"I think this is true, although perhaps a bit too strong. What's interesting to me is *why* it's true, because I've found that most people are quite honest. They wouldn't dream of stealing a CD from a store, so why would they create an infringing copy of the same content? "
In addition to the points you make (which I partly agree with, and partly disagree with), there's also the fact that it's near impossible to get caught doing the latter compared with the former.
There's a saying, "One's morality can be measured by how they act when they know nobody is watching."
you *trust* the consumer not to violate copyright law... Write me a ticket if you catch me speeding, but don't put a governor on my car that won't allow me to speed. Lock me up if I bash someone with a club, but don't handcuff me at birth. That's the way it has to work.
So, retail stores should simply trust the "customers" and remove the scanners at the doorways? Movie theaters should simply trust the "customers" and not check for tickets at the theater entrance? I could go on and on. It was shown that the scanners at the doorways of retail stores were needed because the shoplifters weren't being caught. It's even harder to catch internet pirates of media/software/etc, and you *know* that, so other measures besides "prosecute the offender when you catch them" are needed. I don't like DRM, but your solution isn't a solution at all, it's intellectually dishonest garbage. Proposing a solution that you *know* doesn't work at all is extremely disingenuous.
Well, removing IE would remove APIs that other apps rely on. Same with WMP.
And: If you remove QuickTime from OSX, you cripple the OS since many apps and parts of the OS rely on the QuickTime API. If you remove Safari, including webkit, you cripple the OS sicne many apps and parts of the OS rely on webkit.
"Does Windows offer a anything comparable to the iLife suite of programs with each install?"
Windows doesn't offer iLife apps (well, it offers some of it (WMP and Windows Movie Maker, and Vista will have a DVD Maker), but many OEMs do. And this is no different than Macs, for OSX doesn't offer iLife, rather, the OEM does with hardware.
It's not true that Office 2007 doesn't do anything that Office 2003 doesn't. Office 2007 has many new features and extended capabilities. Hell, even Excel's maximum spreadsheet dimensions (number of columns and rows) has been hugely increased (if I recall, the increase is literally exponential).
506. Criminal offenses: (a) Criminal Infringement. - Any person who infringes a copyright willfully either -
(1) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or
(2) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000,
shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, United States Code. For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement.
So the criminal threshold is $1000 worth of works in 180 days. I guess as long as you stay under that threshold, you're only liable for civil violations.
iPod is "cool" now, but how cool will it be when it's being used by seemingly everybody? When a teen sees that he's using the same gear as his parents, his teachers, the mailman, etc, how long will he still think that it's cool? That's when you'll see the younger set looking for iPod alternatives, and one of these alternatives will become the new "cool" thing, then you'll see iPod's dominance begin its gradual decline.
Even Jobs knows this, which is why he's trying to milk the iPod for all it's worth while he can. $99 Apple-branded iPod leather cases, anyone?
To those noting that DOC is 4 times larger than OpenXML, and are therefore gloating that this proves that DOC is bloated, how about Adobe's PDF?
I've just downloaded the just released ECMA Draft 1.4 OpenXML Specs. They are 5 files, available in both DOCX (the OpenXML version of DOC) and PDF. The PDF files are 4 to 7 times larger than the DOCX files (except for the "Part 3 - Primer" doc, where the PDF file is only 1.2 times larger than the corresponding DOCX file). For the main file, "Part 4 - Markup Language Reference", the PDF version is is 42MB and the DOCX version is 10MB.
"Can we please just have an option to use "classic mode" when you first start Word: "Click here if you're afraid of change or using an outdated system". At least this doesn't negatively affect those of us who want to move forward."
The problem is that the "classic" UI was already overburdened, and Office 2007 adds even more features. There's just no way to add all that to the old UI (Jensen Harris has posted that it would require 17 more task panes, or a task pane just to manage task panes, and umpeen more toolbars, etc, or something like that).
Also, a "classic mode" would tempt people to keep using the old UI, so they'd miss out on the new features and the features that have previously been hidden. Also, Microsoft would be forced to maintain the classic UI into the future, which wastes development resources.
Even Microsoft says that they won't be competitive with iPod for at least 5 years (and I think that's overly optimistic). iPod has such a large brandname recognition; it'll take long time to compete against that.
I've read that copyright infringment is a civil offense, unless you reach a certain threshold (for example, "sharing" $1000 worth of copyrighted material over 12 months (I forget what the actual threshold is)), at which point it becomes a criminal offense.
Regarding the term "file sharing", isn't that misleading? Sharing an object implies there's one object being shared among people, and at any one time, one of those people has the object and the others do not, or they all "have" that single object because they're all in the same location. What you're referring to is file "copying". "Sharing" is a feel-good euphamism for what's going on.
Microsoft has been paying quarterly dividends for a few years now. And couple years ago they paid a massive 20 billion dollar dividend, I think the largest dividend payout in history.
The story is just talking about the option to keep the ribbon in a minimized and only extend when actually used, in which case it looks more like a menu, but it's still a ribbon. This is NOT the default setting.
Just to amend my previous comment, if you've ever seen a hex-dump of a.doc file, you see a lot of "empty space" that's filled with 0's (all that space would disappear if the file were zip compressed, but that's another matter). The XML version doesn't have that empty space to begin with, so there's a savings right there. But the XML data does take up more space than the "non-empty" space of a.doc file, since XML is stored as text rather than binary. But then zip compression cuts down on the space that the XML text takes up.
Most of the reduction in file size is due to the fact that OpenXML, like other XML document formats, stores the various pieces in zip files. The zip compression is what's lowering file size.
The story is just talking about the option to make the ribbon minimized and autohide, in which case it looks more like a menu, but it's still a ribbon. The autohide/minimized setting is not the default setting.
Everyone on slashdot thinks he's an "expert" on "everything", and speaks in a manner accordingly. (But in reality, most around here don't know what they're talking about.:))
The most common complaint voiced around here against Vista is that Vista filled with DRM, that is, Vista supports "more DRM" than XP. That "more DRM" is/was the ability to play protected BR and HD-DVD discs. Vista32 now won't have that ability. So your "Vista is evil because it shoves DRM down our throats!!" complaints are now moot.:p
The HD content you're currently enjoying is unprotected (or, at least not protected with AACS, the DRM used for HD-DVD and BR discs), and such unprotected content will run on Vista32, Win32, Ubuntu (assuming there's a Linux player available), etc. This issue doesn't affect unprotected discs.
Slashdot Mirror
"I think this is true, although perhaps a bit too strong. What's interesting to me is *why* it's true, because I've found that most people are quite honest. They wouldn't dream of stealing a CD from a store, so why would they create an infringing copy of the same content? "
In addition to the points you make (which I partly agree with, and partly disagree with), there's also the fact that it's near impossible to get caught doing the latter compared with the former.
There's a saying, "One's morality can be measured by how they act when they know nobody is watching."
I regularly get the "Spinning Beachball of Death" on my Mac.
So, retail stores should simply trust the "customers" and remove the scanners at the doorways? Movie theaters should simply trust the "customers" and not check for tickets at the theater entrance? I could go on and on. It was shown that the scanners at the doorways of retail stores were needed because the shoplifters weren't being caught. It's even harder to catch internet pirates of media/software/etc, and you *know* that, so other measures besides "prosecute the offender when you catch them" are needed. I don't like DRM, but your solution isn't a solution at all, it's intellectually dishonest garbage. Proposing a solution that you *know* doesn't work at all is extremely disingenuous.
"When we upgraded her computer to OSX, there was no iLife - unless we wanted to pay an extra $100."
;-)
That's because iLife doesn't come with OSX; it comes with Mac computers and is available for sale at retail.
Not that this goes against your post; I'm just adding it to serve as illumination for other readers.
Well, removing IE would remove APIs that other apps rely on. Same with WMP.
And:
If you remove QuickTime from OSX, you cripple the OS since many apps and parts of the OS rely on the QuickTime API.
If you remove Safari, including webkit, you cripple the OS sicne many apps and parts of the OS rely on webkit.
There's no difference here.
"Does Windows offer a anything comparable to the iLife suite of programs with each install?"
Windows doesn't offer iLife apps (well, it offers some of it (WMP and Windows Movie Maker, and Vista will have a DVD Maker), but many OEMs do.
And this is no different than Macs, for OSX doesn't offer iLife, rather, the OEM does with hardware.
At least in the new ads, the Mac Guy isn't dressed like a bum. That's one improvement!
You really think that MS doesn't provide the ability for document collaboration over corporate networks?
It's not true that Office 2007 doesn't do anything that Office 2003 doesn't. Office 2007 has many new features and extended capabilities. Hell, even Excel's maximum spreadsheet dimensions (number of columns and rows) has been hugely increased (if I recall, the increase is literally exponential).
Well, maybe that's the point.
So the criminal threshold is $1000 worth of works in 180 days. I guess as long as you stay under that threshold, you're only liable for civil violations.
iPod is "cool" now, but how cool will it be when it's being used by seemingly everybody? When a teen sees that he's using the same gear as his parents, his teachers, the mailman, etc, how long will he still think that it's cool? That's when you'll see the younger set looking for iPod alternatives, and one of these alternatives will become the new "cool" thing, then you'll see iPod's dominance begin its gradual decline.
Even Jobs knows this, which is why he's trying to milk the iPod for all it's worth while he can. $99 Apple-branded iPod leather cases, anyone?
To those noting that DOC is 4 times larger than OpenXML, and are therefore gloating that this proves that DOC is bloated, how about Adobe's PDF?
I've just downloaded the just released ECMA Draft 1.4 OpenXML Specs. They are 5 files, available in both DOCX (the OpenXML version of DOC) and PDF.
The PDF files are 4 to 7 times larger than the DOCX files (except for the "Part 3 - Primer" doc, where the PDF file is only 1.2 times larger than the corresponding DOCX file).
For the main file, "Part 4 - Markup Language Reference", the PDF version is is 42MB and the DOCX version is 10MB.
Just adding some perspective.
"Can we please just have an option to use "classic mode" when you first start Word: "Click here if you're afraid of change or using an outdated system". At least this doesn't negatively affect those of us who want to move forward."
The problem is that the "classic" UI was already overburdened, and Office 2007 adds even more features. There's just no way to add all that to the old UI (Jensen Harris has posted that it would require 17 more task panes, or a task pane just to manage task panes, and umpeen more toolbars, etc, or something like that).
Also, a "classic mode" would tempt people to keep using the old UI, so they'd miss out on the new features and the features that have previously been hidden. Also, Microsoft would be forced to maintain the classic UI into the future, which wastes development resources.
No, it's better to make a clean break.
Even Microsoft says that they won't be competitive with iPod for at least 5 years (and I think that's overly optimistic). iPod has such a large brandname recognition; it'll take long time to compete against that.
I've read that copyright infringment is a civil offense, unless you reach a certain threshold (for example, "sharing" $1000 worth of copyrighted material over 12 months (I forget what the actual threshold is)), at which point it becomes a criminal offense.
Regarding the term "file sharing", isn't that misleading? Sharing an object implies there's one object being shared among people, and at any one time, one of those people has the object and the others do not, or they all "have" that single object because they're all in the same location. What you're referring to is file "copying". "Sharing" is a feel-good euphamism for what's going on.
Microsoft has been paying quarterly dividends for a few years now. And couple years ago they paid a massive 20 billion dollar dividend, I think the largest dividend payout in history.
The story is just talking about the option to keep the ribbon in a minimized and only extend when actually used, in which case it looks more like a menu, but it's still a ribbon. This is NOT the default setting.
6 72345.aspx
See Jensen Harris' blog entry of a July 20 for accurate info, including a video of the minimized ribbon in action:
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/07/20/
Just to amend my previous comment, if you've ever seen a hex-dump of a .doc file, you see a lot of "empty space" that's filled with 0's (all that space would disappear if the file were zip compressed, but that's another matter). .doc file, since XML is stored as text rather than binary. But then zip compression cuts down on the space that the XML text takes up.
The XML version doesn't have that empty space to begin with, so there's a savings right there. But the XML data does take up more space than the "non-empty" space of a
Most of the reduction in file size is due to the fact that OpenXML, like other XML document formats, stores the various pieces in zip files. The zip compression is what's lowering file size.
The story is just talking about the option to make the ribbon minimized and autohide, in which case it looks more like a menu, but it's still a ribbon. The autohide/minimized setting is not the default setting.
6 72345.aspx
See Jensen Harris' blog entry of a July 20 for accurate info:
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/07/20/
I swear, the tech media is getting worse and worse with their misleading, inaccurate, and shallow stories.
"You tread heavily, but you speak the truth." LOL
:))
Everyone on slashdot thinks he's an "expert" on "everything", and speaks in a manner accordingly. (But in reality, most around here don't know what they're talking about.
The most common complaint voiced around here against Vista is that Vista filled with DRM, that is, Vista supports "more DRM" than XP. That "more DRM" is/was the ability to play protected BR and HD-DVD discs. Vista32 now won't have that ability. So your "Vista is evil because it shoves DRM down our throats!!" complaints are now moot. :p
The HD content you're currently enjoying is unprotected (or, at least not protected with AACS, the DRM used for HD-DVD and BR discs), and such unprotected content will run on Vista32, Win32, Ubuntu (assuming there's a Linux player available), etc. This issue doesn't affect unprotected discs.