From: Roy Wallace <waldo000000_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:13:26 +1000

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> This again is a false comparison. The WWW doesn't have resource
> restrictions in the same manner as Rockbox. Assume the internet became
> slower for everyone, the instant any website was put up. Were this the case
> there would immediately be a concern on the value of having more information
> available versus the ability for people to access this information in a
> reasonable time frame. Assuming there were a controlling authority, any
> website put up would be looked at in terms of "how many people will this
> help" versus "how much current, and potentially future, cost will this have
> to users who will, and especially who won't, use this feature."
>
>
I'm sorry you feel that I made a "false comparison" - sounds a bit
oxymoronic to me. Anyway, we seem to agree that the issue is: "how much
current, and potentially future, cost will [the inclusion of a feature] have
to users?".
Received on 2008-10-29