I would think Amazon dropping DRM first and selling MP3s at a very competitive price had a lot more to do with dropping that than EFF and FSFs publicity campaigns. I don't mean to discredit their work against DRM and I'm sure it was an influence. I just credit Amazon and business competition a bit more. That perspective could be my bias though. My initial experience with iTuens was horrible. It wasn't until I tried Amazon's MP3 store that I started buying digital music again.
Unless they are charging more for their print edition to make up for the online costs and redesign then the print subscribers aren't adding any extra revenue. In short, they don't count. The newsite is effectively reducing their revenue stream and more importantly their traffic and interest. If I'm looking for news sites this is one less site on my list to visit.
The shuttle has 129 recorded space flights (failure rate is 1.55%). The 5 test flights of the Enterprise, which was never considered space mission worthy by NASA, don't count. Wikipedia has a pretty good entry on the flight history of the shuttle.
If we're considering failure rate to be a fatal crash rate commercial airlines and commercial airline vendors (Boeing, etc) have a much better failure rate than NASA. It doesn't make any more sense to use to another country's space program than it does to use commercial vendors.
Of course when things go wrong for them it goes amazingly spectacularly. You cannt have that much LOX laying around and other major crazy flammable stuff and not have someone die once and awhile.
2 divided by 129 is 1.55%. It's not a good failure rate, especially considering the failure and accident rate of commercial airlines. Here are some plane crash statistics. Plane Crash Info.
NASA was negligent in both of those crashes. Their QA has an abysmal track record compared to other Level 1 systems such an US Naval nuclear power or commercial air.
These dudes are *IN* it because it is risky. They love the risk.... Just because you are risk adverse (it shows because you want a 0% fail rate) doesnt mean they are. These dudes are crazy...
Astronaut movies have about as much to do with space travel as The Hunt For Red October does with being a submariner or Tron does with being an IT worker.
Isn't the DOJ supposed to support the laws regardless whether they question the the constitutionality of the details? Are you saying it's okay to use sensationalist tactics if someone's timeline isn't meeting yours?
The problem I have with your headline is that it focuses blame only on one part of the system. Now we have everyone talking about if they feel the president has changed enough fast enough, not whether we're making progress or not. This doesn't look at the judicial system's utter failure to address this issue head on. It doesn't address congresses' horrible failure to enact clear and fair laws. You're pleading to our emotional senses rather than logic and reasoning.
Let's just be honest here. You used the term Obama DOJ because it is incendiary. You chose it just to be sensationalist. It's what lawyers do. Your profession sensationalizes a subject to sway people. You are in fact part of the problem.
He has enacted change, but obviously not fast enough for you. How much did you think was going to change in a little under a year? Unless you change first how can you expect the corrupt system you work in to change. Honestly, are you any better for throwing a hot and fairly disingenuous title in the article? There is great information in the summary and I appreciate you sharing it, but I have little more respect for you and your position than the DOJ. When one person pees in the pool everyone swimming in the pool is covered in it.
What will they (his party) keep losing? Let's say he loses the vote because people aren't seeing the change they want fast enough. Now what? The fickle populous will vote in the next person who still won't be able to enact change fast enough (in either direction). Look at what happened to the last president who didn't play by the Washington insider rulebook.
We just voted out a strong Republican grip because we didn't like what they're doing. Are we going to vote that Republican party back in because now they're going to do it all right? You post the looming threat of election losses to the other party like it's going to solve anything.
I guess we'll see what this new Senator from Mass has to offer. It's a little early yet to be saying "I told you so."
Agreed, but I think putting Obama at the front of the article instead of just focusing on the DOJ itself is sensationalist. Instead of leading the reader to consider poor DOJ policies or practices it sends the focus to rhetoric and party spin.
I really think this would have been better served leaving the presidents name out of the title and letting the criticism of the Administration enter as relevant to the discussion. In any event, it's a good article. Thanks for posting it.
I don't think this has anything to do with showing illegalities. Apple loves this sort of attention and the legal threat is their standard procedure. If they hadn't made legal motions against this I think there would have been many more people wondering what they're up to. The C&Ds and legal motions is Apple's way of generating even more publicity via the Streisand Effect.
I always wonder if these events are just astroturfing at it's finest.
That's the point of open source though isn't it? Any developer, company, etc can take the code modify it for it's own use and distribute it within the license agreement. Maybe the answer to ensuring cross brand compatibility with applications is for Google to develop a standard interface that requires third party system developers to implement in order to use the Google or Droid trademark on the phone.
Occasionally (and I'm not trying to be pedantic), I will try and use parentheses (not that it's a better solution, but it seems to break up the parenthetical expressions in a more visually pleasing manner) to keep my sentences simpler, while other times (more often than not) I'll just get straight to the point (if there indeed a point to be made).:)
Check out the products list at Mozilla Labs. There are some interesting ideas being tossed around. They are exploring sync technology in a project called Weave. There is a project called Prism that lets you split web apps out from the browser. It seems like Mozilla is also trying to evolve and improve the way people use and develop for their browser system. Take a look at that page and decide for yourself. I think the author of the article should have presented what else is going on with Mozilla's development vision and not just singled out Jetpack. It's only part of the picture. The article is really troll and flamebait.
I've been an AT&T mobile customer for a bit over 2 years now and I don't like their service or support.
Why are you still with them ?.. If it's because they are the only game in your town, then you do like their service.. If it's because they are the only one who has the phone you want, then you do like their support.. Your with them for a reason.. it's just more fun to bitch.
I had a two year contract with them which was up this month. Ah, maybe you didn't consider that before you jumped to far gone imaginary conclusions.
I don't like their coverage. I don't like their crappy support. And now that my contract is up I'm in the process of switching carriers. Though I'm sure you could have said something worthwhile... it's just more fun to just come across as a pedantic asswad.
While I care about speed, I care more about coverage and reliability. Did the testers cherry pick AT&T friendly locations? I know when I went to Washington D.C. earlier this year that not only was my 3G coverage under AT&T spotty, my ability to simply connect to AT&T and make calls was also poor. It would be a much more interesting test if this was performed in every city over a certain population size. In my opinion 12 cities does not make a good test.
I'll admit I'm biased though. I've been an AT&T mobile customer for a bit over 2 years now and I don't like their service or support.
Generally speaking, I have far less reason to fear Google than Microsoft. Microsoft has repeatedly broken the law for its own end. As far as I know, Google has no record of similar transgressions.
Google doesn't seem to have a problem with selling the information they gather to every other single evil company out there that has or hasn't broken the law. They don't need to do evil if they can profit off of those who do. I don't think it's that conspiratorial. I just want to point out that the moral black and white of large tech companies and the IT industry in general is a lot more shades of gray than some clear good and evil division.
[consiparacy_theory_on]
I think the blog's reference to Schmidt was just an excuse (one they've been looking for) to make a shift away from Google. Google hasn't changed its policy or methods so why should Mozilla bark because Google's exec makes a controversial statement. Google has made a really good open source browser and that's what really bothers Mozilla. As a matter of opinion, Google has made a better (faster more standards compliant) browser than Mozilla has. They have implemented a clean UI, fast JS engine, webkit rendering, and now plug-ins. This is Mozilla's competition, not IE or Opera. Chrome has just been released in beta for both OSX and Linux (links are on the Chrome website). It only makes sense that Mozilla will politicize a sensitive subject and look for a break from Google.
[conspiracy_theory_off]
'The FBI could not comment on this specific case, but said if child pornography is ever downloaded accidentally, the user needs to call authorities immediately.'
At which point you've just confessed to trafficking in child porn. No, the proper thing to do is have a secure file deletion utility to nuke all evidence on your system.
No. Just buy a new hard drive and destroy the old one. Open the old hard drive and use a sawsall to cut the disks in to little pieces and scatter them.
Matt is pleading guilty on the advice of his public defender in hopes of getting a three and a half year sentence.
In other words, he doesn't have the money to actually fight this.
And I'll add that his public pretender could have a deal going with the DA's office. The DA gets this case and the public pretender gets another important case of his. Win-win for everyone, except the defendant in this case. It probably sounds like some wacky conspiracy theory until it happens close to home.
There's limitations and hardware requirements to how well virtualization works. A home user isn't going to be happy or probably understand why they don't have advanced 3D rendering for their game in XP mode. XP Mode is designed to help businesses transition from legacy code and make Win 7 a viable business platform. Win 7 Home Premium users can still install Windows Virtual PC, etc.
Domain access is a similar tree you're barking up. It's meant for business not home. Win 7 has Home Groups which is a way for users to setup easy network sharing at home.
I don't think either of those constitute a crippled version, but that's subjective. I'll still vote for fewer versions and lower pricing for non-commercial home use though.
Here is the lemma to your myopic car analogy: Replace the brakes, belts, and other wearables. Service your engine and transmission at required intervals. When a warranty recall for a defective part is issued bring the vehicle to dealer to have it replaced. If you don't do these things and service your vehicle, it will break down and leave you vulnerable to the consequences. Yeah I know - maintaining your vehicle keeps mechanics employed.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Google is solving a problem that doesn't exist. I have yet to hear anyone ask to do all their computing through a web browser.
I love Chrome. It's my browser of choice most of the time. I'm a Google account/services user. I do think they provide an excellent web experience. I don't see them providing the same experience for my desktop as they do for the web. I guess we'll see how this unfolds though. Something tells me there is more to this than we're seeing.
The Chrome version I'm using [4.0.223.16] passes the Acid 3 test with a score of 100. I'm not sure how long it's been this way. I've been using it since around the time they released ChromeFrame and it's been compliant since then.
I like Chrome because it renders well, it's fast, and I find it unobtrusive. Unless IE9 provides a much better user experience I'll only use it to do stuff at Microsoft domains.
I disagree. Most of those features like 'the awesome bar' should be config items not plug-ins/add-ons. So if someone wants a lean FF they can enable/disable those features in config. I would much rather some features be built in rather than a downloadable add-on, but being able to configure the browser without having to go into the about:config system would be something I very much appreciate.
Slashdot Mirror
I would think Amazon dropping DRM first and selling MP3s at a very competitive price had a lot more to do with dropping that than EFF and FSFs publicity campaigns. I don't mean to discredit their work against DRM and I'm sure it was an influence. I just credit Amazon and business competition a bit more. That perspective could be my bias though. My initial experience with iTuens was horrible. It wasn't until I tried Amazon's MP3 store that I started buying digital music again.
Unless they are charging more for their print edition to make up for the online costs and redesign then the print subscribers aren't adding any extra revenue. In short, they don't count. The newsite is effectively reducing their revenue stream and more importantly their traffic and interest. If I'm looking for news sites this is one less site on my list to visit.
Well, that's because you posted outside of Slashdot's acceptable distance radius and didn't connect to the proper data center.
The shuttle has 129 recorded space flights (failure rate is 1.55%). The 5 test flights of the Enterprise, which was never considered space mission worthy by NASA, don't count. Wikipedia has a pretty good entry on the flight history of the shuttle.
If we're considering failure rate to be a fatal crash rate commercial airlines and commercial airline vendors (Boeing, etc) have a much better failure rate than NASA. It doesn't make any more sense to use to another country's space program than it does to use commercial vendors.
Out of 129 flights 2 have gone wrong or a .003 percent failure rate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_shuttle_missions#List_of_shuttle_flights
Of course when things go wrong for them it goes amazingly spectacularly. You cannt have that much LOX laying around and other major crazy flammable stuff and not have someone die once and awhile.
2 divided by 129 is 1.55%. It's not a good failure rate, especially considering the failure and accident rate of commercial airlines. Here are some plane crash statistics. Plane Crash Info.
NASA was negligent in both of those crashes. Their QA has an abysmal track record compared to other Level 1 systems such an US Naval nuclear power or commercial air.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_Stuff_(film) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_Earth_to_the_Moon_(TV_miniseries) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_13_movie While dramatized it shows why they do it.
These dudes are *IN* it because it is risky. They love the risk.... Just because you are risk adverse (it shows because you want a 0% fail rate) doesnt mean they are. These dudes are crazy...
Astronaut movies have about as much to do with space travel as The Hunt For Red October does with being a submariner or Tron does with being an IT worker.
Isn't the DOJ supposed to support the laws regardless whether they question the the constitutionality of the details? Are you saying it's okay to use sensationalist tactics if someone's timeline isn't meeting yours?
The problem I have with your headline is that it focuses blame only on one part of the system. Now we have everyone talking about if they feel the president has changed enough fast enough, not whether we're making progress or not. This doesn't look at the judicial system's utter failure to address this issue head on. It doesn't address congresses' horrible failure to enact clear and fair laws. You're pleading to our emotional senses rather than logic and reasoning.
Let's just be honest here. You used the term Obama DOJ because it is incendiary. You chose it just to be sensationalist. It's what lawyers do. Your profession sensationalizes a subject to sway people. You are in fact part of the problem.
He has enacted change, but obviously not fast enough for you. How much did you think was going to change in a little under a year? Unless you change first how can you expect the corrupt system you work in to change. Honestly, are you any better for throwing a hot and fairly disingenuous title in the article? There is great information in the summary and I appreciate you sharing it, but I have little more respect for you and your position than the DOJ. When one person pees in the pool everyone swimming in the pool is covered in it.
What will they (his party) keep losing? Let's say he loses the vote because people aren't seeing the change they want fast enough. Now what? The fickle populous will vote in the next person who still won't be able to enact change fast enough (in either direction). Look at what happened to the last president who didn't play by the Washington insider rulebook.
We just voted out a strong Republican grip because we didn't like what they're doing. Are we going to vote that Republican party back in because now they're going to do it all right? You post the looming threat of election losses to the other party like it's going to solve anything.
I guess we'll see what this new Senator from Mass has to offer. It's a little early yet to be saying "I told you so."
Agreed, but I think putting Obama at the front of the article instead of just focusing on the DOJ itself is sensationalist. Instead of leading the reader to consider poor DOJ policies or practices it sends the focus to rhetoric and party spin.
I really think this would have been better served leaving the presidents name out of the title and letting the criticism of the Administration enter as relevant to the discussion. In any event, it's a good article. Thanks for posting it.
I don't think this has anything to do with showing illegalities. Apple loves this sort of attention and the legal threat is their standard procedure. If they hadn't made legal motions against this I think there would have been many more people wondering what they're up to. The C&Ds and legal motions is Apple's way of generating even more publicity via the Streisand Effect.
I always wonder if these events are just astroturfing at it's finest.
I'm pretty sure most of us have been tired of small minded insecure bigots for a lot longer than this.
That's the point of open source though isn't it? Any developer, company, etc can take the code modify it for it's own use and distribute it within the license agreement. Maybe the answer to ensuring cross brand compatibility with applications is for Google to develop a standard interface that requires third party system developers to implement in order to use the Google or Droid trademark on the phone.
Occasionally (and I'm not trying to be pedantic), I will try and use parentheses (not that it's a better solution, but it seems to break up the parenthetical expressions in a more visually pleasing manner) to keep my sentences simpler, while other times (more often than not) I'll just get straight to the point (if there indeed a point to be made). :)
Check out the products list at Mozilla Labs. There are some interesting ideas being tossed around. They are exploring sync technology in a project called Weave. There is a project called Prism that lets you split web apps out from the browser. It seems like Mozilla is also trying to evolve and improve the way people use and develop for their browser system. Take a look at that page and decide for yourself. I think the author of the article should have presented what else is going on with Mozilla's development vision and not just singled out Jetpack. It's only part of the picture. The article is really troll and flamebait.
I've been an AT&T mobile customer for a bit over 2 years now and I don't like their service or support.
Why are you still with them ?.. If it's because they are the only game in your town, then you do like their service.. If it's because they are the only one who has the phone you want, then you do like their support.. Your with them for a reason.. it's just more fun to bitch.
I had a two year contract with them which was up this month. Ah, maybe you didn't consider that before you jumped to far gone imaginary conclusions.
I don't like their coverage. I don't like their crappy support. And now that my contract is up I'm in the process of switching carriers. Though I'm sure you could have said something worthwhile... it's just more fun to just come across as a pedantic asswad.
While I care about speed, I care more about coverage and reliability. Did the testers cherry pick AT&T friendly locations? I know when I went to Washington D.C. earlier this year that not only was my 3G coverage under AT&T spotty, my ability to simply connect to AT&T and make calls was also poor. It would be a much more interesting test if this was performed in every city over a certain population size. In my opinion 12 cities does not make a good test.
I'll admit I'm biased though. I've been an AT&T mobile customer for a bit over 2 years now and I don't like their service or support.
Generally speaking, I have far less reason to fear Google than Microsoft. Microsoft has repeatedly broken the law for its own end. As far as I know, Google has no record of similar transgressions.
Google doesn't seem to have a problem with selling the information they gather to every other single evil company out there that has or hasn't broken the law. They don't need to do evil if they can profit off of those who do. I don't think it's that conspiratorial. I just want to point out that the moral black and white of large tech companies and the IT industry in general is a lot more shades of gray than some clear good and evil division.
[consiparacy_theory_on]
I think the blog's reference to Schmidt was just an excuse (one they've been looking for) to make a shift away from Google. Google hasn't changed its policy or methods so why should Mozilla bark because Google's exec makes a controversial statement. Google has made a really good open source browser and that's what really bothers Mozilla. As a matter of opinion, Google has made a better (faster more standards compliant) browser than Mozilla has. They have implemented a clean UI, fast JS engine, webkit rendering, and now plug-ins. This is Mozilla's competition, not IE or Opera. Chrome has just been released in beta for both OSX and Linux (links are on the Chrome website). It only makes sense that Mozilla will politicize a sensitive subject and look for a break from Google.
[conspiracy_theory_off]
"It probably sounds like some wacky conspiracy theory"
That's because it is.
...until it happens close to home.
'The FBI could not comment on this specific case, but said if child pornography is ever downloaded accidentally, the user needs to call authorities immediately.'
At which point you've just confessed to trafficking in child porn. No, the proper thing to do is have a secure file deletion utility to nuke all evidence on your system.
No. Just buy a new hard drive and destroy the old one. Open the old hard drive and use a sawsall to cut the disks in to little pieces and scatter them.
Matt is pleading guilty on the advice of his public defender in hopes of getting a three and a half year sentence.
In other words, he doesn't have the money to actually fight this.
And I'll add that his public pretender could have a deal going with the DA's office. The DA gets this case and the public pretender gets another important case of his. Win-win for everyone, except the defendant in this case. It probably sounds like some wacky conspiracy theory until it happens close to home.
There's limitations and hardware requirements to how well virtualization works. A home user isn't going to be happy or probably understand why they don't have advanced 3D rendering for their game in XP mode. XP Mode is designed to help businesses transition from legacy code and make Win 7 a viable business platform. Win 7 Home Premium users can still install Windows Virtual PC, etc.
Domain access is a similar tree you're barking up. It's meant for business not home. Win 7 has Home Groups which is a way for users to setup easy network sharing at home.
I don't think either of those constitute a crippled version, but that's subjective. I'll still vote for fewer versions and lower pricing for non-commercial home use though.
Here is the lemma to your myopic car analogy: Replace the brakes, belts, and other wearables. Service your engine and transmission at required intervals. When a warranty recall for a defective part is issued bring the vehicle to dealer to have it replaced. If you don't do these things and service your vehicle, it will break down and leave you vulnerable to the consequences. Yeah I know - maintaining your vehicle keeps mechanics employed.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Google is solving a problem that doesn't exist. I have yet to hear anyone ask to do all their computing through a web browser.
I love Chrome. It's my browser of choice most of the time. I'm a Google account/services user. I do think they provide an excellent web experience. I don't see them providing the same experience for my desktop as they do for the web. I guess we'll see how this unfolds though. Something tells me there is more to this than we're seeing.
The Chrome version I'm using [4.0.223.16] passes the Acid 3 test with a score of 100. I'm not sure how long it's been this way. I've been using it since around the time they released ChromeFrame and it's been compliant since then.
I like Chrome because it renders well, it's fast, and I find it unobtrusive. Unless IE9 provides a much better user experience I'll only use it to do stuff at Microsoft domains.
I disagree. Most of those features like 'the awesome bar' should be config items not plug-ins/add-ons. So if someone wants a lean FF they can enable/disable those features in config. I would much rather some features be built in rather than a downloadable add-on, but being able to configure the browser without having to go into the about:config system would be something I very much appreciate.