Oil doesn't have to run out. The supply simply has to be disrupted due to war or some other economic or natural cause (as in last summer's hurricanes). Let the disruption last long enough, and I suspect that people will wish they HAD some other option.
"Inexperience can mitigate the benefits of any technology..."
Inexperience and ignorance. And it sounds as if it applies to you and to this situation. I don't see how you can rant against "bloated" technologies you never bothered to learn. Without that knowledge, you don't understand everything that's happening behind the scenes and, since that scares you, you stick with the subset of the developmentatl universe you do know, no matter how appropriate, or inappropriate, it may be to the problem at hand.
I strongly suspect that once you've moved on to other victims, the next developer the guy hires will take one look at your carefully-crafted optimum solution, shudder, and then rewrite the whole thing.
Perhaps not, but the burden of proof is beginning to shift. And I suspect a bit of an inconvenience will be in order after the feds grab all of your computers looking for the download childed porn, mass-mail spam lists, terrorist bomb plans, and/or infringed music and movies.
You have that backwards. The other services are charging 79 cents in an attempt to steal market share from iTMS. Apple has mind share, market share, the iPod, iTunes on Mac and Windows, and an integrated service. Everyone else is lowballing price to compete.
And while we're on the subject, "most all" notebooks these days use a power brick to supply DC power. A move which also allows them to easily use 12v DC car chargers and plug into airline power outlets. In fact, I dare say that more notebooks do that than they use a specific CD/DVD drive form factor... which is why I made the suggestion in the first place.
"They just have a different front bezel attached."
Precisely. Often permanently attached. And not "all" support an extra battery at that location. And, of course, there are notebooks and sub-notebooks without CD-ROM bays at all. And Macs with slot-loading, non-removeable drives. Or Panasonic Toughbooks with their top-loading drives. Or...
Never mind. It's apparent that "most all" of the notebooks with which you're personally familiar adequately represent the entire notebook universe.
I don't get it. Practically every manufacturer uses a different form factor for CD bays, and many more than one. How hard is it going to be to find one of these for your favorite notebook? What about notebooks that don't have swapable bays?
A better option would be to make a power "brick" with a DC output and a number of tips for popular notebooks, much as currently done for universal power supplies. You could then make a single device that works with a lot more notebooks, and have more power available as it's not constrained to fit into a particular form factor.
This is one of my biggest issues with Apple. Like an anorexic teenager, it seems like their products can never be thin enough. It's not enough to be faster, better, etc., they have to employ every advanced technique in the book to make the next generation even slimmer and smaller. In short, "sexier".
Of course, that only leads us into the present situation of having a iPod that can hold a hundred hours or more of video... and play two. Or of having a cool new notebook... whose battery won't even last until lunch, and which loses features because the some of the components are no longer small enough.
Just ONCE I'd like Apple to employ all of those wonderful, space-saving enhancements--and then NOT make the device smaller. Fill all of that new, extra, available space with a battery that lasts long enough for us to enjoy and USE the silly thing.
My aluminum G4 Powerbook was thin enough, thank you.
Given how thoroughly you missed the mark on all counts, I suggest that in the future you get at least 10 independent teams of engineers and physicists to thoroughly check any plans... that you make.
"If I want to sit in a restraunt and talk to my mate over a headset it is no louder..."
False to fact. Most people who talk on a phone do so at a level twice as loud as that of a "normal" conversation in the same setting. Three times louder if it's a headset. In a way it's much like the idiot who shouts to you while wearing headphones and listening to music. Subconsciously, he thinks you can't hear him over the noise. If you have a poor connection, phone at low volume, or you or the recipient is in a nosiy environment or has trouble hearing, you WILL automatically raise your voice.
I suspect if someone recorded your conversations both on and off the phone, you'd be surprised...
Regarding caps, perhaps the ISPs could charge per gigabyte on home accounts. Not for normal downstream usage, however, but for the amount of "upstream" data sent.
Back in the day, some people might copy a VHS tape or two for a friend. Few would do more than that, however, because it took time to do so, and you had to buy the tapes. There was a cost involved.
In a way, the proliferation of torrents is similar to that of spam. There's no cost to breaking the law once you've paid for your connection. But perhaps if a person had to pay their own money to share that music with 10,000 friends, most would revert back to "sharing" only with their real friends.
Yeah, pretend to be funny, when you know perfectly well that any church, non-profit organization, industry trade group or association, special-interest group, support group, watch group, hobby, OOS project, fan club, political action group, or sport has tons of dedicated or special interest mailing lists.
I guess AOL folk don't belong to any of those either...
"And, I've actually found a performance cars is more safe....I've been able to get out of the way of many an idiot that almost hit me...that instant acceleration, along with handling and braking has gotten me out of many a potential wreck."
I'm not sure the logic tracks here, because if that technology goes into production and becomes widespread (as implied) then your "high-performance" car becomes just one of many equally high-performance vehicles careening together through traffic. With, I dare say, the majority driven by "idiots" who think they're safer.
"...but where on earth does one get a reasonably priced production car that does 0-60 in FOUR seconds."
The better question is: For all practical purposes, why you NEED a reasonably priced production car that does 0-60 in FOUR seconds? Are in that much of a hurry to get to the next stoplight?
To quote: "This is a room full of people whose living depends on this working. You're getting pushback to the point of hostility. If you can't sell this to us, how are you going to sell it to the target 16-45 demographic?"
"People need to start standing up for their RIGHTS again..."
Personally, I think that's a big part of the problem. Too many idiots think that means standing up for THEIR rights, and be damned to everyone and everything else.
Reread my reply. I said charge (as in surcharge) by byte (kilo, mega, giga, take your pick) for UPSTREAM usage. Like cell phone charges, your first N "minutes" would be free.
As to some of your other complaints, most of the big ISPs don't (for good or bad) let home accounts run websites anyway. And I suspect the profile difference between a worker or student who needs to upload a "large" file and a torrent server is rather significant. Yes, there are "legitimate" uses, but you know, I suspect every computer on the planet ought to be running Linux by now... given the number of "legitimate" distros being downloaded off bittorrent.
And as to $9.95 movies, there are a lot of bad ones, but a lot of popular movies only a few years old are available that way as well. Including a lot of "classics". BTW, I get most of my new releases at Target for $16, others get them even cheaper at Costco. Serenity is $17 at Amazon. Who pays retail prices for movies?
Finally, as near as I can tell, "the actions of a few" are why I have to lock my house and car, spend hours in line at the airport, and why parents have to go through what seems to be the same level of security just to pick up their kids out of day care.
My question to you is why, instead of ranting at me, are you not ranting at the people who think they're entitled to whatever it is they want, without charge or consequence, and who're escalating this thing just as much as the "labels" who simply want to protect their investments. Talk about "the actions of a few" who're spoiling it for everyone else...
"...w if you invented a replicator, then you'd have people capable of making free food..."
While most of your comments are relatively fair (even if I disagree with some) I did want to comment on the often-quoted replicator analogy. Yes, if we had one we probably could solve many of these issues... but we don't. So what we have is a imbalance, because we do have a replicator (of sorts) for content.
However, a replicator can only replicate something for which an existing pattern exists. So content must still be created. Further, it must be created in an environment in which other replicators do NOT exist. So cash is still needed on the creation side of the equation, because cash is needed to buy food and pay the rent.
You claim that prices have stayed the "same", and have not gone down. Odd, because, I can buy a lot of DVDs on sale for $6 at WalMart, and many more for $9.95. Even if the retail price of a CD had not gone down over the last several decades (it has, but ignore that) you seem to forget that the price of nearly everything ELSE (food, clothing, housing, transportation) has gone up almost 100-200% during the time the price of a CD has decreased. So, inflation-adjusted, you're paying roughly $5 for that $15 CD on the shelf.
Finally, do I think loaning a book or CD to a friend is fair. Yes. Unfortunately, too many people have 10,000 "friends". In short, like my Best Buy example, too many people have abused the privilege.
Perhaps the ISPs should charge per byte, not for downloads, but for uploads. Because, in a way, the proliferation of torrents is similar to that of spam. There's no cost to breaking the law. But perhaps if it cost money to share that music with those 10,000 friends, some might revert back to "sharing" with their real friends.
Yeah, "...saying they want desktops cluttered with unnecessary features" just throws a bit of bias into the pool, with "cluttered" as a negative. Users actually want uncluttered desktops WITH all of the features available they might need.
what to do when you propose an idea but millions of other people disagree?
I propose to grow food and sell it. Millions of people, who'd prefer free food, would rather steal it. Food isn't free, and costs money to produce. What to do? While not a perfect analogy, the point is that the "disagreement" may not be rational, and that someone's wants and desires may conflict with practical realities.
People give allofmp3 as an example of "reasonably" priced unencumbered music that they'd pay for, and as an indication of a pricing model the industry should follow. All well and good. They tend to miss the point, however, that it's easy to sell a song for a nickel when you didn't have to produce it in the first place. Like it or not, content creation takes money. And in some cases, a lot of it.
... using DRM is not meeting in the middle. since you refuse to budge no middle ground can be reached
What middle ground? Apparently the endpoint desired by the "consumer" is free (or nearly so) unencumbered music/video that they can share with as many "friends" as they want. Sorry, but to my mind that's not reasonable, nor practical. And as the early days of VHS have shown, people will not "honor" voluntary restrictions. That's how MacroVision came into play. You're correct, of course, that any form of security will inconvenience someone. Tough. I'd prefer not having clerks escort my purchases at Best Buy, but it seems that too many others have abused the privilege.
a world that lives by supply and demand. the demand for your products IS elastic
Yes, it is. And so are your choices. Buy it now at the price asked, or wait until it comes down it price, as it always does, or refuse to buy it at all. Unfortunately, too many apparently can't wait, must have it now, and refuse to pay the asking price. Price too high? Maybe. But a free market has shaped it into what most people will pay for that content at that time. If enough people don't buy it, the price will be dropped. Supply and demand.
But, a price higher than some might wish is not grounds for stealing whatever they want, simply because they want it. Desire is not a "right".
Slashdot Mirror
Oil doesn't have to run out. The supply simply has to be disrupted due to war or some other economic or natural cause (as in last summer's hurricanes). Let the disruption last long enough, and I suspect that people will wish they HAD some other option.
Inexperience and ignorance. And it sounds as if it applies to you and to this situation. I don't see how you can rant against "bloated" technologies you never bothered to learn. Without that knowledge, you don't understand everything that's happening behind the scenes and, since that scares you, you stick with the subset of the developmentatl universe you do know, no matter how appropriate, or inappropriate, it may be to the problem at hand.
I strongly suspect that once you've moved on to other victims, the next developer the guy hires will take one look at your carefully-crafted optimum solution, shudder, and then rewrite the whole thing.
Perhaps not, but the burden of proof is beginning to shift. And I suspect a bit of an inconvenience will be in order after the feds grab all of your computers looking for the download childed porn, mass-mail spam lists, terrorist bomb plans, and/or infringed music and movies.
You have that backwards. The other services are charging 79 cents in an attempt to steal market share from iTMS. Apple has mind share, market share, the iPod, iTunes on Mac and Windows, and an integrated service. Everyone else is lowballing price to compete.
And a prize to the first one who can tell me the octal code for a NOP from memory. No fair Googling.
And while we're on the subject, "most all" notebooks these days use a power brick to supply DC power. A move which also allows them to easily use 12v DC car chargers and plug into airline power outlets. In fact, I dare say that more notebooks do that than they use a specific CD/DVD drive form factor... which is why I made the suggestion in the first place.
Precisely. Often permanently attached. And not "all" support an extra battery at that location. And, of course, there are notebooks and sub-notebooks without CD-ROM bays at all. And Macs with slot-loading, non-removeable drives. Or Panasonic Toughbooks with their top-loading drives. Or...
Never mind. It's apparent that "most all" of the notebooks with which you're personally familiar adequately represent the entire notebook universe.
A better option would be to make a power "brick" with a DC output and a number of tips for popular notebooks, much as currently done for universal power supplies. You could then make a single device that works with a lot more notebooks, and have more power available as it's not constrained to fit into a particular form factor.
Of course, that only leads us into the present situation of having a iPod that can hold a hundred hours or more of video... and play two. Or of having a cool new notebook... whose battery won't even last until lunch, and which loses features because the some of the components are no longer small enough.
Just ONCE I'd like Apple to employ all of those wonderful, space-saving enhancements--and then NOT make the device smaller. Fill all of that new, extra, available space with a battery that lasts long enough for us to enjoy and USE the silly thing.
My aluminum G4 Powerbook was thin enough, thank you.
Given how thoroughly you missed the mark on all counts, I suggest that in the future you get at least 10 independent teams of engineers and physicists to thoroughly check any plans... that you make.
Please. I think you're severely underestimating the current administration.
False to fact. Most people who talk on a phone do so at a level twice as loud as that of a "normal" conversation in the same setting. Three times louder if it's a headset. In a way it's much like the idiot who shouts to you while wearing headphones and listening to music. Subconsciously, he thinks you can't hear him over the noise. If you have a poor connection, phone at low volume, or you or the recipient is in a nosiy environment or has trouble hearing, you WILL automatically raise your voice.
I suspect if someone recorded your conversations both on and off the phone, you'd be surprised...
Back in the day, some people might copy a VHS tape or two for a friend. Few would do more than that, however, because it took time to do so, and you had to buy the tapes. There was a cost involved.
In a way, the proliferation of torrents is similar to that of spam. There's no cost to breaking the law once you've paid for your connection. But perhaps if a person had to pay their own money to share that music with 10,000 friends, most would revert back to "sharing" only with their real friends.
I guess AOL folk don't belong to any of those either...
I'm not sure the logic tracks here, because if that technology goes into production and becomes widespread (as implied) then your "high-performance" car becomes just one of many equally high-performance vehicles careening together through traffic. With, I dare say, the majority driven by "idiots" who think they're safer.
The better question is: For all practical purposes, why you NEED a reasonably priced production car that does 0-60 in FOUR seconds? Are in that much of a hurry to get to the next stoplight?
MPAA speaker finds "choir" unreceptive.
To quote: "This is a room full of people whose living depends on this working. You're getting pushback to the point of hostility. If you can't sell this to us, how are you going to sell it to the target 16-45 demographic?"
Personally, I think that's a big part of the problem. Too many idiots think that means standing up for THEIR rights, and be damned to everyone and everything else.
As to some of your other complaints, most of the big ISPs don't (for good or bad) let home accounts run websites anyway. And I suspect the profile difference between a worker or student who needs to upload a "large" file and a torrent server is rather significant. Yes, there are "legitimate" uses, but you know, I suspect every computer on the planet ought to be running Linux by now... given the number of "legitimate" distros being downloaded off bittorrent.
And as to $9.95 movies, there are a lot of bad ones, but a lot of popular movies only a few years old are available that way as well. Including a lot of "classics". BTW, I get most of my new releases at Target for $16, others get them even cheaper at Costco. Serenity is $17 at Amazon. Who pays retail prices for movies?
Finally, as near as I can tell, "the actions of a few" are why I have to lock my house and car, spend hours in line at the airport, and why parents have to go through what seems to be the same level of security just to pick up their kids out of day care.
My question to you is why, instead of ranting at me, are you not ranting at the people who think they're entitled to whatever it is they want, without charge or consequence, and who're escalating this thing just as much as the "labels" who simply want to protect their investments. Talk about "the actions of a few" who're spoiling it for everyone else...
While most of your comments are relatively fair (even if I disagree with some) I did want to comment on the often-quoted replicator analogy. Yes, if we had one we probably could solve many of these issues... but we don't. So what we have is a imbalance, because we do have a replicator (of sorts) for content.
However, a replicator can only replicate something for which an existing pattern exists. So content must still be created. Further, it must be created in an environment in which other replicators do NOT exist. So cash is still needed on the creation side of the equation, because cash is needed to buy food and pay the rent.
You claim that prices have stayed the "same", and have not gone down. Odd, because, I can buy a lot of DVDs on sale for $6 at WalMart, and many more for $9.95. Even if the retail price of a CD had not gone down over the last several decades (it has, but ignore that) you seem to forget that the price of nearly everything ELSE (food, clothing, housing, transportation) has gone up almost 100-200% during the time the price of a CD has decreased. So, inflation-adjusted, you're paying roughly $5 for that $15 CD on the shelf.
Finally, do I think loaning a book or CD to a friend is fair. Yes. Unfortunately, too many people have 10,000 "friends". In short, like my Best Buy example, too many people have abused the privilege.
Perhaps the ISPs should charge per byte, not for downloads, but for uploads. Because, in a way, the proliferation of torrents is similar to that of spam. There's no cost to breaking the law. But perhaps if it cost money to share that music with those 10,000 friends, some might revert back to "sharing" with their real friends.
That explains the million or so function calls in PHP...
Yeah, "...saying they want desktops cluttered with unnecessary features" just throws a bit of bias into the pool, with "cluttered" as a negative. Users actually want uncluttered desktops WITH all of the features available they might need.
Actually, in the case of operating systems, Apple has just two: OS X and OS X Server.
Simple, clean, and elegant. Like most of their products...
I propose to grow food and sell it. Millions of people, who'd prefer free food, would rather steal it. Food isn't free, and costs money to produce. What to do? While not a perfect analogy, the point is that the "disagreement" may not be rational, and that someone's wants and desires may conflict with practical realities.
People give allofmp3 as an example of "reasonably" priced unencumbered music that they'd pay for, and as an indication of a pricing model the industry should follow. All well and good. They tend to miss the point, however, that it's easy to sell a song for a nickel when you didn't have to produce it in the first place. Like it or not, content creation takes money. And in some cases, a lot of it.
What middle ground? Apparently the endpoint desired by the "consumer" is free (or nearly so) unencumbered music/video that they can share with as many "friends" as they want. Sorry, but to my mind that's not reasonable, nor practical. And as the early days of VHS have shown, people will not "honor" voluntary restrictions. That's how MacroVision came into play. You're correct, of course, that any form of security will inconvenience someone. Tough. I'd prefer not having clerks escort my purchases at Best Buy, but it seems that too many others have abused the privilege.
a world that lives by supply and demand. the demand for your products IS elastic
Yes, it is. And so are your choices. Buy it now at the price asked, or wait until it comes down it price, as it always does, or refuse to buy it at all. Unfortunately, too many apparently can't wait, must have it now, and refuse to pay the asking price. Price too high? Maybe. But a free market has shaped it into what most people will pay for that content at that time. If enough people don't buy it, the price will be dropped. Supply and demand.
But, a price higher than some might wish is not grounds for stealing whatever they want, simply because they want it. Desire is not a "right".
Yeah. It's not like the USSR invaded Afghanistan and tried to bomb it into the stone age before we did... wait.