I think the problem is that both Hollywood and Silicon Valley are industries founded by "rebels" or people who "thought different". However, as these industries become mature, MBA style and experienced business people move in, and these people are generally much more conservative. To these people, the bottom line is far more important, and rebelliousness is often seen as something that threatens it.
Personally, if there IS a Pixarland, I'd go in a heartbeat, and I'll bet millions of people would too. Consider how long Disney has been around versus Pixar, and in time I think Pixar - if it continues to make smart decisions in its productions - could have a wide reach than it does now. However, it would probably take at least a couple generation of leadership - like Disney. I doubt Steve Jobs can do it all, but maybe he is Superman in disguise.
>The only way to prevent this current outsourcing trend is to >become totally isolationist, which two world wars tell us is >totally wrong.
Protectionism is not isolationism. The US is already protectionist. We place trade barriers on many different things - especially agricultural products.
>Either that or go back in time and undo the Clintonian H1B >trend of the last ten years (where do you think the Indian labor >force learned how to do their jobs) and stop importing >students for American universities.
The H1B cap was raised only in 1999, at the end of the Clinton administration. If Bush or the Republican congress actually cared about the H1B visa issue, they had four years to enact changes, unfortunately they did nothing from 2000 to October of last year (2003). In fact the cap only dropped because an expiration date was written into the law raising the H1B visa cap.
Also, I don't understand this fear of foreign students. The truth to the matter is that most of domestic students' education is actually subsidized by the much higher tuitions paid by foreign students. The government has been cutting funding to public universities for years, and foreign students are a great source of additional funding. Furthermore, the students who do get into American universities tend to be quite talented and gifted, and many of them do end up staying in the US after graduation - becoming a valuable part of the workforce.
Your comment on not "importing" additional foreign students is especially odd when you have already made a comment about how the US shouldn't be isolationistic.
Below is the exact quote from the Wired article with regards to dollars per carat:
"But the greatest potential for CVD diamond lies in computing. If diamond is ever to be a practical material for semiconducting, it will need to be affordably grown in large wafers. (The silicon wafers Intel uses, for example, are 1 foot in diameter.) CVD growth is limited only by the size of the seed placed in the Apollo machine. Starting with a square, waferlike fragment, the Linares process will grow the diamond into a prismatic shape, with the top slightly wider than the base. For the past seven years - since Robert Linares first discovered the sweet spot - Apollo has been growing increasingly larger seeds by chopping off the top layer of growth and using that as the starting point for the next batch. At the moment, the company is producing 10-millimeter wafers but predicts it will reach an inch square by year's end and 4 inches in five years. The price per carat: about $5."
It sounds like ultimately it will only cost $5 per carat to produce these diamonds. However, this is a price on CVD diamonds, which is still a very new process, so it likely would take time to drive the cost down. Furthermore, the price quoted above may only be achievable if diamonds are used in semiconductors, thus driving demands up and prices down. Presently, diamonds are used mainly in jewelry (ignoring industrial usages, which cares less about carats), which supports higher prices. Besides, if a man-made diamond used in jewelry is priced too low, it may even drive potential buyers away. It's the monetary value that drive up demand in jewelry, so if the price is set too low, the demand might actually diminish... Strange, I know.
>Also, assuming they keep to their previous methodology, >they'll be reporting on their estimates of machines that >shipped with Linux already installed. This obviously >underreports overall Linux market share, discounting people >who convert new or old machines to either Linux or dual-boot >status.
Then outside of enterprise purchases, these numbers wouldn't factor into people who buy ultra low priced PC's with Linux pre-installed and slap on a copy of their friend's Windows OS.
Nevertheless, I think it's a good sign for the future of Linux on the desktop! But presently I still prefer OS X as my primary OS.;-)
I don't think this criticism of Apple is fair. Granted, iTunes does use DRM, but that is inevitable, since the record labels would not have let anyone to sell their music without DRM. But considering the music DRMs that were around at the time of iTunes Music Store's introduction, it is by far the most leniant. I mean, you can listen to the songs concurrently on 3 machines, on as many iPods as you want, and burn it as many times as you want (albeit you have to change the playlist).
Furthermore, unlike Microsoft, you don't have serial numbers or product activation on the OS installation disks! So you can essentially install the OS on as many machines as you want (illegally of course). So Apple gives its users a lot more slack than you suggest. I haven't tried their iLife CD's yet, but I would assume it's using the same honors system.
I think your observation is essentially correct. However, Microsoft Windows 1.0 was actually introduced in 1985, and Windows, as a product was actually announced in 1983.
http://www.computerhope.com/history/windows.htm
The truth of the matter is, the computer industry needed something like GUI to really propel its products into the mainstream. Without GUI, computer usage uptake (especially with regards to home usage) would be much lower. Granted, a lot of people are buying computers these days to surf the net, etc., but can you imagine how much less popular the web would be if everyone has to use Lynx?
I think Apple might have been a bit ahead of the curve, but I don't think by much. Considering the fact that Windows 3.0 was released about five years later (in 1990), and it pretty much brought GUI to the masses. Without Apple, Windows would probably be released much, much later, since there is less of a reason for Microsoft to compete - this is assuming that no other company releases a popular GUI, which would've been unlikely.
My first computer was a IIc. They were really popular at my elementary school too! In fact, I think our computer lab was all IIc's.
I like my IIc, but I was bummed, because I really wanted a IIe instead (it was a hand me down). I don't know about the internal specs, the IIc probably was more powerful, but I wanted the IIe for its expansion capabilities.
I'd like to say I got some good educational use out of my IIc, but mainly I just used it to play Bard's Tale!
If you're deciding between Mac OS X, Linux, or BSD, the deciding factor should be what you are going to use the OS for.
For servers, I would definitely go with BSD or Linux. I like BSD for its robustness and security. However, Linux, with the latest kernels will have better performance (load handling and thorough-put). Also, Linux is highly touted by IBM and HP, so if you ever need to find external support, it's probably a better platform.
However, for the desktop, I suggest Mac OS X for now. Ultimately I see Linux will become much more prevelant on the desktop, but it's just not quite there yet. With Mac OS X, you can run practically any Linux application (with the built-in X server and Fink, etc.), yet still enjoy a polished and consistent UI. The iLife applications are great too. Besides, Mac OS X allows you to learn/polish your Unix skills, and should you ever decide to go to a Linux desktop, those skills would be applicable too. So for now, it's the best of both worlds.
Then again, I do run Mac OS X on a TiBook, so I might be slightly biased!;-)
As far as I understood, the service is "free" for the streaming content, which usually costs a subscription free, but to burn the songs, a separate purchase fee must be paid.
It would be interesting to see the breakdown b/w streamed content versus "paid" download content. I have a feeling for actual purchases, it would be a low number. However, if I were living on campus with access to broadband and free streaming, I'd be using it all the time! So the number is actually a bit low in my book.
with AAC. Dolby has quite a bit of clout in the audio industry, and I think more people (who are perhaps less knowledgeable than the Slashdot crowd regarding audio file formats) would take AAC more seriously. Perhaps if the iPod has a Dolby logo in reference to AAC or something. I am sure a lot of shoppers would go, "Hey! This AAC thing is Dolby technology! Cool!".
I am sure some people look at AAC, and see that iPod is by Apple and think, "AAC... Must stand for Apple audio something... Must be proprietary, maybe I should go with this WMA standard... It's supported by so many players, it must be more open!".
I can't imagine placing a LCD TV above the stove is a good idea. Not only would heat from the stove damage it, but what about oil splatter from cooking?
MTV has ceased to be about "music" long time ago. I swear, they should just change it to RWTV or RRTV for "Real World" TV or "Road Rules" TV. For me, it more about "Rage" TV, since pretty much everyone on MTV, from the VJs to "Real World" and "Road Rules" contestants are unlikable, I feel the veins in my brain pop every time I watch MTV.
I'd love to buy more CDs in Australia, but so many are copy-protected. I simply refuse to buy CDs that are copy-protected. I don't know what the situation is like in the US, since I haven't been back in 2 years. Hopefully it's better, since I am moving back in a month.
If you check out the iTunes' list of top downloaded songs, it has always been current hits.
I personally love using iTunes to discover older music. Sometime I would stumble upon a tune that is familiar and try to find it on iTunes. And if I like it, I'd just buy it. For example, I just bought Kate Bush's "Wuthering Heights" just because I overheard it being played somewhere and thought it was interesting.
In fact, I rarely get the new stuff from iTunes, but I don't think that is the common modus operandi from most iTunes users.
I switch to Macs about two years ago, and now I am a diehard Apple fan. Two years ago I would still refer people who wants to buy a PC to Dell (in fact, quite a few friends of mine have Dells because of this), but not anymore. Ever since Dell started shipping "black" hardware (compared to beige ones years ago), their quality has gone down by a shocking degree. At where I worked we all used Dells, people would actually try to use older systems rather than the new ones simply because they are so much more reliable. This is with the same OS and configuration (essentially the same disk image).
To be honest, I don't even know which big named brands on the PC side I can confidently suggest anymore. Perhaps IBM? Or maybe Sony? All the big named PCs seem pretty lame these days.
Taiwan is actually one of the biggest outsourcer to China. This has been happening for years. I forgot what the exact number is, but more than 50% of investment capital originated in Taiwan goes to China.
I seem to remember The Economist stating that China, if it wants to "take back" Taiwan, it doesn't even need to use the military, all it needs to do is close its economic borders to Taiwan.
I believe Taiwan's manufacturing sector has already undergone major changes due to competition for China, and that is why it is focused on manufacturing of hi-tech goods, where China still lags in expertise.
One positive trait of human beings is that we can learn from out past. The first world nations of today may have achieved their status by pillaging, that doesn't mean it is the only way to go. As first world nations, we have seen the mistakes we have done in the past, and it is our duty to inform and help other nations to get to where we are using more positive means.
The truth is the cycle of pillaging to get ahead cannot be sustained forever, we will run out of people and countries to abuse sooner or later.
It is in our best interest to ensure that third world nations of today join the first world nations in more positive means. Many countries are still dealing with their colonization efforts in the past - UK's immigration issues, the tension between France and its past colonies, and the racial tension within the US. Not to mention the environmental concerns. These issues may not be economical, but they are important social issues, and they impact our standard of living (happiness) significantly.
It may not be easy guiding other nations to first world status using alternative means, but it is possible and we should pursue it. Think of it as paying for the "sins" our fathers have committed.
In short, as human beings we can LEARN and we can TEACH.
Most animals in nature do indeed defend their food, but this is because out of necessity. Animals tend to feed on the food defended until full, then they abandon what is left so that scavengers (foxes, wolves, various birds, etc.) can also feed. If animals are truly "greedy", they would feed until they are full, then guard the food further even though they are no longer hungry.
Keep in mind that most animals in the wild are actually scavengers, so the "system" does work. If animals are truly greedy, then there would be a lot less species today.
I thought this prediction was really weird... Didn't MS recent made a statement that it's going to use IBM technology for the X-Box 2? I thought it was pretty much widely speculated (and accepted) that the pact was to use an IBM chip as its CPU... So isn't MS in the same boat as Nintendo and Sony? Also, I don't think IBM nor Nintendo ever stated that the next console will be using the Cell.
This prediction just seems to be random observations and "facts" jumbled together.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the problem is that both Hollywood and Silicon Valley are industries founded by "rebels" or people who "thought different". However, as these industries become mature, MBA style and experienced business people move in, and these people are generally much more conservative. To these people, the bottom line is far more important, and rebelliousness is often seen as something that threatens it.
-B
Personally, if there IS a Pixarland, I'd go in a heartbeat, and I'll bet millions of people would too. Consider how long Disney has been around versus Pixar, and in time I think Pixar - if it continues to make smart decisions in its productions - could have a wide reach than it does now. However, it would probably take at least a couple generation of leadership - like Disney. I doubt Steve Jobs can do it all, but maybe he is Superman in disguise.
-B
>The only way to prevent this current outsourcing trend is to
>become totally isolationist, which two world wars tell us is
>totally wrong.
Protectionism is not isolationism. The US is already protectionist. We place trade barriers on many different things - especially agricultural products.
>Either that or go back in time and undo the Clintonian H1B
>trend of the last ten years (where do you think the Indian labor
>force learned how to do their jobs) and stop importing
>students for American universities.
The H1B cap was raised only in 1999, at the end of the Clinton administration. If Bush or the Republican congress actually cared about the H1B visa issue, they had four years to enact changes, unfortunately they did nothing from 2000 to October of last year (2003). In fact the cap only dropped because an expiration date was written into the law raising the H1B visa cap.
Also, I don't understand this fear of foreign students. The truth to the matter is that most of domestic students' education is actually subsidized by the much higher tuitions paid by foreign students. The government has been cutting funding to public universities for years, and foreign students are a great source of additional funding. Furthermore, the students who do get into American universities tend to be quite talented and gifted, and many of them do end up staying in the US after graduation - becoming a valuable part of the workforce.
Your comment on not "importing" additional foreign students is especially odd when you have already made a comment about how the US shouldn't be isolationistic.
-B
Below is the exact quote from the Wired article with regards to dollars per carat:
"But the greatest potential for CVD diamond lies in computing. If diamond is ever to be a practical material for semiconducting, it will need to be affordably grown in large wafers. (The silicon wafers Intel uses, for example, are 1 foot in diameter.) CVD growth is limited only by the size of the seed placed in the Apollo machine. Starting with a square, waferlike fragment, the Linares process will grow the diamond into a prismatic shape, with the top slightly wider than the base. For the past seven years - since Robert Linares first discovered the sweet spot - Apollo has been growing increasingly larger seeds by chopping off the top layer of growth and using that as the starting point for the next batch. At the moment, the company is producing 10-millimeter wafers but predicts it will reach an inch square by year's end and 4 inches in five years. The price per carat: about $5."
It sounds like ultimately it will only cost $5 per carat to produce these diamonds. However, this is a price on CVD diamonds, which is still a very new process, so it likely would take time to drive the cost down. Furthermore, the price quoted above may only be achievable if diamonds are used in semiconductors, thus driving demands up and prices down. Presently, diamonds are used mainly in jewelry (ignoring industrial usages, which cares less about carats), which supports higher prices. Besides, if a man-made diamond used in jewelry is priced too low, it may even drive potential buyers away. It's the monetary value that drive up demand in jewelry, so if the price is set too low, the demand might actually diminish... Strange, I know.
-B
>Also, assuming they keep to their previous methodology,
;-)
>they'll be reporting on their estimates of machines that
>shipped with Linux already installed. This obviously
>underreports overall Linux market share, discounting people
>who convert new or old machines to either Linux or dual-boot
>status.
Then outside of enterprise purchases, these numbers wouldn't factor into people who buy ultra low priced PC's with Linux pre-installed and slap on a copy of their friend's Windows OS.
Nevertheless, I think it's a good sign for the future of Linux on the desktop! But presently I still prefer OS X as my primary OS.
-B
It might be GEOS or GEM, I always get them mixed up. There were quite a few windowing environments around back then.
-B
I am not sure what is the native build of OpenOffice the previous poster was referring to, but I am assuming he is referring to this.
NeoOffice:
http://www.neooffice.org/
As far as I know, it's still in experimental stages, and I have not used it. So it probably isn't fair to compare it to a release build of OpenOffice.
-B
LCD's do not get the burn in effect. Plasma displays do however. This is corroborated by the article.
-B
I don't think this criticism of Apple is fair. Granted, iTunes does use DRM, but that is inevitable, since the record labels would not have let anyone to sell their music without DRM. But considering the music DRMs that were around at the time of iTunes Music Store's introduction, it is by far the most leniant. I mean, you can listen to the songs concurrently on 3 machines, on as many iPods as you want, and burn it as many times as you want (albeit you have to change the playlist).
Furthermore, unlike Microsoft, you don't have serial numbers or product activation on the OS installation disks! So you can essentially install the OS on as many machines as you want (illegally of course). So Apple gives its users a lot more slack than you suggest. I haven't tried their iLife CD's yet, but I would assume it's using the same honors system.
-B
I think your observation is essentially correct. However, Microsoft Windows 1.0 was actually introduced in 1985, and Windows, as a product was actually announced in 1983.
http://www.computerhope.com/history/windows.htm
The truth of the matter is, the computer industry needed something like GUI to really propel its products into the mainstream. Without GUI, computer usage uptake (especially with regards to home usage) would be much lower. Granted, a lot of people are buying computers these days to surf the net, etc., but can you imagine how much less popular the web would be if everyone has to use Lynx?
I think Apple might have been a bit ahead of the curve, but I don't think by much. Considering the fact that Windows 3.0 was released about five years later (in 1990), and it pretty much brought GUI to the masses. Without Apple, Windows would probably be released much, much later, since there is less of a reason for Microsoft to compete - this is assuming that no other company releases a popular GUI, which would've been unlikely.
-B
My first computer was a IIc. They were really popular at my elementary school too! In fact, I think our computer lab was all IIc's.
I like my IIc, but I was bummed, because I really wanted a IIe instead (it was a hand me down). I don't know about the internal specs, the IIc probably was more powerful, but I wanted the IIe for its expansion capabilities.
I'd like to say I got some good educational use out of my IIc, but mainly I just used it to play Bard's Tale!
-B
Zealotry is over-rated.
;-)
If you're deciding between Mac OS X, Linux, or BSD, the deciding factor should be what you are going to use the OS for.
For servers, I would definitely go with BSD or Linux. I like BSD for its robustness and security. However, Linux, with the latest kernels will have better performance (load handling and thorough-put). Also, Linux is highly touted by IBM and HP, so if you ever need to find external support, it's probably a better platform.
However, for the desktop, I suggest Mac OS X for now. Ultimately I see Linux will become much more prevelant on the desktop, but it's just not quite there yet. With Mac OS X, you can run practically any Linux application (with the built-in X server and Fink, etc.), yet still enjoy a polished and consistent UI. The iLife applications are great too. Besides, Mac OS X allows you to learn/polish your Unix skills, and should you ever decide to go to a Linux desktop, those skills would be applicable too. So for now, it's the best of both worlds.
Then again, I do run Mac OS X on a TiBook, so I might be slightly biased!
-B
The number quoted includes streamed content.
As far as I understood, the service is "free" for the streaming content, which usually costs a subscription free, but to burn the songs, a separate purchase fee must be paid.
It would be interesting to see the breakdown b/w streamed content versus "paid" download content. I have a feeling for actual purchases, it would be a low number. However, if I were living on campus with access to broadband and free streaming, I'd be using it all the time! So the number is actually a bit low in my book.
-B
with AAC. Dolby has quite a bit of clout in the audio industry, and I think more people (who are perhaps less knowledgeable than the Slashdot crowd regarding audio file formats) would take AAC more seriously. Perhaps if the iPod has a Dolby logo in reference to AAC or something. I am sure a lot of shoppers would go, "Hey! This AAC thing is Dolby technology! Cool!".
I am sure some people look at AAC, and see that iPod is by Apple and think, "AAC... Must stand for Apple audio something... Must be proprietary, maybe I should go with this WMA standard... It's supported by so many players, it must be more open!".
-B
I can't imagine placing a LCD TV above the stove is a good idea. Not only would heat from the stove damage it, but what about oil splatter from cooking?
-B
To learn what was modified to the Mach kernel and BSD subsystem in OS X, try:
http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/
Which was given in another Slashdot article.
-B
MS had dropped development of IE for Mac OS X since June of 2003.
8 ,0 0.asp
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,11115
-B
MTV has ceased to be about "music" long time ago. I swear, they should just change it to RWTV or RRTV for "Real World" TV or "Road Rules" TV. For me, it more about "Rage" TV, since pretty much everyone on MTV, from the VJs to "Real World" and "Road Rules" contestants are unlikable, I feel the veins in my brain pop every time I watch MTV.
-B
I'd love to buy more CDs in Australia, but so many are copy-protected. I simply refuse to buy CDs that are copy-protected. I don't know what the situation is like in the US, since I haven't been back in 2 years. Hopefully it's better, since I am moving back in a month.
-B
If you check out the iTunes' list of top downloaded songs, it has always been current hits.
I personally love using iTunes to discover older music. Sometime I would stumble upon a tune that is familiar and try to find it on iTunes. And if I like it, I'd just buy it. For example, I just bought Kate Bush's "Wuthering Heights" just because I overheard it being played somewhere and thought it was interesting.
In fact, I rarely get the new stuff from iTunes, but I don't think that is the common modus operandi from most iTunes users.
-B
I switch to Macs about two years ago, and now I am a diehard Apple fan. Two years ago I would still refer people who wants to buy a PC to Dell (in fact, quite a few friends of mine have Dells because of this), but not anymore. Ever since Dell started shipping "black" hardware (compared to beige ones years ago), their quality has gone down by a shocking degree. At where I worked we all used Dells, people would actually try to use older systems rather than the new ones simply because they are so much more reliable. This is with the same OS and configuration (essentially the same disk image).
To be honest, I don't even know which big named brands on the PC side I can confidently suggest anymore. Perhaps IBM? Or maybe Sony? All the big named PCs seem pretty lame these days.
-B
Taiwan is actually one of the biggest outsourcer to China. This has been happening for years. I forgot what the exact number is, but more than 50% of investment capital originated in Taiwan goes to China.
I seem to remember The Economist stating that China, if it wants to "take back" Taiwan, it doesn't even need to use the military, all it needs to do is close its economic borders to Taiwan.
I believe Taiwan's manufacturing sector has already undergone major changes due to competition for China, and that is why it is focused on manufacturing of hi-tech goods, where China still lags in expertise.
-B
One positive trait of human beings is that we can learn from out past. The first world nations of today may have achieved their status by pillaging, that doesn't mean it is the only way to go. As first world nations, we have seen the mistakes we have done in the past, and it is our duty to inform and help other nations to get to where we are using more positive means.
The truth is the cycle of pillaging to get ahead cannot be sustained forever, we will run out of people and countries to abuse sooner or later.
It is in our best interest to ensure that third world nations of today join the first world nations in more positive means. Many countries are still dealing with their colonization efforts in the past - UK's immigration issues, the tension between France and its past colonies, and the racial tension within the US. Not to mention the environmental concerns. These issues may not be economical, but they are important social issues, and they impact our standard of living (happiness) significantly.
It may not be easy guiding other nations to first world status using alternative means, but it is possible and we should pursue it. Think of it as paying for the "sins" our fathers have committed.
In short, as human beings we can LEARN and we can TEACH.
-B
Most animals in nature do indeed defend their food, but this is because out of necessity. Animals tend to feed on the food defended until full, then they abandon what is left so that scavengers (foxes, wolves, various birds, etc.) can also feed. If animals are truly "greedy", they would feed until they are full, then guard the food further even though they are no longer hungry.
Keep in mind that most animals in the wild are actually scavengers, so the "system" does work. If animals are truly greedy, then there would be a lot less species today.
-B
I thought this prediction was really weird... Didn't MS recent made a statement that it's going to use IBM technology for the X-Box 2? I thought it was pretty much widely speculated (and accepted) that the pact was to use an IBM chip as its CPU... So isn't MS in the same boat as Nintendo and Sony? Also, I don't think IBM nor Nintendo ever stated that the next console will be using the Cell.
This prediction just seems to be random observations and "facts" jumbled together.
-B