If one compared the services provided by Google and Apple, then there is competition in providing content. Apple could use Google's technology (easier to search technical notes on Apple support?), or Google could use Apple servers? Or what?
How about network services? Does Apple have a network? Google does, or is building one. Could iTunes integrate some Google "free" content? Could Google pass people to iTunes? Could.mac also provide network services with point of presence? What about Google/Apple/IPTV? That would be network+content+billing system+hardware? Google wireless broadband in every city? Bypass IPs? What happened to Sherlock? Googa-lock? Sher-google?
What about advertising? Allow self-publishers of music via iTunes to advertise through Google with integrated billing system? Both purchase LuLu.com?
I'm curious about how Slashdot readers think is the best way to think through this type of problem? Is it simply looking where services could combine? where services could "compliment" each other? where both companies could address an entirely new market? Slashdot readers: what is the basic principle of innovation here and how does one analyze it?
This is a great chance to see the distributions "fight it out". Without administrative interferrence, the best distribution gradually will predominate.
Or will it?
I'm sure many will be watching to see what type of "ecology" evolves. Will a distribution eventually predominate? Or will an alternative to the "winner take all" market theory emerge? Who knows...
This is the the best news I've heard in years.
Once people start to learn to work with an OS that actually.... works.... then there will be a rising tide against Windows. People will see Microsoft Windows for what it really is: an over-priced, bloated, unreliable, electronic carrier of cyber-diseases. A sucker of people's time. A constant headache. A threat to society.
After all, it has to be pretty darn bad for an operating system to merit an official announcement from the Department of Homeland Security that it posed a threat... yet that happened last week to Windows.
Does this mean that Apple will be forced to license its iPod technology? To French companies? Does it mean that Apple must reveal details of aac and drm that will make it possible for other online stores to offer the same service? For example, could there be a French itunes store not owned by Apple that uses forced-licensed aac drm and sells to iPods? This law appears at least on the surface to violate basic principles of intellectual property and patent protection. The solution in France is simply to place a tax on media, such as recordable CDs, and so on so that artists can be "compensated". This actually means a large government controlled cash pool that is dribbled out to artists the state decides to support. Of course there is nothing provided for non-French artists that have their IP rights violated in France. If French companies wish to participate in this market, why don't they simply buy stock in Apple?
Microsoft might do better focusing on providing higher quality operating systems and letting others make some money as well. This story reminds me of the automobile export debate between the US and Japan in the 1970s. The US side was complaining about trade barriers in Japan that prevented GM from entering into the Japanese market. One observer remarked: "Does GM really wish to launch such a fight in order to gain a chance to enter the Japanese market and compete with Nissan and Toyota on their own turf?" Until Microsoft is able to produce higher quality operating systems, they might wish to focus on that instead of squandering their talents on digging at small entrenched market players.
For Apple, investing in India is not worth the money.
Possible problems might be:
1/ prices for software development not competitive
2/ India suppliers unable to provide sufficient skilled personnel
3/ Use of phone service for customer service or technical support not judged to meet Apple's quality standards.
4/ Negotiations with US-based [or elsewhere] suppliers successful after playing India card resulted outcome more favorable to Apple.
5/ Fully-loaded "system" costs of using India suppliers [labor, travel, logistics, management overhead, quality control] were too much to compensate for simple estimation based on cheaper labor.
6/ Inability to get legal protection in India for intellectual property [trade secrets, patents pending]. Indian laws are inadequate.
7/ Security and reliability of Indian subcontractors not up to Apple standards..... and finally:
8/ India not judged to be priority market for Apple products and services [in comparison with other parts of the world].
Anyone following the press sees almost daily reports of Chinese industrial espionage circles working around the world. It is not just chips, but formulas, software, manufacturing techniques, and many trade secrets.
China is not the only country that does this. There have been serious incidents with Russia, Japan, France, etc.
However, in the case of countries with which the US does not have a defense treaty, wholesale theft of technology and related trade secrets risks strengthening the military establishment of those countries. This makes it a national security issue for the US.
Unfortunately, even if exposed, the chances in the US of getting caught, prosecuted, and having to pay for industrial espionage are so low that for all practical purposes US technology is free of charge. You probably have a better chance of winning the local lottery than getting punished.
The problem occurs when foreign espionage organizations target private [non-military related] companies that do not have adequate security measures.
In terms of this particular case, the reaction of the Chinese government is out of character to its past actions, which have somewhat ignored wholesale violation of intellectual property rights, and have encouraged massive collection of economic and technical information from the West.
There is no way other than the use of industrial espionage to explain the short amount of time China took in developing its space program and supercomputer capabilities.
In this chip case, the reaction seems motivated by one of two factors: 1/ it is an emotional reaction from someone higher up who felt duped by the scam of the "researcher", 2/ it is a politicized attempt at public relations -- one of those highly publicized "crack downs" that periodically emerge from China before everything gets back to normal.
It's really a non-event. There are probably dozens of other laboratories working right now on other pilfered technologies. In the long run, however, China is graduating enough engineers to surpass the West within about 25 years. In which case, all of this will seem rather transitional in nature.
In our shop, we have spent years carefully excluding Microsoft products from any machine that touches our network. It's a security and reliability thing more than anything else. To me is it astonishing that anyone under any circumstances willingly would allow that cockroach operating system to contaminate their disk drive.
Why? So you can enjoy on your mac the feezes, virus attacks, crashes, configuration nightmares, and otherwise incredible unreliability of Windows?
The article over-states the ease with which mobile phones will displace the iPod technology. 1/ Can you plug your Nokia into your TV and play videos? 2/ Do you want to carry around a clunky mobile phone to listen to your music when you could use a Nano? 3/ Do you want to plug your mobile phone into your car so you can listen to music -- what happens when you want to use the phone while driving? 4/ Can you burn CD's from your mobile phone? 5/ Can you store your entire CD collection on your mobile phone? [like on your computer, taking only part of the collection for your iPod]? Finally, 6/ do you believe mobile phone companies can make a reasonable user-friendly interface to access your music?
Car can crash. Planes fall out of the air. Too much Tylenol can harm. Knives can cut you. Sizzors used in grade school classes can be a lethal weapon. Working near a pile driver without ear plugs can harm your hearing. But listening to an iPod? No. However, the problem with the case might be in the lack of adequate warning. Does anyone know if other players come with warnings? If so, then Apple might be in trouble.
The change to variable pricing likely will have two effects: 1/ substantially increase the cost of popular songs, 2/ either 2a/ increase the amount of piracy for popular songs, or [at best], 2b/ decrease the rate of substitution of legally purchased songs for "shared" songs. Due to iTunes, the record companies finally have found a mechanism that rapidly grows the share of legally-downloaded songs. One supposes they will have to learn for themselves the meaning of the phrase: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" That is, through their own actions, they will disable the single technology platform that promised the fullest to protect their intellectual property interests.
I've had great reception with Moto phones. The 2000 world phone is amazing, probably because it has a pull out antenna (remember those?). However, the user interface, imho is the *primary* reason Moto lost market share to Nokia. Even today I still can't store and retreive numbers easily, although the newer models, like v-600 are considerably better, still there wierd 'dead zones' in the interface one can fall into and can't get out of.
The practice of looking for possible names that large companies might use, then taking those names, and registering them in various domains in the hopes that at some time in the future the large company will be forced to pay a fee to recover their name is little more than cheap and nasty extortion. Given the hundreds of domains and variations, should cyber squatters be allowed recklessly to register iTunes or any other Apple product in all of these other domains around the world, and then be allowed to extort money from Apple, or from any other company thus damaged by these actions? It is not Apple's responsibility to prevent this, but the domain name registery and also the party attempting the extortion. The penalty for this type of extortion should be a revocation of all names registered by the cyber-squatter, pursuant to a complete audit of these registered names, and a search for any other examples of extortion perpetrated in the past by the squatter, and if such past practices are found, then global and permanent revocation of all registration rights going forward.
It is highly unlikely there is significant data to back up this claim. It defies logic to me. Why would anyone make efforts to invite into their hard disk an operating system that is so full of security vulnerabilities, crashes a lot, and generally is slower and less easy to use?
I recently upgraded my cell phone to a Nokia 6620. This rather amazing phone has several hundred dollars of commercial software "bundled" with it. Each one has a trial one time use, then a need to pay a license fee, which can be $15 to 20 dollars or more. This market [micro applications on mobile and wireless devices] is growing very rapidly. For example, many companies now are discovering that almost 1/2 of their *entire* data communications, networking, and telephone budget is going into mobile and wireless. My question is what is the status of open software development for these new platforms? There surely is a great deal of money to be saved.
There is strong evidence that many major corporations are moving away from Microsoft and towards. There are two basic reasons: (1) reliability, and (2) cost. Regarding (1) [reliability] I know of one very large French bank that moved to linux for all of its financial transactions. Their testing revealed too many security flaws in Microsoft products, and they "could not take the chance with Microsoft." Regarding (2) I know of a major Italian bank that is rolling out its *entire branch office network* using open source. Their move was in response to raised prices in Microsoft licensing. They tested, prototyped, and found out that "Yes, open source really works. Yes, even for the desktops and office workers." In North America I know if a large logistics company (can't mention name) that switched to Linux in all of its offices. They didn't have any bias against Microsoft, but they just couldn't take the downtime in their business. I also know of a large automobile manufacturing company that switched to Linux on Dell boxes to serve up all of its parts and other manuals in all dealers throughout North America. The reason was because of reliability, cost, and complexity. They found Linux far easier to implement. Finally, I've talked with a very large pharmaceutical company. They are involved in building a new global research center. They are going to use only Linux clusters for their drug discovery ("NME New Molecular Entity") research. Not Microsoft. So what can we conclude? There is some movement towards Linux on the part of many CIO's. There is nothing like a frozen IT budget and lots of financial pressure to get people thinking about Linux. Times are really bad in many industries now, and those licensing fees are looking larger and larger.
There are a number of good books showing how to improve memory. There is a long history of this, starting with Simonides of Ceos. Try Frances A. Yates, The Art of Memory, University of Chicago Press, 1966. Or for a shorter book that contains many exercises and tricks [how to memorize all of the states of the U.S. in alphabetical order in a way that you can recite it backwards, forwards, or starting from any point, etc], and other such tricks, try Harry Lorayne & Jerry Lucas, The Memory Book, Ballantine Books, New York, 1974.
Slashdot Mirror
How about network services? Does Apple have a network? Google does, or is building one. Could iTunes integrate some Google "free" content? Could Google pass people to iTunes? Could
What about advertising? Allow self-publishers of music via iTunes to advertise through Google with integrated billing system? Both purchase LuLu.com?
I'm curious about how Slashdot readers think is the best way to think through this type of problem? Is it simply looking where services could combine? where services could "compliment" each other? where both companies could address an entirely new market? Slashdot readers: what is the basic principle of innovation here and how does one analyze it?
This is a great chance to see the distributions "fight it out". Without administrative interferrence, the best distribution gradually will predominate.
Or will it?
I'm sure many will be watching to see what type of "ecology" evolves. Will a distribution eventually predominate? Or will an alternative to the "winner take all" market theory emerge? Who knows...
This is the the best news I've heard in years.
Once people start to learn to work with an OS that actually.... works .... then there will be a rising tide against Windows. People will see Microsoft Windows for what it really is: an over-priced, bloated, unreliable, electronic carrier of cyber-diseases. A sucker of people's time. A constant headache. A threat to society.
After all, it has to be pretty darn bad for an operating system to merit an official announcement from the Department of Homeland Security that it posed a threat ... yet that happened last week to Windows.
Hoo Haa. Hoooo Haaaa.
Does this mean that Apple will be forced to license its iPod technology? To French companies? Does it mean that Apple must reveal details of aac and drm that will make it possible for other online stores to offer the same service? For example, could there be a French itunes store not owned by Apple that uses forced-licensed aac drm and sells to iPods?
This law appears at least on the surface to violate basic principles of intellectual property and patent protection. The solution in France is simply to place a tax on media, such as recordable CDs, and so on so that artists can be "compensated". This actually means a large government controlled cash pool that is dribbled out to artists the state decides to support. Of course there is nothing provided for non-French artists that have their IP rights violated in France. If French companies wish to participate in this market, why don't they simply buy stock in Apple?
Microsoft might do better focusing on providing higher quality operating systems and letting others make some money as well. This story reminds me of the automobile export debate between the US and Japan in the 1970s. The US side was complaining about trade barriers in Japan that prevented GM from entering into the Japanese market. One observer remarked: "Does GM really wish to launch such a fight in order to gain a chance to enter the Japanese market and compete with Nissan and Toyota on their own turf?" Until Microsoft is able to produce higher quality operating systems, they might wish to focus on that instead of squandering their talents on digging at small entrenched market players.
For Apple, investing in India is not worth the money.
Possible problems might be:
1/ prices for software development not competitive
2/ India suppliers unable to provide sufficient skilled personnel
3/ Use of phone service for customer service or technical support not judged to meet Apple's quality standards.
4/ Negotiations with US-based [or elsewhere] suppliers successful after playing India card resulted outcome more favorable to Apple.
5/ Fully-loaded "system" costs of using India suppliers [labor, travel, logistics, management overhead, quality control] were too much to compensate for simple estimation based on cheaper labor.
6/ Inability to get legal protection in India for intellectual property [trade secrets, patents pending]. Indian laws are inadequate.
7/ Security and reliability of Indian subcontractors not up to Apple standards.
8/ India not judged to be priority market for Apple products and services [in comparison with other parts of the world].
Anyone following the press sees almost daily reports of Chinese industrial espionage circles working around the world. It is not just chips, but formulas, software, manufacturing techniques, and many trade secrets.
China is not the only country that does this. There have been serious incidents with Russia, Japan, France, etc.
However, in the case of countries with which the US does not have a defense treaty, wholesale theft of technology and related trade secrets risks strengthening the military establishment of those countries. This makes it a national security issue for the US.
Unfortunately, even if exposed, the chances in the US of getting caught, prosecuted, and having to pay for industrial espionage are so low that for all practical purposes US technology is free of charge. You probably have a better chance of winning the local lottery than getting punished.
The problem occurs when foreign espionage organizations target private [non-military related] companies that do not have adequate security measures.
In terms of this particular case, the reaction of the Chinese government is out of character to its past actions, which have somewhat ignored wholesale violation of intellectual property rights, and have encouraged massive collection of economic and technical information from the West.
There is no way other than the use of industrial espionage to explain the short amount of time China took in developing its space program and supercomputer capabilities.
In this chip case, the reaction seems motivated by one of two factors: 1/ it is an emotional reaction from someone higher up who felt duped by the scam of the "researcher", 2/ it is a politicized attempt at public relations -- one of those highly publicized "crack downs" that periodically emerge from China before everything gets back to normal.
It's really a non-event. There are probably dozens of other laboratories working right now on other pilfered technologies. In the long run, however, China is graduating enough engineers to surpass the West within about 25 years. In which case, all of this will seem rather transitional in nature.
Does anyone know if a copy of the complaint [against Apple] is available online?
Why? So you can enjoy on your mac the feezes, virus attacks, crashes, configuration nightmares, and otherwise incredible unreliability of Windows?
GTFOOH.
The article over-states the ease with which mobile phones will displace the iPod technology.
1/ Can you plug your Nokia into your TV and play videos?
2/ Do you want to carry around a clunky mobile phone to listen to your music when you could use a Nano?
3/ Do you want to plug your mobile phone into your car so you can listen to music -- what happens when you want to use the phone while driving?
4/ Can you burn CD's from your mobile phone?
5/ Can you store your entire CD collection on your mobile phone? [like on your computer, taking only part of the collection for your iPod]?
Finally, 6/ do you believe mobile phone companies can make a reasonable user-friendly interface to access your music?
Car can crash. Planes fall out of the air. Too much Tylenol can harm. Knives can cut you. Sizzors used in grade school classes can be a lethal weapon. Working near a pile driver without ear plugs can harm your hearing. But listening to an iPod? No. However, the problem with the case might be in the lack of adequate warning. Does anyone know if other players come with warnings? If so, then Apple might be in trouble.
Anyone for Open Source music?
I've had great reception with Moto phones. The 2000 world phone is amazing, probably because it has a pull out antenna (remember those?). However, the user interface, imho is the *primary* reason Moto lost market share to Nokia. Even today I still can't store and retreive numbers easily, although the newer models, like v-600 are considerably better, still there wierd 'dead zones' in the interface one can fall into and can't get out of.
The practice of looking for possible names that large companies might use, then taking those names, and registering them in various domains in the hopes that at some time in the future the large company will be forced to pay a fee to recover their name is little more than cheap and nasty extortion. Given the hundreds of domains and variations, should cyber squatters be allowed recklessly to register iTunes or any other Apple product in all of these other domains around the world, and then be allowed to extort money from Apple, or from any other company thus damaged by these actions? It is not Apple's responsibility to prevent this, but the domain name registery and also the party attempting the extortion. The penalty for this type of extortion should be a revocation of all names registered by the cyber-squatter, pursuant to a complete audit of these registered names, and a search for any other examples of extortion perpetrated in the past by the squatter, and if such past practices are found, then global and permanent revocation of all registration rights going forward.
It is highly unlikely there is significant data to back up this claim. It defies logic to me. Why would anyone make efforts to invite into their hard disk an operating system that is so full of security vulnerabilities, crashes a lot, and generally is slower and less easy to use?
I recently upgraded my cell phone to a Nokia 6620. This rather amazing phone has several hundred dollars of commercial software "bundled" with it. Each one has a trial one time use, then a need to pay a license fee, which can be $15 to 20 dollars or more. This market [micro applications on mobile and wireless devices] is growing very rapidly. For example, many companies now are discovering that almost 1/2 of their *entire* data communications, networking, and telephone budget is going into mobile and wireless. My question is what is the status of open software development for these new platforms? There surely is a great deal of money to be saved.
There is strong evidence that many major corporations are moving away from Microsoft and towards. There are two basic reasons: (1) reliability, and (2) cost. Regarding (1) [reliability] I know of one very large French bank that moved to linux for all of its financial transactions. Their testing revealed too many security flaws in Microsoft products, and they "could not take the chance with Microsoft." Regarding (2) I know of a major Italian bank that is rolling out its *entire branch office network* using open source. Their move was in response to raised prices in Microsoft licensing. They tested, prototyped, and found out that "Yes, open source really works. Yes, even for the desktops and office workers." In North America I know if a large logistics company (can't mention name) that switched to Linux in all of its offices. They didn't have any bias against Microsoft, but they just couldn't take the downtime in their business. I also know of a large automobile manufacturing company that switched to Linux on Dell boxes to serve up all of its parts and other manuals in all dealers throughout North America. The reason was because of reliability, cost, and complexity. They found Linux far easier to implement. Finally, I've talked with a very large pharmaceutical company. They are involved in building a new global research center. They are going to use only Linux clusters for their drug discovery ("NME New Molecular Entity") research. Not Microsoft. So what can we conclude? There is some movement towards Linux on the part of many CIO's. There is nothing like a frozen IT budget and lots of financial pressure to get people thinking about Linux. Times are really bad in many industries now, and those licensing fees are looking larger and larger.
There are a number of good books showing how to improve memory. There is a long history of this, starting with Simonides of Ceos. Try Frances A. Yates, The Art of Memory, University of Chicago Press, 1966. Or for a shorter book that contains many exercises and tricks [how to memorize all of the states of the U.S. in alphabetical order in a way that you can recite it backwards, forwards, or starting from any point, etc], and other such tricks, try Harry Lorayne & Jerry Lucas, The Memory Book, Ballantine Books, New York, 1974.