Hey, I won't lie. I got my Mac mini for free by busting my ass at work. Would I have one otherwise? Probably not. I think it's a great platform, but I do think that it is hard to justify the price. I think that is changing though. Hopefully the switch to x86 will cause prices to drop a bit.
While I will agree that Gnome has one of the best UIs I've ever seen, when it comes to actual ease of use (installing programs, etc), OS X still wins hands down.
Let's just put it this way, I've used Linux for a long time, Windows for a long time, BSD for a long time, and OS X for a short amount of time (5 mos compared to years for the others)... I'm also a Tier 1 rep for Apple... I've never once had anyone call in saying they had an issue with failed dependencies when trying to install an app.
The only thing that really pisses me off with OS X is that I think that the focus should follow the mouse by default. As it stands, you've got to jump through some hoops to get that working.
Disclaimer: I'm a Tier 1 AppleCare rep, but hardly a mac fanboy.
A quick perusal of Dell's website (which, btw, is a UI nightmare) shows that the cheapest desktop model they have is a Dimension 2400, which starts at $299 (normally $374 but they're on sale right now). This machine comes with a 40GB HD, 256 MB RAM, 2.4 GHz Celeron processor (ha!), onboard intel graphics chipset, and a 17" monitor. Oh, don't forget the 32-64 MB of shared video memory for that onboard video. So 1/8-1/4 of your RAM is used up right out of the box. Not to mention the XP RAM usage footprint.
You say not to compare it to a mac mini... why not? It comes with the same amount of hard drive space, same amount of RAM, and a somewhat comparable processor. Not to mention the fact that any Mac you buy now comes with 10.4 preloaded, which pretty much has all of the bells and whistles MS keeps promising for their *eventual* release of Longhorn.
Also, let's not forget that Apple bundles the iLife suite, which includes video and audio production software. Granted, they are not the most powerful programs in the genre, but show me a Dell that comes with comparable software bundled out of the box.
Even if Apple is not the right thing for you, that's no reason to say that it's not right for someone else. Especially for a new user, considering Apple's tech support is pretty much accepted to be the best in the industry. Compare this to Dell, where you're lucky to get someone you understand when you call them.
Also, please provide further clarification of your statement "OS X is UNIX for morons". Considering that you can completely bypass the GUI if you wish, and can run X apps if you have X11 installed, and can get packages with Fink, I'd say it's hardly UNIX for morons.
Yeah, they charge a little more for their computers. The Mac mini is (IMHO) the sexiest consumer computer available on the market (from a purely aesthetic standpoint). I still have my PC, and it's ugly and grey, but it works. So does my Mac, it just happens to be a lot prettier (not to mention my PC sounds like a jet engine compared to the mini). I have the option of XP, OS X, and Ubuntu between the computers I have. I find myself using OS X primarily at this point.
Methinks you just fall into the group that is the antithesis of mac fanboys: anti-mac fanboys.
In soviet russia, apple copies microsoft^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h you!
Seriously though, Microsoft has been taking their sweet time for OS development. They are a hulking bohemoth. When was the last major update to the OS? All of these features that they are touting for their new software have already been implemented. Tabbed browsing in IE7. Big deal. That's so Opera and Firefox. Instantaneous indexed searching. Yawn, hey that's just like Spotlight.
Microsoft really needs to pick up the ball. So when the only other primary consumer competitor you have has an OS development cycle that is ~1-1.5 years between updates, and yours is twice that (not to mention MS's oft ridiculed delays in release), I don't think you can really claim any type of innovation or something.
I think you oversimplify the response you get on Linux support forums. I last used Linux ~5 years ago, until recently I installed Ubuntu. I had an issue with NDISWrapper, and I found the response to be very good. Not one person told me to RTFM (of course, I already had)... in fact, the responses I received were all very helpful.
YMMV, but the Ubuntu forums are full of very nice and helpful people.
Pardon the obligatory Family Guy reference in the subject line;-)
Let me just say though, it's not that difficult to mess up a machine running Mac OS X. All it takes is a (l)user who *thinks* s/he knows what the hell s/he's doing... starts deleting stuff from the System folder because "I needed more space on my hard drive!"
As soon as Camino supports Firefox extensions, I'd switch to it.
Seriously, how hard could it be? I'm not a programmer, but they're built off the same core for crying out loud! It doesn't seem like it'd be that hard...
That being said, I do prefer Camino's interface over that of Safari or Firefox. It looks the way an OS X browser should...
Well, I guess I should preface this comment by saying I am a Tier 1 rep for Applecare. So obviously, I would not like to think that I am not good at my job, or that my employer doesn't take care of their customers.
That being said, I think every company has issues with warranties. I think that Apple's plan is pretty fair. You get 1 year of hardware coverage. If you want three, you can spend anywhere from $149 (Mac Mini) to $349 (Powerbook) for an Applecare Protection Plan (APP). Additionally, it gives you the benefits of free phone support for that same 3 year period, onsite service (for desktop systems), and battery replacement (for portables).
The only people I've ever talked to that have had issues with Apple's warranty are the ones who haven't purchased the APP.
"What?!? You mean I have to pay $49 for tech support since I'm outside of my 90 days! That's BS!!!!!!1111!!" (keep in mind most companies charge for tech support these days)
"You mean you won't pay for my new logic board even though it failed 15 months after I purchased the unit?!?! You guys suck! You're con artists! You make pieces of shit!" (yeah, because components on PCs 'nevar fale!' and they're all MUCH better made than Apple machines *snark*. Even a low-end eMachine is better than those shitty Powermacs!)
You just spent $3000 for a Powermac. Is an extra $249 for an APP really going to kill you? It fucking TRIPLES the hardware warranty for gods sake, AND makes it so you don't have to box up the 60 pound machine and send it in for service. Live within 50 miles of an Apple store? Someone'll come out to your house and fix it. Retailers who offer service plans (Best Buy et al) won't even do that (as far as I know)
Hmm... interesting. I've always thought it would create an amusing (from my prole point of view) world if we directly tied a CEOs wage to the level of "social conscience" his or her company exhibits. If your company pollutes, you (as the CEO) lose money. If you defraud shareholders, you don't get paid. For extreme cases, throw them in jail.
At the very least, we'd finally get some reasonable reform in our prison system (given the upper crust whitebread infusion).
I was thinking Guinness without the coffee personally... but hell, I'll try anything once! Tomorrow is my beer day, I will post again about how it was;-)
Yeah I heard that... hopefully they will make it easy to adblock. I am thinking something like having all ads come from http://ads.google.com or something along those lines.
You know, this is something about/. that has bothered me for awhile. Yes, I am aware this is offtopic, but I don't care.
You people who use your mod points need to pay more attention before you mod something. My comment was the first one posted to this story that contained the full text of the article. NYT requires reg, not everyone likes to give out their personal info (probably even more so on slashdot than your "normal" segment of the population). I was trying to do something nice and post the text of the article so that people could read it without having to go through hoops. It is not redundant you twits, because it was the first fucking post that contained the text of the article. I was not trying to karma whore, so I did not expect the comment to me modded up-- but to mod it down as "redundant" is ridiculous. Now, if there were 3 other posts (or hell, I'll even give you 1) that contained the full text of the article that were posted BEFORE mine I would be much more understanding. As it is, things like this make me glad I and many other Slashdotters have the ability to meta-moderate. I will make sure to keep an eye out for ignorant moderation such as this, and I hope that enough people meta-moderate these dolts that don't pay attention so that they no longer have the ability to moderate comments without discretion.
I don't foresee Google adding ads to a local search function... there are no ads on the Google toolbar, nor are there any ads on the Google Deskbar (save the ones that appear in the mini browser, but those are merely Google.com ads).
Google seems to be as anti-ad as most people on Slashdot. I personally hate ads, but I feel that most of Google's ads are non-invasive and in good taste.
For those of you who hate to register. Google Moves Toward Clash With Microsoft
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: May 19, 2004
AN FRANCISCO, May 18 - Edging closer to a direct confrontation with Microsoft, Google, the Web search engine, is preparing to introduce a powerful file and text software search tool for locating information stored on personal computers.
Google's software, which is expected to be introduced soon, according to several people with knowledge of the company's plans, is the clearest indication to date that the company, based in Mountain View, Calif., hopes to extend its search business to compete directly with Microsoft's control of desktop computing.
Improved technology for searching information stored on a PC will also be a crucial feature of Microsoft's long-delayed version of its Windows operating system called Longhorn. That version, which is not expected before 2006 at the earliest, will have a redesigned file system, making it possible to track and retrieve information in ways not currently possible with Windows software.
Google's move is in part a defensive one, because the company is concerned about Microsoft's ability to make searching on the Web as well as on a PC a central part of its operating system. By integrating more search functions into Windows, Microsoft could conceivably challenge Google the way it threatened, and destroyed, an earlier rival, Netscape, by incorporating Web browsing into the Windows 98 operating system.
A Google spokesman declined to comment about the new search tool.
Although Google's core business rests on huge farms of server computers that permit fast searching on the Internet, the company has already taken several steps to move beyond that business.
Last year, Google began testing a free program called the Google Deskbar that makes it possible to search the Web by entering words and phrases in a small dialog box placed in the Windows desktop taskbar at the bottom of the computer screen.
Google also sells a computer search system designed to index and retrieve information created and stored by a single organization.
There is a rich history of less-than-successful attempts to create information search tools for personal computers. In the 1980's, for example, Mitchell Kapor's On Technology developed On Location for retrieving information on Macintosh computers and Bill Gross, a prominent software developer, led a group of programmers to create Lotus Magellan for the PC.
Digital Equipment's Alta Vista search engine group also developed a search tool for data stored on desktop PC's. Today there are a number of commercial products for desktop searches like X1 and dtSearch. Moreover, both the Macintosh and Windows operating systems have file and text retrieval capabilities.
The Google software project, which is code-named Puffin and which will be available as a free download from Google's Web site, has been running internally at the company for about a year.
The project was started, in part, to prepare Google for competing with Windows Longhorn, which according to industry analysts will dispense with the need for a stand-alone browser.
The disappearance of the Web browser and the integration of both Web search and PC search into the Windows operating system could potentially marginalize Google's search engine. Google, well aware of this threat, hired a Microsoft product manager last year to oversee the Puffin project as part of its strategy to compete with Microsoft's incursion into its territory.
Microsoft has shown demonstrations of its new search technology, which emphasizes the use of natural language in queries like "Where are my vacation photos?" or "What is a firewall?" Microsoft believes that Longhorn users will no longer think about where information is stored; they will instead see a unified view of documents stored on both the Internet and on the desktop.
The looming confrontation between Microsoft and Google is coming as Micro
I do not remember the exact link to go to to avoid registration, but if you go to google.com and enter the URL into the search box, then click where it says "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link: www.nytimes.com/2004/05/19/technology/19google.htm l?hp", you will get through. I am pretty sure this is because the referrer is Google.com and they are a NYT partner.
Of course the CEO's of the RIAA companies are rich, I don't really see that as relevant.
You make several good points that I wish I had the time to address right now, but I've been awake for a long time and sleep is beckoning me.
However, I do want to address that statement briefly. There is, in my opinion, nothing wrong with having or making money. If that was at all what was conveyed I apologize. My issue is not with the fact that they have money, but that they use other people to get it (I will not enter into a debate about that, I'm sure many people think that all people who have a lot of money use other people to get it). You state that there are legitimate alternatives to the RIAA. This may be true, although the RIAA is the most "known" face of the recording industry, they have the most clout, and they hold most of the cards in the deck compared to the "other guys" in the recording industry. I view it as a Microsoft situation-- there are other alternatives available but, to draw a comparison, RIAA alternatives are only known to/used by the music geeks (listeners of indie. I view them as the music world equivalent of linux users).
I don't know what my point was really, because I am tired as hell. Basically, I think that until the RIAA alternatives start to speak up, the RIAA will be synonymous with the music world (at least to the uninitiated)
"and the bible says 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth... The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God's people. Amen'" (that is Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21)
Of course the RIAA is going to fudge the numbers. If word got out that they were *GASP* not losing money, or at least not as much as they lead people to believe, it would make it oh-so-harder to justify their legal pursuit of grannies and pre-teens to the general public. As it is, it's a game of "oh look at us, we're the poor RIAA, we are making so much more money in a week than you poor consumers will ever make in our lives, but it's not as much as it used to be... we used to make more in a DAY than you would make in your entire life! Take pity on us, and understand why we are fucking the artists, and giving them pennies for every CD sold, so that we can afford limousines and caviar for our poor underfed kitties!". And the consumers eat it up, as evidenced by the ill-informed dolts saying things like "duh, anybody who downloads music off the internet is a thief". The RIAA makes it so that even if you download music that you're ALLOWED to (like Indy) it has a stigma associated with it. It's not about protecting "the artists", or the IP, it's about ensuring their lifestyle. They're thieves too, but in a way that is so much worse than average Joe Public who jumps on Kazaa or SoulSeek to download the new Creed/Eminem/[insert shitty pop band here] song-- Joe Public downloads the song because he likes or loves music, the RIAA and MPAA'ers of the world do what they do because they are money hungry fucks who will do anything they can to maintain their dominance.
I'm not a religious person, and I normally don't resort to Biblical citations, but I think this one applies:
"The love of money is the root of all evil." (also one of the most misquoted passages in the Bible just for the record).
On the reverse side, piracy is not the ideal situation either. I am a musician, and I hope someday to make a living off my music, but I know it won't be with a record deal-- and I sure as hell know it probably won't be from selling records. Hopefully by the time I am ready to try my music as a full time career we'll have something a bit more established that will allow truly independent music distribution, with a vehicle that guarantees the artist will at least see some money for their hard work.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, I won't lie. I got my Mac mini for free by busting my ass at work. Would I have one otherwise? Probably not. I think it's a great platform, but I do think that it is hard to justify the price. I think that is changing though. Hopefully the switch to x86 will cause prices to drop a bit.
I've used Gnome, KDE, windowmaker, etc.
While I will agree that Gnome has one of the best UIs I've ever seen, when it comes to actual ease of use (installing programs, etc), OS X still wins hands down.
Let's just put it this way, I've used Linux for a long time, Windows for a long time, BSD for a long time, and OS X for a short amount of time (5 mos compared to years for the others)... I'm also a Tier 1 rep for Apple... I've never once had anyone call in saying they had an issue with failed dependencies when trying to install an app.
The only thing that really pisses me off with OS X is that I think that the focus should follow the mouse by default. As it stands, you've got to jump through some hoops to get that working.
Show me a BSD window manager that is as pretty, not to mention easy to use, and I will agree with you.
Disclaimer: I'm a Tier 1 AppleCare rep, but hardly a mac fanboy.
A quick perusal of Dell's website (which, btw, is a UI nightmare) shows that the cheapest desktop model they have is a Dimension 2400, which starts at $299 (normally $374 but they're on sale right now). This machine comes with a 40GB HD, 256 MB RAM, 2.4 GHz Celeron processor (ha!), onboard intel graphics chipset, and a 17" monitor. Oh, don't forget the 32-64 MB of shared video memory for that onboard video. So 1/8-1/4 of your RAM is used up right out of the box. Not to mention the XP RAM usage footprint.
You say not to compare it to a mac mini... why not? It comes with the same amount of hard drive space, same amount of RAM, and a somewhat comparable processor. Not to mention the fact that any Mac you buy now comes with 10.4 preloaded, which pretty much has all of the bells and whistles MS keeps promising for their *eventual* release of Longhorn.
Also, let's not forget that Apple bundles the iLife suite, which includes video and audio production software. Granted, they are not the most powerful programs in the genre, but show me a Dell that comes with comparable software bundled out of the box.
Even if Apple is not the right thing for you, that's no reason to say that it's not right for someone else. Especially for a new user, considering Apple's tech support is pretty much accepted to be the best in the industry. Compare this to Dell, where you're lucky to get someone you understand when you call them.
Also, please provide further clarification of your statement "OS X is UNIX for morons". Considering that you can completely bypass the GUI if you wish, and can run X apps if you have X11 installed, and can get packages with Fink, I'd say it's hardly UNIX for morons.
Yeah, they charge a little more for their computers. The Mac mini is (IMHO) the sexiest consumer computer available on the market (from a purely aesthetic standpoint). I still have my PC, and it's ugly and grey, but it works. So does my Mac, it just happens to be a lot prettier (not to mention my PC sounds like a jet engine compared to the mini). I have the option of XP, OS X, and Ubuntu between the computers I have. I find myself using OS X primarily at this point.
Methinks you just fall into the group that is the antithesis of mac fanboys: anti-mac fanboys.
In soviet russia, apple copies microsoft^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h you!
Seriously though, Microsoft has been taking their sweet time for OS development. They are a hulking bohemoth. When was the last major update to the OS? All of these features that they are touting for their new software have already been implemented. Tabbed browsing in IE7. Big deal. That's so Opera and Firefox. Instantaneous indexed searching. Yawn, hey that's just like Spotlight.
Microsoft really needs to pick up the ball. So when the only other primary consumer competitor you have has an OS development cycle that is ~1-1.5 years between updates, and yours is twice that (not to mention MS's oft ridiculed delays in release), I don't think you can really claim any type of innovation or something.
I think you oversimplify the response you get on Linux support forums. I last used Linux ~5 years ago, until recently I installed Ubuntu. I had an issue with NDISWrapper, and I found the response to be very good. Not one person told me to RTFM (of course, I already had)... in fact, the responses I received were all very helpful.
YMMV, but the Ubuntu forums are full of very nice and helpful people.
Pardon the obligatory Family Guy reference in the subject line ;-)
Let me just say though, it's not that difficult to mess up a machine running Mac OS X. All it takes is a (l)user who *thinks* s/he knows what the hell s/he's doing... starts deleting stuff from the System folder because "I needed more space on my hard drive!"
As soon as Camino supports Firefox extensions, I'd switch to it.
Seriously, how hard could it be? I'm not a programmer, but they're built off the same core for crying out loud! It doesn't seem like it'd be that hard...
That being said, I do prefer Camino's interface over that of Safari or Firefox. It looks the way an OS X browser should...
You have an insanely low slashdot UID!
;-)
Therefore, everything you say must be true!
Flawed analogy.
Goldstein and the Brotherhood was a falsity (within the realm of fiction that was 1984).
This is very real.
Well, I guess I should preface this comment by saying I am a Tier 1 rep for Applecare. So obviously, I would not like to think that I am not good at my job, or that my employer doesn't take care of their customers.
That being said, I think every company has issues with warranties. I think that Apple's plan is pretty fair. You get 1 year of hardware coverage. If you want three, you can spend anywhere from $149 (Mac Mini) to $349 (Powerbook) for an Applecare Protection Plan (APP). Additionally, it gives you the benefits of free phone support for that same 3 year period, onsite service (for desktop systems), and battery replacement (for portables).
The only people I've ever talked to that have had issues with Apple's warranty are the ones who haven't purchased the APP.
"What?!? You mean I have to pay $49 for tech support since I'm outside of my 90 days! That's BS!!!!!!1111!!" (keep in mind most companies charge for tech support these days)
"You mean you won't pay for my new logic board even though it failed 15 months after I purchased the unit?!?! You guys suck! You're con artists! You make pieces of shit!" (yeah, because components on PCs 'nevar fale!' and they're all MUCH better made than Apple machines *snark*. Even a low-end eMachine is better than those shitty Powermacs!)
You just spent $3000 for a Powermac. Is an extra $249 for an APP really going to kill you? It fucking TRIPLES the hardware warranty for gods sake, AND makes it so you don't have to box up the 60 pound machine and send it in for service. Live within 50 miles of an Apple store? Someone'll come out to your house and fix it. Retailers who offer service plans (Best Buy et al) won't even do that (as far as I know)
Lesson: Buy the damn APP.
I, for one, am against the usage of any acronym that is so close to nad. In fact, the pronounciation would be exactly the same.
That would like the Society for Trendy Undeserving People Instigating Debate
Hmm... interesting. I've always thought it would create an amusing (from my prole point of view) world if we directly tied a CEOs wage to the level of "social conscience" his or her company exhibits. If your company pollutes, you (as the CEO) lose money. If you defraud shareholders, you don't get paid. For extreme cases, throw them in jail.
At the very least, we'd finally get some reasonable reform in our prison system (given the upper crust whitebread infusion).
I was thinking Guinness without the coffee personally... but hell, I'll try anything once! Tomorrow is my beer day, I will post again about how it was ;-)
I was thinking Baileys Irish Cream (never drink coffee without it), but I guess Guinness will work too ;-)
Yeah I heard that... hopefully they will make it easy to adblock. I am thinking something like having all ads come from http://ads.google.com or something along those lines.
corrected
;-)
Damnit, talk about deflating someones balloon!
So let me rephrase that:
My comment was the first top-level post on this story that contained the text from the article.
/me awaits someone else to prove that statement wrong too...
You know, this is something about /. that has bothered me for awhile. Yes, I am aware this is offtopic, but I don't care.
You people who use your mod points need to pay more attention before you mod something. My comment was the first one posted to this story that contained the full text of the article. NYT requires reg, not everyone likes to give out their personal info (probably even more so on slashdot than your "normal" segment of the population). I was trying to do something nice and post the text of the article so that people could read it without having to go through hoops. It is not redundant you twits, because it was the first fucking post that contained the text of the article. I was not trying to karma whore, so I did not expect the comment to me modded up-- but to mod it down as "redundant" is ridiculous. Now, if there were 3 other posts (or hell, I'll even give you 1) that contained the full text of the article that were posted BEFORE mine I would be much more understanding. As it is, things like this make me glad I and many other Slashdotters have the ability to meta-moderate. I will make sure to keep an eye out for ignorant moderation such as this, and I hope that enough people meta-moderate these dolts that don't pay attention so that they no longer have the ability to moderate comments without discretion.
Have a bright and wonderful day!
Dan.
I don't foresee Google adding ads to a local search function... there are no ads on the Google toolbar, nor are there any ads on the Google Deskbar (save the ones that appear in the mini browser, but those are merely Google.com ads).
Google seems to be as anti-ad as most people on Slashdot. I personally hate ads, but I feel that most of Google's ads are non-invasive and in good taste.
For those of you who hate to register.
Google Moves Toward Clash With Microsoft
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: May 19, 2004
AN FRANCISCO, May 18 - Edging closer to a direct confrontation with Microsoft, Google, the Web search engine, is preparing to introduce a powerful file and text software search tool for locating information stored on personal computers.
Google's software, which is expected to be introduced soon, according to several people with knowledge of the company's plans, is the clearest indication to date that the company, based in Mountain View, Calif., hopes to extend its search business to compete directly with Microsoft's control of desktop computing.
Improved technology for searching information stored on a PC will also be a crucial feature of Microsoft's long-delayed version of its Windows operating system called Longhorn. That version, which is not expected before 2006 at the earliest, will have a redesigned file system, making it possible to track and retrieve information in ways not currently possible with Windows software.
Google's move is in part a defensive one, because the company is concerned about Microsoft's ability to make searching on the Web as well as on a PC a central part of its operating system. By integrating more search functions into Windows, Microsoft could conceivably challenge Google the way it threatened, and destroyed, an earlier rival, Netscape, by incorporating Web browsing into the Windows 98 operating system.
A Google spokesman declined to comment about the new search tool.
Although Google's core business rests on huge farms of server computers that permit fast searching on the Internet, the company has already taken several steps to move beyond that business.
Last year, Google began testing a free program called the Google Deskbar that makes it possible to search the Web by entering words and phrases in a small dialog box placed in the Windows desktop taskbar at the bottom of the computer screen.
Google also sells a computer search system designed to index and retrieve information created and stored by a single organization.
There is a rich history of less-than-successful attempts to create information search tools for personal computers. In the 1980's, for example, Mitchell Kapor's On Technology developed On Location for retrieving information on Macintosh computers and Bill Gross, a prominent software developer, led a group of programmers to create Lotus Magellan for the PC.
Digital Equipment's Alta Vista search engine group also developed a search tool for data stored on desktop PC's. Today there are a number of commercial products for desktop searches like X1 and dtSearch. Moreover, both the Macintosh and Windows operating systems have file and text retrieval capabilities.
The Google software project, which is code-named Puffin and which will be available as a free download from Google's Web site, has been running internally at the company for about a year.
The project was started, in part, to prepare Google for competing with Windows Longhorn, which according to industry analysts will dispense with the need for a stand-alone browser.
The disappearance of the Web browser and the integration of both Web search and PC search into the Windows operating system could potentially marginalize Google's search engine. Google, well aware of this threat, hired a Microsoft product manager last year to oversee the Puffin project as part of its strategy to compete with Microsoft's incursion into its territory.
Microsoft has shown demonstrations of its new search technology, which emphasizes the use of natural language in queries like "Where are my vacation photos?" or "What is a firewall?" Microsoft believes that Longhorn users will no longer think about where information is stored; they will instead see a unified view of documents stored on both the Internet and on the desktop.
The looming confrontation between Microsoft and Google is coming as Micro
I do not remember the exact link to go to to avoid registration, but if you go to google.com and enter the URL into the search box, then click where it says "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link: www.nytimes.com/2004/05/19/technology/19google.htm l?hp", you will get through. I am pretty sure this is because the referrer is Google.com and they are a NYT partner.
Of course the CEO's of the RIAA companies are rich, I don't really see that as relevant.
You make several good points that I wish I had the time to address right now, but I've been awake for a long time and sleep is beckoning me.
However, I do want to address that statement briefly. There is, in my opinion, nothing wrong with having or making money. If that was at all what was conveyed I apologize. My issue is not with the fact that they have money, but that they use other people to get it (I will not enter into a debate about that, I'm sure many people think that all people who have a lot of money use other people to get it). You state that there are legitimate alternatives to the RIAA. This may be true, although the RIAA is the most "known" face of the recording industry, they have the most clout, and they hold most of the cards in the deck compared to the "other guys" in the recording industry. I view it as a Microsoft situation-- there are other alternatives available but, to draw a comparison, RIAA alternatives are only known to/used by the music geeks (listeners of indie. I view them as the music world equivalent of linux users).
I don't know what my point was really, because I am tired as hell. Basically, I think that until the RIAA alternatives start to speak up, the RIAA will be synonymous with the music world (at least to the uninitiated)
Just like I could say:
... The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God's people. Amen'" (that is Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21)
:-)
"and the bible says 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth
gotta love taking things out of context
I know! And the RIAA of all companies, what with their previous track record of honesty and piety!
Of course the RIAA is going to fudge the numbers. If word got out that they were *GASP* not losing money, or at least not as much as they lead people to believe, it would make it oh-so-harder to justify their legal pursuit of grannies and pre-teens to the general public. As it is, it's a game of "oh look at us, we're the poor RIAA, we are making so much more money in a week than you poor consumers will ever make in our lives, but it's not as much as it used to be... we used to make more in a DAY than you would make in your entire life! Take pity on us, and understand why we are fucking the artists, and giving them pennies for every CD sold, so that we can afford limousines and caviar for our poor underfed kitties!". And the consumers eat it up, as evidenced by the ill-informed dolts saying things like "duh, anybody who downloads music off the internet is a thief". The RIAA makes it so that even if you download music that you're ALLOWED to (like Indy) it has a stigma associated with it. It's not about protecting "the artists", or the IP, it's about ensuring their lifestyle. They're thieves too, but in a way that is so much worse than average Joe Public who jumps on Kazaa or SoulSeek to download the new Creed/Eminem/[insert shitty pop band here] song-- Joe Public downloads the song because he likes or loves music, the RIAA and MPAA'ers of the world do what they do because they are money hungry fucks who will do anything they can to maintain their dominance.
I'm not a religious person, and I normally don't resort to Biblical citations, but I think this one applies:
"The love of money is the root of all evil." (also one of the most misquoted passages in the Bible just for the record).
On the reverse side, piracy is not the ideal situation either. I am a musician, and I hope someday to make a living off my music, but I know it won't be with a record deal-- and I sure as hell know it probably won't be from selling records. Hopefully by the time I am ready to try my music as a full time career we'll have something a bit more established that will allow truly independent music distribution, with a vehicle that guarantees the artist will at least see some money for their hard work.
Dan