Past stories on Slashdot and more credible sources have suggested that Apple does indeed pull in around 10-12 cents per song. Each one of those is charged a transaction fee by Visa or Paypal or however you pay for the songs (except gift cards, naturally). Then you have to take into account the actual costs of running the store, from maintenance to bandwidth to artwork to massively redundant data storage (for accounts and the media files themselves).
Put another way, Apple's earnings reports indicate that ALL non-hardware sales at Apple clock in at less than 10% of their total revenue. This includes software sales of their OS, iLife, iWork, their pro applications, AppleCare purchases, etc. AND iTunes sales. The explosive growth in both Mac and other hardware sales (and now their consumer electronics products) make the iTunes sales essentially irrelevant to their bottom line.
You are right that sales from iTMS does account for roughly 10% of their revenue. That number happens to be 450 MILLION dollars. And that's just for sales in iTMS and iTMS related services(please read the given pdf). I guarantee you that any sane company would miss $450,000,000.
Oh and maintenance? Bandwidth? Are you serious? Those are drops in the bucket compared to what they are getting in return. And massively redundant storage for all intents and purposes are one time purchases, and they did that purchasing a long time ago.(yes I'm sure they upgrade some time but it's not on a very regular basis)
Most of what you say is both interesting and correct but
I'll set forth my own opinion: Apple gains nothing from DRM. Apple makes its money selling hardware, like iPods and Macs. Nobody credible believes that Apple is making much, if any, money from the iTunes music store. Instead, it seems the iTMS exists for the convenience of Apple's customers--that is, so Apple can sell more iPods.
that's a little silly don't you think. Using these statistics
http://cmichae.acm.jhu.edu/blog/articles/apple-itu nes-sales-statistics/ and saying that iTMS makes about 35 cents per download equates to roughly $1,000,000 PER DAY. But lets just short change them quite a bit and say they make just 10 cents per download. that's still $300,000 per day and $9,000,000 per month and that's without any sort of physical store to take care of, and low balling them quite a bit. So to say they don't have a vested interest in having DRM in their music or trying to create vendor lock-in is a little short sighted.
If you re-read the statement he describes a scenario where the only software you can get for the iPhone is from them. Like he said they don't have to write it, and it will be a controlled environment but saying that there won't be bugs in that software is being a little naive. The current list of applications on the iPhone come from pretty fleshed out programs already available. That's the reason they work so well. But if you think that iTunes in it's first iteration wasn't buggy then you've got the magical herb. And when Apple or the software makers that they decide to do the programming for them write something new it's not going to be roses and gumdrops.
I still expect to see non-Apple and non-Cingular developers having access to the tools to build applications for the iPhone.
From the article: "We define everything that is on the phone," he said. "You don't want your phone to be like a PC."
No he isn't talking about buggy software, he's actually talking about ANY more software. He's saying that in order for the phone to function as well as it does it cannot have ANY other software competing for time on the processor when the included software needs a piece of it.
Does anyone really think that the iPhone is going to be the only good phone going for $500 in 2008. Apple made big news, but that's not the end of the story. Thanks to the Big A other phone companies are gonna be driven hard to produce even better handhelds. And that truly is a Good Thing(tm). But it also necessarily means that Apple will be competing with the more well known Cell phone makers. Sony-Erickson, Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, LG, RIM. Some or all are gonna sit up and think of ways to expand. Looks like it's going to be a good decade to live in.
Sooooo. It runs OS X does it? Do I have to shell out $200 for Leopard in order to upgrade my phone operating system? Cause only that would make it more awesome.
Yeah like I've said before the big downfall with the Windows Registry is it's portability. But you can do a similar thing that you do in OS X(btw I prefer the way OS X keeps preferences). In Windows you open the registry and export the Software subtree. Then on your new computer just install the program like normal and then import the.reg file that you exported from the old computer. Piece of cake really. But it's not all encompassing.
In OS X all the applications that I've seen so far behave the same way. But in Windows, especially older programs, they sometimes use their own.ini file. In which case to get the settings you just copy over the.ini file to the new computer and voila.
I don't use either method very much though. I don't change computers often and when I do I actually want the settings to be different. My desktop is different than my Macbook and I behave differently depending on what computer I'm using. So I just install my applications and have a clean slate in order to accommodate my new environment. But I too have never went to a fresh computer and had a complete install take more than 3 hours. It's just a different experience that's all.
The fact that stuff you delete with a keyboard command ends up in the Trash Can, but not in the Recycle Bin, for one.
That's quite funny. The default action for hitting the delete button on a Windows machine will send files to the Recycle Bin. Only if you hit Shift+delete will it permanently delete something. Please expand your horizons a little bit.
Yeah, it's sooo much easier than to download one of the million of "change one of the settings you want to change changer thingies" for MacOS X. Why, was that a double standard I just showed up?
Umm not really. Like I've stated before. I'm using OS X right now and I'm continually looking for the simple programs to do what I need. But if you haven't shut your mind down you would have seen that by now. I'm just saying that the solution you pointed out for a Windows machine that seemed so hard for you, is actually much easier than it seems.
So you are used to your OS only being able to do what you stumble upon by accidently hitting a key and ruining the work you just did. Hell, I just love it when I have to manouver out of some mess because I accidently touched the Windows button - I can see why you fear accidently hitting ctrl-F1 (it's so close to one of the "close window" key-commands on Windows).
That's not what I said at all. And in fact I don't think you know what you just said. OS X and Windows share a lot of good ideas and most come from they both support global shortcut keys. Btw the close window command on windows are ctrl-f4 and alt-f4 depending if you just want the window or the application to close.
Oh and if you ever have that MASSIVE problem when you hit the Windows key... Just hit the Windows key again and your exactly where you left off. Sorry to have solved your problem with a simple solution. You're very welcome.
Well, why would you want to delete the Trash Can from OS X - unlike the Recycle Bin it is not useless.
As for TweakUI - you also never wanted to to add tweakui.exe to the Control Panel folder?
As for being able to Tab - gee, that's "a simple checkbox". Not to mention that you can turn it on/off by a key command.
You sound like quite the microsoft basher. Let me ask you something. What makes the Recycle Bin that much different than the Trash Can?
1 - I've never wanted to put the tweakui into the Control Panel. It goes into the Administrative Tools folder quite easily thank you very much
2 - You did realize that in the page you linked to, you just download the.reg file and double click don't you. Sounds pretty easy like a pretty simple solution, wouldn't you agree.
I just found the Tab option yesterday. But since this behavior seemed like it was just the way the OS handled it I didn't even think that they had an option for it. Took me a little while but I'll get down the global shortcut keys soon enough. Not that I would actually want to turn it off/turn it off by accident. Personally I think they should leave that setting in the system preferences and not allow it to be a key command. If I accidentally turn it on I'm sure it'll take me some time figuring out how to change it back. But that's my preference.
You mean you never deleted a key like "{645FF040-5081-101B-9F08-00AA002F954E}" from HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersion\Explorer\Desktop\NameSpace?
Nope. Does that make me a bad person? I've never had to mess with registry settings for the Recycle Bin. I've also never tried to delete the Trash Can from OS X(How do you do that anyways?). But then again, you bring up a better point. Maybe that setting should be a little hidden. You don't want just anyone to go around screwing with stuff that they don't understand. But I know that if I do need to do something like that I'd just download and use TweakUI. Clear, easy to understand programs are more reliable and better for comprehension than any reading of manuals and editing of text files.
I hope this comes out clear. I don't have time to learn everything that there is in a OS. I just want the options to be available using programs that I can use. A simple checkbox and my life can go on. And being able to Tab to it makes it a great time saver.
So you don't want to "type a million things into a console (and have to remember all the options myself) or write into configuration files", but instead you want to have to write cryptic strings into hard to remember subsections of the Registry.
In the over 10 years I have had to live with a Registry, I have never, not once, had to write cryptic strings into hard to remember subsections in the Registry. If I did have to write something in the registry it's exactly where I would expect it to be... In the software section under the heading of company name. I dunno. seems quite easy to me.
The real problem with the registry (for me anyways) has never been editing it. It's portability. You just can't take it with you easily.
But again, because almost all of the possible options are exposed in the options panel of any decent software, I have rarely(once maybe every 6 months) had to use any sort of registry editor. Honestly it doesn't get any easier than that.
Not quite. Ever since I got my MacBook I've been triple booting. It's all about best tools for the job and for me that isn't any one OS.
I want to believe that one OS is the best... OS X is great. But I need MORE options not less. I don't want to type a million things into a console (and have to remember all the options myself) or write into configuration files. I just want an option box that gives me all the options. OS X software typically does the kind of handholding where I'm given the least amount of options which can lead to decent output. Call me a tweaker or an option whore. I just like my software to behave exactly the way I want to, best practices be damned.
You'd better hope you're not typing at 120wpm not looking at the screen, or you may inadvertently dismiss the dialog and not find out your save failed and you just lost a couple of hours work. Well, you'll find out when the boss comes to rip you a new asshole for not having done that report. That's fundamentally bad design. Apple's default is much safer.
I actually do a lot of report processing at my job. I switch between reports all the time and I know what errors could occur. Thankfully Windows + Word has never issued a dialog while I'm in another document. It'll just blink in the taskbar waiting for me to alt+tab to the window with the problem. And when getting through these reports as fast as I can is what my employer is really looking at, being able to use the keyboard shortcuts to answer a dialog box saves me tons of time, instead of having to lift my hand and use the mouse.
All I ask for is that the OS doesn't treat me like I'm a brain dead child. I can learn and I'd rather learn once than be slower all the time.
Conversely, on Windows, in general *everything* is enabled at start up. Confuses the hell out of novice users. The Mac approach - simplicity and usability with the option for power use - wins out every time.
But this isn't usable is it. If I'm using the tab key to cycle through controls, then its obvious that I want to use the keyboard for navigation. Not being to cycle through ALL the controls then seems counterproductive. Is there a case where cycling through only the textboxes and lists makes me more productive. Seems unlikely.
You can easily concoct examples for which x86 requires fewer instructions but more cycles.
But this really is a function of the CPU isn't it. I can easily concoct examples that requires fewer instructions and fewer cycles depending on the CPU. There is a lot of new SIMD instructions that Core2 processors can now do in 1 cycle. Sooo in the end, what we really need is real world testing. Bring it on.
Oh, and even if it would work all cool like you speculate, you'd still need to aim it, else the freindly fire aspect will *suck*.
Now if this was a weapon that works, and I'm not saying that it would, wouldn't they just make it so that they can drop it where the enemy is, like a less explosive bomb? Makes sense to me
The Cell has as many "cores" as the device requires. It's an expandable CPU and that is why it's so intriguing. It has one main "core" which is really the brains of the operation and several coprocessing units that do very simple operations very very fast. But the cell DOES NOT have a set number of these units. It just so happens to have 8 in the PS3, 6 used for general purpose game/entertainments stuff, 1 for OS security, and 1 disabled for better yields.
You have to be able to imagine that this processor is supposed to be in all sorts of other devices. Say a cell phone with 1-2 coprocessing units because it has to be stingy with the power. Or a renderfarm with 16 spu's per Cell per computer to speed up video processing. Expandability is the key with the Cell architecture.
1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?
1. It's true that you need to have a client "out there" with the video that you want to watch in order for this to work. In comes what I like to call super clients. Clients with high bandwidth abilities that auto-download torrents from popular sites and seed within their ability. They don't have to be watched and quickly give availability to the masses.
2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports.
2. Really? you really shouldn't be watching YouTube at work. Not that I don't... =P
3. Will the bandwidth usage be acceptable for the average user? When you view a Youtube video, you use only the bandwidth necessary to download the video. This active form of downloading means that bandwidth usage stops as soon as the video is completely downloaded. With Bittorrent, users will both upload and download while waiting for the video to complete. They also are recommeneded to leave the client open while going about other tasks. Which can have a negative impact on their other Internet activities.
3. That's the exact thing we're trying to do! HD videos require large space and bandwidth requirements. Much more than a single service can ever handle. So we need regular people to help out. Uploading is part of the p2p game and you get faster service out of it. It doesn't have to ruin the rest of the internet experience. Just make sure that the you have enough upload bandwidth to do the rest of the stuff you want to do. I'm sure in the near future Azereus(it's been a while since I used it) will be able to intelligently upload depending on how much you are using the internet.
4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program. This not only breaks up the user's workflow, but it also presents a more confusing interface. If the user wants to view the video, he has to open the torrent tab, click on "Files", then double click the correct file. This action is non-obvious to someone who simply wants to view the show. In addition, Azureus may not even launch when the Zudeo link is clicked! Magnet links are intended as a generic P2P descriptor, and are often claimed by programs other than Azureus.
4. uh yeah. If you had Azereus then you had another window open helping with torrents: Again this is p2p's domain. I haven't used Zudeo so I really don't know about its interface. But interfaces need to be refined over time depending on how the users actually use the program. Just ask Apple(never buy an Apple 1.0 product). Magnet links may be generic but if you have multiple p2p clients then you seriously need to understand that it's up to you to determine which program handles what links. I use eMule, uTorrent and Sharaza, and some can use the same links, but I specifically state that I want eMule to handle ed2k links and shareaza to handle magnet links even though they both can handle both types.
5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.
Bah humbug. Screw you and your merry little Christmas. I want my Mp3 Player/Cell phone/Digital Camera/Game player/PDA/Fax machine/money sucker/relationship killer all in one device! Having fun with your family is nice and all but wouldn't it be a bit nicer with new shiny toys?
While if we marked the molecules on the water and tracked its passage, yes of course we would know that it isn't exactly the same as it was before. But it doesn't matter. They aren't looking for a 1 to 1 correspondence. It doesn't matter that the water molecule that we see isn't the same one we expected when it came down the stream. All that matters is that their is A water molecule that LOOKS the same heading in the right direction.
Also making something completely invisible to the naked eye would be a disaster for a person who was being invisible. But the person or thing doesn't have to be COMPLETELY invisible. For example, if a ninja were trying to be invisible, a pair of eyes are a lot easier to hide than an entire body. Just make the rest of the body invisible and move your eyes to where people aren't looking.
Or if you were making a plane invisible. Make the entire plane invisible except the windshield. Sure you could see people inside if you were looking at the plane from the front. But most people would be looking at one from the ground where you can't even see the windshield.
No seriously. Shoot the parents and administrators who insist on these silly rules. That'll teach them that there are more important things they need to be worried about.
What are you doing spinning your disks at 40x. Only theives would need to have their disks going that fast. I think they should go after cd drive manufacturers next...
Slashdot Mirror
I forgot to add that this is was just last quarter. Not for the year. So go ahead and multiply that times 4 for the year.
You are right that sales from iTMS does account for roughly 10% of their revenue. That number happens to be 450 MILLION dollars. And that's just for sales in iTMS and iTMS related services(please read the given pdf). I guarantee you that any sane company would miss $450,000,000.
Oh and maintenance? Bandwidth? Are you serious? Those are drops in the bucket compared to what they are getting in return. And massively redundant storage for all intents and purposes are one time purchases, and they did that purchasing a long time ago.(yes I'm sure they upgrade some time but it's not on a very regular basis)
that's a little silly don't you think. Using these statistics http://cmichae.acm.jhu.edu/blog/articles/apple-it
No he's not talking about buggy software
If you re-read the statement he describes a scenario where the only software you can get for the iPhone is from them. Like he said they don't have to write it, and it will be a controlled environment but saying that there won't be bugs in that software is being a little naive. The current list of applications on the iPhone come from pretty fleshed out programs already available. That's the reason they work so well. But if you think that iTunes in it's first iteration wasn't buggy then you've got the magical herb. And when Apple or the software makers that they decide to do the programming for them write something new it's not going to be roses and gumdrops.
From the article: "We define everything that is on the phone," he said. "You don't want your phone to be like a PC."
No he isn't talking about buggy software, he's actually talking about ANY more software. He's saying that in order for the phone to function as well as it does it cannot have ANY other software competing for time on the processor when the included software needs a piece of it.
Does anyone really think that the iPhone is going to be the only good phone going for $500 in 2008. Apple made big news, but that's not the end of the story. Thanks to the Big A other phone companies are gonna be driven hard to produce even better handhelds. And that truly is a Good Thing(tm). But it also necessarily means that Apple will be competing with the more well known Cell phone makers. Sony-Erickson, Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, LG, RIM. Some or all are gonna sit up and think of ways to expand. Looks like it's going to be a good decade to live in.
Sooooo. It runs OS X does it? Do I have to shell out $200 for Leopard in order to upgrade my phone operating system? Cause only that would make it more awesome.
Yeah like I've said before the big downfall with the Windows Registry is it's portability. But you can do a similar thing that you do in OS X(btw I prefer the way OS X keeps preferences). In Windows you open the registry and export the Software subtree. Then on your new computer just install the program like normal and then import the .reg file that you exported from the old computer. Piece of cake really. But it's not all encompassing.
.ini file. In which case to get the settings you just copy over the .ini file to the new computer and voila.
In OS X all the applications that I've seen so far behave the same way. But in Windows, especially older programs, they sometimes use their own
I don't use either method very much though. I don't change computers often and when I do I actually want the settings to be different. My desktop is different than my Macbook and I behave differently depending on what computer I'm using. So I just install my applications and have a clean slate in order to accommodate my new environment. But I too have never went to a fresh computer and had a complete install take more than 3 hours. It's just a different experience that's all.
That's quite funny. The default action for hitting the delete button on a Windows machine will send files to the Recycle Bin. Only if you hit Shift+delete will it permanently delete something. Please expand your horizons a little bit.
Umm not really. Like I've stated before. I'm using OS X right now and I'm continually looking for the simple programs to do what I need. But if you haven't shut your mind down you would have seen that by now. I'm just saying that the solution you pointed out for a Windows machine that seemed so hard for you, is actually much easier than it seems.
That's not what I said at all. And in fact I don't think you know what you just said. OS X and Windows share a lot of good ideas and most come from they both support global shortcut keys. Btw the close window command on windows are ctrl-f4 and alt-f4 depending if you just want the window or the application to close.
Oh and if you ever have that MASSIVE problem when you hit the Windows key... Just hit the Windows key again and your exactly where you left off. Sorry to have solved your problem with a simple solution. You're very welcome.
Now that's useful! Although I don't use that many windows when I'm home, I'm still definitely going to use that shortcut. Thanks.
You sound like quite the microsoft basher. Let me ask you something. What makes the Recycle Bin that much different than the Trash Can?
1 - I've never wanted to put the tweakui into the Control Panel. It goes into the Administrative Tools folder quite easily thank you very much
2 - You did realize that in the page you linked to, you just download the
I just found the Tab option yesterday. But since this behavior seemed like it was just the way the OS handled it I didn't even think that they had an option for it. Took me a little while but I'll get down the global shortcut keys soon enough. Not that I would actually want to turn it off/turn it off by accident. Personally I think they should leave that setting in the system preferences and not allow it to be a key command. If I accidentally turn it on I'm sure it'll take me some time figuring out how to change it back. But that's my preference.
Nope. Does that make me a bad person? I've never had to mess with registry settings for the Recycle Bin. I've also never tried to delete the Trash Can from OS X(How do you do that anyways?). But then again, you bring up a better point. Maybe that setting should be a little hidden. You don't want just anyone to go around screwing with stuff that they don't understand. But I know that if I do need to do something like that I'd just download and use TweakUI. Clear, easy to understand programs are more reliable and better for comprehension than any reading of manuals and editing of text files.
I hope this comes out clear. I don't have time to learn everything that there is in a OS. I just want the options to be available using programs that I can use. A simple checkbox and my life can go on. And being able to Tab to it makes it a great time saver.
In the over 10 years I have had to live with a Registry, I have never, not once, had to write cryptic strings into hard to remember subsections in the Registry. If I did have to write something in the registry it's exactly where I would expect it to be... In the software section under the heading of company name. I dunno. seems quite easy to me.
The real problem with the registry (for me anyways) has never been editing it. It's portability. You just can't take it with you easily.
But again, because almost all of the possible options are exposed in the options panel of any decent software, I have rarely(once maybe every 6 months) had to use any sort of registry editor. Honestly it doesn't get any easier than that.
Not quite. Ever since I got my MacBook I've been triple booting. It's all about best tools for the job and for me that isn't any one OS.
I want to believe that one OS is the best... OS X is great. But I need MORE options not less. I don't want to type a million things into a console (and have to remember all the options myself) or write into configuration files. I just want an option box that gives me all the options. OS X software typically does the kind of handholding where I'm given the least amount of options which can lead to decent output. Call me a tweaker or an option whore. I just like my software to behave exactly the way I want to, best practices be damned.
I actually do a lot of report processing at my job. I switch between reports all the time and I know what errors could occur. Thankfully Windows + Word has never issued a dialog while I'm in another document. It'll just blink in the taskbar waiting for me to alt+tab to the window with the problem. And when getting through these reports as fast as I can is what my employer is really looking at, being able to use the keyboard shortcuts to answer a dialog box saves me tons of time, instead of having to lift my hand and use the mouse.
All I ask for is that the OS doesn't treat me like I'm a brain dead child. I can learn and I'd rather learn once than be slower all the time.
But this isn't usable is it. If I'm using the tab key to cycle through controls, then its obvious that I want to use the keyboard for navigation. Not being to cycle through ALL the controls then seems counterproductive. Is there a case where cycling through only the textboxes and lists makes me more productive. Seems unlikely.
But this really is a function of the CPU isn't it. I can easily concoct examples that requires fewer instructions and fewer cycles depending on the CPU. There is a lot of new SIMD instructions that Core2 processors can now do in 1 cycle. Sooo in the end, what we really need is real world testing. Bring it on.
Now if this was a weapon that works, and I'm not saying that it would, wouldn't they just make it so that they can drop it where the enemy is, like a less explosive bomb? Makes sense to me
The Cell has as many "cores" as the device requires. It's an expandable CPU and that is why it's so intriguing. It has one main "core" which is really the brains of the operation and several coprocessing units that do very simple operations very very fast. But the cell DOES NOT have a set number of these units. It just so happens to have 8 in the PS3, 6 used for general purpose game/entertainments stuff, 1 for OS security, and 1 disabled for better yields.
You have to be able to imagine that this processor is supposed to be in all sorts of other devices. Say a cell phone with 1-2 coprocessing units because it has to be stingy with the power. Or a renderfarm with 16 spu's per Cell per computer to speed up video processing. Expandability is the key with the Cell architecture.
But magically words like "suckitude" become part of your vocabulary. You don't want that, do you?
1. It's true that you need to have a client "out there" with the video that you want to watch in order for this to work. In comes what I like to call super clients. Clients with high bandwidth abilities that auto-download torrents from popular sites and seed within their ability. They don't have to be watched and quickly give availability to the masses.
2. Really? you really shouldn't be watching YouTube at work. Not that I don't... =P
3. That's the exact thing we're trying to do! HD videos require large space and bandwidth requirements. Much more than a single service can ever handle. So we need regular people to help out. Uploading is part of the p2p game and you get faster service out of it. It doesn't have to ruin the rest of the internet experience. Just make sure that the you have enough upload bandwidth to do the rest of the stuff you want to do. I'm sure in the near future Azereus(it's been a while since I used it) will be able to intelligently upload depending on how much you are using the internet.
4. uh yeah. If you had Azereus then you had another window open helping with torrents: Again this is p2p's domain. I haven't used Zudeo so I really don't know about its interface. But interfaces need to be refined over time depending on how the users actually use the program. Just ask Apple(never buy an Apple 1.0 product). Magnet links may be generic but if you have multiple p2p clients then you seriously need to understand that it's up to you to determine which program handles what links. I use eMule, uTorrent and Sharaza, and some can use the same links, but I specifically state that I want eMule to handle ed2k links and shareaza to handle magnet links even though they both can handle both types.
Bah humbug. Screw you and your merry little Christmas. I want my Mp3 Player/Cell phone/Digital Camera/Game player/PDA/Fax machine/money sucker/relationship killer all in one device! Having fun with your family is nice and all but wouldn't it be a bit nicer with new shiny toys?
While if we marked the molecules on the water and tracked its passage, yes of course we would know that it isn't exactly the same as it was before. But it doesn't matter. They aren't looking for a 1 to 1 correspondence. It doesn't matter that the water molecule that we see isn't the same one we expected when it came down the stream. All that matters is that their is A water molecule that LOOKS the same heading in the right direction.
Also making something completely invisible to the naked eye would be a disaster for a person who was being invisible. But the person or thing doesn't have to be COMPLETELY invisible. For example, if a ninja were trying to be invisible, a pair of eyes are a lot easier to hide than an entire body. Just make the rest of the body invisible and move your eyes to where people aren't looking.
Or if you were making a plane invisible. Make the entire plane invisible except the windshield. Sure you could see people inside if you were looking at the plane from the front. But most people would be looking at one from the ground where you can't even see the windshield.
No seriously. Shoot the parents and administrators who insist on these silly rules. That'll teach them that there are more important things they need to be worried about.
What are you doing spinning your disks at 40x. Only theives would need to have their disks going that fast. I think they should go after cd drive manufacturers next...