Re:Someone will find a way to complain about this
on
Code Monkey Like Fritos
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I know you slashdot weenies like to think everything must be free, in whatever version of the term you like to use... but being free doesn't immediately make something good. If someone doesn't like the song, they have every right to say "this song sucks". Although, on slashdot the only acceptable choices are for everyone to hate it, or everyone to like it, and any viewpoints opposing the groupthink will quickly be modded into oblivion.
The idiocy of slashdot mods never ceases to amaze me. How exactly is this offtopic? Troll, maybe. Flamebait, possibly. But offtopic? Come on, it's a song about code monkeys sung in a broken voice without normal sentence structure, that's a style people use to represent cavemen. It's a direct comment on the song in the linked article. Moderator monkey not like use common sense.
My favorite is on the Terminator 2 DVD. There's a mirrored logo (cyberdyne maybe?) and you hear footsteps behind you, then see a reflection of Arnold with a shotgun. He blows the logo apart and lots of shattering noises surround you, then the pieces melt terminator-style, and the THX sound plays while the puddle morphs into a THX logo. They have used a similar one since then, but the T2 version rocked.
You see, I've invented a box that you can buy for $80 less than an ipod, that does nothing but stream media from a PC, and I'm going to tell people it's a replacement for an ipod, which has its OWN storage space, and can play media anywhere, including a TV.
A single function box instead of a multi-use ipod? BRILLIANT!
Re:Great, my boss will love this!
on
TV Outside the Box
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Oh I agree that cringely is still a dumbass. I have only read the parts of the article that are copy and pasted here on slashdot - cringely is and always has been a cheap troll looking for advertisement dollars, and I'm not going to feed him, so I only grudgingly admit that he might have a sliver of a somewhat possible idea. That doesn't imply he would recognize a clue if you wrapped it in barbed wire and smacked him in the genitals with it.
Wine implements the API in an application which runs on top of the kernel. As far as I can tell, cringely is suggesting Apple will implement the support directly in the OS, and not in userland.
Could cringely be saying something that actually makes a bit of sense? I have no doubt that WINE will eventually be at least as good on os x as it is on linux today, which is not too shabby. Apple have shown with boot camp that, if the hackers get it working and people are excited about it, Apple is willing to release a more elegant solution to accomplish the same goals. With the mach microkernel setup they've got going now, it's not too hard to imagine a windows compatibility layer that could run tandem to the BSD layer they already use. IMO, this one is at least a possibility. I wouldn't say Apple is neccesarily planning to do this right now, but if people start getting really exited when darwine starts getting good, I wouldn't be suprised to see the ole man in the turtleneck upstaging them by releasing an Apple sanctioned implementation.
Really the most shocking part of this whole article is the fact the Cringely said something that actually kinda makes sense. I guess a stopped clock really can be right once in a while.
As I said, I don't agree with their monitoring content - but there is no technological solution to replace that part of their job, as the original poster implied.
As far as the telecom in somalia, they are using the parts designed by companies that DO have to conform to regulations. They aren't designing some proprietary cell tower technology - they are just using what exists. The stuff that exists works exactly BECAUSE it was designed under regulation.
Frequency hopping will NOT stop one company from blasting a lot of radiation, if for no other reason than to fuck with their competitors. With no regulation you have no power to stop abuse.
Technology has completely replaced EVERYTHING that the FCC is mandated to regulate
Uh... huh? How has technology replaced, say, monitoring content on public broadcasts?(1) How has technology eliminated the need to regulate the radio spectrum so devices dont stomp all over each other? How has technology ensured that every manufacturer will somehow produce devices which accept interference?
HAM and CB are both still useful technologies. Look no further than your favorite natural disaster to see HAMs at work helping organize efforts when all your high-tech technological solutions have broken down. They ARE pushing to force a change to all-digital TV, but there are still a whole lot of analog TV's out there. You propose forcing the entire population to go out and buy new sets to fit with your idiotic view of how the spectrum should be used. Don't you think THAT would be benefitting the manufacturers of TVs more than anyone else?
If you don't regulate the spectrum, all that will happen is companies will build devices to stomp all over each others' devices. If you don't regulate the spectrum, there will be nothing stopping someone using the same frequencies as air traffic controllers. Disbanding the FCC has got to be one of the most idiotic ideas I've ever read on slashdot. Restructure it, sure. Fire everyone working there, fine. Try to remove the corruption, absolutely. But to suggest we don't need any regulation of the radio spectrum is absolutely ludicrous.
(1) - not that I believe their monitoring is right, but it's what they do, and technology sure hasn't changed that in any way.
I'm pretty sure you're the ONLY person I've ever heard say that mac os x apps are LESS intuitive than classic ones. I gotta wonder where you got that crack, and how much you paid for it, 'cause that must be some good shit.
For a guy who has some great moral opposition to patents, he didn't seem to mind taking a 20k payoff to help a company exploit a patent to extort millions from RIM. Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical to anyone else?
Ya know, I was a linux fanboy once. I was proud of how 'leet my platform of choice was. I rejoiced in my freedom to do anything and everything I wanted to do. And I spent so much time fucking around trying to make shit work, that I never actually used my computer. A year or so ago, my research group provided me with an ibook, so I could have a reliable laptop running an OS with a unix command line available, and where the OS had good user support in case something went wrong at a conference somewhere. I haven't had a need to use linux since. OS X gives me all the freedom I ever used when I was in linux, and has a much slicker, more well thought out design. I spend my time on my computer doing work, not tweaking configuration files.
As far as your whole "apple is so restrictive" line of crap - it's an exaggeration. You've been able to dual boot linux on apple hardware for a long time. You couldn't boot windows because the hardware wasn't right. Then, apple came out with new machines, and didn't use the legacy BIOS - not because they were trying to restrict people, but because it's fucking decades old technology and needs to die. However, as a courtesy to users, they released bootcamp so the intel machines would be able to boot legacy OSes.
Apple failed because their management sucked, and the pre-os-X operating system was slow, shitty, and lacked decent multitasking. A once-revolutionary OS became stagnant and bloated, and bad business decisions licensing the OS to clone makers nearly drove them out of business. Then, they did the unthinkable, scrapped the piece of shit os, and built a new one baseed on a solid foundation with its roots in UNIX. But, they did something NO ONE was able to do before them - build something on top of UNIX that has a well designed, efficient, polished user interface that is as useful to a scientist as it is to grandma.
Before you judge, sit down and use an OS X machine sometime. I mean, really use it. Spend a month using nothing but the apple - find all the replacements for the programs you use, install X windows so you can run those linux programs you can't live without, and see how fast you start trying to move away from those programs, because you find how much BETTER the UI of the apple machine is. I have not met ONE PERSON who's used an OS X computer for any significant amount of time without coming to the conclusion that it's worlds better than what they were using before. Perhaps you don't understand it because your prejudice keeps you from being open minded enough to give it a chance. I was like you once, a closed minded linux zealot who hated apple machines because they are for style-over-substance art types and not for real men like me. Really use the computer, and I bet you might change your tone.
I don't give a shit about steve jobs or how popular the mac is - Apple makes damn good computers, and they help me do my work better. THAT'S why I'm an apple fan, because at the moment, it is the best damn computer on the market. If tomorrow someone else makes a better computer, I very well might switch - but for the time being, nothing comes close.
Apple doesn't "want you to" use fat32. They helpfully suggest using it, as mac os x cannot natively write to an ntfs partition, but it can write to fat32. It's a simple practical consideration, not some conspiracy.
The fact that you have to mess with all of these 3rd party encoders is one of the major problems I have with iTunes.
EyeTV is like Tivo for the mac - it records a standard mpeg stream. The software has a builtin checkbox that will allow scheduled shows to automatically get resized and re-encoded for the ipod screen, and automatically uploaded. This isn't some random encoder downloaded from versiontracker, it's the software that powers my video capture box. By the way, eyetv uses quicktime (hardly third party) to do its encoding to h.264.
Cabos is a P2P download application - it doesn't re-encode anything, but does automatically add my downloads to itunes, as well as to a custom playlist so I know exactly which files have been downloaded from that specific program.
How, exactly, does dragging and dropping your files on the ipod suddenly get rid of the encoders? They still have to be in a format that's readable by the software. That has NOTHING to do with itunes, and everything to do with the ipod software - which is not what I addressed in my post.
Since you're on linux (I assume running itunes in WINE?) it will probably be tougher. I only know the apple side of things, so what I would do is write an automator script or applescript to automatically import all files in a certain directory into itunes. This is pretty straightforward and only about a three-line automator workflow. I know people have written plugins for the windows version of itunes, so there is some ability to interface with it, but I don't know what the functionality is out of the box, or how hard this would be to accomplish.
On the mac, many programs written to download or create digital content have options to automatically add to the itunes library. For example, when my eyetv records a tv show, it is automaticlly re-encoded to h.264 and added to my ipod.
Slashdot Mirror
I know you slashdot weenies like to think everything must be free, in whatever version of the term you like to use... but being free doesn't immediately make something good. If someone doesn't like the song, they have every right to say "this song sucks". Although, on slashdot the only acceptable choices are for everyone to hate it, or everyone to like it, and any viewpoints opposing the groupthink will quickly be modded into oblivion.
The idiocy of slashdot mods never ceases to amaze me. How exactly is this offtopic? Troll, maybe. Flamebait, possibly. But offtopic? Come on, it's a song about code monkeys sung in a broken voice without normal sentence structure, that's a style people use to represent cavemen. It's a direct comment on the song in the linked article. Moderator monkey not like use common sense.
Do code monkeys talk like fucking cavemen?
Your anecdotal evidence intrigues me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
No - Microsoft doesn't release patches fast enough and they don't do adequate testing. They don't win on either count.
My favorite is on the Terminator 2 DVD. There's a mirrored logo (cyberdyne maybe?) and you hear footsteps behind you, then see a reflection of Arnold with a shotgun. He blows the logo apart and lots of shattering noises surround you, then the pieces melt terminator-style, and the THX sound plays while the puddle morphs into a THX logo. They have used a similar one since then, but the T2 version rocked.
You see, I've invented a box that you can buy for $80 less than an ipod, that does nothing but stream media from a PC, and I'm going to tell people it's a replacement for an ipod, which has its OWN storage space, and can play media anywhere, including a TV.
A single function box instead of a multi-use ipod? BRILLIANT!
Your mom has a bigger box.
(ah, a good old friday night karma burn)
Oh I agree that cringely is still a dumbass. I have only read the parts of the article that are copy and pasted here on slashdot - cringely is and always has been a cheap troll looking for advertisement dollars, and I'm not going to feed him, so I only grudgingly admit that he might have a sliver of a somewhat possible idea. That doesn't imply he would recognize a clue if you wrapped it in barbed wire and smacked him in the genitals with it.
Wine implements the API in an application which runs on top of the kernel. As far as I can tell, cringely is suggesting Apple will implement the support directly in the OS, and not in userland.
Could cringely be saying something that actually makes a bit of sense? I have no doubt that WINE will eventually be at least as good on os x as it is on linux today, which is not too shabby. Apple have shown with boot camp that, if the hackers get it working and people are excited about it, Apple is willing to release a more elegant solution to accomplish the same goals. With the mach microkernel setup they've got going now, it's not too hard to imagine a windows compatibility layer that could run tandem to the BSD layer they already use. IMO, this one is at least a possibility. I wouldn't say Apple is neccesarily planning to do this right now, but if people start getting really exited when darwine starts getting good, I wouldn't be suprised to see the ole man in the turtleneck upstaging them by releasing an Apple sanctioned implementation.
Really the most shocking part of this whole article is the fact the Cringely said something that actually kinda makes sense. I guess a stopped clock really can be right once in a while.
I know there's a Yakov Smirnoff joke in here somewhere, but I'm coming up empty.
I just had a Urotsukodoji (sp?) flashback... *shudder*
No one said you had to buy the services they run on those ranges. How is it a tax if it's optional?
As I said, I don't agree with their monitoring content - but there is no technological solution to replace that part of their job, as the original poster implied.
As far as the telecom in somalia, they are using the parts designed by companies that DO have to conform to regulations. They aren't designing some proprietary cell tower technology - they are just using what exists. The stuff that exists works exactly BECAUSE it was designed under regulation.
Frequency hopping will NOT stop one company from blasting a lot of radiation, if for no other reason than to fuck with their competitors. With no regulation you have no power to stop abuse.
Technology has completely replaced EVERYTHING that the FCC is mandated to regulate
Uh... huh? How has technology replaced, say, monitoring content on public broadcasts?(1) How has technology eliminated the need to regulate the radio spectrum so devices dont stomp all over each other? How has technology ensured that every manufacturer will somehow produce devices which accept interference?
HAM and CB are both still useful technologies. Look no further than your favorite natural disaster to see HAMs at work helping organize efforts when all your high-tech technological solutions have broken down. They ARE pushing to force a change to all-digital TV, but there are still a whole lot of analog TV's out there. You propose forcing the entire population to go out and buy new sets to fit with your idiotic view of how the spectrum should be used. Don't you think THAT would be benefitting the manufacturers of TVs more than anyone else?
If you don't regulate the spectrum, all that will happen is companies will build devices to stomp all over each others' devices. If you don't regulate the spectrum, there will be nothing stopping someone using the same frequencies as air traffic controllers. Disbanding the FCC has got to be one of the most idiotic ideas I've ever read on slashdot. Restructure it, sure. Fire everyone working there, fine. Try to remove the corruption, absolutely. But to suggest we don't need any regulation of the radio spectrum is absolutely ludicrous.
(1) - not that I believe their monitoring is right, but it's what they do, and technology sure hasn't changed that in any way.
Sony and MS are focused on tech specs for a reason because that's what real gamers want.
You misspelled "people with penis envy"
I'm made of ooze, you insensitive clod!
I'm pretty sure you're the ONLY person I've ever heard say that mac os x apps are LESS intuitive than classic ones. I gotta wonder where you got that crack, and how much you paid for it, 'cause that must be some good shit.
For a guy who has some great moral opposition to patents, he didn't seem to mind taking a 20k payoff to help a company exploit a patent to extort millions from RIM. Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical to anyone else?
Ya know, I was a linux fanboy once. I was proud of how 'leet my platform of choice was. I rejoiced in my freedom to do anything and everything I wanted to do. And I spent so much time fucking around trying to make shit work, that I never actually used my computer. A year or so ago, my research group provided me with an ibook, so I could have a reliable laptop running an OS with a unix command line available, and where the OS had good user support in case something went wrong at a conference somewhere. I haven't had a need to use linux since. OS X gives me all the freedom I ever used when I was in linux, and has a much slicker, more well thought out design. I spend my time on my computer doing work, not tweaking configuration files.
As far as your whole "apple is so restrictive" line of crap - it's an exaggeration. You've been able to dual boot linux on apple hardware for a long time. You couldn't boot windows because the hardware wasn't right. Then, apple came out with new machines, and didn't use the legacy BIOS - not because they were trying to restrict people, but because it's fucking decades old technology and needs to die. However, as a courtesy to users, they released bootcamp so the intel machines would be able to boot legacy OSes.
Apple failed because their management sucked, and the pre-os-X operating system was slow, shitty, and lacked decent multitasking. A once-revolutionary OS became stagnant and bloated, and bad business decisions licensing the OS to clone makers nearly drove them out of business. Then, they did the unthinkable, scrapped the piece of shit os, and built a new one baseed on a solid foundation with its roots in UNIX. But, they did something NO ONE was able to do before them - build something on top of UNIX that has a well designed, efficient, polished user interface that is as useful to a scientist as it is to grandma.
Before you judge, sit down and use an OS X machine sometime. I mean, really use it. Spend a month using nothing but the apple - find all the replacements for the programs you use, install X windows so you can run those linux programs you can't live without, and see how fast you start trying to move away from those programs, because you find how much BETTER the UI of the apple machine is. I have not met ONE PERSON who's used an OS X computer for any significant amount of time without coming to the conclusion that it's worlds better than what they were using before. Perhaps you don't understand it because your prejudice keeps you from being open minded enough to give it a chance. I was like you once, a closed minded linux zealot who hated apple machines because they are for style-over-substance art types and not for real men like me. Really use the computer, and I bet you might change your tone.
I don't give a shit about steve jobs or how popular the mac is - Apple makes damn good computers, and they help me do my work better. THAT'S why I'm an apple fan, because at the moment, it is the best damn computer on the market. If tomorrow someone else makes a better computer, I very well might switch - but for the time being, nothing comes close.
Apple doesn't "want you to" use fat32. They helpfully suggest using it, as mac os x cannot natively write to an ntfs partition, but it can write to fat32. It's a simple practical consideration, not some conspiracy.
The fact that you have to mess with all of these 3rd party encoders is one of the major problems I have with iTunes.
EyeTV is like Tivo for the mac - it records a standard mpeg stream. The software has a builtin checkbox that will allow scheduled shows to automatically get resized and re-encoded for the ipod screen, and automatically uploaded. This isn't some random encoder downloaded from versiontracker, it's the software that powers my video capture box. By the way, eyetv uses quicktime (hardly third party) to do its encoding to h.264.
Cabos is a P2P download application - it doesn't re-encode anything, but does automatically add my downloads to itunes, as well as to a custom playlist so I know exactly which files have been downloaded from that specific program.
How, exactly, does dragging and dropping your files on the ipod suddenly get rid of the encoders? They still have to be in a format that's readable by the software. That has NOTHING to do with itunes, and everything to do with the ipod software - which is not what I addressed in my post.
The ipod with multiple machines thing is a huge problem, I agree - it's Apple bending over for the music industry and it sucks.
For the others, could you elaborate? How is itunes bad with classical music?
What doesn't it do well in handling albums?
What is so hard about right clicking a file and choosing "get info" to edit mp3 tags?
What's wrong with compilations on itunes?
Since you're on linux (I assume running itunes in WINE?) it will probably be tougher. I only know the apple side of things, so what I would do is write an automator script or applescript to automatically import all files in a certain directory into itunes. This is pretty straightforward and only about a three-line automator workflow. I know people have written plugins for the windows version of itunes, so there is some ability to interface with it, but I don't know what the functionality is out of the box, or how hard this would be to accomplish.
On the mac, many programs written to download or create digital content have options to automatically add to the itunes library. For example, when my eyetv records a tv show, it is automaticlly re-encoded to h.264 and added to my ipod.