Hell yea it is. I'm not an old guy, so I was an infant in the 70's, but back then even the girls knew stuff about engines, cylindars, and horsepower. Everyone knew what the cool cars were and enjoyed them.
Now, half the people I meet (girls and guys) don't have a clue how to even add washer fluid.
I will never own one of those cars that can be parked straight into a paralell parking spot. Ever. I don't care what happens; I'd rather take the bus. At least those will always have big engines.
My god, what has this world come to. Now a Honda Civic is a normal sided car? Wtf?
People tell me all the time that my Cadillac STS is huge, but it's the same size as a Nissan Ultima, a lot smaller then an SUV, and gets a fairly respectable 27MPG highway out of it's 300HP engine.
The STS is a "normal" (Mid Sized) car. The Civic is a compact car. An SUV is a truck. A 1974 Lincoln Town Car is a "Full Sized" car.
How can you say that they are "notoriously unreliable" and then continue to say they do well if you take care of them? No shit man! Anything is unreliable if you beat the shit out of it - what makes something *really* unreliable is when they break a lot and you DON'T beat the shit out of them.
Re:How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
I somewhat agree with you here.
I do think that a company should be allowed to evolve, dispite it's name, but they did technically have this very stupidly agreed upon agreement..
The speaker thing someone else mentioned was actually a synthesizer, but even still, it's the same thing. Little FM synth chips were being installed by all the PC makers - and Apple is a PC maker. Should they not be allowed to be competitive because of their name?
The whole thing seems screwey. Maybe we don't know all the facts, which is quite possible, but if this is what it seems then it's just one of those legal menuvers that makes no sense yet wins in court.
No. To me, it's competition being determened by the speed and features of the graphics boards.
It doesn't matter what MS is going to use in Xbox 2, 3, whatever. It's that if I want to play the new games, I now have a choice of brands, and pricing is a lot better now too. (I do admit that the boards from either company are very expensive when they are new, but the competition factor brings those prices down quickly.)
Re:How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
You knew that people would be downloading MP3's for their iPods to SD cards, 25 years ago? Nice! Tell me when the end of the world is.
Re:How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
Well, you're a little off here.
IBM, Microsoft, and HP are the full names of those companies.
More accurately, it would be like calling your company "International Music Machines", "Music Packard" or "Hewlett Music", and "Micromusic". Those sound okay to me, and it's on the same lines of this lawsuit.
I don't see a problem starting a company called "Apple Automotive" and then put car stereos in them with MP3 playing capability, do you? That's what Apple Computer is doing with their PC's (basically.)
I used Network Solutions for a long time (Well, I didn't really have a choice back then) and it was always a pain to get changes made.
The e-mail forms were OKAY but the response times on them could be very long. Not to mention that if I register my e-mail under one of my domains, and there's a problem with that domain, I'm screwed.
You could set up a password-type authentication thing to use in the e-mail forms but it was always too complicated for me to deal with.
I ended up using a netaddress e-mail account to be the administrativew contact, but that ended up biting me in the ass too when they went to a paid system and I lost access to my e-mail address.
Now I use Register.com, and I pretty much just forget about it. I do my own DNS, and if I need to make a nameserver change I just go to the web page, click a few times, and I'm done.
I have also used BulkRegister.com at my last job because they were asses and purchased over 1600 domain names - pretty much anything with the name "jobs" in it. They were pretty easy to work with; the domains were all spread out with different registrars and BulkRegister helped me get them all transferred over as best they could. They have some nice tools to make bulk changes to blocks of domains.
Re:How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
This much is obvious.
Apple made PC's for quite awhile before including a synthesizer in their machines, and they were following the market trend of everyone else by including this.
It's silly. If they change their name, they can sell whatever they want, I guess. But if your company name contains similar elements to another company, you cannot? Even if your company evolved to this point?
The original "agreement" is not in dispute.. and it seems legally binding enough. It's really whacky though, and I hope a judge agrees. The world changes, technology changes, you can't blame Apple Computer for offering the same products that many other computer makers offer.
Re:How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
What's in a name?
I think it's a valid practice to evolve a business from one thing to another. If over the course of years you end up making a product similar to a competitor with similar name elements, I don't see a problem.
The agreement was set when Apple computer wasn't nearly as big as it is today. It was still a successful company back then, but there were factors as to why Apple Computer would have agreed to these terms. One of them being the size of the company, not wishing to risk too much over something that "would never be a problem", and the fact that nobody could have guessed that MP3's and such would be created and be so popular.
Re:How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
I see, the article said "speakers" (I'm one of the few that actually reads the articles) so it's a bit misleading. However, other PC's also included synthesizers at the time, and they didn't get sued.
The world changes. A really outdated agreement over a company name issue shouldn't hold this much weight. Maybe Apple Computer can use this lawsuit as a chance to overturn this agreement alltogether.
Not to say that I'm a fan (or not) of Apple - these types of things just annoy me no matter who the target is. (Unless it's SCO.)
Re:How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
If it was called "Glosprinklewisterfed Music" then I could buy that, but since the word "Apple" is an extremely common English word, well, then I can't.
There's many many companies out there with the same name elements, and many of them even do similar things. They don't sue each other because not many of them are billion dollar companies like Apple Computer. That's the only reason this lawsuit exists.
Compiling software involves a lot of CPU heavy computation and drive access. Although you might not compile things on a daily basis, it *is* a decent measure of performance.
If you can't realize that, well, I can't help you...
I still like the Beatles. I'm sure this has very little to do with the still-alive members of the Beatles, and more to do with the corporate losers at this Apple record label joke-of-a-company.
How utterly annoying for Apple Computer
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I mean seriously. When the agreement was first made, who knew which direction computers would take. Apple isn't being a record label, they are simply selling devices for playing music and distributing music from the record companies.
Give me a break. I still can't believe that an earlier suit was won against Apple Computer because they included speakers with their PC.
Something's gotta give here. Hopefully some judge will step in and say "This is retarded. Case dismissed."
Looks like I'm too late to get a new one of these things. I just looked at the empeg site and got all excited about it, but upon further investigation, it's been discontinued completely.
Apparently it was very expensive to manufacture and thus the cost for the consumer was high and not too many people actually bought them. A crying shame.
Could maybe get one on ebay at some point, who knows.
Do you think that most people will bother with this kind of crap? I don't.
Most offices (small and medium business makes up a great deal of the office space in the USA) don't have the infrastructure to support such a thing as server based DRM. God, most people don't even have a domain or central server, nevermind the fact that a lot of people still run Windows 95.
I've been to three businesses in the last two weeks with NT 3.51 servers, one of them runs Winframe to serve up dos applications. A scary amount of people run Netware 3.12 - only a few have the y2k patch up to 3.2.
The point is, I think it's marketing crap. Most people won't use the DRM stuff. Most people don't even use the password features on documents now, nevermind going to a client server model DRM.
Maybe we live in different parts of the world or something.
I never saw an EISA slot on anything but machines like old Compaq servers. The only cards I ever saw plugged into them were NICs and SCSI controllers.
I saw VLB slots on every PC out there, with Video boards, NICs, and everything else plugged into them. The most common VLB boards out there were Video Boards, but that rings true for any high speed bus.
Since VLB slots are a slot extension on ISA slots as well, you could slap them on a board with PCI/ISA slots too. I have a few 486 boards in the closet with VLB-ISA and PCI slots.
AGP is indeed superior to PCI for graphics, but it's only good for graphics. VLB and EISA were general purpose slots like PCI.
Overall I'm sure glad that PCI was standardized and used for this long. The time period of the VLB/ISA/PCI/EISA slots sucked. Too many different types of slots and boards to go with them. Let us hope that the next standard bus lasts just as long, or longer.
I would say that EISA was a lot LESS common then the Vesa Local Bus slots. I have a lot of PC Magazines of the time - they all advertised VLB slots, not EISA slots.
EISA was used in the server arena for awhile, but for the common PC it was Vesa Local Bus slots. It was a much easier and cheaper way to pump more data to a device like a Video board.
Re:Not the VESA bus, the EISA bus!
on
SCO Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Like someone else said, the "Vesa Local Bus" (known as VLB, Vesa slot, Local Bus slot) was used quite a bit in PC's before PCI became widespread. Every single late 486, 386, and even some early Pentiums had VLB slots.
Don't you remember the slot? You'd have say 7 ISA slots, and three of them would have extensions on them (they looked like brown PCI slots.) Mostly used for Video boards.
Slashdot Mirror
Hell yea it is. I'm not an old guy, so I was an infant in the 70's, but back then even the girls knew stuff about engines, cylindars, and horsepower. Everyone knew what the cool cars were and enjoyed them.
Now, half the people I meet (girls and guys) don't have a clue how to even add washer fluid.
I will never own one of those cars that can be parked straight into a paralell parking spot. Ever. I don't care what happens; I'd rather take the bus. At least those will always have big engines.
I can think of over half a billion reasons to sue Microsoft for this.
My god, what has this world come to. Now a Honda Civic is a normal sided car? Wtf?
People tell me all the time that my Cadillac STS is huge, but it's the same size as a Nissan Ultima, a lot smaller then an SUV, and gets a fairly respectable 27MPG highway out of it's 300HP engine.
The STS is a "normal" (Mid Sized) car. The Civic is a compact car. An SUV is a truck. A 1974 Lincoln Town Car is a "Full Sized" car.
How can you say that they are "notoriously unreliable" and then continue to say they do well if you take care of them? No shit man! Anything is unreliable if you beat the shit out of it - what makes something *really* unreliable is when they break a lot and you DON'T beat the shit out of them.
I somewhat agree with you here.
I do think that a company should be allowed to evolve, dispite it's name, but they did technically have this very stupidly agreed upon agreement..
The speaker thing someone else mentioned was actually a synthesizer, but even still, it's the same thing. Little FM synth chips were being installed by all the PC makers - and Apple is a PC maker. Should they not be allowed to be competitive because of their name?
The whole thing seems screwey. Maybe we don't know all the facts, which is quite possible, but if this is what it seems then it's just one of those legal menuvers that makes no sense yet wins in court.
No. To me, it's competition being determened by the speed and features of the graphics boards.
It doesn't matter what MS is going to use in Xbox 2, 3, whatever. It's that if I want to play the new games, I now have a choice of brands, and pricing is a lot better now too. (I do admit that the boards from either company are very expensive when they are new, but the competition factor brings those prices down quickly.)
You knew that people would be downloading MP3's for their iPods to SD cards, 25 years ago? Nice! Tell me when the end of the world is.
Well, you're a little off here.
IBM, Microsoft, and HP are the full names of those companies.
More accurately, it would be like calling your company "International Music Machines", "Music Packard" or "Hewlett Music", and "Micromusic". Those sound okay to me, and it's on the same lines of this lawsuit.
I don't see a problem starting a company called "Apple Automotive" and then put car stereos in them with MP3 playing capability, do you? That's what Apple Computer is doing with their PC's (basically.)
haha yea I guess so. It'll be awhile before it's considered "okay" for any sort of media to say that an nVidia board has sucky performance.
It keeps getting excused away by "archetecture changes" or "early driver issues" or "the full moon."
Go go ATI! You brought competition back to the consumer 3D board scene, thank you!
Enjoy your 15 minutes of fame*.
*idiocy
I used Network Solutions for a long time (Well, I didn't really have a choice back then) and it was always a pain to get changes made.
The e-mail forms were OKAY but the response times on them could be very long. Not to mention that if I register my e-mail under one of my domains, and there's a problem with that domain, I'm screwed.
You could set up a password-type authentication thing to use in the e-mail forms but it was always too complicated for me to deal with.
I ended up using a netaddress e-mail account to be the administrativew contact, but that ended up biting me in the ass too when they went to a paid system and I lost access to my e-mail address.
Now I use Register.com, and I pretty much just forget about it. I do my own DNS, and if I need to make a nameserver change I just go to the web page, click a few times, and I'm done.
I have also used BulkRegister.com at my last job because they were asses and purchased over 1600 domain names - pretty much anything with the name "jobs" in it. They were pretty easy to work with; the domains were all spread out with different registrars and BulkRegister helped me get them all transferred over as best they could. They have some nice tools to make bulk changes to blocks of domains.
This much is obvious.
Apple made PC's for quite awhile before including a synthesizer in their machines, and they were following the market trend of everyone else by including this.
It's silly. If they change their name, they can sell whatever they want, I guess. But if your company name contains similar elements to another company, you cannot? Even if your company evolved to this point?
The original "agreement" is not in dispute.. and it seems legally binding enough. It's really whacky though, and I hope a judge agrees. The world changes, technology changes, you can't blame Apple Computer for offering the same products that many other computer makers offer.
What's in a name?
I think it's a valid practice to evolve a business from one thing to another. If over the course of years you end up making a product similar to a competitor with similar name elements, I don't see a problem.
The agreement was set when Apple computer wasn't nearly as big as it is today. It was still a successful company back then, but there were factors as to why Apple Computer would have agreed to these terms. One of them being the size of the company, not wishing to risk too much over something that "would never be a problem", and the fact that nobody could have guessed that MP3's and such would be created and be so popular.
I see, the article said "speakers" (I'm one of the few that actually reads the articles) so it's a bit misleading. However, other PC's also included synthesizers at the time, and they didn't get sued.
The world changes. A really outdated agreement over a company name issue shouldn't hold this much weight. Maybe Apple Computer can use this lawsuit as a chance to overturn this agreement alltogether.
Not to say that I'm a fan (or not) of Apple - these types of things just annoy me no matter who the target is. (Unless it's SCO.)
If it was called "Glosprinklewisterfed Music" then I could buy that, but since the word "Apple" is an extremely common English word, well, then I can't.
There's many many companies out there with the same name elements, and many of them even do similar things. They don't sue each other because not many of them are billion dollar companies like Apple Computer. That's the only reason this lawsuit exists.
You're ignorant.
Compiling software involves a lot of CPU heavy computation and drive access. Although you might not compile things on a daily basis, it *is* a decent measure of performance.
If you can't realize that, well, I can't help you...
I still like the Beatles. I'm sure this has very little to do with the still-alive members of the Beatles, and more to do with the corporate losers at this Apple record label joke-of-a-company.
I mean seriously. When the agreement was first made, who knew which direction computers would take. Apple isn't being a record label, they are simply selling devices for playing music and distributing music from the record companies.
Give me a break. I still can't believe that an earlier suit was won against Apple Computer because they included speakers with their PC.
Something's gotta give here. Hopefully some judge will step in and say "This is retarded. Case dismissed."
Looks like I'm too late to get a new one of these things. I just looked at the empeg site and got all excited about it, but upon further investigation, it's been discontinued completely.
Apparently it was very expensive to manufacture and thus the cost for the consumer was high and not too many people actually bought them. A crying shame.
Could maybe get one on ebay at some point, who knows.
I think it was a joke. (I hope)
My XBOX runs Gentoo.
Do you think that most people will bother with this kind of crap? I don't.
Most offices (small and medium business makes up a great deal of the office space in the USA) don't have the infrastructure to support such a thing as server based DRM. God, most people don't even have a domain or central server, nevermind the fact that a lot of people still run Windows 95.
I've been to three businesses in the last two weeks with NT 3.51 servers, one of them runs Winframe to serve up dos applications. A scary amount of people run Netware 3.12 - only a few have the y2k patch up to 3.2.
The point is, I think it's marketing crap. Most people won't use the DRM stuff. Most people don't even use the password features on documents now, nevermind going to a client server model DRM.
Maybe we live in different parts of the world or something.
I never saw an EISA slot on anything but machines like old Compaq servers. The only cards I ever saw plugged into them were NICs and SCSI controllers.
I saw VLB slots on every PC out there, with Video boards, NICs, and everything else plugged into them. The most common VLB boards out there were Video Boards, but that rings true for any high speed bus.
Since VLB slots are a slot extension on ISA slots as well, you could slap them on a board with PCI/ISA slots too. I have a few 486 boards in the closet with VLB-ISA and PCI slots.
AGP is indeed superior to PCI for graphics, but it's only good for graphics. VLB and EISA were general purpose slots like PCI.
Overall I'm sure glad that PCI was standardized and used for this long. The time period of the VLB/ISA/PCI/EISA slots sucked. Too many different types of slots and boards to go with them. Let us hope that the next standard bus lasts just as long, or longer.
I would say that EISA was a lot LESS common then the Vesa Local Bus slots. I have a lot of PC Magazines of the time - they all advertised VLB slots, not EISA slots.
EISA was used in the server arena for awhile, but for the common PC it was Vesa Local Bus slots. It was a much easier and cheaper way to pump more data to a device like a Video board.
Like someone else said, the "Vesa Local Bus" (known as VLB, Vesa slot, Local Bus slot) was used quite a bit in PC's before PCI became widespread. Every single late 486, 386, and even some early Pentiums had VLB slots.
Don't you remember the slot? You'd have say 7 ISA slots, and three of them would have extensions on them (they looked like brown PCI slots.) Mostly used for Video boards.