I'm willing to bet mp3 playing phones will grow more (especially outside of the US). The end result will be that the ipod will become just another player, a cool one admittedly, but definitely holding a smaller percentage of the market than it does now.
My guess is that every cell phone also being an mp3 player will have about as much of an effect on the stand-alone mp3 player market as picture phones had on the camera market. Its a gimmick, not a replacement for the real thing,. Particularly at the high end of the camera/mp3 player market.
Just read a little blurb about the Nintendo Revolution.
Sounds like they may be shy in the "tech" department. However the rep interviewed mentioned that on the other platforms development costs are soaring into the 8 figure range, and Nintendo may make game development a lot cheaper and easier.
If that's the case, instead of the Nth sequal of the "popular" games that will be on the new consoles from Sony and MS, Nintendo may be able to entice the smaller developers, the ones who may have the fresh ideas, to develop for the Revolution.
Of course then they go onto the lineup of new games to be available when released -a half dozen with the word "Mario" somewhere in the title.
And one of the cool demos of Spotlight shows a "Smart Search" being updated the second a new file fitting the search parameters is saved on the disk.
So if I tell Microsoft Search to update every ten minutes, I have to wait a while before I can figure out where I put that document I just saved.
OTOH if you have it update too often, you get a performance hit.
I really like Apple's solution better. You update the index when the file changes and only worry about indexing if a file changes. The difference is wether the OS has to poll for changes at a regular interval, vs. the filesystem notifying the OS when there's a change.
No, he's just doing what he's always done -he alludes to it right in his article. "In the olden days, O'Gara would have been given a medal for generating readership."
He writes an article for the sole purpose of upsetting a large group of people, because he knows it will generate tons of hits (that's the name of the game). In the old days, there was a word for this, Troll.
Then in a week or two he'll write another article about how offended he was by all the lunatics in whatever community he attacked previously.
Bonus points if he can incite someone to threaten him. If he gets 10,000 reasonble posts and one threat, he'll make the next article about that one threat, completely ignoring the rest.
Its a scam. And nobody does it better than Dvorak. He's not where he is because of the quality of his "journalism", its his ability to incite "hits".
And considering the number of people who are relying on the linked pdf about Mach as a primer for the OS X kernal, I thought a couple paragraphs from that link might be helpful.
"A kernel, in traditional operating-system terminology, is a small nucleus of software that provides only the minimal facilities necessary for implementing additional operating-system services." -- from The Design and Implementation of the 4.4 BSD Operating System, McKusick, Bostic, Karels, and Quarterman, 1996.
Similarly, in traditional Mach-based operating systems, the kernel refers to the Mach microkernel and ignores additional low-level code without which Mach does very little.
In Mac OS X, however, the kernel environment contains much more than the Mach kernel itself. The Mac OS X kernel environment includes the Mach kernel, BSD, the I/O Kit, file systems, and networking components. These are often referred to collectively as the kernel.
Personally, I think the cellular companies are really trying to pound a square peg into a round hole.
The biggest advantage Apple has with the iTunes Music Store, iTunes and the iPod is how well they work together. I sit at my computer and organize my music into playlists. I download my music over broadband (I also rip my music from my CDs). All this Apple allows me to effortlessly sync with my iPod.
The cellular companies want me to download music using the horrific interface on the phone, over a slow, unreliable network, and try to organize tens to thousands of songs with the interface on the phone? Are they nuts???
Its like when Jobs first introduced Address Book syncing over Bluetooth. He essentially said what a PITA it is to enter info on the phone, because its not made for that. That's what the computer is good for. Enter the info on the computer, sync it to the phone.
The only advantage the cellular companies have is that they subsidize the process of getting the phones into the consumers' hands.
I kept hoping they would go the video route, but now that they seem to be favoring USB over FW on the iPod I'm not so sure that will happen.
Just think of all the video cameras, TV's and video recorders that already have FW that an iPod could hook up to. Record DV on your iPod, plug it into your Mac to edit or your TV to view. Maybe even view it on a built-in color display.
Pre-announcing products by years only serves to generate expectations that more often than not are unmet.
Not so much anymore, but MS used to be notorious for pre-announcing products to kill the competition. If MS saw a software company release something that looked like it would take off, all they had to do was put out a press release announcing they've been working on the same thing and it would be out real soon.
So while the "competitor" is going bankrupt because sales have tanked following MS's announcement, MS can take a year or two to get it to market, if they ever do.
It only works if you're the 800 pound gorilla, which is why nobody else does it.
Portable electronics devices, yes - there is somewhat more of an overlap between a PDA and an iPod than there is between a PDA and a cigarette lighter.
Of course once we start using fuel cells to power PDAs...
IMO your phone/mp3 player is no better than the spork.
Ever notice how mp3 players don't use numerical keypads for input? The mp3 player interface fon phones works, like a spork, but it isn't as good as a stand-alone mp3 player.
And then there's the issue of needing a bigger, heavier battery so you have enough juice for both.
Yes, some people watch "television" on a computer, but most do it with a TV.
Lots of people assume that because he is successful, that his predictions carry some weight.
And lets not forget he's not where he is because he was right about some prediction. A lot of it has to do with being in the right place and the right time... and knowing it.
The problem Gates doesn't seem to see is that the more things you "melt" into the device, the more difficult all of the features become to use, and the less likely you'll find the features you want.
When I buy a muic player, there are certain specifications I want. The same is true for my cell phone, music player and everything else. I can have the Apple iPod that's exactly what I want, and the Sony digital camera that's exactly what I want, and the Nokia phone that's exactly what I want.
Does anybody want the "MS Device" that plays music, takes pictures and makes phone calls, but is more difficult to use than all three together and does nothing well?
Personally, I don't see myself buying anything like that, but I guess many people would be very happy with it. At least that's what I keep hearing.
And if history is a good guide, this will happen right after people no longer have to worry about malware -just about the time Longhorn is released. Right Bill?
How many corporations do we see telling an OSS group, "Why don't you just take our code and use it for your project whole-hog"? My guess is not many.
And yet that doesn't seem to slow down the claims that Apple "doesn't give anything back".
The real problem seems to be that Apple isn't willing to send it back Special Delivery on a silver platter as requested for easier handling. Just thrown as-is into a plain brown box sent via UPS ground.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm willing to bet mp3 playing phones will grow more (especially outside of the US). The end result will be that the ipod will become just another player, a cool one admittedly, but definitely holding a smaller percentage of the market than it does now.
My guess is that every cell phone also being an mp3 player will have about as much of an effect on the stand-alone mp3 player market as picture phones had on the camera market. Its a gimmick, not a replacement for the real thing,. Particularly at the high end of the camera/mp3 player market.
That's really true. The 840AV we had could do the AV stuff sooo much more reliabley than the PPC's could (at least the initial ones).
Just read a little blurb about the Nintendo Revolution.
Sounds like they may be shy in the "tech" department. However the rep interviewed mentioned that on the other platforms development costs are soaring into the 8 figure range, and Nintendo may make game development a lot cheaper and easier.
If that's the case, instead of the Nth sequal of the "popular" games that will be on the new consoles from Sony and MS, Nintendo may be able to entice the smaller developers, the ones who may have the fresh ideas, to develop for the Revolution.
Of course then they go onto the lineup of new games to be available when released -a half dozen with the word "Mario" somewhere in the title.
Go figure.
And shows that, despite the rhetoric, they really are stuck with a single source -Microsoft.
It was non-voting stock,
and MS made a pretty tidy profit on their investment.
Don't forget the security detail with the red shirts!
And one of the cool demos of Spotlight shows a "Smart Search" being updated the second a new file fitting the search parameters is saved on the disk.
So if I tell Microsoft Search to update every ten minutes, I have to wait a while before I can figure out where I put that document I just saved.
OTOH if you have it update too often, you get a performance hit.
I really like Apple's solution better. You update the index when the file changes and only worry about indexing if a file changes. The difference is wether the OS has to poll for changes at a regular interval, vs. the filesystem notifying the OS when there's a change.
No, he's just doing what he's always done -he alludes to it right in his article. "In the olden days, O'Gara would have been given a medal for generating readership."
He writes an article for the sole purpose of upsetting a large group of people, because he knows it will generate tons of hits (that's the name of the game). In the old days, there was a word for this, Troll.
Then in a week or two he'll write another article about how offended he was by all the lunatics in whatever community he attacked previously.
Bonus points if he can incite someone to threaten him. If he gets 10,000 reasonble posts and one threat, he'll make the next article about that one threat, completely ignoring the rest.
Its a scam. And nobody does it better than Dvorak. He's not where he is because of the quality of his "journalism", its his ability to incite "hits".
And considering the number of people who are relying on the linked pdf about Mach as a primer for the OS X kernal, I thought a couple paragraphs from that link might be helpful.
"A kernel, in traditional operating-system terminology, is a small nucleus of software that provides only the minimal facilities necessary for implementing additional operating-system services." -- from The Design and Implementation of the 4.4 BSD Operating System, McKusick, Bostic, Karels, and Quarterman, 1996.
Similarly, in traditional Mach-based operating systems, the kernel refers to the Mach microkernel and ignores additional low-level code without which Mach does very little.
In Mac OS X, however, the kernel environment contains much more than the Mach kernel itself. The Mac OS X kernel environment includes the Mach kernel, BSD, the I/O Kit, file systems, and networking components. These are often referred to collectively as the kernel.
it becomes harder to really say exactly what sort of design a kernel really has
It quickly becomes like the debates about wether the current CPU options fall in the RISC or CISC camp.
Why weren't you expecting it to explode?
I was dissapointed when I RTFA.
"there was an explosion, or more of a pop."
Then from, "burned a hole in the bed" to "It was more smoke than fire but it did leave a burn mark on the cover."
So, no explosion, no fire. Just a kid who inhaled a little smoke.
Sounds to me like a teenager having a good time...
I was just thinking about that -it might make more sense for Gates to go the portable game player on phone route.
Not only would the "kids" love it (if it didn't suck), the cellular service providers would love to provide the backbone for networked games.
Just think Everquest on a cell phone.
Personally, I think the cellular companies are really trying to pound a square peg into a round hole.
The biggest advantage Apple has with the iTunes Music Store, iTunes and the iPod is how well they work together. I sit at my computer and organize my music into playlists. I download my music over broadband (I also rip my music from my CDs). All this Apple allows me to effortlessly sync with my iPod.
The cellular companies want me to download music using the horrific interface on the phone, over a slow, unreliable network, and try to organize tens to thousands of songs with the interface on the phone? Are they nuts???
Its like when Jobs first introduced Address Book syncing over Bluetooth. He essentially said what a PITA it is to enter info on the phone, because its not made for that. That's what the computer is good for. Enter the info on the computer, sync it to the phone.
The only advantage the cellular companies have is that they subsidize the process of getting the phones into the consumers' hands.
I kept hoping they would go the video route, but now that they seem to be favoring USB over FW on the iPod I'm not so sure that will happen.
Just think of all the video cameras, TV's and video recorders that already have FW that an iPod could hook up to. Record DV on your iPod, plug it into your Mac to edit or your TV to view. Maybe even view it on a built-in color display.
Pre-announcing products by years only serves to generate expectations that more often than not are unmet.
Not so much anymore, but MS used to be notorious for pre-announcing products to kill the competition. If MS saw a software company release something that looked like it would take off, all they had to do was put out a press release announcing they've been working on the same thing and it would be out real soon.
So while the "competitor" is going bankrupt because sales have tanked following MS's announcement, MS can take a year or two to get it to market, if they ever do.
It only works if you're the 800 pound gorilla, which is why nobody else does it.
Portable electronics devices, yes - there is somewhat more of an overlap between a PDA and an iPod than there is between a PDA and a cigarette lighter.
Of course once we start using fuel cells to power PDAs...
IMO your phone/mp3 player is no better than the spork.
Ever notice how mp3 players don't use numerical keypads for input? The mp3 player interface fon phones works, like a spork, but it isn't as good as a stand-alone mp3 player.
And then there's the issue of needing a bigger, heavier battery so you have enough juice for both.
Yes, some people watch "television" on a computer, but most do it with a TV.
Lots of people assume that because he is successful, that his predictions carry some weight.
And lets not forget he's not where he is because he was right about some prediction. A lot of it has to do with being in the right place and the right time... and knowing it.
Or he could just wait a few months [ipodsdirtysecret.com]. Checkout the link it is really good.
And the info it contains has been so thoroughly discredited so many times its amazing to see people still referencing it.
IOW they wanted the music to be downloaded to the device via their network so they could take their cut.
They didn't like the idea of people loading their phone with music from their computer.
Please, no. Do you really want that?
The problem Gates doesn't seem to see is that the more things you "melt" into the device, the more difficult all of the features become to use, and the less likely you'll find the features you want.
When I buy a muic player, there are certain specifications I want. The same is true for my cell phone, music player and everything else. I can have the Apple iPod that's exactly what I want, and the Sony digital camera that's exactly what I want, and the Nokia phone that's exactly what I want.
Does anybody want the "MS Device" that plays music, takes pictures and makes phone calls, but is more difficult to use than all three together and does nothing well?
Personally, I don't see myself buying anything like that, but I guess many people would be very happy with it. At least that's what I keep hearing.
And if history is a good guide, this will happen right after people no longer have to worry about malware -just about the time Longhorn is released. Right Bill?
Those phasers/blasters/guns only work if your opponent doesnt' have the right king of shielding technology.
And aside from its intended purpose, a gun can't do anything else.
Yeah, but the phaser...
You could blast through things, use it to heat a rock for warmth, stun, hit somebody over the head with it...
How many corporations do we see telling an OSS group, "Why don't you just take our code and use it for your project whole-hog"? My guess is not many.
And yet that doesn't seem to slow down the claims that Apple "doesn't give anything back".
The real problem seems to be that Apple isn't willing to send it back Special Delivery on a silver platter as requested for easier handling. Just thrown as-is into a plain brown box sent via UPS ground.
At least that's what I'm reading.