Back when I was last in the studio, and this was back in the days of tape, let alone what could be achieved with digital, it was trivial to set everyone up, preferably with the drummer off in another room for better sound isolation, and do a take with everyone tracking out as separately as possible given the studio's equipment. At the very least, you came away with a candidate for the final drum track. The rest of the band could go back in, one at a time or whatever you wanted, and re-track their part with at least the drum track available to play to and quite likely the rest of the band (as there is at least some version of it from that original take or whatever has been dubbed/punched onto the tape tracks since then).

There are some other noteworthy reasons for a click track, though, beyond making sequenced elements, tempo-synced effects, and editing work nicely:

One example is that many drummers simply can't hold tempo. They'll rush the verses and drag the chorus when if anything you might want the opposite. Or they'll do the opposite when you want the other. ;) Or they'll slowly drag the tempo up through the entire song. Or down. Or they'll drop a few BPM whenever they need to play sixteenths on the hi-hat. (This last one is getting sickeningly common in live shows but even on albums recently. Bone up on your skills, guys! There's a thing called "practice" that you might have heard of! ;) )

The thing that all of these reports are ignoring is that 1.1 (which is required for paid apps to even show up) isn't even available for the ADP1 yet. (And no, the holiday version doesn't count.)

People need to wait until 1.1 is actually available for the ADP1 and _then_ see if there is a problem accessing paid apps. There probably will be a problem, but until we are looking at 1.1 running on an ADP1 this is all just conjecture.

Oh, I'm certain there are many. I was just curious about the potential interest in that location (or any other garnering such in-depth investigation, for that matter.) Sunken treasure, vast natural resources, veritable swarms of nubile mermaids, that sort of thing. ;)

I've heard this stated many times in many places since this subject came up a few days back, but have yet to spot anyone ask the obvious follow-up question I'm going to ask you in case you might know the answer:

All tinfoil-hat crap aside, why does this little patch of the ocean have so damn many ship tracks relative to any other random location? What of interest is (or is at least thought to be) down there in that area?

I'm honestly curious.

There are two "sides" to the licensing of each song. They aren't the sides you think. They are 1. the side for the songwriting and 2. the side for the recording. Each side needs to be licensed in order to use an original recording, whereas only the songwriting side needs to be licensed in order to _create_ a cover. That said, to _license_ the cover itself one would still need to license both sides (for the original songwriting and the new recording, though for the new recording it is often easier if the publisher of the cover and the creator of the cover are one in the same, even if only in terms of ownership and not the actual individual musicians).

The need to separately license both sides grows out of the fact that there are two distinct pieces of copyrighted material and different sets of people with their legal hands on each part. With the propensity for guest artists these days, especially in certain genres of what their proponents call "music" *cough*hip-hop*cough*, you can imagine just how many people could be involved in any one side, let alone both.

Whether there is one side to negotiate or two, and whether for a cover or not, in any given case the overall process is the same and equally open to all sorts of craziness in terms of who wants how many dollars.

That aside for the moment, and to comment on the overall subject in general, it is worth noting that both sides have been more than happy to license their music to these games, and that you would be amazed at the amount of money it sometimes takes to get one into a game. The only reason the fees aren't even higher is because there is _competition_. What do I mean by this? Well, there are a great many songs out there, as we all know, so these copyright holders can only push negotiations so high before those in control of the budget for the game will dump the song and move onto something else on their list. Unless all of the artists form a cartel to control these license fees, this form of competition is what keeps the production of these games even remotely affordable.

In the meantime, both the copyright holders and those licensing the copyrights (the game companies) are completely free to negotiate for what they want and to walk away at any time. That the labels have been doing one thing (happily licensing their side) and saying another (complaining about the licensing fees they are receiving) should be no surprise to anyone here on /., that's for sure.

Simple. So simple I find it hard to believe that no one else has mentioned the reason yet:

Japan and France (and places like them that score consistently high in terms of connectedness and bandwidth) have significantly higher population density than the US.

Loads of people in a tiny space makes it very easy to justify running fibre all over the shop, for example.

Yes, with a further just-to-be-on-the-safe-side clarification that AGPS has on-board GPS hardware.

People always seem to think that AGPS is the "fake" "GPS" that just uses the cell towers to tell roughly where you are (in other words, they think that cell tower triangulation is AGPS.) They end up knocking it when in fact it is the best of the three possibilities.

When the technology comes together the TTFF is quite remarkable (which I noted when I first fired up my AGPS after most having used a traditional handheld GPS.)

Cell tower triangulation != AGPS.

AGPS = GPS hardware + downloading ephemeris data via the cell data network to speed satellite acquisition.

I find it strange that so many people seem to confuse the two, so don't consider yourself singled out. ;)

No links off the top of the head, and as you'll note I'm not the person you replied to :), I just figured I'd fire you this quick reply:

If you want a stable image regardless of viewing angle, and don't mind it having slightly slower response time (it'll be slightly worse for games but will make your eyes thank you for basically every other usage) and slightly lower contrast, check out IPS panels. S-IPS, H-IPS, whatever prefix the manufacturer wants to put on it it doesn't much matter.

Marketing response times and contrast ratios are usually B.S. anyway, so you will be best off checking out displays in person at some point regardless, but all in all IPS panels own when it comes to viewing angles. Some older larger models would pick up a slight color tinge from off-axis, but that has been rectified in newer models.

As for IPS examples: Dell's 3007, Apple's big cinema displays, the NEC 2690 WUXI, a number of models from LG (LG makes the panel in the NEC 2690). They're out there to be found if you google up some pages with the size range you want, the resolution you want, and "IPS" in the search.

Sadly, as a member of a "small" shop, and having been there for six years, his career advancement halted approximately three years ago, give or take.

In all my years in this business I have yet to see someone in a position with a company (consultancy or otherwise) for more than approximately three years benefit more from staying beyond that point than they would from moving on and gaining varied experience elsewhere. Not that I am advocating job-hopping, of course. After a certain amount of time living within the world of one organization, there is only so much more growing one can do there.

Not disagreeing with your post, of course. ;) I agree entirely. I just thought I'd point out yet another reason for the submitter to run and not look back.

Buying 5 drives from any manufacturer that were the "same make, model, batch, store", and "shelf" is exactly how people get into massive RAID (or JBOD or even just multiple single-drive machine) failure situations in the first place. Just. Don't. Do. It. Especially when it comes to getting multiple drives from the same production batch. You created your own failure.

And that's okay by me, as you are not one of the folks that are demanding _both_ the acceleration _and_ the living room on wheels. :)

By the way, as for driving a race car: no, I have not. However, I have donned a racing helmet and ridden shotgun in a race-setup street car down at Seattle International Raceway and it was quite an amazing experience. Obviously not the same as driving one, and certainly not the same type of car as, say, and formula race car, but since you seem inclined to reading way much into my use of the phrase "race car" I am left tempted to ask the following: Seriously dude have _you_ ever driven a race car?

I didn't suggest anything in particular about what people were _getting_, just what they were _desiring_. :)

At the end of the day, the majority of people are desiring a set of vehicle characteristics that are almost directly in opposition to one another, and in order to produce what they demand one has to throw in a good amount of power for the acceleration they want, huge amounts of mass to give them that living room on wheels, and then yet more power to recover the acceleration that was lost due to adding the mass of the living room on wheels. It is no wonder that these "requirements" result in vehicles that are so abysmally wasteful that they make much of consumerism look downright thrifty.

Considering that more than ten years ago (IIRC) Honda offered in North America a Civic variant that did in excess of 70 MPG I'm having a hard time believing that it is going to take $50k some years in the future to hit 60 MPG.

Technology is not the problem. The problem is people's desire for a living room on wheels that can accelerate like a race car.