Ironically, before iTunes people were complaining music was too expensive to purchase. Then iTunes came around, and people started complaining that the music was digitally protected. Obviously (to them), the only alternative was to simply not pay for the music, the same way they were all the time. Of course, they balanced the downloads with complaints that all "mainstream musis was junk", thereby nullifying any monetary compensation.
Sorry for the rant... it's frustrating to see article after article of back-patting amongst the filesharers who claim to have no problems with not paying for items. As an artist (web design, photography), I would be greatly displeased if I found out others were taking my photographs and making copies of them without my permission, when I was attempting to sell them. If my artwork was horrible, and the people copying my artwork claimed that, why would they take my art? And if a portion came back after copying it and quietly paid me for it, does that make the initial copying "okay"? I think not.
Wha? When does debating the benefits of a business mean I "love" it?! People here loathe Wal*Mart. I like Wal*Mart, just like I like its competitiors. It's a store, not a person. Are you against debating when it disagrees with your opinion?
Why would a talking ad that turns on when you walk by make you mad...? Just ignore it. It doesn't know who you are, it just knows you're there. I don't see why this is a big deal - there have been motion-detected ads placed in malls in the past. It's just another form of advertisement for us all to ignore.
People have the right to form a union if they want to. If you don't like unions then don't join them. It's not anyone else's problem. Despite complaints from people about unions (including my own personal experience) their presence is better than their abscense. We've already seen what happens when we don't have the right to form unions.
They still take the money from your paycheck! Join them or don't join them, you still pay union dues. Might as well join them. Otherwise, I am paying for nothing.
Do you know anything about predatory pricing, discriminatory pricing, and display fees? I didn't think so or you wouldn't be posting.
Good grief, are all Slashdot users rude? I said, there should be no concession made to small businesses by larger businesses to stay alive. To say that Wal*Mart can't enter a community, so that a smaller business may thrive is creating a monopoly for the smaller business. Wal*Mart has just as much right to enter an area as a small business. If Wal*Mart is doing something illegal, then stop them. If they're not, it's business. If these small businesses are so great for the community, why are they dying? Because the people in the small community aren't visiting them any longer. Don't fault Wal*Mart for the lack of loyalty among small business patrons!
I think it should also be noted that Sam's Club was made for small businesses to get the deals to which Wal*Mart was privy. Ironic that it comes from the "evil" company itself.
First of all, the CEO must ultimately take responsibility for the company. In fact CEO's have been arrested for offenses committed by their managers or even salespeople usually as a result of healthcode violations. Walmart also has a responsibility as a company to provide for a fair and non-discriminatory work environment and they haven't done that. Maybe you missed the news when Walmart had a class action lawsuit against them for disciminatory behaviour, concerning the lack of women who received promotions. Next time you are in a Walmart take a look at what positions the women usually hold as compared to the men.
Has the lawsuit yet been finished? I really don't know, so if anyone has any information, please post. Otherwise, they're innocent until proven guilty. Just because there is a lawsuit in the works, does not mean it has any grounds in reality.
No, I don't work for Wal*Mart. Is that the only way folks here believe people can be positive about something so "evil"? I have a Wal*Mart in my area. I've shopped there. I've shopped at their competition - I've worked for their competition. Wal*Mart's fine with me.
I don't think defending a business would really be considered anal... my commment about the anal attitude was the spelling of Wal*Mart. Sorry for the confusion.
Minimum wage pay, union busting, illegal anti-competitive behavior against local busines, discrimanatory against women in their merit practices--
So they pay minimum wage... that's their choice. Nobody is really forcing you to work there. I know, in small towns, the evil store takes away all other jobs and forces you to work in their store - my counter to that argument would be to question the pay rate of the original occupation. If it's a small town, you're probably not getting much over minimum wage anyway.
Union busting? Unions are terrible, and a waste of time. I worked in a union-backed retail store, and the only thing I found the union did was take my money from my paycheck every week. I tried using it, and the union was, and continues to be, worthless. I applaud Wal*Mart for being union-free.
How can you be "anti-competitive"? I don't know what you mean, mind explaining?
I have no experiences with the discriminatory behavior, so I can't really comment much on your final statement. In my area, there are more women working in Wal*Mart than there are men, so I don't know how true your statement is in terms of the entire company. Your area may have problems, but I would link that more to the poor managerial staff, and not Wal*Mart in general. But as I said, I don't have experience with that, so I can't comment much.
I guess you havnt been to a small town that has been taken over by Walmart?
And what's so bad with Wal*Mart coming in to a small town? You don't like new jobs in a small town? My uncle would be extremely pleased if a Wal*Mart came into his area - right now he's working in a lumber mill that caused his hands to be crushed several times now, and he's making less than a cashier at a retail store! Don't assume every person weeps when the "evil" Wal*Mart builds a store. Your choice of words - "taking over" - is quite negative, when a new Wal*Mart in the area definitely is not something negative.
All large companies today began as small companies in the past. To complain that Wal*Mart doesn't give Ed's Groceries a chance is ridiculous. Wal*Mart didn't suddenly pop into a super size existence - it grew. It grew from the size small businesses are today. Those small businesses are the same size of company as Wal*Mart was years ago. Wal*Mart started before those new companies. Early bird gets the worm. Small business is risky. It's life. You move on. And all those other clichés.
On another note, why are there users here writing Wal*Mart's name as "WalM*rt"? Is there some phobia with writing the name properly? Are people so angst-ridden that they can't handle writing out the name? Are they in fear of somehow paying backhand respect to a company that is so "evil" that by writing out the name they and their children are cursed for all eternity? Grow up people, write the name for crying out loud. It's not going to kill you.
Okay, rant's over. Please don't take this for trolling. I just don't like anal attitudes about simple, petty things. It gets to me.
And? The stats are still from their weblogs. It doesn't say they use stats from elsewhere, only that they monitor them.
Your point? The W3Schools link clearly indicates that the web logs are compared to other sites to ensure an accurate statistic. It doesn't provide the sources - but are you saying that because the W3C is a "techy" website, that there information can't be trusted - not even the sources they use for simple statistic pages? Wow!
2.2. Affiliate agrees not to make any representations, warranties or other statements concerning Apple, Apple's site, any of Apple's products or services, or Apple's site policies, except as expressly authorized by the Engagement.
Would anyone mind explaining this to me? I'm not a lawyer, so I can't be sure... but from what I can see, doesn't this mean that as an affiliate, we are not allowed to say we like or dislike a song to which is being linked?
I too was confused with the FAQ, but for a different reason: there are no banner measurements given. I don't want to have to sign an agreement that gives me certain responsibilities without knowing all my tools at my disposal beforehand. Does "creative" mean text-based ads similar to Google's? Does "banner" mean 88x31 pixels, or 500x150 pixels? If I'm going to have to follow all sorts of rules just to see what I can promote on my website, forget it. I don't want to take the risk of Apple emailing me about my lack of participation. Maybe I'm being too paranoid?
If you earn more than $25 in a given month, you'll receive a check about 45 days after the end of that month. If your earnings total less than $25, then you will receive a check after the end of the following month in which your total earnings reach $25.
I don't know if downloading from allofmp3.com in the US will prevent you from being targeted by the RIAA. Something doesn't sit right with me about that website.
So what's the point? It's to leverage their monopoly (Windows OS, Windows Media Player bundled with said OS) into the online music business.
Rose-colored glasses. iTunes was intended to increase iPod purchases. A large company in today's world, starting a service just because they want to help people, is rare indeed. There is almost always a monetary or positionary motive behind the actions.
Best example I can think of is Primary Colors, which was not free, but was anonymous. Linux is free, but not anonymous. Information wants to be free is an anthem for highly intelligent people.
You still haven't explained yourself. Information is just that, information. Data. Non-sentient. You may want information to be free. That doesn't mean that it has to be. Nice move on patting yourself on the back with the "intelligent" bit. Please.
What? I don't get what you're talking about. Information is not sentient... it has no wants or needs. As for attaching a name to a song... I don't get what that means, either. Mind explaining?
Every new music store offers the same music, just ties you to a different media player. iTunes Music Store, by virtue of being the first, has a greater foothold in the market.
Microsoft has to find a way to be better than iTunes, rather than just selling music in the.wma format. Otherwise, I don't think they'll be beating out iTunes any time soon. Challenging it, yes. Ending up the most popular, no. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I would think by now that those who were going to purchase music online would have started with iTunes or one of its competitors.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry for the rant... it's frustrating to see article after article of back-patting amongst the filesharers who claim to have no problems with not paying for items. As an artist (web design, photography), I would be greatly displeased if I found out others were taking my photographs and making copies of them without my permission, when I was attempting to sell them. If my artwork was horrible, and the people copying my artwork claimed that, why would they take my art? And if a portion came back after copying it and quietly paid me for it, does that make the initial copying "okay"? I think not.
And allofmp3.com isn't exactly legal in the US.
Yeah, I will from now on: this was the first time that he linked two Anonymous Coward posts he made together.
Wha? When does debating the benefits of a business mean I "love" it?! People here loathe Wal*Mart. I like Wal*Mart, just like I like its competitiors. It's a store, not a person. Are you against debating when it disagrees with your opinion?
Who are you? You're following me around now? As an Anonymous Coward? Get a life, man.
Why would a talking ad that turns on when you walk by make you mad...? Just ignore it. It doesn't know who you are, it just knows you're there. I don't see why this is a big deal - there have been motion-detected ads placed in malls in the past. It's just another form of advertisement for us all to ignore.
They still take the money from your paycheck! Join them or don't join them, you still pay union dues. Might as well join them. Otherwise, I am paying for nothing.
Do you know anything about predatory pricing, discriminatory pricing, and display fees? I didn't think so or you wouldn't be posting.
Good grief, are all Slashdot users rude? I said, there should be no concession made to small businesses by larger businesses to stay alive. To say that Wal*Mart can't enter a community, so that a smaller business may thrive is creating a monopoly for the smaller business. Wal*Mart has just as much right to enter an area as a small business. If Wal*Mart is doing something illegal, then stop them. If they're not, it's business. If these small businesses are so great for the community, why are they dying? Because the people in the small community aren't visiting them any longer. Don't fault Wal*Mart for the lack of loyalty among small business patrons!
I think it should also be noted that Sam's Club was made for small businesses to get the deals to which Wal*Mart was privy. Ironic that it comes from the "evil" company itself.
First of all, the CEO must ultimately take responsibility for the company. In fact CEO's have been arrested for offenses committed by their managers or even salespeople usually as a result of healthcode violations. Walmart also has a responsibility as a company to provide for a fair and non-discriminatory work environment and they haven't done that. Maybe you missed the news when Walmart had a class action lawsuit against them for disciminatory behaviour, concerning the lack of women who received promotions. Next time you are in a Walmart take a look at what positions the women usually hold as compared to the men.
Has the lawsuit yet been finished? I really don't know, so if anyone has any information, please post. Otherwise, they're innocent until proven guilty. Just because there is a lawsuit in the works, does not mean it has any grounds in reality.
I don't think defending a business would really be considered anal... my commment about the anal attitude was the spelling of Wal*Mart. Sorry for the confusion.
So they pay minimum wage... that's their choice. Nobody is really forcing you to work there. I know, in small towns, the evil store takes away all other jobs and forces you to work in their store - my counter to that argument would be to question the pay rate of the original occupation. If it's a small town, you're probably not getting much over minimum wage anyway.
Union busting? Unions are terrible, and a waste of time. I worked in a union-backed retail store, and the only thing I found the union did was take my money from my paycheck every week. I tried using it, and the union was, and continues to be, worthless. I applaud Wal*Mart for being union-free.
How can you be "anti-competitive"? I don't know what you mean, mind explaining?
I have no experiences with the discriminatory behavior, so I can't really comment much on your final statement. In my area, there are more women working in Wal*Mart than there are men, so I don't know how true your statement is in terms of the entire company. Your area may have problems, but I would link that more to the poor managerial staff, and not Wal*Mart in general. But as I said, I don't have experience with that, so I can't comment much.
And what's so bad with Wal*Mart coming in to a small town? You don't like new jobs in a small town? My uncle would be extremely pleased if a Wal*Mart came into his area - right now he's working in a lumber mill that caused his hands to be crushed several times now, and he's making less than a cashier at a retail store! Don't assume every person weeps when the "evil" Wal*Mart builds a store. Your choice of words - "taking over" - is quite negative, when a new Wal*Mart in the area definitely is not something negative.
All large companies today began as small companies in the past. To complain that Wal*Mart doesn't give Ed's Groceries a chance is ridiculous. Wal*Mart didn't suddenly pop into a super size existence - it grew. It grew from the size small businesses are today. Those small businesses are the same size of company as Wal*Mart was years ago. Wal*Mart started before those new companies. Early bird gets the worm. Small business is risky. It's life. You move on. And all those other clichés.
On another note, why are there users here writing Wal*Mart's name as "WalM*rt"? Is there some phobia with writing the name properly? Are people so angst-ridden that they can't handle writing out the name? Are they in fear of somehow paying backhand respect to a company that is so "evil" that by writing out the name they and their children are cursed for all eternity? Grow up people, write the name for crying out loud. It's not going to kill you.
Okay, rant's over. Please don't take this for trolling. I just don't like anal attitudes about simple, petty things. It gets to me.
There was no indication that it is definitely talking about commission.
Your point? The W3Schools link clearly indicates that the web logs are compared to other sites to ensure an accurate statistic. It doesn't provide the sources - but are you saying that because the W3C is a "techy" website, that there information can't be trusted - not even the sources they use for simple statistic pages? Wow!
Hey, guess what pal. It's not "cool" to be rude. Grow up. Each song on iTunes is $.99. 25 songs, 25 dollars.
It's still not secure in Internet Explorer.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/affiliates/terms.html
Would anyone mind explaining this to me? I'm not a lawyer, so I can't be sure... but from what I can see, doesn't this mean that as an affiliate, we are not allowed to say we like or dislike a song to which is being linked?
Oh, security? That'll be installed on Tuesday!
I too was confused with the FAQ, but for a different reason: there are no banner measurements given. I don't want to have to sign an agreement that gives me certain responsibilities without knowing all my tools at my disposal beforehand. Does "creative" mean text-based ads similar to Google's? Does "banner" mean 88x31 pixels, or 500x150 pixels? If I'm going to have to follow all sorts of rules just to see what I can promote on my website, forget it. I don't want to take the risk of Apple emailing me about my lack of participation. Maybe I'm being too paranoid?
http://www.apple.com/itunes/affiliates/faq.html
It does seem a little vague... I can't be sure if it means 25 songs, or $25 in commission.
Sorry, I forgot about the formatting requirements with Slashdot.
http://www.gnomedesktop.org/article.php?sid=1938&m ode=thread&order=0&thold=1
Hopefully this site doesn't get Slashdotted!
I don't know if downloading from allofmp3.com in the US will prevent you from being targeted by the RIAA. Something doesn't sit right with me about that website.
Rose-colored glasses. iTunes was intended to increase iPod purchases. A large company in today's world, starting a service just because they want to help people, is rare indeed. There is almost always a monetary or positionary motive behind the actions.
You still haven't explained yourself. Information is just that, information. Data. Non-sentient. You may want information to be free. That doesn't mean that it has to be. Nice move on patting yourself on the back with the "intelligent" bit. Please.
What? I don't get what you're talking about. Information is not sentient... it has no wants or needs. As for attaching a name to a song... I don't get what that means, either. Mind explaining?
Microsoft has to find a way to be better than iTunes, rather than just selling music in the .wma format. Otherwise, I don't think they'll be beating out iTunes any time soon. Challenging it, yes. Ending up the most popular, no. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I would think by now that those who were going to purchase music online would have started with iTunes or one of its competitors.