Can be read during takeoff and landing on an airplane
Can be resold or donated or given away
They have some disadvantages:
Chew up some dead trees
Large and bulky, hard to travel with
But for me the advantages outweigh disadvantages. BUT I still refuse to pay more for an ebook. I'd rather pay the physical book. But I don't do that, instead I purchase indie books, or read classics
What does pottermore have to do with anything? Amazon doesn't set the prices, the publishers do. The publishers can release books to several sellers, Barnes and Noble, Apple AND even Amazon.
Well so far all that supposed word of both has generated 2500 sales. So yeah "poor" is accurate. Over 90 percent of your "fan" base doesn't think much of you, other than to be selfish and greedy.
I recently wanted to read Stephen King's first novel. Published some 40 odd years ago. I'm sure the proofreading and the marketing and the layout have all been bought and paid for. Ebook price? $7.99.
End result, I opted to pick up some free classics (and a couple of cheaper indies)
(Paper and ink are dirt cheap; proofreaders and marketing teams aren't.)
I refuse to buy an ebook that is priced at the same price as the mass market paperback.
This has nothing to do with how much they paid the proofreader, or the lumberjack. It comes down to how much I am willing to pay. Barnes and Noble gives me %10 off the cover price for a mass market paper back. So why should I then pay more for the ebook?
The same proofreading and marketing and layout goes into generating the mass market paperback. In addition there is a cost for the physical book. Paper, shipping, storage.
I'm not asking for dirt cheap, or free ebooks. Just don't charge me more for the ebook.
Agreed. I can't understand why this clueless guy got placement on slashdot... Oh that's right, its a pro-piracy story,
An author, whose books are published by a publisher that just announced they are going to start shipping non DRM titles is a pro pirate and clueless? How much closer to the story do you have to get to have a clue? And if it is your OWN product, how are you a pirate?
Maybe you need to look in the mirror to find the clueless one.
Re:interestingly lawyers do this anyway
on
Hacking the Law
·
· Score: 1
The more I get targeted and harassed the less likely I am to buy.
If you are a guy, what would you rather see? An add for tampons, or an add for WOW or beer or other manly product?
A targeted ad should be less harassing, less oppressive, and more likely that you will pay attention to the ad.
Because the airlines don't do that. I was flying internationally and thanks to the TSA (and Delta's stupid baggage fees) missed my flight. I was meeting someone and had to get to Europe. I found a later flight to my connecting city and would let me catch my overseas flight. I went to the gate, bought a ticket, and was one of the last people to board the plane. Cost? Full price, in fact probably more than what most people on the plane paid. If I didn't buy the ticket, the seat would have been empty, as you couldn't get it much more last minute than that.
Caveat Emptor
I'm not sure what your point is, or how things are different today than they are 2000 years ago.
Not everyone is trying to screw you over. But pretty much everyone is trying to make a buck. Sometimes that means what is best for both of you, sometimes it doesn't.
Regardless of application, I feel that all patents are a bad idea. Inventing something gives you an edge over the competition,
Patents are supposed to protect the little guy. When your competition has enough money to go to market TOMORROW and they just need to figure out that last little piece, and then you(the small inventor) figure it out. While you are scrambling for the money and infastructure to take your product to market, the big guys can jump on the band wagon immediately (because they stole your idea). You won't be driven out of the market in a year, you'll be driven out of the market today.
The real problem with software patents is the part of figuring it out. You are supposed to patent things that are hard to figure out. Not things everyone in the know can figure out. But that is what is happening. One person patents it, of course it is trivial, so others come up with the same idea, and are screwed.
It remains to be seen whether this guy can sucker some jury with a Doctrine of Equivalents story.
Like many software patents, I question the novelty. How hard is it to go from sliding things around to "throwing" them off the screen? The code isn't complicated (even in 98) the concept isn't that complicated. Anyone with half a brain can come up with some of this stuff.
You're erroneously linking interest in athletics to interest in colleges. While there are those who base their college choices on sports teams, for many people it is still about the Education and the Experience.
You do realize that part of "the Experience" IS the sports? You do realize that MANY people choose schools not soley based on education. The base it on location (close or far from home, near a beach, etc) and for many people the success of the sports plays a role.
I enjoy watching sports and probably would not go to a school that didn't have a decent sports program
Why is this sensible? Why do we care that his ID matches his boarding pass? My ID doesn't need to match my ticket when I go to the movies, or the ball game, or get on a bus. Why does it need to match when I get on a plane? Why does the TSA care that the boarding pass is valid. The airline should care, and that is it.
So far as I can see from a brief glipse at the law in question, it basically amounts to giving police powers to directly enforce whatever rules IOC comes up to. This, in particular, looks like it allows the police to arrest you on the spot if you're wearing a T-shirt with a wrong logo or anything like that.
Wearing a tshirt? Where do you read that. I didn't read the whole law, but what I did read (and what they can arrest you for) revolves around trade. I don't know the general UK laws, but I do know elsewhere they require permits to sale stuff, and you can be arrested if you don't have the permits.
Fact is the ribbon was designed from user feedback, and while slashdot trolls can cite himself and his 5 immediate co-workers as people who do not like the ribbon, Microsoft can point to thousands of data points and usage metrics to explain why the Ribbon is in fact a better UI.
Pretty much everything at Microsoft is designed from user feedback. But there are ways to guide that feedback. The ribbon was designed from way less user feedback than you thick. The ribbon's main purpose is to look different then 2007
Most of the data points that point that the "ribbon" is a better UI isn't actually ribbon related.
Let me ask you, what would you prefer, a menu or a toolbar? The ribbon is just a sticky menu, a step backwards.
Not sure I buy that. Less mouse movement maybe, but the targets are larger in Office, so it's unclear which interface has less target time according to Fitts Law. I think the Ribbon still wins overall since there is more functionality within 2 clicks than in the old menu.
This may be true, but there is WAY fewer items that can be access with 1 click than before. I find that for a lot of what I want to do, I am click 2 or 3 times, when before I clicked once.
Wow, you got it exactly right, except where you are wrong:
1) The default Ribbon layout is roughly TWICE has high as the default toolbar layout. The default toolbar layout is Caption/Menu/Standard Toolbar. The ribbon? A larger caption, a "menu", and the ribbon which is about the height of three toolbars. You could hide the toolbars, have as much functionaility and still have more space (only a few pixels, remember the caption is taller)
2) There were keyboard shortcuts to every menu item. You have to look at each menu, or each ribbon, discoverability about the same
3) There is room for only a handful of buttons in the quick access toolbar. Unlike the multitude of toolbars and buttons from before.
It completely exposes the functionality of Office,
Except the stuff that is hidden. And yes there are items that could easily be found on the old menus/toolbars that aren't on the ribbon.
My biggest problem with the ribbon is the amount of extra mouse clicks it takes to do something. They did do some things right with the ribbon, like automatically changing the font. But that could have been done with toolbars as well.
Slashdot Mirror
They have some disadvantages:
But for me the advantages outweigh disadvantages. BUT I still refuse to pay more for an ebook. I'd rather pay the physical book. But I don't do that, instead I purchase indie books, or read classics
What does pottermore have to do with anything? Amazon doesn't set the prices, the publishers do. The publishers can release books to several sellers, Barnes and Noble, Apple AND even Amazon.
The poor bastard!
Well so far all that supposed word of both has generated 2500 sales. So yeah "poor" is accurate. Over 90 percent of your "fan" base doesn't think much of you, other than to be selfish and greedy.
I recently wanted to read Stephen King's first novel. Published some 40 odd years ago. I'm sure the proofreading and the marketing and the layout have all been bought and paid for. Ebook price? $7.99.
End result, I opted to pick up some free classics (and a couple of cheaper indies)
(Paper and ink are dirt cheap; proofreaders and marketing teams aren't.)
I refuse to buy an ebook that is priced at the same price as the mass market paperback.
This has nothing to do with how much they paid the proofreader, or the lumberjack. It comes down to how much I am willing to pay. Barnes and Noble gives me %10 off the cover price for a mass market paper back. So why should I then pay more for the ebook?
The same proofreading and marketing and layout goes into generating the mass market paperback. In addition there is a cost for the physical book. Paper, shipping, storage.
I'm not asking for dirt cheap, or free ebooks. Just don't charge me more for the ebook.
Agreed. I can't understand why this clueless guy got placement on slashdot... Oh that's right, its a pro-piracy story,
An author, whose books are published by a publisher that just announced they are going to start shipping non DRM titles is a pro pirate and clueless?
How much closer to the story do you have to get to have a clue? And if it is your OWN product, how are you a pirate?
Maybe you need to look in the mirror to find the clueless one.
computer programmers try to play by the rules:
RTFM? You are joking right?
The more I get targeted and harassed the less likely I am to buy.
If you are a guy, what would you rather see? An add for tampons, or an add for WOW or beer or other manly product?
A targeted ad should be less harassing, less oppressive, and more likely that you will pay attention to the ad.
Because the airlines don't do that. I was flying internationally and thanks to the TSA (and Delta's stupid baggage fees) missed my flight. I was meeting someone and had to get to Europe. I found a later flight to my connecting city and would let me catch my overseas flight. I went to the gate, bought a ticket, and was one of the last people to board the plane. Cost? Full price, in fact probably more than what most people on the plane paid. If I didn't buy the ticket, the seat would have been empty, as you couldn't get it much more last minute than that.
Caveat Emptor
I'm not sure what your point is, or how things are different today than they are 2000 years ago.
Not everyone is trying to screw you over. But pretty much everyone is trying to make a buck. Sometimes that means what is best for both of you, sometimes it doesn't.
Regardless of application, I feel that all patents are a bad idea. Inventing something gives you an edge over the competition,
Patents are supposed to protect the little guy. When your competition has enough money to go to market TOMORROW and they just need to figure out that last little piece, and then you(the small inventor) figure it out. While you are scrambling for the money and infastructure to take your product to market, the big guys can jump on the band wagon immediately (because they stole your idea). You won't be driven out of the market in a year, you'll be driven out of the market today.
The real problem with software patents is the part of figuring it out. You are supposed to patent things that are hard to figure out. Not things everyone in the know can figure out. But that is what is happening. One person patents it, of course it is trivial, so others come up with the same idea, and are screwed.
It remains to be seen whether this guy can sucker some jury with a Doctrine of Equivalents story.
Like many software patents, I question the novelty. How hard is it to go from sliding things around to "throwing" them off the screen? The code isn't complicated (even in 98) the concept isn't that complicated. Anyone with half a brain can come up with some of this stuff.
You have to spend money to make money. Paying the lowest bidder isn't always the cheapest option, doesn't always increase the shareholder value.
You're erroneously linking interest in athletics to interest in colleges. While there are those who base their college choices on sports teams, for many people it is still about the Education and the Experience.
You do realize that part of "the Experience" IS the sports? You do realize that MANY people choose schools not soley based on education. The base it on location (close or far from home, near a beach, etc) and for many people the success of the sports plays a role.
I enjoy watching sports and probably would not go to a school that didn't have a decent sports program
If you are still traveling on other peoples return flights (when the buy a round trip), it is time to stop!
Again. WHY?
Wow... You know I have a very Christian name... LITERALLY. It is 11 characters... Guess what? It is sometimes too long.
Glad they are closing this loophole, it is one of the very few things the TSA has done or is doing that makes sense.
You are being sarcastic, right?
Why is this sensible? Why do we care that his ID matches his boarding pass? My ID doesn't need to match my ticket when I go to the movies, or the ball game, or get on a bus. Why does it need to match when I get on a plane? Why does the TSA care that the boarding pass is valid. The airline should care, and that is it.
Do the RIAA and MPAA even have elections? Plenty of those affected will have no right to vote in either the USA or New Zealand in any case.
Yes the RIAA and MPAA have elections.
And you don't have to be a USA or even a New Zealand citizen to vote. Just need to be a shareholder.
So far as I can see from a brief glipse at the law in question, it basically amounts to giving police powers to directly enforce whatever rules IOC comes up to. This, in particular, looks like it allows the police to arrest you on the spot if you're wearing a T-shirt with a wrong logo or anything like that.
Wearing a tshirt? Where do you read that. I didn't read the whole law, but what I did read (and what they can arrest you for) revolves around trade. I don't know the general UK laws, but I do know elsewhere they require permits to sale stuff, and you can be arrested if you don't have the permits.
I appreciate the Olympics, but I'm not giving up my rights just because my country is hosting them.
What rights do you think you are giving up?
Fact is the ribbon was designed from user feedback, and while slashdot trolls can cite himself and his 5 immediate co-workers as people who do not like the ribbon, Microsoft can point to thousands of data points and usage metrics to explain why the Ribbon is in fact a better UI.
Pretty much everything at Microsoft is designed from user feedback. But there are ways to guide that feedback. The ribbon was designed from way less user feedback than you thick. The ribbon's main purpose is to look different then 2007
Most of the data points that point that the "ribbon" is a better UI isn't actually ribbon related.
Let me ask you, what would you prefer, a menu or a toolbar? The ribbon is just a sticky menu, a step backwards.
Not sure I buy that. Less mouse movement maybe, but the targets are larger in Office, so it's unclear which interface has less target time according to Fitts Law. I think the Ribbon still wins overall since there is more functionality within 2 clicks than in the old menu.
This may be true, but there is WAY fewer items that can be access with 1 click than before. I find that for a lot of what I want to do, I am click 2 or 3 times, when before I clicked once.
Wow, you got it exactly right, except where you are wrong: 1) The default Ribbon layout is roughly TWICE has high as the default toolbar layout. The default toolbar layout is Caption/Menu/Standard Toolbar. The ribbon? A larger caption, a "menu", and the ribbon which is about the height of three toolbars. You could hide the toolbars, have as much functionaility and still have more space (only a few pixels, remember the caption is taller)
2) There were keyboard shortcuts to every menu item. You have to look at each menu, or each ribbon, discoverability about the same
3) There is room for only a handful of buttons in the quick access toolbar. Unlike the multitude of toolbars and buttons from before.
It completely exposes the functionality of Office,
Except the stuff that is hidden. And yes there are items that could easily be found on the old menus/toolbars that aren't on the ribbon.
My biggest problem with the ribbon is the amount of extra mouse clicks it takes to do something. They did do some things right with the ribbon, like automatically changing the font. But that could have been done with toolbars as well.