Okay, again a legitimate, factual point. Perhaps the intention of your parent post was lost in the ensuing replies, but I have been talking about hypothetical "what-ifs." Yes, Apple doesn't make money from selling their OS, but from selling their hardware. We agree on this. Though if Apple sold their OS for open x86 architecture -AND- sold hardware also -OR- only sold software, the price of their OS would most likely rise to match Microsoft's OS costs. That is all that I said. I think. Let me go back and read my posts. Eh, I'm too lazy. And off in 12 minutes. Sweet! Later!
You know, I don't know where it goes, but when you leave it on the curb next to the mailbox (sans-return address), the mail person will happily remove it from the premises.
That is true, but if we apply your logic to the particular discussion at hand, Microsoft would have been freely giving away Windows licenses to any bum like you or me long ago. Sure MS makes more in (on? from?) the professional sector, but I don't think they mind the "few" additional billions in their coffer from consumer XP sales. I don't mean to be an ass, as what you say is true, but your comment is completely off-topic.
You're absolutely right. I probably should have mentioned that I'm a rabid OS X supporter and 50/50 user between OS X (personal) and XP (business - the sad truth). If Apple's other business stayed the same, OS X could have it's price raised, or if they didn't raise it, Microsoft would have to drop Windows prices for sure. That said, my assumption was based on Apple becoming a software-only company, in which case they'd have to raise prices by default. I'm sure their OS development costs are right in line with Microsoft's (BTW, any real data on this would be awesome. Anyone?), so the retail prices would likely be similar too, IF Apple wasn't selling hardware anymore.
Well, one's thing is for sure -- I won't be posting pictures on my website showing off my USPS poster tube bong (DISCLAIMER: For tobacco use only) anytime soon. My USPS "toilet" probably wouldn't go over too well either . . .
Well, take this only as my assumption, but Apple would likely charge the same amount as Microsoft for their OS -- if not more (which I'm sure Jobs could justify with his pretty marketing spin) -- if/when they release OS X for open x86 hardware.
Will Apple do such? I don't think many people have any point of reference to make an educated guess about that. They certainly would not sell OS X to the mass market for $129 though.
I assume this is intended to be funny (i.e. sarcastic), not insightful. And if you're being sarcastic, you're absolutely right. Why the hell would companies proactively fill positions with people of different races just to make some "politically correct" quota? This is just as bullshit as affirmative action.
Sure, there are ignorant companies out there that hesitate to hire *qualified* minorities, but would a qualified black person really want to work at company who only hiring to accomodate a law and doesn't even really want them?
It goes both ways too: if a company without bigotry doesn't receive any interest in available positions from minorities, should they feel the need to proactively hire on minorities who don't care in the first place?
I guess my point is, this article is a bunch of useless words. A person is a person is a person.
"It took me three readings and copious notes to work out what the connecting threads were between chapters, and in turn, between his examples and the main elements of his thesis. Bluntly, the dots are there, but he fails to connect them effectively."
It sounds like the author's reading into it a little too much and making his own dots to connect. I would say he's an idiot, but the review well written otherwise. I guess he's just fucking crazy.
Not necessarily. I happen to be a drunken bum in the US, and many people here will use that term to address me. I'm not sure if a Brit or American coined the term . . . wait, let me check. Nope can't find it. I guess this post isn't getting an +1 Informative.
Oh, and how'd you know I was a drunken bum? Your one of those interweb hackers, huh!?
And then there's people like me who could care less about people like you who care a lot about things like karma on a website like Slashdot that nobody aside from the people AT Slashdot care about.
Or were you being funny? If so, touché my friend, touché.
Think about it. If Microsoft had 5 million version 1 Xbox 360s (sans HD-DVD) in consumers hands, then released a hardware revision that supported HD-DVD and started releasing games on HD-DVD media, what happens to those 5 million other consoles out there that can't play these new games? That won't happen.
On the other hand, the HD-DVD spec includes the ability to have a single disc with one or two HD-DVD layers and a standard 4.7GB DVD layer that will play in any standard DVD player (or in this case, game console). So, we may see Microsoft release games on such media with extra content on the HD-DVD layers, but the games will always be on a standard DVD layer.
As long as people with the original hardware are not forced to pay extra for this stuff when they can't actually access it, there's really no harm to this.
Touché, my friend. You indeed didn't say much at all. I guess your comment regarding hiring a middle-schooler to write professional scripts/stories was misinterpreted by me as stupid, when I clearly should have known that it was an educated opinion of a person who thinks of themselves "AAA." I'm KOSBNR (kind of sorry but not really). Enjoy your weekend!
So, if I'm a singer/songwriter in Canada, I would get paid royalties, but if I was a singer in a pop group that didn't write their own songs, I wouldn't get anything, well, other than the label pays?
I'm not disputing what you're saying, I'm just curious if that is how it works.
Or, just read the fucking article. The author's point goes far beyond taking some idea for a game and hiring someone to put words in the characters mouth. Of course, if you can't bother to read, no one should expect you to know anything about writing.
Mod me +1 Flamebait please. Oh, yeah, flamebait is a negative thing . . .
Regarding what ooPo said, "people are voting with their dollar" and "Guys dislike crappy games, too" are referecing the fact that these games that this woman is complaining about are good games in their own right, and that we are technically voting with our dollar.
Some shitty games make hundreds of millions in revenue, but with the popularity of review sites these days (and perhaps aided by some people's gullibility), as well as the increased complexity of the Big Three's hardware revisions, I think that there will be a decrease in subpar games coming out.
The talented developers at the tiny studios which can't float themselves through the next console generation are going to be aborbed by the big studios pushing out licensed games. Where you had b-rate people working on these types of games in the past, you know have a multitude of top rate, innovative developers coming at you from all over the place. Just a thought.
The later revisions of the original gray-box PlayStation also had a controllable visualizer that you could activate by pressing 'select' while playing a CD. It was actually pretty cool for something stupid you would never use. I was kinda surprised that the PS2 doesn't do anything similar. That block is kinda stupid, I think, but all my music is MP3s, so what should I care?
Slashdot Mirror
Is anyone following this?
**SLAMS head on desk**
**Ow.**
Okay, again a legitimate, factual point. Perhaps the intention of your parent post was lost in the ensuing replies, but I have been talking about hypothetical "what-ifs." Yes, Apple doesn't make money from selling their OS, but from selling their hardware. We agree on this. Though if Apple sold their OS for open x86 architecture -AND- sold hardware also -OR- only sold software, the price of their OS would most likely rise to match Microsoft's OS costs. That is all that I said. I think. Let me go back and read my posts. Eh, I'm too lazy. And off in 12 minutes. Sweet! Later!
You know, I don't know where it goes, but when you leave it on the curb next to the mailbox (sans-return address), the mail person will happily remove it from the premises.
That is true, but if we apply your logic to the particular discussion at hand, Microsoft would have been freely giving away Windows licenses to any bum like you or me long ago. Sure MS makes more in (on? from?) the professional sector, but I don't think they mind the "few" additional billions in their coffer from consumer XP sales. I don't mean to be an ass, as what you say is true, but your comment is completely off-topic.
You're absolutely right. I probably should have mentioned that I'm a rabid OS X supporter and 50/50 user between OS X (personal) and XP (business - the sad truth). If Apple's other business stayed the same, OS X could have it's price raised, or if they didn't raise it, Microsoft would have to drop Windows prices for sure. That said, my assumption was based on Apple becoming a software-only company, in which case they'd have to raise prices by default. I'm sure their OS development costs are right in line with Microsoft's (BTW, any real data on this would be awesome. Anyone?), so the retail prices would likely be similar too, IF Apple wasn't selling hardware anymore.
Yeah, my favorite Goatse pic. Why do you ask?
Well, one's thing is for sure -- I won't be posting pictures on my website showing off my USPS poster tube bong (DISCLAIMER: For tobacco use only) anytime soon. My USPS "toilet" probably wouldn't go over too well either . . .
Well, take this only as my assumption, but Apple would likely charge the same amount as Microsoft for their OS -- if not more (which I'm sure Jobs could justify with his pretty marketing spin) -- if/when they release OS X for open x86 hardware.
Will Apple do such? I don't think many people have any point of reference to make an educated guess about that. They certainly would not sell OS X to the mass market for $129 though.
I assume this is intended to be funny (i.e. sarcastic), not insightful. And if you're being sarcastic, you're absolutely right. Why the hell would companies proactively fill positions with people of different races just to make some "politically correct" quota? This is just as bullshit as affirmative action.
Sure, there are ignorant companies out there that hesitate to hire *qualified* minorities, but would a qualified black person really want to work at company who only hiring to accomodate a law and doesn't even really want them?
It goes both ways too: if a company without bigotry doesn't receive any interest in available positions from minorities, should they feel the need to proactively hire on minorities who don't care in the first place?
I guess my point is, this article is a bunch of useless words. A person is a person is a person.
Huh? I don't understand.
. . . motherfucker!
It sounds like the author's reading into it a little too much and making his own dots to connect. I would say he's an idiot, but the review well written otherwise. I guess he's just fucking crazy.
Not necessarily. I happen to be a drunken bum in the US, and many people here will use that term to address me. I'm not sure if a Brit or American coined the term . . . wait, let me check. Nope can't find it. I guess this post isn't getting an +1 Informative.
Oh, and how'd you know I was a drunken bum? Your one of those interweb hackers, huh!?
And then there's people like me who could care less about people like you who care a lot about things like karma on a website like Slashdot that nobody aside from the people AT Slashdot care about.
Or were you being funny? If so, touché my friend, touché.
You're not alone. My first impulse as soon as I saw the story was to post what you did. Bastard. =)
Think about it. If Microsoft had 5 million version 1 Xbox 360s (sans HD-DVD) in consumers hands, then released a hardware revision that supported HD-DVD and started releasing games on HD-DVD media, what happens to those 5 million other consoles out there that can't play these new games? That won't happen.
On the other hand, the HD-DVD spec includes the ability to have a single disc with one or two HD-DVD layers and a standard 4.7GB DVD layer that will play in any standard DVD player (or in this case, game console). So, we may see Microsoft release games on such media with extra content on the HD-DVD layers, but the games will always be on a standard DVD layer.
As long as people with the original hardware are not forced to pay extra for this stuff when they can't actually access it, there's really no harm to this.
PS. Starting Score: 1 point Moderation -1 100% Flamebait Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier 0 (Edit) Total Score: 0
Juno? I think NetZero is a far better planet name personally.
Thank you. I feel sarcasm is THE elixir for the soul. And b33r.
Touché, my friend. You indeed didn't say much at all. I guess your comment regarding hiring a middle-schooler to write professional scripts/stories was misinterpreted by me as stupid, when I clearly should have known that it was an educated opinion of a person who thinks of themselves "AAA." I'm KOSBNR (kind of sorry but not really). Enjoy your weekend!
So, if I'm a singer/songwriter in Canada, I would get paid royalties, but if I was a singer in a pop group that didn't write their own songs, I wouldn't get anything, well, other than the label pays?
I'm not disputing what you're saying, I'm just curious if that is how it works.
Or, just read the fucking article. The author's point goes far beyond taking some idea for a game and hiring someone to put words in the characters mouth. Of course, if you can't bother to read, no one should expect you to know anything about writing.
Mod me +1 Flamebait please. Oh, yeah, flamebait is a negative thing . . .
Mod parent +1 Funny please, you uptight jerks =P
Regarding what ooPo said, "people are voting with their dollar" and "Guys dislike crappy games, too" are referecing the fact that these games that this woman is complaining about are good games in their own right, and that we are technically voting with our dollar.
Some shitty games make hundreds of millions in revenue, but with the popularity of review sites these days (and perhaps aided by some people's gullibility), as well as the increased complexity of the Big Three's hardware revisions, I think that there will be a decrease in subpar games coming out.
The talented developers at the tiny studios which can't float themselves through the next console generation are going to be aborbed by the big studios pushing out licensed games. Where you had b-rate people working on these types of games in the past, you know have a multitude of top rate, innovative developers coming at you from all over the place. Just a thought.
The later revisions of the original gray-box PlayStation also had a controllable visualizer that you could activate by pressing 'select' while playing a CD. It was actually pretty cool for something stupid you would never use. I was kinda surprised that the PS2 doesn't do anything similar. That block is kinda stupid, I think, but all my music is MP3s, so what should I care?
Aww, beat me to the punch.