Read this:
Over 100,000 Ordered Since June 23 Introduction
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT= 104&STORY=/www/story/08-18-2003/0002002429&EDA TE=
Considering the fact that IBM popularized the practice of litigating a company till they run out of money to fight... it shouldn't take long for this one to end.
"would make S. Jobs shit his pants?"
I left out the "IT" on purpose as a play on words... thinking it would have been somewhat obvious why.
The reference to S. Jobs shitting his pants comes from his comment to Dean Kamenwhen Dean showed S. Jobs the segway and Steve said that it was ugly and that he could get designers that would cause you to shit your pants.
However, now that I had to explain the joke... its not funny any more.
[roll eyes]
"Its not like Safari is innovative or anything"
Its not? What about Safari's SnapBack feature?
Safari's bookmark manager is also an innovative feature. When first run, Safari automatically imports your IE bookmarks. That's pretty innovative if you ask me.
"I agree the powerbooks are expensive, but I think that feature-for-feature, the ibooks can price compete with any x86 laptop."
As are the PowerBooks.
With PC desktops, you can less more and therefore pay less, but they are NOT less expensive than Macs of equal specs. The same is true for Apple's laptops.
"Thank you for your interest in Movielink. We want you to take part in the powerful Internet movie rental experience that Movielink delivers; however, you currently do not meet our minimum system requirements. You will need to adjust the following:
You Need Windows 98, ME, 2000, XP"
I just randomly looked up 10 different albums. And most of the album prices were at $12.95. Most track prices were at $.99. How is this cheaper? Yeah they start at $.79. I haven't found that many yet. There is something to be said about consistency.
After hopping on a PC and doing a few quick searches for music, I noticed that there are hundreds if not thousands of songs in their system which are "Not Available for Sale"...
They still have a 30-second preview and album info, but you can't buy them.
I wonder how many songs in total there are like this... they seemed to be in every search i did.
read the "license restrictions" area at this site:
http://www.buymusic.com/support/help.aspx#Minimum_ Downloading
I don't need to quote anything, just read it and laugh with me at what they're doing.
The pricing is variable, anywhere from $.79 to $1.49. The heterogeneous nature of the service licensing should help doom buymusic.com to failure, but who knows? The iTunes Music Store needs to come to Windows SOON.
Different licenses for different songs with varying limits for burning versus uniform licensing for all songs with unlimited burns.
It's going to be hell making your own custom music CD using that service. I'm sticking with Apple, and once Apple releases its PC iTunes, I'm sticking that on my PCs as well.
"I'd prefer to HAVE an Apple, as I love the idea of a truly consumer friendly Unix OS (though Linux is improving in leaps and bounds), but their hardware, being that they are themselves a monopoly in their market, is twice as expensive as common x86 systems..."
You obviously haven't priced Mac in a LONG time. All of Apple's hardware is either only slightly more expensive (in the $100 range) at the same price or slightly less expensive. In some occations, the hardware is significantly less expensive as seen with the new G5s.
When comparing prices, its important to compare hardware as close as possible, while also figuring in software bundles as well.
>>> "Heh. Yeah, and Apple has what percent of market share?"
You can't visit a popular technology-oriented discussion board these days without hearing the oft-misconceived phrase, "Apple has 5% of the market and Windows has 95%.
There are two things wrong with this statement, the first being that if Apple has five, Windows must have 95. We as users of alternative operating systems know this not to be the case. Of course, a considerable number of desktop PCs do not bear the Windows logo.
The second problem is the implication that "market-share" can be used interchangeably with "installed-base." When most people use the word "market-share", what they really mean is "installed-base."
For example, while Apple's Macintosh market-share may be 3 percent, its installed-base is approximately 10 to 12 percent of the computing industry, a figure that's roughly similar to that of Linux based PCs.
When these figures are coupled with the remaining alternative operating systems on the market, Windows installed-base works out to be somewhere in the way of 80 percent -- a far cry from the 95 figure that is often touted.
So how does market-share play into the picture you ask?
Market-share is determined by quarterly or annual sales figures. The problem with market-share statistics is that it implies that all computers retain the same level of usability over time. It assumes that once a computer is sold, it will retain its productivity status for as long as its parts continue to function.
Unfortunately, usability statistics and replacement purchasing habits of consumers vary significantly between platforms thus causing the market-share figure to look skewed.
Linux users (for example) are known to keep aging computer hardware useful long after it was left for dead by its former Windows using owner. The open source community consistently manages to squeeze every last ounce of processing power from even the most aged hardware available.
Similarly, Mac users are known to keep their computers as primary productivity tools until the gears fall off. This is really a testament to the quality that Apple incorporated into its hardware and software over the years.
Unfortunately, the incorporation of quality into these platform's coding efforts will only fuel the notion that they are far less popular as what they are as long as market-share is the most commonly used gauge to determine platform popularity.
Because the Linux operating system's distribution model isn't tied directly to sales, it will never get a truly accurate gauge as long as market-share is touted over installed-base.
Apple on the other hand, may be in a better situation for the foreseeable future.
As we all know, the troubled economy has caused desktop PC purchases to fall to an all time low. This fact may actually work to Apple's advantage.
Everything Apple has been working toward pivots on the release of OS X running on next generation hardware.
Apple is scheduled to release next generation professional hardware in the coming weeks. The release of this hardware, when coupled with Apple's Panther operating system starts the completion of Steve Jobs' rebuilding of Apple.
It's this combination, which the computer using populace has been waiting for, many of which have said that they've been holding back their computer purchases for Apple to get the time table right.
This sudden sales windfall will occur in parallel with the PC industry's slow sales rate, which means that as long as the semi-misleading market-share statistic continues to be touted; Apple's percentage will likely jump from its current 3 percent status to double-digit growth, (somewhere in the 12 percent range) in as few as 6-9 months.
Remember, marketshare for any given company is calculated in relation to the sales of its competators. This will cause Apple's market share to make an even larger spike considering the fact that each individual PC manufacturer's sales wont be there to counter Apple's.
Of course, if the technology spinmeisters try to turn the table and tout installed-base (as they should have all along), Apple's current 12 percent status is covered there too.
Sorry to pick nits, but "MAC" is an acronym for Media Access Control and the "Mac" is the abbreviation for Macintosh.
Sorry, but it bugs me to no end when I see people spell it that way.
"Wrong. You cannot just re-rip a CD you have burned into MP3 format.
Go ahead and try it."
Sure you can. I do it with iTunes all the time.
Maybe because its not really DRM (at least not like you're refering to it. It's not managing your rights... telling you what you can and can't do with the file, hence the reason why you can burn the sungs to CD in MP3 format... than unrip them afterwards.
On the iTMS, I can listen to all the music i want... the same way I would on Rhapsody... in an effort to make sure that I don;t download any unnecessary garbage.
Yes, I only get 30 seconds worth of audio, but I didn;t have to pay a subscription fee for the privilage.
Slashdot Mirror
it sucks? Its the best media container format available...
Read this: Over 100,000 Ordered Since June 23 Introduction http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT= 104&STORY=/www/story/08-18-2003/0002002429&EDA TE=
We've already seen independant research tests that showed the G5 to be faster.
Considering the fact that IBM popularized the practice of litigating a company till they run out of money to fight... it shouldn't take long for this one to end.
"would make S. Jobs shit his pants?" I left out the "IT" on purpose as a play on words... thinking it would have been somewhat obvious why. The reference to S. Jobs shitting his pants comes from his comment to Dean Kamenwhen Dean showed S. Jobs the segway and Steve said that it was ugly and that he could get designers that would cause you to shit your pants. However, now that I had to explain the joke... its not funny any more. [roll eyes]
would make S. Jobs shit his pants?
"Its not like Safari is innovative or anything" Its not? What about Safari's SnapBack feature? Safari's bookmark manager is also an innovative feature. When first run, Safari automatically imports your IE bookmarks. That's pretty innovative if you ask me.
"I agree the powerbooks are expensive, but I think that feature-for-feature, the ibooks can price compete with any x86 laptop." As are the PowerBooks. With PC desktops, you can less more and therefore pay less, but they are NOT less expensive than Macs of equal specs. The same is true for Apple's laptops.
The same copy and pasted troll again I see...
"Thank you for your interest in Movielink. We want you to take part in the powerful Internet movie rental experience that Movielink delivers; however, you currently do not meet our minimum system requirements. You will need to adjust the following: You Need Windows 98, ME, 2000, XP"
I just randomly looked up 10 different albums. And most of the album prices were at $12.95. Most track prices were at $.99. How is this cheaper? Yeah they start at $.79. I haven't found that many yet. There is something to be said about consistency.
After hopping on a PC and doing a few quick searches for music, I noticed that there are hundreds if not thousands of songs in their system which are "Not Available for Sale"... They still have a 30-second preview and album info, but you can't buy them. I wonder how many songs in total there are like this... they seemed to be in every search i did.
read the "license restrictions" area at this site: http://www.buymusic.com/support/help.aspx#Minimum_ Downloading
I don't need to quote anything, just read it and laugh with me at what they're doing.
The pricing is variable, anywhere from $.79 to $1.49. The heterogeneous nature of the service licensing should help doom buymusic.com to failure, but who knows? The iTunes Music Store needs to come to Windows SOON.
Different licenses for different songs with varying limits for burning versus uniform licensing for all songs with unlimited burns. It's going to be hell making your own custom music CD using that service. I'm sticking with Apple, and once Apple releases its PC iTunes, I'm sticking that on my PCs as well.
"I'd prefer to HAVE an Apple, as I love the idea of a truly consumer friendly Unix OS (though Linux is improving in leaps and bounds), but their hardware, being that they are themselves a monopoly in their market, is twice as expensive as common x86 systems..." You obviously haven't priced Mac in a LONG time. All of Apple's hardware is either only slightly more expensive (in the $100 range) at the same price or slightly less expensive. In some occations, the hardware is significantly less expensive as seen with the new G5s. When comparing prices, its important to compare hardware as close as possible, while also figuring in software bundles as well.
Here's the benchmarks which you said weren't listed: http://www.apple.com/powermac/graphics.html
In related news, they said that the software is only compatible with Windows.
We Mac users never get any of the popular software...
>>> "Heh. Yeah, and Apple has what percent of market share?"
You can't visit a popular technology-oriented discussion board these days without hearing the oft-misconceived phrase, "Apple has 5% of the market and Windows has 95%.
There are two things wrong with this statement, the first being that if Apple has five, Windows must have 95. We as users of alternative operating systems know this not to be the case. Of course, a considerable number of desktop PCs do not bear the Windows logo.
The second problem is the implication that "market-share" can be used interchangeably with "installed-base." When most people use the word "market-share", what they really mean is "installed-base."
For example, while Apple's Macintosh market-share may be 3 percent, its installed-base is approximately 10 to 12 percent of the computing industry, a figure that's roughly similar to that of Linux based PCs.
When these figures are coupled with the remaining alternative operating systems on the market, Windows installed-base works out to be somewhere in the way of 80 percent -- a far cry from the 95 figure that is often touted.
So how does market-share play into the picture you ask?
Market-share is determined by quarterly or annual sales figures. The problem with market-share statistics is that it implies that all computers retain the same level of usability over time. It assumes that once a computer is sold, it will retain its productivity status for as long as its parts continue to function.
Unfortunately, usability statistics and replacement purchasing habits of consumers vary significantly between platforms thus causing the market-share figure to look skewed.
Linux users (for example) are known to keep aging computer hardware useful long after it was left for dead by its former Windows using owner. The open source community consistently manages to squeeze every last ounce of processing power from even the most aged hardware available.
Similarly, Mac users are known to keep their computers as primary productivity tools until the gears fall off. This is really a testament to the quality that Apple incorporated into its hardware and software over the years.
Unfortunately, the incorporation of quality into these platform's coding efforts will only fuel the notion that they are far less popular as what they are as long as market-share is the most commonly used gauge to determine platform popularity.
Because the Linux operating system's distribution model isn't tied directly to sales, it will never get a truly accurate gauge as long as market-share is touted over installed-base.
Apple on the other hand, may be in a better situation for the foreseeable future.
As we all know, the troubled economy has caused desktop PC purchases to fall to an all time low. This fact may actually work to Apple's advantage.
Everything Apple has been working toward pivots on the release of OS X running on next generation hardware.
Apple is scheduled to release next generation professional hardware in the coming weeks. The release of this hardware, when coupled with Apple's Panther operating system starts the completion of Steve Jobs' rebuilding of Apple.
It's this combination, which the computer using populace has been waiting for, many of which have said that they've been holding back their computer purchases for Apple to get the time table right.
This sudden sales windfall will occur in parallel with the PC industry's slow sales rate, which means that as long as the semi-misleading market-share statistic continues to be touted; Apple's percentage will likely jump from its current 3 percent status to double-digit growth, (somewhere in the 12 percent range) in as few as 6-9 months.
Remember, marketshare for any given company is calculated in relation to the sales of its competators. This will cause Apple's market share to make an even larger spike considering the fact that each individual PC manufacturer's sales wont be there to counter Apple's.
Of course, if the technology spinmeisters try to turn the table and tout installed-base (as they should have all along), Apple's current 12 percent status is covered there too.
Why was this modded as troll?!
MAC is NOT the correct spelling.... Geeeez people!
This is a canned troll.
/.
I've seen this comment made (near verbadum) on other occations on
Sorry to pick nits, but "MAC" is an acronym for Media Access Control and the "Mac" is the abbreviation for Macintosh. Sorry, but it bugs me to no end when I see people spell it that way.
"Wrong. You cannot just re-rip a CD you have burned into MP3 format.
Go ahead and try it."
Sure you can. I do it with iTunes all the time.
Maybe because its not really DRM (at least not like you're refering to it. It's not managing your rights... telling you what you can and can't do with the file, hence the reason why you can burn the sungs to CD in MP3 format... than unrip them afterwards.
"You overlooked listening WITHOUT burning. Throw that in, and Real's prices look a lot better."
But Apple's service allows you to listen too.... WITHOUT a burn fee.
Throw that in, and Apple's prices look a lot better.
On the iTMS, I can listen to all the music i want... the same way I would on Rhapsody... in an effort to make sure that I don;t download any unnecessary garbage.
Yes, I only get 30 seconds worth of audio, but I didn;t have to pay a subscription fee for the privilage.
Apple's business model wins even then...