Hmm... leveraging one monopoly to create another... interesting.
Don't know that I'd really call either one a monopoly. Right now they both enjoy the highest market share, but every week we hear one company or another say that they're ready to knock the "king" off the top of the hill. If they really had the market dominance of a monopoly, nobody would be saying that.
When was the last time you heard another company say they were going to spend a $100 million in marketing and knock Office (or Windows) out of the top spot in the next year?
I agree entirely, but the integration with the Apple store doesn't make it easier for people who want to listen to music they already own on another format, or for people who want to listen to music that isn't carried on iTMS.
Not quite following what you mean here unless you're talking about WMA? The iPod has no problem with AAC, mp3, AIFF, Apple lossless, and it does convert WMA to AAC automatically on Windows.
OK, if I'd just read the History section (sounded too boring at first) I get part of the answer. Among other things,
"The third was a 1500 t/yr plant at Barnwell, South Carolina, which was aborted due to a change in government policy which ruled out all US civilian reprocessing as one facet of US non-proliferation policy."
But apparently there are still defense run reprocessing plants. Why defense but not civil recycling is allowable baffles me though.
I was reading through that and came across "Nevertheless, one version also has Pu recovered for recycling commercially as fuel, as in Europe, but at present contrary to US policy."
There's no guarantee that Yucca Mt. will work for hundreds of thousands of years, so we'll settle for 100 years when some of the radioactivity will have decayed and we may have better ways of managing it.
That's better than putting it in Yucca Mt. for a thousand years when much more of the radioactivity would have decayed and we may have exponetially better ways of handling it?
AFAIK the only reason Yucca Mt. is a "failure" is because of the lawsuits arguing that it can't be guaranteed to last forever.
I kept wondering exactly who Balmer was speaking for. AFAIK, he can only really speak for one company, Microsoft. So I would interpret it as MS saying they will sue.
If, on the other hand, he's speaking for some other company or companies, I think he has some explaining to do.
It takes a rather sophisticated training and conditioning to be able to consistently select a product based on how smooth the marketing speak is, or how sexy the babe is.
FWIW all the studies I've read about lately actually indicate that today's teens are more skepical of advertising claims and less likely to be influenced by the "glitter" than any generation before.
For the VHS tapes, I started marking on them what time point I needed to fast-foreward to for the beginning of a movie. Of course, if you do that and you've had kids around as long as I have you miss out on fun things like,
I always thought it was bad having to fast-foreward through all the crap at the beginning of a Disney movie on VHS.
Boy, how I longed for the ability to skip it all with a push of a button -the advances of a digital life.
Little did I know that Disney would have veto power over my player, making it so that not only can I not skip the ads, I can't fast forward throught them either -the advances of a digital lie.
(Note that "lie" was actually a typo for "life", but somehow it seems more appropriate as is).
One thing I can easily do with Wikipedia that can't be done with a "traditional" encyclopedia is see how a definition or entry evolves. The evolutionary process can say as much about a topic as any single static entry can. As the prevous post points out, even the entries for Britannica evolve over time. IMO one loses a bit of history by not being able to see how they've evolved.
Made me think of a news story a while back about counterfeiting in general. The counterfeits are getting good enough that sometimes even the original company can't tell an original from the forgery. One example used was high end golf clubs. For some the only way to tell a difference is to actually cut across the head of the clup to inspect the interior. Kinda kills the club in the process. Now if they had an RFID tag in them......you could tell if they were fake.
and...you're wife could keep track of how much golfing you really have been doing.
I'm still trying to figure out the overall economic impact. Theoretically the RFID tags should make tracking drugs easier, more efficient, and more accurate. All things that should save money. What I don't know is if the savings is equal to, less than, or greater than the cost. I do know that Wal Mart doesn't want the tags so they can spy on people. Wal Mart wants them because they will save it some money.
One other thing-the cost of one lawsuit for incorrectly dispensed medication could by a lot of RFID tags (not to mention the potential human cost).
Just FYI, it is on Apple's Safari. In fact there's a little text entry box in the top right of every Safari window with the word "Google" greyed out. When I want to search Google, I type the search in there and hit enter. Via the pull-down associated with the text entry field I can even view my last few searches.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you mean, IsToo!
No, I think he meant IsTo. We're talking Microsoft, it won't be IsToo until version 3.
Hmm... leveraging one monopoly to create another... interesting.
Don't know that I'd really call either one a monopoly. Right now they both enjoy the highest market share, but every week we hear one company or another say that they're ready to knock the "king" off the top of the hill. If they really had the market dominance of a monopoly, nobody would be saying that.
When was the last time you heard another company say they were going to spend a $100 million in marketing and knock Office (or Windows) out of the top spot in the next year?
The iPod not only does AIFF (yeah no compression) but it now handles Apple's lossless codec as well. Just out of curiosity, have you tried the latter?
Just FYI, there is a plugin to play Vorbis in iTunes (its a Quicktime plugin), though that still doesn't help if you want to play it on the iPod.
For the most part, the justification for the iPod's price is the extra features it supports
I thought the higher price was for reduced physical size and the best interface for handling large volumes of music.
I agree entirely, but the integration with the Apple store doesn't make it easier for people who want to listen to music they already own on another format, or for people who want to listen to music that isn't carried on iTMS.
Not quite following what you mean here unless you're talking about WMA? The iPod has no problem with AAC, mp3, AIFF, Apple lossless, and it does convert WMA to AAC automatically on Windows.
OK, if I'd just read the History section (sounded too boring at first) I get part of the answer. Among other things,
"The third was a 1500 t/yr plant at Barnwell, South Carolina, which was aborted due to a change in government policy which ruled out all US civilian reprocessing as one facet of US non-proliferation policy."
But apparently there are still defense run reprocessing plants. Why defense but not civil recycling is allowable baffles me though.
I was reading through that and came across "Nevertheless, one version also has Pu recovered for recycling commercially as fuel, as in Europe, but at present contrary to US policy."
Now I have to figure out what policy and why.
I found it lacking in the consistency part.
There's no guarantee that Yucca Mt. will work for hundreds of thousands of years, so we'll settle for 100 years when some of the radioactivity will have decayed and we may have better ways of managing it.
That's better than putting it in Yucca Mt. for a thousand years when much more of the radioactivity would have decayed and we may have exponetially better ways of handling it?
AFAIK the only reason Yucca Mt. is a "failure" is because of the lawsuits arguing that it can't be guaranteed to last forever.
I kept wondering exactly who Balmer was speaking for. AFAIK, he can only really speak for one company, Microsoft. So I would interpret it as MS saying they will sue.
If, on the other hand, he's speaking for some other company or companies, I think he has some explaining to do.
It takes a rather sophisticated training and conditioning to be able to consistently select a product based on how smooth the marketing speak is, or how sexy the babe is.
FWIW all the studies I've read about lately actually indicate that today's teens are more skepical of advertising claims and less likely to be influenced by the "glitter" than any generation before.
Don't know what that says about their parents...
Wait until you have kids. They'll own the netflix account too.
For the VHS tapes, I started marking on them what time point I needed to fast-foreward to for the beginning of a movie. Of course, if you do that and you've had kids around as long as I have you miss out on fun things like,
"Fantasia 2, coming soon to theatres near you!"
I always thought it was bad having to fast-foreward through all the crap at the beginning of a Disney movie on VHS.
Boy, how I longed for the ability to skip it all with a push of a button -the advances of a digital life.
Little did I know that Disney would have veto power over my player, making it so that not only can I not skip the ads, I can't fast forward throught them either -the advances of a digital lie.
(Note that "lie" was actually a typo for "life", but somehow it seems more appropriate as is).
Were I to use Britannica to check the same fact or initiate the same research I might not feel the need to go further
And therin lies the irony.
Everyone automatically assumes the Wikipedia entry is wrong because McHenry is a "Former Editor in Chief, the Encyclopaedia Britannica".
Funny, he cites no sources other than himself. How do I know he's right?
Further research is needed.
One thing I can easily do with Wikipedia that can't be done with a "traditional" encyclopedia is see how a definition or entry evolves. The evolutionary process can say as much about a topic as any single static entry can. As the prevous post points out, even the entries for Britannica evolve over time. IMO one loses a bit of history by not being able to see how they've evolved.
Answer: The names on the royalty/licensing checks.
Just wait 'til the guy gets tired of music and switches to video...
No, worse.
Imagine every toilet in America equipped with an RFID scanner.
I thought it was bad when they were talking about RFID tagging chickens!
Made me think of a news story a while back about counterfeiting in general. The counterfeits are getting good enough that sometimes even the original company can't tell an original from the forgery. One example used was high end golf clubs. For some the only way to tell a difference is to actually cut across the head of the clup to inspect the interior. Kinda kills the club in the process. Now if they had an RFID tag in them... ...you could tell if they were fake.
...you're wife could keep track of how much golfing you really have been doing.
and
I'm still trying to figure out the overall economic impact. Theoretically the RFID tags should make tracking drugs easier, more efficient, and more accurate. All things that should save money. What I don't know is if the savings is equal to, less than, or greater than the cost. I do know that Wal Mart doesn't want the tags so they can spy on people. Wal Mart wants them because they will save it some money.
One other thing-the cost of one lawsuit for incorrectly dispensed medication could by a lot of RFID tags (not to mention the potential human cost).
My fault "competitors" is spelled wrong in the quote, not the person being quoted.
Multiple operator errors resulted in the misquote.
Why are we not rejoicing? We now have two copetitors
Probably because (right or wrong) many people are thinking "we now have one competitor and one big monopoly looking to extend its reach".
IOW, we look back on what happened to Netscape and wonder if it will happen again.
Microsoft is not respected by many people.
/.
True on
But there are a scary number of people who not only respect MS, but think its the savior of the computing/tech world.
Just FYI, it is on Apple's Safari. In fact there's a little text entry box in the top right of every Safari window with the word "Google" greyed out. When I want to search Google, I type the search in there and hit enter. Via the pull-down associated with the text entry field I can even view my last few searches.