Have there been any reactions from Big Media / Big Patents to this?... How do they swallow the fact that the Pirate Parties are now taking a legal and official route to copyright reform?
I'm thinking they'll just shrug their shoulders. They'll probably make a little money from this, by running human interest stories about the new "joke party" that started up. And they wouldn't be too far off the mark in calling it a joke party, either.
Except for the fact that actual piracy on the high seas, with weapons, kidnapping and extortion is on the rise off the coast of Somalia. So yeah, it's not as cute to call yourself a pirate these days, as it was when it was a quaint thing of the past.
It doesn't work like that. You don't plan things like Silicon Valley, they are just things that happen. Silicon Valley itself is something that nobody should deliberately emulate. The fact that it is the home of many successful tech companies is simply a bizarre freak of nature. Otherwise, it's just a strange congested-but-also-not-dense piece of land. There's nothing inherently technological or successful about it. It's just a patch of land that's not really in the mountains and not quite on the coast either, that's not quite industrial and not quite residential.
Well, firstly, beer and parties tend to go together. Nobody has wild parties over mobile phones. Secondly, I haven't seen a beer ad like that for years, could you point me to one? Most beer ads these days tend to go for the post-modern irony angle, rather than the "you're the coolest person in the world!!!" approach.
wow suddenly people who want to do more than apple lets them are murderers and robbers...
No, that's not what I was saying. Have you ever heard of an "analogy"?
excuse us for simply wanting some freedom from the aforementioned "walled garden".
But you said a lot more than that. You do have the freedom from the "walled garden" - when did anybody ever force you to use an Apple product? And why do you want to use things that don't work?
I think that you missed my contextual definition of "just works". It "Just works", so long as you don't change the hardware and don't take it anywhere, or run anything, that Apple doesn't approve.
Doesn't really change anything. "Just works" as long as Apple approves is still a lot better than "doesn't work." Let's apply this to society - society tends to "just work" as long as you obey social conventions such as not robbing or murdering people. Would you rather a society that didn't work, where you are free to murder and rob people?
So, that tool may not exist now. Adobe's trying to bring it to the market
Considering that so many people have tried, but nobody has ever succeeded in producing such a tool that produces satisfying results, what are the chances that Adobe will suddenly succeed, with Flash, no less?
And the cross-platform apps may not be quite as high quality as native apps, but they're generally still usable
Thanks for illustrating my point so succinctly. An application that is merely "usable" has no place existing.
But, if a developer wants to develop for the iPhone and for other platforms, then it increases his total cost of doing so above what it would be if Apple hadn't made that decision.
But that's not what you said in your original post. All you said was that it increases the cost of developing for platforms other than the iPhone - not that it increases costs for multi-platform development that includes the iPhone.
I get 2-4 DVDs in the post every week to watch for about the same price as buying one DVD a month.
Don't you realize that you are hurting Hollywood, the birthplace of our nation, and KILLING HUMAN CREATIVITY with your immoral renting? Every decent, moral person knows that renting is for hookers and illegal immigrants, not movies.
and also refuses to port iTunes to Linux, which I suspect would be a trivial effort,
I think you have funny ideas about what "trivial" means. Porting to Linux and maintaining it would require at least a few extra full-time staff, probably more, considering that you would also have to port the supporting tools, like Quicktime. And even if it was ported, it would only generate whining among Linux users that it's not Free and Open Source. Even if it was Free and Open Source, whenever you mention iTunes to a Linux user, they whine about how bloated it is.
What, exactly, is the upside for Apple of porting iTunes to Linux?
What's stopping Adobe from porting Flash to iPhone, iPad, iPod?
The rules of the developer agreement for iApps. There's language in there about not running interpreted or executable code that Flash would run afoul of. Also, Apple could refuse to allow Flash for any reason whatsoever, even if it follows all the other rules.
Furthermore, even if Flash was developed for the iPhone, nothing compels Apple to include it as a plug-in for Mobile Safari. And where do people use Flash? In a web browser, of course.
So, it should be illegal to open a store selling software online?
All developers should be free to publish their apps wherever thay want for whatever price they want.
So, if you have a personal website (perhaps one where you rant against the evils of capitalism), you should be forced to sell random companies' malware on it?
It's called DEMOCRACY.
Doesn't sound like democracy to me.
Unfortunately, capitalism is heading from free market to corporate dictatorship.
I'm confused. Are you for the free market, or against it? You spent the first three sentences railing against the free market.
There's nothing that comes close to Photoshop for professionals,
Depends on what you do. For 90% of my professional photography work, Lightroom and Aperture kick ass over Photoshop. I rarely need to open Photoshop anymore.
The reason that touchpads are pointless, is that the range from laptops over smartbooks to mobile phones, does the same, but has a keyboard, and other goodies. Comparatively, touchpads are an inconvenience that only makes sense, if there is so little space that you haven’t got place for separate input and output devices.
Actually, touchscreens make perfect sense for a wide range of devices. After getting used to using one, I keep wanting to touch my desktop display to interact with it. In many ways, the keyboard and mouse are contrivances that get in the way and are clumsy. Particularly the mouse - it adds a barrier between you and the interface, you have to push a pointer around the screen, rather than directly interacting with it.
Barring voice or thought-controlled input, keyboards will still remain necessary for text input, but for the many situations where you don't need to input large amounts of text, a touchscreen is fantastic, it's faster and more intuitive than a mouse (and doesn't give me the RSI issues a mouse does).
Of course, I've been using pen-based graphics tablets for many years, and the mouse has always seemed inferior to me. I guess if all you're used to is a mouse, you are blinded to its inefficiencies.
Actually HTML (any version) sucks. HTML5 is only awesome in comparison to other bad ideas. But HTML gets the job done, despite it being crufty nonsensical crap.
What they give a damn about is Microsoft's reputation as a lame, stodgy computer company that looks like that dork John Hodgeman.
And conversely, the fake "social" bullshit they do when trying to market their products and being cool and edgy. As if buying a Microsoft product will suddenly transport you to wild parties where everyone is having the time of their lives.
What about this announcement are we supposed to hate, exactly?
Have you seen the website for this product? Enough to make you want to poke your eyes out with a fork, and pierce your eardrums with a knitting needle.
Also, doesn't 'knit together... kindred spirits' activate your gag reflex? Something very strange is going on with Microsoft marketing. First "The Social" for the Zune, and now this. It's like Microsoft wants you to think of your electronic devices as your best friend or something, rather than a useful tool. It's just over the top how they are trying to infuse "funky" into their products, like they are over-compensating for their historically straight-laced nerdy-businessman image.
OEM packaging would be both cheaper and make greenpeace happier, but at a large loss of the package fetish crowd.
Say what? Apple has been a pioneer at reducing packaging. It may be "designer" but it is also minimalist. While other computer and software companies were shipping product in huge boxes with lots of wasted space, Apple was making the packaging smaller and smaller. Examples: is there any desktop computer that uses less packaging than a Mac mini? Or any desktop-and-display combo that uses less than an iMac? iPod Nanos come in boxes smaller than a packet of cigarettes.
Slashdot Mirror
Have there been any reactions from Big Media / Big Patents to this? ... How do they swallow the fact that the Pirate Parties are now taking a legal and official route to copyright reform?
I'm thinking they'll just shrug their shoulders. They'll probably make a little money from this, by running human interest stories about the new "joke party" that started up. And they wouldn't be too far off the mark in calling it a joke party, either.
The term has already lost all meaning.
Except for the fact that actual piracy on the high seas, with weapons, kidnapping and extortion is on the rise off the coast of Somalia. So yeah, it's not as cute to call yourself a pirate these days, as it was when it was a quaint thing of the past.
Dear former Soviet Socialists,
It doesn't work like that. You don't plan things like Silicon Valley, they are just things that happen. Silicon Valley itself is something that nobody should deliberately emulate. The fact that it is the home of many successful tech companies is simply a bizarre freak of nature. Otherwise, it's just a strange congested-but-also-not-dense piece of land. There's nothing inherently technological or successful about it. It's just a patch of land that's not really in the mountains and not quite on the coast either, that's not quite industrial and not quite residential.
Regards,
People who have been to Silicon Valley
Well, firstly, beer and parties tend to go together. Nobody has wild parties over mobile phones. Secondly, I haven't seen a beer ad like that for years, could you point me to one? Most beer ads these days tend to go for the post-modern irony angle, rather than the "you're the coolest person in the world!!!" approach.
In your analogy you equated anything that Apple does not let you do with crimes or unpleasant things.
No, I didn't. I equated "things that don't work" with crime and unpleasant things.
What makes you think that anything outside the Apple ecosystem does not work?
When did I say anything to that effect?
I own no Apple products at all, and I do not have this "things dont work" problem that you seem so sure about.
You were the one who said you thought it was sad that most people like things that work, not me.
The grass is just as green on the other side of the fence, so you perhaps need to adjust your assumptions a little.
What assumptions are you talking about?
wow suddenly people who want to do more than apple lets them are murderers and robbers...
No, that's not what I was saying. Have you ever heard of an "analogy"?
excuse us for simply wanting some freedom from the aforementioned "walled garden".
But you said a lot more than that. You do have the freedom from the "walled garden" - when did anybody ever force you to use an Apple product? And why do you want to use things that don't work?
I think that you missed my contextual definition of "just works". It "Just works", so long as you don't change the hardware and don't take it anywhere, or run anything, that Apple doesn't approve.
Doesn't really change anything. "Just works" as long as Apple approves is still a lot better than "doesn't work." Let's apply this to society - society tends to "just work" as long as you obey social conventions such as not robbing or murdering people. Would you rather a society that didn't work, where you are free to murder and rob people?
So, that tool may not exist now. Adobe's trying to bring it to the market
Considering that so many people have tried, but nobody has ever succeeded in producing such a tool that produces satisfying results, what are the chances that Adobe will suddenly succeed, with Flash, no less?
And the cross-platform apps may not be quite as high quality as native apps, but they're generally still usable
Thanks for illustrating my point so succinctly. An application that is merely "usable" has no place existing.
But, if a developer wants to develop for the iPhone and for other platforms, then it increases his total cost of doing so above what it would be if Apple hadn't made that decision.
But that's not what you said in your original post. All you said was that it increases the cost of developing for platforms other than the iPhone - not that it increases costs for multi-platform development that includes the iPhone.
I get 2-4 DVDs in the post every week to watch for about the same price as buying one DVD a month.
Don't you realize that you are hurting Hollywood, the birthplace of our nation, and KILLING HUMAN CREATIVITY with your immoral renting? Every decent, moral person knows that renting is for hookers and illegal immigrants, not movies.
Safe the free world, be a pirate!
If I put the free world in my safe, wouldn't it then become not free?
The other movies distributed by Paramount, including "GI Joe," ''Nacho Libre" and "Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius"
Holy fuck, couldn't they have just shipped the drive pre-loaded with herpes instead? It would have the same effect, with less effort.
Because Mercedes like many other car manufacturers have computers that are not being sold to other garages.
My Mercedes doesn't have any computers or electronic equipment in it, so I don't see how that's relevant.
And if you were to do that then your warranty would go poof!
What warranty?
and also refuses to port iTunes to Linux, which I suspect would be a trivial effort,
I think you have funny ideas about what "trivial" means. Porting to Linux and maintaining it would require at least a few extra full-time staff, probably more, considering that you would also have to port the supporting tools, like Quicktime. And even if it was ported, it would only generate whining among Linux users that it's not Free and Open Source. Even if it was Free and Open Source, whenever you mention iTunes to a Linux user, they whine about how bloated it is.
What, exactly, is the upside for Apple of porting iTunes to Linux?
What's stopping Adobe from porting Flash to iPhone, iPad, iPod?
The rules of the developer agreement for iApps. There's language in there about not running interpreted or executable code that Flash would run afoul of. Also, Apple could refuse to allow Flash for any reason whatsoever, even if it follows all the other rules.
Furthermore, even if Flash was developed for the iPhone, nothing compels Apple to include it as a plug-in for Mobile Safari. And where do people use Flash? In a web browser, of course.
That store shouldn't exist at all.
So, it should be illegal to open a store selling software online?
All developers should be free to publish their apps wherever thay want for whatever price they want.
So, if you have a personal website (perhaps one where you rant against the evils of capitalism), you should be forced to sell random companies' malware on it?
It's called DEMOCRACY.
Doesn't sound like democracy to me.
Unfortunately, capitalism is heading from free market to corporate dictatorship.
I'm confused. Are you for the free market, or against it? You spent the first three sentences railing against the free market.
There's nothing that comes close to Photoshop for professionals,
Depends on what you do. For 90% of my professional photography work, Lightroom and Aperture kick ass over Photoshop. I rarely need to open Photoshop anymore.
If Apple obviously doesn't want to play nice with Adobe, why should Adobe keep providing Apple with a main selling feature of Macs?
Because it makes Adobe a metric fuckton of money? I don't think they do it out of charity.
Sadly, most people seem to be interested more in "just works",
What's sad about that? I'd be more worried if people were interested in things that didn't work. That would be a truly dysfunctional society.
The reason that touchpads are pointless, is that the range from laptops over smartbooks to mobile phones, does the same, but has a keyboard, and other goodies. Comparatively, touchpads are an inconvenience that only makes sense, if there is so little space that you haven’t got place for separate input and output devices.
Actually, touchscreens make perfect sense for a wide range of devices. After getting used to using one, I keep wanting to touch my desktop display to interact with it. In many ways, the keyboard and mouse are contrivances that get in the way and are clumsy. Particularly the mouse - it adds a barrier between you and the interface, you have to push a pointer around the screen, rather than directly interacting with it.
Barring voice or thought-controlled input, keyboards will still remain necessary for text input, but for the many situations where you don't need to input large amounts of text, a touchscreen is fantastic, it's faster and more intuitive than a mouse (and doesn't give me the RSI issues a mouse does).
Of course, I've been using pen-based graphics tablets for many years, and the mouse has always seemed inferior to me. I guess if all you're used to is a mouse, you are blinded to its inefficiencies.
HTML5 is awesome, but certainly not ubiquitous.
Actually HTML (any version) sucks. HTML5 is only awesome in comparison to other bad ideas. But HTML gets the job done, despite it being crufty nonsensical crap.
What they give a damn about is Microsoft's reputation as a lame, stodgy computer company that looks like that dork John Hodgeman.
And conversely, the fake "social" bullshit they do when trying to market their products and being cool and edgy. As if buying a Microsoft product will suddenly transport you to wild parties where everyone is having the time of their lives.
Well, at least it'll sell well in Appalachia, enabling teens to keep track of which cousins are dating which.
ExecuBot Gamma: It's funny, but is it going to get them off their tractors?
"Envy", or "Cliq" or "Devour" or "Neon" or "Magnet" or "Curve" or "Reveal."
I thought those were condom brands.
Microsoft's naming here is no worse than any other cell maker.
Well... that's certainly an achievement to be proud of.
What about this announcement are we supposed to hate, exactly?
Have you seen the website for this product? Enough to make you want to poke your eyes out with a fork, and pierce your eardrums with a knitting needle.
Also, doesn't 'knit together... kindred spirits' activate your gag reflex? Something very strange is going on with Microsoft marketing. First "The Social" for the Zune, and now this. It's like Microsoft wants you to think of your electronic devices as your best friend or something, rather than a useful tool. It's just over the top how they are trying to infuse "funky" into their products, like they are over-compensating for their historically straight-laced nerdy-businessman image.
OEM packaging would be both cheaper and make greenpeace happier, but at a large loss of the package fetish crowd.
Say what? Apple has been a pioneer at reducing packaging. It may be "designer" but it is also minimalist. While other computer and software companies were shipping product in huge boxes with lots of wasted space, Apple was making the packaging smaller and smaller. Examples: is there any desktop computer that uses less packaging than a Mac mini? Or any desktop-and-display combo that uses less than an iMac? iPod Nanos come in boxes smaller than a packet of cigarettes.