Slashdot Mirror

the article, but here's the link to the linx (badum tsh) website, with another news site for the article.

Here's a bit more regarding ITunes and patents. Even "double click" is considered an invention and was issued a U.S. patent. It doesn't matter if you don't agree. One of the reasons for computers rapid growth is that no one had a patent on them as the court ruled Dr. Atanasoff was clearly the inventor and he claimed no patent.

I didn't even need to click. I've been doing the math to figure how big a deal this iTunes thing is (not big, at least not yet).

Here are the numbers. The U.S. record industry sold $12.6 billion worldwide in various formats (almost all CDs) in 2002. This is off a bit from the peak $14.6 billion in 1999. It's important to keep in mind that, even at those levels, we're talking about nine weeks revenue for IBM.

Assuming the Windows side of iTunes Music Store continues to sell at the initial rate of 1 million songs/$1 million revenue in the first 3.5 days, that's only about $104 million per year. The Mac side sold $13 million in tunes in the first six months, so we'll put that side at $26 million per year.

That's $130 million per year for all iTMS. Even if the store doubles its sales, and then the other stores collectively match its sales, you'd be talking about total online sales of $520 million per year, still a drop in the bucket.

The growth will need to get exponential before there is any comparison with offline music sales. I'm not saying it won't happen, but that's what we're talking about, and that's how I instantly new the hed on the posting was wrong.

Moderation:
100% Telling the truth on /.: -1
Extra truth modifier: 0 (Edit)

Total Score: -1

Even the Macworld staff will own up to what most people think of QT on Windows.

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsI D=7006

Apple invented neither the mp3 player nor the pay-for-download service, yet every one that comes along is an iPod/iTunes clone. Please explain.

Slashdot didn't pick up the story when it happened a couple of weeks ago, but Be, Inc. has settled its antitrust suit against Microsoft for $23 million. Microsoft, as usual, admitted no wrongdoing in the settlement.

Readers may recall that Be brought their suit against the Microsoft back in February 2002. At the time this suit was brought, it was becoming obvious that the US government's antitrust suit against Microsoft was not going to result in any significant punishment for the convicted monopolist, and in fact time has borne this out -- Microsoft is arguably more powerful today than ever before.

Some observers felt Be's claims that Microsoft's vendor contracts excluded competitors from the market was a stronger case than the browser bundling aspect that the US department of justice pursued, but in the end it seems that Be no longer had the resources to complete the trial.

With the Be lawsuit abandoned, the best hopes for a remedy to the Microsoft monopoly now seem to be in the European courts, or with a possible regime change in the USA in 2005.

Microsoft may have gotten away with murder, but at least we've got people nursing the corpse along, as stories like the current one illustrate. *sigh*

This comment isn't offtopic....the link is wrong - there is a space where there shouldn't be one.

Use this instead.

Hard to believe the parent was modded as "insightful".

Cool! Where are the numbers to support [Mac Total Cost of Ownership lower than Windows]? Probably isn't going to cut it. [More uncontrolled ranting...]

Sad, people never learned to search the internet before pressing the flame button. There are a lot of studies that support Cringley's statement etc., and you'd be hard pressed to find a single study in the reverse!

BTW, I've seen studies supporting Linux as having a good TCO vs. Windows NT. I've never seen a study comparing Linux vs Mac TCO on desktop, and there are only a few studies comparing Linux vs Mac TCO in servers (the Mac usually comes out on top, but the studies are recent and may have bias).

Macworld UK says "WozNet is a lost cause"

Macworld has a pretty decent article

Cryptonomican bemoans the lack of information about security

Google has the goods

And there's even an article on Slashdot about it...

Last time I looked at it it was essentially a watch with both GPS and GSM (phone) built in so one could get the location of the watch at any time through their service. Sounds like a potentail DOS atack, though, if you obtain phone numbers or cell phone connection information (jamming signals, jamming GPS, etc)

Plus, since all the power is being used by the phone and GPS (chances are good the actual GPS processing is done elsewhere, like in the current E991 GPS services offered by phones) then it's unlikely that much encryption is being done at all.

-Adam

The decision reflects Apple's success in the digital video market with Final Cut Pro. "Around 80-90 per cent of our Premiere customers are on Windows," Kilisky said. "There was around a 70 per cent Windows, 30 per cent Mac split before Final Cut Pro."

"Final Cut Pro cut the business in half," he added. "It's unfortunate for those left behind - we'll be happy to upgrade them to the Windows version," he said.

Is it original? The slashdot article looks suspiciously like a derivative of this one: MacWorld UK

According to this article Apple switched from LG Electronics to Hon Hai Precision Industry as the manufacturer of BOTH the 15" and 17" iMacs.

[sigh] Same FUD, different day.

An article at MacWorld UK says that Apple is going to be switching its supplier of iMacs and eMacs. I think it's likely that the real story here is that LG will stop production of the iMac in June, NOT that Apple will stop making them completely. Obviously I can't be certain that both reports aren't true, but this certainly looks like another example of bad journalism.

"With both companies held by Apple, who will fill the void in the Windows and Linux?"

I know i didn't just read that.

The idea that Apple would work to assume control of a imperceptably tiny market like this is hardly something to warrant such a whiny question as the poster made.

With the power of 5 black holes crunched together, MS wields the controls of every computer market from the desktop OS, to fscking two button mice. And with a large number of /.'ers ready to follow them into the Abyss with C# - stop yer whining, already.

Apple creeping into a market even farther that they pretty much already 0wwn j00 (and no one cares), this is not the end of the world..

this is the beginning for a major shift of a microsocopic percentage of people who claim already less than 5% of the market.

And the funny part is that, it will end up saving those users money in the long run.

Waaah.

No independent firm can develop new hardware without supporting and licensing Microsoft product. It's simply not financially possible, given the control by Microsoft of the marketplace.

(That's Apple, if you don't want to bother clicking the link.)