Sorry, I don't keep up with the minute-by-minute Mac fanboy vs. Windows fanboy battles on the Intertron -- just linking to a relevant article on the subject at hand. I actually don't use Digg, so I have no idea about the history there. Some of Daniel's articles come off as a bit skewed, sure, but it's his blog and he's entitled to his opinion. Plus, is trying to get a few people to email Digg and Apple, which your linked blog article claims, the same as "spamming" it? Give me a break.
I was there maybe a year and a half ago or so, very cool, and they have an AWESOME gift shop. I got a really sweet lenticular NSA logo mousepad -- but I later learned that optical mice don't like to be used on lenticular surfaces. Oh well, it's still cool. They have T-shirts and pens and mugs and all that stuff. The exhibits are really interesting. Very cool place to go.
But it's more than twice as thick, and Apple is marketing the Air at people who want thin. Agree or disagree, but it's not a direct competitor at more than twice as thick.
I should be hired as a consultant for record companies, because I have an idea that I think solves all this idiocy. I can't claim all the credit -- Apple seems to have already begun this model.
- Apple negotiates with partner labels to allow public performance of iTunes-downloaded tracks at business establishments
- Apple sells or leases an iTunes jukebox system similar to what they are putting into Starbucks, which publicly identifies tracks that are playing/have played over the jukebox to the iPhones/iPod Touchs of people in the vicinity
- If someone buys one of these tracks through the iTunes WiFi music store, the shop-owners get a few cents on the sale
There, that's it. Done. Apple wins, obviously. The shop-owners win. And the music industry wins, because now they have a great, grassroots way for EVERYONE to participate in the distribution of their product. Better yet, make it so anyone with iTunes is allowed this public-play license, and can get in on the few-cents-per-track sales model. Expand it to the iPods/iPhones themselves, even, sort of like Microsoft's Zune sharing features -- but make it automatic, if a user chooses to turn it on (you could even know what people on headphones are listening to.)
I'm sure there are holes in the above idea, but it strikes me that something akin to the above is really the only hope the music industry has to actually grow in the 21st century. The fact that they themselves are not going CRAZY to implement systems like the above tells me that most of their decisions are probably being made by dinosaurs who are likely only vaguely acquainted with technology and the internet, and should be fired by their boards of directors immediately (they can hire me, and I will only ask for a $250,000/year salary.)
This sounds like a precursor to the android technology in the anime Heatguy J. Sweeeet! Occasionally the cyborg J has to let off steam when he's been using a lot of power.
Let me begin by saying I am a huge fan of "cyberpunk" sci-fi, and Blade Runner is definitely one of my favorite films.
Children of Men is a better movie. On almost all levels. Not geeky-cool-nerdy-high-tech-special-effectsy kind of stuff. It's just a much better movie. Better acting (by far.) Better editing (by far.) Better cinematography even (and in this area Blade Runner is quite amazing.)
Children of Men is simply amazing -- definitely should have won Best Cinematography, at least (Pan's Labyrinth was good, but not THAT good.) If you enjoy heady, thinking-person's sci-fi, especially when produced masterfully, I highly encourage you to check it out. But now I am happy I got the standard 480p DVD, and didn't buy the Xbox 360 HD-DVD, which I almost did _specifically_ for this film. Whew!
This strikes me as being true for all mediated reality, including television, film, internet, etc. (Electronic) Media has been used to manipulate outlooks and impressions about the world around us since its inception. Often, those outlooks don't mesh with reality.
But see, all you people who claim that consumers don't want HD are WRONG because consumers ARE buying HD sets in record numbers, at growing rates, for cheaper prices every month. I believe in fact that high def. sets are the fastest growing segment of the television product market. At the end of the day, those who are happy with NTSC/standard def. will be a small, small minority (using their government subsidized ATSC tuners w/ NTSC outputs), and the rest of us will be LOVING our HD football games every weekend. GO RAVENS!:-)
Oh please... yes, Apple compyooters make me dumb... OK...
What I don't understand is why people who don't watch TV, don't own TVs, or don't care about the quality of TV images bother to spend their time on threads like this. Don't you have anything better to do? Stop whining about something that doesn't sound like it will affect you. And the fact is, HD TVs will be a couple hundred bucks by the time everyone is "forced" to switch.
And let's ignore for a moment that the government is going to subsidize ATSC tuners for people who want to keep their old TVs, once NTSC goes dead. SHeesh, some peole just like to complain I guess?
I guess your argument is defeated by the fact that the HD adoption rate among US consumers is going through the roof, and those folks are voting with their dollars if you will and are saying Yes, we think HD is better. It's OK that you have lower standards as far as what you can enjoy video quality-wise. Just don't feel the rest of us have to be happy with your lower standards. Hardly notice the difference between HD and SD, when going back to SD? Puh-leeeeeeze... Maybe you were one of those 25% of all Americans who THOUGHT you were watching HD when in reality you were not.
I should add that Final Cut Pro, when it went HD at version 4.5, is one of the PRIMARY factors that is contributing to a wider HD adoption rate by content creators. When your only option a few years ago was to spend, oh, a hundred grand or so on an HD Avid suite, well, yes that was a hard case to make. Nowadays, I can set you up with a Final Cut rig for $5K+ that will allow you to do an HD project (not including VTR of course, and obviously using a compressed HD format such as XDCAM-HD or DVCPROHD, or even that red-headed stepchild of the HD world, HDV). Sure, a banging HD FCP rig can still run you 50 or 60 grand when you include VTRs, RAID array for uncompressed HD capture/playback, and nice Ikegami HD CRT monitor, but shoot, that's hardly _necessary_ to work with HD content, and is still very cheap compared to what this stuff went for only a few years back.
"Demonstrate that a pizza ad in HD makes your viewers more likely to buy your pizza and you'll sell more of those FCP systems than you can stock. Until then, it's an upgrade that no one cares about."
As I stated previously, I am pretty sure I _could_ make this case. But I don't claim that all salesmen are up to it. And as of today, I certainly wouldn't go after Pizza Hut for HD ad sales, but rather, premium products/services/brands that cater to folks who likely DO have HDTV sets, and most certainly WILL notice that an HD ad has more of an impact than one in SD.
And for the record -- sales have been very good. I'm not complaining.:-)
This is a decent point -- HD MPEG-2 artifacting, which is normally visible in scenes with high movement, is ugly. HOWEVER, once the analog channels are shut off, and once most ATSC channels are being broadcast in HD, they will be able to pump up those MPEG-2 bitrates, and things will improve in this area. Already you can see major differences in the amount of artifacts between different broadcasters. And at the end of the day, even witht he MPEG-2 artifacts, I will take well-produced HD content over well-produced SD content ANY day of the week.
One other point which I haven't seen brought up -- another huge part of "HD" is the inherent 16:9 aspect ratio, which in this "HD Industry shill's" opinion is VASTLY superior than 4:3 when it comes to telling stories with moving pictures.
Oh bullshit, you trolling old fart. I'm going to call you on it. B-S. You are of course speaking subjectively, as am I. However, I am pretty sure you are very much in the minority, as far as your assertion that "most folks can't even appreciate HD or tell the difference between HD and SD". And what, you're trying to back up your argument by pointing out that most TV watchers in the USA are idiots? You're not going to find me arguing against you on THAT point.
I too have noticed that even in the last month, the number of true HD advertisements has SKYROCKETED during prime time. If so much acceleration has occurred in the USA in just the past month, imagine where things will be by this time next year? Heck, I just read today that that silly show The View is going to HD production. You know when people want to look at Rosie O'Donnel and company in HD, the market is ready for it.;-)
I make my living selling editing and post workstations (and associated systems, such as SANs). Many/most of the systems I sell are capable of handling HD content (mostly Apple Final Cut-based solutions), and many of my sales are into the broadcast space. So, I think I have a good sense of this stuff.
HD is happening, and the adoption rate both for consumers, content creators, and broadcasters is accelerating. I have seen MUCH acceleration in 2006, and I think 2007 will be the year HD really takes command of the market. Let me put it this way -- perhaps the SUITS at broadcast organizations can't find a case for HD. But I will tell you this -- the engineers, editors, etc. are VERY MUCH ready for HD, and know it is happening, and there's no looking back. This isn't really up for debate, it's the fact of the matter.
What I find a little strange about this guy's comments is that he's basically trying to justify keeping a 50-year-old broadcast standard, well into the 21st century. Let's think about that for a moment -- what would have happened if the computer industry had decided to stay with, say, the standards that were in place for computing in the 1950s, through today. Yeeeaaaah... As bizarre as this scenario sounds, this is the reality that the broadcast market has perpetuated for the last 50 years or so. I would think that consumers would be demanding a much quicker adoption of HD! Oh, so you need to buy a new TeeVee set? Me cry you a river. That's like saying I should be forced to use a building-sized supercomputer that runs on punchcards to handle basic arithmetic problems, just because you don't feel you should need to upgrade your computer. But it's even more ridiculous than that, because we tolerate "needing" to buy a new computer every 5 years or so, but sheesh, needing to upgrade your TV once per fifty years? IT'S A TRAVESTY!
And on another note -- if those idiots can't command higher ad rates for HD advertisements, well, please fire them and hire me to do your HD advertising sales, because your current ad sales team SUCKS and is not worth what you're paying them. I am pretty certain I could do a better job myself. And I'm not just throwing that out there -- again, I make my living largely "selling" video content producers on HD.
Finally, another interesting debate/issue concerns the video/post/broadcast world's move to tapeless workflows, where you are essentially recording video _files_ right onto flash RAM/hard drives/optical discs/SANs/etc. And video tapes go the way of the dodo. This is another HUGE shift in the broadcast market, which is only recently incorporating "IT technologies" into the systems that drive broadcast facilities. A lot of broadcasters are going to go for "two for the price of one" -- let's go tapeless, and let's make sure our upgrades are HD-capable at least.
OK OK, one laaast point -- anyone who doesn't feel HD is a worthwhile upgrade SERIOUSLY needs to get their eyes checked. I recommend doing an A/B comparison between SD and HD, of the same content. HD is only truly profound when you _go back_ to SD, and you ask yourself, how the hell did I deal with this shit for so long? BRING ON MORE HD!!!
just about the saddest goddamned thing I've ever read on slashdot. The thought of becoming an arthritis-ridden man who can't play video games is just... shocking. *sigh*
I am so jumping into an active volcano when I start to get frail...
"Lucas decided to make a cheesy love story out of it. A love story. Now, name ONE SciFi movie that is named when it comes to numbering the greatest SciFi movies of all times that consists basically of a love story."
The Futurological Congress is not only terribly entertaining, but also quite twisted, and I recommend it very much. One has to think that The Matrix and even P.K. Dick owe a lot to Lem, his way of thinking, and some of the dark scenarios it leads to.
Now it's time to kill The Simpsons
on
Futurama Returns
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
OK -- Family Guy is back, American Dad is getting pretty decent IMO. Futurama is returning.
PLEASE kill The Simpsons already. The longer it goes on, the darker the future is for all of us.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, I don't keep up with the minute-by-minute Mac fanboy vs. Windows fanboy battles on the Intertron -- just linking to a relevant article on the subject at hand. I actually don't use Digg, so I have no idea about the history there. Some of Daniel's articles come off as a bit skewed, sure, but it's his blog and he's entitled to his opinion. Plus, is trying to get a few people to email Digg and Apple, which your linked blog article claims, the same as "spamming" it? Give me a break.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/14/cocoa-for-windows-flash-killer-sproutcore/ This is from Roughly Drafted.
I was there maybe a year and a half ago or so, very cool, and they have an AWESOME gift shop. I got a really sweet lenticular NSA logo mousepad -- but I later learned that optical mice don't like to be used on lenticular surfaces. Oh well, it's still cool. They have T-shirts and pens and mugs and all that stuff. The exhibits are really interesting. Very cool place to go.
But it's more than twice as thick, and Apple is marketing the Air at people who want thin. Agree or disagree, but it's not a direct competitor at more than twice as thick.
What are you talking about? DIdn't you want her to tell you how hot you are?
- Apple negotiates with partner labels to allow public performance of iTunes-downloaded tracks at business establishments
- Apple sells or leases an iTunes jukebox system similar to what they are putting into Starbucks, which publicly identifies tracks that are playing/have played over the jukebox to the iPhones/iPod Touchs of people in the vicinity
- If someone buys one of these tracks through the iTunes WiFi music store, the shop-owners get a few cents on the sale
There, that's it. Done. Apple wins, obviously. The shop-owners win. And the music industry wins, because now they have a great, grassroots way for EVERYONE to participate in the distribution of their product. Better yet, make it so anyone with iTunes is allowed this public-play license, and can get in on the few-cents-per-track sales model. Expand it to the iPods/iPhones themselves, even, sort of like Microsoft's Zune sharing features -- but make it automatic, if a user chooses to turn it on (you could even know what people on headphones are listening to.)
I'm sure there are holes in the above idea, but it strikes me that something akin to the above is really the only hope the music industry has to actually grow in the 21st century. The fact that they themselves are not going CRAZY to implement systems like the above tells me that most of their decisions are probably being made by dinosaurs who are likely only vaguely acquainted with technology and the internet, and should be fired by their boards of directors immediately (they can hire me, and I will only ask for a $250,000/year salary.)
This sounds like a precursor to the android technology in the anime Heatguy J. Sweeeet! Occasionally the cyborg J has to let off steam when he's been using a lot of power.
Children of Men is a better movie. On almost all levels. Not geeky-cool-nerdy-high-tech-special-effectsy kind of stuff. It's just a much better movie. Better acting (by far.) Better editing (by far.) Better cinematography even (and in this area Blade Runner is quite amazing.)
Children of Men is simply amazing -- definitely should have won Best Cinematography, at least (Pan's Labyrinth was good, but not THAT good.) If you enjoy heady, thinking-person's sci-fi, especially when produced masterfully, I highly encourage you to check it out. But now I am happy I got the standard 480p DVD, and didn't buy the Xbox 360 HD-DVD, which I almost did _specifically_ for this film. Whew!
Sex scandal? Uh, yeah... don't hold your breath.
This strikes me as being true for all mediated reality, including television, film, internet, etc. (Electronic) Media has been used to manipulate outlooks and impressions about the world around us since its inception. Often, those outlooks don't mesh with reality.
But see, all you people who claim that consumers don't want HD are WRONG because consumers ARE buying HD sets in record numbers, at growing rates, for cheaper prices every month. I believe in fact that high def. sets are the fastest growing segment of the television product market. At the end of the day, those who are happy with NTSC/standard def. will be a small, small minority (using their government subsidized ATSC tuners w/ NTSC outputs), and the rest of us will be LOVING our HD football games every weekend. GO RAVENS! :-)
What I don't understand is why people who don't watch TV, don't own TVs, or don't care about the quality of TV images bother to spend their time on threads like this. Don't you have anything better to do? Stop whining about something that doesn't sound like it will affect you. And the fact is, HD TVs will be a couple hundred bucks by the time everyone is "forced" to switch.
And let's ignore for a moment that the government is going to subsidize ATSC tuners for people who want to keep their old TVs, once NTSC goes dead. SHeesh, some peole just like to complain I guess?
I guess your argument is defeated by the fact that the HD adoption rate among US consumers is going through the roof, and those folks are voting with their dollars if you will and are saying Yes, we think HD is better. It's OK that you have lower standards as far as what you can enjoy video quality-wise. Just don't feel the rest of us have to be happy with your lower standards. Hardly notice the difference between HD and SD, when going back to SD? Puh-leeeeeeze... Maybe you were one of those 25% of all Americans who THOUGHT you were watching HD when in reality you were not.
I should add that Final Cut Pro, when it went HD at version 4.5, is one of the PRIMARY factors that is contributing to a wider HD adoption rate by content creators. When your only option a few years ago was to spend, oh, a hundred grand or so on an HD Avid suite, well, yes that was a hard case to make. Nowadays, I can set you up with a Final Cut rig for $5K+ that will allow you to do an HD project (not including VTR of course, and obviously using a compressed HD format such as XDCAM-HD or DVCPROHD, or even that red-headed stepchild of the HD world, HDV). Sure, a banging HD FCP rig can still run you 50 or 60 grand when you include VTRs, RAID array for uncompressed HD capture/playback, and nice Ikegami HD CRT monitor, but shoot, that's hardly _necessary_ to work with HD content, and is still very cheap compared to what this stuff went for only a few years back.
As I stated previously, I am pretty sure I _could_ make this case. But I don't claim that all salesmen are up to it. And as of today, I certainly wouldn't go after Pizza Hut for HD ad sales, but rather, premium products/services/brands that cater to folks who likely DO have HDTV sets, and most certainly WILL notice that an HD ad has more of an impact than one in SD.
And for the record -- sales have been very good. I'm not complaining. :-)
One other point which I haven't seen brought up -- another huge part of "HD" is the inherent 16:9 aspect ratio, which in this "HD Industry shill's" opinion is VASTLY superior than 4:3 when it comes to telling stories with moving pictures.
Oh bullshit, you trolling old fart. I'm going to call you on it. B-S. You are of course speaking subjectively, as am I. However, I am pretty sure you are very much in the minority, as far as your assertion that "most folks can't even appreciate HD or tell the difference between HD and SD". And what, you're trying to back up your argument by pointing out that most TV watchers in the USA are idiots? You're not going to find me arguing against you on THAT point.
I too have noticed that even in the last month, the number of true HD advertisements has SKYROCKETED during prime time. If so much acceleration has occurred in the USA in just the past month, imagine where things will be by this time next year? Heck, I just read today that that silly show The View is going to HD production. You know when people want to look at Rosie O'Donnel and company in HD, the market is ready for it. ;-)
HD is happening, and the adoption rate both for consumers, content creators, and broadcasters is accelerating. I have seen MUCH acceleration in 2006, and I think 2007 will be the year HD really takes command of the market. Let me put it this way -- perhaps the SUITS at broadcast organizations can't find a case for HD. But I will tell you this -- the engineers, editors, etc. are VERY MUCH ready for HD, and know it is happening, and there's no looking back. This isn't really up for debate, it's the fact of the matter.
What I find a little strange about this guy's comments is that he's basically trying to justify keeping a 50-year-old broadcast standard, well into the 21st century. Let's think about that for a moment -- what would have happened if the computer industry had decided to stay with, say, the standards that were in place for computing in the 1950s, through today. Yeeeaaaah... As bizarre as this scenario sounds, this is the reality that the broadcast market has perpetuated for the last 50 years or so. I would think that consumers would be demanding a much quicker adoption of HD! Oh, so you need to buy a new TeeVee set? Me cry you a river. That's like saying I should be forced to use a building-sized supercomputer that runs on punchcards to handle basic arithmetic problems, just because you don't feel you should need to upgrade your computer. But it's even more ridiculous than that, because we tolerate "needing" to buy a new computer every 5 years or so, but sheesh, needing to upgrade your TV once per fifty years? IT'S A TRAVESTY!
And on another note -- if those idiots can't command higher ad rates for HD advertisements, well, please fire them and hire me to do your HD advertising sales, because your current ad sales team SUCKS and is not worth what you're paying them. I am pretty certain I could do a better job myself. And I'm not just throwing that out there -- again, I make my living largely "selling" video content producers on HD.
Finally, another interesting debate/issue concerns the video/post/broadcast world's move to tapeless workflows, where you are essentially recording video _files_ right onto flash RAM/hard drives/optical discs/SANs/etc. And video tapes go the way of the dodo. This is another HUGE shift in the broadcast market, which is only recently incorporating "IT technologies" into the systems that drive broadcast facilities. A lot of broadcasters are going to go for "two for the price of one" -- let's go tapeless, and let's make sure our upgrades are HD-capable at least.
OK OK, one laaast point -- anyone who doesn't feel HD is a worthwhile upgrade SERIOUSLY needs to get their eyes checked. I recommend doing an A/B comparison between SD and HD, of the same content. HD is only truly profound when you _go back_ to SD, and you ask yourself, how the hell did I deal with this shit for so long? BRING ON MORE HD!!!
just about the saddest goddamned thing I've ever read on slashdot. The thought of becoming an arthritis-ridden man who can't play video games is just... shocking. *sigh* I am so jumping into an active volcano when I start to get frail...
Solaris...
Did they lie about chopping down the cherry tree?
The Futurological Congress is not only terribly entertaining, but also quite twisted, and I recommend it very much. One has to think that The Matrix and even P.K. Dick owe a lot to Lem, his way of thinking, and some of the dark scenarios it leads to.
PLEASE kill The Simpsons already. The longer it goes on, the darker the future is for all of us.
Let's just hope it doesn't turn out like the Neverending Story sequels did.... Uhg!!!! Talk about laaaame. :P