Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions

[JorgeA]

Apple internally refers to its new design interface as 'Modern UI'

Apple Envy on one side is now becoming Microsoft Envy on the other!!

The two companies, once a study in contrasts, are converging toward one flat, kiddie walled-garden model.

As WSJ reports, Apple is now internally referring to its new design interface as "Modern UI." Not surprisingly, Microsoft has been referring to Windows 8's radical new design and look as "Modern UI" and formerly "Metro." However, Apple realizes that many critics will jump on this so all Apple presenters have been told to not refer to the new design as "Modern UI" when giving demonstrations. This information comes from people familiar with the internal matter.

The source:

Since Apple unveiled iOS 7 to developers on Monday, reviewers have been quick to compare the sparser designs to software from Microsoft and Google .

It turns out there is another similarity. Internally, Apple employees have been calling the new design “Modern UI,” according to people familiar with the nomenclature. That happens to be what people at Microsoft and developers call the company’s tiled Windows 8 interface.

[source]

So, in a way -- given what we just saw about Microsoft demo'ing Xbox One games on a Windows 7 system and not Win8 -- you could say that Apple likes Win8 better than does Microsoft...

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

Oh, and yet another embarrassment for MSFT (not sure if we've covered this one already):

Microsoft reportedly miscalculated the screen size in Windows 8 vs iPad comparison

According to Microsoft, the Asus VivoTab Smart has 35% more screen size compared to the iPad. Well, not according to Elliot Temple who actually popped out a calculator and did the calculations. He found that the iPad has a screen area of 45.16 square inches while the ASUS VivoTab Smart has a screen area of 43.56 square inches. In other words, the screen size on the Asus VivoTab Smart is smaller than the iPad's screen size, not larger as Microsoft pointed out.

Who's minding the store over in Redmond?

--JorgeA

[Formfiller]

You have to be a special kind of retard to follow Microsoft's route after all the controversy they have caused with it.

I still give Apple the benefit doubt, given that they still haven't mangled their desktop OS and actually plan to put out a new version of the Mac Pro (in opposite to MS, who seem to be 100% committed to the toys-route). But the signs coming out of Cupertino are worrying.

Pretty obvious that Tim Cook is just a typical bean counter compared to Jobs. With Microsoft, there is a at least the possibility that Gates could come back, at least for a short while, to clean up the mess that Ballmer has created. A similar option with Apple is obviously out of the question.

Edited June 16, 2013 by Formfiller

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

btw Formfiller, being new to that forum I see lots of references to TMR and Pogson and Dr. Loser and Olderman, but what is the backstory to them? What are they and what connects them all?

OK, long story: ...

Thanks, very helpful!

EDIT: While we're mentioning TechBroil, I have to quote his opening thought in his latest post: PS4 Wins ...

What a crazy tech world when Sony is needed to prevent a megacorp from taking us into DRM hell.

That sentence really nails it. After the Sony CD audio DRM fiasco this has got to be the most amazing turn of events in a long while.

Edited June 17, 2013 by CharlotteTheHarlot

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

You want to know why they hate distribution media? It is because it remains the last impediment to the complete destruction of private property and completes Microsoft's transition to a company that sells information one electron at a time.

Naah, the electron is licensed, NOT sold.

D'oh! Right you are!

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Xbox One Games At E3 Were Running On Windows 7 With Nvidia GTX Cards:

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbox-One-Games-E3-Were-Running-Windows-7-With-Nvidia-GTX-Cards-56737.html

Another PR disaster.

Indeed ...

Some Xbox One demos at E3 2013 ran on Windows 7 NVIDIA PCs ( NeoWin 2013-06-15 )

... And it begs two questions IMHO ...

• Why use a PC instead of an Xbox sample?
  
• Why use Windows 7 instead of Windows 8?
  

None of the answers I see parroted by the NeoWin fanboys makes a whole lot of sense to me at all. They are maybe 4 months from shipment, no way can anyone convince me they have no working samples of Xbone yet. That is unfathomable. Well, unless it is undergoing another redesign in light of the Sony knee-capping of their original plans. The NeoWhiners keep saying that "well they had to rush over to E3 so grabbed whatever they could to get through the presentation". But this presentation included hands-on experience with actual games. How does it make sense to have tech writers and blog authors using non-Xbox hardware knowing full well they will write about it? PR disaster to say the least. It reeks of complete mismanagement, again.

Now about using Windows 7. We hear even lamer excuses like the allegation that the SDK was available before Windows 8 came out, and it was designed for Windows 7 ( and other variations on this excuse ). Bullcrap. This is where the rubber meets the road fanboys. You cannot keep spouting the "Windows 8 is just like Windows 7, only better" nonsense, or "Windows 8 is Windows 7 plus Metro", or most importantly "Windows 8 does everything Windows 7 does and has the same desktop you love". Either this pOS is a backward compatible operating system, or it is not. I think this is very telling in fact. It goes totally against all the alleged dogfooding, doesn't it? The point is that there is definitely even more problems in Windows 8 yet to be discovered in the area of gaming compatibility, and I suspect it will be DRM related because those components will have only been reinforced, not relaxed, in this so-called operating system "upgrade".

EDIT: typo(s)

Edited June 16, 2013 by CharlotteTheHarlot

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Apple internally refers to its new design interface as 'Modern UI'

Apple Envy on one side is now becoming Microsoft Envy on the other!!

The two companies, once a study in contrasts, are converging toward one flat, kiddie walled-garden model.

Wow. Amazingly weird! Especially when we keep in mind that Apple is a hardware company, the OS that it creates ( or buys ) is primarily to make their hardware function. They do NOT distribute the Mac OS or iOS to non-Apple hardware. Unless that is about to change there is no logical reason to copy Microsoft ( and Android ) unless they think that people are buying non-Apple hardware because they like the non-Apple operating system more than theirs! That makes no sense to me. They are in effect blurring or erasing their own identity to fit in with a crowd of others.

And no, I don't like what I see so far in iOS 7, readability and instant recognition of what a given icon does has been reduced. It wasn't as bad as it could have been, but the path they are on now is suicide. They are making a similar calculation that Microsoft has made by altering the familiarity that longtime users expect - hoping they will gain more in new purchasers than they will lose in old. Even completely disregarding the hatred and bad publicity this garners, they fail to realize that very few people buy Apple because of the interface or operating system. They are buying the complete one-stop solution, the whole package warranty and reputation and everything else. At a time when they could lose a huge amount of customers ( for phones anytime the contract expires ) to a much more inexpensive Android, you do NOT give them a reason to leave.

Microsoft and Apple have never been competitors on any actual playing field. They are in fact a duopoly and I have always believed that Gates and Jobs have had some agreements hammered out on a golf course or something. Stunningly, they both have managed to employ the same types of underlings ...

EDIT: typo(s)

Edited June 18, 2013 by CharlotteTheHarlot

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

PlayStation 4 is destroying the Xbox One in Amazon customer poll ( TechSpot 2013-06-15 )

Previous results from the Amazon Ps4 vs Xboner poll on June 14, 2013 ...

94% Of Gamers Favor PS4 To Xbox One, According To Amazon Poll ( CinemaBlend 2013-06-13 )
Currently 21,501 to 1,240.

Time to check in two days later on June 16, 2013 ...

Sony winning previously with 94.547%, now winning with 94.745%. You think Microsoft is going to notice this? You wanna bet they are in panic mode right about now? Will they do the right thing?

So what do NeoWhiners have to say now? Let's see ...

Poll: If Microsoft twist, will you stick? [update] ( NeoWin 2013-06-15 )

They have their own poll once again, using mind-bending vernacular rather than simple understandable language ...

If Microsoft was to admit it made a mistake with its policies and restrictions around the Xbox One, regardless of cost, would you stick or twist? ...

• Xbox all the way! - 61.7%
  
• PS4 for the rest of my days! - 38.3%
  

I guess the point of this exercise is to measure the amount of people thinking of jumping ship like rats scurrying off the deck of a doomed boat. And the answer would seem to indicate there are a few because well over a third of the NeoWin crowd says they are going with Sony's PlayStation. From this crowd, I think that is saying something since the price difference is only $50 to $100 depending on your point of view.

NB: that phrase: "stick or twist" is apparently some kind of variation on the much more common "hit or stay" or "hit or stand" used in "21" aka "BlackJack". Actually, In real life it is customary to only use hand signals, especially in a loud Casino, but n00b tourists often say "Hit me" or "I'll Stay" anyway. In many decades of visiting Casinos in Las Vegas and Atlantic City I can safely say I have never heard that "stick or twist" phrase before, ever. You try that with a BlackJack dealer at a table full of players and you will be emasculated and humiliated and quite possibly taken out back and beaten.

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Proof that all the assorted Microsoft controversies are evolving into a general public IQ Test ...

Who cares if the Xbox One is spying on you? ( NeoWin 2013-06-15 )

The bigger question is: Even if Microsoft's newest console is spying on every move we make, does it really matter? Do you own a cell phone? It also has a camera and microphone, and follows you around everywhere. A tablet? Same. How about a laptop? Yup. Even many televisions are including cameras built into them, so why are we suddenly up in arms over the fact that our video game console has the same functionality as a five year old smartphone?

Huh?

First thing to notice is the instinctual habit of quickly pointing fingers at other things as some kind of comparative justification for the question at hand. Most famously and for probably the longest period that has been the "But Apple does this ..." kind of reply, even though Apple has not ever been a competitor to Microsoft in the same space, ever. Apple used as a foil has sapped the intelligence from a sizeable portion of Microsoft's user base. Naturally these days we can easily see "But Android does this ..." and now "But Sony does this ...". They even use it against earlier products like "But Windows XP did this ..." and "But Windows 7 does that ...". This is commonplace at NeoWin and The Verge and each time their comparison is clearly bogus because they fail on the facts and also on the spirit of the issue.

In this instance, the clueless fanboy uses cellphones and PC Webcams and even Smart TV's as a foil to rationalize Kinect. A cellphone that is in a skin or pouch or pocketbook. Webcams that are perhaps the crappiest form of camera still perpetrated on the consumer. Smart TV's which even if they include a camera have no tracking abilities, just like PC webcams. Kinect works in low light and no light, ever tried low light with a webcam? Kinect uses a microphone, to this very day the mic used in PC and laptop situations roughly sucks as bad as a child toy and its software ( and associated Windows components ) are among the worst ever developed. Contrary to what the AI community like IBM would have you believe, voice recognition is almost non-existent in the PC space except for those that buy the right hardware, and software, and invest time ironing out numerous bugs. Successful cases are found primarily in cases of handicap persons, disabled veterans, etc. The video component using webcams is even less mature and reliable, and we are still chasing the elusive case of seamless video calls, except in those specialized cases where people buy the right combination of hardware, and now lately some success with Skype and similar concepts.

But you see what I did there? I still managed to stupidly chase this author down one of his rabbit holes anyway. The comparison is bogus because of the difference between dedicated active surveillance and passive ad hoc sometimes-working arrangements of A/V components. He is comparing slingshots with sniper rifles. Most importantly, in order to be able to listen for and interpret someone saying: "Xbox On", Kinect is constantly polling. Naturally Microsoft will overlook the obvious best-practices answer in this case - clear delineation of operating modes - LED indicators that say OFF or Private or NO Surveillance so there is no ambiguity whatsoever. There should be a LED indicating that Kinect is Polling Audio and Polling Video. But I assure you these things are not even crossing their minds and the reason is partially due to idi0tic fanboys that are acting as enablers for everything they do. ADDED: there is a huge slice of cognitive dissonance here as well. If they need to switch to flat GUIs on everything, sacrificing familairity and enduring consumer rants and criticism just to save power, well how does it make sense to build a device that polls constantly just to hear the magic words "Xbox On" ? Not to mention the fact that this feature is by definition redundant as it mirrors the simple pressing of a button, making it a completely optional luxury, with an associated cost in power usage. All this work just to have the convenience of powering on without getting up and pressing a button? Hypocrites in action! Save the rain forest, ban Kinect!

So instead of clear, unambiguous LED indicators Microsoft has released propaganda saying stuff like "will guide you through settings ..." or "easy to configure options ...". Trust me, they mean no such thing when they say this. There will be duhfaults. And these duhfaults will mirror or even exceed the much decried privacy options set by Google, but with far greater downside to privacy than ad-tracking identifiers. Microsoft has no intention of protecting privacy whatsoever. This is yet another precedent they will establish laying a foundation for further expansion later. If you ask me, this is a very good place for people to take a principled stand. If you don't think so and accept them now, let me ask a very simple question. What kind of precedents will be seen in the future by your kids and your grandkids, and their kids and their grandkids? What would you say if they could ask you why you did nothing back in the early days? Once again, George Orwell's 1984 was a warning, not an instruction manual!

As a kid I used to be told "Two wrongs don't make a right" when trying logical fallacies. Yet today it is common to hear "Google does it too!". So I really have to wonder just what is wrong with the parents of MicroZealot members of Generation Xbox. One thing a good parent does is teach their kids that they do NOT get to point a finger at someone else in order to get away with what they have done. "But Dad, the kid next door can ride his bike after dark" or "The neighbor has a BB gun, why can't I" or "They were throwing snowballs too so why are you punishing me?". Learn this lesson as a kid and you won't make the mistake later in life of "But officer, all the cars were going faster than the speed limit". Since we know that some of the members of the NeoWin peanut gallery are actually adults, you have to wonder what they do when their own kids cross this line at home. Will they notice their own hypocrisy when they tell them "Just because Billy jumps off a bridge doesn't mean you should also jump".

Almost forgot, John Dvorak inexplicably expressed similar crazy thoughts a few days ago ...

The NSA Is Mining Our Data. So What? ( John C. Dvorak PC Magazine 2013-06-12 )

... which astonishingly places him drinking from the same Kool-aid fountain as Ed MicroBott!

The real story in the NSA scandal is the collapse of journalism ( Ed Bott ZDNet 2013-06-08 )

How did mainstream media get the NSA PRISM story so hopelessly wrong? ( Ed Bott ZDNet 2013-06-15 )

EDIT: typo(s), clarity, added article(s), added comment

Edited June 17, 2013 by CharlotteTheHarlot

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Roundup of some updates to the breaking news from just over one week ago ...

Tech Companies Concede to Surveillance Program ( New York Times 2013-06-07 )

Twitter declined to make it easier for the government. But other companies were more compliant, according to people briefed on the negotiations. They opened discussions with national security officials about developing technical methods to more efficiently and securely share the personal data of foreign users in response to lawful government requests. And in some cases, they changed their computer systems to do so.

[...]

The companies that negotiated with the government include Google, which owns YouTube; Microsoft, which owns Hotmail and Skype; Yahoo; Facebook; AOL; Apple; and Paltalk, according to one of the people briefed on the discussions. The companies were legally required to share the data under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. People briefed on the discussions spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are prohibited by law from discussing the content of FISA requests or even acknowledging their existence.

How the U.S. Uses Technology to Mine More Data More Quickly ( New York Times 2013-06-08 )

In addition to opening the Utah data center, reportedly scheduled for this year, N.S.A. has secretly enlarged its footprint inside the United States, according to accounts from whistle-blowers in recent years.

In Virginia, a telecommunications consultant reported, Verizon had set up a dedicated fiber-optic line running from New Jersey to Quantico, Va., home to a large military base, allowing government officials to gain access to all communications flowing through the carrier’s operations center.

In Georgia, an N.S.A. official said in interviews, the agency had combed through huge volumes of routine e-mails to and from Americans.

And in San Francisco, a technician at AT& T reported on the existence of a secret room there reserved for the N.S.A. that allowed the spy agency to copy and store millions of domestic and international phone calls routed through that station.

PRISM declassified by NSA to mitigate misimpressions and inaccuracies ( TechSpot 2013-06-10 )

One of the more immediate points raised in the press release is that the U.S. government does not “unilaterally obtain information” from servers, meaning that they do not have unlimited and unregulated access as has been suggested, and that any information obtained by the government is done so with FISA Court approval.

Wait, what? Read the last two again. Someone is lying.

American public deems NSA's phone spying acceptable, says Pew study ( TechSpot 2013-06-11 )

Yeah sure. The expected propaganda effort to tamp down the outrage. Pew polls for the government are like Forrester studies for Microsoft.

Secret court makes refusing government data requests tricky for companies ( TechSpot 2013-06-14 )

Sources in touch with the New York Times purport that Yahoo was one of the companies with enough brass to try to resist national security data requests before its indoctrination into PRISM. In a secretive court though, the company was given the choice to either cooperate with federal agencies or submit to breaking the law. Yahoo, along with several other companies, chose the former.

"The record supports the government. Notwithstanding the parade of horribles trotted out by the petitioner, it has presented no evidence of any actual harm, any egregious risk of error, or any broad potential for abuse." the court stated. “Efforts to protect national security should not be frustrated by the courts."

"The petitioner suggests that, by placing discretion entirely in the hands of the Executive Branch without prior judicial involvement, the procedures cede to that Branch overly broad power that invites abuse." the court continued. "But this is little more than a lament about the risk that government officials will not operate in good faith. That sort of risk exists even when a warrant is required."

We're from the government, we're here to help. Oh, and don't worry, we're over-seeing ourselves. Trust us!

NSA spying flap extends to contents of U.S. phone calls ( CNet 2013-06-15 )

The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls, a participant said.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed on Thursday that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed "simply based on an analyst deciding that."

If the NSA wants "to listen to the phone," an analyst's decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. "I was rather startled," said Nadler, an attorney and congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.

So the lying liars lied when they said it is only recorded metadata! UPDATE: see this ZDNet story that claims to contradict these allegations. The powers-that-be appear to be working overtime.

Google and Twitter Take a Pass on new FISA Disclosure Deal Adopted by Facebook and Microsoft ( Maximum PC 2013-06-16 )

Privacy concerns are front and center in the online world these days, and a deal taken by Facebook and Microsoft on government transparency doesn’t pass the Google sniff test. Google claims the offer comes with strings attached they can’t live with, and they appear to be holding out for a better offer.

Perhaps something similar to the recent Sony kneecapping of Microsoft in the console wars will be taking place here as well? Google and Twitter noticing the outcry deciding to capitalize on it and gain back some of their customer trust and loyalty. Well, we can certainly hope so. The problem is we have no way to tell what is real anymore. This the Matrix.

Microsoft offers more info on its US national security requests ( NeoWin 2013-06-16 )

Microsoft stated that for the second half of 2012, it had received "between 6,000 and 7,000 criminal and national security warrants, subpoenas and orders" from various US government agencies. Those requests affected between 31,000 and 32,000 Microsoft consumer accounts.

The requests came from local, state and federal groups.

So much for that "our hands are tied because of FISA" excuse. Lying liars lying again. State and Local has nothing to do with issues of FISA and national security. And this is only Microsoft, imagine the total of non-Federal mandated information being given up by Google and the rest. You see, this is why government has never tried to discourage monopolies except for the rarest cases. They allowed creation of a handful of ISP's available to any individual or family to gain access to the Internet. They allowed us to have one cable or Fiber or phone company in any given area. They allowed huge merging of many companies ( e.g., HDD, Routers, Chips, Software ) to singular giants. By allowing these things they have many less points of access to gain control of. It also means less possibility of loose lips sinking their ship.

EDIT: typo(s), clarity, another article

Edited June 17, 2013 by CharlotteTheHarlot

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

A pair of articles from Thurrott concerning the Xbox saga. As usual he endeavors to save Microsoft with a bullet list of non-solutions. Actually I wanted to point out how the topic of private property is at the core of this controversy even if they don't yet realize it. Leave it to the Thurrott commenters to whip up some false analogies in order to support Microsoft ...

Xbox One Launch Missteps Could Cost Microsoft. Don Mattrick opens mouth, inserts foot ( Thurrott 2013-06-13 )

As for used games, it's a shame to see limits on sharing and swapping games with friends, or buying games from places like Craigslist. But companies like GameStop are significantly more "evil" than Microsoft will ever be. Trading in a game a week after release, getting $20, and then seeing them put that game back on the shelf for $55 is infuriating, and I'm almost in full support of any new developments that will bring down that BS business model.

"It's a shame, but ..." Don't you just love enablers! GameStop is evil? Because someone that actually paid for something is trying to sell it to someone else? Notice the busy body approach in that they are concerning themselves with how much the seller gets for his resale. First of all it isn't even his business what someone gets for what they sell, yet he makes it his business anyway. Secondly, he flat-out wants some development to occur that will stop this private selling in its tracks. Truly we have seen an entire strain of totalitarians grow up in our "free" world. Instead of advancing the human race, the Internet has dragged many of us down to the lowest common denominator - Idiocracy.

How Microsoft Can Fix Xbox One. It's so close ( Thurrott 2013-06-14 )

Note that these next three commenters are all addressing the same person.

The second hand market for digital goods is fundamentally different from the second hand market for physical goods. Ford doesn't particularly care about the second hand market for its cars because what you are buying, in most cases, is a two, three, etc. year old car that has more miles on it and more problems. A used car (or used any other physical good--clothes) is not THE SAME good as the new.

A second hand game, on the other hand, is in exactly the same perfect condition as any first hand game. Price is driven by supply and demand. If developers/publishers got the value of later sales (instead of the re-seller) prices might come down. Gamers are largely responsible ...

This will only work well if it is the developer/publisher that gets the benefit of selling at the discounted price, not the first buyer.

Ah, trying to hammer out that private property exception for digital goods. First of all, the condition of the used car has nothing to do with the subject of private property and resale from one customer to another. That is the logical fallacy of a strawman. Likewise, the fact that a digital game or any other software is binary identical is a further expansion of the same strawman. Whether a person's "used" car is for sale beaten up or factory new has nothing to do with this. Perhaps he thinks he is arguing about counterfeit software where someone duplicates the bits and sells them? Who knows, but he is only distracting us and confusing his own brain. That last bit is the problem. When he says the dev should get the money from the second sale, another bite of the apple. In short, this crazy idea is that developers get to take a slice ( or even the whole thing ) every time their so-called product changes hands, and the justification is because it is digital!

Sorry you can't used that same tired used car analogy because the bits on the game disc don't degrade like a car. They are in the exact same condition they were when the first owner popped it into their console. You also can't easily make a brand new copy of a car and distribute over the internet either.

This is an issure because like the older movie and music industries there aren't alternate means of revenue per game and when they are introduced there is huge push back from players (DLC, etc). With TV/Movies you have syndication/DVD/Bluray money and with music you have concerts/radio fees.

No kidding. The bits don't degrade. Nice strawman once again. Distracting and not relevant. He is also throwing in the kitchen sink with DLC and DVD to muddy the waters but is essentially echoing the previous comment. They are both advocating a quasi-Communist approach of complete management of the chain from developer to all users in perpetuity. In fact that isn't a bad comparison because black markets thrive in Communist systems and they are asking for it here bigtime.

The used game market keeps prices high because the publisher/creator cannot recoup their investment through new sales alone. Imagine a company makes a game for $60 and 10 people will buy it. Only five buy it right away, the other 5 figure they'll get it cheaper used in a month. Had all 10 bought it right away (eg: no used market) it could have been sold for $30. The revenue to the published would be the same in either case - $300

Catch that? They can't make enough money selling their product. Hence they are eyeballing secondary sales as their rightful property. Needless to say this person would not only destroy the concept of private property of the customers, but while he is at it is willing to destroy the concept of supply and demand. If they cannot sell their "product" they are either charging too much money or shouldn't be making a product no-one will buy. Coveting other people's money to take in order to cover up your own mis-management is evil.

There is a lot of this Neo-Fascist thinking going on these days in forums like Thurrott's and anywhere this subject comes up. The Fascist part comes from the inevitable final solution - government regulation through courts and such that establish these arbitrary rules that upend the concept of a free market and create an artificial world that suits whoever bought the most lawyers. Later on, more recognizable Fascism is established in the enforcement mechanisms that are necessary to police this artificial economy - outfits like the BSA and RIAA and MPAA, and their subsequent use of spying ISP's and real police to kick down the doors and drag people into kangaroo courts. Maybe George Orwell underestimated the potential damage that a world full of sheeple will endure and enable?

All of this is the natural evolution of something I mentioned upthread - the dangerous consequences of the illogical and completely arbitrary and self-serving paradigm of carving out an exception for software as non-private virtual property. There is a reason that I cannot claim ownership of a new sandwich recipe, it is illogical because enforcement would require ridiculous laws and dangerous entities like the ISP ( International Sandwich Police ) to kick down doors and make sure you are not copying my sandwich style without paying royalties. "I'm sorry, even though you are using your own ingredients the idea is already claimed and you cannot use it for free.". That is how many of the early arguments went, and there are many better ones, but it still serves to explain the concept of a recipe. One wonders if these Fascist pro-Intellectual Property zealots ever wonder who invented their ham sandwich or steak dinner or scrambled eggs or any other number of things that they use on a day-to-day basis without paying royalties for. Pretty much every single thing they do in a 24-hour day was "invented" by someone.

The normal way to sell and market an idea that is not easily protect-able ( sandwich recipe ) was to sell value-added product to make the sale sensible. For example, a nicely bound book of recipes will still sell even today even though the recipes themselves are easily transmitted from grandma to grandma on the telephone if they choose to do so. An important logical market control lies in the fact that if your brilliant idea has no feasible way to be sold without being copied or otherwise protected, you simply cannot sell it or you give it away. We're pretty much getting into a radically selfish area these days with the obvious push to monetize every single possible sliver of intellectual property, what with companies existing almost solely for the purpose of filing and purchasing patents. Everyone wants to sit on their assets and get paid by someone else.

It would be nice if a few more Benjamin Franklins were born into this world. Can you imagine if Microsoft, or her MicroZealots or any number of these companies held a patent on the lightning rod? An invention that he considered so important he gave it to the world for free. We can also imagine that it might have been a difficult patent to enforce, like a recipe, because anyone can stick a tall metal pole into the ground. ~sigh~ What a difference a few centuries make.

[Formfiller]

Wow, the guys on Thurrott sounds exactly like the guys on Channel9. Verbatim. You've probably read the thread I've linked here a few times.

Thurrott-guys:

This is an issure because like the older movie and music industries there aren't alternate means of revenue per game and when they are introduced there is huge push back from players (DLC, etc). With TV/Movies you have syndication/DVD/Bluray money and with music you have concerts/radio fees.

They are painfully trying to create even in the "all-digital" realm special rules ONLY for video games, with painfully stupid arguments.

Money making schemes for video games:

DLC, in-game advertising, merchandising, TV show licensing, item shops, premium memberships, serving as the basis for future expansions, re-release on compilation packages, re-release as add-on DVD of video game magazines, re-release later on sites like GOG.com (for PC games), sponsoring, book/comic licensing...

There is no shortage to make additional money with games. I would say the possibilities are even bigger than with movies and music.

Another thread regarding this issue on C9:

http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/How-and-why-is-it-OK-to-ban-second-hand-games/f5e8e4d343594c5f9d5ba1c800fe18c7

You see, exactly the same arguments by these guys (the guy I debated with changed opinion later, after he saw the huge backlash against the Xbone).

Edited June 17, 2013 by Formfiller

[jaclaz]

No kidding. The bits don't degrade.

But bits are also licensed, NOT sold.

What about revamping this not-so-old idea (that thank goodness never took hold)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexplay

They could make non copyable DVD's that only last - say - a week/2 weeks/1 month/3 months/6 months/1 year and a "gold edition" (for which you have to be a member of the "Premium XboX1 Club", you need to be introduced by at least two pre-existing members, make a solemn oath about never using an iPad and pay a nominal fee of 360 US$ /year) lasting 2 years.

For the most affectionate and smartest one, there is also the "Excellence Restricted Circle" which offers exactly the same as the above, but costs 720 US$/year, minimum 10 years and you have remote assistance - at most two hours/year - and provides you with a T-shirt and a badge representing a very tiny "O" with an even tinier "x" in the middle, symbolizing at the same time how exclusive the circle is and the actual vote in roman numerals the MS guys give to the console in a scale from 0 to 10).

jaclaz

[HalloweenDocument12]

It's not true that used games are identical to new. In many ways they degrade in the same fashion as cars. Used games are far more likely to have scratches and other forms of damage, which may make the game skip cutscenes or even render it unplayable. Packaging and inserts are likely to be damaged or missing. The center knob of the case is more likely to be broken, and the case in general is more likely to be in overall poor condition. The older the game, the more magnified the effect. Over time product is lost due to damage.

There's also the issue of the game simply having less overall value even with "identical bits" by the virtue of it disappearing from public consciousnesses or removal of features such as multiplayer, either by fiat or by de facto via abandonment of player base.

If game quality was up to par, we wouldn't be seeing a glut of $5 off used games mere days after first sale. While evil Gamestop may be flipping those games at near retail, the people trading them in are getting a fraction back. Gamers are panicking over a poor purchase and are willing to accept virtually anything back to minimize the sunk cost. If they were motivated to hold onto the game for more than a week or two, there wouldn't be a glut of supply. As it is, these first sale customers are receiving negative value by buying at $60 and selling at $20 a few days later. Also, this $20 is in store credit, so, wow, how bad can these games be when customers are willing to abandon them without even cash in hand?

[Formfiller]

It's not true that used games are identical to new. In many ways they degrade in the same fashion as cars. Used games are far more likely to have scratches and other forms of damage, which may make the game skip cutscenes or even render it unplayable. Packaging and inserts are likely to be damaged or missing. The center knob of the case is more likely to be broken, and the case in general is more likely to be in overall poor condition. The older the game, the more magnified the effect. Over time product is lost due to damage.

There's also the issue of the game simply having less overall value even with "identical bits" by the virtue of it disappearing from public consciousnesses or removal of features such as multiplayer, either by fiat or by de facto via abandonment of player base.

If game quality was up to par, we wouldn't be seeing a glut of $5 off used games mere days after first sale. While evil Gamestop may be flipping those games at near retail, the people trading them in are getting a fraction back. Gamers are panicking over a poor purchase and are willing to accept virtually anything back to minimize the sunk cost. If they were motivated to hold onto the game for more than a week or two, there wouldn't be a glut of supply. As it is, these first sale customers are receiving negative value by buying at $60 and selling at $20 a few days later. Also, this $20 is in store credit, so, wow, how bad can these games be when customers are willing to abandon them without even cash in hand?

True. And as we can see, Microsoft lied about reducing costs:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/14/4431720/microsoft-selling-xbox-one-first-party-games-for-59-99

But it was no surprise. Steam hasn't reduced costs as well. No DRM scheme has, despite all the lies that the various shills used to steamroll the market. The only thing these schemes did was raise prices, all the time.

I can remember when games used to have tons of goodies in the package:

Those goodies vanished, along with the big boxes. The excuse back then was "cheaper prices", well, there were no cheaper prices for sure when the barebones DVD cases appeared. Of course, the production costs exploded, but so has the audience and the market. So that's a weak excuse. And about the "better games" excuses: You know, I play games like Master of orion 2 regularly even today, while many of today's products can barely hold the attention. I won't sell my Master of Orion 2 copy (and many other older games for that matter). I can't speak the same about lots of the newer games. And it's not just nostalgia. If a game from 1996 is still able to bind you on the computer for hours, it's certainly not because of my rose-tinted glasses.

If Gamestop is really a problem today, it's surely not because the DRM is too weak.

Edited June 17, 2013 by Formfiller