Someone wants to make a buck off of OS X without paying the Apple tax and Apple is upset. Is anyone really surprised?

Thank you for the recommendation. I'll give it a look.

So, we're up to $20k/month US for just two sites. That still doesn't factor in things like firewalls, DoS mitigation, software distribution between the two sites, etc. etc. etc.

My point was simply this -- there are more costs involved in software distribution than just the cost of the "pipes".

Thank you for providing real-world numbers.

Ok, let's point 100,000 clients to your residential connection and see how long it takes them to download anything before your cable/dsl modem rolls over and DIES.

Read the post before jumping in next time. We are talking about infrastructure to support massive amounts of downloads...not your tiny little residential connection.

Ask bitbucket about Amazon S3. Bitbucket got DoS'ed off the 'net for almost a day.

No, I'm not providing a link. Go google it.

He introduces bogus issues of "trust" and "conflict of interest" and you can't see the FUD, aka absurd claims? He can't cite ANY case where Steam and Valve have collaborated to screw a publisher. NOT ONE.

Then, while he's bemoaning the "lack of competition" in the industry, he notes that Microsoft has some digital distribution service. Which is it? Does Steam have competition or not?

(The answer is yes...but the competitors just can't measure up)

He's entitled to his opinion as you are to yours. Spreading FUD earns him no points in the industry and hopefully, costs him customers.

Pushing for more competition is good. When Amazon dove into MP3 space, a lot of things started changing with Apple's iTMS. Competition is good. Attacking Steam over absurd and bogus claims of trust and anti-competitiveness is just wrong.

Hope you enjoy the game.

I said infrastructure, not hardware. The hardware is cheap. Thank Dell for that. Paying for the multiple servers at multiple providers (for redundancy), paying for the multiple links to multiple providers (again for redundancy), and paying for the resulting Internet baggage is where the money adds up.

Sure, you can buy a colo server from some no-name provider in the US or EU. Good luck dealing with them when your server dies. Good luck when TAT-14 (cable between US and EU) takes a hit and suddenly a good portion of Internet users can't access your site.

News orgs and blogger sites are often rated on how long they take to break a story. Instead of focusing on the content, they are focused on getting the latest infonugget out to as many eyeballs as possible. That just seems wrong. The old adage about "it's easier to print a bogus story now and a correction later than wait for confirmation" applies more and more to the news media.

Yahoo, always a favorite punching bag, got roasted over the Iranian story and it turns out to be FALSE? Outrageous. What can they do? Sue some blog site? Go after people spreading the bogus story? They would end up throwing good money away chasing ghosts.

This isn't the first time either. There are bogus press releases announcing a new product or detrimental story about a company. The company's stock tanks...then someone does some basic research behind the PR to discover that it is 100% bogus.

If we can't trust the newsmedia to deliver facts, who can we trust? Joe Blogger?
 

What a crock.

Attacking Steam won't earn you points here...or in the gamer community. Steam is fact now.

To introduce these "trust" and "anti-competitive" perceptions regarding Steam then provide not a SINGLE, SOLITARY fact to support such absurd claims makes you a piece of FUD. Talking in vague terms like "perceptions" and "angles of industry". You should be ashamed of yourself. Your initial article and this half-baked follow-up are nothing but a third-rate attempt at passing off FUD as fact. Slashdot isn't fooled by it. Neither am I.

Competition is good. Others have tried game distribution. They have failed. Steam gets it right time and time again. Attacking them because you don't want to pay some percentage for distribution is both dishonest and sleazy.

In closing, I will not be purchasing your game.

I'll take your $17 and ship you not one, but TWO discs filled with amazing non-Vista software!

Paying for the infrastructure to support that 3GB/customer download (with some downloading multiple times) is a heck of a lot more expensive than just shipping out some discs.

Shipping discs is the cheaper option here.

So, Google Frame upgrades the engines...on the Titanic?

We don't need no stinkin Mr. Rogers running our servers. Go sell nice someplace else.

Doesn't even come close to being comparable. The OP is about a civil case. Different rules apply.

There is a "reasonable man" test here. The hosting company was approached by the manufacturer of said bags. The manufacturer, who can speak authoritatively about the bags, complained about a hosting company's customer selling fakes. The hosting company need only look at the website to confirm. Instead they ignored the problem. They got what they deserved.

Using your example, the bank would, or should ask you questions about the alleged fraud. When they find out you're a kook, they hang up on you.