Not mentioned yet is Bob Cringely's theory that the reason Apple didn't put in 3G is because Cingular and Apple are both competing in the Video download market. And Apple won't let 3G on to the phone until Apple wins total control.
This sounds far more plausible than the original story saying that 3G is "Not Ready Yet" and so we use Edge. Apple loves setting standards and being early to market. Being late on 3G must have a business reason, not a techincal one. Conflict with Cingular on video makes a lot of sense. Apple will crush Cingular on this. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_200 70111_001476.html
I own an iRiver iHP-120 and find it has a fine interface and nice looking. I record my band's live gigs on it and they come out great, besides it being a fine player. iPods may be slightly nicer but they can't record.
Besides CNET gives top marks to the iRiver products, many of which are editors choice.
http://cnet.search.com/search?chkpt=astg.cnet.fd.s earch.cnet&q=iriver
iRiver products stand out as technically more sophisticated than Apple, which I thought was the slashdot crowd. Their new player fits right in.
Creative Labs is already shipping a similar product for streaming audio off your computer, but theirs has a wireless RF remote. http://us.creative.com/products/product.a sp?catego ry=119&subcategory=121&product=9192#
Apple has the marketing power so their solution will probably sell better. Maybe when Apple let's you control the music via your iPod, it'll be as nice. Until then I'd take Creative Labs system, even if it's not perfect.
This just shows that Sun is reacting to getting killed by Linux. Linux is shooting at Microsoft, but hitting Sun with friendly fire.
The simple fact is that Linux is most suited to Sun's core market (realiable servers), and Sun is losing market share big time to Linux. On the other hand I believe that last year Microsoft went from 92% to 94% of the desktop market.
geometric progressions can't live forever
on
True Names
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The singularity (http://sysopmind.com/singularity.html) is predicated on geometric progression gone wild. Computer speed doubles every x period of time forever. And when the brain doing the work is also doubled, then you have a runaway geometric progression. Pretty cool thought.
But.....as they say, if something can't go on forever, it won't. Population explosions burn themselves out for lack of food. If you double your bet in the casino until you win, you'll wind up broke because you eventually double beyond you money supply.
Intelligent articles about Moore's law speculate on how long the doubling can last not on whether it can go on forever. So yes, maybe we are heading toward a singularity where smart machines can make ever smarter machines. But this progression won't be a geometric singularity, at least not for long. It will become linear when some kind of limit we can't anticipate stops it. And if that limit hits sooner than we think, we might find that machines aren't getting smarter very quickly at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Not mentioned yet is Bob Cringely's theory that the reason Apple didn't put in 3G is because Cingular and Apple are both competing in the Video download market. And Apple won't let 3G on to the phone until Apple wins total control.
0 70111_001476.html
This sounds far more plausible than the original story saying that 3G is "Not Ready Yet" and so we use Edge. Apple loves setting standards and being early to market. Being late on 3G must have a business reason, not a techincal one. Conflict with Cingular on video makes a lot of sense. Apple will crush Cingular on this.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20
Conan O'Brien did a great spoof of how iPhone can do everything, from shaving your beard to working as a prophylactic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xXNoB3t8vM
The problem of course is that a few Apple die hards probably won't be able to tell its a spoof.
I own an iRiver iHP-120 and find it has a fine interface and nice looking. I record my band's live gigs on it and they come out great, besides it being a fine player. iPods may be slightly nicer but they can't record. Besides CNET gives top marks to the iRiver products, many of which are editors choice. http://cnet.search.com/search?chkpt=astg.cnet.fd.s earch.cnet&q=iriver
iRiver products stand out as technically more sophisticated than Apple, which I thought was the slashdot crowd. Their new player fits right in.
Creative Labs is already shipping a similar product for streaming audio off your computer, but theirs has a wireless RF remote.a sp?catego ry=119&subcategory=121&product=9192#
http://us.creative.com/products/product.
Apple has the marketing power so their solution will probably sell better. Maybe when Apple let's you control the music via your iPod, it'll be as nice. Until then I'd take Creative Labs system, even if it's not perfect.
This just shows that Sun is reacting to getting killed by Linux. Linux is shooting at Microsoft, but hitting Sun with friendly fire.
The simple fact is that Linux is most suited to Sun's core market (realiable servers), and Sun is losing market share big time to Linux. On the other hand I believe that last year Microsoft went from 92% to 94% of the desktop market.
The singularity (http://sysopmind.com/singularity.html) is predicated on geometric progression gone wild. Computer speed doubles every x period of time forever. And when the brain doing the work is also doubled, then you have a runaway geometric progression. Pretty cool thought.
But.....as they say, if something can't go on forever, it won't. Population explosions burn themselves out for lack of food. If you double your bet in the casino until you win, you'll wind up broke because you eventually double beyond you money supply.
Intelligent articles about Moore's law speculate on how long the doubling can last not on whether it can go on forever. So yes, maybe we are heading toward a singularity where smart machines can make ever smarter machines. But this progression won't be a geometric singularity, at least not for long. It will become linear when some kind of limit we can't anticipate stops it. And if that limit hits sooner than we think, we might find that machines aren't getting smarter very quickly at all.