Alright. Normally, I wouldn't jump into a thread and criticize a brilliant mind like you, but it's people like you that make my blood boil.
Really, what is so "dumb" about integrating two, currently separate technologies, into one simple card? Is it the praticality in it? Is it the space saving aspect? I personally think the idea would be absolutely wonderful. Dongles suck dirty goat balls.
Disagreement aside... just because you use (Apple) technology in a certain way, certainly does not mean the entire Apple customer spectrum uses it in the same manner.
Then again, I don't know what's more lame, my flaming(?) you for your idiotic assertion, or the fact that I've been compelled to call you on it.
OVERRATED? Try INSIGHTFUL. Java isn't as wonderful as some believe. Try playing a game over at Yahoo! on anything other than a Windows computer. It won't work. In fact, there are many instances I can think of that Java does not work on anything other than Windows.
But that's Microsoft's fault, for bastardizing Java... right?
Ok, you've made it obvious that you hate everything the web has become since 1998. You're over 40, aren't you?
HTML e-mail isn't a bad thing. HTML's implementation in general is. The second that everyone understands this, the better off we'd all be. It royally pisses me off that HTML looks different on competing browswers, or even the same branded browser on different platforms. My biggest peeve is that fonts shouldn't have to be installed on the client's computer in order for a website to look as the creator intended. Automatic font downloading would save a HUGE amount of bandwidth... no more JPGs of text. Anyone who wrongly believes that (clean) HTML is just oh-so-wonderful needs to get their head out of their ass. Please. No really...
By default... WYSIWYG != bad design.
If you use a shitty product such as Microsoft FrontPage, then yes, what-you-see-is-what-you-get ends up resulting in poorly coded HTML. But, as I previously stated, HTML is a piss-poor format.
As for the blink tag~ it's much less annoying than the pop-up and pop-under ads harassing people such as myself. I never see the blink tag used anymore, and when I do, I'm pretty cool calm and collected about it.
NNTP > Web-Based forums ~ Are you for real? Slashdot is what... oh yeah, a web-based forum. And I happen to like things around here.
Finally, and more to the point, we have Flash. Honestly, Flash is one of the very few web standards that actually does what it's supposed to do across Windows/Macintosh. It looks the same across the two. I have absolutely *zero* experience with the Linux side of thing, so maybe I'm a bit myopic, but Flash > HTML when it comes to a modern and artistic website. Although... both require (much) different degrees of comprehension to achieve beautiful results.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Flash doesn't suck any more than HTML does... and Flash is better in several respects. It really boils down to the designer and application above all else. Furthermore, just because you like your view of the world wide web in 12-point black Courier doesn't mean we all should see things that (boring) way. Seems to be like you're shunning Flash just because you like all things text ( you probably use Lynx, don't you? )
DRM will fail in the long run, PERIOD. This is what Microsoft and others simply refuse to admit. This is what most if not all of us here on/. have come to a consensus on, right? Wasn't someone told to STFU by the RIAA... over a paper criticizing a DRM idea called the Secure Digital Music Initiative?
If Microsoft sells their flavor (or any flavor) of DRM to a content creator under the impression that it is 100% secure, they're flat out liars. All it takes is *one* person to crack the code, and release it over the 'net. Microsoft realizes they can't offer 100% security, I'm sure. Since they do realize this, they're going to tell their clients that their stab at DRM is better than no DRM at all, and companies are going to bite.. as they already are.
But it all comes down to this.
The instant people can't use their Windows computer to upload files to their MP3 player, a dangerous consumer backlash will occur. People won't buy the new flavor of Windows if it prevents them from ripping their own CDs, or if they find out they can't use Kazaa with it either.
Furthermore, nobody cares about WMA, which is a huge problem for Microsoft considering they NEED to use WMA for their DRM to work in the first place.
Truth is, consumers have already spoken. They want iPods, not the SDMI crap that Sony put out and forces NetMD and MemoryStick players to use.
SDMI ~ Add a few O's and replace with I with a Y and it better represents what it attempts^Hed to achieve.
Anyone with half an ounce of technology smarts would know that simply encrypting sensitive digital documents would be DRM-enough. Who cares if you can copy a 512bit-encrypted PDF if you don't have the key to open it up?
Does Microsoft honestly expect to stay afloat in five years if their next move forward involves two strategies which royally piss off corporations and consumers alike?
Perhaps some need a better grasp of reality. Just because someone does not know the ins and outs of the computer world does not automatically make them an idiot by default. Ignorant, sure. Idiot, hardly.
I could make the statement, "All poor spellers are idiots." Is it true? Some of said "idiots" are simply apathetic sentence architects who harbor quite a wealth of technical information in that noggin of theirs... they just don't see a point in typing to 100% perfection. So does that make them: (a) an idiot (b) a lazy ass - or - (c) ignorant?
Probably "C," although to a lesser extent, "B" as well.
I guess I should've clarified... I meant Region 1/USA only. I've never come across any DVDs from regions other than #1, seeing that I'm in America and all, and don't actively seek them out.
Furthermore, sending $20 to the EFF would be a waste. To say otherwise is pretty foolish. They've done absolutely nothing as of late to help shore up my rights as both a consumer and a citizen of the theoretically "free" United States of America.
*Some* DVDs have somewhat lengthy FBI warnings, but the idea that you're forced to "watch 2+ minutes" of them is a gross overstatement. 30 seconds, at the most. If you can prove me wrong, I'll give you $20. Obviously, those who modded this post up felt that it was either clever sarcasm, or are simply blind and ignorant.
Yes, you are prevented from skipping the warning on most DVDs, but again, they aren't 120 seconds long. Some major studio DVDs don't even have FBI warnings at all! It depends on the distributor, motion picture, and movie studio.
There's something mildly hypocritical about your audacity to demand that I stop "pirating?" You stop, first.
Give the artists a better cut, and quit looting and pillaging from their collective talents.
Perhaps you should set a better example yourself, and then maybe, maybe, I'll start buying CDs again.
Better yet, use that collective muscle you like to flex to push all of your member artists' music on to the Internet, through several distribution sites. I wouldn't want to see a monopoly in the Internet music arena, you know.
By the way, leave out that cumbersome and futile Digital Rights Management stuff. I'm only going to pay for 192kbps+ MP3s. Furthermore; I'm not going to pay more than 25 per track. And that's if you're lucky. I would much rather pay ~$10.00 a month.
I hope you didn't cancel your service solely based on the fact that you don't agree with a 50% margin. Most things you buy are priced at twice their actual cost.
How much do you think it costs Coke to make a bottle of Sprite? $1.00 for a bottle? Come on.
Note to class: ASCAP and BMI are the two organizations which collect money from current FM/AM/(Cable)TV* broadcasters in exchange for music rights. ASCAP/BMI have set fees based on several standards, namely, listener mass, and the amount of revenue the station pulls in.
This new web-fee hoopla stems from the additional fee for broadcasting, simply because you're using the Internet as a means of transmission. A webcaster would pay a webcasting fee ON TOP OF the already established ASCAP/BMI fee.
It's like saying - hey, we want you to pay 50 extra on this gallon of gasoline for road taxes. Then, you turn around and make anyone with an automatic transmission pay an extra 25/gal, for no reason.
I think the surprising thing is the lack of publicized ClearChannel comment over all of this. I would think that they'd want to be able to run Internet streams for their thousand radio stations, without additional, "web only" fees.
They are the true 800 pound gorilla. Yet, are as quiet as a church mouse.
*MTV can be loose with music, placing whichever songs they choose in their own programming, without an authors consent, because they pay their ASCAP/BMI fees.
This morning, Acme Semiconductor (NASDAQ: ACME) announced the unveiling of their new 15Ghz processors, dubbed JackHammer. Company officials displayed a hands-off demo of Quake 3, which reported a sustained frame rate of over 234,545 frames per second, an astonishing feat. A top-of-the-line 2.6Ghz Intel Pentium 4 produces numbers in the mid hundreds, depending on the established screen resolution.
Company officials told reporters that the Internet is faster on computers based upon the JackHammer. Photoshop filters take dramatically less time to render as well, they added.
Acme says it plans on shipping the processor mid to late 2005.
If you want to use the majority of the music published through traditional channels... you need to talk to ASCAP and/or BMI. AFAIK, talking to them does not help secure rights to use a song in something like a movie, but for most part, you're on the right track if you talk to these guys.
Radio stations pay ASCAP/BMI fees in order to play music on their radio stations. They're responsible for dividing up money to member artists.
The funny thing is that I've *never* seen or read an article where either organization has taken a stand for or against DRM... it's always the RIAA.
Back in the days of NES, I figured out that if I turned the sharpness setting on my TV as low as I could tollerate... bewm. Instant, effortless, anti-aliasing.
Call me crazy, but I've never seen the point in dueling standards. Shouldn't the whole point of a standard to get everyone in the same industry involved in its creation, and in the end, simplify a problem?
one standard = harmony two (or more) standards = proprietary mess
USB v. USB2 v. USB-LMNOP v. FireWire NTSC v. PAL v. SECAM Beta v. VHS DVD v. DVD-R v. DVD-RW v. DVD+RW v. DVD-LMNOP v. DVD+LMNOP OpenGL v. DirectX v. Glide Java [Microsoft] v. Java [Sun Microsystems]
and the one that really ticks me off...
HTML/CSS [IE Windows] v. HTML/CSS [IE Macintosh] v. HTML/CSS [Mozilla/Netscape] v. HTML/CSS [Everyone else]
Slashdot Mirror
Alright. Normally, I wouldn't jump into a thread and criticize a brilliant mind like you, but it's people like you that make my blood boil.
Really, what is so "dumb" about integrating two, currently separate technologies, into one simple card? Is it the praticality in it? Is it the space saving aspect? I personally think the idea would be absolutely wonderful. Dongles suck dirty goat balls.
Disagreement aside... just because you use (Apple) technology in a certain way, certainly does not mean the entire Apple customer spectrum uses it in the same manner.
Then again, I don't know what's more lame, my flaming(?) you for your idiotic assertion, or the fact that I've been compelled to call you on it.
OVERRATED? Try INSIGHTFUL. Java isn't as wonderful as some believe. Try playing a game over at Yahoo! on anything other than a Windows computer. It won't work. In fact, there are many instances I can think of that Java does not work on anything other than Windows.
But that's Microsoft's fault, for bastardizing Java... right?
BAH.
Mozilla and Flash play nicely together on every website I've seen. There are more problems with Java across platforms than Flash, for sure.
Ok, you've made it obvious that you hate everything the web has become since 1998. You're over 40, aren't you?
HTML e-mail isn't a bad thing. HTML's implementation in general is. The second that everyone understands this, the better off we'd all be. It royally pisses me off that HTML looks different on competing browswers, or even the same branded browser on different platforms. My biggest peeve is that fonts shouldn't have to be installed on the client's computer in order for a website to look as the creator intended. Automatic font downloading would save a HUGE amount of bandwidth... no more JPGs of text. Anyone who wrongly believes that (clean) HTML is just oh-so-wonderful needs to get their head out of their ass. Please. No really...
By default... WYSIWYG != bad design.
If you use a shitty product such as Microsoft FrontPage, then yes, what-you-see-is-what-you-get ends up resulting in poorly coded HTML. But, as I previously stated, HTML is a piss-poor format.
As for the blink tag~ it's much less annoying than the pop-up and pop-under ads harassing people such as myself. I never see the blink tag used anymore, and when I do, I'm pretty cool calm and collected about it.
NNTP > Web-Based forums ~ Are you for real? Slashdot is what... oh yeah, a web-based forum. And I happen to like things around here.
Finally, and more to the point, we have Flash. Honestly, Flash is one of the very few web standards that actually does what it's supposed to do across Windows/Macintosh. It looks the same across the two. I have absolutely *zero* experience with the Linux side of thing, so maybe I'm a bit myopic, but Flash > HTML when it comes to a modern and artistic website. Although... both require (much) different degrees of comprehension to achieve beautiful results.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Flash doesn't suck any more than HTML does... and Flash is better in several respects. It really boils down to the designer and application above all else. Furthermore, just because you like your view of the world wide web in 12-point black Courier doesn't mean we all should see things that (boring) way. Seems to be like you're shunning Flash just because you like all things text ( you probably use Lynx, don't you? )
DRM will fail in the long run, PERIOD. This is what Microsoft and others simply refuse to admit. This is what most if not all of us here on /. have come to a consensus on, right? Wasn't someone told to STFU by the RIAA... over a paper criticizing a DRM idea called the Secure Digital Music Initiative?
If Microsoft sells their flavor (or any flavor) of DRM to a content creator under the impression that it is 100% secure, they're flat out liars. All it takes is *one* person to crack the code, and release it over the 'net. Microsoft realizes they can't offer 100% security, I'm sure. Since they do realize this, they're going to tell their clients that their stab at DRM is better than no DRM at all, and companies are going to bite.. as they already are.
But it all comes down to this.
The instant people can't use their Windows computer to upload files to their MP3 player, a dangerous consumer backlash will occur. People won't buy the new flavor of Windows if it prevents them from ripping their own CDs, or if they find out they can't use Kazaa with it either.
Furthermore, nobody cares about WMA, which is a huge problem for Microsoft considering they NEED to use WMA for their DRM to work in the first place.
Truth is, consumers have already spoken. They want iPods, not the SDMI crap that Sony put out and forces NetMD and MemoryStick players to use.
SDMI ~ Add a few O's and replace with I with a Y and it better represents what it attempts^Hed to achieve.
Anyone with half an ounce of technology smarts would know that simply encrypting sensitive digital documents would be DRM-enough. Who cares if you can copy a 512bit-encrypted PDF if you don't have the key to open it up?
Does Microsoft honestly expect to stay afloat in five years if their next move forward involves two strategies which royally piss off corporations and consumers alike?
I was, but I (thought) I removed every single trace of the damn thing.
This isn't new to 10.2.3, but I can't seem to get ASP open. When I run it, it'll crash after two or three seconds.
Anyone know what's up?
Perhaps some need a better grasp of reality. Just because someone does not know the ins and outs of the computer world does not automatically make them an idiot by default. Ignorant, sure. Idiot, hardly.
I could make the statement, "All poor spellers are idiots." Is it true? Some of said "idiots" are simply apathetic sentence architects who harbor quite a wealth of technical information in that noggin of theirs... they just don't see a point in typing to 100% perfection. So does that make them: (a) an idiot (b) a lazy ass - or - (c) ignorant?
Probably "C," although to a lesser extent, "B" as well.
In Soviet Russia, Moore's Law ends you!
I guess we can all stop the stereotypical cracks about WV for being a bunch of stupid illiterate hillbillies, huh.
Yeah, that's what happens when people stop caring about their local school districts. When parents aren't involved, the whole system goes to shiat.
/me puts ear to the ground
Funny, some people think nothing of dropping $500 for a new nVidia card, but cringe at the thought of paying for a school levy.
Now that is the true pitty.
Oh crap!$@%#$ It's an offtopic-mod stampede!
I guess I should've clarified... I meant Region 1/USA only. I've never come across any DVDs from regions other than #1, seeing that I'm in America and all, and don't actively seek them out.
Furthermore, sending $20 to the EFF would be a waste. To say otherwise is pretty foolish. They've done absolutely nothing as of late to help shore up my rights as both a consumer and a citizen of the theoretically "free" United States of America.
+4 Insightful?!
*Some* DVDs have somewhat lengthy FBI warnings, but the idea that you're forced to "watch 2+ minutes" of them is a gross overstatement. 30 seconds, at the most. If you can prove me wrong, I'll give you $20. Obviously, those who modded this post up felt that it was either clever sarcasm, or are simply blind and ignorant.
Yes, you are prevented from skipping the warning on most DVDs, but again, they aren't 120 seconds long. Some major studio DVDs don't even have FBI warnings at all! It depends on the distributor, motion picture, and movie studio.
To whom it may concern,
There's something mildly hypocritical about your audacity to demand that I stop "pirating?" You stop, first.
Give the artists a better cut, and quit looting and pillaging from their collective talents.
Perhaps you should set a better example yourself, and then maybe, maybe, I'll start buying CDs again.
Better yet, use that collective muscle you like to flex to push all of your member artists' music on to the Internet, through several distribution sites. I wouldn't want to see a monopoly in the Internet music arena, you know.
By the way, leave out that cumbersome and futile Digital Rights Management stuff. I'm only going to pay for 192kbps+ MP3s. Furthermore; I'm not going to pay more than 25 per track. And that's if you're lucky. I would much rather pay ~$10.00 a month.
Thank you for your time,
Adam Carrington
Speaking of Vonage... just think... WiFi connection, VoIP... Instant "cell phone."
Two Years from now, we may see a device that's a combination of 802.11 and telephone handset, plus a cheap means (service) in which to use it.
W00t.
I'm playing Devil's Advocate.
it's supposed to withstand a nuclear war?
I hope you didn't cancel your service solely based on the fact that you don't agree with a 50% margin. Most things you buy are priced at twice their actual cost.
How much do you think it costs Coke to make a bottle of Sprite? $1.00 for a bottle? Come on.
Note to class: ASCAP and BMI are the two organizations which collect money from current FM/AM/(Cable)TV* broadcasters in exchange for music rights. ASCAP/BMI have set fees based on several standards, namely, listener mass, and the amount of revenue the station pulls in.
This new web-fee hoopla stems from the additional fee for broadcasting, simply because you're using the Internet as a means of transmission. A webcaster would pay a webcasting fee ON TOP OF the already established ASCAP/BMI fee.
It's like saying - hey, we want you to pay 50 extra on this gallon of gasoline for road taxes. Then, you turn around and make anyone with an automatic transmission pay an extra 25/gal, for no reason.
I think the surprising thing is the lack of publicized ClearChannel comment over all of this. I would think that they'd want to be able to run Internet streams for their thousand radio stations, without additional, "web only" fees.
They are the true 800 pound gorilla. Yet, are as quiet as a church mouse.
*MTV can be loose with music, placing whichever songs they choose in their own programming, without an authors consent, because they pay their ASCAP/BMI fees.
I remember first seeing the new G3s at a CompUSA several years ago. The blue and white boxes with the easy-opening side door... loved 'em.
October 18th, 2002
Silicon Valley, CA (AP)
This morning, Acme Semiconductor (NASDAQ: ACME) announced the unveiling of their new 15Ghz processors, dubbed JackHammer. Company officials displayed a hands-off demo of Quake 3, which reported a sustained frame rate of over 234,545 frames per second, an astonishing feat. A top-of-the-line 2.6Ghz Intel Pentium 4 produces numbers in the mid hundreds, depending on the established screen resolution.
Company officials told reporters that the Internet is faster on computers based upon the JackHammer. Photoshop filters take dramatically less time to render as well, they added.
Acme says it plans on shipping the processor mid to late 2005.
Stock Ticker - All prices delayed 20 minutes
Acme Semiconductor (ACME) || 14 1/4 || +5 7/8
If you want to use the majority of the music published through traditional channels... you need to talk to ASCAP and/or BMI. AFAIK, talking to them does not help secure rights to use a song in something like a movie, but for most part, you're on the right track if you talk to these guys.
Radio stations pay ASCAP/BMI fees in order to play music on their radio stations. They're responsible for dividing up money to member artists.
The funny thing is that I've *never* seen or read an article where either organization has taken a stand for or against DRM... it's always the RIAA.
Back in the days of NES, I figured out that if I turned the sharpness setting on my TV as low as I could tollerate... bewm. Instant, effortless, anti-aliasing.
w00t!
Call me crazy, but I've never seen the point in dueling standards. Shouldn't the whole point of a standard to get everyone in the same industry involved in its creation, and in the end, simplify a problem?
one standard = harmony
two (or more) standards = proprietary mess
USB v. USB2 v. USB-LMNOP v. FireWire
NTSC v. PAL v. SECAM
Beta v. VHS
DVD v. DVD-R v. DVD-RW v. DVD+RW v. DVD-LMNOP v. DVD+LMNOP
OpenGL v. DirectX v. Glide
Java [Microsoft] v. Java [Sun Microsystems]
and the one that really ticks me off...
HTML/CSS [IE Windows] v. HTML/CSS [IE Macintosh] v. HTML/CSS [Mozilla/Netscape] v. HTML/CSS [Everyone else]
bla bla bla bla bla...
ENOUGH ALREADY.