc4 cpus in it maxing out the memory (small server)... I'm using more or less generic compenents... where is apples 'hardware' side in that? (SDram etc)
I doubt it will be too long before the DRM is cracked and I'll be running OSXi on my AMD box... after that I'll not ever need to buy an apple again...
the death of choice. the birth of comoditized hardware and the end of an era that was apple...
just think of that sgi article the other day
32k for a 400mhz sgi intel box.... you WHAT ????
I think your looking at this wrong (no offence)
...
Theatres apparently make little money off the actual movies... hence why the food and drink is so damn expensive.. (as another poster stated)
You say that an intermission would waste time and time means money yet you forget about the (up to) 45 minutes of adverts beforehand. fortunately living in the uk, I dont believe we have so many adverts as the Americans do... but that doesnt mean I go to the cinema dead on time -- more like 20 minutes or so after to miss the crap on before.
So why not split these adverts in the middle? I mean the advertizers wont admit it but few of us enjoy sitting on our asses watching the damn things.. so why cant the cinema owners make some money out of selling icecream, drinks etc
It kinda makes sense to me that way than the current setup they have.. I hate the idea of both personally.. I dont want any adverts period ! but what can you do? I guess this way I might actually have to watch one or two lol.
The people to blame I feel is the MPAA.. If they sold the cinema reels (licenses) at a reasonable price to the theatres then they wouldnt have to bump up the price of the food and drinks... people would buy more consumables (and tickets!) and the *Cash flow* for everybody would be much higher... Sadly this is not the case and the film consortiums ripp the pish out of everybody involved.
but thats just my opinion..
can you maybe relate super computers to Formula1 racing? After reading your post I had this thought and they seem quite similar...
Large companies spend millions to get into F1 racing, and hardly make a profit. Their prestige on the other hand sells their 'normal' range of cars and although within a couple of years they will be replaced at the top... since everyone has seen ferrari race like a bandit, they all want one! IBMs name sells servers and (used to be) Personal Computers this way.
F1 cars like supercomputers innovate industry but since only big governments and a handful of racing teams can afford them the market demand is tiny. the profit margin is even smaller
Supercomputers like Formula 1 cars are high mantenence in terms of reliability and also require special tools and experience to fix.
Once you run out of that innovation... everybody else in the bigger market below catches up. nobody wants to pay 100k for something you could get for 2k whither its a 180mph sports car, supercomputer, graphics card or windows license.
Sad reality as a parent suggested is that SGI no longer has the huge edge in terms of cpu and gpu markets. But if you have enough R&D/love to develop something fantastically new (apple) then you can rise to the top again and live back in a niche market.
I dont think Microsoft could live in this market these days, they have to sell big, fast and to lots of stupid people. The people might not be any brighter, but even they would rather be screwed by someone else. SGI I believe only have to do something that puts them in front of Sun & IBM to get back into the leading market and be king again. The Supercomputer market has so few players that you only get forgotten when you run out of both innovation and money.
Although Apple may have done this with the ipod, their operating system and processors will take years of catching on and marketing before they are close to the scale or Microsoft.
woah... and I was moaning about my 2mb 20:1 'business' ADSL connection not hitting 245kb/s like it used to getting about 230kb/s these days >:) hehe
I think your right... this is money motivating Microsoft... nothing more..
IF Microsoft fixed their browser... they couldnt make money out their insecurities could they?
I agree with you to some extent:
"The reason this ISO class system was created was because TFT screens were incredibally hard to make without dead pixels,"
time machines are hard to make too... does that mean we buy the ones that don't work until someone comes up with one that does?
I admit I've never heard of the class 2 argument... if it was up to me I'd have 'Class 2' pretty much stamped all over it!
but as the guy above stated -- they tried that once and look what happened.. misleading advertising?
so you would buy a sound system that played 3 minutes out of 4 minutes of music.... and had silence the rest... but cost you £50 cheaper?
Its all wrong -- maybe 3 years ago when a TFT display was in the thousands then yes -- fair enough as LONG as the they know what they are getting...
the technology isnt as old now commodities are moving in....
here are a few more points made...
[00:50] gordonthestewart: They'll all say in the small print what standard they conform to. I've seen group tests in my magazines that state the dead pixel standard the diplay conforms to. Losing a quarter of any track is a much bigger fault than a few dead or stuck pixels. No I wouldn't like any dead pixels at all of course but that's the way the world is. If only perfection was accepted in cpu and memory fabrication, for instance, then most of any batch, that could have been used with more limited functionality or at a slower speed, would be scrapped. Your Athlon 64 FX 53 processor could cost £10 million each...and as no one would pay that, AMD wouldn't put the money into developing it...and in fact probably wouldn't exist as there wouldn't be a viable market.
[00:51] Nossie666: that's my point tho
[00:52] Nossie666: the threshold for failure should be much higher because the chance of someone noticing it is also much higher
[00:52] Nossie666: sound and visuals especially
[00:53] Nossie666: I know my cpu has bugs... I know my motherboard has bugs
[00:53] Nossie666: isnt that what revisions are for?
[00:55] Nossie666: I'm not running something that needs an uptime of 100%.... I don't need 100% reliability or 100% perfect 'picture'
[00:55] Nossie666: and if you do you pay through the nose
[00:56] Nossie666: but with sound or visuals... if it doesn't work to a basic standard... then whats the fricking point in having it?
[00:56] Nossie666: with monitors you play the lottery every time you buy one
I have to agree with you here...
In the UK atleast and if you buy online we have a legal right to return any bought product before 14? days have passed with no questions asked, as long as its still worth selling.
I have a 20" HP LCD which has no dead pixels... 1600x1200 of pure sexyness..
But I'd feel robbed if I thought I'd paid the money for that and got more than say 3 dead pixels in conspicuous places.
I laugh at Sony's PSP dead pixel policy and honour Nintendo's 0 tolerance offer...
woopy do how many pixels there are on a monitor -- it does not give companies the right to sell faulty products. If they cant sell them perfect they shouldnt be selling them at all.
In the uk I think I can legally return any product by law if I'm not happy with what I bought... but I also think you *need* to kick up the shit in the showroom you bought it from to do so. (trading standards would come down on them like a ton of bricks) And bad publicity usually makes any store stand down.
Rather than making it up to the consumer to put their own money up front to ensure satisfaction.. I believe it should be law that you recieve (for the same price) a product in the same condition someone else could. Because if I can get a TFT with no dead pixels... why the hell should I buy another that might?
I have to agree with you...
That is up until your last point.
Yes, dead pixels are hard to remove completely... but what if 1 of those pixels is smack bang in the middle of the screen? I doubt you'd be too happy to have that on your $400 piece of kit.
I agree that its not Sharps fault for dead pixels... some will go through QC undetected and passed on to Sony.
I think the problem lies on Sony's own quality control... they aren't giving a shit as to how many are dead as long as they get them out the door.. that IMHO is just wrong..
Since they only pay their staff $2 an hour, why don’t they have a few at the end of the production line glancing at the screen to check for dead pixels? I'd be much happier with a scratch on the case than one dead pixel on the display -- its the one thing that’s looked at the most!
I have a 20" 1600x1200 HP TFT monitor... not one dead pixel (yet)
If HP can do that on a much larger scale like a monitor then SURELY!!! Sony can properly test their own tiny weeny screens before they go out the door...
Don’t get me wrong sir, I agree with you 100% on your other points... but I think having dead pixels on portable machine is real downer -- and they shouldn’t be able to make people pay the price of a PS2+7 games for the privilege...
If they cant test machines properly and still sell them for $400... then they simply shouldn’t have brought it out in the first place.
Microsoft seems to have started the trend of using the consumer as the guinea pig... its a shame Sony seems to have taken this role too... we should be the ones being paid to be beta testers..
damn it man stop being so piccy!
:)
if I'd said FX55 you'd have said they were stupid...
If I'd said a 3200 Barton I'm sure they would have came up with something else lol...
The point being here, your not getting what you paid for..... no matter what the price discount was...
heh
If I'm led to believe correctly... a rolex watch is a watch for life... with a 'lifetime warranty'
/.
Now I'm not sure if its the life of the watch *grins*
but unlike your brand names and current designer fashions there are still companies out there that sell more than just 'style'. Sod Nike and their $5 sneakers... Armani(sp?) and the rest of the criminals.
I'd kinda compare Rolex to Ferrari or Austin Martin... Yeah sure, you pay through the nose for a 'hand built' machine... but its still far more than a ford with a bodyshell.
What you say might work with clothes, jewellery and 70% of your 'designer' watches but your off the mark on the rolex comment...
I hate designer names with a passion.. why on earth would you buy the same thing in two stores except one has a label and one doesn't... yet there is a 600% price hike?
Reason I said about rolex... is that I know someone who that happened to.. It was a reasonably 'cheap' watch but he took it into a watchrepair place on holiday abroad and they swapped the guts for a digital one.
He only noticed when he got back home, but the insurance by Rolex covered the replacement.
I admit, that more can go wrong with a mechanical piece. Some though, may consider it art.. or a craft long since forgotten...
But I think your wrong that all mechanical watches are inaccurate... or unreliable. In 100 years time, a grandson or daughter may have a rolex ticking away in their jewelery box. Which is more than I can say for your mass manufactured quartz crap.
If I had 60k to spend on a rolex..... I'd buy a few 8-way opteron clusters>:)
This has went OT.. but hey, what doesnt on
hmmm that sounds familiar...
... I have to go find the the windows update link, stop the redirect and go type in google or something... (That is when I dont have Firefox running and cant just right click and press "view this page in IE"
I had to delete mine from the quicklaunch because of that.... the pointer would click the icon before I'd even thought about it. So I replaced it with the firefox icon and have been safe since >:)
Sadly, if I really have to use IE
heh - that extension is a godsend.
I think any company should have a right to enforce their own IP. I'd even support the RIAA/MPAA if they cracked down on marketstalls or websites profiteering from the distribution. Sadly they also abuse their consumers, and I think thats going too far.
Nintendo is doing nothing less than protecting its rights, and in a far more amicable way than some of the other corporations. Sure the emulation scene has been blasted by lawyers over the years. Although, considering they are still making a profit from the old games (classic handhelds etc) do you really blame them?
Systems to support this would be the Classic NES and snes converstions to the GBA
*** (I'm not suggesting constant remakes and re-releases is right either here btw ) ***
People are slating that guy in the link because he was miffed at recieving a counterfit product. I have to say I support him 100% for taking it back.
WE ALL know counterfit copies exist, some of us are even quite prepared to buy them *knowing* they are fake/stolen but not wanting to pay full price. It's a totally different story when a shop tries to sell such products and pretend they are legit.
how would you like to buy a $60,000 Rolex to find a quartz movement inside? OR a an athlon64 4000 to find its an overclocked 3800?
I think then, you might not be so jeering when it was you that had the wrong end of the stick.
Sony may have made a killing selling multitudes of games...(and a lot more if they hadn't been pirated) but the games did heavily subsidise the hardware. Costing them a lot of money in lost games revenue and hardware purchases
Nintendo may not have sold so many games... but most of the ones they did were their own and weren't copied. Instead of losing money on every unit sold, Nintendo profited far more than either Sony or Microsoft.
From a corporates point of view, I know which one I'd be happier having my stakes in.
I think the XBox would be gone now if they didnt have the backing of a monopoly.
Sadly it may simply have came down to Nintendo not putting the same amount of R&D into their generation than any other company but at the end of the day their figures arent hurting as much as the rest of the players.