The record companies are trying to re-release everything so that they get a sale from each market segment - physical media and data. I am sure they are looking at the person who purchases a CD then rips it (legally) to their iPod (I do lossless) as 2 potential sales of which they only got 1 (the less profitable one). I currently purchase CD's and then put it on my iPod precisely because I can have it at high quality (lossless) for my home stereo as well as for the car and while exercising. The record company looks at it and sees that they are leaving at least $5-45 'on the table' because they can't use the DMCA to force me to buy their album again for each of my uses. Too bad, because this thinking is what continues to get them in trouble, and mp3 sounds terrible on good home stereos.
I fear it may be both - restrictions on gas (tax) and cars (tax). Might also consider banning cars with higher than a certain amount of emissions regardless of status (remove older vehicles from the road altogether)?
You aren't alone, though, while a lot of Americans feel that they would be willing to "sacrifice" in order to "save the environment" many will sing a different tune once the "sacrifices" are defined...
And don't forget that Detroit will spend more time fighting the regulations in court and through lobbyists than designing vehicles that give good performance in the new restrictions.:-(
You have a point, though they are responsible for a couple that made it big, too (CD format with Philips for instance). In High Definition Audio, all formats flopped in the greater marketplace, Sony's SACD is the format of choice amongst audiophile fans of classical music and jazz. To declare a loser right off the bat is a little silly.
"The assembly in China. Which is where all the money and infrastructure goes."
Nope. Contract manufacturers generally make very low gross margins. Apple holds all the strings and makes most of the money.
They also have a hold on the content side of things with the popularity of iTunes.
"Basically China is using Apple to finance all the R&D for them and handle the marketing while they make all the actual stuff and take the dough, because the iPod doens't[sic] make any money for Apple."
Not sure where you are getting that idea from?
#1: Contact manufacturers are a dime a dozen, cut each others' throat for assembly work, and generally don't make much money at all. At least not nearly as much as Apple.
#2: If all the money and profits were made in factory work - then we would outsource everything but the factory work to lower wage countries. If Apple 's contract manufacturer were to make more money than them - and Apple would lose money or break even on the iPod - they would quickly be out of business and their lack of profit margins would let everyone know you are correct. They are making money hand over fist, and with any luck, the contractors that work for Apple are doing OK, too, but as the main company in charge of it, expect them to make most of the profits.
Keep in mind also that "China" isn't a company and "China" isn't a monolithic organization, it is a country that has many companies in it. Does anyone know the name of the company that actually does the assembly work for Apple in assembly of the iPod?
Creative design talent is in short supply and is profitable. The ability to snap a couple of things together, and screw a few philips heads screws isn't a high wage, high profit type of operation, and there a legions of people lining up to do it for you CHEAP. This is the reason for the decline of unskilled and semi-skilled factory jobs and union jobs in the West.
The people being "throttled back" are the folks that rent out all the movies Netflix will send them, the subscriber copies them, and send them right back.
I have the service, and generally do not have trouble with big delays, but then again, I don't burn copies of their movies and generally won't get a chance to watch the movies until the weekend.
Whether their new service is fair or not, I think depends upon the actual algorithm used.
Slashdot Mirror
The record companies are trying to re-release everything so that they get a sale from each market segment - physical media and data. I am sure they are looking at the person who purchases a CD then rips it (legally) to their iPod (I do lossless) as 2 potential sales of which they only got 1 (the less profitable one). I currently purchase CD's and then put it on my iPod precisely because I can have it at high quality (lossless) for my home stereo as well as for the car and while exercising. The record company looks at it and sees that they are leaving at least $5-45 'on the table' because they can't use the DMCA to force me to buy their album again for each of my uses. Too bad, because this thinking is what continues to get them in trouble, and mp3 sounds terrible on good home stereos.
I fear it may be both - restrictions on gas (tax) and cars (tax). Might also consider banning cars with higher than a certain amount of emissions regardless of status (remove older vehicles from the road altogether)?
...
:-(
You aren't alone, though, while a lot of Americans feel that they would be willing to "sacrifice" in order to "save the environment" many will sing a different tune once the "sacrifices" are defined
And don't forget that Detroit will spend more time fighting the regulations in court and through lobbyists than designing vehicles that give good performance in the new restrictions.
You have a point, though they are responsible for a couple that made it big, too (CD format with Philips for instance). In High Definition Audio, all formats flopped in the greater marketplace, Sony's SACD is the format of choice amongst audiophile fans of classical music and jazz. To declare a loser right off the bat is a little silly.
"The assembly in China. Which is where all the money and infrastructure goes."
Nope. Contract manufacturers generally make very low gross margins. Apple holds all the strings and makes most of the money.
They also have a hold on the content side of things with the popularity of iTunes.
"Basically China is using Apple to finance all the R&D for them and handle the marketing while they make all the actual stuff and take the dough, because the iPod doens't[sic] make any money for Apple."
Not sure where you are getting that idea from?
#1: Contact manufacturers are a dime a dozen, cut each others' throat for assembly work, and generally don't make much money at all. At least not nearly as much as Apple.
#2: If all the money and profits were made in factory work - then we would outsource everything but the factory work to lower wage countries. If Apple 's contract manufacturer were to make more money than them - and Apple would lose money or break even on the iPod - they would quickly be out of business and their lack of profit margins would let everyone know you are correct. They are making money hand over fist, and with any luck, the contractors that work for Apple are doing OK, too, but as the main company in charge of it, expect them to make most of the profits.
Keep in mind also that "China" isn't a company and "China" isn't a monolithic organization, it is a country that has many companies in it. Does anyone know the name of the company that actually does the assembly work for Apple in assembly of the iPod?
Creative design talent is in short supply and is profitable. The ability to snap a couple of things together, and screw a few philips heads screws isn't a high wage, high profit type of operation, and there a legions of people lining up to do it for you CHEAP. This is the reason for the decline of unskilled and semi-skilled factory jobs and union jobs in the West.
The people being "throttled back" are the folks that rent out all the movies Netflix will send them, the subscriber copies them, and send them right back.
I have the service, and generally do not have trouble with big delays, but then again, I don't burn copies of their movies and generally won't get a chance to watch the movies until the weekend.
Whether their new service is fair or not, I think depends upon the actual algorithm used.