It's got a higher quality/bitrate, but it's much more processor intensive to decode, which translates directly to battery power. Case in point: playing video on an iPod (which only supports h264) will drain the battery in an hour or two, where as DivX video on a Creative player will give you 5-6 hours on a similar battery.
If you're optimizing for space, sure, h264 is great. However, most PMPs are hard drive based, and thus have lots of space to spare.
For one thing, that way you're reencoding and losing quality, and for the other it simpy isn't practical in volume; precisely where it matters the most.
There's no explicit mention of that anywhere in iTunes. Sure, it's probably buried somewhere in the EULA, but no one reads those. Apple doesn't market to knowledgeable consumers; it targets the neophyte, and exploits them. There's absolutely no justification for not licensing FairPlay, or for not supporting PlaysForSure, it's pure greed. That isn't acceptable behavior, and it's well within the scope of government to smack them for it.
It's not so much that they're restricting how people buy new music, but that they're locking in their existing customers. Someone who already has purchased iTunes music can't then go buy a non-Apple music player.
Say you have a reasonably sizeable music collection, several hundred albums. Are you really suggesting that it's reasonable to buy several spindles of blank cds and spend weeks manually burning and reripping (with fidelity loss) your entire collection?
The stars are a limited commodity, so their pay rate will fluctuate with demand. A lot of the crew are just grunt work (say, grips), and the only reason they're making more than minimum wage is the union atmosphere. That's fine if you have a giant cash cow. They want their piece, and they've gotten it. If the golden goose goes away, that attitude has to follow.
I forsee the content industry having a lot less excess cash to throw around in the medium-long term. People just aren't going to be willing to pay the same amount with the cost of distribution so obviously at 0.
This isn't a bad thing. The movies worth watching, and music worth listening to, doesn't really need all that. Britney Spears and Waterworld aren't going to be feasible, but I don't think that's much of a loss.
Offering a relocation bonus is certainly within the scope of a hiring manager. However, I wasn't really referring to legal obligations, but to moral ones. It doesn't seem wise to relocate for a company already pulling shenanigans.
The hiring manager was authorized to speak for the company, and they have an obligation to honour his commitments. The proper response to him overstating things is to discipline him, not renege on their commitments.
I stand by my statement. The CRIA is most certainly not only affiliated with the RIAA, it is not in any sense a distinct organization. It represents American commercial interests, not Canadian companies, artists, or citizens.
The CMCC has the backing of all major Canadian labels, not just artists. Anything the CRIA has to say should be relayed through David Wilkins.
The Sims was never any good to start with. You could call it an extension of SimCity/Earth/Ant/Life/blahblah, but that's stretching it a bit, and that series is very much alive with Spore.
They're penny stocks; companies that are just barely able to squeak past the listing requirements. Investing in them is no better than gambling, so outside interference doesn't hurt any legitimate investors; there aren't any.
Slashdot Mirror
It's got a higher quality/bitrate, but it's much more processor intensive to decode, which translates directly to battery power. Case in point: playing video on an iPod (which only supports h264) will drain the battery in an hour or two, where as DivX video on a Creative player will give you 5-6 hours on a similar battery.
If you're optimizing for space, sure, h264 is great. However, most PMPs are hard drive based, and thus have lots of space to spare.
There's no technical reason there needs to be a loss of quality.
You have the right to demand and unlock code for your cell phone. The network is legally obligated to provide it. Whether they like it or not.
Apple does not have any right to a profit. If they lose money, tough shit, that's business.
For one thing, that way you're reencoding and losing quality, and for the other it simpy isn't practical in volume; precisely where it matters the most.
There's no explicit mention of that anywhere in iTunes. Sure, it's probably buried somewhere in the EULA, but no one reads those. Apple doesn't market to knowledgeable consumers; it targets the neophyte, and exploits them. There's absolutely no justification for not licensing FairPlay, or for not supporting PlaysForSure, it's pure greed. That isn't acceptable behavior, and it's well within the scope of government to smack them for it.
It's not so much that they're restricting how people buy new music, but that they're locking in their existing customers. Someone who already has purchased iTunes music can't then go buy a non-Apple music player.
Say you have a reasonably sizeable music collection, several hundred albums. Are you really suggesting that it's reasonable to buy several spindles of blank cds and spend weeks manually burning and reripping (with fidelity loss) your entire collection?
There's absolutely nothing stopping Apple from supporting PlaysForSure on iPods.
Anyone can (and everyone but Apple does) license PlaysForSure from Microsoft. That's all that's being asked for.
If Apple wants Norway's business, it has to PlayFair. ;)
Music is not. You shouldn't have to keep re-purchasing music, no matter how much Apple and the music companies want you to.
What the hell is wrong with you people?
The stars are a limited commodity, so their pay rate will fluctuate with demand. A lot of the crew are just grunt work (say, grips), and the only reason they're making more than minimum wage is the union atmosphere. That's fine if you have a giant cash cow. They want their piece, and they've gotten it. If the golden goose goes away, that attitude has to follow.
I forsee the content industry having a lot less excess cash to throw around in the medium-long term. People just aren't going to be willing to pay the same amount with the cost of distribution so obviously at 0.
This isn't a bad thing. The movies worth watching, and music worth listening to, doesn't really need all that. Britney Spears and Waterworld aren't going to be feasible, but I don't think that's much of a loss.
I can't speak for the Californian ones, but having looked over a friends here in Vancouver, that's an industry that desperately needs to trim the fat.
Offering a relocation bonus is certainly within the scope of a hiring manager. However, I wasn't really referring to legal obligations, but to moral ones. It doesn't seem wise to relocate for a company already pulling shenanigans.
The hiring manager was authorized to speak for the company, and they have an obligation to honour his commitments. The proper response to him overstating things is to discipline him, not renege on their commitments.
I stand by my statement. The CRIA is most certainly not only affiliated with the RIAA, it is not in any sense a distinct organization. It represents American commercial interests, not Canadian companies, artists, or citizens.
The CMCC has the backing of all major Canadian labels, not just artists. Anything the CRIA has to say should be relayed through David Wilkins.
The Sims was never any good to start with. You could call it an extension of SimCity/Earth/Ant/Life/blahblah, but that's stretching it a bit, and that series is very much alive with Spore.
Or is not considered dead until Forever comes out?
Why would he be working at McDonalds?
It's just a branch office of the American RIAA. The group that represents Canadian artists is the Canadian Music Creators Coalition.
If you sue all your dates afterwards. What, didn't she put out?
If they managed to make off with the money, why shouldn't he be on the hook for it?
When people think of pirates, they don't think of raping and pillaging. They think of Talk Like a Pirate Day and halloween costumes.
They're penny stocks; companies that are just barely able to squeak past the listing requirements. Investing in them is no better than gambling, so outside interference doesn't hurt any legitimate investors; there aren't any.