- Every time I tried it out for the past 10 years, Schwinn had never built a better snow plow. And further, the schrader valves on the bicycle never got more compatible with my presta air pump. Certainly not ready for prime-time.
- I started and ran my own small business. I wanted to do all of my office work with a hedge trimmer. But working with my primary customer required me to fax documents, and I couldn't get the hedge trimmer to fax documents to my customer. I went out of business because of the hedge trimmer, and I don't think hedge trimmers are ready for use by businesses.
- I was an executive chef at McDonald's and I really wanted to learn how to cook sashimi. Everybody kept talking about it, and how it could go mainstream, so I wanted to find a way to integrate it into the dollar menu. But every time I tried to cook sashimi, it came out as something else. I finally gave up trying to cook sashimi and I don't think sashimi is ready for use in serious restaurants yet. Maybe in a couple more years I will try to cook sashimi again, and hopefully for sashimi I will have more luck next time.
- I wanted to drive my F1 racer to work on the highway. I really wanted to support the F1 world and all that. So 10 years ago I tried for the first time, but the police wouldn't let me (once they caught me, when I ran out of fuel). I ended up selling that car and purchasing a Geo Metro. But just recently, I thought I'd try again, with one of the newer snazzier cars from McLaren. The cops still wouldn't let me drive on the highway. Maybe if I give McLaren's F1 team another two years they'll be up to par with the ford fiesta that I currently own. After all, 99.99% of people drive on public roads and 99.99% of roads are public. So I really can't see how any enterprise could use an F1 car until such cars are made perfectly compatible with public roads.
I appreciate your attempts at interjecting useful, accurate, expert information on this forum concerning a scientific article. Unfortunately this can become a Sisyphean task when surrounded by such overabundance of the uninformed (myself included) and their comments.
But thank you for increasing the level of the discussion, Mr. Oskay, whose name, I assume, is the one that appears on the NIST press release.
Amen about the glossy display. I purchased my hp laptop online, and got the free upgrade for brighter screen. No mention of the glare, though. It's a real pain to use in a lot of lighting settings that a matte display with less brightness will handle fine. When I have an application with a black background and light-colored text in the foreground, if I'm sitting by a window (indirect sunlight only) I can't read the text at all, for example. Completely unusable outside except at night.
Here's waiting for something like OLED displays, or the like, that one can actually use outside and in broader range of lighting situations.
Spread the word.
Re:explanation about oscillation/mass relationship
on
Neutrino Mass Confirmed
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
My understanding: The oscillation talked about with neutrinos is a back-and-forth changing of a neutrino's state. The state of a photon, on the other hand, is -represented by- its frequency of oscillation (and polarization, I believe... anything else?). There is no way to change the photon's state, however, and the oscillation of a photon does NOT represent a periodic changing of the photon's state. In other words, if you give me a vertically-polarized photon at 500 kHz, I have no physical means to make that same photon horizontally polarized or oscillate at 2.4 GHz.
I see. I knew there was something wrong when my $20 headphones would actually store up the sound for like 10 milliseconds before playing any of it. Thank goodness this company built speaker drivers "faster than most conventional speaker drivers found in traditional headphones, making the Everglide s-500 optimized for millisecond feedback."
Now I can listen to games without my speaker drivers storing up all the sound before spitting it out.
And it's a good thing they optimized these for games because games produce sound, like, way cooler than music can. And it's directional, whereas music just comes in stereo and binaural forms, which aren't directional at all. And they can pinpoint sound to a pixel, which is cool because I have a lot of pixels.
And it's good they made these comfortable, because people who listen to music only spend like a few hours listening, whereas a gamer like myself will typically game for 48+ hours, so I need that extra level of comfort.
And it's cool they reproduce the full 20 Hz - 20 kHz sounds range; just looking at sub-$500, I have yet to find a pair of regular "music" headphones that can do 20 Hz. (Of course they spec their cans at +/-1dB or +/-3dB; maybe these people spec to +/-60dB, in which they might be right.)
Fortunately, if anyone buys these, he or she must be so enamored with the purchase that he/she will think that he/she has the best set of headphones (for gaming) in the world. And ignorant happiness will ensue. So buyer and seller will have achieved their goals.
You sound like a cheapskate fashion elitist who doesn't have a clue as to how the system works.
"What? Saks updates its collection every few months? So I can't buy one outfit today and be able to brag to my friends that I am on top of the fashion world for the next few years? Oh, the horror. I have lost all respect for Saks, that evil inconsiderate Microsoft of a company."
Either accept paying the bill every few months to have the latest fashion, or quit buying fashion in your technology.
Seems like there IS something in common besides marketing, namely the "instruction-set architecture":
Power Architecture(TM) technology is an instruction-set architecture that spans applications from consumer electronics to supercomputers. Power Architecture encompasses PowerPC®, POWER4(TM) and POWER5(TM) processors.
I don't have time in a geology course for the professor to invite a guest lecturer in to extoll the evils of George W. Bush, and to continue to use classtime each day to discuss the same on his own (but without the expert witness). But that's what has happened. Some students and professors want to spend their time protesting; let them skip class and not teach class that semester. Some students want to spend their time learning about a particular subject; don't tease them by entitling the course "geology" and switching the topic to politics. I guess liberals aren't in support of honesty just as much as the Republicans they criticize.
What if all doctors decided that instead of saving patients, it was more important to teach them about liberalism? Well God bless their protest-mindedness, but get me another doctor! Not everyone ranks pushing a political agenda as high as others, and I'd appreciate the opportunity to avoid those who think that politics (and their particular form) are the answer to all the woes of the world. It's the same shit but a different can. But you are self-righteous about your can of shit, and hence you don't have to teach me (or be honest with me) about anything; to almost all political activists I have encountered, the end justifies the means. And then people who want to identify those professors who rank politics above learning as "political activists" are called "nazis" to try to keep them at bay. Hahahaha. Which label is more inciteful? Hahahahaha.
Yet another article (not the source article, but the post to/.) to make reference to the fact that there is yet another list at the end of the year. How long does it take those who disclaim their conformity to realize they are conforming by disclaiming their conformity, and to start disclaiming their disclaimers?
Aw, crap... am I being original, either? Slippery slope, folks.
These are, vast majority, really good ideas for consumer devices. I concur with the NYTimes author, and I think that "slashdot.org" just woke up on the wrong side of the bed today, and came up with some weak arguments to boot.
Think about it... you criticize the SD card for not being a USB stick, but... why don't you use SD cards instead of USB sticks, if they have built-in USB interfaces? Smaller. Faster (on the SD side). Fits into more devices. Hmmm. Sounds like a reason to bitch to me.
I have had TV's with connectors in front, but it is unsightly and in the end I always go with the rear connectors. Nice job, HP. Of course the completely wireless (data, not power) hi-fi home theatre would kick more ass, but until then...
Camera whose self-timer takes multiple shots. Guess you missed the point. But cheers! A great idea!
Bad UI on the phone is fixed? Great. Somebody willing to break the barrier deserves customers, and praise. I guess irrational bitterness gets high marks from Slashdot moderators... And another person commented on accidentally hitting buttons placing calls, but if the buttons only do ignore/fwd to voicemail, then hopefully there is no possibility of making an embarrassing call by touching these buttons accidentally. And need they beep?
Downloadable TV shows? I've been waiting for it ever since I left the TV era behind, every once in a while I'd like to check out a NOVA episode or something. Great idea, but only more reason for bitterness, apparently.
And remember, we never talk about true tech/sci advancements in consumer electronics. It's all about using current tech for a better experience. Dude, you must be having a really bad day! But cheer up!
I agree that sampling a broader range of articles would be more representative of the entire encyclopedia, but I disagree that this is an attempt to misrepresent the accuracy of Wikipedia (they say they just look at science articles; they make no claims beyond that).
The research was done by Nature magazine after all, and so they assessed what is most interesting to them, and what they have expertise in. They did their part in verifying the accuracy of (or probably more precisely giving credence to) Wikipedia science articles, and should be commended for the exercise; I doubt that they are playing the role of spin doctors here. That's what the other people are doing, taking the study for something it is not and does not claim to be.
My gut tells me the same thing: If someone comes knocking on a novice's door, saying "you uploaded a movie," would a novice point to an unsecured wireless connection?
If you know what an unsecured wireless connection is, you probably have enough knowledge to 1) secure it or 2) justify it as a public service. You probably aren't, at least, unwittingly sharing your connection.
And the guy has 4 computers? Most novices I know have one computer per person living in residence, maybe a second laptop, max. The damned things are just too scary for the novice to be outnumbered by them. Of course this is not a proof, but I'm just connecting the dots (albeit sparse) with the straightest possible lines.
And the computer that was supposedly wiped clean? Well, if it has a drive whose data is completely unrecoverable, then it's 100-to-1: novice he is not.
I agree, the response to this incredible new (as in consumer-ready) technology on this forum is completely ridiculous. Like people are offended at something new...
But offense at something truly new may actually be a common thread on this site; even self-described computer nerds are, analogously, too caught up in religion to accept heliocentricity!
I concur. NIST Boulder, as an example that I am familiar with, is developing certain techniques that can be used for quantum computing. (http://tf.nist.gov/ion/index.htm)
But the reason why the Time and Frequency division at NIST cares is because these techniques may yield better clocks in the future. (In fact, many breakthroughs in fundamental theoretical/experimental physics are applicable to clocks.) Meantime, however, the project gets mainstream-media publicity for quantum computing implications, gets funding from NSA, QuIST/DARPA, etc.
I'm sure it's a windfall for the physicists to do fundamental research, though, so "Hoorah Quantum Computers!!! (and cut me that check...)"
At least one other group (http://qdev.boulder.nist.gov/) is working on research similar to that published on PhysicsWeb, specifically using Josephson junctions in creating quantum bits & logic. That group was just recently setting up an honest phase measurement system, though, so are probably a bit behind in the research mentioned.
The reason that group plays with Josephson junction devices (how they justify it under the NIST banner)? Voltage standards. The reason they tell other funding agencies? Quantum computing, communication, and good-old-Alice-and-Bob.
Alright, you wrote a reasonable response, so I will respond.
The fact that the article is speculation, we all agree. It just isn't something that, in my mind, requires pointing out, since the article itself points it out. A valid criticism of a speculation piece, however, is not that it is speculation. You can criticize slashdot for posting speculation, or criticize someone for taking it as hard fact. But otherwise, it is what it is, and let's stop wishing that it were something else.
Put another way: I wish that Picasso had composed symphonies. It is logically fallacious (or just pointless) of me, however, to criticize his paintings because he wasn't composing symphonies instead.
You've never encountered a piece of software with a ridiculous limitation built in...
Those are business decisions. Apple built the software in question, so it is Apple's business decision to limit the # of tunes on the phone. It's not like apple bought the DRM software from Microsoft to sell to Moto; it is Apple's software that enforces the 100 song limit. And even if it had bought somebody else's DRM software, they could probably choose the guy who sold DRM software that allowed more than 100 songs. But that's not the case; Apple has FULL CONTROL over themselves and the products they produce, within physical and technological limitations (e.g., they can't build a perpetual motion machine). End of story.
Is that evidence of a conspiracy by MS to "sabotage" the financial sector? Or is it just bad programming? (concerning 64k-row limit in Excel)
No, that's called a Business Decision. That's my point. MS limits its excel users to 64k rows, possibly at one time as a technological limit of the architecture they chose (16 bit), but now as a business decision (cuz as you said yourself, they could do more w/ 4GB of RAM), but they see no compelling reason to change the software now.
Your assertion that "his speculation is not supported by the article he cites" misses the point of speculation. The article gives a couple of facts, or purported facts, and the reviewer uses these and a couple of other points (such as, that the DRM software is completely under Apple's control, and that Apple makes good profit off of iPods and leads the market in the category). Connecting those points together by some reasoning is speculation, and is not directly supported by anything.
Now if you are referring to your original post's quote of the Wired article and your reasoning that the Wired article directly contradicts the speculation in the blog, I think you are completely FOS. I gave reasons why earlier (Apple has control, etc), and we can argue those, but it seems they fell on deaf ears (or blind eyes, as it were).
I feel my movie reviewer analogy is inferior to my Picasso analogy, but nonetheless, you seem to be the reviewer who is panning the movie on the basis of scenes that did not actually appear. Examples:
"Maybe Apple Blog should call up Apple and ask them to comment on Wired's reporting"
"In fact, Apple Blog could do us all a favor and dig into this question for us"
less an arbitrary business decision and more a decision based on limits inherent in Apple's FairPlay DRM
Ah yes, the Apple-designed DRM system has hit the fundamental limits of physics / current technology (which Apple has defined by their FairPlay DRM); there is no way they can allow more than 100 songs in any cell phone made by anyone (Motorola OR Nokia, so it MUST not be predatory), but iPods and iTunes somehow can support many, many more... Ergo it must not have been a business decision.
Unless compelling evidence is given otherwise, let's make the more valid assumption that decisions businesses make are "BUSINESS DECISIONS." Very few companies push the boundaries of what is physically or even technologically possible; how far back from that limit a business operates is a BUSINESS DECISION. Even saintly only-good-intentioned, non-predatory (cough, cough) Apple.
By the way, using italicized noncommital language like could doesn't relieve you of responsibility for the ridiculous statements that follow.
And whining about the article posing as original journalism is unnecessary: many references are made to the Wired article as a source, and it is clear that the article is the author's read on the situation as presented by the article and the surrounding situation. You wish to invalidate his speculation because he is not a journalist and posting online? Guess we are mostly all guilty of that one. Is a movie reviewer invalidated because he didn't really make the movie?
Mod parent up to 6 for flawless and all-too-common slashdot logic.
Slashdot Mirror
- Every time I tried it out for the past 10 years, Schwinn had never built a better snow plow. And further, the schrader valves on the bicycle never got more compatible with my presta air pump. Certainly not ready for prime-time.
- I started and ran my own small business. I wanted to do all of my office work with a hedge trimmer. But working with my primary customer required me to fax documents, and I couldn't get the hedge trimmer to fax documents to my customer. I went out of business because of the hedge trimmer, and I don't think hedge trimmers are ready for use by businesses.
- I was an executive chef at McDonald's and I really wanted to learn how to cook sashimi. Everybody kept talking about it, and how it could go mainstream, so I wanted to find a way to integrate it into the dollar menu. But every time I tried to cook sashimi, it came out as something else. I finally gave up trying to cook sashimi and I don't think sashimi is ready for use in serious restaurants yet. Maybe in a couple more years I will try to cook sashimi again, and hopefully for sashimi I will have more luck next time.
- I wanted to drive my F1 racer to work on the highway. I really wanted to support the F1 world and all that. So 10 years ago I tried for the first time, but the police wouldn't let me (once they caught me, when I ran out of fuel). I ended up selling that car and purchasing a Geo Metro. But just recently, I thought I'd try again, with one of the newer snazzier cars from McLaren. The cops still wouldn't let me drive on the highway. Maybe if I give McLaren's F1 team another two years they'll be up to par with the ford fiesta that I currently own. After all, 99.99% of people drive on public roads and 99.99% of roads are public. So I really can't see how any enterprise could use an F1 car until such cars are made perfectly compatible with public roads.
The translator has artificially large breasts, eh?
How many IP Core equivalents of the 4004 would fit onto the Xilinx Spartan FPGA? Any guesses?
Just curious. Didn't see what type of Spartan it is, nor do I know the complexity of implementing the 4004.
I appreciate your attempts at interjecting useful, accurate, expert information on this forum concerning a scientific article. Unfortunately this can become a Sisyphean task when surrounded by such overabundance of the uninformed (myself included) and their comments.
But thank you for increasing the level of the discussion, Mr. Oskay, whose name, I assume, is the one that appears on the NIST press release.
I'd mark you funny, if I could, for YASA (yet another simplistic analysis).
Have you no vested interest in how the net works? Hmmmm... So who do you ask about this one? The Amish?
Amen about the glossy display. I purchased my hp laptop online, and got the free upgrade for brighter screen. No mention of the glare, though. It's a real pain to use in a lot of lighting settings that a matte display with less brightness will handle fine. When I have an application with a black background and light-colored text in the foreground, if I'm sitting by a window (indirect sunlight only) I can't read the text at all, for example. Completely unusable outside except at night.
Here's waiting for something like OLED displays, or the like, that one can actually use outside and in broader range of lighting situations.
Spread the word.
My understanding: The oscillation talked about with neutrinos is a back-and-forth changing of a neutrino's state. The state of a photon, on the other hand, is -represented by- its frequency of oscillation (and polarization, I believe... anything else?). There is no way to change the photon's state, however, and the oscillation of a photon does NOT represent a periodic changing of the photon's state. In other words, if you give me a vertically-polarized photon at 500 kHz, I have no physical means to make that same photon horizontally polarized or oscillate at 2.4 GHz.
I see. I knew there was something wrong when my $20 headphones would actually store up the sound for like 10 milliseconds before playing any of it. Thank goodness this company built speaker drivers "faster than most conventional speaker drivers found in traditional headphones, making the Everglide s-500 optimized for millisecond feedback."
Now I can listen to games without my speaker drivers storing up all the sound before spitting it out.
And it's a good thing they optimized these for games because games produce sound, like, way cooler than music can. And it's directional, whereas music just comes in stereo and binaural forms, which aren't directional at all. And they can pinpoint sound to a pixel, which is cool because I have a lot of pixels.
And it's good they made these comfortable, because people who listen to music only spend like a few hours listening, whereas a gamer like myself will typically game for 48+ hours, so I need that extra level of comfort.
And it's cool they reproduce the full 20 Hz - 20 kHz sounds range; just looking at sub-$500, I have yet to find a pair of regular "music" headphones that can do 20 Hz. (Of course they spec their cans at +/-1dB or +/-3dB; maybe these people spec to +/-60dB, in which they might be right.)
Fortunately, if anyone buys these, he or she must be so enamored with the purchase that he/she will think that he/she has the best set of headphones (for gaming) in the world. And ignorant happiness will ensue. So buyer and seller will have achieved their goals.
You sound like a cheapskate fashion elitist who doesn't have a clue as to how the system works.
"What? Saks updates its collection every few months? So I can't buy one outfit today and be able to brag to my friends that I am on top of the fashion world for the next few years? Oh, the horror. I have lost all respect for Saks, that evil inconsiderate Microsoft of a company."
Either accept paying the bill every few months to have the latest fashion, or quit buying fashion in your technology.
What foppery you present us with. Grow up.
Seems like there IS something in common besides marketing, namely the "instruction-set architecture":
See: http://www-03.ibm.com/chips/power/aboutpower/
I don't have time in a geology course for the professor to invite a guest lecturer in to extoll the evils of George W. Bush, and to continue to use classtime each day to discuss the same on his own (but without the expert witness). But that's what has happened. Some students and professors want to spend their time protesting; let them skip class and not teach class that semester. Some students want to spend their time learning about a particular subject; don't tease them by entitling the course "geology" and switching the topic to politics. I guess liberals aren't in support of honesty just as much as the Republicans they criticize.
What if all doctors decided that instead of saving patients, it was more important to teach them about liberalism? Well God bless their protest-mindedness, but get me another doctor! Not everyone ranks pushing a political agenda as high as others, and I'd appreciate the opportunity to avoid those who think that politics (and their particular form) are the answer to all the woes of the world. It's the same shit but a different can. But you are self-righteous about your can of shit, and hence you don't have to teach me (or be honest with me) about anything; to almost all political activists I have encountered, the end justifies the means. And then people who want to identify those professors who rank politics above learning as "political activists" are called "nazis" to try to keep them at bay. Hahahaha. Which label is more inciteful? Hahahahaha.
Yet another article (not the source article, but the post to /.) to make reference to the fact that there is yet another list at the end of the year. How long does it take those who disclaim their conformity to realize they are conforming by disclaiming their conformity, and to start disclaiming their disclaimers?
Aw, crap... am I being original, either? Slippery slope, folks.
So quit disclaiming and say what you gotta say.
These are, vast majority, really good ideas for consumer devices. I concur with the NYTimes author, and I think that "slashdot.org" just woke up on the wrong side of the bed today, and came up with some weak arguments to boot.
Think about it... you criticize the SD card for not being a USB stick, but... why don't you use SD cards instead of USB sticks, if they have built-in USB interfaces? Smaller. Faster (on the SD side). Fits into more devices. Hmmm. Sounds like a reason to bitch to me.
I have had TV's with connectors in front, but it is unsightly and in the end I always go with the rear connectors. Nice job, HP. Of course the completely wireless (data, not power) hi-fi home theatre would kick more ass, but until then...
Camera whose self-timer takes multiple shots. Guess you missed the point. But cheers! A great idea!
Geometrically. You're the hoot, unless I'm missing something completely out of my league; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometrically
Bad UI on the phone is fixed? Great. Somebody willing to break the barrier deserves customers, and praise. I guess irrational bitterness gets high marks from Slashdot moderators... And another person commented on accidentally hitting buttons placing calls, but if the buttons only do ignore/fwd to voicemail, then hopefully there is no possibility of making an embarrassing call by touching these buttons accidentally. And need they beep?
Downloadable TV shows? I've been waiting for it ever since I left the TV era behind, every once in a while I'd like to check out a NOVA episode or something. Great idea, but only more reason for bitterness, apparently.
And remember, we never talk about true tech/sci advancements in consumer electronics. It's all about using current tech for a better experience. Dude, you must be having a really bad day! But cheer up!
I agree that sampling a broader range of articles would be more representative of the entire encyclopedia, but I disagree that this is an attempt to misrepresent the accuracy of Wikipedia (they say they just look at science articles; they make no claims beyond that).
The research was done by Nature magazine after all, and so they assessed what is most interesting to them, and what they have expertise in. They did their part in verifying the accuracy of (or probably more precisely giving credence to) Wikipedia science articles, and should be commended for the exercise; I doubt that they are playing the role of spin doctors here. That's what the other people are doing, taking the study for something it is not and does not claim to be.
And now we have schools (universities included) to select out anyone who looks beyond imitation as the goal.
squawk Polly want an A! squawk
My gut tells me the same thing: If someone comes knocking on a novice's door, saying "you uploaded a movie," would a novice point to an unsecured wireless connection?
If you know what an unsecured wireless connection is, you probably have enough knowledge to 1) secure it or 2) justify it as a public service. You probably aren't, at least, unwittingly sharing your connection.
And the guy has 4 computers? Most novices I know have one computer per person living in residence, maybe a second laptop, max. The damned things are just too scary for the novice to be outnumbered by them. Of course this is not a proof, but I'm just connecting the dots (albeit sparse) with the straightest possible lines.
And the computer that was supposedly wiped clean? Well, if it has a drive whose data is completely unrecoverable, then it's 100-to-1: novice he is not.
I agree, the response to this incredible new (as in consumer-ready) technology on this forum is completely ridiculous. Like people are offended at something new...
But offense at something truly new may actually be a common thread on this site; even self-described computer nerds are, analogously, too caught up in religion to accept heliocentricity!
I concur. NIST Boulder, as an example that I am familiar with, is developing certain techniques that can be used for quantum computing. (http://tf.nist.gov/ion/index.htm)
But the reason why the Time and Frequency division at NIST cares is because these techniques may yield better clocks in the future. (In fact, many breakthroughs in fundamental theoretical/experimental physics are applicable to clocks.) Meantime, however, the project gets mainstream-media publicity for quantum computing implications, gets funding from NSA, QuIST/DARPA, etc.
I'm sure it's a windfall for the physicists to do fundamental research, though, so "Hoorah Quantum Computers!!! (and cut me that check...)"
At least one other group (http://qdev.boulder.nist.gov/) is working on research similar to that published on PhysicsWeb, specifically using Josephson junctions in creating quantum bits & logic. That group was just recently setting up an honest phase measurement system, though, so are probably a bit behind in the research mentioned.
The reason that group plays with Josephson junction devices (how they justify it under the NIST banner)? Voltage standards. The reason they tell other funding agencies? Quantum computing, communication, and good-old-Alice-and-Bob.
The shelves would be empty only if you had listened to Sony music.
Despite the joke, just to set things straight, France controls UTC (at the BIPM).
Alright, you wrote a reasonable response, so I will respond.
The fact that the article is speculation, we all agree. It just isn't something that, in my mind, requires pointing out, since the article itself points it out. A valid criticism of a speculation piece, however, is not that it is speculation. You can criticize slashdot for posting speculation, or criticize someone for taking it as hard fact. But otherwise, it is what it is, and let's stop wishing that it were something else.
Put another way: I wish that Picasso had composed symphonies. It is logically fallacious (or just pointless) of me, however, to criticize his paintings because he wasn't composing symphonies instead.
Those are business decisions. Apple built the software in question, so it is Apple's business decision to limit the # of tunes on the phone. It's not like apple bought the DRM software from Microsoft to sell to Moto; it is Apple's software that enforces the 100 song limit. And even if it had bought somebody else's DRM software, they could probably choose the guy who sold DRM software that allowed more than 100 songs. But that's not the case; Apple has FULL CONTROL over themselves and the products they produce, within physical and technological limitations (e.g., they can't build a perpetual motion machine). End of story.
No, that's called a Business Decision. That's my point. MS limits its excel users to 64k rows, possibly at one time as a technological limit of the architecture they chose (16 bit), but now as a business decision (cuz as you said yourself, they could do more w/ 4GB of RAM), but they see no compelling reason to change the software now.
Your assertion that "his speculation is not supported by the article he cites" misses the point of speculation. The article gives a couple of facts, or purported facts, and the reviewer uses these and a couple of other points (such as, that the DRM software is completely under Apple's control, and that Apple makes good profit off of iPods and leads the market in the category). Connecting those points together by some reasoning is speculation, and is not directly supported by anything.
Now if you are referring to your original post's quote of the Wired article and your reasoning that the Wired article directly contradicts the speculation in the blog, I think you are completely FOS. I gave reasons why earlier (Apple has control, etc), and we can argue those, but it seems they fell on deaf ears (or blind eyes, as it were).
I feel my movie reviewer analogy is inferior to my Picasso analogy, but nonetheless, you seem to be the reviewer who is panning the movie on the basis of scenes that did not actually appear. Examples:
"Maybe Apple Blog should call up Apple and ask them to comment on Wired's reporting"
"In fact, Apple Blog could do us all a favor and dig into this question for us"
IANAL.
Okay, I just wanted to say that.
I call BS on your call of BS!
Ah yes, the Apple-designed DRM system has hit the fundamental limits of physics / current technology (which Apple has defined by their FairPlay DRM); there is no way they can allow more than 100 songs in any cell phone made by anyone (Motorola OR Nokia, so it MUST not be predatory), but iPods and iTunes somehow can support many, many more... Ergo it must not have been a business decision.
Unless compelling evidence is given otherwise, let's make the more valid assumption that decisions businesses make are "BUSINESS DECISIONS." Very few companies push the boundaries of what is physically or even technologically possible; how far back from that limit a business operates is a BUSINESS DECISION. Even saintly only-good-intentioned, non-predatory (cough, cough) Apple.
By the way, using italicized noncommital language like could doesn't relieve you of responsibility for the ridiculous statements that follow.
And whining about the article posing as original journalism is unnecessary: many references are made to the Wired article as a source, and it is clear that the article is the author's read on the situation as presented by the article and the surrounding situation. You wish to invalidate his speculation because he is not a journalist and posting online? Guess we are mostly all guilty of that one. Is a movie reviewer invalidated because he didn't really make the movie?
Mod parent up to 6 for flawless and all-too-common slashdot logic.
Ah, but MRTech Local Install, you can select 25 extensions AT ONCE, and install them all, at once. That's the simplicity, the beauty of it.