Yes, the price of it is inflated, the price of the games and peripherals are inflated. It's not worth the money. However, you are totally forgetting the social aspect to entertainment consumerist tendencies. As much as people will buy a new car to impress the neighbours, people will buy an Xbox 360 to impress their friends. It could run on a 486sx and people would still buy it, simply because it's the hot new thing. Give it about 6-12 months (and a $50 discount) and people will actually be making informed choices.
Remember furbies? Without social conformity, no-one would have bought them. Who the hell would decide they *wanted* one without outside influences?
I think you're describing the ideology of capitalism, rather than capitalism in practice. Innovation is no longer fostered by capitalism, it is capped. With the rise of DRM, propriatory solutions, closed standards, cheap 3rd world labour and large scale downsizing the idea of capitalism has changed to *maintaining* an advantage, rather then innovating it. Development hasn't given momentum to corporate profit in 10 years. It's control of a current market, pure and simple. Give any corporation the chance to monopolise the industry and they will. Consumers gain nothing out of the current situation.
For Gods sake, file sharing isn't all about stealing the latest Mariah Carey album. If you want to avoid being prosecuted, stop downloading music published by the big multinationals, EMI, RCA, Time-warner, etc. etc.
You aren't missing out on anything. 90% of my collection is from artists who aren't signed up to this draconion bullshit, and it's a damn sight better then any of the trash the major labels are trying to spew onto me. With the moving of p2p into the mainstream the RIAA only exists to scare off warez kiddies, who have enough money to buy the albums anyway.
If you buy into the corporation, you have to live with it. Same goes for anyone who downloads material from them.
Just say no kids. Get it on tape instead
after all, it's offering to manage my digital rights. If it wasn't for Microsoft and the powers that be, i might do something naughty!
It'll be good when it's all integrated:
"Windows has detected a CDR in your computer. Do you want windows to send a Cease and Desist?"
The problem i see with space exploration is that at this stage it's done entirely for it's own sake. The Cold War sparked the moon landings and our first steps into space, and now that's over there's no competitive ethos to give us any reason to return there.
Besides, research and development in these areas cannot continue while companies profit in the inefficiency of current technology. Why are we still using the internal combustion engine, developed over 100 years ago? Simply, because there's profit in the fact that it's hopelessly inefficient. The same applies to space travel, if we give it a competitive or commercial context it will grow, and that's the only reason man went to the moon
"It's sort of like the handicapped parking spots everywhere - I can't remember the last time I saw someone wheelchair-bound park in one, can you?"
people don't tend to park their wheelchairs in car parks, they might get run over.
Despite everyone's views on the use of p2p networks, isn't it a dangerous precadent to set to allow these companies to steamroller over *anyone* who dares share copyrighted material. Is living in a DRM world where consumer rights are constantly reevaluated as to give us the least amount of enjoyment and freedom from our purchases worthwhile? It doesn't matter *who* these p2p sharers are, isn't setting the precadent of removing consumer rights by DRM (to copy, rip, burn for backup etc.) far more demeening and indefencible?
The problem with prosecuting a large multinational is that they wring in far too much money, and employ far too many people to make it an option. If the courts were to be politicised by such a huge case then no government would want to be in charge when microsoft made cutbacks, or the tax revenue dries up. Yes, this means multinations can act sans-law, but thats the joys of capitalism. Besides, few understand these kinds of cases, but they fear the consequences
Slashdot Mirror
Windows XP supports multiple desktops, all you need is the powertoys collection (which is free).
NT4 and 2000 also supported multiple desktops through the resource kit.
Yes, the price of it is inflated, the price of the games and peripherals are inflated. It's not worth the money. However, you are totally forgetting the social aspect to entertainment consumerist tendencies. As much as people will buy a new car to impress the neighbours, people will buy an Xbox 360 to impress their friends. It could run on a 486sx and people would still buy it, simply because it's the hot new thing. Give it about 6-12 months (and a $50 discount) and people will actually be making informed choices. Remember furbies? Without social conformity, no-one would have bought them. Who the hell would decide they *wanted* one without outside influences?
Gagh.
Sorry to be pedantic, but it's *espresso*, not expresso. Does your coffee move quickly? No? It's an espresso!
"They don't use rainforrests for making paper"
With printers like this one, that policy won't last long.
I'm still waiting for DirectX 5 support in NT 4! They couldn't get it right then, and won't get it right now.
By 2020, only the top 5 governments in the world will be able to afford mice.
And they'll be so huge that a warehouse will be needed to store them.
Who controls the spice, controls Dune. Take heed.
Buy your music on LP.
I think you're describing the ideology of capitalism, rather than capitalism in practice. Innovation is no longer fostered by capitalism, it is capped. With the rise of DRM, propriatory solutions, closed standards, cheap 3rd world labour and large scale downsizing the idea of capitalism has changed to *maintaining* an advantage, rather then innovating it. Development hasn't given momentum to corporate profit in 10 years. It's control of a current market, pure and simple. Give any corporation the chance to monopolise the industry and they will. Consumers gain nothing out of the current situation.
For Gods sake, file sharing isn't all about stealing the latest Mariah Carey album. If you want to avoid being prosecuted, stop downloading music published by the big multinationals, EMI, RCA, Time-warner, etc. etc. You aren't missing out on anything. 90% of my collection is from artists who aren't signed up to this draconion bullshit, and it's a damn sight better then any of the trash the major labels are trying to spew onto me. With the moving of p2p into the mainstream the RIAA only exists to scare off warez kiddies, who have enough money to buy the albums anyway. If you buy into the corporation, you have to live with it. Same goes for anyone who downloads material from them. Just say no kids. Get it on tape instead
after all, it's offering to manage my digital rights. If it wasn't for Microsoft and the powers that be, i might do something naughty! It'll be good when it's all integrated: "Windows has detected a CDR in your computer. Do you want windows to send a Cease and Desist?"
billboards beam you
The problem i see with space exploration is that at this stage it's done entirely for it's own sake. The Cold War sparked the moon landings and our first steps into space, and now that's over there's no competitive ethos to give us any reason to return there. Besides, research and development in these areas cannot continue while companies profit in the inefficiency of current technology. Why are we still using the internal combustion engine, developed over 100 years ago? Simply, because there's profit in the fact that it's hopelessly inefficient. The same applies to space travel, if we give it a competitive or commercial context it will grow, and that's the only reason man went to the moon
"It's sort of like the handicapped parking spots everywhere - I can't remember the last time I saw someone wheelchair-bound park in one, can you?" people don't tend to park their wheelchairs in car parks, they might get run over.
Despite everyone's views on the use of p2p networks, isn't it a dangerous precadent to set to allow these companies to steamroller over *anyone* who dares share copyrighted material. Is living in a DRM world where consumer rights are constantly reevaluated as to give us the least amount of enjoyment and freedom from our purchases worthwhile? It doesn't matter *who* these p2p sharers are, isn't setting the precadent of removing consumer rights by DRM (to copy, rip, burn for backup etc.) far more demeening and indefencible?
Never mind the wi-fi, I'm impressed by the fact that a UK train reached 100mph in the first place.
How would i read anime on a cellphone? turn it upside down?
you could do that anyway, but your neighbours might not be so fond of you
The problem with prosecuting a large multinational is that they wring in far too much money, and employ far too many people to make it an option. If the courts were to be politicised by such a huge case then no government would want to be in charge when microsoft made cutbacks, or the tax revenue dries up. Yes, this means multinations can act sans-law, but thats the joys of capitalism. Besides, few understand these kinds of cases, but they fear the consequences