400mbit/sec? Considering I'm running my PC display at 1600x1200 32-bits in 100Hz, that's a whopping 6144000000 bits per second. USB2 isn't by far enough for HDTV (720p clocking in at 1.4Gb/sec IIRC).
Yeah. And that is what makes buying the most sold HD-DVD/Blu-Ray players, getting the player keys and releasing them extrordinarily fun. Think of all the hassle the regular consumers will have:-D
No, I didn't pay for linux. The card wasn't *designed* for linux either. But really. Shit happens. It's not worthy of a slashdot story. Operating systems and hardware are both horrendously complex. Bugs are guaranteed to show up.
You really dont know what you are talking about. It is way hard for someone without a good strong CS or IT background to open up the Microsoft installer packages, add in your own crap and then wrap it all back together so the person installing does not know it is happening.
I could do it and someone else with 1/2 a brain can but the people selling the crap on the side most certainly are not that smart.
You're falling in the exact same trap as I pointed out to the grandparent. You don't know if it has already been added.
I agree with the grandparent post. the FUD in the article about the viruses and spyware is merely that FUD to make the BSA and software companies happy. Nobody has bought a bunch of this stuff and then taken it apart to look and see all of these viruses and trojans in there.
Typically pirated software is better than the legit stuff, the pirated apps are patched to remove all the crap that causes you to enter validation keys, have the CD in, etc...
I've seen several apparently "valid" "scene" releases of eg. Windows XP. With trojans installed before you boot.
Jesus. Get a grip. It's a bug. This happens all the time with software. Actually, I'll be off now whining about that my wireless card hangs under linux.
So what if the big groups do "proper" releases? It's not harder than getting their release, adding a trojan and putting it back online with the same name. There is no way to verify the name.
Reading your BIOS to determine CPU ain't gonna be useful. I doubt any BIOSes store info on which CPU is on the board. Especially since there's easy ways to identify the CPU. I bet windows has a syscall that gives you CPU information.
What you have to do is migrate in a series of stages. First you configure your desktop Outlook clients to listen to a POP3 server. Then you set up a new mail server with something like exim and qpopper. Then you reconfigure Outlook to send via SMTP. Then you turn off the Exchange server altogether. Then you migrate your desktops from Outlook on Windows to Thunderbird on Windows. Then to Thunderbird on GNU/Linux.
If exim/qpopper and thunderbird would provide half the functionality of Outlook/Exchange, it just might work! Got news for you buddy.. Compared to Outlook, Thunderbird sucks. (I'm running linux-only at home and windows at work, so I know what I'm talking about)
Push email has already taken off - where's the open source version mobile operators can take up (Though I presume this needs to be developed outside the US to avoid software patent litigation)?
* Lying about the whole thing in an effort to flamebait an MS discussion
* Bought the eMachine from someone with a pirated copy of the OS
* Purposely installed a pirated copy that he may/may not have paid for
* Is not diligent enough to actually deal with MS
* Is dealing with a brain dead computer store pseudo-geek (really, if they are that good, they can get a much better job, the computer store geek is to real geeks what MacDonald cooks are to Chefs)
* Just a liar
* Has an OEM licence.
OEM licences prevent you from activating on a different computer. This is really old news though. What I'm wondering is... how long will Microsoft activate XP machines? If I'm keeping an old PC in the basement to run legacy applications, what happens when Microsoft decides to stop activation and I have to replace the motherboard? Will I be forced to buy another OS, that won't run my legacy applications? What about closed-source legacy apps? Does Microsoft have the right to deny me running an OS I've legally bought, for the PC it was intended to run on, even after 20+ years?
Yeah, I get it. You're paying for a TiVo. If that makes you happy, fine. It'll cost money to do content online, no matter how many TiVo's you care to have.
Keeping three copies of each work on hard drives in a data center is significantly less expensive than keeping three hundred copies of each work on DVDs in a warehouse, no?
Significantly so. (Although I think three copies might be too few when we talk about popular shows. Then again, a massive amount of shows can probably do with just two, so it'll probably average out)
Is this more expensive than a warehouse lease, shipping, and handling?
Significantly cheaper. Where do you get those $2 DVD's?
Then why are infringing copies available on PP2P2P2PP2P for zero bells? Why does infrastructure cost money only if the copyright owner authorizes a particular act of distribution?
I'll bite. Infrastructure costs money because:
1. The content is verified (Ie, you'll get Lost S3E12.avi, not "My mom getting assfucked by our german shepherd.avi" renamed to Lost S3E12.avi) 2. The content is guaranteed to always be available (Barring some service outages, but it'll come back up) 3. The bandwidth-bill is paid by the distributor. If you're using P2P to distribute it, it'll cost much less, since the distributor is sucking the bandwidth from all the users instead. 4. Pirates spend their own time and money getting stuff on to the P2P networks. Content distributors do too.
Anyway, I'd rather download the full, high-quality, drm & virus-free (yes, virus-free) content from the original distributer than some asshat that might switch off the PC half-way, and I'll happily pay (although not through my nose)
My point here is that the costs for the manufacturer and distributor don't factor into what I'm willing to pay for something.
Ok, so the manufacturer and distributor shouldn't get paid. They won't "sell" to you at a loss either.
There are products that are not manufactured at all bacause the costs would be too high compared to what the end user is willing to pay. If the convenience of having a coat to keep me warm in winter is worth $100, I won't pay $200 for it to cover the costs of transportation etc.
Of course there are products that aren't manufactured because there is no target market (due to price). If you don't want to pay $200 for a coat to stay warm during the winter, fine - don't buy an "expensive" coat. Buy a cheapskate coat for $100. Unless you go to the factory directly, there's got to be some cost to get that coat to you. You can't get the "raw" price of the product, if someone has to pay to get it to you. TINSTAAFL.
Content providers tend to argue something like this: The customer is willing to pay $20 for a Beatles CD containing 20 songs. The cost of infrastructure for letting him download one song is $1 and we lose $2 / song on piracy. Ergo, the customer should pay $4 per song.
What I'm willing to pay didn't change; it's still $1 per song. The claimed costs are enough to make selling the music unprofitable. Don't sell then.
This doesn't have any relevance to the cost of the infrastructure and production. Those are imaginary sales. The value of the song (including the cost of production, distribution and a reasonable amount of profit) is $1. There is no reason a customer should be paying $4 for a $1 product.
1. With Subscription TV you're already paying for the content, yet they show the commercials anyway. 2. Your convenience is not really something that cost money to the Studio. 3. This is a real cost, but looking at other online file services, it should be pretty cheap.
1. Advertising is subsidising the content. Without it, it is more expensive. Nevertheless, it should be an option 2. Isn't it? Keeping the content available to me at all times isn't free. 3. Of course, this cost isn't really large. It's just a huge server-farm, a ridiculous bandwidth bill, server room cooling/electricity, and maintenance. What other online file services are you comparing it to by the way? File services where you can subscribe to get premium service, or file services where you are bombarded by ads?
I'll pay for convenience, but there is no way I will pay extra for infrastructure or lack of commercials. The infrastructure is a cost for the distributor, not added value for me. The lack of commercials is the default state. I would expect content to be cheaper or free if financed by commercials.
Ok, who do you propose pays for the infrastructure and maintenance? Paying a premium not to get the commercials is fine by me. Getting it cheaper, subsidised by commercials is probably fine by others. No matter how you look at it, it should be paid for.
a) A subscription service that starts downloading an episode when it's available, so I can watch it whenever I get home / have the time, as opposed to checking a website and setting it to download hours before I can watch it. This would have to be available within 24 hours from airing on TV, otherwise I've already downloaded it.
Yes, please! If content makers/distributed would get the "convenience" part, a lot less piracy would happen.
b) Free, advertising-supported downloads without any DRM. Having an official release with guaranteed quality from a trusted source would outweigh the hassle of advertising to me. Sure, someone would strip the commercials and release that, but 90% of viewers would still watch the official version.
Yes, please. DRM-less goes under "convenience", and also "not criminal by default". Someone would strip the commercials and release it, sure. I'd still pay a premium to get the ad-free, high-quality, non-drm'ed version directly to my livingroom to watch at my leisure, shortly after it has aired (Or even simultaneously).
If you think you're disagreeing with me, you're wrong;-)
People are prepared to pay that much for this product (Well, obviously except this math-challenged OP). *I* am willing to pay that much, for the reasons I stated in my original post. You're paying for a service that comes at a price they've figured you'd accept. No argument there.
Regarding the economics of it, there's a bunch of factors that come into play. Obviously, economics of scale, diffusion of innovation, and as you say, market elasticity. I believe that this product is still in the early stages of diffusion, and as such has an artificially high price, that will eventually come down as more people use it and the competition for the customers grows (like your $1.75 price point)
If I could pay $2 per episode for content that was guaranteed to be ad-free, DRM-free (or free enough that it doesn't hinder my fair use efforts), persistent (meaning it doesn't get deleted out from under me), and included added-value content like commentaries and behind-the-scenes features, I would.
Oh wait, it's called buying it on DVD.
Yeah, if only DVD's didn't come with annoying ads, trailers and "do-not-pirate-shit infomercials" that I can't skip, that'd make what you say true.
Well let's assume you have a four-person household, and each person watches an average of 30 hours a week of TV. That's 6240 hours a year. If your cable bill is $720 a year, then that's about 11c per hour, or 6c for a half-hour show. It's effectively a 1700% markup.
He doesn't say anything about a family. He says, and I quote:
So here's what I would like to see happen. Currently, I watch about four different television shows on a regular basis - Lost, Battlestar Galactica, Heroes, and typically a current reality show (which is Grease: You're The One That I Want right now).
That's far from being four 30-hour TV weeks in my book.
Skipping commercials or viewing whenever you want can be done with a Tivo.
Yes, another product. Add more money (And it's only available in the US)
The main problem with pay per view is that you have to be dead sure you want to watch something before you watch it. You can't channel surf, you can't browse, you can't tune into the middle of a show to see if it's any good. You're pretty much restricted to watching shows you really like.
Yes. That's why they should charge you a small fee to download the show you want to see, commercial-free and watchable whenever you want. Atleast, that's the way I want it to be. I can tape the show legally anyway (Atleast in Norway)
This guy should just get himself a VCR. He'd have to endure the commercials that pay for his programming, BUT WHAT THE HELL DOES HE EXPECT?
1. You're paying not to see commercials 2. You're paying for the convenience of seeing whenever you want 3. You're paying for the infrastructure needed
The prices are high as they are with any "new tech". As I see it, this is still an "early adopter" price.
I also question the maths involved here. Is he watching cable 24/7 to get those prices?
A distributed approach to software and information systems often has catastrophic failure as part of the mix. A well-designed central approach, with built-in redundancy and a qualified backup scheme can usually outperform the poorly administered "edge" systems run by end users.
A well-designed central approach helps zip if your local ISP's upstream fiber has been dug up. A centralized approach is probably more reliable retention-wise, but access-wise it's far worse. There's loads of POF along the way from you to the central.
Slashdot Mirror
400mbit/sec? Considering I'm running my PC display at 1600x1200 32-bits in 100Hz, that's a whopping 6144000000 bits per second. USB2 isn't by far enough for HDTV (720p clocking in at 1.4Gb/sec IIRC).
Yeah. And that is what makes buying the most sold HD-DVD/Blu-Ray players, getting the player keys and releasing them extrordinarily fun. Think of all the hassle the regular consumers will have :-D
Can anyone but root install rpms?
No, I didn't pay for linux. The card wasn't *designed* for linux either. But really. Shit happens. It's not worthy of a slashdot story. Operating systems and hardware are both horrendously complex. Bugs are guaranteed to show up.
You're falling in the exact same trap as I pointed out to the grandparent. You don't know if it has already been added.
I've seen several apparently "valid" "scene" releases of eg. Windows XP. With trojans installed before you boot.
Jesus. Get a grip. It's a bug. This happens all the time with software. Actually, I'll be off now whining about that my wireless card hangs under linux.
So what if the big groups do "proper" releases? It's not harder than getting their release, adding a trojan and putting it back online with the same name. There is no way to verify the name.
Reading your BIOS to determine CPU ain't gonna be useful. I doubt any BIOSes store info on which CPU is on the board. Especially since there's easy ways to identify the CPU. I bet windows has a syscall that gives you CPU information.
Got news for you buddy.. Compared to Outlook, Thunderbird sucks.
(I'm running linux-only at home and windows at work, so I know what I'm talking about)
OEM licences prevent you from activating on a different computer. This is really old news though.
What I'm wondering is... how long will Microsoft activate XP machines? If I'm keeping an old PC in the basement to run legacy applications, what happens when Microsoft decides to stop activation and I have to replace the motherboard?
Will I be forced to buy another OS, that won't run my legacy applications? What about closed-source legacy apps?
Does Microsoft have the right to deny me running an OS I've legally bought, for the PC it was intended to run on, even after 20+ years?
Yeah, I get it. You're paying for a TiVo. If that makes you happy, fine.
It'll cost money to do content online, no matter how many TiVo's you care to have.
1. The content is verified (Ie, you'll get Lost S3E12.avi, not "My mom getting assfucked by our german shepherd.avi" renamed to Lost S3E12.avi)
2. The content is guaranteed to always be available (Barring some service outages, but it'll come back up)
3. The bandwidth-bill is paid by the distributor. If you're using P2P to distribute it, it'll cost much less, since the distributor is sucking the bandwidth from all the users instead.
4. Pirates spend their own time and money getting stuff on to the P2P networks. Content distributors do too.
Anyway, I'd rather download the full, high-quality, drm & virus-free (yes, virus-free) content from the original distributer than some asshat that might switch off the PC half-way, and I'll happily pay (although not through my nose)
I'd moderate you funny if I hadn't written way too many replies already :-P
If you don't want to pay $200 for a coat to stay warm during the winter, fine - don't buy an "expensive" coat. Buy a cheapskate coat for $100. Unless you go to the factory directly, there's got to be some cost to get that coat to you. You can't get the "raw" price of the product, if someone has to pay to get it to you.
TINSTAAFL. This doesn't have any relevance to the cost of the infrastructure and production. Those are imaginary sales. The value of the song (including the cost of production, distribution and a reasonable amount of profit) is $1. There is no reason a customer should be paying $4 for a $1 product.
2. Isn't it? Keeping the content available to me at all times isn't free.
3. Of course, this cost isn't really large. It's just a huge server-farm, a ridiculous bandwidth bill, server room cooling/electricity, and maintenance. What other online file services are you comparing it to by the way? File services where you can subscribe to get premium service, or file services where you are bombarded by ads?
Paying a premium not to get the commercials is fine by me. Getting it cheaper, subsidised by commercials is probably fine by others. No matter how you look at it, it should be paid for. Yes, please! If content makers/distributed would get the "convenience" part, a lot less piracy would happen. Yes, please. DRM-less goes under "convenience", and also "not criminal by default". Someone would strip the commercials and release it, sure. I'd still pay a premium to get the ad-free, high-quality, non-drm'ed version directly to my livingroom to watch at my leisure, shortly after it has aired (Or even simultaneously).
I'm well aware of that possibility. I'm thinking more of the generic populace. Jumping through these hoops should be unneccessary.
If you think you're disagreeing with me, you're wrong ;-)
People are prepared to pay that much for this product (Well, obviously except this math-challenged OP). *I* am willing to pay that much, for the reasons I stated in my original post. You're paying for a service that comes at a price they've figured you'd accept. No argument there.
Regarding the economics of it, there's a bunch of factors that come into play. Obviously, economics of scale, diffusion of innovation, and as you say, market elasticity. I believe that this product is still in the early stages of diffusion, and as such has an artificially high price, that will eventually come down as more people use it and the competition for the customers grows (like your $1.75 price point)
This guy should just get himself a VCR. He'd have to endure the commercials that pay for his programming, BUT WHAT THE HELL DOES HE EXPECT?
I haven't RTFA, but I could give three reasons.
1. You're paying not to see commercials
2. You're paying for the convenience of seeing whenever you want
3. You're paying for the infrastructure needed
The prices are high as they are with any "new tech". As I see it, this is still an "early adopter" price.
I also question the maths involved here. Is he watching cable 24/7 to get those prices?
Yeah, like Dresden,Germany (AMD plant), Taiwan (AMD Plant), Bangalore, India (AMD Engineering center). Or Intel's plant in Ireland.
Regarding cellphones though. The US really is behind other "developed" countries.
A distributed approach to software and information systems often has catastrophic failure as part of the mix. A well-designed central approach, with built-in redundancy and a qualified backup scheme can usually outperform the poorly administered "edge" systems run by end users.
A well-designed central approach helps zip if your local ISP's upstream fiber has been dug up. A centralized approach is probably more reliable retention-wise, but access-wise it's far worse. There's loads of POF along the way from you to the central.