that was less about myspace tv and much, much more about fox tv leveraging their myspace bandwidth to do their on demand, which is lakc luster at best. The quality is good. the amount of content fox puts online is horrific. i was telling a friend about hell's kitchen and that it was on fox on demand. he couldn't find it. fox does a grreat job at hiding it from their network tv site, only linking it from an innocuous "on demand" text link in a drop down menu.
I posted a comment complaining of the loss of Itunes Atore credits and had it removed in an hour or so from Apple's Itunes forrum for general comments. I would likely take screen grabs of my posts as well when posting on Apple's site.
As someone who uses a Mac and a PC daily, I think some of the commercials are funny but a couple of them are a bit misleading. I think that implying that Macs are for certain stuff and PCs are for other stuff is pretty annoying. I'd rather they use blatant sex to sell stuff then try to mislead people.
I ran a lab of PCs and Macs and have been using Powerbooks as my main personal computer for a long time. But some of Apple's stance is a bit of FUD when it comes to the differences between Macs and PCs. For instance, for those using AVID, more people will use a PC over a Mac. DV (Digital Video) did a test with the new Core2Duo and did a variety of tasks on the same machine in OS X and XP. XP blew OS X away.
I am not saying this as a PC fan boy. Remember, I use a Powerbook, not a Dell or Toshiba. I feel like everyone needs to find a balance between ease of use, attractiveness and price that they are comfortable with. But the Apple Ad with Mac and PC visiting a counselor kind of stuck in my craw. 10 years ago, Mac killed PCs when it came to creative stuff. Not so today. At best, they both offer similar if not identical tools to get the same stuff done. It just comes down to which one you want to pick.
A core2duo Mac running OS X is slower than a core2duo Mac running XP when using photoshop, encoding and some other processesor intensive tasks.
I had a dual proc quad core with 4 gigs of ram running 10.4.x and it was slower for simple tasks like web browsing than my single processor Dell with 1.5 gigs of ram, if you are talking about perceived speed...
American movie companies are selling the same movies we pay $15 and up for in China for $1.99 because piracy is so extensive. So what does that tell us? That companies don't look at the cost of goods when setting a price, they look at what the market is willing to pay. Not that it isn't smart of the movie industry, but there is certainly a semi-collusion going on to set the price fairly evenly across the board. You don't have one company selling DVDs for $4.99 while everyone else is charging over $15. So if Universal is able to sell in China for that low, they could sell for just as cheaply here. It is because most people don't really want to steal that movie companies are still charging so much. I am not going to pull an Abby Hoffman and say steal this movie (or book) but I have trouble feeling that what is being charged for the same DVD with the same special features here and in China could be considered fair.
And I'm sorry, but charging $15 for a reduced resolution movie to be downloaded with reduced rights is just plain dumb. Your average Joe who gets burned by his more than a couple times will realize at the very least that they can rip a DVD they BUY for $15 and have it both in full quality for their DVD player and for their mobile video device. Then movie companies will try to Macrovision or alternate DRM DVDs and consumers will do an D-A-D conversion to get around it.
Music artists like Beck are figuring out that by adding significant value to the typical offering is the way to get people to buy your stuff and give the artist mind share which converts to live ticket sales which is where the artist makes much of its money anyway (read - Price who will regularly play in Vegas for $125 a ticket and runs his own record label).
Movie companies are stuck in spending money trying to defeat technology instead of adding sufficient value that makes it worth it us giving them our money. Asshats.
they should have bought the different incarnations of their domain name a long time ago. People have been buying spelling mistake and phonetic combinations of their domain name like everyone else if they were worried about this years ago like other responsible companies have been doing for a long time. Tough titties.
That's a great song, but potentially more difficult to remix into something catchy that Shock the Monkey. Not that I was ever really into that song. I have found that a lot of his best stuff was done with African musicians and that most people never hear any of it.
I have been a part of a Slingbox thread where many Slingmedia customers are raising holy hell because Sling promised a mac client soooo long ago and have yet to come through with it. They supposedly have a beta, yet none of the folks who have been waiting have even confirmed that they are a part of the beta program. I don't believe they really have one and think its still vapor ware at this point.
That said, I am using a Slingbox with a PC as I pen this on my other monitor. Its pretty good and the overhead seems to be less than that of my dual head GBPVR. I also have a ReplayTV and a dual head Comcast PVR.
Sling works great over a local network but is a bit crappy over the net. But it makes sense if you want to watch local programming (lets say Red Sox or Patriot games) when not at home.
Their remotes is supposed to be the OS X of universal remotes. Its what you are supposed to buy for your relatives who can't set the microwave clock. And yet my 50 something year old mother doesn't use it because its too confusing.
Slashdot Mirror
Plus they think they will lose their AOL homepage and email...
that was less about myspace tv and much, much more about fox tv leveraging their myspace bandwidth to do their on demand, which is lakc luster at best. The quality is good. the amount of content fox puts online is horrific. i was telling a friend about hell's kitchen and that it was on fox on demand. he couldn't find it. fox does a grreat job at hiding it from their network tv site, only linking it from an innocuous "on demand" text link in a drop down menu.
How is this not like Net Neutrality? Deciding what the consumer gets based upon the highest bidder, ignoring what the consumer wants.
Does this mean that pedophiles will get ads for Lucky Charms, or that children will get ads for Viagra?
I am suspicious of your comment as Slashdotters don't have dinner dates. Unless, of course, you meant your mother.
where does it end?
when do I get to play a mario game with a mii as the main character?
I posted a comment complaining of the loss of Itunes Atore credits and had it removed in an hour or so from Apple's Itunes forrum for general comments. I would likely take screen grabs of my posts as well when posting on Apple's site.
They aren't unique, I would just like to hold them to a higher standard.
As someone who uses a Mac and a PC daily, I think some of the commercials are funny but a couple of them are a bit misleading. I think that implying that Macs are for certain stuff and PCs are for other stuff is pretty annoying. I'd rather they use blatant sex to sell stuff then try to mislead people.
I ran a lab of PCs and Macs and have been using Powerbooks as my main personal computer for a long time. But some of Apple's stance is a bit of FUD when it comes to the differences between Macs and PCs. For instance, for those using AVID, more people will use a PC over a Mac. DV (Digital Video) did a test with the new Core2Duo and did a variety of tasks on the same machine in OS X and XP. XP blew OS X away.
I am not saying this as a PC fan boy. Remember, I use a Powerbook, not a Dell or Toshiba. I feel like everyone needs to find a balance between ease of use, attractiveness and price that they are comfortable with. But the Apple Ad with Mac and PC visiting a counselor kind of stuck in my craw. 10 years ago, Mac killed PCs when it came to creative stuff. Not so today. At best, they both offer similar if not identical tools to get the same stuff done. It just comes down to which one you want to pick.
A core2duo Mac running OS X is slower than a core2duo Mac running XP when using photoshop, encoding and some other processesor intensive tasks.
I had a dual proc quad core with 4 gigs of ram running 10.4.x and it was slower for simple tasks like web browsing than my single processor Dell with 1.5 gigs of ram, if you are talking about perceived speed...
The first is fact, the second is my opinion.
That said, I enjoy OS X a great deal...
I predict this card will fail. No one will ever need more than 512 MB of ram on a video card.
American movie companies are selling the same movies we pay $15 and up for in China for $1.99 because piracy is so extensive. So what does that tell us? That companies don't look at the cost of goods when setting a price, they look at what the market is willing to pay. Not that it isn't smart of the movie industry, but there is certainly a semi-collusion going on to set the price fairly evenly across the board. You don't have one company selling DVDs for $4.99 while everyone else is charging over $15. So if Universal is able to sell in China for that low, they could sell for just as cheaply here. It is because most people don't really want to steal that movie companies are still charging so much. I am not going to pull an Abby Hoffman and say steal this movie (or book) but I have trouble feeling that what is being charged for the same DVD with the same special features here and in China could be considered fair.
And I'm sorry, but charging $15 for a reduced resolution movie to be downloaded with reduced rights is just plain dumb. Your average Joe who gets burned by his more than a couple times will realize at the very least that they can rip a DVD they BUY for $15 and have it both in full quality for their DVD player and for their mobile video device. Then movie companies will try to Macrovision or alternate DRM DVDs and consumers will do an D-A-D conversion to get around it.
Music artists like Beck are figuring out that by adding significant value to the typical offering is the way to get people to buy your stuff and give the artist mind share which converts to live ticket sales which is where the artist makes much of its money anyway (read - Price who will regularly play in Vegas for $125 a ticket and runs his own record label).
Movie companies are stuck in spending money trying to defeat technology instead of adding sufficient value that makes it worth it us giving them our money. Asshats.
they should have bought the different incarnations of their domain name a long time ago. People have been buying spelling mistake and phonetic combinations of their domain name like everyone else if they were worried about this years ago like other responsible companies have been doing for a long time. Tough titties.
We came up with the "Mr. Nice Guy" which is to fold your pinky down, really giving a half-shocker...
More like surprise the monkey.
The track gets "mixed down" into a stereo track, then encoded into an MP3.
That's a great song, but potentially more difficult to remix into something catchy that Shock the Monkey. Not that I was ever really into that song. I have found that a lot of his best stuff was done with African musicians and that most people never hear any of it.
Proxy registrars also help reduce spam to your domain.
Perhaps the government can afford the PS3 when buying $200 hammers...
to remix Peter Gabriel and Paris Hilton's new song and call it Shock the Junkie
RFID tags coupled with shock collars.
giving a school Windows Movie Maker for their editing lab for free, which it is, because it should be.
Little do they know they are getting Windows 3.1
I have been a part of a Slingbox thread where many Slingmedia customers are raising holy hell because Sling promised a mac client soooo long ago and have yet to come through with it. They supposedly have a beta, yet none of the folks who have been waiting have even confirmed that they are a part of the beta program. I don't believe they really have one and think its still vapor ware at this point.
That said, I am using a Slingbox with a PC as I pen this on my other monitor. Its pretty good and the overhead seems to be less than that of my dual head GBPVR. I also have a ReplayTV and a dual head Comcast PVR.
Sling works great over a local network but is a bit crappy over the net. But it makes sense if you want to watch local programming (lets say Red Sox or Patriot games) when not at home.
Math might be overrated but the logic that solves most math and a lot of other things isn't.
Their remotes is supposed to be the OS X of universal remotes. Its what you are supposed to buy for your relatives who can't set the microwave clock. And yet my 50 something year old mother doesn't use it because its too confusing.
Can't win...