90% of 60s music was completely awful. 90% of 70s music was completely awful. 90% of 80s music was completely awful. 90% of 90s music was completely awful. 90% of 00s music was completely awful.
True, but the 10% of 60s, 70s, and 80s music that was great is 10 times better than anything recorded today.
Really? Every year I download Billboard's Top 100 of the year.
Well there's your first problem right there. But if you do that, you at least have to admit that Billboard Top 100 changed somewhere around the hair metal era of the mid/late 80s. Sure there was a lot of fluff pop on there back in the day, but there also was a lot of timeless classics (and not just radio single classics). The Top 100 since about 1990 has been nothing but pop singles and one-hit wonders (for the most part).
And what music in the past 10 years will have the longevity and replayability of Dark Side of the Moon? (I have a few ideas, but not a lot of mainstream ones). Even my favorite modern band (Foo Fighters) will not be as 'legendary' in the grand scheme as Pink Floyd. I'm curious as to which music in the 2000s we'll still be playing in 2020.
My kids (16, 12) tell me all the time that "my" music (mostly album oriented rock and art rock of the late 70s through mid 80s) sounds like it's modern. To which I tell them, when you play real instruments with real virtuosity, your music is timeless. You can't really tell the difference between a Tom Petty live performance recorded in the early 80s from one today, for example, because there's nothing different about the tech (other than the fidelity is better these days....sheesh, did I just say fidelity? Get off my lawn!)
Seriously, Steve Jobs was wrong (something I don't say lightly) when he said "people don't want to 'rent' their music, they want to own it". Well, close...sorta. People don't necessarily want to own their music, but they are definitely NOT above the concept of paying for access to things. With Spotify, there's no difference between me owning a song versus pulling it down from a server, on a practical level (why do I need the file on my local device?). Yeah, yeah I know, what if Spotify goes out of business...then oh well, I didn't lose something I paid to to own, I simply lost access to which there will be several alternatives for.
Now if you want to own your music, nothing wrong with that, but to assert that NOBODY would go for a monthly service fee for access to iTunes is bull-headed hubris. I've played hundreds of hours of Spotify music for free, which is something I would have gladly paid for before this free and easy alternative came around. Just think of all the years I would have gladly paid for iTunes "rentals" on my music...le sigh.
It's more like a government that lacks enough transparency that the common slashdotter assumes the government has the time and energy to monitor its 300 million citizens' private communications. If there were more transparency, you'd quickly realize it isn't nearly as insidious as you think, based on pure logistics.
You aren't as interesting as you think, and "the government" doesn't have enough manpower to monitor even a fraction of the billions of communications that go on daily.
Once the tinfoil hat group does the basic math, they'll realize it simple isn't likely that they'll ever be spied on by their own government.
Are you seriously using a web cam as proof of hardware success? Not to mention I've never even seen one in the wild, but seriously...a web cam is the measurement?!?
Collective plurals are weird in US English. In UK English a company or a team are plural. Manchester City are champions...New York Giants are champions (same in both languages. ) Manchester are taking the pitch....New York IS taking the field, but the Giants ARE taking the field (UK vs. US). I prefer the UK version because it is more consistent.
Except in the case of Microsoft who make boatloads of money for a product nobody "really" wants to buy, but end up giving in because of their own insecurities. "Hey I need this for home because I have it at work, even though like most people on the planet, I'll never do any work at home, and I don't actually need Microsoft Office, but hell through that in too, because that's what everyone else has."
Microsoft is the most confounding success story in business history.
You changed the tense though. I think you mean "MSFT decide not to offer..." to keep it parallel with the original construct. But then again, you'll have people who don't realize that British English and American English differ in this regard.
I got more than what you give me credit for, but disappointingly low, considering this is slashdot where things like really great hardware suck if they costs more than the rent they have to pay for their moms' basements. $200 for RAM...oh the humanity. Instead, for $80, I'll buy this 4 inch thick 12 pound Dell and use the money I save to buy 8 more months of WoW subscription (that my 12 pound Dell can't run, so I have a $300 build-it-yerself rig for that).
Thank you. I'm a he btw. To the point, I was "stoked" because either way, I'm going to spend the money. Why not get one that is new (thus less prone to breaking again for a while), has better performance, and doesn't cost any more money? Hell, my 2008 Mazdaspeed3 just blew up and the price to fix it ($3800) wasn't worth it, so instead of sinking ~$4k into something with 100k miles that might break again tomorrow, I put $6500 down on a new car (the value of my car after the cost of the repair,...it was paid off). Sure I have a car payment for 24 months, but I also have a shiny new car that, even if it blows up in the next 3 years, won't cost me a dime to repair.
So no, it's not an Apple fanboy thing, it's a convenience/value thing.
Because voting is a protected expression. You are free to select somebody for president based on any logic you want. Race, however, is a protected class, and thus carriers relevant civil rights protections and rules for employers.
I don't understand what's so hard to understand. Hiring a black guy because he's black is not racism. NOT hiring a black guy because he is black is.
And finally, your last statement is one we can agree on.
From what I've seen, you aren't "upgrading" 8GB of RAM to 16GB, you are buying a model with 8GB or a model with 16GB. It's not as simple as just adding 8GB more. I understand in user-replacable laptops you can just fill another slot, but there are no "slots". You don't recover the RAM you are upgrading to use in another computer or sell on eBay. Therefore, you have to price the cost of 16GB of RAM, not 8GB. Which, by the way, is an argument FOR user-replaceable RAM, but I don't think that's feasible given the engineering design of the thin form-factor.
And for your HDD analogy, that's exactly how it works with the non retina Macbooks. If that is your requirement (to save money), then the engineering tradeoff of non-user replaceable hard drive because of ultra ridiculously thin form factor is not for you. But a non-retina Macbook Pro. It's not like Apple charges your for 8GB of RAM, takes it out and keeps it for themselves, then forces you to buy 16GB of RAM. They make two models. Pick one that suits your needs. If neither do, buy something else. Forcing decade-old paradigms on a product that is obviously trying to buck decade-old paradigms doesn't make much sense. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, makes sense to you, there are plenty of non retina display laptops from Apple and other manufacturers to chose from.
$120 for preinstalled RAM upgrades isn't really a big deal for someone considering this model, especially in a computer that starts at $2100. Imagine if you will a high-end car brand buyer NOT buying a $75,000 car because he didn't want to spend $150 on floor mats he can get at Wal-mart for $15. Pretty stupid, in the grand scheme.
Well, for starters, if the entire trackpad surface is a physical click button (not talking about the tap to click, but you actually depress the track pad surface), then repetitive motion is reduced not having to go down to the bottom of the track pad. Right click register anywhere on the right half of the track pad surface. Even less RSI inducing is using two fingers to right click, however, that doesn't solve your problem of inadvertent clicking. Which, by the way, is why it is off by default.
And for cryin' out cryin', show me a trackpad on the market that is more effective in conducting "real work". Maybe they don't work "for you", but at some point you have to concede you are an outlier.
Agreed that it's problematic that it's not user-upgradable (for certain customers), but the machines come with either 8GB or 16GB. They don't add 8GB when you order a 16GB model. And is that Amazon price the same type of custom shaped RAM that fits in an ultrathin portable and uses low energy requirements, like that in the Retina display Macbook Pros? Isn't mass produced similar form-factor ram chips like that on Amazon cheap because there's so much of it available (honestly don't understand RAM as a commodity, so I'm just asking, not saying)? It would follow that custom ram that works in the ultrathin form factor and with the lower power requirements for longer battery life would be more expensive.
The target customer for this product thinks 8GB is already enough OR they'll go for the insane 16GB amount because $200 isn't a lot of money when spending $2100 (at least). In three or four years, something new and shiny will be out. To this market segment (and I admit, I'm in it), the RAM is not an issue.
Yes, my "quick search on newegg.com" was, imagine this, a quick search on new egg.com, which is why I said, "Quick search on newegg.com has 16GB DDR# RAM at $149.
So your price is effectively $30 cheaper, for RAM with a form factor not made for an ultra-thin notebook with low power requirements. Congrats, but I don't care about $30.
Which is more likely, the fact that individuals are acting with their own self interest in mind and the fact that people tend to vote with people who they perceive to benefit from. The fact that most democrats tend to vote in favor of federally funded science programs and universities and are general proponents of aid for college.
I have a simpler explanation. PEOPLE (not Democrats) vote in favor of federally funded science programs and universities and are proponents of aid for college because it's good for society. So sure, if that's what you mean by "self-interest", I agree. For me a better society is in everyones self-interest.
Or is it more likely that because I identify more as X than Y, clearly X must be superior in all the ways that I believe myself to be superior, which is what your argument basically comes down to.
Says you. That's not my argument at all, nor did I say anything to infer as much.
People vote for who they think will benefit them the most.
I'm a "people" and I don't vote that way. I'm sure there are millions more who don't vote this way either. I was in the military for 10 years and I never advocated increasing the defense budget, for one small example.
People with higher education tend to work in education because in the business world with a few exceptions (law fields, medical fields) having an advanced degree really doesn't transfer to all that better pay and a better job.
This is pretty awful logic. Since having an advanced degree is a requirement for all people working in higher education, it only makes sense that all people in higher education have advanced degrees (duh). The reason people without advanced degrees don't work in higher education is because they aren't qualified. I have an advanced degree in Education and I make 6 figures as a training manager. I'm pretty sure there are zero teachers with BA degrees that make 6 figures. It appears there are more fields out there other than law and medical that reward higher salaries for higher education than you suggest.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you miss the bit about "Teens listen to whatever they're surrounded by"? The teens didn't choose that music, the game company did.
Game companies understand that teens buy whatever games their parents GIVE THEM MONEY to buy. Appeal to the one with buying power and commence profit.
90% of 60s music was completely awful.
90% of 70s music was completely awful.
90% of 80s music was completely awful.
90% of 90s music was completely awful.
90% of 00s music was completely awful.
True, but the 10% of 60s, 70s, and 80s music that was great is 10 times better than anything recorded today.
Really? Every year I download Billboard's Top 100 of the year.
Well there's your first problem right there. But if you do that, you at least have to admit that Billboard Top 100 changed somewhere around the hair metal era of the mid/late 80s. Sure there was a lot of fluff pop on there back in the day, but there also was a lot of timeless classics (and not just radio single classics). The Top 100 since about 1990 has been nothing but pop singles and one-hit wonders (for the most part).
At least dubstep is kind of original and, more importantly, cool sounding and head bobbing (says this 42 year old classically trained musician).
And what music in the past 10 years will have the longevity and replayability of Dark Side of the Moon? (I have a few ideas, but not a lot of mainstream ones). Even my favorite modern band (Foo Fighters) will not be as 'legendary' in the grand scheme as Pink Floyd. I'm curious as to which music in the 2000s we'll still be playing in 2020.
My kids (16, 12) tell me all the time that "my" music (mostly album oriented rock and art rock of the late 70s through mid 80s) sounds like it's modern. To which I tell them, when you play real instruments with real virtuosity, your music is timeless. You can't really tell the difference between a Tom Petty live performance recorded in the early 80s from one today, for example, because there's nothing different about the tech (other than the fidelity is better these days....sheesh, did I just say fidelity? Get off my lawn!)
Herp a durp...Why would I not think a greater than symbol would not show up in my title :-(
So as I was saying: Spotify is greater than iTunes...
...and I say that as an Apple Fanboy.
Seriously, Steve Jobs was wrong (something I don't say lightly) when he said "people don't want to 'rent' their music, they want to own it". Well, close...sorta. People don't necessarily want to own their music, but they are definitely NOT above the concept of paying for access to things. With Spotify, there's no difference between me owning a song versus pulling it down from a server, on a practical level (why do I need the file on my local device?). Yeah, yeah I know, what if Spotify goes out of business...then oh well, I didn't lose something I paid to to own, I simply lost access to which there will be several alternatives for.
Now if you want to own your music, nothing wrong with that, but to assert that NOBODY would go for a monthly service fee for access to iTunes is bull-headed hubris. I've played hundreds of hours of Spotify music for free, which is something I would have gladly paid for before this free and easy alternative came around. Just think of all the years I would have gladly paid for iTunes "rentals" on my music...le sigh.
It's more like a government that lacks enough transparency that the common slashdotter assumes the government has the time and energy to monitor its 300 million citizens' private communications. If there were more transparency, you'd quickly realize it isn't nearly as insidious as you think, based on pure logistics.
You aren't as interesting as you think, and "the government" doesn't have enough manpower to monitor even a fraction of the billions of communications that go on daily.
Once the tinfoil hat group does the basic math, they'll realize it simple isn't likely that they'll ever be spied on by their own government.
...or that the "Department of Defense" actually defends US soil?
Yes, it actually DOES defend US oil...oh wait...
Are you seriously using a web cam as proof of hardware success? Not to mention I've never even seen one in the wild, but seriously...a web cam is the measurement?!?
Collective plurals are weird in US English. In UK English a company or a team are plural. Manchester City are champions...New York Giants are champions (same in both languages. ) Manchester are taking the pitch....New York IS taking the field, but the Giants ARE taking the field (UK vs. US). I prefer the UK version because it is more consistent.
This is a dumb conTROVersy.
Except in the case of Microsoft who make boatloads of money for a product nobody "really" wants to buy, but end up giving in because of their own insecurities. "Hey I need this for home because I have it at work, even though like most people on the planet, I'll never do any work at home, and I don't actually need Microsoft Office, but hell through that in too, because that's what everyone else has."
Microsoft is the most confounding success story in business history.
You changed the tense though. I think you mean "MSFT decide not to offer..." to keep it parallel with the original construct. But then again, you'll have people who don't realize that British English and American English differ in this regard.
I got more than what you give me credit for, but disappointingly low, considering this is slashdot where things like really great hardware suck if they costs more than the rent they have to pay for their moms' basements. $200 for RAM...oh the humanity. Instead, for $80, I'll buy this 4 inch thick 12 pound Dell and use the money I save to buy 8 more months of WoW subscription (that my 12 pound Dell can't run, so I have a $300 build-it-yerself rig for that).
I'm going to go with "people must like them". Unless there are some interesting tin-foil hat theories out there I haven't heard yet.
Thank you. I'm a he btw. To the point, I was "stoked" because either way, I'm going to spend the money. Why not get one that is new (thus less prone to breaking again for a while), has better performance, and doesn't cost any more money? Hell, my 2008 Mazdaspeed3 just blew up and the price to fix it ($3800) wasn't worth it, so instead of sinking ~$4k into something with 100k miles that might break again tomorrow, I put $6500 down on a new car (the value of my car after the cost of the repair, ...it was paid off). Sure I have a car payment for 24 months, but I also have a shiny new car that, even if it blows up in the next 3 years, won't cost me a dime to repair.
So no, it's not an Apple fanboy thing, it's a convenience/value thing.
That's dumb logic. With that, you could just as easily say 16GB of RAM from Apple is only $200, but 8GB is free! Spin works both ways.
Because you haven't used race to discriminate against him.
Because voting is a protected expression. You are free to select somebody for president based on any logic you want. Race, however, is a protected class, and thus carriers relevant civil rights protections and rules for employers.
I don't understand what's so hard to understand. Hiring a black guy because he's black is not racism. NOT hiring a black guy because he is black is.
And finally, your last statement is one we can agree on.
From what I've seen, you aren't "upgrading" 8GB of RAM to 16GB, you are buying a model with 8GB or a model with 16GB. It's not as simple as just adding 8GB more. I understand in user-replacable laptops you can just fill another slot, but there are no "slots". You don't recover the RAM you are upgrading to use in another computer or sell on eBay. Therefore, you have to price the cost of 16GB of RAM, not 8GB. Which, by the way, is an argument FOR user-replaceable RAM, but I don't think that's feasible given the engineering design of the thin form-factor.
And for your HDD analogy, that's exactly how it works with the non retina Macbooks. If that is your requirement (to save money), then the engineering tradeoff of non-user replaceable hard drive because of ultra ridiculously thin form factor is not for you. But a non-retina Macbook Pro. It's not like Apple charges your for 8GB of RAM, takes it out and keeps it for themselves, then forces you to buy 16GB of RAM. They make two models. Pick one that suits your needs. If neither do, buy something else. Forcing decade-old paradigms on a product that is obviously trying to buck decade-old paradigms doesn't make much sense. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, makes sense to you, there are plenty of non retina display laptops from Apple and other manufacturers to chose from.
$120 for preinstalled RAM upgrades isn't really a big deal for someone considering this model, especially in a computer that starts at $2100. Imagine if you will a high-end car brand buyer NOT buying a $75,000 car because he didn't want to spend $150 on floor mats he can get at Wal-mart for $15. Pretty stupid, in the grand scheme.
Well, for starters, if the entire trackpad surface is a physical click button (not talking about the tap to click, but you actually depress the track pad surface), then repetitive motion is reduced not having to go down to the bottom of the track pad. Right click register anywhere on the right half of the track pad surface. Even less RSI inducing is using two fingers to right click, however, that doesn't solve your problem of inadvertent clicking. Which, by the way, is why it is off by default.
And for cryin' out cryin', show me a trackpad on the market that is more effective in conducting "real work". Maybe they don't work "for you", but at some point you have to concede you are an outlier.
Agreed that it's problematic that it's not user-upgradable (for certain customers), but the machines come with either 8GB or 16GB. They don't add 8GB when you order a 16GB model. And is that Amazon price the same type of custom shaped RAM that fits in an ultrathin portable and uses low energy requirements, like that in the Retina display Macbook Pros? Isn't mass produced similar form-factor ram chips like that on Amazon cheap because there's so much of it available (honestly don't understand RAM as a commodity, so I'm just asking, not saying)? It would follow that custom ram that works in the ultrathin form factor and with the lower power requirements for longer battery life would be more expensive.
The target customer for this product thinks 8GB is already enough OR they'll go for the insane 16GB amount because $200 isn't a lot of money when spending $2100 (at least). In three or four years, something new and shiny will be out. To this market segment (and I admit, I'm in it), the RAM is not an issue.
Yes, my "quick search on newegg.com" was, imagine this, a quick search on new egg.com, which is why I said, "Quick search on newegg.com has 16GB DDR# RAM at $149.
So your price is effectively $30 cheaper, for RAM with a form factor not made for an ultra-thin notebook with low power requirements. Congrats, but I don't care about $30.
Which is more likely, the fact that individuals are acting with their own self interest in mind and the fact that people tend to vote with people who they perceive to benefit from. The fact that most democrats tend to vote in favor of federally funded science programs and universities and are general proponents of aid for college.
I have a simpler explanation. PEOPLE (not Democrats) vote in favor of federally funded science programs and universities and are proponents of aid for college because it's good for society. So sure, if that's what you mean by "self-interest", I agree. For me a better society is in everyones self-interest.
Or is it more likely that because I identify more as X than Y, clearly X must be superior in all the ways that I believe myself to be superior, which is what your argument basically comes down to.
Says you. That's not my argument at all, nor did I say anything to infer as much.
People vote for who they think will benefit them the most.
I'm a "people" and I don't vote that way. I'm sure there are millions more who don't vote this way either. I was in the military for 10 years and I never advocated increasing the defense budget, for one small example.
People with higher education tend to work in education because in the business world with a few exceptions (law fields, medical fields) having an advanced degree really doesn't transfer to all that better pay and a better job.
This is pretty awful logic. Since having an advanced degree is a requirement for all people working in higher education, it only makes sense that all people in higher education have advanced degrees (duh). The reason people without advanced degrees don't work in higher education is because they aren't qualified. I have an advanced degree in Education and I make 6 figures as a training manager. I'm pretty sure there are zero teachers with BA degrees that make 6 figures. It appears there are more fields out there other than law and medical that reward higher salaries for higher education than you suggest.
The ability to quickly repair Thinkpads is a key reason I buy them instead.
Worst selling point ever. "Look, when this breaks down, it's easy to fix!"