The original 5gb iPod was sold at the same price as the standalone 5gb Toshiba drive... but Apple undoubtedly got tremendous profit due to buying the drive in bulk. Perhaps the same case here: $70 in lots of 100,000, but I am willing to bet Apple can procure and easily sell a million of these. If they can get them at $50 each, and then bundle $50 of electronics, and then sell it for $199, they are making huge markup, no?
You can back up your computer Boot off it Keep track of appointments Keep track of phone numbers Play Solitaire Listen to MP3s Safeguard $3k worth of music
In fact... it's about as useful as a PC running Windows 95!
I'm joking, but the worth of an iPod is >>> than just an MP3 player. It's a portable firewire powered hard drive that also happens to play MP3s
Haha, then perhaps the future of efficiency demands that Dell become Apple's reseller and distributor; Apple then gets higher volume, and Dell gets higher margin, and both companies win : )
How so? I use Linux and Mac systems, and I don't funnel any money into the Microsoft at all. I don't see what your issue with my statement is at all. I honesty believe our online ecosystem would be healthier and stronger if Microsoft didn't dominate the way it does. I don't mean for them to die; I just don't think they need to thrive as much as they currently do.
I dunno, I kinda think the Neuros is better than an iPod in the sense that a Chevy Cavalier is better than a Volvo S60.
In that if you can't afford the build, design, usability, and style, then saving some money is probably worth it. You can get more features at less price!
It will be. But competition necessarily forces improvement. Unless there is *only* a single evolutionary path (I doubt it) in office suites (which would also imply that we might as well adopt Microsoft Office since it too *has* to be on the same path) then having 3 Office programs (MS, KDE, and Sun) means you can optimize the three to different needs.
Right? They can attack different needs. Not *everyone needs a 20mb Word program (MS Word), or a 300mb Office program (OpenOffice). Some of us like 3mb Word programs (KWord).
Any and all Linux users can use the full suite of Apple software under Mac OS X; all you need is a Mac. Sure, that forces you to run OS X, but at least you can run OS X under Linux through MacOnLinux.
And the BSD folk will have to settle for OS X itself, which is a flavor of BSD...
The desktop software produced by Apple isn't free, as in beer, or free, as in liberty, but free as in concession: You give and they give, and both win.
Or you can run Windows under VMWare...
Apple's goal is not OS equality (which is why they don't offer their software on all OSes, as that requires tremendous QA resources) or OS alternatives... they only care about making money, and making happy customers. That's it.
If you want to be an Apple customer, you need Apple product. That means hardware+software, or Windows+iTunes. They aren't a charity, any more than you are.
Because Microsoft isn't a team player. There is no real technical benefit to WMA or WMV: All the 'next gen' codecs are better (ogg, wma, aac) than mp3, so the only real advantage to WMA is secondary.
Do you trust Microsoft? I don't. By using WMA, you give them more power and more clout, and like any big organization with the power to dictate international and national standards... I don't trust them. Unless of course you *like* paying taxes. Instead of money, though, Microsoft collects in marketshare and power.
Anyway, I hope you like living in a Microsoft future... I'm trying to avoid that, myself.
The video iTunes would probably make sense when more people watch video on monitor like displays than on TVs, much as now people listen to music through computers as likely as a sound system (or the computer connects to the sound system)
The video proposition is not understood, but the implementation is; it's merely a question of convenience and timing, on Apple's part.
You mention iTunes MS but forget the iPod and Mac product lines which is the real money maker for Apple.
WalMart and Microsoft stores don't *follow* Apple's internet business model.
If the next bubble is content, you need to device a profit center. The internet is good at distribution, therefore removing the costs associated with it. I suspect the next bubble is not so much content, but content awareness: If Apple can make it easy to find stuff you like amidst a sea of choice, then you will keep using iTunes MS and a future prototypical Video Store.
The money of course is when you buy a device to store/facilitate all this content. A video iPod is about as likely to occur when you start seeing 300 disc DVD changers; then Apple will produce the digital equivalent, iPod2, which can store 300 DVDs in a convenient footprint and equivalent quality.
For us early adopters even as far back as one year ago could not know that DVD+R would pull ahead, because:
DVD-R was first DVD-R was cheaper DVD-R media was cheaper DVD-R was more compatible
So for at least two years, DVD-R had an advantage. However, given how competition works, are you saying/suggesting DVD-R won't catch up, the way DVD+R did? It's a moot point in that my next system will use whatever standard is most advantageous to me, but I do believe that competition is a good thing, and without DVD-R being there first, DVD+R would not have worked so hard to win; and now that DVD+R has the advantage, this will spur DVD-R manufacturers post haste, I think.
But that isn't how science works. That example is conclusive proof because it is reproducible and well documented.
If you want to disbelieve, that is a personal preference, but better, and more scientific, would be for you to perform an experiment which refutes that finding: Feed DDT to a population and document *no* thinning eggshell, a thickening of the eggshell, or statistically random effects that decorrelated DDT with eggshell thickness.
Yes, it is obviously better if there is additional research to confirm and reconfirm these findings, but this one group has done *two* studies, not one, on DDT and eggshell thickness.
The first was a control study with ducks and DDT The second was an observation study with peregrine falcon eggs and DDT correlation that *reconfirmed* the findings of the first experiment.
If there are other experiments, I haven't looked, but you nor anyone else has provided proof *otherwise* that DDT is safer than it is dangerous. Yes, you can 'safely' ingest DDT because it is fat soluble and will pass through your system fairly cleanly and any trace amount picked up will be processed by your liver and kidneys. We know DDT kills mosquitos, and we know DDT also is highly persistent, and will work up the food chain. It is an estrogen like compound and it does interfere with eggshell formation in birds, and in undocumented ways in people. Possibly, given how similar it is to estrogen, it will have effects on the human reproductive system, bone growth, and various reproductive cancers.
You can believe who you want, but you have to use your *analytic* ability, if you have any, short of actually conducting an experiment yourself; but we are posting on Slashdot after all!
What do you require to believe?
PDF directly from Patuxent itself? This is a gov sponsored site, but it shows the same (it is the same!) data the other two reference.
The world will do fine regardless of whether it warms up or cools down.
It is humanity that will suffer as our coastal cities get flooded or our fertile plains become desert or our valleys become lakes.
Science is helps us understand, predict, prevent, and change in our favor our environment. The whole brouhaha is whether we are making things worse *for ourselves* or whether we can somehow make it better.
Yes, it is nice to protect the Earth; I believe in that, but a lot of people seem to need the additional anthropomorphic justification that global warming or global cooling will hurt us, and we need to at least *prepare* for it if we cannot do anything else.
I couldn't believe I read this, so I did a Google on DDT and eggshell and came up with the research group that did a study on DDT and eggshells!
They fed DDT to a control group of ducks and compared to an untreated group of ducks otherwise fed and raised identically, and found eggshell thinning on DDT fed ducks. They were thus armed with a biological model of the DDT-eggshell relationship and went out to look at Peregrine falcon eggs and saw the same relationship: And that the more DDT were found in the egg, the thinner the eggshell.
And it's well known, if you do more research/search that DDT is an artificial environmental estrogen, in that it mimics and interferes with estrogen in humans; and very likely as an estrogen like compound in most animals. Why is this important?
Estrogen and estrogen replacement therapy is used in humans to treat osteoperosis, or bone loss. It's not difficult to understand why then DDT would thin eggshells.
Article on Patuxent, and article on the DDT research at Patuxent.
The amusing thing is that you reference Silent Spring, which is a book that references Patuxent's relevant research into DDT, eggshells, and Peregrine falcons.
It also affects quite adversely birds of various feathers; thinner shells and lower birthrate are the biggest side effects.
This also explains that DDT is very poorly absorbed through the gut, so if the kind doctor really wants an effective test, he needs to emulsify it into a fatty liquid and smear it on his arm. That will see just how toxic DDT is ^^
So the AMD64 has 16 user visible integer registers?
The PPC 970 has 32 floating point, 32 general purpose, and 32 128bit registers. It also has 48 floating point rename registers. However I don't think you can point at the number of rename registers as a factor in performance. I believe the number of rename registers exist in order to alleviate performance bottlenecks, right? They essentially allow multiple instructions to be in flight and executing without completing in a timely manner.
My oldest Mac is from 2001, and the eyecandy *lets* me work.
It's not like it's useless or something. Drop shadows demarcate window focus and content, translucency indicates current focus, animation (and it can be turned off or down) indicates action and focus, etc.
I'm sorry you think OS X is ugly. You're one of the few I know who's ever said that. All I can point out is the scores of Aqua themes all over the place...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, for two years now ^^
As long as iPods have existed, the capability existed too.
Make something 5x as good and twice the price... that way people buying it will feel like they're getting a bargain!
Can it not be argued that, despite the higher price, the iPod was a Rio killer, since at the time Rio was synonymous with MP3 players?
What I mean is that if I leave my iPod in my car, and the car burns up, I still have all $3k of my music.
If my iPod gets stolen...
If my computer gets rooted...
End result?I still have all $3k of music.
Thus my using my iPod safeguards my music.
But having a DVD-R backup is a good idea.
You misunderstand ^^
The original 5gb iPod was sold at the same price as the standalone 5gb Toshiba drive... but Apple undoubtedly got tremendous profit due to buying the drive in bulk. Perhaps the same case here: $70 in lots of 100,000, but I am willing to bet Apple can procure and easily sell a million of these. If they can get them at $50 each, and then bundle $50 of electronics, and then sell it for $199, they are making huge markup, no?
Except it does!
You can back up your computer
Boot off it
Keep track of appointments
Keep track of phone numbers
Play Solitaire
Listen to MP3s
Safeguard $3k worth of music
In fact... it's about as useful as a PC running Windows 95!
I'm joking, but the worth of an iPod is >>> than just an MP3 player. It's a portable firewire powered hard drive that also happens to play MP3s
Get ye an old BlueBerry iBook then ^^
Omniweb has that save state thing. Think of it as 'sleep on close' and 'wake on open', except with web browsing : )
Haha, then perhaps the future of efficiency demands that Dell become Apple's reseller and distributor; Apple then gets higher volume, and Dell gets higher margin, and both companies win : )
How so? I use Linux and Mac systems, and I don't funnel any money into the Microsoft at all. I don't see what your issue with my statement is at all. I honesty believe our online ecosystem would be healthier and stronger if Microsoft didn't dominate the way it does. I don't mean for them to die; I just don't think they need to thrive as much as they currently do.
I dunno, I kinda think the Neuros is better than an iPod in the sense that a Chevy Cavalier is better than a Volvo S60.
In that if you can't afford the build, design, usability, and style, then saving some money is probably worth it. You can get more features at less price!
It will be. But competition necessarily forces improvement. Unless there is *only* a single evolutionary path (I doubt it) in office suites (which would also imply that we might as well adopt Microsoft Office since it too *has* to be on the same path) then having 3 Office programs (MS, KDE, and Sun) means you can optimize the three to different needs.
Right? They can attack different needs. Not *everyone needs a 20mb Word program (MS Word), or a 300mb Office program (OpenOffice). Some of us like 3mb Word programs (KWord).
I'm being facetious but it's true!
Any and all Linux users can use the full suite of Apple software under Mac OS X; all you need is a Mac. Sure, that forces you to run OS X, but at least you can run OS X under Linux through MacOnLinux.
And the BSD folk will have to settle for OS X itself, which is a flavor of BSD...
The desktop software produced by Apple isn't free, as in beer, or free, as in liberty, but free as in concession: You give and they give, and both win.
Or you can run Windows under VMWare...
Apple's goal is not OS equality (which is why they don't offer their software on all OSes, as that requires tremendous QA resources) or OS alternatives... they only care about making money, and making happy customers. That's it.
If you want to be an Apple customer, you need Apple product. That means hardware+software, or Windows+iTunes. They aren't a charity, any more than you are.
For choosing WMA, for endorsing WMV.
Why?
Because Microsoft isn't a team player. There is no real technical benefit to WMA or WMV: All the 'next gen' codecs are better (ogg, wma, aac) than mp3, so the only real advantage to WMA is secondary.
Do you trust Microsoft? I don't. By using WMA, you give them more power and more clout, and like any big organization with the power to dictate international and national standards... I don't trust them. Unless of course you *like* paying taxes. Instead of money, though, Microsoft collects in marketshare and power.
Anyway, I hope you like living in a Microsoft future... I'm trying to avoid that, myself.
There is a build of OpenOffice under X11 on OS X.
KOffice doesn't require X11. KWord, for example, runs natively under OS X.
The video iTunes would probably make sense when more people watch video on monitor like displays than on TVs, much as now people listen to music through computers as likely as a sound system (or the computer connects to the sound system)
The video proposition is not understood, but the implementation is; it's merely a question of convenience and timing, on Apple's part.
You mention iTunes MS but forget the iPod and Mac product lines which is the real money maker for Apple.
WalMart and Microsoft stores don't *follow* Apple's internet business model.
If the next bubble is content, you need to device a profit center. The internet is good at distribution, therefore removing the costs associated with it. I suspect the next bubble is not so much content, but content awareness: If Apple can make it easy to find stuff you like amidst a sea of choice, then you will keep using iTunes MS and a future prototypical Video Store.
The money of course is when you buy a device to store/facilitate all this content. A video iPod is about as likely to occur when you start seeing 300 disc DVD changers; then Apple will produce the digital equivalent, iPod2, which can store 300 DVDs in a convenient footprint and equivalent quality.
Why not? It's a joke!
Unless by taking his comment seriously, you want us to also believe the other theories you fail to mention are also the basis for jokes?
For us early adopters even as far back as one year ago could not know that DVD+R would pull ahead, because:
DVD-R was first
DVD-R was cheaper
DVD-R media was cheaper
DVD-R was more compatible
So for at least two years, DVD-R had an advantage. However, given how competition works, are you saying/suggesting DVD-R won't catch up, the way DVD+R did? It's a moot point in that my next system will use whatever standard is most advantageous to me, but I do believe that competition is a good thing, and without DVD-R being there first, DVD+R would not have worked so hard to win; and now that DVD+R has the advantage, this will spur DVD-R manufacturers post haste, I think.
But that isn't how science works. That example is conclusive proof because it is reproducible and well documented.
If you want to disbelieve, that is a personal preference, but better, and more scientific, would be for you to perform an experiment which refutes that finding: Feed DDT to a population and document *no* thinning eggshell, a thickening of the eggshell, or statistically random effects that decorrelated DDT with eggshell thickness.
Yes, it is obviously better if there is additional research to confirm and reconfirm these findings, but this one group has done *two* studies, not one, on DDT and eggshell thickness.
The first was a control study with ducks and DDT
The second was an observation study with peregrine falcon eggs and DDT correlation that *reconfirmed* the findings of the first experiment.
If there are other experiments, I haven't looked, but you nor anyone else has provided proof *otherwise* that DDT is safer than it is dangerous. Yes, you can 'safely' ingest DDT because it is fat soluble and will pass through your system fairly cleanly and any trace amount picked up will be processed by your liver and kidneys. We know DDT kills mosquitos, and we know DDT also is highly persistent, and will work up the food chain. It is an estrogen like compound and it does interfere with eggshell formation in birds, and in undocumented ways in people. Possibly, given how similar it is to estrogen, it will have effects on the human reproductive system, bone growth, and various reproductive cancers.
Why don't you look up Petuxent then?
You can believe who you want, but you have to use your *analytic* ability, if you have any, short of actually conducting an experiment yourself; but we are posting on Slashdot after all!
What do you require to believe?
PDF directly from Patuxent itself? This is a gov sponsored site, but it shows the same (it is the same!) data the other two reference.
The world will do fine regardless of whether it warms up or cools down.
It is humanity that will suffer as our coastal cities get flooded or our fertile plains become desert or our valleys become lakes.
Science is helps us understand, predict, prevent, and change in our favor our environment. The whole brouhaha is whether we are making things worse *for ourselves* or whether we can somehow make it better.
Yes, it is nice to protect the Earth; I believe in that, but a lot of people seem to need the additional anthropomorphic justification that global warming or global cooling will hurt us, and we need to at least *prepare* for it if we cannot do anything else.
I couldn't believe I read this, so I did a Google on DDT and eggshell and came up with the research group that did a study on DDT and eggshells!
They fed DDT to a control group of ducks and compared to an untreated group of ducks otherwise fed and raised identically, and found eggshell thinning on DDT fed ducks. They were thus armed with a biological model of the DDT-eggshell relationship and went out to look at Peregrine falcon eggs and saw the same relationship: And that the more DDT were found in the egg, the thinner the eggshell.
And it's well known, if you do more research/search that DDT is an artificial environmental estrogen, in that it mimics and interferes with estrogen in humans; and very likely as an estrogen like compound in most animals. Why is this important?
Estrogen and estrogen replacement therapy is used in humans to treat osteoperosis, or bone loss. It's not difficult to understand why then DDT would thin eggshells.
Article on Patuxent, and article on the DDT research at Patuxent.
The amusing thing is that you reference Silent Spring, which is a book that references Patuxent's relevant research into DDT, eggshells, and Peregrine falcons.
It also affects quite adversely birds of various feathers; thinner shells and lower birthrate are the biggest side effects.
This also explains that DDT is very poorly absorbed through the gut, so if the kind doctor really wants an effective test, he needs to emulsify it into a fatty liquid and smear it on his arm. That will see just how toxic DDT is ^^
So the AMD64 has 16 user visible integer registers?
The PPC 970 has 32 floating point, 32 general purpose, and 32 128bit registers. It also has 48 floating point rename registers. However I don't think you can point at the number of rename registers as a factor in performance. I believe the number of rename registers exist in order to alleviate performance bottlenecks, right? They essentially allow multiple instructions to be in flight and executing without completing in a timely manner.
My oldest Mac is from 2001, and the eyecandy *lets* me work.
It's not like it's useless or something. Drop shadows demarcate window focus and content, translucency indicates current focus, animation (and it can be turned off or down) indicates action and focus, etc.
I'm sorry you think OS X is ugly. You're one of the few I know who's ever said that. All I can point out is the scores of Aqua themes all over the place...