Can you imagine if Hamlet never came to an end (ok, if you've ever sat through a bad student production, it might have felt like that) but instead ran on for 17 plays, with 8-12 comprising the little-loved Finland arc, play 4 introducing a new love interest who got written out in play 9 and then the whole thing stopped abruptly after play 17 because the Globe burned down? How many modern TV stories have been ruined by this kind of thing? The X-Files? Lost? Buffy?
The inherent assumption that you are making is that Shakespeare would would have a bad sequel. I don't think this is true. Shakespeare was in the business of making money. If he had thought he could make money through making prequels or sequels for some of his popular plays, say Young Hamlet or How We Miss Caesar, he would have, and some of them would have been excellent.
However, I really think that you're missing the point. You're really comparing apples and oranges when you compare Shakespeare's plays, written for the stage, with big budget games or movies. The latter cost a lot of money to develop while in general the former do not. Thus, I think to some degree movies, video games, and even many books (with high unit and distribution costs) become formulaic because of the production costs involved. Many video games cost millions to develop; many movies cost over $100 million. For those types of entertainment, when a corporation with shareholders footing the bill, you're going to see less chances taken. A successful movie or video game is almost like the lottery, so the smart, responsible thing to do for your shareholders is to milk it. Before you say that this doesn't apply to video games, think about how many lines of code it takes to write a decent game that's going to sell. For that, you need someone with money paying you to pay your rent while you're developing your game. That means someone, ultimately, expects to get paid.
Besides, this is what people want. They want to watch or experience the same things that made them happy before. The last thing that a video game developer wants it to hear that its new game sucks compared to the old one. Fanboys can be vocal and vitriolic, and unfortunately many developers spend much of their time keeping their original audience happy, rather than expanding the audience.
. . . My father subscribed to the local major city news paper for 35 years. He remarked how the newspaper had continued to shrink year after year in the past 10 years. Finally they cut out the listing of stocks to just a few blue chips and the bigger local employers and the sports section, which he could read free online. So about a year ago he canceled his subscription and now reads the local sports section online. . . .
I have found the exact same issue with our small town newspaper. For the same price as a major market newspaper, we get one, maybe two, local stories in addition to sports. That's it. It doesn't even publish letters to the editor. Seriously. There are, however, lots of wire reports. I would like to get the local paper, but I can't justify the cost for, essentially, no news.
The real problem is consolidation. Most newspapers are owned my news conglomerates. Years ago, some jerk with an M.B.A. figured out you could increase short term profits by slashing your reporters and editorial staff. All you had to do was buy stories from someone else. Overall, this was less expensive, provided you can't get the same news somewhere else, and it worked until everyone had access to the same stories on the internet. For free. With no recycling.
First, Blackberry captured more market share away from the iPhone in the fourth quarter of 2008, so he should focus his initial boo-hooing on the Canadians. Second, it's not like Microsoft let anyone keep developing anything for the original Xbox. F***ers. Nope, have to buy our new, poorly manufactured, Sony-busting POS if you want to still buy new games. If someone wants to install software on their iPhone that's not available through the App Store, they can jailbreak it. Same thing people have done to add life to their original Xboxes. Thousands of engineers, and all the Microsoft can do is play catchup.
Here's what you do, Steve: Quit your f***ing job. Seriously, just cash out your shares and retire. Let someone better, smarter, and more creative figure out to do with all of Microsoft's R&D $$$. You're not an engineer, Steve; you're not a designer. You're a business guy, Steve. Sure, you're good with numbers and making money, but you're the Jerry Jones of the computer world. You are the embodiment of the Peter Principle, a great number two while the Bill the Puppetmaster was yanking the strings of the PC industry, but we all see you behind the curtain of the little wooden stage.
So, quit, cash out, enjoy your retirement, and grow some tomatoes. Your company and shareholders, not to mention the entire world, would be better off if the strategic direction of your company embodied something more meaningful than being a Johnny-Come-Lately With Lots of Money. Great ideas, new ideas, can create wealth, new industries. You're married to the old, Steve. Let someone new come up with something new.
I just use a text document with point-for-point descritions on how to follow the procedure. It's practical because you can print it and take it to the workfloor and cross the points you've finished. When you find out something new you can easily write it on the paper and add it in the computer file later on. Just make sure there is only one person maintaining the file, to avoid chaos and misunderstandings.
This actually works quite well in a number of settings. Checklists work. Years ago, when I was working through college at a warehouse, I had a job of some responsibility that usually involved me working late nights. Eventually, my boss quit and I was left in charge. To take a night off, and make sure the wheels didn't fall off, I created a text file with a checklist of the nightly procedures. Not only did it force me to think about everything I did, it also helped everyone know how much longer we would have to work each night before we could call it a night. You would be surprised at how much morale can improve if everyone has an idea of what's going on. Managers making decisions, seemingly arbitrarily, don't instill much confidence.
My advice would be to document your procedures, what you actually think needs to be done, and then take some time to distill them into a list. Then, following the list, does the procedure accomplish the task? If yes then move on to the next task.
From the article: "They have been forced to pay substantially more to acquire the Windows XP operating system than they would have to pay in a competitive marketplace," the complaint read. A competitive marketplace? Seriously? This person could have purchased something else. She could have bought a computer with Linux. What did people expect? A "competitive marketplace for Windows XP?" Companies take products off the market or replace successful versions with newer, "better" versions. Microsoft wanted to quit selling and supporting XP. Was Vista "better" than XP? Most people would say "no," but that doesn't change the fact that Microsoft can still shoot itself in the foot and sell something else.
I'm no Microsoft fan, but it sounds as if $59.25 to get a completely different commercial OS, XP, isn't an egregious fee when you purchased the crummy consumer version of the newer OS, Vista. On the other hand, had I bought a more expensive version of Vista for my business (which I have not done), I would expect that Microsoft would throw in XP for free, maybe so I could run some legacy software for my business that was not completely tested or compatible with Vista.
This makes about as much sense as someone buying a coach ticket on an airline complaining about not getting free drinks like First Class. The alcohol really isn't the issue, even though it may seem that way.
What the fuck is authentic these days? I'm sick of the notion that creative output needs to have an olympic mentality to it. It is like the guys that can play 64th note riffs on guitars and then act as if anyone that cannot approach their technical ability has no business playing.
Agreed. Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits doesn't play very fast guitar, but he plays great guitar. Besides, there is a great deal that musicians can do today that was never possible before. Music isn't static, it grows. Otherwise, we'd all have nothing to watch but live symphony performances, or cavemen banging rocks and sticks together.
Personally, I'm a little tired of companies contracting out their manufacturing to Asia to cut costs, and then not owning up to manufacturing defects when they come to light. It has kept me from buying an Xbox 360, and it will keep me from ever buying an Nvidia CPU. Of course, I don't drink Kook-Aid, so I'm obviously not the potential customer here.
This doesn't have to be anything like Terminator. It could be much, MUCH better. Think mechanical zombies. That way, no one has to think about putting a bullet in a loved one. Now, if only they could self-replicate, my years of survival horror video games could be put to good use.
This too shall pass. A couple of observations. First, P2P accounts for between one-third and four-fifths of internet traffic, depending on the entities collecting the data and the regions from where the data is collected. Either way, it seems like a lot. Second, internet usage continues to grow. People love YouTube, just wait until the quality improves. How many people are watching Netflix's Watch Now as a result of if being available on so many systems? Third, the economy will prevent many, if not most, ISPs from adding additional bandwidth. Thus, in order to keep up with increased legitimate demand without adding more capacity, it makes since that ISPs would want to reduce demand from file sharing. Simple, really.
My understanding is that while the current uses for cord blood are limited . . .
That may be true. Some of the potential maladies that could be cured by the stem cells in cord blood may be present in the banked blood, for instance genetic disorders. However, if you have more than one child, and you have blood banked for one of your other children, the other child's banked blood could be useful.
I, too, was skeptical of banking my child's blood due to the high cost, but our pediatrician and our OB/GYN both banked their first child's blood and thought it was a good idea. Ultimately, we chose to follow the examples of our doctors. You only get one shot at this. If it's not going to push you to insolvency, you should at least consider it. Some of the maladies which could one day be treated using cord blood may not respond to anything else. Also, the high initial cost can, with most of the cord blood companies, be paid with monthly payments over a few years.
So, you can swap possible long-term memory loss for probable short-term memory loss. I'll wait for the large, double-blind study after they've isolated what exactly in the marijuana, if anything, reduces the risk of Alzheimer's. Meanwhile, there have been recent reports that coffee and red wine could reduce the risk of Alzheimer's. Seems like a safer, not to mention legal, alternative to experimenting on yourself by breathing smoke. Most doctors will agree that any smoking is harmful, and before you say that it can be eaten or steeped like tea, carcinogens can still cause cancer even if not smoked.
It's more about making products people want to buy. How many people really want to buy Microsoft products anymore? When was the last time we heard about people lining up to buy the latest version of Windows? The problem for Microsoft is that it has a hard time making products that excite the vast majority of the public, and they've had a few huge mistakes in public perception lately. The Xbox 360 Red Ring of Death was a just a debacle. They shipped a Zune that was less feature-filled than the then current iteration iPod. Don't get me started on Vista, "Vista Capable," and "Vista Ready," or whatever those stupid stickers said.
Sure, Apple products are cool, but they also work pretty well. Why Microsoft didn't look to Apple's or it's own playbook and more closely linked the Zune to the Windows environment is beyond me. This worked for years with Explorer.
Seriously, Xbox games are "cool." I have an original Xbox, and I have been giving Microsoft my $$$ for several years now for my Xbox Live membership. However, I'm just too stingy to give my money to Microsoft for an Xbox 360 after all the hoopla about failure rates. The race to beat Sony to the market was a failure of vision and an appreciation of paradigm shift. There was a huge market for casual gaming that just wasn't going to be satisfied by the first-person shooter, and Nintendo was able to capture it. We can chalk that up to a happy accident for Nintendo executives, but so what?
If a company tries to be all things to all people, it will be unable to do everything as well as companies that are smaller, more focused, or more nimble. Look at General Motors as example number one. Consumers have too much access to information and too many choices. The problem with Microsoft's executive leadership is that the strategic steps they take are, primarily, reactions to market forces. Then, they are placed in the position of having to respond. Why didn't anyone at Microsoft see that Netbooks might one day become popular and have a version of Vista which would run on them? No one? How long was Intel working on the Atom?
Microsoft stocks are, historically, looking pretty affordable right now, but I'm going to wait. I just don't see any game changing ideas coming out of Redmond. Until, as a company, it starts doing something much better than the competition, it will never rise to its former glory days, and its market share and/or profits will continue to decline.
The main mistake Circuit City made IMHO was that their prices were always higher than their primary competitors (Best Buy, CompUSA, etc.)....
Well, that, along with rotten retail locations and firing the company's most experienced (read, knowledgeable) sales staff.
Sure, the management is at fault, but they only did what they thought would increase shareholder value. Wall Street usually responds positively to layoffs. Cretins.
Welcome to business in the U.S.A., where you matter only as much as the last quarter.
To anyone who jumps on the sensational bandwagon that this is just like Western countries relocating their manufacturing facilities to China, you obviously know nothing about European politics or its economy.
Okay, sure this stinks for the local Irish economy, but citizens in EU countries have freedom of movement. So, big deal. This is no different from a manufacturer relocating from the Northeast U.S. to the South for the lower labor costs. Workers in the EU have the right to move to where the work is. Also, companies in the EU have the freedom to move their operations or "capital."
"Five years ago, a great game would have sold for a longer period of time than for a bad game â" which was essentially our incentive to make great games. But no longer. Now publishers and developers just see revenue the initial few weeks regardless of the game's quality and then gamers start buying used copies which generates money that goes into GameStop's pocket, nobody else's."
I only play console games, so I can't speak for the PC, but there are lots of games which continued to sell well for a long time. On the Xbox Halo 2, Halo 3, CoD4, GoW all continued to sell at a pretty good pace well after launch because they had a lot of replay value. Addictive online multiplayer does that. I never pay full price for something that's single player only because the number of hours/$ is so much lower.
I may be an anomaly, but I've never seen the fun in going back and playing a game on a higher difficulty. On the other hand, I really enjoy playing people online. Game developers either need to lower their costs, or make games that have more compelling online play. Who wants to spend $60 for a game that I can finish in just 10 hours? What if it sucks? That's $6/hr. It's cheaper to just go to a movie. Can you imagine paying $60 to go see a movie and finding out once you're there that it's a dud?
There are lots of PC companies that probably see Windows as a bit of a stumbling block to future sales. Dell has definitely said that it would like to sell machines with OS X. Should a court rule that Apple does not have the right to restrict OS X to its own hardware, that would open the floodgates to major manufacturers including Dell and HP to selling machines with OS X. I
Seriously? Where would all of this software come from? The "ether?" As I understand it, Psystar is buying a separate retail upgrade copy of Mac OS X and installing it into a generic PC box. Were this not so, it would be blatant copyright infringement. There are only so many retail copies of OS X floating around. Win or lose, I can't imagine Apple granting licenses to PC makers to install its products. More likely would be a rollback of the availability of OS X retail upgrades.
Why is it illegal to clone Apple Macintosh computers, but it was not illegal to clone the IBM PC? Why is Apple protected, but IBM was not? What's the distinction?
It's simple. IBM built the original PC using essentially off the shelf parts, and it licensed the DOS operating system from Microsoft without having an exclusivity clause. Microsoft then licensed DOS to Compaq. Compaq was able to make it's PC work like IBM's by reverse engineering the BIOS chip.
Thus, the difference is that Microsoft wanted it's operating system ported to other computers.
Every MMO server/side has it's heroes and that's what some people like about MMOs, you get to be a hero, someone special where you get real recognition from real players rather than simply NPCs telling you you're great in single player games.
Or, you could just take my approach. I get to be a hero everyday. It's called being "Daddy."
I purchased a MacBook over the summer, and it was more expensive than equivalent PCs. You know what? I didn't care. I've had Macs and PCs for years, and I wanted a Mac. I didn't want my wife accidentally installing software. I didn't want to worry about whether the laptop would recognize my old network printer. And, most importantly, I wanted iLife.
I bought a digital camera that is pretty well reviewed, but the included PC software sucks. However, the camera shows up in iMovie. No problems, no gimmicks, no concessions. Say what you will, Macs are about the OS, and OS X is a superior product. It is superior to any offerings from Microsoft, and Linux does not offer the same end user experience. I know, there are some nice installations of Linux, but the experience will be different.
What I really think is that many of the people who blast Macs want to use OS X, but want to pay less for the hardware. Because that can't happen, they blast the specs. Specs are only part of the equation. Compare your average V8 pickup truck to a Volvo station wagon. Sure you can find LOTS of pickup trucks which cost much less with much more horsepower, but the user experience is fundamentally different.
I'm wondering about the rational behind that decision. After all, isn't the ability to use iMovie to make your own home movies a big selling point for the consumer level Macs?
Without a firewire interface, iMovie (and by extension iDVD) seems like it would be useless.
Depends. I bought a Hard Drive DV camera over the summer from BestBuy, and almost all of the cameras were USB 2.0 only. If I remember from shopping for DV cameras, you had to spend over $1,000 to get a HD DV camera with firewire.
Men, do not fear the razor. The Gillete Mach 3 is your friend.
Personally, I prefer my cordless titanium clippers. I'm able to embrace my hair loss while simultaneously paying homage to Hank Paulson. We all know how popular he is today.
Anyone who has ever seen the elderly try to drive a car already knows this is a HORRIBLE idea.
Puhh-lease. My grandmother only drives at about 30 MPH. Of course, she drives at that same 30 MPH through parking lots. And on my driveway. Pretty much 30 MPH at all times, really. Hmmmm. Maybe you're right.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you imagine if Hamlet never came to an end (ok, if you've ever sat through a bad student production, it might have felt like that) but instead ran on for 17 plays, with 8-12 comprising the little-loved Finland arc, play 4 introducing a new love interest who got written out in play 9 and then the whole thing stopped abruptly after play 17 because the Globe burned down? How many modern TV stories have been ruined by this kind of thing? The X-Files? Lost? Buffy?
The inherent assumption that you are making is that Shakespeare would would have a bad sequel. I don't think this is true. Shakespeare was in the business of making money. If he had thought he could make money through making prequels or sequels for some of his popular plays, say Young Hamlet or How We Miss Caesar, he would have, and some of them would have been excellent.
However, I really think that you're missing the point. You're really comparing apples and oranges when you compare Shakespeare's plays, written for the stage, with big budget games or movies. The latter cost a lot of money to develop while in general the former do not. Thus, I think to some degree movies, video games, and even many books (with high unit and distribution costs) become formulaic because of the production costs involved. Many video games cost millions to develop; many movies cost over $100 million. For those types of entertainment, when a corporation with shareholders footing the bill, you're going to see less chances taken. A successful movie or video game is almost like the lottery, so the smart, responsible thing to do for your shareholders is to milk it. Before you say that this doesn't apply to video games, think about how many lines of code it takes to write a decent game that's going to sell. For that, you need someone with money paying you to pay your rent while you're developing your game. That means someone, ultimately, expects to get paid.
Besides, this is what people want. They want to watch or experience the same things that made them happy before. The last thing that a video game developer wants it to hear that its new game sucks compared to the old one. Fanboys can be vocal and vitriolic, and unfortunately many developers spend much of their time keeping their original audience happy, rather than expanding the audience.
. . . My father subscribed to the local major city news paper for 35 years. He remarked how the newspaper had continued to shrink year after year in the past 10 years. Finally they cut out the listing of stocks to just a few blue chips and the bigger local employers and the sports section, which he could read free online. So about a year ago he canceled his subscription and now reads the local sports section online. . . .
I have found the exact same issue with our small town newspaper. For the same price as a major market newspaper, we get one, maybe two, local stories in addition to sports. That's it. It doesn't even publish letters to the editor. Seriously. There are, however, lots of wire reports. I would like to get the local paper, but I can't justify the cost for, essentially, no news.
The real problem is consolidation. Most newspapers are owned my news conglomerates. Years ago, some jerk with an M.B.A. figured out you could increase short term profits by slashing your reporters and editorial staff. All you had to do was buy stories from someone else. Overall, this was less expensive, provided you can't get the same news somewhere else, and it worked until everyone had access to the same stories on the internet. For free. With no recycling.
First, Blackberry captured more market share away from the iPhone in the fourth quarter of 2008, so he should focus his initial boo-hooing on the Canadians. Second, it's not like Microsoft let anyone keep developing anything for the original Xbox. F***ers. Nope, have to buy our new, poorly manufactured, Sony-busting POS if you want to still buy new games. If someone wants to install software on their iPhone that's not available through the App Store, they can jailbreak it. Same thing people have done to add life to their original Xboxes. Thousands of engineers, and all the Microsoft can do is play catchup.
Here's what you do, Steve: Quit your f***ing job. Seriously, just cash out your shares and retire. Let someone better, smarter, and more creative figure out to do with all of Microsoft's R&D $$$. You're not an engineer, Steve; you're not a designer. You're a business guy, Steve. Sure, you're good with numbers and making money, but you're the Jerry Jones of the computer world. You are the embodiment of the Peter Principle, a great number two while the Bill the Puppetmaster was yanking the strings of the PC industry, but we all see you behind the curtain of the little wooden stage.
So, quit, cash out, enjoy your retirement, and grow some tomatoes. Your company and shareholders, not to mention the entire world, would be better off if the strategic direction of your company embodied something more meaningful than being a Johnny-Come-Lately With Lots of Money. Great ideas, new ideas, can create wealth, new industries. You're married to the old, Steve. Let someone new come up with something new.
I just use a text document with point-for-point descritions on how to follow the procedure. It's practical because you can print it and take it to the workfloor and cross the points you've finished. When you find out something new you can easily write it on the paper and add it in the computer file later on. Just make sure there is only one person maintaining the file, to avoid chaos and misunderstandings.
This actually works quite well in a number of settings. Checklists work. Years ago, when I was working through college at a warehouse, I had a job of some responsibility that usually involved me working late nights. Eventually, my boss quit and I was left in charge. To take a night off, and make sure the wheels didn't fall off, I created a text file with a checklist of the nightly procedures. Not only did it force me to think about everything I did, it also helped everyone know how much longer we would have to work each night before we could call it a night. You would be surprised at how much morale can improve if everyone has an idea of what's going on. Managers making decisions, seemingly arbitrarily, don't instill much confidence.
My advice would be to document your procedures, what you actually think needs to be done, and then take some time to distill them into a list. Then, following the list, does the procedure accomplish the task? If yes then move on to the next task.
There was already a short segment on Nova about a year ago about epigenetics. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/video/3411/q02-220.html
From the article: "They have been forced to pay substantially more to acquire the Windows XP operating system than they would have to pay in a competitive marketplace," the complaint read. A competitive marketplace? Seriously? This person could have purchased something else. She could have bought a computer with Linux. What did people expect? A "competitive marketplace for Windows XP?" Companies take products off the market or replace successful versions with newer, "better" versions. Microsoft wanted to quit selling and supporting XP. Was Vista "better" than XP? Most people would say "no," but that doesn't change the fact that Microsoft can still shoot itself in the foot and sell something else.
I'm no Microsoft fan, but it sounds as if $59.25 to get a completely different commercial OS, XP, isn't an egregious fee when you purchased the crummy consumer version of the newer OS, Vista. On the other hand, had I bought a more expensive version of Vista for my business (which I have not done), I would expect that Microsoft would throw in XP for free, maybe so I could run some legacy software for my business that was not completely tested or compatible with Vista.
This makes about as much sense as someone buying a coach ticket on an airline complaining about not getting free drinks like First Class. The alcohol really isn't the issue, even though it may seem that way.
AMEN to this.
What the fuck is authentic these days? I'm sick of the notion that creative output needs to have an olympic mentality to it. It is like the guys that can play 64th note riffs on guitars and then act as if anyone that cannot approach their technical ability has no business playing.
Agreed. Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits doesn't play very fast guitar, but he plays great guitar. Besides, there is a great deal that musicians can do today that was never possible before. Music isn't static, it grows. Otherwise, we'd all have nothing to watch but live symphony performances, or cavemen banging rocks and sticks together.
What I would really like to know is who at Nvidia thinks this is a good idea? Do we really need another x86 supplier? Are they going to aim for the low end or the high end? If it's the high end, I thought that Nvidia contracted out their manufacturing. http://industry.bnet.com/technology/1000386/nvidia-chip-problems-might-be-warning-for-everyone/ Maybe that explains why the company has had trouble with some of its graphics chips in the last year or so. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13554_3-10020782-33.html
Personally, I'm a little tired of companies contracting out their manufacturing to Asia to cut costs, and then not owning up to manufacturing defects when they come to light. It has kept me from buying an Xbox 360, and it will keep me from ever buying an Nvidia CPU. Of course, I don't drink Kook-Aid, so I'm obviously not the potential customer here.
This doesn't have to be anything like Terminator. It could be much, MUCH better. Think mechanical zombies. That way, no one has to think about putting a bullet in a loved one. Now, if only they could self-replicate, my years of survival horror video games could be put to good use.
This too shall pass. A couple of observations. First, P2P accounts for between one-third and four-fifths of internet traffic, depending on the entities collecting the data and the regions from where the data is collected. Either way, it seems like a lot. Second, internet usage continues to grow. People love YouTube, just wait until the quality improves. How many people are watching Netflix's Watch Now as a result of if being available on so many systems? Third, the economy will prevent many, if not most, ISPs from adding additional bandwidth. Thus, in order to keep up with increased legitimate demand without adding more capacity, it makes since that ISPs would want to reduce demand from file sharing. Simple, really.
My understanding is that while the current uses for cord blood are limited . . .
That may be true. Some of the potential maladies that could be cured by the stem cells in cord blood may be present in the banked blood, for instance genetic disorders. However, if you have more than one child, and you have blood banked for one of your other children, the other child's banked blood could be useful.
I, too, was skeptical of banking my child's blood due to the high cost, but our pediatrician and our OB/GYN both banked their first child's blood and thought it was a good idea. Ultimately, we chose to follow the examples of our doctors. You only get one shot at this. If it's not going to push you to insolvency, you should at least consider it. Some of the maladies which could one day be treated using cord blood may not respond to anything else. Also, the high initial cost can, with most of the cord blood companies, be paid with monthly payments over a few years.
So, you can swap possible long-term memory loss for probable short-term memory loss. I'll wait for the large, double-blind study after they've isolated what exactly in the marijuana, if anything, reduces the risk of Alzheimer's. Meanwhile, there have been recent reports that coffee and red wine could reduce the risk of Alzheimer's. Seems like a safer, not to mention legal, alternative to experimenting on yourself by breathing smoke. Most doctors will agree that any smoking is harmful, and before you say that it can be eaten or steeped like tea, carcinogens can still cause cancer even if not smoked.
It's more about making products people want to buy. How many people really want to buy Microsoft products anymore? When was the last time we heard about people lining up to buy the latest version of Windows? The problem for Microsoft is that it has a hard time making products that excite the vast majority of the public, and they've had a few huge mistakes in public perception lately. The Xbox 360 Red Ring of Death was a just a debacle. They shipped a Zune that was less feature-filled than the then current iteration iPod. Don't get me started on Vista, "Vista Capable," and "Vista Ready," or whatever those stupid stickers said.
Sure, Apple products are cool, but they also work pretty well. Why Microsoft didn't look to Apple's or it's own playbook and more closely linked the Zune to the Windows environment is beyond me. This worked for years with Explorer.
Seriously, Xbox games are "cool." I have an original Xbox, and I have been giving Microsoft my $$$ for several years now for my Xbox Live membership. However, I'm just too stingy to give my money to Microsoft for an Xbox 360 after all the hoopla about failure rates. The race to beat Sony to the market was a failure of vision and an appreciation of paradigm shift. There was a huge market for casual gaming that just wasn't going to be satisfied by the first-person shooter, and Nintendo was able to capture it. We can chalk that up to a happy accident for Nintendo executives, but so what?
If a company tries to be all things to all people, it will be unable to do everything as well as companies that are smaller, more focused, or more nimble. Look at General Motors as example number one. Consumers have too much access to information and too many choices. The problem with Microsoft's executive leadership is that the strategic steps they take are, primarily, reactions to market forces. Then, they are placed in the position of having to respond. Why didn't anyone at Microsoft see that Netbooks might one day become popular and have a version of Vista which would run on them? No one? How long was Intel working on the Atom?
Microsoft stocks are, historically, looking pretty affordable right now, but I'm going to wait. I just don't see any game changing ideas coming out of Redmond. Until, as a company, it starts doing something much better than the competition, it will never rise to its former glory days, and its market share and/or profits will continue to decline.
Someone beat me to it. Seriously, it's not as if iWork is that expensive, and there are free alternatives. Why steal it?
The main mistake Circuit City made IMHO was that their prices were always higher than their primary competitors (Best Buy, CompUSA, etc.). ...
Well, that, along with rotten retail locations and firing the company's most experienced (read, knowledgeable) sales staff.
Sure, the management is at fault, but they only did what they thought would increase shareholder value. Wall Street usually responds positively to layoffs. Cretins.
Welcome to business in the U.S.A., where you matter only as much as the last quarter.
There's a wikipedia article which lists free first-person shooters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_free_first-person_shooters
To anyone who jumps on the sensational bandwagon that this is just like Western countries relocating their manufacturing facilities to China, you obviously know nothing about European politics or its economy.
Okay, sure this stinks for the local Irish economy, but citizens in EU countries have freedom of movement. So, big deal. This is no different from a manufacturer relocating from the Northeast U.S. to the South for the lower labor costs. Workers in the EU have the right to move to where the work is. Also, companies in the EU have the freedom to move their operations or "capital."
"Five years ago, a great game would have sold for a longer period of time than for a bad game â" which was essentially our incentive to make great games. But no longer. Now publishers and developers just see revenue the initial few weeks regardless of the game's quality and then gamers start buying used copies which generates money that goes into GameStop's pocket, nobody else's."
I only play console games, so I can't speak for the PC, but there are lots of games which continued to sell well for a long time. On the Xbox Halo 2, Halo 3, CoD4, GoW all continued to sell at a pretty good pace well after launch because they had a lot of replay value. Addictive online multiplayer does that. I never pay full price for something that's single player only because the number of hours/$ is so much lower.
I may be an anomaly, but I've never seen the fun in going back and playing a game on a higher difficulty. On the other hand, I really enjoy playing people online. Game developers either need to lower their costs, or make games that have more compelling online play. Who wants to spend $60 for a game that I can finish in just 10 hours? What if it sucks? That's $6/hr. It's cheaper to just go to a movie. Can you imagine paying $60 to go see a movie and finding out once you're there that it's a dud?
There are lots of PC companies that probably see Windows as a bit of a stumbling block to future sales. Dell has definitely said that it would like to sell machines with OS X. Should a court rule that Apple does not have the right to restrict OS X to its own hardware, that would open the floodgates to major manufacturers including Dell and HP to selling machines with OS X. I
Seriously? Where would all of this software come from? The "ether?" As I understand it, Psystar is buying a separate retail upgrade copy of Mac OS X and installing it into a generic PC box. Were this not so, it would be blatant copyright infringement. There are only so many retail copies of OS X floating around. Win or lose, I can't imagine Apple granting licenses to PC makers to install its products. More likely would be a rollback of the availability of OS X retail upgrades.
QUESTION:
Why is it illegal to clone Apple Macintosh computers, but it was not illegal to clone the IBM PC? Why is Apple protected, but IBM was not? What's the distinction?
It's simple. IBM built the original PC using essentially off the shelf parts, and it licensed the DOS operating system from Microsoft without having an exclusivity clause. Microsoft then licensed DOS to Compaq. Compaq was able to make it's PC work like IBM's by reverse engineering the BIOS chip.
Thus, the difference is that Microsoft wanted it's operating system ported to other computers.
Every MMO server/side has it's heroes and that's what some people like about MMOs, you get to be a hero, someone special where you get real recognition from real players rather than simply NPCs telling you you're great in single player games.
Or, you could just take my approach. I get to be a hero everyday. It's called being "Daddy."
I purchased a MacBook over the summer, and it was more expensive than equivalent PCs. You know what? I didn't care. I've had Macs and PCs for years, and I wanted a Mac. I didn't want my wife accidentally installing software. I didn't want to worry about whether the laptop would recognize my old network printer. And, most importantly, I wanted iLife.
I bought a digital camera that is pretty well reviewed, but the included PC software sucks. However, the camera shows up in iMovie. No problems, no gimmicks, no concessions. Say what you will, Macs are about the OS, and OS X is a superior product. It is superior to any offerings from Microsoft, and Linux does not offer the same end user experience. I know, there are some nice installations of Linux, but the experience will be different.
What I really think is that many of the people who blast Macs want to use OS X, but want to pay less for the hardware. Because that can't happen, they blast the specs. Specs are only part of the equation. Compare your average V8 pickup truck to a Volvo station wagon. Sure you can find LOTS of pickup trucks which cost much less with much more horsepower, but the user experience is fundamentally different.
I'm wondering about the rational behind that decision. After all, isn't the ability to use iMovie to make your own home movies a big selling point for the consumer level Macs?
Without a firewire interface, iMovie (and by extension iDVD) seems like it would be useless.
Depends. I bought a Hard Drive DV camera over the summer from BestBuy, and almost all of the cameras were USB 2.0 only. If I remember from shopping for DV cameras, you had to spend over $1,000 to get a HD DV camera with firewire.
Men, do not fear the razor. The Gillete Mach 3 is your friend.
Personally, I prefer my cordless titanium clippers. I'm able to embrace my hair loss while simultaneously paying homage to Hank Paulson. We all know how popular he is today.
Anyone who has ever seen the elderly try to drive a car already knows this is a HORRIBLE idea.
Puhh-lease. My grandmother only drives at about 30 MPH. Of course, she drives at that same 30 MPH through parking lots. And on my driveway. Pretty much 30 MPH at all times, really. Hmmmm. Maybe you're right.