Well... just to be contrary... and putting on my tinfoil hat, the news is that, as far as we've been told, some 24 as yet unnamed people in London and Pakistan have been detained under anti-terror laws and can be held incommunicado for a month while investigation continues. The British government has said that an attack on trans-atlantic flights was imminent, but I've yet to hear about any actual bombs, materials, or detonators found.
Though if the ingredients are indeed "common" household chemicals, I've no doubt that some ex-girlfriend's bottle of peroxide in their medicine cabinet is now proof enough to get them sent away. Heck, I'VE got peroxide at home, AND I have a camera with a flash.
The point being that at this point in time there's a whole lot of pontification, and very few facts. Everyone, even Wired, is running the same damned AP article. And for some reason I'm strongly reminded of the other highly ballyhooed and recently foiled "plot", by individuals with no money, training, materials, plan, or even shoes...
"I for one do not fly direct Singapore to LA using one of those new super jumbo Airbus jetliners because they are generation 1 jets."
Ever see the number of suggested and required repair notices sent out by the FAA on a new jet?
"I do not buy a newly released car because it is a generation 1 vehicle."
You mean like the first generation Toyota hybrids that are being recalled for brake and other issues?
"I do not buy a new technology flat screen TV because it is.. guess what? Generation 1!"
Like the generation 1 screens that had limited life spans and suffered from burn-in problems?
Again, repeat after me: ALL first generation products will have issues. Some more than others. Now, whether or not you us that as an excuse for not buying a first gen product is up to you, and generally depends on where you fall on the early-adopter / I-just-want-it-to-work curve.
So we're not giving Appe a pass... nor Boeing, nor Toyota, nor Sony.
Internals, yes, but externals no. I've noticed that practically every MacBook Pro I've seen has fit and finish issues, most noticably a "bent" lid that curves up at the corners in sort of a "U" shape, the bottom of the U at the latches. This means the lid rocks and compresses when it's closed and you pick up the MBP. Is it so hard to make a flat lid?
Re:Flash as an application development platform
on
The Future of Flash
·
· Score: 1
"You wind up missing out on a few potential customers or whatever, but this doesn't get documented as hard statistics."
Yeah, I mean hardly anyone that does business maintains site, registration, and customer logs...
Re:Flash as an application development platform
on
The Future of Flash
·
· Score: 1
"Flash 8 and 9 are not available on Linux"
So I can't reach about 1.5% of the desktops out there? Want to look up the phrase "almost ubiquitous" again?
Dead on, in fact the following quote bears this out:
"Destineer President Peter Tamte... said that when his company shipped its squad-based first-person shooter First to Fight last year, it found within a few weeks that more people were trying to log on to multiplayer servers with a single banned serial number than the total number of copies Destineer had sold combined."
Reread that sentence: more people tried to play the game with a single hacked serial number than paid for it in the first place.
Apple gets a LOT of milage out of the "it just works" mantra. All that washing their hands of it and saying "it's up to you" would do is piss off a lot of people. They're not going to think the software not working is their fault, no matter what the pretty dialog said, they're going to think it's Apple's fault. And even if they could return it, they're going to be pissing and moaning about it all the way back to the store, and to their friends and coworkers.
Apple doesn't need that kind of hassle, nor do they want or need tons of unhappy customers.
If they do it, they're going to have to spend the time and dollars to it right... or not at all.
Or politically-correct an article. Or correct an article with "facts" everyone knows. Or just "correct" an article.
The problem with your assertion is that the number of people who know nothing, or who "think" they know something, vastly outnumbers those who actually do.
I suspect that if you take the economic demographic for ipod sales you'd find that the intersection between those people and the Neon and Focus customer to be... lacking.
I'm REALLY tired of all of the people bashing corporations and acting as if it's a sin to for anyone to make money. Shareholders, huh? Okay, do you have a pension plan? 401K? Interest-bearing bank account? Car loan? Mortgage? Life, car, home, or health insurance? Student-loan? SBL?
Where do you think that money comes from? Did you know that half the stocks in the US are owned by... us, in the form of pension and retirement funds? Or that business and corporate taxes on profit fund the lions share of the money the government runs on?
No.
Is the system perfect? Also no. But while it's easy to say that the system should be smashed, I've yet to see anyone work through the alternatives and come up with something better.
BTW, I've also noticed that many of the same people who cry about how "unfair" the system is cry even louder when their Welfare check is late...
"...we'd get _five times_ the current R&D if we paid for it outright."
If WE paid WHO for it outright? I don't know about you, but I don't know who's doing what in the industry. So who is paying whom? And who's deciding who should get paid in the first place? And all of those researchers are going to be working for who? And are going to need no facilities and administration whatsoever? And the products will produce themselves? And market themselves?
So who's paying again? If not us, and not "evil" corporations, then who? The government? You want a more efficient system and you want the government involved?
"Apple Computer on Thursday announced deals with Ford, General Motors and Mazda to integrate the iPod into the stereo systems of most of the carmakers' new models. The agreements, according to Apple, mean that more than 70 percent of 2007-model U.S. automobiles will offer built-in iPod compatibility, a much more reliable experience than trying to sync the players to auto stereo systems after they have been built."
Let's say that, tomorrow, the RIAA came up with a perfect way to stop online file sharing, copying, and downloading, such that once again you had to buy the music. Somehow, I suspect that in that case many of the "potential" sales would become "actual" sales, as I doubt all of those people would suddenly decide to do completely without music altogether. The flip side, of course, is that they'd only buy music they wanted and liked, translating into the "not every download is a lost sale" mantra often expoused around here.
Piracy rests on three main legs: it's free (something for nothing), it's easy, and your chances of getting caught and punished for your actions is extremely low, unlike, say, trying to walk out of Best Buy with a disc under your coat. The music industry attempts to combat "free" by price and convenience (e.g. iTMS-per-track-pricing) and "easy" by DRM.
Many say they would buy if the price was "fair", but that's entirely relative. What if I think it's worth a buck and you think it's worth a quarter? Or if they drop the price of a track to a quarter, and you think a tune by an artist you don't care for is only worth a nickel? In other words, no matter how low you drop the price, someone is going to think it's "unfair" and feel justified in taking what he wants.
They also attempt to hit the third leg with lawsuits, but that fails as a real deterent and isn't cost effective. What I suspect will happen is something on the order of the recent attempts to suspend user internet accounts on the grounds that illegal file sharing violates TOS, but more automated.
But no matter what, you're right that, whatever the rhetoric and rationalizations, most are card-carrying members of the "something for nothing" club.
And the ends hardly ever justify the means, that's just another rationalization...
Why? If it's translating the DirectX calls (which abstract the hardware) into OpenGL calls (which also abstracts the hardware) , why do you need GPU virtualization?
Chickens and eggs. You're right that Mac's aren't heavy gaming consoles, but a good portion of that is a lack of games. Plus, as mentioned, let it support more games, and you'll get still more cross-over from PC-to-Mac types who might have switched, but didn't want to give up their gaming.
"The problem is that the media giants have decided that they want more than a fair price for their product, so many people look elsewhere to get the things they want..."
No, the problem is that everyone and his brother has their own definition of what constitutes a "fair" price. As your "$20" statement illustrates.
For most things that wouldn't be an issue, as if you think the price for some product is unfair you simply do without it or buy something else. It's not like you're going to die without the lastest piece of junk from 50-Cent. But here, when people decide the price is "unfair" they think they're entitled to it anyway. Back to your statement, why would you buy music from an artist you don't care much for? On the flip side, if you don't care for them, why steal (your word) their music and waste your time in the first place?
Voting with your dollars is one thing. Stealing quite another.
Finally, why should they trust you? You've just clearly stated that anytime you think the terms of the agreement is "unfair" you're going to break it. Where's the "trust" in that?
What if I think it's worth a buck and you think it's worth a quarter? Or if they drop the price of a track to a quarter, and you think a tune by an artist you don't care for is only worth a nickel. In either case are you now justified in stealing whatever you want yet again?
There are quite a few worthwhile arguments out there. Yours, however, isn't one of them...
While many corporations do, as you point out, have flaws, you're again attempting to tar all of them with the same brush. And though small businesses are wonderful things, they simply can't generate the economies of scale needed for infrastructure, research, manufacturing, shipping, mining, medicine, agriculture, power production, and more I don't have the time to name.
Promote Fuller's "Small is Beautiful" mindset all you want, but realize that there are many situations where that model simply doesn't apply.
We've bypassed the ability to carry our population with communes and "community" gardens and I don't know about you, but I spent many summers growing up on a farm, and I have no fantasies about going back to "nature". Living off the land is boring, never-ending, back-breaking work, and I'm more than happy to leave that job in the hands of those who want to do it.
Sorry, but I still have to believe that you, "hippy" or not, still haven't thought things out, and that I, in fact, won the mental bet I placed when I asked for your "solution" to the problem: You don't have one.
"The best value for your dollar would be Linux for 90+% of people."
With just over 1% of the existing desktop market, I doubt it. And even that number is deceiving, with hundred's of distro's fragmenting even that percentage. In many cases "free" is worth exactly what you paid for it.
"Would that be the same business economics that would say Windows is the best operating system because it made Bill Gates makes the most money?"
Please. You're smarter than that, and economics says no such thing. It may be the most used, but it's far from being the best. And it's the most used due to a large number of economic forces, which translates mainly into choices made by lots and lots of people, businesses and consumers, who looked at the choices available and decided, based on their own self-interests.
But if you're done setting up straw men and knocking them down, perhaps you can answer the question about how you don't ever want the best value for your dollar? And why business owners should feel any different?
All I hear are rants and raves and cries about how things are unfair and how all corporations are evil. Fine. But what's your SOLUTION? I want to hear one. And one that works, not some utopian pie-in-the-sky theory that ignores reality and the human condition and harkens back to the "good old days" when everyone was down on the farm growing corn... and dying at 40.
So what is it? No finger pointing at "them". No "should's" or "it would nice if's". For once, if possible, put aside your rightous indignation and in plain language tell me your solution.
Aluminum, yes. Because it's well crafted and a joy to use. And you forgot the weight. And the fact that none of the other alternatives legally run OS X. So there are no "equivalents". A system is more than a processor, memory, and a disk drive...
Slashdot Mirror
"This news is about a STOPPED attack."
Well... just to be contrary... and putting on my tinfoil hat, the news is that, as far as we've been told, some 24 as yet unnamed people in London and Pakistan have been detained under anti-terror laws and can be held incommunicado for a month while investigation continues. The British government has said that an attack on trans-atlantic flights was imminent, but I've yet to hear about any actual bombs, materials, or detonators found.
Though if the ingredients are indeed "common" household chemicals, I've no doubt that some ex-girlfriend's bottle of peroxide in their medicine cabinet is now proof enough to get them sent away. Heck, I'VE got peroxide at home, AND I have a camera with a flash.
The point being that at this point in time there's a whole lot of pontification, and very few facts. Everyone, even Wired, is running the same damned AP article. And for some reason I'm strongly reminded of the other highly ballyhooed and recently foiled "plot", by individuals with no money, training, materials, plan, or even shoes...
"I for one do not fly direct Singapore to LA using one of those new super jumbo Airbus jetliners because they are generation 1 jets."
Ever see the number of suggested and required repair notices sent out by the FAA on a new jet?
"I do not buy a newly released car because it is a generation 1 vehicle."
You mean like the first generation Toyota hybrids that are being recalled for brake and other issues?
"I do not buy a new technology flat screen TV because it is.. guess what? Generation 1!"
Like the generation 1 screens that had limited life spans and suffered from burn-in problems?
Again, repeat after me: ALL first generation products will have issues. Some more than others. Now, whether or not you us that as an excuse for not buying a first gen product is up to you, and generally depends on where you fall on the early-adopter / I-just-want-it-to-work curve.
So we're not giving Appe a pass... nor Boeing, nor Toyota, nor Sony.
Internals, yes, but externals no. I've noticed that practically every MacBook Pro I've seen has fit and finish issues, most noticably a "bent" lid that curves up at the corners in sort of a "U" shape, the bottom of the U at the latches. This means the lid rocks and compresses when it's closed and you pick up the MBP. Is it so hard to make a flat lid?
"You wind up missing out on a few potential customers or whatever, but this doesn't get documented as hard statistics."
Yeah, I mean hardly anyone that does business maintains site, registration, and customer logs...
"Flash 8 and 9 are not available on Linux"
So I can't reach about 1.5% of the desktops out there? Want to look up the phrase "almost ubiquitous" again?
Dead on, in fact the following quote bears this out:
... said that when his company shipped its squad-based first-person shooter First to Fight last year, it found within a few weeks that more people were trying to log on to multiplayer servers with a single banned serial number than the total number of copies Destineer had sold combined."
"Destineer President Peter Tamte
Reread that sentence: more people tried to play the game with a single hacked serial number than paid for it in the first place.
Apple gets a LOT of milage out of the "it just works" mantra. All that washing their hands of it and saying "it's up to you" would do is piss off a lot of people. They're not going to think the software not working is their fault, no matter what the pretty dialog said, they're going to think it's Apple's fault. And even if they could return it, they're going to be pissing and moaning about it all the way back to the store, and to their friends and coworkers.
Apple doesn't need that kind of hassle, nor do they want or need tons of unhappy customers.
If they do it, they're going to have to spend the time and dollars to it right... or not at all.
Or politically-correct an article. Or correct an article with "facts" everyone knows. Or just "correct" an article.
The problem with your assertion is that the number of people who know nothing, or who "think" they know something, vastly outnumbers those who actually do.
Turn that around. Try checking the R&D numbers for Apple or GM or IBM or GE.
I think you'll find that 20% is a huge number in comparison...
I suspect that if you take the economic demographic for ipod sales you'd find that the intersection between those people and the Neon and Focus customer to be... lacking.
"Yeah, it goes to the shareholders."
I'm REALLY tired of all of the people bashing corporations and acting as if it's a sin to for anyone to make money. Shareholders, huh? Okay, do you have a pension plan? 401K? Interest-bearing bank account? Car loan? Mortgage? Life, car, home, or health insurance? Student-loan? SBL?
Where do you think that money comes from? Did you know that half the stocks in the US are owned by... us, in the form of pension and retirement funds? Or that business and corporate taxes on profit fund the lions share of the money the government runs on?
No.
Is the system perfect? Also no. But while it's easy to say that the system should be smashed, I've yet to see anyone work through the alternatives and come up with something better.
BTW, I've also noticed that many of the same people who cry about how "unfair" the system is cry even louder when their Welfare check is late...
"...we'd get _five times_ the current R&D if we paid for it outright."
If WE paid WHO for it outright? I don't know about you, but I don't know who's doing what in the industry. So who is paying whom? And who's deciding who should get paid in the first place? And all of those researchers are going to be working for who? And are going to need no facilities and administration whatsoever? And the products will produce themselves? And market themselves?
So who's paying again? If not us, and not "evil" corporations, then who? The government? You want a more efficient system and you want the government involved?
That's the funniest thing I've read all day.
Again, "The agreements, according to Apple, mean that more than 70 percent of 2007-model U.S. automobiles..."
Obviously, it's soon enough for them to feel confident about the 70% mark.
Must have missed this...
"Apple Computer on Thursday announced deals with Ford, General Motors and Mazda to integrate the iPod into the stereo systems of most of the carmakers' new models. The agreements, according to Apple, mean that more than 70 percent of 2007-model U.S. automobiles will offer built-in iPod compatibility, a much more reliable experience than trying to sync the players to auto stereo systems after they have been built."
I'd say the writing is on the wall for the CD....
Let's say that, tomorrow, the RIAA came up with a perfect way to stop online file sharing, copying, and downloading, such that once again you had to buy the music. Somehow, I suspect that in that case many of the "potential" sales would become "actual" sales, as I doubt all of those people would suddenly decide to do completely without music altogether. The flip side, of course, is that they'd only buy music they wanted and liked, translating into the "not every download is a lost sale" mantra often expoused around here.
Piracy rests on three main legs: it's free (something for nothing), it's easy, and your chances of getting caught and punished for your actions is extremely low, unlike, say, trying to walk out of Best Buy with a disc under your coat. The music industry attempts to combat "free" by price and convenience (e.g. iTMS-per-track-pricing) and "easy" by DRM.
Many say they would buy if the price was "fair", but that's entirely relative. What if I think it's worth a buck and you think it's worth a quarter? Or if they drop the price of a track to a quarter, and you think a tune by an artist you don't care for is only worth a nickel? In other words, no matter how low you drop the price, someone is going to think it's "unfair" and feel justified in taking what he wants.
They also attempt to hit the third leg with lawsuits, but that fails as a real deterent and isn't cost effective. What I suspect will happen is something on the order of the recent attempts to suspend user internet accounts on the grounds that illegal file sharing violates TOS, but more automated.
But no matter what, you're right that, whatever the rhetoric and rationalizations, most are card-carrying members of the "something for nothing" club.
And the ends hardly ever justify the means, that's just another rationalization...
Why? If it's translating the DirectX calls (which abstract the hardware) into OpenGL calls (which also abstracts the hardware) , why do you need GPU virtualization?
So what do we need to do to get TransGaming's technology incorporated into Parallels, so that ANY game will work?
Chickens and eggs. You're right that Mac's aren't heavy gaming consoles, but a good portion of that is a lack of games. Plus, as mentioned, let it support more games, and you'll get still more cross-over from PC-to-Mac types who might have switched, but didn't want to give up their gaming.
"The problem is that the media giants have decided that they want more than a fair price for their product, so many people look elsewhere to get the things they want..."
No, the problem is that everyone and his brother has their own definition of what constitutes a "fair" price. As your "$20" statement illustrates.
For most things that wouldn't be an issue, as if you think the price for some product is unfair you simply do without it or buy something else. It's not like you're going to die without the lastest piece of junk from 50-Cent. But here, when people decide the price is "unfair" they think they're entitled to it anyway. Back to your statement, why would you buy music from an artist you don't care much for? On the flip side, if you don't care for them, why steal (your word) their music and waste your time in the first place?
Voting with your dollars is one thing. Stealing quite another.
Finally, why should they trust you? You've just clearly stated that anytime you think the terms of the agreement is "unfair" you're going to break it. Where's the "trust" in that?
What if I think it's worth a buck and you think it's worth a quarter? Or if they drop the price of a track to a quarter, and you think a tune by an artist you don't care for is only worth a nickel. In either case are you now justified in stealing whatever you want yet again?
There are quite a few worthwhile arguments out there. Yours, however, isn't one of them...
"Hmm...now, it becomes clear, the children are the terrorists!!!"
I take it you've never been in a house full of two, three, and four-year-olds...
While many corporations do, as you point out, have flaws, you're again attempting to tar all of them with the same brush. And though small businesses are wonderful things, they simply can't generate the economies of scale needed for infrastructure, research, manufacturing, shipping, mining, medicine, agriculture, power production, and more I don't have the time to name.
Promote Fuller's "Small is Beautiful" mindset all you want, but realize that there are many situations where that model simply doesn't apply.
We've bypassed the ability to carry our population with communes and "community" gardens and I don't know about you, but I spent many summers growing up on a farm, and I have no fantasies about going back to "nature". Living off the land is boring, never-ending, back-breaking work, and I'm more than happy to leave that job in the hands of those who want to do it.
Sorry, but I still have to believe that you, "hippy" or not, still haven't thought things out, and that I, in fact, won the mental bet I placed when I asked for your "solution" to the problem: You don't have one.
"The best value for your dollar would be Linux for 90+% of people."
With just over 1% of the existing desktop market, I doubt it. And even that number is deceiving, with hundred's of distro's fragmenting even that percentage. In many cases "free" is worth exactly what you paid for it.
Yeah. We need a good "American" to play a cop, not some Australian, but someone of good red-blooded Irish or Scottish descent.
Wait...
"Would that be the same business economics that would say Windows is the best operating system because it made Bill Gates makes the most money?"
Please. You're smarter than that, and economics says no such thing. It may be the most used, but it's far from being the best. And it's the most used due to a large number of economic forces, which translates mainly into choices made by lots and lots of people, businesses and consumers, who looked at the choices available and decided, based on their own self-interests.
But if you're done setting up straw men and knocking them down, perhaps you can answer the question about how you don't ever want the best value for your dollar? And why business owners should feel any different?
All I hear are rants and raves and cries about how things are unfair and how all corporations are evil. Fine. But what's your SOLUTION? I want to hear one. And one that works, not some utopian pie-in-the-sky theory that ignores reality and the human condition and harkens back to the "good old days" when everyone was down on the farm growing corn... and dying at 40.
So what is it? No finger pointing at "them". No "should's" or "it would nice if's". For once, if possible, put aside your rightous indignation and in plain language tell me your solution.
Aluminum, yes. Because it's well crafted and a joy to use. And you forgot the weight. And the fact that none of the other alternatives legally run OS X. So there are no "equivalents". A system is more than a processor, memory, and a disk drive...