The definition of a "common carrier" is defined in case law, and one of the requirements to qualify as a common carrier is that you offer your services for hire to anyone willing to pay for them. You can't just run a free bulletin board (e.g. YouTube) and claim to be a common carrier for anyone who chooses to use it. Of course, if this case goes on, that could be overturned (theoretically to google's benefit). That would be pretty awesome. VIA would have to go after each individual user posting copyrighted material they don't own (the real crooks).
Apple will let you send in your iPod (of any generation, I believe) to replace the battery for $59, but no iPods officially have user-servicable batteries. This seems like not as viable an option for a cell phone. Lots of people travel with extra cell phone batteries when they're going to be unable to charge them.
The timestamp of the image in iPhoto has pretty much the same problem. 99% of my iPhoto library is dated 2002-01-01. Why? My digital camera is a piece of crap. It takes AA batteries, and it goes through a pair approximately every time I decide to use it. Result: the clock is constantly resetting itself to January 1, 2002 because I keep having to change the batteries. What's worse is it doesn't even advance the clock until you manually set it, so you can't even use timestamp as a sorting criteria independent of actual value. I never bothered to set it after the first time I discovered that it was going to be necessary every time I used the stupid thing, and setting the clock requires manipulating this retarded wheel + 4 button interface which is slow, not to mention a PITA to use. And unlike my ipod, the clock doesn't sync over the USB cable. So the point is, Garbage In, Garbage Out. It also turns out I'm too lazy to look for an option to modify the timestamp of photos in the iPhoto library, but that might be a good thing if it existed. It would be nice if iPhoto had a dialog when you import pictures that asked "it looks like all your photos were taken on the same day, 4 years ago. would you like to pretend they were taken today instead?"
PostgreSQL is not the successor to Ingres, it is a branch of the source code from the early eighties. The commercial Ingres product was maintained and improved by a large team of full time engineers for 20+ years since the branch. It is arguable the superior branch.
This is all true. Now, I invite anybody with half a brain to argue that it actually is the superior branch.
Apple never advertised Q2DE. It was mentioned at the WWDC, but that is a developers conference - and developers can enable it for testing purposes. They advertise Quartz 2D and Quartz Extreme, because these are shipping features.
Q2DE was, once upon a time, listed as one of the coming attractions in Tiger on www.apple.com, back before 10.4 was released. Like, months before. So it's an understandable disappointment that it didn't actually ship working. Anyway, from the 10.4.3 release notes I get the impression it can't be enabled any more, even for testing purposes.
Re:No, or Apple would be marketing like mad
on
Video iPod Oct 12?
·
· Score: 1
Actually, you are completely wrong. Releases of Apple products are NEVER preceeded by a massive marketing campaign.
When Apple first released the original iPod, a lot of people observed that for $400, you could buy a 5GB iPod, or the tiny 5GB HD that's used inside the iPod. But the iPod also included two processors, a screen, user interface controls, a firewire interface, a battery, and a cheap pair of earphones. So at the time, no, it appeared that Apple was not making any particular profit selling iPods, and at that rate they were never going to recover their design and engineering costs.
Using my superior pattern recognition skills I've deduced that a iPod Pico will be forthcomming.
Apple has already bypassed the arcanely licensed pico by releasing the more modern and free nano. As you know, several years ago Apple introduced emacs. It is clear Apple's next product will be vi based.
That's interesting. I don't want to invest in a dying platform, which is why I haven't bought a dual G5 powermac. Instead, I'm waiting for the announcement of new low-end Macs this week so I can get something cheap which will last me until I can buy an intel Mac.
I can believe that in 2008 Dick Cheney will enter the holochamber and ask Karl Rove who the Republican party shall nominate. I can believe that total fraud of an organization, the Federal Election Commission, will do whatever bidding the executive branch fancies.
I can believe the neocons would employee a terrorist act which sacrifices some American lives to maintain their power. But I can also believe some Arab terrorists would plan an attack to disrupt US elections. Attacking during a high-security event would not be consistent with al qaeda's normal tactics, but it might be consistent with their normal tactic of attacking on a Tuesday. If this happens, don't we want the elections delayed? Wouldn't it be better to hold elections not in a state of immediate panic, when for some of the electorate transportation and polling places (probably in a blue state) are destroyed/on fire/contaminated?
Finally, to nitpick: If memory serves me correctly, the New York city primary elections of 9/11/2001 were delayed. Not a national election, so not exactly precident for this sort of thing, but still probably a good idea, don't you think?
When Honda switched the "S2000" from a 2.0 L flat 4, stroking it to 2.2 L, and in the process sacrificed the exclusive 9000 rpm redline for a more mundane 8000 rpm redline, people on the Honda forums complained and doubtless some people decided not to buy one - even though everyone agreed the larger displacement performed better.
When Mazda discontinued the RX-7, their rotary engine-powered sports car, people on the Mazda forums complained and people who otherwise would have been loyal to Mazda probably bought another car instead. (this was before the introduction of the RX-8)
When Porsche switched the 911 from an air-cooled flat 6 to water cooling, some Porsche fans insisted it wasn't even a real 911 any more...
The question that makes sense is not "will you stop using MacOS X instead of buying a Mactel box?" The question is "Will you continue to pay the Apple tax on new hardware if you can get MacOS X to run on generic hardware?"
No, of course not. It would bring great shame to my low slashdot ID to do so.
Truer than you realize. Supposedly the "Pepsi challenge" always offered tasters Coke first, then Pepsi. Statistically, people are more likely to say they prefer whatever they tried more recently in this type of comparison.
If anybody has a link to back this up, it would be appreciated. I'm probably talking out of my ass again.
That is also why Pepsi won the Pepsi challenge. They still use cane sugar. While not all people can taste the difference between corn sugar and cane sugar, those who can overwhelmingly prefer cane sugar.
This is interesting, but I'm suspicious. The second ingredient in my Pepsi is high fructose corn syrup, not sugar.
For the record, I prefer Coke. I have had Coke in Europe but I didn't notice any significant difference in flavor from the American Coke that I'm used to. But I can tell the difference between the flavor of sugar* and corn syrup. I'm surprised there could be anyone who couldn't tell the difference.
*Incidentally, most domestic sugar is beet sugar, not cane sugar. Cane sugar is theoretically of a higher quality, but is more expensive and harder to grow. I'll admit, I can't tell the difference between the taste of sucrose from sugar beets and sucrose from sugar cane.
But I prefer the open architecture of the PC. Ever since I opened a G3 and read the words "warranty void if removed" on a processor dip switch, I've had a bad taste for the platform.
Oh please. Name one PC vendor that will still knowingly warranty your computer after you open it up and overclock it. (I wouldn't want to be subsidizing supposed vendor's customers' broken machines, would you?) The PC is only more "open" than the Mac for values of "open" meaning "ubiquitous".
I don't get this argument at all. The few slashdotters are the ones who will run OS X on their x86 boxes just because they can, but plenty of other people will want to because it's a good idea. People such as: Mac users who don't have unlimited disposable income. PC users who might be interested in running OS X, but not enough to buy new hardware. Basically, anybody who would ever want to run OS X, but isn't obsessed with Apple's shiny/white hardware. I don't expect Apple to cut their pricing premium for Mactel hardware, but it would be a good idea if they're worried about revenue lost to generic-PC OS X. They could also change the way OS X is sold/licensed, so that there isn't quite so much incentive to run OS X on a generic PC. Or maybe they have some killer hardware feature which will only be available from Apple. But so far, I haven't seen any good reason why anyone would want to buy an Apple Mactel box if generic PC OS X is reasonably easy.
The death of the megahertz myth cuts both ways. Until now, it's always been ambiguous how much of a premium you have to pay for a pretty box, the Apple logo, and permission to run MacOS X. Everyone knows a 2GHz G5 is faster than a 2GHz P4, but it's hard to put a dollar value on that, because there isn't a simple and accurate benchmark. With an x86-based Mac, you're going to be able to count every penny of difference between Apple's [whoa. I just realized the term "PowerMac" is dead] machine and a comparably equipped Dell.
Slashdot Mirror
- Get US troops out of Saudi.
- Discredit the US in the international community.
- Raise the price of oil.
- Increase sensitivity of the Western media to Muslim culture.
Oh wait, I always get this mixed up. Which one involved underpants and which one involved profit? Darn.The definition of a "common carrier" is defined in case law, and one of the requirements to qualify as a common carrier is that you offer your services for hire to anyone willing to pay for them. You can't just run a free bulletin board (e.g. YouTube) and claim to be a common carrier for anyone who chooses to use it. Of course, if this case goes on, that could be overturned (theoretically to google's benefit). That would be pretty awesome. VIA would have to go after each individual user posting copyrighted material they don't own (the real crooks).
Apple will let you send in your iPod (of any generation, I believe) to replace the battery for $59, but no iPods officially have user-servicable batteries. This seems like not as viable an option for a cell phone. Lots of people travel with extra cell phone batteries when they're going to be unable to charge them.
but will the battery be replacable? who's going to buy a $500 cell phone without a replacable battery?
The timestamp of the image in iPhoto has pretty much the same problem. 99% of my iPhoto library is dated 2002-01-01. Why? My digital camera is a piece of crap. It takes AA batteries, and it goes through a pair approximately every time I decide to use it. Result: the clock is constantly resetting itself to January 1, 2002 because I keep having to change the batteries. What's worse is it doesn't even advance the clock until you manually set it, so you can't even use timestamp as a sorting criteria independent of actual value. I never bothered to set it after the first time I discovered that it was going to be necessary every time I used the stupid thing, and setting the clock requires manipulating this retarded wheel + 4 button interface which is slow, not to mention a PITA to use. And unlike my ipod, the clock doesn't sync over the USB cable. So the point is, Garbage In, Garbage Out. It also turns out I'm too lazy to look for an option to modify the timestamp of photos in the iPhoto library, but that might be a good thing if it existed. It would be nice if iPhoto had a dialog when you import pictures that asked "it looks like all your photos were taken on the same day, 4 years ago. would you like to pretend they were taken today instead?"
And for those who missed Dr. Frist's report to the Senate, she was fine.
Frist / DeLay 2008!
PostgreSQL is not the successor to Ingres, it is a branch of the source code from the early eighties. The commercial Ingres product was maintained and improved by a large team of full time engineers for 20+ years since the branch. It is arguable the superior branch.
This is all true. Now, I invite anybody with half a brain to argue that it actually is the superior branch.
Apple never advertised Q2DE. It was mentioned at the WWDC, but that is a developers conference - and developers can enable it for testing purposes. They advertise Quartz 2D and Quartz Extreme, because these are shipping features.
Q2DE was, once upon a time, listed as one of the coming attractions in Tiger on www.apple.com, back before 10.4 was released. Like, months before. So it's an understandable disappointment that it didn't actually ship working. Anyway, from the 10.4.3 release notes I get the impression it can't be enabled any more, even for testing purposes.
Actually, you are completely wrong. Releases of Apple products are NEVER preceeded by a massive marketing campaign.
Well, maybe not since the iMac...."The glass is half full of beast." -Herbmaster
When Apple first released the original iPod, a lot of people observed that for $400, you could buy a 5GB iPod, or the tiny 5GB HD that's used inside the iPod. But the iPod also included two processors, a screen, user interface controls, a firewire interface, a battery, and a cheap pair of earphones. So at the time, no, it appeared that Apple was not making any particular profit selling iPods, and at that rate they were never going to recover their design and engineering costs.
Duh, I'm a clod.
Apple released a vi derivative 13 years ago. What was I thinking? Perhaps Apple will next go for an ed product?
Using my superior pattern recognition skills I've deduced that a iPod Pico will be forthcomming.
Apple has already bypassed the arcanely licensed pico by releasing the more modern and free nano. As you know, several years ago Apple introduced emacs. It is clear Apple's next product will be vi based.
Begun, this clone war has.
You read all your software EULAs, don't you? Of course you do.
That's interesting. I don't want to invest in a dying platform, which is why I haven't bought a dual G5 powermac. Instead, I'm waiting for the announcement of new low-end Macs this week so I can get something cheap which will last me until I can buy an intel Mac.
I dunno.
I can believe that in 2008 Dick Cheney will enter the holochamber and ask Karl Rove who the Republican party shall nominate. I can believe that total fraud of an organization, the Federal Election Commission, will do whatever bidding the executive branch fancies.
I can believe the neocons would employee a terrorist act which sacrifices some American lives to maintain their power. But I can also believe some Arab terrorists would plan an attack to disrupt US elections. Attacking during a high-security event would not be consistent with al qaeda's normal tactics, but it might be consistent with their normal tactic of attacking on a Tuesday. If this happens, don't we want the elections delayed? Wouldn't it be better to hold elections not in a state of immediate panic, when for some of the electorate transportation and polling places (probably in a blue state) are destroyed/on fire/contaminated?
Finally, to nitpick: If memory serves me correctly, the New York city primary elections of 9/11/2001 were delayed. Not a national election, so not exactly precident for this sort of thing, but still probably a good idea, don't you think?
When Mazda discontinued the RX-7, their rotary engine-powered sports car, people on the Mazda forums complained and people who otherwise would have been loyal to Mazda probably bought another car instead. (this was before the introduction of the RX-8)
When Porsche switched the 911 from an air-cooled flat 6 to water cooling, some Porsche fans insisted it wasn't even a real 911 any more...
The question that makes sense is not "will you stop using MacOS X instead of buying a Mactel box?" The question is "Will you continue to pay the Apple tax on new hardware if you can get MacOS X to run on generic hardware?"
No, of course not. It would bring great shame to my low slashdot ID to do so.
Truer than you realize. Supposedly the "Pepsi challenge" always offered tasters Coke first, then Pepsi. Statistically, people are more likely to say they prefer whatever they tried more recently in this type of comparison.
If anybody has a link to back this up, it would be appreciated. I'm probably talking out of my ass again.
That is also why Pepsi won the Pepsi challenge. They still use cane sugar. While not all people can taste the difference between corn sugar and cane sugar, those who can overwhelmingly prefer cane sugar.
This is interesting, but I'm suspicious. The second ingredient in my Pepsi is high fructose corn syrup, not sugar.
For the record, I prefer Coke. I have had Coke in Europe but I didn't notice any significant difference in flavor from the American Coke that I'm used to. But I can tell the difference between the flavor of sugar* and corn syrup. I'm surprised there could be anyone who couldn't tell the difference.
*Incidentally, most domestic sugar is beet sugar, not cane sugar. Cane sugar is theoretically of a higher quality, but is more expensive and harder to grow. I'll admit, I can't tell the difference between the taste of sucrose from sugar beets and sucrose from sugar cane.
But I prefer the open architecture of the PC. Ever since I opened a G3 and read the words "warranty void if removed" on a processor dip switch, I've had a bad taste for the platform.
Oh please. Name one PC vendor that will still knowingly warranty your computer after you open it up and overclock it. (I wouldn't want to be subsidizing supposed vendor's customers' broken machines, would you?) The PC is only more "open" than the Mac for values of "open" meaning "ubiquitous".
I don't get this argument at all. The few slashdotters are the ones who will run OS X on their x86 boxes just because they can, but plenty of other people will want to because it's a good idea. People such as: Mac users who don't have unlimited disposable income. PC users who might be interested in running OS X, but not enough to buy new hardware. Basically, anybody who would ever want to run OS X, but isn't obsessed with Apple's shiny/white hardware. I don't expect Apple to cut their pricing premium for Mactel hardware, but it would be a good idea if they're worried about revenue lost to generic-PC OS X. They could also change the way OS X is sold/licensed, so that there isn't quite so much incentive to run OS X on a generic PC. Or maybe they have some killer hardware feature which will only be available from Apple. But so far, I haven't seen any good reason why anyone would want to buy an Apple Mactel box if generic PC OS X is reasonably easy.
Yes, it is confirmed that OpenFirmware is dead.
Apple Mac OS X Universal Binary Programming Guidelines
The death of the megahertz myth cuts both ways. Until now, it's always been ambiguous how much of a premium you have to pay for a pretty box, the Apple logo, and permission to run MacOS X. Everyone knows a 2GHz G5 is faster than a 2GHz P4, but it's hard to put a dollar value on that, because there isn't a simple and accurate benchmark. With an x86-based Mac, you're going to be able to count every penny of difference between Apple's [whoa. I just realized the term "PowerMac" is dead] machine and a comparably equipped Dell.