Good has been bought by Motorola, so I doubt they will do the job.
If Apple wants to get enterprise users, they could - get in bed with RIM via BBConnect - get in bed with Microsoft, via Exchange push
But I suspect Apple doesn't care right now. The consumer space is the big battleground. If they start to make major inroads in the consumer space, some high-powered CEOs will push for enterprise support and someone will step up to the plate.
And things may be "good enough". People will be using this device to read email, surf the web and check out stock quotes and movie listings. For that, pull email might be good enough.
On Windows, pressing the maximize button, maximizes the window so that it takes up the entire screen (well, except for the task bar as you mention).
On Macintosh, there is a button called zoom. It resizes the window to show all the contents of the window. In some cases, this is (considerably) smaller than the entire screen.
The problem is that Windows Users (and apparently Linux Users) expect the zoom button (on the Mac) to take up the entire screen, so that it hides all other open windows. it doesn't do that.
Conversely, when Mac users use Windows, the maximize button really isn't what they want. They want to make the window bigger, but the don't want to obscure other windows, because they still want to see and use content from the other windows.
Both implementations have their uses. The confusion lies when you try and work in multiple environments and expect the same functionality.
You are assigned a random and unique number. How do you verify that the number is actually "random". Information about you could be embedded in the number.
anyone can verify that their vote was cast accurately If I was strong-armed to vote for someone, they can now check that I voted who I said I voted for. As it is now, I can vote for whom I please, and they can't tell if I voted they way they wanted me to.
should be a paper printout -one for the voter, and one for storage. Now it's now really easy for someone to find out who you voted for.
regards to authorizing a computer to play purchased music?
When you purchase music, it takes your key, and encodes the file with that key. Apparently this encoding is done on your computer.
some point iTunes will want to phone home to double-check that the computer in question is still authorized to play those tracks,
Not required. Your music file has been encoded with your key. If you don't have a key, you can't play it. The key is on your computer - both in the music file, and in your local iTunes data store. If you want to play that file on another computer, you enter your key (or rather your "password") - which I guess would fetch the appropriate key from the iTunes Music store.
you haven't reached any burning limits
Again, the iTunes software can do this locally. Its datastore keeps tracks of what burns you have done.
Converting from protected 128-bit AAC -> CD is lossless
Then it is up to you what you do from there. If you rip the CD to AIFF, or ALE then the conversion is lossless. If you elect to convert to 64-bit MP3, it is lossy. Mind you, I'd like to think that the encoder included with iTunes is good enough that if you convert it to, say 256-bit AAC the degradation would not be noticeable -- even to you. (has anyone done tests?)
Is it illegal? It certainly isn't against the licensing terms of the file your received. It is the recommended method for playing your files on music players other than iPods. It should fall under the category of fair use. I'd be very, very surprised if it was illegal.
Waste of CD? You bet. Waste of time? Also true. For some segment of the population, they're willing to waste a CD and spend the extra time to have an unencumbered copy of their music.
Apple has exactly the same base as Dell -- the computer buying public. They have just chosen to embrace a limited strategy of high prices and proprietary hardware.
Just a nitpick: Doesn't Dell (and in fact all computer manufacturers (by definition)) make proprietary hardware?
And when you say "high prices", don't you really mean "limited selection". Since the selection they have is price-competitive (i.e. within 10% of the equivalent Dell product).
To buy a Mac, you have to drink the Koolaid first and become one of "them"
An interesting observation. I wonder how they break out of that mold. I guess Linux has the same problem.
I am assuming that they wouldn't have published a number if they didn't have something to back it up. And it seems to match what we've been hearing on the Internet. The ipodnanosucks.com website only found 3 or 4 other people with cracked screens.
But I guess the skepticism is largely based on "how could they get such a precise figure"? I don't pretend to understand manufacturing procedures, but I'll take a stab at it.
1) Perhaps all the cracked screens were documented to be from the same manufacturing run? 2) Perhaps the internal Quality Control testing procedures found a certain percentage of defective screens. 3) Perhaps it is based on reported cases in the field. But I would bet that anyone with a cracked screen would report it immediately. I can't imagine that if 1000 people had the problem only 100 people would report it. But now I'm pulling numbers out of a hat.
And the manufacturing angle holds weight to me, because I don't see what other cause it could be. The screens are cracked in a very specific way. And they crack with no pressure applied to them. Feels like a bad run of iPods -- not some inherent flaw.
I could move to a country where libel isn't illegal (or perhaps considerably more lax). I could set up a website there, and slander people, government and organizations all I want. It wouldn't matter that 90% of my readers are in Canada or the United States, I'd be free to publish what I want.
I'm probably reading this wrong, but when iTunes and Napster say I can copy the music I rent (as far as I can tell it's more like renting than buying) up to 10 times, I think, "Great. So I have to buy my music all over again every 5 years?" I typically reformat my PC once a year, copying all of my music to a file server, then back. Either the flunked the grammar section while they partied their way through business school or it's a bum rap. Given that we're talking about the music industry, my instinct is to assume the latter.
It's not as simple as that. (It never is)
For iTunes Music Store purchases, you can burn a "playlist" of music up to seven times. A playlist is an ordered set of songs. In this case "burn" means burrning onto a CD in standard CD format. You can do whatever you want with that CD including re-rip it (standard lossless/lossy rules apply here)
For iTunes Music store purchases you can play/share/stream music on up to five computers. That's five computers at once. So if you replace an existing computer you can deauthorize that computer and authorize a new computer.
You can copy the actual music files as often as you want - but the authorized computer rules outlined above apply. So in your scenario where you reformat your PC once a year, you'd be fine. Tar up your music files, reformat your drive, then un-tar the music files again.
EBay's advantages: cheaper, no DRM, physical media
iTunes advantages: instant gratification, a la carte shopping
And don't dismiss those advantages. I buy the song, I listen to the song. No waiting for the CD to arrive. And suppose I only like 3 songs on an album - then the cost difference is negligible.
And I expect there's an addictive quality to iTunes. You listen to a song, you click, its yours. Then you see the songs other people liked, and you listen to them, click: you've bought another. Then you click on related artists, hear a couple of those songs, "click", you've bought another. Your 99 cent impulse buy has just turned into $20 in purchases.
And nothing says you only have to buy music from one source.
If the SSN is anything like a SIN, then I think you do need to provide it.
I have to give my SIN out for anything that pays me money. My employer gives me paychecks, the bank pays me interest and the affiliate program gives me commission cheques. That institution is responsible for telling Revenue Canada I've made money -- and Revenue Canada doesn't want my name, it needs my SIN as well.
So the institution is required by law to have my SIN. There are supposed to be severe restrictions on how they use that number though.
Slashdot Mirror
Good has been bought by Motorola, so I doubt they will do the job.
If Apple wants to get enterprise users, they could
- get in bed with RIM via BBConnect
- get in bed with Microsoft, via Exchange push
But I suspect Apple doesn't care right now. The consumer space is the big battleground. If they start to make major inroads in the consumer space, some high-powered CEOs will push for enterprise support and someone will step up to the plate.
And things may be "good enough". People will be using this device to read email, surf the web and check out stock quotes and movie listings. For that, pull email might be good enough.
The parent is referring to the "maximize" button.
On Windows, pressing the maximize button, maximizes the window so that it takes up the entire screen (well, except for the task bar as you mention).
On Macintosh, there is a button called zoom. It resizes the window to show all the contents of the window. In some cases, this is (considerably) smaller than the entire screen.
The problem is that Windows Users (and apparently Linux Users) expect the zoom button (on the Mac) to take up the entire screen, so that it hides all other open windows. it doesn't do that.
Conversely, when Mac users use Windows, the maximize button really isn't what they want. They want to make the window bigger, but the don't want to obscure other windows, because they still want to see and use content from the other windows.
Both implementations have their uses. The confusion lies when you try and work in multiple environments and expect the same functionality.
Apparently I'm dumb. I thought the article was about allowing other online music Stores to create FairPlay DRM'd files that could play on iPods.
I am quite surprised that so few other MP3 players support it. Some Sony-Ericcson phones do, as do Nokia, Motorola, Siemens and the Sony PSP.
Maybe the reason why Creative, iriver, Rio and others don't support AAC is because they are too busy supporting proprietary formats like WMA.
Converting from protected 128-bit AAC -> CD is lossless
Then it is up to you what you do from there. If you rip the CD to AIFF, or ALE then the conversion is lossless. If you elect to convert to 64-bit MP3, it is lossy. Mind you, I'd like to think that the encoder included with iTunes is good enough that if you convert it to, say 256-bit AAC the degradation would not be noticeable -- even to you. (has anyone done tests?)
Is it illegal? It certainly isn't against the licensing terms of the file your received. It is the recommended method for playing your files on music players other than iPods. It should fall under the category of fair use. I'd be very, very surprised if it was illegal.
Waste of CD? You bet. Waste of time? Also true. For some segment of the population, they're willing to waste a CD and spend the extra time to have an unencumbered copy of their music.
They could be running IBM Lotus Domino or Novell Groupwise.
I am assuming that they wouldn't have published a number if they didn't have something to back it up. And it seems to match what we've been hearing on the Internet. The ipodnanosucks.com website only found 3 or 4 other people with cracked screens.
But I guess the skepticism is largely based on "how could they get such a precise figure"? I don't pretend to understand manufacturing procedures, but I'll take a stab at it.
1) Perhaps all the cracked screens were documented to be from the same manufacturing run?
2) Perhaps the internal Quality Control testing procedures found a certain percentage of defective screens.
3) Perhaps it is based on reported cases in the field. But I would bet that anyone with a cracked screen would report it immediately. I can't imagine that if 1000 people had the problem only 100 people would report it. But now I'm pulling numbers out of a hat.
And the manufacturing angle holds weight to me, because I don't see what other cause it could be. The screens are cracked in a very specific way. And they crack with no pressure applied to them. Feels like a bad run of iPods -- not some inherent flaw.
I doubt you went to an Apple Retail store in 1998. The first store was opened in Virginia in 2001.
/
So we're a bit behind the times in Canada, but not that badly! The first store in Europe was opened in November 2004.
SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Store_(retail)
Ooops. Remove the trailing slash!
http://www.blackberry.com/developers/index.shtml
Nope. BlackBerry development environment is free:
http://www.blackberry.com/developers/index.shtml/
And it's java, so it'll run MIDlets too.
Suppose the ruling is thrown out?
I could move to a country where libel isn't illegal (or perhaps considerably more lax). I could set up a website there, and slander people, government and organizations all I want. It wouldn't matter that 90% of my readers are in Canada or the United States, I'd be free to publish what I want.
For iTunes Music Store purchases, you can burn a "playlist" of music up to seven times. A playlist is an ordered set of songs. In this case "burn" means burrning onto a CD in standard CD format. You can do whatever you want with that CD including re-rip it (standard lossless/lossy rules apply here)
For iTunes Music store purchases you can play/share/stream music on up to five computers. That's five computers at once. So if you replace an existing computer you can deauthorize that computer and authorize a new computer.
You can copy the actual music files as often as you want - but the authorized computer rules outlined above apply. So in your scenario where you reformat your PC once a year, you'd be fine. Tar up your music files, reformat your drive, then un-tar the music files again.
iTunes advantages: instant gratification, a la carte shopping
And don't dismiss those advantages. I buy the song, I listen to the song. No waiting for the CD to arrive. And suppose I only like 3 songs on an album - then the cost difference is negligible.
And I expect there's an addictive quality to iTunes. You listen to a song, you click, its yours. Then you see the songs other people liked, and you listen to them, click: you've bought another. Then you click on related artists, hear a couple of those songs, "click", you've bought another. Your 99 cent impulse buy has just turned into $20 in purchases.
And nothing says you only have to buy music from one source.
If the SSN is anything like a SIN, then I think you do need to provide it.
I have to give my SIN out for anything that pays me money. My employer gives me paychecks, the bank pays me interest and the affiliate program gives me commission cheques. That institution is responsible for telling Revenue Canada I've made money -- and Revenue Canada doesn't want my name, it needs my SIN as well.
So the institution is required by law to have my SIN. There are supposed to be severe restrictions on how they use that number though.
Instructions are available here. Sometimes there are PDFs, sometimes HTML files sometimes quicktime movies.
How 'bout this
You mean like this