@webran61
since when did a magazine make money with the sale of the magazine itself.

mainly, the cost of the magazine will cover for the cost of:
ink, paper, printing, shipping, distribution, an point of sale cut.

the magazine itself makes money with the commercials inside.
a little bit like the radio business.

so electronic distribution should reduce that price a lot:
no more paper, ink, printing, and no point of sale cut.
however, it cannot be zero, as there is still a distribution cost.

so, indeed, the magazines are trying to increase their margin.
so the question is: in a dying industry, with ads shifting from it, are we as customer willing to have this content for a price, and maybe ensure the continuity of it?

me: o need, industries are dying, and new ones created. so hell with it, I can find all that info online, and would love to have a subscription model, with a bouquet of magazines available.

that'll be great.
a full bag of....
gee! that's the geek in me. not knowing what I'll get makes it even better: spending hours checking everything. sweeeeeeeeeet

oh about saving the world economy. hmmm! how about a little step.... get rid of hybrid gas, that pays farmers more for colza and such, thus reducing the farming surface for human food crops all over the world, gets us first time over 1 billion people starving every day, adn will pollute as much (as long as it is a niche it is ok, when million of cars use that, it will cause ecological issue.
that way, we'll have to find other tech, real clean, and generate jobs there, might even be jobs for the belly-full people we'll have then.
hmmm: electron electromagnetic traps, or something, allowing storage and transport of a lot of electricity.
and sun electricity farms in hot areas, which reduces the need to petrol, wind (which can cause atmospheric effects when massively used (like land erosion when the humid wind is stopped from going into the land) , and also reduces the albedo, thus lowering the temp increase in the atmosphere.
ok, I dream, but wouldn't that be great?
until that happens, I'll just play with my bag of stuff I'll get soon.

hey Fuzzball,
what happens here is the same in so many countries, and yes , including US.
to attract corporations, and investments (investments that will be done anyway), and in order to create local jobs, many countries in teh world provide grants.
these grants are bound to requirements:
example can be that you get a tax exmption for 10 years, a land rental for free for 10 years, if you invest these and create 1000 jobs, 80% local hireesin the first 2 years and keep these 10 years.
gvts are not inflexible, and market conditions understood to be impacting on these numbers, thus flexibility.
however, at a time when the corporation announces a huge profit,it decides to close the factory, before the terms agred upon. which means the money received (in cash or subsidies, read the tax rebate...) are kind of "stolen" as the other side of the bargain is not kept, and this without economical reasons.
read the green card procedure for new investors in US, and the requirements, or the grants requirements for investing in Alaska. almost all countries do so.

on the legal ground, and I am not a legal expert, even though in this case, there might not have been a written bound, rulings are left to the judges. a part of Nokia's last year benefits might have been a direct result of the fact that they needed not invest the money they got from Germany. they could, I think, feel lucky germany is only asking for the money given, instead of estimating the worldwide investments by nokia, the share Germany financed, and take that percentage of Nokias profits.

more or less, a relation can be made in the marital stauses: even without being married, or married under contract for separation of wealth, one partner can overrule this contract or no-contract with a judgement on the fact that by helping in the personal life (cooking, cleaning...) it participated in the wealth generation and has right to a share of it.

last but not least, the bounding with requirements, even if not wirteen and signed, is the standard for Gvt subsidies to a company's investment throughout the world, nokia cannot default for lack of knowledge on a mainstream and widely common procedure.

PS: not for you fuzzball, why is everybody still comparing economically germany to US, or UK to US, or france.
each EU country should be compared to a US state.or ALL EU to ALL USA.
then the comparison pales: export, population, market capitalisation.... the difference is then really blurred. EU is at least economically a union of countries, as much as USA is a union of states (which is equivalent here)

well, it is just forbidden to force bundled sales.
in theoory and if you have time to waste, you can enter a shop, open the pack of 6 soft drinks, get one can only and go to pay for it.

the manager might argue, YET! he cannot force you to buy the pack of 6: it is up to him to charge you a price for it, and up to you not to buy if the price is too high.

that is for bundles.

and that will be for Iphone Bundled to both a PLAN and ITUNES for registration.
just waiting for the first compplaints.
and then: phase 2: the "60 million consumers" association to sue apple after they sold a lot of iphones. including a backward refund, for everybody, as they alreaddy did for other things (like the minute charging: a minute started is a minute charged)

thanks apple: will enrich France, I can see 1000's of turists going there, spending money to get their legal IPHONE :)

ENGADGET : 20th sept 2010.
FIRST REVESE class action.
after apple has sold 1 million Icars, and set 248 patents, Texas patent court has deemed recievable the first "reverse class action" case.
Apple is suing all 7 billion peopleon earth, extending to the moon (where 10 scientists are permanently living) for breaching it's patent on the Wheel.
"although already in use widely, apple has been the first to patent the wheel, and every one using it is possibly breaching Apple's IP" statd the head of court.
in the filling, Apple seeks dammages to be paid in order of billions, and the cease of every wheel use in the world.
Apple was not available for comment, but our bionic cockroach in their offices has caught wording on the next move on the steering wheel.
-----------
sounds familiar? well just check what happens with the iphone.

Pito,
I agree with you on that fact.
if you read my comment correctly you will see the diference:
when you buy a song, you pay for the Rights to listen to this song.
if it is tied only to a single player, then you get a restriction to that right, that is not intended on the original definition (not amended)
in that case, and with Apple having a quasi monopol on digital music, which is great, it allows it to impose their own will to the coonsumers, even against customer's benefits. that is wherre the administration bodys are here to prevent that from happening, as they did with Vista, or with selling websites that removed all responsability on their side in their small prints, or the 7 days free of charge order cancellation in france when you buy online.

mainly the song is not the player.

how would you feel if, when you buy your milk in Wal mart, to be obliged to play ONLY through a 16% fee loan from Wal Mart.
or to buy your petrol, you can only use it in a toyota car, and nothing else.

mainly, it has been decades, that in europe the tendency is to forbid companies to FORCE sales though bundles, and to be picky, an example is: if you need one single AAA battery, and the shop only sells pack of 4 batteries, you are allowed to open it, and buy one, up to them to price it accordingly. they cannot force you to buy more or to tie a sale to another one.

in most european countries the operators cannot tie the customer as in US. they must allow the phone to be unlocked (they can charge a fee for it though, but not a reasonabble fee).
it goes the same way as the mobile number portability, or roaming charges being scrapped/lowered this summer: customer protection through customer's choice and freedom.
in comparison to corporate protection through lobby's.
however apple will play with the activation and obligation to use the itunes. so you must use your operator, as they will only link the choosen operators to that.

I can't wait to see the first complaints to european courts against apple for doing so: same as the IPOD, and the laws passed to freeing customers. when you buy a song it is separate ffrom the player and apple must allow now their itunes songs to play on other devices.

EU not only slapped Microsoft a lot, it will also (and already did) slap apple.

hehe: yet a lot more stories about iphone to read in engadget then :)

all right seems that there is a lack of general knowledge here.
1_ freedom, yes.
when leaving in a community, your freedom stops where you start removing one's own freedom
I think I have to explain.
you have a neighbourg
you can dump your garbage in your own backyard. good for you, that is your freedom.
BUT IT STOPS when this garbage is making health risk for your neighbourg

well, just one example.
and US is applying it as well.

I do prefer france with the radar listed publicly (at least the fixed ones)

and hate the property destruction involved in the swiss law

yet, maybe you need to consider things like in that case, repression since the 90's in western europe, has cut the yearly road death by about 50%, not bad for 5000 families a year in france who's kid did not die because a TOTAL freedom lover feels he can speed in a town, or dirve drunk.

until all people get enough responsability and drive saely, which is not going to happen until manual driving is removed and replace by automated stuff.
so until 100% of people do drive right, then maybe we wont have any death.

so if just ONE a day in a country is stupid enough to hit the breaks 100 meter before the radar, and speed again right after, then forbid the tool, destroy it, and get his car out of him. that will save lives.

VIVA automated pilots, and if you really want to drive, then Circuits, out of town, where you can KILL yourself as much as you want. but will never kill a full family coming back from scholl with the kids.

quick fact even my non-educated gran'ma knew.
in life you have to ways to be better
1_ effectively: by really being better
2_ relatively, by bringing the others down, then towards them you are superior.

true in life, corporate life and so on.
seems that is what apple is trying to do on the OS side (not on the PMP . read: ipod...), why the need to ever-bashing MS? can't they praise their own products instead, seems more like point 2 methodology.

OS X and vista a diferent products for diferent people.
I'd buy an apple right away for my mum (60 years old , computer illiterate) yet will keep windows for games (or any other console) and communication.
for work, I;ll keep Solaris.
diferent uses, diferent markets, diferent needs.

the only things that is worrying is the rethoric of SOME (and I said some) Mac users. closer to religious fanatism.
where no reasonning could possibly overcome the facts.
example: praising macs: normal, IT IS SUPERIOR.
and praising windows: they are all paid by MS.
same fact, diferent interpretation by the same person.

on a hyperbole, and I will push it, some (yet some only) people sound like islamists extremism leaders.

SAD, when one will deny himself the benefits of other things by bare blindness, and fanatism to a company that just wants your buying power in their financial results. (read again the sentence I did not wpecify who, and what product, works both sides)

lets tax all writers of comments favorable to MS, as we all know now they are paid by MS (capitalist pigs! - sarcastic note and reference to the hatred of capitalisms in the past century)
oh and not forget:
lets detax all apple benefits, as any religious organisation (they do have a guru, collect money for the good of the causefrom the followers, deny other beliefs, must convert the non-believer, has a big believer's base, even extreme ones.)

yep, I like both products, yet (dispise) no, pity instead some of the comment writers for shortsidedness, and if this comment make you think, then it has reached its target.

Beau, man you really dont get it:
of course people can buy another product.
they can even buy their songs in other format, and not from itunes.
wait...
can they
apple has exclusivity distribution rights for some artists.
apple has a near market domination.
and if you buy a song from ITUNES: you pay for the right to listen to this song.
this is the fee: the right for YOU to listen to THAT song you paid the rights for, on one device at a time, with the fair play possibility to back it up.

nowhere you paid the rights for listening to one soong ON IPOD only.
so unlike USA (waranties for a mnth, no retraction perod after an online purcchase....) most countries in the world have consumer protection. might be new idea to you. as US only enforces it via lawsuits.

so yes you buy a song from ITUNES, can only listen to it on IPOD while you paid for the rights to listen to this song. final dot.
and if ou buy another MP3: you have to re-pay for that right, you already paid for...... unless,
you spent money on ITUNES, your ipod is broken, dead, and after a year or 2, no more support from apple, so YOU MUST BUY A NEW IPOD, from APPLE, hmmm!
souds like the dominant playing is putting constraints to FORCE new sales to its customers.......

same as the car industry, europe put laws, you can buuy your breakes from any garage, until recently you had to go to the brand dealer.

get real, I'd guess you were spitting at microsoft when they were doing half of that, and now defend Apple.
an information to you: APPLE is not a religion, you need not worship APPLE. ;)