According to SoundExchange's Ades, the problem is that Pandora's user-friendly service isn't really designed to make the money it should. "They're giving away music for free. Who's not going to want that?" Ades says. "The question is: 'What is Pandora doing to raise revenue?' They're attracting listeners with the music, but they're not requiring listeners to pay for the music. Pandora's failure to monetize their business is why they can't afford the rates."
I'm sure if Pandora went to a flat $15/month subscription and kept half of the 16 million years, the industry would still try to regulate them out of business so OTA radio (and payola) still reigns supreme. IIRC, iTunes had quite a rough patch with the industry, and that's friggin' iTunes. How the hell can the industry give iTunes a hard time? It's scary that how corporations have enough pull that they can almost literally make their own laws just to keep things the way they've always been.
It'll be a sad day when my absolute favorite music listening method dies. To add another anecdotal reference, I've found SO much music, so many artists, even an entire genre, since I've started listening to Pandora about half a year ago. I'd subscribe to them in a heartbeat.
I'd argue that, yes, the experience (mainly the dialogue and humor) of Portal is hard to beat, but notsomuch the art. To me, Portal was a very bland game visually. Don't get me wrong, the minimalist style worked for its presentation, especially when it contrasted with you leaving the facility proper later in the game, but I didn't find the generic surroundings as the massive selling point.
Braid, OTOH, with its impressionist-like backdrops, soothing music, along with the nifty rewind/ff/pause to go along with those backdrops and music are all extremely well-done and presented.
(a) PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION, MANUFACTURE, AND DISTRIBUTION.--No person shall import, manufacture, or distribute any digital audio recording device or digital audio interface device that does not conform to--
(1) the Serial Copy Management System;
(2) a system that has the same functional characteristics as the Serial Copy Management System and requires that copyright and generation status information be accurately sent, received, and acted upon between devices using the system's method of serial copying regulation and devices using the Serial Copy Management System; or
(3) any other system certified by the Secretary of Commerce as prohibiting unauthorized serial copying.
I know nothing about this XM device in question, but my guess is that, since it's called XM+MP3, it probably has no copy-protection scheme, and that's likely why the record companies and this judge have their undies in a wad.
"I'd dare say not many can bring up a memorable rap 'song' older than a year ago....just does not have timelessness or staying power."
http://www.answers.com/topic/ad-hominem
Any fan of rap (although the genre has horribly waned in quality in the mainstream) or even music can name at least a dozen rap songs dawning from its birth up 'til today. On the other hand, I can't think of any of jazz songs. That's because I'm not a big fan of jazz; it has nothing to do with the genre not having timelessness or staying power.
I also don't hear buzz amongst friends who have xbox 360's or PS3's about one game or the other
Well, first off, anecdotal evidence is bad (and I hate to partake in it with you).
But I have to call shenanigans. Everyone I've encountered with 360s has done nothing but rant and rave about Gears of War and how it's one of the best games they've played ever. The game has sold nearly 3 million at this point, and that's not an accident or some localized thing.
I'm still not convinced the Wii will take America & Europe from the 360 (GTA4 & Halo 3 later this year), but I do think the Wii will end up winning worldwide. The appeal to non-gamers/casuals and parents getting it for their kids is undeniable, unparalleled, and possibly the widest ever.
His comment is akin to a console owner saying he doesn't care about WoW because "it ain't on a real system like the Wii/360/PS3"; it's a fanboy comment that serves nothing.
Whether or not the mouse/keyboard would work better (probably make sniping a lot more manageable) is debatable. But GoW is not a FPS, and the final game is designed (and works extremely well) with the controller.
And it's only on the 360 for the moment, so dem's the breaks...
I read this on a post a while ago (could find the source, but don't feel like it right now) that Ep 4 of Season 3 "Exodus", quite possibly the best ep of the series, was the lowest rated ep of the series at that point.
As good as the show is, it's not doing good ratings wise (or awards wise, but that's another topic), and a change to Sunday night is very welcome. Friday night has not been a good night for TV for some time now.
Maybe the summary got edited to take out the word "discovered", but too many people are chiming in with "Tesla did it!". From the article itself:
... US researchers have outlined a relatively simple system that could deliver power to devices such as laptop computers or MP3 players without wires.
The concept exploits century-old physics and could work over distances of many metres, the researchers said.
... Old technology The team from MIT is not the first group to suggest wire-less energy transfer.
Nineteenth-century physicist and engineer Nikola Tesla experimented with long-range wire-less energy transfer, but his most ambitious attempt - the 29m high aerial known as Wardenclyffe Tower, in New York - failed when he ran out of money.
Yes. Tesla did it. We know it. The article knows it and states it plainly. The credit has been given. So can we discuss the actual feasibility for short distances, now?
What if some little kid who doesn't know any better has a toothache, and this poor kid comes across this Slashdot post labeled "Informative" and subsequently thinks that drilling a hole in his aching tooth with his dad's powerdrill is the smartest idea ever? Did you think of this all-too-possible scenario, mods?
IT people aren't in the position to make good decisions to affect millions (or dare I say, billions?) of people, and, most importantly it's not their job. Politicians are SUPPOSED to make good decisions. Whether that requires them to learn something or get people that do, that IS their job.
This post is like responding to a situation of a coach of a losing team by saying that some complaining players on the losing team don't know anything about coaching.
I'm not overtly concerned with being with people the same color as me, and I'm not bound to African culture (above all, I'm just an ignorant American:) I don't mind if the population is mostly white, but I am concerned with being viewed fairly and being able to say hello or hail a cab without being viewed as a either a threat or a beggar. Europe has disturbed me lately. Racist chants at soccer games? I can't even fathom what it would be like if the MLB Playoffs had people chanting racial slurs at black or Latino players. I'm still interested in the Far East, but I've heard stories and accounts about how racist they can be there with foreigners and minorities. Even in Japan, where I heard blacks are (were?) the "it" thing, it's still racism based on stereotypes and such.
I appreciate the advice and the reply, and I'll keep my eye out for that movie.
I don't expect to get a reply at all, but what's the best place for a black person? I hear all these "the people are so nice" comments for various places, then I see read news reports about rampant racist soccer hooligans, that rampage that happened in Australia not too long ago, and these other snippets of news that suggest that not all everyone is nice and accepting, at least not to darker-colored people.
So, my question is, how are the race relations in all these suggested countries (Holland, Sweden, Norway, Australia, etc.)?
Somewhat related question: Are black people still "in vogue" in Japan?
To translate the Team America metaphor into this, the point needs to be made that the only people watching the Sheepdogs are the Sheep. It's up to the Sheep to keep the Sheepdogs from getting out of line and attacking everything, just as its up to the Sheepdog from letting the Sheep get too idealistic and defang the Sheepdogs.
However, Sheep can't turn into Wolves. That's where I can't translate it, but that's primarily because the Team America metaphor fails here. The Dic... er, Sheepdog has a much better chance of becoming an As... um, Wolf than the Sheep. The Sheepdog has the means and the power to do the same things the Wolf; the only thing he's missing is intent. Add misguided or bad intent like, say, controlling the Sheep by killing the "bad" Sheep or trying to make the Sheep lives better by taking the land of other Sheep/Sheepdogs, and voila. Wolf.
But both metaphors are still off for being far too simple. And self-serving.
Don't forget archaelogy. I'm no archaelogist, but I can't imagine the day to day work being like The Da Vinci Code, National Treasure, or Indiana Jones.
But, anyway, we geeks should be honored that Hollywood takes enough interest in our not-that-interesting-to-us fields to make fluff entertainment out of them. Overlooking the usual medical/law/cop/spy/military shows/movies, how much entertainment centered around other specialized professions has been made?
You don't see many movies/films (or even supporting characters) based on civil engineering, sociology, or English literature, do you? Shoot, computer tech movies are beating out those archaelogy films* and archaelogy's been around forever! So take that, archaelogy!
*Comparison is limited to the quantity of entertainment in each genre, not the quality.
360? Japan? New games? You have to goto the 2nd hand section in my local games shop to find 360 games there. The 360 demo box standing outside has been converted to a ps2 demo box. I doubt new games or even droping the 360's price below 10,000 will help MS in Japan now.
I'm still not sure why Microsoft has such a hard-on for losing in Japan. The original XBox was a dismal failure in Japan, but it was a pretty solid yet distant second place in just about every other major market in the world. The ONLY reason why there's this pointless debate about "which console was #2 last generation" was because the XBox failed so miserably in Japan.
According to an AP story not too long ago, the 360 has sold 150,000 units in Japan, but 5 million units worldwide. Going by the fact that they still lose money on every unit purchased, all Japan amounts to is a big money sink with absolutely no prospect of obtaining a good marketshare percentage.
The PS3 dropping its price is the 360's Japanese death knell. I don't understand why Microsoft keeps trying over there; WHY exactly is Japan "must-win"? Developers? If the 360 holds a firm number one spot in North America and Europe, wouldn't Playstation-friendly Japanese developers be willing to develop for the 360, especially with the PS3 set to get trounced by the Wii in Japan and possibly not be a market leader anywhere? Is impossible world domination THAT much more important to them than actually making some money? Why doesn't Microsoft take a page from Nintendo and just focus on trying to make a profit for once. Concentrate on markets that actually want your product and cut your losses. That means exiting Japan ASAP.
I live in the US where the XBox brand is relatively popular and I plan to own a 360. But I don't want to purchase a console that won't be supported in the future by a cash-strapped manufacturer because they were too stupid to stop throwing money away in another country in a BLATANTLY OBVIOUS lost cause.
I'd really like to hear other possibly more informed opinions about this, because I seriously don't know what's what.
But it does seem like the Wii will stomp all over Japan. This next-generation is looking very interesting.
Pretty selective and short-sighted reasoning here.
The funny thing about your statement is that you fail to realize that 99% of all top-end, ground-breaking First/Third Person Shooters are released on the PC long before they make it to any consoles...
Same with RTS games...and adventure games...and flight simulators...(and MMORPG's)...I could go on and on
This is almost completely irrelevant. Two points: 1) Most PC genres (let alone games) don't ever do that well on consoles, the obvious exception being FPSs and MMORPGs 2) The most popular console games are those that were NOT born on the PC
If Mario Bros is a huge console hit, then gets ported over to the PC sometime later and no one really cares enough to buy it, how is that worth bringing into an argument as to why consoles are better than PCs? It's the same twisted logic you've used.
It seems to me like Consoles are a just niche for sports, fighting and racing games...and a lot of those are even released at the same time or slightly earlier on the PC...
And sandbox GTA-style games. And third-person survival horror games. And action/adventure games (not many of those on PC popular anymore). And third-person stealth/action games. And 3D platformers. And Japanese RPGs. I could go on and on...
As for the same time or slightly earlier comment, can you back this sweeping generalization up? I can't recall Burnout or Tekken being released at the same time or earlier on PCs...
This debate wouldn't be always be so bad if either side didn't keep misrepresenting the other side so incorrectly.
But, considering that far too many games these days are ending up as playable tech demos, what's the point? Who wants to play Doom 3 on minimum specs? People who really want to play it for the gameplay??
Few if any console games offer the ability to look better on future hardware that may be backwards compatible
Not exactly true. Since the last generation, older games (PS1/XBox) running on the newer hardware (PS2/360) will at least allow for better anti-aliasing.
Consider RAM--consoles will never have tons of gigabytes of space. Or hard disk space--for that matter.
That's because PCs (and the OSs that run them) aren't designed just for gaming.
For the top end (yes, some gamers do have money), it's PC.
The same can be said for that "top end" that have to own big-screen TVs and high-end sport cars. They're still niche.
That said, like the first poster already stated, WoW alone prevents PC gaming from being niche. I dunno if it's as widespread or well-known as a console Madden or GTA, but it's kinda hard to call that large of a userbase a niche.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure if Pandora went to a flat $15/month subscription and kept half of the 16 million years, the industry would still try to regulate them out of business so OTA radio (and payola) still reigns supreme. IIRC, iTunes had quite a rough patch with the industry, and that's friggin' iTunes. How the hell can the industry give iTunes a hard time? It's scary that how corporations have enough pull that they can almost literally make their own laws just to keep things the way they've always been.
It'll be a sad day when my absolute favorite music listening method dies. To add another anecdotal reference, I've found SO much music, so many artists, even an entire genre, since I've started listening to Pandora about half a year ago. I'd subscribe to them in a heartbeat.
I'd argue that, yes, the experience (mainly the dialogue and humor) of Portal is hard to beat, but notsomuch the art. To me, Portal was a very bland game visually. Don't get me wrong, the minimalist style worked for its presentation, especially when it contrasted with you leaving the facility proper later in the game, but I didn't find the generic surroundings as the massive selling point. Braid, OTOH, with its impressionist-like backdrops, soothing music, along with the nifty rewind/ff/pause to go along with those backdrops and music are all extremely well-done and presented.
Well, you can't say I didn't gave them the benefit of the doubt. I'm getting back into the "Down with the RIAA" mob. Where's my torch and pitchfork?
I know nothing about this XM device in question, but my guess is that, since it's called XM+MP3, it probably has no copy-protection scheme, and that's likely why the record companies and this judge have their undies in a wad.
If it does, then never mind.
"I'd dare say not many can bring up a memorable rap 'song' older than a year ago....just does not have timelessness or staying power." http://www.answers.com/topic/ad-hominem Any fan of rap (although the genre has horribly waned in quality in the mainstream) or even music can name at least a dozen rap songs dawning from its birth up 'til today. On the other hand, I can't think of any of jazz songs. That's because I'm not a big fan of jazz; it has nothing to do with the genre not having timelessness or staying power.
Great album by a great group.
His comment is akin to a console owner saying he doesn't care about WoW because "it ain't on a real system like the Wii/360/PS3"; it's a fanboy comment that serves nothing.
Whether or not the mouse/keyboard would work better (probably make sniping a lot more manageable) is debatable. But GoW is not a FPS, and the final game is designed (and works extremely well) with the controller.
And it's only on the 360 for the moment, so dem's the breaks...
I read this on a post a while ago (could find the source, but don't feel like it right now) that Ep 4 of Season 3 "Exodus", quite possibly the best ep of the series, was the lowest rated ep of the series at that point.
As good as the show is, it's not doing good ratings wise (or awards wise, but that's another topic), and a change to Sunday night is very welcome. Friday night has not been a good night for TV for some time now.
What if some little kid who doesn't know any better has a toothache, and this poor kid comes across this Slashdot post labeled "Informative" and subsequently thinks that drilling a hole in his aching tooth with his dad's powerdrill is the smartest idea ever? Did you think of this all-too-possible scenario, mods?
Please think of the children.
"...we correct it."
And it's designation is ED-209.
IT people aren't in the position to make good decisions to affect millions (or dare I say, billions?) of people, and, most importantly it's not their job. Politicians are SUPPOSED to make good decisions. Whether that requires them to learn something or get people that do, that IS their job. This post is like responding to a situation of a coach of a losing team by saying that some complaining players on the losing team don't know anything about coaching.
And, oddly enough, they're all political science, business, and law majors.
I'm not overtly concerned with being with people the same color as me, and I'm not bound to African culture (above all, I'm just an ignorant American :) I don't mind if the population is mostly white, but I am concerned with being viewed fairly and being able to say hello or hail a cab without being viewed as a either a threat or a beggar. Europe has disturbed me lately. Racist chants at soccer games? I can't even fathom what it would be like if the MLB Playoffs had people chanting racial slurs at black or Latino players. I'm still interested in the Far East, but I've heard stories and accounts about how racist they can be there with foreigners and minorities. Even in Japan, where I heard blacks are (were?) the "it" thing, it's still racism based on stereotypes and such.
I appreciate the advice and the reply, and I'll keep my eye out for that movie.
I don't expect to get a reply at all, but what's the best place for a black person? I hear all these "the people are so nice" comments for various places, then I see read news reports about rampant racist soccer hooligans, that rampage that happened in Australia not too long ago, and these other snippets of news that suggest that not all everyone is nice and accepting, at least not to darker-colored people.
So, my question is, how are the race relations in all these suggested countries (Holland, Sweden, Norway, Australia, etc.)?
Somewhat related question: Are black people still "in vogue" in Japan?
To translate the Team America metaphor into this, the point needs to be made that the only people watching the Sheepdogs are the Sheep. It's up to the Sheep to keep the Sheepdogs from getting out of line and attacking everything, just as its up to the Sheepdog from letting the Sheep get too idealistic and defang the Sheepdogs.
However, Sheep can't turn into Wolves. That's where I can't translate it, but that's primarily because the Team America metaphor fails here. The Dic... er, Sheepdog has a much better chance of becoming an As... um, Wolf than the Sheep. The Sheepdog has the means and the power to do the same things the Wolf; the only thing he's missing is intent. Add misguided or bad intent like, say, controlling the Sheep by killing the "bad" Sheep or trying to make the Sheep lives better by taking the land of other Sheep/Sheepdogs, and voila. Wolf.
But both metaphors are still off for being far too simple. And self-serving.
http://www.gamesradar.com/us/xbox360/game/news/art icle.jsp?articleId=2006081195220737049§ionId=1 006
2 035
Pics:
http://www.xbox365.com/news.cgi?id=GGrirdrLru0511
The PS3 may or may not be quiet, but going by EVERYTHING I've read and seen about it, no one can use the size of the PS3 as an advantage over the 360.
Don't forget archaelogy. I'm no archaelogist, but I can't imagine the day to day work being like The Da Vinci Code, National Treasure, or Indiana Jones.
But, anyway, we geeks should be honored that Hollywood takes enough interest in our not-that-interesting-to-us fields to make fluff entertainment out of them. Overlooking the usual medical/law/cop/spy/military shows/movies, how much entertainment centered around other specialized professions has been made?
You don't see many movies/films (or even supporting characters) based on civil engineering, sociology, or English literature, do you? Shoot, computer tech movies are beating out those archaelogy films* and archaelogy's been around forever! So take that, archaelogy!
*Comparison is limited to the quantity of entertainment in each genre, not the quality.
I'm still not sure why Microsoft has such a hard-on for losing in Japan. The original XBox was a dismal failure in Japan, but it was a pretty solid yet distant second place in just about every other major market in the world. The ONLY reason why there's this pointless debate about "which console was #2 last generation" was because the XBox failed so miserably in Japan.
According to an AP story not too long ago, the 360 has sold 150,000 units in Japan, but 5 million units worldwide. Going by the fact that they still lose money on every unit purchased, all Japan amounts to is a big money sink with absolutely no prospect of obtaining a good marketshare percentage.
The PS3 dropping its price is the 360's Japanese death knell. I don't understand why Microsoft keeps trying over there; WHY exactly is Japan "must-win"? Developers? If the 360 holds a firm number one spot in North America and Europe, wouldn't Playstation-friendly Japanese developers be willing to develop for the 360, especially with the PS3 set to get trounced by the Wii in Japan and possibly not be a market leader anywhere? Is impossible world domination THAT much more important to them than actually making some money? Why doesn't Microsoft take a page from Nintendo and just focus on trying to make a profit for once. Concentrate on markets that actually want your product and cut your losses. That means exiting Japan ASAP.
I live in the US where the XBox brand is relatively popular and I plan to own a 360. But I don't want to purchase a console that won't be supported in the future by a cash-strapped manufacturer because they were too stupid to stop throwing money away in another country in a BLATANTLY OBVIOUS lost cause.
I'd really like to hear other possibly more informed opinions about this, because I seriously don't know what's what.
But it does seem like the Wii will stomp all over Japan. This next-generation is looking very interesting.
IANAP, but what you described sounds a bit like sociopathic behavior.
This is almost completely irrelevant. Two points:
1) Most PC genres (let alone games) don't ever do that well on consoles, the obvious exception being FPSs and MMORPGs
2) The most popular console games are those that were NOT born on the PC
If Mario Bros is a huge console hit, then gets ported over to the PC sometime later and no one really cares enough to buy it, how is that worth bringing into an argument as to why consoles are better than PCs? It's the same twisted logic you've used.
And sandbox GTA-style games.
And third-person survival horror games.
And action/adventure games (not many of those on PC popular anymore).
And third-person stealth/action games.
And 3D platformers.
And Japanese RPGs.
I could go on and on...
As for the same time or slightly earlier comment, can you back this sweeping generalization up? I can't recall Burnout or Tekken being released at the same time or earlier on PCs...
This debate wouldn't be always be so bad if either side didn't keep misrepresenting the other side so incorrectly.
Not exactly true. Since the last generation, older games (PS1/XBox) running on the newer hardware (PS2/360) will at least allow for better anti-aliasing.
The same can be said for that "top end" that have to own big-screen TVs and high-end sport cars. They're still niche. That said, like the first poster already stated, WoW alone prevents PC gaming from being niche. I dunno if it's as widespread or well-known as a console Madden or GTA, but it's kinda hard to call that large of a userbase a niche.