Nice generalization,
How many of those "sold" phones were free with the plan? I guarantee you that they weren't ALL high-end phones like a mp3-phone would be.
Plus many of the phone buyers were buying a cell to buy a cell, not to but a combo device, which is why someone would buy a iPod over a cell phone with a iPod-like feature.
Streaming to your phone is currently available.
Regardless of price the stream and the minutes, it still wouldn't make a phone an iPod killer.
It's streaming. So what are you going do in bad signal areas? The media isn't on the device at the time.
Will CD sales be killed by the "streaming" radio on the air? nope.
And yeah, you can stream music to your phone from your PC, provided you have a Bluetooth enabled phone & a Bluetooth enabled pc with songs, and have it all configured correctly.
But then what do you have? Your phone is now a glorified Bluetooth headset for your PC. If that's the use you're looking for, why care about an iPod killer, you're still tethered to your PC/Laptop (by about 30feet).
My point was that it won't kill iPod's market share because "all-in-one" products are never as good as the specialized single use products. This is because the single use products have to make sure it works and works WELL, while the all-in-oners have to make sure it ALL just works, even if it's just mediocre. So any cell phone that trys to do what apple does wouldn't be able to do it as well. They can't spend ALL their development time and money on the "killing" feature. Apple's iPod developers can. If the cell phone developers did, then they would neglect what the product is. A phone, and that in itself would make the phone-ipod a failure.
Think of it this way. Will WindowsXP MediaCenter Edition kill the sales of WindowsXP and/or Tivo because it can do what both products can do?
Nope. Because while it does to both, it doesn't do either well.
Plus, iPod has a niche market AND a very strong "cult" following.
Cliché for ya,
Jacks of all trades ace of none.
They also have cell phones that stream video, so are you going to throw out your tv and buy a cell phone?
If it catches on at all, it'll only have a minimal market-share.
Nokia already has it's N91 phone that is slated to be released in the 4th quarter of 2005. http://digital-lifestyles.info/display_page.asp?se ction=platforms&id=2154
It's spec'd to have a 4GB internal hard drive and is marketed to take some market share from the iPod mini. But nokia's phone is going to be quite pricy.
The biggest problem with the idea is (as mentioned by other people as well) is battery life.
If it's gonna be an iPod killer, it's GOT to have massive memory.
To have massive memory (multiple GB without massive price of flash-based mem) they'll have to use a hard drive (which means moving parts). Hard drives with moving parts require more power which means a larger battery.
Larger battery + Hard drive=Larger phone.
So phones of the type will either have horrible battery life, or be awkwardly bulky.
So unless 30-60GB iPods shrink down to HALF the size of a current cell-phone, and a cell phones do the same, then MAYBE they could combine the two (and hope they both can run for 8+ hours off one power source)
Otherwise it'll never happen and catch on.
plus, how many times have you dropped your cell phone?
Hard-disks + Falling impacts = BAD.
And on top of that Gates thinks it will run Windows....un huh.
I think Gates's brain just BSOD'd.
How is any court going to be able to enforce such a law? With a shared folder, how would a prosecutor prove beyond a reasonable doubt that THIS person shared the file? How can they prove it wasn't someone else walking by the PC, or a malicious new virus that downloads remote DMCA illegal files and then places them in the user's folders to incriminate them? (Hence this post's title.)
There's not much forensic evidence in an operating system when it comes to proving beyond any reasonable doubt to convict someone in such cases. Anyone could operate a mouse & keyboard if the user weren't looking. What a BS law.
Lets hope iTunes never sets it's folder as shared on install. AHHH!
Stop and read what you just said.
You honestly don't believe that...do you?
"Suspect"
When you suspect there to be a problem with somthing... you think there MIGHT be a problem.
You don't know FOR SURE.
Just because someone is a suspect dosen't in any way make that person absolutely guilty.
To think so would put everyone back into the mindset similar to that of Salem during the witchhunts.
If one person kills another person, there may be dozzens of suspects in the initial investigation. Now according to your logic they are ALL guilty.
So if some crazy serial-killer kills a lady and runs, then I guess the husband of that lady would HAVE to go to prison for life, or be put on death-row, huh? Because in the case of murder, the spouse is always the first suspect.
Seriously. Come on now.
Suspects are only under the suspicion of guilt. No more, no less.
There's a worthless law.
Why won't this work?... MANY REASONS.
1. Near 100% of p2p programs allow a user to download a piece of a progeam from multiple users.
So none is "uploading" a file. Just small parts.
Your honnor.. I didn't "upload" the file just the section of it that states "one,zero,zero,zero,zero,one,zero,one,zero,one,one,one,zero,one,zero,one" which in itself, is not a file. If I am to be convicted...so must be everyone who sees a car be convicted of auto theft.
B. Users of a p2p network do not "upload" files (with the exception of the PUSH p2p networks...I know of only one.)
And
III. Every whiny bitchy beaurocrat who complains about p2p, and tries to pass laws making any part of it illegal all seem to overlook a vital element in their plans. Jurisdiction.
Lets have everyone chip-in and we can all buy a share in a new company. One that produces Free floating, or anchored file-servers. They'll all free float in the international waters of the worlds oceans, or in orbit high above the Earth, and high above the money-grubby hands of Technology ignorant ageing polititions.
If file sharing becomes illegal...ut oh!
Bye-bye Bill Gates. You built-in to Windows the ability to share files and folders on a network.
FOOM! There goes windows.
It's back to Windows 3.X for us!
Speaking of File sharing....isn't a webpage basicly a rudimentary shared file of text files, Images, and multimedia content?
FOOM! There goes the internet.
My downloading is for historical reference.
I'm providing future mankind a vital service by recording the pop-culture traded on the effemeral internet for posterity.
And who knows, maybe in 1000 years the coimbination of songs traded today will be found to be the key to mankind's survival (i.e. Mars Attacks) and backup copies will be vital tools protecting human life.
PAY FOR OUR SONGS OR DIE! *Menioacial RIAA laughter*
The solution then?
Organize your logfiles into whitespace and type. Then use the whitespace or type to draw out stick figures or whatever.
ASCII art can be fun!
I don't recall ever saying I thing Pocket PC is bad.
If I did think it was, I'd install linux.
Nope , never had any problems with.net.
And who uses "word processors" anymore?
Wow, that's a flash back. *imagining that clunky replacement for the typewriter, before computers were commonplace*
You woudln't happen to work for Microsoft's Advertising department, would you?
If not...try just listing the link instead of the entire freak'in page content.
I myself like that Microsoft renamed this version.
With the name "Pocket PC" many people have abbreviated that even further to just PPC. When searching for software ventors, it's jsut a bit frustrating to be looking for Pocket PC software and keep getting Power PC related links.
Both use PPC as their Acronym.
Now all I have to worry about is a bout of retardism making me type MSM, to get SMS...:-p
But anything MS does to improve their products is should be viewed as a welcome change.
Someone should have a little chat with Mr. Orin.
Does he believe that ALL computers should be nuked if they contain illegal copyrighted material?
If so, then what about those computers in the government which may contain terabytes of important information, and maybe one single illegal file? Does that one single file give the copyright owner the right to destroy all that information?
What would stop the next senator (extremist or just looking for the political spotlight) from taking that next step?
Here's a scenario, Someone at, say the FBI has access to their mainframe, and while doing their job they like to listen to music, so they have Mp3s on their PC. Well one day they are told they are getting a new PC, and happily transfer all their personal data onto the mainframe so it can be copied to their new PC later.
Say they like to listen to Metalica, and one of the files they had was an old file originally illegally traded through Napster or Kazaa or such.
Does Metalica now have the right to destroy the FBI mainframe, and doing so destroy any data contained therein about criminals and terrorists?
Doing so would directly jeopardize the safety of millions upon millions of people.
What about software that was created using illegally gained SDKs? Should that software be destroyed as well?
Sorry Jimmy, I know your in middle of your kidney dialysis, but the firmware for this machine was written using an illegal download of a copyrighted compiler. Oh and by the way, your dad's pacemaker? the firmware for that was written using the Notepad of an illegally pirated copy of Microsoft Windows 3.1. It's going to have to be nuked.
You can say good bye to your dad now. Yep bye bye....bye bye!
You mom? oh she's on a flight here...
oh shit...the navigational software on that plane...
I think Orin should be enlightened to the ramifications of opening this Pandora's box.
What would then stop a terrorist from alleging that the vital computers he fried contained his copyrighted material?
The banning is retarded.
Its always done under the assumption that people can't think for themselves, and need someone else telling them what's right and wrong for them, and what they should and should not believe/do/watch/participate in.
YOU MUST BE THIS WAY!...NO! THAT'S WRONG!
I SMITHE THEE!
What next?
Uh oh! Pooh's searching for another great pot of honey! Uh oh! he got stuck in another tree!
That must be a metaphor for budist religious efforts towards attaining a state of nirvana! And the tree must represent THE MAN putting him down and keeping him from his goals!
Give me a break.
Some people have to stop reading too much into things.
Harry Potter is not totally unholy attempt to push children towards the ucult.
Elmo's vibrations when tickled are not orgasmic in any nature.
....Although the Teletubbies...I think we can all agree the Teletubbies ARE gay.
I wish people would read the posts before posting themselves.
Not only would it stop these endless reposts of basicly the same comments.. (i.e. G's never been 54 it's 22, B was never 11 it was 5 etc, etc, etc, blah, balh, blah)
Exactly how may people read the posts before posting their own replys?
Maybe if this was done we could have some more entertaining and informative debates.
Grrrr
Hopefully this will be (Score: 5 INFORMATIVE)
but most likely....... (Score: -1: Offtopic)
Becuase Micro(?)Soft knows that as long as there are people running linux out there, there will be a market share they don't have their grimey fingers in.
This way they can get a chunk of change off the sale of the boxes. Or at least get the advertisement from their mediaplayer being on the boxes. I mean even if the person looks at the icon, that's one more place where microsoft has it's name/trademark.
Remember when you NEVER thought you'd see Microsoft Software on a Mac?
The plague is spreading.
OK... Since no one is actully giving any suggestions. I will.
Compaq Ipaq.
It's probably the most popular PocketPC. With a TON of expansion options, and you can reflash the memory to have linux on it instead of PPC 200x.
I do believe it'll support those languages as well although you'll probably have to download some shiznazz to get it to work.
You can program Java (albeit a very cutdown version of java) on it, as well as C++ and VB(ick)
Also Comeon! integrated WiFi, bluetooth AND a biometric finger reader? SHWEET!
I'm saying that this idea wouldn't be bad for the market of PC users who don't need anything more than "average" speakers. Such as office use. Obviously anyone who appreciates high quality sound wouldn't want to comprimise the quality over the convience.
My parents dislike for the nusance of many tangeling cords, was just an example of how this could be a convience.
(The knots I've seen in my parent's computer cords could make the most hardened boyscout cry.:-p)
Obviously anyone who loves their music won't want this, just like how gamers don't like integrated videocards.
But for those people who don't really care about the best sound, and hate the wires of external speakers, it would be great. (obviously not your average slashdotter)
(Think of the most PC-retarded person you know...)
But what percentage of the PC market buys things just because they are cool?
I know this would be great for my parents who know nothing about their computer except that the cords are a mess. (And don't know a sub-woofer from a sump-pump)
If they can place this membrane on the screen, they should open up to placing this membrane on other things.... ...Toilet seats, window glass (windshield?), coffee cups, sneakers?.
Then again...maybe not.
I fear the day my cubicle talks to me.
I wonder how they plan on resolving the conflict that would arise with the need of the new Tablet-PC's or Pocket-PC/Palm devices to have a touch sensetive screen?
(That is if they even would decide to place the membrane there)
"I'd love to hear a wav file or something of how it sounds"
Reminds me of a request I got from a friend.
*hands me a VHS tape*
"Can ya record me a few episodes of Blahblahblah on HD-TV? I wanna see the diffrence."....nope...not gonna work.
Well said.
*Applause*
Finally an intelectual who knows the facts,
can discren the truth from the rumors, and is intelligent enough to convey himself with tact.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice generalization, How many of those "sold" phones were free with the plan? I guarantee you that they weren't ALL high-end phones like a mp3-phone would be. Plus many of the phone buyers were buying a cell to buy a cell, not to but a combo device, which is why someone would buy a iPod over a cell phone with a iPod-like feature.
Streaming to your phone is currently available.
Regardless of price the stream and the minutes, it still wouldn't make a phone an iPod killer. It's streaming. So what are you going do in bad signal areas? The media isn't on the device at the time. Will CD sales be killed by the "streaming" radio on the air? nope. And yeah, you can stream music to your phone from your PC, provided you have a Bluetooth enabled phone & a Bluetooth enabled pc with songs, and have it all configured correctly. But then what do you have? Your phone is now a glorified Bluetooth headset for your PC. If that's the use you're looking for, why care about an iPod killer, you're still tethered to your PC/Laptop (by about 30feet).
My point was that it won't kill iPod's market share because "all-in-one" products are never as good as the specialized single use products. This is because the single use products have to make sure it works and works WELL, while the all-in-oners have to make sure it ALL just works, even if it's just mediocre. So any cell phone that trys to do what apple does wouldn't be able to do it as well. They can't spend ALL their development time and money on the "killing" feature. Apple's iPod developers can. If the cell phone developers did, then they would neglect what the product is. A phone, and that in itself would make the phone-ipod a failure.
Think of it this way. Will WindowsXP MediaCenter Edition kill the sales of WindowsXP and/or Tivo because it can do what both products can do? Nope. Because while it does to both, it doesn't do either well.
Plus, iPod has a niche market AND a very strong "cult" following.
Cliché for ya,
Jacks of all trades ace of none.
They also have cell phones that stream video, so are you going to throw out your tv and buy a cell phone?
If it catches on at all, it'll only have a minimal market-share.
e ction=platforms&id=2154
It's spec'd to have a 4GB internal hard drive and is marketed to take some market share from the iPod mini. But nokia's phone is going to be quite pricy.
...un huh.
Nokia already has it's N91 phone that is slated to be released in the 4th quarter of 2005.
http://digital-lifestyles.info/display_page.asp?s
The biggest problem with the idea is (as mentioned by other people as well) is battery life.
If it's gonna be an iPod killer, it's GOT to have massive memory.
To have massive memory (multiple GB without massive price of flash-based mem) they'll have to use a hard drive (which means moving parts). Hard drives with moving parts require more power which means a larger battery.
Larger battery + Hard drive=Larger phone.
So phones of the type will either have horrible battery life, or be awkwardly bulky.
So unless 30-60GB iPods shrink down to HALF the size of a current cell-phone, and a cell phones do the same, then MAYBE they could combine the two (and hope they both can run for 8+ hours off one power source)
Otherwise it'll never happen and catch on.
plus, how many times have you dropped your cell phone?
Hard-disks + Falling impacts = BAD.
And on top of that Gates thinks it will run Windows.
I think Gates's brain just BSOD'd.
How is any court going to be able to enforce such a law?
With a shared folder, how would a prosecutor prove beyond a reasonable doubt that THIS person shared the file?
How can they prove it wasn't someone else walking by the PC, or a malicious new virus that downloads remote DMCA illegal files and then places them in the user's folders to incriminate them?
(Hence this post's title.)
There's not much forensic evidence in an operating system when it comes to proving beyond any reasonable doubt to convict someone in such cases.
Anyone could operate a mouse & keyboard if the user weren't looking.
What a BS law.
Lets hope iTunes never sets it's folder as shared on install. AHHH!
Stop and read what you just said.
You honestly don't believe that...do you?
"Suspect"
When you suspect there to be a problem with somthing... you think there MIGHT be a problem.
You don't know FOR SURE.
Just because someone is a suspect dosen't in any way make that person absolutely guilty.
To think so would put everyone back into the mindset similar to that of Salem during the witchhunts.
If one person kills another person, there may be dozzens of suspects in the initial investigation. Now according to your logic they are ALL guilty. So if some crazy serial-killer kills a lady and runs, then I guess the husband of that lady would HAVE to go to prison for life, or be put on death-row, huh? Because in the case of murder, the spouse is always the first suspect.
Seriously. Come on now.
Suspects are only under the suspicion of guilt. No more, no less.
There's a worthless law.
e ,one,zero,one,zero,one" which in itself, is not a file. If I am to be convicted...so must be everyone who sees a car be convicted of auto theft.
Why won't this work?... MANY REASONS.
1. Near 100% of p2p programs allow a user to download a piece of a progeam from multiple users. So none is "uploading" a file. Just small parts. Your honnor.. I didn't "upload" the file just the section of it that states "one,zero,zero,zero,zero,one,zero,one,zero,one,on
B. Users of a p2p network do not "upload" files (with the exception of the PUSH p2p networks...I know of only one.)
And
III. Every whiny bitchy beaurocrat who complains about p2p, and tries to pass laws making any part of it illegal all seem to overlook a vital element in their plans. Jurisdiction.
Lets have everyone chip-in and we can all buy a share in a new company. One that produces Free floating, or anchored file-servers. They'll all free float in the international waters of the worlds oceans, or in orbit high above the Earth, and high above the money-grubby hands of Technology ignorant ageing polititions.
If file sharing becomes illegal...ut oh!
Bye-bye Bill Gates. You built-in to Windows the ability to share files and folders on a network. FOOM! There goes windows.
It's back to Windows 3.X for us!
Speaking of File sharing....isn't a webpage basicly a rudimentary shared file of text files, Images, and multimedia content?
FOOM! There goes the internet.
My downloading is for historical reference.
I'm providing future mankind a vital service by recording the pop-culture traded on the effemeral internet for posterity.
And who knows, maybe in 1000 years the coimbination of songs traded today will be found to be the key to mankind's survival (i.e. Mars Attacks) and backup copies will be vital tools protecting human life.
PAY FOR OUR SONGS OR DIE! *Menioacial RIAA laughter*
Your going to take this seriously?....Seriously!
The solution then?
:-p
Organize your logfiles into whitespace and type. Then use the whitespace or type to draw out stick figures or whatever.
ASCII art can be fun!
Now your log files are creative.
I don't recall ever saying I thing Pocket PC is bad.
.net.
If I did think it was, I'd install linux.
Nope , never had any problems with
And who uses "word processors" anymore?
Wow, that's a flash back. *imagining that clunky replacement for the typewriter, before computers were commonplace*
You woudln't happen to work for Microsoft's Advertising department, would you? If not...try just listing the link instead of the entire freak'in page content.
I myself like that Microsoft renamed this version. With the name "Pocket PC" many people have abbreviated that even further to just PPC. When searching for software ventors, it's jsut a bit frustrating to be looking for Pocket PC software and keep getting Power PC related links. Both use PPC as their Acronym.
Now all I have to worry about is a bout of retardism making me type MSM, to get SMS...:-p
But anything MS does to improve their products is should be viewed as a welcome change.
Someone should have a little chat with Mr. Orin. Does he believe that ALL computers should be nuked if they contain illegal copyrighted material?
If so, then what about those computers in the government which may contain terabytes of important information, and maybe one single illegal file? Does that one single file give the copyright owner the right to destroy all that information?
What would stop the next senator (extremist or just looking for the political spotlight) from taking that next step?
Here's a scenario, Someone at, say the FBI has access to their mainframe, and while doing their job they like to listen to music, so they have Mp3s on their PC. Well one day they are told they are getting a new PC, and happily transfer all their personal data onto the mainframe so it can be copied to their new PC later.
Say they like to listen to Metalica, and one of the files they had was an old file originally illegally traded through Napster or Kazaa or such.
Does Metalica now have the right to destroy the FBI mainframe, and doing so destroy any data contained therein about criminals and terrorists?
Doing so would directly jeopardize the safety of millions upon millions of people.
What about software that was created using illegally gained SDKs? Should that software be destroyed as well?
Sorry Jimmy, I know your in middle of your kidney dialysis, but the firmware for this machine was written using an illegal download of a copyrighted compiler. Oh and by the way, your dad's pacemaker? the firmware for that was written using the Notepad of an illegally pirated copy of Microsoft Windows 3.1. It's going to have to be nuked.
You can say good bye to your dad now. Yep bye bye....bye bye!
You mom? oh she's on a flight here...
oh shit...the navigational software on that plane...
I think Orin should be enlightened to the ramifications of opening this Pandora's box.
What would then stop a terrorist from alleging that the vital computers he fried contained his copyrighted material?
The banning is retarded. ...NO! THAT'S WRONG!
....Although the Teletubbies...I think we can all agree the Teletubbies ARE gay.
Its always done under the assumption that people can't think for themselves, and need someone else telling them what's right and wrong for them, and what they should and should not believe/do/watch/participate in.
YOU MUST BE THIS WAY!
I SMITHE THEE!
What next?
Uh oh! Pooh's searching for another great pot of honey! Uh oh! he got stuck in another tree!
That must be a metaphor for budist religious efforts towards attaining a state of nirvana! And the tree must represent THE MAN putting him down and keeping him from his goals!
Give me a break.
Some people have to stop reading too much into things.
Harry Potter is not totally unholy attempt to push children towards the ucult.
Elmo's vibrations when tickled are not orgasmic in any nature.
Dumb...plain dumb.
I wish people would read the posts before posting themselves.
Not only would it stop these endless reposts of basicly the same comments.. (i.e. G's never been 54 it's 22, B was never 11 it was 5 etc, etc, etc, blah, balh, blah)
Exactly how may people read the posts before posting their own replys?
Maybe if this was done we could have some more entertaining and informative debates.
Grrrr
Hopefully this will be (Score: 5 INFORMATIVE)
but most likely....... (Score: -1: Offtopic)
Becuase Micro(?)Soft knows that as long as there are people running linux out there, there will be a market share they don't have their grimey fingers in. This way they can get a chunk of change off the sale of the boxes. Or at least get the advertisement from their mediaplayer being on the boxes. I mean even if the person looks at the icon, that's one more place where microsoft has it's name/trademark. Remember when you NEVER thought you'd see Microsoft Software on a Mac? The plague is spreading.
OK... Since no one is actully giving any suggestions. I will. Compaq Ipaq. It's probably the most popular PocketPC. With a TON of expansion options, and you can reflash the memory to have linux on it instead of PPC 200x. I do believe it'll support those languages as well although you'll probably have to download some shiznazz to get it to work. You can program Java (albeit a very cutdown version of java) on it, as well as C++ and VB(ick) Also Comeon! integrated WiFi, bluetooth AND a biometric finger reader? SHWEET!
I'm saying that this idea wouldn't be bad for the market of PC users who don't need anything more than "average" speakers. Such as office use.
:-p)
Obviously anyone who appreciates high quality sound wouldn't want to comprimise the quality over the convience.
My parents dislike for the nusance of many tangeling cords, was just an example of how this could be a convience.
(The knots I've seen in my parent's computer cords could make the most hardened boyscout cry.
Obviously anyone who loves their music won't want this, just like how gamers don't like integrated videocards.
But for those people who don't really care about the best sound, and hate the wires of external speakers, it would be great. (obviously not your average slashdotter)
(Think of the most PC-retarded person you know...)
But what percentage of the PC market buys things just because they are cool? I know this would be great for my parents who know nothing about their computer except that the cords are a mess. (And don't know a sub-woofer from a sump-pump)
If they can place this membrane on the screen, they should open up to placing this membrane on other things....
...Toilet seats, window glass (windshield?), coffee cups, sneakers?.
Then again...maybe not.
I fear the day my cubicle talks to me.
I wonder how they plan on resolving the conflict that would arise with the need of the new Tablet-PC's or Pocket-PC/Palm devices to have a touch sensetive screen?
(That is if they even would decide to place the membrane there)
"I'd love to hear a wav file or something of how it sounds" Reminds me of a request I got from a friend. *hands me a VHS tape* "Can ya record me a few episodes of Blahblahblah on HD-TV? I wanna see the diffrence." ....nope...not gonna work.
Well said. *Applause* Finally an intelectual who knows the facts, can discren the truth from the rumors, and is intelligent enough to convey himself with tact.