Bibliography
Lowe, Judy. 12/31/2009. "Video games can be energy hogs. Three tips to cut your power bill."<http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Bright-Green/2009/1221/Video-games-. > (01/14/2010).
Powers, Jenny. 11/19/2009. "New Report: Video Games are Energy Drains." < http://www.nrdc.org/media/2008/081119.asp > (01/14/2010).
Clark. Christina. 12/27/2009. "Video Game Systems Use as Much Energy as San Diego." <http://www.greendaily.com/2009/01/07/video-game-systems-use-as-much-energy-as-san-diego/ > (01/14/2010).
Source for Diagram 1: < http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/grn/gr/arts/nrdc_price_of_play_350x.jpg >
News Item Extract
Even When Idle, Gaming Consoles Cost Consumers More than $1 Billion Worth of Wasted Energy
NEW YORK (November 19, 2008) – Video game consoles nationwide use about as much electricity in a year as every home in San Diego combined, and can significantly add to consumers’ electric bills, according to a new report released by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) today. Much of this energy use is consumed by machines that are left on, but not in use.
“If you leave your Xbox 360 or Sony Play Station 3 on all the time, you can cut your electric bill by as much as $100 a year simply by turning it off when you are finished playing,” said NRDC Senior Scientist Noah Horowitz. “With so many struggling in today’s economy – it’s important to realize there are simple steps gamers can take to lower their energy costs. And if manufacturers make future systems more energy efficient, they’ll be doing the right thing for consumers’ pockets, for our clean energy future, and for the environment.”
Friday, January 22, 2010
Part D
Solutions to Problems
There are many possible solutions to the problems that arise in the issue. Both problems that arise deal with the amount of energy used and how we may cut down on this figure. The recent studies and also some pure common sense guidelines for energy saving allow one to see just how much they can save by doing the simplest things. For example, one may do the following to lower the amount of energy their system uses:
1. If you don't have a gaming console yet, go for the Nintendo Wii. It uses around 1/10 of the energy as the other guys.
2. If you have an Xbox 360, you can set it to use a power save mode.
3. Like many appliances, turn it off when you aren't using it.
4. If your system can play movies, using it for that purpose probably uses more energy than just using the DVD or Blu-Ray player.
5. Always recycle used systems properly. They contain toxic chemicals and should definitely not be thrown in the trash (Clark, 2009).
The amount of power generated with each individual console differs from 100 - 200 watts to 20-50 watts. It all depends on what the paricular console does. The possible solutions to the problems arisen in this issue are very easily feasible with the hardest one being recycling your used systems properly. The amount of energy that one may save by buying the cheaper console, turing off their console when not in use, putting their console in power saver mode (much like a labtop), not using your console to play movies, and recycling used systems all allow for the amount of energy to be used as far less than it would be if one does not follow those energy saving guidelines when playing with a videogame console (Lowe, 2009).
There are many possible solutions to the problems that arise in the issue. Both problems that arise deal with the amount of energy used and how we may cut down on this figure. The recent studies and also some pure common sense guidelines for energy saving allow one to see just how much they can save by doing the simplest things. For example, one may do the following to lower the amount of energy their system uses:
1. If you don't have a gaming console yet, go for the Nintendo Wii. It uses around 1/10 of the energy as the other guys.
2. If you have an Xbox 360, you can set it to use a power save mode.
3. Like many appliances, turn it off when you aren't using it.
4. If your system can play movies, using it for that purpose probably uses more energy than just using the DVD or Blu-Ray player.
5. Always recycle used systems properly. They contain toxic chemicals and should definitely not be thrown in the trash (Clark, 2009).
The amount of power generated with each individual console differs from 100 - 200 watts to 20-50 watts. It all depends on what the paricular console does. The possible solutions to the problems arisen in this issue are very easily feasible with the hardest one being recycling your used systems properly. The amount of energy that one may save by buying the cheaper console, turing off their console when not in use, putting their console in power saver mode (much like a labtop), not using your console to play movies, and recycling used systems all allow for the amount of energy to be used as far less than it would be if one does not follow those energy saving guidelines when playing with a videogame console (Lowe, 2009).
Part C
Impact of the Issue
There are two problems that can be seen when looking at the the issue developing over whether or not video games produce too much energy, and if they do should it continue. Mant pro-earth people claim that video games, as well as video game systems, use up far too much of the earth's energy resources and thus should be stopped or at least slowed down in production and distribution. However, the other side of the argument is that the companies that produce these games feel like video games are for one purpose only and that is to have fun. Gaming companies do not make games to hurt the environment. The social issue that is arised when one dicusses the problems associated within video game production, usage, and earth's resources dwindling, is that should video games and video game consoles be continued and if so, at what rate?
The social problem arisen in this issue is very vague because everyone knows that videogames are never going to grow old and thus the quantities of videogames and consoles is always going to increase leveling the amount of the earth's energy resources. However, the ethical issue is one of more importance in the sense that, how do we know whether or not videogames are good or bad? There have been plenty of studies which have proven videogames to actually be good for someone. However, not for the environment.
For gaming companies to produce the amount of consoles and games that they do, it is understandable why there is a very large amount of gamers throughout the world. The many people that fight to keep earth's resources from depleting are going to lose the battle because our world is contstantly being changed through technology. Almost everyday there are new technological advances that allow us to reinvent ourselves and our culture. If this means using alittle bit more energy, so be it. “Energy efficiency saves people money, reduces global warming pollution, and is an essential part of our clean energy future,” said Horowitz. “Electronics manufacturers can help by making smarter products. NRDC is working to make sure this happens" (Clark, 2009).
There are two problems that can be seen when looking at the the issue developing over whether or not video games produce too much energy, and if they do should it continue. Mant pro-earth people claim that video games, as well as video game systems, use up far too much of the earth's energy resources and thus should be stopped or at least slowed down in production and distribution. However, the other side of the argument is that the companies that produce these games feel like video games are for one purpose only and that is to have fun. Gaming companies do not make games to hurt the environment. The social issue that is arised when one dicusses the problems associated within video game production, usage, and earth's resources dwindling, is that should video games and video game consoles be continued and if so, at what rate?
The social problem arisen in this issue is very vague because everyone knows that videogames are never going to grow old and thus the quantities of videogames and consoles is always going to increase leveling the amount of the earth's energy resources. However, the ethical issue is one of more importance in the sense that, how do we know whether or not videogames are good or bad? There have been plenty of studies which have proven videogames to actually be good for someone. However, not for the environment.
For gaming companies to produce the amount of consoles and games that they do, it is understandable why there is a very large amount of gamers throughout the world. The many people that fight to keep earth's resources from depleting are going to lose the battle because our world is contstantly being changed through technology. Almost everyday there are new technological advances that allow us to reinvent ourselves and our culture. If this means using alittle bit more energy, so be it. “Energy efficiency saves people money, reduces global warming pollution, and is an essential part of our clean energy future,” said Horowitz. “Electronics manufacturers can help by making smarter products. NRDC is working to make sure this happens" (Clark, 2009).
Part B
IT Background of the Issue
The ever ongoing battle between IT companies and pro-earth people has led to many articles and experiments to be conducted which focus primarily on the amount of energy used by said IT systems and equipment. Many people want to see just how much energy video game consoles use up and when they see the figures they are shocked. “If you leave your Xbox 360 or Sony Play Station 3 on all the time, you can cut your electric bill by as much as $100 a year simply by turning it off when you are finished playing,” said NRDC Senior Scientist Noah Horowitz (Powers, 2009). Thus there have been many articles written trying to urge the general people that are into gaming to cut the amount of time that they game to the amount of time that they game and no more.
However, the gaming companies see it otherwise. A report recently conducted by the National Resources Defense Council said, "These these systems use nearly the same amount of power when you are playing them as they do when you leave them on and walk away. With more efficient devices and by utilizing existing power-saving features, consumers could save more than $1 billion a year on utility bills and reduce as much global warming pollution per year as the tailpipe emissions from all the cars in San Jose" (Clark, 2009). The recent developements in scientific advancement allows scientists to prove the claims that video games are bad for the environment but they should not get as much bad reputation as they do for there are many other IT equipment, such as computers, cars, stadiums, that use far more energy than video game consoles do.
Diagram 1: Energy amounts used by consoles
The ever ongoing battle between IT companies and pro-earth people has led to many articles and experiments to be conducted which focus primarily on the amount of energy used by said IT systems and equipment. Many people want to see just how much energy video game consoles use up and when they see the figures they are shocked. “If you leave your Xbox 360 or Sony Play Station 3 on all the time, you can cut your electric bill by as much as $100 a year simply by turning it off when you are finished playing,” said NRDC Senior Scientist Noah Horowitz (Powers, 2009). Thus there have been many articles written trying to urge the general people that are into gaming to cut the amount of time that they game to the amount of time that they game and no more.
However, the gaming companies see it otherwise. A report recently conducted by the National Resources Defense Council said, "These these systems use nearly the same amount of power when you are playing them as they do when you leave them on and walk away. With more efficient devices and by utilizing existing power-saving features, consumers could save more than $1 billion a year on utility bills and reduce as much global warming pollution per year as the tailpipe emissions from all the cars in San Jose" (Clark, 2009). The recent developements in scientific advancement allows scientists to prove the claims that video games are bad for the environment but they should not get as much bad reputation as they do for there are many other IT equipment, such as computers, cars, stadiums, that use far more energy than video game consoles do.
Diagram 1: Energy amounts used by consoles
The diagram chart above represents the amount of energy used by every popular console. Many charts like these have been made through scientist's research that try to prove that video games and video game consoles are bad.
Part A
Presentation of the Issue
Recently in the news there has been data shown that claims that video game consoles are using far too much energy. Even When Idle, Gaming Consoles Cost Consumers More than $1 Billion Worth of Wasted Energy (Powers, 2009). For many who believe in saving and protecting the Earth's valuable resources, video games and video game consoles are downright "energy hogs" (Lowe, 2009). Many people like to see the Earth's resources being saved and used efficiently and in their eyes video game consoles use too much than there is to go around. However, there are also many gaming companies that believe video games are solely made for fun and do not see the negative side of the argument for they are very keen at denying the scientific evidence proving that, "Video game consoles nationwide use about as much electricity in a year as every home in San Diego combined" (Powers, 2009). So, based on this article there are clearly two problems associated with it: one being ethical and one social. The social problem falls along the lines of whether or not video game consoles should be continued and if so, then what ones? Whereas the ethical issue at hand focuses more on whether or not video games are good or bad for the environment. From these articles we are able to see that the area of impact that will be addressed in this portfolio will be Science and the Environment.
Recently in the news there has been data shown that claims that video game consoles are using far too much energy. Even When Idle, Gaming Consoles Cost Consumers More than $1 Billion Worth of Wasted Energy (Powers, 2009). For many who believe in saving and protecting the Earth's valuable resources, video games and video game consoles are downright "energy hogs" (Lowe, 2009). Many people like to see the Earth's resources being saved and used efficiently and in their eyes video game consoles use too much than there is to go around. However, there are also many gaming companies that believe video games are solely made for fun and do not see the negative side of the argument for they are very keen at denying the scientific evidence proving that, "Video game consoles nationwide use about as much electricity in a year as every home in San Diego combined" (Powers, 2009). So, based on this article there are clearly two problems associated with it: one being ethical and one social. The social problem falls along the lines of whether or not video game consoles should be continued and if so, then what ones? Whereas the ethical issue at hand focuses more on whether or not video games are good or bad for the environment. From these articles we are able to see that the area of impact that will be addressed in this portfolio will be Science and the Environment.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Portfolio Topic Check
Porfolio Topic Check
1. Does the topic relate to ITGS? Explain how!
Yes, this topic does relate to ITGS because videogame consoles are comsuming far too much electricity a year and we need to find out a way to cut down on the amount.
2. Is the area of impact one that has not been addressed in a previous portfolio piece? Which area of impact have you already done? Which area of impact does this piece fit?
Yes because this portfolio piece will focus on Science and the environment. I have already done the Health, Business and Employment, and Politics and Government portfolio piece.
3. Was the news item published no more than six months before you started the course (you started September 2008)? What is the publication date of the article?
Yes, this news article was published on December 21, 2009.
4. Does the article raise one or more social or ethical issues related to an IT system? State clearly the social or ethical issue.
Yes, this article does raise on or more social or ethical issues related to an IT system. One ethical issue is the argument whether videogames/video game consoles should be stopped and the social is that it is killing our electical output in the world.
5. Is the problem clear? Explain the problem.
Yes, the problem is very clear. How do we limit the amount of enery video game consoles use?
Video games use too much energy annd we need a way to fix it asap or else the world's electrical output will suffer drastically.
6. Can you think of two viable solutions? Briefly state the possible solutions.
Yes, I can think of two viable solutions.
1. Choose a console that uses less energy [PDF]. The Nintendo Wii is the power miser of the group tested, Xbox 360 is in the middle, and Sony PS3 uses the most energy if left on all the time. (See No. 3.)
2. Don't watch movies on your game console. According to Noah Horowitz of NRDC, "movie playback on the PS3 uses four to five times as much power as that of a stand-alone BluRay player."
7. Do you have access to a range of resources on this topic? Name three possible resources to research this topic.
Yes, I do have access to a range of resources on this topic. I have the Christian Science Monitor, BBC, and Wikipedia.
1. Does the topic relate to ITGS? Explain how!
Yes, this topic does relate to ITGS because videogame consoles are comsuming far too much electricity a year and we need to find out a way to cut down on the amount.
2. Is the area of impact one that has not been addressed in a previous portfolio piece? Which area of impact have you already done? Which area of impact does this piece fit?
Yes because this portfolio piece will focus on Science and the environment. I have already done the Health, Business and Employment, and Politics and Government portfolio piece.
3. Was the news item published no more than six months before you started the course (you started September 2008)? What is the publication date of the article?
Yes, this news article was published on December 21, 2009.
4. Does the article raise one or more social or ethical issues related to an IT system? State clearly the social or ethical issue.
Yes, this article does raise on or more social or ethical issues related to an IT system. One ethical issue is the argument whether videogames/video game consoles should be stopped and the social is that it is killing our electical output in the world.
5. Is the problem clear? Explain the problem.
Yes, the problem is very clear. How do we limit the amount of enery video game consoles use?
Video games use too much energy annd we need a way to fix it asap or else the world's electrical output will suffer drastically.
6. Can you think of two viable solutions? Briefly state the possible solutions.
Yes, I can think of two viable solutions.
1. Choose a console that uses less energy [PDF]. The Nintendo Wii is the power miser of the group tested, Xbox 360 is in the middle, and Sony PS3 uses the most energy if left on all the time. (See No. 3.)
2. Don't watch movies on your game console. According to Noah Horowitz of NRDC, "movie playback on the PS3 uses four to five times as much power as that of a stand-alone BluRay player."
7. Do you have access to a range of resources on this topic? Name three possible resources to research this topic.
Yes, I do have access to a range of resources on this topic. I have the Christian Science Monitor, BBC, and Wikipedia.
Part E
Sources Used
Johnston, J. Stuart. 11/13/2009. "Microsoft Wants to Sell Windows Themes as Ads". < http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3848486/Microsoft+Wants+to+Sell+Windows+Themes+as+Ads.htm > (01/14/2010)
Keizer, Gregg. 11/13/2009. "Microsoft sells Windows 7 desktop to advertisers". < http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.computerworld.com/common/images/site/features/2009/112009/awindows7ads_420.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9140810/Microsoft_sells_Windows_7_desktop_to_advertisers&usg=__52oIw8a-tTBdXRqLFCoHDqTB1yI=&h=251&w=420&sz=37&hl=en&start=10&sig2=zfMX8k3BBIcySD9Ua7AJIg&itbs=1&tbnid=dIiavvMM5K_4lM:&tbnh=75&tbnw=125&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwindows%2B7%2Bad%2Bthemes%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den&ei=ZwFZS7j_EYmHlAet7aH8Aw > (01/14/2010)
-- Used for Diagram 1 as well
Hachman, Mark. 11/13/2009. "Windows 7 Themes Allow You to Put Ads on Your Desktop" < http://www.appscout.com/2009/11/windows_7_themes_allow_you_to.php >(01/15/2010)
News Item Extract
"Microsoft is enabling global marketers to utilize the desktop or Internet browsing experience exclusively for their brand, with Windows Theme Experience and Windows Personalization Gallery," according to a company statement. "Microsoft is enabling global marketers to utilize the desktop or Internet browsing experience exclusively for their brand, with Windows Theme Experience and Windows Personalization Gallery," according to a company statement.
Johnston, J. Stuart. 11/13/2009. "Microsoft Wants to Sell Windows Themes as Ads". < http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3848486/Microsoft+Wants+to+Sell+Windows+Themes+as+Ads.htm > (01/14/2010)
Keizer, Gregg. 11/13/2009. "Microsoft sells Windows 7 desktop to advertisers". < http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.computerworld.com/common/images/site/features/2009/112009/awindows7ads_420.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9140810/Microsoft_sells_Windows_7_desktop_to_advertisers&usg=__52oIw8a-tTBdXRqLFCoHDqTB1yI=&h=251&w=420&sz=37&hl=en&start=10&sig2=zfMX8k3BBIcySD9Ua7AJIg&itbs=1&tbnid=dIiavvMM5K_4lM:&tbnh=75&tbnw=125&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwindows%2B7%2Bad%2Bthemes%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den&ei=ZwFZS7j_EYmHlAet7aH8Aw > (01/14/2010)
-- Used for Diagram 1 as well
Hachman, Mark. 11/13/2009. "Windows 7 Themes Allow You to Put Ads on Your Desktop" < http://www.appscout.com/2009/11/windows_7_themes_allow_you_to.php >(01/15/2010)
News Item Extract
"Microsoft is enabling global marketers to utilize the desktop or Internet browsing experience exclusively for their brand, with Windows Theme Experience and Windows Personalization Gallery," according to a company statement. "Microsoft is enabling global marketers to utilize the desktop or Internet browsing experience exclusively for their brand, with Windows Theme Experience and Windows Personalization Gallery," according to a company statement.
Part D
Solutions to Problems
While observing the potential problems and disadvantages of using the pilot program on Windows 7 PCs, the tendency to overlook the possible solutions is a very large amount. The potential problems of using the pilot program are that many small businesses do not want their company to suffer and also many Microsoft Windows 7 users do not want to have their computer, while not connected to the Internet, to be run be advertisements. The solutions to both of these problems are both very easy to conquer.
With the possibility of smaller retailers not having the ability to purchase space on the Windows 7 desktops is a problem that Microsoft is currently trying to fix. "Using Windows 7 themes -- collections of backgrounds, borders and audio elements -- advertisers will be able to brand the desktop", Microsoft said (Hachman, 2009). This would allow for small and large companies to both have the ability to buy Windows 7 desktop real estate for the small price as long as they are willing to pay for their ad theme to be created. This would allow both companies to have equal rights when it came to buying and creating ads on Windows 7 themes. Thus eliminating the first problem. With the second problem comes a more vast amount of possible solutions.
For example, people that do not want to turn on their computer's monitor to find an ad in their face will have the ability to decide whether or not they want to be part of the pilot program. Miscrosoft said that the company wanted to make a point to stress that the themes were "opt-in," and thus would not appear automatically when a user launches Windows 7 (Johnston, 2009). The ability to be able to "opt-in"to the pilot program is a very feasible solution to the problem that arises when people, who are against advertisements on the internet, do not want to see ads on their desktops and so both problems, even though there are some more, are solved.
While observing the potential problems and disadvantages of using the pilot program on Windows 7 PCs, the tendency to overlook the possible solutions is a very large amount. The potential problems of using the pilot program are that many small businesses do not want their company to suffer and also many Microsoft Windows 7 users do not want to have their computer, while not connected to the Internet, to be run be advertisements. The solutions to both of these problems are both very easy to conquer.
With the possibility of smaller retailers not having the ability to purchase space on the Windows 7 desktops is a problem that Microsoft is currently trying to fix. "Using Windows 7 themes -- collections of backgrounds, borders and audio elements -- advertisers will be able to brand the desktop", Microsoft said (Hachman, 2009). This would allow for small and large companies to both have the ability to buy Windows 7 desktop real estate for the small price as long as they are willing to pay for their ad theme to be created. This would allow both companies to have equal rights when it came to buying and creating ads on Windows 7 themes. Thus eliminating the first problem. With the second problem comes a more vast amount of possible solutions.
For example, people that do not want to turn on their computer's monitor to find an ad in their face will have the ability to decide whether or not they want to be part of the pilot program. Miscrosoft said that the company wanted to make a point to stress that the themes were "opt-in," and thus would not appear automatically when a user launches Windows 7 (Johnston, 2009). The ability to be able to "opt-in"to the pilot program is a very feasible solution to the problem that arises when people, who are against advertisements on the internet, do not want to see ads on their desktops and so both problems, even though there are some more, are solved.
Part C
Impact of the Issue on Society
There are many advantages that are available when advertisements are being able to go onto and into places where they have never gone before. The ability to be a retailer and being able to sell your company's commodities online, and on a Windows 7 theme no less, is almost unbelievable and back in the day, impossible. "The new Windows Theme Experience and Windows Personalization Gallery in Windows 7 allow consumers to customize their technology to reflect the things in life they are most passionate about," said Darren Huston again in his press conference held to discuss the new technological advances that Microsoft had pioneered (Keizer, 2009). Also, another key advantage to being able to use advertisements on Windows 7 themes is that the many users of PC products will now have the luxory of being able to order goods straight from their desktop which allows for less money to be wasted on travel as well as less time lost (Hachman, 2009). Many believe that this pilot program is going to be a great thing that Microsoft has produced for Windows 7 compatible computers. The abilities to be a retailer and create advertisements online, to be a consumer and now buy major retailer's goods straight from your desktop, is a feat in itself. However, with all the advantages, one may overlook the possible disadvantages of using this pilot program.
There are many small businesses who believe that their retail stores are being endangered by this technological advance that Microsoft has recently created. Mant believe that with the major retailers having the ability to advertise their items online, that makes their profit come in double and make their franchise ever larger than it was before, thus leaving the smaller retailers out of the picture. From Technology Business Research, a man named Allan Kranes stated that, "They're seeking every way to add all incremental income" (Keizer, 2009). The whole idea behind this concept is to max out the possible revenue that Microsoft could potentially make. Also, there are many people that would not take nicely to the idea of having their desktop run by ads because they are tired of seeing them all over the internet, never mind right in their face when they turn their computer monitor on. Krans also added, "I don't think a sizable portion of users will bother" (Keizer, 2009). This contradicts what many other Microsoft technological staff have said and thus further promotes the idea that this pilot program may or may not be the best thing that Microsoft has done with Windows 7.
There are many advantages that are available when advertisements are being able to go onto and into places where they have never gone before. The ability to be a retailer and being able to sell your company's commodities online, and on a Windows 7 theme no less, is almost unbelievable and back in the day, impossible. "The new Windows Theme Experience and Windows Personalization Gallery in Windows 7 allow consumers to customize their technology to reflect the things in life they are most passionate about," said Darren Huston again in his press conference held to discuss the new technological advances that Microsoft had pioneered (Keizer, 2009). Also, another key advantage to being able to use advertisements on Windows 7 themes is that the many users of PC products will now have the luxory of being able to order goods straight from their desktop which allows for less money to be wasted on travel as well as less time lost (Hachman, 2009). Many believe that this pilot program is going to be a great thing that Microsoft has produced for Windows 7 compatible computers. The abilities to be a retailer and create advertisements online, to be a consumer and now buy major retailer's goods straight from your desktop, is a feat in itself. However, with all the advantages, one may overlook the possible disadvantages of using this pilot program.
There are many small businesses who believe that their retail stores are being endangered by this technological advance that Microsoft has recently created. Mant believe that with the major retailers having the ability to advertise their items online, that makes their profit come in double and make their franchise ever larger than it was before, thus leaving the smaller retailers out of the picture. From Technology Business Research, a man named Allan Kranes stated that, "They're seeking every way to add all incremental income" (Keizer, 2009). The whole idea behind this concept is to max out the possible revenue that Microsoft could potentially make. Also, there are many people that would not take nicely to the idea of having their desktop run by ads because they are tired of seeing them all over the internet, never mind right in their face when they turn their computer monitor on. Krans also added, "I don't think a sizable portion of users will bother" (Keizer, 2009). This contradicts what many other Microsoft technological staff have said and thus further promotes the idea that this pilot program may or may not be the best thing that Microsoft has done with Windows 7.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Part B
THE IT BACKGROUND OF THE ISSUE
The recent affordability with many types of pcs have allowed people to have the ability to buy items online and see many types of online advertisement. For many, going all the way to the store to get themselves an item, when instead they could do it from the comfort of their own home, is far too slow and also requires them to lose time to do other things and spend as money going to the place. Many online businesses all for the shipping of their goods to be free and thus online advertisement is very popular among large retail stores as well. Windows 7 ad themes make a compromise between losing time and money by allowing pc user's to buy goods from their own home and thusly is thought to soon be very successful with future users.
Diagram 1 from: Microsoft Sells Windows 7 Desktop to Advertisers (Keizer, 2009)
The recent affordability with many types of pcs have allowed people to have the ability to buy items online and see many types of online advertisement. For many, going all the way to the store to get themselves an item, when instead they could do it from the comfort of their own home, is far too slow and also requires them to lose time to do other things and spend as money going to the place. Many online businesses all for the shipping of their goods to be free and thus online advertisement is very popular among large retail stores as well. Windows 7 ad themes make a compromise between losing time and money by allowing pc user's to buy goods from their own home and thusly is thought to soon be very successful with future users.
Diagram 1 from: Microsoft Sells Windows 7 Desktop to Advertisers (Keizer, 2009)
Microsoft is selling Windows 7 desktop real estate to advertisers and has launched a pilot program that includes Coca-Cola, Infiniti and Porsche. Microsoft expects to use Windows 7 ad themes from 2009 onto 2010 and they are unsure whether or not they will continue with the pilot program. They do say that several major companies will be investing in the idea though, with many over-the-top lines of retailers buying their share of the desktops (Hachman, 2009). Also, with the growing number of retailers opening all over the world, the quest to be number one seems almost near to impossible unless they have the right technology to make their franchise reach this spot. Recently, the corporate vice president of the company's consumer and online group, a man named Darren Huston, stated, "These are great examples of Microsoft innovation and technology coming together to enable top global brands to reach audiences in new and interesting ways" (Keizer, 2009).
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Part A
PRESENTATION OF THE ISSUE
Recently in November, Microsoft announced that they will experiment with selling marketers the right to place ads in Windows 7 themes on users' desktops (Johnston, 2009). Many people have PC's and with those PC's come internet connections that lead to people seeing and sometimes even hearing ads being played in the background of websites/blogs. Thus, with this recent announcement of ad placing on PC desktops, many over-the-top companies are saying that they are willing to spend huge amounts of money in order for their products to be displayed.
Online ads offer many advantages to both the people on their desktop and the companies displaying their information. For example, some advantages for the companies could be: making more money, gaining more reputation, and also taking out their rival companies with ads placing things made by their company as less than the others. The advantages for the people with the desktops could be: finding something they had forgetten they needed to get and also seeing more companies' ads would open their eyes to more places to get goods.
However, smaller companies are worried that the ads being displayed on Windows themes are for only large scale business such as Ducati, Infiniti, Porsche and Twentieth Century Fox (Johnston, 2009). Many of these smaller companies would like to have a share in the ads but they are held back with their amount of gross income they receive. Also, people that own PC are becomming agitated that more ads are going to be displayed on Windows 7 themes because the internet already does enough advertising. People want to see ads here and there, not every time they go to turn on their computer.
Recently in November, Microsoft announced that they will experiment with selling marketers the right to place ads in Windows 7 themes on users' desktops (Johnston, 2009). Many people have PC's and with those PC's come internet connections that lead to people seeing and sometimes even hearing ads being played in the background of websites/blogs. Thus, with this recent announcement of ad placing on PC desktops, many over-the-top companies are saying that they are willing to spend huge amounts of money in order for their products to be displayed.
Online ads offer many advantages to both the people on their desktop and the companies displaying their information. For example, some advantages for the companies could be: making more money, gaining more reputation, and also taking out their rival companies with ads placing things made by their company as less than the others. The advantages for the people with the desktops could be: finding something they had forgetten they needed to get and also seeing more companies' ads would open their eyes to more places to get goods.
However, smaller companies are worried that the ads being displayed on Windows themes are for only large scale business such as Ducati, Infiniti, Porsche and Twentieth Century Fox (Johnston, 2009). Many of these smaller companies would like to have a share in the ads but they are held back with their amount of gross income they receive. Also, people that own PC are becomming agitated that more ads are going to be displayed on Windows 7 themes because the internet already does enough advertising. People want to see ads here and there, not every time they go to turn on their computer.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Homework due 1/11/10
In Gift of Fire, answers questions 6.8, 6.11, 6.13 and 6.14.Please post to your blog!
6.8 Describe two things the entertainment industry has done to protect its copyrights. For each, tell whether you think it is justified. Give reasons.
A copyright is an exclusive right granted to an author of a literary, musical, audiovisual or artistic work, giving the author the sole right to reproduce and distribute that work. One place in which copyright laws are protected is with Nintendo. Some of the ways in which copyright laws are protected there are under various copyrights in Nintendo's software source code, executable code, game visual display, game music, game characters, product packaging, game manuals and labels; hardware chip microcode; artwork and publications. This means that practically everything that Nintendo creates, is theirs and nobody elses. Nintendo wants to make sure that when they create something, whether it be games or music, it will be theirs forever or until they sell it because they see it as if they create it then they own it. Another way that an entertainment industry has protected its copyrights is with Skunk Records. Skunk Records is a music company which manages and produces many bands such as Disturbed. They have set up legal action to those who steal from them and are caught. The right to their intellectual property, they believe, is for those who are willing to pay for the music rather than steal it. I think that both things are justified because if someone creates something and then copyrights and patents it and what have you, then its rightfully theirs. If they are the sole owners of something that has never been senn before, then the right to that information belongs to them and them alone. Well, that is unless they are willing to sell their ideas to other companys and then their copyright policies on that certain thing is no longer theirs.
6.11 This book, like many others, includes short quotations from other people's work at the beginning of many sections. Such quotes are almost always used without explicit permission. Explain why they are fair uses.
Using quotes without explicit permission are fair uses when it comes to this book and many others, is because this book (books in general) usually have something to inform the general people. This book was created to inform students about Information Technology and Global Society and we know this as true. We have come to the consensus gentium that this book is ment solely to inform and that sure, there is profit for the author, but the book when in use, is for nonprofit educational reasons like being used in a class. Also, the books that use quotes without explicit permission do it to inform and not to make their piece of writing any better than it is. They just want the people to know more. Take this book for example, the Fair-Use Doctrine guidelines are stated almost the same as when the government first stated them. However, this book is ment to inform and educate... nothing more. Also, since this book and others use only small quotes here and there, then they are not taking much from the other persons work but rather just a crumb in the writers cake. People use each others quotes because it helps them educate and make more sense of certain things, not just to steal and say "ha-ha". Finaly, the small quotes used in this book and others do nothing when it comes to limiting the value of the persons work that had originally said the piece of text. In fact, if one book states another, and the person reading that book has not heard of said stated book then they can go get that book anf thus the economic cycle may continue.
6.13 A political group organized a forum on its Web site where people were encouraged to post and comment on individual newspaper articles relevant to political issues of concern to the group. Other participants added their comments, and debate and discussion of the articles continued. Two newspapers sued, arguing that posting the articles violated their copyrights. Analyze the case. How do the fair-use guidelines apply? Who should win?
The Fair-Use Doctrine guidelines are as follows:
- The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
- The nature of the copyrighted work
- The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
- The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work
As we can see, since the political group was posting articles that they did not have right of distribution over it doesnt matter in this case. This is because the political group that is posting and commenting over the news articles are doing it for educational purposes and for their own leizure. They are not doing it because they are making any money over it. Also, the nature of the copyrighted articles is to inform, not to dicuss just because. The members of the political group want their web site to have posts and comments on interesting subject matter, and in this case it happens to be politics. Then we have the issue of the copyright issue with matter. I believe that since the political is not taking every article, just some of the politically based ones, that it is fine because they are not taking every article that is written by the newspaper company. And since only some of the political articles are posted and commented on, that means that people will still have to buy the whole paper to get all the other articles. To post and comment on only one type of article will not have any drastic effects on the newspaper companys income. And if it does, I'll be shocked. Neither the company nor the political group should be fighting because both are doing perfectly legal things. The political group is commenting on some articles relevant to political issues and the newspaper company is producing those articles knowing that this might happen and that they will have to go on even of it does. I believe that the political group should win the case because they are a nonprofit educationally based web site and everything that they have done so far has been legal and pertains directly to the Fair-Use Doctrine. They have cheated no one.
6.14 You are a teacher. You would like your students to use a software package, but the school's budget does not include enough money to buy copies for all the students. Your school is in a poor neighnorhood, and you know most of the parents cannot afford to but the software for their children.
a) List some ways you could try to obtain the software without making unauthorized copies.
- Try to get a school grant
- Try to fundraise for the software
- Get a loan for the software
- Under the Fair Use Doctrine one may buy one copy and then copyright the product so that it may "encourage production of a useful work"
- As long as the meaning behind the copyright is educational based then it is fair game
- Since the software being used is for a nonprofit organization it is again ok to do
b) Suppose none of the methods you try work. Will you copy the software or decide not to use it? Give some arguments for and against your position. Explain why you think the arguments on your side are stronger.
- I would definatley steal the copyrighted software because if my students need it in order for them to strive academically and become better scholars then I believe that it is fair game. Some arguments for my position are that "I couldnt afford to buy the product", "The company is a large, wealthy corporation. What's one stolen piece of software going to do?", "I wouldnt buy the piece of software at the normal ticketed price anyway because I do not have the money", "Since I am making copies of the software for my students, it then just becomes an act of generosity", and "Everybody is doing it!!" are just a few prime examples. Many of these arguments are what I would say to the judge if I was put on trial for copyright infringement however, these arguments only show one side of my position. Arguments against my position would be a little bit more forceful and descriptive why it is in fact bad. Examples could be:
- "Not being able to buy the product is not an excuse for stealing it!"
- "The success of the company does not justify stealing from it!"
- "You are taking something of value from a company and not giving anything in return"
- "Sure, we have the right to buy a copy of the software, but we do not have the right to mass produce copies of the product and then distribute them!"
- "To copy something is not ethical"
- "Also, the number of people doing something does not make it right! You cannot kill someone because someone else does... it isnt right and it doesnt make any sense."
I believe that the arguments on my side are stronger because that is what I see as just. However, even though I know that stealing is bad I would do it anyways because everyone else does it. I would feel bad if I stole the software but it would make me feel good seeing the students learning and being able to use the software freely. The Fair Use Doctrine can be used to cover only so much copyright however after mass production more forceful actions must be taken to ensure that the copyrighted work does not lose value.
6.8 Describe two things the entertainment industry has done to protect its copyrights. For each, tell whether you think it is justified. Give reasons.
A copyright is an exclusive right granted to an author of a literary, musical, audiovisual or artistic work, giving the author the sole right to reproduce and distribute that work. One place in which copyright laws are protected is with Nintendo. Some of the ways in which copyright laws are protected there are under various copyrights in Nintendo's software source code, executable code, game visual display, game music, game characters, product packaging, game manuals and labels; hardware chip microcode; artwork and publications. This means that practically everything that Nintendo creates, is theirs and nobody elses. Nintendo wants to make sure that when they create something, whether it be games or music, it will be theirs forever or until they sell it because they see it as if they create it then they own it. Another way that an entertainment industry has protected its copyrights is with Skunk Records. Skunk Records is a music company which manages and produces many bands such as Disturbed. They have set up legal action to those who steal from them and are caught. The right to their intellectual property, they believe, is for those who are willing to pay for the music rather than steal it. I think that both things are justified because if someone creates something and then copyrights and patents it and what have you, then its rightfully theirs. If they are the sole owners of something that has never been senn before, then the right to that information belongs to them and them alone. Well, that is unless they are willing to sell their ideas to other companys and then their copyright policies on that certain thing is no longer theirs.
6.11 This book, like many others, includes short quotations from other people's work at the beginning of many sections. Such quotes are almost always used without explicit permission. Explain why they are fair uses.
Using quotes without explicit permission are fair uses when it comes to this book and many others, is because this book (books in general) usually have something to inform the general people. This book was created to inform students about Information Technology and Global Society and we know this as true. We have come to the consensus gentium that this book is ment solely to inform and that sure, there is profit for the author, but the book when in use, is for nonprofit educational reasons like being used in a class. Also, the books that use quotes without explicit permission do it to inform and not to make their piece of writing any better than it is. They just want the people to know more. Take this book for example, the Fair-Use Doctrine guidelines are stated almost the same as when the government first stated them. However, this book is ment to inform and educate... nothing more. Also, since this book and others use only small quotes here and there, then they are not taking much from the other persons work but rather just a crumb in the writers cake. People use each others quotes because it helps them educate and make more sense of certain things, not just to steal and say "ha-ha". Finaly, the small quotes used in this book and others do nothing when it comes to limiting the value of the persons work that had originally said the piece of text. In fact, if one book states another, and the person reading that book has not heard of said stated book then they can go get that book anf thus the economic cycle may continue.
6.13 A political group organized a forum on its Web site where people were encouraged to post and comment on individual newspaper articles relevant to political issues of concern to the group. Other participants added their comments, and debate and discussion of the articles continued. Two newspapers sued, arguing that posting the articles violated their copyrights. Analyze the case. How do the fair-use guidelines apply? Who should win?
The Fair-Use Doctrine guidelines are as follows:
- The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
- The nature of the copyrighted work
- The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
- The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work
As we can see, since the political group was posting articles that they did not have right of distribution over it doesnt matter in this case. This is because the political group that is posting and commenting over the news articles are doing it for educational purposes and for their own leizure. They are not doing it because they are making any money over it. Also, the nature of the copyrighted articles is to inform, not to dicuss just because. The members of the political group want their web site to have posts and comments on interesting subject matter, and in this case it happens to be politics. Then we have the issue of the copyright issue with matter. I believe that since the political is not taking every article, just some of the politically based ones, that it is fine because they are not taking every article that is written by the newspaper company. And since only some of the political articles are posted and commented on, that means that people will still have to buy the whole paper to get all the other articles. To post and comment on only one type of article will not have any drastic effects on the newspaper companys income. And if it does, I'll be shocked. Neither the company nor the political group should be fighting because both are doing perfectly legal things. The political group is commenting on some articles relevant to political issues and the newspaper company is producing those articles knowing that this might happen and that they will have to go on even of it does. I believe that the political group should win the case because they are a nonprofit educationally based web site and everything that they have done so far has been legal and pertains directly to the Fair-Use Doctrine. They have cheated no one.
6.14 You are a teacher. You would like your students to use a software package, but the school's budget does not include enough money to buy copies for all the students. Your school is in a poor neighnorhood, and you know most of the parents cannot afford to but the software for their children.
a) List some ways you could try to obtain the software without making unauthorized copies.
- Try to get a school grant
- Try to fundraise for the software
- Get a loan for the software
- Under the Fair Use Doctrine one may buy one copy and then copyright the product so that it may "encourage production of a useful work"
- As long as the meaning behind the copyright is educational based then it is fair game
- Since the software being used is for a nonprofit organization it is again ok to do
b) Suppose none of the methods you try work. Will you copy the software or decide not to use it? Give some arguments for and against your position. Explain why you think the arguments on your side are stronger.
- I would definatley steal the copyrighted software because if my students need it in order for them to strive academically and become better scholars then I believe that it is fair game. Some arguments for my position are that "I couldnt afford to buy the product", "The company is a large, wealthy corporation. What's one stolen piece of software going to do?", "I wouldnt buy the piece of software at the normal ticketed price anyway because I do not have the money", "Since I am making copies of the software for my students, it then just becomes an act of generosity", and "Everybody is doing it!!" are just a few prime examples. Many of these arguments are what I would say to the judge if I was put on trial for copyright infringement however, these arguments only show one side of my position. Arguments against my position would be a little bit more forceful and descriptive why it is in fact bad. Examples could be:
- "Not being able to buy the product is not an excuse for stealing it!"
- "The success of the company does not justify stealing from it!"
- "You are taking something of value from a company and not giving anything in return"
- "Sure, we have the right to buy a copy of the software, but we do not have the right to mass produce copies of the product and then distribute them!"
- "To copy something is not ethical"
- "Also, the number of people doing something does not make it right! You cannot kill someone because someone else does... it isnt right and it doesnt make any sense."
I believe that the arguments on my side are stronger because that is what I see as just. However, even though I know that stealing is bad I would do it anyways because everyone else does it. I would feel bad if I stole the software but it would make me feel good seeing the students learning and being able to use the software freely. The Fair Use Doctrine can be used to cover only so much copyright however after mass production more forceful actions must be taken to ensure that the copyrighted work does not lose value.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)