... that by banning Google from reprinting their stories, they have shot themselves in the revenue-hungry foot. Without Google serving up ads for them or redirects to their pages that contain ads, I predict a massive drop in their internet based income. It could very well be enough to kill the already fragile print media (or at least that one outlet).
Eventually news corporations will realize that they need Google a hell of a lot more than Google needs them.
(It's kind of scary that Google has become so powerful that they can order news corporations around, but I'd rather it be them in power than the news co's.)
Sure, it can be used on older machines, but what will the performance costs be? Is it going to be prohibitive to the actual functionality of the system (which, in UNIX, is what most users are using it for)?
Agreed. One would have to assume that there would be a high likelyhood that people who would fall for a phishing attack would be the same kinds of people who are uneducated about internet security, hence, strong password usage.
Not only that, but in selecting Myspace to study strength of passwords, you're going to come to the conclusion that everyone on the planet is a moron. It would be like judging the intelligence of the average person by giving IQ tests during American Idol.
They mention the blue light necessity of this system, but they never really explain why it has to be blue light or what the light itself does (unless I've become illiterate). Can anyone explain (or at least make something plausible up) the whole blue light component of this mechanism?
As for valuing the drivel on the radio, well, that is your personal opinion. I am sure that what you heard when you were in your teens would have been derided as drivel by you elders, so making such a comment says more about you and your age than about the children, which in any case have the right to decide if a radio is a desirable feature or not in a portable music player, subjective musical or aesthetic judgments aside.
I'm 22. It really has more to do with the complete lack of artistic merit that modern pop music has. It's more inane than the music of previous generations, and instead of espousing values such as rebellion or peace and love, it espouses an illiterate, "gangsta" lifestyle that children too young and/or stupid to see through emulate out of a complete lack of other stimuli and a lack of a proper education (be it scholastic or parental) that tells them what is right and wrong.
I'd argue that it has more to do with my exposure to a wide range of music and my education than with my age, as, well, I'm still a youngster.
Also, for clarification, by "the radio", I mean modern media outlets (Myspace, MTV, radio, Hollywood movies, etc...)
Microsoft said no such thing. They stated that they think that Windows, in it's current OS-on-a-DVD-that-you-install-on-a-PC form probably wouldn't exist. They're thinking of expanding it to a network or web-based OS environment based on the idea that people will have less and less to do with actual physical PC's and will be using more distributed computing methods (smartphones, consoles, laptops, etc...).
What you suggested is not only false, but it's inflammatory. You should be ashamed!
But the difference is that there was a void where the MP3 could fit. There was nothing like it before it came out.
OGG and AAC and so on won't catch on because for 99% of people, their purpose is already served by MP3's. And as much as audiophiles want to be pretentious and argue the point, most people can't hear the difference between 192kbps MP3 and anything above that.
How long will it be until you hear Indian comedians complaining about calling tech support only to have some stupid American speaking gibberish to them over the phone?
You're falling into the trap of assuming that we are the average consumer group, when in reality, the average iPod consumer is the 14 year old kid whose parents bought him or her and iPod for a birthday present to keep the kid from bitching about how all of his friends have one, but they don't.
Do you think that a kid who believes 50 Cent to be the voice of his generation is going to have any idea about open formats and removable memory/battery benefits?
Just because a group happens to be VERY vocal about their desires, they are not necessarily the majority, or even the most desired demographic.
- You can't retrieve Songs from the iPod. (yes there are programms available)
Sure, but the only real reason one would need to retrieve songs from an iPod would be after a re-format, and god knows that the average user simply does not reformat all that often. Hence this DRM is not really a worry for them.
- Content purchased at iTunes has DRM on it. (yes there are programms or
you could burn a purchased track and then rip/mix/burn it to remove
the DRM.
Agreed, but I would be willing to bet that the majority of iPod owners get their music from CD's that are ripped into iTunes. While the iTMS may be terribly successful as an online retailer, it's still got a ways to go before it catches up with physical album sales. This DRM, while inconvenient to the/. crowd, also doesn't do much to the average user either. Besides, the/. crowd is the ones who know of ways around these restrictions.
I've always had a theory that the DRM on iPod's is so easy to break by intention. Apple may be being forced to apply some DRM, but they don't have to put good DRM in place.
If they can make a system of automatically piloted vehicles within the ancient, twisted roads of Europe, it would be almost effortless to convert a similar system to the (comparatively) modern roads of America. Given our vast stretches of highway, an automated system could make long distance road travel less expensive and almost as effortless as train or even plane travel.
And your car probably wouldn't want to inspect your shoes before you get in either.
Agreed. So, given those points, you have to conclude that either there is no lasting effect or that it is so difficult to quantify as to be virtually neglible for any real person.
IANAAE (I Am Not An Apple Engineer), but I imagine that adding such a feature would inherently add some amount of extra work to their schedule (and thusly to the cost of the unit itself). Why would Apple want to add a feature that is only important to an extremely small minority, that may add quite a bit to the overall cost of either the R&D or the unit itself?
As much as I'm going to be burned alive for saying this, the reality is that no one outside of the Slashdot/IT/geek-cred camp cares (or even knows) about OGG support. You could do a poll of 100 people anywhere on the planet and maybe 1 or 2 of them would know what OGG is, and of those 1 or 2, I'd be amazed if they would request it on a DAP.
People know what an MP3 is, and talking about OGG and AAC and Apple Lossless just confuses them. Confusion leads to aversion. Aversion leads to fewer sales for Apple. Hence, you're going to have to get by without your OGG supporting iPod.
There is only one thing that could actively cripple the iPod, and that is DRM.
Apple's machine has an insurmountable mindshare lead on the competition. They have reached the point where their product name is synonymous with it's purpose. Tell 50 people that you're going to the store to buy a DAP and they'll have no idea what you're talking about, but if you tell them you're going to buy an iPod, they'll smile and tell you all about how they think iPod's are the bee's knees.
However, if Apple falls into the trap of DRMing the iPod/iTunes interface to the point where it becomes too difficult for the average person to use quickly and efficiently (read: anything that takes more than 30 seconds will lose the average person's attention span), just to appease the music conglomerates, people will very quickly lose interest.
Luckily for Apple, they're smart enough to know this, and the powers that be in the recording industry are quickly realizing that they need Apple more than Apple needs them.
With that many cellular connections and users, you would think that by now we would have some solid data as to whether they cause the purported issues with irradiation and cancer that people would have you believe, and yet we have no evidence to support the idea that cellular phones have any carcinogenic properties.
Two possibilities come to mind;
Studies simply aren't being performed on this topic (which I doubt, as there are many groups out there who would love to be able to link something this widely used with dangerous cancers, such as the media and environmental activists)
There really is no danger of getting cancer from using a cellular (more likely, as with over a billion connections, we have yet to hear of anyone who actually got cancer and died due to phone usage)
Sorry to be somewhat off-topic, but the FUD surrounding cellular phones (and the fact that it's repeated to me ad nauseam by some of my more luddite co-workers) makes me rather upset.
It's going to be almost impossible for any future MMO to be successful while not borrowing ideas from WoW. It has become the template for success in the MMO market. With 6 million+ subscribers, they must be doing something right.
The real ironic part is that most of the original Warcraft lore was almost blatantly lifted from Warhammer all those years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
... that by banning Google from reprinting their stories, they have shot themselves in the revenue-hungry foot. Without Google serving up ads for them or redirects to their pages that contain ads, I predict a massive drop in their internet based income. It could very well be enough to kill the already fragile print media (or at least that one outlet).
Eventually news corporations will realize that they need Google a hell of a lot more than Google needs them.
(It's kind of scary that Google has become so powerful that they can order news corporations around, but I'd rather it be them in power than the news co's.)
If it's eye-candy, one must ask:
Sure, it can be used on older machines, but what will the performance costs be? Is it going to be prohibitive to the actual functionality of the system (which, in UNIX, is what most users are using it for)?
Agreed. One would have to assume that there would be a high likelyhood that people who would fall for a phishing attack would be the same kinds of people who are uneducated about internet security, hence, strong password usage.
Not only that, but in selecting Myspace to study strength of passwords, you're going to come to the conclusion that everyone on the planet is a moron. It would be like judging the intelligence of the average person by giving IQ tests during American Idol.
They mention the blue light necessity of this system, but they never really explain why it has to be blue light or what the light itself does (unless I've become illiterate). Can anyone explain (or at least make something plausible up) the whole blue light component of this mechanism?
As for valuing the drivel on the radio, well, that is your personal opinion. I am sure that what you heard when you were in your teens would have been derided as drivel by you elders, so making such a comment says more about you and your age than about the children, which in any case have the right to decide if a radio is a desirable feature or not in a portable music player, subjective musical or aesthetic judgments aside.
I'm 22. It really has more to do with the complete lack of artistic merit that modern pop music has. It's more inane than the music of previous generations, and instead of espousing values such as rebellion or peace and love, it espouses an illiterate, "gangsta" lifestyle that children too young and/or stupid to see through emulate out of a complete lack of other stimuli and a lack of a proper education (be it scholastic or parental) that tells them what is right and wrong.
I'd argue that it has more to do with my exposure to a wide range of music and my education than with my age, as, well, I'm still a youngster.
Also, for clarification, by "the radio", I mean modern media outlets (Myspace, MTV, radio, Hollywood movies, etc...)
You're just blatantly FUDing there!
Microsoft said no such thing. They stated that they think that Windows, in it's current OS-on-a-DVD-that-you-install-on-a-PC form probably wouldn't exist. They're thinking of expanding it to a network or web-based OS environment based on the idea that people will have less and less to do with actual physical PC's and will be using more distributed computing methods (smartphones, consoles, laptops, etc...).
What you suggested is not only false, but it's inflammatory. You should be ashamed!
Some of us, however, like to play popular, modern games on our consoles.
I'd like to make the argument that these children were all idiots.
Point 1: They choose $400 gadgets based on fashion.
Point 2: They value the drivel on the radio (I doubt they were missing NPR).
But the difference is that there was a void where the MP3 could fit. There was nothing like it before it came out.
OGG and AAC and so on won't catch on because for 99% of people, their purpose is already served by MP3's. And as much as audiophiles want to be pretentious and argue the point, most people can't hear the difference between 192kbps MP3 and anything above that.
You're right. It's almost like cheating. I'm tempted to do my grad thesis on the psychological gaming of Slashdot.
Eveything becomes less funny when you bring reality into it! Jerk!
How long will it be until you hear Indian comedians complaining about calling tech support only to have some stupid American speaking gibberish to them over the phone?
Correction: Those are things that we ask for.
You're falling into the trap of assuming that we are the average consumer group, when in reality, the average iPod consumer is the 14 year old kid whose parents bought him or her and iPod for a birthday present to keep the kid from bitching about how all of his friends have one, but they don't.
Do you think that a kid who believes 50 Cent to be the voice of his generation is going to have any idea about open formats and removable memory/battery benefits?
Just because a group happens to be VERY vocal about their desires, they are not necessarily the majority, or even the most desired demographic.
- You can't retrieve Songs from the iPod. (yes there are programms available)
/. crowd, also doesn't do much to the average user either. Besides, the /. crowd is the ones who know of ways around these restrictions.
Sure, but the only real reason one would need to retrieve songs from an iPod would be after a re-format, and god knows that the average user simply does not reformat all that often. Hence this DRM is not really a worry for them.
- Content purchased at iTunes has DRM on it. (yes there are programms or you could burn a purchased track and then rip/mix/burn it to remove the DRM.
Agreed, but I would be willing to bet that the majority of iPod owners get their music from CD's that are ripped into iTunes. While the iTMS may be terribly successful as an online retailer, it's still got a ways to go before it catches up with physical album sales. This DRM, while inconvenient to the
I've always had a theory that the DRM on iPod's is so easy to break by intention. Apple may be being forced to apply some DRM, but they don't have to put good DRM in place.
Wake me when a samurai-sword-wielding pizza man starts spreading ancient Babylonian curses.
I'm hoping this project is wonderfully succesful.
If they can make a system of automatically piloted vehicles within the ancient, twisted roads of Europe, it would be almost effortless to convert a similar system to the (comparatively) modern roads of America. Given our vast stretches of highway, an automated system could make long distance road travel less expensive and almost as effortless as train or even plane travel.
And your car probably wouldn't want to inspect your shoes before you get in either.
Agreed. So, given those points, you have to conclude that either there is no lasting effect or that it is so difficult to quantify as to be virtually neglible for any real person.
IANAAE (I Am Not An Apple Engineer), but I imagine that adding such a feature would inherently add some amount of extra work to their schedule (and thusly to the cost of the unit itself). Why would Apple want to add a feature that is only important to an extremely small minority, that may add quite a bit to the overall cost of either the R&D or the unit itself?
As much as I'm going to be burned alive for saying this, the reality is that no one outside of the Slashdot/IT/geek-cred camp cares (or even knows) about OGG support. You could do a poll of 100 people anywhere on the planet and maybe 1 or 2 of them would know what OGG is, and of those 1 or 2, I'd be amazed if they would request it on a DAP.
People know what an MP3 is, and talking about OGG and AAC and Apple Lossless just confuses them. Confusion leads to aversion. Aversion leads to fewer sales for Apple. Hence, you're going to have to get by without your OGG supporting iPod.
Correction: Apple sabotaged Motorola's ability to be the one profitting from that phone.
Eventually you'll see your iPhone, but that time will not be until Apple is the only force behind it.
There is only one thing that could actively cripple the iPod, and that is DRM.
Apple's machine has an insurmountable mindshare lead on the competition. They have reached the point where their product name is synonymous with it's purpose. Tell 50 people that you're going to the store to buy a DAP and they'll have no idea what you're talking about, but if you tell them you're going to buy an iPod, they'll smile and tell you all about how they think iPod's are the bee's knees.
However, if Apple falls into the trap of DRMing the iPod/iTunes interface to the point where it becomes too difficult for the average person to use quickly and efficiently (read: anything that takes more than 30 seconds will lose the average person's attention span), just to appease the music conglomerates, people will very quickly lose interest.
Luckily for Apple, they're smart enough to know this, and the powers that be in the recording industry are quickly realizing that they need Apple more than Apple needs them.
Two possibilities come to mind;
- Studies simply aren't being performed on this topic (which I doubt, as there are many groups out there who would love to be able to link something this widely used with dangerous cancers, such as the media and environmental activists)
- There really is no danger of getting cancer from using a cellular (more likely, as with over a billion connections, we have yet to hear of anyone who actually got cancer and died due to phone usage)
Sorry to be somewhat off-topic, but the FUD surrounding cellular phones (and the fact that it's repeated to me ad nauseam by some of my more luddite co-workers) makes me rather upset.Isn't that kind of a skewed way to look at it?
Sure, people may have been playing that many hours, but that doesn't mean they were doing it to the exclusion of work or school at the time.
Maybe these people actually play CS in their leisure time! *gasp*
You say that like it's a bad thing!
I'm looking forward to many nights killing puny humans and offering handfuls of cash while saying "Shake it mainframe!"
It's going to be almost impossible for any future MMO to be successful while not borrowing ideas from WoW. It has become the template for success in the MMO market. With 6 million+ subscribers, they must be doing something right.
The real ironic part is that most of the original Warcraft lore was almost blatantly lifted from Warhammer all those years ago.