Some have it, some don't, not totally obvious
on
Free IMAP On Gmail
·
· Score: 4, Informative
OK, some interesting bits:
-My Gmail account created late 2004 has it, as well as a friend from a month later.
-My Gmail account created summer 2005 does NOT have it.
-My "Google Apps for your domain" account, late 2006, has it, admins and regular users.
-Unlike typical announcements, it's not showing in the upper right. You have to go into your preferences. If you see a "Forwarding & POP" tab, you lack it. If you see a "Forwarding & POP/IMAP" tab...obviously, you have it.
-All your labels become Subfolders in a "[Gmail]" folder that sits next to your inbox. It also has the spam and All Mail folders (If you have a lot of email, it understandably take FOREVER to load the first time--- "Processing 1 of 7000 email headers")
It's a great move that's likely to keep me on Gmail, but it seems to play a lot nicer with Outlook 2003 on Win XP Pro than Evolution on Ubuntu Gutsy.One email account is perfect, the other is horrible, and other than the username they have the same exact settings. The one that doesn't work has 600 email headers to download, and the other one downloaded 7,000 in a snap.
People who work at money grubbing labels are out of touch with reality. More at 11.
Sony BMG misses the days where they controlled all of the avenues, from start to finish, and could extort and force customer re-buys. This is the old, outdated mindset. With iTunes and digital distribution, we're finally starting to get some choice (iTunes Plus, not to mention non-legal sources)...
BMG needs to adapt or die. This laughably ignorant statement shows that it'll probably be (after many years) the latter. Piracy is easy and the music comes without restrictions (not to mention it's free. If the labels don't give consumers what they want (the music itself, how it can be obtained legally), they'll still get it. Not to mention that it completely ignores fair use.
Not really an MP3, the Slashdot summary (and the line in the article) are misleading. Quote the SpiralFrog website:
Can I transfer the music I download to a portable device?
SpiralFrog is compatible with portable music players and music phones that support Windows Digital Rights Management (DRM). Look out for devices that prominently display the "PlaysForSure" logo.
So, they're not MP3s; they are WMA files with DRM. This is a nonstory.
In a study that began in 2004 and included 600 gamers, gaming-advertisement firm Massive Inc.
Of course the company that offers advertising solutions is going to find that in-game advertising is effective! They have a direct interest in getting more advertisers and games to advertise in.
On the topic of in-game advertising, it can be implemented properly. I don't mind walking by a Coca Cola machine vs. a generic soda machine. And in Crackdown, there were some billboards, but they were in an urban area, so they fit in.
However, a lot of ingame advertising is insultingly bad. That's why I didn't buy Battlefield 2142 (completely unrealistic ads), and why I dropped my subscription to Planetside for a while (it damaged any sense of belonging in the game- seeing an ad for Jeep as you get in your VTOL aircraft).
Well...yeah. The buyer doesn't have to pay for the cost of a Windows License, which to many enthusiasts or people that don't plan to keep Windows on the computers, means avoiding a "Windows Tax" that they have had to pay on laptops for years. Additionally, even if you don't use Ubuntu, you've bought Linux compatible HW.
Of course, that warning is also an ass covering; somebody who bought a Linux laptop might think (somehow) it includes both Linux AND Windows, and that is a pretty clear clarifying statement.
IANAL, but doesn't this device create some legal liability for security?
-Someone gets this device used on them. They have damage from stomach acid in their esophagus. They sue.
-They use this on someone who is sick (from another cause). They puke up blood/get sicker/die.
-(This is BS, but lawyers will sue for anything these days) "Psychological trauma" caused by the device.
Is it a reasonable expectation that the device may be used on you if you go to airport/border?
Re:Geeks do- everyone else doesn't
on
The DRM Scorecard
·
· Score: 1
Exactly. I doubt anyone other than geeks know that there isn't a foolproof DRM method. However, upper management in these companies aren't geeks, and it doesn't help that the people who make the system market it as foolproof.
Even if the music/movie companies (or any other company) acknowledges internally that DRM isn't perfect, it still stops a large majority of customers from cracking it. Better yet (for the companies), consumers rebuy content when it isn't compatible with their new phones.
-The quality of service is dependent on the cable provider being consistent.
-Even if the provider is good, there is no prioritizing for VOIP on the cable modem, which is a huge advantage for cable companies who want to do their own VOIP. Some will even give a little bit more upstream for VOIP users.
-Some providers use their own routers (like Vonage). A lot depend on ethernet adapters. Routers that are not configured properly or are overloaded/old (and cannot handle the traffic) are problems, not to mention that many routers don't prioritize VOIP.
-Cable companies get a connection to nearby servers. You're at the mercy of the general internet for third party VOIP. The quality isn't usually as good anyways.
-With all of the above in mind, cable companies often give incentives for "triple plays" (TV, Internet, Phone). With my cable company , not only do you get a promo price on the phone ($30 v $35), but for having all three, I get $20 off my bill. So, phone service is $10, and I get a "Rewards" card that gives me free movies on Tuesdays.
As far as reducing the voice quality, a lot of people wouldn't be happy with that I'd imagine. It's a barely better alternative to dropping.
In fairness, I have not used the trial version of Office 2007.
How, then, is this even a story? The submitter warns of the impending danger of the 07 trial, goes over his experiences with the 03 trial, and then admits he hasn't even tried the 07 trial.
A friend of mine bought a Toshiba Satellite with vista from Best Buy, and it came preinstalled with the Office 2007 trial. He used it for a week. He then uninstalled the 2007 trial via the control panel, installed his retail license of 2003 (he was not a fan of the ribbon...), and imported his files without any compatibility issues, including his entire Outlook file, contacts, email, everything.
This analyst is out of his mind. Of course, the Content Scrambling System, the "invincible" content protection on DVDs, worked on a key based system that allowed the revocation of compromised keys.
While Sony has worked on Blu-ray DRM after the failure of the CSS, calling it uncrackable is insanity. Harder to crack? Maybe. Impossible? Definitely not. Anything that allows analog playback will be crackable. And, even with digital signal, there will be some method of attack.
Even if the security on Blu-ray discs turns out to be only slightly cracked (and subsequently fixed) for a few years, they'll still be DVDs in the meantime (a studio would have to be insane not to sell DVDs and alienate a huge market). And, of course, "Media analyst" sounds somewhat like "Sony shill".
1) No, it's not paranoia then.
2) Can't be slander if it's true. Of course, it might be seen a different way with the legal army of Microsoft against you.
3) It depends on the way the pop is licked and the licker in question, but the average is 413 licks.
4) Well, Twinkies used to use a banana filling, but switched to vanilla in WWII. Of course, it's mostly flavored random chemicals at this point. Yummy.
Given the previous FUD Microsoft has put out about Linux (235 patents? Which patents?), I'm not really surprised to see this.
Of course, if anyone should be counting browser flaws as OS flaws, it's MS. MS makes the case that they can't remove IE from the OS since it is integral to it working properly, yet doesn't count them on the vulnerability list.
Meanwhile, FF doesn't even have to come with a Linux distro, and a bug that compromises FF as an app is much less likely to compromise the OS as a whole.
Looks like more FUD to scare non technical people from "illegal" and "unsafe" Linux.
After that amendment passed, I was worried about NYS letting this fly. I'm glad to see that the legislators are attentive.
The real question is: What does Microsoft have to hide from election officials?
-Are they worrying that the source will be leaked?
-Due to the above fear, is MS afraid of getting crap from the DRM loving media cartels?
-Is there something in the code that MS doesn't want seen?
-Are they afraid this mentality hurts the "security through obscurity" idea?
Of course this is all speculation. I'm just so curious why Microsoft is so opposed to sharing their code with a state government.
Downloads DOESN'T equal active users. Just because you download a browser, doesn't mean you're going to use it regularly, or even past the first time.
I myself grabbed it for some light web development. And while I've used Safari on the Mac (blazing fast), the Windows version was extremely slow. Within a few minutes (5 tabs, same as the ones in Firefox), it hit 300MB. And the Firefox was up to 140MB (a bloat by any standard), but it had been open over a day.
It may be a beta (and therefore has bugs), but I'm not using Safari actively, even though I downloaded it. I don't think it has enough compelling features to steal marketshare from IE yet.
MS isn't going to cut the 360 price points at any time soon. They JUST made the elite $480, and they're not going to do anything which makes it seem like less of a value yet. As others have said, announcing a price cut would be boneheaded for MS, because it would give time for competitors to act appropriately and would decimate sales until the price cut came.
Now, I wouldn't be surprised if in the few weeks/days before Halo 3, the often predicted price cut comes. It would push sales of Halo 3 for Bungie/MS/retailers, but more importantly the 360 itself. Not to mention all of the wireless controllers, memory cards, and other games. It would be a huge blow to the PS3 if the lower end 360 was availible for 1/3 of the price, and the top of the line for 1/2 the price.
It's not really a question of "if", but "when" and "how much". If MS was to drop the high end 360 to $300, you could get the 360, 3 additional wireless controllers ($150), 4 rechargeable batteries ($80), and Halo 3 for $10 less than the PS3.
I'm confused as hell how the software creator violated Microsoft's contract too. To me, it seems like the guy is evasive and saying he hacked the Express edition, when he just used supported capabilities from examples on MSes documentation.
Am I missing something, or did this guy not violate any contract at all? To me, the guy who is writing letters back and forth is awfully vague...
It's convenient once in a while- I get about 1 a month. For situations that you can't be disturbed in, it occasionally makes sense to text.
However, I don't get the obsession with texting that some teenagers have. Why text when you can talk? It's a heck of a lot easier, and texting is a literal pain to (I don't get how someone can type 200 texts a day and not have their fingers fall off).
It seems kind of silly to use text messages on a device with such limited input. A few phones have keyboards, but even then the keys are so small it's easier to talk.
How is a computer supposed to tell, with exact certainty, whether a video matches content pulled for content violation? There are so many problems with this idea:
-If you make it so it only picks up exact copies, people will resize or make some other small video adjustment.
-If you make it aggressive enough so it can pick up on those modifications, it will probably hit a bunch of false positives.
-If it is possible to make it smart enough to pick up on videos and not get false positives, it will hammer the servers.
-What about the ease of abusing the DCMA? What happens when an owner of a copyrighted video is blocked by a fake request? What is the unblock mechanism?
-If Myspace manages to do all of the above without issues, then you've driven all of the worthwhile content off of the site and alienated the userbase...
I think that cops SHOULD be held accountable for running a red light if they're on patrol, or just driving back to the precinct. The upholders of the law should be held to the law as well.
That said, there are numerous acceptable reasons for a cop to run a red light. A few I can think of off the top of my head...
-An officer is on his way to stop or going to the scene of a 911 call.
-A suspect car runs a red light as well, and in order to continue, pursuit, the cop must also run the red light.
At this point, technology is still in earlier stages, but...
-You could make a filter with police car license plates, and forward them to the appropriate precinct.
-If not possible, human verification and forwarding.
I never said that the kid will become a murderer, or attracted to guns, booze, and prostitutes. Kids see all sorts of objectionable stuff on network TV (24, Standoff, CSI, etc.) and in movies.
But, it's in video games, some parents ask, ?!?!?!, Johnnies on a murder simulator, get a psychologist, etc.. It is really ridiculous.
I personally believe there is more objectionable content during the news than in GTA. In GTA it's not even REAL. And about "not being able to tell the difference", that's a load of crap.
Personally, I don't think the fact that the sales of M-rated games to minors dropping. Why? Well, many times it goes like this:
Child: Mom, I want Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
Mom: Oh, what do you do in that game?
Child: You drive cars.
Mom: Oh, OK then.
Clerk: Ma'm, you realize this is an Mature Game, intended for ages 18 and up?
Mom: Yeah, sure, whatever.
*Kid plays game full of violence*
Forget the fact that it's on the back of the box (inappropriate content warnings), parents will blithely ignore them. All of the sales restrictions to minors don't prevent bad parents from buying them.
Why not just do it yourself? All you have to do is buy an enclosure and a drive...
-It's cheaper to buy the two separately.
-You get to pick your drive case (color, features, etc.)
-You get to pick your drive (WD, Maxtor, Seagate).
-While OEM drives often come with more than a year warranty (SG is 5 years, I believe WD is three), regular external drives often come with a one year warranty.
While you do lose a few features (I'm dying for a good enclosure w/ one button backup), it's cheaper and you have more selection. Plus, the software that comes with external hard drives is such crap anyways (Seagate and BounceBack Crippled/Express Edition).
Of course, as a slashdotter, I may not be representative of the average computer user (OK, I'm not).
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, the IMAP connection is secured via SSL.
OK, some interesting bits:
-My Gmail account created late 2004 has it, as well as a friend from a month later.
-My Gmail account created summer 2005 does NOT have it.
-My "Google Apps for your domain" account, late 2006, has it, admins and regular users.
-Unlike typical announcements, it's not showing in the upper right. You have to go into your preferences. If you see a "Forwarding & POP" tab, you lack it. If you see a "Forwarding & POP/IMAP" tab...obviously, you have it.
-All your labels become Subfolders in a "[Gmail]" folder that sits next to your inbox. It also has the spam and All Mail folders (If you have a lot of email, it understandably take FOREVER to load the first time--- "Processing 1 of 7000 email headers")
It's a great move that's likely to keep me on Gmail, but it seems to play a lot nicer with Outlook 2003 on Win XP Pro than Evolution on Ubuntu Gutsy.One email account is perfect, the other is horrible, and other than the username they have the same exact settings. The one that doesn't work has 600 email headers to download, and the other one downloaded 7,000 in a snap.
People who work at money grubbing labels are out of touch with reality. More at 11.
Sony BMG misses the days where they controlled all of the avenues, from start to finish, and could extort and force customer re-buys. This is the old, outdated mindset. With iTunes and digital distribution, we're finally starting to get some choice (iTunes Plus, not to mention non-legal sources)...
BMG needs to adapt or die. This laughably ignorant statement shows that it'll probably be (after many years) the latter. Piracy is easy and the music comes without restrictions (not to mention it's free. If the labels don't give consumers what they want (the music itself, how it can be obtained legally), they'll still get it. Not to mention that it completely ignores fair use.
Not really an MP3, the Slashdot summary (and the line in the article) are misleading. Quote the SpiralFrog website:
Can I transfer the music I download to a portable device?
SpiralFrog is compatible with portable music players and music phones that support Windows Digital Rights Management (DRM). Look out for devices that prominently display the "PlaysForSure" logo.
So, they're not MP3s; they are WMA files with DRM. This is a nonstory.
In a study that began in 2004 and included 600 gamers, gaming-advertisement firm Massive Inc.
Of course the company that offers advertising solutions is going to find that in-game advertising is effective! They have a direct interest in getting more advertisers and games to advertise in.
On the topic of in-game advertising, it can be implemented properly. I don't mind walking by a Coca Cola machine vs. a generic soda machine. And in Crackdown, there were some billboards, but they were in an urban area, so they fit in.
However, a lot of ingame advertising is insultingly bad. That's why I didn't buy Battlefield 2142 (completely unrealistic ads), and why I dropped my subscription to Planetside for a while (it damaged any sense of belonging in the game- seeing an ad for Jeep as you get in your VTOL aircraft).
Well...yeah. The buyer doesn't have to pay for the cost of a Windows License, which to many enthusiasts or people that don't plan to keep Windows on the computers, means avoiding a "Windows Tax" that they have had to pay on laptops for years. Additionally, even if you don't use Ubuntu, you've bought Linux compatible HW.
Of course, that warning is also an ass covering; somebody who bought a Linux laptop might think (somehow) it includes both Linux AND Windows, and that is a pretty clear clarifying statement.
IANAL, but doesn't this device create some legal liability for security?
-Someone gets this device used on them. They have damage from stomach acid in their esophagus. They sue.
-They use this on someone who is sick (from another cause). They puke up blood/get sicker/die.
-(This is BS, but lawyers will sue for anything these days) "Psychological trauma" caused by the device.
Is it a reasonable expectation that the device may be used on you if you go to airport/border?
Exactly. I doubt anyone other than geeks know that there isn't a foolproof DRM method. However, upper management in these companies aren't geeks, and it doesn't help that the people who make the system market it as foolproof.
Even if the music/movie companies (or any other company) acknowledges internally that DRM isn't perfect, it still stops a large majority of customers from cracking it. Better yet (for the companies), consumers rebuy content when it isn't compatible with their new phones.
It's tough for numerous reasons.
-The quality of service is dependent on the cable provider being consistent.
-Even if the provider is good, there is no prioritizing for VOIP on the cable modem, which is a huge advantage for cable companies who want to do their own VOIP. Some will even give a little bit more upstream for VOIP users.
-Some providers use their own routers (like Vonage). A lot depend on ethernet adapters. Routers that are not configured properly or are overloaded/old (and cannot handle the traffic) are problems, not to mention that many routers don't prioritize VOIP.
-Cable companies get a connection to nearby servers. You're at the mercy of the general internet for third party VOIP. The quality isn't usually as good anyways.
-With all of the above in mind, cable companies often give incentives for "triple plays" (TV, Internet, Phone). With my cable company , not only do you get a promo price on the phone ($30 v $35), but for having all three, I get $20 off my bill. So, phone service is $10, and I get a "Rewards" card that gives me free movies on Tuesdays.
As far as reducing the voice quality, a lot of people wouldn't be happy with that I'd imagine. It's a barely better alternative to dropping.
In fairness, I have not used the trial version of Office 2007.
How, then, is this even a story? The submitter warns of the impending danger of the 07 trial, goes over his experiences with the 03 trial, and then admits he hasn't even tried the 07 trial.
A friend of mine bought a Toshiba Satellite with vista from Best Buy, and it came preinstalled with the Office 2007 trial. He used it for a week. He then uninstalled the 2007 trial via the control panel, installed his retail license of 2003 (he was not a fan of the ribbon...), and imported his files without any compatibility issues, including his entire Outlook file, contacts, email, everything.
This analyst is out of his mind. Of course, the Content Scrambling System, the "invincible" content protection on DVDs, worked on a key based system that allowed the revocation of compromised keys.
While Sony has worked on Blu-ray DRM after the failure of the CSS, calling it uncrackable is insanity. Harder to crack? Maybe. Impossible? Definitely not. Anything that allows analog playback will be crackable. And, even with digital signal, there will be some method of attack.
Even if the security on Blu-ray discs turns out to be only slightly cracked (and subsequently fixed) for a few years, they'll still be DVDs in the meantime (a studio would have to be insane not to sell DVDs and alienate a huge market). And, of course, "Media analyst" sounds somewhat like "Sony shill".
1) No, it's not paranoia then.
2) Can't be slander if it's true. Of course, it might be seen a different way with the legal army of Microsoft against you.
3) It depends on the way the pop is licked and the licker in question, but the average is 413 licks.
4) Well, Twinkies used to use a banana filling, but switched to vanilla in WWII. Of course, it's mostly flavored random chemicals at this point. Yummy.
Given the previous FUD Microsoft has put out about Linux (235 patents? Which patents?), I'm not really surprised to see this.
Of course, if anyone should be counting browser flaws as OS flaws, it's MS. MS makes the case that they can't remove IE from the OS since it is integral to it working properly, yet doesn't count them on the vulnerability list.
Meanwhile, FF doesn't even have to come with a Linux distro, and a bug that compromises FF as an app is much less likely to compromise the OS as a whole.
Looks like more FUD to scare non technical people from "illegal" and "unsafe" Linux.
...and, of course, by "passed", I mean "proposed". That's what happens when you spend more time rambling then proofreading. X(
After that amendment passed, I was worried about NYS letting this fly. I'm glad to see that the legislators are attentive.
The real question is: What does Microsoft have to hide from election officials?
-Are they worrying that the source will be leaked?
-Due to the above fear, is MS afraid of getting crap from the DRM loving media cartels?
-Is there something in the code that MS doesn't want seen?
-Are they afraid this mentality hurts the "security through obscurity" idea?
Of course this is all speculation. I'm just so curious why Microsoft is so opposed to sharing their code with a state government.
Downloads DOESN'T equal active users. Just because you download a browser, doesn't mean you're going to use it regularly, or even past the first time.
I myself grabbed it for some light web development. And while I've used Safari on the Mac (blazing fast), the Windows version was extremely slow. Within a few minutes (5 tabs, same as the ones in Firefox), it hit 300MB. And the Firefox was up to 140MB (a bloat by any standard), but it had been open over a day.
It may be a beta (and therefore has bugs), but I'm not using Safari actively, even though I downloaded it. I don't think it has enough compelling features to steal marketshare from IE yet.
MS isn't going to cut the 360 price points at any time soon. They JUST made the elite $480, and they're not going to do anything which makes it seem like less of a value yet. As others have said, announcing a price cut would be boneheaded for MS, because it would give time for competitors to act appropriately and would decimate sales until the price cut came.
Now, I wouldn't be surprised if in the few weeks/days before Halo 3, the often predicted price cut comes. It would push sales of Halo 3 for Bungie/MS/retailers, but more importantly the 360 itself. Not to mention all of the wireless controllers, memory cards, and other games. It would be a huge blow to the PS3 if the lower end 360 was availible for 1/3 of the price, and the top of the line for 1/2 the price.
It's not really a question of "if", but "when" and "how much". If MS was to drop the high end 360 to $300, you could get the 360, 3 additional wireless controllers ($150), 4 rechargeable batteries ($80), and Halo 3 for $10 less than the PS3.
I'm confused as hell how the software creator violated Microsoft's contract too. To me, it seems like the guy is evasive and saying he hacked the Express edition, when he just used supported capabilities from examples on MSes documentation.
Am I missing something, or did this guy not violate any contract at all? To me, the guy who is writing letters back and forth is awfully vague...
Apparently not...
Marti Rubenstein, said she has seen Sofia and her friends text each other even when they're in the same room.
Am I the only one who finds that mind numbingly stupid? Why not just... I don't know... talk to the person? Too much effort?
I personally hate text messaging.
It's convenient once in a while- I get about 1 a month. For situations that you can't be disturbed in, it occasionally makes sense to text.
However, I don't get the obsession with texting that some teenagers have. Why text when you can talk? It's a heck of a lot easier, and texting is a literal pain to (I don't get how someone can type 200 texts a day and not have their fingers fall off).
It seems kind of silly to use text messages on a device with such limited input. A few phones have keyboards, but even then the keys are so small it's easier to talk.
How is a computer supposed to tell, with exact certainty, whether a video matches content pulled for content violation? There are so many problems with this idea: -If you make it so it only picks up exact copies, people will resize or make some other small video adjustment. -If you make it aggressive enough so it can pick up on those modifications, it will probably hit a bunch of false positives. -If it is possible to make it smart enough to pick up on videos and not get false positives, it will hammer the servers. -What about the ease of abusing the DCMA? What happens when an owner of a copyrighted video is blocked by a fake request? What is the unblock mechanism? -If Myspace manages to do all of the above without issues, then you've driven all of the worthwhile content off of the site and alienated the userbase...
I think that cops SHOULD be held accountable for running a red light if they're on patrol, or just driving back to the precinct. The upholders of the law should be held to the law as well.
That said, there are numerous acceptable reasons for a cop to run a red light. A few I can think of off the top of my head...
-An officer is on his way to stop or going to the scene of a 911 call.
-A suspect car runs a red light as well, and in order to continue, pursuit, the cop must also run the red light.
At this point, technology is still in earlier stages, but...
-You could make a filter with police car license plates, and forward them to the appropriate precinct.
-If not possible, human verification and forwarding.
I never said that the kid will become a murderer, or attracted to guns, booze, and prostitutes. Kids see all sorts of objectionable stuff on network TV (24, Standoff, CSI, etc.) and in movies.
But, it's in video games, some parents ask, ?!?!?!, Johnnies on a murder simulator, get a psychologist, etc.. It is really ridiculous.
I personally believe there is more objectionable content during the news than in GTA. In GTA it's not even REAL. And about "not being able to tell the difference", that's a load of crap.
Personally, I don't think the fact that the sales of M-rated games to minors dropping. Why? Well, many times it goes like this:
Child: Mom, I want Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
Mom: Oh, what do you do in that game?
Child: You drive cars.
Mom: Oh, OK then.
Clerk: Ma'm, you realize this is an Mature Game, intended for ages 18 and up?
Mom: Yeah, sure, whatever.
*Kid plays game full of violence*
Forget the fact that it's on the back of the box (inappropriate content warnings), parents will blithely ignore them. All of the sales restrictions to minors don't prevent bad parents from buying them.
Why not just do it yourself? All you have to do is buy an enclosure and a drive...
-It's cheaper to buy the two separately.
-You get to pick your drive case (color, features, etc.)
-You get to pick your drive (WD, Maxtor, Seagate).
-While OEM drives often come with more than a year warranty (SG is 5 years, I believe WD is three), regular external drives often come with a one year warranty.
While you do lose a few features (I'm dying for a good enclosure w/ one button backup), it's cheaper and you have more selection. Plus, the software that comes with external hard drives is such crap anyways (Seagate and BounceBack Crippled/Express Edition).
Of course, as a slashdotter, I may not be representative of the average computer user (OK, I'm not).