Hell, isn't the raw audio on the CD AIFF in the first place? At least, that's been my impression. If you just copy an audio track right from a CD to your hard disk, the file is AIFF.
If you RIP your CD collection using iTunes and AIFF I thought it just copied the data to the iTunes library.
In any event, with almost no compression, AIFF files from the CD are huge, 300+mb per song. If that's all your going to use the data file for, might as well just leave it on the CD and buy a portable CD player and save yourself the trouble.
The trick is to get MP3 or AAC compression to sound like the original AIFF, or as close to it, but consume 1/10th the space. Now that's snazzy
But to hell if I'm going ot rip a CD to iTunes with zero compression then download it to my iPod so I can hook the iPod up to my home audio equipment and call it trick! It's plain stupid, just go buy a CD player!
So far, for listening with the iPod and/or through my Harmon-Kardon Soundsticks equipped G4, 160Kbps AAC is pretty damn good and disk space tidy.
If I wanna get my "audiophile" buzz on, I'll just play the fricken CD through my Carver home audio system.
Yes, it depends on the landline's call "package" as to what you will be charged.
However, what I was trying to explain is that some folks think that by "forwarding" their calls from a landline number that the calls coming in to that landline are just "bumped" to the forwarded number, when in fact, they're not.
The way the phone companies do it (at least SBC in Illinois) is the call comes in to the landline from the caller, that forwarded landline then connects the call to the forwarded number as if a person had picked up the phone and dialed that number themselves. Now the call takes place running up two minute meters and being charged connect fees on both phones (the cell phone recieving the call and the forwarded landline that connected to the cell phone).
Forwarding a landline number is the same (to the phone company) as having someone sit in your house with two lines and picking up one phone, calling the forwarded number, and putting the two handsets together.
It's convient to do, as I had done, since everyone knew my main landline number which I've had for nearly 32 years, however, every time someone called me, it was as if I was calling myself from home 20 times a day even though I never used the home landline to make a call in months. I was charged for every call that came in to that landline and subsequently forwarded to my cellphone, essentially paying for each call twice.
It would have been cheaper to just have people call me direct on the cell phone.
Yeah except now you're paying double for every call that comes in! Both you and your caller pay for that call to your cell phone.
Oh, and don't travel too far away from your home calling area on that 2nd line. You'll start getting local long distance charges on that 2nd line when your cell phone travels to a cell that is too far away for your local call pack.
I used to do this too, until I started getting billed about $12-$20 a month in usage charges on the forwarded phone line, as well as eatting up my cell minutes.
It's a neat idea if you can afford it, but don't be fooled into thinking that you're not charged for the forwarded call as if you had direct dialed it on that line to your cellphone yourself. You're paying for those calls on both lines, the cellphone line (minutes or time or both) AND the forwarded landline (connect charge, minutes per call).
I live nearby too and the only thing that surprises me about this is that the school even HAS Wi-Fi or computers.
Oak Park is pretty much the land of Guido sons and daughters of plumbers and auto mechanics with an IROC on every street and an El Camino up on blocks in every *shared* garage.
I live 10 miles from there. I could probably find out.
Oak Park Illinois is *not* exactly known for it's "hipness" or overly "evolved" citizenry. It's mostly a low rent blue collar *plumber* & *auto mechanic* suburb of Chicago's West Side. Lots of IROC Camaro's on the streets in front of the apartment converted townhouses.
Sounds like the people bringing this suit should move a little farther North to Niles IL, where the Mayor of that town went on a personal crusade for years trying to sue AT&T Wireless from putting up cell phone towers inside the city limits of Niles. Even though AT&T has three retail stores there that do a brisk business and who knows how many countless residents that use the phones.
As I think the story stated, they'll be sent "Over the Air". Meaning an antenna on your roof. Just like HDTV is sent.
You know, the old "free" way of getting television, sticking a metal pole in the air and receiving the signal. You can still do it all over the world. And as it is right now, in Chicago at least, there's twice the HDTV offerings this way than any Sat/Cable provider, but that's a different subject.
This service will be broadcast through the air and recived with a standard television rooftop antenna.
I remember hearing the same thing said about fax machines and mobile phones too. Hmm, home CD creation, home video as well.
My point is, 11Mbps DSL should just be a standard part of every phone line by now and they "should" be working on increasing that to 56Mbps or better so we can finally start doing video calls and getting movies delievered to every device in our house via our communications system that we've paid for, over and over again through subsidies and monthly billing.
Instead, we're burping little photos over 1.5/384K lines or cable links and watching grainy video in 1"x1" windows with audio you can barely understand. And on top of all that, they're talin' about capping the bandwidth (well one company is). It should be going in the other direction.
Doesn't this just go in the opposite direction of progress?
I've been on the "net" for over 11 years, I started with a 2400 baud Hayes modem and AOL, quickly replaced within the first year with a 14.4 modem and an ISP, in those 10-11 years where has it progressed to? A 700k modem and I still can barely send anything more than keystrokes and a few postage stamp sized images to another person across the Ether. We all sit here like monkeys with a coconuts hammering away at keyboards and cellphone keypads.
It's the 21st century and they're talking about rolling back the bandwidth?
Where are the Gigabit Ethernet lines over glass, or better, to every single household? Where are the video conferencing screens in every living room? Why can't I call my friends and see them on my flat plasma screen via voice command? Where are my HD Dolby Digital movies on demand? Are we going forward or backwards?
To affect real change here I think it can only be done on a federal level by throttling the telecommunications industry by the neck away from it's profit model and back into a citizens utility so it can truly serve the citizens like it was intended to do 40 years ago and earlier!
All of these wonderful dreams of the future of technology and the internet are being strangled through the 300k broadband bottle necks that half the populous can't even get and those that can are paying double what they were before for no real improvement.
Comcast shouldn't be figuring out caps, they should be figuring out ways to offer 10 times the throughput to everyone in their service region and expanding that service region beyond what it is now.
The pipes need to be bigger or we're just spinning our wheels on this information superhighway.
I'm not sure if being PPC has anything to do with this one way or another (as the poster below/above mentioned) and yes, SSHd is turned "off" by default in OS X, however, for those of us using it, it's troubling to be in the dark about whether this affects us or not. Luckily Apple is pretty good about this stuff, so if it does, an update should be along any minute now.
Also I would like to point out that the latest version of Mac OS X (10.2.6) is using version 3.4pl of OpenSSH. Not sure if there are any other bug fixes between that and 3.7 that we should be worried about too.
As a 35 year old semi-geek male, I agree they are too hard and wind up being frustrating. And this couldn't have been proven to me more recently.
I have a PS2 and an XBox (I bought the PS2, based on how cool a game looked at a friends house, the XBox I got free from Speakeasy), and have very few titles for either. So, this weekend, I decided to change that. Not wanting to spend a lot of money I opted to get two used games from GameStop.
I purchased Grand Theft Auto: Vice city for PS2 and Hitman 2 for Xbox.
The Xbox game Hitman: 2 after playing it for nearly an hour had me hung up after mission 1 and it took me almost all of that hour or more just to get through level 1 correctly. Level 2 I can't even figure out, so, I gave up.
The PS 2 game Grand Theft Auto: Vice City is somewhat easier to have fun with, however, after diligently spending the better part of two days, I'm stuck once again in this game by two of the early missions that must be completed to move on. It's maddening to have to "do over" these missions/scenes only to fail time and time again and this is in the beginning levels of the game (the radio controlled helicopter mission and the "Guardian Angels" mission, stuck on both, can't go any further until they're completed).
Not to say that any of this is without hope. I've done Google searches on both games and have found and downloaded information on how to get by these levels and in GTA:VC's case I found tons of fun and entertaining "cheats" which have provided much more entertainmet than the standard gameplay which I'm now stuck on.
The point though is, what if I didn't have access to these resources? Should I be required to? Why are these games "so" difficult after paying nearly $50 each to be entertained only to be left frustrated at the beginning levels?
There really should be a mode on some of these where just the simple "adventure" is all that's offered and creating in-depth and extremely complicated skills is left out. I'd be much happier to casually work my way though many easy scenarios and have fun playing in the made up worlds/maps, than figuring out the correct way to "jump a car over three bridges while doing a wheelie" or "standing at the exact spot on a rooftop and firing a weapon in a specific order taking out targets in the right sequence" all with a little paddle controller and my thumbs!
And then for those who want a serious challenge of their skillz they can be allowed to turn on the harder scenarios for competition level gameplay.
Slashdot Mirror
If you RIP your CD collection using iTunes and AIFF I thought it just copied the data to the iTunes library.
In any event, with almost no compression, AIFF files from the CD are huge, 300+mb per song. If that's all your going to use the data file for, might as well just leave it on the CD and buy a portable CD player and save yourself the trouble.
The trick is to get MP3 or AAC compression to sound like the original AIFF, or as close to it, but consume 1/10th the space. Now that's snazzy
But to hell if I'm going ot rip a CD to iTunes with zero compression then download it to my iPod so I can hook the iPod up to my home audio equipment and call it trick! It's plain stupid, just go buy a CD player!
So far, for listening with the iPod and/or through my Harmon-Kardon Soundsticks equipped G4, 160Kbps AAC is pretty damn good and disk space tidy.
If I wanna get my "audiophile" buzz on, I'll just play the fricken CD through my Carver home audio system.
However, what I was trying to explain is that some folks think that by "forwarding" their calls from a landline number that the calls coming in to that landline are just "bumped" to the forwarded number, when in fact, they're not.
The way the phone companies do it (at least SBC in Illinois) is the call comes in to the landline from the caller, that forwarded landline then connects the call to the forwarded number as if a person had picked up the phone and dialed that number themselves. Now the call takes place running up two minute meters and being charged connect fees on both phones (the cell phone recieving the call and the forwarded landline that connected to the cell phone).
Forwarding a landline number is the same (to the phone company) as having someone sit in your house with two lines and picking up one phone, calling the forwarded number, and putting the two handsets together.
It's convient to do, as I had done, since everyone knew my main landline number which I've had for nearly 32 years, however, every time someone called me, it was as if I was calling myself from home 20 times a day even though I never used the home landline to make a call in months. I was charged for every call that came in to that landline and subsequently forwarded to my cellphone, essentially paying for each call twice.
It would have been cheaper to just have people call me direct on the cell phone.
Oh, and don't travel too far away from your home calling area on that 2nd line. You'll start getting local long distance charges on that 2nd line when your cell phone travels to a cell that is too far away for your local call pack.
I used to do this too, until I started getting billed about $12-$20 a month in usage charges on the forwarded phone line, as well as eatting up my cell minutes.
It's a neat idea if you can afford it, but don't be fooled into thinking that you're not charged for the forwarded call as if you had direct dialed it on that line to your cellphone yourself. You're paying for those calls on both lines, the cellphone line (minutes or time or both) AND the forwarded landline (connect charge, minutes per call).
Oak Park is pretty much the land of Guido sons and daughters of plumbers and auto mechanics with an IROC on every street and an El Camino up on blocks in every *shared* garage.
Lots of mullets in Oak Park.
Oak Park Illinois is *not* exactly known for it's "hipness" or overly "evolved" citizenry. It's mostly a low rent blue collar *plumber* & *auto mechanic* suburb of Chicago's West Side. Lots of IROC Camaro's on the streets in front of the apartment converted townhouses.
Sounds like the people bringing this suit should move a little farther North to Niles IL, where the Mayor of that town went on a personal crusade for years trying to sue AT&T Wireless from putting up cell phone towers inside the city limits of Niles. Even though AT&T has three retail stores there that do a brisk business and who knows how many countless residents that use the phones.
You know, the old "free" way of getting television, sticking a metal pole in the air and receiving the signal. You can still do it all over the world. And as it is right now, in Chicago at least, there's twice the HDTV offerings this way than any Sat/Cable provider, but that's a different subject.
This service will be broadcast through the air and recived with a standard television rooftop antenna.
I've done this twice, both times it took all of 10 mins.
My point is, 11Mbps DSL should just be a standard part of every phone line by now and they "should" be working on increasing that to 56Mbps or better so we can finally start doing video calls and getting movies delievered to every device in our house via our communications system that we've paid for, over and over again through subsidies and monthly billing.
Instead, we're burping little photos over 1.5/384K lines or cable links and watching grainy video in 1"x1" windows with audio you can barely understand. And on top of all that, they're talin' about capping the bandwidth (well one company is). It should be going in the other direction.
I've been on the "net" for over 11 years, I started with a 2400 baud Hayes modem and AOL, quickly replaced within the first year with a 14.4 modem and an ISP, in those 10-11 years where has it progressed to? A 700k modem and I still can barely send anything more than keystrokes and a few postage stamp sized images to another person across the Ether. We all sit here like monkeys with a coconuts hammering away at keyboards and cellphone keypads.
It's the 21st century and they're talking about rolling back the bandwidth?
Where are the Gigabit Ethernet lines over glass, or better, to every single household? Where are the video conferencing screens in every living room? Why can't I call my friends and see them on my flat plasma screen via voice command? Where are my HD Dolby Digital movies on demand? Are we going forward or backwards?
To affect real change here I think it can only be done on a federal level by throttling the telecommunications industry by the neck away from it's profit model and back into a citizens utility so it can truly serve the citizens like it was intended to do 40 years ago and earlier!
All of these wonderful dreams of the future of technology and the internet are being strangled through the 300k broadband bottle necks that half the populous can't even get and those that can are paying double what they were before for no real improvement.
Comcast shouldn't be figuring out caps, they should be figuring out ways to offer 10 times the throughput to everyone in their service region and expanding that service region beyond what it is now.
The pipes need to be bigger or we're just spinning our wheels on this information superhighway.
Also I would like to point out that the latest version of Mac OS X (10.2.6) is using version 3.4pl of OpenSSH. Not sure if there are any other bug fixes between that and 3.7 that we should be worried about too.
As a 35 year old semi-geek male, I agree they are too hard and wind up being frustrating. And this couldn't have been proven to me more recently.
I have a PS2 and an XBox (I bought the PS2, based on how cool a game looked at a friends house, the XBox I got free from Speakeasy), and have very few titles for either. So, this weekend, I decided to change that. Not wanting to spend a lot of money I opted to get two used games from GameStop.
I purchased Grand Theft Auto: Vice city for PS2 and Hitman 2 for Xbox.
The Xbox game Hitman: 2 after playing it for nearly an hour had me hung up after mission 1 and it took me almost all of that hour or more just to get through level 1 correctly. Level 2 I can't even figure out, so, I gave up.
The PS 2 game Grand Theft Auto: Vice City is somewhat easier to have fun with, however, after diligently spending the better part of two days, I'm stuck once again in this game by two of the early missions that must be completed to move on. It's maddening to have to "do over" these missions/scenes only to fail time and time again and this is in the beginning levels of the game (the radio controlled helicopter mission and the "Guardian Angels" mission, stuck on both, can't go any further until they're completed).
Not to say that any of this is without hope. I've done Google searches on both games and have found and downloaded information on how to get by these levels and in GTA:VC's case I found tons of fun and entertaining "cheats" which have provided much more entertainmet than the standard gameplay which I'm now stuck on.
The point though is, what if I didn't have access to these resources? Should I be required to? Why are these games "so" difficult after paying nearly $50 each to be entertained only to be left frustrated at the beginning levels?
There really should be a mode on some of these where just the simple "adventure" is all that's offered and creating in-depth and extremely complicated skills is left out. I'd be much happier to casually work my way though many easy scenarios and have fun playing in the made up worlds/maps, than figuring out the correct way to "jump a car over three bridges while doing a wheelie" or "standing at the exact spot on a rooftop and firing a weapon in a specific order taking out targets in the right sequence" all with a little paddle controller and my thumbs!
And then for those who want a serious challenge of their skillz they can be allowed to turn on the harder scenarios for competition level gameplay.