I installed it on Tiger, my wife then used it to compose a message in Hotmail and Firefox crashed, losing the long message in the process. I'm keen to keep her happy with Mac and Firefox, so I've rolled back to 1.0.5.
I know 1.5 is in beta, but even still I would expect it to handle a site as widely used as Hotmail.
Don't know about syncing with PDAs, but Panther handled syncing with my phone beautifully. I just bought my phone into range (Sony Ericsson T630), iMac detected it, displayed a picture of it on iMac screen, iSync kicked in and exported all my contacts and iCal across within a few seconds. I would expect no less with a compatible PDA.
I would blame the idiots who choose to code for one browser. And that's what I said in my message. I was criticizing Microsoft for not conducting proper cross browser compatibility tests when developing their site. Firefox rules, OK.
It isn't for me. The text next to the checkbox is almost touching said checkbox. And the bottom links are all aligned too far to the right, rather than directly underneath the primary content.
Tiny problems I'm sure you'll agree, but in my book any website development project worth its salt will have cross-browser compatibility as a success criteria. Especially if the client has money to throw around. It isn't that hard.
Given that there aren't many (any?) papers that get international exposure, I would've thought that a magazine such as Time or The Economist would be a better choice than a paper which is generally only read by Americans. Then again I suppose it boils down to which demographic they're trying to reach. Businessmen, with the power to implement it in their companies? Joe, with the power to run it at home? Who, exactly?
SMS is good for some things though, for example when you're in a loud bar and you want to send the name of the bar and directions to several people. If you phone them, they can't hear you and generally don't have pen and paper to hand.
Other than that I would have to agree. Chavs seem to be the ones who use texting as their primary form of communication, and for that reason alone usage should be capped.
You've implied that you shouldn't have to justify your intention to burn a playlist more than 7 times, because you own the music. However, you've overlooked the fact that there is a business model to sustain, which is underpinned by the record companies agreement to distribute music in this way.
I think the music companies are justified in claiming that there is no legal reason why anyone would want to create more than 7 copies of one playlist, and they're within their rights to ask Apple to do something about it (they'd do it with CDs too if they could without pissing people off (with e.g. copy protection)). So I think the onus is on you to come up with your reason - any reason - why you'd want to create more than 7 copies of your playlist, which I don't think you've done so far. Even if it is for personal use (if for example you have 10 CDs players in different places), you can always create a new playlist and copy from there. The intention is to stop people easily making - and selling - dozens of copies of the same CD. Where's the harm in that?
We all hate the RIAA, but I think on this occasion they're doing the right thing for their clients.
No control = unfettered piracy = record labels withdraw their music = no iTMS = we're back to the chaotic, litigious environment we were facing before iTMS came along.
Simply claiming that Apple could screw you over next time isn't much of an argument. They've taken an ethical approach to DRM so far and would lose precious business if they changed their approach in the future. If you don't trust Apple, don't use Apple.
What it boils down to is that the changes are reasonable IMHO and it helps sustain the business model for the benefit of all. You haven't lost your choice to buy from shops if you don't like it.
It'd be one thing if iTunes and the iPod sucked, but they don't They're fantastic.
While you're happy to have the choice made for you now, that might not be the case in the future. Could be tricky moving your entire music collection over to another format.
I doubt very much whether Google would risk upsetting their fans by dangling such an attractive service in front of them and then calling "April fool!".
No, I reckon its far more likely that they've released this on / near April 1 because the possibility of it being an April fool's joke is generating almost as much interest as the service they'll be offering. Double the interest, double the anticipation and double the publicity. I'd love to know how many clicks the gmail site has got by the day's end.
The expression "The customer is always right" is not intended to be taken literally! It is intended to provoke a more thoughtful response to customer care issues, encouraging vendors to think about what is the best response to a complaint (taking into account bad publicity, repeat complaints, cost, common sense, etc.) rather than just the cheapest - regardless of the legal position.
IMHO, someone with cannablistic tendancies becomes more likely to perform cannablistic acts when they see online that other people share their urges. I would expect them to get comfort knowing that they're not as unusual as they might otherwise think they were, and this in turn can be a source of inspiration.
Also, given that cannibals and people who want to be eaten are so few and far between, its unlikely that these people would meet through any other means.
Of course, its all very difficult to prove or measure - but that doesn't mean the correlation doesn't exist.
I wish you'd been around when I was younger - I use a dawn simulator for medical purposes. I suffer from Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD, and no I'm not joking - details here), and the most effective treatment is light therapy. This can take the form of lightboxes (intense light) or - you guessed it - a dawn simulator. AFAIK, these only became commercially available 10 years ago. I got mine in 1996 (aged 22), and haven't looked back.
Slashdot Mirror
And they're not the only one.
but didn't you only see the broken units? I mean, did you have a way of measuring how many units were broken versus those that weren't?
Home-made movies?
Music videos?
I know 1.5 is in beta, but even still I would expect it to handle a site as widely used as Hotmail.
I expect there'll be someone ahead of you in the queue for that job....
(adopt Quagmire voice)
Huh...huh....huh.....alriiiight!
Who's next? Oh no, uh, its a fat guy!
Oh no, and here comes a chubby chick!
Oh sweet Jesus, that woman is old!
Hang on....here she comes....giggidy giggidy giggidy!! Alriiiiight!
Don't know about syncing with PDAs, but Panther handled syncing with my phone beautifully. I just bought my phone into range (Sony Ericsson T630), iMac detected it, displayed a picture of it on iMac screen, iSync kicked in and exported all my contacts and iCal across within a few seconds. I would expect no less with a compatible PDA.
I would blame the idiots who choose to code for one browser. And that's what I said in my message. I was criticizing Microsoft for not conducting proper cross browser compatibility tests when developing their site. Firefox rules, OK.
Tiny problems I'm sure you'll agree, but in my book any website development project worth its salt will have cross-browser compatibility as a success criteria. Especially if the client has money to throw around. It isn't that hard.
Shouldn't this sig-quote be attributed to Yoda?
Given that there aren't many (any?) papers that get international exposure, I would've thought that a magazine such as Time or The Economist would be a better choice than a paper which is generally only read by Americans. Then again I suppose it boils down to which demographic they're trying to reach. Businessmen, with the power to implement it in their companies? Joe, with the power to run it at home? Who, exactly?
From today's BBC Website;
Price per one track download
UK - 79p
Germany & France - 99 cents (68p)
US - 99 cents (51p)
Canada - 99 cents (43p)
We are being royally screwed.
"and then??"
Other than that I would have to agree. Chavs seem to be the ones who use texting as their primary form of communication, and for that reason alone usage should be capped.
Harsh, I know - but fair.
You've implied that you shouldn't have to justify your intention to burn a playlist more than 7 times, because you own the music. However, you've overlooked the fact that there is a business model to sustain, which is underpinned by the record companies agreement to distribute music in this way.
I think the music companies are justified in claiming that there is no legal reason why anyone would want to create more than 7 copies of one playlist, and they're within their rights to ask Apple to do something about it (they'd do it with CDs too if they could without pissing people off (with e.g. copy protection)). So I think the onus is on you to come up with your reason - any reason - why you'd want to create more than 7 copies of your playlist, which I don't think you've done so far. Even if it is for personal use (if for example you have 10 CDs players in different places), you can always create a new playlist and copy from there. The intention is to stop people easily making - and selling - dozens of copies of the same CD. Where's the harm in that?
We all hate the RIAA, but I think on this occasion they're doing the right thing for their clients.
No control = unfettered piracy = record labels withdraw their music = no iTMS = we're back to the chaotic, litigious environment we were facing before iTMS came along.
Simply claiming that Apple could screw you over next time isn't much of an argument. They've taken an ethical approach to DRM so far and would lose precious business if they changed their approach in the future. If you don't trust Apple, don't use Apple.
What it boils down to is that the changes are reasonable IMHO and it helps sustain the business model for the benefit of all. You haven't lost your choice to buy from shops if you don't like it.
Not very practical if you've got thousands of songs in your collection...
While you're happy to have the choice made for you now, that might not be the case in the future. Could be tricky moving your entire music collection over to another format.
The site doesn't exist yet. Google are not claiming that it exists yet. That doesn't mean that it will never exist.
No, I reckon its far more likely that they've released this on / near April 1 because the possibility of it being an April fool's joke is generating almost as much interest as the service they'll be offering. Double the interest, double the anticipation and double the publicity. I'd love to know how many clicks the gmail site has got by the day's end.
The expression "The customer is always right" is not intended to be taken literally! It is intended to provoke a more thoughtful response to customer care issues, encouraging vendors to think about what is the best response to a complaint (taking into account bad publicity, repeat complaints, cost, common sense, etc.) rather than just the cheapest - regardless of the legal position.
An explanation can be found here.
Also, given that cannibals and people who want to be eaten are so few and far between, its unlikely that these people would meet through any other means.
Of course, its all very difficult to prove or measure - but that doesn't mean the correlation doesn't exist.
They're both fucking close to water!
Its true! The old ones are the best!
More info on the one I have is here,
Also, I have found that moving from London to Sydney has helped....no need for a dawn simulator here!!