Let's be honest here, the only people that truly cares about these particular details are the nerd-types, and while we are at it, let's be honest enough to say that we are a minority. I would bet that if you approached ten people that you normally wouldn't associate with (or they wouldn't normally associate with you) and ask them what a "lossless" or "lossy" format is, nine or ten of them will say "huh?". In short, most people don't really care about that.
It might be more appropriate to say "They care, they just don't know it." All the people who have iPods and huge iTMS libraries likely just continue buying iPods. Other players are no longer an option to them, unless they want to burn-rerip. 5-10 years down the road when there is more competition in the portable "digital audio" player market (or even home stereo "digital audio" player market), they will be more likely to care. Whether they'll realize that they had an option not to buy compressed DRM'd music at that point is unknown though.
Keep in mind that my parents' generation still owns many of their records from over 30 years ago.
what you download isn't DVD-Video, but can then be burned to DVD, at which point it is converted to DVD-Video and will playback on any DVD player.
You bring up a good point. If it is converting some file format such as H.264 or more likely WMV to create DVDs, the quality is going to be awful. That may be acceptable for iPods and ripped movies, but it is not acceptable for bought-and-burned DVDs for watching on your home theater.
The iriver clix sure does. It looks much better, has a potentially more intuitive (and customizable) touchscreen interface, doesn't waste space where a screen could/should be, and isn't too outrageous of a price. Works with Unbox too, which unfortunately isn't seeming to get as many shows as iTMS, but is still decent. Only real question is how good its software is compared to iTunes.
Apparently their marketing sucks though, as even though it got great reviews and top ratings, I never hear it mentioned in these discussions.
Yeah, but these "databases" will be extremely tiny. Think "up to a couple megs". Give it a standard format, a few namespaces and version numbers and just distribute it any way possible. Rapidshare, overseas hosting, P2P, IRC, anything... Eventually a couple cracker groups (the "namespaces" mentioned previously) will maintain a consistently versioned database that just grows, accepting keys from anyone to keep it up to date.
This may be the first I've heard of a _software_ maker giving out _hardware_ as a freebie, but maybe they just wanted to be sure Vista runs flawlessly and didn't want to chance that with the recipients' extant hardware.
I tend to agree with your take on this. I think it has more to do with a controlled platform than bribery. Even if they can't control the actual users' configuration, by giving away laptops, at least they can control the reviewers' config. The Acer laptop probably received more extensive testing to ensure the reviewers will not run into any issues that they might then complain about in their reviews.
I also read an article that mentioned that the Congresspeople add "tributes" to the Record. Entire sections honoring usually local hometown heroes with praise and thanks are added, when they didn't really say any of that at all. It sounded like it was quite common to add tributes to the record, which is fine I guess. It would be better if they actually said it. But it makes me really wonder what else they add or remove. It's much more than just correcting pronunciation errors and the like.
I just was speaking with someone from Oracle recently who told me how in an environment with a lot of Linuxes connected to a lot of SANs, the 2.4 kernel was complete junk. He did say things were getting better with the 2.6.
That seems bass ackwards to me. I admit I don't administer linux servers for a living, but every web host I've used is still using 2.4, for reasons of stability and security. If there was a substantial benefit to using the latest 2.6, wouldn't they switch? To me, 2.6 has been about improving the desktop, especially related to media apps, device support, and features related to laptops. Finer grained kernel locking, better responsiveness, lower latency, better wireless support, improving hibernation, improving boot time, etc. are all improvements of the 2.6 kernel (and related userland work) over 2.4.*
That's not to minimize the work done in 2.6 for the enterprise, but I think it makes more sense to assume that work is being done on both fronts.
*As far as this humble n00b knows from occasional reading and usage. Some of that could be userland and also apply to 2.4 for all I know.
Would a book publisher seriously consider adding in some full page adds in the middle of a novel? Of course not, so why do they think they can get away with it games?
The reason they are considering it is because they see "mind share" leaving television and movies for video games, a trend that will likely continue. The advertisers want to place their advertising anywhere that has the most viewers/participants. They are willing to pay game studios money to put the ads in the games, and the game studios have a hard time turning down money.
As long as people increasingly turn to games for entertainment, advertisers still want their ads seen, game studios want extra money, and people don't get overly annoyed by ads to the point of not buying the games, it will continue to get worse.
The article also grossly exaggerates the savings buying from allofmp3.com:
AllofMP3 typically charges under $1 for an entire album and just cents per track. By contrast, an album at Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes Music Store and other licensed services typically costs about $10 and a song 99 cents.
What they don't mention is that the price is variable based on bandwidth, and the $1/album figure is basically impossible to find on the site.
I just randomly checked Taylor Hicks' album (not a fan of his). It is 12 tracks long, so it's slightly below average length. Default 192 kbps is $1.81. The cheapest you can get it for is 128 kbps for $1.33. CD-equivalent lossless is $7.15. WAV, the format of an actual CD, is $11.23.
All of those figures are "typically" slightly more for an average ~14 track album. Everyone I've heard of buying songs from allofmp3.com usually buys ~320 kbps or lossless, for 3-6 times as much as the article states is the "typical" cost.
For the longest albums, lossless ends up costing more than the CD. But allofmp3.com gives the customer the chance to decide how much they're willing to spend in relation to the quality they want. Meanwhile iTunes charges more than the fraction of an album that a particular track is for a fixed 128 kbps version. Only when buying whole albums at once is iTunes a better deal than CD, albeit at reduced quality.
You can "transfer" (spend) them over there now. AllTunes is the software for browsing AllOfMp3.com's catalog. It is the same company. Same catalog. Different browsing/download method.
If you try to send the email without attachments, you are warned about it and asked to confirm your action.
Added option to scan messages for "attachment keywords". If the message contains some of the user defined keywords and has no attachments, you are warned about it.
My current dual 1.6 GHz Opteron system can't do it in real time. Doesn't even come close.
CoreAVC's requirements for 1080p24 are: # 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 or faster processor # At least 1GB of RAM # 256MB or greater video card
So if you have a good video card, I don't see why your dual Opteron couldn't do it with CoreAVC. Quicktime is a different story though. But Quicktime has the worst performance of practically any H.264 player/decoder.
Hmm...you're right. It's* a step towards the Semantic Web, but only a subset. Maybe referring to it as MVC would have been more appropriate. Anyway.
* I know the correct usage of its and it's, but I still have to consciously think about which one to use. It doesn't come naturally to me. That time fell into the 5% I don't catch.
I believe not allowing target= anymore has more to do with semantic web stuff. It's presentation/functionality, and doesn't belong in the HTML (in theory). What it really means, though, is everyone will use annoying javascript like the one mentioned a few parents up for a while, until they all figure out that you can apply the javascript to certain classes or rels.
Btw, popup windows do have their purposes, such as music players that should remain running even while you're browsing other pages, or in some cases toolbox-type windows. At least with target= you can override it's default behavior by Ctrl-clicking or right-click->new tab.
Another option is to use the Coral Cache version of our site (particularly if you are just looking for information) by just clicking on this link: http://www.funagain.com.nyud.net:8090/
Ha, if you click that link from here you still get the slashdot message.
If you're going to get something other than an iPod, you should take a look at iriver clix. It's got good reviews, it's loaded but simple, and looks damn sexy. If it came in a 8 GB or more version, I'd probably own one already.
Sounds like you're talking about server use while they tested workstation use. It looks like they called it "server/workstation" class, whatever that means.
"Soon, the article asserts, the very same p2p-style networks that 'threatened' legitimate business may be the basis for most video-on-demand services."
This has been said many times in the past few years, but it's still not feasible. One big reason YouTube is popular is because it is "Instant-On." No waiting for it to download. Generally no waiting for "buffering."
BitTorrent and the like are incompatible with that feature. BitTorrent does not download videos (or any other file) in order, and it's actually somewhat harmful to the torrent to distribute the same chunks to everybody. BitTorrent works so well because it gives everybody on the torrent unique chunks to pass along. Not good for streaming.
Secondly, ISPs drastically limit upload. This means that to get even close to realtime streaming downloads, the seeders (the content provider in this case) need to have massive bandwidth available. Otherwise, it will take to long for the torrent to really get going with other seeders, and the first ~50 people will have to wait to watch. So you're back to having powerful centralized servers again.
Plus, what benefit do I have for letting them use my upload? With most broadband connections, saturating the upload makes browsing at the same time slow with high latency. It might make sense for community sharing, where the content provider can't afford the bandwidth, and therefore I would want to contribute, but it doesn't make sense for companies to demand that of me.
Slashdot Mirror
It might be more appropriate to say "They care, they just don't know it." All the people who have iPods and huge iTMS libraries likely just continue buying iPods. Other players are no longer an option to them, unless they want to burn-rerip. 5-10 years down the road when there is more competition in the portable "digital audio" player market (or even home stereo "digital audio" player market), they will be more likely to care. Whether they'll realize that they had an option not to buy compressed DRM'd music at that point is unknown though.
Keep in mind that my parents' generation still owns many of their records from over 30 years ago.
You bring up a good point. If it is converting some file format such as H.264 or more likely WMV to create DVDs, the quality is going to be awful. That may be acceptable for iPods and ripped movies, but it is not acceptable for bought-and-burned DVDs for watching on your home theater.
He wears a lot of hats. He's also been working for Barclay's (banking) in the UK for the past 30 years.
The iriver clix sure does. It looks much better, has a potentially more intuitive (and customizable) touchscreen interface, doesn't waste space where a screen could/should be, and isn't too outrageous of a price. Works with Unbox too, which unfortunately isn't seeming to get as many shows as iTMS, but is still decent. Only real question is how good its software is compared to iTunes.
Apparently their marketing sucks though, as even though it got great reviews and top ratings, I never hear it mentioned in these discussions.
Yeah, but these "databases" will be extremely tiny. Think "up to a couple megs". Give it a standard format, a few namespaces and version numbers and just distribute it any way possible. Rapidshare, overseas hosting, P2P, IRC, anything... Eventually a couple cracker groups (the "namespaces" mentioned previously) will maintain a consistently versioned database that just grows, accepting keys from anyone to keep it up to date.
I tend to agree with your take on this. I think it has more to do with a controlled platform than bribery. Even if they can't control the actual users' configuration, by giving away laptops, at least they can control the reviewers' config. The Acer laptop probably received more extensive testing to ensure the reviewers will not run into any issues that they might then complain about in their reviews.
I also read an article that mentioned that the Congresspeople add "tributes" to the Record. Entire sections honoring usually local hometown heroes with praise and thanks are added, when they didn't really say any of that at all. It sounded like it was quite common to add tributes to the record, which is fine I guess. It would be better if they actually said it. But it makes me really wonder what else they add or remove. It's much more than just correcting pronunciation errors and the like.
That seems bass ackwards to me. I admit I don't administer linux servers for a living, but every web host I've used is still using 2.4, for reasons of stability and security. If there was a substantial benefit to using the latest 2.6, wouldn't they switch? To me, 2.6 has been about improving the desktop, especially related to media apps, device support, and features related to laptops. Finer grained kernel locking, better responsiveness, lower latency, better wireless support, improving hibernation, improving boot time, etc. are all improvements of the 2.6 kernel (and related userland work) over 2.4.*
That's not to minimize the work done in 2.6 for the enterprise, but I think it makes more sense to assume that work is being done on both fronts.
*As far as this humble n00b knows from occasional reading and usage. Some of that could be userland and also apply to 2.4 for all I know.
You could just host your Blogger content on your own host instead of blogspot.com.
Only blogspot.com's TOS forces you to display their ads, not Blogger's.
The reason they are considering it is because they see "mind share" leaving television and movies for video games, a trend that will likely continue. The advertisers want to place their advertising anywhere that has the most viewers/participants. They are willing to pay game studios money to put the ads in the games, and the game studios have a hard time turning down money.
As long as people increasingly turn to games for entertainment, advertisers still want their ads seen, game studios want extra money, and people don't get overly annoyed by ads to the point of not buying the games, it will continue to get worse.
What they don't mention is that the price is variable based on bandwidth, and the $1/album figure is basically impossible to find on the site.
I just randomly checked Taylor Hicks' album (not a fan of his). It is 12 tracks long, so it's slightly below average length. Default 192 kbps is $1.81. The cheapest you can get it for is 128 kbps for $1.33. CD-equivalent lossless is $7.15. WAV, the format of an actual CD, is $11.23.
All of those figures are "typically" slightly more for an average ~14 track album. Everyone I've heard of buying songs from allofmp3.com usually buys ~320 kbps or lossless, for 3-6 times as much as the article states is the "typical" cost.
For the longest albums, lossless ends up costing more than the CD. But allofmp3.com gives the customer the chance to decide how much they're willing to spend in relation to the quality they want. Meanwhile iTunes charges more than the fraction of an album that a particular track is for a fixed 128 kbps version. Only when buying whole albums at once is iTunes a better deal than CD, albeit at reduced quality.
You can "transfer" (spend) them over there now. AllTunes is the software for browsing AllOfMp3.com's catalog. It is the same company. Same catalog. Different browsing/download method.
Yeah, it's capable of the Baseline profile and partially supports the Main profile. Quicktime doesn't support any of the following:
You can turn those off in Nero Recode's Standard-AVC profile to make a Quicktime compatible video, or follow this guide for encoding with x264.
Quicktime also obviously doesn't support High profile. A full list of the features it supports is here.
CoreAVC's requirements for 1080p24 are:
# 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 or faster processor
# At least 1GB of RAM
# 256MB or greater video card
So if you have a good video card, I don't see why your dual Opteron couldn't do it with CoreAVC. Quicktime is a different story though. But Quicktime has the worst performance of practically any H.264 player/decoder.
Hmm...you're right. It's* a step towards the Semantic Web, but only a subset. Maybe referring to it as MVC would have been more appropriate. Anyway.
* I know the correct usage of its and it's, but I still have to consciously think about which one to use. It doesn't come naturally to me. That time fell into the 5% I don't catch.
So AOL users can still steal each other's cookies. Guess AOL users are SOL.
I believe not allowing target= anymore has more to do with semantic web stuff. It's presentation/functionality, and doesn't belong in the HTML (in theory). What it really means, though, is everyone will use annoying javascript like the one mentioned a few parents up for a while, until they all figure out that you can apply the javascript to certain classes or rels.
Btw, popup windows do have their purposes, such as music players that should remain running even while you're browsing other pages, or in some cases toolbox-type windows. At least with target= you can override it's default behavior by Ctrl-clicking or right-click->new tab.
I'm with you on that, regardless of its, umm, ambiguous name. Block by default, Alt-C to allow.
The alternative, asking on every site, would be very annoying.
Ha, if you click that link from here you still get the slashdot message.
Then you can click it within the message.
Chris Kemp, director of business development, NASA Ames Research Center
NASA Ames Research Center is also the location mentioned in the press release on googlenasa.com
If you're going to get something other than an iPod, you should take a look at iriver clix. It's got good reviews, it's loaded but simple, and looks damn sexy. If it came in a 8 GB or more version, I'd probably own one already.
Check out the Mac forum of rpc1.org. There are a few apps and the possibility to flash your firmware to make it region free. I'd try the apps first.
Sounds like you're talking about server use while they tested workstation use. It looks like they called it "server/workstation" class, whatever that means.
This has been said many times in the past few years, but it's still not feasible. One big reason YouTube is popular is because it is "Instant-On." No waiting for it to download. Generally no waiting for "buffering."
BitTorrent and the like are incompatible with that feature. BitTorrent does not download videos (or any other file) in order, and it's actually somewhat harmful to the torrent to distribute the same chunks to everybody. BitTorrent works so well because it gives everybody on the torrent unique chunks to pass along. Not good for streaming.
Secondly, ISPs drastically limit upload. This means that to get even close to realtime streaming downloads, the seeders (the content provider in this case) need to have massive bandwidth available. Otherwise, it will take to long for the torrent to really get going with other seeders, and the first ~50 people will have to wait to watch. So you're back to having powerful centralized servers again.
Plus, what benefit do I have for letting them use my upload? With most broadband connections, saturating the upload makes browsing at the same time slow with high latency. It might make sense for community sharing, where the content provider can't afford the bandwidth, and therefore I would want to contribute, but it doesn't make sense for companies to demand that of me.