I don't understand how you can get a laptop half the price that's 3-5 times faster? Looking at HP's site the HP NC8230 ranges from $1,879 for the 1.73GHz P-M, while the similarly equipped 1.5GHz G4 PowerBook is $1,999. You can get a $2,349 NC9230 that's a 2.0GHz P-M, vs the 1.67GHz G4 for $2,299... I suppose when you bought, the NC8230 were cheaper ($800 cheaper?) while the PowerBook was more expensive ($1,000 more expensive?)
I have a 400MHz G4 right now and I'm looking forward to the upgrade to a >GHz G4. You talk as if your Mac laptop didn't serve you well in three years; do you think that a 2GHz P-M will age more gracefully in three years than a similar 1.67GHz G4? I ask because, while it does feel a bit long in the tooth, my laptop is 4 years old now and only failing because the optical drive is bad.
What's the cheapest Dell machine that is currently virus-proof?
Or is silent (to the point of only having one fan for the CPU)?
Or can fit inside a casserole dish?
There are markets where your Dell isn't so great. The mini is not a two year disposable product; it will probably, given the life I've seen with my 400MHz PowerBook, be a 10 year product if you're a casual user, a 5 year product if you're a hardcore user.
So let's say you need to upgrade every 2 years. How much do you spend every two years? If it's more than $499, you've already 'broke the bank', as upgrading mini's every two years only takes $499. But if I'm right and it's closer to a 5 year product, the mini will win if you upgrade $100 a year.
You mean this right? That's like iTunes allowing you to keep five copies of your music on five computers.
I was talking about this where you can browse the library, playlists, and songs of another iTunes library within iTunes. Using built in Windows file sharing is not a feature of Napster; it is a feature of Windows. In which case you can argue any music library can be 'shared' by placing the library on a public share from which any client can see the songs, but not the playlists, the ratings, or the library.
The XBox is huge! The XBox is 32x10x25 The GameCube is 16x11x15
So it's slightly shorter, but you can fit two Cubes side by side in the volume of an XBox, and 3/5 the depth.
Put it another way: You can store the GameCube under the games, or place the XBox vertically, the XBox will have space for one game where the GameCube will have space for 10.
Your logic is like saying, "If you have room for a Mini Cooper, you have room for a Cadillac STS," just because the Cadillac is a third as long, just as high, and a third as wide as a Mini Cooper.
If you want a more practical consideration: It's like keeping a 36" TV in a bathroom 8' by 5'. A much smaller 13" TV would be more convenient by far.
Try reading. Apple is requiring use of 4.7, which has been out for five months. If Apple upgraded anything, it's the client authentication on the server.
Apple only releases updates to iTunes when they add features: The original iPod support iTunes Music Store support Sharing/streaming library support Party shuffle support iPod mini support Airtunes Express support iPod Photo support iPod Shuffle support
The original poster was talking about more money for Apple means more R&D, and then somehow someone brought up Microsoft, and then someone rebutted how little Microsoft research is worth and then another rebuttal on how much cool research Microsoft has and I brought up the point that Apple doesn't publish, they do.
I do believe usability is innovation. The difference between a rock and an ax is a matter of shaping the rock correctly, and you can get a 1000fold improvement in efficiency, and the only difference is the proper application of force to chip away flakes. That's a usability enhancement, AND it is innovation.
The continuous refinements of adding a metal blade to a plow, adding a moldboard to turn the earth, and finally polishing the blade to reduce friction were all tremendous innovations by reducing the amount of work, and therefore increasing the efficiency, a farmer had to do to till and sow his fields.
In the same way, I argue that Apple continuous refinements are also changing the way people work, not in leaps and bounds, but by making it easier to manage multiple windows, keep multiple programs open, search an increasing amount of data, access an increasing amount of data, and manage an increasing amount of data.
Just because a meta-data database exists (NTFS has had the capability, indexes have been around since Windows 95 I'm sure) doesn't mean anything if it isn't being used. Apple's innovation is to make the indexing happen during file writes, and not overnight schedules like Windows, to keep the index up to date. Additionally Apple is placing search APIs throughout the entire OS, and has placed a 'search' field directly into the Finder interface since OS X 10.2.
I use Microsoft Windows at work and my Mac at home, and you don't know how frustrating it is that my 1.8GHz PC has to search and grind for minutes what my Mac can find in seconds. This applies to just about everything that I do, from maintaining fifteen open windows, eight open applications, searching my mail, searching my desktop, searching the network, and searching my files.
Yes, nothing Apple is doing is revolutionary by themselves; it's only the combination of refinements in all aspects combined that a revolution occurs. Let the computer do the hard work it's good at (organnizing, indexing, and compiling) and let the human do the hard work he's good at (creating, editing, and doing).
You also harp on Dashboard. Yes, Apple should have given more credit to the Konfabulator people. However Apple also has had widgets since 1984 with the release of the original Mac. Of course they weren't called widgets and they didn't use Expose, and they were called Desktop Accessories, but Apple did invent them.
You also pan Automator: Full blown IDEs and programming environments have been around for years, just like before iTunes databases have been around for years, but like how Apple put a database into iTunes changed the way people are using gigabytes of music, Automator can change the way people program their computers. For most people programming is hard, and Automator is supposed to make it simpler.
If you had a shovel head, and I had one with a handle, a 'usability' change, wouldn't that be innovation?
So in the past 4 years Apple has added to it's 'usability' stable with: Quartz, a 3d accelerated windowing system, as realtime information feedback Expose, as a window management feature Meta-data database in iTunes as an information management feature Live search in iTunes, Mail, and Finder, as an information management feature Rendezvous, a p2p network discovery and configuration tool Firewire, a high speed data bus 802.11b/g, a high speed wireless networking component
In the next year they will add: Meta-data database in the OS as an information management feature Dashboard, though I don't know how 'revolutionary' it will be Automator, a pervasive scripting tool to access the pervasive scripting environment available for over 15 years
It almost seems you don't have a real idea of what 'innovation' is. What has Microsoft done that is innovative in the past 10 years? Windows Media Center? Windows Tablet PC? Windows PocketPC? Windows XP? XBox? Windows 2k? Windows NT? Windows ME? Windows 98?
Where is the correlation betwen research publications and research & development?
You seem to imply that lack of publications equates to lack of development, when it's quite visible that Apple has done a few neat things without publishing; instead they've been releasing products!
Several points: When has cheaper ever meant better? Cheaper, by definition, means cheaper. Do you like looking cheap? Being called cheap? Would you date someone cheap?
The iPod, as a non flash based player, has one advantages: Storage capacity Price
The iPod, as a non Creative part, has two advantages: UI Software
And then you ask, "What did Apple do to have such control...?" Some would answer 'marketing', and that's correct. Apple has adverts on TV and in print. The Practice had an episode two years ago where one lawyer said in court, "I would hate to live in a world where we are all plugged into iPods and ignoring each other. A little bit of noise is good sometimes."
Then you ask what the Shuffle does better: It's cheaper. $89 for 256mb from Creative or $99 for 512mb from Apple. It uses iTunes, which is free if you want to see why it's better than Creative Nomad Exlorer (or whatever they call it now).
Finally you ask, "Why do people act like Apple was the first people to make mp3 players?"
The answer is, Apple was the first to make a portable high capacity high usability mp3 player.
The Apple iPod did four great things when it was released that no one else had ever done: Make something the size of a pack of cigarettes that could store more than 256mb; it could store 5gb. The local competitor was the Creative Nomad, which was the size of a 4 CD box and weighed over a pound, and was far from portable. It used Firewire. Synching an iPod took less than 10 minutes to upload 5gb of music. The Creative Nomad, using USB, could upload 500mb in 10 minutes. It had a phenomenal UI, which could be used one handed. The Nomad, on the other hand, could not. It had a folder based UI display, and even today the Nomad 3 has 11 buttons on it's face to control it's UI. The iPod, still, only has five. It had phenomenal software, in iTunes. Not only could you upload 5gb of music, the software allowed you to manage many multiple gbs easily because it handled all the cataloging, database management, playlist generation, ripping, and encoding.
Imagine how powerful this is, and this is something Creative only gained this year but Apple has had for two or three: A playlist generator.
I want: Not country Songs played less than 4 times Songs not played in the last week
That's what Apple offered, in iTunes, that no one else had. iTunes ALSO offered (new at the time, I'm sure everyone has most of these now): Streaming shared online libraries. iTunes users can see and play each other's libraries Automatic tagging Streaming to wireless speakers (Airport Express) Automatic ripping Automatic synching Music search via ID3 tags Album art CD burning (remember 'Rip, Mix, Burn'?)
I think the MuVo works with iTunes; give it a shot!
The changes you talk about have nothing to do with DRM, per se, as much as iTunes functionality:
Burn limits: from 10 times per playlist to 7 times per playlist. You mean you will realistically hit a use wall because you're going to burn more than 7 copies of a playlist with protected music files on them? It isn't a limitation of burning the protected file, only a limitation on the number of times a playlist can be burned without modification.
Playing Real's files: while a pointless, useless, and unhelpful act, playing Real's files was never one of the capabilities the iPod supports. iPods play unprotected AAC (Real is not unprotected), iTMS AAC (Real is not an iTMS AAC), AIFF, MP3, etc. If Real wants to be on an iPod, Real can either use a supported format, or continue hacking to emulate iTMS AAC.
You should research the product more, because I'm not sure you have an accurate understanding of it.
iTunes already allows you to burn protected AAC to CD; and for the clever among the audience, many people have already figured out how to convert AAC to MP3 without actually burning a CD, either.
Feel free. iTunes has a big 'Burn' button that allows you to burn all your purchased songs onto CD. Or you can use an audio grabber, if you are so technically minded, to grab and convert directly without burning.
If everyone says, "Damn I should have waited" then the market never materializes, the profit incentive never kicks in, and competition never makes any decent products.
IE, the world decides the Creative Nomad is good enough, the iPod tanks, and no "equally good products" are ever produced.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand how you can get a laptop half the price that's 3-5 times faster? Looking at HP's site the HP NC8230 ranges from $1,879 for the 1.73GHz P-M, while the similarly equipped 1.5GHz G4 PowerBook is $1,999. You can get a $2,349 NC9230 that's a 2.0GHz P-M, vs the 1.67GHz G4 for $2,299... I suppose when you bought, the NC8230 were cheaper ($800 cheaper?) while the PowerBook was more expensive ($1,000 more expensive?)
I have a 400MHz G4 right now and I'm looking forward to the upgrade to a >GHz G4. You talk as if your Mac laptop didn't serve you well in three years; do you think that a 2GHz P-M will age more gracefully in three years than a similar 1.67GHz G4? I ask because, while it does feel a bit long in the tooth, my laptop is 4 years old now and only failing because the optical drive is bad.
So are you denying your ignorance, or admitting to your stupidity?
Your 5 button Logitech mouse works fine on a $499 Mac.
What's the cheapest Dell machine that is currently virus-proof?
Or is silent (to the point of only having one fan for the CPU)?
Or can fit inside a casserole dish?
There are markets where your Dell isn't so great. The mini is not a two year disposable product; it will probably, given the life I've seen with my 400MHz PowerBook, be a 10 year product if you're a casual user, a 5 year product if you're a hardcore user.
So let's say you need to upgrade every 2 years. How much do you spend every two years? If it's more than $499, you've already 'broke the bank', as upgrading mini's every two years only takes $499. But if I'm right and it's closer to a 5 year product, the mini will win if you upgrade $100 a year.
How about price per size? Or price per virus? Or price per decibel? Or price per watt?
There are measures of performance where the Dell doesn't win.
If performance == MHz, yes. If performance == size or noise or heat or usability, then no, you'd need to buy a signficantly more expensive Dell.
Yes, but the first time you had to register to read the article!
You mean this right? That's like iTunes allowing you to keep five copies of your music on five computers.
I was talking about this where you can browse the library, playlists, and songs of another iTunes library within iTunes. Using built in Windows file sharing is not a feature of Napster; it is a feature of Windows. In which case you can argue any music library can be 'shared' by placing the library on a public share from which any client can see the songs, but not the playlists, the ratings, or the library.
The XBox is huge!
The XBox is 32x10x25
The GameCube is 16x11x15
So it's slightly shorter, but you can fit two Cubes side by side in the volume of an XBox, and 3/5 the depth.
Put it another way: You can store the GameCube under the games, or place the XBox vertically, the XBox will have space for one game where the GameCube will have space for 10.
Your logic is like saying, "If you have room for a Mini Cooper, you have room for a Cadillac STS," just because the Cadillac is a third as long, just as high, and a third as wide as a Mini Cooper.
If you want a more practical consideration: It's like keeping a 36" TV in a bathroom 8' by 5'. A much smaller 13" TV would be more convenient by far.
No, as long as they are better than Microsoft.
You have N choices, and all but one suck; one sucks less.
What would you choose?
How many people can you share your library with on the Windows Media Player?
Or the Creative Mediasource? Maybe I am under a mistaken impression that iTunes was the only player that allowed you to share the library?
Mac mini
Then maybe it wasn't transparent! Which is even worse; consumers will accept DRM, if they are given no other choice!
Of course the RIAA has a problem; they DO have another choice, unprotected CDs or unprotected files on p2p networks.
What the RIAA has to do, to solve this, is 'induce' a new industry wide protected format, like say the UMD.
Yet DVDs were bought BEFORE they were trivially worked around.
You had to buy Japanese DVD players, or unlockable DVD players, to play Japanese DVDs, for example.
So the point still stands: People have proven, with DVDs, that DRM is acceptable as long as it is transparent.
That Jon 'DVD Jon' Johanson became famous for cracking that DRM?
So truthfully what you portray, even if you aren't saying it, is that you will accept any DRM you never notice.
Check it out. Do the DVDs you own have CSS?
You seem to fit your own criteria perfectly, of a consumer not adequately aware or informed of the DRM system implemented in DVDs!
Try reading. Apple is requiring use of 4.7, which has been out for five months. If Apple upgraded anything, it's the client authentication on the server.
Apple only releases updates to iTunes when they add features:
The original iPod support
iTunes Music Store support
Sharing/streaming library support
Party shuffle support
iPod mini support
Airtunes Express support
iPod Photo support
iPod Shuffle support
The original poster was talking about more money for Apple means more R&D, and then somehow someone brought up Microsoft, and then someone rebutted how little Microsoft research is worth and then another rebuttal on how much cool research Microsoft has and I brought up the point that Apple doesn't publish, they do.
I do believe usability is innovation. The difference between a rock and an ax is a matter of shaping the rock correctly, and you can get a 1000fold improvement in efficiency, and the only difference is the proper application of force to chip away flakes. That's a usability enhancement, AND it is innovation.
The continuous refinements of adding a metal blade to a plow, adding a moldboard to turn the earth, and finally polishing the blade to reduce friction were all tremendous innovations by reducing the amount of work, and therefore increasing the efficiency, a farmer had to do to till and sow his fields.
In the same way, I argue that Apple continuous refinements are also changing the way people work, not in leaps and bounds, but by making it easier to manage multiple windows, keep multiple programs open, search an increasing amount of data, access an increasing amount of data, and manage an increasing amount of data.
Just because a meta-data database exists (NTFS has had the capability, indexes have been around since Windows 95 I'm sure) doesn't mean anything if it isn't being used. Apple's innovation is to make the indexing happen during file writes, and not overnight schedules like Windows, to keep the index up to date. Additionally Apple is placing search APIs throughout the entire OS, and has placed a 'search' field directly into the Finder interface since OS X 10.2.
I use Microsoft Windows at work and my Mac at home, and you don't know how frustrating it is that my 1.8GHz PC has to search and grind for minutes what my Mac can find in seconds. This applies to just about everything that I do, from maintaining fifteen open windows, eight open applications, searching my mail, searching my desktop, searching the network, and searching my files.
Yes, nothing Apple is doing is revolutionary by themselves; it's only the combination of refinements in all aspects combined that a revolution occurs. Let the computer do the hard work it's good at (organnizing, indexing, and compiling) and let the human do the hard work he's good at (creating, editing, and doing).
You also harp on Dashboard. Yes, Apple should have given more credit to the Konfabulator people. However Apple also has had widgets since 1984 with the release of the original Mac. Of course they weren't called widgets and they didn't use Expose, and they were called Desktop Accessories, but Apple did invent them.
You also pan Automator: Full blown IDEs and programming environments have been around for years, just like before iTunes databases have been around for years, but like how Apple put a database into iTunes changed the way people are using gigabytes of music, Automator can change the way people program their computers. For most people programming is hard, and Automator is supposed to make it simpler.
What, usability isn't innovation?
If you had a shovel head, and I had one with a handle, a 'usability' change, wouldn't that be innovation?
So in the past 4 years Apple has added to it's 'usability' stable with:
Quartz, a 3d accelerated windowing system, as realtime information feedback
Expose, as a window management feature
Meta-data database in iTunes as an information management feature
Live search in iTunes, Mail, and Finder, as an information management feature
Rendezvous, a p2p network discovery and configuration tool
Firewire, a high speed data bus
802.11b/g, a high speed wireless networking component
In the next year they will add:
Meta-data database in the OS as an information management feature
Dashboard, though I don't know how 'revolutionary' it will be
Automator, a pervasive scripting tool to access the pervasive scripting environment available for over 15 years
It almost seems you don't have a real idea of what 'innovation' is. What has Microsoft done that is innovative in the past 10 years? Windows Media Center? Windows Tablet PC? Windows PocketPC? Windows XP? XBox? Windows 2k? Windows NT? Windows ME? Windows 98?
Where is the correlation betwen research publications and research & development?
You seem to imply that lack of publications equates to lack of development, when it's quite visible that Apple has done a few neat things without publishing; instead they've been releasing products!
Picnics in the park are not 'cheap'. Taking the time to make potato salad, fruit salad, grilled tuna melts, and fresh lemonade isn't cheap.
McDonalds in the parking lot, that's cheap.
Where do you get that Shakespeare is the cream?
He was popular and funny and accessible. If I were to compare his works to anyone today, it would be Andrew Lloyd Weber.
Several points:
When has cheaper ever meant better? Cheaper, by definition, means cheaper. Do you like looking cheap? Being called cheap? Would you date someone cheap?
The iPod, as a non flash based player, has one advantages:
Storage capacity
Price
The iPod, as a non Creative part, has two advantages:
UI
Software
And then you ask, "What did Apple do to have such control...?" Some would answer 'marketing', and that's correct. Apple has adverts on TV and in print. The Practice had an episode two years ago where one lawyer said in court, "I would hate to live in a world where we are all plugged into iPods and ignoring each other. A little bit of noise is good sometimes."
Then you ask what the Shuffle does better: It's cheaper. $89 for 256mb from Creative or $99 for 512mb from Apple. It uses iTunes, which is free if you want to see why it's better than Creative Nomad Exlorer (or whatever they call it now).
Finally you ask, "Why do people act like Apple was the first people to make mp3 players?"
The answer is, Apple was the first to make a portable high capacity high usability mp3 player.
The Apple iPod did four great things when it was released that no one else had ever done:
Make something the size of a pack of cigarettes that could store more than 256mb; it could store 5gb. The local competitor was the Creative Nomad, which was the size of a 4 CD box and weighed over a pound, and was far from portable.
It used Firewire. Synching an iPod took less than 10 minutes to upload 5gb of music. The Creative Nomad, using USB, could upload 500mb in 10 minutes.
It had a phenomenal UI, which could be used one handed. The Nomad, on the other hand, could not. It had a folder based UI display, and even today the Nomad 3 has 11 buttons on it's face to control it's UI. The iPod, still, only has five.
It had phenomenal software, in iTunes. Not only could you upload 5gb of music, the software allowed you to manage many multiple gbs easily because it handled all the cataloging, database management, playlist generation, ripping, and encoding.
Imagine how powerful this is, and this is something Creative only gained this year but Apple has had for two or three: A playlist generator.
I want:
Not country
Songs played less than 4 times
Songs not played in the last week
That's what Apple offered, in iTunes, that no one else had. iTunes ALSO offered (new at the time, I'm sure everyone has most of these now):
Streaming shared online libraries. iTunes users can see and play each other's libraries
Automatic tagging
Streaming to wireless speakers (Airport Express)
Automatic ripping
Automatic synching
Music search via ID3 tags
Album art
CD burning (remember 'Rip, Mix, Burn'?)
I think the MuVo works with iTunes; give it a shot!
The Shuffle and Mini, respectively, are $120 and $249 in Canada. Both of which are considerably cheaper than $400.
The changes you talk about have nothing to do with DRM, per se, as much as iTunes functionality:
Burn limits: from 10 times per playlist to 7 times per playlist.
You mean you will realistically hit a use wall because you're going to burn more than 7 copies of a playlist with protected music files on them? It isn't a limitation of burning the protected file, only a limitation on the number of times a playlist can be burned without modification.
Playing Real's files: while a pointless, useless, and unhelpful act, playing Real's files was never one of the capabilities the iPod supports. iPods play unprotected AAC (Real is not unprotected), iTMS AAC (Real is not an iTMS AAC), AIFF, MP3, etc. If Real wants to be on an iPod, Real can either use a supported format, or continue hacking to emulate iTMS AAC.
You should research the product more, because I'm not sure you have an accurate understanding of it.
iTunes already allows you to burn protected AAC to CD; and for the clever among the audience, many people have already figured out how to convert AAC to MP3 without actually burning a CD, either.
Feel free. iTunes has a big 'Burn' button that allows you to burn all your purchased songs onto CD. Or you can use an audio grabber, if you are so technically minded, to grab and convert directly without burning.
If everyone says, "Damn I should have waited" then the market never materializes, the profit incentive never kicks in, and competition never makes any decent products.
:)
IE, the world decides the Creative Nomad is good enough, the iPod tanks, and no "equally good products" are ever produced.
So I thank you for your sacrifice