Member since: Feb 4th, 2008
Mar 25th 2010 12:09AM First off how do you know that the majority of people on here use X86 instead of X64? Secondly you were warned and anyone with a bit of sense would make a restore point or even a system backup when using / installing software of unknown quality and/or reliability. Thirdly I really don't understand what your problem is since in the end the choice is yours. Finally maybe you should get a clue and due your own research in addition to a recommendation (that came with a warning) especially since you can't read beyond a third grade level and due to your limited mental capabilities choose to bitch and complain about your problems, which you did to yourself, and even go so far as to try to blame the author instead of growing up and taking responsibility for your lack of prep/protection with your computer(s). Get over it and move on.
Feb 10th 2010 1:02PM Apple;s refusal to allow flash on there mobile products has nothing to do with the B.S. spouted by Jobs about stability, etc. It's all about not allowing the usr to have control over the equipment they own. Allowing flash would hurt the app store since the user could just play flash games off the web or go to flash based sites instead of having to purchase apps/games through the Apple app store which restricts what they allow to be offered/downloaded. Apple would lose there control in that respect and Jobs is notorious for being overly controlling/restrictive with his Apple products. Maybe Jobs should listen to the customer instead of the B.S. voices in his head telling him to control everything,
Nov 1st 2009 1:32AM I would love to win the invite.
Aug 28th 2009 10:58PM First off maybe you should get off should get off your high horse since your making a common mistake with the so called culture of entitlement BS. The average person with a brain knows that it take money to create/produce products. The only difference is that we prefer to not been screwed out of every dime for the products that we are more then willing to buy legally. I think you need to do some homework and realize that it should never cost anyone $1 a song to purchase for bad/inferior quality music laden with DRM( and yes I know that the DRM has been removed not to long ago). Maybe people are tired of all the games that the industry plays and think that changes need to be forced upon the industry in order for it to change even a little bit.As far as you "explanation" with regards to the price of music/movie discs, I'll partially agree with you that they need to sell the product for a profit and that the recording/producing of the music/movie is the most costly part. Aside from that though your argument loses since how can you explain the price of digital downloads or if you want to stick to the physical media the actual cost to produce the music/movie (not the made up numbers produced by the industry) in addition to the 10 cents a disc that they pay to make the disc. You also forget that there is an upfront cost for any hardware (disc creation, recording studios, etc.) which has been paid for and is no longer an additional cost to making the music/movie. As far as the retailer taking a part, what about all the direct to download products. In addition to that what about the contracts that they make with these retailers, etc. Do you really think that they would make these contracts with these retailers,etc. if it wasn't for there benefit overall. With regards to your checking out reviews,etc. from the websites you listed, that is not the same as actually viewing the movie or music you are interested in seeing/listening to. I and many others prefer not to go off of someone else's review/explanation of the music/movie. Also how exactly is it a lame justification that people want to know what they are buying before they actually purchase it. Especially considering the current financial situation the world is in and the current price being charged for the media. I personally never P2P a video game since there are demos of games weeks to months before they are released and are being released many different ways (Xbox 360 DL, PC Steam, Direct download from game publishers, etc.)If the industry wants people to buy then they need to give them a real reason to pay the price there asking for not just complaining about P2P and the supposed "dangers" of digital downloads, etc. Oh, and by the way the music industry has posted another year of record sale. So obviously P2P is actually a benefit overall to the industry(s). If the DMCA wasn't worded in such a way that it prohibits and at the same time allows for the ripping of legally purchased discs, then at least some people wouldn't want to download a copy of the movies that they legally own. You know some people actually would like to have a backup copy of a disc in case something happens to the physical media or they would like to watch it on there computer without the disc. Maybe the Music/Movie industry should learn to embrace the technology instead of blaming it for everything. I never said that the music/movie industry was "evil", you did however. I'm merely pointing out that they have tried to restrict and overcharge for the products they produce. I'm also saying that they have never tried to accept new tech. and have wasted time and money to restrict how the consumer uses the product they legally bought and have continued to stop any advancement they didn't like. Maybe they should(and you as well) get a clue and adapt/move on from the old way of thinking and move to a better and easier way of doing business without trying to screw the consumer every chance they get. I also forgot one thing. There has been study after study, even a recent one stating that those that file share(P2P) are some of the biggest consumers of those same goods and products (including posters, shirts, etc.) Get over yourself and your better then everyone else attitude for thinking that just because you prefer to go off of some reviews and commercials that it is enough for other people to justify the spending of there hard earned money for overpriced low quality products. And by the way the industry has been bashing Google/Youtube and similar sites with DMCA takedown notices and lawsuites over the use of there product (even though the artist/actors/producers wanted it to be up and to be seen). You need to get a clue and look at the larger picture and whats been going on for nearly a century, starting with the player piano and now with P2P. Learn a little more before you start making comments about the subject.
Aug 26th 2009 10:46PM The price of movies and music on disc has been a rip off for a long time. Paying $20-30 for music or media is ridiculous since the overall price for the media costs only pennies on the dollar. As far as the movie/music on them the price can be debatable at best but it still comes down to the fact that there is no reason for the current or past price for these media types. As far as P2P illegally, most people prefer the try before you buy option since people don't want to waste there money on something they won't/don't like in the end. If the music/movie industry wasn't so greedy and corrupt (collection societies) then people might be more willing to pay for the product, at least at a reduced price compared to the current cost of there products. Maybe instead of forcing people to use the products they sell to the consumer the way the industry wants and only that way the industry should listen to the consumers and produce a better distribution method without the DRM and without all the stupid restrictions that come with it. Just because the music/movie industry was able to convince/pay off the government official/lawmaker and put into effect these ridiculous laws/restrictions doesn't mean people want to or even should follow them. Especially since the wording of the laws are contradictory on many points. The laws need to be fixed without the interference of the music/movie industry. Good luck with that though since the industry commit a large amount of money to the "elected" officials campaigns, etc.
Jul 24th 2009 8:53PM Considering how much they charge for there Adobe Professional products, whether its a complete package or upgrade, I think it's wrong that Adobe can't do proper bug/security screenings especially since other PDF viewers don't have anywhere near the number of problems. I can understand a few issues here and there but it seems like this happens every few weeks at most.
Apr 17th 2009 7:21PM How many times do people need to be told that "piracy" of media actually adds to the overall value of that media. On average people use torrents to preview the media usually before they purchase it. There have been many times that artists, etc. have shown that if they give away there product the consumers will then purchase other things related to the original content (shirts, dvd\cd, posters, extra content, etc.)People need to get a clue and realize that TPB is nothing more then a search engine. Just because they promote the supposed "piracy" of media doesn't mean that they actually host that media.Maybe instead of trying to prohibit the use of the media that has been legally purchased they should actually listen to the consumer and find out what they want instead of wasting time and money on DRM that never works in the end.
Feb 25th 2009 10:23AM First off I never stated anything with regards to the US only the EU. Secondly I never said anything with regards to the OS specifically only in inclusion of the browser (Internet Explorer). The EU has made a over the top effort to go after Microsoft time and time again. Also I was talking about the current antitrust violations against Microsoft by the EU. Maybe you should actually read the comments made instead of just the first line then you would hopefully realize that I was not talking about history/past issues at all ONLY the current one(s). Since you obviously think the EU's actions are right you should also apply the broad and over reaching standards set forth against Apple, IBM and multiple if not all large IT companies not just Microsoft.
Feb 25th 2009 8:41AM Most of these responses are made by Apple Mac Fanboys who obviously believe that Apple can do nothing wrong. Apple should be brought up on anti-competition charges and quite possibly anti-trust charges. The main reason Microsoft has had charges made against them by the EU is because they are a big company and an easy target. People need to get over it and just concentrate on more important issues other then simply bashing Microsoft all the time.
Feb 25th 2009 8:35AM This is nothing more then a farce. Microsoft has not committed any antitrust violations with regards to browser being part of the OS. I think it is completely wrong of the Mozilla rep. that stated he whole heartily believes that Microsoft committed antitrust violations.For the Mozilla rep that made this comment it is quite obvious that they are doing it just to gain more market share (especially considering mozilla's browser is continually gaining market space on a daily basis). Any person can easily download another browser if they feel like it. There is no reason to require Microsoft to have multiple browsers installed. If Microsoft is required then why not Apple or even to an extreme every Linux distro (and yes I know that Linux already has more then one on average). This whole idea is ridiculous and those responsible should be brought up on charges of abuse of power/illegal charges. Anyone that thinks that antitrust violations should be made against Microsoft for the browser issue is a complete idiot and has no idea how technology much less OS's work. People need to get a life and get over it. I'm sure there are much more important things to do. How about going after Apple for not allowing installation on any other hardware other then there own. Apple may or may not be be able to apply antitrust laws against them but they definitely are violating anti-competition laws and quite blatantly for a matter of fact.
Save your tabs and Panorama tab groups in Firefox 4
Amazon Appstore for Android hands-on review: Android Market is in trouble