From: Chris Devers Date: 06:23 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: inrainbows.com Okay, so it's a web site. So there's that. And okay, so most of the content on this list tends to be things that are let's say "accidentally hateful" or "hates of omission rather than hates of commision", which is to say, they're usually not actively trying to be difficult, but just chafing against how savvy users would expect them to behave. So there's that, too. But come on. I wanted to like this. This is supposed to be The Future. Radiohead releases their new album sans record label, on their website. Except, err, in 20 minutes of poking around, I can't find a link for it. I keep getting linked to different domains, including one selling all of their other albums, but nothing for this one. The closest is a link labelled "HODIAU DIREKTON", which pops a new window with the album art for the album I'm trying to find, but no link to it. (I'm sure of this, I ended up reading the HTML source to be sure of it.) So, no problem, I try Google. No radiohead.com links in the first couple of pages. Hrm. First one is rollingstone.com, which seems promising for at least pointing the right direction. Except, err, the first half-dozen or so people commenting on the article are saying "I want to buy the album, but can't find the link". Hrm. Ah, here we go, someone says that you have to just "know" to go to inrainbows.com, which now I see that the nice Mr. Google tried to tell me about, albeit without the customary link summary info, hence my seeing right past it the first time. So, load the site, what do we have? Album art. Colors. *click* A promo-slash-info page. *click* An order page, with links for DISCBOX or DOWNLOAD, both labelled "PRE-ORDER", even though it's no longer pre-. Oh well. *click* "This item has been added to your basket". *click* Back to order page. Find VIEW BASKET link. *click* The famous oh-so-prisoner's-dilemma "name your price" page. With no numbers filled in, and no "Checkout" link. Fill in a number. *click* "You have no items in your basket." *click* Back to order page. Dammit. Go to DOWNLOAD again. *click* Fill in a number. "PAY NOW" link magically appears. Super. *click* From there it's pretty routine web order checkout stuff, but the hoops you have to go through to get to that point are absurd, implying at least one or both of: * rock bands know nothing about making a usable web site (and thus this could end up poisoning their experiment in "name your price" as would-be buyers either give up and turn to BitTorrent, or get annoyed & pay zero) * rock bands actually *might* know how to make a usable web site, but may just be willfully trying to confound all expectations how how a site should work (and thus still poisoning their experiment) In any case, I'll happily pay for a copy of a CD, but I'm feeling a lot more wary about paying for ... whatever it was that the process for getting this "name your price" this way was trying to accomplish. As far as I can see, the point is to insult the industry and the buyers. :-/
From: H.Merijn Brand Date: 07:33 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:23:27 -0400 (EDT), Chris Devers <cdevers@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: > Okay, so it's a web site. So there's that. > > And okay, so most of the content on this list tends to be things that > are let's say "accidentally hateful" or "hates of omission rather than > hates of commision", which is to say, they're usually not actively > trying to be difficult, but just chafing against how savvy users would > expect them to behave. So there's that, too. > > But come on. I wanted to like this. This is supposed to be The Future. > Radiohead releases their new album sans record label, on their website. I stopped reading here. For *my* taste, Radiohead is so hateful that I always want to be able to kill the source of where this ether pollution is sent from. Admitted, their *music* isn't that bad, but as soon as Thom Yorke opens his mouth, my ears start to hurt. Hateful! Hateful! In my score list on Radio Paradise, Radiohead scores an avarage of 1.05405405405405, which only Coldplay, Simple Minds, Starsaylor and U2 can beat. http://www.radioparadise.com/content.php?name=Members&file=userinfo&showdata=ratelow&u=22794
From: Chris Devers Date: 07:57 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > I stopped reading here. For *my* taste, Radiohead is so hateful that I > always want to be able to kill the source of where this ether > pollution is sent from. And that's fine, everyone has different taste in music. My bigger point is that the way they're releasing this is being portrayed as some kind of seismic shift, where a band skips past the middlemen, allows the buyer to pay anything or nothing, and provides a copy of the music with no DRM restrictions. Whether or not you care for this particular band, for a high profile act to be able to pull this off does seem like it could be a turning point. ...except, of course, for the hateful web site [software]. I can see where maybe they think the site itself is part of the "artistic expression" they're going after, but it almost seems more like, to grasp painfully for a metaphor, as if Karl Marx had decided to give out free copies of _The Communist Manifesto_ to anyone that wanted a copy, but only if you can solve a series of riddles all while speaking Pig Latin. Neverminding for the moment if this is a book you have any interest in to begin with; if this is such a novel way to distribute the work, why put on the distracting side show to get in the way of it? That's the part that frustrated & confused me...
From: Earle Martin Date: 10:35 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com On 11/10/2007, H.Merijn Brand <h.m.brand@xxxxxx.xx> wrote: > In my score list on Radio Paradise, Radiohead scores an avarage of > 1.05405405405405, which only Coldplay, Simple Minds, Starsaylor and > U2 can beat. Totally unnecessary decimal places. Now *that's* hateful.
From: H.Merijn Brand Date: 11:01 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:35:22 +0100, "Earle Martin" <hates-software@xxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: > On 11/10/2007, H.Merijn Brand <h.m.brand@xxxxxx.xx> wrote: > > In my score list on Radio Paradise, Radiohead scores an avarage of > > 1.05405405405405, which only Coldplay, Simple Minds, Starsaylor and > > U2 can beat. > > Totally unnecessary decimal places. Now *that's* hateful. Absolutely true. changed. (not my taste, but the report) Coldplay has avarage 1.00 ... Simple Minds has avarage 1.00 ... Starsailor has avarage 1.00 ... U2 has avarage 1.00 ... Radiohead has avarage 1.05 ... Muse has avarage 1.12 ... My Morning Jacket has avarage 1.50 ... John Lennon has avarage 1.62 ... Joseph Arthur has avarage 1.64 ... Beatles has avarage 1.74 ... Stevie Wonder has avarage 1.75 ... Gomez has avarage 1.88 ... Travis has avarage 2.00 ... Death Cab For Cutie has avarage 2.07 ... Chemical Brothers has avarage 2.09 ... Cake has avarage 2.22 ... Ryan Adams has avarage 2.23 ... Vast has avarage 2.25 ... George Harrison has avarage 2.36 ... Doves has avarage 2.46 ... Beck has avarage 2.56 ... : : Depeche Mode has avarage 8.14 ... Tori Amos has avarage 8.15 ... Loreena McKennitt has avarage 8.33 ... Tracy Chapman has avarage 8.33 ... Sarah McLachlan has avarage 8.36 ... Hem has avarage 8.38 ... Delerium has avarage 8.43 ... Natalie Merchant has avarage 8.43 ... Dead Can Dance has avarage 8.50 ... Air has avarage 8.65 ... Dire Straits has avarage 8.67 ... Al Stewart has avarage 8.71 ... Mark Knopfler has avarage 8.81 ... Zero 7 has avarage 8.82 ... Solas has avarage 8.83 ... Peter Gabriel has avarage 8.97 ... Fleetwood Mac has avarage 9.00 ... Imogen Heap has avarage 9.00 ... Jethro Tull has avarage 9.12 ... Led Zeppelin has avarage 9.12 ... Vienna Teng has avarage 9.18 ... Kate Bush has avarage 9.19 ... Philip Glass has avarage 9.33 ... Supertramp has avarage 9.38 ... Pink Floyd has avarage 9.74 ... David Gilmour has avarage 10.00 ...
From: Ricardo SIGNES Date: 13:22 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com * Chris Devers <cdevers@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-10-11T01:23:27] > Except, err, in 20 minutes of poking around, I can't find a link for it. > I keep getting linked to different domains, including one selling all of > their other albums, but nothing for this one. The closest is a link > labelled "HODIAU DIREKTON", which pops a new window with the album art > for the album I'm trying to find, but no link to it. (I'm sure of this, > I ended up reading the HTML source to be sure of it.) ...uh. Their website has links in Esperanto. WELCOME TO 1899!
From: Juerd Waalboer Date: 13:34 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com Ricardo SIGNES skribis 2007-10-11 8:22 (-0400): > ...uh. Their website has links in Esperanto. WELCOME TO 1899! Eĉ ankoraÅ nun Äi paroliÄas :)
From: David Cantrell Date: 14:03 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 02:34:59PM +0200, Juerd Waalboer wrote: > Ricardo SIGNES skribis 2007-10-11 8:22 (-0400): > > ...uh. Their website has links in Esperanto. WELCOME TO 1899! > E?? ankora?? nun ??i paroli??as :) Thank you for your kind offer, but I do not wish to purchase your sister at this time. Have you tried ebay?
From: Peter da Silva Date: 14:49 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com On 11-Oct-2007, at 07:34, Juerd Waalboer wrote: > Ricardo SIGNES skribis 2007-10-11 8:22 (-0400): >> ...uh. Their website has links in Esperanto. WELCOME TO 1899! > E=C4=89 ankora=C5=AD nun =C4=9Di paroli=C4=9Das :) Dit kan mijn kamer niet zijn, ik adem geen ammoniak.
From: Juerd Waalboer Date: 14:57 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com Peter da Silva skribis 2007-10-11 8:49 (-0500): > >>...uh. Their website has links in Esperanto. WELCOME TO 1899! > >Eĉ ankoraÅ nun Äi paroliÄas :) > Dit kan mijn kamer niet zijn, ik adem geen ammoniak. Uitermate boeiend :)
From: Peter da Silva Date: 14:47 on 11 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: inrainbows.com On 11-Oct-2007, at 07:22, Ricardo SIGNES wrote: > ...uh. Their website has links in Esperanto. WELCOME TO 1899! 1899 is the new 2001!
Generated at 10:26 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi