Instead of charging $50 with DRM, charge $10 with no DRM. That would be a less expensive to produce and support. In addition, MANY more people would be willing to pay just $10. If even 50% were pirates, they make up the lost income from the lower price through additional sales, less support costs, and less development/licensing for DRM. And talk about customer satisfaction!!!
They just don't get it through, do they?
Apple is NOT (I repeat - NOT) afraid of being sued - even less afraid of a _threat_ of being sued. Especially the nickel and dime stuff that would be done for App Store _potential_ violations. Apple just wants to make more money off the App Store, so they reject as much good free stuff as possible, so that people will go _buy_ the non-free apps, so that they can make their (more than fair) share.
gimp
Noun:
1. Twisted silk or cotton with cord or wire running through it, used chiefly in upholstery.
2. offensive. A physically handicapped or lame person.
You are just spreading FUD. Windows 8 competes with Windows 7 and they have to allow users to upgrade with an old PC. It would be stupid to implement an OS that requires a Secure Boot mode, because it would mean that mean that users would have to buy new hardware.
Ummm... no. If the "Windows 8" certification requires Secure Boot, it doesn't mean that Windows 8 will only work on that hardware, it means that hardware would only work with Windows 8 (unless they also supply a way to turn the secure boot requirement off). The "buy new hardware" would only affect people who are... "buying new hardware."
Even if they did, there will be anti-trust litigation in both the US or EU. Microsoft has been in trouble in the past for bundling software, which is a far less serious offense than actually locking out the competition. Any attempt would just be negative publicity and could potentially bar them from selling in a major market.
Tell me... When has Microsoft ever let anti-trust legislation stop them from doing something monopolistic?... Never! They do it, then fight in court until they loose. It's like they will steal from others until someone stands up to them, then they continue to steal, until they are found guilty, and then still continue to steal until someone comes along and hits them up the side of the head.
It would be a stupid business decision especially when over 95% of consumers prefer Windows over Linux anyways. There is little to gain for Microsoft and a lot to lose
Don't be so naive as to think that this is only about the desktop. The Internet is run mostly on Linux, NOT Windows. If you include all devices that run some version of Linux to all devices that run some version of Windows, Linux wins. Period. That doesn't mean that this isn't mostly about the desktop. If and when Microsoft comes out with a Windows 8 tablet version, if they put the same restriction on that hardware (again, FOR Windows 8 Certification, not that Windows 8 would run on other hardware that isn't certified), then it would be useless to try to run Android on the tablet (even though it would probably improve the tablet significantly). This is all about control. Microsoft wants to be in control. They see the market slipping away from them as the mobile market takes control of personal computing. The only way they could insure they would have some hardware penetration into the mobile phone market was to buy Nokia. Right now there are twice as many Android phones as there are iPhones in the US, and Microsoft hardly registers as an "also ran." What does their future look like, really? They have to find a way to get control back, or they will loose it all eventually.
One of the things that most interests me in this type of discussion is the fear that people have of Mormon baptism for the dead. Let's look at this for a second. If the Mormons are right (God exists and accepts that baptism for entrance into "heaven"), then the baptism might be helpful (if the dead person accepts the baptism). If the Mormons are wrong, then what harm did it do the dead person? It certainly can't condemn them (since they weren't involved). So the fact is - it is either valuable, or inconsequential. There is NO other possibility.
So I ask, why all the fuss? Really!!
Well at least there were three of us. I quite looked forward to the new episodes each week. I think that there was more to the show than most people cared to figure out. It was definitely more gritty and more of a moral dilemma show. Not many shows would have written a story where the captain suffocates one of his men to make it so that he didn't have to die alone when he was left behind. I thought much of the stuff was very thought provoking. I'll miss it.
Jobs is just a big baby. He doesn't play well with others. He gets upset when he doesn't get his way. The only way he lets you play with his toys is if you pay him. I bet he even wears diapers.
Safari for Linux? Not likely. Apple's afraid to do that...
I think it's more a case of Apple has no motivation to spend the time and money doing that since it doesn't get them anything.
Maybe they could be nice?
Why does Apple want to make you download and install Safari?
Because this is a demo of Safari's new HTML5 support. If you don't have Safari, you can't see what Safari's support is. This page is aimed at normal users or potential users of Safari.
So why not show what the other browser won't do it, but safari will - in video?
Since they are already checking your browser to see the demo, why not have an alternative video file for each demo if your current browser doesn't support the individual demo?
Because they didn't think of it or get around to it? Besides, interactive features are much cooler because you can actually play around with them.
Didn't think my ass. And get around to it? Ditto.
What is Apple afraid of?
Why didn't you make the demos yourself post them somewhere and link to them. Are you just incompetent? What are you afraid of?
So, you want me to install Windows on my computer, (and given your fanboy status, I don't think you really want me to do that), or buy a Mac (you'd like that, wouldn't you?) so that I can promote Apple products? Are they going to pay me? Please look at your first comment to my posting for more information.
Safari for Linux? Not likely. Apple's afraid to do that, or maybe just not competent enough to do it (which I doubt). Or maybe they are just too arrogant and self-centered.
Why does Apple want to make you download and install Safari?
Since they are already checking your browser to see the demo, why not have an alternative video file for each demo if your current browser doesn't support the individual demo? Why not try to show what their browser can do instead of making you install it in order to see what it can do. They could even put 1080 videos on Youtube (oops, that might allow someone to comment on the video).
That's an interesting statement coming from a guy that was quite heavily into psychedelic drugs (and who knows what else) at one point in his adult, corporate life. I'm not saying he's not right about not wanting to sell porn, but definitely sanctimonious, especially if he hasn't claimed to have cleaned up his act (I-found-Jesus sort of statement).
I have great respect for the OpenBSD folks. Their focus on security was a result of needing to distinguish themselves in the free marketplace. Back in the late 90's it was necessary to focus on something to keep from being lost in the fray. I don't believe it was their altruism that pushed them to that focus as much as they had some good expertise and made the most of it for marketing.
Like I said, I have great respect for them, but let's not put them up on a pedestal that is too high. They have made some security mistakes in the past, and they've fixed them pretty well, too. They are human just like the rest of us.
If every other cell phone manufacturer pooled resources against the lawsuit, Apple wouldn't have a prayer, particularly if they all counter sue with all of their patents aimed directly at Apple's infringements. Why let one guy fight the bully? Gang up on the rat and send him to the hospital so he won't ever try it again.
I *HATE* bing. No, really. I HATE bing. Yahoo a wildly popular search engine? Only because the people already using it are too afraid to use anything else. Google is vastly superior in every way to Yaho's search. That move was a giant step backwards!!!!!
Between the troubles faced in the US domestic economy, the conflicts in the Middle East and Asia, health care reform, and setting a good example for his daughters, Obama is a man to be respected for his accomplishments during the past year.
What? What? I'm sorry, but what did you say? Huh? What? Oh, sarcasm!!!:) Sorry, I'm so slow! Please disregard my questions.
Wow! Gates and Balmer as Dominatrices getting billions of dollars from the masses for inflicting pain. Didn't everyone realize that if they weren't getting pleasure from the pain that they were wasting their money? Ohhh, the horror that has been wrought in my brain of the mental picture of that pair in latex and thigh-high stiletto boots!!! Too bad I can't un-imagine it!! Quick! Someone kill me!
Microsoft wants to call black white, while also calling it black and gray. What kind of arrogance makes them think that they can define all terms and create all definitions, and not have people question them?
My neighbor is a super Apple fanboy. Anything Apple is perfect. He says that it is because of the "experience" he has with Apple products. He feels like they are so much better than everyone that they should protect their IP at all costs. I told him how they basically borrowed all the windowed interface experience from Xerox PARC, to which he said, "If Xerox didn't copyright, patent or otherwise protect their IP, then Apple would be perfectly within their right to do it so that they can protect their IP." I told him he was stupid (not in those words, but in that spirit).
Amen. I'm paying for my family to go on a trip to Disneyland with extra money I've made from neighbors who can't figure their "Dang Windows computers," and I go over and help them out. I do have to thank Microsoft for providing me with a good steady stream of extra income.
I've given several people a couple of minutes prep on Linux, and then let them go on their own. Only the dumbest of the bunch had trouble. Everyone else was fine, and even liked it more than Windows. So I guess my experience makes it more like 75/25 in favor of Linux (and in my case, the dumb one being the only one with a problem and that was because it wasn't like the Windows he'd been using for years - I bet he'd have been fine if he hadn't started with windows). Granted also, I did pick bright people for my subjects (with the one exception), because I knew they could handle the change better. But not because Windows is easier than Windows. Brighter people tend to be able to change environments more easily.
Now that doesn't mean that all those people stayed on Linux. They had to have Windows for some applications that they ran (like Quickbooks), but they would have liked to have used Linux if there had been the application support.
I've used Unix/Linux since 1980 for work, and since 1992 at home. I'd hate to have to give it up for Windows. Yes, I use Windows plenty (unfortunately) and I support several businesses and many homes that use it. It's kind of like being a Doctor - I'm treating a crippling disease without having to have the disease myself.:):)
Slashdot Mirror
The first thing you do when you find your company is getting ready to spiral into the toilet is to introduce a new logo. Right?
Instead of charging $50 with DRM, charge $10 with no DRM. That would be a less expensive to produce and support. In addition, MANY more people would be willing to pay just $10. If even 50% were pirates, they make up the lost income from the lower price through additional sales, less support costs, and less development/licensing for DRM. And talk about customer satisfaction!!! They just don't get it through, do they?
Let's use "gratis" and "liberated" software, and maybe throw in a "pro bono" for good measure. It will properly distinguish the intent.
Apple is NOT (I repeat - NOT) afraid of being sued - even less afraid of a _threat_ of being sued. Especially the nickel and dime stuff that would be done for App Store _potential_ violations. Apple just wants to make more money off the App Store, so they reject as much good free stuff as possible, so that people will go _buy_ the non-free apps, so that they can make their (more than fair) share.
gimp Noun: 1. Twisted silk or cotton with cord or wire running through it, used chiefly in upholstery. 2. offensive. A physically handicapped or lame person.
Then we can see what happens. :)
You are just spreading FUD. Windows 8 competes with Windows 7 and they have to allow users to upgrade with an old PC. It would be stupid to implement an OS that requires a Secure Boot mode, because it would mean that mean that users would have to buy new hardware.
Ummm... no. If the "Windows 8" certification requires Secure Boot, it doesn't mean that Windows 8 will only work on that hardware, it means that hardware would only work with Windows 8 (unless they also supply a way to turn the secure boot requirement off). The "buy new hardware" would only affect people who are ... "buying new hardware."
Even if they did, there will be anti-trust litigation in both the US or EU. Microsoft has been in trouble in the past for bundling software, which is a far less serious offense than actually locking out the competition. Any attempt would just be negative publicity and could potentially bar them from selling in a major market.
Tell me... When has Microsoft ever let anti-trust legislation stop them from doing something monopolistic? ... Never! They do it, then fight in court until they loose. It's like they will steal from others until someone stands up to them, then they continue to steal, until they are found guilty, and then still continue to steal until someone comes along and hits them up the side of the head.
It would be a stupid business decision especially when over 95% of consumers prefer Windows over Linux anyways. There is little to gain for Microsoft and a lot to lose
Don't be so naive as to think that this is only about the desktop. The Internet is run mostly on Linux, NOT Windows. If you include all devices that run some version of Linux to all devices that run some version of Windows, Linux wins. Period. That doesn't mean that this isn't mostly about the desktop. If and when Microsoft comes out with a Windows 8 tablet version, if they put the same restriction on that hardware (again, FOR Windows 8 Certification, not that Windows 8 would run on other hardware that isn't certified), then it would be useless to try to run Android on the tablet (even though it would probably improve the tablet significantly). This is all about control. Microsoft wants to be in control. They see the market slipping away from them as the mobile market takes control of personal computing. The only way they could insure they would have some hardware penetration into the mobile phone market was to buy Nokia. Right now there are twice as many Android phones as there are iPhones in the US, and Microsoft hardly registers as an "also ran." What does their future look like, really? They have to find a way to get control back, or they will loose it all eventually.
I can think of a gesture that I'd like to wave at Apple and Microsoft.
One of the things that most interests me in this type of discussion is the fear that people have of Mormon baptism for the dead. Let's look at this for a second. If the Mormons are right (God exists and accepts that baptism for entrance into "heaven"), then the baptism might be helpful (if the dead person accepts the baptism). If the Mormons are wrong, then what harm did it do the dead person? It certainly can't condemn them (since they weren't involved). So the fact is - it is either valuable, or inconsequential. There is NO other possibility. So I ask, why all the fuss? Really!!
Well at least there were three of us. I quite looked forward to the new episodes each week. I think that there was more to the show than most people cared to figure out. It was definitely more gritty and more of a moral dilemma show. Not many shows would have written a story where the captain suffocates one of his men to make it so that he didn't have to die alone when he was left behind. I thought much of the stuff was very thought provoking. I'll miss it.
Well that would be the second best. The best would be to just die.
Jobs is just a big baby. He doesn't play well with others. He gets upset when he doesn't get his way. The only way he lets you play with his toys is if you pay him. I bet he even wears diapers.
Safari for Linux? Not likely. Apple's afraid to do that...
I think it's more a case of Apple has no motivation to spend the time and money doing that since it doesn't get them anything.
Maybe they could be nice?
Why does Apple want to make you download and install Safari?
Because this is a demo of Safari's new HTML5 support. If you don't have Safari, you can't see what Safari's support is. This page is aimed at normal users or potential users of Safari.
So why not show what the other browser won't do it, but safari will - in video?
Since they are already checking your browser to see the demo, why not have an alternative video file for each demo if your current browser doesn't support the individual demo?
Because they didn't think of it or get around to it? Besides, interactive features are much cooler because you can actually play around with them.
Didn't think my ass. And get around to it? Ditto.
What is Apple afraid of?
Why didn't you make the demos yourself post them somewhere and link to them. Are you just incompetent? What are you afraid of?
So, you want me to install Windows on my computer, (and given your fanboy status, I don't think you really want me to do that), or buy a Mac (you'd like that, wouldn't you?) so that I can promote Apple products? Are they going to pay me? Please look at your first comment to my posting for more information.
Safari for Linux? Not likely. Apple's afraid to do that, or maybe just not competent enough to do it (which I doubt). Or maybe they are just too arrogant and self-centered.
Why does Apple want to make you download and install Safari?
Since they are already checking your browser to see the demo, why not have an alternative video file for each demo if your current browser doesn't support the individual demo? Why not try to show what their browser can do instead of making you install it in order to see what it can do. They could even put 1080 videos on Youtube (oops, that might allow someone to comment on the video).
What is Apple afraid of?
That's an interesting statement coming from a guy that was quite heavily into psychedelic drugs (and who knows what else) at one point in his adult, corporate life. I'm not saying he's not right about not wanting to sell porn, but definitely sanctimonious, especially if he hasn't claimed to have cleaned up his act (I-found-Jesus sort of statement).
I have great respect for the OpenBSD folks. Their focus on security was a result of needing to distinguish themselves in the free marketplace. Back in the late 90's it was necessary to focus on something to keep from being lost in the fray. I don't believe it was their altruism that pushed them to that focus as much as they had some good expertise and made the most of it for marketing. Like I said, I have great respect for them, but let's not put them up on a pedestal that is too high. They have made some security mistakes in the past, and they've fixed them pretty well, too. They are human just like the rest of us.
If every other cell phone manufacturer pooled resources against the lawsuit, Apple wouldn't have a prayer, particularly if they all counter sue with all of their patents aimed directly at Apple's infringements. Why let one guy fight the bully? Gang up on the rat and send him to the hospital so he won't ever try it again.
I *HATE* bing. No, really. I HATE bing. Yahoo a wildly popular search engine? Only because the people already using it are too afraid to use anything else. Google is vastly superior in every way to Yaho's search. That move was a giant step backwards!!!!!
Between the troubles faced in the US domestic economy, the conflicts in the Middle East and Asia, health care reform, and setting a good example for his daughters, Obama is a man to be respected for his accomplishments during the past year.
What? What? I'm sorry, but what did you say? Huh? What? Oh, sarcasm!!! :) Sorry, I'm so slow! Please disregard my questions.
Wow! Gates and Balmer as Dominatrices getting billions of dollars from the masses for inflicting pain. Didn't everyone realize that if they weren't getting pleasure from the pain that they were wasting their money? Ohhh, the horror that has been wrought in my brain of the mental picture of that pair in latex and thigh-high stiletto boots!!! Too bad I can't un-imagine it!! Quick! Someone kill me!
Now I understand what was in the thick goo everyone was sleeping in in "The Matrix!"
Microsoft wants to call black white, while also calling it black and gray. What kind of arrogance makes them think that they can define all terms and create all definitions, and not have people question them?
My neighbor is a super Apple fanboy. Anything Apple is perfect. He says that it is because of the "experience" he has with Apple products. He feels like they are so much better than everyone that they should protect their IP at all costs. I told him how they basically borrowed all the windowed interface experience from Xerox PARC, to which he said, "If Xerox didn't copyright, patent or otherwise protect their IP, then Apple would be perfectly within their right to do it so that they can protect their IP." I told him he was stupid (not in those words, but in that spirit).
Amen. I'm paying for my family to go on a trip to Disneyland with extra money I've made from neighbors who can't figure their "Dang Windows computers," and I go over and help them out. I do have to thank Microsoft for providing me with a good steady stream of extra income.
I've given several people a couple of minutes prep on Linux, and then let them go on their own. Only the dumbest of the bunch had trouble. Everyone else was fine, and even liked it more than Windows. So I guess my experience makes it more like 75/25 in favor of Linux (and in my case, the dumb one being the only one with a problem and that was because it wasn't like the Windows he'd been using for years - I bet he'd have been fine if he hadn't started with windows). Granted also, I did pick bright people for my subjects (with the one exception), because I knew they could handle the change better. But not because Windows is easier than Windows. Brighter people tend to be able to change environments more easily.
Now that doesn't mean that all those people stayed on Linux. They had to have Windows for some applications that they ran (like Quickbooks), but they would have liked to have used Linux if there had been the application support.
I've used Unix/Linux since 1980 for work, and since 1992 at home. I'd hate to have to give it up for Windows. Yes, I use Windows plenty (unfortunately) and I support several businesses and many homes that use it. It's kind of like being a Doctor - I'm treating a crippling disease without having to have the disease myself. :) :)