Quote:<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">The Bug in Microsoft's Ear The software giant is mulling its own digital device that adds gaming to music and video, in an effort to compete with Apple's iPod empire!
After getting trounced for four years in the digital music business by Apple Computer (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT) finally seems poised to do something about it. BusinessWeek has learned that the software giant is working on plans to develop its own portable digital media device to rival the iPod, rather than just providing technology to partners. Microsoft hasn't decided if it will go ahead. But sources inside the company and at its partners say Microsoft has put together a team that's considering the business end of such an initiative.
Advertisement
Going forward with it would be an acknowledgement that the current strategy isn't working. Chairman William H. Gates III has argued that consumers would prefer a vast choice of devices to the limited selection from Apple. That's why Microsoft has relied on dozens of partners to come up with sleek devices and clever online-music services that use its software.
LIMITED APPEAL? But each year, Apple extends its lead in digital music. In 2005, Apple's share of portable media devices sold in the U.S. grew to 67% from 52% in 2004, according to NPD Group. Making its own device, despite an uneven track record in consumer electronics, may be Microsoft's only viable alternative.
What would it look like? Xbox boss Peter Moore says any Microsoft media device would have to leverage the company's most significant consumer strength, video gaming. "It can't just be our version of the iPod," says Moore, who nonetheless would not confirm that Microsoft is considering making such a device. So in addition to playing music and videos, a Microsoft device would include games. Microsoft would probably use the Xbox brand to market the gadget. "I think the brand is an opportunity," Moore says.
True, perhaps, but also risky. If the new device comes with the Xbox brand, most consumers will view it as a game player, like Sony's (SNE) PlayStation Portable. That might limit its appeal, since the portable gaming market is much smaller than the one for digital media.
TARGETING THE LIVING ROOM. There's also the risk of alienating partners. If Microsoft fashions its own gadget, those device makers could abandon Microsoft's digital media technology and devise their own software. "Everybody will try to do their own thing to differentiate," says Sim Wong Hoo, chief executive of Creative Technology (CREAF), the No.2 digital media device maker. "What Microsoft was trying to build will collapse."
With $39.8 billion in annual sales, Microsoft isn't particularly interested in increments from the digital media device business or online music. It's after a spot in consumers' living rooms. The more consumers purchase iPods, the more they'll buy songs and videos from iTunes, and the various iPod accessories to play music and video around their house. That in turn convinces more entertainment companies to partner with Apple. "The stakes are incredibly high," says Michael Gartenberg, vice-president and research director at JupiterResearch (JUPM).
The question still remains: Will Microsoft really do it? It has abandoned efforts over the years to make everything from computer speakers to PC-connected telephones. The company gave some clues in December, when it put its digital media software unit and its MSN Music service under Robert J. Bach, president of the Entertainment & Devices division. "It's a lot easier to talk about the end-to-end scenarios, because it's all under Robbie," says Microsoft's Moore. Indeed, the soup-to-nuts approach has been the key to Apple's success. For Microsoft, it may be worth the risk.
Okay, I already know what all of you are thinking and I'm telling you right now to stop. Don't post if all you're going to say is "it's going to fail" or "it has no chance", or "this is stupid" or anything like that. Instead, discuss what you think might make it a success, or at least give it a fighting chance. I'll start...
Microsoft's strengths obviously lie in their ability to create software and services. These, imo could greatly compliment a portable device. Microsoft is certainly serious about the MP3 biz since they partnered with MTV to make URGE (an online music service), and I have no doubt that some type of video service is in the making since MS reps have repeatedly expressed their opinion that online media distribution is the future as opposed to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. With the MP3 player market booming, and the video downloads becoming more popular, there's certainly room for another device that does both very well. That shouldn't be all though...
Games...imho, this should be a secondary function. Microsoft should market the hell out of it as a music/video player but back it up with solid video game capabilities. I think a media device capable of accessing and utilizing Xbox Live + Xbox Live Arcade would be killer. Not to mention it could interact with the 360 in some ways. I would just hope that Microsoft wouldn't take the route of Sony and simply have Playstation type games in portable fashion. Portables are not consoles, and thus should be treated differently.
Interactivity. Other than the 360 there is also Windows Vista. Imagine accessing all your media files from your PC and simply viewing them on the device.
...I'm tired so I'm just going to close with saying that if Microsoft really does this I hope they create something special. Don't target Nintendo, don't go after Sony, don't go directly after iPod...take what they've created or done and go further with it. Create something unique that truly captures peoples attention, not a device that simply says "me, too."
According to this, people walking their unvaccinated pets in Yellowstone are spreading diseases among the wolf population in the park, resulting in a drop in survival for the pups there.
This basically stems from two things: either they are too cheap to vaccinate the dogs (not likely, considering poor people tend not to go on vacations like these), or it's just part of the nation-wide histaria regarding vaccinations in general. People actually seem to think it's harmful. They don't get what a vaccination actually is. It's creating an immune system response so your body can fight the disease when the stronger varieties invade the system! Our bodies, when you get right down to it, are simply piles of chemicals organized into a complex series of machines based on programmed data. The line between natural and unnatural is arbitrary at best, and people need to realize that whatever their definition of natural and unnatural, it has no bearing at all on what is healthy or unhealthy for a person. In fact, things you just pick out of nature, they tend to be complex enough they are more likely to do harm as they haven't been carefully broken down to a level where the human body's reaction to it can be safely predicted. You want natural? The bubonic plague, snake venom, poison ivy, and various birth defects such as heart murmurs are natural by most definitions of the term. Indeed, certain supplements that claim to produce chemicals our body naturally creates can really do harm. The word "herbal supplement" should never be taken to mean "no side effects", no matter what some snake oil salesman will tell you. ANYTHING powerful enough to have a physical effect on the body is powerful enough to have a negative physical effect.
Well, rant mode off. I'm just trying to point out that if that is the reason these wolf pups are dying, it would seem that the strange attempt to "return to nature" in such an ignorant fasion has actually damaged it in the process.
Quote:"Konami Computer Entertainment Japan and Nintendo yesterday announced the development of 'Silent Hill 5' for the Japanese company's new console, codenamed Revolution. Although everyone initially thought that the new edition of this horror series would arrive exclusively for PS3 [C3 note: since the rest of the series has been on Sony formats], it would seem that the development team was seduced by the innovative Revolution controller. According to Akira Yamaoka, Producer of the series: "We are excited with the great possibilities of the new control. We believe that the Silent Hill series will have a great jump [in the next generation] and the Revolution is the solution to materialise our innovative plans ". Silent Hill 5 will be launched exclusively for the Nintendo Revolution. The first images will be published, according to Yamaoka, during the Eletronic Entertainment Expo (E3) in May 2006."
All I can say is... fucking WOW. No doubt in my mind whatsoever that I'll be owning a Revolution as soon as possible!
How to enable EMS memory in WinME, most basic way... How did I manage to miss this for four years... actually it looks like I tried before, but it re-activated, or I didn't look hard enough or something, because one line was deactivated already and another identical one below it not, but whatever... it would have been really nice to have EMS years ago too, not just now. :( (I know, I can run all of those games in DOSBox, and that's what I did, but lots of them run too slow in DOSBox... of course some run too fast in normal speed, but too fast is often better than too slow, as long as it's not TOO fast...) :(
This had been annoying me for so long... it's really frusterating to find that it was something so simple...
This fellow wants to eliminate the property tax (the idea being a sound one I suppose, to encourage land ownership). Of course, the government needs a means of supporting it's own existance, so where to get replacement funds? Of course, tax the things "we" don't want while not taxing things "we" do want.
I believe his decisions on what "we" think are unwanted are a little arbitrary, however I must add that there's the whole issue as to whether this would actually benefit the state. Unfortunatly I can't really think of a logical reason why it wouldn't if the decided "unwanted" things to be taxed were agreed upon by the public and didn't infringe on the rights of the minority in the process. Still, something seems "off". Is it just in my head or is there a good logical reason why I should be against/for this sort of thing (in concept rather than execution)?
