I see this as a good way for airlines to make more money. Having recently flown Frontier and enjoyed the 22 (or so) channel satellite TV service (that I paid a nominal $5 charge for - and was free until after take off) I welcome many options like this for the airlines. I do admit that $30 is pretty steep for something like this. I'm not a penny pincher by any means, but I would find it tough to cough up the cash for this. I would, however, easily plunk down $15 for this service.
I'm also happy the airlines have been increasingly moving towards charging for inflight meals as it's something I've thought they should have done long again. Instead of everyone, no matter if you're hungry or not, getting plain awful food, those who wish to pay a reasonable price actually get good food.
I don't see why it wouldn't be MS Office compatibile
Because there are a lot of companies that have tried to create a MS Office compatible product and have not been unable to fully achieve this, mainly due to the closed nature of the Office document formats.
And interestingly enough, RMS is missing from the list:) (am not complaining, though).
I'm sure there are a lot of people who read RMS as Root-Mean-Squared, right? I know RMS is a person, and I've seen his name probably about 100 times, and he's all ubergood and everything, but I still can not remember any part of his damn name.
This isn't trolling you idiot mods. Offtopic? Yes. Troll? No.
Warning people about what the link leads to is not trolling. And stating that people who enjoy seeing those type of pictures should kill themselves is +1 Insightful (as they really should kill themselves) or +1 Informative (as it lists ways for them to kill themselves).
What's the pricing for this setup? I know the article mentions a $2/user/month charge, but it also requires IBM Websphere (which is what IBM really wants to sell with this setup). Which version does it require? Websphere has quite a price range.
Also, the really big question is: What is its compatibility with MS Office?
Unless you like to see shit on a girls face... don't click the link
if you do... click on the link, and then go jump out of the window. if you're in the basement, stay there and impaile yourself on your keyboard. if you're on the first floor, eat a box of broken glass and then drink a jug of drano.
I do have my firewall reject all WAN ping attempts, but that just makes such a scan take longer.
But it still is able to find out some things:
Interesting ports on somehostname.somehost.com (123.456.789.101): PORT STATE SERVICE XXXXX/tcp filtered unknown XXXXX/tcp open unknown XXXXX/tcp open unknown Device type: general purpose Running: Microsoft Windows (blah, blah, blah)
But not what service(s) are running:) And, actually, some of the port information is innacurate depending on what type of scan you do.
And, now that I've scanned more ports, it inacurately reports some ports as open:
PORT STATE SERVICE XXX78/tcp open unknown XXX79/tcp closed unknown XXX80/tcp closed unknown XXX81/tcp open unknown XXX82/tcp open unknown
Please, they make 70 cents revenue. Not profit. Revenue. To quote you, doing absolutely no work to get it is completely wrong! The artists, managers, tour expenses, studios, advertisement and a whole bunch of other costs aren't "absolutely no work."
Yes, they do all that, but they were doing that before iTunes and all the other stores existed and making money so all of those expenses were already paid for. This increase in revenue cost them nothing as all the work is being done by Apple, therefore it is all profit for the record company.
Say a company has a revenue of $1 million and a total profit of $100,000.
Now that same company has another company sell their product and it costs them nothing to have the second company do so. Now the company has a revenue of $1,100,000. They are now making a $200,000 profit. The extra $100,000 cost them nothing. Get it?
That's a good question. I setup port redirecting on my firewall to access my home systems to avoid problems (people scanning for common open ports and my ISP blocking them). That coupled with dynamic DNS works pretty nice. Of course they could block obscure ports like 39492 (not the one I actually use, wouldn't want to give away my top secret network secrets!), but why would they (other than to be evil)? Of course... I don't use their service (TimeWarner owns the cable around my house)... but I have friends that do.
At the 99-cent price, only about 10 cents from each song sale goes to Apple's bottom line, with about 70 cents going to the record labels and the other 20 cents paying for credit-card fees and distribution costs, sources say.
Come on now. So, for each sale they get 10 cents. Where does that 10 cents go to? The bank? No, to pay for the costs associated with the service It is revenue, not profit. As I stated before iTunes does not pull a profit, as stated by Apple. So, how is there a $.10/song profit when there is no profit? Unless you're talking about Enron, that doesn't work.
Dell's 6% profit is mostly profit.
It's ALL profit. It's the net margin (total revenues - total costs).
I have seen no qualification for that stat. You stated Dell has a profit margin of only 6% on the computers they sell. So, there's nothing wrong with what I've said. Is that before or after other costs (which I referenced) were included? Companies love to fidget with their numbers to make themselves look better.
Well, maybe you need to also take a reading comprehension class. This is Apple's net profit assuming the grandparent post is correct. Read what you wrote half an hour before.
That was clearly a quote, and not written by me. It is also not implying that the $0.10 is a profit and as I've stated over and over again now, Apple does not pull a profit from iTunes so they are not profitting $0.10 a song.
First, 10 cents out of every 99 is a very good profit margin, considering that Apple does not do anything other than distribute the tracks. In fact, that's an excellent profit margin... For instance, Dell has a profit margin of only 6% on the computers they sell -- that would correspond to about 6 cents for a song. Try taking an Economics 101 class sometime.
If that's what they're teaching in this mystical "Economics 101" class, I really don't want to take it.
Apple's $0.10 on the dollar is not profit, it's revenue. As another poster pointed out that is before all of the costs associated with the iTunes store (development, servers, promotion, etc). Apple has said they make no money on iTunes.
Dell's 6% profit is mostly profit. Although there are marketing and other considerations to take into account the main costs (hardware, software, assembly, customer support) are all paid for by the sale of the item. Dell's focus, like most comptuer manfucturers, is now on goods with higher profit margins. Examples of these are: extended warranties, printer consumables (HP's most profitable market), business services, etc.
Perhaps they teach this in Economics 102?
What the hell are you smoking?
Actually, I rarely smoke. And on the rare occasion that I do, I usually smoke Djarum cloves. Gives me a nice little buzz and they smell quite nice. Thanks for asking. Any other questions about my personal consumption habits that you may want to know about? Or would you like to tell me what you learned in other amazing classes like "Art 101", "Computer Science 101", or "Pottery 101"?
Would you PLEASE stop repeating this garbage? Any article on slashdot invariably parrots the same damn thing "there are only two or three good tracks on each CD". That's just bullshit. You are buying the wrong music.
I was really referring to the music that the RIAA pushes. Whether it's the latest Britney clone or "gangsta" rap.
The problem is that my wife still insists on buying a lot of those types of albums. That's why I'm trying to get her hooked on different genres like Vocal Trance, European Dance, etc (although some of that stuff makes me wish I was listening to Britney). Still got a lot of fluff to some of it, but it's not as bad.
I was referring to the work they do in relation to online stores like iTunes. In terms of iTunes they do (basically) no work.
Most of the work is in marketing and promotion. Without that you would have no idea what "music" you wanted to download
Thank God the RIAA is there then. Otherwise I really wouldn't know what to do! Oddly enough, I buy music almost solely based on suggestions from friends/acquaintances and after I download a sampling of the artists music (oops! I pirate). Most of the rest of my music is from places like the (old) mp3.com and include music that is unfortunately not available for purchase anywhere (live techno/trance sets). I don't own a TV (well.. I do, but it is for DVDs/PS2/XBox only), very rarely listen to music on the radio, and find magazines like Rolling Stone worthless. So I fail to see where the RIAA is "telling" me what to buy.
From the register At the 99-cent price, only about 10 cents from each song sale goes to Apple's bottom line, with about 70 cents going to the record labels and the other 20 cents paying for credit-card fees and distribution costs, sources say.
AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!
they're making a $0.70 profit on each song sold and doing absolutely no work to get it! kill me now! Armageddon has come! Jesus fuck this drives me insane. So now they need $0.95 per song?
Slashdot Mirror
I had problems seeing it in Firefox but it seemed to show up fine in IE. Haven't tried that google cache link yet.
holy fuck my grammar is going way down hill
that's embarassing to read
blah
I'll wear it to work and never get fired again.
Again? You've already been fired, so they don't have to fire you again.
service will be unveiled on May 17 on non-stop flights from Munich to Los Angeles,
Missed the length of the flight. $30 for that flight is a good deal. $10 for 30 minutes on the other hand... that's pretty steep.
I see this as a good way for airlines to make more money. Having recently flown Frontier and enjoyed the 22 (or so) channel satellite TV service (that I paid a nominal $5 charge for - and was free until after take off) I welcome many options like this for the airlines. I do admit that $30 is pretty steep for something like this. I'm not a penny pincher by any means, but I would find it tough to cough up the cash for this. I would, however, easily plunk down $15 for this service.
I'm also happy the airlines have been increasingly moving towards charging for inflight meals as it's something I've thought they should have done long again. Instead of everyone, no matter if you're hungry or not, getting plain awful food, those who wish to pay a reasonable price actually get good food.
I don't see why it wouldn't be MS Office compatibile
Because there are a lot of companies that have tried to create a MS Office compatible product and have not been unable to fully achieve this, mainly due to the closed nature of the Office document formats.
Vote Alexai Pazhitnov
Tetris owns you!
And interestingly enough, RMS is missing from the list :) (am not complaining, though).
I'm sure there are a lot of people who read RMS as Root-Mean-Squared, right? I know RMS is a person, and I've seen his name probably about 100 times, and he's all ubergood and everything, but I still can not remember any part of his damn name.
Change it back then. Anyone can edit Wikipedia articles.
This isn't trolling you idiot mods. Offtopic? Yes. Troll? No.
Warning people about what the link leads to is not trolling. And stating that people who enjoy seeing those type of pictures should kill themselves is +1 Insightful (as they really should kill themselves) or +1 Informative (as it lists ways for them to kill themselves).
What's the pricing for this setup? I know the article mentions a $2/user/month charge, but it also requires IBM Websphere (which is what IBM really wants to sell with this setup). Which version does it require? Websphere has quite a price range.
Also, the really big question is: What is its compatibility with MS Office?
because if you're using some more advanced and secure browser[1]
like mozilla firefox which is what I'm using?
oh shoot... still see the shit
Unless you like to see shit on a girls face... don't click the link
if you do... click on the link, and then go jump out of the window. if you're in the basement, stay there and impaile yourself on your keyboard. if you're on the first floor, eat a box of broken glass and then drink a jug of drano.
thank you
I just downloaded the latest version (3.50)
Didn't try the -A option so I guess I'll give that another shot when I get back to work tomorrow.
Cisco owns Linksys though. Check it out.
Yeah I know. I thought I implied that with my last sentence, but I guess not.
I do have my firewall reject all WAN ping attempts, but that just makes such a scan take longer.
:) And, actually, some of the port information is innacurate depending on what type of scan you do.
But it still is able to find out some things:
Interesting ports on somehostname.somehost.com (123.456.789.101):
PORT STATE SERVICE
XXXXX/tcp filtered unknown
XXXXX/tcp open unknown
XXXXX/tcp open unknown
Device type: general purpose
Running: Microsoft Windows (blah, blah, blah)
But not what service(s) are running
And, now that I've scanned more ports, it inacurately reports some ports as open:
PORT STATE SERVICE
XXX78/tcp open unknown
XXX79/tcp closed unknown
XXX80/tcp closed unknown
XXX81/tcp open unknown
XXX82/tcp open unknown
But it's a fun tool.
Please, they make 70 cents revenue. Not profit. Revenue. To quote you, doing absolutely no work to get it is completely wrong! The artists, managers, tour expenses, studios, advertisement and a whole bunch of other costs aren't "absolutely no work."
Yes, they do all that, but they were doing that before iTunes and all the other stores existed and making money so all of those expenses were already paid for. This increase in revenue cost them nothing as all the work is being done by Apple, therefore it is all profit for the record company.
Say a company has a revenue of $1 million and a total profit of $100,000.
Now that same company has another company sell their product and it costs them nothing to have the second company do so. Now the company has a revenue of $1,100,000. They are now making a $200,000 profit. The extra $100,000 cost them nothing. Get it?
That's a good question. I setup port redirecting on my firewall to access my home systems to avoid problems (people scanning for common open ports and my ISP blocking them). That coupled with dynamic DNS works pretty nice. Of course they could block obscure ports like 39492 (not the one I actually use, wouldn't want to give away my top secret network secrets!), but why would they (other than to be evil)?
Of course... I don't use their service (TimeWarner owns the cable around my house)... but I have friends that do.
If LinkSys is doing this in one device, what about others?
In their defense, they're a company, and this is going to make them money. So... oh well.
And of course, it was Cisco, not Linksys that recently admitted it had a backdoor in some of its products.
Now, if only I could remember who Linksysis owned by...
you with your fancy real accounting knowledge and ability to discern truth!
you have no place on slashdot! =p
At the 99-cent price, only about 10 cents from each song sale goes to Apple's bottom line, with about 70 cents going to the record labels and the other 20 cents paying for credit-card fees and distribution costs, sources say.
Come on now. So, for each sale they get 10 cents. Where does that 10 cents go to? The bank? No, to pay for the costs associated with the service It is revenue, not profit. As I stated before iTunes does not pull a profit, as stated by Apple. So, how is there a $.10/song profit when there is no profit? Unless you're talking about Enron, that doesn't work.
Dell's 6% profit is mostly profit.
It's ALL profit. It's the net margin (total revenues - total costs).
I have seen no qualification for that stat. You stated Dell has a profit margin of only 6% on the computers they sell. So, there's nothing wrong with what I've said. Is that before or after other costs (which I referenced) were included? Companies love to fidget with their numbers to make themselves look better.
Well, maybe you need to also take a reading comprehension class. This is Apple's net profit assuming the grandparent post is correct. Read what you wrote half an hour before.
That was clearly a quote, and not written by me. It is also not implying that the $0.10 is a profit and as I've stated over and over again now, Apple does not pull a profit from iTunes so they are not profitting $0.10 a song.
First, 10 cents out of every 99 is a very good profit margin, considering that Apple does not do anything other than distribute the tracks. In fact, that's an excellent profit margin... For instance, Dell has a profit margin of only 6% on the computers they sell -- that would correspond to about 6 cents for a song. Try taking an Economics 101 class sometime.
If that's what they're teaching in this mystical "Economics 101" class, I really don't want to take it.
Apple's $0.10 on the dollar is not profit, it's revenue. As another poster pointed out that is before all of the costs associated with the iTunes store (development, servers, promotion, etc). Apple has said they make no money on iTunes.
Dell's 6% profit is mostly profit. Although there are marketing and other considerations to take into account the main costs (hardware, software, assembly, customer support) are all paid for by the sale of the item. Dell's focus, like most comptuer manfucturers, is now on goods with higher profit margins. Examples of these are: extended warranties, printer consumables (HP's most profitable market), business services, etc.
Perhaps they teach this in Economics 102?
What the hell are you smoking?
Actually, I rarely smoke. And on the rare occasion that I do, I usually smoke Djarum cloves. Gives me a nice little buzz and they smell quite nice. Thanks for asking. Any other questions about my personal consumption habits that you may want to know about? Or would you like to tell me what you learned in other amazing classes like "Art 101", "Computer Science 101", or "Pottery 101"?
Would you PLEASE stop repeating this garbage? Any article on slashdot invariably parrots the same damn thing "there are only two or three good tracks on each CD". That's just bullshit. You are buying the wrong music.
I was really referring to the music that the RIAA pushes. Whether it's the latest Britney clone or "gangsta" rap.
The problem is that my wife still insists on buying a lot of those types of albums. That's why I'm trying to get her hooked on different genres like Vocal Trance, European Dance, etc (although some of that stuff makes me wish I was listening to Britney). Still got a lot of fluff to some of it, but it's not as bad.
They are doing plenty of work.
I was referring to the work they do in relation to online stores like iTunes. In terms of iTunes they do (basically) no work.
Most of the work is in marketing and promotion. Without that you would have no idea what "music" you wanted to download
Thank God the RIAA is there then. Otherwise I really wouldn't know what to do! Oddly enough, I buy music almost solely based on suggestions from friends/acquaintances and after I download a sampling of the artists music (oops! I pirate). Most of the rest of my music is from places like the (old) mp3.com and include music that is unfortunately not available for purchase anywhere (live techno/trance sets). I don't own a TV (well.. I do, but it is for DVDs/PS2/XBox only), very rarely listen to music on the radio, and find magazines like Rolling Stone worthless. So I fail to see where the RIAA is "telling" me what to buy.
In response to myself:
From the register
At the 99-cent price, only about 10 cents from each song sale goes to Apple's bottom line, with about 70 cents going to the record labels and the other 20 cents paying for credit-card fees and distribution costs, sources say.
AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!
they're making a $0.70 profit on each song sold and doing absolutely no work to get it! kill me now! Armageddon has come! Jesus fuck this drives me insane. So now they need $0.95 per song?