I'm just curious what you get out of being a fanboy. I mean, it is a corporation we're talking about. So, unless you work there, cheerleading a group of people employed to create company profits is meaningless.
Let's not go overboard here, we're talking about a record retention policy on a public commercial site. This information is not private, nor secure right now. They want the ability to go back further in time then THEY ALREADY CAN in order to find what they want. They already had access and the law behind them before this.
With that said, I don't think it's a good use of legislation because how the hell are they going to determine what is social networking? Is in-game WoW chat social networking? What about a personal blog page where people can reply to me? If I were an online business I would be concerned that I would get slapped with a "social networking" tag and suddenly have to put my working capital into more record retention. That means more hardware, software, maintenance and employee's.
Attaching laws to the web2.0, neo-lingo of the day is bad practice.
I enjoy games with replayability, obviously, hence the replayability. But, I also enjoy a good 1 time, play through game if it has a good story line.
An example of this is Half Life 2. It was a great story line, great concept, just not something I want to play again once I'm done because it's story based. Once I know the story I lose interest. Counter Strike, bundled with HL2 when I bought it, has huge replayability, but no story line and so may be of equivalent rank to me, but something I play much more.
I just don't think the amount of replay a game has is the determining factor as to how good it is. I've finished games in 3-4 days that I've loved, or spent 2 months slogging through another one only to be dissappointed when finished.
The interface and casual features such as what you listed aren't going to be compelling reasons by themselves, but there is a lot more going on under the hood of Vista that makes it appealing. Some of those features are:
better user account control (not having to be logged on as admin for everything), better firewall, startup repair tool, hardware independent Windows imaging, better control with group policy, new script host and wmi classes, not to mention Direct X 10, which for gamers is going to basically mandate a switch.
Some of these are more directed at business, but there are some good features for the home users. If all you do is use a pc for the basics (web, word, IM), then you won't be interested, although it should be more secure than previous MS OS's, at least for a little while. Then again, if all you use is web, word and IM, you'd probably be better off with Linux.
I agree about the non-revolution of the wii hardware. To me, it's a less powerful console, sold for less money than the competition and rightfully so. That said, people are looking for new systems now and I think the price of the console will make it a big success. The competition has kept upping the price ante and opened themselves up to being undercut by a console with good specs and games that are fun to play.
In spite of the grandios speculation, I don't see women flocking to console gaming until it has more social networking games and features. They are simply aren't generally attracted to activities that make them feel isolated from other people.
The legal condemnation is clear and I understand the need for anti-trust laws in keeping the marketplace competitive.
That said, I think that it would be a big loss to the average consumer to have to deal with the download/install of a browser or whatever other software package that has become not only ubiquitous, but one of the primary reasons for purchasing a computer. I think this is an example of how the legal system, which has been designed to protect the consumer, would in fact be harming them.
I think I also addressed home users in my post, not just enterprise environments, but to reiterate about home users; they don't care and Windows comes preloaded on most of the more affordable systems, so that is what they are going to use and have become comfortable with, no matter what browser is on it. They probably don't even associate the big blue "e" with Microsoft, nor does it influence any other purchasing decisions in their lives.
Regarding the enterprise, you've actually made my point for me. Your client is converting an application to run in Firefox instead of IE, yet is still forced to use Windows because of the OTHER software, which as you say "aren't easily replaced by any means". That is control and mindshare, not a product like IE, which IS so easily replaced.
Pure nonsense. I could set up Firefox on every user workstation in my office and it wouldn't make a bit of difference. Windows is used because that is what all of our software is written for and has the best options for managing a large number of workstations (AD, SMS, Altiris, etc.). What browser to use is the absolute last consideration of what OS to use in an enterprise environment.
As for home users, most aren't even vaguely aware that there is a difference; they are all just portals to the internet for most people. For the people that are aware of the difference, they are mostly on Windows because of the gaming.
I feel much better about their lack of quality service now that I know I'm helping to subsidize disadvantaged WoW players in Asia. Can I at least get a postcard with their picture, telling me how their doing?
Seriously, one of their biggest failings is communication and there is no excuse for that. It's cheap and easy and would at least keep people hopeful that their lost gaming time is being spent in the pursuit of greater future stability.
Slashdot Mirror
STFU!! AMD is t3h R0x0r n00b!!!!!1!1!!111
Wow, that felt great! I see what you mean!!!
I'm just curious what you get out of being a fanboy. I mean, it is a corporation we're talking about. So, unless you work there, cheerleading a group of people employed to create company profits is meaningless.
Let's not go overboard here, we're talking about a record retention policy on a public commercial site. This information is not private, nor secure right now. They want the ability to go back further in time then THEY ALREADY CAN in order to find what they want. They already had access and the law behind them before this.
With that said, I don't think it's a good use of legislation because how the hell are they going to determine what is social networking? Is in-game WoW chat social networking? What about a personal blog page where people can reply to me? If I were an online business I would be concerned that I would get slapped with a "social networking" tag and suddenly have to put my working capital into more record retention. That means more hardware, software, maintenance and employee's.
Attaching laws to the web2.0, neo-lingo of the day is bad practice.
Great news about you daughter, but what's wrong with healing adults?
I enjoy games with replayability, obviously, hence the replayability. But, I also enjoy a good 1 time, play through game if it has a good story line.
An example of this is Half Life 2. It was a great story line, great concept, just not something I want to play again once I'm done because it's story based. Once I know the story I lose interest. Counter Strike, bundled with HL2 when I bought it, has huge replayability, but no story line and so may be of equivalent rank to me, but something I play much more.
I just don't think the amount of replay a game has is the determining factor as to how good it is. I've finished games in 3-4 days that I've loved, or spent 2 months slogging through another one only to be dissappointed when finished.
The interface and casual features such as what you listed aren't going to be compelling reasons by themselves, but there is a lot more going on under the hood of Vista that makes it appealing. Some of those features are: better user account control (not having to be logged on as admin for everything), better firewall, startup repair tool, hardware independent Windows imaging, better control with group policy, new script host and wmi classes, not to mention Direct X 10, which for gamers is going to basically mandate a switch. Some of these are more directed at business, but there are some good features for the home users. If all you do is use a pc for the basics (web, word, IM), then you won't be interested, although it should be more secure than previous MS OS's, at least for a little while. Then again, if all you use is web, word and IM, you'd probably be better off with Linux.
I agree about the non-revolution of the wii hardware. To me, it's a less powerful console, sold for less money than the competition and rightfully so. That said, people are looking for new systems now and I think the price of the console will make it a big success. The competition has kept upping the price ante and opened themselves up to being undercut by a console with good specs and games that are fun to play.
In spite of the grandios speculation, I don't see women flocking to console gaming until it has more social networking games and features. They are simply aren't generally attracted to activities that make them feel isolated from other people.
The legal condemnation is clear and I understand the need for anti-trust laws in keeping the marketplace competitive. That said, I think that it would be a big loss to the average consumer to have to deal with the download/install of a browser or whatever other software package that has become not only ubiquitous, but one of the primary reasons for purchasing a computer. I think this is an example of how the legal system, which has been designed to protect the consumer, would in fact be harming them.
I think I also addressed home users in my post, not just enterprise environments, but to reiterate about home users; they don't care and Windows comes preloaded on most of the more affordable systems, so that is what they are going to use and have become comfortable with, no matter what browser is on it. They probably don't even associate the big blue "e" with Microsoft, nor does it influence any other purchasing decisions in their lives.
Regarding the enterprise, you've actually made my point for me. Your client is converting an application to run in Firefox instead of IE, yet is still forced to use Windows because of the OTHER software, which as you say "aren't easily replaced by any means". That is control and mindshare, not a product like IE, which IS so easily replaced.
Pure nonsense. I could set up Firefox on every user workstation in my office and it wouldn't make a bit of difference. Windows is used because that is what all of our software is written for and has the best options for managing a large number of workstations (AD, SMS, Altiris, etc.). What browser to use is the absolute last consideration of what OS to use in an enterprise environment.
As for home users, most aren't even vaguely aware that there is a difference; they are all just portals to the internet for most people. For the people that are aware of the difference, they are mostly on Windows because of the gaming.
I feel much better about their lack of quality service now that I know I'm helping to subsidize disadvantaged WoW players in Asia. Can I at least get a postcard with their picture, telling me how their doing?
Seriously, one of their biggest failings is communication and there is no excuse for that. It's cheap and easy and would at least keep people hopeful that their lost gaming time is being spent in the pursuit of greater future stability.