Who the hell modded that "funny"? It's either "informative" or "insightful".
The funniest stuff is both.
Other apps use and install the Bonjour service.
Bonjour is a general method to discover services on a local area network. It is widely used throughout Mac OS X and allows users to set up a network without any configuration. Currently it is used by Mac OS X and on other operating systems to find printers and file-sharing servers. It is also used by iTunes to find shared music, iPhoto to find shared photos, iChat, Adobe Systems Creative Suite 3, Proteus, Adium, Fire, Pidgin, Skype, Vine Server, Elgato EyeTV to share local recordings with multiple clients, the Gizmo5 to find other users on the local network, TiVo Desktop to find digital video recorders and shared media libraries, SubEthaEdit and e to find document collaborators, Contactizer to find and share contacts, tasks, and events information, and OmniFocus to synchronize projects and tasks across the Mac desktop and the iPhone or iPod touch. It is used by Safari to find local web servers and configuration pages for local devices, and by Asterisk to advertise telephone services along with configuration parameters to VoIP phones and dialers. Software such as Bonjour Browser or iStumbler, both for Mac OS X, or Zeroconf Neighborhood Explorer for Windows, can be used to view all services declared by these applications. Apple's "Remote" application for iPhone and iPod Touch also uses Bonjour to establish connection to iTunes libraries via Wi-Fi.[2]
Google has never purchased a jumbo jet, and neither have it's founders.
The two founders bought a 767 back in 2005. They then had an argument over the kind of beds to put in it. Starting a post with a factual inaccuracy in a paragraph by itself isn't usually a good start.
It's not a factual inaccuracy. The Boeing 767 is a widebody jet, but not a jumbo.The photos immediately above, or a few seconds of fact checking, show the difference. The Google jet is a smaller 767, the 767-200. They bought it from Qantas airlines, who would have carried 180 passengers on it, and the Google refit can board 50. The Boeing 747 is a jumbo jet and can carry about 500 passengers because it is a significantly larger plane.
Not that I see anything evil in buying a plane, nor do I imagine that "do no evil" is often interpreted as more than "do no shit that I don't like". There is more than three words behind the motto. Not that anyone is interested.
You think it's more likely that a CEO made a moral choice? Don't make me laugh. If morals had anything to do with it, they would never have gotten into China in the first place.
They made a plausible argument that they had ethical and business reasons for wanting to be in China. http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/testimony-internet-in-china.html You may not agree that they meant it, you may not agree with the merits of the argument, but it's reasonable to me to believe that they meant it. It's entirely possible and very common to make a moral choice and be entirely wrong, in hindsight. It's even reasonable to try something you think might not work out, just in case you're wrong about that. CEOs are human, too, and want to make money, sleep well, and love their friends and family as much as anyone else does.
To suggest that CEOs en masse have no morality is not sensible. A CEO can be compromised by his obligations to shareholders, that he may or may not be a complete asshole, or be so insulated from the real world by his position that choices might be made which you or I would deem immoral is entirely reasonable. Any of those I'd agree with, except when applied to every business executive, everywhere.
Is there anything Rogers gets right? Or are they currently the most abusive monopoly Canucks have to live with?
While I agree rogers sucks, they aren't a monopoly. Canada does have a problem with cell providers though. There has to be collusion between the cell companies, that's the only explanation for the ridiculous rates canadians have to put up with. I've had a cell phone since '98 and comparable plans have not gotten cheaper since then. I've been on all the major canadian carriers as well and while coverage is acceptable now it still sucks. Best coverage and cost I ever had was in Vancouver with Fido before they were bought out by Rogers. "High speed" internet is the same thing. It costs the same as I was paying in the 90's and I had better bandwidth then (no upload speed caps, much more consistent DL speeds). If I want higher upload rates I now have to pay a premium for them to up the cap. Awesome.
Replace "abusive monopoly" with "corporate fucktards" and you've got a near-perfect sentence. I'd sooner go without than go with Rogers for any of their services. (Thank goodness I found TekSavvy!) Collusion isn't needed when competition is light, and so far competition has been light - and between two companies known for marketing on B.S. more than competitive pricing or services.
Heh. We're talking about gamers here. These are the same people who say that wireless controllers are too slow, that 5ms monitors are too slow, and that a 1-frame lag in Street Fighter 2 totally kills their game--even though all these things are all demonstrably quicker than their reflexes or visible acuity. Imagine how they'll react to something like OnLive?
Maybe we aren't talking about gamers - maybe we're we talking about people who play games. There's a lot of people who don't get that excited about games who might subscribe to such a service, if it's technically sound and has enough games. The other question, aside from the technical, is whether that kinda gamer market can be reached and appealed to. For me, it'd be a lot less than buying the games I want to play (although these days it's easy to find stacks of five dollar games), and so I might be a customer.
And there's nothing wrong with games like Guitar Hero. If I was willing to pay $100 for a fake guitar I would get it. The problem is that they're pushing this as something that should be used in all games. First person shooters, RPGs, platformers, racing games.. there are a lot of games that should not be using gimmicky controls like this, and if the Wii is a good indicator, all of them will anyway.
But one thing the Wii has shown - these "gimicky" controls can be used well. Some games on the Wii work very well with the controls. Some don't, but that's as more due to programming than the nature controls. There's enough on the Wiimote/Nunchuck combo that you've got a standard controller without using the motion sensitivity, if that's best for the game. I find the split control more comfortable to use than the XBox/PS3 one. And the push is not for all XBox games to be Natal controlled:
Microsoft’s Aaron Grenberg explained the plan for Project Natal in an interview with Joystiq: “Our focus is on most, if not all, [Project Natal] games falling into a category of completely unique, brand-new experiences.”
Greenberg said Microsoft did not simply want to tack Project Natal functionality onto pre-existing titles: “We’re not looking at just adding little Natal components to games, we’re looking at how [to] actually bring an entirely new category of controller-free games and entertainment to the market.”
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/09/project-natal-focus-on-brand-new-experiences-not-little-natal/
They won't all be programmed for the Natal because the developers know that a lot of people aren't going to buy it. Which also means that many games that are programmed for it, won't require it. I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out for it. I don't know that I'll like it, but I'm curious enough to withhold judgement until then.
Chuck had a good ending, and it came back worse then ever.
Fixed that for you.
You write that as if your opinion is the standard for universal truth. I'm enjoying the third season, although the "reset" felt a bit kludgy. I particularly enjoyed the third episode and if they keep up with it, I'll enjoy the season. And now, NBC really needs shows of almost any popularity to fill the 10:00 p.m. slot.
To set aside all the geek bitching and snarking and for a better example, there's Mad Men. Every season has a solid ending that is also a good jumping off point for the next season, and the following season doesn't always follow the preceding immediately. Cliffhangers can be great for generating fan buzz, but a solid ending with potential for new stories can be just as good. And some games have been good at this as well, with stories or game universes you could revisit later in the timeline, or from another character's perspective, etc. If there's a trend towards the never-ending game story, there will eventually be a balancing towards stories that have endings too. Especially as the games market broadens, there are too many people in the potential market who want endings for the creators and publishers to ignore, and plenty of room for both ongoing and ending stories.
I'm as much against the stupid War on Some Drugs, ACTA, ridiculous IP laws, etc. as the next Slashdotter, but as an American, I think you citizens of other countries need to take responsibility for your own governments' actions and stop blaming ours....
I can blame my crappy government for passing stupid laws, and I can blame the U.S. government/lobbyists for strong-arming our jackasses to do so. I pester my friends, sign petitions, send mail, and vote for/against my government, and find plenty of room in my heart left to blame the U.S. government/lobbyists for pressuring my government as if we were a branch office of theirs. I'm an idiot for drinking the Kool-Aid, but Bob's an asshole for pouring it down everyone's throat.
Electing new officials, however, makes little difference. Kow-towing to American interests seems to be a matter of permanent policy. And with the economics involved, that's not likely to change.
Or who say they have never seen it before...
Ask when their wives or girlfriends are in the room.
Flamebait? Someone's clearly not had their first coffee of the day yet...
And
The trouble is, with Apple, that sort of thing wouldn't happen. That's what makes them more dangerous than their competitors.
People only care about DRM when it stops them doing something that they want.
Yup, you won't see an enforced ad pop up while using the phone "normally", while running iTunes, or sending an e-mail, or making a call or whatever else is basic on the iPhone. If you see them, they'll be embedded into apps and content you download from other sources. This is a patent that lets Apple say "Here's an easy way to generate revenue from our customer base with your content, and without charging it all directly for the download. They won't mind clicking on an use your stuff. Better than DRM, because even if they send it on to our other customers, the ads go with it." It's similar to the tactic they took when they rolled out iTunes, with inoffensive DRM replacing non-ownership of files by subscription.
And now that streaming services are becoming viable and popular, thanks to increased bandwidth, customer familiarity, and other factors, there's an application for the ad model. Hulu on the iPhone, or similar. Not only will people not mind - they will approve. The feeling, for many, will be that putting up with this will give them what they want rather than not having it at all. To my mind, smart compromise is the best thing to hope for. The realistic alternative isn't no DRM or other restrictions, the alternative is heinous and insidious DRM. That's the industry recognizing, eventually, what the business models and customer bases are becoming. I'm not sure that I'd agree with "dangerous", but I do agree that Apple could pull this off in a way palatable to enough customers that other companies think they'll be able to get away with worse.
How much does LIVE cost on xbox?
$0.00
This is misleading. These lists are pulled from the XBox Live site. XBox Silver, for free, gets you:
XBox Live Gold, for $60 a year, adds:
How much it costs depends on how much you want to do.
An option would be to provide the customer with 3 figures at the pay point: Retail price ($20); Recommended price (say $10); Average price so far ($X)...
Sounds like something Jane Siberry did with her music - first link I found: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/419-jane-siberrys-you-decide-what-feels-right-pricing
"When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest." -- Bullwinkle Moose
