Advertisement
This is genuinely hilarious. Just excellent, excellent stuff.
Discuss this Article 64
"Next time I'll be sure to use little itty bitty words and type real slow so you can understand."
That's actually pretty funny to me, because I briefly typed out that you would respond in exactly that way, and then I just decided to delete it and see what you would say. I was spot on. Yep, you're exactly right, I need everything dumbed down for me. There can't possibly be any other reason that I would make fun of you for your choice in words....oh, I'm sorry, I mean, be "pejorative" toward you.
But like I already pointed out, you obviously have set responses that you like to say using those words, which was shown with your near identical responses on two different posts to two different people, so I can imagine it's hard for you to break out of the habit of sounding like a douche.
Uh oh, I used the word douche. That must mean that your linguistic abilities far exceed mine and I can apparently say nothing more than "SUXXXOR" (when I've never even remotely spoke in that manner).
Oh well, either way, kudos at ignoring the rest of my post.
"I doubt many people are using the Netflix service"
So you sarcastically "chortle" at me mentioning Netflix as an example where a lot of people are using Silverlight, all because you "doubt" that people are using it. Wow, what great data representation you've brought to the table to shoot me down with.
As far as your "A" and "B" points....neither of those matter. I wasn't arguing with you about whether people think it's a Silverlight or Netflix problem pertaining to quality. I was strictly addressing whether there is a large number of people using it. So you bringing up quality and whose to blame for it is a moot point because it has absolutely nothing to do with our conversation.
"I doubt many people are using the Netflix service, especially compared to the numbers of people using competing and similar flash-based services (such as Hulu).'
Apple must be a joke of a company in your eyes then. There aren't many people using them compared to the number of people using competing and similar machines (ie. PCs). What was it, something like 4% worldwide last time I checked? The thought of Macs must make you chortle I would presume.
Very nice. I had a very good laugh with this. Microsoft needs to do more of these kinds of videos. What gets over all the negative perceptions are these kinds of humor injected videos and Microsoft does them well. I think they would be a nice counter to the Mac vs PC marketing, in which people laugh with Microsoft instead of against.
lotsa,
Your stock is falling around here. The more you keep retorting with such snarky and predictable remarks, the less weight your words really have. You can use the thesaurus all you like to enhance you words, but an wilting rose by another name doesn't smell so sweet.
But like the rest have pointed out, you'll resort to the same responses and insult people with the same hubris. So please, don't be so predictable. The best thing you can do is apologise and move on.
Later.
"I now realize why I have refrained from getting into discussion with you, Waethorn. Like lotsa always says, you just keep throwing up straman arguments."
I'm not arguing with you over comments you made. In fact, I'm backing them up by reasons presented by the industry.
"My point was the cost of DRM, _not_ that anybody should be able to get past DRM or casual copying. You could have retained your dignity by showing that this cost is worth it, but you didn't even try that."
It's not DRM that does that - it's copyright law. DRM is just the enforcer of that law. That's not knocking copyright law either. In fact, I agree that copyright and IP holders deserve to protect their content with whatever method is necessary, and with as much force as necessary. There just isn't much else they can do beyond existing DRM measures, unfortunately. If there was a way for restrictions to better identify users, and their usage intent, please present it (not saying it specifically to you - just the industry in general). Until then, the existing DRM methods are the best that content owners have.
"To begin with, you quoted me out of context, then took that out of context quote and put up this whole argument about it being illegal to break DRM. Come on, really?"
I didn't actually. It is illegal to break DRM. That's the DCMA at work. I don't like it. You don't like it. Most people don't. But it's the law. Again, existing DRM methods can't identify users' intent with content, so there isn't much we can do about it except come up with a better DRM system that has a more manageable methodology so that users can make their own backup copies, but not be able to distribute them to others, so that existing laws can remain intact. The existing law is fair, but the enforcement method is not. The enforcement method is the easier thing to change between the two, but it's still extremely difficult given the options.
"Whatever, Pr!ck."
You should quit taking notes from losta, but I'll forgive that this time.
"It turns out the gambit was a savvy business move. In the first month, about a million fans downloaded In Rainbows."
Only 40% of people paid anything for it, and the average was £4. Most paid nothing.
FAIL!
@Sandman:
Whenever losta can't win an argument, he'll just resort to the old hat of "STFU", calling people "Dipsh_t", insulting their nationality, or using fake names on here to insult a persons lineage anonymously.
"You should quit taking notes from losta, but I'll forgive that this time."
I apologize, I don't like being mocked. As you can see, I don't second guess what I right (or say for that matter, I got punched a lot as a kid).
"using fake names on here to insult a persons lineage anonymously."
Wrong again, "waethorn". I don't have any ID on this site except this one. You keep saying otherwise, but that doesn't make it true. That kind of marketing might work with in your Bargain Basement PC Hut and Poutine Diner, but it won't fly here.
And I have no problem using it to insult you personally. God knows, I've taken enough from you in the past (if you'd like, I could compile a list for you). As far as "insulting someone's nationality", you never EVER pass up the opportunity to slam my country, even though we gave you the OS you so dearly worship. Get over yourself, won't you?
"You can use the thesaurus all you like to enhance you [sic] words, but an [sic] wilting rose by another name doesn't smell so sweet."
I'm sorry. I couldn't help myself. :-)
Waethorn: " You don't like it"
That's quite the accusation. I think earlier in the thread I said I was a proponent for DRM.
Don't mistake what I said in my posts for an admission that I "don't like" DRM. Frankly, I'm indifferent since it doesn't effect me at all.
Like I said, you are taking what I write out of context.
That is a great video!!!
Now it's my turn to be predictable...Several of you guys are mindless drones for the companies that make your OS of choice...it's really quite funny...and also predictable! Simple minded is a good way to describe those who blindly follow a company like Microsoft or Apple.
--tayme
Another dumb and extremely lame video from Microsoft. No taste (Microsoft trademark)
The amusing thing is that you Microsoft drones think it's great. When you all have no taste, and the company you like has no taste, it's the blind leading the blind.
"Well being Netflix is HUGE"
Netflix is huge, but their streaming service sucks really bad, content wise. There is nothing new on there at all, unless it went straight to DVD, and then you get a few titles.
Just a bit more on DRM, copyrights and software...
As much as I wish such were not necessary, protections like DRM on media and activations and product keys for software, certainly are required and while they protect content and IP owners, they also protect businesses and consumers.
I reason the protections for businesses and consumers is not well articulated and too often, the apparent restrictions and constraints placed on consumers cloud the very real benefits protections provide.
Some here may recall how much software and media used to cost. Copies of a single movie on VHS, or BetaMax tape were five times what they are today for a DVD/BD Disc, and software costs were sobering. Yes, mass production and distribution are factors which lower costs and efficiencies in each and economies of scale contribute to lowering prices, but that is only part of the story.
The risks to content and IP owners presented by unauthorized distribution, piracy (casual and otherwise) and or inappropriate use was well understood. Prior to protections like DRM, risks were mitigated by selling at much higher prices - reducing the accessibility of content to a much smaller group of wealthier people. In no small way, protections of every type made it possible to broadly distribute media content and software by reducing the losses to those holding rights to copyrighted material and IP. Those being protected is not restricted to content owners, but extends to those producing and lawfully distributing protected material, as well as all involved in the lawful sale of such material.
In the same way that automatic car locks and now ubiquitous car alarms contribute to lower automobile insurance costs by reducing theft and associated losses, media and software protections contribute to lower costs and broader availability of the same.
As software like Office 2010 begins to emerge and their design and distribution models make them work across the web and on an increasingly diverse body of connected devices, protections will again contribute to their lower costs and wider accessibility. Fast, in-place upgrades will be cheaper and easier to access than ever and again benefit from protections.
I think each of us that enjoys media and benefits from the power and broad availability of software, should reflect on how copy and other protections have benefitted all of us. At the same time, we should think hard about how harmful piracy and unauthorized distribution truly are. None of us tolerates the theft of our own property. We lock our cars and our homes. We set alarms and buy insurance products of every type. We demand respect for our property and space. We defend our keep. We need to respect not only the rights of others, but what good that respect provides us.
