Yes. I would have to recoup those costs somehow or go out of business or make less money for myself. How long do you think I could pay into the tax base of the government at a loss to my business?
That's (in part) my point. You seem to be incapable of thinking about more than one variable at a time... try harder.
Not *all* increases can be passed along to consumers, because the price will become higher than the market will bear. The rule is psuedo-absolute (though still with an upper bound) only in examples such as cigarettes, gax, and alcohol because there is no alternative. People want/need those things, and nothing else can take their place for %99.9 of the population, given all current variables being where they are.
Now this is where it gets tricky when it comes to petroleum and gasoline: if the impetus were great enough, some of those variables likely would change, and alternatives would become available. At which point it would become analogous to industries such as, say, Sweet-Tart production, where every tax increase on isomalt can *not* be compensated by a price rise, because a lot of people will by M&Ms, sourballs, or lemonheads instead if Sweet-Tarts are ten cents more expensive. Get it?
And I've been out of college and working in businesses, including the one run by my family, for ten years. Thanks for the advice, though.
A smart, efficient business (which big oil certainly is) is already charging more or less the max the market will profitably bear at any given moment. They can spike prices for a few weeks during the peak summer season, or when there's some "catastrophe" in the news, because people say, "Damn, this sucks, but I know why it's going up"--because they think they *do* know, even though of course it's just profiteering. In this way they slowly raise the acceptable "steady state", with a spike and then a partial rollback.
But if there's no particularly apparent reason for it to be going up, and it keeps going up, behavior changes will be much more forthcoming because people will feel like it's a ripoff (supply and demand, in the end, is nothing but a study of human psychology--never forget this fact, people who do talk about the invisible hand endlessly and almost always get it wrong, and are usually libertarians). Most people can easily carpool or take public transport, and would start doing so if there were a sustained price increase without a good justification in the mass media.
Moral of the story is, tax on a company has comparitively little impact on the price of a product, and people who tell you it does need to go back to school.
Their instance to using the iPhone Trademark regardless of the fact that Cisco owns it will only make Cisco's case of proving it has been harmed easier as it is clear that there is a demand for products under the iPhone moniker and hence they are well within their legal rights.
Huh? You're exactly wrong.
Trademark is about a company having a right to a name because they have marketed a product using that name. You're claiming that the demand for the Apple iPhone means that there's a demand for something, anything, called an iPhone, and thus Cisco has been harmed because they hold a trademark on the name. This is obviously silly and nothing to do with the law. There isn't a demand for an iPhone--there is a demand for a phone made by Apple, makers of the iPod.
This is how it works:
There's a demand for the product. The product is known by a name. Not the other way around. Trademark doesn't work on the premise that there is a demand for something (even if it doesn't exist) under name XYZ, and thus it's valuable. You have to already be using the mark, ie, created its value by created demand for the product so-named, to have a case.
Ah, I see where you're going. Sounded like a direct comparison.
I understand the feeling, that's how I am about cameras. I'd rather repair a classic for my use then buy something off the shelf. But, if I could get a new Zeiss Ikon for $1000 less than it sells for I would.
Of course they can't. That's also irrelevant. Apple isn't in that market. In the markets they *are* in, they're not comparatively expensive.
This is like saying that a good wooden canoe is expensive because you can build your own for the cost of some lumber, glue, and sealant. It's apples and oranges. One requires labor and an investment of time, the other doesn't.
Since I know you wouldn't make a comment about something without having a clue, I'm sure you must be aware that if you don't want to use iTunes but want an iPod, there are plenty of third-party tools to copy the songs over from your HD and have them be playable. Or even to synch playlists on your iPod with playlists in non-iTunes audio apps.
I'm sure you're also aware that, if you aren't proficient with a search engine and can't find such an app, you can set up iTunes to do nothing but show a list of all your audio files (left in their places, where you want them to be, not touched at all by iTunes) and dump them on the iPod. You can still use an app of your choice for all your audio play needs on your computer.
Yeah, like the OS on the iPod only serves a niche market.
Damn. My eyes just rolled so hard they fell outta my head.
Also, do a little googling about the PC wars. The closed platform ain't why Apple lost, never was, it's silly revisionist "common knowledge". They had already lost before the Mac, when their offerings were open.
I like how you decry "niche" markets, obviously thinking you're part of the mainstream... when you want an open-source phone and edit the source of its apps. Welcome to being 0.01% (generously) of the cell phone market, genius.
Get a life. In everything but the bargain-basement end and one narrow stripe in the absolute middle-of-the-road (ie, easiest to capitalize on economies of scale), everything Apple does is cheaper than any competitor for equivalent (and often better) specs. Towers, minis, notebooks, MP3 players. In the budget-but-not-trash and everything above the absolute middle (ie, all pro gear) they're anywhere from 10% to 25% cheaper than Dell, Gateway, and the like. We're talking hundreds of dollars on good notebooks, over a thousand on high-end towers.
Do the research yourself, or read any of the myriad articles (even by pro-PC sources) that have looked at this and acknowledge it.
Seriously. Give it up, trolls.
I'm sure this is a troll, but just in case someone who isn't familiar with an iPod sees and believes his post, let us all say it together now:
YOU CAN PLAY NORMAL UNENCUMBERED MP3s ON ANY iPOD.
You don't have to touch the damn iTunes Music Store. You can download all your music from Limewire or whatever the flavor of the month is and put it on your iPOD. You can rip plain old MP3s, AAC, or lossless files from your CDs and use them on an iPod.
Ignore this idiot.
You're all thinking about this in old terms. 8GB, even 4, is fine. Of course more is always better, but you're missing the big picture: this has pretty much *every kind* of current wireless connectivity, and some wired.
How often do most people that are the target market for this stay outside of Wi-Fi range for more than an hour at a time?
STREAMING! Stream, stream, stream--and in the background, erase the episode of "The Office" that you watched on the bus on the way to work and download a new one for the ride home. Not necessarily for money from iTMS, but from your own machine! From your file-sharing method of choice. From your TiVo or iTV or MythTV server.
Sure, it'll be easier when the drive is bigger and you don't have to mess with deleting, but frankly I'd rather stream anyway given decent streaming (ie, not Windows Media or RealPlayer). I realize this doesn't cover every person and every situation, but it sure covers the vast majority.
This is a fundamentally flawed argument. By putting up a website, you are simply making something available. It's not your fault that it's available everywhere, and anyone who chooses to use it must govern themselves according to their local laws.
Online gambling is not "visiting a website". The proprietor takes your credit card and address, and so knows where you are and that said activity is illegal. He's not just "letting you come to him"; he's actively engaging in trade with you.
.... it's not like this is awesome breaking news. I know of at least one institution that's been doing this since the 20th century (as a matter of fact, they likely invented greylisting before anyone had thought to call it that).
Biometrics are just about the worst security around. Far worse than passwords, as they're more easily "cracked" and non-revocable. They're an amazingly, amazingly bad idea and the fact that people fall for it is disheartening.
SecurID/PKI token solutions are infinitely superior. In fact, the feds are continuing to roll out PKI for applications that have traditionally been projected as key markets for biometrics, such as secure building access.
Part of the problem is that the most vocal bits of Ohio tend to be the idiots. There is a substatial portionsof the state (in the NW) which has the highest rates of mental defects in the nation, due largely to groundwater pollution; and there is a large population of ignorant racists that moved up two generations ago from places like Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, for jobs in the automotive factories...
The eastern half of the state is mostly quite nice.
QNX is exceedingly stable. It's the primary OS used for realtime applications, such as vehicle autopiloting. That is, applications that have lives depending on them.
I'm not sure how many people notice this, but classic Unix shell-isms also work in most Mac apps (all of the Apple-produced ones, most of the third-party ones).
IE: ctrl-A = beginning of line, ctrl-E = end of line, ctrl-K = cut line, etc.
I use that for "home" and "end", since I'm used to doing it anyway. And it's friendlier to home-row typists than using separate keys like Home and End.
You anonymous cowards sure like to pimp this. I work at an instution that buys more iBooks than you're ever likely to see in your life. Haven't heard of a single instance of this. I just don't buy that it's the end of the world scenario that you claim it is. I notice all you ever link to is Apple's site about how they're handling the problem. Never something that has data claiming that this is more than an occasional abberation.
Short version: I call shenanigans. Put up or shut up!
Welcome to 1986, where your comment belongs. It's been 20 years since you couldn't upgrade a Mac, genius. From the RAM all the way up to replacing the motherboard. Damn near anything in a Mac (particularly the towers) can be replaced, often (such as RAM, HD) using the exact same parts as would go in a Windows box.
Get a clue.
You said Apple would have to do better to match Falcon. Unless you're talking about the "rad" cases, there's nothing to match. Apple already has their version of "sleek and simple". So your comment makes no sense.
Only 16 year old leet gamerz want a machine that's "bad ass". Everyone else in the world wants something pleasing to the eye that fits into the room. They don't want their desk or office or living room to look like a 16 year old roxxorz the h4l0 up in that mutha. Get real.
Wrong. The number of people who want a rad case with shiny blue lights all over it is very small. The number of people who want an elegant, understated case is quite large. You either work for Falcon, or are 17. No offense; we're all 17 at some point.
Re:One Point For Gmail
on
Gmail vs Pine
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
A perspective from someone who deals with this issue... the reason that Gmail smtp servers end up blacklisted is always (in my experience) due to lag in DNS changes, particularly in propogation of reverse DNS after they change IP ranges entirely.
As opposed to Hotmail, et al, which generally are blacklisted for actual bad acts, like acting as open relays or pumping spam for money and disclaiming responsibility via their various "affiliate" programs.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. I would have to recoup those costs somehow or go out of business or make less money for myself. How long do you think I could pay into the tax base of the government at a loss to my business?
That's (in part) my point. You seem to be incapable of thinking about more than one variable at a time... try harder.
Not *all* increases can be passed along to consumers, because the price will become higher than the market will bear. The rule is psuedo-absolute (though still with an upper bound) only in examples such as cigarettes, gax, and alcohol because there is no alternative. People want/need those things, and nothing else can take their place for %99.9 of the population, given all current variables being where they are.
Now this is where it gets tricky when it comes to petroleum and gasoline: if the impetus were great enough, some of those variables likely would change, and alternatives would become available. At which point it would become analogous to industries such as, say, Sweet-Tart production, where every tax increase on isomalt can *not* be compensated by a price rise, because a lot of people will by M&Ms, sourballs, or lemonheads instead if Sweet-Tarts are ten cents more expensive. Get it?
And I've been out of college and working in businesses, including the one run by my family, for ten years. Thanks for the advice, though.
So if the government instituted a 50% tax on some component of your business, you'd raise prices enough to cover it?
Unlikely.
Absolute statements are moronic.
You fail econ. No offense. Most people do.
A smart, efficient business (which big oil certainly is) is already charging more or less the max the market will profitably bear at any given moment. They can spike prices for a few weeks during the peak summer season, or when there's some "catastrophe" in the news, because people say, "Damn, this sucks, but I know why it's going up"--because they think they *do* know, even though of course it's just profiteering. In this way they slowly raise the acceptable "steady state", with a spike and then a partial rollback.
But if there's no particularly apparent reason for it to be going up, and it keeps going up, behavior changes will be much more forthcoming because people will feel like it's a ripoff (supply and demand, in the end, is nothing but a study of human psychology--never forget this fact, people who do talk about the invisible hand endlessly and almost always get it wrong, and are usually libertarians). Most people can easily carpool or take public transport, and would start doing so if there were a sustained price increase without a good justification in the mass media.
Moral of the story is, tax on a company has comparitively little impact on the price of a product, and people who tell you it does need to go back to school.
Their instance to using the iPhone Trademark regardless of the fact that Cisco owns it will only make Cisco's case of proving it has been harmed easier as it is clear that there is a demand for products under the iPhone moniker and hence they are well within their legal rights.
Huh? You're exactly wrong.
Trademark is about a company having a right to a name because they have marketed a product using that name. You're claiming that the demand for the Apple iPhone means that there's a demand for something, anything, called an iPhone, and thus Cisco has been harmed because they hold a trademark on the name. This is obviously silly and nothing to do with the law. There isn't a demand for an iPhone--there is a demand for a phone made by Apple, makers of the iPod.
This is how it works:
There's a demand for the product. The product is known by a name. Not the other way around. Trademark doesn't work on the premise that there is a demand for something (even if it doesn't exist) under name XYZ, and thus it's valuable. You have to already be using the mark, ie, created its value by created demand for the product so-named, to have a case.
Ah, I see where you're going. Sounded like a direct comparison.
I understand the feeling, that's how I am about cameras. I'd rather repair a classic for my use then buy something off the shelf. But, if I could get a new Zeiss Ikon for $1000 less than it sells for I would.
Of course they can't. That's also irrelevant. Apple isn't in that market. In the markets they *are* in, they're not comparatively expensive.
This is like saying that a good wooden canoe is expensive because you can build your own for the cost of some lumber, glue, and sealant. It's apples and oranges. One requires labor and an investment of time, the other doesn't.
Since I know you wouldn't make a comment about something without having a clue, I'm sure you must be aware that if you don't want to use iTunes but want an iPod, there are plenty of third-party tools to copy the songs over from your HD and have them be playable. Or even to synch playlists on your iPod with playlists in non-iTunes audio apps.
I'm sure you're also aware that, if you aren't proficient with a search engine and can't find such an app, you can set up iTunes to do nothing but show a list of all your audio files (left in their places, where you want them to be, not touched at all by iTunes) and dump them on the iPod. You can still use an app of your choice for all your audio play needs on your computer.
You do know all that, right? I figured.
Yeah, like the OS on the iPod only serves a niche market.
Damn. My eyes just rolled so hard they fell outta my head.
Also, do a little googling about the PC wars. The closed platform ain't why Apple lost, never was, it's silly revisionist "common knowledge". They had already lost before the Mac, when their offerings were open.
I like how you decry "niche" markets, obviously thinking you're part of the mainstream... when you want an open-source phone and edit the source of its apps. Welcome to being 0.01% (generously) of the cell phone market, genius.
Clueless, like the rest of the weenies.
Get a life. In everything but the bargain-basement end and one narrow stripe in the absolute middle-of-the-road (ie, easiest to capitalize on economies of scale), everything Apple does is cheaper than any competitor for equivalent (and often better) specs. Towers, minis, notebooks, MP3 players. In the budget-but-not-trash and everything above the absolute middle (ie, all pro gear) they're anywhere from 10% to 25% cheaper than Dell, Gateway, and the like. We're talking hundreds of dollars on good notebooks, over a thousand on high-end towers. Do the research yourself, or read any of the myriad articles (even by pro-PC sources) that have looked at this and acknowledge it. Seriously. Give it up, trolls.
I'm sure this is a troll, but just in case someone who isn't familiar with an iPod sees and believes his post, let us all say it together now: YOU CAN PLAY NORMAL UNENCUMBERED MP3s ON ANY iPOD. You don't have to touch the damn iTunes Music Store. You can download all your music from Limewire or whatever the flavor of the month is and put it on your iPOD. You can rip plain old MP3s, AAC, or lossless files from your CDs and use them on an iPod. Ignore this idiot.
You're all thinking about this in old terms. 8GB, even 4, is fine. Of course more is always better, but you're missing the big picture: this has pretty much *every kind* of current wireless connectivity, and some wired.
How often do most people that are the target market for this stay outside of Wi-Fi range for more than an hour at a time?
STREAMING! Stream, stream, stream--and in the background, erase the episode of "The Office" that you watched on the bus on the way to work and download a new one for the ride home. Not necessarily for money from iTMS, but from your own machine! From your file-sharing method of choice. From your TiVo or iTV or MythTV server.
Sure, it'll be easier when the drive is bigger and you don't have to mess with deleting, but frankly I'd rather stream anyway given decent streaming (ie, not Windows Media or RealPlayer). I realize this doesn't cover every person and every situation, but it sure covers the vast majority.
This is prima facie absurd.
Gambling in and of itself causes harm: the loss of money. You lose everything and can't pay your bills, we all pay for it.
Exactly the same as seat belts.
(Note: I'm not
This is a fundamentally flawed argument. By putting up a website, you are simply making something available. It's not your fault that it's available everywhere, and anyone who chooses to use it must govern themselves according to their local laws.
Online gambling is not "visiting a website". The proprietor takes your credit card and address, and so knows where you are and that said activity is illegal. He's not just "letting you come to him"; he's actively engaging in trade with you.
.... it's not like this is awesome breaking news. I know of at least one institution that's been doing this since the 20th century (as a matter of fact, they likely invented greylisting before anyone had thought to call it that).
XP has never had that feature. Prove it.
Biometrics are just about the worst security around. Far worse than passwords, as they're more easily "cracked" and non-revocable. They're an amazingly, amazingly bad idea and the fact that people fall for it is disheartening.
SecurID/PKI token solutions are infinitely superior. In fact, the feds are continuing to roll out PKI for applications that have traditionally been projected as key markets for biometrics, such as secure building access.
Part of the problem is that the most vocal bits of Ohio tend to be the idiots. There is a substatial portionsof the state (in the NW) which has the highest rates of mental defects in the nation, due largely to groundwater pollution; and there is a large population of ignorant racists that moved up two generations ago from places like Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, for jobs in the automotive factories...
The eastern half of the state is mostly quite nice.
QNX is exceedingly stable. It's the primary OS used for realtime applications, such as vehicle autopiloting. That is, applications that have lives depending on them.
I'm not sure how many people notice this, but classic Unix shell-isms also work in most Mac apps (all of the Apple-produced ones, most of the third-party ones).
IE: ctrl-A = beginning of line, ctrl-E = end of line, ctrl-K = cut line, etc.
I use that for "home" and "end", since I'm used to doing it anyway. And it's friendlier to home-row typists than using separate keys like Home and End.
You anonymous cowards sure like to pimp this. I work at an instution that buys more iBooks than you're ever likely to see in your life. Haven't heard of a single instance of this. I just don't buy that it's the end of the world scenario that you claim it is. I notice all you ever link to is Apple's site about how they're handling the problem. Never something that has data claiming that this is more than an occasional abberation. Short version: I call shenanigans. Put up or shut up!
Welcome to 1986, where your comment belongs. It's been 20 years since you couldn't upgrade a Mac, genius. From the RAM all the way up to replacing the motherboard. Damn near anything in a Mac (particularly the towers) can be replaced, often (such as RAM, HD) using the exact same parts as would go in a Windows box. Get a clue.
You said Apple would have to do better to match Falcon. Unless you're talking about the "rad" cases, there's nothing to match. Apple already has their version of "sleek and simple". So your comment makes no sense.
Only 16 year old leet gamerz want a machine that's "bad ass". Everyone else in the world wants something pleasing to the eye that fits into the room. They don't want their desk or office or living room to look like a 16 year old roxxorz the h4l0 up in that mutha. Get real.
Wrong. The number of people who want a rad case with shiny blue lights all over it is very small. The number of people who want an elegant, understated case is quite large. You either work for Falcon, or are 17. No offense; we're all 17 at some point.
A perspective from someone who deals with this issue... the reason that Gmail smtp servers end up blacklisted is always (in my experience) due to lag in DNS changes, particularly in propogation of reverse DNS after they change IP ranges entirely.
As opposed to Hotmail, et al, which generally are blacklisted for actual bad acts, like acting as open relays or pumping spam for money and disclaiming responsibility via their various "affiliate" programs.