Yahoo doesn't want to be under you, get the hint. At this point, those at Microsoft do not care what would be preferred by those at Yahoo. The actions by Microsoft have an stench of inevitability.
However, Yahoo may have done an excellent job of driving up the asking price. By denying Microsoft, News Corp. is becoming involved, and supposedly Time Warner, and let's not forget the Google rumours.
Before, Yahoo had one option, an option that Microsoft felt Yahoo would eventually have to agree to. With the possibility of new potential buyers or investors, Microsoft may have to reconsider its original bargaining posture.
Without getting into the dificulty of predicting market conditions, the price of gas, and all the other reasons companies use for not meeting their own expectations, I'm horribly underqualified to believe one way or another if this will happen on a large scale.
I can speak through personal experience.
For the longest time, I told myself I wouldn't be interested in HD displays, at least, not for a while. Then, I got my new laptop, with an HD capable monitor. After a month I finally popped in a DVD, and after being exposed to HD content I was able to appreciate the difference. I noticed how the picture was not as sharp, colors were muted.
Then I downloaded some movie trailers in HD. I saw a considerable difference, and for the first time seriously considered purchasing a new HD TV and player.
I think the secret to Sony's success on this front will be a gradual but constant exposure to HD content over time. As people upgrade their computers and get new monitors with better capabilities, I believe the desire for HD content will grow.
Most people only get exposed to HD in retail outlets, looking at a 52" LCD and saying "Oh, isn't that nice" and then move on at the price tag. Also, those not technically inclined may not be anxious to jump headfirst into something so new.
Impulse buys are only going to get Sony so far. And it won't be easy convincing people that they need HD content. Getting them to want it is the trick. And to want it, someone needs to appreciate what they're missing (in my case, through prolonged exposure to HD and then reverted back) and affordable pricing.
Having ranted on that with no particular organization (and the above is only my opinion, as is the following) I don't see Blu-ray selling like DVDs by the end of this year. Next year, perhaps, if they can provide a competitively-priced player and televisions, and are willing to take a financial loss to gain a presence in the living room.
I can only imagine that Bell's public relations director is out-sick today. He'll walk in Monday, see his 1,046 new voicemails, go in the corner and cry.
From TFA
...This should allow the majority of legacy applications to run perfectly, while still retaining native performance for applications compiled specifically with the Windows 7 platform in mind. Seriously, what is it with all the editing of story submissions? Lately every summary has a knee-jerk reaction, but if you RTFA it's not nearly as bad as implied.
At the WWDC show last June, however, Adobe & other developers learned that Apple had decided to stop their Carbon 64 efforts. This means that 64-bit Mac apps need to be written to use Cocoa (as Lightroom is) instead of Carbon. This means that we'll need to rewrite large parts of Photoshop and its plug-ins (potentially affecting over a million lines of code) to move it from Carbon to Cocoa. The main reason for the Mac having only the 32-bit (Yes, CS4 will still be available for the Mac) is Adobe does not feel like rewriting an entire program at a moments notice, and I can't say I blame them.
Additionally, this shouldn't rule out the eventuality of a 64-bit Mac version. I would assume it is a goal and it will just not be available at launch.
Maybe you haven't seen it in your area yet (I know Citrus County doesn't really have a choice) but Verizon has a nice presence in Florida, including their Tampa data center. Plus, if you go by their website, the coverage area is never properly updated.
Part of the problem comes down to installation costs. Verizon wants to get FiOS out to as many people as possible, but when you consider the cost of rolling out that fiber, and then apartment complexes that have exclusive contracts with cable companies (which is more of an issue than having no-competition: no choice) its not always beneficial to move as fast as possible.
I've always lived in areas in Florida that have at least two choices for Internet and Television. It's rare that I find an area that's actually locked in without competition.
I read the headline and feared this was a new revenue-generating plan from the mind of Darl McBride. "There's this completely untapped market! All we need is a basket of kittens and a commercial-grade deli slicer...no no, listen! When it doesn't make money, we sue Quizno's!"
I had that iBook. The logic board died on me and I never knew about the recall until it was too late. Other than that it was a great machine. How was soldering the GPU in that manner bad? Basically, the way the GPU was soldered (see, I spelled it correctly this time) wouldn't have been a problem had the chip been sitting on top of the board. It's actually underneath, hanging upside-down, so when the GPU heats up, the solder softens and the chip can actually drop down far enough to lose contact with the logic board.
After independant research, it wasn't the logic board at all, it was poor design. I had a technician confirm that it only affected the white 12 inch 800 MHz G3, and that's when I found the infamous upside-down GPU issue.
If you still have the iBook, you can actually open it up, put a shim underneath it, and it many cases it works as intended.
I'm just ticked that I had to have the thing repaired 4 times and they still never "fixed" it.
I doubt I have a faulty unit. It ran for over 15 hours straight without even a hiccup in less-than-optimal conditions. I would think if anything would make it fail, that situation would.
More than likely, I, like others I know, don't really enjoy the television as loud as others due, and easily pick up background noise such as air conditioners, etc.
Another reason for not including Blu-Ray capabilities... Like I'd be able to hear the movie?
This isn't a troll. I love my 360, I do. But I've used it to watch DVDs and stream videos from my laptop, and honestly, even in the most well-ventilated of spaces, the console is just too loud for me to enjoy it as a media center at all.
Does Comcast think the behvior exhibited is beneficial to them in the eyes of current/potential customers or the FCC? To think, someone actually believes this is the way to run a business.
Although, I suppose it gives us something to talk about between SCO updates.
After reading the Volkoh article, I'm a tad more at ease about the practice here. Not completely at ease, but my concern has slightly waned.
The original link was posted on a message board that specialized in this content declaring itself as the illegal content. The link routed out to a FBI computer to log the IP. Now, a few steps could be used to further ease my concern.
1. If the referring IP address is logged, so it can be verified that yes, the person accused of searching for that content was actively looking for such content and took the bait as intended, with any other referrals being disqualified as it reduces the credibility of the link.
2. Change the link, and change it often. Hopefully this isn't one static link, and if so, change it up after so many hits.
I was up in arms about this at first, but after reading the hows-and-wheres of this link, I'm less convinced an innocent would find it easily. And if the above steps are followed it could eliminated false-positives.
The use of "may" most likely relates to the timeframe of the release of that information, rather than any necessity or obligation to do so at all. (eg. They "may" release the information in the next few weeks...if all paperwork is filed by that time, blah blah blah.)
Maybe I implied something I didn't mean to, so I'll clarify my position a bit.
Internal schedules, release dates, etc., those should always be present. If you don't have any internal dates, there's no motivation for your workers, as they'll just "get it done when it's done".
Published release dates are what can cause the problems. If you tell your employees "We need this by March", that's one thing. That's also something you can pass along to your business partners. But when you come out and tell the public "Our product will be out in March", and the product falls excessively short of expectations, or does not even make it out of the gate, that's when you create a problem, all for the sake of marketing.
Or you can try that when you have to pay your bills, "Yeah, we'll make our best effort to pay that mortgage on the 10th."
The world doesn't work that way. Except that paying bills, an obligation to having and continuing to have a service or receiving goods, is not the same as marketing software.
Yes, having a firm release date may snag more customers, but you have to look at the end product and decide if the backlash will outweigh the praise.
All the more reason to avoid release dates. Whether it's completely arbitrary, or it's an estimate given by a developer, release dates only result in two things: Making people rush, and making products late or not as advertised.
I can understand a statement such as "We hope for our product to be ready by [date]" or "We're aiming for a possible launch window of [date]", but to say "Our product will be available on this date" only puts pressure on those lower down the totem pole, and can result in a lot of lost features or quality assurance.
Conversely, this should not be used to infer the Duke Nukem Forever will be an awesome game if it is ever released.
Am I alone in noticing the irony that someone using the name "I don't believe in imaginary products" is contributing news on a company that really hasn't offered any sort of product in quite some time, yet still sold something?
Wasn't there a registrar (I want to say Network Solutions) that was doing the same thing, only it was regardless of whatever connection you were using?
This sounds a lot like Simplenet from the late 90s. They provided you with a sub-domain and unlimited hosting and bandwith for about the same price.
Then a couple of sites got popular, and started causing problems for the servers.
That's when Simplenet sent e-mail messages to the "top users" and informed them they would be automatically moved to a new plan as they had qualified for an addendum in the Terms of Service. An addendum that was put out moments before the e-mail message was sent.
All I remember is a lot of people jumping ship, just out of spite. I hope Yahoo! has a better idea of what they're getting into.
Slashdot Mirror
However, Yahoo may have done an excellent job of driving up the asking price. By denying Microsoft, News Corp. is becoming involved, and supposedly Time Warner, and let's not forget the Google rumours.
Before, Yahoo had one option, an option that Microsoft felt Yahoo would eventually have to agree to. With the possibility of new potential buyers or investors, Microsoft may have to reconsider its original bargaining posture.
Without getting into the dificulty of predicting market conditions, the price of gas, and all the other reasons companies use for not meeting their own expectations, I'm horribly underqualified to believe one way or another if this will happen on a large scale.
I can speak through personal experience.
For the longest time, I told myself I wouldn't be interested in HD displays, at least, not for a while. Then, I got my new laptop, with an HD capable monitor. After a month I finally popped in a DVD, and after being exposed to HD content I was able to appreciate the difference. I noticed how the picture was not as sharp, colors were muted.
Then I downloaded some movie trailers in HD. I saw a considerable difference, and for the first time seriously considered purchasing a new HD TV and player.
I think the secret to Sony's success on this front will be a gradual but constant exposure to HD content over time. As people upgrade their computers and get new monitors with better capabilities, I believe the desire for HD content will grow.
Most people only get exposed to HD in retail outlets, looking at a 52" LCD and saying "Oh, isn't that nice" and then move on at the price tag. Also, those not technically inclined may not be anxious to jump headfirst into something so new.
Impulse buys are only going to get Sony so far. And it won't be easy convincing people that they need HD content. Getting them to want it is the trick. And to want it, someone needs to appreciate what they're missing (in my case, through prolonged exposure to HD and then reverted back) and affordable pricing.
Having ranted on that with no particular organization (and the above is only my opinion, as is the following) I don't see Blu-ray selling like DVDs by the end of this year. Next year, perhaps, if they can provide a competitively-priced player and televisions, and are willing to take a financial loss to gain a presence in the living room.
I can only imagine that Bell's public relations director is out-sick today. He'll walk in Monday, see his 1,046 new voicemails, go in the corner and cry.
Additionally, this shouldn't rule out the eventuality of a 64-bit Mac version. I would assume it is a goal and it will just not be available at launch.
Maybe you haven't seen it in your area yet (I know Citrus County doesn't really have a choice) but Verizon has a nice presence in Florida, including their Tampa data center. Plus, if you go by their website, the coverage area is never properly updated.
Part of the problem comes down to installation costs. Verizon wants to get FiOS out to as many people as possible, but when you consider the cost of rolling out that fiber, and then apartment complexes that have exclusive contracts with cable companies (which is more of an issue than having no-competition: no choice) its not always beneficial to move as fast as possible.
I've always lived in areas in Florida that have at least two choices for Internet and Television. It's rare that I find an area that's actually locked in without competition.
1. Don't ask.
2. Don't tell.
3. Don't opt-in.
I read the headline and feared this was a new revenue-generating plan from the mind of Darl McBride. "There's this completely untapped market! All we need is a basket of kittens and a commercial-grade deli slicer...no no, listen! When it doesn't make money, we sue Quizno's!"
After independant research, it wasn't the logic board at all, it was poor design. I had a technician confirm that it only affected the white 12 inch 800 MHz G3, and that's when I found the infamous upside-down GPU issue.
If you still have the iBook, you can actually open it up, put a shim underneath it, and it many cases it works as intended.
I'm just ticked that I had to have the thing repaired 4 times and they still never "fixed" it.
I owned the white, 12-inch 800 MHz G3 iBook. I hate them now.
Honestly, Apple! Soddering the GPU with a ball grid array upside-down? Yeah, thanks for that!
I doubt I have a faulty unit. It ran for over 15 hours straight without even a hiccup in less-than-optimal conditions. I would think if anything would make it fail, that situation would.
More than likely, I, like others I know, don't really enjoy the television as loud as others due, and easily pick up background noise such as air conditioners, etc.
Oh well, to each their own.
Another reason for not including Blu-Ray capabilities... Like I'd be able to hear the movie?
This isn't a troll. I love my 360, I do. But I've used it to watch DVDs and stream videos from my laptop, and honestly, even in the most well-ventilated of spaces, the console is just too loud for me to enjoy it as a media center at all.
Does Comcast think the behvior exhibited is beneficial to them in the eyes of current/potential customers or the FCC? To think, someone actually believes this is the way to run a business.
Although, I suppose it gives us something to talk about between SCO updates.
After reading the Volkoh article, I'm a tad more at ease about the practice here. Not completely at ease, but my concern has slightly waned.
The original link was posted on a message board that specialized in this content declaring itself as the illegal content. The link routed out to a FBI computer to log the IP. Now, a few steps could be used to further ease my concern.
1. If the referring IP address is logged, so it can be verified that yes, the person accused of searching for that content was actively looking for such content and took the bait as intended, with any other referrals being disqualified as it reduces the credibility of the link. 2. Change the link, and change it often. Hopefully this isn't one static link, and if so, change it up after so many hits.
I was up in arms about this at first, but after reading the hows-and-wheres of this link, I'm less convinced an innocent would find it easily. And if the above steps are followed it could eliminated false-positives.
Considering that this article was listed as showing "11 of 3 Comments" I think this is quite a common problem.
The use of "may" most likely relates to the timeframe of the release of that information, rather than any necessity or obligation to do so at all. (eg. They "may" release the information in the next few weeks...if all paperwork is filed by that time, blah blah blah.)
Maybe I implied something I didn't mean to, so I'll clarify my position a bit.
Internal schedules, release dates, etc., those should always be present. If you don't have any internal dates, there's no motivation for your workers, as they'll just "get it done when it's done".
Published release dates are what can cause the problems. If you tell your employees "We need this by March", that's one thing. That's also something you can pass along to your business partners. But when you come out and tell the public "Our product will be out in March", and the product falls excessively short of expectations, or does not even make it out of the gate, that's when you create a problem, all for the sake of marketing.
The world doesn't work that way. Except that paying bills, an obligation to having and continuing to have a service or receiving goods, is not the same as marketing software.
Yes, having a firm release date may snag more customers, but you have to look at the end product and decide if the backlash will outweigh the praise.
All the more reason to avoid release dates. Whether it's completely arbitrary, or it's an estimate given by a developer, release dates only result in two things: Making people rush, and making products late or not as advertised.
I can understand a statement such as "We hope for our product to be ready by [date]" or "We're aiming for a possible launch window of [date]", but to say "Our product will be available on this date" only puts pressure on those lower down the totem pole, and can result in a lot of lost features or quality assurance.
Conversely, this should not be used to infer the Duke Nukem Forever will be an awesome game if it is ever released.
Am I alone in noticing the irony that someone using the name "I don't believe in imaginary products" is contributing news on a company that really hasn't offered any sort of product in quite some time, yet still sold something?
Wasn't there a registrar (I want to say Network Solutions) that was doing the same thing, only it was regardless of whatever connection you were using?
This sounds a lot like Simplenet from the late 90s. They provided you with a sub-domain and unlimited hosting and bandwith for about the same price.
Then a couple of sites got popular, and started causing problems for the servers.
That's when Simplenet sent e-mail messages to the "top users" and informed them they would be automatically moved to a new plan as they had qualified for an addendum in the Terms of Service. An addendum that was put out moments before the e-mail message was sent.
All I remember is a lot of people jumping ship, just out of spite. I hope Yahoo! has a better idea of what they're getting into.