You miss the point. He would be forced to switch to Windows. That means purchasing a copy of Windows. That means money. And as for your solution, that would mean purchasing a copy of VMWare. That means more money. The guy says he has no job which means no money, especially since he has lawyers fees to payso he has less than no money. Here it is real simple: More money > Money > No money > Less than no money. So no, not done.
Going off on their own? What does that mean? Start their own cellphone company?
What nonsense, as if then Apple would add any of the "features" you want. What you want is mostly hardware related which Apple decided not to include. Hell, they had to push back OS X 10.5 just to get the iPhone out in time.
Your complaints remind of the complaints I heard about the iPod (no radio, no removable battery, etc.) and that product seems to have done well for itself. And regardless of the reviews and the network the phone is on, I think the iPhone will do well for itself too.
To summarize, Apple has a real chance of going somewhere with their phone.
Oh and I read your other comment. You seem to really dislike this phone. I like it but I'm not getting it. You remind me of the wolf that couldn't get the grapes in Aesop's Fables.
I wholeheartedly agree. Not trusting his facts is not a good enough reason. Not sharing his views and not planning on watching the movie are, however.
In agreeing with your post I must say that there are other sources, as I am sure he will not be saying anything that has not been said already, and if he does have so wonderful new point of view or factiod then these other sources will gladly quote him for me.
Boston over-reacted and Cartoon Network is the scapegoat.
Whatever. Cartoon Network paid because the city of Boston had to pay all the public workers they called to deal with the scare. Call it what you want but it wouldn't have happened without this so-called 'marketing'. It's amazing how we're all just accepting the invasion of advertising. Keep your ads on TV, in magazines and on billboards. Stop trying to shove them in my face with 'clever' marketing campaigns.
Mod up the parent for doing some research and giving city officials credit for doing their job.
No, actually you won't change your mind. Even if all these questions were answered with viable and logical responses you would still hold your beliefs and come up with new reasons why the answers don't work.
There is only one thing everyone agrees on and that is that a plane hit the second world trade center while black smoke was coming from the first. And the only reason we all agree on that is because there is simply too much video, professional and amatuer, for that to be false. other than that everything else is up for debate.
Other than what I named above, if you can give me one other fact you and non-conspiracy-kool-aid-drinking-government-report -believing kooks agree on and I will give you enough "information" to make you doubt that fact.
As for military operations, if you've ever been in an emergency or mass casualty situation, the first thing to go out the door is the plans you made to contend with an emergency or mass casualty because for the most part the situation requires a great amount of flexibility. For instance, remember those emergency broadcast tests with the annoying tone TV stations use? If you aren't going to use those on 9/11, when are you going to use them? So yes, proper operating procedure and the "imutable" laws of physics went out the window. As they should.
In an emergency, I don't want the people I depend on going, "Well in paragraph 3, subsection 8a, it says..." I want them to use their common sense and judgement and get the job done.
Well I've only seen PHP used on the web in conjunction with or as a replacement for traditional HTML/JavaScript dynamic pages. So I'm only talking from what I've experienced while browsing. Would you have preferred if I used ASP, XHTML or perhaps some other alphabet-soup-acronym-language I've never heard of?
Right. A simple googling and you find out the piece linked to is written by someone who works for the company that (surprise, surprise!) has the solution for your privacy-password concerns.
Slashdot already has paid advertisements, they certainly don't need to be giving them away for free and calling them "stories".
Re:its a slow slow process
on
The Future of HTML
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
HTML is like the mp3 format. It was there at the beginning and will always be there. No matter what comes along (PHP, Flash, etc.) and how much better (or worse) it is, HTML will still be there.
You threw up so much techno-jargon, I almost forgot your point. But with all the cash you have to blow on the latest and greatest, I think you'll be in Best Buy (or whatever upscale tech store you go to) shopping for a new Xbox 360 or PS3 game and look over at the Revolution and go "Why not?" and buy it anyway.
Then it will go into the 27" TV in the bedroom and you'll amuse yourself playing Nintendo's back catalog on their newest system.
I couldn't agree more. Classic battle between those who abhor change and those who welcome it, have it take off it's coat, have a seat and offer it a drink.
I'm not a big gamer and I don't currently own any consoles but after seeing the controller and watching the video I may just buy one of these things.
But how is this going to work with Nintendo's old games and, more importantly, the pinball games which must come out for these consoles?
I am not giving away anything for free. In fact I am paying to give it away. Paying because I am paying whoever is hosting the site to make the content availible to the public. Unless I have some means of generating money from the content provided then I am actually losing money by paying for the hosting. That's it. Plain and simple.
I am paying for space on the server, I am paying for space to transmit data over their cables.
As for the bowl of candy, I imagine the bowl of candy is a file. Well, I'm not talking about the file, you can't steal the file, I made it availible, but you can steal the means to access the file which is the bandwidth. Wait, you can steal the file. You can put it up on your site and claim it's yours but that is another point entirely. If you let the candy be a file and bowl be the website, then bandwidth theft is the equivalent of taking from the bag I use to fill the bowl with. Sure the candy was free but my method of giving it away is the bowl not the bag. What you're saying is I should hide the bag. I shouldn't have to hide the bag. It isn't theirs but they take from it anyway. Where I come from taking something that isn't yours is stealing.
But lets say I did put the file behind some sort of password protection and I even sell passwords so that people can access it. So one guy has the file load on his site by having the password sent everytime someone tries to access his site. What's that? I sold him the means to access the file and it is only his site accessing the file.
If I park my car in the middle of the street, leave it in drive, with the windows rolled down, the door open and the keys still in the ignition and some guy comes buy gets in and drives off with it, I guess he didn't steal it.
Sorry for another real world example, that one just popped into my head but is it even possible to steal something once its on the internet? I just want to know if there is a case where you would consider it theft.
My point was about your statement of bandwidth theft being a fallacy because eventhough the file is availible to the public, and this is what the internet and the real world have in common, someone is paying so the public can get to it. Because when you get down to the nuts and bolts the internet isn't free (and it isn't an infinite resource), it's just availible most of the time. That's why there are adds everywhere and sites want you to register.
See, I equate purchasing to ownership and if I'm paying for bandwidth and someone comes along and links to an image on my site for theirs so that everytime, their site is loaded, the image on my site is going out over bandwith I paid for then it theft.
When the bytes are transferred the amount of bytes I have yet to transfer decrease. I don't get those bytes back. So those bytes are gone. I didn't use them, yet I don't have them but I'm paying for them. They've been stolen.
My issue is whether or not there can be bandwidth theft not who is accessing the file, why they are accessing the file, or where they are accessing the file but how they are accessing the file. And hotlinking is bandwidth theft.
The kind used in EULA's, in the fine print at the bottom of TV commercials and contracts and said really, really quickly at the end of radio commercials.
The whole idea of "bandwidth theft" is a fallacy on its face.
Wow. Are you wrong. While the public may not know, the person providing the link does. And it is theft because the content provided over bandwidth wasn't their's to give to the public.
The way you're arguing this, me selling TVs I stole from walmart out of the back of a truck suddenly aren't stolen property because the person buying them has no idea I stole them.
If I put a garden gnome on my lawn for people to see it does not mean someone can camp out on my lawn and invite their friends over to do the same just because they're admiring the gnome. On the same point, yes it was put up for the public, yes it is for the public to see, no other people can't use my bandwith to display it.
I knew someone would say that so right out of the TOS:
Usage Rules.
Your use of the Products is conditioned upon your prior acceptance of the terms of this Agreement.
You shall be authorized to use the Products only for personal, noncommercial use.
You shall be authorized to use the Products on five Apple-authorized devices at any time.
You shall be entitled to export, burn or copy Products solely for personal, noncommercial use.
You shall be authorized to burn a playlist up to seven times.
You shall be able to store Products from up to five different Accounts on certain devices, such as an iPod and iPod mini, at a time.
Any burning or exporting capabilities are solely an accommodation to you and shall not constitute a grant or waiver (or other limitation or implication) of any rights of the copyright owners in any content, sound recording, underlying musical composition, or artwork embodied in any Product.
You agree that you will not attempt to, or encourage or assist any other person to, circumvent or modify any security technology or software that is part of the Service or used to administer the Usage Rules.
The delivery of Products does not transfer to you any commercial or promotional use rights in the Products.
Mmm, I guess I can burn the files to a CD which I then rip back to iTunes for, and this is where I don't violate the TOS, personal use because I don't violate the rights of the copyright owner after.
And guess what? When iTunes/iPod stops supporting burning or mp3 files I'll find another peice of software/audio device that does what I need it to do.
Then do you back up your Mp3s to 8-track, then back to a WAV file, then back to a cassette tape after that?
I bet those music tracks sound AWESOME, especially since they started off lossy to begin with.
What? If you're going to reply and be sarcastic at least use some logic.
I know the files are lossy, I don't mind. They sound just find to me.
I am also aware I may be removing different types of data by moving from aac to CD format to mp3. I have done it a number of times and they sound just fine to me.
I buy off iTunes, then I burn to a CD. That's right a CD. A hard copy. It's like making a backup.
Honestly, I can't get everything I listen to on mp3 or acc (or insert acronym here) but I can find it on CD. So I add my digital files to my CD collection but I keep my digital files on my iPod because it is easier than lugging around 30 gigs.
But you know what I do after I burn my CD, I re-rip to iTunes as an mp3. Circumventing DRM? No, I'm ripping my CD.
Ridiculous how much complaining is done about DRM. If I couldn't burn to CD, you'd have a point but it is your music that you bought with your money knowing full well how it would act when you bought it. But all this is irrelevant because we should all backup our digital files, especially those we paid for.
And get off your moral soapbox about the music industry, if you want to support the artist and screw the industry, see the artist live and pirate the music but don't expect the industry to support artists they can't make money from.
Low-end is the right term. Sounds like a phone that is jack of all trades, master of none.
I'm not one of those "a-phone-should-be-a-phone" guys. I understand that some features would be useful. I mentioned the pda feature before. But come on. They, the manufacturers, only add features onto phones so the service providers can roll out new towers that enable the phone with the ability to send photos, send videos, buy ringtones, buy screensavers, buy subscriptions and do everything but not drop a call and not make it sound like you're talking on a cellphone.
But I own a Treo 600, mainly because I can operate the thing with one hand more than 75% of the time, so maybe I'm not qualified to even comment on no-frills cellphones.
So that when I lose my phone on my vacation, or it drops and breaks into 5 million peices I also lose my:
Camcorder
mp3 player
digital camera
PDA
personal video player
personal tv (??!)
cellphone
or I could just lose my:
cellphone
All this consolidation isn't a boon. I don't have masses of electronic items lying around waiting to get lost and honestly the only thing a phone should have in addition to the phone is the pda feature, since it can tell time and has a calendar. Everything else is extravagance that only adds to the price the manufacturer can charge.
Better make sure to get that extended warranty/replacement plan!
Of course Mac and Windows are fundamentally the same and Java can work on both platforms. Not to flamebait but the Windows UI is a lesser implementation of the Mac UI (or at least it was until Win95, it has caught up quite nicely) which is an interpolation of the Xerox PARC UI.
And what's wrong with WIMP anyway? It ain't broke so why are we trying to fix it?
Yahoo does this too and if Google just started this, Yahoo has been doing it longer.
And while I haven't tried Google's database thing, Rotten Tomatoes does it as does Metacritic, and Metacritic does music too, so it ain't nothing new, it just has the Google name.
Which leads back to the.com bubble and the just plain uselessness of an IPO from Google. Sure the stock will be worth lots when it comes out but as more and more investors realize exactly what you and other posters here noted, that there really was no reason for the IPO except to make hordes of money, then the investors will slip away and Google will still be Google. Only not as rich.
"With luck, Google's owners will remember to work out a viable strategy for Google beyond the point at which they cash out."
And what would be the point of that? I suppose I would cash out on the day after the IPO and do something else, and definetly more constructive than worrying about quarterly earnings reports, with my life.
Slashdot Mirror
You miss the point.
He would be forced to switch to Windows. That means purchasing a copy of Windows. That means money. And as for your solution, that would mean purchasing a copy of VMWare. That means more money. The guy says he has no job which means no money, especially since he has lawyers fees to payso he has less than no money. Here it is real simple: More money > Money > No money > Less than no money.
So no, not done.
Going off on their own? What does that mean? Start their own cellphone company?
What nonsense, as if then Apple would add any of the "features" you want. What you want is mostly hardware related which Apple decided not to include. Hell, they had to push back OS X 10.5 just to get the iPhone out in time.
Your complaints remind of the complaints I heard about the iPod (no radio, no removable battery, etc.) and that product seems to have done well for itself. And regardless of the reviews and the network the phone is on, I think the iPhone will do well for itself too.
To summarize, Apple has a real chance of going somewhere with their phone.
Oh and I read your other comment. You seem to really dislike this phone. I like it but I'm not getting it. You remind me of the wolf that couldn't get the grapes in Aesop's Fables.
I wholeheartedly agree. Not trusting his facts is not a good enough reason. Not sharing his views and not planning on watching the movie are, however.
In agreeing with your post I must say that there are other sources, as I am sure he will not be saying anything that has not been said already, and if he does have so wonderful new point of view or factiod then these other sources will gladly quote him for me.
Boston over-reacted and Cartoon Network is the scapegoat.
Whatever. Cartoon Network paid because the city of Boston had to pay all the public workers they called to deal with the scare. Call it what you want but it wouldn't have happened without this so-called 'marketing'. It's amazing how we're all just accepting the invasion of advertising. Keep your ads on TV, in magazines and on billboards. Stop trying to shove them in my face with 'clever' marketing campaigns.
Mod up the parent for doing some research and giving city officials credit for doing their job.
Ever wonder why a game you want hasn't made it to the Mac, or the games that you're interested in may lack some features as their PC counterparts?
And if Macs supported games, would you buy one? If yes, then why don't you have one of them new intel Macs dual-booting Win XP? If no, shut up!
No, actually you won't change your mind. Even if all these questions were answered with viable and logical responses you would still hold your beliefs and come up with new reasons why the answers don't work.
t -believing kooks agree on and I will give you enough "information" to make you doubt that fact.
There is only one thing everyone agrees on and that is that a plane hit the second world trade center while black smoke was coming from the first. And the only reason we all agree on that is because there is simply too much video, professional and amatuer, for that to be false. other than that everything else is up for debate.
Other than what I named above, if you can give me one other fact you and non-conspiracy-kool-aid-drinking-government-repor
As for military operations, if you've ever been in an emergency or mass casualty situation, the first thing to go out the door is the plans you made to contend with an emergency or mass casualty because for the most part the situation requires a great amount of flexibility. For instance, remember those emergency broadcast tests with the annoying tone TV stations use? If you aren't going to use those on 9/11, when are you going to use them? So yes, proper operating procedure and the "imutable" laws of physics went out the window. As they should.
In an emergency, I don't want the people I depend on going, "Well in paragraph 3, subsection 8a, it says..." I want them to use their common sense and judgement and get the job done.
Well I've only seen PHP used on the web in conjunction with or as a replacement for traditional HTML/JavaScript dynamic pages. So I'm only talking from what I've experienced while browsing. Would you have preferred if I used ASP, XHTML or perhaps some other alphabet-soup-acronym-language I've never heard of?
Right. A simple googling and you find out the piece linked to is written by someone who works for the company that (surprise, surprise!) has the solution for your privacy-password concerns. Slashdot already has paid advertisements, they certainly don't need to be giving them away for free and calling them "stories".
HTML is like the mp3 format. It was there at the beginning and will always be there. No matter what comes along (PHP, Flash, etc.) and how much better (or worse) it is, HTML will still be there.
A 'pregnant pause' mmm? Interesting choice of words.
You threw up so much techno-jargon, I almost forgot your point. But with all the cash you have to blow on the latest and greatest, I think you'll be in Best Buy (or whatever upscale tech store you go to) shopping for a new Xbox 360 or PS3 game and look over at the Revolution and go "Why not?" and buy it anyway.
Then it will go into the 27" TV in the bedroom and you'll amuse yourself playing Nintendo's back catalog on their newest system.
And as the slashdot crowd says, Nintendo profits!
I couldn't agree more. Classic battle between those who abhor change and those who welcome it, have it take off it's coat, have a seat and offer it a drink.
I'm not a big gamer and I don't currently own any consoles but after seeing the controller and watching the video I may just buy one of these things.
But how is this going to work with Nintendo's old games and, more importantly, the pinball games which must come out for these consoles?
I am not giving away anything for free. In fact I am paying to give it away. Paying because I am paying whoever is hosting the site to make the content availible to the public. Unless I have some means of generating money from the content provided then I am actually losing money by paying for the hosting. That's it. Plain and simple.
I am paying for space on the server, I am paying for space to transmit data over their cables.
As for the bowl of candy, I imagine the bowl of candy is a file. Well, I'm not talking about the file, you can't steal the file, I made it availible, but you can steal the means to access the file which is the bandwidth. Wait, you can steal the file. You can put it up on your site and claim it's yours but that is another point entirely. If you let the candy be a file and bowl be the website, then bandwidth theft is the equivalent of taking from the bag I use to fill the bowl with. Sure the candy was free but my method of giving it away is the bowl not the bag. What you're saying is I should hide the bag. I shouldn't have to hide the bag. It isn't theirs but they take from it anyway. Where I come from taking something that isn't yours is stealing.
But lets say I did put the file behind some sort of password protection and I even sell passwords so that people can access it. So one guy has the file load on his site by having the password sent everytime someone tries to access his site. What's that? I sold him the means to access the file and it is only his site accessing the file.
If I park my car in the middle of the street, leave it in drive, with the windows rolled down, the door open and the keys still in the ignition and some guy comes buy gets in and drives off with it, I guess he didn't steal it.
Sorry for another real world example, that one just popped into my head but is it even possible to steal something once its on the internet? I just want to know if there is a case where you would consider it theft.
My point was about your statement of bandwidth theft being a fallacy because eventhough the file is availible to the public, and this is what the internet and the real world have in common, someone is paying so the public can get to it. Because when you get down to the nuts and bolts the internet isn't free (and it isn't an infinite resource), it's just availible most of the time. That's why there are adds everywhere and sites want you to register.
See, I equate purchasing to ownership and if I'm paying for bandwidth and someone comes along and links to an image on my site for theirs so that everytime, their site is loaded, the image on my site is going out over bandwith I paid for then it theft.
When the bytes are transferred the amount of bytes I have yet to transfer decrease. I don't get those bytes back. So those bytes are gone. I didn't use them, yet I don't have them but I'm paying for them. They've been stolen.
My issue is whether or not there can be bandwidth theft not who is accessing the file, why they are accessing the file, or where they are accessing the file but how they are accessing the file. And hotlinking is bandwidth theft.
legal english.
The kind used in EULA's, in the fine print at the bottom of TV commercials and contracts and said really, really quickly at the end of radio commercials.
The way you're arguing this, me selling TVs I stole from walmart out of the back of a truck suddenly aren't stolen property because the person buying them has no idea I stole them.
If I put a garden gnome on my lawn for people to see it does not mean someone can camp out on my lawn and invite their friends over to do the same just because they're admiring the gnome. On the same point, yes it was put up for the public, yes it is for the public to see, no other people can't use my bandwith to display it.
Mmm, I guess I can burn the files to a CD which I then rip back to iTunes for, and this is where I don't violate the TOS, personal use because I don't violate the rights of the copyright owner after.
And guess what? When iTunes/iPod stops supporting burning or mp3 files I'll find another peice of software/audio device that does what I need it to do.
Then do you back up your Mp3s to 8-track, then back to a WAV file, then back to a cassette tape after that? I bet those music tracks sound AWESOME, especially since they started off lossy to begin with.
What? If you're going to reply and be sarcastic at least use some logic.
I know the files are lossy, I don't mind. They sound just find to me.
I am also aware I may be removing different types of data by moving from aac to CD format to mp3. I have done it a number of times and they sound just fine to me.
Height of laziness.
I buy off iTunes, then I burn to a CD. That's right a CD. A hard copy. It's like making a backup.
Honestly, I can't get everything I listen to on mp3 or acc (or insert acronym here) but I can find it on CD. So I add my digital files to my CD collection but I keep my digital files on my iPod because it is easier than lugging around 30 gigs.
But you know what I do after I burn my CD, I re-rip to iTunes as an mp3. Circumventing DRM? No, I'm ripping my CD.
Ridiculous how much complaining is done about DRM. If I couldn't burn to CD, you'd have a point but it is your music that you bought with your money knowing full well how it would act when you bought it. But all this is irrelevant because we should all backup our digital files, especially those we paid for.
And get off your moral soapbox about the music industry, if you want to support the artist and screw the industry, see the artist live and pirate the music but don't expect the industry to support artists they can't make money from.
Low-end is the right term. Sounds like a phone that is jack of all trades, master of none.
I'm not one of those "a-phone-should-be-a-phone" guys. I understand that some features would be useful. I mentioned the pda feature before. But come on. They, the manufacturers, only add features onto phones so the service providers can roll out new towers that enable the phone with the ability to send photos, send videos, buy ringtones, buy screensavers, buy subscriptions and do everything but not drop a call and not make it sound like you're talking on a cellphone.
But I own a Treo 600, mainly because I can operate the thing with one hand more than 75% of the time, so maybe I'm not qualified to even comment on no-frills cellphones.
- Camcorder
- mp3 player
- digital camera
- PDA
- personal video player
- personal tv (??!)
- cellphone
or I could just lose my:- cellphone
All this consolidation isn't a boon. I don't have masses of electronic items lying around waiting to get lost and honestly the only thing a phone should have in addition to the phone is the pda feature, since it can tell time and has a calendar. Everything else is extravagance that only adds to the price the manufacturer can charge. Better make sure to get that extended warranty/replacement plan!Of course Mac and Windows are fundamentally the same and Java can work on both platforms. Not to flamebait but the Windows UI is a lesser implementation of the Mac UI (or at least it was until Win95, it has caught up quite nicely) which is an interpolation of the Xerox PARC UI.
And what's wrong with WIMP anyway? It ain't broke so why are we trying to fix it?
Yahoo does this too and if Google just started this, Yahoo has been doing it longer.
And while I haven't tried Google's database thing, Rotten Tomatoes does it as does Metacritic, and Metacritic does music too, so it ain't nothing new, it just has the Google name.
Isn't the grass always greener on the other side? I mean sure all of that is nice but what about the bad? I would think that's only fair after all.
And the existing infrastructure guys are right too.
Which leads back to the .com bubble and the just plain uselessness of an IPO from Google. Sure the stock will be worth lots when it comes out but as more and more investors realize exactly what you and other posters here noted, that there really was no reason for the IPO except to make hordes of money, then the investors will slip away and Google will still be Google. Only not as rich.
"With luck, Google's owners will remember to work out a viable strategy for Google beyond the point at which they cash out."
And what would be the point of that? I suppose I would cash out on the day after the IPO and do something else, and definetly more constructive than worrying about quarterly earnings reports, with my life.