An established artist going independent still entails a certain risk. Why go independent when you have the leverage to sign contracts that are more favorable to you, and still get all the benefits of belonging the cartel?
Marketing is a powerful tool for manipulating demand. DeBeers did it by convincing people that diamonds were rare (they are not) and that "Diamonds are forever", i.e. you shouldn't resell a diamond. The music industry does it via their stranglehold on distribution and marketing channels. In the case of music for most people, the vast majority, if not all music that they want it fed to them via traditional marketing channels like radio stations and music channels.
Really shitty music can become popular if you play it enough.
* Their music will *never* be played on mainstream radio ("payola", though in more subtle forms, is very much alive today) * Their videos will never be played on Music Channels like mTV * Their CDs will never be sold in major music stores, or sold on major online retailers. * As a result of the aforementioned, they will never be able to to gain much exposure, and thus never be able to sell many concert tickets, which is the biggest revenue stream for most musicians.
In short, going independent is a sure way to not make much money.
The entire music industry is a cartel, much like the DeBeers diamond cartel. Like DeBeers has with diamonds, they have near complete control over the production and distribution of their product. This allows them to manipulate both supply and demand, which in turn, allows them to sell their product for more than it would be worth in a truly open market. Because of the control they have over every aspect of music production and distribution, third parties are not able to make much money selling music unless they join the cartel.
Currently the music industry is trying to further limit distribution of their product via DRM. This further increases the profit margins because consumers cannot resell their DRM locked music, like they can used tapes or CDs. DeBeers has done a similar thing - though by different means (obviously you can't put DRM on a diamond), and been very successful at it over the last century.
I know the DeBeers/Music Industry analogy isn't perfect, by DeBeers is the most successful cartel ever so I imagine every cartel looks to it for "inspiration".
To both of you, I would check to make sure your respective text editors are working properly. When you open a (non-empty).vbs file in vi or notepad, some text should be displayed on the screen. The fact that nothing is happening might indicate a problem with your systems.
Most large software companies do this. Cisco and Oracle come to mind as companies that buy instead of develop new product lines all the time.
I wonder why people see this a such a bad thing. Reinventing the wheel is viewed as a anti-pattern in the programming world, but when a large company chooses to not do it through acquisitions, it's viewed as a bad thing.
My mistake. I had a pvr150 in there. I've since moved my PVR150 to my Windows Media Center PC, and I'm going to put the PVR500 in the machine that runs FreeBSD.
I've tested it with my Windows media center PC and DirecTV HD receiver.
The receiver feeds the signal to my PVR150 card via SVideo. The resulting picture sent from my PVR to my TV over the VGA is only 720x480, but it still looks much, much better than a regular TV signal. I have a very hard time telling the difference between direct HD output to my TV and output that had gone through my PVR.
Obviously, the same results would be possible if I was using MythTV, since it can use the same hardware.
I'm married, and I managed to get my pvr350 working in FreeBSD using the pvrxxx driver port. I wrote a shell script that turns the TV on and off and changes the channels.
But I also have a Windows Media Center PC. Maybe that balances things out?
It might just be your particular area. I've had SBC (At&T) for three years now, and at times have downloaded/uploaded into the hundreds of GB in a month and I've never heard a peep from SBC/AT&T.
Java can be deployed via Active Directory group policies. We deploy the JRE to desktops this way. As for servers we only have two or three that use it, so it wasn't that much of a headache to o those by hand.
Since java comes as an msi installer, and Sun provides documentation on how to customize the msi to your liking, I would consider managing java via group policies.
We deploy the same version of JRE to all of our desktops, but with other software like Office we have different versions for different groups of computers.
If my points still aren't clear: Windows sucks, OS X and Linux rules. Also vi over emacs, but TextMate is the best, and etc is pronounced etcee. hehe.:)
Ok. I've got some for you.
* FreeBSD > Linux
* OSX is the result of Apple realizing that they couldn't write a decent OS themselves.
* Using Emacs to edit a text file is like using a front end loader to put out the cat. (not my quote)
Seriously though, the serious problems with Windows that you point out are simply the cost of backward compatibility. It would interesting to see what would have happened if Microsoft had cut off, or severely crippled backward compatibility with the win9x series like Apple did with OS9.
So what was the point of your post? Everything you've described is possible with Windows.
There are lots of Windows apps out there that install just fine for regular users. We see them on users workstations all the time. If an application developer for Windows doesn't take into account the possibility that the user might not have admin rights, then that's their problem.
Vista's UAC is meant to light a fire under the ass of lazy ISVs who, to this day, assume everyone will have admin rights.
Slashdot Mirror
An established artist going independent still entails a certain risk. Why go independent when you have the leverage to sign contracts that are more favorable to you, and still get all the benefits of belonging the cartel?
Marketing is a powerful tool for manipulating demand. DeBeers did it by convincing people that diamonds were rare (they are not) and that "Diamonds are forever", i.e. you shouldn't resell a diamond. The music industry does it via their stranglehold on distribution and marketing channels. In the case of music for most people, the vast majority, if not all music that they want it fed to them via traditional marketing channels like radio stations and music channels. Really shitty music can become popular if you play it enough.
If they go independant
* Their music will *never* be played on mainstream radio ("payola", though in more subtle forms, is very much alive today)
* Their videos will never be played on Music Channels like mTV
* Their CDs will never be sold in major music stores, or sold on major online retailers.
* As a result of the aforementioned, they will never be able to to gain much exposure, and thus never be able to sell many concert tickets, which is the biggest revenue stream for most musicians.
In short, going independent is a sure way to not make much money.
The entire music industry is a cartel, much like the DeBeers diamond cartel. Like DeBeers has with diamonds, they have near complete control over the production and distribution of their product. This allows them to manipulate both supply and demand, which in turn, allows them to sell their product for more than it would be worth in a truly open market. Because of the control they have over every aspect of music production and distribution, third parties are not able to make much money selling music unless they join the cartel.
Currently the music industry is trying to further limit distribution of their product via DRM. This further increases the profit margins because consumers cannot resell their DRM locked music, like they can used tapes or CDs. DeBeers has done a similar thing - though by different means (obviously you can't put DRM on a diamond), and been very successful at it over the last century.
I know the DeBeers/Music Industry analogy isn't perfect, by DeBeers is the most successful cartel ever so I imagine every cartel looks to it for "inspiration".
"Perhaps because it runs os x?"
Probably run by that idiot Mac zealot who did the pointless "hack my mac" (and DoS my employer's network in the process) contest a while ago.
Thanks. Luckily my state is on the allow list for import of booze. I'll be ordering some later tonight.
To both of you, I would check to make sure your respective text editors are working properly. When you open a (non-empty) .vbs file in vi or notepad, some text should be displayed on the screen. The fact that nothing is happening might indicate a problem with your systems.
Thanks a lot. Getting out the credit card now.
Most large software companies do this. Cisco and Oracle come to mind as companies that buy instead of develop new product lines all the time.
:(
I wonder why people see this a such a bad thing. Reinventing the wheel is viewed as a anti-pattern in the programming world, but when a large company chooses to not do it through acquisitions, it's viewed as a bad thing.
BTW, I was never able to find Duvel locally.
It's very common. Many people also think OSX is based on Linux.
I'll even admit when I tried Linux for the first time ~1997, of the first "Linux distros" I tried was FreeBSD. I had no idea.
No. He won and you are the idiot.
Oh my, I said "pvr350" in my original post didn't I. I have a 150 and 500MCE.
My mistake. I had a pvr150 in there. I've since moved my PVR150 to my Windows Media Center PC, and I'm going to put the PVR500 in the machine that runs FreeBSD.
I've tested it with my Windows media center PC and DirecTV HD receiver.
The receiver feeds the signal to my PVR150 card via SVideo. The resulting picture sent from my PVR to my TV over the VGA is only 720x480, but it still looks much, much better than a regular TV signal. I have a very hard time telling the difference between direct HD output to my TV and output that had gone through my PVR.
Obviously, the same results would be possible if I was using MythTV, since it can use the same hardware.
I'm married, and I managed to get my pvr350 working in FreeBSD using the pvrxxx driver port. I wrote a shell script that turns the TV on and off and changes the channels.
But I also have a Windows Media Center PC. Maybe that balances things out?
That would work great if Dell made hardware and wrote drivers.
Yep. They must have cheaped out and went with mysql instead of a real enterprise DB like MS SQL Server.
I'm just waiting for the "lols! Dell runs Microsoft IIS on their webservers!" comments.
It might just be your particular area. I've had SBC (At&T) for three years now, and at times have downloaded/uploaded into the hundreds of GB in a month and I've never heard a peep from SBC/AT&T.
Anyone who signs up to an internet messageboard as 'billgates' is a retard.
Java can be deployed via Active Directory group policies. We deploy the JRE to desktops this way. As for servers we only have two or three that use it, so it wasn't that much of a headache to o those by hand.
Since java comes as an msi installer, and Sun provides documentation on how to customize the msi to your liking, I would consider managing java via group policies.
We deploy the same version of JRE to all of our desktops, but with other software like Office we have different versions for different groups of computers.
Ok. I've got some for you.
* FreeBSD > Linux
* OSX is the result of Apple realizing that they couldn't write a decent OS themselves.
* Apple users need to shut the **** up.
* Using Emacs to edit a text file is like using a front end loader to put out the cat. (not my quote)
Seriously though, the serious problems with Windows that you point out are simply the cost of backward compatibility. It would interesting to see what would have happened if Microsoft had cut off, or severely crippled backward compatibility with the win9x series like Apple did with OS9.
So what was the point of your post? Everything you've described is possible with Windows.
There are lots of Windows apps out there that install just fine for regular users. We see them on users workstations all the time. If an application developer for Windows doesn't take into account the possibility that the user might not have admin rights, then that's their problem.
Vista's UAC is meant to light a fire under the ass of lazy ISVs who, to this day, assume everyone will have admin rights.
So I take it in your workplace, all of the employees - down to the secretaries - log in as root on their *nix workstations?