I once worked on a cable crew, installing several hundred miles of a backbone to the internet. Six conduits, a few hundred strand of fiber...sounds like a dream, right? All that bandwidth (most of which isn't even lit up seven years later, btw) in the palms of your hands...
Except I was on the cleanup crew for this project. And we weren't union (they paid extra because we weren't -- a LOT extra). This meant mandatory 13 hour days, six times a week, followed by a half hour trip to a cutrate hotel that was also a brothel. We were working alongside a road, two hundred miles from home, with cars going by at 70-80 mph, and were not allowed to use U-turns (meaning going BACK a mile meant a 45 minute round trip).
The machines we were using were run by a guy who spiked his iced tea with VODKA. We discovered this one day when they had used our water jug to clean a dirty rock drill bit, and stole a drink from his jug when it proved to be the hottest day of the summer. This was the guy who'd hollar at us to "get in thar' and grease that bit" while it was still spinning. This was the guy who'd spill diesel or boring solution, and yell at us to bury it before the environmental inspectors showed up. The boring solution was a sticky mass of silicate silt with a warning not to breath it. We breathed it every day.
None of us were allowed to turn the key of these machines because we weren't trained on them. We had to travel ducked down in the bed of a dumptruck full of roadcones.
Speaking of which, "laying down the pattern" was fun. Walking into a road during rush hour bumper to bumper traffic with only the authority of an orange flag between a speeding SUV and your flannel shirt takes BALLS. Especially when they're on cell phones. Oh, and some truckers like to play "baseball." That's where they hit your barrels and see how far they can make them fly into your site.
Actual work was mostly mindless and consisted of using a shovel without stopping. Even if this meant digging a hole and filling it in again. Boss didn't want people calling to say that his crew wasn't working -- that was the inspectors' job.
There were fun parts, though. Like the one afternoon where we all relaxed with our lunch and watched a car burn at the rest area. Or the way the superviser would call us "niggers," despite the fact that we were all white kids. Or guarding the machines at night from the local union, who would monkeywrench the project until we hired their boys. And nothing in the world is more satisfying than coming home to your girl on Friday, covered in dirt with tanned muscles bulging out everywhere. Doesn't matter if you got them holding 200 pound pipes over your head for a half hour while the welder did his thing.
Oh, and being able to say "I built this internet with my blood and sweat." That's awesome.
Blah blah blah...anti-advertising sentiment is so en-vogue with the Utne Reader crowd these days. I personally hate labels on my clothes, but I don't think that being a "walking billboard" for Nike is that big an issue.
For one thing, it easily backfires. Just look at the cutthroat world of hip-hop fashion, where wearing last year's label is akin to wearing white shoes after labor day. Companies can be at the top of fashion one year, and gone the next as the result of a single comment from a prominent figure. In this case, it's the community which drives the success of the brand, and not vica-versa. The prominence of the label is a double-edged sword. While it's popular, it's good advertising. When it's unpopular, it's poison.
For another, most of the clothing that features prominent labels does so as a result of consumer demand. What? Yes, people like others to know who made their clothing, because there's a common myth that certain name brands make better clothes. These same companies often make cloths that are without labels as well, and Nike is a good example -- I have three Nike running shirts, none of which have the logo. Incidentally (or is it coincidentally), these shirts were also more expensive than the ones with logos. It could be that the lack of a big logo coincides with a lack of a discounted price, in which case they *ARE* paying you to wear the logo. Lucky you, huh?
Besides, these days so much money is dumped into marketting and branding is so (obnoxiously) pervasive that a lot of brand names are synonymous with lifestyle choices. Think about Atari, Kool-Aid, Levis, Goya, Adidas, Apple, Phat Farm, Fender, and tell me you don't associate a personality with each.
A lot of people bemoan this aspect of modern culture, but I figure if it makes people happy to associate themselves thusly, why fight it? It's obvious that the Nikes and Coca-Colas of the world don't give a shit what the Adbusters crowd thinks of them. So don't waste the energy. If you don't like brand names on your body, do what I do: buy nice, solid, comfortable clothes from fair trade sources, chill out, and let everybody else do their thing. They're going to do it anyway.
I made a ton of money of cobalt boxes. If Sun had sat down and said, "yes, we already have server and linux solutions, but what cobalt is doing -- marketting Linux based machines to Windows users replacing their Windows based servers in the process -- is completely different, and an essential niche," then i'd still be making money off of them. Instead I've got to do it all myself *sigh* and it has proved a tad more daunting.
This, is of course, where the Windows aficianados are allowed to laugh at us a little. See, we have engineered all of these complex solutions to allow people to drag icons to the trashcan, which represents the concept of deletion.
On Windows, you just hit the key that says "delete" on it.
There's this great new device that accomplishes this. I just had it installed in my den.
It's called "curtains." They install a fibrous semi-transparent membrane over an organic dowel. And it was only $79.95 at some technology wwarehouse called "linens and things!"
While we were there, we picked up this other awesome device that reduces the the effect of water cohesion after a shower...they called it a "towel"...god I love the 21st century!
Those who live in glasses houses shouldn't watch porn. And they definitely shouldn't make their own. Though in New York, they could have a hell of a time suing people for voyeurism (which is illegal here even if it's accidental).
Hmm. I feel the same way about the Lord of the Rings films. It's the attention to detail that put hobbits on my screen with painstakingly perfect makup, expressions, clothes and dialog in beautiful settings. And it is scenes like that which made those films into a true fantasy. It wasn't just the efforts of Peter Jackson, director of "Meet the Feebles."
Agreed. I hated Episode 1. I hated Episode 2. I have even extended my hate to Return of the Jedi.
And yet, I will see Episode 3, and I proudly GM the Star Wars d20 RPG (in a campaign based around the Old Republic era seen in KotOR, thus preventing the players from having to meet up with any damn gungans). If they make a sequel trilogy, even if it isn't based on Zahn's great books, I will go see it. Though I think they can't help but drawn on these guys...come one, Luke and Mara Jade? The tsalmiri? Leia hiding out on a planet of violent assassins, playing up her father's infamy? Even Lucas can't deny that's good stuff!
What can I say? Star Wars is a pleasant fantasy realm that cannot be stifled even by the ineptitude of its creator. I *like* the Star Wars universe, midichlorian bullshit and all.
So let me get this straight. A person who works in the embedded market makes a comment on the embedded market and he's automatically wrong because he works in the embedded market?
Is it at all likely that the guy has worked with Linux himself and had it turn out badly? Or that his customers have come to him with cobbed solutions based on Linux? Is it possible he wanted to support Linux, but found so little quality development in his segment that he realized he'd be doing most of the work himself, AND have to support a community, AND not be able to make as much money off of the work?
The party line is that Open Source is always better than proprietary software. And in some case I've found that to be true (apache, blender, bsd, firebird). In other cases, I've found Open Source solutions to be sorely lacking when compared to their proprietary competitors (bind vs djbdns, sendmail vs qmail, Gnome or KDE vs OSX;). In those areas where Open Source isn't ready, I support and suggest to my clients non-Open solutions. Why? Because they work better. Which means my clients come back. They don't come back if I suggest something that's complete, insecure, hard to use shit, but has FSF approval. That kind of brainless advocacy would make me look bad.
Look, I'm not saying this guy isn't a sleaze trying to sell his own products. But he doesn't mention them in this article...and he's not the only guy who sells products in the embedded market. He's saying that, in general, Linux isn't there yet, and he's as much in a position to say that empirically as he is to benefit off saying it without basis. What, can a market analysis only be true if it comes out of Stallman's mouth?
Still about laziness. Linux was invented so that nerds didn't have to work to be able to afford UN*X.
Re:If the dock had been introduced back in the day
on
Tog Takes on Mac OS X 10.3
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
No. The article was "The Top Nine Reasons the Dock Sucks," and consists of nine petty things. Petty things don't make a control "suck. Maybe they make it less useful, but come on. After the first time you drag an icon representing a program out of the dock, you never again think that you just deleted it. Instead, you realize that there's a difference between the program and its representation, and without a long winded dialog (try deleting a shortcut in Windows to see the opposite). Plus, the grandparent post was waxing poetic about the APPLICATION MENU. If the dock is a Yugo, this guy's pining for the halcyon days of the rickshaw.
I don't think the Dock is a yugo...if anything, its flaws are a cause of its ambition and usefulness. Using the Dock, if anything, is like drivinga Cadillac with a 4/6/8. And Tog is sitting on the sidewalk complaining about my cruise controls.
Or maybe it's because SkyOS is a nice, polished system with direction from a "benelovent dictator," while Syllable is a mismanaged kludge of an OS.
In short: it gets press BECAUSE of what you call its "critical fault:" it's restricted to a core of talented people who don't want a bunch of hackers fucking things up in the name of the community.
Silly mortal. You don't need to crack MS SQL. Just run MSDE (the Microsoft SQL Desktop Engine) and restrict your script engine to 5 or fewer connections...
If it's closed source and proprietary, then forget it. Such a system is of no real use.
Then let it join the realms of other useless software. Winamp! DivX! Qmail! Irfanview!
(BTW: I come from the Real World. You know, where people believe in consistancy, accountability and responsibility in software development. We consider most Open Source to be of no real use in any of these three areas. But, you know, keep up your liberal dreaming. I too am a fan of Bob Dylan)
Re:If the dock had been introduced back in the day
on
Tog Takes on Mac OS X 10.3
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Whoa kid. The Dock solves a few problems the MacOS has always had, while maintaining very little screen real estate (none at all if, like me, you hide it). And it introduces so much new functionality that I can't imagine a mac OS without it.
The dock tells you:
What programs you have open, but that have no client windows left (without having to check the Application menu, which took up space in the already crowded program bar and had no keyboard shortcuts other than option tab)
Which programs are open, but hidden, again without having to check a menu.
Informs you when (and often why) a certain program needs your attention in a very noticable but inobtrusive way. And the bouncing can be seen even when the dock is hidden (the icon bounds up at the bottom/sides of the screen).
Programatic control of icons can offer all KINDS of useful information at a glance without needing to switch programs...everything from the date in iCal's icon to full memory and process indicators.
The dock allows you:
An easy way to start, stop and switch programs without having to browse the hard drive. Most programs have useful controls added to their dock icon as well...and you can access these functions with a single interface.
An easy way to access the trash bin without having to expose the desktop at all times (so annoying)
Access to the discs in a convenient cascading manner. This has allowed me to access common files and PROGRAMS without taking up resources at all times.
In short: The dock accomplishes all of the functions of most OS' taskbars, menus and so forth in a much simpler, much more powerful, much more intuitive and above all CUSTOMIZABLE fashion. It kicks ass.
And you're griping about the loss of the two most useless UI controls ever invented...oh my god, i just responded to a TROLL, didn't I?!?
Or maybe they're afraid to release the source until the OS has evolved its basic design far enough that it can't be ignored by contributors who don't understand or don't agree with it. See, Linux's success has partially been a result of its being a "Unix Like" system. One of the ideas of SkyOS was to get away from trying to make a clone. Therefore, it needs to have precedents in programming and user interface design, or else contributors will donate their own arbitrary, and possibly incongruous, designs.
In short: it is easier to create a strong system by following loose rules and methodologies than it is to create one with no rules or methodologies.
Uh...a skinny, gaunt geek with a camera/phone/laptop/mediaplayer/gameboy/pocket fisherman in a single, impossible to use unit?
The kind of cat that buys a $2000 OQO or a $500 iPod, and the first thing he does is DELETE THE OS and install Linux (over the course of six or seven days).
What's really shameful is that the screen on my Casio PDA isn't sunlight viewable. So I'll have to be constantly ducking in and out of archways... duck out, charge up for a few minutes, then dart back inside to read some more exciting ebooks on the ease and simplicity of our digital lifestyle...
when Apple makes it officially compatible with Linux.
Fat chance. They only made it compatible with Windows to get the, um, 95% marketshare that Windows represents. At this point it is a waste of time to go after the tiny little Linux market (and have to bear their whining about insufferably boring and useless things like OGG support).
If you want support for your iPod, get a damn mac. After all, the stock OSX install is a better OS , in every significant way, than the best tuned Linux installation on the planet.
Actually, no. It's because of P2P that there won't be any suppy to meet the demand of non-DRM'd MP3s. You know, just becasue the RIAA are dicks doesn't mean that all the anti-RIAA artists want to give away their music. Most of the musicians I know would love to have something like iTunes be the sole online distribution system for their music, because it would mean that their music could be spread (on infinite mix CDs) without spreading uncontrolled on KaZaa. You can't fool the indy muscians, kid. They know the power of P2P, and they know it's a double edged sword. This is why most Indys would only put their back catalog on eMusic...they knew it could help drive the sales of the newest stuff, but that they'd lost sales entirely if they "gave away" their latest albums.
And I think "most customers" don't give a shit about DRM on things THEY OWN. Like a Protected AAC file. This is why copy protecting a CD doesn't cripple its sales -- people don't care! And the people who DO care, many of them don't buy music anyway.
It isn't. But if Microsoft uses its position to sanction HP for offering their customers a device built around the most popular format, which is also an industry designed and developed standard, that's monopolistic. If Microsoft refuses to offer an automatically downloadable codec for AAC (the way it does for DivX, but not for Indeo), that's monopolistic.
As for superiority...well, you just illustrated an area in which AAC is fairly useless. Your audio player will probably never be updated to support it...so in your sector, WMA actually is the superior product. And it is a problem for the MPEG that they took so long finalizing the standard that Microsoft has been able to acheive a large market share in the areas that MPEG-4 was designed to operate. I think Apple's success with AAC is a boon for the MPEG, and it's good for consumers, as well...otherwise, we'd all be stuck licensing WMA for our PVRs and digicams and what have you.
Slashdot Mirror
I once worked on a cable crew, installing several hundred miles of a backbone to the internet. Six conduits, a few hundred strand of fiber...sounds like a dream, right? All that bandwidth (most of which isn't even lit up seven years later, btw) in the palms of your hands...
Except I was on the cleanup crew for this project. And we weren't union (they paid extra because we weren't -- a LOT extra). This meant mandatory 13 hour days, six times a week, followed by a half hour trip to a cutrate hotel that was also a brothel. We were working alongside a road, two hundred miles from home, with cars going by at 70-80 mph, and were not allowed to use U-turns (meaning going BACK a mile meant a 45 minute round trip).
The machines we were using were run by a guy who spiked his iced tea with VODKA. We discovered this one day when they had used our water jug to clean a dirty rock drill bit, and stole a drink from his jug when it proved to be the hottest day of the summer. This was the guy who'd hollar at us to "get in thar' and grease that bit" while it was still spinning. This was the guy who'd spill diesel or boring solution, and yell at us to bury it before the environmental inspectors showed up. The boring solution was a sticky mass of silicate silt with a warning not to breath it. We breathed it every day.
None of us were allowed to turn the key of these machines because we weren't trained on them. We had to travel ducked down in the bed of a dumptruck full of roadcones.
Speaking of which, "laying down the pattern" was fun. Walking into a road during rush hour bumper to bumper traffic with only the authority of an orange flag between a speeding SUV and your flannel shirt takes BALLS. Especially when they're on cell phones. Oh, and some truckers like to play "baseball." That's where they hit your barrels and see how far they can make them fly into your site.
Actual work was mostly mindless and consisted of using a shovel without stopping. Even if this meant digging a hole and filling it in again. Boss didn't want people calling to say that his crew wasn't working -- that was the inspectors' job.
There were fun parts, though. Like the one afternoon where we all relaxed with our lunch and watched a car burn at the rest area. Or the way the superviser would call us "niggers," despite the fact that we were all white kids. Or guarding the machines at night from the local union, who would monkeywrench the project until we hired their boys. And nothing in the world is more satisfying than coming home to your girl on Friday, covered in dirt with tanned muscles bulging out everywhere. Doesn't matter if you got them holding 200 pound pipes over your head for a half hour while the welder did his thing.
Oh, and being able to say "I built this internet with my blood and sweat." That's awesome.
I got mine six to eight weeks after ordering...maybe you should speak to your postman!
I also got these awesome guns from Charles Atlas...
Blah blah blah...anti-advertising sentiment is so en-vogue with the Utne Reader crowd these days. I personally hate labels on my clothes, but I don't think that being a "walking billboard" for Nike is that big an issue.
For one thing, it easily backfires. Just look at the cutthroat world of hip-hop fashion, where wearing last year's label is akin to wearing white shoes after labor day. Companies can be at the top of fashion one year, and gone the next as the result of a single comment from a prominent figure. In this case, it's the community which drives the success of the brand, and not vica-versa. The prominence of the label is a double-edged sword. While it's popular, it's good advertising. When it's unpopular, it's poison.
For another, most of the clothing that features prominent labels does so as a result of consumer demand. What? Yes, people like others to know who made their clothing, because there's a common myth that certain name brands make better clothes. These same companies often make cloths that are without labels as well, and Nike is a good example -- I have three Nike running shirts, none of which have the logo. Incidentally (or is it coincidentally), these shirts were also more expensive than the ones with logos. It could be that the lack of a big logo coincides with a lack of a discounted price, in which case they *ARE* paying you to wear the logo. Lucky you, huh?
Besides, these days so much money is dumped into marketting and branding is so (obnoxiously) pervasive that a lot of brand names are synonymous with lifestyle choices. Think about Atari, Kool-Aid, Levis, Goya, Adidas, Apple, Phat Farm, Fender, and tell me you don't associate a personality with each.
A lot of people bemoan this aspect of modern culture, but I figure if it makes people happy to associate themselves thusly, why fight it? It's obvious that the Nikes and Coca-Colas of the world don't give a shit what the Adbusters crowd thinks of them. So don't waste the energy. If you don't like brand names on your body, do what I do: buy nice, solid, comfortable clothes from fair trade sources, chill out, and let everybody else do their thing. They're going to do it anyway.
Hey!
I made a ton of money of cobalt boxes. If Sun had sat down and said, "yes, we already have server and linux solutions, but what cobalt is doing -- marketting Linux based machines to Windows users replacing their Windows based servers in the process -- is completely different, and an essential niche," then i'd still be making money off of them. Instead I've got to do it all myself *sigh* and it has proved a tad more daunting.
This, is of course, where the Windows aficianados are allowed to laugh at us a little. See, we have engineered all of these complex solutions to allow people to drag icons to the trashcan, which represents the concept of deletion.
On Windows, you just hit the key that says "delete" on it.
There's this great new device that accomplishes this. I just had it installed in my den.
It's called "curtains." They install a fibrous semi-transparent membrane over an organic dowel. And it was only $79.95 at some technology wwarehouse called "linens and things!"
While we were there, we picked up this other awesome device that reduces the the effect of water cohesion after a shower...they called it a "towel"...god I love the 21st century!
Those who live in glasses houses shouldn't watch porn. And they definitely shouldn't make their own. Though in New York, they could have a hell of a time suing people for voyeurism (which is illegal here even if it's accidental).
Star Wars purists would notice the differnce. Hey, I'm still pissed that they didn't use David Prowse as a body double for Anakin in movies 1 and 2!
Hmm. I feel the same way about the Lord of the Rings films. It's the attention to detail that put hobbits on my screen with painstakingly perfect makup, expressions, clothes and dialog in beautiful settings. And it is scenes like that which made those films into a true fantasy. It wasn't just the efforts of Peter Jackson, director of "Meet the Feebles."
Agreed. I hated Episode 1. I hated Episode 2. I have even extended my hate to Return of the Jedi.
And yet, I will see Episode 3, and I proudly GM the Star Wars d20 RPG (in a campaign based around the Old Republic era seen in KotOR, thus preventing the players from having to meet up with any damn gungans). If they make a sequel trilogy, even if it isn't based on Zahn's great books, I will go see it. Though I think they can't help but drawn on these guys...come one, Luke and Mara Jade? The tsalmiri? Leia hiding out on a planet of violent assassins, playing up her father's infamy? Even Lucas can't deny that's good stuff!
What can I say? Star Wars is a pleasant fantasy realm that cannot be stifled even by the ineptitude of its creator. I *like* the Star Wars universe, midichlorian bullshit and all.
So let me get this straight. A person who works in the embedded market makes a comment on the embedded market and he's automatically wrong because he works in the embedded market?
;). In those areas where Open Source isn't ready, I support and suggest to my clients non-Open solutions. Why? Because they work better. Which means my clients come back. They don't come back if I suggest something that's complete, insecure, hard to use shit, but has FSF approval. That kind of brainless advocacy would make me look bad.
Is it at all likely that the guy has worked with Linux himself and had it turn out badly? Or that his customers have come to him with cobbed solutions based on Linux? Is it possible he wanted to support Linux, but found so little quality development in his segment that he realized he'd be doing most of the work himself, AND have to support a community, AND not be able to make as much money off of the work?
The party line is that Open Source is always better than proprietary software. And in some case I've found that to be true (apache, blender, bsd, firebird). In other cases, I've found Open Source solutions to be sorely lacking when compared to their proprietary competitors (bind vs djbdns, sendmail vs qmail, Gnome or KDE vs OSX
Look, I'm not saying this guy isn't a sleaze trying to sell his own products. But he doesn't mention them in this article...and he's not the only guy who sells products in the embedded market. He's saying that, in general, Linux isn't there yet, and he's as much in a position to say that empirically as he is to benefit off saying it without basis. What, can a market analysis only be true if it comes out of Stallman's mouth?
Still about laziness. Linux was invented so that nerds didn't have to work to be able to afford UN*X.
No. The article was "The Top Nine Reasons the Dock Sucks," and consists of nine petty things. Petty things don't make a control "suck. Maybe they make it less useful, but come on. After the first time you drag an icon representing a program out of the dock, you never again think that you just deleted it. Instead, you realize that there's a difference between the program and its representation, and without a long winded dialog (try deleting a shortcut in Windows to see the opposite). Plus, the grandparent post was waxing poetic about the APPLICATION MENU. If the dock is a Yugo, this guy's pining for the halcyon days of the rickshaw.
I don't think the Dock is a yugo...if anything, its flaws are a cause of its ambition and usefulness. Using the Dock, if anything, is like drivinga Cadillac with a 4/6/8. And Tog is sitting on the sidewalk complaining about my cruise controls.
Or maybe it's because SkyOS is a nice, polished system with direction from a "benelovent dictator," while Syllable is a mismanaged kludge of an OS.
In short: it gets press BECAUSE of what you call its "critical fault:" it's restricted to a core of talented people who don't want a bunch of hackers fucking things up in the name of the community.
Silly mortal. You don't need to crack MS SQL. Just run MSDE (the Microsoft SQL Desktop Engine) and restrict your script engine to 5 or fewer connections...
If it's closed source and proprietary, then forget it. Such a system is of no real use.
Then let it join the realms of other useless software. Winamp! DivX! Qmail! Irfanview!
(BTW: I come from the Real World. You know, where people believe in consistancy, accountability and responsibility in software development. We consider most Open Source to be of no real use in any of these three areas. But, you know, keep up your liberal dreaming. I too am a fan of Bob Dylan)
The dock tells you:
What programs you have open, but that have no client windows left (without having to check the Application menu, which took up space in the already crowded program bar and had no keyboard shortcuts other than option tab)
Which programs are open, but hidden, again without having to check a menu.
Informs you when (and often why) a certain program needs your attention in a very noticable but inobtrusive way. And the bouncing can be seen even when the dock is hidden (the icon bounds up at the bottom/sides of the screen).
Programatic control of icons can offer all KINDS of useful information at a glance without needing to switch programs...everything from the date in iCal's icon to full memory and process indicators.
The dock allows you:
An easy way to start, stop and switch programs without having to browse the hard drive. Most programs have useful controls added to their dock icon as well...and you can access these functions with a single interface.
An easy way to access the trash bin without having to expose the desktop at all times (so annoying)
Access to the discs in a convenient cascading manner. This has allowed me to access common files and PROGRAMS without taking up resources at all times.
In short: The dock accomplishes all of the functions of most OS' taskbars, menus and so forth in a much simpler, much more powerful, much more intuitive and above all CUSTOMIZABLE fashion. It kicks ass.
And you're griping about the loss of the two most useless UI controls ever invented...oh my god, i just responded to a TROLL, didn't I?!?
Or maybe they're afraid to release the source until the OS has evolved its basic design far enough that it can't be ignored by contributors who don't understand or don't agree with it. See, Linux's success has partially been a result of its being a "Unix Like" system. One of the ideas of SkyOS was to get away from trying to make a clone. Therefore, it needs to have precedents in programming and user interface design, or else contributors will donate their own arbitrary, and possibly incongruous, designs.
In short: it is easier to create a strong system by following loose rules and methodologies than it is to create one with no rules or methodologies.
Uh...a skinny, gaunt geek with a camera/phone/laptop/mediaplayer/gameboy/pocket fisherman in a single, impossible to use unit?
The kind of cat that buys a $2000 OQO or a $500 iPod, and the first thing he does is DELETE THE OS and install Linux (over the course of six or seven days).
What's really shameful is that the screen on my Casio PDA isn't sunlight viewable. So I'll have to be constantly ducking in and out of archways... duck out, charge up for a few minutes, then dart back inside to read some more exciting ebooks on the ease and simplicity of our digital lifestyle...
What about the Chuds? What about the Mole people? What about the CRAB PEOPLE?!?!
We show these cultures no respect whatsoever. No wonder they resent us and our day star!
And I'm sure, somehow, it's all the GOP's fault.
Isn't Paul Thurrott the name of that blue eyed kid from Dune?
when Apple makes it officially compatible with Linux.
Fat chance. They only made it compatible with Windows to get the, um, 95% marketshare that Windows represents. At this point it is a waste of time to go after the tiny little Linux market (and have to bear their whining about insufferably boring and useless things like OGG support).
If you want support for your iPod, get a damn mac. After all, the stock OSX install is a better OS , in every significant way, than the best tuned Linux installation on the planet.
Actually, no. It's because of P2P that there won't be any suppy to meet the demand of non-DRM'd MP3s. You know, just becasue the RIAA are dicks doesn't mean that all the anti-RIAA artists want to give away their music. Most of the musicians I know would love to have something like iTunes be the sole online distribution system for their music, because it would mean that their music could be spread (on infinite mix CDs) without spreading uncontrolled on KaZaa. You can't fool the indy muscians, kid. They know the power of P2P, and they know it's a double edged sword. This is why most Indys would only put their back catalog on eMusic...they knew it could help drive the sales of the newest stuff, but that they'd lost sales entirely if they "gave away" their latest albums.
And I think "most customers" don't give a shit about DRM on things THEY OWN. Like a Protected AAC file. This is why copy protecting a CD doesn't cripple its sales -- people don't care! And the people who DO care, many of them don't buy music anyway.
It isn't. But if Microsoft uses its position to sanction HP for offering their customers a device built around the most popular format, which is also an industry designed and developed standard, that's monopolistic. If Microsoft refuses to offer an automatically downloadable codec for AAC (the way it does for DivX, but not for Indeo), that's monopolistic.
As for superiority...well, you just illustrated an area in which AAC is fairly useless. Your audio player will probably never be updated to support it...so in your sector, WMA actually is the superior product. And it is a problem for the MPEG that they took so long finalizing the standard that Microsoft has been able to acheive a large market share in the areas that MPEG-4 was designed to operate. I think Apple's success with AAC is a boon for the MPEG, and it's good for consumers, as well...otherwise, we'd all be stuck licensing WMA for our PVRs and digicams and what have you.