Gradually, TV and movies have devolved into very little content, but a lot of sex and violence.
How do you know? You haven't watched TV in four years.
But of course, we must pander to the mindless majority. If someone speaks up, he/she is just an old prude who wants to stop everyone else's fun.
No, he/she is someone who thinks they are smarter than everyone else, and should therefore make their decisions for them.
And you are free, of course, to use your first ammendment right to support the dumbing down of America.
And you are also free to not support the "dumbing down" by not watching this crap. I don't like it either, but there are alternativesto broadcast smut. Before "moral" groups start taking away my choices, perhaps they should exercise some restraint like you did.
By the way, you can make XBMC be the default program when you boot the Xbox, if thats all you want to use your console for.
You can still use your XBox to play games if you use XBMC as your dashboard. All you have to do is modify your
xboxmediacenter.xml file, which can be found on the C: drive, to point to your games. You can rename all of the links on screen in XBMC to say what you want, and also (obviously) modify where they point. There is also a "default" tag for each section which will tell XBMC what to load first when you select each menu item.
As for getting the files, as another poster mentioned, use the #xbins on efnet --> xbins method. That way, you will should always be able to trust the source.
So you get fewer resources, but often the quality of them equals the best of the Windows resources. End result: You have what you need.
Oh, you were still talking about the community! I thought you were talking about the software available. =)
In all seriousness though, there are still people out there who think that they can't get certain functionality because they can't get program X for the Mac. What they don't seem to understand is that the functionality is there, the program just has a different name. Of course there are exceptions (CAD leaps to mind) but for the most part, the software is as good or better than most of the stuff available for Windows.
Software availablity is, IMHO, the greatest hurdle Apple has to overcome.
Yeah, the industry is very difficult right now. That's why I do a lot of my work from home- less overhead. Instead of bringing in clients to the studio and losing money, I do almost the same things from home. Of course, the studio has a Fairchild 670, a Neve console, etc.
Live sound is paying my bills right now, but it's not what I went to school for. I still have a lot to learn with live sound though.
I'm in Detroit, and I do whatever kind of live work comes my way. I work at a club in downtown Detroit, and will probably start working at a larger club within the next two weeks. Live sound isn't my main interest, and I do it mainly to pay the bills- the work is a lot more steady. I work at a studio on the "westside" of Detroit, but currently, I do most of my studio work from home.
Orlando, eh? I went to Full Sail in Winter Park. It's interesting to see that you are currently attending Middle Tennesee, as they are the only University who would accept my credits from Full Sail. I've toyed with going down there to finish my bachelors, but I'm almost done with a bachelors in Film at Wayne State in Detroit.
Best of luck in the industry. It's difficult but rewarding work (for me at least).
Apology accepted, and I am sorry if I pushed the wrong buttons.
Again, I have no opinion of the software. I can't have an opinion because I haven't used it.
However, calling this software "pro" is completely unwarranted for something that's a 0.1 release. What criteria are fulfilled by this application that make it pro? The plug-in arcitecture isn't even finished- it has no support for RTAS (proprietary), Audio Unit, or VST plug-ins (VST is currently in development). That alone is a deal breaker.
I'm not trying to be a jerk (although I may be one anyway) but calling something "pro" does not make it so. From the website: Wired aims to be a professional music production and creation software. Aiming for something is great; I hope they make this app the finest in the world. Until that time, it's still in development ie. not finished.
For those of us who have spent *thousands* of dollars already, not only must we be able to use our current software (plug-ins, for instance) but also our hardware (TDM cards, etc.) to consider another app. Otherwise, we have no reason to use something else.
Another poster replied to me that I should be willing to experiment, as you can usually discover cool new things that way. It's a great point, and I can't say that I will never use Wired. Maybe I will someday soon. Experimentation is one thing, but when it's crunch time, there's no way I could turn to this app to get the job done. Lack of plug-in support alone kills it.
They are not nebulous preconceptions, they are facts. If XXX isn't supported yet, and pros need XXX, then it's not professional grade software.
Again, I apologize if you feel that I've insulted you in some way, but I stand by my original post.
Jeez, really? What kind of cables are you using if you don't mind me asking. I was looking into getting some high quality cables, but again, ran out of money.
I realize the importance of good cables, but also realized that I could replace them in the future. I, too, am usually only moving eight channels in or out at home. If I need more inputs, I slave Logic to Pro Tools and track into that with my MOTU 896HD.
Agreed, but no one outside of the engineering community knows the difference between an SM57 and a U47 besides that they look different.
Cables in the back of my patchbays, eh? I'm not sure what they are at the studio as the patchbay came with the board (Neve), but on my home rig (Pro Tools TDM + Logic) I just use Hosa. Not very high tech there, but after spending all of that money on the TDM rig, I ran out of cash! =)
Most musicians don't even know what Pro Tools does, they just "know" that they need it. THAT'S entrenchment right there.
Excellent points. You're right, it doesn't need to be cheaper to be considered "pro", but there is no incentive to switch if it's not cheaper. I kinda thought that was the major "selling" point of this new software.
I'm not sure if you are right about Logic though. It is missing some key features (delay compensation on Aux tracks!?!) but it does some things exceptionally well (better than Pro Tools at least). When it comes to MIDI, I don't Logic is matched by *any* other software out there, although I have not used them all.
What I should have said, is "No one will switch unless it's A) Better than Pro Tools B) better than Logic and C) is cheaper than both." I stick with cheaper versus what's available during this "generation". If SACD picks up steam, we are all going to have to switch to systems that are capable of doing both PCM and PDM encoding (rolls eyes).
But, when that happens, we are going to be in the same boat we are now, and is mentioned in your post: use what gets the job done. From an engineers perspective, I could care less how much something costs because that's not my concern.
I have yet to see a contract that specifies Pro Tools, but it doesn't surprise me. As soon as you say "Pro Tools" eyes light up, that's for sure.
BTW, Pro Tools ships a lot of Intel systems nowadays.
Yep, and does so quite well. I hate to admit that I was shocked, but I was. There are still a few things that Digidesign has left out, but nothing big, and nothing I can remember off-hand.
Yeah, I'm a studio engineer (and I also do live sound). My deadlines are no where near as stringent as yours I'm sure.
It was a mistake for me to imply that Pro Tools and Logic are the only solutions out there. They are not as your post shows. However, would you feel comfortable installing this new software in one of your suites working with mission critical data? I wouldn't, but that's me. I *am* anxious to try this software out, but calling it "pro-level" is IMHO a mistake.
ProTools is an excellent product and I will say that I haven't seen anything yet that will compare to it. Saying that a product has to be better and cheaper to be comparable to it is a self-defeating statement used to vidicate your love of ProTools.
Well.... you're right. It wasn't the best argument I could have made (it was very late, and I was a little drunk). Being a musician also, experimentation is key. I didn't mean to imply that I *won't* use this software. I probably will eventually, when I get some spare time to play with it.
I just think that it's a mistake to call something "pro-level" when it hasn't been properly tested in a professional environment. Heck, I don't love Pro Tools... I spent thousands of dollars on a system that crashed in the middle of a session the other day. However, it does some things that other programs just can't touch. Reading your reply, I'm sure you know that.
Using what everyone else is using as an argument...
I agree with you and disagree with you at the same time. It's important for clients to *know* that all of their hard work can translate to another studio. Pro Tools makes this very easy. Logic... well it's getting better. I can't comment on the other programs you mentioned because I haven't used them. Perhaps this new OSS makes it incredibly easy, but until it starts getting tested, no one will know. I understand that I could be the guy to see, but I'm busy doing work. And *that* is the real problem (yes, I am part of the problem).
You are 100% completely correct though- use what you need to get the job done.
Thanks for calling me names, it really furthers your point.
Logic does some things better than Pro Tools, and vice versa. I use both because I need to. Most sound engineers are not all that familiar with computers, but see them as a necessary evil. I would imagine that most of those same people don't want to relearn software, when what they have already does what they want.
I was not commenting on the quality of the software, I was just saying that it has to be out "in the industry" getting used everyday for critical tasks to be considered "pro-level".
Ya know, I even prefaced my comment by stating clearly that I had not used the software. No where in my post did I say "this software sucks" for a reason- I wasn't commenting on it.
But don't expect anyone to take you seriously when you've giving an opinion out of your ass on a piece of software that you've never used.
Before you fly off the handle, perhaps you should read what I actually wrote. I didn't give any sort of opinion about the quality of the software. I understand your points, but there's no need to be rude about it.
However, as a professional who makes a living both recording and doing live sound, I find this very hard to believe.
Let me explain, please....
I think that software deadlines are similar to professional audio deadlines- you just never have enough time. No matter what happens, you can always look back and think, "This could have been better."
However, you get no revisions with a song (or album, etc.) after it's been released. Once it's "done"... you're ass is on the line.
Here's the big finish: I don't know of anyone (and I don't know _everyone_) who would consider this "Pro-level". It's only pro-level when it does A) things better thanPro Tools B) things better than Logic C) things cheaper than both. Most importantly D) Has been through trial by fire.
Perhaps I've not emphasized enough that prefessional audio engineers are under a very tight schedule. Considering that fact alone, it's *very* difficult to call something "professional" when it's barely out of it's infancy.
I would really like to see something like this succeed. After spending a huge amount of money on pro gear, it would be nice to have some thorough, reliable tools that work well. Remember though, Pro Tools has the same thing Apple has going for them - tight software/hardware integration.
I don't care about the Open/Closed software discussion when it comes down to paying my bills or not paying my bills. If it works, you are going to have to *really* try to convince me that I should change my mind.
So... mod the parent UP, not only is he right, but dammit, The Princess Bride is a funny movie!
A mod chip is NOT needed. You can use a free software exploit to mod your Xbox without spending a dime.
While you are correct, you *will* need someone with a modded XBox to get the gamesave files onto the XBox or a Memory Card.
I'm not trying to sound like a jerk, I'm merely pointing out that *somewhere* along the line, you are going to need a modded XBox even if you don't plan on using a modchip.
Oh, and XBox Media Center absolutely rules. It's worth buying an XBox for alone.
Why should I pay money to people who can't even run a decent website than can stand up to a pre-Slashdot effect from subscribers?
A fair question, but the website has been down since a link to it was posted on Macsurfer.com earlier this morning.
Even if the Cherry OS is a workable solution, I would have a problem buying something from a company that hates making money enough to not post a mirror of their website *somewhere*. It just shows that there will (more than likely) be next to no support for the product.
Or, perhaps they had no idea that running Mac OS X on an x86 machine was of any interest to people.(?)
I'm not sure I can necessarily argue against all of the points raised in your linked articles, but I can tell you that one of my best friends and my girlfriend both work across the street from Comerica Park in downtown Detroit, and business is definitely *up* when the Tigers/Lions have a game. They both work in the restaurant business though.... people want to eat and drink when they are out (naturally).
That being said, any extra business for Detroit is a good thing. Detroit doesn't have the bustling downtown area that most major cities have. Most of the big businesses are spread out around the city itself, so business can only go up for the downtown area.
The point is, even though it may not be a "boom" the stadiums have increased business nonetheless.
Nice try. You don't have to use Apple's Lossless CODEC to have lossless audio on your iPod. AIFF and WAV formats are lossless and will play on most "portable media players" including the iPod. The only difference is that the files will be much larger.
I'm not an Apple employee, nor do I use Apple's format. I'm just a happy iPod user who doesn't see what all the fuss is about. Anyone who reads Slashdot on any sort of regular basis knows what the iPod's limitations are. Everyone has the choice to *not* use an iPod based on those limitations.
Wrong. The Karma plays mp3, ogg, wma and flac. So no need to use a lossy format, nor DRM...
Sorry, but mp3, ogg, and wma are *all* lossy formats. All three reduce the sound quality in order to achieve a smaller file size.
FLAC on the other hand is not a lossy format (Free Lossless Audio Codec.) Apple has developed their own proprietary lossless format that is usable on the iPod, and reduces the file size to about half that of an AIFF or WAV file.
Someone's the bad guy here but it sure doesn't feel like Real for giving consumers more choice on their legally purchased hardware. Or did I miss the part where restricting how we could use our own hardware became "cool".
No, I think you missed the part where the Apple logo loaded as soon as you switched your iPod on. The *software* is what's making the hardware work. When you loaded iTunes for the first time, you agreed to Apple's EULA which allows only limited functionality of their hardware. Don't like it? Buy something else!
If you don't want to follow Apple's EULA, then why should SCO (or anyone else) have to follow the GPL? Unfortunately, if you own and use an iPod, you've already made the decision to play by Apple's rules. You can't change those rules in the middle of the game.
So that leaves more market percentage (not more sales!) to those dumb asses who don't care about DRM. Result: bigger percentage of CD's sold with DRM.
So what? Sell more CDs with DRM. If you can easily get around it, who cares?
That's not a very popular thing to say around here, but everyone is assuming that should the RIAA switch to a more stringent form of DRM, no one will care. People will start to care when they can't rip CDs onto their hard drives. Until then, DRM doesn't matter to most people.
An interesting point, but I don't think even the RIAA would be that devious/stupid. I can't say that for sure, but I find it hard to believe that the RIAA would want to maliciously trash someone's computer. Something like that would be a publicity nightmare for them, and they're not exactly on anyone's Christmas card list at present.
Still, who knows what a bunch of monkeys in suits will do.
I heard the Velvet Revolver CD does something along the same lines. I bought it today, and there was a sticker on it that said that the CD was protected by copy protection. When I inserted the CD, two separate volumes mounted- one with the audio, and one with some "other" files on it. Nothing launched when the CD was inserted, and iTunes said nothing when I ripped it into my Library and then onto my iPod. Weird.
It was mentioned in one of the linked articles that there is no MacOS uninstaller. That's no surprise to me, but I sure would like to know where any files could have been installed to. I'm sure it's just a matter of time before someone figures out how to get any DRM/crippling software off of our systems.
You make some excellent points, but the important thing to remember IMHO, is that copy protection, DRM, etc. can only be valid for current or future releases, not prior releases.
In other words, there is no way anyone can tell me that the remastered Ramones CD I bought four months ago is now subject to the RIAA's new flavor of DRM. I already own it, and have backed it up on my computer. I signed no license, nor was any implied at the time of purchase. I am not violating any DRM by making copies, and am completely within my legal rights in doing so.
The RIAA can choose to put DRM on that Ramones album now, but it's too late to do any good. There are thousands of copies of the disc floating around on the internet already, and we all know if someone wants to download it for free they can. This could be said about almost every CD sold in the past 21 years.
How many albums are on the market already? And how many albums come out every month? Even if the they puts DRM on every new release, the RIAA has 21 years of catching up to do.... so why even bother?
I do understand the outrage, but I think it's far more effective to laugh out loud at their pathetic attempts. Good luck RIAA, once you finally get a DRM scheme that actually works, no one will be purchasing your music.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, but they don't have to sue everyone. They can just sue a few people to try to scare the rest of us.
The RIAA and MPAA have been doing it for years. You can see that their tactics are working because no one is using P2P, right?
Gradually, TV and movies have devolved into very little content, but a lot of sex and violence.
How do you know? You haven't watched TV in four years.
But of course, we must pander to the mindless majority. If someone speaks up, he/she is just an old prude who wants to stop everyone else's fun.
No, he/she is someone who thinks they are smarter than everyone else, and should therefore make their decisions for them.
And you are free, of course, to use your first ammendment right to support the dumbing down of America.
And you are also free to not support the "dumbing down" by not watching this crap. I don't like it either, but there are alternatives to broadcast smut. Before "moral" groups start taking away my choices, perhaps they should exercise some restraint like you did.
By the way, you can make XBMC be the default program when you boot the Xbox, if thats all you want to use your console for.
You can still use your XBox to play games if you use XBMC as your dashboard. All you have to do is modify your xboxmediacenter.xml file, which can be found on the C: drive, to point to your games. You can rename all of the links on screen in XBMC to say what you want, and also (obviously) modify where they point. There is also a "default" tag for each section which will tell XBMC what to load first when you select each menu item.
As for getting the files, as another poster mentioned, use the #xbins on efnet --> xbins method. That way, you will should always be able to trust the source.
So you get fewer resources, but often the quality of them equals the best of the Windows resources. End result: You have what you need.
Oh, you were still talking about the community! I thought you were talking about the software available. =)
In all seriousness though, there are still people out there who think that they can't get certain functionality because they can't get program X for the Mac. What they don't seem to understand is that the functionality is there, the program just has a different name. Of course there are exceptions (CAD leaps to mind) but for the most part, the software is as good or better than most of the stuff available for Windows.
Software availablity is, IMHO, the greatest hurdle Apple has to overcome.
Feel free to email me anytime!
callitaclue(removethis)@gmail.com
Yeah, the industry is very difficult right now. That's why I do a lot of my work from home- less overhead. Instead of bringing in clients to the studio and losing money, I do almost the same things from home. Of course, the studio has a Fairchild 670, a Neve console, etc.
Live sound is paying my bills right now, but it's not what I went to school for. I still have a lot to learn with live sound though.
Anyway, best of luck!
I'm in Detroit, and I do whatever kind of live work comes my way. I work at a club in downtown Detroit, and will probably start working at a larger club within the next two weeks. Live sound isn't my main interest, and I do it mainly to pay the bills- the work is a lot more steady. I work at a studio on the "westside" of Detroit, but currently, I do most of my studio work from home.
Orlando, eh? I went to Full Sail in Winter Park. It's interesting to see that you are currently attending Middle Tennesee, as they are the only University who would accept my credits from Full Sail. I've toyed with going down there to finish my bachelors, but I'm almost done with a bachelors in Film at Wayne State in Detroit.
Best of luck in the industry. It's difficult but rewarding work (for me at least).
Apology accepted, and I am sorry if I pushed the wrong buttons.
Again, I have no opinion of the software. I can't have an opinion because I haven't used it.
However, calling this software "pro" is completely unwarranted for something that's a 0.1 release. What criteria are fulfilled by this application that make it pro? The plug-in arcitecture isn't even finished- it has no support for RTAS (proprietary), Audio Unit, or VST plug-ins (VST is currently in development). That alone is a deal breaker.
I'm not trying to be a jerk (although I may be one anyway) but calling something "pro" does not make it so. From the website: Wired aims to be a professional music production and creation software. Aiming for something is great; I hope they make this app the finest in the world. Until that time, it's still in development ie. not finished.
For those of us who have spent *thousands* of dollars already, not only must we be able to use our current software (plug-ins, for instance) but also our hardware (TDM cards, etc.) to consider another app. Otherwise, we have no reason to use something else.
Another poster replied to me that I should be willing to experiment, as you can usually discover cool new things that way. It's a great point, and I can't say that I will never use Wired. Maybe I will someday soon. Experimentation is one thing, but when it's crunch time, there's no way I could turn to this app to get the job done. Lack of plug-in support alone kills it.
They are not nebulous preconceptions, they are facts. If XXX isn't supported yet, and pros need XXX, then it's not professional grade software.
Again, I apologize if you feel that I've insulted you in some way, but I stand by my original post.
Jeez, really? What kind of cables are you using if you don't mind me asking. I was looking into getting some high quality cables, but again, ran out of money.
I realize the importance of good cables, but also realized that I could replace them in the future. I, too, am usually only moving eight channels in or out at home. If I need more inputs, I slave Logic to Pro Tools and track into that with my MOTU 896HD.
Agreed, but no one outside of the engineering community knows the difference between an SM57 and a U47 besides that they look different.
Cables in the back of my patchbays, eh? I'm not sure what they are at the studio as the patchbay came with the board (Neve), but on my home rig (Pro Tools TDM + Logic) I just use Hosa. Not very high tech there, but after spending all of that money on the TDM rig, I ran out of cash! =)
Most musicians don't even know what Pro Tools does, they just "know" that they need it. THAT'S entrenchment right there.
Excellent points. You're right, it doesn't need to be cheaper to be considered "pro", but there is no incentive to switch if it's not cheaper. I kinda thought that was the major "selling" point of this new software.
I'm not sure if you are right about Logic though. It is missing some key features (delay compensation on Aux tracks!?!) but it does some things exceptionally well (better than Pro Tools at least). When it comes to MIDI, I don't Logic is matched by *any* other software out there, although I have not used them all.
What I should have said, is "No one will switch unless it's A) Better than Pro Tools B) better than Logic and C) is cheaper than both." I stick with cheaper versus what's available during this "generation". If SACD picks up steam, we are all going to have to switch to systems that are capable of doing both PCM and PDM encoding (rolls eyes).
But, when that happens, we are going to be in the same boat we are now, and is mentioned in your post: use what gets the job done. From an engineers perspective, I could care less how much something costs because that's not my concern.
I have yet to see a contract that specifies Pro Tools, but it doesn't surprise me. As soon as you say "Pro Tools" eyes light up, that's for sure.
BTW, Pro Tools ships a lot of Intel systems nowadays.
Yep, and does so quite well. I hate to admit that I was shocked, but I was. There are still a few things that Digidesign has left out, but nothing big, and nothing I can remember off-hand.
Yeah, I'm a studio engineer (and I also do live sound). My deadlines are no where near as stringent as yours I'm sure.
It was a mistake for me to imply that Pro Tools and Logic are the only solutions out there. They are not as your post shows. However, would you feel comfortable installing this new software in one of your suites working with mission critical data? I wouldn't, but that's me. I *am* anxious to try this software out, but calling it "pro-level" is IMHO a mistake.
That was the point of my long winded post. =)
I appreciate the thoughtful reply.
ProTools is an excellent product and I will say that I haven't seen anything yet that will compare to it. Saying that a product has to be better and cheaper to be comparable to it is a self-defeating statement used to vidicate your love of ProTools.
Well.... you're right. It wasn't the best argument I could have made (it was very late, and I was a little drunk). Being a musician also, experimentation is key. I didn't mean to imply that I *won't* use this software. I probably will eventually, when I get some spare time to play with it.
I just think that it's a mistake to call something "pro-level" when it hasn't been properly tested in a professional environment. Heck, I don't love Pro Tools... I spent thousands of dollars on a system that crashed in the middle of a session the other day. However, it does some things that other programs just can't touch. Reading your reply, I'm sure you know that.
Using what everyone else is using as an argument...
I agree with you and disagree with you at the same time. It's important for clients to *know* that all of their hard work can translate to another studio. Pro Tools makes this very easy. Logic... well it's getting better. I can't comment on the other programs you mentioned because I haven't used them. Perhaps this new OSS makes it incredibly easy, but until it starts getting tested, no one will know. I understand that I could be the guy to see, but I'm busy doing work. And *that* is the real problem (yes, I am part of the problem).
You are 100% completely correct though- use what you need to get the job done.
Again, I appreciate your polite response.
Thanks for calling me names, it really furthers your point.
Logic does some things better than Pro Tools, and vice versa. I use both because I need to. Most sound engineers are not all that familiar with computers, but see them as a necessary evil. I would imagine that most of those same people don't want to relearn software, when what they have already does what they want.
I was not commenting on the quality of the software, I was just saying that it has to be out "in the industry" getting used everyday for critical tasks to be considered "pro-level".
Ya know, I even prefaced my comment by stating clearly that I had not used the software. No where in my post did I say "this software sucks" for a reason- I wasn't commenting on it.
But don't expect anyone to take you seriously when you've giving an opinion out of your ass on a piece of software that you've never used.
Before you fly off the handle, perhaps you should read what I actually wrote. I didn't give any sort of opinion about the quality of the software. I understand your points, but there's no need to be rude about it.
***I have not used this software***
However, as a professional who makes a living both recording and doing live sound, I find this very hard to believe.
Let me explain, please....
I think that software deadlines are similar to professional audio deadlines- you just never have enough time. No matter what happens, you can always look back and think, "This could have been better."
However, you get no revisions with a song (or album, etc.) after it's been released. Once it's "done"... you're ass is on the line.
Here's the big finish: I don't know of anyone (and I don't know _everyone_) who would consider this "Pro-level". It's only pro-level when it does A) things better thanPro Tools B) things better than Logic C) things cheaper than both. Most importantly D) Has been through trial by fire.
Perhaps I've not emphasized enough that prefessional audio engineers are under a very tight schedule. Considering that fact alone, it's *very* difficult to call something "professional" when it's barely out of it's infancy.
I would really like to see something like this succeed. After spending a huge amount of money on pro gear, it would be nice to have some thorough, reliable tools that work well. Remember though, Pro Tools has the same thing Apple has going for them - tight software/hardware integration.
I don't care about the Open/Closed software discussion when it comes down to paying my bills or not paying my bills. If it works, you are going to have to *really* try to convince me that I should change my mind.
So... mod the parent UP, not only is he right, but dammit, The Princess Bride is a funny movie!
A mod chip is NOT needed. You can use a free software exploit to mod your Xbox without spending a dime.
While you are correct, you *will* need someone with a modded XBox to get the gamesave files onto the XBox or a Memory Card.
I'm not trying to sound like a jerk, I'm merely pointing out that *somewhere* along the line, you are going to need a modded XBox even if you don't plan on using a modchip.
Oh, and XBox Media Center absolutely rules. It's worth buying an XBox for alone.
Why should I pay money to people who can't even run a decent website than can stand up to a pre-Slashdot effect from subscribers?
A fair question, but the website has been down since a link to it was posted on Macsurfer.com earlier this morning.
Even if the Cherry OS is a workable solution, I would have a problem buying something from a company that hates making money enough to not post a mirror of their website *somewhere*. It just shows that there will (more than likely) be next to no support for the product.
Or, perhaps they had no idea that running Mac OS X on an x86 machine was of any interest to people.(?)
How about:
9am: Go to work, call boss a fascist pig
10am: Have sex with his wife
11am: Tell boss's wife she's a fascist pig
12pm: Eat again
etc.
I'm not sure I can necessarily argue against all of the points raised in your linked articles, but I can tell you that one of my best friends and my girlfriend both work across the street from Comerica Park in downtown Detroit, and business is definitely *up* when the Tigers/Lions have a game. They both work in the restaurant business though.... people want to eat and drink when they are out (naturally).
That being said, any extra business for Detroit is a good thing. Detroit doesn't have the bustling downtown area that most major cities have. Most of the big businesses are spread out around the city itself, so business can only go up for the downtown area.
The point is, even though it may not be a "boom" the stadiums have increased business nonetheless.
Nice try. You don't have to use Apple's Lossless CODEC to have lossless audio on your iPod. AIFF and WAV formats are lossless and will play on most "portable media players" including the iPod. The only difference is that the files will be much larger.
I'm not an Apple employee, nor do I use Apple's format. I'm just a happy iPod user who doesn't see what all the fuss is about. Anyone who reads Slashdot on any sort of regular basis knows what the iPod's limitations are. Everyone has the choice to *not* use an iPod based on those limitations.
Wrong. The Karma plays mp3, ogg, wma and flac. So no need to use a lossy format, nor DRM...
Sorry, but mp3, ogg, and wma are *all* lossy formats. All three reduce the sound quality in order to achieve a smaller file size.
FLAC on the other hand is not a lossy format (Free Lossless Audio Codec.) Apple has developed their own proprietary lossless format that is usable on the iPod, and reduces the file size to about half that of an AIFF or WAV file.
Someone's the bad guy here but it sure doesn't feel like Real for giving consumers more choice on their legally purchased hardware. Or did I miss the part where restricting how we could use our own hardware became "cool".
No, I think you missed the part where the Apple logo loaded as soon as you switched your iPod on. The *software* is what's making the hardware work. When you loaded iTunes for the first time, you agreed to Apple's EULA which allows only limited functionality of their hardware. Don't like it? Buy something else!
If you don't want to follow Apple's EULA, then why should SCO (or anyone else) have to follow the GPL? Unfortunately, if you own and use an iPod, you've already made the decision to play by Apple's rules. You can't change those rules in the middle of the game.
So that leaves more market percentage (not more sales!) to those dumb asses who don't care about DRM. Result: bigger percentage of CD's sold with DRM.
So what? Sell more CDs with DRM. If you can easily get around it, who cares?
That's not a very popular thing to say around here, but everyone is assuming that should the RIAA switch to a more stringent form of DRM, no one will care. People will start to care when they can't rip CDs onto their hard drives. Until then, DRM doesn't matter to most people.
An interesting point, but I don't think even the RIAA would be that devious/stupid. I can't say that for sure, but I find it hard to believe that the RIAA would want to maliciously trash someone's computer. Something like that would be a publicity nightmare for them, and they're not exactly on anyone's Christmas card list at present.
Still, who knows what a bunch of monkeys in suits will do.
I heard the Velvet Revolver CD does something along the same lines. I bought it today, and there was a sticker on it that said that the CD was protected by copy protection. When I inserted the CD, two separate volumes mounted- one with the audio, and one with some "other" files on it. Nothing launched when the CD was inserted, and iTunes said nothing when I ripped it into my Library and then onto my iPod. Weird.
It was mentioned in one of the linked articles that there is no MacOS uninstaller. That's no surprise to me, but I sure would like to know where any files could have been installed to. I'm sure it's just a matter of time before someone figures out how to get any DRM/crippling software off of our systems.
You make some excellent points, but the important thing to remember IMHO, is that copy protection, DRM, etc. can only be valid for current or future releases, not prior releases.
In other words, there is no way anyone can tell me that the remastered Ramones CD I bought four months ago is now subject to the RIAA's new flavor of DRM. I already own it, and have backed it up on my computer. I signed no license, nor was any implied at the time of purchase. I am not violating any DRM by making copies, and am completely within my legal rights in doing so.
The RIAA can choose to put DRM on that Ramones album now, but it's too late to do any good. There are thousands of copies of the disc floating around on the internet already, and we all know if someone wants to download it for free they can. This could be said about almost every CD sold in the past 21 years.
How many albums are on the market already? And how many albums come out every month? Even if the they puts DRM on every new release, the RIAA has 21 years of catching up to do.... so why even bother?
I do understand the outrage, but I think it's far more effective to laugh out loud at their pathetic attempts. Good luck RIAA, once you finally get a DRM scheme that actually works, no one will be purchasing your music.