You mean it might be possible to disagree with BOTH sides of the "political spectrum"? What a staggering realization! Next, you'll tell me that/. readers are not a monolithic consciousness, and is actually a bunch of humans with opinions that might be different from one another!
Hey, go buy a bunch of music from Real. Knock yourself out. Just don't come back crying when you update the firmware on your hypothetical iPod and lose all the music you "bought". Is that good for you? Is the risk worth it?
I won't buy music from any online source regardless. Real can reverse engineer whatever they want...I'm still not going to give them any money (particularly since I can't use their service on my Mac...so much for consumer choice!).
And why does Apple care if they're a niche player? I certainly don't. Their products work fine for me. I don't care whether they work for you or not, even for very large values of "you".
But changing the brand wouldn't change the perception.
I mean, Real could change their name to "NotRealNetworks", but all us savvy geeks wouldn't be distracted.
"NotRealNetworks? Oh yeah. They used to be Real Networks. Not gonna buy their crap. You remember trying to install their damn player? Change the state on EVERY SINGLE RADIO BUTTON or it's spam for years."
It's not just branding: It's building a reputation for good products (or failing to do so). Brand is a factor, insofar as a company's product history informs my decision, but it's not at all the most relevant factor.
It's easy to make your digital music store compatible with the iPod. Just sell un-DRMed AAC or MP3 files.
For the record, I love my iPod, and I don't use the iTMS.
Apple did not want to license their DRM scheme (which, by the way, seems awful darn liberal) to Real. I wouldn't want to do business with Real either...they've been making themselves the enemies of their customers for the better part of a decade.
I don't think Real has done anything wrong reverse-engineering the DRM scheme. I just think that anybody who buys music from them is really not very smart, because the next iPod firmware update is going to nuke this loophole something fierce.
So it's worth it to you. It's not worth it to me. If TiVo wants my business, they need to give me more for less.
$300 for a couple hundred K/week of data I pull across my Internet connection? No freakin' way. Particularly when I can get the same data (not formatted for TiVo, of course) free from any number of sources.
Their hardware is crazy cheap. Their "service" is crazy expensive. I'd pay reasonable prices for both (that is, more for the hardware and less for the service).
What, you mean content to have their proprietary firmware reverse-engineered, and then stupidly selling the crown jewels to a little tiny company that has come to 0wn the industry?
I feel like TiVo is nickel-and-diming me. I'd be willing to pay full (un-subsidized) price for the hardware, if I could get the data from a reasonably priced source. I mean, there's no cost advantage to using my broadband connection instead of dialing into their (expensive to maintain) modem bank...why can't the savings be passed on to me?
DirecTivo (or whatever they're calling it) is much closer to my price threshhold.
Well, I'm never without my Man Bag, and my 12" Powerbook fits in it beautifully. It takes all of three seconds to wake from sleep, and I don't know why a "general purpose interface" would be a problem.
And I'm not too worried about it getting stolen. I'm big and scary. : )
I honestly don't think it occured to the Founders to enshrine something as basic as the right to be secure in one's identity. Come on! How many of the documents and pamphlets that contain the very notions that we hold sacred in America were published anonymously? The Constitution also doesn't say that we aren't supposed to eat the daisies: It simply wasn't on their radar screen that things could get SO out of hand to require such a codicil.
SSN is a terrible example. The law that saddled us with the damn thing stated explicitly that it was not to be used as a method for identification for anything other than administration of the Social Security system. To me, that's a perfect example of a system that is being abused once it exists.
Slashdot Mirror
You saw what happened to Howard Dean, right?
You mean it might be possible to disagree with BOTH sides of the "political spectrum"? What a staggering realization! Next, you'll tell me that /. readers are not a monolithic consciousness, and is actually a bunch of humans with opinions that might be different from one another!
Stop the fucking presses!
Splitting hairs about what is or is not sexual intercourse is not telling the whole truth. Period.
He's the President. What he does in the White House IS my business.
Had he told the truth, there would have been no problem. He lied, though.
So he violated his oath to tell "The truth, the whole truth, so help me God..."
Telling the truth is pretty not complicated. It's frightening sometimes, but it's usually the simplest course.
I guess it all depends on what the definition of "is" is...
If it didn't last a year, and it was still under warranty, why didn't you have them fix it?
Or did you not bother to call 'em until your warranty was up?
Because I'd rather be a market leader and innovator than another manufacturer of the Same Old Boxes.
/love/ the Thinkpad line...but I like the Powerbooks much mobettah.
I
Why can't I hate them for both?
Ummm, because Apple isn't a monopoly?
But I (and many other geeks) know that Gator==Claria.
The contention is that geeks are showing susceptability to brand marketing. I am disagreeing. We are not talking about the mass market.
Hey, go buy a bunch of music from Real. Knock yourself out. Just don't come back crying when you update the firmware on your hypothetical iPod and lose all the music you "bought". Is that good for you? Is the risk worth it?
I won't buy music from any online source regardless. Real can reverse engineer whatever they want...I'm still not going to give them any money (particularly since I can't use their service on my Mac...so much for consumer choice!).
Fuck 'em.
What's unfeasible about it?
And why does Apple care if they're a niche player? I certainly don't. Their products work fine for me. I don't care whether they work for you or not, even for very large values of "you".
So it's worth it to you, and not to me. Fine.
I resent paying $13/mo for a tiny bit of data. I won't do it.
And I won't pay the "lifetime (*of this particular device)" subscription.
You will. Good for you.
Now, if TiVo wants my business, they need to give me more for less. If they don't want my business, they need do nothing whatsoever.
If you think that the Mac vs. PC debate is just about a brand name, you're completely ignorant of the discussion.
Of course not. I expect them to provide products I want to buy if they want my money.
I don't care if Real ever releases another piece of software. I don't need 'em.
They could have done that by selling un-DRMed files. But they won't do that.
Real doesn't give a damn about user choice. They DO care about getting a slice of somebody else's pie.
But changing the brand wouldn't change the perception.
I mean, Real could change their name to "NotRealNetworks", but all us savvy geeks wouldn't be distracted.
"NotRealNetworks? Oh yeah. They used to be Real Networks. Not gonna buy their crap. You remember trying to install their damn player? Change the state on EVERY SINGLE RADIO BUTTON or it's spam for years."
It's not just branding: It's building a reputation for good products (or failing to do so). Brand is a factor, insofar as a company's product history informs my decision, but it's not at all the most relevant factor.
It's easy to make your digital music store compatible with the iPod. Just sell un-DRMed AAC or MP3 files.
For the record, I love my iPod, and I don't use the iTMS.
Apple did not want to license their DRM scheme (which, by the way, seems awful darn liberal) to Real. I wouldn't want to do business with Real either...they've been making themselves the enemies of their customers for the better part of a decade.
I don't think Real has done anything wrong reverse-engineering the DRM scheme. I just think that anybody who buys music from them is really not very smart, because the next iPod firmware update is going to nuke this loophole something fierce.
Dude, if you can fit a computer in there, how do you buy pants?!
So it's worth it to you. It's not worth it to me. If TiVo wants my business, they need to give me more for less.
$300 for a couple hundred K/week of data I pull across my Internet connection? No freakin' way. Particularly when I can get the same data (not formatted for TiVo, of course) free from any number of sources.
Their hardware is crazy cheap. Their "service" is crazy expensive. I'd pay reasonable prices for both (that is, more for the hardware and less for the service).
What, you mean content to have their proprietary firmware reverse-engineered, and then stupidly selling the crown jewels to a little tiny company that has come to 0wn the industry?
Yeah, being IBM's PC division is great. Not.
And that "maybe" is exactly why I won't buy one.
I feel like TiVo is nickel-and-diming me. I'd be willing to pay full (un-subsidized) price for the hardware, if I could get the data from a reasonably priced source. I mean, there's no cost advantage to using my broadband connection instead of dialing into their (expensive to maintain) modem bank...why can't the savings be passed on to me?
DirecTivo (or whatever they're calling it) is much closer to my price threshhold.
The five lion one is far cooler, although I did get a cheap Korean knock-off of the 15 vehicle one at Toys R Us one day. That was a good day.
Well, I'm never without my Man Bag, and my 12" Powerbook fits in it beautifully. It takes all of three seconds to wake from sleep, and I don't know why a "general purpose interface" would be a problem.
And I'm not too worried about it getting stolen. I'm big and scary. : )
I honestly don't think it occured to the Founders to enshrine something as basic as the right to be secure in one's identity. Come on! How many of the documents and pamphlets that contain the very notions that we hold sacred in America were published anonymously? The Constitution also doesn't say that we aren't supposed to eat the daisies: It simply wasn't on their radar screen that things could get SO out of hand to require such a codicil.
SSN is a terrible example. The law that saddled us with the damn thing stated explicitly that it was not to be used as a method for identification for anything other than administration of the Social Security system. To me, that's a perfect example of a system that is being abused once it exists.
Give a mouse a cookie...
Like which ones? I didn't know there were any since, like, Athens.