"The real iPod killer won't be an mp3 player"
Guy Kawasaki says something similar. Innovation is not progressing along the same curve (i.e. adding a Helvetica 18 point font to a daisy wheel typewriter) but jumping to another curve (i.e. laser printers).
There is an argument for having only one speaker. When attending a classical concert, the listener will rarely find the orchestra arranged in a 5.1 seating order (for example with drums up front, violins on the sides and wind instruments at the back of the concert hall)
So we could have concert quality sound with only one speaker, at least according to this product site stereolith. Attention: foreign language warning.
The site describes a one-speaker technology. Does anyone have experience listening to such a set-up?
Waiting for someone to come around and give you a position on Mars is wishful thinking at the best.
But if you put all you energy into solving the problems involved in colonizing Mars, then who knows if the sky will really be the limit?
"but the secret is in just getting them to your site and if in the first seconds they don't like it then more than likely you have lost them for good"
The secret would be to start from scratch and especially replacing the horrible commercial-speak.
It was painful trying to find out what the site offers the visitor. I got a "bit of everything but nothing in particular" impression when reading part of the text.
Find out what your target market is and what interests them. Then rebuild the site to offer them what they want.
Rule: A first glance should give your target reader the feeling he/she found a site catering to their interests.
I often find the statement "Apple is mostly making money off iPod sales as opposed to iTMS; iTMS is an important factor in generating iPod sales".
If true, this could lend more weight to a record label's threats of non-renewal of their iTMS contract as it might also impact iPod sales. I think this may be what Steve Gordon was alluding to, indirectly saying "if Apple still makes money from selling music in a broad sense, then the price is not high enough".
But then, would the absence of the big five from iTMS really impact iPod sales? Most music on iPods probably still is from peoples CD librarys. Podcasts and indie Music could fill up the rest.
We need to be reminded we are mostly discussing unique products. There is only one "ABC" of the Jackson 5. I can't (and wouldn't want to) just go and buy a version from Jackson Four because it's similar but cheaper.
From a seller perspective, it would be best to sell high to diehard fans, lower pricing for mainstream and sell cheapily to casual buyer's who only buy during a "Sale".
A way to achieve this is either time-based pricing as previously stated, or to increase value of the higher price segment (for example lossless encoding, added content.
Apple is already increasing revenue by selling a package of song and video at a higher price. I'd love to see lossless encoding for classical music, which until now has kept me from buying it over iTunes.
To benefit from The Long Tail, the music industry would be advised to really open their back catalogues and price these cheaper than music which is being promoted today (and therefore costs them more).
So a way out for everyone could be 1) maintain existing $.99 pricing for most songs, higher pricing for better content/encoding and lower prices for back catalogue.
I think this would be accepted by customers. For customers and the musicians benefit, competition on promotion and quality should be foremost, not competition on pricing.
First of all, I firmly believe we are at the point where knowledge of geothermal processes and improving technologies will make geothermal energy a major alternative source of energy to oil, gas and coal.
I support research and projects into HDR technology, but there are a number of fundamental problems with it that have already been solved with other geothermal technologies.
HDR entails drilling two boreholes usually a number of kilometers apart, then pressing water with high pressure through one hole to create fissures in the rock through which one hopes water at ambient temperature can then be pumped from the other borehole.
The main risk is no one can guarantee that this "closed circuit" will function as planned. Water may not come out of the "pump" hole, or not is sufficient quantities. Thus one can not calculate the energy output beforehand in a precise manner. This makes financing such projects risky and costly.
Secondly, in practice the water is washing the rock and accumulating sediments and chemicals along it's way. So the pumped up water will not be pure. Corrosion and mineral deposits are some of the consequences which can shorten the longevity of such a solution.
I've recently learned of a technology Geohil (sorry, link is to German language text only) whereby only one borehole is required.
It has generally been thought that the energy output of one borehole technologies is insufficient to be commercially viable, especially for electricity generation (I'm excluding hot water geothermal energy such as used in Iceland). However such studies have not taken into account the fact that rocks are saturated with water at a depth varying from 12 to 50 or more meters and water which circulates in such an open system is not only heated by the walls of the borehole but also by water in the surrounding rocks. This effect increases the energy output by 4 to 5 times that of the normal output of a traditional borehole.
The technology can be resumed thus: a thermo insulated pipe is lowered into the borehole within a larger water permeable pipe. The hole is then filled with pebbles. Surface water is poured down and the warm water is then pumped up through the inner pipe, creating a closed circuit. Since the outer pipe is permeable, the cooler water can interact with the water in the water saturated rocks and not only the outer walls of the borehole.
Experiments have shown that these boreholes can be placed within a radius of 8 to 10 meters within each other without affecting the thermal energy output of each hole.
I've seen working installations, which have already been functioning since over 20 years. The beauty of it is one can calculate very precisely how deep and wide a borehole must be to guarantee a certain energy output. Secondly, this technology can be used everywhere and does not depend on specific geological conditions. This last point is the major advantage over all other geothermal energy technologies.
So you may ask "why doesn't anyone know about this technology yet?" or "why hasn't it been a huge commercial success already?" The short answer is that a good engineer is not necessarily a good marketer or entrepreneur.
Another rhetorical question: "So, is this whole post just product placement?" No. I have no commercial interests so far;) But I'm convinced the state of geothermal technology is at a turning point to much larger deployment and will be a credible and financially attractive alternative energy source.
You are right. The worst for Sony is the bad publicity. Sony spends millions of dollars on advertising to build up an image (cool, high tech, reliable, avantgarde) and then they negate all the effort through bad publicity such as the roolkit issue.
If Sony continues like this, they'le end up with a Microsoft-like image, which at least on Slashdot is rather unfavorable.
This opens another plan of attack which I think will have more chance of succeeding (at least for public mind-share. I can't judge the legal value of the argument).
"There's an ombudsman, and a procedure to resolve complaints, but the mere existence of an NSL is secret, so it's not clear how anyone can complain!"
I eventually had to go down to the cellar. With a torch. The notice was on display at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "beware of the leopard".
Use Synergy for Mac 10.x to give you iTunes play buttons and playlists in the top menu bar. What could take up less space than this and still be functional? Synergy can even show you the song information in a programmable pop-up if so desired.
The few TV downloads, which are only available in the US presently, do not represent the growth potential of video on the iPod. Rather individuals and companies using the now more easily available visual mobile technology to communicate.
Think more in the terms of vbloggers, vicasting.
Subscribe to a RSS based dating service with live visual "promos" of a lascivious single searching for a geek partner automatically downloaded to your iPod.
City tours. Soundseeing is passé. Have commentary and visuals for museum tours with closeups of the details of a particular painting or fresque by an art historian.
Instead of sending a postcard or an email from Tasmania, let them subscribe to a periodic vicast of your travels (or travails) to hear the earsplitting cries of the Tasmanian Devil while you can just make out its glowing eyes in the semi-darkness near your tent.
See first hand video casts of the latest cataclysm, instead of just reading about them on a blog.
Ok, the technology is not new. But iTMS makes it easier to disseminate and teh new iPod makes it easier to look at while on the move (public transport or backseat).
Slashdot Mirror
cm'on: hook up a 30-inch screen to the laptop and you'll have realms of HD goodness.
"The real iPod killer won't be an mp3 player" Guy Kawasaki says something similar. Innovation is not progressing along the same curve (i.e. adding a Helvetica 18 point font to a daisy wheel typewriter) but jumping to another curve (i.e. laser printers).
There is an argument for having only one speaker. When attending a classical concert, the listener will rarely find the orchestra arranged in a 5.1 seating order (for example with drums up front, violins on the sides and wind instruments at the back of the concert hall)
So we could have concert quality sound with only one speaker, at least according to this product site stereolith. Attention: foreign language warning.
The site describes a one-speaker technology. Does anyone have experience listening to such a set-up?
So, who ya gonna call?
Waiting for someone to come around and give you a position on Mars is wishful thinking at the best. But if you put all you energy into solving the problems involved in colonizing Mars, then who knows if the sky will really be the limit?
"but the secret is in just getting them to your site and if in the first seconds they don't like it then more than likely you have lost them for good"
The secret would be to start from scratch and especially replacing the horrible commercial-speak.
It was painful trying to find out what the site offers the visitor. I got a "bit of everything but nothing in particular" impression when reading part of the text.
Find out what your target market is and what interests them. Then rebuild the site to offer them what they want.
Rule: A first glance should give your target reader the feeling he/she found a site catering to their interests.
This must be the first discussion where none of the posts are on topic (at least the topic the editors are trying to dupe us into discussing).
This post ensures we don't break our new record.
Here is another download link: rapidshare
At least we have GPS and don't need to rely on a compass to find our way. Who still needs a compass anyway?
Good thought. Luckily Skype has much more lobbying power now that eBay has acquired them.
This is a proof of concept. Next Google will be asked to "filter" searches based on "precedent".
If true, this could lend more weight to a record label's threats of non-renewal of their iTMS contract as it might also impact iPod sales. I think this may be what Steve Gordon was alluding to, indirectly saying "if Apple still makes money from selling music in a broad sense, then the price is not high enough".
But then, would the absence of the big five from iTMS really impact iPod sales? Most music on iPods probably still is from peoples CD librarys. Podcasts and indie Music could fill up the rest.
From a seller perspective, it would be best to sell high to diehard fans, lower pricing for mainstream and sell cheapily to casual buyer's who only buy during a "Sale". A way to achieve this is either time-based pricing as previously stated, or to increase value of the higher price segment (for example lossless encoding, added content.
Apple is already increasing revenue by selling a package of song and video at a higher price. I'd love to see lossless encoding for classical music, which until now has kept me from buying it over iTunes. To benefit from The Long Tail, the music industry would be advised to really open their back catalogues and price these cheaper than music which is being promoted today (and therefore costs them more).
So a way out for everyone could be 1) maintain existing $.99 pricing for most songs, higher pricing for better content/encoding and lower prices for back catalogue.
I think this would be accepted by customers. For customers and the musicians benefit, competition on promotion and quality should be foremost, not competition on pricing.
oops, comment above was filed under the wrong post.
Sure, with $18 you can even get a free rootkit with that CD ;)
and a rebuttal of the rebuttal can be found here: Tallent.
Luckily we can upgrade to dual core.
I support research and projects into HDR technology, but there are a number of fundamental problems with it that have already been solved with other geothermal technologies.
HDR entails drilling two boreholes usually a number of kilometers apart, then pressing water with high pressure through one hole to create fissures in the rock through which one hopes water at ambient temperature can then be pumped from the other borehole.
The main risk is no one can guarantee that this "closed circuit" will function as planned. Water may not come out of the "pump" hole, or not is sufficient quantities. Thus one can not calculate the energy output beforehand in a precise manner. This makes financing such projects risky and costly.
Secondly, in practice the water is washing the rock and accumulating sediments and chemicals along it's way. So the pumped up water will not be pure. Corrosion and mineral deposits are some of the consequences which can shorten the longevity of such a solution. I've recently learned of a technology Geohil (sorry, link is to German language text only) whereby only one borehole is required.
It has generally been thought that the energy output of one borehole technologies is insufficient to be commercially viable, especially for electricity generation (I'm excluding hot water geothermal energy such as used in Iceland). However such studies have not taken into account the fact that rocks are saturated with water at a depth varying from 12 to 50 or more meters and water which circulates in such an open system is not only heated by the walls of the borehole but also by water in the surrounding rocks. This effect increases the energy output by 4 to 5 times that of the normal output of a traditional borehole.
The technology can be resumed thus: a thermo insulated pipe is lowered into the borehole within a larger water permeable pipe. The hole is then filled with pebbles. Surface water is poured down and the warm water is then pumped up through the inner pipe, creating a closed circuit. Since the outer pipe is permeable, the cooler water can interact with the water in the water saturated rocks and not only the outer walls of the borehole.
Experiments have shown that these boreholes can be placed within a radius of 8 to 10 meters within each other without affecting the thermal energy output of each hole.
I've seen working installations, which have already been functioning since over 20 years. The beauty of it is one can calculate very precisely how deep and wide a borehole must be to guarantee a certain energy output. Secondly, this technology can be used everywhere and does not depend on specific geological conditions. This last point is the major advantage over all other geothermal energy technologies.
So you may ask "why doesn't anyone know about this technology yet?" or "why hasn't it been a huge commercial success already?" The short answer is that a good engineer is not necessarily a good marketer or entrepreneur.
Another rhetorical question: "So, is this whole post just product placement?" No. I have no commercial interests so far ;) But I'm convinced the state of geothermal technology is at a turning point to much larger deployment and will be a credible and financially attractive alternative energy source.
I think you meant "back/".
This looks as it will become a Slashdot classic in-joke. "To hide something" =$sys$
If Sony continues like this, they'le end up with a Microsoft-like image, which at least on Slashdot is rather unfavorable.
This opens another plan of attack which I think will have more chance of succeeding (at least for public mind-share. I can't judge the legal value of the argument).
I eventually had to go down to the cellar. With a torch. The notice was on display at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "beware of the leopard".
Use Synergy for Mac 10.x to give you iTunes play buttons and playlists in the top menu bar. What could take up less space than this and still be functional? Synergy can even show you the song information in a programmable pop-up if so desired.
The few TV downloads, which are only available in the US presently, do not represent the growth potential of video on the iPod. Rather individuals and companies using the now more easily available visual mobile technology to communicate. Think more in the terms of vbloggers, vicasting. Subscribe to a RSS based dating service with live visual "promos" of a lascivious single searching for a geek partner automatically downloaded to your iPod. City tours. Soundseeing is passé. Have commentary and visuals for museum tours with closeups of the details of a particular painting or fresque by an art historian. Instead of sending a postcard or an email from Tasmania, let them subscribe to a periodic vicast of your travels (or travails) to hear the earsplitting cries of the Tasmanian Devil while you can just make out its glowing eyes in the semi-darkness near your tent. See first hand video casts of the latest cataclysm, instead of just reading about them on a blog. Ok, the technology is not new. But iTMS makes it easier to disseminate and teh new iPod makes it easier to look at while on the move (public transport or backseat).