1) Unlike Mozilla, Microsoft, Apple and Opera, Google is actually not hyping new releases by calling it "the new Chrome 7", etc. They just say a new version is out. When you go to the Chrome site, it just lets you download Chrome. No special version. Just the latest. So for your argument to be valid at all, they would have to gloat about every new version.
2) As far as browsers go, it's actually better to tell a person that his browser version 5 is greatly outdated rather than saying that 5.000.052 is now available over his old 5.000.015. That will likely get more people to update their stuff.
3) I just installed version 7. It didn't say "welcome to version 7" or anything. In fact, if I hadn't read this news, I'd not notice the update and Chrome would do it for me without even telling me. Yet again, no gloating about numbers.
Last but not least, since when is a number supposed to define how much is in the software? And why the hell should anyone even give a crap if Chrome is at 1.94 or 7.0?
This case is for that kind of people and it's painfully obvious even without having people pointing out the price tag.
I understand that the author of this post may have had something else in mind, but Nintendo penetrated/created a niche market and gets away with low costs and innovation.
Everytime i see an article like this all i can think is "what Microsoft backed puppet wrote this crap?". Microsoft is working very hard to make out Google as craptastic, greedy and customerhating as them.
Why are you diverting a serious matter like this into smearing a company that most likely had nothing to do with it? E-mail accounts can contain very sensitive data, ranging from bank papers to personal issues. And especially if people you know get access to this, it makes the problem more serious than ever.
I won't comment on Google's actions because I don't know enough details, but if I had my mails exposed, I would be pretty pissed. And the fact that it is free doesn't make it more acceptable. It's like saying that someone volunteering for a non-paid job can act whichever way he or she wants just because it's free. No, you still have to follow rules.
Comments like this make me realize why there are so many extremists in this world.
We still use the microwave, we still use the freezer, the cooktop, the oven, we mostly use the combustion engine, we still mostly use steam for power plants, computers have gotten faster and we have LCD's now but nothing huge has hapenned, we don't have anti-gravity, we don't have teleportation, we can't change one thing in to another (easily), medically we still aren't growing replacement bodies.
I would say that the rate of transportation and availability of things has improved greatly. If something was invented 50 years ago, it would take a long time for a product to reach us globally. Today, a new Apple product or an Xbox is spread throughout the world in days for immediate availability.
Combine this with the fact that we're living rather comfortable lives; we have ovens, cars, microwaves, food delivery, shopping malls, etcetera. Back in the good ol' days, we didn't have these things, which is why inventing it made sense. Today, new inventions aren't as necessary as they were before. More effective, compact and cheaper products are, however.
Also, I'd argue that the jump from a horse wagon to a car is smaller than from a car to a teleporter - and there aren't that many steps in between.
The star is not a likely cause for its abnormal rotation, although that would make it far more interesting.
Wait until those same people with gambling problems get in front of a loan shark, or shot because they can't pay.
So, prior to the 'net, how many people were shot in the D.C. area per annum because they couldn't pay?
That wasn't his point (if you quote him properly). Regardless, it should be everyone's right to choose what to do with the money that he or she makes. Obviously to some extent, but in the long run, poker is a game of skill, and like any other sport, it takes money and patience to achieve something.
I have at least 5 different devices that cannot stream that I use weekly. Also why waste the bandwidth playing the same songs over and over again [..]
There's a difference between true streams and streams with cache. Applications like Spotify lets you choose whether you want to cache the songs you're listening to or not.
Slow connection? Use caching.
Running out of space? Disable caching!
Slow connection and low on disk space? Well, then this service is not aimed to people like you.
I'm sure it will work fine for some games, that is until someone walks behind you or moves around in the background to ruin your game. Also, multiplayer will require a huge room and lots of sensors. But perhaps Microsoft expects people to play online, a console for people with no real friends.
Why are you bashing a product you haven't tried yet? I'm sure they've spent a lot of time and effort to make this work in a good way, similar to what Nintendo did with the Wiimote.
I'll admit that I love my PlayStation 3 and I don't own an Xbox 360, but this is a very tempting product if it gets enough games to support it with.
Last but not least, I doubt that the controller will be so unintelligent that it cannot distinguish you from other people in the background in the same way that it can tell the difference in multiplayer, which it is told to support. That is, of course, unless someone jerks around right behind you and sabotages your game. But that's nothing you can blame MS for.
In comparison, web sites with new standards should prompt users to upgrade to the latest version in order to see the site as it was intended. It must not be forced, as with DirectX, but if users were prompted every time, I think we would see a large quantity of updated users.
It's a move that would make sense for everyone, because;
1) The user would be up-to-date and surfing on a secure browser.
2) Microsoft and other developers would spend less time on supporting outdated software.
3) Web developers would cut spending on making cross-browser version compatibility.
Agreed. Owning up to your mistakes, whether you're a company or an individual, is a sign of dependability and reliability. I don't know about you, but for me that's a major factor when I purchase something.
That would only work in a perfect world. It's like when IBM admitted to the scratching disk problems it had a few years ago. Even if they admitted the problem fairly early, it didn't stop people from dropping the brand.
In reality, if Intel admitted the problems, it would go from a rumor/forum discussion to public announcement with worldwide dirt on the company's drives. Furthermore, we don't really know how many drives are really affected by this problem. I have two X-25M disks myself and have not encountered any problems at all.
So if we look at it from their side, they may have had a problem which - for all they knew - was only limited to a very low percentage of their total shippings. Why would they then want to go public with it and cause a major upset? From a corporate's point of view, it would make no sense.