i'm not sure i understand the point of apple tv. i have a tivo that no only lets me play files off my computer, but also let's me record tv. what's the point of the apple tv (only 50 hours), which costs more than an 80 hour tivo with dual tuner that comes with a 1 year subscription? with my tivo, i can move movies to my computer (currently only windows, but possibly macos as well, i'm not sure), record tv on 2 stations at the same time, have a nice tv guide, watch movies from my computer on my tv, play music on my computer through my tv, show picture slideshows from my computer on my tv, download amazon unbox videos, and watch tivo casts that i get off the internet. what's the point of apple tv if it doesn't even do half of this, yet costs the same? i just don't get it.
1. they can fill up and you might not be able to offload the pics. 2. it's good to keep those separate from your camera when you're not using hte camera on the off-chance your camera is stolen. a friend of mine had this happen to her when she was on vacation. she went swimming with her camera on her chair near the pool and someone ran off with it, taking all her pics with her.
it depends on the person working at the store. they're not supposed to do things like hold them, but it happens. i got my second remote by chance like that. one of my co-workers was in a target and they had 5 of them. he asked the girl in the electronics section if she would hold one for me. sure enough, she did. it was the only target in the state that had remotes at the time. i don't think she was supposed to hold it for me, because when i got there, the kid seemed surprised that there was one being held.
dick blumenthal has done some great stuff for CT... like forcing retailers to honor gift cards for their actual value and not reduce the value overtime or expire them or charge service fees for their use. however, he has recently gone completely nuts... first there was allowing the prosecution of the teacher who "showed students porn" because of spyware... and now this. i once thought he would make a great governor. now i'm glad i left CT.
interesting... we have no affiliation with apple and are just starting to get them here. apple doesn't seem to have any interest in starting up some sort of communication with us for budgeting and pricing and all that. they just don't seem to care. as far as we're concerned, there's no reason to go with them until they can work with a business the way other companies work with us. we have no problems getting possible pricing from our other vendors, but apple won't do that for us. so we can't budget them in, and if we can't budget them in, we don't buy a lot of apple computers. it's fine by me. everyone i know who has one has had some sort of hardware issue that apple took their sweet time to fix. it was only fixed after sending it back to apple 3 or 4 times. that's bad service if you ask me.
that's still a poor comparison. vista doesn't just have addons. it was changed quite a bit. ME didn't have much over 98 except different icons and less stability. vista has a fair amount over XP. so far i'd say it's just as stable too.
i don't see any reason to recommend against running vista if your computers meets the requirements.
funny... i just put vista on my work laptop. well, i did it twice. first was an in place upgrade, which worked fine until i decided to put another stick of memory in it that wasn't 100% compatible with my computer and destroyed my install. so i formatted and reinstalled and had the same problem until i installed without that other stick of memory in there and it went fine. i have no plans on reverting back to XP. i like vista better. all the apps i need run on it perfectly, even some that i thought i might have an issue with (macromedia suite mx 2004, for example). there's a few things that won't work (pdfcreator and the version of nero that we've got at work, although that's really not supposed to be installed on the laptops we have because it's OEM with the dvd-rw's that come with our desktop machines).
i'm the first staff member in my place of business (with between 700 and 900 employees) that's using it. there is 1 issue that i see so far... group policy in AD. we have policies that force the user to use automatic updates (because too few computers were being updated). it prevented me from getting around that to install the optional updates (which include drivers and office 2003 updates as the policy did not allow me to install microsoft update). i had them exclude me from the policy though, that way i got all the updates i needed, mostly for office and drivers.
frankly, i think while the UAC is quite annoying to the power user who installs a lot of stuff (especially since i had to for my clean install), it won't be that bad for the user who buys a computer with vista pre-installed since the average user does not install a whole lot. i think it has the potential to make it more secure by making them think before they say "accept".
unless my computer literally blows up, i will not be reverting back to XP. and for the record, your comparison of vista with ME is completely off the mark. ME was just plain terrible and a completely different operating system altogether. vista was built practically from the ground up and has a lot of nice features (some purely superficial) and is 100x more stable than ME, perhaps the worst operating system ever made (at least by MS). i strongly recommend anyone buying a new computer to get it with vista, at least home premier.
my laptop is an HP nc8430 with a core duo 2.16 MHz, 1 GB RAM and ATI raedon x1600 with 256 MB, happily running vista.
rep. bono's analogy that not using DRM and rather educating users is like not enforcing speed limits is just bogus. DRM is more like having a lock on your car that prevents your car from going any faster or slower than the speed limit except for slowing down to turn or stop. DRM is not a means of enforcement. it's a means of control.
i actually like his voice. it's very suitable to the style he sings.
and a lot of people do sing his stuff... joan baez, the band, jimi hendrix, eric clapton, guns n roses... aside from what the band does (one of my favorite all time bands), i think dylans renditions of his own songs is better than any of the others, with maybe the exception of watchtower.
in the 60's, this didn't happen (hence the original comment about joplin and dylan)... mick also happens to have been with some seriously hot women over the years. i don't think his looks mattered.
you're correct. just look at american idol creator, simon cowel, for that. he made a comment that he finds bob dylan to be boring. while dylan isn't a pop artist by any means, his music and songs are certainly far from boring.
the major labels won't even promote someone who's really ugly, even if he/she has an amazing voice, writes perfect songs, and plays awesome guitar. little girls won't scream and cry over someone that ugly. that's how we ended up with john mayer... so-so voice, mediocre song writing skills, and uninteresting guitar playing (yes, even with his blues band).
there's a venue here in providence, AS220, that only allows original music.
from their site:
Will you book our cover band?
No. AS220 aims to support original music. In addition, as of November 1st, 2004, a boycott of all music licensed by ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC is in effect. This means that all material performed at AS220 must be original or must be in the public domain. Please contact the office if you need clarification on this policy. so, not all venues are the same. AS220 hosts a huge variety of music of all genres and the shows are always cheap (no more than $9 i think), the beer is cheap (and they got some good beers there), and the space is nice. the music is almost always worth listening to. many of the artists that have gone through there got there start at AS220 and went on to more regional and sometimes national recognition (sage francis, for instance).
i get this strange feeling that this post was made just for more vista bashing. i'm using vista on 1 GB of RAM right now and there's no issues that i've seen with speed. it's just as quick as XP, and actually starts up and shuts down quicker than XP.
i will admit that it sits at about 50% memory usage all the time, but i haven't noticed any slowness. granted, i don't do any vmware stuff. i haven't attempted at firing up any memory intensive programs, other than maybe dreamweaver (which isn't bad from what i can tell). this is also only my second day using it (i did an in place upgrade from XP pro).
my other question is why he's got windows 2003 installed... i imagine he means XP, in which case, maybe he doesn't really know what he's doing? sounds like he didn't even bother trying to find laptops and just wanted to bash vista.
well, it's a good thing i didn't buy the game then... i would have to buy a controller too. it might be something i consider in the future. i'm definitely thinking i'll get a classic controller for some virtual console games.
did you even read the article? he made a few comments as to what he found better than XP... the start menu, the search, the icons, the robustness, the fact that you can get a resource boost by using a USB drive as extra system memory...
maybe those aren't better to you, but to him they are. better is completely subjective and will mean different things to different people. he outright said he missed certain features of vista when he went back to XP. that alone says that something is right.
your 2 months pales compared to his 19 months. you have to let yourself become acquainted with the new locations for things. my guess is you didn't reach that point. i will say that the first time i saw vista to support someone's issue, i couldn't find where something as simple as add/remove programs was, but then i did. i'm making the switch next week and i'm sure it'll hurt my productivity a bit at first, but once i'm used to it, i'll be good.
i think any new nintendo console will have backwards compatibility. the wii does with gamecube (i almost bought some gamecube games the other day, but i'd prefer to play them with a gamecube controller, which would've been another purchase). the wii is simply the most fun, most innovative gaming console i've seen. frankly, i don't care how good the graphics are on anything else... it's no longer just a graphics war and i think nintendo has pushed some serious limits with what console gaming means.
4 years from now, we'll be thinking about the next generation of consoles. PS2 was announced in 1999 and released in 2000. the original xbox was announced in 2000 and released in 2001 (the xbox 360 was released 4 years after the original xbox, and the PS3 was released 6 years after the PS2, which didn't come far after the original playstation... and the gamecube was released in 2001, 5 years before the wii). 4 years from now, there'll be at least an announcement for the next generation of consoles. by then, no one will be caring about the current crop and the actual consoles won't be selling all that much anymore.
that being said, i do think that the PS3 will continue to sell because of the HD/blu-ray capabilities, but i wouldn't be surprised if nintendo made some sort of announcement about an update for the wii that unlocks better HD capabilities.
currently, the wii already has a ton of games, many of which are great. once they have network/internet capable games, it'll be awesome. i really have no interest in a PS3 because i don't have and can't afford an HD TV (making it impossible for me to afford a PS3) and because my wii is already super fun. i don't care about cool graphics, i care about games that are fun to play, and the wii is just that. the reason the wii will continue to sell is because it's fun, not only for the gamer, but for just about anyone who picks it up. my mother and fiancee, both not even remotely into video games, have fun with it. my fiancee is practically addicted to it. the same wouldn't happen with the PS3 or xbox.
we have a pedestrian problem in providence... while i normally let them pass without issue, we get these punk kids or just bitchy people who will walk out in front of your car (crosswalk or not) and slowly make their way across the street. if they were elderly, i wouldn't have an issue, but they stare at me like i'm some sort of jerk for not wanting to stop for them (when i have a green light and they have a "don't walk" sign).
this seems like it will end up being a state law. in most states, the driver has the responsibility to stop for a pedestrian in the road and it is generally the driver's fault if they hit a pedestrian, regardless of whether or not the pedestrian was in a crosswalk or crossing when the sign said "don't walk".
personally, i think anyone who is walking/driving/biking/running wearing headphones is stupid. most of those people can't hear what's going on around them enough to react when necessary. people walking and reading isn't a boston thing. it happens in a lot of places (my ex was hit by Janeane Garofalo while walking down 5th ave in NYC... janeane was reading... i was hit by a university police officer at a major university in philly while he was on a motorcycle reading, the bike was moving, i was walking).
the law needs to say that a driver is not liable if a pedestrian jaywalks wearing headphones or reading or talking on the phone, where jaywalking is defined not only as crossing outside a crosswalk (or assumed crosswalk such as at an intersection that doesn't have a crosswalk) but also crossing when the side says "don't walk".
i read the article before i even found it posted on slashdot. it sounds like a PR piece to get europe off his back. he's not challenging the record companies, he's telling the people who hate DRM to go after them rather than apple because apple apparently has no say. last i checked, apple has a say in what they sell. he's pandering.
no, i don't buy his argument one bit. his keys would not be anymore loose than they are by keeping it on the ipod. sure, there's a chance, but the likelihood is pretty slim assuming he's not licensing it to vendors such as "joe schmoe's media players". have the playsforsure keys gotten loose because of all the devices that's licensed for? this would be similar.
by posting this, he's advocating, but not actively pushing for the removal of DRM. who should we go after, the ones who sell the music or the ones who license it? if the companies that sell music didn't accept contracts that force DRM, the record companies would be screwed. apple, being the largest online retailer of downloadable music, can have a big effect, as was seen with holding their ground on the pricing and not just bending over for the record companies' push for different pricing schemes.
and while the contract might say that all commercial music needs DRM, it does not say that apple is not allowed to license that DRM to other devices.
as for his statistics, i would venture to guess that they're not entirely accurate. while he might know how many ipods have been sold and he might know how many songs have been sold, he doesn't have a solid knowledge of how many songs are on the average ipod unless itunes sends that information back to apple... which would make another reason to avoid it.
i am not anti-apple by any means, but i'm anti-DRM and i actively support organizations that are actively against it. is steve jobs actively against it? no, but i think he's tired of people saying that he's in favor of it, which would seem to be the case given that he's done absolutely nothing to stop it. in order for his little essay to have any meaning, he would need to be actively petitioning the record industry to drop the DRM requirement. until then, i buy DRM-free CD's and support local and independent music only.
Slashdot Mirror
i'm not sure i understand the point of apple tv. i have a tivo that no only lets me play files off my computer, but also let's me record tv. what's the point of the apple tv (only 50 hours), which costs more than an 80 hour tivo with dual tuner that comes with a 1 year subscription? with my tivo, i can move movies to my computer (currently only windows, but possibly macos as well, i'm not sure), record tv on 2 stations at the same time, have a nice tv guide, watch movies from my computer on my tv, play music on my computer through my tv, show picture slideshows from my computer on my tv, download amazon unbox videos, and watch tivo casts that i get off the internet. what's the point of apple tv if it doesn't even do half of this, yet costs the same? i just don't get it.
i'd recommend extra memory cards for 2 reasons...
1. they can fill up and you might not be able to offload the pics.
2. it's good to keep those separate from your camera when you're not using hte camera on the off-chance your camera is stolen. a friend of mine had this happen to her when she was on vacation. she went swimming with her camera on her chair near the pool and someone ran off with it, taking all her pics with her.
it depends on the person working at the store. they're not supposed to do things like hold them, but it happens. i got my second remote by chance like that. one of my co-workers was in a target and they had 5 of them. he asked the girl in the electronics section if she would hold one for me. sure enough, she did. it was the only target in the state that had remotes at the time. i don't think she was supposed to hold it for me, because when i got there, the kid seemed surprised that there was one being held.
dick blumenthal has done some great stuff for CT... like forcing retailers to honor gift cards for their actual value and not reduce the value overtime or expire them or charge service fees for their use. however, he has recently gone completely nuts... first there was allowing the prosecution of the teacher who "showed students porn" because of spyware... and now this. i once thought he would make a great governor. now i'm glad i left CT.
interesting... we have no affiliation with apple and are just starting to get them here. apple doesn't seem to have any interest in starting up some sort of communication with us for budgeting and pricing and all that. they just don't seem to care. as far as we're concerned, there's no reason to go with them until they can work with a business the way other companies work with us. we have no problems getting possible pricing from our other vendors, but apple won't do that for us. so we can't budget them in, and if we can't budget them in, we don't buy a lot of apple computers. it's fine by me. everyone i know who has one has had some sort of hardware issue that apple took their sweet time to fix. it was only fixed after sending it back to apple 3 or 4 times. that's bad service if you ask me.
my fiancee loves my wii. she intends on buying a few games for it. occasionally, i see her playing with it just out of the blue.
listen to his VH1 story tellers album. he says that part of the problem was that they didn't think an actor could sing.
that's still a poor comparison. vista doesn't just have addons. it was changed quite a bit. ME didn't have much over 98 except different icons and less stability. vista has a fair amount over XP. so far i'd say it's just as stable too.
i don't see any reason to recommend against running vista if your computers meets the requirements.
funny... i just put vista on my work laptop. well, i did it twice. first was an in place upgrade, which worked fine until i decided to put another stick of memory in it that wasn't 100% compatible with my computer and destroyed my install. so i formatted and reinstalled and had the same problem until i installed without that other stick of memory in there and it went fine. i have no plans on reverting back to XP. i like vista better. all the apps i need run on it perfectly, even some that i thought i might have an issue with (macromedia suite mx 2004, for example). there's a few things that won't work (pdfcreator and the version of nero that we've got at work, although that's really not supposed to be installed on the laptops we have because it's OEM with the dvd-rw's that come with our desktop machines).
i'm the first staff member in my place of business (with between 700 and 900 employees) that's using it. there is 1 issue that i see so far... group policy in AD. we have policies that force the user to use automatic updates (because too few computers were being updated). it prevented me from getting around that to install the optional updates (which include drivers and office 2003 updates as the policy did not allow me to install microsoft update). i had them exclude me from the policy though, that way i got all the updates i needed, mostly for office and drivers.
frankly, i think while the UAC is quite annoying to the power user who installs a lot of stuff (especially since i had to for my clean install), it won't be that bad for the user who buys a computer with vista pre-installed since the average user does not install a whole lot. i think it has the potential to make it more secure by making them think before they say "accept".
unless my computer literally blows up, i will not be reverting back to XP. and for the record, your comparison of vista with ME is completely off the mark. ME was just plain terrible and a completely different operating system altogether. vista was built practically from the ground up and has a lot of nice features (some purely superficial) and is 100x more stable than ME, perhaps the worst operating system ever made (at least by MS). i strongly recommend anyone buying a new computer to get it with vista, at least home premier.
my laptop is an HP nc8430 with a core duo 2.16 MHz, 1 GB RAM and ATI raedon x1600 with 256 MB, happily running vista.
rep. bono's analogy that not using DRM and rather educating users is like not enforcing speed limits is just bogus. DRM is more like having a lock on your car that prevents your car from going any faster or slower than the speed limit except for slowing down to turn or stop. DRM is not a means of enforcement. it's a means of control.
i actually like his voice. it's very suitable to the style he sings.
and a lot of people do sing his stuff... joan baez, the band, jimi hendrix, eric clapton, guns n roses... aside from what the band does (one of my favorite all time bands), i think dylans renditions of his own songs is better than any of the others, with maybe the exception of watchtower.
in the 60's, this didn't happen (hence the original comment about joplin and dylan)... mick also happens to have been with some seriously hot women over the years. i don't think his looks mattered.
you're correct. just look at american idol creator, simon cowel, for that. he made a comment that he finds bob dylan to be boring. while dylan isn't a pop artist by any means, his music and songs are certainly far from boring.
the major labels won't even promote someone who's really ugly, even if he/she has an amazing voice, writes perfect songs, and plays awesome guitar. little girls won't scream and cry over someone that ugly. that's how we ended up with john mayer... so-so voice, mediocre song writing skills, and uninteresting guitar playing (yes, even with his blues band).
from their site: Will you book our cover band?
No. AS220 aims to support original music. In addition, as of November 1st, 2004, a boycott of all music licensed by ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC is in effect. This means that all material performed at AS220 must be original or must be in the public domain. Please contact the office if you need clarification on this policy. so, not all venues are the same. AS220 hosts a huge variety of music of all genres and the shows are always cheap (no more than $9 i think), the beer is cheap (and they got some good beers there), and the space is nice. the music is almost always worth listening to. many of the artists that have gone through there got there start at AS220 and went on to more regional and sometimes national recognition (sage francis, for instance).
i get this strange feeling that this post was made just for more vista bashing. i'm using vista on 1 GB of RAM right now and there's no issues that i've seen with speed. it's just as quick as XP, and actually starts up and shuts down quicker than XP.
i will admit that it sits at about 50% memory usage all the time, but i haven't noticed any slowness. granted, i don't do any vmware stuff. i haven't attempted at firing up any memory intensive programs, other than maybe dreamweaver (which isn't bad from what i can tell). this is also only my second day using it (i did an in place upgrade from XP pro).
my other question is why he's got windows 2003 installed... i imagine he means XP, in which case, maybe he doesn't really know what he's doing? sounds like he didn't even bother trying to find laptops and just wanted to bash vista.
well, it's a good thing i didn't buy the game then... i would have to buy a controller too. it might be something i consider in the future. i'm definitely thinking i'll get a classic controller for some virtual console games.
did you even read the article? he made a few comments as to what he found better than XP... the start menu, the search, the icons, the robustness, the fact that you can get a resource boost by using a USB drive as extra system memory...
maybe those aren't better to you, but to him they are. better is completely subjective and will mean different things to different people. he outright said he missed certain features of vista when he went back to XP. that alone says that something is right.
your 2 months pales compared to his 19 months. you have to let yourself become acquainted with the new locations for things. my guess is you didn't reach that point. i will say that the first time i saw vista to support someone's issue, i couldn't find where something as simple as add/remove programs was, but then i did. i'm making the switch next week and i'm sure it'll hurt my productivity a bit at first, but once i'm used to it, i'll be good.
i take it you didn't RTFA. in the article he says there's nothing earth shattering, but on a whole, it's better than XP.
i think any new nintendo console will have backwards compatibility. the wii does with gamecube (i almost bought some gamecube games the other day, but i'd prefer to play them with a gamecube controller, which would've been another purchase). the wii is simply the most fun, most innovative gaming console i've seen. frankly, i don't care how good the graphics are on anything else... it's no longer just a graphics war and i think nintendo has pushed some serious limits with what console gaming means.
4 years from now, we'll be thinking about the next generation of consoles. PS2 was announced in 1999 and released in 2000. the original xbox was announced in 2000 and released in 2001 (the xbox 360 was released 4 years after the original xbox, and the PS3 was released 6 years after the PS2, which didn't come far after the original playstation... and the gamecube was released in 2001, 5 years before the wii). 4 years from now, there'll be at least an announcement for the next generation of consoles. by then, no one will be caring about the current crop and the actual consoles won't be selling all that much anymore.
that being said, i do think that the PS3 will continue to sell because of the HD/blu-ray capabilities, but i wouldn't be surprised if nintendo made some sort of announcement about an update for the wii that unlocks better HD capabilities.
currently, the wii already has a ton of games, many of which are great. once they have network/internet capable games, it'll be awesome. i really have no interest in a PS3 because i don't have and can't afford an HD TV (making it impossible for me to afford a PS3) and because my wii is already super fun. i don't care about cool graphics, i care about games that are fun to play, and the wii is just that. the reason the wii will continue to sell is because it's fun, not only for the gamer, but for just about anyone who picks it up. my mother and fiancee, both not even remotely into video games, have fun with it. my fiancee is practically addicted to it. the same wouldn't happen with the PS3 or xbox.
we have a pedestrian problem in providence... while i normally let them pass without issue, we get these punk kids or just bitchy people who will walk out in front of your car (crosswalk or not) and slowly make their way across the street. if they were elderly, i wouldn't have an issue, but they stare at me like i'm some sort of jerk for not wanting to stop for them (when i have a green light and they have a "don't walk" sign).
this seems like it will end up being a state law. in most states, the driver has the responsibility to stop for a pedestrian in the road and it is generally the driver's fault if they hit a pedestrian, regardless of whether or not the pedestrian was in a crosswalk or crossing when the sign said "don't walk".
personally, i think anyone who is walking/driving/biking/running wearing headphones is stupid. most of those people can't hear what's going on around them enough to react when necessary. people walking and reading isn't a boston thing. it happens in a lot of places (my ex was hit by Janeane Garofalo while walking down 5th ave in NYC... janeane was reading... i was hit by a university police officer at a major university in philly while he was on a motorcycle reading, the bike was moving, i was walking).
the law needs to say that a driver is not liable if a pedestrian jaywalks wearing headphones or reading or talking on the phone, where jaywalking is defined not only as crossing outside a crosswalk (or assumed crosswalk such as at an intersection that doesn't have a crosswalk) but also crossing when the side says "don't walk".
i read the article before i even found it posted on slashdot. it sounds like a PR piece to get europe off his back. he's not challenging the record companies, he's telling the people who hate DRM to go after them rather than apple because apple apparently has no say. last i checked, apple has a say in what they sell. he's pandering.
no, i don't buy his argument one bit. his keys would not be anymore loose than they are by keeping it on the ipod. sure, there's a chance, but the likelihood is pretty slim assuming he's not licensing it to vendors such as "joe schmoe's media players". have the playsforsure keys gotten loose because of all the devices that's licensed for? this would be similar.
by posting this, he's advocating, but not actively pushing for the removal of DRM. who should we go after, the ones who sell the music or the ones who license it? if the companies that sell music didn't accept contracts that force DRM, the record companies would be screwed. apple, being the largest online retailer of downloadable music, can have a big effect, as was seen with holding their ground on the pricing and not just bending over for the record companies' push for different pricing schemes.
and while the contract might say that all commercial music needs DRM, it does not say that apple is not allowed to license that DRM to other devices.
as for his statistics, i would venture to guess that they're not entirely accurate. while he might know how many ipods have been sold and he might know how many songs have been sold, he doesn't have a solid knowledge of how many songs are on the average ipod unless itunes sends that information back to apple... which would make another reason to avoid it.
i am not anti-apple by any means, but i'm anti-DRM and i actively support organizations that are actively against it. is steve jobs actively against it? no, but i think he's tired of people saying that he's in favor of it, which would seem to be the case given that he's done absolutely nothing to stop it. in order for his little essay to have any meaning, he would need to be actively petitioning the record industry to drop the DRM requirement. until then, i buy DRM-free CD's and support local and independent music only.