Chris

Yep, lined up at noon today to buy GHIII at Walmart. Everyone rushed to the electronics department, happily picking up both the PS2 and XBOX 360 bundles off the display... but within moments the joy was shattered as we all realized they weren't the right guitars. People then starting putting the bundles back on the display, totally disillusioned. Our Walmart apparently received zero wireless bundles for the XBOX 360.

I think it's a bit shortsighted to say the Wii is the only "next-gen" system. Cooperative and competitive online gaming is every bit as important an innovation as a motion-sensing controller, and for the moment, nothing holds and candle to the Xbox 360 and Xbox Live.

I've been a proponent of digital distribution for years and I've paid for music downloads ever since it became an option. This is a slap in the face. "Hey, thanks for actually paying for music when everyone around you mocked you and downloaded it illegally. You sure are stupid. And now we're going to make you pay even more!"

Hooray. I love the music industry.

This is completely ridiculous. The ability to add to the calendar is the smallest of features, and just the tip of what should be on the iPod Touch. What about Notes? Or Calculator? Where are those apps? Don't tell me either of these would cut into the potential market of the iPhone. All PDAs have had this capability this the Newton. And don't give me that crap that the iPod Touch is just a music player—a simple player don't have touch-screen interfaces and wifi!

It's a deal breaker for me.

I disagree with your rebuttal! (Ha, of course!) Seriously, though, I
didn't say it encouraged theft. I said it sanctioned it, which means
it makes it permissible. And that is not the right message to send
out. Furthermore, this is not an example of a business like a grocery
store charging more for beef to offset losses in bulk candy (which are
routinely knicked). The labels cannot charge more for music because it
will just push more people into theft. So the labels lobby the
government for some type of intervention to protect their market, and
the government responds with a very imperfect solution that actually
sanctions the very behavior that has destroyed the market in the
first place. A $25 gift certificate to iTunes gets you 25 songs. A
$25 levy tells you it's okay to fill that 30GB iPod with thousands of
stolen songs, because in some magic way, the government will see to it
that the levy you paid reaches the right artists.

And that's a load of crap.

I disagree with your rebuttal! (Ha, of course!) Seriously, though, I didn't say it encouraged theft. I said it sanctioned it, which means it makes it permissible. And that is not the right message to send out. Furthermore, this is not an example of a business like a grocery store charging more for beef to offset losses in bulk candy (which are routinely knicked). The labels cannot charge more for music because it will just push more people into theft. So the labels lobby the government for some type of intervention to protect their market, and the government responds with a very imperfect solution that actually sanctions the very behavior that has destroyed the market in the first place. A $25 gift certificate to iTunes gets you 25 songs. A $25 levy tells you it's okay to fill that 30GB iPod with thousands of stolen songs, because in some magic way, the government will see to it that the levy you paid reaches the right artists.

And that's bullshit.

This is so insane. You've got to wonder how these people can get together, have a conversation, and come out with such a ridiculous conclusion. There are so many things wrong with the idea of a levy, it's mind-boggling. The first of which is that you're legally sanctioning theft. You're telling everyone it's alright to go out and download as much crap as you want and not pay the artist for it, because, hey, we'll do it for you. WHICH THEY WILL NOT. There is no provision to pay a fee to any non-Canadian. Steal all the Beyonce and Jay-Z you want, they'll likely never see a cent from the levies. Even if there is a clause to provide compensation to American labels with Canadian branches, exactly what kind of mind-boggling schedule will they have to come up with fairly distribute this collected fees to the artists? Will they watch the Much Music Countdown every week to see who is and is not popular? Doubtful. No, the levies will probably go to crap Canadian artists like the Barenaked Ladies, who need money because they suck so much.

A levy isn't fair to anyone.

Yeah, Rockstar clearly is having problems with their character models. They just don't look very good. And they certainly don't look next-gen. Resident Evil 4 has much better character models, and it's a freaking GameCube game...

The MacBook display is just fine for its product class. It's significantly brighter and more saturated than those in the iBooks and 12" PowerBook.

On the other hand, the MacBook Pro display is crap, especially for its class. In the three models I've examined, the backlighting was terribly uneven, the color wasn't very saturated and there was a noticeable shift in color towards the bottom of the display. The displays were also rather grainy (much like the 20" Apple Cinema Display). I was so disappointed in the display that I settled for a basic MacBook. And I'd argue its display is actually better than the MacBook Pros.

I have a four year old 867MHz PowerBook G4 that has a much better display than both the MacBook and MacBook Pro. This doesn't seem right. You'd think over time, the displays would get better. Not worse.

Gee, how about a screen that doesn't suck? Oh, the current one is fine so long as the image isn't moving... but once it starts, you're in motion trail hell!