There are readers for OBD II (check engine light) that cost less than one visit to have the code read. And, it's an open standard, designed by SAE (society of automotive engineers).
It's actually a requirement by the EPA that the codes CANNOT be read or erased without a tool.
Virtualization would be bad for Apple. The dual-boot "solution" allows windows apps to run well, but just inconveniently enough that people would try to avoid running Windows apps if there was an OSX version.
Don't underestimate the value of OSX-only and OSX-bundled apps. Pages, Keynote, and Mail are already superior to Word, PowerPoint, and Outlook for routine work. Plus, the cost differential between iWork and Office pretty much offsets the extra price for Mac hardware.
If Apple manages to keep it fairly inconvenient to boot to Windows while increasing hardware market share this way, I think that it would have the opposite effect on apps being ported - if people are rebooting to Windows to run one specific app, it will be ported.
I priced out an equivalent Dell laptop to my MacBook pro (without the camera/IR, since they are not available) at $2732. The MacBook Pro is $2978. It's not that much more for a far better laptop (imho). If they manage to stake out a substantial market share in the hardware, whether or not people use Windows, I think the apps will follow, as long as OSX is able to provide most of what people need for routine work, and Windows continues to suck enough that people avoid using it unless necessary.
Given a large enough installed base of dual-booting Macs, every time a specialized app is ported, the marketshare for Windows will decrease, as people no longer need Windows to run that single app. Also, people buying new computers, seeing their specialized apps available for OSX, will not bother installing Windows in the first place.
I would suppose it has something to do with the ductility of gold, making it the easiest metal to draw out into the extremely thin wires that this would require.
You can't register a new diesel vehicle under a certain weight in NY. (I forget the exact weight, but it's above any passenger vehicle weight.)
To get a "new" Diesel car in NYS, you basically have to go to another state with a friend, have him buy the car, then drive the car something like 4000 miles (I also don't recall the exact minimum amount of mileage to qualify as "used"), then have him transfer the title to you.
Did you just say that google should offer a PC but just not call it a PC?
Yeah. "PC" has a lot of connotations that won't help. The XBOX is essentially a PC, but it's not positioned as such, and people don't expect as much of it.
By positioning it as a device with a specific function (that just happens to do almost everything a Windows PC does), you end up solving the first problem, which is just getting the shit in people's hands.
Actually, as poor a description as "moving videos between a PC and a TV set" is, it is actually a great idea for something like this. Nobody is ever going to be able to market a PC with a non-windows OS for the reason you mentioned - (almost) everything on the market requires Windows. However, by offering what is essentially a fully-functioning PC with say, Linux, but not positioning it as a PC, it would better have the ability to get into people's homes.
By not positioning it as a replacement for a Windows PC, but as an additional accessory, it doesn't have to replace every esoteric piece of software available for Windows. However, if these devices become popular for their own specific "purpose", and have the ability to duplicate at least a large portion of the functionality of a Windows PC, the apps will fall into place as people demand them.
I think an important part of this equation is HDTV. The display's ability to offer a reasonably useful "computer" interface simply wasn't available with NTSC. Now, a box connected to an HDTV display, with a one piece wireless keyboard/trackball interface, could be a lot more palatable to people, than say the old WebTV.
Hopefully they won't screw it up like everyone else has.
Can you imagine someone spending a few grand on AV and then being too cheap to buy a DVD?
Easily.
After spending all their money on the equipment, there's no money left for a DVD! If I had $2000 to spend, I could either get a $1000 system and buy 50 DVD's, or I could get a $2000 system and pirate 50 DVD's.
Think of any tangible good that's bought and sold. There's regulation there to keep the market running smoothly. Although these regulations may seem to be the antithesis of free-marketism, they keep things going by "legalising civility" (if i can coin a phrase) between buyer and seller.
The illegal drug market is often cited as one of the purest examples of a "free market", specifically in discussions about the model of perfect competition - despite the fact that it would seem to be the least "free" market considering that the entire market is illegal! It's the "freest" market in the sense of specific regulations targeting market forces.
Oddly enough, drug prices are remarkably stable, and aside from drug-related violence (which isn't usually related to a sale), I'd say it's one of the most civil markets around. I've never hung out with a record store clerk to listen to CD's after I bought one, but I've certainly smoked a bowl with a dealer.
So, congratulations, you were always a capitalist. Liking communism because it would get you a higher salary isn't communism. I like communism because of the convenience of never having to worry about losing your checkbook.
If a person has to be authorized to sell something, it's not a free market.
In a true free market, you can't even HAVE a black market, since this means that products are excluded from the regular market - and thus it is not free.
What are you wanting people to learn, exactly? Arcane UNIX commands? Uh, how is that good for kids?
They learn how computers work. I see a huge difference between people who got involved in computers before and after the emergence of GUI's. People who cut their teeth on more rudimentary systems generally have a much better first-principles idea of what is going on in that black box, which is still relevant even in the most modern environment.
Knowing how to use a word processor, or knowing the various calls for drawing windows in whatever API happens to be popular doesn't mean shit in the long run. If the goal of giving these laptops away is to move these people forward in a technological society, it's far more important for them to understand the technology than just be able to go through the motions.
If a bunch of kids in Africa learn how to use a word processor, that isn't going to help at all. We already have enough starving people in India to do our data-entry. If the same kids actually gain an understanding of technology, they have a chance to move ahead.
I totally agree with you, for completely different reasons. I don't think that the strength of open-source will ever be in making knockoffs of commercial software, it will come from "orphan projects" - projects that aren't commercially viable, yet are desired by small segments of the marketplace. If there is a sufficient body of work in this area, there will be a reversal in the install base - A lot of people (myself included) don't run Windows because of Office, they run it because they have some specific, specialized application that requires it. In my case, a few of these are actually free, closed source scientific data analysis programs. Even if OpenOffice sucked (I think it's good enough), I'd put up with it if it was the only office suite that ran on the same OS as my specific-application stuff.
Of course, RMS would totally disagree with this point, but I don't really care if application software is open-source or not. It's always nice, but if there is a sufficiently high install base for open-source operating systems because it's the only place to get these specific applications, all the closed-source apps you're stuck running Windows for will be ported. I'd rather have an open-source operating system and all closed-source apps than a closed-source operating system with all open-source apps.
(*an analogy from pharmaceuticals, where "orphan drugs" are drugs that aren't commercially viable, such as for diseases other than limpdick and high blood pressure)
I think college professors are overcompensated, so I'm going to take a seat in some of their classes without contributing a dime towards their income.
Oddly enough, I do this all the time. Most professors are more than happy to let people sit in on a class. You pay for the credit hours.
Don't pretend that you respect an artist enough to want them to entertain you, but then stop short of the one thing that artist is asking of you as you acquire your copies of what they work to produce.
This is an incredibly naive statement. The artists have pretty much no say in anything regarding CD's. Tom Petty notwithstanding.
Seriously, if they thought the prices were fair, do you think they'd be illegally downloading it ?
Yes. allofmp3.com is illegal, and the prices are fair. Although allofmp3 is dirt cheap (something like 20 cents per song), I'd bet that they charge more per song than the artists get from something like iTunes. Although it's somewhat of a moral quandary for me, since if I get a song from allofmp3, the artists probably get nothing - the fact that I get higher quality, DRM free songs wins out anyway. I just take all the money I saved on not buying the legitimate copy and go see the band in concert.
I realize in the end that some people get unfairly cut out here (particularly those involved in the recording process), but I personally don't give a flying fuck if anyone not involved in the actual production of the music never sees a dime. And, I feel better about not giving my money to RIAA execs, even though audio engineers, etc might get hurt in the process. It's unfortunate.
The free market gives you the choice to obtain the desired product at the lowest price that someone is willing to provide it. Which in this case, is zero.
According to your link, "Payed" is only correct if he means to say that he covered his CD with a protective coating of asphalt. I believe this is perfectly legal.
It is possible to create a kernel module that intercepts system calls on OS X. Any admin user can install a kernel module - and most users are accustomed to entering their password when installing.
They are not, however, accustomed to entering their password when playing an audio CD.
Slashdot Mirror
More likely, the type of buyers who demand "No Windows"
a) Almost never call tech support unless the hardware fails.
b) Don't buy computers from Dell, anyway.
There are readers for OBD II (check engine light) that cost less than one visit to have the code read. And, it's an open standard, designed by SAE (society of automotive engineers).
It's actually a requirement by the EPA that the codes CANNOT be read or erased without a tool.
Well, you can get the smallest one, which looks like an iPod...
Virtualization would be bad for Apple. The dual-boot "solution" allows windows apps to run well, but just inconveniently enough that people would try to avoid running Windows apps if there was an OSX version.
Don't underestimate the value of OSX-only and OSX-bundled apps. Pages, Keynote, and Mail are already superior to Word, PowerPoint, and Outlook for routine work. Plus, the cost differential between iWork and Office pretty much offsets the extra price for Mac hardware.
If Apple manages to keep it fairly inconvenient to boot to Windows while increasing hardware market share this way, I think that it would have the opposite effect on apps being ported - if people are rebooting to Windows to run one specific app, it will be ported.
I priced out an equivalent Dell laptop to my MacBook pro (without the camera/IR, since they are not available) at $2732. The MacBook Pro is $2978. It's not that much more for a far better laptop (imho). If they manage to stake out a substantial market share in the hardware, whether or not people use Windows, I think the apps will follow, as long as OSX is able to provide most of what people need for routine work, and Windows continues to suck enough that people avoid using it unless necessary.
Given a large enough installed base of dual-booting Macs, every time a specialized app is ported, the marketshare for Windows will decrease, as people no longer need Windows to run that single app. Also, people buying new computers, seeing their specialized apps available for OSX, will not bother installing Windows in the first place.
I would suppose it has something to do with the ductility of gold, making it the easiest metal to draw out into the extremely thin wires that this would require.
That's got to be bullshit. I pay less than $8/gallon for spectroscopic grade methanol.
You can't register a new diesel vehicle under a certain weight in NY. (I forget the exact weight, but it's above any passenger vehicle weight.)
To get a "new" Diesel car in NYS, you basically have to go to another state with a friend, have him buy the car, then drive the car something like 4000 miles (I also don't recall the exact minimum amount of mileage to qualify as "used"), then have him transfer the title to you.
Did you just say that google should offer a PC but just not call it a PC?
Yeah. "PC" has a lot of connotations that won't help. The XBOX is essentially a PC, but it's not positioned as such, and people don't expect as much of it.
By positioning it as a device with a specific function (that just happens to do almost everything a Windows PC does), you end up solving the first problem, which is just getting the shit in people's hands.
There isn't even a google bar for Safari.
You must be using a different version of Safari than I've ever seen.
Actually, as poor a description as "moving videos between a PC and a TV set" is, it is actually a great idea for something like this. Nobody is ever going to be able to market a PC with a non-windows OS for the reason you mentioned - (almost) everything on the market requires Windows. However, by offering what is essentially a fully-functioning PC with say, Linux, but not positioning it as a PC, it would better have the ability to get into people's homes.
By not positioning it as a replacement for a Windows PC, but as an additional accessory, it doesn't have to replace every esoteric piece of software available for Windows. However, if these devices become popular for their own specific "purpose", and have the ability to duplicate at least a large portion of the functionality of a Windows PC, the apps will fall into place as people demand them.
I think an important part of this equation is HDTV. The display's ability to offer a reasonably useful "computer" interface simply wasn't available with NTSC. Now, a box connected to an HDTV display, with a one piece wireless keyboard/trackball interface, could be a lot more palatable to people, than say the old WebTV.
Hopefully they won't screw it up like everyone else has.
Can you imagine someone spending a few grand on AV and then being too cheap to buy a DVD?
Easily.
After spending all their money on the equipment, there's no money left for a DVD! If I had $2000 to spend, I could either get a $1000 system and buy 50 DVD's, or I could get a $2000 system and pirate 50 DVD's.
Yeah, but what Mitnick did is like jaywalking compared to these guys.
Now we know the true cause of the riots. They were obviously financed and sponsored by Microsoft in retaliation.
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned is that suits are generally washed less often than even the most filthy slob's T-shirt.
Getting a suit cleaned is not as trivial as just tossing it into a washing machine.
Think of any tangible good that's bought and sold. There's regulation there to keep the market running smoothly. Although these regulations may seem to be the antithesis of free-marketism, they keep things going by "legalising civility" (if i can coin a phrase) between buyer and seller.
The illegal drug market is often cited as one of the purest examples of a "free market", specifically in discussions about the model of perfect competition - despite the fact that it would seem to be the least "free" market considering that the entire market is illegal! It's the "freest" market in the sense of specific regulations targeting market forces.
Oddly enough, drug prices are remarkably stable, and aside from drug-related violence (which isn't usually related to a sale), I'd say it's one of the most civil markets around. I've never hung out with a record store clerk to listen to CD's after I bought one, but I've certainly smoked a bowl with a dealer.
So, congratulations, you were always a capitalist. Liking communism because it would get you a higher salary isn't communism. I like communism because of the convenience of never having to worry about losing your checkbook.
If a person has to be authorized to sell something, it's not a free market.
In a true free market, you can't even HAVE a black market, since this means that products are excluded from the regular market - and thus it is not free.
What are you wanting people to learn, exactly? Arcane UNIX commands? Uh, how is that good for kids?
They learn how computers work. I see a huge difference between people who got involved in computers before and after the emergence of GUI's. People who cut their teeth on more rudimentary systems generally have a much better first-principles idea of what is going on in that black box, which is still relevant even in the most modern environment.
Knowing how to use a word processor, or knowing the various calls for drawing windows in whatever API happens to be popular doesn't mean shit in the long run. If the goal of giving these laptops away is to move these people forward in a technological society, it's far more important for them to understand the technology than just be able to go through the motions.
If a bunch of kids in Africa learn how to use a word processor, that isn't going to help at all. We already have enough starving people in India to do our data-entry. If the same kids actually gain an understanding of technology, they have a chance to move ahead.
I totally agree with you, for completely different reasons. I don't think that the strength of open-source will ever be in making knockoffs of commercial software, it will come from "orphan projects" - projects that aren't commercially viable, yet are desired by small segments of the marketplace. If there is a sufficient body of work in this area, there will be a reversal in the install base - A lot of people (myself included) don't run Windows because of Office, they run it because they have some specific, specialized application that requires it. In my case, a few of these are actually free, closed source scientific data analysis programs. Even if OpenOffice sucked (I think it's good enough), I'd put up with it if it was the only office suite that ran on the same OS as my specific-application stuff.
Of course, RMS would totally disagree with this point, but I don't really care if application software is open-source or not. It's always nice, but if there is a sufficiently high install base for open-source operating systems because it's the only place to get these specific applications, all the closed-source apps you're stuck running Windows for will be ported.
I'd rather have an open-source operating system and all closed-source apps than a closed-source operating system with all open-source apps.
(*an analogy from pharmaceuticals, where "orphan drugs" are drugs that aren't commercially viable, such as for diseases other than limpdick and high blood pressure)
Community service benefits corporations, because the better off people are, the more shit they can buy.
I think college professors are overcompensated, so I'm going to take a seat in some of their classes without contributing a dime towards their income.
Oddly enough, I do this all the time. Most professors are more than happy to let people sit in on a class. You pay for the credit hours.
Don't pretend that you respect an artist enough to want them to entertain you, but then stop short of the one thing that artist is asking of you as you acquire your copies of what they work to produce.
This is an incredibly naive statement. The artists have pretty much no say in anything regarding CD's. Tom Petty notwithstanding.
Seriously, if they thought the prices were fair, do you think they'd be illegally downloading it ?
Yes. allofmp3.com is illegal, and the prices are fair. Although allofmp3 is dirt cheap (something like 20 cents per song), I'd bet that they charge more per song than the artists get from something like iTunes. Although it's somewhat of a moral quandary for me, since if I get a song from allofmp3, the artists probably get nothing - the fact that I get higher quality, DRM free songs wins out anyway. I just take all the money I saved on not buying the legitimate copy and go see the band in concert.
I realize in the end that some people get unfairly cut out here (particularly those involved in the recording process), but I personally don't give a flying fuck if anyone not involved in the actual production of the music never sees a dime. And, I feel better about not giving my money to RIAA execs, even though audio engineers, etc might get hurt in the process. It's unfortunate.
The free market gives you the choice to obtain the desired product at the lowest price that someone is willing to provide it. Which in this case, is zero.
Actually it is.
According to your link, "Payed" is only correct if he means to say that he covered his CD with a protective coating of asphalt. I believe this is perfectly legal.
It is possible to create a kernel module that intercepts system calls on OS X. Any admin user can install a kernel module - and most users are accustomed to entering their password when installing.
They are not, however, accustomed to entering their password when playing an audio CD.