Simple: Rake in literally billions and billions and billions and billions by auctioning off the freed up part of the spectrum. It already happened with UMTS (3G) in Europe, where governments made tens of millions.
But they are talking about taking my money away from me and transfering it to their priorities (for certain values of them and me), at gun point.
Well, what about sending off young men to fight and die in a war, at a tremendous cost to the country, just because a few people have their priorities and values?
But back to the point, as soon as your behaviour affects other people, and everyone's planet, I don't think it's excusable to make a point of your freedom, and whether you want to act on it. The modern form of state, and the rule of law is the current status, which means that a democraticaly elected government can tell you how much you can pollute, and can decide which indutries or technologies it wants to subsidise, as long as the majority agree (which should go without saying in a true democracy)
I bet most of them are just stupid kids bidding up themselves. Seriously, I doubt anyone would really pay that much for something that, come new year, will be widely available for $600. I expect them to be trying and trying until christmas, when everyone realises that they won't get that much and just sells it off quickly to get their money back.
Nobody would pay $500 up front for a phone. Most people have cheaper models, and even the ones that have the more expensive phones pay for it through their subscription.
The most expensive iPod is $350. But the bulk of the sales come from the nanos and the 30 GB $250 version.
Most people wouldn't be able to tell you what the "next gen features" of the PS3 are, apart from "good graphics". Contrary to what Sony wants you to believe, most PS2 owners haven't got a job yet.
That was one of the funniest stories I heard. People camping out for preorders? What's next? Preordering tickets for a raffle which decides which people get to stand first in the preorder line?
After having preordered at an online store that I usually buy from, the guy told me last week that he'd be getting 20, although he'd already taken over 800 orders. He reckonned he could get 60-80 by christmas. Because I was only number 270, I cancelled my order, along with hundreds of others, so you can imagine the guy was pretty pissed with Nintendo for losing out on business.
That's in Europe. It might be different in the US, depending on how they supply the different regions
I got onto number 7 on the list for on of the main games retailers where I live, so I'm hoping I'm pretty safe. I still plan on being there before when store opens though, and if I'm out of luck I could try some other places. Camping out is practically unheard of here, so I think being there 10 minutes early will be enough.
Re:Yerp. Figure it Out, Already.
on
Game Breakers
·
· Score: 1
The Idea behind Majora's Mask, like many other games, is that you only save when you want to stop playing. Dieing only made you start from the last door you entered.
Same goes for OOT. Saving was only a waste of time.
Don't bet on it. I'm in Europe, and although I preordered the Wii months ago, I was told by the dealer that he'd be getting a meager 20 units, and I'm number 270 on the list.
I think I'll try to be there when the store opens, which should be a historic first where I come from.
I'm sure it's been discussed, but I think the risk of losing home users is the real impetus behind Microsoft basically giving away software to schools, and offering STEEP discounts to governments.
Precisely. Microsofts main advantage over Office competitors is basically "everyone is "trained" in MS Office". And the fact that Computer classes in schools are mainly just about using Microsoft Software is despicable. Apart from the ludicrous Idea that using Powerpoint qualifies as a professional skill, that should have to be "trained", taeching them specific menu functions turns them into morons who become completely useless after something as trivial as a UI tweak in a software update.
...but it isn't as much of a deciding factor as some might think. Past success didn't help Nintendo much with the N64, and I would say that alot more people have fond memories with "Nintendo" than with "Playstation", even today. The N64 wasn't the huge cartridge-hardware mistake many people believe it to be (most games wouldn't have had a problem with the more limited space). It even looked as if Nintendo was winning in the early days of the system.
TFA is a bit strange though. What is he basing it on? Because he can't imagine Sony losing? Most of his arguements have been discussed to great extent, so he's basically just saying "yeah, but Sony will win anyway".
Exccept abusing property rights, to achieve a government granted monopoly would probably come under the definition of "government intervention", don't you think? Or do the "PSP Police" go to Hongkong and beat the workers dead?
Yeah, can't wait to use my keyboard and mouse as a nunchuk.
With the GameCube it was very easy to play imports. You only needed a freeloader, which came out a few months after the release. Probably won't be so easy with the Wii bu who knows.
You say "consumer", but the fact is that in them days, the consumer barely knew what these magic "laser discs" were, and he wasn't able to replicate them for about a decade.
No, but they are very comprehensive, often with a significant timeframe, in which the author remains exclusive.
But more importantly, it means that Weir Al can't just decide to sell his songs over the internet, because that would be against the contract he signed with the publisher, whether that's Sony, or any other.
Have you got a source? My initial reaction was "bullshit", but I don't know, we live in a crazy world.
A trademark is only applies to doing trade (business) by claiming, or implying that they are the trademark holders (the company). But because they are official products and they are only selling them without any trademark infringement, there should be no problem.
It's a curious case. The only judgement against them was ruled by a UK court, at a hearing they couldn't even attend. And let's face it, their system is so fucked up, it doesn't come as much of a surprise.
Apart from that, they only say that there are other court cases being persued, and they got scared.
Slashdot Mirror
Simple: Rake in literally billions and billions and billions and billions by auctioning off the freed up part of the spectrum.
It already happened with UMTS (3G) in Europe, where governments made tens of millions.
Well, what about sending off young men to fight and die in a war, at a tremendous cost to the country, just because a few people have their priorities and values?
But back to the point, as soon as your behaviour affects other people, and everyone's planet, I don't think it's excusable to make a point of your freedom, and whether you want to act on it.
The modern form of state, and the rule of law is the current status, which means that a democraticaly elected government can tell you how much you can pollute, and can decide which indutries or technologies it wants to subsidise, as long as the majority agree (which should go without saying in a true democracy)
I bet most of them are just stupid kids bidding up themselves. Seriously, I doubt anyone would really pay that much for something that, come new year, will be widely available for $600. I expect them to be trying and trying until christmas, when everyone realises that they won't get that much and just sells it off quickly to get their money back.
People who don't want to play Wii tennis on their own.
Except for the majority of people, who don't have a broadband connection.
Nobody would pay $500 up front for a phone. Most people have cheaper models, and even the ones that have the more expensive phones pay for it through their subscription.
The most expensive iPod is $350. But the bulk of the sales come from the nanos and the 30 GB $250 version.
Most people wouldn't be able to tell you what the "next gen features" of the PS3 are, apart from "good graphics".
Contrary to what Sony wants you to believe, most PS2 owners haven't got a job yet.
Watch this. The line in Question is at about 2 minutes into the video.
That was one of the funniest stories I heard. People camping out for preorders? What's next? Preordering tickets for a raffle which decides which people get to stand first in the preorder line?
After having preordered at an online store that I usually buy from, the guy told me last week that he'd be getting 20, although he'd already taken over 800 orders. He reckonned he could get 60-80 by christmas. Because I was only number 270, I cancelled my order, along with hundreds of others, so you can imagine the guy was pretty pissed with Nintendo for losing out on business.
That's in Europe. It might be different in the US, depending on how they supply the different regions
I got onto number 7 on the list for on of the main games retailers where I live, so I'm hoping I'm pretty safe. I still plan on being there before when store opens though, and if I'm out of luck I could try some other places. Camping out is practically unheard of here, so I think being there 10 minutes early will be enough.
The Idea behind Majora's Mask, like many other games, is that you only save when you want to stop playing. Dieing only made you start from the last door you entered. Same goes for OOT. Saving was only a waste of time.
Don't bet on it. I'm in Europe, and although I preordered the Wii months ago, I was told by the dealer that he'd be getting a meager 20 units, and I'm number 270 on the list.
I think I'll try to be there when the store opens, which should be a historic first where I come from.
As far as I know Audacity records the PCM stream, so there should be no loss of quality.
Precisely. Microsofts main advantage over Office competitors is basically "everyone is "trained" in MS Office". And the fact that Computer classes in schools are mainly just about using Microsoft Software is despicable.
Apart from the ludicrous Idea that using Powerpoint qualifies as a professional skill, that should have to be "trained", taeching them specific menu functions turns them into morons who become completely useless after something as trivial as a UI tweak in a software update.
Yeah, doing a voluntary poll on the BBC "technology" page is really representative.
...but it isn't as much of a deciding factor as some might think.
Past success didn't help Nintendo much with the N64, and I would say that alot more people have fond memories with "Nintendo" than with "Playstation", even today.
The N64 wasn't the huge cartridge-hardware mistake many people believe it to be (most games wouldn't have had a problem with the more limited space). It even looked as if Nintendo was winning in the early days of the system.
TFA is a bit strange though. What is he basing it on? Because he can't imagine Sony losing? Most of his arguements have been discussed to great extent, so he's basically just saying "yeah, but Sony will win anyway".
Sounds a bit like this
But that's not the point. Any other publisher he signed the rights to will have exclusive publishing rights, whether they're Sony or not.
Exccept abusing property rights, to achieve a government granted monopoly would probably come under the definition of "government intervention", don't you think? Or do the "PSP Police" go to Hongkong and beat the workers dead?
Yeah, can't wait to use my keyboard and mouse as a nunchuk.
With the GameCube it was very easy to play imports. You only needed a freeloader, which came out a few months after the release. Probably won't be so easy with the Wii bu who knows.
You say "consumer", but the fact is that in them days, the consumer barely knew what these magic "laser discs" were, and he wasn't able to replicate them for about a decade.
No, but they are very comprehensive, often with a significant timeframe, in which the author remains exclusive.
But more importantly, it means that Weir Al can't just decide to sell his songs over the internet, because that would be against the contract he signed with the publisher, whether that's Sony, or any other.
Have you got a source? My initial reaction was "bullshit", but I don't know, we live in a crazy world.
A trademark is only applies to doing trade (business) by claiming, or implying that they are the trademark holders (the company). But because they are official products and they are only selling them without any trademark infringement, there should be no problem.
It's a curious case. The only judgement against them was ruled by a UK court, at a hearing they couldn't even attend. And let's face it, their system is so fucked up, it doesn't come as much of a surprise.
Apart from that, they only say that there are other court cases being persued, and they got scared.
Most publishing contracts are exclusive.
Same with the new rules in germany. A company only has to pay the licence once too, which is why the new rules seem all the more pointless and stupid.