Is that how it works (not counting the cured disease part?) If so, please provide a link... I've looked at all their sites, and can't seemto find mention of what the rate of payout actually is...
It'd also be nice to know how long a few sample processors take to process a block, for example use a P200 MMX as the baseline, Celeron 333, P-II 450, P-III 750, Athlon 750, PPC G3/G4 (if they grow to support those) just so people can get a gander at how much they'll earn...
I'd participate in those projects so long as I was assured that I'd earn more money than the electricity costs that power my machines...
Amelio was CEO of Apple. Jobs was CEO of NeXT. Amelio bought next, brought in steve jobs as his advisor, and was promptly displaced by him. It's not as though Jobs was running apple and next and bought his own company for hundreds of millions... Jobs was non involved with apple for YEARS before Apple bought his company. Only after that did he come back on board...
Actually, the record companies set the minimum prices in order to protect the smaller record stores... Think about it, they can't buy nearly as much, and hence get the same price breaks as the larger companies. Department stores and electronics stores could start selling CD's as loss leaders in order to sell CD player and even unrelated things like washers and dryers...
To reiterate, if there was no minimum price set, then the only plaec you'd be able to acquire music offline would be walmart, pretty much...
I only wish the movie industry would set the same sort of policy in order to prevent blockbuster fom driving out every other smaller video store for the sheer reason that they have more money and can get things for cheaper than basically anyone else...
I couldn't resist, as that is your name, apparently...
1 - The users guide only costs them $1.50 or so to print and bind, since they're doing so many.
2 - So they're charging me and millions of users for a service which they never have to fulfill? Maybe I, and everyone else who bought their distro without asknig for support, should start a class action suit to get that money back. I didn't want to pay for thier tech support, since i didn't plan to use it, but they offered me no choice of just letting me but the CD, Manual, and box for $6.00 (the cost of materials + 100%)...
Come on... that $50 is so rarely spent on tech support... in most cases it's just extra profit... Yet no one complains about that, selling somehting that is free for them to get for $50.00 on upwards...
I just bought Shellac's new record yesterday... for $12.98, you could get the CD. Or, for $12.98 you could get the record, which includes the CD as a bonus...
cool band you say? Too bad the other ones aren't nearly as considerate and just strive to make it big on one of the major labels... That's their choice. Respect them for that, rather than saying "I'm going to steal their music since they signed with a label and they're only going to get a couple dollars anyways"...
If the music sucks, blame the bands, not the labels... If your taste sucks, again, blame yourself, not the labels...
There aren't really as many costs involved with a book, as you just have an author and agent and printer to pay, rather than all the ancillary work that goes into creating music...
DVD's and VHS' normally come out some time after a movie is released in the theatres... If the studios didn't have the theatres, the costs of tapes and discs would climb quite a ways upwards, i'd bet...
And through your arguments, I'd like to ask why you overlook the fact that DVD's are much more expensive than VHS tapes even though they're again, cheaper to produce?
Yes, there is price-fixing going on, but not to the tune that you like to imagine... even if the case is a knockout win a la microsoft, don't expect the price of cd's to drop more than 3 or 4 dollars... anymore than that would just be incredibly unreasonable...
Why do you talk about the cost of a blank cd as being part of the issue? For instance, a Redhat Linux CD costs $50 from Redhat. That's a helluva a lot more markup than ever occurs with a single mass produced music CD...
Music single: 6.00
Full Length CD: $12-$17
Video game: $30-40
"Free operating system": $50-120
Windows upgrade: $90
Windwos fullversion $200
Office Suite: $500
Yet they all ship on the exact same media. CD's...
Not once in the entire antitrust trial, did the DOJ hold up a blank CD and wonder why Microsoft charged so much more than that... They wondered about microsofts pricing yes, but they never considered the actual media as being a large enough of an expense...
Same as for music. Software has developers, QA, graphic designers, lawyers, executives, etc... Music has musicians, producers, executives, lawyers...
Makes no sense to my why people openly advocate stealing music yet cry fould when someone violates their GPL by not releasing source... Get on one side of the fence or the other, please...
Come on... how many networks were there in 1983, when the Lisa was introduced? Besides that, he listened, because when the Lisa was cancelled and replaced by the original Mac 128k, lo and behold, there was Appletalk networking, built into every Mac ever built...
So far as the NeXT "failure"... A company hasn't failed if it fails to achieve 90% marketshare. Or even 1% marketshare. He pioneered with Apple. He pioneered with NeXT. OpenStep did eventually run on x86, Sparc, and PA-RISC (I think a few others as well, I might be mistaken, though), so he did eventually give up on the hardware philosophy when it was apparent it wasn't working.
It is working for Apple, though, so you can't call that a failure... Next sold to Apple for $400 million. I'd deposit $400 million into my bank account for a "failure" any day! And apples worth $20 billion... nice failure, again...
Well, they were so secretive for 4 or 5 years prior, only to let the cat out of the bag in January and give Intel PLENTY of time to come up with it's response. If they hadn't announced a time table or what they were even doing when they did, Intel would still be resting on it's laurels rather than announcing it's own ultra-low power chips...
Transmeta should have waited. Signed up a number of OEM's under NDA's to manufacture some products, and then waited til NEXT january and said "and everything you see here, you can buy on line today".
Emulating the x86 instruction set... Though it's not clear that their processor is indeed doing that, since it's not actually an x86 processor, it just runs the codemorphing software that allows it to run intel-compatible binaries.
IBM's long had a patent cross licensing agreement with Intel, allowing it to manufacture it's own x86 compatible processors, and other chip makers have contracted some of their chip manufacturing to IBM as a way of keeping out of Intel's legal crosshairs.
I thought this was interesting while its kind of funny seeing a small company like Transmeta hiding behind IBM's legal team.
Better safe than sorry! I bet IBM has many more and much better lawyers than anything else that Transmeta has access to... It's just like picking a fight with a bully and then watching your big brother step in and say "if you want him you have to go through me first..."
Copyright isn"t a guarentee that you'll make money... plenty of things have been copyrighted only to lose boatloads of money. The only thing that copyright does do is insure that the original creator (or whoever they authorized) of a work is the one that makes money from it...
If you create something, you or again, whoever you authorize should be the only one allowed to make money from it during your lifetime...
The original poster had a great point that if things lapsed into the public domain rapidly, then in fact it would be the oh-so-loved BIG corporations that would stand to make any money that was to be made from them, and theyed be under no obligation to pay the authors... Is that what you want?
Actually, I think that software companies relied on copyright protection up until Apple lost it's suit against Microsoft copying it's "look and feel"... Copyright was made to protect against duplication, but not abstract things... so the software companies started patenting their creations using phrases like "method for transfering..." or "system embodied in a..."
They didn't "ditch" them per se... They bought them so they could gain access to the stuff they wanted and incorporate that into their machines and then resold them once there was nothing to gain... Supercomputers aren't a dying business, they're just not SGI's target market right now... And they really need to focus on having a few profitable lines rather than many loss creating lines... Just as Apple did.
Movies would be made by studios paying producers totake writers scripts and making cinematic productions. Once their screen time ran out, they'ed be rented on these things called "Video cassettes" and "DVD's".
Companys' like Napster and lets say... "Videoster" would have no business creating software that enambed people to trade these files... they'ed get sued out of existance, and the memmbers of their boards of directors tortured for eons...
BUT if personal file sharing was going on, there would be no penalty. I just wish that we as a race would advance the the point of realizeing that yes, trading with your triends might not be legal, but it's okay, rather than the current "yes, i can trade whith all 30 million of my pas... how can you prove they aren't my friends"...
Cowardice hiding behind a wall of technology...
I kind of suspect that we're o n the same side of this argument, but you just misunderstood me...
No. I'm not a troll. Explain to me why you think that if I invest my time and money, or better yet, you do, why should anyone besides me or you (a la Napster) be able to profit from that without either of ours explicit consent? Please.
As for not for profit activities (a la Gnutella)... that's all fine and dandy, in my eyes. I just wish that people would have more respect for other peoples creations. Regardless, though, as long as no one but the creator or owner of a work is making money, it should be okay. but the moment that money changes hands, no matter how detatched it is from the transaction (advertising on a website offering mp3's for download, for instance) the first hand in line should be that of the creator or owner of a given work...
Now tell me, am I really a troll? Or just someone that you disagree with?
I'm of the belief that there should be absolutely NO COMMERCIAL INTEREST in the unauthorized trading of intellectual property... That's anything that's distributed by someone one to someone else that was not created or owned by either of the parties involved, when someone stands to make money from the efforts...
So far as personal sharing of files, though... There shouldn't be any laws prohibiting that either... Otherwise, we'd face a draconian existance, where police could get search warrants based on IP addresesses that appeared in say... Gnutella...
Napster bad.
Gnutella, not all bad... I just wish that people would use the service in order to distribute things that they're authorized to distribute rather than just as a means of pirating other peoples intellectual property...
It's just sad that we've reached such an impasse as a society that only a small fraction of us bother to create works of art, instead prefering to be consumers rather than creators, hiding behind the shroud of "evil corporations run our lives" and stealing because of it rather than trying to create a means of circumventing it...
Corporations will rule your lives as long as you let them... no longer than that, though...
Indeed the earth is motionless, with the entire rest of the universe orbitting around us... but since everything on out to the furthest star is in perpetual motion, the end result is that it appears that we too are in motion...
I could go on with this theory for a bit more, but i need to finish my coffee...
It doesn't run linux. It doesn't use beowolf. It's it's own completely different beast, yet somehow you've managed a way to connect it and Linux in this discussion and somehow pat Linux on the back for Compaq's engineering feats?
Get over it... Linux isn't anywhere on the map of this discussion. Tru64 Unix is, though, but how much do they have in common besides being differnt branches off the Unix family tree?
Corporations ARE people in the eyes of the law. That's exactly why groups of people or even individuals incorporate. They own property, sue, be sued, pay taxes, and everything else that individuals can do.
Many people incorporate their businesses to lessen their liability. They have every right to. But they shouldn't lose rights that they would have had otherwise by doing so.
It's a common sentiment that corporations are bad. They're not. Mom and Pop, Inc. shouldn't be grouped with the Microsofts and Time-Warners of the world. That being said, how large would a corporation have to be before it no longer had the same rights as people in this country? Would a one person corporation have free speech, while a hundred person corporation couldn't?
Welcome to America, land of the free, so long as you don't fall too far outside the norm (I know, that... that statement can be reversed on me in a second)/
Don't mind the URL. As some people know, I hate napster. And it's not formatted very well... maybe i'll do that soon, but for the time being it's just pre tags.
Slashdot Mirror
Is that how it works (not counting the cured disease part?) If so, please provide a link... I've looked at all their sites, and can't seemto find mention of what the rate of payout actually is...
It'd also be nice to know how long a few sample processors take to process a block, for example use a P200 MMX as the baseline, Celeron 333, P-II 450, P-III 750, Athlon 750, PPC G3/G4 (if they grow to support those) just so people can get a gander at how much they'll earn...
I'd participate in those projects so long as I was assured that I'd earn more money than the electricity costs that power my machines...
Amelio was CEO of Apple. Jobs was CEO of NeXT. Amelio bought next, brought in steve jobs as his advisor, and was promptly displaced by him. It's not as though Jobs was running apple and next and bought his own company for hundreds of millions... Jobs was non involved with apple for YEARS before Apple bought his company. Only after that did he come back on board...
You can buy a P-III with monitor, 100 megabit ethernet and firewire for one third of $799? Where?
Actually, the record companies set the minimum prices in order to protect the smaller record stores... Think about it, they can't buy nearly as much, and hence get the same price breaks as the larger companies. Department stores and electronics stores could start selling CD's as loss leaders in order to sell CD player and even unrelated things like washers and dryers...
To reiterate, if there was no minimum price set, then the only plaec you'd be able to acquire music offline would be walmart, pretty much...
I only wish the movie industry would set the same sort of policy in order to prevent blockbuster fom driving out every other smaller video store for the sheer reason that they have more money and can get things for cheaper than basically anyone else...
I couldn't resist, as that is your name, apparently...
1 - The users guide only costs them $1.50 or so to print and bind, since they're doing so many.
2 - So they're charging me and millions of users for a service which they never have to fulfill? Maybe I, and everyone else who bought their distro without asknig for support, should start a class action suit to get that money back. I didn't want to pay for thier tech support, since i didn't plan to use it, but they offered me no choice of just letting me but the CD, Manual, and box for $6.00 (the cost of materials + 100%)...
Come on... that $50 is so rarely spent on tech support... in most cases it's just extra profit... Yet no one complains about that, selling somehting that is free for them to get for $50.00 on upwards...
I just bought Shellac's new record yesterday... for $12.98, you could get the CD. Or, for $12.98 you could get the record, which includes the CD as a bonus...
cool band you say? Too bad the other ones aren't nearly as considerate and just strive to make it big on one of the major labels... That's their choice. Respect them for that, rather than saying "I'm going to steal their music since they signed with a label and they're only going to get a couple dollars anyways"...
If the music sucks, blame the bands, not the labels... If your taste sucks, again, blame yourself, not the labels...
And how much was gas in 1987? Or a 286 processor? Or the oft-quoted loaf of bread?
If you actually look at it, the price of music has stayed even, it's just that the value of the dollar has fallen...
No, not really...
There aren't really as many costs involved with a book, as you just have an author and agent and printer to pay, rather than all the ancillary work that goes into creating music...
DVD's and VHS' normally come out some time after a movie is released in the theatres... If the studios didn't have the theatres, the costs of tapes and discs would climb quite a ways upwards, i'd bet...
And through your arguments, I'd like to ask why you overlook the fact that DVD's are much more expensive than VHS tapes even though they're again, cheaper to produce?
Yes, there is price-fixing going on, but not to the tune that you like to imagine... even if the case is a knockout win a la microsoft, don't expect the price of cd's to drop more than 3 or 4 dollars... anymore than that would just be incredibly unreasonable...
Why do you talk about the cost of a blank cd as being part of the issue? For instance, a Redhat Linux CD costs $50 from Redhat. That's a helluva a lot more markup than ever occurs with a single mass produced music CD...
Music single: 6.00
Full Length CD: $12-$17
Video game: $30-40
"Free operating system": $50-120
Windows upgrade: $90
Windwos fullversion $200
Office Suite: $500
Yet they all ship on the exact same media. CD's...
Not once in the entire antitrust trial, did the DOJ hold up a blank CD and wonder why Microsoft charged so much more than that... They wondered about microsofts pricing yes, but they never considered the actual media as being a large enough of an expense...
Same as for music. Software has developers, QA, graphic designers, lawyers, executives, etc... Music has musicians, producers, executives, lawyers...
Makes no sense to my why people openly advocate stealing music yet cry fould when someone violates their GPL by not releasing source... Get on one side of the fence or the other, please...
Come on... how many networks were there in 1983, when the Lisa was introduced? Besides that, he listened, because when the Lisa was cancelled and replaced by the original Mac 128k, lo and behold, there was Appletalk networking, built into every Mac ever built...
So far as the NeXT "failure"... A company hasn't failed if it fails to achieve 90% marketshare. Or even 1% marketshare. He pioneered with Apple. He pioneered with NeXT. OpenStep did eventually run on x86, Sparc, and PA-RISC (I think a few others as well, I might be mistaken, though), so he did eventually give up on the hardware philosophy when it was apparent it wasn't working.
It is working for Apple, though, so you can't call that a failure... Next sold to Apple for $400 million. I'd deposit $400 million into my bank account for a "failure" any day! And apples worth $20 billion... nice failure, again...
Well, they were so secretive for 4 or 5 years prior, only to let the cat out of the bag in January and give Intel PLENTY of time to come up with it's response. If they hadn't announced a time table or what they were even doing when they did, Intel would still be resting on it's laurels rather than announcing it's own ultra-low power chips...
Transmeta should have waited. Signed up a number of OEM's under NDA's to manufacture some products, and then waited til NEXT january and said "and everything you see here, you can buy on line today".
What are they doing that could anger intel?
Emulating the x86 instruction set... Though it's not clear that their processor is indeed doing that, since it's not actually an x86 processor, it just runs the codemorphing software that allows it to run intel-compatible binaries.
IBM's long had a patent cross licensing agreement with Intel, allowing it to manufacture it's own x86 compatible processors, and other chip makers have contracted some of their chip manufacturing to IBM as a way of keeping out of Intel's legal crosshairs.
I thought this was interesting while its kind of funny seeing a small company like Transmeta hiding behind IBM's legal team.
Better safe than sorry! I bet IBM has many more and much better lawyers than anything else that Transmeta has access to... It's just like picking a fight with a bully and then watching your big brother step in and say "if you want him you have to go through me first..."
Copyright isn"t a guarentee that you'll make money... plenty of things have been copyrighted only to lose boatloads of money. The only thing that copyright does do is insure that the original creator (or whoever they authorized) of a work is the one that makes money from it...
If you create something, you or again, whoever you authorize should be the only one allowed to make money from it during your lifetime...
The original poster had a great point that if things lapsed into the public domain rapidly, then in fact it would be the oh-so-loved BIG corporations that would stand to make any money that was to be made from them, and theyed be under no obligation to pay the authors... Is that what you want?
Actually, I think that software companies relied on copyright protection up until Apple lost it's suit against Microsoft copying it's "look and feel"... Copyright was made to protect against duplication, but not abstract things... so the software companies started patenting their creations using phrases like "method for transfering..." or "system embodied in a..."
That's my belief... I may be wrong, though...
Hey, next time you do something like that, email me and i'll pay the shipping :)
I'll always love those old Indy's...
They didn't "ditch" them per se... They bought them so they could gain access to the stuff they wanted and incorporate that into their machines and then resold them once there was nothing to gain... Supercomputers aren't a dying business, they're just not SGI's target market right now... And they really need to focus on having a few profitable lines rather than many loss creating lines... Just as Apple did.
Sorry, second response to your rebuttal...
Movies would be made by studios paying producers totake writers scripts and making cinematic productions. Once their screen time ran out, they'ed be rented on these things called "Video cassettes" and "DVD's".
Companys' like Napster and lets say... "Videoster" would have no business creating software that enambed people to trade these files... they'ed get sued out of existance, and the memmbers of their boards of directors tortured for eons...
BUT if personal file sharing was going on, there would be no penalty. I just wish that we as a race would advance the the point of realizeing that yes, trading with your triends might not be legal, but it's okay, rather than the current "yes, i can trade whith all 30 million of my pas... how can you prove they aren't my friends"...
Cowardice hiding behind a wall of technology...
I kind of suspect that we're o n the same side of this argument, but you just misunderstood me...
Clarify?
No. I'm not a troll. Explain to me why you think that if I invest my time and money, or better yet, you do, why should anyone besides me or you (a la Napster) be able to profit from that without either of ours explicit consent? Please.
As for not for profit activities (a la Gnutella)... that's all fine and dandy, in my eyes. I just wish that people would have more respect for other peoples creations. Regardless, though, as long as no one but the creator or owner of a work is making money, it should be okay. but the moment that money changes hands, no matter how detatched it is from the transaction (advertising on a website offering mp3's for download, for instance) the first hand in line should be that of the creator or owner of a given work...
Now tell me, am I really a troll? Or just someone that you disagree with?
I'm of the belief that there should be absolutely NO COMMERCIAL INTEREST in the unauthorized trading of intellectual property... That's anything that's distributed by someone one to someone else that was not created or owned by either of the parties involved, when someone stands to make money from the efforts...
So far as personal sharing of files, though... There shouldn't be any laws prohibiting that either... Otherwise, we'd face a draconian existance, where police could get search warrants based on IP addresesses that appeared in say... Gnutella...
Napster bad.
Gnutella, not all bad... I just wish that people would use the service in order to distribute things that they're authorized to distribute rather than just as a means of pirating other peoples intellectual property...
It's just sad that we've reached such an impasse as a society that only a small fraction of us bother to create works of art, instead prefering to be consumers rather than creators, hiding behind the shroud of "evil corporations run our lives" and stealing because of it rather than trying to create a means of circumventing it...
Corporations will rule your lives as long as you let them... no longer than that, though...
Indeed the earth is motionless, with the entire rest of the universe orbitting around us... but since everything on out to the furthest star is in perpetual motion, the end result is that it appears that we too are in motion...
I could go on with this theory for a bit more, but i need to finish my coffee...
OH, come on!
It doesn't run linux. It doesn't use beowolf. It's it's own completely different beast, yet somehow you've managed a way to connect it and Linux in this discussion and somehow pat Linux on the back for Compaq's engineering feats?
Get over it... Linux isn't anywhere on the map of this discussion. Tru64 Unix is, though, but how much do they have in common besides being differnt branches off the Unix family tree?
Corporations ARE people in the eyes of the law. That's exactly why groups of people or even individuals incorporate. They own property, sue, be sued, pay taxes, and everything else that individuals can do.
Many people incorporate their businesses to lessen their liability. They have every right to. But they shouldn't lose rights that they would have had otherwise by doing so.
It's a common sentiment that corporations are bad. They're not. Mom and Pop, Inc. shouldn't be grouped with the Microsofts and Time-Warners of the world. That being said, how large would a corporation have to be before it no longer had the same rights as people in this country? Would a one person corporation have free speech, while a hundred person corporation couldn't?
Welcome to America, land of the free, so long as you don't fall too far outside the norm (I know, that... that statement can be reversed on me in a second)/
That's what I just said.
But in a very hackish sort of way....
It's over here
Don't mind the URL. As some people know, I hate napster. And it's not formatted very well... maybe i'll do that soon, but for the time being it's just pre tags.
And no flames, please.