The record companies will lose money as a result of slashing prices to compete. This will lead to them representing fewer acts and those will be only the ones that are safe bets (the heavily produced Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys, Enrique Iglesias, etc) and less of the risky (read: interesting) ones. Diversity in record stores will suffer as p2p flourishes. If you want an actual packaged CD of a band that is more intertesting than the aforementioned acts, you're eventually going to have to actually go out to their show and buy it from them yourself. I personally think that's a great thing. Supporting live music, giving more money to musicians and less to distributors is all good in my books. If you're a proponent of p2p filesharing as I am, don't later whine that there's nothing good in the stores.
I'm afraid I have to disagree. Firstly, since cd sales do not appear to have suffered ANY ill effects in the 5 or so years that mp3s have been available to the public at large through file swapping services, I think its highly unlikely that the music industry will feel compelled to slash prices.
But more to the point, I think that the very bands you mentioned are the ones more likely to suffer as a result of fileswapping. Independant bands and lesser known names get exposure and sell more cds, while the big names who put out overmarketted crap are the ones who are downloaded.
The marketting may have convinced you that you have to have the new Britney spears album, but why ask mommy for the 15 dollars when you can just as easily download it. Meanwhile nearly all the cd's I've bought in the past few years have been of groups I've NEVER heard played on the radio and never would have heard of at all had I not downloaded a song beforehand.
If anything, I think the reason the music industry fights file sharing so hard is not because it hurts cd sales (we already know otherwise) but because it works against their efforts to create those "safe bets" you mentioned. Suddenly using media monopolies to ensure that the latest piece of crap the backstreet boys put out is played constantly on the radio doesn't have the effect it used to . ..
When Microsoft announced their portable media center operating system which is meant for devices EXACTLY like this one, a very high percentage of the comments were along the lines of: "Nobody wants this. We don't need video. You can't watch video while jogging. This will fail miserably."
Now apple has announced it, and I hear little aside from praise and jubilation. So what's suddenly changed? Did you all wake up this morning and say "You know what, I do want a portable video player. I was dead wrong 2 weeks ago when I said no one woudl want that."
Or was it simply that all the apple fanatics (come on, you know you're out there) over-reacted because the title of the previous story called it an "ipod killer"?
I want to know what's suddenly changed that we all think this is a great idea when apple announces it, but it was an awful idea when Microsfot announced it. ..
P.S. I'm not trolling, check my karma if you don't believe me. If this thing will play Divx without forcing me to re-encode into some DMR'ed format, I'll definately be buying one. . .
GreyMagic started work on this issue with Microsoft on 11-Mar-2004. They have quickly confirmed our findings and were able to produce a fix less than two days later. As a result, Hotmail is no longer vulnerable to this method of exploitation.
Wow...I'm actually sort of impressed that Microsoft fixed a vulnerabillity in their product that was pointed out to them in email, rather than ignoring it until it blew up in their face. . .
Just so you're clear, the only have LESS battery life when you use them to play VIDEO. If you use them for music only, they have LONGER battery lifes than the ipod.
But in general, I have to agree that if all you want is music, an ipod is better. Though the market for PVP's does overlap a bit with the market for ipods, for the most part, its not fair to call any of these devices "ipod killers" yet.
Nevertheless, that doesn't make them neat little gizmos by their own right. I think alot of the people asking "Why?" just don't get it. . . They've confused the fact that they have no use for such a device to mean that no one would, which is simply not true. There's all sorts of neat things you can do with these that many people will be interested in.
Digital Photographers can take them for their abillity to display jpegs as a means of portable storage and viewing. Since this will most likely support USB on the go, they can just plug their camera right in and look through the days shots.
Anime freaks will be dying to get ahold of these. Business travelers will be able to watch movies on the plane on a device that also fits in their pocket and holds their schedule for when they land. Who doesn't want a PDA with a hard drive? It may be a tiny bit bigger than an ipod, but if lets you carry around one device instead of two or 3, then its an improvement in my book.
The point is, just because you can't watch a movie while jogging doesn't mean there aren't 100 other things you do with this that you can't do with an Ipod that people are gonna like.
This particular unit overcomes the biggest hurdle of the previously mentioned units by being much smaller. I don't know how big your minidisc player is, but maybe thats your niche. If you JUST want o listen to music and ultra-portabillity is a priority for you, then this may not be your device. But that doesn't mean other people aren't drooling over it. . .
The first archos unit was ok, a bit bulky, but its main probelm was it's inabillity to support most currently encoded Divx files. You'd have to re-encode them to a lower resolution to get them to play. If this one lives up to spec, it will have solved both of those problems soundly -- since the average divx file usually clocks in at 640x480@30fps.
I guess all you ipod owners must live much more active lifestyles than me -- since you talk about not being able to watch video while jogging or other such nonsense. I want one of these for when I'm *sitting*. I want to kick back and watch a movie or some anime when I'm sitting on a plane waiting for it to go somewhere, or when I'm sitting on my ass waiting on something. I know I'm not alone when I Look at all these announced PVP's and drool. I've personally put off buying an ipod waiting for a pvp to come out that wouldn't require me to reencode my existing divx files (as both the lyra and the archos would).
The only real downside to this one, which appears to be by far the slickest one announced, is a little tidbit left out of this particular article: It won't be out until the christmas season. Whereas almost all of the competetion is scheduled to come out between April-June.
Still, It might just be worth waiting a few extra months to see if archos can deliver on this promise. ..
I sell Diablo 2 items on ebay. It's good money for very little work. Unfortunately, there's been a recent outbreak of fraud by users who buy items using stolen ebay accounts and pay with stolen paypal accounts. The items are virtual, so they recieve them almost instantly -- when the user reports their account stolen a few weeks later, the sellers have the payments retracted and get stuck with the bill.
These aren't just little kids trying to get items for free. There's a definate pattern here. People, who I imagine don't even play Diablo 2, have taken towards buying D2 items with stolen paypal accounts and on some legitimate account (which actually belongs to them) they resell the items. Thus they end up with money in their paypal accounts which is very cleverly laundered from stolen paypal accounts in a manner which is almost untracable. So all those people phising for paypal accounts have found a way to keep the money without having any sort of records connecting their money with the account they stole.
The only weakness of this plan is that, of course, is that the accoutn which does the actual reselling of the stolen items must be a real account. I have taken a couple hours of my time to track down the legitimate account of a person who ripped me off for roughly 150 dollars, and tried to bring this person to eBay's attention, but they don't care. After all, he's a seller generating seller fees for them -- they're not gonna do anything unless I somehow give them ironclad proof.
You would think would an overwhealming level of circumstancial evidence (he started selling the just a few hours after the first items were purchased using a stolen account, he sells the same items in the same quantities as were stolen by the two accounts I know to have been stolen by the same person, he even recieved his first seller feedback from one of the stolen accounts for his cheapest item) would be enough to convince ebay to even consider some sort of investigation. But they won't even respond to my emails anymore (and I'm a powerseller, supposed to be entitled to "priority support").
Let's face it, ebay is complicit in the fraud committed by these individuals. They do not act strongly to stop them. They do not actively monitor for fraud (if I can search completed listings and tell you who's a fraudulent buyer and who's not, then certainly ebay could).
So then it's not really suprising that ebay users would take to doing ebay's job for them -- someone has to do it. There's no real alternative to ebay at this point (yahoo auctions is a sad, sad shell of ebay) and people depend on ebay to make a living.
Heck, the thought of buying something from the legitimate account of the person who stole 150 dollars from me just so I could request the phone number from ebay and do a reverse look-up had crossed my mind. But even if I did get his home address, what would I do with it then? Show up on his doorstep with a baseball bat?
I'm at a loss for ideas. Now with all my auctions I'm forced to screen my buyers very carefully. Calling long distance to verify that the people using the ebay account are in fact the real users, checking bidding histories for suspicious patterns.
I want to treat my customers like customers, not like criminals. But I see no real alternative as long as eBay continues to drop the ball on halting fraud.
The big color screen is only in use if your watching videos. So you get he *SAME* Batery life if you're just listening to music (maybe slightly less if you spend a bit of time in menus). You only get less if you choose to use the video capabillities.
Thanatopsis: its well over that by now. They sold 100,000 units JUST in On-line orders from their website. This was before they managed to get a retail presence.
Now of course, you can go into best buy and buy it -- but I have no idea how many they've managed to sell since getting retail space. Anyways, I think 100,000 units for a no-name, non-retail product is pretty damn impressive. It show's a geniuine demand.
Or, to put my argument another way, tell me you don't want one of these.
I know I'd knock down my own grandmother to buy one of those. Granted it's just a mock up and the technology might not all be here yet, but you have to admit that's way better than a normal ipod.
No one's suggesting you're gonna watch movies while jogging. While jogging, you'll leave the screen off to save battery and just listen to music. But next time you're on a long plane flight or you're killing time away from home, you can bust that baby out and watch that episode of the Simpsons you tivoed but never got around to.
You could fit a 3 inch or larger screen on an ipod. Remember screensize goes by diagnol not by length or width. A 3 inch screen is bigger than you'll find on MOST portable tvs.
So now imagine this: You have two devices. Both are the same size. They both play the same mp3 files with the same battery playback. One has a nice large color screen for file lists and can also use that screen to playback video files or display pictures directly from your digital camera. It costs 50 dollars more than the other unit. Which one will you buy?
It's just a matter of waiting for the technology to catch up a bit so that the cost and size both decrease enough to make video a standard feature . . . give it 3 years or so and it'll happen.
How is the AV320 a smaller package? It's pretty bulky. Understand that Microsoft is selling SOFTWARE here, not an actual hardware product. The hardware is being produced by MANY different companies (creative, iriver, and several other famililar names from the mp3 player field).
So while the AV320 may be smaller than one offering, its highly doubtful it will be smaller than all of the offerings.
And of course the AV320 suffers the crippling drawback of forcing you to reencode your existing divx files to make them playable on the player. I'd hold out more hope for the av400 or 500 which are rumored to be coming out soon.
I don't which specific device the article is refering to -- but most of them support divx. And there are quite a few people clamoring for a device that is both portable and plays divx. Just look at archos, they've sold well over 100,000 units of their AV300 PVP -- and with it, you have to re-encode your avis because it can't support the resolutions most are encoded at.
That market overlaps with the ipod's market at some points, but not others. It wont' be until these devices become as small as ipods that they could really be considered "Ipod killers". So while it may be fair to say it's not an ipod killer, its not fair to say there's no market for it.
And 3 years from now, when these things are as sleek and small as an ipod, and do everything else an ipod can do, they will defiantely be ipod killers. Of course, by then I'm sure Apple will have probably added video to the ipod anyways (cost will be significantly less an issue by then, and battery drain only increases if you actulally use it to play video).
I personally was going to buy an ipod sometime back, but have held off deciding I might as well get something that'll do video too. I haven't jumped on the archos bandwagon because I don't want to reencode my files.
The new PVP's based on Microsoft's OS might be good, but personally I'll probably buy whichever is the first out that is reasonably well designed and can play 640x480 divx files at 30fps. Right now I'm keeping a close eye on the Mec Station and the Tight Taz.
I, and the hundreds of thousands of others, who signed up for this beta test and are eagerly awaiting our chance to download the beta whole-heartedly thank you.
I know whenever I'm anxiously waiting to download a file from someone, I think to myself "I hope this site gets Slashdotted."
On behalf of everyone who signed up for the beta, and whoever provides Blizzard with their bandwidth, "Thanks Slashdot!"
Have you seen Blizzards client? They won't even release a.torrent file. They make you download thier downloader in order to get the file. Trust me, they made changes. They want to restrict who has access to download -- and you do that by modifying the client and not releasing the new source.
I think part of the reason you see an open source product able to gain so much corporate support so fast is that it was release under the MIT license instead of the GPL.
Not having to release the source code I think is a huge draw to large corporations who like to keep things proprietary.
Although many would consider that releasing the source code being optional is the downfall of the MIT license, it is in some ways also its major strength.
Goto google and type in "nintendo profits" and see what comes up. You'll find virtually every hit has something to do with Nintendo and FALLING profits.
THere are dozens of articles all with hard numbers all of which will tell you what I already told you.
If you do a search for "Nintendo profits 2003" you'll find articles from when nintendo missed its 10 million unit goal by about a million units, and you'll also find that they were losing money for the first fiscal half of 2003.
As for you "noticed I refused to back up my claims", I refused no such thing. You never asked me to back them up.
Look, the point is, I see Nintendos actions like this:
Nintendo, dependant on its handheld gaming dominance for continued profits, sees the looming threats of the PSP and others and has gotten nervous. Rather than letting the strength of thier products stand on their own, they've turned to the sort of anti-competetive measures that we've come to expect out of the Microsofts of the world.
I'm not predicting Nintendo's death; I'm not claiming anything particularly outrageous or that I can't back up. Nintendo's actions thus far may not quite be up to the level of the SCO, but this patent basically gives them the capabillity to rise to that level. What we've seen so far is only the first action they've taken using this patent. Consider all the possibillities. Consider the royalties they can now try to claim from companies producuing emulators which have nothing to do with Nintendo (Newton on Palm for instance). Consider the fair-rights uses which Nintendo is attempting to strip from consumers.
Their actions are outrageous and there's simply no way you can defend them.
Oh, and as for the Nintendo loyalists giving up Nintendo, I'm not hearing it from Slashdotters. As a college student, one of my part time jobs was at a game store. I worked there for well over a year.
I used to sell gamecubes and gamecube games. Trust me, the dissapointment out there is genuine. We always had used gamecubes sell because people were always trading them in -- but we never had used PS2's or Xboxes for more than a day.
Time and Time again, I would hear the same complaints "There are no games!". Nintendo has put itself in the habit of only releasing one-two major games per month, and unfortunately in the last 4-5 months, most of those games have been big dissapointments. When you go 4-5 months waiting for a new game and the *BEST* game to come out during that time span is Pac Man versus (which regretfully was given away for free to people who reserved a game that ultimately no one liked, I can't even remember which game).
That is a ridiculous comparison, and maybe why it was modded as a troll in the first place.
I happen to think its a relatively apt analogy. . . Once again, I point out "Simply because you disagree with something someone says does not mean they are trolling"
They have faced competition for years now, and are still #2 in the home console market, #1 in the handheld market.
My statement was directly in reference to the handheld market only, which as you know or should know, is a market which they've managed to have relatively limited competetion.
They still dominate the handheld market.
Microsoft dominates the operating system software market -- does that mean their product is the best? There are better portables than what Nintendo is offering, just not easily available.
Nintendo's future uncertain? When? I know that some journalists have tried to spin it that way, but when did a profitable company with billions of dollars available start having an "uncertain future"?
Their future is uncertain because it's not clear what business they will be in 5 years from now. I'm not doubting they will still be in business, just whether or not they will still be in the same one. There is a realistic chance that whatever upcoming console they have planned could well be thier last. Thus, their future hingest upon it's success. Do they remain a console hardware company, or do they retreat back to the handheld market and focus on console software for someone elses hardware.
It has always been crystal clear to me that Nintendo is in this for the long run. They have a niche market, and as long as the other console makers continue to spew out "adult" games with more graphics than gameplay, Nintendo will have secured their income.
Nintendo put out alot of really bad games lately. Some of them were good (the new mario kart was kinda fun), but others just weren't up to par with what people expect out of Nintendo. Only the fanboys were impressed (of which I assume you are one by your fervent defense of the indefensible).
You don't get it do you? Nintendo is turning a profit - in both markets. And it dominates the handheld market. It is number two in the home console market. Nintendo's "long-term future" is no unsure at all. It is profitable, it has billions to spare, and it has a niche market which it holds onto like nothing else.
What company are you looking at? Nintendo turned a profit in 2003 -- barely. They managed that thanks thier near christmas price cut which helped them sell a decent number of consoles. Prior to that price-cut (for the entire first half of fiscal 2003) they were LOSING MONEY. Even after the successful holiday season, it only barely gave them a profit for the year as a whole.
As of this time last year, Nintendo had sold less than 1/5th as many gamecubes as sony sold PS2s. They even fell short of their own projected goal of 10 million (by about a million units).
At this point, Nintendo is almost entirely dependant on strong Game Boy advance sales to maintain their razor thin profits, and luckily for them they've managed to face almost zero real competetion until now. But soon they will be faced with genuine competetion from the very same competitor that dominates them in the console market. Clearly that does note bode well for Nintendo's financial success this year or next.
As for the niche market you speak of, I assume you mean the loyal Nintendo fanboys who fervently defend its every move without question. And yet, even in this seemingly secure niche, I see far less stabillity than I see in similar niches.
Rarely do I hear a mac user say "Well, I've had enough of this poor selection of games. I'm buying a PC tommorow." And yet I've heard many times lamentations that "this is not the Nintendo I grew up with" and I've seen increasing disillusionment among even Nintendo's most loyal fans.
Well, it most certainly is not "insightful" or "interesting":
It was the "title" of the post which contained the information I felt was "insightful". Comparing Nintendo (in this particular instance) to the SCO struck me as a particularly apt analogy.
Nintendo still dominates the handheld market completely Nintendo is still #2 in home systems, beating Microsoft, and unlike Microsoft, turning a profit from their home systems Sony and Microsoft have done equally bad things in the past, so it's not like ditching Nintendo to go for one of the others is a noble thing
1) Yes, but they were once uncontested and now are about to face a flurry of competetion. 2) They're only number 2 because of very strong sales in Japan -- in most places of the world they are a distant third (and 3rd out of 3 isn't exactly hot stuff). 3) I dont' particularly care for Sony or Microsoft either, but I'm sad to see Nintendo join their ranks. The simple fact is that you may hate Nintendo for doing this, but if you choose to buy Sony or Microsoft instead, then you are just a hypocrite, because they are equally bad, and have done equally bad things in the past. Bleem, anyone? If you are going to let Nintendo know that we will not support this (this which is an idea that I personally support, but that's besides the point), then boycotting them in favor of Sony or Microsoft just shows a serious lack of judgement on your part.
Where in my post or my post's parent did you find anyone advocating Sony or Microsoft? I dislike consoles personally, and as for portables, Nintendo isn't as great as everyone seems to think. There are plenty of excellent alternatives to the Gameboy Advance. Frankly, the GP32 (by a korean company called GamePark) is LEAPS AND BOUNDS ahead of the gameboy advance (one of its best uses, ironically, is emulation...you can load your roms on it and play classic nintendo games). It's clearly the best handheld on the market. I've also heard many great things about the Tapwave Zodiac. ..
That, Cyberllama, is why the grandparent might as well be modded as "troll" when it's gotten both "insightful" and "interesting" already, without justification.
When I made my post, it had recieved only one moderation -- troll. For the reasons I've outlined above, I felt that was a very unfair bit of moderation -- hence my post.
And the "lagging behind" comment is beyond silly. You cannot say that someone who dominates a market and is #2 in another "lags behind". That, too, shows a serious lack of judgement.
I dont' know exactly what the original poster meant by "lags behind". He could have meant that they lag behind in sales, which is somewhat true.
If we're being honest, we have to admit that Nintendo is treading a fine line. Remember how uncertain its future was just a year ago? Would they ever make another console again, or would they follow segas lead and give up on hardware. There was serious speculation that they might, It wasn't until recently that Nintendo made their decision (you could argue that they made the decision long ago, but only recently made the decision PUBLIC, but could show you why you were wrong) to keep making consoles.
The point is, Nintendo's long-term future is unsure, and it appears that they intend to try to secure it via the SCO's infamous "litigate instead of innovate" approach.
Alternatively, the original poster might have meant that Nintendo lags behind in terms of the technology they're using. I would have to agree with that assessment to an extent, I think Microsoft clearly wins that department -- no one else has comparable graphics right now. Also the lack of any sort of coherent on-line service is clearly a strike against Nintendo (Phantasy Star Online does NOT count). Nintendo does have a bit of catching up to do in some respects. It wouldn't be completley unfair for someone to say that they are "lagging behind".
No one said "dead". And just because you disagree with someone's assessment of a certain products market strength does NOT make them a troll.
The problem is, too many companys have extremely loyal fanboys who are simply unwilling to believe that sometimes large comapnies (even the ones they like) do the things that large companies do that we all hate.
Any legitimate criticism of Apple, Nintendo, Linux (Yes I'm aware it's not a company, but the same idea applies) on Slashdot is immediately modded down to troll or flamebait regardless of how accurate or insightful it might be.
As for Nintendo's market penetration, they are number 2 world-wide, and #3 in Europe/US (strong sales in Japan keep them at #2 worldwide). They used to be number 1, but they've clearly slipped a bit. I would agree with the assessment that constitutes "lagging behind". Just because you disagree, however, certainly does mean the original poster is trolling.
They aren't the leader of the "video game industry". They're a distant third in the console wars (at least here in the states).
True thier handheld marketshare is significant and likely to remain so for at least a few years (depending on the success of products from competetitors). But that alone cannot offset their spectacular plummet from top of the world to bottom of the heap in the console department. Nintendo is struggling, and acts like these are the acts of a desperate company -- but that cannot excuse or justify them.
And yet, if you think about it, this patent covers so much more.
Want to make a Newton emulator for your Palm? Better pay nintendo.
Want to make a TI-85/89 emulator for your Palm? Better pay Nintendo.
This is a pretty damn outragous patent which Nintendo has clearly shown a will to abuse. It's the very same sort of business tactic which has caused the SCO to earn so much of our ire (though the SCO's target hit a bit closer to home for many of us).
I don't know why someone would moderate something so insightful as "troll" (I mean, come on, its not like we're talking about Apple -- theres no reason to squelch legitimate criticism.) Perhaps because it was posted as an anonymous coward. ..
Anyways, I fully agree. Nintendo has crossed a line here that should not be crossed and we must let them know that we will not support it.
IANAL, but I don't see how this patent could possibly stand up against any sort of scrutiny. How could Nintendo possibly claim to be the first at emulation on a handheld when they so clearly are not fist?
Slashdot Mirror
The record companies will lose money as a result of slashing prices to compete. This will lead to them representing fewer acts and those will be only the ones that are safe bets (the heavily produced Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys, Enrique Iglesias, etc) and less of the risky (read: interesting) ones. Diversity in record stores will suffer as p2p flourishes. If you want an actual packaged CD of a band that is more intertesting than the aforementioned acts, you're eventually going to have to actually go out to their show and buy it from them yourself. I personally think that's a great thing. Supporting live music, giving more money to musicians and less to distributors is all good in my books. If you're a proponent of p2p filesharing as I am, don't later whine that there's nothing good in the stores.
.
I'm afraid I have to disagree. Firstly, since cd sales do not appear to have suffered ANY ill effects in the 5 or so years that mp3s have been available to the public at large through file swapping services, I think its highly unlikely that the music industry will feel compelled to slash prices.
But more to the point, I think that the very bands you mentioned are the ones more likely to suffer as a result of fileswapping. Independant bands and lesser known names get exposure and sell more cds, while the big names who put out overmarketted crap are the ones who are downloaded.
The marketting may have convinced you that you have to have the new Britney spears album, but why ask mommy for the 15 dollars when you can just as easily download it. Meanwhile nearly all the cd's I've bought in the past few years have been of groups I've NEVER heard played on the radio and never would have heard of at all had I not downloaded a song beforehand.
If anything, I think the reason the music industry fights file sharing so hard is not because it hurts cd sales (we already know otherwise) but because it works against their efforts to create those "safe bets" you mentioned. Suddenly using media monopolies to ensure that the latest piece of crap the backstreet boys put out is played constantly on the radio doesn't have the effect it used to . .
P.P.S. I'm speaking to those who posted saying "Good idea apple" and not necessarily to those who posted saying "It's an obvious april fools joke."
I just didn't see anyone who posted, "It's a bad idea".
When Microsoft announced their portable media center operating system which is meant for devices EXACTLY like this one, a very high percentage of the comments were along the lines of: "Nobody wants this. We don't need video. You can't watch video while jogging. This will fail miserably."
.
Now apple has announced it, and I hear little aside from praise and jubilation. So what's suddenly changed? Did you all wake up this morning and say "You know what, I do want a portable video player. I was dead wrong 2 weeks ago when I said no one woudl want that."
Or was it simply that all the apple fanatics (come on, you know you're out there) over-reacted because the title of the previous story called it an "ipod killer"?
I want to know what's suddenly changed that we all think this is a great idea when apple announces it, but it was an awful idea when Microsfot announced it. .
P.S. I'm not trolling, check my karma if you don't believe me. If this thing will play Divx without forcing me to re-encode into some DMR'ed format, I'll definately be buying one. . .
GreyMagic started work on this issue with Microsoft on 11-Mar-2004. They have quickly confirmed our findings and were able to produce a fix less than two days later. As a result, Hotmail is no longer vulnerable to this method of exploitation.
Wow...I'm actually sort of impressed that Microsoft fixed a vulnerabillity in their product that was pointed out to them in email, rather than ignoring it until it blew up in their face. . .
Just so you're clear, the only have LESS battery life when you use them to play VIDEO. If you use them for music only, they have LONGER battery lifes than the ipod.
But in general, I have to agree that if all you want is music, an ipod is better. Though the market for PVP's does overlap a bit with the market for ipods, for the most part, its not fair to call any of these devices "ipod killers" yet.
Nevertheless, that doesn't make them neat little gizmos by their own right. I think alot of the people asking "Why?" just don't get it. . . They've confused the fact that they have no use for such a device to mean that no one would, which is simply not true. There's all sorts of neat things you can do with these that many people will be interested in.
Digital Photographers can take them for their abillity to display jpegs as a means of portable storage and viewing. Since this will most likely support USB on the go, they can just plug their camera right in and look through the days shots.
Anime freaks will be dying to get ahold of these. Business travelers will be able to watch movies on the plane on a device that also fits in their pocket and holds their schedule for when they land. Who doesn't want a PDA with a hard drive? It may be a tiny bit bigger than an ipod, but if lets you carry around one device instead of two or 3, then its an improvement in my book.
The point is, just because you can't watch a movie while jogging doesn't mean there aren't 100 other things you do with this that you can't do with an Ipod that people are gonna like.
This particular unit overcomes the biggest hurdle of the previously mentioned units by being much smaller. I don't know how big your minidisc player is, but maybe thats your niche. If you JUST want o listen to music and ultra-portabillity is a priority for you, then this may not be your device. But that doesn't mean other people aren't drooling over it. . .
The first archos unit was ok, a bit bulky, but its main probelm was it's inabillity to support most currently encoded Divx files. You'd have to re-encode them to a lower resolution to get them to play. If this one lives up to spec, it will have solved both of those problems soundly -- since the average divx file usually clocks in at 640x480@30fps.
.
I guess all you ipod owners must live much more active lifestyles than me -- since you talk about not being able to watch video while jogging or other such nonsense. I want one of these for when I'm *sitting*. I want to kick back and watch a movie or some anime when I'm sitting on a plane waiting for it to go somewhere, or when I'm sitting on my ass waiting on something. I know I'm not alone when I Look at all these announced PVP's and drool. I've personally put off buying an ipod waiting for a pvp to come out that wouldn't require me to reencode my existing divx files (as both the lyra and the archos would).
The only real downside to this one, which appears to be by far the slickest one announced, is a little tidbit left out of this particular article: It won't be out until the christmas season. Whereas almost all of the competetion is scheduled to come out between April-June.
Still, It might just be worth waiting a few extra months to see if archos can deliver on this promise. .
I sell Diablo 2 items on ebay. It's good money for very little work. Unfortunately, there's been a recent outbreak of fraud by users who buy items using stolen ebay accounts and pay with stolen paypal accounts. The items are virtual, so they recieve them almost instantly -- when the user reports their account stolen a few weeks later, the sellers have the payments retracted and get stuck with the bill.
These aren't just little kids trying to get items for free. There's a definate pattern here. People, who I imagine don't even play Diablo 2, have taken towards buying D2 items with stolen paypal accounts and on some legitimate account (which actually belongs to them) they resell the items. Thus they end up with money in their paypal accounts which is very cleverly laundered from stolen paypal accounts in a manner which is almost untracable. So all those people phising for paypal accounts have found a way to keep the money without having any sort of records connecting their money with the account they stole.
The only weakness of this plan is that, of course, is that the accoutn which does the actual reselling of the stolen items must be a real account. I have taken a couple hours of my time to track down the legitimate account of a person who ripped me off for roughly 150 dollars, and tried to bring this person to eBay's attention, but they don't care. After all, he's a seller generating seller fees for them -- they're not gonna do anything unless I somehow give them ironclad proof.
You would think would an overwhealming level of circumstancial evidence (he started selling the just a few hours after the first items were purchased using a stolen account, he sells the same items in the same quantities as were stolen by the two accounts I know to have been stolen by the same person, he even recieved his first seller feedback from one of the stolen accounts for his cheapest item) would be enough to convince ebay to even consider some sort of investigation. But they won't even respond to my emails anymore (and I'm a powerseller, supposed to be entitled to "priority support").
Let's face it, ebay is complicit in the fraud committed by these individuals. They do not act strongly to stop them. They do not actively monitor for fraud (if I can search completed listings and tell you who's a fraudulent buyer and who's not, then certainly ebay could).
So then it's not really suprising that ebay users would take to doing ebay's job for them -- someone has to do it. There's no real alternative to ebay at this point (yahoo auctions is a sad, sad shell of ebay) and people depend on ebay to make a living.
Heck, the thought of buying something from the legitimate account of the person who stole 150 dollars from me just so I could request the phone number from ebay and do a reverse look-up had crossed my mind. But even if I did get his home address, what would I do with it then? Show up on his doorstep with a baseball bat?
I'm at a loss for ideas. Now with all my auctions I'm forced to screen my buyers very carefully. Calling long distance to verify that the people using the ebay account are in fact the real users, checking bidding histories for suspicious patterns.
I want to treat my customers like customers, not like criminals. But I see no real alternative as long as eBay continues to drop the ball on halting fraud.
The big color screen is only in use if your watching videos. So you get he *SAME* Batery life if you're just listening to music (maybe slightly less if you spend a bit of time in menus). You only get less if you choose to use the video capabillities.
Thanatopsis: its well over that by now. They sold 100,000 units JUST in On-line orders from their website. This was before they managed to get a retail presence.
Now of course, you can go into best buy and buy it -- but I have no idea how many they've managed to sell since getting retail space. Anyways, I think 100,000 units for a no-name, non-retail product is pretty damn impressive. It show's a geniuine demand.
Or, to put my argument another way, tell me you don't want one of these.
I know I'd knock down my own grandmother to buy one of those. Granted it's just a mock up and the technology might not all be here yet, but you have to admit that's way better than a normal ipod.
No one's suggesting you're gonna watch movies while jogging. While jogging, you'll leave the screen off to save battery and just listen to music. But next time you're on a long plane flight or you're killing time away from home, you can bust that baby out and watch that episode of the Simpsons you tivoed but never got around to.
You could fit a 3 inch or larger screen on an ipod. Remember screensize goes by diagnol not by length or width. A 3 inch screen is bigger than you'll find on MOST portable tvs.
So now imagine this: You have two devices. Both are the same size. They both play the same mp3 files with the same battery playback. One has a nice large color screen for file lists and can also use that screen to playback video files or display pictures directly from your digital camera. It costs 50 dollars more than the other unit. Which one will you buy?
It's just a matter of waiting for the technology to catch up a bit so that the cost and size both decrease enough to make video a standard feature . . . give it 3 years or so and it'll happen.
How is the AV320 a smaller package? It's pretty bulky. Understand that Microsoft is selling SOFTWARE here, not an actual hardware product. The hardware is being produced by MANY different companies (creative, iriver, and several other famililar names from the mp3 player field).
So while the AV320 may be smaller than one offering, its highly doubtful it will be smaller than all of the offerings.
And of course the AV320 suffers the crippling drawback of forcing you to reencode your existing divx files to make them playable on the player. I'd hold out more hope for the av400 or 500 which are rumored to be coming out soon.
I don't which specific device the article is refering to -- but most of them support divx. And there are quite a few people clamoring for a device that is both portable and plays divx. Just look at archos, they've sold well over 100,000 units of their AV300 PVP -- and with it, you have to re-encode your avis because it can't support the resolutions most are encoded at.
That market overlaps with the ipod's market at some points, but not others. It wont' be until these devices become as small as ipods that they could really be considered "Ipod killers". So while it may be fair to say it's not an ipod killer, its not fair to say there's no market for it.
And 3 years from now, when these things are as sleek and small as an ipod, and do everything else an ipod can do, they will defiantely be ipod killers. Of course, by then I'm sure Apple will have probably added video to the ipod anyways (cost will be significantly less an issue by then, and battery drain only increases if you actulally use it to play video).
I personally was going to buy an ipod sometime back, but have held off deciding I might as well get something that'll do video too. I haven't jumped on the archos bandwagon because I don't want to reencode my files.
The new PVP's based on Microsoft's OS might be good, but personally I'll probably buy whichever is the first out that is reasonably well designed and can play 640x480 divx files at 30fps. Right now I'm keeping a close eye on the Mec Station and the Tight Taz.
I, and the hundreds of thousands of others, who signed up for this beta test and are eagerly awaiting our chance to download the beta whole-heartedly thank you.
I know whenever I'm anxiously waiting to download a file from someone, I think to myself "I hope this site gets Slashdotted."
On behalf of everyone who signed up for the beta, and whoever provides Blizzard with their bandwidth, "Thanks Slashdot!"
Have you seen Blizzards client? They won't even release a .torrent file. They make you download thier downloader in order to get the file. Trust me, they made changes. They want to restrict who has access to download -- and you do that by modifying the client and not releasing the new source.
I think part of the reason you see an open source product able to gain so much corporate support so fast is that it was release under the MIT license instead of the GPL.
Not having to release the source code I think is a huge draw to large corporations who like to keep things proprietary.
Although many would consider that releasing the source code being optional is the downfall of the MIT license, it is in some ways also its major strength.
Goto google and type in "nintendo profits" and see what comes up. You'll find virtually every hit has something to do with Nintendo and FALLING profits.
e nd o.reut/
THere are dozens of articles all with hard numbers all of which will tell you what I already told you.
Here's a few for instances:
http://cube.ign.com/articles/476/476348p1.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/BUSINESS/04/07/nint
If you do a search for "Nintendo profits 2003" you'll find articles from when nintendo missed its 10 million unit goal by about a million units, and you'll also find that they were losing money for the first fiscal half of 2003.
As for you "noticed I refused to back up my claims", I refused no such thing. You never asked me to back them up.
Look, the point is, I see Nintendos actions like this:
Nintendo, dependant on its handheld gaming dominance for continued profits, sees the looming threats of the PSP and others and has gotten nervous. Rather than letting the strength of thier products stand on their own, they've turned to the sort of anti-competetive measures that we've come to expect out of the Microsofts of the world.
I'm not predicting Nintendo's death; I'm not claiming anything particularly outrageous or that I can't back up. Nintendo's actions thus far may not quite be up to the level of the SCO, but this patent basically gives them the capabillity to rise to that level. What we've seen so far is only the first action they've taken using this patent. Consider all the possibillities. Consider the royalties they can now try to claim from companies producuing emulators which have nothing to do with Nintendo (Newton on Palm for instance). Consider the fair-rights uses which Nintendo is attempting to strip from consumers.
Their actions are outrageous and there's simply no way you can defend them.
Oh, and as for the Nintendo loyalists giving up Nintendo, I'm not hearing it from Slashdotters. As a college student, one of my part time jobs was at a game store. I worked there for well over a year.
I used to sell gamecubes and gamecube games. Trust me, the dissapointment out there is genuine. We always had used gamecubes sell because people were always trading them in -- but we never had used PS2's or Xboxes for more than a day.
Time and Time again, I would hear the same complaints "There are no games!". Nintendo has put itself in the habit of only releasing one-two major games per month, and unfortunately in the last 4-5 months, most of those games have been big dissapointments. When you go 4-5 months waiting for a new game and the *BEST* game to come out during that time span is Pac Man versus (which regretfully was given away for free to people who reserved a game that ultimately no one liked, I can't even remember which game).
That is a ridiculous comparison, and maybe why it was modded as a troll in the first place.
I happen to think its a relatively apt analogy. . . Once again, I point out "Simply because you disagree with something someone says does not mean they are trolling"
They have faced competition for years now, and are still #2 in the home console market, #1 in the handheld market.
My statement was directly in reference to the handheld market only, which as you know or should know, is a market which they've managed to have relatively limited competetion.
They still dominate the handheld market.
Microsoft dominates the operating system software market -- does that mean their product is the best? There are better portables than what Nintendo is offering, just not easily available.
Nintendo's future uncertain? When? I know that some journalists have tried to spin it that way, but when did a profitable company with billions of dollars available start having an "uncertain future"?
Their future is uncertain because it's not clear what business they will be in 5 years from now. I'm not doubting they will still be in business, just whether or not they will still be in the same one. There is a realistic chance that whatever upcoming console they have planned could well be thier last. Thus, their future hingest upon it's success. Do they remain a console hardware company, or do they retreat back to the handheld market and focus on console software for someone elses hardware.
It has always been crystal clear to me that Nintendo is in this for the long run. They have a niche market, and as long as the other console makers continue to spew out "adult" games with more graphics than gameplay, Nintendo will have secured their income.
Nintendo put out alot of really bad games lately. Some of them were good (the new mario kart was kinda fun), but others just weren't up to par with what people expect out of Nintendo. Only the fanboys were impressed (of which I assume you are one by your fervent defense of the indefensible).
You don't get it do you? Nintendo is turning a profit - in both markets. And it dominates the handheld market. It is number two in the home console market. Nintendo's "long-term future" is no unsure at all. It is profitable, it has billions to spare, and it has a niche market which it holds onto like nothing else.
What company are you looking at? Nintendo turned a profit in 2003 -- barely. They managed that thanks thier near christmas price cut which helped them sell a decent number of consoles. Prior to that price-cut (for the entire first half of fiscal 2003) they were LOSING MONEY. Even after the successful holiday season, it only barely gave them a profit for the year as a whole.
As of this time last year, Nintendo had sold less than 1/5th as many gamecubes as sony sold PS2s. They even fell short of their own projected goal of 10 million (by about a million units).
At this point, Nintendo is almost entirely dependant on strong Game Boy advance sales to maintain their razor thin profits, and luckily for them they've managed to face almost zero real competetion until now. But soon they will be faced with genuine competetion from the very same competitor that dominates them in the console market. Clearly that does note bode well for Nintendo's financial success this year or next.
As for the niche market you speak of, I assume you mean the loyal Nintendo fanboys who fervently defend its every move without question. And yet, even in this seemingly secure niche, I see far less stabillity than I see in similar niches.
Rarely do I hear a mac user say "Well, I've had enough of this poor selection of games. I'm buying a PC tommorow." And yet I've heard many times lamentations that "this is not the Nintendo I grew up with" and I've seen increasing disillusionment among even Nintendo's most loyal fans.
The way I see it, comparing Nintendo
Well, it most certainly is not "insightful" or "interesting":
.
It was the "title" of the post which contained the information I felt was "insightful". Comparing Nintendo (in this particular instance) to the SCO struck me as a particularly apt analogy.
Nintendo still dominates the handheld market completely
Nintendo is still #2 in home systems, beating Microsoft, and unlike Microsoft, turning a profit from their home systems
Sony and Microsoft have done equally bad things in the past, so it's not like ditching Nintendo to go for one of the others is a noble thing
1) Yes, but they were once uncontested and now are about to face a flurry of competetion.
2) They're only number 2 because of very strong sales in Japan -- in most places of the world they are a distant third (and 3rd out of 3 isn't exactly hot stuff).
3) I dont' particularly care for Sony or Microsoft either, but I'm sad to see Nintendo join their ranks.
The simple fact is that you may hate Nintendo for doing this, but if you choose to buy Sony or Microsoft instead, then you are just a hypocrite, because they are equally bad, and have done equally bad things in the past. Bleem, anyone?
If you are going to let Nintendo know that we will not support this (this which is an idea that I personally support, but that's besides the point), then boycotting them in favor of Sony or Microsoft just shows a serious lack of judgement on your part.
Where in my post or my post's parent did you find anyone advocating Sony or Microsoft? I dislike consoles personally, and as for portables, Nintendo isn't as great as everyone seems to think. There are plenty of excellent alternatives to the Gameboy Advance. Frankly, the GP32 (by a korean company called GamePark) is LEAPS AND BOUNDS ahead of the gameboy advance (one of its best uses, ironically, is emulation...you can load your roms on it and play classic nintendo games). It's clearly the best handheld on the market. I've also heard many great things about the Tapwave Zodiac. .
That, Cyberllama, is why the grandparent might as well be modded as "troll" when it's gotten both "insightful" and "interesting" already, without justification.
When I made my post, it had recieved only one moderation -- troll. For the reasons I've outlined above, I felt that was a very unfair bit of moderation -- hence my post.
And the "lagging behind" comment is beyond silly. You cannot say that someone who dominates a market and is #2 in another "lags behind". That, too, shows a serious lack of judgement.
I dont' know exactly what the original poster meant by "lags behind". He could have meant that they lag behind in sales, which is somewhat true.
If we're being honest, we have to admit that Nintendo is treading a fine line. Remember how uncertain its future was just a year ago? Would they ever make another console again, or would they follow segas lead and give up on hardware. There was serious speculation that they might, It wasn't until recently that Nintendo made their decision (you could argue that they made the decision long ago, but only recently made the decision PUBLIC, but could show you why you were wrong) to keep making consoles.
The point is, Nintendo's long-term future is unsure, and it appears that they intend to try to secure it via the SCO's infamous "litigate instead of innovate" approach.
Alternatively, the original poster might have meant that Nintendo lags behind in terms of the technology they're using. I would have to agree with that assessment to an extent, I think Microsoft clearly wins that department -- no one else has comparable graphics right now. Also the lack of any sort of coherent on-line service is clearly a strike against Nintendo (Phantasy Star Online does NOT count). Nintendo does have a bit of catching up to do in some respects. It wouldn't be completley unfair for someone to say that they are "lagging behind".
Reg
No one said "dead". And just because you disagree with someone's assessment of a certain products market strength does NOT make them a troll.
The problem is, too many companys have extremely loyal fanboys who are simply unwilling to believe that sometimes large comapnies (even the ones they like) do the things that large companies do that we all hate.
Any legitimate criticism of Apple, Nintendo, Linux (Yes I'm aware it's not a company, but the same idea applies) on Slashdot is immediately modded down to troll or flamebait regardless of how accurate or insightful it might be.
As for Nintendo's market penetration, they are number 2 world-wide, and #3 in Europe/US (strong sales in Japan keep them at #2 worldwide). They used to be number 1, but they've clearly slipped a bit. I would agree with the assessment that constitutes "lagging behind". Just because you disagree, however, certainly does mean the original poster is trolling.
They aren't the leader of the "video game industry". They're a distant third in the console wars (at least here in the states).
True thier handheld marketshare is significant and likely to remain so for at least a few years (depending on the success of products from competetitors). But that alone cannot offset their spectacular plummet from top of the world to bottom of the heap in the console department. Nintendo is struggling, and acts like these are the acts of a desperate company -- but that cannot excuse or justify them.
And yet, if you think about it, this patent covers so much more.
Want to make a Newton emulator for your Palm? Better pay nintendo.
Want to make a TI-85/89 emulator for your Palm? Better pay Nintendo.
This is a pretty damn outragous patent which Nintendo has clearly shown a will to abuse. It's the very same sort of business tactic which has caused the SCO to earn so much of our ire (though the SCO's target hit a bit closer to home for many of us).
I don't know why someone would moderate something so insightful as "troll" (I mean, come on, its not like we're talking about Apple -- theres no reason to squelch legitimate criticism.) Perhaps because it was posted as an anonymous coward. . .
Anyways, I fully agree. Nintendo has crossed a line here that should not be crossed and we must let them know that we will not support it.
IANAL, but I don't see how this patent could possibly stand up against any sort of scrutiny. How could Nintendo possibly claim to be the first at emulation on a handheld when they so clearly are not fist?
Here's a picture/description of it:
o re
http://www.akibalive.com/archives/000524.html#m