Archos is the real mp3 player pioneer, they paved the way for large hard drive mp3 players with their Jukebox Multimedia. If you want any of the features mentioned in this article, you don't have to wait for the next iPod, because Archos has had them for a while now.
I think this is more a case of doing a search for "Red Hat Linux" and getting a page plastered with advertisements for Windows Vista.
There's nothing wrong with that at all. If Red Hat doesn't like it, then they can buy advertising, too. Either way the government needs to keep its stupid, bloated self out of search engines' business.
The DVD rips are in 720x480, whereas the HD caps are in 1920x1080. To better illustrate this, imagine a signal (DVD), and then imagine a signal six times the resolution of the first one (HDTV). I'm pretty sure the latter looks significantly better.
You are obviously ignoring the alternative, offering time-limited demos that offer the full feature set, instead of offering time limited demos that offer a crippled feature set that nags you whenever you try to do any of the standard functions, only 1/10th of which are supported in the demo.
The de facto video editing app for professionals these days is Adobe Premiere. In fact, since Adobe Creative Suite 3 has support for universal binaries, the latest iteration of Premiere will be again be available on OSX.
It would be useless to list it for you because you are being intentionally deceptive in order to serve your own preconceived, unchangeable biases. I could tell you that it has a nice, universally-located realtime search, but then you'd probably whine about it, say you didn't ask for it, and claim you'd rather use a slow, non-realtime search that's only accessible from the find file dialog.
If you want to get technical, then the person making the copy is the one uploading it.
The uploader takes his or her file, makes a copy of it in the form of network data, and sends this copy to the downloader. The downloader streams this network data to their hard drive.
Downloaders are no more guilty of copying than people who buy pirated dvd's off the streets. That is to say, not at all.
In your pathetic straw-man argument, you failed to acknowledge the fact that Apple refuses to license their DRM scheme to other mp3 players in order to form a monopoly, whereas Microsoft happily licenses their DRM scheme to whoever asks for it in order to encourage interoperability.
Who owns what format is irrelevant, what is relevant is who can play them.
DRM'd WMA? Hundreds of different mp3 players from tons of companies.
DRM'd AAC? ONE mp3 player from ONE company.
How can you claim that Microsoft is trying to control the music industry and Apple isn't, when Microsoft is the only one of the two who implements an open-format DRM scheme to foster interoperability?
What leads you to believe this? The way he dresses? The way he talks? The fact that he releases products that come in different colors? All preconceived public relations schemes.
What are these other mp3 manufacturers going to say in their commercials? "Now compatible with 20% of Itunes"? Nobody will buy that unless they don't care about Itunes one way or the other. The manufacturers will likely wait until 100% of Itunes is un-DRM'd beforehand, and who knows when that will be?
Don't fool yourself, DRM'd WMA and DRM'd AAC serve the same purpose; To attempt to control the online music industry, and to attempt to control what people do with the music they buy online. Apple is just as guilty as Microsoft when it comes to DRMing music, because they both do it. Do you think Apple DRMs music because the industry makes them, but Microsoft DRMs music because they choose to? Please. The music industry needs the support of online music sellers just as much as online music sellers need the support of the music industry. 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. The problem here isn't simply that the music industry is evil, the problem is that the music industry, the music resellers, and the online music stores all have the same interests in mind, and all those interests involve screwing the consumer.
You can also burn your entire DRM'd ITMS collection to cds, and then rip the cds back to the computer in a more fair-use-friendly format, but as I mentioned before, Apple is banking on the fact that most users won't.
Also, I forgot to mention -- regarding Jobs letter,
It was simply a publicity stunt to shift the blame of DRM away from him and to the record companies. Universally-compatible, DRM-less music from itunes means Jobs makes less money on his itunes-ipod monopoly, and believe it or not, Jobs is a businessman who wants to make money. So instead of threatening to not resell music for the record companies, he simply played the victim himself and blamed somebody else.
You may not realize this, but the Zune plays music in.mp3 format, too, which would be an ideal, universally compatible format for DRM-less downloadable music.
Jobs didn't want that, though. He didn't want universally compatible music, he wanted ipod-and-only-ipod compatible music, which is why these new higher priced songs are only offered in AAC. It allows him to keep leveraging his near-monopoly between itunes and ipods in the same manner that Apple-DRM-Protected files did.
"But DJCacophony," you may say, "there are other players that can handle unprotected AAC." I am well aware of this, but the fact of the matter is that there aren't a whole lot, and Jobs knows this. The only other semi-mainstream player I can name offhand is the Zune, and it isn't all that popular, as you probably know. The only other option is to convert the file to a more universal format, and Jobs is banking on the fact that most users either don't know how to do this or don't want whatever hassle it may entail.
In summary, this may be a small victory for fair use, but not as much of one against vendor lock-in and corrupt, monopolistic business practices.
HDMI has better quality and support for higher resolutions than VGA. Furthermore, unlike VGA, HDMI incorporates error correction in the specs. Finally, if you are using CRT then you should get with the fucking program and upgrade to a display technology that isn't 110 years old.
Slashdot Mirror
Because it does more. Besides, if you're so worried about weight, then buy one of Archos' smaller, lighter, more compact players.
Archos already has Wi-Fi enabled players, Widescreen players, 160GB HDD players, Touchscreen players, Camcorder players, and all the accessories you can think of, including a DVR station, a helmet camcorder, and an FM radio. .PS, .VOB, H.264, and AAC.
They can play back MPEG-2,
Archos is the real mp3 player pioneer, they paved the way for large hard drive mp3 players with their Jukebox Multimedia. If you want any of the features mentioned in this article, you don't have to wait for the next iPod, because Archos has had them for a while now.
I think this is more a case of doing a search for "Red Hat Linux" and getting a page plastered with advertisements for Windows Vista.
There's nothing wrong with that at all. If Red Hat doesn't like it, then they can buy advertising, too. Either way the government needs to keep its stupid, bloated self out of search engines' business.
The DVD rips are in 720x480, whereas the HD caps are in 1920x1080. To better illustrate this, imagine a signal (DVD), and then imagine a signal six times the resolution of the first one (HDTV). I'm pretty sure the latter looks significantly better.
You are obviously ignoring the alternative, offering time-limited demos that offer the full feature set, instead of offering time limited demos that offer a crippled feature set that nags you whenever you try to do any of the standard functions, only 1/10th of which are supported in the demo.
I think the OP meant, could he download files into a folder that could not be subsequently uploaded from?
Software companies don't lose money by letting people try the full version instead of just a portion of it. Restaurants do. Thus, shut up.
...nothing TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE to do with it
Wow, I knew there was an anti-microsoft bias on Slashdot, but an anti-Adobe bias? What did Adobe ever do to you?
The de facto video editing app for professionals these days is Adobe Premiere. In fact, since Adobe Creative Suite 3 has support for universal binaries, the latest iteration of Premiere will be again be available on OSX.
It would be useless to list it for you because you are being intentionally deceptive in order to serve your own preconceived, unchangeable biases. I could tell you that it has a nice, universally-located realtime search, but then you'd probably whine about it, say you didn't ask for it, and claim you'd rather use a slow, non-realtime search that's only accessible from the find file dialog.
If you want to get technical, then the person making the copy is the one uploading it.
The uploader takes his or her file, makes a copy of it in the form of network data, and sends this copy to the downloader. The downloader streams this network data to their hard drive.
Downloaders are no more guilty of copying than people who buy pirated dvd's off the streets. That is to say, not at all.
In your pathetic straw-man argument, you failed to acknowledge the fact that Apple refuses to license their DRM scheme to other mp3 players in order to form a monopoly, whereas Microsoft happily licenses their DRM scheme to whoever asks for it in order to encourage interoperability.
Who owns what format is irrelevant, what is relevant is who can play them.
DRM'd WMA? Hundreds of different mp3 players from tons of companies.
DRM'd AAC? ONE mp3 player from ONE company.
How can you claim that Microsoft is trying to control the music industry and Apple isn't, when Microsoft is the only one of the two who implements an open-format DRM scheme to foster interoperability?
Steve Jobs [is] quite unlike other CEOs.
What leads you to believe this? The way he dresses? The way he talks? The fact that he releases products that come in different colors? All preconceived public relations schemes.
How many of those are mainstream, or even semi-mainstream? The PSP and maybe the Ipaq.
How many of those are strictly mp3 players? None.
In my perfect world there'd be the option of picking what format you want the song in.
Your perfect world got shut down by the U.S. and Russian Governments.
What are these other mp3 manufacturers going to say in their commercials? "Now compatible with 20% of Itunes"? Nobody will buy that unless they don't care about Itunes one way or the other. The manufacturers will likely wait until 100% of Itunes is un-DRM'd beforehand, and who knows when that will be?
Don't fool yourself, DRM'd WMA and DRM'd AAC serve the same purpose; To attempt to control the online music industry, and to attempt to control what people do with the music they buy online. Apple is just as guilty as Microsoft when it comes to DRMing music, because they both do it. Do you think Apple DRMs music because the industry makes them, but Microsoft DRMs music because they choose to? Please. The music industry needs the support of online music sellers just as much as online music sellers need the support of the music industry. 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. The problem here isn't simply that the music industry is evil, the problem is that the music industry, the music resellers, and the online music stores all have the same interests in mind, and all those interests involve screwing the consumer.
You can also burn your entire DRM'd ITMS collection to cds, and then rip the cds back to the computer in a more fair-use-friendly format, but as I mentioned before, Apple is banking on the fact that most users won't.
Also, I forgot to mention -- regarding Jobs letter,
It was simply a publicity stunt to shift the blame of DRM away from him and to the record companies. Universally-compatible, DRM-less music from itunes means Jobs makes less money on his itunes-ipod monopoly, and believe it or not, Jobs is a businessman who wants to make money. So instead of threatening to not resell music for the record companies, he simply played the victim himself and blamed somebody else.
You may not realize this, but the Zune plays music in .mp3 format, too, which would be an ideal, universally compatible format for DRM-less downloadable music.
Jobs didn't want that, though. He didn't want universally compatible music, he wanted ipod-and-only-ipod compatible music, which is why these new higher priced songs are only offered in AAC. It allows him to keep leveraging his near-monopoly between itunes and ipods in the same manner that Apple-DRM-Protected files did.
"But DJCacophony," you may say, "there are other players that can handle unprotected AAC." I am well aware of this, but the fact of the matter is that there aren't a whole lot, and Jobs knows this. The only other semi-mainstream player I can name offhand is the Zune, and it isn't all that popular, as you probably know. The only other option is to convert the file to a more universal format, and Jobs is banking on the fact that most users either don't know how to do this or don't want whatever hassle it may entail.
In summary, this may be a small victory for fair use, but not as much of one against vendor lock-in and corrupt, monopolistic business practices.
APRIL FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!11
The part was destroyed and subsequently compressed into a singularity by the black hole that the device created.
HDMI has better quality and support for higher resolutions than VGA. Furthermore, unlike VGA, HDMI incorporates error correction in the specs. Finally, if you are using CRT then you should get with the fucking program and upgrade to a display technology that isn't 110 years old.