[MP3.com] was shut down on December 2, 2003 by CNET, which, after purchasing the domain name (but not MP3.com's technology or music assets), established the current MP3.com site.
On January 12, 2000, MP3.com launched the "My.MP3.com" service which enabled users to securely register their personal CDs and then stream digital copies online from the My.MP3.com service. Since consumers could only listen online to music they already proved they owned the company saw this as a great opportunity for revenue by allowing fans to access their own music online. The record industry did not see it that way and sued MP3.com claiming that the service constituted unauthorized duplication and promoted copyright infringement.
Judge Jed S. Rakoff, in the case UMG v. MP3.com, ruled in favor of the record labels against MP3.com and the service on the copyright law provision of "making mechanical copies for commercial use without permission from the copyright owner." Before damage was awarded, MP3.com settled with plaintiff, UMG Recordings, for $53.4 million, in exchange for the latter's permission to use its entire music collection. Later, the firm no longer had sufficient funds to weather the technology downturn. MP3.com was subsequently bought and the new owner did not continue the same service.
Weakened financially, MP3.com was eventually acquired by Vivendi Universal in May 2001 at $5 per share ($23 below the IPO share price) or approximately $372 million in cash and stock. Jean-Marie Messier, then-CEO of Vivendi Universal, stated "The acquisition of MP3.com was an extremely important step in our strategy to create both a distribution platform and acquire state-of-the-art technology. MP3.com will be a great asset to Vivendi Universal in meeting our goal of becoming the leading online provider of music and related services.
Vivendi had difficulties growing the service and eventually dismantled the original site, selling off all of its assets including the URL and logo to CNET in 2003.
So you're writing off the whole tablet industry because it's not suitable for one setting?
I don't think they're a fad at all. The only reason PDAs died out is because they are the same size as phones and technology got to the point where the two devices could be combined into one.
Tablets are not (and, by definition, can never be) good enough to replace all computers in all places but now that the form factor has been done right and the CPU and battery life are good, they are suitable for many tasks and they will never go away. Who cares if they aren't "sexy" in 10 years? As long as they work, they'll still be in use. Light bulbs and toilets aren't very sexy either but I don't want to live in a world without them.
Their email is either #1 or #2. If it's no longer #1, it was up until recently. They've branched out a lot and acquired a lot. Like Google, they were smart enough to realize they aren't in the "search engine" business, they are in the "get people to come to sites we run" business.
... when we were doing the iPhone, we thought, wouldn't it be great to have maps on the iPhone?... we ended up writing a client app for [Google's] APIs... the app we were able to write, since we're pretty reasonable at writing apps, blows away any Google Maps client. Just blows it away. Same set of data coming off the server, but the experience you have using it is unbelievable... that client is the result of a lot of technology on the client, that client application. So when we show it to them, they're just blown away by how good it is. And you can't do that stuff in a browser. [emphasis mine]
You can still use any web app you want on your iDevice. But native will always be faster and, if the dev is any good, better. Or did you not notice that Google themselves make a little program called Google Earth?
Yeah, I have since had a chance to read it. I saw this while heading out the door and glanced at the pic in TFA but didn't get any further and just wanted to post that link before too many comments came in.
... Starfire, a project by Bruce Tognazzini from 1992 when he was working at Sun. (He had previously been the founder of the Human Interface Group at Apple.)
... and don't call it a "gun", either, or else you'll have to stand naked with your hand on your crotch repeatedly chanting "This is my XM25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement System, this is my gun, this is for fighting, this is for fun."
An even better way to take advantage of this exploit: Once you've got your page that hides the address bar, at the top of the page show a graphic of Safari's address bar with a totally legit URL. You could even make it a form field so people could click into it and type, and if they click 'Go' have it take you to whatever site they asked for. (Or not.)
"Given how rampant phishing and malware attempts are these days, I hope Apple chooses to not allow arbitrary Web applications to scroll the real Safari address bar out of view," he said. "Perhaps Apple may consider displaying or scrolling the current domain name right below the universal status bar, i.e. below the carrier and time stamp. Positioning the current domain context in a location that is unalterable by the rendered Web content can provide the users similar indication that browsers such as IE and Chrome provide by highlighting the current domain being rendered."
Even if the true URL were visible it still wouldn't help much--people would still visit www.bankofamercia.com or www.bankofamerica.evilsite.com or www.bankofamericaonline.net or any one of a million other correct-looking domains.
"I hope Apple chooses to not allow arbitrary Web applications to scroll the real Safari address bar out of view"
Yes, let's make everyone's experience worse just to help a small percentage of people who couldn't use the information shown to help themselves anyhow. No, thanks.
... I bet this was just one of those dumb little things and will probably get overturned very soon. I know Apple has denied some things in the past for questionable reasons but something like this--a harmless little magazine--sounds to me more like it belongs in the "Never attribute to malice..." category.
> And the state might also have to raise the income tax...
Some states (including two biggies--Florida and Texas) would have to CREATE a state income tax first. Talk about something unlikely to be voted into existence...
I absolutely HATE being in Orlando International Airport and hearing a steady drone of how the current threat level is "orange." It's been that way for YEARS which proves two things: 1) it's completely inaccurate and 2) the creators never read The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
Let's sort all Android apps into the following categories:
Apps from Google.
Third-party apps that also exist on iOS.
Third-party apps that are exclusive to Android.
From my time spent with the Nexus One early this year, I know that Google's Android apps are pretty good. These include both the core system apps, and the closed-source "Google Experience" apps like the dedicated Gmail client and Google Maps.
There are definitely a fair number of apps in the second category -- those ported to both iOS and Android. Examples: Amazon's Kindle client, Pandora, and a few popular games, such as Angry Birds and Doodle Jump.
But what I find striking is that the apps in the third category -- those exclusive to Android -- are almost entirely unappealing or irrelevant to iOS users.
That's not to say there's nothing in Android, as a system, that appeals to iPhone owners. Built-in turn-by-turn navigation on certain models. A system-wide notification system. Widgets on the homescreen. Over-the-air system updates. Unrestricted background processing for third-party apps, battery-life be damned. But those are things that are built into the system itself, or which otherwise come from Google. What I'm questioning is the strength and depth of Android's third-party developer support.
Which are the apps, from developers other than Google, that I should feel like I'm missing out on because I don't have an Android device? Where are the killer apps for Android?
Turn the table and we could be here all day running down the list of high-quality, interesting apps which are exclusive to iOS.
Slashdot Mirror
Never let those pesky "facts" get in the way of a good Apple-bashing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3.com
[MP3.com] was shut down on December 2, 2003 by CNET, which, after purchasing the domain name (but not MP3.com's technology or music assets), established the current MP3.com site.
On January 12, 2000, MP3.com launched the "My.MP3.com" service which enabled users to securely register their personal CDs and then stream digital copies online from the My.MP3.com service. Since consumers could only listen online to music they already proved they owned the company saw this as a great opportunity for revenue by allowing fans to access their own music online. The record industry did not see it that way and sued MP3.com claiming that the service constituted unauthorized duplication and promoted copyright infringement.
Judge Jed S. Rakoff, in the case UMG v. MP3.com, ruled in favor of the record labels against MP3.com and the service on the copyright law provision of "making mechanical copies for commercial use without permission from the copyright owner." Before damage was awarded, MP3.com settled with plaintiff, UMG Recordings, for $53.4 million, in exchange for the latter's permission to use its entire music collection. Later, the firm no longer had sufficient funds to weather the technology downturn. MP3.com was subsequently bought and the new owner did not continue the same service.
Weakened financially, MP3.com was eventually acquired by Vivendi Universal in May 2001 at $5 per share ($23 below the IPO share price) or approximately $372 million in cash and stock. Jean-Marie Messier, then-CEO of Vivendi Universal, stated "The acquisition of MP3.com was an extremely important step in our strategy to create both a distribution platform and acquire state-of-the-art technology. MP3.com will be a great asset to Vivendi Universal in meeting our goal of becoming the leading online provider of music and related services.
Vivendi had difficulties growing the service and eventually dismantled the original site, selling off all of its assets including the URL and logo to CNET in 2003.
For comparison, Apple opened the iTunes Music Store in April 2003--23 months after Universal got MP3.com. CNET bought mp3.com in November 2003.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2003/apr/28musicstore.html
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1008275/cnet-buys-mp3com
So you're writing off the whole tablet industry because it's not suitable for one setting?
I don't think they're a fad at all. The only reason PDAs died out is because they are the same size as phones and technology got to the point where the two devices could be combined into one.
Tablets are not (and, by definition, can never be) good enough to replace all computers in all places but now that the form factor has been done right and the CPU and battery life are good, they are suitable for many tasks and they will never go away. Who cares if they aren't "sexy" in 10 years? As long as they work, they'll still be in use. Light bulbs and toilets aren't very sexy either but I don't want to live in a world without them.
Their email is either #1 or #2. If it's no longer #1, it was up until recently. They've branched out a lot and acquired a lot. Like Google, they were smart enough to realize they aren't in the "search engine" business, they are in the "get people to come to sites we run" business.
Too bad Disney didn't have the geeky balls to name the sequel TROFF. :-)
The 1968 movie actually showed her naked boob, and she's supposed to be how old? Isn't that a depiction of child porn? OH NOES!!!!11
I was mildly disgusted to see that the domain http://mcdonaldsmom.com/ actually exists. Happily, it redirects to http://www1.mcdonalds.com/momstrust/ which gives a 404. As it should be.
Well, if it costs $1 and only lasts 1 year then in 110 years he would have been better off buying from the dealer.
Oh, wait, the original ones didn't las 110 years. So scratch that. Yes, he'd be better off making his own, today, tomorrow, and forever.
Do you know what the profit margins are for ISPs? If they take a hit on profits, they go out of business.
I they wanted to ship a few more copies they should have gone with my choice, 'Naughty Nympho.'
Even before the iPhone launched, Steve Jobs knew that with limited CPU, RAM, and screen size, native apps were the way to go on mobile devices.
... when we were doing the iPhone, we thought, wouldn't it be great to have maps on the iPhone? ... we ended up writing a client app for [Google's] APIs... the app we were able to write, since we're pretty reasonable at writing apps, blows away any Google Maps client. Just blows it away. Same set of data coming off the server, but the experience you have using it is unbelievable... that client is the result of a lot of technology on the client, that client application. So when we show it to them, they're just blown away by how good it is. And you can't do that stuff in a browser. [emphasis mine]
You can still use any web app you want on your iDevice. But native will always be faster and, if the dev is any good, better. Or did you not notice that Google themselves make a little program called Google Earth?
So if "gentlemen prefer Androids and ladies prefer iOS" then what does that make you? ;-)
And how about a Windows phone? Qualdows Phone System 7 Mobile Series for Handhelds?
Yeah, I have since had a chance to read it. I saw this while heading out the door and glanced at the pic in TFA but didn't get any further and just wanted to post that link before too many comments came in.
... Starfire, a project by Bruce Tognazzini from 1992 when he was working at Sun. (He had previously been the founder of the Human Interface Group at Apple.)
AFAIK "Accept Cookies... Only from sites I visit" is the default setting in Safari.
Ah. I found my problem -- two TFAs to read. :-) It's not specified in the first one.
... and don't call it a "gun", either, or else you'll have to stand naked with your hand on your crotch repeatedly chanting "This is my XM25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement System, this is my gun, this is for fighting, this is for fun."
An even better way to take advantage of this exploit: Once you've got your page that hides the address bar, at the top of the page show a graphic of Safari's address bar with a totally legit URL. You could even make it a form field so people could click into it and type, and if they click 'Go' have it take you to whatever site they asked for. (Or not.)
"Given how rampant phishing and malware attempts are these days, I hope Apple chooses to not allow arbitrary Web applications to scroll the real Safari address bar out of view," he said. "Perhaps Apple may consider displaying or scrolling the current domain name right below the universal status bar, i.e. below the carrier and time stamp. Positioning the current domain context in a location that is unalterable by the rendered Web content can provide the users similar indication that browsers such as IE and Chrome provide by highlighting the current domain being rendered."
Even if the true URL were visible it still wouldn't help much--people would still visit www.bankofamercia.com or www.bankofamerica.evilsite.com or www.bankofamericaonline.net or any one of a million other correct-looking domains.
"I hope Apple chooses to not allow arbitrary Web applications to scroll the real Safari address bar out of view"
Yes, let's make everyone's experience worse just to help a small percentage of people who couldn't use the information shown to help themselves anyhow. No, thanks.
... I bet this was just one of those dumb little things and will probably get overturned very soon. I know Apple has denied some things in the past for questionable reasons but something like this--a harmless little magazine--sounds to me more like it belongs in the "Never attribute to malice..." category.
No, read the article. It's much better (worse.) There's a special place in Hell reserved for this guy.
> And the state might also have to raise the income tax...
Some states (including two biggies--Florida and Texas) would have to CREATE a state income tax first. Talk about something unlikely to be voted into existence...
List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_income_tax
About ten years ago, when Taco got a TiBook and Mac OS went all UNIX-y. Where have you been?
I absolutely HATE being in Orlando International Airport and hearing a steady drone of how the current threat level is "orange." It's been that way for YEARS which proves two things: 1) it's completely inaccurate and 2) the creators never read The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
>> Which one has a richer appstore? Which one has the apps you're looking for?
> Umm, both have the same apps? Seriously, besides a handful of high profile games, what does Apple have that Android doesn't?
For the answer, see here and here.
Let's sort all Android apps into the following categories:
From my time spent with the Nexus One early this year, I know that Google's Android apps are pretty good. These include both the core system apps, and the closed-source "Google Experience" apps like the dedicated Gmail client and Google Maps.
There are definitely a fair number of apps in the second category -- those ported to both iOS and Android. Examples: Amazon's Kindle client, Pandora, and a few popular games, such as Angry Birds and Doodle Jump.
But what I find striking is that the apps in the third category -- those exclusive to Android -- are almost entirely unappealing or irrelevant to iOS users.
That's not to say there's nothing in Android, as a system, that appeals to iPhone owners. Built-in turn-by-turn navigation on certain models. A system-wide notification system. Widgets on the homescreen. Over-the-air system updates. Unrestricted background processing for third-party apps, battery-life be damned. But those are things that are built into the system itself, or which otherwise come from Google. What I'm questioning is the strength and depth of Android's third-party developer support.
Which are the apps, from developers other than Google, that I should feel like I'm missing out on because I don't have an Android device? Where are the killer apps for Android?
Turn the table and we could be here all day running down the list of high-quality, interesting apps which are exclusive to iOS.