"Super duper mega" Storm Sandy (hint the sarcasm) was destructive because of where it landed. Not because of the global warming. Hint, they couldnt call it a hurrican because it was too weak.
Other manufacturers manage to make cheaper phones under better conditions, e.g. LG which has factories in South Korea
And in China. And problems with the environment and working conditions world-wide (and most certainly in South Korea too) http://www.corp-research.org/LG
For computer equipment, buy used and learn how to repair it. It's not a perfect solution since no electronics are made without slaves, but it's better than Feeding the Beast directly. It honors the people who bled for your equipment by not throwing out their labor when it has lost its shine.
That's pure whitewashing. Like saying that if you don't buy endangered species souvenirs directly from the poacher makes it okay.
The long term plan is to run iOS on laptops and desktops, or have you not been paying attention? This is why Apple has stopped caring about POSIX, and has put all of its efforts into the iOS runtime environment--UI, toolchain, etc. OS X is a second-class citizen.
I think that's nominally true for CPUs designed from the ground up. Given that chip's taking most of it's cues from reference designs by ARM themselves... I think this is less of the usual case.
Well, if "that chip's taking most of it's cues from reference designs by ARM" - why the hell is it so different from all other ARM chips? Why is it still the only 64bit ARM chip shipping?
The graph shows the global annual counts for all hurricanes and major hurricanes. From '92 through '98, there was around 35 major hurricanes per year, falling this year to 29 major hurricanes. The peaks of the graph roughly correspond to el Nino years, with the stronger the el Nino the more hurricanes.
Wait, what? How can you claim that this proves the claim was wrong, when all the time you insisted that there was a "Hiatus in Global Warming" in exactly that time period?
Clearly not every device is bad for customers if what he/she said was true, as devices exist which don't require DRM to run, or will minimise any interoperability issues with DRM'd media.
So iPods aren't evil, because they never required DRM to work.
Apple didn't allow competitors with DRM. (reminds me early Apple vs PC days)
Music industry decided it's better to have no-DRM + competition, than Apple only DRM.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12...
So in other words, this suit was about making money from Apple for forcing the music industry to drop DRM.
"While iTunes is the most popular digital music store, others have been faster to offer songs without copy protection. Amazon.com started selling DRM-free music in 2007 and swayed all the major labels to sign on in less than a year."
Awfully weird indeed.
Amazon started selling DRM-free music in September 2007
>
April 28, 2003 12:16 PM PDT
Apple unveils music store ...
The songs cost 99 cents each to download, with no subscription fee, and include the most liberal copying rights of any online service to date. Jobs has been an outspoken opponent of so-called digital rights management (DRM) in the past, arguing that limitations on digital music will undermine the market for legitimate content.
Apple hardware/software stack is proprietary and owned by one company, so this decision is correct.
Microsoft's software stack is proprietary yet they got pinged for private APIs (which Apple does) and for bundling a web browser (which Apple does). It is the same anti-competitive behavior but Apple gets away with those dirty tactics because they dont technically have a monopoly.
1. Which of Apple's "private" APIs haven't either been removed or made public after coming out of beta?
2. Microsoft has been attacked for bundling IE with Windows because they previously made a settlement with the DOJ in which they agreed not to tie other Microsoft products to the sale of Windows.
they blocked any non-Apple DRM, just like every other company out there, and Real had to hack it (to get their stuff to work around Apple's DRM).
but in the end, iTunes allowed you to use any hardware you wanted, as long as the maker coded a few of Apple's APIs (eventually Apple decided to play nice and stop suing manufacturers and instead made an API system that allowed other hardware to play nice with iTunes).
Errm, wrong. The Mac version of iTunes was and AFAIK still is able to sync with a number of PMPs, and you could always drag any music file from iTunes on the mounted player, which copied the files to them.
Slashdot Mirror
What's ridiculous is thinking Android users don't have a choice when it comes to ethics... http://www.fairphone.com/
Well, sure. You can buy a phone with a high price, low specs, and long shipping times. 20,000 people have done so far.
Learn to read. Then learn to admit defeat.
Of course Apple had _some_ DRM free titles by 2007, everyone did. Selling a small portion of your catalogue DRM free is not very useful for me.
It was all music from one of the major studios, not "a small portion". That means you fail.
So please tell me why, scientists arent going to the media and telling them to stop the scaremongering?
Because idiots like you would claim that they admit that Global Warming is a hoax.
"Super duper mega" Storm Sandy (hint the sarcasm) was destructive because of where it landed. Not because of the global warming. Hint, they couldnt call it a hurrican because it was too weak.
Sandy was a category 3 hurricane, you idiot.
Other manufacturers manage to make cheaper phones under better conditions, e.g. LG which has factories in South Korea
And in China. And problems with the environment and working conditions world-wide (and most certainly in South Korea too) http://www.corp-research.org/LG
The poor conditions in Chinese factories were highlighted in 2010 when 14 workers killed themselves at Apple's biggest supplier, Foxconn.
Can't argue with BBC about this sad statistics,
Well, if suicides show poor conditions - what do lack of suicides show? What was so special about 2010?
For computer equipment, buy used and learn how to repair it. It's not a perfect solution since no electronics are made without slaves, but it's better than Feeding the Beast directly. It honors the people who bled for your equipment by not throwing out their labor when it has lost its shine.
That's pure whitewashing. Like saying that if you don't buy endangered species souvenirs directly from the poacher makes it okay.
You don't own the music; the label does. You own a copy of the music.
Not with streaming music.
Your previous post which linked information from 2006, this was prior to 2006, it did not work.
Wanna bet? http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/itunes/ You lost. You so fucking lost it completely.
The long term plan is to run iOS on laptops and desktops, or have you not been paying attention? This is why Apple has stopped caring about POSIX, and has put all of its efforts into the iOS runtime environment--UI, toolchain, etc. OS X is a second-class citizen.
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3607.htm
I think that's nominally true for CPUs designed from the ground up. Given that chip's taking most of it's cues from reference designs by ARM themselves... I think this is less of the usual case.
Well, if "that chip's taking most of it's cues from reference designs by ARM" - why the hell is it so different from all other ARM chips? Why is it still the only 64bit ARM chip shipping?
If anything, it's the opposite:
http://models.weatherbell.com/...
The graph shows the global annual counts for all hurricanes and major hurricanes. From '92 through '98, there was around 35 major hurricanes per year, falling this year to 29 major hurricanes. The peaks of the graph roughly correspond to el Nino years, with the stronger the el Nino the more hurricanes.
Wait, what? How can you claim that this proves the claim was wrong, when all the time you insisted that there was a "Hiatus in Global Warming" in exactly that time period?
So there is clothing that makes it easier to steal clothing by blocking the RFIDs of the theft detection systems?
Clearly not every device is bad for customers if what he/she said was true, as devices exist which don't require DRM to run, or will minimise any interoperability issues with DRM'd media.
So iPods aren't evil, because they never required DRM to work.
No, not at all.
Apple didn't allow competitors with DRM. (reminds me early Apple vs PC days) Music industry decided it's better to have no-DRM + competition, than Apple only DRM. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12...
So in other words, this suit was about making money from Apple for forcing the music industry to drop DRM.
Within a year of Amazon opening their digital music store, they had the major labels. Apple was still heavily into DRM then.
Because Amazon paid the major labels not to let anybody, especially not Apple, sell DRM free music. Time to sue Amazon.
Article from 2009 announcing price cuts to iTunes music, mentions Apple has plans to go DRM free in the future:
http://www.computerworld.com/a...
From same article:
"While iTunes is the most popular digital music store, others have been faster to offer songs without copy protection. Amazon.com started selling DRM-free music in 2007 and swayed all the major labels to sign on in less than a year."
Awfully weird indeed.
Amazon started selling DRM-free music in September 2007
Apple started selling DRM-free music in April 2007 - https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/04/02Apple-Unveils-Higher-Quality-DRM-Free-Music-on-the-iTunes-Store.html
Ohh, and http://news.cnet.com/2100-1027-998590.html
> April 28, 2003 12:16 PM PDT
...
Apple unveils music store
The songs cost 99 cents each to download, with no subscription fee, and include the most liberal copying rights of any online service to date. Jobs has been an outspoken opponent of so-called digital rights management (DRM) in the past, arguing that limitations on digital music will undermine the market for legitimate content.
Two-thousand-fucking-three.
Back when this lawsuit started, iTunes most definately worked with nothing that wasn't sold by Apple.
Bullshit, as I just fucking proved in my previous post.
Even if it costs tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars to own legally? Renting is cheaper (1/10th or 1/100th the price to own).
Paying for the need to be online to listen to music: Priceless.
why exactly do you want to stream everything?
For the price of one album per month, you get a larger variety than you'd get buying one album per month.
For the price of not owning any music.
Apple hardware/software stack is proprietary and owned by one company, so this decision is correct.
Microsoft's software stack is proprietary yet they got pinged for private APIs (which Apple does) and for bundling a web browser (which Apple does). It is the same anti-competitive behavior but Apple gets away with those dirty tactics because they dont technically have a monopoly.
1. Which of Apple's "private" APIs haven't either been removed or made public after coming out of beta?
2. Microsoft has been attacked for bundling IE with Windows because they previously made a settlement with the DOJ in which they agreed not to tie other Microsoft products to the sale of Windows.
they blocked any non-Apple DRM, just like every other company out there, and Real had to hack it (to get their stuff to work around Apple's DRM).
but in the end, iTunes allowed you to use any hardware you wanted, as long as the maker coded a few of Apple's APIs (eventually Apple decided to play nice and stop suing manufacturers and instead made an API system that allowed other hardware to play nice with iTunes).
Errm, wrong. The Mac version of iTunes was and AFAIK still is able to sync with a number of PMPs, and you could always drag any music file from iTunes on the mounted player, which copied the files to them.
Only laws and states can create monopolies and oligopolies. Free-markets do not have them.
Regulated free markets don't have them, true free markets always end up in them.
Would buying a product with the intent of suing over a known property of that product even be admissible?