They'll probably just turn blogs over to the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security. You're good to go if you have the platinum "Gannon" license for internet bloggification. After several background and body-cavity searches, naturally.
Have you tried using an FM radio in the middle of the desert? Even bad AM reception is better than nothing at that range. Some places are just too far for an FM transmitter to reach. AM, not so much. Not all disasters involve storms, or happen in urban areas.
And have you compared the quality of reception of integrated gadget/radios, with devices that are just radios? If you want something in an emergency - just buy an AM/FM radio. Relying on one inside a miniaturized device not designed for radio, is a bad idea. It is so damn cheap to buy a decent receiver these days, why is anyone concerned about it being build into the iPod? You can already get inline tuners for the iPod that go in the headphone lead.
Having that radio available is what lets most families get into their basements in time to be safe, especially when the power is out. If only for that reason, the radio circuitry should be included with any digital music device.
Help, help! I'm being repressed. It's just not right that every electronic device ever made doesn't have a radio built into it. It is the responsibility of any random electronic gadget to save my life, in the event of a disaster!! Help!
Truly, the terrorists have already won, if people are so freaked out that they think having a radio in a device is the difference between life and death. If you are worried about disasters, surely you would buy a decent AM radio (with greater range than FM) rather than rely on a few cheap, miniaturized chips in a device not designed to be a radio or emergency tool?
Zero, because it uses the earphone cable as antenna?
No, something with good reception. I'm a radio fan with good options in my area, and have tried countless compact digital FM radios. They all suck. You get much better reception if you get a slightly larger unit that has an analog tuner.
Also, if you are just using FM, then you are excluding a large amount of radio enthusiasts who listen to AM radio. There is no possible way of installing a decent AM antenna inside an MP3 player the size of an iPod. But you can get decent AM and FM reception in a very inexpensive portable radio receiver. Why bother with an inferior quality from a cheap "micro" receiver in another device?
In my history of owning devices that do multiple things, it is always the case that they do each poorly. It is less than the sum of the parts.
I'd say the Macintosh is an exception. It allows me to make music, do graphic design, video and motion graphics, and combine them all if needed into a live performance. And it has allowed me much more freedom and ability with those mediums than the older technology it was replacing.
I don't really get nostalgic about the days when publishing was cut-n-paste, and I needed dedicated video decks to edit video, and a separate audio recording and performance system.
That's totally stupid reasoning. Just because the iPod is a big success, doesn't mean it comes at the expense of the mac platform. Macs and software are still highly profitable for Apple. Why would they want to reduce their products, AND destroy their stellar brand-name by having someone else screw with the Macintosh?
Seriously. I'd do this for free. Many people probably already have.
step 1. Massive raid 5 array with a mirror array off site and pleanty of hot spares.
step 2. Fix date stamping on whatever image format, sound format, text format you decide on.
step 3. Don't use lossy compression.
Yeah, all that really sounds like it will be free. Whatever you say, boss.
You can't even replace this one if you WANT to (unless you have your own soder kit and all).
Woah, Apple are like Nazis! They make me pay $8 for a soldering iron, and a whole dollar for solder, just so I can make my own repairs. What bastards! Miniature consumer electronics should be made modular, like Lego!!!! Unfair! Don't get me started about repairing the surface-mount electronics in my mobile phone! Do you realize how much equipment you need to repair that shit???
Just get an inline FM-tuner that goes in the headphone cord. You get to use separate batteries that way, too! So you can listen to the radio when your 'Pod battery dies. Same with recording. rather than make a bulkier, more expensive unit, those who want it can add an accessory that might even include a microphone.
OK. Considering the limit of 100 songs, it takes you *less* than 6 hours to hear everything you can pack in it.
Then you have to listen to the same stuff two more times. Why accept that?
Indeed, why accept that? If you recall, I am saying the phone-MP3 player combo is not a great idea. So why would I accept that "100 songs" crap in addition to the lack of battery life?
With a Smartphone, I don't need a dedicated music player - it does its job, not in a stellar way, but it does it.
With a ROKR, I'd need an extra PDA (or a Smartphone).
Right. So, why not just get an iPod Nano to go with your existing phone. Then you change your battery life from 6 hours to, what? A typical phone gets at least 24-48 hours battery life when used normally. The iPod Nano gets about 14 hours. So, you go from 6 hours to 38-62 hours of total battery life - and you get an MP3 player that does do a stellar job, instead of a crappy one. And it's probably cheaper to get a new basic phone plus a Nano, than it is to buy a phone with enough storage and features to be a decent MP3 player.
Case and point is my Nokia 3650: Camera sucks, syncing sucks, nobody else actually uses Bluetooth,
I have a Nokia 6600, and I agree with you on all points above - with the exception of Bluetooth. I'm not sure what you mean by "nobody else uses it." The 6600, being a "business" oriented phone, uses bluetooth beautifully. My iCal calendar syncs perfectly with the built-in calendar. My address book syncs perfectly. I can use bluetooth for file transfer, and make my own ringtones from audio files, etc. It's also fantastic as a remote for iTunes - and will pause the playing song when I get a call, and resume when I hang up. Bluetooth is the only reason I bought this phone, and it really is worth it. I also type SMS messages from my laptop, instead of using the fiddly numeric keypad. Seeing as most people mainly use SMS these days, I rarely have to even remove the phone from my bag - I just use it remotely via bluetooth.
I'm just a bit skeptical about "videoblogs." Most audio blogs (podcasts) on technology and science topics turned out to be a waste of time. The audio format just tends to add filler. I can get the same information more thoroughly and efficiently via text. Does the video (or audio) experience actually add anything?
I have seen and heard good radio and TV shows about science and technology - but they tend to come from my local (non-commercial) FM and TV stations, not web broadcasting. I am reluctant to bother spending much time mucking about with different video formats to get substandard video streams, when I can just switch on the TV or radio.
This article goes over my head because it uses too much jargon. Can one of my assistants, or even better, the lovely Brit Hume, please summarize the article in words I can understand? I know you underlings read this little slashdot email list.
I don't think one needs Feng Shui to explain why not blocking entrances is a bad idea. Feng Shui is about more than just practical considerations - it also uses explanations of "energy" and "spirits" that are not materially demonstrated.
Slashdot Mirror
Why, yes. It's made of latex and has five fingers.
They'll probably just turn blogs over to the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security. You're good to go if you have the platinum "Gannon" license for internet bloggification. After several background and body-cavity searches, naturally.
And have you compared the quality of reception of integrated gadget/radios, with devices that are just radios? If you want something in an emergency - just buy an AM/FM radio. Relying on one inside a miniaturized device not designed for radio, is a bad idea. It is so damn cheap to buy a decent receiver these days, why is anyone concerned about it being build into the iPod? You can already get inline tuners for the iPod that go in the headphone lead.
Help, help! I'm being repressed. It's just not right that every electronic device ever made doesn't have a radio built into it. It is the responsibility of any random electronic gadget to save my life, in the event of a disaster!! Help!
Truly, the terrorists have already won, if people are so freaked out that they think having a radio in a device is the difference between life and death. If you are worried about disasters, surely you would buy a decent AM radio (with greater range than FM) rather than rely on a few cheap, miniaturized chips in a device not designed to be a radio or emergency tool?
What makes you think you can't use lower encoding rates with an iPod?
No, something with good reception. I'm a radio fan with good options in my area, and have tried countless compact digital FM radios. They all suck. You get much better reception if you get a slightly larger unit that has an analog tuner.
Also, if you are just using FM, then you are excluding a large amount of radio enthusiasts who listen to AM radio. There is no possible way of installing a decent AM antenna inside an MP3 player the size of an iPod. But you can get decent AM and FM reception in a very inexpensive portable radio receiver. Why bother with an inferior quality from a cheap "micro" receiver in another device?
I'd say the Macintosh is an exception. It allows me to make music, do graphic design, video and motion graphics, and combine them all if needed into a live performance. And it has allowed me much more freedom and ability with those mediums than the older technology it was replacing.
I don't really get nostalgic about the days when publishing was cut-n-paste, and I needed dedicated video decks to edit video, and a separate audio recording and performance system.
APPLE SHOULD invest in the Time Cube! Are you ignorant?
Sorry, but your idiocy goes all the way up to 11. ;-)
That's totally stupid reasoning. Just because the iPod is a big success, doesn't mean it comes at the expense of the mac platform. Macs and software are still highly profitable for Apple. Why would they want to reduce their products, AND destroy their stellar brand-name by having someone else screw with the Macintosh?
That's because oval tables make conversations snappier than round ones.
Yeah, all that really sounds like it will be free. Whatever you say, boss.
So, you have a rechargeable AAA battery. Not a very efficient power source, and bulky and heavy.
Geee, that's not at all wasteful or expensive to be using non-rechargeable AAA batteries.
Woah, Apple are like Nazis! They make me pay $8 for a soldering iron, and a whole dollar for solder, just so I can make my own repairs. What bastards! Miniature consumer electronics should be made modular, like Lego!!!! Unfair! Don't get me started about repairing the surface-mount electronics in my mobile phone! Do you realize how much equipment you need to repair that shit???
Hate to break it to you, but the term "Nerd Porn" has been around since at least the '80s.
Just get an inline FM-tuner that goes in the headphone cord. You get to use separate batteries that way, too! So you can listen to the radio when your 'Pod battery dies. Same with recording. rather than make a bulkier, more expensive unit, those who want it can add an accessory that might even include a microphone.
Modern Lithium Ion, Lithium polymer and even NiMH batteries don't really suffer from a memory effect. Not like the old NiCd batteries do.
Indeed, why accept that? If you recall, I am saying the phone-MP3 player combo is not a great idea. So why would I accept that "100 songs" crap in addition to the lack of battery life?
With a Smartphone, I don't need a dedicated music player - it does its job, not in a stellar way, but it does it. With a ROKR, I'd need an extra PDA (or a Smartphone).
Right. So, why not just get an iPod Nano to go with your existing phone. Then you change your battery life from 6 hours to, what? A typical phone gets at least 24-48 hours battery life when used normally. The iPod Nano gets about 14 hours. So, you go from 6 hours to 38-62 hours of total battery life - and you get an MP3 player that does do a stellar job, instead of a crappy one. And it's probably cheaper to get a new basic phone plus a Nano, than it is to buy a phone with enough storage and features to be a decent MP3 player.
I have a Nokia 6600, and I agree with you on all points above - with the exception of Bluetooth. I'm not sure what you mean by "nobody else uses it." The 6600, being a "business" oriented phone, uses bluetooth beautifully. My iCal calendar syncs perfectly with the built-in calendar. My address book syncs perfectly. I can use bluetooth for file transfer, and make my own ringtones from audio files, etc. It's also fantastic as a remote for iTunes - and will pause the playing song when I get a call, and resume when I hang up. Bluetooth is the only reason I bought this phone, and it really is worth it. I also type SMS messages from my laptop, instead of using the fiddly numeric keypad. Seeing as most people mainly use SMS these days, I rarely have to even remove the phone from my bag - I just use it remotely via bluetooth.
I have seen and heard good radio and TV shows about science and technology - but they tend to come from my local (non-commercial) FM and TV stations, not web broadcasting. I am reluctant to bother spending much time mucking about with different video formats to get substandard video streams, when I can just switch on the TV or radio.
This article goes over my head because it uses too much jargon. Can one of my assistants, or even better, the lovely Brit Hume, please summarize the article in words I can understand? I know you underlings read this little slashdot email list.
Sincerely,
High-Ranking Executive
The Company You Work For
I don't think one needs Feng Shui to explain why not blocking entrances is a bad idea. Feng Shui is about more than just practical considerations - it also uses explanations of "energy" and "spirits" that are not materially demonstrated.
I, for one, welcome out new iPod-killing cellphones glued to iPods.
Precisely. Who is going to accept a pathetic 6 hours of battery life from their phone (or their MP3 player, for that matter)?