This censorship issue was discussed before the law was passed, but the politicians did not understand at all how the Internet works. Now we're in a situation where it's actually easier to find child porn (by scanning the net and checking which sites are blocked). And now they're censoring the people who try to criticize and alert everybody about the situation. Sad times for Finland.
It boils down to this: If Apple's hardware is so fantastic, why do they feel that the only way they can compete is by forcing people to use it? What are they afraid of?
If you buy a DVD player, you don't want to install your own OS and try to get all drivers to work, etc.. IMO that's the whole idea with Apple's products. They're trying to make computers more like any other (consumer) product. So when you buy something made by Apple, you can be pretty sure it works.
DVB isn't as easy as you may think. Since the MPEG-2 stream is broadcast over unreliable media, you get a lot of broken/missing packets. Hardware decoders (set-top-boxes) can cope with this, but PC-based software often has problems, because it's designed for DVD playback only.
A particularly hairy issue is trying to transcode captured DVB MPEG-2 video into something else, such as DivX. You usually lose lipsync or have the codecs crash on you because of the errors.
Of course, DVB is clearly the way to go in the future in Europe, but the PC software and codecs need to get better.
As a developer with many years of experience with both Java and Microsoft languages, I would consider Visual Studio.NET (2003) a key factor for C#'s success.
It really combines the best features of Delphi, Visual Basic and Java into one clean product. In the past one had to choose one of those; now you can get almost anything done with C# and.NET (as long as your target supports the framework).
Having used Sun's IDEs a bit, I wouldn't even compare them with Visual Studio. They're crappy, slow and unintuitive for Windows users. Of course, if you're developing server-side stuff the IDE has less priority. But new people grow up writing GUI apps with Visual Studio and will want to continue using it for servers as well.
So my point is, Java desperately needs something like Visual Studio.NET to remain competitive. And it should be free.
It's really important telephones can be operated single-handedly, while the typical operations you perform with a PDA are more comfortable with two hands.
If you ever used a touchscreen based phone, you know what I'm talking about. It's terrible to try to pull out the pen and mess with the contact lists and other UI when you're in a bus or subway packed with people.
On the other hand, it's not very optimal to type in calendar events or notes with just one hand, using the typical SMS text entry method.
Perhaps the best semi-solution is still the Nokia Communicator way, where an ordinary phone can be folded out into a laptop-like PDA with qwerty keyboard and all. Even then, one of the most requested features was to be able to type SMS messages _without_ folding it out, using just one hand in the phone mode.
This does not sound like a particularly good idea, when there are already existing standards for building interactive television applications. The current, open standard endorsed by Europe is of course MHP (Multimedia Home Platform), which is based on Java and a number of existing standards, such as JavaTV, HAVi and DAVIC.
I can understand some motivation towards building simpler standards (e.g. not requiring a Java VM), but fragmentation in this field will not be a good thing. We're talking about a mass market (television / STB manufacturers) and it needs volume, which calls for a single, common standard.
Of course, I suppose the US industry wants to create its own proprietary standards for interactive television just as for everything else they do.
They always forget that scratching is just one little part of the experience of playing vinyl on a turntable.
I have to admit that this sounds like a good attempt though. The timecoded dummy records allow for new tricks that haven't been possible with simpler emulations.
But you have to remember that the complete vinyl experience consists of all the little stuff like
browsing your records physically in the box, checking out the covers etc.
flipping records with your bare hands instead of grabbing the mouse and fiddling with GUI displays
having that little extra snap, crackle & pop in the sound
letting people actually see what you are playing, since the record's always visible on the turntable
etc.
All these little things are what really contribute to the overall feeling that you get with turntables, it's not just the scratching interface. And you know, sometimes it's actually the slight inconvenience or difficulty of doing something that makes it feel cool. When you change it and make it easier, you also change the overall feeling and your emulation is not successful.
So, I believe that if you go digital, it's possible to come up with much better interfaces for DJ'ing than simple turntable emulation. If a GUI is going to be your primary interface (for finding the tracks you want to play etc), you should leverage the GUI and find the most natural interfaces there.
After all, scratching and pitch mixing are just 'hacks' applied to the original turntable device, which was designed for much simpler use. The possibilities of a computer with a GUI are endless and should not be limited to just these traditional ideas.
I think a lot of people are missing the fact that the desktop does not represent a hard disk or a folder; it represents the _whole_ computer.
The problems arise when operating systems adopting the desktop have to support parallel legacy concepts, such as Windows with it's multiple X:\ roots or Mac OS X with the Unix directory tree.
The cleanest desktop implementation has always been the old MacOS (=9), where the desktop is consistently presented as the root of everything. Through it you can access hard disks and other storage quite naturally, and you never get lost.
Slashdot Mirror
This censorship issue was discussed before the law was passed, but the politicians did not understand at all how the Internet works. Now we're in a situation where it's actually easier to find child porn (by scanning the net and checking which sites are blocked). And now they're censoring the people who try to criticize and alert everybody about the situation. Sad times for Finland.
If you buy a DVD player, you don't want to install your own OS and try to get all drivers to work, etc.. IMO that's the whole idea with Apple's products. They're trying to make computers more like any other (consumer) product. So when you buy something made by Apple, you can be pretty sure it works.
DVB isn't as easy as you may think. Since the MPEG-2 stream is broadcast over unreliable media, you get a lot of broken/missing packets. Hardware decoders (set-top-boxes) can cope with this, but PC-based software often has problems, because it's designed for DVD playback only.
A particularly hairy issue is trying to transcode captured DVB MPEG-2 video into something else, such as DivX. You usually lose lipsync or have the codecs crash on you because of the errors.
Of course, DVB is clearly the way to go in the future in Europe, but the PC software and codecs need to get better.
As a developer with many years of experience with both Java and Microsoft languages, I would consider Visual Studio .NET (2003) a key factor for C#'s success.
.NET (as long as your target supports the framework).
.NET to remain competitive. And it should be free.
It really combines the best features of Delphi, Visual Basic and Java into one clean product. In the past one had to choose one of those; now you can get almost anything done with C# and
Having used Sun's IDEs a bit, I wouldn't even compare them with Visual Studio. They're crappy, slow and unintuitive for Windows users. Of course, if you're developing server-side stuff the IDE has less priority. But new people grow up writing GUI apps with Visual Studio and will want to continue using it for servers as well.
So my point is, Java desperately needs something like Visual Studio
My friend who works in Japan got me a genuine Hot Cubby (tm) Coffee Cup Warmer, which is powered through a USB connector. No drivers required!
Only problem, since all the instructions are in Japanese, I'm afraid to plug it in anywhere...
(Also included were some weird japanese foods, no idea what their labels say either. I hope it's not sushi.)
It's really important telephones can be operated single-handedly, while the typical operations you perform with a PDA are more comfortable with two hands.
If you ever used a touchscreen based phone, you know what I'm talking about. It's terrible to try to pull out the pen and mess with the contact lists and other UI when you're in a bus or subway packed with people.
On the other hand, it's not very optimal to type in calendar events or notes with just one hand, using the typical SMS text entry method.
Perhaps the best semi-solution is still the Nokia Communicator way, where an ordinary phone can be folded out into a laptop-like PDA with qwerty keyboard and all. Even then, one of the most requested features was to be able to type SMS messages _without_ folding it out, using just one hand in the phone mode.
This does not sound like a particularly good idea, when there are already existing standards for building interactive television applications. The current, open standard endorsed by Europe is of course MHP (Multimedia Home Platform), which is based on Java and a number of existing standards, such as JavaTV, HAVi and DAVIC.
I can understand some motivation towards building simpler standards (e.g. not requiring a Java VM), but fragmentation in this field will not be a good thing. We're talking about a mass market (television / STB manufacturers) and it needs volume, which calls for a single, common standard.
Of course, I suppose the US industry wants to create its own proprietary standards for interactive television just as for everything else they do.
I have to admit that this sounds like a good attempt though. The timecoded dummy records allow for new tricks that haven't been possible with simpler emulations.
But you have to remember that the complete vinyl experience consists of all the little stuff like
browsing your records physically in the box, checking out the covers etc.
flipping records with your bare hands instead of grabbing the mouse and fiddling with GUI displays
having that little extra snap, crackle & pop in the sound
letting people actually see what you are playing, since the record's always visible on the turntable
etc.
All these little things are what really contribute to the overall feeling that you get with turntables, it's not just the scratching interface. And you know, sometimes it's actually the slight inconvenience or difficulty of doing something that makes it feel cool. When you change it and make it easier, you also change the overall feeling and your emulation is not successful.
So, I believe that if you go digital, it's possible to come up with much better interfaces for DJ'ing than simple turntable emulation. If a GUI is going to be your primary interface (for finding the tracks you want to play etc), you should leverage the GUI and find the most natural interfaces there.
After all, scratching and pitch mixing are just 'hacks' applied to the original turntable device, which was designed for much simpler use. The possibilities of a computer with a GUI are endless and should not be limited to just these traditional ideas.
I think a lot of people are missing the fact that the desktop does not represent a hard disk or a folder; it represents the _whole_ computer.
The problems arise when operating systems adopting the desktop have to support parallel legacy concepts, such as Windows with it's multiple X:\ roots or Mac OS X with the Unix directory tree.
The cleanest desktop implementation has always been the old MacOS (=9), where the desktop is consistently presented as the root of everything. Through it you can access hard disks and other storage quite naturally, and you never get lost.