People care more about their iPods than they do about Vista and if Microsoft wants to bet on this, it's at their own peril. My bet is that people will upgrade this less than they did XP. The problem with Vista in general is that alot of the "enhancements" are not visible to the average user. Upgrades also have a reputation of being a pain in the ass. Word gets out that it breaks the iPod... GAME OVER!
As a son of African immigrants, I'm a little familiar with the exchange rates between here and African countries. A dollar goes a VERY long way in alot of them. These protesters use these shock value numbers because most people in this country don't get it. Believe me 3 cents over there is better than nothing!
Top billing is not a problem. EXCLUSION is. As far as I can tell, Google doesn't exclude. If your search produces a relevant result it will be displayed. Next question? These conspiracy theories are a waste of time.
I know Bill Gates is all into charity these days but I didn't figure he'd be into giving away his market share to Apple! Macs are already touted as "easy" and "user friendly". This will only add to that impression as Mac braggarts tell Windows users how experiences like these are alien to them!
You people are comparing apples to oranges. 128kbps on mp3 is very different than the satellite stream as far as I understand it. I'm not sure if they are using the same codec (aacplus?) to stream but if they are it could very well be CD quality. What do you care anyway when you're listening on tinny headphones, puny car stereo speakers and/or shitty laptop speakers??
They're a good company. Their Music Studio software is practically free when CompUSA has its rebate deals on it. It's a great piece of software for $30 - $0.
Just FYI
This may have made the RIAA happy but it's not going to make customers happy at all. Apple has mastered the art of the latter and that's why they'll continue to dominate. Everyone complains about Apple's DRM but the reality is that mp3s are readily available and they have a decent and fair policy with regards to DRM. Microsoft can't be serious about taking on iTunes by offering less. Period.
The future is hard disk and broadband. Besides, my mpeg4s look just fine on my widescreen. This will be the biggest digital video flop since the first Divx!
>
Yeah but new DVDs cost about $15 - 20 a pop. Considering there's no packaging or distribution, I'd say $9.99 for a new movie is quite fair. They don't get that without the packaging, it is viewed as getting something less no matter how you try to spin it. And it does cost less for them to distribute. We're not too stupid to figure that out.
What's surprising to me is that they still think they can afford the luxury to pick their own pricing. If I could buy a reasonably priced digital version of a movie, I'd do it but since that's not available it's worth it to search torrents and get what I want. If these studios wait to long, torrenting or some other form of piracy is going to be the accepted norm, if it isn't already.
Sony's got a market cap of about $50 billion and although gaming makes a big part of their revenue and profit, there's also the movie and music division, other electronics, and tons of other bloat to go along with the gaming system. Not to mention that there's no way in hell an American company is going to be able to buy the pride and joy of Japan!!! Hell, Microsoft might as try buying Matshusita while they're at it!!!
This is actually one of the first useful and inexpensive applications I've found for Bluetooth. I use a Kensington Bluetooth ($15) and a Logitech Bluetooth Earpiece ($30) to make calls through Skype. It works like a charm! I have about 30 feet of range so I just click on dial and walk away. So it's not 100% necessary that you need to be chained to your computer to make calls.
You DO realize that most people pay $2.50 for JUST a simple lo-fi ringtone, right? And that may even be a weekly fee depending on who they buy it from.
Buying a ringtone is much different than building a music library. Sprint and the record companies may be using this rationale to justify their price but the reality is that at $2.50 people will not be building libraries of songs. Therefore, they will be unable to catch up to iTunes.
They have to be joking if they think they can take on iTunes at 150% higher. At this price point, it's worth it to carry a second device. It's not even a nice try!
This is typical Apple bashing that we see every quarter. The formula is some pundit picks out the next "threat" to iPod's dominance in the hopes that this will be the quarter that he will be hailed as the person that had the "foresight" to predict's Apple's demise and save his investors lots of money. Before it was the fact that other players that had "more features" which only served to confuse users that wanted something simple. Then it was players that had FM radio.. you know that broadcast medium that plays the same rotation of 20 songs between commercials. Then it was Microsoft's mafia of mediocre media devices, which have yet to get off the ground. Then it was the cell phone. You know, the same cell that can't keep a connection for more than 10 minutes was supposed somehow become the streaming platform that crushed the iPod.
Since these pundits have had so much trouble finding another company that can destroy iPod's dominance, they must now look at the only enemy that could possibly defeat it... ITSELF.
Problem is, Apple's strategy is perfectly brilliant. First off, they picked television shows instead of movies. I dismissed the video iPod at first because I agree that no one wants to watch movies on a two inch screen. BUT, catching up on a television show you missed is a completely different thing. The primary goal of downloading a television show is to get fill in information before the next episode comes. If that means watching it on a small screen so be it. With the video iPod you get to catch up on your show on the subway or during a lunch break. This is a good thing and a winner that no one else thought of doing.
The biggest loser in my opinion is AOL because for years they've been sitting on a huge library of content that they could done the same thing with YEARS AGO. But instead, piracy paralysis kept them from doing anything. Now AOL has egg on its face as it watches Steve Jobs gloat on stage as the *forefather* of video download distribution. AOL could have been giving its client away for free to broadband users and used it as a storefront to download this library. But they failed to sieze the opportunity and they have no one to blame but themselves.
I went to the iPod precisely because two of my previous mp3 players were absolute shite in terms of usability. I decided if I was going to spend another $300, I was going to spend it on something that did the job right. I haven't looked back since and my previous experiences with other players has soured me ever considering anything but. I've also spent another $1000 buying iPods and shuffles for other people in an effort to "spread the love". I won't recommend any other player to even my worst enemy. It's not only about marketing. It's also about functionality, ease of use, integration, and word of mouth testimonial.
I'm a big fan of powweb. I use them to host mine and my clients' websites. You can't beat 2gig, free mysql, and php for $7 a month. I just registered a couple of domains with godaddy recently but found the value was better with powweb's hosting.
I don't know how it's going to handle the application count but if you have three pieces of spyware running at the same time, you may end up in a situation where no applications start.
Slashdot Mirror
After Comcast loses all their customers to DSL, will they complain about [whatever DSL company]'s unfair monopoly advantage?
People care more about their iPods than they do about Vista and if Microsoft wants to bet on this, it's at their own peril. My bet is that people will upgrade this less than they did XP. The problem with Vista in general is that alot of the "enhancements" are not visible to the average user. Upgrades also have a reputation of being a pain in the ass. Word gets out that it breaks the iPod... GAME OVER!
As a son of African immigrants, I'm a little familiar with the exchange rates between here and African countries. A dollar goes a VERY long way in alot of them. These protesters use these shock value numbers because most people in this country don't get it. Believe me 3 cents over there is better than nothing!
Top billing is not a problem. EXCLUSION is. As far as I can tell, Google doesn't exclude. If your search produces a relevant result it will be displayed. Next question? These conspiracy theories are a waste of time.
I know Bill Gates is all into charity these days but I didn't figure he'd be into giving away his market share to Apple! Macs are already touted as "easy" and "user friendly". This will only add to that impression as Mac braggarts tell Windows users how experiences like these are alien to them!
OK who overpays these idiots and keeps them in business? They've been dead wrong in just about every ball-licking report they've put out on Microsoft!
You people are comparing apples to oranges. 128kbps on mp3 is very different than the satellite stream as far as I understand it. I'm not sure if they are using the same codec (aacplus?) to stream but if they are it could very well be CD quality. What do you care anyway when you're listening on tinny headphones, puny car stereo speakers and/or shitty laptop speakers??
They're a good company. Their Music Studio software is practically free when CompUSA has its rebate deals on it. It's a great piece of software for $30 - $0. Just FYI
This may have made the RIAA happy but it's not going to make customers happy at all. Apple has mastered the art of the latter and that's why they'll continue to dominate. Everyone complains about Apple's DRM but the reality is that mp3s are readily available and they have a decent and fair policy with regards to DRM. Microsoft can't be serious about taking on iTunes by offering less. Period.
The future is hard disk and broadband. Besides, my mpeg4s look just fine on my widescreen. This will be the biggest digital video flop since the first Divx!
That about says it all...
> Yeah but new DVDs cost about $15 - 20 a pop. Considering there's no packaging or distribution, I'd say $9.99 for a new movie is quite fair. They don't get that without the packaging, it is viewed as getting something less no matter how you try to spin it. And it does cost less for them to distribute. We're not too stupid to figure that out. What's surprising to me is that they still think they can afford the luxury to pick their own pricing. If I could buy a reasonably priced digital version of a movie, I'd do it but since that's not available it's worth it to search torrents and get what I want. If these studios wait to long, torrenting or some other form of piracy is going to be the accepted norm, if it isn't already.
Wha???
Sony's got a market cap of about $50 billion and although gaming makes a big part of their revenue and profit, there's also the movie and music division, other electronics, and tons of other bloat to go along with the gaming system. Not to mention that there's no way in hell an American company is going to be able to buy the pride and joy of Japan!!! Hell, Microsoft might as try buying Matshusita while they're at it!!!
Classic. Maybe they need to pony up and get their name in the adsense block?!?!?
This is actually one of the first useful and inexpensive applications I've found for Bluetooth. I use a Kensington Bluetooth ($15) and a Logitech Bluetooth Earpiece ($30) to make calls through Skype. It works like a charm! I have about 30 feet of range so I just click on dial and walk away. So it's not 100% necessary that you need to be chained to your computer to make calls.
Who wasted time chasing this while nearly putting themselves out of business. How about focusing on some real products???
Buying a ringtone is much different than building a music library. Sprint and the record companies may be using this rationale to justify their price but the reality is that at $2.50 people will not be building libraries of songs. Therefore, they will be unable to catch up to iTunes.
They have to be joking if they think they can take on iTunes at 150% higher. At this price point, it's worth it to carry a second device. It's not even a nice try!
This is typical Apple bashing that we see every quarter. The formula is some pundit picks out the next "threat" to iPod's dominance in the hopes that this will be the quarter that he will be hailed as the person that had the "foresight" to predict's Apple's demise and save his investors lots of money. Before it was the fact that other players that had "more features" which only served to confuse users that wanted something simple. Then it was players that had FM radio.. you know that broadcast medium that plays the same rotation of 20 songs between commercials. Then it was Microsoft's mafia of mediocre media devices, which have yet to get off the ground. Then it was the cell phone. You know, the same cell that can't keep a connection for more than 10 minutes was supposed somehow become the streaming platform that crushed the iPod. Since these pundits have had so much trouble finding another company that can destroy iPod's dominance, they must now look at the only enemy that could possibly defeat it... ITSELF. Problem is, Apple's strategy is perfectly brilliant. First off, they picked television shows instead of movies. I dismissed the video iPod at first because I agree that no one wants to watch movies on a two inch screen. BUT, catching up on a television show you missed is a completely different thing. The primary goal of downloading a television show is to get fill in information before the next episode comes. If that means watching it on a small screen so be it. With the video iPod you get to catch up on your show on the subway or during a lunch break. This is a good thing and a winner that no one else thought of doing. The biggest loser in my opinion is AOL because for years they've been sitting on a huge library of content that they could done the same thing with YEARS AGO. But instead, piracy paralysis kept them from doing anything. Now AOL has egg on its face as it watches Steve Jobs gloat on stage as the *forefather* of video download distribution. AOL could have been giving its client away for free to broadband users and used it as a storefront to download this library. But they failed to sieze the opportunity and they have no one to blame but themselves.
I went to the iPod precisely because two of my previous mp3 players were absolute shite in terms of usability. I decided if I was going to spend another $300, I was going to spend it on something that did the job right. I haven't looked back since and my previous experiences with other players has soured me ever considering anything but. I've also spent another $1000 buying iPods and shuffles for other people in an effort to "spread the love". I won't recommend any other player to even my worst enemy. It's not only about marketing. It's also about functionality, ease of use, integration, and word of mouth testimonial.
I wish Pixar would. That would be awesome.
I'm a big fan of powweb. I use them to host mine and my clients' websites. You can't beat 2gig, free mysql, and php for $7 a month. I just registered a couple of domains with godaddy recently but found the value was better with powweb's hosting.
We are talking about a major Windows update here. I'm not updating until I'm held at gunpoint.
I don't know how it's going to handle the application count but if you have three pieces of spyware running at the same time, you may end up in a situation where no applications start.