What does the casing have to do with component quality?
The casing is a... component... of the computer, in case you didn't realize. A quality case can increase the longevity of the parts contained within, and make servicing easier, give more efficient cooling, etc.
People bagged on the "Fisher-Price" because they were ugly.
That's revisionist history. Ask most people if they prefered the look of the Mac cases or the typical PC case of the time. The Mac would win for 99% of people. Do you remember just how ugly PC cases were back then?
But you miss the point, anyway. It's not mostly about looks. It's about functionality and industrial design. The G3/G4 towers had convenient handles for moving the machine around. The iMac cases took up less desk space, and also made it convenient to move the machine around. As far as looks, it meant they could be used in public places, like in the reception areas of advertising agencies, without having to hide them under a desk.
Try exporting it into.wmv or a DivX, thats what I do when I make movies. Though, I am converting FRAPS files there, not from a camcorder.
Why would you do that? Running your practically uncompressed DV footage through a high-ratio playback compressor like DiVx, only to recompress with another playback compressor (MPEG-2) does not make any sense.
I dunno. Representing Mac as some cool-but-arrogant college fuck and PC as a dowdy old businessman seems... offensive... to anyone who owns and has no trouble using their PC
Why? Do you have some sort of prejudice against dowdy businessmen? Perhaps this says more about you than the ads.
These ads say to me 'if I buy a mac, i'm going to become an unshaven jean wearing hipster (whoes probably in the closet)
That's pretty ironic, as it's usually the conservative-looking businessmen who are deeply in the closet, and the younger generation who are more open about their sexuality.
"You are your inbox. Take a clear-eyed look at how you answer or file each email. Notice what you choose to keep or delete. Consider your anxiety when your inbox is jammed with unanswered messages.
Piss off. I'm not doing what you tell me to, and submitting you your repressive inbox-ocracy. I refuse to even consider the idea that an inbox exists.
I think his point was that you could use it anywhere from a technological perspectiv
How is it any different today? Take the popular legal music services - iTunes and eMusic (or whatever that one that gives you MP3s is called). You simply burn the tracks to a CD, or record your computer's audio-out if you want to use an audio cassette.
In reality, this is much simpler than it was in the old days (at least for CD listening) - when you had to record everything manually in real-time using a cassette recorder.
So, what has really changed about where I can play my iTunes-purchased music?
With vinyl, cassettes and CDs there was a certain standard that meant if you bought music you could use it pretty much anywhere.
Not really. You have to pay big bucks to use music, regardless of the medium, for public performances, such as in a play, or in a movie soundtrack. If you play it on the radio, you must play royalties. The medium didn't change this.
After this, the quality of the ideas in the article is what matters and not so much the quality of the writing.
As I said, the content was very poor, not just the writing. From the outset, it was clear that there was very little insight, and no good ideas. Basically, "DRM is bad" and "Apple is bad." When the ideas and the writing is at a such low level, why waste your time with drivel?
As I don't have copies of the contracts, that would be difficult. However, DVD players do, in fact, copy data from the disk to temporary staging areas in RAM, so actually, yes, the DVD CCA contracts will cover certain types of copying (if not all),
And that would be an authorized use. The movie industry uses the DVD CCA specifically to prevent users copying data for their own purposes, "fair use" or not.
What is almost certainly the case is that the DVD-CCA is permitted to allow all copying that falls under a liberal definition of "fair use".
Why do you say that is almost certainly the case? I'd say it's likely to be the exact opposite: the DVD CCA was used by the movie companies to prevent any legal right to fair use by technical measures. Otherwise, why would they even use CSS in the first place?
It's highly unlikely that the DVD-CCA is only allowed to permit one type of copy, as this would be supremely inflexible and would allow no margin for future expansion of products and services that might benefit CSS users.
The movie studios could always negotiate future expansion. And c'mon, do you realize how hard it is to get any movie copyright holder to allow copies for any purpose? Inflexible is exactly what the industry wants. Why would they want to benefit "CSS users"? They want to benefit the studios profits, not users.
Be realistic here. The movie industry may be greedy, but they're not so completely stupid that they'd keep a body already subservient to them completely powerless.
I am being realistic. If they are completely subservient, then why would they need to grant them any power over their copyrights? Because, if they are completely subservient, then they can dictate what is allowed. If they allow any degree of independence, then that lessens the subservience. So it doesn't really make sense that you would say they have flexibility, and be subservient. Subservience is achieved through inflexibility.
Oh, and the movie industry is very stupid, not just greedy. Otherwise, why do the enforce region coding, which damages sales and profits? Why do they consistently do things which go against their own interests if they aren't stupid?
If they're not authorized to give the type of permission you're referring to, then every DVD player in America is illegal.
Bullshit. The licensing for DVD players covers playback, not copying. Show me where the copyright holders authorize the DVD CCA to give permission to make copies of their copyrighted material to certain companies without consultation.
He says both that the only method to play Apple's DRM'd files is through an Apple music player, and that the only DRM'd files an Apple music player can play come from Apple.
No, read the article. He does not say that the only DRMed files an iPod can play come from Apple. He says the only proprietary files an iPod can play come from Apple.
Although the iPod plays MP3s, they don't count as a proprietary format.
Seeing as MP3 is a proprietary format, then why wouldn't MP3 count as a proprietary format?
Ownership -property rights- is the cornerstone of a free country.
That's funny - I thought human rights were the cornerstone of a free country. Property rights are far more insignificant. A country ruled by property rights above all else is a corporate-ruled country, or perhaps a fascist country. I'm not sure how you get the idea that property rights are anywhere near the level of human rights. Humans are born with life and liberty (or lack thereof), not property. Often the lack of liberty is due to property ownership superceding human liberty.
Work best at what? Making money? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that for-sale non-negotiable copyrighted software, music and movies make a LOT more money than those sustained by voluntary donation.
At producing the best/most innovative or popular product? Again, the world's best artists in music and movies, and the world's most innovative/powerful software tends to come from the non-negotiable commercial side of things. Very few of the people who distribute via donation could compete with the non-negotiable commercial players. Even independent musicians tend to sell their music or concert tickets for a fixed price, not donation. You see, people like to have a reliable income so they can eat, have a place to live, and money to invest in their future creative projects.
But what reason would anyone have for reading the rest of the article. It is so poorly written that it doesn't really warrant reading any further. How about we find some tech commentators who can actually write, and thoroughly consider issues, instead of these screechers who know nothing of either style or substance?
How could that organization give permission for all DVDs to be copied? Some copyright holders might not agree to that, or might not be members of that organization. Further, from the press-release:
Both would require special blank DVD discs that will use the Content Scramble System (CSS) for encryption and will be compatible with the millions of existing DVD players in the marketplace today.
That does not cover copying to iPods and PSPs, but rather to a "special" encrypted disc. So how does that cover what Circuit City is doing?
Yeah CDs sound better than files played from a hard drive, because the shiny silver coating makes the identical bits sound better. Really, it's true! And it sounds even better if you run a green marker around the edge of the CD, while using a valve amplifier!
Oh wait, I'm full of shit, and things like dynamic range and sampling rate actually determine digital audio quality, not the medium on which the file is stored.
Data is like fluids, you can't filter everything... Want a real life example? Take spam - you can't control that either,
They make liquid Spam now? No wonder it gets through the filters more easily. This could be useful, though. Whenever I try to make Spam Smoothies, I can't suck it through a straw and have to use a spoon.
Mainstream publishers have these services because they pay people to provide them. If you have a book in mind and you want these services, buy them yourself.
Any online publication service will be happy to sell editing and proofing services to you at extra charge, or line up your own
You make it sound like this process is like looking up "editors" in the yellow pages or Google. It's not as simple and tangible as that. One needs a good relationship with editors, a "conversation" based on many things including style, and knowledge of the subject area.
Superglue a small magnet to the inside of the upper lip of the can so that it's flush with the open top of the can.
a) Aluminium isn't magnetic, it wouldn't hold the can closed
Did you even read what you quoted? What the fuck do you think the superglue is for? Do you think that Coke cans somehow resist glue?
So now I can pay to spend an ungodly amount of time and energy to get some 320x240 jittery so-so contrast version of some big screen movie. And I'll have to watch it in a certain time period or lose it? Or, they'll restrict the number of times I can watch it? Somebody pinch me, I must be dreaming. Could life really be this good?
Why do you assume that the movies will be jittery and 320x240 resolution, and not H-264 compressed high-definition versions? The service hasn't even been announced yet, and is still a rumour - so how exactly do you know what format they plan to release in?
Personally I don't need random stock photos of smiling people with dreadlocks and thick rimmed plastic glasses using laptops to use a website.
Hmmm. Dreadlocks with thick-rimmed glasses. I think I just found my new look!
Re:Oh, for crying out loud...
on
Beginning GIMP
·
· Score: 1
It's pretty sad how these terms get abused. "State of the Art" is usually meant to mean something that is on the cutting edge. GIMP is in the stone age in the graphic industry. I mean, look at the things people have been doing with computer graphics. The movie Monsters Inc was released how many years ago now? I'd like to see somebody create that with GIMP.
Slashdot Mirror
The casing is a ... component ... of the computer, in case you didn't realize. A quality case can increase the longevity of the parts contained within, and make servicing easier, give more efficient cooling, etc.
People bagged on the "Fisher-Price" because they were ugly.
That's revisionist history. Ask most people if they prefered the look of the Mac cases or the typical PC case of the time. The Mac would win for 99% of people. Do you remember just how ugly PC cases were back then?
But you miss the point, anyway. It's not mostly about looks. It's about functionality and industrial design. The G3/G4 towers had convenient handles for moving the machine around. The iMac cases took up less desk space, and also made it convenient to move the machine around. As far as looks, it meant they could be used in public places, like in the reception areas of advertising agencies, without having to hide them under a desk.
Why would you do that? Running your practically uncompressed DV footage through a high-ratio playback compressor like DiVx, only to recompress with another playback compressor (MPEG-2) does not make any sense.
Why? Do you have some sort of prejudice against dowdy businessmen? Perhaps this says more about you than the ads.
That's pretty ironic, as it's usually the conservative-looking businessmen who are deeply in the closet, and the younger generation who are more open about their sexuality.
How quaint. Somebody with only 1,000 emails. You should win an award for "Slashdot reader with least email traffic" or something.
Who are you, the email Nazi? NO IMAP FOR YOU!
Piss off. I'm not doing what you tell me to, and submitting you your repressive inbox-ocracy. I refuse to even consider the idea that an inbox exists.
How is it any different today? Take the popular legal music services - iTunes and eMusic (or whatever that one that gives you MP3s is called). You simply burn the tracks to a CD, or record your computer's audio-out if you want to use an audio cassette.
In reality, this is much simpler than it was in the old days (at least for CD listening) - when you had to record everything manually in real-time using a cassette recorder.
So, what has really changed about where I can play my iTunes-purchased music?
Not really. You have to pay big bucks to use music, regardless of the medium, for public performances, such as in a play, or in a movie soundtrack. If you play it on the radio, you must play royalties. The medium didn't change this.
As I said, the content was very poor, not just the writing. From the outset, it was clear that there was very little insight, and no good ideas. Basically, "DRM is bad" and "Apple is bad." When the ideas and the writing is at a such low level, why waste your time with drivel?
And that would be an authorized use. The movie industry uses the DVD CCA specifically to prevent users copying data for their own purposes, "fair use" or not.
What is almost certainly the case is that the DVD-CCA is permitted to allow all copying that falls under a liberal definition of "fair use".
Why do you say that is almost certainly the case? I'd say it's likely to be the exact opposite: the DVD CCA was used by the movie companies to prevent any legal right to fair use by technical measures. Otherwise, why would they even use CSS in the first place?
It's highly unlikely that the DVD-CCA is only allowed to permit one type of copy, as this would be supremely inflexible and would allow no margin for future expansion of products and services that might benefit CSS users.
The movie studios could always negotiate future expansion. And c'mon, do you realize how hard it is to get any movie copyright holder to allow copies for any purpose? Inflexible is exactly what the industry wants. Why would they want to benefit "CSS users"? They want to benefit the studios profits, not users.
Be realistic here. The movie industry may be greedy, but they're not so completely stupid that they'd keep a body already subservient to them completely powerless.
I am being realistic. If they are completely subservient, then why would they need to grant them any power over their copyrights? Because, if they are completely subservient, then they can dictate what is allowed. If they allow any degree of independence, then that lessens the subservience. So it doesn't really make sense that you would say they have flexibility, and be subservient. Subservience is achieved through inflexibility.
Oh, and the movie industry is very stupid, not just greedy. Otherwise, why do the enforce region coding, which damages sales and profits? Why do they consistently do things which go against their own interests if they aren't stupid?
Bullshit. The licensing for DVD players covers playback, not copying. Show me where the copyright holders authorize the DVD CCA to give permission to make copies of their copyrighted material to certain companies without consultation.
No, read the article. He does not say that the only DRMed files an iPod can play come from Apple. He says the only proprietary files an iPod can play come from Apple.
Although the iPod plays MP3s, they don't count as a proprietary format.
Seeing as MP3 is a proprietary format, then why wouldn't MP3 count as a proprietary format?
That's funny - I thought human rights were the cornerstone of a free country. Property rights are far more insignificant. A country ruled by property rights above all else is a corporate-ruled country, or perhaps a fascist country. I'm not sure how you get the idea that property rights are anywhere near the level of human rights. Humans are born with life and liberty (or lack thereof), not property. Often the lack of liberty is due to property ownership superceding human liberty.
Work best at what? Making money? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that for-sale non-negotiable copyrighted software, music and movies make a LOT more money than those sustained by voluntary donation.
At producing the best/most innovative or popular product? Again, the world's best artists in music and movies, and the world's most innovative/powerful software tends to come from the non-negotiable commercial side of things. Very few of the people who distribute via donation could compete with the non-negotiable commercial players. Even independent musicians tend to sell their music or concert tickets for a fixed price, not donation. You see, people like to have a reliable income so they can eat, have a place to live, and money to invest in their future creative projects.
But what reason would anyone have for reading the rest of the article. It is so poorly written that it doesn't really warrant reading any further. How about we find some tech commentators who can actually write, and thoroughly consider issues, instead of these screechers who know nothing of either style or substance?
Both would require special blank DVD discs that will use the Content Scramble System (CSS) for encryption and will be compatible with the millions of existing DVD players in the marketplace today.
That does not cover copying to iPods and PSPs, but rather to a "special" encrypted disc. So how does that cover what Circuit City is doing?
Oh wait, I'm full of shit, and things like dynamic range and sampling rate actually determine digital audio quality, not the medium on which the file is stored.
They make liquid Spam now? No wonder it gets through the filters more easily. This could be useful, though. Whenever I try to make Spam Smoothies, I can't suck it through a straw and have to use a spoon.
Why not? It's possible in almost any forum. I didn't realize that "most forums" banned people with knowledge from posting.
You make it sound like this process is like looking up "editors" in the yellow pages or Google. It's not as simple and tangible as that. One needs a good relationship with editors, a "conversation" based on many things including style, and knowledge of the subject area.
Did you even read what you quoted? What the fuck do you think the superglue is for? Do you think that Coke cans somehow resist glue?
Why do you assume that the movies will be jittery and 320x240 resolution, and not H-264 compressed high-definition versions? The service hasn't even been announced yet, and is still a rumour - so how exactly do you know what format they plan to release in?
Hmmm. Dreadlocks with thick-rimmed glasses. I think I just found my new look!
It's pretty sad how these terms get abused. "State of the Art" is usually meant to mean something that is on the cutting edge. GIMP is in the stone age in the graphic industry. I mean, look at the things people have been doing with computer graphics. The movie Monsters Inc was released how many years ago now? I'd like to see somebody create that with GIMP.