"MS's biggest flaw this time around was admitting fault they should have done like Sony last generation and said nothing, wait for the class action suits then make part of the settlement an agreement that they not have to admit fault of disclose the failure rate, it would have been alot cheaper than the 3 year warranty."

Does this sound like a company with their customers interests at heart? Is this a company that deserves customer loyalty? Putting aside who it is, I'd personally shun any company who'd first seek to hide from it's own responsibilities, then blame others when hiding it no longer an option. This is a way of treating customers that the MS fanboys approve of? I understand the shareholders, they only want a return, regardless of the ethics or legalities of how they get their return. Many of the shareholders won't use an XBOX 360, so a 1 in 2 chance of getting a dud won't affect them.

Surely the right response would be to have taken the reports of fails seriously, spent some development resources on getting to the route of the problem, finding a fix for it then make sure all unsold consoles are recalled and replaced with the new fixed ones. At least then you can limit the bad experience your customer gets.

For those who use the "how would they stay in business if this fail rate was true" defense I say this: MS's Windows and Office license rackets are the major earners, they subsidies MS's attempts to get into and buy market share in other areas, from console gaming to search engines. Most of MS loses them money. If MS was a gaming company the XBOX 360 fails would have sent them into administration long ago.

The XBOX 360 looks like a very nice console, pity about the odds of getting a dud. At least gamblers KNOW they're taking a chance with their money, shoppers should have a guarantee that the vast majority of some product coming out of a factory is working as it should and has passed some decent level of quality control, so that if they get a dud it's rare, and the chances of a replacement for the dud also being a dud is something even a gambler wouldn't bet on. 1 in 2 is atrocious and should be investigated by trading standards. MS seem to have no intention of doing right by their customers as usual until their hand is forced.

Seems to me that prototypes of the new iGrenade were slipped onto the market by accident. Apple do like to ensure they get the publicity by announcing new stuff themselves after all. The iGrenade will allow the US military to seed the battlefield with attractive weapons the insurgents will want to pick up. Apple should sue. /sarcasm

There have been quite a few reports from filmmakers over the years to the effect that around 50% of a movies budget is set aside for advertising. A movie reputed to cost $200m actually cost $100m, with the rest in marketing. Of course the half actually used in making the movie also has big chunks set aside like celeb fees and licensing of rights. Take away those fees, pay the cast and crew a decent wage and you could make the same thing for less than $50m.

With that type of money, it's hardly surprising investors want to see the best chance of making a return and profit from their money. The movie business is not about telling stories, creating art or any other fancy stuff.....it's about making money. They churn out mainstream bland sequels of tried and tested formulas knowing their marketing budget gets all the endorsements, quotes and interview slots done by sycophantic journalists to ensure the people have their predictable buttons pushed that get them through the cinema door having paid to see a rehash of something they've already seen a million times before.

Investors want to ensure the movie is made with clipboards, ensuring it ticks as many boxes as possible to maximize it's potential audience. Anything original, which is more niche is not even considered. The aim of the game is to pump out what they want to sell you, rather than sell you something you want to buy.

On the EA issue, I've long known they spend more in other areas than development, their sports games are terrible. A large chunk of the costs go into paying for the rights to use the NBA, FIFA etc names, stadia, player rosters, player likenesses etc that they have little left to spend improving the next version of the game beyond a few graphical polishing tweaks; the players facial hair looks a little more real now.....wow, how about improving the game itself? Not to mention the releasing of half-baked versions like "road to world cup" which only has the qualifying rounds, if you want to actually play in the world cup you have to buy ANOTHER version of the fucking game. They've long taken the piss out of their customers, knowing there's a HUGE number of kids who will put up with a pile of shit if they can see their favorite players names, likenesses etc coming up hen they score. EA are a factory for mainstream shit, there's little creation there, the "arts" part of their name seems like it should be investigated under from the "truth in advertising" perspective.

With football (soccer to the US) games, compare FIFA to Konami's Pro Evolution (formerly known as ISS). No rights to tournaments, players or stadia but the ability to edit team and player names. Everything was recognizable to the fans but under different names. Oh and the game itself was a million times more accurate to football. ISS gained the reputation of being the best by players themselves, so they don't need to spend much on marketing to get it selling. They created something people are desperate for. In short, they respect their customers, and fans.

All the IE exploit goodness without being reminded that IE is sitting there as a security loophole on your PC, genius. It reminds me of an ostrich sticking it's head in the sand when a predator comes along, assuming it's safe. It'd be nice if MS allowed people to remove IE altogether, not just the front end like they've been forced to in the EU.

Start at a much older age? They're twins, Luke was still a newbie, at most he had a year or two's head start on learning this new Force stuff, with no teacher or training material, not counting the short sessions with Obi-Wan en route to the Death Star, or his few weeks on Dagobah with Yoda. He was hardly an an advanced student. Given how a Princess / Politician would be raised and trained to learn a lot of stuff in a structured way, you could easily argue that Leia would be in a better position to learn when she started training.

"she died when I was very young" - yes, minutes old in fact. Before her eyes can adjust to the world outside the womb, before she realizes she's breathing this new stuff called air, she already has memories enough to recall 20yrs down the line.

There are plot holes in most fiction regardless of the medium, Star Wars is no different. The holes were made worse by the prequels. The only way of filling them, is adding the mental fills often done by the fans. I do the same myself. I happen to be a fan of the Expanded Universe novels, the movies are handy for a visual reminder but not a lot else.

The bottom line is the movies were never meant to be scrutinized in so much detail, they were entertainment for kids who wouldn't notice these plot holes. A lot of the criticism Star Wars gets, like the hatred for Jar Jar Binks comes from adults who watch a kids movie with adult eyes. It's not aimed at them. It's aimed at kids. They were the target age for the original trilogy and grew to love it then. All the new Star Wars stuff is just a long overdue continuation of something they loved from their childhood, a large part of that love comes from being the right target for a story, from the memories it evoked at the time, and the imagination it triggered. Revisit the prequels, the various Clone Wars episodes and try to watch them as a kid would, unjaded, with no adult-complex plots etc. Sit back and watch them for what they are, a visual piece of entertainment with plenty of action.

For what it's worth, the authors in the Expanded Universe do a MUCH better job than George Lucas at bringing to life the Star Wars universe. They provide the depth, the complexity etc that tunes it more to an adult audience, while keeping the Star Wars "family friendly" approach to some subjects. Some authors are better than others, some books are better than others. Apart from a few bad novels, most are very good however.

/. needs an edit feature, sorry.

The Star Wars saga was originally planned as 9 movies, but the plots for each movie were very vague, rough "back of a beermat" level of detail. He only managed to get funding for one of them, and knowing it was likely to be a one off didn't take any care in locking himself in. Luke & Leia were never meant to be related, let alone twins and Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader were meant to be two different people. "Anakin was betrayed and murdered by Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine before he turned to evil". In the fleshing out stage those details were added to help provide extra value to the cliffhanger in episode 5.

After these are all set in stone in the original movies, he then has to find a place those could have come from, with all the story limitations he's created for himself. The tech from the prequels has to look modern from the audience's perspective, yet somehow evolve in the SW universe into the tech seen in the original movies. Sleek, aerodynamic ships evolve into blocky ones. For that he's done well. From a storytellers perspective it'd be far easier to work from episode 1 onwards, it keeps people guessing in the scenes. If you know Obi-Wan helps Luke 20yrs down the line, no matter what situation you put him in he survives, he has to, to help Luke years later.

Remember Luke asking Leia if she remembers her real mother? Remember her reply? It does not tally with Leia's birth and Padme's death.

Obi-Wan being unaware that Luke has a sister for a start.

All movies are designed visually, with any attention to science as an afterthought. Star Wars was designed for kids, so it's all kid-friendly droids, easy to recognize black / white stuff. It was also designed as a one-off movie because he only got funding for one movie. That's why Episode 4 (a tag added in a later edition) was the only one of the 6 which has a beginning and end, rather than a set up for the next movie. Only after it took off did the funding come in for the other 2. Episode 5 was in large part a set up for episode 6 since they knew they were doing it.

There are plenty of mistakes caused by the prequels, they contradict some history written as a brief throwaway line in the original movies. Everything written for episode 4 set the boundaries for what would come after, from characters, outfits, ships, political / social settings etc. Episode 4 was written as a visual matinée for kids, with lots of effects, shooting, sword duels, saving the princes etc. It wasn't written with any forethought. The designs they could bring to the screen then was limited too in terms of costumes to get actors into, sets for them to act on as well as post production effects. The design process for everything was focused around the fact that it had to be practical to shoot and look good on film, without being too scary for the kids.

In some cases the expanded universe does provide "extra explanations" on some mistakes in the movies, but they are just that, explanations you can use to fill the gap, it does not change the fact that something they put in the movie does not make sense. They are mistake patches, not removers.

It does not help that George Lucas seems to have spent his entire career rehashing the SW franchise every couple of years and releasing yet another new remaster, so you can't just mention which episode 4 you mean but the exact edition. I gave up on this a long time ago, the sooner SW fans boycott new remasters the sooner Lucas will give up trying to milk them. I don't care if Han shot first, I don't care if Hayden Christiansen appeared at Vader's funeral pire as a ghost, the first remaster with everything cleaned up and digitized was fine, leave it alone from then on in.

I reckon time is exactly what they deserve, I'm sure we could make room next door to Mahdof. Perhaps they will discover the alternate meaning of ATM first hand while there, as taught by the ever present Big Bubba and colleagues.

Oh, wait....you meant time to fix the problem. My bad ;)

Actually ATM (Ass To Mouth) kinda sums up the capitalist system quite well; you have to be fucked in the ass by the corporations to earn money to put food in your mouth. Only the few at the top do the actual fucking. Perhaps naming the machine that you rely on to give you your reward for being an obedient gimp an ATM is another way of giving them a chuckle. Who cares if the ATM's are hacked? The rules they paid their politicians to introduce will ensure the little guy always pays, and the rich never use ATM's. Even when they're working fine, many ATM's charge you for access to YOUR money. You already took a shot in the ass to earn it in the first place.

In the UK. the banking industry pulled a fast one with chip & pin (something I refuse to use), is it any wonder they pull this shit?

This "focusing revenues" sounds a lot like an equation which didn't work out well for Phorm.

On one had is the money they "could" make by introducing it by adverts, on the other is the potential number of existing customers who will jump to another ISP added to the number of potential customers not even looking at BT as an option when switching from their ISP. Their current subscribers direct debits are guaranteed income with most subscribers not bothering to look around. Not to mention dealing with Phorm gives you the badge of a pariah.

They could be right, in that it's more profitable to drop Phorm. That said, I'm not sure they dropped it permanently. They seem to have bought into the DPI advert injection model, so no doubt they will only put it into the "let's get back to that after the broohaha has calmed down" box before being reintroduced a couple of years from now under a different name with lessons learned about "how not to get caught". They may still face further legal / political fallout over what they've done to date with Phorm, so dropping Phorm may help mitigate any sanctions.

For those who are currently with BT and have reconsidered moving away after this announcement I say "watch this space, BT have proven themselves perfectly willing to fuck their customers over once, they will do it again". BT think they have done no wrong. They can't be trusted. They avoided police action in the UK, they may yet avoid other punishment, but consumers CAN punish them.

If these guy's had use the Imperial handbook, they wouldn't be in this situation.

"The Emperor is most displeased with your apparent lack of effort" - Vader
"He asks the impossible, we need more men, we need more time" - Commander
"Then perhaps you can tell him yourself when he arrives" - Vader
"The Emperor is coming here?" - Commander
"That is correct Commander" - Vader
"We shall redouble our efforts" - Commander
"I hope so Commander for your sake, the Emperor is not as forgiving as I am" - Vader

Flesh space is a problem on all platforms, you're right. If you can get a user to click on something they will fall for it. In this case it's adverts which look real, and divert the user to a malicious website. You don't need to have any specific OS to see that advert and click on it, but you do need to have Windows to let it infect you.

Linux does have good user / admin separation so malicious stuff run as a user won't be allowed to execute admin functions, which does limit it's potential for harm. That won't stand in the way of tricking someone to enter their admin password when the box suddenly appears on their screen. End user education is key on all platforms to avoid the basic social engineering mistakes.

Admittedly it's very rare but Macs are not totally immune.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8096822.stm

The answer for this is for both Mac and Linux users to unite behind open standards in protocols and formats, and in Apple's case, demand Apple install them on their stuff. Anytime a user (on any OS) has to install a plugin to see a piece of content on a website, they are potentially vulnerable to installing a fake or infected player. If players are pre-installed, the content shows with no need to install. There'd need to be a no-autostart option on people's browsers too, to prevent unwanted code running.

Of course Microsoft and Apple, along with others like Adobe like using their own formats and protocols to help lock users in so they're not helping their own customers cause.

It is time for users of all platforms to start demanding open standards, which benefit all of us, give us all choice and free us from being locked to any one vendor. Many *nix people have been calling for it for years, it's time that voice was strengthened.

In that hypothetical situation I'd agree that malware writers would all suddenly focus their efforts towards Apple and Linux, but the success rate would be limited. Both are built to be secure.

Apple have a small number of setups that a malware writer can rely being there to target, Apple also like to keep any security (and anything else for that matter) issues secret until they have a fix, so there's potential for exploitation there. Many of their users are also of the mindset that they are different from "PC"'s even thought they run a PC too, that malware is a Windows problem, so they won't do anything to protect themselves from it.

Linux is by far a small and very fast moving target to hit. Each Linux distro has a different choice of software installed by default, slightly modified versions of software in their repositories and an army of people looking over the code before it reaches the end user. I see the most likely source of malware on Linux (when it starts) will be in closed source plugins for apps like Firefox. Flash Player has proven a weak point before, on all platforms.

Eventually, both Linux and OSX will start to see malware, but it won't be anywhere near as bad as Windows is. Windows is a once-in-a-lifetime fuck-up that others have seen and nobody has been stupid enough to emulate.

Look at the variety of OS's doing the rounds, they're ALL based on *nix. Whether it's a fully free and open source path, or a proprietary code bolted on. EVERY current OS in existence apart from Windows is *nix based to some degree, and which has 100% of the market share it really don't want? Windows. That tells it's own story. Feel free to convince yourself that things would be different and that Windows is no worse, or no more vulnerable than others. Repeat it enough and you might start believing it; it still won't make it any more true.