"Should Apple reduce its price on any shipped product within 10 calendar days of shipment, you may contact Apple Sales Support at 1-800-676-2775 to request a refund or credit of the difference between the price you were charged and the current selling price. To receive the refund or credit you must contact Apple within 14 business days of shipment."
from http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/s alespoli cies.html#Apple%20Prices
In Washington State, spam is illegal and the attorney general encourages people to file complaints. These are often done by filling out a simple form. To help argue against spammers saying "we didn't know this address originated from Washington State", there is online registration for users who reside in the state and do not want to receive spam. You can find it over here:
I switched to InDesign for new projects almost the momment it came out. I only kept Quark around for old projects that needed reprinting or tweeking. There were problems with InDesign 1.0, but since 1.5 it has been great, and 2.0 is a dream.
I was looking for any out from Quark. The company has treated customers horribly for a long time. This includes bad tech support, crazy licensing schemes (including overpriced licenses), and a crusty product that was prone to crash a lot and not do what they said it would do.
Pagemaker was not updated in quite some time precisely because Adobe was working on InDesign. They built it from the ground up so that every piece of it is modular and easily updated. It has lots of great features and a great interface. I think the pricing structure is very straightforward, and Adobe has made many different upgrade paths available (a long time offering it for $99 to any Photoshop user).
I believe Apple is only playing favorites right now because Quark is growing more and more behind. If they don't start getting people to try out InDesign (and by using it realize how much better it is), if Quark doesn't deliver, they are screwed.
The movie business already had to contend with this. There are child actors all the time, creating content (performances), who are working and legally contributing. There are different rules for child actors than regular actors though, including shorter maximum shooting days, trust fund witholding (so that parents can't take the money from the kid before their old enough to use it), and other rules specific to minors. Sometimes studios decide they don't want to go to all that trouble for a role (why do you think everyone on Dawsons Creek or Beverly Hills 90210 was not *actually* in high school?) and hire younger adults anyway. But many times they hire minors, and because they law is figured out already, they do what they need to. Child actors can do what they love, and the government can still keep children from being exploited (as much as they can anyone).
Perhaps this is a good model for software development as well? (As are other corellations between making movies and making software.)
The way this question is posed sort of riles my feathers. Why? Because this question, and a lot of replies to it, give a lot of thought to how to *hide the bad things you are doing* instead of doing what's right. If you have a problem with your company doing lots of immoral or unethical things, you should work to have them stop doing those things, not simply come up with a better document retention policy so they don't get caught.
There are good reasons for a document retention policy. A big one is simply space. After about 5 years, documents tend to take up LOTS of disk space. They also become harder to search through, and thus harder to find things in when you need to. For user interface reasons, and technical reasons, many companies should have a document retention policy. But to have one mainly because the company is screwing over everyone else is a horrible idea. Get some moral backbone and simply do the right thing for once. Then you don't need to hide or make excuses.
I stand corrected. I was misinformed by other parties AND misread docs on Apple's site. Sorry about that.
This would be a good thing though, yes? If Apple developed a native set of java classes that provided Quicktime functionality and APIs to any machine running Java, this would allow Apple to retain it's intellectual investment, but allow lots of not-directly-supported machines to run it and Open Source folks more leeway to make apps for it. Hmmm...
Sorry again for the error. Thanks for the correction.
1- Who told anyone they couldn't write their own movie-player? Once the architecture is installed, any app on your system has access to that architecture. I have had multiple movie players on my system, including Peter's Player that would load a whole movie into memory to ensure no skipping back on my slower proccessors and hard drives. This includes Sorrensen and any other codec you can get for Quicktime. Once it is installed, it is available to all applications.
2- Quicktime for Java is available from the regular quicktime installer. Go install the thing and write a movie player on Linux., or for your other java-enabled portables. I don't know what you're complaining about!
3- Quicktime is the basis of the next mpeg standard precicely because it is widely available and a great architecture for combining all kinds of different media. It is robust and scalable (very tiny streams all the way to HDTV). This is not a closed platform, and will only become more open when mpeg4 is finalized. Sorrensen is licensed, but there are just as many other small-compression formats you can get for free that plug-in to the QT architecture just as well.
4- I use different operating systems for different things. Unix has traditionally been great for server things, Macs for graphics and multimedia, and Windows has been good for keeping Tech Support staff, Security Experts and Lawyers gainfully employed. I am so happy under MacOS X to have a Unix server AND Quicktime AND a decent GUI. I'm not saying it's better for anybody else, but I really like it. If I didn't like it, or I wanted to continue to use other OSes as well, or thought Apple charged too much for hardware, I wouldn't be running it-- but I also wouldn't be complaining that they should give it all away for free.
Frank Lloyd Wright's buildings were often new ideas in theory and construction, much like the "unknown" part of estimating a software or web project today. His materials were often strange (or at least had traditional material joining with more exotic material) and the structures were oddly shaped.
This is why Frank Lloyd Wright's buildings were often way behind schedule and way over-budget. He was a great architect and a wonderful designer, and I'm sure most of the engineers and builders were talented as well... but when you are dealing with brand new ideas, there is a certain amount of trial and error neccessary. Unfortunately he also didn't build that trial and error into his estimates.
Also unfortunate is that many of his buildings have leaky roofs.
The way that guy Joel does project management is the way I've been doing it for quite awhile, but he does say it so nicely:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/stories/storyReade r$ 31
If you are going to compare building a bridge or a house with building software, choose the right bridge or house to compare with. Most software projects are not a cookie-cutter suburban home that everyone knows exactly what it's gonna be like and how to make it. Most of the time it's more like a Frank Lloyd Wright or IM Pei house.... We know the physics and tools of building a house. But we usually want to make them more useful, more livable, and more beautiful. That last part takes more time.
Q. Can I use FireWire mode with noncomputer products?
A. Yes. First you will need to reset your iPod. When the Apple logo appears on the screen, hold
down the Previous/Rewind button and the Next/Fast-forward button simultaneously until the
FireWire icon appears. When you finish using iPod in this "forced" FireWire mode, disconnect
and reset it again before normal operation.
So strange how much misinformation is floating about.
eBooks by their nature aren't bad. But there are some problems.
- Old fashioned physical books are better at what they do right now. They have better resolution, they can do things that electric ones can't, and they have a bit of history and object quality about them.
- eBooks are currently harder to use in many ways (you can't just throw it in a your backpack and go), and are harder to read (which is of course the point).
So the problem is price reversal. It's ok if you have an inferior product if it has some other advantages (you can get it right now over your internet connection, it's easily searchable, etc) BUT this should be treated as a lesser version of the product. Why does an electronic book cost the same as a paperback? Does anyone know? You aren't getting a paperback. It just so happens the publisher doesn't have to print the thing either, so the lower quality thing also costs less to produce. So why are they charging so much?
If eBooks were offered at say $1 a piece, the disadvantages would be balanced by the price, and someone could fairly consider which was more important to them... quality or price. Having an eBook priced at $10 or $5 is insane. If publishers realized this, they would have many more buyers.
-trout
The person buying be might not be interested in releasing the BeOS as a full-fledged OS. Though this is certainly possible, especially with someone like Sony (or Kodak;) it's just as likely the buyer will be getting for some of the cool intellectual property the BeOS has intact. Apple has a history of doing this multiple times in the last 3 years. The basis of Final Cut from Macromedia, the beginnings of iDVD and DVD Pro and recent buyout of another DVD company for DVD technology. I'm not saying it's Apple, but considering all the cool technology Be has, and from what you guys are saying, not much of a recent update in place-- the buyer may very well be looking to scavenge all the great technology it can, to add to it's own.
Slashdot Mirror
"Should Apple reduce its price on any shipped product within 10 calendar days of shipment, you may contact Apple Sales Support at 1-800-676-2775 to request a refund or credit of the difference between the price you were charged and the current selling price. To receive the refund or credit you must contact Apple within 14 business days of shipment."
s alespoli cies.html#Apple%20Prices
from
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/
-trout
In Washington State, spam is illegal and the attorney general encourages people to file complaints. These are often done by filling out a simple form.
To help argue against spammers saying "we didn't know this address originated from Washington State", there is online registration for users who reside in the state and do not want to receive spam. You can find it over here:
http://registry.waisp.org/
-trout
I switched to InDesign for new projects almost the momment it came out. I only kept Quark around for old projects that needed reprinting or tweeking. There were problems with InDesign 1.0, but since 1.5 it has been great, and 2.0 is a dream.
I was looking for any out from Quark. The company has treated customers horribly for a long time. This includes bad tech support, crazy licensing schemes (including overpriced licenses), and a crusty product that was prone to crash a lot and not do what they said it would do.
Pagemaker was not updated in quite some time precisely because Adobe was working on InDesign. They built it from the ground up so that every piece of it is modular and easily updated. It has lots of great features and a great interface. I think the pricing structure is very straightforward, and Adobe has made many different upgrade paths available (a long time offering it for $99 to any Photoshop user).
I believe Apple is only playing favorites right now because Quark is growing more and more behind. If they don't start getting people to try out InDesign (and by using it realize how much better it is), if Quark doesn't deliver, they are screwed.
But Quark brought this on themselves long ago.
That's the end of my rant.
-trout
The movie business already had to contend with this. There are child actors all the time, creating content (performances), who are working and legally contributing. There are different rules for child actors than regular actors though, including shorter maximum shooting days, trust fund witholding (so that parents can't take the money from the kid before their old enough to use it), and other rules specific to minors. Sometimes studios decide they don't want to go to all that trouble for a role (why do you think everyone on Dawsons Creek or Beverly Hills 90210 was not *actually* in high school?) and hire younger adults anyway. But many times they hire minors, and because they law is figured out already, they do what they need to. Child actors can do what they love, and the government can still keep children from being exploited (as much as they can anyone).
Perhaps this is a good model for software development as well? (As are other corellations between making movies and making software.)
-Trout
The way this question is posed sort of riles my feathers. Why? Because this question, and a lot of replies to it, give a lot of thought to how to *hide the bad things you are doing* instead of doing what's right. If you have a problem with your company doing lots of immoral or unethical things, you should work to have them stop doing those things, not simply come up with a better document retention policy so they don't get caught.
There are good reasons for a document retention policy. A big one is simply space. After about 5 years, documents tend to take up LOTS of disk space. They also become harder to search through, and thus harder to find things in when you need to. For user interface reasons, and technical reasons, many companies should have a document retention policy. But to have one mainly because the company is screwing over everyone else is a horrible idea. Get some moral backbone and simply do the right thing for once. Then you don't need to hide or make excuses.
I stand corrected. I was misinformed by other parties AND misread docs on Apple's site. Sorry about that.
This would be a good thing though, yes? If Apple developed a native set of java classes that provided Quicktime functionality and APIs to any machine running Java, this would allow Apple to retain it's intellectual investment, but allow lots of not-directly-supported machines to run it and Open Source folks more leeway to make apps for it. Hmmm...
Sorry again for the error. Thanks for the correction.
-Minister of Quicktime
1- Who told anyone they couldn't write their own movie-player? Once the architecture is installed, any app on your system has access to that architecture. I have had multiple movie players on my system, including Peter's Player that would load a whole movie into memory to ensure no skipping back on my slower proccessors and hard drives. This includes Sorrensen and any other codec you can get for Quicktime. Once it is installed, it is available to all applications.
2- Quicktime for Java is available from the regular quicktime installer. Go install the thing and write a movie player on Linux., or for your other java-enabled portables. I don't know what you're complaining about!
3- Quicktime is the basis of the next mpeg standard precicely because it is widely available and a great architecture for combining all kinds of different media. It is robust and scalable (very tiny streams all the way to HDTV). This is not a closed platform, and will only become more open when mpeg4 is finalized. Sorrensen is licensed, but there are just as many other small-compression formats you can get for free that plug-in to the QT architecture just as well.
4- I use different operating systems for different things. Unix has traditionally been great for server things, Macs for graphics and multimedia, and Windows has been good for keeping Tech Support staff, Security Experts and Lawyers gainfully employed. I am so happy under MacOS X to have a Unix server AND Quicktime AND a decent GUI. I'm not saying it's better for anybody else, but I really like it. If I didn't like it, or I wanted to continue to use other OSes as well, or thought Apple charged too much for hardware, I wouldn't be running it-- but I also wouldn't be complaining that they should give it all away for free.
-The Minister of Quicktime
Frank Lloyd Wright's buildings were often new ideas in theory and construction, much like the "unknown" part of estimating a software or web project today. His materials were often strange (or at least had traditional material joining with more exotic material) and the structures were oddly shaped.
e r$ 31
This is why Frank Lloyd Wright's buildings were often way behind schedule and way over-budget. He was a great architect and a wonderful designer, and I'm sure most of the engineers and builders were talented as well... but when you are dealing with brand new ideas, there is a certain amount of trial and error neccessary. Unfortunately he also didn't build that trial and error into his estimates.
Also unfortunate is that many of his buildings have leaky roofs.
The way that guy Joel does project management is the way I've been doing it for quite awhile, but he does say it so nicely:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/stories/storyRead
If you are going to compare building a bridge or a house with building software, choose the right bridge or house to compare with. Most software projects are not a cookie-cutter suburban home that everyone knows exactly what it's gonna be like and how to make it. Most of the time it's more like a Frank Lloyd Wright or IM Pei house.... We know the physics and tools of building a house. But we usually want to make them more useful, more livable, and more beautiful. That last part takes more time.
-trout
Go to the vaunted FAQ again...
So strange how much misinformation is floating about.
-Trout
eBooks by their nature aren't bad. But there are some problems. - Old fashioned physical books are better at what they do right now. They have better resolution, they can do things that electric ones can't, and they have a bit of history and object quality about them. - eBooks are currently harder to use in many ways (you can't just throw it in a your backpack and go), and are harder to read (which is of course the point). So the problem is price reversal. It's ok if you have an inferior product if it has some other advantages (you can get it right now over your internet connection, it's easily searchable, etc) BUT this should be treated as a lesser version of the product. Why does an electronic book cost the same as a paperback? Does anyone know? You aren't getting a paperback. It just so happens the publisher doesn't have to print the thing either, so the lower quality thing also costs less to produce. So why are they charging so much? If eBooks were offered at say $1 a piece, the disadvantages would be balanced by the price, and someone could fairly consider which was more important to them... quality or price. Having an eBook priced at $10 or $5 is insane. If publishers realized this, they would have many more buyers. -trout
The person buying be might not be interested in releasing the BeOS as a full-fledged OS. Though this is certainly possible, especially with someone like Sony (or Kodak ;) it's just as likely the buyer will be getting for some of the cool intellectual property the BeOS has intact. Apple has a history of doing this multiple times in the last 3 years. The basis of Final Cut from Macromedia, the beginnings of iDVD and DVD Pro and recent buyout of another DVD company for DVD technology. I'm not saying it's Apple, but considering all the cool technology Be has, and from what you guys are saying, not much of a recent update in place-- the buyer may very well be looking to scavenge all the great technology it can, to add to it's own.