Of course they're selling it at a "reduced" rate. It's just like ketchup at a restaurant or HBO at a hotel - both are offered with something for which you already paid them money.
Comcast is offering a "reduced" rate, but to take advantage of it you need to have their service first. That's not altruism and good will toward consumers, that's marketing.
In 1997, Grand Forks, North Dakota and East Grand Forks, Minnesota experienced the worst flood of the river since 1826. This caused 2 billion dollars in damage to the community.
Oddly enough, I found that my favorite memories of computing are from the many times I had to figure out exactly what went wrong with Windows 95/98.
While I realize that this shows me to be far younger than many Slashdotters, as well as much less technically skilled, I think I ended up learning a lot about how to fix many basic computer problems. I may not be a "computer guru" or even a "133t h4x0r", but it did get me up to what would probably be considered a modest level of understanding.
It may have been extremely frustrating, but I look back upon it kindly for allowing me to learn.
What I don't understand is why any software corporation would even want to consider doing this.
For an example, let's take one of these file sharing college students and look at what they've been up to. These kids pirate software and learn to use it while they're in college, then they graduate and move on to the corporate world. Several possibilities arise:
(1) The student goes into business for themselves and begins to use software they already know how to. In order to avoid problems within their business they buy the software they need, most likely sticking with brands they know (i.e. the pirated brands they picked up off the internet in college).
(2) The student enters into the workforce at a large corporation. There it's possible they may be trained on certain products as needed, but it's also possible they may say they understand Windows/Apple/Linux already (i.e. again the pirated software they learned in college). The choice then goes between training them on something new or simply getting the employee what they already know.
In both of these cases if it's cheaper to get someone what they know and understand than it is to teach them something new, then the pirated software they learned off of will be picked up. The companies could benefit in the long run from such activity, but yes in the short term it may be less profitable to allow students to do this.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course they're selling it at a "reduced" rate. It's just like ketchup at a restaurant or HBO at a hotel - both are offered with something for which you already paid them money.
Comcast is offering a "reduced" rate, but to take advantage of it you need to have their service first. That's not altruism and good will toward consumers, that's marketing.
Wouldn't it be easier, and cheaper, to buy a dog and tape your schedule to it?
1997 Red River Flood
In 1997, Grand Forks, North Dakota and East Grand Forks, Minnesota experienced the worst flood of the river since 1826. This caused 2 billion dollars in damage to the community.
Oddly enough, I found that my favorite memories of computing are from the many times I had to figure out exactly what went wrong with Windows 95/98.
While I realize that this shows me to be far younger than many Slashdotters, as well as much less technically skilled, I think I ended up learning a lot about how to fix many basic computer problems. I may not be a "computer guru" or even a "133t h4x0r", but it did get me up to what would probably be considered a modest level of understanding.
It may have been extremely frustrating, but I look back upon it kindly for allowing me to learn.
What I don't understand is why any software corporation would even want to consider doing this.
For an example, let's take one of these file sharing college students and look at what they've been up to. These kids pirate software and learn to use it while they're in college, then they graduate and move on to the corporate world. Several possibilities arise:
(1) The student goes into business for themselves and begins to use software they already know how to. In order to avoid problems within their business they buy the software they need, most likely sticking with brands they know (i.e. the pirated brands they picked up off the internet in college).
(2) The student enters into the workforce at a large corporation. There it's possible they may be trained on certain products as needed, but it's also possible they may say they understand Windows/Apple/Linux already (i.e. again the pirated software they learned in college). The choice then goes between training them on something new or simply getting the employee what they already know.
In both of these cases if it's cheaper to get someone what they know and understand than it is to teach them something new, then the pirated software they learned off of will be picked up. The companies could benefit in the long run from such activity, but yes in the short term it may be less profitable to allow students to do this.