Does anybody's boss ever come up and say "Wow, whenever I assign you a task, you actually get it done! You're the greatest employee ever!". Then, why are we amazed and give praise to any company when we 1) get what we ordered and 2) it works when we get it. I mean, isn't that why we give them our hard earned money in the first place?
The real problem is that we have come to expect (especially from online retailers) poor quality and poor service. Perhaps NewEgg is great and out shines even the best companies, but I think we should do as this post suggests and set our standards for greatness higher than simply getting what we paid for.
The problem is that the consumers who will actually be interested AND willing to spend the money are the same people (including self) that sit at the computer all day eating cheetos, chips, , and drinking pop. I can only imagine how short of a life span these things will have given that kind of use. Hell, look how fast people in this profession burn through keyboards...
I agree. Though, the problem that this is solving is a non-problem. The occassional whoops is understandable and forgiven by most in society. However, the reason for this "solution" is due to those who are sitting in the theatre chatting away without any regard for those around them. The problem is that most of the people for whom this solution was invented do not possess any consideration or respect for others. IMHO, this feature will not be a "why-buy" feature for those who really need it.
Idea for next invention...
on
Polite Cell Phones
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You and people like you make a serious error when you state that only Christians and Bush supporters (same thing in your book) are the only flag-wearing patriots in this country. Furthermore, you demonstrate the problem with everyone who bashes religions or other groups. You are inconsiderate, disrespectful, ignorant, and prejudice. Try speaking to others with a basic level of respect. Not respect because they are above you, earned it by some title, or because they demand it. Try treating others as a fellow human being with basic rights and freedoms and with the knowledge that you aren't better than everyone yourself. Then, try realizing that the you are no better than those "Christians" you lump into the same category as angry, Bush supporting fanatics just because of you're own jaded views of all Christians. Do I dare say that all democrats are liberal, tree hugging, political correct, no spine when it comes to defending our country, hippies? I'd be very wrong because that is just what the other party wants me to believe. Just like you and others with an agenda want us to believe that all Christians are white, angry, crusading, Bush conservatives.
There are people who want to kill people for their beliefs on any side of the fence (satan followers, wicans, atheists, christians, etc.). This doesn't have to do with a flaw in a religion or a group of people in general; it is a individual flaw. For you to hate to the point you want to kill or to want to kill out of frustration because you can't make people believe what you believe is a twisted sickness that exists in people everywhere.
I love how people want to bash Christians in this country for being intolerant and angry white biggots. However, you can have O'Brian on the Late, Late, Show with porcelian figures of Jesus stealing, smoking dope, etc. and this is funny. No riots occurred over that. No riots occur when we enforce seperation of church and state and take Christian prayers, scriptures, and songs out of the schools. I think we in America, especially the Christians, have shown great tolerance, compassion, and understanding. To say that Christian America is evil and Bush and Christians are full of hate and anger is ridiculous. The facts just don't support that at all. If Christians were like these Muslims (who also don't represent everyone who calls themselves Muslims), we would have had a nuclear crusade by now and you wouldn't be allowed NOT to say prayer in school.
I just wanted to make sure this post was long enough to make a chapter in the novel you wrote, so forgive me for the length.
Let spell this out for you. The first sentence was what grown ups call "sarcasm". The following statement regarding Windows CE NOT being used was a "serious" statement. I hate to gun down your attempt at being funny, so next time I'll step down the sarcism for you so you don't have to take so much time trying to point out what you perceive as someone else's short comings. Don't throw stones in a class house my friend (ask mommy to explain that one for you)
Sorry, I guess I accidentally edited out the part about that just being MHO and I could be wrong. Looks like I'm wrong again. Better call your fellow MS nazis to come get me and sentence me to 4 years on Windows 3.1.
Yes, you're right. Windows CE runs on all of our real-time systems in the automotive world. Explorer is not the only flaw in Windows, which Windows CE shares a similar platform with.
I do know something about embedded systems as I do work in the automotive industry. Having said that, I could be wrong as I am a new player. However, in all my short career (a few years) in embedded systems, I have never seen CE used in anything that had real-time requirements or security concerns. So, that is what I based my views on. I actually run M$ windows at home and work and used it frequently at Bill Gates University (aka University of Washington).
I do not hate M$ just to hate them. However, I'm not a blind follower either. Just because CE doesn't surf the net with IE doesn't have anything to do with the platform and core code it was written on. Surely you don't think that uninstalling IE means you can open up all your ports and click away on your Windows box do you?
As I stated in my first post, I'm wrong quite often; I have a wife who reminds me. So, I don't mind being wrong, but if you want to knock down my statement please try to do it with a little more facts and less assuming and bashing yourself. It also doesn't hurt to show a little backbone and not post AC
FTA: "Microsoft chairman Bill Gates is scheduled to speak at a computer security conference in San Jose, Calif., next week."
Computer security and M$ is truly an oxymoron. I don't think that this will hurt Linux as much as Kaefer would like to think. M$ may be able to BS the average home user, but the embedded world may turn out to be a different story. Security and dependability are critical to embedded systems and M$ doesn't come to most peoples' minds when they think of security, not to mention dependability.
Actually, a recent http://www.wnep.com/Global/story.asp?S=4269677&nav =menu158_6study shows that men's lifespans are catching up. This, according to the study, is mostly due to women working harder, smoking more, etc. Sure it goes on to say that women will continue to live longer than men (about 4 years currently), but that it is due to the risky behaviors of men.
So, I don't think there is really much evidence to support this story based simply on the fact that women live longer than men. This actually supports your statement that lifespan is different between genders due to life style and roles rather than genetics.
We will not be "driven" by this car or any other car until they can take a lot more into consideration than staying between the lines. Along with this technology, you have to add collision avoidence (roadkill anyone?), as well as the ability to detect road hazards (i.e. ice, potholes - try driving in Michigan with this thing just staying in the lines).
None of that is out of the realm of possibility, but to pack that much extra wiring, hardware, and software to perform all that into a vehicle is going to do several things. Raise the price of the vehicle beyond the reach of the average joe, increase repair costs for both warranty and other, problems with that much new technology and no agreed upon standard will cause serious issues for aftermarket repairs and upgrades, and with that many different systems depending on each other the reliability of the vehicle will be difficult, to say the least, to ensure.
I just think that getting all excited about this technology or putting it down is a way to premature. There is simply too much else to consider before this can be feasible to offer in a public market.
You are kidding right? The US is about living a good life peacefully and set an example as some kind of peaceful utopia??? We came here as a result of the birth of the market economy and capitalism. Then, we took this land, violently, as our own. We then fought a war to become our own country so we could pursue further riches. Since then we have gone to war roughly every ten years since that time. So, where in our constitution, other writings, or our actions have you decided that this is what the US is supposed to be about?
This country started with the idea of being able to pursue your own dreams and desires to become more than what you were born with.
Now, as to the subject of our military and the use of propoganda, this is a necessary tool in order to do their job. You and others are complaining about something that every country in the world participates in. The only difference is, as in most other areas of our military, we out perform them. Have you ever been to the DMZ in Korea and listened to the stuff that is spewed out over loud speakers from North Korea?
This is a part of war, and in an effort to "inform America" our media is taking this propoganda and reporting it. Whether they report it out of stupidity or greed (ratings = money) are not the point. The fact is it gets reported. Now, what do you want our military to do when this happens. Should they come out and publicly say "Whoops, our bad. That wasn't intended for you at home, but the media got wind of it and reported it. That is just propoganda. Our real war plans are much different. In fact, here's what we are going to do to the enemy...." Let our soldiers fight the war they are in and use the already acceptable tools and weapons that everyone else uses to get the job done and come home victorious and safe. There will be plenty of time afterwards to get the facts straight and hold our military leaders and those in government responsible for leaking propoganda or whatever to our citizens. Although, I wish we would be as diligent at holding our media responsible for what they report and how they determine fact and fiction before sending it out to us as fact.
The real tragedy is that we have to hire people to report the positive truths about our country. This is not just a foreign problem either. I'm not saying that our government is flawless by any means, but our country does a great deal of good.
After all, no matter how misguided and incompetent our government is, the people of America are by and large kind, generous, and good. We have shown that with our pocket books during international tragedies, and with our voices in protest (even against our own government) when we see injustice.
Having said all that, how is this a restriction on freedom of press? Are you telling me that our media and press don't accept money to say nice things about a company, a political candidate, or a product? What do you call commericials and ads? What about press coverage in the form of interviews that spin politicians, actors, etc. in a good light? This is all called PR. It is perfectly normal and does not trample anyone's rights in any way.
The only crime would be if we were paying them to NOT print negative stories. This is obviously not the case since there are plenty of stories around the world about the evil giant America.
Your problem is one that is shared by everyone in the world, including myself. We seem to want to look for the negative in everything. We are intrigued by it and expect it. That's why the media has to be enticed to report on the positive, because the negative is what sells. An earlier reply to your post talks about Capitalism and how the guy with the money dictates what the people get to hear. As if the media is some kind of pawn. The media is as much Capitalism as our government and big companies. They will report and print what makes them the most money. So cheer up and enjoy positive news and encourage it as long as it is truthful and doesn't demand the suppressing of negative news. After all, freedom of press was to make sure that the people are not misinformed or kept in the dark and that includes good news as well as bad.
FTFA: The article states that only the following will be retained for the 2 years: -data that can trace fixed or mobile telephone calls -time and duration of calls -location of the mobile phone being called -details of connections made to the Internet -details, but not the content, of internet e-mail and internet telephony services
Now, do I trust the government to not look at the contents? No. But IMHO most of the posts seem to be blowing this out of proportion. I mean, they are going to be bombarded with a ton of data. I doubt that it will be feasible to search this data for violations of any kind. Rather, I think the government (or record industry if they are given access) would first have to have some leads or a specific suspect before they could begin to poor through that data to "nail" someone for a "crime".
So, if you are not being a blatant idiot and sending all sorts of email or making phone calls about your terrorist activity or bragging about all your pirated music files, you are safe until you allow yourself to become a suspect. I doubt this will truly impact the majority of the people in terms of being "watched". I think there should be more outrage over what this will do in regards to ISP pricing. That's the real problem, IMO!
"There had better be some incentives for housing that kind data
I imagine the incentive will be similiar to the USA's Sarbanes-Oxley, either do it or face criminal charges and/or fines. Threaten a company's wallet, and not only do you get their attention, you will have motivated them to do what they need to keep it fat and getting fatter.
"Where's it going to be stored and who's going to pay for it?"
As for who pays for it, the customers will. The ISP will be initially responsible, but they will be sure to pass that on to the customer in the form of higher rates. I mean, you don't really expect them to take a dip in profits do you?
Bear with me as I think this is relevant to MS and selling consoles at a loss. I work in the auto industry. We sell certain model vehicles (as do the other big 3 American auto makers) at a loss (around $1000 or more per sale). Why do we do this? Well, a big part of it is market share. The financing wizards have determined that it is less costly to lose money on each vehicle we sell, than to have our customers go to another auto maker. MS is very business savy, and I wouldn't doubt if they were doing something similiar. By selling the consoles at a loss, they can keep market share and even increase it by taking market share away from others (i.e. Sony and Nintendo). So, I think you are right about market share but the games are not the cause of market share as much as first getting you the console. The games is where they can try to recoup their profit, just as auto makers do with after market parts. I just thought this perspective might be worth while to share given this thread.
For all of you posting all the other events that happend on Jan. 5th, please RTFA:
"The company says the attack could have a significant damaging effect on internet traffic, as the worm designed to send politically motivated spam from tens of millions of e-mail addresses. The next phase of the multi-phased Sober worm has been discovered by iDefense using reverse-engineering techniques in the most recent version of the worm."
The article coins another brilliant 'ism: hacktivism before going on to the above article. The connection to the Nazi anniversary was not just pulled out of thin air. So, please close the wikopedia page and put up your Farmer's Almanac and step away from the keyboard. Thank you.
The article does say that Sober will spew out politically motivated email. One then can only assume that the politics they speak of are related to Nazism in some way. Or...it was a great way to grab readers attention and come up with a cool new 'ism.
FTFA: "Advice to users is to be careful when clicking on links in IM messages--even when they seem to come from friends--and to use up-to-date antivirus software. When receiving a link in an instant message, the best practice is to verify with the sender if the link was sent intentionally or not."
In other words, computers and the Internet aren't new, so quit clicking on email and links from your cousin you've never met to get pictures of you and your family from a party you were never at!
Actually, I think that this is one of the rare moments they were trying to look out for their users. Announcing the exploit without a fix would result in letting every 13+ old kid with a computer and no life go ahead and see how many computers you can hack while you can.
I mean, I assume this happens all the time with lots of software. I find it hard to believe that M$ and other software companies don't know about many of the vulnerabilities well before the public is alerted. I would love to hear from anybody with personal experience regarding known vulnerabilities and the timing around notifying the public, and providing a fix.
They shouldn't because this is a ridiculous demand. No matter how you feel about M$, it is insane to suggest that they link to their competitors. Leveling the playing field is one thing, but forcing a company to direct business (in a sense advertising) to another company is crazy. I mean, think about it, this could end up a two-way street and I for one do not want links to IE popping up in FF!
Good point. However, wouldn't you, as a developer, be responsible for proper testing of any components/applications your software uses within the context of your software?
I just think that good testing/development/security practices dictate that you never trust anything (including user input, and other components/applications). I think this is a Google problem only because they used IE, and assumed that it worked as expected. This is a horrible assumption even when you or a collegue are the ones who wrote the original code, not to mention trusting M$ to put out solid code.
I don't disagree that this doesn't let MS off the hook or take away their portion of the blame for this. I hope you're right and MS feels the pressure.
I know I should have known better than to make up a story to help illustrate my thoughts. Please, for those of you who do not get it, the story is what I like to call an "example". I know it's easy to shoot holes through the story and thus trick yourself into believing you have blown away my opinion. I do not mind being called out as being wrong (I'm married. Trust me this is not new to me), but please point out the problems with my statement based on the opinion I was trying to convey, which is: Without some kind of IP laws, it will be impossible to protect those who cannot otherwise protect themselves. [more or less]
Wow, guess I should've just said that to begin with : ) Sorry.
Slashdot Mirror
You got it exactly right.
Does anybody's boss ever come up and say "Wow, whenever I assign you a task, you actually get it done! You're the greatest employee ever!". Then, why are we amazed and give praise to any company when we 1) get what we ordered and 2) it works when we get it. I mean, isn't that why we give them our hard earned money in the first place?
The real problem is that we have come to expect (especially from online retailers) poor quality and poor service. Perhaps NewEgg is great and out shines even the best companies, but I think we should do as this post suggests and set our standards for greatness higher than simply getting what we paid for.
The problem is that the consumers who will actually be interested AND willing to spend the money are the same people (including self) that sit at the computer all day eating cheetos, chips, , and drinking pop. I can only imagine how short of a life span these things will have given that kind of use. Hell, look how fast people in this profession burn through keyboards...
I agree. Though, the problem that this is solving is a non-problem. The occassional whoops is understandable and forgiven by most in society. However, the reason for this "solution" is due to those who are sitting in the theatre chatting away without any regard for those around them. The problem is that most of the people for whom this solution was invented do not possess any consideration or respect for others. IMHO, this feature will not be a "why-buy" feature for those who really need it.
Let's invent polite people. Problem solved.
"Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead." - Benjamin Franklin
You and people like you make a serious error when you state that only Christians and Bush supporters (same thing in your book) are the only flag-wearing patriots in this country. Furthermore, you demonstrate the problem with everyone who bashes religions or other groups. You are inconsiderate, disrespectful, ignorant, and prejudice. Try speaking to others with a basic level of respect. Not respect because they are above you, earned it by some title, or because they demand it. Try treating others as a fellow human being with basic rights and freedoms and with the knowledge that you aren't better than everyone yourself. Then, try realizing that the you are no better than those "Christians" you lump into the same category as angry, Bush supporting fanatics just because of you're own jaded views of all Christians. Do I dare say that all democrats are liberal, tree hugging, political correct, no spine when it comes to defending our country, hippies? I'd be very wrong because that is just what the other party wants me to believe. Just like you and others with an agenda want us to believe that all Christians are white, angry, crusading, Bush conservatives.
There are people who want to kill people for their beliefs on any side of the fence (satan followers, wicans, atheists, christians, etc.). This doesn't have to do with a flaw in a religion or a group of people in general; it is a individual flaw. For you to hate to the point you want to kill or to want to kill out of frustration because you can't make people believe what you believe is a twisted sickness that exists in people everywhere.
I love how people want to bash Christians in this country for being intolerant and angry white biggots. However, you can have O'Brian on the Late, Late, Show with porcelian figures of Jesus stealing, smoking dope, etc. and this is funny. No riots occurred over that. No riots occur when we enforce seperation of church and state and take Christian prayers, scriptures, and songs out of the schools. I think we in America, especially the Christians, have shown great tolerance, compassion, and understanding. To say that Christian America is evil and Bush and Christians are full of hate and anger is ridiculous. The facts just don't support that at all. If Christians were like these Muslims (who also don't represent everyone who calls themselves Muslims), we would have had a nuclear crusade by now and you wouldn't be allowed NOT to say prayer in school.
I just wanted to make sure this post was long enough to make a chapter in the novel you wrote, so forgive me for the length.
Let spell this out for you. The first sentence was what grown ups call "sarcasm". The following statement regarding Windows CE NOT being used was a "serious" statement. I hate to gun down your attempt at being funny, so next time I'll step down the sarcism for you so you don't have to take so much time trying to point out what you perceive as someone else's short comings. Don't throw stones in a class house my friend (ask mommy to explain that one for you)
Sorry, I guess I accidentally edited out the part about that just being MHO and I could be wrong. Looks like I'm wrong again. Better call your fellow MS nazis to come get me and sentence me to 4 years on Windows 3.1.
Yes, you're right. Windows CE runs on all of our real-time systems in the automotive world. Explorer is not the only flaw in Windows, which Windows CE shares a similar platform with.
I do know something about embedded systems as I do work in the automotive industry. Having said that, I could be wrong as I am a new player. However, in all my short career (a few years) in embedded systems, I have never seen CE used in anything that had real-time requirements or security concerns. So, that is what I based my views on. I actually run M$ windows at home and work and used it frequently at Bill Gates University (aka University of Washington).
I do not hate M$ just to hate them. However, I'm not a blind follower either. Just because CE doesn't surf the net with IE doesn't have anything to do with the platform and core code it was written on. Surely you don't think that uninstalling IE means you can open up all your ports and click away on your Windows box do you?
As I stated in my first post, I'm wrong quite often; I have a wife who reminds me. So, I don't mind being wrong, but if you want to knock down my statement please try to do it with a little more facts and less assuming and bashing yourself. It also doesn't hurt to show a little backbone and not post AC
FTA: "Microsoft chairman Bill Gates is scheduled to speak at a computer security conference in San Jose, Calif., next week."
Computer security and M$ is truly an oxymoron. I don't think that this will hurt Linux as much as Kaefer would like to think. M$ may be able to BS the average home user, but the embedded world may turn out to be a different story. Security and dependability are critical to embedded systems and M$ doesn't come to most peoples' minds when they think of security, not to mention dependability.
Actually, a recent http://www.wnep.com/Global/story.asp?S=4269677&nav =menu158_6study shows that men's lifespans are catching up. This, according to the study, is mostly due to women working harder, smoking more, etc. Sure it goes on to say that women will continue to live longer than men (about 4 years currently), but that it is due to the risky behaviors of men.
So, I don't think there is really much evidence to support this story based simply on the fact that women live longer than men. This actually supports your statement that lifespan is different between genders due to life style and roles rather than genetics.
We will not be "driven" by this car or any other car until they can take a lot more into consideration than staying between the lines. Along with this technology, you have to add collision avoidence (roadkill anyone?), as well as the ability to detect road hazards (i.e. ice, potholes - try driving in Michigan with this thing just staying in the lines).
None of that is out of the realm of possibility, but to pack that much extra wiring, hardware, and software to perform all that into a vehicle is going to do several things. Raise the price of the vehicle beyond the reach of the average joe, increase repair costs for both warranty and other, problems with that much new technology and no agreed upon standard will cause serious issues for aftermarket repairs and upgrades, and with that many different systems depending on each other the reliability of the vehicle will be difficult, to say the least, to ensure.
I just think that getting all excited about this technology or putting it down is a way to premature. There is simply too much else to consider before this can be feasible to offer in a public market.
You are kidding right? The US is about living a good life peacefully and set an example as some kind of peaceful utopia??? We came here as a result of the birth of the market economy and capitalism. Then, we took this land, violently, as our own. We then fought a war to become our own country so we could pursue further riches. Since then we have gone to war roughly every ten years since that time. So, where in our constitution, other writings, or our actions have you decided that this is what the US is supposed to be about?
This country started with the idea of being able to pursue your own dreams and desires to become more than what you were born with.
Now, as to the subject of our military and the use of propoganda, this is a necessary tool in order to do their job. You and others are complaining about something that every country in the world participates in. The only difference is, as in most other areas of our military, we out perform them. Have you ever been to the DMZ in Korea and listened to the stuff that is spewed out over loud speakers from North Korea?
This is a part of war, and in an effort to "inform America" our media is taking this propoganda and reporting it. Whether they report it out of stupidity or greed (ratings = money) are not the point. The fact is it gets reported. Now, what do you want our military to do when this happens. Should they come out and publicly say "Whoops, our bad. That wasn't intended for you at home, but the media got wind of it and reported it. That is just propoganda. Our real war plans are much different. In fact, here's what we are going to do to the enemy...." Let our soldiers fight the war they are in and use the already acceptable tools and weapons that everyone else uses to get the job done and come home victorious and safe. There will be plenty of time afterwards to get the facts straight and hold our military leaders and those in government responsible for leaking propoganda or whatever to our citizens. Although, I wish we would be as diligent at holding our media responsible for what they report and how they determine fact and fiction before sending it out to us as fact.
The real tragedy is that we have to hire people to report the positive truths about our country. This is not just a foreign problem either. I'm not saying that our government is flawless by any means, but our country does a great deal of good.
After all, no matter how misguided and incompetent our government is, the people of America are by and large kind, generous, and good. We have shown that with our pocket books during international tragedies, and with our voices in protest (even against our own government) when we see injustice.
Having said all that, how is this a restriction on freedom of press? Are you telling me that our media and press don't accept money to say nice things about a company, a political candidate, or a product? What do you call commericials and ads? What about press coverage in the form of interviews that spin politicians, actors, etc. in a good light? This is all called PR. It is perfectly normal and does not trample anyone's rights in any way.
The only crime would be if we were paying them to NOT print negative stories. This is obviously not the case since there are plenty of stories around the world about the evil giant America.
Your problem is one that is shared by everyone in the world, including myself. We seem to want to look for the negative in everything. We are intrigued by it and expect it. That's why the media has to be enticed to report on the positive, because the negative is what sells. An earlier reply to your post talks about Capitalism and how the guy with the money dictates what the people get to hear. As if the media is some kind of pawn. The media is as much Capitalism as our government and big companies. They will report and print what makes them the most money. So cheer up and enjoy positive news and encourage it as long as it is truthful and doesn't demand the suppressing of negative news. After all, freedom of press was to make sure that the people are not misinformed or kept in the dark and that includes good news as well as bad.
FTFA: The article states that only the following will be retained for the 2 years:
-data that can trace fixed or mobile telephone calls
-time and duration of calls
-location of the mobile phone being called
-details of connections made to the Internet
-details, but not the content, of internet e-mail and internet telephony services
Now, do I trust the government to not look at the contents? No. But IMHO most of the posts seem to be blowing this out of proportion. I mean, they are going to be bombarded with a ton of data. I doubt that it will be feasible to search this data for violations of any kind. Rather, I think the government (or record industry if they are given access) would first have to have some leads or a specific suspect before they could begin to poor through that data to "nail" someone for a "crime".
So, if you are not being a blatant idiot and sending all sorts of email or making phone calls about your terrorist activity or bragging about all your pirated music files, you are safe until you allow yourself to become a suspect. I doubt this will truly impact the majority of the people in terms of being "watched". I think there should be more outrage over what this will do in regards to ISP pricing. That's the real problem, IMO!
"There had better be some incentives for housing that kind data
I imagine the incentive will be similiar to the USA's Sarbanes-Oxley, either do it or face criminal charges and/or fines. Threaten a company's wallet, and not only do you get their attention, you will have motivated them to do what they need to keep it fat and getting fatter.
"Where's it going to be stored and who's going to pay for it?"
As for who pays for it, the customers will. The ISP will be initially responsible, but they will be sure to pass that on to the customer in the form of higher rates. I mean, you don't really expect them to take a dip in profits do you?
Bear with me as I think this is relevant to MS and selling consoles at a loss. I work in the auto industry. We sell certain model vehicles (as do the other big 3 American auto makers) at a loss (around $1000 or more per sale). Why do we do this? Well, a big part of it is market share. The financing wizards have determined that it is less costly to lose money on each vehicle we sell, than to have our customers go to another auto maker. MS is very business savy, and I wouldn't doubt if they were doing something similiar. By selling the consoles at a loss, they can keep market share and even increase it by taking market share away from others (i.e. Sony and Nintendo). So, I think you are right about market share but the games are not the cause of market share as much as first getting you the console. The games is where they can try to recoup their profit, just as auto makers do with after market parts. I just thought this perspective might be worth while to share given this thread.
For all of you posting all the other events that happend on Jan. 5th, please RTFA: "The company says the attack could have a significant damaging effect on internet traffic, as the worm designed to send politically motivated spam from tens of millions of e-mail addresses. The next phase of the multi-phased Sober worm has been discovered by iDefense using reverse-engineering techniques in the most recent version of the worm." The article coins another brilliant 'ism: hacktivism before going on to the above article. The connection to the Nazi anniversary was not just pulled out of thin air. So, please close the wikopedia page and put up your Farmer's Almanac and step away from the keyboard. Thank you.
FTFA: "threat of 'hacktivism' "
The article does say that Sober will spew out politically motivated email. One then can only assume that the politics they speak of are related to Nazism in some way. Or...it was a great way to grab readers attention and come up with a cool new 'ism.
FTFA: "Advice to users is to be careful when clicking on links in IM messages--even when they seem to come from friends--and to use up-to-date antivirus software. When receiving a link in an instant message, the best practice is to verify with the sender if the link was sent intentionally or not."
In other words, computers and the Internet aren't new, so quit clicking on email and links from your cousin you've never met to get pictures of you and your family from a party you were never at!
Actually, I think that this is one of the rare moments they were trying to look out for their users. Announcing the exploit without a fix would result in letting every 13+ old kid with a computer and no life go ahead and see how many computers you can hack while you can.
I mean, I assume this happens all the time with lots of software. I find it hard to believe that M$ and other software companies don't know about many of the vulnerabilities well before the public is alerted. I would love to hear from anybody with personal experience regarding known vulnerabilities and the timing around notifying the public, and providing a fix.
They shouldn't because this is a ridiculous demand. No matter how you feel about M$, it is insane to suggest that they link to their competitors. Leveling the playing field is one thing, but forcing a company to direct business (in a sense advertising) to another company is crazy. I mean, think about it, this could end up a two-way street and I for one do not want links to IE popping up in FF!
Good point. However, wouldn't you, as a developer, be responsible for proper testing of any components/applications your software uses within the context of your software?
I just think that good testing/development/security practices dictate that you never trust anything (including user input, and other components/applications). I think this is a Google problem only because they used IE, and assumed that it worked as expected. This is a horrible assumption even when you or a collegue are the ones who wrote the original code, not to mention trusting M$ to put out solid code.
I don't disagree that this doesn't let MS off the hook or take away their portion of the blame for this. I hope you're right and MS feels the pressure.
would be to help avoid Road Rage. Just avoid the pissed off cars until the cops can come drag them to a happy place : )
I know I should have known better than to make up a story to help illustrate my thoughts. Please, for those of you who do not get it, the story is what I like to call an "example". I know it's easy to shoot holes through the story and thus trick yourself into believing you have blown away my opinion. I do not mind being called out as being wrong (I'm married. Trust me this is not new to me), but please point out the problems with my statement based on the opinion I was trying to convey, which is: Without some kind of IP laws, it will be impossible to protect those who cannot otherwise protect themselves. [more or less]
Wow, guess I should've just said that to begin with : ) Sorry.