Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Software Media Television Entertainment

Shanda Box vs. Microsoft Venus After Six Years? 103

Posted by Cliff from the real-product-vs-vapourware dept.
Luyi Chen asks: "Shanda revealed their new PC entertainment center (aka Shanda Box) at China International Consumer Electronics Show (SinoCES) last Friday. It's strategy is to move Internet content to TV. Six years ago, Microsoft Venus was to provide a cheap operating system with basic information processing ability for the TV set-top market. While Microsoft focused on reducing the price, Shanda focuses on reducing the entry level. Both strategies are based on the fact that the number of TVs dwarfs the number of PCs in China, which won't change in six years. What is different is that we have faster hardware, more Internet content and users. Amazingly enough, Microsoft's Venus didn't make it out of the laboratory. Does Slashdot think Shanda will succeed where Microsoft thought it would fail?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Shanda Box vs. Microsoft Venus After Six Years? More

Shanda Box vs. Microsoft Venus After Six Years?

Comments Filter:

  • yawn, not again ?!? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by swschrad ( 312009 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @07:47PM (#12998986) Homepage Journal
    rotten resolution, if apple II didn't look good on the old Philco in the living room, why would dark-blue on blue web pages? I don't get this. sounds like somebody wrote down a dream on toilet paper when they got up, and it doesn't translate into reality.

    • More importantly.... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by appleLaserWriter ( 91994 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @09:12PM (#12999406)
      rotten resolution, if apple II didn't look good on the old Philco in the living room, why would dark-blue on blue web pages? I don't get this. sounds like somebody wrote down a dream on toilet paper when they got up, and it doesn't translate into reality.

      Chinese text requires far more resolution than latin text. While you might get away with a 6x4 character grid for latin characters, very few chinese characters can be rendered at that resolution.

      A set-top-box that does video chat over broadband and displays to a TV might work, but it seems unlikely that a useful amount of chinese text could be displayed on an ordinary TV.

      • Re:More importantly.... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by shirai ( 42309 ) *
        The parent rings true and smacks false.

        TRUE: You will not be able to fit that many characters in a 6x4 grid so you will need a larger grid per character.

        FALSE: it seems unlikely that a useful amount of chinese text could be displayed on an ordinary TV.

        Remember, in Chinese, 1 character equals ONE WORD, not 1/5th of a word.

        Not only that, Chinese has simpler sentence construction and ideas can be expressed in fewer words.
        • I was running
        • I ran
        • I used to run
        • I am running

        Can all be expressed, basically

    • Planning for the near-future? Surfing, email, etc. are pretty cool on a nice big HDTV.

  • Shanda... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Smiffa2001 ( 823436 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @07:50PM (#12999003)
    ...sounds like a very weak beer.
    • I thought it sounded like "panda", which would be fitting since the company's targetting China.

      Seriously? Beer is the first thing that came to mind?

    • Re:Shanda... (Score:5, Funny)

      by flyingsquid ( 813711 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:36AM (#13000596)
      "Shanda" is a contraction of the words "sham" and "panda". The term's proper use is demonstrated by the following exchange:

      CHINESE PEASANT #1:Look at this swell panda I got at the market in Beipao! There's no limit to what I can do with this panda! I can harness him to a cart and use him to haul my rice! Give him to the local head of the Communist Party as a bribe! Start a petting zoo- or chop him up and make panda jerky! My fortunes have changed at last!

      CHINESE PEASANT #2: Much did you pay?

      CHINESE PEASANT #1: Only 1000 yuan!

      CHINESE PEASANT #2: Wait a minute... that's not a panda- it's a shanda!

      CHINESE PEASANT #1: What? A shanda? Are you sure?

      CHINESE PEASANT #2:Positive! See? It's just a sheep with a bit of black paint!

      CHINESE PEASANT #1: Shit!

  • The big American companies line up to sell to the vast Chinese market -- Microsoft, Google, E-bay, all mentioned in the accompanying article.
    Is the problem the cost of displays? Seems like the cost of cheap displays should be approaching the competitve point with TV-PCs. For instance, I thought with the MIT $100 PC would be competitive with this Shanda idea -- which, according to the article, will not be released, identified, or priced!
    It seems there are several technologies converging on third-world mark
  • All it'll take is for some nationalist in the PRC to get a bug up their ass and Microsoft won't be legally allowed to participate without at least a heavy barrier to entry into the market. I wouldn't mind seeing Microsoft succeed because I'm an American and I don't want the communists to get richer at our expense.

    It'd be good for the US and China to get into a trade war NOW while China still doesn't have too much leverage against us. Yeah, they could do a good bit of damage, but nothing we couldn't recover
    • Yeah, well the problem is that we let our current account balance get way out of hand by running up enormous defense budget and tax cut debts (as well as SS and Medicare cost increases). We let credit cards rule the consumer so individuals aren't saving shit either. And it's possible that the tax code also encourages consumerism in big business. The end result is that China is buying up our debts and propping up the dollar. We can't afford to call their bluff now.
      • We can't afford to call their bluff now.

        Sure we could. We just don't want to do that. We are not a nation that can handle short-term instability for the sake of long-term stability. But we could afford to call their bluff.

    • Re:It's entirely possible (Score:4, Interesting)

      by periol ( 767926 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @08:49PM (#12999294) Homepage
      I'm taking you at face-value, whether or not you're serious.

      I'm an American and I don't want the communists to get richer at our expense.

      You talk about the free market, but you ignore our freedom to *not* buy their products. Are you an American, or are you selfish? If you're an American, and you're concerned about China getting rich off of us, then stop buying Chinese products. Or, you could selfishly give into the market, and buy whatever is cheapest.

      It'd be good for the US and China to get into a trade war NOW while China still doesn't have too much leverage against us. Yeah, they could do a good bit of damage, but nothing we couldn't recover from within five to ten years

      IANAE, but I've had this same thought for about ten years. I don't understand the hypocrisy of our trade policy with China. We wouldn't even have to get into a trade war, honestly. It wouldn't come to that.

      It'd be nice to see Bush actually pull one of his "homeland security" initiatives by getting a law passed that mandates a major US divestment from China. Why we're investing in a country that is belligerant toward Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, three of our largest trade partners and three good allies is beyond me.

      Because Bush isn't stupid (for the record, I'm a member of the Green party) and has read his history. The same history that tells us that whenever America tries to ignore the rest of the world, it doesn't work. We end up getting into wars anyways.

      We live in a global economy now. Nothing is cut-and-dry, there are no easy solutions to simple problems. I'd be willing to bet that if we really had a free market, you wouldn't like it very much, since your standard of living would significantly decrease. Significantly.

      if and when the PLA invades Taiwan before 2008.

      Please. There will be no invasion. It will be a peaceful coup. It will happen anytime China decides to make it happen. But it won't be an invasion.

      I almost agree with everything you said. I don't agree with any of it.
      • >>You talk about the free market, but you ignore our freedom to *not* buy their products. The problem is we can't NOT buy their products. They are everywhere, start reading the damn labels on the products they got the "made in china" labels everywhere! Even things without the label has *parts* of it made in China. This is the result of our healthcare system and laws which demand companies pay for that, so American companies are more and more saying "screw that" and outsource.
    • The Chinese 'Communist' party is closer to 'fascist' now. Chinese are going over Mao's little red book for business tips.

      What China is proving today is that free market capitalism doesn't inherently lead toward freedom.

      While I'd agree with that, China is still a third world country outside of a few major cities.

      Of course, China is democratic at the local level.
      And America is only so democratic at the national level - we're effectivly dominated by the two major parties, and have proven ourselves unabl
      • Soap Box

        I know this is a dead horse, and way off topic, but I figure I'll get back up on my soap box.

        First of all, America is not a democracy. We were never meant to be a democracy. We're a republic. I'm surprised the Founding Fathers haven't gone on a zombie rampage with all the recent talk about bringing democracy to the rest of the world.

        Democracy != freedom. Democracy == rule by the mob. We elect congressmen etc. simply because the Founding Fathers hoped we'd elect enough vaguely competent & wi

        • Re:It's entirely possible (Score:4, Interesting)

          by PsiPsiStar ( 95676 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @11:44PM (#13000135)
          Okay, I've spent too much time arguing on Yahoo boards and have become rather imprecise. Yes, the US is a democratic republic. I've just gotten used to people saying "we're free and they aren't" etc. to justify their own supposed superiority. Knee jerk reaction. Sorry.

          Personally, I think it's China who is taking the 'long view,' somthing that the Chinese are known for. They entice companies with short term profits, but the end result is that the Chinese will have their industrial technology. These companies going to China are either selling themselves out or investing in their competition.
          Once these companies are knee deep in Chinese territory, China has an established history of selling them short.

          In the Chinese view, this is the time when "sheep eat people." Just as various attempts to starve the southern states to feed the industrial north led to the American civil war, China is working to exploit their agricultural base in order to get cheap currency to buy foreign goods. In short, they're doing whatever they can to get industrial technology and the foreign currency that they need to buy advanced weapons.

          Add to this the fact that China is massively corrupt, and it becomes clear why this huge influx of money isn't creating the basis for democracy.
          Government (at the risk of sounding stuffy here) is pretty much a formalization of existing power relations. And China hasn't created a broad middle class. They're where we were at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution with Robber Barons, cheap labor, etc.

          Also, I think some of this "globalization" trend is an effort by Western companies to counteract the power of unions and drive wages down. With industries in several labor pools, each working below capacity, any labor shortage in one pool can be made up for by switching to another.

          Having been to China, I can say that there is certainly a market for high tech gadgets in the cities. The purchase of cars has soared. The roads can't take it. Internet bars are everywhere. There are more cell phones there than in the US. High tech stores run a brisk business. But you can't make software since there are no patents and so much readily available pirated software.

          Don't believe any of this stuff about the Chinese switching to Linux. In sensitive govt. operations, maybe. But everywhere I went they were running pirated copies of windows.

          Of course, I taught in Nanjing, which is in Jiangsu ( the wealthiest province in China) and the other provices are much different. Heck, even the rural areas of Nanjing are different. I guess what I'm trying to say is that 3rd world countries aren't typified by poverty as much as extreme disparity of wealth. There is a market for high end goods.
      • China has some freedoms that the US doesn't have - freedom from patents

        Required reading for anyone tempted to post a comment on the IP law of China: Ministry of Science and Technology: Laws and Regulations [most.gov.cn]

        Topics:

        Patent Law
        Trademark Law
        Copyright Law
        Technology Contract Law
        Product Quality Law

        Freedom to buy alcohol and cigarettes without a license or age requirement

        Shops ignore the law, but sales of alcohol and tobacco to minors is illegal in China and you are expected to show your ID. People' [people.com.cn]

        • Laws which exist on paper but are not enforced are not laws.

          All I can say is; go to China and see what any of these laws are worth to you.

          China recently made some IP concessions, but I don't know how they're being enforced. It happened less than a year ago.
          • China recently made some IP concessions, but I don't know how they're being enforced. It happened less than a year ago

            The IP laws referenced were adopted or ammended between 1984-1994.

            Following China's entry into the WTO, Microsoft China became the first foreign company to become a full member of the China Software Industry Association in 2002.

            The president of MS China at the time moved to Shanda in 2004. Shanda is to online gaming in China what Sony is to online gaming in Japan. Former Microsoft Chin [chinadaily.com.cn]

            • The IP laws that you referenced weren't worth the paper that they were written on when I went to China. Rule of law in China is secondary to the power of your family.

              Online gaming in China, or at least Jiangsu - seemed much like in the US - Warcract, counterstrike, playstation, etc.

              Seriously, have you been to the country? Do you have friends there? If so, I welcome your opinion. If not, I think you're relying far far far too much on published news sources, which are not a reliable way to get to know the
    • > Chinese Market is quite open now. And according its commitment to WTO, you will see more big change recently. On the other hand, the inbalance of trade between USA and China has many reasons. One of them is USA forbid many kinds of high tech products to be exported to China. Could you give any example of products that China cann't buy from USA due to "heavy barrier" from China? > I suggest you remove "communists". It's hard to find real ones in China now. > I has not doubt on it. But don't for

    • "Microsoft won't be legally allowed to participate without at least a heavy barrier to entry into the market....However, the fact remains that China has allowed us very little access to their markets while demanding access to our markets..."

      Chinese Market is quite open now. And according its commitment to WTO, you will see more big change recently. On the other hand, the inbalance of trade between USA and China has many reasons. One of them is USA forbid many kinds of high tech products to be exported t

    • What do you mean that "China doesn't have too much leverage against us" ?

      Do you have any idea what would happen to the US economy it the DOLLAR TREE had to change it's name to 3-DOLLAR TREE?

      If you don't see the humor here, just mod this as a troll.

      Wait!

      NO!

      Don't!

      I did't really mean it! I was just funnin' with you.

  • What ... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Infernal Device ( 865066 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @07:54PM (#12999024)
    All of a sudden we're experts on the Chinese internal market?

    Inside China? Who knows? The State might just force all its citizens to buy it at gunpoint.

    Outside China? Probably not.

  • What *also* hasn't changed... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @07:56PM (#12999033)
    > Both strategies are based on the fact that the number of TVs dwarfs the number of PCs in China, which won't change in six years. What is different is that we have faster hardware, more Internet content and users

    What is the same is that unless the Shanda folks are assuming that the number of HDTVs is going to also dwarf the number of PCs in China, it doesn't matter how fast the set-top box is: Surfing teh Intarweb, whether you do it in NTSC, PAL, or SECAM, is going to be teh suck. It's bad enough trying to read ASCII characters at resolutions comparable to 640x480 -- can you imagine trying to read Chinese characters?

    Sometimes you can leapfrog technology - as China did with wireless telephones vs. land lines.

    Problem is, you can only do it when it's cheaper to set up the new technology (cheap transmission towers in the middle of nowhere) than the old one (a hunk of fiber or copper, to every home, multiplied by a billion users).

    Barring a miracle in materials science, we're not going to see HDTV sets eclipsing TV in China. We're therefore, I think, not going to see "Internet TV" taking off in any big way, either.

    • Re:What *also* hasn't changed... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by dreamchaser ( 49529 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @09:03PM (#12999351) Homepage Journal
      I think you've let yourself lose sight of the fact that to someone who has never used the Internet in high resolution, 640x480 is just fine.

      Queue all the obligatory 'that's nothing, in my day we only had ONE pixel' jokes, but the Internet was more than usuable at 640x480 resolutions 'back in the day'. Actually, it still is. Just because *you* think it's 'teh suck' doesn't mean the vast majority of people in China will.

      • No. Surfing the web on a low quality analog TV sucks ass. Even someone who has never used the internet before will notice the problem.

        Modern websites are graphics heavy and designed for resolutions of at least 800x600 (1024x768 is the most common design target now).

        Additionally, a normal quality analog television is worse for web browsing than a Windows 3.1 era 640x480 16 color monitor would be. The display resolution is slightly better (in china) at 768x576, but television are designed for a significan

      • It's not just the resolution. There's also an incredible amount of color bleeding through "RCA" connectors, and an INSANE amount if you have to use composite (god have mercy on your soul...). Put a vertical white line on a black background on RCA or composite and tell me you only see black and white :).

        Unless all these TV's have some "nice" connections on them, it's not really close to comparing it to a 640x480 VGA monitor.

      • Re:What *also* hasn't changed... (Score:4, Informative)

        by Belial6 ( 794905 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @11:03PM (#12999941)
        Also, you have to keep in mind that a Chinese characters are entire words. So while a symbol might have to be four times the size to be readable, it also will be one symbol for what could be five or six symbols in English.
    • Resolution didn't stop Nintendo or Sega, etc. from releasing any of it's hardware in Japan. Resolution didn't stop game developers from creating RPGS and other game types in Japanese using a combination of Hiragana, Katakana and Kanji. Its easier to forget that not to long ago some of the most successful hardware and software wasn't in HDTV, but in very low television resolutions. Lastly, many of the millions in China that Shanda is perhaps trying to go after haven't even been exposed to the higher-end t

  • Another doomed platform... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TheNarrator ( 200498 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @07:59PM (#12999044)
    For 90% of the target market, the only thing that matters is if it can display dhtml, flash , javascript, and multimedia as well as IE 6 Running on Windows 98 or better. Another 8% will use it if it can do these things as well as Firefox. Otherwise the target market will go down to the local internet cafe and just use ie6 on windows.

    The only platform people are somewhat willing to compromise on is their mobile phone. They can't carry around their windows pc in their pocket so they'll settle for less. For the rest it will be not worth it.

    It's kind of like the office suite market. The only question that matters is does the thing read and write word flawlessly every time. If it works 99% of the time it better be free or else nobody will use it.
    • For 90% of the target market, the only thing that matters is if it can display dhtml, flash , javascript, and multimedia as well as IE 6

      You aim too high grasshopper, 90% of users just want pretty pictures and no pop-ups, the rest sounds too techinical for them.

      [BEGIN USER MODE]
      D-H-T-M-L? Sounds too complicated, I just want to see slideshows in my browser!
      [END USER MODE]
    • You give the 90% of the people too much credit. The 90% of the people will use whatever you shove down their throats. They may bitch, they may moan but they will never ever spend even an iota of time trying to get something else to even make a choice.

      Just shove something down their throats and they will eat it. Go ask any random computer user if they made a conscious choice to use the software they have on their machine. The answer is no.

      Corporations understand this very well. that's why in most fast food

  • Crashing Appliances (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fyoder ( 857358 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @07:59PM (#12999047) Homepage Journal
    Recently I had to 'reboot' my phone after a java browser I'd downloaded to it crashed it. I had the horrible vision of a future where all appliances are computers, and they all crash and have to be rebooted.

    Some form of web tv will eventually catch on and bring with it new problems. There should be a betting pool on the date of the first television virus, possibly one which hijacks the display to present spam advertising.

    • All appliances with digital circuits inside are already computers. They compute (calculate) things. what you probably meant is "a future where all appliances would use complex hardware or software".

      Complexity is where the bugs come from. It increases the chance that people forget to check some corner case where a bug is lurking.

      Anyways, the future is now. Have a nice day ;-)
    • I mean really. Considering the content on TV, how the fuck could/can you tell? Product placement?

      The first tv virus was in the 1940s. It was intentional too.

  • I have one thing to say to shanda.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by ShaniaTwain ( 197446 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @08:00PM (#12999049) Homepage
    You go girl!

    Shanda VS. Venus, sounds like a catfight at a strip club.

    a TV strip club.

  • Watch that voice change (Score:5, Interesting)

    by joe_bruin ( 266648 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @08:02PM (#12999056) Homepage Journal
    said the submitter: What is different is that we have faster hardware, more Internet content and users. Amazingly enough, Microsoft's Venus didn't make it out of the laboratory.

    We? The article started as "Shanda did this", and then transitioned to "we did this". You see, if you're trying to plug your technology by making it appear like a legitimate Ask Slashdot, at least have the courtesy to pretend to be impartial. That and pitting it against a Microsoft research product that never existed outside the lab (six years ago) as if you're competing with it. This has to be one of the worst plugs I've seen.

    • Re:Watch that voice change (Score:5, Informative)

      by perlionex ( 703104 ) * <[joseph] [at] [ganfamily.com]> on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @08:35PM (#12999214)
      I believe that "we" is meant to be a collective; i.e., "we", as the world of 2005, now have faster hardware, more Internet content and users.

      The submitter is a Chinese PhD student blogger, legitimately trying to source for more opinions from Slashdot about this issue.

      If you had read his blog linked from his submission, you'll see he has done some of his own analysis. Quite a bit more than what most posters here have so far, and it's not very much yet.
    • Cause if so, you're excused.

      Otherwise ..you're a real idiot who can't use his brain. It's pretty clear that the submission's author's we refers to the chinese or world population in general.

      How can people be so paranoid and suspicious of everything? Wait a second .. you work for microsoft dont you??

      Gosh, why don't people think a bit critically and analyze evidence carefully without immediate bias?

      Who were the idiots that modded you up?

      Moderators, PLEASE mod the parent post down, dont waste a mod pushin
  • Does Slashdot think Shanda will succeed where Microsoft thought it would fail?"

    MS failed/fails because it is MS. Load of crap to think anything else.

    Shanda will succeed because it knows it's markets...very simple.
    • "Does Slashdot think Shanda will succeed where Microsoft thought it would fail?"

      I don't know, does Shanda think Microsoft will think it will fail where Slashdot think it will succeed? That would make the question more clearer.

    • LCDR Data, when he was telling new-to-Picard's-Bridge Young Wesley:

      "There once was a woman from Venus ;

      Whose forehead was shaped like a..."

      Riker and Picard knew where the joke was going, but Picard cut Data off at the pass...

      Maybe there is an undisclosed reason the Venus never made it out the underground/windowless? lab? Apparently, they hid it where the sun don't shine...

  • Heck... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Audacious ( 611811 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @08:12PM (#12999100) Homepage
    I'm in agreement with the other posters in that if China wants a really cheap PC to be both the entertainment center as well as the TV center - then let them use a cheap PC with a TV video card in it. After all, you can get a PC for around $200.00 now on-line and a cheap monitor (CRT at least) on-line as well. The whole thing can sit in the entertainment center or shelves and then they'd have a decent picture as well as a way to play games if they wanted.

    There are only a few problems with this though:

    1. China still has a huge number of farmers who do not have electricity.
    2. Most of the people living outside of the major cities have hardly any money at all and get most of their news from radios or TVs which are run by generator and are communal radios/TVs.
    3. Unlike the US - the people of China do not have the "I've gotta have it!" kind of outlook. It is more like how the US used to be. The "If it won't solve my problems I don't want it." kind of outlook. And their major problems are food, clean water, medicines, and shelter. Electricity would be nice but just having enough fuel to keep the fire burning is better in some areas. (I'm not saying all of China is backwards or anything like that. Just that in some areas they live with the land and have more basic needs than some electronic gadget.)

    There was a story about Africa from some years back. (I know a couple of them actually.) Anyway, people thought that it would be a great idea to send tractors over so the people of Africa could plow the fields and produce more goods. Only they forgot that there weren't any oil refineries, gas stations, and the like in place yet. So all of the equipment just sat and rusted away. This situation is similar to that problem (IMHO). There are huge numbers of people who live so far below the poverty line that we tend to just push them out of our minds. So a few million people in China may be able to buy a box to watch TV and play games with. Well, what about the other 3.5 Billion people who are just trying to make it day by day? They aren't going to buy anything.

    Unless we treat them like we do some of the other countries. Where we give them our money so they can buy our products. Sounds crazy I know, but the US does that to several countries. As far as I can tell, we do that to help jumpstart those countries' economies. But that's just my opinion. What's yours?

    • Re:Heck... (Score:3, Informative)

      by LeiGong ( 621856 )
      While the parent makes a few good points, I have to correct point #3 and make a comment about the first 2 points.

      3. Unlike the US - the people of China do not have the "I've gotta have it!" kind of outlook. It is more like how the US used to be. The "If it won't solve my problems I don't want it." kind of outlook. And their major problems are food, clean water, medicines, and shelter.

      I think parent is stuck in the 1980's mindset of China. I've visted China 4x in the past decade and I was most recently

      • Actually, the statement is made based upon friends and family who live on farms here and the people I know who have traveled to China (recently and not like twenty years ago). Although there are a lot of people living in the cities (just like in the US), there are still a lot of people who live outside of the cities. (And I believe the tally is that there are still more people living outside of the major cities than within the major cities at this point.)

        As a "for instance" kind of remark - you state tha
    • Wow, many thoughts to reply to.

      1. China still has a huge number of farmers who do not have electricity.

      1. China has a huge number of wealthy city dwellers who have electricity.

      2. Most of the people living outside of the major cities have hardly any money at all and get most of their news from radios or TVs which are run by generator and are communal radios/TVs.

      2. China has a growing, urban middle class who have extra cash to spend and want the same luxuries as many 'westerners.' This may be Hol

  • The Shanda Box article makes no mention of Microsoft, but Slashdot just had to present this "Shanda Box spotted at SINOCES" news as a "vs Microsoft" issue. LOL You guys should see a therapist to get over your Microsoft obsession. ;-)
    • Excuse me but if you knew a bit more history you might see beyond your knee jerk anti-slashdot smugness. Many years ago a former Apple engineer started a company that promised to bring the web to standard TV users and the product was called WebTV. It was solidly engineered and designed. It made a big splash in the market and was acquired by Microsoft for quite a chunk of money.

      I don't know why they emphasize some product that did not leave Microsoft's lab but WebTV sold in the millions and they got a lot o
  • The fact is that Microsoft is still very commited to IPTV check this out http://msntv.com/pc/ [msntv.com]
  • ...all your TV are belong to us!
  • The problem with settop boxes is that they decrease the usability of the TV. Assuming Chinese homes have one TV, that TV will can either be used to watch broadcast TV, pirated DVDs or surf the internet at 14.4. If you had your choice which would it be? If the family has 2 large TV's, then maybe they would be willing to tie one up with a substandard internet connection, but if you have two TVs that can display text (chinese characters no less) legibly then you can most likely afford an actual computer.*

  • Short answer: no (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SideshowBob ( 82333 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @08:45PM (#12999267)
    Long answer: TVs are terrible output devices (low rez, interlaced), and couches are terrible ergonomic environments for keyboarding/mousing.

    You'd be better off building very cheap laptops like the Indians are doing.
  • It should be of no surprise that particular Microsoft "products" never leave the starting gate. Quite often, forthcoming products are announced years before their proposed arrival, probably even before the first lines of code are cast. The result is often that potential competitors may quash the development and release of their own future products, for fear that Microsoft's offering will be so much more successful. Another possible outcome is that an announcement can spark enough frenzied anticipation th

  • WEB TV (Score:3, Funny)

    by ucblockhead ( 63650 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2005 @09:00PM (#12999334) Homepage Journal
    Yes, I think
    browsing on a TV
    is the future.

    There is little or
    no advantage to an
    expensive PC, so
    soon "WEB TV"
    browsers will be
    in the majority.

  • Microsoft Venus was to provide a cheap operating system

    Using "Microsoft" and "cheap operating system" in the same sentence is an oxymoron, it's a facially invalid statement. Like using "Verizon" or "SBC" and "cheap phone service"; or using "military" and "intelligence."

    Microsoft's cost structures are too high, and they can't afford to provide anything "cheap" unless you also add "shoddy" as in the case of Windows XP Crippled Edition or whatever the name of the version they are selling in Asia is called

  • ...to having a Slashdot article about me.
  • Or will the words like "Democracy" continue to be blocked by the search engines?
  • Let's see, you have a research center with a history of producing pretty much exactly nothing useful. So how is it you are surprised when they keep the status quo and continue to do what they do best, which is write white papers and fail to release products?

    Microsoft R&D is there to keep smart people out of other companies, if Microsoft wants any innovation they'll buy it wholesale if it looks like the market takes a shine to it.
  • if it wasn't so ugly.

    A few comments on the Shanda Box:

    The "Box" will be one of the best low profile computers available. It's got a DVD drive, a hard drive, a mid-end ATI DirectX9 video card, and 802.11 wireless from Linksys. Just open up the box and upgrade the memory module, and you have a fairly powerful PC. The production versions will probably need some hardware hacks to make it a full PC, but the pre-production samples can be installed with any OS with no changes!

    Shanda's big marketing theme for th
  • irrelevant because it is too unintelligent, spews annoying ads at us, uses a suck-ass business model where we, the audience, don't matter (just blandness between the largely unrelated-to-content ads) and shifting everything to the internet where everything is or will be searchable, on demand, inexpensive anarchy.

    They are moulding their society into a passive receptacle for propaganda, or beer commercials. I wish them luck.

    The natural order of things is entropy. Our model requires far less coherence that t

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close