Hollywood afraid of Microsoft 266
prostoalex writes "Associated Press claims that media industry has been quietly avoiding Microsoft and trying to keep the movie and music industries to their own. However, these days there's little chance of doing business without Microsoft and the movie studios are afraid of digital piracy more than they're afraid of Microsoft. The biggest fear? Microsoft will use its desktop PC monopoly to charge Hollywood outrageous fees and basically own the movie industry. Microsoft refutes the accusations, saying that it's only interested in selling more copies of Windows and applications for its platform, and providing movie content would promote the platform. Also noteworthy that among the four video-on-demand services that New York Times reviewed recently two that got the journalistic acclaim (StarzTicket and CinemaNow) are run by technology companies - Real Networks and Microsoft."
Polish in the Right Places (Score:5, Informative)
This is FUD. Microsoft can't own the movie industry because the movie industry doesn't even own the movie industry. The customers own the movie industry and if Hollywood continues putting out crap films, studio execs will only have themselves to blame for the fall of Hollywood. Obviously Microsoft doesn't want that to happen. They want to keep doing business with Hollywood and Microsoft is afraid of Open Source, so Billy's army of one will only have to start competing with Open Source in a way that is fair and honest (not "Best Practice", True Practice), or Microsoft too will only have themselves to blame when the palace of cards comes tumbling down.
I see some parallelism here between Hollywood and Microsoft. Both are too big for their own good and it's about time they realize it and start acting like they have something to lose if they don't change their tactics.
I just saw a Canadian movie today called Shot in the Face (2001) [imdb.com]. Yes the fans at IMDB give it an under-rated 5.6/10, but to me the film had a unique plot, interesting characters and it was fun -- it was just low budget, but it still brought a smile to my face. Obviously not A-list by any stretch of the imagination. My point is that large organizations take something unique out of films, and they also take something unique out of software and operating systems. Polish sometimes ruins things, and both these industries have ruined their products by either having too much polish in all the wrong places, or by have not enough polish in the places that matter.
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:2)
MS be abusive??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you saying that wolves cannot be trusted to treat hens with respect?
Distro.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Indeed, if Microsoft introduces a video/audio player with it's one proprietary encryption, then just gives it away Hollywood* would likely embrace it. Once all the investment is made, to convert media to this format and a few iterations of releases Microsoft, there could be no backing out and Microsoft would be calling the tune. I expect Windows Media Player is exactly this
Re:Distro.. (Score:5, Insightful)
What makes you think F/OSS is any less secure? Because you can see how the lock is made? If it's made right, it shouldn't matter. If it's implemented right, it shouldn't matter.
And if it isn't, then someone can find out quickly and without fear of DMCA enforcement and let the coders know there's an issue.
Because in its long history, PGP has been hacked HOW many times?
GTRacer
- P.S. It's naivete.
Re:Distro.. (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is you're taking the short view. The long view is all the main players, owners of large libraries of film, music, etc. encode stuff, they want it secure perpetually. They're paranoid -- many of the entertainment industry moguls fortunes were made by shamelessly exploiting people and keeping rights to things in perpetuity, why else would they have pushed for the seemingly endless copyright protection?
The reality is, they'll have to settle on som
Their paranoia is worth jack shit (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Distro.. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because the problem PGP solves is... well... solvable. DRM is the art of giving information to someone without giving it to them. Not just impossible, plain stupid. Now I'm as much a FOSS fan as the next (/.) guy, but I don't think it can do the impossible.
Stupid question time! (Score:5, Insightful)
Firstly a stupid question is one that questions a premise that everyone falsely believes to be true so here goes
If encryption is a methods to allow two trusted parties to comunicate without an untrusted third party understanding the communication; how could Hollywood, use it to comunicate with an un-trusted consummer? Obviously they can't. Some how, some way Hollywood has to give the decryption key to the untrusted for viewing and no matter how obfuscated the key is, it has to be available and therefore breakable.
Re:Stupid question time! (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. At some point they have to realize they can only do so much. Amazingly it's taken decades to bring out some of the stuff we've always wanted from the vaults -- old films, TV shows, and maybe maybe classic events in news or sports (they are playing some classic old football games, but imagine being able to choose the game you want to watch -- what did the end of the 'Heidi' game look like?) Produce and outstrip the pirates, undercut the prices of the pirates. It's amazing what people showed they were willing to spend to have a copy of a movie on Laser Disk or Video Tape -- too bad Hollywood still thinks it needs to charge high prices, which are the greatest contributor to piracy.
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:4, Funny)
Mmmm... no. On the one hand, Quicktime is competition; if backed into a corner by Microsoft, the movie industry would be humping up Apple's leg in no time.
On the other hand, "Hollywood" is not the whole of the movie industry. Leaving aside the black sheep of the family (pr0n! [asciipr0n.com]), there's also Bollywood, and a shlode of independents. Of course, they won't be spending $70M on production and $50M on marketing [boxofficemojo.com], but that doesn't mean that they can't put out good movies. The special effects may be cheezier, but heck, I still play Angband and NetHack [nethack.org].
I suspect that, much like lots of little Indie music bands putting out MP3s on the cheap-and-easy, some people may start putting homemade movies up in [insert favorite format] on the Torrents. They won't get rich, and 90% of everything up there will be poorly made crap... and thus, probably a better ratio than we get today. =)
Now, perhaps M$ can end up in control of Hollywood -- given "reasonable" terms, and perhaps a little backmail ("We've 30 billion lying around... maybe we should start a movie studio? Whadayathink?"); but they don't DARE try to drive Apple out of business-- they've already been a convicted monopolist once, they don't want to deal with that again. Ergo, the little guys will continue to roam wild and free... for a little while longer.
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, yes, the will all only have themselves to really blame but who will they blame instead? Any outside force that they can; the weather, the people, the pirates, the actors, the staff, Microsoft, the theatres, the lavish party planners, whatever.
Bad movies are put out because people still go and watch them either in the theatre or later on DVD. They will always have a market because there really isn't competition out there. It's not exactly as if we have a large group of movies to choose from every week...
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:2)
My favorite choice each week: none of the above.
The last time I went to a movie with my wife, we spent something like $25 on tickets and concessions, the movie was awful, there were people talking behind us, and someone with huge hair in front of us. Even with our crappy old TV at home, I'd rather rent for under $4 and have mediocre microwave popcorn than go to a movie theatre. Also, I can drink beer during a movie at
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:3, Interesting)
The solution: (Score:5, Insightful)
If you rent instead of buy, there is a rental sales list that is published weekly, so the MPAA can keep track of what people rent. However, they don't have a list (yet) for used DVD sales. And unlike used VHS tapes, they can't dirty up your DVD player. Just give the DVD a nice wipe with a static-free wet wipe before you first play it.
Re:The solution: (Score:2)
Three DVDs for $25 is an excellent deal. My fiancee and I regularly end up paying $25+ for a night at the movies (between possible parking fees, tickets, and a box of popcorn). I get to see three movies without issue forever.
Works for me. Check your local rental stores and see what sort of deal they may have. The one I buy from has a 1 year guarantee on all the for-sale used DVDs.
Re:The solution: (Score:2)
And now here's a plug for Netflix
Re:The solution: (Score:2)
I can goto the video store, rent a movie for $2.99 and have it back the next night by midnight for a dollar credit (on select titles). That beats Netflix.
Re:The solution: (Score:2)
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:3, Insightful)
>Competition in MOVIES not in other media formats.
I think the AC was addressing;
>Bad movies are put out because people still go and watch them either in the theatre or later on DVD.
The competition is in how you spend your time and money.
You don't go to the opera or the latest polka festival (if you do, lets assume you don't). Its not becuase there is a lack of competition in those areas but its because you have better things to do with your time.
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:2)
No, it has nothing to do with that at all.
It's because I don't like most opera and polka. I do like movies at times. I would especially like it if more good movies were put out onto the screen and home-use formats. Because there is little competition in that market there are only a few movies
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:2)
And therefore you have something better to do with your time. Having more competition isn't going to change this fact. (Ok, maybe if you are really weak-willed)
>I do like movies at times.
But do you like bad movies. Suppose all the movies you saw were bad for the next 10 years. Would you still like movies and spend your free time and money on them?
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Polish in the Right Places (Score:2)
there is actually a word for a company that is owned by it's customers(and as thus giving all the profit back to the customer-owners as the companys only reason for existing is to provide a service for the people that own it and _not_ to make prof
Easy Target (Score:2, Funny)
Growing pains for the movie industry (Score:2)
Each project (movie) is now an individual $50 to $200 million ?corporation?. A movie is a corporation that is its own product. And it?s a corporation that delivers about 2/3rds of its possible profitable return within a month after it is introduced to the public.
The stream of profit that comes from all the secondary sources (post-theatrical release, i.e. DVD & video rentals, TV broadcast,
Bears biting asses (Score:2)
Yes, MS is the only bad guy here, no really... (Score:3, Interesting)
Well of course it can't as it has been proven time and time again that it is indeed buggy and exploitable. It seems to me that the current methods for playing movies in theatres works pretty damn well and it isn't exactly as if MS' deals are going to make distribution inexpensive enough to become attractive.
Yet Microsoft can't quite shake fears that its real intention is to use its monopoly position to charge Hollywood outrageous fees to access the computer desktop.
They charge everyone else astronomical licensing fees and speculation that it will only get worse is running rampant - probably justifiably so. Would they really cut Hollywood such a sweet deal as to protect them forever from licensing fees that would make this cost prohibitive? I doubt it. I would really like to know exactly how MS is trying to sell this to them.
To be honest though, I am fairly impressed that Hollywood is actually making a stand and telling them off. I don't know too many other businesses that would be so wary.
That is one hysterical comment that was only for the benefit of those that won't RTFA.
Counter to what MS has been saying (Score:2)
Yet Microsoft can't quite shake fears that its real intention is to use its monopoly position to charge Hollywood outrageous fees to access the computer desktop.
And of course this goes counter to what MS has been saying recently, and conventional wisdom. MS has explicity stated to shareholders that it has saturated OS and Office markets and is searching for new markets to grow profits.
Do antitrust laws prevent a monopoly from becoming monopolies in other industries?
Not held hostage to any one company (Score:3, Funny)
With the MPAA we aren't held hostage by any one movie studio.
With the RIAA we aren't held hostage by any single record company.
Microsoft needs to learn to innovate like the MPAA and RIAA.
Aww, that's so cute (Score:5, Funny)
Antitrust (Score:4, Funny)
The enemy of my enemy is ... my head hurts. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The enemy of my enemy is ... my head hurts. (Score:5, Funny)
The enemy of your enemy is your enemy (Score:5, Insightful)
Mutual annihilation (nuclear weapons optional)?
If the Media Cartels and Hollywood mutually destroyed one another, we'd not only see the renaissance in software we've seen in the free software world accelerate even faster, we'd see a renaissance in cultural expression as well.
Unfortunately the two are very likely to work out a sweetheart deal that destroys both and leaves us with nothing but a cultural wasteland in both arenas.
Re:The enemy of your enemy is your enemy (Score:5, Interesting)
I think this is the case. I fear they would not exterminate each other, but most likely one would emerge the winner, and we the public would be the biggest losers. Better to let them stay wary of each other while we run an underground movement to defeat both opponents at once.
Re:The enemy of your enemy is your enemy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The enemy of your enemy is your enemy (Score:2)
we'd see a renaissance in cultural expression as well.
This is key.
It would be interesting to see what would develop in the way of many small, low-cost productions vs the current business model that relies on high-cost per film blockbusters with low risk by using tried and true themes (eg, Alien vs Predator).
But I suspect even small time "open source" producers of cinema and music would find irresistable the attractions and audiences you get by mixing in just a little porn and bloodlust. It's human natu
terminate them all and let /. sort it out (Score:5, Funny)
Is Microsoft therefore scarier than republicans by transitivity?
I mean, I know there's shades of grey and then there's shades of grey... but this is grey.
Hey, neat, instead of my Uncle, Bob's my parent.
Re:The enemy of my enemy is ... my head hurts. (Score:2)
Couldn't we just pray for fire and brimstone?
Re:The enemy of my enemy is ... my head hurts. (Score:2)
Don't cheer either one of them. The winner will emerge stronger than either, and free from doubt.
But Hollywood cannot fight Redmond, unless it first obtains the Mandatory DRM Act...
Re:The enemy of my enemy is ... my head hurts. (Score:3, Funny)
Coming this summer to theaters:
MPAA v MSFT: Whoever wins, we lose
Re:The enemy of my enemy is ... my head hurts. (Score:2)
The both are a bit awkward and they couldn't sneak up to a deaf man in a disco. It's more like the velocraptors and the T-Rex going at it at the end of Jurassic Park.
(And if you haven't seen AVP, it really is worth watching in the theater.)
Re:The enemy of my enemy is ... my head hurts. (Score:2, Funny)
Oh, there're plenty of possibilities!!
And the list goes on and on and on...
Hollywood and microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
--
* I'm not claiming any special insider knowledge of how Hollywood studios work. This is my guess based on my experience of how big corporations work in general.
** If they have brains. Or hearts. Or courage. All of which are highly debatable.
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:4, Informative)
Linux will never make it to the desktops, the productivity applications will forever be 5+ years behind. But on the other side, in the render farms, Linux has already replaced more expensive solutions like SGI and Solaris. It's free, and it works just as well or better. People in charge of enormous corporations like that sort of thing.
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:3, Interesting)
Are you telling me there's been any genuinely significant improvement in Microsoft Office in the last 5 years?
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:2)
Yes. The most obvious being the HTML/XML support, internal program smart tags (2002 and 2003 will actually ask you, in a rather quiet way, if you want them to stop or undo an automatic change), and a slew of things that interoperate with an MS server.
Oh, and Excel's Pivottables, new data formats (in 2000 - four years old, and not likely to go anywhere soon), Frontpage sucking way less than it di
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:3, Insightful)
I think what he means is that a typical suit doesn't believe in the 'no-strings-attached'. A suit usually work for money and think money. Anything that isn't in this realm of thinking is mysterious to them
"How can you can a product/service without spending ressources? How can such a thing survive?"
It's not that they will never adopt Linux, it's just that they can't project anything about it. If everything was Capitalis
OT : 5+ years behind (Score:2)
And they are doing just fine...
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe, but the people just down the hall from the people in charge of enormous corporations like to have someone at whom to point the ominous finger of blame if (and inevitably when) something goes wrong. Sooner or later, somebody (and I'm not saying it might be someone in the employ of everybody's favorite villain. I'm NOT saying it. No way!) will launch an attack against everyone's favorite open-source OS and find some nasty little holes that nobody's ever noticed -- that's not a criticism of any individual, the open source "community", humanity in general, or anything else -- that's just plain common sense; nobody's perfect and therefore nobody's OS is perfect, no matter how hard we try to make the perfect one. That realization and the fact that Mr. IT Manager Dude doesn't want this script to play out in Mr. Bigwig's office someday:
is what's maintaining the "status quo." He'd much rather it went something like this:
"CYA" is still "Management-101" in a lot of books!
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:2, Insightful)
Now of course Linux can have productivity apps that don't suck. It's just that no one has written them yet.
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:5, Funny)
If movies have taught me anything, its that one quick trip to the Wizard of Oz can fix this!
Re:Hollywood and microsoft (Score:3, Informative)
Big corporations with people in charge who have no understanding of modern technology or people don't view free software (or free anything) as "an abomination and unclean". They just view it with deep suspicion.
This is perfectly natural. If someone you had never seen before was giving away free burgers on the street you might view that with suspicion. If somebody approached you and said "here, take this truck - it's free" you would view that with suspicion too. You would be right to
I think it would be more accurate (Score:5, Funny)
The movie industry (Score:5, Funny)
If they get mixed up with the likes of Bill Gates, I just don't know what this will do to our shining example of what Americans are really like?
Don't wanna deal w/ MS? (Score:4, Insightful)
If Hollywood had their way... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hollywood is generally the greediest of them all. After all, if they had their way:
So I guess they really have two outputs: Movies and FUD.
Re:If Hollywood had their way... (Score:5, Interesting)
no selling of their software on EBay.
no ownership of the software after you purchase it (they really own it you just license it from them)
I guess MS has two outputs: Software and bugs?
Re:If Hollywood had their way... (Score:2)
Are you implying it costs millions of dollars to ship some heavy tin cans around the country? I find that hard to believe. While digital distribution is clearly superior, when the infrastructure is in place, I find it hard to believe that moving the film around is a significant cost compared to producing the film, paying the actors and crew or marketing.
Re:If Hollywood had their way... (Score:4, Insightful)
Once the studios have gotten some sap to accept payment as a percentage of net [hollywoodnetwork.com], it can cost billions (according to Hollywood Accounting) just to buy the tin for the can.
Re:Without the Internet, where would Free SW be? (Score:5, Interesting)
It has had zero effect for the public.
Sorry, it has had the effect that some software made it back to the community, so it has had an effect on a very small margin of the public after all.
I'm more worried about Bill... (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft using Hollywood business practices?!? (Score:5, Funny)
Windows II: Webcentric Boogaloo
Clippy Strikes Back
The Neverending BSOD
And many others too terrible to imagine...
They brought this on themself (Score:5, Interesting)
No real 'favorites' here. (Score:5, Insightful)
As for MS's "noble" intentions...pure bullshit. Where did MSNBC come from if MS wasn't interested in encroaching on Hollywood?
Re:No real 'favorites' here. (Score:2, Insightful)
How about, 'every' publicly traded companie's objective is to make money and increase share value?
Even your precious Apple and Google's primary objective is to make money.
No one in business has 'noble' intentions without a bottomline to consider.
The BBC isn't afraid... Hollywood could help them (Score:5, Informative)
DIRAC, the BBC-technology project to bring a new, royalty and patent free open source codec into life, has got to be worth looking into.
Surely someone with an ounce of intelligence in Hollywood could put 2+2 together and make 4. ie, Hollywood has money. DIRAC looks good, and could do with industry support and resources...
As our American cousins would say, "you do the math".
Re:The BBC isn't afraid... Hollywood could help th (Score:4, Insightful)
I wish everyone here would stop equating "not microsoft" with "vehemently opposed to microsoft on an ideological level and smoking the open-source pole" - it is possible to just not choose MS and still think for yourself.
Re:The BBC isn't afraid... Hollywood could help th (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, well, I'll believe it when I see it. The BBC is funded by the British taxpayer to the tune of GBP 2.5Bn (that's around USD 4Bn) per year. All the material they produce WE ALREADY OWN. I should be able to download - or at least, buy for the cost of the media alone - anything produced by the BBC ever, simply by proving that I've paid the TV tax (which I have). Instead, the BBC is off on some ivory tower "let's invent a new format" wild goose chase.
There are already squillions of codecs. The BBC should just pick one and get to work encoding its video archives for download. Dirac is nothing but procrastination.
Re:The BBC isn't afraid... Hollywood could help th (Score:2)
Hollywood knows better than to get involved with open sores.
</sarcasm>
Anyone ever hear of efforts in Hollywood to help the poor, victims of disaster, those without healthcare, or anything to benefit mankind, EVER?
There are a few actors/actresses who give a shit about the rest of the world. From what I can tell, the rest of them are a waste of human flesh.
Blue Crush, Blue Streak, and now? (Score:5, Funny)
Slightly OT, but I saw this coming, alongside Microsofts patent scams, 'licensing' their API's (read, now they are established, pay for them biatch, whilst destroying other standards).
Microsoft are moving in subtle ways - they have the money to do this as well.
Now we can have bad movies that delete themselves, at least that saves us the trouble...
I wonder how long it will be before they dynamically or on the fly replace movie scenes and adverts within movies across the lifespan of the movie?
Changing In-Movie Ads (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm sure the DVD releases will replace all those ads with self-serving ads, like previews fro the newest "Studio ABC" release, or simply a shout out to their own company! I'm still sick of all the p
MPAA vs. Microsoft? (Score:5, Funny)
Cory Doctorow Was All Over This (Score:3, Informative)
I'm a Microsoft customer. Like millions of other Microsoft customers, I want a player that plays anything I throw at it, and I think that you are just the company to give it to me.
The BBC story becomes relevant again (Score:2)
That's precisely the thinking behind the BBC Dirac idea, and it's the same sort of thinking that needs to be adopted here. And yes, I know the idea of the DRM is unpalatable - I'm trying to imagine things from the studio's viewpoint not the
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Coming to a cinema soon.... (Score:5, Funny)
"Hi... it looks like you're trying to pulverize me!"
Re:Coming to a cinema soon.... (Score:4, Funny)
"x=x+28 days later." A man wakes up from a coma to find all the computers in the world have been reformatted by a virus to run BSD.
MSNBC? (Score:5, Interesting)
Hollywood fears Everything (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember: Hollywood will go with Linux if it Makes Money.
Re:Hollywood fears Everything (Score:4, Informative)
I think if Hollywood was so afraid of losing money they would make more of the smaller films moderate casts and minimal expenses. I think Hollywood's fear of losing money pales in comparison to it's lust to make boatloads of it. That's why there's all the blockbusters with the big budgets, because if they are enormous sucesses, the money will flow and most are willing to take the risk of failure for the possibly of a huge success.
That said I think the biggest factor isn't money at all but power & ego and control. Sure money helps but it's the only way to get it. Why do the studios spend so much lobbying for the academy awards? They don't really make all that much more money for anyone, but it's all about the juice. Look at me! Look what I did!
With good reason (Score:2)
Re:With good reason (Score:3, Informative)
They want Microsoft buy in so they can have customer lock-in. (Keep in mind, this is an industry that has already been broken up by Antitrust courts before. In addition to producing and distributing movies, they also used to own the theaters.)
Kiss your Internet GOOD BYE ! (Score:2, Interesting)
The new revised Internet sequel, Internet 2 coming to a PC near you is a fully censorship based controlled media. Enjoy the old free Internet now while you can.
http://www.newswithviews.com/public_comm/public_c o mmentary7.htm
Although I am enjoying liberal Hollywood taking a beating for dumping their nonsense leftist movies on us, Microsoft would be worse. MSNBC is a failure. (MS = Microsoft)
Ths new Internet 2: Censored, should make Microsoft our official Censorship Czar fo
Is there a chance that Microsoft will kill MPAA? (Score:5, Informative)
Guess what, I quote:
For instance, If you go to Itunes and download a song for $.99, Apple retains about $.34 and the label receives about $.65. Labels then calculate a royalty base price to apply to the artists deal points. Following are some of the deductions:
a. A packaging fee (container cost) of up to, and sometimes more than, 25%. That's 25% of retail which is $.99 equaling about $.25 (by the way, there is no packaging on a digital download).
b. A 15% deduction for free goods. That's an additional $.15 or so. (There is usually no free goods with digital downloads unless someone is ripping it from the net.
That leaves a royalty base price of close to $.60 per track that the artists royalty is calculated against. If an artist receives 15 points in their deal (and remember, that's a very good deal) then he is entitled to aprox. $.09 a track. This is then cut in half because of the "new technology clause" that is incorporated into most deals. The artists royalty is then calced out at $.04-.05 a download and from that, 100% of it is withheld by the label to go towards recoupment of any advances to make the record, advances in general, tour support, radio promotion and other things in some cases. Most managers and producers are paid from record one and are paid regardless of the expenses, leaving the artists with even more of a recoupment burden before they start to see any income.
Quote ends. Suddenly hollywood people look like Mother Theresa.
dilemma... (Score:4, Funny)
= )
-b
Re:dilemma... (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the fears are right (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, we've never heard this before (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft: "Hi there! I'm Microsoft, and I just want to play friendly and build up value for my own products. I have no interest in your markets. You don't have to worry about us!"
The number of companies that have been subsequently crushed or eaten goes on and on and on...
Choice quote.. (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft knows how to do technology and software. They don't know how to tell a story.
I fear that this is actually false; they know more about telling stories than technology:
And no, a company which is not content with 95% of the desktop share wouldn't possibly try to buy Hollywood, now would they? I mean, that would be so out of character for them - those felonies, drumming competition out of business, etc... - those were just a few minor slips, right? I mean, gosh, deep down inside, Microsoft is really just a misunderstood giant...
Not that I'd cry for Hollywood, though. But it does seem a little insincere on Microsoft's part.
Possible solution ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Nick
Good. Kill them All, (Score:3, Funny)
Macintosh and the movies (Score:3, Interesting)
I've often wondered what underlying politics within the movie industry drives this trend, as it certainly is no coincidence.
Dan East
Re:Macintosh and the movies (art directors) (Score:3, Informative)
I worked in TV for a few years... Everyone had a Mac where I was...
Re:Yes... (Score:2)
Re:What are the odds? (Score:2, Interesting)
Watching a movie and seeing a C:\ prompt on a monitor emblazoned with the Apple logo just bothers me.
Re:Microsoft (Score:3, Insightful)
All those divisions just sort of "happened" too.