I have to agree. I always thought the two most important parts of the series are tom bombadil and the scouring of the shire. On the surface they seem like they are there for no reason, but on further examination I think Tolkien meant them to be the most important.
Nope, no problems at all... and it's what I voted with last time (couple of weeks ago), when I lived in texas it was the connect the line method, but still similar in theory to bubble sheets. When you're done, you slide it into the counter and that's that. It counts as quickly as a computer, and there is a paper trail.
I just hope that the record industry going back to the single doesn't kill the album as an art form. 99% of the music I listen to are bands that put out good albums. I think there is something special where an album is made up of songs that convey a common theme. I don't want to loose that.
Funny neither my linux box or my windows box gets viruses or crashes. Do you know why? I set them both up, and I am not an idiot. Since you moved your wife to Linux, I will assume you are not an idiot either, because you were able to set up a linux box. Now that means that you also could have set up a windows box that didn't get viruses either. It's pretty easy. Use Mozilla or Opera. Install a firewall. Install virus checking/spyware checking. Don't use outlook. Hell, you can even install open office. I have not had XP crash a single time on my current workstation. I have not got a virus. I don't have any spyware. It's pretty easy.
The other reason MP3s are so popular is that many of today's CDs only contain 1 to 3 good songs - the rest is filler.
I'm sick of this arguement. This is the way it always was! There are a few good bands that put out quality albums. Then there are the people who have 3 singles and filler. This has been the same since the industry moved to selling albums in the 60's.
I think Sony is falling because nearly every gamer who wants a PS2 has one. Some of the people who only have PS2's are now buyin xboxes and game cubes.
But the consoles do last about 5 to 7 years. All three of the consoles came out at about the same time in either 2000 or 2001. The next gen consoles will all be out in 2005 and 2006. That is in the 5 to 7 year window.
You should get the gamecube just for SSX 3. Loads of fun. But I agree, it's the games not the console. I realize my playstation 2 is probably the weakest of the 3 consoles. However it has DDR, SSX, GTA 3/VC, and Gran Turismo. Those are the games I want to play.
I thought the big deal of the renisis (isn't that what they call it?) engine was not it's economy or it's power. It was the fact it made the same power, had the same fuel economy, and passed emmission standards which is something the old rx-7 couldn't do.
Maybe not at the highest level of production, but I've listened to music recorded by bands who never sold a disc.
So have I, and alot of them went into debt to do it.
How many songs that you listen to have you seen the video for? Did you see the video before you decided you liked the song? Would you buy a copy of a lousy song if it had a good video?
Sometimes seeing a video will make me seek out a band. This happened with both the Sound Track of Our Lives and the new Super Furry Animals discs. These were both bands I was at least familiar with, but had never heard. Seeing their videos made me interested enough to check them out and buy their CD's. I'll admit videos aren't deal breakers for me, but for 90% of the music buying populace they serve as very effective commercials. Think Britney or N'Sync would sell many records with out a video? The new OutKast CD is outstanding in my opinion, however there is no way it sells 700,000 copies in the first week without heavy video airplay.
Ok, that's one thing the labels do. Internet radio and the like may not be enough to make a band big. But it may be enough to make a living.
Don't forget the labels control internet radio right now. Their the ones in charge of collecting all the royalty payments. But this is possible now. On an indie label it is possible to make a living selling less than a 100,000 records, touring, and selling t-shirts and stickers. There is a certain kind of audience that will always be interested in that kind of music (me and my friends). However, that audience already buys alot of CD's, I don't know how much bigger that part of the industry can get without attracting alot of new listeners. And that's the problem, the general populace likes to be told what to like. It's always been then way, and always will.
I just have a hard time ever seeing this reaching a critical mass. The labels have the rights to 99% of all recorded music from the last 50 years. If they think iTMS is getting too powerful they can simply pull their music from the store and sell it to someone else. Which service are most people going to choose the one that has a few new indie bands, or the one that has 99% of all the past popular music?
ethernet is definately a cool feature. It means that any computer in your house running any operating system can sync with the device. To me that's a big deal.
Why the heck would I want to listen to crappy radio stations when I have thousands of commercial free songs at my disposal?!
Not all radio is crappy. There are good stations. There are things like NPR, local news, and traffic reports that those of commuting would like to hear.
Yay, support for a bunch of codecs I'll never use!
I didn't realize choice was a bad thing. I prefer to keep all my music in FLAC. Right now I have to convert it to mp3 to use on my player. It would be nice to have a player that just supported FLAC out of the box.
Yay, fancy displays and visualizations to kill the battery faster!
That would be a good arguement if the iPod didn't have the worse battery time of any of the players out there.
The Rio player is the same as the equivalent ipod ($400 for 20gb)
The Rio is actually $349 and has features the iPod does not including: longer battery life, audio in, ethernet, support for any OS out of the box, FLAC support, OGG Vorbis support. So not only is it cheaper per GB, it includes more bang for the buck. The iRiver hard drive player is the same price as the iPod but it also includes more features including an FM tuner.
There is no ipod equivalent to the 2gb bantam player, but for $70 more you can get an extra 8gb with the ipod.
The bantam player is flash based is it not? Totally different kind of product than a hard drive based player.
The philips player is more expensive, I will give you that. Which is why I wouldn't buy it:)
So you go indie, you get on CDBaby, you get your music on iTunes and then.... this is the ??? before profit. You still need to get the word out. Somehow people need to hear of you so they know to seach out your music and download it. This is the service that record labels provide. They pay for marketing. Now I will agree that they over charge for marketing bands, but it is nearly impossible for a band to make money unless they have a record label pushing their music. How many unsigned artists get national air play? music videos? magazine adds? magazine reviews? Those things are important to selling your music.
It was the Sony Pictures not the MPAA for the record. But the reason behind this was simple. Studios love to give people a percentage off the net profit in their contract. It's very easy to use accounting tricks to make the net profit become zero (that's why stan lee didn't get paid). When signing any contract if you are given a percentage (commonly refered to as points) make sure it is off the gross and not the net.
You still are going to need some kind of middle man. A band usually can not afford to pay to record an album on there own. There is also the problem of marketing it. Just putting your music on iTunes does not gurantee anyone is going to buy it. You still need someone to pay to shoot your video. You still need to get radio air play. These are all things the labels do for artists and these are all things that are not going to go away.
Sony makes a profit as well. It starts out as a small profit, and then increases the longer production goes on. Sony is actually still making a profit on the psones it sells today.
they're getting the same amount per song that the major's are getting... about $.65. This is pure profit to them because there are no associated costs besides providing a master track to apple.
You're link is a litte missleading. The 40gb ipod comes out cheaper per MB than other companies 20gb players. but it is also cheaper per MB than the 20gb ipod. You need to compare apples to apples here. compare the 20gb ipod to other 20gb players, and the 40gb ipod to other 40gb players. you will see that the ipod either is more expensive or the same price but lacking other features.
The WMA-based services don't use the same DRM for every song. Some don't let you burn CDs. Some restrict the number of burns to an absolute number (like 3 or 5). Some don't let you add/drop computers (so you lose your songs when you get a new computer). Some expire if you don't maintain a paid subscription to the service.
This is almost always witht he subscription based services. The alacarte downloads usually mimi the iTMS exactly. But remember, it is the labels who decide what DRM scheme to implement not the people selling the music. I think what apple has done is basically refuse to sell anything that wants stricter DRM than they are willing to offer. The other stores are willing to implement harsher restrictions on certain songs, in order to offer a larger selection of music. I would wager (although I am not certain) that the DRM from any song from apple would have identical DRM at the other stores when downloading alacarte. The songs that have stricter restrictions at the other stores are either not available at apple, or available only as streams.
You're not wrong. My point was that the DRM on WMA files is identical in nature to the AAC files from iTMS. The only way you can say apple's is more open is by comparing it to the streaming options, but since apple doesn't support this it's an invalid arguement.
You can burn the DRM'd WMA files to an audio cd, and re-rip them to any thing you want. I really find no differences in the DRM schemes the iTMS is using and those set in place by napster or music match. The only glaring differences are when it comes to streaming and subscriptions, which iTMS doesn't offer.
Actually I think this player might address all those features. It would solve everything but the price, and if you're willing to step down in capacity it solves that too.
Slashdot Mirror
I have to agree. I always thought the two most important parts of the series are tom bombadil and the scouring of the shire. On the surface they seem like they are there for no reason, but on further examination I think Tolkien meant them to be the most important.
Nope, no problems at all... and it's what I voted with last time (couple of weeks ago), when I lived in texas it was the connect the line method, but still similar in theory to bubble sheets. When you're done, you slide it into the counter and that's that. It counts as quickly as a computer, and there is a paper trail.
I just hope that the record industry going back to the single doesn't kill the album as an art form. 99% of the music I listen to are bands that put out good albums. I think there is something special where an album is made up of songs that convey a common theme. I don't want to loose that.
Funny neither my linux box or my windows box gets viruses or crashes. Do you know why? I set them both up, and I am not an idiot. Since you moved your wife to Linux, I will assume you are not an idiot either, because you were able to set up a linux box. Now that means that you also could have set up a windows box that didn't get viruses either. It's pretty easy. Use Mozilla or Opera. Install a firewall. Install virus checking/spyware checking. Don't use outlook. Hell, you can even install open office. I have not had XP crash a single time on my current workstation. I have not got a virus. I don't have any spyware. It's pretty easy.
The other reason MP3s are so popular is that many of today's CDs only contain 1 to 3 good songs - the rest is filler.
I'm sick of this arguement. This is the way it always was! There are a few good bands that put out quality albums. Then there are the people who have 3 singles and filler. This has been the same since the industry moved to selling albums in the 60's.
Unless of course your idea of free speech is an algorithm to break DCSS... or circumvent copy protection.
I think Sony is falling because nearly every gamer who wants a PS2 has one. Some of the people who only have PS2's are now buyin xboxes and game cubes.
But the consoles do last about 5 to 7 years. All three of the consoles came out at about the same time in either 2000 or 2001. The next gen consoles will all be out in 2005 and 2006. That is in the 5 to 7 year window.
You should get the gamecube just for SSX 3. Loads of fun. But I agree, it's the games not the console. I realize my playstation 2 is probably the weakest of the 3 consoles. However it has DDR, SSX, GTA 3/VC, and Gran Turismo. Those are the games I want to play.
I thought the big deal of the renisis (isn't that what they call it?) engine was not it's economy or it's power. It was the fact it made the same power, had the same fuel economy, and passed emmission standards which is something the old rx-7 couldn't do.
Maybe not at the highest level of production, but I've listened to music recorded by bands who never sold a disc.
So have I, and alot of them went into debt to do it. How many songs that you listen to have you seen the video for? Did you see the video before you decided you liked the song? Would you buy a copy of a lousy song if it had a good video?
Sometimes seeing a video will make me seek out a band. This happened with both the Sound Track of Our Lives and the new Super Furry Animals discs. These were both bands I was at least familiar with, but had never heard. Seeing their videos made me interested enough to check them out and buy their CD's. I'll admit videos aren't deal breakers for me, but for 90% of the music buying populace they serve as very effective commercials. Think Britney or N'Sync would sell many records with out a video? The new OutKast CD is outstanding in my opinion, however there is no way it sells 700,000 copies in the first week without heavy video airplay.
Ok, that's one thing the labels do. Internet radio and the like may not be enough to make a band big. But it may be enough to make a living.
Don't forget the labels control internet radio right now. Their the ones in charge of collecting all the royalty payments. But this is possible now. On an indie label it is possible to make a living selling less than a 100,000 records, touring, and selling t-shirts and stickers. There is a certain kind of audience that will always be interested in that kind of music (me and my friends). However, that audience already buys alot of CD's, I don't know how much bigger that part of the industry can get without attracting alot of new listeners. And that's the problem, the general populace likes to be told what to like. It's always been then way, and always will.
I just have a hard time ever seeing this reaching a critical mass. The labels have the rights to 99% of all recorded music from the last 50 years. If they think iTMS is getting too powerful they can simply pull their music from the store and sell it to someone else. Which service are most people going to choose the one that has a few new indie bands, or the one that has 99% of all the past popular music?
ethernet is definately a cool feature. It means that any computer in your house running any operating system can sync with the device. To me that's a big deal.
Why the heck would I want to listen to crappy radio stations when I have thousands of commercial free songs at my disposal?!
Not all radio is crappy. There are good stations. There are things like NPR, local news, and traffic reports that those of commuting would like to hear.
Yay, support for a bunch of codecs I'll never use!
I didn't realize choice was a bad thing. I prefer to keep all my music in FLAC. Right now I have to convert it to mp3 to use on my player. It would be nice to have a player that just supported FLAC out of the box.
Yay, fancy displays and visualizations to kill the battery faster!
That would be a good arguement if the iPod didn't have the worse battery time of any of the players out there.
The Rio player is the same as the equivalent ipod ($400 for 20gb)
:)
The Rio is actually $349 and has features the iPod does not including: longer battery life, audio in, ethernet, support for any OS out of the box, FLAC support, OGG Vorbis support. So not only is it cheaper per GB, it includes more bang for the buck. The iRiver hard drive player is the same price as the iPod but it also includes more features including an FM tuner.
There is no ipod equivalent to the 2gb bantam player, but for $70 more you can get an extra 8gb with the ipod.
The bantam player is flash based is it not? Totally different kind of product than a hard drive based player.
The philips player is more expensive, I will give you that. Which is why I wouldn't buy it
So you go indie, you get on CDBaby, you get your music on iTunes and then.... this is the ??? before profit. You still need to get the word out. Somehow people need to hear of you so they know to seach out your music and download it. This is the service that record labels provide. They pay for marketing. Now I will agree that they over charge for marketing bands, but it is nearly impossible for a band to make money unless they have a record label pushing their music. How many unsigned artists get national air play? music videos? magazine adds? magazine reviews? Those things are important to selling your music.
It was the Sony Pictures not the MPAA for the record. But the reason behind this was simple. Studios love to give people a percentage off the net profit in their contract. It's very easy to use accounting tricks to make the net profit become zero (that's why stan lee didn't get paid). When signing any contract if you are given a percentage (commonly refered to as points) make sure it is off the gross and not the net.
You still are going to need some kind of middle man. A band usually can not afford to pay to record an album on there own. There is also the problem of marketing it. Just putting your music on iTunes does not gurantee anyone is going to buy it. You still need someone to pay to shoot your video. You still need to get radio air play. These are all things the labels do for artists and these are all things that are not going to go away.
Sony makes a profit as well. It starts out as a small profit, and then increases the longer production goes on. Sony is actually still making a profit on the psones it sells today.
they're getting the same amount per song that the major's are getting... about $.65. This is pure profit to them because there are no associated costs besides providing a master track to apple.
You're link is a litte missleading. The 40gb ipod comes out cheaper per MB than other companies 20gb players. but it is also cheaper per MB than the 20gb ipod. You need to compare apples to apples here. compare the 20gb ipod to other 20gb players, and the 40gb ipod to other 40gb players. you will see that the ipod either is more expensive or the same price but lacking other features.
The WMA-based services don't use the same DRM for every song. Some don't let you burn CDs. Some restrict the number of burns to an absolute number (like 3 or 5). Some don't let you add/drop computers (so you lose your songs when you get a new computer). Some expire if you don't maintain a paid subscription to the service.
This is almost always witht he subscription based services. The alacarte downloads usually mimi the iTMS exactly. But remember, it is the labels who decide what DRM scheme to implement not the people selling the music. I think what apple has done is basically refuse to sell anything that wants stricter DRM than they are willing to offer. The other stores are willing to implement harsher restrictions on certain songs, in order to offer a larger selection of music. I would wager (although I am not certain) that the DRM from any song from apple would have identical DRM at the other stores when downloading alacarte. The songs that have stricter restrictions at the other stores are either not available at apple, or available only as streams.
You're not wrong. My point was that the DRM on WMA files is identical in nature to the AAC files from iTMS. The only way you can say apple's is more open is by comparing it to the streaming options, but since apple doesn't support this it's an invalid arguement.
You can burn the DRM'd WMA files to an audio cd, and re-rip them to any thing you want. I really find no differences in the DRM schemes the iTMS is using and those set in place by napster or music match. The only glaring differences are when it comes to streaming and subscriptions, which iTMS doesn't offer.
Of course I can create WMA files that are not DRMed as well. So what was your point again?
Actually I think this player might address all those features. It would solve everything but the price, and if you're willing to step down in capacity it solves that too.