Seems kind of redundant really. Unless it is spying on you while you are watching your personal media collection, there is a playback mechanism that already has sufficient information on what you are watching to precisely identify what you are watching.
I tweaked my MythTV setup to enable this very sort of thing. I would expect an outbreak of spastic paranoia if such features were in the official version though.
Makes it easy to see that I am watching entirely too much TV though... and what it might cost to replicate same with iTunes.
Hey. Whatever does the job. Of course neither you nor I have any standing in this matter. So the fact that you are b*tching about this is totally bogus. It's up to Microsoft to decide if tolerating piracy is good for their bottom line. It simply isn't up to you.
You can argue about whether or not it makes good business sense.
Apple was the only one that had a "mutually incompatable" format. The rest not so much.
While there were a lot of custom chips, there were also a good number of stock parts as well. This included floppy controllers, IO controllers, and sound chips.
Now the bit about everything being documented is a good point. This is how it is that I am still somewhat familiar with the parts that were in my old machine. This probably made the 030 Linux versions a lot easier to deal with.
In the 80s, you had machines made out of standard 3rd party components. Your CPU was the same as the next guy even if he got his computer from a competing brand. This is why an Atari could emulate a Mac. The actual CPU was a particular part that everyone bought from the same place. This is why you can have versions of Linux targeting those 80s/90s era machines. A 68000 in one machine is the same as the next, or a 6502, or a 68030.
The old home computer landscape seems positively orderly by comparison.
This whole problem stems from the fact that you are subject to a physical monopoly and the policies put in place with the stated goal of avoiding this problem have done nothing but reinforce this problem. One incumbent is left with the ability to deal with the DRM and patent legal mine field involved.
It's funny that you should mention these since an 80s wired network is probably more reliable and faster than anything an iPad is using.
Such a solution could break down things in a number of ways including a "roaming profile" if you want. However the really important bit is the fact that you can do anything on a remote terminal that you could on the workstation where everything is hosted. A tablet can't quite manage that.
>> First: The iPad is generally a media consumption machine. I thought we'd already agreed on that. > > Only Apple Haters agreed on promoting that talking point.
Why do fanboys have to be such blatant eggregious liars? Is the fraud really necessary?
> but there is no comparable experience on the PC that would have provided him with the same ease of creativity
The exact same app on the platform it originate from perhaps?
Its so funny how these Apple fanboys seem so intent on ignoring or denigrating the Mac now that the cult's direction seems to be focused on a successor. So years and years of propaganda go quickly out the window as if nothing happened.
Makes you wonder what will trigger the next shift here and what they will be saying (or perhaps not saying) about PhoneOS tablets in the future.
> Because, lets be perfectly honest for a moment, there > is no Android phone that comes to the simplicity and > ease of use as an iPhone.
Nonsense.
I bought an Android because it sensibly and robustly handles basic phone features. It also handles basic media with less nonsense. However, that's just an added bonus when compared to the fact that I don't have to "hack the phone" to deal with basic stuff that any Nokia handles better (than Apple).
Android needs more developers on board and more apps. The core device is fine. Superior to Apple's product even in "non geeky" ways.
Slashdot Mirror
...and in all other cases it is REDUNDANT.
There are simply much more accurate ways to determine what is being watched.
This ls much like taking a Ferrari down to the corner store to get some milk.
Seems kind of redundant really. Unless it is spying on you while you are watching your personal media collection, there is a playback mechanism that already has sufficient information on what you are watching to precisely identify what you are watching.
I tweaked my MythTV setup to enable this very sort of thing. I would expect an outbreak of spastic paranoia if such features were in the official version though.
Makes it easy to see that I am watching entirely too much TV though... and what it might cost to replicate same with iTunes.
Isn't Tivo already spying on people like this?
Likewise Netflix and Apple could do the same.
Hey. Whatever does the job. Of course neither you nor I have any standing in this matter. So the fact that you are b*tching about this is totally bogus. It's up to Microsoft to decide if tolerating piracy is good for their bottom line. It simply isn't up to you.
You can argue about whether or not it makes good business sense.
Whether or not it is "right" is not up to you.
That kind of argument only works out for things derived from corn or soybeans.
The rest is not subject to the sort of meddling you seem to be complaining about.
Although Australians could have the same sorts of subsidies for all we know. Most countries do.
Why should government enforced multi-year warranties cost a "luxury vendor" like Apple extra money?
Aren't they supposed to be the "BMW of computing"? If that's the case then there would be no extra cost to better warranties.
Of course we all know that the "luxury" rhetoric is in fact bogus. So Apple does suffer from being forced to stand behind it's product.
So is letting the other guy sell their stuff.
The shoe is on the other foot now. Clearly Apple (or at least the fanboys) are unable to live with the rules they abuse other companies with.
Apple was the only one that had a "mutually incompatable" format. The rest not so much.
While there were a lot of custom chips, there were also a good number of stock parts as well. This included floppy controllers, IO controllers, and sound chips.
Now the bit about everything being documented is a good point. This is how it is that I am still somewhat familiar with the parts that were in my old machine. This probably made the 030 Linux versions a lot easier to deal with.
It is NOTHING like computers in the 70s and 80s.
In the 80s, you had machines made out of standard 3rd party components. Your CPU was the same as the next guy even if he got his computer from a competing brand. This is why an Atari could emulate a Mac. The actual CPU was a particular part that everyone bought from the same place. This is why you can have versions of Linux targeting those 80s/90s era machines. A 68000 in one machine is the same as the next, or a 6502, or a 68030.
The old home computer landscape seems positively orderly by comparison.
Just buy a Mac Mini or any ION machine on Amazon.
There are also plenty of other machines at places like Frys and BestBuy that aren't monsters either.
Building an HTPC is so 2005.
I dumped mine 5 years ago for something better.
It's time for something new. It's too bad that this particular market won't allow for the next iteration of "some guy in his garage".
Sure is does.
This whole problem stems from the fact that you are subject to a physical monopoly and the policies put in place with the stated goal of avoiding this problem have done nothing but reinforce this problem. One incumbent is left with the ability to deal with the DRM and patent legal mine field involved.
Sucking less probably.
Cableco PVRs are the sorts of things that inspire great free software projects to be created.
From what I have seen of current (new) boxes, that has not changed a whole heck of a lot.
Now you may have an unusually cool device. Since everyone is at the mercy of their cable providers, the rest of us may not be so lucky.
It's funny that you should mention these since an 80s wired network is probably more reliable and faster than anything an iPad is using.
Such a solution could break down things in a number of ways including a "roaming profile" if you want. However the really important bit is the fact that you can do anything on a remote terminal that you could on the workstation where everything is hosted. A tablet can't quite manage that.
The "strength" of the iPad is as an input device for a real computer.
That computer can be sitting on your desk or it could be sitting in a rack in China.
The issue is not how much you personally value what is done by a particular person or corporation but how effective a given tool is.
Some tools just don't cut the mustard no matter how much enthusiastic wishful thinking you might try to apply to the situation.
Good solutions don't need to be forced on people.
>> First: The iPad is generally a media consumption machine. I thought we'd already agreed on that.
>
> Only Apple Haters agreed on promoting that talking point.
Why do fanboys have to be such blatant eggregious liars? Is the fraud really necessary?
You need the appropriate type of "terminal" and the freedom to use that terminal and to run the program in question.
The PC still trumps in all of these areas.
That's not even getting into the "mine's bigger" problem where the performance gap between a tablet and a PC actually matters.
...actually this doctor example points to bigger devices. The keyboard may or may not be important, but the display should be much larger.
A "tablet" of this kind needs to be able to fully replace what it is displacing.
That is true in general. Thus some tasks aren't going anywhere. The lack of a 30 inch display or keyboard is too much of a show stopper.
Although that's down to IO devices rather than the power of the system or how much the manufacturer locked it down.
In this regard, an iPad is just a big iPod.
The PC isn't really getting displaced. The iPod is just getting bigger.
This is very much how Archos presented it's version of an iPad style tablet a few months before the actual iPad came out.
Since it was Archos, no one ever heard about it.
> but there is no comparable experience on the PC that would have provided him with the same ease of creativity
The exact same app on the platform it originate from perhaps?
Its so funny how these Apple fanboys seem so intent on ignoring or denigrating the Mac now that the cult's direction seems to be focused on a successor. So years and years of propaganda go quickly out the window as if nothing happened.
Makes you wonder what will trigger the next shift here and what they will be saying (or perhaps not saying) about PhoneOS tablets in the future.
A good toolbox can have any manner of tools, including ones for delicate work.
That's the key advantage of being able to put any tool in my box. I can do whatever jobs I want and face no artificial limitations.
I could post the usual basic complaints but you would just find some weak reason to denigrate them again.
> yes, and have it devolve into the bug-ridden compromised machines that unlocked down windows PCs inevitably become
You mean turn it into a Mac?
Some of the smaller states don't have a big enough congressional delegation to ensure that they get a piece of the action.
> Because, lets be perfectly honest for a moment, there
> is no Android phone that comes to the simplicity and
> ease of use as an iPhone.
Nonsense.
I bought an Android because it sensibly and robustly handles basic phone features. It also handles basic media with less nonsense. However, that's just an added bonus when compared to the fact that I don't have to "hack the phone" to deal with basic stuff that any Nokia handles better (than Apple).
Android needs more developers on board and more apps. The core device is fine. Superior to Apple's product even in "non geeky" ways.