Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:V34.0.5? (Score 1) 237

by CritterNYC (#48510257) Attached to: Firefox 34 Arrives With Video Chat, Yahoo Search As Default
Yes and no. Chrome, in general, has more between version patches than Firefox. Version 33 was a notable exception due to the landing of off-screen GPU renderring though. So, even though Mozilla's release cycle is 15 days faster, Chrome is still pushing out more new browser versions. Source: I have to package every version of each for portable use, so I know about every new full version and patch version whereas most local users don't notice due to automatic updating.

Comment: The Majority Of People Can Use It Now (Score 1) 237

by CritterNYC (#48504517) Attached to: Firefox 34 Arrives With Video Chat, Yahoo Search As Default
It'll start with users on Windows that are using better browsers (Firefox and Chrome as well as variants) as well as some of the 8% of the world that runs Mac who've grown beyond the often-outdated Safari (since it's OS tied and you have to upgrade your whole OS to update it). And it'll start on the majority of smartphone users that use Android. So that means most users can either use this now or upgrade to a better browser that can use this now. It'll come to the #2 mobile OS later once Apple adds it in to Safari but then it'll work for every browser on iOS since every browser on iOS is actually just Safari with a pretty UI on top.

Comment: Re:This just makes sense... (Score 1) 253

by CritterNYC (#47099307) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Tech Customers Forced Into Supporting Each Other?
If you're talking about hard goods like washing machines and lawn mowers, their cost with respect to wages and inflation has decreased dramatically over time. Why? Because people value price over quality. And don't consider ten year investments anymore. So, we have cheap washing machines that don't cost much more than they did in 1962 (and that's WITHOUT inflation) that are basically disposable and meant to last 10 years. A washing machine cost nearly $200 in 1962. A basic top-loading washing machine today with no bells and whistles similar to a 1962 model costs a lot less than $1,550 today (the equivalent in 2014 dollars). Or maybe a basic, single-set cordless phone that was $129 in 1982. A basic model today costs a lot less than $330. You can get the same support you used to, but you have to pay A LOT more for it. Why? Because most people just want it cheap and won't pay for quality and support. So the quality and support side of things loses the economies of scale that it used to enjoy. So, you can get the quality and support, you'll just have to pay a lot more for it.

Comment: Re:This just makes sense... (Score 1) 253

by CritterNYC (#47083593) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Tech Customers Forced Into Supporting Each Other?
Sure it does. If they had to provide support, they would build in the cost of said support to the price of the software. Instead, you have the option of paying for live technical support on a contract or incident basis if you so choose. You're free to pay for technical support if you would like it.

Comment: Re:I'm Okay With It (Score 1) 253

by CritterNYC (#47083575) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Tech Customers Forced Into Supporting Each Other?
If you paid for a technical support contract, you'll get a person on the phone to assist with technical problems. If you didn't, you shouldn't expect it. Most companies operate on margins that a single technical support call handled in the US would wipe out their margin on that product these days. Everybody wanted everything cheap. Now we have it.

Comment: Re:$60+ for ESPN (Score 1) 340

That's the price the cable networks have to pay for each subscriber with anything more than a basic broadcast package. And they have to include ESPN in all packages except that and aren't allowed to offer it a la carte as per their contracts. So, while it won't show up as a line item on your cable bill, that is the average price ESPN is getting of your monthly cable bill whether you watch it or not. And that's solely for ESPN alone. They often force you to take additional networks as well but it varies by cable provider.

Comment: Re:$60+ for ESPN (Score 1) 340

by CritterNYC (#46969035) Attached to: Average American Cable Subscriber Gets 189 Channels and Views 17
It's pretty common knowledge. It was $4.69 at the end of 2011. [1] And it was $5.54 in the middle of 2013. [2] And this is ONLY for ESPN proper. Additional properties all have their own price (ESPN2 is another $0.70, for instance). By forcing cable companies to gouge all their customers, ESPN is able to pay $2 billion a year just for Monday night football. As cable subscriptions shrink, that model will become much more difficult. 1 - http://www.sportsgrid.com/medi... 2 - http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08...

Waste not, get your budget cut next year.

Working...