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


Forgot your password?

Comment I just can't see it happening (Score 1) 410

The Halo example isn't really comparable - yes it was a new IP on a new platform and it did a great job of getting it's platform sold but the difference is that the XBOX was at least in people's mind as a gaming platform even if they weren't inclined to buy it before. Linux is not viewed as that and I can't see something like Steam OS changing that without a massive marketing push - which often means a big exclusive to showcase it and that brings me to the next problem which is that Steam is already spread across various platforms and I just can't see someone, even Valve developing a AAA exclusive game for it. Games of that calibre are just too damn expensive to develop to risk it sinking without a trace because of the platform. It's a different story for someone like Microsoft or Sony to entice exclusives because they are massive corporations with huge amounts of money to throw at it, even so it seems to be going the way that "true" exclusives are getting rarer and I might be wrong but it seems to me that many of those tend to either be developed by a studio they own or a smaller house that they take under their wing.

An existing, hugely popular IP would maybe have a good shot at raising the profile of the platform but why take such a risk with something that would be massively profitable if published in it's normal channels? A timed exclusive is unlikely to generate too much interest since people will just wait unless the period is on the long side and then the potential customers will just get resentful instead.

Comment "Web standards" as we know them are pointless (Score 1) 373

And the always have been IMHO - when ever there is a platform with a majority market share then the de facto standard is always going to be whatever that platform supports.Back when IE had overwhelming market share in the desktop people could cry all they like about how their code was "standards compliant" but if it didn't work for the vast majority of visitors then it was essentially broken and the devs were just wasting their time. Other browser vendors can either support what the majority holder is doing or accept that some sites won't work quite right and I don't see that has changed in anyway - just because it's the other way around now doesn't alter anything.

Comment Not sure this is the best idea (Score 5, Insightful) 62

I'm really not a fan of ISPs doing mass data retention but I'm not sure that going around endangering customers privacy is the best way of getting ISPs to respect people's privacy.

The problem really is that Anonymous only really has two tools at it's disposal for dealing with people and organisations they don't like - data grab 'n' release and DoS. And you know what they say about when the only thing you've got is a hammer everything starts to look like a nail...

Comment Re: webOS and HP TouchPad (Score 1) 64

"I don't get all the people rushing to hack these to run Android, quite frankly? webOS is far more enjoyable to work with for a tablet than any of the Android tablets I've seen. Android feels like it was "made for a phone, but shoehorned onto a tablet"."

I couldn't agree more... I bought mine for relatively cheap during the firesale with the thought that I'd probably just stick Android on it and it would be a cheap way to get better hardware than most of the cheap 'droid slabs that are kicking around, a few days into using WebOS though that idea just dissolved - it's so much slicker than and Android tablet I'd ever used before and I find that it suits my way of thinking much better than iOS as well. The lack of apps hasn't been a problem for me as so far it's only taken one WebOS update and three 3rd-party apps for me to get all the functionality I need.

WebOS certainly isn't perfect and neither is the hardware but then nothing is and since it's managed to go from an impulse buy to an essential daily device for me I'd say I can't really complain.

Comment Re:The number itself is entertaining but ... (Score 1) 348

I still want to know why the Linux kernel should contain anything from a company that constantly assaults the community. A company who calls us thieves and intellectual pirates. Microsoft is going after Android OEMs saying that Linux violates their patents so they have to pay up on licensing fees. Yet Microsoft won't publicly announce what any of those patents are. In fact when Barnes and Noble called BS on Microsoft and refused to sign the NDA. It turned out Microsoft didn't sue over Linux they sued over web browsing and the interface, which is a long long way from Linux itself or even any Linux distribution.

Maybe because some of us just want to Get The Job Done(TM) and couldn't give two shits about all the political bollocks

Comment Re:Just a prediction.. (Score 1) 792


"A non-free program is a system of unjust power and shouldn't exist. The existence and use of non-free software [which] is a social problem. It's an evil. And our aim is a world without that problem.'"

Sounds pretty clear to me (taken from TFA) Stallman appears to be (continuing) to bang on that any non-"free" (under his definition) software is inherently wrong. At the moment I have the freedom to choose to make my software non-"free" and users have the freedom to use my software or not, RMS has the freedom to have his own opinions and to use whatever software/devices he chooses - I wouldn't want to take that choice away from him yet it appears he won't be happy untill he has taken mine from me. Who's the more oppressive?

Comment Just a prediction.. (Score 1) 792

.. but I'm kind of expecting Stallman to eventually be found in a darkend room with both himself and the walls shrouded in tinfoil. The man is definately crossing the line into frothing lunatic.

RMS only believes in a very specific view of "freedom" - his own. What about my "freedom" as a developer to choose the license model for my software or my "freedom" as a software consumer to choose which software I get?

Comment Nothing will change (Score 2) 378

People who hate IE currently will still hate it (for some its almost a religion - IE could give them free money and they would still hate it), those who like it will probably still like it (having used some of the Betas I can't see anything that would piss off an existing user). There will still be lots of frothy-mouthed ranting on the internet and those of us who really don't give a shit about who uses what browser will still just pick the one we like and get on with our lives.

Comment Re:Good For Google (Score 1) 415

I'm no fan of the extremes that Apple take their control of the app store to - but that doesn't mean that there aren't legitimate reasons and app should be banned and this is most definitely one of them.

As a general rule I've found Google's stance on privacy of users data to be pretty poor so on this one I say Bravo Google! It would be interesting to see if what (if any) steps they take to protect the platform as a whole from things like this, after all the app store isn't the only way software can be installed on an Android device.

Comment Sounds like a lot of effort (Score 1) 1

I know the US is the litigation capital of the world and based on the information I've seen it sounds like they are mainly right in their arguments but I'm not sure what they hope to gain by suing, companies make products all the time that fail to be "fit for purpose" but unless you've actually sustained damages or injuries as a result (Think Toyota with stuck throttle type failure) then there isn't really any need to sue - personally if it was me I wouldn't have bothered suing as I would just have returned the phone - probably stamping my feet enough to get rid of any "re-stocking fee" in the process and then I'd go buy something better. Maybe they are just band-wagon jumping to try and get some cash in their pocket. To be fair I don't really know how the legislation works in the States for this sort of thing though!

Comment Re:my point of view (developer) (Score 2) 268

While you come across as a reasonable guy who not doubt had good intentions trying to put the onus on SCEE to "play nice" as you put it doesn't really wash. After all the responsibility was on you to "play nice" and establish permission to use the name etc. first before you submitted the game to the app stores. FWIW I think you might have had a better chance of getting permission had you asked before you took so to speak.

Saying that you tried back in 2001 doesn't really work either since for a kick off that was 9 years ago and even if you weren't sure who owned it there surely was never a doubt that somebody did. It's like milk in a fridge, just because you aren't sure who it belongs to doesn't mean its OK to use it!

remember: manners are free but lawyers are expensive!

Comment Re:Uh huh. (Score 1) 1089 browse the web in complete security.

this, and this from TFA:

And as we did for the Google Chrome browser, we are going back to the basics and completely redesigning the underlying security architecture of the OS so that users don't have to deal with viruses, malware and security updates. It should just work.

are quite scary really. Are Google honestly claiming that the whole thing is (and will remain) completely invulnerable to any attacks? And people are believing this? Yeah.... Good luck with that.

I'm not denying that it will probably be fairly secure out of the box - after all the less functionality something offers the easier it is to secure, but to claim "complete security" is just foolish.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The fundamental principle of science, the definition almost, is this: the sole test of the validity of any idea is experiment." -- Richard P. Feynman