There you have it! I'm always a little bit confused with stuff like this. Even though you are an AC, I'll still take your word for it. But really, how would something like this be enforced? Is the FBI or whoever actually looking for stuff like this? Or does it fall under the category of "I-happended-to-see-you-playing-this-back-while-se lling-food-and-now-I'm-gonna-make-an-example-out-o f-you" type of thing?
OWWWW!!!! my brain hurts. It all seems a little bit out of control to me.
If they have a whole Seinfeld theme, then they probably got a license for it. That, or they're breaking the law.
Well, that's the big question, isn't it? I know that the Deli taped the shows when they were broadcast on TV. Now if they are not selling the viewing of the shows, only food and drink, I think that should be okay. It would be tantamount to just having the TV on in the Deli while the show was on. But, again, I could be wrong.
Plus, there is the whole issue, in these DMCA days, that he is actually capturing digital broadcasts. That may, or may not be treated differently than analog recordings. Also there's the issue of fair-use, but since I'm not the big expert, I would refer to EFF on that.
since 95% of what they do are those textbooks, no go.
Sounds like a pretty specific clientele that shop has. My shop does everything from movie posters to business cards back to high-lacquer coffee-table books. If we didn't accept InDesign and PageMaker, we'd be out of business. I guess it really depends on what type of design you're privy to. For some, Quark works great. For others, InDesign is the way to go. As the Pre-press Operator, I must use them all. I like them all, too, but for different reasons.
Sure, if RageMaker or MS Publisher float your boat
If you work in a decent Service Bureau that likes the business that customers bring in, they would have to float your boat. Automatic. If I turned a customer away because I thought they used the wrong layout software, I'd be out of business. Believe it or not, PageMaker still accounts for about 40% of our offset print production. InDesign is about 20% now. Quark? Yeah, about the same as PM.
How? You can't just throw something on the page without a bounding box of some kind. How else will the program know how to flow the text? How else will the program know how to wrap other elements around the text or picture?
PageMaker allowed you to place an image or text without creating a frame first. This, in turn allowed the user to not have to worry about the frame ever getting bigger than the object that was in it; thus making alignment and text wrapping easier. The only time you would notice a "frame" is when you cropped an image. As for text, there were special text frames, but you still didn't have to create them first.
InDesign sorta works like Quark. You may create a frame first, then place an image in it, or place the image on the page and it would create the frame for you. The cool thing that InDesign has (over Q5, at least) is the ability to fit the frame to the object inside it, and vice versa. Plus, with the alignment proxy in the Transform pallette, one can align that frame to any point by its center, left-bottom, left-top, right-center, etc. A minor feature, maybe, but it's pretty damn useful when making sure that images don't bleed over folds and things like that. I have yet to see if Q6 has anything like that.
I'm not saying that one is definitely better than the other. As a pre-press tech, I had to learn every type of layout software there is (our shop never turns anything away, even Publisher *barf*). When I made the switch to OS X from 9 at home, InDesign was the only thing I could use, and I liked it a lot. That's all I'm sayin'.
but in the process they seem to have introduced some new ones.
What kind of quirks? Have you been able to nail down anything specific? And about Acrobat 6...I haven't got it yet but I have to ask, can you print separations from it? If so, how is it?
That is until Adobe finishes InDesign which, hopefully, will blow QuarkXPress out of the water.
It's done, bro. Version 2.0.2. Try using it. Unfortunately, many designers are just plain stuck with Quark because they refuse to try anything else. I used Quark for years. Then OS X came out and then InDesign 2.0. Quark was lagging, so I gave InDesign a try. I think it works great! It even has some familiar Quark-style features (like the infamous boxes to place images and text in). The Photshop/Illustrator-style pallets are a breeze, and the proxy for alignment makes the ol' create-a-second-empty-box-to-align-by-center trick in Quark totally archaic.
I am not only a designer, but I am also a pre-press technician, and InDesign writes pretty clean Postscript and integrates well into a Heidelberg Delta/Fuji Topsetter workflow. Give it a shot. Although now that Q6 is out, I gotta go pick up a copy, just to check it out.
In Santa Barbara, CA, there are 3 delis that operate under the name Bitterman's Deli. They have a whole Seinfeld theme. They play recorded episodes of the show on a continuous loop using a VCR. I don't know if having video tape (analog) vs. PVR (digital) is distinguished under any laws, but maybe you can call Bitterman's and ask them.
Orange Micro definitely used to have one. Apple's version, I beleive was the DOS Compatibility Card. It was for the old NuBus Macs like the PowerMac 6100/66. Way old school. Worked pretty well...for DOS anyway. I think you could actually run Windows 3.11 on it as well. But it's been so long...
There was also a guy named Micheal Jordan who seems to have done alright financially.
Shoe salesmen don't count here...We're talking about computer guys, even though the very mention of the name Gates is enough to make me puke...Oh crap, there it is again! Blerrrgch!
Should that type of music simply go away - your personal opinion as to whether it's 'good' or 'bad' music aside, should an entire genre be dismissed because it's not economically viable under your model?
I'm not dismissing anything. I'm not in control here. I guess I don't equate music with economics they way some folks do. I was thinking of a time when it would become so difficult for a musician to make money selling recordings of their music, that they would have to find other ways of surviving. Live shows were one of the ways (and that's a pretty good way, since many people like live music). And, for the third time, if the artist is that good, their music would sell itself.
Take, for instance, J Mascis of Dinosaur Jr., now of J Mascis and the Fog. He records all the instruments himself, but live he just plays guitar with his live band. Lemme tell you, his guitar playing really stands out and the whole band rules it live!!! He lives for the music, and he sure as hell doesn't make as much money as pop artists do.
People like you need to realize this and stop being so cheap. Just pay for the stuff and stop complaining.
Where, in my post did I ever make any sort of complaint? Where did I ever advocate the need to share music? Nowhere. I was merely stating my vision of the future if sharing got so out of hand that record companies had to fold. I'm not cheap. I'm just being realistic: there are many others out there who are cheap, or share music just because they can. I'm not in any way promoting the stealing of music. All I'm saying is that the more you try and stop it, the more it's going to happen. Artists are going to have to make a big adjustment to this reality.
For example, an experimental music composer can't really do a live show to make money (short of setting up a P.A. and playing his/her CD). Why would anyone pay to see that if they already had the CD? Also, what about artists who are a single man/woman who play and record all of the instruments on the CD? That is HARD work
Yes. Music is very hard work. If you work hard enough, and make good music, you might end up giving people a reason to buy the music. And why would you not want to see them live if you already bought the CD? Are they not good enough for you with out ProTools and studio modifications?
Music is an orignal creation and chould be copyrighted and protected.
Protected against what? Copyright infringement? Does that destroy their music at all? No. It just destroys their ability to make money off their music. Again, artists who must be paid for their music are not artist at all; they are manufacturers of a product. That's all. In today's world of inevitable file sharing, a musician should know going in that they may not make any money. Besides, you are an Anonymous Coward, and no one here cares what you have to say.
Every time the music companies and the RIAA try to stop file sharing, it seems that somebody out there will find a way to do it. Some say that this can only hurt the music industry because artists won't get paid, and the label won't make a profit, blah, blah, blah. If you ask me, I think the time for pop stars and record labels making millions is almost at an end.
Here's my vision of the future of music: People everywhere are able to share the music they purchase with anyone they want. That gets the musicians' product to millions of people, fast. The musician then has to tour and play live to make money. At the live show, maybe the musician sells some more CDs and other merch, and the cycle begins anew. What's so bad about that? Live shows are great! Maybe this whole new process will weed out those fakers that aren't any good without ProTools. Our ears may get a well deserved break from the cookie-cutter pop music crap that radio stations are forced to play by big-money record labels.
It'll make the quality of the music better as well. Without the domination by a few music acts that get all the airplay and spots on TRL, musicians will have to be extraordinary, musically and lyrically, in order to really shine and rise above the rest. Sure, they won't make the millions that artists do now. Oh well. That just means musicians that are in it for the music will continue to play.
One can only dream. And in case you are wondering: Yes, I am a musician. The thing is, I know there are so many musicians out there who are way better than I am. I'd still be at the bottom of the pile. Then again, that could be a good thing.
Whatever. Morons are ACs who write posts without checking the validity of their information first. At least I got the balls to use my name...your Mom knows about my balls...Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...talk about soothing!
For some people, taking notes, actually writing down the points which you think are important, helps you better organize and remember what was said in class. But, for some people, typing it also works. It depends on the brain.
One thing I can't believe people lived without were class web sites.- course syllabus
- assignment/lab report/essay due dates
- exams dates
- (sometimes) class notes
- marks
- how to contact the professor (email, phone, office hours, etc)
It was called "paper." All a student had to do was save all those things in his PeeChee folder and he was all set. Class notes (at my Univ., at least) could be bought at the University Center from University approved note takers. The lazy thing? Maybe. The paper way took discipline to keep it all organized.
Sure, one can go to the library and get reams of information, but it's not sorted, as if I had typed in a search request to a popular search engine.
You really don't believe that, do you? Not only are libraries sorted better (no matter which system they use) than Google, everything in the library can be verified. I'm willing to bet that 90% of the stuff that's listed by Google is crap anyway. Who would want to search through that? Published books are verifiable sources of information. You can't go wrong. Think about it: Books have publishers who edit the content and verify the sources that the author cited before they print it; the college, in turn, selects the best books that it thinks will most benefit the students for each subject offered based on professors' recommendations, grad student dissertations, etc. In contrast, any idiot can put up a web site without anyone else verifying the content.
Most books also have an index in the back, anyway. Combine that with the card catalogue, the human help at the desk, and I would take it over Google anyday.
As for the convenience of being able to surf in the middle of the night, etc.: I'd sacrifice that for good, solid information for my papers.
The only way to find out for sure is to go back to college yourself, bro. Any one of us can tell you that it has changed, but compared to what? A student now has no way of telling what it was like back in the day, because they weren't there.
I remember the library, too. I'd still probably use it if I went back today: I am more comfortable with citing published works as sources; your eyes don't hurt as much reading a book compared to a screen; and you never know if the guy on the web is full of crap, or crazy, or what. Besides, from what I hear, students today just buy their term papers online anyway. Screw Cliffs Notes!
Gimme a break. You wouldn't be calling him "Ronny" if you didn't have a problem with or were out of your diapers when he was in office. You are an AC anyway, so you can take your Trickledown Economics and bite me. At least Alan has the balls to use his name, not like you, you pansy butt-dart rimjobbing turd-burgular. Stop being such a pussy.
Slashdot Mirror
...two words: LAN party! 'Nuff said?
There you have it! I'm always a little bit confused with stuff like this. Even though you are an AC, I'll still take your word for it. But really, how would something like this be enforced? Is the FBI or whoever actually looking for stuff like this? Or does it fall under the category of "I-happended-to-see-you-playing-this-back-while-se lling-food-and-now-I'm-gonna-make-an-example-out-o f-you" type of thing?
OWWWW!!!! my brain hurts. It all seems a little bit out of control to me.
If they have a whole Seinfeld theme, then they probably got a license for it. That, or they're breaking the law.
Well, that's the big question, isn't it? I know that the Deli taped the shows when they were broadcast on TV. Now if they are not selling the viewing of the shows, only food and drink, I think that should be okay. It would be tantamount to just having the TV on in the Deli while the show was on. But, again, I could be wrong.
Plus, there is the whole issue, in these DMCA days, that he is actually capturing digital broadcasts. That may, or may not be treated differently than analog recordings. Also there's the issue of fair-use, but since I'm not the big expert, I would refer to EFF on that.
since 95% of what they do are those textbooks, no go.
Sounds like a pretty specific clientele that shop has. My shop does everything from movie posters to business cards back to high-lacquer coffee-table books. If we didn't accept InDesign and PageMaker, we'd be out of business. I guess it really depends on what type of design you're privy to. For some, Quark works great. For others, InDesign is the way to go. As the Pre-press Operator, I must use them all. I like them all, too, but for different reasons.
Sure, if RageMaker or MS Publisher float your boat
If you work in a decent Service Bureau that likes the business that customers bring in, they would have to float your boat. Automatic. If I turned a customer away because I thought they used the wrong layout software, I'd be out of business. Believe it or not, PageMaker still accounts for about 40% of our offset print production. InDesign is about 20% now. Quark? Yeah, about the same as PM.
How? You can't just throw something on the page without a bounding box of some kind. How else will the program know how to flow the text? How else will the program know how to wrap other elements around the text or picture?
PageMaker allowed you to place an image or text without creating a frame first. This, in turn allowed the user to not have to worry about the frame ever getting bigger than the object that was in it; thus making alignment and text wrapping easier. The only time you would notice a "frame" is when you cropped an image. As for text, there were special text frames, but you still didn't have to create them first.
InDesign sorta works like Quark. You may create a frame first, then place an image in it, or place the image on the page and it would create the frame for you. The cool thing that InDesign has (over Q5, at least) is the ability to fit the frame to the object inside it, and vice versa. Plus, with the alignment proxy in the Transform pallette, one can align that frame to any point by its center, left-bottom, left-top, right-center, etc. A minor feature, maybe, but it's pretty damn useful when making sure that images don't bleed over folds and things like that. I have yet to see if Q6 has anything like that.
I'm not saying that one is definitely better than the other. As a pre-press tech, I had to learn every type of layout software there is (our shop never turns anything away, even Publisher *barf*). When I made the switch to OS X from 9 at home, InDesign was the only thing I could use, and I liked it a lot. That's all I'm sayin'.
but in the process they seem to have introduced some new ones.
What kind of quirks? Have you been able to nail down anything specific? And about Acrobat 6...I haven't got it yet but I have to ask, can you print separations from it? If so, how is it?
That is until Adobe finishes InDesign which, hopefully, will blow QuarkXPress out of the water.
It's done, bro. Version 2.0.2. Try using it. Unfortunately, many designers are just plain stuck with Quark because they refuse to try anything else. I used Quark for years. Then OS X came out and then InDesign 2.0. Quark was lagging, so I gave InDesign a try. I think it works great! It even has some familiar Quark-style features (like the infamous boxes to place images and text in). The Photshop/Illustrator-style pallets are a breeze, and the proxy for alignment makes the ol' create-a-second-empty-box-to-align-by-center trick in Quark totally archaic.
I am not only a designer, but I am also a pre-press technician, and InDesign writes pretty clean Postscript and integrates well into a Heidelberg Delta/Fuji Topsetter workflow. Give it a shot. Although now that Q6 is out, I gotta go pick up a copy, just to check it out.
In Santa Barbara, CA, there are 3 delis that operate under the name Bitterman's Deli. They have a whole Seinfeld theme. They play recorded episodes of the show on a continuous loop using a VCR. I don't know if having video tape (analog) vs. PVR (digital) is distinguished under any laws, but maybe you can call Bitterman's and ask them.
Orange Micro definitely used to have one. Apple's version, I beleive was the DOS Compatibility Card. It was for the old NuBus Macs like the PowerMac 6100/66. Way old school. Worked pretty well...for DOS anyway. I think you could actually run Windows 3.11 on it as well. But it's been so long...
Point taken. :) All of those guys can easily make money in a purely file sharing world, ibid my parent post.
There was also a guy named Micheal Jordan who seems to have done alright financially.
Shoe salesmen don't count here...We're talking about computer guys, even though the very mention of the name Gates is enough to make me puke...Oh crap, there it is again! Blerrrgch!
Touché...But my name was on the parent. Not his. I got a rep (and an ego) to protect.
Should that type of music simply go away - your personal opinion as to whether it's 'good' or 'bad' music aside, should an entire genre be dismissed because it's not economically viable under your model?
I'm not dismissing anything. I'm not in control here. I guess I don't equate music with economics they way some folks do. I was thinking of a time when it would become so difficult for a musician to make money selling recordings of their music, that they would have to find other ways of surviving. Live shows were one of the ways (and that's a pretty good way, since many people like live music). And, for the third time, if the artist is that good, their music would sell itself.
Take, for instance, J Mascis of Dinosaur Jr., now of J Mascis and the Fog. He records all the instruments himself, but live he just plays guitar with his live band. Lemme tell you, his guitar playing really stands out and the whole band rules it live!!! He lives for the music, and he sure as hell doesn't make as much money as pop artists do.
People like you need to realize this and stop being so cheap. Just pay for the stuff and stop complaining.
Where, in my post did I ever make any sort of complaint? Where did I ever advocate the need to share music? Nowhere. I was merely stating my vision of the future if sharing got so out of hand that record companies had to fold. I'm not cheap. I'm just being realistic: there are many others out there who are cheap, or share music just because they can. I'm not in any way promoting the stealing of music. All I'm saying is that the more you try and stop it, the more it's going to happen. Artists are going to have to make a big adjustment to this reality.
For example, an experimental music composer can't really do a live show to make money (short of setting up a P.A. and playing his/her CD). Why would anyone pay to see that if they already had the CD? Also, what about artists who are a single man/woman who play and record all of the instruments on the CD? That is HARD work
Yes. Music is very hard work. If you work hard enough, and make good music, you might end up giving people a reason to buy the music. And why would you not want to see them live if you already bought the CD? Are they not good enough for you with out ProTools and studio modifications?
Music is an orignal creation and chould be copyrighted and protected.
Protected against what? Copyright infringement? Does that destroy their music at all? No. It just destroys their ability to make money off their music. Again, artists who must be paid for their music are not artist at all; they are manufacturers of a product. That's all. In today's world of inevitable file sharing, a musician should know going in that they may not make any money. Besides, you are an Anonymous Coward, and no one here cares what you have to say.
Every time the music companies and the RIAA try to stop file sharing, it seems that somebody out there will find a way to do it. Some say that this can only hurt the music industry because artists won't get paid, and the label won't make a profit, blah, blah, blah. If you ask me, I think the time for pop stars and record labels making millions is almost at an end.
Here's my vision of the future of music: People everywhere are able to share the music they purchase with anyone they want. That gets the musicians' product to millions of people, fast. The musician then has to tour and play live to make money. At the live show, maybe the musician sells some more CDs and other merch, and the cycle begins anew. What's so bad about that? Live shows are great! Maybe this whole new process will weed out those fakers that aren't any good without ProTools. Our ears may get a well deserved break from the cookie-cutter pop music crap that radio stations are forced to play by big-money record labels.
It'll make the quality of the music better as well. Without the domination by a few music acts that get all the airplay and spots on TRL, musicians will have to be extraordinary, musically and lyrically, in order to really shine and rise above the rest. Sure, they won't make the millions that artists do now. Oh well. That just means musicians that are in it for the music will continue to play.
One can only dream. And in case you are wondering: Yes, I am a musician. The thing is, I know there are so many musicians out there who are way better than I am. I'd still be at the bottom of the pile. Then again, that could be a good thing.
Whatever. Morons are ACs who write posts without checking the validity of their information first. At least I got the balls to use my name...your Mom knows about my balls...Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...talk about soothing!
For some people, taking notes, actually writing down the points which you think are important, helps you better organize and remember what was said in class. But, for some people, typing it also works. It depends on the brain.
One thing I can't believe people lived without were class web sites.- course syllabus - assignment/lab report/essay due dates - exams dates - (sometimes) class notes - marks - how to contact the professor (email, phone, office hours, etc)
It was called "paper." All a student had to do was save all those things in his PeeChee folder and he was all set. Class notes (at my Univ., at least) could be bought at the University Center from University approved note takers. The lazy thing? Maybe. The paper way took discipline to keep it all organized.
Sure, one can go to the library and get reams of information, but it's not sorted, as if I had typed in a search request to a popular search engine.
You really don't believe that, do you? Not only are libraries sorted better (no matter which system they use) than Google, everything in the library can be verified. I'm willing to bet that 90% of the stuff that's listed by Google is crap anyway. Who would want to search through that? Published books are verifiable sources of information. You can't go wrong. Think about it: Books have publishers who edit the content and verify the sources that the author cited before they print it; the college, in turn, selects the best books that it thinks will most benefit the students for each subject offered based on professors' recommendations, grad student dissertations, etc. In contrast, any idiot can put up a web site without anyone else verifying the content.
Most books also have an index in the back, anyway. Combine that with the card catalogue, the human help at the desk, and I would take it over Google anyday.
As for the convenience of being able to surf in the middle of the night, etc.: I'd sacrifice that for good, solid information for my papers.
The only way to find out for sure is to go back to college yourself, bro. Any one of us can tell you that it has changed, but compared to what? A student now has no way of telling what it was like back in the day, because they weren't there.
I remember the library, too. I'd still probably use it if I went back today: I am more comfortable with citing published works as sources; your eyes don't hurt as much reading a book compared to a screen; and you never know if the guy on the web is full of crap, or crazy, or what. Besides, from what I hear, students today just buy their term papers online anyway. Screw Cliffs Notes!
I'd slap your mama, but she's so fat I have to pull my dick out and walk around her ass to get to her face!
Don't even bother to reply. Dumbass AC.
So Apple spun off AppleLink Personal Edition. It became America Online.
Don't make me slap you.
Ronny was was great...
Gimme a break. You wouldn't be calling him "Ronny" if you didn't have a problem with or were out of your diapers when he was in office. You are an AC anyway, so you can take your Trickledown Economics and bite me. At least Alan has the balls to use his name, not like you, you pansy butt-dart rimjobbing turd-burgular. Stop being such a pussy.
Mind you, whatever fucknut at Apple decided that 'new folder' should become CMD-SHIFT-N needs a good, hard kick up the arse, Bishop Brennan style.
Father Ted in the house! Alright!