I believe where Monster truly excels is gaining brand recognition. I know of them purely by word of mouth. One place were they fall short however, is actual reputation.
I'm just wondering why you're mentioning.wma
I'm not particularily fond of it and as such have not used it extensively, but to me it looks like any old closed filetype.
"you don't own it, you've merely purchased a license to use it -- but you can only use it in the way that we dictate"
While I do not like the notion of the recording industry saying that I can't put music on my X-brand player, the way you've phrased it, this seems almost fair.
Purchasing a license to something effectively restricts you to the terms of the license. If the terms say only play it on 1 PC, then why wouldn't you be bound to it?
What didn't you like about the minidisc? The fact that the discs don't fit anywhere other than your minidisc player or that you had use ATRAC because Sony was avoiding mp3...
There's also the possibility that since Suse is commercial, they have people (and more responsibility?) to write patches _as their job_ so Suse will not develop a reputation for being leaky.
True that Slashdot is not the whole world, but how many people actually load the front page. Between browser cache and Google bar(s)... not many.
And then I'm also missing the fact that there's more to Google than the front page.
--
Okok... I just wanted to post something...
There would be no Internet sales tax police, however, because compliance would be on the honor system.
In what way would the honor system work? Stores allow customers to pay the tax or not based on their personal preference? Or stores decide whether or not to collect the tax??
I can see it now... "SALE! DON'T PAY THE TAX!"
I assume there are a number of artists who would like to sell their music online with/without DRM at whatever price they want but have no facility to do so. A lack of technical skill could easily hinder them from trying to set up their own secure website for this purpose. Their alternative is then to go with iTunes.
So their case is prior art or something similar? It's probably true that the fellow *is* copying... but if you record it yourself, would it not be similar to recording your own garage band version of "Hey, Jude".
Alerts will not be issued unless users can do something to protect themselves against the threat.
This might include downloading an update from an anti-virus vendor or updating software to close loopholes and fix vulnerabilities.
This could also include something as simple as "don't go to X domain because it hijacks your ICQ"...
Slashdot Mirror
What are the restrictions on playlists? It seems insane to limit the number of times you reference the file!
I believe where Monster truly excels is gaining brand recognition. I know of them purely by word of mouth. One place were they fall short however, is actual reputation.
I'm just wondering why you're mentioning .wma
I'm not particularily fond of it and as such have not used it extensively, but to me it looks like any old closed filetype.
While I do not like the notion of the recording industry saying that I can't put music on my X-brand player, the way you've phrased it, this seems almost fair.
Purchasing a license to something effectively restricts you to the terms of the license. If the terms say only play it on 1 PC, then why wouldn't you be bound to it?
The PC will eventually be relegated to a keyboard, mouse, and screen.
I'm not sure if this is what you meant, but I am hoping that eventually the PC will be small enough and cheap enough to fit inside said peripherals.
They would notice from all the red marks on their paper after it's been marked.
What didn't you like about the minidisc? The fact that the discs don't fit anywhere other than your minidisc player or that you had use ATRAC because Sony was avoiding mp3...
There's also the possibility that since Suse is commercial, they have people (and more responsibility?) to write patches _as their job_ so Suse will not develop a reputation for being leaky.
True that Slashdot is not the whole world, but how many people actually load the front page. Between browser cache and Google bar(s)... not many. And then I'm also missing the fact that there's more to Google than the front page. -- Okok... I just wanted to post something...
There would be no Internet sales tax police, however, because compliance would be on the honor system.
In what way would the honor system work? Stores allow customers to pay the tax or not based on their personal preference? Or stores decide whether or not to collect the tax??
I can see it now... "SALE! DON'T PAY THE TAX!"
I assume there are a number of artists who would like to sell their music online with/without DRM at whatever price they want but have no facility to do so. A lack of technical skill could easily hinder them from trying to set up their own secure website for this purpose. Their alternative is then to go with iTunes.
Comparing his reception to Lindberg's, I'd say most of Kansas feels the same way you do...
And it's not even Jim! I understand it's his factory floor of lesser minions who do the drawing.
He illustrates.
Are you asking for accountability? On Slashdot??
I meant more like... You can perform the song and record yourself performing it. No transfers of money involved.
So their case is prior art or something similar? It's probably true that the fellow *is* copying... but if you record it yourself, would it not be similar to recording your own garage band version of "Hey, Jude".
Alerts will not be issued unless users can do something to protect themselves against the threat. This might include downloading an update from an anti-virus vendor or updating software to close loopholes and fix vulnerabilities. This could also include something as simple as "don't go to X domain because it hijacks your ICQ"...
The problem is that he is probably not as qualified as his title suggests. Although biased, I think a technical person would be more useful.