It was an excellent format that is still around.
You're kidding me right? Not only was MD an abysmal format for what it was marketed as, it was terrible because of exactly the kind of cartoonishly-evil format restrictions that get Sony routinely bashed on here! If you were going to white-knight a Sony media format, you definitely should have picked a better one. MD was marketed primarily as a _recording_ medium, a cheaper replacement for DAT. But the content division wanted it to also be used for distribution, god only knows why (really, who in their right mind would pay more money for a bulkier (thicker) CD just for the plastic case, a fact the market made clear). So even though it was ostensibly for recording, they made it as difficult as possible to actually _get_ the audio you recorded onto your computer!
As another poster mentioned, you couldnt just rip the disk onto your computer, you had to trans-code (Hopefully you had one of those oh-so-ubiquitous optical spdif port on your sound card. MD computer drives were never allowed to be made). Granted, this was a digital transfer so there was no loss in quality, but you still had to sit it there in front of your computer for an hour re-recording the thing like a freaking cassette tape. Much later, they introduced a proprietary, windows-only software program that would transfer the disk to an audio file faster than 'real time' (i.e. like a freaking cdr that everyone was used to at that point). Never used it, always had mac or linux, but I heard it was awful. Keep in mind that this was all to prevent people from ripping commercial MD releases, making this flabbergasting piece of anti-technology in a 'recording' medium one of the worst and most salient examples of Sony's chronic double-think in their consumer electronics division that has led to market failure after market failure for Sony formats.
MD was simply a cash-grab with a garbage proprietary format that noone wanted, and a textbook case of Sony's content division crippling their electronics division. I should have coughed up a little more money and gotten a DAT machine, at least that format is still around, better quality, and more convenient than MD, even though its ~10 years older.
It's an honest question since I know nothing about this website. I thought this court motion from the defendants was very interesting, especially this part:
"Xcentric encourages consumers to post complaints about companies, while at the same time offering its “services” to help these companies improve their image -- for a fee. Xcentric’s practices are controversial. In one recent lawsuit, the plaintiff alleged that Xcentric “actively solicit[s] defamatory content from third parties and directly encourage[s] the use of hyperbole and exaggeration in the title and body of the complaint to maximize the impact and marketability of false reports.”"
The motion then goes on to say that this issue is addressed in an faq on Ripoff Report's website, but I was unable to find it. While I certainly don't agree with the brittish model of "sue for libel first, ask questions later", I think we're all in agreement that protecting defamation is definitely not in the spirit of free speech. Is this really part of Ripoff Report's business plan? Anyone familiar with Ripoff Report care to enlighten?
Actually, while I was also irked by the buzzword-compliance of TFA, I think the point about linking virtualization and the cloud with giving small businesses access to data tools is actually quite valid. Storage and processing are commodities now thanks to these technologies, which significantly reduces the staff and overhead required for a startup or small company to utilize large data sets. I work for a small web design and hosting company and we certainly wouldn't be considering scaling up our data management solutions for our clients if we had to carry the whole infrastructure on our backs. And just because you haven't thought of a novel way to leverage a lot of data doesn't mean that another company won't (and they will).
You really think the housing market (or the 'business model' of building homes) didn't change with the invention of the hammer? I suppose the business model of IT didn't change when people stopped coding in assembly - after all, coding in C is the same thing only faster, and what's all the hype around high level languages since they don't do anything by themselves without a team of software analysts and programmers? I'm actually surprised your post got modded so high since the first half basically amounts to "If it's worth doing it would have been done by now" and the second half is a just a bizarre, directionless and inappropriate outpouring of nerd rage. I guess it's just feels good to rally around someone declaring the popular technology du-jour irrelevant (in this case the cloud - a popular target around here). I'm actually finding it difficult to simultaneously respond to your uninformed opinions and your disrespectful attitude without feeling some nerd rage myself. We should be fucking ashamed? Really?