No, you didn't "call" them a second Sony. You correlated the actions of the two separate companies to show a similar behavior set. Sorry, that's my fault. But no, I fail to see how owning a share of a Japanese record company makes them the owner of an RIAA member label. For those who haven't been paying attention in acronym class, RIAA stands for Recording Industry Association of America (not the Recording Industry Association of Asia).
Not to mention the DRM article you linked to was, oh, about three and a half years old (and AACS has since been broken). Or the fact that EMI has been offering DRM-free downloads as of late. I understand, I hate big corporate as much as the next guy, but Toshiba, in all honestly, seems to be one of the best big companies I have dealt with in a long time. I, as well, recommend their products over Sony, and for the same reasons that the ggp mentioned.
How the fuck does this shit get modded informative? From TFA you linked to:
A joint venture of the EMI Group and Toshiba Corporation, EMI decided to buy out all shares; on 30 June 2007 the buyout was officially consummated, and the company renamed EMI Music Japan.
Do you read English? I'm no Toshiba apologist, but since they don't (jointly) own an RIAA member company anymore, you can't call them a second Sony. I know it's hard, but please, for God's sake, at least read what you link to!
Just for clarity, even though the parent is way OT, I haven't fallen back to Analog on Verizon's network since 2002, while driving through the Mojave desert. YMMV.
Out of about 30 comments, only 3 or 4 people have even bothered to skim the story. It's not asking about cellular providers, it's actual phone-based services (location-based, web, etc.). I know no one ever reads TFA, but please at least RTF summary.
That IS why HP did better than Dell with AMD and Linux. The number of incompetent "I just have an IT degree" admins are starting to decline. So are Dell's sales. Coincidence?
Any IT Dept. with a brain steers clear of Dell. That's why I said "Dell is selling what THEIR users want." HP's customer base is wholly different than Dell's! Why are you arguing with me when we are saying the exact same thing?!?!??
Dell isn't dumb, but their customers are those who (at the moment) want Intel, Server 2003, and a support contract so they can guarantee to the CIO that "It'll just work".
Of course Vista is going to tank (Dell knows it), why do you think they are even paying lip service to the idea of selling Linux?
I agree with you 100%. And you said exactly what I did, they are afraid of MS biting them in the ass!!!
I don't AGREE with what Dell is doing, just pointing out the short-sighted aspect of WHY they are doing it. But as for hand-biting, if M$ were to cut them off tomorrow (hypothetically speaking), how much hardware could they sell? Its simple economics to the Dell executives, I'm sure.
And you are exactly right, Dell is selling what their users want. That means Intel-based Win-servers(TM). Non-MS shops aren't Dell's target demographic (yet).
Not to sound like a broken record around here, but why would Dell go out of their way to find components that work on an OS that is in direct competition with the one that ships with (currently) 100% of their hardware?
I hope I never have to experience a phone call resembling anything like the one you recieved. It would be terrible, and I can't imagine how I'd react. However, anyone who kills someone with a car will usually be locked away without the use of a black box. I don't understand how you can come to the conclusion that the situation would have been avoided if the driver's car had a black box. (which it probably did, since airbags have been mandatory in new vehicles in the US since around 1996 or 1997?) The crash investigators in the above story already knew he was lying and could prove he was driving at least 98 mph. Read the title, it HELPED conviction not PROVED his guilt. With all the ways we are already tracked and traced, and all the technology available to investigators, these boxen are pointless. Prove me wrong. When the national media needs to hype more tracking devices, all they need to do is enlist someone who has experienced a loss similar to yours and distort some facts to show that tracking = safety and they have their heartwrenching story that proves nothing. Sorry if I sound blunt, but I'd rather die by drunk truck driver @ 98MPH tonight, then die at age 75 living in a fascist police state. I'm sorry.
Why will advising the police that I am recording them as part of my "personal surveillance" as I call it get me tagged as a troublemaker. The police record ME at traffic stops. Cameras at every major intersection record me without telling me, so why are the police paranoid that I would be recording them?
Slashdot Mirror
No, you didn't "call" them a second Sony. You correlated the actions of the two separate companies to show a similar behavior set. Sorry, that's my fault. But no, I fail to see how owning a share of a Japanese record company makes them the owner of an RIAA member label. For those who haven't been paying attention in acronym class, RIAA stands for Recording Industry Association of America (not the Recording Industry Association of Asia).
Not to mention the DRM article you linked to was, oh, about three and a half years old (and AACS has since been broken). Or the fact that EMI has been offering DRM-free downloads as of late. I understand, I hate big corporate as much as the next guy, but Toshiba, in all honestly, seems to be one of the best big companies I have dealt with in a long time. I, as well, recommend their products over Sony, and for the same reasons that the ggp mentioned.
How the fuck does this shit get modded informative? From TFA you linked to:
A joint venture of the EMI Group and Toshiba Corporation, EMI decided to buy out all shares; on 30 June 2007 the buyout was officially consummated, and the company renamed EMI Music Japan.
Do you read English? I'm no Toshiba apologist, but since they don't (jointly) own an RIAA member company anymore, you can't call them a second Sony. I know it's hard, but please, for God's sake, at least read what you link to!
Just for clarity, even though the parent is way OT, I haven't fallen back to Analog on Verizon's network since 2002, while driving through the Mojave desert. YMMV.
Out of about 30 comments, only 3 or 4 people have even bothered to skim the story. It's not asking about cellular providers, it's actual phone-based services (location-based, web, etc.). I know no one ever reads TFA, but please at least RTF summary.
That IS why HP did better than Dell with AMD and Linux. The number of incompetent "I just have an IT degree" admins are starting to decline. So are Dell's sales. Coincidence?
Any IT Dept. with a brain steers clear of Dell. That's why I said "Dell is selling what THEIR users want." HP's customer base is wholly different than Dell's! Why are you arguing with me when we are saying the exact same thing?!?!??
Dell isn't dumb, but their customers are those who (at the moment) want Intel, Server 2003, and a support contract so they can guarantee to the CIO that "It'll just work".
Of course Vista is going to tank (Dell knows it), why do you think they are even paying lip service to the idea of selling Linux?
I agree with you 100%. And you said exactly what I did, they are afraid of MS biting them in the ass!!!
I don't AGREE with what Dell is doing, just pointing out the short-sighted aspect of WHY they are doing it. But as for hand-biting, if M$ were to cut them off tomorrow (hypothetically speaking), how much hardware could they sell? Its simple economics to the Dell executives, I'm sure.
And you are exactly right, Dell is selling what their users want. That means Intel-based Win-servers(TM). Non-MS shops aren't Dell's target demographic (yet).
Not to sound like a broken record around here, but why would Dell go out of their way to find components that work on an OS that is in direct competition with the one that ships with (currently) 100% of their hardware?
Something about not biting hands that feed you?
</asbestos chainmail>
I hope I never have to experience a phone call resembling anything like the one you recieved. It would be terrible, and I can't imagine how I'd react.
However, anyone who kills someone with a car will usually be locked away without the use of a black box. I don't understand how you can come to the conclusion that the situation would have been avoided if the driver's car had a black box. (which it probably did, since airbags have been mandatory in new vehicles in the US since around 1996 or 1997?)
The crash investigators in the above story already knew he was lying and could prove he was driving at least 98 mph. Read the title, it HELPED conviction not PROVED his guilt. With all the ways we are already tracked and traced, and all the technology available to investigators, these boxen are pointless. Prove me wrong.
When the national media needs to hype more tracking devices, all they need to do is enlist someone who has experienced a loss similar to yours and distort some facts to show that tracking = safety and they have their heartwrenching story that proves nothing. Sorry if I sound blunt, but I'd rather die by drunk truck driver @ 98MPH tonight, then die at age 75 living in a fascist police state. I'm sorry.
Why will advising the police that I am recording them as part of my "personal surveillance" as I call it get me tagged as a troublemaker. The police record ME at traffic stops. Cameras at every major intersection record me without telling me, so why are the police paranoid that I would be recording them?