It says right on their site that they're using an HP branded version of iTunes. I'm not sure if this will extend to the Starbucks deal but it seems extremely likely. Why would they choose Apple, iTunes and the iPod and then offer a service that competes with that?
You're right about the general involvement of Canadians in government but I think that's going to change as we become a more connected country. Canada is huge and has always been an East vs. Quebec vs. West political map. It's been hard to organise on a larger scale so historically the Liberals, who are the most average have always been the default party.
Now, as we become more technologically and geographically connected, I think common voices will be able to band together in a way that has never happened. I'm amazed for example, that here in Ottawa, the Arts community recently came together to protest the City's budget cuts to the Arts and Community Services. They were proposing to spend only $0.57 per person on funding compared to Toronto at $14 and Montreal at $26 (approx. amounts). I'd never seen such organization from such a typically "removed" group. The internet played a huge part. There were protests, banner and poster campaigns, fund raisers etc.
The NDP more than any other party is realizing that there's now an easy way to get younger people and people of conscience involved that never existed before. I think there's a very good chance we see a significant number of left wing candidates in parliament after the next election.
The other by-product of this new awareness is that left-wingers will be held more accountable for notorious overspending. It all points to more open government. Because of Canada's parliamentary style, I think there is much opportunity to clean things up through public pressure.
I don't think I was saying that it was the other way around in the US. The companies bribe the politicians to make policy that suits the companies' interest. I was just saying that it isn't that overt in Canada. As it's been said in other posts, a bribe can't really influence policy to a great extent because of the decentralized nature of our government. Things like contract fast-tracking are about the worst thing that happens. Sometimes a company will get money for no work if they have a very good contact, but this is rare. In the HP case, the government department likely forgot to check to see if the work was delivered, or perhaps gave some favouritism to the HP salesperson, but in an audit they'll likely get it all back when the mistake is found.
Canada has MANY parties. The four biggest are the Liberals, Conservatives, Bloq Quebecois, and the NDP. There are many smaller parties as well and many independents run for seats in the house of commons (like the US congress). The Conservatives are the equivalent to US Republicans. The Liberals (although getting more right wing) are the equivalent to the Democrats. The NDP is quite a bit left, but still in the Democratic vein.
Overall though, all the parties in Canada, including the Conservatives are more left wing than anything in the US. We have national medicare, publicly funded universities etc. that even the Conservatives fundamentally believe in. Recently, it's true that the Liberals were involved in a scandal involving many millions of dollars of "favours" to private companies, but even these were more along the lines of fast-track bidding and not all out policy-bribery like is common in the US.
To get back to the original point of the article, with the department of Defence getting shafted by HP, this is likely due to the general incompetence of a few technology people and their managers, not a particular party.
I agree that this is what they'll do but it will only have returns for a few years and then it will turn into a giant liability. On the server side, most people don't care about the extra "features" that bring security when there's a free secure alternative. Windows is already fighting a tough battle there. The difference will come on the desktop side when there's a free secure alternative WITH MAJOR APPS. We're already starting to see some important apps coming to the Linux desktop (perhaps Macromedia soon) and when that happens no one is going to pay more for the "features" that bring security while locking you into an expensive product. Even if Linux gets a few moderate sized apps from semi-important vendors, Microsoft is going to have to open things up or really start innovating to justify the premium price. They basically will have to do what Apple is doing now which I think is wishful thinking. Apple already is the premium brand with all the vertical integration of hardware and is also much more nimble as a company. The market can only support 2 camps - nearly free and very good, and premium priced and very, very good. Proprietary security features will only stave off the hoards for so long.
Wishful thinking, but none of these 3 are usually possible. I think the best thing you can do is spend time with your kids doing what they like to do. Most of these kinds of kids don't have friends who like what they like so at least they have a parent supporting them. Beyond that, make sure they have fun. A depressed kid, especially if they're gifted, is going to get jaded really quick. Since they can't necessarily have social fun, at least ensure they can have fun doing their thing. In time they'll just naturally attract others who see value in those things and the social part will work itself out. If they're having negative experiences with other kids don't ignore it. Make sure you tell them it's not the way things should be and then take action to stop it. Don't make the kid deal with negative experiences alone because they're incapable. Don't baby either, but make sure the right environment exists as much as possible.
If someone doesn't identify themselves in most places it's not a crime. That's the whole point. It might seem odd in certain circumstances, but that only gives cause for the officer to observe further. It's not the suggestion of a crime. That's the line that was crossed.
With the handwriting technology in OS X being pretty darn good, you could just buy a small Wacom tablet to carry with you. They're thin and lightweight and you could do everything a tablet could do, plus you'd have a real computer on the side:-)
I agree the users are a big problem, but the technology is horrible too, not just in Windows but all OSes. The Mac is the only system that balances the user's need to accomplish things with the protection to not do something catastrophic. It doesn't do this through tons of "Are you sure..." dialog boxes, or with Orwellian security routines, and not even through add-on programs which check up on viruses and backups.
The Mac simply has a user interface that allows you to do the things you want to do. It sounds simple, but most Mac users don't ever get to the point of confusion where they might do something stupid. The terminal isn't right there on the desktop, it's not even in the Applications folder. It's in a folder called Utilities. The Windows folder is such a generic name, it's a likely candidate to be "cleaned out" by a curious user. On the Mac it's called System which has an obvious connotation that it's important to running your computer. I could go on and on.
The interface of the machine is the easiest way to educate users. Make it intuitive and even a novice is going to play safe.
It seems like there's some grey area in terms of who's actually doing the copying. If I leave all my CDs out on the street and someone borrows one of them and copies it, then the law wouldn't be broken. Leaving all your CDs out on the net and having someone copy them seems to be the equivalent for P2P. Doesn't someone's computer technically have to "ask" to borrow the bits before they can be sent?
Actually, you're assuming that the renaming only happens in a consistent way. I'm a graphic designer and I frequently get hundreds of graphics files that have no common naming convention and I need to change them all to suit my naming system. The only easy way to do this is through a GUI and the one-click method is the fastest way hands down. Sure, for all those systematic changes like changing jpg to jpeg a contextual menu works fine, you don't need bash or anything. Mac OS X has folder actions that will do pretty much this, and it would take about 5 seconds for a Find and Replace option. My point is that for simple actions, you don't want a contextual menu to hide anything away, there's usually a very easy way to implement it through a GUI.
I think this method is insane. Haven't any of you had to rename 50 or even 500 files? Mac OS X 1-click rename is the only way I'd want to do it. My carpal tunnel is acting up just thinking about all that right clicking. I think the author of the article has some serious mouse control problems. I almost never mistakenly click a file and rename it by accident.
Right clicking by its nature is stupid. There is almost always an easy way of making the UI work the way you want it to without needing a complicated hidden menu.
Ironically, the data from Kazaa downloads and files offered for share would provide a way to start applying scientific statistical analysis to the gatekeeper service.
People seem to be hoping that this is going to be a good replacement for the same kind of selection service but I'll tell you right now that it's not going to happen. MP3.com was a good example. You could look at that site and never know what was good despite everything being ranked. That's the fundamental flaw of the net (and the topic of the WIKI article from a few days ago). The net is really good at building consensus but it isn't necessarily good consensus. Some might say that there will be web sites reviewing music and weeding stuff out. We already have those and most are average at best. The other thing is, where do those people get their tips... their local record store. Once they're gone the whole system is going to unravel. It'll be like having Google recommend music to you-ouch.
Most record stores aren't stupid. I happen to own one and I know a lot of other people that do too. In fact, I run a whole web site devoted to finding the good ones.
The reason that record stores are going out of business is two-fold:
1. Product is too expensive and there is very poor availability. It has been like this since CDs came out.
2. People can get everything they want for free.
The result obviously is that no one except true music lovers are willing to buy anything. The blame should be shared equally between the industry for not making a good, affordable product, and the consumer for not appreciating that music is art and costs money. Neither of these has anything to do with record stores being stupid. If anything, the local independent record store has been the only reason that the whole music industry didn't implode in the 70s.
Local stores provide an invaluable "gatekeeper" service which determines what records become classics and what records become popular. All day long, I'm listening to new music and selecting the best stuff for my clients. I'm always learning their taste, and they mine, and I can pull 10 records at any time that I know a particular person will like. It's kind of sad that people don't want this kind of interaction anymore.
It's the same ridiculous concept as the RIAA is pushing. There's not enough "friction" currently so let's make it harder and more expensive to use so that it will cut down on "spam." Obviously the end result is that ordinary people pay more and have less freedom to use the technology.
Most electronics were perfected years ago...
on
KISS
·
· Score: 1
Companies have been making perfect electronics for at least 80 years. In fact, most of them are still around because they have a great product and a loyal following. The blame for making new crappy models with way too many features and limited shelf life should be placed squarely on consumers. Stop buying so much crap!
People don't seem to realize that all the inventions we like to have around were perfected years ago. Take some examples (approximations):
Telephone - 1950 Bell telephone
Microwave - 1970
Stereo - 1957 Quad, 1980 Linn LP12
Camera - 1940 Leica M
TV - 1980 Sony Trinitron
Car - 1990 Honda Accord
Computer - 2000 Apple G4
Some of these are even being generous. Sure, we can do things a little quicker with newer gadgets but the pure user experience and lasting quality reached a peak a long time ago for most things. Product usability has been going steadily downward since the 60s with a huge crash in the late 90s.
That's just a mistake that managers make. You can both protect your share and innovate over time. Only businesses that do BOTH become successful. Keeping the iPod form factor and reducing the price is a play that ensures market growth which enables you to innovate in the coming years. By your logic, if Apple went my suggested route, another competitor would come out with iPod mini and sink apple's cheaper player - please. First, the competition wouldn't even be as good as the current iPod (as we've seen). Secondly, they wouldn't have the iTMS. Third, it would cost more and not be as "cool" as Apple is right now. Your logic is flawed. Clearly, if Apple had just dropped the price and capacity of the current iPod it would have at least 6 months to 1 year to steal market share. Then they could think about the iPod mini which is only desirable (even currently) on the differentiating factors of size and style. Bottomline- build your market share with a great product first, then kill the remaining competition with even better products.
If you break it all down like the Ars Technica article does you can kind of rationalize that it's a good value, but nothing stands up to the fact that if they just took the current iPod and dropped a 4GB drive in it, it would have been much cheaper. The iPod is already perfectly designed and plenty small for 99% of people. I bet with the saving in R&D they could have sold the 4GB full size iPod for $149. Hell, they could have even added colors to it. It would have killed ALL competition including portable CD players. Complete market dominance.
I love Apple but they are still going for the margins and the bleeding edge design. When are they going to realize that when you already have far superior design you don't have to keep going. Rest on your laurels and innovate OVER TIME instead of killing the markets you're leading in up front.
There are two types of management. Those who listen and those who don't. The ones who listen can be swayed; the ones who don't will likely make your life hell for bringing any problems up. It's something to do with ego...
I'm sure you're right, but politicians don't run our lives. Certainly, WE could do something to improve the situation before the industry collapses. All the options I've seen here on Slashdot seem reactionary - "Stop buying CDs," "Download more," "Buy CDs and return them," "Buy only independent CDs," "Use iTunes." Perhaps it's just too big a question but isn't there a way to keep what we have and make it work?
Completely true, but at the same time, it will be at least a few years before the sheer volume of material that even a small record store has could be downloaded. 3000 good CDs in one store vs. 300,000 of unknown value online gives you a pretty great bang-for-your-buck incentive to actually go to the store. People forget that the infrastructure of CD stores and even distributors works to select quality new material, not just sell everything under the sun. Getting rid of the quality arbiters in favour of massive choice has some serious drawbacks.
I own a new/used record/CD store and I see the whole gamut of people that come in. This parent poster is what I call the regular, in that they like music and they want to have a lot of it around. They're usually knowledgeable and moderately wealthy and they like the ritual of buying new stuff and enjoying it. When these people are switching to downloading I'm telling you that they are the LAST to do so. Basically, after they're gone, the whole recorded music industry is gone. You just can't make any money selling anything if there isn't at least a small number of these kind of people supporting your store. Distribution and margins have been reduced so drastically by the music companies that it's next to impossible to compete with downloading even if you have tons of would be customers.
I'm not trying to take the RIAA side either. If anything, they started the whole ball rolling when CDs came out in the 80s, but you pit their business model against P2P and there isn't going to be any new popular music within a year or two. Frankly, even if the industry converts 50% of its sales to downloads right now, the main revenue stream will be entirely decimated. Sure, the back catalog will survive for a few years longer, but as we're already seeing the only new music is going to be coming from small independents. I just think we're in for some really dark years ahead of us while all this gets sorted out. In the meantime, try to support your local store as much as you can, whether new or used, CD or vinyl. We may reach a glorious download utopia some day, but we might also kill all possibility of that upfront.
Slashdot Mirror
It says right on their site that they're using an HP branded version of iTunes. I'm not sure if this will extend to the Starbucks deal but it seems extremely likely. Why would they choose Apple, iTunes and the iPod and then offer a service that competes with that?
And if the SUV had OnStar wired in...
You're right about the general involvement of Canadians in government but I think that's going to change as we become a more connected country. Canada is huge and has always been an East vs. Quebec vs. West political map. It's been hard to organise on a larger scale so historically the Liberals, who are the most average have always been the default party.
Now, as we become more technologically and geographically connected, I think common voices will be able to band together in a way that has never happened. I'm amazed for example, that here in Ottawa, the Arts community recently came together to protest the City's budget cuts to the Arts and Community Services. They were proposing to spend only $0.57 per person on funding compared to Toronto at $14 and Montreal at $26 (approx. amounts). I'd never seen such organization from such a typically "removed" group. The internet played a huge part. There were protests, banner and poster campaigns, fund raisers etc.
The NDP more than any other party is realizing that there's now an easy way to get younger people and people of conscience involved that never existed before. I think there's a very good chance we see a significant number of left wing candidates in parliament after the next election.
The other by-product of this new awareness is that left-wingers will be held more accountable for notorious overspending. It all points to more open government. Because of Canada's parliamentary style, I think there is much opportunity to clean things up through public pressure.
I don't think I was saying that it was the other way around in the US. The companies bribe the politicians to make policy that suits the companies' interest. I was just saying that it isn't that overt in Canada. As it's been said in other posts, a bribe can't really influence policy to a great extent because of the decentralized nature of our government. Things like contract fast-tracking are about the worst thing that happens. Sometimes a company will get money for no work if they have a very good contact, but this is rare. In the HP case, the government department likely forgot to check to see if the work was delivered, or perhaps gave some favouritism to the HP salesperson, but in an audit they'll likely get it all back when the mistake is found.
Canada has MANY parties. The four biggest are the Liberals, Conservatives, Bloq Quebecois, and the NDP. There are many smaller parties as well and many independents run for seats in the house of commons (like the US congress). The Conservatives are the equivalent to US Republicans. The Liberals (although getting more right wing) are the equivalent to the Democrats. The NDP is quite a bit left, but still in the Democratic vein.
Overall though, all the parties in Canada, including the Conservatives are more left wing than anything in the US. We have national medicare, publicly funded universities etc. that even the Conservatives fundamentally believe in. Recently, it's true that the Liberals were involved in a scandal involving many millions of dollars of "favours" to private companies, but even these were more along the lines of fast-track bidding and not all out policy-bribery like is common in the US.
To get back to the original point of the article, with the department of Defence getting shafted by HP, this is likely due to the general incompetence of a few technology people and their managers, not a particular party.
I agree that this is what they'll do but it will only have returns for a few years and then it will turn into a giant liability. On the server side, most people don't care about the extra "features" that bring security when there's a free secure alternative. Windows is already fighting a tough battle there. The difference will come on the desktop side when there's a free secure alternative WITH MAJOR APPS. We're already starting to see some important apps coming to the Linux desktop (perhaps Macromedia soon) and when that happens no one is going to pay more for the "features" that bring security while locking you into an expensive product. Even if Linux gets a few moderate sized apps from semi-important vendors, Microsoft is going to have to open things up or really start innovating to justify the premium price. They basically will have to do what Apple is doing now which I think is wishful thinking. Apple already is the premium brand with all the vertical integration of hardware and is also much more nimble as a company. The market can only support 2 camps - nearly free and very good, and premium priced and very, very good. Proprietary security features will only stave off the hoards for so long.
Wishful thinking, but none of these 3 are usually possible. I think the best thing you can do is spend time with your kids doing what they like to do. Most of these kinds of kids don't have friends who like what they like so at least they have a parent supporting them. Beyond that, make sure they have fun. A depressed kid, especially if they're gifted, is going to get jaded really quick. Since they can't necessarily have social fun, at least ensure they can have fun doing their thing. In time they'll just naturally attract others who see value in those things and the social part will work itself out. If they're having negative experiences with other kids don't ignore it. Make sure you tell them it's not the way things should be and then take action to stop it. Don't make the kid deal with negative experiences alone because they're incapable. Don't baby either, but make sure the right environment exists as much as possible.
If someone doesn't identify themselves in most places it's not a crime. That's the whole point. It might seem odd in certain circumstances, but that only gives cause for the officer to observe further. It's not the suggestion of a crime. That's the line that was crossed.
With the handwriting technology in OS X being pretty darn good, you could just buy a small Wacom tablet to carry with you. They're thin and lightweight and you could do everything a tablet could do, plus you'd have a real computer on the side :-)
I agree the users are a big problem, but the technology is horrible too, not just in Windows but all OSes. The Mac is the only system that balances the user's need to accomplish things with the protection to not do something catastrophic. It doesn't do this through tons of "Are you sure..." dialog boxes, or with Orwellian security routines, and not even through add-on programs which check up on viruses and backups.
The Mac simply has a user interface that allows you to do the things you want to do. It sounds simple, but most Mac users don't ever get to the point of confusion where they might do something stupid. The terminal isn't right there on the desktop, it's not even in the Applications folder. It's in a folder called Utilities. The Windows folder is such a generic name, it's a likely candidate to be "cleaned out" by a curious user. On the Mac it's called System which has an obvious connotation that it's important to running your computer. I could go on and on.
The interface of the machine is the easiest way to educate users. Make it intuitive and even a novice is going to play safe.
It seems like there's some grey area in terms of who's actually doing the copying. If I leave all my CDs out on the street and someone borrows one of them and copies it, then the law wouldn't be broken. Leaving all your CDs out on the net and having someone copy them seems to be the equivalent for P2P. Doesn't someone's computer technically have to "ask" to borrow the bits before they can be sent?
Actually, you're assuming that the renaming only happens in a consistent way. I'm a graphic designer and I frequently get hundreds of graphics files that have no common naming convention and I need to change them all to suit my naming system. The only easy way to do this is through a GUI and the one-click method is the fastest way hands down. Sure, for all those systematic changes like changing jpg to jpeg a contextual menu works fine, you don't need bash or anything. Mac OS X has folder actions that will do pretty much this, and it would take about 5 seconds for a Find and Replace option. My point is that for simple actions, you don't want a contextual menu to hide anything away, there's usually a very easy way to implement it through a GUI.
I think this method is insane. Haven't any of you had to rename 50 or even 500 files? Mac OS X 1-click rename is the only way I'd want to do it. My carpal tunnel is acting up just thinking about all that right clicking. I think the author of the article has some serious mouse control problems. I almost never mistakenly click a file and rename it by accident.
Right clicking by its nature is stupid. There is almost always an easy way of making the UI work the way you want it to without needing a complicated hidden menu.
Most record stores aren't stupid. I happen to own one and I know a lot of other people that do too. In fact, I run a whole web site devoted to finding the good ones.
The reason that record stores are going out of business is two-fold:
1. Product is too expensive and there is very poor availability. It has been like this since CDs came out.
2. People can get everything they want for free.
The result obviously is that no one except true music lovers are willing to buy anything. The blame should be shared equally between the industry for not making a good, affordable product, and the consumer for not appreciating that music is art and costs money. Neither of these has anything to do with record stores being stupid. If anything, the local independent record store has been the only reason that the whole music industry didn't implode in the 70s.
Local stores provide an invaluable "gatekeeper" service which determines what records become classics and what records become popular. All day long, I'm listening to new music and selecting the best stuff for my clients. I'm always learning their taste, and they mine, and I can pull 10 records at any time that I know a particular person will like. It's kind of sad that people don't want this kind of interaction anymore.
It's the same ridiculous concept as the RIAA is pushing. There's not enough "friction" currently so let's make it harder and more expensive to use so that it will cut down on "spam." Obviously the end result is that ordinary people pay more and have less freedom to use the technology.
Companies have been making perfect electronics for at least 80 years. In fact, most of them are still around because they have a great product and a loyal following. The blame for making new crappy models with way too many features and limited shelf life should be placed squarely on consumers. Stop buying so much crap!
People don't seem to realize that all the inventions we like to have around were perfected years ago. Take some examples (approximations):
Telephone - 1950 Bell telephone
Microwave - 1970
Stereo - 1957 Quad, 1980 Linn LP12
Camera - 1940 Leica M
TV - 1980 Sony Trinitron
Car - 1990 Honda Accord
Computer - 2000 Apple G4
Some of these are even being generous. Sure, we can do things a little quicker with newer gadgets but the pure user experience and lasting quality reached a peak a long time ago for most things. Product usability has been going steadily downward since the 60s with a huge crash in the late 90s.
That's just a mistake that managers make. You can both protect your share and innovate over time. Only businesses that do BOTH become successful. Keeping the iPod form factor and reducing the price is a play that ensures market growth which enables you to innovate in the coming years. By your logic, if Apple went my suggested route, another competitor would come out with iPod mini and sink apple's cheaper player - please. First, the competition wouldn't even be as good as the current iPod (as we've seen). Secondly, they wouldn't have the iTMS. Third, it would cost more and not be as "cool" as Apple is right now. Your logic is flawed. Clearly, if Apple had just dropped the price and capacity of the current iPod it would have at least 6 months to 1 year to steal market share. Then they could think about the iPod mini which is only desirable (even currently) on the differentiating factors of size and style. Bottomline- build your market share with a great product first, then kill the remaining competition with even better products.
If you break it all down like the Ars Technica article does you can kind of rationalize that it's a good value, but nothing stands up to the fact that if they just took the current iPod and dropped a 4GB drive in it, it would have been much cheaper. The iPod is already perfectly designed and plenty small for 99% of people. I bet with the saving in R&D they could have sold the 4GB full size iPod for $149. Hell, they could have even added colors to it. It would have killed ALL competition including portable CD players. Complete market dominance.
I love Apple but they are still going for the margins and the bleeding edge design. When are they going to realize that when you already have far superior design you don't have to keep going. Rest on your laurels and innovate OVER TIME instead of killing the markets you're leading in up front.
There are two types of management. Those who listen and those who don't. The ones who listen can be swayed; the ones who don't will likely make your life hell for bringing any problems up. It's something to do with ego...
I'm sure you're right, but politicians don't run our lives. Certainly, WE could do something to improve the situation before the industry collapses. All the options I've seen here on Slashdot seem reactionary - "Stop buying CDs," "Download more," "Buy CDs and return them," "Buy only independent CDs," "Use iTunes." Perhaps it's just too big a question but isn't there a way to keep what we have and make it work?
So how do you make something good happen when the industry is bent on taking all the content with it when it self-destructs?
Completely true, but at the same time, it will be at least a few years before the sheer volume of material that even a small record store has could be downloaded. 3000 good CDs in one store vs. 300,000 of unknown value online gives you a pretty great bang-for-your-buck incentive to actually go to the store. People forget that the infrastructure of CD stores and even distributors works to select quality new material, not just sell everything under the sun. Getting rid of the quality arbiters in favour of massive choice has some serious drawbacks.
I own a new/used record/CD store and I see the whole gamut of people that come in. This parent poster is what I call the regular, in that they like music and they want to have a lot of it around. They're usually knowledgeable and moderately wealthy and they like the ritual of buying new stuff and enjoying it. When these people are switching to downloading I'm telling you that they are the LAST to do so. Basically, after they're gone, the whole recorded music industry is gone. You just can't make any money selling anything if there isn't at least a small number of these kind of people supporting your store. Distribution and margins have been reduced so drastically by the music companies that it's next to impossible to compete with downloading even if you have tons of would be customers.
I'm not trying to take the RIAA side either. If anything, they started the whole ball rolling when CDs came out in the 80s, but you pit their business model against P2P and there isn't going to be any new popular music within a year or two. Frankly, even if the industry converts 50% of its sales to downloads right now, the main revenue stream will be entirely decimated. Sure, the back catalog will survive for a few years longer, but as we're already seeing the only new music is going to be coming from small independents. I just think we're in for some really dark years ahead of us while all this gets sorted out. In the meantime, try to support your local store as much as you can, whether new or used, CD or vinyl. We may reach a glorious download utopia some day, but we might also kill all possibility of that upfront.
A hobby of mine:
RecordStoreReview.com
Most have pictures and reviews so you know where to go at a glance.