Of course that list also states a bunch of reasons why Linux isn't as good.
Linux lets you alter it for whatever you want to do with it, something not possible in MacOS.
If you really think Linux allows me to "alter it for whatever" I want, you vastly overrate my programming abilities.
BTW, what makes you say its not possible to alter MacOS? I'm sure all those people writing utilities that do just this would be surprised to here that.
Gee, I have OX X, OS 9, Win 95, Win XP and DOS on my Mac. And I can run them all at the same time -veerrry slowly of course. They even all share one of the internal drives for documents.
The SE supported color though the monitor was B/W. That meant you could add a video card for a color monitor, and also meant you could print color to a Stylewriter II if you put in a 4-color ribbon.
Now that's a challenge. Create a document to print in color using a B/W monitor!
There are a couple sentences that are ambiguous, but nothing I saw that specifically states they are making hardware.
I guess the question is, is the "Portable Media Center" their name for the software, or is it a hardware product? My interpretation (and its only an interpretation based on context) is that its the software.
Generally speaking there's a computer between the music source (CD or download) and the portable player. Most of those computers run a MS OS. If MS can lock-in the audio on the computer to a propriatary format they own (WMA) then player domination is only a step away -want a player that you know will work with Longhorn, buy one running MS software.
I kept looking, but I can't see any reference to MS actually making the hardware. I would appreciate it if you could tell me what specifically makes you think MS is making any of the hardware. I saw a couple sentences that were somewhat ambiguous ("The Microsoft devices will support..."), but none that really said MS was making any of the hardware.
Maybe you guys are reading a different article than I am, but my understanding is Microsoft isn't making the hardware, they're just supplying the software that will run devices from "Manufacturers such as iRiver International, Samsung Electronics, SANYO Electric and ViewSonic."
public universities funded with taxpayer money have a duty to make the fruits of that funding available to the people who paid for it
The other viewpoint is that its not right for your tax dollars to be used for research that will make some private company and its investors rich. Its better to patent, and make those private companies pay licensing fees which go back into the University's research coffers to fund further research. Some universities get a good deal of their research funding this way.
I should also note that, IIRC, other publicly funded researhers do have essentially free access to these patents.
Your analysis is correct, but I wanted to point out that isn't the problem here. Remember these are external devices so the "controller" is in with the drive and shouldn't be a problem. Also, these drives were working prior to the upgrade.
There also seems to be more than one problem. One affects the "big" drives, and another is affecting all sizes of drives.
You might also want to check the cool accessories link.
And we haven't even gotten to all the 3rd party stuff. For example see
http://news.com.com/2100-1041-5095625.html
about Apple working with others to develop more software and more hardware. It also says Apple is boasting more than 130 add-ons for the iPod. Some include a voice recorder, media card reader, speakers with a dock for the iPod, an infrared remote, and, apparently, tons of custom cases.
You're right, I don't understand the technology, that's what I'm trying to find out about.
IMO if you don't understand the technology any "security process" has the potential of being fataly flawed. You end up doing the equivalent of locking your car doors while leaviing the windows wide open.
I'll admit I don't fully understand what MS is doing in this respect, but is sounds like it could be worse then even you are making it out to be.
For example, if I have a business relationship with MyCorp and they send email to me, doesn't that mean that I may end up having to use Outlook and authenticate with their server before reading those messages?
"Everything that gets written for Windows will be.Net code, which is supposed to help prevent developer errors that can lead to unsecure applications, according to Microsoft."
Everything I read in the article from this to the talk about the file system and how it allows "searching for an array of files...strewn across ever-larger hard drives" and creating all these "smart" programs that "automatically sniff out network connections," really makes me wonder how secure this OS is going to be. Am I the only one who reads this stuff and thinks that a security vulnerability at any point has the potential of corrupting an entire system or even LAN?
Having easy lines of communications between the OS, apps, files and networked resources is great, but who's doing the gatekeeping between all these resources to keep them secure? And how is it being done? Or is it just assumed that once something is "trusted" its trusted to do anything it wants?
Should it say "just like Proteron's Lite Switch X...", or "just like Microsoft Windows."?
I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing the reason the Proteron and Apple implementations look so much alike is due more to using the same APIs for drawing windows and text and following Apple's interface guidelines, than any deliberate "copying" on Apple's part.
iTunes is easy to use and nice and all, but it's hardly fundamentally different from a variety of services out there
Don't confuse iTunes with the iTunes Music Store (iTMS). I think of the iTMS as just being one of the features of iTunes. You're right though, it isn't fundamentally different from the others in any one way, but IMO that doesn't mean the package as a whole isn't fundamentally better. YMMV.
1) Selection of radio genres is not that great.
Can't argue with that, but I thought there was a way to add more stations to the iTunes list. Unfortunately I can't figure out how, so I may be wrong (that'd be a first -just ask my wife).
3) All downloaded music is in AAC format.
Which brings up the question of when other music players will start supporting more standards -AAC is part of the mpeg4 standard. And we all know about the ogg fans around here.
Of course then you get into the problem that even though AAC is a standard, the DRM system used is not. I don't know if its possible, much less feasible, for other manufacturers to license the FairPlay scheme to enable their players to work with files from the iTMS. Anybody have any info on this?
Minority maybe, but not alone. I'm not exactly sure why, but I'm not all that excited about downloading music either.
I don't know how others felt about the transition to CDs, but the great promise of the CD was that it has great sound quality that doesn't degrade with time and use like vinyl or tape. If properly cared for you would never need to replace a CD in your lifetime.
Maybe its because I spent so much time and money replacing my vinyl and tapes with CDs, but I don't want to buy a bunch of music now and have to start repurchasing it in 5 years in a lossless, possible better than CD quality format.
recall a lot of folks ((in my circle of musician friends) with apple computers) saying that the music they downloaded from iTunes (when it first was launched) was kinda 'muddled' sounding, many blamed the copy-protection as doing it.
That's a common problem, but its not the copy protection. It's one of the settings in iTunes -I don't remember if its the equalizer settings or the "Sound Enhancer' or "Sound Check" effects found in the preferences.
Have them try turning that stuff off and see if it helps.
iTunes restricts what you can do with what you buy
Can we please get our terminology straight so people like me at least have a chance of understanding the arguments?
iTunes is a program used for listening to and organizing music on a computer.
The iTunes Music Store or iTMS is a service which sells music in an standards compliant format (AAC) wrapped up with a proprietary (FairPlay) DRM scheme.
Thus iTunes does not restrict anything and can be used with several different audio formats and transcode between many of them. The iTMS sells music with some restrictions that are easily worked-around.
I find it pretty interesting that Microsoft would have the gall to make such ridiculous statements.
Not just ridiculous, outright false.
If iTunes only works with music from the tTMS, whatever have those Mac people been doing with the program for the last 4(?) years? And I guess those people walking around with iPods have just been listening to static.
Don't know if its been mentioned or not, but those million people also installed the latest version of QuickTime along with iTunes (assuming they installed it). I gotta wonder if that's the biggest jump Apple's ever had in QuickTime penetration in the Windows market.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course that list also states a bunch of reasons why Linux isn't as good.
Linux lets you alter it for whatever you want to do with it, something not possible in MacOS.
If you really think Linux allows me to "alter it for whatever" I want, you vastly overrate my programming abilities.
BTW, what makes you say its not possible to alter MacOS? I'm sure all those people writing utilities that do just this would be surprised to here that.
"Coexists with another operating system on disk"
Gee, I have OX X, OS 9, Win 95, Win XP and DOS on my Mac. And I can run them all at the same time -veerrry slowly of course. They even all share one of the internal drives for documents.
The SE supported color though the monitor was B/W. That meant you could add a video card for a color monitor, and also meant you could print color to a Stylewriter II if you put in a 4-color ribbon.
Now that's a challenge. Create a document to print in color using a B/W monitor!
WRT AppleCare, I agree its not worth it for desktops, but if you're getting a portable, get AppleCare.
Where specifically?
There are a couple sentences that are ambiguous, but nothing I saw that specifically states they are making hardware.
I guess the question is, is the "Portable Media Center" their name for the software, or is it a hardware product? My interpretation (and its only an interpretation based on context) is that its the software.
I don't know that they can, but...
Generally speaking there's a computer between the music source (CD or download) and the portable player. Most of those computers run a MS OS. If MS can lock-in the audio on the computer to a propriatary format they own (WMA) then player domination is only a step away -want a player that you know will work with Longhorn, buy one running MS software.
I kept looking, but I can't see any reference to MS actually making the hardware. I would appreciate it if you could tell me what specifically makes you think MS is making any of the hardware. I saw a couple sentences that were somewhat ambiguous ("The Microsoft devices will support..."), but none that really said MS was making any of the hardware.
Maybe you guys are reading a different article than I am, but my understanding is Microsoft isn't making the hardware, they're just supplying the software that will run devices from "Manufacturers such as iRiver International, Samsung Electronics, SANYO Electric and ViewSonic."
public universities funded with taxpayer money have a duty to make the fruits of that funding available to the people who paid for it
The other viewpoint is that its not right for your tax dollars to be used for research that will make some private company and its investors rich. Its better to patent, and make those private companies pay licensing fees which go back into the University's research coffers to fund further research. Some universities get a good deal of their research funding this way.
I should also note that, IIRC, other publicly funded researhers do have essentially free access to these patents.
It didn't say he did it all in one order. He may have split it up.
OTOH maybe he just wanted 100 and since the field wasn't big enough he accidently ordered 1100.
Oops! Oh well, not my credit card.
Your analysis is correct, but I wanted to point out that isn't the problem here. Remember these are external devices so the "controller" is in with the drive and shouldn't be a problem. Also, these drives were working prior to the upgrade.
There also seems to be more than one problem. One affects the "big" drives, and another is affecting all sizes of drives.
Some other things to look at can be found at
http://www.apple.com/ipod/beyondmusic.html
You might also want to check the cool accessories link.
And we haven't even gotten to all the 3rd party stuff. For example see
http://news.com.com/2100-1041-5095625.html
about Apple working with others to develop more software and more hardware. It also says Apple is boasting more than 130 add-ons for the iPod. Some include a voice recorder, media card reader, speakers with a dock for the iPod, an infrared remote, and, apparently, tons of custom cases.
You're right, I don't understand the technology, that's what I'm trying to find out about.
IMO if you don't understand the technology any "security process" has the potential of being fataly flawed. You end up doing the equivalent of locking your car doors while leaviing the windows wide open.
I hear they have these new things called DVD players that will so something like this.
I'll admit I don't fully understand what MS is doing in this respect, but is sounds like it could be worse then even you are making it out to be.
For example, if I have a business relationship with MyCorp and they send email to me, doesn't that mean that I may end up having to use Outlook and authenticate with their server before reading those messages?
This "network" effect is what is worrisome to me.
I probably should have stated that quote is from the Internet Week article, not the one at yahoo.com.
No, they're supposed to set realistic goals.
I think MS may have actually done that in this case. Who'd have thought you could use "smart" and "Outlook" in the same sentence and have it be true.
From the article,
.Net code, which is supposed to help prevent developer errors that can lead to unsecure applications, according to Microsoft."
"Everything that gets written for Windows will be
Everything I read in the article from this to the talk about the file system and how it allows "searching for an array of files...strewn across ever-larger hard drives" and creating all these "smart" programs that "automatically sniff out network connections," really makes me wonder how secure this OS is going to be. Am I the only one who reads this stuff and thinks that a security vulnerability at any point has the potential of corrupting an entire system or even LAN?
Having easy lines of communications between the OS, apps, files and networked resources is great, but who's doing the gatekeeping between all these resources to keep them secure? And how is it being done? Or is it just assumed that once something is "trusted" its trusted to do anything it wants?
Or am I just paranoid?
Should it say "just like Proteron's Lite Switch X...", or "just like Microsoft Windows."?
I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing the reason the Proteron and Apple implementations look so much alike is due more to using the same APIs for drawing windows and text and following Apple's interface guidelines, than any deliberate "copying" on Apple's part.
iTunes is easy to use and nice and all, but it's hardly fundamentally different from a variety of services out there
Don't confuse iTunes with the iTunes Music Store (iTMS). I think of the iTMS as just being one of the features of iTunes. You're right though, it isn't fundamentally different from the others in any one way, but IMO that doesn't mean the package as a whole isn't fundamentally better. YMMV.
1) Selection of radio genres is not that great.
Can't argue with that, but I thought there was a way to add more stations to the iTunes list. Unfortunately I can't figure out how, so I may be wrong (that'd be a first -just ask my wife).
3) All downloaded music is in AAC format.
Which brings up the question of when other music players will start supporting more standards -AAC is part of the mpeg4 standard. And we all know about the ogg fans around here.
Of course then you get into the problem that even though AAC is a standard, the DRM system used is not. I don't know if its possible, much less feasible, for other manufacturers to license the FairPlay scheme to enable their players to work with files from the iTMS. Anybody have any info on this?
Minority maybe, but not alone. I'm not exactly sure why, but I'm not all that excited about downloading music either.
I don't know how others felt about the transition to CDs, but the great promise of the CD was that it has great sound quality that doesn't degrade with time and use like vinyl or tape. If properly cared for you would never need to replace a CD in your lifetime.
Maybe its because I spent so much time and money replacing my vinyl and tapes with CDs, but I don't want to buy a bunch of music now and have to start repurchasing it in 5 years in a lossless, possible better than CD quality format.
recall a lot of folks ((in my circle of musician friends) with apple computers) saying that the music they downloaded from iTunes (when it first was launched) was kinda 'muddled' sounding, many blamed the copy-protection as doing it.
That's a common problem, but its not the copy protection. It's one of the settings in iTunes -I don't remember if its the equalizer settings or the "Sound Enhancer' or "Sound Check" effects found in the preferences.
Have them try turning that stuff off and see if it helps.
iTunes restricts what you can do with what you buy
Can we please get our terminology straight so people like me at least have a chance of understanding the arguments?
iTunes is a program used for listening to and organizing music on a computer.
The iTunes Music Store or iTMS is a service which sells music in an standards compliant format (AAC) wrapped up with a proprietary (FairPlay) DRM scheme.
Thus iTunes does not restrict anything and can be used with several different audio formats and transcode between many of them. The iTMS sells music with some restrictions that are easily worked-around.
I find it pretty interesting that Microsoft would have the gall to make such ridiculous statements.
Not just ridiculous, outright false.
If iTunes only works with music from the tTMS, whatever have those Mac people been doing with the program for the last 4(?) years? And I guess those people walking around with iPods have just been listening to static.
Don't know if its been mentioned or not, but those million people also installed the latest version of QuickTime along with iTunes (assuming they installed it). I gotta wonder if that's the biggest jump Apple's ever had in QuickTime penetration in the Windows market.