I've never programmed a GUI application ("Hello World" in Python/TK doesn't count), so I can't comment on the Motif API. However, I can comment on the usability of the end product.
Two things stand out:
1. The file dialogue, which I assume is a standard feature, since I've seen it in every motif application I've used, is horrid. Say you want to save a file using its default filename, in a different directory: double click on the directory you want, and the filename disappears.
2. Pull down lists. For large lists, where you reach the edge of the screen, they just don't work. You need the patience of a saint just to choose the item you want.
...and then there's all those neat UI features in GTK that just aren't there in Motif, and I'm guessing never will be. Just off the top of my head -- TAB completion is a godsend.
But... it all depends on your audience. At the end of the day, in the present climate, if you're programming for the Free Software crowd, Motif isn't an option. If you're doing bespoke coding for commerce, Motif might be the first choice. --
Re:Energy from Giant Spliffs
on
Quickies Rock!
·
· Score: 2
Too expensive? They could have offset the cost easily. There's a lot of people who are willing to pay large amounts of money to live downwind of such a power plant.
Funny, yes, well done: but it's worth pointing out that hemp grown for this purpose would have negligible narcotic qualities. The whole drug thing distracts people from the other uses of the plant (and it doesn't help that campaigners who *obviously* just want to get stoned legally, also use the "great fuel, animal feed, textile" rhetoric) --
Until Linux as a whole is standardised by a central body incorporated under law, it will never succeed in drawing in users who want an OS that they can do something with, rather than people who want a toy they can spend all of their time configuring.
That's precisely what is *not* needed. Free Software and Open Standards are all about *interoperability*. For example - Corel might be producing the Linux distribution you want: it works out of the box and requires very little tinkering.
However, I would expect to be able to exchange files with you, created on (say) a Debian box, or a BSD box, or a Linux box created for myself from scratch. It's all about choice.
You are free to use a 100% KDE or Gnome setup if you so choose: you will find that if you only use Gnome applications, for example, they will work together very well.
... but it's a choice. I you then decide to use Athena Ghostview, you have that option. Isn't that fair enough? --
As a fully-qualified professional IT consultant employed by one of the leading names in the software industry (hence the anonymous posting) I am engaged in a study into the "open source" (thanks to people for correcting my misconception about freeware vs. open source) phenomenon started by Linus Torvelds and his Linux operating system suite.
As it happens, I also work for a "leading name in the software industry", yet here I am, not posting anonymously.
Do you see how, if you'd provided contact details, I could have got in touch privately, and helped you out with your research in an environment where fewer people would laugh at you...
(unless it *is* a troll... but who'd go to that much trouble just to piss people off?)
Mail me if you want a factually accurate, balanced view of Free Software. --
Surely an OS as big as Linux - taking a whole CD-ROM up as it does - is not the obvious choice for a small device with limited capabilities? Wouldn't a custom built OS for this kind of device such as EPOC or Windows CE be much better suited in this domain?
Linux does not take up a whole CD-ROM; not by a long way. Linux is just the kernel -- the rest of the CD is taken up by applications, tools, servers, stuff like that.
One nice thing about Linux is that you can recompile the kernel with as many or as few features included as you like. For a device such as this, a lot of device drivers could be removed, making the resulting kernel really quite small.
Also, I am wondering whether the Linux GUI, GNOME, is of sufficiently high standard for the purposes of an "easy to use" device such as he Yopy. From what people have shown me, it seems to be somewhat complex and has a lot of non-standard interface features which users will be unconfortable with. Since the GUI is part and parcel of the operating system, isn't this another reason why Linux is the wrong choice for the PDA domain?
Part of the UNIX philosophy is that the GUI is in no way "part and parcel of the Operating System". I'd be very surprised if Yopy's GUI used X, Gnome, or any window manager we've heard of. It is more likely to use a custom-written graphics library, or possibly a port of something like GGI.
Anyway, your thoughts as representatives of the open source community would be appreciated on this issue, because I can't really see why this is any more than a publicity stunt, cashing in on the "geek coolness" of the Linux brand name. Thanks.
There's an element of truth to this. The buzzword factor of using Linux will certainly appeal to them. There's a school of thought that says that a multitasking operating system is overkill for a palm computer...
.. but in the end -- why not? If this PDA can run Linux well in an affordable package, with an acceptable battery life, then I'm all for it. It means I could write an httpd for it, without learning a new API... It means the developers of this box don't need to write a new OS from scratch, or licence a closed-source OS.
It means that if Yopy doesn't work exactly how I want it to, maybe(*) I'll be able to do something about it.
(*)I say "maybe" because I'm not sure that the apps (such as the GUI) running on Yopy will be Free Software -- it's entirely possible that only the kernel will be Free. --
I had big ideas when I was at University. We did a little stunt where we put posters up telling the residents of the three residential tower blocks to look out of their windows at a given time and "copy": I started flashing my desklamp on and off, and within 5 minutes, all three towers were shimmering with flashing lights. That proves is can be done (we had 20 floors in each tower).
The problem with using the main lights of a building is that if they're striplights (which is likely) they tend to take a few seconds to flicker into life. I don't fancy playing Tetris with that much display latency...
Putting aside for one moment the question of whether computers should be a major part of a child's education (I say yes):
I worked for 2.5 years as Sysadmin at a large 11-18 school in England.
Although the powers that be did not allow me to pursue it, I am absolutely convinced that thin client terminals (X/VNC/ICA, whatever) are the right way to go for schools, for the following reasons:
Upgrades are at the server side, and therefore cheaper and easier
Old PCs can be reused as clients
New terminals are cheap
A complete new environment can be created in one fell swoop, it's all on the server side
Strong security
Network-centric, like computers should be
Allows for remote support (you can ghost student's screen to help them out)
I'm afraid that for the moment it's going to have to be Windows in the classroom at least some of the time (we were looking at Citrix Winframe, now Microsoft Terminal Server) -- lots of schools have made a large investment in Windows software which they can't afford to replace, and for which there is no Linux/whatever equivalent. For example, our Maths department made heavy use of a package called Global Maths, which was a Windows maths teaching package specifically designed for the British National Curriculum. Until Global do a port, moving to a different platform is *not* something the maths department would have tolerated.
If yes, can you now tell me with a straight face that it is NOT used primarily (like 99.9999%) for the purpose of illegally trading copyright material? Are you the same people that would then have a shit-fit if any company stepped outside of the boundaries of using GPL software? Yeah, I thought so.
Thanks for that, Bill.
The point is that Napster are not responsible for what people use it for. What if every person currently illegally trading copyright material using Napster were to shift over to using FTP? Would it then be OK for the RIAA to go and sue the IETF? Berkley University?
Of course not. I'm not suggesting that violating the license on these materials is a "right" -- what I'm saying is that Napster have no control over what MP3s people transfer using it, and they are under no obligation to have the software make checks.
I don't actually agree with the statement "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" -- but I would heartily agree with "Napster doesn't violate copyright laws, people violate copyright laws". You don't restrict the sales of plastic bags just because they can be used to transport drugs.
I can't provide a solution to the problem of music piracy (in fact I would argue that, morally wrong or not, it is too difficult to combat, and the best answer is "live with it"), but Napster is too far removed from the crime to be fairly held responsible.
Trolling is the practice of posting material designed to incite a negative response -- stirring up trouble just for the sake of it.
I'm not sure your post *was* a troll... but 'I am in the middle of a detailed investigation into the "freeware" phenomenon that Linus Torvaldes started with his Linux operating system' belies a fair amount of ignorance... -- you'll need a little more insight into the history of Freeware pre-Linux before showing anyone your "detailed report".
I shouldn't accept the average/. poster's opinion as being representative of the Open Source community as a whole, by the way -- most of them spend more time posting than coding.
Remember also that the community is not homogenous: some of the "socialist zealots" you speak of will in fact be proud to be anti-commercial, and will have jobs which reflect this. Others may be extremely commercially minded, and will be motivated by the benefits they see Commerce can gain from Open Source methodologies.
By the way -- do you see how you have cost me? By asking a question and posting anonymously you've forced me to reply with an off-topic posting. If I get moderated down and lose karma, it's your fault...
I'm really hoping for the day when I can find music I like, easily, in legal MP3 form.
There are plenty of excellent bands and artists who are making their music as a hobby. In some cases the music they are making is of a higher quality than some of the stuff churned out by major labels.
Note use of "some". 95% of what's on MP3.com is crap, but then so is 95% of what you can buy in HMV.
The problem is, we have a large, established infrastructure in place to help us gain exposure to music we might like: radio, TV, the music press -- people who are paid to sift through the dross and present us with the cream.
You choose which cream you wish to be exposed to, of course: if you like mainstream pop you listen to primetime commercial radio; if you like Hip Hop you listen to a specialist show; etc.
The thing is, selecting from the vast amount of music that's out there is a full time job. We *need* the press and broadcast media to make recommendations for us. We need someone do "discover" bands, so we don't have to.
Eventually, these media sources will get wise to MP3, and we'll start to see reviews in (say) NME for music which is only available as a freely redistibutable MP3. I'm guessing it'll be in one of the less mainstream genres to begin with.
For the moment, it's just too easy for a radio station to accept whatever the major record labels shove under their noses: it's usually polished, and has a nice video to go with it... --
Everything seems to work OK, unless I go to the "What's new in Netscape 6" site, whereupon the window fills with garbage, then the whole thing crashes... Bizarre. --
The idea is that Sega will try to make thier bandwidth dedicated to network games. Somehow I feel that it's quite evil to dedicate the entire ISP service to consume bandwidth on games.
You've got a funny idea of evil... I mean, this is not quite on a par with gassing ethnic minorities, is it?
Seriously, I'm not sure I understand your point here. Dedicating an ISP to gaming keeps that bandwidth off other, general purpose ISPs: surely that's a Good Thing? The alternative, gaming on ordinary ISPs means that I end up paying over the odds for my ISP connection, because I only surf the Web a little and get an SMTP feed, while other people are pumping Quake III packets day in and day out for the same price. --
There's a project afoot to port OpenBSD to the Dreamcast. There is a working port of NetBSD to the Hitachi SH3; the Hitachi SH4 in the Dreamcast is backwards compatible with the SH3 - so there's promise there. --
I'll field that flamebait: whoever said I was a Linux advocate, dumb or otherwise?
I'm wearing my "free software advocate" hat, or maybe even my "open file formats" hat.
If the MPAA convince courts that distributing software to decode CSS is illegal, that means that Free software to view DVDs can never be distributed. I believe that everyone should have the right to write and distribute whatever software they like, under whatever terms they like. --
Linux is just an example of a "non standard" platform upon which DVDs should be viewable. If DVD wants to be the standard format for selling video, then the right to develop a player should be free.
Bringing out a closed-source, X86 binary only player for Linux does *not* get the MPAA off the hook as far as CSS is concerned. Simply substitute NetBSD, LinuxPPC, QNX, whatever, for "Linux", and make the same argument all over again. --
This stuff existing isn't enough to make Linux rival its commercial competitors: mainstream Linux distributions need to include a jfs and use it as standard.
Quit making excuses. People who create something deserve the right to charge something for it if they choose to do so. If you don't like it, don't buy it. But don't steal it either.
Actually, I don't. I have an archive of about 15 albums in MP3 form, all of which I own on legit CD.
... and I'm not arguing that copying music (or software) when the license forbids it is right: rather I'm arguing that a number of artists are enslaved by record labels because they feel it is the only way to get their creations heard -- and in the past this was true. Sure, musicians have a right to distribute music under whatever terms they like: I'm saying that there is an opportunity coming into existence for free distribution and other means of making money.
I've said it in other posts, but I'll say it again: record sales amount to a tiny fraction of what a musician earns. The vast majority of their income will be from broadcast royalties: radio play, public broadcast (discos, lobby play etc). If you're lucky enough to get your music used in an advert, that'll pay a mortgage for a long while. --
Throwing Muses are on the commercial end of "alternative" music. I dunno how well their records sell these days, but I'll bet they're not starving: they'll be making a fair amount from the festivals as well.
I don't question Throwing Muses' artistic integrity however...
By the way, when I was about 14 I had quite a crush on Kirsten Hersh. At the time she was the demure one who always stood at the back of band photos, while Tanya (?) was the glam one... I found that quite alluring:)
>>If no one will pay for your music, perhaps you >>should get a day job?
>Perhaps you should get a clue. Other than the >few that get massive press (Backstreet Crap, >Titney Spears), most artists work day jobs >so they can do art at night and on weekends.
I think you'll find that it's only the big commercial "artists" who are whingeing about Napster. The guys with day jobs aren't making enough money out of CDs to care.
The big names also seem to spend more time on kids TV than actually making music. --
It amuses me when people like Puff Daddy refer to themselves as "artists", and state that they "deserve" to get paid for their work.
The majority of great art is *not* rewarded by great fortunes: the streotype of the starving artist is not so far removed from the truth.
Great music is a labour of love -- and it isn't that expensive to make (especially nowadays, when most people could build a modest home studio if they scrimp and save for a while). Napster and MP3 provide an excellent means to get your work hear: which if it's really "art" ought to be a reward in itself. For money, get a proper job.
You used to need a record label to get your art heard: pressing and distributing records/CDs/whatever cost money. Now the record companies have too much of an influence over other media. Radio playlists are directly influenced by record company pushers.
I heard somewhere that record sales are a fraction of the money artists make: the real money is from broadcast royalties. In time, I hope to see broadcasters dipping into the massive resource that is available only on MP3 - artists with no record company. We really don't need record labels. --
Slashdot Mirror
Have you played with Everything or Everything 2; how do you feel they compare to the h2g2.com effort to create a real-world Guide?
--
I've never programmed a GUI application ("Hello World" in Python/TK doesn't count), so I can't comment on the Motif API. However, I can comment on the usability of the end product.
Two things stand out:
1. The file dialogue, which I assume is a standard feature, since I've seen it in every motif application I've used, is horrid. Say you want to save a file using its default filename, in a different directory: double click on the directory you want, and the filename disappears.
2. Pull down lists. For large lists, where you reach the edge of the screen, they just don't work. You need the patience of a saint just to choose the item you want.
...and then there's all those neat UI features in GTK that just aren't there in Motif, and I'm guessing never will be. Just off the top of my head -- TAB completion is a godsend.
But... it all depends on your audience. At the end of the day, in the present climate, if you're programming for the Free Software crowd, Motif isn't an option. If you're doing bespoke coding for commerce, Motif might be the first choice.
--
Too expensive? They could have offset the cost easily. There's a lot of people who are willing to pay large amounts of money to live
downwind of such a power plant.
Funny, yes, well done: but it's worth pointing out that hemp grown for this purpose would have negligible narcotic qualities. The whole drug thing distracts people from the other uses of the plant (and it doesn't help that campaigners who *obviously* just want to get stoned legally, also use the "great fuel, animal feed, textile" rhetoric)
--
Until Linux as a whole is standardised by a central body incorporated under law, it will never succeed in drawing in users who want an OS that they can do something with, rather than people who want a toy they can spend all of their time configuring.
That's precisely what is *not* needed. Free Software and Open Standards are all about *interoperability*. For example - Corel might be producing the Linux distribution you want: it works out of the box and requires very little tinkering.
However, I would expect to be able to exchange files with you, created on (say) a Debian box, or a BSD box, or a Linux box created for myself from scratch. It's all about choice.
You are free to use a 100% KDE or Gnome setup if you so choose: you will find that if you only use Gnome applications, for example, they will work together very well.
... but it's a choice. I you then decide to use Athena Ghostview, you have that option. Isn't that fair enough?
--
As a fully-qualified professional IT consultant employed by one of the leading names in the software industry (hence the anonymous posting) I am engaged in a study into the "open source" (thanks to people for correcting my misconception about freeware vs. open source) phenomenon started by Linus Torvelds and his Linux operating system suite.
As it happens, I also work for a "leading name in the software industry", yet here I am, not posting anonymously.
Do you see how, if you'd provided contact details, I could have got in touch privately, and helped you out with your research in an environment where fewer people would laugh at you...
(unless it *is* a troll... but who'd go to that much trouble just to piss people off?)
Mail me if you want a factually accurate, balanced view of Free Software.
--
Surely an OS as big as Linux - taking a whole CD-ROM up as it does - is not the obvious choice for a small device with limited capabilities? Wouldn't a custom built OS for this kind of device such as EPOC or Windows CE be much better suited in this domain?
Linux does not take up a whole CD-ROM; not by a long way. Linux is just the kernel -- the rest of the CD is taken up by applications, tools, servers, stuff like that.
One nice thing about Linux is that you can recompile the kernel with as many or as few features included as you like. For a device such as this, a lot of device drivers could be removed, making the resulting kernel really quite small.
Also, I am wondering whether the Linux GUI, GNOME, is of sufficiently high standard for the purposes of an "easy to use" device such as he Yopy. From what people have shown me, it seems to be somewhat complex and has a lot of non-standard interface features which users will be unconfortable with. Since the GUI is part and parcel of the operating system, isn't this another reason why Linux is the wrong choice for the PDA domain?
Part of the UNIX philosophy is that the GUI is in no way "part and parcel of the Operating System". I'd be very surprised if Yopy's GUI used X, Gnome, or any window manager we've heard of. It is more likely to use a custom-written graphics library, or possibly a port of something like GGI.
Anyway, your thoughts as representatives of the open source community would be appreciated on this issue, because I can't really see why this is any more than a publicity stunt, cashing in on the "geek coolness" of the Linux brand name. Thanks.
There's an element of truth to this. The buzzword factor of using Linux will certainly appeal to them. There's a school of thought that says that a multitasking operating system is overkill for a palm computer...
.. but in the end -- why not? If this PDA can run Linux well in an affordable package, with an acceptable battery life, then I'm all for it. It means I could write an httpd for it, without learning a new API... It means the developers of this box don't need to write a new OS from scratch, or licence a closed-source OS.
It means that if Yopy doesn't work exactly how I want it to, maybe(*) I'll be able to do something about it.
(*)I say "maybe" because I'm not sure that the apps (such as the GUI) running on Yopy will be Free Software -- it's entirely possible that only the kernel will be Free.
--
If Napster users are using Napster to break laws, then I'm all for seeing them prosecuted -- and not Napster themselves.
So, this is a strike for common sense. How refreshing.
--
It seems very nice. As well as gphoto, there's a nice command line tool on freshmeat called "digicam", which works beautifully with the camera.
I'm no expert -- all I can say is that the images look OK to me (sample).
These things eat batteries (I imagine all digital cameras do). I really need to buy a bigger compactflash card, too.
--
The problem with using the main lights of a building is that if they're striplights (which is likely) they tend to take a few seconds to flicker into life. I don't fancy playing Tetris with that much display latency...
--
I worked for 2.5 years as Sysadmin at a large 11-18 school in England.
Although the powers that be did not allow me to pursue it, I am absolutely convinced that thin client terminals (X/VNC/ICA, whatever) are the right way to go for schools, for the following reasons:
I'm afraid that for the moment it's going to have to be Windows in the classroom at least some of the time (we were looking at Citrix Winframe, now Microsoft Terminal Server) -- lots of schools have made a large investment in Windows software which they can't afford to replace, and for which there is no Linux/whatever equivalent. For example, our Maths department made heavy use of a package called Global Maths, which was a Windows maths teaching package specifically designed for the British National Curriculum. Until Global do a port, moving to a different platform is *not* something the maths department would have tolerated.
Same goes for English, RE, Technology etc.
--
If yes, can you now tell me with a straight face that it is NOT used primarily (like 99.9999%) for the purpose of illegally trading copyright material? Are you the same people that would then have a shit-fit if any company stepped outside of the boundaries of using GPL software? Yeah, I thought so.
Thanks for that, Bill.
The point is that Napster are not responsible for what people use it for. What if every person currently illegally trading copyright material using Napster were to shift over to using FTP? Would it then be OK for the RIAA to go and sue the IETF? Berkley University?
Of course not. I'm not suggesting that violating the license on these materials is a "right" -- what I'm saying is that Napster have no control over what MP3s people transfer using it, and they are under no obligation to have the software make checks.
I don't actually agree with the statement "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" -- but I would heartily agree with "Napster doesn't violate copyright laws, people violate copyright laws". You don't restrict the sales of plastic bags just because they can be used to transport drugs.
I can't provide a solution to the problem of music piracy (in fact I would argue that, morally wrong or not, it is too difficult to combat, and the best answer is "live with it"), but Napster is too far removed from the crime to be fairly held responsible.
--
... it'll set a fascinating precedent:
Napster is as much responsible for music piracy as Memorex are (for selling magnetic media).
Perhaps we'll see Metallica suing Sony for selling blank minidiscs next?
--
Trolling is the practice of posting material designed to incite a negative response -- stirring up trouble just for the sake of it.
/. poster's opinion as being representative of the Open Source community as a whole, by the way -- most of them spend more time posting than coding.
I'm not sure your post *was* a troll... but 'I am in the middle of a detailed investigation into the "freeware" phenomenon that Linus Torvaldes started with his Linux operating system' belies a fair amount of ignorance... -- you'll need a little more insight into the history of Freeware pre-Linux before showing anyone your "detailed report".
I shouldn't accept the average
Remember also that the community is not homogenous: some of the "socialist zealots" you speak of will in fact be proud to be anti-commercial, and will have jobs which reflect this. Others may be extremely commercially minded, and will be motivated by the benefits they see Commerce can gain from Open Source methodologies.
By the way -- do you see how you have cost me? By asking a question and posting anonymously you've forced me to reply with an off-topic posting. If I get moderated down and lose karma, it's your fault...
--
(Said it before, I'm saying it again)
I'm really hoping for the day when I can find music I like, easily, in legal MP3 form.
There are plenty of excellent bands and artists who are making their music as a hobby. In some cases the music they are making is of a higher quality than some of the stuff churned out by major labels.
Note use of "some". 95% of what's on MP3.com is crap, but then so is 95% of what you can buy in HMV.
The problem is, we have a large, established infrastructure in place to help us gain exposure to music we might like: radio, TV, the music press -- people who are paid to sift through the dross and present us with the cream.
You choose which cream you wish to be exposed to, of course: if you like mainstream pop you listen to primetime commercial radio; if you like Hip Hop you listen to a specialist show; etc.
The thing is, selecting from the vast amount of music that's out there is a full time job. We *need* the press and broadcast media to make recommendations for us. We need someone do "discover" bands, so we don't have to.
Eventually, these media sources will get wise to MP3, and we'll start to see reviews in (say) NME for music which is only available as a freely redistibutable MP3. I'm guessing it'll be in one of the less mainstream genres to begin with.
For the moment, it's just too easy for a radio station to accept whatever the major record labels shove under their noses: it's usually polished, and has a nice video to go with it...
--
If the libel laws are a problem in the UK, why not operate from a jurisdiction where this is not a problem?
How about: because a fix is better than a workaround. If you keep running away from oppressive regimes, eventually you run out of places to run.
--
Everything seems to work OK, unless I go to the "What's new in Netscape 6" site, whereupon the window fills with garbage, then the whole thing crashes... Bizarre.
--
The idea is that Sega will try to make thier bandwidth dedicated to network games. Somehow I feel that it's quite evil to dedicate the entire ISP service to consume bandwidth on games.
You've got a funny idea of evil... I mean, this is not quite on a par with gassing ethnic minorities, is it?
Seriously, I'm not sure I understand your point here. Dedicating an ISP to gaming keeps that bandwidth off other, general purpose ISPs: surely that's a Good Thing? The alternative, gaming on ordinary ISPs means that I end up paying over the odds for my ISP connection, because I only surf the Web a little and get an SMTP feed, while other people are pumping Quake III packets day in and day out for the same price.
--
There's a project afoot to port OpenBSD to the Dreamcast. There is a working port of NetBSD to the Hitachi SH3; the Hitachi SH4 in the Dreamcast is backwards compatible with the SH3 - so there's promise there.
--
I'll field that flamebait: whoever said I was a Linux advocate, dumb or otherwise?
I'm wearing my "free software advocate" hat, or maybe even my "open file formats" hat.
If the MPAA convince courts that distributing software to decode CSS is illegal, that means that Free software to view DVDs can never be distributed. I believe that everyone should have the right to write and distribute whatever software they like, under whatever terms they like.
--
Bringing out a closed-source, X86 binary only player for Linux does *not* get the MPAA off the hook as far as CSS is concerned. Simply substitute NetBSD, LinuxPPC, QNX, whatever, for "Linux", and make the same argument all over again.
--
The same goes for LVM.
--
Quit making excuses. People who create something deserve the right to charge something for it if they choose to do so. If you don't like it, don't buy it. But don't steal it either.
Actually, I don't. I have an archive of about 15 albums in MP3 form, all of which I own on legit CD.
... and I'm not arguing that copying music (or software) when the license forbids it is right:
rather I'm arguing that a number of artists are enslaved by record labels because they feel it is the only way to get their creations heard -- and in the past this was true. Sure, musicians have a right to distribute music under whatever terms they like: I'm saying that there is an opportunity coming into existence for free distribution and other means of making money.
I've said it in other posts, but I'll say it again: record sales amount to a tiny fraction of what a musician earns. The vast majority of their income will be from broadcast royalties: radio play, public broadcast (discos, lobby play etc). If you're lucky enough to get your music used in an advert, that'll pay a mortgage for a long while.
--
Throwing Muses are on the commercial end of "alternative" music. I dunno how well their records sell these days, but I'll bet they're not starving: they'll be making a fair amount from the festivals as well.
:)
I don't question Throwing Muses' artistic integrity however...
By the way, when I was about 14 I had quite a crush on Kirsten Hersh. At the time she was the demure one who always stood at the back of band photos, while Tanya (?) was the glam one... I found that quite alluring
--
>>If no one will pay for your music, perhaps you
>>should get a day job?
>Perhaps you should get a clue. Other than the
>few that get massive press (Backstreet Crap,
>Titney Spears), most artists work day jobs
>so they can do art at night and on weekends.
I think you'll find that it's only the big commercial "artists" who are whingeing about Napster. The guys with day jobs aren't making enough money out of CDs to care.
The big names also seem to spend more time on
kids TV than actually making music.
--
It amuses me when people like Puff Daddy refer to themselves as "artists", and state that they "deserve" to get paid for their work.
The majority of great art is *not* rewarded by great fortunes: the streotype of the starving artist is not so far removed from the truth.
Great music is a labour of love -- and it isn't that expensive to make (especially nowadays, when most people could build a modest home studio if they scrimp and save for a while). Napster and MP3 provide an excellent means to get your work hear: which if it's really "art" ought to be a reward in itself. For money, get a proper job.
You used to need a record label to get your art heard: pressing and distributing records/CDs/whatever cost money. Now the record companies have too much of an influence over other media. Radio playlists are directly influenced by record company pushers.
I heard somewhere that record sales are a fraction of the money artists make: the real money is from broadcast royalties. In time, I hope to see broadcasters dipping into the massive resource that is available only on MP3 - artists with no record company. We really don't need record labels.
--