An excellent question. This information is available on my MEGA MASTER MILLION NIGERIAN EMAIL SCAM STATISTICS PAGE to which I will offer FREE ACCESS to for a limited time only if you send USD 50 to the following address...
It's interesting that MSN and Yahoo IM clients are working together to get in on the pie
I read an excellent article about a month ago after the release of Google Talk that predicted something like this would happen based what reliable sources had said (anyone have the link?)
I don't think it's an issue of getting in on any 'pie', more that they're slightly fearful of what Google can accomplish. Running any IM service is expensive - think of the infrastructure required, and the demands people would make for constant reliability. If everyone suddenly migrates to Google (not inconceivable) once they offer some killer UI / feature-set, the other IM services are in trouble, and the maintenance of many separate services is likely to end up costly and inconvenient.
Absolutely. It's not nominally a public beta, but they're not immensely selective about whom they grant access to. If you think about it, the only users that are going to be downloading beta software are the dedicated fans - potentially these users, even the unauthorised ones, will test it out and provide some useful bug reports. Microsoft don't stand to lose much either way.
The whole point of excessive storage in a device is comfort. People like to have way more than they'll ever use just for the sake of it - Gmail is a particularly good example.
Don't forget that iPods don't just have to store music - I'm sure as capacities increase we'll move towards higher quality, even lossless music files as a standard.
The bill would address common cell phone annoyances...
Industry sponsors say they'll fight the bill.
The only grounds they really have for complaint here is the economic feasibility of allowing one year contracts - the longer the contract the easier it is to subsidise the cost of the phone and still obtain a handsome profit.
But arguing about dead zones and refusing to offer bills consumers can understand? What could the possible justification there be?
However, some criteria that would make it more clear to me what they're counting as web sites
An older survey of theirs seems to contain the answer:
The Netcraft Web Server Survey is a survey of Web Server software usage on Internet connected computers. We collect and collate as many hostnames providing an http service as we can find, and systematically poll each one with an HTTP request for the server name.
So yeah, they're probably being quite lax about actual content.
Circumventing copy protections, even for personal use, will be illegal. (it states so in the law, even tho the government tried to argue that the right wont be pursued by government, but nothing stops record labels, movie studios, etc to do so)
Letting a government pass a law that encompasses a certain ability to do something on the basis that they've argued they won't use it is quite worrying.
The robo-dog may steal owners away from the Tamagotchi virtual pet, which swept the world in the mid-1990s.
Did anyone ever play with theirs for longer than 5 minutes? More importantly, what audience is there to 'steal' given that these haven't been on the market for years?
This could happen regardless of whether you use a portable music device or not. Anyone who goes out to clubs will be exposed to loud music anyway, and in that kind of setting you can't control the volume.
I believe EU iPods have a volume limit anyway, but this is easily removed.
This is a topic that's been raised quite a lot recently. Firstly, would we even want to read emails from 1990 in the future? Unlike, say, Byron's letters, that give us lucid insights and useful historical detail, most of modern day e-mail- and IM-based communication is mostly functional and lifeless.
I remember reading an article about the archival of scientific research; many researches involved in the discovery of DNA's structure didn't keep their (hand-written) notes, but they were later recovered by others who saw the value of such significant documents to future generations.
Nowadays, of course, we can just trash something by clicking the delete button, and one the hard drive's formatted, it's gone. This does make me wonder how much historical and scientific information will be lost to future generations simply because of this ease of deletion.
Is anyone else struck by the suggestiveness of the extended metaphor on this other news site reporting on the story?
"Siebel has needed to be picked up for some time. There are other suitors that would probably have made better sense, but it seems that Oracle is going for the number one slot no matter what the cost and aiming to become the only boy on the CRM block..."
It's a legitimate, functional technology. This is all too reminiscent of the media companies' fear of a threat to their established business models.
Regardless of any efforts to block its use, once people realise the advantages of VOIP, organisations, whether Governments or companies who want to enforce some kind of monopoly, will have to embrace this worthwhile development.
Slashdot Mirror
An excellent question. This information is available on my MEGA MASTER MILLION NIGERIAN EMAIL SCAM STATISTICS PAGE to which I will offer FREE ACCESS to for a limited time only if you send USD 50 to the following address...
I read an excellent article about a month ago after the release of Google Talk that predicted something like this would happen based what reliable sources had said (anyone have the link?)
I don't think it's an issue of getting in on any 'pie', more that they're slightly fearful of what Google can accomplish. Running any IM service is expensive - think of the infrastructure required, and the demands people would make for constant reliability. If everyone suddenly migrates to Google (not inconceivable) once they offer some killer UI / feature-set, the other IM services are in trouble, and the maintenance of many separate services is likely to end up costly and inconvenient.
Absolutely. It's not nominally a public beta, but they're not immensely selective about whom they grant access to. If you think about it, the only users that are going to be downloading beta software are the dedicated fans - potentially these users, even the unauthorised ones, will test it out and provide some useful bug reports. Microsoft don't stand to lose much either way.
Don't forget that iPods don't just have to store music - I'm sure as capacities increase we'll move towards higher quality, even lossless music files as a standard.
Industry sponsors say they'll fight the bill.
The only grounds they really have for complaint here is the economic feasibility of allowing one year contracts - the longer the contract the easier it is to subsidise the cost of the phone and still obtain a handsome profit.
But arguing about dead zones and refusing to offer bills consumers can understand? What could the possible justification there be?
Maybe they're compensating for the lack of DRM in the MP3 format!
An older survey of theirs seems to contain the answer:
The Netcraft Web Server Survey is a survey of Web Server software usage on Internet connected computers. We collect and collate as many hostnames providing an http service as we can find, and systematically poll each one with an HTTP request for the server name.
So yeah, they're probably being quite lax about actual content.
Because they can!
Letting a government pass a law that encompasses a certain ability to do something on the basis that they've argued they won't use it is quite worrying.
There must be more to this.
Did anyone ever play with theirs for longer than 5 minutes? More importantly, what audience is there to 'steal' given that these haven't been on the market for years?
Survival of the fittest, I guess!
Yes, but Google also caches the pages.
And they couldn't have just figured this out by turning the laptop on? Do you need forensic tests to work out that a new OS is on there?
Anonymous comments are tolerated here, and there's even the potential to defame.
Not too many people complaining, though.
There aren't that many euphonic alternatives. Nintenducks? Nintegnu!
I believe EU iPods have a volume limit anyway, but this is easily removed.
Style, functionality, the interface's ease of use. Oh, and peer pressure. Those are reasons enough!
Of course, it were a Microsoft product, the natural successor would be 'Gallery Super Uber Ultimate Edition'.
I remember reading an article about the archival of scientific research; many researches involved in the discovery of DNA's structure didn't keep their (hand-written) notes, but they were later recovered by others who saw the value of such significant documents to future generations.
Nowadays, of course, we can just trash something by clicking the delete button, and one the hard drive's formatted, it's gone. This does make me wonder how much historical and scientific information will be lost to future generations simply because of this ease of deletion.
"Siebel has needed to be picked up for some time. There are other suitors that would probably have made better sense, but it seems that Oracle is going for the number one slot no matter what the cost and aiming to become the only boy on the CRM block..."
Woah, he's not talking about Slashdot?
What are the odds that you'll be able to 'upgrade' from one version to the other by changing one registry key?
As long as were hear stimulateing discusion, its not really they're responsability to make sure thing's make gramatical sense. *Coughs*
Regardless of any efforts to block its use, once people realise the advantages of VOIP, organisations, whether Governments or companies who want to enforce some kind of monopoly, will have to embrace this worthwhile development.
Oh, wait.