Slashdot Mirror

Sorry, the link is this

MacNN Forums got it to 53 (with some cross references).
Can someone complete it?

01. spotlight
02. ichat av video
03. ichat audio
04. ichat interface like itunes list
05. safari rss
06. dashboard
07. automator
08. voice over
09. .mac sync
10. enhanced unix support
11. 64 bit os better 64 bit atvantage
12. xcode 2.0
13. system prefs stealth mode
14. firewall logging
15. block udp traffic
16. core video
17. core graphics
18. new quicktime cocoa
19. quicktime mpeg4 part 10 the h.264 avc
20. so metadata you could say
21. i heard safari is faster 2.0
22. mail is better with smart thingies
23. people say over all response is faster
24. new theme for overall appearance
25. no debug code
26. has a min requirirment for core image and video
27. all the windows integration
28. Dock menus contain option to remove items.
29. Help Viewer searches Apple KBase articles.
30. iChat has support for inline groups.
31. Support for profile editing in Chat.
32. Menu in iChat for quickly switching between accounts.
33. Share devices over the internet with .Mac.
34. Mail - "Favorites" bar for mail folders.
35. Extra options in Mail compose window.
36. Mail - toggle automatic adding of iCal invites.
37. QuickTime - live resizing.
38. Safari - navigation in contextual menus.
39. Safari - copy image addresses from context. menu
40. Safari - add image to iPhoto by right-clicking
41. Finder - renaming items in sidebar
42. Context. menu for items in sidebar.
43. Setup Assistant - options for transferring files & settings between computers.
44. Finder - save search results as Smart Folders.
46. System-wide tabbed interface?
47. Considerably enhanced Dock?
48. Virtual workspaces in Exposé?
46. search in system prefs
47. new finder search
48. new system wide search
49. search is not limited to the apps it's in
50. search in mail
51. search in address book
52. ability to have spotlight intigrated with other apps
53. Coredata

Good point, Apple makes most of it's money on hardware. IIRC, that hardware is called the iPod.

Not even close. Apple sold 807k iPods the first quarter of this year, which is maybe $300 million in revenue, compared to total revenue of $1.9 billion. And that was after the release of new iPods and with most of their CPUs being due for an update. Apple can't survive in anything close to its present form as an iPod seller.

Not really that interesting, but there is an ongoing dispute over the name Rendezvous.

You can read a little about it here

We don't have AppleStores here in Australia (except the online Store). We only have AppleCentres and Second Hand Dealers.
The three AppleCentres I've been to (one a 30min Walk, one a 30min Drive, and the third and Hour Away) are all clean showrooms.

The guys in Berwick Village (closest to me) know me by name, and although they don't have everything in stock all the time, can provide me with a well-priced solution in no time. They also provide Internet Services and Database Design. They also do in-house Repairs.

The Guys in an Industrial Estate in Dandenong provide Commercial Printing Services and have most products in stock. I used to live 10mins away by foot.

I've only been to the AppleCentre Melbourne CBD once, but they have several floors of machines, all current and on display, and always have friendly helpful staff.

One of the other AppleCentres also provided a Free iPod as one of the prizes during a Public Radio Stations subscription drive. Here in Melbourne, AppleCentres are important parts of the community, and don't expect Apple Australia to subsidise them. They don't expect Apple Australia to Undercut them either, but that's another (related) story.

Man, Victoria's going to be pissed.

Oh well, I guess her secret has been out of a while now anyway:

Victoria's Secret Revealed (big pic)

Matt Fahrenbacher

Excuse me? Who puts graphics cards with blinkenlights an colorful fans on them into their computers? Mac users?

i do agree with you though, there are just not enough people using ogg for apple to care.

As you'll see from this benchmark Apple's implementation of journaling has generally negligible effect on performance, and some operations do in fact run faster.

Or, it could have been there since November 7th, 2003 like they stated. Mac OS has had WMP releases before WMP 9, and Mac OS X, as well.

And I see no evidence they were informed; further, how were they informed, if it did happen? Was it a "dude, your browser sucks! I can totally 0wnZ j00!" email sent to steve@apple.com? Or was it a well-written report sent through the proper channels? Or was it somewhere in between? I won't assume Apple was notified, or that it was done properly, just because someone says so.

Jobs may be right that portable video may not be all that great, but that doesn't mean that Apple shouldn't come out with a video iPod just to throw at the media. If Sony's and Microsoft's devices get too much attention just because of the color screens, Apple has to counter.

I wonder about how Microsoft's offerings will affect their effort to make WMA the "standard" for portable audio? Maybe other portable makers will look to a real standard, not one controlled by a competitor. If MPEG finally adds a standard DRM to AAC, I think we could see AAC take off.

On Monday it was posted on the infamous MacNN thread where the previous exploit was discovered that there is yet another way to exploit LaunchServices. The previous one was to advertise a malicious app on a volume as a bogus protocol handler. LaunchServices would pick it up automatically when it mounts a disk://, disks://, ftp:// or afp:// volume. The new one is to advertise your app as a newer version of an already registered protocol handler. For unknown reasons, it doesn't work with some apps, but iTunes can be hijacked. In simple terms, you stick your malware on a disk image or ftp or afp server, you advertise it as a newer version of iTunes through Info.plist, and construct a webpage that mounts the volume. LaunchServices will automatically register it on mounting. You then have the webpage refresh or redirect to an itms:// url and your malware is launched.

This issue was discovered on the MacNN forum, when they were discussing the previous exploit. The accepted workaround was downloading one of the utilities to change the protocol helpers, but the user kampl refused to have any non-Apple "security fix" on his system (He never acknowledged that the utilities were not sucurity fixes at all, just tools to change user preferences). His solution was to delete the HelpViewer app from his system. One bright member of the forum pointed out that that isn't enough, you could probably just stick the HelpViewer on the .dmg image and LaunchServices would find it there. Another poster realized this might work for any application if you bind it to a bogus protocol in the Info.plist file, so there is no need for HelpViewer at all. A third poster had a sample exploit coded in no time. Apple was promptly notified, so we can expect another fix soon (hopefully).

As already noted in the writeup and elsewhere in this thread, the Apple fix isn't enough. The other issues, discovered on the MacNN forum, are summarized here.

In other words, lets' say I write a standard Mac app that deletes the home directory. The Info.plist for this app contains

(snipped for lameness filter)
<key>CFBundleURLSchemes</key>
<array>
<string>malware</string>
</array>

The malware author sticks this app into a DMG and uses the trick mentioned elsewhere in this thread to mount the DMG and then redirect the web page to "malware://anything". Boom - bye bye home directory.

Am I missing something here, or did this vulnerability just get even nastier?

yikes! Make sure you turn off "open safe files" in Safari (or the equivalent in your browser), and also disable the disk:// protocol, until this is resolved!

Sure would. Even Macnn.com had this posted two days ago. What happened to new news?

The "professional version" will be released once they fix Virtual PC for Mac OS X Panther

I have a copy of Virtual PC and it runs flawlessly on Panther. I think that you mean "once they fix Virtual PC for G5":

" Virtual PC relies on a feature of the G3/G4 processors called 'pseudo little-endian mode' for increased performance when emulating a Pentium processor.... Because the new G5 processor does not support this feature, large portions of the VPC for Mac program must be rewritten and carefully tested to work properly on the G5 CPU"

There has already been a minor flame war on MacNN over this. lixlpixel has spent some effort to make Apple aware of the issue, so you're left with two options: either Apple reacts rather slowly, or it's pretty hard to make Apple aware of the issue.

According to a forum post on MacNN, this has been known since February...

For what? For the 3.2% (Apple's market share in '03)???

Give me a break...

At the 99-cent price, only about 10 cents from each song sale goes to Apple's bottom line, with about 70 cents going to the record labels and the other 20 cents paying for credit-card fees and distribution costs, sources say.

Come on now. So, for each sale they get 10 cents. Where does that 10 cents go to? The bank? No, to pay for the costs associated with the service It is revenue, not profit. As I stated before iTunes does not pull a profit, as stated by Apple. So, how is there a $.10/song profit when there is no profit? Unless you're talking about Enron, that doesn't work.

Dell's 6% profit is mostly profit.

It's ALL profit. It's the net margin (total revenues - total costs).

I have seen no qualification for that stat. You stated Dell has a profit margin of only 6% on the computers they sell. So, there's nothing wrong with what I've said. Is that before or after other costs (which I referenced) were included? Companies love to fidget with their numbers to make themselves look better.

Well, maybe you need to also take a reading comprehension class. This is Apple's net profit assuming the grandparent post is correct. Read what you wrote half an hour before.

That was clearly a quote, and not written by me. It is also not implying that the $0.10 is a profit and as I've stated over and over again now, Apple does not pull a profit from iTunes so they are not profitting $0.10 a song.

Apple on Friday denied a report that the computer maker was planning to raise prices for songs bought on its popular iTunes online music store, according to Reuters. "'These rumors aren't true," said Apple spokeswoman Natalie Sequeira. 'We have multiyear agreements with the labels and our prices remain 99 cents a track.' Apple's statement came after the New York Post reported on Friday, citing one unnamed source, that music fans may have to start paying more for some songs on Apple's music store following contract renegotiations with the record labels ahead of the one-year anniversary of the store.

- MacNN

From Mac News Network:

Jobs today said that Apple has the largest online music catalog in the world, touting over 700,000 songs from over 450 independent labels as well as the big Five.

I've also read that Apple offered the SAME EXACT TERMS to indies that the Big Five get.

Full article here:
http://www.macnn.com/news.php?id=24469

"The Wall Street Journal carries a story today on the higher prices customers are starting to face from online music stores. Apple, for example, is charging $17 for N.E.R.D.'s new 12-track Fly or Die album, while Napster charges $14--both higher than the $13.50 Amazon is selling the physical CD for. All five major record labels are also reportedly discussing ways to raise the price of single downloads, from increasing the price anywhere from $1.25 to $2.50, to bundling hot singles with less desirable tracks or charging more for singles of tracks that have not yet been released in stores."

From what I've read Apple only gets 10 cents from each track sold and RIAA get 70 cents.

"Despite the article's assertions, no evidence of widespread security problems"

How widespread could the problems really be? I mean... When you only have 3.2% market share, its not like the problems affect *that* many consumers.

The real question (rumor?) floating around other mac-specific news sites is whether or not this is just to hold us over until the release of G5 notebooks sometime in the not to distant future (January?) A couple interesting threads:

Apple Insider

MacNN

Alpine is coming out with an interface that will allow one to control an iPod from the deck, complete with OSD of titles and all...


http://www.macnn.com/news/22778

Don't get too used to that $10 price.

bit 'o quote from the above link:

Here's what I've deduced... BuyMusic.com (which I will refer to as BM) got their "vast" music library of 300,000 plus songs from a company called the Orchard. The Orchard is a distribution company that has consistently shafted artists by not paying them for CD's sold nor returning unsold CD's or canceling contracts. So, without the express consent of what is likely all of the Orchards catalog, BM has put it up for sale at the bargain price of $.79 a song.

So now, they can tout they're selling tracks at $.79 and they can say they have a library of music of over 300,000 songs. But what they don't tell you is that it comes from musicians/bands that were not asked for permission, and who will likely not see a penny of any sale made through BM. By their very own site policy they are committing copyright infringement. They have done this to lure PC/windows users to their site in hopes to sell the few major label aquired songs they do have, at a price that is much higher than Apple's $.99.

Can't say I'm a fan of people who make their cases light up ( I think it's a waste of time and money, frankly), but why not try something no one else has?

(This was also posted on my weblog, so my apologies for babbling about things most /.'ers would already know...)

I did wonder a bit about the G5/Xbox2 link back in November, when news first broke that the Xbox2 would likely be running on the G5 chip. At the time, I was idly wondering about the possibility of an Xbox emulator for the Mac (similar to Connectix' old Virtual Gamestation software that allowed Mac users to run Playstation games on their home computer).

Now, though, the news that the seeded G5's are running a custom NT kernel has me wondering along different lines.

In February of '03, Microsoft bought Virtual PC, the PC-emulation software for Macs that allows them to run Windows software inside an emulated PC. They've continued to support and update Virtual PC for the Mac, along with releasing Virtual PC for the PC, allowing Windows machines to run multiple virtual machines on one physical box handy for software testing purposes. Unfortunately, Virtual PC depends on a feature of earlier PowerPC processors that is not present in the G5, so there hasn't been a version of Virtual PC released yet that will run on Apple's flagship G5 desktop machines.

Last month, Microsoft announced that a new G5-compatible version of Virtual PC would be released along with Office 2004. Considering that the Xbox2 SDK is apparently running a customized NT kernel that runs on G5 systems, could some of those same customizations be worked into Virtual PC 7, making for a major speed increase, as more of the low-level code would be running natively on the Mac rather than having to pass through an emulator? I don't really know enough about the innards of how software like this works, so I could be entirely off-base here the differences between the emulation required for Virtual PC and the customizations needed to get the NT kernel running on the PowerPC processor may have absolutely nothing in common but it was enough to get me wondering.

Even more interesting, though, would be if someone could leak some form of benchmarks, even rough ones, showing what kind of performance this customized NT kernel was getting on the SDK machines. I'm assuming it must be at least somewhat respectable, as the machines are being used for creating software for the Xbox2 but how respectable?

And going even more wildly out of the bounds of realityfor years now, there have been rumors of Apple porting the Mac OS to be able to run on Intel-based PCs (realistically, that's not likely to ever be released publicly, but the technology is there). However, what about going the other direction? What if Microsoft were to take these customizations to their kernel and and eventually supplant Virtual PC with an actual build of Longhorn for the G5, either as a "red box" that would allow you to run Windows applications concurrently with Mac OS X applications (we can already run Mac OS X apps, "Classic" Mac OS apps, Unix command-line apps, and Unix X-11 apps all at the same time as it is), or as a dual-boot option (Which OS would you like to run today)?

Likely? I seriously doubt it. But fun to play with.

And I'd still love to find out just how zippy those G5s are running NT. Wouldn't it be a fun little tweak if they were running as fast as (or faster, even) than high-end PCs?

Sorry... I snagged that off of the following...

Apple has $4.8 billion in total assets

Apple has $4.8 billion in total assets

Total assets are a far cry from cash, and include land/improvements, office equipment, machinery, etc... as well as cash. Also included would be investments in other companies, which Apple has been known to do.

The latest Filling was Feburary 10th, summmarized full My educated geuss since most filling as trimesterly about May 10th will be the next major SEC filling.

Because he thinks the Comcast board, as well as Steve Jobs and Roy Disney are all Shite Muslims

Watch for Mickey to deny this later, then we know its true!

While each project will continue to deliver software in their own way, the coordination between projects will:

• accelerate the development efforts of all projects
• avoid unwanted duplication of effort
• improve the consistency, quality, and responsiveness of ports

People sometimes stare when Microsoft Corp. executive Tim McDonough opens his laptop in meetings. But that's probably to be expected when someone uses a Mac PowerBook in the center of the Windows world.

"I can get challenged to see my employee badge," he says.

That's a sick place to work. So much for all the BS posts I've read around here from M$ apologists about how open and free the Microsoft campus is. "They let you use whatever tool you want, as long as you get the job done," they sang out as if centrally directed. Right. No he was not joking and yes, it can get you fired. That's really fucked up. In an environment of horrid group think like that, what can you expect?

My personal favorite Mac-in-car mod is the Pathintosh (which looks much better than the Tatra Mac G4, IMHO).

http://www.macnn.com/news.php?id=3111

It appears that the official Pathintosh page is down, but the specs can be found here.

While it's only a G3, it's plenty powerful for its purpose. It has plenty of RAM and is capable of running Mac OS X. A Pismo PowerBook might be the better option for those looking to do this for themselves.

According to the rover spec sheet, the lander uses a radiation-hardened version of the PowerPC processor.

See page 45, last paragraph, of the linked PDF. For those PDF weinies out there, here's what it reads:

The computer in each Mars Exploration Rover runs with a 32-bit Rad 6000 microprocessor, a radiation-hardened version of the PowerPC chip used in some models of Macintosh computers, operating at a speed of 20 million instructions per second. Onboard memory includes 128 megabytes of random access memory, augmented by 256 megabytes of flash memory and smaller amounts of other non-volatile memory, which allows the system to retain data even without power.

According to the Mac News Network, independent sources put its latest sales figures of desktop systems at around 3.8% market share.

CNet News.com puts Apple's latest (3rd Quarter 2003) market share figures slightly lower: "Apple, meanwhile, saw shipments rise, but not as fast as the market. The company's U.S. market share is now 3 percent, while its worldwide share is below 3 percent."

While it is true that Apple has taken as much as 7% market share in the laptop market of the US in some months (see this MacLinks article) this only translates to 4% worldwide share. And HP is still the world laptop leader.

Apple, despite what you might think, has not significantly improved its market share over the last few years, except in laptops. You could make the argument that they have managed to keep market share from declining (which was the trend up until 1999), but they have failed to translate their new products into market share leadership.

I know it's hard to believe all of this when you get your news from Slashdot posters, but luckily industry analysts don't.

Link here.

I must admit that now I've become used to Safari, the ideas we discussed then don't seem quite as exciting as they once did. I find that when I have too many tabs with Safari I simply open up a new window. I do wish Safari allowed tabs to be rearranged and drug between windows though. However that may infringe upon Adobe's patent. (Although Microsoft has a similar interface in some applications like Visual Studio with apparently no problem)

I also have to say that I rarely have more than about six tabs open. I get lost easily with Safari (or Phoenix's) tabs then. Perhaps Omniweb will help here. On the other hand working with Expose makes me wonder about the drawer/sidebar approach as textual data really doesn't communicate well when reduced. And most of my tabs are pages from similar sites. (i.e. I tend to open all the slashdot articles I'm interested in and then read each tab)

Some of the other features, such as RSS feeds do seem more exciting. However to be honest, it will be hard to compete with Safari. Safari really does do nearly everything I want in a browser.

When I first saw the way Omni had implemented tabs in OW, I thought they were trying to be different for its own sake.

On this thread, Tim2, who's on the team at Omni, explains the reasoning behind their tabs implementation (vertical tabbing, drawer as opposed to hotlist a la Mozilla). I reproduce it here:

So, there have been some people wondering why we chose to use a drawer instead of just doing the more traditional Safari/Mozila thing. Here's the deal with the drawer:

• I've found that thumbnails generally convey much more useful information than page titles. Most page titles are junk anyway (go to eBay and you'll see what I mean). I can switch between tabs much more accurately when I can actually see the page I'm switching to. And in those cases where the thumbnail really is not a distinguishing factor, such as when multiple tabs are open to these forums, then the page title is usually enough supplimentary information for me to figure it out.
• The tabs were put vertically in a drawer for a number of reasons:
• First, you can get more vertical space in a drawer than in an in-window sidebar. This is because the drawer overlaps the main window's toolbar, while a view inside the window could only stretch from the bottom of the toolbar to the bottom of the window. That's like 50 extra pixels.
• Second, they are oriented vertically instead of horizontally so that you don't have to deal with truncated page titles if you don't want to. If you load fifty tabs in Safari, they will have incomprehensibly short titles and will run off the end of the window. OmniWeb does not have this problem. It's also easier on your eyes to scan a list of items that are arranged in rows (as opposed to Safari's single row, multiple column implementation). On top of all that, you can view more tabs at once than you can with Safari -- In OmniWeb's list mode, I can create 20 tabs in a single window before a scroll bar appears (this is on my dinky 12" PowerBook). In Safari, however, I can only fit 11 tabs in a window before they start running off the screen into that annoying menu thing.
• And finally, you can hide and show a drawer without having to resize the content area of the window. If we put the tabs in an in-window side bar, then we would have to resize the page every time the tab sidebar was hidden or shown. This can have detrimental effects on page layout and can make the user feel cramped, especially when reading pages which lay out best when the window is wide.

Essentially, the Omni implementation scales better with a large number of tabs. This is the first great improvement to tabbed browsing that I have seen in a long time. I can definitely see myself $30 for this thing.

>It reminds me of the Mac vs. PC cost debate, because Macs need less overall maintenance and therefore end up being the same cost or cheaper than competing PCs.....

Where the heck did you pull that one from? Especially today, when, apart from the CPU and chipset, Macs are using PC Hardware (ATi Video, Western Digital IDE HDDs, VGA video, etc, etc, etc). And, as far as PCs go, chipsets and CPUs are the least likely parts to break. In fact, apart from abuse, I've never actually seen a CPU fail (I've once seen a chipset fail, but I question if the owner knew how to use an audio card properly...).

Don't get me started on Apple Laptops. They're made by Acer, Compal, Asus, and Quanta, amongst others. Anyone who has owned an Acer PC can attest to the ""quality"" (quad quotes for effect) level of them. The other manufacturers have a better rep, but also make PC laptops.

The differences between an Apple and a PC are, nowadays, pretty much:

- Choice of Operating System
- Choice of CPU
- Choice of Chipset

Apart from that, you can hardly even choose a manufacturer anymore.

I'm wondering, how, exactly, you get this maintenance difference when an Apple and a PC are made from similar parts (apart from the above differences) by the same companies.

If you're talking software maintenance, well, that's more a question of knowing how to operate the machine rather than a question of "maintenance".

>So I say, go for a higher-end model from a name brand manufacturer like Sony, Philips, etc. and have something that you can enjoy for years(with much better support from the company and industry),

Sony, along with Philips, OEM for more companies than I care to think about! Some good (Hey, I loved my old Tektronics monitor!), some not so good (bargain tubes for bargain electronics).

The secret is to buy *smart* and cheap. Some cheap products really are made by crapola companies. Other cheap products are made by companies with a clue. And some "good" products (early Apple Powerbooks, for example) are made by companies whose overally quality standards are questionable, at best.

And, if your reading this Mr BlackCider, they did recall a few things already (making your bad-recall-press rant in your Open Letter a bit moot), like the powersupply for the G3 and the replacement plan for noisy G4's. Hopefully they address this and all you iBook users out there with this problem get a solution, soon.

According to this post on MacNN, this was also on the front page of the Daily Telegraph in London, which adds a little more credibility to the story.

There is an excellent list of laptop bag companies in this MacNN thread.

Some of them are geared toward the Apple Powerbook, but most are general purpose ones that would work well with any computer.

The MacNN forums have an on-going thread about this.