Frankly, if I were a Macchiavellian bastard who wanted to stay in power, I'd arrange to have several 'necessary' military actions (of the apparently non-quagmire type) going on at the same time as the elections. As long as it's considered treason to question those actions, there will be a majority of people who think a continuity of leadership is necessary, so I know I could be re-elected.
Congradulations, you've just described "The War On Terror". Someone will by be by to silence you within the hour.
Ever thought about actually dicussing the topic? Would it be too crazy to actually talk about the capture and its effects on Iraq?
Personally, I'd rather talk about the capture and it's effects on the United States of America, because I live there, and that's where I keep all my stuff.
That means a lot of talk about how much I've been lied to, how disappointed I am in my president (even if I had no part in electing him), and how worried I am that my country is going to hell in a handbasket because people don't know the difference between the lies and the truth (from the right, from the left, from anywhere.)
What today's capture means to me (and don't pretend this isn't on-topic) is that millions of Americans are going to go to sleep tonight believing that the 'war' is over (just like they did in April, with the "Mission Accomplished" stunt), and that the human and economic costs were worth capturing one man, and that they don't have anything to worry or think about except what to buy for Christmas.
This kind of thing terrifies me, as it should anyone, regardless of politics, because I know that millions of people will stop thinking about what's going on around them.
Dennis Kucinich [kucinich.us]: the only presidential candidate who voted against the PATRIOT Act
I feel compelled to point out that not every presidential candidate was in a position to vote against the PATRIOT Act. That's like saying "Howard Dean: the only presidential candidate who is governor of Vermont."
The iPod doesn't have those things because even without them, people are still buying it. That's really all there is to it.
Popular opinion and plain old word of mouth (amplified by excellent, if cheesy, marketing) have proven that the iPod doesn't suck. In this day and age, that guarantee is worth a hell of a lot more than most realize.
Sure, the iRiver might have more features, but is the software as good? Is the interface as good? Could my mom use it? My grandmother? My daughter? My dog? Is the sound quality good? Are the supplied headphones good? Is it going to fall apart in six days? Weeks? Months?
The thing is, the iRiver might be better in every way. But I'm sure the iPod is good.
So why does the iPod comes with a contact manager, alarm clock, calendar, games, and FireWire hard drive capability? That sounds like a lot of non-music-player features to me
For one thing, these are all software features, unlike an FM tuner and voice recorder.
They almost all tie-in to Apple software, as well. Your Address Book contacts are synced, as are your iCal calendars and alarms. If you use these things, having them synced on something you carry around all the time is incredibly useful and doesn't get in the way.
The games aren't exactly a selling point, but are pretty neat when you've got to stand or sit in the occasional long line. They are a hell of a lot better than the usual cell-phone games. I imagine they are there because one of the iPod developers cooked up the BreakOut clone in his spare time. That scroll wheel was just begging for it.
The FireWire hard drive capability is kind of expected. The iPod *is* a FireWire hard drive, so why wouldn't it work like one?
Really, none of the features you mentioned are comparable to adding an FM tuner or voice recorder. Those require additional hardware, which would cost a lot more for Apple than additional software features. They didn't get those billions in the bank by riding on thin margins. The iPod is a cash cow as it is. It doesn't *need* more features.
You can also "physically sit down to any machine running any OS and perform a denial of service attack" by doing this:
1) Get some explosives 2) Place explosives near target machine 3) Get to safe distance (optional) 4) Detonate explosives
I've reported this to Apple, Microsoft, Sun, and all the open source OS guys. They all say they see it as a non-issue! Except the OpenBSD guys who said "We're working on it. Patches welcome."
On the Mac, Alt-Tab (actually Cmd-Tab, the same physical keystroke) cycles through open applications, not open windows. (Cmd-` cycles through open windows within an app).
Both of these assume that your left hand is on the keyboard, and require multiple pressings to cycle through a stack of windows to find the one you want.
Expose does a lot of things here : It turns two different keystrokes into one action (either a keystroke or a mouse gesture, depending on your preference), eliminates the need to cycle through to find what you want, and assumes that you'll have a hand (left or right) on the mouse, a more common scenario than not. (If you've both hands on the keyboard, you can still use Cmd-Tab or Cmd-` to your heart's content.)
(Expose's other two modes are, for most people, less important and useful than it's main 'all windows' role, which is truly a stroke of genius as far as user interfaces go.)
The recordings on etree are of bands that condone or encourage taping and trading of live shows. People have been freely trading tapes of some of these bands' shows since before there even was an internet.
That said, it's pretty cool to be able to download a high-quality recording of a show you went to a few days earlier.
A better example would be Nullsoft WASTE (Released, then pulled.).
In that case, it was made clear that the author had written the software for his employers' internal use. It appeared that even though his contract didn't state "all your code are belong to us", that particular product was considered "Work For Hire" under copyright law, which means he didn't own the rights to it at all. The author had never heard of this forgettable part of copyright law, and quit in disgust.
This, however, seems like a more clear-cut case where the author's contract with his employer did not explicitly exclude software coded on his own time. It is not unreasonable for them to have such a contract. What if the software he was coding at home was directly competitive with Apple's software? Or that leveraged his insider knowledge of what Apple was working on? What if he was coding for Windows? What if he was writing an operating system that ran on PowerPC hardware and started a business selling the same? Would that not be a conflict of interests?
The only reason that the iTMS appears to have uniform licensing is that it lacks a streaming service entirely.
You say that as if it's a bad thing. I'm glad iTunes doesn't have a streaming service. Why should I pay more to hear certain tracks, while losing the ability to burn them or transfer them to a device, or share them on my LAN? Why pay more for less?
Tom Green: wildly successful, with shows on MTV Bam Margera & friends: MTV's Jackass, ultimately leading up to a Jackass big screen release.
Both of these have been heavily promoted by Viacom because they're enormously profitable. Yes, both of them started independently and were to some degree successful on their own, but don't think that being 'bought up' by MTV is a sign of individual success. Neither would be where they are today if not for the overwhelming promotion by Viacom.
I personally wouldn't mind having a couple of those and run Reason and Ableton Live side-by-side. Tweaking knobs on screen in real-time using a stylus is much better than using a mouse.
No way. Even better than that is to get a simple MIDI controller like an Oxygen 8 and tweak real knobs in real time. Use the right tool for the right job.
Thank you, Microsoft for standing up to my right to choose. Now fuck off.
I already have choices, and I choose iTunes, the iTunes Music Store, and the iPod. I've looked at other options, and with rare exceptions, they all suck. Some of them (like Buy.com's music downloads), sucked really fucking hard. If Microsoft (or anybody else) wants me to choose anything else, they should try creating something that doesn't suck, instead of telling me that I'm being "locked-in" when I choose to use iTunes.
why would a simple network file retrieving application (let's face it, that's all this is with a little security thrown in) need that much memory?
This is not just the Music Store. This is iTunes in it's entirety -- Ripping/Encoding/Organizing/Playback/Burning -- everything, really. It consumes about 20-30MB of RAM when in the foreground (drops to about 5-7MB when just playing in the background). This is comparable to Windows Media Player and MusicMatch Jukebox, apps which have the same functions. (Now's a good time to point out that iTunes is a hell of a lot better than either of these.)
That said, I'm currently running iTunes on Win2k on an older laptop with only 64MB of RAM as part of my stereo system, and it works fine for that with no other apps running.
What point is there to this kind of benchmark when the entire platform is so different?
I mean, who on earth really finds them relevant? Is anyone going to be choosing one over the other because of how fast they can search-and-replace in Word? Is anyone actually still running Premier on a Mac? Is any serious gamer even going to consider a Mac? Do graphic designers really use Gaussian blur that fucking much?
We all know that both chips are pretty fucking fast. Is that really in question here?
Another stunning lack of innovation... Why not put two contacts on the bottom and create a USB powered charging base, like the Logitech etc cordless mice.
You're ignoring the fact that the Apple wireless mouse doesn't have a base station at all. That's part of the draw. A wireless mouse would be rather pointless with my PowerBook if I had to plug in a base station.
The innovation here isn't really whiz-bang. Nor should it be for something as technically insignificant as a mouse/keyboard. What it is is just another step in a long term strategy that has already been successful.
The innovation started in January when Apple released PowerBooks with Bluetooth standard. It's continued until today where all but one of their products (iBook) doesn't have integrated (that is, internal) Bluetooth (standard or optional).
Apple is doing the same thing to Bluetooth that it did with USB Taking a useful but languishing interface and making it ubiquitous.
Not to poop on Synergy or anything, but it's really not necessary. You can click and hold on iTunes' icon to get it's dock menu, which allows you to change the rating. It takes about a second and doesn't take you out of the current app. Unless you absolutely can't take your hands of the keyboard, it's just as unobtrusive, and you save yourself $5.
I don't really understand why there's such a big stink over whether the G5 (in general or specific models) is faster or slower than PCs (in general or specific models). Even if it's 5% slower on some benchmark, it's still pretty fucking fast.
I haven't seen anyone disagree with that much, and yet lots of people are demanding that Apple (and only Apple) back up their marketing.
Slashdot Mirror
No, seriously? Windows GUIs suck... compared to what?
Oh boy, that's easy : Mac OS X
Frankly, if I were a Macchiavellian bastard who wanted to stay in power, I'd arrange to have several 'necessary' military actions (of the apparently non-quagmire type) going on at the same time as the elections. As long as it's considered treason to question those actions, there will be a majority of people who think a continuity of leadership is necessary, so I know I could be re-elected.
Congradulations, you've just described "The War On Terror". Someone will by be by to silence you within the hour.
Ever thought about actually dicussing the topic? Would it be too crazy to actually talk about the capture and its effects on Iraq?
Personally, I'd rather talk about the capture and it's effects on the United States of America, because I live there, and that's where I keep all my stuff.
That means a lot of talk about how much I've been lied to, how disappointed I am in my president (even if I had no part in electing him), and how worried I am that my country is going to hell in a handbasket because people don't know the difference between the lies and the truth (from the right, from the left, from anywhere.)
What today's capture means to me (and don't pretend this isn't on-topic) is that millions of Americans are going to go to sleep tonight believing that the 'war' is over (just like they did in April, with the "Mission Accomplished" stunt), and that the human and economic costs were worth capturing one man, and that they don't have anything to worry or think about except what to buy for Christmas.
This kind of thing terrifies me, as it should anyone, regardless of politics, because I know that millions of people will stop thinking about what's going on around them.
Dennis Kucinich [kucinich.us]: the only presidential candidate who voted against the PATRIOT Act
I feel compelled to point out that not every presidential candidate was in a position to vote against the PATRIOT Act. That's like saying "Howard Dean: the only presidential candidate who is governor of Vermont."
They wouldn't have to be gracefully undone, if there was a simple check to gracefully prevent them from being made.
Nevertheless, this, like any system, should be designed to fail gracefully.
Why doesn't the iPod have those things?
The iPod doesn't have those things because even without them, people are still buying it. That's really all there is to it.
Popular opinion and plain old word of mouth (amplified by excellent, if cheesy, marketing) have proven that the iPod doesn't suck. In this day and age, that guarantee is worth a hell of a lot more than most realize.
Sure, the iRiver might have more features, but is the software as good? Is the interface as good? Could my mom use it? My grandmother? My daughter? My dog? Is the sound quality good? Are the supplied headphones good? Is it going to fall apart in six days? Weeks? Months?
The thing is, the iRiver might be better in every way. But I'm sure the iPod is good.
So why does the iPod comes with a contact manager, alarm clock, calendar, games, and FireWire hard drive capability? That sounds like a lot of non-music-player features to me
For one thing, these are all software features, unlike an FM tuner and voice recorder.
They almost all tie-in to Apple software, as well. Your Address Book contacts are synced, as are your iCal calendars and alarms. If you use these things, having them synced on something you carry around all the time is incredibly useful and doesn't get in the way.
The games aren't exactly a selling point, but are pretty neat when you've got to stand or sit in the occasional long line. They are a hell of a lot better than the usual cell-phone games. I imagine they are there because one of the iPod developers cooked up the BreakOut clone in his spare time. That scroll wheel was just begging for it.
The FireWire hard drive capability is kind of expected. The iPod *is* a FireWire hard drive, so why wouldn't it work like one?
Really, none of the features you mentioned are comparable to adding an FM tuner or voice recorder. Those require additional hardware, which would cost a lot more for Apple than additional software features. They didn't get those billions in the bank by riding on thin margins. The iPod is a cash cow as it is. It doesn't *need* more features.
You can also "physically sit down to any machine running any OS and perform a denial of service attack" by doing this :
1) Get some explosives
2) Place explosives near target machine
3) Get to safe distance (optional)
4) Detonate explosives
I've reported this to Apple, Microsoft, Sun, and all the open source OS guys. They all say they see it as a non-issue! Except the OpenBSD guys who said "We're working on it. Patches welcome."
On the Mac, Alt-Tab (actually Cmd-Tab, the same physical keystroke) cycles through open applications, not open windows. (Cmd-` cycles through open windows within an app).
Both of these assume that your left hand is on the keyboard, and require multiple pressings to cycle through a stack of windows to find the one you want.
Expose does a lot of things here : It turns two different keystrokes into one action (either a keystroke or a mouse gesture, depending on your preference), eliminates the need to cycle through to find what you want, and assumes that you'll have a hand (left or right) on the mouse, a more common scenario than not. (If you've both hands on the keyboard, you can still use Cmd-Tab or Cmd-` to your heart's content.)
(Expose's other two modes are, for most people, less important and useful than it's main 'all windows' role, which is truly a stroke of genius as far as user interfaces go.)
The recordings on etree are of bands that condone or encourage taping and trading of live shows. People have been freely trading tapes of some of these bands' shows since before there even was an internet.
That said, it's pretty cool to be able to download a high-quality recording of a show you went to a few days earlier.
A better example would be Nullsoft WASTE (Released, then pulled.).
In that case, it was made clear that the author had written the software for his employers' internal use. It appeared that even though his contract didn't state "all your code are belong to us", that particular product was considered "Work For Hire" under copyright law, which means he didn't own the rights to it at all. The author had never heard of this forgettable part of copyright law, and quit in disgust.
This, however, seems like a more clear-cut case where the author's contract with his employer did not explicitly exclude software coded on his own time. It is not unreasonable for them to have such a contract. What if the software he was coding at home was directly competitive with Apple's software? Or that leveraged his insider knowledge of what Apple was working on? What if he was coding for Windows? What if he was writing an operating system that ran on PowerPC hardware and started a business selling the same? Would that not be a conflict of interests?
The only reason that the iTMS appears to have uniform licensing is that it lacks a streaming service entirely.
You say that as if it's a bad thing.
I'm glad iTunes doesn't have a streaming service. Why should I pay more to hear certain tracks, while losing the ability to burn them or transfer them to a device, or share them on my LAN? Why pay more for less?
Tom Green: wildly successful, with shows on MTV
Bam Margera & friends: MTV's Jackass, ultimately leading up to a Jackass big screen release.
Both of these have been heavily promoted by Viacom because they're enormously profitable. Yes, both of them started independently and were to some degree successful on their own, but don't think that being 'bought up' by MTV is a sign of individual success. Neither would be where they are today if not for the overwhelming promotion by Viacom.
See also : Merchants of Cool
Professional DJs don't buy music.
Never have.
They get promos from Record Pools.
Shitty DJs don't buy music. If you're only playing promos, you're a fucking tool.
I personally wouldn't mind having a couple of those and run Reason and Ableton Live side-by-side. Tweaking knobs on screen in real-time using a stylus is much better than using a mouse.
No way. Even better than that is to get a simple MIDI controller like an Oxygen 8 and tweak real knobs in real time. Use the right tool for the right job.
Thank you, Microsoft for standing up to my right to choose. Now fuck off.
I already have choices, and I choose iTunes, the iTunes Music Store, and the iPod. I've looked at other options, and with rare exceptions, they all suck. Some of them (like Buy.com's music downloads), sucked really fucking hard. If Microsoft (or anybody else) wants me to choose anything else, they should try creating something that doesn't suck, instead of telling me that I'm being "locked-in" when I choose to use iTunes.
why would a simple network file retrieving application (let's face it, that's all this is with a little security thrown in) need that much memory?
This is not just the Music Store. This is iTunes in it's entirety -- Ripping/Encoding/Organizing/Playback/Burning -- everything, really. It consumes about 20-30MB of RAM when in the foreground (drops to about 5-7MB when just playing in the background). This is comparable to Windows Media Player and MusicMatch Jukebox, apps which have the same functions. (Now's a good time to point out that iTunes is a hell of a lot better than either of these.)
That said, I'm currently running iTunes on Win2k on an older laptop with only 64MB of RAM as part of my stereo system, and it works fine for that with no other apps running.
Now might be a good time to point out that iTunes
is now available for Windows.
(Karma Whoring? What's that?)
What point is there to this kind of benchmark when the entire platform is so different?
I mean, who on earth really finds them relevant? Is anyone going to be choosing one over the other because of how fast they can search-and-replace in Word? Is anyone actually still running Premier on a Mac? Is any serious gamer even going to consider a Mac? Do graphic designers really use Gaussian blur that fucking much?
We all know that both chips are pretty fucking fast. Is that really in question here?
Which is why we're THRILLED when we keep getting dividend checks
Congratulations, you've just proved that you're not an Apple shareholder. They don't pay dividends.
Another stunning lack of innovation ... Why not put two contacts on the bottom and create a USB powered charging base, like the Logitech etc cordless mice.
You're ignoring the fact that the Apple wireless mouse doesn't have a base station at all. That's part of the draw. A wireless mouse would be rather pointless with my PowerBook if I had to plug in a base station.
The innovation here isn't really whiz-bang. Nor should it be for something as technically insignificant as a mouse/keyboard. What it is is just another step in a long term strategy that has already been successful.
The innovation started in January when Apple released PowerBooks with Bluetooth standard. It's continued until today where all but one of their products (iBook) doesn't have integrated (that is, internal) Bluetooth (standard or optional).
Apple is doing the same thing to Bluetooth that it did with USB Taking a useful but languishing interface and making it ubiquitous.
Ubiquity is the innovation
Not to poop on Synergy or anything, but it's really not necessary. You can click and hold on iTunes' icon to get it's dock menu, which allows you to change the rating. It takes about a second and doesn't take you out of the current app. Unless you absolutely can't take your hands of the keyboard, it's just as unobtrusive, and you save yourself $5.
I love it when one idiot mods up another idiot.
It's a joke, son. Played off another joke, no less. Surely you can see that now.
I don't really understand why there's such a big stink over whether the G5 (in general or specific models) is faster or slower than PCs (in general or specific models). Even if it's 5% slower on some benchmark, it's still pretty fucking fast.
I haven't seen anyone disagree with that much, and yet lots of people are demanding that Apple (and only Apple) back up their marketing.