Facebook to my knowledge has the largest number of social application developers, being the industry leader in the "social web platform" space. I was never meaning to imply Myspace doesn't have the most traffic, and more to your point, they are only participating, not governing. Myspace is still planning its own platform, as is Friendster and others.
My critism still remains that in not inviting Facebook (or Myspace, or anyone) to help *govern* the API, they clearly had not intended it to be "open". Standards organizations exist for a reason, so many people can come together and decide on whats best for everyone.
It doesn't sound to me that you're a Facebook Developer based on your comments. Since that's who is mostly affected here, like myself, you'd realized the FUD Google was spreading. An "Open" alliance that is governed only by Google and lacked inviting the industry leader. Please, I'm not blind. OpenSocial only offers a subset of everything Facebook was already doing, but Facebook provides deeper site integration than OpenSocial will for some time. Inbox, wall, navigation links, bug trackers, developer analytics, etc, all come with Facebook Platform. Sure, its their own language, but as a developer I have to learn APIs for any extra site I want to support anyways. Facebook even gives pre-designed HTML snippets like friend selectors, tab structures, headers, etc also for free speeding up development cost.
Yes FBML for profiles and the push tech behind it is less flexible that just an iframe. But its also safer and faster. What if a user on Myspace has 20 iframes from 20 companies going to 20 servers all over the world. The user experience of waiting an extra 10-20 seconds just for the page to load would be horrible. It clear in that looking at the lack of documentation and support for the OpenSocial API that this was pushed out the door when it wasn't really even in Alpha testing.
Sorry, I'll check back again when Google is done with the PR games and has a decent API... would be nice if it was actually "Open" too. The fact is most developers (larger ones) will simply support both, it's not a tremendous cost difference as its all web code (vs say Mac and PC).
I read through most of the comments and didn't see anyone state the obvious. Earnings are due next week for AAPL and they'll need to explain why they've lowered targets for Q3. An OS release quarter brings in alot of cash, and analysts need to know ahead of time when so they can accurately (haha) predict the earnings.
I understand the point, just not what they were correcting. The memo at no point in time states anying reguarding assets and neither does the slashdot story or the article that was linked to.
Quite frankly, they rock. Almost anything they sell is available and the team is flexible on what all you can do with it. Many of the developers offer their code as examples, and they have examples themselves in the 'kit' of just about any platform you want out there, from ASP to PHP, via SOAP or XLST. Here's my spin on it:
DVD Jones
It's a DVD cataloging (and sharing) site that offers recommendations from Amazon filtering out what you already own.
This simply doesn't work, while it may be fine for ftp transfers, copying files from jaguar finder to jaguar server doens't respect umask. The group bit was being set in puma (Mac OS X 10.1) although UNIX permissions were not being respected. A later version of Panther (10.2.3?) added the ability to have new files created over AFP either respect UNIX permissions or the permission of the group folder. Setable via the workgroup admin application on a share point by share point basis. I'm not exactly sure why someone modded your post up.
Backups? iTunes has built in DVD-Archiving. What happens if your CD collection goes up in flames? Does that mean record companies owe you new CDs? Lets be serious, backups are YOUR responsibility, not Apples.
Now having said that... I like eMusics previous backup approach that you could re-download 2 more times and if you needed it yet again, you could call customer service and get that flag reset.
Its restricted at the Akamai level most likely. If your not in the US, your not downloading it. BTW, try to remember that every song, artist, album, and art has to be negotiated, not only for the US, but for every single country, plus the back-end to support it. If they had waited, we'd never see it!
I can understand frustration but its not that simple. Every artist, every song, and yes even every album cover has its own rights that had to be negotiated, and that took quite some time... just for one country. Now think about doing that in multiple countries and you can see this isn't some small task. Every music company has different rights for every country out there.
Personally I love their web services, easy to use, plenty of information. They have some areas to improve such as switching out ASINs, not including an 'image not found' image, but overall I'm very pleased.
That simply isnt true. Those NeXT boys had the multiple platform thing down-pat. Simply check a box in project builder and your.app contains code for both platforms in one neat file, at only a 10% increase in size. NeXT ran on Intel, PA-RISC, and NeXT's own creations.
Uh no, it is not illegal at this time. Sharing a VHS tape with your sister of a show you recorded is not illegal. It has been proven in courts. The Replay simply extends that sharing. I have been over this is my lawyers and right now it is not illegal to share over the air broadcasts.
TV is not music. Napster help violate copyrights of material people purchase. Time-shifting of over the air shows that every person in the country has free access to, is not illegal. That is why this is a civil case against ReplayTV and not a criminal case.
explicity illegal? Funny, my facts do not point to that.
My facts (as the owner of Planet Replay) show that the majority of users share shows to catch shows they missed, as in already have access to. Take Joe Millionaire. A cheesy show launched last week. In two days it was in the top 10 most requested shows. People had simply forgotten to record it and wanted to see the first episode. If you need more examples you can read more of my facts below.
Well IBM makes boatloads of cash, thats for sure, but I wouldn't call them just a software company. Like Sun they make their cash off of services and support for overpriced hardware. MS is pretty much all software, and has a market cap more than twice that of IBM, which is why they are the worlds largest software company. Plus Im not sure where you got your profit numbers, but on Quicken a different story is painted:
MSFT:
Revenue - $7,746,000
Net Income - $2,726, 000
IBM:
Revenue - $19,821,000
Net Income - $1,694,000
And also from Quicken:
What is Net Income?
The amount of a company's total sales (revenue) remaining after subtracting all of its costs, in a given period of time (also referred to as "net earnings"). This very important figure (literally the source of the term "the bottom line" for where you find it on an income statement) is the best measure of the current operating state of a company.
I've been recently composing some thoughts for an upcoming article. This is merely a rough drafts, but pertinent to the subject at hand. A few snippets:
Many people say these lawsuits fall somewhere between the Sony Betamax case and the more recent Napster cases. In the Betamax case, media companies sued Sony over the recording features in the newly released betamax. The court found that while copyright violations were possible with the Betamax (just as they are possible with typewriters and copy machines) that the "fair use" of the machine greatly outweighed it. There are many legitimate uses for recording shows from PBS, religious stations, and whether copying was not objectionable to the copyright holder.
With the success of the VCR in this case, a tradition has clearly been establish of time-shifting a show for later viewing. This tradition extends to lending of time-shifted shows to other individuals. The technology behind SonicBlue's show sharing ReplayTV is very similar. You record a show, then when its over, you can send it to up to 15 friends (whom cannot resend that same show). The media is left in tact, commercials and all, just as it is with a VCR tape. Furthermore, since this tradition is well over 25 years old, no evidence has surfaced that these methods of time-shifting cause little to no negative impact on the plaintiff's business. It is my opinion that time-shifting only expands viewership of shows.
The main complaint over show sharing is this: The ReplayTV allows users to share shows they've recorded to other ReplayTV owners, possilby allowing people who have not paid for premium channels to watch premium content for free. But are they? Does anyone know if this is what people are using the device for? If I missed premium content I already pay for due to a power outage, am I not allowed to receive that content from another ReplayTV owner? Certainly that seems like fair use. The TV studios tried to find out exactly how much of their content was being traded and had their court order overturned. But someone certainly must know if people are sharing, and if so how much. Well, I do.
Enter Planet Replay. Planet Replay is an internet hub for ReplayTV enthusiasts created around the launch of the ReplayTV 4000. It is a place for Replay owners to discuss various topics involving the ReplayTV and find shows to borrow from other members. In show sharing Planet Replay is simply a directory of recorded material along with a directory of Replay owners. It tries to simply some of the work of sharing shows by matching users. All shows are shared between users and not through Planet Replay. It is up to both end users if they want to send the show to the other person, and do so via email contact. So just what do I track?
Sometime over the summer (not really sure when), Planet Replay introduced ratings system. The idea was simple, allow users to rate each other over the helpfulness of the person sharing the show. It would in theory help spur sharing on... but it didn't. Planet Replay even sends the requesting users ranks along with the request email, hoping to help further sharing. User rankings were so poor during the first 2 months, we were for to lower expectations of the system and the stars accordingly. Even as the owner of Planet Replay, I have sent maybe 20-30 shows. So just what are the real numbers?
After I received the subpeona, I ran statistics on the ranking system. A rank of 5 typically means the show was successfully transferred. In the first two months I started the system, there were an average of 10-20 a week claiming successful transfer. Out of 400-500 users thats really small. Last week (Nov 26th) there were 78 transfers for 670 requests and 1234 users. One week later 58 transfers for 1293 users and 770 requests. The request system tracks only that a request was made and the following rank, which lives for a week in our database. Why so many requests and so little transfers?
I missed the season opener of a show called "Firefly". I really wanted to see it. The S.F. Giants though were still being televised and shifted the show beyond what my Replay was set to record. And I really wanted to see it. I then went to Planet Replay and sent out 5 requests for it from various people. None came in after 2 days. I finally found someone to send it to me. Myself, like most users, have unforeseen circumstances where we'll miss a show... a baseball game runs late... the power goes out... scheduling conflict... ect. In an attempt to receive that show, we'll place multiple requests. Still even that number seems low. Why aren't people sharing?
Why should we share? We already own a Digital PVR. Perfectly programmed to record every single episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer that even shows on any channel. Why would I need to borrow it from someone else? Well the circumstances above show us why. Given the numbers, ~60 shares for 1200 users a week, that would point us at the average Planet Replay user shares 1 show every 5 months. Wow. Compared to the number of ReplayTVs on the market with the ability to share, that number would be even smaller. Why else is that number so low?
Television shows are not music. This isn't Napster. I'm not going to download all the Buffy's I can and watch them in the car, on the plane, at the gym, in my iPod. TV shows are one-time viewings. Maybe two times for Buffy. This is why Blockbuster is so popular. People simply want to view video once, where as music is repeatable. Not only that, but the files are way bigger. The average one hour show can take around 2 days (yes 2 days) to transfer. That's a long time to wait for Buffy. I might as well just drive over to a friends house and borrow a VHS tape, it would be simpler and faster.
It's not downloadable, why do people keep thinking it is. 2.1 is and *update* to 2.0. You can *order* 2.1 full version on DVD for shipping only (19.95). Apple doesn't host this rather large download, since anyone and their mother would try to download it (1.06 GB).
There are plenty of places you can get an Apple SuperDrive, slap in your machine and install iDVD. Worked fine for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Facebook to my knowledge has the largest number of social application developers, being the industry leader in the "social web platform" space. I was never meaning to imply Myspace doesn't have the most traffic, and more to your point, they are only participating, not governing. Myspace is still planning its own platform, as is Friendster and others.
My critism still remains that in not inviting Facebook (or Myspace, or anyone) to help *govern* the API, they clearly had not intended it to be "open". Standards organizations exist for a reason, so many people can come together and decide on whats best for everyone.
It doesn't sound to me that you're a Facebook Developer based on your comments. Since that's who is mostly affected here, like myself, you'd realized the FUD Google was spreading. An "Open" alliance that is governed only by Google and lacked inviting the industry leader. Please, I'm not blind. OpenSocial only offers a subset of everything Facebook was already doing, but Facebook provides deeper site integration than OpenSocial will for some time. Inbox, wall, navigation links, bug trackers, developer analytics, etc, all come with Facebook Platform. Sure, its their own language, but as a developer I have to learn APIs for any extra site I want to support anyways. Facebook even gives pre-designed HTML snippets like friend selectors, tab structures, headers, etc also for free speeding up development cost.
Yes FBML for profiles and the push tech behind it is less flexible that just an iframe. But its also safer and faster. What if a user on Myspace has 20 iframes from 20 companies going to 20 servers all over the world. The user experience of waiting an extra 10-20 seconds just for the page to load would be horrible. It clear in that looking at the lack of documentation and support for the OpenSocial API that this was pushed out the door when it wasn't really even in Alpha testing.
Sorry, I'll check back again when Google is done with the PR games and has a decent API... would be nice if it was actually "Open" too. The fact is most developers (larger ones) will simply support both, it's not a tremendous cost difference as its all web code (vs say Mac and PC).
I read through most of the comments and didn't see anyone state the obvious. Earnings are due next week for AAPL and they'll need to explain why they've lowered targets for Q3. An OS release quarter brings in alot of cash, and analysts need to know ahead of time when so they can accurately (haha) predict the earnings.
What, all doctors aren't like House?
MacNN is incorrect. If you read the actual report:
Apple Financial Statements
You'll see $4.8 billion as of Dec 2003 in cash and investments, and $7.0 billion in total assets.
I understand the point, just not what they were correcting. The memo at no point in time states anying reguarding assets and neither does the slashdot story or the article that was linked to.
It's unclear what you are correcting. The memo clearly states 4.8 billion of "cash in the bank".
I would actually build a supercomputer with computers like the Xserve G5 cluster node instead of Xgrid (software). But hey, Im funny like that.
Actually its Oct 28th, of last year (2003). As in, its already happened. It would help if moderators actually follow links :-)
Quite frankly, they rock. Almost anything they sell is available and the team is flexible on what all you can do with it. Many of the developers offer their code as examples, and they have examples themselves in the 'kit' of just about any platform you want out there, from ASP to PHP, via SOAP or XLST. Here's my spin on it:
DVD Jones
It's a DVD cataloging (and sharing) site that offers recommendations from Amazon filtering out what you already own.
This simply doesn't work, while it may be fine for ftp transfers, copying files from jaguar finder to jaguar server doens't respect umask. The group bit was being set in puma (Mac OS X 10.1) although UNIX permissions were not being respected. A later version of Panther (10.2.3?) added the ability to have new files created over AFP either respect UNIX permissions or the permission of the group folder. Setable via the workgroup admin application on a share point by share point basis. I'm not exactly sure why someone modded your post up.
Backups? iTunes has built in DVD-Archiving. What happens if your CD collection goes up in flames? Does that mean record companies owe you new CDs? Lets be serious, backups are YOUR responsibility, not Apples.
Now having said that... I like eMusics previous backup approach that you could re-download 2 more times and if you needed it yet again, you could call customer service and get that flag reset.
Its restricted at the Akamai level most likely. If your not in the US, your not downloading it. BTW, try to remember that every song, artist, album, and art has to be negotiated, not only for the US, but for every single country, plus the back-end to support it. If they had waited, we'd never see it!
I can understand frustration but its not that simple. Every artist, every song, and yes even every album cover has its own rights that had to be negotiated, and that took quite some time... just for one country. Now think about doing that in multiple countries and you can see this isn't some small task. Every music company has different rights for every country out there.
DVD Jones
Personally I love their web services, easy to use, plenty of information. They have some areas to improve such as switching out ASINs, not including an 'image not found' image, but overall I'm very pleased.
That simply isnt true. Those NeXT boys had the multiple platform thing down-pat. Simply check a box in project builder and your .app contains code for both platforms in one neat file, at only a 10% increase in size. NeXT ran on Intel, PA-RISC, and NeXT's own creations.
Uh no, it is not illegal at this time. Sharing a VHS tape with your sister of a show you recorded is not illegal. It has been proven in courts. The Replay simply extends that sharing. I have been over this is my lawyers and right now it is not illegal to share over the air broadcasts.
TV is not music. Napster help violate copyrights of material people purchase. Time-shifting of over the air shows that every person in the country has free access to, is not illegal. That is why this is a civil case against ReplayTV and not a criminal case.
explicity illegal? Funny, my facts do not point to that.
My facts (as the owner of Planet Replay) show that the majority of users share shows to catch shows they missed, as in already have access to. Take Joe Millionaire. A cheesy show launched last week. In two days it was in the top 10 most requested shows. People had simply forgotten to record it and wanted to see the first episode. If you need more examples you can read more of my facts below.
http://www.planetreplay.com/sharing_121202.php
Your welcome.
;-)
Well IBM makes boatloads of cash, thats for sure, but I wouldn't call them just a software company. Like Sun they make their cash off of services and support for overpriced hardware. MS is pretty much all software, and has a market cap more than twice that of IBM, which is why they are the worlds largest software company. Plus Im not sure where you got your profit numbers, but on Quicken a different story is painted:
MSFT:
Revenue - $7,746,000
Net Income - $2,726, 000
IBM:
Revenue - $19,821,000
Net Income - $1,694,000
And also from Quicken:
What is Net Income?
The amount of a company's total sales (revenue) remaining after subtracting all of its costs, in a given period of time (also referred to as "net earnings"). This very important figure (literally the source of the term "the bottom line" for where you find it on an income statement) is the best measure of the current operating state of a company.
True, the button is misleading. Thanks for pointing it out. I have removed it.
It's not downloadable, why do people keep thinking it is. 2.1 is and *update* to 2.0. You can *order* 2.1 full version on DVD for shipping only (19.95). Apple doesn't host this rather large download, since anyone and their mother would try to download it (1.06 GB). There are plenty of places you can get an Apple SuperDrive, slap in your machine and install iDVD. Worked fine for me.
Actually the G4's were announced at Seybold San Francisco, not at a Macworld.
So is it bluetooth enabled?