EA Sticking With SecuROM

[mkreku]

Because I've been listening to the same nonsense for years about how anti-piracy measures hurt PC sales. I used to be on the anti-piracy bandwagon, but then I realized their shtick is old and boring too.

Since you obviously don't mind EA making your games useless for trade-in or second hand sales, where's your limit? Will you do whatever EA wants you to do, no matter how ridiculous? I mean you obviously don't think anti-piracy measures hurt PC sales. What if the next step from EA is that you have to enter your credit card number before being allowed to play the game? That way they can charge you $1 for every time you start up the game. I mean, it's a privilege to play games you bought, not a right. Right? Would that be enough for you to take a stance?

 

You don't mind that the game you're buying is incomplete on the disc and needs files downloaded off the internet to work.

You don't mind that the single player game you're about to start up needs an internet authentication.

You don't mind that someone else decides how many times you can install a game you've bought.

 

All of the above will cause problems down the line. Not one year after purchase, perhaps, but after that? Useless.

 

I didn't used to be on the anti-piracy bandwagon before. Why? Because it never bothered me. I bought my games (or got them sent to me), played them and never even wasted a second's thought on stuff like Starforce or SecuROM. Now we even know the names of the malware tormenting us whenever we decide to give someone our time and money. It was actually during my job as a games reviewer that I realized how much better the pirates have it than us regular users! I had to start downloading cracks to not have to juggle discs and manuals or whatever the next company decided was needed for me to play the games I wanted/had to play.

[random n00b]

No I don't know it's true, I'm simply making an assumption based on the fact there isn't any evidence that what the anti-DRM crowd claims is true, that DRM significantly hurts sales. They're the ones making the claim so they're the ones who need to provide the evidence.

Perhaps it's because it's simply not possible to accurately gauge lost sales because of this? Absence of proof cannot, in this case, be taken as proof of anything, either way.

 

 

Why do I have to post numbers, I'm not the one making any definitive claims

Oh, but you are:

I'm saying the people it does break the deal for, well there simply aren't enough of them to matter, even though they might want to think otherwise.

 

 

There are people who don't buy particular games because they include DRM, no one is arguing that, what I'm arguing is that the anti-DRM crowd are as unable to prove that DRM significantly hurts sales as publishers are unable to prove that every pirated copy is a lost sale. And until either side is able to backup their claims I'm not going to worry about either of them.

Agreed. That's not the same you said before, though.

 

 

I've already pointed out that by saying I've never been affected by it I mean I've never had copy protection stop me from playing games I own, but I'm sure you'll continue to ignore that. Despite the anti-DRM crowd insisting that "it only hurts paying customers", I'm a paying customer who has never been hurt by it (apparently so is Hurlshot).

Yes, yes. DRM is certainly not an insurmountable barrier, but again, nobody has argued that. It is however an unnecessarily annoying extra thing you need to worry about with PC games. I guess that, by turning it into a black and white issue (can play vs cannot play whatsoever), the point is much easier to defeat.

 

 

This isn't a private conversation, and not everything I post is a direct response to you, rather it concerns the topic in general.

If it's posted after quoting me, I'm going to assume it's directed at me.

 

 

Exactly! What good are the people who claim to be protesting doing if they only post about it on internet message boards.

They aren't only posting in message boards. They are also not buying the games.

 

 

It does to them.

So? Edited September 19, 2008 by random n00b

[random n00b]

Yay for quote limits.

 

 

 

HAHA awesome.

How about posting something consequential instead of trying to characterise those who don't think like you as pirates and spicing it up with lame one-liners?

 

 

For some reason I seem to be one of the few people that doesn't mind when I need a CD in the drive...I mean, given I've been gaming on computers for years and years and years, where all games except a few exceptions have required me to have the CD in the drive, or the floppy disk in the drive, or whatever. In fact, the overwhelming majority of times I have played games without needing a CD or a floppy disk in the drive, were the times in my youth when I actively WAS pirating game software. Heck, I had a CD burner before people even knew what they were, and was pretty much a printing press for games. I even turned a profit!

So, obviously, those that don't want to need the CD in the drive MUST be pirates, because of your particular experience and preferences. That's some serious deductive reasoning right there.

 

 

though probably more just because it's more fun

So, you are just trolling. At least you're honest about it.

 

 

and in general I think people are stupid

I'm not even going to touch this one, lest I go back in probation.

 

 

Furthermore, it annoys me when people have clearly made their point, yet continue to randomly chime in with "Boo DRM I no likey" type comments which interfere with discussion. At least this thread is actually about DRM, so it makes sense here.

 

My "arguments" against you and all those like you are that I have been hearing the same **** for years. Furthermore, it'd be a pretty ****ing boring topic if all it was was people going "OMG ya teh DRM is evil!!!!"

Only this thread in particular is about a conceptually different DRM which actually raises concerns about the viability of playing games you've paid for in the future. This is about SecuROM, not CD-checks. Refer to the thread title if in doubt.

 

 

No one side is ****ing over the industry. The tandem of both of them are IMO.

I didn't know the industry was being "****ed". It seems to be going fairly well... Edited September 19, 2008 by random n00b

[Hurlshort]

Geez. They are just games, people. I'm not sure why you take them so seriously.

 

Actually the only reason I got involved in the thread is because a couple posters were clearly hinting that piracy is the solution to DRM problems. I think that's utterly idiotic and morally bankrupt.

 

I support DRM protests. I also would be willing to actively go after EA to improve their customer support.

 

But yeah, some folks are like broken records on this forum. Every Spore and ME thread doesn't need a post about how they are not getting it because of DRM. We got it when you made a topic about it.

[Hell Kitty]

I'm saying your "hey I'm fine with it" argument doesn't hold water anywhere, except to justify why you personally won't invest time & effort in the issue.

 

It holds as much water as the "well I didn't buy it" argument. I'm not arguing for DRM I'm arguing against the idea that "it only hurts paying customers".

 

I'm still wondering if you had any trouble activating Spore.

 

Why do I have to post numbers, I'm not the one making any definitive claims

Oh, but you are:

QUOTE (Hell Kitty @ Sep 18 2008, 06:07 AM) *

I'm saying the people it does break the deal for, well there simply aren't enough of them to matter, even though they might want to think otherwise.

 

That's not a definitive claim, it's an assumption. As much as the anti-DRM crowd want to think that DRM hurts sales of the game, games with DRM continue to sell well, so I'm going to continue to assume the anti-DRM folks claims are wrong, until they are able to prove otherwise. Same goes for those in the industry claiming that piracy is killing PC gaming.

 

So?

 

So if they think they have a good reason then it doesn't matter that you or anyone else think they don't.

[alanschu]

Because I've been listening to the same nonsense for years about how anti-piracy measures hurt PC sales. I used to be on the anti-piracy bandwagon, but then I realized their shtick is old and boring too.

Since you obviously don't mind EA making your games useless for trade-in or second hand sales, where's your limit? Will you do whatever EA wants you to do, no matter how ridiculous? I mean you obviously don't think anti-piracy measures hurt PC sales. What if the next step from EA is that you have to enter your credit card number before being allowed to play the game? That way they can charge you $1 for every time you start up the game. I mean, it's a privilege to play games you bought, not a right. Right? Would that be enough for you to take a stance?

 

First off, I don't trade nor sell my old games, so yeah, that's a moot point. As for EA charging me $1 every time I start up the game, I likely wouldn't buy that game because I wouldn't see it as economically viable. But yes, it is a privilege for me to play games, not a right. It's EA's IP, they can do whatever they want with it. Because the bottom line is that it's just a video game, and my life is not going to be incomplete if I decide to stop playing them.

 

You don't mind that the game you're buying is incomplete on the disc and needs files downloaded off the internet to work.

You don't mind that the single player game you're about to start up needs an internet authentication.

You don't mind that someone else decides how many times you can install a game you've bought.

 

Nope, nope, and nope.

 

All of the above will cause problems down the line. Not one year after purchase, perhaps, but after that? Useless.

 

I used to agree with you, until I realized that there are sooooooooooooooo few games out there that I even look at a second time once I finish with them. Could I be burned by it? Sure. If I am I'm not really going to care a whole bunch though. Steam is my favourite distribution method (I tend to prefer digital distribution in all cases actually), and if Valve suddenly explodes and goes out of business, I'm screwed for those games. But I know that's a risk and frankly don't care if it happens. Oh well, c'est la vie, **** happens.

 

I didn't used to be on the anti-piracy bandwagon before. Why? Because it never bothered me. I bought my games (or got them sent to me), played them and never even wasted a second's thought on stuff like Starforce or SecuROM. Now we even know the names of the malware tormenting us whenever we decide to give someone our time and money. It was actually during my job as a games reviewer that I realized how much better the pirates have it than us regular users! I had to start downloading cracks to not have to juggle discs and manuals or whatever the next company decided was needed for me to play the games I wanted/had to play.

 

I don't even keep my computer area particularly organized, and sometimes have to hunt for a CD or a game manual, but for some reason I always considered that my own fault for losing it. In the end I always seem to find it though, so yay then I play. I never found CD juggling annoying either. Maybe it's because I also played game consoles and juggling cartridges was pretty much the same thing.

Edited September 19, 2008 by alanschu

[alanschu]

HAHA awesome.

How about posting something consequential instead of trying to characterise those who don't think like you as pirates and spicing it up with lame one-liners?

 

I will when you don't post ridiculously ironic and hypocritical statements. It's absurd to get pissed at Hell Kitty for stating his opinion (I can understand that it's his opinion, even if he doesn't explicitly say "in my opinion") about numbers, when the other people don't either. But hey, it's cool to get other people to do the work for you. The idea that DRM hurts sales is pretty clear in this thread and other threads, yet hasn't been substantiated either. Call them out on it too! Oh wait....you agree with them. Well that's not very scientific of you! Tsk tsk.

 

 

For some reason I seem to be one of the few people that doesn't mind when I need a CD in the drive...I mean, given I've been gaming on computers for years and years and years, where all games except a few exceptions have required me to have the CD in the drive, or the floppy disk in the drive, or whatever. In fact, the overwhelming majority of times I have played games without needing a CD or a floppy disk in the drive, were the times in my youth when I actively WAS pirating game software. Heck, I had a CD burner before people even knew what they were, and was pretty much a printing press for games. I even turned a profit!

So, obviously, those that don't want to need the CD in the drive MUST be pirates, because of your particular experience and preferences. That's some serious deductive reasoning right there.

 

No, but I'm talking anecdotally. I figured I no longer needed to state things such as "in my opinion" or state that an experience is anecdotal when it's obvious that it is. Everyone else does the same ****, but when it's someone that disagrees with you that does it, time to call them out on it. Nice. And what I am saying is that needing the media IN THE DRIVE has been a common occurrence in computer gaming since long before CDs were invented. There was a window where things could just be installed on HDs, but those were also the times when I found it easiest to pirate, and even made money off my piracy because it was so easy for me to do.

 

So, you are just trolling. At least you're honest about it.

I'm not trolling looking for a fight. I tend to pick the anti-global warming stance because it actually leads to interesting discussions about that topic, rather than just having a big agreement party with the people I hang out with. That's boring. Or, to use my original word, not fun. Call me crazy, but I like to enjoy life.

 

and in general I think people are stupid

I'm not even going to touch this one, lest I go back in probation.

Then why quote it and mention it at all. In doing so you do touch it. But maybe if you tried posting something consequential instead of just using some sort of lame one liner.

 

 

Only this thread in particular is about a conceptually different DRM which actually raises concerns about the viability of playing games you've paid for in the future. This is about SecuROM, not CD-checks. Refer to the thread title if in doubt.

 

That just means the lyrics have been altered, not that the song is really any different. First people were upset when they had to pick the right word from the manual or whatever, because "what if I lose the manual or something? That sucks!" Then "WTF, a CD Key? That sucks for reinstalls in case I lose the manual....and now I can't play MP games with my friends as easily if we LAN!!!!" Then "Booo CD authentication." Now, "Boo online activation" and "boo DRM." Same ****, different pile. Been hearing it for years and years and years. Furthermore, I'm well aware of the title of the thread (and you accused me of trolling...but hey, at least I was honest about it), but other people discussed No CD checks in this thread, and given I was linking the current brouhaha for DRM to the similar brouhaha that people had about CD checks (and other cries), I figured it was obvious.

 

 

I didn't know the industry was being "****ed". It seems to be going fairly well...

Wait, I thought crippling DRM was its downfall? (you're right, it's not ****ed, but the people that get all pissy about copy protection and anti-piracy measures sure like to paint that picture). Oh wait, this is where I demand that you post numbers proving that the PC industry is doing well, right? (don't ask me to support my claim that it's "****ed" since I'm being facetious right now, but I figured it might be important to spell it out, since it seems I have to start saying "in my opinion" or qualify something that is clearly anecdotal as anecdotal).

 

Hell Kitty is correct in that for whatever reason, the suits at corporations think that their DRM implementations are effective in improving their sales numbers. As much as we bash executives for only being interested in making money and not worrying about innovative games and just making the same crap and sequelitis, it's funny that suddenly all of their profit driven greediness seems to go out the window when it comes to anti-piracy. I mean, they obviously do it because they like throwing money away into DRM without seeing any return on that investment.

[random n00b]

I will when you don't post ridiculously ironic and hypocritical statements. It's absurd to get pissed at Hell Kitty for stating his opinion (I can understand that it's his opinion, even if he doesn't explicitly say "in my opinion") about numbers, when the other people don't either.

Huh? I'm just addressing his (unsubstantiated) statements, whereas you just point and laugh, rolleyes included.

 

 

But hey, it's cool to get other people to do the work for you. The idea that DRM hurts sales is pretty clear in this thread and other threads, yet hasn't been substantiated either. Call them out on it too! Oh wait....you agree with them. Well that's not very scientific of you! Tsk tsk.

Actually, if instead of just reading the last post and then unleashing the ****ing fury you actually took the time to read the thread, perhaps you'd make less of a fool of yourself. Since you are obviously unable to read past the last page:

Yeah, yeah. What's all this "PC gaming is dying" nonsense, anyway?

Has anyone actually made the claim that DRM actually causes significant loss of sales? I haven't seen that, myself, and personally I don't believe it does.

Those are BOTH in this very thread. You are welcome to read the rest of the discussion and actually get a clue about the stances people actually have. THEN take your shots.

 

 

No, but I'm talking anecdotally. I figured I no longer needed to state things such as "in my opinion" or state that an experience is anecdotal when it's obvious that it is. Everyone else does the same ****, but when it's someone that disagrees with you that does it, time to call them out on it. Nice.

Sure. Because I never use anecdotal evidence to illustrate anything because its value is nil. But it's not only that. You are also making the assumption that since you don't mind having the CD in, nobody should. Hello? There's a world out there with preferences, too.

 

 

And what I am saying is that needing the media IN THE DRIVE has been a common occurrence in computer gaming since long before CDs were invented. There was a window where things could just be installed on HDs, but those were also the times when I found it easiest to pirate, and even made money off my piracy because it was so easy for me to do.

If it wasn't because broadband is dead cheap, you could still make money with piracy. What's the relevance of this, anyway?

 

 

I'm not trolling looking for a fight. I tend to pick the anti-global warming stance because it actually leads to interesting discussions about that topic, rather than just having a big agreement party with the people I hang out with. That's boring. Or, to use my original word, not fun. Call me crazy, but I like to enjoy life.

Wait, wait. So "HAHA" is how you initiate "interesting discussions"? My, my. Aren't you the master conversationalist!

[random n00b]

Really, they need to do away with this stupid quote limit. It's cramping my style!

 

 

Then why quote it and mention it at all. In doing so you do touch it. But maybe if you tried posting something consequential instead of just using some sort of lame one liner.

You are right. In hindsight, it doesn't even merit response.

 

 

That just means the lyrics have been altered, not that the song is really any different. First people were upset when they had to pick the right word from the manual or whatever, because "what if I lose the manual or something? That sucks!" Then "WTF, a CD Key? That sucks for reinstalls in case I lose the manual....and now I can't play MP games with my friends as easily if we LAN!!!!" Then "Booo CD authentication." Now, "Boo online activation" and "boo DRM." Same ****, different pile. Been hearing it for years and years and years.

None of those are really in the same level as limited installs dependant on online activation. If you lose the manual, the CD, your head, or whatever, it's YOUR fault. If you keep everything and the publisher shuts down the authentication servers for whatever reason (or refuses to authorize further installs), it's them not providing the service you paid for. I didn't think it was so hard to understand?

 

 

Furthermore, I'm well aware of the title of the thread (and you accused me of trolling...but hey, at least I was honest about it), but other people discussed No CD checks in this thread, and given I was linking the current brouhaha for DRM to the similar brouhaha that people had about CD checks (and other cries), I figured it was obvious.

Other people brought it up in an attempt to make an analogy with SecuROM. It was a flawed argument, and it still is.

 

 

Wait, I thought crippling DRM was its downfall? (you're right, it's not ****ed, but the people that get all pissy about copy protection and anti-piracy measures sure like to paint that picture). Oh wait, this is where I demand that you post numbers proving that the PC industry is doing well, right? (don't ask me to support my claim that it's "****ed" since I'm being facetious right now, but I figured it might be important to spell it out, since it seems I have to start saying "in my opinion" or qualify something that is clearly anecdotal as anecdotal).

Do you really want me to look up some numbers to show how the video game industry has become a billion dollar business since its inception? How the offer has grown and diversified?

 

Anyway, I have no problem with you posting your irrelevant anecdotes, so long as you don't use them as basis for a reasoning whose conclusions you extend to everyone who disagrees with you.

 

 

Hell Kitty is correct in that for whatever reason, the suits at corporations think that their DRM implementations are effective in improving their sales numbers. As much as we bash executives for only being interested in making money and not worrying about innovative games and just making the same crap and sequelitis, it's funny that suddenly all of their profit driven greediness seems to go out the window when it comes to anti-piracy. I mean, they obviously do it because they like throwing money away into DRM without seeing any return on that investment.

So, just because they think DRM works does it mean it actually works? Well, at different points in history, many things were considered solvent ideas, and with time they were debunked. Are company execs some sort of godly, omniscient beings not subject to error? Edited September 19, 2008 by random n00b

[Tigranes]

It holds as much water as the "well I didn't buy it" argument. I'm not arguing for DRM I'm arguing against the idea that "it only hurts paying customers".

 

I'm still wondering if you had any trouble activating Spore.

 

It does hurt paying customers. It just doesn't happen to hurt you, at this moment, with your specific lifestyle, with this specific DRM. That's a narrow cocoon to shelter yourself in when DRM is changing and becoming more draconian.

 

I didn't register Spore online because it's my friend's copy and it's going back next week, after which I will uninstall. I don't know if it still activated anything, but the game installation process was fine. I'm not sure where you are going at with tho. Let's say I did activate online and had no trouble. Is that evidence for anything?

 

This is wonderful, we have some kind of asynchronous parallel quote monster horde going on here.

[Hell Kitty]

It does hurt paying customers. It just doesn't happen to hurt you, at this moment, with your specific lifestyle, with this specific DRM.

 

If people can continue to say they didn't buy a game because of DRM, then other people can continue to point out they've not had the problems the anti-DRM crowd complain about. See, anecdotal evidence works both ways. Your continued insistence that my individual experience isn't relevant is hypocritical when you don't also attempt to dismiss the individual experiences of the anti-DRM crowd.

 

That's a narrow cocoon to shelter yourself in when DRM is changing and becoming more draconian.

 

Okay then, you've convinced me. I shall emerge from my cocoon to become a beautiful anti-DRM butterfly and fight against the terrible corporations potentially hindering my leisure activities. Or maybe I'll just continue to enjoy playing the games I've bought instead.

 

I didn't register Spore online because it's my friend's copy and it's going back next week, after which I will uninstall. I don't know if it still activated anything, but the game installation process was fine. I'm not sure where you are going at with tho.

 

So you don't even need to activate to play, or you used a crack? It doesn't matter, all I wanted to know was whether you were fighting the idea of DRM of you were actually "hurt" by it. If people are going to continue to insist that DRM hurts paying customers, they can't just ignore the times it doesn't.

Edited September 20, 2008 by Hell Kitty

[random n00b]

If people can continue to say they didn't buy a game because of DRM, then other people can continue to point out they've not had the problems the anti-DRM crowd complain about. See, anecdotal evidence works both ways. Your continued insistence that my individual experience isn't relevant is hypocritical when you don't also attempt to dismiss the individual experiences of the anti-DRM crowd.

What exactly are you arguing, then? The thread is about how SecuROM is a step forward in pissing paying customers while still failing at deterring piracy. I don't think anyone has made the claim that it pisses off ALL paying customers, since some people may not even be aware of what they are installing. And then, there's people like you who just don't care as long as they can find a crack. Your whole discourse is, "I don't care, and for each of you who does, there's a thousand more who don't".

 

I'm not saying you're not entitled to having your opinion and voicing it, but you seem to be trying to use it to somehow refute what we're saying - it doesn't. You are not getting a special version of the product without DRM, and even if you refuse to be bothered by it, you are still subject to its potential effects - denial of service, regardless of your ability to overcome it.

 

It's fallacious to claim that people being bothered by DRM are inconsequential simply because there are people who don't have a problem with it. Taking the corporate stance that they aren't in numbers large enough to make a dent on sales doesn't change that either. That's essentially what you are doing. Games didn't have it before - that coupled to the fact that piracy hasn't been affected at all is enough proof that games don't need it.

 

So, again, what are you trying to prove?

[Humodour]

I'm a bit curious....will any of you completely abandon PC gaming if all companies start using similar DRM methods?

 

I'm a bit curious... do you think that would in any way justify the existence of such restrictive DRM methods?

 

Because, y'know, that seems to be what you and HKD are about: "If you don't like it, go somewhere else." or "If you're not doing anything wrong, you don't need to worry."

 

Heaven forbid we make any noise about moves that limit our rights on a game we bought.

[Tigranes]

 

I'm so happy for you!

 

I'm not even telling you that you're wrong though. I'm not saying, "I dont care if DRM doesn't affect or bother you at all, FIGHT IT". I would be incredibly stupid and naive to fail to acknowledge the basic fact that, for you, DRM is not a problem at the moment, and thus it would be difficult for you to sympathise. I'm just making the point that such a position doesn't invalidate the anti-DRM argument at all, and certainly wouldn't persuade anyone else.

 

The anecdotal evidence about DRM troubles is somewhat different because the burden of proof is on the anti-DRM people. Personally, I wouldn't use either side's anecdotal evidence as anything more than to confirm that yes, some (hard to know how many) people are affected by DRM. Many others are not. And then, logically, we can infer, if DRM methods become more severe or look at various different kinds of restrictions, then it stands to reason that more and more people will go in the first camp.

[Humodour]

Well with good enough gear you can hear the difference between any compressed format and lossless, but you have to train not too much unlike a jedi to get there

Well, since you think 160 kbps is "slightly above Youtube quality", would you mind doing a quick test?

 

I'll link you to ten 320 kbps MP3's, where some have been downsampled to 160 kbps, then upsampled back to 320 kbps. This means they all look like they are 320 kbps, but some of them sounds like 160 kbps.

Give it a try here: 320-160 kbps Test.rar

 

I'm curious to see if you actually can hear a difference. I can not.

 

You just won the thread.

[Spider]

I didn't register Spore online because it's my friend's copy and it's going back next week, after which I will uninstall. I don't know if it still activated anything, but the game installation process was fine. I'm not sure where you are going at with tho. Let's say I did activate online and had no trouble. Is that evidence for anything?

 

I'm pretty sure you used an activation there. The activation is used when you install the game, not when you register online inside the game I think.

[Gorgon]

I don't see how you could not mind paying full price for something you can install three times. I have installed all the games I own 10 times at least, and as far as I know there aren't any Danish call in lines, that would mean calling overseas to beg them to be able to install the game again.

 

This is unacceptable to me, should be to any sane person, but that's just me.

[Dark_Raven]

These idiots will only hurt themselves with this DRM ****. People will start getting games from websites that have the word pirate in their link.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

These idiots will only hurt themselves with this DRM ****.

 

[Slowtrain]

Also, when one is dealing with something as twitchy as pcs, machines which are prone to malware infections, software conflicts, hardware failures and general OS decay, it should be expected that games will be installed multiple times by people. I take pretty good care of my pc but I've had three hard drives failures in the last 2 years, which meant of course three reinstalls just for that reason for any games I want to play. Happily it hasn't caused me any problems, but I certainly understand why such issues concern people.

[thepixiesrock]

They should just start making games for mac and not PC.

[SteveThaiBinh]

They should just start making games for mac and not PC.

Yup. And we could all migrate en-masse to the Mac. It would be like a nest-relocation in creature Spore.

[Nick_i_am]

They should just start making games for mac and not PC.

 

You're stupid pixies, stop making a fool of yourself ego ego ego hurf durf PROVE IT WITH NUMBERS!

[Gorgon]

They should just start making games for mac and not PC.

Yup. And we could all migrate en-masse to the Mac. It would be like a nest-relocation in creature Spore.

Don't you mean migrate to (insert cat family OS), Mac has had PC architecture for a while now, and somehow managed to remain ridiculously pricey. If everyone migrated to Mac OS it wouldn't take long for it to be just as vulnerable.

Edited September 22, 2008 by Gorgon

[thepixiesrock]

Since the software on every Mac is created by the same company that makes the Mac itself, you get a completely integrated computer that