Ummmm... Probably because it requires people to expend resources writing a component that could be filled with one that might already be out in the GPL code domain simply because of the harsh restrictions placed on the "freedom" of the code.
Will 2004 *finally* be the year when Linux makes significant in-roads on the desktop?
Yes. Government adoptions happening in Massachusetts, Brazil, South Africa, and all over the Pacific Rim are driving this trend. There's a lot happening in the private sector, too, but the adopters there won't talk about that because thety want to hold on to their advantage over competitors paying the Microsioft tax.
Of course! The business world is absolutely full of Linux on the desktop but it's the worlds best kept fucking secret.
ESR is spouting off bullshit thats even more crackpotish than usual. He must be taking lessons from our old friend Darl or something.
Back in ancient egypt when the aliens were helping us to build a space elevator we only had cubits and we had to go 837,760,000 of them to reach the moon!
Going digital to analog and back might not give you the quality you expect. This, of course, is what the makers of DRM want to force on you. Distribute in crummy and lossy formats that don't copy perfectly. It's a perversion of available technology.
You mean going from digital to digital and back.
It's enough to appease the record industy because they can tighten the screws later. They first have to move people to crappy formats and make them think they are gaining something before they take it all away.
And if they tighten the screws later you can stop buying the label's music and start buying independent music with the same old non-DRM that you're used to.
Nonsense. People are already providing music that's more reasonable. DRM is unreasonable because no one asked for it and it breaks. The artists themselves are rebelling.
Really? So I guess the 150 people from the indy record labels were just there for punch and pie.
Would you please provide me one good reason not to use free software? All of the above is circular - use it because you must. I've yet to see any advantages of DRM and encumbering new technology with 100 year old limits and more.
Let's see. It appeases the gate keepers while everyone figures out a better way of doing things? I know everyone loves to plug the caring and sharing underdog but the fact is the major labels hold the people and the expertise that makes music sell and they also have the huge back catalogues that the people want to buy.
Granted, I haven't played videos using Windows in quite a while, so I'm not sure at this point if Windows Media Player will let you, for instance, view a Quicktime video and vice-versa.
WMP will let you view videos for any codec you have installed. Sadly, Apple and Real don't give out system codecs. They're more interested in keeping some resemblence of market share.
The majority of your 99 cents goes to the label. It's then up to the label to see how the royalties are to be distributed. I find it hard to believe your assertation that Apple is unfriendly to the artist when they hold little if any contact with the artist.
You could try to imply it with Apple's decision to only work with record labels (big and independent) but I'd say thats more to do with them wanting to use the record labels as quality controllers rather than Steve Jobs waking up in the morning and saying "How can Apple screw the artists better today?"
Much as I think Apple have created an amazing proof of concept in the Apple Music Store I am not convinced it qualifies as an invention.. Downloading music off the internet is not new and paying for it is not new either...
It's not that they did it. It's that they did it RIGHT. It's an elegant solution which people actually enjoy throwing money at.
Now if they radically opened up the distribution to bypass the majors... now that would be rather revolutionary... but we'll have to see how far they take it..
Nokia used to make really solid mobile phones. The 5110, the 3210, the 3310 and more lately, the 6610. Then came the completely silly models. Like the 3530 and the 3300. Nokia's designers seem to have been smoking crack with all the money they've earnt.
At the moment I'd gladly pay US$9.99 for an album of M4P tracks. Most CDs over here are between AUD$20 and AUD$30 while the equivalent CD in the iTMS is only about AUD$16.
They've been in Winamp 3 but not in Winamp 2. Winamp 3 just felt like a three toed sloth on Valium while iTunes runs at a fair clip sorting through my 3,000 or so songs quite quickly. Hopefully those issues will be sorted in WA5 (currently in beta) but I don't think I'll be trying it anytime soon.
I won't argue with you on the very little screen space. Minimode takes up more space than WA's windowshade mode but at 1280x1024 it doesn't really bother me that much.
Winamp 3 was a good rough and ready solution for those people that needed it now but iTunes is far more elegant (and pretty, IMHO) solution.
Plus, Windoze users seem to have taken to iTunes like a duck to water.
I know I have. I've been spending the past few days sorting and cataloguing my music. Normally I didn't give a shit about ID3 tags but iTunes has changed all of that.
Its just so insanely powerful and simple. I think most of the Apple bitchers at the moment are having trouble switching from a "Now Playing" style playlist to the library style of iTunes. It eventually grew on me and now I can't live without my Library and my Browse button.
You'd think people would have learned from silicon, and even from the occasional problems with the in-your-arm-time-release-birth-control products. Is anyone really willing to make these tradeoffs?
Ask a girl who's on implanon if they're willing to go back to the regular pill. Every girl I know with it would probably say no.
1) Obfuscate e-mail addresses 2) Stop spammers from getting to places containing real email addresses 3) Keep stupid people off the internet so the revenue stream of spammers is cut off.
I'm usually considered a moderate bordering on Microsoft apologist but this time I whole-heartedly side with the zealots.
Transparency is the key to this. Any hidden source code is a bad thing.
Re:This nothing more than BeOS filesystem
on
CNet on WinFS
·
· Score: 1
As an academic matter, BeFS is a good implementation of well established principles. Can't remember his name, but the author of BeFS actually worked from a book called approximately "Practical Filesystem Design".
Re:Been saying it for years
on
CNet on WinFS
·
· Score: 1
The metadata is already in the ID tags of his MP3s, and in a way that his player can understand. Why would he want NTFS adding extra metadata which'd get lost when he moved the data across?
The argument works for MP3 because MP3 meta-data (ID3) is ubiquitous and I admit you make a very good case. However, I have to agree with the parent. Filesystem level metadata is a Good Thing. Format dependant metadata means you have to write a new damn parser for the metadata every time a new file format comes out.
IMHO, the way to solve the transfer problem would be to wrap the file in a metadata "wrapper" before its sent. Much like objects are serialized in Java or PHP.
Slashdot Mirror
How is it anti-business?
Ummmm... Probably because it requires people to expend resources writing a component that could be filled with one that might already be out in the GPL code domain simply because of the harsh restrictions placed on the "freedom" of the code.
Will 2004 *finally* be the year when Linux makes significant in-roads on the desktop?
Yes. Government adoptions happening in Massachusetts, Brazil, South Africa, and all over the Pacific Rim are driving this trend. There's a lot happening in the private sector, too, but the adopters there won't talk about that because thety want to hold on to their advantage over competitors paying the Microsioft tax.
Of course! The business world is absolutely full of Linux on the desktop but it's the worlds best kept fucking secret.
ESR is spouting off bullshit thats even more crackpotish than usual. He must be taking lessons from our old friend Darl or something.
Yeah... well... 16-bit processors will never die.
God forbid the day Motorola stops making 68K chips.
Yeah? Yeah? You had furlongs?
Back in ancient egypt when the aliens were helping us to build a space elevator we only had cubits and we had to go 837,760,000 of them to reach the moon!
Going digital to analog and back might not give you the quality you expect. This, of course, is what the makers of DRM want to force on you. Distribute in crummy and lossy formats that don't copy perfectly. It's a perversion of available technology.
You mean going from digital to digital and back.
It's enough to appease the record industy because they can tighten the screws later. They first have to move people to crappy formats and make them think they are gaining something before they take it all away.
And if they tighten the screws later you can stop buying the label's music and start buying independent music with the same old non-DRM that you're used to.
Nonsense. People are already providing music that's more reasonable. DRM is unreasonable because no one asked for it and it breaks. The artists themselves are rebelling.
Really? So I guess the 150 people from the indy record labels were just there for punch and pie.
Would you please provide me one good reason not to use free software? All of the above is circular - use it because you must. I've yet to see any advantages of DRM and encumbering new technology with 100 year old limits and more.
Let's see. It appeases the gate keepers while everyone figures out a better way of doing things? I know everyone loves to plug the caring and sharing underdog but the fact is the major labels hold the people and the expertise that makes music sell and they also have the huge back catalogues that the people want to buy.
Granted, I haven't played videos using Windows in quite a while, so I'm not sure at this point if Windows Media Player will let you, for instance, view a Quicktime video and vice-versa.
WMP will let you view videos for any codec you have installed. Sadly, Apple and Real don't give out system codecs. They're more interested in keeping some resemblence of market share.
True, but most people seem to have something else, be it MusicMatch, iTunes, or Real Player.
Then where's the problem? WMP for the ignorant masses and Winamp/iTunes for people who know what they're doing.
2 weeks ago: "we do not support the Linux platform but you can try and run it"
This was defined as: "MICROSOFT IS RIPPING LINUX OUT OF VIRTUAL PC!"
Today: "we do not support the Linux platform but you can try and run it" which is now being defined as "YOU CAN STILL RUN LINUX!"
Can someone explain this to me because I am totally confused.
The majority of your 99 cents goes to the label. It's then up to the label to see how the royalties are to be distributed. I find it hard to believe your assertation that Apple is unfriendly to the artist when they hold little if any contact with the artist.
You could try to imply it with Apple's decision to only work with record labels (big and independent) but I'd say thats more to do with them wanting to use the record labels as quality controllers rather than Steve Jobs waking up in the morning and saying "How can Apple screw the artists better today?"
And being good has absolutely nothing to do with whether they're an independent who hasn't "sold out" to "the man".
Case in point: 90% of the shit that used to be on mp3.com.
Much as I think Apple have created an amazing proof of concept in the Apple Music Store I am not convinced it qualifies as an invention.. Downloading music off the internet is not new and paying for it is not new either...
It's not that they did it. It's that they did it RIGHT. It's an elegant solution which people actually enjoy throwing money at.
Now if they radically opened up the distribution to bypass the majors... now that would be rather revolutionary... but we'll have to see how far they take it..
Hello, we're Apple and we want to sell your music
Nokia used to make really solid mobile phones. The 5110, the 3210, the 3310 and more lately, the 6610. Then came the completely silly models. Like the 3530 and the 3300. Nokia's designers seem to have been smoking crack with all the money they've earnt.
6) iTunes.
I currently have Caldera on it
Come on, Daryl. We know its you!
At the moment I'd gladly pay US$9.99 for an album of M4P tracks. Most CDs over here are between AUD$20 and AUD$30 while the equivalent CD in the iTMS is only about AUD$16.
Do you have the track number in the ID3 tag. Otherwise it probably won't play in order.
They've been in Winamp 3 but not in Winamp 2. Winamp 3 just felt like a three toed sloth on Valium while iTunes runs at a fair clip sorting through my 3,000 or so songs quite quickly. Hopefully those issues will be sorted in WA5 (currently in beta) but I don't think I'll be trying it anytime soon.
I won't argue with you on the very little screen space. Minimode takes up more space than WA's windowshade mode but at 1280x1024 it doesn't really bother me that much.
Winamp 3 was a good rough and ready solution for those people that needed it now but iTunes is far more elegant (and pretty, IMHO) solution.
Plus, Windoze users seem to have taken to iTunes like a duck to water.
I know I have. I've been spending the past few days sorting and cataloguing my music. Normally I didn't give a shit about ID3 tags but iTunes has changed all of that.
Its just so insanely powerful and simple. I think most of the Apple bitchers at the moment are having trouble switching from a "Now Playing" style playlist to the library style of iTunes. It eventually grew on me and now I can't live without my Library and my Browse button.
Uhhh... it said "sold to the highest bidder".
You'd think people would have learned from silicon, and even from the occasional problems with the in-your-arm-time-release-birth-control products. Is anyone really willing to make these tradeoffs?
Ask a girl who's on implanon if they're willing to go back to the regular pill. Every girl I know with it would probably say no.
It's part of the three pronged attack on spam.
1) Obfuscate e-mail addresses
2) Stop spammers from getting to places containing real email addresses
3) Keep stupid people off the internet so the revenue stream of spammers is cut off.
I'm usually considered a moderate bordering on Microsoft apologist but this time I whole-heartedly side with the zealots.
Transparency is the key to this. Any hidden source code is a bad thing.
As an academic matter, BeFS is a good implementation of well established principles. Can't remember his name, but the author of BeFS actually worked from a book called approximately "Practical Filesystem Design".
Close but no cigar. Dominic Giampaolo wrote a book called "Practical Filesystem Design".
The metadata is already in the ID tags of his MP3s, and in a way that his player can understand. Why would he want NTFS adding extra metadata which'd get lost when he moved the data across?
The argument works for MP3 because MP3 meta-data (ID3) is ubiquitous and I admit you make a very good case. However, I have to agree with the parent. Filesystem level metadata is a Good Thing. Format dependant metadata means you have to write a new damn parser for the metadata every time a new file format comes out.
IMHO, the way to solve the transfer problem would be to wrap the file in a metadata "wrapper" before its sent. Much like objects are serialized in Java or PHP.
After all, how many people out there have turned on the default Windows XP firewall since Blaster?
I know every machine I fixed during the blaster worm's reign had its default firewall turned on.