I've been enjoying cheap phone service for 18 months now, and hoped it would last a lot longer. If Vonage goes under, and the other VoIP companies face the same patent issues, I may end up having to sign up for Comcast's crappy phone/cable/internet package... increasing my total bill for those services by $10 now, and by another $30 after a year.
I absolutely refuse to go back to Qwest with their horribly incompetent customer service people (apologies if any of you work there), surprise bonus charges and fees, and the constant attempts to sell you new features you don't need. Thanks a lot Verizon, you really know how to ruin a good thing (and I'm not even in your service area!).
It's really sad the ammount of people that think converting one lossy format to another is something reasonable to do.
A) I was just addressing the fact that the quote I referenced labeled wma as iPod-incompatible. I wasn't really discussing quality, but whether it is possible to use wma files with an iPod.
B) If I'm listening to music on my iPod, it's usually in the car, or in some other somewhat noisy public place. The amount of background noise usually degrades the quality of the sound I hear anyway, to the point that I probably wouldn't notice quality levels above a certain limit, which is probably considerably higher than the limit for someone listening in their acoustically-tuned media room with their DVD-Audio discs, tube amp and $5000 speakers.
C) 128kbps mp3 is not the same as 128kbps aac and 128kbps wma that are sold from the online stores.
D) I really don't know about this for sure, I haven't compared converted files at different bitrates, I don't know how much quality is lost, or what the equivalent quality levels for a converted file are, but I'm guessing that if you start at a higher bitrate to begin with (if the MS Zune store follows the same strategy as the iTunes store, then that's what they'll do for the DRM-free files), the resulting file may still be higher-quality than the DRM'ed tracks currently available. If anyone has any real information on this point, feel free to correct it or support it.
E) For me, my iPod is about convenience, for music and video. I know its limitations on both, but I still like to use it. I know that the 320x240 resolution offered by the small video screen is not anywhere near the quality of a 60" HD screen. But I don't mind. Because I was able to record The Office last night on my Mythbox, have commercials automatically removed, and have it transcoded to iPod format, so that I can watch it whenever and wherever I want to. I also could have bought that episode off the iTunes store this morning, with pretty much the same convenience. No DVDs to carry or scratch. No need to sit on my living room couch to watch it. Just a portable player that fits in my pocket. And I'm OK with that little screen and the 320x240 resolution. That's because I appreciate the convenience more than the quality for a lot of situations. Sure, if I'm going to be sitting at home, I'd prefer to watch just about anything on a large, 1080p screen with a great sound system. But if I'm going to catch up on a TV show, or watch part of a movie on my lunch break, I have no problem at all with sacrificing the quality for the convenience. Music is the same way. I don't see any reason to be all snobby about the quality of music or video on my portable player.
I do notice quality issues in music at 128 kbps mp3 quality, and if it's less than that, I'll usually rather just turn it off. But most people aren't going even notice problems at quality levels above that. I think it's sad that it bothers you so much that other people aren't as tuned in to the quality as you are. If people convert their music, and still listen to it, and the quality doesn't bother them, then it shouldn't bother you that they do that. As for you, you know what you like, so you can look for online or brick & mortar stores that meet your needs. Everybody's happy. Have a nice day.
Wasn't the zune the device that added DRM to anything you put on it?
I don't own a Zune, but I know they don't let you access files on it as a removable drive, and I don't know if they let you get files back off of it in the Zune software (I know iTunes doesn't let you get media back off of the iPod, but I hadn't heard either way on the Zune). So if the music gets put on the Zune, the only way to get it off is through the wireless sharing... If you can't get the music off of it, then it really doesn't matter if it adds DRM to the files, because those files won't be played anywhere else anyhow.
Unless by Zune, you're referring to the software which is used to manage the device... I guess the software could add DRM to the files on the harddrive of the PC, but I'm guessing it probably doesn't.
5) They release the tracks as unprotected (but iPod-incompatible) WMA and find they don't sell any better, then claim that consumers aren't really interested in DRM-free tracks.
I've never needed to try this, because I haven't used.wma in a long time, but I'm pretty sure that iTunes will convert non-DRM'ed.wma's to AAC or mp3, possibly even without any user interaction if you try to put them on the iPod. Can anybody verify that?
Thanks, that at least explains how they're different, which does clear up why Verizon would have patents involving WiFi in the first place.
But even so, in the case of the one WiFi phone that Vonage sells, aren't they just using the manufacturer's stack, which would be handling all of that? It's a standard WiFi SIP phone, and as far as I know the firmware doesn't have any major Vonage modifications, other than being locked down to Vonage service. In the case of the softphone programs running on a PC, I know Vonage specifies one to use, but I think the softphone service will work for with SIP software client, and if those do anything special for WiFi connections, that's out of Vonage's hands, too.
So what is it that Vonage is infringing on, that the hardware and software manufacturers aren't?
Isn't Vonage required to pay fees to Verizon based on subcription revenue? How does this affect that? Do they still have to pay (other than the $58M, of course)?
The only Wi-Fi device that I know of that Vonage supports is the WiFi UTStarcom F1000, of which Vonage sells a locked-down version, but the same phone is used as a general SIP client for other VoIP services... how is it that selling that device could possibly constitute a violation of a patent about VoIP over WiFi? Also, what's different about VoIP over WiFi than VoIP over Ethernet?
Also, Vonage provides SoftPhone accounts, where you run SIP software on your PC using Vonage SIP credentials... If I use that software on my laptop while I'm plugged into a wired network, then I go wireless and use the same software over WiFi, did I just start violating their patent?
Microsoft or Apple could demand DRM-less music and record industries would have to comply, because they know they would lose tons of money to piracy or lack of purchasing if they didn't.
MS might be able to make such a demand, but I doubt it. Apple sure can't.
MS wouldn't make that demand, they go the opposite direction. Steve Jobs did make that demand (whether or not you agree with his sincerity, he did post a lengthy anti-DRM manifesto on the Apple website). And now, Apple and EMI have announced this deal. So who can and would make that demand?
MS has been sucking up to the RIAA and giving in to whatever they want. Remember, MS agreed to give $1 from the sale of each Zune to Universal "because we all know these things are just repositories for stolen music." (Sorry, I don't remember which music exec said that quote, and it's mostly from memory.) Of course, if you buy a Red iPod Nano, $10 goes to the fund to fight AIDS in Africa... (OK, maybe I shouldn't have added that last part.)
Seriously, though, MS has tried to cozy up to the music suits for years, and they have a minority of the portable player market, despite the fact that most players support their format, and most online music stores sell that format. Apple has won over the customers, and is now nudging the labels towards more open music. It's not like it's an innovative thing, because as Jobs pointed out, 90% of music sold today is DRM free already on CD's. But in a world where MS is trying to buy the favor of the music people by offering restrictions, Apple is going the opposite direction and helping to remove the restrictions.
I'm not saying Steve Jobs is all noble and innocent, he is a businessman, so I'm sure he's trying to take his company where the money is, but this is doing it in a way that helps the customers, instead of screwing us all.
A) As I understand it, they've come out with a "basic" system for under $10,000 that will handle either music, or movies. (Their higher-end systems will do both now).
B) The product line that used to start at $27k is now, I believe, around $23k, or it was a few months ago.
C) This isn't for Slashdot geeks who understand computers and codecs and TB hard drives and MythTV. This is for wealthy people who don't know how to edit a config file, who would pay $100,000 to have someone come into their home and install a high-end theater for them. So no, this isn't for you to watch movies on from the futon in your mom's basement.
D) This is a very, very nice system. It's easy and quick to set up, and simple and smooth to use.
Now that this legal mess is cleared up, maybe prices will start to come down even more. I'm not sure about competition, because Kaleidescape is the only DVD-ripping music server that actually licensed CSS... Several other similar products exist, but because those other companies didn't license CSS, they have to send you to the Internet to get DeCSS yourself. Technically, this probably paves the way for those other companies to obtain licenses to use CSS themselves, but I don't know if the DVDCCA will want to grant those licenses. They only granted Kaleidescapes because they didn't realize what the product in question was.
a ruling in favor of Kaleidescape "could open the flood gates to copycats. Prices could come down to that of a laptop for products that are not as elegant as Kaleidescape's but have the same basic functionality...
The funny thing is, those products already exist, exactly as he described them: lower cost, not as elegant, but with the same basic functionality. Axonix, Xperinet, and others have been doing the same thing as Kaleidescape, but not as expensively, not as slick, not as secure, and do you know how they get around the CSS problem? They point the users to where they can find DeCSS on the web. Their software on the media server is preconfigured to work with DeCSS, they just have to get you to install it.
Good job, DVDCCA. You were trying to make the inferior products, which are dependant on unlicensed CSS decryption into the only legal alternatives. You're probably lucky you lost. Especially considering the fact that Kaleidescape optionally sells large collections of movies with the servers.
The problem I see is that you're paying extra for wireless, and it's not useful for anything.
Actually, you're not paying for wireless... the price was determined by the price of the iPod. Back when the 30GB iPod was priced at $300, the Zune was going to barely undercut it... then just before the Zune price was going to be relieved, Apple cut the price on the 30GB to $250, so Microsoft matched that price. What you're paying for is a device that competes with the iPod on price, with more features.
Not that I care for the Zune, or its wireless "feature", but you're really not paying for the wireless.
With MCE you can *easily* be recording 2-3 HD channels while watching a DVD (or another channel) on a 2Ghz P4. I'd venture a guess that anything down to about a 1Ghz P3 would be trouble-free for a single live channel or DVD playback.
That's 5 - 7 year old hardware - how on Earth is it "cutting edge" ?
On my 2.66 GHz P4 laptop with 2GB of RAM, Windows Vista (Vista, because that's what all of the new HP DECs would have to be if they did keep making them) crawls, especially in the Media Center interface. In fact, the Vista MC won't even play video files, it always says files are missing, try rebooting. The same video files play fine in Windows Media Player on the same system. I brought that laptop back to XP, and it does much better. I'm not sure how demanding the XP MCE is, but XP isn't the playground for the rising generation of Media Centers... the Vista ones do require a lot of horsepower.
Personally, I'm very happy with my 1GHz MythTV box, but I don't get any HD programming.
"Mindless dribble" = "Mindless drivel", people. please. I see this so often and it grieveth me so.
-and, from previous Slashdot discussions...
"a mute point" = "a moot point"
and my absolute favorite...
"for all intensive purposes" (aaargh!) = "for all intents and purposes"
Go read your WWI history, and spend 10 minutes contemplating the meaning of 3 million dead or permanently maimed
I realize this is inappropriate considering the subject matter, but I read that sentence as "3 million dead or permanently married"... I've got to start getting more sleep at night.
In my day we had to make cast the bronze ourselves
make cast? I've done make, make install, make clean, make menuconfig, make xconfig, make modules make modules install, but I've never done make cast...
But obviously I've never compiled anything with a linked list in it anyhow, since this dude just barely invented them.
You are obviously a retard. I can set up a gentoo system in under an hour. I never have any of the problems you listed there.
Good for you. That's too bad that you got your feelings hurt because you didn't think about the context of the GPP. Were you able to install Gentoo in under an hour the first time? Was Gentoo your first experience at installing and using Linux?
I use Gentoo on my MythTV box at home, and it's working quite well. In the past, I have installed Gentoo from the command line and from the LiveCD GUI. I've botched things up sometimes and abandoned the install, sometimes I've botched them up then figured it out and set things right, but that always took some time and some googling. If I wouldn't have had a 2nd functional computer around I would have been screwed. Oh, and I run Ubuntu on my laptop. The right tool for the right job.
I know, I'm feeding a troll, but his point wasn't that Gentoo is bad, just that Gentoo is for people who really want Gentoo Linux. It's not for the vast majority of computer users (I said "users", not "hobbyists"). Ubuntu, OpenSuse, and others are much more suited to the general population of computer users. If my neighbor who knows just a little bit about computers wants to try linux out, I'll point him to Ubuntu. Maybe I'll tell him Gentoo exists, but I won't suggest it to him until he's really had some time getting to know Linux. I know Gentoo has a live CD-based graphical installer, but I've used it, and it's still not for beginners.
The original post mentioning Gentoo was as a generic alternative to Vista. The GP pointed out that there's a lot of steps and potential for complications. Just because you don't have those problems doesn't mean that people in general won't have problems.
Gentoo is very good in a lot of ways, and it's a great distribution for a number of things. It's just not a good distro to wean people off of Windows.
AKAImBatman spoke to Slashdot this week, commenting that Microsoft's CEO is 'insane,' and the company has few successful businesses outside of Windows and Office. He referred to Balmer's stage antics as 'cute.' 'I don't really know that yelling "Developers" and doing your own thing on the stage creates value.' AKAImBatman went on complain that, in general, competition for good stage presenters has become an issue. Even companies like SCO are looking for skilled showmen, making the HR fight between the two companies that much more challenging.
You don't even have to replace things in the quote with silly stuff, you can user pretty realistic replacements to point out the hypocrisy:
Microsoft's size/market share/Vista bloat is "insane", Microsoft's non-OS/non-Office efforts are "cute" (e.g. Zune)....
And I'm sure the Microsoft staff in the Windows Media, Zune, XBox, MSN, Money, VirtualPC, and Windows Mobile departments are working hard and all, but are they actually creating value, or are they sucking up resources without creating a payoff like Google Earth is doing? Oh yeah, MS has their own Google Earth, too, except it's just the web-based maps part... For a company that's trying to keep up with the same interesting technologies as Google (while trying to manage all the other random technology areas they've been trying to compete in), I think that leaves more explaining for MS to do than Google.
Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining.
As someone else already replied to your post, he doesn't mean we should settle down about wanting Linux, he means we should settle down about exactly how we want Linux on those Dells.
Obviously any 1337 user who knows exactly which distro and which version of that distro he/she wants, which window manager and text editor he/she wants probably already has CDs burned, and would rather do the job themselves. The exciting part of Dell offering Linux preinstalled is not that I expect to be able to get a Linux box pre-customized exactly the way I want it. The exciting part is that this means all of our parents and friends who look at a Linux command prompt and think "Why does this have DOS on it?" (if they even know what DOS is) can get a system that's fully functional, with hardware that is supported and tested. The point is that Linux can be made available to mainstream users, and can be made easy to use, and most importantly, that normal people will hear about Linux, and find out why they would possibly want to leave Windows behind.
This doesn't take anything away from the Linux power user who doesn't use a full KDE or Gnome DE, and only uses a minimalist WM with hundreds of memorized keyboard shortcuts. Those users probably won't be buying from Dell anyway, and if they do, they would rather install their own OS. The bright side of things for those users though, is that if Dell does start offering Linux as a preinstalled option for a significant number of their consumer systems, they would probably also include the option of shipping the systems with no OS.
So just be glad they're considering preinstalling Linux at all, and don't complain about Dell not giving you what you want... because if you know what you want, you're not the type of person who would normally want it from them! Also, on the last quote from the article:
i'm getting so sick and tired of hearing excuses and rationalizations. just put the cd in the cupholder, install it and sell it. period. there's no need to analyze or certify. what is so hard about this?
I don't see what is amusing or telling about this quote... Of course there is a need to analyze and certify. As I said, these PCs need to be able to go out to grandmothers, liberal arts college students, construction workers, single moms, high school kids, and anyone else that may not know how to install NVidia drivers from the command prompt. Hardware does have to be certified and working out of the box, the software does have to be customized for people who aren't "computer people", and the distribution does have to be chosen carefully. I don't think anyone's giving any invalid excuses or rationalizations. These decisions take time, and no matter what choices are made, lots of people are going to find things to complain about. If Dell takes the time to carefully study and consider the factors involved, that might just show that they care about putting Linux in a good light.
I still think HD-DVD has the best chance if they can make the hybrid disks (HD-DVD that will play in DVD players) a big enough deal to get the major publishers to completely switch to them on new releases.
First they have to actively advertise hybrid discs, which they don't seem to do. It's bad enough that people don't really know about HD-DVD, nobody knows about hybrid disks.
Second, they need decent movies available on hybrids. Last I checked in Best Buy (in January), I could only find about 3, and one of those was The Lake House... not compelling stuff. I just went to Amazon and saw that Superman Returns, Happy Feet and The Departed are available on hybrid... so there's 3 movies out of the first two pages worth of HD-DVDs that I looked at.
Third, hybrid discs need to be equal in price (or maybe just a tiny bit above) to the regular HD-DVDs... this is a feature that could help HD-DVD win the format war, it's not something the HD-DVD camp can afford to charge a buttload extra for. I'd like to know how many people out there actually ponied up $40 for the Lake House! (Amazon lists is for $27.99 now, but the original retail price was $40.)
Slashdot Mirror
Damn.
I've been enjoying cheap phone service for 18 months now, and hoped it would last a lot longer. If Vonage goes under, and the other VoIP companies face the same patent issues, I may end up having to sign up for Comcast's crappy phone/cable/internet package... increasing my total bill for those services by $10 now, and by another $30 after a year.
I absolutely refuse to go back to Qwest with their horribly incompetent customer service people (apologies if any of you work there), surprise bonus charges and fees, and the constant attempts to sell you new features you don't need. Thanks a lot Verizon, you really know how to ruin a good thing (and I'm not even in your service area!).
A) I was just addressing the fact that the quote I referenced labeled wma as iPod-incompatible. I wasn't really discussing quality, but whether it is possible to use wma files with an iPod.
B) If I'm listening to music on my iPod, it's usually in the car, or in some other somewhat noisy public place. The amount of background noise usually degrades the quality of the sound I hear anyway, to the point that I probably wouldn't notice quality levels above a certain limit, which is probably considerably higher than the limit for someone listening in their acoustically-tuned media room with their DVD-Audio discs, tube amp and $5000 speakers.
C) 128kbps mp3 is not the same as 128kbps aac and 128kbps wma that are sold from the online stores.
D) I really don't know about this for sure, I haven't compared converted files at different bitrates, I don't know how much quality is lost, or what the equivalent quality levels for a converted file are, but I'm guessing that if you start at a higher bitrate to begin with (if the MS Zune store follows the same strategy as the iTunes store, then that's what they'll do for the DRM-free files), the resulting file may still be higher-quality than the DRM'ed tracks currently available. If anyone has any real information on this point, feel free to correct it or support it.
E) For me, my iPod is about convenience, for music and video. I know its limitations on both, but I still like to use it. I know that the 320x240 resolution offered by the small video screen is not anywhere near the quality of a 60" HD screen. But I don't mind. Because I was able to record The Office last night on my Mythbox, have commercials automatically removed, and have it transcoded to iPod format, so that I can watch it whenever and wherever I want to. I also could have bought that episode off the iTunes store this morning, with pretty much the same convenience. No DVDs to carry or scratch. No need to sit on my living room couch to watch it. Just a portable player that fits in my pocket. And I'm OK with that little screen and the 320x240 resolution. That's because I appreciate the convenience more than the quality for a lot of situations. Sure, if I'm going to be sitting at home, I'd prefer to watch just about anything on a large, 1080p screen with a great sound system. But if I'm going to catch up on a TV show, or watch part of a movie on my lunch break, I have no problem at all with sacrificing the quality for the convenience. Music is the same way. I don't see any reason to be all snobby about the quality of music or video on my portable player.
I do notice quality issues in music at 128 kbps mp3 quality, and if it's less than that, I'll usually rather just turn it off. But most people aren't going even notice problems at quality levels above that. I think it's sad that it bothers you so much that other people aren't as tuned in to the quality as you are. If people convert their music, and still listen to it, and the quality doesn't bother them, then it shouldn't bother you that they do that. As for you, you know what you like, so you can look for online or brick & mortar stores that meet your needs. Everybody's happy. Have a nice day.
I don't own a Zune, but I know they don't let you access files on it as a removable drive, and I don't know if they let you get files back off of it in the Zune software (I know iTunes doesn't let you get media back off of the iPod, but I hadn't heard either way on the Zune). So if the music gets put on the Zune, the only way to get it off is through the wireless sharing... If you can't get the music off of it, then it really doesn't matter if it adds DRM to the files, because those files won't be played anywhere else anyhow.
Unless by Zune, you're referring to the software which is used to manage the device... I guess the software could add DRM to the files on the harddrive of the PC, but I'm guessing it probably doesn't.
I've never needed to try this, because I haven't used
Thanks, that at least explains how they're different, which does clear up why Verizon would have patents involving WiFi in the first place.
But even so, in the case of the one WiFi phone that Vonage sells, aren't they just using the manufacturer's stack, which would be handling all of that? It's a standard WiFi SIP phone, and as far as I know the firmware doesn't have any major Vonage modifications, other than being locked down to Vonage service. In the case of the softphone programs running on a PC, I know Vonage specifies one to use, but I think the softphone service will work for with SIP software client, and if those do anything special for WiFi connections, that's out of Vonage's hands, too.
So what is it that Vonage is infringing on, that the hardware and software manufacturers aren't?
Isn't Vonage required to pay fees to Verizon based on subcription revenue? How does this affect that? Do they still have to pay (other than the $58M, of course)?
The only Wi-Fi device that I know of that Vonage supports is the WiFi UTStarcom F1000, of which Vonage sells a locked-down version, but the same phone is used as a general SIP client for other VoIP services... how is it that selling that device could possibly constitute a violation of a patent about VoIP over WiFi? Also, what's different about VoIP over WiFi than VoIP over Ethernet?
Also, Vonage provides SoftPhone accounts, where you run SIP software on your PC using Vonage SIP credentials... If I use that software on my laptop while I'm plugged into a wired network, then I go wireless and use the same software over WiFi, did I just start violating their patent?
Is that in a WordPerfect file format?
and on weekends and holidays and all throughout May
And you'll always be wrong, no matter what you say!
--Brian Regan
MS wouldn't make that demand, they go the opposite direction. Steve Jobs did make that demand (whether or not you agree with his sincerity, he did post a lengthy anti-DRM manifesto on the Apple website). And now, Apple and EMI have announced this deal. So who can and would make that demand?
MS has been sucking up to the RIAA and giving in to whatever they want. Remember, MS agreed to give $1 from the sale of each Zune to Universal "because we all know these things are just repositories for stolen music." (Sorry, I don't remember which music exec said that quote, and it's mostly from memory.) Of course, if you buy a Red iPod Nano, $10 goes to the fund to fight AIDS in Africa... (OK, maybe I shouldn't have added that last part.)
Seriously, though, MS has tried to cozy up to the music suits for years, and they have a minority of the portable player market, despite the fact that most players support their format, and most online music stores sell that format. Apple has won over the customers, and is now nudging the labels towards more open music. It's not like it's an innovative thing, because as Jobs pointed out, 90% of music sold today is DRM free already on CD's. But in a world where MS is trying to buy the favor of the music people by offering restrictions, Apple is going the opposite direction and helping to remove the restrictions.
I'm not saying Steve Jobs is all noble and innocent, he is a businessman, so I'm sure he's trying to take his company where the money is, but this is doing it in a way that helps the customers, instead of screwing us all.
A) As I understand it, they've come out with a "basic" system for under $10,000 that will handle either music, or movies. (Their higher-end systems will do both now).
B) The product line that used to start at $27k is now, I believe, around $23k, or it was a few months ago.
C) This isn't for Slashdot geeks who understand computers and codecs and TB hard drives and MythTV. This is for wealthy people who don't know how to edit a config file, who would pay $100,000 to have someone come into their home and install a high-end theater for them. So no, this isn't for you to watch movies on from the futon in your mom's basement.
D) This is a very, very nice system. It's easy and quick to set up, and simple and smooth to use.
Now that this legal mess is cleared up, maybe prices will start to come down even more. I'm not sure about competition, because Kaleidescape is the only DVD-ripping music server that actually licensed CSS... Several other similar products exist, but because those other companies didn't license CSS, they have to send you to the Internet to get DeCSS yourself. Technically, this probably paves the way for those other companies to obtain licenses to use CSS themselves, but I don't know if the DVDCCA will want to grant those licenses. They only granted Kaleidescapes because they didn't realize what the product in question was.
The funny thing is, those products already exist, exactly as he described them: lower cost, not as elegant, but with the same basic functionality. Axonix, Xperinet, and others have been doing the same thing as Kaleidescape, but not as expensively, not as slick, not as secure, and do you know how they get around the CSS problem? They point the users to where they can find DeCSS on the web. Their software on the media server is preconfigured to work with DeCSS, they just have to get you to install it.
Good job, DVDCCA. You were trying to make the inferior products, which are dependant on unlicensed CSS decryption into the only legal alternatives. You're probably lucky you lost. Especially considering the fact that Kaleidescape optionally sells large collections of movies with the servers.
Actually, you're not paying for wireless... the price was determined by the price of the iPod. Back when the 30GB iPod was priced at $300, the Zune was going to barely undercut it... then just before the Zune price was going to be relieved, Apple cut the price on the 30GB to $250, so Microsoft matched that price. What you're paying for is a device that competes with the iPod on price, with more features.
Not that I care for the Zune, or its wireless "feature", but you're really not paying for the wireless.
I'm sure that begs a question, but I'm not sure which one.
On my 2.66 GHz P4 laptop with 2GB of RAM, Windows Vista (Vista, because that's what all of the new HP DECs would have to be if they did keep making them) crawls, especially in the Media Center interface. In fact, the Vista MC won't even play video files, it always says files are missing, try rebooting. The same video files play fine in Windows Media Player on the same system. I brought that laptop back to XP, and it does much better. I'm not sure how demanding the XP MCE is, but XP isn't the playground for the rising generation of Media Centers... the Vista ones do require a lot of horsepower.
Personally, I'm very happy with my 1GHz MythTV box, but I don't get any HD programming.
I could care less about those grammar errors...
I realize this is inappropriate considering the subject matter, but I read that sentence as "3 million dead or permanently married"... I've got to start getting more sleep at night.
make cast? I've done make, make install, make clean, make menuconfig, make xconfig, make modules make modules install, but I've never done make cast...
But obviously I've never compiled anything with a linked list in it anyhow, since this dude just barely invented them.
Aaaaahhhhh, I get it now. But wait, an instirantiamated what?
I think we can mash these up for a new Vista slogan: Defective by design, effective by accident!.
Good for you. That's too bad that you got your feelings hurt because you didn't think about the context of the GPP. Were you able to install Gentoo in under an hour the first time? Was Gentoo your first experience at installing and using Linux?
I use Gentoo on my MythTV box at home, and it's working quite well. In the past, I have installed Gentoo from the command line and from the LiveCD GUI. I've botched things up sometimes and abandoned the install, sometimes I've botched them up then figured it out and set things right, but that always took some time and some googling. If I wouldn't have had a 2nd functional computer around I would have been screwed. Oh, and I run Ubuntu on my laptop. The right tool for the right job.
I know, I'm feeding a troll, but his point wasn't that Gentoo is bad, just that Gentoo is for people who really want Gentoo Linux. It's not for the vast majority of computer users (I said "users", not "hobbyists"). Ubuntu, OpenSuse, and others are much more suited to the general population of computer users. If my neighbor who knows just a little bit about computers wants to try linux out, I'll point him to Ubuntu. Maybe I'll tell him Gentoo exists, but I won't suggest it to him until he's really had some time getting to know Linux. I know Gentoo has a live CD-based graphical installer, but I've used it, and it's still not for beginners.
The original post mentioning Gentoo was as a generic alternative to Vista. The GP pointed out that there's a lot of steps and potential for complications. Just because you don't have those problems doesn't mean that people in general won't have problems.
Gentoo is very good in a lot of ways, and it's a great distribution for a number of things. It's just not a good distro to wean people off of Windows.
Vi tip of the day: yy p
or 20yy p
Vi FTW!
You don't even have to replace things in the quote with silly stuff, you can user pretty realistic replacements to point out the hypocrisy:
Microsoft's size/market share/Vista bloat is "insane", Microsoft's non-OS/non-Office efforts are "cute" (e.g. Zune)....
And I'm sure the Microsoft staff in the Windows Media, Zune, XBox, MSN, Money, VirtualPC, and Windows Mobile departments are working hard and all, but are they actually creating value, or are they sucking up resources without creating a payoff like Google Earth is doing? Oh yeah, MS has their own Google Earth, too, except it's just the web-based maps part... For a company that's trying to keep up with the same interesting technologies as Google (while trying to manage all the other random technology areas they've been trying to compete in), I think that leaves more explaining for MS to do than Google.
As someone else already replied to your post, he doesn't mean we should settle down about wanting Linux, he means we should settle down about exactly how we want Linux on those Dells.
Obviously any 1337 user who knows exactly which distro and which version of that distro he/she wants, which window manager and text editor he/she wants probably already has CDs burned, and would rather do the job themselves. The exciting part of Dell offering Linux preinstalled is not that I expect to be able to get a Linux box pre-customized exactly the way I want it. The exciting part is that this means all of our parents and friends who look at a Linux command prompt and think "Why does this have DOS on it?" (if they even know what DOS is) can get a system that's fully functional, with hardware that is supported and tested. The point is that Linux can be made available to mainstream users, and can be made easy to use, and most importantly, that normal people will hear about Linux, and find out why they would possibly want to leave Windows behind.
This doesn't take anything away from the Linux power user who doesn't use a full KDE or Gnome DE, and only uses a minimalist WM with hundreds of memorized keyboard shortcuts. Those users probably won't be buying from Dell anyway, and if they do, they would rather install their own OS. The bright side of things for those users though, is that if Dell does start offering Linux as a preinstalled option for a significant number of their consumer systems, they would probably also include the option of shipping the systems with no OS.
So just be glad they're considering preinstalling Linux at all, and don't complain about Dell not giving you what you want... because if you know what you want, you're not the type of person who would normally want it from them! Also, on the last quote from the article:
I don't see what is amusing or telling about this quote... Of course there is a need to analyze and certify. As I said, these PCs need to be able to go out to grandmothers, liberal arts college students, construction workers, single moms, high school kids, and anyone else that may not know how to install NVidia drivers from the command prompt. Hardware does have to be certified and working out of the box, the software does have to be customized for people who aren't "computer people", and the distribution does have to be chosen carefully. I don't think anyone's giving any invalid excuses or rationalizations. These decisions take time, and no matter what choices are made, lots of people are going to find things to complain about. If Dell takes the time to carefully study and consider the factors involved, that might just show that they care about putting Linux in a good light.
First they have to actively advertise hybrid discs, which they don't seem to do. It's bad enough that people don't really know about HD-DVD, nobody knows about hybrid disks.
Second, they need decent movies available on hybrids. Last I checked in Best Buy (in January), I could only find about 3, and one of those was The Lake House... not compelling stuff. I just went to Amazon and saw that Superman Returns, Happy Feet and The Departed are available on hybrid... so there's 3 movies out of the first two pages worth of HD-DVDs that I looked at.
Third, hybrid discs need to be equal in price (or maybe just a tiny bit above) to the regular HD-DVDs... this is a feature that could help HD-DVD win the format war, it's not something the HD-DVD camp can afford to charge a buttload extra for. I'd like to know how many people out there actually ponied up $40 for the Lake House! (Amazon lists is for $27.99 now, but the original retail price was $40.)