Slashdot Mirror

CCP Games calls EVE Online the world's largest game universe. It's a massively multiplayer online role playing game (MMORPG) set in outer space. The service currently has over 160,000 active subscriptions -- more than 34,000 thousand players have been online at once.

I should have included the following link as well:

http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/03/09/eve/index. php

You are 100% correct. In fact MacWorld has an article on it along with a video showing how easy it is:

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/macword/2006/05/ma cbookvideo/index.php

It's literally remove battery, undo 3 screws and the piece they are holding and then the hard drive slides out. The RAM is also in the same spot and they also just slide out. It's one of the easiest hard drive/RAM installs I've ever seen on a laptop.

The law, proposed by Minister of the Interior Nicolas Sarkozy, is intended to clamp down on a wide range of public order offenses. [...]

The broad drafting of the law so as to criminalize the activities of citizen journalists unrelated to the perpetrators of violent acts is no accident [...]

The government has also proposed a certification system for Web sites, blog hosters, mobile-phone operators and Internet service providers, identifying them as government-approved sources of information if they adhere to certain rules. [...]

In total OVERALL music sales... for today only... you're right. Now sit down for a moment and think....

Look at Nielsen SoundScan.. here's some breakdown

As you can see, album sales are DOWN worldwide (4.9% decrease), and internet sales are UP(65% increase). Take that trend out 5 to 10 years. Statistically, you'll see that Compact Disc will quickly be overwhelmed by digital media sales. And of that growth - Apple has 82% of the market captured from Job's own mouth.

Monopolies are defined by sales in a MARKET.. In the online music market, it's a monopoly. If sales continue their current trend Apple will have a overall music monopoly in a few years time.

And stock prices are determined largely on growth. Now what are YOU smoking?

I work in OS X and while the Finder as directory browser is good, what I end up using most is saved searches (aka smart folders) and Spotlight. I work with thousands of files on a daily basis as an interactive director (flash, graphics, pdfs, word files, html, php, etc. etc) and being able to search the content of the files for keywords is more important to me than where the file is or what it's name is.

Most importantly the search feature has to work across SMB shares, which spotlight does (if a little slowly compared to local disks). I do run a cron of spotlight indexing on the shared projects directory though so that helps out (it's at least 10 times faster than if I didn't) which took some research to figure out.

The command line tool for this is mdutil as in: sudo mdutil -i on "/Volumes/YourShareName"

This will turn on Spotlight indexing for any volume that is mounted on your system.

A fairly good article on the subject is here: http://www.macworld.com/2005/07/secrets/augustgeek factor/index.php

The new Apple TV media extender is supposed to ship this month, perhaps even by the time you read this column, and if you are like me you are wondering what that 40-gig hard drive is doing inside. I'm guessing we won't know for sure until later this year [...]

...unless you listened to Jobs' Macworld Keynote or read the flurry of articles that flew around afterwards -- such as this Macworld article -- in which case you would know that the AppleTV is a glorified video iPod that can be synced with iTunes like any other iPod. (Sorry, that's not technically true; apparently the AppleTV can sync over a wireless network connection.)

It will be interesting to hear Apple's explanation for the hard drive.

Is he seriously unaware of the purpose of the hard drive? Can he honestly not find the AppleTV page where they discuss how the AppleTV syncs with iTunes?

Or is this simply the most egregious example of not letting the facts -- easily-obtained facts, no less -- get in the way of his "secret answer"? I know these Cringely pieces are often light on substance and heavy on BS, but this in unbelievable...

See here, it works with other versions of Vista....

http://www.macworld.com/2007/02/firstlooks/vistama c/index.php

Whether it all falls over if you install it in boot camp AND parallels because of MS's phone home registration, we are yet to find out.

A fair question, so I tracked down the review I read that mentions it:

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/macword/2007/01/ip honehands/index.php?lsrc=mwrss

Hope that helps.

D

Want to re-program your iPod? It can be done. http://www.macworld.com/2005/05/secrets/julygeekfa ctor/index.php

I see people posting articles saying why "They're going to win". ... Yet... they're looking for an excuse as to WHY they want their side to win.

I AM a gamer, and i won't state my opinion as to which consoles i own or which i assume will win. Instead i will take a neutral stance and point out the things that it seems people dont want to point out.

1) Who will win the "dvd format / movie war"? No one. http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/01/04/lg/index.p hp Unlike DVD vs. Betamax back in the day, the new formats are similar enough that they are already making dual compatible players. Who wins? Who looses? Both. The "winner" is the company (for movies anyways) that makes the hardware to do both at the same time. So who wins the movie format? Who cares if both are available and both work on one movie player (since most people will STILL buy a movie player and not watch ALL their movies on a console)

2) Who wins the console wars? The ones with the best games. I've heard this argument SO many times... "M$ has a ton more games AND the system is cheaper! WIN WIN!".... "Wii is better because it's just so random and FUN to jump around" ... "Sony will win, because sony has held the market and they have ties to all the best games / game makers" ....

I'll be honest. Why the hell is everyone conserned with who the winner is. Are guys really so hypnotized by the market, or egotistical to believe that your opinions matter when you say "my X is better than yours"? WTF.

Microsoft is currently "winning" and has more games. Wii is more "fun" though. But Sony does/will have "better" games.

If you love your 360, yay for you. Go play it. If you love your wii... yay, go play it.... same with the ps3 if you ever get ahold of one...

For the "last gen" consoles.... PS2 was "the winner". Can someone explain to me why tons of people i know WANTED .. and DID buy a gamecube then? Or an xBox?

The winner is the one that will (eventually at least) have the most amount of games that you WANT. And that doesn't make it better vs any of the others systems, it just means that for YOU... it's better.

Finally.... since the "losers" will still always be available to the market... why is this argument honestly so mind-provoking to everyone that they must know the answer and argue about it. If we defined a winner right now? Would you throw away your other consoles and only get the "winner" one? Of course not...

"OS X does not ignore the last two decades worth of human/computer interaction research."

Actually they have.
See
http://www.asktog.com/columns/044top10docksucks.ht ml
http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/12/21/services/i ndex.php

This is the same company that charges you $10 for the ability to use their media player to play videos at full screen, for crying out loud.

If all you want from QuickTime is full screen, go here. I'm not sure where you're getting $10 from, because QuickTime Pro is $30, and that gets you a lot more than just the ability to play movies full screen.

They charge $130 for incremental OS updates every 12-18 months, which is basically a subscription service.

Wrong. Truly spoken like somebody who doesn't actually know what they're talking about! Don't be fooled by what looks like a change in the minor version number; what you think are "incremental" updates always have a large amount of new features -- it's closer to uprading from Windows 2000 to Windows XP than applying a service pack. Besides, if you don't want the new features, it's not like the older versions of OS X stop working, and they still provide security updates for them.

They're charging $2 to enable the 802.11n hardware that they will ship.

For legal reasons. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act really is that stupid.

Reset the permissions? I've been running multiple OS X systems since 10.0, and I've never had to "reset the permissions" even once. I'm not even sure I know where to look to do something like that. WTF is he talking about?

The price of your Sony Ericsson example is without the discount from your cell phone company for signing a 2 year contract. According to Macworld, "Apple has no plans to release a version of the iPhone without a service contract or one that is unlocked." The prices announced for the iPhone include a 2 year contract. As for the Windows Mobile phones, you're just wrong.

If you want a phone with a comparable screen resolution (480x640 compared to iPhone's 480x320), try the Neo1973 OpenMoko phone, available in February 2007, priced at $350 unlocked. (It even has a touchscreen)

Or you could just admit that people who buy Apple want to pay more than they have to for a computer/music player/phone.

Writing for The New York Times, Matt Richtel quoted one analyst who said that iPod's exclusivity to the Mac (at least for now) severely limits its audience....

CNet News.com writer Ian Fried quoted analysts who knocked the iPod's high price and timing given the poor consumer market right now...

Writing for ABCNews.com, Paul Eng suggested that the $399 iPod may face an uphill battle. Eng quoted an analyst who said that the iPod is priced at the upper end of the MP3 market, and another who suggested that the digital music market needs better definition so that consumers can understand what makes the iPod different from other MP3 products.

Plus, the existence of 'Final Cut Pro' on the Mac platform crowds out and eliminates the motivation for other people to come in and develop competing products

Adobe brings Premiere back to the Mac.

As long as Apple doesn't unfairly use its advantage of owning the OS FCP runs on, competition is good. If they changed to OS to hurt Premiere, then FCP would be a bad thing. They don't.

Oh, MS is a monopoly all right. It's written there in Judge Jackson's statement; something that's *never been overturned. Ever tried to buy a bare PC? Seems you can't. It's Windoze or Nodoze. So, pre-loaded it is and not a choice in sight.

As in "too successful" ... when have Americans started liking monopolies? I thought that was an anathema to the free-market. But, hey, it's your market. I just wish the Imperialists wouldn't thrust their idea of a "free market" onto the rest of us.

I take the opposing view. The markets are moral, and we have regulators to make sure the markets behave themselves within limits. Microsoft is an object lesson for regulators, o'wise they'll find some shit monopoly clogging up the pathways of business, demanding tax from all and sundry, holding back the reins of what America wants to be. *AA and Microsoft, they're made from the same cloth.

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/12/19/miniford/i ndex.php?lsrc=mwrss

I don't think Apple has an iPod production line. I think like everyone else, they outsource to the cheapest tender in China. I don't think Apple gets to dictate what their contractors use to produce iPods at the cheapest possible price. But Windows and virus do go together like a ferret in a rabbit hole.

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/12/19/miniford/i ndex.php?lsrc=mwrss

According to this article http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/12/29/att/index. php, they are only agreeing to network-neutrality for two years.

To me, this means, they agree to network-neutrality until they can build out enough bandwidth and there is more of a demand for video over the internet, then it's out the window.

Maybe they should have to split apart once their concessions end?

Because blogs are a way to reach audiences that are not reached through traditional marketing outlets

Yeah, because Apple has a real problem "reaching audiences." I mean, who ever heard of an iPod? They seem to think that TV commercials and word-of-mouth alone will sell the things.

they increase the amount of feedback you receive from your customers, and they provide a way to mine your user base for ideas.

If only there were some website where Apple could gather user opinions and feedback.

-- Brian Boyko
-- Professional Blogger.

It shows.

You're absolutely right, there are no non-Apple products available for purchase anywhere. You're totally locked in.

You're absolutely right, there are no non-Apple products available for purchase anywhere. You're totally locked in.

You're absolutely right, there are no non-Apple products available for purchase anywhere. You're totally locked in.

You're absolutely right, there are no non-Apple products available for purchase anywhere. You're totally locked in.

You're absolutely right, there are no non-Apple products available for purchase anywhere. You're totally locked in.

You're absolutely right, there are no non-Apple products available for purchase anywhere. You're totally locked in.

You're absolutely right, there are no non-Apple products available for purchase anywhere. You're totally locked in.

4.8% in July, with a strong upwards trend.

6.1 % US market

multiple sources report the share of the notebook market at 12%.

Questions?

Oh yes, this was the same USAF facility that photographed the space shuttle Columbia as it passed overhead minutes before it broke apart during its 2003 entry. They say they took that picture on an 11 year old Mac which would be almost 15 years old now. Not too surprising that this type of research is going on there, although it is pretty close to Albuquerque.

You won't because iTunes is the easiest to break. You just have to burn it onto a CD.

I want to see real benchmarks like perhaps windows running on it vs a comparable "PC" laptop from say dell, toshiba or some other vendor.

Something like this?. GFE.

If you'd take a few minutes to look this stuff up, you'd find everything you're looking for. Don't bitch just because it's not all on one page.

Read your own quote. What exactly does "introduced to the Japanese market in April that year" mean to you? Sony put the product on the market in April, 2003. Samsung and JVC are the ones that didn't get to the market until 2005.

Unfortunately "introduced" does not mean that it was placed on the market in this context. Unfortunately whoever used that word in the wikipedia article did not know what it means. As the sibling said, the standard had not even been formalized in 2003. It was literally impossible to sell a Blu-Ray player because Blu-Ray didn't mean anything. In particular they were still fighting over which codecs would be supported in both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray at that time.

Your own link contradicts itself and you did not take this as a reason to go do some additional research? here is an article (in macworld of all places) about how Japan and the US will share a region code when they come out "later this year" - it was from August 17, 2006. Here is an article from Japan today on August 30, 2006 about how Blu-Ray Discs and Players are to go on sale "from November" and also that "Nishitani said Sony plans to release Blu-ray players in the United States around October, but a launch date for Japan has not yet been decided."

YOU CANNOT TRUST WIKIPEDIA AS YOUR ONLY REFERENCE. I sometimes do refer to Wikipedia, and even cite it as a sole reference, but I either know what it is saying is true, or I tend to doublecheck somewhere else to make sure it is not full of shit.

In other words, you are a dumbfuck. Please go away and do not return. Thank you. BTW I may flame, but I'm correct, which puts me ahead of your sorry ass.

Here is a sample installation. Use the search box at the top.

Just got it from their ftp server.

ftp://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox /releases/2.0/

source
http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/10/23/firefox/in dex.php

Maybe they're being percieved as an alternative but they show a frightening inability to convert that into sold systems.

As of June the 1st they still have a personal computer marketshare of 3.8 percent which doesn't seem to have moved since October of last year. In fact, in 2002 that figure was around 3.5. 0.3% growth in three years is nothing to crow about, let's be honest.

If anything, Apple should worry that though Windows XP might be losing market slightly, it isn't to Apple. It's this wonderful category 'Other' they should be worrying about.

Actually, when they fist introduced the iPod, they mentioned their intention to port it to Windows:

"We have thought than when we get a little spare time, we will look at taking it to Windows. We know the experience won't be as good, but we will probably look at that down the road."

...from the Macword live coverage of the event on October 23, 2001.

I wonder, if in the future, NASA will develop a type of self cleaning aparatus to aide in "dusting" them.

Perhaps they could use a self-cleaning mechanism like this?

Yeah. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery huh? So Microsoft really likes Arlo Rose and Perry Clarke? Lest we forget that the Apple Widget Dashboard is a "total rip-off" of Konfabulator. Though there are dissenting views on this.

I used to feel bad for the Konfabulator team until they were bought by Yahoo- they finally got the attention they deserved.

The "flaw" that SecureWorks reported did not exist. Apple wasn't told what the flaw was or really any details about it, and like a responsible company, audited all relevant code irregardless. They found three potential *crashers*. These may be impossible crashers, as in the requirements to get to that section of code means it is impossible for the data to be invalid, but they added an error check "just in case".

The problem is now days everyone considers a crasher to be a security exploit, even if it can't be used to run any code.

But none of these are what the SecureWorks guys "reportedly" found. Either way, they definitely and without a doubt lied on that video. The device they attached was not a wireless device seen by the system at all. The SecureWorks guys never even stated anything, other than the community didn't have the mental capacity to understand what the exploit was.

They also said they would not release details until Apple fixed it. So I assume they'll now put up or shut up. It really all looks like a publicity stunt to sell their upcoming book.

I'll let MacWorld say it for me:
From http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/09/21/wireless/i ndex.php:
Apple on Thursday released a Security and AirPort update for Mac OS X that fixes vulnerabilities found in the company's wireless drivers. Apple said the issues found were the result of an internal audit of the software drivers and that no known exploits exist for the issues addressed in this update.
...
Apple has maintained that SecureWorks has provided no proof that Mac drivers are vulnerable in any way.
"They did not supply us with any information to allow us to identify a specific problem, so we initiated an internal audit," Apple spokesman, Anuj Nayar, told Macworld. "Today's update preemptively strengthens our drivers against potential vulnerabilities, and while it addresses issues found internally by Apple, we are open to hearing from security researchers on how to improve security on the Mac."

Too bad Apple has also been very good about resisting bug fixes in the iPod. Guess they don't want my money.

First of all, the Vareity article (which doesn't necessarily know anything for certain) says:

"The only studio that will definitely [emphasis added] be part of Apple's movie store at launch is Disney.

So that still doesn't preclude other studios being on board at the time of launch. Even so, it still goes on to say:

"Other studios will likely join iTunes in the next year."

Further:

"The reason Amazon will have content from most major studios, while Apple may have only one, comes down to price, insiders said. Because it also sells DVDs, Amazon has agreed to studio demands that digital wholesale prices not undercut those of DVDs. [emphasis added] As a result, Amazon.com's digital download prices are expected to range from $9.99 to $19.99 -- about the same as those for other online retailers such as CinemaNow, Movielink and AOL.

Initially, Apple was pushing to sell all films for $9.99, just as it sells songs for a flat price of 99 and all TV shows for $1.99. But due to studio pressure, it will launch with two price points: $9.99 for library titles, $14.99 for new pics in the DVD window."

Not only is this the same type of behavior we saw to a certain extent with iTunes in the context of music, and moreso with television programming, I'm quite glad that Apple is pressuring the industry on the price issue, similar to the way they took a significant part in pressuring MPEG LA for reasonable licensing terms, which made the MPEG-4 family of protocols, including H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10, actually usable by normal people for content creation, broadcasting, and playback without the encumbrances of royalties and per-use/per-time fees that would have all but killed MPEG-4 and H.264 on anything but OEM devices and commercial broadcast services.

Then there's the question of usability: the same thing that has made the iTunes universe so attractive to users is still there as it has transitioned to video. It's not just a simple "download a media file and do with it what you will" service (though it can be treated as such; note I'm not talking about this in the context of DRM, I'm speaking in terms of the process via which you download something and play it) - it's a completely integrated system that normal people can actually use that has a pleasant user experience. With things like Front Row now shipping on all of Apple's systems, they've created an end-to-end solution that actually makes viewing, using, or listening to the content a tightly integrated experience that "just works". The turnkey nature of iTunes/iPod/Front Row has been one of the key reasons for its continuing success.

Many developers reading this news may be thinking that they'll have to go through the same woes they had to in order to get their Mac OS 9 applications "Carbonized" to run on Mac OS X. Jobs assured the crowd that this isn't like that at all. To demonstrate, he brought on stage Theo Gray, cofounder of Mathematica maker Wolfram Research.

Gray said that Mathematica it only took about two hours to get Mathematica's Mac OS X code running on an Intel-based Mac. "We're talking about twenty lines of source code out of millions, from a dead cold start. This is nothing like Carbonizing. It's pretty good when the biggest problem from your port is to figure out what to do with the rest of your weekend."

Any box that doesn't run Windows confuses most investigators.

before they only threw dirt to make him look unreliable

Point me to the link where Apple threw dirt at him.

There are plenty of bloggers who did the research on their own and asked the right kind of questions, but I've never seen anything from Apple attacking him. Maybe you're referring to Apple pointing out that he used a third party USB device and didn't disclose any info to Apple about the exploit? I wouldn't exactly call that throwing dirt.

Think about it, how do you get famous in security? You break something. Further, a lot of pen-testing is done with loaded contracts, if you actually break in, you might get paid a lot more so you create this culture where by nobody who does that is really that interested in actually increasing security and it's in their best interest to actually have a collection of exploits that they don't disclose. There is a whole mystic around it, do you want Kevin Mitnick to test your social engineering defenses or do you want some faceless large company to do it?

You can spend a couple grand to go to blackhat and "learn hacking" and you can spend tens of thousands of dollars buying exploits from companies like immunitysec, it's a potentically a great business if you don't mind being a security "expert" that doesn't actually encourage security and you don't mind hanging around and dealing with criminals and some of the dirtier folks out there. Just trade and accumulate "0days" and then sell them. Then they all have this nice little excuse built in, they are practicing responsible disclosure and so they can't tell you; then they backhand the vendors and claim that they reported certain issues "months ago" and the vendors never fixed it. I'm not sure what the percentage is, but a lot of it is bullshit. Just look at those Apple Wireless frauds from a couple weeks ago, they didn't report shit to anybody, they lied about it, the lied about being threatened with law suits and claimed that's why they couldn't disclose anything, the entire thing could be a fraud. They lied to their audience at blackhat, they very clearly made it sound like they were threatened by apple and other vendors and the truth is they never spoke to anyone about it; that's par for the course. I'd bet that somewhere near 80% or even more of it is that way, that's the reason behind full-disclosure.

It's all about layered protection and policy. That's sort of where the whole thing falls apart, organizations don't have policy and you can't build protection on top of nothing. No policy, what do you expect? Sure, large schools and organizations are going to have tons of unpatched systems, who'd want to screw up a working server if they don't have to and security isn't their concern? Honestly, unless you're a high profile target, 0days aren't your problem. Your problem is insiders doing stupid or malicious things, botnets and unpatched systems that are exposed to the world and that you potentially don't even know about.

Not true. There are several non-obvious ways to Mute the Startup Sound.

(See, the start up "noise" is not obviously controllable to new Mac users... Oh, never mind...)