Call of Duty is quite a game in that regard. I'm not claiming to know what it really feels like to be a soldier, but after playing that game, I had a much deeper respect for those who have lost their lives in war, fighting for my freedoms. There were times where I was actually fearful of my character dying. Powerful game, that one is. Powerful game.
Now we know where you have been for the last year. Under a rock somewhere. GTA:SAs rating was NOT changed because of the violence. There was a mod that unlocked a pixelated sex scene between two consenting adults who happened to be both wearing clothes. Google hot coffee. Look it up on Wikipedia. But by golly, don't go around claiming that GTA:SA is AO because you can kill and slaughter and otherwise cause mayhem.
You are absolutely correct. Just because he's not going to leave until July 2008, and just because he is giving up his day-to-day activities while remaining chairman of the board and "advisor for key development projects" doesn't mean he should still be considered at all a leader of any kind over at MS right now in August of 2006.
You may be a native English speaker, but from where? In the US I rarely hear people say 2nd of August. I hear August 2nd. A few posts up someone said that in England it is said the way you say it. Thus, English influenced places do it differently than US influenced places.
And concerning the 12 o'clock hour...the 12 hour clock needs some fixing. I am constantly getting my AMs and PMs mixed up. I really wish people would ignore AM and PM at noon and midnight. I have made it a habit to say noon thirty or midnight twenty-five or whatever to make sure people know what I am talking about.
Why does doing something backwards make logical sense? It should be done yy/mm/dd. That's how I do anything on that needs to be organized by date. I have lots of folders and files named that way, journal entries, newsletters, image folders, etc. Actually they are yyyy_mm_dd but the idea is the same.
The same is true for time. We don't write 41:07, we write 7:41. So the same should be true of dates.
Also, how much do you think Sony paid Nvidia to have him say that? I'm taking bets.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say Sony paid him a contract for the GPU in the PS3. In addition to that, that's the only next-gen console GPU nVidia made so they have a reason to hype the PS3 over the other consoles.
OK, the word of the day is presumed. I'm not concerned in this instance whether we are talking legally, ethically, or two guys talking at the water cooler. If you are innocent, then no amount of proof will make you guilty. If you are guilty, no lack of proof will make you innocent. One can presume innocence until proven guilty, one can presume guilt, until proven innocent, one can even presume one way or the other despite proof to the contrary. But you cannot be made non-innocent (and thus guilty), simply by proof of the fact. Otherwise, what fact would be proven.
Okay, I'll talk. In third grade I cheated on my history
exam. In fourth grade I stole my Uncle Max's toupe and I glued it on
my face when I played Moses in my Hebrew school play. In fifth grade I
knocked my sister Edith down the stairs and I blamed it on the dog...
Actually, everybody is innocent until they do something which would make them guilty. Proof of a fact does not create and/or change it. The laws of physics, math, etc. were working in an orderly manner well before any one decided to write them up and prove them. I think you were looking for "presumed innocent until proven guilty."
See, the monitor's pixels would change in such a way that they absorb only the wavelength of light that is supposed to be displayed. Then we will all wear those lights on our heads that miners do, only they will be powered by our urine. Huge savings in power will be realized.
Don't worry. If the pins and needles multiply enough then you will essentially be on a bed of nails and that is doable. And then they will multiply even more until you are practically on flat ground. So those pins and needles that were once poking you will soon enough be as flat, stable and boring as a slab of metal.
Come to think of it, I think there is a metaphore for stuff that's overly hype in there.
That's all fine and good, but the functionality is the same, and the table says that Firefox and Opera don't have it. So in essence they are claiming the Firefox and Opera don't have the ability to mark web pages for easy retrieval later. That's like saying the French don't have heads simply because their word for it is tete. Same thing, different name.
Did you know that by default SDL uses DirectX drivers though for graphics on Windows?
Did you know that SDL tries to make the interface for GUIs the same on multiple platforms? They aren't trying to rewrite those interfaces, just to make an intermediate level for programmers so they don't have to know how to write for a particular platform. That SDL uses DirectX doesn't surprise me, nor anyone else who understands what the SDL is trying to do. DirectX is a great API. Why not use it? Put simply, because it is Windows Only. So write to SDL. Then you can write to many platforms all at once, and if SDL uses DirectX underneath on Windows, then great, you've gotten the benefit of DirectX plus the benefit of cross-platform code.
I think standards does not mean what you think it means. You are using it more like format. The idea of a private or closed standard is absurd. In that case you are using a proprietary format of some variety. That's not a standard.
Also look at Wikipedia's entry on screws and you will find that most of the different head types were proprietary to prevent people from undoing the screws. Then there are head shapes, which are used for different applications. This would be akin to using html for simple web pages, css for special formatting, PDF for exact formating, etc. That is different tools for different applications.
So you see a difference in light sockets. Did you notice the examples you gave were different sockets for different types of bulbs? Would you like all computer ports to look like PS/2? Then the keyboard/mouse ports, video ports, USB ports, power ports, Firewire ports, mic ports, speaker ports, printer ports and others can all be the same. Let's just forget that there are different demands required of each of them, let alone the confusion that would cause when plugging things in, especially for non-technical people. There are reasons why halogen, LED, fluourescent, incandescent and PAR 64s have different light sockets. Not only is it for the physical demands, it's also to keep people from trying to plug incadescents into halogen sockets, etc.
Nay, standards are a good thing, and as soon as people realize that, the better off we will all be. I agree, sometimes it's necessary to break away from the standard to add new features, and that doing so can be hard. If it wasn't we'd already have switched from gas engines to corn oil or something cleaner. Just look around you at all the things that are standard, whether it be by nature or by dictate: Spelling, Grammar, Music, Scientific Method, electricity, etc. If it weren't for that we'd all be in a heap of trouble.
It's just not suited to you. You have other ways you would prefer to get them. So it's not for you. It wouldn't be for me either. But it might be for some people. If you wanted to watch it on DVD, you have Netflix. In fact, if you wanted to watch it on your Nokia 770/PSP/GP32X/other-gadget-I-may-or-may-not-own you could get it from Netflix, rip it, reformat it, watch it, and then delete it when your done to remain honest.
The issue is NOT whether DRM is appropriate for this model. This is really the only reasonable scenario I see DRM as appropriapate. The real issue is whether this model is appropriate for you. Apparently not, and that is fine. That is why there are music subscription services, and music download services. Different strokes for different folks.
Still, no way, no how. I don't care who packages the DRM of this sort. Its wrong. If I pay for it I want access to it when I want to access it. Otherwise refund me when it expires.
Three cheers for reading comprehension! This is for rented movies. You can access when you want to access it during the time that the rental agreement allows. Same thing goes at Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, Netfliz, etc. You can't just rent a movie and expect to keep it forever.
I'm against DRM on purchased stuff as well. But to cry over DRM on rented stuff is just silly. You don't own it in any way shape or form. I don't mean that from even a copyright perspective. I mean you don't even own the plastic disk it came on or the file it's stored in or whatever. If you rent it, you agree to the terms, and here the terms are that the movie watching privileges go away after a certain time, just like any other movie rental, but they use DRM to enforce it. Boo-hoo.
Do you realize this for rentals? Are they supposed to let you download it and expect you to delete the file after a week on your honor? If you don't want DRM go out and buy the stupid DVD and rip it. Seriously, it's not that hard. Do you complain that you have to give a phone and credit card number to Blockbuster so that you can't just keep a rented movie forever? If so, I recommend going to an anger management class or something.
Next thing you know, places like Blockbuster are going to ask people for phone and credit card numbers so that people can't just keep the rented movies indefinitely
This is actually the one time I can see a legitmate use of DRM. I've though this for a long time. DRM would be a great thing to allow me to rent* movies over the web as it would automatically delete the file or render it useless after the rental time or number of views was up. If people want to get a hate-on for DRM for legitmately purchased movies, I'm all for it. That's just crap. But for a service like this, DRM is what makes this even possible.
* Not that I would actually do any renting. If a movie is worth watching, it's worth having. The reverse is also true; If it's not worth having, it's not worth watching.
Before you bash people you ought to understand them. Yes MS is being a little arrogant, and yes that is to be expected not only from a business but also a business of their size. Then again the person you replied to has some points that you are ignoring, perhaps purposely, which shows you're not paying attention.
MS got big buy doing what some call shady business practices, others call excellent business tactics. In either case, it wasn't by them telling a competitor openly not to stop on their terrain. Their two big products are Windows and Office. The GP mentions some other things that they are failing at big time. His point is that now that MS is big, they can't seem to do anything else. They have money and resources to make something spectacular and yet they can't seem to do it. For all the money and effort they are or were pouring into MSN, passport, hotmail, home entertainment, etc. they are making back neither money nor market share in any way comparable. For those reasons, if MS didn't have billions stored up, those products would hardly see the light of day or be worth considering. If someone else was making MSN, how many people would be using it? If someone else was making Defender, how many people would care? If someone else was making the Xbox, would anyone have ever heard of t he Xbox 360? Probably, most of those products would have been abysmal failures, or slightly profitable at best. They are feeding off of brand name and the revenue of other offerings. They aren't better in any way.
Too bad a five-year share price history doesn't mean anything for the vitality of the company in the overall scheme of things
I know you were being sarcastic, but it was not related to what the parent was saying. MS is a profitable company, and their stocks continue to rise over time. That makes them an excellent company in the eyes of stock holders. They come out with new products, expanding their assets again making them an excellent company for stock holders. But they are riding on the coattails of Office and Windows alone. They have very few other profitable products, let alone big revenue generators. Hence, the GP said "If Microsoft didn't have billions in the bank its new product offerings would not even blip on the radar."
Now for the mistruths in your post: Consoles are NOT always a loss leader. Nintendo has only sold their consoles at a loss for a few months total and even then they lose single digits on each sale when they do. Overall however, they have made money on their hardware while the software revenue was just icing on the cake. MS lost $5 billion (that's with a b) on the Xbox. Sony is also starting to turn a profit in hardware, but they have been rolling in money from software. Being first also did nothing to force neither Sony's nor Nintendo's hand. Both companies have been working on their next-gen systems for a while. Nintendo didn't just come up with the Wii's controller overnight, nor did Sony invent the Cell on a whim, because MS came out with a new console first.
Slashdot Mirror
Call of Duty is quite a game in that regard. I'm not claiming to know what it really feels like to be a soldier, but after playing that game, I had a much deeper respect for those who have lost their lives in war, fighting for my freedoms. There were times where I was actually fearful of my character dying. Powerful game, that one is. Powerful game.
Now we know where you have been for the last year. Under a rock somewhere. GTA:SAs rating was NOT changed because of the violence. There was a mod that unlocked a pixelated sex scene between two consenting adults who happened to be both wearing clothes. Google hot coffee. Look it up on Wikipedia. But by golly, don't go around claiming that GTA:SA is AO because you can kill and slaughter and otherwise cause mayhem.
I think his point was that you could use it anywhere from a technological perspective.
You are absolutely correct. Just because he's not going to leave until July 2008, and just because he is giving up his day-to-day activities while remaining chairman of the board and "advisor for key development projects" doesn't mean he should still be considered at all a leader of any kind over at MS right now in August of 2006.
MM/DD/YYYY is also easy to say.
4th 5th, 2005
You may be a native English speaker, but from where? In the US I rarely hear people say 2nd of August. I hear August 2nd. A few posts up someone said that in England it is said the way you say it. Thus, English influenced places do it differently than US influenced places.
And concerning the 12 o'clock hour...the 12 hour clock needs some fixing. I am constantly getting my AMs and PMs mixed up. I really wish people would ignore AM and PM at noon and midnight. I have made it a habit to say noon thirty or midnight twenty-five or whatever to make sure people know what I am talking about.
Why does doing something backwards make logical sense? It should be done yy/mm/dd. That's how I do anything on that needs to be organized by date. I have lots of folders and files named that way, journal entries, newsletters, image folders, etc. Actually they are yyyy_mm_dd but the idea is the same.
The same is true for time. We don't write 41:07, we write 7:41. So the same should be true of dates.
Also, how much do you think Sony paid Nvidia to have him say that? I'm taking bets.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say Sony paid him a contract for the GPU in the PS3. In addition to that, that's the only next-gen console GPU nVidia made so they have a reason to hype the PS3 over the other consoles.
I'll wager an insightful mod point.
OK, the word of the day is presumed. I'm not concerned in this instance whether we are talking legally, ethically, or two guys talking at the water cooler. If you are innocent, then no amount of proof will make you guilty. If you are guilty, no lack of proof will make you innocent. One can presume innocence until proven guilty, one can presume guilt, until proven innocent, one can even presume one way or the other despite proof to the contrary. But you cannot be made non-innocent (and thus guilty), simply by proof of the fact. Otherwise, what fact would be proven.
Okay, I'll talk. In third grade I cheated on my history exam. In fourth grade I stole my Uncle Max's toupe and I glued it on my face when I played Moses in my Hebrew school play. In fifth grade I knocked my sister Edith down the stairs and I blamed it on the dog...
everybody is innocent until proven guilty
Actually, everybody is innocent until they do something which would make them guilty. Proof of a fact does not create and/or change it. The laws of physics, math, etc. were working in an orderly manner well before any one decided to write them up and prove them. I think you were looking for "presumed innocent until proven guilty."
See, the monitor's pixels would change in such a way that they absorb only the wavelength of light that is supposed to be displayed. Then we will all wear those lights on our heads that miners do, only they will be powered by our urine. Huge savings in power will be realized.
Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification.
Don't worry. If the pins and needles multiply enough then you will essentially be on a bed of nails and that is doable. And then they will multiply even more until you are practically on flat ground. So those pins and needles that were once poking you will soon enough be as flat, stable and boring as a slab of metal.
Come to think of it, I think there is a metaphore for stuff that's overly hype in there.
And what, pray tell, is wrong with that?
That's all fine and good, but the functionality is the same, and the table says that Firefox and Opera don't have it. So in essence they are claiming the Firefox and Opera don't have the ability to mark web pages for easy retrieval later. That's like saying the French don't have heads simply because their word for it is tete. Same thing, different name.
Not mention that IE 7 has favorites but the other browsers don't. I was unaware that favorites and bookmarks are different in any significant way.
Did you know that by default SDL uses DirectX drivers though for graphics on Windows?
Did you know that SDL tries to make the interface for GUIs the same on multiple platforms? They aren't trying to rewrite those interfaces, just to make an intermediate level for programmers so they don't have to know how to write for a particular platform. That SDL uses DirectX doesn't surprise me, nor anyone else who understands what the SDL is trying to do. DirectX is a great API. Why not use it? Put simply, because it is Windows Only. So write to SDL. Then you can write to many platforms all at once, and if SDL uses DirectX underneath on Windows, then great, you've gotten the benefit of DirectX plus the benefit of cross-platform code.
I think standards does not mean what you think it means. You are using it more like format. The idea of a private or closed standard is absurd. In that case you are using a proprietary format of some variety. That's not a standard.
Also look at Wikipedia's entry on screws and you will find that most of the different head types were proprietary to prevent people from undoing the screws. Then there are head shapes, which are used for different applications. This would be akin to using html for simple web pages, css for special formatting, PDF for exact formating, etc. That is different tools for different applications.
So you see a difference in light sockets. Did you notice the examples you gave were different sockets for different types of bulbs? Would you like all computer ports to look like PS/2? Then the keyboard/mouse ports, video ports, USB ports, power ports, Firewire ports, mic ports, speaker ports, printer ports and others can all be the same. Let's just forget that there are different demands required of each of them, let alone the confusion that would cause when plugging things in, especially for non-technical people. There are reasons why halogen, LED, fluourescent, incandescent and PAR 64s have different light sockets. Not only is it for the physical demands, it's also to keep people from trying to plug incadescents into halogen sockets, etc.
Nay, standards are a good thing, and as soon as people realize that, the better off we will all be. I agree, sometimes it's necessary to break away from the standard to add new features, and that doing so can be hard. If it wasn't we'd already have switched from gas engines to corn oil or something cleaner. Just look around you at all the things that are standard, whether it be by nature or by dictate: Spelling, Grammar, Music, Scientific Method, electricity, etc. If it weren't for that we'd all be in a heap of trouble.
It's just not suited to you. You have other ways you would prefer to get them. So it's not for you. It wouldn't be for me either. But it might be for some people. If you wanted to watch it on DVD, you have Netflix. In fact, if you wanted to watch it on your Nokia 770/PSP/GP32X/other-gadget-I-may-or-may-not-own you could get it from Netflix, rip it, reformat it, watch it, and then delete it when your done to remain honest.
The issue is NOT whether DRM is appropriate for this model. This is really the only reasonable scenario I see DRM as appropriapate. The real issue is whether this model is appropriate for you. Apparently not, and that is fine. That is why there are music subscription services, and music download services. Different strokes for different folks.
Still, no way, no how. I don't care who packages the DRM of this sort. Its wrong. If I pay for it I want access to it when I want to access it. Otherwise refund me when it expires.
Three cheers for reading comprehension! This is for rented movies. You can access when you want to access it during the time that the rental agreement allows. Same thing goes at Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, Netfliz, etc. You can't just rent a movie and expect to keep it forever.
I'm against DRM on purchased stuff as well. But to cry over DRM on rented stuff is just silly. You don't own it in any way shape or form. I don't mean that from even a copyright perspective. I mean you don't even own the plastic disk it came on or the file it's stored in or whatever. If you rent it, you agree to the terms, and here the terms are that the movie watching privileges go away after a certain time, just like any other movie rental, but they use DRM to enforce it. Boo-hoo.
Do you realize this for rentals? Are they supposed to let you download it and expect you to delete the file after a week on your honor? If you don't want DRM go out and buy the stupid DVD and rip it. Seriously, it's not that hard. Do you complain that you have to give a phone and credit card number to Blockbuster so that you can't just keep a rented movie forever? If so, I recommend going to an anger management class or something.
Next thing you know, places like Blockbuster are going to ask people for phone and credit card numbers so that people can't just keep the rented movies indefinitely
This is actually the one time I can see a legitmate use of DRM. I've though this for a long time. DRM would be a great thing to allow me to rent* movies over the web as it would automatically delete the file or render it useless after the rental time or number of views was up. If people want to get a hate-on for DRM for legitmately purchased movies, I'm all for it. That's just crap. But for a service like this, DRM is what makes this even possible.
* Not that I would actually do any renting. If a movie is worth watching, it's worth having. The reverse is also true; If it's not worth having, it's not worth watching.
Before you bash people you ought to understand them. Yes MS is being a little arrogant, and yes that is to be expected not only from a business but also a business of their size. Then again the person you replied to has some points that you are ignoring, perhaps purposely, which shows you're not paying attention.
MS got big buy doing what some call shady business practices, others call excellent business tactics. In either case, it wasn't by them telling a competitor openly not to stop on their terrain. Their two big products are Windows and Office. The GP mentions some other things that they are failing at big time. His point is that now that MS is big, they can't seem to do anything else. They have money and resources to make something spectacular and yet they can't seem to do it. For all the money and effort they are or were pouring into MSN, passport, hotmail, home entertainment, etc. they are making back neither money nor market share in any way comparable. For those reasons, if MS didn't have billions stored up, those products would hardly see the light of day or be worth considering. If someone else was making MSN, how many people would be using it? If someone else was making Defender, how many people would care? If someone else was making the Xbox, would anyone have ever heard of t he Xbox 360? Probably, most of those products would have been abysmal failures, or slightly profitable at best. They are feeding off of brand name and the revenue of other offerings. They aren't better in any way.
Too bad a five-year share price history doesn't mean anything for the vitality of the company in the overall scheme of things
I know you were being sarcastic, but it was not related to what the parent was saying. MS is a profitable company, and their stocks continue to rise over time. That makes them an excellent company in the eyes of stock holders. They come out with new products, expanding their assets again making them an excellent company for stock holders. But they are riding on the coattails of Office and Windows alone. They have very few other profitable products, let alone big revenue generators. Hence, the GP said "If Microsoft didn't have billions in the bank its new product offerings would not even blip on the radar."
Now for the mistruths in your post: Consoles are NOT always a loss leader. Nintendo has only sold their consoles at a loss for a few months total and even then they lose single digits on each sale when they do. Overall however, they have made money on their hardware while the software revenue was just icing on the cake. MS lost $5 billion (that's with a b) on the Xbox. Sony is also starting to turn a profit in hardware, but they have been rolling in money from software. Being first also did nothing to force neither Sony's nor Nintendo's hand. Both companies have been working on their next-gen systems for a while. Nintendo didn't just come up with the Wii's controller overnight, nor did Sony invent the Cell on a whim, because MS came out with a new console first.
In an attempt to publish hastily, scientists often willingfully ignore some shortcomings
I like how you work examples into your writing.