To smooth out these fluctuations, Valve needs to start selling Steam Decks in China!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: benstor214I don't comprehend why the fluctuations tend to grow stronger recently.

. . . And since Valve won't tell anything about the methodology of the survey, I expect we'll keep on not comprehending.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

You know, to this day every time I see "Master Chief" I find myself thinking "Master Chef".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: 14

Quoting: Cybolic

Quoting: 14Companies are for-profit, ya know? Go to church if you want more of a family feel. Companies are not your family.

I'm afraid I have bad news for you....

Sorta funny, but you're not claiming they're for profit, are you?

Regardless, if you don't like my example, my point still stands. Think of a different example I guess.

Ahem. "The library".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Anyone else get the feeling that lately, various projects that were sort of not bothering with Wayland, having a sort of "leave it till later" attitude, are finding that "later" is now?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: StoneColdSpider

Quoting: Purple Library GuyThat is so not the reason. The reason is the execs are the ones with the power, making the firing choices. "Hmmm . . . should I fire myself, or a bunch of guys I've never met? Decisions, decisions . . ."

The shareholders have the power to order the board to fire the CEO and they also have the power to clear out the Board of Directors...... But they dont.......

Because they're all the same people and they all know what game is being played. So, the people with the direct power to fire CEOs are boards of directors. People on boards of directors are typically executives on other companies; most of these people sit on multiple such boards. The CEO the directors are evaluating sits on some of their boards of directors. It all interlocks. They do their best to avoid being rude enough to judge each other, or reduce their performance bonus even if they just ran the company into the ground, let alone sack them.

As to the shareholders themselves, there are currently three basic kinds of shareholder structures. There's the kind where there are many shareholders and no small group really controls it, which are increasingly rare. These are hardly ever activist, certainly not about overriding boards of directors with respect to CEOs; the small shareholders don't know enough about what's going on and they don't know each other so it's hard for them to organize. There's the kind controlled mostly by one or a few major shareholders. Major shareholders are of course very rich; they hang out with CEOs, not with line workers, and they think roughly the same way, particularly since CEOs are also significant shareholders. And, there's the kind that are controlled by Blackrock or similar funds. These funds are run by . . . CEOs who are on various boards of directors.

It has nothing to do with what would cost money or what would work, it has to do with who's in what class.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BelaptirAre you suggesting that this (not)fifa is not just a rooster update

So, like, more colourful feathers, bigger wattles?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Well, I'm sad for the hundreds of people who lost their jobs.
But if hundreds of people were going to lose their jobs, I'm pleased it's a signal that Epic is doing badly.

As to the Epic store . . . I don't think their cute shallow tricks with the exclusives and free games and this and that were ever going to build that store into serious competition for Steam. I'd go so far as to say it was a bad strategy and playing it straight, building up the store's features and doing things in harder, more high road kinds of ways would have been a better strategy. That said, it still probably wouldn't have worked. Trying to create a major competitor to Steam is really hard, because of network effects and because Valve do a pretty good job. I think Epic's plan was kind of doomed from the start; their belief that with enough money to sink into it they could pull it off was fundamentally mistaken.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Grogan

Quoting: PenglingHow many buzzwords does this guy use? Yikes!

Buzzwords are a pet peeve of mine and as long as the execs can keep coming up with presentations full of them, it won't be them losing their jobs.

Listen to how this flows, he nailed it :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyV_UG60dD4

I especially hate IT parroting full of buzzwords. I wish those twits realized how dumb they sound, it's a turn off for me.

Weird Al is a genius and I love the way he not only did this, but did it with a totally hippie "Peter Paul and Mary" kind of vibe that's totally at odds with the whole corporate culture thing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: StoneColdSpider

Quoting: PenglingSeriously, though, this is yet another example of why consolidation is bad for everyone. Why is it never the high-ups who took the company in this direction who lose their jobs for it?

Simple....... Its costs more in payouts to fire the CEO or Board or Upper management than it does to fire the office grunts...... Thats why the office grunts are the first to go......

That is so not the reason. The reason is the execs are the ones with the power, making the firing choices. "Hmmm . . . should I fire myself, or a bunch of guys I've never met? Decisions, decisions . . ."

View this comment - View article - View full comments