View Full Version : RIAA death knells???
View Full Version : RIAA death knells???
Travis982
August 28th, 2002, 08:26 AM
As we all know the RIAA is not getting the message -- that the more you please the customer, the more money you make.
The MPAA on the other hand, while still stodgy, has a better hand on things.
For example: DVDs are not usually overpriced for what they contain. Most contain a timely released, good quality movie with many extra features well worth the $15 - $25 price. Notice these are selling in record numbers and the movie industry is raking in money. The customer is basically pleased with DVDs.
CDs however are not changing to meet the times. Usually one or two decent tracks on a $12 - $18 CD. Also the majority of music being promoted by the larger labels is not exactly high standard (my opinion of course). People are not pleased; And, in fact, have been complaining for several years about the poor content on CDs.
Why can't the RIAA adapt? It seems that as greedy as they are they would realise that pursuing their current course of action will kill them. Don't they hire decent analysts? Don't they listen at all to their customers?
If the RIAA does fold (and if they don't change, they most certainly will), it will mean a lot of chaos in the music industry. And as much as it sounds like a good thing for them to fold, it might not have the positive effect most of the readers of this forum think. It would be much better if they could adapt and render a more smooth transaction to a better business model. One way or the other eventually the customers are going to get what they want, with or without the RIAA.
bbrriiaann
August 28th, 2002, 09:56 AM
Dude, keep dreaming. As I sit here and view how many fileshring progs just don't work, I think the RIAA has already won. And Gnuttela just don't work, so ..... At least , if it does work it's way too slow for us spoiled Kazaa/Audiogalaxy/winmx users.
Sorry, i wish it wasn't so. Maybe b.... bing their ass would help?
what recently just don't work:
bearshare
imesh
all gnutella clones
winmx don't connect
etc etc
only kazaa lite seems to work
method
August 29th, 2002, 03:10 AM
"I think the RIAA has already won" - Don't be so defeatist, there are many more apps, protocols, tricks and tactics that developers/users can use. They'll never win, you can bet on it.
Foreverboard
August 29th, 2002, 07:09 AM
[i] They'll never win, you can bet on it. [/B]
I agree, P2P is too far ahead, and the people are much smarter than those at the RIAA\MPAA
bbrriiaann
August 30th, 2002, 07:58 PM
all i'm saying is that with the exception of kazaa light no p2p prog works anymore on my machine. Gnutella clones have never worked. With the death of Audio Gal and the rolling over of several others, it just looks like they've won.
i'm still getting plenty of music thru kazaa though.
Or can anybody explain me why all these apps don't work on a win 95/ P2 350 mhz / 64 mb machine????
Caitlyn Marble
August 31st, 2002, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by bbrriiaann
Or can anybody explain me why all these apps don't work on a win 95/ P2 350 mhz / 64 mb machine????
Uh, I think your sys isn't up to snuff. I mean, I've got winME, 1ghz, and 128 megs of memory, and running kazaa lite with anything other than winamp is a drain. WinMX on primary connection is hell.
Oh, and perhaps if you went removed the adware lurking in your system you might see better performance. I did. Though, the best solution would be to upgrade.
Ken17625
August 31st, 2002, 12:26 PM
yep.
wiggum
August 31st, 2002, 02:06 PM
They'll never win, you can bet on it.
Damn right. It really is just a case of how badly they are going to be defeated. p2p will not kill the RIAA but it's going to be a much smaller force in a decade.
bbrriiaann
September 3rd, 2002, 04:20 AM
Sorry Catrin,
Your answer is like any incompetent helpdesks' : Upgrade, reinstall, buy new.
I mean thank for replying, but i refuse to believe that 64 megs has anything to do with it. It ain't the hardware, it might be the OS, win95 is buggy as hell, and it might be the hardware config.
But your answer is symptomatic of what is wrong in IT today. Don't analyze, just CTRL-ALT-DEL your way out.
i gig of mem is ridiculous, the fact that things don't work wel with your PC lies with WinME rather than anything else. If I could get Win NT some where cheap, i would.
cheapprick
September 3rd, 2002, 06:35 AM
bbrriiaann, she gave you the right answer. As time goes on software maker's creations use more and more resources. Your 350 MH chip should be fine to use the apps, but your Ram and operating system could use some help. Now 128 mb of ram wouldn't cost you much, and the improvement would be immediate. Windows 98 would be a good choice for operating system. You could try something more recent, but would have to go through hcl's to see if your hardware would do, and they have a higher minimum ram requirement.
As time goes on the software available requires more resources, that's enivitable. Is it because some developers get sloppy knowing that most people's new machine's have all of that extra power? Maybe. Have you run msconfig and made sure that your not running needless programs on start-up?
There was no need to get rude with the person who tried to help you.
bbrriiaann
September 5th, 2002, 07:09 AM
Okay, if i did get rude I'm sorry.
At the same time, I think it's weird and unhealthy to not analyse even a little when someone asks about a problem.
I mean listen to her!:
She's got 1GIGA hz, and 128 megs of memory, and "running kazaa lite with anything other than winamp is a drain"!!
I mean, get real. This is ridiculous. She should be able to run everything she wants smoothly (ok up to a certain level, but surely not the level she describes)
As for me, I was looking for tips to tweak my system so that other fileswappers would work. I've the strong impression that it isn't the power of my overall system but something in the configuration. OR the RIAA really got to WinMX and other like them, Filenavigator, Swaptor.
I'm just looking for ppl with similar experiences who solved this. and once again I'm not trying to be rude or what.