argh, look, my intent wasn't to mindlessly knock Rhythmbox...I'm just saying, you can't really call it an iTunes replacement unless it actually does most or all of the things iTunes does. I think that now that iTunes runs on Linux there might be a lot more people inclined to use it...
The whole idea of Steam to begin with is just utter shit. I have a Powerbook so I don't play very much Half-Life, but it simply amazes me what hardcore gamers are willing to put up with from Valve. There are lots of perfectly good other games; why the HELL should Valve even be allowed to do this? If it's M game, I should be able to play it, even if I don't have an internet connection. I don't doubt people who pirate the game are going to figure out ways around the authentication mechanism, and in the mean time it just pisses the hell out of people who really did buy the game. Scrap the whole thing.
Think about all the different peer-to-peer systems in use. Gnutella, BitTorrent, Fasttrack, etc... The people using KaZaA Media Desktop are already seeing ads. Same with Limewire Basic. But all the rest, Shareaza on Windows, probably every implentation of BitTorrent, Acquisition on Mac OS X....how the hell are you going to insert ads into these programs?
...Unless these ads are just going to consist of miniscule files with keywords and a URL in the file name, that dominate your search results? That's more just spamming than anything else. I don't see how that'd be much in the way of an effective delivery method for advertisements. It's unreliable, most p2p clients don't have a provision for being able to click a link in a file name in search results window and send that to your browser.
I'd say most people that are smart enough to use various p2p systems in the first place are probably going to go for an open and free network instead of some proprietary bullshit from some dot-com, and avoid all these ads entirely. Bottom line, unethical, impractical, just plain dumb. Never going to happen.
Uhh...right. You know, the first step to NOT getting modded as Funny is to put "lmao" at the end of your post. Seriously, when you be as sarcastic as possible the joke always turns out much better lmao
I'm thinking that this could eventually replace laptop screens. Somewhere on your laptop you'd have one of these with 1600x1200 resolution and 32-bit colour and you could just project the screen onto any flat surface. It would probably bring down the weight a little bit, and maybe the power requirements of a laptop.
This is really just more MS-FUD. Almost everyone know now uses Firefox. A year ago, that definitely wouldn't have been true. If IE earns enough of a reputation as being a complete piece of junk, and starts being "uncool" to use, even the dumbest of users will start using the "cool" thing to have at the moment, Firefox.
By the way, the original original original trailer was shown in 1999 during Steve Jobs's keynote at Macworld. While it was being shown, that trailer was rendered, in real time, using OpenGL, on a Macintosh. It looks virtually identical to the gameplay of the 2001 XBox version. I'm still trying to find the original movie...
Why exactly does Microsoft deserve any congratulations, here? Virtually every single aspect of Halo's graphics, gameplay, and storyline were thought up in 1999 and 2000, by Bungie, while the XBox was still on the drawing board, before Microsoft had any part of it. It was going to be released on the Mac first, then on the PC. Bungie was probably THIS CLOSE to a beta, or at least an alpha, and Microsoft exploded the whole thing and wasted months and months re-writing the whole thing for the XBox.
Why look, Here's one of the original trailers, from 2000, 100% Microsoft-free. There's even a rocket warthog. Just ONE MONTH after that trailer was shown at E3, Microsoft bought the whole thing.
I really do think MS has done nothing but fuck up everything. Mod me down all you want, but I really think Microsoft realised the XBox was going to fail, utterly, without Halo. It's a great game, but Microsoft didn't friggin' make it. Let's congratulate them for making Virtual PC too. And Windows.
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. AIM is a service from America Online, and they--guess what--make money from their subscription service, just like Skype makes money from SkypeOut.
I just see very little difference here between the two.
The very first versions of AIM had no ads. Zero, none. At all. Then there was a small one. Then it became animated. And they added some stupid shit. Then the ad became bigger.
Isn't ANYONE afraid that this is going to happen with Skype? That these sons of bitches will backstab everyone and put ads in the free version of Skype once enough people have started using it? You may say, "oh, but this is different" all you like. These guys made KaZaA Media Desktop, too. That says it all right there.
Also, as a user of Mac OS X, I consider the user interface of Skype (at least, the Mac version of it) to be an absolute abomination.
Mod me down all you want, but these guys aren't just giving centrally-managed VoIP away free to everyone for all time. Pretty soon there are going to have to be some sacrifices, which is why I completely prefer Jabber and iChat AV. Fortunately, with Tiger, those two will be more united than they are now. I like Apple's implementation of audio and video chatting. Yeah, did I mention Skype doesn't do video, even as an option? Way to set us back a few years, guys. I, for one, have seen webcams for sale for what, $10? It's not like it's some expensive toy for the elite. It's useful, I think, in humanising online communication.
So in conclusion, while I welcome the IDEA of Skype, their implementation just sucks. So far Apple is doing this much better. I know, I know, it isn't cross platform, but it's still better. I also think it'd probably be easier to write programs compatible with iChat's A/V stuff as opposed to Skype's...
I've always wondered where we should draw the line. Obviously if someone posted something like, "Mozilla, a free open-source web browser...."
Then SOMEONE would post, "oh come ON, do we really need to be told what Mozilla is?
So what I'm wondering is, what DO we explain to readers and what don't we? There are obviously pieces of software and hardware that are familiar to some, but not others.
Slashdot Mirror
Story at 11.
argh, look, my intent wasn't to mindlessly knock Rhythmbox...I'm just saying, you can't really call it an iTunes replacement unless it actually does most or all of the things iTunes does. I think that now that iTunes runs on Linux there might be a lot more people inclined to use it...
...I really must say, Rhythmbox is junk. It does about a tenth of the things iTunes does. Besides, Linux users can now buy music. Awesome job, guys!
The whole idea of Steam to begin with is just utter shit. I have a Powerbook so I don't play very much Half-Life, but it simply amazes me what hardcore gamers are willing to put up with from Valve. There are lots of perfectly good other games; why the HELL should Valve even be allowed to do this? If it's M game, I should be able to play it, even if I don't have an internet connection. I don't doubt people who pirate the game are going to figure out ways around the authentication mechanism, and in the mean time it just pisses the hell out of people who really did buy the game. Scrap the whole thing.
....don't take too kindly to SABOTAGE!! HEHEHEHEH!
Seriously, spelling it "Linus Trerribald" is just asking for it. I looked at this guy's past comments; quite helpful...
Not that this would actually work very well.
Think about all the different peer-to-peer systems in use. Gnutella, BitTorrent, Fasttrack, etc... The people using KaZaA Media Desktop are already seeing ads. Same with Limewire Basic. But all the rest, Shareaza on Windows, probably every implentation of BitTorrent, Acquisition on Mac OS X....how the hell are you going to insert ads into these programs?
...Unless these ads are just going to consist of miniscule files with keywords and a URL in the file name, that dominate your search results? That's more just spamming than anything else. I don't see how that'd be much in the way of an effective delivery method for advertisements. It's unreliable, most p2p clients don't have a provision for being able to click a link in a file name in search results window and send that to your browser.
I'd say most people that are smart enough to use various p2p systems in the first place are probably going to go for an open and free network instead of some proprietary bullshit from some dot-com, and avoid all these ads entirely. Bottom line, unethical, impractical, just plain dumb. Never going to happen.
slower, cooler, but higher performing processors
.Slower, higher performance. Only from Intel.
I wouldn't think that emulating India is really the way to go
Yah, they should just run it natively.
Uhh...right. You know, the first step to NOT getting modded as Funny is to put "lmao" at the end of your post. Seriously, when you be as sarcastic as possible the joke always turns out much better lmao
I'm thinking that this could eventually replace laptop screens. Somewhere on your laptop you'd have one of these with 1600x1200 resolution and 32-bit colour and you could just project the screen onto any flat surface. It would probably bring down the weight a little bit, and maybe the power requirements of a laptop.
Sorry, that should be "Almost everyone I know now uses Firefox." Yay for not using Preview...
This is really just more MS-FUD. Almost everyone know now uses Firefox. A year ago, that definitely wouldn't have been true. If IE earns enough of a reputation as being a complete piece of junk, and starts being "uncool" to use, even the dumbest of users will start using the "cool" thing to have at the moment, Firefox.
Uh, you know, Commerce Secretary Don Evans has resigned with Ashcroft....that's sort of significant...I'm surprised no one's mentioned it.
...I'm planning to migrate to Canada. I hear access to the internets is faster there.
It should be "(Apple) Finder File Edit View Go Window Help"
And it's a red aqua gumpdropeseque blob of translucent fluid you ignoramus.
I for one...
By the way, the original original original trailer was shown in 1999 during Steve Jobs's keynote at Macworld. While it was being shown, that trailer was rendered, in real time, using OpenGL, on a Macintosh. It looks virtually identical to the gameplay of the 2001 XBox version. I'm still trying to find the original movie...
Why exactly does Microsoft deserve any congratulations, here? Virtually every single aspect of Halo's graphics, gameplay, and storyline were thought up in 1999 and 2000, by Bungie, while the XBox was still on the drawing board, before Microsoft had any part of it. It was going to be released on the Mac first, then on the PC. Bungie was probably THIS CLOSE to a beta, or at least an alpha, and Microsoft exploded the whole thing and wasted months and months re-writing the whole thing for the XBox.
Why look, Here's one of the original trailers, from 2000, 100% Microsoft-free. There's even a rocket warthog. Just ONE MONTH after that trailer was shown at E3, Microsoft bought the whole thing.
I really do think MS has done nothing but fuck up everything. Mod me down all you want, but I really think Microsoft realised the XBox was going to fail, utterly, without Halo. It's a great game, but Microsoft didn't friggin' make it. Let's congratulate them for making Virtual PC too. And Windows.
"Ha," says the state trooper. "There is no Division Six."
FLASH!
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. AIM is a service from America Online, and they--guess what--make money from their subscription service, just like Skype makes money from SkypeOut.
I just see very little difference here between the two.
I really was not trying to be a troll, here...
My problem with Skype is this.
The very first versions of AIM had no ads. Zero, none. At all. Then there was a small one. Then it became animated. And they added some stupid shit. Then the ad became bigger.
Isn't ANYONE afraid that this is going to happen with Skype? That these sons of bitches will backstab everyone and put ads in the free version of Skype once enough people have started using it? You may say, "oh, but this is different" all you like. These guys made KaZaA Media Desktop, too. That says it all right there.
Also, as a user of Mac OS X, I consider the user interface of Skype (at least, the Mac version of it) to be an absolute abomination.
Mod me down all you want, but these guys aren't just giving centrally-managed VoIP away free to everyone for all time. Pretty soon there are going to have to be some sacrifices, which is why I completely prefer Jabber and iChat AV. Fortunately, with Tiger, those two will be more united than they are now. I like Apple's implementation of audio and video chatting. Yeah, did I mention Skype doesn't do video, even as an option? Way to set us back a few years, guys. I, for one, have seen webcams for sale for what, $10? It's not like it's some expensive toy for the elite. It's useful, I think, in humanising online communication.
So in conclusion, while I welcome the IDEA of Skype, their implementation just sucks. So far Apple is doing this much better. I know, I know, it isn't cross platform, but it's still better. I also think it'd probably be easier to write programs compatible with iChat's A/V stuff as opposed to Skype's...
There's a copyright flag on CDDA???
I've always wondered where we should draw the line. Obviously if someone posted something like, "Mozilla, a free open-source web browser...."
Then SOMEONE would post, "oh come ON, do we really need to be told what Mozilla is?
So what I'm wondering is, what DO we explain to readers and what don't we? There are obviously pieces of software and hardware that are familiar to some, but not others.