RSS is designed to be extended, the base specification is very loose and open to extension by third parties. Lots of companies already use extensions to RSS, so MS wont be the first if they do, and they wont be 'evil' if they do. Get over it.
Cheapest Mac - $499 (PPC Mini), $1299 (Intel iMac)
OSX - $129
To run an alternate OS on a Mac, which of the above do you need? Is it really economical for Apple to lock down the HIGHER PAYING product in an effort to gain more income on the LOWER PAYING product, of which income isnt guaranteed since you dont *need* to buy OSX seperately from a Mac?
Think of the system they use with the iPod, low paying item tied to high paying item, not the other way around.
If someone wants to run an alternate OS, they have already given Apple lots of money. But if someone wants to run OSX on an alternate platform, they havent given Apple lots of money. Think about it.
Epstein made four observations. The first was that the Apple Switch ad campaign was over, and nobody switched.
I switched. 3 other people in my office switched. Whats he talking about?
Seriously, in December 2004 there were no Mac owners in my office, then I got an iBook (always wanted to play with OSX), and within a month two other people had purchased various Macs based on my purchase. Then 3 months ago someone else purchase a powerbook, again based on the experiences of us owners in the office.
I don't know if they ship an "universal" upgrade, but if you have a legal license for OS X (for example from an old Mac) and a legal OS X upgrade to 10.4.4 that can upgrade it to a "dual-platform" OS X version, then you have a valid license.
No, you have a valid license for the PPC version, not the Intel version. Two different products.
Bundling the hardware and OS is illegal in many places (I know at least in Germany the courts stuck Microsofts OEM license down) and whatever the EULA says is null and void. Theoretically you should be able to move your OS X license (paid in full) to a generic x86 machine.
In some jurisdictions maybe, but you are still going to have to pony up for a complete Mac, and you cant use the same license on both systems.
Yes, you can challenge the law itself in.... the House of Lords:) While the lower courts deal with application of the law, if you take the case to the House of Lords, they deal with the validity of the law as applied (if they choose to hear the case that is).
you not only lose new email for the duration, but also all your stored email unless you take the step of pop3ing stuff down, and if you do that then whats the point of using this service?
You were probably joking, but I entirely fail to see how the MPAA can be held responsable for the actions of an independant and seperate company supplying services the MPAA has nothing to do with.
This is Netflix thats causing the problem (Lovefilm in the UK have the same clause in their terms and conditions, throttling of high usage users, and Lovefilm supply the backend service for a LOT of the online rentals clubs in the UK).
You are quite right, however there is also a large number of people that have contributed significantly more than a 'snippit' - enough to still make it a very arduous task with the final outcome still likely to be having to rewrite blocks of code.
What benefit would the Linux kernel have from going GPL3?
Even with Linus going GPL3, it would be next to impossible to have the kernel go GPL3 because of the number of people who have contributed little snippets of code here and there, you would have to get all of their individual permissions because the Linux kernel development doesnt require copyright assignation and the license doesnt include the 'or later' clause. Its doable, but as I said, near impossible.
The USSR had 9 seperate space stations, including Salyut 1 - 7 (1971 to 1991) and Mir (1986 - 2001).
Mir - out of 7 components, only 1 was shipped and constructed using the Shuttle (the Shuttles docking port), the rest were launched by Proton and docked manually. If it can be done for Mir, it can be done for the ISS.
I agree tho that the ISS is getting to be a waste of time and money.
Copying and distribution costs may have gone down (although I wouldnt bet that distirbution has decreased all that much, people still demand CDs, inlays etc - its only a small proportion that use itunes), but initial production costs havent decreased dramatically, and marketing costs have probably increased as alternatives have entered the market. If the artists want more, they should take the entire burden on themselves.
Copyright is as artificial as the laws are that are stopping me from taking your car when you 'abandon' it in a carpark. Just because you can easily copy it doesnt mean you automatically should be allowed to, just the same as all the other types of possession law out there are technically easy to break.
While you have my book, I cant lend it to anyone else and I cant read it myself. I can make 10,000 copies of an electronic version with little to no effort and give them to 10,000 people who can do the same, ad infinitum. And I would still have my copy, as pristine as it ever was. Theres the difference.
And the Pentagon has just issued plans to retire the F-117 in FY2008, in favour of more F-22s. The drone mentioned in that book is probably the D-21 drone, launched from the back of the SR-71 aircraft at altitude. It pretty much failed.
You chose to have a distance between you and your job, so why should the employer pay for your time commuting? They dont get anything productive out of it, so whats their money going toward? Want to spend less unpaid time commuting? Move closer, or get a job closer to home.
I dont think many other industries have had to deal with their customers suddenly being able to get the SAME product (not a similiar alternative) for free because of technological change. The RIAA is suing people because whats actually happening is illegal, its copyright infringement anyway you cut it. The business model isnt failing because of competition with alternatives, its failing because the competition is exactly the same product with zero costs and zero investment for the 'producer'.
You have no entitlement to their product - dont like the current system? Go without until its changed.
The same act, Part 5, Chapter 48, section 296ZE "Remedy where effective technological measures prevent permitted acts", allows action to be taken where DRM blocks acts permitted under law.
Entrapped means the person was talked into doing something they otherwise wouldnt have done, tricked has similiar connotations. In this case I would say Microsoft caught him fair and square, and the transaction provided all the evidence required to jail him. Good riddance I say.
There are already none Apple Core Duo laptops around (but they are expensive), why not see if the problem exists under Linux on these devices? If it doesnt, then it isnt the hardware. Infact, you should be able to put the Intel iMacs into the same state and see if a larger than expected current is drawn from the mains.
The British Phonographic Industry win a court case against two file sharers, with Judges handing down interim damages of £1,500 and £5,000 with costs and further full damages to be determined at a later hearing.
Well, AJP Computers sell that kind of PC, and have done for at least 5 years. I use one of their older 17 inch all in one units at work and its great, no complaints, indeed we have around 60 of their systems at work and have no real complaints.
Slashdot Mirror
RSS is designed to be extended, the base specification is very loose and open to extension by third parties. Lots of companies already use extensions to RSS, so MS wont be the first if they do, and they wont be 'evil' if they do. Get over it.
- Cheapest Mac - $499 (PPC Mini), $1299 (Intel iMac)
- OSX - $129
To run an alternate OS on a Mac, which of the above do you need? Is it really economical for Apple to lock down the HIGHER PAYING product in an effort to gain more income on the LOWER PAYING product, of which income isnt guaranteed since you dont *need* to buy OSX seperately from a Mac?Think of the system they use with the iPod, low paying item tied to high paying item, not the other way around.
If someone wants to run an alternate OS, they have already given Apple lots of money. But if someone wants to run OSX on an alternate platform, they havent given Apple lots of money. Think about it.
Epstein made four observations. The first was that the Apple Switch ad campaign was over, and nobody switched.
I switched. 3 other people in my office switched. Whats he talking about?
Seriously, in December 2004 there were no Mac owners in my office, then I got an iBook (always wanted to play with OSX), and within a month two other people had purchased various Macs based on my purchase. Then 3 months ago someone else purchase a powerbook, again based on the experiences of us owners in the office.
I don't know if they ship an "universal" upgrade, but if you have a legal license for OS X (for example from an old Mac) and a legal OS X upgrade to 10.4.4 that can upgrade it to a "dual-platform" OS X version, then you have a valid license.
No, you have a valid license for the PPC version, not the Intel version. Two different products.
Bundling the hardware and OS is illegal in many places (I know at least in Germany the courts stuck Microsofts OEM license down) and whatever the EULA says is null and void. Theoretically you should be able to move your OS X license (paid in full) to a generic x86 machine.
In some jurisdictions maybe, but you are still going to have to pony up for a complete Mac, and you cant use the same license on both systems.
The UK had ID cards during WW2, so your point may not be as valid as you think.
Yes, you can challenge the law itself in .... the House of Lords :) While the lower courts deal with application of the law, if you take the case to the House of Lords, they deal with the validity of the law as applied (if they choose to hear the case that is).
you not only lose new email for the duration, but also all your stored email unless you take the step of pop3ing stuff down, and if you do that then whats the point of using this service?
You were probably joking, but I entirely fail to see how the MPAA can be held responsable for the actions of an independant and seperate company supplying services the MPAA has nothing to do with.
This is Netflix thats causing the problem (Lovefilm in the UK have the same clause in their terms and conditions, throttling of high usage users, and Lovefilm supply the backend service for a LOT of the online rentals clubs in the UK).
You are quite right, however there is also a large number of people that have contributed significantly more than a 'snippit' - enough to still make it a very arduous task with the final outcome still likely to be having to rewrite blocks of code.
What benefit would the Linux kernel have from going GPL3?
Even with Linus going GPL3, it would be next to impossible to have the kernel go GPL3 because of the number of people who have contributed little snippets of code here and there, you would have to get all of their individual permissions because the Linux kernel development doesnt require copyright assignation and the license doesnt include the 'or later' clause. Its doable, but as I said, near impossible.
The USSR had 9 seperate space stations, including Salyut 1 - 7 (1971 to 1991) and Mir (1986 - 2001).
Mir - out of 7 components, only 1 was shipped and constructed using the Shuttle (the Shuttles docking port), the rest were launched by Proton and docked manually. If it can be done for Mir, it can be done for the ISS.
I agree tho that the ISS is getting to be a waste of time and money.
The Russians built many space stations without the Shuttle, pretty sure the geniuses at NASA can accomplish the same.
Copying and distribution costs may have gone down (although I wouldnt bet that distirbution has decreased all that much, people still demand CDs, inlays etc - its only a small proportion that use itunes), but initial production costs havent decreased dramatically, and marketing costs have probably increased as alternatives have entered the market. If the artists want more, they should take the entire burden on themselves.
Copyright is as artificial as the laws are that are stopping me from taking your car when you 'abandon' it in a carpark. Just because you can easily copy it doesnt mean you automatically should be allowed to, just the same as all the other types of possession law out there are technically easy to break.
While you have my book, I cant lend it to anyone else and I cant read it myself. I can make 10,000 copies of an electronic version with little to no effort and give them to 10,000 people who can do the same, ad infinitum. And I would still have my copy, as pristine as it ever was. Theres the difference.
And the Pentagon has just issued plans to retire the F-117 in FY2008, in favour of more F-22s. The drone mentioned in that book is probably the D-21 drone, launched from the back of the SR-71 aircraft at altitude. It pretty much failed.
You chose to have a distance between you and your job, so why should the employer pay for your time commuting? They dont get anything productive out of it, so whats their money going toward? Want to spend less unpaid time commuting? Move closer, or get a job closer to home.
I dont think many other industries have had to deal with their customers suddenly being able to get the SAME product (not a similiar alternative) for free because of technological change. The RIAA is suing people because whats actually happening is illegal, its copyright infringement anyway you cut it. The business model isnt failing because of competition with alternatives, its failing because the competition is exactly the same product with zero costs and zero investment for the 'producer'.
You have no entitlement to their product - dont like the current system? Go without until its changed.
We do actually, as codified in the 2005 amendment to the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, section Part 1, Chapter 3, Section 29 "Research and private study."
The same act, Part 5, Chapter 48, section 296ZE "Remedy where effective technological measures prevent permitted acts", allows action to be taken where DRM blocks acts permitted under law.
Yes, and also that they dont hold people without charge or trial for 4 or more years.
Entrapped means the person was talked into doing something they otherwise wouldnt have done, tricked has similiar connotations. In this case I would say Microsoft caught him fair and square, and the transaction provided all the evidence required to jail him. Good riddance I say.
There are already none Apple Core Duo laptops around (but they are expensive), why not see if the problem exists under Linux on these devices? If it doesnt, then it isnt the hardware. Infact, you should be able to put the Intel iMacs into the same state and see if a larger than expected current is drawn from the mains.
The British Phonographic Industry win a court case against two file sharers, with Judges handing down interim damages of £1,500 and £5,000 with costs and further full damages to be determined at a later hearing.
Google Video allows anyone to upload, not just the copyright holder. Pretty sure Topgear didnt upload this gem.
They certainly werent evil in the Greek and Roman times, which people often love to hold up as a high point in human history.
Well, AJP Computers sell that kind of PC, and have done for at least 5 years. I use one of their older 17 inch all in one units at work and its great, no complaints, indeed we have around 60 of their systems at work and have no real complaints.