151–160 of 374 posts
Seems like the "new Microsoft" honeymoon period has been brought to an abrupt end. Did every single Windows 7 user get this? Perhaps they can recover from this by learning quickly from the backlash that's about to happen.
Backlash from needing to go into settings and flick a toggle switch from on to off? Oh the horror!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Software will never truly be "free" because someone pays for it to exist. It has upfront fixed costs and variable costs to maintain, which need to be covered by the developers, users, advertisers, or some combination of the three.
By that definition nothing can be "free" (as in beer), there's always someone paying for it (even if it's just opportunity cost). For any useful definition of the word free there can also be free software.
Which is the point in context to someone saying "If only there really was universal expectation of free software...". With IP, the costs are hidden and it's easy to fall into the trap of expecting it to be totally free.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hahah, I did the same. It was either the Economist or FT that did a cost/benefit analysis of removing those inserts for their already-subscribed customers copies, and found that it would cost more in lost new subscriptions to remove them.
> it would cost more in lost new subscriptions to remove them. How does that make sense?
Seems like the "new Microsoft" honeymoon period has been brought to an abrupt end. Did every single Windows 7 user get this? Perhaps they can recover from this by learning quickly from the backlash that's about to happen.
Backlash from needing to go into settings and flick a toggle switch from on to off? Oh the horror!
Seems like the only way people want to make money these days is through invasive advertising without the end-user's explicit consent. Granted the expectation of free software is driving most of this, but it starts a vicious cycle because those who get annoyed with them develop countermeasures, which the creator responds to with more aggressive ads, ad infinitum. It does start explaining some of the highly controversi…
People want free. Things aren't free. But people want free, so let's give them "free" and monetize them indirectly with surveillance, invasive advertising, etc. The entire Internet has gone down this road since it's very hard to compete with someone who is giving something away for "free" (note quotes). Free has given us George Orwell's bidirectional it-watches-you TV set.
There's at least one very promising competing model: give something away for free (note lack of quotes) and offer people the option to pay.
In the software world we usually do that by using the free version as advertisement for a better paid version, Patreon (and Dwarf Fortress etc) show that the model can even work if paying offers no notable advantages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the exact reason why Google is so valuable- when I use Google, I'm actively searching for something, so I'm happy to see relevant ads in my search results. If I search "bike shop London," I want to find a bike shop in London, so if I see an ad for a bike shop in London, I'm ecstatic, and I'll probably go there. When I go to check my inbox, on the other hand, that's because I want to see what email I've receiv…
I think Google is massively overpaid for what it does at this point. In your scenario, you've decided you want to 1) buy a bike 2) from a brick and mortar store 3) by going there and talking to them. Your mind is made up. Why does your local bike shop have to pay Google to show up in those results? What if a bike shop uses its budget to advertise on Google instead of training its employees, you'll go to the one that'…
The effects of this are subtle, but it could be that they are pretty big.
Just look at Google removing forum search from it's engine - so instead of reading discussions among people(and some shills, sure), most people often read commercial stuff or crap journalism.What does that do to democracy ? consumer choice ?
With Windows 10 doing things like this, and Windows 7 being aggressively deprecated, I decided I finally wanted to ditch Windows as my daily driver. It was good timing, then, that I watched the "7 Gamers 1 CPU" video from LinuxTechTips, which showed me how to do it without sacrificing gaming. Most everything I use runs in Linux, and for the few things that don't I can spin up a VM. But there's the caveat that is as o…
How much of a performance hit do you get running a VM with vtx and vtd versus running windows bare metal? Is it as simple as it seems? I'd love to switch over to a VM for windows games backed by vtx and vtd, but I've been worried that it'd be waay more work.
With Windows 10 doing things like this, and Windows 7 being aggressively deprecated, I decided I finally wanted to ditch Windows as my daily driver. It was good timing, then, that I watched the "7 Gamers 1 CPU" video from LinuxTechTips, which showed me how to do it without sacrificing gaming. Most everything I use runs in Linux, and for the few things that don't I can spin up a VM. But there's the caveat that is as o…
Any chance you have a parts list for your build?
Another similar resource is overclocking https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking