Slashdot Mirror

Defaults should be sane, and optimized for the common case. Fall-through-by-default is not the common case, it's the exceptional case. Because C chose fall-through-by-default, programmers are penalized for the much more common case of no-fall-through by having to type "break;" at the end of every frickin' case statement.

Because of this, common C practice is to annotate intentional fall-through statements with a comment, like so:

switch(expr) {
    case superset:
/* superset code ...*/
/* FALLTHROUGH */
    case base:
/* base code ...*/
}

So, guess what Swift does? That's right, an explicit fallthrough keyword, which you can apply to get the uncommon (but, as you noted, occasionally useful) fallthrough behaviour. This is both wonderfully self-documenting, and eliminates the need for break in the common case. Switch statements in Swift are shorter and safer as a result. (Also, their use of Lisp/Scheme/...-esque matching semantics for switch is a nice touch, as are the genericized Enums...but that's a story for later).

There are code examples in their online documentation plenty: https://developer.apple.com/li...

Good catch! They are super explicit about this though in their documentation: https://developer.apple.com/li...

They have a neat operator unshare (i.e. b.unshare()) which means that b's copy is unique.

Swift Language.

Do you know C? Any desire to implement such a feature in Linux? Seems like a good idea, and your claim of dramatic performance improvement has got me thinking. Perhaps this would be a good way to dip my toes into kernel hacking, and perhaps I'm not the only one thinking that.

Yup -- I even wrote an experimental real-time kernel for the Atmel AT90 a few years back.

To be honest, I have considered it, as I'm also a Linux user (OS X makes a fantastic interface into a bunch of headless Linux servers that do the grunt work around here), and I'd love to have this support there as well. I currently have 285 processes running on my iMac, and while I'm not really putting a lot of memory pressure on the system (7.97GB used out of 8GB, with only 8.76GB of virtual memory active and no swap), however OS X has still managed to compress 395.6MB of memory, and I haven't noticed a thing. Indeed, it's probably saved me from having to page to disk at the moment to the tune of roughly 200MB. That's a lot of pages available for use pretty quickly without the need to load them from disk first.

What's stopping me? Time. I used to do a lot of Open Source software development, and have had a few projects of my own over the years that have seen some moderate success, and would like to contribute more to the community -- but that was before I had a wife, and before we had a child who has a lot of medical needs. After a long day of commercial application development, and driving my daughter from one appointment to another six days a week, my hobbies currently reflect my desire to get out from behind the keyboard and do things outdoors.

I lament that things have gone this way -- there's nothing more I'd love than to do some deeper research on the type of compression algorithms Apple is using in their memory compression scheme (WKdm, re-implement it as part of the Linux kernel, look at algorithms to quickly identify candidates for compression, and all that good stuff. I get giddy just thinking about it -- but the last thing I need on my plate right now is another project.

If someone decides to take this up, they have my moral support. Maybe in a few years I can start working on interesting stuff like this again, but right now it would probably burn me out to take on something of this size.

Yaz

You can read documentation etc. online: https://developer.apple.com/li... via https://developer.apple.com/sw...

You can read documentation etc. online: https://developer.apple.com/li... via https://developer.apple.com/sw...

Yawn: https://developer.apple.com/li...

Bullshit. There is plenty wrong with plain C. For example there is no defending fall-through by default between cases in switch statements.

In the "Powerful" section in Apple's sample code, there's an example of a switch statement in Swift. The example doesn't have break statements, so I guess Swift switch statements don't have fall-through.

Yosemite will feature a new icon set. A bigger news is Swift, a new, safe programming language with type inference. Anyone who is able to find a language reference manual (supposedly available on iBooks) will get a lot of mod points.

Here you go

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/bo...

Here's what I found to show language basics, but I too would like to see something more in depth that I can read for free online. https://developer.apple.com/sw... https://developer.apple.com/li...

Here's what I found to show language basics, but I too would like to see something more in depth that I can read for free online. https://developer.apple.com/sw... https://developer.apple.com/li...

Swift Language Guide was uploaded recently @ https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/swift-programming-language/id881256329

US Link

https://itunes.apple.com/ca/bo...

I sure as hell didn't need them to go to Apple.com to see the banner at the bottom of the home page, which leads to this page which clearly tells us about the live streaming tomorrow.

I sure as hell didn't need them to go to Apple.com to see the banner at the bottom of the home page, which leads to this page which clearly tells us about the live streaming tomorrow.

you can play it on iPad and iPhone. If you feel strongly about it you can mirror your iPad screen to the apple TV. If you feel super strongly you can buy a bluetooth gamepad controller. https://itunes.apple.com/us/ap...

Not sure if it depends on the model (artificially) - but someone here is showing it as working:
https://discussions.apple.com/...

Before posting that I googled the status and found this page, which specifies "OS X Mavericks v10.9.3 or later" and DOES show the "Larger Text / More Space" (HiDPI) slider being associated with an external display. So I consulted "About This Mac", which says I have OSX 10.9.3. So I re-connected the 4K monitor and tried again before posting, and it still does NOT show me that slider. (I also still don't see it on the 2560x1600 30" display I am using right now). So, I can't explain it. I am skeptical my OSX release has been updated in the last couple weeks, but it says 10.9.3, and the Available Updates only lists updates for iTunes, Safari, iMovie and iPhoto.

eBooks are a bonanza for publishers and authors right now. They're pretty good for the minor players in the eBookstore market (ie: BN.com, the iBookstore, etc.), but terrible for Amazon. Why? Amazon discounts, and the discount comes entirely from Amazon's margin.

The publisher's recommended price for an eBook is called the list price. The way a company like Amazon get eBooks is that it decides how many copies it's likely to sell, and then send the publisher 70% of list price times the number of copies. An eBook I was recently interested in purchasing, for example, is Firethorn by Sarah Micklem. List price is $16.99, which is the price both Apple and BN charge. This means that Amazon is paying $11.89 per copy. If they give a 20% discount off list price they would only charge $13.79, which would mean all their overhead (including Jeff Bezos salary) would have to be covered by $1.90. And 20% discounts are quite common. My current read ("Like a Mighty Army," by David Weber) is listed at $14.99, but Amazon sells it for $12.99. But Firethorn is a bit different.

Their price? $6.83. They lose $5.06 whenever anybody buys that book. It's a 60% discount, and 30 of those percentage points are a loss to Amazon. I wouldn't be surprised to find out they're getting a special deal of some sort with this book, but OTOH I also wouldn't be surprised if they're just eating the five bucks.

If Amazon can convince Hachette to reduce their portion of the sale to 60% then Amazon can increase it's standard discount to 25% and still increase eBook revenue by roughly a third (it goes from 10% of list price to 15%). Then they could seriously consider doing things Wall Street loves like paying dividends.

btw. safari for windows exists. http://support.apple.com/downl...

btw. developers have to buy a computer, so why not a mac.

Did you look at the release date for the Windows-version on your link? This version is outdated, Safari for Windows is no longer maintained and a poor choice for testing Safari compatibility today.

As for your second argument, this was in response to someone claiming the problem with IE was that you had to buy Windows to get IE compatibility (which several posters have noted is wrong)... Well, for Safari you have to buy a Mac.

And Apple's SSL.

btw. safari for windows exists. http://support.apple.com/downl...

btw. developers have to buy a computer, so why not a mac.

Luckily this isn't the bad old days where it was just IE and netscape, today you DO have options! There is Comodo Dragon (what I use, better security features and no phone home to Google) Chromium, SWIron, and Opera which my oldest boy swears is the greatest thing ever (boy is he still pissed they quit using presto) and on the gecko side there is Firefox, PaleMoon (the other browser I use, I prefer the UI over IceDragon and it seems snappier), SeaMonkey, IceDragon, if you need really low resource there is always Kmeleon which runs really well even on a P3 running Win98SE and if you want to avoid BOTH the Chromium and Gecko engines you can go with QTWeb which is just what it says on the tin, a cross platform browser that uses Webkit and the QT framework...quite nice actually and of course Safari if you are into Apple. There is one other....what was it? Oh yeah the big blue E thing. ;-)

So if you don't like the direction Google is going? Don't use their products. After they started getting nasty with the TOS and trying to ram G+ down our throats I dropped Google like a bad habit, I set up a throwaway Gmail I never use just for my Android phone (so they can't tie my desktop and mobile together) and use my main Gmail for a spam dump, switched to Bing for my search and Yahoo for my mail so no one company has access too all my online data and ya know what? couldn't be happier. What DOES really piss me off about Google is how they have become a drive by spammer, you have no idea how many Chrome "infections" I've had to clean off of customers PCs because some "freeware" had Chrome tied into it. We used to get seriously pissed at how McCrappee and Horton used to dump their stupid scanners onto us with freeware so why isn't everyone mad at how Google is spamming Chrome? An unwanted install that takes over defaults...hmmm...if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck?

Why would Apple be interested in grabbing your data? They're the only one of the major tech companies which have so far shown no interest at all in the "you're the product" business model.

iAd Workbench is the simplest way to advertise to millions of people on their Apple devices. In a few steps, you can create a campaign that drives traffic to your website, generates video views, or promotes your iTunes Store content. Choose your audience, set your budget, and run your campaign across thousands of Apple-verified and brand-safe iOS apps.

http://advertising.apple.com/t...

The Apple Data Mining Lab is looking for an outstanding data mining scientist who is interested in designing, developing, and fielding data mining solutions that have direct and measurable impact to Apple.

http://www.linkedin.com/jobs2/...

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - The lack of specific injury dooms a massive lawsuit accusing Apple and 14 app developers of mining iPhones and iPads for data, a federal judge said.

http://www.courthousenews.com/...

So we have one out of many add net works - the only one where there are complains that Apple doesn't give data about their customers to the people paying for the adds. We have an job search for a "data mining expert" - because the data mined has to be sold to others, not used to improve local services benefitting the user like SIRI. And most damning, we have a lawsuit where Apple was one of the accused simply because they own the App Store - not because they collected data.

Why would Apple be interested in grabbing your data? They're the only one of the major tech companies which have so far shown no interest at all in the "you're the product" business model.

iAd Workbench is the simplest way to advertise to millions of people on their Apple devices. In a few steps, you can create a campaign that drives traffic to your website, generates video views, or promotes your iTunes Store content. Choose your audience, set your budget, and run your campaign across thousands of Apple-verified and brand-safe iOS apps.

http://advertising.apple.com/t...

The Apple Data Mining Lab is looking for an outstanding data mining scientist who is interested in designing, developing, and fielding data mining solutions that have direct and measurable impact to Apple.

http://www.linkedin.com/jobs2/...

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - The lack of specific injury dooms a massive lawsuit accusing Apple and 14 app developers of mining iPhones and iPads for data, a federal judge said.

http://www.courthousenews.com/...

It seems like a great presentation device also, because you could run something like powerpoint, except more interactive, moving around a bit instead of stuck behind the podium, sketching formulae or annotations on the slides. I see there is Keynote for iPad, but with a number of limitations due to the limitations of the iPad itself or the fact that it's a re-write from the OSX version. And surely writing equations etc. on the screen is much more accurate with a pen than a finger.

Late 2011 17" MBP here... Apple screwed the pooch removing the Save function from their apps; though their current online documentation implies that it's back (and, indeed, it is in TextEdit, the only Apple app I use).

Another thing Apple screwed up was dropping the 17" MBP line. 17" Retina MBP? Yes, please. Even if it's the same resolution as the 15", making the pixels just a hair bigger won't hurt; I like a slightly larger machine that can fit comfortably on my lap, without requiring that I keep my legs smashed together lest it fall between them, and has ample component spacing to allow for decent cooling, thank you very much. I'd love an upgrade, but they don't offer anything I find compelling anymore.

The only Apple program I use is TextEdit, and that only for a scratch pad, so I'm more or less unaffected by that. That said, I can certainly see why it would be annoying... essentially, if you decide you want to save your changes in a new file, they want you to copy the most recent version (in Finder), then roll the original back the a previous version. The option-click "workaround" was added because people couldn't figure that out; not that they should have to, as "Save As..." should never have gone away in the first place. But, with autosave, it's somewhat of a hack, anyway; what does the original file end up looking like? Do you revert the original to the state it was in when it was last opened? The last autosave? Normally, it would retain its last manually-saved state, but there isn't one...

Replacing a 3-step process (Command-Shift-S; Type new filename, Hit Enter) with a 7-step process (Close file [to ensure your changes are saved, since you can no longer do this manually]; Copy file; Rename copy; Reopen the file; Click File -> Revert To -> Browse All Versions; Find the version you want to revert to; Click Restore).

Alternately, you can restore the old revision as a new file (the opposite workflow) in 5-steps (Click File -> Revert To -> Browse All Versions; Find the version you want; Option-Click Restore a Copy; Enter new filename; Click Save).

Of course, Apple's own documentation does imply that the "Save" option still exists. It is there in TextEdit, but I can't confirm this for any other Apple apps under Mavericks.

Bravo, Apple... Bravo.

Ok then where is the documentation that explains how iMessage works? I couldn't find it - I'm certainly not saying it doesn't exist so if you can point me to it then that would be very helpful.

Well first off the copy under messages indicates it is a service If you’re a texter, you’ll love Messages on iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch. Now they all come with iMessage, a service that’s an even better kind of texting. Because it’s free for you and anyone texting over Wi-Fi using an iOS device or Mac with iMessage. And it’s unlimited.* So say as much as you want. (https://www.apple.com/ios/messages)

For people who want details the "Local and Push Notification Programming Guide" (link may not work: https://developer.apple.com/li... )
Is excellent. It walks you through bit by bit on messaging structures and how the push gateway works. There are other books on messaging but this would be a good place to start to figure out the basics and what other resources (ex NSNotification Class library reference) that you might need.

For people who want a less detailed presentation the: Notification Programming Guide for Websites ( https://developer.apple.com/li...)

Ok then where is the documentation that explains how iMessage works? I couldn't find it - I'm certainly not saying it doesn't exist so if you can point me to it then that would be very helpful.

Well first off the copy under messages indicates it is a service If you’re a texter, you’ll love Messages on iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch. Now they all come with iMessage, a service that’s an even better kind of texting. Because it’s free for you and anyone texting over Wi-Fi using an iOS device or Mac with iMessage. And it’s unlimited.* So say as much as you want. (https://www.apple.com/ios/messages)

For people who want details the "Local and Push Notification Programming Guide" (link may not work: https://developer.apple.com/li... )
Is excellent. It walks you through bit by bit on messaging structures and how the push gateway works. There are other books on messaging but this would be a good place to start to figure out the basics and what other resources (ex NSNotification Class library reference) that you might need.

For people who want a less detailed presentation the: Notification Programming Guide for Websites ( https://developer.apple.com/li...)

They have tons of documentation about iCloud works aimed at all levels.

Ok then where is the documentation that explains how iMessage works? I couldn't find it - I'm certainly not saying it doesn't exist so if you can point me to it then that would be very helpful.

Of course they are. The moment they go into the account they see a phone number associated with it, and moreover when they make changes to iCloud and get notification they see the number listed at part of the iCloud contacts along with emails.

The issue is that it isn't clear that this is associating the phone number with the account for other people, so you changing your phone and you not using iMessage doesn't mean that iMessage won't be used by other people to contact you. Just look at all the confusion in this story by comments of techs and geeks and then imagine how the non-tech crowd reacts.

Which is marked undelivered for the sender until at least one device picks it up and then it is marked delivered. And if they have read receipts on they also know unread.

Based on my testing "delivered" means delivered to the server, not to a device. Which also explains why people get iMessages that are delivered by not received. Of course if the documentation is as abundant as you claim then surely something like this would be pretty easy to find.

It does, but you should never under-estimate the ability of people to bother reading or paying attention to such details.

Apple does have a way to deactivate iMessage, but when you leave the Apple eco-system people don't realise that something that they were taking for granted suddenly gets in the way.

BTW the knowledge page for deactivating iMessage (never tried it): http://support.apple.com/kb/TS...

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT...

Certainly a page on Apple's website explaining this would be useful.

http://support.apple.com/kb/ts...

http://www.samsung.com/us/supp...

http://www.htc.com/www/support...

but still everyone is going to say how people don't read emails from companies....

In the last ignorant rant about this posted just a day or so before this story, it was pointed out that their provider DID in fact send them an email that told them what they had to do when they switched phones.

At some point, the user has to actually pay attention to what they are doing and put some personal effort into it.

Their are indications of sent, delivered and read for the sender. They are color coded as to whether it went out iMessage or SMS. So yes there are indications.

As for not turning on setting related to iMessage you remember: http://www.apple.com/icloud/se...
Pretty much the very first thing you did.

Ok, correction.

So, she's suing because she's too clueless to figure out how to deactivate iMessage support on her number?

http://support.apple.com/kb/TS...

http://www.samsung.com/us/supp...

Both Apple and Samsung have clear solutions to this if anyone cares to ask. How is that worthy of a lawsuit?

The people sending you messages are not sending you SMS, they are sending you iMessages. They are sending to your contact phone number, and they have iMessage turned on to save them $$$ when sending texts to other people registered with iMessage.

Because you used to have an iPhone, and had also turned iMessage on, your phone number is in their database, and so when it's deciding what data channel to use, it looks up the phone number it's about to send to, and if it's listed in the iMessage database, it sends an iMessage to the associated AppleID instead of sending an SMS via the cellular network. This way it doesn't cost them SMS $$$ to send the message.

When you pulled the SIM from your iPhone, you stupidly failed to turn off iMessage in your settings, and then sync those settings back to the iCloud. As this knowledge base article indicates, it can therefore take up to 45 days before it starts using SMS again: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS...

Alternately, you can go to http://appleid.apple.com/ and log in with your Apple ID, and manage your account, and disable iMessage that way (typically by removing your mobile phone number, and if you don't have an land line, putting the number in for your (non-mobile) contact number instead.

Note: Once the message has been sent, either via iMessage, or SMS, from the originating phone, it's sent; you don't get a second shit. It's not like those messages are "stored up" in a system that's capable of sending SMS messages, since the decision was made on the senders iPhone, not on the back end server.

Basically, it boils down to the former iPhone user being an idiot about disengaging from the additional iPhone associated services that they opt'ed into.

But never fear, up to 45 days afterward, the switch will happen automatically, as iMessage feeds back into the configuration database that the messages sent to the number have been undeliverable via iMessage. Or, you know, they could log onto http://appleid.apple.com/ now and fix it themselves, which can take up to 24 hours to take effect, because some idiot thought NoSQL was a good idea.

The people sending you messages are not sending you SMS, they are sending you iMessages. They are sending to your contact phone number, and they have iMessage turned on to save them $$$ when sending texts to other people registered with iMessage.

Because you used to have an iPhone, and had also turned iMessage on, your phone number is in their database, and so when it's deciding what data channel to use, it looks up the phone number it's about to send to, and if it's listed in the iMessage database, it sends an iMessage to the associated AppleID instead of sending an SMS via the cellular network. This way it doesn't cost them SMS $$$ to send the message.

When you pulled the SIM from your iPhone, you stupidly failed to turn off iMessage in your settings, and then sync those settings back to the iCloud. As this knowledge base article indicates, it can therefore take up to 45 days before it starts using SMS again: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS...

Alternately, you can go to http://appleid.apple.com/ and log in with your Apple ID, and manage your account, and disable iMessage that way (typically by removing your mobile phone number, and if you don't have an land line, putting the number in for your (non-mobile) contact number instead.

Note: Once the message has been sent, either via iMessage, or SMS, from the originating phone, it's sent; you don't get a second shit. It's not like those messages are "stored up" in a system that's capable of sending SMS messages, since the decision was made on the senders iPhone, not on the back end server.

Basically, it boils down to the former iPhone user being an idiot about disengaging from the additional iPhone associated services that they opt'ed into.

But never fear, up to 45 days afterward, the switch will happen automatically, as iMessage feeds back into the configuration database that the messages sent to the number have been undeliverable via iMessage. Or, you know, they could log onto http://appleid.apple.com/ now and fix it themselves, which can take up to 24 hours to take effect, because some idiot thought NoSQL was a good idea.

The people sending you messages are not sending you SMS, they are sending you iMessages. They are sending to your contact phone number, and they have iMessage turned on to save them $$$ when sending texts to other people registered with iMessage.

Because you used to have an iPhone, and had also turned iMessage on, your phone number is in their database, and so when it's deciding what data channel to use, it looks up the phone number it's about to send to, and if it's listed in the iMessage database, it sends an iMessage to the associated AppleID instead of sending an SMS via the cellular network. This way it doesn't cost them SMS $$$ to send the message.

When you pulled the SIM from your iPhone, you stupidly failed to turn off iMessage in your settings, and then sync those settings back to the iCloud. As this knowledge base article indicates, it can therefore take up to 45 days before it starts using SMS again: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS...

Alternately, you can go to http://appleid.apple.com/ and log in with your Apple ID, and manage your account, and disable iMessage that way (typically by removing your mobile phone number, and if you don't have an land line, putting the number in for your (non-mobile) contact number instead.

Note: Once the message has been sent, either via iMessage, or SMS, from the originating phone, it's sent; you don't get a second shit. It's not like those messages are "stored up" in a system that's capable of sending SMS messages, since the decision was made on the senders iPhone, not on the back end server.

Basically, it boils down to the former iPhone user being an idiot about disengaging from the additional iPhone associated services that they opt'ed into.

But never fear, up to 45 days afterward, the switch will happen automatically, as iMessage feeds back into the configuration database that the messages sent to the number have been undeliverable via iMessage. Or, you know, they could log onto http://appleid.apple.com/ now and fix it themselves, which can take up to 24 hours to take effect, because some idiot thought NoSQL was a good idea.

Yes here it is, http://support.apple.com/kb/TS..., basically deactivate iMessage (as long as you have a iphone) and of course a list of things that don't work. As well as of course contacting Apple Support which is free 'er' as long as "Most Apple products come with 90 days of complimentary phone support and a one-year limited warranty. We recommend that you check your coverage before contacting us." otherwise you have to pay for it sucka, mwah ha ha. So yeah, basically a big ole bag of dicks move by Apple. What should happen, the crap arse iMessage service should be able to recognised when the recipient has not has not received the message and notify the sender accordingly with the option of sending an SMS, not target the ex user with bill from Apple 'EX'-Customer Support.

Going to https://supportprofile.apple.c... and unregistering your iOS device fixes this like it's designed to.

How is Apple supposed to know if you are no longer using iMessage if you simply remove your SIM and sell your iOS device without unregistering iMessage otherwise?

This is not "new" and should not be a top story. Here is a forum post started June 13, 2013 regarding this same issue. That same article discusses pretty much everything I have seen here, and gives the same fixes. Vodafone has a video posted from August 8th 2013 for how to fix the most common causes of this problem which can be found here.

Slashdot has had discussion on this same topic, and nope I am not going to google that for people too.

TFA links to a Gizmodo story written by Adam Pash, who used to edit LifeHacker and is a prominent Apple fan. There is also this rather long thread on Apple's forums about it. I don't know why you think it contains "no links to substantiate the issue", it clearly does.

It doesn't fall back to SMS because the message is "delivered", you just don't get it. It seems to be related to Apple thinking you still have a device capable of receiving iMessages somewhere. Sometimes if people change their phone but still have an iPad they find that all the messages go to the iPad, but in this case it seems that even if you don't have any devices the system thinks you do and accepts the message, even though it isn't delivered.

http://support.apple.com/kb/ts...

"If you can't access your iPhone, you no longer have it, or you can't deactivate iMessage after you try the above steps, please contact Apple Support."

Sheesh.

Going to https://supportprofile.apple.c... and making sure my old phone was removed was what eventually fixed this for me. Just putting the SIM back in and turning off iMessage did not fix it.

It was a while ago, so it's possible this might not be the exact right location; but, I do know that it was "removing registered devices" that I did. This seems right.

Then if I show that I bought this album in 1985 am I licensed to download the song?

Oh.

Of course you can. That's what iTunes Match does. (And like all iTunes music downloads, there's no DRM.)
https://www.apple.com/itunes/itunes-match/

OS X Mavericks.

systemd is just an inferior version of launchd.

.c and .h files in top-of-trunk systemd as of a "git pull" done a minute or so ago:

$ find . -name '*.[ch]' -print | xargs wc -l | tail -1
252223 total

.c and .h files in launchd-842.90.1, which opensource.apple.com claims is what's in OS X 10.9.2 (did they just release 10.9.2?):

$ find . -name '*.[ch]' -print | xargs wc -l | tail -1
26790 total

Yes, that's almost a factor of 10.