Maybe this is still a superior system at 1$, but either way, we're almost certainly not seeing the equilibrium price here.
No doubt about that - the publicity was huge - but they took the risk and reaped the benefit when it worked out. But even at $1 this is a quite profitable way to do it, and is another nail in the coffin of the "big label" system.
They get the money now, not in some slow-motion royalty stream, and they know there's no accounting shenanigans and no waste.
I'm sure Radiohead is already hard at work on a follow-up, and I'm also sure that other artists will soon follow suit. And then when the labels shrivel up and die, what will take over is a distribution system in which the artists get the lion's share.
The argument could be made that if any divine entity could create the whole bloody universe, he might be able to make a planet older than it appears to be
But at that point you're not even really arguing. Under those rules, it is completely equally valid to say that the guy digging half-eaten cheeseburgers out of the trash made it all happen last Thursday. There's no reality. And if you say "Yes there is - the reality that He created," well then you're right back to having a very old planet.
If residents could run VoIP on an iPhone, then cellular revenue would plummet here. I suspect that would catch on like wildfire, once proven. This is RISKY business for Apple.)
You mean the risk of selling a hundred million phones?
Re:I've seen the trickle down effects of piracy
on
RIAA Sues Usenet.com
·
· Score: 1
Karaoke is expensive. About $2 a track. So somebody please tell me, with a straight face how these new guys that just popped out of nowhere suddenly have a $300,000 karaoke collection. Fact is, they don't.
You got screwed by the people charging $40 and $50 a disk, even though you need hundreds of them. Such stupidity absolutely guaranteed a thriving black market. Had they instead put together large collections at a steep discount they'd be a lot happier and so would you. But they chose to stick their heads in the sand and put the short-term squeeze on guys like you.
I read that some of them can get up beyond $5 per track. This is EXACTLY what the record labels wanted, leading to Step 3 - Consumer loses, record labels get fatter.
But the labels have another competitor - piracy. The more they raise prices, the more people turn to it. It's piracy that is actually making the market more efficient.
Even for a country with a poor exchange rate, 4 bucks seems quite cheap for bribing.
I live in country that is much better off than Nigeria. At 1 A.M. the other night I was stopped by two policemen on motorcycles for having a passenger without a helmet. Here the regular police are completely separate from the transit police, so these guys had no authority to do that. So they told me they were going to call the transit police and we'd have to wait for them to come, and that my passenger would have to either walk home or take a taxi. Of course what they actually wanted was a bribe, and for the US equivalent of $9.60 not only was I free to go, but they suddenly had no problem with my passenger not having a helmet. When they left she was mad. Not because I bribed them, but because she thought I had overpaid.
There is NO correlation whatsoever between corruption level and wealth....
The truth is, countries where there is no culture of corruption will, sooner or later, develop a healthy economy.
Those statements seem to be somewhat at odds with each other.
You post might have been funny if Nigeria were actually known for that kind of spam. Had you made it some sort of 419-ish letter of rejection it would have made sense.
It is Apple that have locked them self out of EU by not obeying our laws!
What if the law said, for instance, that no cell phone can cost more than 50 euros? Would Apple have locked themselves out, or would the restriction be locking them out? The difference is whether or not you perceive the law to be good and reasonable. And laws restricting the market place are very difficult to get right. Maybe this one is - I don't know.
450 million costumers? Man, I knew the EU was into theatre and Hallowe'en is fast approaching, but that seems a little high to me...
Yeah. And apparently they're all to change just a single model. Seems somewhat inefficient. How do they even fit in the room?
Re:In a lot of ways, Gimp is more intuitive than P
on
GIMP 2 for Photographers
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The problem is that if you consistently work with small files and get used to having a long undo trail then you may get surprised when you only have a short history when you open a big file.
Sheesh. You're really stretching to find a reason. It doesn't do it because Adobe hasn't put it in. And the reason they haven't is probably because there's not a lot of call for it. That seems like a perfectly reasonable answer.
Photoshop is an amazing program. I'm surprised the reviewer wrote "almost unparalleled." It's flat-out unparalleled. But it's undo, and even its history feature, are not as good as they could be.
Re:Congratulations Microsoft...
on
ZOMG New Zunes
·
· Score: 1
wireless sync? On that itself I'm sold.
Is it really that big of a deal? You've still got to plug it in to charge it, and it will sync while it's charging. Also, how easy it to use? I don't know the answer, but I sure wouldn't make a decision based on just a feature checklist.
They might sue, but they also might have risked their reputation as the creator of the PC market.
You may not realize how much IBM dominated "computers" back then. Before Microsoft the phrase was "nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM." And had they realized what the PC market would become they would have done everything possible to own that market. In Apple's 1984 commercial it was IBM that was Big Brother. Of all the things Microsoft has copied, it got its ruthlessness from IBM.
I couldn't find it either. I don't often have anything truly insightful or informative to say, and I got my karma from "funny" mods, back when they used to count.
My memory isn't foolproof, of course, but the reason I remember it is because I was surprised that my silly little remark was modded up so quickly.
So perhaps I posted it AC, or perhaps the database is incomplete. On the other hand, browsing through my old comments I note that they are not nearly as clever as I must have thought at the time, so it wouldn't really be a bad thing if some are missing.
But despite my recommendations, my dad who's a DJ went with iTunes with the ridiculous DRM that went so far that they actually have their own filetype.
With solid info like that, I can't imagine why he wouldn't listen to you.
as such and by extension no contract condition can in any way shape or form over ride any right given by the constitution, the idea is laughable
That's ridiculous. People enter into contracts every day in which they agree to not do something that's otherwise perfectly legal. Examples abound, but for a very common instance, suppose I sell you a business and as part of the deal I agree not to open a similar business for some number of years. Now I still have the perfect right to open that business, but if I do I've violated our agreement and you can sue me for breach of contract.
So maybe you think, despite your unequivocal "any way shape or form," that this is different. Well many contracts contain what's known as a "morals" clause, in which if one party behaves in a certain way that the other party has the right to terminate the contract, even though the first party had the "constitutional right" to behave the way they did.
Slashdot Mirror
No doubt about that - the publicity was huge - but they took the risk and reaped the benefit when it worked out. But even at $1 this is a quite profitable way to do it, and is another nail in the coffin of the "big label" system.
They get the money now, not in some slow-motion royalty stream, and they know there's no accounting shenanigans and no waste.
I'm sure Radiohead is already hard at work on a follow-up, and I'm also sure that other artists will soon follow suit. And then when the labels shrivel up and die, what will take over is a distribution system in which the artists get the lion's share.
But at that point you're not even really arguing. Under those rules, it is completely equally valid to say that the guy digging half-eaten cheeseburgers out of the trash made it all happen last Thursday. There's no reality. And if you say "Yes there is - the reality that He created," well then you're right back to having a very old planet.
You mean the risk of selling a hundred million phones?
You got screwed by the people charging $40 and $50 a disk, even though you need hundreds of them. Such stupidity absolutely guaranteed a thriving black market. Had they instead put together large collections at a steep discount they'd be a lot happier and so would you. But they chose to stick their heads in the sand and put the short-term squeeze on guys like you.
But the labels have another competitor - piracy. The more they raise prices, the more people turn to it. It's piracy that is actually making the market more efficient.
How much of that is tax? In many parts of the US the final amount will be 7 or 8% higher than $129.
I live in country that is much better off than Nigeria. At 1 A.M. the other night I was stopped by two policemen on motorcycles for having a passenger without a helmet. Here the regular police are completely separate from the transit police, so these guys had no authority to do that. So they told me they were going to call the transit police and we'd have to wait for them to come, and that my passenger would have to either walk home or take a taxi. Of course what they actually wanted was a bribe, and for the US equivalent of $9.60 not only was I free to go, but they suddenly had no problem with my passenger not having a helmet. When they left she was mad. Not because I bribed them, but because she thought I had overpaid.
The truth is, countries where there is no culture of corruption will, sooner or later, develop a healthy economy.
Those statements seem to be somewhat at odds with each other.
You post might have been funny if Nigeria were actually known for that kind of spam. Had you made it some sort of 419-ish letter of rejection it would have made sense.
"We had exhausted the crocodiles, and begun with the alligators, when the garden-bell rang. " - Charles Dickens, 1850.
What if the law said, for instance, that no cell phone can cost more than 50 euros? Would Apple have locked themselves out, or would the restriction be locking them out? The difference is whether or not you perceive the law to be good and reasonable. And laws restricting the market place are very difficult to get right. Maybe this one is - I don't know.
Yeah. And apparently they're all to change just a single model. Seems somewhat inefficient. How do they even fit in the room?
Sheesh. You're really stretching to find a reason. It doesn't do it because Adobe hasn't put it in. And the reason they haven't is probably because there's not a lot of call for it. That seems like a perfectly reasonable answer.
Photoshop is an amazing program. I'm surprised the reviewer wrote "almost unparalleled." It's flat-out unparalleled. But it's undo, and even its history feature, are not as good as they could be.
Is it really that big of a deal? You've still got to plug it in to charge it, and it will sync while it's charging.
Also, how easy it to use? I don't know the answer, but I sure wouldn't make a decision based on just a feature checklist.
You may not realize how much IBM dominated "computers" back then. Before Microsoft the phrase was "nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM." And had they realized what the PC market would become they would have done everything possible to own that market. In Apple's 1984 commercial it was IBM that was Big Brother. Of all the things Microsoft has copied, it got its ruthlessness from IBM.
If IBM had it to do over, I think we'd both agree that they would sue the pants off them to protect their design.
My memory isn't foolproof, of course, but the reason I remember it is because I was surprised that my silly little remark was modded up so quickly.
So perhaps I posted it AC, or perhaps the database is incomplete. On the other hand, browsing through my old comments I note that they are not nearly as clever as I must have thought at the time, so it wouldn't really be a bad thing if some are missing.
That's an upside. Get a lot of people to use it and become dependent on it, then crack down on the non-payers.
I can't be certain, of course, but I believe that I wrote the first "you must be new here" post, and I've been regretting it ever since.
Especially since a screwhead is a relatively modern invention.
With solid info like that, I can't imagine why he wouldn't listen to you.
Say, wasn't that John Kennedy Toole's other unpublished novel?
That's ridiculous. People enter into contracts every day in which they agree to not do something that's otherwise perfectly legal. Examples abound, but for a very common instance, suppose I sell you a business and as part of the deal I agree not to open a similar business for some number of years. Now I still have the perfect right to open that business, but if I do I've violated our agreement and you can sue me for breach of contract.
So maybe you think, despite your unequivocal "any way shape or form," that this is different. Well many contracts contain what's known as a "morals" clause, in which if one party behaves in a certain way that the other party has the right to terminate the contract, even though the first party had the "constitutional right" to behave the way they did.
You won't be the first to try. You'll might end up about like Technocrat, with most stories getting only a handful of comments.
P.S. I'll take the overs on the 'out by the end of October' part.
Or at least buried.