Or you don't know how to read a mild pun (something implying that nobody in their right mind would seriously suggest mac users are more intelligent than the average computer user) or you're just plain assholes who love a good shout.
Read the parent, then my reply and see in what category you fall.
You might in general have a point, I couldn't say. But here specifically...
Two things: 1) in Europe, statements like biggest, best, most satisfying, blablabla are frowned upon, whereas in the US everything is so biggest that you have to invent a whole range of superlatives for newerestbestest products. 2) we also are a bit sceptical of advertising, and consumers react adversary to ads that they feel are incorrect, immoral or degeneratory. That's why those panels and advisory commisions are so rapid to respond. If not, they get regulations from above, better to do it themselves than to let politicians rule the game.
That's why the G5 ad was banned.
I don't think it's the best ad Apple ever made, and I think it's a bit silly to state you've got the fastest PC while there are so many better reasons to buy an Apple, but I understand why they did it - recover from the "Apple is slow" perception.
What I don't understand is the reaction from those british complainers. For years they've been bombarded with the most ridiculous statements from PeeCee-makers and developers, and now that Apple joins that stupid game it suddenly bothers them...
Yeah, it's a bitch, but in all fairness, blame ourselves for being so culturally diverse (good) and hopelessly hung up on our own little plot of land (bad).
Apple tries to cut across all that diverseness and give us Eurotrashers the same deal. Imagine the amount of work that is, the language-problem alone must be daunting...
I can believe... IBM and others can make a general purpose desktop linux aimed at corporations (Sun has done a pretty good attempt already). I hope it will shake things up a little. I'd rather upgrade straight to OS X, but that's just me...
I can't believe... anybody can make a general purpose linux aimed at the home user. It sort of defeats the purpose of linux at the moment and however much you would WANT a linux for the average home user, it would imply a lot of work, dedication and adherance to rules that a lot of programmers aren't interested in - and why should you be, it's your time, your party, your OS.
If you don't understand cars, you're fated to do menial jobs.
Maybe a stupid comparison, but I'd rather my kid spoke four, five human languages like her parents than have her spend thousands of hours trying to get into the "mind" of her computer.
Yes, I do understand HTML (big deal) and I "get" my computer. Most kids of today do btw.
Suggesting you'll become obsolete when you don't speak computerese - be it through lazyness or cowardice - is really really naive. I think 10-50-100 years from now it will still be about "getting" your fellow man.
As if "speaking" one of hundreds of languages for machines gives you special powers. I know programmers who still don't get their machine - and wrestle with their VCR and toasters. Lack of 'mpathy', I guess.
As long as I can't SAY "OK, print 'this here' and don't go wild on the ink, as a matter of fact, do this one black and white and make it a quicky." I don't want to be bothered with anything else than a screen that has the relevant options on printing and doesn't expect me to TYPE.
Some users need the flexibility of command line, most however don't.
This article is great, but don't kid yourself into believing commands are somehow better for everything.
Look at it this way: one button is one click. One command is between three and 15 'keyboardpunches' - and they all must be the right ones in the right order.
Meaning: as long as we don't have an intuitive natural language INTERFACE - computers with ears and eyes and the muscles to put two and two together - cute UI's are really really wonderful. I love them. They make me happy.
For a label to offer both formats is not too much to ask. In the end delivering digital media to the distributor is way easier and less time consuming than CD production.
But right now, I think the cost of maintaining two formats and the end user confusion associated with this makes it impossible for any shop to do this.
They (except for iTunes, who has excellent reasons to stick to its format) won't make any profit as it is anyway the first couple of years.
In a few years the survivors will be able to be flexible and even offer lossless quality, but now it makes a lot of sense to stick to one format.
1) It is unheard of to give equal shelfspace to all and any label or artist. You have no idea how much that is going to hurt. Are you really bobbing Jobs on the head for treating more than 200 "indies" just like the "biiiig five"? 2) You have not calculated the costs and winnings when Apple is to set its target next year (100 milion songs distributed). Never mind Pepsi. 3) You fail to mention the margin artists get from CD sales. I can already hear the roaring sound of re-negotiations... you think the RIAA can justify big margins on digital sales forever?
I'm part of a very small label (stupidly called "independent" as if the big ones aren't). We will start selling on any and all digital music stores we can get into. Some only offer 50% from sales (because being smaller makes logistics a bigger cost). You can't get a better deal than iTunes.
Here's the cincher: what do you think we have to do to get worldwide digital distribution rights from the artists? Right: talk, explain, ne-go-sh-i-ate.
I'm not saying Jobs is a saint, but you totally, blatantly fail to see the big picture if you think the iTMS is saving the big five and keeps them firmly in the saddle as is. I'm not saying "indies will win against the dark empire", I'm saying there's a new distribution model that is changing the rules and nobody knows where we'll be in five years. Your article is about the most one-sided thing i've read on the topic.
As for your 1c per CD proposal. It's naive to think this can work as is and replace the current model. There needs to be a sort of competitive model. Artists don't live in some marxist fairy land, they live in this cruel, brutal world. You want them to lead the revolution for you?
Now, if you'd say, fuck it, let's do the 1c anyway, regardless, whatever... Then you're talking. It would guarantee a flat income for starting and struggling artists - and would generate a lot of crap music, but that's ok. As a concept it's sound and I don't see how an iTMS or any other store should or would change anything about it. Go for it, tax those media carriers. To be fair you should probably give 0,5c to software authors, but that's ok too.
But this system doesn't make a difference between "good" and "bad" (read popular and unpopular) and as such can't be used to replace sales income. You might think that doesn't matter, and philosophically I'd agree, but if you think musicians will agree, just because they're making music which everybody knows should be free and is elevated and out of here, you haven't played in a band and actually don't know any musicians. They are people for christ sakes.
I want you to imagine taking all the competition out of your profession. In some ways that would be great. But it also means you get paid just as much as that moron there who types l-i-k-e t-h-a-t and doesn't know shit. And if you want to earn more than what's your due (whatever that is) you can always perform, right? Yeah baby yeah.
BTW: our label is largely run by artists. we may be terminally stupid in this, but we're not uninvolved. And we all vote for as many music taxes as possible on non musical folks. That'll teach em for not having rhythm.
Don't worry. Most professional "online multimedia artists" work on a mac.
I honestly don't see them embracing pc-only sparkly stuff. And keep in mind, we're talking about 2006 - at the earliest. By then flash itself may be obsolete.
(and btw: please, keep linux from the desktop - as it is now)
The iTunes installer clearly stated this would happen. I repeat, you got a warning in big letters and simple wording that this would happen.
What the article should have told us:
1) iTunes is made to support the iPod. You expect Apple to bend over to accomodate the competition - even if it was an ex-partner? There are tons of considerations and technical issues. It would be stupid for them to do it otherwise. If you think that's "unfair", look at it this way, iTunes is a free upgrade for iPod owners, if you don't want the upgrade, don't install.
2) iTunes doesn't disable MusicMatch, it disables syncing only, which is the only logical thing to do (see above). iTunes can also "import" all your music with the click of one button, which means you don't really need to use MusicMatch anymore.
3) If you still wish to use MusicMatch, you're left with two choices: - don't install iTunes - install iTunes and use musicmatch without iPod syncing. And I guess, enjoy buying WMA files in the MusicMatch store.
Apple is sooo bad, it's a conspiracy. Right. Meanwhile try finding a music store for mac users that isn't called iTunes.
Linux is nowhere near the desktop. - no GUI rules, total application jungle and no power apps for the end user. Don't get me wrong, I think OO and the Gimp are good programs. They're not however serious Office or Photoshop replacements. - no hardware support - the average person wants their gadgets and stuff to work without having to write a driver or spend hours on end trying to install one. - administrating your machine and keeping it sound and safe is not feasible for about 90% of people that are currently using computers
Windows is on all desktops, but does a half-ass job - sure, you have tremendous power-apps, but you'll lose data ever so often for no apparent reason - there's a sort of plug and play that sometimes works immediately and even works longer than a month. More often than not, however you're frustrated into looking for drivers. - administrating your machine and keeping it sound and safe is not feasible for about 90% of people that are currently using computers
There's only one desktop that really takes the hassle out of computing, and that's OS X.
Disclaimer: I think Windows is friendlier and more foolproof than Linux, but I think Linux is way cooler and an incredible feat in itself. But we're talking about the desktop here.
quote -- "Compare gun deaths in the US to eg gun deaths in Canada, Australia, the EG, all with a varying degree of freedom and accountability, but none of them as personal-protection-gun-crazy as the US.
And, while you are at it, you should also check countries like Mexico, Brazil, Jamaica, and most of the Eastern European countries. All have stringent gun control, and significantly higher murder rates than the US." --unquote
Well, I wouldn't say Brazil has stringent gun control. Not at all. I've been there, for a weapons distruction no less (observer). You wouldn't believe what those guys in the Favela's have. Included: one rocket launcher (bazooka)...
They're now trying to get strict control of legal weapons posession by law, but this most likely won't succeed - Brazil itself is a weapons producing country.
Even though the US has more than its share of poor and uneducated people - for a western country - I am a bit disappointed you don't compare it with Africa, btw. I tried to be fair in my comparison and not directly compare the US with Sweden. And now you have me compare the US with Jamaica?
BTW, I agree, it's not that simple, but you could make it really simple. I compare the pro weapons lobby with the tobacco lobby. Those guys have been claiming for years smoking doesn't cause cancer. And had all sorts of statistics to prove it. Now you have all those people showing figures of mortality rates caused by traffic and the flue, and the high murder rate without guns (while carefully avoiding the term 'culture of violence') which accidentally shoves all deaths by gunshots into a corner.
Why do you think they are so opposed to the term "Culture of violence" in any international treaty?
Because it literally applies to the US.
Which is quite unique because the US - as opposed to other countries that apply for that distinction - for the most part aren't at war and don't suffer internal conflicts.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm still grieving over the death of Apple and now this?
When will it end!!!
Thanks, I couldn't get into Forbes.
Since they most likely don't know about the Internet anyway they won't be bothered with popups, so that's alright.
Let me rephrase and detox for the hopelessly sarcasm-impaired:
Other browsers have this option in a menu or preference pane. Still most users disable popups immediately.
Thus suggesting that a big button is not even necessary for most to rid themselves of popups forever.
Everybody happy? Bland enough for you?
Well, I don't know, arrogant, stupid, shitstains.
Or you don't know how to read a mild pun (something implying that nobody in their right mind would seriously suggest mac users are more intelligent than the average computer user) or you're just plain assholes who love a good shout.
Read the parent, then my reply and see in what category you fall.
Good day to you too, dimwits.
In Safari, this option is very well hidden (in a Menu) and still almost everybody enables it immediately.
Of course you didn't mean to say Mac users are more intelligent than Windows users.
The first time I saw that G5 ad here in the US I wondered how they could get away with total bullshit false advertising like that.
Yeah, as if those fans could really blow you through the wall. Sheez, what do they think we are, dumb?
OK, name me 5 european computer brands.
...
You might in general have a point, I couldn't say. But here specifically
Two things:
1) in Europe, statements like biggest, best, most satisfying, blablabla are frowned upon, whereas in the US everything is so biggest that you have to invent a whole range of superlatives for newerestbestest products.
2) we also are a bit sceptical of advertising, and consumers react adversary to ads that they feel are incorrect, immoral or degeneratory. That's why those panels and advisory commisions are so rapid to respond. If not, they get regulations from above, better to do it themselves than to let politicians rule the game.
That's why the G5 ad was banned.
I don't think it's the best ad Apple ever made, and I think it's a bit silly to state you've got the fastest PC while there are so many better reasons to buy an Apple, but I understand why they did it - recover from the "Apple is slow" perception.
What I don't understand is the reaction from those british complainers. For years they've been bombarded with the most ridiculous statements from PeeCee-makers and developers, and now that Apple joins that stupid game it suddenly bothers them...
You open a bussiness that requires a huge investment and at only 500 millions of sales can generate a profit of 10%.
Take into account they're only at 14,5 million songs now. Meaning they must be making a loss.
Yeah, it's a bitch, but in all fairness, blame ourselves for being so culturally diverse (good) and hopelessly hung up on our own little plot of land (bad).
Apple tries to cut across all that diverseness and give us Eurotrashers the same deal. Imagine the amount of work that is, the language-problem alone must be daunting...
Same with iPhoto
I can believe ...
...
IBM and others can make a general purpose desktop linux aimed at corporations (Sun has done a pretty good attempt already). I hope it will shake things up a little. I'd rather upgrade straight to OS X, but that's just me...
I can't believe
anybody can make a general purpose linux aimed at the home user. It sort of defeats the purpose of linux at the moment and however much you would WANT a linux for the average home user, it would imply a lot of work, dedication and adherance to rules that a lot of programmers aren't interested in - and why should you be, it's your time, your party, your OS.
If you don't understand cars, you're fated to do menial jobs.
Maybe a stupid comparison, but I'd rather my kid spoke four, five human languages like her parents than have her spend thousands of hours trying to get into the "mind" of her computer.
Yes, I do understand HTML (big deal) and I "get" my computer. Most kids of today do btw.
Suggesting you'll become obsolete when you don't speak computerese - be it through lazyness or cowardice - is really really naive. I think 10-50-100 years from now it will still be about "getting" your fellow man.
As if "speaking" one of hundreds of languages for machines gives you special powers. I know programmers who still don't get their machine - and wrestle with their VCR and toasters. Lack of 'mpathy', I guess.
Here's the thing.
As long as I can't SAY "OK, print 'this here' and don't go wild on the ink, as a matter of fact, do this one black and white and make it a quicky." I don't want to be bothered with anything else than a screen that has the relevant options on printing and doesn't expect me to TYPE.
Some users need the flexibility of command line, most however don't.
This article is great, but don't kid yourself into believing commands are somehow better for everything.
Look at it this way: one button is one click. One command is between three and 15 'keyboardpunches' - and they all must be the right ones in the right order.
Meaning: as long as we don't have an intuitive natural language INTERFACE - computers with ears and eyes and the muscles to put two and two together - cute UI's are really really wonderful. I love them. They make me happy.
For a label to offer both formats is not too much to ask. In the end delivering digital media to the distributor is way easier and less time consuming than CD production.
But right now, I think the cost of maintaining two formats and the end user confusion associated with this makes it impossible for any shop to do this.
They (except for iTunes, who has excellent reasons to stick to its format) won't make any profit as it is anyway the first couple of years.
In a few years the survivors will be able to be flexible and even offer lossless quality, but now it makes a lot of sense to stick to one format.
1) It is unheard of to give equal shelfspace to all and any label or artist. You have no idea how much that is going to hurt. Are you really bobbing Jobs on the head for treating more than 200 "indies" just like the "biiiig five"? ... you think the RIAA can justify big margins on digital sales forever?
2) You have not calculated the costs and winnings when Apple is to set its target next year (100 milion songs distributed). Never mind Pepsi.
3) You fail to mention the margin artists get from CD sales. I can already hear the roaring sound of re-negotiations
I'm part of a very small label (stupidly called "independent" as if the big ones aren't). We will start selling on any and all digital music stores we can get into. Some only offer 50% from sales (because being smaller makes logistics a bigger cost). You can't get a better deal than iTunes.
Here's the cincher: what do you think we have to do to get worldwide digital distribution rights from the artists? Right: talk, explain, ne-go-sh-i-ate.
I'm not saying Jobs is a saint, but you totally, blatantly fail to see the big picture if you think the iTMS is saving the big five and keeps them firmly in the saddle as is. I'm not saying "indies will win against the dark empire", I'm saying there's a new distribution model that is changing the rules and nobody knows where we'll be in five years. Your article is about the most one-sided thing i've read on the topic.
As for your 1c per CD proposal. It's naive to think this can work as is and replace the current model. There needs to be a sort of competitive model. Artists don't live in some marxist fairy land, they live in this cruel, brutal world. You want them to lead the revolution for you?
Now, if you'd say, fuck it, let's do the 1c anyway, regardless, whatever... Then you're talking. It would guarantee a flat income for starting and struggling artists - and would generate a lot of crap music, but that's ok. As a concept it's sound and I don't see how an iTMS or any other store should or would change anything about it. Go for it, tax those media carriers. To be fair you should probably give 0,5c to software authors, but that's ok too.
But this system doesn't make a difference between "good" and "bad" (read popular and unpopular) and as such can't be used to replace sales income. You might think that doesn't matter, and philosophically I'd agree, but if you think musicians will agree, just because they're making music which everybody knows should be free and is elevated and out of here, you haven't played in a band and actually don't know any musicians. They are people for christ sakes.
I want you to imagine taking all the competition out of your profession. In some ways that would be great. But it also means you get paid just as much as that moron there who types l-i-k-e t-h-a-t and doesn't know shit. And if you want to earn more than what's your due (whatever that is) you can always perform, right? Yeah baby yeah.
BTW: our label is largely run by artists. we may be terminally stupid in this, but we're not uninvolved.
And we all vote for as many music taxes as possible on non musical folks. That'll teach em for not having rhythm.
if it were true.
'nuf said
Don't worry. Most professional "online multimedia artists" work on a mac.
I honestly don't see them embracing pc-only sparkly stuff. And keep in mind, we're talking about 2006 - at the earliest. By then flash itself may be obsolete.
(and btw: please, keep linux from the desktop - as it is now)
The iTunes installer clearly stated this would happen. I repeat, you got a warning in big letters and simple wording that this would happen.
What the article should have told us:
1) iTunes is made to support the iPod. You expect Apple to bend over to accomodate the competition - even if it was an ex-partner? There are tons of considerations and technical issues. It would be stupid for them to do it otherwise.
If you think that's "unfair", look at it this way, iTunes is a free upgrade for iPod owners, if you don't want the upgrade, don't install.
2) iTunes doesn't disable MusicMatch, it disables syncing only, which is the only logical thing to do (see above).
iTunes can also "import" all your music with the click of one button, which means you don't really need to use MusicMatch anymore.
3) If you still wish to use MusicMatch, you're left with two choices:
- don't install iTunes
- install iTunes and use musicmatch without iPod syncing.
And I guess, enjoy buying WMA files in the MusicMatch store.
Apple is sooo bad, it's a conspiracy. Right.
Meanwhile try finding a music store for mac users that isn't called iTunes.
joke, joke, joke!
jesus, with the amount of really idiotic mac-jokes around, I'd assume you'd get the odd windowsjoke...
I thought it was pretty funny.
When you shout, you do get loud, but it doesn't augment the quality of the argument.
Please take note. It is a very handy feature for laptop owners, but it's not ONLY for laptops. The Fucking Documentation doesn't say that at all.
There are a LOT of instances where you'd want to use Filevault on a desktop.
Remember, you only enable Filevault once.
And if you have to encrypt xxGB of data, that'll take time.
So the problem is not something that can turn up any time there's a powerfailure, but only when you're in the middle of "enabling" filevault.
(and as was pointed out rather tactfully by others, it is primarily designed for laptops with batteries)
Cheers,
Linux is nowhere near the desktop.
- no GUI rules, total application jungle and no power apps for the end user. Don't get me wrong, I think OO and the Gimp are good programs. They're not however serious Office or Photoshop replacements.
- no hardware support - the average person wants their gadgets and stuff to work without having to write a driver or spend hours on end trying to install one.
- administrating your machine and keeping it sound and safe is not feasible for about 90% of people that are currently using computers
Windows is on all desktops, but does a half-ass job
- sure, you have tremendous power-apps, but you'll lose data ever so often for no apparent reason
- there's a sort of plug and play that sometimes works immediately and even works longer than a month. More often than not, however you're frustrated into looking for drivers.
- administrating your machine and keeping it sound and safe is not feasible for about 90% of people that are currently using computers
There's only one desktop that really takes the hassle out of computing, and that's OS X.
Disclaimer: I think Windows is friendlier and more foolproof than Linux, but I think Linux is way cooler and an incredible feat in itself. But we're talking about the desktop here.
Forgot to mention I really like those statistics. Good links.
Cheers
quote -- "Compare gun deaths in the US to eg gun deaths in Canada, Australia, the EG, all with a varying degree of freedom and accountability, but none of them as personal-protection-gun-crazy as the US.
And, while you are at it, you should also check countries like Mexico, Brazil, Jamaica, and most of the Eastern European countries. All have stringent gun control, and significantly higher murder rates than the US." --unquote
Well, I wouldn't say Brazil has stringent gun control. Not at all. I've been there, for a weapons distruction no less (observer). You wouldn't believe what those guys in the Favela's have. Included: one rocket launcher (bazooka)...
They're now trying to get strict control of legal weapons posession by law, but this most likely won't succeed - Brazil itself is a weapons producing country.
Even though the US has more than its share of poor and uneducated people - for a western country - I am a bit disappointed you don't compare it with Africa, btw. I tried to be fair in my comparison and not directly compare the US with Sweden. And now you have me compare the US with Jamaica?
BTW, I agree, it's not that simple, but you could make it really simple.
I compare the pro weapons lobby with the tobacco lobby. Those guys have been claiming for years smoking doesn't cause cancer. And had all sorts of statistics to prove it.
Now you have all those people showing figures of mortality rates caused by traffic and the flue, and the high murder rate without guns (while carefully avoiding the term 'culture of violence') which accidentally shoves all deaths by gunshots into a corner.
Why do you think they are so opposed to the term "Culture of violence" in any international treaty?
Because it literally applies to the US.
Which is quite unique because the US - as opposed to other countries that apply for that distinction - for the most part aren't at war and don't suffer internal conflicts.
Each to his own, I guess...