One problem I see with the 'linux' movement is that it leaves a lot of the free software ideals in the dust in order to further their own monetary needs. This battle will probably rage for as long as there is free software, people trying to make it more free balenced by those who wish to exploit it. I think that RMS is trying to keep the software as free as possible. Promoting GNU/Linux is just a way for him to try and keep the GNU name in public view, (mindshare) which is very important. Linux got popular very slowly and now normal people are finally getting exposed to it.
And most people can't tell the difference between the OS, the kernel, the GUI and the Mouse. When more people talk about 'the internet' they are actually talking about netscape navigator or Internet Explorer (Problem with IE, is that the name implies that it can actually explore the entire internet). By encouraging people to call it GNU/Linux instead of linux he promotes the ideals of the FSF which most people have no clue about. Most people think that if something is cheap, then it has no value, so the Free Software Foundation must be worthless. People that know about it, know that to be false, but it's hardwired into people that price determines worth.
There is no way that RMS could to have written all the code the GNU project maintains. I don't care how smart he is believed to be. If you believe that he's just trying to get his name attached to the popularity that linux has then you are wrong, he wants everyone who has contributed to the project to get credit.
That said, I think that his real goal with making a big stink over this whole deal is that he wants to make sure that people know about free software, and not let free software die. He believes that the usage of non-free software impares free software, and to a certain degree he is right.
One one hand you can say, that RMS really is being greedy and selfish and just wants credit for his work. However I think that is wrong, I think that what he is really saying is that he wants the spirit of free software to be infused in this software because the software is 'based' on the GPL and was made possiable by free software. Linux is GPLed, but Linus doesn't really care if you believe in free software or not, he just wants to have fun programming and doing his projects. However, this project has grown beyond his original scope. RMS is an idealist, he believes that software should be free, not free of cost, but free to expand and grow. He sees software as a puzzle and when you write a program that does something useful, it's like a self-solving puzzle. Most people would take that information that you have created by writing your code and hide it in the form of a computer binary. He thinks that we should instead let everyone see your solution and learn from it. That's what free software is, being able to learn from other people's work and expand on it to create something better then what the original author imagined.
He's not a hypocrite, he wants the people who use free software to subscribe to the same philosophy with which the programs were written in. What's wrong with that?
That's what I was trying to say, just not as well as you have.
Moore's 'LAW' probably is a self fullfilling prophecy, and someday as all the naysayers state, it will not come true.
However, I believe that when that day comes, and the hardware can't be made any faster, then the software will just get more efficient to make the hardware SEEM faster.
Why do you assume that MS will have a monopoly? Why not Sony or Nintendo. Nintendo has the monopoly in the late 80's, lost it to Sony via the PSX, and now Sony almost has it. In Japan, they own it almost outright. I don't know about europe, but it seems like the Sony is the most popular system there as well. MS is not guarenteed to own the living room, they may, but it will require a lot more effort then they are giving right now. They are losing too much money one the hardware and they don't own enough content sources to provide decent content for the box. Sony's stragedy is to own the living room, they are focusing on three areas, Content, Electronics, and Games (strange, as I see games as content but that's pr for you). Don't forget that they own everquest and star wars galaxies, the most popular MMORPGs. (Star wars isn't out yet, but I bet that it will be more popular then EQ) MS has to get some content for the X-BOX to win.
But why target for the questionable X-Box when you can target for the profitable PS2 (or even GC)? After all, by yours and everyone's accounts, porting a game is a small part of the entire budget. Just because there are a ton of people who own the PS2 you are almost guarenteed a certain level of sales.
I always wondered if the law was right, because we just keep putting more and more people on the task of making the machines faster. There are a lot more people working on making computers faster now then when he said that.
On the other hand, software has a way of becoming so abstract as to ensure that computers will always need to get faster.;)
Right now, the only way that MS is going to get any more good games made for the XBOX is to buy more and more game dev firms. They pissed EA off, they pissed many japanese developers off, so basically, all the really awesome developers are not going to be making games for them. (Well, probably doom 3)
That's their main problem is the lack of good games for the system.
They will have to re-release HALO for the X-Box the current version doesn't work on the real internet afaik.
That will piss some people off I know.
Re:They are on top, but they may fall
on
The Age of Nvidia
·
· Score: 2
I'm not saying like 5fps faster, I mean like twice as fast. But right now that doesn't matter at all since all games run at 100+ fps anyway.
After the new games come out that only run at like 30 frames with a GF4, then we will have an opertunity for someone to take their place.
BTW, I realize that my argument is weak, that's cause it really doesn't seem that they will be taken down anytime soon. It will take a huge blunder at Nvidia to cause them to be dethroned.
They are on top, but they may fall
on
The Age of Nvidia
·
· Score: 2
Since nobody seems to think that Nvidia has any chance of failing anytime soon, I think I'll play a little devil's advocate. Nvidia has many things going for it, great reputation , great drivers, and the best speed so far. However, the market is very fickle and whomever gets the highest frame rates will become the market leader within the next cycle. It wasn't until nvidia beat 3dfx card in more then one or two games that they started to even get close to them in sales. If you go back to the days of Quake 2 and Unreal, then you see that many people would spend insane amounts of money on their dual VooDoo2 setups, just for the sake of some FPS. Nvidia has gotten to the top through technical ability, and may stay there. We may some day all be running nvidia chips in most desktops like x86es. All matrox, ATI, etc. have to do is produce a card that will beat them in FPS even if it crashes more, it will win. Of course, right now we are at a plateau of graphics. We need another generation of tools to help the artists generate art and programmers code to get the most out of even the current generation of cards. Maybe we'll see some real uses of technology after this year's E3.
they are great salesmen. They basically sold the entire world a product that simply didn't do what they said it would do. Only now are they finally making good on their promise. They are finally making the software robust and not crash 20 times a day. They are finally making it such that you can actually use the programs without fear of having to reinstall the whole when you try to get a new screensaver. They are finally making it a good product.
What's wrong with this? They've been charging for the full product all along, when only now are they finally delivering. They have suckered the entire world. They take your money every time you buy a computer even if you don't use their software.
I know I'm not bug free, but at least I can shut mozilla off if I don't like it. With IE you are forced to use it even if you are not browsing the web, thanks to the complete integration of the shdocvw.dll into every other program (explorer, word, excel, outlook, etc). Basically, nobody can be secure when running 24/7 on the internet, and all the features that make our lives 'easier' just end up causeing us to be less secure.
When a kernel patch comes out it usually consists of fixes to features (speed, stability, etc.) and yet more new features. Read the changelogs, that's what they are.
When MS releases an IE patch it's because they need to fix the ability for some random porn site to install software on your computer. Or make it easier to spy on you with their messenger client.
Not that this affects me at all as I only use mozilla now.
wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Well if you want to hold up this movie like it was some kind of magical experience then go right ahead. The few people who realize that IT'S JUST A MOVIE will go on and watch it and have fun regardledd of your fanboy expectations.
MS sales do look shallow because the market is so large now. And they also said in their own words that they would have sold more consoles by now then they actually have. They planned on having twice the amount sold by now then they actually have sold.
I want to have a good reason to buy one, but so far they have only give me one or two crappy ones. I want to get HALO, but I also want to be able to play it online without using a hack. I want to play Morrowind, but that's only on PC so far ( I don't trust bethsoft after the whole Daggerfall debacle, I never want to have to patch their games again ).
Atari could to have had it all, but they messed it up like 17 years ago. Nintendo beat them to the toy stores, and that killed them. ( For the history imparied, Nintendo was sold as a toy and not as a computer which is how it got to the front of the pack , remember ROB the robot?)
The saturn was more popular then the N64 in japan, but the PSX was even more popular then the Saturn. I think that the reason that the Saturn wasn't that popular in the US was that at that time there was a revolution in PC gaming that drew away from the consoles. America seems to have the largets base of PC gamers and at that time, Doom 2, then Quake came out which IMO drew attention from the saturn which was largely a 2-d system. (esp. when it came out)
Nintendo 64 never did well in the US either. It only had a few games worth buying. The PSX owned the home market from 1997-2000. The N64 coasted while the GameBoy and Pokemon racked in the sales.
Interisting fact:Nintendo started as playing card company.
I think that the gaming market is controlled by the japanese. Not the companies, but rather the people. If a game system is blessed by the japanese public, then it will do well. Otherwise it is doomed to fail. Maybe back in the 70's you could get away with it, but today if they do not like your games, then you are screwed.
Don't forget that it's cheaper to make new PS2 boxes as compared to making older PS2 boxes. A month or so ago they finally got both the processors onto one chip. This will reduce the cost of the box. Probably isn't in the current boxes being sold, but they will be. So basically, since sony designed all the HW themselves it is easier to integrate all the HW to reduce cost. (PS2 on a chip?)
I wonder what the consoles would cost if the had to be sold at cost to the manufacturer.
This is a case of false advertising, pure and simple.
Flash is advertised as a 'media player' it plays flash movies, music (mp3s, etc.), and that's it.
If it was advertised as a camera sharing / spy tool then fine, as long as you know that before you download it. The programs don't usually tell you things like that before you download it. Open source programs ( mozilla comes to mind) have a release notes section that tells you IN PLAIN ENGLISH ( or hopefully your native tounge ) what the update to the program does to your computer that is different from the past version.
This has nothing to do with MAC vs WINDOWS vs UNIX, it has everything to do with 'free' software that is really 'free to download but with so many strings attached that you probably don't actually want to use it.'
--quote on from cnn article. "When kids play video games, they assume the identity of the characters in the games.... Do you really want your kids assuming the role of a mass murderer or car jacker when you are away at work?" --quote off
Right, so has this guy played with GI-Joes, Cops and robbers, played cowboys and indians, drew pictures of tanks or planes, or basically ever done what was considered 'normal' play time by parents before video games were invented.
The only real difference between video games and real games is that video games are automated. Video games are like the ultimate babysitter, much better then the TV. I mean for the low low price of 50 dollars you can keep you children entertained for hundreds of hours ( sports, rpgs ). Even the crappiest of games can keep a child entertained for at least 5-10 hours, which is very economical. Cheaper then a REAL babysitter.
Laws like this always remind me the the episode of the simpsons where Marge drops maggie off at the day care center, is about to leave with another parent and says "we should leave them alone". So the other parent goes, turns on the TV, and they leave. (1st season, the Dr. Marvin Monroe Episode)
Slashdot Mirror
One problem I see with the 'linux' movement is that it leaves a lot of the free software ideals in the dust in order to further their own monetary needs. This battle will probably rage for as long as there is free software, people trying to make it more free balenced by those who wish to exploit it. I think that RMS is trying to keep the software as free as possible. Promoting GNU/Linux is just a way for him to try and keep the GNU name in public view, (mindshare) which is very important. Linux got popular very slowly and now normal people are finally getting exposed to it.
And most people can't tell the difference between the OS, the kernel, the GUI and the Mouse. When more people talk about 'the internet' they are actually talking about netscape navigator or Internet Explorer (Problem with IE, is that the name implies that it can actually explore the entire internet). By encouraging people to call it GNU/Linux instead of linux he promotes the ideals of the FSF which most people have no clue about.
Most people think that if something is cheap, then it has no value, so the Free Software Foundation must be worthless. People that know about it, know that to be false, but it's hardwired into people that price determines worth.
There is no way that RMS could to have written all the code the GNU project maintains. I don't care how smart he is believed to be. If you believe that he's just trying to get his name attached to the popularity that linux has then you are wrong, he wants everyone who has contributed to the project to get credit.
That said, I think that his real goal with making a big stink over this whole deal is that he wants to make sure that people know about free software, and not let free software die. He believes that the usage of non-free software impares free software, and to a certain degree he is right.
One one hand you can say, that RMS really is being greedy and selfish and just wants credit for his work. However I think that is wrong, I think that what he is really saying is that he wants the spirit of free software to be infused in this software because the software is 'based' on the GPL and was made possiable by free software. Linux is GPLed, but Linus doesn't really care if you believe in free software or not, he just wants to have fun programming and doing his projects. However, this project has grown beyond his original scope. RMS is an idealist, he believes that software should be free, not free of cost, but free to expand and grow. He sees software as a puzzle and when you write a program that does something useful, it's like a self-solving puzzle. Most people would take that information that you have created by writing your code and hide it in the form of a computer binary. He thinks that we should instead let everyone see your solution and learn from it. That's what free software is, being able to learn from other people's work and expand on it to create something better then what the original author imagined.
He's not a hypocrite, he wants the people who use free software to subscribe to the same philosophy with which the programs were written in. What's wrong with that?
That's what I was trying to say, just not as well as you have.
Moore's 'LAW' probably is a self fullfilling prophecy, and someday as all the naysayers state, it will not come true.
However, I believe that when that day comes, and the hardware can't be made any faster, then the software will just get more efficient to make the hardware SEEM faster.
Man I used to love sierra games, but recently I haven't seen much from them. I want a return to the old sierra engine games of yesteryear.
Why do you assume that MS will have a monopoly? Why not Sony or Nintendo. Nintendo has the monopoly in the late 80's, lost it to Sony via the PSX, and now Sony almost has it. In Japan, they own it almost outright. I don't know about europe, but it seems like the Sony is the most popular system there as well.
MS is not guarenteed to own the living room, they may, but it will require a lot more effort then they are giving right now. They are losing too much money one the hardware and they don't own enough content sources to provide decent content for the box.
Sony's stragedy is to own the living room, they are focusing on three areas, Content, Electronics, and Games (strange, as I see games as content but that's pr for you). Don't forget that they own everquest and star wars galaxies, the most popular MMORPGs. (Star wars isn't out yet, but I bet that it will be more popular then EQ) MS has to get some content for the X-BOX to win.
But why target for the questionable X-Box when you can target for the profitable PS2 (or even GC)? After all, by yours and everyone's accounts, porting a game is a small part of the entire budget. Just because there are a ton of people who own the PS2 you are almost guarenteed a certain level of sales.
I always wondered if the law was right, because we just keep putting more and more people on the task of making the machines faster. There are a lot more people working on making computers faster now then when he said that.
;)
On the other hand, software has a way of becoming so abstract as to ensure that computers will always need to get faster.
Right now, the only way that MS is going to get any more good games made for the XBOX is to buy more and more game dev firms. They pissed EA off, they pissed many japanese developers off, so basically, all the really awesome developers are not going to be making games for them. (Well, probably doom 3)
That's their main problem is the lack of good games for the system.
The reason that they can deflect laser bolts is simple, they can see into the future! (and look cool while they do it)
They will have to re-release HALO for the X-Box the current version doesn't work on the real internet afaik.
That will piss some people off I know.
I'm not saying like 5fps faster, I mean like twice as fast. But right now that doesn't matter at all since all games run at 100+ fps anyway.
After the new games come out that only run at like 30 frames with a GF4, then we will have an opertunity for someone to take their place.
BTW, I realize that my argument is weak, that's cause it really doesn't seem that they will be taken down anytime soon. It will take a huge blunder at Nvidia to cause them to be dethroned.
Since nobody seems to think that Nvidia has any chance of failing anytime soon, I think I'll play a little devil's advocate.
Nvidia has many things going for it, great reputation , great drivers, and the best speed so far. However, the market is very fickle and whomever gets the highest frame rates will become the market leader within the next cycle. It wasn't until nvidia beat 3dfx card in more then one or two games that they started to even get close to them in sales. If you go back to the days of Quake 2 and Unreal, then you see that many people would spend insane amounts of money on their dual VooDoo2 setups, just for the sake of some FPS.
Nvidia has gotten to the top through technical ability, and may stay there. We may some day all be running nvidia chips in most desktops like x86es.
All matrox, ATI, etc. have to do is produce a card that will beat them in FPS even if it crashes more, it will win. Of course, right now we are at a plateau of graphics. We need another generation of tools to help the artists generate art and programmers code to get the most out of even the current generation of cards. Maybe we'll see some real uses of technology after this year's E3.
And the planet of the apes was really earth.
they are great salesmen. They basically sold the entire world a product that simply didn't do what they said it would do. Only now are they finally making good on their promise.
They are finally making the software robust and not crash 20 times a day.
They are finally making it such that you can actually use the programs without fear of having to reinstall the whole when you try to get a new screensaver.
They are finally making it a good product.
What's wrong with this? They've been charging for the full product all along, when only now are they finally delivering. They have suckered the entire world. They take your money every time you buy a computer even if you don't use their software.
I know I'm not bug free, but at least I can shut mozilla off if I don't like it. With IE you are forced to use it even if you are not browsing the web, thanks to the complete integration of the shdocvw.dll into every other program (explorer, word, excel, outlook, etc).
Basically, nobody can be secure when running 24/7 on the internet, and all the features that make our lives 'easier' just end up causeing us to be less secure.
When a kernel patch comes out it usually consists of fixes to features (speed, stability, etc.) and yet more new features. Read the changelogs, that's what they are.
When MS releases an IE patch it's because they need to fix the ability for some random porn site to install software on your computer. Or make it easier to spy on you with their messenger client.
Not that this affects me at all as I only use mozilla now.
wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Well if you want to hold up this movie like it was some kind of magical experience then go right ahead. The few people who realize that IT'S JUST A MOVIE will go on and watch it and have fun regardledd of your fanboy expectations.
MS sales do look shallow because the market is so large now. And they also said in their own words that they would have sold more consoles by now then they actually have. They planned on having twice the amount sold by now then they actually have sold.
I want to have a good reason to buy one, but so far they have only give me one or two crappy ones. I want to get HALO, but I also want to be able to play it online without using a hack. I want to play Morrowind, but that's only on PC so far ( I don't trust bethsoft after the whole Daggerfall debacle, I never want to have to patch their games again ).
Atari could to have had it all, but they messed it up like 17 years ago. Nintendo beat them to the toy stores, and that killed them. ( For the history imparied, Nintendo was sold as a toy and not as a computer which is how it got to the front of the pack , remember ROB the robot?)
The saturn was more popular then the N64 in japan, but the PSX was even more popular then the Saturn. I think that the reason that the Saturn wasn't that popular in the US was that at that time there was a revolution in PC gaming that drew away from the consoles. America seems to have the largets base of PC gamers and at that time, Doom 2, then Quake came out which IMO drew attention from the saturn which was largely a 2-d system. (esp. when it came out)
Nintendo 64 never did well in the US either. It only had a few games worth buying. The PSX owned the home market from 1997-2000. The N64 coasted while the GameBoy and Pokemon racked in the sales.
Interisting fact:Nintendo started as playing card company.
I think that the gaming market is controlled by the japanese. Not the companies, but rather the people. If a game system is blessed by the japanese public, then it will do well. Otherwise it is doomed to fail. Maybe back in the 70's you could get away with it, but today if they do not like your games, then you are screwed.
Don't forget that it's cheaper to make new PS2 boxes as compared to making older PS2 boxes. A month or so ago they finally got both the processors onto one chip. This will reduce the cost of the box. Probably isn't in the current boxes being sold, but they will be. So basically, since sony designed all the HW themselves it is easier to integrate all the HW to reduce cost. (PS2 on a chip?)
I wonder what the consoles would cost if the had to be sold at cost to the manufacturer.
This is a case of false advertising, pure and simple.
Flash is advertised as a 'media player' it plays flash movies, music (mp3s, etc.), and that's it.
If it was advertised as a camera sharing / spy tool then fine, as long as you know that before you download it. The programs don't usually tell you things like that before you download it. Open source programs ( mozilla comes to mind) have a release notes section that tells you IN PLAIN ENGLISH ( or hopefully your native tounge ) what the update to the program does to your computer that is different from the past version.
This has nothing to do with MAC vs WINDOWS vs UNIX, it has everything to do with 'free' software that is really 'free to download but with so many strings attached that you probably don't actually want to use it.'
I spit on you, corp. america.
--quote on from cnn article. ... Do you really want your kids assuming the role of a mass murderer or car jacker when you are away at work?"
"When kids play video games, they assume the identity of the characters in the games.
--quote off
Right, so has this guy played with GI-Joes, Cops and robbers, played cowboys and indians, drew pictures of tanks or planes, or basically ever done what was considered 'normal' play time by parents before video games were invented.
The only real difference between video games and real games is that video games are automated. Video games are like the ultimate babysitter, much better then the TV. I mean for the low low price of 50 dollars you can keep you children entertained for hundreds of hours ( sports, rpgs ). Even the crappiest of games can keep a child entertained for at least 5-10 hours, which is very economical. Cheaper then a REAL babysitter.
Laws like this always remind me the the episode of the simpsons where Marge drops maggie off at the day care center, is about to leave with another parent and says "we should leave them alone". So the other parent goes, turns on the TV, and they leave. (1st season, the Dr. Marvin Monroe Episode)