bradwiggo

Am I the only one who thinks music companies copyright claiming stuff like this and youtube videos is just scummy business practise? As if someone genuinely wants to "pirate" music by downloading it off youtube, surely they would just download the song (which are all available on youtube anyway), instead of downloading and clipping it out of a video with game audio or someone talking in it? I don't think the people who make the music are losing anything by youtubers or streamers having it in the background if it's in a game or something. If their problem is that people don't pay license fees for it, well none of these streamers would pay license fees as they wouldn't be able to afford it, they would just not use the music, so they aren't really losing anything that way either. 

Am I the only one who thinks music companies copyright claiming stuff like this and youtube videos is just scummy business practise? As if someone genuinely wants to "pirate" music by downloading it off youtube, surely they would just download the song (which are all available on youtube anyway), instead of downloading and clipping it out of a video with game audio or someone talking in it? I don't think the people who make the music are losing anything by youtubers or streamers having it in the background if it's in a game or something. If their problem is that people don't pay license fees for it, well none of these streamers would pay license fees as they wouldn't be able to afford it, they would just not use the music, so they aren't really losing anything that way either. 

Music industry is straight up cancer and they wonder why no one wants to buy music. THIS IS ONE OF DAMN THINGS! It's not because people listen to it for free on streams because it plays in the background, it's because music industry is full of assholes.
 
If some streamer just straight up plays music and does nothing else, sure, whatever. But if someone has it in the background, just stop it. Stop being greedy assholes.

I think James is awesome and he should host more videos. 
#dealwithit

Have you made sure your monitor is plugged into your GPU and not your motherboard? 

Apple Music actually plays a lot more songs out of the artists libraries than Spotify does. It does a lot less filtering of the hits than Spotify does in my experience. I actually went back and checked to see if Spotify had the songs I hadn't heard there that I did on Apple Music

We take a pretty liberal stance on fair use of our content. I would consider a screenshot of a video that's been turned into a meme to be highly transformative and therefore covered under fair use. 

I'd like to see a simplified naming scheme personally. even just adding the year they released would be helpful to most people I think. For mobos, something like tiers would be nice, something like Basic/medium/high, and then the stack where they sit... everything else should be covered by socket supported, except in intels case as they stupidly have the same socket sometimes but CPUs actually supported can be finicky.

Why is it ridiculous? AMD are being assholes when it comes to naming schemes. Look at the X399 chipset for Threadripper (copying Intel's HEDT chipset naming scheme trend of X79, X99, X299), mid range consumer B350/B450 chipset (copying Intels naming scheme trend of B150, B250 chipsets). That has caused issue for Intel who had to change to B360 naming scheme to avoid customer confusion. They even did the same thing with the Ryzen 3, 5, 7, and 9 CPUs (copying Intel's i3, i5, i7, i9).

Then there are rumours that AMD will be naming their new graphics cards the RX 3080/RX3070 copying Nvidia's RTX2080/RTX2070/etc scheme? Yeah, of course Nvidia is going to do what they can to protect against that.

If Burger King released the "Bigger Mac" burger don't you think McDonalds would take action? The "Happier Meal"?
What if Kia released a sports sedan called the M3?

AMD are being petty. The only reason they are naming their product in that way are to steal the names used by the competition, either to cause issues for the competition or to confuse customers (probably both). There will probably be some consumers browsing newegg or amazon who may not know a lot about computers who will think "Oh, the RX 3080 is a bigger number than the RTX 2080, that must mean it's newer and better".
AMD need to just stick to their own naming scheme and worry about competing in terms of performance, not pulling stupid stunts like stealing competitors naming schemes.
Just call it the RX 600 series and follow the RX naming scheme from RX 200, RX 300, RX 400, RX 500.

Then again we thought the new RTX2080 was going to be called the GTX1180 until a few weeks before it launched, so who really knows. Let's wait and see if AMD gives an official announcement of the Navi GPU line up at Computex in a few days.

Sorry, but does subscriber count really make a difference to the end user? Does the fact that someone has 4,099 instead of 4k or 4,999,999 instead of 4.9m make you watch their content any less?
Prime example is AvE. He has his sub count completely hidden, and he's doing perfectly fine

Metro apps might be less optimised (code has not been around as long) or kitbashed (API and tools to transfer from existing apps). But as we are talking about MS Metro apps, then it's probably MS, not other companies using multi platform code.
 
IMO Metro on Win8 was slower on menus and 7 just feels more snappy. Same goes for the Setting page in 10 vs 7. It may just be the page waits for all elements to load before screen (or window) refreshing. It might be it's checking a LOT more for online content on each app etc (pinging either to download new widgets/icons/pictures or pinging to upload tracking/bug reports/gui user experience tracking).
 
However, IMO Metro does not feel as quick and responsive. Full stop (hardware independent!!!). That may be the animations, and not the code.

Yes and I stand by those claims? Are you going to pretend windows is a perfect OS? 
 
You responded to something that I didn't actually say. I never said MS apps are worse for everyone, you took my quote out of context. And now you say my experience is moot just because you don't agree with it? 
 
Your point "all apps are laggy on low end hardware" is just plain wrong as well. There are many lightweight small apps that run fine on low end hardware. Sadly Microsoft apps aren't included in that, obviously there are non Microsoft apps that lag on low end hardware as well, but the ones I use don't (at least most of them don't, there are one or two more intensive ones that do). 
 
Note: Don't really see the point of continuing this argument any longer, you are right in what you are saying, as am I, mainly because we are saying two different things, apologies for not wording my earlier posts better. 

Surely if I have a laptop which is on the line of "Microsoft apps are laggy and others aren't" that proves my point? As overall they are more laggy, because when other apps stop being laggy, they still are? 
 
You say that Microsoft apps aren't overall slower, but surely that is your first hand evidence. I don't see why your first hand evidence is more valid than mine. 
 
Also you say it's not that  complicated, but you did reply with loads of points from what was basically only 1 original simple point that I made. I don't mind that, I'm just saying that saying "it's not that complicated" isn't a counterpoint to anything I said. 

I have an Asus Laptop that cost £200, it has an AMD E2. If I use my browser on it (Opera), it runs fine. It doesn't open as fast as on my main PC, obviously, but it does work and doesn't lag. Steam open fine and doesn't lag at all, unless you are downloading loads of stuff or have a game open, and things like XN View image viewer and Widnows Media Player all work fine. I haven't tried all of the metro apps, but Edge is really laggy and browser tab are always reopening when I am typing in them, The mail app will often stick on the bootup screen where it just shows the icon, the Microsoft store is quite laggy to use (not unusable, but annoying), and the Metro photos app is always very laggy when it opens. I don;t really see why you seem to think everything has to lag on a low end device? Your last statement just doesn't make sense, of course people would still buy better hardware, do you think people only buy better hardware so windows apps aren't as laggy? Of course there will be a lot of non Windows Apps that lag on slower hardware, but they will be higher end things, like photoshop, premier and intensive games. I am talking about the kind of program the everyday user will use, and in my experience, the Windows metro ones run much worse than the non Windows Metro ones. You mentioned all apps run worse on low end devices, which probably just means your "low end" device is more low end than my "low end" device, but I know for a fact that on my device, Windows Metro apps run worse. What reason do I have to lie about this? 
 
I did actually edit my comment after having used the app, but I guess you chose to ignore that. And my statement before was a general statement covering what I see as the two possibilities for it: It could either be just as good as the snipping tool app, or it could be worse, I don't see where you take issue with that, surely that covers literally every state the app could be in. I wasn't saying what the app would be like, I was listing the possibilities that it could be like. And having used it, it seems to fall into the "just as good but no better therefore a waste of time" category. Explain to me again what you problem was with my original statement? I literally said it can EITHER be as good as snipping tool, or it can be worse, I don't see how I needed to have used it to make that statement. By your logic people aren't allowed to make predictions until they have used the thing, in which case it would no longer be a prediction. 
 
"So clearly you just want to make shit posts about MS." TIL putting my opinion forward on certain flaws with there OS is "making shit posts". I apologise that your opinion is better than mine? I'm not "hating" on Microsoft just because I think there are some flaws with there Operating System, there is such a thing as criticism. 
 
"If you don't like it don't use it, you aren't the only user in the world." You seem to be getting annoyed at me for complaining about a minor thing Microsoft did on a thread about a minor thing Microsoft did. I'm ridiculously angry because paint and snipping tool changed, I just thought it was a relevant point to bring up on this thread. 

Not everything is laggy. Opera browser opens perfectly fine, Word works fine and Steam opens perfectly. It's just Windows Metro apps that lag. 
 
I haven't used it already no, that why I said at best and at worst. I just don;t see the point in it. Either it crap and everyone hates it, or it will be decent but then what's the point? 
 
I do have an issue with Microsoft, I don't see why they spend there time developing useless crap no one needs. 
 
Update: Just tried it, and it seems functionally the same as Snipping Tool, expect a bit slower, as in there is a bigger pause between highlighting the area and the image appearing, and this is on an i5-8600k. So it's the same but a bit slower. Again I ask, what's the point? 

Still don't see the point though. everyone who uses Windows has third party applications, which don't follow the metro theme, so it doesn't look out of place (also, subjectively, I don't care at all about the aesthetic of my OS) and there is nothing wrong with the snipping tool app. In my experience, Windows 10 default apps are very laggy on low end devices, and subjectively, I hate the metro design, it's too flat and boring compared to windows 7's aero. 
 
At worst the new app will be horrible to use, and at best it will work just as well as snipping tool, so even at best it seems like a waste of time. All this on an OS that still has major flaws, like the fact that I can't just restart my computer quickly if Microsoft decides I want to update it. 

Any particular subject you were looking to cover? You could get some simple Dell machine from a thrift store and show that building a PC can be done by humans and it takes only a couple minutes (basically you go there with the case, motherboard, CPU, cooler, and power supply and build it and make it POST).
That could be cool, but only as a 'demonstration' type thing.
 
You could also do something on Folding@Home, more info on that here: 
 
It's basically using a computer to help advance medical research.
 
You could talk about electronics repair, or maybe even right to repair in general. Might be interesting if you are into that.

Is it the devs or the publishers normally that want DRM? Although yes I do agree, they don't do it to win over consumer, they do it because they feel they have to. 

Are less people really going to pirate the game if they have to wait a few days? Surely if you plan on pirating it then you would have the patience to wait a few days, don't think having DRM for the first few days will make any difference. Then again all DRM is pointless imo, developers should stop using it, it just hurts consumers. 

Used market, sales, e-waste.

I would probably say the publishers, couldn't imagine many developers caring much about DRM when your primary focus is on making the game at all. Publishers also have the larger financial incentive too since they are funding it, part funding it or coordinated the funding.

You are likely right, I can't honestly claim that I follow AAA game news very closely, having little interest in them myself, but I recall seeing articles about how the amount of Piracy of the Wicher 3 was lower than other games with DRM, I might be wrong though. 
 
However I still don't support DRM, it hurts consumers for a most likely minor gain on the companies side, whilst treating all the people who actually bought the game like they are criminals. 

No one likes DRM except the devs.   
 
 

The Witcher 3 didn't have DRM, I don't remember any news about thousands upon thousands of people pirating that. DRM isn't necessary, even if it makes them slightly more money, they don't need slightly more money, they need to care about the consumers more. 

I don't see how it is though? Surely if you are planning on pirating something you won't mind waiting a few weeks? There will still be plenty of people who buy the game. DRM isn't necessary at all.