If the players weren't so fucking overpaid to play games, then advertising wouldn't be necessary at all. Of course, it would still exist as it is profitable to the stadium owner.
As you mentioned, advertising would still exist because it is profitable.
And the salaries are what they are because they can demand that much, and the business brings in enough revenue that it makes financial sense for the owners to pay it.
They also happen to be a place where enough gravity exists to keep humans healthy without having to expend energy and resources to generate it artificially.
I don't even trust all of my own memories, let alone yours.
Heh, I have memories that I *know* are false. And can prove so conclusively. Yet they seem absolutely true to me, while I can't recall the version of events as they really happened no matter how hard I try.
And, no, I'm not talking about situations where chemical influence was a factor.
The point is the principal of creating a standard can be the basis of understanding the technology and extending its capabilities that is open to anyone
Oh, to be young, naive, and ideological again....
No, that's NOT the point.
THE POINT is that if it can't add numbers to a companies bottom line, it will fade into obscurity in favor of something that does.
Except for the fact that there are some VERY well done DLNA servers that handle real time transcoding just fine, and do it based on the formats that the playing device supports.
AND, when we're talking about the Constitution, there is an established procedure for making changes.
You create an amendment, and get it ratified by the requisite number of states.
What you DON'T do is have congress pass an unconstitutional law, and appoint a bunch of morons to the Supreme Court that care more about public opinion than the Constitution, and law in general, to rubber stamp your unconstitutional law.
It depends on what the new ideas are, and what the change is.
If the change brings about a better situation for the general population, then it's probably a good idea, and deserving of public debate and possible implementation.
If the change brings about a much worse situation for the general population, and the only benefit is the ILLUSION of more safety, then yes, only a fucking coward would support it.
A standard allows multiple parties to come together (hardware vendors, software devs, sellers) and have a common ground / interface, so everyone knows what they are talking about. So progress on spreading a open solution should be accelerated by defining a standard first.
OK, let's write up the business plan. Pick an existing, successful, and widely implemented technology. Come up with an alternative.
Approach a venture capitalist with your business plan that includes the phrases "and all the consumer has to do is buy a Raspberry Pi and roll their own homebrew adapter" and "will have a subset of the functionality of the existing, successful product".
You do realise that most media centres run XBMC, which would have no problem supporting this standard.
HUH???
"MOST" media centers run a cable or satellite box. The "geeky" consumers *might* have a Roku.
XBMC is about as niche as you can get. Probably the only thing more niche would be MythTV. (Ignoring a bunch of also-rans that have about 7 users each.)
To the best of my knowledge, DLNA does not support the AirPlay behavior.
I should probably clarify my original post.
When I said that DLNA "does it better", I was referring to the fact that it also handles video while MagicPlay is at this point music only. I didn't mean it more closely mimicked AirPlay behavior.
But I'm not aware of any DLNA component that allows a system with local media to select an advertised client and force it to start playing a stream. Unless I've missed something DLNA doesn't even require clients to advertise, let alone to allow remote control.
It's definitely part of the spec. I've even found a few android apps that implement the "remote control" part, as in using your phone to tell your TV to play a movie stored on your file server in the basement.
What's unfortunate, is that to I've not been able to find examples of all 3 components (server, player, controller) that are anywhere close to being a workable setup. Unless you count Plex, which does do all 3, but unfortunately doesn't seem to play nice with non-Plex DLNA apps.
There are people who's media world doesn't revolve around an iPhone. And while there are various stop gap measure for those users - including using AirPlay in unauthorized ways - it is still a proprietary protocol, and this is Apple so we know they will release the lawyers when the time comes.
I actually find it remarkable that I should have to argue that an open standard that does something like AirPlay would be a good thing if it were done right and caught on.
You are 100% correct in everything you say. But he still has a point.
Being Apple compatible is the "sexy" thing to do in the manufacturing world these days, and this is all rather useless if you can't go to Best Buy and pick up a device that supports it.
Add to that the fact that there is an existing standard that can already do this stuff (UPnP/DLNA), and do it better. And those standards actually have some device support, although the implementations all seem like they were a quickly hacked together afterthought.
That said, being outside of the Apple world, I have found that Plex media server + Roku + Plex Android app handles all of my media streaming needs just fine.
Slashdot Mirror
If the players weren't so fucking overpaid to play games, then advertising wouldn't be necessary at all. Of course, it would still exist as it is profitable to the stadium owner.
As you mentioned, advertising would still exist because it is profitable.
And the salaries are what they are because they can demand that much, and the business brings in enough revenue that it makes financial sense for the owners to pay it.
If you do it, you're fair game for anyone to punch in the face.
Actually, "Open with as much Freedom as possible" would be releasing the code into the public domain.
The entire purpose of a license, ANY license, is to place restrictions on what can be done with the code.
They also happen to be a place where enough gravity exists to keep humans healthy without having to expend energy and resources to generate it artificially.
Even with the $30 million prize, sending a robot to the moon, in all likelihood would be a net expense, not a source of income.
I don't even trust all of my own memories, let alone yours.
Heh, I have memories that I *know* are false. And can prove so conclusively. Yet they seem absolutely true to me, while I can't recall the version of events as they really happened no matter how hard I try.
And, no, I'm not talking about situations where chemical influence was a factor.
Then it's a good thing mice are tiny.
Let's not try it with hippos.
The data may not be useful immediately, but presumably society would begin rebuilding at some point.
It may be a long time before the information is useful, but once that time arrived, it would save a great deal of wheel re-invention.
The point is the principal of creating a standard can be the basis of understanding the technology and extending its capabilities that is open to anyone
Oh, to be young, naive, and ideological again....
No, that's NOT the point.
THE POINT is that if it can't add numbers to a companies bottom line, it will fade into obscurity in favor of something that does.
That's how the world actually works.
Except for the fact that there are some VERY well done DLNA servers that handle real time transcoding just fine, and do it based on the formats that the playing device supports.
Right. I think I said something like:
and "will have a subset of the functionality of the existing, successful product".
AND, when we're talking about the Constitution, there is an established procedure for making changes.
You create an amendment, and get it ratified by the requisite number of states.
What you DON'T do is have congress pass an unconstitutional law, and appoint a bunch of morons to the Supreme Court that care more about public opinion than the Constitution, and law in general, to rubber stamp your unconstitutional law.
It depends on what the new ideas are, and what the change is.
If the change brings about a better situation for the general population, then it's probably a good idea, and deserving of public debate and possible implementation.
If the change brings about a much worse situation for the general population, and the only benefit is the ILLUSION of more safety, then yes, only a fucking coward would support it.
A standard allows multiple parties to come together (hardware vendors, software devs, sellers) and have a common ground / interface, so everyone knows what they are talking about. So progress on spreading a open solution should be accelerated by defining a standard first.
OK, let's write up the business plan. Pick an existing, successful, and widely implemented technology. Come up with an alternative.
Approach a venture capitalist with your business plan that includes the phrases "and all the consumer has to do is buy a Raspberry Pi and roll their own homebrew adapter" and "will have a subset of the functionality of the existing, successful product".
Let me know how big of a check they write you.
True, FTP and NFS are open alternatives to Server Message Block to an extent.
NFS, eh, sorta, but it's a stretch. FTP? Not even close.
Odd, I've never had much trouble streaming 5.1 DD and DTS over DLNA. Or h.264.
You do realise that most media centres run XBMC, which would have no problem supporting this standard.
HUH???
"MOST" media centers run a cable or satellite box. The "geeky" consumers *might* have a Roku.
XBMC is about as niche as you can get. Probably the only thing more niche would be MythTV. (Ignoring a bunch of also-rans that have about 7 users each.)
Mod this up +100, AC or not.
I'll agree that I haven't found much of a use case, for myself, for wifi speakers.
But my bluetooth speaker gets enough use that I bought a higher amp charger for it so it would have less downtime. I love that thing.
TuxRacer, of course!
Did you spot the chasm of difference between the two.
Nope. I can walk into Best Buy or Walmart and purchase AirPlay and HDMI devices. In neither store can I find MagicPlay/HDMI-open-alternative devices.
Do you see the glaring similarity?
To the best of my knowledge, DLNA does not support the AirPlay behavior.
I should probably clarify my original post.
When I said that DLNA "does it better", I was referring to the fact that it also handles video while MagicPlay is at this point music only. I didn't mean it more closely mimicked AirPlay behavior.
But I'm not aware of any DLNA component that allows a system with local media to select an advertised client and force it to start playing a stream. Unless I've missed something DLNA doesn't even require clients to advertise, let alone to allow remote control.
It's definitely part of the spec. I've even found a few android apps that implement the "remote control" part, as in using your phone to tell your TV to play a movie stored on your file server in the basement.
What's unfortunate, is that to I've not been able to find examples of all 3 components (server, player, controller) that are anywhere close to being a workable setup. Unless you count Plex, which does do all 3, but unfortunately doesn't seem to play nice with non-Plex DLNA apps.
Um, because AirPlay is proprietary.
There are people who's media world doesn't revolve around an iPhone. And while there are various stop gap measure for those users - including using AirPlay in unauthorized ways - it is still a proprietary protocol, and this is Apple so we know they will release the lawyers when the time comes.
I actually find it remarkable that I should have to argue that an open standard that does something like AirPlay would be a good thing if it were done right and caught on.
You are 100% correct in everything you say. But he still has a point.
Being Apple compatible is the "sexy" thing to do in the manufacturing world these days, and this is all rather useless if you can't go to Best Buy and pick up a device that supports it.
Add to that the fact that there is an existing standard that can already do this stuff (UPnP/DLNA), and do it better. And those standards actually have some device support, although the implementations all seem like they were a quickly hacked together afterthought.
That said, being outside of the Apple world, I have found that Plex media server + Roku + Plex Android app handles all of my media streaming needs just fine.
No, but it would require me to find alternative employment.