The Beta and VHS discussion was not really about price or technological superiority. It was more about market clout. Sony didn't have wide market support for its format, other companies joined Matsushita to produce VHS systems, which eventually leveled the prices.
Ultimately, wasn't it really about licensing? Sony didn't license Betamax to anyone, at least not anyone who made a unit that reached US retailers, while Matsushita licensed VHS to a fair number of manufacturers. More manufacturers, more features, more options, better prices, different styles...
...the KDE developers should follow Apple's lead and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software perfection.
Which needs of what users? If Apple focused on my needs, I'd own some Apple product. I don't because they don't. Perhaps the key issue here is simply that each group is attempting to continue to provide what their existing users have come to expect.
No doubt. Using your analogy, selling the gas station begins to look more attractive than cleaning the bathroom. Where there isn't sufficient momentum from sheer numbers of users, hasty maintenance inevitably sees the competition cruising past you because their product is faster or more stable when you reach the point where you can no longer put off cleaning the bathroom.
Seriously, I totally agree with you. I think kprinter actually is a very good example of the problems kde faces. Kprinter is technically an awsome tool if you take the time to really get into it. However the problem is, for simply setting up a local printer it is way to confusing.
No, but your post is a very good example of the problems KDE, Gnome and the rest face, when it comes to adoption by Windows users. If something has a configuration option or two less than Windows does for the same thing, then it's not configurable enough. If it's got a configuration option or two more than Windows does, it's too confusing. I just pulled up the default Windows and vendor provided printer configuration panels on Windows 2k, XP and 98 SE and printer properties in Kprinter for KDE 3.4. Kprinter appears to have just a couple more options than the default Windows equivalent and a couple less than the configuration tools provided by Epson and Canon. The most significant difference I see is a matter of depth. In Kprinter and the Epson tool all the options appear to be presented at the same depth, a handful of tabbed pages in one window, while the Windows and Canon tools have buttons on some pages that open additional windows. The latter have most the same options as the former, they just hide more of them.
A poll on a website is completely scientific, and it has a well-defined meaning; it simply happens to be a meaning that differs from what you might naively expect...
Ahem. What I might naively expect? It's a biased, self-selecting sample with biased, pre-selected choices. The respondents' most common primary concerns may not have been presented at all. The company that conducted the poll has a financial interest in the results. In fact, because of the nature of their business, the company stands to benefit from unexpected results. And, lo and behold, a company that stands to gain from unexpected results got them. It's completely scientific?? Care to run that naive thing by me again?
...but it does fulfill a primary function of polls: to give you ideas about where things might stand or where they might be headed.
As do wild guesses, psychic hotlines and the fabulous where-things-might-be-headed dartboard.
You forgot to add:
1) Expensive telecommunications infrastructure to Microsoft's primary call centers...
Don't even try pawning that '$2 to $4 per minute' BS off on me, bud. What I forgot to add is that Microsoft's call centers in Charlotte, North Carolina; Las Colinas, Texas; and Issaquah, Washington were closed and the 2,400+ CSR jobs in those cities moved to Bangalore, India, and that the bulk of the CSRs make nowhere near the $11 an hour they're paid in Las Vegas. What I forgot to add is that compared to most of the call centers handling Microsoft support calls, Client Logic's is expensive.
It's another non-story story. The results of poll on a web site are more than less than scientific, they're pretty much meaningless. Lots of visitors participate in those polls because they hope to see a specific result, or to prevent one, or to annoy someone in the room with them, or because they're bored, or any of a number of other reasons that will see them not answering honestly, or thoughtfully, or accurately. Attempting to draw a number of conclusions from said polls is downright silly.
Microsoft charges $35/incident for basic consumer support. Average minutes per incident in the industry is 30. Yet it costs them over $70 to provide that incident of support.
Baloney. Yes, MS charges $35 per incident for basic support. No, it costs them nowhere near $70 per to provide it. Take a trip to 420 Pilot Rd, in Las Vegas, Nevada, and talk to the folks taking breaks outside the Client Logic building. They are some of the people who pick up the phone when you call the support lines of Micron PC, Gateway, Dell, Microsoft and others. The people providing that support make, on average, $11 an hour. Last I heard of it, average call handle time in the Microsoft section was about 11 minutes. About 5 calls an hour, or around $175 an hour. I don't know what Microsoft pays Client Logic but not far away Sitel bills a client $22.50 an hour for people they pay $12 an hour. These are people for whom Wnidows support is a subset of the support they provide, and who spend twice as long in class training as do the Microsoft support representatives, so it's a safe bet Microsoft isn't paying more than that. Microsoft is no doubt making around $1,300 per seat, per shift, for providing support.
According the article: "The problem, according to some free software voices..."
Stop right there. Name names that carry some weight, please.
You had it with stop right there. Yes, vague references to a few unnamed, unhappy people don't cut it for me either. And I don't care if they've a name or two that carries weight. The reality is it's a small, albeit vocal, minority. Most of us don't have a problem with the way OpenOffice has or is being developed. To many of us it looks to be going swimmingly. The only thing I have to say to the OpenOffice developers is 'Great job! Keep up the good work.'
MySQL's target audience is people who already know what SQL is and are keen on an alternative. It needs that SQL in the name. note that it is not called C-SQL...*snip*...postgresql is supposed to be better than MySQL, but i have no idea how to pronounce it. neither do many other people, thats one of the main reasons why its not as well known/used.
While it certainly doesn't hurt if the name is original, clever and carries product information, what is important is that it is remembered. The name they have is descriptive and easy to remember. I doubt it's an issue but I'd expect that the authors would change the name were there a compelling argument made for it. It's lame isn't such an argument.
the grandparent is 100% correct concerning the pitch. if this guy wants to make money, hes gotta market his project like a pro.
The grandparent is 100% assuming, condescending tripe. The phpMyTicket site is hosted on InteleNet and the product is in active use by several community theater groups. Its authors are actively posting of it in relevant fora. I see no evidence but that they are handling their project thoughtfully. They deserve better than uninspired, ad hominem attacks. Some tiny grain of truth in the attack doesn't negate that. Market it? You don't think it occurred to the authors of phpMyTicket to market their product? And come on, market it like a pro?? As opposed to marketing it like a hack? It's not helpful to state the obvious, it's just insulting.
however, that will lose him the backing of the Open Source community as it will alienate them.
Huh? The Open Source community is alienated by marketing? Is there something in the water?
So try to act professional maybe? Calling your program phpMyTicket is pretty lame. Go to some big theater exec and tell them that name. You will be out the door in a second. What is with the "php" in the name? Do you really think _anyone_ that would actually _pay_ you for the software cares if it is based on PHP?
Oh yeah, products with My or a technology reference in their names are doomed to fail. An SQL DBMS, for instance, would never get anywhere with My or SQL in its name. A DBMS administration application with My, PHP and Admin in its name would be triply cursed and certain to die.
No, if you want to come across as professional you've got to be condescending and pepper your speech with insults and professional-sounding words like lame and dude. It also helps to use obscure acronyms pulled straight from comic strips when referring to those in an organization who make more money than you do. Call them PHBs, for Pointy Haired Boss, for example, if you want respect and for people to believe you occupy a senior position in a Fortune 500 company. You know, like all the guys do when they work the fry station and take their career frustrations out on assorted people on-line.
Re:Ahem.... Without MS applications?
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
Firefox doesn't need a Google toolbar. It already has one.
I didn't address need or availability. Google's is for IE only.
Wrong again. I am using Picasa on my Windows 98 machine.
Yes, I missed 98 on their list. But it is as the download page says, requires Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0+, yes? And IE is still an MS application, right? So your point was??
Then, when that poor little guy isn't looking, provided what he does with the technology is interesting enough, big bad Microsoft will come along and... swallow him up! That's right, they'll pay that peppy lil' entrepreneur a ton of money for the company he put together and he'll walk away a rich man.
Or when they see that he's doing really well with it, some time after the IPO they'll offer to buy his company for a fraction of what it's worth. He'll turn the offer down because he's enjoying the work, the cash and the spotlight too much. Then Microsoft will announce Project Shortantler, vaporware that they'll claim will do just what our soon-to-be-ex hero's software does. Then they will remind us all that they invented the technology from which his product is built. Our hero's stock price will fall through the floor and he'll find himself wishing he'd taken Microsoft's offer as they buy the company out from under him for a song. Then they'll snicker and rename his product Shortantler.
Re:Ahem.... Without MS applications?
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
But since that part of the article doesn't address what may be or what will be isn't it likely that neither slashdot nor the gene pool will miss you when you die?
Re:Ahem.... Without MS applications?
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
Yes, you're crazy and the quote does not say that.
Ahem.... Without MS applications?
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
You can use Google software with any Internet browser to search the web and your desktop for just about anything; send and store up to two gigabytes of e-mail via Gmail (Hotmail, Microsoft's rival free e-mail service, offers 250 megabytes, a fraction of that); manage, edit, and send digital photographs using Google's Picasa software, easily the best PC photo software out there; and, through Google's Blogger, create, post online, and print formatted documents--all without applications from Microsoft.
Emphasis mine. Nice notion, but rather inaccurate. Google Toolbar is for Internet Explorer only. Google Desktop Search is available only for Windows XP and Windows 2000. Picasa Photo Organizer requires Internet Explorer and Windows XP or Windows 2000. Same for Google Deskbar and GMail Notifier. You can use Google's sites without applications from Microsoft, but you sure can't use any of their downloadable software without a good dose of fairly recent Microsoft product.
Google returns some
interesting, possibly relevant links on the subject. Personally, I'm disinclined to spend any real time on microsoft.com but at a glance it appears they may be using aforementioned document standard.
Are you serious or was that supposed to be funny? No more 'trolls', 'people with agendas', 'poorly thought out comments' or 'mindless Microsoft shills'? If it'll cost money it follows that it'll be done well? Then explain network TV to me. No worthless crap there, because it costs money for it to get there? Nothing but quality material at your local newsstand? No shills or agendas on the radio?
Charge 25 cents per post and the only thing you'll lose are the voices of the people unwilling or unable to spend 25 cents per post. You'll still have shills. You'll still have people with agendas. You'll still have post from people who post without thinking.
Isn't that funny? Of all the possible answers to the question why is the show doing so poorly the producers glossed right over the most obvious answer, that they had been doing a lousy job.
Personally, I enjoyed the show, not because it had anything truly inspired or original, but because it had Jolene Blalock, a good cast, Jolene Blalock, visually-pleasing special effects and Jolene Blalock. But if you ask me, the reason it didn't do well is that the producers served up a bunch of reheated leftovers. STTNG gave us some new bits with The Q and The Borg, and even the generally uninspired, Jeri-Ryan-carried Voyager delivered a little something new, but Enterprise boldly went where every Star Trek series had gone before. Yes, the franchise is tired, but on their end, now ours.
Slashdot Mirror
The Beta and VHS discussion was not really about price or technological superiority. It was more about market clout. Sony didn't have wide market support for its format, other companies joined Matsushita to produce VHS systems, which eventually leveled the prices.
Ultimately, wasn't it really about licensing? Sony didn't license Betamax to anyone, at least not anyone who made a unit that reached US retailers, while Matsushita licensed VHS to a fair number of manufacturers. More manufacturers, more features, more options, better prices, different styles...
Which needs of what users? If Apple focused on my needs, I'd own some Apple product. I don't because they don't. Perhaps the key issue here is simply that each group is attempting to continue to provide what their existing users have come to expect.
No doubt. Using your analogy, selling the gas station begins to look more attractive than cleaning the bathroom. Where there isn't sufficient momentum from sheer numbers of users, hasty maintenance inevitably sees the competition cruising past you because their product is faster or more stable when you reach the point where you can no longer put off cleaning the bathroom.
Arbitrary? The number of mammal digits gets decided only after millions of years of evolution.
Thanks. Now I remember the other reason I hang around here; gems like that. Priceless. But damn it if I didn't just forget the first reason...
And then there are lots of us who'll burn a CD or ten for friends, family, to take along on service calls, user group meetings, whatever.
Oops. My bad. I was sitting at 3.3 at the time. Yeah, what he said. ;-)
Seriously, I totally agree with you. I think kprinter actually is a very good example of the problems kde faces. Kprinter is technically an awsome tool if you take the time to really get into it. However the problem is, for simply setting up a local printer it is way to confusing.
No, but your post is a very good example of the problems KDE, Gnome and the rest face, when it comes to adoption by Windows users. If something has a configuration option or two less than Windows does for the same thing, then it's not configurable enough. If it's got a configuration option or two more than Windows does, it's too confusing. I just pulled up the default Windows and vendor provided printer configuration panels on Windows 2k, XP and 98 SE and printer properties in Kprinter for KDE 3.4. Kprinter appears to have just a couple more options than the default Windows equivalent and a couple less than the configuration tools provided by Epson and Canon. The most significant difference I see is a matter of depth. In Kprinter and the Epson tool all the options appear to be presented at the same depth, a handful of tabbed pages in one window, while the Windows and Canon tools have buttons on some pages that open additional windows. The latter have most the same options as the former, they just hide more of them.
great. maybe they will get rid of those huge tooltips when you mouse over the links on the panel
Right-click the panel, select configure, in layout click on appearance and uncheck show tooltips and you won't see them anymore.
A poll on a website is completely scientific, and it has a well-defined meaning; it simply happens to be a meaning that differs from what you might naively expect...
Ahem. What I might naively expect? It's a biased, self-selecting sample with biased, pre-selected choices. The respondents' most common primary concerns may not have been presented at all. The company that conducted the poll has a financial interest in the results. In fact, because of the nature of their business, the company stands to benefit from unexpected results. And, lo and behold, a company that stands to gain from unexpected results got them. It's completely scientific?? Care to run that naive thing by me again?
As do wild guesses, psychic hotlines and the fabulous where-things-might-be-headed dartboard.
You forgot to add:
1) Expensive telecommunications infrastructure to Microsoft's primary call centers...
Don't even try pawning that '$2 to $4 per minute' BS off on me, bud. What I forgot to add is that Microsoft's call centers in Charlotte, North Carolina; Las Colinas, Texas; and Issaquah, Washington were closed and the 2,400+ CSR jobs in those cities moved to Bangalore, India, and that the bulk of the CSRs make nowhere near the $11 an hour they're paid in Las Vegas. What I forgot to add is that compared to most of the call centers handling Microsoft support calls, Client Logic's is expensive.
It's another non-story story. The results of poll on a web site are more than less than scientific, they're pretty much meaningless. Lots of visitors participate in those polls because they hope to see a specific result, or to prevent one, or to annoy someone in the room with them, or because they're bored, or any of a number of other reasons that will see them not answering honestly, or thoughtfully, or accurately. Attempting to draw a number of conclusions from said polls is downright silly.
No doubt fixing tha link, http://www.effortlessis.com/contact.html is one of the things you have to get done. ;-)
Microsoft charges $35/incident for basic consumer support. Average minutes per incident in the industry is 30. Yet it costs them over $70 to provide that incident of support.
Baloney. Yes, MS charges $35 per incident for basic support. No, it costs them nowhere near $70 per to provide it. Take a trip to 420 Pilot Rd, in Las Vegas, Nevada, and talk to the folks taking breaks outside the Client Logic building. They are some of the people who pick up the phone when you call the support lines of Micron PC, Gateway, Dell, Microsoft and others. The people providing that support make, on average, $11 an hour. Last I heard of it, average call handle time in the Microsoft section was about 11 minutes. About 5 calls an hour, or around $175 an hour. I don't know what Microsoft pays Client Logic but not far away Sitel bills a client $22.50 an hour for people they pay $12 an hour. These are people for whom Wnidows support is a subset of the support they provide, and who spend twice as long in class training as do the Microsoft support representatives, so it's a safe bet Microsoft isn't paying more than that. Microsoft is no doubt making around $1,300 per seat, per shift, for providing support.
According the article: "The problem, according to some free software voices..."
Stop right there. Name names that carry some weight, please.
You had it with stop right there. Yes, vague references to a few unnamed, unhappy people don't cut it for me either. And I don't care if they've a name or two that carries weight. The reality is it's a small, albeit vocal, minority. Most of us don't have a problem with the way OpenOffice has or is being developed. To many of us it looks to be going swimmingly. The only thing I have to say to the OpenOffice developers is 'Great job! Keep up the good work.'
MySQL's target audience is people who already know what SQL is and are keen on an alternative. It needs that SQL in the name. note that it is not called C-SQL...*snip*...postgresql is supposed to be better than MySQL, but i have no idea how to pronounce it. neither do many other people, thats one of the main reasons why its not as well known/used.
While it certainly doesn't hurt if the name is original, clever and carries product information, what is important is that it is remembered. The name they have is descriptive and easy to remember. I doubt it's an issue but I'd expect that the authors would change the name were there a compelling argument made for it. It's lame isn't such an argument.
the grandparent is 100% correct concerning the pitch. if this guy wants to make money, hes gotta market his project like a pro.
The grandparent is 100% assuming, condescending tripe. The phpMyTicket site is hosted on InteleNet and the product is in active use by several community theater groups. Its authors are actively posting of it in relevant fora. I see no evidence but that they are handling their project thoughtfully. They deserve better than uninspired, ad hominem attacks. Some tiny grain of truth in the attack doesn't negate that. Market it? You don't think it occurred to the authors of phpMyTicket to market their product? And come on, market it like a pro?? As opposed to marketing it like a hack? It's not helpful to state the obvious, it's just insulting.
however, that will lose him the backing of the Open Source community as it will alienate them.
Huh? The Open Source community is alienated by marketing? Is there something in the water?
So try to act professional maybe? Calling your program phpMyTicket is pretty lame. Go to some big theater exec and tell them that name. You will be out the door in a second. What is with the "php" in the name? Do you really think _anyone_ that would actually _pay_ you for the software cares if it is based on PHP?
Oh yeah, products with My or a technology reference in their names are doomed to fail. An SQL DBMS, for instance, would never get anywhere with My or SQL in its name. A DBMS administration application with My, PHP and Admin in its name would be triply cursed and certain to die.
No, if you want to come across as professional you've got to be condescending and pepper your speech with insults and professional-sounding words like lame and dude. It also helps to use obscure acronyms pulled straight from comic strips when referring to those in an organization who make more money than you do. Call them PHBs, for Pointy Haired Boss, for example, if you want respect and for people to believe you occupy a senior position in a Fortune 500 company. You know, like all the guys do when they work the fry station and take their career frustrations out on assorted people on-line.
Firefox doesn't need a Google toolbar. It already has one.
I didn't address need or availability. Google's is for IE only.
Wrong again. I am using Picasa on my Windows 98 machine.
Yes, I missed 98 on their list. But it is as the download page says, requires Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0+, yes? And IE is still an MS application, right? So your point was??
Then, when that poor little guy isn't looking, provided what he does with the technology is interesting enough, big bad Microsoft will come along and ... swallow him up! That's right, they'll pay that peppy lil' entrepreneur a ton of money for the company he put together and he'll walk away a rich man.
Or when they see that he's doing really well with it, some time after the IPO they'll offer to buy his company for a fraction of what it's worth. He'll turn the offer down because he's enjoying the work, the cash and the spotlight too much. Then Microsoft will announce Project Shortantler, vaporware that they'll claim will do just what our soon-to-be-ex hero's software does. Then they will remind us all that they invented the technology from which his product is built. Our hero's stock price will fall through the floor and he'll find himself wishing he'd taken Microsoft's offer as they buy the company out from under him for a song. Then they'll snicker and rename his product Shortantler.
But since that part of the article doesn't address what may be or what will be isn't it likely that neither slashdot nor the gene pool will miss you when you die?
Yes, you're crazy and the quote does not say that.
You can use Google software with any Internet browser to search the web and your desktop for just about anything; send and store up to two gigabytes of e-mail via Gmail (Hotmail, Microsoft's rival free e-mail service, offers 250 megabytes, a fraction of that); manage, edit, and send digital photographs using Google's Picasa software, easily the best PC photo software out there; and, through Google's Blogger, create, post online, and print formatted documents--all without applications from Microsoft.
Emphasis mine. Nice notion, but rather inaccurate. Google Toolbar is for Internet Explorer only. Google Desktop Search is available only for Windows XP and Windows 2000. Picasa Photo Organizer requires Internet Explorer and Windows XP or Windows 2000. Same for Google Deskbar and GMail Notifier. You can use Google's sites without applications from Microsoft, but you sure can't use any of their downloadable software without a good dose of fairly recent Microsoft product.
Google returns some interesting, possibly relevant links on the subject. Personally, I'm disinclined to spend any real time on microsoft.com but at a glance it appears they may be using aforementioned document standard.
Are you serious or was that supposed to be funny? No more 'trolls', 'people with agendas', 'poorly thought out comments' or 'mindless Microsoft shills'? If it'll cost money it follows that it'll be done well? Then explain network TV to me. No worthless crap there, because it costs money for it to get there? Nothing but quality material at your local newsstand? No shills or agendas on the radio?
Charge 25 cents per post and the only thing you'll lose are the voices of the people unwilling or unable to spend 25 cents per post. You'll still have shills. You'll still have people with agendas. You'll still have post from people who post without thinking.
PJ is Groklaw. Andrew Orlowski isn't The Register. The Register publishes Orlowski's opinions, they don't claim them as their own.
Isn't that funny? Of all the possible answers to the question why is the show doing so poorly the producers glossed right over the most obvious answer, that they had been doing a lousy job.
Personally, I enjoyed the show, not because it had anything truly inspired or original, but because it had Jolene Blalock, a good cast, Jolene Blalock, visually-pleasing special effects and Jolene Blalock. But if you ask me, the reason it didn't do well is that the producers served up a bunch of reheated leftovers. STTNG gave us some new bits with The Q and The Borg, and even the generally uninspired, Jeri-Ryan-carried Voyager delivered a little something new, but Enterprise boldly went where every Star Trek series had gone before. Yes, the franchise is tired, but on their end, now ours.