I'd have to hope that the costs of losing customers would cause a greater net loss to the companies than they could obtain in profits. I'm not sure how the American telcos operate or compete, over in the UK at least it's fairly easy to switch to another company for phone services.
They need to make an Xbox 360 that sells for no more than $300, and includes at least a 40GB hard drive. Then they need to get more and better games.
I'd tend to agree with the suggestions that improvement of the console is required to maintain interest, that a larger hard-drive, or allowing the use of any, generic, hard drive would be a vast improvement, particularly for games developers (if they could count on a hard drive being present then I suspect games might stream slightly better without so many obvious, and sometimes painful, loading screens. The use of a generic hard drive would also have the benefit of reduced manufacturing costs for Microsoft (though potentially also reduced profits) and also a reduced purchase cost for the consumer.
As for the 'better games' that's a problem that's not entirely limited to MS' X-Box, every console, from the NES onwards has had more than its share of paltry games, but so long as sufficient people purchase those games they'll continue to be made and sold, sadly.
They also need to make Xbox Live! Gold memberships free for the first year. That's what people actually WANT.
May I ask what was your research methodology? While I believe that this would benefit MS, by encouraging people to participate in the X-Box Live! environment it'd be more likely that people would pursue that environment to other platforms (PC, older X-Box and whatever others MS might introduce). It'd also help to increase any potential advertising revenue, which might not off-set the lost income from charging, but would have far more potential viewers which should increase the value to MS and its customers (obviously in this sense 'customers' would refer to the advertisers, not the X-Box purchasers). I also, despite that last, feel that free membership to the Gold service would be valued by the customers but, among others, I don't feel it's at the top of the list. I'd hazard a guess that cheaper consoles, improved reliability, reduced noise levels and improved networking features would be further up the list, as you already noted.
This HTPC crap is a waste of time. Both MS and Sony keep trying to turn their console into a "media center", which while a nice idea, isn't something that the mass-market really cares about.
I'd suggest that the success and popularity of Myth TV, HTPCs, Media Center and X-Box Media Center show that there is quite a high level of interest in the HTPC and HD TV tuner addition. If nothing else I'd like to be able to control my TV, Sky, DVD and music from one place without having to get up to change channels, turn on and turn off equipment and then find the right remote for whatever appliance I'm currently wanting to use. I confess that this is 'lazy' but that's part of the innovation and improved convenience to the consumer; and if I get bored with TV or whatever and want to play a game then, with the apathy of boredom, it'd be easier if the X-Box was already plugged in, turned on and ready to go.
And even better if I was able to store game images on the console or network, so I don't have to do the getting-up to change discs. But that might be just too damn lazy...;-)
Unbelievable - "better position to compete"? Are they so incredibly afraid of Sony, then, despite their enormous lead? Or are things not quite as rosy for the XBox as various sources would have us believe?
I don't think that they're trying to improve their position simply because they're afraid of Sony, but I'd suggest, as others no doubt will, that it's a process of continual improvement or innovation. Whether Microsoft are including features offered in other consoles/HTPCs, improvement, or adding new features, innovating, is irrelevant since it's always about gaining or retaining the market-leader position. The ideal situation would be that of both Sony and Microsoft, and to a lesser-extent Nintendo competing and adding features constantly in order to win over more consumers.
Further, if a new product replaces an older product, while continuing, in Microsoft's case, to honour the extended warranties then either the consumer or Microsoft, and potentially both, can still win, this in one instance the consumer's old-model X-Box can be replaced by a more up-to-date model.
Why don't you just twist a red glow-stick into a ring and glue it to the front of a cereal box? It'll work as well as most 360s do...
True enough, but will my glow-stick and cereal box be repaired under an extended warranty when it inevitably falls apart, or I add milk to the contents?
While it's good that Monsoon's finally agreed to uphold the GPL agreement I was rather hoping that they'd hold out, if only to establish precedent for future actions.
Still, there's a chance that other companies approached by the SFLC will look to this act before deciding to refuse to comply with the GPL they're trading under.
Additional infrastructure for the Internet is good for users and there are a number of proposals to add a Pacific submarine cable." Submarine's run on cables?!
Well, there's nothing like wired network access for security...;D
Having read the article I'm now prompting bad karma by double-posting and replying to myself, but it's apparently good for between 4000 and 6000 litres; making the cost-per-litre between 4.75pence and 3.16 (recurring) pence per litre. Which isn't bad at all, really apart from the initial outlay.
Though there's still the matter of when you know the filter's exhausted and needs replacing.
Especially for those entering inhospitable terrain or likely to face the risk of severe dehydration, desert or jungle environments and so forth, as well as for emergency post-disaster use. As this is Slashdot I've obviously not read the article (yet) but what's the lifespan/filtration capacity of the bottle? Presumably it's able to be used many times, but is there some way of seeing, or being made aware, of when it's no longer effectively filtering the contaminants?
Do not give them a root password and provide sudo instructions for the visiting grandchildren if the golden age customer asks them to install something in addition.
So, wait...you're suggesting that visiting strangers should have sudo instructions/access but not the main users of the machines? I can't imagine that applications would be installed so frequently as to be problematic for the OP to install, thereby maintaining security and avoiding apparently-random changes to the installation. Plus the consensus so far seems to be towards read-only privileges to/usr, would it not be even simpler to offer something along the lines of removable media, such as a USB stick, for saving to and simply allowing the default installation of applications? At the very worst, if the users are aware of Gmail, on attempting to save a dialogue could be configured to suggest that either a USB key is required or that the user simply email the document to themselves for online storage?
I am, regretfully, inexperienced with *nix but it should, I'd imagine, be possible? And this way maintains security/integrity of the machines.
Of course if the machines are regarded as the property of the people using them then they should certainly have more freedoms, whether that incurs more work for the sysadmin is, to my mind, irrelevant. People are never to old to learn and adapt and, some research suggests, continuing to learn reduces the likelihood of memory-loss, degenerative mental illnesses.
I can't help but wonder if this is like the idea of the seven-league boots; that, in one stride, allow the wearer to travel (classically) 21 miles or (Roman) 10.5 miles. Groin strain seems the inevitable corollary to this. Oddly enough, from the earlier comments, it seems that's the presumed outcome of this development too...
We should all stop to think for a moment: just because we can, should we? Won't anyone think of the soldiers?
FWIS The "ionic wind" takes place inside a sealed chamber, no ozone would be leaking out.
I'm possibly being naive, and I've yet to read the featured article, but if the ionic wind is inside a sealed chamber how does it aid cooling? Surely the sealed chamber would simply grow warmer over time and become a thermal insulator?
If I'm being dumb please don't hesitate to retort or point out the flaws in my thinking...
[T]hey've been arguing that they own the copyright to the guide data
The data itself, i.e. the XML feeds, or just the schedule? I can't see the legality of either of those claims, personally (though of course this comes with the obligatory IANAL, or, indeed, even Australian). As I understand it one cannot copyright facts (the schedule itself) so how they could copyright either the feeds or the schedule is beyond me.
From reading the synopsis it seems that it would require the participation/consent of the mobile phone user to allow tracking. From activating bluetooth visibility, or accepting a phone with an RFID feature. It'd be interesting to see if this has any similarity to the oft-rumoured GPhone.
But why would a consumer, given the relatively low prices of cell phones, tariffs and contracts, accept this? I'm speaking from the UK but I can't imagine that US cell contracts, etc, are so prohibitively expensive that this would be an attractive form of subsidy. Especially given the potential 'government interest.'
I realise that it's a valid trademark protection, and so required by trademark rules/laws in order for J&J to keep that mark but...wow.
Take the emotions out of the discussion, this is purely business. No, it is not big pharma beating on a poor charity, it is a trademark licensee abusing a license agreement in such a way the owner of the trademark is negatively impacted. Until J & J officially turns the trademark over to the ARC, they own and they must defend it.
Agreed; as I noted above this is a valid application of trademark rules/laws and I support J&J in their decision to curb the ARC's sub-licensing of the trademark; however rather than sue a charity I feel it would have worked better for J&J to have negotiated with the charity rather than go to court. If only because of the publicity associated with the case.
The fact that the mentioned for-profit businesses licensed the patents from the ARC rather than J&J suggest that there is a further income to be gained from the mark, but perhaps J&J are setting the prices too high. In that instance I'd have to suggest that J&J review their terms and conditions and view this as an opportunity to improve their standing, rather than going to court and acting like 'big pharma.'
I realise that it's a valid trademark protection, and so required by trademark rules/laws in order for J&J to keep that mark but...wow.
Suing a charity seems like a ridiculous, albeit efficient, way to garner negative publicity and shoot oneself in the foot in terms of reducing positive mind-share in the general public (assuming that the general public are made aware of this through the news outlets, of course).
An easier resolution would surely have been a no-cost license to/for charitable concerns, thereby reducing costs (of law-suits), reducing negative publicity (suing a charity) and enforcing patent-protection (or whatever, since it's licensed to the third party, not being used without permission).
Of course all of this sort of requires that the red cross mark in question is near-enough identical to confuse a moron in a hurry, or whatever the correct term is...
Ah, legally-minded businesses, first the RIAA and MPAA and now this...
I was under the impression that the price at which a product was advertised was the price at which it must be sold? Otherwise the low price expectation being met with a higher-price reality leads to the problems of the 'bait-and-switch.'
Holy crap. ..you have any idea how badly their server is going to be slashdotted now? It's bad enough when its a php driven webpage but now you've just encouraged slashdotters to try a game or two against it. ..if the server crashes in the middle of a game is it considered a win for the human player?
It's a little difficult to play when you can't even load the game...
If the other player doesn't turn up doesn't the match default to a victory for the player present?
That is only a problem for countries that enforce software patents, that is, IIRC, the USA. If he admits that Linux is better than the alternative, but he feels somehow constrained by the warnings and restrictions, he can either vote with his money (that he does) and buy a software that doesn't "put him off", or vote with his feet and move from the country that imposes such restrictions on him. He can also join the choir and try to change this absurd legislation that allows people to patent algorithms instead of implementations, but I'm trying to keep it real, for once.
While I'm happy to concur with your suggestion of voting with money, purchasing a non-scary/non-intimidating software, in general I'm not sure how well it applies to the Linux scene. I'm only slowly finding my feet with Linux (Ubuntu Edgy Eft and Gentoo) but, so far, I've not encountered a commercial vendor for a particular software with the relevant licenses to legally allow the playing of.wmv/.aacs/.mp4 etc.
Also I'm assuming you're not being entirely serious in suggesting that the submitter move to another country in order to listen to/watch media in these codecs? Even I'd rather bite the bullet and simply purchase another OEM for WinXP (I feel dirty saying it, here, but I actually quite like XP Pro...in moderation).
Here's a hint to the idiot who posted this: DON'T INSTALL THEIR SOFTWARE. YOU DON'T NEED IT. Plug your router/linux box into the cable modem, DHCP, viola, internet connection. Easy as that.
Is the viola necessary? Maybe that's why they're dependant on Windows, for hardware-compatible drivers for the required instruments.
Vista actually has a full-drive encryption mechanism, called 'BitLocker'. If it's enabled, I suppose any attempt at forensic examination would require either (a) the permission of the owner, or (b) breaking the encryption.
I haven't yet had any direct experience of Windows Vista, though am considering the Ultimate edition later in the year, following SP1, for a new build. Does the Bitlocker encryption support a TrueCrypt-style hidden volume?
As one can always be forced to hand over a password to the blatantly encrypted volume (by courts or persuasion), but if a second encrypted layer would, as with TrueCrypt, defy proof. As far as I can see that'd be the only way to defy legally-sanctioned examination.
And most importantly the question every slashdotter wants to know -- What if we want to have sex on the kitchen bench, instead of cooking? Would the building turn down the lights and maybe warm the bench a little?
I don't know if it'll accommodate by warming the bench, but, if it answers, I wonder if it'll say 'get a room'?
Governments have done this with newspapers and other media for ever.
This is true. And there's always a way around the censorship, so 'big deal,' eh? I've got to say that yeah; it is a big deal. Every time your speech or other communication is curbed arbitrarily it reduces the ability of every person to enhance their lives. Whether impeding science, religion or philosophy it doesn't matter. But every speech has the capacity to help someone affect change in their lives.
Though that's a fairly sweeping statement it's one I believe to be true and, this being Slashdot, I'd hope that others respect my right to express that belief, regardless of whether they share that belief. Now, why should a government or other authority not be held to that same standard?
Slashdot Mirror
Wait, we've got Sith Lords posting on Slashdot now?
Note to self: do not disagree with Cobralisk...
I'd have to hope that the costs of losing customers would cause a greater net loss to the companies than they could obtain in profits. I'm not sure how the American telcos operate or compete, over in the UK at least it's fairly easy to switch to another company for phone services.
I'd tend to agree with the suggestions that improvement of the console is required to maintain interest, that a larger hard-drive, or allowing the use of any, generic, hard drive would be a vast improvement, particularly for games developers (if they could count on a hard drive being present then I suspect games might stream slightly better without so many obvious, and sometimes painful, loading screens. The use of a generic hard drive would also have the benefit of reduced manufacturing costs for Microsoft (though potentially also reduced profits) and also a reduced purchase cost for the consumer.
As for the 'better games' that's a problem that's not entirely limited to MS' X-Box, every console, from the NES onwards has had more than its share of paltry games, but so long as sufficient people purchase those games they'll continue to be made and sold, sadly.
May I ask what was your research methodology? While I believe that this would benefit MS, by encouraging people to participate in the X-Box Live! environment it'd be more likely that people would pursue that environment to other platforms (PC, older X-Box and whatever others MS might introduce). It'd also help to increase any potential advertising revenue, which might not off-set the lost income from charging, but would have far more potential viewers which should increase the value to MS and its customers (obviously in this sense 'customers' would refer to the advertisers, not the X-Box purchasers). I also, despite that last, feel that free membership to the Gold service would be valued by the customers but, among others, I don't feel it's at the top of the list. I'd hazard a guess that cheaper consoles, improved reliability, reduced noise levels and improved networking features would be further up the list, as you already noted.
I'd suggest that the success and popularity of Myth TV, HTPCs, Media Center and X-Box Media Center show that there is quite a high level of interest in the HTPC and HD TV tuner addition. If nothing else I'd like to be able to control my TV, Sky, DVD and music from one place without having to get up to change channels, turn on and turn off equipment and then find the right remote for whatever appliance I'm currently wanting to use. I confess that this is 'lazy' but that's part of the innovation and improved convenience to the consumer; and if I get bored with TV or whatever and want to play a game then, with the apathy of boredom, it'd be easier if the X-Box was already plugged in, turned on and ready to go.
And even better if I was able to store game images on the console or network, so I don't have to do the getting-up to change discs. But that might be just too damn lazy...;-)
I don't think that they're trying to improve their position simply because they're afraid of Sony, but I'd suggest, as others no doubt will, that it's a process of continual improvement or innovation. Whether Microsoft are including features offered in other consoles/HTPCs, improvement, or adding new features, innovating, is irrelevant since it's always about gaining or retaining the market-leader position. The ideal situation would be that of both Sony and Microsoft, and to a lesser-extent Nintendo competing and adding features constantly in order to win over more consumers.
Further, if a new product replaces an older product, while continuing, in Microsoft's case, to honour the extended warranties then either the consumer or Microsoft, and potentially both, can still win, this in one instance the consumer's old-model X-Box can be replaced by a more up-to-date model.
True enough, but will my glow-stick and cereal box be repaired under an extended warranty when it inevitably falls apart, or I add milk to the contents?
I don't think Mr. Kelloggs will be forthcoming...
And here I'm still saving to buy the 360...
Sigh...
While it's good that Monsoon's finally agreed to uphold the GPL agreement I was rather hoping that they'd hold out, if only to establish precedent for future actions.
Still, there's a chance that other companies approached by the SFLC will look to this act before deciding to refuse to comply with the GPL they're trading under.
Hopefully...
Well, there's nothing like wired network access for security... ;D
Having read the article I'm now prompting bad karma by double-posting and replying to myself, but it's apparently good for between 4000 and 6000 litres; making the cost-per-litre between 4.75pence and 3.16 (recurring) pence per litre. Which isn't bad at all, really apart from the initial outlay.
Though there's still the matter of when you know the filter's exhausted and needs replacing.
Especially for those entering inhospitable terrain or likely to face the risk of severe dehydration, desert or jungle environments and so forth, as well as for emergency post-disaster use. As this is Slashdot I've obviously not read the article (yet) but what's the lifespan/filtration capacity of the bottle? Presumably it's able to be used many times, but is there some way of seeing, or being made aware, of when it's no longer effectively filtering the contaminants?
So, wait...you're suggesting that visiting strangers should have sudo instructions/access but not the main users of the machines? I can't imagine that applications would be installed so frequently as to be problematic for the OP to install, thereby maintaining security and avoiding apparently-random changes to the installation. Plus the consensus so far seems to be towards read-only privileges to /usr, would it not be even simpler to offer something along the lines of removable media, such as a USB stick, for saving to and simply allowing the default installation of applications? At the very worst, if the users are aware of Gmail, on attempting to save a dialogue could be configured to suggest that either a USB key is required or that the user simply email the document to themselves for online storage?
I am, regretfully, inexperienced with *nix but it should, I'd imagine, be possible? And this way maintains security/integrity of the machines.
Of course if the machines are regarded as the property of the people using them then they should certainly have more freedoms, whether that incurs more work for the sysadmin is, to my mind, irrelevant. People are never to old to learn and adapt and, some research suggests, continuing to learn reduces the likelihood of memory-loss, degenerative mental illnesses.
I can't help but wonder if this is like the idea of the seven-league boots; that, in one stride, allow the wearer to travel (classically) 21 miles or (Roman) 10.5 miles. Groin strain seems the inevitable corollary to this. Oddly enough, from the earlier comments, it seems that's the presumed outcome of this development too...
We should all stop to think for a moment: just because we can, should we? Won't anyone think of the soldiers?
I'm possibly being naive, and I've yet to read the featured article, but if the ionic wind is inside a sealed chamber how does it aid cooling? Surely the sealed chamber would simply grow warmer over time and become a thermal insulator?
If I'm being dumb please don't hesitate to retort or point out the flaws in my thinking...
The data itself, i.e. the XML feeds, or just the schedule? I can't see the legality of either of those claims, personally (though of course this comes with the obligatory IANAL, or, indeed, even Australian). As I understand it one cannot copyright facts (the schedule itself) so how they could copyright either the feeds or the schedule is beyond me.
From reading the synopsis it seems that it would require the participation/consent of the mobile phone user to allow tracking. From activating bluetooth visibility, or accepting a phone with an RFID feature. It'd be interesting to see if this has any similarity to the oft-rumoured GPhone.
But why would a consumer, given the relatively low prices of cell phones, tariffs and contracts, accept this? I'm speaking from the UK but I can't imagine that US cell contracts, etc, are so prohibitively expensive that this would be an attractive form of subsidy. Especially given the potential 'government interest.'
Agreed; as I noted above this is a valid application of trademark rules/laws and I support J&J in their decision to curb the ARC's sub-licensing of the trademark; however rather than sue a charity I feel it would have worked better for J&J to have negotiated with the charity rather than go to court. If only because of the publicity associated with the case.
The fact that the mentioned for-profit businesses licensed the patents from the ARC rather than J&J suggest that there is a further income to be gained from the mark, but perhaps J&J are setting the prices too high. In that instance I'd have to suggest that J&J review their terms and conditions and view this as an opportunity to improve their standing, rather than going to court and acting like 'big pharma.'
I realise that it's a valid trademark protection, and so required by trademark rules/laws in order for J&J to keep that mark but...wow.
Suing a charity seems like a ridiculous, albeit efficient, way to garner negative publicity and shoot oneself in the foot in terms of reducing positive mind-share in the general public (assuming that the general public are made aware of this through the news outlets, of course).
An easier resolution would surely have been a no-cost license to/for charitable concerns, thereby reducing costs (of law-suits), reducing negative publicity (suing a charity) and enforcing patent-protection (or whatever, since it's licensed to the third party, not being used without permission).
Of course all of this sort of requires that the red cross mark in question is near-enough identical to confuse a moron in a hurry, or whatever the correct term is...
Ah, legally-minded businesses, first the RIAA and MPAA and now this...
I was under the impression that the price at which a product was advertised was the price at which it must be sold? Otherwise the low price expectation being met with a higher-price reality leads to the problems of the 'bait-and-switch.'
Or am I being somewhat naive?
Are they still our systems these days? I could've sworn the EULA said it was just a license I bought...
If the other player doesn't turn up doesn't the match default to a victory for the player present?
A Slashdot victory!
While I'm happy to concur with your suggestion of voting with money, purchasing a non-scary/non-intimidating software, in general I'm not sure how well it applies to the Linux scene. I'm only slowly finding my feet with Linux (Ubuntu Edgy Eft and Gentoo) but, so far, I've not encountered a commercial vendor for a particular software with the relevant licenses to legally allow the playing of .wmv/.aacs/.mp4 etc.
Also I'm assuming you're not being entirely serious in suggesting that the submitter move to another country in order to listen to/watch media in these codecs? Even I'd rather bite the bullet and simply purchase another OEM for WinXP (I feel dirty saying it, here, but I actually quite like XP Pro...in moderation).
Is the viola necessary? Maybe that's why they're dependant on Windows, for hardware-compatible drivers for the required instruments.
I haven't yet had any direct experience of Windows Vista, though am considering the Ultimate edition later in the year, following SP1, for a new build. Does the Bitlocker encryption support a TrueCrypt-style hidden volume?
As one can always be forced to hand over a password to the blatantly encrypted volume (by courts or persuasion), but if a second encrypted layer would, as with TrueCrypt, defy proof. As far as I can see that'd be the only way to defy legally-sanctioned examination.
I don't know if it'll accommodate by warming the bench, but, if it answers, I wonder if it'll say 'get a room'?
This is true. And there's always a way around the censorship, so 'big deal,' eh? I've got to say that yeah; it is a big deal. Every time your speech or other communication is curbed arbitrarily it reduces the ability of every person to enhance their lives. Whether impeding science, religion or philosophy it doesn't matter. But every speech has the capacity to help someone affect change in their lives.
Though that's a fairly sweeping statement it's one I believe to be true and, this being Slashdot, I'd hope that others respect my right to express that belief, regardless of whether they share that belief. Now, why should a government or other authority not be held to that same standard?