There is no shortage of U.S. firms capable of packaging software and Mandrake's delay in getting their product to market could have dire consequences. The entire Linux distribution market is in a precarious position. Their business model is predicated on most potential customers not having the bandwidth to download multiple CDs, but with cable modems (and DSL connections) finding their way into more and more homes, many people are finding that downloading 1-5 CDs is no big deal. Start it up, wait a few hours or go to bed, burn them the next day.
Add a delay to the availability of a boxed distribution and suddenly people are asking their friends with high-speed connections to download and burn a set of CDs for them. Some that would have paid for a retail copy will now download it themselves rather than wait for it to appear on store shelves.
The only hope that I see for the Linux distro market in the near future is to switch over to DVDs since most people currently lack the capability of burning DVDs from images.
Don't lecture me -- I have used PGP and it is not the simple matter you pretend that it is -- especially not when you and your correspondents each use multiple computers and have to move your private keys around.
First they have to promise not to use it for commercial purposes and then they have to fill out a form that asks them how many copies they intend to purchase, the timeframe, the company for whom they work, their title, their address, phone number, e-mail address, number of computers at their location, etc. Do you have any idea of how long it takes for my friends with 56K modems to download a 7MB file (which PGP is)? About 30 minutes -- if they don't drop the connection. Then I have to go through the whole "you won't get a virus" lecture before they will cautiously try to install it.
The freeware version, by default, installs VPN/Firewall. Then it wants to know which adapters you want secured. Yeah, that's what I want to try to explain to someone who majored in English Literature. Then it wants the user to enter a passphrase of at least 8 characters -- but not write the passphrase down anywhere. Another thing for them to remember -- which many of them will not.
I could go on and on, but it's not worth my time. Instead, I'll ask you a simple question: What percentage of your non-computer-geek friends use PGP and if it is so simple to use and free, why do do few use it?
You just don't get it, do you? A simple private key encryption needs to be built in to the mail client the way that SSL is built into the browser. The whole digital ID thing for e-mail is a joke. I got a Thawte Freemail digital ID. My friend, a computer professional, also got one. Netscape 4.7x (his e-mail client) claimed that his had already expired -- despite displaying an expiration date in the future for the ID. Then he downloaded Mozilla only to find that it does not support encryption at all. He finally gave up after a lot of trying.
All I want is an e-mail client with an 'encrypt' button. I press the button and it asks me for an encryption key. I enter a key that my correspondent and I have exchanged over the phone, in person, etc. The message is encrypted and sent.
I'm not Osama Bin Laden. I'm not expecting someone to be monitoring my phone, e-mail, in-person conversations, cell phone, etc. I just want to be able to exchange e-mail with friends and not have every nosy guy at the ISP or my company be able to read it.
PGP is just an incredibly complex and painful solution for what should be a simple problem. 99.9% of the public just wants to be able to occasionally send encrypted messages to friends using a private key. I don't care how easy the/. crowd thinks it is to use PGP. Some of my friends aren't computer gurus and it's just too much complication and hassle for them to use PGP.
I paid $100 for two 256M sticks of RAM from crucial.com, and my Athlon 1.2GHz still crashes all the time. Shrug.
If RAM alone could eliminate all system crashes, then Microsoft could just toss in a couple of sticks with each copy of Windows. As I am sure you know, there are lots of possible reasons for system instability and flaky RAM is only one possible cause. Other causes can range from the software/OS running on the system to heat problems to noisy (electrically speaking) power supplies. Sadly, there's no magic bullet, but you can at least feel pretty confident that the RAM is not to blame and move on to other theories.
Not only that, but the prices are for cheapo RAM with no compatibility guarantee. If you buy from your OEM or anything with a compatibility guarantee for specific models it'll cost more.
I have seen countless cases of generic, cheap RAM causing problems. I know screwdriver shops that got a bad reputation just due to the RAM they used (boxed Intel CPUs and Asus motherboards are not inherently unstable -- unless equipped with poor-quality RAM).
I just pay more and order from www.crucial.com (which is a subsidiary of Micron). The frustration caused by system lockups, crashes, etc. means that paying $80 for top-quality RAM is a lot smarter than paying $40 for something that might work.
As I stated in my original post, it is a noble thing to release "free" software. But that does not make anyone who chooses not to some kind of right-wing, establishment, capitalist pig. Most of the people who release shareware get an occasional small check in exchange for hours of development time. That's hardly puts them into the same boat with Microsoft.
While there are many good arguments in favor of open source software, some of which you make, the main appeal to many people is that they get something for nothing.
Why is it a "pity" that someone can try to earn a living by writing useful computer software? Should talented programmers write software for free and earn a living by flipping burgers or selling drugs? You should be damned glad that he's made a useful package and is only asking $20 for it.
This whole "all software should be free" crap is really annoying the hell out of me. If someone wants to give away the software that they write for the good of some community, that's very noble, but that doesn't mean that everyone should. I have found that most of the people in the "free software movement" are actually a bunch of leeches that just want to get something for nothing. They don't write software and are frequently just computer users. They give nothing back to the community. But they are the first ones on the FTP site when any new piece of free software hits the platters.
If you like the package, pay the guy $20. Then send him an e-mail thanking him for making it available for such a small price.
Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC!
on
Biking @ 80 MPH
·
· Score: 2
The point is he was trying to make is, what cause this anti-american prejudice and can you do anything to stop it? Arrogance of the kind you you just demostrated, is not going to win you any friends anywhere.
1. Pride in American ingenuity, drive, and technical leadership is not "arrogance."
2. I will be damned if I will tone down my pro-American "arrogance" out of a cowardly fear of more terrorist attacks.
3. I don't care to have a bunch of thugs, murderers, and religious zealots from Afghanistan as my "friends."
Maybe you can start telling blacks and Jews to "have a good hard look at [themselves]" to find out why people hate them so much. Maybe you can counsel blacks to stop listening to rap and hip-hop because it fuels bigotry. Perhaps you can advise Jews not to be so openly pro-Israel because it causes some people to be prejudiced against them.
The original poster made a sick comment claiming that America was, in some way, responsible for the attacks on the WTC. He was wrong and you are wrong for supporting him.
Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC!
on
Biking @ 80 MPH
·
· Score: 2
If you really want I could put it this way, THe US invented the internet, but couldn't think of anyway to turn it into the big all encompassing, new form of mass-media it is now days. It took a European idea to do that.
Those in the U.S. responsible for the Internet were, by and large, opposed to it being commercialized and turned into what it has become today. They were not trying to think of a way to make Joe Average into an Internet user. Claiming that they "couldn't think of a way" to make it commercial is hardly fair in light of that.
I'm not claiming that http/WWW is unimportant, but neither is it "The Internet". Like AOL Instant Messenger, Napster (in its day), and a myriad of other extremely powerful apps, it builds on the pioneering, brilliant work of those that created the Internet.
Going further, HTTP has morphed so much since its invention that early browsers (e.g. Netscape 1.0, Mosaic, etc.) are practically worthless today. The same cannot be said of FTP, SMTP, and other core protocols behind the Internet. Someone with an FTP client from ten years ago is still able to connect to modern FTP sites. People using old versions of PINE can still retrieve their e-mail. What takes brilliance and foresight is the creation of something in the computer field that can last for 20 or more years and still be useful.
Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC!
on
Biking @ 80 MPH
·
· Score: 2
Any comment that claims invention of the Internet as an US archievement
And who do you think invented it? It was invented and funded through the U.S. military agency DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) and was originally called the ARPANET.
and looks down on other countries because they supposedly are unable to manufacture ICs.
No, I look down on other countries that can't design competitive microprocessor ICs. Any third-world upstart can manufacture ICs. It's the difference between designing a car and bolting it together.
Last time I checked www was a thing that came out Switzerland,
Please! The web is just a minor protocol and formatting standard. It pales in comparison with Ethernet, IP, TCP, FTP, SMTP, POP, Telnet and other pioneering standards developed by U.S. companies and universities like Stanford, UCLA, and MIT. These foundations for the Internet were being developed in the late 60's and early 70's. Claiming that "www" is the basis of the Internet is as ignorant as claiming that AOL Instant Messenger makes AOL an Internet pioneer.
The Internet was a U.S. invention. It was not co-invented by the U.S. and other countries. 30+ years after its initial inception, it stands as a monument to the creativity, engineering talent, and technological vision of the United States. You're welcome to come along for the ride, but don't try to pretend that you designed the car.
Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC!
on
Biking @ 80 MPH
·
· Score: 2
... and exactly this arrogance is what made the WTC towers collapse...
What caused the collapse was anonymous cowards (like you?) feeling that they had a right to kill thousands of people because of their anti-american prejudice.
Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC!
on
Biking @ 80 MPH
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
Please, slashdotters, post everything in metric, except when dealing with nautical measurements
The Internet was invented by the United States at U.S. taxpayer expense and, therefore, people should use U.S. standards when posting on it. It is really annoying when some Jacques-come-lately gets on the Internet and starts demanding that people post in his country's language, measurement system, etc.
Don't like inches, feet, miles, and fahrenheit? Then develop your own wide-area network comprising millions of computers. Maybe you could do that about the time that your oh-so-advanced Euro-buddies figure out how to produce a commercially viable microprocessor IC.
... and masturbation can lead to abuse of others, especially while viewing child pornography, whether real or virtual.
Says who? That is just an absurd, unfounded claim.
There's something a bishop of mine always told people that I will never forget (additions in parentheses): there is not a man (or woman?) on the planet that can view pornography (intentionally or unintentionally) and not be affected by it.
Were you affected by viewing the bible? Does that mean that it should be banned? Of course pornography affects the viewer. It is supposed to and designed to.
Given the Catholic church's record with child molestation by members of the clergy (who do not, as a rule, view a lot of porn), I'd look for a more reputable authority figure on how to reduce pedophilia. Specifically, you may wish to look for one that does not dress young boys in silk robes (choir boys) and give the adults private rooms called "rectories."
it has already been proven that most predators, of adults and children alike, either were introduced or desensitized to such ideas by pornographic material, or used porn to excite themselves before actually violating someone.
You say that is has "already been proven." Please tell me the names of the studies that "prove" this.
Pornography has caused families to fall apart, fathers to abuse wives and children, children to become sexually active, and worse.
That is just more religious hysteria passed off as fact. Do you have even a shred of evidence that shows that pornography causes those things?
In my opinion, a trustworthy religious organization would be the best organization to make such determinations.
You and the Taliban leaders would get along great. They share your views on pornography and the role of religious organizations in restricting access to it. They also have one of the worst records in the world for abuse of women -- despite their complete ban on all forms of pornography and any other type of sexual entertainment. Gee, maybe having a bunch of extremely sexually frustrated people isn't such a good idea after all...
It was a funny mistake on my part when I reread it, but, hey, much worse has gotten into print. It was grammatically and syntactically correct, but hardly the finest example of the English language ever written.
Because a bunch of morons thought that the web had to look like television, they put ActiveX, VBScript, Javascript, Flash and other crap into browsers and plug-ins. This, not surprisingly, lead to many vulnerabilities like the one exploited here. (Who is the genius that decided that the "Back" button should be able to be redefined by any website that the user viewed?) If the web simply displayed pictures and text, we would not have this idiotic problem. Lest you laugh, that's what books and newspapers have done for centuries and they still seem mighty useful and popular.
We have seen this overcomplexity lead to many problems. Look at Microsoft Outlook: some group of idiots decided that displaying text, or even pictures, was not enough. So they added Visual BASIC scripting to it. And HTML that you can't turn off. Suddenly any nitwit could create an e-mail Trojan horse that emailed itself to every person in the address book. Or Outlook could display some web site in the preview window, play annoying music, or provide confirmation to a spammer that you received and saw his message.
It's time that we started demanding robust, secure applications even if it means that web sites won't be able to display animated, dancing piglets.
Except for the fact of course that the availability of "virtual" child porn will increase the number of child molestations. That's a big statement, I know, but consider regular porn for a minute. Regular porn makes one think of sex, thinking of sex tends to make people want to have sex, and people tend to carry out their desires.
Most people look at "regular porn", masturbate themselves to orgasm, and then stop thinking about sex. When Sweden legalized porn, rape, child molestation, and other sex crimes dropped.
Why is the unit a hassle? Installing the unit was easy, its the same as installing any other aftermarket head unit. The tuner plugs into the back of the docking sled. No big deal.
The reason that the unit is a hassle is:
1. It requires a separate amp. If you already have a separate head unit and amp, that's no big deal. For those of us who don't, it is a PITA. And in my VW Golf, I simply don't need 200 watts per channel. The 19W RMS / 50W Peak x 4 provided by the JVC MP3 unit I bought is more than adequate. If I later add a powered sub, the need for amp power decreases even further. If I ever decide that I want to upgrade to separates, I can, but in the meantime, I'll have had a fully functional car stereo.
2. Getting new music into the Empeg is a major operation. If I buy a CD, I cannot just play it. I have to take the head unit out of the car, bring it downstairs to my computer room, hook it up, rip the CD, transfer the tracks to the head unit, disconnect it, take it back out to the car, and reinsert it.
While item two may not seem like a big problem to someone in a high crime area, most people who live in low crime areas don't make a practice of stripping our car of all valuables whenever we leave. My head unit and even the faceplate remain installed. I worry about things like connector longevity and the risk of dropping the unit or banging it into something, such as a wall or table, while carrying it.
The reason that I, and others, find CD/R based solutions preferable is because they answer these concerns. If I am on vacation and spot a CD I want to hear, I can just buy it, pop it in, and play it. If I want some more tunes in the car when I am at home, I can just grab a stack of CDs, rip them, and cut them onto a 20 cent blank. I get 8 hours of music on a single CD at a high bit rate (192kbps). So I change the CD after 8 hours of listening. That's just approaching zero on the inconvenience scale. I'd much rather do that than have to constantly be lugging around the head unit in case I decided that I wanted more music in the car.
None of this is meant to degrade the Empeg, which appears to be a really intelligently designed, classy unit (though the audio specs leave something to be desired). Conceptually, it's really neat and I'd have one today if it had a decent built-in amp, could play normal audio CDs, and could copy both audio and MP3 CDs to its hard disc.
You state that SB marketed this player. Ive never seen one advertisement at all for this. SB bought empeg for its software knowledge then killed the player off.
1. Go to their web site and you will see lots of advertising of the player.
2. It was open source, so the "software knowledge" was freely available.
3. MP3 software is not rocket science.
That's because ftp and telnet have no security and shouldn't be used. Particularly when openssh [openssh.org] and scp work so well.
Wrong. MD4/5 one-time-passwords put security into both Telnet and FTP. Granted, the transfers are done in the clear, but to claim that there is "no security" is just a gross over-generalization.
I agree that openssh and scp are good technologies, but most people don't have working clients installed on their machines.
Do you know for a fact that you can hear anything at or above 18khz?
Yes, in both ears. I have been tested. Consider the fact that the spec of 18khz is not even given in conjunction with a +/-db tolerance. It might be down 12db. And you conveniently ignored the horrible 50db channel separation spec.
The tuner is available, I don't know why you think it is such a drawback.
Because it adds an additional expense to an already expensive (avg. $1500 + amp) unit.
No, thats where you are wrong. Thats not why its been discontinued.
Then explain why it is being discontinued with no replacement product announced. It's being discontinued because of poor sales. The sales are poor because people cannot logically justify the cost and hassle of the unit.
No, I am not. I went to the web page and saw what it could do as sold to the end-user.
And your point is?
That 99.9% of the public will use it in the manner in which it is sold to them and that the other.1% does not constitute a viable market. A corollary to this is that what it does (as-sold) does not justify it's price to the vast majority of the public that would use it that way.
If you happened to investigate the signature system a little closer you might notice that if you change your sig now it will change everywhere.
I purposely chose a page that was static (e.g., no replies allowed) as I believe that those signatures are also static. If you wish to take the time, I think that you will find other people have commented on my signature in the past. I have no time to search through the archives looking for such an examples but you are welcome to do so if you are the type of person who likes to retract unfair accusations.
In closing, this argument has gotten absurd. I explained why the general public would view the Empeg as overpriced. You came up with some esoteric uses for it that might make it valuable to you -- but to very few others. The fact that it has failed in the marketplace, despite having a high profile and being marketed by a large company, supports my arguments very well and I'll leave that market failure to stand on its own. I think that this may be the most telling statement in your whole response:
Personally I myself would not choose an Empeg even if the company was still producing them today simply because I believe other options are more interesting.
So what you are saying is that you cannot cost-justify it given its limitations? If you could, you would have one in your car today.
But unfortunately you are simply ignoring a few things:
No, I am not. I went to the web page and saw what it could do as sold to the end-user. Normal people in cars want music. That's why it is sold for that purpose. I don't care about being able to hook my GPS to it and get a worse display than the GPS comes with. I don't have any need to store files from a digital camera on it -- I have a laptop for that or I can just buy more memory modules.
It's not an in-dash computer (Diamond has enough sense to know that a 128 x 32 display does not a computer make). It's a car stereo. That's why it is sold as that. And in that role, it's sorely lacking. Even the audio specs are not that good with the AUX input having an upper limit of 18khz and only a 50db separation. They don't even publish the frequency response specs for the D/A section.
You are in a car driving. What application could possibly make up for the fact that it can't play CDs, doesn't come with a tuner, doesn't come with an amp, and eats up the only available DIN slot in most cars? Don't cell phones distract you enough? Now you want to play PacMan on your dashboard?
Please! I would suspect you put this in your sig just because of this little arguement.
Shows what you know. That's been my sig for months and months. Here's the URL of a post I made in July:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=13374&thresh ol d=0&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=67350
I believe it is plain to see that you are obviously biased towards your solution.
Yes. I developed that bias by comparison shopping. That's why I chose the JVC. I looked at the Empeg and, frankly, the cost was not an issue. What were issues were the shortcomings that I have mentioned previously (no CD, no amp, tuner not included, etc.) Even if you were to offer me the Empeg for $400, I'd still take the JVC KD-SH99 that I chose.
Feel free to maintain the persecuted attitude but I doubt any logical person will buy it.
I don't feel persecuted. My comments have not been modded down and this debate has nothing to do with the merits of Linux vs. some other OS.
You know what no logical person will buy? The Empeg. That's why they are being discontinued.
On the same note your unit can do so much less than the empeg.
Let's enumerate what each unit can do.
The Empeg can:
1. Play MP3s stored on a hard disc.
The JVC I mentioned can:
1. Play MP3s stored on CD.
2. Play audio CDs.
3. Receive AM and FM radio stations (w. no add-ons).
4. Directly drive loudspeakers.
5. Provide a subwoofer active crossover.
The Empeg does one major thing that my CD-based units do not while they do at least five things that the Empeg does not.
Do you really feel the need to defend your choice so much?
No. I was simply defending my answer to the question of why many people think that the Empeg is overpriced.
I think a lot of people just don't want to deal with CDs anymore. No matter what kind of CD it is nor how often you have to change it.
Obviously not enough to sustain the Empeg. I look at it as a convenience thing. Changing the CD out after 8 hours of music is a lot easier than lugging an Empeg into and out of my house and office every time I want to get some new music on it. There is also the concern about longevity. If I drop a 17 cent CD, I'm out 17 cents plus my time to cut it. If I drop the Empeg on one of its numerous trips in and out of the house, I might find myself out a lot more. Plus, the wear and tear on the Empeg's electrical connections is not inconsequential.
Enjoy your "fuzzy" music.
If I want it to be less "fuzzy", I can play an uncompressed CD rather than a lossy MP3.
If you want to play cds, then hook up a cd player to the aux in.
And affix it to my dash with duct tape? Most cars have a singe DIN opening. That means a single in-dash component for most people.
Empeg + 4 channel amp = $1200
Even ignoring the fact that you did not include the optional tuner cost or the price of the external CD player that you mentioned, it's still triple the price of the unit that I bought ($400) that handles MP3, CD, and AM/FM.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no shortage of U.S. firms capable of packaging software and Mandrake's delay in getting their product to market could have dire consequences. The entire Linux distribution market is in a precarious position. Their business model is predicated on most potential customers not having the bandwidth to download multiple CDs, but with cable modems (and DSL connections) finding their way into more and more homes, many people are finding that downloading 1-5 CDs is no big deal. Start it up, wait a few hours or go to bed, burn them the next day.
Add a delay to the availability of a boxed distribution and suddenly people are asking their friends with high-speed connections to download and burn a set of CDs for them. Some that would have paid for a retail copy will now download it themselves rather than wait for it to appear on store shelves.
The only hope that I see for the Linux distro market in the near future is to switch over to DVDs since most people currently lack the capability of burning DVDs from images.
Don't lecture me -- I have used PGP and it is not the simple matter you pretend that it is -- especially not when you and your correspondents each use multiple computers and have to move your private keys around.
First they have to promise not to use it for commercial purposes and then they have to fill out a form that asks them how many copies they intend to purchase, the timeframe, the company for whom they work, their title, their address, phone number, e-mail address, number of computers at their location, etc. Do you have any idea of how long it takes for my friends with 56K modems to download a 7MB file (which PGP is)? About 30 minutes -- if they don't drop the connection. Then I have to go through the whole "you won't get a virus" lecture before they will cautiously try to install it.
The freeware version, by default, installs VPN/Firewall. Then it wants to know which adapters you want secured. Yeah, that's what I want to try to explain to someone who majored in English Literature. Then it wants the user to enter a passphrase of at least 8 characters -- but not write the passphrase down anywhere. Another thing for them to remember -- which many of them will not.
I could go on and on, but it's not worth my time. Instead, I'll ask you a simple question: What percentage of your non-computer-geek friends use PGP and if it is so simple to use and free, why do do few use it?
You just don't get it, do you? A simple private key encryption needs to be built in to the mail client the way that SSL is built into the browser. The whole digital ID thing for e-mail is a joke. I got a Thawte Freemail digital ID. My friend, a computer professional, also got one. Netscape 4.7x (his e-mail client) claimed that his had already expired -- despite displaying an expiration date in the future for the ID. Then he downloaded Mozilla only to find that it does not support encryption at all. He finally gave up after a lot of trying.
All I want is an e-mail client with an 'encrypt' button. I press the button and it asks me for an encryption key. I enter a key that my correspondent and I have exchanged over the phone, in person, etc. The message is encrypted and sent.
/. crowd thinks it is to use PGP. Some of my friends aren't computer gurus and it's just too much complication and hassle for them to use PGP.
I'm not Osama Bin Laden. I'm not expecting someone to be monitoring my phone, e-mail, in-person conversations, cell phone, etc. I just want to be able to exchange e-mail with friends and not have every nosy guy at the ISP or my company be able to read it.
PGP is just an incredibly complex and painful solution for what should be a simple problem. 99.9% of the public just wants to be able to occasionally send encrypted messages to friends using a private key. I don't care how easy the
I paid $100 for two 256M sticks of RAM from crucial.com, and my Athlon 1.2GHz still crashes all the time. Shrug.
If RAM alone could eliminate all system crashes, then Microsoft could just toss in a couple of sticks with each copy of Windows. As I am sure you know, there are lots of possible reasons for system instability and flaky RAM is only one possible cause. Other causes can range from the software/OS running on the system to heat problems to noisy (electrically speaking) power supplies. Sadly, there's no magic bullet, but you can at least feel pretty confident that the RAM is not to blame and move on to other theories.
Not only that, but the prices are for cheapo RAM with no compatibility guarantee. If you buy from your OEM or anything with a compatibility guarantee for specific models it'll cost more.
I have seen countless cases of generic, cheap RAM causing problems. I know screwdriver shops that got a bad reputation just due to the RAM they used (boxed Intel CPUs and Asus motherboards are not inherently unstable -- unless equipped with poor-quality RAM).
I just pay more and order from www.crucial.com (which is a subsidiary of Micron). The frustration caused by system lockups, crashes, etc. means that paying $80 for top-quality RAM is a lot smarter than paying $40 for something that might work.
As I stated in my original post, it is a noble thing to release "free" software. But that does not make anyone who chooses not to some kind of right-wing, establishment, capitalist pig. Most of the people who release shareware get an occasional small check in exchange for hours of development time. That's hardly puts them into the same boat with Microsoft.
While there are many good arguments in favor of open source software, some of which you make, the main appeal to many people is that they get something for nothing.
Pity it's $20 shareware
Why is it a "pity" that someone can try to earn a living by writing useful computer software? Should talented programmers write software for free and earn a living by flipping burgers or selling drugs? You should be damned glad that he's made a useful package and is only asking $20 for it.
This whole "all software should be free" crap is really annoying the hell out of me. If someone wants to give away the software that they write for the good of some community, that's very noble, but that doesn't mean that everyone should. I have found that most of the people in the "free software movement" are actually a bunch of leeches that just want to get something for nothing. They don't write software and are frequently just computer users. They give nothing back to the community. But they are the first ones on the FTP site when any new piece of free software hits the platters.
If you like the package, pay the guy $20. Then send him an e-mail thanking him for making it available for such a small price.
The point is he was trying to make is, what cause this anti-american prejudice and can you do anything to stop it? Arrogance of the kind you you just demostrated, is not going to win you any friends anywhere.
1. Pride in American ingenuity, drive, and technical leadership is not "arrogance."
2. I will be damned if I will tone down my pro-American "arrogance" out of a cowardly fear of more terrorist attacks.
3. I don't care to have a bunch of thugs, murderers, and religious zealots from Afghanistan as my "friends."
Maybe you can start telling blacks and Jews to "have a good hard look at [themselves]" to find out why people hate them so much. Maybe you can counsel blacks to stop listening to rap and hip-hop because it fuels bigotry. Perhaps you can advise Jews not to be so openly pro-Israel because it causes some people to be prejudiced against them.
The original poster made a sick comment claiming that America was, in some way, responsible for the attacks on the WTC. He was wrong and you are wrong for supporting him.
If you really want I could put it this way, THe US invented the internet, but couldn't think of anyway to turn it into the big all encompassing, new form of mass-media it is now days. It took a European idea to do that.
Those in the U.S. responsible for the Internet were, by and large, opposed to it being commercialized and turned into what it has become today. They were not trying to think of a way to make Joe Average into an Internet user. Claiming that they "couldn't think of a way" to make it commercial is hardly fair in light of that.
I'm not claiming that http/WWW is unimportant, but neither is it "The Internet". Like AOL Instant Messenger, Napster (in its day), and a myriad of other extremely powerful apps, it builds on the pioneering, brilliant work of those that created the Internet.
Going further, HTTP has morphed so much since its invention that early browsers (e.g. Netscape 1.0, Mosaic, etc.) are practically worthless today. The same cannot be said of FTP, SMTP, and other core protocols behind the Internet. Someone with an FTP client from ten years ago is still able to connect to modern FTP sites. People using old versions of PINE can still retrieve their e-mail. What takes brilliance and foresight is the creation of something in the computer field that can last for 20 or more years and still be useful.
Any comment that claims invention of the Internet as an US archievement
And who do you think invented it? It was invented and funded through the U.S. military agency DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) and was originally called the ARPANET.
and looks down on other countries because they supposedly are unable to manufacture ICs.
No, I look down on other countries that can't design competitive microprocessor ICs. Any third-world upstart can manufacture ICs. It's the difference between designing a car and bolting it together.
Last time I checked www was a thing that came out Switzerland,
Please! The web is just a minor protocol and formatting standard. It pales in comparison with Ethernet, IP, TCP, FTP, SMTP, POP, Telnet and other pioneering standards developed by U.S. companies and universities like Stanford, UCLA, and MIT. These foundations for the Internet were being developed in the late 60's and early 70's. Claiming that "www" is the basis of the Internet is as ignorant as claiming that AOL Instant Messenger makes AOL an Internet pioneer.
The Internet was a U.S. invention. It was not co-invented by the U.S. and other countries. 30+ years after its initial inception, it stands as a monument to the creativity, engineering talent, and technological vision of the United States. You're welcome to come along for the ride, but don't try to pretend that you designed the car.
... and exactly this arrogance is what made the WTC towers collapse...
What caused the collapse was anonymous cowards (like you?) feeling that they had a right to kill thousands of people because of their anti-american prejudice.
Please, slashdotters, post everything in metric, except when dealing with nautical measurements
The Internet was invented by the United States at U.S. taxpayer expense and, therefore, people should use U.S. standards when posting on it. It is really annoying when some Jacques-come-lately gets on the Internet and starts demanding that people post in his country's language, measurement system, etc.
Don't like inches, feet, miles, and fahrenheit? Then develop your own wide-area network comprising millions of computers. Maybe you could do that about the time that your oh-so-advanced Euro-buddies figure out how to produce a commercially viable microprocessor IC.
This is an idea I never really thought about for single handed typing input. wrote Commander Taco
So, how fast were you able to type "what are you wearing?" in the chat room?
... and masturbation can lead to abuse of others, especially while viewing child pornography, whether real or virtual.
Says who? That is just an absurd, unfounded claim.
There's something a bishop of mine always told people that I will never forget (additions in parentheses): there is not a man (or woman?) on the planet that can view pornography (intentionally or unintentionally) and not be affected by it.
Were you affected by viewing the bible? Does that mean that it should be banned? Of course pornography affects the viewer. It is supposed to and designed to.
Given the Catholic church's record with child molestation by members of the clergy (who do not, as a rule, view a lot of porn), I'd look for a more reputable authority figure on how to reduce pedophilia. Specifically, you may wish to look for one that does not dress young boys in silk robes (choir boys) and give the adults private rooms called "rectories."
it has already been proven that most predators, of adults and children alike, either were introduced or desensitized to such ideas by pornographic material, or used porn to excite themselves before actually violating someone.
You say that is has "already been proven." Please tell me the names of the studies that "prove" this.
Pornography has caused families to fall apart, fathers to abuse wives and children, children to become sexually active, and worse.
That is just more religious hysteria passed off as fact. Do you have even a shred of evidence that shows that pornography causes those things?
In my opinion, a trustworthy religious organization would be the best organization to make such determinations.
You and the Taliban leaders would get along great. They share your views on pornography and the role of religious organizations in restricting access to it. They also have one of the worst records in the world for abuse of women -- despite their complete ban on all forms of pornography and any other type of sexual entertainment. Gee, maybe having a bunch of extremely sexually frustrated people isn't such a good idea after all...
It was a funny mistake on my part when I reread it, but, hey, much worse has gotten into print. It was grammatically and syntactically correct, but hardly the finest example of the English language ever written.
Thanks for clarifying it for the nimrods.
Because a bunch of morons thought that the web had to look like television, they put ActiveX, VBScript, Javascript, Flash and other crap into browsers and plug-ins. This, not surprisingly, lead to many vulnerabilities like the one exploited here. (Who is the genius that decided that the "Back" button should be able to be redefined by any website that the user viewed?) If the web simply displayed pictures and text, we would not have this idiotic problem. Lest you laugh, that's what books and newspapers have done for centuries and they still seem mighty useful and popular.
We have seen this overcomplexity lead to many problems. Look at Microsoft Outlook: some group of idiots decided that displaying text, or even pictures, was not enough. So they added Visual BASIC scripting to it. And HTML that you can't turn off. Suddenly any nitwit could create an e-mail Trojan horse that emailed itself to every person in the address book. Or Outlook could display some web site in the preview window, play annoying music, or provide confirmation to a spammer that you received and saw his message.
It's time that we started demanding robust, secure applications even if it means that web sites won't be able to display animated, dancing piglets.
Except for the fact of course that the availability of "virtual" child porn will increase the number of child molestations. That's a big statement, I know, but consider regular porn for a minute. Regular porn makes one think of sex, thinking of sex tends to make people want to have sex, and people tend to carry out their desires.
Most people look at "regular porn", masturbate themselves to orgasm, and then stop thinking about sex. When Sweden legalized porn, rape, child molestation, and other sex crimes dropped.
Thanks for you intelligent, well-reasoned reply.
Why is the unit a hassle? Installing the unit was easy, its the same as installing any other aftermarket head unit. The tuner plugs into the back of the docking sled. No big deal.
The reason that the unit is a hassle is:
1. It requires a separate amp. If you already have a separate head unit and amp, that's no big deal. For those of us who don't, it is a PITA. And in my VW Golf, I simply don't need 200 watts per channel. The 19W RMS / 50W Peak x 4 provided by the JVC MP3 unit I bought is more than adequate. If I later add a powered sub, the need for amp power decreases even further. If I ever decide that I want to upgrade to separates, I can, but in the meantime, I'll have had a fully functional car stereo.
2. Getting new music into the Empeg is a major operation. If I buy a CD, I cannot just play it. I have to take the head unit out of the car, bring it downstairs to my computer room, hook it up, rip the CD, transfer the tracks to the head unit, disconnect it, take it back out to the car, and reinsert it.
While item two may not seem like a big problem to someone in a high crime area, most people who live in low crime areas don't make a practice of stripping our car of all valuables whenever we leave. My head unit and even the faceplate remain installed. I worry about things like connector longevity and the risk of dropping the unit or banging it into something, such as a wall or table, while carrying it.
The reason that I, and others, find CD/R based solutions preferable is because they answer these concerns. If I am on vacation and spot a CD I want to hear, I can just buy it, pop it in, and play it. If I want some more tunes in the car when I am at home, I can just grab a stack of CDs, rip them, and cut them onto a 20 cent blank. I get 8 hours of music on a single CD at a high bit rate (192kbps). So I change the CD after 8 hours of listening. That's just approaching zero on the inconvenience scale. I'd much rather do that than have to constantly be lugging around the head unit in case I decided that I wanted more music in the car.
None of this is meant to degrade the Empeg, which appears to be a really intelligently designed, classy unit (though the audio specs leave something to be desired). Conceptually, it's really neat and I'd have one today if it had a decent built-in amp, could play normal audio CDs, and could copy both audio and MP3 CDs to its hard disc.
--- Fred ---
You state that SB marketed this player. Ive never seen one advertisement at all for this. SB bought empeg for its software knowledge then killed the player off.
1. Go to their web site and you will see lots of advertising of the player.
2. It was open source, so the "software knowledge" was freely available.
3. MP3 software is not rocket science.
That's because ftp and telnet have no security and shouldn't be used. Particularly when openssh [openssh.org] and scp work so well.
Wrong. MD4/5 one-time-passwords put security into both Telnet and FTP. Granted, the transfers are done in the clear, but to claim that there is "no security" is just a gross over-generalization.
I agree that openssh and scp are good technologies, but most people don't have working clients installed on their machines.
Do you know for a fact that you can hear anything at or above 18khz?
Yes, in both ears. I have been tested. Consider the fact that the spec of 18khz is not even given in conjunction with a +/-db tolerance. It might be down 12db. And you conveniently ignored the horrible 50db channel separation spec.
The tuner is available, I don't know why you think it is such a drawback.
Because it adds an additional expense to an already expensive (avg. $1500 + amp) unit.
No, thats where you are wrong. Thats not why its been discontinued.
Then explain why it is being discontinued with no replacement product announced. It's being discontinued because of poor sales. The sales are poor because people cannot logically justify the cost and hassle of the unit.
No, I am not. I went to the web page and saw what it could do as sold to the end-user.
.1% does not constitute a viable market. A corollary to this is that what it does (as-sold) does not justify it's price to the vast majority of the public that would use it that way.
And your point is?
That 99.9% of the public will use it in the manner in which it is sold to them and that the other
If you happened to investigate the signature system a little closer you might notice that if you change your sig now it will change everywhere.
I purposely chose a page that was static (e.g., no replies allowed) as I believe that those signatures are also static. If you wish to take the time, I think that you will find other people have commented on my signature in the past. I have no time to search through the archives looking for such an examples but you are welcome to do so if you are the type of person who likes to retract unfair accusations.
In closing, this argument has gotten absurd. I explained why the general public would view the Empeg as overpriced. You came up with some esoteric uses for it that might make it valuable to you -- but to very few others. The fact that it has failed in the marketplace, despite having a high profile and being marketed by a large company, supports my arguments very well and I'll leave that market failure to stand on its own. I think that this may be the most telling statement in your whole response:
Personally I myself would not choose an Empeg even if the company was still producing them today simply because I believe other options are more interesting.
So what you are saying is that you cannot cost-justify it given its limitations? If you could, you would have one in your car today.
Tada!
It's overpriced for its capabilities.
But unfortunately you are simply ignoring a few things:
h ol d=0&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=67350
No, I am not. I went to the web page and saw what it could do as sold to the end-user. Normal people in cars want music. That's why it is sold for that purpose. I don't care about being able to hook my GPS to it and get a worse display than the GPS comes with. I don't have any need to store files from a digital camera on it -- I have a laptop for that or I can just buy more memory modules.
It's not an in-dash computer (Diamond has enough sense to know that a 128 x 32 display does not a computer make). It's a car stereo. That's why it is sold as that. And in that role, it's sorely lacking. Even the audio specs are not that good with the AUX input having an upper limit of 18khz and only a 50db separation. They don't even publish the frequency response specs for the D/A section.
You are in a car driving. What application could possibly make up for the fact that it can't play CDs, doesn't come with a tuner, doesn't come with an amp, and eats up the only available DIN slot in most cars? Don't cell phones distract you enough? Now you want to play PacMan on your dashboard?
Please! I would suspect you put this in your sig just because of this little arguement.
Shows what you know. That's been my sig for months and months. Here's the URL of a post I made in July:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=13374&thres
I believe it is plain to see that you are obviously biased towards your solution.
Yes. I developed that bias by comparison shopping. That's why I chose the JVC. I looked at the Empeg and, frankly, the cost was not an issue. What were issues were the shortcomings that I have mentioned previously (no CD, no amp, tuner not included, etc.) Even if you were to offer me the Empeg for $400, I'd still take the JVC KD-SH99 that I chose.
Feel free to maintain the persecuted attitude but I doubt any logical person will buy it.
I don't feel persecuted. My comments have not been modded down and this debate has nothing to do with the merits of Linux vs. some other OS.
You know what no logical person will buy? The Empeg. That's why they are being discontinued.
On the same note your unit can do so much less than the empeg.
Let's enumerate what each unit can do.
The Empeg can:
1. Play MP3s stored on a hard disc.
The JVC I mentioned can:
1. Play MP3s stored on CD.
2. Play audio CDs.
3. Receive AM and FM radio stations (w. no add-ons).
4. Directly drive loudspeakers.
5. Provide a subwoofer active crossover.
The Empeg does one major thing that my CD-based units do not while they do at least five things that the Empeg does not.
Do you really feel the need to defend your choice so much?
No. I was simply defending my answer to the question of why many people think that the Empeg is overpriced.
I think a lot of people just don't want to deal with CDs anymore. No matter what kind of CD it is nor how often you have to change it.
Obviously not enough to sustain the Empeg. I look at it as a convenience thing. Changing the CD out after 8 hours of music is a lot easier than lugging an Empeg into and out of my house and office every time I want to get some new music on it. There is also the concern about longevity. If I drop a 17 cent CD, I'm out 17 cents plus my time to cut it. If I drop the Empeg on one of its numerous trips in and out of the house, I might find myself out a lot more. Plus, the wear and tear on the Empeg's electrical connections is not inconsequential.
Enjoy your "fuzzy" music.
If I want it to be less "fuzzy", I can play an uncompressed CD rather than a lossy MP3.
It can play AM/FM. It has a top quality tuner.
Which is sold as an option.
If you want to play cds, then hook up a cd player to the aux in.
And affix it to my dash with duct tape? Most cars have a singe DIN opening. That means a single in-dash component for most people.
Empeg + 4 channel amp = $1200
Even ignoring the fact that you did not include the optional tuner cost or the price of the external CD player that you mentioned, it's still triple the price of the unit that I bought ($400) that handles MP3, CD, and AM/FM.