[...] points out that the console makers hold some responsibility here too In other words, "we want Microsoft to throw its weight around to help us". Not a bad idea, IMO.
I'm from the UK. Over here, we have to pay $80 (~£40) for new 360/PS3 games. And that's from Amazon. RRP (though most retailers don't charge this) is over $100 (£50). PC games are generally around $70 (£35).
24 hours? That's either an exageration, or your friend has a 28K dialup connection that's powered by hamsters. I've brought XP base installs to SP2 in a matter of 3 or 4 hours.
The British Board of Film Classification is an independent, non-governmental body [...] Statutory powers on film remain with the local councils, which may overrule any of the Board's decisions, passing films we reject, banning films we have passed, and even waiving cuts, instituting new ones, or altering categories for films exhibited under their own licensing jurisdiction
So the BBFC acts as an advisory to local government. If you're really outraged by this decision, by a private company no less, that has the potential to affect your rights (and frankly you should be), then complain to your local council and/or contact the Communities and Local Government department.
A simple e-mail stating that you would like to complain about the recent decision by the BBFC to ban the game "Manhunt II" based on the fact that it constitutes unwarranted censorship of the arts and is contrary to the public interest will do. If Slashdotters can bring down entire servers, then they can certainly make an impact on a local council. I'd strongly encourage people to not stand for this mollycoddling, Big Brother bullshit.
How does Vista's DRM stretch to Apple's proprietary player? In codecs? I thought the Vista DRM issues were to do with HD hardware? I'm confused. Also, surely if this was some DRM poking its nose in, this would be an issue on other Vista (non-Toshiba) systems?
PS3 is a blue ray player and well under $1000 Not in Europe. The PS3 retails for £420 (~$840) in the UK. Aren't we the lucky ones? HD-DVD all the way! All hail Microsoft!
consumer is simple [sic] unwilling to pay directly the costs I would agree, but seeing potential customers do u-turns at the price of Macs versus low-cost PCs tells me that you're wrong.
My argument is that if Apple make OSX available for use on generic hardware (incorporating this cost, and that lost in hardware markups in retail and OEM pricing), they will open themselves up to a much greater market by virtue of the consumer choice that they will be providing.
Consumer choice isn't meaningfully reduced I completely disagree. Hardware configurations are pre-specified. That is a whole lot of consumer choice to many people. Think of developers, too: developing for OSX means buying Apple hardware. I would be writing software for OSX as well as Windows and Linux if I could boot them all on the same systems. And before bringing up virtualization, that simply isn't good enough for developing an end-user product.
I appreciate your argument, but I think that restructuring this hardware tie-in model is the key to Apple's success.
The same is true in a lot of places. For example: You probably drive a car. You probably do not care that by doing so, you're slowly destroying the Earth.
Actually, I don't even have a driving licence, and we both know this analogy is silly, largely because OS choice only kills things that are subjectively good.
that's because of default choices, not because they actually don't care
I see both issues to be one and the same. The default choice requires less effort, and so it is easier for a user to use and forget about. Try telling my mother to install and use a different browser - she'll tell you to leave her PC alone, she likes the way things are.
Look, I use Opera, Firefox and IE6/7 because I have to for testing purposes. I was not making a judgement on the quality of any of them, but merely pointing out WHY users don't always use the best software.
Oh, you mean they want Apple.
No, that's the last thing I meant. If I had meant that, I would have said that I advocated tying Windows to Microsoft-built hardware that is then sold for a ridiculous price.
See Dell's Linux survey
No! That is such a typical response. When will Linux advocates learn? Getting Dell to distribute systems with the option of Linux will not entice Windows users to Linux, it will merely make buying systems from Dell more convenient for Linux users! Proactive marketing aimed towards Windows users is what is needed, and this is not on the cards.
the recent Mac vs PC ads
Are you serious? Those adverts are an abomination (see above - Dell/Linux problem). How do you think it looks to Windows users for Apple to base their entire marketing strategy on making vague claims as to what the competition don't supposedly do? Not one of those ads make a relevant, compelling reason for anyone to switch from Windows to OSX. It's almost like Apple don't want converts. My favourite is the one in which the Mac claims that Windows is only good for work, and the Mac is for entertainment. This simply doesn't strike a chord with Windows users: Media Centre, gaming, a plethora of digital media players including the new snazzy (and infinitely improved) Windows Media Player 11...
You're right, I do care. It's a pretty closely-guarded secret, but I like the idea of Linux gaining significant market share. It will force Microsoft to get its act together (like AMD did with Intel), and I would relish that kind of competition in the OS market. I just wish that Linux marketing wasn't so prohibitive. It's too technical (even Ubuntu and its hardware compatibility issues), users cannot be assured of minimal effort in transferring, and it's simply not common knowledge that there's that other option. And then of course you have that group of people (you'll know who I mean) who insist that Linux must not be "dumbed down", and text-based command interfaces should be accepted by a wide audience. It just isn't going to happen.
Apple OSX is a non-starter. In my opinion, the hardware tie is simply unacceptable. Full stop.
I do sympathise. Windows is for people who know how to cover their asses, and most people don't. This leads to very bad things. But like I said, my post wasn't about choosing one technology over another, it was about illustrating why Linux cannot grow. People like having it easy, so switching OS has to be REALLY easy for it to be viable.
Also, I'm sorry if you thought I was being inflammatory. I suppose I was, but it was borne more out of frustration for the incessant "people should use Linux" argument and a lack of progress in making this a reality, than it was about annoying you.
Exactly. Apple force OSX users to use Apple hardware which is very, very expensive. But sun shines out of Apple's arse so that's OK, we should all concentrate our efforts on the paramount evil of Microsoft. Such bullshit.
The only problem with Dell is that they're over-priced and their own-brand stuff like cases and peripherals are of poor quality.
Still, it would be nice to see Ubuntu and Windows sharing a market properly. I'm sure innovation would drive up at Microsoft.
You may want to get on that. I recently bought the fastest available AMD chip on the market (Athlon X2 6000+, 2x 3.0GHz cores) for about £170 (~$340) delivered. What's more, I could have had a Core 2 Duo E6600 for less, and an E6700 for little more, but decided that I'd show my support for AMD and vote with my wallet. It's so important that the competition stays on for Intel.
I don't know what you do on your Windows machine, but I haven't had to reboot my XP SP2 system in at least a year, and it's running 24/7 with few breaks. Very efficiently at that.
People who don't use Windows often make these assumptions based on experience with previous versions, but the reality is that XP is a very stable, fast and easy-to-use OS. Other than price (and with Microsoft's OEM release policies this is hardly an issue IMO), I don't know why any Joe User would switch to Linux. It just seems like unnecessary effort.
Microsoft has made considerable ground on Sony, and has entered the market in a very effective way. They may be losing money now, but in the long term you can be sure that they will make it up. After all, Microsoft is selling 360s at a profit, Sony is selling PS3s at a loss.
if you use IE, you're directly responsible for parts of the Web sucking for Firefox users, and that is one reason I look down on you. You seem to have a warped notion of causality. If Microsoft made IE adhere to standards better, then the few exclusive IE-only sites that exist would not be a problem for Firefox users. If IE users didn't use IE in the masses and used another browsers that adhered to standards better than IE does, then it would be less of a problem for Firefox users. But despite either of these things, the real people to blame are site developers: it is more than possible to create a site compatible with all current major market-share browsers, so not doing so really is incompetence. And don't forget, rendering issues exist on Opera, Firefox and Safari, too.
Anti-virus software would not have to exist, were it not for Windows This is absurd. Anti-virus software recognises malicious signatures in files on a system. How have they got there? Normally, it's user stupidity - downloading software from untrusted sources. You can't eliminate this stupidity by using a different OS, nor can you eliminate people's motives for writing malicious programs. Similarly, you can't eliminate anti-virus.
Look down on whoever you want, but the reality is that users do not care. Why? Because they shouldn't have to. That's the point - Microsoft leads users because that's what they want. The average person doesn't give two shits about what browser they use, or about your bleeding heart story of unsupported standards. They want to do their work, browse online, and without hinderance. You want to change things? Start lobbying OEMs to pre-install Firefox, market Linux to the masses without technobabble and with seamless integration with existing Windows-based technology. Then, people might just give a damn.
As it is, though, you're just a frustrated little guy who the people who count, the masses, just don't care about.
here in the US we actually think our outlook is superior because our outlook includes viewing ourselves as superior Haha, excellently put. It's sort of like a cycle of arrogance. Will it ever end? Who knows.
our visually oriented wysiwyg culture You make some good points, but the reality is that for computing power to make us more efficient, it has to be employed all along the chain of expertise - from poweruser to all-but-computer-illiterate. What good is it if a bank's server technicians know exactly what they are doing if customers don't know how to access the online banking website? Satisfying users of all levels means satisfying those that want nothing more than to be able to use the minimum technology to complete their tasks. This is the majority of users, and this majority finds text-based software a very big turn off.
Now just a minute - most users can't be convinced to change word processor because they're scared of how different it will be, so how the hell will they ever be convinced to learn a new keyboard layout?!
Seems like a lot of effort for little gain, especially considering it is unlikely to ever become widely adopted.
Absolutely. Hardware vendors really don't make very good config software for WiFi cards, but have to include them for backwards compatibility (pre-Windows XP does not have native WiFi support). This would be all well and good if they sensibly disabled their own software on Windows versions that had WiFi support and allowed it to take over, but this is rarely the case. Even for cards which do support Wireless Zero Config (which is most of them), you often have to manually enable the Wireless Zero service and then purge the third-party config from startup. Definitely not the friendliest user experience.
Utter bullshit. Significant Windows releases in the last five years: Windows 2000 SP1, Windows XP, Windows 2000 SP2, Windows XP SP1, Windows 2000 SP3, Windows 2003, Windows XP SP2, Windows 2003 SP1, Windows 2000 SP3, Windows 2003 SP2, Windows Vista.
If you think the market is
screaming for a decent mobile phone and the iPhone is it, then you're delusional. With no 3G support, an exclusive network tie to a US-only carrier and a touchscreen that measures 3.5 inches, it really is just an Apple-branded PDA phone. And PDA phones are simply not what the mass market wants - they're bulky, delicate and complicated.
Unfortunately, people (like you?) who seem to blindly worship anything Apple will eat it up like corporate lap dogs. Nokia and Sony Ericsson make truly excellent mobile phones, and I very much doubt that the iPhone will challenge them, even if, in a display of truly successful Apple brainwashing, you think that because it runs OS X
it must be important .
Slashdot Mirror
Object Pascal? Lean, efficient and syntactically not a world away from C++.
I'm from the UK. Over here, we have to pay $80 (~£40) for new 360/PS3 games. And that's from Amazon. RRP (though most retailers don't charge this) is over $100 (£50). PC games are generally around $70 (£35).
24 hours? That's either an exageration, or your friend has a 28K dialup connection that's powered by hamsters. I've brought XP base installs to SP2 in a matter of 3 or 4 hours.
The Xbox 360's graphics processing power is superior to that of the PS3's. That kind of pisses all over your fire.
Maybe in future you should base comments on fact, not irrational fanboy loyalties.
Haha, NO! What are you going to do about it? Thought so.
A simple e-mail stating that you would like to complain about the recent decision by the BBFC to ban the game "Manhunt II" based on the fact that it constitutes unwarranted censorship of the arts and is contrary to the public interest will do. If Slashdotters can bring down entire servers, then they can certainly make an impact on a local council. I'd strongly encourage people to not stand for this mollycoddling, Big Brother bullshit.
How does Vista's DRM stretch to Apple's proprietary player? In codecs? I thought the Vista DRM issues were to do with HD hardware? I'm confused. Also, surely if this was some DRM poking its nose in, this would be an issue on other Vista (non-Toshiba) systems?
My argument is that if Apple make OSX available for use on generic hardware (incorporating this cost, and that lost in hardware markups in retail and OEM pricing), they will open themselves up to a much greater market by virtue of the consumer choice that they will be providing.
Consumer choice isn't meaningfully reduced I completely disagree. Hardware configurations are pre-specified. That is a whole lot of consumer choice to many people. Think of developers, too: developing for OSX means buying Apple hardware. I would be writing software for OSX as well as Windows and Linux if I could boot them all on the same systems. And before bringing up virtualization, that simply isn't good enough for developing an end-user product.
I appreciate your argument, but I think that restructuring this hardware tie-in model is the key to Apple's success.
Actually, I don't even have a driving licence, and we both know this analogy is silly, largely because OS choice only kills things that are subjectively good.
that's because of default choices, not because they actually don't care
I see both issues to be one and the same. The default choice requires less effort, and so it is easier for a user to use and forget about. Try telling my mother to install and use a different browser - she'll tell you to leave her PC alone, she likes the way things are.
Look, I use Opera, Firefox and IE6/7 because I have to for testing purposes. I was not making a judgement on the quality of any of them, but merely pointing out WHY users don't always use the best software.
Oh, you mean they want Apple.
No, that's the last thing I meant. If I had meant that, I would have said that I advocated tying Windows to Microsoft-built hardware that is then sold for a ridiculous price.
See Dell's Linux survey
No! That is such a typical response. When will Linux advocates learn? Getting Dell to distribute systems with the option of Linux will not entice Windows users to Linux, it will merely make buying systems from Dell more convenient for Linux users! Proactive marketing aimed towards Windows users is what is needed, and this is not on the cards.
the recent Mac vs PC ads
Are you serious? Those adverts are an abomination (see above - Dell/Linux problem). How do you think it looks to Windows users for Apple to base their entire marketing strategy on making vague claims as to what the competition don't supposedly do? Not one of those ads make a relevant, compelling reason for anyone to switch from Windows to OSX. It's almost like Apple don't want converts. My favourite is the one in which the Mac claims that Windows is only good for work, and the Mac is for entertainment. This simply doesn't strike a chord with Windows users: Media Centre, gaming, a plethora of digital media players including the new snazzy (and infinitely improved) Windows Media Player 11...
You're right, I do care. It's a pretty closely-guarded secret, but I like the idea of Linux gaining significant market share. It will force Microsoft to get its act together (like AMD did with Intel), and I would relish that kind of competition in the OS market. I just wish that Linux marketing wasn't so prohibitive. It's too technical (even Ubuntu and its hardware compatibility issues), users cannot be assured of minimal effort in transferring, and it's simply not common knowledge that there's that other option. And then of course you have that group of people (you'll know who I mean) who insist that Linux must not be "dumbed down", and text-based command interfaces should be accepted by a wide audience. It just isn't going to happen.
Apple OSX is a non-starter. In my opinion, the hardware tie is simply unacceptable. Full stop.
I do sympathise. Windows is for people who know how to cover their asses, and most people don't. This leads to very bad things. But like I said, my post wasn't about choosing one technology over another, it was about illustrating why Linux cannot grow. People like having it easy, so switching OS has to be REALLY easy for it to be viable.
Also, I'm sorry if you thought I was being inflammatory. I suppose I was, but it was borne more out of frustration for the incessant "people should use Linux" argument and a lack of progress in making this a reality, than it was about annoying you.
Exactly. Apple force OSX users to use Apple hardware which is very, very expensive. But sun shines out of Apple's arse so that's OK, we should all concentrate our efforts on the paramount evil of Microsoft. Such bullshit.
Trust the Apple fanboy to not be able to use the quote tag properly.
The only problem with Dell is that they're over-priced and their own-brand stuff like cases and peripherals are of poor quality. Still, it would be nice to see Ubuntu and Windows sharing a market properly. I'm sure innovation would drive up at Microsoft.
You may want to get on that. I recently bought the fastest available AMD chip on the market (Athlon X2 6000+, 2x 3.0GHz cores) for about £170 (~$340) delivered. What's more, I could have had a Core 2 Duo E6600 for less, and an E6700 for little more, but decided that I'd show my support for AMD and vote with my wallet. It's so important that the competition stays on for Intel.
Now is a great time to upgrade your CPU. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/ is my preferred retailer, FYI.
I don't know what you do on your Windows machine, but I haven't had to reboot my XP SP2 system in at least a year, and it's running 24/7 with few breaks. Very efficiently at that. People who don't use Windows often make these assumptions based on experience with previous versions, but the reality is that XP is a very stable, fast and easy-to-use OS. Other than price (and with Microsoft's OEM release policies this is hardly an issue IMO), I don't know why any Joe User would switch to Linux. It just seems like unnecessary effort.
Microsoft has made considerable ground on Sony, and has entered the market in a very effective way. They may be losing money now, but in the long term you can be sure that they will make it up. After all, Microsoft is selling 360s at a profit, Sony is selling PS3s at a loss.
eBay - Helping consumers evade import duties since 1995.
Now just a minute - most users can't be convinced to change word processor because they're scared of how different it will be, so how the hell will they ever be convinced to learn a new keyboard layout?! Seems like a lot of effort for little gain, especially considering it is unlikely to ever become widely adopted.
Absolutely. Hardware vendors really don't make very good config software for WiFi cards, but have to include them for backwards compatibility (pre-Windows XP does not have native WiFi support). This would be all well and good if they sensibly disabled their own software on Windows versions that had WiFi support and allowed it to take over, but this is rarely the case. Even for cards which do support Wireless Zero Config (which is most of them), you often have to manually enable the Wireless Zero service and then purge the third-party config from startup. Definitely not the friendliest user experience.