I think a huge problem is that most video game plots suck. Look at Half-life. Everyone is it seems is just short of begging for a film adapation. I ask "TO WHAT!?" the plot of Half-Life can be told in its entirety as:
1)"Just a normal day at work, this experiment should be interesting." 2)"Aughhh the horror!" 3)"Mosters everywhere I don't understand." 4)"Freeman you must get to the other building and beam out of here!" 5)"Ok." 6)"Hey look there is some guy in a suit. Weird." 7)"Hey don't shoot at me I'm on your side... fine then." 8)"Wheeeee bouncy bouncy fun fun fun alien world." 9)"Quit yo mumblin' alien mastermind." 10)"I don't care about your masters, give them my number they know where to find me." 11)"WTF is this shit... fine, I choose not to get wasted by hordes of aliens."
Do you REALLY want to see that movie? That is a bad video game movie. Video game movies suck (including Mortal Kombat) because usually they choose incredibly lame game plots like Mortal Kombat. Mario the movie could have been better, but it would have taken a great deal of creativity on the part of the writers, creativity which went a little too far in the film version.
"Anyhow, if someone wants to make money from a creation, try giving a concert - not monopolizing the distribution channel and microregulating how every individual on the planet copys information at their disposal. If you want balance, then let content flow freely and charge for content related services. Content doesn't have a natural limit in supply vs demand, content related services do."
Let's look at that statement in context of this article. As a film maker I take issue with this statement.
I spend months trying to raise money for a project. I spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce a film.
Now what? If Warner wants it, they can just grab one of my copies and show it around the country in theaters.
Fine fine... I guess this is all for the public's good. I'll just sell the DVD. I don't have time to actually negotiate distribution deals with Wal-mart or even the local street vendor. But why do they care? They already have a special 2 disc set out.
I post it on the internet, but the bandwidth costs are pretty high for an independent like myself. Does it really matter? Apple has already put it up on Itunes for $1.99.
Well perhaps I'll sell T-shirts... nope too late, there are a thousand fan boys selling high quality T-shirts on CafePress.
Oh but wait! Concerts! Of course, why didn't I present my film live! Silly me... I just got into the wrong industry, the stage is where all storytelling belongs. Sure am glad I have this warm fuzzy feeling from making a film... no wait... that's the deep fat fryer at KFC.
"Hopefully MS again recognizes its hardcore fans who acquired the 360 early in the production cycle will expect some sort of compensation for their willingness to purchase a console with apparent heat/performance issues."
They already have. You get to play the 360 for an extra year.
If you ask me the current design is excellent. The real achilles heal in the whole operation is on the fold/seal. That thing tears off about 1/3rd of the time and I have to just tape the dumb thing shut. They used to be made much heartier, and I would never have a torn envelope. Maybe they could just reinforce that one fold somehow.
"On the whole, it sounds like the number of affected users is quite small, but may reflect a common lack of knowledge of what a 'beta' release really is: Not ready for prime-time."
Listening to Apple's propaganda machine running full bore 24/7 about what an amazing program this is I can see how a large number of people don't understand what "beta" means in this case. Especially with Google's liberal definition watering down the perceived danger in the public subconscious. Most beta software isn't marketed to the public in earnest.
It may not be supported, but it sure as hell is being promoted. I don't know... that in of itself sort of rubs me the wrong way, sounds like they want it both ways.
...just like how everyone has ignored Intel for the last 5 years. Ignored their inferiority. I know Xerox is still raking in the cash from mice.
"The Source(tm)" usually dumps huge amounts of $$ and then someone else comes along and steals it. But hey... our patent process is far too strict, so I'm sure nobody will find a way to steal Nintendo's controller.
You've interpreted my point completely incorrectly. I'm not saying all people care about is money (which may be an accurate statement but beyond the realm of this discussion). I'm saying people don't care at all about IT. IT enables people to "Do", it does nothing in of itself. The job of IT is to ensure that people continue doing what they were doing before they had a computer: art, philosophy, science, politics or yes, making money.
It doesn't matter how good an employee is technically if they don't understand the business that they're enabling to happen. For instance, if you were a systems manager at ILM, you would need to understand the needs and demands of an artist working there in order to better facilitate that business. The same is true of any corporate environment. People look to IT to keep them focused on their work, as soon as the IT department becomes visible they have in my mind failed.
Too often I see IT departments getting caught up in their jobs and enwrapped with what they think is best from a technical stand point, without taking the time to see if it's best for the client. Sometimes even disrupting work being done by their clients in order to flex their technical prowess.
IT should never be an end in of itself. Sometimes departments lose sight of that mantra. Technology for technology's sake is a wasteful and self indulgent path which should be avoided at all costs.
IT is to enable people to make money, not to make money in of itself. If you can't come up with technical solutions which drive that goal, it doesn't matter what you can do technically.
I know, I know, you didn't think you were going to 6 years of school to help Bob in sales increase the stock value. You thought you were training to make all of your 1337 virtual networks interface in new and creative/exciting ways with the latest database. You were wrong. Nobody cares about your network. Nobody cares about your storage. Nobody cares if you use Linux or Windows. They want to know how you can help them "do", which in most cases is make money. IT is somewhere in the social hierarchy around Janitors: "Don't tell me what shoes leave less scuff marks, just clean up the damn spot!"
If you can't express how you are able to leverage technology to help them make money, you're applying for the wrong job, I would recommend a job in higher education. Lots of tech jobs where the newest, latest and greatest gets applied to making newer and greater.
Considering that in this article from the same source Hitachi set a record for hard drives with a density of 230 GB with its perpendicular HD system, I'm going to assume that 515Gb isn't even in the running. So we can assume that Gigabits was a misprint on their part.
"The new drives are capable of 230GB per inch squared, compact enough to build a 20GB mini iPod or a terabyte 3.5 inch drive."
I shudder to think that he might attempt to write all 100 episodes without the help of coauthors.
I think we're probably safe on this. I don't know anyone who would be willing to write 4,000 pages of screenplay on the same story. The volume of work required demands a team.
I just put a lamp on a dimmer behind my TV. It doesn't adjust the color dynamically, but it at least reduces eye strain and decreases the eye's recovery time after quick changes in light and dark on screen.
This is definitely a challenge for all developers world wide. However, this is nothing new, or unique to FOSS, just an old problem approached from a new perspective.
As mentioned in the article, this leads back to an earlier Slashdot news post, on the Consistency/Efficiency debate.
I would be inclined to lean towards consistency myself, and side with the disabled folks, but how can you create new and exciting platforms while still being maintaining familiarity. If you ask me, the web is an excellent case study in creating exciting new products, while simultaneously establishing conventions.
Perhaps this article shouldn't be taken as a call to turn all of the FOSS software into retail clones, but to concentrate on bringing innovative features, while still maintaining a consistant and familiar interface.
Not quite. It's more like "how dare Microsoft charge extra for a workaround instead of fixing the shortcomings in the first place for free, like companies in every other industry (such as the auto industry) would be forced to do?!"
I agree. We should model our lawsuit against Microsoft after the one filed by the Association of Drunk Drivers Who Are Unable to Their Control Vehicles and Were Harmed in Accidents.
I just don't understand where CNet is running into challenges. The process for hooking up my HDTV to my ATI RADEON:
1)Attach component adapter to DVI port. 2)Plug in TV. 3)Change channel on TV to component input.
How could they f*** that up? Mind you, things used to be a real chore about 10 years ago. I haven't run into a modern driver suite, that doesn't "just work".
I won't even touch the gross genealizations about an entire market of computers made in the first paragraph.
"Why would anybody want that thing?" "It's such a terrible size! It's too big to fit in your pocket, and if I really wanted to make a call, I could just go to one of a billion phone booths." "Once again, they've created a product that looks like ass." "Please... change my life? It's just a phone, talk about over hyped." "The quality is so much worse than a land line." "The battery life is terrible!" "Maybe it if it was a lot cheaper, but at that price range, come on." "The interface is terrible." "Looks like it'll only really appeal to a niche market." "Anyone who has used buttons will know that you'll be constantly breaking that keypad." "Just another example of a company trying to jump in and create a need that doesn't exist."
This is still front lines, cutting edge gadgetry here, which is going to create a whole new market, not just exploit an existing one. PDAs failed because they were a whole new paradigm "I can't use my normal applications? What applications can I use?" This is, your normal computer, that sits on your desk, now sitting in your hand. Everything you do day in and day out is possible on this thing. But not just, anything is possible, everything you already do on your pc is possible on this thing. Only now it's finally a size that can be whipped out and put away quickly. Something that even tablet PCs are fighting, they're still trouble to take out and put away. Imagine your desktop, in your hand, on the street, available at a moments notice. Sign me up... for version 2.0
I'm not entirely sure why people would want to advertise how many times Firefox has been downloaded. The obvious next step would be to compare your statistic to the competition. Something tells me that Firefox, while downloaded in large quantities, won't even come close to touching IE in the downloads/updates department.
If anything the current campaign tells me as a consumer: "Firefox, it's downloaded quite a bit." Not exactly a strong marketing slogan. The alternative Microsoft slogan would be "IE, downloaded by just about everybody."
Re:Do we have evidence that Intel coerced...
on
AMD Subpoenas Skype
·
· Score: 1
"AMD's chips run all the same software that Intel's do, so there's nothing technical that locks you into one company over the other. "
...except for of course... having to purchase a new motherboard and in some cases RAM.
While it is the case now, that most software runs on both intel and amd, this wasn't always the case. Especially in high performance applications, you'll still find software which requires an Intel chip extension, making AMD left out in the cold.
Slashdot Mirror
Apperantly I'm on average 49% artificial, based on school papers I wrote. I dub thee program: a failure.
I think a huge problem is that most video game plots suck. Look at Half-life. Everyone is it seems is just short of begging for a film adapation. I ask "TO WHAT!?" the plot of Half-Life can be told in its entirety as:
1)"Just a normal day at work, this experiment should be interesting."
2)"Aughhh the horror!"
3)"Mosters everywhere I don't understand."
4)"Freeman you must get to the other building and beam out of here!"
5)"Ok."
6)"Hey look there is some guy in a suit. Weird."
7)"Hey don't shoot at me I'm on your side... fine then."
8)"Wheeeee bouncy bouncy fun fun fun alien world."
9)"Quit yo mumblin' alien mastermind."
10)"I don't care about your masters, give them my number they know where to find me."
11)"WTF is this shit... fine, I choose not to get wasted by hordes of aliens."
Do you REALLY want to see that movie? That is a bad video game movie. Video game movies suck (including Mortal Kombat) because usually they choose incredibly lame game plots like Mortal Kombat. Mario the movie could have been better, but it would have taken a great deal of creativity on the part of the writers, creativity which went a little too far in the film version.
"Anyhow, if someone wants to make money from a creation, try giving a concert - not monopolizing the distribution channel and microregulating how every individual on the planet copys information at their disposal. If you want balance, then let content flow freely and charge for content related services. Content doesn't have a natural limit in supply vs demand, content related services do."
Let's look at that statement in context of this article. As a film maker I take issue with this statement.
I spend months trying to raise money for a project. I spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce a film.
Now what? If Warner wants it, they can just grab one of my copies and show it around the country in theaters.
Fine fine... I guess this is all for the public's good. I'll just sell the DVD. I don't have time to actually negotiate distribution deals with Wal-mart or even the local street vendor. But why do they care? They already have a special 2 disc set out.
I post it on the internet, but the bandwidth costs are pretty high for an independent like myself. Does it really matter? Apple has already put it up on Itunes for $1.99.
Well perhaps I'll sell T-shirts... nope too late, there are a thousand fan boys selling high quality T-shirts on CafePress.
Oh but wait! Concerts! Of course, why didn't I present my film live! Silly me... I just got into the wrong industry, the stage is where all storytelling belongs. Sure am glad I have this warm fuzzy feeling from making a film... no wait... that's the deep fat fryer at KFC.
"Hopefully MS again recognizes its hardcore fans who acquired the 360 early in the production cycle will expect some sort of compensation for their willingness to purchase a console with apparent heat/performance issues."
They already have. You get to play the 360 for an extra year.
That explains why so many of my DVDs are broken.
If you ask me the current design is excellent. The real achilles heal in the whole operation is on the fold/seal. That thing tears off about 1/3rd of the time and I have to just tape the dumb thing shut. They used to be made much heartier, and I would never have a torn envelope. Maybe they could just reinforce that one fold somehow.
"NEEEERRAAAOOOWWWWWUUUMMMMMMMMMM"
was how I was always told to spell it in Kindergarden.
"On the whole, it sounds like the number of affected users is quite small, but may reflect a common lack of knowledge of what a 'beta' release really is: Not ready for prime-time."
Listening to Apple's propaganda machine running full bore 24/7 about what an amazing program this is I can see how a large number of people don't understand what "beta" means in this case. Especially with Google's liberal definition watering down the perceived danger in the public subconscious. Most beta software isn't marketed to the public in earnest.
It may not be supported, but it sure as hell is being promoted. I don't know... that in of itself sort of rubs me the wrong way, sounds like they want it both ways.
You could release a side scrolling version of Duke Nukem (a la Duke Nukem II) that I would play given a good story line and fun puzzle-solving levels.
You mean like Duke Nukem Manhattan Project?
...just like how everyone has ignored Intel for the last 5 years. Ignored their inferiority. I know Xerox is still raking in the cash from mice.
"The Source(tm)" usually dumps huge amounts of $$ and then someone else comes along and steals it. But hey... our patent process is far too strict, so I'm sure nobody will find a way to steal Nintendo's controller.
You've interpreted my point completely incorrectly. I'm not saying all people care about is money (which may be an accurate statement but beyond the realm of this discussion). I'm saying people don't care at all about IT. IT enables people to "Do", it does nothing in of itself. The job of IT is to ensure that people continue doing what they were doing before they had a computer: art, philosophy, science, politics or yes, making money.
It doesn't matter how good an employee is technically if they don't understand the business that they're enabling to happen. For instance, if you were a systems manager at ILM, you would need to understand the needs and demands of an artist working there in order to better facilitate that business. The same is true of any corporate environment. People look to IT to keep them focused on their work, as soon as the IT department becomes visible they have in my mind failed.
Too often I see IT departments getting caught up in their jobs and enwrapped with what they think is best from a technical stand point, without taking the time to see if it's best for the client. Sometimes even disrupting work being done by their clients in order to flex their technical prowess.
IT should never be an end in of itself. Sometimes departments lose sight of that mantra. Technology for technology's sake is a wasteful and self indulgent path which should be avoided at all costs.
IT is to enable people to make money, not to make money in of itself. If you can't come up with technical solutions which drive that goal, it doesn't matter what you can do technically.
I know, I know, you didn't think you were going to 6 years of school to help Bob in sales increase the stock value. You thought you were training to make all of your 1337 virtual networks interface in new and creative/exciting ways with the latest database. You were wrong. Nobody cares about your network. Nobody cares about your storage. Nobody cares if you use Linux or Windows. They want to know how you can help them "do", which in most cases is make money. IT is somewhere in the social hierarchy around Janitors: "Don't tell me what shoes leave less scuff marks, just clean up the damn spot!"
If you can't express how you are able to leverage technology to help them make money, you're applying for the wrong job, I would recommend a job in higher education. Lots of tech jobs where the newest, latest and greatest gets applied to making newer and greater.
I think it's because it's possible to keep track. I can't keep track of how many people I've gotten hooked on Windows.
Considering that in this article from the same source Hitachi set a record for hard drives with a density of 230 GB with its perpendicular HD system, I'm going to assume that 515Gb isn't even in the running. So we can assume that Gigabits was a misprint on their part.
- breaks-hard-drive-record
"The new drives are capable of 230GB per inch squared, compact enough to build a 20GB mini iPod or a terabyte 3.5 inch drive."
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2127087/hitachi
I shudder to think that he might attempt to write all 100 episodes without the help of coauthors.
I think we're probably safe on this. I don't know anyone who would be willing to write 4,000 pages of screenplay on the same story. The volume of work required demands a team.
I just put a lamp on a dimmer behind my TV. It doesn't adjust the color dynamically, but it at least reduces eye strain and decreases the eye's recovery time after quick changes in light and dark on screen.
No fire yet.
I can help you solve one of your problems.
In Winamp:
Right click -> Window Settings -> Scaling -> Custom
This is definitely a challenge for all developers world wide. However, this is nothing new, or unique to FOSS, just an old problem approached from a new perspective.
As mentioned in the article, this leads back to an earlier Slashdot news post, on the Consistency/Efficiency debate.
I would be inclined to lean towards consistency myself, and side with the disabled folks, but how can you create new and exciting platforms while still being maintaining familiarity. If you ask me, the web is an excellent case study in creating exciting new products, while simultaneously establishing conventions.
Perhaps this article shouldn't be taken as a call to turn all of the FOSS software into retail clones, but to concentrate on bringing innovative features, while still maintaining a consistant and familiar interface.
Of course this setup I described will never be used in Vista...
...either that or you would never bother to check.
One of those statements is true, I leave it to the reader to decide which. http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/security/
Not quite. It's more like "how dare Microsoft charge extra for a workaround instead of fixing the shortcomings in the first place for free, like companies in every other industry (such as the auto industry) would be forced to do?!"
I agree. We should model our lawsuit against Microsoft after the one filed by the Association of Drunk Drivers Who Are Unable to Their Control Vehicles and Were Harmed in Accidents.
What you need to do is replace all of your IT staff with the Microsoft Paper-clip.
I just don't understand where CNet is running into challenges. The process for hooking up my HDTV to my ATI RADEON:
1)Attach component adapter to DVI port.
2)Plug in TV.
3)Change channel on TV to component input.
How could they f*** that up? Mind you, things used to be a real chore about 10 years ago. I haven't run into a modern driver suite, that doesn't "just work".
I won't even touch the gross genealizations about an entire market of computers made in the first paragraph.
http://www.oaktreeent.com/web_photos/Telephones/US -West_Old-School_Cell_Phone_Horiz_Tan_web.jpg
"Why would anybody want that thing?"
"It's such a terrible size! It's too big to fit in your pocket, and if I really wanted to make a call, I could just go to one of a billion phone booths."
"Once again, they've created a product that looks like ass."
"Please... change my life? It's just a phone, talk about over hyped."
"The quality is so much worse than a land line."
"The battery life is terrible!"
"Maybe it if it was a lot cheaper, but at that price range, come on."
"The interface is terrible."
"Looks like it'll only really appeal to a niche market."
"Anyone who has used buttons will know that you'll be constantly breaking that keypad."
"Just another example of a company trying to jump in and create a need that doesn't exist."
This is still front lines, cutting edge gadgetry here, which is going to create a whole new market, not just exploit an existing one. PDAs failed because they were a whole new paradigm
"I can't use my normal applications? What applications can I use?"
This is, your normal computer, that sits on your desk, now sitting in your hand. Everything you do day in and day out is possible on this thing. But not just, anything is possible, everything you already do on your pc is possible on this thing. Only now it's finally a size that can be whipped out and put away quickly. Something that even tablet PCs are fighting, they're still trouble to take out and put away. Imagine your desktop, in your hand, on the street, available at a moments notice. Sign me up... for version 2.0
I'm not entirely sure why people would want to advertise how many times Firefox has been downloaded. The obvious next step would be to compare your statistic to the competition. Something tells me that Firefox, while downloaded in large quantities, won't even come close to touching IE in the downloads/updates department.
If anything the current campaign tells me as a consumer: "Firefox, it's downloaded quite a bit." Not exactly a strong marketing slogan. The alternative Microsoft slogan would be "IE, downloaded by just about everybody."
Well... first you need a lawyer. Which costs $$.
"AMD's chips run all the same software that Intel's do, so there's nothing technical that locks you into one company over the other. "
...except for of course... having to purchase a new motherboard and in some cases RAM.
While it is the case now, that most software runs on both intel and amd, this wasn't always the case. Especially in high performance applications, you'll still find software which requires an Intel chip extension, making AMD left out in the cold.