Steve Jobs also said that Apple had no plans to compete in the $500 computer market and then later Apple released the Mac mini.
Apple's stated plans can change if their market research indicates sufficient consumer demand. I'm not expecting this to happen with the first rev of the Intel switch but I've believed for a very long time that some kind of cloning or licensing would occur with Mac OS X.
Apple's been slowly moving away from a Mac hardware dependent revenue model for many years but the iPod has really changed the dynamics for them. When Mac hardware is no longer life support they will be free to take the big risks for the chance at making big payoffs.
Finding new monsters is undoubtable the 'coolest' thing, since they are so well made. But that is about the only thing that makes me come crawling back.
So, what you're saying is that it's like.... Pokémon?
Just because she's looking for sex doesn't necessarily mean you'd want any from her.
Think about it, she's in a school surrounded by men who'd sleep with anything provided they had a high enough blood alcohol level as well as a bunch of geeks who... well, I don't have to describe that situation here, do I?
In this environment she's "sex depraved"?
I know they say you should never look a gift horse in the mouth but I'm not getting it on with a damn horse. I'm not THAT desperate.
Their claim is that this startling finding has harmed their reputation, is that right?
According to this story, Nathaniel Brown, spokesperson for Bertlesmann Musig Group (BMG), the publisher of Hamilton's latest CD, admits that the MediaMax protections are little more than a "speed bump," but the company hopes that this minor inconvenience will deter casual copiers. "It's not going to stop a hacker or someone who wants to mass copy," says Brown and add that the technology was selected not for it's protection abilities, but because it affords a "new level of playability."
By publishing a "work around" for the CD copy protections, Halderman might have exposed himself to risk of procecution under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA.) SunComm president Peter Jacobs reports that they have no plans to pursue such a case, however, saying "this isn't one of the weighty issues of the world."
How can SunComm's reputation be hurt when their paying customer knew the technology was practically worthless before hand?
I also find CEO Peter Jacobs complete change of opinion interesting, he went from practically dismissing the incident a few days ago to now saying, "No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property."
Can anybody tell me what the deal is with that psychotic looking pirate in the bottom, right corner in the pink box? He also appears in the top, right of the magazine logo.
Pirates aren't supposed to shoot the bird, they're supposed to wear them on their shoulder.
It seems out of place and makes me think it's a hoax but then I'm not familiar with the Japanese culture. Can anybody translate the box?
The patent relates to the embedding of objects in hypermedia documents, and Microsoft has indicated they will have to make changes to Internet Explorer as a result of the ruling.
Given what this patent covers and this response from Microsoft I can't help but feel a bit uneasy.
In the old PBS interview posted further down the person behind the patent presented a hypothetical situation wherein they had the power to exclude Microsoft or IE from using these technologies and thus remove their ability to compete on a level playing field.
My big concern is just how extensive these changes will be.
Do they still have the clout to turn the tables? What I mean is could they create an entirely new form of "interactive content" that's not like a plug-in or ActiveX control, send it out as a critical update for everybody using IE versions 4 through 6 and remove the old functionality?
This would put everybody with interactive content in the position of re-writing their code and using this new, proprietary Microsoft format that *nobody else* would have the ability to use or have their site broken to at least 80% of web surfers.
I'm heading into territory I have little knowledge of now so please forgive any ignorance of the subject as I continue.
ActiveX is already gives them some of this power but it does share some basic similarities with plug-ins and thus allows for cross platform adjustments to be made to code. A plug-in and an ActiveX control essentially do the same things right? They just interact with the browser in different ways.
If this new format can be nothing like a plug-in then what's stopping them from using these "changes" and their market share from killing everybody else's browser off?
As usual, the web developers have the real power here but they tend to follow the biggest player and everybody else gets screwed.
I hope I'm wrong about this and the sheer entrenchment of these technologies would prevent such a move by Microsoft. The other hope I have is that interactive content is mostly developed using Macromedia and Apple tools so these two companies would have to participate. However, I highly doubt they'd just ignore IE's market share and say, "Download a Gecko or KHTML based browser" but it would be nice if they did.
Geez, that's enough doom and gloom for one day, it must be the weather.
I feel it important to first mention that I have not read the linked article.
If the quote was indeed that Microsoft is considering charging for some software updates that it now makes available for free and that's as specific as it gets, then I'm inclined to believe that it's not what many here are thinking.
I would imagine the stuff they're considering charging for would be along the lines of what Apple does. Take iChat A/V, iChat is free but the upgrade to A/V for non-Panther users will be $29.
iDVD is free with new, SuperDrive equipped Macs but caries an upgrade fee for anyone wanting the newest version.
I think Microsoft has already gone down this path with that recent, for pay software pack that included updated features to Windows MovieMaker and some odd ball features for Media Player.
Shouldn't this move be welcomed? Microsoft charging for such things is better for the competitive landscape as it gives people an incentive to shop for alternatives.
There are other things that don't sit well with me, take a look at the iChat video screen shot. It would seem to be using a Windows XP icon and a Windows XP progress bar or at least a modified version of one because I've never seen a progress bar on OS X that looked anything like that. Why would they use two dissimilar appearances in one app and one that is a blatant XP rip off at that?
The overall look of everything is very inconsistent, the titlebars are darker than the tool bars and are stripe-less. The toolbars appear to have no stripes at first glance but closer inspection shows there are very light ones while the window backgrounds have very clear stripes.
In the picture of the Finder, that looks too much like Safari, you've got a strange new view that mixes columns with icon (again, a very Windows kind of appearance) the voulme Xdrive has a blue highlight of a square style while the icon behind the menu has a rounded highlight of a slightly lighter color.
Also in the Finder picture, why is there a menu being generated by a button? Especially considering that button is only duplicating context menu functionality, it makes no sense. Furthermore, the button appears in the depressed/active blue color but if it's suppsed to be a drop down box then it shouldn't change color at all, at least I can't find any current X drop down boxes that do that.
Finally, there is a disk image called "Install Internet Explorer" in the list of volumes. However, the only icon that should appear in such a list would be that of a mounted volume icon, not it's image.
Real is charging $10 per month for unlimited streaming tethered to a computer and Internet connection and then $.79 to burn a track to CD while Apple charges $.99 per track that you can do almost anything you want with with no monthly fees.
The Real advantage is the ability to have access to an entire library of full songs that you can stream on demand but for $10 per month one could just subscribe to XM Radio and have unlimited, (mostly) commercial free, CD quality audio played anywhere and anytime plus news, comedy and other content.
Wouldn't XM + $.99 downloads from the iTMS be a better deal? The downside to XM is the hardware investment but hey, that's a downside to owning a Mac too. (I'm a Mac user so it's not trolling just the compromise I willingly accept to use the platform I like)
I've now seen two different pictures of the Athens, one shows XP's Crystal while the other does have a closer resemblence to the Aqua desktop picture, it's not a copy but there are definite similarities.
That's not Apple's default desktop picture, Apple's is very different than that. What is pictured is a wallpaper that ships with every copy of Windows XP. I believe it's called Crystal.
It is a P2P app that overlays the desktop, supports drag and drop file transfers, does instant messaging, sends/shares images and even lets you send emoticons including kissing lips. The CoSI product seems to be considerably more advanced, however.
This could just be a big coincidence and both Microsoft and Co/Operating Systems had similar ideas at the same time but then Microsoft does have a history of usurping others ideas...
Slashdot Mirror
Billy West has indicated that he may have been wrong on page three of the linked forum thread.
He says something is going on with Futurama but it may be DVD related.
Steve Jobs also said that Apple had no plans to compete in the $500 computer market and then later Apple released the Mac mini.
Apple's stated plans can change if their market research indicates sufficient consumer demand. I'm not expecting this to happen with the first rev of the Intel switch but I've believed for a very long time that some kind of cloning or licensing would occur with Mac OS X.
Apple's been slowly moving away from a Mac hardware dependent revenue model for many years but the iPod has really changed the dynamics for them. When Mac hardware is no longer life support they will be free to take the big risks for the chance at making big payoffs.
So, what you're saying is that it's like
Just because she's looking for sex doesn't necessarily mean you'd want any from her.
... well, I don't have to describe that situation here, do I?
Think about it, she's in a school surrounded by men who'd sleep with anything provided they had a high enough blood alcohol level as well as a bunch of geeks who
In this environment she's "sex depraved"?
I know they say you should never look a gift horse in the mouth but I'm not getting it on with a damn horse. I'm not THAT desperate.
Their claim is that this startling finding has harmed their reputation, is that right?
According to this story, Nathaniel Brown, spokesperson for Bertlesmann Musig Group (BMG), the publisher of Hamilton's latest CD, admits that the MediaMax protections are little more than a "speed bump," but the company hopes that this minor inconvenience will deter casual copiers. "It's not going to stop a hacker or someone who wants to mass copy," says Brown and add that the technology was selected not for it's protection abilities, but because it affords a "new level of playability."
By publishing a "work around" for the CD copy protections, Halderman might have exposed himself to risk of procecution under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA.) SunComm president Peter Jacobs reports that they have no plans to pursue such a case, however, saying "this isn't one of the weighty issues of the world."
How can SunComm's reputation be hurt when their paying customer knew the technology was practically worthless before hand?
I also find CEO Peter Jacobs complete change of opinion interesting, he went from practically dismissing the incident a few days ago to now saying, "No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property."
Hmm...
Can anybody tell me what the deal is with that psychotic looking pirate in the bottom, right corner in the pink box? He also appears in the top, right of the magazine logo.
Pirates aren't supposed to shoot the bird, they're supposed to wear them on their shoulder.
It seems out of place and makes me think it's a hoax but then I'm not familiar with the Japanese culture. Can anybody translate the box?
The patent relates to the embedding of objects in hypermedia documents, and Microsoft has indicated they will have to make changes to Internet Explorer as a result of the ruling.
Given what this patent covers and this response from Microsoft I can't help but feel a bit uneasy.
In the old PBS interview posted further down the person behind the patent presented a hypothetical situation wherein they had the power to exclude Microsoft or IE from using these technologies and thus remove their ability to compete on a level playing field.
My big concern is just how extensive these changes will be.
Do they still have the clout to turn the tables? What I mean is could they create an entirely new form of "interactive content" that's not like a plug-in or ActiveX control, send it out as a critical update for everybody using IE versions 4 through 6 and remove the old functionality?
This would put everybody with interactive content in the position of re-writing their code and using this new, proprietary Microsoft format that *nobody else* would have the ability to use or have their site broken to at least 80% of web surfers.
I'm heading into territory I have little knowledge of now so please forgive any ignorance of the subject as I continue.
ActiveX is already gives them some of this power but it does share some basic similarities with plug-ins and thus allows for cross platform adjustments to be made to code. A plug-in and an ActiveX control essentially do the same things right? They just interact with the browser in different ways.
If this new format can be nothing like a plug-in then what's stopping them from using these "changes" and their market share from killing everybody else's browser off?
As usual, the web developers have the real power here but they tend to follow the biggest player and everybody else gets screwed.
I hope I'm wrong about this and the sheer entrenchment of these technologies would prevent such a move by Microsoft. The other hope I have is that interactive content is mostly developed using Macromedia and Apple tools so these two companies would have to participate. However, I highly doubt they'd just ignore IE's market share and say, "Download a Gecko or KHTML based browser" but it would be nice if they did.
Geez, that's enough doom and gloom for one day, it must be the weather.
I feel it important to first mention that I have not read the linked article.
If the quote was indeed that Microsoft is considering charging for some software updates that it now makes available for free and that's as specific as it gets, then I'm inclined to believe that it's not what many here are thinking.
I would imagine the stuff they're considering charging for would be along the lines of what Apple does. Take iChat A/V, iChat is free but the upgrade to A/V for non-Panther users will be $29.
iDVD is free with new, SuperDrive equipped Macs but caries an upgrade fee for anyone wanting the newest version.
I think Microsoft has already gone down this path with that recent, for pay software pack that included updated features to Windows MovieMaker and some odd ball features for Media Player.
Shouldn't this move be welcomed? Microsoft charging for such things is better for the competitive landscape as it gives people an incentive to shop for alternatives.
There are other things that don't sit well with me, take a look at the iChat video screen shot. It would seem to be using a Windows XP icon and a Windows XP progress bar or at least a modified version of one because I've never seen a progress bar on OS X that looked anything like that. Why would they use two dissimilar appearances in one app and one that is a blatant XP rip off at that?
The overall look of everything is very inconsistent, the titlebars are darker than the tool bars and are stripe-less. The toolbars appear to have no stripes at first glance but closer inspection shows there are very light ones while the window backgrounds have very clear stripes.
In the picture of the Finder, that looks too much like Safari, you've got a strange new view that mixes columns with icon (again, a very Windows kind of appearance) the voulme Xdrive has a blue highlight of a square style while the icon behind the menu has a rounded highlight of a slightly lighter color.
Also in the Finder picture, why is there a menu being generated by a button? Especially considering that button is only duplicating context menu functionality, it makes no sense. Furthermore, the button appears in the depressed/active blue color but if it's suppsed to be a drop down box then it shouldn't change color at all, at least I can't find any current X drop down boxes that do that.
Finally, there is a disk image called "Install Internet Explorer" in the list of volumes. However, the only icon that should appear in such a list would be that of a mounted volume icon, not it's image.
Real is charging $10 per month for unlimited streaming tethered to a computer and Internet connection and then $.79 to burn a track to CD while Apple charges $.99 per track that you can do almost anything you want with with no monthly fees.
The Real advantage is the ability to have access to an entire library of full songs that you can stream on demand but for $10 per month one could just subscribe to XM Radio and have unlimited, (mostly) commercial free, CD quality audio played anywhere and anytime plus news, comedy and other content.
Wouldn't XM + $.99 downloads from the iTMS be a better deal? The downside to XM is the hardware investment but hey, that's a downside to owning a Mac too. (I'm a Mac user so it's not trolling just the compromise I willingly accept to use the platform I like)
I've now seen two different pictures of the Athens, one shows XP's Crystal while the other does have a closer resemblence to the Aqua desktop picture, it's not a copy but there are definite similarities.
That's not Apple's default desktop picture, Apple's is very different than that. What is pictured is a wallpaper that ships with every copy of Windows XP. I believe it's called Crystal.
The moment I saw the threedegrees flash demo I was reminded of a recent app I was reading about.
It's called HelloWorld and is made by Co/Operating Systems, Inc.
It is a P2P app that overlays the desktop, supports drag and drop file transfers, does instant messaging, sends/shares images and even lets you send emoticons including kissing lips. The CoSI product seems to be considerably more advanced, however.
This could just be a big coincidence and both Microsoft and Co/Operating Systems had similar ideas at the same time but then Microsoft does have a history of usurping others ideas...