Actually, it costs Apple $1.25 for every song they sell for $0.99 on the iTMS (due to the record labels greed) so the more songs they sell on the iTMS the more money they lose. About $260,000,000 with this billionth song.
However, the iPod's quite a healthy money maker with a very tidy profit.
They're currently doing the beta for the updated Hotmail, dubbed "Windows Mail Live" or something. If you wanna try it you have to pop-over to live.com and opt-in for the new mail beta, they'll send you an email at some point asking if you want to transfer over.
It's crap, only works properly (as using AJAX) in IE and its slow and cumbersome. Stick to Gmail.
So, IE7 Beta 1 really IS IE6 with tabbed browsing? Is it me, or is that actually an alpha? I thought beta's were supposed to be production versions that were in the final testing stages. Why do people keep cutting them slack? Its been 3 years. We shouldn't have to be telling the team what they have to fix in a severly redundant browser. Its obvious what needs to be done. And it still isn't being done even in the first beta. Maybe its time they just let IE go, otherwise they're always going to be playing catchup to the people setting the standards, and we're going to have to keep double-coding for a crap browser just because its included in the world's biggest desktop operating system and therefore everyone ends up using it.
The comment "Though you won't see (most of) these until Beta 2" was referring to the statement "In IE7, we will fix as many of the worst bugs that web developers hit as we can". It then goes on to say "we have already fixed the following bugs" - indicating that everything in the list is part of the 1st beta.
To name a couple of specific CSS fixes and then to relate it to the comment of "you won't see this until beta 2" seems ridiculous, why would you name 2 specific things and then give them such ambiguity? Mind you, the post does come from the same author who thinks that 2.1 isn't the current CSS recommendation.
Whilst the support in IE7 is better than IE6, its still awful, and they've even lied in places to make themselves look better. To quote the IEBLOG, they've fixed ":hover on all elements" - which isn't true, as the:hover pseudo-class STILL doesn't work on anything other than anchors.
The acid2 test looks exactly the same in IE6 and IE7 too, which implies that not much has changed.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it costs Apple $1.25 for every song they sell for $0.99 on the iTMS (due to the record labels greed) so the more songs they sell on the iTMS the more money they lose. About $260,000,000 with this billionth song. However, the iPod's quite a healthy money maker with a very tidy profit.
Live HTTP Headers says its IIS 6.0, which isn't surprising. As for the OS I doubt Microsoft would use anything other than Server 2003.
They're currently doing the beta for the updated Hotmail, dubbed "Windows Mail Live" or something. If you wanna try it you have to pop-over to live.com and opt-in for the new mail beta, they'll send you an email at some point asking if you want to transfer over.
It's crap, only works properly (as using AJAX) in IE and its slow and cumbersome. Stick to Gmail.
So, IE7 Beta 1 really IS IE6 with tabbed browsing? Is it me, or is that actually an alpha? I thought beta's were supposed to be production versions that were in the final testing stages. Why do people keep cutting them slack? Its been 3 years. We shouldn't have to be telling the team what they have to fix in a severly redundant browser. Its obvious what needs to be done. And it still isn't being done even in the first beta. Maybe its time they just let IE go, otherwise they're always going to be playing catchup to the people setting the standards, and we're going to have to keep double-coding for a crap browser just because its included in the world's biggest desktop operating system and therefore everyone ends up using it.
The comment "Though you won't see (most of) these until Beta 2" was referring to the statement "In IE7, we will fix as many of the worst bugs that web developers hit as we can". It then goes on to say "we have already fixed the following bugs" - indicating that everything in the list is part of the 1st beta. To name a couple of specific CSS fixes and then to relate it to the comment of "you won't see this until beta 2" seems ridiculous, why would you name 2 specific things and then give them such ambiguity? Mind you, the post does come from the same author who thinks that 2.1 isn't the current CSS recommendation.
Whilst the support in IE7 is better than IE6, its still awful, and they've even lied in places to make themselves look better. To quote the IEBLOG, they've fixed ":hover on all elements" - which isn't true, as the :hover pseudo-class STILL doesn't work on anything other than anchors.
The acid2 test looks exactly the same in IE6 and IE7 too, which implies that not much has changed.