Unless LCD Projector fans have gotten extremely quiet over the past couple of years, I doubt the noise emanating from a Shuttle SFF PC would be your biggest noise producer.
Having used a Shuttle in my stereo cabinet before, however, _any_ device with a fan will generate annoying sound levels in an otherwise silent room.
You're better off looking at a passively cooled PC or something using liquid cooling. Even the relatively quiet Shuttle won't cut it in a home theater room. But then again, either will the noisy fan from an LCD projector.
And unless you're going to completely black out the room, you probably shouldn't consider an LCD projector, because any ambient light will ultimately reduce the picture quality coming from the projector.
Now people have something to shorten the life span of their expensive Plasma displays... I think it would be cheaper to just to buy a few art prints (cheaper and higher resolution too) and rotate them every few months. Of course, the expensive "I've got way too much time on my hands" coolness factor would be diminished somewhat.
But, is the punishment fitting for the crime? What punishment will the CEOs/CFOs of Enrons, Worldcoms, etc. get compared to this misguided fool? Sure this Phillies fan sent out tons of spam, but unlike Ken Lay, he didn't bilk people out of billions of dollars.
Interesting, but the change would still allow users prior to version 4.0.2 (imaginary versioning, I assume - I'm not a mac user) to sell his copy, since he purchased the song under the previous agreement.
IANAL, but unless there's a clause that allows future licenses to supercede older licenses by Apple, I don't see how a new license can stop older purchases from being resold, which isn't trivial, considering how many hundreds of thousands of songs have been sold to date.
Yes, this is very true. If you edit a lot of home movies in a non-linear editor, this could be very handy for "scrubbing" your videos. I bought a USB metal knob (powermate) for this, but i'd be much happier if I didn't have to take my hands off the mouse to do scrubbing. A knob is really good for an enthusiast, but I see a lot of value in the tilting wheel for an occasional video editing dabbler like myself.
I do think it may take longer for a tilting wheel to become as ubiquitous as the original wheel (the wheel was somewhat revolutionary, the tilt is only evolutionary, in my mind)
Unless the answer to all three of the above is "yes,' I'll be sticking with what I have now, thanks.
Somehow I don't think that DIN unit targets the type of person who would create an "Inspector Gadget" van like yours. Gotta admit, it was entertaining to see a wiring panel in the back of a van. It's as though your van came straight out of the movie Sneakers!
Or just use something like ViaVoice for input and some text-to-speech program for output. Nobody said that this PC had to be used in the same fashion as a PC on your desk. When you're actually driving, looking at the screen is a detriment anyways. Sure, listening to a voice (i.e. your pc, significant other, mother in-law) is still a distraction, but at least your eyes will still be on the road.
Every point and counterpoint for and against Mac mentioned in your post has been put forth hundreds of times here on slashdot.
Do you really think you're doing Mac users (or/. users, for that matter) a service with your overlong, insecure and defensive (and somewhat redundant) rebuttal? You're just galvanizing the opinion held by many that while Macs are cool, die-hard Mac users are not.
I like and respect Apple and their products, but every time I see a post like that, I feel like bashing Apple, Mac and all of the faithful.
There is more to who you are than the computer you own. Go outside and enjoy some sunshine.
But the greed here is incredible. Where do people get this notion that they have a legally enforceable right to make a profit off a bad business model?
The dot-com boom probably provided some inspiration.
The screen shots of Scribus are impressive, but why is that every time I see a Linux app's screenshots, that the screen fonts just look amateurish? They just strike me as looking like Apple IIgs screen shots.
Mac screenshots always seem to look the most polished (no, I'm not a Mac user), partly because of the timeless elegance of fonts like Chicago, Charcoal and whatever their font du jour is today. I even have to admit that even post-2K Windows screenshots look half decent.
I know that Linux is skinnable, but why does it seem like all the linux developers choose screen fonts that will make their applications less polished? Of course, if you click through the link to see the Red Hat 8 + Keramic shots of Scribus, you'll see MUCH better looking screens. The bottom line -- you only get one chance to make a good first impression -- so why not have the better looking shots on the main page?
Yes, Virginia, grammar is important. Maybe people should spend more time editing their posts.
This is the Internet, however, not the New Yorker. Slashdot posters come from all over the world. For many of them, English is not their first language.
If the point of the message comes across, be a bit more forgiving of the grammar. Slashdot is a community of global users, who happen to use English as a common language.
One cannot start a sentence with "for". If this alone was forgiveable, the comma after "month" delineates the meaning of the sentence. And for some reason, the author chose the parenthsize one of the benefits the users may get.
If starting a sentence with "for" is not a good thing, is starting a sentence with "and for" any better?
Remember, Slashdot, grammar is what separates us from the animals.
Stop being a grammar nazi. Few people can produce perfectly spelled posts without grammatical errors or style issues. I'm not one of them, and either are you.
You are kidding yourselves if you believe that an american company couldn't roll out a similar network.
They can. It will just cost three times as much (with one third going to lobbyists), take three times as long to complete, and have one-third the efficiency.
Look at how densely packed Japan is. Look at the huge expanses of empty land in the states.
Doing it here means wiring to every single family home. Doing it there means getting 1000 customers per apartment complex you hit.
While density is a totally legitimate point, I don't know if you can make that claim when an even larger country to the north of the USA, with only roughly 10% of the population seems to have broadband on par or cheaper than in the US. (I'm speaking of Canada, by the way).
Granted, people in rural Canada have the same bandwidth dearth that those in the "rural USA" (is there even such a thing?), but considering how Canada's "major cities" (even excluding Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal) probably have better access to cheaper broadband than cities of comparable size and density in the US, something tells me there is more at work than simply geography.
You can get a DSL line with 1.5 Mb/s down and 384k up for $60/month from the provider here (blacksburg - ntelos).
Sorry, but that's not cheap. In Canada, you would pay roughly $40 CDN for that level of service (depending on whether you go with the telco or a bit provider, who can actually give you a better deal). In USD, that's around 30USD. Even 3MB DSL, (around $70 CDN) is cheaper than the $60 US/Month you're talking about. Call us tightwads, but $60US for 1MB DSL is way, way, way expensive.
Um. It's a concept more than it is a saying. And the saying, taken literally is far from being the truth. The concept of "selling at a loss, and making it up in volume" doesn't hold in all economic scenarios. Adobe is selling software, not widgets.
That so-called saying assumes economies of scale (or market power). When you're dealing with many millions of dollars of development and marketing costs and a small and arguably tiny market (i.e. the Mac market) with stiff competition (from the likes of Apple no less), selling at a loss (i.e. $80 price point) in hopes of recouping profits later made from any economies of scale is just a pipe dream. Easy to do if you've got a monopoly (which Adobe Premiere does not), because you can price gouge once you own the market.
If Adobe sold Premiere at a loss to get market share against FCP, they'd just end up losing a pile of money in the long run.
Aside from the screenshots on the Adobe site, I haven't seen any reviews of it. Maybe it doesn't "suck" as much compared to FCP now...
Everyone's knocking Premiere 6.5 and earlier, but it is conceivable (maybe not likely) that with a focused development team on a single platform, Premiere could start catching up to FCP (in terms of product quality) over the next two years, considering that they also have a new code base.
This is a perspective from the outside looking in... I've been off the Mac bandwagon for 7 years.
It's both. Apple has strong application designers, programmers and marketers. Apple basically are the king sh!ts of packaging products. Hands down.
In most cases, they talk the talk and walk the walk (although the g5 performance hyperbole has me giggling).
Apple could easily take away customers from Quicken, Microsoft Office, Adobe or any other major 3rd party application by releasing a version of their own. Why? Because their products can stand up to criticial scrutiny, and because the loyalists want to support the Mother Ship.
That they've been selective about who to attack (i.e. FCP, Safari, Keynote) is a good thing. They've eliminated "reliance" on external companies to ensure a competitive edge on the platform.
Alienating too many 3rd party vendors, however, would hurt them in the long run.
The fact (or is that opinion?) that FCP is better than Adobe Premiere doesn't change the fact Premiere is still a competent video editing package. I've demo'd a lot of editing apps on Windoze, and I keep going back to Premiere.
On the other hand, maybe Adobe should be thanking Apple for buying FCP from Macromedia and keeping it only on the Mac. (My understanding is that Macromedia, had they kept the product, would have released Mac/Doze simultaneously.)
I wonder how Premiere would be doing if FCP was also available on Windows?
I doubt that the dropping of Premiere for the Mac market is going to hurt Adobe. I think it's been widely perceived among Mac users that Adobe has lost that war to FCP. What's wrong with Adobe acknowledging it themselves? It seems like a solid business decision to me.
And if I were Adobe, I'd consider dropping the Acrobat reader for the Mac too, considering the new one from Apple that's coming out in Panther. Seeing how they're not making money from the reader anyways, no point in throwing money into that either.
Maybe you shouldn't look at this as a knock against Adobe, but a compliment on Apple's software developers.
(No, I'm not an Apple shill -- I'm a Windoze user)
Why does everyone think that they constitute some giant demographic?
I hope that umbrella statement is also targeted at the Mac users and their 2% market share who think that it's a no brainer that everyone and his cousin will switch from 'doze, Linux, Solaris and any other OS with today's G5 announcement.
This is offtopic, but to respond, no... I'm not stupid. I'm just not an American, which means, of course, my understanding of the US government's workings is not as deep as yours.
It was only a hypothetical speculation based on news coverage I read in some opinion pieces in the American media. And if I recall correctly, the stuff I read speculated that a Bush, empowered by a second term, _could_ stack the Supreme court with another ultra-conservative to replace a potentially retiring judge. At that point, he'd try to do what the Reagan administration attempted, but failed to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless LCD Projector fans have gotten extremely quiet over the past couple of years, I doubt the noise emanating from a Shuttle SFF PC would be your biggest noise producer.
Having used a Shuttle in my stereo cabinet before, however, _any_ device with a fan will generate annoying sound levels in an otherwise silent room.
You're better off looking at a passively cooled PC or something using liquid cooling. Even the relatively quiet Shuttle won't cut it in a home theater room. But then again, either will the noisy fan from an LCD projector.
And unless you're going to completely black out the room, you probably shouldn't consider an LCD projector, because any ambient light will ultimately reduce the picture quality coming from the projector.
Now people have something to shorten the life span of their expensive Plasma displays... I think it would be cheaper to just to buy a few art prints (cheaper and higher resolution too) and rotate them every few months. Of course, the expensive "I've got way too much time on my hands" coolness factor would be diminished somewhat.
But, is the punishment fitting for the crime? What punishment will the CEOs/CFOs of Enrons, Worldcoms, etc. get compared to this misguided fool? Sure this Phillies fan sent out tons of spam, but unlike Ken Lay, he didn't bilk people out of billions of dollars.
Interesting, but the change would still allow users prior to version 4.0.2 (imaginary versioning, I assume - I'm not a mac user) to sell his copy, since he purchased the song under the previous agreement.
IANAL, but unless there's a clause that allows future licenses to supercede older licenses by Apple, I don't see how a new license can stop older purchases from being resold, which isn't trivial, considering how many hundreds of thousands of songs have been sold to date.
Yes, this is very true. If you edit a lot of home movies in a non-linear editor, this could be very handy for "scrubbing" your videos. I bought a USB metal knob (powermate) for this, but i'd be much happier if I didn't have to take my hands off the mouse to do scrubbing. A knob is really good for an enthusiast, but I see a lot of value in the tilting wheel for an occasional video editing dabbler like myself.
I do think it may take longer for a tilting wheel to become as ubiquitous as the original wheel (the wheel was somewhat revolutionary, the tilt is only evolutionary, in my mind)
Not as disappointed as me. I thought this thread was going to be about Jean Claude Van Damme's latest effort!
Unless the answer to all three of the above is "yes,' I'll be sticking with what I have now, thanks.
Somehow I don't think that DIN unit targets the type of person who would create an "Inspector Gadget" van like yours. Gotta admit, it was entertaining to see a wiring panel in the back of a van. It's as though your van came straight out of the movie Sneakers!
Or just use something like ViaVoice for input and some text-to-speech program for output. Nobody said that this PC had to be used in the same fashion as a PC on your desk. When you're actually driving, looking at the screen is a detriment anyways. Sure, listening to a voice (i.e. your pc, significant other, mother in-law) is still a distraction, but at least your eyes will still be on the road.
Every point and counterpoint for and against Mac mentioned in your post has been put forth hundreds of times here on slashdot.
/. users, for that matter) a service with your overlong, insecure and defensive (and somewhat redundant) rebuttal? You're just galvanizing the opinion held by many that while Macs are cool, die-hard Mac users are not.
Do you really think you're doing Mac users (or
I like and respect Apple and their products, but every time I see a post like that, I feel like bashing Apple, Mac and all of the faithful.
There is more to who you are than the computer you own. Go outside and enjoy some sunshine.
Don't some airlines charge double for extremely obese passengers?
But the greed here is incredible. Where do people get this notion that they have a legally enforceable right to make a profit off a bad business model?
The dot-com boom probably provided some inspiration.
The screen shots of Scribus are impressive, but why is that every time I see a Linux app's screenshots, that the screen fonts just look amateurish? They just strike me as looking like Apple IIgs screen shots.
Mac screenshots always seem to look the most polished (no, I'm not a Mac user), partly because of the timeless elegance of fonts like Chicago, Charcoal and whatever their font du jour is today. I even have to admit that even post-2K Windows screenshots look half decent.
I know that Linux is skinnable, but why does it seem like all the linux developers choose screen fonts that will make their applications less polished? Of course, if you click through the link to see the Red Hat 8 + Keramic shots of Scribus, you'll see MUCH better looking screens. The bottom line -- you only get one chance to make a good first impression -- so why not have the better looking shots on the main page?
Yes, Virginia, grammar is important. Maybe people should spend more time editing their posts.
This is the Internet, however, not the New Yorker. Slashdot posters come from all over the world. For many of them, English is not their first language.
If the point of the message comes across, be a bit more forgiving of the grammar. Slashdot is a community of global users, who happen to use English as a common language.
One cannot start a sentence with "for". If this alone was forgiveable, the comma after "month" delineates the meaning of the sentence. And for some reason, the author chose the parenthsize one of the benefits the users may get.
If starting a sentence with "for" is not a good thing, is starting a sentence with "and for" any better?
Remember, Slashdot, grammar is what separates us from the animals.
Stop being a grammar nazi. Few people can produce perfectly spelled posts without grammatical errors or style issues. I'm not one of them, and either are you.
You are kidding yourselves if you believe that an american company couldn't roll out a similar network.
They can. It will just cost three times as much (with one third going to lobbyists), take three times as long to complete, and have one-third the efficiency.
Geography.
Look at how densely packed Japan is. Look at the huge expanses of empty land in the states.
Doing it here means wiring to every single family home. Doing it there means getting 1000 customers per apartment complex you hit.
While density is a totally legitimate point, I don't know if you can make that claim when an even larger country to the north of the USA, with only roughly 10% of the population seems to have broadband on par or cheaper than in the US. (I'm speaking of Canada, by the way).
Granted, people in rural Canada have the same bandwidth dearth that those in the "rural USA" (is there even such a thing?), but considering how Canada's "major cities" (even excluding Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal) probably have better access to cheaper broadband than cities of comparable size and density in the US, something tells me there is more at work than simply geography.
You can get a DSL line with 1.5 Mb/s down and 384k up for $60/month from the provider here (blacksburg - ntelos).
Sorry, but that's not cheap. In Canada, you would pay roughly $40 CDN for that level of service (depending on whether you go with the telco or a bit provider, who can actually give you a better deal). In USD, that's around 30USD. Even 3MB DSL, (around $70 CDN) is cheaper than the $60 US/Month you're talking about. Call us tightwads, but $60US for 1MB DSL is way, way, way expensive.
Um. It's a concept more than it is a saying. And the saying, taken literally is far from being the truth. The concept of "selling at a loss, and making it up in volume" doesn't hold in all economic scenarios. Adobe is selling software, not widgets.
That so-called saying assumes economies of scale (or market power). When you're dealing with many millions of dollars of development and marketing costs and a small and arguably tiny market (i.e. the Mac market) with stiff competition (from the likes of Apple no less), selling at a loss (i.e. $80 price point) in hopes of recouping profits later made from any economies of scale is just a pipe dream. Easy to do if you've got a monopoly (which Adobe Premiere does not), because you can price gouge once you own the market.
If Adobe sold Premiere at a loss to get market share against FCP, they'd just end up losing a pile of money in the long run.
Has anyone even tried Premiere Pro?
Aside from the screenshots on the Adobe site, I haven't seen any reviews of it. Maybe it doesn't "suck" as much compared to FCP now...
Everyone's knocking Premiere 6.5 and earlier, but it is conceivable (maybe not likely) that with a focused development team on a single platform, Premiere could start catching up to FCP (in terms of product quality) over the next two years, considering that they also have a new code base.
This is a perspective from the outside looking in... I've been off the Mac bandwagon for 7 years.
It's both. Apple has strong application designers, programmers and marketers. Apple basically are the king sh!ts of packaging products. Hands down.
In most cases, they talk the talk and walk the walk (although the g5 performance hyperbole has me giggling).
Apple could easily take away customers from Quicken, Microsoft Office, Adobe or any other major 3rd party application by releasing a version of their own. Why? Because their products can stand up to criticial scrutiny, and because the loyalists want to support the Mother Ship.
That they've been selective about who to attack (i.e. FCP, Safari, Keynote) is a good thing. They've eliminated "reliance" on external companies to ensure a competitive edge on the platform.
Alienating too many 3rd party vendors, however, would hurt them in the long run.
The fact (or is that opinion?) that FCP is better than Adobe Premiere doesn't change the fact Premiere is still a competent video editing package. I've demo'd a lot of editing apps on Windoze, and I keep going back to Premiere.
On the other hand, maybe Adobe should be thanking Apple for buying FCP from Macromedia and keeping it only on the Mac. (My understanding is that Macromedia, had they kept the product, would have released Mac/Doze simultaneously.)
I wonder how Premiere would be doing if FCP was also available on Windows?
Um. you're wrong. By making up losses in volume, you just end up losing more. Do the math.
I think what you mean is "Well, we may be making pennies on every sale, but we'll make up for it in volume!"
I doubt that the dropping of Premiere for the Mac market is going to hurt Adobe. I think it's been widely perceived among Mac users that Adobe has lost that war to FCP. What's wrong with Adobe acknowledging it themselves? It seems like a solid business decision to me.
And if I were Adobe, I'd consider dropping the Acrobat reader for the Mac too, considering the new one from Apple that's coming out in Panther. Seeing how they're not making money from the reader anyways, no point in throwing money into that either.
Maybe you shouldn't look at this as a knock against Adobe, but a compliment on Apple's software developers.
(No, I'm not an Apple shill -- I'm a Windoze user)
That works out to $26 each.
In that case, I'd rather just pay $26 for the OS. Especially if I only have one Mac.
Why does everyone think that they constitute some giant demographic?
I hope that umbrella statement is also targeted at the Mac users and their 2% market share who think that it's a no brainer that everyone and his cousin will switch from 'doze, Linux, Solaris and any other OS with today's G5 announcement.
This is offtopic, but to respond, no... I'm not stupid. I'm just not an American, which means, of course, my understanding of the US government's workings is not as deep as yours.
It was only a hypothetical speculation based on news coverage I read in some opinion pieces in the American media. And if I recall correctly, the stuff I read speculated that a Bush, empowered by a second term, _could_ stack the Supreme court with another ultra-conservative to replace a potentially retiring judge. At that point, he'd try to do what the Reagan administration attempted, but failed to do.