Apple gets so much attention, publicity & free defense from the bloggers.
But contrary to conventional wisdom, all publicity is not good publicity, especially when said bloggers get it wrong. Before the iPod Mini was released, all kinds of rumors were flying around: that it would have wireless, or six gigs of storage, and cost $150. Of course, what was released was considerably less than that, so the reaction was rather...underwhelming.
Mind you, that's still illegal. First sale does not apply here.
No, it's not, and yes, it does.
Your license only was valid for the Dell computer the OEM Windows was bundled with.
Which would be great, if we were licensing the software and making contractual agreements with the vendor on its use. And while volume purchasers may make those agreements, Joe Smoe buying a Dell from Worst Buy does not, making any license restrictions beyond basic copyright protections null and void.
Another poster had the EULA issue well summarized here.
Well the reason I hear most is cost. Apple cost more to buy
Generally. However, a Windows box can cost far more to service. A couple of Sasser worms can easily wipe out your initial cost savings by going with PC's. Get another couple bad worms or viruses, and Macs start to look like a pretty good investment.
more to repair, and more to upgrade.
Did you just step out of a time capsule from 1990? Macs have used PCI, ATA, VGA, upgradable processors and standard memory for over 10 years now. True, the processor upgrades were very pricey, but the move to Intel should take care of that issue.
I could argue this with you all day, but most people do not need or want the Mac OS. It isn't just a cost issue. This is especially true at most corporations who have a ton of specialty programs that work in Windows and will never work on a Mac. They have no use for the Mac OS, so why do they care if Dell and/or HP cannot offer it to them.
Of course they don't want it: Windows viruses, piss poor user security, service pack upgrade nightmares and spyware issues are what keep most of their IT departments employed.
Vista is not ripped from Apple. It implements a few features, but most people take a look a SCREENSHOTS and cry that they're stealing from Apple. The interfaces look nothing a like. Microsoft has only tried to make it more "stylish" as that seems to be the thing these days. You can't say that by trying to make an attractive UI they're copying Apple.
So while Sweden's population density is lower than the US, it's not lower by much, but the area of the US (which is going to add to the cost of rolling out a network very quickly) is 20 times that of Sweden.
Which would explain why you get crappy reception out in Bumfuck, Nowhere, but not why reception is bad even in large, metropolitan areas.
For starters, cell phone usage is cheaper in the US.
No, it's not. While the advertized rate may be cheaper than your plan, every cell company that I've seen in the U.S. has so many fees that your $40 a month plan starts to look more like $50 when you pay your bill.
And don't forget the ludicrously high cost of phones if you don't sign up for their two year agreements. They seem to have the same business model as Nike: make your product cheap in Asia, then ship it over here and increase the price by at least 1,000%. And even if you do buy your own phone, it's a real pain to switch carriers.
Somewhere, something went very wrong inside that organization, their mission changed from being the electronic and radio equivalent of the Parks Service, to a division of Internal Revenue.
Not really. The airwaves are public property, so I would I would certainally hope that big money corporations would have to pay for the exclusive right to use them. In fact, sometimes they don't worry about money *enough*, and give away huge swaths of bandwidth for free.
No, the problem is that the FCC, much like the rest of the government, is less interested in the well being of the public, and much more interested in being corporate whores and moral busybodies.
You make the same mistake as all the other slashbots, by framing the actions of others in what you think to be true.
And you don't?
People, as a rule, will take anything not nailed down. This is why people download stuff. Not because it's "more versatile," which doesn't even register for most people, but because they can get it for $0. Zero Dollars. Free.
It's only free if your time is worthless. That's why it's not about "free", it's about convenience. Sometimes it is more convenient to download a movie or cd than to buy it in the store. I am reminded of this every time I am seduced by the bargin bin at Wal-Mart and then have to spend five minutes getting all the plastic tape off the boxes. But as more online stores emerge, it's becomming more convenient to purchase what you're looking for rather than spend hours searching online, and dealing with crappy quality and users that disconnect on you.
A) Buying a copy of a song on iTunes with a mediocre bitrate, many limits, and incompatible with most players, or
iPods are "most players". For the rest, most use WMA instead of AAC, so you can get the songs you want from Wal-Mart or Napster or some other store.
DRM drives people to piracy, it doesn't prevent it.
Depends on how much of a pain it is, and if the media in question is your only option for purchase. i.e. if you don't like 128 bit AAC and want to play songs on your iRiver, you can buy a physical cd or a track from a different online store. If you want to buy one of the Batman movies on DVD, you are stuck with whatever Time Warner offers you.
I know that FAT is a sucky file system, but at least it can be read by Mac OS X.
So can Mac's, since at least Panther. Write support is another matter, so I would recommend having a Fat32 partition so you can move files back to Windows.
You've been able to do that for years with a bluetooth capable Powerbook and a bluetooth pda or phone that can run Salling Clicker so you can use it as a remote. Powerbooks can run with the lid closed, and if you had a bluetooth headset you wouldn't have to worry about cords, either. Dunno about heat and battery life issues, though. My aunt's Crapaq Presario would get so hot in the bag that I was tempted to try cooking brownies in it once.
Maybe up North or out on the West Coast, but it won't happen in the Texas or Florida. Arkansas or LA won't either. Why? Think about why people need them. My mom has always had something that can haul 4+ kids and their stuff. You must be single or without any kids. Ask your mom if she and your dad would have gone on vacation or just run around town with your siblings in a compact or subcompact car or SUV if given a choice. My wife drives a Tarus and it just barely works. The truck is large for a car, but it doesn't work for elementary school kid's backpacks or sports equipment. I'd love a sub compact car myself, but I can't afford a car. I'm riding around after my last piece of crap car stopped working and took up a paycheck looking at it but not fixing it. You seem to think that I have money to afford a sub compact car for a daily commute, a truck for the times that we need to move stuff (which happens atleast once a month), and a passager vehicle for moving a family around. I'd have to get a truck rather than a compact car just because I would lose a function that I will need some time if I go another route. You may be able to rent a vehicle for a given trip, but I can't so I'd need that piece of crap 6+ year old used truck some one else has to get rid of because that's all that I can afford. If you really want to help the environment, make selling used cars illegal in your state. Almost any new vehicle would be better than the class of vehicles that I can afford that are all used and atleast 6-7 years old.
When you're speaking in a representative capacity for your employer, your employer has the right, actually the responsibility, to make demands of you.
But Bush insn't their employer. The American taxpayer is. And I find it disturbing that you don't find it disturbing that the opinions of a public official working at a public agency set up by Congress is being censored by a highly partisan administration.
I ask because most Republican pundits and politicians seem utterly incapable of making an argument without dipping into the pot of logical fallacies, in your case the red herring. Obviously, Earth's climate has undergone radical changes in the past. The problem of global warming today is that the aforementioned 99.9% of scientists agree that yes, it is happening, and becuase of human actions. So whatever happens on Mars is bat-shit irrelevant to what's happening here.
Games that are released simultaniously (or nearly so) will do just fine - i.e. most id and Blizzard games. What this will kill, however, is shipping a title for the Mac at $50 when a year and a half after the PC version was released, which is currently in the bargin bin for $20.
because the telcos arn't getting their cut of profit for the fiber THEY layed.
...layed across OUR land with NO compensation to us with the aid of eminent domain, you ignorant boob. If the telecos whine about this, then fine, cities and other entities that use their networks as common carriers can pay more. But if we do that, then we also start charging telecos a great deal of rent for running their wires over our property.
How about flying 400 feet over your own, private property, using a police helecopter, to peer in the skylight of your greenhouse, without a warrant? Thanks to FleaPlus for the link.
Thanks for the link. People (including myself) like to complain about the Bush Administration eroding people's rights, but I think the real worry is that the Supreme Court has been rubber-stamping even the most brazen of police tactics for decades.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple gets so much attention, publicity & free defense from the bloggers.
But contrary to conventional wisdom, all publicity is not good publicity, especially when said bloggers get it wrong. Before the iPod Mini was released, all kinds of rumors were flying around: that it would have wireless, or six gigs of storage, and cost $150. Of course, what was released was considerably less than that, so the reaction was rather...underwhelming.
Mind you, that's still illegal. First sale does not apply here.
No, it's not, and yes, it does.
Your license only was valid for the Dell computer the OEM Windows was bundled with.
Which would be great, if we were licensing the software and making contractual agreements with the vendor on its use. And while volume purchasers may make those agreements, Joe Smoe buying a Dell from Worst Buy does not, making any license restrictions beyond basic copyright protections null and void.
Another poster had the EULA issue well summarized here.
Well the reason I hear most is cost. Apple cost more to buy
Generally. However, a Windows box can cost far more to service. A couple of Sasser worms can easily wipe out your initial cost savings by going with PC's. Get another couple bad worms or viruses, and Macs start to look like a pretty good investment.
more to repair, and more to upgrade.
Did you just step out of a time capsule from 1990? Macs have used PCI, ATA, VGA, upgradable processors and standard memory for over 10 years now. True, the processor upgrades were very pricey, but the move to Intel should take care of that issue.
I could argue this with you all day, but most people do not need or want the Mac OS. It isn't just a cost issue. This is especially true at most corporations who have a ton of specialty programs that work in Windows and will never work on a Mac. They have no use for the Mac OS, so why do they care if Dell and/or HP cannot offer it to them.
Of course they don't want it: Windows viruses, piss poor user security, service pack upgrade nightmares and spyware issues are what keep most of their IT departments employed.
But have you seen what passes for "journalism" these days?
I don't. Pass it, I mean. I wouldn't call most of the talking heads on CNN "journalists", and certainally none at Fox.
Just get Cygwin and use bash.
Vista is not ripped from Apple. It implements a few features, but most people take a look a SCREENSHOTS and cry that they're stealing from Apple. The interfaces look nothing a like. Microsoft has only tried to make it more "stylish" as that seems to be the thing these days. You can't say that by trying to make an attractive UI they're copying Apple.
You sure about that?
So while Sweden's population density is lower than the US, it's not lower by much, but the area of the US (which is going to add to the cost of rolling out a network very quickly) is 20 times that of Sweden.
Which would explain why you get crappy reception out in Bumfuck, Nowhere, but not why reception is bad even in large, metropolitan areas.
For starters, cell phone usage is cheaper in the US.
No, it's not. While the advertized rate may be cheaper than your plan, every cell company that I've seen in the U.S. has so many fees that your $40 a month plan starts to look more like $50 when you pay your bill.
And don't forget the ludicrously high cost of phones if you don't sign up for their two year agreements. They seem to have the same business model as Nike: make your product cheap in Asia, then ship it over here and increase the price by at least 1,000%. And even if you do buy your own phone, it's a real pain to switch carriers.
Somewhere, something went very wrong inside that organization, their mission changed from being the electronic and radio equivalent of the Parks Service, to a division of Internal Revenue.
Not really. The airwaves are public property, so I would I would certainally hope that big money corporations would have to pay for the exclusive right to use them. In fact, sometimes they don't worry about money *enough*, and give away huge swaths of bandwidth for free.
No, the problem is that the FCC, much like the rest of the government, is less interested in the well being of the public, and much more interested in being corporate whores and moral busybodies.
You make the same mistake as all the other slashbots, by framing the actions of others in what you think to be true.
And you don't?
People, as a rule, will take anything not nailed down. This is why people download stuff. Not because it's "more versatile," which doesn't even register for most people, but because they can get it for $0. Zero Dollars. Free.
It's only free if your time is worthless. That's why it's not about "free", it's about convenience. Sometimes it is more convenient to download a movie or cd than to buy it in the store. I am reminded of this every time I am seduced by the bargin bin at Wal-Mart and then have to spend five minutes getting all the plastic tape off the boxes. But as more online stores emerge, it's becomming more convenient to purchase what you're looking for rather than spend hours searching online, and dealing with crappy quality and users that disconnect on you.
A) Buying a copy of a song on iTunes with a mediocre bitrate, many limits, and incompatible with most players, or
iPods are "most players". For the rest, most use WMA instead of AAC, so you can get the songs you want from Wal-Mart or Napster or some other store.
DRM drives people to piracy, it doesn't prevent it.
Depends on how much of a pain it is, and if the media in question is your only option for purchase. i.e. if you don't like 128 bit AAC and want to play songs on your iRiver, you can buy a physical cd or a track from a different online store. If you want to buy one of the Batman movies on DVD, you are stuck with whatever Time Warner offers you.
Would be nice if it were variable, but that helps. thx
My PC is currently down, so I'm not sure if this particular trick/feature works with any other platform or software
NVDVD (Nvidia) does the same thing. What I don't like about Apple's DVD Player is that you're limited to searching at 4x.
I know that FAT is a sucky file system, but at least it can be read by Mac OS X.
So can Mac's, since at least Panther. Write support is another matter, so I would recommend having a Fat32 partition so you can move files back to Windows.
You've been able to do that for years with a bluetooth capable Powerbook and a bluetooth pda or phone that can run Salling Clicker so you can use it as a remote. Powerbooks can run with the lid closed, and if you had a bluetooth headset you wouldn't have to worry about cords, either. Dunno about heat and battery life issues, though. My aunt's Crapaq Presario would get so hot in the bag that I was tempted to try cooking brownies in it once.
To the people who are looking at Windows Vista and saying it's the same as OSX based on visuals...well you must be mac users.
Oh?
Sounds more like the problem is that said company has a monopoly on broadband.
Maybe up North or out on the West Coast, but it won't happen in the Texas or Florida. Arkansas or LA won't either. Why? Think about why people need them. My mom has always had something that can haul 4+ kids and their stuff. You must be single or without any kids. Ask your mom if she and your dad would have gone on vacation or just run around town with your siblings in a compact or subcompact car or SUV if given a choice. My wife drives a Tarus and it just barely works. The truck is large for a car, but it doesn't work for elementary school kid's backpacks or sports equipment. I'd love a sub compact car myself, but I can't afford a car. I'm riding around after my last piece of crap car stopped working and took up a paycheck looking at it but not fixing it. You seem to think that I have money to afford a sub compact car for a daily commute, a truck for the times that we need to move stuff (which happens atleast once a month), and a passager vehicle for moving a family around. I'd have to get a truck rather than a compact car just because I would lose a function that I will need some time if I go another route. You may be able to rent a vehicle for a given trip, but I can't so I'd need that piece of crap 6+ year old used truck some one else has to get rid of because that's all that I can afford. If you really want to help the environment, make selling used cars illegal in your state. Almost any new vehicle would be better than the class of vehicles that I can afford that are all used and atleast 6-7 years old.
One word: Minivan.
When you're speaking in a representative capacity for your employer, your employer has the right, actually the responsibility, to make demands of you.
But Bush insn't their employer. The American taxpayer is. And I find it disturbing that you don't find it disturbing that the opinions of a public official working at a public agency set up by Congress is being censored by a highly partisan administration.
I ask because most Republican pundits and politicians seem utterly incapable of making an argument without dipping into the pot of logical fallacies, in your case the red herring. Obviously, Earth's climate has undergone radical changes in the past. The problem of global warming today is that the aforementioned 99.9% of scientists agree that yes, it is happening, and becuase of human actions. So whatever happens on Mars is bat-shit irrelevant to what's happening here.
Careful, by saying this you are saying that you want the government to decide for you where is the right and wrong place to shop.
How does restrictions on *Wal-Mart* directly deciding where you, personally, shop?
And morons will get just what they deserve in the end, don't be one of them.
You might not have any choice if they drag you down with them.
Games that are released simultaniously (or nearly so) will do just fine - i.e. most id and Blizzard games. What this will kill, however, is shipping a title for the Mac at $50 when a year and a half after the PC version was released, which is currently in the bargin bin for $20.
...layed across OUR land with NO compensation to us with the aid of eminent domain, you ignorant boob. If the telecos whine about this, then fine, cities and other entities that use their networks as common carriers can pay more. But if we do that, then we also start charging telecos a great deal of rent for running their wires over our property.
How about flying 400 feet over your own, private property, using a police helecopter, to peer in the skylight of your greenhouse, without a warrant? Thanks to FleaPlus for the link.
Thanks for the link. People (including myself) like to complain about the Bush Administration eroding people's rights, but I think the real worry is that the Supreme Court has been rubber-stamping even the most brazen of police tactics for decades.