I disagree that it was unclear. Adaptive Enterprise defines an entity where a company will be able to dynamically readjust to changes that affect its business.
Soooo...like if I get a new customer I can dynamically readjust my database to reflect the changes that just affected my business? We've never had a machine that could handle SQL INSERT stetements before! What a breakthrough for HP!
Why do they let people like this run companies, or even speak? I mean christ, MS APIs are more well-understood than that buzzword soup.
The big difference is that deleting Internet Explorer will delete integral libraries as well. Safari is a 100% self-contained application.
A Mac binary is a Mac binary is a Mac binary. Some extremely complex programs prove to be an exception, but most of the time a Mac app is a little self-contained box you can drag all around as one file, keep anywhere you want, and delete simply by dragging to the trash. There is no registry, there is no install log hanging around. No one has to do "Add/Remove Programs" and possibly remove a library that happens to be a dependency for other apps.
This is one of the reasons I find the Mac platform a joy, and is exactly the difference nessisary to provide bundling AND choice.
Well, if you're male, you might be able to come up with one more thing...
On-site "DNA analysis" is one biometric I hope I never see in existance...
...however, after taking your statement into consideration, perhaps I'd like to have a machine of my own, for uh, personal reasearch purposes. Yeah, that's it.
Well, you are. Get a clue. It states very clearly that the HFS+ filesystem is not supposeted under Windows. This is the fault of Windows, it CANNOT see the disk drive of a for-Mac iPod. This has been the rule since the first iPod was ever plugged into a PC by some hacker "just to see what happens".
Class action lawsuit? Please. This is well known, well documented. Makes you ashamed you support Apple?
Trolling. Mad down.
Offtopic: Note
on
The Scar
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
I think the main page needs a </I>, sorry for the offtopic.
Cool. So if someone borrows my car and I know the brakes don't work, and they run over somebody, all I have to say is 'I'd intended to fix the brakes but just hadn't found the time to do so' and I'm off the hook - right?
Nope,. I'd say you get in some kind of trouble.
Now, for an analogy which could actually apply to this situation:
if someone
STEALS my car and I know the brakes don't work, and they run over somebody, all I have to say is 'I'd intended to fix the brakes but just hadn't found the time to do so' and I'm off the hook - right?
Wrong, I shouldn't be on the hook in the first place because someone is operating my equipment without my persmisson and most likely without my knowledge.
2. is that Microsoft is truly behind this case and that it is all part of a final MS funded and supported massive attack on OSS that will either succede and lead to total dismissal of OSS in the US* or be a huge setback leading to criminal charges aginst many in the industry. The way things are going I'm not so certain that this isn't the way things are going to turn out. The stakes are pretty damn high and the whole thing stinks of some underhanded motives.
/me sits and thinks for a moment...
Linux: Reloaded
IBM - Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the anomaly revealed as both beginning, and end. There are two doors. The door to your right leads to the dismissal, and the salvation of Linux. The door to the left leads back to the courtroom, to the GPL, and to the end of your company. As you adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you're going to do, don't we? Already I can see the chain reaction, the chemical precursors that signal the onset of emotion, designed specifically to overwhelm logic, and reason. An emotion that is already blinding you from the simple, and obvious truth: Linux is going to exist, and there is nothing that you can do to stop it.
*McBride walks to the door on his left*
IBM - Humph. Greed, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest motivation, and your greatest weakness.
McBride - If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again.
The actual Redbook audio that your CD Player can "see" is not visible to a PC. The PC can only see the second session that contains the WMA files and other fluff.
If you get caught "leaking" the modified firmware, you broke the law (I think...). Perhaps sell the devices with adiquate technical documentation and let some slick hackers write a flash update for it. Hell, it could even be an open-source project, cite fair use of older materials as justification of it's existance.
...that and the TV show is allowed 16 hours a scene to render 5^10x50 polygons for one 30-second scene, whereas your game console has to represent the same sequence in real time, with a few microseconds to come up with close-as-possible pictures.:-)
...but it's part of the fact we prefer to think that we "think for ourtselves". This is obviously becomming less and less apparent as more people in the US allow themselves to be puppets.
Honestly, not to troll, but I see so much blind Americanism it's almost digusting. Perhaps if you looked and agreed with the current issues and official positions, sure. I can live with people having actual opinions, and those that do, even whom disagree with my wholeheartedly, are entitled. That's suposed to be one of America's base pirnciples: You can think what you want, and you're allowed to expose others to such opinions. What I have a problem with is those who regurgitate the evening news, as if what you saw was always 100% correct and unbiased.
America's problem is that we're being fed. Ads started the trend and now factual information is slowly but surely metamorphisising into that wich is more convincing than informng, between the opportunity for ratings (more ads sold for more $$$) and for control (same reasons). I, for one, do not welcome our new former Soviet overlords, this is not a troll.
Love or hate the current America, you can't disagree this hapens to some extent.
If you've ever watched Futurama and seen the spaceship they fly around in, you've seen 3D CG with a cartoon-ish shader at work. That can be really useful in some aspects of cartooning.
...And if you've ever seen more than perhaps the very first episode (season?) of South Park, you've seen 2D CG at work, which is pretty much Flash on steroids. Of course, that doesn't mean all 2D CG will appear like South Park, of course. Regular cartoons can easily be created as well.
... where the possibly inaccurate responses of a small fraction (12%) of an incosequential number (40,000/(number of PC users)) is used to extrapolate numbers of the order of 1 million. Hell, 80% of those who deleted had less than 50 files on their machines... they're not even serious music downloaders! How meaningless is that?
This is the most interesting and probably the best point brought up in this discussion yet. The fact of the matter relates directly to the reason why the half-assed DRM iTMS is such an important thing: Would you get sued?
My answer is probably yes, knowing Apple's all too paranoid legal team, etc. I think "Why?" is perhaps a valid question at this point.
What Apple has done is found a soultion though discouragement, almost a valid use for "security through obscurity", if you will. People will still pirate, and some will still take the time to pirate from iTMS. It simply won't, however, happen on the massive scale is was with Napster and is now with <INSERT FILE SHARING NETWORK OF CHOICE HERE>. Piracy of Apple's offerings is no longer a click away, but a legal purchase is simple as ever. 10 minutes to break the law or 5 seconds to do the right thing for cheaper+more convenient than usual?
Yes, it is control, I do see what you mean there. They are indirectly leading people away from that absolute freedom...but I cite some other posts in this thread which speak of, for example, why installing remote controls in cars to keep people from speeding is bad; suppose you need to speed away from a natural disaster or there is some other emergency, This is true, I would be totally against such a thing. Think of this, however: What emergency is so great you need to play a song from the iTMS?
If such a thing where to spread beyond pain-in-the-ass restrictions on entertainment, I'd be against it. Honestly, though, making piracy of music a round-about pain doesn't seem that horrific in my eyes. I would still fight if they tried to govern my car and latch my arms back, but "You can't listen to this song now because you haven't paid your one-time $0.99 fee" doesn't seem so awful compared to what could become.
So... Exactly. iTunes Music Store is like a DVD. You can purchase and enjoy it as much as you want, and if you have the patience, you can rip it to another format to protect your inventsment or do with it what you will. The ripping part isn't easy, but it's better than having some company tell you that you have no rights to do anything at all, isn't it?
Honestly I didnt 'mean to come off that way. I know what rights copyright holders have. The DRM in iTunes barely prevents copying. Derivative works isn't possible to protect in hardware, as someone who can listen can create. Public performance protection isn't easily implemented either.
My point is iTunes make it a contorted, roundabout way to achieve something. Copying. It can be done, but it's not straightforward. In my eyes that's not a bad thing. Too many people have gotten used to just "taking" what isn't really free, and no matter how great or significan the technology that makes tha possible is, they're still seeing it that way,
I'm not siding with the strongarm tactics of the RIAA here, either. I understand why they want to do what they want to do, even if they make a life-and-death matter out of that which is not.
The point is: People copy music illegally. Here is a service which makes the illegal part a pain in the ass, though not impossible. Fair use is maintained. The folks who deserve it are paid (well, kinda, label fees and what have you, but better than straight piracy) , and everyone should be much happier. iTunes is no where near Palladium, and my overall point is that no one should feel controlled by it. It's not that much of a pain in the ass to avoid, and it discourages people from performing illegal actions, which has really become a problem. I've seen with my own two eyes.
It's not like I want to offer control to OTHER areas, but music piracy has taken off wether you like it or not, and dispite fanatics on both sides, this is honesly a rational solution as far as I'm concerned. I hope you folks can see where I'm comming from.
No flames or trolling intended, and believe me, I'm much more on your side than I probably sound.
I forgot just how much I need to revise and watch my wording on Internet discussions, especially Slashdot. My bad.
So, basically Apple is saying "If you buy our product it will only work with our other (free) product."
That's like being pissed when someone says "If you buy our Linux database, it will only work with the (free) Linux OS." "WTF? What happned to choice? Since when is Linux a Monopoly? I WANNA RUN AIX & SOLARIS!" "Sorry, Linux only."
(Probable defense by Apple zealots: "Apple isn't anywhere near as bad as Microsoft." Problem with that defense: That doesn't justify defending Apple, that justifies criticizing them more selectively.)
Let's take that one step further: Apple has their bad points, but overall they have been consistently higher-quality than Microsoft, and they rarely absuse their position. Microsoft forces crap apon people, buys out competition and replacies their market share with their own crappy product.
Don't you think this is a bit of strange angle to attack Windows from in a story regarding a DRM program from Apple, ported from the Mac?
DRM is DRM is DRM is DRM. Palladium and iTunes are one and the same. When you install iTunes you have already said, "Of course my computer decides what I can and can't do, and I obey." You can't get further from owning your own computer than that.
Don't you think this is a bit of strange angle to attack a poster from in a thread regarding a DRM program from Apple, ported from the Mac? I must be feeding a troll...
That is the dumbest thing I ever heard. The copyright holders of the songs decide what you can and can't do, which, honestly is they way it shoudl be. I'm sorry you're upset that you can't copy music for free anymore without fear of legal troubles, but guess what, it's ALWAYS BEEN ILLEGAL. Now we have a way to get it LEGALLY and at CHEAPER prices at that, and the DRM even allows itself to be LEGALLY cirrcumvented in this age of DMCA....AND YOU STILL FIND A WAY TO COMPLAIN.
I'm sorry for the flamebait, but that's absolutely pathetic.
...on Slashdot without trolling, but I've definetly seen my friends on a college campus be able to pick up all the Bluetooth phones in a 10-meter sphere around their dorm rooms, and the little bastards have definately send a picture message with the goatse man to anyone and everyone...
Slashdot Mirror
Why do they let people like this run companies, or even speak? I mean christ, MS APIs are more well-understood than that buzzword soup.
The big difference is that deleting Internet Explorer will delete integral libraries as well. Safari is a 100% self-contained application.
A Mac binary is a Mac binary is a Mac binary. Some extremely complex programs prove to be an exception, but most of the time a Mac app is a little self-contained box you can drag all around as one file, keep anywhere you want, and delete simply by dragging to the trash. There is no registry, there is no install log hanging around. No one has to do "Add/Remove Programs" and possibly remove a library that happens to be a dependency for other apps.
This is one of the reasons I find the Mac platform a joy, and is exactly the difference nessisary to provide bundling AND choice.
...however, after taking your statement into consideration, perhaps I'd like to have a machine of my own, for uh, personal reasearch purposes. Yeah, that's it.
Well, you are. Get a clue. It states very clearly that the HFS+ filesystem is not supposeted under Windows. This is the fault of Windows, it CANNOT see the disk drive of a for-Mac iPod. This has been the rule since the first iPod was ever plugged into a PC by some hacker "just to see what happens".
Class action lawsuit? Please. This is well known, well documented. Makes you ashamed you support Apple?
Trolling. Mad down.
I think the main page needs a </I>, sorry for the offtopic.
Buying that domain doesn't sound very CNet-like to me...I would have thought they would just toss a new box on "mp3.com.com"
Now, for an analogy which could actually apply to this situation: Wrong, I shouldn't be on the hook in the first place because someone is operating my equipment without my persmisson and most likely without my knowledge.
Linux: Reloaded
IBM - Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the anomaly revealed as both beginning, and end. There are two doors. The door to your right leads to the dismissal, and the salvation of Linux. The door to the left leads back to the courtroom, to the GPL, and to the end of your company. As you adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you're going to do, don't we? Already I can see the chain reaction, the chemical precursors that signal the onset of emotion, designed specifically to overwhelm logic, and reason. An emotion that is already blinding you from the simple, and obvious truth: Linux is going to exist, and there is nothing that you can do to stop it.
*McBride walks to the door on his left*
IBM - Humph. Greed, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest motivation, and your greatest weakness.
McBride - If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again.
IBM - We won't.
If you get caught "leaking" the modified firmware, you broke the law (I think...). Perhaps sell the devices with adiquate technical documentation and let some slick hackers write a flash update for it. Hell, it could even be an open-source project, cite fair use of older materials as justification of it's existance.
...that and the TV show is allowed 16 hours a scene to render 5^10x50 polygons for one 30-second scene, whereas your game console has to represent the same sequence in real time, with a few microseconds to come up with close-as-possible pictures.
...but it's part of the fact we prefer to think that we "think for ourtselves". This is obviously becomming less and less apparent as more people in the US allow themselves to be puppets.
Honestly, not to troll, but I see so much blind Americanism it's almost digusting. Perhaps if you looked and agreed with the current issues and official positions, sure. I can live with people having actual opinions, and those that do, even whom disagree with my wholeheartedly, are entitled. That's suposed to be one of America's base pirnciples: You can think what you want, and you're allowed to expose others to such opinions. What I have a problem with is those who regurgitate the evening news, as if what you saw was always 100% correct and unbiased.
America's problem is that we're being fed. Ads started the trend and now factual information is slowly but surely metamorphisising into that wich is more convincing than informng, between the opportunity for ratings (more ads sold for more $$$) and for control (same reasons). I, for one, do not welcome our new former Soviet overlords, this is not a troll.
Love or hate the current America, you can't disagree this hapens to some extent.
If you've ever watched Futurama and seen the spaceship they fly around in, you've seen 3D CG with a cartoon-ish shader at work. That can be really useful in some aspects of cartooning.
...And if you've ever seen more than perhaps the very first episode (season?) of South Park, you've seen 2D CG at work, which is pretty much Flash on steroids. Of course, that doesn't mean all 2D CG will appear like South Park, of course. Regular cartoons can easily be created as well.
This is the most interesting and probably the best point brought up in this discussion yet. The fact of the matter relates directly to the reason why the half-assed DRM iTMS is such an important thing: Would you get sued?
My answer is probably yes, knowing Apple's all too paranoid legal team, etc. I think "Why?" is perhaps a valid question at this point.
What Apple has done is found a soultion though discouragement, almost a valid use for "security through obscurity", if you will. People will still pirate, and some will still take the time to pirate from iTMS. It simply won't, however, happen on the massive scale is was with Napster and is now with <INSERT FILE SHARING NETWORK OF CHOICE HERE>. Piracy of Apple's offerings is no longer a click away, but a legal purchase is simple as ever. 10 minutes to break the law or 5 seconds to do the right thing for cheaper+more convenient than usual?
Yes, it is control, I do see what you mean there. They are indirectly leading people away from that absolute freedom...but I cite some other posts in this thread which speak of, for example, why installing remote controls in cars to keep people from speeding is bad; suppose you need to speed away from a natural disaster or there is some other emergency, This is true, I would be totally against such a thing. Think of this, however: What emergency is so great you need to play a song from the iTMS?
If such a thing where to spread beyond pain-in-the-ass restrictions on entertainment, I'd be against it. Honestly, though, making piracy of music a round-about pain doesn't seem that horrific in my eyes. I would still fight if they tried to govern my car and latch my arms back, but "You can't listen to this song now because you haven't paid your one-time $0.99 fee" doesn't seem so awful compared to what could become.
So... Exactly. iTunes Music Store is like a DVD. You can purchase and enjoy it as much as you want, and if you have the patience, you can rip it to another format to protect your inventsment or do with it what you will. The ripping part isn't easy, but it's better than having some company tell you that you have no rights to do anything at all, isn't it?
So many responses, so little time.
Honestly I didnt 'mean to come off that way. I know what rights copyright holders have. The DRM in iTunes barely prevents copying. Derivative works isn't possible to protect in hardware, as someone who can listen can create. Public performance protection isn't easily implemented either.
My point is iTunes make it a contorted, roundabout way to achieve something. Copying. It can be done, but it's not straightforward. In my eyes that's not a bad thing. Too many people have gotten used to just "taking" what isn't really free, and no matter how great or significan the technology that makes tha possible is, they're still seeing it that way,
I'm not siding with the strongarm tactics of the RIAA here, either. I understand why they want to do what they want to do, even if they make a life-and-death matter out of that which is not.
The point is: People copy music illegally. Here is a service which makes the illegal part a pain in the ass, though not impossible. Fair use is maintained. The folks who deserve it are paid (well, kinda, label fees and what have you, but better than straight piracy) , and everyone should be much happier. iTunes is no where near Palladium, and my overall point is that no one should feel controlled by it. It's not that much of a pain in the ass to avoid, and it discourages people from performing illegal actions, which has really become a problem. I've seen with my own two eyes.
It's not like I want to offer control to OTHER areas, but music piracy has taken off wether you like it or not, and dispite fanatics on both sides, this is honesly a rational solution as far as I'm concerned. I hope you folks can see where I'm comming from.
No flames or trolling intended, and believe me, I'm much more on your side than I probably sound.
I forgot just how much I need to revise and watch my wording on Internet discussions, especially Slashdot. My bad.
So, basically Apple is saying "If you buy our product it will only work with our other (free) product."
That's like being pissed when someone says "If you buy our Linux database, it will only work with the (free) Linux OS." "WTF? What happned to choice? Since when is Linux a Monopoly? I WANNA RUN AIX & SOLARIS!" "Sorry, Linux only."Let's take that one step further: Apple has their bad points, but overall they have been consistently higher-quality than Microsoft, and they rarely absuse their position. Microsoft forces crap apon people, buys out competition and replacies their market share with their own crappy product.
That is the dumbest thing I ever heard. The copyright holders of the songs decide what you can and can't do, which, honestly is they way it shoudl be. I'm sorry you're upset that you can't copy music for free anymore without fear of legal troubles, but guess what, it's ALWAYS BEEN ILLEGAL. Now we have a way to get it LEGALLY and at CHEAPER prices at that, and the DRM even allows itself to be LEGALLY cirrcumvented in this age of DMCA....AND YOU STILL FIND A WAY TO COMPLAIN.
I'm sorry for the flamebait, but that's absolutely pathetic.
...I almost thought you meant "Whack the fscking monkey"!
...I thought I had slept through another OS X release for a second!
...on Slashdot without trolling, but I've definetly seen my friends on a college campus be able to pick up all the Bluetooth phones in a 10-meter sphere around their dorm rooms, and the little bastards have definately send a picture message with the goatse man to anyone and everyone...