You seem to be under the impression that the RIAA has any shame whatsoever. These people are reptiles! I mean, they insist on deposing 10 year-old girls face-to-face. They file tons of "John Doe" suits and go after people who don't even own computers. And you think they will shy away from this just because it is your music?
If I had the money I'd start a web radio station playing my own music just to get the RIAA to start a lawsuit against me. When they did I'd turn around and file a lawsuit against and sue for every dime they have while saying they're organized crime and use the RICO Act.
If they actually start enforcing this, I'm just going to start an internet radio station with my own music. Other artists should do the same. Just let them try to sue me for royalties on music that I wrote/recorded/produced.
If you do, you'll be waiting for quite a long time. This arrangement doesn't apply to situations where an explicit contract is present, such as in the case of creating a station with your own music. It only applies if you want to use someone else's music without going to them for permission
Ah but how will they know whether someone who does this either has a license or is the copyright owner? For instance what if I right my own songs and play them with my flute. I go and record my songs then start a net radio station without any mention of who owns the copyrights, how is the RIAA ever going to own whether the radio station has to pay them without contacting me first? Or what if they do contact me but I refuse to reply?
The lincense is compulsory for the copyright holders
I say this is BS! No where does the USA Constitution give the government the power to dictate that I use any compulsory licensing for any song I write.
I'm certain that such a scheme could be legalized by the US Government (i.e. designate a single authority to handle some particular issue..)
While it may be legal, ie congress passed a law the president signed, no where in the USA Constitution does it give the government this power. And seeing has how the Constitution places limits on what the government can do this law is then unconstitutional.
My point was to (apparently poorly) illustrate out the silliness of the AC parent's complaint that 'his vote didnt matter because someone else won the state.' You can make the same argument for any election if your candidate doesn't win, but that is not a valid reason not to vote.
K. What I tell many who say they don't vote is that if they don't vote then they have no reason to complain. Simply if they aren't voting then they should have no expectation of change other than reductions in their freedom or other things they don't like. Also more than likely if they don't vote then they never contact their elected officials, for which again they shoudn't expect anything. I first voted in 1980 and with two exeptions I've voted in every presidential election. The first was in 1996 when I was living in a rehab house after a bad accident, and though I don't recall who it was I had planned on voting for the candidate from the Libertarian Party. The second was in 2004, I had moved before the election but didn't change my registration before election day. Then I fully supported Michael Badnarik.
Thanks to "winner takes all" my vote was essentially thrown out and changed to Bush since that's what the majority of my country voted for.
Well then get active with your state legislature and lobby to have the law changed. Lobby to have it so each candidate gets the same percentage in the electoral college as they get in the popular vote. Even better would be to also campaign to have Amendment 12 - Choosing the President, Vice-Presiden repealed. Go back to how the president and vice president used to be elected. Everyone ran for president then the electoral college voted until there were only 2 candidates left, then the final vote chose who was president and who was vp.
There's only 2 parties in the US and both of them already have their flock of sheep that will vote for them.
Just because only two political parties get most of the press in the US does not mean there aren't others. There are a bunch of other parties. At one tyme I was depotized to register people to vote. We were given a list of parties a person could register for and there were 57 parties on the list. I myself have voted for candidates from 5 political parties as well as independent candidates.
Who'd've thought that a member of the "party of Reagan" would preside over the largest budget increase in history?
Actually Reagan presided over a big budget increase and blooming deficit. It was only at the end of Clinton's terms that the deficit was almost eliminated.
I'm not saying that the invasion of Afghanistan was a mistake, because I think it was fully warranted due to the Taliban's refusal to turn over Bin Laden.
I've pretty much agreed with you until I got to this. Something had to be done to the Taliban because they are Taliban not because they refused to hand over bin Laden, which they did not do. In fact the Taliban asked to see any evidence bin Laden had anything to do with 911, which is the correct thing to do. The thing is is Bush actually supported the Taliban at one tyme, he gave them more than $40,000,000 of US taxpayer money. By the logic above, either hand over a suspect without seeing any evidence or being invaded then Venezuela should be able to invade the USA, because the USA is shielding suspected Cuban terrorists Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carilles who are accused blowing up Cubana Flight 455.
1. After 9/11, Gore would have made some big talk in front of the U.N. about terrorist groups. But the U.N. would have done exactly what it did do: nothing. The terrorists would have seen us as unwilling to defend ourselves and would have made subsequent attacks on us.
So, you've got a direct connection to those terrorists? Are you one yourself?
2. The federal budget would be no more balanced than it is today
Under Clinton, by the end of his terms the budget deficit was almost paid off. Now under Bush Jr the USA has the biggest deficit it has ever had.
here would also likely be a socialized health care system, which would be modeled after Canada's. This would pretty much destroy any specialists in the U.S. as they would be paid a pittance and they'd move elsewhere.
Where would they go? Almost everyone has socialized medicine, including the US now.
4. There probably wouldn't be as many jails, period,
GOOD!!! As it is now the US has one of the highest people in prison per capita. And many of them are there for nonviolent drug offenses. Get rid of prohibition laws and prisons could emptied while still keeping people safe. As it is now violent criminals are let out early to make room for convicted of nonviolent drug offenses. Unfortunately neither Democrats now Republicans would do anything about this.
The only people who'd get jailed are corporate execs
WRONG!!! Many are in prison for nonviolent drug offenses.
5. The Supreme Court would have a couple of special interest group apologist
HAHA! Like it's not now. This Court has even allowed states' rights to be trampled by the feds, without any basis in the USA Constitution.
6. The various federal agencies would have been populated with a bunch of incompetent bleeding-heart political tools. And there would be many more of them.
Another HAHA! Federal agencies now are populated incommpetent neo conservative hacks. Not only that but they also silence the scientists in the agencies. And if you're a US attorney and don't go after enough Democrats you're fired.
"They are the same" to the extent that they all do stupid things. It's only the extent of the damage and the exact methods employed that differ. It's a frying pan or the oven kind of comparison; neither are very appealing.
Agreed again!!! That's why I for the candidate not the party. I've voted for candidates that were Democrat, Green, Independents, Reform, and Republican. And yes, there is a difference between "independent" and Independent", independents are not affiliiated with a party whereas there is an Independent party.
The Economist's research and analysis is the best in journalism today, but its editorial stance is most decidedly not liberal. It has little tolerance for many of the things liberalism holds dear, and if anything aligns more with centrist conservative philosophy than anything else[*]. That said, they do occasionally see the value of government intervention in things, but if that's how you define liberalism
Actually Liberals were those who wanted not big government but small government and believed in capitalism. Liberalism has it's roots in the Age of Reason and the Age of Enlightenment. It was carried over from France during the Enlightenment. As it's being used predominately today, in the USA, the meaning of "Liberal" has been twisted around so much many take it to mean socialism now.
Put it this way, if you are arguing with the business and can say "The economist said" its going to be a million times better that wired/slashdot/any computing mag you can think of.
I like reading "The Economist" myself. However because I only read one maybe two compleat issues a month and it's a weekly I don't subscribe.
the officers in charge of them are more interested in maximizing financial return on the products they sell to the public, by changing the business model from a universal media purchase, to one of individual device rights.
The problem with this is it does not maximize profits. By requiring people to pay for every item they want to play music or movies on they are discouraging people from buying to begin with. I used to buy a lot of music however I rarely even listen to it now. Lately though I've been thinking of getting a new turntable and reel-to-reel tape deck but I wanted to see if I'd be able to buy new vinyl records, and reels of tape. Now I've found two stores that do sale and will order if they don't carry a record.
Actually at one of the stores I went through to see what new albums they had and right then and there I was ready to get a turntable because they had an album by Otis Reading which had his song "(Sittin' on) the Dock of the Bay".
Windows comes with a firewall, where have you been? And the anti-spyware and AV probably came with the computer.
Windows itself is now spyware. That is what WGA/WPA is, spyware. I don't like being treated like a criminal which is what MS does.
Every single mac I've owned have had at least one 'logicboard failure' among numerous other hardware issues...:/
I've bought 3 PCs running Windows brand new and one remanufactured. Two of the new PCs had both the hdd and the motherboard replaced in the first year. The remanufactured PC was a laptop and the LCD cracked within a few months. Even though I got an extended service plan with it when I called Gateway, who I got it from, I was told the plan did not cover that. So I asked how much it would cost to fix and the tech just said between $300 and $1200. Come on, the second number is 4 tymes the first. The other new PC I bought is a DEC Alpha running NT 4.0. It was the only PC I did not have hardware problems with, however because it's an Alpha I was not able to get much software installed on it.
On the other hand I've also bought 2 used Macs. The first was a Mac SE30 I got in 1992. It lasted until 2000, 8 year, when the floppy drive died. The second Mac's a Power Mac 7300/200 I got a few months later, in 2000. It lasted until early 2006 when it refused to bootup. Both used Macs I bought lasted longer than the brand new PCs I bought.
I send it again, it gets 'lost' for a month, they find it, reinstall OS X
Something like that happened to me with the first laptop PC I got. Within a few months the hdd died so they just overnight shipped a new hdd. However just few days before I had it a year the motherboard died. They had a box dropped off the following day to ship it in to have it repaired. Not hearing anything a week later I called to check on the status and was told it had just been dropped off at the apartments I lived in. I was calling from there and no one dropped anything off. So I went to the office to see if it may of been taken there, nope! So I called back and after going between tech support and the shipping company they decided to send me a new laptop. Another week passes by so I call back to see what's taking so long. They were out of one of the peices and had to wait for it to come in. Eventually, 4 weeks after sending mine in, I get the replacement PC.
Most of the cost of getting a drug to market is in the research that went into developing the drug.... Perhaps you'd rather pay taxes to fund only government-sponsored research instead?
But it was government sponsored research that led to this drug! The NCI spent $183,000,000 to develop and test Taxol. It then "sold" the rights to all of the data needed to gain FDA approval exclusively to Bristol-Myers Squibb for a measly $43,000,000. The NCI spent $140,000,000 more than it got back.
Uninformed conspiracy nuts seem to think Pharm companies do all the medical research. The NIH (National Institutes of Health) will spend more than 28+ Billion on medical research this year (your tax dollars at work).
This drug, Taxol, is a good example of government spending on medical research. Taxol was developed and tested by the NCI, it cost $183,000,000. But then the NCI rurned around and pratically gave away the rights to all the test data to Bristol-Myers Squibb for a measly $43,000,000.
Your joke points to a sad reality however, that it's only through patenting cures (ie having a monopoly over a cure) can pharmaceutical companies (free enterprises) get the investment capital to develop medicines. Cures are IP, traded and guarded.
In this case, Taxol, the company that markets and distributes the drug didn't spend a dime on developing the drug. The National Cancer Institute, NCI, spent $183,000,000 to develop and test Taxol. Then the NCI turned around and "sold", what a joke, the rights to all of the data needed to get approval for the drug by the FDA to Bristol-Myers Squibb for $43,000,000. The NCI spend $140,000,000 more to develop and test Taxol than it got for the rights. In 2000 MBS made almost $1,000,000,000 on Taxol. That's American taxpayers money at work.
With proprietary software, much of it in a legacy stage, keeping corporations using Windows PCs, it seems like Apple's business plan should be obvious:
Buy Parallels, and
Include it free with every new Mac sold through business channels.
It might make sense if Apple were to buy Parallels however Vista's licensing requires the more expensive versions if it is run in a VM.
Couldent agree with you more, just today i bought 5 hp's and 5 imacs for the school i work for. the macs were about £700 each, the better speced HP's were £248 each. Needless to say the majority of our 500 boxs are pc's the macs are relegated to the specialist departments such as music.
And how much money was spent to make sure those HPs had AV, antispyware, and a firewall? Then how long will they last? I'm typing this on an HP Pavilion I bought new. In the first year both the hdd and the motherboard had to be replaced. Because it was under warranty it didn't cost me anything to repair but when the motherboard took a dive I was without my PC for a few days then when the hdd dove I lost another couple of days. And then I had to return it because the hdd they replaced the old one with was smaller, there's no way I was going to except a smaller drive. If I had needed the HP for work then I would of had to spend more money to get something I could use while not having this one, or I would of lost some income.
Simply put, there aren't enough models and configurations
Agreed!!! This is one of the things that agravates me about the lines of Macs Apple puts out. Apple needs to release a line of Macs that sits between iMacs and Mac Pros, something that though not top of the line is expandable, a stripped version of the Mac Pro maybe.
Many business professionals use tablets
I wouldn't mind a tablet Mac. Even better would be one that's 21" and could run on battery for several hours.
I still, inexplicably, can't buy one with 2 mouse buttons.
You're right, the Macbook(Pro)s only have one button however myself I never did like using track pads. When I had a laptop I had a second mouse in the bag. And the Mighty Mouse is a four button mouse. Now the only laptops I've had were PCs running Windows however because MS has started to treats it's customers like criminals I'm switching. You can also use generic two button mice with Macs.
But it didn't count on my transcripts, because we were expected to have already known that stuff, not to have to take it in college.
I wasn't able to take algebra or trig in high school, er I was led to believe I couldn't. I should of taken algebra in 7th grade but I wasn't allowed to register for it, I was told I had to know how to do square roots before I could take it. It was only later that I found out you learn to do squart roots in algebra.
Back then I was a CE major, with minors in both math and physics.
You might say I was purpose driven back then and I saw her drinking as wasting her life. I'm not against drinking alcohol but I am for moderation and responsibility. Heck I believe hemp aka marijuana should be legalized, along with other street or illegal drugs. Government has no place dictating to individuals what they do or don't do with their own bodies as long as they don't harm another.
Long story short, I ended up having to take remedial math, which ended up earning me a world of hatred and loathing from my classmates, and made me a source of endless amusement to my advisor (who had told me to my face that my "sleep deprivation" story was hilariously implausible), due to my "impossible" 116 point class average...I was so far off the curve, that they had to adjust it anyway, and count my score as a data anomaly.
When I took an entrance exam when I started college I was told I had to take an intro to algebra class, which I got a "D" in. The following semester I took the intermediate algebra class selfpaced. I finished it in half the semester with an "A". I then used the rest of the semester to work on geometry and trig. By the end of the semester I had a "B" average with one test left to finish it. When we had registration for the following semester my guidance counselor said I shouldn't of been allowed to take the intermediate class because of the "D" however my scores in intermediate and trig made up for it. I asked her about getting the credit for trig and she said in order to get it I'd have to register and pay for it. Then I asked if I needed the credit to take calculus and she said no so I skipped it and registered for calc.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to be under the impression that the RIAA has any shame whatsoever. These people are reptiles! I mean, they insist on deposing 10 year-old girls face-to-face. They file tons of "John Doe" suits and go after people who don't even own computers. And you think they will shy away from this just because it is your music?
If I had the money I'd start a web radio station playing my own music just to get the RIAA to start a lawsuit against me. When they did I'd turn around and file a lawsuit against and sue for every dime they have while saying they're organized crime and use the RICO Act.
FalconIf they actually start enforcing this, I'm just going to start an internet radio station with my own music. Other artists should do the same. Just let them try to sue me for royalties on music that I wrote/recorded/produced.
If you do, you'll be waiting for quite a long time. This arrangement doesn't apply to situations where an explicit contract is present, such as in the case of creating a station with your own music. It only applies if you want to use someone else's music without going to them for permission
Ah but how will they know whether someone who does this either has a license or is the copyright owner? For instance what if I right my own songs and play them with my flute. I go and record my songs then start a net radio station without any mention of who owns the copyrights, how is the RIAA ever going to own whether the radio station has to pay them without contacting me first? Or what if they do contact me but I refuse to reply?
FalconThe lincense is compulsory for the copyright holders
I say this is BS! No where does the USA Constitution give the government the power to dictate that I use any compulsory licensing for any song I write.
FalconI'm certain that such a scheme could be legalized by the US Government (i.e. designate a single authority to handle some particular issue..)
While it may be legal, ie congress passed a law the president signed, no where in the USA Constitution does it give the government this power. And seeing has how the Constitution places limits on what the government can do this law is then unconstitutional.
FalconMagnatune.com
You may also want to checkout Links to Tens of Thousands of Legal Music Downloads.
FalconNot only yes but hell YES!!! the RIAA is pulling a scam
FalconMy point was to (apparently poorly) illustrate out the silliness of the AC parent's complaint that 'his vote didnt matter because someone else won the state.' You can make the same argument for any election if your candidate doesn't win, but that is not a valid reason not to vote.
K. What I tell many who say they don't vote is that if they don't vote then they have no reason to complain. Simply if they aren't voting then they should have no expectation of change other than reductions in their freedom or other things they don't like. Also more than likely if they don't vote then they never contact their elected officials, for which again they shoudn't expect anything. I first voted in 1980 and with two exeptions I've voted in every presidential election. The first was in 1996 when I was living in a rehab house after a bad accident, and though I don't recall who it was I had planned on voting for the candidate from the Libertarian Party. The second was in 2004, I had moved before the election but didn't change my registration before election day. Then I fully supported Michael Badnarik.
FalconThanks to "winner takes all" my vote was essentially thrown out and changed to Bush since that's what the majority of my country voted for.
Well then get active with your state legislature and lobby to have the law changed. Lobby to have it so each candidate gets the same percentage in the electoral college as they get in the popular vote. Even better would be to also campaign to have Amendment 12 - Choosing the President, Vice-Presiden repealed. Go back to how the president and vice president used to be elected. Everyone ran for president then the electoral college voted until there were only 2 candidates left, then the final vote chose who was president and who was vp.
FalconThere's only 2 parties in the US and both of them already have their flock of sheep that will vote for them.
Just because only two political parties get most of the press in the US does not mean there aren't others. There are a bunch of other parties. At one tyme I was depotized to register people to vote. We were given a list of parties a person could register for and there were 57 parties on the list. I myself have voted for candidates from 5 political parties as well as independent candidates.
FalconWho'd've thought that a member of the "party of Reagan" would preside over the largest budget increase in history?
Actually Reagan presided over a big budget increase and blooming deficit. It was only at the end of Clinton's terms that the deficit was almost eliminated.
FalconI'm not saying that the invasion of Afghanistan was a mistake, because I think it was fully warranted due to the Taliban's refusal to turn over Bin Laden.
I've pretty much agreed with you until I got to this. Something had to be done to the Taliban because they are Taliban not because they refused to hand over bin Laden, which they did not do. In fact the Taliban asked to see any evidence bin Laden had anything to do with 911, which is the correct thing to do. The thing is is Bush actually supported the Taliban at one tyme, he gave them more than $40,000,000 of US taxpayer money. By the logic above, either hand over a suspect without seeing any evidence or being invaded then Venezuela should be able to invade the USA, because the USA is shielding suspected Cuban terrorists Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carilles who are accused blowing up Cubana Flight 455.
Falcon1. After 9/11, Gore would have made some big talk in front of the U.N. about terrorist groups. But the U.N. would have done exactly what it did do: nothing. The terrorists would have seen us as unwilling to defend ourselves and would have made subsequent attacks on us.
So, you've got a direct connection to those terrorists? Are you one yourself?
2. The federal budget would be no more balanced than it is today
Under Clinton, by the end of his terms the budget deficit was almost paid off. Now under Bush Jr the USA has the biggest deficit it has ever had.
here would also likely be a socialized health care system, which would be modeled after Canada's. This would pretty much destroy any specialists in the U.S. as they would be paid a pittance and they'd move elsewhere.
Where would they go? Almost everyone has socialized medicine, including the US now.
4. There probably wouldn't be as many jails, period,
GOOD!!! As it is now the US has one of the highest people in prison per capita. And many of them are there for nonviolent drug offenses. Get rid of prohibition laws and prisons could emptied while still keeping people safe. As it is now violent criminals are let out early to make room for convicted of nonviolent drug offenses. Unfortunately neither Democrats now Republicans would do anything about this.
The only people who'd get jailed are corporate execs
WRONG!!! Many are in prison for nonviolent drug offenses.
5. The Supreme Court would have a couple of special interest group apologist
HAHA! Like it's not now. This Court has even allowed states' rights to be trampled by the feds, without any basis in the USA Constitution.
6. The various federal agencies would have been populated with a bunch of incompetent bleeding-heart political tools. And there would be many more of them.
Another HAHA! Federal agencies now are populated incommpetent neo conservative hacks. Not only that but they also silence the scientists in the agencies. And if you're a US attorney and don't go after enough Democrats you're fired.
"They are the same" to the extent that they all do stupid things. It's only the extent of the damage and the exact methods employed that differ. It's a frying pan or the oven kind of comparison; neither are very appealing.
Agreed again!!! That's why I for the candidate not the party. I've voted for candidates that were Democrat, Green, Independents, Reform, and Republican. And yes, there is a difference between "independent" and Independent", independents are not affiliiated with a party whereas there is an Independent party.
FalconThe Economist's research and analysis is the best in journalism today, but its editorial stance is most decidedly not liberal. It has little tolerance for many of the things liberalism holds dear, and if anything aligns more with centrist conservative philosophy than anything else[*]. That said, they do occasionally see the value of government intervention in things, but if that's how you define liberalism
Actually Liberals were those who wanted not big government but small government and believed in capitalism. Liberalism has it's roots in the Age of Reason and the Age of Enlightenment. It was carried over from France during the Enlightenment. As it's being used predominately today, in the USA, the meaning of "Liberal" has been twisted around so much many take it to mean socialism now.
FalconPut it this way, if you are arguing with the business and can say "The economist said" its going to be a million times better that wired/slashdot/any computing mag you can think of.
I like reading "The Economist" myself. However because I only read one maybe two compleat issues a month and it's a weekly I don't subscribe.
Falconthe officers in charge of them are more interested in maximizing financial return on the products they sell to the public, by changing the business model from a universal media purchase, to one of individual device rights.
The problem with this is it does not maximize profits. By requiring people to pay for every item they want to play music or movies on they are discouraging people from buying to begin with. I used to buy a lot of music however I rarely even listen to it now. Lately though I've been thinking of getting a new turntable and reel-to-reel tape deck but I wanted to see if I'd be able to buy new vinyl records, and reels of tape. Now I've found two stores that do sale and will order if they don't carry a record.
Actually at one of the stores I went through to see what new albums they had and right then and there I was ready to get a turntable because they had an album by Otis Reading which had his song "(Sittin' on) the Dock of the Bay" .
FalconWindows comes with a firewall, where have you been? And the anti-spyware and AV probably came with the computer.
Windows itself is now spyware. That is what WGA/WPA is, spyware. I don't like being treated like a criminal which is what MS does.
Every single mac I've owned have had at least one 'logicboard failure' among numerous other hardware issues... :/
I've bought 3 PCs running Windows brand new and one remanufactured. Two of the new PCs had both the hdd and the motherboard replaced in the first year. The remanufactured PC was a laptop and the LCD cracked within a few months. Even though I got an extended service plan with it when I called Gateway, who I got it from, I was told the plan did not cover that. So I asked how much it would cost to fix and the tech just said between $300 and $1200. Come on, the second number is 4 tymes the first. The other new PC I bought is a DEC Alpha running NT 4.0. It was the only PC I did not have hardware problems with, however because it's an Alpha I was not able to get much software installed on it.
On the other hand I've also bought 2 used Macs. The first was a Mac SE30 I got in 1992. It lasted until 2000, 8 year, when the floppy drive died. The second Mac's a Power Mac 7300/200 I got a few months later, in 2000. It lasted until early 2006 when it refused to bootup. Both used Macs I bought lasted longer than the brand new PCs I bought.
I send it again, it gets 'lost' for a month, they find it, reinstall OS X
Something like that happened to me with the first laptop PC I got. Within a few months the hdd died so they just overnight shipped a new hdd. However just few days before I had it a year the motherboard died. They had a box dropped off the following day to ship it in to have it repaired. Not hearing anything a week later I called to check on the status and was told it had just been dropped off at the apartments I lived in. I was calling from there and no one dropped anything off. So I went to the office to see if it may of been taken there, nope! So I called back and after going between tech support and the shipping company they decided to send me a new laptop. Another week passes by so I call back to see what's taking so long. They were out of one of the peices and had to wait for it to come in. Eventually, 4 weeks after sending mine in, I get the replacement PC.
FalconMost of the cost of getting a drug to market is in the research that went into developing the drug.... Perhaps you'd rather pay taxes to fund only government-sponsored research instead?
But it was government sponsored research that led to this drug! The NCI spent $183,000,000 to develop and test Taxol. It then "sold" the rights to all of the data needed to gain FDA approval exclusively to Bristol-Myers Squibb for a measly $43,000,000. The NCI spent $140,000,000 more than it got back.
FalconUninformed conspiracy nuts seem to think Pharm companies do all the medical research. The NIH (National Institutes of Health) will spend more than 28+ Billion on medical research this year (your tax dollars at work).
This drug, Taxol, is a good example of government spending on medical research. Taxol was developed and tested by the NCI, it cost $183,000,000. But then the NCI rurned around and pratically gave away the rights to all the test data to Bristol-Myers Squibb for a measly $43,000,000.
FalconYour joke points to a sad reality however, that it's only through patenting cures (ie having a monopoly over a cure) can pharmaceutical companies (free enterprises) get the investment capital to develop medicines. Cures are IP, traded and guarded.
In this case, Taxol, the company that markets and distributes the drug didn't spend a dime on developing the drug. The National Cancer Institute, NCI, spent $183,000,000 to develop and test Taxol. Then the NCI turned around and "sold", what a joke, the rights to all of the data needed to get approval for the drug by the FDA to Bristol-Myers Squibb for $43,000,000. The NCI spend $140,000,000 more to develop and test Taxol than it got for the rights. In 2000 MBS made almost $1,000,000,000 on Taxol. That's American taxpayers money at work.
FalconWith proprietary software, much of it in a legacy stage, keeping corporations using Windows PCs, it seems like Apple's business plan should be obvious:
It might make sense if Apple were to buy Parallels however Vista's licensing requires the more expensive versions if it is run in a VM.
FalconCouldent agree with you more, just today i bought 5 hp's and 5 imacs for the school i work for. the macs were about £700 each, the better speced HP's were £248 each. Needless to say the majority of our 500 boxs are pc's the macs are relegated to the specialist departments such as music.
And how much money was spent to make sure those HPs had AV, antispyware, and a firewall? Then how long will they last? I'm typing this on an HP Pavilion I bought new. In the first year both the hdd and the motherboard had to be replaced. Because it was under warranty it didn't cost me anything to repair but when the motherboard took a dive I was without my PC for a few days then when the hdd dove I lost another couple of days. And then I had to return it because the hdd they replaced the old one with was smaller, there's no way I was going to except a smaller drive. If I had needed the HP for work then I would of had to spend more money to get something I could use while not having this one, or I would of lost some income.
FalconSimply put, there aren't enough models and configurations
Agreed!!! This is one of the things that agravates me about the lines of Macs Apple puts out. Apple needs to release a line of Macs that sits between iMacs and Mac Pros, something that though not top of the line is expandable, a stripped version of the Mac Pro maybe.
Many business professionals use tablets
I wouldn't mind a tablet Mac. Even better would be one that's 21" and could run on battery for several hours.
I still, inexplicably, can't buy one with 2 mouse buttons.
You're right, the Macbook(Pro)s only have one button however myself I never did like using track pads. When I had a laptop I had a second mouse in the bag. And the Mighty Mouse is a four button mouse. Now the only laptops I've had were PCs running Windows however because MS has started to treats it's customers like criminals I'm switching. You can also use generic two button mice with Macs.
FalconBut it didn't count on my transcripts, because we were expected to have already known that stuff, not to have to take it in college.
I wasn't able to take algebra or trig in high school, er I was led to believe I couldn't. I should of taken algebra in 7th grade but I wasn't allowed to register for it, I was told I had to know how to do square roots before I could take it. It was only later that I found out you learn to do squart roots in algebra.
FalconBack then I was a CE major, with minors in both math and physics.
You might say I was purpose driven back then and I saw her drinking as wasting her life. I'm not against drinking alcohol but I am for moderation and responsibility. Heck I believe hemp aka marijuana should be legalized, along with other street or illegal drugs. Government has no place dictating to individuals what they do or don't do with their own bodies as long as they don't harm another.
FalconLong story short, I ended up having to take remedial math, which ended up earning me a world of hatred and loathing from my classmates, and made me a source of endless amusement to my advisor (who had told me to my face that my "sleep deprivation" story was hilariously implausible), due to my "impossible" 116 point class average...I was so far off the curve, that they had to adjust it anyway, and count my score as a data anomaly.
When I took an entrance exam when I started college I was told I had to take an intro to algebra class, which I got a "D" in. The following semester I took the intermediate algebra class selfpaced. I finished it in half the semester with an "A". I then used the rest of the semester to work on geometry and trig. By the end of the semester I had a "B" average with one test left to finish it. When we had registration for the following semester my guidance counselor said I shouldn't of been allowed to take the intermediate class because of the "D" however my scores in intermediate and trig made up for it. I asked her about getting the credit for trig and she said in order to get it I'd have to register and pay for it. Then I asked if I needed the credit to take calculus and she said no so I skipped it and registered for calc.
Falcon