He's probably comparing this with the 17" Apple PowerBook, and that's why he thinks the resolution on this laptop is high. The latest 17" PowerBook has 1600x1000 resolution, which is a step lower.
I'm getting the 17" PowerBook shortly, and I have to say its resolution looks pretty good. I don't think I could read type much smaller, so I'm not sure how much gain higher resolution gives you, and I'm a screen size junkie (I have a 23" Cinema Display which is 1920x1200, or the same resolution as the test laptop).
The 17" PowerBook is often thought of as a desktop replacement, even though the processor is obviously not as powerful as the G5. I used a 1ghz 15" PowerBook as my sole computer for a few months before I bought my G5, and performance was excellent for everything short of video special effects work.
So I think as a desktop replacement, the 17" PowerBook with its 4 hour battery life, large screen and 6 pound weight (half of the review unit) is a lot more practical, and at $2,500 it's even a bit cheaper.
But I'm sure the Black Widow's far better at gaming.
Anyone know what happened to the founders? They were strangely silent in the Wired article, even though they apparently still work for the company.
The Scientology angle's pretty interesting, and the echos of Scientology-speak with their management were positively eerie. I've come close to crossing swords with that group in the past, and I must say I'm not keen on doing so in the future.
I have to say, it's a very clever concept. It's worth visiting just to look at the bizarre creatures they've created. You don't need to sign up and sacrifice your body thetans to them in order to take a look.
Fortunately.
D
(I ran an anti-Scientology site until I found that dealing with the anti-cult was almost as life absorbing as actually being in Scientology:-( ).
The best way to solve the QuickTime Pro problem, of course, is to drink the Kool-Aid in full and buy Final Cut Studio.
It includes a no extra charge QuickTime pro license:-).
However, even I was a little upset when I realized that during the time between when I purchased Tiger and Final Cut Pro 5.0 (and corresponding Final Cut Pro Studio) came out, I would have to settle for QuickTime Amateur unless I wanted to pay for a license that I would never use after I purchased the inevitable Final Cut upgrade. This was not a very nice thing for Apple to do, not after I've blown thousands of dollars on Apple software (let alone hardware!) over the years.
I like Safari because I can use emacs keystrokes on it. I also like OmniWeb (and even paid for it, what the heck, $29 isn't going to break me or anything) because their tab implementation, with its scrolling window and page thumbnails is really cool. When I try FireFox and Opera, I note nice features but I can't use emacs command keys and without that feature life is pretty bleak over here.
I think it will be a few years yet before we see X86-only software. But I'm sure there will be software that will run a lot better on the faster X86 systems, and I'm sure that will cause me to buy one. The processor doesn't bother me as long as the OS is great.
I've really been pleased with my PowerMac G5. It's the now-ancient 2ghz dual processor model. I was expecting that I'd replace it in a year or so when the 3.0ghz came out, but of course it never did. So it's had a pretty healthy service life. It's probably going to get replaced sometime next year with some kind of quad processor machine (whether I hold off for Intel or get the last of the PowerPCs is to be determined).
I've talked to people whose number one love in their lives is fooling around with their hardware, always getting the latest video card or swapping motherboards or whatever. Even a rabid Machead like me agrees that they'd be nuts to get a Mac.
I know a music composer who probably should have stuck with an ancient machine running MacOS 9. He really doesn't like learning MacOS X because it's new and modern and he doesn't want new and modern. Pity he had to return that creaky old machine to the guy who loaned it to him, so I had to set him up with something I had, which was more modern even though I personally considered it ancient.
Then there's someone like me who's highly loyal to the Mac because I love the designer look and feel, together with Apple's great software. Of course I salivate at the new Quad Processor G5 and only tiresome financial limitations prevent me from plunking down my money right this moment.
Just because my type of person puts thousands of dollars a year in Steve's pocket doesn't mean my type is right. Nor does it mean it's wrong. It's just the way I am, and the way these other people are.
For what it's worth, when I administrated a network with Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000 and Windows XP computers, locating the various subpanels where control panels moved was a major chore.
It became much harder to find things the more modern the MS operating system, which is not really what I like to see.
Since MacOS X never implemeneted a hierarchical control panel interface, it's never been 1/10th as much of a problem to track down lost control panel elements as it was in Windows.
I'm actually thinking of doing something similar to this for a project I'm working on, so realize that I'm being the Devil's advocate here.
When I was working in IT, I had to administrate a network of Windows machines. Outlook has a user interface which has all kinds of panels that can be dragged around.
Every once in a while, somebody - and it was often me - would do this by accident and find out that a crucial panel was missing from the program, with no clue at all how to get it back. I don't even remember the procedure to get things back, but I do remember it was not all that obvious. So by simple use of the software, someone could customize inadvertently and become completely at sea.
I think geeks as a class wildly overestimate the amount of time people are willing to put into an application. They'll customize it with new wallpaper and the like, but I don't think most people like to really pour energy into the guts of something to make it work better. So I would be cautious about customizability; make sure the vanilla version is perfectly usable as it is, and that people don't have to customize in order to make use of the application.
I think you missed the point somehow. He was saying there were many non-Apple applications superior to Apple ones, while you seem to be looking to argue the opposite way.
I would add Motion to that pile. Not to mention Final Cut Pro.
My guess is that part of it is thanks to people like me, who on the whole like change. The subset of customers I represent love to buy a new release of the software, because we're getting new and more interesting goodies. For us, it just wouldn't seem right if there wasn't some radical change thrown in with the mix, as long as it doesn't slow us down much.
In other words, I think what's going on is that Steve responds to the desires of the user, particularly the user who wants to upgrade and give him money.
But even I will admit, getting rid of key caps was just plain dumb. Nobody's perfect, not even Steve.
But at least he does care, and that's why I stick with him.
But still, as one of the other replies to my post said, it sounds like pure bitterness without some examples of truly great software that's better than what Apple's created.
Perhaps you could name a few names, to further our education?
But he refuses to give examples, which is strange.
I can tell you that in my experience, the best software by far comes from Apple, from OSX on down to products like Final Cut Pro and Motion. Compare the user interface of Motion with the mess that is Flash and you'll get the point. Or compare Final Cut with Premiere.
Apple's not perfect, and I think Woz is responding to that fact. He's frustrated that even with world-class perfectionist Steve at the helm, software isn't perfect.
And of course this is true. But at least Steve's fighting for perfection - I fundementally agree with the cartoon I linked to - in an industry where most want to settle for "good enough for Government work."
MacOS X has a very thoughtful feature for people like me who have been using emacs virtually since birth.
In Cocoa text boxes, the standard emacs keystrokes - Control-N for next line, Control-P for previous, etc - work just as they do in emacs. So I can edit my text more or less as I do in emacs, which is a great blessing for me because the keystrokes are truly embedded in my fingertips.
Well, Wikipedia uses AccessKeys, and this absolutely ruins my browsing experience. I was typing merrily away writing an entry when I hit Control-O to open a new line.
Wikipedia interpreted this as my desire to log out, and I couldn't even use the back button to get my document back. I lost an hour of work and was fuming at the people who designed it.
Why would you have an accesskey for the logout function, anyway? It's not like I ever actually/want/ to log out. (I always use my own computer to compose articles, and I really, really HATE typing in passwords).
I actually created a Wikipedia bug request about this. It's something a very small number of people are extremely angry about, but the administration doesn't care since it's so few people. But I sure wish I could turn off the feature because it has sabotaged my entries many times.
I suppose I could use a regular text editor to write my entries and then post them but that's a bit of a bother, at least for me.
I remember Final Cut Pro as being absolutely first class from release 1.0, at least compared to what pathetic competition existed at the time.
I started using it at version 1.2 and was awestruck by its quality from the start.
Judging by what I've read, DVD Studio Pro is another story entirely, but I really have to defend Final Cut Pro from its detractors. On the other hand, the reason Macromedia sold Final Cut Pro to Apple is because the development team was taking years to do it and they lost their nerve. Perhaps even Apple got impatient in the more recent software.
I was very impressed by the Aperture demos, where they have heavy duty pro photographers using it, but the Ars Technica guy did seem to have a point with his images. Maybe they tested it with a lot of images that were less contrasty than those clouds.
I don't think the reviewer should be criticised for being nitpicky since the market of professional photographers is nitpicky - you're really looking for the perfect image, or close to it, and the raw image problems in Aperture do cut to the whole purpose of the program. I hope these problems can be fixed and reworked because I love the look, feel and concept of the program.
Apple looks like a real bargain when you think of what this guy's time is worth. Or even what yours is.
I know someone, a small-time user who's scared of computers, who has given up computing entirely because he can never keep his Windows box clean.
So I borrowed it (as a hardcore Mac user, I needed one to see how my web sites look on it), and Internet Explorer is just about hopeless to run, even after repeatedly running anti-virus and anti-spyware software. I don't know where he went on the net, but whenever I run the anti-spyware program it comes up with the same old names over and over again.
Still, his brand new entry-level Thinkpad limps along just barely well enough to serve as a software test PC. I don't know what mainstream people who have to use PCs do.
Not because of vendor lock-in - I really don't care about that and I do own a copy of Photoshop. But because it would be nice to understand the concepts. For instance, I'm told to blur something in step by step directions, but not told why blurring is a good idea and what kind of effects it performs.
Something that described how to draw or how to paint, but with emphasis on how to do it electronically instead of by hand.
I really think I'd have an easier time with something that was a blend of conceptual ideas (which are rare in these books) and concrete examples (that are everywhere, of course).
So if anyone can suggest such a book, I'd love to hear ideas.
I suppose I should have been more careful with my language. The PC makers started making their boxes in black or colors, leaving Steve no choice but to go to an elegant white!
Although if pressed I'll say I really, really like the aluminum/stainless steel in the more expensive models:-).
I certainly appreciate the warm courtesy and intelligence so apparent in your response.
I see minimal to no advantages in using a generic MP3 player, so that argument's gone. Apple's the same price nowadays and has far superior design.
I can and have backed up my music, so your second argument's gone, too.
Steve still makes great stuff. Who else does in this boring, white-box, generic world? I don't happen to like white-box, generic stuff, so I'm going to stick with Steve's products, thank you very much.
Nope. I had the same experience he did, and I am sorry to report Apple hasn't paid me any money to say this.
In fact, in the last few years I've dropped over $5k at the Apple Store.
Customers really do love Apple computers, and with some exceptions, Apple loves us back. True, life in the Apple camp is expensive, but there's a definite warm glow of "got what you paid for" which I just don't see in the Windows world.
Let's give credit where credit's due here. I've bought a lot of music through the iTunes Music Store, and other than being asked for a password when I buy a new machine, I've had zero trouble with iTunes DRM. I download the music, and it just works on the computers I have registered for it.
If any company can manage seamless, quality DRM acceptable to all parties, it's Apple.
Actually, it may be a misreading of demographics. Nowadays, I think people in their 20s are still trying to find mates, people in their 30s might be starting families, and so on. The amount of time we spend single and alone has definitely increased over the years.
So this means most people in their 20s shouldn't have much trouble affording gaming consoles, even multiple ones. Heck, you can buy every gaming console on the market for about $1,000, right? Put under $100 a month in the gaming kitty and you're all set. $100 even if you count buying a few games.
It's a pause to give thanks to all of the positive things about our lives. I think it's a good idea.
Canadians actually have it a bit earlier than the US, so you could say this holiday at this time is entirely US-centric.
That being said, I don't think there's anything wrong with a US-based site continuing to reflect US attitudes. The fact that it's popular in other countries simply says that people everywhere in the world are interested in the subject matter.
My impression is that Slashdot is run by a bunch of friends and any tampering with that is likely to change its unique quality. So unless they travel internationally and select their own editor from face to face meetings, I don't think an International Slashdot would really work.
Forking off a Slashdot International as a separate site, though, is something I'd probably support, at least on principle.
An interesting counterpoint is The Register, a UK-based source of tech news. For a while they were running a US version, which was basically the same as the UK site but with all the funny UK stories stripped out. Since I find the UK-based stories entertaining, I always read the UK Register instead of the US version. I think most people did the same and they discontinued a separate US Register shortly thereafter.
Of course if International Slashdot posted more stories more efficiently than the real thing, it might gain American readers who could then be treated (fairly!) like second-class citizens.
It looks like the traffic flowing to Slashdot has continued to grow, but fewer people are following the links. I think the hypothesis that people use RSS to discover important updated stories before Slashdot picks them up is plausible, especially considering how late Slashdot often is in picking up major stories.
I haven't done any detailed analysis on the decline of comment quality, and if true that certainly would be a concern.
Slashdot Mirror
He's probably comparing this with the 17" Apple PowerBook, and that's why he thinks the resolution on this laptop is high. The latest 17" PowerBook has 1600x1000 resolution, which is a step lower.
I'm getting the 17" PowerBook shortly, and I have to say its resolution looks pretty good. I don't think I could read type much smaller, so I'm not sure how much gain higher resolution gives you, and I'm a screen size junkie (I have a 23" Cinema Display which is 1920x1200, or the same resolution as the test laptop).
The 17" PowerBook is often thought of as a desktop replacement, even though the processor is obviously not as powerful as the G5. I used a 1ghz 15" PowerBook as my sole computer for a few months before I bought my G5, and performance was excellent for everything short of video special effects work.
So I think as a desktop replacement, the 17" PowerBook with its 4 hour battery life, large screen and 6 pound weight (half of the review unit) is a lot more practical, and at $2,500 it's even a bit cheaper.
But I'm sure the Black Widow's far better at gaming.
D
Anyone know what happened to the founders? They were strangely silent in the Wired article, even though they apparently still work for the company.
:-( ).
The Scientology angle's pretty interesting, and the echos of Scientology-speak with their management were positively eerie. I've come close to crossing swords with that group in the past, and I must say I'm not keen on doing so in the future.
I have to say, it's a very clever concept. It's worth visiting just to look at the bizarre creatures they've created. You don't need to sign up and sacrifice your body thetans to them in order to take a look.
Fortunately.
D
(I ran an anti-Scientology site until I found that dealing with the anti-cult was almost as life absorbing as actually being in Scientology
The best way to solve the QuickTime Pro problem, of course, is to drink the Kool-Aid in full and buy Final Cut Studio.
:-).
It includes a no extra charge QuickTime pro license
However, even I was a little upset when I realized that during the time between when I purchased Tiger and Final Cut Pro 5.0 (and corresponding Final Cut Pro Studio) came out, I would have to settle for QuickTime Amateur unless I wanted to pay for a license that I would never use after I purchased the inevitable Final Cut upgrade. This was not a very nice thing for Apple to do, not after I've blown thousands of dollars on Apple software (let alone hardware!) over the years.
I like Safari because I can use emacs keystrokes on it. I also like OmniWeb (and even paid for it, what the heck, $29 isn't going to break me or anything) because their tab implementation, with its scrolling window and page thumbnails is really cool. When I try FireFox and Opera, I note nice features but I can't use emacs command keys and without that feature life is pretty bleak over here.
I think it will be a few years yet before we see X86-only software. But I'm sure there will be software that will run a lot better on the faster X86 systems, and I'm sure that will cause me to buy one. The processor doesn't bother me as long as the OS is great.
I've really been pleased with my PowerMac G5. It's the now-ancient 2ghz dual processor model. I was expecting that I'd replace it in a year or so when the 3.0ghz came out, but of course it never did. So it's had a pretty healthy service life. It's probably going to get replaced sometime next year with some kind of quad processor machine (whether I hold off for Intel or get the last of the PowerPCs is to be determined).
D
People have conflicting needs.
:-(.
I've talked to people whose number one love in their lives is fooling around with their hardware, always getting the latest video card or swapping motherboards or whatever. Even a rabid Machead like me agrees that they'd be nuts to get a Mac.
I know a music composer who probably should have stuck with an ancient machine running MacOS 9. He really doesn't like learning MacOS X because it's new and modern and he doesn't want new and modern. Pity he had to return that creaky old machine to the guy who loaned it to him, so I had to set him up with something I had, which was more modern even though I personally considered it ancient.
Then there's someone like me who's highly loyal to the Mac because I love the designer look and feel, together with Apple's great software. Of course I salivate at the new Quad Processor G5 and only tiresome financial limitations prevent me from plunking down my money right this moment.
Just because my type of person puts thousands of dollars a year in Steve's pocket doesn't mean my type is right. Nor does it mean it's wrong. It's just the way I am, and the way these other people are.
So you're right, you can't please everyone.
D
For what it's worth, when I administrated a network with Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000 and Windows XP computers, locating the various subpanels where control panels moved was a major chore.
It became much harder to find things the more modern the MS operating system, which is not really what I like to see.
Since MacOS X never implemeneted a hierarchical control panel interface, it's never been 1/10th as much of a problem to track down lost control panel elements as it was in Windows.
D
I'm actually thinking of doing something similar to this for a project I'm working on, so realize that I'm being the Devil's advocate here.
When I was working in IT, I had to administrate a network of Windows machines. Outlook has a user interface which has all kinds of panels that can be dragged around.
Every once in a while, somebody - and it was often me - would do this by accident and find out that a crucial panel was missing from the program, with no clue at all how to get it back. I don't even remember the procedure to get things back, but I do remember it was not all that obvious. So by simple use of the software, someone could customize inadvertently and become completely at sea.
I think geeks as a class wildly overestimate the amount of time people are willing to put into an application. They'll customize it with new wallpaper and the like, but I don't think most people like to really pour energy into the guts of something to make it work better. So I would be cautious about customizability; make sure the vanilla version is perfectly usable as it is, and that people don't have to customize in order to make use of the application.
D
I think you missed the point somehow. He was saying there were many non-Apple applications superior to Apple ones, while you seem to be looking to argue the opposite way.
I would add Motion to that pile. Not to mention Final Cut Pro.
D
My guess is that part of it is thanks to people like me, who on the whole like change. The subset of customers I represent love to buy a new release of the software, because we're getting new and more interesting goodies. For us, it just wouldn't seem right if there wasn't some radical change thrown in with the mix, as long as it doesn't slow us down much.
In other words, I think what's going on is that Steve responds to the desires of the user, particularly the user who wants to upgrade and give him money.
But even I will admit, getting rid of key caps was just plain dumb. Nobody's perfect, not even Steve.
But at least he does care, and that's why I stick with him.
D
Fair enough, maybe I do.
But still, as one of the other replies to my post said, it sounds like pure bitterness without some examples of truly great software that's better than what Apple's created.
Perhaps you could name a few names, to further our education?
D
But he refuses to give examples, which is strange.
I can tell you that in my experience, the best software by far comes from Apple, from OSX on down to products like Final Cut Pro and Motion. Compare the user interface of Motion with the mess that is Flash and you'll get the point. Or compare Final Cut with Premiere.
Apple's not perfect, and I think Woz is responding to that fact. He's frustrated that even with world-class perfectionist Steve at the helm, software isn't perfect.
And of course this is true. But at least Steve's fighting for perfection - I fundementally agree with the cartoon I linked to - in an industry where most want to settle for "good enough for Government work."
D
MacOS X has a very thoughtful feature for people like me who have been using emacs virtually since birth.
/want/ to log out. (I always use my own computer to compose articles, and I really, really HATE typing in passwords).
In Cocoa text boxes, the standard emacs keystrokes - Control-N for next line, Control-P for previous, etc - work just as they do in emacs. So I can edit my text more or less as I do in emacs, which is a great blessing for me because the keystrokes are truly embedded in my fingertips.
Well, Wikipedia uses AccessKeys, and this absolutely ruins my browsing experience. I was typing merrily away writing an entry when I hit Control-O to open a new line.
Wikipedia interpreted this as my desire to log out, and I couldn't even use the back button to get my document back. I lost an hour of work and was fuming at the people who designed it.
Why would you have an accesskey for the logout function, anyway? It's not like I ever actually
I actually created a Wikipedia bug request about this. It's something a very small number of people are extremely angry about, but the administration doesn't care since it's so few people. But I sure wish I could turn off the feature because it has sabotaged my entries many times.
I suppose I could use a regular text editor to write my entries and then post them but that's a bit of a bother, at least for me.
D
Seems like his objections are still completely accurate, unfortunately.
So is he simply saying that things never change and people still recycle the same bad ideas as in the past?
D
Soundtrack Pro's pretty good. I've composed some passable music using it, and that's good for me.
D
I remember Final Cut Pro as being absolutely first class from release 1.0, at least compared to what pathetic competition existed at the time.
I started using it at version 1.2 and was awestruck by its quality from the start.
Judging by what I've read, DVD Studio Pro is another story entirely, but I really have to defend Final Cut Pro from its detractors. On the other hand, the reason Macromedia sold Final Cut Pro to Apple is because the development team was taking years to do it and they lost their nerve. Perhaps even Apple got impatient in the more recent software.
I was very impressed by the Aperture demos, where they have heavy duty pro photographers using it, but the Ars Technica guy did seem to have a point with his images. Maybe they tested it with a lot of images that were less contrasty than those clouds.
I don't think the reviewer should be criticised for being nitpicky since the market of professional photographers is nitpicky - you're really looking for the perfect image, or close to it, and the raw image problems in Aperture do cut to the whole purpose of the program. I hope these problems can be fixed and reworked because I love the look, feel and concept of the program.
D
Apple looks like a real bargain when you think of what this guy's time is worth. Or even what yours is.
I know someone, a small-time user who's scared of computers, who has given up computing entirely because he can never keep his Windows box clean.
So I borrowed it (as a hardcore Mac user, I needed one to see how my web sites look on it), and Internet Explorer is just about hopeless to run, even after repeatedly running anti-virus and anti-spyware software. I don't know where he went on the net, but whenever I run the anti-spyware program it comes up with the same old names over and over again.
Still, his brand new entry-level Thinkpad limps along just barely well enough to serve as a software test PC. I don't know what mainstream people who have to use PCs do.
D
I'm just wondering why anyone would want to do this.
Surely the more people who read your ads and can buy your stuff, the better?
D
I think she was sicced by her Sidekick, actually.
I don't think there's any Blackberry with a build-in camera, so Paris-style hijinx, with her infamous risque Sidekick pictures, are not possible.
D
Not because of vendor lock-in - I really don't care about that and I do own a copy of Photoshop. But because it would be nice to understand the concepts. For instance, I'm told to blur something in step by step directions, but not told why blurring is a good idea and what kind of effects it performs.
Something that described how to draw or how to paint, but with emphasis on how to do it electronically instead of by hand.
I really think I'd have an easier time with something that was a blend of conceptual ideas (which are rare in these books) and concrete examples (that are everywhere, of course).
So if anyone can suggest such a book, I'd love to hear ideas.
D
I suppose I should have been more careful with my language. The PC makers started making their boxes in black or colors, leaving Steve no choice but to go to an elegant white!
:-).
Although if pressed I'll say I really, really like the aluminum/stainless steel in the more expensive models
D
I certainly appreciate the warm courtesy and intelligence so apparent in your response.
I see minimal to no advantages in using a generic MP3 player, so that argument's gone. Apple's the same price nowadays and has far superior design.
I can and have backed up my music, so your second argument's gone, too.
Steve still makes great stuff. Who else does in this boring, white-box, generic world? I don't happen to like white-box, generic stuff, so I'm going to stick with Steve's products, thank you very much.
D
Nope. I had the same experience he did, and I am sorry to report Apple hasn't paid me any money to say this.
In fact, in the last few years I've dropped over $5k at the Apple Store.
Customers really do love Apple computers, and with some exceptions, Apple loves us back. True, life in the Apple camp is expensive, but there's a definite warm glow of "got what you paid for" which I just don't see in the Windows world.
D
Let's give credit where credit's due here. I've bought a lot of music through the iTunes Music Store, and other than being asked for a password when I buy a new machine, I've had zero trouble with iTunes DRM. I download the music, and it just works on the computers I have registered for it.
If any company can manage seamless, quality DRM acceptable to all parties, it's Apple.
D
Actually, it may be a misreading of demographics. Nowadays, I think people in their 20s are still trying to find mates, people in their 30s might be starting families, and so on. The amount of time we spend single and alone has definitely increased over the years.
So this means most people in their 20s shouldn't have much trouble affording gaming consoles, even multiple ones. Heck, you can buy every gaming console on the market for about $1,000, right? Put under $100 a month in the gaming kitty and you're all set. $100 even if you count buying a few games.
D
It's a pause to give thanks to all of the positive things about our lives. I think it's a good idea.
Canadians actually have it a bit earlier than the US, so you could say this holiday at this time is entirely US-centric.
That being said, I don't think there's anything wrong with a US-based site continuing to reflect US attitudes. The fact that it's popular in other countries simply says that people everywhere in the world are interested in the subject matter.
My impression is that Slashdot is run by a bunch of friends and any tampering with that is likely to change its unique quality. So unless they travel internationally and select their own editor from face to face meetings, I don't think an International Slashdot would really work.
Forking off a Slashdot International as a separate site, though, is something I'd probably support, at least on principle.
An interesting counterpoint is The Register, a UK-based source of tech news. For a while they were running a US version, which was basically the same as the UK site but with all the funny UK stories stripped out. Since I find the UK-based stories entertaining, I always read the UK Register instead of the US version. I think most people did the same and they discontinued a separate US Register shortly thereafter.
Of course if International Slashdot posted more stories more efficiently than the real thing, it might gain American readers who could then be treated (fairly!) like second-class citizens.
D
I typed appropriate terms into Google and found a few articles:
r 2005/tc2005032_0932_tc119.htm
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/ma
http://www.richardfrench.net/?p=4
It looks like the traffic flowing to Slashdot has continued to grow, but fewer people are following the links. I think the hypothesis that people use RSS to discover important updated stories before Slashdot picks them up is plausible, especially considering how late Slashdot often is in picking up major stories.
I haven't done any detailed analysis on the decline of comment quality, and if true that certainly would be a concern.
D