You bring an interesting point to the table. Disney's official slant on the dvd is that it's based on Hamlet, but for those who want to see what he's talking about, here's the link.
Disney has only made it worse by being unoriginal, stealing ideas, and making crappy movies.
I'm not sure that originality is Disney's biggest problem. After all, some of Disney's biggest 2D hits were based on fairy tales and fables (Beauty & The Beast, The Little Mermaid, and yes, Aladdin and The Lion King [based on Hamlet] ). No, I think the big problem is Disney can't seem to find something that audiences identify with anymore. In the 90's, that something was the production value of a cartoon with Broadway musical numbers combined with the best animation Disney had to offer, and decent story telling (Aladdin was nearly completely rewritten before it was ever released).
So far, Disney can't find that niche to milk it. Pixar has managed to find this formula without musical numbers. Can Disney do the same? So far, the answer seems to be a resounding no.
If you have your work organized in a defined folder structure, your memory will be faster than any Spotlight search...
In part, I agree with you. I'm anal about my folder heiarchy as well. But the problem comes when I have a file that's buried in my d: drive amidst 50 folders, 25 sub folders, and 65 sub-sub folders. Especially when I've not opened that file in 2 years, but remember that it had something valuable in it.
I think that it truthfully depends on the application of search technology, but there's no reason why you can use both methods and win both ways.
I'd have to agree with this...pc hardware is much cheaper, and does have a bit more horsepower for your buck than Apple's offerings.
I love OSX, but I use WinXP. I would love to be able to pick up a copy of OSX for x86. I'd most certainly embrace it, even if the OS was priced higher than XP.
Ever try getting upgrades to newer Windows CE from the hardware vendor? It doesn't happen unless you trash your existing hardware buy the latest device!
You could be right about most devices, but this isn't always the case. Case in point: HP and Dell. Of course, if you're talking cell phones, well...I can't help you there.
Given that the beta GUI is horrid, I've no doubt that MS will improve it...well, then again...look at XP...
Nevertheless, I really wonder how many of MS' GUI designers actually consider function over pretty colors. Not to be an Apple fanboy (I don't even own a mac), but OSX's GUI seems to have function as well as slickness. I'm anxious to see if Longworn:D will do the same.
Also, Apple aren't giving the american consumers what they want - subscription based. For $15 or around, I should be able to rent music.
Who says that's what we want? I couldn't care less about "renting" music...I'm better off listening to the radio if I want to do that. The whole reason I use online stores is I want to OWN certain songs, without paying for the whole album.
But let's not stop with the big 3. Television as a whole has fallen apart. Since when is building a motorcycle DISCOVERY? Since when is someone building a crane out of a hearse a la Monster Garage interesting?
I shudder to say it, but the only thing interesting on television these days is either PBS or the occassional Sci Fi show. And even those are getting fewer and farther between.
My wife and I are moving, and she wants to get satellite. My question is and still remains "why?". What shows are worth paying an extra 35-55 bucks a month for?
So, as an executive, I am going to make sure MS knows I have the money to spend and then I am going to contact all their competitors because I want to ink the best deal possible. And you think it is about employees experience with home machines? Please.
You do have a valid point there. My argument is a little skewed...it's about the managers of the departments who go complaining to the administration saying that they don't have what everyone else uses. It's about employees who complain to these managers about the fact that when they email attachments to a different county, the SXW file doesn't open in the other guy's MSWORD.
There's more, but essentially when the IT department approaches the guy signing the check, he's already been approached by people who are demanding MSWORD.
I'm not saying that this is a good thing, or that I approve. I'm simply stating that this is what happens...people go over IT to administration, and they get what they want. And sometimes even saving money isn't enough to get them to move!! My supervisor (the head of our IT dept.) took a plan to set up a T1 via fiber to our administration. The plan would be saving us money right now, but because of the ignorance of the administration, it was shot down. Those in power will do what they will, and no amount of pleading from those who know better will change their minds unless they are willing to change them.
I agree with you, but I wish Windows would automatically allow you to assign an "always on top" to every single application. That way I wouldn't have to resize my stinking windows in order to watch a dvd while doing something else without using WMP and shrinking it down to the tasktray.
Mainly because I try to keep as many applications out of startup / systray as possible. And the other gentleman is right...even with removing the Office item out of the startup folder, Word runs circles around OO.
Who cares about load up time?
You'd be surprised. Try supporting 200+ people who use Word at home, and complain about the slowness to the big man in charge, then go on to complain that they don't have "real" software. You'd be surprised how many executives don't give a fiddle about paying extra money, as long as it's what "everyone else is using".
But I'm not impressed with Open Office's load times. One of the reasons we aren't moving more people to this particular open source package is that it typically takes 5 times as long to open the Text Document app if you don't have the tasktray icon loading.
So no, we're not planning on moving anyone to Open Office. We have, however, moved a few workstations to Star Office.
Kind of a negative reenforcement?
Eh, doesn't matter to me. I couldn't care less what critics say. I enjoy a movie for what it is, or hate it for what it is. I don't need a critic for that.
(Though I wish I had had one before watching Matrix Reloaded...oy!)
Consider this. Yahoo, MSN, and many others have begun scrambling to provide the same services that Google has right now. Toolbars, Desktop Search apps, and even increased space in your email accounts.
Like it or not, Google has changed the face of the search industry. Will they keep their dominance? It depends on how the technology evolves.
I've not seen any of the other internet based companies have the same impact. I'd say that makes Google pretty important.
Since when does a color palette have to be that lousy dumbed down pastel crud that most studios keep turning out?
This is why I love Chinese and Japanese films so much...they're not afraid to experiment with color, especially vibrant color.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry...that didn't work.
THE LINK
You bring an interesting point to the table. Disney's official slant on the dvd is that it's based on Hamlet, but for those who want to see what he's talking about, here's the link.
I'm not sure that originality is Disney's biggest problem. After all, some of Disney's biggest 2D hits were based on fairy tales and fables (Beauty & The Beast, The Little Mermaid, and yes, Aladdin and The Lion King [based on Hamlet] ). No, I think the big problem is Disney can't seem to find something that audiences identify with anymore. In the 90's, that something was the production value of a cartoon with Broadway musical numbers combined with the best animation Disney had to offer, and decent story telling (Aladdin was nearly completely rewritten before it was ever released).
So far, Disney can't find that niche to milk it. Pixar has managed to find this formula without musical numbers. Can Disney do the same? So far, the answer seems to be a resounding no.
7) ????*
* - Depends on the future market of the iPod/iTunes interaction.
It's actually cheetos. While trying to figure out where the Mountain Dew is as you're attacking the darkness with Magic Missle.
In part, I agree with you. I'm anal about my folder heiarchy as well. But the problem comes when I have a file that's buried in my d: drive amidst 50 folders, 25 sub folders, and 65 sub-sub folders. Especially when I've not opened that file in 2 years, but remember that it had something valuable in it.
I think that it truthfully depends on the application of search technology, but there's no reason why you can use both methods and win both ways.
But you can't. Unless you decide to stop browsing your hard drive using Windows.
IE is embedded deep within Windows Explorer. Next time you wonder, try punching in a website into the address bar for My Computer.
I love OSX, but I use WinXP. I would love to be able to pick up a copy of OSX for x86. I'd most certainly embrace it, even if the OS was priced higher than XP.
You could be right about most devices, but this isn't always the case. Case in point: HP and Dell. Of course, if you're talking cell phones, well...I can't help you there.
Thanks...at least SOMEONE knows Monty Python well enough to quote it. It's a shame to be modded down for a QUOTE on Slashdot.
I bet you're gay.
I thought the same thing. Are you sure it isn't?
Nevertheless, I really wonder how many of MS' GUI designers actually consider function over pretty colors. Not to be an Apple fanboy (I don't even own a mac), but OSX's GUI seems to have function as well as slickness. I'm anxious to see if Longworn :D will do the same.
Who says that's what we want? I couldn't care less about "renting" music...I'm better off listening to the radio if I want to do that. The whole reason I use online stores is I want to OWN certain songs, without paying for the whole album.
I shudder to say it, but the only thing interesting on television these days is either PBS or the occassional Sci Fi show. And even those are getting fewer and farther between.
My wife and I are moving, and she wants to get satellite. My question is and still remains "why?". What shows are worth paying an extra 35-55 bucks a month for?
You do have a valid point there. My argument is a little skewed...it's about the managers of the departments who go complaining to the administration saying that they don't have what everyone else uses. It's about employees who complain to these managers about the fact that when they email attachments to a different county, the SXW file doesn't open in the other guy's MSWORD.
There's more, but essentially when the IT department approaches the guy signing the check, he's already been approached by people who are demanding MSWORD.
I'm not saying that this is a good thing, or that I approve. I'm simply stating that this is what happens...people go over IT to administration, and they get what they want. And sometimes even saving money isn't enough to get them to move!! My supervisor (the head of our IT dept.) took a plan to set up a T1 via fiber to our administration. The plan would be saving us money right now, but because of the ignorance of the administration, it was shot down. Those in power will do what they will, and no amount of pleading from those who know better will change their minds unless they are willing to change them.
I agree with you, but I wish Windows would automatically allow you to assign an "always on top" to every single application. That way I wouldn't have to resize my stinking windows in order to watch a dvd while doing something else without using WMP and shrinking it down to the tasktray.
Yes, I'm surprised MS' marketting manager is resorting to sarcasm and wit these days.
Mainly because I try to keep as many applications out of startup / systray as possible. And the other gentleman is right...even with removing the Office item out of the startup folder, Word runs circles around OO.
Who cares about load up time?
You'd be surprised. Try supporting 200+ people who use Word at home, and complain about the slowness to the big man in charge, then go on to complain that they don't have "real" software. You'd be surprised how many executives don't give a fiddle about paying extra money, as long as it's what "everyone else is using".
But I'm not impressed with Open Office's load times. One of the reasons we aren't moving more people to this particular open source package is that it typically takes 5 times as long to open the Text Document app if you don't have the tasktray icon loading.
So no, we're not planning on moving anyone to Open Office. We have, however, moved a few workstations to Star Office.
Kind of a negative reenforcement? Eh, doesn't matter to me. I couldn't care less what critics say. I enjoy a movie for what it is, or hate it for what it is. I don't need a critic for that. (Though I wish I had had one before watching Matrix Reloaded...oy!)
Consider this. Yahoo, MSN, and many others have begun scrambling to provide the same services that Google has right now. Toolbars, Desktop Search apps, and even increased space in your email accounts. Like it or not, Google has changed the face of the search industry. Will they keep their dominance? It depends on how the technology evolves. I've not seen any of the other internet based companies have the same impact. I'd say that makes Google pretty important.
Since when does a color palette have to be that lousy dumbed down pastel crud that most studios keep turning out? This is why I love Chinese and Japanese films so much...they're not afraid to experiment with color, especially vibrant color.