Sadly, there's no compelling reason for Company A to allow Company B access to the inner workings of their product. It *MAY* be in the consumer's best interests, but it doesn't benefit Company A's bottom line, so the consumer's interests don't matter.
Since there's no financial benefit to Company A, and there's no legal reason forcing them to (yet) then the consumer is just SOL.
I don't agree with passing laws to regulate how specific businesses work in most cases, but when there's no way the market (ie, the consumer) can do anything to provide a financial incentive, then maybe thats what it will take -- either symantic buys a new law, or they sue and get a court order.
Yeah, another 1,000,000 dollars worth of Stallman doing damage to open source adoption by making a fool out of himself and insisting everyone follow his ideology.
Thanks, but I'm hoping the winner is a couple of smart college guys or girls, and not Stallman
No, I'm not going to make that claim. Since the post I was responding to was mentioning development tools, not operating systems, and since I was addressing the point about "$250 extremely limited student versions" not being an accurate statement, it is not relavent.
For what its worth, a PIII with 128MB RAM will run XP just fine -- you do realize that PIIIs were "current" when XP came out, and that for most of XP's existance most computers shipped with 64 or 128 MB RAM right (granted, not the computers that slashdotters were buying, since the slashdot crowd tends to build their own)? -- hell, an AMD K6-2 with 96MB RAM will run XP though load times do make it borderline unusable. Vista will just laugh at you for thinking about it, however, since it is a rather bloated POS.
MS now has a free version of visual studio 2005, so touting open source as the only cheap development environment is a load of horse-hockey. The previous "academic" versions that were priced at $199 (for visual studio 6.0 in 1998 and visual studio.net 2003 in 2003 -- I skipped the first vs.net) were not "extremely limited" -- they were the exact same thing as the "professional" package (one step down from their "enterprise" which didn't have many features a beginning programmer would use anyway) with a much cheaper price for students and faculty. And if thats still too pricey for students, there's the option for students to use their school/college/university labs.
A lot of your points are true, BUT most of them are not affected by this situation -- the only "downside" is that it might limit US programmers' abilities to contribute to open source projects that violate patents. Not everything has to violate patents, even though its trendy to bash any and all uses of the patent system.
In any case, you need to update your arguments as far as development environments - that may have been the case at one point, but it is no longer true.
You're going "out of your way" to block ads by using adblock.
Until a browser has it built-in and turned-on-by-default, you're going out of your way to block ads.
If enough people tivo their way through commercials, can we kill off the current crop of drivel on tv?*
As for the NYT articles, some people DON'T use bugmenot -- we actually PAY for the CONTENT WE WANT. Which is the whole point. The information is valuable enough to us that we're willing to pay to have it. We just want to pay with cash instead of paying by putting up with advertisements.
*I know, doesn't work that way, yada yada yada don't bother correcting it, its humor for those of you who didn't notice
The point is that people who go out of their way to avoid ads (ie, by using adblock or whatever) are the same people who wouldn't click on them ANYWAY.
From a business point of view, its a non-issue since they weren't going to get that person anyway.
From the consumer point of view, they're not blocking specific types of ads, they're blocking ALL adds (or at least as many as they can) -- thats their goal, and adblock and the like are pretty good at it.
They're tools too, but by their nature they're not stuffed under a desk.
And yes, people that let their life revolve around their car(s) are just as silly as people who insist that their computer needs windows and glow-in-the-dark cables and cold cathode tubes to show off their oh-so-special-yet-outdated components.
What a silly analogy. Both should be form following function. Plexiglass windows and cold cathode tubes have as much place in a computer as carbon fiber wings and neon lights have on honda civics.
Computers are TOOLS people. TOOLS. They are NOT fashon statements. Go back to treating them as tools, and not as the object that your entire life revolves around.
Well, fox news has its share of the blame, but Al Gore jumping around "global warming this" and "global warming that" doesn't help the average person's view of the "green" movement.
Actually, as far as uses for it go, I think games will be pretty low on the list. Scientific computing will probably be far and away the number one use for it -- IBM will probably come up with a new supercomputer they can sell based on racks of those instead of racks of opterons, etc.
I'd also guess that NSA type agencies around the world would like them as well - X years of CPU time doesn't seem like much when you've got 80 of them in one box, and you've got acres of those boxes -- although cryptography and data mining arguably fall under scientific computing even when they're not being used in pursuit of science. Then again, if they've already got something better, maybe they don't care about 80 intel processors per chip.
Those in the warez scene won't have any problems with WGA.
The only illegitimate copies this will really catch are those where some kid upgrades his parents computer and uses the same copy he had, or a warez copy, or whatever. Which is also the same group that will fall for the false-positives and shell out for another copy of windows because they don't know any better.
Being "green" seems to have taken on the conotation of only being about global warming - but it's so very much more.
I agree with you, but you can thank the likes of Al Gore and other kooks that damage the environmental movement every time they open their mouths and spew hate-filled vitrol about anyone who doesn't agree with them. THEY are the ones that have made the average person think "green"=="global warming".
Then again, people are dumb, and unless you can fit your complete message into a 5 second sound clip between updates on survivor and american idol, most will never take the time to learn.
It takes care of my needs, which ultimatly is all that matters -- the computer is a tool, nothing more. As long as it lets you do what you need to, everything else isn't all that important -- in my case, Visual Studio, Photoshop, Office, and Firefox take care of everything I need the computer to do. I don't care about playing music or watching videos. I don't care about playing every single game that comes out.
You have fun playing with your linux flavor of the week, I'll continue to use my computers as tools, nothing more, nothing less.
Put your Windows machine behind a NAT-ing home router, even using the defaults, and have half a clue about clicking stupid stuff, and you don't need layers of norton stuff.
If you do decide you want a personal firewall, AV, etc, just do yourself a favor and stay the hell away from norton.
Re:Wii-doubting articles - the biggest thing...
on
Will the Wii Work?
·
· Score: 1
LOL -- you know, I didn't think about that. Maybe the Wii *WILL* catch the oooh-shiney market.
Or at least the "Apple Lifestyle" market.
And judging by the number of iPods sold, the "Apple Lifestyle" market might be a better market to target than the "more == better, graphics==gameplay, FPSs are the only types of games that matter" category.
All I hope is that there are enough self-delusional people out there like myself that say "I'll put up with an inconvenience, pay a little more, wait a little longer, whatever, as long as it keeps my dollars away from walmart." to eventually actually hurt their bottom line.
Pick any reason you like, there are plenty -- cheaply made junk, generally full of rude people and their screaming spawn, for a couple of reasons, or you can take the more ideologically based reasons -- they don't pay their employees enough to live on, they don't provide health care, etc. Or there the reason a lot of people don't like them: "they're a big, successful company, therefore they're evil and must be stopped."
I personally quit shopping there for the first two, since I did work at a walmart a couple of years ago, made enough to support myself (barely, but it was enough), and had pretty decent health benefits, so I won't fault them for that. I won't even fault them for being a big, successful company. But the shopping environment they create SUCKS, the goods they peddle are cheaply made pieces of junk (and I'm being kind with that description) and while they do pay enough for their employees to survive on (keeping in mind there is no entitlement two the house, two cars, and white picket fence lifestyle) they DON'T pay their employees enough to give a shit about the customers.
Slashdot Mirror
Sadly, there's no compelling reason for Company A to allow Company B access to the inner workings of their product. It *MAY* be in the consumer's best interests, but it doesn't benefit Company A's bottom line, so the consumer's interests don't matter.
Since there's no financial benefit to Company A, and there's no legal reason forcing them to (yet) then the consumer is just SOL.
I don't agree with passing laws to regulate how specific businesses work in most cases, but when there's no way the market (ie, the consumer) can do anything to provide a financial incentive, then maybe thats what it will take -- either symantic buys a new law, or they sue and get a court order.
Yeah, another 1,000,000 dollars worth of Stallman doing damage to open source adoption by making a fool out of himself and insisting everyone follow his ideology.
Thanks, but I'm hoping the winner is a couple of smart college guys or girls, and not Stallman
No, I'm not going to make that claim. Since the post I was responding to was mentioning development tools, not operating systems, and since I was addressing the point about "$250 extremely limited student versions" not being an accurate statement, it is not relavent.
For what its worth, a PIII with 128MB RAM will run XP just fine -- you do realize that PIIIs were "current" when XP came out, and that for most of XP's existance most computers shipped with 64 or 128 MB RAM right (granted, not the computers that slashdotters were buying, since the slashdot crowd tends to build their own)? -- hell, an AMD K6-2 with 96MB RAM will run XP though load times do make it borderline unusable. Vista will just laugh at you for thinking about it, however, since it is a rather bloated POS.
MS now has a free version of visual studio 2005, so touting open source as the only cheap development environment is a load of horse-hockey. The previous "academic" versions that were priced at $199 (for visual studio 6.0 in 1998 and visual studio.net 2003 in 2003 -- I skipped the first vs.net) were not "extremely limited" -- they were the exact same thing as the "professional" package (one step down from their "enterprise" which didn't have many features a beginning programmer would use anyway) with a much cheaper price for students and faculty. And if thats still too pricey for students, there's the option for students to use their school/college/university labs.
A lot of your points are true, BUT most of them are not affected by this situation -- the only "downside" is that it might limit US programmers' abilities to contribute to open source projects that violate patents. Not everything has to violate patents, even though its trendy to bash any and all uses of the patent system.
In any case, you need to update your arguments as far as development environments - that may have been the case at one point, but it is no longer true.
Since you admit that you did go out of your way at one point to find a method of blocking ads, I think I can rest my case.
You're going "out of your way" to block ads by using adblock. Until a browser has it built-in and turned-on-by-default, you're going out of your way to block ads.
Except the radioactive material is encased in a manner designed to survive such events.
It happened, and it worked. Go look up the the Nimbus mission that was destroyed by a range-safety-officer.
If enough people tivo their way through commercials, can we kill off the current crop of drivel on tv?*
As for the NYT articles, some people DON'T use bugmenot -- we actually PAY for the CONTENT WE WANT. Which is the whole point. The information is valuable enough to us that we're willing to pay to have it. We just want to pay with cash instead of paying by putting up with advertisements.
*I know, doesn't work that way, yada yada yada don't bother correcting it, its humor for those of you who didn't notice
I kinda like the banner-sized black space at the top of slashdot. I'd be rather irritated if they put banners there.
The point is that people who go out of their way to avoid ads (ie, by using adblock or whatever) are the same people who wouldn't click on them ANYWAY.
From a business point of view, its a non-issue since they weren't going to get that person anyway.
From the consumer point of view, they're not blocking specific types of ads, they're blocking ALL adds (or at least as many as they can) -- thats their goal, and adblock and the like are pretty good at it.
They're tools too, but by their nature they're not stuffed under a desk. And yes, people that let their life revolve around their car(s) are just as silly as people who insist that their computer needs windows and glow-in-the-dark cables and cold cathode tubes to show off their oh-so-special-yet-outdated components.
"Sure, your PC looks cool, but who really cares?"
Do you hide your car under your desk?
What a silly analogy. Both should be form following function. Plexiglass windows and cold cathode tubes have as much place in a computer as carbon fiber wings and neon lights have on honda civics.
Computers are TOOLS people. TOOLS. They are NOT fashon statements. Go back to treating them as tools, and not as the object that your entire life revolves around.
So it is, so it is. :)
Well, fox news has its share of the blame, but Al Gore jumping around "global warming this" and "global warming that" doesn't help the average person's view of the "green" movement.
Ah, but you forget....if your buyer is paying out of the "black" portion of the budget, economies of scale do not necessarily apply.
So...imagine a beowulf cluster of THOSE.
Actually, as far as uses for it go, I think games will be pretty low on the list. Scientific computing will probably be far and away the number one use for it -- IBM will probably come up with a new supercomputer they can sell based on racks of those instead of racks of opterons, etc.
I'd also guess that NSA type agencies around the world would like them as well - X years of CPU time doesn't seem like much when you've got 80 of them in one box, and you've got acres of those boxes -- although cryptography and data mining arguably fall under scientific computing even when they're not being used in pursuit of science. Then again, if they've already got something better, maybe they don't care about 80 intel processors per chip.
Not all, but not a small number either.
Those in the warez scene won't have any problems with WGA.
The only illegitimate copies this will really catch are those where some kid upgrades his parents computer and uses the same copy he had, or a warez copy, or whatever. Which is also the same group that will fall for the false-positives and shell out for another copy of windows because they don't know any better.
Obviously your sarcasm detector is broken.
Being "green" seems to have taken on the conotation of only being about global warming - but it's so very much more.
I agree with you, but you can thank the likes of Al Gore and other kooks that damage the environmental movement every time they open their mouths and spew hate-filled vitrol about anyone who doesn't agree with them. THEY are the ones that have made the average person think "green"=="global warming".
Then again, people are dumb, and unless you can fit your complete message into a 5 second sound clip between updates on survivor and american idol, most will never take the time to learn.
But public transportation is good! Its for the children! ....so they can all have cancer.
I think we're both saying the same thing here -- stupid people will have problems.
The problem is now matter how hard you try to make something idiot proof, the universe builds a better idiot.
It takes care of my needs, which ultimatly is all that matters -- the computer is a tool, nothing more. As long as it lets you do what you need to, everything else isn't all that important -- in my case, Visual Studio, Photoshop, Office, and Firefox take care of everything I need the computer to do. I don't care about playing music or watching videos. I don't care about playing every single game that comes out.
You have fun playing with your linux flavor of the week, I'll continue to use my computers as tools, nothing more, nothing less.
Put your Windows machine behind a NAT-ing home router, even using the defaults, and have half a clue about clicking stupid stuff, and you don't need layers of norton stuff.
If you do decide you want a personal firewall, AV, etc, just do yourself a favor and stay the hell away from norton.
LOL -- you know, I didn't think about that. Maybe the Wii *WILL* catch the oooh-shiney market.
Or at least the "Apple Lifestyle" market.
And judging by the number of iPods sold, the "Apple Lifestyle" market might be a better market to target than the "more == better, graphics==gameplay, FPSs are the only types of games that matter" category.
All I hope is that there are enough self-delusional people out there like myself that say "I'll put up with an inconvenience, pay a little more, wait a little longer, whatever, as long as it keeps my dollars away from walmart." to eventually actually hurt their bottom line.
Pick any reason you like, there are plenty -- cheaply made junk, generally full of rude people and their screaming spawn, for a couple of reasons, or you can take the more ideologically based reasons -- they don't pay their employees enough to live on, they don't provide health care, etc. Or there the reason a lot of people don't like them: "they're a big, successful company, therefore they're evil and must be stopped."
I personally quit shopping there for the first two, since I did work at a walmart a couple of years ago, made enough to support myself (barely, but it was enough), and had pretty decent health benefits, so I won't fault them for that. I won't even fault them for being a big, successful company. But the shopping environment they create SUCKS, the goods they peddle are cheaply made pieces of junk (and I'm being kind with that description) and while they do pay enough for their employees to survive on (keeping in mind there is no entitlement two the house, two cars, and white picket fence lifestyle) they DON'T pay their employees enough to give a shit about the customers.