Shawn Fanning's New Venture

Hero? Give me a break by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-25 08:57 · Score: 2, Troll

He was just some kid who wrote a program primarily designed to trade illicit software.

Re:Hero? Give me a break by blixel · 2004-01-25 09:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

Hero - within the context of the message.

If they had just said "he's a hero" and left it at that, I would agree. But they qualified the statement by saying "heroes of the MP3 revolution". Which I agree with. Within that small, contained area, they have certainly attained hero status. Without WinAmp or Napster, what would be the state of portable music today? (Assuming no on else had come along and achieved a similar status. But if that were the case, you would be arguing that [Some Guy] wasn't a hero instead of Justin Frankel.)

Not well thought out if you need everyone to agree by CGP314 · 2004-01-25 09:00 · Score: 3, Insightful

"It's a pretty well thought-out idea, but the success of it hinges on everybody in the ecosystem getting involved,"

Sounds like all those well thought-out ideas to stop spam, that simply need everyone to agree on something new.

--
In London? Need a Physics Tutor?

American Weblog in London

original name by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-25 09:01 · Score: 3, Funny

His lawyers wouldn't let him call it AssCap (get it, poking fun at ASCAP)?

How good is this for the consumer? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-25 09:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

If people are sharing-files in some form of triangle scheme for sharing profits-- who controls the quality of the music bought? I refuse to pay for music that cannot guarantee high-quality bit-rate. And, what happens when only part of a song is downloaded that was paid for and it becomes impossible to resume the download, because the person(s) whom you were grabbing a copy from disconnect?

Re:How good is this for the consumer? by larry+bagina · 2004-01-25 09:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

I haven't tried Napster 2, walmart, buymusic, etc., but I get better download speeds from iTunes than I do from most p2p.
Having a bittorrent-type distribution system with the online music store always on might work, but there would probably be too many problems wrt DRM.
But what do I know? I've never run an unprofitable company with no business model before, Shawn has.

--
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

dead page by tsunamifirestorm · 2004-01-25 09:02 · Score: 2, Interesting

you would think his website would at least have something to explain what it is going to be... a company called SnoCap from San Franciso, sounds like a snowboarding company

New website? by ksheka · 2004-01-25 09:05 · Score: 2, Funny

News.com.com.com For when you want news about news.com.com ???

Yes, /. is redundant at times, but I thought the guys at CNet were a bit better...

--
alias uptime="echo '5:33pm up 22342352324 days, 6:28, 2124315623 users, load average: 2432.40, 12312.31, 123123.19'"

Re:New website? by koreth · 2004-01-25 09:27 · Score: 2, Flamebait

Nah, that'd be news.news.com.com.com.

Napster and Shawn Fanning by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-25 09:06 · Score: 3, Interesting

Shawn Fanning is an idiot. This is not a troll. He releases a PTP system that is so inherently unthought out and stupidly illegal and try to make a go of it. He wrote a program in VB that was what it was because he couldn't implement anything more complex. Sure, some of the beauty of Napster was its simplicity. But this is also the reason we are in a jam with PTP systems like we are today. Without Napster we would not have the RIAA court cases. We would have Gnutella systems, Bit Torrent etc free from lawyers and everyone would be happy.

Napster was a lowest common denominator PTP system. It stole MP3's. Many people thought of simple systems like this that the masses could use but most knew better than to damage PTP credibility before this. Writing a Napster program in VB would take a few days at best. Not that his idea wasn't what counts, it is and simple is usually better. But in his case there was no way around it. Napster was made to steal music. At least with Hotline and similar technologies you could say it had other purposes and in some cases make other purposes for it.

Napster has caused so many problems with legit PTP systems. My problem with it was it was so flagrant. It was a dumb mans PTP system and it brought attention to other areas that otherwise didn't want it.

Now, I probably sound like I am hating on Napster because now it's harder for me to steal things. Well, it's not harder for to steal things so you can rule that out. But, I know systems are being monitored closely now and the general public knows what a PTP system is, well sort of. I download some music I don't own. I use free software so I don't need to pirate that. But now I can get a huge fine if I D/L a song from the wrong person. I blame Napster for this. Not for me D/Ling things, but for being so stupid, flagrant and blatantly illegal about it they fucked it up for everyone.

Re:Napster and Shawn Fanning by jonfelder · 2004-01-25 09:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

One thing you cannot ignore is that napster brought P2P to the public eye. Sure we'd have P2P networks now, and they probably wouldn't have the RIAA trying to put them down. The reason why is because almost no one would be using them.

I don't like the RIAA tactics, but you have to admit that P2P is forcing them to change their business model. Would iTunes Music Store exist if P2P wasn't so wildly popular? Furthermore would we have access to so many portable music devices if it weren't for the popularity of napster and hence the popularity of digitized music (aka MP3 files)?

Not to mention that P2P gives me hope that one day artists will be able to directly reach their audience without the RIAA.

Fanning was really the first to let the gennie out of the bottle so to speak. You may think Fanning was an idiot for putting out a program designed only to steal music. I think he was pretty smart for putting out a program that finally allowed us to have something to fight the media giants with, and changed the way many people obtain their music. No longer do you have to record crappy quality tracks off the radio, nor do you have to buy 15 songs of crap for $18 to get one song you like.

P2P is a force to be reckoned with and it's because of napster that this is true.
Re:Napster and Shawn Fanning by MacDork · 2004-01-25 09:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

Shawn Fanning is an idiot. This is not a troll. He releases a PTP system that is so inherently unthought out and stupidly illegal and try to make a go of it. He wrote a program in VB that was what it was because he couldn't implement anything more complex. Sure, some of the beauty of Napster was its simplicity. But this is also the reason we are in a jam with PTP systems like we are today. Without Napster we would not have the RIAA court cases. We would have Gnutella systems, Bit Torrent etc free from lawyers and everyone would be happy.
The reason we have distributed systems in the first place is due to the destruction of Napster. If Napster had never existed, I'm inclined to believe P2P would be nowhere near as widespread as it is today, or that it would even exist at all.
That said, I see no need for any software that allows the recording industry to make money. We simply don't need the recording industry anymore. All we really need are artists, and fans. Woe be to the recording industry when the likes of iRate and CDBaby meet. It's clear that we've got the distribution thing covered with the internet. A system like iRate handles the task of getting the artist exposure with fans who will appreciate them, and a store like CDBaby handles the obvious financial needs of the artists. That's really all the current recording industry does now.
So why do we need to include the bastards who sue 12 year olds again?
Re:Napster and Shawn Fanning by Jordy · 2004-01-25 10:42 · Score: 4, Informative

He wrote a program in VB that was what it was because he couldn't implement anything more complex.

The Napster client was written using C++ using win32 calls. It was never written in VB. Ever. Granted it was more C with classes than C++, but it certainly wasn't VB.

You have to pretty naive to think that without Napster the RIAA would have simply ignored other systems that enable copyright infringement. Especially a system like bittorrent that with a central server component. Remember that Scour (which predated Napster) was sued, Aimster was sued, etc. It is just Napster received far more press than anyone else.

--
The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
Re:Napster and Shawn Fanning by me.nick() · 2004-01-25 10:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

And as for not needing the recording industry at all, I'll agree that the current incarnation of the recording industry is not required, but its uses might need some form of record companies to exist.

Record lables/companies don't only create & distribute, but they MARKET the artists and artists' products. Every time you see an artist on tv, or hear them on the radio (which is how most artists are introduced to the MASS audience), or see their posters in stores or songs in movies, the labels spent a lot of money and effort to get that exposure. How will you replace that? I know the internet can generate exposure to an already installed fan base, but how do you get more?

The internet is ideal for distribution, and with faster/lower priced desktops and music creation software, its easy to create the music. The last step is marketing, getting that music heard by a lot of people. I think that will be the only role future music companies might need to fill.

Is it too late anyway by Space+cowboy · 2004-01-25 09:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

Given there is a good freely-available format to rip into (OGG), the only way the publishers are going to get rich(er) is by value-add. That's not a terribly strong argument for a product.

The fundamental problem is I want to copy the music once I've paid for it. The music industry doesn't want me to do this - because if I can easily move it around, I can move it to my friends house (for visits, you understand :-) If they'd not been so damn greedy at the start, this state of affairs might have been (well, almost) completely avoided....

All I can say is, Good Luck - you're going to need it...

Simon

--
Physicists get Hadrons!

OCD? by Jonah+Hex · 2004-01-25 09:07 · Score: 2, Funny

which changed its name from Open Copyright Database

Might be a good thing to be called OCD, they could say their Obsessive and Compulsive about their Database software!

Jonah Hex

--
Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes

Re:Not well thought out if you need everyone to ag by BoldAC · 2004-01-25 09:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

"It's a pretty well thought-out idea, but the success of it hinges on everybody in the ecosystem getting involved," said one record label executive familiar with Snocap. "The key to its success is the peer-to-peer companies agreeing to participate. If they do participate, it could be phenomenal."

Might as well complete the quote...

The focus here is getting the peer-to-peer companies to participate. The user is going to take the path of least resistance (and money.) As long as there are free and easy to use peer-to-peer systems, projects like this do not stand a chance.

However, projects like this could easily take over... if and only if they include one vital key. The makers of the peer-to-peer software will make more money. Kazza, emule, and all the others will lay down their arms and gladly go to a pay-type system if they can make more money that way.

The problem with that is... there is not enough money to go around. For peer-to-peer to make more that means the music companies are going to have to take less. (They can't rape the artists any more than they already are.)

AC

Please don't... by JamesP · 2004-01-25 09:12 · Score: 3, Insightful

is currently developing file-sharing mechanisms that would allow the music industry to earn money."

If anyone here thinks the RIAA should get more money please raise your hands...

Yes, yes... I thought so...

--
how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?

Please don't compare the two. by jon_c · 2004-01-25 09:17 · Score: 4, Flamebait

Shawn Fanning is no Justin Frankel. He's not even in the same league. Justin Frankel is a hero, Shawn Fanning is just some dope that got lucky.

--
this is my sig.

Re:Please don't compare the two. by CaseyB · 2004-01-25 10:21 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sorry. From a software development standpoint, Napster was BAD. The architecture of the network may have had some inspiration, but the implementation was uniformly awful. The VB client was an abomination.
On the other hand, Frankel's work is consistently excellent. He writes creative applications that are small, elegant, and fast. The two people really are in different leagues.

What a bizarre plan by Python · 2004-01-25 09:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

This seems doomed to fail. It sounds like Sean is trying to sell DRM, based on audio fingerprints, to the record labels. Several technical problems exist with such schemes, such as the ability of the fingerprint to truly fingerprint the content, and of course, the need to trust the client, amongst other problems with DRM. In short, DRM built in the client won't work.

The big elephant in the room, however, is Sean himself. It sounds like SnoCap is trying to sell a "Secure" model to the entertainment industry, from someone the industry does not trust: Sean. This doesn't bode well for the industry. This is someone the industry claims contributed to the decline of CD sales, and yet then they will turn around and work with him to prevent it? Doesn't add up. Further, if well healed security and DRM companies have not suceeded with the industry, why should SnoCap where others have failed? SnoCap doesn't even appear to have any security people on its staff, so where does it get its expertise? Can anyone say "implementation flaw"? It just doesn't add up. DRM from a company and people that don't have any experience with DRM, security or working with the entertainment industry. Yeah, they're gonna get alot of cooperation from the RIAA.

Let us not forget the fact that Sean is not well liked in the entertainement industry, nor are the former investors in Napster. These people have little hope of getting the RIAA onboard. Even if they do manage to gain some ground with the industry, its a steep climb for SnoCap to anything close to sucess.

BTW, why would you want to use a P2P client that has DRM, when you can use something like eMule, Kazaa, GNUNet or any other P2P client that doesn't? Yeah, this will do about as well as Napster would have if they had implemented DRM. Dead in the water.

--

Python

Re:What a bizarre plan by jfengel · 2004-01-25 10:12 · Score: 4, Insightful

why would you want to use a P2P client that has DRM, when you can use something like eMule, Kazaa, GNUNet or any other P2P client that doesn't?

Well, for starters I'd pick a P2P client that doesn't include spyware, which lets out Kazaa, at least the original. Not that DRM doesn't contain its own nasty potential for privacy violations, but I'd pick it over Gator.

Then I'd look for the biggest network, because the more people use it, the more stuff you can actually get your hands on. If this guy can make a lot of stuff available, many people might go for it, because dealing with DRM may well be less bad than 200-hour failed downloads from an illegal system. That's why people pay a buck to Apple: "free" but unavailable isn't free.

Still, in the end I dunno what this guy thinks he's going to get. P2P works only because it's free. When you pay for music, you get the privilege of a dedicated fast server with a support staff. Pay music on P2P would be trying to get other people to do the storage and network space. I'm not participating in that.
Re:What a bizarre plan by Python · 2004-01-25 11:37 · Score: 3, Informative

Yep. People pay for apple because they serve the content. With a P2P model, you have no idea what service you are going to get from a peer. The problem with the P2P pay-as-you-go model is that you have no QOS guaranteed in the model. Maybe you get the download now, maybe it takes a few days, maybe its a good recording, etc, you just don't know. Come on, for pennies you can get the music NOW!. With SnoCap you get... what? DRM crippled content? A slow P2P download? An untrustworthy company filled with people that don't care about the users or the content owners? No thanks. They don't sound like they plan to do anyone any favors
For most people, the old school P2P model works because they already paid for the bandwidth (ISP fees), they own the computer and, they don't mind waiting for the content. It didn't "cost" them anything, so let it ride. Sean is apparently not as smart as everyone thinks. This makes no sense. Napster worked because it was "free" and it was the only option at the time. Now there are many many other options, and they are vastly superior to napster, they offer other content as well (video, boosk, software, etc.), and lets be honest, Napster was a trivially simple setup: client -> server. This is a real P2P system like gnutella, kazaa, etc.. Sean invented the mainframe, someone else invented the PC of the P2P world. His ideas are ancient history and he hasn't had a new idea since then. Frankly, all he did was create a central directory for DCC IRC transfers. Neat, useful, revolutionary, but its ancient history now. There are much better options and he seems stuck in the past.
Regardless, SnoCap appears to lack the key ingredient that is needed: value. People have to see that there is a point to using it, more content, faster D/ls, quality, time not wasted, money, etc. Given the unlikeliness that Sean can convince an industry made up of technophobes with petty beefs towards him, long memories, and a history of not caring about either the artist or the consumer, SnoCaps chances of working out a good deal for all parties are slim. These are not people that play well with others, let alone their enemies: Napster founders and executives. The whole P2P revolution the recording industry believes cost them a ton of money, and is continuing to hurt them. Why on Earth would the recording industry trust someone that they believe cost them billions?
This SnoCap thing is ridiculous. You couldn't ask for a bigger joke. The users won't trust Sean because he's "sold out", he wants to build DRM on top of P2P, and the entertainment industry can't stand him or the people involved with him. Its absurd. If I didn't know any better, I would wonder if this was some big fake story for what the company is really doing. But seeing who invesnted in it, I'm not suprised. These are the same people that thought poring money into Napster, without anything close to a business model was going to net them billions. Yeah, so how is that working out for them now? Thought so.
Move along folks. This is ysterdays news. This is the the sad story of a dot-bomb crew trying to relive their glory days in the most absurd and attention grabing way possible. The industry might throw them a bone, but they have nothing to add to the current mix. iTunes and others are already doing this, and without all the mess. Its cheap, its easy, and if you don't want to even pay a few cents for your tunes, you can still get them from Kazaa, eMule and so on. Nothing to see here at all, except a sad sad attempt to try and re-invent Napster.

--
Python

OGG vs SnoCap by BoldAC · 2004-01-25 09:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

Do not consider this a troll... (as I am sure your alarms are going off already) but I do not understand why this kid is getting rich as hell, and the makers of OGG are not.

This kid just has an idea for a peer-to-peer system and he already has a large angel investor... the same angel investor that poured large amounts of money into napster. And the system doesn't even exist yet.

On the otherhand, take OGG -- a kickass music format that we all love and cherish. A few advertising wizards could turn it into the standard music format on the internet. Where are the VCs and angel investors for OGG?

OGG is a proven product that rocks. SnoCap is little more than white text on a blue background.

SnoCap will make money because non-tech people remember that napster exploded with potential. SnoCap will make money because investors see that I-Tunes is working.

OGG will struggle because the non-tech investing community doesn't understand the power of a new and better music format.

The world is twisted.

AC

Re:OGG vs SnoCap by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-25 09:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

This kid just has an idea for a peer-to-peer system and he already has a large angel investor... the same angel investor that poured large amounts of money into napster. And the system doesn't even exist yet.

To put it in perspective:

I know the readers of /., for the most part, have a problem with people actually making $ off of software. IMHO Napster is a peice of computing history. It brought P2P into the mainstream, and forced media companies to take notice. iTunes and the like owe their existance to Napster.

Frankly, unlike many of the .com's out there that produced a great number of optionaires, Sean produced something REAL that MILLIONS of people found USEFUL.

Sean's riches have allowed him to move out of his parents' basement and get a haircut; You should worship him.

As for Ogg, audio CODECs are a dime a dozen. Listening to you geeks argue that Ogg is better than, say WMA, is like listening to audiophiles argue about which DAC sounds better in their hi-fi. Who cares?

I have a log of the program's debug output! by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · 2004-01-25 09:26 · Score: 5, Funny

Snocap has been working on ways to identify songs, as they are traded through a file-swapping network, including using a technique called "audio fingerprinting," which monitors the sonic characteristics of music files.
shawn $ fingerprint_id_test test_files.txt LOADING INPUT TEST FILE: beethoven.mp3 Identifying ... 100% Match: Beethoven, Ludwig Van, classical LOADING INPUT TEST FILE: coltrane.mp3 Identifying ... 100% Match: Coltrane, John, Jazz LOADING INPUT TEST FILE: chembros.mp3 Identifying ... 100% Match: Chemical Brothers, electronic 77% Match: Daft Punk, electronic 75% Match: Noise, industrial-moise-recording LOADING INPUT TEST FILE: britspears.mp3 Identifying ... 100% Match: Spice girls, teenage pop 100% Match: N'Sync, teenage pop 100% Match: Backstreet Boys, teenage pop 100% Match: Hilary Duff, teenage pop 100% Match: Maris Willson, teenage pop 100% Match: Holly Valance, teenage pop 100% Match: Mandy Moore, teenage pop 100% Match: Vitamin C, teenage pop 100% Match: Christina Aguilera, teenage pop 100% Match: Five, teenage pop 100% Match: Jennifer Lopez, teenage pop 100% Match: Aaliyah, teenage pop 100% Match: Rachel Stevens, teenage pop 100% Match: Pink, teenage pop *** Endless recursion error. Core dumped ***

--
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash

Love Your Enemy by BoldAC · 2004-01-25 09:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

"Shawn is a smart, articulate guy. That goes a long way," said one source familiar with Fanning's discussions with record labels. "He walks in a world that they desperately want access to."

If I were this group of record companies... I would kill myself and do the world a favor.

Wait...

If I were this group of record companies, I would hire a kid like this in a heartbeat. He is likely to understand the peer-to-peer community much more than the record executives. He's help people do it the free and easy way... and maybe he can transition everybody into a more "legit" method of music transfer.

I don't think the record execs are scared of this guy... I think they are having wet dreams about his re-securing their monolopy on music.

What is this kid likely to do? We'll just have to wait and see. He's probably smart enough that he could sweet talk his way into a lot of vaporware dollars...

AC

Justin Resigned AOL/Nullsoft by lotsofno · 2004-01-25 09:38 · Score: 5, Informative

Justin recently announced that he has resigned from AOL and Nullsoft:

Trying landoleet.org
Attempting to finger justin@landoleet.org -
Login: justin - - - - - - - - - - Name: Justin
Directory: /home/deadbeef - - - - Shell: /usr/local/bin/tcsh
Never logged in.
New mail received Thu Oct 9 15:07 2003 (PDT)
- - Unread since Mon Mar 10 12:28 2003 (PST)
Mail forwarded to: justin@blorp.com
Plan:
Jan 22, 2004

Well, it took a bit longer than I (or likely anybody else expected), but after four and a half years, I've resigned from my position at AOL. Yay/sigh/etc.

This will likely be the last time I update this .plan, but I might find myself updating the .plan of justin@blorp.com.

peace out.

eof
-
End of finger session

Fortunately, this won't really result in a loss of quality with future Winamp versions. their two main coders, "Francis and Christophe," Will be taking over most of the development. From what I've heard, they did most of the work with Winamp 5. And as most of those who've taken the time to really check out Winamp 5... It really whips the llama's ass.

"allow the music industry to earn money" by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-25 09:39 · Score: 3, Funny

allow the music industry to earn money

Next, we'll be teaching fish to swim, birds to fly, and rabbits to reproduce....

Re:Not well thought out if you need everyone to ag by gl4ss · 2004-01-25 09:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

there's just one problem with that as well, the systems where there IS NO COMPANY, so 'more profit' is not a motivator.

-

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Common MIsconceptions..... by szyzyg · 2004-01-25 10:40 · Score: 5, Insightful

You know most people here seem to be of the opinion that Napster was an obvious concept and anybody here couldhave come up with it. The Next step in everyone's misguided logid is that Shawn is therefore no smarter than the average slashdot reader..... then jealousy kicks in and people start calling him names for getting all the attention.

Well, at the start of 2002 I ended up out of a job and managed to get a position in Napster, long past the days when they were running the full service. There was the Beta test for the pay service running as well as a few potentially groundbreaking court cases. Turns out I was the last engineer Napster hired.

Anyway, I'd studied the napster setup in great detail and I pretty much had the same opinions - I figured that Shawn was an average geek who had got lucky. I didn't expect he'd much from him, hey, I'd spent 10 years in academia, I'd spent years 'saving the world from killer asteroids' (http://szyzyg.arm.ac.uk/~spm), and....

I'd wrote and released the first mp3 radio software and then watched Justin Frankel and winamp get all the credit for 'inventing' it a year and a half later. I went to napster expecting that Shawn wasn't anything special.

Boy was I wrong, he is a genuinely smart guy, yes he was also lucky - just like I'm a smart guy who wasn't so lucky. I think a lot of technical people underestimate him and sometimes this is working to his advantage.

So, lay off the assumption that luck == stupid - smart people get lucky all the time too.

Re:Common MIsconceptions..... by Python · 2004-01-25 11:52 · Score: 3, Interesting

Oh please. Lets be realistic. He had a revolutionary idea in a market vacuum. He wrote some cool, useful, revolutionary software - but he is not a business genius. You can have the greatest idea on Earth, but if you can't make it into a business, then you won't make a cent of it. Sean wanted to make money, and he made nothing, nor did his investors or anyone except the lawyers.
So lets review, Sean was smart enough to let his Uncle own over 70% of the company before they had even hired one employee, smart enough to never construct a model that would generate one cent of revenue, and smart enough to let his VCs and lawyers run Napster into the ground and he's working with them again? Wow, what a plan, anyone wondering whats going to happen again?
Just to be clear, how much did you, or anyone else net from Napster? Aside from all the lawyers of course? Nothing? This is sad. Sean is a clever opportunistic programmer, but he's not a sharp businessman. He's in league with the same people that ran Napster into the ground. He's a dupe. He's being taken advantage of, at best, and he's shortsighted at worst. I for one hope he cuts the bounds, turns his back on these idiots that ruined Napster and truly does his own thing.
Don't be so quick to hand him all the credit for the implosion of Napster though. Afterall, he was surrounded by geniuses. Brilliant people that blew the chance of a lifetime and netted nothing, and convinced him it was a great idea. No doubt how they have strung him along with this one.
A sad story. Pity the man.

--
Python

It makes me feel... by Andy+Smith · 2004-01-25 11:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

... physically sick to see Shawn Fanning referred to as a hero.

There are many cold, calculating and ruthless people in the music business. Shawn Fanning is one of them. Please don't ever think for one single second that he was "one of us".

He's not the real Napster by Stubtify · 2004-01-25 11:35 · Score: 3, Funny

He's not Napster! I'm the real napster. Shawn was my roommate in college, I rote napster and named it that because I was always napping. When I fell asleep one day he stole the program from me and now he gets all the glory.

Re:Why by Zefram · 2004-01-25 11:46 · Score: 2, Informative

I hate to feed a troll and be off topic, but it annoys me that people see no reason for record companies. The music industry goes through piles and piles of utter crap to pick one crappy band that might make it to radio. They're an amazing shit filter, the public does NOT want to be inundated with unfiltered bands.

A recording company will help the artists develop their style. I don't mean make overs, they'll hook them up with a producer who will make the band sound like they know how to play so they can have a decent album. The record company will also split the bill for (a) hiring the producer who will make them sound decent, (b) hiring the engineers and renting the space for them to record (usually $50/hr for the room itself, and it takes months to record), (c) produce the actual CDs, market said CDs, make posters, buy ad space in magazines, try to get interviews with the band.

A recording company will also help get the band into venues, which are usually all run by one person in an area and are really hard to get into (the bigger venues, smallers clubs are run independently, sometimes).

Like I said, the whole music industry is a tremendous crap filter. Before a band gets on the radio it has to jump through so many flaming hoops that most don't make it, thankfully. I speak from experience, having been in bands and done much label work. Do I think things should stay this way? No f-ing way, there must be a better way to do it... and I'm out there trying things.

--
What about MEEPT?!?!

Re:Winamp 5 is a hog by pyrros · 2004-01-26 08:26 · Score: 2, Interesting

[Nice troll, being a winamp fanboi, i can't help but reply]

Have you actually tried winamp 5 or are you talking out of your ass?

Seriously, winamp 5 is winamp 2 with winamp3 skin support (which is where most of the hogging comes from, and you can even disable it by uninstalling the "modern skins support" plugin) plus ripping and burning support (depending on who you ask -- it was added in an unofficial 2.x version)

On my athlon 2100+ system, winamp5 takes up 2.5 megs of ram while playing with a classic skin and less than 1% cpu (task manager says 0%) and while it jumps up to 15 megs with the default modern skin, cpu use stays the same.

On the new functionality thing, modern skins are a huge plus, as they have better international/ unicode support, they can alpha blend (try always on top + transparency with auto opaque on focus/hover). Also, classic skins feel very very small on 1280x1024 and up. The music library is better too, and the global hotkeys are kind of useful. I personally don't care about ripping and burning but i guess someone could like them.

36 of 165 comments (clear)