For instance, he says Harmony is perfectly legal, but when asked whether it would be alright for Apple to create software that deals with Real's DRM without a license, he says that they'd be happy to discuss licensing with Apple.
Yep, that's exactly where he lost me. He completely avoided the best question of the bunch. I can see why he did it, but it's still disappointing.
I wouldn't go that far. I do believe that it raises your credibility. I tend not to take posts seriously that have blatent gramatical errors and intentional mispellings (such as windoze and the like.)
LOL! That's hilarious.
For anyone who didn't get it, "blatent," "gramatical," and "mispellings" are all intentional misspellings.
Kefka is certifiably crazy, but he's hilarious! Yes, we never really learned the reason he was so evil, but I think they did a good job of showing just how evil he really was -- he was so thoroughly corrupt that no back story could come close to justifying it. Still, I love him so much because he's funny. Not only did he hate everyone, but he took great pleasure in making fun of them as well. Maybe I'm warped, but Kefka had me laughing out loud numerous times. I'm sure some people might think he's corny, but I love him.
I'm in the same boat. Back in the NES days, I was a Dragon Warrior kind of guy, so my first FF was VII. I went back and played the others. FF6 is by far the best game in the series. For one thing, I think the ensemble cast worked better than having one less-than-interesting main character (see Cloud, Squall, Zidane).
Well, I'd say Sephiroth is the best FF7 character, but I don't have much to say about the others. Cloud, Aeris, Barrett... they're all rather bland. I cared about Aeris after she died, but not before. FF6 and FF4 have better characters than FF7 IMO. As far as coolness goes, Locke and Shadow are the coolest FF characters ever.
Yeah, I'm going to have to agree. One of the (many) reasons FF6 is the best of the series is the strength of its characters. Celes, Locke, Terra, Sabin, Shadow, and Kefka -- just to name a few...
I don't think it was quite as convoluted as everyone says. Most of the twists and turns were rather cool. Most importantly, it's an excellent game regardless.
If I buy music from iTMS if have to use iTunes or an iPod to listen. Not that the WMA is much better, but there seems to be more options (car stereos, most non-apple mp3 players do support the WMA format).
Are you sure car stereos play DRM WMA files? Anyway, while there are more options for DRM WMA, there aren't any better options.
If it were truly one complete work of art, they shouldn't divide it into tracks. These artists underestimate the curiosity of people who are willing to pay $0.99 to sample music and buy more after hearing something they like.
BTW, Radiohead albums were available briefly when the iTMS debuted. I gained a new appreciation for the group after buying one of their songs (and seeing Selway and O'Brien play with Neil Finn at the 7 Worlds Collide show).
One of the big reasons is because I like my shortcut collection - "favorites" - to be INDEPENDENT OF THE BROWSER. What if - *gasp* - I might actually want to have several browsers and be able to actively switch between them, sharing and adding to the SAME on-disk collection of shortcuts rather than separate and distinct proprietary ones? Netscape certainly had no clue how to do it
Actually, Netscape's bookmarks were/are kept in a single HTML file, which is about as nonproprietary as it gets. I used to point all browsers to that one file back when I used Windows.
I think IE 6 Service Pack 2 has the best popup blocking by far...
There were a lot of pop unders and others that were starting to get by the google toolbar and even on my Linux box with Mozilla. I have not seen one pop up since upgrading my XP boxes to SP2...
... probably because it's basically brand new.
FWIW, I have yet to see an unsolicited popup with Safari (and the same goes with Firefox and Camino although I use them less frequently).
Nevermind. I just re-read your original reply to the link you quoted. You knew full well he was talking about AllOfMP3 instead of Apple. I give up again.
Now we're getting somewhere! You misunderstood him. He was talking about AllOfMP3, not Apple. You can tell by the context of the rest of the post. You claimed they (AllOfMP3) make a profit in the parent and he was asking how you "knew" that (since they haven't reported anything like Apple).
No, you're changing the point. Yes, Apple is making a profit on the iTMS -- no one disputed that. You insist on claiming Apple lied about making "no profit on iTMS" or expecting not to make a profit when it's quite possible they crossed into the black at some point well after the launch and they beat their expectations because of higher-than-predicted revenue and/or lower-than-predicted expenses. You're assuming Apple has been deliberately lying about the profitability of the iTMS (something they were eventually going to report, BTW) without any proof. At any rate, that's about all I have to say, so feel free to have the last word if you want it.
You're assuming Napster's R&D costs are the same as (or even comparable to) Apple's; you have no proof whatsoever. Remember, Apple was the trailblazer in this market -- and they traditionally have higher R&D costs. I suspect they are spending a lot more money here.
You're assuming Napster's sales and marketing costs are similar to Apple's. Again, you have no proof. This is called an assumption.
- 7. See above.
Roxio != Apple
I don't see why Apple's expenses would be that much more than Napster.
Unlike almost everything else you've written, this is an actual fact -- you don't see how this could be possible. However, that doesn't mean it isn't. By your reasoning, Napster should be in the black as well, but, AFAIK, they aren't. Please correct me if I'm wrong... and try to do it with facts instead of more assumptions.
Which is why I went so far as to say that even if AllofMP3 makes ZERO profit, and Apple's costs are THREE TIMES that of AllofMP3, Apple's still making $16.1 million. Even if Apple's expenses are 20c per track (which is ridiculously high), they're still making $10 million.
But the problem here is your "three times" number is completely arbitrary. Take another look at caddisfly's list of reasons why Apple's costs are probably different (higher) than AllofMP3's:
I don't see any comparable R&D done at "allofMP3"; they are just serving music, they didn't develop the itunes program and interface, etc
I haven't seen any marketing efforts done by "allofMP3" - print, radio, TV ads; Apple's cost multiple millions;
No evidence that "allofMP3" had to pay any lawyers to negogiate fees with license holders like Apple did
I would think the respective salary of employees is a bit different; Guess now, which one do you think is higher?...and how about the benefits piece? US v Russia
Taxes in US vs Russia
Cost of facilities and data centers are probably different
Cost of respective customer support infrastructure. does "allofMP3" have one?
You probably have no idea how much any of that costs, so it's rather naive to say that expenses of $0.20/track for Apple is "ridiculously high." Your entire argument is based on assumptions and leaps of logic.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, I thought it was funny.
Kefka is certifiably crazy, but he's hilarious! Yes, we never really learned the reason he was so evil, but I think they did a good job of showing just how evil he really was -- he was so thoroughly corrupt that no back story could come close to justifying it. Still, I love him so much because he's funny. Not only did he hate everyone, but he took great pleasure in making fun of them as well. Maybe I'm warped, but Kefka had me laughing out loud numerous times. I'm sure some people might think he's corny, but I love him.
I agree with you. They aren't all eye candy after FF6. However, none of them are as good as FF6.
I'm in the same boat. Back in the NES days, I was a Dragon Warrior kind of guy, so my first FF was VII. I went back and played the others. FF6 is by far the best game in the series. For one thing, I think the ensemble cast worked better than having one less-than-interesting main character (see Cloud, Squall, Zidane).
There were more and better characters in FF6. Kefka alone is better than anyone in FF7... and that's no joke.
Well, I'd say Sephiroth is the best FF7 character, but I don't have much to say about the others. Cloud, Aeris, Barrett... they're all rather bland. I cared about Aeris after she died, but not before. FF6 and FF4 have better characters than FF7 IMO. As far as coolness goes, Locke and Shadow are the coolest FF characters ever.
Yeah, I'm going to have to agree. One of the (many) reasons FF6 is the best of the series is the strength of its characters. Celes, Locke, Terra, Sabin, Shadow, and Kefka -- just to name a few...
I don't think it was quite as convoluted as everyone says. Most of the twists and turns were rather cool. Most importantly, it's an excellent game regardless.
Whether they license it or not, it's still proprietary. They own it.
Well said.
eMusic
BTW, Radiohead albums were available briefly when the iTMS debuted. I gained a new appreciation for the group after buying one of their songs (and seeing Selway and O'Brien play with Neil Finn at the 7 Worlds Collide show).
FWIW, I have yet to see an unsolicited popup with Safari (and the same goes with Firefox and Camino although I use them less frequently).
Nevermind. I just re-read your original reply to the link you quoted. You knew full well he was talking about AllOfMP3 instead of Apple. I give up again.
Now we're getting somewhere! You misunderstood him. He was talking about AllOfMP3, not Apple. You can tell by the context of the rest of the post. You claimed they (AllOfMP3) make a profit in the parent and he was asking how you "knew" that (since they haven't reported anything like Apple).
No, you're changing the point. Yes, Apple is making a profit on the iTMS -- no one disputed that. You insist on claiming Apple lied about making "no profit on iTMS" or expecting not to make a profit when it's quite possible they crossed into the black at some point well after the launch and they beat their expectations because of higher-than-predicted revenue and/or lower-than-predicted expenses. You're assuming Apple has been deliberately lying about the profitability of the iTMS (something they were eventually going to report, BTW) without any proof. At any rate, that's about all I have to say, so feel free to have the last word if you want it.
- You're assuming Napster's R&D costs are the same as (or even comparable to) Apple's; you have no proof whatsoever. Remember, Apple was the trailblazer in this market -- and they traditionally have higher R&D costs. I suspect they are spending a lot more money here.
- You're assuming Napster's sales and marketing costs are similar to Apple's. Again, you have no proof. This is called an assumption.
- - 7. See above.
Roxio != Apple Unlike almost everything else you've written, this is an actual fact -- you don't see how this could be possible. However, that doesn't mean it isn't. By your reasoning, Napster should be in the black as well, but, AFAIK, they aren't. Please correct me if I'm wrong... and try to do it with facts instead of more assumptions.- I don't see any comparable R&D done at "allofMP3"; they are just serving music, they didn't develop the itunes program and interface, etc
- I haven't seen any marketing efforts done by "allofMP3" - print, radio, TV ads; Apple's cost multiple millions;
- No evidence that "allofMP3" had to pay any lawyers to negogiate fees with license holders like Apple did
- I would think the respective salary of employees is a bit different; Guess now, which one do you think is higher?
...and how about the benefits piece? US v Russia
- Taxes in US vs Russia
- Cost of facilities and data centers are probably different
- Cost of respective customer support infrastructure. does "allofMP3" have one?
You probably have no idea how much any of that costs, so it's rather naive to say that expenses of $0.20/track for Apple is "ridiculously high." Your entire argument is based on assumptions and leaps of logic.