Re:They're working on a new OS...Just like Google.
on
What Happened To Palm?
·
· Score: 1
Apple didn't make the iPhone SDK available before the release of iPhone 2.0? Really? Or are you just referring to the fact that the iPhone launched without any sort of platform for third party app development (in which case, fair enough).
I can't imagine any possible reason why you wouldn't be able to play it on your MacBook Pro (even if it's a 1st gen one with the crippled X1600 GPU, it should still be able to handle it just fine.... Blizzard isn't exactly Crytek when it comes to system requirements).
Wow, you're right..... I can't possibly imagine what software plugin it might want you to install. If only there were some sort of clue.... perhaps in the subject of the Slashdot story you're posting a comment in?
No idea - and yeah, it's not so much the collection or memorabilia itself that I thought was cool (although there is some cool stuff there), but more the technology behind the website itself, which basically has a single large image, and when you click on a particular area it zooms directly in to show you a particular item from the collection - it's just done very well and very smoothly.
I'm pretty sure I read that Microsoft is in the middle of migrating over to Silverlight for most of their sites, since it is one of their biggest platforms for promoting and getting people to install it. I think the same article said the Olympics site was also going to be a big showcase for Silverlight.
I have to admit, some of the Silverlight sites I've seen so far have actually been kind of cool - the one that sticks out to me is the Hard Rock Memorabilia site at http://memorabilia.hardrock.com/
You can tell all that just from playing "a few hours"? I think I'll take the word of those who have actually played through the entire game as far as comments about whether it's the same thing as the previous versions.
Well, if you do read any of the in-depth reviews that have come out so far, what has surprised people has been the fact that the storyline is deeper and more "artistic" than the previous GTA games.
As you said, most people expected this game to be the same thing but "shiny", which probably would have been enough any way for plenty of praise and GOTY honors. That they also seem to have made a more mature and complex story is why people are giving this even more praise.
I can say that I've mainly played the previous GTA games as sandboxes and not really gotten much into the story itself, but if the early word is anything to go by, it seems like this will be a game where the story aspect will be a lot more compelling.
The extremist didn't tell his followers to lay down their arms because the Iraqi forces of Maliki succeeded in anything. He told them to lay down their arms because he got what he wanted - the Iraqi government agreed to leave the Mahdi militia alone. Sadr got what he wanted, which was demonstrating his strength and Maliki's weakness.
Not sure exactly how Opus is too "left-wing"; it's libertarian if anything (and Breathed's quote about himself probably sums it up: "Liberal, shmiberal. That should be a new word. Shmiberal: one who is assumed liberal, just because he's a professional whiner in the newspaper. If you'll read the subtext for many of those old strips, you'll find the heart of an old-fashioned Libertarian. And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.").
I'd have a hard time figuring out what Opus strips have been too "left-wing"; do you have any examples? Or is anything that is critical of Bush/Cheney/etc. automatically left-wing (even though plenty of right-wing folks share those same sentiments)?
Yeah.... that is the funny thing though, so much of the guitar business does seem to be built around selling that idea - if you buy this Flying V here, you can be Jimi! If you buy this Gibson SG, you can be Angus! And of course this is a lot of what goes on in selling amps, effects pedals, etc.
Re:The best tools stay out of the way...
on
Goodbye Cruel Word
·
· Score: 1
Why do you suspect your feelings about Word 2008 for the Mac will remain the same? From the previews MS has been releasing of it, it seems to have a lot in common with Word 2007, and seems to be a major improvement over Word 2004 (which of course has gotten quite long in the tooth).
OS X is more than just a "serviceable X Window replacement".
And Apple does more than just pick components to cram into a laptop. The MacBook Pro, for example, was designed from the ground up by Apple, and does feature custom designed internals - yes, obviously some components are standard (the CPU, GPU, etc.) but the motherboard, etc. is original.
If the MacBook Pro was just a bunch of off the shelf components, there would be a lot more 1" thick 5.4 pound laptops out there.
I was going to post something similar but not surprisingly this point has already been made. Frankly, it seems like the whole idea that people know they are being monitored would have a very significant effect on their behavior, choices, etc.
Yeah, they closed all of the Northern Virginia area CompUSAs(the one in Fairfax, the one in Alexandria, the one in Vienna).
The closure of CompUSA actually worked out well for me; I used to primarily go to the Vienna CompUSA because it was closer to me, but its closure forced me to go to the Fairfax MicroCenter. It really is just leaps and bounds above CompUSA or Best Buy.
I think your chronology might be a bit skewed; Steve Jobs posted an open letter about DRM before any of the major labels started offering DRM-free music. In that letter, Jobs argued that it made sense for everyone to give up DRM, as it wasn't really accomplishing its goal, etc. EMI was the most receptive label to this, and agreed to offer DRM-free music. As I understand it, Apple's charging of a premium for individual DRM-free tracks seemed to be a bit of a concession to labels so they would make more profit per track. Full DRM-free (iTunes Plus) albums are the same price as the DRM versions. I think this is still something that depends on the labels, for the most part. For example, Apple now also offers iTunes Plus DRM-free tracks for a number of indie labels, and those are sold at 99 cents.
Actually, browsing through the iTunes Store, it seems like even the EMI tracks are now available at 99 cents (looking at some Coldplay and Pink Floyd albums), so it seems like they have also relented on the higher cost.
Either way, at this point, the main thing is that things are slowly moving towards the acceptance that DRM-free is the way to go. Microsoft and Apple are both pushing this now, and Amazon is as well with their DRM-free MP3 store.
The main issue at this point is that some labels are still choosing to not offer DRM-free music through the iTunes Store, because they do want to do what they can to make other music stores have success, and the easiest way for them to do this is to with-hold content or at least with-hold DRM-free content; ultimately this comes down to some other labels still wanting to be able to charge more per track, and they know they can't do this as long as the iTunes Store is the only dominant online music store. For the time being they are offering cheaper tracks on things like the Amazon MP3 store, but I haven't heard that Amazon has any specific desire to stick to these lower price points.
In the end, I think that particular tactic may backfire on the labels anyway; once customers continue to get used to these lower prices, that 99 cent cap that Apple has stuck to is going to be seen as the maximum price anyway. Even if the labels tactic of helping the Amazon MP3 store, etc. be successful works, they might not be able to later push for what they want (the ability to bundle singles, charge more for the most popular tracks, etc.).
I have provided sources too, and none from Wikipedia. Most every definition I found of censorship and censors indicates that both terms can most definitely be applied to other scenarios besides governments (or even governmentalized religion, as you put it).
The more I read what you're saying, the more I don't get it, I guess. You seem to be insisting that censorship as a term only refers specifically to a government forbidding the publication of a document. But it seems pretty obvious that censorship as a term and censors exist in plenty of other scenarios. Most dictionary and encyclopedia definitions acknowledge that censorship is not so narrowly defined as you are saying, so why are you insisting on this? Censorship and censors and censoring have clearly come to mean far more than just governments forbidding the publication of documents.
censorship
Act of changing or suppressing speech or writing that is considered subversive of the common good. In the past, most governments believed it their duty to regulate the morals of their people; only with the rise in the status of the individual and individual rights did censorship come to seem objectionable. Censorship may be preemptive (preventing the publication or broadcast of undesirable information) or punitive (punishing those who publish or broadcast offending material). In Europe, both the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches practiced censorship, as did the absolute monarchies of the 17th and 18th centuries.
So there we have an acknowledgement of religions practicing censorship, not governments.
From the Columbia Encyclopedia:
censorship, official prohibition or restriction of any type of expression believed to threaten the political, social, or moral order. It may be imposed by governmental authority, local or national, by a religious body, or occasionally by a powerful private group. It may be applied to the mails, speech, the press, the theater, dance, art, literature, photography, the cinema, radio, television, or computer networks.
Just to clarify; censors who examine and modify music/literature/etc. to remove anything objectionable/etc. are clearly engaging in an act defined as censorship. Just because they don't do it on behalf of a government doesn't mean the activity isn't censorship. Censorship and censoring both have clear meanings that refer to any number of acts that have nothing to do with governments specifically.
I'm sorry, but what you are talking about is government censorship specifically. But again, my point is, governments are not the only body capable of censorship. It seems like you have a very narrow description of censorship. There are plenty of other scenarios that can be seen as censorship as well; corporations, religious bodies, etc. are all capable of this. And why are you insulting me? Looking this up in any number of dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc. indicates that "censorship" has a broader meaning than what you are referring to.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple didn't make the iPhone SDK available before the release of iPhone 2.0? Really? Or are you just referring to the fact that the iPhone launched without any sort of platform for third party app development (in which case, fair enough).
I can't imagine any possible reason why you wouldn't be able to play it on your MacBook Pro (even if it's a 1st gen one with the crippled X1600 GPU, it should still be able to handle it just fine.... Blizzard isn't exactly Crytek when it comes to system requirements).
Wow, you're right..... I can't possibly imagine what software plugin it might want you to install. If only there were some sort of clue.... perhaps in the subject of the Slashdot story you're posting a comment in?
No idea - and yeah, it's not so much the collection or memorabilia itself that I thought was cool (although there is some cool stuff there), but more the technology behind the website itself, which basically has a single large image, and when you click on a particular area it zooms directly in to show you a particular item from the collection - it's just done very well and very smoothly.
I have to admit, some of the Silverlight sites I've seen so far have actually been kind of cool - the one that sticks out to me is the Hard Rock Memorabilia site at http://memorabilia.hardrock.com/
You can tell all that just from playing "a few hours"? I think I'll take the word of those who have actually played through the entire game as far as comments about whether it's the same thing as the previous versions.
Well, if you do read any of the in-depth reviews that have come out so far, what has surprised people has been the fact that the storyline is deeper and more "artistic" than the previous GTA games. As you said, most people expected this game to be the same thing but "shiny", which probably would have been enough any way for plenty of praise and GOTY honors. That they also seem to have made a more mature and complex story is why people are giving this even more praise. I can say that I've mainly played the previous GTA games as sandboxes and not really gotten much into the story itself, but if the early word is anything to go by, it seems like this will be a game where the story aspect will be a lot more compelling.
And of course: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L307650.htm So basically, Maliki's government completely failed in the most important objective to actually de-arm these forces.
The extremist didn't tell his followers to lay down their arms because the Iraqi forces of Maliki succeeded in anything. He told them to lay down their arms because he got what he wanted - the Iraqi government agreed to leave the Mahdi militia alone. Sadr got what he wanted, which was demonstrating his strength and Maliki's weakness.
I think Lorenzo Music's voice contributed a lot to that.
I'd have a hard time figuring out what Opus strips have been too "left-wing"; do you have any examples? Or is anything that is critical of Bush/Cheney/etc. automatically left-wing (even though plenty of right-wing folks share those same sentiments)?
Yeah.... that is the funny thing though, so much of the guitar business does seem to be built around selling that idea - if you buy this Flying V here, you can be Jimi! If you buy this Gibson SG, you can be Angus! And of course this is a lot of what goes on in selling amps, effects pedals, etc.
Why do you suspect your feelings about Word 2008 for the Mac will remain the same? From the previews MS has been releasing of it, it seems to have a lot in common with Word 2007, and seems to be a major improvement over Word 2004 (which of course has gotten quite long in the tooth).
Just out of curiosity, is the blind character "Whistler" from "Sneakers" based on him?
And Apple does more than just pick components to cram into a laptop. The MacBook Pro, for example, was designed from the ground up by Apple, and does feature custom designed internals - yes, obviously some components are standard (the CPU, GPU, etc.) but the motherboard, etc. is original.
If the MacBook Pro was just a bunch of off the shelf components, there would be a lot more 1" thick 5.4 pound laptops out there.
I was going to post something similar but not surprisingly this point has already been made. Frankly, it seems like the whole idea that people know they are being monitored would have a very significant effect on their behavior, choices, etc.
The closure of CompUSA actually worked out well for me; I used to primarily go to the Vienna CompUSA because it was closer to me, but its closure forced me to go to the Fairfax MicroCenter. It really is just leaps and bounds above CompUSA or Best Buy.
Actually, browsing through the iTunes Store, it seems like even the EMI tracks are now available at 99 cents (looking at some Coldplay and Pink Floyd albums), so it seems like they have also relented on the higher cost.
Either way, at this point, the main thing is that things are slowly moving towards the acceptance that DRM-free is the way to go. Microsoft and Apple are both pushing this now, and Amazon is as well with their DRM-free MP3 store.
The main issue at this point is that some labels are still choosing to not offer DRM-free music through the iTunes Store, because they do want to do what they can to make other music stores have success, and the easiest way for them to do this is to with-hold content or at least with-hold DRM-free content; ultimately this comes down to some other labels still wanting to be able to charge more per track, and they know they can't do this as long as the iTunes Store is the only dominant online music store. For the time being they are offering cheaper tracks on things like the Amazon MP3 store, but I haven't heard that Amazon has any specific desire to stick to these lower price points.
In the end, I think that particular tactic may backfire on the labels anyway; once customers continue to get used to these lower prices, that 99 cent cap that Apple has stuck to is going to be seen as the maximum price anyway. Even if the labels tactic of helping the Amazon MP3 store, etc. be successful works, they might not be able to later push for what they want (the ability to bundle singles, charge more for the most popular tracks, etc.).
I can dig it.
Thank you; this is what I was trying to get at, although you explained it much more eloquently than I could.
I have provided sources too, and none from Wikipedia. Most every definition I found of censorship and censors indicates that both terms can most definitely be applied to other scenarios besides governments (or even governmentalized religion, as you put it).
The more I read what you're saying, the more I don't get it, I guess. You seem to be insisting that censorship as a term only refers specifically to a government forbidding the publication of a document. But it seems pretty obvious that censorship as a term and censors exist in plenty of other scenarios. Most dictionary and encyclopedia definitions acknowledge that censorship is not so narrowly defined as you are saying, so why are you insisting on this? Censorship and censors and censoring have clearly come to mean far more than just governments forbidding the publication of documents.
So there we have an acknowledgement of religions practicing censorship, not governments.
From the Columbia Encyclopedia:
Just to clarify; censors who examine and modify music/literature/etc. to remove anything objectionable/etc. are clearly engaging in an act defined as censorship. Just because they don't do it on behalf of a government doesn't mean the activity isn't censorship. Censorship and censoring both have clear meanings that refer to any number of acts that have nothing to do with governments specifically.
I'm sorry, but what you are talking about is government censorship specifically. But again, my point is, governments are not the only body capable of censorship. It seems like you have a very narrow description of censorship. There are plenty of other scenarios that can be seen as censorship as well; corporations, religious bodies, etc. are all capable of this. And why are you insulting me? Looking this up in any number of dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc. indicates that "censorship" has a broader meaning than what you are referring to.