Do you know anyone with Google Voice? I noticed in the last day or so it suddenly said I had 3 invites..(!) Hadn't seen that mentioned anywhere, but have been (figuratively) under a rock the last few weeks.
It is amazing how developers seem to assume low PC sales automatically equals piracy. The thought that people may have decided to NOT buy it, or maybe picked up a used copy for a console or something (Which they see no money from) as a protest, never seems to cross anyone's mind.
How can you vote with your wallet when it's assumed you must be stealing if you do?
Pretty much EVERY NiMH rechargable battery runs at 1.2V. It's just the nature of the beast. Given the way alkaline batteries slowly discharge it is really quite comparale. (Alkaline usually just run at 1.5V and drop off pretty quickly to 1.2V or lower. NiMH run much more consistently at 1.2V until just before they die.) This is part of the reason battery indicators are so wonky with NiMH rechargables, they don't follow the same trend lines alkalines do.
I've never really heard of this voltage difference causing any problems in electronics, and I've been using NiMH rechargeables for anything battery operated (Except remote controls due to much longer life with alkaline) for many years now... don't use them for battery operated fans or something.
One of the original articles (not my blog) about this shows it making a link to 2o7.net. That's what I was referring to.
I agree that a lot of what happened yesterday was overreaction, but at the same time, I think companies need to make sure they're being open about what they're collecting. Yesterday, we didn't know anything, and some people raised the alarm that this was happening. It got a lot of attention and some people flipped out instead of just getting Apple to comment. Unfortunately, unless there's a big overreaction, most companies will ignore you (see Sony). How does the average end user contact someone at Apple in the know (not just a support-droid with a flowchart of scripted answers) to get a straight answer?
They said they were sending information to "the music store". To me, that means apple.com. Not a third party. How does 2o7.net (or whoever was collecting the info) come into play? I guess you could argue they allow for 3rd party info in the EULA but that is not the same as saying "Hey, this cool new feature works by sending your info out to this other company". I haven't seen Apple acknowledge that explicitly in a location where a normal user (i.e., someone not digging through the Apple knowledgebase for some archaic article) would see it.
I'm not trolling. And this is not the worst privacy issue in the history of man. But I think Apple should've been much more up front. How do you answer the criticism that Apple specifically includes Gracenote info in the EULA but not the ministore? They could've avoided a LOT of criticism by being up front. Maybe someone just screwed up and forgot to update something, but in an era where a lot of companies are doing a lot of questionable things, I think it's good when there is public pressure when something questionable pops up.
I can't help but think if this were ANY OTHER COMPANY than Apple, that the reaction would be universal condemnation.
Imagine if Sony's Connect player was upgraded and did this kind of thing, by default, and didn't mention a word about it? There would've been plans made to burn the CEOs at the stake and public bulldozings of Sony equipment. Of course, no one cares about Sony Connect so maybe that wasn't the best example.
The fact is, Apple is a corporation. They don't care about you. They don't come over and feed your pets when you're on vacation. They're in business to make money. By having these 'related artists', it might feed iTunes sales. And they slipped a feature in that phones home (actually, phones a third party) without being explicit about what is going on. Sure, it could be innocuous (and appears-- TODAY-- to be semi-innocuous) but no one knew yesterday except a mysterious connection was being made with no explanation.
As for everyone saying "When you buy something they can track your habits" -- of course they can. That's expected. What's not expected is a third party IP address obtaining information just as you're playing music with no explanation of what they're getting. Apple COULD HAVE been sending ANYTHING to them. That company could have been doing ANYTHING with that. It wasn't explicit.
Either way, they blew it and they got called on it. This is a privacy issue. Don't let your fanboy-ism get in the way of seeing that. The public reaction was a GOOD thing.
Yep, I had my alarm set for 5:30 (and was hoping to sleep a bit later since I haven't gotten a lot of sleep in the last few days) but the booms woke me up. At first I had no idea what was going on (upstairs neighbours dropping bowling balls?) but remembered the shuttle was possibly coming in here. I got up, watched the landing, was happy they're home safe, and am now at work trying to figure out how to get a nap to make up for my 30-60 minutes of lost sleep thanks to NASA.;) Or I'll just go home early before I fall asleep at the keyboard.
Does anyone in LA remember them coming in this early before? I can't remember being woken up by a shuttle before. Of course, I got an email from my dad, who normally wakes up if a feather drops on the floor 2 rooms away, saying he didn't hear it and slept right through the landing (he's normally up really early anyway)
I haven't seen anyone comment on the possibility that this will be the end of Amazon's "free super saver shipping." They'll yell for a few months about what a great deal this is. Everyone will moan that all you have to do is spend $25 and it's truly "free".
So Amazon pulls free shipping entirely, leaving you the option of $5+ per order, or $80/year.
It's brilliant, really, unless consumer backlash is worse than they're prepared for.
(I will say Best Buy ending their free shipping pretty much put an end to me ordering from them...) [oops, does that make me a Devil Geek, admitting shopping at both BB and Amazon?]
My work is being asked to join into a Microsoft Campus Agreement, that part of it does include a "bundled" Office + Windows OS license package. And you're stuck getting a bunch of CALs you may or may not need as part of that as well.
Needless to say, I'm not jumping onto it.... I don't want to have my department absolutely locked into MS products (or, at least PAYING for MS products) for 4 years with no way out. But a lot of people on campus ARE buying in, because it "saves a lot of money" without realising what they're getting drawn into.
As everyone else is saying, look at his track record. His cases seem to be presented with questionable tactics, not fully exploring the ramifications of what he is arguing for, and attacking the case on one tiny point, missing a bigger picture. I remember reading a lot about his work for Gore, that he was so focused on certain demands in the case that he missed arguing for other things he could have won. For the Microsoft case, he was obsessed with the browser issue, missing many points related to Microsoft's behaviour in the bigger picture.
For such a hugely hyped lawyer, he manages to make swiss cheese of the most open-and-shut cases. Now if they had hired Johnny Cochran, I'd be concerned...
The firewire ports and silicon tuner were a disaster for ATI-- many, many people had huge incompatibilities from slight instability to system wouldn't even boot properly. (self included, I gave up on the card and got the AIW 8500 128mb instead). Check the forums at Rage3D. I totally agree this card SHOULD have all that but until ATI can make the hardware work, it's best to leave it off.
Let me start this by saying I have paid for a LOT of shareware, probably more than the average PC user. But with that said, what really irks me is when I download some shareware, and some crucial feature is disabled, then I buy it, and it turns out that crucial feature doesn't work right.
Case in point: I need to find a quick and dirty MPEG editor to edit commercials before I burn TV shows to Video CD. (who needs a VCR?:) I read lots of great stuff about the Womble MPEG editor. I tried a trial-- the "save" feature was disabled, but it seemed to do everything I needed. So I paid for it.
Turns out, the program doesn't correctly save the MPEG files I create. It either creates non-standard MPEG files (That won't work as a VideoCD), or just crashes. I have contacted the company numerous times for either support or a refund, and I have gotten no response.
The point of this is not a flame on them, but it's an indication of what's wrong with Shareware in general-- I paid $50 for a program that doesn't work properly. I have no recourse. I can't take it back to the store, I don't even know if I can contest the charge (as they register you through a 3rd party). And now it just sits on my hard drive, doing nothing, a testament to a bad program.
Shareware developers need to make sure that they provide an accurate trial period (to show what the software can "really" do) and then follow up with good support, if needed. The $50 isn't much now, but it's one of those things that I will remember next time it's time to pay for some crippled shareware that I am not 100% sure will work properly.
(just so I'm not seen as only flaming this company, I'd like to say that the purchase of GetRight, FilePeek, Super NoteTab, etc, has more than made up for this!:)
Slashdot Mirror
Do you know anyone with Google Voice? I noticed in the last day or so it suddenly said I had 3 invites..(!) Hadn't seen that mentioned anywhere, but have been (figuratively) under a rock the last few weeks.
It is amazing how developers seem to assume low PC sales automatically equals piracy. The thought that people may have decided to NOT buy it, or maybe picked up a used copy for a console or something (Which they see no money from) as a protest, never seems to cross anyone's mind.
How can you vote with your wallet when it's assumed you must be stealing if you do?
Pretty much EVERY NiMH rechargable battery runs at 1.2V. It's just the nature of the beast. Given the way alkaline batteries slowly discharge it is really quite comparale. (Alkaline usually just run at 1.5V and drop off pretty quickly to 1.2V or lower. NiMH run much more consistently at 1.2V until just before they die.) This is part of the reason battery indicators are so wonky with NiMH rechargables, they don't follow the same trend lines alkalines do.
I've never really heard of this voltage difference causing any problems in electronics, and I've been using NiMH rechargeables for anything battery operated (Except remote controls due to much longer life with alkaline) for many years now... don't use them for battery operated fans or something.
One of the original articles (not my blog) about this shows it making a link to 2o7.net. That's what I was referring to. I agree that a lot of what happened yesterday was overreaction, but at the same time, I think companies need to make sure they're being open about what they're collecting. Yesterday, we didn't know anything, and some people raised the alarm that this was happening. It got a lot of attention and some people flipped out instead of just getting Apple to comment. Unfortunately, unless there's a big overreaction, most companies will ignore you (see Sony). How does the average end user contact someone at Apple in the know (not just a support-droid with a flowchart of scripted answers) to get a straight answer?
They said they were sending information to "the music store". To me, that means apple.com. Not a third party. How does 2o7.net (or whoever was collecting the info) come into play? I guess you could argue they allow for 3rd party info in the EULA but that is not the same as saying "Hey, this cool new feature works by sending your info out to this other company". I haven't seen Apple acknowledge that explicitly in a location where a normal user (i.e., someone not digging through the Apple knowledgebase for some archaic article) would see it.
I'm not trolling. And this is not the worst privacy issue in the history of man. But I think Apple should've been much more up front. How do you answer the criticism that Apple specifically includes Gracenote info in the EULA but not the ministore? They could've avoided a LOT of criticism by being up front. Maybe someone just screwed up and forgot to update something, but in an era where a lot of companies are doing a lot of questionable things, I think it's good when there is public pressure when something questionable pops up.
This is Slashdot. Do you think that'll EVER happen???
I can't help but think if this were ANY OTHER COMPANY than Apple, that the reaction would be universal condemnation.
Imagine if Sony's Connect player was upgraded and did this kind of thing, by default, and didn't mention a word about it? There would've been plans made to burn the CEOs at the stake and public bulldozings of Sony equipment. Of course, no one cares about Sony Connect so maybe that wasn't the best example.
The fact is, Apple is a corporation. They don't care about you. They don't come over and feed your pets when you're on vacation. They're in business to make money. By having these 'related artists', it might feed iTunes sales. And they slipped a feature in that phones home (actually, phones a third party) without being explicit about what is going on. Sure, it could be innocuous (and appears-- TODAY-- to be semi-innocuous) but no one knew yesterday except a mysterious connection was being made with no explanation.
As for everyone saying "When you buy something they can track your habits" -- of course they can. That's expected. What's not expected is a third party IP address obtaining information just as you're playing music with no explanation of what they're getting. Apple COULD HAVE been sending ANYTHING to them. That company could have been doing ANYTHING with that. It wasn't explicit.
Either way, they blew it and they got called on it. This is a privacy issue. Don't let your fanboy-ism get in the way of seeing that. The public reaction was a GOOD thing.
Yep, I had my alarm set for 5:30 (and was hoping to sleep a bit later since I haven't gotten a lot of sleep in the last few days) but the booms woke me up. At first I had no idea what was going on (upstairs neighbours dropping bowling balls?) but remembered the shuttle was possibly coming in here. I got up, watched the landing, was happy they're home safe, and am now at work trying to figure out how to get a nap to make up for my 30-60 minutes of lost sleep thanks to NASA. ;) Or I'll just go home early before I fall asleep at the keyboard.
Does anyone in LA remember them coming in this early before? I can't remember being woken up by a shuttle before. Of course, I got an email from my dad, who normally wakes up if a feather drops on the floor 2 rooms away, saying he didn't hear it and slept right through the landing (he's normally up really early anyway)
[seriously, great job, glad they're home safe!]
I haven't seen anyone comment on the possibility that this will be the end of Amazon's "free super saver shipping." They'll yell for a few months about what a great deal this is. Everyone will moan that all you have to do is spend $25 and it's truly "free".
So Amazon pulls free shipping entirely, leaving you the option of $5+ per order, or $80/year.
It's brilliant, really, unless consumer backlash is worse than they're prepared for.
(I will say Best Buy ending their free shipping pretty much put an end to me ordering from them...) [oops, does that make me a Devil Geek, admitting shopping at both BB and Amazon?]
It's an odd-numbered Tuesday of an even numbered month.
We like Apple, Sony, and daisies today. Next Friday is when security through obscurity goes out of vogue.
My work is being asked to join into a Microsoft Campus Agreement, that part of it does include a "bundled" Office + Windows OS license package. And you're stuck getting a bunch of CALs you may or may not need as part of that as well.
Needless to say, I'm not jumping onto it.... I don't want to have my department absolutely locked into MS products (or, at least PAYING for MS products) for 4 years with no way out. But a lot of people on campus ARE buying in, because it "saves a lot of money" without realising what they're getting drawn into.
As everyone else is saying, look at his track record. His cases seem to be presented with questionable tactics, not fully exploring the ramifications of what he is arguing for, and attacking the case on one tiny point, missing a bigger picture. I remember reading a lot about his work for Gore, that he was so focused on certain demands in the case that he missed arguing for other things he could have won. For the Microsoft case, he was obsessed with the browser issue, missing many points related to Microsoft's behaviour in the bigger picture.
For such a hugely hyped lawyer, he manages to make swiss cheese of the most open-and-shut cases. Now if they had hired Johnny Cochran, I'd be concerned...
The firewire ports and silicon tuner were a disaster for ATI-- many, many people had huge incompatibilities from slight instability to system wouldn't even boot properly. (self included, I gave up on the card and got the AIW 8500 128mb instead). Check the forums at Rage3D. I totally agree this card SHOULD have all that but until ATI can make the hardware work, it's best to leave it off.
Let me start this by saying I have paid for a LOT of shareware, probably more than the average PC user. But with that said, what really irks me is when I download some shareware, and some crucial feature is disabled, then I buy it, and it turns out that crucial feature doesn't work right.
:) I read lots of great stuff about the Womble MPEG editor. I tried a trial-- the "save" feature was disabled, but it seemed to do everything I needed. So I paid for it.
:)
Case in point: I need to find a quick and dirty MPEG editor to edit commercials before I burn TV shows to Video CD. (who needs a VCR?
Turns out, the program doesn't correctly save the MPEG files I create. It either creates non-standard MPEG files (That won't work as a VideoCD), or just crashes. I have contacted the company numerous times for either support or a refund, and I have gotten no response.
The point of this is not a flame on them, but it's an indication of what's wrong with Shareware in general-- I paid $50 for a program that doesn't work properly. I have no recourse. I can't take it back to the store, I don't even know if I can contest the charge (as they register you through a 3rd party). And now it just sits on my hard drive, doing nothing, a testament to a bad program.
Shareware developers need to make sure that they provide an accurate trial period (to show what the software can "really" do) and then follow up with good support, if needed. The $50 isn't much now, but it's one of those things that I will remember next time it's time to pay for some crippled shareware that I am not 100% sure will work properly.
(just so I'm not seen as only flaming this company, I'd like to say that the purchase of GetRight, FilePeek, Super NoteTab, etc, has more than made up for this!