Posts by Andrew Orlowski 1435 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Sep 2006
"Andrew Orlowski has written a very pro-RIAA follow up to this article, but neglected to have the balls to allow comments on it."
Finnbar - what makes you think journalists read the comments at all? It's a great way of ignoring people like you.
On the other hand, everyone who writes to me directly (and who isn't an obvious nutter) starts a dialog.
So this is actually a conversation you've chosen to exclude yourself from.
What a shame. We'll just have to get by without you. ;-)
"pointless since all you've done is admitted a "crime" which could get you a million buck fine, to tell people something they've known for ages."
You obviously don't want journalists to their own research. That's OK - but could I suggest you try Wikipedia? No original research guaranteed!
The point is: you seem to hate paying for music.
"Plus, what the sweet buggery are these icons for?!"
We're all wondering that, Ash.
"Am I to pick a mood next? "Baffled" is my current state of mind! Should I write you a poem and post pictures of myself looking melancholy from a high angle?
www.emoregister.co.uk"
ROFL :-)
Any idea what the green stick man is doing?
Dismembering a child is my guess.
>> Time to organise a month long embargo on CD and DVD purchases. <<
We've been here before, Nev.
What happens is the only people who join the "boycott" are people who don't buy music anyway.
Besides, everyone with broadband can get music for free anyway, so why rock the boat?
Is there a reason a normal person SHOULD win a case like this?
Please explain the morality. If you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar, expect a slap.
Remember - the chances of you getting caught are still somewhat less than being struck by lightning.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/23/orlowski_interactive_keynote/
Per-unit pricing for digital looks like a dead duck - DRM or no DRM.
It isn't just music that faces this problem - on TV, it's only premium sports events or movies that can command a fee.
But how much would you pay for a service, though, that permitted you to keep your acquisitions and trade songs legally with other members?
How much per week or per month?
Andy S (et al) -
Of course fans are delighted when their favourite artists give away their songs for nothing - I'd be amazed if the reaction was anything other than ecstatic.
But labelless artists suck money out of the system. This has consequences - you might want to start thinking about them.
(I'd be impressed if Radiohead started their own record label / co-operative - or in some way sketched out the post-record label model. But so far, they haven't.)
Right now, no one wants to look the gift horse in the mouth.
Great post - thank you "anonymous". What a great parody of a the bedwetting fanbois.
If only you didn't use an anonymous gmail account, as well as being anonymous, I'd bung a T-shirt in the post as a prize. It's ALL good, but this is my favourite line:
> interesting and new music
From Radiohead??
You have me in stitches.
> They haven't done anything interesting since Creep.
That Pink Floyd one has some good tunes. I even like a couple on that comeback lp of theirs, the Warp Records knock-off that even die-hard fans know is shite.
So it's only TEN years since their creativity disappeared. But they're probably wealthy enough to sit around scratching their arses for another ten years, though.
> Tosh advertising tosh delivered in either tosh or dosh format.
Beautifully put.
Your hatred is blinding you Paul.
The old model is dead. But in your narrow and selective view of the world, the only labels you see are "bad" labels. There were plenty of "good" labels, and they were able to go their own way because their most successful stars didn't keep all the loot for themselves.
Calling Factory a commune (ha ha) not only shows that you don't know Factory, but that you prefer to engage in semantic wibbly-wobbling. Get over it.
> Radiohead ... and still make people a living.
Er, no - it proves nothing of the sort. Radiohead are already millionaires, so can afford to "stick it to the man" and give their music away for free.
Thanks for advocating the economics of feudalism.
> Factory was a wonderful thing <
Good, we agree. So why are you so keen that it never happens again?
John Stag -
"These days a blogger can have as much power as a big radio DJ in the days before radio-payola became an epidemic."
Care to name a blogger with the influence of John Peel? You'd be a happier man if you saw the world as it really is, rather than fantasizing about it.
"When was the last time you discovered some decent music through radio/TV?"
Yesterday, the day before that - and the day before that, too.
You're obviously not listening to the wrong radio stations :-)
Scott, I'm sorry you took away the impression that The Stage had been hoaxed by Wikipedia - when you insist that you been hoaxed by The Guardian Online.
I'm really not sure why you feel the need to boast about this though. The end result is the same:
1. Disengage brain
2. Copy
3. Paste
Remember that Ronnie H. had retired 20 years before the S Club 7 hit. Two seconds of research by your staffer (a fan?) would have revealed this very improbable assertion to be a load of bollocks. Was he so surprised he felt he didn't have to check it?
Still, keep digging.
luv,
Andrew
El Reg
"If it's the former, then Amazon have played a blinder in persuading the major labels to allow an unprecedented number of tracks to be released without DRM, and perhaps the headline needs to splash that fact more prominently - this might even count as a serious nail in DRM's coffin."
Fair shout. I'm pretty impressed with the selection here so far. But not so impressed with the UK prices...
Maybe Apple just came to the market too early - got lumbered with the DRM albatross - and late entrants like Amazon.com will clean up? It's happened often enough: the US and mainframes, for example ;-)
@ Nick -
"I wonder how long a mobile phone battery will last when you start downloading tens of MB of music over 3G. I expect it won't last a day if you download a few tracks"
Good point.
I can't see people downloading for more than an hour a day, but an hour is nevertheless around 40 per cent of a typical 3G phone's talk time.
@ Mark / Fenwar / Jim -
The use of DRM as a technical means of recreating the "single" or "album" - is dead. It's simply nailed to its perch; no one believes in it anymore. It doesn't help sell consumer goods and it doesn't help sell music.
(And as someone with more than 20 feet of vinyl in my living room, I understand the value of collections.)
But MusicStation is not a way of building a collection, and they're very upfront about this. It's really user-powered radio. So I wonder how much waving around this dead bogeyman - DRM - is simply an excuse not to pay for music?
"They will always reduce the argument to the absurd 'ahh, you don't want to pay for music' "
Oh, I forgot. Because Russia is effictively outside the reciprocal copyright system for music, artists from Mali to Montevideo to Manchester don't see a penny for any sales or airplay in Russia.
Now I can see why you think it's "absurd" to pay creators, Vladimir -you've never done it before ;-)
>> The point I was trying to make was that the "bloggers" took the bait and were used to start that grass roots buzz. <<
I hear what you're saying, Ian.
But that's like saying I'm being "used" by an airline or hotel when I go on holiday. When in fact it's a mutually satisfactory contract.
You're denying the possibility that Marie's fans supported her through their own free choice. She became a "hit" because people liked her, not because they were being "used". You're also taking from the fans their ability to find out for themselves whether Marie was actually an unsigned artist. Ten seconds on Google could have confirmed she was on Disney.
You're saying that the fans were too dumb to do so - I'm saying they don't really care.
So you're actually making the fans/bloggers look far more stupid than I possibly could. At least I'm not denying that free will still exists, and that fans are capable of making well-informed, autonomous choices :)
@ Ian Gumby
>> these bloggers are outraged and that they are, for the first time unable to clearly communicate their emotions. <<
First time?
>> That is, Disney tossed this girl out like bait, and let these "blogger manics" run with the story. <<
She did it using her own initiative.
That's what puzzles me. Are you saying Marie shouldn't make home made videos and post them to YouTube if she's signed to a label? I thought YouTube was for everyone.
Or are you saying corporations shouldn't use YouTube? If they enjoy some First Amendment rights in the US, I don't see why not.
Either way, it's just inverted snobbery.
"You're right ... fatter pipes would do the trick."
Ignorance piled on ignorance, here. You've already explained why this doesn't help, but you haven't joined up the dots yet:
"If you've got a pile of kids downloading torrents in your neighborhood, that has absolutely no impact on anyone in another loop."
So everyone in that neighborhood is screwed. Now find a neighborhood where someone _isn't_ using Bittorrent - and happy hunting.
Now put imagine yourself as the ISP.
There's absolutely no incentive for you to spend even an extra $1 on a "fatter pipe", only to see those pesky neighborhood kids eat it all up. You can spend a bilion, to get to exactly where you are today. You absolutely need that packet prioritization.
@ Nexox Enigma:
The net has never been "neutral". So how can you give up something you never had?
@ C
"Bias requires traffic analysis... intrusion into the type of traffic "
Which we already have. If we didn't have it, your VoIP call wouldn't go through because Bittorrent is saturating the pipe. As Ian K Rolph illustrates above: today's net is easily rendered unusable without traffic analysis and discrimination.
Discrimination == intelligence. Discrimination is not necessariy == abuse. Only in your paranoid imagination, perhaps.
@ Anonymous 100 per cent Man:
So 100 per cent of your health club's members can utilize 100 per cent of the health club's equipment 100 per cent of the time?
Three great examples of ignorance - not understanding how the net works - generating fear.
>> I played with a new device, could not understand how to make it work (because I do not know what shortcuts mean) <<
You obviously haven't been able to compare these two phones. So let me spell it out slowly for you.
Both phones present the user with a QWERTY keyboard. On one, you can start to type "G-U-S-H" and before you've got to the "S", you have a scrollable list of contacts, available in real time. That's how you can call or text someone in under 5 seconds. On the Nokia, it's click ... pause ... click ... pause.
When you get the chance, try comparing opening a new incoming text message. You will have time to complete a crossword by the time the E61i shows the message. Try it for yourself.
>> It is nice to live in your own world but take a look at
Nokia's market share ... profitability and ... profitability <<
Is that supposed to make me feel better, Gushter? That although I'm having an inferior user experience - the company is doing well financially?
I feel better already!
"Tampere, we have a problem."
>> How can you possibly produce a headline like that and not even include a Blackberry in the comparison. <<
Because it's about Blackberry contenders, not about the Blackberry. Please try and read as far down as the fourth paragraph next time ;-)
>> The reason why to do lists on the devices are not full-featured is that the general customer does not use them. <<
Gushter - have you thought of working for the S60 team at Nokia? If not, give it a go, you'll fit right in.
With luck you'll be fast-tracked so you can skip the first day's training, which allegedly involves repeating the phrase "The customer is always wrong" several thousand times. A promising career awaits you in almost any British service industry.
>> Plus, you do have loose address string search within the sms application, just need to know how use it. <<
Overall, given the sluggishness of the device, the Q9 performed the same tasks in 3-5 seconds, which with the E61i took 10-15 seconds.
>> the P1i has not useable keyboard <<
It's actually very usable - on a par with the squidgy E61i but not as good as the Q9. The Motorola's word recognition helps to speed things alot too.
I'd have loved to throw the comparable RIM and Sony Ericsson devices into the ring - and as soon as they get round to sending us them, I will :-)
I'm impressed with the build quality of the P1i from what I've seen. But the noteworthy aspect for me was that Windows Mobile has improved so much so quickly. Nokia is drinking its own Kool Aid if it doesn't wake-up to the competitive threat.
> "And since this is The Register, why don't you mention SSH capabilities? "
Good point John. If anyone has experience of the various clients, please add them below. Is putty still the best choice?
I'll follow-up with a piece explaining why these email devices actually made me less "productive" ... ;-)
Brett - I've been using a Q9H for a few days - less time than the reviewer above, and far short of the month that's needed to draw decent conclusions. But this might help:
My first impressions are very positive: this is a much better phone than the original Q. The differences are minor, but they're important and they really add up.Similar to the improvements Sony Ericsson made from the P800 to the P900).
If you use the device on an HSDPA network you really don't miss Wi-Fi - it's very fast indeed. (Which is a substantial saving - my monthly 1GB plan costs me less than an hour of using Wi-Fi on a train). You only need Wi-Fi when a) you're roaming in Europe or b) really want to use SIP calling.
The keyboard is also much better, I can type a lot faster on this than any other similar 'Berry clone.
"Finally the battery life mystery needs to be verified"
Always-on push email murders the battery (as does leaving Opera open), but fetching every 10 minutes is fine. Agree with you on the scroll wheel...
My unit doesn't come with Documents To Go, but I'm told by Motorola that all UK models will.
a
Simon -
>> In essence, it's not just the web that motivates this rapid turnover, but the increased needs of the entertainment industry in general. <<
The entertainment industry really wants the exact opposite: reliable, well-established names who can crank out a platinum seller at regular intervals. It wants the Elton Johns and Cliff Richards. It doesn't even mind if the artist is dead, so long as it has re-packaging rights. In this sense, it's no different to the software companies who want to replace upgrades with subscriptions, and "software as a service". Every business craves revenue predictability.
Tim Butterworth -
>> sciencifying (is that a real word?) <<
No
TeeCee - Use of the word "meme" is considered pretty naff (and a giveaway sign that the person using it is a chump). There are so few occurances of "meme" at El Reg it's not worth formally banning.
(It's appeared a couple of dozen times in 70,000-odd articles, almost always satirically).
In this story, it's obviously being used satirically too. Empty-headed Web 2.0 enthusiasts like to use the word to make themselves sound cooler and more important.
See Jaron Lanier for a good explanation of the naffness of "meme" -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12/27/jaron_lanier_futurist_conference/
>> "The 'meme' is what's left of ideas when you remove the sense of experience, and so the 'meme' is a way of saying ideas are nothing more than relativistic game theory moves," he says. "That's absolutely, demonstrably, not so in some specific areas like mathematics where things are true and false. But I don't think it's so where life has experience and experience gives us an alternate anchor point. An inexperienced life can only be made a 'meme'." <<
Rhett -
If it's taking you 13 steps to launch Opera Mini, then add it to your shortcuts button. That's the silver one on the right of the D-Pad. You'll then be able to launch Opera Mini in 2 steps. Consult your manual for further details.
Morely, calagan -
the Amiga and Atari were launched in 1985 - a year after the Mac. And I very much doubt the Mac Toolbox was based on GEM - they were developed independently. Fair point overall, though: the Atari was much, much cheaper than the Mac and the Amiga had real multitasking.
Tim - cheers, attribution fixed. Keep up the good work at PiC.
Nikolaus -
"Those two facts would tell you that Apple is in the mobile phone market to stay. ..."
Never judge a phone until you've seen three quarters worth of data. Some of Nokia's biggest flops have "exceeded expectations" in the first quarter, only to find a tiny niche.
"... To rule."
Yes, I can hear the trumpets already.
"Does this mean I should end my genetic experiment to cross-pollinate a Mac user with a Scientologist to produce the world's most pompous asshole?"
Oooh, missus!
Or the world's most predictable conversationalist ;-)
In my experience almost all of my fellow Mac users care rather less about their choice of tool than PC users. The creepy cult part of the user base is quite small. They just make a lot of noise, and give the rest of us a bad name.
Valan Chan -
"A much more interesting article about the iPhone would have been how Apple managed to sucker the media into such a frenzy!"
It would be a pretty short piece, though, wouldn't it? Maybe we could take a sociological or anthropological approach. Do any readers know of any academic studies of voluntary infantalization?
Some context here is important. Sony Ericsson considers this phone acceptable for sale to the general public - but won't release one for examination by journalists for professional review.
By all means use the comments here to vent your spleens, or declare your love for your favourite vendor. But we have a duty to convey accurate information on the site - so malicious and misleading comments will be removed.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
