1901 posts • joined 26 Jan 2009
Why the hate?
It's a piece of crap, that's why. Not everyone wears the same brand of blinders as you. This "we invented everything" mentality doesn't help either.
"Real multimedia" was done on other platforms before Quicktime and on even more austere hardware.
For most of us, Quicktime is at best just Apple's brand of Flash.
Why the hate? Mindless hype of course.
Not everyone wears your brand of blinders. We don't buy into the whole "Apple invented everything" mentality and actually find it quite annoying.
"Real multimedia" was being done by competitors with lesser hardware before Quicktime.
Most people just view Quicktime as another more proprietary variation on Flash.
PVRs and streamers are different kinds of devices. Unless you're building your own box, they will have mutually exclusive features. Trying to lump them together is a bit foolish to begin with.
This is especially true since streamers have gotten so cheap. You can easily add one to whatever setup you have. The fact that you are escalating the number of devices you are dealing with is easily offset by how cheap and small they are.
Buy the PVR for it's recording features and ignore the rest. Get a cheap streamer to go with it. Don't worry about about a device that is a jack of all trades an master of none.
Nothing beats an HTPC in terms of features. This goes for both the PVR and streaming features.
Windows in a bottle
> what happens if you run sliverlight on a Win XP running inside virtualbox running on Linux ?
Netflix streaming runs just fine this way actually.
I did this before the whole Quickster nonsense.
Now I just use Amazon Prime streaming minus the bother of a virtual machine.
Twisted Lemming Logic...
No. The logical thing for a "business" person to do is NOTHING.
NOTHING does not require investing any extra money.
No. They "business" person will like the status quo. They might consider hedging against future changes but they will not blow a lot of money to screw over ANY portion of their user base. All money is good money. Someone that's actually in business tends not to just flush it for no good reason.
Who really cares?
Who really cares if people try to save the films they stream from Lovefilm. They're crap. If someone is willing to put up with that, they are not great customers. They are simply too cheap and nothing you do will change that.
This is the modern equivalent of kids duping tapes between two cheap tape decks while riding next to each other on bicycles.
These people were always lost to you.
A tale of two monkeys...
it sounds like the Redhat guy chose his path. There are certainly enough Corps that hire Unix people that he could have a nice cubicle job if he really wanted one. Chances are that he doesn't like the Fortune 100 life. I could certainly understand it if he does not.
The real revisionism...
The real revisionism is to factor Apple in the same market as IBM.
It was never really a business computer. IBM entering the market really sealed Apple's fate and there's no arguing around that. Macs were just another "home computer" like Commies.
Anyone trying to claim that any 8-bit Apple was more appropriate for "work" is just on crack.
> Personally I think iLife + itunes make the difference.
Just don't let your data take a trip across another brand of computer between being recorded and being used by iMovie.
Any cheap software at BestBuy or available free as shareware can do better than iLife.
iLife is a joke for people with no clue or taste.
> Nearly everyone I know who doesn't work in IT and gets a laptop from work runs windows. Their home machines or "personally bought" laptops are Macs.
You must have a lot of rich friends. This goes double if you are on the other side of the pond.
Even if I liked MacOS, I would not touch Apple products due to poor engineering and bad ergonomics. It's too bad you can't run it on better hardware.
Most people outside of IT don't have any appreciation for "the better things" and tend to just be intolerably cheap.
All this article shows is that the reality distortion field has been on for a very long time.
As others have said, it was a crowded market in 1984. The idea that Apple was pushing an overpriced variant of the Apple II at that point was just sad. You can excuse Atari and Commodore for it a bit since their machines were cheap and they had not yet come out with their 68K machines.
If IBM was "failing" at this point then it was because the clones were beginning their rise.
The Apple narcissists are once again fixating on the wrong details.
Any perceived triump attributed to Apple here is statistical noise in the big picture.
The value of many
I don't think IBM ever has understood the "retail" market.
They never had to really.
Others were able to take up the slack for them.
That's the value of a platform not limited merely to a single vendor. You can have multiple companies each effectively addressing different parts of the market some of which may be mutually exclusive.
You don't have to be excluded because a computer costs you what a new pickup truck would.
Portable storage still isn't very cheap. Most mobile devices don't even have enough capacity to hold a decent sized MP3 collection. Never mind storing everything in pristine formats.
That's not even getting into the question of whether or not some random device supports the format you want to use.
There is really no reason for consumer grade drives to be this expensive. The elasticity of demand just isn't there. The fellow that mentioned "gas stations" hit the nail right on the head. This is a luxury device for digital pack rats. I suspect that the market will ultimately not bear these prices.
Unless you have a drive failing right now and don't have a spare, you can probably wait this out.
I suspect this is just a speculative bubble based on some panic buying and a lot of wishful thinking.
Time will tell...
Both Kurosawa knockoffs...
They were both Kurosawa knockoffs and Akira was probably fine with all of it.
It seems he was just that kind of guy (and not at all like Ellison).
PBS style adverts...
Yeah. I think this sort of situation where a "PBS style" of advert is added and the original stream is kept intact should be perfectly legal. Don't expect it to be adjudicated that way tough.
Don't think John Simm being the adjudicator would even help. '-)
Stupid political posturing
> That would be women, not girls. You know, adults, as opposed to children.
No. He probably meant GIRLS as this was an article about college students.
The juvenile monicker undoubtedly fits. Applies across the board too.
It's an indicator of poor corporate culture...
> People behave consistently, so if you're a flusterer in this question, it's a good indication that you may not respond well to stressful circumstances at work.
If you have to deal with this kind of nonsense in the interview, chances are that you will have to deal with similar nonsense on the job. It's a sign of bad corporate culture and a company best avoided.
You've got to ask yourself if you are really that desperate.
It's all about the spin.
> There's a REASON why Apple makes a ton of money people,
Yes, and it's marketing.
The proper "location irrelevant' source is not your phone. It's just something that looks really impressive to people that really don't have any clue what they are looking at and are in no position to judge it based on that understanding (that they don't have).
Anything that can be streamed by an iPhone probably has no business being viewed in the manner you described. It's a great parlour trick but it ultimately shows a lack of taste by Apple and it's target demographic.
Being able to move data around freely is a considerable advantage. Anyone that's ever knackered their copy of iTunes can relate.
Talk about freetardry...
> The Samsung F4 2TB drives i bought for ~£70 are now a hilarious £180!
> No-one in their right mind would pay that.
I paid $400 for my first 1G drive and my first 500G drive.
If there aren't any other options, you either pay the market price or do without. The dirt cheap drives were nice for awhile but that seems to going away for awhile.
A $400 2TB spinny disk still beats the SSD alternative if one exist.
Bad car analogies...
> You're not going to bother with a high end sports car because your compact has a trunk thats nearly as big.
No. It's more like saying that I won't bother with the high end sports car because it offers minimal marginal performance at a dramatically reduced cost. I can already engage in felonious speeding with a reasonably priced performance sedan.
Simply don't need a car that costs more than the house.
The cheap performance sedan has a nice trunk too.
Hobby is just a codeword for failure.
Hobby is just a codeword for failure.
It's what they tell people instead of fessing up and saying that they managed to stumble at something. They don't want to do anything to undermine the myth of Apple. Of course the faithful eat it right up.
If anyone has a handle on this "problem" it's probably Tivo. They just have the same problem with the entrenched network monopolies that everyone else has.
It's that whole "we have a right to exclude anyone" mentality...
It doesn't just hurt Google.
Can't say anything good or bad about the Revue really. I don't think a lot of people can because it missed a very key element. It wasn't priced right. They released a $300 device when everyone else was releasing sub-$100 devices and a real PC could be had for the same $300.
It might be "a shitty product" or it might not be. Because of the whole pricing problem, I can be fairly certain that you are speaking completely out your arse because you're too cheap to have any actual firsthand experience.
It's an entirely different beast in this regard than a Roku or AppleTV and it has nothing to do with how good the actual tech is.
> It's part of the "right" in copyright.
> Redistribution rights are part of
> modern copyrights, so the
> broadcasters can say who gets
> to display their show and who can't.
That is just insane, Feudal nonsense.
> ...is Apple to enter the market in a big way, like what happened for mobile phones.
You mean like they already have done and have been doing for quite some time now? They've been at it long enough for them to go through a 68K -> PPC style architecture change already.
Some people just miss the point...
Yeah, this is about how the title exploits the BD format. It's not about how good the content is.
Given how good the DVD9 transfer of Revenge of the Sith was, I am not surprised that Lucasfilm did well with the BluRay transfers. Still not buying them though. I want theatrical releases. That goes for all of the films in question. If you're not going to give us the original trilogy in it's pristine form, at least give us a pristine version of the special editions.
Those movies need version numbers before you can sort out anything.
Does that tablet dissolve in water?
> As a ready recipe reference in the kitchen (no keyboard to collect dirt),
Yeah... like a smudge slab won't collect dirt or be prone to other kinds of damage.
Not all of the detractors here are "unimaginative".
Some people just make simple things hard.
...or you just spent a few minutes to rip a CD when you bought it. It might have been in the 90s or it could be in the oughts. The only real difference is how long you had to wait for the ripper to finish before you could play your music. You still spent a whole 5 minutes on the process.
Backups just happen.You automate something that sorts you out in general and backups of your music are "free". Any time you manually copy your music to some device (like your phone), that is yet another backup with a marginal cost of zero.
You don't futz with stuff because you realize that if one ancient format (like vinyl) is good enough than you don't have to constantly move between less ancient formats.
It helps to only use what seems suitable to begin with.
Although video is an entirely different kettle of fish...
No proof of purchase.
Without some sort of physical token of ownership, you don't really have any means to prove that you have any right to a particular digital file. Even without DRM, you still have the problem of "proving that it's yours". Screeching fanboys that like to paint anything not purchased from Apple as piracy are a great example of this problem.
You buy it from Amazon, then how do you prove it when someone tries to say otherwise?
The idea versus the thing.
> The best inventions seem completely obscure and when completed seem completely obvious.
Patents protect implementations and not ideas.
If all it takes for something to be invented is a good description and the work of a college student, then it really doesn't deserve a patent. This was the case for my own "favorite" patents that Tivo was granted for the PVR.
You are advocating treating nukes like firecrackers for no other reason that you are really ignorant and you can't imagine anyone actually having a clue.
A 17 year exclusive innovation crushing monopoly is like any nasty thing you can name (nuke, toxic waste, biological weapon) and should be treated accordingly. Proliferation certainly shouldn't be casually encouraged.
Highly sub-optimal solution
> .. or they'll get external drives to add further storage when the price is better.
That tends to be a less satisfying option. Although upgrading internal storage could certainly be made easier. It's not that hard with most laptops as it is though.
It's strange that you have to be a geek in order to even be aware of "better usability" options.
Size doesn't matter so much anymore...
There is a practical lower bound price on components. Certain manufacturers aren't interested in selling the cheaper gear. So once you get to a certain price point, things don't get cheaper anymore. You just end up with "better" components. That means that it becomes increasingly harder to find small hard drives or even reasons to buy them.
Before this flood, there was very little price difference between the smallest spinny drive you could get and a much bigger one.
SSDs are still puny. It's easy enough to overwhelm them with just music and family photos. You don't even need to get into various forms of video hoarding. The gap between SSD and spinny disk capacity is simply too wide.
The stupid bike analogy
There are many ways that I can avoid paying Townsend for his "talent". Some of them are legal and some of them are not. They are largely equivalent in the end despite the differing moral and legal values place on them.
With so much fixation on "freeloaders", you would think that the busybodies here would suffer sufficient confusion for their heads to explode if they really thought about what they were babbling.
MTV. Movie Trading Company. Pandora. BT. It all looks the same on the balance sheet in the end.
It's the Brooklyn Bridge...
> Of course it happens, it's one of the main reasons that the PRS exist.
PRS exists so that PRS gets paid.
Whether or not anyone besides the middleman actually gets anything is another matter entirely.
"Distrust and be sure to verify,"
I have a bridge for you...
>> "Getting music for free from the radio or it's equivalent is what advertises artists"
> eh.. no. Artists receive a royalty payment when a song is play on the radio as it is considered a performance.
If you really think this actually happens, I have a bridge to sell you across the pond.
>> "iTunes is comparable to the record shops of old"
> Eh, No. If you bought a record (or a CD) you paid for the whole record and
You remind me of all of those surveys they like to take of incoming college freshmen and then whine about in the news media. There is NOTHING new about the whole "just pay for the hits" model of iTunes. This was the normal way the industry did business since the beginning. Only during a very brief period during the rise of the CD did this ever change.
Then it came back with a vengance.
Singles are nothing new. They are something that should be VERY familiar to the likes of Townsend.
Singles always existed side by side with Albums.
iTunes is just another vendor
iTunes is just another vendor. They sell singles or albums and they sell them under the terms offered by the publisher. If the artists aren't seeing any windfall, then it is the middle men that are at fault at not iTunes. Apple is simply chasing the market.
iTunes is no more or less vampiric than Virgin Megastore.
The labels are the actual villain in this piece and always have been. If Apple has gained any power here, than the labels have given it to them.
The mind boggles...
You've really got to wonder where radio and MTV fits into Pete's view of things here.
There are plenty of bands who's works I've enjoyed for free and quite legally too.
This includes The Who oddly enough.
...talking 'bout my generation and whatnot.
Price without reason
Price without reason is the perfect description of the Apple user demographic. With a wider array of choices, PC buyers will opt for one of the other many options available to them. The option may be cheaper or it may be more capable.
Macbooks sell to people that brag about their own ignorance.
The PC market probably isn't quite so easy. Wankers like me will be asking if it actually is worth the money rather than just mindlessly queuing up for it.
First in the wild on a Falcon
> How many people are complaining how rubbish Windows is whilst simultaneously posting said message from a Windows PC.
I could be posting this from an Atari Falcon if not for the fact that Microsoft muscled most everyone else out of the home computer business. Proprietary network effects tend to quickly favor a single computing vendor.
I could migrate off of kludge clones in a heartbeat if another option presented itself.
The fantastic OS
...if you believe that Android is nothing more than Linux slapped together with some spyware then clearly the people that ought to be complaining about theft are AT&T rather than Microsoft since Linux is a variant of Unix and not some DOS clone.
If Linux is running afoul of any Microsoft patents they likely mainly involve "compatability".
"hating" on emacs
This "hating" on emacs quite nicely highlights the "fanboy" problem.
Not everyone is the same sort of extra from an Apple SuperBowl ad. Some of us "think different" and have different requirements. Some of those requirements might be quite techical, or simply being able to recieve large numbers of text messages and not go insane cleaning them up afterwards.
Apple has a totalitarian approach. If they only abused their own customers it would be fine. However, they also insist on limiting everyone else's choices. They aren't just some hippies keeping to themselves in their own commune. They are more like a notorious band of fascist invaders.
You should be at liberty to use the right tool for the job.
You get to choose the corner
> Show us these similarly spec'd PCs that are half the price.
> They don't exist. Either they have cut corners
Well that's the rub. If you buy a PC, you get to decide what corners you want cut. If you buy and Apple, you simply have no choice. You either take what the corporate overlord wants to sell you or you do without completely.
Sucks if you've got any investment in iTunes content with DRM or expensive proprietary apps.
With a PC, I can pick my tradeoffs and spend 1/2 or 1/3 or 1/4 the price.
It's ultimately the same spare parts made by other companies with production outsourced to China.
I think one thing that bothers a lot of people here is the new idea that Apple fanboys have been pushing to support their Messiah 2.0 platform. That idea is the notion that you need to have the computing equivalent of 1984 in order to have a secure system. This is an idea that Apple itself and the fanboys didn't push until relatively recently. Once their glorious leader declared the new direction they all decided to ignore the previous propaganda en masse in favor of the new propaganda.
The idea that open systems can't be secured or made easy is nonsense. Apple's own products disproved that. There is nothing necessary or useful about Apple's current approach.
It simply seems to suit Apple as the new Microsoft.
> Any kind of tea is fine with milk and sugar?
> Green tea? Lemon tea? URRRGH! Sounds awful! >:b
Are you from the UK? Have you never had American tea? I could understand your confusion then.
If he is presented with proper "first sort" tea, he might not care about the brand or how long the leaves have been cooked. I can relate to his perspective on tea having never been able to stomach the stuff until I visited London and had the real thing.
Lowering the bar...
Apple is like Microsoft here. Microsoft "lowered the bar" when it came to expectations about computers in terms of security and reliability. Apple is doing the same for end user choice.
It would be nice if we were just talking about Free Software here but the bar is even lower than that.
Now you have systems that end users aren't even in control of. Never mind source code, people aren't even in full control of their personal data or proprietary applications. You have a system where commercial rivals are easily locked out.
Free Software is just the tip of the iceberg here.
Apple deserves the flac it gets
> a portable music player with a command line interface is probably not gonna catch on.
Yes but one that "just works" and plays anything you happen to have on hand just might.
It's a shame that St. Jobs didn't allow his product to do this and actively attacked competitors that were willing to take up the slack.
Greasey fingers are just the beginning
> Its the 21stC there's no need to kill trees with out of date documents.
I would rather get a bit of dead tree wet or covered with extra virgin olive oil than some overpriced consumer electronics device.
Fanboys ignoring the inconvenient.
> Remote controls are not a good example of usability
Sure they are.
They are great examples of how a company approaches design and how that approach impacts usability and usefulness. Apple remotes are the perfect example of real world practical usability and usefulness taking a back seat to dubious design goals.
A conventional remote may have "too many buttons" but it does include enough such that basic features one usually associates with modern video appliances. Admittedly, the OSD interfaces that Apple employs could take up the slack here, but they don't.
Apple remotes are also a great example of Apple ignoring established UI elements that are already well understood by the users. Apple's TV interfaces are a great example of Apple ignoring HID guidelines that fanboys like to crow about so much.
Problem already solved, by someone other than Apple.
> The problem is not the hardware it's the content,
> or rather access to content. The problem with
> Telly is that, you can't watch what you want to
> watch, when you want to watch it.
Tivo already solved that problem.
Kaledescape also solved that problem but they are the only vendor that has survived the ensuing inevitable legal challenges from Hollywood. So any other similar products have to be DIY.
> you can watch the last 5 seasons of Doctor Who one after the other
Got a lot of storage on the PVR. Can do that already. Could have done that in the 90s too.
At $2 or $3 or $5 a pop, stuff ads up fast. A lot of the stuff on iTunes that isn't new releases can be bought on spinny disk for what Apple wants to charge you to rent it.