Slashdot Mirror

Oh, and no Apple product cost twice what it should, they are comparable in price to any business-class Dell or HP. There is no 500GB HD for $200, so you are just a filthy fucking liar trying to spread propaganda which you can't back up.

They recently listed a 640 GB for $199

They list a 4GB ECC 1333 DIMM module for $150
Newegg has a 8GB ECC 1333 DIMM module for $68

So from where I sit it looks like Apple products cost twice what they should. .... just saying.

You'd be overextending the analogy if you take it in the direction you've suggested, since you're clearly confused about EPEAT's role. EPEAT doesn't set laws that companies are required to follow. Instead, companies have the option> to pay EPEAT to certify their devices, and there are benefits that come with that certification, such as federal offices being able to purchase their device.

So, yes, there are consequences for not getting certified, since certain organization will deny purchase requests for devices not certified by EPEAT, but that doesn't mean that getting certified is required for everyone, just that it is required if you want to sell in certain markets that Apple has never taken much interest in. In contrast, Ford does not have an option to opt-out of EPA regulations, since those regulations are bound by law and required of every vehicle on the road.

As for the design, this isn't an issue of being able to pry apart the device, as you suggest, otherwise Apple would have been failing EPEAT certification ever since it introduced unibody (i.e. a single block of seamless CNCed metal) laptops quite a number of years ago. Instead, EPEAT has been giving them its highest ratings. If you want an example of an actual issue, rather than the fictional one you invented, the new MacBook Pro with retina screen had tolerances that were so tight that Apple had to secure the batteries to the chassis using adhesive, rather than mechanical fasteners, which is a no-no for EPEAT's serviceability score. Without changing the form factor, there were no other options.

So, basically, Apple isn't breaking any rules, nor can they fix the issues as simply as you're suggesting. As for them having an ulterior motive, that makes no sense whatsoever. Despite withdrawing from EPEAT, they continue to voluntarily publish all of their environmental data for anyone to see. More importantly, the data they are self-publishing is far more comprehensive than the data that EPEAT considers, since, as I mentioned, EPEAT still fails to consider a number of factors. Anyone can look at the data for themselves and analyze against EPEAT's standards. If you did so, you'd see the obvious: that the compromises they are making are all in the interest of a slimmer form factor.

I'm responding to a lot of posts here because I see a lot of bad info modded up to +5.

Yes, it may be hard to disassemble Apple products, but it's not impossible. Apple has to be able to repair all those things that come in for warranty repairs at the very least, right? So Apple will recycle your old Apple gear* for you. For free. They'll even send you a free box with prepaid shipping if there's not an Apple store near you.

Not only will they take gear off your hands, they'll pay you for your computer if it's still worth a bit (granted, you could probably do better by reselling it) or you can bring in any old iPod and they'll give you 10% off a new one. It would seem to me that they're trying very, very hard to get people to recycle.

Apple knows how to take care of their products. They'll do it for free. Let them. See also http://www.apple.com/environment/

* they'll also recycle ANY cell phone.

I'm responding to a lot of posts here because I see a lot of bad info modded up to +5.

Yes, it may be hard to disassemble Apple products, but it's not impossible. Apple has to be able to repair all those things that come in for warranty repairs at the very least, right? So Apple will recycle your old Apple gear* for you. For free. They'll even send you a free box with prepaid shipping if there's not an Apple store near you.

Not only will they take gear off your hands, they'll pay you for your computer if it's still worth a bit (granted, you could probably do better by reselling it) or you can bring in any old iPod and they'll give you 10% off a new one. It would seem to me that they're trying very, very hard to get people to recycle.

Apple knows how to take care of their products. They'll do it for free. Let them. See also http://www.apple.com/environment/

* they'll also recycle ANY cell phone.

According to apple, its 35 million iPhones and 12 million iPads last quarter. http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/04/24Apple-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results.html

The issue here is that in order for a recycling program to be effective, it has to be sufficiently easy for things to be recycled, that there is a financial benefit for said recycling. Otherwise, recycling has no incentive.

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/reuse_and_recycle
Just found out my 1st gen 16Gig/3G ipad is worth $125 dollars for recycle.
My daughter's old slightly beat up 3GS is worth $95.
Hmmm, maybe time for a new iPad.

...in any practical sense. You're correct that these design choices have consequences, but your interpretation, which appears to be that Apple products are actually less green because of it, is completely false.

The EPEAT requirements are dated, and Apple provides comprehensive recycling for all of its products, making the ability to disassemble them moot — do you really believe individuals, businesses, or government agencies are disassembling Apple — or any other — products themselves for recycling? Those parts of the EPEAT guidelines are designed that way so that all manufacturers' products are broadly recyclable.

BUT APPLE HAS A FREE RECYCLING PROGRAM FOR ALL OF ITS PRODUCTS, not to mention leads the industry in the amount of recyclable materials in its products. In other words, even without EPEAT, Apple is still better than other manufacturers on the environment front. Now, it's understandable that government and institutional customers would look to such a standard, because it makes things easier and has many other benefits — but Apple not being a part of EPEAT doesn't mean Apple is "less green" in a real sense.

For what it's worth, this is Apple's response.

You can't take it apart, but you can hook up your iPhone 4+ or iPad to a projector or TV with Apple's VGA cable (also comes in composite and HDMI). And from a programming perspective, you can address the device's screen and the video output independently. Some games support it and it's pretty cool on the projector! And iPad 2&3 can mirror the built-in display to the video out.

It's funny to me that this video-out feature hasn't been marketed and exploited more. Apple doesn't make it very easy for developers to use it either, as documentation and examples are definitely lacking.

Maxwell Smart had a shoe with a phone. An unlisted shoe at that

As does anyone who uses the Nike + iPod sensor.

In the present context at least, Objective-C seems like an even better counterexample, given that its syntax, however convenient, is not required to use the underlying object system provided by the lightweight runtime.

In the present context at least, Objective-C seems like an even better counterexample, given that its syntax, however convenient, is not required to use the underlying object system provided by the lightweight runtime.

Don't like Safari? Too bad, nothing else is available.

I don't yet own an iPad or an iPhone, but it looks like you may be wrong about that.

I'd say his point is that it's not a viable alternative because Apple gives its browser preferential treatment, click on a link in any application and it will open up in Safari, there is no way to change the default browser to Chrome.

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/bing-for-ipad/id418435837?mt=8

Yep, the article you linked to refers you to Apple's battery page here:
http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro/service/battery/

That clearly states that it's $199 for a new battery via Apple. Not saying it's ideal, or the right thing to do, but it does save weight/size on the laptop, which is what Apple is after. And there is obviously a market of people that don't care, or Apple wouldn't continue making these.

I can say that the market that doesn't care likely includes my parents - on a previous laptop, they continued using it for years with a battery that wouldn't hold a charge more than a couple of minutes. They just plugged it into the wall. They didn't care, and didn't want to spend the money either for a new battery ("why spend money on a computer I need to replace") or for a new computer ("this one is good enough right now, I can spend money on other things"). Note that they *knew* it needed a new battery, and that a new battery was $60-75. This computer was also 3 years old at that point, and they used it until it was almost 6 years old tethered to a wall and shut it down whenever they weren't using it.

So yes. While you do care (and so do I), there are a large number of people that just *don't*. As much as you may not want to admit it, these people outnumber you and I.

Well you could throw it away (tell me which dumpster you leave it in please, or you could pay $129-$199 for Apple to replace the battery for you so that it's brand new again.

http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro/service/battery/

Doesn't seem like that pice is entirely out to lunch unless you shop the cheap 3rd party batteries for laptops. The OEM ones I've seen are generally around $100 anyway. Your call.

Here is the link to prove you can't ever change the battery.

All I can say is wow

Well you could throw it away (tell me which dumpster you leave it in please, or you could pay $129-$199 for Apple to replace the battery for you so that it's brand new again.

http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro/service/battery/

Doesn't seem like that pice is entirely out to lunch unless you shop the cheap 3rd party batteries for laptops. The OEM ones I've seen are generally around $100 anyway. Your call.

http://blog.lumension.com/5365/what-the-security-features-of-apples-mountain-lion-mean-for-the-enterprise/

And ASLR was adopted 12 months ago and updated system patching. Looks like what Micrsoft has done for years Apple has caught up in some ways.

What is noteworthy is Apple cant make their OS secure enough to hold FIPS 140-2 certification.

So now, it doesn't matter that Apple HAS certain security features; but rather WHEN they were adopted? Again, changing the parameters of the original statement "completely unprepared".

OS X has had limited ASLR since 10.5 (Leopard), which launched in 2007. Windows introduced limited ASLR in Vista, which launched... in 2007. So where are those "years" you crowed about? BTW, you will note that not only does Windows ASLR have to be disabled for "compatibility reasons", but that it has several known shortcomings. In contrast, OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion)'s ASLR appears to be not only system-wide, but also a much more robust implementation than in either Windows or Linux.

And as far as FIPS 140-2 is concerned, both OS X and Windows 7 can be brought to FIPS 140-2 Level 1. Neither goes further. But keep in mind that NIST hasn't had a chance to test against OS X Mountain Lion (10.8), which has security features that are stronger than its predecessors. So now what?

Oh, and apparently you are behind on your reading; for here is an Apple Tech Support document on how to set up and maintain a FIPS-compliant system in OS X 10.7 (Lion). The tech support article also has "Additional Information" regarding OS X's FIPS 140-2 compliance.

So, you might do just 10 seconds of research before you open your mouth next time, AC.

Oh, and that article you mentioned is far from unbiased, and is chock-full of inaccuracies and hyperbole, as I have pointed out in this comment. However, a complete analysis of the lies and exaggerations in that article would take about 10 pages, and I don't have time for that right now, especially for an AC.

Which is why nobody uses Linux and instead uses one of the multitude of BSD licensed kernels instead.

Oh ... Linux has far higher adoption than all the BSD licensed kernels combined. (OSX is not BSD licensed, and nobody uses Darwin (Hell, even Jordan Hubard only says Darwin is "probably not impossible"to compile and distribute as a binary, so I think we can safely count the number of people actually using the BSD licensed version of Darwin at zero.

If the goal of BSD licensed operating systems is widespread usage. The BSD license has had a spectacular failure in that regards: the UNIX wars. The BSD license allowed vendors to fragment the code enough to allow Windows NT 4 to displace UNIX resulting in a net fewer people using the code. (using other standards Darwin, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD are all successes, but usage is the criteria you put forth as the measurement of success.)

There are times that BSD licensing makes more sense than the GPL, but the GPL has proven to be very useful in getting competitors to cooperate, even when there is almost no trust between them (Oracle, RedHat, and Microsoft all contribute code to the Linux kernel to meet the business needs of the three companies. If the license didn't require them to share their changes the would not and you would need the special oracle kernel to run the oracle database server and the Microsoft kernel to properly run Linux in a Microsoft VM

From your username i wont take offence at your personal attacks. I speaking ill about Apple is akin to calling your mother a whore.

...And then you respond with a personal attack.

Moron.

If an app was developed by an unknown developer — one with no Developer ID — Gatekeeper can keep your Mac safe by blocking the app from being installed.

Apple's containment process is unsavoury to ones computing freedom and precisely the problem with the security model. It's like the cave man vs the modern human, you give the cave man some raw meat and he eats it no troubles. Give it too the modern man and he dies because of sort of bacteria in the meat.

Apple's germ free environment is why when the malware industry does hit. It will hit them hard.

So, let me get this straight: You said that "Apple is completely unprepared for the shitstorm that is to follow.". I countered with unequivocal proof that your statement was false. And now, since your statement has been refuted, you SWITCH your argument to a combination of an ad hominem attack (which was couched in a statement that you weren't going to respond to me calling you a clueless moron (which you are)), but more importantly, you now say that one aspect of Apple's security methodology (signed binaries) is "too restrictive" (because it's too restrictive for Devs. to sign up for a FREE signature (Developer accounts cost $100/yr, and that includes as many certs. as you wish to create; or you can use an industry-standard cert. from any one of a number of authorities).

But what you failed to realize is that GateKeeper's "sterilization-level" is adjustable by the user; so s/he can decide for hirself how much digital E. Coli that they want to subject themselves to.

From the "What is Security" guide I linked to in my original response to your "Completely Unprepared" post: Gatekeeper gives you three security options. Just like today, you can download and install apps from anywhere on the web. Or you can choose the safest option and download and install apps only from the Mac App Store. Or use the default option, which allows you to download apps from the Mac App Store as well as those signed with a Developer ID. If an app is unsigned, Gatekeeper blocks the app from being installed and warns you that it did not come from an identified developer. If you’re sure the app is safe, you can manually override Gatekeeper by Control-clicking the app and choosing to open it.

So, since in ANY setting of GateKeeper, the user is free to 'eat the tainted meat' with just a Click, tell me how GateKeeper is "unsavory to ones computing freedom."???

But the biggest question is: "How does all this mean that APPLE is "completely unprepared"? From where I sit, it looks like OS X is much MORE prepared than Windows or Linux for any possible "shitstorm".

Apple Research

Also remember a Trojan/Worm/whatever isn't about being known, it's the unknown malicious apps out there that are the concern. Techs find an exploit here or there but is that simply the tip of the iceberg? and Apple's security focus is simply under manned and considered an afterthought?

Does THIS look like an afterthought?!?

And keep in mind that these security features are built into an OS with NO known self-replicating malware. So no, I wouldn't say that Security is an "Afterthought" with Apple.

Pro Tip: If you don't know about something, then STFU.

Also remember a Trojan/Worm/whatever isn't about being known, it's the unknown malicious apps out there that are the concern. Techs find an exploit here or there but is that simply the tip of the iceberg? and Apple's security focus is simply under manned and considered an afterthought?

Does THIS look like an afterthought?!?

And keep in mind that these security features are built into an OS with NO known self-replicating malware. So no, I wouldn't say that Security is an "Afterthought" with Apple.

Pro Tip: If you don't know about something, then STFU.

Apple is completely unprepared for the shit storm that is to follow.

You're right, of course. Apple is completely unprepared.

And keep in mind that those features are already installed in an OS that has a spotless track record as far as self-replicating malware (worms and true viruses, rather than stupid-ass Trojans).

So yeah, Apple is just sitting there with their proverbial pants down, waiting for insertion...

Clueless moron.

Don't like Safari? Too bad, nothing else is available.

I don't yet own an iPad or an iPhone, but it looks like you may be wrong about that.

Connecting lion to exchange works pretty smoothly.

It's called virtualization. If you don't know what that is, turn in your geek card.

Disclaimer: I'm an Objective C Programmer by day

The LLVM compiler suite is tremendously powerful with Apple's billions advancing many select features, but key to it's success from a users prospective the core use of reference counted object graphs (of type 'id') and reflection (RTTI - via 'isa' and 'Class'). Obviously this means the entire language is dynamically typed at runtime, but with express qualification in 99% of the code you'll use there's absolutely no performance hit despite the ubiquity of the core object.

I worry that many C programmers will remember RTTI was once considered an unportable disaster in C++ because of the the many differing implementations owing to a spec that left the implementation up to each compiler... Don't let this kind of talk scare you! Although objective, objc is contained to a well defined spec, single inheritance and nary a template in sight.

I consider my programming work to be relatively easy. 50% of my ease comes from the object system above. The other 50% from the fast messaging system used in place of raw ADTs: In the objc world a nil object doesn't fault when messaged (in a C world dereferencing a NULL pointer, common if a struct fetching function fails and then passes NULL on failure) leads to all manner of crashes, or as seen recently, kernel exploits. The messaging system can even push around primitive values, not just nasty objects.

If you program in C, you may have missed Automatic Reference Counting, if you have, low and behold, it's amazing: at *compile time* the compiler adds lifetime qualifiers to the IR that automatically inserts retain and release messages (retain is +1 on alloc, -1 on dealloc - release occurs at 0). In other words the lifetime of an object in objective-c is now exactly the period of acquisition to last use. Yes, last use. ARC's use of a new 'weak' reference means that dangling pointers are a thing of the past: a __weak object is automatically nil'ed after last use: in all local instances of that object (did I say nil objects don't fault on message?).

Admittedly most of what I've mentioned is thanks to the advances in LLVM's Clang compiler, in particular it's static analyser, therefore much objc analysis also benefits C (LLVM's IR is quite specular ).

I could go on: methods can be heap objects with cblocks, objc encourages abstract programming with delegates, you can method swizzle at runtime, extend existing classes and link to C/C++ code.

Disclaimer: I'm an Objective C Programmer by day

The LLVM compiler suite is tremendously powerful with Apple's billions advancing many select features, but key to it's success from a users prospective the core use of reference counted object graphs (of type 'id') and reflection (RTTI - via 'isa' and 'Class'). Obviously this means the entire language is dynamically typed at runtime, but with express qualification in 99% of the code you'll use there's absolutely no performance hit despite the ubiquity of the core object.

I worry that many C programmers will remember RTTI was once considered an unportable disaster in C++ because of the the many differing implementations owing to a spec that left the implementation up to each compiler... Don't let this kind of talk scare you! Although objective, objc is contained to a well defined spec, single inheritance and nary a template in sight.

I consider my programming work to be relatively easy. 50% of my ease comes from the object system above. The other 50% from the fast messaging system used in place of raw ADTs: In the objc world a nil object doesn't fault when messaged (in a C world dereferencing a NULL pointer, common if a struct fetching function fails and then passes NULL on failure) leads to all manner of crashes, or as seen recently, kernel exploits. The messaging system can even push around primitive values, not just nasty objects.

If you program in C, you may have missed Automatic Reference Counting, if you have, low and behold, it's amazing: at *compile time* the compiler adds lifetime qualifiers to the IR that automatically inserts retain and release messages (retain is +1 on alloc, -1 on dealloc - release occurs at 0). In other words the lifetime of an object in objective-c is now exactly the period of acquisition to last use. Yes, last use. ARC's use of a new 'weak' reference means that dangling pointers are a thing of the past: a __weak object is automatically nil'ed after last use: in all local instances of that object (did I say nil objects don't fault on message?).

Admittedly most of what I've mentioned is thanks to the advances in LLVM's Clang compiler, in particular it's static analyser, therefore much objc analysis also benefits C (LLVM's IR is quite specular ).

I could go on: methods can be heap objects with cblocks, objc encourages abstract programming with delegates, you can method swizzle at runtime, extend existing classes and link to C/C++ code.

Disclaimer: I'm an Objective C Programmer by day

The LLVM compiler suite is tremendously powerful with Apple's billions advancing many select features, but key to it's success from a users prospective the core use of reference counted object graphs (of type 'id') and reflection (RTTI - via 'isa' and 'Class'). Obviously this means the entire language is dynamically typed at runtime, but with express qualification in 99% of the code you'll use there's absolutely no performance hit despite the ubiquity of the core object.

I worry that many C programmers will remember RTTI was once considered an unportable disaster in C++ because of the the many differing implementations owing to a spec that left the implementation up to each compiler... Don't let this kind of talk scare you! Although objective, objc is contained to a well defined spec, single inheritance and nary a template in sight.

I consider my programming work to be relatively easy. 50% of my ease comes from the object system above. The other 50% from the fast messaging system used in place of raw ADTs: In the objc world a nil object doesn't fault when messaged (in a C world dereferencing a NULL pointer, common if a struct fetching function fails and then passes NULL on failure) leads to all manner of crashes, or as seen recently, kernel exploits. The messaging system can even push around primitive values, not just nasty objects.

If you program in C, you may have missed Automatic Reference Counting, if you have, low and behold, it's amazing: at *compile time* the compiler adds lifetime qualifiers to the IR that automatically inserts retain and release messages (retain is +1 on alloc, -1 on dealloc - release occurs at 0). In other words the lifetime of an object in objective-c is now exactly the period of acquisition to last use. Yes, last use. ARC's use of a new 'weak' reference means that dangling pointers are a thing of the past: a __weak object is automatically nil'ed after last use: in all local instances of that object (did I say nil objects don't fault on message?).

Admittedly most of what I've mentioned is thanks to the advances in LLVM's Clang compiler, in particular it's static analyser, therefore much objc analysis also benefits C (LLVM's IR is quite specular ).

I could go on: methods can be heap objects with cblocks, objc encourages abstract programming with delegates, you can method swizzle at runtime, extend existing classes and link to C/C++ code.

Automator works just fine without a command line.
Applescript dates back to classic Mac OS days before it had a command line.

"1) No data ports - Want to plug in a keyboard? Want to plug in a thumb drive? Want to plug in a printer or peripheral of any sort? Fugetaboutit."

Why would I need to plug in a keyboard or printer? That's what bluetooth and AirPrint are for.

"2) Content creation is horrible Typing a document or entering formulas into a spreadsheet requires a keyboard. That'll cost you an extra $60."

So which "tablet" comes with a "free" keyboard?

"3) Terrible to administer in the enterprise -

"iPads sync to only one computer."

Why would you need to sync an iPad at all since iOS 5?

" iPad storage cannot be backed up & mirrored. "

iCloud, or back up locally with iTunes.

"Apps and iOS updates must be done one-at-a-time. "

You can update all of your apps with one click.

"Apps / software must be Apple-approved and Apple-distributed."

https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/enterprise/

"Surface has a USB port. Surface has an included
keyboard. "

The keyboard is extra....

"Surface has Windows & Active Director"

No it doesn't

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/windows-8-tablets-not-open-for-business/2261

"a platform supported by the vast majority of software companies."

Really? Where are all of these companies that have announced support for Windows 8 RT?

Actually, all iPod, iPhone, iPad and MacBook batteries are replaceable.
http://www.apple.com/batteries/replacements.html

Mac/Win/Linux compatible. For $100: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC414 For $180: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD031LL/A/AirPort-Extreme?fnode=MTY1NDA0Mg Easy to setup and configure. And nobody screws you out of your privacy. Great support staff too. I currently have an Extreme installed. It shoots out internets like the cannon on a warship.

Mac/Win/Linux compatible. For $100: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC414 For $180: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD031LL/A/AirPort-Extreme?fnode=MTY1NDA0Mg Easy to setup and configure. And nobody screws you out of your privacy. Great support staff too. I currently have an Extreme installed. It shoots out internets like the cannon on a warship.

I don't think anyone is gonna sit down here with this plate of crow and some ketchup. But, can anyone deny Jobs's statement was inaccurate now? http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ Just sayin.

I thought the whole point of Gentoo was that everything should be compiled by the user, so they can tailor it to their hardware by compiling with the right sets of flags.

At any rate, beyond the kernel, there is no "software tailored for the scecific Hardware platform", either. Apple's kernels support Core2Duo, Atom, i3, i5, i7, and I beleive Opteron, and a decent list of chipsets, all natively. You can even coax them to run on AMD, with no modification, just the right boot flags. Of course, you're welcome to compile your own Darwin kernel, just as you can compile your own Linux kernel, with support only for the hardware you actually have; then, you have software tailored for the specific Hardware platform. Beyond that, you have drivers; for dedicated graphics, those are vendor-supplied, for everything else, the open source drivers are used as a starting point, with modifications returned to the community as required, so all that tailoring they're doing there, anyone who wants to use Linux gets it, as well. If anything that ran on top of the kernel were tailored for a specific platform (say, sandy bridge i7), none of it would run on anything else. Since you can take an image of a C2D iMac's hard drive and put it on an i7 PowerBook's hard drive (assuming updates have been installed) and boot it, I'm gonna say no, no tailoring is going on here. Just like Linux and BSD (which Darwin is), OSX loads kernel modules; but they don't call them that, so you might not realize it. OSX is no more tailored than Ubuntu. This is what I was trying to point out in my previous post.

and "ARC" objective-C

Care to explain the difference? If you mean Automatic Reference Counting, the java-like garbage-collection-with-a-different-name, that's part of the Objective-C spec, it's in the compiler, and available on Linux as well. If you mean something else, please explain.

Plus, you'll have to pay at least 900 to your average PC manufacturer to get an i7, High Def display, SSD, & High quality graphics card as well as on board.

Well, since store.apple.com hasn't banned me yet, let me take a look... I heard the MacBook Air has a full HD screen now, nice! Let's check those out, they start at only $99 more than a PC with all the amenities, that sounds alright. Whoops, the top of the line model, for $1499, has an i5 and only integrated graphics. On to the MacBook Pro line, starting at $1199. OH! A 13 inch with an i7, for $1499! Wait... Only integrated graphics, damn. Ahh, here we go, next model up, for $1799, that's got everythign you listed! Wait, no, no SSD there. Let's try again. Ahh, if I go for a retina display, I can have everything! GREAT! It's only $2199! Awesome! Wait... No optical drive of any sort? Fuck.

Well, for $30 less I can have a 2.6Ghz i7 (vs the quoted MBP's 2.3Ghz), 256GB SSD (just like the MBP) *and* a 750GB HD, 16GB of RAM (vs the MBP's 8), and a BluRay burner. True, I'm giving up the retina display, but let's just say I need the faster CPU, more storage, and might want to watch a blu-ray movie, bought with that $30 I saved, on the plane during my next trip.

Let's see if Apple can match those other specs, I might be willing to pay a little bit for that. Oh! Cool! The next model up starts with a 2.6Ghz i7, for only $2799! I can affort the extra $630, so let's look at that! Upgraqde to 16GB of RAM, $200; can only upgrade the storage to a total of 768GB, which falls short of the PC, for $500 more, but let's move along anyway. Oh! I can add a DVD drive, that might work, and it's only $79! Wait, it's external. Damn, one more thing to carry on the plane. Oh well, it comes with a nice laptop bag, right? Wait, no, that was the PC, which also included a decent mouse AND a worthwhile trackpad. Well, that PC has 1 year of accidental damage protection and 2 years P&L warranty, better add AppleCare to

When European colonialists "settled" Oregon, they went with their families. Though they left most of their familiar lives behind, they still had the wonderful constance of their spouses, children, parents.

In the Mars One info, I've not seen it specified that preference is being given to married couples. To me, it seems that if we're going to start a whole new civilization (or even just a village) on another planet, the new colonialists would do best if they had at least some basic societal structures that are familiar to them (everything else will be so foreign for so long). Has there been consideration of trying to send committed couples, rather than heroic loners? The biggest challenge of settling a new planet will not be the technical aspects, but the social and mental ones (as other commenters have noted).

Also, I don't think anyone would thrive long-term on an entire planet devoid of music, art, sports, speeches, plays, poetry, dance, etc. The first crew certainly needs to be made up entirely of people who are great at medicine, geology, biology, research & science. But at least one of these people should probably also be a musician, or a painter, etc. No one will feel at home until cultural roots are also put down on the planet. Will there be room on the transport vehicle for a guitar and two years' worth of new strings? For two years' worth of paint and canvas? (Maybe an iPad with Paper would suffice, but best to leave that decision up to the artist).

Also! This looks to be shaping up to be a wonderful multicultural affair (though all of the people in the videos so far are white...), but will you also try to make it pluralistic? Send atheists, christians, muslims, hindus, pagans, anyone (and a variety even within the first crew). In part of their ten-year training, they should be taught to build relationships on mutual respect and open communication even with people of different creeds. It would be terribly depressing to see Mars end up with a whole starting village of one or two creeds. It would be worse to see them fight over their differences. Is this aspect of the human experience being considered in the selection of marstronauts?

The extend to which retail clerks are expected to know what company policy is, is a matter of opinion.

That there is company policy, that follows the law, and that this particular clerk was aware of it, and acted on it is a matter of fact.
http://www.apple.com/legal/export.html

Maybe Apple clerks are better informed than your average tech-store clerk.

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ataris-greatest-hits/id422966028?mt=8

Free Atari Games today only, got an email about it.

For iPhones and iPads only.

All 100 Atari Greatest Hits games are free on iOS today. Link Here

Awesome, i can't wait to relive the joystick era on a touchscreen. (seriously, how does one play oldschool arcade style games on an iOS device?)

All 100 Atari Greatest Hits games are free on iOS today. Link Here

Not sure if this will convince you, but drawing down my feeds outside of a web browser helps my productivity--if I've got a browser open, then I'm viewing about 18 different tabs and refreshing feeds when I should be working on other thngs. Having Akregator running lets me read my rss feeds without the temptation of a browser when I have internet connectivity, yet still lets me read downloaded feeds without internet access.

What are you doing reading RSS feeds when you should be working on other things?

Given that a lot of the stuff I work on requires looking stuff up on the Intarwebs, I'm pretty much fucked there; there's always the temptation to browse, and sometimes I just need a break in the middle of hacking. So maybe that works for you, but it's 100% unconvincing, and 100% wrong, for me.

Of course, some people use more than that to avoid distractions, with some of them taking rather extreme steps.

I'm no power user, but neither am I a complete idiot. I really like KDE4. I hit the kickoff, then type in the name of the program and I can run it. I know how to get under the hood and clank around if I need or want to with linux/KDE4. With OSX, everything is very kindergarten-simple...as long as you work their way. If you want to work your way and not theirs, it's up to you to change.

So if I want to view an RSS feed in my browser in KDE - i.e., work my way and not theirs - is it up to me to change, or does Konqueror now support reading feeds itself? :-)

I'm not a command-line commando, either. I'm smart enough to know how to use an application and just finicky enough to want to use it my way. Maybe I've been lucky, but KDE 4 has worked for me from 4.0 on.

KDE 1 worked fine for me, as my primary desktop environment, atop FreeBSD 3.0 many many years ago, and KDE3+FreeBSD 6-or-so was OK when my Mac notebook was getting its disk recovered, but that was when I decided that separate RSS reader applications were not the answer for me.

(Speaking of command lines, hopefully most modern UN*X+X11 combinations, whether Linux distributions or PC-BSD-style desktop *BSDs or..., have XSel as a standard package or even pre-insalled, so you can do the same thing there that you can do on OS X with pbcopy and pbpaste.)

Ummm, yeah, why not? It's a wireless keyboard. The same one I use with my Mac mini, and my ps3. So, pairing it with my iPad no longer makes my iPad an iPad? If I also have power and the hdmi output hooked up to my projector, it's no longer an iPad? How's that?

You are being purposefully obtuse. Of course it's still a tablet, but when it needs to be hooked up to external displays and keyboards just to be able to compete against the efficiency of a notebook, it can hardly be said that the tablet functionality is contributing anything meaningful towards its usability in the same environment.

Yes. And, the cost of the iPad and the keyboard are still about as much as a netbook.

iPad + bluetooth keyboard = $580 - $780
ASUS Eee PC = $250

I'm just wondering why he's using a $99 AppleTV and pushing the video over a network, rather than cabling up with HDMI and a $40 adapter (which is still too expensive.)

Hum... You mean this? http://opensource.apple.com/source/xnu/xnu-1699.26.8/

http://www.apple.com/education/

Take a look, educate yourself. I'm sure you can find something like it for android as well. If you can't understand how thats better than a text book than theres not a lot that can be done for you in general.

You like the OSX desktop? I hate it. It is like it was designed for children and gets in the way too often. I want focus follows mouse, I want to get rid of the idiot dock bar thing, I want menus on every screen not just the main monitor.

And others don't. Opinions differ on merits of different desktops; story at 11. "Desktop A rules, desktop B sucks" is, absent data from a broad population of users, a personal opinion, not a statement of fact (regardless of whether desktop A is the OS X desktop or $OTHER_UN*X_DESKTOP and whether desktop B is $OTHER_UN*X_DESKTOP or the OS X desktop); to make it a statement of fact, prepend "for me" and append "your mileage may vary" (and, yes, this applies to you and the person to whom you're replying).

(But it sounds as if Apple may be killing one thing I really liked about Safari relative to, for example, Konqueror - Safari, at least, had an RSS feed reader built in, so I didn't have to fuck around with Akregator. Note: if you want to defend the separation of RSS feed reading from Web browsing, please explain to me - in a fashion convincing to me; convincing to you, by itself, doesn't even come close to sufficing - why I would not want to read a feed of Web pages in a Web browser. But I digress....)

On top of it, SHIP WITH THE FUCKING GNUTOOLS YOU MORONS. The half baked commercial versions of these tools lack way to many features.

To which GNU tools are you referring? Developer tools? They used to ship GCC, but when it went to GPLv3 they decided to put their efforts behind Clang and LLVM instead. I don't know whether the current version of GDB is GPLv3, but they're putting their effort behind LLDB. (They may be "commercial" in the sense of being supported by a vendor, but they're free software.) They never used the GNU assembler or linker; they have their own APSL 2.0-licensed assembler and APSL 2.0-licensed linker; presumably if "half baked commercial versions of these tools" is referring to the assembler or linker, "commercial versions of these tools" means "...commercial assembler and linker" not "...commercial versions of the GNU assembler and linker".

You like the OSX desktop? I hate it. It is like it was designed for children and gets in the way too often. I want focus follows mouse, I want to get rid of the idiot dock bar thing, I want menus on every screen not just the main monitor.

And others don't. Opinions differ on merits of different desktops; story at 11. "Desktop A rules, desktop B sucks" is, absent data from a broad population of users, a personal opinion, not a statement of fact (regardless of whether desktop A is the OS X desktop or $OTHER_UN*X_DESKTOP and whether desktop B is $OTHER_UN*X_DESKTOP or the OS X desktop); to make it a statement of fact, prepend "for me" and append "your mileage may vary" (and, yes, this applies to you and the person to whom you're replying).

(But it sounds as if Apple may be killing one thing I really liked about Safari relative to, for example, Konqueror - Safari, at least, had an RSS feed reader built in, so I didn't have to fuck around with Akregator. Note: if you want to defend the separation of RSS feed reading from Web browsing, please explain to me - in a fashion convincing to me; convincing to you, by itself, doesn't even come close to sufficing - why I would not want to read a feed of Web pages in a Web browser. But I digress....)

On top of it, SHIP WITH THE FUCKING GNUTOOLS YOU MORONS. The half baked commercial versions of these tools lack way to many features.

To which GNU tools are you referring? Developer tools? They used to ship GCC, but when it went to GPLv3 they decided to put their efforts behind Clang and LLVM instead. I don't know whether the current version of GDB is GPLv3, but they're putting their effort behind LLDB. (They may be "commercial" in the sense of being supported by a vendor, but they're free software.) They never used the GNU assembler or linker; they have their own APSL 2.0-licensed assembler and APSL 2.0-licensed linker; presumably if "half baked commercial versions of these tools" is referring to the assembler or linker, "commercial versions of these tools" means "...commercial assembler and linker" not "...commercial versions of the GNU assembler and linker".

Preface: I am an apple fanboy ... but ...

iBook for text books has the best damn demo I've ever seen as to why exactly tablets would make freaking AWESOME textbook replacements.

http://www.apple.com/education/

The current flash on that page displays a demo of someone using a textbook. THAT is HOW text books SHOULD BE DONE. It doesn't have to be iBooks or an iPad, but that general concept is freaking awesome and just goes to show how Billy and the Gates foundation in general aren't about helping the world so much as finding another way to rip it off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

"It is composed of code developed by Apple, as well as code derived from NeXTSTEP, BSD, and other free software projects."

https://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

"Apple, the first major computer company to make Open Source development
a key part of its software strategy, continues to use and release significant
quantities of open source software."

Their 'first' statement is questionable, but does nothing for your argument either way pilgrim.