HN user
It /could/ do, sure. There's uncertainty. Companies deal with uncertainty all the time.
Perhaps they didnt believe that internal investment could actually bring profits.
Perhaps it could bring profits, but the opportunity cost wasn't worth it.
Businesses can do all sorts of investments, beyond upgrading their file serving setup to meet the ideals of IT workers.
Yeah, sounds like the IT situation was working within reasonable parameters for the company.
As a developer, I often see other developers/Adkins propose "huge improvements" only for it to cost much more than expected and deliver less. Maybe Ferrari guy was right to ignore this suggestion.
That's the best you can ever hope for from companies.
Valve investing in Linux gaming? Same deal.
As much as some Mall in your city charging high rental rates.
I had a quick look.
Per https://www.shacknews.com/article/130287/valve-faces-antitru... , Valve are currently (?) being investigated for Most Favored Nation practices.
This is the equivalent of a high rent mall demanding that its shops don't charge less for its wares in lower rent malls.
He is fighting everyone's 30% fees. Perhaps, just perhaps, they are worth it because if they weren't the it would be easy to create a platform.
Perhaps. And perhaps its monopolistic behaviour. If so, we all stand to win by challenging it.
WTF???? So if you lose money, the he isn't going to sue you, but if you make money, then he will sue you.
Sounds like Sweeney is suggesting the hardware itself is sold at a loss, not that console manufacturers make no money.
30% sounds high. Are there anticompetitive effects at play?
I play so few games that I'm happy to buy mostly from the much smaller gog.com. I'm not sure if their fees are less, but it at least raises competition.
I generally don't trust DRM platforms like Steam or Epic, but bravo to Tim Sweeney for championing smaller publishers unable to negotiate down from Steam's 30% fees.