You guys are forgetting one very important thing. Google didn't buy YouTube because it's YouTube. Google now has licensing deals with BMG Sony, Universal Music, CBS and Warner Music Group. You can't tell me that's not worth something. You think copyright holders will insist their stuff be taken down when it's competing for licensed video content? Not bloody likely.
That's like making an indie film and having it distributed with major studio releases. As a video copyright holder, why would I tell Google to take something down when it's getting the same exposure Sony, Universal and CBS are getting?
"Dedicated gamers" will own all three
on
Will the Wii Work?
·
· Score: 1
With the dedicated gamer it's not a matter of which system to buy. It's a matter of which platform do I play because my sister is playing the other platform.
From what I've read, Conroe benefits break down when you exceed the built-in cache. Intel set up some press tests where they only allowed some very limited testing. In the limited testing, the Conroe looked pretty good until the testers were able to do stuff that exceeded the cache size, then the AMD chips did better. Doesn't sound like Intel is being very innovative at all.
Look, in my opinion, this is a case where a patent worked the way it was supposed to work. Sure, I have trouble with the RIM situation where a company and thousands of users were basically held hostage by what was obviously a patent troll, but in this case the actual inventor of the technology was stepped on by a larger company.
If we didn't have the patent system, every game company would release their own version of Halo. Or every drug company would release their own version of Viagra. If companies couldn't profit from their own invention and expect their invention to be protected by law, we wouldn't have any kind of innovation at all.
It's not a perfect system. Not by a long shot. But seriously, "all patents are bad" is a little overkill.
Although it has one of the most impressive news readers I've seen, the basic browser is a little buggy. I had some problems with browsing some pages, so I wonder about how closely firefox based it is.
I've not yet seen a virtual machine that was fully useful. The inform z-machine, java, Apple's early forray into running old Mac software on the PowerPC, the SoftPC that ran Windows on a Mac. They all had limits. While they can emulate a processor, they are still a virtual machine. While there's a certain security in running applications within a virtual machine (if theres a crash, it happens within the virtual machine and hopefully doesn't affect other applications, or in Java's case Java is prevented from greatly affecting the system at all) I'm not convinced it's worthwhile to market full-fledged applications written in virtual machines.
I will have to say, however, that the enterprise software market has embraced the virtual machine. Many enterprise groupware apps are written in Java and.NET. That, I'm sure cuts down on development time and opens their products to more platforms, but I'm sure it's limiting in what their developers can actually do.
That's easy for you to say. If your included link is you, then your job is basically a party lifestyle. Fine. But lets say you're a college graduate with a nice job, and maybe you have a future in management. If it comes down to 2 people for promotion and your boss googles the two candidates, he's gonna pick the guy who didn't have a myspace profile or nasty usenet posts. Just look at modern politics, how many people don't run because they have something that the FBI will find in a background check.
Look 15 years down the road even. You're married, you have a 13 year old kid. You're trying to be the responsible adult teaching your kid through example. Suddenly your kid googles you, and finds a photo of you partying on someone else's profile or something. How many parents don't like admitting to their kids that they smoked pot in school, and now theres pictures?
I used to work at a software company, where I did technical support via phone, email and fax, plus webmaster work. One time I took a vacation. One of my bosses decided she was going to do my job while I was out of town. When I got back, she gave me a raise. She went crazy doing my job and couldn't believe I was doing it. When I eventually quit that job, I had to "train my replacement". Same boss asked me to come back 3 months later because she'd totally screwed up the web site. So I came back for 3 months on the condition I'd only do web work. They had 2 people doing my tech support job. LOL. Three if you count my boss messing up the web site.
DPBS is right. If light could be bent AROUND an object, it would be invisible or nearly invisible. That's seemingly the idea behind this experiment, using the properties of a lens to bend reflected light around an object. Water bends light, crystals bend light, the idea here is to bend the light outside of the lens. I can see how it could be possible, and perhaps with the right technology might not require "power" as the cloaking device seems to. It's all about the reflective qualities of light and how to bend light around an object that would otherwise block it. By bending light around an object, I wouldnt see the object, I'd see what's behind it. Or failing that, I would see the object in a different space other than it actually occupied. It's already a well known fact that gravity can bend light. The question here is can it be done on a controlled basis?
You're quite mistaken. There's a differnce between public relations and advertising. What you describe in your post is advertising. Press releases, however, are public relations.
You have to remember that the so-called 6 gb mini doesn't really hold 6 gb, it's slightly smaller (it reports 5.6 gb on the About screen). So with a decent amount of songs plus a regular collection of the four podcasts I regularly subscribe to, I easily fill my Mini. I don't see that I could put the same amount on a Nano, so I haven't bought a Nano. I'd be much more inclined to consider an 8-gig Nano, and could really care less about a touch-screen model.
Every industry has their puppet journalists, whether it's politics or cars or real estate. Why should video games be any different. And duh - is this guy reporting yesterdays news or what? It's not like we didn't know this.
-d
OK I was like "why" when I first read the story and looked at the site, but damn they have a hell of a marketing department. I looked at the video and went "I want one."
I don't believe that indi groups are being "rewarded" because of talent. What incentive do file sharers have in buying an indi album simply because it's better than a pop album? I don't think there's any. No, they buy the indi album because it's more obscure than the pop album.
Take an indi group like "Betty" for example. Ever try to find any of their music online? You won't find much on file sharing services, but if you go to their web site you can download SOME of their songs from select albums, which you can buy from their site.
But Billy Joel, The Beatles, Celine Dion... sure tons of those are on the file sharing services. I have no reason to buy their songs because I can get them for free, we all know this. I'm not going to "reward" them no matter how good a musician they are. I'll buy a CD if I want a CD. It's as simple as that. But if I like the indi group, basically I HAVE to buy their CD because it's hard to find their music on file sharing.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REWARD.
I don't doubt that P2P has impacted the music industry. But the RIAA and labels are going about it wrong. They need to reinvent the industry to keep up with technology, or they will vanish into obscurity.
-dave
Slashdot Mirror
You guys are forgetting one very important thing. Google didn't buy YouTube because it's YouTube. Google now has licensing deals with BMG Sony, Universal Music, CBS and Warner Music Group. You can't tell me that's not worth something. You think copyright holders will insist their stuff be taken down when it's competing for licensed video content? Not bloody likely. That's like making an indie film and having it distributed with major studio releases. As a video copyright holder, why would I tell Google to take something down when it's getting the same exposure Sony, Universal and CBS are getting?
With the dedicated gamer it's not a matter of which system to buy. It's a matter of which platform do I play because my sister is playing the other platform.
My AD&D texts haven't moved from my filing cabinet in 10 years. Do people still play with them? Dice, paper and pencil? How very retro.
Sony expects to have 700,000 units available on the newly reclassified "Dwarf planet" Pluto on launch.
From what I've read, Conroe benefits break down when you exceed the built-in cache. Intel set up some press tests where they only allowed some very limited testing. In the limited testing, the Conroe looked pretty good until the testers were able to do stuff that exceeded the cache size, then the AMD chips did better. Doesn't sound like Intel is being very innovative at all.
Look, in my opinion, this is a case where a patent worked the way it was supposed to work. Sure, I have trouble with the RIM situation where a company and thousands of users were basically held hostage by what was obviously a patent troll, but in this case the actual inventor of the technology was stepped on by a larger company.
If we didn't have the patent system, every game company would release their own version of Halo. Or every drug company would release their own version of Viagra. If companies couldn't profit from their own invention and expect their invention to be protected by law, we wouldn't have any kind of innovation at all.
It's not a perfect system. Not by a long shot. But seriously, "all patents are bad" is a little overkill.
Although it has one of the most impressive news readers I've seen, the basic browser is a little buggy. I had some problems with browsing some pages, so I wonder about how closely firefox based it is.
I've not yet seen a virtual machine that was fully useful. The inform z-machine, java, Apple's early forray into running old Mac software on the PowerPC, the SoftPC that ran Windows on a Mac. They all had limits. While they can emulate a processor, they are still a virtual machine. While there's a certain security in running applications within a virtual machine (if theres a crash, it happens within the virtual machine and hopefully doesn't affect other applications, or in Java's case Java is prevented from greatly affecting the system at all) I'm not convinced it's worthwhile to market full-fledged applications written in virtual machines.
.NET. That, I'm sure cuts down on development time and opens their products to more platforms, but I'm sure it's limiting in what their developers can actually do.
I will have to say, however, that the enterprise software market has embraced the virtual machine. Many enterprise groupware apps are written in Java and
That's easy for you to say. If your included link is you, then your job is basically a party lifestyle. Fine. But lets say you're a college graduate with a nice job, and maybe you have a future in management. If it comes down to 2 people for promotion and your boss googles the two candidates, he's gonna pick the guy who didn't have a myspace profile or nasty usenet posts. Just look at modern politics, how many people don't run because they have something that the FBI will find in a background check. Look 15 years down the road even. You're married, you have a 13 year old kid. You're trying to be the responsible adult teaching your kid through example. Suddenly your kid googles you, and finds a photo of you partying on someone else's profile or something. How many parents don't like admitting to their kids that they smoked pot in school, and now theres pictures?
I used to work at a software company, where I did technical support via phone, email and fax, plus webmaster work. One time I took a vacation. One of my bosses decided she was going to do my job while I was out of town. When I got back, she gave me a raise. She went crazy doing my job and couldn't believe I was doing it. When I eventually quit that job, I had to "train my replacement". Same boss asked me to come back 3 months later because she'd totally screwed up the web site. So I came back for 3 months on the condition I'd only do web work. They had 2 people doing my tech support job. LOL. Three if you count my boss messing up the web site.
DPBS is right. If light could be bent AROUND an object, it would be invisible or nearly invisible. That's seemingly the idea behind this experiment, using the properties of a lens to bend reflected light around an object. Water bends light, crystals bend light, the idea here is to bend the light outside of the lens. I can see how it could be possible, and perhaps with the right technology might not require "power" as the cloaking device seems to. It's all about the reflective qualities of light and how to bend light around an object that would otherwise block it. By bending light around an object, I wouldnt see the object, I'd see what's behind it. Or failing that, I would see the object in a different space other than it actually occupied. It's already a well known fact that gravity can bend light. The question here is can it be done on a controlled basis?
You're quite mistaken. There's a differnce between public relations and advertising. What you describe in your post is advertising. Press releases, however, are public relations.
You have to remember that the so-called 6 gb mini doesn't really hold 6 gb, it's slightly smaller (it reports 5.6 gb on the About screen). So with a decent amount of songs plus a regular collection of the four podcasts I regularly subscribe to, I easily fill my Mini. I don't see that I could put the same amount on a Nano, so I haven't bought a Nano. I'd be much more inclined to consider an 8-gig Nano, and could really care less about a touch-screen model.
Every industry has their puppet journalists, whether it's politics or cars or real estate. Why should video games be any different. And duh - is this guy reporting yesterdays news or what? It's not like we didn't know this. -d
-dave
I don't believe that indi groups are being "rewarded" because of talent. What incentive do file sharers have in buying an indi album simply because it's better than a pop album? I don't think there's any. No, they buy the indi album because it's more obscure than the pop album. Take an indi group like "Betty" for example. Ever try to find any of their music online? You won't find much on file sharing services, but if you go to their web site you can download SOME of their songs from select albums, which you can buy from their site. But Billy Joel, The Beatles, Celine Dion... sure tons of those are on the file sharing services. I have no reason to buy their songs because I can get them for free, we all know this. I'm not going to "reward" them no matter how good a musician they are. I'll buy a CD if I want a CD. It's as simple as that. But if I like the indi group, basically I HAVE to buy their CD because it's hard to find their music on file sharing. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REWARD. I don't doubt that P2P has impacted the music industry. But the RIAA and labels are going about it wrong. They need to reinvent the industry to keep up with technology, or they will vanish into obscurity. -dave