The Apple PowerBooks have a good reputation among musicians. Apple has posted a page of music-related technologies for the PowerMac line, such as the AudioSport Quattro 24/96, described as "24-bit 96kHz USB audio and MIDI interface with direct monitoring switches; 4x4 audio interface; with ASIO and OMS MIDI drivers."
I thought this editorial cartoon about the new Euro was pretty damn funny, although it doesn't directly address the RFID tags, it pokes fun at some of the other Euro-related concerns.
What's been missing from the debate so far has been the users themselves. It seems safe to say that most computer and Internet users like to have choices -- choices both of the content they consume and of the kinds of tools they should get to use. Still, maybe citizens would say they're willing to give up "general-purpose" computers and willing to use, instead, systems designed to prevent them from engaging in willy-nilly copying, if that is the price you have to pay for compelling music and movies and television over the Internet.
I guess I don't hear people clamoring for "compelling music and movies and television" over the Internet. I already have devices that do all three of those things just fine -- what's going to compell me to buy new devices to do these same things? I don't really want to sit in front of my computer to watch movies or television anyway, and I don't see the digital televisions coming into the _really_ affordable range (sub $1k) anyway.
I'd be happy to keep it that way as long as nobody tries to mandate how my computer treats bits! Why would I want to give up my existing devices for new content-controlled, digital rights managed devices? Is it somehow going to be "better" for me? What are the benefits to the consumer? It seems like (almost?) all the benefits are for the content companies, not me! Why would somebody pay money for this?
I'll second that on the iBook. I picked one up this summer and really dig OS X -- and I've never owned a mac before.
And plus an open-source BSD variant (well at least the darwin part) is pre-installed! Really, it's too cool to have a laptop with unix, a beautiful gui, and lots of free tools pre-installed (think Perl, Emacs, SSH, gcc, etc...). Not only that, you can install an xFree86 -- I'm now running the Gimp on my iBook! With all that going for it, I can't really see wanting to run Linux on it... OSX has is the new OS of choice as far as I'm concerned.
All this plus what the guy above mentioned... life is sweet! I don't regret my purchase for a moment.
I just bought my iBook and since that's the price range you'll be looking at, just know that an Apple dealer advised me that Apple allows no margins for the iBooks, so the dealers and resellers can't really compete on price. That's why I'd recommend buying it from your local dealer rather than mail order or direct from Apple. You'll get better service if you need it.
Also, as stated previously, don't buy RAM from Apple -- they way overcharge. I've had my iBook for a week now and think it's great. OS X is still a little show in launching apps, but all reports say that 10.1 (due in Sept) shows a 3-5 times speed increase when launching apps. This is my first Mac (used many Windoze and Unices though) and it gives me great comfort to know there's a command line interface available if I need it.
This reminds me of another dispute where Kellogg's cereal tried to block a band from trademarking the name "The Toucans", claiming that it infringed on their "Toucan Sam" trademark and also claimed damages as a result of the band's name! They claimed the band's name confused their customers. More details of the dispute.
You're assuming I have tube gear -- I do not. Tubes are not automatically better, there is some excellent transistor equipment on the market. In fact, some say that tube gear is an acquired taste. So called high-end equipment typically eschews lots of features and buttons for simplicity and something that is dependable. My favorite low-end high-fidelity (or cheap high-end, as you might want to call it) is Rega. Great sounding, solid gear.
High-end audio can be addictive, but it doesn't have to be. I got the bug and my current system is worth "only" about $5,000. But it's a wonderful investment -- music sounds beautiful and considerably better then many people realize stereos can sound.
The thing is, most people have never heard a high-end (or moderately high-end) system. So it's easy for them to dismiss it as people blowing money. My audio hardware is of excellent quality and will outlast any of the mass-market Circuit City units by 15 years, easy. It's highly unlikely I'll ever have to replace my stereo due to it being broken.
Perhaps the most important thing in buying high-end equipment is listening. A surprising number of people don't do this. They look up specs for watts and distortion not realizing that the stereo companies actually engineer their equipment to come in with "better specs" but in doing so they completely ruin the actual sound quality. I have a very good system "on the cheap" (comparatively) because I spent a lot of time in my local dealer's showroom matching components with speakers. You wouldn't think you could tell a difference?? Even my wife could, and she's deaf in one ear! She had very distinct opinions about the various equipment we listened to, even though at first she thought the idea of expensive audio equipment was pretty silly. She even wishes we could've got the more expensive integrated amplifier because it sounded obviously better.
It's easy to think some of these audio nuts are smoking crack -- thousands of dollars on speaker wires or interconnects (patch cords)?? I borrowed two sets of interconnects from my local dealer for a week to decide which set I wanted to keep (each one was about $100). A friend and I sat around for hours comparing the two and there were obvious differences! If you'd told me five years ago that there are significant, audible differences between two patch cords (which just conduct the electric signal) I would've called you crazy! Alas, it's true. You just have to make out a budget and then stick to it -- try different combinations of components until you get the one that sounds best to your ears.
And oh yeah, Bose is not the best, not even close. They just have marketing that has convinced people that they are the cat's meow. Walk into your local store and listen to Bose, then go into a high-end dealer and listen to their cheapest equipment--you'll laugh at yourself for considering Bose.
I don't understand why people still freak out over the idea of hydrogen as a fuel -- oh yeah, it's because of the Hindenburg.
If you think about it, a hydrogen explosion is a relatively safer thing then a gasoline explosion. Gasoline is a liquid, it explodes and gets thrown outward, landing on stuff and setting it on fire. Hydrogen explodes, it goes upward in a big poof, and it's over. I remember my high school chem teacher 12-13 years ago arguing for hydrogen fuel on these grounds.
I see stuff like this that really makes me want a TiVo for it's hackability, Linux and open-sourceness. Then stuff like the earlier article and their subscription-based shenanigans knock me back a few pegs. I'm still sitting on my wallet, though. ReplayTV has no subscription fee... UltimateTV--well, on principle I can't give more $ to M$ then is absolutely necessary.
I think if TiVo got rid of the subscription model and went to a model fueled by hardware sales they'd have the best shot of becoming the ubiquitous device of this decade -- but with MS gunning at them and their continuing missteps, it's hard to see them becoming a widespread success. I'm still waiting to see what becomes of the vaporous but potential TiVo-killer Nokia Media Terminal. By the time these devices reach third generation, they'll be great--but I hate having to wait it out in the meantime!!
Actually, it may make sense. Currently at this early alpha stage they're already getting 96Kbps... I would expect that to increase as future versions allow. I bet this could eventually be a viable option for some people. I wouldn't disparage the use of acoustic signals just because they are acoustic signals-- the end result is all that matters! If they can do it, Bravo!!
I noticed a curious lack of details about what criminal charges have been made and the reason for the obtained protective order -- hopefully the author can fill us in.
I wonder if this is something that the Electronic Frontier Foundation would get involved in? Maybe not, but maybe the ACLU?
The University of Utah's argument to owning the content is strange -- if someone at the same University wrote an original poem on a blackboard in the classroom, would the University own that poem? How about a new mathematical theorem? Why is this different because the data stored electronically?
The MS email says to "Notify and provide copy of the bid to your Microsoft Account Manager at: SBWest@microsoft.com". I wonder if this email address would be a good place to voice concerns over this policy?
We're getting that much closer to Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age where we have clouds of microscopic, lighter-than-air robots that serve as defense/attack systems. Pretty soon someone will engineer these bots into "smart bugs" -- eavesdropping devices that move around, making them harder to find.
The article says that 75 of the AGCs were produced, surely there's a few knocking around in NASA's closet somewhere. Maybe they can put a few of them up on Ebay? I'm willing to bet that some crafty slashdotter could manage to make one function as a simple webserver. How cool would that be?
It seemed to me that the Microsoft rep was really grasping at straws to find reasons why Linux wouldn't succeed. Because the public companies which have business models based on selling Linux are not doing so hot? Well, maybe they're not doing so hot because Linux is FREE and they're trying to sell it. IBM is embracing Linux stronger than ever. Microsoft seems to be trying to use measurements of traditional corporate viability to judge an open source product and thereby generate FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt).
Yes, Linux on laptops is not the easiest thing, and there may not be hot-swappable CPU support. But Linux is dominating in many server areas and even if it's growth is temporarily stagnant more and more of the general public know about Linux. As it becomes embedded in the public consciousness it will become a more natural option for people and corporations.
The Seattle Union Record (the online paper for the still-striking Seattle Times workers) has another story posted about the monolith.
Funny, I posted a report here of the Monolith moving yesterday afternoon, but the powers that be rejected it.
Slashdot Mirror
Virtual PC will run both Linux and Windows flavors in a Mac "VM" so to speak. I haven't used it myself, but I've read that it's pretty nice.
The Apple PowerBooks have a good reputation among musicians. Apple has posted a page of music-related technologies for the PowerMac line, such as the AudioSport Quattro 24/96, described as "24-bit 96kHz USB audio and MIDI interface with direct monitoring switches; 4x4 audio interface; with ASIO and OMS MIDI drivers."
The new iMac will do it, and it's running a BSD-derived Unix. For that matter, it makes it easy. Without all the mkisofs stuff.
Apple just seems to be getting cooler all the time, I never owned a Mac until OSX tempted me into an iBook.
I thought this editorial cartoon about the new Euro was pretty damn funny, although it doesn't directly address the RFID tags, it pokes fun at some of the other Euro-related concerns.
Yesterday we saw that many artists are upset about how they're being treated by the content distribution companies. Well, except some of them.
I guess I don't hear people clamoring for "compelling music and movies and television" over the Internet. I already have devices that do all three of those things just fine -- what's going to compell me to buy new devices to do these same things? I don't really want to sit in front of my computer to watch movies or television anyway, and I don't see the digital televisions coming into the _really_ affordable range (sub $1k) anyway.
I'd be happy to keep it that way as long as nobody tries to mandate how my computer treats bits! Why would I want to give up my existing devices for new content-controlled, digital rights managed devices? Is it somehow going to be "better" for me? What are the benefits to the consumer? It seems like (almost?) all the benefits are for the content companies, not me! Why would somebody pay money for this?
I'll second that on the iBook. I picked one up this summer and really dig OS X -- and I've never owned a mac before.
And plus an open-source BSD variant (well at least the darwin part) is pre-installed! Really, it's too cool to have a laptop with unix, a beautiful gui, and lots of free tools pre-installed (think Perl, Emacs, SSH, gcc, etc...). Not only that, you can install an xFree86 -- I'm now running the Gimp on my iBook! With all that going for it, I can't really see wanting to run Linux on it... OSX has is the new OS of choice as far as I'm concerned.
All this plus what the guy above mentioned... life is sweet! I don't regret my purchase for a moment.
OMG, Free software stolen from other Free software!! Everybody get ready to write your representatives about this terrible problem!
I just bought my iBook and since that's the price range you'll be looking at, just know that an Apple dealer advised me that Apple allows no margins for the iBooks, so the dealers and resellers can't really compete on price. That's why I'd recommend buying it from your local dealer rather than mail order or direct from Apple. You'll get better service if you need it. Also, as stated previously, don't buy RAM from Apple -- they way overcharge. I've had my iBook for a week now and think it's great. OS X is still a little show in launching apps, but all reports say that 10.1 (due in Sept) shows a 3-5 times speed increase when launching apps. This is my first Mac (used many Windoze and Unices though) and it gives me great comfort to know there's a command line interface available if I need it.
This reminds me of another dispute where Kellogg's cereal tried to block a band from trademarking the name "The Toucans", claiming that it infringed on their "Toucan Sam" trademark and also claimed damages as a result of the band's name! They claimed the band's name confused their customers. More details of the dispute.
#!/usr/bin/perl
use Conspiracy qw(Censorship Story);
my $outage = new Story;
$Story->change();
$Story->change();
my $controversy = $Story->replies();
$controversy->mod_down();
my $interestlevel = $controversy->modpoints();
if ($interestlevel > 1) {
$controversy->mod_down();
$controversy++;
}
You're assuming I have tube gear -- I do not. Tubes are not automatically better, there is some excellent transistor equipment on the market. In fact, some say that tube gear is an acquired taste. So called high-end equipment typically eschews lots of features and buttons for simplicity and something that is dependable. My favorite low-end high-fidelity (or cheap high-end, as you might want to call it) is Rega. Great sounding, solid gear.
The thing is, most people have never heard a high-end (or moderately high-end) system. So it's easy for them to dismiss it as people blowing money. My audio hardware is of excellent quality and will outlast any of the mass-market Circuit City units by 15 years, easy. It's highly unlikely I'll ever have to replace my stereo due to it being broken.
Perhaps the most important thing in buying high-end equipment is listening. A surprising number of people don't do this. They look up specs for watts and distortion not realizing that the stereo companies actually engineer their equipment to come in with "better specs" but in doing so they completely ruin the actual sound quality. I have a very good system "on the cheap" (comparatively) because I spent a lot of time in my local dealer's showroom matching components with speakers. You wouldn't think you could tell a difference?? Even my wife could, and she's deaf in one ear! She had very distinct opinions about the various equipment we listened to, even though at first she thought the idea of expensive audio equipment was pretty silly. She even wishes we could've got the more expensive integrated amplifier because it sounded obviously better.
It's easy to think some of these audio nuts are smoking crack -- thousands of dollars on speaker wires or interconnects (patch cords)?? I borrowed two sets of interconnects from my local dealer for a week to decide which set I wanted to keep (each one was about $100). A friend and I sat around for hours comparing the two and there were obvious differences! If you'd told me five years ago that there are significant, audible differences between two patch cords (which just conduct the electric signal) I would've called you crazy! Alas, it's true. You just have to make out a budget and then stick to it -- try different combinations of components until you get the one that sounds best to your ears.
And oh yeah, Bose is not the best , not even close. They just have marketing that has convinced people that they are the cat's meow. Walk into your local store and listen to Bose, then go into a high-end dealer and listen to their cheapest equipment--you'll laugh at yourself for considering Bose.
I don't understand why people still freak out over the idea of hydrogen as a fuel -- oh yeah, it's because of the Hindenburg. If you think about it, a hydrogen explosion is a relatively safer thing then a gasoline explosion. Gasoline is a liquid, it explodes and gets thrown outward, landing on stuff and setting it on fire. Hydrogen explodes, it goes upward in a big poof, and it's over. I remember my high school chem teacher 12-13 years ago arguing for hydrogen fuel on these grounds.
The specs say it's resolution is 1365(H) x 768(V) pixels. I guess I wish something that size could be used at a higher resolution if desired.
But they're having financial troubles, too, a "lifetime" subscription could be pretty short-lived. Even with their new time-warping patent ;-)
I think if TiVo got rid of the subscription model and went to a model fueled by hardware sales they'd have the best shot of becoming the ubiquitous device of this decade -- but with MS gunning at them and their continuing missteps, it's hard to see them becoming a widespread success. I'm still waiting to see what becomes of the vaporous but potential TiVo-killer Nokia Media Terminal. By the time these devices reach third generation, they'll be great--but I hate having to wait it out in the meantime!!
Actually, it may make sense. Currently at this early alpha stage they're already getting 96Kbps... I would expect that to increase as future versions allow. I bet this could eventually be a viable option for some people. I wouldn't disparage the use of acoustic signals just because they are acoustic signals-- the end result is all that matters! If they can do it, Bravo!!
I noticed a curious lack of details about what criminal charges have been made and the reason for the obtained protective order -- hopefully the author can fill us in. I wonder if this is something that the Electronic Frontier Foundation would get involved in? Maybe not, but maybe the ACLU? The University of Utah's argument to owning the content is strange -- if someone at the same University wrote an original poem on a blackboard in the classroom, would the University own that poem? How about a new mathematical theorem? Why is this different because the data stored electronically?
Personally, I've never been a big fan of cancer -- but this really makes me reconsider.
The MS email says to "Notify and provide copy of the bid to your Microsoft Account Manager at: SBWest@microsoft.com". I wonder if this email address would be a good place to voice concerns over this policy?
We're getting that much closer to Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age where we have clouds of microscopic, lighter-than-air robots that serve as defense/attack systems. Pretty soon someone will engineer these bots into "smart bugs" -- eavesdropping devices that move around, making them harder to find.
The article says that 75 of the AGCs were produced, surely there's a few knocking around in NASA's closet somewhere. Maybe they can put a few of them up on Ebay? I'm willing to bet that some crafty slashdotter could manage to make one function as a simple webserver. How cool would that be?
It seemed to me that the Microsoft rep was really grasping at straws to find reasons why Linux wouldn't succeed. Because the public companies which have business models based on selling Linux are not doing so hot? Well, maybe they're not doing so hot because Linux is FREE and they're trying to sell it. IBM is embracing Linux stronger than ever. Microsoft seems to be trying to use measurements of traditional corporate viability to judge an open source product and thereby generate FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt). Yes, Linux on laptops is not the easiest thing, and there may not be hot-swappable CPU support. But Linux is dominating in many server areas and even if it's growth is temporarily stagnant more and more of the general public know about Linux. As it becomes embedded in the public consciousness it will become a more natural option for people and corporations.
The Seattle Union Record (the online paper for the still-striking Seattle Times workers) has another story posted about the monolith. Funny, I posted a report here of the Monolith moving yesterday afternoon, but the powers that be rejected it.