Well considering that it wouldn't be Apple's choice to raise the prices, I would think it might be pretty hard to find lower prices from legitimate online stores.
Personally, I don't care if the prices go to a tiered structure. I don't buy the "hits" so the songs I'd purchase would probably come out cheaper than $.99.
If your parents took you as a child, you pretty much didn't make that decision on your own. It was engrained in you as a child. If you never attended church as a child, and started going on your own as an adult, then you can make the claim that you made a choice.
So you are saying Apple is too close with the CONTENT PROVIDERS to get CONTENT?
No, what I'm saying is the content providers hate TiVo and DVR in general. Apple won't do anything to hurt their feelings.
I totally agree with you that broadcast television is ultimately doomed. On demand is the future. The question is how will we get on demand. Will it be streamed? Or will we download it and view it at our convenience.
Not going to happen. Apple wants no part of DVR.
on
Mac mini, Apple DVR?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Apple is too close with Hollywood. Cable and Satellite companies own the DVR market from here on out. Unless Apple and them agree on a way to extract the recordings off the cable box, it just won't happen. Apple knows this.
Apple will make a Mac mini running an Intel chip that will be a media player though. It will connect to your television and stereo. It will show photos, play music, and play videos that are on the computer. But it won't record television broadcasts.
I have worked in local governments for the last 8 years. This is exactly what they do and why open source has a hard time making inroads here. The thinking here is that we have to spend money or we lose it next year. So around here, we have the latest copies of Windows XP and Office 2003, but we don't seem to have any money to buy a decent office color laser jet that prints duplex. Where are there priorities? Obviously, not on production.
Its all about memorizing a routine. I bought a book and learned what to do. You set one corner up correctly and then every move after that is performed in sequence until it is solved. Don't remember how long it took to solve it but I would say maybe about a minute. Once you solve it though, it got boring. I've still got the cube, but I don't have the book anymore. So without the book, its taking me 20+ years and I still haven't solved it.
I've been wanting to write an app for OS X using PostgreSQL but I really wanted to take advantage of Core Data. Since sqlite is an option in core data, I may try it the way you are using PostgreSQL and Core Data. Thanks for the eye opener.
A small website should probably use http://www.sqlite.org/. It doesn't require administration or setup. A complete database is stored in a single file. And it implements most of SQL92. Probably more than MySQL but I'm not positive.
I don't give a crap whether they are safe or not
on
Safe Cigarettes?
·
· Score: 1
I don't want them around me period. If you want to kill yourself, thats your business. Just do it someone that I don't have to breathe your smoke or smell it.
I don't follow. Are you using a Mac? Sounds like you aren't. If you were, you would know that you could actually close the iTunes window. Or if you wanted, you could run the iTunes widget from Dashboard.
If I don't act on it, I shouldn't be entitled to receive compensation for it. And receiving a patent for an idea is not acting on that idea in my opinion.
I was very interested in Django since I love Python. It looked simple enough and I was able to get through the tutorials and thought that Django was my holy grail. But then I tried to adapt it to an existing database system I had. And here is where the project failed for me.
The problem I have with Django is that it wants to hijack your database. Sure, they make it real nice to start from scratch. You write classes, run some scripts, and next thing you know, its created a database and all the necessary tables and indexes. But what if you've already got a database? Well, they provide a way to use your existing database too. But unfortunately, Django wants to add its own stuff to your database. I find this unacceptable. If Django needs a database for its internal administration stuff, fine. Create a separate database for that. But don't throw your tables inside a database that may already be in use for other projects.
Plus, what if I want this database used for multiple projects. I don't think Django makes that possible.
Thousands of webmasters and home-based coders don't want a competitor to Oracle, we want something that gets he job done quickly, efficiently and affordably.
MySQL is owned by a company, MySQL AB. PostgreSQL is an all-volunteer organization, sort of like Debian is to Linux. Sure, there are a few companies that work with PostgreSQL, such as Command Prompt, but they don't control the direction of PostgreSQL. MySQL AB controls all aspects of the MySQL database. Plus, being a company, they have the money to promote it.
This is one of the reasons why it is so much more popular than PostgreSQL. Another reason is that around the time of PHP taking off, 1998 or 1999, MySQL was emerging, while PostgreSQL was still in version 6.x. PostgreSQL was going through a complete code cleanup and rewrite so it was optimized at all. Therefore it performed much slower than MySQL. It has since closed that gap, while being a more robust database. PostgreSQL and MySQL actually took different development routes. PostgreSQL wanted to add the features to make it a world class database and optimize it and add speed later, while MySQL went for speed first and is now trying to add the features.
MySQL has always reminded me of how Microsoft works. Make it just good enough for the masses and then try to add enough to it to please the experts in the field.
Slashdot Mirror
Well considering that it wouldn't be Apple's choice to raise the prices, I would think it might be pretty hard to find lower prices from legitimate online stores.
Personally, I don't care if the prices go to a tiered structure. I don't buy the "hits" so the songs I'd purchase would probably come out cheaper than $.99.
If your parents took you as a child, you pretty much didn't make that decision on your own. It was engrained in you as a child. If you never attended church as a child, and started going on your own as an adult, then you can make the claim that you made a choice.
Going the DIY route, bands may actually create a new industry. The will need touring promoters and facilitators. I smell an opportunity.
1. Somebody will claim they have a patent on this.
2. The RIAA will sue somebody over this.
Nothing more to say.
So you are saying Apple is too close with the CONTENT PROVIDERS to get CONTENT?
No, what I'm saying is the content providers hate TiVo and DVR in general. Apple won't do anything to hurt their feelings.
I totally agree with you that broadcast television is ultimately doomed. On demand is the future. The question is how will we get on demand. Will it be streamed? Or will we download it and view it at our convenience.
Apple is too close with Hollywood. Cable and Satellite companies own the DVR market from here on out. Unless Apple and them agree on a way to extract the recordings off the cable box, it just won't happen. Apple knows this.
Apple will make a Mac mini running an Intel chip that will be a media player though. It will connect to your television and stereo. It will show photos, play music, and play videos that are on the computer. But it won't record television broadcasts.
Final Victim http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0380728168/104-81 19741-8893512?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v =glance is written by Stephen J. Cannell. Its the typical law enforcement vs. serial murderer novel but with technology thrown in. The reprint was issued in 1997 yet the story details how the serial murderer's use of Linux.
I have worked in local governments for the last 8 years. This is exactly what they do and why open source has a hard time making inroads here. The thinking here is that we have to spend money or we lose it next year. So around here, we have the latest copies of Windows XP and Office 2003, but we don't seem to have any money to buy a decent office color laser jet that prints duplex. Where are there priorities? Obviously, not on production.
Its all about memorizing a routine. I bought a book and learned what to do. You set one corner up correctly and then every move after that is performed in sequence until it is solved. Don't remember how long it took to solve it but I would say maybe about a minute. Once you solve it though, it got boring. I've still got the cube, but I don't have the book anymore. So without the book, its taking me 20+ years and I still haven't solved it.
And then back in again in the election after that.
I've been wanting to write an app for OS X using PostgreSQL but I really wanted to take advantage of Core Data. Since sqlite is an option in core data, I may try it the way you are using PostgreSQL and Core Data. Thanks for the eye opener.
A small website should probably use http://www.sqlite.org/. It doesn't require administration or setup. A complete database is stored in a single file. And it implements most of SQL92. Probably more than MySQL but I'm not positive.
I don't want them around me period. If you want to kill yourself, thats your business. Just do it someone that I don't have to breathe your smoke or smell it.
I don't follow. Are you using a Mac? Sounds like you aren't. If you were, you would know that you could actually close the iTunes window. Or if you wanted, you could run the iTunes widget from Dashboard.
If I don't act on it, I shouldn't be entitled to receive compensation for it. And receiving a patent for an idea is not acting on that idea in my opinion.
I read your entire argument only to find the you use Notepad? Oh my god, I've wasted two minutes of my life. Thanks.
And then they don't want to take a side. So they recommend a referendum where the voters choose instead.
Ok, so you run eDirectory on a Linux box. Still way less than the cost of Windows 2003 Server.
I was very interested in Django since I love Python. It looked simple enough and I was able to get through the tutorials and thought that Django was my holy grail. But then I tried to adapt it to an existing database system I had. And here is where the project failed for me.
The problem I have with Django is that it wants to hijack your database. Sure, they make it real nice to start from scratch. You write classes, run some scripts, and next thing you know, its created a database and all the necessary tables and indexes. But what if you've already got a database? Well, they provide a way to use your existing database too. But unfortunately, Django wants to add its own stuff to your database. I find this unacceptable. If Django needs a database for its internal administration stuff, fine. Create a separate database for that. But don't throw your tables inside a database that may already be in use for other projects.
Plus, what if I want this database used for multiple projects. I don't think Django makes that possible.
Oops mispelled gigolo.
How about giraffe and gigalo.
http://www.sqlite.org/ would be a better choice for these users.
Let me also add that MySQL had support for Windows long before PostgreSQL. This is another reason for its success over PostgreSQL.
MySQL is owned by a company, MySQL AB. PostgreSQL is an all-volunteer organization, sort of like Debian is to Linux. Sure, there are a few companies that work with PostgreSQL, such as Command Prompt, but they don't control the direction of PostgreSQL. MySQL AB controls all aspects of the MySQL database. Plus, being a company, they have the money to promote it.
This is one of the reasons why it is so much more popular than PostgreSQL. Another reason is that around the time of PHP taking off, 1998 or 1999, MySQL was emerging, while PostgreSQL was still in version 6.x. PostgreSQL was going through a complete code cleanup and rewrite so it was optimized at all. Therefore it performed much slower than MySQL. It has since closed that gap, while being a more robust database. PostgreSQL and MySQL actually took different development routes. PostgreSQL wanted to add the features to make it a world class database and optimize it and add speed later, while MySQL went for speed first and is now trying to add the features.
MySQL has always reminded me of how Microsoft works. Make it just good enough for the masses and then try to add enough to it to please the experts in the field.