Sample rates higher than 20Khz are required for accurate timing of spatial data. It isn't important for electronic music, but is crucial for classical and other forms which are recorded in a complex acoustical environment.
Yup. Sound roughly travels at about 1 foot/ms. My ears are about 8" or so apart, but I can clearly tell directional information based off of 0.7 ms timing differences and loudness differences I'm able to tell the world around me aurally. Its very impressive what the human (and superior) brains can do.
Monkey is good for speed and size, but it is less portable than flac, and I don't believe it supports meta-tags.
Trust me, I've used _everything_ and flac is the best in terms of quality, reliability, and features.
Now if only the flac authors will remember when UNIX had the philosophy of "no news is good news", and the verbose switch is nice for verbosity. For those that do not know, by default flac spams you with copyright notices and everything while compressing/decompressing. Its annoying. I believe there may be a -q flag to shut it up, but I'm old school:)
The problem with flac (in particular on devices) is that it uses lossless compression.
The "problem", that is why I use it.
Lossy compression is horrible for archival use. Especially in the hands of noobs that recompress the stuff again. The same goes for JPEGs and anything else. I'm more of an audio freak vs vide one, but even when I branch out to digital photography, its uncompressed pics for me.
Disk space is too cheap to sacrifice quality.
Amongst my circle of friends, "Friends don't let friends do MP3!"
So, Americans/Christians aren't excellent at killing people. They are still pretty good. The thing is that they kill "others" where most of the genocide kings kill their own people. Maybe I should have put that constraint on the exercise.
There are at least a few "Christians" that would threaten the same kind of violence as these Islamic extremists. Thankfully the seem to be a lot fewer of them.
Can you name 5 people in the last 50 years who has killed more people than Christians have? Be sure to include the "Christian" Presidents of the United States.
Keep in mind that since the beginning of Vietnam, the US has killed on average of 100,000 people annually.
This makes Saddam's 120-140 from 20 years ago seem like a waste of a trial.
The default in Safari, and I guess most browsers is to not show the URL that you are going to when you hover over the link. Even if the link ends in.html, all it has to do is redirect you to a.zip like this one and you got the fun by VISiTING the website.
Hell, even blindly visiting a website with a refresh after a few seconds could download and run one of these guys.
Moral of the story, "Thou shall not arbitrarily download and run stuff off of the net without human intervention".
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this exploit can only affect items that the user has rights to. If a script were written to make changes to the system, OSX should prompt you for your password, right?
You are right. Even if this exploit were to make it "in the wild", it would not be that damaging.
It would only really be able to muck with stuff that the user owns, which is only their data. And although everybody's data is so important that they never back it up, these weenie exploits never do anything productive/destructive like remove data, they just try to become the next big press release for taking down the net or whatnot.
First, this is a drastic error on Apple's part for defaulting to opening "safe" files, which has been an issue for at least one year for the "non-safe" ones like this.
I'm happy or at least safe with over 99% of Apple's decisions with defaults, but this falls into the "you fucked up" category. Its known from MS's track record, that you cannot safely execute vbscript or jscript code, or use any 'autorun' techniques. The user shall always be involved in opening a document that is downloaded from the net. Period.
This is quite a nasty little exploit so I suggest making the change ASAP.
I did this years ago.
Can someone remind me what is the point of a browser allowing "driveby downloads" and automatically launching the content of the download?
Safari has a nice download manager that lists the most recent downloads, and by simply double clicking on the one you trust and want to view is up to you.
Is it too much to ask for normal users to double click on a file to launch it? This is what we used to do, and still do with email, ftp, removable media, networked drives, everything. What is the point of a driveby download and launch?
Lossless formats like FLAC will become popular long before people demand better quality mp3 sound.
I'm (im)patiently waiting for that day to come.
It pisses me off that I have to incrementally take about 1 hour of a time of music into my car (an audio CD) out of the 2200+ hours of CD+ quality flac soundfiles that I have.
Although, I might break down and get one of these but even then, I still have to walk the stupid thing upstairs instead of using my WAP from my driveway.
I can't figure out if technology progresses quickly or slowly. I always seem to be waiting...
I think that open formats as ogg should have a better future if manufactures would offer more support to them. It's in our hand not to buy those gadgets that do not offer support to open formats.
OK. Then remind me what is wrong with flac that out of the box today supports up to 8 channels of sound and up to 32bit bit depth and up to 65,5350 (k)Hz sample rate? (Their FAQ must be wrong, because it says flac can only handle 65,5350 Hz rate, and I have 96 kHz files already).
The "File" menu has been disabled in all programs. GNOME proponents stated that the change is to ensure that end users "aren't confused by all of the big words, like 'exit' and 'print.'" The Edit menu has been removed in most programs.
Yes, that is funny!
However, who in their right mind would put 'exit' under the "File" menu? 'print' and 'close' makes sense, but 'exit' is to exit a program, not do anything with a file.
It looks like I'm going to have to admin a lab of Linux boxes soon, and I'm pleased with the progress that is coming on the nebulous "Linux desktop".
Although, both Gnome and KDE are still 90'ish, at least Gnome is now knocking off OS X instead of Windows.
Now, for the confusing part. Why was their previous allocator so lame compared to malloc()? Its worth a read to check out this for an allocator. Being that multi-core/"threads"/CPUs are pretty common today, its worth using that to one's advantage.
Now how do we get a plugin for something like this mass installed into browsers like that of flash, so that a web app like google reader (but independently developed, maybe specialized to other things) can take advantage of this idea?
"We" get this as soon as you 1) write it for all known platforms that people use for the web 2) integrate it into all of the known browsers for all known platforms.
I see zero need for a plugin where a standalone app can do the same thing without destroying my web experience in the process.
Remember the mid-late 90s when everybody and their mother wanted you to install a new plugin that did not work properly to view their website?
Do we want to ruin the web again with untested and proprietary extensions like plugins?
Personally, I'm much happier now that I can use one web browser to browse the web. I get a little grumpy when I go to a website that tells me my computer is not good enough for their lack of web programming abilities.
Lets stick to standards, or I'll come flying at you in the USofA at 100mph in the left lane because I feel as though that is the "better" lane to drive in. After all, that is what they use in Japan and England right?
I think all Unipage was trying to do was get away from the PDF plugin annoyance.
Just for the record, in 2006 here are things that web developers should NOT do anymore.
Open up links in new windows, unless its for a reason. The only reason I can think of is when sites like CNN open up external links to indicate that you are leaving their domain, and they are not responsible for the external site's content or whatnot. (Its still annoying, but it has a valid reason).
NEVER, EVER, use plugins. EVER!
All content like PDFs and Java JAR files, should have a mime type to just download the file for offline viewing. The same with flash, or the new plugin of the week.
Am I the only person who uses the web and downloads files? Am I the only person on the web who knows how to open up a link in a new window or tab? I find some websites just to be annoying to navigate. I can't figure out their rhyme or reason for opening up in a new window or not (sometimes it appears random), and I can't figure out to close the window to go back to the previous page or to hit the back button. Less is more.
I haven't unpacked a PC or laptop that came with windows since 2001. And in 2001, yes, you are right, it was there when I unpacked it until I put something else on it. But since that date, none of the computers I have bought or worked with (roughly 100) have come with Windows on them.
Obviously there are certain kinds of trade secrets or valuable personal data (banking, financial, etc) that are vulnerable to theft and this information is supposedly protected for that reason.
But, look a little deeper into who does this kind of stuff.
OK, are they bright or dumb?
Probably on the brighter side, right? Dumb people risk their lives ripping off a convenience store for $50.
OK, are they wealthy or "underpaid"?
I would say more on the underpaid part. Wealthy people do whatever they want anyway, there is basically nothing that can be done preemptively or after the fact with these guys most of the time.
So, what kind of person is underpaid and bright? Your unconfident typical slashdot geek. So, yeah, I would bet that treating this kind of guy pretty well would reduce your risk of getting burned by this guy.
It's not a law. It's just incorrectly called a law.
Right!
It should be plainly obvious that any exponentially increasing phenomenon can't be a "law".
Wrong!
For those that don't know, Moore's "law" says something like, "Every 18 months, humans (hopefully those that work for Intel) will figure out how to double the existing transistor count in a CPU".
Anybody that can put an open ended and exponentially increasing assumption on human behavior _AND_ call it a law should be in marketing, not science.
Now, regarding CPU performance and whatnot, am I the only one who believes that performance has not significantly increased over the past 3 years (2 Moore cycles)? Sure, they may be able to put more crap in the CPUs, but they surely haven't seemed to get any faster.
online banking is something I would not really do right now on a Windows-based system...)....
Teach your peers. Tell them about it. Tell them to friggin' install that damn antivirus tool. And to upgrade their Windows. And most of all, to finally abandon that insecure webbrowsing pest that comes with every MS System!
Why do you still recommend a broken solution?
Nobody that I know of that uses a Mac has virus problems, spyware, or any of the chronic probelems that plague Microsoft operating systems. In fact, I don't even know if there are antivirus or spyware removal programs for the Mac OS.
Besides games, I don't know what is so compelling about the Windows platform.
Although it's a worn cliche, sometimes the occasional rehashing can be called for: if you don't already exist, then how can you think?
The cliche "Cognito ergo sum" or "I think, therefore I am" works. Decarte did "systematic doubting", and he went down and doubted everything, but then realized in his doubting that he was still thinking, therefore he must at least be a "thinking thing", and a "thing" must exist. From there, he went on to conclude that God also existed, which that thought experiment seems a bit much of a jump.
But the thing is that I cannot prove my existence to anyone. As soon as I stop thinking, to me, I no longer exist, regardless of the fact of the matter. I could just be unconscious:)
The one on the right is basically a wheelchair. I saw a thing on TV about it, and the thing can scoot around on 4 wheels, or go upright like a regular Segway on two wheels (like in the picture). The cool thing about it, is that the person in the "chair" can be at eye level with "normal" people.
The other thing is an offroad version. Both are pretty cool. The regular Segways have no real use in my opinion.
I had a psychology teacher who pointed out that the term ``subconscious'' is pretty much a Hollywood popularized word. You're either talking about being conscious or not being conscious, that is, unconscious. The writer of the article seems to agree with her because they don't use the term subconscious. Sorry to nitpick, but the word unconscious communicates the idea more clearly, while the subconscious is vague. Besides, I think it's safe to say that if you're asleep, you're unconscious.
I'm pretty big in to consciousness. To me, that is all there is. Cognito ergo sum. "I think, therefor I am" for the english version.
To me, there are 3ish states of consciousness. Altered state of consciousness, via chemicals either natural (mental "disorders") or introduced (chemicals). Unconscious, which is "not conscious". An example is "superstitious behavior", where a person may do something repeatedly with no conscious awareness of it. One example would be when a person has a bad tooth or something, and the unconsciously try to cover the bad tooth with their lip. 99% of the time, the person will disagree with you if you tell them that they are doing the unconscious thing because, well they are not conscious of it. Another example of unconscious behavior in humans is that girls are more likely to wear tight, revealing shirts, optionally with their belly exposed when they are at the peak of their menstrual fertility. Then there is "subconscious", which is like intuition. You may look around and see something that you are not conscious of, but make a decision based on the observation. This could be something like smell. Humans are not very good sniffers, but they can tell things like dominance and fertility of others via smell, but not be consciously aware of it. They will however behave according to the smell data or whatnot.
Granted, there is no clear distinction between unconscious and subconscious. If I get smashed in the head, and fall unconscious, that is not subconscious. To me, the distinction between unconscious and subconscious, is that unconscious simply does not have conscious involvement. It just happens. Subconscious creeps into consciousness and a decision is based on the "subconscious" data, but there may not be any conscious thought of the subconsciously observed thing.
Yes, Apple does not have $200 PCs at Wal-mart where I guess everybody else buys their computers. But they do sell iMacs at $1,300 with a monitor included, or a computer without a monitor for $500. Dell's front page today has leadin prices from $299 to $999 for their systems.
So, yeah, Apple hardware, despite that its many steps above a Dell in terms of styling and quality of hardware is bloated in price.
...whole laundry list of other services and technologies.
Like the laserprinter, 3.5" floppies, getting rid of 3.5" floppies, the GUI, the mouse, USB, Firewire, gigabit, booting off of an external device, the list goes on, that is all I can think of off of the top of my head.
Apple brings technology to the user, other companies talk about innovation.
Slashdot Mirror
Sample rates higher than 20Khz are required for accurate timing of spatial data. It isn't important for electronic music, but is crucial for classical and other forms which are recorded in a complex acoustical environment.
Yup. Sound roughly travels at about 1 foot/ms. My ears are about 8" or so apart, but I can clearly tell directional information based off of 0.7 ms timing differences and loudness differences I'm able to tell the world around me aurally. Its very impressive what the human (and superior) brains can do.
Monkey is good for speed and size, but it is less portable than flac, and I don't believe it supports meta-tags.
Trust me, I've used _everything_ and flac is the best in terms of quality, reliability, and features.
Now if only the flac authors will remember when UNIX had the philosophy of "no news is good news", and the verbose switch is nice for verbosity. For those that do not know, by default flac spams you with copyright notices and everything while compressing/decompressing. Its annoying. I believe there may be a -q flag to shut it up, but I'm old school
The problem with flac (in particular on devices) is that it uses lossless compression.
The "problem", that is why I use it.
Lossy compression is horrible for archival use. Especially in the hands of noobs that recompress the stuff again. The same goes for JPEGs and anything else. I'm more of an audio freak vs vide one, but even when I branch out to digital photography, its uncompressed pics for me.
Disk space is too cheap to sacrifice quality.
Amongst my circle of friends, "Friends don't let friends do MP3!"
Yeah, I even visited that page.
So, Americans/Christians aren't excellent at killing people. They are still pretty good. The thing is that they kill "others" where most of the genocide kings kill their own people. Maybe I should have put that constraint on the exercise.
Good work!
There are at least a few "Christians" that would threaten the same kind of violence as these Islamic extremists. Thankfully the seem to be a lot fewer of them.
Can you name 5 people in the last 50 years who has killed more people than Christians have? Be sure to include the "Christian" Presidents of the United States.
Keep in mind that since the beginning of Vietnam, the US has killed on average of 100,000 people annually.
This makes Saddam's 120-140 from 20 years ago seem like a waste of a trial.
Just VISITING the site won't do that.
.html, all it has to do is redirect you to a .zip like this one and you got the fun by VISiTING the website.
Wrong!
The default in Safari, and I guess most browsers is to not show the URL that you are going to when you hover over the link. Even if the link ends in
Hell, even blindly visiting a website with a refresh after a few seconds could download and run one of these guys.
Moral of the story, "Thou shall not arbitrarily download and run stuff off of the net without human intervention".
That has been known for many, many years to date.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this exploit can only affect items that the user has rights to. If a script were written to make changes to the system, OSX should prompt you for your password, right?
You are right. Even if this exploit were to make it "in the wild", it would not be that damaging.
It would only really be able to muck with stuff that the user owns, which is only their data. And although everybody's data is so important that they never back it up, these weenie exploits never do anything productive/destructive like remove data, they just try to become the next big press release for taking down the net or whatnot.
First, this is a drastic error on Apple's part for defaulting to opening "safe" files, which has been an issue for at least one year for the "non-safe" ones like this.
I'm happy or at least safe with over 99% of Apple's decisions with defaults, but this falls into the "you fucked up" category. Its known from MS's track record, that you cannot safely execute vbscript or jscript code, or use any 'autorun' techniques. The user shall always be involved in opening a document that is downloaded from the net. Period.
Yes, its really a bug in LaunchServices
& q=windows+autorun+vulnerability&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
& q=windows+vbscript+vulnerability&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
& q=windows+jscript+vulnerability&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
& q=driveby+downloads&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
No it is not a bug, its an implementation error.
No application on a computer should run downloaded code without human intervention.
Javascript is fairly benign. HTML is fairly benign.
"Autorun" in any variety is going to hurt people, See: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en
What about vbscripting? See: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en
What about jscript? See: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en
What about driveby downloads? A new term coined to exactly describe this problem. See: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en
A wise man once said, "A smart man learns from his mistakes, a Wise man learns from other people's mistakes."
There is no try. Do or do not. Do not like Microsoft does.
Regarding this URL:
5 084
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=16724&cid=195
I would like to contact you regarding these types of systems. Can you provide some form of contact information so I can contact you?
I would greatly appreciate it.
This is quite a nasty little exploit so I suggest making the change ASAP.
I did this years ago.
Can someone remind me what is the point of a browser allowing "driveby downloads" and automatically launching the content of the download?
Safari has a nice download manager that lists the most recent downloads, and by simply double clicking on the one you trust and want to view is up to you.
This is at least over a 1 year old issue: http://www.net-security.org/vuln.php?id=3461
Is it too much to ask for normal users to double click on a file to launch it? This is what we used to do, and still do with email, ftp, removable media, networked drives, everything. What is the point of a driveby download and launch?
Lossless formats like FLAC will become popular long before people demand better quality mp3 sound.
I'm (im)patiently waiting for that day to come.
It pisses me off that I have to incrementally take about 1 hour of a time of music into my car (an audio CD) out of the 2200+ hours of CD+ quality flac soundfiles that I have.
Although, I might break down and get one of these but even then, I still have to walk the stupid thing upstairs instead of using my WAP from my driveway.
I can't figure out if technology progresses quickly or slowly. I always seem to be waiting...
I think that open formats as ogg should have a better future if manufactures would offer more support to them. It's in our hand not to buy those gadgets that do not offer support to open formats.
OK. Then remind me what is wrong with flac that out of the box today supports up to 8 channels of sound and up to 32bit bit depth and up to 65,5350 (k)Hz sample rate? (Their FAQ must be wrong, because it says flac can only handle 65,5350 Hz rate, and I have 96 kHz files already).
Its what I use exclusively for my music.
The "File" menu has been disabled in all programs. GNOME proponents stated that the change is to ensure that end users "aren't confused by all of the big words, like 'exit' and 'print.'" The Edit menu has been removed in most programs.
Yes, that is funny!
However, who in their right mind would put 'exit' under the "File" menu? 'print' and 'close' makes sense, but 'exit' is to exit a program, not do anything with a file.
It looks like I'm going to have to admin a lab of Linux boxes soon, and I'm pleased with the progress that is coming on the nebulous "Linux desktop".
Although, both Gnome and KDE are still 90'ish, at least Gnome is now knocking off OS X instead of Windows.
Now, for the confusing part. Why was their previous allocator so lame compared to malloc()? Its worth a read to check out this for an allocator. Being that multi-core/"threads"/CPUs are pretty common today, its worth using that to one's advantage.
Now how do we get a plugin for something like this mass installed into browsers like that of flash, so that a web app like google reader (but independently developed, maybe specialized to other things) can take advantage of this idea?
"We" get this as soon as you 1) write it for all known platforms that people use for the web 2) integrate it into all of the known browsers for all known platforms.
I see zero need for a plugin where a standalone app can do the same thing without destroying my web experience in the process.
Remember the mid-late 90s when everybody and their mother wanted you to install a new plugin that did not work properly to view their website?
Do we want to ruin the web again with untested and proprietary extensions like plugins?
Personally, I'm much happier now that I can use one web browser to browse the web. I get a little grumpy when I go to a website that tells me my computer is not good enough for their lack of web programming abilities.
Lets stick to standards, or I'll come flying at you in the USofA at 100mph in the left lane because I feel as though that is the "better" lane to drive in. After all, that is what they use in Japan and England right?
I think all Unipage was trying to do was get away from the PDF plugin annoyance.
Just for the record, in 2006 here are things that web developers should NOT do anymore.
Open up links in new windows, unless its for a reason. The only reason I can think of is when sites like CNN open up external links to indicate that you are leaving their domain, and they are not responsible for the external site's content or whatnot. (Its still annoying, but it has a valid reason).
NEVER, EVER, use plugins. EVER!
All content like PDFs and Java JAR files, should have a mime type to just download the file for offline viewing. The same with flash, or the new plugin of the week.
Am I the only person who uses the web and downloads files? Am I the only person on the web who knows how to open up a link in a new window or tab? I find some websites just to be annoying to navigate. I can't figure out their rhyme or reason for opening up in a new window or not (sometimes it appears random), and I can't figure out to close the window to go back to the previous page or to hit the back button. Less is more.
It's there when you unpack your new PC or laptop.
Huh?
I haven't unpacked a PC or laptop that came with windows since 2001. And in 2001, yes, you are right, it was there when I unpacked it until I put something else on it. But since that date, none of the computers I have bought or worked with (roughly 100) have come with Windows on them.
Obviously there are certain kinds of trade secrets or valuable personal data (banking, financial, etc) that are vulnerable to theft and this information is supposedly protected for that reason.
But, look a little deeper into who does this kind of stuff.
OK, are they bright or dumb?
Probably on the brighter side, right? Dumb people risk their lives ripping off a convenience store for $50.
OK, are they wealthy or "underpaid"?
I would say more on the underpaid part. Wealthy people do whatever they want anyway, there is basically nothing that can be done preemptively or after the fact with these guys most of the time.
So, what kind of person is underpaid and bright? Your unconfident typical slashdot geek. So, yeah, I would bet that treating this kind of guy pretty well would reduce your risk of getting burned by this guy.
It's not a law. It's just incorrectly called a law.
Right!
It should be plainly obvious that any exponentially increasing phenomenon can't be a "law".
Wrong!
For those that don't know, Moore's "law" says something like, "Every 18 months, humans (hopefully those that work for Intel) will figure out how to double the existing transistor count in a CPU".
Anybody that can put an open ended and exponentially increasing assumption on human behavior _AND_ call it a law should be in marketing, not science.
Now, regarding CPU performance and whatnot, am I the only one who believes that performance has not significantly increased over the past 3 years (2 Moore cycles)? Sure, they may be able to put more crap in the CPUs, but they surely haven't seemed to get any faster.
online banking is something I would not really do right now on a Windows-based system...). ...
Teach your peers. Tell them about it. Tell them to friggin' install that damn antivirus tool. And to upgrade their Windows. And most of all, to finally abandon that insecure webbrowsing pest that comes with every MS System!
Why do you still recommend a broken solution?
Nobody that I know of that uses a Mac has virus problems, spyware, or any of the chronic probelems that plague Microsoft operating systems. In fact, I don't even know if there are antivirus or spyware removal programs for the Mac OS.
Besides games, I don't know what is so compelling about the Windows platform.
Although it's a worn cliche, sometimes the occasional rehashing can be called for: if you don't already exist, then how can you think?
:)
The cliche "Cognito ergo sum" or "I think, therefore I am" works. Decarte did "systematic doubting", and he went down and doubted everything, but then realized in his doubting that he was still thinking, therefore he must at least be a "thinking thing", and a "thing" must exist. From there, he went on to conclude that God also existed, which that thought experiment seems a bit much of a jump.
But the thing is that I cannot prove my existence to anyone. As soon as I stop thinking, to me, I no longer exist, regardless of the fact of the matter. I could just be unconscious
By far, these are the coolest Segways to date.
The one on the right is basically a wheelchair. I saw a thing on TV about it, and the thing can scoot around on 4 wheels, or go upright like a regular Segway on two wheels (like in the picture). The cool thing about it, is that the person in the "chair" can be at eye level with "normal" people.
The other thing is an offroad version. Both are pretty cool. The regular Segways have no real use in my opinion.
I had a psychology teacher who pointed out that the term ``subconscious'' is pretty much a Hollywood popularized word. You're either talking about being conscious or not being conscious, that is, unconscious. The writer of the article seems to agree with her because they don't use the term subconscious. Sorry to nitpick, but the word unconscious communicates the idea more clearly, while the subconscious is vague. Besides, I think it's safe to say that if you're asleep, you're unconscious.
I'm pretty big in to consciousness. To me, that is all there is. Cognito ergo sum. "I think, therefor I am" for the english version.
To me, there are 3ish states of consciousness. Altered state of consciousness, via chemicals either natural (mental "disorders") or introduced (chemicals). Unconscious, which is "not conscious". An example is "superstitious behavior", where a person may do something repeatedly with no conscious awareness of it. One example would be when a person has a bad tooth or something, and the unconsciously try to cover the bad tooth with their lip. 99% of the time, the person will disagree with you if you tell them that they are doing the unconscious thing because, well they are not conscious of it. Another example of unconscious behavior in humans is that girls are more likely to wear tight, revealing shirts, optionally with their belly exposed when they are at the peak of their menstrual fertility. Then there is "subconscious", which is like intuition. You may look around and see something that you are not conscious of, but make a decision based on the observation. This could be something like smell. Humans are not very good sniffers, but they can tell things like dominance and fertility of others via smell, but not be consciously aware of it. They will however behave according to the smell data or whatnot.
Granted, there is no clear distinction between unconscious and subconscious. If I get smashed in the head, and fall unconscious, that is not subconscious. To me, the distinction between unconscious and subconscious, is that unconscious simply does not have conscious involvement. It just happens. Subconscious creeps into consciousness and a decision is based on the "subconscious" data, but there may not be any conscious thought of the subconsciously observed thing.
Yes, Apple does not have $200 PCs at Wal-mart where I guess everybody else buys their computers. But they do sell iMacs at $1,300 with a monitor included, or a computer without a monitor for $500. Dell's front page today has leadin prices from $299 to $999 for their systems.
So, yeah, Apple hardware, despite that its many steps above a Dell in terms of styling and quality of hardware is bloated in price.
...whole laundry list of other services and technologies.
Like the laserprinter, 3.5" floppies, getting rid of 3.5" floppies, the GUI, the mouse, USB, Firewire, gigabit, booting off of an external device, the list goes on, that is all I can think of off of the top of my head.
Apple brings technology to the user, other companies talk about innovation.