I'm sick of people saying that the new wave of Internet-based companies aren't living up to the hype! I'm sick of small-minded people squawking about "profits", "revenue", or "return on investment". Don't you realize these companies have attitude! Cool commercials! Free shipping! That's what a successful business is made of. You don't measure the new, super-cool companies by outdated concepts like a "balance sheet".
They sell below cost, but they make it up in VOLUME! Can you imagine what sort of house of cards-- I mean utopia-- we'd live in if all companies were run like the Internet companies?
Re:Finally they get something out of the investmen
on
Apple's New Trackpad?
·
· Score: 1
Way ahead of its time? No kidding. I recently passed my Newton MessagePad 2000 to my wife, and I'm now using a Palm V.
I used my Newton for over 3 years, and the handwriting recognition got to the point where I would make fewer mistakes with it than with a regular computer keyboard.
Don't get me wrong. The Palm's *okay*, but I'm surprised that this brand new Palm lacks more than half the features my Newton had. If Apple had gotten the synchronization as good as the Palm's Hotsync (which has always been a limitation with the Newt), and had made it as small as the Palm V, I'd still be using it today.
The Palm and Newton are in a way very different products. The Palm is basically an extension of my contact manager and complements my PowerBook. My Newton could effectively replace a laptop for some types of business trips.
You also have to remember that the return visit is important to video stores as well. Customers are likely to rent a video on the return trip, which works like the shampoo cycle:
1. Rent 2. Return 3. Repeat
I just don't think this is going to work out for the rental business. The person who suggested using this for encrypted material has a good point.
I'm also concerned about the environmental concerns. I disagree with the people that say that throwing away a disc is somehow better than driving down to the store. For one, I assume that most people go to the video store when they're running other errands, so it's not like a disposable DVD will cut down on people driving. Of course, there are probably some people who will get out their 8 mpg suburban assault vehicle and drive just to return a video. But these people would probably drive to the end of their driveway to throw the DVD away in the trash anyway.
> But holding the mouse in a natural grip while using the middle finger to scroll is quite uncomfortable
That's because you're trying to run it in X; the Logitech mouse was designed for Windows, whose users are used to using their middle fingers when dealing their computers.:-)
I'm not positive about this, but I think Apple used the Roman numeral for two reasons:
(1) Mac OS 9 + 1 = 10 or X. Kind of obvious.
(2) X is used for all sorts of Unix products, e.g. X-Window, and they were indicating that the new Mac OS uses a Unix microkernel. So the dual meanings are a kind of pun.
I think that they will restart the numbering from there so you have "Mac OS X 1.0", "Mac OS X 1.1", etc. This way, you don't have the problem with huge version numbers. I can't imagine that they're going to do "Mac OS X.I" or "Mac OS X.IV.III" because that would look kind of dumb.
It's good that Apple didn't fall to the prey of tacking a "2000" or "Millennium" moniker to it (sorry MS, but it's cheesy; admit it). After all the annoying hype we've had for "THE END OF THE MILLENNIUM WOO HOO!!!!!", any product with "2000" or "Millennium" in it will in a couple of years be about as cool as a black velvet painting of "Keep on Truckin'" in someone's house, or a "Ultra Hot" sticker on someone's car still equipped with Euro wipers.
"Manos Hands of Fate"! Now that's a great movie. No, wait, it's a terrible movie. I mean, it's a great, terrible movie. What about the music they played when Torvold (not Linus, I mean the hunchback in the movie) shows up on screen? I would love an MP3 of that.
There are some things that are artfully bad, meaning that if most people tried to make something that bad, they wouldn't succeed. It takes a certain cursed idiot savant to make an artfully bad production, like "Manos...", the music of the Shaggs, and most everything on access television in Austin. I expect to put the Star Wars Xmas special in that category as well, if bonesnet's ftp server can actually serve the MPEGs.
After reading the CNN article it seems that there's a lot of bands on the on-line MP3 sites, but very few of them are seeing a lot of downloads or CD sales. At least I know that my band is typical. My band is posted on one of those sites, herearfter called "Behemoth.Com" just to keep it anonymous. Last month we got 227 page views, and 150 downloads. Total CD sales: $0.00. (That's in US dollars, by the way).
I can look at this two ways. My "Behemoth.Com" site is a complete failure, and I should pick up my toys and go home. Or, I could look at it that 50 people hit the site and liked a song enough to download it to their hard drive. Similarly, I've found a few bands that I really like on "Behemoth.Com", bands that I probably wouldn't have found elsewhere.
Yes, it's simple to set up a web site and server -- I've done it many times myself -- but I like the fact that "Behemoth.Com" deals with the hard drive space and maintenance. So it seems that the people that really benefit from this type of service are the garage bands or "weekend warriors" who just enjoy the exposure but aren't necessarily looking to make money.
Most people, however, are interested in music from music professionals. That's not to say that some people don't like indie music, but I think it's a fair bet to say that most people like established, professional musicians. So this means that that these online sites are designed to cover a niche market filled with players who have little desire to earn money. So how long will this last? I expect that eventually "Behemoth.Com" and other sites will start to drop artists that don't have a certain number of page hits or downloads.
You know your favorite music genre is dead when it's played during a GAP commercial. Sig altered so this post won't become a commerical.
From www.sciam.com/1998/1298issue/1298techbus4.html
Most computer users would be startled to realize that somebody parked outside their home with the right kind of (very expensive) receiving equipment can read the data that appear on their computer screens. The receiver uses the monitor's radio emanations to reconstruct the screen's contents.
And like a predictable villian from a tired James Bond movie:
The story began, Anderson says, when Microsoft made its $20-million investment in Cambridge's computer science lab and said the company was particularly interested in ways to control software piracy.
Of course Microsoft wouldn't abuse this technology, right? They may sneak the GUID serial number into user's documents, track users' PCs who install Windows 98, pay your college professors to push their products, organize an astroturf campaign to fake support for their DOJ lawsuit, disguise advertisements as news stories, and fake evidence during their DOJ trial, but they're honest, dammit!
Sorry if there are any typos in this, but it's hard to type when you have your head buried in the sand.
I'm the owner of a Power Mac 7500 that's been upgraded twice, so I'm clearly not happy about Apple preventing user upgrades. Perhaps, however, there's another side of the story? When I upgraded my 7500 to a 604, there was a high-pitched (and barely noticeable whine) sometimes, which I was told was normal when putting a 604 in a 7500 (it didn't happen in the 7600). Then when I upgraded to a G3, I've noticed some increased instability due to imcompatibilities with the SCSI controller; about once a month, the first SCSI hard drive isn't seen by the system when I turned it on. My point is, processor upgrades (although they are less expensive for the user) are not really good alternatives for most users. Perhaps Apple's concerns are for how the 'upgraded' Mac tends to be a bit crappier than a real Mac, so they don't want their less experienced users getting involved with it. Think about how the old, Macs in classrooms give kids a bad impression of Macintoshes. An upgraded Mac can kind of do the same thing. I'd be interested to know if any Apple hardware people anonymously would like to state if Apple specifically targeted the upgrade market, or if this was the byproduct of other changes to the ROM.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sick of people saying that the new wave of Internet-based companies aren't living up to the hype! I'm sick of small-minded people squawking about "profits", "revenue", or "return on investment". Don't you realize these companies have attitude! Cool commercials! Free shipping! That's what a successful business is made of. You don't measure the new, super-cool companies by outdated concepts like a "balance sheet".
They sell below cost, but they make it up in VOLUME! Can you imagine what sort of house of cards-- I mean utopia-- we'd live in if all companies were run like the Internet companies?
Way ahead of its time? No kidding. I recently passed my Newton MessagePad 2000 to my wife, and I'm now using a Palm V.
I used my Newton for over 3 years, and the handwriting recognition got to the point where I would make fewer mistakes with it than with a regular computer keyboard.
Don't get me wrong. The Palm's *okay*, but I'm surprised that this brand new Palm lacks more than half the features my Newton had. If Apple had gotten the synchronization as good as the Palm's Hotsync (which has always been a limitation with the Newt), and had made it as small as the Palm V, I'd still be using it today.
The Palm and Newton are in a way very different products. The Palm is basically an extension of my contact manager and complements my PowerBook. My Newton could effectively replace a laptop for some types of business trips.
You also have to remember that the return visit is important to video stores as well. Customers are likely to rent a video on the return trip, which works like the shampoo cycle:
1. Rent
2. Return
3. Repeat
I just don't think this is going to work out for the rental business. The person who suggested using this for encrypted material has a good point.
I'm also concerned about the environmental concerns. I disagree with the people that say that throwing away a disc is somehow better than driving down to the store. For one, I assume that most people go to the video store when they're running other errands, so it's not like a disposable DVD will cut down on people driving. Of course, there are probably some people who will get out their 8 mpg suburban assault vehicle and drive just to return a video. But these people would probably drive to the end of their driveway to throw the DVD away in the trash anyway.
> But holding the mouse in a natural grip while using the middle finger to scroll is quite uncomfortable
That's because you're trying to run it in X; the Logitech mouse was designed for Windows, whose users are used to using their middle fingers when dealing their computers. :-)
I'm not positive about this, but I think Apple used the Roman numeral for two reasons:
(1) Mac OS 9 + 1 = 10 or X. Kind of obvious.
(2) X is used for all sorts of Unix products, e.g. X-Window, and they were indicating that the new Mac OS uses a Unix microkernel. So the dual meanings are a kind of pun.
I think that they will restart the numbering from there so you have "Mac OS X 1.0", "Mac OS X 1.1", etc. This way, you don't have the problem with huge version numbers. I can't imagine that they're going to do "Mac OS X.I" or "Mac OS X.IV.III" because that would look kind of dumb.
It's good that Apple didn't fall to the prey of tacking a "2000" or "Millennium" moniker to it (sorry MS, but it's cheesy; admit it). After all the annoying hype we've had for "THE END OF THE MILLENNIUM WOO HOO!!!!!", any product with "2000" or "Millennium" in it will in a couple of years be about as cool as a black velvet painting of "Keep on Truckin'" in someone's house, or a "Ultra Hot" sticker on someone's car still equipped with Euro wipers.
"Manos Hands of Fate"! Now that's a great movie. No, wait, it's a terrible movie. I mean, it's a great, terrible movie. What about the music they played when Torvold (not Linus, I mean the hunchback in the movie) shows up on screen? I would love an MP3 of that.
There are some things that are artfully bad, meaning that if most people tried to make something that bad, they wouldn't succeed. It takes a certain cursed idiot savant to make an artfully bad production, like "Manos...", the music of the Shaggs, and most everything on access television in Austin. I expect to put the Star Wars Xmas special in that category as well, if bonesnet's ftp server can actually serve the MPEGs.
After reading the CNN article it seems that there's a lot of bands on the on-line MP3 sites, but very few of them are seeing a lot of downloads or CD sales. At least I know that my band is typical. My band is posted on one of those sites, herearfter called "Behemoth.Com" just to keep it anonymous. Last month we got 227 page views, and 150 downloads. Total CD sales: $0.00. (That's in US dollars, by the way).
I can look at this two ways. My "Behemoth.Com" site is a complete failure, and I should pick up my toys and go home. Or, I could look at it that 50 people hit the site and liked a song enough to download it to their hard drive. Similarly, I've found a few bands that I really like on "Behemoth.Com", bands that I probably wouldn't have found elsewhere.
Yes, it's simple to set up a web site and server -- I've done it many times myself -- but I like the fact that "Behemoth.Com" deals with the hard drive space and maintenance. So it seems that the people that really benefit from this type of service are the garage bands or "weekend warriors" who just enjoy the exposure but aren't necessarily looking to make money.
Most people, however, are interested in music from music professionals. That's not to say that some people don't like indie music, but I think it's a fair bet to say that most people like established, professional musicians. So this means that that these online sites are designed to cover a niche market filled with players who have little desire to earn money. So how long will this last? I expect that eventually "Behemoth.Com" and other sites will start to drop artists that don't have a certain number of page hits or downloads.
You know your favorite music genre is dead when it's played during a GAP commercial. Sig altered so this post won't become a commerical.
Here's the article you were talking about:
From www.sciam.com/1998/1298issue/1298techbus4.html
And like a predictable villian from a tired James Bond movie:
Of course Microsoft wouldn't abuse this technology, right? They may sneak the GUID serial number into user's documents, track users' PCs who install Windows 98, pay your college professors to push their products, organize an astroturf campaign to fake support for their DOJ lawsuit, disguise advertisements as news stories, and fake evidence during their DOJ trial, but they're honest, dammit!
Sorry if there are any typos in this, but it's hard to type when you have your head buried in the sand.
GUID: //www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,33413,00.html
Win98 profiling: //www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990312S0008
Professor Spokesman: /chronicle.com/data/articles.dir/art-44.dir/issue- 33.dir/33a03001.htm
Astroturf: http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/BUSINESS/UPDATES/ lat_microsoft0410.htm
Ads as news: //www.thestandard.net/articles/display/0,1449,6087 ,00.html?home.bf
Video: //www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17938.htm l
I'm the owner of a Power Mac 7500 that's been upgraded twice, so I'm clearly not happy about Apple preventing user upgrades. Perhaps, however, there's another side of the story? When I upgraded my 7500 to a 604, there was a high-pitched (and barely noticeable whine) sometimes, which I was told was normal when putting a 604 in a 7500 (it didn't happen in the 7600). Then when I upgraded to a G3, I've noticed some increased instability due to imcompatibilities with the SCSI controller; about once a month, the first SCSI hard drive isn't seen by the system when I turned it on. My point is, processor upgrades (although they are less expensive for the user) are not really good alternatives for most users. Perhaps Apple's concerns are for how the 'upgraded' Mac tends to be a bit crappier than a real Mac, so they don't want their less experienced users getting involved with it. Think about how the old, Macs in classrooms give kids a bad impression of Macintoshes. An upgraded Mac can kind of do the same thing. I'd be interested to know if any Apple hardware people anonymously would like to state if Apple specifically targeted the upgrade market, or if this was the byproduct of other changes to the ROM.