Also, careful with the SMP kernel on MDD G4s, as in: Don't. It is not ready and will totally hose the system. Apparently it works in Breezy, but when I loaded it for Dapper the most obvious problem was my system clock was completely out of whack and I couldn't do anything because the screensaver kept taking over. When I did finally get in and past the screensaver of death, every applet in my menu died at once producing about 8 error messages on the desktop.
You saved me some typing, this is my standard response to these discussions. The only thing I would add is a flat fee for all-you-can-eat content. Unfortunanely, licensing is going to prevent this holy grail of home entertainment from ever happening. What service in today's market could EVER provide the selection of movies you might find on Netflix plus all current TV shows on demand and get away with it?
I'll keep dreaming but I stopped holding my breath a while ago. I've said it before, but might as well say it again: I'm ready to pay $50/month or so for this type of service and will gladly abandon my torrents.
Oh, one more thing: I don't even want to keep these files! DRM them, I don't care! Why should I want to own something that is always available via my fantasy on-demand service?
That's absolutely moronic. Your $40 DVD player couldn't output 1080 material to save it's life. I said computer dvd players.
I actually use my computer to view DVDs thankyouverymuch. With an HD solution that fit on a DVD I'd be quite happy. Shame about the lawsuits, seems like the EVD could have been a useful format.
Make it an all-you-can-eat monthly subscription, with files that'll play on OS X and I'll dump Netflix for it.
Netflix/TiVo were going to offer 'on demand' downloads but it didn't work because the movie corps wouldn't grant the licensing (what a shock!), not sure that it will be any different in this case, but I'm hopeful.
That was the original plan of HD-DVD, to be a better compression format of HD quality movies to fit on a normal (AKA: red laser) DVD. Actually, a format called EVD already exists in China which does just that, but we'll never see it over here. Apparently the disks would be playable in current computer DVD drives as long as you had the software. Good going HD-DVD and Blu Ray for not jumping on THAT, sheesh - that would be so bad for business if people could get higher quality movies without having to also buy another $600 player!
There are HD files floating around out there, lots of really good Discovery channel and BBC shows in 1280x720 XviD format that look great and *surprise!* they are 700MB files (for a roughly 40 minute show) that will fit on a standard CD.
There is a great interview with Mark Knox from Toshiba regarding the HD DVD format in which he discusses the copy protection, MPAA etc. Long, but a good read.
I just purchased an HD LCD and am NOT planning on duplicating my DVD library on HD. They are not making the content very appealing to own. Why buy something that severely limits your options? If anything, I'll get some sort of player and just depend on Netflix for content. The last thing I need is another copy of the Star Wars trilogy.
MPAA: I'll give you $50 or so a month for unlimited access to streamed movies and TV shows. HD would be a plus. I don't even want to keep it. Why not put just a tiny bit of effort into profiting from the idea of downloaded content rather than fighting it every step of the way? Worked for Apple.
I don't want to own movies or tv shows; there isn't a need if they are *available* all the time (yes i'll pay - stop asking!). I have around 100 DVDs, of those I maybe brush the dust off 1 a month and watch it (Netflix for everything else). With a fee-based always-on model ('streaming Netflix' or some such thing), there would be no need to buy DVDs, or illegally download anything - plus the **AA would get their $$ which I think is what all the crying is about anyway.
Why not? Because people, you and me, should not have to: A- worry about being able to afford a vital medication B- have to go through the beurocracy of today's insurance companies, who, being businesses themselves, probably wouldn't cover you with a terminal illness because you don't fit into the "good ROI" category anymore.
The scientists have to eat, pay their rent, and hopefully put their kids through school. COME ON! The guys working on this are not starving artists. They are well-educated people with well-paying jobs. How much "profit" does one need to "eat" and "pay their rent?" What the hell are they eating?
Why is making money from a drug that saves peoples lives more evil than making money from guns, food, real estate, or video games. Not evil, just stupid, greedy and selfish. It is a benefit to society, and for some it will mean the difference between life and death. You want to put a price on that? How much is life worth? Lets see, this guy is probabably worth $xxxxx if he goes on living with our drug, so he OWES us that!
You could say that people need these drugs to live but people also need food, shelter, and clothing to live. Who are you talking about? The starving scientists again, the people who need the drug, or people in general? Today some people are living on a shady line between making ends meet, and living on the street (oh i think i feel a song coming on... NO! STOP IT! STOP THAT! sorry...). Many of them either A- can't afford insurance, or B- the insurance they have sure as hell won't cover a super-premium drug needed. So they end up on the street where they can die faster... yay capitalism!
Hoarding is defined as "A hidden fund or supply stored for future use; a cache." Which fits the netflix/"timeshifting" model described above.
However, I tend to think of hoarding in terms of scarcity. With Netflix being available to anyone who is willing to pay the monthly fee, these DVDs are not scarce. By me 'hoarding' a personal copy of them, the only one harmed is me in the form of lost data storage and optical media.
Plus, I may be the only one doing this, but often times I'll really use this method for timeshifting and convenience of viewing the movies/shows and delete them after watching for the sake of HD space. I will "hoard" up some movies and TV shows during the week, then watch some over the weekend or when I have time.
I got laid off from my job and found it to be a great time to put out a new version of my open source project. I completely rewrote the thing in about a week, being out of work is great for open source!
Slashdot Mirror
I win. Xfce put it in "Other."
Farnsworth: "This will be one hell of a bowel movement. He'll be lucky to have any bones left!"
Obviously there just aren't enough ads in the self-checkout screens!
Also, careful with the SMP kernel on MDD G4s, as in: Don't. It is not ready and will totally hose the system. Apparently it works in Breezy, but when I loaded it for Dapper the most obvious problem was my system clock was completely out of whack and I couldn't do anything because the screensaver kept taking over. When I did finally get in and past the screensaver of death, every applet in my menu died at once producing about 8 error messages on the desktop.
You saved me some typing, this is my standard response to these discussions. The only thing I would add is a flat fee for all-you-can-eat content. Unfortunanely, licensing is going to prevent this holy grail of home entertainment from ever happening. What service in today's market could EVER provide the selection of movies you might find on Netflix plus all current TV shows on demand and get away with it?
I'll keep dreaming but I stopped holding my breath a while ago. I've said it before, but might as well say it again: I'm ready to pay $50/month or so for this type of service and will gladly abandon my torrents.
Oh, one more thing: I don't even want to keep these files! DRM them, I don't care! Why should I want to own something that is always available via my fantasy on-demand service?
That's absolutely moronic. Your $40 DVD player couldn't output 1080 material to save it's life.
I said computer dvd players.
I actually use my computer to view DVDs thankyouverymuch. With an HD solution that fit on a DVD I'd be quite happy. Shame about the lawsuits, seems like the EVD could have been a useful format.
Make it an all-you-can-eat monthly subscription, with files that'll play on OS X and I'll dump Netflix for it.
Netflix/TiVo were going to offer 'on demand' downloads but it didn't work because the movie corps wouldn't grant the licensing (what a shock!), not sure that it will be any different in this case, but I'm hopeful.
That was the original plan of HD-DVD, to be a better compression format of HD quality movies to fit on a normal (AKA: red laser) DVD. Actually, a format called EVD already exists in China which does just that, but we'll never see it over here. Apparently the disks would be playable in current computer DVD drives as long as you had the software. Good going HD-DVD and Blu Ray for not jumping on THAT, sheesh - that would be so bad for business if people could get higher quality movies without having to also buy another $600 player!
There are HD files floating around out there, lots of really good Discovery channel and BBC shows in 1280x720 XviD format that look great and *surprise!* they are 700MB files (for a roughly 40 minute show) that will fit on a standard CD.
oh wait....
There is a great interview with Mark Knox from Toshiba regarding the HD DVD format in which he discusses the copy protection, MPAA etc. Long, but a good read.
I just purchased an HD LCD and am NOT planning on duplicating my DVD library on HD. They are not making the content very appealing to own. Why buy something that severely limits your options? If anything, I'll get some sort of player and just depend on Netflix for content. The last thing I need is another copy of the Star Wars trilogy.
MPAA: I'll give you $50 or so a month for unlimited access to streamed movies and TV shows. HD would be a plus. I don't even want to keep it. Why not put just a tiny bit of effort into profiting from the idea of downloaded content rather than fighting it every step of the way? Worked for Apple.
I don't want to own movies or tv shows; there isn't a need if they are *available* all the time (yes i'll pay - stop asking!). I have around 100 DVDs, of those I maybe brush the dust off 1 a month and watch it (Netflix for everything else). With a fee-based always-on model ('streaming Netflix' or some such thing), there would be no need to buy DVDs, or illegally download anything - plus the **AA would get their $$ which I think is what all the crying is about anyway.
Why not?
Because people, you and me, should not have to:
A- worry about being able to afford a vital medication
B- have to go through the beurocracy of today's insurance companies, who, being businesses themselves, probably wouldn't cover you with a terminal illness because you don't fit into the "good ROI" category anymore.
The scientists have to eat, pay their rent, and hopefully put their kids through school.
COME ON! The guys working on this are not starving artists. They are well-educated people with well-paying jobs. How much "profit" does one need to "eat" and "pay their rent?" What the hell are they eating?
Why is making money from a drug that saves peoples lives more evil than making money from guns, food, real estate, or video games.
Not evil, just stupid, greedy and selfish. It is a benefit to society, and for some it will mean the difference between life and death. You want to put a price on that? How much is life worth? Lets see, this guy is probabably worth $xxxxx if he goes on living with our drug, so he OWES us that!
You could say that people need these drugs to live but people also need food, shelter, and clothing to live.
Who are you talking about? The starving scientists again, the people who need the drug, or people in general? Today some people are living on a shady line between making ends meet, and living on the street (oh i think i feel a song coming on... NO! STOP IT! STOP THAT! sorry...). Many of them either A- can't afford insurance, or B- the insurance they have sure as hell won't cover a super-premium drug needed. So they end up on the street where they can die faster... yay capitalism!
Tonight at 11: Microsoft patents breathing.
Everyone in the country owes age*$400 in retro licensing fees!
Hoarding is defined as "A hidden fund or supply stored for future use; a cache." Which fits the netflix/"timeshifting" model described above.
However, I tend to think of hoarding in terms of scarcity. With Netflix being available to anyone who is willing to pay the monthly fee, these DVDs are not scarce. By me 'hoarding' a personal copy of them, the only one harmed is me in the form of lost data storage and optical media.
Plus, I may be the only one doing this, but often times I'll really use this method for timeshifting and convenience of viewing the movies/shows and delete them after watching for the sake of HD space. I will "hoard" up some movies and TV shows during the week, then watch some over the weekend or when I have time.
yup, it took a week or 2 but I adapted to it eventually. That was actually the hardest part of the switch.
Before you go nuts setting up a server for your address book, check out this software (oh yeah, its free).
I got laid off from my job and found it to be a great time to put out a new version of my open source project. I completely rewrote the thing in about a week, being out of work is great for open source!