No one is forcing you to update. If you see an upgrade is available for Greasemonkey on your Firefox updates list, it's your responsibility to go see what was changed before installing.
Research? The problem with Amazon's patents (and 95% of other software patents nowadays) is that they don't research to come up with these things, they take basic foundations of e-commerce and traditional retailing that have been in use for years, if not decades, and then patent them.
Ford builds cars that can break the speed limit. Therefore, they are liable for all resulting acts from speeding (tickets, accidents) by third parties.
But the hard drive is used for a lot more than just saving and loading. Look at Final Fantasy XI.
Now, a different question is, among all those slots, I saw no mention of PS/PS2 memory cards. What good is backwards compatibility if we can't use old saved games?
That would work. I just don't think they can go another generation without some sort of onboard storage for developers to use. Some sort of flash that at least let you use it, but might not be big enough to have _everything_ on it, would still be usable-- users who were bothered by it could upgrade to the hard drive, but the functionality would exist for everyone.
If you want to get petty about it, a "file" in a "folder" is nothing more than a shortcut to an address on your hard disk. You organize them into folders to make it easier to keep track of what is where.
Bookmarks are the same way. A shortcut to an address on the web, which you can organize into folders to keep track of what is where.
If Spotlight = Google, saying that Spotlight is the death of folders is basically the same as saying Google is the end of bookmarks. And that's just not the case. The folder structure isn't going away, Spotlight just makes it more usable than ever before.
I've been using a Tungsten T for over two years and the only time I ever calibrated the digitizer was when I first turned it on. Still works perfectly.
It really doesn't look intimidating, it just looks stupid.
And it seems like the real origin of it was that some movie director realized that if the actors held the guns sideways he could get a better shot of their faces and the guns. Then people saw it and started copying it.
If someone is ever going to shoot at me, I hope they use the "gansta grip," because their odds of hitting me are pretty low.
Those days are over? Better tell everyone who buys a CD and rips it to MP3 themselves!
Additionally, the "iPod format" doesn't include only DRMed AAC, it also includes open AAC and MP3, formats that any artists could sell their music in if they chose to.
They're paying for the gas, they can drive whatever they want. You don't like the gas prices, you drive something fuel efficient. Some people have no problem paying for a vehicle they prefer, so it's their choice.
If you choose to decline an EULA then you can simply operate withing copyright law. You can decline the EULA and install and run the software.
Any Apple product that has a EULA cancels installation if you decline the EULA. Once you press agree, you're bound by it. By accepting the iTunes EULA, you agree not to use any software other than iTunes to access the music store. If you don't agree to the EULA, then you can't even create an account in the store, so the third-party software is useless.
What the license says is irrelevant. The owners of the software can choose to license ithow they want, just as you can choose the GPL. If they chose a certain license, and you feel it's ok to ignore it, how is it wrong for them to do the same with GPL-licensed software?
I remember accepting it, although I'm not sure if it was when I first ran iTunes or when I opened my music store account-- I did them both in succession so I can't recall, but I do know I saw it and had to Agree to it. This isn't an implicit contract and no iTunes user can really use the argument that they were unaware of its existence.
Again, I'm not talking about the DRM here. This is very simple: accessing the iTunes Music Store with any software other than iTunes violates the license agreement. Even if this software did nothing to skirt the DRM, and downloaded a DRMed file identical to what you'd get using iTunes, it is still violating the license agreement.
There's a pervasive attitude on/. that software license agreements are meaningless, yet the community is up in arms whenever there is so much as a rumor of a GPL violation. The GPL is a software license too, and if it's ok to ignore everyone else's, it's ok to ignore the GPL as well.
There's a big difference between being forced into a license and choosing to accept a license. You have to download iTunes, install iTunes (unless you're on OS X where it's included), run iTunes, choose to open an account at the music store, and then agree to the license.
No, he hasn't legitimately gotten around it, because the iTunes Music Store license specifically states that you can't use any software other than iTunes to access the store. Regardless of what he's done to avoid the DRM, he violated that agreement.
Slashdot Mirror
And even if there was, you are NEVER forced to install the update. If you want to keep using the old one, go ahead.
No one is forcing you to update. If you see an upgrade is available for Greasemonkey on your Firefox updates list, it's your responsibility to go see what was changed before installing.
What's scary is that people who can't even figure out the difference are voting.
A lot of corporate phone systems run on OS/2, but other than that I don't know of anyplace it's in use still.
What happened to prior art?
Ford builds cars that can break the speed limit. Therefore, they are liable for all resulting acts from speeding (tickets, accidents) by third parties.
Oh wait, it doesn't. A Pfizer facility is not for the public good, it's for the good of the Pfizer shareholders. The ruling is an abomination.
I'd be pretty happy with that. I'd also be happy if PS1 and PS2 saves could be copied to the hard drive and used from there.
Now, a different question is, among all those slots, I saw no mention of PS/PS2 memory cards. What good is backwards compatibility if we can't use old saved games?
That would work. I just don't think they can go another generation without some sort of onboard storage for developers to use. Some sort of flash that at least let you use it, but might not be big enough to have _everything_ on it, would still be usable-- users who were bothered by it could upgrade to the hard drive, but the functionality would exist for everyone.
Terrible move by Sony. Developers ignored the PS2 hard drive because the installed base was so low, and I'm sure PS3 will be the same way.
The point is, Spotlight isn't the be-all and end-all of file organization, just like Google isn't the be-all and end-all of web navigation.
Bookmarks are the same way. A shortcut to an address on the web, which you can organize into folders to keep track of what is where.
If Spotlight = Google, saying that Spotlight is the death of folders is basically the same as saying Google is the end of bookmarks. And that's just not the case. The folder structure isn't going away, Spotlight just makes it more usable than ever before.
I've been using a Tungsten T for over two years and the only time I ever calibrated the digitizer was when I first turned it on. Still works perfectly.
And it seems like the real origin of it was that some movie director realized that if the actors held the guns sideways he could get a better shot of their faces and the guns. Then people saw it and started copying it.
If someone is ever going to shoot at me, I hope they use the "gansta grip," because their odds of hitting me are pretty low.
Additionally, the "iPod format" doesn't include only DRMed AAC, it also includes open AAC and MP3, formats that any artists could sell their music in if they chose to.
If they would've let the stores sell MP3s from the start, we wouldn't be in this situation.
They're paying for the gas, they can drive whatever they want. You don't like the gas prices, you drive something fuel efficient. Some people have no problem paying for a vehicle they prefer, so it's their choice.
Any Apple product that has a EULA cancels installation if you decline the EULA. Once you press agree, you're bound by it. By accepting the iTunes EULA, you agree not to use any software other than iTunes to access the music store. If you don't agree to the EULA, then you can't even create an account in the store, so the third-party software is useless.
What the license says is irrelevant. The owners of the software can choose to license ithow they want, just as you can choose the GPL. If they chose a certain license, and you feel it's ok to ignore it, how is it wrong for them to do the same with GPL-licensed software?
I remember accepting it, although I'm not sure if it was when I first ran iTunes or when I opened my music store account-- I did them both in succession so I can't recall, but I do know I saw it and had to Agree to it. This isn't an implicit contract and no iTunes user can really use the argument that they were unaware of its existence.
There's a pervasive attitude on /. that software license agreements are meaningless, yet the community is up in arms whenever there is so much as a rumor of a GPL violation. The GPL is a software license too, and if it's ok to ignore everyone else's, it's ok to ignore the GPL as well.
There's a big difference between being forced into a license and choosing to accept a license. You have to download iTunes, install iTunes (unless you're on OS X where it's included), run iTunes, choose to open an account at the music store, and then agree to the license.
No, he hasn't legitimately gotten around it, because the iTunes Music Store license specifically states that you can't use any software other than iTunes to access the store. Regardless of what he's done to avoid the DRM, he violated that agreement.