So, when someone decides to turn a cellphone into a ubiquitous multimedia player with ample storage, why should ANY cell phone maker rush to implement these feature? Why should a cellphone company allow the user to store gigabytes of high resolution pictures so they can return home to their PC and download the pictures FOR FREE to their computer. Why should a cellphone company allow people to listen to hours of music or watch hours of video FOR FREE. Why should a cellphone company allow ANY feature to be used for free on a cellphone.
You're confusing cellphone makers with service providers.
Samsung / Nokia / Motorola don't make a cent when you send pictures over Verizon / Cingluar / Whoever. But they make lots of money when you buy a new phone directly from them because you want a decent uncrippled phone, and just drop in your provider's SIM card that you got with your POS $0 phone.
This is how the cell phone market works. Technophiles buy unlocked phones before th eproviders even offer them. Wanna-bees who don't know what a SIM is see the cool phones and ask their providers are going to get them. Market pressure and marketability forces them to get them, but they rape and lock down functionality so people will be encouraged ot use the pay-per-play services. Technophile now wants something better than the average joe, so he upgrades. Rinse, repeat.
They aren't seen by my phone. So clearly, your claims of technical ignorance and that "any" phone can play "any" MP3 are far overblown.
Are they VBR MP3s? If so can your phone handle those?
Are they using extended filename syour phone can't reconize?
Do you have your primary memory device even set to your TF card?
There's a plethora of reasons these may not show up, none of which have to do with DRM. If you're talking about the a950, I can assure you it can play MP3s fine. You're doing something incorrect.
I can guarentee you if you bought it stock or from a 3rd party you'd have the cable and software to transfer whatever the hell you want.
And my phone (and all the ones this thing is for) has a removeable transflash card I can just plug in my PC. Also my phone came with the cable - and I can set it so that when I plug it into the PC it shows up as a USB flash drive.
I also already have a toaster and an oven. That doesn't mean there's not a market for toaster ovens.
People don't want to carry 15 different devices when one can do the job of all good enough. Why is it some/.'ers can't understand that?
My V635 is a perfectly capable MP3 player and also a very decent phone. Why should I have to carry around a whole other device to listen to a bit of music one in awhile. Simmilarly, the 1.3 MP camera is "good enough" for what I use it for, quick snapshots.
I have one of the listed phones (V635) that takes transflash, and I can play any MP3 in the player, use any MP3 as a ringtone, re-encode any video I want to.3gp format in mplayer and upload it - including full movies. I have re-encoded whole DVDs into 20 MB.3gp files and watched them on my phone while on the bus.
There is no DRM issue whatsoever. You can plug a transflash card into any SD reader to download or upload whatever the hell you want on it. It's no different than CF or SD or XD or any other memory card, there is no DRM involved.
The parent poster is pretty ignorant to this technology. Personally I can't wait to get one of these - the highest storage transflash card right now (I am aware of) is only 512 MB. 8GB would rock.
It's not being a jerk. It is supplying the information.
And "Sorry, I don't give that information out." doe s*not* work every time. I have been in many stores whene they said they had to have the information for the reciept, it was required. At which point I give them fake information.
So now I just skip the first step and always give fake information. Its faster, its easier, and the person behind the counter really could care less anyway.
I usually find its faster to give them the old "10 Nowhere Drive, 90210, 555-1212" routine. If they start to clue in they just stop asking. If they don't then who cares.
As for surround sound systems, AC3 in the 384kbps+ bitrate is already the standard there. I can't see why MP3 surround will displace it; MP3 surround isn't, as far as I know, mentioned in any of the current or next-gen DVD specs.
Actually, this is not true, There are "full sized" style headphones where each headphone does not have only one speaker, but three, each at different positions around the ear canal - and none of them directly in the canal. These headphones support dolby digital surround via some smart logic.
I don't haver time to google them up but I assure you they exist.
Er.... why would someone want to copy a DVD player?
It would cost more in parts and labour then it would be to go just buy one.
This was true when they were first released, and is even more true now.
Unless you are talking about a software player? In which case you would just be plain wrong, CSS encryption does not protect the software binaries in any way from pirating.
CSS did nothing to stop pirating of DVDs. Neither did restricting composite outs on DVD players.
My question is, who are the asshats making this decision, because they obviously have no technical background. Anyone who knows anything knows that you don't need any composite outs or decryption schemes to make a bit-for-bit copy of anything. As soon as the first PC Blue-Ray/HD-DVD drive hits the shelves, you will be able to copy these movies. That simple.
(Sure, you may not have anything to copy them *onto*, but that isn't the point. There is nothing to copy them onto if you record them at full resolution via the composite outputs either).
I understand that OSS is not about profit and commercialization. However, what good is it if it does not have an impact on people everywhere (both inside and outside the OSS community)?
Again, missing the point. Most developers don't write OSS to "have an impact on people" or to change the world, or make money or anything else. Frankly, we don't give a shit if our code has an impact on anyone. We do it because either we need the software ourselves and it doesn't exist as we want it, or we do it for fun. That's all.
I would argue that OSS is not merely there just for us to be able to toy with code and be able to lay claim to brilliance that ordinary humans will never understand.
You'd be wrong.
I can tell you, as an OSS developer myself, that you and most other people totally mis-interpert the motives of us. We're not in it *for anyone or anything or any reason*, other than it's something to do that's fun. For an OSS developer, writing code is like watching sports is to others. They don't watch sports because it accomplishes anything, they do it for something to do.
Because writing OSS is a self-fufilling process, you don't need anyone elses approval or any kind of userbase to define success. Success is the act of writing the code in the first place. Which is why OSS will always succeed.
In a perfect world everyone would develop software and approach it the way you do (which I applaud). However, the fact remains that enterprises have a HUGE influence on what is successful and what isn't.
You're not getting it. What is "successful for an open source project? If an authour opens his code, and one other person finds it useful (either as it is, or in another project), then that project iss a success. Basically, it is having a userbase of two - the authour, plus one other person who finds it useful.
Anything else, more users, more support, financial gains - that's just icing on the cake. It does not define "success" in an open source project. This is what business people can not seem to grasp - the vast majority of people involved in open source software are not looking to recieve any kind of financial gain, or any kind of market penetration. They are just doing it for themselves, and for other people.
For the vast majority of open source projects, saying that they won't make it in "the Enterprise" is about as relevant as saying that cows will never use the iPod.
What people on/. seem to forget is that on average they are on the upper-end of the income curve.
Not everyone can afford to drop $200-$300 on a fancy iPod, that's why there is still a market for $30 CD players at Walmart. But if Amazon's supply chain can bring the cost of an iPod-alike down to $70 or below, they will capture that whole other market segment Apple has ignored - the ones that don't care about trendy and hip, the ones that care about value. AKA the majority of the populace.
If you are in X an are running gaming apps that grab control of the mouse and keyboard, and the application locks solid, you are usually locked right out of X altogether. *Sometimes* you can still CTRL-ALT-F(1-4) to get to a terminal, but more often than not, you need to reboot.
Sure, in theory you could probably SSH into your PC from somewhere else and kill X and re-start it, but not everyone has another PC in the house to do that with, and even if you do, it is probably far simpler and faster to just reboot than walk around the house to do that.
Just look at the way we breed as if there were no tomorrow
Actually, I have statistics and data to back my claims up that the birthrate in first-world countries is falling well below replacement value. Where are yours? And don't point me at some "dramtic graph" from the 70s or 80s showing how there will be 15 billion people in the world by 2015.
If you don't believe me, why don't you look around you and tell me how many couples do you know with 3 or mroe children? Because in order to have replacement birthrate, At least 1 out of every 3 couples needs to have 3 or more children - and that's assuming that all the other couples are having two. In mordern western society this is all becoming very rare.
...and our breeding habits ar ehighly dependant on our social lives. We're not driven to breed by an unstoppable biological force like yeast. We have stuff like birth control. Which is why the population is rapidly approaching rquilibrium, and even approaching decline in regions.
All you have to do is look at an actual global population growth chart to see that the curve is rapidly flattening. And all you have to do to see the reasons why is look around you. In highly industrialized modern countries, like the US, Europe, Japan, etc, the birth rate is actually very close to or even *below replacement*, which is 2.2 births per couple. If it wasn't for immigration from other still-above-replacement-rate countries, like China/India/African continent, these countries would actually have declining populations.
And not to be harsh, but the places in the world where the birth rate is still far above replacement (Africa, South America, south-east Asia), also have a much higher mortality rate, due to disease and hunger. There's only two possible outcomes. Either the poor countries with high birthrates will industrialize and subsequently lower their birthrates, or they will not, and will implode with skyrocketing amounts of mortality due to disease. Either way, there is no unlimited exponential growth to population.
Slashdot Mirror
Cheap advertising.
It's cheaper to donate $100,000 to a group and get covered on multiple national media outlets than to buy advertising on all those said outlets.
It's also better for PR value.
Time := Money, but Money := Time.
No matter how much money you have, you can't buy back your wasted life.
So this quashes your argument.
Check if they are VBR, my phone won't play VBR MP3s.
Also try re-naming them to something somple, like File.mp3, see if they show then. There may be filesystem limitations.
Also make sure they're in the right folder.
So, when someone decides to turn a cellphone into a ubiquitous multimedia player with ample storage, why should ANY cell phone maker rush to implement these feature? Why should a cellphone company allow the user to store gigabytes of high resolution pictures so they can return home to their PC and download the pictures FOR FREE to their computer. Why should a cellphone company allow people to listen to hours of music or watch hours of video FOR FREE. Why should a cellphone company allow ANY feature to be used for free on a cellphone.
You're confusing cellphone makers with service providers.
Samsung / Nokia / Motorola don't make a cent when you send pictures over Verizon / Cingluar / Whoever. But they make lots of money when you buy a new phone directly from them because you want a decent uncrippled phone, and just drop in your provider's SIM card that you got with your POS $0 phone.
This is how the cell phone market works. Technophiles buy unlocked phones before th eproviders even offer them. Wanna-bees who don't know what a SIM is see the cool phones and ask their providers are going to get them. Market pressure and marketability forces them to get them, but they rape and lock down functionality so people will be encouraged ot use the pay-per-play services. Technophile now wants something better than the average joe, so he upgrades. Rinse, repeat.
They aren't seen by my phone. So clearly, your claims of technical ignorance and that "any" phone can play "any" MP3 are far overblown.
Are they VBR MP3s? If so can your phone handle those?
Are they using extended filename syour phone can't reconize?
Do you have your primary memory device even set to your TF card?
There's a plethora of reasons these may not show up, none of which have to do with DRM. If you're talking about the a950, I can assure you it can play MP3s fine. You're doing something incorrect.
I can guarentee you if you bought it stock or from a 3rd party you'd have the cable and software to transfer whatever the hell you want.
And my phone (and all the ones this thing is for) has a removeable transflash card I can just plug in my PC. Also my phone came with the cable - and I can set it so that when I plug it into the PC it shows up as a USB flash drive.
I also already have a toaster and an oven. That doesn't mean there's not a market for toaster ovens.
/.'ers can't understand that?
People don't want to carry 15 different devices when one can do the job of all good enough. Why is it some
My V635 is a perfectly capable MP3 player and also a very decent phone. Why should I have to carry around a whole other device to listen to a bit of music one in awhile. Simmilarly, the 1.3 MP camera is "good enough" for what I use it for, quick snapshots.
I have one of the listed phones (V635) that takes transflash, and I can play any MP3 in the player, use any MP3 as a ringtone, re-encode any video I want to .3gp format in mplayer and upload it - including full movies. I have re-encoded whole DVDs into 20 MB .3gp files and watched them on my phone while on the bus.
There is no DRM issue whatsoever. You can plug a transflash card into any SD reader to download or upload whatever the hell you want on it. It's no different than CF or SD or XD or any other memory card, there is no DRM involved.
The parent poster is pretty ignorant to this technology. Personally I can't wait to get one of these - the highest storage transflash card right now (I am aware of) is only 512 MB. 8GB would rock.
Anyone who is forced to be pro-Bono should be compensated.
I mean... what's with wearing the sunglasses indoors? So pretentious!
They called gmaerdad and he explained in no nonsense terms that it was all bot impossible.
They then ignored his comments and published the story without them.
It's not being a jerk. It is supplying the information.
And "Sorry, I don't give that information out." doe s*not* work every time. I have been in many stores whene they said they had to have the information for the reciept, it was required. At which point I give them fake information.
So now I just skip the first step and always give fake information. Its faster, its easier, and the person behind the counter really could care less anyway.
Exactly. For example, small cats are efficient predators but are also hunted by coyotes.
My cat *thinks* he is an efficient predator, but he can't even catch my laser pointer!
I usually find its faster to give them the old "10 Nowhere Drive, 90210, 555-1212" routine. If they start to clue in they just stop asking. If they don't then who cares.
As for surround sound systems, AC3 in the 384kbps+ bitrate is already the standard there. I can't see why MP3 surround will displace it; MP3 surround isn't, as far as I know, mentioned in any of the current or next-gen DVD specs.
Actually, this is not true, There are "full sized" style headphones where each headphone does not have only one speaker, but three, each at different positions around the ear canal - and none of them directly in the canal. These headphones support dolby digital surround via some smart logic.
I don't haver time to google them up but I assure you they exist.
Er.... why would someone want to copy a DVD player?
It would cost more in parts and labour then it would be to go just buy one.
This was true when they were first released, and is even more true now.
Unless you are talking about a software player? In which case you would just be plain wrong, CSS encryption does not protect the software binaries in any way from pirating.
CSS did nothing to stop pirating of DVDs. Neither did restricting composite outs on DVD players.
My question is, who are the asshats making this decision, because they obviously have no technical background. Anyone who knows anything knows that you don't need any composite outs or decryption schemes to make a bit-for-bit copy of anything. As soon as the first PC Blue-Ray/HD-DVD drive hits the shelves, you will be able to copy these movies. That simple.
(Sure, you may not have anything to copy them *onto*, but that isn't the point. There is nothing to copy them onto if you record them at full resolution via the composite outputs either).
All it is trying to do is regulate *advertisements* for online gambling.
Which is a very weird bill in an of itself, but anyways, it's not the same as the US bill.
I understand that OSS is not about profit and commercialization. However, what good is it if it does not have an impact on people everywhere (both inside and outside the OSS community)?
Again, missing the point. Most developers don't write OSS to "have an impact on people" or to change the world, or make money or anything else. Frankly, we don't give a shit if our code has an impact on anyone. We do it because either we need the software ourselves and it doesn't exist as we want it, or we do it for fun. That's all.
I would argue that OSS is not merely there just for us to be able to toy with code and be able to lay claim to brilliance that ordinary humans will never understand.
You'd be wrong.
I can tell you, as an OSS developer myself, that you and most other people totally mis-interpert the motives of us. We're not in it *for anyone or anything or any reason*, other than it's something to do that's fun. For an OSS developer, writing code is like watching sports is to others. They don't watch sports because it accomplishes anything, they do it for something to do.
Because writing OSS is a self-fufilling process, you don't need anyone elses approval or any kind of userbase to define success. Success is the act of writing the code in the first place. Which is why OSS will always succeed.
Agree 100%. Also the dock is an absolute useability nightmare.
Not only that, but I personally hate the look and feel of Aqua. It's way too bubbly and distracting for me.
I actually prefer KDE with Plastik to Aqua.
In fact, the inability to natively change the theme in OSX is what keeps me *off* of Macs.
In a perfect world everyone would develop software and approach it the way you do (which I applaud). However, the fact remains that enterprises have a HUGE influence on what is successful and what isn't.
You're not getting it. What is "successful for an open source project? If an authour opens his code, and one other person finds it useful (either as it is, or in another project), then that project iss a success. Basically, it is having a userbase of two - the authour, plus one other person who finds it useful.
Anything else, more users, more support, financial gains - that's just icing on the cake. It does not define "success" in an open source project. This is what business people can not seem to grasp - the vast majority of people involved in open source software are not looking to recieve any kind of financial gain, or any kind of market penetration. They are just doing it for themselves, and for other people.
For the vast majority of open source projects, saying that they won't make it in "the Enterprise" is about as relevant as saying that cows will never use the iPod.
Some cows do, you insolent clod!
What people on /. seem to forget is that on average they are on the upper-end of the income curve.
Not everyone can afford to drop $200-$300 on a fancy iPod, that's why there is still a market for $30 CD players at Walmart. But if Amazon's supply chain can bring the cost of an iPod-alike down to $70 or below, they will capture that whole other market segment Apple has ignored - the ones that don't care about trendy and hip, the ones that care about value. AKA the majority of the populace.
If you are in X an are running gaming apps that grab control of the mouse and keyboard, and the application locks solid, you are usually locked right out of X altogether. *Sometimes* you can still CTRL-ALT-F(1-4) to get to a terminal, but more often than not, you need to reboot.
Sure, in theory you could probably SSH into your PC from somewhere else and kill X and re-start it, but not everyone has another PC in the house to do that with, and even if you do, it is probably far simpler and faster to just reboot than walk around the house to do that.
Just look at the way we breed as if there were no tomorrow
Actually, I have statistics and data to back my claims up that the birthrate in first-world countries is falling well below replacement value. Where are yours? And don't point me at some "dramtic graph" from the 70s or 80s showing how there will be 15 billion people in the world by 2015.
If you don't believe me, why don't you look around you and tell me how many couples do you know with 3 or mroe children? Because in order to have replacement birthrate, At least 1 out of every 3 couples needs to have 3 or more children - and that's assuming that all the other couples are having two. In mordern western society this is all becoming very rare.
...and our breeding habits ar ehighly dependant on our social lives. We're not driven to breed by an unstoppable biological force like yeast. We have stuff like birth control. Which is why the population is rapidly approaching rquilibrium, and even approaching decline in regions.
All you have to do is look at an actual global population growth chart to see that the curve is rapidly flattening. And all you have to do to see the reasons why is look around you. In highly industrialized modern countries, like the US, Europe, Japan, etc, the birth rate is actually very close to or even *below replacement*, which is 2.2 births per couple. If it wasn't for immigration from other still-above-replacement-rate countries, like China/India/African continent, these countries would actually have declining populations.
And not to be harsh, but the places in the world where the birth rate is still far above replacement (Africa, South America, south-east Asia), also have a much higher mortality rate, due to disease and hunger. There's only two possible outcomes. Either the poor countries with high birthrates will industrialize and subsequently lower their birthrates, or they will not, and will implode with skyrocketing amounts of mortality due to disease. Either way, there is no unlimited exponential growth to population.