Windows Vista is coming out as a 're-write' of the code, but I don't believe they are recoding the real legacy parts of the Windows code. I think Microsoft needs to do away with native legacy support like Apple did, but keep it around with emulation. If WINE can reverse engineer the Windows layer, than why can't Microsoft, with access to the source?
What I thought that Microsoft should have done with the versions of Windows beginning with Windows 95 (which didn't have a completely separate version of MS-DOS within it), was to have no backwards compatibility, but when you install it it gives you the option of retaining your old OS. When needed you could drop back to the old OS for the applications that need it, then return to the current version of Windows when needed with a simple keystroke (like the old TSR programs).
Hmm. Never heard Pixar complain. Did they license, or is this another 'they have less money than us and can't defend' suit?
I think a reason Pixar was able to use the characters they did in the movie The Incredibles is that although they had similarities to the Fantastic Four, each character was also similar to other characters that were published by DC Comics and Marvel Comics. Examples of DC Comics characters with the same abilities as three of the characters off the top of my head:
Mr. Incredible: Blockbuster (a villain), Robotman, Risk (a one-time member of the Teen Titans)
Elastigirl: Elastigirl (a member of the Doom Patrol), and Elongated Man.
Dash: Impulse (now known as Kid Flash) and Xs
The problem with coming up with an original superhero concept is that there are so many characters already out there. The key, now, is creating characters that you want to read about. THAT is where The Incredibles succeeds.
I think a related issue to this is the short-battery life in most portable players, a result of the need to make the players and batteries as small as possible. It seems like even the smallest factor works to decrease battery life. But a question comes to mind: Why is this necessary?
If a device has a battery life of only six hours then even a slight increase in the power drain can dramatically cut the battery life. But if a device has a charge that lasts 24 hours, a loss of an hour or two is not that big a deal to the average user. This could reduce the impact of factors like the codex, DRM, and the bitrate.
With the iPod, I'd be willing to have a larger (size-wise) iPod in exchange for a longer battery life. I take a Sony CD player to work and I can usually get more than 24 hours of play time on a single AA battery when playing MP3 files (per the instruction book it can get up to 41 hours on a single AA if playing ATRAC3 files). The play time is so long that I rarely think of having the change the battery.
Concerning battery life, I'm of the opinion once a device has a play time of more than 16 hours on a single charge, battery life ceases to be a concern because it can playing during all of your waking hours and can be charged while you sleep.
Returning to the topic at hand, I think on of the reasons that the concern over DRM reducing the battery life of players is that the battery life of players itself is an issue.
The best solution would be to just stop listening to music all together. That'd really stick it to the MPAA!
Actually, if people simply reduced the amount of music they purchase it would have a significant effect on the music industry. I think this has happened, but not because of piracy. It has happened because much of the music being released is not what the people want to buy.
A simple equation: Releasing music that people don't want to buy = Lower music sales
This is also a factor in the success or lack of success of new music formats like DVD-Audio and SACD. For most people, CD is a perfectly fine audio format, and it is a well-established standard. It overcame just about all of the problems with the previous formats.
But are the weaknesses of CD enough to make people willing to shell out the money to buy a new format? In addition to cost, the locked-down nature of newer formats (including DRM) will be a disincentive for people to move away from CD.
The test sounds good. The only additions I would add are:
Include at least an hour's worth of tracks in all formats and include a mix of different music types.
Test the tracks on more than one type of player.
The above would reduce the effect of a specific type of player on the results, and of a specific type of music (a heavy metal track might take more computing power to process than a piano solo track).
What is interesting is that when I upgraded the software on my iPod the battery life on the player suddenly increased a great deal. I encode my MP3 files at 192kbs for music files and I was getting about six hours on a charge. After the software upgrade I suddenly had more than eight hours of life on a charge.
Re:Grossing Twice the Cost is a Flop?
on
The Story of Tron
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I think the reason that many consider TRONStar Wars and that movie changed the standards for what is a hit. But TRON making back double what it original cost to make would make it a success to me.
I think the problem with TRON was that it came out at the wrong time, a time before most people were very familiar with computers. Due to this some of the humor in the movie did not instinctively carry to the average viewer.
But some elements of the movie still hold up to this day. The light cycle sequence has become iconic, and the interest in TRON is still there, as shown by the excitement over the inclusion of a TRON level in the upcoming Kingdom Hearts II video game, and a sequel to TRON has been released in the form of a video game: TRON 2.0.
Although some have knocked the plot of the movie as confusing, when you distill it down to the basics it is a quest movie like Lord of the Rings. One weakness in the movie was the lack of interaction between the real world and the computer world. In the novelization of TRON they included a scene where, when Flynn refused to kill his opponent, in the real world a video game at an arcade froze while waiting for Flynn to act.
The idea of a person trapped inside a computer has become a common theme by now. It shows up in movies like The Matrix, and in anime series like.Hack. This proves that interest in a movie like TRON exists, but it has to have the right timing.
I have a minidisc deck and I didn't find the copy protection methods that restrictive. Simply put, you can make a copy of an original CD on minidisc but you can't make a copy of that copy.
Granted, I brought the deck for recording and using my own content and not to play pre-recorded discs. If the players are designed not to allow copying of purchased minidiscs under the above restriction, that would be too restrictive and would have significantly hurt the format in the consumer market.
I think the thing which caused minidisc not to succeed is the price. For a long time the price of the players, recorders and blank minidiscs was simply too high for the average audio buyer, and it is what caused me not to buy a Sony player for years (the lowest cost home deck I could find from them was $1,000). Years later I bought a JVC deck for about $200.
A factor in the success of the iPod is its ability to play MP3 files and not only itself to files in a proprietary format. The RIAA may not like the MP3 format, but it is here to stay. In my humble opinion, any compressed audio player that does not support the MP3 format will not succeed in the market place. Witness Sony's attempt to market a player without MP3 support.
Nonsense. A CD CAN have Data Compression. What do you think a MP3 is? At it's most basic form, a MP3 is compressed Data.
I think the writer is referring to an audio CD made to the Red Book standard. By definition a CD with compressed audio files is not a Red Book Standard CD.
It is the same issue with copy protection on "CDs." If a CD contains copy protection, it is not a Red Book Standard CD.
Universal play is one of the features that has made CDs successful. When the CD standard was being proposed there were several different formats being proposed, including one involving 12 inch laserdiscs, as a successor to the LP and 45. A main reason that CD has been successful is that only one format came out and it is playable on all players.
I agree with the previous poster about wanting my music via an actual physical product. In addition to having a DRM free format, it allows me to choose the format and bitrate that I want for my compressed files. For example: I prefer 192kbs for my music files and 128kbs for my spoken word files. I also have physical proof that I actually purchased the music.
But if you purchase a file encoded at 128kbs that is the best it will ever be. It can be converted into a standard CD track, but it is a track based on a compressed file. Its not the same as the CD original.
Another factor that has been touched on is the longevity of files. Although recordable CDs will last a while, they do have a limited lifespan. In order to retain your files, you will have to copy the backups on a regular basis, with the inherent danger of data errors in the copies.
The other issue is the obsolescence of files. With word processing files they eventually become unreadable because of changes in software. I think it is likely that the same thing will happen with compressed audio files. That is why I think that MP3 will remain viable, it is widely available and supported by all audio companies.
But I've had some CDs for over 20 years and they are still as playable today as the day that I bought them. I wonder if this has become an issue for the recording industry, since you only have to buy a CD once and its good for life.
This may have been the reason the Pink Floyd album "Dark Side Of The Moon" stayed on the charts for so long. Albums and tapes would wear out over time, requiring the user to rebuy them and keeping the album on the charts. Once CD became the standard, the need to rebuy the album disappeared, causing it to drop off the charts.
In the end I think that a DRM format will not become the standard for music. For decades people have been able to purchase and listen to music anyway that they want, with the only limitation being that of the media itself (it would very difficult listen to a record in a moving car). I don't think that people will be willing to give up that freedom.
A lot of the posts talk about ebook readers that are "going to be released on XX/YY." Given that the entire point of this article seems to be "People aren't picking up ebook technology" some, if not most, of those will probably never see the light of day (and if they do, expected low volume will make them prohibitively expensive).
What I want to find is something like my old clie(R.I.P.) with the side jogdial and the blue/white-blue backlight. That was easy to read in the dark, and easy on the eyes. The only downside was that it was Memory Stick. I find my Zaurus SL-5500 doesn't have the battery capacity to last very long, and the lack of the side-dial makes it awkward to hold.
Something older would be cool, too, so I didn't have to skip a payment on my motorcycle to afford it. Any suggestions?
For low cost a used Handspring Visor might be a way to go. Although the screen has a 160 by 160 resolution, the pixels themselves are very sharp. Also, the screen is fairly readable in normal room light without turning on the backlight. With more recent handhelds you must turn on the backlight to be able to read them.
The battery life if fairly good as long as you don't use the backlight, and since it uses AA batteries you can easily carry an extra set and easily replace them when needed. Also, since it is a pre-Palm OS 5 device there are a number of free e-book readers for it.
Shifting to the subject of what is needed for a successful e-book reader, I think that it needs to meet the following requirements:
Support multiple open e-book formats (plain text and HTML as a minimum) that allow you to put free e-books on your device and your own content (such as stories you have written).
Support several DRM e-book formats (not just only one from the company that released the device) that allow you to purchase e-books from several sources. I think that it is likely that the profit for e-books will not come from the devices themselves, but from the content that is sold for them (like the profits for video games come from the games themselves, not the game consoles).
A relatively large screen (the size of a paperback book page as a minimum) with a pixel-less resolution. By "pixel-less resolution" I mean the resolution is high enough where you cannot see the individual pixels.
An naturally intuitive interface that allows you to easily pick up and use the device without reading a massive instruction book. An example of this is my Palm handheld: I was easily able to use it right out of the box and the only time I had to refer to the instruction book was to see how to hook it to my computer and install the software, and then one time to find an obscure bit of information on specific function.
I agree that with another poster that there is room for both conventional books and for e-books. I'm a comic book reader and I don't think that a computer screen could replace conventional paper for that type of book, and an e-book reader that could duplicate the quality of a printed comic book page could be too expensive for the average customer.
But for short-term documents, like local newspapers and monthly magazines, an e-book reader would be great. It would also eliminate the need to dispose of massive amounts of paper each day, and no real space would be needed to store them.
We have HTML, and that presents a fine enough format for presenting digital text. Those who want a higher resolution can use a truetype font of their choice. PDF isn't bad either. The web was designed for digital text, and has been refined to pretty darn useful status in that application niche.
I agree. Basic HTML provides enough formatting options for general e-book use, and features like typefaces and text size can be left up to the reader itself. I've tried an e-book in the PDF format for my Palm and I prefer the Palm Reader format since it is designed with a small screen in mind.
The only problem I've had with some Palm ebook readers is the inconsistent way they render HTML documents, with some double spacing between paragraphs, and others needing a hard return in addition to an closing paragraph tag to get a blank line between the paragraphs.
I've been reading e-books on my Palm OS devices for years and have found it to be a usable device for e-books. I recently addressed the issue of a small screen by purchasing a Palm T/X which has a screen which, on its side, is almost as wide as the text area of a paperback book. The higher-resolution screen is an improvement too.
I agree with the comments about white text on a black background being much easier on the eyes (when I used Wordperfect 5.1 for DOS I found that black text on an orange/light brown background was very easy on the eyes). This brings to mind one of the greatest advantages of e-books: the ability to adjust the color/size/typeface of the text to make reading easier. For example, e-book readers eliminate the need for both a regular print and large print version of the same e-books. The e-book reader can adjust the size of the print to suit the reader.
On the subject of DRM, I don't have a problem with an e-book reader that uses DRM for its e-books as long as it also allows the use non-DRM e-books. A reason for this, due to my experience with the RCA e-book reader, is that if the company which supplies content to your reader goes out of business who do you get new content for your reader?
I use the Palm Reader on both my handheld and on my computer and one of the best things Palm did for their readers was to provide software (both a free version and a paid version) that allows you to make your own e-books, and information on the markup language used for their e-books. With the free version you have to add the markup yourself, while the paid version will add the markup for you.
I think that this will be a key issue with the upcoming e-book readers. An e-book reader that will only work with DRM content will fail. But I think a reader that can use both DRM e-books (both commercial and free), along with open-format e-books (such as the uploading of plain text files and HTML files) has a good chance of success.
Returning to the subject of DRM, one thing that is needed, and that I don't think will happen, is a universal DRM format for e-books. Right now you have to buy a version of a commercial e-book for your specific reader, but a universal format would allow many suppliers to provide commercial e-books for all readers.
Using Notepad for word processing via HTML could work for many users, and I've thought of going to that myself. The only problem I can see for some users is Notepad's 64kb limit for files.
A free word processor (which uses RTF as its native format) I've been using that also makes a good text editor is Jarte (http://www.jarte.com./ Unlike Notepad it doesn't have a 64kb limit for files. It was so good that I ended up buying the paid version, which has a few extra features not in the free version. It has the features you need for word processing, without the bloat that you don't.
One of the things that stopped me from going with HTML as a format is the limit on the formatting control for the document (because of the limitations of basic HTML itself). This has been addressed via CSS.
With all of the discussion of the OpenDocument format, one feature of StarOffice (and I assume OpenOffice.org also has) that needs a mention is its ability to generate fairly clean HTML. I took an OpenDocument text file saved it as an HTML 3.2 file and saw nothing that needed to be changed. This is unlike other word processors I've used. This might allow some users to more easily use HTML.
I'm an old Wordstar user and one of the best things about the program was the ability to work without using a mouse (it was designed to be used without a mouse, with no function keys, and no numeric keypad). It was designed for touch typists and did not require you to move your hands away from home row to use the program.
Although it took time to learn the commands, once you did (the commands did have a consistent logic to them once you got into the program) they became almost second nature. I got the point that when I thought to do something my hands would immediately hit the keys (such as Control K and then D to save and close a document). Even with MS Word, I find it much faster and more accurate to use the cursor keys to mark only the text I want and then hit a Control-I to make it italic.
I agree that Minidisc had the potential to be the replacement for all portable audio and personal recording applications. Due to the compression used I don't know if it would have been successful in replacing the CD for non-portable use.
Up until the introduction of the CD, LP had been the dominant format for music because of the sound quality. I usually found that the sound quality of a cassette recorded from an album was better than if I purchased the album on cassette. Due to this, I preferred to buy the LP and then record my own for portable use.
Back about two years after minidisc and DCC (a competing Phillips format) were introduced I made the decision to go with DCC for a couple of reasons: DCC decks could play all existing cassettes, DCC tapes cost less than minidiscs and had a longer recording time, and the players and recording decks were less expensive (at the time I could by both a DCC deck and a DCC portable player for the cost of one portable minidisc player). I noticed that it was only when other companies started making minidisc players and recorders that they became affordable.
As far as CD players go, I've found that the CD MP3 players that Sony releases have been outstanding as far as easy of use, sound quality, and battery life (I can get more than a day of play time out of a set of AA batteries). But although the players include the software for creating ATRAC files, I discontinued using it after trying it a few times.
Although ATRAC seems to be a good format, it is far too locked down for my taste (playable only on Sony players, ATRAC discs cannot be played on computers). I have the same problem with the locked-down nature of AAC files. If I buy a different type of player I don't want to have to re-encode my music files again.
This is why I think that MP3 will remain a dominant format for compressed audio. Consumers are used to being able to take their music anywhere they want and listen to it in any way that they want. The following formats allow this: records, analog tapes, CDs, and MP3s. But the record companies are attempting to market formats that do not allow this.
The record companies are facing the same problem with the MP3 format that the United States had with alcohol during prohibition. With prohibition an attempt was made to restrict something already in widespread use and to go against what the public already had and wanted. Like with prohibition, I think that the record companies are fighting a battle against the MP3 format that they will lose.
I agree that when paying for music, I only want it in a lossless format. My own preference is Red Book CDs for this reason. CDs might be bulky, but they are playable on just about every CD player ever made, while formats like AAC are only playable on one type of player.
Due to this I consider CDs the digital music equivalent of ASCII/plain text. ASCII/plain text has its limitations, but just about every computer on the planet can open and read a ASCII/plain text file. In the same way CD has its limitations, but as mentioned above just about every player will play the disc.
DRM also brings forth another concern: What happens when, in time, the files become unplayable due to changes in the technology or if the player they were purchased for breaks? Since the DMCA makes it illegal to bypass copy protection, the files would become unplayable and you would be required to purchase them again. Consider this: How many people are able to accurately open word processing documents in the MS Word 1.0 format? In Professional Write 1.0 format?
Yet Standard CDs have been around for over 20 years and they are still as playable as ever, except for the discs containing DMR. Players are readily available and relatively inexpensive. True the discs themselves are more expensive than digital downloads, but that is the price of better quality.
I like the concept of electronic books and look forward to the day that it becomes a practical reality. PDAs are okay, but the screen is a bit small.
A book to read concerning this is Cyberbooks by Ben Bova. It is a sci-fi novel set a few years in the future and it covers the issues concerning the introduction of an e-book reader, and the forces that work against it. It is a very good read and has quite a bit of humor too.
I don't think and e-book reader will be successful if it only allows the use of DRM-based formats. In order for it to be successful, it must also allow the use of open formats, with at least plain text as the minimum.
Without that option, there is a risk that the device will be unusable in the future, say if the company producing the content goes out of business. There is also the problem of: what if my e-book reader wears out/breaks? I think that in that case you would be required to repurchase your DRMed e-books, unless an option is allowed to redownload your e-books for free as a replacement.
I don't have a problem with DRMed e-books as long as my reader also allows the use of an open format for the above reason. If you buy a DRMed e-book you take a risk that it will not be reable in the future and that is a risk that you take. Despite its limitations, a plain text e-book is readable on just about every computer ever made, and it is not tied to a single device.
Many formats allow fancy formatting and other options, but for many books (such as those in the public domain) plain text is all that you need. Unlike many e-books in DMRed formats, plain text e-books are readable in any format and will always be available.
A lot of small companies, organizations and people in general could do miracles in Access if they would quit treating MS Excel as one...
The experience I've had with Access is that it usually takes a great deal of time and effort to create even a simple database. One of the things about Access is that it is better for databases where you know what you want ahead of time and for databases that you are going to keep around for a long time. Excel is better to use as a database where you don't know what you want ahead of time (it may be sorted several different ways, some data may be not be needed by all customers, and so on), and for short-term databases (created for a one-time use and not used again).
With a ASCII list that you want to sort and get out quickly, it is faster amd easier to just dump it into Excel, turn it into a spreadsheet and save it, and then send it out. With Access you have to create the table, create a query, set up and adjust an input screen form, and possibly create a report.
In my experience, often I've had to use a combination of Excel and Word to create reports using mail merge that I was not able to get Access to generate within itself. An example of this sorting a report by a field that doesn't appear in the report itself. There may be a way to do this in Access, but I wasn't able to find it (putting it in a query that the report was based off didn't work for me).
I think that the complexity of Access is the reason many people use Excel as a database. Excel isn't as powerful as Access for database work, but often it is better for simple databases that you need to get out quickly, and for databases where you don't want to go through the effort needed to generate queries, forms, and reports.
Slashdot Mirror
NETHED wrote:
What I thought that Microsoft should have done with the versions of Windows beginning with Windows 95 (which didn't have a completely separate version of MS-DOS within it), was to have no backwards compatibility, but when you install it it gives you the option of retaining your old OS. When needed you could drop back to the old OS for the applications that need it, then return to the current version of Windows when needed with a simple keystroke (like the old TSR programs).
mccalli wrote:
I think a reason Pixar was able to use the characters they did in the movie The Incredibles is that although they had similarities to the Fantastic Four, each character was also similar to other characters that were published by DC Comics and Marvel Comics. Examples of DC Comics characters with the same abilities as three of the characters off the top of my head:
The problem with coming up with an original superhero concept is that there are so many characters already out there. The key, now, is creating characters that you want to read about. THAT is where The Incredibles succeeds.
I think a related issue to this is the short-battery life in most portable players, a result of the need to make the players and batteries as small as possible. It seems like even the smallest factor works to decrease battery life. But a question comes to mind: Why is this necessary?
If a device has a battery life of only six hours then even a slight increase in the power drain can dramatically cut the battery life. But if a device has a charge that lasts 24 hours, a loss of an hour or two is not that big a deal to the average user. This could reduce the impact of factors like the codex, DRM, and the bitrate.
With the iPod, I'd be willing to have a larger (size-wise) iPod in exchange for a longer battery life. I take a Sony CD player to work and I can usually get more than 24 hours of play time on a single AA battery when playing MP3 files (per the instruction book it can get up to 41 hours on a single AA if playing ATRAC3 files). The play time is so long that I rarely think of having the change the battery.
Concerning battery life, I'm of the opinion once a device has a play time of more than 16 hours on a single charge, battery life ceases to be a concern because it can playing during all of your waking hours and can be charged while you sleep.
Returning to the topic at hand, I think on of the reasons that the concern over DRM reducing the battery life of players is that the battery life of players itself is an issue.
Thanks for reading.
Anonymous Coward wrote:
Actually, if people simply reduced the amount of music they purchase it would have a significant effect on the music industry. I think this has happened, but not because of piracy. It has happened because much of the music being released is not what the people want to buy.
A simple equation: Releasing music that people don't want to buy = Lower music sales
This is also a factor in the success or lack of success of new music formats like DVD-Audio and SACD. For most people, CD is a perfectly fine audio format, and it is a well-established standard. It overcame just about all of the problems with the previous formats.
But are the weaknesses of CD enough to make people willing to shell out the money to buy a new format? In addition to cost, the locked-down nature of newer formats (including DRM) will be a disincentive for people to move away from CD.
The test sounds good. The only additions I would add are:
The above would reduce the effect of a specific type of player on the results, and of a specific type of music (a heavy metal track might take more computing power to process than a piano solo track).
What is interesting is that when I upgraded the software on my iPod the battery life on the player suddenly increased a great deal. I encode my MP3 files at 192kbs for music files and I was getting about six hours on a charge. After the software upgrade I suddenly had more than eight hours of life on a charge.
I think the reason that many consider TRONStar Wars and that movie changed the standards for what is a hit. But TRON making back double what it original cost to make would make it a success to me.
I think the problem with TRON was that it came out at the wrong time, a time before most people were very familiar with computers. Due to this some of the humor in the movie did not instinctively carry to the average viewer.
But some elements of the movie still hold up to this day. The light cycle sequence has become iconic, and the interest in TRON is still there, as shown by the excitement over the inclusion of a TRON level in the upcoming Kingdom Hearts II video game, and a sequel to TRON has been released in the form of a video game: TRON 2.0.
Although some have knocked the plot of the movie as confusing, when you distill it down to the basics it is a quest movie like Lord of the Rings. One weakness in the movie was the lack of interaction between the real world and the computer world. In the novelization of TRON they included a scene where, when Flynn refused to kill his opponent, in the real world a video game at an arcade froze while waiting for Flynn to act.
The idea of a person trapped inside a computer has become a common theme by now. It shows up in movies like The Matrix, and in anime series like .Hack. This proves that interest in a movie like TRON exists, but it has to have the right timing.
I have a minidisc deck and I didn't find the copy protection methods that restrictive. Simply put, you can make a copy of an original CD on minidisc but you can't make a copy of that copy.
Granted, I brought the deck for recording and using my own content and not to play pre-recorded discs. If the players are designed not to allow copying of purchased minidiscs under the above restriction, that would be too restrictive and would have significantly hurt the format in the consumer market.
I think the thing which caused minidisc not to succeed is the price. For a long time the price of the players, recorders and blank minidiscs was simply too high for the average audio buyer, and it is what caused me not to buy a Sony player for years (the lowest cost home deck I could find from them was $1,000). Years later I bought a JVC deck for about $200.
A factor in the success of the iPod is its ability to play MP3 files and not only itself to files in a proprietary format. The RIAA may not like the MP3 format, but it is here to stay. In my humble opinion, any compressed audio player that does not support the MP3 format will not succeed in the market place. Witness Sony's attempt to market a player without MP3 support.
Chanc_Gorkon wrote as part of a post:
I think the writer is referring to an audio CD made to the Red Book standard. By definition a CD with compressed audio files is not a Red Book Standard CD.
It is the same issue with copy protection on "CDs." If a CD contains copy protection, it is not a Red Book Standard CD.
Universal play is one of the features that has made CDs successful. When the CD standard was being proposed there were several different formats being proposed, including one involving 12 inch laserdiscs, as a successor to the LP and 45. A main reason that CD has been successful is that only one format came out and it is playable on all players.
I agree with the previous poster about wanting my music via an actual physical product. In addition to having a DRM free format, it allows me to choose the format and bitrate that I want for my compressed files. For example: I prefer 192kbs for my music files and 128kbs for my spoken word files. I also have physical proof that I actually purchased the music.
But if you purchase a file encoded at 128kbs that is the best it will ever be. It can be converted into a standard CD track, but it is a track based on a compressed file. Its not the same as the CD original.
Another factor that has been touched on is the longevity of files. Although recordable CDs will last a while, they do have a limited lifespan. In order to retain your files, you will have to copy the backups on a regular basis, with the inherent danger of data errors in the copies.
The other issue is the obsolescence of files. With word processing files they eventually become unreadable because of changes in software. I think it is likely that the same thing will happen with compressed audio files. That is why I think that MP3 will remain viable, it is widely available and supported by all audio companies.
But I've had some CDs for over 20 years and they are still as playable today as the day that I bought them. I wonder if this has become an issue for the recording industry, since you only have to buy a CD once and its good for life.
This may have been the reason the Pink Floyd album "Dark Side Of The Moon" stayed on the charts for so long. Albums and tapes would wear out over time, requiring the user to rebuy them and keeping the album on the charts. Once CD became the standard, the need to rebuy the album disappeared, causing it to drop off the charts.
In the end I think that a DRM format will not become the standard for music. For decades people have been able to purchase and listen to music anyway that they want, with the only limitation being that of the media itself (it would very difficult listen to a record in a moving car). I don't think that people will be willing to give up that freedom.
For low cost a used Handspring Visor might be a way to go. Although the screen has a 160 by 160 resolution, the pixels themselves are very sharp. Also, the screen is fairly readable in normal room light without turning on the backlight. With more recent handhelds you must turn on the backlight to be able to read them.
The battery life if fairly good as long as you don't use the backlight, and since it uses AA batteries you can easily carry an extra set and easily replace them when needed. Also, since it is a pre-Palm OS 5 device there are a number of free e-book readers for it.
Shifting to the subject of what is needed for a successful e-book reader, I think that it needs to meet the following requirements:
I agree that with another poster that there is room for both conventional books and for e-books. I'm a comic book reader and I don't think that a computer screen could replace conventional paper for that type of book, and an e-book reader that could duplicate the quality of a printed comic book page could be too expensive for the average customer.
But for short-term documents, like local newspapers and monthly magazines, an e-book reader would be great. It would also eliminate the need to dispose of massive amounts of paper each day, and no real space would be needed to store them.
Thanks for reading.
bitspotter wrote as part of a post:
I agree. Basic HTML provides enough formatting options for general e-book use, and features like typefaces and text size can be left up to the reader itself. I've tried an e-book in the PDF format for my Palm and I prefer the Palm Reader format since it is designed with a small screen in mind.The only problem I've had with some Palm ebook readers is the inconsistent way they render HTML documents, with some double spacing between paragraphs, and others needing a hard return in addition to an closing paragraph tag to get a blank line between the paragraphs.
I've been reading e-books on my Palm OS devices for years and have found it to be a usable device for e-books. I recently addressed the issue of a small screen by purchasing a Palm T/X which has a screen which, on its side, is almost as wide as the text area of a paperback book. The higher-resolution screen is an improvement too.
I agree with the comments about white text on a black background being much easier on the eyes (when I used Wordperfect 5.1 for DOS I found that black text on an orange/light brown background was very easy on the eyes). This brings to mind one of the greatest advantages of e-books: the ability to adjust the color/size/typeface of the text to make reading easier. For example, e-book readers eliminate the need for both a regular print and large print version of the same e-books. The e-book reader can adjust the size of the print to suit the reader.
On the subject of DRM, I don't have a problem with an e-book reader that uses DRM for its e-books as long as it also allows the use non-DRM e-books. A reason for this, due to my experience with the RCA e-book reader, is that if the company which supplies content to your reader goes out of business who do you get new content for your reader?
I use the Palm Reader on both my handheld and on my computer and one of the best things Palm did for their readers was to provide software (both a free version and a paid version) that allows you to make your own e-books, and information on the markup language used for their e-books. With the free version you have to add the markup yourself, while the paid version will add the markup for you.
I think that this will be a key issue with the upcoming e-book readers. An e-book reader that will only work with DRM content will fail. But I think a reader that can use both DRM e-books (both commercial and free), along with open-format e-books (such as the uploading of plain text files and HTML files) has a good chance of success.
Returning to the subject of DRM, one thing that is needed, and that I don't think will happen, is a universal DRM format for e-books. Right now you have to buy a version of a commercial e-book for your specific reader, but a universal format would allow many suppliers to provide commercial e-books for all readers.
Using Notepad for word processing via HTML could work for many users, and I've thought of going to that myself. The only problem I can see for some users is Notepad's 64kb limit for files.
A free word processor (which uses RTF as its native format) I've been using that also makes a good text editor is Jarte (http://www.jarte.com./ Unlike Notepad it doesn't have a 64kb limit for files. It was so good that I ended up buying the paid version, which has a few extra features not in the free version. It has the features you need for word processing, without the bloat that you don't.
One of the things that stopped me from going with HTML as a format is the limit on the formatting control for the document (because of the limitations of basic HTML itself). This has been addressed via CSS.
With all of the discussion of the OpenDocument format, one feature of StarOffice (and I assume OpenOffice.org also has) that needs a mention is its ability to generate fairly clean HTML. I took an OpenDocument text file saved it as an HTML 3.2 file and saw nothing that needed to be changed. This is unlike other word processors I've used. This might allow some users to more easily use HTML.
I'm an old Wordstar user and one of the best things about the program was the ability to work without using a mouse (it was designed to be used without a mouse, with no function keys, and no numeric keypad). It was designed for touch typists and did not require you to move your hands away from home row to use the program.
Although it took time to learn the commands, once you did (the commands did have a consistent logic to them once you got into the program) they became almost second nature. I got the point that when I thought to do something my hands would immediately hit the keys (such as Control K and then D to save and close a document). Even with MS Word, I find it much faster and more accurate to use the cursor keys to mark only the text I want and then hit a Control-I to make it italic.
I agree that Minidisc had the potential to be the replacement for all portable audio and personal recording applications. Due to the compression used I don't know if it would have been successful in replacing the CD for non-portable use.
Up until the introduction of the CD, LP had been the dominant format for music because of the sound quality. I usually found that the sound quality of a cassette recorded from an album was better than if I purchased the album on cassette. Due to this, I preferred to buy the LP and then record my own for portable use.
Back about two years after minidisc and DCC (a competing Phillips format) were introduced I made the decision to go with DCC for a couple of reasons: DCC decks could play all existing cassettes, DCC tapes cost less than minidiscs and had a longer recording time, and the players and recording decks were less expensive (at the time I could by both a DCC deck and a DCC portable player for the cost of one portable minidisc player). I noticed that it was only when other companies started making minidisc players and recorders that they became affordable.
As far as CD players go, I've found that the CD MP3 players that Sony releases have been outstanding as far as easy of use, sound quality, and battery life (I can get more than a day of play time out of a set of AA batteries). But although the players include the software for creating ATRAC files, I discontinued using it after trying it a few times.
Although ATRAC seems to be a good format, it is far too locked down for my taste (playable only on Sony players, ATRAC discs cannot be played on computers). I have the same problem with the locked-down nature of AAC files. If I buy a different type of player I don't want to have to re-encode my music files again.
This is why I think that MP3 will remain a dominant format for compressed audio. Consumers are used to being able to take their music anywhere they want and listen to it in any way that they want. The following formats allow this: records, analog tapes, CDs, and MP3s. But the record companies are attempting to market formats that do not allow this.
The record companies are facing the same problem with the MP3 format that the United States had with alcohol during prohibition. With prohibition an attempt was made to restrict something already in widespread use and to go against what the public already had and wanted. Like with prohibition, I think that the record companies are fighting a battle against the MP3 format that they will lose.
I agree that when paying for music, I only want it in a lossless format. My own preference is Red Book CDs for this reason. CDs might be bulky, but they are playable on just about every CD player ever made, while formats like AAC are only playable on one type of player.
Due to this I consider CDs the digital music equivalent of ASCII/plain text. ASCII/plain text has its limitations, but just about every computer on the planet can open and read a ASCII/plain text file. In the same way CD has its limitations, but as mentioned above just about every player will play the disc.
DRM also brings forth another concern: What happens when, in time, the files become unplayable due to changes in the technology or if the player they were purchased for breaks? Since the DMCA makes it illegal to bypass copy protection, the files would become unplayable and you would be required to purchase them again. Consider this: How many people are able to accurately open word processing documents in the MS Word 1.0 format? In Professional Write 1.0 format?
Yet Standard CDs have been around for over 20 years and they are still as playable as ever, except for the discs containing DMR. Players are readily available and relatively inexpensive. True the discs themselves are more expensive than digital downloads, but that is the price of better quality.
Thanks for reading.
I like the concept of electronic books and look forward to the day that it becomes a practical reality. PDAs are okay, but the screen is a bit small.
A book to read concerning this is Cyberbooks by Ben Bova. It is a sci-fi novel set a few years in the future and it covers the issues concerning the introduction of an e-book reader, and the forces that work against it. It is a very good read and has quite a bit of humor too.
I don't think and e-book reader will be successful if it only allows the use of DRM-based formats. In order for it to be successful, it must also allow the use of open formats, with at least plain text as the minimum.
Without that option, there is a risk that the device will be unusable in the future, say if the company producing the content goes out of business. There is also the problem of: what if my e-book reader wears out/breaks? I think that in that case you would be required to repurchase your DRMed e-books, unless an option is allowed to redownload your e-books for free as a replacement.
I don't have a problem with DRMed e-books as long as my reader also allows the use of an open format for the above reason. If you buy a DRMed e-book you take a risk that it will not be reable in the future and that is a risk that you take. Despite its limitations, a plain text e-book is readable on just about every computer ever made, and it is not tied to a single device.
Many formats allow fancy formatting and other options, but for many books (such as those in the public domain) plain text is all that you need. Unlike many e-books in DMRed formats, plain text e-books are readable in any format and will always be available.
Martin Foster wrote:
The experience I've had with Access is that it usually takes a great deal of time and effort to create even a simple database. One of the things about Access is that it is better for databases where you know what you want ahead of time and for databases that you are going to keep around for a long time. Excel is better to use as a database where you don't know what you want ahead of time (it may be sorted several different ways, some data may be not be needed by all customers, and so on), and for short-term databases (created for a one-time use and not used again).
With a ASCII list that you want to sort and get out quickly, it is faster amd easier to just dump it into Excel, turn it into a spreadsheet and save it, and then send it out. With Access you have to create the table, create a query, set up and adjust an input screen form, and possibly create a report.
In my experience, often I've had to use a combination of Excel and Word to create reports using mail merge that I was not able to get Access to generate within itself. An example of this sorting a report by a field that doesn't appear in the report itself. There may be a way to do this in Access, but I wasn't able to find it (putting it in a query that the report was based off didn't work for me).
I think that the complexity of Access is the reason many people use Excel as a database. Excel isn't as powerful as Access for database work, but often it is better for simple databases that you need to get out quickly, and for databases where you don't want to go through the effort needed to generate queries, forms, and reports.
Thanks for reading.