#1 They have last mover advantage; they didn't try to create a new market just tried to do a better job. #2 It's priced to make them money; they aren't giving them away meaning it's healthy for them #3 Because they are actually selling music over time as that makes more money they can afford at some point lower margins on the pods
This means #4, that in Japan or any place else, if people only buy the pods that's ok. If people download thats ok too.
One thing that I had problems with was I didn't know I could get iTunes and sign up and not actually own an IPOD. I have no Pod and no competive product. I just run iTunes on my PC and download mostly video, some tunes and the free songs they offer!
so ok, 5 ways.. #5 it works as software only! it's great on MY PC:)
In the US copyright holders have managed to extend and extend (E.g., Sonny Bono Act) copyright again and again.. I see now reason why they will not do so. They have every reason to spend as much money to Lobby on this issue.
They only threat is really, like a crack dealer, sending a hit in 30 second on some street corner, in a few years you'll be able to buy a tera-byte of data (songs, movies, etc.) No Net, No P2P, just some street kid or college kid or house wife swapping $20 for a hit of media..
Short of that, or out right p2p "lifting" there is much to stop the copyright lobby..
To be clear I think p2p drives sales and the RIAA and MPAA are finding it harder and harder to make their business work like a production line... 100 Million doesn't make a hit movie any more and NYS Atty General is putting real dent in RIAA MEMBERS PAYOLA schemes. They are the ones who are illegal. We need a class action suit to sue them corp. and personally for all of the damages from their Payola.
Based on this plus a fair amount of well settled law and I expect Google to win most if not all legal fights...
The stronger Fair use is and the more settled the LAW is about Fair Use, the better it will be for other (IMHO) technologies that also require "Fair Use."
Google is only putting part of the books online.. The whole book is searchable but you can't download it. That is well within both the spirit and the meaning of fair use law. In fact if anything it will lead to more request to get the book both from libraries and to purchase it; both of which will ultimately increase sales of these books. Given that some of these books are not in print, it is also of great benefit to society.
It could be cost.. to do a high strength car window might say be $30,000 USD and the same for a pair of eye glasses by size only say $300 a lens. My guess these glasses if they exist in prototype form are in the many thousands of dollar range.
I'd hate to be driving my car w/ these when the batteries go or the computer reboots and the glasses get all funky!
As for medical devices, she is/was a home aid worker so was thinking she might have use of a heart monitor or blood sugar monitor or even a electronic home scale...
Most builders and contruction types (at least on this side of the pond) have lots electric power tools encluding many that are battery powered and I'm would think there are some computers in those as well..
Sounds like some one in her home used her name/credit to buy Net Access leading them to sue her rather than whoever used the computer. Or perhaps this is a case of an identity thef!
It is also of course factually wrong that she has never used a computer. People use them all the them. There are embedded system in microwaves, ovens, washing machines, medical devices, etc. It would be impossible for anyone but the Unibomber to have never used anything that contained a computer... of course they mean personal computer/PC.. well, they should say that..
With the Switch to INTEL, Apple puts the competition squarely on the OS to OS head...
MS agrees since they have just CLONED (again) the MAC OS.
Apple isn't looking to sell Office to computers to the Average office worker nor the average home users. They want to sell office computers to the CREATIVE Staff/Industry. In terms of home users, they want home users who want something a bit different, like those who were willing to pay a bit extra for a BMW or a SAAB.
The success of the iPOD means more people are willing to buy a computer that is a "bit different."
The question is will this market be enough to keep Apple in the Black? That really depends on if they have a follow up hit to the iPOD.
NOTE: The iPOD has done well because Apple had the LAST MOVER advantage. They came in after the market was established and offered a better product (E.g., UI) with better support (iTunes) and better Accessories (iTune's Store).
Will they have the ability (and courage) to wait (again) while others spend millions or billions to educate the population about some new market and then come in at the end, just as the market is ramping up and offer a better product? Timing is hard. Can you say, "iPOD for my TV!."
If it did, would that mean you could use kenetic energy (gun powder, etc.) to trigger a LASER pulse? Meaning you could create a weapon that didn't need a big electrical plug?
If the APP is open source but the OS is not and/or the Network stack and/or any drivers are not open source it doesn't really help. A step in the right direction but the entire system (hardware, Software, Firm ware, etc. need to be inspectable.
If these machines are networked in anyway all of that equipment should also be open source..
This is a pure move to stop Microsoft from a) killing googles current deail w/ AOL and from doing anything else with AOL that would hurt google. I doubt they care if their is any real upside.
I totally agree.. and with a really "free" market, you should be able to buy bits in advance in some sort of commodity market so you have plenty of quality bits for the next Nearly Naked Fashion Model Stream!
The ISSUE for regulators is the quality of the "all you can eat price." At the local China Buffet the food can suck but it isn't allowed to make you sick. Likewise, the all you can eat price shouldn't be deliberately underpowered. Or worse handicap'd.
Some day, bits have to cost money. They may come a few trillion to the $ but if you want a HDTV/DVD quality movie streamed to your home, in real time, at 8pm on Friday night, that's a real amount of bandwidth and that's something that is worth charging for.
When you pay a flat rate, your eating at a buffet getting the "all you can eat" rate. Plenty to eat but the food basically sucks. That's ok for email, ok for P2P, event for net games and other things like basic HTTP. There is no promise that the bits will arrive (UPD) or that if they do arrive that they will arrive in order (TCP).
Paying more for premium bits is something that will have to happen some day (economically speaking). If you don't like the price you switch IPs. If you don't want to stream HTDV because it uses to many bits then buy the DVD.
The good news is when it costs $2 or $3 (or less) in bandwidth to stream a full res full length movie to your HOME, that your yearly cost of VOICE Telephony (VOIP, etc.) is going to be (priced by the bits) $1 a year.
Large organziations have annual training budgets. Each year they can focus on critical training issues.
With a major software change its possible that the training budget will be spent to fast/quick and additional funds would be needed.
Its also possible that with a good training staff, computer based training (internet based training too), and so forth that the extra expensive is more of a mole hill than a mountain.
With a trademark on the name using the name RISK, you might cause confusion... picking a totally different name gets' you out of the trademark issue (unless you call it something that would cause confusion (same/similar name and the same or similar product).
Thus Lexis and Lexsus (the database and the car company) DO NOT infringe because no one (reasonable) would think they are buying database access and ooopps find out they bought a car instead...
I have a burger joint.. My old fry oil goes to my Neon Sign guy -> http://www.litebriteneon.com/ who runs his desiel car on it... I think he just runs it as is (after a good filtering..).
He gets my old oil for free... New veggie oil costs me about $3-$4 a gallon..
its' called a public good. Water is still fairly cheap here and so there is little incentive economically to develop a variety of things that would make sense if you actually had to pay serious $$ for your water..
If you look at the sample images, you can see the type of image that will be "helped" by their camera...
Auto focus cameras have to focus on something... and many times I've had them focus on the wrong thing. There isn't really anything you can do at that point except reshoot.. or use the system such as they describe.
This would be of great value to me, I have many photos where the image is otherwise perfect except the focus point is off.
Slashdot Mirror
They got it right 3 or 4 ways.
:)
#1 They have last mover advantage; they didn't try to create a new market just tried to do a better job.
#2 It's priced to make them money; they aren't giving them away meaning it's healthy for them
#3 Because they are actually selling music over time as that makes more money they can afford at some point lower margins on the pods
This means #4, that in Japan or any place else, if people only buy the pods that's ok. If people download thats ok too.
One thing that I had problems with was I didn't know I could get iTunes and sign up and not actually own an IPOD. I have no Pod and no competive product. I just run iTunes on my PC and download mostly video, some tunes and the free songs they offer!
so ok, 5 ways..
#5 it works as software only! it's great on MY PC
In the US copyright holders have managed to extend and extend (E.g., Sonny Bono Act) copyright again and again.. I see now reason why they will not do so. They have every reason to spend as much money to Lobby on this issue.
They only threat is really, like a crack dealer, sending a hit in 30 second on some street corner, in a few years you'll be able to buy a tera-byte of data (songs, movies, etc.) No Net, No P2P, just some street kid or college kid or house wife swapping $20 for a hit of media..
Short of that, or out right p2p "lifting" there is much to stop the copyright lobby..
To be clear I think p2p drives sales and the RIAA and MPAA are finding it harder and harder to make their business work like a production line... 100 Million doesn't make a hit movie any more and NYS Atty General is putting real dent in RIAA MEMBERS PAYOLA schemes. They are the ones who are illegal. We need a class action suit to sue them corp. and personally for all of the damages from their Payola.
Based on this plus a fair amount of well settled law and I expect Google to win most if not all legal fights...
The stronger Fair use is and the more settled the LAW is about Fair Use, the better it will be for other (IMHO) technologies that also require "Fair Use."
Google is only putting part of the books online.. The whole book is searchable but you can't download it. That is well within both the spirit and the meaning of fair use law. In fact if anything it will lead to more request to get the book both from libraries and to purchase it; both of which will ultimately increase sales of these books. Given that some of these books are not in print, it is also of great benefit to society.
It could be cost.. to do a high strength car window might say be $30,000 USD and the same for a pair of eye glasses by size only say $300 a lens. My guess these glasses if they exist in prototype form are in the many thousands of dollar range.
I'd hate to be driving my car w/ these when the batteries go or the computer reboots and the glasses get all funky!
Wouldn't any electronic device w/ an advanced battery system and integrated charging system have a microprocessor for "intelligent" charging?
As for medical devices, she is/was a home aid worker so was thinking she might have use of a heart monitor or blood sugar monitor or even a electronic home scale...
Most builders and contruction types (at least on this side of the pond) have lots electric power tools encluding many that are battery powered and I'm would think there are some computers in those as well..
Sounds like some one in her home used her name/credit to buy Net Access leading them to sue her rather than whoever used the computer. Or perhaps this is a case of an identity thef!
It is also of course factually wrong that she has never used a computer. People use them all the them. There are embedded system in microwaves, ovens, washing machines, medical devices, etc. It would be impossible for anyone but the Unibomber to have never used anything that contained a computer... of course they mean personal computer/PC.. well, they should say that..
I didn't say MS got it right but it shows that they know people will now be looking at UI in greater dept.
In terms of Analogies, not as much as what is known as Psychographic Segmentation. You can google it..
With the Switch to INTEL, Apple puts the competition squarely on the OS to OS head...
MS agrees since they have just CLONED (again) the MAC OS.
Apple isn't looking to sell Office to computers to the Average office worker nor the average home users. They want to sell office computers to the CREATIVE Staff/Industry. In terms of home users, they want home users who want something a bit different, like those who were willing to pay a bit extra for a BMW or a SAAB.
The success of the iPOD means more people are willing to buy a computer that is a "bit different."
The question is will this market be enough to keep Apple in the Black? That really depends on if they have a follow up hit to the iPOD.
NOTE: The iPOD has done well because Apple had the LAST MOVER advantage. They came in after the market was established and offered a better product (E.g., UI) with better support (iTunes) and better Accessories (iTune's Store).
Will they have the ability (and courage) to wait (again) while others spend millions or billions to educate the population about some new market and then come in at the end, just as the market is ramping up and offer a better product? Timing is hard. Can you say, "iPOD for my TV!."
If it did, would that mean you could use kenetic energy (gun powder, etc.) to trigger a LASER pulse? Meaning you could create a weapon that didn't need a big electrical plug?
If the APP is open source but the OS is not and/or the Network stack and/or any drivers are not open source it doesn't really help. A step in the right direction but the entire system (hardware, Software, Firm ware, etc. need to be inspectable.
If these machines are networked in anyway all of that equipment should also be open source..
Good points. I think that is what has been happening if you look at Linux circa 1995 vs today. (Or NetBSD, FreeBSD, etc.).
You used to have to compile programs and do all sorts of things. Things youc an choose to do today but often are not required
* GUI
* Packages for applications
* More driver support?
* What else? I'm sure there is more..
This is a pure move to stop Microsoft from a) killing googles current deail w/ AOL and from doing anything else with AOL that would hurt google. I doubt they care if their is any real upside.
I totally agree.. and with a really "free" market, you should be able to buy bits in advance in some sort of commodity market so you have plenty of quality bits for the next Nearly Naked Fashion Model Stream!
The ISSUE for regulators is the quality of the "all you can eat price." At the local China Buffet the food can suck but it isn't allowed to make you sick. Likewise, the all you can eat price shouldn't be deliberately underpowered. Or worse handicap'd.
Some day, bits have to cost money. They may come a few trillion to the $ but if you want a HDTV/DVD quality movie streamed to your home, in real time, at 8pm on Friday night, that's a real amount of bandwidth and that's something that is worth charging for.
When you pay a flat rate, your eating at a buffet getting the "all you can eat" rate. Plenty to eat but the food basically sucks. That's ok for email, ok for P2P, event for net games and other things like basic HTTP. There is no promise that the bits will arrive (UPD) or that if they do arrive that they will arrive in order (TCP).
Paying more for premium bits is something that will have to happen some day (economically speaking). If you don't like the price you switch IPs. If you don't want to stream HTDV because it uses to many bits then buy the DVD.
The good news is when it costs $2 or $3 (or less) in bandwidth to stream a full res full length movie to your HOME, that your yearly cost of VOICE Telephony (VOIP, etc.) is going to be (priced by the bits) $1 a year.
Now that's a use I never thought of and surely deserves a patent :)
a small group called FSF (free software...), and the i495/Rout 128 area has been high tech for almost as long as the "valley" has...
Large organziations have annual training budgets. Each year they can focus on critical training issues.
With a major software change its possible that the training budget will be spent to fast/quick and additional funds would be needed.
Its also possible that with a good training staff, computer based training (internet based training too), and so forth that the extra expensive is more of a mole hill than a mountain.
With a trademark on the name using the name RISK, you might cause confusion... picking a totally different name gets' you out of the trademark issue (unless you call it something that would cause confusion (same/similar name and the same or similar product).
Thus Lexis and Lexsus (the database and the car company) DO NOT infringe because no one (reasonable) would think they are buying database access and ooopps find out they bought a car instead...
What about the price of gas in the US? It goes up and down with availablity and demand?
I have a burger joint.. My old fry oil goes to my Neon Sign guy -> http://www.litebriteneon.com/ who runs his desiel car on it... I think he just runs it as is (after a good filtering..).
He gets my old oil for free... New veggie oil costs me about $3-$4 a gallon..
its' called a public good. Water is still fairly cheap here and so there is little incentive economically to develop a variety of things that would make sense if you actually had to pay serious $$ for your water..
If you look at the sample images, you can see the type of image that will be "helped" by their camera...
Auto focus cameras have to focus on something... and many times I've had them focus on the wrong thing. There isn't really anything you can do at that point except reshoot.. or use the system such as they describe.
This would be of great value to me, I have many photos where the image is otherwise perfect except the focus point is off.