It's convenient! Just think about when you're away somewhere and just get this urge to HAVE to download a specific song, regardless how shitty quality and price it is, and you didn't have the mp3 player with you or couldn't wait with it until you had... Maybe it could even happen once a decade or so for me!
I'd actually argue that while the text ads had something to do with it, the massive growth in pop-up/under blockers made as much of a difference, if not even more.
I'd guess that far more users are met with Google text ads than the users of MSN Toolbar + the ~10% users of non-IE.
But he criticizes the 'stratospheric new price for the legal download of a single song: $2.50.' Sprint justifies the price because of the convenience and usability of its store.
Oh, so the songs are all DRM free??
Or is he just talking out his ass?
*checks article*
The high costs don't stop there. The new music store can be accessed -- so far -- on only two new high-end phones, from Sanyo and Samsung, which cost more than $200, even after rebates. Even then, if you want to store more than about 32 songs on your phone, you'll have to spring for a larger memory card, which costs anywhere from $25 to $100. You have to pay at least $15 a month for a data plan that allows you just to access the music store, though you also get other services.
Not only that, but the Sprint store imposes more limitations on the use of the songs than Apple does. You can play downloaded songs on only one phone, and the song files can't be played back on a PC.
Ehh... Not only is he talking out his ass about convenience. As Linus would've said: He's on crack.
Instead of trying to give less freedom for your paying customers compared to the pirated work, give more freedom? Online encoding services work great for allofmp3.com -- you tell them which song(s) you want, then if you want it as mp3, ogg, FLAC, or something else, and in which bitrate. Nothing is of course DRM'ed. Granted, allofmp3.com may not be entirely "clean" legally, but it's time the sites who are start doing the same.
Give the customers something P2P software rarely can; there's a lot to offer still, compared to eMule or Pirate Bay's unorganized torrents where you don't know how good job the ripper did, and where you only get the raw music, and nothing more.
I think they need to *compete* against piracy, as it'll always stay, and competing isn't done best by basically pissing on your paying customers with DRM protections.
Can we stop the "brits" thing. We don't go around calling the French, Germans or Polish "Europeans" yet we still get that crappy label (which very few support) from Americans.
We have nationalities, we're not from Britianland.
???
Scroll down the list and you'll see why that particular shorthand form is used...
I'll be interested to see what Microsoft is going to do in Vista to try to spoil things for Firefox. My guess is even further integration of IE into Windows, and lots of stuff that doesn't even feel like you're using IE will actually be through their browser. Also, they're going to try to get more lock-in on the corporate intranet rather than the public web.
No signs so far of further IE integration in Vista so far, at least in the most recent public October build. The November one is supposed to be out tomorrow btw. However, beta 2 (due ~January 06) will be much more interesting as it's supposed to take a leap in features. But I still don't believe there's much to fear in this specific area as they have both the DOJ and EU's knife on their throat here since quite a while ago. And they have acted before, not only by forcing them to provide an accessible UI for default browser switching, but also on the Media Player bundle.
What Google Base is proposing is very interesting (though of dubious use at the moment), but I just don't think that users are going to be rushing to grab ahold. Users will continue to keep their recipes on their computers or Recipe Database websites, jobs will continue to be posted on Monster, and life will otherwise continue on as is.
Maybe until they start noticing that their Google Base content start appearing in their main index, Froogle, and other services. It says this may happen if the relevancy is good enough on Google Base. Quite a deal for being free.
It would be useful if they actually provided some simple notification of updates to the services they provide, possibly just some small blurb on search result pages or something.
Right after Microsoft leaked that memo where they're going to try enter the online ad market due to problems with their business strategies, Google pulls a rabbit out their hat to raise their AdWords attractiveness to new heights... Establishing their foothold further, before MS have even got their steam up. I can already hear things crashing in Ballmer's office.:-p
It's calling Opera users as Firefox users! Don't ridicule us like that!;-)
Seriously, I don't understand why they *block* browsers like that. So, it renders a bit wrong? Whoop-di-doo... Before they've started supporting these browsers, if it would get popular, someone has written e.g. a Greasemonkey script to fix it. I can imagine an Internet bank doing it for it not having passed a browser security test yet and they'd have such routines, but a photo search service? What terrible things could happen from a different web browser rendering the content slightly differently?
Not that I'm looking at it as an advantage with Vista;-), but how is it really an advantage to NOT use an OS that supports "trusted computing"?
So far, it seems like it'll be like this -- download DRM HDTV movie from the web, and Vista with its trusted computing initiative will require a special monitor to playback it, or show it in reduced resolution. Sure, that sounds horrible, but what will you get in another OS? Yes, either the same behavior (DRM feature supported), an illegal version (DRM feature cracked), or a version that doesn't know what they heck you're trying to do with the garbled file (DRM feature not supported). How are these options really better? How have you gained anything in choosing an alternative here? And if you haven't, what have you lost if you'd use Vista?
And as for unprotected content, Vista plays mp3's perfectly, and lets you rip unprotected CD's to your hearts content. Use BitTorrent if you wish, and so on.
Are you talking about staying away from it for purely ideological reasons, or am I missing something? However, on the other hand, Linus has earlier said he has nothing against DRM, so who knows what'll happen there. And I agree with that -- to me it's just a feature like any other you can choose to support or not. Don't, and be at a disadvantage for those who wish to use it.
Also, Vista won't require any "Fritz" chip, or whatever scaremongering you may have been subject to in the "spying-chips-must-be-on-the-motherboard-to-instal l-Vista" department.;-) AFAIK, that hasn't even been brought up on the table by Microsoft lately.
No they won't. The whole reason people buy macs is for the stability of OSX.
Well, it's not like they can buy Macs for any other reason, is it, even if they wanted to? Here's what I mean: A reason, not all, but a lot of people use Linux is because they like to tinker with their PC's and try out new things, and explore new grounds that Microsoft hasn't or don't want to explore. They do this because they can. They can't with OS X, at least not legally.
Hardware revenues aside and the improbabilities of Apple doing so, I think that if Apple dropped their DRM protections to lock down hardware, we'd see new kinds of communities spring to life. Communities similar to the Linux one, maybe just wanting to find some middle ground between Windows and Linux, with a stable OS of a FreeBSD heritage, but still backed by a developer providing a unified interface, standards, and tools. I think it would be a new niche, but Apple is simply keeping the door to it closed for now.
The whole reason people won't be buying Mac's to tinker with on their PC's and look for / build drivers for is because Apple officially says they aren't allowed to, and puts in DRM checks just to be sure the message is clear.
If apple had to start supporting 3rd party hardware, this level of stability would severely drop.
Only if Apple stopped making hardware. Start supporting 3rd party hardware by removing DRM mechanisms and embracing a legal driver development community doesn't imply stopping developing and selling hardware they designed the OS for primarly.
Stability would only be at risk of dropping if people used non-standard hardware. OS X could for example at install-time display a dialog box that hardware not signed by Apple has been detected and warning the user of the potential effects. The same thing as Windows does when you install drivers that aren't digitally signed to have been tested in Microsoft's Windows Hardware Quality Labs.
More freedom to use what you need, while being informed about the risks, but there's of course little chance Apple will want to do this, I believe not because there isn't a community that want them to do it, but because they want to sell hardware.
Is this the same Sony that's using a) DRM to promote their products for playback and b) to restrict fair use rights, while c) recommending a Linux-incompatible ripper (heck, a PC is even defined as running Windows there)?
What a strange twist of irony that they were to become a backer of... Linux
Slashdot Mirror
And so, a new champion rised in the world of horribly silly open-source names.
Is the point really to make the application / technology users blush when they have to give away the name?
"Unfortunately"??
Only a Microsoft ally would claim that armed laser-using penguin overlords were bad news!
It's convenient! Just think about when you're away somewhere and just get this urge to HAVE to download a specific song, regardless how shitty quality and price it is, and you didn't have the mp3 player with you or couldn't wait with it until you had... Maybe it could even happen once a decade or so for me!
I'd actually argue that while the text ads had something to do with it, the massive growth in pop-up/under blockers made as much of a difference, if not even more.
I'd guess that far more users are met with Google text ads than the users of MSN Toolbar + the ~10% users of non-IE.
http://www.eightyford.com/google/02-googleplex.jpg
:-s
g
:-)
What the... Oh right, this is England.
Anyway, where's the male kids?
http://www.eightyford.com/google/06-googleplex.jp
Cute, the trademark sign in a heart!
I'm sure they'll grow up to become good business(wo)men.
Wow! This sounds awesome:
But he criticizes the 'stratospheric new price for the legal download of a single song: $2.50.' Sprint justifies the price because of the convenience and usability of its store.
Oh, so the songs are all DRM free??
Or is he just talking out his ass?
*checks article*
The high costs don't stop there. The new music store can be accessed -- so far -- on only two new high-end phones, from Sanyo and Samsung, which cost more than $200, even after rebates. Even then, if you want to store more than about 32 songs on your phone, you'll have to spring for a larger memory card, which costs anywhere from $25 to $100. You have to pay at least $15 a month for a data plan that allows you just to access the music store, though you also get other services.
Not only that, but the Sprint store imposes more limitations on the use of the songs than Apple does. You can play downloaded songs on only one phone, and the song files can't be played back on a PC.
Ehh... Not only is he talking out his ass about convenience. As Linus would've said: He's on crack.
Instead of trying to give less freedom for your paying customers compared to the pirated work, give more freedom? Online encoding services work great for allofmp3.com -- you tell them which song(s) you want, then if you want it as mp3, ogg, FLAC, or something else, and in which bitrate. Nothing is of course DRM'ed. Granted, allofmp3.com may not be entirely "clean" legally, but it's time the sites who are start doing the same.
Give the customers something P2P software rarely can; there's a lot to offer still, compared to eMule or Pirate Bay's unorganized torrents where you don't know how good job the ripper did, and where you only get the raw music, and nothing more.
I think they need to *compete* against piracy, as it'll always stay, and competing isn't done best by basically pissing on your paying customers with DRM protections.
What, I thought chemistry, with plastics and things like that, were popular among some geek communities? :-)
MS SQL was designed and likely largely tested in a single processor system and multiprocessor or HT support is somewhat less than optimal.
;-)
lol, with an outrageous claim like this for dedicated server software, you really need to provide an unbiased source.
This is an important problem on Windows
And, due to enormous MS dominance, for P4 HT processors as well.
Can we stop the "brits" thing. We don't go around calling the French, Germans or Polish "Europeans" yet we still get that crappy label (which very few support) from Americans.
We have nationalities, we're not from Britianland.
???
Scroll down the list and you'll see why that particular shorthand form is used...
Only if you're sharing the same thought as someone else. :-/
Then I'm afraid you're using another intellect's property...
I'll be interested to see what Microsoft is going to do in Vista to try to spoil things for Firefox. My guess is even further integration of IE into Windows, and lots of stuff that doesn't even feel like you're using IE will actually be through their browser. Also, they're going to try to get more lock-in on the corporate intranet rather than the public web.
No signs so far of further IE integration in Vista so far, at least in the most recent public October build. The November one is supposed to be out tomorrow btw. However, beta 2 (due ~January 06) will be much more interesting as it's supposed to take a leap in features. But I still don't believe there's much to fear in this specific area as they have both the DOJ and EU's knife on their throat here since quite a while ago. And they have acted before, not only by forcing them to provide an accessible UI for default browser switching, but also on the Media Player bundle.
According to News.com Microsoft has said they will require 64-bit instruction set processors (AMD64/EMT64) for all future processor releases.
I think "all" should be "some" and "processor releases" should be "software releases"... Here's CNET's take on it:
Microsoft said some upcoming products, including its Exchange 12 e-mail server, will run only on 64-bit processors.
It seems to be mostly a focus on 64-bit server products from now on to me, and far from a total switch to 64-bit.
What Google Base is proposing is very interesting (though of dubious use at the moment), but I just don't think that users are going to be rushing to grab ahold. Users will continue to keep their recipes on their computers or Recipe Database websites, jobs will continue to be posted on Monster, and life will otherwise continue on as is.
Maybe until they start noticing that their Google Base content start appearing in their main index, Froogle, and other services. It says this may happen if the relevancy is good enough on Google Base. Quite a deal for being free.
It would be useful if they actually provided some simple notification of updates to the services they provide, possibly just some small blurb on search result pages or something.
You could always join the Google Friends newsletter:
http://www.google.com/contact/newsletter.html
And they keep claiming there isn't life on Mars...
. jpg
Pfft...
http://marsrovers.nasa.gov/spotlight/images/3d01h
Right after Microsoft leaked that memo where they're going to try enter the online ad market due to problems with their business strategies, Google pulls a rabbit out their hat to raise their AdWords attractiveness to new heights... Establishing their foothold further, before MS have even got their steam up. I can already hear things crashing in Ballmer's office. :-p
It's calling Opera users as Firefox users! Don't ridicule us like that! ;-)
Seriously, I don't understand why they *block* browsers like that. So, it renders a bit wrong? Whoop-di-doo... Before they've started supporting these browsers, if it would get popular, someone has written e.g. a Greasemonkey script to fix it. I can imagine an Internet bank doing it for it not having passed a browser security test yet and they'd have such routines, but a photo search service? What terrible things could happen from a different web browser rendering the content slightly differently?
Not that I'm looking at it as an advantage with Vista ;-), but how is it really an advantage to NOT use an OS that supports "trusted computing"?
l l-Vista" department. ;-) AFAIK, that hasn't even been brought up on the table by Microsoft lately.
So far, it seems like it'll be like this -- download DRM HDTV movie from the web, and Vista with its trusted computing initiative will require a special monitor to playback it, or show it in reduced resolution. Sure, that sounds horrible, but what will you get in another OS? Yes, either the same behavior (DRM feature supported), an illegal version (DRM feature cracked), or a version that doesn't know what they heck you're trying to do with the garbled file (DRM feature not supported). How are these options really better? How have you gained anything in choosing an alternative here? And if you haven't, what have you lost if you'd use Vista?
And as for unprotected content, Vista plays mp3's perfectly, and lets you rip unprotected CD's to your hearts content. Use BitTorrent if you wish, and so on.
Are you talking about staying away from it for purely ideological reasons, or am I missing something? However, on the other hand, Linus has earlier said he has nothing against DRM, so who knows what'll happen there. And I agree with that -- to me it's just a feature like any other you can choose to support or not. Don't, and be at a disadvantage for those who wish to use it.
Also, Vista won't require any "Fritz" chip, or whatever scaremongering you may have been subject to in the "spying-chips-must-be-on-the-motherboard-to-insta
No they won't. The whole reason people buy macs is for the stability of OSX.
Well, it's not like they can buy Macs for any other reason, is it, even if they wanted to? Here's what I mean: A reason, not all, but a lot of people use Linux is because they like to tinker with their PC's and try out new things, and explore new grounds that Microsoft hasn't or don't want to explore. They do this because they can. They can't with OS X, at least not legally.
Hardware revenues aside and the improbabilities of Apple doing so, I think that if Apple dropped their DRM protections to lock down hardware, we'd see new kinds of communities spring to life. Communities similar to the Linux one, maybe just wanting to find some middle ground between Windows and Linux, with a stable OS of a FreeBSD heritage, but still backed by a developer providing a unified interface, standards, and tools. I think it would be a new niche, but Apple is simply keeping the door to it closed for now.
The whole reason people won't be buying Mac's to tinker with on their PC's and look for / build drivers for is because Apple officially says they aren't allowed to, and puts in DRM checks just to be sure the message is clear.
If apple had to start supporting 3rd party hardware, this level of stability would severely drop.
Only if Apple stopped making hardware. Start supporting 3rd party hardware by removing DRM mechanisms and embracing a legal driver development community doesn't imply stopping developing and selling hardware they designed the OS for primarly.
Stability would only be at risk of dropping if people used non-standard hardware. OS X could for example at install-time display a dialog box that hardware not signed by Apple has been detected and warning the user of the potential effects. The same thing as Windows does when you install drivers that aren't digitally signed to have been tested in Microsoft's Windows Hardware Quality Labs.
More freedom to use what you need, while being informed about the risks, but there's of course little chance Apple will want to do this, I believe not because there isn't a community that want them to do it, but because they want to sell hardware.
Yes, Sony deserves a lot of the blame. But Microsoft deserves just as much. You can start to "fight this stupidity" by not using Windows.
What does the engineering of Windows have anything to do with this?
Does a defenseless girl excuse the actions of a rapist too?
Like Sony assaults Windows because it let them to, doesn't make it more right to assault someone just because you could, not even slightly.
Just in case some don't know, in the upcoming IE 7, ActiveX is at least now an opt-in feature.
Is this the same Sony that's using a) DRM to promote their products for playback and b) to restrict fair use rights, while c) recommending a Linux-incompatible ripper (heck, a PC is even defined as running Windows there)?
What a strange twist of irony that they were to become a backer of... Linux