Yeah, at generating press about something that may end up unused by most people in the end. Like Zune. It's not good press until something good comes from it... it could backfire and people could see it just like the price drop for the PS3. It's not even like there's a $170 bluray drive for the 360 you can hedge your bets with... MS says they will never make one.
In fairness, I don't think anyone saw the Wii coming or could have planned on the fact that simpler game play, with less intense graphics, that actually involved moving around would have captivated so many people
You mean nobody caught the clue train when it stopped by almost 2 years ago? Ever since they revealed the controller and the highly popular videos of people using it (not even any game footage!), I don't think anyone has had a doubt...
Because email is dead to everyone except adults.. and those adults are working in an environment that needs Exchange-like functionality (i.e. not email but scheduling, synching with other applications such as PDA & groupware, and supports extended scriptability for integration with other apps, i.e. clicking a macro in Spreadsheet will add new appointments and email people about it all in one shot)
They don't have to fool OSS developers or users, just those who may be on their way to becoming OSS developers or users. If they hit MS's new "get the facts" site, they may have some doubts when they start reading about OSS later on.
If that was the only problem, Sony, Nintendo, MS, etc would just sell their games online. The problem is that these are the companies that don't want such games on their system. For example: Microsoft just said they wanted their system to appeal a family setting and being the first to sell an AO game would kinda go against that.
What is this "ignoring hardcore" crap?
on
Where the Wii Fits In
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Why does every article think that when Nintendo's hyping their "practical game" type stuff, it automatically means they'll never make another Mario game ever again? I guess the authors don't know about the word "expand" because this is what Nintendo is doing. Nintendo's even said it themselves (scroll down to the question about market share). Or to put it in MS terms (maybe these marketing-heads will understand it now), "The Wii is introducing a paradigm shift, thus unilaterally expanding the user experience to new high growth areas in untapped markets." I mean, who can't understand that?!
So it'll be progressively better operating systems (with the possible exclusion of XP over 2000 IMO) that aren't "perfect"? That sounds fine to me.
That sounds fine? Then why does MS find it so hard to say that instead of launching some "new! sliced bread!" campaign?
We all know products never live up to the hype, so I don't quite understand the criticism here.
The criticism here is towards the hype. The story is hype: the fact that the code name is "7" while nothing else has been announced. There was ridiculous hype for Vista. It's pretty overblown, more so than for any other product. Wouldn't MS be the most likely target for criticsm over hype? Another such example is Apple, except the difference is people don't mind as much because their products aren't something that most have no option but to use on a daily basis.
But what if you could have prevented the circumstances had you worried enough, thus becoming more aware and thus more able to influence your surroundings? You're more likely to survive, and isn't that bit of likeliness worth it when it comes to your life?
Trust me, I don't want to worry about anything, but I'm too worried not to.
That's fine and all for church, but there are very compelling arguments (if not clear factual benefits) for changing to open standards. You're not locked into a specific application or version or vendor or toolkit or API. Middleware can be created for your data to work with proprietary applications if you so desire. You can even convert back. With proprietary software, it's a lot harder to "stop going to church" and you're pretty much stuck if your files are held hostage and you need to get work done.
Ask 3rd parties why they don't want to make games for what will be the most popular and accessible console this generation. I guess they don't like money?
One problem: The Wiimote can't determine its absolute position. It only knows direction of motion, acceleration, and orientation (whether it's upside down, vertical, etc). The only way the Wiimote can be accurate in determining where in space you're holding it is if you a) point the IR sensor at the bar on top of your TV, which means always holding it facing your TV (you can't swing around), or b) constantly requiring you to calibrate it. Option B is ridiculous in a realtime sword fighting game.
Why the need? Adding tools that enable interoperability makes sense, so Sun did this one right. Extending Office? Why sell more product for MS, and why develop for MS when they'll take my extension, reimplement it as a new feature in the next version and put me out of business?
Parent poster meant we should extend the functionality of Office so that it is capable of interoperating with OSS, in the way that Sun did with its tool. If MS puts out a product, we should predicate any proprietary functionality with an OSS plugin/addon/tool.
Most of the "techies" that I know think the same thing about Vista. That the really big reasons for not upgrading will be fixed after SP1
Which is why we should be weary for Microsoft's rush to put out SP1 ("Microsoft attempted to undercut Google's reason for extending the consent decree by promising to release a beta Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) before the decree's Nov. 12 expiration.") -- It's not really the fix everyone's hoping for. Maybe in the future SP1 will be put out as soon as possible just to placate people who would generally wait for SP1 before buying? It makes marketing sense at least.
No where is it indicated that the site actually provided any of the free movies it claimed to have. So no-one obtained anything off them, illegal or otherwise.
Then wouldn't the site be popular for maybe 3 seconds and then people would spam all over IRC/newsgroups/nfopages "fake site miivi fake site" or whatever?
There were several high profile media stories about the protection that HD-DVD uses exclusively is cracked quickly and repeatedly ahead of key updates. The Blu-Ray camp has been touting BD+* for a while now, and naturally studios and distributors will be backing any chance they have of getting more money. Is it really more complicated than that?
* (a DRM scheme exclusive to Blu-Ray which relies on executable code that modifies the video stream to make it viewable. This is as opposed to the scheme HD-DVD uses which is passive and has more in common with CSS, the protection DVDs use.)
You can't have your identity stolen, because according to the government, your identity is not within you, it's some intangible record. It can be misappropriated though, in the sense that someone other than you can use it. It's a flaw that criminals take advantage of to view private information, take your stuff, or take actions on behalf of you, and THAT is the actual problem.
As for stealing code, I think the problem is not actually that the code is stolen but that the copyright and license have been violated, and in addition they have made money from someone else's work without them knowing. If SAP is getting Oracle's customers when they would have otherwise gone to Oracle if SAP had not used Oracle's code, then SAP is altering the course of revenue that Oracle would otherwise have, and that is a crime.
Every new version of Microsoft something that mucks around with the UI and p*sses off established users is another opportunity for people and companies to slowly peel away. That could snowball eventually. At the very least it could cause consumer resentment and set the stage for a competitor.
Actually, at the very least, like it's doing now, consumers are being dazzled by new fangles. MS always has covered their ass in the past, even in asinine ways... but with the new MS Office, the mantra is "You can revert to the old interface." With UAC, the mantra is "Well, you approved the action!" or "You shouldn't have disabled UAC!" and MS gets out of jail free. The only way this type of thing takes hold is if the MS PR machine and its fanboys don't excuse away all of the real concerns their users have.
If they really wanted revenue from Linux users they would come out with Office for Linux.
No, because that helps people migrate from MS's tether. What they want is people being further entrenched into MS tech. People considering Linux are migrating away from Windows. Linux is growing at its own pace, but also at the expense of Windows users. I used to be a Windows user, and so did a lot of other Ubuntu and Fedora Core installations. These are the fastest growing community Linux projects because they do a good job of providing an interface that a Windows user can feel familiar with very quickly, and they help migrate users from Windows. Look at ubuntuguide and Fedora FAQ, they answer Linux newbie questions from a Windows-centric point of view. They show common tasks and applications that Windows users would want.
Their long term goal is still to scare businesses away from Linux.
No, their long term goal is to have guaranteed income from each PC user, and further guarantee & increase that income whenever possible.
Of course, they weren't considering directly competing with the iPod before either, and Windows XP Express was just for a different demographic, they didn't care about the OLPC and thought SmartPhones were the way to go, and that OLPC wasn't going after the same market because they didn't share exactly the same goals...
Microsoft is forever expanding into new markets because Windows and Office aren't the "revenue streams" they used to be, and eventually they will be trying to get money from people using Linux. Even if they don't go after Linux directly, they will probably be going after Linux users saying they owe Microsoft something for some reason. Microsoft isn't interested in putting products on the shelf that a user may or may not buy.
They're more interested in taxing or selling a "service", simply because it's a guaranteed income if the customer is tethered to Microsoft in some way. If you don't buy Windows, then you can't keep it on your PC when Microsoft releases a new version. Instead, MS wants to be charging you yearly for using Windows (like with business Licensing) or yearly for using their IP in Linux. It's guaranteed money every year, as opposed to you maybe not upgrading every year like their ideal situation.
For something that's supposed to be used independantly of a computer (I.e. it's not a computer peripheral), if something like that requires a computer, it should be seen by the computer as a mass storage device and use plaintext configuration files (that can be modified by a 1st party tool, like iTunes, but also 3rd party ones in case you can't use the 1st party tool), and allow you to transfer whatever files are compatible with the device with copy/paste (the 1st party tool such as iTunes can manage it too, but the user must be able to still use the device if they can't use iTunes).
If a computer's a requirement, then the device should at least degrade nicely if the computer doesn't support everything. Just like web pages + browsers.
this is the sort of law that sounds like it was put together over a drinking game by a couple of high school students, but in reality it has been assembled by a group of mid level government bureaucrats who obviously have not thought very far down the road as to the possible implications, legal or otherwise
What is this law supposed to prevent or enable? I saw a bunch of stuff about needing a permit, and being a professional, and at the bottom of the article it says that those who are using hand-held cameras won't have to get a permit if this law is passed... but what is the ultimate goal of this law? If this is the problem we have making laws, then shouldn't a law be described differently? We could just say "Anyone using a hand-held camera doesn't have to get a permit" or "Professional photographers (and have a strict definition) can't do this without a permit"... What's all this other vague crap?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, at generating press about something that may end up unused by most people in the end. Like Zune. It's not good press until something good comes from it... it could backfire and people could see it just like the price drop for the PS3. It's not even like there's a $170 bluray drive for the 360 you can hedge your bets with... MS says they will never make one.
In fairness, I don't think anyone saw the Wii coming or could have planned on the fact that simpler game play, with less intense graphics, that actually involved moving around would have captivated so many people
You mean nobody caught the clue train when it stopped by almost 2 years ago? Ever since they revealed the controller and the highly popular videos of people using it (not even any game footage!), I don't think anyone has had a doubt...
Because email is dead to everyone except adults.. and those adults are working in an environment that needs Exchange-like functionality (i.e. not email but scheduling, synching with other applications such as PDA & groupware, and supports extended scriptability for integration with other apps, i.e. clicking a macro in Spreadsheet will add new appointments and email people about it all in one shot)
They don't have to fool OSS developers or users, just those who may be on their way to becoming OSS developers or users. If they hit MS's new "get the facts" site, they may have some doubts when they start reading about OSS later on.
If that was the only problem, Sony, Nintendo, MS, etc would just sell their games online. The problem is that these are the companies that don't want such games on their system. For example: Microsoft just said they wanted their system to appeal a family setting and being the first to sell an AO game would kinda go against that.
Why does every article think that when Nintendo's hyping their "practical game" type stuff, it automatically means they'll never make another Mario game ever again? I guess the authors don't know about the word "expand" because this is what Nintendo is doing. Nintendo's even said it themselves (scroll down to the question about market share). Or to put it in MS terms (maybe these marketing-heads will understand it now), "The Wii is introducing a paradigm shift, thus unilaterally expanding the user experience to new high growth areas in untapped markets." I mean, who can't understand that?!
So it'll be progressively better operating systems (with the possible exclusion of XP over 2000 IMO) that aren't "perfect"? That sounds fine to me.
That sounds fine? Then why does MS find it so hard to say that instead of launching some "new! sliced bread!" campaign?
We all know products never live up to the hype, so I don't quite understand the criticism here.
The criticism here is towards the hype. The story is hype: the fact that the code name is "7" while nothing else has been announced. There was ridiculous hype for Vista. It's pretty overblown, more so than for any other product. Wouldn't MS be the most likely target for criticsm over hype? Another such example is Apple, except the difference is people don't mind as much because their products aren't something that most have no option but to use on a daily basis.
But what if you could have prevented the circumstances had you worried enough, thus becoming more aware and thus more able to influence your surroundings? You're more likely to survive, and isn't that bit of likeliness worth it when it comes to your life?
Trust me, I don't want to worry about anything, but I'm too worried not to.
Infinite loop head explode.
I really can't take the story's word for it without photographic evidence.
That's fine and all for church, but there are very compelling arguments (if not clear factual benefits) for changing to open standards. You're not locked into a specific application or version or vendor or toolkit or API. Middleware can be created for your data to work with proprietary applications if you so desire. You can even convert back. With proprietary software, it's a lot harder to "stop going to church" and you're pretty much stuck if your files are held hostage and you need to get work done.
Ask 3rd parties why they don't want to make games for what will be the most popular and accessible console this generation. I guess they don't like money?
One problem: The Wiimote can't determine its absolute position. It only knows direction of motion, acceleration, and orientation (whether it's upside down, vertical, etc). The only way the Wiimote can be accurate in determining where in space you're holding it is if you a) point the IR sensor at the bar on top of your TV, which means always holding it facing your TV (you can't swing around), or b) constantly requiring you to calibrate it. Option B is ridiculous in a realtime sword fighting game.
Why the need? Adding tools that enable interoperability makes sense, so Sun did this one right. Extending Office? Why sell more product for MS, and why develop for MS when they'll take my extension, reimplement it as a new feature in the next version and put me out of business?
Parent poster meant we should extend the functionality of Office so that it is capable of interoperating with OSS, in the way that Sun did with its tool. If MS puts out a product, we should predicate any proprietary functionality with an OSS plugin/addon/tool.
It's what you see in your awards icons when you catch a certain XBox 360 virus that re-routes all DNS lookups to a goatse cache.
Most of the "techies" that I know think the same thing about Vista. That the really big reasons for not upgrading will be fixed after SP1
Which is why we should be weary for Microsoft's rush to put out SP1 ("Microsoft attempted to undercut Google's reason for extending the consent decree by promising to release a beta Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) before the decree's Nov. 12 expiration.") -- It's not really the fix everyone's hoping for. Maybe in the future SP1 will be put out as soon as possible just to placate people who would generally wait for SP1 before buying? It makes marketing sense at least.
Yes, it too was overblown, even a girl hiding in a tub managed to get her fair share
No where is it indicated that the site actually provided any of the free movies it claimed to have. So no-one obtained anything off them, illegal or otherwise.
Then wouldn't the site be popular for maybe 3 seconds and then people would spam all over IRC/newsgroups/nfopages "fake site miivi fake site" or whatever?
There were several high profile media stories about the protection that HD-DVD uses exclusively is cracked quickly and repeatedly ahead of key updates. The Blu-Ray camp has been touting BD+* for a while now, and naturally studios and distributors will be backing any chance they have of getting more money. Is it really more complicated than that?
* (a DRM scheme exclusive to Blu-Ray which relies on executable code that modifies the video stream to make it viewable. This is as opposed to the scheme HD-DVD uses which is passive and has more in common with CSS, the protection DVDs use.)
You can't have your identity stolen, because according to the government, your identity is not within you, it's some intangible record. It can be misappropriated though, in the sense that someone other than you can use it. It's a flaw that criminals take advantage of to view private information, take your stuff, or take actions on behalf of you, and THAT is the actual problem.
As for stealing code, I think the problem is not actually that the code is stolen but that the copyright and license have been violated, and in addition they have made money from someone else's work without them knowing. If SAP is getting Oracle's customers when they would have otherwise gone to Oracle if SAP had not used Oracle's code, then SAP is altering the course of revenue that Oracle would otherwise have, and that is a crime.
Let's not forget Stanley Tookie Williams.
Every new version of Microsoft something that mucks around with the UI and p*sses off established users is another opportunity for people and companies to slowly peel away. That could snowball eventually. At the very least it could cause consumer resentment and set the stage for a competitor.
Actually, at the very least, like it's doing now, consumers are being dazzled by new fangles. MS always has covered their ass in the past, even in asinine ways... but with the new MS Office, the mantra is "You can revert to the old interface." With UAC, the mantra is "Well, you approved the action!" or "You shouldn't have disabled UAC!" and MS gets out of jail free. The only way this type of thing takes hold is if the MS PR machine and its fanboys don't excuse away all of the real concerns their users have.
If they really wanted revenue from Linux users they would come out with Office for Linux.
No, because that helps people migrate from MS's tether. What they want is people being further entrenched into MS tech. People considering Linux are migrating away from Windows. Linux is growing at its own pace, but also at the expense of Windows users. I used to be a Windows user, and so did a lot of other Ubuntu and Fedora Core installations. These are the fastest growing community Linux projects because they do a good job of providing an interface that a Windows user can feel familiar with very quickly, and they help migrate users from Windows. Look at ubuntuguide and Fedora FAQ, they answer Linux newbie questions from a Windows-centric point of view. They show common tasks and applications that Windows users would want.
Their long term goal is still to scare businesses away from Linux.
No, their long term goal is to have guaranteed income from each PC user, and further guarantee & increase that income whenever possible.
Of course, they weren't considering directly competing with the iPod before either, and Windows XP Express was just for a different demographic, they didn't care about the OLPC and thought SmartPhones were the way to go, and that OLPC wasn't going after the same market because they didn't share exactly the same goals...
Microsoft is forever expanding into new markets because Windows and Office aren't the "revenue streams" they used to be, and eventually they will be trying to get money from people using Linux. Even if they don't go after Linux directly, they will probably be going after Linux users saying they owe Microsoft something for some reason. Microsoft isn't interested in putting products on the shelf that a user may or may not buy.
They're more interested in taxing or selling a "service", simply because it's a guaranteed income if the customer is tethered to Microsoft in some way. If you don't buy Windows, then you can't keep it on your PC when Microsoft releases a new version. Instead, MS wants to be charging you yearly for using Windows (like with business Licensing) or yearly for using their IP in Linux. It's guaranteed money every year, as opposed to you maybe not upgrading every year like their ideal situation.
For something that's supposed to be used independantly of a computer (I.e. it's not a computer peripheral), if something like that requires a computer, it should be seen by the computer as a mass storage device and use plaintext configuration files (that can be modified by a 1st party tool, like iTunes, but also 3rd party ones in case you can't use the 1st party tool), and allow you to transfer whatever files are compatible with the device with copy/paste (the 1st party tool such as iTunes can manage it too, but the user must be able to still use the device if they can't use iTunes).
If a computer's a requirement, then the device should at least degrade nicely if the computer doesn't support everything. Just like web pages + browsers.
this is the sort of law that sounds like it was put together over a drinking game by a couple of high school students, but in reality it has been assembled by a group of mid level government bureaucrats who obviously have not thought very far down the road as to the possible implications, legal or otherwise
What is this law supposed to prevent or enable? I saw a bunch of stuff about needing a permit, and being a professional, and at the bottom of the article it says that those who are using hand-held cameras won't have to get a permit if this law is passed... but what is the ultimate goal of this law? If this is the problem we have making laws, then shouldn't a law be described differently? We could just say "Anyone using a hand-held camera doesn't have to get a permit" or "Professional photographers (and have a strict definition) can't do this without a permit"... What's all this other vague crap?