If you call the applecare line be sure you have a credit card number handy. They won't talk to you unless your computer is less than 90 days old or if you purchased a support contract. For all other cases you must purchase support per incident.
BTW: with panther came out they refused to ship free updates (even for shipping "cost" of 20$) even to customers who purchased after the official announced date. It was the first time they did it but you can expect it to happen this time around as well.
" I'd like to see a GUI wrapper around./configure && make && make install -- a window with checkboxes for all the different --enable and --with options, a button to change what directories the program is installed to, and a "build" button at the bottom. Do all the configuring in a hidden embedded terminal widget, and have a "details" button........."
You just described autopackage! Everything you request is in there. Autopackage is just the next version of tarballs. Only easier to use and more compatible.
I have to agree with you on that one. XboX controllers pretty much suck the big one. Every time I pick it up I feel like I'm holding a fisher price remote control for a 5 dollar toy.
I typically don't play XboX but when I do I try to use the Logitech controllers for it.
Why is slashdot posting a lawsuit of this magnitude but failing to post anything about the world famous (and more relevant) Lexar Lawsuit worth over $460 million and will cause a massive disruption in the supply/demand equations currently applied to the significantly growing flash USB key and card memory market?
How hard would it be to fix these distributions? Would it require a lot of cooperation on the developers or would it be as simple as updating the path variable when someone installs autopackage? Or is it a different beast altogether?
Since/usr/local is reserved to packages not managed by the distribution, I would think it would be the correct place to install to. Would it be that hard to fix the path when autopackage is installed?
It sounds like the smaller broken distributions are what needs fixing.
"does this file go in/sbin,/usr/sbin,/usr/bin/,/usr/local/bin, or somewhere else?"
Well, if it is a tool root might need and might be needed in some sort of "recovery" console, then you put it in/sbin. If it is a tool that might be needed by users then you put it in/usr/bin. However, this all assumes these are distribtuion supplied files. 3rd party files not provided by your distributer's package management should be installed into/usr/local/bin. The distribution package managers stay out of/usr/local. It is reserved for the administrator to install programs into.
Config files is another story. But typically the program shouldn't install files into people's/home until that user uses that program (IMO) Otherwise keep the default files to be copied in/etc.
Where do the configuration settings go?/home/*/.config?/etc/profile?"
Re:Where does everything get autopackaged to?
on
AutoPackaging for Linux
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Because maybe your package is a small project not yet picked up by the distributions. Are you as the maintainer going to package it for debian, mandrake, redhat, and suse? Or would you rather convert your tarballs into autopackages?
I think if I were an upstart package, and nobody were packaging me for their distro, I would want to be converted to an autopackage.
I have been following autopackage for a while now.. It looks promising. This release will be the test to see if anybody will take it seriously (I hope so). Autopackage brings some really cool features to the table:
Frontends to different windowing and desktop systems.
Able to resolve dependancies even if you installed other software through the source, or with RPM or DEB
You will be able to download one package and install it on several different distributions.
Essentially, this will be as flexible as tarballs, only they will install easilly, and have clean upgrade paths and uninstall paths. With clean dependancy resolution. It sounds too good to be true, but you can only know it if you try it.
Here is the sourceforge link with some more info and downloading.
" This isn't all that much work, but even so I'd still rather it synced automatically."
Maybe you should lobby Apple to put in the 2 lines of code required to sync files up with a mass storage players as well. But that would be asking too much. Being that iTunes is crippled on this point (it isn't just a feature they haven't gotten around to yet).
No, its not much bigger. It's a little fatter but also shorter. It weighs about the same as the shuffle. It also comes with an armband in the case. And as far as brick and mortar stores: sandisk is sold in bestbuy, circuit city, compUSA, and almost every mom and pop shop. It's harder to find apple products in B&M. Sandisk is the largest seller of flash memory in the US. How can you say they aren't in brick and mortar. The creative labs works the same. The fact that you haven't found either sandisk or creative labs in a B&M store proves you haven't reasonably looked. Because sandisk and creative labs brands are more common at B&M than apple by a long shot.
"... and doesn't sync with iTunes." Most wouldn't consider this a problem. The nice thing about the sandisk player is it is a mass storage device. Therefore, there is no special software required (though it would be trivial for any software sync utility to implement a sync for it because of this feature). With the iPod, it is reversed. There is a proprietary sync protocol which only works with apple sanctioned software (ie: iTunes, and maybe one day they will license it to 3rd parties).
3rd party flash players don't sync with iTunes simply because Apple only supports the iPod proprietary protocol to sync. They don't support standard mass storage devices like all other software products out there do. It's silly. Claiming that this is a detriment to non-iPod players is just plain silly. If anything that is the iPod's biggest problem: its requirement to use apple's sync protocol.
"I said to STOP the FUD, not repeat the FUD. Sheesh."
Ease up on me, I didn't realize you were trolling...
"The only DRM the iPod supports is the iTMS DRM."
Thus, the only music download store iPod supports is the iTunes music store.
You can go on and on about how maybe BitTorrent or P2P is a download service.. Sure it is..
There are also independant artists who post downloads on their website. Sure, you can consider it a "music download store" but that is kindof bending the truth wouldn't you say?
Well, for $93/$139 you can get SanDisk
with screen and FM radio and voice recorder and with removeable
battery: 512MB [newegg.com], 1GB [newegg.com]
For
$115/$151 you can get Creative Labs with screen, FM radio, voice
recorder, and line input(note: comes in several diff colors)Muvo N200 512MB [newegg.com], Muvo N200 1GB [newegg.com]
One nice thing about these players is they don't tie you to a single source
of music downloads. With these players you can choose any music
download site you wish (other than iTMS). With the iPod, you
are forced to either buy CD's and rip them yourself or you must
download songs from iTMS which typically are a little more expensive
(for example, it would cost $10,000 to fill up a 20GB iPod) and more
restrictions.
There are several competing services to meet
individual's needs outside of iTMS so it is kindof silly to purchase a
player which isn't compatible with any of these highly competative
markets.Another nice thing with the sandisk and creative
labs, you can use any program you wish, or no program at all (even
windows and macOS shell, and unix "cp" will drag and drop files into
these players)
you obviously haven't tried NiMH AA and AAA batteries. They last twice as long as NiCd batteries, and don't have to be discharged. They have no memory effect.
They last about as long as lithium batteries (though their only disadvantage is that they slowly discharge when not in use, but this is not so bad because it is slow)
Consider that NiMH batteries are barely more expensive then alkalines, and significantly cheaper than Lithium Ion batteries, and its a winning combination. (Did I mention they have GREAT battery life for digital music players and digital cameras?)
" Microsoft is just trying to spread the misinformation by making consumers think that iPod only works with iTunes, which is untrue."
Excuse me? This is 100% true. iTMS is the only compatible downloading service for iPod. iTunes (the software) is also the only supported software to load songs onto the iPod (sure, there are 3rd parties who try to keep up by reverse engineering the protocols, etc.. but it is an uphill battle)
How can you make the claims you posted with a straight face?
"There is nothing preventing another music download service to open up tomorrow and offer MP3's or AAC's for sale (some already do), that will be compatible with the iPod."
Umm, where have you been? Apple already shut out Real for trying this. They also refuse to license their version of DRM to anyone. They have and will always have 100% control over the iPod's downloading service. End of story.
My guess is he is talking about online music store formats... The iPod Shuffle only supports apple's format for downloadable music.
All the other players all over the world support downloads from every other download service in existance..
So yea, the iPod plays mp3's. But so does every other player. That problem isn't in the home brew mp3 compatibility. The problem is that the only download service iPod supports is apple's service. That is vendor lock in. And that is probably what the parent is trying to point out.
Ever heard of NiMH AAA batteries? (they are super cheap and last a LONG time)
I hate to say it to you, but it obviously takes less resources to produce a blank CD-R than it does to produce the same sized flash card. If it didn't then we would have flash cards flooding the market right now at cheaper prices. We don't.
You can talk all day about how using a CDR based player is ruining the environment. But really are you serious? You picture him throwing his CD-R's away all the time for no reason? I don't. I use a in dash CD based mp3 unit. I almost NEVER throw away a CDR. Only if it is too scratched to use.
You act like the only way to conserve the environment is to buy products from apple. The silly thing is that there are tons of flash and HD based players all over the market. Trash talking to this guy who happens to be using a competitor to the iPod about how he is "wasting" the environment is just plain silly and hypocritical.
Well, for $93/$139 you can get a better name brand SanDisk with screen and FM radio and voice recorder and with removeable battery: 512MB , 1GB
For $115/$151 you can get Creative Labs with screen, FM radio, voice recorder, and line input(note: comes in several diff colors)Muvo N200 512MB, Muvo N200 1GB
One nice thing about these players is they don't tie you to a single source of music downloads. With these players you can choose any music download site you wish (other than iTMS). With the iPod shuffle, you are forced to either buy CD's and rip them yourself or you must download songs from iTMS which typically are a little more expensive (for example, it would cost $10,000 to fill up a 20GB iPod) and more restrictions.
There are several competing services to meet individual's needs outside of iTMS so it is kindof silly to purchase a player which isn't compatible with any of these highly competative markets.
On top of it all, the iPod forces you to use iTunes the program to load up songs onto the player. With the sandisk and creative labs, you can use any program you wish, or no program at all (even windows and macOS shell, and unix "cp" will drag and drop files into these players)
So while you might try to claim that no cheaper or better players exist, it is a futile attempt. Because as I have shown better name brands, Better warranties, Easier to use, and more features, all at the same or cheaper price, exist everywhere.
I know several people in the workplace who must make appointments several months in advance just to see their doctor. Sure, the ER is reasonably fast (provided ou aren't in a large city) but then you have to pay tons of out of pocket expenses. And what if it isn't an emergency but it can't wait 2 months? Then your SOL.
I'm sure the same stories happen all over the world. But you can't justify your beliefs by saying that in the US it is more streamlined. It isn't.
Actually you do. Nobody has a right to scan files in your computer without a warrant or unless you offer it up. If he had a open network share that is one thing, they could scan it from the network. But coming into his room and scanning his hard drive is a big NO NO without a warrant or permission.
He also has no reason to give up his rights to privacy. You don't let the cops in to search your house and thumb print you when you did nothing illegal. So why would it be any different if you get caught using your PC legally?
To the parent: whatever you do. DO NOT give up your rights to privacy to get your net connection back. No matter if you did nothing illegal. If you give up your privacy, then you justify it to the administration that it is ok for them to do the same thing to other students.
Every iPod commercial out there says "iPod + iTunes"
they aren't just ipod commercials. They are iTunes commercials... Some might argue that they would split the cost of that commercial up and put half into the cost of iTMS and the other half into the cost of iPod but you can't really say. At that point you are splitting hairs because apple is one company and it is rare for them to be reporting exact costs for each component of their business. And since they don't you can only analyse their business model and try to come up with an answer.
My analysis just points to the fact that they resell high margin songs with similar but lower costs than a normal online retailer and claim they are unprofitable or barely profitable. The numbers just don't add up.
Slashdot Mirror
If you call the applecare line be sure you have a credit card number handy. They won't talk to you unless your computer is less than 90 days old or if you purchased a support contract. For all other cases you must purchase support per incident.
BTW: with panther came out they refused to ship free updates (even for shipping "cost" of 20$) even to customers who purchased after the official announced date. It was the first time they did it but you can expect it to happen this time around as well.
They don't even make the xbox. it is contracted out to a factory in china owned by some taiwan motherboard manufacturer. even the plastic case
" I'd like to see a GUI wrapper around ./configure && make && make install -- a window with checkboxes for all the different --enable and --with options, a button to change what directories the program is installed to, and a "build" button at the bottom. Do all the configuring in a hidden embedded terminal widget, and have a "details" button ... ... ..."
You just described autopackage! Everything you request is in there. Autopackage is just the next version of tarballs. Only easier to use and more compatible.
I have to agree with you on that one. XboX controllers pretty much suck the big one. Every time I pick it up I feel like I'm holding a fisher price remote control for a 5 dollar toy.
I typically don't play XboX but when I do I try to use the Logitech controllers for it.
Small potatoes.
Why is slashdot posting a lawsuit of this magnitude but failing to post anything about the world famous (and more relevant) Lexar Lawsuit worth over $460 million and will cause a massive disruption in the supply/demand equations currently applied to the significantly growing flash USB key and card memory market?
Oh bummer. That sux... :(
How hard would it be to fix these distributions? Would it require a lot of cooperation on the developers or would it be as simple as updating the path variable when someone installs autopackage? Or is it a different beast altogether?
Since /usr/local is reserved to packages not managed by the distribution, I would think it would be the correct place to install to. Would it be that hard to fix the path when autopackage is installed?
It sounds like the smaller broken distributions are what needs fixing.
"does this file go in /sbin, /usr/sbin, /usr/bin/, /usr/local/bin, or somewhere else?"
/sbin. If it is a tool that might be needed by users then you put it in /usr/bin. However, this all assumes these are distribtuion supplied files. 3rd party files not provided by your distributer's package management should be installed into /usr/local/bin. The distribution package managers stay out of /usr/local. It is reserved for the administrator to install programs into.
/home until that user uses that program (IMO) Otherwise keep the default files to be copied in /etc.
/home/*/.config? /etc/profile?"
Well, if it is a tool root might need and might be needed in some sort of "recovery" console, then you put it in
Config files is another story. But typically the program shouldn't install files into people's
Where do the configuration settings go?
Because maybe your package is a small project not yet picked up by the distributions. Are you as the maintainer going to package it for debian, mandrake, redhat, and suse? Or would you rather convert your tarballs into autopackages?
I think if I were an upstart package, and nobody were packaging me for their distro, I would want to be converted to an autopackage.
- Frontends to different windowing and desktop systems.
- Able to resolve dependancies even if you installed other software through the source, or with RPM or DEB
- You will be able to download one package and install it on several different distributions.
Essentially, this will be as flexible as tarballs, only they will install easilly, and have clean upgrade paths and uninstall paths. With clean dependancy resolution. It sounds too good to be true, but you can only know it if you try it.Here is the sourceforge link with some more info and downloading.
" This isn't all that much work, but even so I'd still rather it synced automatically."
Maybe you should lobby Apple to put in the 2 lines of code required to sync files up with a mass storage players as well. But that would be asking too much. Being that iTunes is crippled on this point (it isn't just a feature they haven't gotten around to yet).
"...but it's also much bigger..."
No, its not much bigger. It's a little fatter but also shorter. It weighs about the same as the shuffle. It also comes with an armband in the case. And as far as brick and mortar stores: sandisk is sold in bestbuy, circuit city, compUSA, and almost every mom and pop shop. It's harder to find apple products in B&M. Sandisk is the largest seller of flash memory in the US. How can you say they aren't in brick and mortar. The creative labs works the same. The fact that you haven't found either sandisk or creative labs in a B&M store proves you haven't reasonably looked. Because sandisk and creative labs brands are more common at B&M than apple by a long shot.
"... and doesn't sync with iTunes."
Most wouldn't consider this a problem. The nice thing about the sandisk player is it is a mass storage device. Therefore, there is no special software required (though it would be trivial for any software sync utility to implement a sync for it because of this feature). With the iPod, it is reversed. There is a proprietary sync protocol which only works with apple sanctioned software (ie: iTunes, and maybe one day they will license it to 3rd parties).
3rd party flash players don't sync with iTunes simply because Apple only supports the iPod proprietary protocol to sync. They don't support standard mass storage devices like all other software products out there do. It's silly. Claiming that this is a detriment to non-iPod players is just plain silly. If anything that is the iPod's biggest problem: its requirement to use apple's sync protocol.
"I said to STOP the FUD, not repeat the FUD. Sheesh."
Ease up on me, I didn't realize you were trolling...
"The only DRM the iPod supports is the iTMS DRM."
Thus, the only music download store iPod supports is the iTunes music store.
You can go on and on about how maybe BitTorrent or P2P is a download service.. Sure it is..
There are also independant artists who post downloads on their website. Sure, you can consider it a "music download store" but that is kindof bending the truth wouldn't you say?
Well, for $93/$139 you can get SanDisk with screen and FM radio and voice recorder and with removeable battery: 512MB [newegg.com], 1GB [newegg.com]
For $115/$151 you can get Creative Labs with screen, FM radio, voice recorder, and line input(note: comes in several diff colors)Muvo N200 512MB [newegg.com], Muvo N200 1GB [newegg.com]
One nice thing about these players is they don't tie you to a single source of music downloads. With these players you can choose any music download site you wish (other than iTMS). With the iPod, you are forced to either buy CD's and rip them yourself or you must download songs from iTMS which typically are a little more expensive (for example, it would cost $10,000 to fill up a 20GB iPod) and more restrictions.
There are several competing services to meet individual's needs outside of iTMS so it is kindof silly to purchase a player which isn't compatible with any of these highly competative markets.Another nice thing with the sandisk and creative labs, you can use any program you wish, or no program at all (even windows and macOS shell, and unix "cp" will drag and drop files into these players)
you obviously haven't tried NiMH AA and AAA batteries. They last twice as long as NiCd batteries, and don't have to be discharged. They have no memory effect.
They last about as long as lithium batteries (though their only disadvantage is that they slowly discharge when not in use, but this is not so bad because it is slow)
Consider that NiMH batteries are barely more expensive then alkalines, and significantly cheaper than Lithium Ion batteries, and its a winning combination. (Did I mention they have GREAT battery life for digital music players and digital cameras?)
" Microsoft is just trying to spread the misinformation by making consumers think that iPod only works with iTunes, which is untrue."
Excuse me? This is 100% true. iTMS is the only compatible downloading service for iPod. iTunes (the software) is also the only supported software to load songs onto the iPod (sure, there are 3rd parties who try to keep up by reverse engineering the protocols, etc.. but it is an uphill battle)
How can you make the claims you posted with a straight face?
"There is nothing preventing another music download service to open up tomorrow and offer MP3's or AAC's for sale (some already do), that will be compatible with the iPod."
Umm, where have you been? Apple already shut out Real for trying this. They also refuse to license their version of DRM to anyone. They have and will always have 100% control over the iPod's downloading service. End of story.
My guess is he is talking about online music store formats... The iPod Shuffle only supports apple's format for downloadable music.
All the other players all over the world support downloads from every other download service in existance..
So yea, the iPod plays mp3's. But so does every other player. That problem isn't in the home brew mp3 compatibility. The problem is that the only download service iPod supports is apple's service. That is vendor lock in. And that is probably what the parent is trying to point out.
Ever heard of CD-RW
Ever heard of NiMH AAA batteries? (they are super cheap and last a LONG time)
I hate to say it to you, but it obviously takes less resources to produce a blank CD-R than it does to produce the same sized flash card. If it didn't then we would have flash cards flooding the market right now at cheaper prices. We don't.
You can talk all day about how using a CDR based player is ruining the environment. But really are you serious? You picture him throwing his CD-R's away all the time for no reason? I don't. I use a in dash CD based mp3 unit. I almost NEVER throw away a CDR. Only if it is too scratched to use.
You act like the only way to conserve the environment is to buy products from apple. The silly thing is that there are tons of flash and HD based players all over the market. Trash talking to this guy who happens to be using a competitor to the iPod about how he is "wasting" the environment is just plain silly and hypocritical.
What can you expect from an iPod fanboy though...
Well, for $93/$139 you can get a better name brand SanDisk with screen and FM radio and voice recorder and with removeable battery: 512MB , 1GB
For $115/$151 you can get Creative Labs with screen, FM radio, voice recorder, and line input(note: comes in several diff colors)Muvo N200 512MB, Muvo N200 1GB
One nice thing about these players is they don't tie you to a single source of music downloads. With these players you can choose any music download site you wish (other than iTMS). With the iPod shuffle, you are forced to either buy CD's and rip them yourself or you must download songs from iTMS which typically are a little more expensive (for example, it would cost $10,000 to fill up a 20GB iPod) and more restrictions.
There are several competing services to meet individual's needs outside of iTMS so it is kindof silly to purchase a player which isn't compatible with any of these highly competative markets.
On top of it all, the iPod forces you to use iTunes the program to load up songs onto the player. With the sandisk and creative labs, you can use any program you wish, or no program at all (even windows and macOS shell, and unix "cp" will drag and drop files into these players)
So while you might try to claim that no cheaper or better players exist, it is a futile attempt. Because as I have shown better name brands, Better warranties, Easier to use, and more features, all at the same or cheaper price, exist everywhere.
You can?
I know several people in the workplace who must make appointments several months in advance just to see their doctor. Sure, the ER is reasonably fast (provided ou aren't in a large city) but then you have to pay tons of out of pocket expenses. And what if it isn't an emergency but it can't wait 2 months? Then your SOL.
I'm sure the same stories happen all over the world. But you can't justify your beliefs by saying that in the US it is more streamlined. It isn't.
No worries.. Re-reading it I can see how it could be interpreted either way.. Thanks for the reply!
Actually you do. Nobody has a right to scan files in your computer without a warrant or unless you offer it up. If he had a open network share that is one thing, they could scan it from the network. But coming into his room and scanning his hard drive is a big NO NO without a warrant or permission.
He also has no reason to give up his rights to privacy. You don't let the cops in to search your house and thumb print you when you did nothing illegal. So why would it be any different if you get caught using your PC legally?
To the parent: whatever you do. DO NOT give up your rights to privacy to get your net connection back. No matter if you did nothing illegal. If you give up your privacy, then you justify it to the administration that it is ok for them to do the same thing to other students.
Every iPod commercial out there says "iPod + iTunes"
they aren't just ipod commercials. They are iTunes commercials... Some might argue that they would split the cost of that commercial up and put half into the cost of iTMS and the other half into the cost of iPod but you can't really say. At that point you are splitting hairs because apple is one company and it is rare for them to be reporting exact costs for each component of their business. And since they don't you can only analyse their business model and try to come up with an answer.
My analysis just points to the fact that they resell high margin songs with similar but lower costs than a normal online retailer and claim they are unprofitable or barely profitable. The numbers just don't add up.