This is entirely the wrong approach, and an act that demonstrates unwillingness to change, much like what we've seen in certain other parts of the entertainment industry.
But seriously, if you owned and operated a shop selling music, would you be scared of iTunes and the likes, your only real choices would be to evolve and give better service than them, or just close up shop, the choice of abolishing internet music isnt really up there on the list of sane choices, atleast it didnt use to be.
What if you sold horses when cars first became available, would you try to abolish cars altogether, or perhaps change your business into something that fits the market thats coming?
Or what if you suddenly found that you'd been selling fax machines well beyond their obsoletion? Would you rage out and try to abolish the internet, or perhaps just realize that you should try to save the scraps, and turn your shop into selling something that people actually buy?
Trying to force the market to do something can be tricky...
"Development status: Alpha" says the Wikipage,
"Interesting", says Mark ShuttleWorth
"going into production Ubuntu" says Canonical,
"going away from Ubuntu" says I.
I guess the 21/6 rationale is that some people call it "the twenty-first of June." Those people are wrong. It is "June twenty-first," or if you prefer, "June twenty-one." Do those people call the time "the thirty-seventh of three p.m."? I think not.
Well, as far as I can see, the 6/21-rationale is only a result of how dates are read in the english language, and not in any other way "The Right Way", is it more rational to have your dates MM/DD/YYYY, than to have them DD/MM/YYYY, the first one is middle-endian and really weird, while the second one is a little-endian approach, that appreciates the fact that the month and year part to an increasing degree might be implicated.
I agree on YYYY/MM/DD being practical for sorting purposes, but DD/MM/YYYY is just as practical for reading fast. If you have YYYY/MM/DD, you'll have to read either right-to-left, or make some small mental adjustments for the order. When is knowing the year more important than the date of something? Mostly in historical discussions, where the date is often less important than the year (and in many cases, the year might be the best known part of a historical date), but with current events, the first thing you'd like to know, is the date (or perhaps the month if the timescale is a bit bigger), then the month, and then whether it will happen in the far future (some other year), or just simply this year.
What it comes down to for me, is that MM/DD/YYYY is a weird NUXI, somewhat of an abomination in the concept of writing down dates, either use little-endian dates, or big-endian dates. Quite a few languages even appreciate this, and pronounce dates DD/MM/YYYY. As an example, norwegians say "21. Juli 2010".
The argument for MM/DD becomes even worse when looking at how the clock is read, "Quarter Past Three", would imply writing time MM:HH, which is quite in line with writing little-endian dates...
Well its half evil then, seeing as 666 is the number of the beast, it must also be the multiplier of the beast, so: the gross retail is of course calculated AFTER theyve paid that cut.
And seeing as it has been particularly cold in hell recently, they got off with just paying half of it.
But hey, theyre lawyers.
Aside from the obvious "use something else", wouldnt a solution where the amount of copying is minimized as much as possible work?, where all editing is saved to a reference file, this would of course only LIMIT the loss.
But hey, a little whining, and a few trips to IKEA (I hear they're having January-sales on Chairs) ought to be enough to get this fixed anyway.
"Watching the massive crowds shell out even more cash for even less freedom: Priceless"
Oh, and eh, is it just me, or was it less than two weeks ago that we saw an entire discussion about Microsoft's FUD-tactics. I seem to remember their tactics as being:
1: Release a product with about 40-50% of the announced functionality
2: Immediately announce a new product which will have the full _announced_ functionality from the previous version, plus whatever OS X/Linux has been upto recently + 10%
3: Gradually announce that features wont be ready for release X+1
4: GOTO 1
Thus making sure their customers stick with whatever they're doing even though the competition has better choices, cause why risk switching to another product when Microsoft's promising to have the same functionality soon.
Guess thats a great way to make a living, purely off of promises.
Well, let me list the possibilities for getting iPod-compatible music:
1: iTMS (Legal)
2: CD-Ripping (Legal)
3: Using services like the one that was recently raided in sweden (not so legal)
Simple fact is that iPods are the biggest target group for Digital Music Sales, and Apple controls the only DRM that these support, and as long as the record companies insist on using that POS, then we're SOL for setting up competing purely digital stores that target the iPod.
Why reinvent the wheel, we've already got a perfectly good phrase for that:
"When in Rome, do as the Romans do"
Weird how people seem to fail to understand that sayings like that one actually has a purpose.
This seems just as stupid as hacking a webpage, just to put your familypictures in the index.html.
Crime 101: Don't leave clues by choice. Unless you've been living in a cave, you'd know from the TV that the bad guys always get busted if they try to pull an Dr. Evil or Murdoc-plot. If you get caught, then you haven't watched enough CSI.
Seriously, who steals such an item and starts using it? Wouldn't selling it seem like a better idea?
Hmmm, that wouldn't be any fun unless it would be broadcast live to all nations, done from a proper stage, with people throwing tomatoes at him.
I guess a humane sentence would be 1 millisecond of pain for every mail sent by him or his associates, no-one sends mail in bulks of millions, uh, oh wait, never mind.
Because they are the only company that sells Windows, which somehow is the one operating system that almost the entire world rely upon,
mostly because of lock-ins or proprietary solutions, and when the entire computer economy depends upon being able to use Windows,
then Microsoft surely can take any price they want, it's not as if any fewer people would pirate Windows if it was $100 either,
most of the people that use pirated Windows wouldn't have bought it if it was sold for a pack of chewing gum, simply because
they could avoid buying it.
Besides, IF XP were to cost more than $200, even more people would pirate it.
I can't believe anyone pays the full retail-price of XP anyways nowadays, its an old OS.
Well, if you make enough guesses, some of them will eventually come true, as with the Intel-transition, but given the amount of guesses, and the fact that MacIntels are shipping,
I guess Dvorak has used up his lifeshare of lucky guesses.
Slashdot Mirror
This is entirely the wrong approach, and an act that demonstrates unwillingness to change, much like what we've seen in certain other parts of the entertainment industry. But seriously, if you owned and operated a shop selling music, would you be scared of iTunes and the likes, your only real choices would be to evolve and give better service than them, or just close up shop, the choice of abolishing internet music isnt really up there on the list of sane choices, atleast it didnt use to be. What if you sold horses when cars first became available, would you try to abolish cars altogether, or perhaps change your business into something that fits the market thats coming? Or what if you suddenly found that you'd been selling fax machines well beyond their obsoletion? Would you rage out and try to abolish the internet, or perhaps just realize that you should try to save the scraps, and turn your shop into selling something that people actually buy? Trying to force the market to do something can be tricky...
"Development status: Alpha" says the Wikipage,
"Interesting", says Mark ShuttleWorth
"going into production Ubuntu" says Canonical,
"going away from Ubuntu" says I.
I guess the 21/6 rationale is that some people call it "the twenty-first of June." Those people are wrong. It is "June twenty-first," or if you prefer, "June twenty-one." Do those people call the time "the thirty-seventh of three p.m."? I think not.
Well, as far as I can see, the 6/21-rationale is only a result of how dates are read in the english language, and not in any other way "The Right Way", is it more rational to have your dates MM/DD/YYYY, than to have them DD/MM/YYYY, the first one is middle-endian and really weird, while the second one is a little-endian approach, that appreciates the fact that the month and year part to an increasing degree might be implicated.
I agree on YYYY/MM/DD being practical for sorting purposes, but DD/MM/YYYY is just as practical for reading fast. If you have YYYY/MM/DD, you'll have to read either right-to-left, or make some small mental adjustments for the order. When is knowing the year more important than the date of something? Mostly in historical discussions, where the date is often less important than the year (and in many cases, the year might be the best known part of a historical date), but with current events, the first thing you'd like to know, is the date (or perhaps the month if the timescale is a bit bigger), then the month, and then whether it will happen in the far future (some other year), or just simply this year.
What it comes down to for me, is that MM/DD/YYYY is a weird NUXI, somewhat of an abomination in the concept of writing down dates, either use little-endian dates, or big-endian dates. Quite a few languages even appreciate this, and pronounce dates DD/MM/YYYY. As an example, norwegians say "21. Juli 2010".
The argument for MM/DD becomes even worse when looking at how the clock is read, "Quarter Past Three", would imply writing time MM:HH, which is quite in line with writing little-endian dates...
stuck hunting for a crack online just so he could play the game he payed for.
Yeah, i hate when that happens... Wait, what? You had problems connecting for authentication, so you hunted ONLINE for cracks?
I believe that is hello.jpg.
Well its half evil then, seeing as 666 is the number of the beast, it must also be the multiplier of the beast, so: the gross retail is of course calculated AFTER theyve paid that cut. And seeing as it has been particularly cold in hell recently, they got off with just paying half of it. But hey, theyre lawyers.
The mac-users finally get the games they've been demanding? Or, are they simply making a new game about the "Demand Service"?
Aside from the obvious "use something else", wouldnt a solution where the amount of copying is minimized as much as possible work?, where all editing is saved to a reference file, this would of course only LIMIT the loss.
But hey, a little whining, and a few trips to IKEA (I hear they're having January-sales on Chairs) ought to be enough to get this fixed anyway.
"Watching the massive crowds shell out even more cash for even less freedom: Priceless" Oh, and eh, is it just me, or was it less than two weeks ago that we saw an entire discussion about Microsoft's FUD-tactics. I seem to remember their tactics as being: 1: Release a product with about 40-50% of the announced functionality 2: Immediately announce a new product which will have the full _announced_ functionality from the previous version, plus whatever OS X/Linux has been upto recently + 10% 3: Gradually announce that features wont be ready for release X+1 4: GOTO 1 Thus making sure their customers stick with whatever they're doing even though the competition has better choices, cause why risk switching to another product when Microsoft's promising to have the same functionality soon. Guess thats a great way to make a living, purely off of promises.
Well, let me list the possibilities for getting iPod-compatible music: 1: iTMS (Legal) 2: CD-Ripping (Legal) 3: Using services like the one that was recently raided in sweden (not so legal) Simple fact is that iPods are the biggest target group for Digital Music Sales, and Apple controls the only DRM that these support, and as long as the record companies insist on using that POS, then we're SOL for setting up competing purely digital stores that target the iPod.
Sony made some Portables that didn't play MP3s.
Why reinvent the wheel, we've already got a perfectly good phrase for that: "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" Weird how people seem to fail to understand that sayings like that one actually has a purpose.
Neh, a few portraits, one of her backside, and one of some dude in a sofa. None of them qualify as nude.
This seems just as stupid as hacking a webpage, just to put your familypictures in the index.html. Crime 101: Don't leave clues by choice. Unless you've been living in a cave, you'd know from the TV that the bad guys always get busted if they try to pull an Dr. Evil or Murdoc-plot. If you get caught, then you haven't watched enough CSI. Seriously, who steals such an item and starts using it? Wouldn't selling it seem like a better idea?
Hmmm, that wouldn't be any fun unless it would be broadcast live to all nations, done from a proper stage, with people throwing tomatoes at him. I guess a humane sentence would be 1 millisecond of pain for every mail sent by him or his associates, no-one sends mail in bulks of millions, uh, oh wait, never mind.
Well, if you make enough guesses, some of them will eventually come true, as with the Intel-transition, but given the amount of guesses, and the fact that MacIntels are shipping, I guess Dvorak has used up his lifeshare of lucky guesses.