"Why doesn't redhat advertise on tv? ad space on tech TV is horribly dirt cheap, as well as almost every cable channel (USA, TNN, SCI-FI, MTV... etc...)"
Okay, I know I'm not going to be in the popular view here, but it's gotta be said: Redhat cannot do everything that Windows does.
Do this: Go buy any old digital camera and try to download the pics on a RedHat system.
Go buy a DVD-R and try to burn a disc.
Go to any old website showing media (RealPlayer, QuickTime, Windows Media) and see how successful you are at viewing content.
Buy a Firewire DV Video Camera and see how successful you are in getting the video off and editing it.
Try to visit a site that's made for IE.
Go to the store and buy a game.
Buy a PDA and get it to synch up.
Your network card doesn't work, find somebody you know willing to come over and fix it.
A good chunk of these problems have been solved on Linux, and if you're willing to do some insane bs to get them running, you're fine. The steps to do any of the above in Windows are very easy, especially in comparison to Linux.
Some of these challenges are a result of MS's monopoly + it's just plain a de-facto standard. Despite popular belief, there is some good for this. You can't go wrong with having a Windows machine. You're compatible with the internet, and you're compatible with nearly every game and piece of hardware available for PC's.
The problem isn't that people are unaware of it, the problem is that Windows does the best job of being friendly to the user. Sure Linux has technical superiorities in some ways, that alone does not make a good OS.
For that 90% of the people you mentioned, Windows is by far the best choice for them. Linux is a distant 3rd with OSX in 2nd place.
If you want a simple internet machine, Linux does a wonderful job for that. But the moment you start getting peripherals involved, Linux has a huge uphill battle. It just doesn't make sense for that 90 percentile to run Linux today.
You know what though? That can't be true forever. I do feel that Linux can overtake Windows. The first step is to get millions of people running the OS. That's slowly but surely starting to happen. Every time MS makes a misstep (like their SP 3 licensing BS), Linux has an opportunity to make an inroads. When a DVD-Burner manufacturer is swamped with "Uhh where's the Linux Drivers?" questions, they'll eventually realize "oh.. people use Linux too, we should support it...." When that starts to happen, Linux then can become a viable alternative to Windows.
MS didn't get big by bullying people around, it got big because it made computers into something average people can make really good use of. That is why people are buying Windows machines, it's not because they're unaware of Linux's existence. Today, it is not ready.
"There aren't enough Linux users out there to hurt MS at all with this action."
You guys'd screw yourselves more than you'd screw MS. "I spent $200 and I have a game machine I won't play". Yeah, that'd send a message to Microsoft: "We can make people buy ANYTHING!"
"Prove to me that X-Box modchips were created primarily to play pirated games."
M.A.M.E.? Let's face facts: There's yet to be any constructive reason to run MOD on an XBOX for anything other than MAME. It's either an under-utilized PC, or it's an over-priced MP3 player. But MAME, though, is a nice little fit for the XBOX.
It is, illegal (technically) to download ROMS and play them with MAME unless you have a license to do so.
Disclaimer: I am playing Devil's Advocate. Don't flame me over my response, I'm just answering the guy's question. It is very obvious that mod chips could and would be used for piracy. Instead, he should be asking 'In what ways could the mod chip be used legally, and why would people flock to them?'
He's going to lose the "how's it illegal?" qusetion, but when the modders have enough reason to say "here's a legit reason to do it", then the piracy argument is dissolved.
You all remember Jack Valenti and his 'VCRS will destroy the broadcast industry' FUD? The key reason that VCRs were deteremined to be legal was because there was enough legitimate reason to justify their existence. The MPAA was worried that people'd trade pirated movies back and forth, but the court said "as long as a significant chunk of them are using it to time-shift TV shows, then it is not a piracy device."
See my point? Ask how it's illegal and all kinds of not-so-relevant reasons (like my MAME one) will pop up and they'll be believed. Ask what can be done with the modded XBOX that doesn't involve piracy, and you've got a case.
Note to XBOX modders: Find something CONSTRUCTIVE to do with the XBOX. Turn it into a webserver. Turn it into Lightwave rendering node. Turn it into a development kit where garage developers can create games. Do something besides get MAME running on it! You're only hurting yourselves.
"You will learn FAR more from doing small projects that focus on particular effects than to bother with trying to duplicate the same scene you saw in a movie."
a.) I never said "I want to play with actual footage and never ever play with my own footage." If I had said that, then your point'd be true.
b.) Who said duplicate from a movie? I just wanted an exercise to chew on.
c.) Your assumptions are outweighing what I actually said, take it easy.
" You don't need to use copyrighted material to explore ojn your own and learn. There is absolutely NO reason to do so. None. Zero. Zip."
Not true. I don't know where you're getting this idea. If there's a good example of blue-screening in that shot, I would do nothing but benefit from taking a stab at chromakeying and rotoscoping it out. So your 'absolute' becomes negated. If I learn how to use splines to cut out Velma in that scene, then I have completed an exercise. Boom, I have more experience that I did not have before. Could I do the same with a video camera? Sure, even though video cameras and movie cameras capture different areas of color amd grain and blah blah blah. The DMCA prevents me from exploring that avenue.
"You will learn FAR more from doing small projects that focus on particular effects than to bother with trying to duplicate the same scene you saw in a movie."
Again, your point'd make sense if I were saying "use only the DVD material and never ever ever use my own footage". I've told you at least twice now that was never the intent. I guess I'll have to state again (until you get it) that it'd be an extra excercise to assure myself I can do it when the inevitable real world situation shows up. I cannot possibly do anything but benefit from providing myself with extra exercises to master. I never said anything about 'duplicating a scene in a movie', I said 'excercise'. Yeesh.
"As the Scooby-doo footage was likely not shot to fit any of the small projects you would likely design for yourself, it serves to do nothing more than inhibit your ability to truly explore."
I'll say it again: It's an excercise. Exercise! As in: A test of my abilities. I never said "Small Project".
Why are you even arguing with me? I never ever said "I want to use this material and nothing else." Yeesh dude, take it easy. You have a really bizarre image in your head of what I want to do, and no matter how I try to explain it it just isn't resonating with you. Honestly, it'd be more worth your energy to understand what it is I'm saying instead of arguing with what I'm not saying.
Frankly, I'm insulted that you'd come up with such negative assumptions about what I meant. Never mind that I agreed on your points, no no no, you want to perpetuate the argument by making a point that would only need to be made if I said something I very specifically did not say.
Which is fine, you make a good point. However, I sense that you think I want to do that in lieu of getting a camcorder out. I've already *done* the camcorder bit. No matter what, I'm going to continue to do DV exercises. But I still want to do more. The point I was making was that there are some situations that cannot easily be done in a garage that I'd like to try my hand at. I have no interest in publicizing it. Just something for me to goof around with.
I would also like to make sure that what I learn with my video camera doesn't surprise me when I eventually end up working with film. Things change a bit there. For example: What about matching film grain? Remember when the first Star Trek movie was rereleased? They had a CG version of the Enterprise they used in bits of it. In order for the CG ship to match, they had to recreate the film grain and overlay the CG layer with it. I thought that was pretty cool! I'd like to try my hand at a trick like that. That'd be a handy skill to have. If I can pick up on how they did that, then I can also do composites with CG characters in smoke-filled rooms. (maybe?) Who knows what I'd learn from that? I just want to explore, and ripping DVD's gives me a very interesting way of doing that.
Is my position a little clearer now? The main point I'm making is not "I want a cheap demo reel" the point I'm making is "the DMCA is inhibiting my ability to explore."
You misunderstand me. I never said anything about putting that footage in my demo reel.
Here's what I said:
" Normally, I'd rip the section of the DVD to an.AVI file and do some practice work on that..."
In other words, I'd liketa know what the pitfalls are and how to get around them. After Effects, in particular, has a bunch of different tools for doing rotoscoping and chroma keying. Different tools become useful at different times. You treat hair differently than you'd treat a wire, for example. You cannot argue that there is always value in finding ways of challenging yourself.
In any case, no, I was never saying anything about using that footage in my demo reel. I wish you'd give me some credit, though. I'm working really hard here to learn.
Unfortunately, I don't know how much the drives cost. However, I'm pretty sure that I'm under half that.
The plus side being that Windows has shitloads more stuff on it than Mac. I can run LW on a Mac, but I'd forfeit a TON of plugins I need that were compiled for Intel.
"Linux isn't living up to any of the claims that MS or Apple are making."
LOL!!
I can see the Linux ads now:
"So.. like, I bought this Firewire Video camera, and I like shot some footage of my dog and stuff... and like when I plugged the camera into my Linux laptop.. uh.. well it didn't work. So first I went to find a firewire driver. And uh.. well I couldn't find one of those, but I find a kernel update that had firewire support. So I downloaded and recompiled and typed this in and that in and that kind of worked. Then.. then I had to find a free-app that'd do DV-capture and editing. After a few days of posting news groups, I eventually did find one that sort of worked. Of course, I had to fix a bug or two for it to be useful. But hey! It's free!! Isn't that the great thing about Open Source? Fixes happen like really really fast. Anyway, so I sort of got that running... and uh now I can get video from my camera to my laptop. It only took a few weeks! So like there's no way I'm going back to Windows now because I put all this damn effort into this and finally got it working.
I'm an aspiring Visual FX animator. One day I'd like to do blue screen and green screen compositing. This is easy enough to do with a video camera and some blue tarp, but it is not the same as working under studio conditions.
Here's an example: In the Scooby Doo movie, there's a scene where a creature picks up Velma and she tugs on it's ears thinking it's a mask. In the 'Making of' part of the DVD, they show how they filmed that. They suspended the actress on wires up against a blue mockup of the creature. Then they cut out the wires and the blue parts, and inserted a CG creature in the shot.
This is not something I can do in my garage without a huge personal expendature. Thankfully, though, the DVD of the Scooby Doo movie contains the unprocessed footage. Normally, I'd rip the section of the DVD to an.AVI file and do some practice work on that. If I can master some of the techniques the FX studio made for that movie, I have a real shot at working in the industry. In other words, the ability to legally rip this DVD would not only provide me eductational resources, but I'd also get hired by the same indsutry that's trying to prevent me from doing just that.
The DMCA prevents me from legally extracting this footage that I purchased. It really kind of bugs me. A student who's learning to paint can copy a painting, but I cannot take the steps I need to learn a trade that I cannot learn in school.
"Sure, "more hardware is available for less dough", but you get what you pay for..."
I'm running a Dual Atlhon 1.4 gig with 4 UW SCSI drives, a Firewire drive, CD burner, DVD-RAM, dual monitors, a tablet, two network cards, a gig of RAM, and Windows 2000. I have no stability issues.
What's the price tag for an equivalent Mac system?
You seriously missed both the point and the light-heartedness of my post. You're not even close to understanding what I was saying. You wasted a lot of energy there.
One has wires, one doesn't. Oddly enough, people have uses for that.
You could share a drive with multiple machines without a network.
You could bring a new drive on line just by turning it on, no need to search for the right port.
Heck, you could hide the drive and store your child porn collection on it. Won't be easy to find when you get raided!
In any case, here's a lesson for you: Not everybody wants a hard drive with large capacity or ridiculous speeds, some people have other needs. Wireless is one of them. I personally would like one so I could ferry data between here and home (like backups, for example) without needing to hook up the drive every single time.
As a matter of fact, I have a wireless network at both home and work so my laptop can do that job. It'd simplify my life a lot if just had a cheapy wirless drive to do it for me.
Personally, though I'd prefer 802.11 over Bluetooth. But I'll takes what I can gets.
I can get around this protection scheme with only 2 black markers. The first marker is for taking dictation, the second is for rapidly drawing pictures of what's on the screen.
They'd have to blink the film A LOT in order to break that scheme.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't bother reading all this.
You're so out for MS blood that you won't accept anything positive about them. I don't have time for irrational debates.
Good day.
"For some reason, people always conveniently forget that part."
When did I say that Microsoft invented the GUI? It's not a matter of 'conveniently forgetting', it's a matter of relevance.
MS made a useful product, grow up and accept that. Usability ways, they're lightyears ahead of Linux.
Funny thing is, if Mac hadn't been so anal about running on Mac hardware, OSX might be a contender for the OS crown. Linux definitely would not be.
"No, they made money because they saw that Apple made computers easy for people to use, and then they copied it."
And then, spontaneously people just started buying it.
"Why doesn't redhat advertise on tv? ad space on tech TV is horribly dirt cheap, as well as almost every cable channel (USA, TNN, SCI-FI, MTV... etc...)"
Okay, I know I'm not going to be in the popular view here, but it's gotta be said: Redhat cannot do everything that Windows does.
Do this: Go buy any old digital camera and try to download the pics on a RedHat system.
Go buy a DVD-R and try to burn a disc.
Go to any old website showing media (RealPlayer, QuickTime, Windows Media) and see how successful you are at viewing content.
Buy a Firewire DV Video Camera and see how successful you are in getting the video off and editing it.
Try to visit a site that's made for IE.
Go to the store and buy a game.
Buy a PDA and get it to synch up.
Your network card doesn't work, find somebody you know willing to come over and fix it.
A good chunk of these problems have been solved on Linux, and if you're willing to do some insane bs to get them running, you're fine. The steps to do any of the above in Windows are very easy, especially in comparison to Linux.
Some of these challenges are a result of MS's monopoly + it's just plain a de-facto standard. Despite popular belief, there is some good for this. You can't go wrong with having a Windows machine. You're compatible with the internet, and you're compatible with nearly every game and piece of hardware available for PC's.
The problem isn't that people are unaware of it, the problem is that Windows does the best job of being friendly to the user. Sure Linux has technical superiorities in some ways, that alone does not make a good OS.
For that 90% of the people you mentioned, Windows is by far the best choice for them. Linux is a distant 3rd with OSX in 2nd place.
If you want a simple internet machine, Linux does a wonderful job for that. But the moment you start getting peripherals involved, Linux has a huge uphill battle. It just doesn't make sense for that 90 percentile to run Linux today.
You know what though? That can't be true forever. I do feel that Linux can overtake Windows. The first step is to get millions of people running the OS. That's slowly but surely starting to happen. Every time MS makes a misstep (like their SP 3 licensing BS), Linux has an opportunity to make an inroads. When a DVD-Burner manufacturer is swamped with "Uhh where's the Linux Drivers?" questions, they'll eventually realize "oh.. people use Linux too, we should support it...." When that starts to happen, Linux then can become a viable alternative to Windows.
MS didn't get big by bullying people around, it got big because it made computers into something average people can make really good use of. That is why people are buying Windows machines, it's not because they're unaware of Linux's existence. Today, it is not ready.
"There aren't enough Linux users out there to hurt MS at all with this action."
You guys'd screw yourselves more than you'd screw MS. "I spent $200 and I have a game machine I won't play". Yeah, that'd send a message to Microsoft: "We can make people buy ANYTHING!"
heh.
"...next thing you know they're stealing cars and seducing virgins!"
That'd be a bit cannibalistic, dontcha think?
"Prove to me that X-Box modchips were created primarily to play pirated games."
M.A.M.E.? Let's face facts: There's yet to be any constructive reason to run MOD on an XBOX for anything other than MAME. It's either an under-utilized PC, or it's an over-priced MP3 player. But MAME, though, is a nice little fit for the XBOX.
It is, illegal (technically) to download ROMS and play them with MAME unless you have a license to do so.
Disclaimer: I am playing Devil's Advocate. Don't flame me over my response, I'm just answering the guy's question. It is very obvious that mod chips could and would be used for piracy. Instead, he should be asking 'In what ways could the mod chip be used legally, and why would people flock to them?'
He's going to lose the "how's it illegal?" qusetion, but when the modders have enough reason to say "here's a legit reason to do it", then the piracy argument is dissolved.
You all remember Jack Valenti and his 'VCRS will destroy the broadcast industry' FUD? The key reason that VCRs were deteremined to be legal was because there was enough legitimate reason to justify their existence. The MPAA was worried that people'd trade pirated movies back and forth, but the court said "as long as a significant chunk of them are using it to time-shift TV shows, then it is not a piracy device."
See my point? Ask how it's illegal and all kinds of not-so-relevant reasons (like my MAME one) will pop up and they'll be believed. Ask what can be done with the modded XBOX that doesn't involve piracy, and you've got a case.
Note to XBOX modders: Find something CONSTRUCTIVE to do with the XBOX. Turn it into a webserver. Turn it into Lightwave rendering node. Turn it into a development kit where garage developers can create games. Do something besides get MAME running on it! You're only hurting yourselves.
... until Kazaa users turn ethical.
Heh. I don't think we've attained understanding.
"You will learn FAR more from doing small projects that focus on particular effects than to bother with trying to duplicate the same scene you saw in a movie."
a.) I never said "I want to play with actual footage and never ever play with my own footage." If I had said that, then your point'd be true.
b.) Who said duplicate from a movie? I just wanted an exercise to chew on.
c.) Your assumptions are outweighing what I actually said, take it easy.
" You don't need to use copyrighted material to explore ojn your own and learn. There is absolutely NO reason to do so. None. Zero. Zip."
Not true. I don't know where you're getting this idea. If there's a good example of blue-screening in that shot, I would do nothing but benefit from taking a stab at chromakeying and rotoscoping it out. So your 'absolute' becomes negated. If I learn how to use splines to cut out Velma in that scene, then I have completed an exercise. Boom, I have more experience that I did not have before. Could I do the same with a video camera? Sure, even though video cameras and movie cameras capture different areas of color amd grain and blah blah blah. The DMCA prevents me from exploring that avenue.
"You will learn FAR more from doing small projects that focus on particular effects than to bother with trying to duplicate the same scene you saw in a movie."
Again, your point'd make sense if I were saying "use only the DVD material and never ever ever use my own footage". I've told you at least twice now that was never the intent. I guess I'll have to state again (until you get it) that it'd be an extra excercise to assure myself I can do it when the inevitable real world situation shows up. I cannot possibly do anything but benefit from providing myself with extra exercises to master. I never said anything about 'duplicating a scene in a movie', I said 'excercise'. Yeesh.
"As the Scooby-doo footage was likely not shot to fit any of the small projects you would likely design for yourself, it serves to do nothing more than inhibit your ability to truly explore."
I'll say it again: It's an excercise. Exercise! As in: A test of my abilities. I never said "Small Project".
Why are you even arguing with me? I never ever said "I want to use this material and nothing else." Yeesh dude, take it easy. You have a really bizarre image in your head of what I want to do, and no matter how I try to explain it it just isn't resonating with you. Honestly, it'd be more worth your energy to understand what it is I'm saying instead of arguing with what I'm not saying.
Frankly, I'm insulted that you'd come up with such negative assumptions about what I meant. Never mind that I agreed on your points, no no no, you want to perpetuate the argument by making a point that would only need to be made if I said something I very specifically did not say.
Which is fine, you make a good point. However, I sense that you think I want to do that in lieu of getting a camcorder out. I've already *done* the camcorder bit. No matter what, I'm going to continue to do DV exercises. But I still want to do more. The point I was making was that there are some situations that cannot easily be done in a garage that I'd like to try my hand at. I have no interest in publicizing it. Just something for me to goof around with.
I would also like to make sure that what I learn with my video camera doesn't surprise me when I eventually end up working with film. Things change a bit there. For example: What about matching film grain? Remember when the first Star Trek movie was rereleased? They had a CG version of the Enterprise they used in bits of it. In order for the CG ship to match, they had to recreate the film grain and overlay the CG layer with it. I thought that was pretty cool! I'd like to try my hand at a trick like that. That'd be a handy skill to have. If I can pick up on how they did that, then I can also do composites with CG characters in smoke-filled rooms. (maybe?) Who knows what I'd learn from that? I just want to explore, and ripping DVD's gives me a very interesting way of doing that.
Is my position a little clearer now? The main point I'm making is not "I want a cheap demo reel" the point I'm making is "the DMCA is inhibiting my ability to explore."
You misunderstand me. I never said anything about putting that footage in my demo reel.
.AVI file and do some practice work on that..."
Here's what I said:
" Normally, I'd rip the section of the DVD to an
In other words, I'd liketa know what the pitfalls are and how to get around them. After Effects, in particular, has a bunch of different tools for doing rotoscoping and chroma keying. Different tools become useful at different times. You treat hair differently than you'd treat a wire, for example. You cannot argue that there is always value in finding ways of challenging yourself.
In any case, no, I was never saying anything about using that footage in my demo reel. I wish you'd give me some credit, though. I'm working really hard here to learn.
Unfortunately, I don't know how much the drives cost. However, I'm pretty sure that I'm under half that.
The plus side being that Windows has shitloads more stuff on it than Mac. I can run LW on a Mac, but I'd forfeit a TON of plugins I need that were compiled for Intel.
"Linux isn't living up to any of the claims that MS or Apple are making."
LOL!!
I can see the Linux ads now:
"So.. like, I bought this Firewire Video camera, and I like shot some footage of my dog and stuff... and like when I plugged the camera into my Linux laptop.. uh.. well it didn't work. So first I went to find a firewire driver. And uh.. well I couldn't find one of those, but I find a kernel update that had firewire support. So I downloaded and recompiled and typed this in and that in and that kind of worked. Then.. then I had to find a free-app that'd do DV-capture and editing. After a few days of posting news groups, I eventually did find one that sort of worked. Of course, I had to fix a bug or two for it to be useful. But hey! It's free!! Isn't that the great thing about Open Source? Fixes happen like really really fast. Anyway, so I sort of got that running... and uh now I can get video from my camera to my laptop. It only took a few weeks! So like there's no way I'm going back to Windows now because I put all this damn effort into this and finally got it working.
My name is Ronald and I'm a Linux Zealot."
It's a joke, laugh.
I'm an aspiring Visual FX animator. One day I'd like to do blue screen and green screen compositing. This is easy enough to do with a video camera and some blue tarp, but it is not the same as working under studio conditions.
.AVI file and do some practice work on that. If I can master some of the techniques the FX studio made for that movie, I have a real shot at working in the industry. In other words, the ability to legally rip this DVD would not only provide me eductational resources, but I'd also get hired by the same indsutry that's trying to prevent me from doing just that.
Here's an example: In the Scooby Doo movie, there's a scene where a creature picks up Velma and she tugs on it's ears thinking it's a mask. In the 'Making of' part of the DVD, they show how they filmed that. They suspended the actress on wires up against a blue mockup of the creature. Then they cut out the wires and the blue parts, and inserted a CG creature in the shot.
This is not something I can do in my garage without a huge personal expendature. Thankfully, though, the DVD of the Scooby Doo movie contains the unprocessed footage. Normally, I'd rip the section of the DVD to an
The DMCA prevents me from legally extracting this footage that I purchased. It really kind of bugs me. A student who's learning to paint can copy a painting, but I cannot take the steps I need to learn a trade that I cannot learn in school.
... no interesting news today? Just an (-1, Troll) article designed for everybody to come out and laugh at MS? Anybody else tired of it?
"Sure, "more hardware is available for less dough", but you get what you pay for..."
I'm running a Dual Atlhon 1.4 gig with 4 UW SCSI drives, a Firewire drive, CD burner, DVD-RAM, dual monitors, a tablet, two network cards, a gig of RAM, and Windows 2000. I have no stability issues.
What's the price tag for an equivalent Mac system?
"Where's your proof that Apple paid anyone to lie, or that they're even lying?"
Well, for one thing, the "It took my dad an hour to download Windows Drivers" is FUD. You'd think he'd just pop in the CD that came with the camera.
"We know, we know. Most of us use windows on a daily basis."
Not where I work. I have to sit on a stack of binders in order to clear my cubicle walls, only then can I use any windows.
On the flip side, I've gotten a commendation for being so interested in my company's business plan. I just hope they don't go paperless soon.
"The UK has discovered that radio waves can go through walls now?"
Actually, there is a fairly old invention that does allow one to see through walls. It's called a 'window'.
"So what happens when the navy's underwater-spy-glider-drones are picked up in a fishing net?"
Hundreds of people will report that their tuna descended stool is highly resistent to flushing. Heh.
"I think he was kidding, you fucking genius."
:)
So was I. And thank you for calling me a Genius, brightened my day.
You seriously missed both the point and the light-heartedness of my post. You're not even close to understanding what I was saying. You wasted a lot of energy there.
It's just a friggin comment, get over it.
"I'm the guy sitting next to you in the theater. I don't care if your car is stolen, if it keeps that beeper quiet."
Actually it has a vibrate mode. (And yes, I do set it.)
I certainly wouldn't care if my car getting stolen interrupted your movie for 10 seconds. Your trips to the bathroom'd take more than that.
And, btw, you would care if it were your car.
One has wires, one doesn't. Oddly enough, people have uses for that.
You could share a drive with multiple machines without a network.
You could bring a new drive on line just by turning it on, no need to search for the right port.
Heck, you could hide the drive and store your child porn collection on it. Won't be easy to find when you get raided!
In any case, here's a lesson for you: Not everybody wants a hard drive with large capacity or ridiculous speeds, some people have other needs. Wireless is one of them. I personally would like one so I could ferry data between here and home (like backups, for example) without needing to hook up the drive every single time.
As a matter of fact, I have a wireless network at both home and work so my laptop can do that job. It'd simplify my life a lot if just had a cheapy wirless drive to do it for me.
Personally, though I'd prefer 802.11 over Bluetooth. But I'll takes what I can gets.
I can get around this protection scheme with only 2 black markers. The first marker is for taking dictation, the second is for rapidly drawing pictures of what's on the screen.
They'd have to blink the film A LOT in order to break that scheme.