I like that companies try new things, but really do we need Microsoft focusing on some integration of some phone support in a browser?
I think too many software companies still have the philosophy that more is better. In reality we just want the tool to work right the first time and be secure. I think Microsoft should focus all its effort on producing a fast totally secure web browser first. Then when that is done create a API in which you add-on features you want (which will not break nor leave the original funtionality open to bugs or hacks). Quit screwing around by rewriting code and adding more crap to programs that only a few people might use. Secure the program and give people the option to add it later.
I don't get it. It seems the article points several times to this:
"applications will be written for the WebOS and won't be specific to Windows, OS X, or Linux."
Someone enlighten me because I thought that is what all the languages used on the web do right now. PHP, Perl, Javascript, etc. It doesn't seem to me that a WebOS will provide any greater benefit that coding in Perl (or pick one). They are completely platform independant.
The article then quotes a couple users who says that Java and DHTML + Javascript is a mess. Well, yeah, but what language isn't? All programming languages have problems that why there are so many of them. What am I missing?
Not enough time has passed since the last movie. They need a bigger break because they will still have the same people who have been dragging down the movies for a while. Unless the screenplay is truly orginal and very creatively written this is not going to be that good. The problem with the last couple of movies is that rather than create a fantastic movie around a fantastic story being told they are creating a movie to create a movie and using the template of Star Trek to do it. If you think of the very successful movies in the franchise they are the ones in which the writing of the story was original and out of the box.
How many extra pixels will you be able to put on the 15" with the High Defination now?
--
Seriously though, I see the market for the High Defination DVDs as something which is better than normal DVD. The makers are going to be charging premium prices for a while. Not having seen either of these two formats I venture a guess and say in order to see a substantial benefit in quality you are also going to have the other componenant which is a very good television. The people who have these don't mind spending the cash for the stand alones and will do so. Whether the PS3 has the player or not won't increase sales for them.
Now, for the rest of the market--if you are saying that they will buy the PS3 and not the stand alone and reasonably save money, you are correct. However, the person saving money this way, on average, will not have the money for the other expensive toy: the television to view the better effects. My take is that people will buy a BR DVD for a premium price and play it in the PS3 on a regular television and not see much of a difference. When that happens they will ask why am I spending a premium on a BR DVD when I can buy the same for less. And from that PS3 might cause a spike in sales but then it will drop.
The other thing to realize is that now that SUSE was bought by Novell it "corporate". Ubuntu is not. Once something because a corporate item it is perfectly acceptable for other corporations to buy it. But even if the product is very similiar and is not corporate; they will shy away.
Well, I hope you are not tired of reading; because the media hype is just going to get worse.
When both formats are up and running you will not be able to go anywhere and not read about this stuff. There is too much cash involved just to leave the decision up to the consumer. The companies backing the standards simply are not going to trust you to make the choice--they are going to let you know what to think. And the way they are going to do that is by running thousands of ads; ghost writing reviews, etc.
It's just beginning and you haven't heard nothing yet.
If this site/domain name was not well know the hackers would just type in an IP like Click for Rootkit and get what they need.
Simply because they use a domain name and the site is known does not make the information malicious. If you don't think rotating sites on rotating server exist to share compromised media and discussion about server cracking then you don't know anything. Rookit.com is open and out there, but the malicious people don't just stop here. Removing rootkit.com off the face of the earth would do zero to stop server compromises and rootkits.
And don't get me started about the quote..." make it advisable "to throw the computer away" if you want to be sure you got rid of the rootkit". Talk about scare tactics...sheesh. How often do you see a BIOS rootkit? And if you did, why don't you just reflash the BIOS? Or is this a sinister plan to make companies throw out old hardware to buy new so they buy new faster stuff to run Vista. That's it! It's all Microsoft's fault. Amazing how fast we can go do the jump off the bridge path.
I don't think he is worried about that; it is more an issue with things like: you agree to let us search your computer for cheat codes, install root kits to monitor DRM, etc. Even so, there are some states in the US which do require plain language contracts and that means all the legal limitations must be explained in plain english so a normal person can understand them.
Not really. A company won't necessarily take the short term profit, but they will always take the long term profit interest incentive. You mention that we will not have standards--not true. We will so long as it is in the interest of the company to do so. AOL clearly supports the TCP/IP standard because it is in "its" interest to do so, not the public interest. If AOL didn't support this standard then they would be isolated so they cleary support this open standard.
Look at the high defination DVD standards coming out, HD-DVD v. Blue Ray. The companies backing these standards are not damaging the public interest, but are putting their interest ahead of the public's desire for one format. The reason? Because the winner will get a whole lot more money. I don't think I am saying that the public interest is being damaged, but that it just comes second. Sometimes the public benefits from these corporate interest battles. This is nothing but the free market at work; capitalism.
In those days all the content in the world was located at Compuserve. They had the user base, the content but could not keep up. It was a sad day when they were folded into the big machine.
Don't you really mean the future of free speech was last week? It's time has already past. We are under the oppression of dictators like...
[automatically interrupted/edited by AOL software] [AOL, the future is here] [Do you have AOL broadband? Try now!] [AOL is my friend] [This post and all future posts and all content are now owned by AOL] [Copyright (c) 1984 AOL/Time Warner All your rights are ours]
From the article: "Left to their own devices, AOL will always put its own self interest ahead of the public interest."
Well, yeah, no kidding. Since when did the "public interest" pay AOL for anything? Unless there is a law which says AOL cannot filter its "own" servers, too bad. It is AOL's right to do anything like this it wants to.
Is this the best thing to do? Obviously not, however don't be shocked when it does happen. Unless you control your own email completely (from the ISP right down to the server) you are relying on someone else. And that someone else ultimately has their interests in mind before yours.
Now, do some companies care about your interest? Sure, but they are not going to place your interest above theirs, otherwise they will be out of business. Supressing propangda which might cost you money; I don't think any business wouldn't consider that; and most, if not all, would try it.
Tivo has a current promotion in which you actually get the box for free.
--
On another note, while this is a victory, it is not that much. 73 million does not go a long way now, however, it will stave off the Tivo is dead people because now Tivo will have some operating cash flow (assuming they get it quickly; with appeals, maybe in the next five years).
Slashdot Mirror
This is slashdot, nothing is offtopic and everyone looks like a moron. This is just my day.
If you're happy and you know it clap your hands...
You're right I misread. I thought they were implementing phone support into the browser.
I like that companies try new things, but really do we need Microsoft focusing on some integration of some phone support in a browser?
I think too many software companies still have the philosophy that more is better. In reality we just want the tool to work right the first time and be secure. I think Microsoft should focus all its effort on producing a fast totally secure web browser first. Then when that is done create a API in which you add-on features you want (which will not break nor leave the original funtionality open to bugs or hacks). Quit screwing around by rewriting code and adding more crap to programs that only a few people might use. Secure the program and give people the option to add it later.
"applications will be written for the WebOS and won't be specific to Windows, OS X, or Linux."
Someone enlighten me because I thought that is what all the languages used on the web do right now. PHP, Perl, Javascript, etc. It doesn't seem to me that a WebOS will provide any greater benefit that coding in Perl (or pick one). They are completely platform independant.
The article then quotes a couple users who says that Java and DHTML + Javascript is a mess. Well, yeah, but what language isn't? All programming languages have problems that why there are so many of them. What am I missing?
I would see that only if it had the original cast. Can't you just see Spock and Kirk in duet?
Not enough time has passed since the last movie. They need a bigger break because they will still have the same people who have been dragging down the movies for a while. Unless the screenplay is truly orginal and very creatively written this is not going to be that good. The problem with the last couple of movies is that rather than create a fantastic movie around a fantastic story being told they are creating a movie to create a movie and using the template of Star Trek to do it. If you think of the very successful movies in the franchise they are the ones in which the writing of the story was original and out of the box.
>>Why don't you call your local bar association and ask for a referral to an employement lawyer?
Referral? Referral? They don't need no stinkin' referral. They got Slashdot! Home of Perfect Legal Advice. One million nerds can't be wrong!
How many extra pixels will you be able to put on the 15" with the High Defination now?
--
Seriously though, I see the market for the High Defination DVDs as something which is better than normal DVD. The makers are going to be charging premium prices for a while. Not having seen either of these two formats I venture a guess and say in order to see a substantial benefit in quality you are also going to have the other componenant which is a very good television. The people who have these don't mind spending the cash for the stand alones and will do so. Whether the PS3 has the player or not won't increase sales for them.
Now, for the rest of the market--if you are saying that they will buy the PS3 and not the stand alone and reasonably save money, you are correct. However, the person saving money this way, on average, will not have the money for the other expensive toy: the television to view the better effects. My take is that people will buy a BR DVD for a premium price and play it in the PS3 on a regular television and not see much of a difference. When that happens they will ask why am I spending a premium on a BR DVD when I can buy the same for less. And from that PS3 might cause a spike in sales but then it will drop.
It will be tied up in Tax Court (where you appeal decisions like this) for years.
The other thing to realize is that now that SUSE was bought by Novell it "corporate". Ubuntu is not. Once something because a corporate item it is perfectly acceptable for other corporations to buy it. But even if the product is very similiar and is not corporate; they will shy away.
>>but he seemed to have some leadership talent. You don't become a "boss of bosses" otherwise.
Maybe, he just whacked anyone who dared to disagree. Everyone else just fell into line.
I think this is one occupation where traditional management styles may not apply.
these people to be brain surgeons did you?
Well, I hope you are not tired of reading; because the media hype is just going to get worse.
When both formats are up and running you will not be able to go anywhere and not read about this stuff. There is too much cash involved just to leave the decision up to the consumer. The companies backing the standards simply are not going to trust you to make the choice--they are going to let you know what to think. And the way they are going to do that is by running thousands of ads; ghost writing reviews, etc.
It's just beginning and you haven't heard nothing yet.
Does it work kind of like this?
No, its not. See the next Post.
Simply because they use a domain name and the site is known does not make the information malicious. If you don't think rotating sites on rotating server exist to share compromised media and discussion about server cracking then you don't know anything. Rookit.com is open and out there, but the malicious people don't just stop here. Removing rootkit.com off the face of the earth would do zero to stop server compromises and rootkits.
And don't get me started about the quote..." make it advisable "to throw the computer away" if you want to be sure you got rid of the rootkit". Talk about scare tactics...sheesh. How often do you see a BIOS rootkit? And if you did, why don't you just reflash the BIOS? Or is this a sinister plan to make companies throw out old hardware to buy new so they buy new faster stuff to run Vista. That's it! It's all Microsoft's fault. Amazing how fast we can go do the jump off the bridge path.
Block out the sun...
They tried to contact AOL. The message bounced back and was rejected.
Stop being so logical and informative in your posts. That's not what we are here for on Slashdot.
I don't think he is worried about that; it is more an issue with things like: you agree to let us search your computer for cheat codes, install root kits to monitor DRM, etc. Even so, there are some states in the US which do require plain language contracts and that means all the legal limitations must be explained in plain english so a normal person can understand them.
Not really. A company won't necessarily take the short term profit, but they will always take the long term profit interest incentive. You mention that we will not have standards--not true. We will so long as it is in the interest of the company to do so. AOL clearly supports the TCP/IP standard because it is in "its" interest to do so, not the public interest. If AOL didn't support this standard then they would be isolated so they cleary support this open standard.
Look at the high defination DVD standards coming out, HD-DVD v. Blue Ray. The companies backing these standards are not damaging the public interest, but are putting their interest ahead of the public's desire for one format. The reason? Because the winner will get a whole lot more money. I don't think I am saying that the public interest is being damaged, but that it just comes second. Sometimes the public benefits from these corporate interest battles. This is nothing but the free market at work; capitalism.
In those days all the content in the world was located at Compuserve. They had the user base, the content but could not keep up. It was a sad day when they were folded into the big machine.
Don't you really mean the future of free speech was last week? It's time has already past. We are under the oppression of dictators like ...
[automatically interrupted/edited by AOL software]
[AOL, the future is here]
[Do you have AOL broadband? Try now!]
[AOL is my friend]
[This post and all future posts and all content are now owned by AOL]
[Copyright (c) 1984 AOL/Time Warner All your rights are ours]
From the article: "Left to their own devices, AOL will always put its own self interest ahead of the public interest."
Well, yeah, no kidding. Since when did the "public interest" pay AOL for anything? Unless there is a law which says AOL cannot filter its "own" servers, too bad. It is AOL's right to do anything like this it wants to.
Is this the best thing to do? Obviously not, however don't be shocked when it does happen. Unless you control your own email completely (from the ISP right down to the server) you are relying on someone else. And that someone else ultimately has their interests in mind before yours.
Now, do some companies care about your interest? Sure, but they are not going to place your interest above theirs, otherwise they will be out of business. Supressing propangda which might cost you money; I don't think any business wouldn't consider that; and most, if not all, would try it.
Tivo has a current promotion in which you actually get the box for free.
--
On another note, while this is a victory, it is not that much. 73 million does not go a long way now, however, it will stave off the Tivo is dead people because now Tivo will have some operating cash flow (assuming they get it quickly; with appeals, maybe in the next five years).