The vast majority of people who buy desktop computers with either Linux or nothing installed on them are putting Windows on them. I think that's just obvious. They don't want to pay for the Windows license if they already have one or intend to rip it off. On the other hand pretty much all computers that ship with Mac OS on them stay that way.
I really don't believe that Linux has a significant desktop marketshare. I don't believe it ever will until and unless the Linux community developers start to take seriously the idea that consistency and usability mean way more to most people than being able to do any damned thing you want; when they understand that though it might be built buy nerds it can't be built fornerds if you want it to have widespread appeal.
[i]Having internet access and writing papers on a computer are great uses but do they really need to be making movies?[/i]
What's the difference between researching and writing a paper about it and researching a topic and making a movie about it? (Besides the fact that writing a paper makes you a more practiced writer, a noble goal in and of itself of course.) I believe that it can be an important tool for kids to be able to express themselves in the dominant form of media in their daily lives - video. It can be engaging in ways that writing a paper can't.
Note: I'm not advocating doing away with traditional methods like writing papers. But I think any educator worth his/her salt is going to tell you that having multiple instructional/assessment methods is a good thing.
A middle school does in fact need a G5. The education market is one of the prime customers for things like iMovie and iDVD. These apps definitely get some bang out of the G5. The days when all schools did was "just browse the web," launch word and play Carmen SanDiego are gone, my friend.
The fact that the bottom spec on RAM is 256 is entirely due to the fact that nobody cares about RAM. Consider the following scenario. Computer A has a lot of ram and costs $1500. Computer B is identical in every way, but has less RAM and costs $1400. Result: many people buy the cheapo. They just don't know better. Apple doesn't make people buy this way, that's just what they do.
The top spec being 2 gigs is simply a space consideration (2 slots, folks) and also to make sure that people who need more than 2 gigs of RAM buy a G5 Powermac. Sensible from a business perspective.
PP looks like crap - no vid card can change that
on
Accelerated PowerPoint?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
My chief complaint about Powerpoint has always been that while I sit here with a computer capable of rendering Lord of the Rings-style special effects, when I do a presentation it looks like build-your-own-greeting-card software circa 1996. There's just no excuse for it. it's not that hard to make things look nice instead of like crap. That little pixelated "dissolve"? Please. As a Mac user I'm watching for Keynote to become a more mature product. Either that or I use iMovie or - heaven forfend! - nothing at all. (That's right, just talking with maybe only the aid of a whiteboard can be quite refreshing occasionally!)
Anyway, I doubt if getting a new video card is going to make PP look more tasteful. Someone in Redmond would have to get a sense of style for that to happen. I'm not holding my breath.
While I agree that the sentiment around here is overly harsh, I also have just been priced out of this product. I run two blogs, one for me and one for my daughter. Now I gotta pay $70 to upgrade. Which I won't do while there's cheaper alternatives out there, which there certainly appear to be.
Re:Contents of the Letter (playfair.txt)
on
Update on Playfair
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I have a large collection of older Macs, all except one running OS 9 or less. Please tell me how to listen to iTunes music across my home network without having to spend my time burning and reripping everything I buy?
I have a large collection of older stereos, all except one have no CD player. Please tell me how I can listen to CD music throughout my home without having to spend my time re-recording them to cassette.
The argument that Would. Not. Die. Seriously, you can see this argument popping up in discussion forums everywhere with great regularity. Then you can read it in major computer industry publications, too. I'd like to believe that./ readers know better. For those that don't, here's an interesting article.
Flaw in your logic: You're assuming everyone who has an x86 PC has M$ Winblows and Linux (dual boot) OR just M$ Winblows
I don't think so. Everyone who 1) has PC hardware and 2) is nerdy enough to run Linux on it and 3) is the type to pay $50 for a new top-shelf game.... is already dual booting windows. That is my asumption. They will not be deterred by cost. Most of them own a license for Windows anyway, when they bought the box. Those that don't may just steal it. Licensing is not a convincing barrier for the dual-boot gamer theory.
I realize your comment is somewhat tounge-in-cheeck, but for others who could use a reality check: there have always been games for the Macintosh. True, it's nothing compared to the sheer number of titles available for Windows. True, the games that do appear often come out months after the Windows version. But the issue still stands: games of every kind, top-shelf titles not shareware wannabes, are available, have always been avaiable and show no signs of not being available in the future.
Linux, on the other hand, has a fundamental problem with regard to game development. One not direclty related to marketshare - the fact that it runs on PC hardware. Anyone with a PC running linux can also dual boot Windows. If they are gamers they are already doing so. Game developers are already selling a copy of their wares to these guys. They're selling them the Windows version. They gain nothing by developing for Linux and selling them a Linux copy instead. Virtually no increase in sales, no penetration into other markets, no new customers. Mac users represent a customer that they simply would not have had were it not for the development of a Mac port. See the difference?
This is why I worry about the Linux game market. I think there's a sentiment out there that the Linux game market is going to take off like a rocket...RSN. But I kinda doubt that for the reasons stated above.
I've used Canon's ZR series DV camcorders since the "10" version and I have been very satisfied. They are small and use the ubuqitous MiniDV tape standard. They have a hotshoe on and can accept an external mic (essential). Some features that mean nothing: takes still pictures, too! Has a 500x digital zoom! Accepts flash memory of some sort! Baloney. Just make sure it's MiniDV, has firewire and a few sensible extras like can take an external mic, or can digitize input from a VCR.
Also, I would advise anyone to rethink the "I'm not interested in computer-based video editing" idea. Lesson for you folks. Ten years ago young fathers everywhere bought up non-digital camcorders like crazy. The result is a shoebox filled with really crappy home movies that nobody wants to watch, even the people who shot them. The reason is because they aren't edited.
Life is largely boring. If you shot an hour of video you might get 15 minutes of usable stuff. Cut out the crap. Add some music, add some titles. It makes all the difference and with basically free editors from just about everyone there's no excuse not to do it. Burn yourself a DVD when you're done, even. Do not let your hour-long boring-as-hell-movie sit in a shoebox for lack of editing.
What do you mean by "opening up"? iTunes and the iPod will play.mp3,.aac,.wav, etc, with no regard to where you bought them..
What I mean is, other legit online music downloaing services use DRM (and perhaps even file format) that is incompatible with iPod/iTunes. They don't play WMA, and even if they did it wouldn't play the WMA files bought from those competitors stores. Problem I'm having is why would Apple want their player/software to work with those other stores? Folks in this thread have provided some food for thought, but I'm just not entirely convinced that it would be a good idea. When you're in the lead you make others come to you, you don't open up and give an opportunity to the underdogs. You don't go "well iPod now works with music from Microsoft's store!" you go "users of Microsoft's store are losing out on iPod...and lots of them are going to jump ship because of it."
So does that mean iTunes will support WMA? I doubt it. Does it mean the iPod or iTunes will be able to play the particular flavor of DRM used in online music stores using WMA? I rather doubt that too. So what exactly does this get anyone?
And who would want to use WMA in iTunes or on your iPod, unless you were at least going to be able to play a competitor music store's goods.
And why on earth would Apple agree to opening up the iTunes/iPod combo to someone elses store?
A very fair question. For starters, the first third of the book has nothing to do with adventure at sea. Rather, it is about Pi's life in his village in India. His views and practices with regard to religion are fascinating and provide for a number of interesting exchanges between him and other characters.
As for the lifeboat sequences that comprise the rest of the book, I can only say this. Yes, one gets the feeling that the story is allegory. That it's meant to Mean Something Else. But it never quite has the feel of the fantastic. It's quite realistic even. Besides, I think you'll appreciate the end. By that point the whole "this can't really happen!" issue is addressed quite adequately.
I understand your skepticism, but I still think you'd like it.
I haven't read the Da Vinci Code and I don't feel that I have to, having already read the same story in his earlier work, Angels & Demons. I mean, not just that it's the same main character, in the same type of situation, he also ends up playing footsie with a hot young thing who's related to someone who dies early in the story. It's the same story by all accounts.
Furthermore, Angels & Demons wasn't terribly well-written. The characters are cliche, the dialogue is embarrassingly stilted and the plot takes so many hairpin turns that by the end you're not sure who the good guys and the bad guys are anymore. I was rolling my eyes at this book from the beginning when we are introduced to a Harvard professor who literally had no idea what a particle accelerator was. I mean, c'mon.
Dan Brown seems to have one thing going for him: he develops a Cool Idea For A Consipiracy. Then he milks it for all it's worth with his rather mediocre skills as a novelist. He should perhaps be writing screenplays for Hollywood thrillers starring Harrison Ford, maybe.
With all that said, I did not hate Angels & Demons. It was a fun ride even while I chuckled and groaned my way through it. But I have no desire to read his newer work now that I've a) seen his skills as a writer, and b) been exposed to what is essentially the same story with the same characters.
If you're looking for a better book try Life of Pi by Yann Martel. it's about a precocious Indian teenager who emigrates to Canada at 16. He and his zookeeper family are aboard a cargo ship full of animals when it sinks in the middle of the Pacific. The remaining 2/3 of the book deals with his survival at sea in a 25-foot lifeboat. One catch. He's in it with a 250-lb tiger. Gripping story and beautifully written.
Contrast this with Microsoft's "WMA" format. Who made it up? Microsoft. Who can change it any time they wish? Microsoft. Who can determine which players, companies, computers, people can play the files? Microsoft.
Do you trust Microsoft not to abuse that position? I thought not.
It's interesting how touchy the Mac community is about an article on a Mac vulnerability which, though true and though only demonstrating that the Mac OS is not flawless, has the "tone" that the two operating systems might even be comparable.
It's not the idea that they're compare-able. Hell I'm all for comparisons. The erroneous message is that the platforms basically in the same boat with regard to security vulnerabilities and viruses. They are not. There is a real and meaningful difference between the two....I can't tell you how many times I've seen Mac users gloat whenever a Windows vulnerability is discovered.
It's not about gloating. Although Mac users surely do it. I would venture to guess, however, that Linux users do it more. You don't see macslash posting mocking coverage of every Windows explot. Slashdot, on the other hand, does. (There may be other reasons for this, but nevertheless, I think it serves my point.)
It seems to me that, for some people, a Mac is more than a personal computer and an operating system; it's an image, an identity
You a Linux user? Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. Heh. Change "an image, an identity" with "a political stance against commercial, proprietary software" and you're off to the races. In both cases, the investment on the part of the user goes beyond the technolgy itself.
In reality, I doubt there are many serious Mac users who ACTUALLY BELIEVE that the Mac OS is infallible.
Nothing is perfect, everyone in the biz knows that. But one thing that puts a bug up my ass with regard to this article is this. People use it to further the idea that there is no meaningful difference between the platforms when it comes to viruses and security vulnerabilities. This is ridiculously false. Generally speaking, we Mac users are in a demonstrably better situation than Windows users are. Aritcles like this don't actually lie about Mac vulnerabilities, but in their tone they convey the message that there's really no difference. That isn't true.
Yes. And I think you have some very valid points. Please know that some of us patriotic Americans actually see the problem. We're not all jingoistic idiots. We see.
Actually the way I heard it is that they are one of the best companies to work for. There was some ranking associated with it as well. Most family-friendly or most friendly to women or something like that. Can't recall exactly.
I even like how Windows lets me dismiss the prompts to restart until I decide to do so on my own better than Apple's approach.
Yeah I can see that. Of course there's situations where you basically want to make damned sure that people restart. Such as when applying security patches. When you have to restart for changes to take effect you don't want some boob clicking "later" and then rebooting the machine 12 days hence. And with the stability of today's operating systems that's easy to do. At least Apple's way you're free to ignore the Restart button and take care of your other business...but it won't go away until you click it.
If you think that any kind of DRM is going to stop file sharing, then you obviously don't understand the situation.
I totally agree, no DRM is going to prevent copyright infrigngement. But I think the Sony guy has it right: the only way to make a living here is to compete with the illegal filesharing technologies. Like Steve Jobs - "we're not going to sue it, we're not going to ingore it, we're going to compete with it." And now he's single-handedly come up with the only successful digital music selling model in history. And everyone else is copying him.
One of the main reasons he's been so successful is that the rights you get when you buy from him are much more liberal than what you got from anyone else. Burn as many CDs as you want, restrictions on where you could play the DRM'd file proved to be nothing more than "speedbumps" designed to make outright piracy inconvenient rather than impossible. One might characterize the model as "trusting the consumer." Sure, it's not totally unrestricted. But neither are VCR and DVD technology. Reasonable protections of copyright are usually pretty palatable to consumers.
That, I believe, is where this Sony guy is getting this. He's a recent convert to the Church of iTunes. Trust the consumer and compete with the illegal stuff by giving people what they want so they won't have to steal it.
Slashdot Mirror
The vast majority of people who buy desktop computers with either Linux or nothing installed on them are putting Windows on them. I think that's just obvious. They don't want to pay for the Windows license if they already have one or intend to rip it off. On the other hand pretty much all computers that ship with Mac OS on them stay that way.
I really don't believe that Linux has a significant desktop marketshare. I don't believe it ever will until and unless the Linux community developers start to take seriously the idea that consistency and usability mean way more to most people than being able to do any damned thing you want; when they understand that though it might be built buy nerds it can't be built fornerds if you want it to have widespread appeal.
[i]Having internet access and writing papers on a computer are great uses but do they really need to be making movies?[/i]
What's the difference between researching and writing a paper about it and researching a topic and making a movie about it? (Besides the fact that writing a paper makes you a more practiced writer, a noble goal in and of itself of course.) I believe that it can be an important tool for kids to be able to express themselves in the dominant form of media in their daily lives - video. It can be engaging in ways that writing a paper can't.
Note: I'm not advocating doing away with traditional methods like writing papers. But I think any educator worth his/her salt is going to tell you that having multiple instructional/assessment methods is a good thing.
A middle school does in fact need a G5. The education market is one of the prime customers for things like iMovie and iDVD. These apps definitely get some bang out of the G5. The days when all schools did was "just browse the web," launch word and play Carmen SanDiego are gone, my friend.
The fact that the bottom spec on RAM is 256 is entirely due to the fact that nobody cares about RAM. Consider the following scenario. Computer A has a lot of ram and costs $1500. Computer B is identical in every way, but has less RAM and costs $1400. Result: many people buy the cheapo. They just don't know better. Apple doesn't make people buy this way, that's just what they do.
The top spec being 2 gigs is simply a space consideration (2 slots, folks) and also to make sure that people who need more than 2 gigs of RAM buy a G5 Powermac. Sensible from a business perspective.
Nope! I'm a dumbass.
My chief complaint about Powerpoint has always been that while I sit here with a computer capable of rendering Lord of the Rings-style special effects, when I do a presentation it looks like build-your-own-greeting-card software circa 1996. There's just no excuse for it. it's not that hard to make things look nice instead of like crap. That little pixelated "dissolve"? Please. As a Mac user I'm watching for Keynote to become a more mature product. Either that or I use iMovie or - heaven forfend! - nothing at all. (That's right, just talking with maybe only the aid of a whiteboard can be quite refreshing occasionally!)
Anyway, I doubt if getting a new video card is going to make PP look more tasteful. Someone in Redmond would have to get a sense of style for that to happen. I'm not holding my breath.
While I agree that the sentiment around here is overly harsh, I also have just been priced out of this product. I run two blogs, one for me and one for my daughter. Now I gotta pay $70 to upgrade. Which I won't do while there's cheaper alternatives out there, which there certainly appear to be.
I have a large collection of older Macs, all except one running OS 9 or less. Please tell me how to listen to iTunes music across my home network without having to spend my time burning and reripping everything I buy?
I have a large collection of older stereos, all except one have no CD player. Please tell me how I can listen to CD music throughout my home without having to spend my time re-recording them to cassette.
The argument that Would. Not. Die. Seriously, you can see this argument popping up in discussion forums everywhere with great regularity. Then you can read it in major computer industry publications, too. I'd like to believe that ./ readers know better. For those that don't, here's an interesting article.
Flaw in your logic: You're assuming everyone who has an x86 PC has M$ Winblows and Linux (dual boot) OR just M$ Winblows
I don't think so. Everyone who 1) has PC hardware and 2) is nerdy enough to run Linux on it and 3) is the type to pay $50 for a new top-shelf game.... is already dual booting windows. That is my asumption. They will not be deterred by cost. Most of them own a license for Windows anyway, when they bought the box. Those that don't may just steal it. Licensing is not a convincing barrier for the dual-boot gamer theory.
I realize your comment is somewhat tounge-in-cheeck, but for others who could use a reality check: there have always been games for the Macintosh. True, it's nothing compared to the sheer number of titles available for Windows. True, the games that do appear often come out months after the Windows version. But the issue still stands: games of every kind, top-shelf titles not shareware wannabes, are available, have always been avaiable and show no signs of not being available in the future.
Linux, on the other hand, has a fundamental problem with regard to game development. One not direclty related to marketshare - the fact that it runs on PC hardware. Anyone with a PC running linux can also dual boot Windows. If they are gamers they are already doing so. Game developers are already selling a copy of their wares to these guys. They're selling them the Windows version. They gain nothing by developing for Linux and selling them a Linux copy instead. Virtually no increase in sales, no penetration into other markets, no new customers. Mac users represent a customer that they simply would not have had were it not for the development of a Mac port. See the difference?
This is why I worry about the Linux game market. I think there's a sentiment out there that the Linux game market is going to take off like a rocket...RSN. But I kinda doubt that for the reasons stated above.
What am I missing here?
I've used Canon's ZR series DV camcorders since the "10" version and I have been very satisfied. They are small and use the ubuqitous MiniDV tape standard. They have a hotshoe on and can accept an external mic (essential). Some features that mean nothing: takes still pictures, too! Has a 500x digital zoom! Accepts flash memory of some sort! Baloney. Just make sure it's MiniDV, has firewire and a few sensible extras like can take an external mic, or can digitize input from a VCR.
Also, I would advise anyone to rethink the "I'm not interested in computer-based video editing" idea. Lesson for you folks. Ten years ago young fathers everywhere bought up non-digital camcorders like crazy. The result is a shoebox filled with really crappy home movies that nobody wants to watch, even the people who shot them. The reason is because they aren't edited.
Life is largely boring. If you shot an hour of video you might get 15 minutes of usable stuff. Cut out the crap. Add some music, add some titles. It makes all the difference and with basically free editors from just about everyone there's no excuse not to do it. Burn yourself a DVD when you're done, even. Do not let your hour-long boring-as-hell-movie sit in a shoebox for lack of editing.
What do you mean by "opening up"? iTunes and the iPod will play .mp3, .aac, .wav, etc, with no regard to where you bought them..
What I mean is, other legit online music downloaing services use DRM (and perhaps even file format) that is incompatible with iPod/iTunes. They don't play WMA, and even if they did it wouldn't play the WMA files bought from those competitors stores. Problem I'm having is why would Apple want their player/software to work with those other stores? Folks in this thread have provided some food for thought, but I'm just not entirely convinced that it would be a good idea. When you're in the lead you make others come to you, you don't open up and give an opportunity to the underdogs. You don't go "well iPod now works with music from Microsoft's store!" you go "users of Microsoft's store are losing out on iPod...and lots of them are going to jump ship because of it."
So does that mean iTunes will support WMA? I doubt it. Does it mean the iPod or iTunes will be able to play the particular flavor of DRM used in online music stores using WMA? I rather doubt that too. So what exactly does this get anyone?
And who would want to use WMA in iTunes or on your iPod, unless you were at least going to be able to play a competitor music store's goods.
And why on earth would Apple agree to opening up the iTunes/iPod combo to someone elses store?
What's so good about it?
A very fair question. For starters, the first third of the book has nothing to do with adventure at sea. Rather, it is about Pi's life in his village in India. His views and practices with regard to religion are fascinating and provide for a number of interesting exchanges between him and other characters.
As for the lifeboat sequences that comprise the rest of the book, I can only say this. Yes, one gets the feeling that the story is allegory. That it's meant to Mean Something Else. But it never quite has the feel of the fantastic. It's quite realistic even. Besides, I think you'll appreciate the end. By that point the whole "this can't really happen!" issue is addressed quite adequately.
I understand your skepticism, but I still think you'd like it.
I haven't read the Da Vinci Code and I don't feel that I have to, having already read the same story in his earlier work, Angels & Demons. I mean, not just that it's the same main character, in the same type of situation, he also ends up playing footsie with a hot young thing who's related to someone who dies early in the story. It's the same story by all accounts.
Furthermore, Angels & Demons wasn't terribly well-written. The characters are cliche, the dialogue is embarrassingly stilted and the plot takes so many hairpin turns that by the end you're not sure who the good guys and the bad guys are anymore. I was rolling my eyes at this book from the beginning when we are introduced to a Harvard professor who literally had no idea what a particle accelerator was. I mean, c'mon.
Dan Brown seems to have one thing going for him: he develops a Cool Idea For A Consipiracy. Then he milks it for all it's worth with his rather mediocre skills as a novelist. He should perhaps be writing screenplays for Hollywood thrillers starring Harrison Ford, maybe.
With all that said, I did not hate Angels & Demons. It was a fun ride even while I chuckled and groaned my way through it. But I have no desire to read his newer work now that I've a) seen his skills as a writer, and b) been exposed to what is essentially the same story with the same characters.
If you're looking for a better book try Life of Pi by Yann Martel. it's about a precocious Indian teenager who emigrates to Canada at 16. He and his zookeeper family are aboard a cargo ship full of animals when it sinks in the middle of the Pacific. The remaining 2/3 of the book deals with his survival at sea in a 25-foot lifeboat. One catch. He's in it with a 250-lb tiger. Gripping story and beautifully written.
Apple doesn't kow tow to M$ by using wma. They use their own format, with decent DRM policies.
An additional point that is often lost on slashdot discussions is the fact that Apple's "AAC" format isn't just something they made up, nor is it something that Apple "controls." It's the audio component for the mpeg 4 standard which was created by several biggies in the industry.
Contrast this with Microsoft's "WMA" format. Who made it up? Microsoft. Who can change it any time they wish? Microsoft. Who can determine which players, companies, computers, people can play the files? Microsoft.
Do you trust Microsoft not to abuse that position? I thought not.
...piracy will continue to run rampant until the industry offers a legal alternative which is free of DRM...
They're called CDs. How'd that work out?
It's interesting how touchy the Mac community is about an article on a Mac vulnerability which, though true and though only demonstrating that the Mac OS is not flawless, has the "tone" that the two operating systems might even be comparable.
...I can't tell you how many times I've seen Mac users gloat whenever a Windows vulnerability is discovered.
It's not the idea that they're compare-able. Hell I'm all for comparisons. The erroneous message is that the platforms basically in the same boat with regard to security vulnerabilities and viruses. They are not. There is a real and meaningful difference between the two.
It's not about gloating. Although Mac users surely do it. I would venture to guess, however, that Linux users do it more. You don't see macslash posting mocking coverage of every Windows explot. Slashdot, on the other hand, does. (There may be other reasons for this, but nevertheless, I think it serves my point.)
It seems to me that, for some people, a Mac is more than a personal computer and an operating system; it's an image, an identity
You a Linux user? Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. Heh. Change "an image, an identity" with "a political stance against commercial, proprietary software" and you're off to the races. In both cases, the investment on the part of the user goes beyond the technolgy itself.
In reality, I doubt there are many serious Mac users who ACTUALLY BELIEVE that the Mac OS is infallible.
Nothing is perfect, everyone in the biz knows that. But one thing that puts a bug up my ass with regard to this article is this. People use it to further the idea that there is no meaningful difference between the platforms when it comes to viruses and security vulnerabilities. This is ridiculously false. Generally speaking, we Mac users are in a demonstrably better situation than Windows users are. Aritcles like this don't actually lie about Mac vulnerabilities, but in their tone they convey the message that there's really no difference. That isn't true.
Have you had a look at your White House lately?
Yes. And I think you have some very valid points. Please know that some of us patriotic Americans actually see the problem. We're not all jingoistic idiots. We see.
Somehow the term "family-friendly" connotates political correctness or gay rights advocacy? I have three words for you: get professional help.
:)
And don't forget to vote Democrat in 2004!
Actually the way I heard it is that they are one of the best companies to work for. There was some ranking associated with it as well. Most family-friendly or most friendly to women or something like that. Can't recall exactly.
I even like how Windows lets me dismiss the prompts to restart until I decide to do so on my own better than Apple's approach.
Yeah I can see that. Of course there's situations where you basically want to make damned sure that people restart. Such as when applying security patches. When you have to restart for changes to take effect you don't want some boob clicking "later" and then rebooting the machine 12 days hence. And with the stability of today's operating systems that's easy to do. At least Apple's way you're free to ignore the Restart button and take care of your other business...but it won't go away until you click it.
If you think that any kind of DRM is going to stop file sharing, then you obviously don't understand the situation.
I totally agree, no DRM is going to prevent copyright infrigngement. But I think the Sony guy has it right: the only way to make a living here is to compete with the illegal filesharing technologies. Like Steve Jobs - "we're not going to sue it, we're not going to ingore it, we're going to compete with it." And now he's single-handedly come up with the only successful digital music selling model in history. And everyone else is copying him.
One of the main reasons he's been so successful is that the rights you get when you buy from him are much more liberal than what you got from anyone else. Burn as many CDs as you want, restrictions on where you could play the DRM'd file proved to be nothing more than "speedbumps" designed to make outright piracy inconvenient rather than impossible. One might characterize the model as "trusting the consumer." Sure, it's not totally unrestricted. But neither are VCR and DVD technology. Reasonable protections of copyright are usually pretty palatable to consumers.
That, I believe, is where this Sony guy is getting this. He's a recent convert to the Church of iTunes. Trust the consumer and compete with the illegal stuff by giving people what they want so they won't have to steal it.