Your wrong, the RIAA told Apple that they must support DRM or they couldnt sell their music. Since Apple cannot legally promote and distribute their own bands (through agreements with Apple Music Inc) their choices became support DRM or give up on iTunes.
And so the argument still stands.
If what you're saying is the case, then Apple can either give up on iTunes or lobby, from their powerful position, for the incorporation of DRM as a legal pre-requisite for selling music online. Companies have a massive amount of legislative clout in this day and age, and it's telling that Apple aren't doing anything about this abusive situation. Apple are instead 'going with the flow' and as such stand as active, wholly willing supporters of the DRM model. This cannot be denied from either logical or ethical perspectives.
It is widely known that the CD music industry, as a whole, has not actually suffered from the advent of peer to peer systems. What has changed is that users are more capable of making informed decisions - a try before you buy arrangement - and this is precisely what the big labels don't want. Talk to any small or independent label out there about P2P and most if not all will hail it as a blessing. They no longer have to compete with agressive advertisers to expose new listeners to their music. As such the companies really losing here are the marketeers and advertising executives. In short, the only companies that stand to lose money from the right to share or resell what you have legally bought are those that don't adapt their business models.
Apple is in a fine position to set the record straight (so to speak) while still benefitting from high volume sales of their high-quality music. Apple, like other on and offline music sellers must learn to find new ways of living alongside, and even working with, with P2P systems. Think of P2P as a kind of 'radio', and it starts to make sense.
This action should attract the people who thought that Apple was not a good target because it is the RIAA that requires DRM..
While Apple may not be the primary target, they most certainly shouldn't be delisted from those considered responsible; Apple is proving that DRM business is big business, and so indirectly affirming the RIAA's idiotic war. Despite the fact it is trivial to bypass the AAC copy restrictions/'lock-in', users are still disallowed the legitimate rights to use the stuff they bought the way they want to use it. Apple is making this work in their favour, not ours.
Futhermore no one forced Apple to adopt support for DRM, and so we should be wary of the notion that Economic Rationalism somehow renders them inadvertent victims of these lobbyists and would-be legislators. Apple are actively supporting the reduction of use-rights and will no doubt continue to develop technologies to these ends.
How is it possible that even images of their own device on fire could look so boring. They're so devoid of composition, of sensitivity.
In this other example, the victim has taken time to place the burning device against a backdrop of roughly hewn rock, and has done so at a time of day
deserving of the generous tones cast by the flames as they lash, even swagger about the white plastic..
Dell, here this: even in death, one should look positively gorgeous.
From what I hear their biggest market is Shake on Linux, now a standard production platform in the feature film industry. I wonder if this is due to 64 bit systems being the favourite of big production houses, or whether it's because Linux is also more widely used in 3D animation and rendering roles. King Kong (pictured on the Apple site) was almost entirely made on Red Hat Linux machines running on IBM workstations AFAIK.
1. Firefox development is focused on Win32. Ben Goodger, the lead developer, does not use Linux.
That may be the case, but the browser benchmarks I've seen place FF on Windows as performing worse on Windows than on Linux. Regardless, it's performance on any platform is nothing to be proud of, and I'll be surprised if we don't see Opera heavily eating into FF's market share in the coming year.
I don't want to be running a closed-source browser, but given the increasingly miserable state of state of Firefox, and insufficent open-source alternatives, chosing not to run Opera is starting to look like masochism.
Reading changelogs such as these should strike fear into the hearts of the Firefox developers, while that they squander so foolishly their hard-earned market share. If it wasn't for Opera, Joe Clickit wouldn't have reason to think FF was so poorly cobbled together.
Firefox, while it started with good intentions has become thick around the midriff. It's memory useage is embarassing, and I use Linux which is apparently the build target Firefox is most optomised for. How long can we be told we're sick of being told they're imagining FF's gushing memory leaks.. Why does an open-source application fall so miserably behind a closed-source competitor? The trend is the inverse.
America is the only country to use nuclear weapons, inflicting total misery on hundreds of thousands of people. The same country to invade another looking for nuclear weapons that aren't there. The same nation that chastises, to the point of threatening war, other countries for enriching uranium... and now they publically anounce they are working on a new and improved life annihilating weapon of their own.
Now you can't argue with the totally fscking absurd, but you can argue that the world is alot less safe with America in it.
Do you really think, that with the formidable task of a 12000 PC migration, they considered the world of operating systems to be comprised of only Linux and Solaris?
Futhermore while Windows is an obvious option, have you ever heard of OSX being used, on any comparable scale, by any international government?
It's rush-hour on a Friday night. The train carriage I'm in has an odourous ambience of smug techno-arianism and revolting self-ordained hipness. I look over either shoulder and realise the source of my discomfort. All my fellow passengers have little or no surface features. To put it more clearly, they are in fact all silhouettes striking obtuse dance poses in what appear to be exaggerated representations of a person enjoying music in the privacy of their own home... the entire carriage is full of 2-Dimensional Private Dancers..
One of these creatures hands me a single white earpiece and says something like "Do you feel it?". I hear what appears to be RadioHead's "Ok Computer" coming from the earpiece. Barely suppressing a sudden onset of nausea, I sidle away. I reach into my pocket and crank up an Ogg Vorbis rip of New Order's 'Bizarre Love Triange' on my iAudio and breathe deeply.. i'm going to make it. Down the other end of the carriage I make eye contact with the only other three-dimensional being on board. She smiles nervously and points to her Sony Discman..
I can imagine users will fall over themselves with hacks to get XScreensaver working again.
Tell me about it.. It took days. I lost a leg and three fingers in the battle and am since stricken with a gripping case of Tourettes Syndrome. Here's what i had to go through:
You are an idiot. Ubuntu 'competing' with Debian is like you competing with your own spine.
Ubuntu has some 50 package maintainers riding on the work of some 5000 in Debian that actually compile software and prepare it in packages ready for use downstream by distributions like Ubuntu. Ask any of the Ubuntu developers or maintainers altogether and they will say "If it wasn't for Debian we wouldn't be here."
Secondly, Debian couldn't give a damn about being a 'desktop' OS. They don't call it the "Universal Operating System" for nothing. Ubuntu only testifies to Debian's great success.
miserly
adj : used of persons or behavior; characterized by or indicative
of lack of generosity; "a mean person"; "he left a
miserly tip" [syn: {mean}, {mingy}, {tight}
I think you'll find that etymologically speaking, 'miserable' in fact derives from the old word 'miserly' by way of 'miser', a wretched and selfish person.
I have 2 Asus Pentium M's and one has 3.8h and the other 4.5h after a year. From what I've read about the Dual Core I imagined far better performance than a more power hungry predecessor. Asustek make the MacBook for Apple. I guess we'll have a better comparison when/if Asus come out with a Dual Core laptop under their own brand.
You're talking about _Debian_ an OS which was never explictly designed for the desktop at all, ever.
I've been using Debian for many years, and in order to run a Debian desktop you pretty much need to run the Testing or Unstable branches, which as their names suggest, should not be relied upon. And you're right, there is a hell of alot of fiddling over the years to keep up with changes like those to libC, device file systems, X etc.
Along comes Ubuntu however, a Debian derivative bent on making a n00b proof desktop experience and install process. You simply don't need to be a computer expert to install and run Ubuntu, proven by absolutely non-power user students of mine - 3 of which recently switched from OSX. The popularity of the distro reflects this truth, it is reaching mainstream audiences. Installing Ubuntu and having a working desktop takes around an hour, bandwidth permitting. As usual it's always best to check that your hardware is supported. If not and you want to use a Linux OS regardless, then do as you have done with OSX and buy a preinstalled computer
You should be careful to generalise "Linux" as you do. Linux is a kernel, on top of which many different kinds of operating system can be built for many different purposes.
I'd be interested to know if it is possible to buy a MacIntel without OSX preinstalled.
OSX doesn't fulfill my needs as a primary OS, but the CoreDuo Mac Mini has appeal as a low temperature SFF Linux box. If Apple do reach even half the market share they once had, I wonder if we'll be seeing an increase in demand for the hardware they distribute without the OS tax? Given that Asustek and Quanta make all of the Apple hardware, my next best bet is that Asus simply put out a blank SFF box with the same spec as the Mini.
but it would suck to have some Russian grab your company by the nuts
Eh? Didn't fear of "The Russians" die with Raegenism? Wolfowitz did a fine job on old Ronald - and you it would seem. Tom Clancy does keeps a few Russian snipers employed these days, but aside from this there's really there's not a whole lot scary about "The Russians" these days.
Frankly a far more realistic fear is found between Americans and their own government... America is the place where the right to personal privacy extends about as far as your local drugstore and it's in America that legislation to personal privacy is being rewritten daily - thank Jacob they don't need to type that stuff out.
It could safely be said, if you want more privacy, move from America to Russia.
In fact, Apple's new MacBook Pro marks the first time one of their machines has been assembled in China..
Rubbish. Apple branded portables and desktop machines have been almost entirely manufactured by Taiwanese companies Quanta and AsusTek back as far as2002. AsusTek (Asus) are themselves a huge name in laptops, selling several times the volume of Apple portables branded in their own name.
While it's not news that Apple's laptops are not of a high quality anymore (the G3 was great however), that is probably more to do with a shoddy deal they have with Asustek and Quanta than the fact it's made in China. I met an indian guy once that said he tried MacDonalds and decided "American food was really bad".
Regardless of where it's made, the illusion Apple laptops have better internals than that of HP or Asus is absurd given they have near identical internals. Not a surprise; they were put together by the same hands.
LOL Yes!!!! Like buying a new Corvette and ripping out that "stupid" motor because you don't know how to work on the one that came with it!!!
Tedious automobile analogies aside, it would seem that you are having trouble working your own brain. What is actually wrong with someone preferring to use another operating system over OSX. Is the thought that abominable? Many many people have tried OSX and find it doesn't suit them for whatever reason, sometimes the list is long, sometimes it is short. Why on earth would you spare the energy to celebrate that you're disturbed by this fact?
OSX and Linux have around the same market share of the desktop computer market - a combined 8% at best. Shouldn't you be directing your disappointment at another operating system?
"You're asking me to ignore my own first hand knowledge of that talk he gave."
No I'm not. Howver it's obviously during the "fanboy stuff" that you switched off; a couple of questions did, in fact, request Cory's views on DRM, Apple, open-standards and iTunes.
Free-software and open-standards were a hot topic for that festival even though it was under the frame of 'Free-culture'. This topic was heated even further by the fact several of these leading free-culture and free-software protagonists were using proprietary (rights restricted) operating systems like OSX and Windows. Questions surrounding this apparent and overt incoherency continued immediately afterwards in several blogs, one of which resulted in a direct and defensive response from Cory. A good response however came from the DownHillBattle guys, who were far less defensive and gave opinions of a practical nature indicating real experience on the topic. Another clear-headed answer came from Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia fame who explained he in fact uses Yellow Dog Linux on his PB.
Slashdot Mirror
If what you're saying is the case, then Apple can either give up on iTunes or lobby, from their powerful position, for the incorporation of DRM as a legal pre-requisite for selling music online. Companies have a massive amount of legislative clout in this day and age, and it's telling that Apple aren't doing anything about this abusive situation. Apple are instead 'going with the flow' and as such stand as active, wholly willing supporters of the DRM model. This cannot be denied from either logical or ethical perspectives.
It is widely known that the CD music industry, as a whole, has not actually suffered from the advent of peer to peer systems. What has changed is that users are more capable of making informed decisions - a try before you buy arrangement - and this is precisely what the big labels don't want. Talk to any small or independent label out there about P2P and most if not all will hail it as a blessing. They no longer have to compete with agressive advertisers to expose new listeners to their music. As such the companies really losing here are the marketeers and advertising executives. In short, the only companies that stand to lose money from the right to share or resell what you have legally bought are those that don't adapt their business models.
Apple is in a fine position to set the record straight (so to speak) while still benefitting from high volume sales of their high-quality music. Apple, like other on and offline music sellers must learn to find new ways of living alongside, and even working with, with P2P systems. Think of P2P as a kind of 'radio', and it starts to make sense.
Futhermore no one forced Apple to adopt support for DRM, and so we should be wary of the notion that Economic Rationalism somehow renders them inadvertent victims of these lobbyists and would-be legislators. Apple are actively supporting the reduction of use-rights and will no doubt continue to develop technologies to these ends.
How is it possible that even images of their own device on fire could look so boring. They're so devoid of composition, of sensitivity.
In this other example, the victim has taken time to place the burning device against a backdrop of roughly hewn rock, and has done so at a time of day deserving of the generous tones cast by the flames as they lash, even swagger about the white plastic..
Dell, here this: even in death, one should look positively gorgeous.
From what I hear their biggest market is Shake on Linux, now a standard production platform in the feature film industry. I wonder if this is due to 64 bit systems being the favourite of big production houses, or whether it's because Linux is also more widely used in 3D animation and rendering roles. King Kong (pictured on the Apple site) was almost entirely made on Red Hat Linux machines running on IBM workstations AFAIK.
I don't want to be running a closed-source browser, but given the increasingly miserable state of state of Firefox, and insufficent open-source alternatives, chosing not to run Opera is starting to look like masochism.
Reading changelogs such as these should strike fear into the hearts of the Firefox developers, while that they squander so foolishly their hard-earned market share. If it wasn't for Opera, Joe Clickit wouldn't have reason to think FF was so poorly cobbled together.
Firefox, while it started with good intentions has become thick around the midriff. It's memory useage is embarassing, and I use Linux which is apparently the build target Firefox is most optomised for. How long can we be told we're sick of being told they're imagining FF's gushing memory leaks.. Why does an open-source application fall so miserably behind a closed-source competitor? The trend is the inverse.
America is the only country to use nuclear weapons, inflicting total misery on hundreds of thousands of people. The same country to invade another looking for nuclear weapons that aren't there. The same nation that chastises, to the point of threatening war, other countries for enriching uranium... and now they publically anounce they are working on a new and improved life annihilating weapon of their own.
Now you can't argue with the totally fscking absurd, but you can argue that the world is alot less safe with America in it.
Reccommended reading.
Do you really think, that with the formidable task of a 12000 PC migration, they considered the world of operating systems to be comprised of only Linux and Solaris? Futhermore while Windows is an obvious option, have you ever heard of OSX being used, on any comparable scale, by any international government?
At least someone still takes Laura and the Yankee Group seriously. Proof that Loyal fans such as Slashdot are not to be discarded easily.
For those of you unclear on the just what deserves this unerring trust, see here.
From where I sit, I welcome the competition.
It's rush-hour on a Friday night. The train carriage I'm in has an odourous ambience of smug techno-arianism and revolting self-ordained hipness. I look over either shoulder and realise the source of my discomfort. All my fellow passengers have little or no surface features. To put it more clearly, they are in fact all silhouettes striking obtuse dance poses in what appear to be exaggerated representations of a person enjoying music in the privacy of their own home... the entire carriage is full of 2-Dimensional Private Dancers..
One of these creatures hands me a single white earpiece and says something like "Do you feel it?". I hear what appears to be RadioHead's "Ok Computer" coming from the earpiece. Barely suppressing a sudden onset of nausea, I sidle away. I reach into my pocket and crank up an Ogg Vorbis rip of New Order's 'Bizarre Love Triange' on my iAudio and breathe deeply.. i'm going to make it. Down the other end of the carriage I make eye contact with the only other three-dimensional being on board. She smiles nervously and points to her Sony Discman..
SanDisk, Bring The Humans Back.
You are best to use Easy Ubuntu, reccommended by Ubuntu developers and package maintainers over competing scripts.
You are an idiot. Ubuntu 'competing' with Debian is like you competing with your own spine.
Ubuntu has some 50 package maintainers riding on the work of some 5000 in Debian that actually compile software and prepare it in packages ready for use downstream by distributions like Ubuntu. Ask any of the Ubuntu developers or maintainers altogether and they will say "If it wasn't for Debian we wouldn't be here."
Secondly, Debian couldn't give a damn about being a 'desktop' OS. They don't call it the "Universal Operating System" for nothing. Ubuntu only testifies to Debian's great success.
From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:
miserly
adj : used of persons or behavior; characterized by or indicative of lack of generosity; "a mean person"; "he left a miserly tip" [syn: {mean}, {mingy}, {tight}
I think you'll find that etymologically speaking, 'miserable' in fact derives from the old word 'miserly' by way of 'miser', a wretched and selfish person.
The rest of your reply was informative, thankyou.
I have 2 Asus Pentium M's and one has 3.8h and the other 4.5h after a year. From what I've read about the Dual Core I imagined far better performance than a more power hungry predecessor. Asustek make the MacBook for Apple. I guess we'll have a better comparison when/if Asus come out with a Dual Core laptop under their own brand.
You're talking about _Debian_ an OS which was never explictly designed for the desktop at all, ever.
I've been using Debian for many years, and in order to run a Debian desktop you pretty much need to run the Testing or Unstable branches, which as their names suggest, should not be relied upon. And you're right, there is a hell of alot of fiddling over the years to keep up with changes like those to libC, device file systems, X etc.
Along comes Ubuntu however, a Debian derivative bent on making a n00b proof desktop experience and install process. You simply don't need to be a computer expert to install and run Ubuntu, proven by absolutely non-power user students of mine - 3 of which recently switched from OSX. The popularity of the distro reflects this truth, it is reaching mainstream audiences. Installing Ubuntu and having a working desktop takes around an hour, bandwidth permitting. As usual it's always best to check that your hardware is supported. If not and you want to use a Linux OS regardless, then do as you have done with OSX and buy a preinstalled computer
You should be careful to generalise "Linux" as you do. Linux is a kernel, on top of which many different kinds of operating system can be built for many different purposes.
You're a Socialist running XP??
C00l! I'm a 35 year Anglican and Biological Weapons Engineer living in Morocco. I like Burzum, Vegan cuisine and greyhound racing!
I'd be interested to know if it is possible to buy a MacIntel without OSX preinstalled.
OSX doesn't fulfill my needs as a primary OS, but the CoreDuo Mac Mini has appeal as a low temperature SFF Linux box. If Apple do reach even half the market share they once had, I wonder if we'll be seeing an increase in demand for the hardware they distribute without the OS tax? Given that Asustek and Quanta make all of the Apple hardware, my next best bet is that Asus simply put out a blank SFF box with the same spec as the Mini.
Frankly a far more realistic fear is found between Americans and their own government... America is the place where the right to personal privacy extends about as far as your local drugstore and it's in America that legislation to personal privacy is being rewritten daily - thank Jacob they don't need to type that stuff out.
It could safely be said, if you want more privacy, move from America to Russia.
While it's not news that Apple's laptops are not of a high quality anymore (the G3 was great however), that is probably more to do with a shoddy deal they have with Asustek and Quanta than the fact it's made in China. I met an indian guy once that said he tried MacDonalds and decided "American food was really bad".
Regardless of where it's made, the illusion Apple laptops have better internals than that of HP or Asus is absurd given they have near identical internals. Not a surprise; they were put together by the same hands.
Tedious automobile analogies aside, it would seem that you are having trouble working your own brain. What is actually wrong with someone preferring to use another operating system over OSX. Is the thought that abominable? Many many people have tried OSX and find it doesn't suit them for whatever reason, sometimes the list is long, sometimes it is short. Why on earth would you spare the energy to celebrate that you're disturbed by this fact?
OSX and Linux have around the same market share of the desktop computer market - a combined 8% at best. Shouldn't you be directing your disappointment at another operating system?
You don't work for Attila by any chance?
"You're asking me to ignore my own first hand knowledge of that talk he gave."
No I'm not. Howver it's obviously during the "fanboy stuff" that you switched off; a couple of questions did, in fact, request Cory's views on DRM, Apple, open-standards and iTunes.
Free-software and open-standards were a hot topic for that festival even though it was under the frame of 'Free-culture'. This topic was heated even further by the fact several of these leading free-culture and free-software protagonists were using proprietary (rights restricted) operating systems like OSX and Windows. Questions surrounding this apparent and overt incoherency continued immediately afterwards in several blogs, one of which resulted in a direct and defensive response from Cory. A good response however came from the DownHillBattle guys, who were far less defensive and gave opinions of a practical nature indicating real experience on the topic. Another clear-headed answer came from Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia fame who explained he in fact uses Yellow Dog Linux on his PB.