Not to worry. These are just initial sales figures. They had to reach a saturation level at some point. Apple will still do fine, especially when people have to start replacing their iPods once the batteries start to hit end-of-life.
I don't believe it is unreasonable, nor prejudiced, to think that a man, who obviously and intentionally doctored a photo, did so to fan the anti-Isreali flame that seems to permeate the world right now.
The fact, that the man has an "arab-sounding name", only intensifies that theory.
However, it is just a theory as is your excusing his fraud by stating he was simply trying to "make a buck." Unless you have personal knowledge of his reasons, your theory is no more valid than any others. Of course, I'm not calling you a racist. Heaven forbid someone come to the logical assumption that he may have biased intentions based on the fact that he is either from that region or a muslim (based on his "arab-sounding name").
I despise the use of racism as a method of shutting down opinions that are contradictory to the politically-correct crowd.
I am working for a company called Ear Technology Corporation and we have just recently started marketing a new alternative to the BAHA system. It is a hearing aid called TransEar http://transear.com/ . It uses a behind-the-ear processor/microphone that drives an oscillator in a custom-fit ear shell. The shell is designed to reach the bony portion of the ear canal in the "dead" ear and uses bone conduction to transfer sound through the skull to the good ear. We are FDA approved and just started commercial production at the beginning of June. This is a much cheaper alternative to the surgical procedure required by the BAHA system. So far we have seen great improvements in the patients that have been fitted with the TransEar unit, including the ability of the wearer to discern the direction of sound. I suggest anyone who has single-sided deafness take a look at this product when considering their options.
We are also looking into other uses of this technology such as high-noise environments.
"This new system allows the artists to receive all of the money for the ticket, minus ticket masters fees...Of course in today's model, for a $50 ticket... the artist gets $50"
The artist does NOT get all $50 and they will not get all of the money in the new system either. The venue takes their chunk from this as well. Who knows what the percentage is?
"the scalpers bought it first and will be glad to sell it to you for $150.... so the scalper pockets $90. So you like this model better?"
So instead of fixing the problem with the current system, we'll just give all the money that was being exploited by scalpers to Ticketmaster?? That sounds much better. Now, you don't even have a chance of getting that ticket before the scalper, because the scalper (Ticketmaster) owns the ticket.
"Ticketmaster has to compete with the other Ticket vendors for the contract to sell the product..."
Just like Microsoft has to compete for the contract to place Windows on OEM machines??
"If you don't like buying from them or think the concert is too expensive then you can go to somone elses concert, go to a movie or whatever..."
Someone else's concert??? Who is selling their tickets?? Ticketmaster!!! GOTO Step 1
Go to a movie??? How is this comparable to seeing your favorite band live?? I know there are some bands out there that don't mind jacking up the cost of their tickets. Since the Eagles were able to get $100 plus for their Hell Freezes Over tour, every big name act seems to think they should get the same price. However, some bands want their fans to be able to come to a show for a reasonable price.
This is the reason that Pearl Jam boycotted Ticketmaster in the '90s. The surcharges were out of control and the band had no say in the matter. Unfortunately, Ticketmaster has such a stranglehold on the market that Pearl Jam could not find suitable alternatives in enough areas to hold an equivalent tour. Now, they sell tickets to their fans through their fan club where the better tickets go to members by seniority.
"They have a Monopoly on that particular concert ticket about as much as Coke has a Monopoly to sell Coke (I can always buy pepsi but I really like Coke more)."
You can buy Coke in any store you walk into, however, you may only see your favorite band at the one venue they are performing at. Guess who sells those tickets?? Furthermore, unless you equate Pepsi to the local unsigned band, then Ticketmaster sells the tickets for Pepsi as well.
I don't think a band that debuts at #2 on the Billboard Top 200 chart is "an over-the-hill burnout band, trying desperate internet publicity stunts in order to stay relevant."
Considering Tool was at #1 that same week, I would say Pearl Jam is still quite relevant. Will they sell as many albums as quickly as they did with Ten or Vs.? Maybe not, but they have gone Platinum on every album they have released. IIRC.
There was no scam involved. Pearl Jam, especially Eddie Vedder, love Vinyl. They are of the age that grew up listening to REAL albums, and they still love the sound of vinyl. That is the sentiment behind their song Spin The Black Circle. They released their albums in limited quantity on vinyl as well as CD for the fans who share their love of that particular format.
They also send out Christmas singles to members of the Ten Club (fan club). These are on vinyl as well.
I can't agree more with the fact that Sony has their heads in the clouds. They obviously think that because they have held a stranglehold on the console market for so long that they will maintain that superiority no matter what.
What bothers me is the fact that there are so many people on here that will likely fulfill that belief. All I hear is that there are not enough games available on the Xbox/360 as the PS2/3. First, lets examine the reason for that: the Playstation grabbed the market how many years ago??? When the PS2 came out, all the owners of the first gen system were lined up to purchase the new system. And why not?? There were not really any viable alternatives with the same kind of performance as the PS2. Naturally, all the developers for the original Playstation were also lined up to introduce their new titles for the HOT NEW PS2!!! Money in the bank due to the assured number of people who would upgrade.
Now, enter MS with the original Xbox. (I personally purchased an Xbox. Why? Well, at the time I bought mine, the Xbox was $50 cheaper than the PS2 and it included a harddrive and Xbox Live. These two features alone were enough to draw my attention.) With Halo, MS managed to carve a slice of the market for themselves. Developers began offerings to this new platform. The number of games have grown in the Xbox library over the years, and the number that will be available for the Xbox 360 will be even more. The simple fact that there is another console to generate revenue for the game developers is enough incentive.
The question is whether the 360 library will rival the PS3?? Hard to say over time, but initially the PS3 will likely have a larger assortment of games. Why? Because they are still expected to be the dominant console. However, if the 360 does take a larger share of this gen's market, the number of games offered will naturally increase.
What we as gamers and consumers need to ask ourselves is whether we want to reward Sony's arrogance as the present market leader. Are we going to be like so many Americans who just vote for the incumbent because they are familiar? Or, are we going to look at the system that provides the best experience for the money. Right now, I would say that appears to be the 360 (I am intentionally excluding the Wii because I feel Nintendo is a "family" console and does not compete in the same areas as the 360 and PS3. Although, I have a cube and will probably get a Wii.) and the game developers will follow the money trail to whatever console will get them the most money.
We are the market, if we want innovation and more choice at a reasonable price, we have to talk with our wallets. I will not pay $200 more for HDMI and Blu-ray because I don't need those at this time. Some of you may, but for the rest: Are you willing to pay that much more just because Sony has been around longer?? Just a question...
To expand on your comments:
I think many on/. forget the users we're talking about here. These are people who do not revolve areound their computers. They use them for work or for looking up new recipes and emailing family members.
Most people these days do not fix their own cars, they take them to a mechanic because they don't want to spend their time learning how their car works. Why should they?? They are not car fanatics! The same goes with the common computer user. Since Microsoft has put Windows on every OEM machine out there, that is the way these users have learned to use a computer. Why would they want to have to relearn an OS to do what they want to do. If computers were so easy for the average user, we would not have so much tech support. The users would just fix their own problems.
We know that is not the case, and that is the biggest problem with Linux becoming mainstream. As larger companies incorporate linux as their OS, then more of the general population will be exposed to linux systems that are already "up and running". This will allow exposure that may lead to more of these people actually contemplating a linux system at home. However, this is a slow process.
While this is certainly great news for the Aussies, I don't think we can find any comfort here in the States. While current US copyright law may allow format shifting, the DMCA is being utilized to effectively nullify this fair-use of media. The legality of the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA, as it relates to fair-use, has not been truly tested in our courts (brought before the Supreme Court). Until then, the **AA will continue to try and eradicate many of the uses we have become accustomed to believing are rights.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to worry. These are just initial sales figures. They had to reach a saturation level at some point. Apple will still do fine, especially when people have to start replacing their iPods once the batteries start to hit end-of-life.
I wish I still had some mod points. Very well done! :)
OK, I'll bite.
I don't believe it is unreasonable, nor prejudiced, to think that a man, who obviously and intentionally doctored a photo, did so to fan the anti-Isreali flame that seems to permeate the world right now.
The fact, that the man has an "arab-sounding name", only intensifies that theory.
However, it is just a theory as is your excusing his fraud by stating he was simply trying to "make a buck." Unless you have personal knowledge of his reasons, your theory is no more valid than any others. Of course, I'm not calling you a racist. Heaven forbid someone come to the logical assumption that he may have biased intentions based on the fact that he is either from that region or a muslim (based on his "arab-sounding name").
I despise the use of racism as a method of shutting down opinions that are contradictory to the politically-correct crowd.
I am working for a company called Ear Technology Corporation and we have just recently started marketing a new alternative to the BAHA system. It is a hearing aid called TransEar http://transear.com/ . It uses a behind-the-ear processor/microphone that drives an oscillator in a custom-fit ear shell. The shell is designed to reach the bony portion of the ear canal in the "dead" ear and uses bone conduction to transfer sound through the skull to the good ear. We are FDA approved and just started commercial production at the beginning of June. This is a much cheaper alternative to the surgical procedure required by the BAHA system. So far we have seen great improvements in the patients that have been fitted with the TransEar unit, including the ability of the wearer to discern the direction of sound. I suggest anyone who has single-sided deafness take a look at this product when considering their options.
We are also looking into other uses of this technology such as high-noise environments.
"This new system allows the artists to receive all of the money for the ticket, minus ticket masters fees...Of course in today's model, for a $50 ticket... the artist gets $50"
The artist does NOT get all $50 and they will not get all of the money in the new system either. The venue takes their chunk from this as well. Who knows what the percentage is?
"the scalpers bought it first and will be glad to sell it to you for $150.... so the scalper pockets $90. So you like this model better?"
So instead of fixing the problem with the current system, we'll just give all the money that was being exploited by scalpers to Ticketmaster?? That sounds much better. Now, you don't even have a chance of getting that ticket before the scalper, because the scalper (Ticketmaster) owns the ticket.
"Ticketmaster has to compete with the other Ticket vendors for the contract to sell the product..."
Just like Microsoft has to compete for the contract to place Windows on OEM machines??
"If you don't like buying from them or think the concert is too expensive then you can go to somone elses concert, go to a movie or whatever..."
Someone else's concert??? Who is selling their tickets?? Ticketmaster!!! GOTO Step 1
Go to a movie??? How is this comparable to seeing your favorite band live?? I know there are some bands out there that don't mind jacking up the cost of their tickets. Since the Eagles were able to get $100 plus for their Hell Freezes Over tour, every big name act seems to think they should get the same price. However, some bands want their fans to be able to come to a show for a reasonable price.
This is the reason that Pearl Jam boycotted Ticketmaster in the '90s. The surcharges were out of control and the band had no say in the matter. Unfortunately, Ticketmaster has such a stranglehold on the market that Pearl Jam could not find suitable alternatives in enough areas to hold an equivalent tour. Now, they sell tickets to their fans through their fan club where the better tickets go to members by seniority.
"They have a Monopoly on that particular concert ticket about as much as Coke has a Monopoly to sell Coke (I can always buy pepsi but I really like Coke more)."
You can buy Coke in any store you walk into, however, you may only see your favorite band at the one venue they are performing at. Guess who sells those tickets?? Furthermore, unless you equate Pepsi to the local unsigned band, then Ticketmaster sells the tickets for Pepsi as well.
I don't think a band that debuts at #2 on the Billboard Top 200 chart is "an over-the-hill burnout band, trying desperate internet publicity stunts in order to stay relevant."
Considering Tool was at #1 that same week, I would say Pearl Jam is still quite relevant. Will they sell as many albums as quickly as they did with Ten or Vs.? Maybe not, but they have gone Platinum on every album they have released. IIRC.
There was no scam involved. Pearl Jam, especially Eddie Vedder, love Vinyl. They are of the age that grew up listening to REAL albums, and they still love the sound of vinyl. That is the sentiment behind their song Spin The Black Circle. They released their albums in limited quantity on vinyl as well as CD for the fans who share their love of that particular format.
They also send out Christmas singles to members of the Ten Club (fan club). These are on vinyl as well.
I can't agree more with the fact that Sony has their heads in the clouds. They obviously think that because they have held a stranglehold on the console market for so long that they will maintain that superiority no matter what.
What bothers me is the fact that there are so many people on here that will likely fulfill that belief. All I hear is that there are not enough games available on the Xbox/360 as the PS2/3. First, lets examine the reason for that: the Playstation grabbed the market how many years ago??? When the PS2 came out, all the owners of the first gen system were lined up to purchase the new system. And why not?? There were not really any viable alternatives with the same kind of performance as the PS2. Naturally, all the developers for the original Playstation were also lined up to introduce their new titles for the HOT NEW PS2!!! Money in the bank due to the assured number of people who would upgrade.
Now, enter MS with the original Xbox. (I personally purchased an Xbox. Why? Well, at the time I bought mine, the Xbox was $50 cheaper than the PS2 and it included a harddrive and Xbox Live. These two features alone were enough to draw my attention.) With Halo, MS managed to carve a slice of the market for themselves. Developers began offerings to this new platform. The number of games have grown in the Xbox library over the years, and the number that will be available for the Xbox 360 will be even more. The simple fact that there is another console to generate revenue for the game developers is enough incentive. The question is whether the 360 library will rival the PS3?? Hard to say over time, but initially the PS3 will likely have a larger assortment of games. Why? Because they are still expected to be the dominant console. However, if the 360 does take a larger share of this gen's market, the number of games offered will naturally increase.
What we as gamers and consumers need to ask ourselves is whether we want to reward Sony's arrogance as the present market leader. Are we going to be like so many Americans who just vote for the incumbent because they are familiar? Or, are we going to look at the system that provides the best experience for the money. Right now, I would say that appears to be the 360 (I am intentionally excluding the Wii because I feel Nintendo is a "family" console and does not compete in the same areas as the 360 and PS3. Although, I have a cube and will probably get a Wii.) and the game developers will follow the money trail to whatever console will get them the most money.
We are the market, if we want innovation and more choice at a reasonable price, we have to talk with our wallets. I will not pay $200 more for HDMI and Blu-ray because I don't need those at this time. Some of you may, but for the rest: Are you willing to pay that much more just because Sony has been around longer?? Just a question...
To expand on your comments: I think many on /. forget the users we're talking about here. These are people who do not revolve areound their computers. They use them for work or for looking up new recipes and emailing family members.
Most people these days do not fix their own cars, they take them to a mechanic because they don't want to spend their time learning how their car works. Why should they?? They are not car fanatics! The same goes with the common computer user. Since Microsoft has put Windows on every OEM machine out there, that is the way these users have learned to use a computer. Why would they want to have to relearn an OS to do what they want to do. If computers were so easy for the average user, we would not have so much tech support. The users would just fix their own problems.
We know that is not the case, and that is the biggest problem with Linux becoming mainstream. As larger companies incorporate linux as their OS, then more of the general population will be exposed to linux systems that are already "up and running". This will allow exposure that may lead to more of these people actually contemplating a linux system at home. However, this is a slow process.
While this is certainly great news for the Aussies, I don't think we can find any comfort here in the States. While current US copyright law may allow format shifting, the DMCA is being utilized to effectively nullify this fair-use of media. The legality of the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA, as it relates to fair-use, has not been truly tested in our courts (brought before the Supreme Court). Until then, the **AA will continue to try and eradicate many of the uses we have become accustomed to believing are rights.
"The FCC is NOT a law-making entity."
No, but they do make regulations which have the "force of law."
You do not abide by the regulation, then you pay the consequences.
No legislation required.