studiomusic
Nov 29, 11:12 AM
Here's my take.
I started a small record label with 3 signed artists. 2 have gone nowhere and probably won't. 1 has finished her debut release (look for Kyria -Whispers In The Dark on itunes!) and we are working on a follow up.
I write/perform the music and she writes lyrics and sings. We split ANY money coming in 45/45/10. 45% for her, 45% for me and 10% for the label.
We've sold a few hundred songs on itunes and have made a few hundred bucks from it.
I think that itunes is a boon for the music biz. But, now you have to have good songs and good artists to succeed. People will not buy 1 hit and 9 loads of crap anymore. Make the very best music, and people will buy it.
I don't want any tax on what might happen with something. What if the State gave you 25 speeding tickets and 40 parking tickets when you bought a new car? We all know that cars are just used for speeding and parking violations.
NOW, if Universal get's a cut from every ipod sold, we would want a cut too (not as big of a cut, but still). Not to be greedy, but to be fair to my artists.
This is why it won't work. Too many independents that would want their piece too.
Oh ya, go buy Kyria's album on itunes! (If I was a big label, I could charge her for the time I took to post that as advertising expenses... broken is the music industry!)
I started a small record label with 3 signed artists. 2 have gone nowhere and probably won't. 1 has finished her debut release (look for Kyria -Whispers In The Dark on itunes!) and we are working on a follow up.
I write/perform the music and she writes lyrics and sings. We split ANY money coming in 45/45/10. 45% for her, 45% for me and 10% for the label.
We've sold a few hundred songs on itunes and have made a few hundred bucks from it.
I think that itunes is a boon for the music biz. But, now you have to have good songs and good artists to succeed. People will not buy 1 hit and 9 loads of crap anymore. Make the very best music, and people will buy it.
I don't want any tax on what might happen with something. What if the State gave you 25 speeding tickets and 40 parking tickets when you bought a new car? We all know that cars are just used for speeding and parking violations.
NOW, if Universal get's a cut from every ipod sold, we would want a cut too (not as big of a cut, but still). Not to be greedy, but to be fair to my artists.
This is why it won't work. Too many independents that would want their piece too.
Oh ya, go buy Kyria's album on itunes! (If I was a big label, I could charge her for the time I took to post that as advertising expenses... broken is the music industry!)
glassbathroom
Jul 28, 03:21 AM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Big is the new small.
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Big is the new small.
zacman
Apr 20, 03:46 AM
And the design was released after the iPhone was out.
No, it was shown at IFA 2006 for the first time but "officially presented" a few months later.
No, it was shown at IFA 2006 for the first time but "officially presented" a few months later.
leekohler
Mar 3, 11:13 PM
no one is preventing you from living with the person you love or having sex with him
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
BVeritas
Mar 31, 07:39 PM
As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
Funkymonk
Mar 22, 05:16 PM
man I may pick up the samsung 10.1. similar specs +thinner and lighter than the ipad + honeycomb? sign my ass up!
mumbo
Aug 26, 12:49 PM
I called this week to have the mighty mouse that came with my DC 2.3 G5 replaced. The guy was helpful and my new mouse came the next day, from California to Canada. I'm pretty impressed!
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:24 PM
No he hasn't, the stage management has been quite subtle, actually, for once.
I had considered that theory, but when Cameron first broached a no-fly zone in parliament, Clinton's reaction seemed to be very put out when she initially put the dampers on the no-fly zone suggestion. If what you suggest is the case then, frankly, it's been done beautifully.
I think there's an argument for letting one of the partaking Arab nations run the show.
I had considered that theory, but when Cameron first broached a no-fly zone in parliament, Clinton's reaction seemed to be very put out when she initially put the dampers on the no-fly zone suggestion. If what you suggest is the case then, frankly, it's been done beautifully.
I think there's an argument for letting one of the partaking Arab nations run the show.
ergle2
Sep 13, 01:30 PM
No software such as Toast 7.1, Handbrake UB. More to the point is not how many cores an application can use but rather how many things can you get done at once. :rolleyes:I think in the next few months the full FCS and Logic will get an update to address this.
One thing to note is that IO may become a more limiting factor than number of cores under heavy multitasking, or even just particularly data-heavy apps (multiple streams of raw hires video, for example).
One thing to note is that IO may become a more limiting factor than number of cores under heavy multitasking, or even just particularly data-heavy apps (multiple streams of raw hires video, for example).
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
boncellis
Jul 20, 12:17 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
That makes a lot of sense, actually. I hadn't thought of it, but with a server class processor ostensibly powering the Mac Pro, it begs the question of what the servers will get as an upgrade.
The simple answer--next generation server chips, duh!
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
That makes a lot of sense, actually. I hadn't thought of it, but with a server class processor ostensibly powering the Mac Pro, it begs the question of what the servers will get as an upgrade.
The simple answer--next generation server chips, duh!
umichfan
Jun 14, 02:07 PM
Nope, he looked it up on his computer and
told me preorders start Thursday for Radio Shack.
However, I would love to be proved wrong on that.
I was told by the employee at my local Radio Shack that they go on sale tomorrow June 15. Sorry I meant you can do the pre-orders. =)
told me preorders start Thursday for Radio Shack.
However, I would love to be proved wrong on that.
I was told by the employee at my local Radio Shack that they go on sale tomorrow June 15. Sorry I meant you can do the pre-orders. =)
grue
Apr 11, 08:39 PM
Overreact much? FCP hasn't even been announced and your company is already talking about jumping ship? I call b.s. I'm in LA and I haven't heard anyone talking about switching anything. What needed features do you need that don't already exist?
How about using more than one bloody core to render a timeline or do an export to the eternally-broken Compressor?
How about properly recognizing file attributes on import?
�stability?
�QMaster having better than coin-flip reliability?
�better R3D support (as well as other cameras)?
�GPGPU/OpenCL?
etc etc
How about using more than one bloody core to render a timeline or do an export to the eternally-broken Compressor?
How about properly recognizing file attributes on import?
�stability?
�QMaster having better than coin-flip reliability?
�better R3D support (as well as other cameras)?
�GPGPU/OpenCL?
etc etc
balamw
Aug 7, 04:24 PM
If Apple had had that feature for years and MS would include it into Vista now, you'd call it copying, no !? ;)
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
jaxstate
Jul 15, 08:53 AM
I'm really wondering how low the low end will be. I have no need for a new intel MacPro, but I do wonder how this will affect the prices of the G5s that will be left in inventory. Wonder will we see a big price drop. Didn't happen with the notebooks, but one can dream.
Has there been any news on new displays?
Has there been any news on new displays?
01civicman
Apr 8, 08:12 AM
I am also a work at BB. I can tell you how it works for me. If we are getting shipments, its being kept from the associates (at least in my store). My store is small and if they were some where in plain sight, we'd see them. Plus I'm pretty close to a lot of inventory guys. The Daily Quota thing doesn't make much sense, because in the end, its a month end budget that we have to meet. If we miss by 2K one day, but are over by 5K the next, it doesn't really matter. Sure the managers want to hit every day, but it doesn't really make that much sense.
As for the $100 pre-sale, my store stopped it at about 10 people, so its not like we did that to a ton of people, and about a week ago, 6 of them got their iPad, so our "list" is almost empty.
Also, having the iPad, definitely brings foot traffic in to potentially make money elsewhere, but in the end, if we sell 20,000 iPads (and nothing else), the store just lost money.
As for the $100 pre-sale, my store stopped it at about 10 people, so its not like we did that to a ton of people, and about a week ago, 6 of them got their iPad, so our "list" is almost empty.
Also, having the iPad, definitely brings foot traffic in to potentially make money elsewhere, but in the end, if we sell 20,000 iPads (and nothing else), the store just lost money.
bobthedino
Apr 27, 09:14 AM
I know of no cell tower or wifi device that works up to 100 miles away.
No-one has said this. Apple said the database contains the location of cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots around your current location.
A bit of research reveals that iOS not only downloads location data for the cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot nearest you, but also for hundreds of others in the area around you. This is so that when you move location it doesn't have to re-query Apple's location database over the internet. This is what the cache is for - to enable the device to look up locations stored locally instead of having to waste battery and talk to Apple again over the internet. In addition it enables Wi-Fi only devices to still be able to locate themselves even when they have no internet connection.
No-one has said this. Apple said the database contains the location of cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots around your current location.
A bit of research reveals that iOS not only downloads location data for the cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot nearest you, but also for hundreds of others in the area around you. This is so that when you move location it doesn't have to re-query Apple's location database over the internet. This is what the cache is for - to enable the device to look up locations stored locally instead of having to waste battery and talk to Apple again over the internet. In addition it enables Wi-Fi only devices to still be able to locate themselves even when they have no internet connection.
Silentwave
Aug 18, 10:17 AM
I know if it is it will work, what i'm asking is, is it? Or is that not known at this time?
Not known. There might be other concerns apart from the socket compatibility: FSB, firmware, and in particular the heat output.
Not known. There might be other concerns apart from the socket compatibility: FSB, firmware, and in particular the heat output.
skunk
Apr 28, 11:15 AM
Excellent, Raid. I'll use that in PRSI. :D
edk99
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
If it is going to be a 4g/LTE iPhone then this works for me. I have no complaints with my iPhone 4 so waiting another 4-6 months is fine with me.
basesloaded190
Apr 6, 11:03 AM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
hayesk
Mar 26, 02:26 PM
I agree entirely.
I also think 10.4.11 is the best OS ever.
I don't want "wow." I want them to fix the broken things, like IMAP subscriptions in Mail, and sync code for Address book, for example.
I also think 10.4.11 is the best OS ever.
I don't want "wow." I want them to fix the broken things, like IMAP subscriptions in Mail, and sync code for Address book, for example.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 12:21 PM
You obviously are posting without knowing anything about what a long form BC is. The short form is what the parents get and what you get when you ask the state for a copy. The long form is what is kept on file by the state. In other words, since it is handled very infrequently, it's probably going to look pristine.
If you don't like the guy, then say so, but it seems to me that to you, ignorance is more important than knowledge.
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing than a pristine copy of the long one. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
If you don't like the guy, then say so, but it seems to me that to you, ignorance is more important than knowledge.
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing than a pristine copy of the long one. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment