You're completely right. My brother and I developed a free version of classmates.com in about a month. The innovative part that we included is that it's completely free, supported by Google Ads of course. You can find it at highschoolforever.com and it's actually pretty well done. There are blogs, forums, pictures, everything.
The only reason I bring this up is to show how simple some of those websites out there really are. And yet people pay $30/year for classmates when there are services like ours that are free.
The difference - classmates.com made their site first. They came up with the idea. They will always have more traffic than us. We have a couple classes that are really using the site well, like this one:
Easy - don't use just Asterisk, use asterisk@home. It's REALLY easy to setup. Get that, a couple VOIP phones, and you're ready to go. In fact, you don't even need the voip phones. You can use a headset and a softphone.
Only obstacle is network latency. If your internet is shaky, your phone calls will suck.
Feel free to reply for more info - I can point you in the right direction. You said you don't have time for it. I setup a new installation of asterisk@home today, and it took about 35 minutes from start to finish. It's really that simple, as long as you have the hardware.
I think your last statement, "From a business standpoint", says it all. A business standpoint should include morals, ethics, care for children, etc. The fact that it doesn't in this country is the very reason our laws are so screwed up and "ineffective".
What we need are some good business leaders to stand up for what's right for once, instead of fighting for whatever brings in the cash. There are many companies out there that make millions without selling filth, taking advantage of the addicted, or flat out stealing.
We recently bought a game cube for us and our son (cute little kid), and we bought it over the Xbox and Playstation mainly because the games for the gamecube tend to be more child-safe. Of course you can find filth for Nintendo, too, but it's not nearly as available as it is on the other platforms. We're not alone on this, but there needs to be more parents that make informed decisions about their kids' playtoys.
Maybe I'm a rare opinion on this, but it makes me feel good to go home at night and know that what I worked for all day is improving society instead of detroying it.
It seems to me that using database software only after it's several years old is extreme. I mean, that would mean you barely considered moving to SQL Server 2000 last year? I can see waiting maybe 3-4 months, at most a year, but several years? It sounds to me that if your database is that important, and backups of the data just aren't enough, then you need a less stressful line of work. Stop and smell the roses, and try out new products. They have this new Windows version now that has a green start button, instead of gray. It's crazy out there!
While there may not be any virus or exploit that can get to you with this method, your laptop may still have contracted some nasty bacteria while abroad. I recommend boiling it for at least 1 hour before using it.
Even better - an interface where you can literally hum a part of the song, and it matches it to the song you're looking for. Or maybe it can check it against a database of tunes, and it will return the song. This would save so much time! And imagine if you made it auto start the song. You could be sitting at your desk. You start singing. All the sudden, the song joins in with you. Wish I knew how to program better... maybe I could make a cool million on it.
How about we just start boycotting companies that use this strategy?
I, for one, will never buy a Creative product again. If more people would be loyal to honest companies, and refuse to do business with companies that try to pull off this crap, they would have no choice but to choose another method, like maybe, being "Creative".
Patent reform is needed too, but the purchasing power of the public is still powerful. Combine the two, and problem solved.
That's not true. You can't protect pictures from being copied. There is always the print screen option. It can't be stopped. Watermarks are really the only protection, and even then they mess up the picture if they really do their duty, and they could still be copied.
The people that define the law are those who were voted into office. If you want to change those laws, run for office, or join a campaign.
And it's not "paranoid religious groups" that control that line. It's the general populace of America. The FCC has really loosened up over the last 40 years as the feelings in America have changed. I think they're doing a good job at balancing.
I do agree, however, that those lines are not clear enough.
Freedom of Speech was meant to protect those who wish to voice their opinion about the government and its policies. It was meant to allow people to worship how they wish religiously and share that openly. It wasn't meant to protect ANY act you desire, no matter how vulgar or cruel. Howard Stern broke the law, and he was punished for it. The law was put in place for a reason.
You might not be offended by porn, vulgar talk, violence, or whatever else. But some people ARE offended by it, and they deserve to have places of sanctity. Everyone knows there are plenty of places for filth. If you really want to hear Howard Stern, the government/FCC isn't stopping you. They just make sure your kids don't hear it too, unless you provide access for them.
Some people say "If you don't like what you see or hear, change the channel." The same applies to you. If there aren't enough boobs or sex talk for you, change the channel.
I don't know if you have kids, but if you do, you should care about them enough to protect them from things like pornography, vulgar movies, or dirty talk shows. It affects them more than you realize.
Well - the reason I don't want to pay the $200 is because of the lack of stations. I can pay $11/month and get all the OTA stations + 30 other channels through cable. Even though the quality isn't as good, it's always on and quality is decent. I guess I hate the feeling of paying the $200 + $150 for antenna when I already get those channels. So for me it's a different situation. If I had no cable available, I suppose I would buy the antenna and tuner, or go with a satellite provider.
The problem is that in America, an OTA digital tuner can't be found for less than $200, plus the cost of the antenna. If we could drive the price down on those receivers, then more people would buy them. Maybe this is a business opportunity. Start churning those suckers out, because there's obviously a need that's not being met. I would own one myself for my 57" Sony WS HDTV(should have bought one with the tuner built in), but they are too pricey. I would say the $50 range would be about right.
It's model number was CD-4192852... but it was only a prototype used for market testing. They never actually manufactured them(people didn't like the idea of throwing their cds around), so you'll have a hard time finding one. Look on Ebay. I must mention that sometimes it misses the disc if I don't verbally say "Heads up!" first, but it walks over and picks it up, never leaving a mess of cds on the floor.
On a more serious note - I still have a 6-disc cd changer from 1993 made by Sony. It works perfectly, and will play anything I throw at it, regardless of burn speed or whatever. I wouldn't be surprised if the disc changing mechanism actually goes before the disc reading mechanism. It's been used consistently for all 12 years, and still going strong. I'd say it comes down to a well made, and semi-pricey, cd player. They just don't make 'em like they used to.
Sheesh - that sucks. Right when I was about to start using ITunes, too. It's too bad - they finally find a product the consumer wants, and they squander it. All in the name of keeping bad artists in business. Let's face it - the talented and popular don't need higher prices. This is to support the one-hit-wonders that never sell a cd because their only good song is mixed with 10 other crap songs, and no one will pay $15 for it. Instead, they just pay 99 cents for the one song that was good.
Good job, RIAA. Good job.
This isn't about the roms dude. This is about a man trying to TM a product so he can have sole rights to it. This product, however, is NOT one he created. The idea to incorporate many arcades into one machine has been around for decades, long before this guy started. And he has NEVER developed for MAME. Now, I would be completely willing to admit that roms have copyrights and deserve to be protected. But the authors of MAME have these SAME rights. This isn't a question of whether MAME should be legal. It's a question of whether this guy has the right to take over someone else's work and then sue them when they use it in anyway. If this guy wants to LEGALLY sell roms and game machines, then he can write his OWN emulator that is "better" than MAME to do so, or he can point the lawyers to the people that are currently breaking the law to compete with him. But it's not ethical to allow him to just TM the logo and name when he has NOTHING to do with the project.
Now - that being said, I love my MAME box. You should build one. Try it out.
Are you kidding? This guy just made 8 million dollars after squandering a great business opportunity. 8 MILLION DOLLARS. That's more than fair compensation for one man's entire life work. Don't forget all the R&D costs companys pay out to find this stuff. Some get lucky. Some barely make it. Most go out of business. 8 Million is more than 95% of you on this site will make in your life. I think he's doing ok. Really. Calm down.
I agree on the load times. I usually wait about 4 minutes to actually get playing, and some of the loading screens between areas take up to 2 minutes. Some are shorter, like 10-15 seconds, but it really takes you out of the environment by distracting you. They could at least put some cut scenes at the appropriate times to play while it loads the next section.
HOWEVER - This game rocks. Buy it. You won't be disappointed. Incredible effects and interactivity. I love the subtle humor, too. Of course, it does withdraw from your wife's emotional bank account. But other than that, it's great!
Maybe I should be more clear, then. I hate the MPAA and the RIAA and hope they all burn in hell. They have unfair business tactics, are lying bas*****, and I believe they are the spawn of satan himself.
HOWEVER -
I just like the convenience of having a movie in 10 minutes instead of 4 hours. And it's nice just swapping movies at the counter instead of paying and all that crap. Plus - it keeps me on budget. AND - I can rent crappy movies and not feel like I wasted my money when I don't finish them.
But again - they charge way too much for movies, spend too much making them, pay the actors too much, and keep too much for themselves. It's like those narcotics suppliers from Columbia.
So instead I only buy movies that are absolutely worth the money, like Monsters Inc., Clue, and Back to the Future Trilogy. The rest I rent. Or download on occasion.;)
Look - it's simple. Pay 24.99/month at BlockBuster, as many free rentals as you want. Done. My wife and I pay for the service, and I haven't even felt the urge to download anything when it's free a block away in dvd-quality.
Of course, you still have the problem of movies not out on dvd. In that case, go to a matinee if you can't wait the 6 months. $4 later you've had a better experience anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
The only reason I bring this up is to show how simple some of those websites out there really are. And yet people pay $30/year for classmates when there are services like ours that are free.
The difference - classmates.com made their site first. They came up with the idea. They will always have more traffic than us. We have a couple classes that are really using the site well, like this one:
Class of 1986 of Minico High School
And their class list:
Class list
It's easy to duplicate, and I'll be the first to admit that. It's harder when it comes to inventing the idea yourself.
Easy - don't use just Asterisk, use asterisk@home. It's REALLY easy to setup. Get that, a couple VOIP phones, and you're ready to go. In fact, you don't even need the voip phones. You can use a headset and a softphone.
Only obstacle is network latency. If your internet is shaky, your phone calls will suck.
Feel free to reply for more info - I can point you in the right direction. You said you don't have time for it. I setup a new installation of asterisk@home today, and it took about 35 minutes from start to finish. It's really that simple, as long as you have the hardware.
I think your last statement, "From a business standpoint", says it all. A business standpoint should include morals, ethics, care for children, etc. The fact that it doesn't in this country is the very reason our laws are so screwed up and "ineffective".
What we need are some good business leaders to stand up for what's right for once, instead of fighting for whatever brings in the cash. There are many companies out there that make millions without selling filth, taking advantage of the addicted, or flat out stealing.
We recently bought a game cube for us and our son (cute little kid), and we bought it over the Xbox and Playstation mainly because the games for the gamecube tend to be more child-safe. Of course you can find filth for Nintendo, too, but it's not nearly as available as it is on the other platforms. We're not alone on this, but there needs to be more parents that make informed decisions about their kids' playtoys.
Maybe I'm a rare opinion on this, but it makes me feel good to go home at night and know that what I worked for all day is improving society instead of detroying it.
It seems to me that using database software only after it's several years old is extreme. I mean, that would mean you barely considered moving to SQL Server 2000 last year? I can see waiting maybe 3-4 months, at most a year, but several years? It sounds to me that if your database is that important, and backups of the data just aren't enough, then you need a less stressful line of work. Stop and smell the roses, and try out new products. They have this new Windows version now that has a green start button, instead of gray. It's crazy out there!
"Playing around with it, I find it cumbersome compared to its Google analog; the drag behaviour, for instance, goes into a bizarre sticky mode."
Well it probably gets sticky because you're playing around with it, a little too much. Some find it bizarre, others like it.
Just make sure you take any cd you might have in the cd-rom drive out first. We've all seen what happens to cds in a microwave. Pretty nasty stuff.
While there may not be any virus or exploit that can get to you with this method, your laptop may still have contracted some nasty bacteria while abroad. I recommend boiling it for at least 1 hour before using it.
Even better - an interface where you can literally hum a part of the song, and it matches it to the song you're looking for. Or maybe it can check it against a database of tunes, and it will return the song. This would save so much time! And imagine if you made it auto start the song. You could be sitting at your desk. You start singing. All the sudden, the song joins in with you. Wish I knew how to program better... maybe I could make a cool million on it.
How about we just start boycotting companies that use this strategy? I, for one, will never buy a Creative product again. If more people would be loyal to honest companies, and refuse to do business with companies that try to pull off this crap, they would have no choice but to choose another method, like maybe, being "Creative". Patent reform is needed too, but the purchasing power of the public is still powerful. Combine the two, and problem solved.
That's not true. You can't protect pictures from being copied. There is always the print screen option. It can't be stopped. Watermarks are really the only protection, and even then they mess up the picture if they really do their duty, and they could still be copied.
The people that define the law are those who were voted into office. If you want to change those laws, run for office, or join a campaign. And it's not "paranoid religious groups" that control that line. It's the general populace of America. The FCC has really loosened up over the last 40 years as the feelings in America have changed. I think they're doing a good job at balancing. I do agree, however, that those lines are not clear enough.
Freedom of Speech != Freedom to be Vulgar
Freedom of Speech was meant to protect those who wish to voice their opinion about the government and its policies. It was meant to allow people to worship how they wish religiously and share that openly. It wasn't meant to protect ANY act you desire, no matter how vulgar or cruel. Howard Stern broke the law, and he was punished for it. The law was put in place for a reason.
You might not be offended by porn, vulgar talk, violence, or whatever else. But some people ARE offended by it, and they deserve to have places of sanctity. Everyone knows there are plenty of places for filth. If you really want to hear Howard Stern, the government/FCC isn't stopping you. They just make sure your kids don't hear it too, unless you provide access for them.
Some people say "If you don't like what you see or hear, change the channel." The same applies to you. If there aren't enough boobs or sex talk for you, change the channel.
I don't know if you have kids, but if you do, you should care about them enough to protect them from things like pornography, vulgar movies, or dirty talk shows. It affects them more than you realize.
Well - the reason I don't want to pay the $200 is because of the lack of stations. I can pay $11/month and get all the OTA stations + 30 other channels through cable. Even though the quality isn't as good, it's always on and quality is decent. I guess I hate the feeling of paying the $200 + $150 for antenna when I already get those channels. So for me it's a different situation. If I had no cable available, I suppose I would buy the antenna and tuner, or go with a satellite provider.
The problem is that in America, an OTA digital tuner can't be found for less than $200, plus the cost of the antenna. If we could drive the price down on those receivers, then more people would buy them. Maybe this is a business opportunity. Start churning those suckers out, because there's obviously a need that's not being met. I would own one myself for my 57" Sony WS HDTV(should have bought one with the tuner built in), but they are too pricey. I would say the $50 range would be about right.
It's model number was CD-4192852... but it was only a prototype used for market testing. They never actually manufactured them(people didn't like the idea of throwing their cds around), so you'll have a hard time finding one. Look on Ebay. I must mention that sometimes it misses the disc if I don't verbally say "Heads up!" first, but it walks over and picks it up, never leaving a mess of cds on the floor.
On a more serious note - I still have a 6-disc cd changer from 1993 made by Sony. It works perfectly, and will play anything I throw at it, regardless of burn speed or whatever. I wouldn't be surprised if the disc changing mechanism actually goes before the disc reading mechanism. It's been used consistently for all 12 years, and still going strong. I'd say it comes down to a well made, and semi-pricey, cd player. They just don't make 'em like they used to.
Sheesh - that sucks. Right when I was about to start using ITunes, too. It's too bad - they finally find a product the consumer wants, and they squander it. All in the name of keeping bad artists in business. Let's face it - the talented and popular don't need higher prices. This is to support the one-hit-wonders that never sell a cd because their only good song is mixed with 10 other crap songs, and no one will pay $15 for it. Instead, they just pay 99 cents for the one song that was good. Good job, RIAA. Good job.
This isn't about the roms dude. This is about a man trying to TM a product so he can have sole rights to it. This product, however, is NOT one he created. The idea to incorporate many arcades into one machine has been around for decades, long before this guy started. And he has NEVER developed for MAME. Now, I would be completely willing to admit that roms have copyrights and deserve to be protected. But the authors of MAME have these SAME rights. This isn't a question of whether MAME should be legal. It's a question of whether this guy has the right to take over someone else's work and then sue them when they use it in anyway. If this guy wants to LEGALLY sell roms and game machines, then he can write his OWN emulator that is "better" than MAME to do so, or he can point the lawyers to the people that are currently breaking the law to compete with him. But it's not ethical to allow him to just TM the logo and name when he has NOTHING to do with the project.
Now - that being said, I love my MAME box. You should build one. Try it out.
Are you kidding? This guy just made 8 million dollars after squandering a great business opportunity. 8 MILLION DOLLARS. That's more than fair compensation for one man's entire life work. Don't forget all the R&D costs companys pay out to find this stuff. Some get lucky. Some barely make it. Most go out of business. 8 Million is more than 95% of you on this site will make in your life. I think he's doing ok. Really. Calm down.
I agree on the load times. I usually wait about 4 minutes to actually get playing, and some of the loading screens between areas take up to 2 minutes. Some are shorter, like 10-15 seconds, but it really takes you out of the environment by distracting you. They could at least put some cut scenes at the appropriate times to play while it loads the next section.
HOWEVER - This game rocks. Buy it. You won't be disappointed. Incredible effects and interactivity. I love the subtle humor, too. Of course, it does withdraw from your wife's emotional bank account. But other than that, it's great!
Maybe I should be more clear, then. I hate the MPAA and the RIAA and hope they all burn in hell. They have unfair business tactics, are lying bas*****, and I believe they are the spawn of satan himself. HOWEVER - I just like the convenience of having a movie in 10 minutes instead of 4 hours. And it's nice just swapping movies at the counter instead of paying and all that crap. Plus - it keeps me on budget. AND - I can rent crappy movies and not feel like I wasted my money when I don't finish them. But again - they charge way too much for movies, spend too much making them, pay the actors too much, and keep too much for themselves. It's like those narcotics suppliers from Columbia. So instead I only buy movies that are absolutely worth the money, like Monsters Inc., Clue, and Back to the Future Trilogy. The rest I rent. Or download on occasion. ;)
Look - it's simple. Pay 24.99/month at BlockBuster, as many free rentals as you want. Done. My wife and I pay for the service, and I haven't even felt the urge to download anything when it's free a block away in dvd-quality.
Of course, you still have the problem of movies not out on dvd. In that case, go to a matinee if you can't wait the 6 months. $4 later you've had a better experience anyway.
My two cents.