What method do you approve of to get the point across? We know damn well that big money buys politicians, and they have big money. What do we have? Of course the people who don't want this will call it all sorts of things. I hereby nominate you to find an effective, yet difficult to rebut, method. If not, well, didn't your wife who works for the CIA arrange that trip for you?
So state and local taxes, paid in part by the borrower, which contribute to the cultural treasure that is a library, are now "renting" books. Is there a cost? Yes. But it's assumed by the -- watch out, libertarians, bad word coming -- collective. Each individual can borrow, for fee, as many books as he can possibly read. Individual costs are only for late charges, when you are penalized for not returning the book to universal access. "Rental"? Only when you stretch a point.
Say all new TVs and so on have no analog in? Or the analog out has some kind of macrovision? Or some kind of digital watchdog is installed on analog ports?
Putting a mic in front of the speakers, though, will sound very bad.
Sure, where there's a will there's a way, but they have a lot of money, and they're not giving up.
'Dja know you'll have to have HDMI for HDTVs, and that will have copy management?
They probably can't turn it off completely, but they can make it damned inconvenient. You'll have to be DVD Jon sooner or later just to hook up the stereo.
Tell me, are human beings actually supposed to read a EULA? Really.
Adobe tells me rather forcefully, with serial numbers and all the rest, that they intend to defend their very high prices. I steer clear. Apple never has taken an aggressive attitude towards enforcement. If "authorized copies" and the like are in the EULA, it's news to me. I never do anything but click "I agree." I'm sure all the parasitic lawyers and people who wish to form their views, and mine, on subjects from presidential sex to immigration to copying CDs based on the simple repetition of the phrase "it's illegal," then they are welcome to talk to themselves.
I'm saying that so-called "illegal" installations of OS X are a delusion. You're completely on the honor system. I've never installed more than maybe two or three, but it's pretty common. If a friend is having trouble, I'll go over with my disks and may end up reinstalling a system. No "authentication" or any such thing. When they came out with a "Family Pack" recently, I was stunned to learn there was a limitation. I've never gone beyond what I think of a "fair use," and there is absolutely no problem with installing an update on a friend's computer. I urge them to get their own copy in case they need the Disk Utilities or a new installation.
And whether you believe it or not, that's the way it was in the '80s. Apple asked its retailers to make copies of System 6 for free if the customers brought in their own -- what was it, four? -- floppies. Some retailers were pissed off, and charged you $20 for their time. I think System 7 began the new regime, partly because there were maybe 8 floppies in the new OS. But it sure as hell was less than the new OS. It was Jobs who put the price up, for System 8.5, as I remember. But the Beta OS X preview was free ($20 S&H, plus a discount on 10.0 disks, and then 10.1 was a free upgrade,) and the first usable form of OS X.
Of course, MS makes nothing but virus facilitators, DRM and copy restrictions, so their business model is to watch you closely and make sure you get one of the seven (!) rumored levels for Vista.
Yeah, well, I'm not gonna pay a penny to XM or Sirius, either. Having all those damned subscriptions is like being nibbled to death by ducks. Greedy ducks.
You've "rented" books? What kind of idiot are you? I've gone to libraries and BORROWED them, but I have never, ever rented a book. If I like it (or it's been required for a class), I BUY it. If I'm doing research of some kind, I go to these institutions called libraries, which are almost always FREE. As well has being responsible for much of the rise of modern civilization, this model has brought us literacy that is not completely dependent on income level. The Enlightenment. You should try it.
Being an Apple guy, who uses iTunes to rip CDs, organize audio and download podcasts almost exclusively, I downloaded WM 11 on my Windows machine just to see what it was like. Well, I'm baffled. No way I'm going to sign up even for a "14-day trial", and then watch things come in on my credit card. I'm not interested AT ALL in buying music I won't own. (Even sounds like a rip-off straight off, right?)
But there seems to be an option to just go on, like iTunes, and buy a track for.99 cents, right? They seem to be pulling a double-shift on you for this. You can give them a credit card number to do that only in the context of a 14-day "free trial," no? Not interested in renting sounds. Uh-uh. I wouldn't mind terribly giving them credit card info, just to see what the purchase "experience" is like -- but I can't seem to do it. It's just as annoying as trying to download Real Audio without getting stung with the subscription to CNN, ABC, etc., all of which is now free.
You may not like iTunes. I can fully understand the distrust of FairPlay and DRM generally, and of compressed music. Sure. But at least the experience is pretty clear, and there are lots of uses to iTunes that don't even cost money. Oh, yeah. An iPod. Well, I own one of those.
However, another thing to understand is that there is no control of the number of installations you do with your retail disk. There are no serial numbers, nada. This might change, I suppose, but the fact is, well into the '90s, when a new OS was announced, you basically paid for the floppy disks and the manual. I can't remember the price, but it certainly wasn't $129. Or, you could go to your local retailer with floppies and get them to copy it for you, for free. Now they ask for a "family" license, but there's zero enforcement. Your copy of Tiger isn't going to blow up on you because you typed the serial in wrong.
A total difference in pricing philosophy. The Mac OS has always been what you need to get the Mac to work, so they'd give it to you if you had a Mac. Mac didn't charge itself royalties. Was it rolled into the cost of the Mac? Sure. Just like the OEM copy of Windows was rolled into the Compaq.
I suppose, if they do make a non-Mac OS X, they'll start with the serial numbers and the activation and all that annoying crap.
"Are you always in the habit of assuming that anyone with whom you happen to disagree must be crooked?"
Walt asked you a good question, which you never answered.
By the way, an extensive security update just arrived in Software Update yesterday, and I believe it clears up some of your overheated security objections. The vulnerabilities in OS X are a matter of concern, but the fact is, nobody has been bitten. So it is somewhat comic to hear someone assume that Mac worms and viruses are somehow approaching Windows. I've also heard the MS FUD about how vulnerable Linux is, and there's always scary-sounding stats behind it. Except any linux users I talk to laugh like crazy when you cite these articles.
I hope that Vista cleans up the mess on the MS side. I have a virus checker on my Mac, but so far, all it's done is identify some viruses passed along to me in e-mail from poor, benighted Windows people. I've deleted it, saving the world some troubles.
End-to-end has some great points. If you choose a limited amount of devices that you support (according to industry standards, by and large, and the exceptions are more and more Microsoft-generated), then you can ensure much more ease of use. Support of Internet standards, common file standards, all of those things are important, and have received a lot of attention in Jobsland. More work is to be done. But most important, possibly, is that, since you have a limited number of platforms to support, you can do transitions more successfully. Since OS X was released, there have now been 4 major changes, with a fifth on the way. And that includes Motorola, IBM, and now Intel processors. Meanwhile, Vista, with its necessity to support every piece of equipment that you find in PCs, will take about 7 years to produce a version of Vista with much of the innovation actually removed. Leopard will be out before Vista, I'll bet; and since BootCamp is just one of its features, I can't wait to see what they've got in mind. Working from a solid core, and developing for a narrower subset of machines, you can really ramp up the speed of changes.
They can open an online store, sure. They have control of the name for their purposes, and no overarching agreement which the boys' lawyers extracted from those computer makers from California. I guess they couldn't call it iTunes, though.
"You have a far too simplistic outlook here. Trademark law is far more complicated then that. There's trademark dilution to start with & Apple Corps' future plans (what if they want to expand into online music sales?)"
I believe the judge has a fairly extensive view of British trademark law, and guess what? He doesn't agree with you either.
And for once, I would hope that the term "fanboi" (particularly obnoxiously spelled with an "i") be banished from civilized discourse. I like Apple computers. I also see their weaknesses. I do not believe in them like a religion. The term shows a readiness to insult, and more, a willingness to argue based on this untrue categorization. I have seen this attitude from Windows partisans and Linux advocates. It's just lazy thinking. Anti-fanbois are particularly lazy, since all they have to do is participate in our culture of contempt; whereas Apple enthusiasts have seen their chosen computer ignored and pronounced dead so often that at least it has taken a thick skin and some defensive mechanisms (or a low budget for computers during the lean years) to have remained a believer -- at least until the reappearance of Jobs.
The implication in this context seems to be, "Only fanbois could possibly welcome this decision." And, "Apple deserves to lose this suit because it has sued many people in the past," which is particularly faulty reasoning. Apple's suit against the rumor sites? I disagree with their strategy, and I hope they lose that, too. Justice as revenge is an old model that has been discarded. You have to judge each case on its merits.
It's the iTunes Music store. They put an Apple logo on it. Pretty simple, no?
[ two returns ]
If the Beatles want to sell their music from a website, more power to them. The identifier would be "Beatles." Nobody but old geezers, and IP lawyers, knows about Apple Records, which used to be the best place to go to score some dope or sex, or embezzle wads of money from the boys.
[One return]
I think if they went with the market leader, they'd sell more, but they obviously have enough money to do what they want.
If it's any comfort to you, I don't think they'd have a leg to stand on if you called yourself "The Apple Company" and you sold apples.
The whole point about brands is, infringement is bad when it creates confusion in the market. Have you ever gone to the computer store to buy an Apple and come back with a Beatles record by mistake?
If the Beatles had paid some smart fellows to put up an "Apple Music Store," like the computer company, then the "iTunes Music Store" might have had to take off all the Apple logos. Otherwise--
What's more, multiple other online stores have roughly the same songs available, in formats that -- guess what -- don't work with the iPod. How come I don't kick because I can't use Napster? Well, because... I can get the same songs from iTunes, or from my CD collection.
"Market leader" does not mean "monopoly." MS defenders seem to be unable to make this distinction. Remember all the people whining that splitting up MS would mean an end to "innovation"? They couldn't see the monopolism at work. Now they see monopolies when there is none.
Thing is, I'd buy a lot more tunes online if you could get them without DRM, and if they made full CD quality available via bit-torrent. DRM is evil, though Apple woud never have been allowed to open the online store without it.
Slashdot Mirror
What method do you approve of to get the point across? We know damn well that big money buys politicians, and they have big money. What do we have? Of course the people who don't want this will call it all sorts of things. I hereby nominate you to find an effective, yet difficult to rebut, method. If not, well, didn't your wife who works for the CIA arrange that trip for you?
So state and local taxes, paid in part by the borrower, which contribute to the cultural treasure that is a library, are now "renting" books. Is there a cost? Yes. But it's assumed by the -- watch out, libertarians, bad word coming -- collective. Each individual can borrow, for fee, as many books as he can possibly read. Individual costs are only for late charges, when you are penalized for not returning the book to universal access. "Rental"? Only when you stretch a point.
Say all new TVs and so on have no analog in? Or the analog out has some kind of macrovision? Or some kind of digital watchdog is installed on analog ports?
Putting a mic in front of the speakers, though, will sound very bad.
Sure, where there's a will there's a way, but they have a lot of money, and they're not giving up.
'Dja know you'll have to have HDMI for HDTVs, and that will have copy management?
They probably can't turn it off completely, but they can make it damned inconvenient. You'll have to be DVD Jon sooner or later just to hook up the stereo.
Tell me, are human beings actually supposed to read a EULA? Really.
Adobe tells me rather forcefully, with serial numbers and all the rest, that they intend to defend their very high prices. I steer clear. Apple never has taken an aggressive attitude towards enforcement. If "authorized copies" and the like are in the EULA, it's news to me. I never do anything but click "I agree." I'm sure all the parasitic lawyers and people who wish to form their views, and mine, on subjects from presidential sex to immigration to copying CDs based on the simple repetition of the phrase "it's illegal," then they are welcome to talk to themselves.
But that's what I'm telling you. I can't listen. I open it up and get some message or other, and I can't listen.
I'm saying that so-called "illegal" installations of OS X are a delusion. You're completely on the honor system. I've never installed more than maybe two or three, but it's pretty common. If a friend is having trouble, I'll go over with my disks and may end up reinstalling a system. No "authentication" or any such thing. When they came out with a "Family Pack" recently, I was stunned to learn there was a limitation. I've never gone beyond what I think of a "fair use," and there is absolutely no problem with installing an update on a friend's computer. I urge them to get their own copy in case they need the Disk Utilities or a new installation.
And whether you believe it or not, that's the way it was in the '80s. Apple asked its retailers to make copies of System 6 for free if the customers brought in their own -- what was it, four? -- floppies. Some retailers were pissed off, and charged you $20 for their time. I think System 7 began the new regime, partly because there were maybe 8 floppies in the new OS. But it sure as hell was less than the new OS. It was Jobs who put the price up, for System 8.5, as I remember. But the Beta OS X preview was free ($20 S&H, plus a discount on 10.0 disks, and then 10.1 was a free upgrade,) and the first usable form of OS X.
Of course, MS makes nothing but virus facilitators, DRM and copy restrictions, so their business model is to watch you closely and make sure you get one of the seven (!) rumored levels for Vista.
Pandora is wonderful, and they always come up with good stuff, it seems. And wait! Where's the monthly subscription?
Yeah, well, I'm not gonna pay a penny to XM or Sirius, either. Having all those damned subscriptions is like being nibbled to death by ducks. Greedy ducks.
You've "rented" books? What kind of idiot are you? I've gone to libraries and BORROWED them, but I have never, ever rented a book. If I like it (or it's been required for a class), I BUY it. If I'm doing research of some kind, I go to these institutions called libraries, which are almost always FREE. As well has being responsible for much of the rise of modern civilization, this model has brought us literacy that is not completely dependent on income level. The Enlightenment. You should try it.
Congress knows about it, too. They call it "the analog hole," and there are all kinds of proposals in Congress to plug it.
Being an Apple guy, who uses iTunes to rip CDs, organize audio and download podcasts almost exclusively, I downloaded WM 11 on my Windows machine just to see what it was like. Well, I'm baffled. No way I'm going to sign up even for a "14-day trial", and then watch things come in on my credit card. I'm not interested AT ALL in buying music I won't own. (Even sounds like a rip-off straight off, right?)
.99 cents, right? They seem to be pulling a double-shift on you for this. You can give them a credit card number to do that only in the context of a 14-day "free trial," no? Not interested in renting sounds. Uh-uh. I wouldn't mind terribly giving them credit card info, just to see what the purchase "experience" is like -- but I can't seem to do it. It's just as annoying as trying to download Real Audio without getting stung with the subscription to CNN, ABC, etc., all of which is now free.
But there seems to be an option to just go on, like iTunes, and buy a track for
You may not like iTunes. I can fully understand the distrust of FairPlay and DRM generally, and of compressed music. Sure. But at least the experience is pretty clear, and there are lots of uses to iTunes that don't even cost money. Oh, yeah. An iPod. Well, I own one of those.
However, another thing to understand is that there is no control of the number of installations you do with your retail disk. There are no serial numbers, nada. This might change, I suppose, but the fact is, well into the '90s, when a new OS was announced, you basically paid for the floppy disks and the manual. I can't remember the price, but it certainly wasn't $129. Or, you could go to your local retailer with floppies and get them to copy it for you, for free. Now they ask for a "family" license, but there's zero enforcement. Your copy of Tiger isn't going to blow up on you because you typed the serial in wrong. A total difference in pricing philosophy. The Mac OS has always been what you need to get the Mac to work, so they'd give it to you if you had a Mac. Mac didn't charge itself royalties. Was it rolled into the cost of the Mac? Sure. Just like the OEM copy of Windows was rolled into the Compaq. I suppose, if they do make a non-Mac OS X, they'll start with the serial numbers and the activation and all that annoying crap.
"Are you always in the habit of assuming that anyone with whom you happen to disagree must be crooked?"
Walt asked you a good question, which you never answered.
By the way, an extensive security update just arrived in Software Update yesterday, and I believe it clears up some of your overheated security objections. The vulnerabilities in OS X are a matter of concern, but the fact is, nobody has been bitten. So it is somewhat comic to hear someone assume that Mac worms and viruses are somehow approaching Windows. I've also heard the MS FUD about how vulnerable Linux is, and there's always scary-sounding stats behind it. Except any linux users I talk to laugh like crazy when you cite these articles.
I hope that Vista cleans up the mess on the MS side. I have a virus checker on my Mac, but so far, all it's done is identify some viruses passed along to me in e-mail from poor, benighted Windows people. I've deleted it, saving the world some troubles.
End-to-end has some great points. If you choose a limited amount of devices that you support (according to industry standards, by and large, and the exceptions are more and more Microsoft-generated), then you can ensure much more ease of use. Support of Internet standards, common file standards, all of those things are important, and have received a lot of attention in Jobsland. More work is to be done. But most important, possibly, is that, since you have a limited number of platforms to support, you can do transitions more successfully. Since OS X was released, there have now been 4 major changes, with a fifth on the way. And that includes Motorola, IBM, and now Intel processors. Meanwhile, Vista, with its necessity to support every piece of equipment that you find in PCs, will take about 7 years to produce a version of Vista with much of the innovation actually removed. Leopard will be out before Vista, I'll bet; and since BootCamp is just one of its features, I can't wait to see what they've got in mind. Working from a solid core, and developing for a narrower subset of machines, you can really ramp up the speed of changes.
I am wounded to the quick, sir.
Actually, I cannot give a damn what your foolish "mission" is.
They can open an online store, sure. They have control of the name for their purposes, and no overarching agreement which the boys' lawyers extracted from those computer makers from California. I guess they couldn't call it iTunes, though.
Odd that your motto is apparently "stop the whine," but I hear a terrific amount of high-pitched squealing coming from your direction.
No, that's just your silly game.
"You have a far too simplistic outlook here. Trademark law is far more complicated then that. There's trademark dilution to start with & Apple Corps' future plans (what if they want to expand into online music sales?)"
I believe the judge has a fairly extensive view of British trademark law, and guess what? He doesn't agree with you either.
And for once, I would hope that the term "fanboi" (particularly obnoxiously spelled with an "i") be banished from civilized discourse. I like Apple computers. I also see their weaknesses. I do not believe in them like a religion. The term shows a readiness to insult, and more, a willingness to argue based on this untrue categorization. I have seen this attitude from Windows partisans and Linux advocates. It's just lazy thinking. Anti-fanbois are particularly lazy, since all they have to do is participate in our culture of contempt; whereas Apple enthusiasts have seen their chosen computer ignored and pronounced dead so often that at least it has taken a thick skin and some defensive mechanisms (or a low budget for computers during the lean years) to have remained a believer -- at least until the reappearance of Jobs.
The implication in this context seems to be, "Only fanbois could possibly welcome this decision." And, "Apple deserves to lose this suit because it has sued many people in the past," which is particularly faulty reasoning. Apple's suit against the rumor sites? I disagree with their strategy, and I hope they lose that, too. Justice as revenge is an old model that has been discarded. You have to judge each case on its merits.
It's the iTunes Music store. They put an Apple logo on it. Pretty simple, no? [ two returns ] If the Beatles want to sell their music from a website, more power to them. The identifier would be "Beatles." Nobody but old geezers, and IP lawyers, knows about Apple Records, which used to be the best place to go to score some dope or sex, or embezzle wads of money from the boys. [One return] I think if they went with the market leader, they'd sell more, but they obviously have enough money to do what they want.
At least I can spell solely.
If it's any comfort to you, I don't think they'd have a leg to stand on if you called yourself "The Apple Company" and you sold apples. The whole point about brands is, infringement is bad when it creates confusion in the market. Have you ever gone to the computer store to buy an Apple and come back with a Beatles record by mistake? If the Beatles had paid some smart fellows to put up an "Apple Music Store," like the computer company, then the "iTunes Music Store" might have had to take off all the Apple logos. Otherwise--
I would remaster all my greatest hits and sell them online at the Apple Store.
Are you somehow bitter about something?
What's more, multiple other online stores have roughly the same songs available, in formats that -- guess what -- don't work with the iPod. How come I don't kick because I can't use Napster? Well, because... I can get the same songs from iTunes, or from my CD collection. "Market leader" does not mean "monopoly." MS defenders seem to be unable to make this distinction. Remember all the people whining that splitting up MS would mean an end to "innovation"? They couldn't see the monopolism at work. Now they see monopolies when there is none. Thing is, I'd buy a lot more tunes online if you could get them without DRM, and if they made full CD quality available via bit-torrent. DRM is evil, though Apple woud never have been allowed to open the online store without it.