[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;29990364]Clip away the tattered plastic and recoat it with liberal amounts of electrical tape. :colbert:
On topic, a rather dickish move a developer can make is forcing a game/application to install in the C:\ disk and make it so that it won't function at all in any other disk(I'm looking at [B][I]YOU [/I][/B]Notch).[/QUOTE]
You can set the install path in the new launcher....
We got a broken Bose subwoofer back as trash in the store I work and decided to see whats inside.
The Thing that appears to be the speaker is just an air membrame, and the actually speakers is a 8 inch LG one.
They also padded the bottom of the case with steel so that it would seem heavier (Seem to have a bigger magnet)
This is a 250€ bose sub from their 123 system.
Yet another reason to hate bose.
[QUOTE=taipan;29994964]We got a broken Bose subwoofer back as trash in the store I work and decided to see whats inside.
The Thing that appears to be the speaker is just an air membrame, and the actually speakers is a 8 inch LG one.
They also padded the bottom of the case with steel so that it would seem heavier (Seem to have a bigger magnet)
This is a 250€ bose sub from their 123 system.
Yet another reason to hate bose.[/QUOTE]
Saving this quote for posterity
[QUOTE=taipan;29994964]We got a broken Bose subwoofer back as trash in the store I work and decided to see whats inside.
The Thing that appears to be the speaker is just an air membrame, and the actually speakers is a 8 inch LG one.
They also padded the bottom of the case with steel so that it would seem heavier (Seem to have a bigger magnet)
This is a 250€ bose sub from their 123 system.
Yet another reason to hate bose.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how true this is, however I do know that even if they do use an LG speaker, Bose are sound engineers and design the casings and housings to get better sound. Not necessarily the speaker itself. The research and design that goes into how the sound is actually transmitted from the speaker to the person is where all the money is that you are paying.
[QUOTE=Squad;29995987]I don't know how true this is, however I do know that even if they do use an LG speaker, Bose are sound engineers and design the casings and housings to get better sound. Not necessarily the speaker itself. The research and design that goes into how the sound is actually transmitted from the speaker to the person is where all the money is that you are paying.[/QUOTE]
work that doesn't mean shit if the speaker's a piece of shit
[QUOTE=Squad;29995987]I don't know how true this is, however I do know that even if they do use an LG speaker, Bose are sound engineers and design the casings and housings to get better sound. Not necessarily the speaker itself. The research and design that goes into how the sound is actually transmitted from the speaker to the person is where all the money is that you are paying.[/QUOTE]
someone has been watching too many Bose commercials
[QUOTE=Squad;29995987] Bose are sound engineers[/QUOTE]
Hahaha. You're kidding right?
Bose only makes crappy overpriced bullshit. 1000$ for a 2.1 setup that doesn't even do its job when you can get a decent 5.1 setup that actually works and sounds good.
[QUOTE=taipan;29994964]
They also padded the bottom of the case with steel so that it would seem heavier (Seem to have a bigger magnet)[/QUOTE]
They do that with basically all of their equipment.
[QUOTE=wingless;29984665]I find it stupid anyway, why can't we just go back to the era of Windows 95, 98, ME and all that shit, all just 1 fucking version? I mean really. Stupid.[/QUOTE]
Having one version would either mean them ditching features or having to offer it at a much higher price. By tiering their offerings they can tailor to each market appropriately. Similar reasons guide the tiers we see in hardware components like graphics cards and CPUs.
[QUOTE=ChristopherB;30000787]Having one version would either mean them ditching features or having to offer it at a much higher price. By tiering their offerings they can tailor to each market appropriately. Similar reasons guide the tiers we see in hardware components like graphics cards and CPUs.[/QUOTE]
Except software isn't like hardware. A CPU has a per-unit cost - even if designing it was free, there's a large chunk of the cost that's materials and manufacturing costs. Different processors use different amounts of material, thus having a justified cost difference.
Any software has, at most, a few cents per unit material cost. All the cost is tied up in R&D. Once Microsoft's gone through the effort to add a new feature to Windows 9 Ultimate, it would cost them nothing to add it to Windows 9 Starter.
The only reason for different tiers of software is to squeeze more money out of those you can, without losing the customers who can't afford that much. So you still get the poor man's $99, but you get the rich punk's $399. For essentially no reason.
(Exceptions, of course, exist for versions that differ mainly in amount of support offered, or ones that actually do include some physical component)
[QUOTE=ChristopherB;30000787]Having one version would either mean them ditching features or having to offer it at a much higher price. By tiering their offerings they can tailor to each market appropriately. Similar reasons guide the tiers we see in hardware components like graphics cards and CPUs.[/QUOTE]
Many of the features in the higher editions shouldn't even exist, they're useless or they should come by default with windows, either one.
[QUOTE=Kecske;29986532]The fact that my iPhone USB/power cable looks like this after a year of (not so extensive) use:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/o9STk.jpg[/IMG]
(still works by the way)
And the stock headset just died after six months.[/QUOTE]
Apple will replace them if you go in store. The guy in the store even told me it's a common problem and it happens with all of their cables.
[QUOTE=Xera;30002039]Apple will replace them if you go in store. The guy in the store even told me it's a common problem and it happens with all of their cables.[/QUOTE]
A common problem that shouldn't happen :colbert:
[QUOTE=GMan003;30001013]Except software isn't like hardware. A CPU has a per-unit cost - even if designing it was free, there's a large chunk of the cost that's materials and manufacturing costs. Different processors use different amounts of material, thus having a justified cost difference.
Any software has, at most, a few cents per unit material cost. All the cost is tied up in R&D. Once Microsoft's gone through the effort to add a new feature to Windows 9 Ultimate, it would cost them nothing to add it to Windows 9 Starter.
The only reason for different tiers of software is to squeeze more money out of those you can, without losing the customers who can't afford that much. So you still get the poor man's $99, but you get the rich punk's $399. For essentially no reason.
(Exceptions, of course, exist for versions that differ mainly in amount of support offered, or ones that actually do include some physical component)[/QUOTE]
I always thought the reason was "You don't need features X, Y, Z, and W, so get this cheaper version instead"
[QUOTE=Xera;30002039]Apple will replace them if you go in store. The guy in the store even told me it's a common problem and it happens with all of their cables.[/QUOTE]
which wouldn't happen if they just put the plastic bits that every other cable has on them so they don't fall the fuck apart
[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;30005882]which wouldn't happen if they just put the plastic bots that every other cable has on them so they don't fall the fuck apart[/QUOTE]
But it won't look magical like that.
[QUOTE=Kecske;29986532]The fact that my iPhone USB/power cable looks like this after a year of (not so extensive) use:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/o9STk.jpg[/IMG]
(still works by the way)
And the stock headset just died after six months.[/QUOTE]
I've been using mine for three years and its still okay. :colbert:
[QUOTE=Oicani Gonzales;30006586][url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/may/21/apple-upgrades-itunes-version[/url]
typical apple :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Well, Apple tries to keep people up on the latest version, or atleast the second-newest. For Apple, this is pretty good, as they'll have to do less optimizing and so on, but it sucks for old customers.
And Microsoft is having a hard time getting rid of XP without being sued and shit...
[QUOTE=ze beaver;30000518]
[QUOTE=Squad;29995987]Bose are sound engineers[/QUOTE]
Hahaha. You're kidding right?
Bose only makes crappy overpriced bullshit. 1000$ for a 2.1 setup that doesn't even do its job when you can get a decent 5.1 setup that actually works and sounds good.[/QUOTE]
It's not "crappy bullshit". Maybe it's not the best, and yes it is expensive, but it's certainly not crappy. Don't pretend that they don't put any money into R&D.
[editline]23rd May 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;30006769]Well, Apple tries to keep people up on the latest version, or atleast the second-newest. For Apple, this is pretty good, as they'll have to do less optimizing and so on, but it sucks for old customers.[/QUOTE]
It's hilarious on some Mac forums, people are talking about how great it is that they are doing this, because it forces people to buy the 'latest and greatest' mac OS, so they can see what they've been missing (lol).
[QUOTE=fenwick;30009224]It's hilarious on some Mac forums, people are talking about how great it is that they are doing this, because it forces people to buy the 'latest and greatest' mac OS, so they can see what they've been missing (lol).[/QUOTE]
It's hilarious that iFans are so willing to bend over and get a good fucking from Apple.
THEN praise them for it afterward.
[sp]Sorry if late[/sp]
[b]1.[/b] Programs that add themselves to startup if you run them (as I found out yesterday, running Windows Live Messenger once to check something, then on return today I found its on auto-run)
[b]2.[/b] Programs that won't minimise like other programs. Alternatively ones that once closed (X not Exit), remain on the taskbar. (Skype for example)
Two things that have wound me up recently.
[sp]Just read some unread pages, fuck Apple[/sp]
[QUOTE=Clunj;30009520][sp]Sorry if late[/sp]
[b]1.[/b] Programs that add themselves to startup if you run them (as I found out yesterday, running Windows Live Messenger once to check something, then on return today I found its on auto-run)
[b]2.[/b] Programs that won't minimise like other programs. Alternatively ones that once closed (X not Exit), remain on the taskbar. (Skype for example)
Two things that have wound me up recently.
[sp]Just read some unread pages, fuck Apple[/sp][/QUOTE]
Go into Skypes compatability settings and set it for Vista, it won't appear in the superbar, it will have its own little system tray icon out of the way.
[QUOTE=chrishind11;30009600]Go into Skypes compatability settings and set it for Vista, it won't appear in the superbar, it will have its own little system tray icon out of the way.[/QUOTE]
Not needed; It has it's own setting in the advanced options.
[img]http://gyazo.com/aebd6a022e13b683a49bbc4ec14ed82e.png[/img]
Though for Windows Live, what you suggested needs to be done so it'll go away.
I hate when I buy something and it doesn't come with cables/batteries.
[QUOTE=Oicani Gonzales;30006586][url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/may/21/apple-upgrades-itunes-version[/url]
typical apple :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
If there's one thing Apple can't do it's backwards compatibility
[QUOTE=GMan003;30001013]Except software isn't like hardware. A CPU has a per-unit cost - even if designing it was free, there's a large chunk of the cost that's materials and manufacturing costs. Different processors use different amounts of material, thus having a justified cost difference.
Any software has, at most, a few cents per unit material cost. All the cost is tied up in R&D. Once Microsoft's gone through the effort to add a new feature to Windows 9 Ultimate, it would cost them nothing to add it to Windows 9 Starter.
The only reason for different tiers of software is to squeeze more money out of those you can, without losing the customers who can't afford that much. So you still get the poor man's $99, but you get the rich punk's $399. For essentially no reason.
(Exceptions, of course, exist for versions that differ mainly in amount of support offered, or ones that actually do include some physical component)[/QUOTE]
I disagree. It's true that the main cost of software is a result of development costs incurred but you can't fairly generalize the cost of developing each feature as the lump sum needed to create the whole OS.
'X' feature may have taken $1,000,000 to develop and may only be relevant to business customers so it makes sense to only include it in the Professional edition and not place the burden of that $1,000,000 on the average consumer.
Sure, they could offer a single version of Windows at some median price but that would cut off many low-income consumers and/or may make the developers rethink investing in creating new features. In my mind that is a lose-lose situation.
This isn't your typical case of artificial scarcity; finite costs are involved and each tier fits a niche need.
[QUOTE=moesislack;28526525]All the apple mice have right click.
[editline]10th March 2011[/editline]
From the apple mouse page in the store.
[url]http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB112LL/B?fnode=MTY1NDA1Mg&mco=MTMzNzYzMzc[/url]
[editline]10th March 2011[/editline]
Apple adopted the 2 button mouse in 2005.[/QUOTE]
The fucking left click doesnt work, and i've tried that stupid shit and it was really bad. BUT the only thing i found was good about that apple mice was its scroller and those buttons on the side.
Thats about it.
And dont go fucking buy it. Go for a good gaming mouse instead.
[QUOTE=Murkrow;30010796]If there's one thing Apple can't do it's backwards compatibility[/QUOTE]
You could say the same thing about Battlefield 3 not being for XP.
I like how they say:
[quote]To make matters worse, I and many others have been told we must track down and buy the update, called Leopard, which is not only hard to get hold of (Apple's UK retail stores no longer stock it) but expensive (£120 new on Amazon). I suspect what Apple wants us to do is throw our hands in the air and go out and buy a new computer (one of its own, of course).[/quote]
When they can upgrade directly from Tiger to Snow Leopard for $30 by buying it at an Apple Store. You don't have to get Leopard first. You don't have to buy a new computer, and £120 is less than a new computer anyway.
[quote]I thought it was just us, but when I went online I found web forums packed with unhappy Apple owners complaining they have been abandoned, and that this is all about "forcing" us to buy new computers.[/quote]
Again, you don't have to buy a new computer.
[quote]It just doesn't make sense to me that Apple supports Windows XP, made by a rival company, but won't support a slightly older version of its own operating system, and won't offer some kind of free solution to those people who are continuing to swell Steve Jobs's coffers by buying his new products.[/quote]
Probably because XP is still supported, while Tiger is not.
I own a Mac. I am not a fanboy though, I still use Windows and Linux. I don't think Apple is the greatest company in the world, but some of the information in this article is incorrect.
[QUOTE=AntoniD;30013273]You could say the same thing about Battlefield 3 not being for XP.
I like how they say:
When they can upgrade directly from Tiger to Snow Leopard for $30 by buying it at an Apple Store. You don't have to get Leopard first. You don't have to buy a new computer, and £120 is less than a new computer anyway.
Again, you don't have to buy a new computer.
Probably because XP is still supported, while Tiger is not.
I own a Mac. I am not a fanboy though, I still use Windows and Linux. I don't think Apple is the greatest company in the world, but some of the information in this article is incorrect.[/QUOTE]
I think he's pointing out that Apple doesn't support their products for as long time. And no, you can't say the same with BF3 for XP. XP is 10 years old and BF3 is not made by Microsoft.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
