Snow Leopard on iPad?
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: BreadWithSpam on 30 Apr 2010 17:50 Warren Oates <warren.oates(a)gmail.com> writes: > There are valid and benign reasons for this. You might want the client > to watch _all_ of your presentation, dammit, and not zip through it. You There are reasons valid to the companies who own the content. Nevertheless, there are reasons consumers hate that and many would be happy to buy hardware which didn't allow the media to do that. I would. As far as I know, there aren't any DVD players legal for sale in the US which allow the consumer to override those restrictions. > Now, I may be wrong about "the government." It's very possible that the > US Justice Dept. has said that every DVD manufactured for sale in the US > must have the fast-forward and "next" buttons disabled for the duration > of the FBI nonsense. But it's part of the existing standard. If the government mandates that you can't FF through the FBI warning, compliance with that mandate stinks. Certainly I cannot do it on some, but on may DVDs, I've had no problem with it. Sometimes they disable "next" but leave FF working, and sometimes the other way around, too. BTW, the word for these thigns is "UOP" for "User operation prohibition". <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_operation_prohibition> -- Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
From: Jim Gibson on 30 Apr 2010 18:12 In article <yob4oismwy0.fsf(a)panix2.panix.com>, <BreadWithSpam(a)fractious.net> wrote: > Warren Oates <warren.oates(a)gmail.com> writes: > > > Now, I may be wrong about "the government." It's very possible that the > > US Justice Dept. has said that every DVD manufactured for sale in the US > > must have the fast-forward and "next" buttons disabled for the duration > > of the FBI nonsense. But it's part of the existing standard. > > If the government mandates that you can't FF through the FBI > warning, compliance with that mandate stinks. Certainly I > cannot do it on some, but on may DVDs, I've had no problem > with it. Sometimes they disable "next" but leave FF working, > and sometimes the other way around, too. > > BTW, the word for these thigns is "UOP" for "User operation > prohibition". > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_operation_prohibition> As that article points out, many DVD-playing systems ignore the restrictions. What is against U. S. federal law is circumventing the encryption (digital rights management) used by DVD manufacturers to protect the content of copyrighted works. It was made illegal by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act> -- Jim Gibson
From: Doug Anderson on 30 Apr 2010 20:12 AES <siegman(a)stanford.edu> writes: > In article <4bda9f4b$0$24374$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot(a)vaxination.ca> wrote: > > > The Ipad isn't a computer, it is an appliance. If you want a computer, > > buy a laptop or netbook. > > Entirely true statement, so far as I can see, and a valid suggestion. > > The sad point, however, is that the iPad _could_ have been a computer, > and a damn nice one -- even with somewhat limited functionality and some > missing features and capabilities compared to full-bore laptops or > netbooks, in order to keep cost and size down and battery life up. Sure it could have been. But that is already a busy market, with lots of netbooks priced very competitively. I certainly wouldn't mind if Apple tried to enter that market, but it looks like they made a different decision based on what would be most profitable for them. The place I disagree with you is in the next paragraph. If you want a "real" computer, that does a wide variety of different things, you are necessarily complexifying the interface. There is a reason that the iPad interface is simple than the MacBook interface. > But, it still could have been a modestly featured but very useful real > computer, useful as a secondary computer for "real computer users" _and_ > at the same time a great appliance for the large market segment that is > now buying it -- and it still could have had a user interface as easy to > use for that larger market as the actual iPad does. As far as I'm concerned, when emacs makes it to the iPad it will be a "very useful real computer, useful as a secondary computer for 'real computer users.'" That may be the day I purchase an iPad.
From: Larry on 30 Apr 2010 21:25 AES <siegman(a)stanford.edu> wrote in news:siegman-3DEF12.11491930042010 @sciid-srv02.med.tufts.edu: > in order to keep cost and size down and battery life up. > I keep hearing about battery life in ipad that runs two batteries in parallel. Unless I'm watching DivX movies with the display running at full brightness, my Samsung NC10 netbook runs lots longer than iPad. Netbooks are the answer to the runtime problems. AND, of course, they have CHANGEABLE battery packs if you like a lot of bright movies, too! Apple fanboiz talking about "cost" is simply hilarious. It's a total oxymoron to say "cost" and "Apple" in the same breath, unless you're pointing out iPad costs TWICE as much as a nice netbook with a 160GB hard drive, 3 USB ports, a 10.1" 16M color display you can also plug into your HDTV to make the movie bigger. -- Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics. Larry
From: Larry on 30 Apr 2010 21:28
nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in news:300420101611145630% nospam(a)nospam.invalid: > anyone can load any media they want into it > Great! I want to load 10 movies off alt.binaries.movies.divx in DivX format, and a couple of Xvids, and play them for the kids in the car! I'm so glad you figured out how to do that! Sheat! -- Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics. Larry |