_122_fs.jpg "ARTIST ANATOMY | THE HUMAN")
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 03:37 PM
I don't doubt this, but from someone who has been using Windows since 3.1.1, take my word that Vista is a gigantic improvement over XP. While I agree that MS's claims of grandure aren't justified, there's no denying that Vista is a noteworthy upgrade (rather than an 8-month downgrade until SP1 surfaces).
So what? Really, not be flip, but XP was a big improvement over 98, and 98 was a bit improvement over 95, etc. A very significant number of people simply do not care. If XP or 98 or whatever they are using suffices, then they are not going to take the Vista plunge.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
Microsoft has taught its customers that the risks can easily outweigh the benefits. That lesson may be finally sinking in.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
Well it does and it doesn't. If Microsoft is looking for a big upgrade movement, then I think they're not going to get it. And I don't think that a lot people will walk into Best Buy and buy a new PC because they like the look of Vista. As always, I believe the need that drives new PC purchases is to get new hardware, not the newest version of Windows. I think I've got history on my side of this debate. But we shall see!
So what? Really, not be flip, but XP was a big improvement over 98, and 98 was a bit improvement over 95, etc. A very significant number of people simply do not care. If XP or 98 or whatever they are using suffices, then they are not going to take the Vista plunge.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
Microsoft has taught its customers that the risks can easily outweigh the benefits. That lesson may be finally sinking in.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
Well it does and it doesn't. If Microsoft is looking for a big upgrade movement, then I think they're not going to get it. And I don't think that a lot people will walk into Best Buy and buy a new PC because they like the look of Vista. As always, I believe the need that drives new PC purchases is to get new hardware, not the newest version of Windows. I think I've got history on my side of this debate. But we shall see!
Night Spring
Apr 27, 02:00 PM
IE9 on Win7. Buttons currently working with no purple box.
Akme
Apr 9, 10:24 AM
Both companies are overly focused on shoehorning their mobile experiences into their desktop operating systems. Both Lion and Windows 8 will see some new features, however, I think (for the most part) they will be releases with a view to long-term unification between mobile and desktop, rather than being focused on an extensive list of features.
While some people are unhappy with some of the steps that Apple have taken in 10.7 toward this, and are judging the new feature list as being somewhat limited, I believe Microsoft will do much of the same for Windows 8.
Windows 7 is to Vista as Snow Leopard is to Leopard. As a result, I believe their next releases will follow a similar trajectory.
While some people are unhappy with some of the steps that Apple have taken in 10.7 toward this, and are judging the new feature list as being somewhat limited, I believe Microsoft will do much of the same for Windows 8.
Windows 7 is to Vista as Snow Leopard is to Leopard. As a result, I believe their next releases will follow a similar trajectory.
AlBDamned
Nov 15, 07:23 PM
my personal gripes/opinions:
multiplayer:
* lots of things to collect and customize .. which is great
* apart of that: average at best:
* many guns essentially worthless: shot guns having a range of 5 meters, machine guns being no more powerfull than assault rifles but way less accurate, and game being too fast paced for sniping rifles...
*knife connecting from ridiculous angles and distances: if _I_ can hit somebody else with a knife when he is standing next to me then there is something wrong
*lots of game modes of which perhaps only 1/3 is actually fun on the actual maps..which for some modes are way too small
*ridiculous bad net code : connection problems, host migrations (working in 1/4 of al lcases), random disconnects, lag, voice echoes and problems, and sound issues
Agree with all of this about the multiplayer. I sure as hell hope there's a significant patch in the works for all platforms, but even that will not bring this game up to where it should be given its history.
It's just a shame that a) MW3 is a long way away; and b) given all the stuff that's gone down at Infinity Ward, there's no guarantee that will be any good either (although it should look like a 2010 game, not something on the PS2). Treyarch jumped the shark completely with Black Ops multiplayer.
multiplayer:
* lots of things to collect and customize .. which is great
* apart of that: average at best:
* many guns essentially worthless: shot guns having a range of 5 meters, machine guns being no more powerfull than assault rifles but way less accurate, and game being too fast paced for sniping rifles...
*knife connecting from ridiculous angles and distances: if _I_ can hit somebody else with a knife when he is standing next to me then there is something wrong
*lots of game modes of which perhaps only 1/3 is actually fun on the actual maps..which for some modes are way too small
*ridiculous bad net code : connection problems, host migrations (working in 1/4 of al lcases), random disconnects, lag, voice echoes and problems, and sound issues
Agree with all of this about the multiplayer. I sure as hell hope there's a significant patch in the works for all platforms, but even that will not bring this game up to where it should be given its history.
It's just a shame that a) MW3 is a long way away; and b) given all the stuff that's gone down at Infinity Ward, there's no guarantee that will be any good either (although it should look like a 2010 game, not something on the PS2). Treyarch jumped the shark completely with Black Ops multiplayer.
MattSepeta
May 4, 03:55 PM
Exactly. Physicians can't be sitting there going through every single life hazard.
"Do you walk across the street?"
"Yes"
"You should look both ways."
"No ****!"
"Do you go to the mall?"
"Yes"
"You should keep children under the age of 5 close at your side at all times."
"No ****!"
Which brings me back to my initial reply. A "Firearm" has ZERO possibility of injuring your child, until someone behaves irresponsibly. I am fine with a doctor providing a pamphlet of common household hazards and steps to prevent them, but I get the feeling this is not the case. I can too easily imagine the doctor going off on a tangent about firearms deaths statistics, etc...
But again, the most important part: If you dont want your doctor "politicing" you, GO TO A NEW DOCTOR. There should NEVER be laws against what you can or can not say.
"Do you walk across the street?"
"Yes"
"You should look both ways."
"No ****!"
"Do you go to the mall?"
"Yes"
"You should keep children under the age of 5 close at your side at all times."
"No ****!"
Which brings me back to my initial reply. A "Firearm" has ZERO possibility of injuring your child, until someone behaves irresponsibly. I am fine with a doctor providing a pamphlet of common household hazards and steps to prevent them, but I get the feeling this is not the case. I can too easily imagine the doctor going off on a tangent about firearms deaths statistics, etc...
But again, the most important part: If you dont want your doctor "politicing" you, GO TO A NEW DOCTOR. There should NEVER be laws against what you can or can not say.
georgethomas
Apr 7, 09:02 PM
Mobile ADs! It is pretty distinctive because 20% of consumer will open an email ad meanwhile 97% will view a mobile ad. Such a big contrast!
Multimedia
Aug 7, 09:48 PM
Anyone Here Think We Should Buy Dell 30" Displays Instead? They are still a lot less money with more inputs. :)
quagmire
Jan 12, 09:38 AM
Jobs wasn't smug at all IMHO. He was excited about it. You should of clearly seen that. He made a few jokes( like that prank call to Starbucks), but that was just his normal old humor. The only problem I had was with the order he stated iPod, phone, and internet communicator. The iPod and phone got good responses and then the internet communicator the people went, " ummm.... ok." I would of went internet communicator-> iPod-> phone. Get louder responses step and save the best for last. Other then that the keynote was good, if not one of his best.
For you iPhone haters, you people seem to think hardware makes the product revolutionary. Since you think so, you're right then. The iPhone in terms of hardware is nothing special. Got the standard CPU, standard 2.5G things, etc. But, there is more things that make it revolutionary then hardware. The UI is what makes the iPhone revolutionary. How you navigate the iPhone is revolutionary. How easy it is to use it and navigate through it. Ok, so it uses flash instead of an HD. How do most people treat their cell phones? Most people I see their cell phones are beat up. Scratches galore, etc. I bet the HD would be killed within weeks. Not to mention the extra thickness and power usage. 8 GB is the highest affordable flash you can put in a product right now so Apple didn't skimp out on that. Plus, the iPhone is a phone first and foremost. The iPod part is just a feature on it. I love how someone avoided the question, " What else were you hoping for?" Doesn't answer the question at all. Just continues the BS on how the iPhone isn't revolutionary.
For most part, the iPhone haters simply don't get the point of Apple. Why Apple makes the products the way they do. They have been brainwashed by other companies throwing in technology galore into their products. What is the point of adding even more technology if the current technology in the product isn't easy to use? You're just going to confuse the crap out of your customer base. That is where Apple steps in. Apple takes the technology and makes it easier to use. So Apple doesn't always use the latest and greatest stuff in their products. Look at the original Mac. Nothing really new in there hardware wise. But, it changed how we used a computer. Fast forward to 2001 when the iPod was introduced. It was just another HD based MP3 player. Had nothing the competition. The iPod did what the other MP3 players could do. Yet, what made the iPod revolutionary was the way we navigated through an MP3 player and how we used it overall( the iTunes/iPod integration for example). It was easy to use and put music on it.
PS: If we bought everything Apple made why didn't the Newton and Cube sell well?
For you iPhone haters, you people seem to think hardware makes the product revolutionary. Since you think so, you're right then. The iPhone in terms of hardware is nothing special. Got the standard CPU, standard 2.5G things, etc. But, there is more things that make it revolutionary then hardware. The UI is what makes the iPhone revolutionary. How you navigate the iPhone is revolutionary. How easy it is to use it and navigate through it. Ok, so it uses flash instead of an HD. How do most people treat their cell phones? Most people I see their cell phones are beat up. Scratches galore, etc. I bet the HD would be killed within weeks. Not to mention the extra thickness and power usage. 8 GB is the highest affordable flash you can put in a product right now so Apple didn't skimp out on that. Plus, the iPhone is a phone first and foremost. The iPod part is just a feature on it. I love how someone avoided the question, " What else were you hoping for?" Doesn't answer the question at all. Just continues the BS on how the iPhone isn't revolutionary.
For most part, the iPhone haters simply don't get the point of Apple. Why Apple makes the products the way they do. They have been brainwashed by other companies throwing in technology galore into their products. What is the point of adding even more technology if the current technology in the product isn't easy to use? You're just going to confuse the crap out of your customer base. That is where Apple steps in. Apple takes the technology and makes it easier to use. So Apple doesn't always use the latest and greatest stuff in their products. Look at the original Mac. Nothing really new in there hardware wise. But, it changed how we used a computer. Fast forward to 2001 when the iPod was introduced. It was just another HD based MP3 player. Had nothing the competition. The iPod did what the other MP3 players could do. Yet, what made the iPod revolutionary was the way we navigated through an MP3 player and how we used it overall( the iTunes/iPod integration for example). It was easy to use and put music on it.
PS: If we bought everything Apple made why didn't the Newton and Cube sell well?
Chupa Chupa
Sep 12, 11:28 AM
Engadget is reporting that Woz will be in the audience today. When is the last time Woz showed up at anything Apple? This event could be bigger than we thought if it gets Woz to show up.
Ugg
May 4, 04:46 PM
Which brings me back to my initial reply. A "Firearm" has ZERO possibility of injuring your child, until someone behaves irresponsibly. I am fine with a doctor providing a pamphlet of common household hazards and steps to prevent them, but I get the feeling this is not the case. I can too easily imagine the doctor going off on a tangent about firearms deaths statistics, etc...
But again, the most important part: If you dont want your doctor "politicing" you, GO TO A NEW DOCTOR. There should NEVER be laws against what you can or can not say.
Dude, you're clueless.
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
But again, the most important part: If you dont want your doctor "politicing" you, GO TO A NEW DOCTOR. There should NEVER be laws against what you can or can not say.
Dude, you're clueless.
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
dumb terminal
Apr 24, 02:26 PM
I hope windows gets rid of the dos command shell and don't have to rely on third party tools like cygwin. If W8 is unix based, it would be glorious.
I hope they don't get rid of the command shell. That would make system administration a real pain in the neck.
Especially when you've been doing system administration since the days of NT 4.0/2000, and use cmd for everything (yes, even tasks that are done easily through a GUI).
I don't see any of this changing anytime soon. That said, Powershell was a great step in the right direction, and added a lot of useful functionality.
I hope they don't get rid of the command shell. That would make system administration a real pain in the neck.
Especially when you've been doing system administration since the days of NT 4.0/2000, and use cmd for everything (yes, even tasks that are done easily through a GUI).
I don't see any of this changing anytime soon. That said, Powershell was a great step in the right direction, and added a lot of useful functionality.
amin
Oct 11, 10:37 AM
Don't get your hopes up too high, since the iPod's screen is the same resolution as the Zune, it has better battery than the Zune and its thinner than the Zune.
A bigger screen than the iPod's would be preferable, even without an increase in pixel count. A 320x240 video on my iMac display is far easier on the eyes than a 320x240 video on my iPod when both are set to the same brightness. Why? Because the iPod display is too damn small for long-term comfortable viewing.
A bigger screen than the iPod's would be preferable, even without an increase in pixel count. A 320x240 video on my iMac display is far easier on the eyes than a 320x240 video on my iPod when both are set to the same brightness. Why? Because the iPod display is too damn small for long-term comfortable viewing.
Lyra
Aug 2, 05:31 AM
Insecurity...? The only thing I'm insecure about at the moment is whether you are for real or just trolling... :confused:
Who says we're best at anything. It's not a contest... :rolleyes:
Up here in the Nordic countries we're a small, fairly uniform, very rich, well-educated (to a degree - pun intended), technological advanced population. The marked might be small, but it's still a nice little marked.
Do you honestly see Apple pull out of a similar marked, let say New Your city, just because an unresolved quarrel with the local government...?
You New York is New York, part of the USA.
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short.
You are not very technologically advanced you know... Well, again, compared to Africa you are...
Look, it seems, you are not seeing the overall picture, only what you see in front of you... And in this case it is Apple... But that is not all there is...
Who says we're best at anything. It's not a contest... :rolleyes:
Up here in the Nordic countries we're a small, fairly uniform, very rich, well-educated (to a degree - pun intended), technological advanced population. The marked might be small, but it's still a nice little marked.
Do you honestly see Apple pull out of a similar marked, let say New Your city, just because an unresolved quarrel with the local government...?
You New York is New York, part of the USA.
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short.
You are not very technologically advanced you know... Well, again, compared to Africa you are...
Look, it seems, you are not seeing the overall picture, only what you see in front of you... And in this case it is Apple... But that is not all there is...
kgtenacious
May 2, 02:33 PM
I kinda liked the fact i could look at where I've been with my phone.
We kind of liked the fact that we could look at where you've been with your iPhone, too.
Signed,
Mr. Stalker, Mr. Hacker and Mr. Big Brother :cool:
We kind of liked the fact that we could look at where you've been with your iPhone, too.
Signed,
Mr. Stalker, Mr. Hacker and Mr. Big Brother :cool:
divjapps
Mar 10, 01:42 AM
Apple certainly had the First Mover's Advantage for a few of their products. But there are so many other company's that have come out with really innovative products like Asus, Motorola. Some of them have been innovative in terms of design while others in terms of tech used.
Goldinboy17
Apr 15, 10:35 PM
What a shame. I really like Android OS but one of my biggest complaints by far is the lack of a solid service to sync and play music with my phone/tablet.
Piggie
May 4, 01:24 AM
Ummmm incorrect. I have a major surgery coming up and the only way me and my doctor could sit down together and review the CT Scan was with my iPad 2 since all CT Scans are done on digital now instead of film. I simply stopped by the hospital and snagged the cd the night before my appointment and loaded it before I left the next day.
My doctor said this was on his wish list, but he couldn't find anywhere in stock.
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d5/audiogodz1/dc1cacec.jpg
The "Only way" ?
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
My doctor said this was on his wish list, but he couldn't find anywhere in stock.
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d5/audiogodz1/dc1cacec.jpg
The "Only way" ?
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
chrismacguy
Apr 13, 12:57 PM
Put a big, thick, security door between the cockpit and the passengers that can take a stronger blast than the plane's hull.
Problem solved; the risk of a man with a knife on a plane is identical to that same man on a public train or bus.
No ridiculous pat-downs and feeling up of children needed. Allow profiling and leave the metal detectors in place (similar security to our local courthouse) to prevent casual idiots, and have the security door to minimize damage from an organized attempt (if they can't hijack the plane, and can only kill the people on board, it's not worth the trouble; they can just go blow up a bus), and you've got a pretty good balance of security.
Actually, that wont work, because someone somewhere on that plane outside of the cockpit will have to know the code, and the door will end up being opened mid-flight regardless - otherwise how are pilots supposed to eat/go to the loo on longer flights? Organised groups would take advantage of that in a second, making your idea null and void on any flight over approx 3 hours. The Shoot-up on a plane also wont cause that much damage. While a bullet may exit the aircraft and cause a decompression, in theory the most that should rip away of the aircrafts outer-skin is a 10-10 square. Not drastic, and definitely survivable. Even with multiple bullet holes, the plane would still in all likelihood get down to 10,000ft and then proceed to land with no loss of non-shot-at life, which is what the TSA actually cares about
Problem solved; the risk of a man with a knife on a plane is identical to that same man on a public train or bus.
No ridiculous pat-downs and feeling up of children needed. Allow profiling and leave the metal detectors in place (similar security to our local courthouse) to prevent casual idiots, and have the security door to minimize damage from an organized attempt (if they can't hijack the plane, and can only kill the people on board, it's not worth the trouble; they can just go blow up a bus), and you've got a pretty good balance of security.
Actually, that wont work, because someone somewhere on that plane outside of the cockpit will have to know the code, and the door will end up being opened mid-flight regardless - otherwise how are pilots supposed to eat/go to the loo on longer flights? Organised groups would take advantage of that in a second, making your idea null and void on any flight over approx 3 hours. The Shoot-up on a plane also wont cause that much damage. While a bullet may exit the aircraft and cause a decompression, in theory the most that should rip away of the aircrafts outer-skin is a 10-10 square. Not drastic, and definitely survivable. Even with multiple bullet holes, the plane would still in all likelihood get down to 10,000ft and then proceed to land with no loss of non-shot-at life, which is what the TSA actually cares about
akadmon
Nov 23, 11:31 PM
Alright! Looks like I'm getting up early tomorrow, like around 10 ;)
fortetfn
Aug 16, 11:32 AM
I received a 2A62XXX Display last week with a May production date. No idea whether it is an old or a new one. However, I did notice a few dead pixels last night after watching a movies. (The movie credits came with a black background. Great for dead pixel discovery!)
By just looking at it, I noticed at least 4 dead pixels, some appeared stronger than others. They are all on the left half of the screen. Is this considered an acceptable or normal number of dead pixels? I am tempted to return it while I can. Any suggestions?
Yes, you should definitely return it and get a new one. I can never accept any dead pixels. It is annoying to see them there. Call Apple and tell them that.
By just looking at it, I noticed at least 4 dead pixels, some appeared stronger than others. They are all on the left half of the screen. Is this considered an acceptable or normal number of dead pixels? I am tempted to return it while I can. Any suggestions?
Yes, you should definitely return it and get a new one. I can never accept any dead pixels. It is annoying to see them there. Call Apple and tell them that.
greenmeanie
Apr 29, 01:21 PM
If you click on the "IPAD" button you see it otherwise you wont even notice it.
Doctor Q
Sep 28, 12:42 PM
No screening room (http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2859/xxapple1984.jpg)?
When will he move in?
When will he move in?
applebum
Aug 5, 12:09 PM
I was thinking, ( always a dangerous activity).
There IS one thing that could make me switch over to the cross platform compatibility side of this argument.
That would be if the CC of Norway enforced it ACROSS THE BOARD!
My first MP3 player was a Creative Zen Micro. The only reason I have an iPod is because when I switched to Macs, the nice people at Creative Labs informed me that their sync software DID NOT SUPPORT MAC OS.
I can't even access Sony's Connect music store on my Mac. I'm told I need to "upgrade to Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher". (Upgrade to IE??? Bwahahahahaha!!! Those silly wabbits. :D)
I have a couple of programs I used in my PC days that are completely useless now, they won't run on Mac OS. Why not? I bought them! I paid for them! What right do these software companies have to lock me into a single platform?
I have, at last count, 317 files on my comp with the extension .xls. If I should decide I prefer to use Lotus, will I be able to open these files as is? Or will I have to take the time to convert them to XML format? Will I lose any of the custom formatting these files contain? ( I honestly don't know. I'm just beginning to learn the ODF stuff. Beside, current version of Lotus appears to be Windows only!) And these files aren't something I paid for, they are my own creations!
I'd be more than willing to see Apple surrender some iPod sales, (given the quality of the product, I don't think it would be much), if it would remove the single largest block against switching to Mac OS; the availabilty of software! Then the OS's could compete on other planes; features, ease of use, quality of computing experience, stability, etc. All of which would be, dare I say, good for the consumer?
Maybe I'm just a silly dreamer, but imagine the boon to Mac and Linux users if all these software development companies were forced to make their products interoperable, with the same functionality, and price.
What a beautiful place the world would be! :cool:
dsnort - finally, someone has hit the nail on the head. A standard DRM does not help ALL consumers - only those using Windows. This is why I see these rules/laws as fluff. There has to be 2 parts to any law before I will see it as positive. First - the law must insist on OS Neutrality. Meaning, if you want to have an online music store, it must work on Linux, Mac, and Windows. You make a music player, then it must have drivers or work on Linux, Mac and Windows. Once you have that, then let's get a universal DRM that is used by all these music stores and all these music players. Until both things happen, these laws do not help all consumers. And isn't what these laws are supposed to do - help the consumer???
My household has nothing but Macs. If these "laws" were enacted and we suddenly had a universal DRM, it would NOT help me as a consumer. I would still only be able to use iTunes, as none of the other big music stores (Sony, Yahoo, Napster, Real, Microsoft, Walmart) work on a Mac. I could perhaps buy a different player, but that would only help if that player had drivers or software that would work on a Mac.
These "laws" seemed to be created by Windows using politicians who don't truly understand what it would take to be fair to ALL consumers. It seems that they only care about whether Windows users get all the bells, whistles, and benefits. So I say leave it the way it is until it will help everyone.
There IS one thing that could make me switch over to the cross platform compatibility side of this argument.
That would be if the CC of Norway enforced it ACROSS THE BOARD!
My first MP3 player was a Creative Zen Micro. The only reason I have an iPod is because when I switched to Macs, the nice people at Creative Labs informed me that their sync software DID NOT SUPPORT MAC OS.
I can't even access Sony's Connect music store on my Mac. I'm told I need to "upgrade to Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher". (Upgrade to IE??? Bwahahahahaha!!! Those silly wabbits. :D)
I have a couple of programs I used in my PC days that are completely useless now, they won't run on Mac OS. Why not? I bought them! I paid for them! What right do these software companies have to lock me into a single platform?
I have, at last count, 317 files on my comp with the extension .xls. If I should decide I prefer to use Lotus, will I be able to open these files as is? Or will I have to take the time to convert them to XML format? Will I lose any of the custom formatting these files contain? ( I honestly don't know. I'm just beginning to learn the ODF stuff. Beside, current version of Lotus appears to be Windows only!) And these files aren't something I paid for, they are my own creations!
I'd be more than willing to see Apple surrender some iPod sales, (given the quality of the product, I don't think it would be much), if it would remove the single largest block against switching to Mac OS; the availabilty of software! Then the OS's could compete on other planes; features, ease of use, quality of computing experience, stability, etc. All of which would be, dare I say, good for the consumer?
Maybe I'm just a silly dreamer, but imagine the boon to Mac and Linux users if all these software development companies were forced to make their products interoperable, with the same functionality, and price.
What a beautiful place the world would be! :cool:
dsnort - finally, someone has hit the nail on the head. A standard DRM does not help ALL consumers - only those using Windows. This is why I see these rules/laws as fluff. There has to be 2 parts to any law before I will see it as positive. First - the law must insist on OS Neutrality. Meaning, if you want to have an online music store, it must work on Linux, Mac, and Windows. You make a music player, then it must have drivers or work on Linux, Mac and Windows. Once you have that, then let's get a universal DRM that is used by all these music stores and all these music players. Until both things happen, these laws do not help all consumers. And isn't what these laws are supposed to do - help the consumer???
My household has nothing but Macs. If these "laws" were enacted and we suddenly had a universal DRM, it would NOT help me as a consumer. I would still only be able to use iTunes, as none of the other big music stores (Sony, Yahoo, Napster, Real, Microsoft, Walmart) work on a Mac. I could perhaps buy a different player, but that would only help if that player had drivers or software that would work on a Mac.
These "laws" seemed to be created by Windows using politicians who don't truly understand what it would take to be fair to ALL consumers. It seems that they only care about whether Windows users get all the bells, whistles, and benefits. So I say leave it the way it is until it will help everyone.
dunk321
Mar 17, 01:05 AM
As for the Karma, I found a iPhone 4 at Macy's 2-days before shopping with my girlfriend, and I didn't think twice about not turning it in. I made this woman's day when she got it back. So I figured hey, maybe that was a little something I got for doing something honest a few days before
No comments:
Post a Comment