Slashdot Mirror

First of all, these local governments are not providing "free" (read: tax-funded) wifi service.

The article did say in response to this bill becoming law that, as an option "The city could provide the service for free". I realize this means tax-funded to get to that point, but the shared cost would still be much lower than the fees charged by Verizon as I doubt taxes would increase without taxpayer approval.

Second, it's not fair to force private industry to compete with an entity with a virtually endless supply of capital.

And is it fair to the American people to let Verizon have a monopoly and decide for us that only certain people (those rich enough) can have internet access? As for a virtually endless supply of capital, I think that taxpayers pockets are not virtually endless.

And how many patent lawsuits has Microsoft been involved in:

Microsoft, Tiscali sued over European download patent

Sun, Microsoft settle suit in billion dollar pact

Microsoft settles Intertrust patent lawsuit

Microsoft settles suit with Immersion

Microsoft settles 1999 Patent Infringement Case

Yes, you are correct. However, it is discontinued.

Give credit where credit is due...Microsoft does not make Halo. Bungie makes Halo. Microsoft bought Bungie. I like Bungie; I dislike Microsoft very much. Halo was nearly finished for the Macintosh http://www.macworld.com/1999/07/bc/18halo/(I believe this was going to be an exclusive Mac-only title, but I'm not sure) when Bungie was bought by Microsoft. If you want to really know where Halo got its start, you need to buy a Mac and find a copy of Marathon (not Marathon II or III), the original. Oh, and why did they make the adapter PS/2 only? Why not USB? Can the controller ports on the Xbox not handle a conversion from USB (I would think they would be able to)?

The GeForce4MX was what was first introduced in the Mac in January of 2002 before it was released to the PC world. Not the GeForce3. Actually, it was the first nVidia graphics card on the platform.

Also, the GeForce2 MX was the first NVIDIA card available on the Mac platform - in February 2001.

Links:

2/21/2001: Macworld keynote: GeForce 3 coming to the Mac
5/03/2001: GeForce3 cards arriving -- for PCs
5/21/2001: GeForce3 cards now available to order from Apple Store

The GeForce4MX was what was first introduced in the Mac in January of 2002 before it was released to the PC world. Not the GeForce3. Actually, it was the first nVidia graphics card on the platform.

Also, the GeForce2 MX was the first NVIDIA card available on the Mac platform - in February 2001.

Links:

2/21/2001: Macworld keynote: GeForce 3 coming to the Mac
5/03/2001: GeForce3 cards arriving -- for PCs
5/21/2001: GeForce3 cards now available to order from Apple Store

The GeForce4MX was what was first introduced in the Mac in January of 2002 before it was released to the PC world. Not the GeForce3. Actually, it was the first nVidia graphics card on the platform.

Also, the GeForce2 MX was the first NVIDIA card available on the Mac platform - in February 2001.

Links:

2/21/2001: Macworld keynote: GeForce 3 coming to the Mac
5/03/2001: GeForce3 cards arriving -- for PCs
5/21/2001: GeForce3 cards now available to order from Apple Store

Well, Apple guys/gals... you'll need these...

Complete List of Doom 3 Console Commands
List of Common Doom 3 cheats

To Run it you'll need this...

Mac System Requirements:
Mac OS X 10.3.6 or later
PowerPC G5 1.5 GHz or faster
384MB RAM (512MB recommended)
2.2 GB free disk space
ATI Radeon 8500/nVidia GeForce 3 or better
32MB of Video Ram (VRAM)
DVD drive required to install and play

And you'll have to wait until..

Aspyr Media Inc. on Wednesday announced plans to publish id Software's Doom 3 for the Macintosh. The game is currently in development for the Mac by id, and will be released in February, 2005.
Source

I was a Mac User for ages, and this sure is a sour topic. Here is the answer to a majority of the Macintosh problems:

Not enough people own Macs. When you are only 2% of the global computer userbase, nothing gets ported to your platform, and when it does, it is buggy and you are ALWAYS the last to get updates/patches.

Don't take my word for it, the high and mighty Adobe even launched a "PC Preferred" campaign, and refused to port Photoshop to OSX at a time when EVERY mac was shipping with OSX. Apple users had to wait for the next whole release.

These aren't games I am talking, I am talking about Graphic software. Mac zealots love to talk about how the Mac is for artists.. pfft!

Alias Maya (industry standard 3D software) was FINALLY ported to OSX, and it was a joke! It was so buggy and lacked so many options, it wasn't even SMP capable!! heh..

Because if the group doing the integrating decides you dont need it, you dont get it.

Unless the group doing the integrating decides, on a lark, to join, embrace, and even contribute to the open standard/software movement. 'Cause then you might be able to still decide what you want or need.

But that couldn't possibly come from some over priced, consumer-electronic excuse for a computer, now could it? No way.

Just keep doing yer thing, man...

Here's a short review of the Fisher FVD-C1 from the current MacWorld article on DV Camcorders:

The Fisher FVD-C1 is one of a new generation of MPEG-4 video camcorders that eschew tape and record directly to storage media. Like a shapely silver iPod, the lightweight, compact Fisher comes with a docking station, fits contentedly in the palm of your hand, and begs you to play. Flip open the bright, 1.5-inch LCD screen, and a cheerful female voice chimes faintly, "Camera mode." Though not much bigger than a postage stamp, the menus are easy to navigate with a beadlike joystick that you control with your thumb.

In spite of its small size, the Fisher takes big pictures: still images at 3.2 megapixels, and video at 640 by 480 pixels and 30 frames per second. At the highest-quality settings, you can fit as many as 491 pictures, or about 21 minutes of video, on the supplied 512MB memory card. The still pictures are sharp and vibrant, but video quality is disappointing, with soft edges, banding (blocks of muddy pixels), and pixel artifacts. Lightweight camcorders like this one are difficult to hold steady, and it has no image stabilization. While the audio is sufficiently loud, we heard a whine and occasional clicking as the autofocus tried to keep up, and you can't use an external microphone.

We'd recommend any of the DV camcorders in our test group over the Fisher for video quality, even if it means hauling around a few extra ounces. And if you're looking for excellent photographs, you can buy a good 3.2-megapixel camera and a 512MB memory card for about half its price.

On the CPU front, Apple sold 836,000 computers, a 6 percent increase over the year-ago quarter but down 5 percent from the third quarter of 2004. Revenue for the entire category was $1.231 billion, up 3 percent year-over-year but down 3 percent sequentially. The company blamed the sluggish numbers on limited G5 processor availability, which delayed the introduction of the G5 iMac and affected the Power Mac G5 pipeline.

The iMac line suffered the expected double-hit from the late introduction as well as supply constraints of the G5 chip. At 229k, this is the 2nd lowest unit sales in iMac sales in the last 5 years. At $216M, it's also the 2nd lowest revenue for the iMac in the last 5 years. Apple continues to see major supply constraints despite holding back the introduction in order to build up inventory. Transitioning the iMac to the G5 at a time when IBM was not prepared to meet volume demands has contributed to further weakening of the consumer desktop line.

See http://www.macworld.com/news/2004/10/12/supreme/in dex.php/?lsrc=mcrss-1004

The radio station that I want to get doesn't come in very well on the RadioShark. Does anyone have any suggestions for an antenna that might work? Thanks!

According to this MacCentral page, the audio output jack of the RadioShark also doubles as an external antenna input. Not sure of the wiring or input impedance.

Sorry to self-reply but yeah he was, but it was more than a year ago:

http://www.macworld.com/news/2002/06/14/browser/in dex.php

What the hell. It's an election year.

• Google search
• CNN
• CNET
• MacWorld
• Computer World
• The Register

I don't understand the "corporate America" distinction.

The web is definitely your friend when it comes to switching. The parent links will help.

MacNN Forums
xlr8yourmac.com's forums
MacFixIt Forums
MacWorld Forums

That should be a good start. You'll find that the Mac community is more than willing to go out of its way to help you, especially if you're a new convert. Just tell people you've switched from Windows, you'll get all the help you'll ever need.

Apple have support forums too, they're worth a look, especially to track bugs - people normally go whinge over there.

Finally, as someone mentioned, VersionTracker and MacUpdate are the places to search for software. Even if you don't know the name of the software, type in what kind of thing you're looking for (eg MP3) and you're bound to find something of use.

Good luck, and most of all, have fun :)

-- james

I think Microsoft is getting faster at copying apple, aren't they supposed to have msTunes sometime this year.

Here is a story on this mouse from almost two months ago. Can you unveil something twice?

Is someone asleep at the wheel?

Sony 2GB memory stick

It is $700, as it is bleeding edge, but should fit the bill nicely and is TINY.

All I have been saying, all along, is that my iPod is perfectly capable of playing music from other sources without having to resort to Real's tactics. If it's about freedom of choice for all iPod owners, do please explain Real's unfathomable decision to make their store unuseable for Mac owners. Real's tactics are the worst form of cash grab. With Real, it's about the money. Not that with Apple it isn't. Or any other publically traded company you wish to point out. Your vendor lock-in in this case is misdirected: it's the record companies causing this, and I fully support not using the DRM techology (*ahem* MP3 - Ogg if iPod ever supports it), but Real just swaps one DRM for another. I'm not using Apple's *or* Real's DRM (or Microsoft's or anyone else's) when it comes to music. If there was a way to remove it that was convenient, I probably would. It's just less of a hassle to buy the CD.

What part of Apple has available several legal avenues" don't you understand? That's the basis for my statement on legality. Not some conjured "finger wagging" argument. Real's actions are in a hazy legal area at best, and that's the lawyers talking, not just me, and not just on the basis of DMCA. Spouting that it's legal when it hasn't been tested doesn't make something legal. Beyond that, Real approached Apple on interoperability, Apple said no. Real is fully aware of their tactics, and to invoke "freedom of choice" as a justification is at the very least disingenuous.

DVD Jon isn't selling anything. He isn't required to support his software. If you use his software (and I have and do), and your program/hardware/whatever breaks, it's your problem. I don't particularly agree with Apple's recent cease and desists in his case either, but it's the thin edge of the wedge: if Apple hadn't reacted, Real would have a stronger case. [Again with the can and should?] Perhaps he does feel he is allowed to use his hardware for anything he likes, and he is right. His blog certainly seems to support that supposition. So let me rephrase that: he doesn't *expect* anyone else to support his software. It's only his and my time being wasted if something breaks due to a firmware update, or a hardware change.

Real, on the other hand (here's where the issue is), *is* selling something. Something for which support will be expected. If I buy 300 songs from their store, and the next Apple firmware update breaks the compatibility, I'm left to either call Real for a fix, Apple for more information, or eat the $150 (soon to be right back up to $300 - you'll see). Apple is under no obligation to support Real's Harmony. And Real probably won't help me at all, or at least not until I click through 17 pages of "buy our player instead." If it breaks permanently, I'm out *money*, and if I'm a typical American, I'm going to want it back from someone, even if it means a frivolus lawsuit.

Perhaps we ough

Bill Gates is correct; the television viewing experience is really different from that of working on a computer.

" Do you have any other thoughts about where your competitors are taking their strategies? For example, Windows Media PCs are computers attached to TV sets.

Well, we've always been very clear on that. We don't think that televisions and personal computers are going to merge. We think basically you watch television to turn your brain off, and you work on your computer when you want to turn your brain on."

With a Mac, you're stuck with the configurations Apple wants to give you - they'd be like a single PC maker in a sea of hundreds on the other side of the fence. Now, obviously this is working for them in some ways, as they're generally profitable of late, though mostly due to iPod.

I was not able to figure out from the article alone what state this is taking place in.

Um. From the article:

"Seagate filed an injunction Friday with Minnesota State Court for Hennepin County, seeking to keep Goglia from working on Western Digital's read/write technology for two years..."

That's pretty easy to read. ;)

Seagate's headquarters is here in the Twin Cities.

Minnesota has pretty weak laws protecting employees... The only relevant precedent I know of off hand is in our local TV market -- TV news personalities typically have non-compete agreements that state they cannot appear on-camera at another station for a certain number of years.

- Peter

You mean the version that Microsoft has officially abandoned?

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/07/29/rea lharmony/

12 songs? like an... album? what do they got in their, a hamster? it can't possibly be that hard to find somewhere to stuff a couple more MP3s in a cell phone. why so stingy?

All of the panelists agreed that Mac OS X looks beautiful, but most have misgivings about the new user interface (UI), lack of documentation and the completeness of its implementation. [...] "The internal improvements of Mac OS X are long overdue, but the UI, well, yuk," said Raskin. "Apple has ignored for years all that has been learned about developing UIs. It's unprofessional, incompetent, and it's hurting users." Hertzfeld was less down on the UI, offering a mixed bag of what he liked and disliked about the new OS.

What do Macs do for Science and Engineering that would justify spending the money on them? They're great for desktop users but they're simply not designed to be "special" for science and engineering. Right now top 40 CS school is split between x86's running redhat and sun machine's. Starting next fall they are probably going to be phasing out the sun's for either more redhat machines OR FreeBSD (yep...really looks like *BSD is dying for all you haters).

You do realize that Mac OS X is BSD-based, don't you?

Your entire argument doesn't make any sense in the face of this. If FreeBSD is good enough for science and engineering, then so is OS X. Indeed, I'd say that OS X is better for anything requiring visualization due to its Quartz, OpenGL, and Quicktime support.

Indeed, it would seem that some academic institutions go completely against your argument. Don't forget Virginia Polytechnic's Apple G5 cluster, which was the third most powerful known supercomputer in the world last fall.

Or that BOINC from Berkeley University is available for OS X, allowing for distributed computing projects on modern Apple platforms.

I probably would have agreed with you 4 or 5 years ago, but ever since Apple moved over to a BSD-based Unix architecture things have changed quite a bit.

Yaz.

I think the answer you seek is here

This May 2004 Macworld editorial [macworld.com] talks about "Henny Penny" attitudes. [I guess they meant "Chicken Little" as in "The sky is falling".] Macworld writers have been dismissing Secunia for months as a FUD source for security issues with Linux and MAC OS.

This May 2004 Macworld editorial talks about "Henny Penny" attitudes. [I guess they meant "Chicken Little" as in "The sky is falling".] Macworld writers have been dismissing Secunia for months as a FUD source for security issues with Linux and MAC OS.

OK, did some googling; according to this: http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2001/04/30/sch ools/ ... Macs have an average TCO of $400 LESS per year than PCs. Googling around, this seems to be the trend too, not the exception. I guess you should be the one taking Economics 101 then ;)

• Popular Photography -
• Rock & Ice
• Climbing
• MacWorld
• Powder
• Skiing
• Couloir

the following magazines, time permitting:

Print Magazine
Communication Arts
Dwell
Step Inside Design
MacWorld
MacAddict
Writer's Digest
Maxim

Of course, it's rare that I actually get to READ them all, but I like to at least have the material available to me.

Fortean Times, Private Eye, Macworld, Blender and Revolver.

I used to read Counterpunch, but got tired of Cockburn.

Man! it would have been interesting if Microsoft had bought Virtual Game Station from Connectix along with VirtualPC. I bought VGS when it first came out, It kicks ass!

but I don't see how it would be possible to emulate a P3 700 class CPU on a 1.xGHz processor of a completely different archecture.

Perhaps by using code derived from Connectix's VirtualPC, which they acquireda little while ago?

My understanding is Sony did exactly the same thing with Virtual GameStation to provide PS1 support on the PS2. In Sony's case, they probably gained access to the technology as part of the settlement to their previous court battle.

Sorry about the RTFA comment earlier, I got my articles confused. You're right, the Register doesn't say so, but this article at Maccentral does.

However... iPods appear to be extremely popular. I'd guess they're the Windows-variety, though. (I suppose it's also possible that there aren't that many iPods - just a lot of kids with white headphones ;)

Reportedly, one out of every six iPods sold over the Christmas quarter last year was sold in the UK. Apparently they're every bit as popular in the UK as anywhere else.

Apple no longer makes Windows-specific iPods, incidentally. The earlier models were platform-specific, but the models made since April 28th of last year have all been officially Mac-Windows. I would indeed assume the overwhelming majority of those UK iPods are probably being used with Windows, of course.

Tom Boger, Apple's Director of Power Mac Product Marketing:
"All-in-all, no we are not getting to 3GHz anytime soon"

1.) Apple admits they won't hit their 3 GHz promise :

Jobs further excited the crowd when he said that Apple would release a 3GHz model within a year -- with two weeks to go before that deadline, Boger said Apple will not meet the 3GHz promise.

"It's actually quite simple," said Boger. "When we made that prediction, we just didn't realize the challenges moving to 90 nanometer would present. It turned out to be a much bigger challenge than anyone expected."

2.) Downgrading from a Superdrive to a Combo drive now saves you only $100, not $200 (on the 1.8 DP model at least; all I checked), even though the hardware is twice as fast burning now. This makes the cost of entry into PowermacLand now $1900 and change, not $1600. Though you almost certainly get that extra $300 in goodies, if you don't have that $300 you ain't got it.

3.) No great deals on older models from the [online] Apple Store as some rumors suggested.

4.) Even the super-cool geek quotient for liquid cooling is apparently only in the 2.5 DP. No, I'm happy that cost doesn't appear [directly] in the other models, but if I'm spending enough to pay the going price for three vintage police crusiers, I need something extra to brag about.

Oh well, at least AirTunes is kewl.

Citing unforseen issues with 90nm chips, Apple's dir of PowerMac marketing, Tom Boger, stated on Mac Central ( Good Link) there will be no 3 Ghz g5 'anytime soon'.

(A friend of mine proposes some kind of on-the-fly transcoding to Apple's Lossless format, but I doubt seriously that that's how Apple has implemented it.)

In fact, that's exactly how it works. It transcodes to Apple Lossless, which is compressed, and streams that. So in theory, anything you can play in iTunes, you can stream to the Airport eXXXpress.

And yes, I want one.

'jfb

Nope. Check the comparison chart on Apple's site, and you'll see that it doesn't connect to the LAN, just to the Internet.

It doesn't offer all the niceties of the UFO-shaped AirPort models, such as support for up to 50 users, separate LAN and WAN ports, an external antenna connector, or a built-in modem.

For those wondering if AirPort Express supports MP3, AAC, or any other specific file formats, the answer is no. AirPort Express supports Apple's Lossless Compression technology -- and everything that your iTunes streams across the network to Airport Express is compressed using that technology.

Source: Jason Snell's blog entry at MacWorld, which has more detail.

(I know a guy who has bought "Dark Side of the Moon" on 8-track, LP, cassette, and twice on CD)

He's in good company.

Thomas Dolby said in an interview: "I've bought six copies of [Pink Floyd's] Dark Side of the Moon over the years, but I don't happen to have a copy of it sitting where I am right now. I kind of like the idea that once I've paid for it, I have the right to dial it up. What I've paid for is the right to listen to that music -- once, or twice, or for life."

http://www.macworld.com/2000/09/features/trendssix /

I think he was referring to this.