Do you have a link to that step by step because I'm still not seeing any particular issues here. By default, airport connects to the last network you used, so even if at boot time I was getting this info, when you log in, the first thing airport will do is look for th elast network you were connected to when you logged out.
Well, the main difference is a magazine is a physical media, music isn't. As nice as readin stuff online is, magazines offer portability that you can't quite get from the internet these days. I can take a magazine anywhere, and toss it roled up in a bag, and it takes much less space, energy and hassle, than taking a laptop arround to read my magazine.
Music on the other hand, I can download, throw on an iPod and take it anywhere as well. Sure I can take CDs, but if I want a lot of music, that's a lot of CDs. And since music always requires power to play, power isn't a factor in my decision here.
Well, generaly speaking, you can buy the whole album if you want for $10, or less if there are less than 10 songs. The incentive here is that you can pick and choose, but if you want the whole album you still get it at a better price (normaly) than you would pay at the store.
See the thing is, you're arguing the difference between streaming and purchasing. iTunes is about purchasing, owning a copy for your use. Rhapsody is about streaming, like on demand, or PPV or XMS. Sure you can burn rhapsody stuff, for an extra 80 cents.
What steve is talking about here is selling music to consumers, giving them a product they can manipulate.
Plus, his talk of PhDs and protection is complete BS. Rhapsody uses a proprietary codec so I can't access the content w/o using their client...I've googled for hacks, haven't found any. Maybe I could hook my audio out into my audio in and record songs as I stream them, but that's about as easy as...making audio cassettes! Steve just wants to dodge the whole copy protection aspect entirely since under his model, it doesn't really exist once you download the media.
How is it bullshit when you just proved his point? He didn't say that the method for cracking had to be easy, he just said it was possible, for anything. Try taking your head out of your ass for a few seconds and exercise some critical reading skills.
What about it? How many companies are making money off of OSS? Where is the OS software that is better than it's commercial counterparts? There isn't a lot, and there's a reason for that. Because there is no incentive for OSS people to devote their time to the software. They do it because they like to, and that's great, but if another project comes along they like better, oh well.
OSS is great, but so far it hasn't produced any hugely succesful businesses without IP protection. Hell, part of OSSs success relies on IP protection (see GPL)
So wait a minute, now not only am I paying a monthly subscription to my music, but if I want to burn a copy to listen to in my car, I have to pay another 80 cents on top of that?
Because they aren't fixing a price per se, they are setting a minimum advertised price. If you check arround you can always find it for less, they just can't advertise it for less.
Dealmac.com is usualy a good place to find them. Also check Apple's hot deals, you can probably get a refurb. If you ask me though, the best thing to do is to wait untill after x-mas and go try to get a deal on the open box reutrns.
The idea (and one that apple is slowly drifting away from) was to simplify everything. There was the entry level desktop (iMac), the entry level laptop (iBook), the pro desktop (G4) and the pro laptop (TiBook). People complained enough that there wasn't a middle line system, so Apple did two things to remedy it:
1) The eMac was born as the low end, etry all in one system, cheap and indeal for schools and people with limited computer knowledge. As a result the iMac moved up a notch to fill the middle line section of computing.
2) Added more than just Fast, Faster and Fastest to their lines, further bluring the line between low, middle and high end.
Nope. Pappers as in the files you keep. THe stuff on your computer and the reciepts that you keep etc. If someone else has the information already however, that's not your papers anymore.
Note the wording of the amendment however, secure in their persons (you're body), houses (your home), papers (your files), and effects (your property like a car)
It says nothing about information about you which other people posess and how that may be used
I dunno about $9.00, but shipping for a CD can easily reach $5, which is what I've traditionaly set mine at.
I ship all CDs with a case, and then I ship it in either a padded envelope (if it's a slim case) or an actual CD box (like the ones BMG sends you CDs in) + postage and insurance or delivery confirmation and yes it can get close to $5. Usualy for me it comes out to arround $4.28 or something like that, but it's easier to charge $5.
I would agree, and normaly that wouldn't be a problem for me. What bothers me is that they don't keep detailed records of my account transactions for longer than 2 months.
Wachovia is starting to make me wonder about switchin gto a different bank (or maybe a credit union). This past summer, I was going through some old bank statements that I hadn't looked at yet (i had been away for 3 months, and didn't have a chance to read my mail). I saw a charge for $10 listed as a service charge. I wondered what it was since it was much higher than the ATM charges, and it was a late night transaction. I went to the online system to double check and make sure it wasn't a misprint,and sure enough, the online transaction record showed a $10 service charge.
So I called them up wanting to know why I had been charged $10 for something, after about an hour of run arround and "system problems" I was told that they don't have the detailed records for anything older than 2 months. And so the charge wasn't showing up in their systems.
I know this is kind of late, but I need to correct some errors in your post here:
In mozilla, I can right click on any item in the bar and delete it or tell it to open the shortcut in a new window/tab, in safari there is no context menu for items in the shortcut bar.
This is just wrong. I'm sitting right here infront of safari and right clicking items in the shortcut bar, I have 3 open options(reg,window,tab), two edit options(name,adress) and a delete option
In mozilla I can reorder items in a shortcut folder just by dragging them around. In safari, I have to go to the bookmarks editor.
Again wrong. You can click and drag items about to your hearts content
And thus is the other problem with the OSS community. Someonw writes some code, and people point out where it needs to be improved, and the author says "Shut up and write your own damn code if you think you can do better"
The OSS community does not take constructive critisism (or critisism of any sort) very well. And even if the point is good, it's lost in a wave of blind hatred for one who would dare insult your baby.
Most people aren't critisising software just for the hell of it. They want to see it get better, and they're giving you ideas. You don't have to take those ideas, but they don't have to like or praise your software either. The reason they tell you instead of coding it themselves is because in terms of total resources, it's less to tell you and have you code it.
Only if you're cleaning those 5000 desktops day in and day out. Here's an example of where it isn't more adventageous. At a school I work at, they have a lab of roughly 1000 computers. Each computer in the lab is completely locked down in the sense that users can not save files localy (except temp files for programs) so the machines are as clean as they can possibly be. Another machine is kept by the administrators and is tweaked and updated every day to try to get that much better performance or space or whatever out of it (limited tech budget means we have to make these things last). That master computer is used to create an image for the other thousand computers. On the off chance we are hit with a virus, all the computers are wiped and reimmaged with the latest immage. This allows for all the computers to be updated at once, and allows for not only a clean system in terms of viruses, but a clean system overall because all the temp and cache files that were taking up space are gone. All the little quirks that OSs build up over time are gone and we have fresh systems that we know work. The whole process takes about 3 hours and is completely automated. Before we go home for the night, we hit update and in the morning everything is fine. This method is not particularly an interruption because every time we want to update software across the board, we only hav eto do one update and then clean immage the machines again.
So yes, for us, the 4 days and 23 hours we saved is well worth it.
The other problem is that people resist change simply because they don't want to have to go through the effort of changing or learning something new. Those people suck and I consider them worthless. Constantly change for the better. If changing something in your life will improve it in a significant way then do it. If not, then what's the point? Living the same unchanging boring life every day? I mean, sure it's just software so maybe I'm going a little far here. But when I switched to Firebird I was able to get an extra 30 minutes of sleep because my daily web checking took less time. That's a significant life change there.
Elitist much? Change for the sake of change, espesialy in the business world and in terms of investments is not always a good idea.
Ok, you want Mozilla to become accepted that's great. But you need to explain why it's worth changing to? For example, I use both Mozilla and Safari on my computer, but I use safari primarily. Why? Because it was the one I started with, so I'm ost familiar with it, and because I see no discernable value (for me) if using Mozilla as a primary browser. Does Mozilla have it's parts that I like, yes, but it's not worht it to me to give up safari for mozilla. That's what matters, and what the OSS community tends to forget. It isn't about whether it's technicaly better, it's about whether it's better for ME, or for someone else.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/
looks like plenty of stuff to me. And that's not even close to a complete list.
Do you have a link to that step by step because I'm still not seeing any particular issues here. By default, airport connects to the last network you used, so even if at boot time I was getting this info, when you log in, the first thing airport will do is look for th elast network you were connected to when you logged out.
The USPO needs an "Ask Slashdot" process for all tech patents.
You'll note I qulified, by adding to the next sentence "there isn't a lot"
And that's the truth. There isn't a whole lot of highly succesful OSS software.
Well, the main difference is a magazine is a physical media, music isn't. As nice as readin stuff online is, magazines offer portability that you can't quite get from the internet these days. I can take a magazine anywhere, and toss it roled up in a bag, and it takes much less space, energy and hassle, than taking a laptop arround to read my magazine.
Music on the other hand, I can download, throw on an iPod and take it anywhere as well. Sure I can take CDs, but if I want a lot of music, that's a lot of CDs. And since music always requires power to play, power isn't a factor in my decision here.
Well, generaly speaking, you can buy the whole album if you want for $10, or less if there are less than 10 songs. The incentive here is that you can pick and choose, but if you want the whole album you still get it at a better price (normaly) than you would pay at the store.
See the thing is, you're arguing the difference between streaming and purchasing. iTunes is about purchasing, owning a copy for your use. Rhapsody is about streaming, like on demand, or PPV or XMS. Sure you can burn rhapsody stuff, for an extra 80 cents.
What steve is talking about here is selling music to consumers, giving them a product they can manipulate.
Plus, his talk of PhDs and protection is complete BS. Rhapsody uses a proprietary codec so I can't access the content w/o using their client...I've googled for hacks, haven't found any. Maybe I could hook my audio out into my audio in and record songs as I stream them, but that's about as easy as...making audio cassettes! Steve just wants to dodge the whole copy protection aspect entirely since under his model, it doesn't really exist once you download the media.
How is it bullshit when you just proved his point? He didn't say that the method for cracking had to be easy, he just said it was possible, for anything. Try taking your head out of your ass for a few seconds and exercise some critical reading skills.
Look at the Open Source movement.
What about it? How many companies are making money off of OSS? Where is the OS software that is better than it's commercial counterparts? There isn't a lot, and there's a reason for that. Because there is no incentive for OSS people to devote their time to the software. They do it because they like to, and that's great, but if another project comes along they like better, oh well.
OSS is great, but so far it hasn't produced any hugely succesful businesses without IP protection. Hell, part of OSSs success relies on IP protection (see GPL)
So wait a minute, now not only am I paying a monthly subscription to my music, but if I want to burn a copy to listen to in my car, I have to pay another 80 cents on top of that?
Remind me again which is the better deal?
But that's how capitalism works. The lower you set your price, the more likely someone is to buy it.
I find them for less all the time outside of Apple retail stores. What are you talking about?
Because they aren't fixing a price per se, they are setting a minimum advertised price. If you check arround you can always find it for less, they just can't advertise it for less.
Which would be entirely relevant if the discussion were about the computers and not the iPod. And the release schedule is 6 months.
Dealmac.com is usualy a good place to find them. Also check Apple's hot deals, you can probably get a refurb. If you ask me though, the best thing to do is to wait untill after x-mas and go try to get a deal on the open box reutrns.
The idea (and one that apple is slowly drifting away from) was to simplify everything. There was the entry level desktop (iMac), the entry level laptop (iBook), the pro desktop (G4) and the pro laptop (TiBook). People complained enough that there wasn't a middle line system, so Apple did two things to remedy it:
1) The eMac was born as the low end, etry all in one system, cheap and indeal for schools and people with limited computer knowledge. As a result the iMac moved up a notch to fill the middle line section of computing.
2) Added more than just Fast, Faster and Fastest to their lines, further bluring the line between low, middle and high end.
Nope. Pappers as in the files you keep. THe stuff on your computer and the reciepts that you keep etc. If someone else has the information already however, that's not your papers anymore.
The right to be secure in one's person (as enumerated by the 4th amendment) has been violated.
Note the wording of the amendment however, secure in their persons (you're body), houses (your home), papers (your files), and effects (your property like a car)
It says nothing about information about you which other people posess and how that may be used
I dunno about $9.00, but shipping for a CD can easily reach $5, which is what I've traditionaly set mine at.
I ship all CDs with a case, and then I ship it in either a padded envelope (if it's a slim case) or an actual CD box (like the ones BMG sends you CDs in) + postage and insurance or delivery confirmation and yes it can get close to $5. Usualy for me it comes out to arround $4.28 or something like that, but it's easier to charge $5.
I would agree, and normaly that wouldn't be a problem for me. What bothers me is that they don't keep detailed records of my account transactions for longer than 2 months.
Wachovia is starting to make me wonder about switchin gto a different bank (or maybe a credit union). This past summer, I was going through some old bank statements that I hadn't looked at yet (i had been away for 3 months, and didn't have a chance to read my mail). I saw a charge for $10 listed as a service charge. I wondered what it was since it was much higher than the ATM charges, and it was a late night transaction. I went to the online system to double check and make sure it wasn't a misprint,and sure enough, the online transaction record showed a $10 service charge.
So I called them up wanting to know why I had been charged $10 for something, after about an hour of run arround and "system problems" I was told that they don't have the detailed records for anything older than 2 months. And so the charge wasn't showing up in their systems.
I know this is kind of late, but I need to correct some errors in your post here:
In mozilla, I can right click on any item in the bar and delete it or tell it to open the shortcut in a new window/tab, in safari there is no context menu for items in the shortcut bar.
This is just wrong. I'm sitting right here infront of safari and right clicking items in the shortcut bar, I have 3 open options(reg,window,tab), two edit options(name,adress) and a delete option
In mozilla I can reorder items in a shortcut folder just by dragging them around. In safari, I have to go to the bookmarks editor.
Again wrong. You can click and drag items about to your hearts content
And thus is the other problem with the OSS community. Someonw writes some code, and people point out where it needs to be improved, and the author says "Shut up and write your own damn code if you think you can do better"
The OSS community does not take constructive critisism (or critisism of any sort) very well. And even if the point is good, it's lost in a wave of blind hatred for one who would dare insult your baby.
Most people aren't critisising software just for the hell of it. They want to see it get better, and they're giving you ideas. You don't have to take those ideas, but they don't have to like or praise your software either. The reason they tell you instead of coding it themselves is because in terms of total resources, it's less to tell you and have you code it.
Only if you're cleaning those 5000 desktops day in and day out. Here's an example of where it isn't more adventageous. At a school I work at, they have a lab of roughly 1000 computers. Each computer in the lab is completely locked down in the sense that users can not save files localy (except temp files for programs) so the machines are as clean as they can possibly be. Another machine is kept by the administrators and is tweaked and updated every day to try to get that much better performance or space or whatever out of it (limited tech budget means we have to make these things last). That master computer is used to create an image for the other thousand computers. On the off chance we are hit with a virus, all the computers are wiped and reimmaged with the latest immage. This allows for all the computers to be updated at once, and allows for not only a clean system in terms of viruses, but a clean system overall because all the temp and cache files that were taking up space are gone. All the little quirks that OSs build up over time are gone and we have fresh systems that we know work. The whole process takes about 3 hours and is completely automated. Before we go home for the night, we hit update and in the morning everything is fine. This method is not particularly an interruption because every time we want to update software across the board, we only hav eto do one update and then clean immage the machines again.
So yes, for us, the 4 days and 23 hours we saved is well worth it.
The other problem is that people resist change simply because they don't want to have to go through the effort of changing or learning something new. Those people suck and I consider them worthless. Constantly change for the better. If changing something in your life will improve it in a significant way then do it. If not, then what's the point? Living the same unchanging boring life every day? I mean, sure it's just software so maybe I'm going a little far here. But when I switched to Firebird I was able to get an extra 30 minutes of sleep because my daily web checking took less time. That's a significant life change there.
Elitist much? Change for the sake of change, espesialy in the business world and in terms of investments is not always a good idea.
Ok, you want Mozilla to become accepted that's great. But you need to explain why it's worth changing to? For example, I use both Mozilla and Safari on my computer, but I use safari primarily. Why? Because it was the one I started with, so I'm ost familiar with it, and because I see no discernable value (for me) if using Mozilla as a primary browser. Does Mozilla have it's parts that I like, yes, but it's not worht it to me to give up safari for mozilla. That's what matters, and what the OSS community tends to forget. It isn't about whether it's technicaly better, it's about whether it's better for ME, or for someone else.