You are deluded. Have you seriously looked at the app selection on the iPhone? Sure there are some fine apps, but there are TONS of absolute crap apps. The idea that Jobs is somehow taking this position in order to preserve the integrity and quality of the platform is laughable. Allowing Adobe's software to be a development platform will do nothing to sway the average quality of an iPhone app.
This is EXACTLY right. It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the apps or battery life. Those are red herrings. What Apple really wants is exclusivity and a high bar for entry. It creates the illusion that their product is somehow unique on it's own merits. They create the illusion that apps developed for it are subjected to rigorous testing for quality before release. The idea of a unified development platform that can port any app across devices scares the shit out of them. Then their phone just looks expensive. They want apps that aren't on other platforms, and Adobe is trying to kill that.
I use the following tools to stay synced in various ways:
Plaxo offers a fairly good Outlook sync utility for free which keeps my Address Book, Calendar and Tasks synced on my work and home desktop computers.
Dropbox offers 2-3 GB of free storage that automatically syncs to any computer logged into that account. I keep all sorts of stuff in there. Photoshop prefs and tools, automation scripts, encrypted password database, etc.
I set up a cheap home server with FTP. It goes to sleep if unused and I can wake it up with a Magic Packet remotely before doing file transfers.
For large libraries of software, music, etc. I have a portable hard drive that I sync on either end using Directory Toolkit about every week or two depending.
And Foxmarks for Firefox.
I'll second this. I like my Dropbox. I referred enough people to get up to 3GB free, and that is surprisingly useful. I fantasize about my entire desktop running from my Dropbox but I can't afford that level of service.
This was modded funny, but for popular data, this is essentially what I would recommend. Why spend a fortune on big hard drives, enclosures, power supplies and all that for stuff that can be tracked down and downloaded easily? Sure, storage is cheap, but you're still talking a few hundred here. Personally, I have a decent sized drive that I store stuff until I watch it, then I just delete it. I never back the thing up and consider it's contents completely disposable. If I really want to have a permanent copy of a movie I just buy the damn thing. I do keep a mirror or two of my music collection though. But at less than 200GB it's a little easier to maintain.
A person who understands what they are doing can get great pictures from $300 glass. Not pro quality, but damn good. The problem is people who invest in this setup and assume it will solve all of their problems automatically.
Actually, I think most people these days are only interested in posting to Facebook or Flickr. Flickr give an option to show original sized images for subscribers, but for everyone else all these megapixels are a waste.
You make a grand assumption that most people have some creative contribution to add to this world. Sorry, but most don't. Creative types have a hard time believing this could be true, but it is. Many people have functional contributions that cannot be subsidized by the whims of the internet's paying customers. In fact, it is the case for the vast majority of people. I wish it weren't true, but *that* is the reality of the world, not the one you describe for your talented girlfriend. I wish her well but your scenario doesn't work for the general population.
I have had a generally positive experience with Netflix, but they have already had more than enough time to address this issue. Actually I am surprised it has taken so long to appear on Slashdot. This has been going on since, like, last October at least.
Honestly, no one would give a shit about DRM if it didn't interfere with normal music listening activities. If the end user were not inconvenienced by DRM, no one would give a hoot about it. The problem isn't DRM, it's greed.
Consider this scenario: a fan purchases a song from an online store. That song can be authorized on any number of devices with nothing more than a password. The playing device never has to phone to a server. There are no limits to the number of copies that can be made, nor the number of devices that it can be played on. The DRM is an open format that any manufacturer can use. The only thing preventing anyone from listening to the song is a password.
If this were the case, I theorize that it would cut out a large percentage of casual piracy, yet would never inconvenience the listener (save the initial authorization procedure which would only take seconds).
Or course OMFG the RIAA might have to accept some losses in it's battle to prevent 110% of music copying. Oh noes! And, oh gee, perhaps an open standard would create a DRM that can be cracked. So what? In the end if they actually did a study of actual numbers I imagine they would find their sales went up, word of mouth would create new fans and sales, and the DRM would create just enough of a hindrance to prevent rampant theft, save for those who are hell bent on stealing all their music no matter what.
The problem is that the RIAA and other groups like them see piracy in black and white terms. If it exists, they are loosing money. That is an immature way to view business and human nature. If they were willing to accept some losses as inevitable, they could recoup much more by lowering the DRM bar so that it is virtually invisible to the honest user.
I would love to hear the issues you have with these programs. I use Flash, Quicktime, and all the Adobe software a lot, and while they aren't perfect, I really like them. So I am honestly curious what all the venom is about.
How hard is it to hold the camera still?
on
PSP-Slim Hands On
·
· Score: 1
I know we're not talking about huge production budgets here (or any production budgets for that matter) but really, how hard is it to take a clear picture of a STILL OBJECT? Two pictures have camera shake, one is overexposed and one is out of focus. Seriously.
The Long Tail economic model is something we all wish we had, sure, but this is *exactly* what the media companies are fighting against. This is, in fact, the root of the problem. They currently make the big bucks by withholding content, not making it always available. They want people to be deprived of something for so long that, when they finally do release it, they can whip everyone up into a frenzy about it. They can make people, who otherwise wouldn't have considered purchasing that product, become so desirous that it's all they can think about. Personally, I think that, in this day and age, this business model is naive and outdated, but they are going to fight tooth and nail to preserve it.
I am with you 100% on this one. The Windows tablet isn't geared towards designers at all- it's a point of sales tool and not a very good one at that. Yes, it can be used in Photoshop and such, but any designer will recognize that it isn't the platform's priority. And I know this because I am a designer with a Tablet PC. A Mac tablet has been a long time dream of mine. I think Apple could blow the Tablet market wide open by appealing to designers and creatives.
Hybrid players only solve part of the problem. A bigger battle is for retailer shelf space. What retailer wants to stock three (four including VHS) of the same title? Eventually someone like Best Buy is going to start pushing one format out. Unless they start creating hybrid discs too.
Slashdot Mirror
You are deluded. Have you seriously looked at the app selection on the iPhone? Sure there are some fine apps, but there are TONS of absolute crap apps. The idea that Jobs is somehow taking this position in order to preserve the integrity and quality of the platform is laughable. Allowing Adobe's software to be a development platform will do nothing to sway the average quality of an iPhone app.
This is EXACTLY right. It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the apps or battery life. Those are red herrings. What Apple really wants is exclusivity and a high bar for entry. It creates the illusion that their product is somehow unique on it's own merits. They create the illusion that apps developed for it are subjected to rigorous testing for quality before release. The idea of a unified development platform that can port any app across devices scares the shit out of them. Then their phone just looks expensive. They want apps that aren't on other platforms, and Adobe is trying to kill that.
+5 Funny!!!
Seems more like this to me: http://www.delgo.com/
I use the following tools to stay synced in various ways: Plaxo offers a fairly good Outlook sync utility for free which keeps my Address Book, Calendar and Tasks synced on my work and home desktop computers. Dropbox offers 2-3 GB of free storage that automatically syncs to any computer logged into that account. I keep all sorts of stuff in there. Photoshop prefs and tools, automation scripts, encrypted password database, etc. I set up a cheap home server with FTP. It goes to sleep if unused and I can wake it up with a Magic Packet remotely before doing file transfers. For large libraries of software, music, etc. I have a portable hard drive that I sync on either end using Directory Toolkit about every week or two depending. And Foxmarks for Firefox.
I'll second this. I like my Dropbox. I referred enough people to get up to 3GB free, and that is surprisingly useful. I fantasize about my entire desktop running from my Dropbox but I can't afford that level of service.
I was just about to make this point. Cars *still* makes tons of money on merchandising. WAAAY more than Ratatouille or even Incredibles.
This was modded funny, but for popular data, this is essentially what I would recommend. Why spend a fortune on big hard drives, enclosures, power supplies and all that for stuff that can be tracked down and downloaded easily? Sure, storage is cheap, but you're still talking a few hundred here. Personally, I have a decent sized drive that I store stuff until I watch it, then I just delete it. I never back the thing up and consider it's contents completely disposable. If I really want to have a permanent copy of a movie I just buy the damn thing. I do keep a mirror or two of my music collection though. But at less than 200GB it's a little easier to maintain.
A person who understands what they are doing can get great pictures from $300 glass. Not pro quality, but damn good. The problem is people who invest in this setup and assume it will solve all of their problems automatically.
Actually, I think most people these days are only interested in posting to Facebook or Flickr. Flickr give an option to show original sized images for subscribers, but for everyone else all these megapixels are a waste.
No, Mark Twain invented LOL Cats.
You make a grand assumption that most people have some creative contribution to add to this world. Sorry, but most don't. Creative types have a hard time believing this could be true, but it is. Many people have functional contributions that cannot be subsidized by the whims of the internet's paying customers. In fact, it is the case for the vast majority of people. I wish it weren't true, but *that* is the reality of the world, not the one you describe for your talented girlfriend. I wish her well but your scenario doesn't work for the general population.
I have had a generally positive experience with Netflix, but they have already had more than enough time to address this issue. Actually I am surprised it has taken so long to appear on Slashdot. This has been going on since, like, last October at least.
Ugh of course I proof read everything but the title. DEAD! Not DEAN! http://www.astrobasego.com/shirtarchives.html
Honestly, no one would give a shit about DRM if it didn't interfere with normal music listening activities. If the end user were not inconvenienced by DRM, no one would give a hoot about it. The problem isn't DRM, it's greed. Consider this scenario: a fan purchases a song from an online store. That song can be authorized on any number of devices with nothing more than a password. The playing device never has to phone to a server. There are no limits to the number of copies that can be made, nor the number of devices that it can be played on. The DRM is an open format that any manufacturer can use. The only thing preventing anyone from listening to the song is a password. If this were the case, I theorize that it would cut out a large percentage of casual piracy, yet would never inconvenience the listener (save the initial authorization procedure which would only take seconds). Or course OMFG the RIAA might have to accept some losses in it's battle to prevent 110% of music copying. Oh noes! And, oh gee, perhaps an open standard would create a DRM that can be cracked. So what? In the end if they actually did a study of actual numbers I imagine they would find their sales went up, word of mouth would create new fans and sales, and the DRM would create just enough of a hindrance to prevent rampant theft, save for those who are hell bent on stealing all their music no matter what. The problem is that the RIAA and other groups like them see piracy in black and white terms. If it exists, they are loosing money. That is an immature way to view business and human nature. If they were willing to accept some losses as inevitable, they could recoup much more by lowering the DRM bar so that it is virtually invisible to the honest user.
Not just any bomb, mind you. It's a really thin bomb. With NO optical drive, which makes it perfectly useless to me.
I would love to hear the issues you have with these programs. I use Flash, Quicktime, and all the Adobe software a lot, and while they aren't perfect, I really like them. So I am honestly curious what all the venom is about.
I know we're not talking about huge production budgets here (or any production budgets for that matter) but really, how hard is it to take a clear picture of a STILL OBJECT? Two pictures have camera shake, one is overexposed and one is out of focus. Seriously.
Policy.
The Long Tail economic model is something we all wish we had, sure, but this is *exactly* what the media companies are fighting against. This is, in fact, the root of the problem. They currently make the big bucks by withholding content, not making it always available. They want people to be deprived of something for so long that, when they finally do release it, they can whip everyone up into a frenzy about it. They can make people, who otherwise wouldn't have considered purchasing that product, become so desirous that it's all they can think about. Personally, I think that, in this day and age, this business model is naive and outdated, but they are going to fight tooth and nail to preserve it.
Well, unless you can pull that trailer with your penis, you are compensating.
Mod Parent up
I am with you 100% on this one. The Windows tablet isn't geared towards designers at all- it's a point of sales tool and not a very good one at that. Yes, it can be used in Photoshop and such, but any designer will recognize that it isn't the platform's priority. And I know this because I am a designer with a Tablet PC. A Mac tablet has been a long time dream of mine. I think Apple could blow the Tablet market wide open by appealing to designers and creatives.
Hybrid players only solve part of the problem. A bigger battle is for retailer shelf space. What retailer wants to stock three (four including VHS) of the same title? Eventually someone like Best Buy is going to start pushing one format out. Unless they start creating hybrid discs too.
...they didn't go to Paramus, New Jersey