France is quite possibly in a worse position than Britian was in, in the 70's. Labour laws in France have practicall sucked the life out of the economy. I'm all for workers rights, but not at the expense of there being no jobs to work in. Sounds like an appropriate time for a French punk movement. Anarchy à le RF!
In almost any country other than the USA, almost everyone think of democrats as a right party. Republicans are considered ultra-right.
I think many countries in Asia and Africa would disagree with that statement. Japan's Liberal Democratic Party is the most right-wing and conservative party in Japan. I snicker every time I hear/read the name of this party.
Oh, go see 'Pirates of Silicon Valley'. You'll enjoy it. I enjoyed it, but if you see this entertaining made-for-TV movie, understand that this movie gets many facts wrong. I guess the real stories weren't interesting enough for prime time television. If you know the real stories, this movie's inaccuracies might be annoying enough to ruin your viewing experience.
For Slashdot readers, I think a far more fascinating (and accurate) video is Robert X. Cringely's PBS documentary Triumph of the Nerds: The Rise of Accidental Empires. I think this documentary is where Apple fanboys got their often-quoted "M$ has no taste" line (from that black turtleneck guy). The transcript is available at PBS's site.
Last time I checked, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves was in Grimm's Fairy Tales, a compilation of European folk stories that existed long before Walt Disney or copyright/trademark laws. As the dad of three, it bugs me more than a little when Disney Inc attempts to own childhood fantasy and retroactively copyright/trademark/turn-into-disney-IP all kinds of things that were part of the childhood psyche-scape long before Uncle Walt was even born.
I think the problem is the fact that they took disneyland/disneyworld's magical kingdom and copied the characters pretty close to verbatim. The story may be public domain, but artistic renderings are different. Asians are just getting back at Disney for ripping off Kimba the White Lion.
I want to get the Linux certified hardware, but I also want OEM pricing on my Vista license. I don't want to have to go buy Vi$ta Ultimate retail.
So here is the dilemma: - I want the linux hardware and they will probably only offer it with Linux OS. But I want the Vista OS too at OEM pricing. If I buy the Vista box, that is a lost sale for Linux. If I buy the Linux box, I have to go spend extra money for Vista.
I'm not an expert on Microsoft's OEM license rules, but I'm pretty darned sure you can legally purchase an OEM version of Vista Ultimate and legally install it on a Dell-built Linux PC. You don't need to install it on a home-built PC to qualify for OEM pricing.
I'm assuming you already know that you can buy OEM versions of Vista Ultimate for $199 at places like Newegg.com. What you might not know is how MS defines a "system builder." According to an Arstechnica.com article titled "Buying OEM versions of Windows Vista: the facts":
Can I buy OEM?
Yes, you can. Microsoft licenses OEM software to "system builders," which the license defines as "an original equipment manufacturer, or an assembler, reassembler, or installer of software on computer systems" (emphasis added). You can install software on computers, right?
When asked, Microsoft says that OEM software is not intended to be installed by end users. Off the record, Microsoft spokespeople have told me that the big concern in Redmond is for Joe Newbie. They don't want inexperienced users buying OEM software, but the fact of the matter is that anyone can buy OEM versions of Windows.
Truth be told, Microsoft is not opposed to the practice. Rather, the company says that people who purchase OEM software will simply be expected to abide by the terms of the licensing agreements.
If you are #1 in your field with a monopoly, you should not be talking about (read advertising) your small competitors. I know nobody here reads TFA, but Ballmer was responding to yet another question about Apple, the iPhone, and the iPod. The interviewer brought them up, not Ballmer. From TFA:
Q: People get passionate when Apple comes out with something new the iPhone; of course, the iPod. Is that something that you'd want them to feel about Microsoft?
Ballmer's silly rambling followed that question. At least he "kind of" answered the question. I don't remember Microsoft ever mentioning Apple or any other small competitor during keynotes and shareholder meetings. Those are the kind of venues where Steve Jobs and Scott McNealy regularly talk trash about MS.
See my previous comment in this thread about the hinges breaking on my $1500 Dell laptop. It is a D600, which is not far off from a D620 The Dell Latitude D600 was released over four years ago, and I assume (I could be wrong) that the quality of the current D620's (released one year ago) enclosure is better. The quality of current MacBooks shouldn't be compared to the shoddy quality of the MacBooks when they were first released with overheating, fading paint, whining fans, etc (which have all been supposedly fixed). That's why I said anectodal comparisons vary.
That said, my comment was a bit off-topic. I was responding to a comment that was all about enclosures, but I ranted on my pet peeve of comparing home PCs to pro PCs. Mod me down, folks.
Around here, they have Dell kiosks in the mall to showcase their products. Sort of like the sony stores. You can go an touch and see a Dell, and then order it up and it gets delivered to your door. Information on the kiosks are a little difficult to find on Dell's web site, but Dell calls them Dell Direct Stores. I think they sound great (I don't mind waiting for delivery), but my problem with the kiosks is that there's not enough of them. It's much, much easier to "touch and see" an HP (they're everywhere). Where I live, it's easier to drive to an Apple Store than find a Dell Direct Store (I guess this varies with location).
Having never gotten around to visiting a Dell kiosk, do they have their business/pro models available for "touching and seeing"? I really have no interest in their Dimension and Inspiron lines, but those models are the only ones pictured on Dell's Direct Store web page.
Dell laptops are oftentimes nice machines, their enclosures are hideous, clunky pieces of plastic that can't hold a candle to Thinkpads or Macbooks. I think it's important to differentiate among the cheap Dell Inspiron home-oriented laptops, the more reliable Dell Latitude business/pro laptops, and the high-end Dell Precision mobile workstations. The Inspiron line also differs in quality/looks from their "basic computing" models to their "enthusiast" models (their enclosures are much different).
Thinkpads aren't in the same class as the cheaper Lenovo 3000 series notebooks. The MacBook Pro is not in the same class as the MacBook (non-Pro). A MacBook (non-Pro) can't hold a candle to a Dell Latitude D620. That's an unfair comparison, but your comment seems to say that all Dell laptops are crap.
Anectodal comparisons vary. Comparing a three-year-old Inspiron to a brand-new MacBook (instead of an iBook) will make Dell look bad.
1) ICT (Image Constraint Token) will make the movie play at half resolution
2) Hollywood has agreed to not use ICT before 2012 at earliest if at all
3) ICT is per disc, so none of your current discs will be degraded in the future The GP might have had FUDdy intentions, but the GP was referring to HDCP and DVI. Note that ICT applies to analog inputs/outputs, not digital. Without HDCP, Blu-ray movies will not play back at all over a digital cable today. Not in 2012. Today. If you want to play a Blu-ray movie from your computer's Blu-ray drive and you don't have HDCP, you must use VGA or DVI-to-VGA converter. Who the hell wants to use VGA on their new LCD monitor, or switch between DVI and VGA just for watching Blu-ray movies?
Does anybody know if burning Bluray is any faster per GB than burning a DVD? If burning Blu-ray at 4x speed, then it's about as fast (per GB) as burning a DVD at 18x. However, the only Blu-ray burner reviews I've seen have only supported 2x burning speed with possible 4x speed via future firmware updates.
The "Reviews" section of cdfreaks.com is my favorite source of thorough burner reviews.
Their most recent review (Feb 2007) of a Blu-ray burner (Philips SPD7000BD Blu-ray TripleWriter) shows that a single-layer Blu-ray disc (22.56GB) at 2x speed takes about 46:34. Dual-layer Blu-ray burning support hasn't been enabled yet. Another currently available Blu-Ray burner (Lite-On LH-2B1S Blu-Ray Disc Triple Writer) will supposedly support 4x single-layer burning speed with a future firmware update.
Their most recent review (Mar 2007) of a DVD burner (Pioneer DVR-112 DVD Burner) shows that single-layer DVD burning (4483MB) takes about 5:20-5:40 at 18x speed. Dual-layer DVD takes about 15:40 at 10x speed (if you can find DL media that support that speed).
You can just "upgrade" by changing a word in a config file somewhere, there's no reinstallation involved; You'll just be bumped with a few programs to download and you're done, there's little reason *not* to. I haven't installed Ubuntu yet (I will eventually), but aren't there *some* good reasons not to upgrade to Feisty Fawn (7.04)? For example:
If it (current Ubuntu installation) ain't broke, don't fix it. Why risk messing up a current installation of OS and applications with a one-day-old version of Ubuntu? I'm sure Ubuntu upgrades (about every six months) are much smoother than other operating systems (years between versions), but shouldn't most people wait a little while until bug reports/fixes have been addressed?
Dapper Drake (6.06 LTS) is supported (security and other updates) until June 2009 (3 years of support since release). Feisty Fawn is supported until October 2008 (18 months).
If you want updated applications for older Ubuntu versions, there's Ubuntu Backports.
Again, I haven't installed Ubuntu yet. But when I do, I'm not sure if I'll install the latest release (currently 7.04) or the latest LTS release (currently 6.06). Maybe my thinking is messed up from Microsoft and Apple operating systems.
A friend of mine recently introduced me to his Cowon D2, which is a very slick piece of hardware: 52h battery life on music, 10h on video, smaller than an iPod and has a touch screen to boot. Why wasn't I sold immediately?
Because it meant the endless tedium of synchronizing my music with the god-awful "drag into Explorer" (or in my case, "drag into Finder") interface.
"Drag into Explorer" (a Windows term) is not necessary since the Cowon D2 is a PlaysForSure device. Therefore, in addition to Cowon's proprietary Windows application, the D2 can be syched with Windows Media Player 11. OS X and Linux users, unfortunately, only have "drag files" support for now (the D2 was introduced last month).
The D2 also promised great things like album covers and even lyrics (which actually is a sweet feature), but both of which required you to maintain your own music library with their proprietary software - a bit of an attempt at cloning iTunes Windows Media Player, which can be used with the D2, has had album cover views for years. That annoying Windows "journalist" Paul Thurrott claims that Apple ripped off Windows Media Player 11 for their album cover views.
I keep explaining this to people: the secret of iPod's success is not only its marketing, but that it rolls the entire experience together from end to end. You play your music, download your music, play your videos, download your videos all from the same spot. The software provides all the features you need - album covers for example, and it also syncs automatically with your portable player. Slick. This can supposedly be done with any PlaysForSure device, like the Cowon D2, and Windows Media Player 11. Sure, it took a while for Windows Media Player to catch up with all this integration. It also beat iTunes for some features (e.g. album covers, video support). The only real advantage I can see for iTunes is its dual platform support (Windows and Mac).
The bad one was the previous Apple 'hockey puck' mouse, it's circular design meant you have to look away from the screen to see which way it was facing, and the mechanical ball rollers were a pain to clean. Even worse, to me, was the original translucent mini keyboard that usually accompanied that hocky puck mouse. When graphite G4 towers were the newest Powermacs in the Mac lab, I used to request older beige Mac desktops because they had usable keyboards.
Just a question, but doesn't flash-based HDs make this an obsolete technology already? When solid-state hard drives catch up to magnetic platter based hard drives in total capacity, price-per-GB, and expected life expectancy, then Robson technology might be obsolete. When solid-state hard drives become available for Fujitsu notebooks, the 16GB drive will be a $700 option and the 32GB drive will be a $1200 option. A 64GB drive has been announced by Samsung, but who knows how much that will cost?
Last time I checked, magnetic platter based notebook hard drives have reached 250GB. Some big Dell notebooks can be configured with two of them for "half a terabyte in a notebook."
There are good reasons to criticize MS's closed file formats, but they've actually been very good about letting different versions of Office exchange files.
I can't believe this kind of FUD keeps getting modded up on Slashdot. There are legitimite reasons to criticize Microsoft, but your comment contains almost nothing but FUD and bullshit.
There's no obligation to upgrade to the latest version of Windows in much the same way that there's no obligation to pay any money to the nice gentleman visiting who would very much like your store to not accidentally burn down next weekend.
You can hold out from upgrading, and in return you can be guaranteed the following services:
* your documents will slowly stop being able to be read by other people since you don't have a current MS Office
Current versions of Office read/edit/save past Office file formats just fine. Past versions of Office (back to Office 2000) can read/edit/save the new Office 2007 formats by downloading the Office Compatibility Pack for Office 2007.
* the software you use will slowly not be supported by the manufacturer since you don't have a current OS This is somewhat true for some software manufacturers (fuck Intuit), but how is this Microsoft's fault? MS cannot be expected to provide workarounds so that their current OS will work with every legacy application. The app developer should provide updates/patches if they want to keep their customers.
* your OS will stop getting security patches and thus will become infested by worms and trojans, possibly making you criminally liable Windows XP will continue to get security updates until at least April 2014, Windows 2000 until at least July 2010. That's at least 12 years (from time of general availability) of security patches for XP and 10 years for Windows 2000. Why would anybody complain about 10 years of security patches for closed-source software?
* your hardware, when it fails and needs replacing (and the warranty probably only lasts for three years) quite possibly won't work on your current OS - and if it does, OEM licensing may make it illegal for you to continue to run your current OS A non-clueless buyer knows that OEM software is often tied to the hardware it was bought with. That's one reason non-clueless buyers use retail or volume license versions of Windows if they want to use it on their next computer.
* your documents will slowly stop being able to be read by other people since you don't have a current MS Office
Office document formats have a bad track record for backward compatibility, but they've always been pretty FORWARD-compatible. If you still create your documents in Office 97 for some reason, other people who have Office Vista Pro 2006 Hyper Fighting Edition should still be able to open and read them.
The real problem is that you will slowly stop being able to read documents generated by other people with newer versions of software.
Actually, Microsoft has always (AFAIK) provided updates for older versions of Office that allowed them to open/edit/save/convert the newest Office file formats. MS's current Office Compatibility Pack allows users of Office 2000, Office XP, and Office 2003 to "open, edit, and save files using the file formats new to Word, Excel, and PowerPoint 2007." There's also a related Knowledge Base article.
Re:It's not about the customers
on
AMD's New DRM
·
· Score: 1
I think it's fairly obvious that it's about AMD Live! versus Intel's Viiv. Each of those two brands is trying to be the ultimate living room multimedia PC. I think that customers haven't really caught on (why would we... who needs an expensive fully decked-out hot and noisy desktop PC masquerading as a media appliance in their living room?) With Media Center Extenders, customers don't need to put their LIVE! or Viiv PCs in the living room. Unfortunately, these extenders haven't hit the market by storm. I think most have been discontinued and the only current ones available are the Xbox and Xbox 360. On that page I linked to, Microsoft claims more are coming "throughout 2007" in set-top boxes, built into HD televisions, and DVD players.
Personally, I think Media Center Extenders were always a much better idea than putting a powerful Media Center PC in the living room. Think Apple TV, but better. These extenders can control almost all of the Media Center functions from another room's PC, including DVR functions.
Was Microsofts older versions of Windows phased out this fast too? Yes, faster. Of course, by "faster" I mean "time after general availablility," not "time after the next version is released." From that page I linked to: "Under the Support Lifecycle policy, Windows desktop licenses are available for four years after general availability in all standard product distribution channels."
Of course, Microsoft extended the lifecycle of Windows XP beyond the guaranteed four years because XP's successor (Vista) wasn't even available in January 2006. Unfortunately, unlike MS's "support lifecycle" policy, their "Desktop License Availability" lifecycle doesn't seem to guarantee availability for any amount of time after a product's successor is released. Hopefully, MS will have the sense to extend license availablity for XP (as they've done many times in the past for other products) if SP1 doesn't solve all of Vista's problems by then.
As all Slashdot readers should know, MS guarantees "Mainstream Support" for Windows for five years or for two years after the next version is released, whichever is longer. I think MS should have this same "two years after next version" policy for license availability as well.
USB 2.0, of course, has a higher theoretical top bandwidth than Firewire 400. When USB 2 first came out, benchmarks showed that it was slower than Firewire; I attributed USB's inferior performance to its newness and immaturity of the disk controllers... I figured that USB 2 would eventually surpass Firewire 400 as the disk controllers matured. It looks like that hasn't come to pass, and probably never will at this point. USB 2.0 apparently has surpassed FireWire 400 in write performance, but peformance varies depending on the controller hardware/drivers (like you said). It still seems to lag behind in read performance, but which is more important for external hard drives? Another comparison here.
The latest Intel and NVIDIA chipsets (with USB 2.0 built into the chipsets) seem to peform well in Windows XP.
the term Firewire is a trademark owned by Apple Computer Inc. Therefore any appliance or PC with firewire has to get Apple's blessing (and presumably pay them a lot of money) before they can use that name. Instead they opt to call it "1394" (after the approved standard IEEE-1394) or "i-Link", leading to massive confusion in the market. Not anymore, I think. I believe Apple finally stopped charging licensing fees for the "FireWire" trademark in May 2002.
However, along with Apple's initial "$1 per port" royalty, this was too little, too late.
When playing high def content (that you rip yourself from DVD or from HDTV), it's not half bad.
I'm really gonna have to question the "rip yourself" part of that equation. Certainly for a DVD, there's no reason to rip it on your computer, transcode it into Apple's format (removing the menus and extras), then transfer it to the Apple TV when it sits two inches away from the device purpose-built to play DVDs. That part (high def content ripped from DVD) confused me. First of all, DVD content is not high def. Second, why rip/trancode/store your DVD on your computer and transfer it over your network when a $30 set top DVD player does a better job?
Very few people have PC HDTV tuners to rip HD content on top of that. I think very few people have PC analog SDTV tuners as well, but for those few people that do, I guess Apple TV is an okay device to watch this content on your main television without connecting your PC to your television. I think a big reason why Windows Media Center Edition PCs have not invaded the living room is because very few people want to connect an $800 computer, which does much more than just "media center" functions, to their main television. For most people, a better solution would be to use an Xbox or Xbox 360 to control their Windows MCE PVR functions over the network.
That being said, I'm pretty sure you're really talking about illegally downloaded videos. Since I doubt Apple wants to market this device as a BitTorrent set top box*, it's only natural to judge the product on the way it is supposed to be used. Do BitTorrent and other sources of illegal video downloads offer their videos in h.264 or other Apple TV-compatible MPEG-4? I think almost all use open source codecs like XviD (not that I'd know about this illegal stuff).
Mac market share is stable at about the 6% mark. These are the people who like integrated monitors or the toy mini. Pro just won't matter for market share as it is ultra high end.
If Apple actually has the slightest interest in increasing market share beyond the current they have to offer what mainstream buyers want and are used to. A decent mid size tower at an affordable price.
Heck, I'd bet a dozen floppy disks that most current iMac and Mac mini buyers would prefer an affordable Mac mini tower or desktop (without notebook parts). I believe that all-in-ones (iMac) and ultra small form factor "mobile on desktops" (mini) would be niche products if Apple offered something close to a microATX form factor (2-4 expansion slots).
I know the iMac was an instant success (and it was a nice all-in-one), but it never had to compete with a decent non-pro Mac mini tower. We can't know for sure, but I'd bet those floppy disks. Floppy disks are pretty expensive, you know.
Slashdot Mirror
For Slashdot readers, I think a far more fascinating (and accurate) video is Robert X. Cringely's PBS documentary Triumph of the Nerds: The Rise of Accidental Empires. I think this documentary is where Apple fanboys got their often-quoted "M$ has no taste" line (from that black turtleneck guy). The transcript is available at PBS's site.
Wait... China and Japan don't have a friendly history.
Nevermind.
So here is the dilemma: - I want the linux hardware and they will probably only offer it with Linux OS. But I want the Vista OS too at OEM pricing. If I buy the Vista box, that is a lost sale for Linux. If I buy the Linux box, I have to go spend extra money for Vista.
I'm not an expert on Microsoft's OEM license rules, but I'm pretty darned sure you can legally purchase an OEM version of Vista Ultimate and legally install it on a Dell-built Linux PC. You don't need to install it on a home-built PC to qualify for OEM pricing.I'm assuming you already know that you can buy OEM versions of Vista Ultimate for $199 at places like Newegg.com. What you might not know is how MS defines a "system builder." According to an Arstechnica.com article titled "Buying OEM versions of Windows Vista: the facts":
Yes, you can. Microsoft licenses OEM software to "system builders," which the license defines as "an original equipment manufacturer, or an assembler, reassembler, or installer of software on computer systems" (emphasis added). You can install software on computers, right?
When asked, Microsoft says that OEM software is not intended to be installed by end users. Off the record, Microsoft spokespeople have told me that the big concern in Redmond is for Joe Newbie. They don't want inexperienced users buying OEM software, but the fact of the matter is that anyone can buy OEM versions of Windows.
Truth be told, Microsoft is not opposed to the practice. Rather, the company says that people who purchase OEM software will simply be expected to abide by the terms of the licensing agreements.
Q: People get passionate when Apple comes out with something new the iPhone; of course, the iPod. Is that something that you'd want them to feel about Microsoft?
Ballmer's silly rambling followed that question. At least he "kind of" answered the question. I don't remember Microsoft ever mentioning Apple or any other small competitor during keynotes and shareholder meetings. Those are the kind of venues where Steve Jobs and Scott McNealy regularly talk trash about MS.
That said, my comment was a bit off-topic. I was responding to a comment that was all about enclosures, but I ranted on my pet peeve of comparing home PCs to pro PCs. Mod me down, folks.
Having never gotten around to visiting a Dell kiosk, do they have their business/pro models available for "touching and seeing"? I really have no interest in their Dimension and Inspiron lines, but those models are the only ones pictured on Dell's Direct Store web page.
Thinkpads aren't in the same class as the cheaper Lenovo 3000 series notebooks. The MacBook Pro is not in the same class as the MacBook (non-Pro). A MacBook (non-Pro) can't hold a candle to a Dell Latitude D620. That's an unfair comparison, but your comment seems to say that all Dell laptops are crap.
Anectodal comparisons vary. Comparing a three-year-old Inspiron to a brand-new MacBook (instead of an iBook) will make Dell look bad.
2) Hollywood has agreed to not use ICT before 2012 at earliest if at all
3) ICT is per disc, so none of your current discs will be degraded in the future
The GP might have had FUDdy intentions, but the GP was referring to HDCP and DVI. Note that ICT applies to analog inputs/outputs, not digital. Without HDCP, Blu-ray movies will not play back at all over a digital cable today. Not in 2012. Today. If you want to play a Blu-ray movie from your computer's Blu-ray drive and you don't have HDCP, you must use VGA or DVI-to-VGA converter. Who the hell wants to use VGA on their new LCD monitor, or switch between DVI and VGA just for watching Blu-ray movies?
The "Reviews" section of cdfreaks.com is my favorite source of thorough burner reviews.
Their most recent review (Feb 2007) of a Blu-ray burner (Philips SPD7000BD Blu-ray TripleWriter) shows that a single-layer Blu-ray disc (22.56GB) at 2x speed takes about 46:34. Dual-layer Blu-ray burning support hasn't been enabled yet. Another currently available Blu-Ray burner (Lite-On LH-2B1S Blu-Ray Disc Triple Writer) will supposedly support 4x single-layer burning speed with a future firmware update.
Their most recent review (Mar 2007) of a DVD burner (Pioneer DVR-112 DVD Burner) shows that single-layer DVD burning (4483MB) takes about 5:20-5:40 at 18x speed. Dual-layer DVD takes about 15:40 at 10x speed (if you can find DL media that support that speed).
- If it (current Ubuntu installation) ain't broke, don't fix it. Why risk messing up a current installation of OS and applications with a one-day-old version of Ubuntu? I'm sure Ubuntu upgrades (about every six months) are much smoother than other operating systems (years between versions), but shouldn't most people wait a little while until bug reports/fixes have been addressed?
- Dapper Drake (6.06 LTS) is supported (security and other updates) until June 2009 (3 years of support since release). Feisty Fawn is supported until October 2008 (18 months).
- If you want updated applications for older Ubuntu versions, there's Ubuntu Backports.
Again, I haven't installed Ubuntu yet. But when I do, I'm not sure if I'll install the latest release (currently 7.04) or the latest LTS release (currently 6.06). Maybe my thinking is messed up from Microsoft and Apple operating systems.Because it meant the endless tedium of synchronizing my music with the god-awful "drag into Explorer" (or in my case, "drag into Finder") interface.
"Drag into Explorer" (a Windows term) is not necessary since the Cowon D2 is a PlaysForSure device. Therefore, in addition to Cowon's proprietary Windows application, the D2 can be syched with Windows Media Player 11. OS X and Linux users, unfortunately, only have "drag files" support for now (the D2 was introduced last month). The D2 also promised great things like album covers and even lyrics (which actually is a sweet feature), but both of which required you to maintain your own music library with their proprietary software - a bit of an attempt at cloning iTunes Windows Media Player, which can be used with the D2, has had album cover views for years. That annoying Windows "journalist" Paul Thurrott claims that Apple ripped off Windows Media Player 11 for their album cover views. I keep explaining this to people: the secret of iPod's success is not only its marketing, but that it rolls the entire experience together from end to end. You play your music, download your music, play your videos, download your videos all from the same spot. The software provides all the features you need - album covers for example, and it also syncs automatically with your portable player. Slick. This can supposedly be done with any PlaysForSure device, like the Cowon D2, and Windows Media Player 11. Sure, it took a while for Windows Media Player to catch up with all this integration. It also beat iTunes for some features (e.g. album covers, video support). The only real advantage I can see for iTunes is its dual platform support (Windows and Mac).Last time I checked, magnetic platter based notebook hard drives have reached 250GB. Some big Dell notebooks can be configured with two of them for "half a terabyte in a notebook."
There are good reasons to criticize MS's closed file formats, but they've actually been very good about letting different versions of Office exchange files.
You can hold out from upgrading, and in return you can be guaranteed the following services:
Current versions of Office read/edit/save past Office file formats just fine. Past versions of Office (back to Office 2000) can read/edit/save the new Office 2007 formats by downloading the Office Compatibility Pack for Office 2007. * the software you use will slowly not be supported by the manufacturer since you don't have a current OS This is somewhat true for some software manufacturers (fuck Intuit), but how is this Microsoft's fault? MS cannot be expected to provide workarounds so that their current OS will work with every legacy application. The app developer should provide updates/patches if they want to keep their customers. * your OS will stop getting security patches and thus will become infested by worms and trojans, possibly making you criminally liable Windows XP will continue to get security updates until at least April 2014, Windows 2000 until at least July 2010. That's at least 12 years (from time of general availability) of security patches for XP and 10 years for Windows 2000. Why would anybody complain about 10 years of security patches for closed-source software? * your hardware, when it fails and needs replacing (and the warranty probably only lasts for three years) quite possibly won't work on your current OS - and if it does, OEM licensing may make it illegal for you to continue to run your current OS A non-clueless buyer knows that OEM software is often tied to the hardware it was bought with. That's one reason non-clueless buyers use retail or volume license versions of Windows if they want to use it on their next computer.* your documents will slowly stop being able to be read by other people since you don't have a current MS Office
The real problem is that you will slowly stop being able to read documents generated by other people with newer versions of software.
Actually, Microsoft has always (AFAIK) provided updates for older versions of Office that allowed them to open/edit/save/convert the newest Office file formats. MS's current Office Compatibility Pack allows users of Office 2000, Office XP, and Office 2003 to "open, edit, and save files using the file formats new to Word, Excel, and PowerPoint 2007." There's also a related Knowledge Base article.Personally, I think Media Center Extenders were always a much better idea than putting a powerful Media Center PC in the living room. Think Apple TV, but better. These extenders can control almost all of the Media Center functions from another room's PC, including DVR functions.
Of course, Microsoft extended the lifecycle of Windows XP beyond the guaranteed four years because XP's successor (Vista) wasn't even available in January 2006. Unfortunately, unlike MS's "support lifecycle" policy, their "Desktop License Availability" lifecycle doesn't seem to guarantee availability for any amount of time after a product's successor is released. Hopefully, MS will have the sense to extend license availablity for XP (as they've done many times in the past for other products) if SP1 doesn't solve all of Vista's problems by then.
As all Slashdot readers should know, MS guarantees "Mainstream Support" for Windows for five years or for two years after the next version is released, whichever is longer. I think MS should have this same "two years after next version" policy for license availability as well.
The latest Intel and NVIDIA chipsets (with USB 2.0 built into the chipsets) seem to peform well in Windows XP.
However, along with Apple's initial "$1 per port" royalty, this was too little, too late.
If Apple actually has the slightest interest in increasing market share beyond the current they have to offer what mainstream buyers want and are used to. A decent mid size tower at an affordable price.
Heck, I'd bet a dozen floppy disks that most current iMac and Mac mini buyers would prefer an affordable Mac mini tower or desktop (without notebook parts). I believe that all-in-ones (iMac) and ultra small form factor "mobile on desktops" (mini) would be niche products if Apple offered something close to a microATX form factor (2-4 expansion slots).I know the iMac was an instant success (and it was a nice all-in-one), but it never had to compete with a decent non-pro Mac mini tower. We can't know for sure, but I'd bet those floppy disks. Floppy disks are pretty expensive, you know.