I think a closer example would be the war on drugs -- it won't address the core issue in the least, but at least we'll get seventy years of raids and court cases.
According to the article, "The now obsolete phones will still work on the AT&T network, howeverthey will continue to have poor reception. Use them at your own risk."
So you can still keep your old phone, and it'll still work as it has in the past -- somewhat poorly, but not differently. Or, AT&T is offering free replacement phones that have improved reception but may not have all the features of your old phone. I don't see the problem here. If you want to stick with what you have, nothing is stopping you. AT&T is giving you a choice, which is more than most companies would do.
It depends on the disc, but wholesale cost is almost never as low as $7.50. If you want a pretty decent indicator of wholesale cost, check out cheap-cds.com; they sell at cost plus shipping & some other small fees, but you can see exactly what the stores are paying.
Wholesale generally ranges from $9-10 on older discs to $14+ on new releases by the majors. When places sell discs for less than that (and the ones on sale almost always are), then they're losing money on the sale.
I'm not saying that they're losing money on every sale or anything like that; on the whole, of course they're in the business to make profit. But on music, things are generally around break even at best to get people in the store.
Best Buy and other big box stores can sell their CDs cheaper than independent sellers and/or just-music chains because they can afford to let the discs go without making a profit or even selling them at a loss, since it gets people in the doors to buy other stuff. If you're only selling music, you can't afford to do that. Of course, once Best Buy and Target et all elimate competition, you can bet they won't be selling discs at cost anymore...
An interesting idea in theory, but delivering *100%* secure software -- at least on the grand scale of operating systems -- is a practical impossibility. Even OpenBSD, arguably the most secure operating system out there, has had at least one large remote hole in the last few years. A law like this would have the effect of practically halting software advances in this country, unfortunately.
And they also showed the scores with dual 2 GHz G5s against dual 3 GHz Xeon chips, and the G5 machine came out ahead in both integer and floating point. Plus, the dual G5 machine is $2999, whereas the dual Xeon machine tested (Dell) clocked in at about $4000.
Keep in mind that these percentages are comparing a single (not dual) G5 at 2GHz against a Xeon at 3GHz. This is not comparing a 2GHz chip with a 2GHz chip!
I've been a Linux user for seven or eight years now, and I had never even considered picking up a Macintosh until the release of OS X. OS X 10.1 sold me -- it's an absolutely fantastic piece of software.
There's a complete BSD environment going on underneath everything in OS X (you can pull up a terminal and poke around) with all the benefits that that brings -- ease of development with GNU tools, fantastic memory management, rock solid stability, multi-user ability, and a horde of other features that Microsoft can only dream of. However, you'd never know this using the OS casually, because on top of everything is a beautiful, seamless GUI that holds everything together and hides the implementation details. The OS X window manager is gorgeous, and fully functional (much more oriented towards multiple applications than OS 9 and earlier ever were,) complete with everything that you could expect, along with a lot of eye candy.
Overall, I'm immensely impressed with OS X. All the features of a standard UNIX, with the added bonus of a fantastic GUI, and good application support (Photoshop, Office, IE,.. everything you need to be productive.)
Did anyone else find their selective blocking interesting? For example, the entire machine configuration was listed, but they blocked out the word that they use for "computer" on multiple occasions. Is it really that much of a security risk if we know their geeky slang?
Slashdot Mirror
I think a closer example would be the war on drugs -- it won't address the core issue in the least, but at least we'll get seventy years of raids and court cases.
According to the article, "The now obsolete phones will still work on the AT&T network, howeverthey will continue to have poor reception. Use them at your own risk."
So you can still keep your old phone, and it'll still work as it has in the past -- somewhat poorly, but not differently. Or, AT&T is offering free replacement phones that have improved reception but may not have all the features of your old phone. I don't see the problem here. If you want to stick with what you have, nothing is stopping you. AT&T is giving you a choice, which is more than most companies would do.
Just my two cents.
It depends on the disc, but wholesale cost is almost never as low as $7.50. If you want a pretty decent indicator of wholesale cost, check out cheap-cds.com; they sell at cost plus shipping & some other small fees, but you can see exactly what the stores are paying.
Wholesale generally ranges from $9-10 on older discs to $14+ on new releases by the majors. When places sell discs for less than that (and the ones on sale almost always are), then they're losing money on the sale.
I'm not saying that they're losing money on every sale or anything like that; on the whole, of course they're in the business to make profit. But on music, things are generally around break even at best to get people in the store.
Best Buy and other big box stores can sell their CDs cheaper than independent sellers and/or just-music chains because they can afford to let the discs go without making a profit or even selling them at a loss, since it gets people in the doors to buy other stuff. If you're only selling music, you can't afford to do that. Of course, once Best Buy and Target et all elimate competition, you can bet they won't be selling discs at cost anymore...
I think the point of the article is that the modem/router actually _runs_ Linux, not just that it's Linux compatible.
The Hawthorne, CA two-disc set is $19.98 on iTMS. :)
An interesting idea in theory, but delivering *100%* secure software -- at least on the grand scale of operating systems -- is a practical impossibility. Even OpenBSD, arguably the most secure operating system out there, has had at least one large remote hole in the last few years. A law like this would have the effect of practically halting software advances in this country, unfortunately.
No, this is comparing against a 3 GHz Xeon.
And they also showed the scores with dual 2 GHz G5s against dual 3 GHz Xeon chips, and the G5 machine came out ahead in both integer and floating point. Plus, the dual G5 machine is $2999, whereas the dual Xeon machine tested (Dell) clocked in at about $4000.
Keep in mind that these percentages are comparing a single (not dual) G5 at 2GHz against a Xeon at 3GHz. This is not comparing a 2GHz chip with a 2GHz chip!
I've been a Linux user for seven or eight years now, and I had never even considered picking up a Macintosh until the release of OS X. OS X 10.1 sold me -- it's an absolutely fantastic piece of software.
.. everything you need to be productive.)
There's a complete BSD environment going on underneath everything in OS X (you can pull up a terminal and poke around) with all the benefits that that brings -- ease of development with GNU tools, fantastic memory management, rock solid stability, multi-user ability, and a horde of other features that Microsoft can only dream of. However, you'd never know this using the OS casually, because on top of everything is a beautiful, seamless GUI that holds everything together and hides the implementation details. The OS X window manager is gorgeous, and fully functional (much more oriented towards multiple applications than OS 9 and earlier ever were,) complete with everything that you could expect, along with a lot of eye candy.
Overall, I'm immensely impressed with OS X. All the features of a standard UNIX, with the added bonus of a fantastic GUI, and good application support (Photoshop, Office, IE,
Check it out if you get the chance.
Did anyone else find their selective blocking interesting? For example, the entire machine configuration was listed, but they blocked out the word that they use for "computer" on multiple occasions. Is it really that much of a security risk if we know their geeky slang?