I have a friend who suggested that part of the problem is that there is very important relationship between the record stores and the record companies. To what extent this relationship exists I am not sure, but it surely has an impact on what the music companies are trying to do. Instead of trying to lower the price across the board, which would encourage people to buy CDs, they do the opposite. What I have never understood is that CDs are marketed as frequent purchase items, but priced as occasional purchase items!?
Interestingly enough Apple has been given a vote of confidence by the European Union in this regard.
What kind of racist crap is this? It shouldn't be in a/. article, for one thing. Bad taste. VERY BAD TASTE
Most people probably didn't comment on this either because they only skimmed over the text of the posting, because they had no idea that it had any racial conotation, or were unphased. I am in he first two groups (didn't fully read the text and didn't know the expression). I had no idea what the expression is about and I have never heard it until now. I take it that is purely USA slang?
They will send me one of those machines if I offer to test Longhorn for them? - Please... I promise to keep Longhorn on the machine for at least a week
And you should also promise not to use Longhorn on any other computer you currently have.
(Note: I'm not trying to argue the relative merits of each OS, but just to point out that 5 releases in 5 years might not be a good thing)
Look at it another way. The alternative offered by certain other companies is a subscription based model whereby you have to renew each year or get locked of the system, even if they didn't do anything improve the system in the meantime.
On the other hand, Apple provides a solution whereby you but the OS and then have the choice to follow the updgrade cycle or stick with what you have. Each has advantages and disadvantages. The one thing that I believe this approach ensures, is a) you see what your money is giving you and b) the developers concentrate on making improvements to a smaller number of features, so making QA that much easier to attain.
Yes I am a Mac user. $129 is a fair bit to pay per year, but I pay that sort of price on some magazine subscriptions, so it works out be an okay price, comparatively.
Nothing to see here. Just another sure sign that antitrust has no effect on the paranoid Microsoft.
Heck, IMO, this is a sure sign of the problems with software patents. In normal due process you should not be able to patent as much as that in that sort of time, unless something is up with the system.
Apple usually does a good job about compatibility. If they failed in this task here, it is because incompatibility was part of the plan. They know people are breaking the DRM, and in order to keep the record companies happy they must show that they are at least doing a token effort. Then again maybe they just screwed up - that would be the excuse given to MS, so why not Apple too?
Just occured to me that iTunes isn't just for the computer, in the sense that all formats that are 'officially' supported are designed to work with the iPod. iTunes will generally accept anything that Quicktime does, but this fact is not advertised as such to avoid people complaining that they can't use these files with their iPod. If Apple chose to use their own format, as opposed to FLAC, there could be a number of reasons:
- lock-in?
- not made here attitude?
- FLAC lacks a good integer based decoder?
- ALE has some yet unadvertised advantage of FLAC?
- something else?
I have no idea which it is, but time will give us the answer.
Why not support open standards and open source and use FLAC
That's one question I have asked myself, so a few things I would like answered first are:
- does Apple have plans of publishing the file format specs used by ALE?
- how does compression between ALE and FLAC compare?
- can you unofficially use FLAC with iTunes?
I have been for a while being bugging my parents to move away from AOL. This is simply because they have an older computer that can't handle the latest Gee-Wiz version of AOL's clients and also because their e-mail needs has moved beyond the limitations of AOL's e-mail client. Maybe with this change they can simply use another e-mail client - finally:)
Look at it another way: A cinema is a private property open to the public. For this reason you are under the obligation of respecting the 'directives' of the premises, on the condition that they do not over-ride any of the laws of the teritory of which the property is part of (local, provencial, country, etc). If you do not, they have the right, in mose cases, to chuck you out.
Well, first, you have to have a monopoly to start talking about monopolistic practices. Even with iPod, Apple doesn't have nearly a "monopoly". And QuickTime, while proprietary, is one of the best media architectures out there, with free live encoding, free streaming servers for multiple platforms, ability to use open standards for playback anywhere, etc. Not to mention that it was primarily Apple and Apple alone that made MPEG-4's licensing - one of the only hopes against Microsoft's VC9 - licensing leaps and bounds more palatable [com.com] than it originally was [com.com]. And Apple has to keep its hardware sales up, lest the analysts start a death knell [google.com] for the 1000th time.
Should also mention that AAC is not Apple's code. Quicktime's file format specs are fully published. It is proprietary, but available for implementation. After that its just down to the codecs. I am still looking for the WMA specs on the Microsoft site.
Do people actually use their browser history for anything other than:
a) Checking up on shared computers' other users porn-browsing habits
b) Tracking the links they've visited in the past.
Fair point. Though sometime the way we use something also depends on the praticality of the tool used to make use of it. It is highly possible that we limit our use of the browser history because in its current form it is not really pratical to be used other wise. If the information appears as too much noise, then we will try to limit our exposure to the noise.
Of course whether the this alternative method makes a difference remains to be seen. Hypercard had also provided a visual history, but it was much more linear.
By time the summer comes around I am sure we will see books on the GarageBand come rolling in. The book writers probably didn't get a head start with a pre-release version, so they only have the public release to work with. Also, to be able to write a good book, you need to understand fully how to use the tool.
Then again you will probably spend all day tinkering with the possibilities, that you won't have time to read a book.
Either way its just going to make things more complex. To use a real world analogy, if I live at '55 Infinite Loop', I expect to get my mail there. I don't expect to have to set up another building in '403 Mail Avenue' or '55 Infinite Loop-Mail Avenue'. So, back on the internet, if my site is site.com then I am at site.com, therefore me@site.com
Some people just don't think things through. The issue is not with the domains, but with the mail protocol and open relays. Heck, I could still leave my mail site wide open and this would not solve anything.
This sounds more like some guys from Verisign trying to hatch another way of charging people for something that works and that they don't have to pay for the moment.
...but they couldn't find somewhere with enough bandwidth to host their site?
Ironic, heck there are probably some ATMs around that could have been used;)
Re:The Peoples' Hate Affair with Apple
on
Apple Quashes pBop
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Bullshit. OS X has over 10,000 apps, many of them equivalent to or even better than comparable Windows versions.
I always like to give the following answer to the people who argue there is less software on the Mac: there probably is, though if there is so much choice on the PC, why is everyone still using MS-Office?
The answer is that people appreciate quality.
Re:The Peoples' Hate Affair with Apple
on
Apple Quashes pBop
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
That leaves step 2: people saying that Apple's designs are bad. It farts liberally in the face of step 3, so it must have something to do with step 1: the fact that Apple made it.
It is well known that any design that stands out enough is going to create a reaction. The more it stands out, the greater the reaction. The only thing is that this draws from both ends of the spectrum: those who say it is the worst thing ever and those who say it is the greatest. You can't please everyone, and it is foolish to think you can. Your average PC maker causes no reaction, simply because they produce the same stuff as the other company. Only the absurd and the different stand out.
If AppleInsider is anything to go by, then Apple also seems to be developing an iPod with these sort of features. See story: Apple readying 4th-generation iPod. Apple already learnt their lesson, circa 1990, whereby standing proud, simply give the competition time to catch up - in that case it was MS catching up, and bypassing, with MS-Windows. If Apple is smart, they will keep one step ahead of the game.
Rather than fixing IE, how about using the same method to make Mozilla render pages designed for IE correctly?
Pages should not be designed for browser x (replace x with browser of choice). This is bad web design. Web pages should be designed to follow standards, as should web browsers. In many cases I would also recommend not using the latest rendition of a standard, since most browsers probably don't support it. The philosphy of web design, is 'write for all, view by all'. NOT 'write for one, view by one' as this is lazy, shows bad design and is just careless. I like to be able to use the browser on whatever computer I am sitting at and still have it display correctly.
This is a rant, but one which I feel passionatly about. Now don't get me going on how Macromedia Flash also shows signs of poor web design.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a friend who suggested that part of the problem is that there is very important relationship between the record stores and the record companies. To what extent this relationship exists I am not sure, but it surely has an impact on what the music companies are trying to do. Instead of trying to lower the price across the board, which would encourage people to buy CDs, they do the opposite. What I have never understood is that CDs are marketed as frequent purchase items, but priced as occasional purchase items!?
Interestingly enough Apple has been given a vote of confidence by the European Union in this regard.
BTW: where you wrote 'unphased' you mean 'unfazed'
:)
Thanks, you're right. I don't think I was talking material state.
What kind of racist crap is this? It shouldn't be in a /. article, for one thing. Bad taste. VERY BAD TASTE
Most people probably didn't comment on this either because they only skimmed over the text of the posting, because they had no idea that it had any racial conotation, or were unphased. I am in he first two groups (didn't fully read the text and didn't know the expression). I had no idea what the expression is about and I have never heard it until now. I take it that is purely USA slang?
And you should also promise not to use Longhorn on any other computer you currently have.
Not that it will run on any other computer he currently has....
That was the point I was trying to make. oh well, another joke falling on its head.
They will send me one of those machines if I offer to test Longhorn for them? - Please... I promise to keep Longhorn on the machine for at least a week
And you should also promise not to use Longhorn on any other computer you currently have.
(Note: I'm not trying to argue the relative merits of each OS, but just to point out that 5 releases in 5 years might not be a good thing)
Look at it another way. The alternative offered by certain other companies is a subscription based model whereby you have to renew each year or get locked of the system, even if they didn't do anything improve the system in the meantime.
On the other hand, Apple provides a solution whereby you but the OS and then have the choice to follow the updgrade cycle or stick with what you have. Each has advantages and disadvantages. The one thing that I believe this approach ensures, is a) you see what your money is giving you and b) the developers concentrate on making improvements to a smaller number of features, so making QA that much easier to attain.
Yes I am a Mac user. $129 is a fair bit to pay per year, but I pay that sort of price on some magazine subscriptions, so it works out be an okay price, comparatively.
The next one is probably Lynx. It goes well with their new eMacs.
Well, I am still holding out for the viMac.
Nothing to see here. Just another sure sign that antitrust has no effect on the paranoid Microsoft.
Heck, IMO, this is a sure sign of the problems with software patents. In normal due process you should not be able to patent as much as that in that sort of time, unless something is up with the system.
Enjoy: Wikipedia: Search engine
they're forcing the upgrade via incompatibility
Apple usually does a good job about compatibility. If they failed in this task here, it is because incompatibility was part of the plan. They know people are breaking the DRM, and in order to keep the record companies happy they must show that they are at least doing a token effort. Then again maybe they just screwed up - that would be the excuse given to MS, so why not Apple too?
Just occured to me that iTunes isn't just for the computer, in the sense that all formats that are 'officially' supported are designed to work with the iPod. iTunes will generally accept anything that Quicktime does, but this fact is not advertised as such to avoid people complaining that they can't use these files with their iPod. If Apple chose to use their own format, as opposed to FLAC, there could be a number of reasons:
- lock-in?
- not made here attitude?
- FLAC lacks a good integer based decoder?
- ALE has some yet unadvertised advantage of FLAC?
- something else?
I have no idea which it is, but time will give us the answer.
Why not support open standards and open source and use FLAC
That's one question I have asked myself, so a few things I would like answered first are:
- does Apple have plans of publishing the file format specs used by ALE?
- how does compression between ALE and FLAC compare?
- can you unofficially use FLAC with iTunes?
Save to AAC from unprotected WMA
That is a nice feature. Though note that this is a an feature for the MS-Windows version only.
Maybe what we need now is something to de-DRM WMA files so that they may all be converted.
I have been for a while being bugging my parents to move away from AOL. This is simply because they have an older computer that can't handle the latest Gee-Wiz version of AOL's clients and also because their e-mail needs has moved beyond the limitations of AOL's e-mail client. Maybe with this change they can simply use another e-mail client - finally :)
Look at it another way: A cinema is a private property open to the public. For this reason you are under the obligation of respecting the 'directives' of the premises, on the condition that they do not over-ride any of the laws of the teritory of which the property is part of (local, provencial, country, etc). If you do not, they have the right, in mose cases, to chuck you out.
Well, first, you have to have a monopoly to start talking about monopolistic practices. Even with iPod, Apple doesn't have nearly a "monopoly". And QuickTime, while proprietary, is one of the best media architectures out there, with free live encoding, free streaming servers for multiple platforms, ability to use open standards for playback anywhere, etc. Not to mention that it was primarily Apple and Apple alone that made MPEG-4's licensing - one of the only hopes against Microsoft's VC9 - licensing leaps and bounds more palatable [com.com] than it originally was [com.com]. And Apple has to keep its hardware sales up, lest the analysts start a death knell [google.com] for the 1000th time.
Should also mention that AAC is not Apple's code. Quicktime's file format specs are fully published. It is proprietary, but available for implementation. After that its just down to the codecs. I am still looking for the WMA specs on the Microsoft site.
What is the air speed velocity... um... I mean Data Transfer rate of a homing pigeon...
African or European?
Do people actually use their browser history for anything other than:
a) Checking up on shared computers' other users porn-browsing habits
b) Tracking the links they've visited in the past.
Fair point. Though sometime the way we use something also depends on the praticality of the tool used to make use of it. It is highly possible that we limit our use of the browser history because in its current form it is not really pratical to be used other wise. If the information appears as too much noise, then we will try to limit our exposure to the noise.
Of course whether the this alternative method makes a difference remains to be seen. Hypercard had also provided a visual history, but it was much more linear.
By time the summer comes around I am sure we will see books on the GarageBand come rolling in. The book writers probably didn't get a head start with a pre-release version, so they only have the public release to work with. Also, to be able to write a good book, you need to understand fully how to use the tool.
Then again you will probably spend all day tinkering with the possibilities, that you won't have time to read a book.
Either way its just going to make things more complex. To use a real world analogy, if I live at '55 Infinite Loop', I expect to get my mail there. I don't expect to have to set up another building in '403 Mail Avenue' or '55 Infinite Loop-Mail Avenue'. So, back on the internet, if my site is site.com then I am at site.com, therefore me@site.com
Some people just don't think things through. The issue is not with the domains, but with the mail protocol and open relays. Heck, I could still leave my mail site wide open and this would not solve anything.
This sounds more like some guys from Verisign trying to hatch another way of charging people for something that works and that they don't have to pay for the moment.
...but they couldn't find somewhere with enough bandwidth to host their site?
;)
Ironic, heck there are probably some ATMs around that could have been used
Bullshit. OS X has over 10,000 apps, many of them equivalent to or even better than comparable Windows versions.
I always like to give the following answer to the people who argue there is less software on the Mac: there probably is, though if there is so much choice on the PC, why is everyone still using MS-Office?
The answer is that people appreciate quality.
That leaves step 2: people saying that Apple's designs are bad. It farts liberally in the face of step 3, so it must have something to do with step 1: the fact that Apple made it.
It is well known that any design that stands out enough is going to create a reaction. The more it stands out, the greater the reaction. The only thing is that this draws from both ends of the spectrum: those who say it is the worst thing ever and those who say it is the greatest. You can't please everyone, and it is foolish to think you can. Your average PC maker causes no reaction, simply because they produce the same stuff as the other company. Only the absurd and the different stand out.
If AppleInsider is anything to go by, then Apple also seems to be developing an iPod with these sort of features. See story: Apple readying 4th-generation iPod. Apple already learnt their lesson, circa 1990, whereby standing proud, simply give the competition time to catch up - in that case it was MS catching up, and bypassing, with MS-Windows. If Apple is smart, they will keep one step ahead of the game.
Rather than fixing IE, how about using the same method to make Mozilla render pages designed for IE correctly?
Pages should not be designed for browser x (replace x with browser of choice). This is bad web design. Web pages should be designed to follow standards, as should web browsers. In many cases I would also recommend not using the latest rendition of a standard, since most browsers probably don't support it. The philosphy of web design, is 'write for all, view by all'. NOT 'write for one, view by one' as this is lazy, shows bad design and is just careless. I like to be able to use the browser on whatever computer I am sitting at and still have it display correctly.
This is a rant, but one which I feel passionatly about. Now don't get me going on how Macromedia Flash also shows signs of poor web design.