Slashdot Mirror
Rumors Removed At Apple's Request
(Full disclosure: I own some Apple stock and have been a fan of the company since my Apple][+; also, MOSR's parent company did ads for Slashdot several years ago.)
Apple apparently claimed to MOSR that - among other things - they had "proprietary and statutory rights" that were violated by the stories that ran on the site. Sounds fishy to me. Unless they can prove an NDA was violated (and Meader says none was), I can't see how they have a case. You can't copyright a fact.
But I'm not a lawyer. If any lawyers would like to comment on this, feel free.
Effectively what this means is that large legal fees would have to be paid unless the rumor site removed the rumors. Win or lose, nobody likes to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit. It just costs too much to defend so the rumors get pulled. Just a fact of life on today's web.
To be sure, another large factor in MOSR's decision is that they are supporters of Apple and of the Macintosh community. Meader says their website "was originally created to help Apple through the rough times of '95-'97 ... because the Mac community is so protective of its center, we don't feel that it's wise nor beneficial to fight Apple on this."
But, as Meader goes on to say, "The real matter at issue here is that Apple wants to be able to do what they want without taking responsibility for failures, schedule slides, or unpopular plans, until they're already carried through. ...Apple figures that rumor sites are inevitable, so individually they have no value. They can be tossed away when they become an inconvenience, and others will spring up to continue giving them free, no-strings hype."
The end result is that rumor sites are allowed to exist ... as long as they don't get too uppity and cause too much trouble for the bottom line.
But here's an interesting angle. MOSR publishes its stories under the OpenContent License (which goes by the odd acronym "OPL"). If anyone happened to snag a copy of the offending rumors before they were removed, then according to the terms of this license,
"You may copy and distribute exact replicas of the OpenContent (OC) as you receive it, in any medium,"
as long as you reproduce the copyright and warranty-disclaimer, and a few other usual things. Oh, and as long as you're willing to get sued by Apple, whose lawyers presumably will welcome the chance to make themselves, once again, useful.
Why in the world do you insist that 70s timesharing technologies are "modern necesseties"? The Macintosh changed the world in 1984, demonstrating that what was then decade-old mini and mainframe software techniques were not necessary. Nice to have if you can afford the hardware, sure. But not "modern", and not "necessities".
Backstabbing the developers.
To what do you refer? Apple has introduced a number of technologies that it later found it didn't have the resources to support. I'm thinking OpenDoc here; it never quite worked right, but they left it in the system for a release or two, and then made it an optional install. Is that backstabbing?
To answer your question, folks use Macintosh because it's the right tool for their jobs.
Because, while the majority of people who read slashdot are techs, a computer is a tool to get things done. A good tool accomplishes something in the shortest, most efficient, most elegant way. Ignore the specifics of the arguments, individual features etc.. what it comes down to is my parents completely and totaly know what's going on with a Mac, with a PC, I end up getting a phone call. That and they are the only computers that might conceviably be called "sexy". -- yes, I have an imac, it sits on top of the e450 ;)
-- Don't overthrow the government, just think about it.
but seriously, i started on a mac in school and then used windows 9x and only recently have i returned to the mac, and it was a very easy return. Thanks to Apple i hate Microsoft Works with a passion (an oxymoron if ever there was one), and i deride it as possibly the shittiest program i have ever had the misfortune to use. Clarisworks is/was a great program particularly the graphics package from 6 years ago is still better than anything that comes with MSoffice. They have had a text to speech program for years, a great way to annoy your teacher.
Dont underestimate the importance of ease of use, Microsoft spends a fortune on it and the Mac is way easier to use. There are more people who dont understand computers than there are who do, if you make the learning curve to steep then they will balk, and give up completely. We dont really want that do we?
Besides Apple is not Microsoft, and that's gotta count for something. ;)
I was at a talk by an Apple exec, and he talked about the wonderful GUI innovations made by Apple i was on the verge of shouting Xerox. Microsoft and Apple have spent decades refining Xerox PARC research from decades ago, and finally Apple is turning to BSD (one small step back, one big step forward IMAO)
I do find the hardware annoying, there first thing you should do is get rid of the "ufo" single button mouse. As someone who scanvenges parts from older machines and messes about a bit with the insides its annoying, but i suppose that is what PPC linux is for, and Mac users allegedly get a longer lifespan out of their hardware than windows users.
I am seriously considering buying a Mac especially since OSX with its BSD foundation should let me take a crowbar to the OS, and get more control. But for now i cant quite kick the MS habit, Linux has steep learning curve (your not going to win over any mac fans if you dont provide a point and click alternative, i dont care how stupid/lazy you may think i am but CLI is not for everyone, although i do appreciate the choice), and BeOS is as close as i get to a Mac on x86 hardware for now.
Ok this editor is not being nice to me, so let's try Plain old text, ok?
http://normad.webhostme.com/jihad.asp
Why should MOSR be held accountable for someone else breaking an NDA? Shouldn't Apple have to prove that an NDA was violated? Either way, once the info is out, it's out. Maybe Apple can sue the person who broke the NDA, but that should be the extent of their legal rights.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
---
So instead of Apple losing money, many Mac Cloners went out of business? One of them, Power Computing, got bought out by Apple after the clone licenses got revoked. If it was Microsoft, that would be anti-competitive behavior.
---
The difference is, Apple doesn't have 90% of the desktop OS market. They have less than 10%, and at the time it was far less than it is even now.
Cloners developed something with a strong dependency on Apple-supplied software, hardware, and R&D. They signed a limited contract to make Mac clones using these resources, which ran out. Apple opted out of renewing. That's it.
Now, you can shout 'monopoly!' over and over as much as you'd like, but the fact remains that Apple can't be a monopoly when there are so many alternative segments within the same market for them to explore. Yeah, Apple is a monopoly in Apple-supplied operating systems and hardware, but that's kind of obvious for any company isn't it?
The point is, Mac cloners could have changed platforms and licensed Windows and still have a chance to survive. A Wintel cloner is pretty much stuck with their platform, or they're going to get screwed in the market.
They have property that they protect, perhaps at the detriment/bankruptcy of competitors. But that alone does not make a monopoly.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
Microsoft doesn't have USB support in WinNT SP 4 that this March-2000 Dell OptiPlex GX1 runs. So what exactly do you mean by "support"?
I don't know where to start, so I'll just rant:
...
Let's start with Apple and MOSR -- you can find more interesting rumors by sitting in coffee shops in Cupertino and SF. Because that's where the Apple guys are sitting.
But, like, fat lot of good it'd do you. Fact is, Apple's teams don't know what the fuck they're working on (read Scully's 500 days, people!). The iBook guys thought it'd weigh in under 4 lbs... or at least some of them did; others thought it had a touch screen;
Not even Apple's managers know what Apple is going to produce. Again, go read Scully.
And then the lawyers: they send out the cease&desists to anyone who gets attention, 'cause, well, they don't have a clue what Apple is working on, but they wanna get paid, and have to find SOMEONE to send cease&desists to.
And MOSR again: well, like being "Mac-centered" means caving in to Apple. Anyway, they're just following their own interest, and this is a good publicity stunt op -- if they told Apple's lawyers to bugger off, they'd bugger off since they don't have a case, but there'd be no story...
And that's view today from Saw Mill Road...
I for one don't know if these rumors are true or not. But what I do know is that Ryan Meader, webmaster of MacOSRumors has been known not only to make up his "stories," but has, in the past, faked such requests from Apple, in order to drum up hits and support his claims.
Editors: We went over this last time a story pointing to MOSR was posted. MOSR is not trustworthy, and I'm surprised Slashdot would rather slap up such a story for little more than kicks.
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
My point exactly. Meader is full of it.
Since the Mac techs aren't busy trying to install a .dll that prevents the machine from booting properly or arguing over which distro of *nix is best, yes they do have spare time. That's also why TCO is less on a Mac than any other system.
MacSlash: News for Mac Geeks
Like if Microsoft said "Windows 2000 will only run on Compaq machines because they partner with us to develop it." and then Microsoft buys out Dell because they can't pre-load the latest Windows and are going out of business.
Also to avoid bleeding money the Newton, Pippin, Apple Printers, Apple scanners, Apple digital cameras, etc got the axe. Face, it, to become profitable Apple had to cut out a lot of things that didn't generate enough money or that cost money. Like tech support for older Macs, etc.
Away like Microsoft, the Apple customers get abused but keep coming back for more. Amazing!
OK. I had my first experience with a Mac 2 yr. ago. Coming from a Microsoft world it seemed incomprehensible that it would take me 20 minutes to figure out how to eject a floppy or even longer to change my wallpaper. I don't find the OS intuitive at all and feel it's restrictive to the point of being useless. Most people that "love" Mac have grown up with it (why I don't know). So far, I find Linux much easier to get around.
Dirty Pirate Hooker
I really don't understand why many people love Apple. ... But the list of negatives is very, very long: inability to update their software with modern necessities (PMT, VM that's not broken, etc). Backstabbing the developers. Backstabbing the clone manufacturers. Incredible arrogance. Price gouging ... Look-and-feel lawsuits. Closed hardware. Closed software. Closed minds.
Clue me in. Why does Apple get all this loyalty? The products are good in a lot of ways, but they're not that good (be honest!). Is it the home of people who just like to be different from the mainstream, and that's the attraction?
I understand your concerns, but I think the confusion lies in the fact that you seem to be forming most of your opinion of Apple based on political/industry actions rather than what the end result is for the person who uses the products.
The basic issue is that Windows and Linux are basically computer-centric operating systems. You are forced to adapt to the computer. The reason Apple has built such loyalty over the years is that it realizes that most computer users are human beings. They like to accomplish tasks quickly, and then move on. 85% of the world's population doesn't care what a kernel is or why one might want to upgrade it. This is particularly true for artists, who want to focus on the art, not the technology. So many people have told me that they like the Mac because it doesn't get in the way of the creative process. This is absolutely crucial to the concept of why Apple is popular with normal people, and creative types. And then there are those that are technically brilliant, but still think computers should be easy and fun to use. These people often become Mac developers.
Additionally, being primarily visual creatures, humans appreciate asethically pleasing elements, such as a well-polished, attractive user interface, and creative approaches to industrial design. This is, of course, more attractive to designers and such. These people don't want to become the next ESR. They just want to accomplish tasks, and possibly play some games. The vast majority of computer owners' lives do not revolve around their computers. There's only a very small segment of the world that cares what database a site is running.
And I know the slashdot masses reject such ideas as blasphemy or just flat out "wrong," which is extremely frustrating. Slashdot was, at some point, a forum for alternative points of ideas to be appreciated. Yet there are still people roaming these forums that truely believe that a person doesn't "deserve" a computer unless they can use text configuration files or write their own code.
Also, as one last note -- the only PowerBook line that ever had signficant problems was the 5300, and that was more than 3 years ago. Aside from that, Apple customers have experienced considerably less hardware issues than the average person with a wintel laptop.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
P'raps you're forgetting the Apple II compatibility cards that Apple made for the Mac LC series?
That for coexistance, since they were both marketed at the educational market. They (Apple) knew the Apple II was on it's way out, but schools weren't biting on the LC because their software wouldn't work on the newer machines, so apple fashioned up a card for them.
Bullhonkies. The slowest PowerPC machine (I own one) ran 68K code in emulation about as fast as the next-to-top-of-the-line machine that it replaced. PowerMac 6100 (60 MHz PPC 601) ran 68K code about as fast as the Quadra 610, a 25 MHz 68040. The only folks who would have found a slowdown were those who upgraded 6 month old machines like a Quadra 840/AV (33 MHz 68040) to the PowerPCs.
Nope. If you looked at the old Speedometer results, the first time a PowerPC based machine eclipsed the speed of the 840AV (which incedentally was 40 MHz, not 33), was with the arrival of the 8500/120 and 9500/120 - 132. Prior to that, the 840 AV was the speed champ when running 68k applications. The 6100 could soundly beat a IIfx, but even a Quadra 605 beat it when running, again, 68k apps. I remember switching back and forth from 6100 to 650 in those days....
Sigh. More half-truths. Apple did not write the 68K emulator to emulate the floating-point hardware, that is true. Apple's programmer guidelines were to use SANE (Standard Apple Numeric Environment) calls -- which were PowerPC native the first time out. So well-written, floating-point intensive 68K software got a big performance boost when running on PowerPC.
Tons of Adobe Photoshop plug-ins where written to access the FPU directly, and hence crashed the computer. Infini-D and Strata Studio Pro did too... Illustrator and Freehand also had some problem with a few of their standard plug ins. And there was a non-native version of dimensions that didn't need an FPU which ran remarkably slower than the same version of the program that did use the FPU when on 040's... The Power Mac's could only run the hobbled version of that, too...
That's my version of the history that i experienced... You may have fared better... I was just trying to say that Apple's undertaken much larger transitions in the past than dropping SCSI and serial ports... You might groan for a little while, but once everyone catches up, every transition that I can think that they've done has paid off big time.
Sure, it's a First Amendment issue. It's also a copyright issue (the Adcritic bit) and a trade secret issue (the MOSR bit).
Now, Copyright is expressly in the constitution, and the First Amendment was a later addition. Which has precedence? (Trick question)
Power Computing was looking to license BeOS as an alternative to MacOS before Apple bought them out. :(
The "DISCLOSURE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED" language at the end of the email makes the following point for those that are still missing it:
The concept that anyone can by law control what you or I do with information we acquire is at best ridiculous and at worst dangerous. The emperor has no clothes; but we have been conditioned to think they are there. Let's all wake up and stop being blinded by the lawyers and the folkes telling us how crazy it is not to have intellectual property laws.
Frankly if I or anyone discovers your secrets, that should be your problem, not one for the taxpayer funded courts.
The only jihad I see here seems to come from you. Why do you feel this need to come up with lengthy posts trying to discredit Mac users?
Perhaps if you can discredit the technology someone will listen to you. Not everyone feels that they are defined by the people who use their computing platform.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
"Love the Mac, Hate Apple" has long been the Macintosh afficionado's creedo. Apple is a short-sighted, mean spirited and callow corporation that's about as despicable as they come. Their current attitude towards independant resellers and users, especially in terms of tech support and making good on defective equipment, is nothing short of "slimy".
Unfortunately, Apple also has the habit of producing revolutionary products that are so much more than the sum of their creator. So, even tho they killed HyperCard, the Newton, OpenDoc and a myriad of other interesting and worthy technologies, even though their legal department is staffed by the Barney Fife brigade and can zero in the big guns on their own foot with uncanny accuracy, people are still loyal.
This is why there are so many Apple/Macintosh rumors sites: Mac users, especially professionals, cannot trust Apple to behave in a predictable, professional manner. Unfortunately, their products are of the caliber where we need to make an effort to get around the limitations of the company to use the best damn computing tools on the planet.
SoupIsGood Food
Hasn't anyone else gotten it that MOSR is full of shit? $10 says that he made up the story (or got bad info... on Ars, one guy said he sent in info he'd made up and it got posted... on THIS story. True, I can't necessarily believe him, but he's more trustworthy than MOSR) and then had "Apple Legal" (read, himself) "pull" the story.
Oh my god!! Look! It's says "Apple Legal" has smacked down on MOSR! Oh Joy of the Heavens! It's true! It's true! Sweet Merciful Crap! They got something right!
...bullshit is all...
The Happy Blues Man
The Happy Blues Man
I accept on blind faith that Cincinatti exists.
The Beige G3's have SCSI, the only ones that don't are the coloured computers.
Jihad Speak for more info.
First, I want to say that Linux/BSD are my primary platforms. I'm writing this from a Debian machine (admittedly under Netscape but Lynx, pine and trn are second nature to me). I have no difficulty in recompiling kernels or tweaking makefiles. This being said, I use Macs for a lot of graphics work. They are extremely easy to use and configure.
Case in point: when I needed to attach a Zip drive I only had to plug it in and start the computer and the drive was automatically detected. This may seem an idiotic reason to someone at home with mke2fs and vi'ing fstab, but is a godsend for those artsy, graphics types who are not technical.
Second, though Windows is catching up swiftly, the Mac has excellent color calibration and media features. Again, this seems a minor detail to gimp users, but it's a huge cost saver when it comes time to proofing ($2 a proof on a dye-sub can add up quickly). Linux does not yet have a comparable technology.
Also, multiple monitor support has been in Macs for a long time. It's difficult to appreciate this unless you're using it for production work, but it's one of those features that I cannot easily do without. Yes, Linux can support this with multiple X servers or Metro-X and Windows now support this with some tweaking but it is no where NEAR as supported as the Mac. Believe me, I've looked at the alternatives.
As for other reasons, I don't think innovation and swimming against the current should be so lightly dismissed. USB and Firewire are really cool technologies. Macs, though they didn't pioneer USB, were one of the first systems to deploy it widely. Wireless ethernet is also very cool and very useful. Again, though not the originators, Apple has made it affordable.
I hate to sound like I'm defending Apple, because they clearly have done some BAD THINGS. But you seem to be holding them to a higher standard than any other company.
The truth of it is that the cloners came up with lower prices than Apple for low end systems. Apple got jealous and wanted that 0.25% Mac Marketshare back so they killed off the cloning!
Microsoft had USB support in 1996 with Windows 95 OSR2, long before the iMac came out. Please be more accurate in your Jihadist rants, ok?
Jihad Speak for more info.
That's not true. I got underwear from Apple during WWDC 1997 when they were testing out Mac OS 8. I didn't get socks however.
just goes to show that all these companies, apple, sun, oracle just want to be like ms and rule the world, control your thoughts and make HUGE piles of money.
- tim -= remove "-spam-" from address before spamming =-
RM 101, I enjoyed your comments very much. Here's my take on the issue.
I try to practice what I preach. I work in the hi-tech industry and admire innovative companies. When I buy products, I try to pick the ones which demonstrate forward progress. I believe that Apple has helped push the industry forward, unlike another company (which shall remain nameless) which has proved more of an anchor.
Apple managed to migrate all their users from the Motorola 68000 to PowerPC architecture with minimal pain. That took balls. Apple is planning to migrate their OS from a custom kernal to a BSD based product. For a consumer oriented company, that definitely takes balls. Apple has firmly embraced SCSI, USB, FireWire, etc. Apple made ethernet standard equipment and is doing the same with wireless connectivity. Apple is shipping video editing software with some iMacs. Apple believes in leading edge industrial design. On both the hardware and software side, Apple has a consistent history of innovation which has helped stimulate the industry.
Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
---
Linux is only Free if your time is worth Nothing
Linux is only free if your time is of no value
Be in Your Senses
I've got a Blue&White G3. Like the design or not, they're really practical.
Every time I go to a LAN party, the others have a real pain carrying their pcs, and I just grab my Mac with its handles and walk on.
If you want to open it, no problem! It just opens on the side (and there are *no cables* running though the thing like in every pc. They're all as short as possible).
And talking about MacOS X... This posting is being written in OmniWeb on MacOS X DP4. I like the system very much and use it every time I'm able to. X-Windows is a joke compared to it. Something when you have too much time to waste.
written as AC because Slashdot doesn't let me in
I'm not a lawyer, but this is correct as I recall. Trade secrets are indeed secrets. If they are leaked, then the company has legal leverage against those who leaked the secrets because the company has an agreement with those persons. I don't think they have any legal leverage (except nuisance lawsuits) against those who promulgated the leak unless that those persons are covered by some agreement.
-dwd-
The 5300 is notorious for its LCD troubles. The wiring which runs through the hinge is quite prone to breaking. Also, while I don't recall what it was for, the 5300 had a recall. You could send your PB to Apple, they did something to it and added an "A" to your serial number to indicate the work had been done.
More recently I understand there has been some quality control problems but I don't think they were severe, just a bit of a bad spell.
Right, or the people who read MOSR. Or did you forget who the content was for?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Actually, it was more likely it would get an "Offtopic".
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
> School kids ok, but artists and musicians? Come
... even done IT work for both Mac and Windows) I can tell you that you are so far from right on this one that you are in another galaxy. What's "shoved down their throats" is Windows, usually in big companies with a small creative department, where they gleefully converted all of their computers to Windows PC's to get some marginal benefit from Microsoft, without a thought about whether that was the best thing for all of their workers. I hear time and again about places like this that are now on their next round of IT purchases and are getting Macs for the creative people again. Some of these places have lost valuable workers in the meantime who got tired of hammering in nails with a Windows screwdriver all day.
... the old protected memory/preemptive multitasking sucks on Macs debate. Well, Windows 98 sucks at that, too, and there aren't enough apps on Windows NT/2000 for musicians. The one major app you can run on NT (SP5 only) is a high-end version of Pro Tools, but they only support one (1) PC model, the $4000 IBM IntelliStation Pro, and they're missing features from the Mac version that runs on a Mac that's half that price. So, for the majority of audio work, your choice is Windows 98 or Mac OS 9, meaning you don't give a shit about PM/PM. It's irrelevant. Besides, Mac software is moving from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X over the next year, and gaining full PM/PM, while most Windows music software is moving from Windows 98 to Windows ME and gaining jack. And, Apple makes up for your one crash a week with a bunch of other stuff. Windows 98 doesn't give you anything for the three crashes a day that moving huge files around in a music app nets you.
> on, until artists understand and demand better
> functionality for art on computers then they will
> have to suffice with whatever is shoved down
> their throats.
As a professional artist and musician who uses a Mac (but has used Windows extensively as well
I would be surprised if you could find a music CD in your collection where a non-Mac computer was used in the production. Among musicians and artists who get to choose which computer to use, amateurs and hobbyists use Windows because they already had the PC and they want to also play games or whatever, professionals use Macs because they are overwhelmingly the right tool for the job. Macs have a laundry list of technologies that support artists and musicians, and these technologies simply don't exist anywhere else. I can guarantee you that Microsoft has not been building the ultimate creative environment over these past few years. Apple has been doing exactly that.
Maybe you're focusing solely on the plumbing
> Who do you respect more; the college kid who
> buys pre-made paints, canvases, and brushes,
> or the starving artist type who makes their own
> material, medium, and tools?
I respect the person who creates the best art, who captures their personal vision in their work most succinctly. It's cheaper to buy your tools than make them, unless you are living in the woods. Starving artists work part-time at art supply places for a few hours and make enough money to buy a canvas and paints, rather than spend a week making their own from scratch. What's important is that there be a wide variety of tools that are available for you to choose from, so that the combination you create is uniquely yours. Once again, on the Mac, there is a wider range of choices available in creative software. Things like MetaSynth and Pluggo just don't exist on Windows, and they are cheap, fantastically creative tools.
I'm not using the same exact system for my music that the next guy is just because I didn't compile anything. I built my own personal "tool", not by coding and compiling, but by choosing a variety of professional software applications and plug-ins and building a combination that's greater than the sum of its parts. I got a Mac, put in the Pro Tools Digi-001 PCI card, plugged in the USB MIDI interface, plugged keyboard and drumpad MIDI controllers into the MIDI interface, plugged in a FireWire RAID as an audio drive (two big Maxtor IDE drives in two cheap FireWire enclosures), installed OMS, Pro Tools, Cubase VST/24, MetaSynth, Xx, Peak, QuickTime Pro, and a whole whack of VST and DirectConnect software synthesizers and effects. It took only a few hours to do, and at the time I put my system together, only two of the above were available for Windows, and both had lesser features than the Mac versions. One was a full version number behind. Since then, the Digi-001 is also available for Windows 98 (not NT or 2000) but the software also lacks features that the Mac version has, and is crippled by music and audio features that are lacking in Windows.
(I take the FireWire RAID with gigabytes of audio data to a bigger studio to mix my work, and just hot-plug it right into their Mac and open up and start working in seconds. Another advantage.)
Maybe you could code and compile (from scratch) a 24 track, 24-bit professional-level project studio that includes software recreations of popular synthesizers and effects units for the few thousand dollars that mine cost, but I don't think so. Maybe in your perfect world, I finish music college and then re-enroll as a computer science major so that I can make my own software so that I can record a demo, but I don't think that's ideal, personally. I spend about an hour a week administering this machine, including installing updates and defragging disks. It's so easy a guitar player could probably do it. That's part of the appeal of a Mac as well.
Really, you have to have some faith that you don't know it all. The range of tasks that people use computers for is very large, and Windows and Linux can't answer every need. They are not the right tools for every job. Musicians are not using Macs because they are too stupid to know better, and they are not hobbled by the lack of certain features like PM/PM or a command line that you think are a requirement. Not only are we surviving just fine, thank-you very much, but artists-that-use-Macs are the happiest computer users in the world, tied for first with coders-who-use-Linux.
How much support do you think USB would have gotten if the iMac had serial ports? Hmm - we use serial, and get the entire macintosh market, or we use USB, and only get the iMacs. Everyone would have continued making serial peripherals, and the USB ports would be useless.
That was the only way to jumpstart the USB market - it was at a standstill before the iMac.
Check out DRM-free movies at http://www.bside.com
So what if the kernel is at least partially BSD. If I can't get a command-line, recompile the kernel, or even add some odd piece of hardware, Mac OS will get no more attention from me than it has since I left the printing industry.
Well, according to Apple and other sources, the kernel is 100% BSD+mach, you can recompile, you do get a command line (if you want it... optional install), etc. The IO driver structure (called IOKit) is open source, so you can add all the hardware you want, as long as you can write a driver for it :)
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
What is this, Mac Rumor Day at Slashdot?
----
Oh my god, Bear is driving! How can this be?
ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
But here's an interesting angle. MOSR publishes its stories under the OpenContent License (which goes by the odd acronym "OPL"). If anyone happened to snag a copy of the offending rumors before they were removed, then according to the terms of this license,
"You may copy and distribute exact replicas of the OpenContent (OC) as you receive it, in any medium,"
With all due respect, you need to own the rights to something to license it. If the information was illegal or in violation of an NDA, then any license this site put out is invalid.
That'd be like releasing VCD's of The Phantom Menace under the GPL
- My password is slashdot
A company should not be able to simply call a legal task force and bully someone into "not saying something about them". All things said Apple doesn't have anything to worry about from this sort of rumor mill - they should only attack truly false dogmatic claims that slander the company as a whole. I see where you are coming from, and you raise valid points. From my viewpoint I may want something to happen - but it doesn't mean that it has to. And nobody has the right to make someone do as they please with the fear of a legal dept. Regardless of how it is, this is not the way it is ment to be.
Due to the nature of trade secrecy law, the information presented herein is not a trade secret, as it has already been disseminated to a wide audience. Having received this information legally through proper means from a public web site (MacOSRumros) with whom I have no contractual non-disclosure arrangement, I an reposting it here.
Saturday, July 8
PowerMac "Cube" Update
As soon as our "Apple's 'Cube' Desktop Mac Confirmed" article (see
below) was published yesterday, the floodgates opened. Numerous
Apple employees, many of whom had never before spoken with us
directly, wrote in with a variety of things to say; surprisingly, not
one denied the rumor although a few hoped to see it silenced.
Dozens of readers wrote in with dirt on the machine, and hundreds
sent in feedback that ranges from speculative to skeptical to
incredulous. To put it mildly, the response has been overwhelming.
Without further ado, the latest details culled from the past day's
reports:
Several sources with long and distinguished track records now
concur that this design is indeed the planned enclosure for
"Mystic," the multiprocessor PowerMac G4 based on the
UMA-2 motherboard chipset. The unconfirmed codename for
the Cube enclosure is "Rubicon."
Accurate measurements of the exact size of the Cube are
still not available. However, thanks to a much clearer
side-by-side comparison of the Cube and an iMac, a
reasonable estimate would be 12 inches to a side -- slightly
smaller than the front face of an iMac with its Elevator
down.
Although easy to overlook on first glance, the "front" side
does contain a standard DVD-ROM drive. The outer door is a
tremendous improvement over the hackish solution used in
the last two generations of translucent Minitower
PowerMacs; instead of swinging down and out of the way on a
hinge, it moves directly in and out as part of a one-piece
media tray.
The bottom of the Cube is rubberized, removing the need for
"feet" while keeping the machine firmly in place.
When opened via a small latch on the side, the Cube is lit
from within to allow easy viewing of the internals in low
light.
To allow for easy portage without disturbing the Cube's
serene lines, handles are stowed in unobtrusive slots on the
same side as the Ports pane.
Beyond the internal DVD drive, there are no provisions for
additional internal removable drives; Apple apparently plans
to rely on the external USB and Firewire busses for these.
Unfortunately, Apple has requested that the original Cube article
(see below) be pulled by Monday -- likely to be followed shortly by
a similar request for this article. Not at all coincidentally, this
marks the first time ever in Rumors' five-year history that Apple
has made such a request based not on any evidence of broken NDAs
or infringed copyrights, but merely on the fact that these are
Apple's trade secrets and because of the intense veil of secrecy,
that NDAs were probably broken. Despite the fact that the two
direct sources of the original article were not in any way under
relevant NDAs -- and it has always been our practice to
discourage those under NDA or at risk of personal harm from
disclosing information -- Rumors' policy has always been amiable
compliance with these requests. This case is no different.
Although Apple Legal's letter contains a non-reproduction
statement and can't be printed here, it states that the issue at hand
is disclosure of trade secrets and suspected violation of NDAs. Does
this not directly confirm that there is at least some truth behind
the rumor? Given that, what is it that makes it worth Apple's while
to go ahead regardless, when the silent treatment has been so
successful in obscuring similar rumors in the past?
Although it may be difficult to deliver proper updates to this story
with legal threats flying, we will endeavour to bring them to you
wherever and whenever possible.
What's your opinion? Where does the middle ground between the
interests of the community and the interests of Apple lie? Is there a
middle ground? Let us know what you think!
Dealprovider.com: - $99 Palm IIIe promotion - Sign up for $99 and receive a
Palm IIIe FREE!!!
(No Strings, No Tax, No Shipping!)
Friday, July 7
Carracho Client PR5.4 PPC adds features to the high-performance Hotline BBS alternative.
PrefsOverload 1.0b1 is a powerful System Preferences manager.
Apple's "Cube" desktop Mac confirmed
After months of obscure reports and unreliable sources, two
contacts with extremely solid track records have reported
sightings of one of Apple's best-kept secrets -- its next-generation
Desktop enclosure and the changes to its product line that will
come with it.
While one of these new reports claims intently that the machine --
a near-perfect cube about 2/3 the size of a modern-day iMac --
will be a complete replacement for today's iMac line-up, the other
is not so sure....and the remaining body of evidence is none too clear
on whether this enclosure will be applied to the PowerMac or iMac
spaces exclusively, or in both.
Setting that important detail aside for the moment, there is much
exciting news about this new Cube that is of much greater
reliability:
[UPDATED] Approximately 14 inches to a side.
Clear polycarbonate plastics similar to today's Macs offer
views of the machine's innards, while opaque colored panels
sport a large Apple logo and provide a sleek look.
Although multiprocessor G4 applications would likely require
more powerful cooling, prototypes are fanless. Cooling is
provided by numerous large vents on the top and bottom of
the enclosure, allowing heat to naturally rise upward and out
of the cube.
All six faces of the cube are featureless, aside from the power
cable and an almost-invisible ports panel on the "back,"
which handles USB, Firewire, Audio I/O, Ethernet, and the
built-in Modem's phone jack.
A small tab on one of the "sides" allows for that side to be
opened for access to the machine's internals.
The entire package, including motherboard and all
components, weighs approximately ten pounds.
There are significant signs that this may be the long-rumored
monitorless iMac; for example, the prototype sources have
reported on does not appear to have external ports to accept PCI
expansion cards. However, there does appear to be enough internal
room for them if the external ports were added.
A related but as yet unconfirmed rumor states that Apple is moving
away from including PCI slots by default in PowerMacs, instead
wiring the Universal Motherboard Architecture's PCI controller to
a small connector which would support an external PCI enclosure
with any number of slots. Note that this would be much less
expensive than a full-blown PCI Expansion Chassis, which connects
a single internal PCI slot to any number of add-on slots via a
costly PCI bridge chip and associated hardware. This scheme would
merely move PCI expansion outside the default PowerMac
enclosure to allow for more innovative small-footprint designs as
well as support more than three PCI slots for those who need them.
For now, all but the details of the Cube enclosure itself are to be
considered highly speculative. We will be watching developments in
this story very closely -- if you believe you may be able to clarify
matters, drop us a line!
Jihad Speak for more info.
Aside from the Apple II/III to the Macintosh change there has been nothing as extreme from the beige to the see through change in hardware compatibility.
There was no transition from the Apple II to the Macintosh. They were two completely distinct product lines that coexisted for quite a long time together.
Remember the 68040 to PowerPC changeover? A LOT of people upgraded their machines only to find their non-native software running much slower than it had previously. And applications that needed access to the floating point unit wouldn't run at all. That's a pretty drastic change. If you've forgotten about that, then that means that in the end they managed the transition very smoothly.
NuBus to PCI was also pretty painful for the video editting crowd. There they were screwed for a while, craving faster machines but being stuck with the much slower ones simply because the cards they needed were't available in PCI form factors, or they were but required a huge investment all over again. But most everyone I talked to back then was eager to see PCI versions of their cards and took everything in stride. These were people with $20,000+ Avid systems to $2000 Radius Video Vision or Targa 2000 cards...
They managed fine, but your ISDN and scanner prevent you from buying their machines...
Yeah, okay, but that was when Amelio was CEO... he never had any style.... although he did have enough taste to wear boxers...
2 1337 4 u!
God intended fruit to be fruity-colored. NOT Computers... and NOT cars.
However, there is still a BunnyLovingTreeHuggingArtsyFartsyLunaticFringe (TM) that's willing to overlook these serious crimes against human sensibility and buys these silly contraptions that offer little in terms of functionality.
They probably think owning one makes them different and cool (like the other half a million idiots that do so).
Mmmm.. Donuts
Thing is...if apple lawyers don't send these types of letters and threaten lawsuits, then trade secret protection of the design of their forthcoming machine is forfeited under the law. That's why they go through the motions. It's not really a big deal...since they DO own the damn proprietary and confidential design of thier as-yet-unrealeased product! 'Sup with all the hostility?
Once again.
I follow both of these sites, and I see the same things happen again and again. AppleInsider occasionally is spot-on with a juicy one, and MacOSRumors sometimes just doesn't say anything, but they talk alot about holding-back. But Apple rarely tells AppleInsider to pull content (like that goofy graphic of the new mouse) - although they do seem to raise Adobe's ire quite regularly.
MacOSRumors must have touched a nerve to get their story pulled. That's all I'm saying. And when it comes to actual stories that could potentially harm the "mother ship", MacOSRumors usually keeps their mouth shut. Unlike AppleInsider, who are usually harmful when they catch it right, and when they're wrong, they're wrong big-time.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Sure and you could send out a cancel request on the article. The nntp-servers respecting that, OTOH...
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
-Jaron Lanier
Two words: Sonic Foundry.
Check out Vegas. It's a ProTools killer if ever I saw one. And there isn't anything like ACID anywhere, not for Mac, not for Linux, not even for Windows.
If I could run Sonic Foundry stuff on MacOS I would, but they are 100% Windows there. And all of their stuff is NT4/W2K savvy.
I am a Mac fan. I hate to say this, being a Mac fan, but the Foundry has kicked just about every Mac sound app's ass. Big time.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
You pay Apple for the "FireWire" name, which they actively promote. Or you can call it IEEE 1394 if you want to. Or pay Sony and call it i.Link. The important thing is that it's a standard, not controlled by one company. Unlike USB 2.0.
Oh, no. They released the iMac and then they released an updated version later (revision b). The bastards! The point is, a person can just go to the store and get an iMac and always get the newest one. Easy.
Or you can speculate about vaguely remembered rumors of recalls. Up to you. :)
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Apple is supporting Linux as a token nudge to hide the fact that they f*cked their users out of being able to run BeOS on G3 and higher systems.
The MacOS is closed in the same way that Windows is closed (IE, "special" people get access to more source than non-"special" people, but they of course share it around in-house. This will continue after any breakup.
The fact that Apple's machines sold poorly compared to clones (IE, up until the end, clones were gaining share and true-blue (Ironic considering that in this context that's a pro-IBM phrase) Apple systems were losing it) only reminds us that you didn't get anything extra by buying a machine straight from Apple; You got a more proprietary machine at a higher price, and it was not necessarily higher quality -- In many cases (literally) the quality is actually lower than going ATX.
Apple is dedicated to the idea that form is more important than function, even if Apple is straining to provide function as well. For example, the latest cases with the four handles are easy to move around (four handles, yay) but they're far more about appearance. Too bad they scratch so pathetically easy. The OS has always been this pretty GUI, but remember that before color quickdraw, there was no video acceleration whatsoever. How do you justify a graphics-only OS with no acceleration?
Most of the mistakes they made were obvious. They would have been solved with better QA (Like most of Microsoft's problems, of course.) IBM systems rarely had such problems, though the damn ESDI drives in IBM PS/2 systems which occurred during the dark days of apple sure did fail frequently -- But I digress.
Is that a question? Naturally, the idea is to leapfrog windows' level of technology (Whether that is actually going to occur remains to be seen. I'll wait until release to pass judgement.) Unfortunately, it comes about five years too late, give or take a few months. Windows 95, as lame as it is/was, made MacOS look pretty pathetic. (Then again, so does AmigaDOS.) Windows NT 3.51 makes MacOS 8 look like a yugo on the autobahn. MacOS 9 only looks like a Ford Escort, and I'm not talking the Cosworth here.
Meanwhile, MacOS7 looked like a goddamn Skoda (Why do Skodas have heated rear windows? To keep your hands warm while you push them up hills) in comparison to Win95. It was a horribly buggy hack which was a desperate bandaid on lousy technology, as evinced by how many minor version and teeny version releases to MacOS7 there were.
I absolutely do. You don't GET anything special for the price except a pretty case. The altivec stuff in the G4 is cool, but when IBM comes out with non-apple ATX G4 boards, I think you're going to see linuxppc running predominantly on systems that are NOT Apples. I wait erectly for the day when IBM/Moto bring out a 500mhz copper G4 on an ATX board that I can mailorder and stick into my servers.
To sum up: Apple did some great stuff for us right around System 6. They were definitely at least a year ahead of the competition then. Windows prior to Win95 was just one bad nightmare of incompatibilities, failing drivers, and problems with 640k barriers, which wasn't helped by the fact that you had these stupid bus standards like EISA, MCA and VLB getting in your way. Now that you can actually go and buy a motherboard with no ISA bus (Like my Asus K7M) things are very much improved. Apple does not today offer me anything that I cannot get from a homebuilt PC clone with an athlon chip, and Windows 2000. When OSX comes out they will have the POSIX.2 environment that windows does not offer out of the box (Only as an addon) and then maybe I will slightly envy the Apple users.
Just not today.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Just thought I'd point out that not only are those pictures bogus (as others have said), but there's no such thing as a "G5", nor will there be for a while.
Where the hell does Apple get their counsel? Sounds like MSFT: a tech company hiring non-tech competent attorneys who are only motivated by greed rather than the promises of technology. JMO, trade dress would be a better argument. Again, probably for this to be a trade secret, Apple would have to show reasonable precautions. If it was pretty easy to learn of these rumors, Apple shouldn't have a chance, again JMO. But, this is the way the system works; Even if Apple is wrong -- are you now going to pay a lawyer to fight Apple in court? These companies need to hire attorneys who really know 1) the law and 2) tech.
Drudge Report drudges up Apple/Disney/Pixar nonsense once again Yeah. That about covers it.
What is the robbing of a bank, compared to the founding of a bank? -- Bertolt Brecht
that is frequently the case.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
First Apple kills off the clone manufacturers, stranding me with a great Power Computing PowerCenter Pro that I hope never dies. Now my only Mac choice if my well-constructed clone goes belly-up is to buy one of those cheesy, plastic, Fisher Price looking Apple computers. That's smart. You allow people to make clones, then you continue to make your own hardware to compete with them. Then when you're lossing your ass because the clone people are making machines 10x better than yours, you kill the whole situation. BRILLIANT! You guys are fucking geniuses!
Then you take the Newton people, spin them off, and before they can continue to make something even better than the great MessagePad 2000, you reel them back in and kill them off too! Now I'm stuck with a MessagePad 2000 with no where to move up to. "Oh no, a good idea! It must be stopped!"
I don't own a TV, so the only place that I am going to get to see Apple's ads are at Adcritic.com. Hello?! That's free advertising. You don't have to pay to run it on TV. People will click on your ads and view your sales pitch without you incurring any further expenses. I can hear the brainiac in marketing on this one: "What? People are showing our ads and we aren't having to pay for them to do so? That's just not right. They must be stopped. Stop them at once!"
Hey Apple. Why don't you graph this: y=(-x)^2+3. Put 1970s on the left side and Present day on the right. Look familiar? It should. See where you are going? Yep, that line keeps going on down.
What a bunch of fucking geniuses.
</RANT>
--
FattMattP (Mac user, budding Linux convert)
Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
Not to mention, that Ryan Meador and his pathetic site have a LONG history of being wrong on almost everything they mention. It's pathetic how much crap Ryan passes through that web site.
-*-*-*-*-
Anarchy rulez!
Support MacSlash: Slashdot for the Mac!
It's been a well-known fact in the Mac Rumors circles, that ever since Steve Jobs came back, that not only was misinformation being purposely leaked by Apple, it was leaked for two reasons: to fuck with the rumors sites, and to identify leaks. (which version of the misinfo got out? who did we give that to?)
Fortunately, most of the non-essential leakers, internally, have been gotten rid of. From what I understand now, they can't internally give out false info to anyone who needs to know the right info to do his or her job. That's all that's left. But beta testers, etc. are still fertile ground for this.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Burris
I'm sorry, but your legal analysis is what is ridiculous. Copyright is not at issue here. Trade secrets are at issue. Just because a NDA wasn't breached doesn't mean that the information is free game. If I break into Apple and look through their confidential files, I've misappropriated trade secrets. And MOSR doesn't get to cross-complain against Apple just because Apple sues. To get damages based on the mere fact that Apple sues, MOSR first has to win the lawsuit. Then it would have to bring a separate lawsuit, which would be difficult to win. And Apple hasn't sued anyone. They asked MOSR to pull a story. And there are lots of reasons for Apple to make such a request. As pointed out above, they have done so in the past in response to totally bogus stories. Frankly, there is a strong bias on /. against companies that assert their legal rights. There is nothing fundementally wrong with doing so. It may be unfair in particular situations, but anyone has the right to do so.
Well, the actual rumor itself, was kind of tasty. Apple is not worried about it's fans getting juicy tidbits, getting our saliva up over cool stuff. What Apple IS justifiably worried about, is that other manufacturers are going to steal their ideas and eat their lunch (likely that other manufacturers could take the idea to market much more quickly too).
The proof is all the iMac clones that came out over the last two years. This new idea is actually very, very cool, if it's real.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
This made me wonder if Apple doesn't "leak" some info just to throw off the rumor-hounds and to make product announcements more spectacular. Showmanship? You bet, but it helps sell computers.
MOSR is "known" for being inaccurate in many cases, but that is part of being in the "rumors" business. Lately MOSR has been more and more careful with readers explaining that rumors are rumors and no one should base any sort of decisions on them until (if) they become fact.
There are those who aren't fans of MOSR though.
BTW, MacSlash has been carrying this story since 7:22 this morning.
MacSlash: News for Mac Geeks
Aha! So Apple is trying to pull an Adobe Systems-style censor threat. The first line of defense for one of these is to reply to the email saying you refuse the validy of the email and and demand a certified letter of Apple's demand. By the time you get the paper either by messenger or fedex, the story has spread as much as possible. Anybody could compose an email posing as a lawyer, demanding article removal and threating legal action.
blessings,
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
iMacs are upgradable... on the latest revision, I think the RAM can be pushed as high as 512 MB.You can drop in a new hard drive, and the processor is a standard moto zif if I'm not mistaken. about the only thing that can't be easily upgraded is the video card which, admittedly, sucks.
If you want upgradability, buy a G4. Basic G4 towers start at $1599 and are quite expandable.
----
----
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft is a misnomer? Perhaps Macrosoft would be a better fit?
you receive a letter from a lawyer, it doesn't mean that you are in fact violating the law. That's for a court of law to decide. The letter informs Mr. Meader that he has disclosed trade secrets. Well, did he actually have access to them in the first place? Did he sign a non-disclosure agreement? If not, isn't he only repeating opinion of some source? And if that's the case, does any opinion that anyone has constitute someone else's trade secret?
Sue the lawyer hasn't made plain just what laws are being violated. Mr. Meader's lawyer should have her clarify just what it is he's doing wrong.
We don't have to roll over and die just because a lawyer tells us to. It's for a court of law to decide.
But at the end of the day we still have them by the balls. Why? They depend on us an our money for their very existence. Their ability to harrass and abuse the public begins and ends with their bottom line.
If a company is being a bastard, don't do business with it. Your dollars are votes, they vote for whether that company will continue to exist and be profitable.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
my point was that these companies are always on about how they're out to make everyones life better and that ms is just there to stifle all innovation.
that apple is no better, no worse than ms when it comes to ur: Mshing their pack to trained lawyers.
- tim -= remove "-spam-" from address before spamming =-
Yes he does, if the only alternative is to discredit its users. You know, those people who get work done day in and day out using the OS in question?
If you'll discard your 'anonymous coward' label, I'd be more than happy to have a serious debate on these issues (in particular, how your first two claims are completely false, and the last is subjective in that I've been 'reliably' running OS9 on Powerbook with few issues).
But really, I imagine it's much easier to practice 'hit and run' zealotry, saving you the burden of responding to my original complaint - that dissing a platform's entire userbase is about as low as you can get in the zealotry scale.
Jihad, indeed.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
yeah, well I can't use my OS 8.6-based machine to listen to MP3's while I work, because, frankly, the multi-tasking sucks. If I dial the internet, read a floppy, or launch a program (these are the three worst places that share almost no CPU at all), the music skips and chops.
I've been waiting for OS X since 1994. Soon? Please?
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Granting all of the above, this was still an amazing feat-- the 68k-to-PPC transition is the only time that a major consumer architecture transitioned to new processor without many consumers even noticing.
The 840 was discontinued in '94. The 9500 was introduced in '95. That means that the period of stagnation was only a year. And by the end of '96 almost all major apps had been re-written to be native, meaning that that 9500 was much faster a year after its introduction than the 840.
One year of performance stagnation is a small price to pay considering that it allowed Apple to abandon a creaking architecture and has allowed the Mac to surpass the competition with the G3. Now it's admittedly lagging behind again, but you can bet it would be much worse if we were still stuck the 68k chips.
I shudder to think what would happen if MS tried to pull the same trick.
...now if that ain't funny...
Why does this make Apple funny? MacOS Rumors has NO BASIS IN REALITY. In other words, don't believe a single word they post. They used to be good, but now they're MOSBS instead of MOSR.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
Apple has argued that the information published on the website was only available to people who had signed an NDA, and that therefore regardless of how MOSR got the rumor, it must have been in violation of an NDA. Apple isn't pursuing an action against MOSR per se, but against whichever person leaked the info to MOSR.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
I remember when the OS was renamed OS8, a lot of people assumed it was some black voodoo to kill off the cloners using their own contracts. Then I used OS8, and realized that it probably deserved the moniker (it was no Copland, sure, but it wasn't a 7.X release either).
Since then, Apple has often changed their numbering schemes during development to reflect where they felt it belonged - even without the need to renegotiate contracts with cloners.
Now, where I *will* agree with you is where you say the cloners (I'm specifically thinking of Power Computing here) were kicking Apple's ass. All things equal, PCC deserved to kick their ass in the market because (at the time) Apple was spewing forth some pretty shitty hardware. However, the cloners wouldn't be anything without the MacOS, and it was Apple's to take away.
I do disagree about the platform, unless you mean it's not a successful platform unless it features more than one vendor. While the average geek would love to piece together their own boxen - and this is what the clones promised - it doesn't matter a bit for the average consumer, graphic artist, web designer, or educational institution. For Apple's core audience, the Mac is quite a viable platform.
That said, I want cloning back. Even if I choose to buy Apple hardware, as long as cloners can expand the MacOS marketshare, everyone wins. Unfortunately that's not what was happening before...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
And that's exactly the point of why the Mac's still around... You can't quantify respect, or even usability, on a rigid scale of actions. When all the dust has settled, and the computer has been turned off* for the night, the Mac's advantages shine... I regularly use both Macs and Windows machines and Linux boxes and Novell warts and NT sludgepiles, and the simple fact is that the limitations of the Mac, such as they are, allow me to see past technical concerns and concentrate on what I'm actually doing. To go back to your analogy about artists, the Mac artist is* the one making their own canvas - not through open source software, or custom-configured hardware - but rather by not focusing on computer-related issues at all. The Mac lets you go from turning the box on to creating*... Something that Windows cannot claim, and something Linux doesn't even WANT to achieve. Some people say Macs are toys, and I smile and think: "what sparks my creativity more, colorful toys, or cheap electronics in 'professional' cases?"
http://www.shonenjump.com The world's most popular manga, now in English!
Here it is
Here they are in all their questionable glory. (Edited to raise signal-to-noise)
Saturday, July 8
PowerMac "Cube" Update
As soon as our "Apple's 'Cube' Desktop Mac Confirmed" article (see below) was published yesterday, [snip]
Without further ado, the latest details culled from the past day's reports:
Several sources with long and distinguished track records now concur that this design is indeed the planned enclosure for "Mystic," the multiprocessor PowerMac G4 based on the UMA-2 motherboard chipset. The unconfirmed codename for the Cube enclosure is "Rubicon." Accurate measurements of the exact size of the Cube are still not available. However, thanks to a much clearer side-by-side comparison of the Cube and an iMac, a reasonable estimate would be 12 inches to a side -- slightly smaller than the front face of an iMac with its Elevator down. Although easy to overlook on first glance, the "front" side does contain a standard DVD-ROM drive. The outer door is a tremendous improvement over the hackish solution used in the last two generations of translucent Minitower PowerMacs; instead of swinging down and out of the way on a hinge, it moves directly in and out as part of a one-piece media tray. The bottom of the Cube is rubberized, removing the need for "feet" while keeping the machine firmly in place. When opened via a small latch on the side, the Cube is lit from within to allow easy viewing of the internals in low light. To allow for easy portage without disturbing the Cube's serene lines, handles are stowed in unobtrusive slots on the same side as the Ports pane.
Beyond the internal DVD drive, there are no provisions for additional internal removable drives; Apple apparently plans to rely on the external USB and Firewire busses for these.
[Apple Legal threat snippage]
Friday, July 7
Apple's "Cube" desktop Mac confirmed
After months of obscure reports and unreliable sources, two contacts with extremely solid track records have reported sightings of one of Apple's best-kept secrets -- its next-generation Desktop enclosure and the changes to its product line that will come with it.
While one of these new reports claims intently that the machine -- a near-perfect cube about 2/3 the size of a modern-day iMac -- will be a complete replacement for today's iMac line-up, the other is not so sure....and the remaining body of evidence is none too clear on whether this enclosure will be applied to the PowerMac or iMac spaces exclusively, or in both.
Setting that important detail aside for the moment, there is much exciting news about this new Cube that is of much greater reliability:
[UPDATED] Approximately 14 inches to a side. Clear polycarbonate plastics similar to today's Macs offer views of the machine's innards, while opaque colored panels sport a large Apple logo and provide a sleek look. Although multiprocessor G4 applications would likely require more powerful cooling, prototypes are fanless. Cooling is provided by numerous large vents on the top and bottom of the enclosure, allowing heat to naturally rise upward and out of the cube. All six faces of the cube are featureless, aside from the power cable and an almost-invisible ports panel on the "back," which handles USB, Firewire, Audio I/O, Ethernet, and the built-in Modem's phone jack. A small tab on one of the "sides" allows for that side to be opened for access to the machine's internals. The entire package, including motherboard and all components, weighs approximately ten pounds.
There are significant signs that this may be the long-rumored monitorless iMac; for example, the prototype sources have reported on does not appear to have external ports to accept PCI expansion cards. However, there does appear to be enough internal room for them if the external ports were added.
A related but as yet unconfirmed rumor states that Apple is moving away from including PCI slots by default in PowerMacs, instead wiring the Universal Motherboard Architecture's PCI controller to a small connector which would support an external PCI enclosure with any number of slots. Note that this would be much less expensive than a full-blown PCI Expansion Chassis, which connects a single internal PCI slot to any number of add-on slots via a costly PCI bridge chip and associated hardware. This scheme would merely move PCI expansion outside the default PowerMac enclosure to allow for more innovative small-footprint designs as well as support more than three PCI slots for those who need them.
For now, all but the details of the Cube enclosure itself are to be considered highly speculative. We will be watching developments in
this story very closely -- if you believe you may be able to clarify matters, drop us a line!
Whew! There we have it.
Screed
[This message has been edited by sCreeD (edited 07-09-2000).]
Whew, there you have it. !screed
Never has one person said so many right and true things about apple in so few words.
You've really got to tell us where you buy your hammers cuz you hit ever nail square on the head and sank each on with one strike.
The issues you brought up are the very reason why I can't stand apple systems, let alone the people for whom they are a religion. I'm not fan of windows but at least I'm not dishonest with myself about how it works and where its strenghts and weaknesses lie. Windows is unstable and buggy, those are implementation issues. But when it comes to design, windows isn't bad at all. The Mac "OS" on the other hand is an utter pile of steaming turds. Even win9x, which thunks everything down to 16bit 286 protected-mode function calls, multitasks better than it does.
Back in '84 the MacOS was revolutionary. The problem is that apple has done a piss poor job of keeping up to date with current features of other desktop OS's. Pretty pictures do not make a modern OS. But of course to the mac freaks the OS is the one true operating system that is flawlessly perfect and anyone who doesn't see that is stupid. Well the good news is that we won't have to put up with it much longer. The fastest mac systems clock in at 500mhz and come with a three grand price tag. The fastest PC systems clock in at a gigahertz and come with a price tag of maybe half that. The powerpc may be a more efficient design, but its not 100% more efficient, and unlike the MacOS, windows and linux don't cripple the cpu.
Anyway, I'm done ranting for now.....
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Anyway Apple grew because the Jihadists made newsletters, web pages, spammed newsgroups and mailing lists saying how great Apple is. Then people believed them. No matter how bad or poorly Apple treats its customers, the Jihadists are there to whip them into shape. Getting no money from Apple, they are like singing Apple's praises. They also knock down anyone silly enough to promote a technology other than Apple's.
Apple also promised CHRP/POP support in MacOS 8.0 and Rhapsody. I see now that Rhapsody's replacement OSX does not have CHRP/POP support and MacOS 8.X and higher has limited support (no mouse or keyboard support, no video, etc.) so Apple never kept its promises. Until Apple bought out NeXT, they would never have made a true VM and PMT and all the other things that Copland promised. Only by going to Unix was Apple able to give the customers what they wanted.
Web sites such as The Apple Doomsday Clock talked about all the mistakes Apple made and why they just don't get it.
Face it, the iMac was nothing but what the Microsoft/Intel NetPC promised which was based on the Sun/Oracle/Netscape Network Computer. All Apple did was make it popular with translucent plastic and a case shape that resembles a woman's breast from behind the iMac case.
Jihad Speak for more info.
Why does Apple get all this loyalty? The products are good in a lot of ways, but they're not that good (be honest!). Is it the home of people who just like to be different from the mainstream, and that's the attraction?
Well, yes, from where I'm sitting (a dual boot mac/linuxppc box), I see pc hardware has lots of value, (and perhaps some pitfalls for the newbie nurse walking into her local high street cheapo 'home pc' shop),
but windows really gets on my tits. I can't stand it. Ever since the day I discovered I could nuke one app by installing another, I just lost all ability to stomach it (yes, yes, mac has bastard extensions, but two apps rarely install 'the same one')
Then there's the design factor... press a button on the colorsync monitor and the relevant control panel pops up, that kind of thing. Keyboards you can plug into the monitor. (ok, this is before USB came out, but you get the idea). A visually sedate and appealling widget set also helps, although this is a taste issue.
Lastly, my favourite and critically acclaimed 3d modeller, form.Z started out on the mac (has since been ported to windows), and was basically my reason for getting a mac. But really, there are so many issues involved, apart from just 'brain dead printer models', like investment in apps, not too much bizarre behaviour, the promise of upcoming MOSX, etc. that changing or choosing a platform is always a compromise. People know they arn't going to get the perfect everything, so they balance it out and put up with the deficiencies. Why do you think windows has been such a survivor?
Also, I've never needed to re-install the OS. :-P
Isn't this about an NDA? If I had some brilliant idea--say, to implement auto-canceling switches in turn-signal activation controls--and I hired some mechanic to design a prototype, I might reasonably have him sign an NDA.
If, later, the Edsel Rumors Circular published an article alleging that "a certain car company is currently working on a self-canceling turn signal", I expect I could contact ERC and say to them "look, that information was secret, and the only people who knew about it were bound by law and mutual consent to keep it secret, so you really shouldn't have gotten hold of it. We'd like you to please cancel circulation of the article."
And if ERC was a supporter of a "certain car company", they'd probably do it out of regard for me (as the owner|manager|duly-appointed legal counsel of said company).
Not everything is necessarily a free-speech issue. Nor is Apple building an Edsel with self-canceling turn signals. That's just a rumor.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
I'm a little unclear on why some people seem to think that if information exists anywhere in the world, it should immediately and infinitely be the property of all citizens of the internet. Apple is working on various prototypes for next generation case designs. Where is it written that everybody who has a web browser has the right to get information on these prototypes?
Specifically, why is it that we are so concerned about individual privacy concerns, but nobody cares about the privacy concerns of organizations? Why is it that Slashdot policitcal correctness sates that Bob has a right to privacy, but not Bob's company?
I can see how the people have a right information about, say, their government, as it does ultimately belong to them. But Apple's not a government. Sure, there are plenty of people with Apple stock, and those people do deserve to know what's going on, and vote on various directions of the company, but you can't give secret information to that group of people without giving it to everyone.
Additionally, let us not forget that these rumor sites sell banner ads. That is, in some cases (probably not all), rumors are posted at least in part for personal gain, at Apple's expense. Think what you will of highly-valued companies (such as the one that owns Slashdot), but the individuals that work at Apple, such as the industrial designers, are passionate, driven people. They deserve some credit. There are few things more frustrating for an artist than a work being shown before it is finished.
I would also point out that Apple frequently gets more attention for their products if they are unexpected. There's nothing unusual or devious about this. There's a natural human appreciation for the elements of surprise.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
USB would not have succeeded as it has if the iMac had had other peripheral interfaces. Apple did the right thing here. However, the iMac is primarily targeted at people who don't already have peripherals and therefore don't need backwards compatibility.
In contrast, PowerMac G3 and G4 systems are supposed to be upgrades from older PowerMacs. To be perfectly honest, even if I'd had the money, I wouldn't have bought a G3, because the hardware compatibility sucked too badly. They've made some improvements with the G4, but I'm still not particularly happy. To be honest, I'd rather buy a used beige G3 system, with serial and ADB (and I'll add a SCSI card if I have to).
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
the stuff about the legal threat has been snipped
----------
Saturday, July 8
PowerMac "Cube" Update
As soon as our "Apple's 'Cube' Desktop Mac Confirmed" article (see below) was published yesterday, [snipped legal threat info]
Without further ado, the latest details culled from the past day's reports:
Several sources with long and distinguished track records now concur that this design is indeed the planned enclosure for "Mystic," the multiprocessor PowerMac G4 based on the UMA-2 motherboard chipset. The unconfirmed codename for the Cube enclosure is "Rubicon." Accurate measurements of the exact size of the Cube are still not available. However, thanks to a much clearer side-by-side comparison of the Cube and an iMac, a reasonable estimate would be 12 inches to a side -- slightly smaller than the front face of an iMac with its Elevator down. Although easy to overlook on first glance, the "front" side does contain a standard DVD-ROM drive. The outer door is a tremendous improvement over the hackish solution used in the last two generations of translucent Minitower PowerMacs; instead of swinging down and out of the way on a hinge, it moves directly in and out as part of a one-piece media tray. The bottom of the Cube is rubberized, removing the need for "feet" while keeping the machine firmly in place. When opened via a small latch on the side, the Cube is lit from within to allow easy viewing of the internals in low light. To allow for easy portage without disturbing the Cube's serene lines, handles are stowed in unobtrusive slots on the same side as the Ports pane. Beyond the internal DVD drive, there are no provisions for additional internal removable drives; Apple apparently plans to rely on the external USB and Firewire busses for these.
----------
g.
You complain that Apple puts form ahead of function, but then go on to over-look Apple's wonderfully designed (function) cases because they scratch (form) too easily. Based off of this, it seems that you find form more important that Apple.
I'm all about form follows function, and I love how Apple's G3 & G4 cases function well and have a beautiful form.
And, no, I do not own an Apple or any stock in the company.
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
Thank you thank you thank you! That also made my day! Hahahaha....
Nebulo!
Apple did help with development of USB, AFAIK. They were the ones that designed the USB icon/logo for what it's worth.
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
Thank you for an honest reply. It was refreshing to read something from a mac person which didn't include that familiar and annoying whiny tone so common to posts from mac people. You're rare in that you talk about why macs are good for YOU, as opposed to trying to tell the rest of us a bunch of BS reasons why macs would be better for us.
If only more people from all the computing camps were so reasonable, we might not have flamewars!
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Oh well, could be worse - I could be an Amiga user! Now they're really crazy! *duck*
You said it. What's most irritating about being an Amiga user is that everybody seems to think there's nothing to learn from the Amiga. So, we consistently have huge, inefficient software and hardware, or somewhat-well-designed, but horribly expensive systems, hitting the market. And if I complain, I'm either told I'm too old for the computer industry (I'm 17!), or the classic "The Amiga is dead, get a PC."
Macs are better than PCs with Windows. Linux is better than Windows on a PC. But I have yet to see a better hardware/software combination than the Amiga.
The point of this rant? Well, be glad you "*duck*"ed, I guess.
--------
"I already have all the latest software."
So are they going to go after the Drudge Report for their Pixar/Disney Apple Merger story? Does the fact that they haven't mentioned it lend validity to the Drudge Story? Does anyone Care, as it is the Drudge Report we're talking about here people..?
Whatever...
What the law does say, at least for music copyrights, and I'm assuming copyrights in general, is if you ABUSE the power of copyrights and the power associated with them, then you risk loosing your copyright. I can't remember where I saw the article, but it was a statement from the Napster defense lawyer, who, coincidently, is one of the prosicuters for the Microsoft case. Hmm.. a few paralells here too, huh?
--I assume full responsibility for my actions, except the ones that are someone else's fault.
From what I've seen, people who like Apple are those who started out with it. I personally started out with an XT, so my roots are firmly in the x86 arena. But, as for those who really love Macintoshes, from what I've seen, the loyalties come from the Operating System, and not the hardware (and thus, extra microsoft-bashing from the Mac community). Those are just my observations on the subject. FrO
> The products are good in a lot of ways, but
> they're not that good (be honest!).
They're THAT good. They really are. I asked the same questions you did until I got a Mac and figured it out. Apple does a pretty poor job of explaining what makes their machines good. They mostly go "isn't it cool?" and that's about it.
Many of the standard computer complaints just aren't there on the Mac. Many people who simply aren't geek enough to use other systems are very, very thankful that the Mac exists so that they can do some computing. Lots and lots of little features add up to a much more pleasant experience.
That's not exactly how it happened. The Contract, said that the licensees could use everything up to OS 8. OS 8, at the time, was Copeland. What eventually came out was OS 7.7 or something like that - renamed to OS 8. Steve didn't renew the contracts - so the cloners couldn't sell the new OS.
.
The cloners were certainly kicking Apple's ass on the price/performance front. Worse, they were beginning to dictate the direction engineering of the Mac platform would take. That was simply unacceptable to Apple, as was the fact that they didn't have enough cash left to close out the year. It was a brutal survival move. I would very much like to see the resurgance of cloning, because I still believe that Macs are way overpriced, and I'd like to see the Power PC platform be open, so people can buy components, and build their own systems, buy whatever OS they want (Be, Linux, Mac, NT PPC) and run it. Since the demise of the cloners, Be, and NT PPC have gone away. Mac won't, and Linux can't. But the future of the platform, and the only real decent challenge to the Intel hegemony, is gone, gone, gone. Sorry to say. Things were looking soooooo good a few years ago, IA-64 was beginning to look like a train wreck, DEC was kicking ass with the Alpha, and CHIRP was perpetually 6 months from market reality.
Now, I *do* want to buy one of these cool new block Macs, with an expansion chassis, multi CPU, OS X, etc. goodies! in perhaps a year when it hits the streets? But it would be a whole lot nicer if I could buy components, munge together a non-Intel tainted system, and run BeOS, or Linux, or Darwin, or OS X, whatever. .
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
my question is, if apple sued and MOSR won (not saying it did, but saying, if) then coulkdn't MOSR like countersiue for the court fees or something like that?
Two wrongs don't make a right, three lefts do!
The price of democracy apparently is not only eternal vigilance, it's also an overly litigous society. Rome was the same way. Guess we gotta deal.
Freedom of choice includes not paying an arm and a leg for a desktop system. I personally think it's a complete ripoff to spend $4000 on the top of the line Apple system. (but that's just me) That, and if you look at Mac gaming, you are limited by what Apple gives you. If you have a Rage 128 Pro in that G4 tower of yours, that's basically your only choice (3dfx is starting to change this, but they have been having problems as a company, so who knows what will happen). I like having the choice between a Geforce2 GTS, Voodoo5-5500, G400 Dualhead, ATi Rage 128 Pro or any of the video cards for PC's.
~ FrO
1. Long confusing story
2. Contact shareholders and paraphrase your mission statement
3. Post anonymously to slashdot
4. Repeat
The whole point is to enter the Cassandra Hall of Fame... Everyone knows whiners are bad leaders. Make everyone look and ACT like a whiner.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Sonic Foundry is the exception that proves the rule. They're the only ones making Mac musicians think about getting Virtual PC. Perhaps we'll see them do ports once OS X is up and running for audio.
That's simply not true.
When AppleInsider came on the scene, they ran a whole lot of material through their page attempting to discredit MOSR. Including some viscious personal attacks. It's like they had some kind of personal vendetta against MOSR. Naturally, the people who frequent AppleInsider are going to have an anti-MOSR viewpoint. From an editorial standpoint, AppleInsider HAS toned down their anti-MOSR rhetoric, but the vitriol remains in their "following" (or maybe some of it is incited by AI staff posing as visitors).
The fact is, AppleInsider is wrong more frequently than MOSR. When AppleInsider IS correct, there is also the ethical choice to be made to sit on a story, if it's going to harm Apple. MOSR makes that choice, time and time again. If you carefully follow their page, and read some of the things that they hint at, and much later reveal, or when Apple reveals them, you see that they had the info far in advance. Much of their information is also corroborated by other Rumors sites, like AppleRecon, which is really less of a rumors site, and more of an investor's reseach site. Sitting on a story is called responsibility. AppleInsider has never, as far as I remember, ever sat on a story. They blab everything. So while they might be a good source for the latest gossip, - I still occasionally come off of that site feeling dirty.
I think AppleInsider's comeuppance will happen within 6 months or so, when the new Apple mouse ships, and I'm 100% confident that it's going to look nothing like that ridiculous picture posted on AppleInsider. Hook. Line. Sinker.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
OK, so why is Apple threatening them with litigation? Do they, for some strange reason, despise their supporters? This doesn't seem like the brightest thing to do.
The reason rumor sites are bad for apple is because when the rumor site starts talking about new stuff that apple is going to release people start believing the rumors. I'm sure we've all been guilty of believing a false rumor.
Anyway, when the rumor turns out to be false people get disapointed and that makes Apple look bad.
He who knows not and knows he knows not is a wise man. He who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool.
> The Mac is still standing largely because of
> the business savvy of it's management
You don't realize how funny it is for you to accuse Apple of getting by on their business-savvy. Anyone who is at all familiar with Apple knows that this is not so. They do well when they ship good products, and not so well when they ship poor ones. Lately, they've been shipping good products, and OS X probably means that will continue for quite a while longer.
"Rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated . . . And will be prosecuted with a lead foot and a gleeful smile."
---
seumas.com
It's the new trend in business (especially high tech business), your customer is your enemy.
I don't see how Apple taking legal action against a rumor site is a demonstration of this theory. Apple's is primarily trying to keep information private from its competitors. Your theory only makes sense to me if you count the handful of people who run MOSR as the "users."
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Then the next Mac expo came and went, and it turned out that the rumor was all BS.
This is probably the same thing happening here. Apple has proven to be a master of misinformation and misdirection in order to make sure that their product announcements will be more suspense filled. It's all Barnum-like showmanship on the part of Steve Jobs. After the expo, the lawyer letters will be forgotten about again.
Of course, the fact that there is no real story here will not prevent Mac OS Rumors from playing themselves up as martyrs of the free press cause... anything to get a few more web hits.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Who do you respect more; the college kid who buys pre-made paints, canvases, and brushes, or the starving artist type who makes their own material, medium, and tools?
Hmmmm... The one with the bigger breasts ?
WARNING: This is intended to be humorous
Marriage is considered capital punishment for the theft of a goat in some third world countries...
Heh. Now Slashdot can frame a letter from Apple's lawyers on the wall right next to the one from Microsoft =)
Christopher A. Bohn
cb
Oooh! What does this button do!?
Cost for the CD version of the Public Beta [of MacOSX] is expected to be nominal -- no more than $25 US.
lol
-Superb0wl
-Superb0wl
It's not that I'm lazy....it's that I just don't care.
I sent a PowerBook 190 that had developed a split seam on the casing back to Apple five years after it was purchased and they replaced the whole outer housing and made it look like a brand new machine for absolutely no charge. Not even shipping.
They are continually in the top three in polls for service and support, along with Dell and IBM.
I guess that's lousy support, though.
For once, it looks like MOSR reported something correctly. Or (conspiracy theorists rejoice!) they pulled it to build up drama!
For the record, this isn't the first time they've pulled a story at apple's request.
just my blog and pix
"old" PowerMacs
- built-in SCSI (5MB/s), ADB, Mac-serial, Apple video
"new" PowerMacs
- built-in FireWire, USB, VGA (plus DVI and AirPort slot on G4)
- add SCSI (10MB/s) $50
- add Mac-serial $50
- ADB built-in on G3, add to G4 for $50
If you have old peripherals, get an adapter for them and extend their life indefinitely. Most of the people I know who moved from an old Mac to a new one needed to get only one of either a ADB, Mac-serial, or SCSI adapter for their new machine in order to use a current peripheral. Since then, most of them have replaced that peripheral (a SCSI scanner or external SCSI hard drive, usually) with a faster and cheaper USB or FireWire version that hot-plugs and uses a much smaller and cheaper cable with much longer cable lengths. They whined a little initially, too, but across the board, they're happy now that they essentially got FireWire and USB for the $50 extra they paid to get an adapter for an old port their new machine lacked.
These days, you can get an IDE-to-FireWire adapter for $80-$120 and turn any monster IDE hard drive into a hot-pluggable external FireWire drive, and feel free to add 20 of those to your stock Mac if you want to. You can choose any VGA display without using an adapter. You can select from hundreds of USB peripherals, instead of 10 or 20 ADB peripherals. You can plug any DV camcorder into any stock Mac (except the iBook) and you even get free DV editing software from Apple, too. All of this for the small one-time price ($50-$150) you paid to add support for any or all of the old ports that you personally required during the transitional few years.
That's a pretty smooth transition, and one the PC world is very, very jealous of. All the major PC vendors have "legacy-free" PC's now, but they're a minority of machines. Most PC's still include serial ports that aren't really fast enough for a 56k modem, even though they've had USB for five years. You have to install a $100 PCI card in most PC's just to get video out of a camcorder.
How many years from now do you think it would be okay for Apple to drop ports that move data at less than 1mbs? Those ports look foolish on a machine that comes with two hot-plug FireWire busses, two hot-plug USB busses, and AirPort and Ethernet.
Okay, let's fantasize.
Say this rumor is true.
The same machine basically, Pro, is also the same as an iMac. Only this one, you can choose your monitor. If you want, you can choose an expansion chassis, or two (hopefully, they interlock or stack well - physically).
Think of the Beowulf possibilities. Especially if these things can ship in 2, 4, or 8-way configurations. Run 'em headless, etc. If you are a Pro, but don't need expansion capabilities right off, you don't need the bulk and expense of the expansion chassis. Apple saves money by having a product line that scales very smoothly, yet utilizes more common components.
Frankly, this gets my 'nads pumping. I can see why Apple doesn't want this idea out in the public yet, because every cheezy PC manufacturer is going to try to beat them to market. They didn't get the chance with the iMac - and Apple sued their asses, but this concept is too good to pass up.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
From what I've read, FireWire (IEEE 1394) is an international standard, but companies must pay royalities to Apple to use it. It's no wonder everyone is pushing USB 2.0. Apple's arrogance continues to this day...yet people continue to defend them. I would think these commercials on a commercial criticism site is FAIR USE, but I guess Apple disagrees. It is ammusing though that back when the media were making the tombstone for Apple, Apple sent me an evangelism CD that had the 1984 commercial on it - they wanted it shown and distributed. Now they don't. How hypocritical. I was a betatester for MacOS 8 and 9, CyberDog, and a number of other products. But several years ago I gave up on Apple...and especially Steve Jobs. Killing the clones was the start, then they released about 20 different model macs all under "iMac" - rev a, rev b, etc. That's supposed to make it simplier for customers? And then they put a laptop keyboard and hockey puck mouse on it, and on the new macs. Apple lost my respect and money a long time ago, and I could care less what they do today.
//m
Go compare prices for a new computer.
Yep. Mac's cost more. it's a matter of economies of scale... More than that, Mercedes cost more than Fords which cost more than Yugos... which would you rather have?
Go look at the software available.
Hmmmm.... Quicken, Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, QuickTime, Dreamweaver, Premiere, Fireworks, Flash, Director...
It almost looks like the wish list of software that the Linux community would like to see ported to it. Windows may have 500 million times more programs available for it than any other platform, but so many of them are crap that it doesn't matter.
Go try and program in OS X.
That's kind of hard being that OS X isn't even completed yet. Yeah, you can program on Linux while it's being developed, but OS X is a MUCH larger undertaking Linux... They're simultateoulsy developing a kernel, file system, compatibiltiy layer, user interface... I'd rather wait til it's done.
Go try to run software with a single button mouse.
Why don't you? I do all day long and it's really not that hard. You point. You click. You type something. Oh, you want a pop up menu? Hold the control key and there it is. The only reason that *nix users feel like a mac's useless because it only has one mouse button is because their software is designed for three buttons. If the developers had specced out the programs to make use of only one mouse button, you really would not have lost that much, if anything.
There is NOTHING, REPEAT, NOTHING in copyright law that says that anyone must protect their copyright, or lose the right to enforce it. The can selectively enforce it all they want. The requirement you're talking about ONLY APPLIES TO TRADEMARKS. I see probably 10 people make this mistake in their responses to any copyright-related article on /., and just about every time they get corrected by someone. It's amazing that there are so many people out there with this misconception.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Ummm...so why didn't they? Let me tell you...because none of those alternatives you mentioned were at the time capable of supporting a company the size of PowerComputing. (which is unfortunate, but a reality...) Had these companies seen any way to stay viable by using alternative OSes, they would have done so. PowerComputing tried to sell Wintel boxes, for cryin' out loud! (They failed. Miserably.)
Apple did a horrible job of writing a license that could profit both the licensors and the licensees. They did cloning for the sake of cloning, as a quick-fix solution to their hemmhoraging market share. It was poorly implemented. Then they pulled the license agreement (as was their prerogative...had the cloners wanted more assurance of stability, they should have negotiated for a longer contract!) and went on to become, ohmigosh, PROFITABLE. Despite what we all wish was the case, companies exist to become and remain profitable, not to provide us with toys that we like on terms we dictate. Maybe in a different society with different values, things would shake out differently (duh) but in the meantime, castigating Apple because they *gasp* didn't want to let the cloners drive them out of business is foolish.
If memory serves, PowerComputing and the other cloners were offered a much higher-priced license for Apple's technology...they just didn't agree to the price. Had they signed while Gil Amelio was still CEO, they'd probably still be in business. However, they procrastinated and hedged until Jobs came along and killed the program. (for good reasons or ill, I don't know...but I can't argue that it wasn't effective!)
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
well...mostly true, but I do have this Mac LC with Apple IIe card sitting next to me...
"It is absurd to divide people into good or bad. People are either charming or tedious." --Oscar Wilde
The 1st amendment shouldnt come to mind. It only gaurentees that the government will not tell people what they can and cannot say or refuse them the right/ability to say it. This is a matter of one company and another company. Nowhere is the government involved, so the 1st amendment doesn't apply.
Kind of like laws against (i know, the obvious) yelling fired in a crowded theatre, as well as laws against false advertising, slander, libel, verbal assault, threats, etc... Should all of those be protected under the first amendment as well?
Oh yeah... and shouldn't spam be a 1st ammendment issue for that matter? People jump to defend the 1st amemdment until it lands them with an extra 5 messages on their hard drive and then they say it's trespassing, or what not.
I don't know where I"m going with this anymore, so i'll stop.
I'm using some new thingie, MacMP3 or something like that. I'll try Sound Jam.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Meader makes up or takes credit from others for all his stories anyway. Go check out http://www.mosr.net They love Meader over there. The reason that Apple wants to put a stop to him is that people actually believe a lot of the crap that he puts on his page. So, the moral of this story is: Put a stop to guaranteed bullshit in a world already full of uncertainty before it damages your rep. when you don't live up to it.
-Well, it may not take a Rocket Scientist to figure this stuff out, but I figure it can't hurt
I'm no lawyer, but seem's to me their beef is with the "person(s)" who leaked the information, not the one who published it.
I didn't say that MOSR was never wrong.
It IS after all a Rumors site. I find it rather entertaining, right or wrong. About the only thing I disagree with was the smear campaign that came out against MOSR, particularly the personal attacks against their staff (check out www.mosr.net), and the perception that AppleInsider is somehow more accurate than MOSR. AppleInsider is pretending to be a news outlet, and they post inaccurate shit, because they're a rumors site. At least MOSR doesn't pretend they're not a rumors site. I agree that some of the technical mistakes they've made were gigantic, mistakes AppleInsider has not made. Some of their stuff has been outright whoring lies to get hits when real information was dry. But at least they know what and who they are, and at least they aren't making personal attacks against the staff of AppleInsider.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
I can say that Apple is making a 500-foot robot with left over MAG. NeXt case parts. It shoots fire, talks and can fly!! It dose not mean it is true. Maybe some one hit too close to home on this one a simple not true or no comment would other wise do. I like the cube thing. I hope they do it.
According to this link, MOSR will accept anybody's word as a "reliable source." Some guy wrote in and claimed he had more details, and within hours, his comments were posted.
This has some interesting ramifications for Apple's legal team's policies. It means they just arbitrarily threaten anything that gets any publicity on the net, thereby drawing no distinction between rumors that are true and rumors that arent. I guess they really have two choices. It's clear that they cant treat true posts differently than false ones, thereby lending credence to some of them, so they either have to threaten everyone they notice or nobody at all. I guess threatening everybody makes them feel important and useful to the rest of apple.
that apple is no better, no worse than ms when it comes to ur: Mshing their pack to trained lawyers
Ummm, when was the last time Microsoft shut down rumors about one of their upcoming products? Let's give some credit where credit is due, Apple is well ahead of the game for this particular issue.
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
Well, as a Mac lover, I like to see new products from Apple early. But.. Apple should not disclose its upcoming products. The market is competitive. So, disclosing information about their new products early is very harmful to the manufacturer.
;)
So, MacOSRumors or AppleInsdier website do something wrong for their beloved company, Apple.
If they really like the Apple Computer Inc., they should stop posting early picture of new Apple products.
It's interesting, though.
SoundJam works great.
:)
;) )
:)
:) )
It plays the MP3s preemptively
(Yes MacOS can do that... but only for special cases... ie you can't make use of a lot of the API inside a preemptive task, but you can decode MP3 audio and pipe it to the audio hardware
Anywho, the big killer for MP3 on the mac is Virtual Memory.
If you have the ram, get rid of it. You'll love it.
It'll be snappy, fast and smooth
(I'd recommend about 180+MB for a serious mac user
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
Jedi & Last *-fytr
Unsubstantiated lies suggested to be fact with the intent to mislead, decieve and defame is libel. Rumor is... well, it's nothing. "Hey, so and so might decide to possible do this or that".
Doesn't sound like it has a foot to stand on.
---
seumas.com
You answered the question.
:)
The ONLY reason Apple users are so loyal to Apple, is they make a product which we... Like.
LOTS.
We may hate the company. But compaq don't make macs. And if they did.. they'd probably look like bottle rockets or something
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
Jedi & Last *-fytr
Apple is based in the United States, a nation burdened by a little document called the constitution... I was taught that all the legal bullcrap in the world can't invalidate that document and its amendments - Do the legal sh!tmeisters in Cupertino have some new take on this burdensome old set of documents? Really the world would be a better place if these pigf@ckers who claim to practice law would just retire from contact with rest of the species!
Without knowing the specifics of Apples complaint, it sounds like a classic slap suit designed to quash free speach. Depends what state MSOR is in, but if they are in one with anti-slap suit laws, they may have good recourse. Of course this is completely invalid argument if Apple has evidence of violation of NDA or similar agreements.
Maybe I'm nitpicking but, IIRC the licenses weren't really revoked. The licenses were valid for Mac OS 7.x only. When Apple releasd OS 8 they opted not to license it, thereby making it impossible to make the clones with a current operating system.
I never did understand what stopped the clone makers from buying OS 8 off the shelf for inclusion with their systems...
MacSlash: News for Mac Geeks
It's one thing to disassociate yourself from a rumor site. It's another thing to use the threat of a meritless but costly lawsuit in order to censor an independent organization.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
This seems rather ass-backwards to me; Metallica is suing their fans, and now Apple is doing something rather similar? Apple has only recently gotten back on their feet, thanks in a large part to the dedication of the Apple user community. It just seems wrong to me to turn around and bash that community in the face.
That would be like Debian turning around, claiming copyright to all the GPL software they support, and then trying to slap the FSF with a lawsuit...
To die, to code, perchance to sleep; aye, there's the rub. For in this code of grep what sleep may come?
With a few more apps anything you do on an apple you will do better on the BEos "on standard hardware", and with 3 mouse bottons!
Dennis Onstenk
Through questionable marketing, Apple managed to turn one of the truly cool products of the 20th century into an also-ran. But Apple/Macintosh fans are rabid in their support. Why alienate this support base?
---
Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
I also work with Win 98/NT/2000, linux, and mac OS boxes, and here's my .02 on the matter: they all are GREAT for different things.
.UGH). Win98 is the workhorse family OS that everyone loves to hate, but it gets the job done--and has tons of support. And Linux is a nice alternative for development. I'd buy one of each.
At work (I work for the Univ. of Wash), I do a lot of digital video production--i.e. capture, compressing, editing, yadda yadda. For this, the Mac is unbeaten in my mind. Hell, the other day I was mocking a friend of mine for wanting a DV iMac. How stupid, I thought then, was a machine like that? Then we got one to check out. It a)ran out of the box, b)had firewire, and c)within the first hour of its operating life allowed me to capture, edit, and compress a short movie. Meanwhile, the G4's haul ass on all of the above. Final Cut Pro 1.2 is a DV suite dream package.
Meanwhile, at home I have my win98 box. I do a lot of gaming, web browsing, and general messing around. Its stable (gasp!), I know it in and out, and everything in it, no matter how exotic, has drivers. 2000 just ain't there yet.
Finally, I do have a linux box as well. I use this primarily for perl coding, openGL hacking, and general experimentation. I'm no *nix genius, but I can move around just fine and have really grown to like it as a dev box. No more AIX UNIX telnet windows for me--Linux (I run SuSE) works great as a dev environment.
There ya have it. Apple machines look sleek, and can make sleek-looking things. The closed system works great (usually) when allowing Apple to release non-conflicting hardware. . . Hence the DV iMac being so impressive (despite being purple. .
S
http://students.washington.edu/steve0/
steve0@u.washington.edu
- - - - - - - -
Don't worry, being eaten by a crocodile is just like going to sleep in a giant blender.
...what next Apple computer will NOT have? There was one without floppy drive, now what - maybe next generation Apple won't have, say, hard disk (who needs them anyway) or CPU (it only makes heat) or maybe it's truly revolutionary design. Like empty case?
Oops, now Apple thugs will gome to get me :-)
--
The moon is not fully subjugated. I demand a second assault wave preceded by a massive nuclear bombardment.
I've given up on buying any of Apple's new hardware at least until AFTER OS X is the "mainstream" Mac OS.
From 1990 through 1999 I was an avid Mac head. I still have my Mac Plus as well as a couple of other Macs and a Mac clone.
Apple's new policy of "We'll do it and MAKE them like it" has turned me off. Apple rendered many of my peripherals useless with their new hardware design. My ISDN "modem" is useless to me on a see-through mac. I have to buy a SCSI card to use my scanner on one of those new pieces of crap.
I take it personally. Apple WAS great. They've changed, they've become no different than any of the other corporate money machines that cares firstly about the bottom line than pleasing their customers.
I don't understand why the guys from MacOS rumors think that it's OK for Apple to act like a bully about this stuff.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
What will said in end of story is absolutely correct. MOSR is good for entertainment... but if you think it's real: have another beer and pass the pretzels, please.
Do you remember how different the PowerMac G3 was when it came out?
;)
;)
;)
:)
;)
;)
:)
It was a completely new motherboard, new zif socket, new IDE drives, new formfactor...
It was ATX. Used IDE... new chip...
How much faster was it...
LOTS...
Now, cast your memory back to the Clone Wars
PowerComputing were about to launch their new Death Star
It was based on the PowerPC 750 and was in all reports totally whipping the pants off of Apple's current offering.
What was Apple working on... PowerExpress...
I think PowerExpress was probably just a 9700
Anywho.
What do you think Apple got for their 100M$?
They got Gossamer. That's what the got.
Here's the deal.
PowerComputing designed the PowerMac G3.
It has a god damn ATX mono and ATX powersupply it uses EIDE and SCSI drives.
On board ATI Rage Pro.
Expandable VRAM
Zif Slot for CPU
ROM on a card.
Dips for bus/clock speed.
These are hallmarks of the PowerComputing Machines
Now... I hope that leaves you with some food for thought
Anywho, I have to go and replace the cpu fan on my PowerCentre Pro
Apple bought PCC, whacked the new PCC computer into an outrigger case and released it.
If PCC had, apple would've died.
Another point. The PMG3 is a CHRP machine. Why did apple build a CHRP machine? They didn't. PCC did.
Think about it. Remember the time.
You know I speak the truth
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
Jedi & Last *-fytr
Asking a question here, my memory's not what it was but, which GEM came first, the ST or the PC one(done by Digital Research)?
Even with UCITA you can click no and avoid the contract. No access to the product, but you haven't be bound to anything yet. With the above email, supposedly just the very act of reading you binds you to an agreement. Once you realize that their is an agreement you can be bound to, it is too late. That is one step beyond UCITA, as far as I can tell. I am not a lawyer, any lawyers know if the above is legal? E.G. By reading this sentence you agree to give me $100 dollars immediately. That doesn't sound legal, but anyone know what the law says?
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
These are all excellent reasons for liking Apple products, but the original post was asking which people have any loyalty left to Apple the company. I haven't seen a good answer to that yet.
--
--
What short sigs we have -
One hundred and twenty chars!
Too short for haiku.
"from the can't-get-more-alliteration-than-that-sorry dept."
:-)
Yes, there _could_ be more alliteration than that... if the story was about RAMBUS.
Friends don't let friends misuse the subjunctive.
Is it just me, or is this yet another case of Stevie saying "look, I was RIGHT last time!". I'm not sure I see the utility in the cube design, but then again I haven't seen the actual unit either. I can say that while I like my NeXT cube, I don't see any particular value to it's cube shape...
ehintz
This is really not intended to be flamebait, although I'm sure many people will interpret it that way. Oh well, let the Karma fall where it may.
I really don't understand why many people love Apple. Granted, in the past they have come up with many innovations, the greatest of which was popularizing (note the word) the GUI. Give them credit where credit is due.
But the list of negatives is very, very long: inability to update their software with modern necessities (PMT, VM that's not broken, etc). Backstabbing the developers. Backstabbing the clone manufacturers. Incredible arrogance. Price gouging. Bad hardware (powerbooks have had a lot of quality problems, several brain-damaged printer models). Look-and-feel lawsuits. Closed hardware. Closed software. Closed minds.
Microsoft never dreamed of the anti-competition, monopolistic practices that Apple has implemented. The only difference is that Apple has been incompetent at becoming a monopoly. Can you imagine the world we would have if Apple had won?
Clue me in. Why does Apple get all this loyalty? The products are good in a lot of ways, but they're not that good (be honest!). Is it the home of people who just like to be different from the mainstream, and that's the attraction?
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
A properly set up OSX Server [re: two hard drives, fast ethernet, several gig of dedicated space] is capable of supporting a "Net Booting" environment- you can boot your happy little iMac, pismo powerbook, or pretty much anything recent from a network server: the option exists in the "Startup Disk" control panel, and will remain greyed out unless you're on a properly set up net-boot network. If you're on one, and use the option, then your machine boots- you guessed it- straight from the server. With this sort of setup going, you can physically remove the hard disk, and the machine remains fully functional [assuming the network isn't lagged to hell by Mp3 whores such as myself]. If you're willing to go "kiosk" and can get a stripped system folder and content set up properly, you can also run the system from the CDROM drive- again, without a hard disk. Every CD-equipped Mac can do that. Net-booting has been around for the past year and a half or so, if not longer: nothing new there.
So, Apple confirms the rumors by requesting the stories be removed. Not ALL the stories, just two of them. Count those as among the true ones.
Poor Apple. All they want to do is hide their secrets, but they go about it all wrong and end up (1) confirming the rumors by showing an interest in them and (2) alienating their customer base and loyal users who went so far as to set up a web site to help them out during rough times.
Poor, dumb lawyers. Poor, dumb Apple.
When will companies realize that if they make something cool, people want to be involved with it. They want to make a web site about it. They want to write programs/modules/accessories for it. Going after these customers with your lawyers is just plain dumb.
wish
---
Complaints about new systems being incompatable with old hardware? Well, the hardware market needs to change or die, buried in a mass of backward compatability. How many ports do you really WANT on the back of your box, anyway? [and why aren't keyboard ports on the FRONT? You lose two feet of cord getting the thing around from the back to the front...]
Want the new goodies, but don't want to lose the old? Let's say you have a reasonably recent Mac- a PCI model. Let's say you're not using it for production and actually have the slots free. Consider this:
1. You already have SCSI, ADB, RS232, etc.
2. PCI cards with USB and/or Firewire ports are available for older machines [pre blue+white tower]. They're a couple of hundred bucks.
3. Processors are upgradeable. Heck, even a 7100 can be turned into a G3. Up the cache if you haven't already [cards are cheap on Ebay], then go to Newer Technology or another third party company and plunk down the cash for a processor upgrade. WONG! For 250-400 $ you've bumped your box from a 604/120 to a G3/450.
4. End result: an older motherboard with a buttload of modern gear. Since you've alredy bought the old box, you have a reasonablym odern system for less than the cost of a new one, and you can still use all of your old gear.
As for myself, I have a pair of 7100s, an iMac, and a Pismo. I have all of the ports I need on four machines, and I'm networked [one 7100 has a nubus NIC, the other is using a Farrallon [sp?] adapter]. The 601s are turtles, but it all works!
How about this...both sites are full of crap.
I'm not even going to pretend to speak for everyone. Here's my reasoning:
...and say what you will about the OS- the UI is the sweetest thing that modern computing has ever seen. I tried Linux and was thoroughly DISGUSTED by the fact that X-windows handled just like the windows UI, and in some cases was even goofier. [don't flame me!! I loved the CLI, but the UI needs to EVOLVE, not DEVOLVE]. The MacOS has the most advanced UI system out there- the only thing more transparent is the PalmOS. Every other system I've tried has seemd like a windows knock-off- clunky and painful.
1. First, the clones. Power Computing and others were price-cutting Apple. With market share already abysmal, they had no choice: lose the clones or lose the company.
2. Second, and the rest fo the list. Apple is a "monopoly" from the standpoint that they are the sole providers of an integrated consumer-priced hardware/software package.
3. The hardware is the >BOMB [boot from ANY drive, zero compatability problems if you know a little about SCSI, painless to network, easy to set up (now), long-lasting, QUIET (say THAT about a PeeCee!)...].
4.
5. Much less to take care of. A reasonably intelligent Mac user can fix any system screwup with a little bit of help or simple plugging around to see what works. Drivers don't conflict, extensions can be switched on and off with relative ease... in general, you can fix a seriously scragged Mac without having to reformat it.
6. No one complains about Apple having a monopoly. Everything important on the Mac has been ported to Windows, or vice versa. MS apps actually work and run BETTER on the Mac [go figure]. As a graphic designer, you can choose your platform- and ninety percent of us use Macs, because they're more intuitive and easier to use for things like Photoshop and Illustrator. [also, burning CDs is a HELL of a lot easier on a Mac than it is in windows- more options, more flexibility, ISO support, dual partitioning, et al. Every burning program I've used on windows handles like a twenty year old basset hound that's been kicked in the groin.]
7. And finally.... [relating to six]
If the MS codebase were half as good as linux, and its UI even a third as useable as the MacOS, I very seriously doubt that anyone would be complaining about them having a monopoly. The only reason anyone is up in arms at all is because we KNOW that MS makes a horribly shitty, derivative OS. [Too bad IBM had the marketing clout to push their "PC" and invite MS along for the OS ride.....] If MS made quality product, Linux would likely not exist, and Apple would have died a gruesome death many years ago.
Thank the powers that be for gross incompetance and total obliviousness on the part of lord bill, for the great and mighty Visionary hath given rise to the discontented masses that have given birth to or continued to support Linux, UNIX, Be, and MacOS.
Shouldn't their right to publish any factual data or opinion over at MOSR (providing, of course, it was legally obtained, which it was) be protected by the first ammendment? It's pretty sad when they can't speak freely because somone else has more money.
I really think their should be a special legal venue to handle this type of issue. One that involves the judge, the plaintiffe and the defendent. If their were a authoritative way to handle cases like this, instead of more baffling bullshit, maybe people could actually EXERCISE their freedoms.
Oh well... it's a thought.
You're reading Slashdot. Of course you like Linux and pc hardware
You missed my point.
Now let's look at what I actually said:
Apple is dedicated to the idea that form is more important than function, even if Apple is straining to provide function as well. For example, the latest cases with the four handles are easy to move around (four handles, yay) but they're far more about appearance. Too bad they scratch so pathetically easy.
I give credit for how the case with the four handles is easy to move around (I didn't mention that the motherboard and PCI card frame fold out, which is keen too) but then said that the case design was far more about appearance than functionality. Then I said it was a shame they scratch so easy. What I'm saying here is that since they're primarily about appearance, it's a shame they scratch so easy, because Apple couldn't even get that right.
You're so wound up in your defense of Apple that your reading comprehension skills are suffering. I agree, the new Apple cases are quite functional. I just think they're spending too much of the consumer's money (Granted, the consumer chooses where to spend it) on appearances, especially since the consumer is no longer able to purchase a clone which puts more emphasis on a quality product for a reasonable price.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Thank you for saying this. What this is really about, in my point of view, is Ryan Meader being a dick, which is nothing new. Most of the time he posts utter BS, and then when he finally gets an actual rumor (probably from reading Appleinsider, not "sources close to Apple"), he mouths of at Apple when he is asked to remove the rumor, while still maintaining that he can't hold stock in Apple because it would be a "conflict of interests." Go to http://mosr.net to see what I'm talking about. Mosr.net's maintainers use the site exclusively to tell the world that mosr.com, and Ryan Meader is a bunch of crock. They could not be more right. Speaking on the subject of AppleInsider, mosr.net says, "Often Right instead of Often Wrong, AppleInsider set an example MOSR seems quite unable to follow." 'nuff said.
The Apple Doomsday Clock 2 posted a picture of the rumored cube and a reprint of the MOSR.COM article:
http://www.sanfranciscojournal.com/new. html
The author of ADC2 explains why he doesn't think the photo is a hoax.
Some say the Mac Cube looks a bit like the old Amiga Walker project that never got past the prototype stage. http://www.spock.mem.net/amiga/wa lker/walker.html It was killed about four years ago. Rather than a cube it was a rounded off trapezoid with feet on the bottom. Just slightly different than that rumored Mac Cube.
i recently had to move ISA fax cards to PCI fax cards in the dell 4200. the sheer pain and aggravation of opening the case, adjusting the cards and then closing it up again drove me insane.
now, my dad has a blue and white g3 and to open that and switch the hard drives was like a walk in park.
apple contiunes to hold advantages over integrators like dell bacause of the innovations that they incorporate into their software and hardware.
finally, on the software side, apple enforces their User Interface Guidelines because consistency is important to them as it should be. i develop my linux applications according to apple's guidelines.
thanks goes to eazel and helixcode for seeing that linux sorely needs consistency.
Friday, July 7
Apple's "Cube" desktop Mac confirmed
After months of obscure reports and unreliable sources, two contacts with extremely solid track records have reported sightings of one of Apple's best-kept secrets -- its next-generation Desktop enclosure and the changes to its product line that will come with it.
While one of these new reports claims intently that the machine -- a near-perfect cube about 2/3 the size of a modern-day iMac -- will be a complete replacement for today's iMac line-up, the other is not so sure....and the remaining body of evidence is none too clear on whether this enclosure will be applied to the PowerMac or iMac spaces exclusively, or in both.
Setting that important detail aside for the moment, there is much exciting news about this new Cube that is of much greater reliability:
[UPDATED] Approximately 14 inches to a side. Clear polycarbonate plastics similar to today's Macs offer views of the machine's innards, while opaque colored panels sport a large Apple logo and provide a sleek look. Although multiprocessor G4 applications would likely require more powerful cooling, prototypes are fanless. Cooling is provided by numerous large vents on the top and bottom of the enclosure, allowing heat to naturally rise upward and out of the cube. All six faces of the cube are featureless, aside from the power cable and an almost-invisible ports panel on the "back," which handles USB, Firewire, Audio I/O, Ethernet, and the built-in Modem's phone jack. A small tab on one of the "sides" allows for that side to be opened for access to the machine's internals. The entire package, including motherboard and all components, weighs approximately ten pounds.
There are significant signs that this may be the long-rumored monitorless iMac; for example, the prototype sources have reported on does not appear to have external ports to accept PCI expansion cards. However, there does appear to be enough internal room for them if the external ports were added.
A related but as yet unconfirmed rumor states that Apple is moving away from including PCI slots by default in PowerMacs, instead wiring the Universal Motherboard Architecture's PCI controller to a small connector which would support an external PCI enclosure with any number of slots. Note that this would be much less expensive than a full-blown PCI Expansion Chassis, which connects a single internal PCI slot to any number of add-on slots via a costly PCI bridge chip and associated hardware. This scheme would merely move PCI expansion outside the default PowerMac enclosure to allow for more innovative small-footprint designs as well as support more than three PCI slots for those who need them.
For now, all but the details of the Cube enclosure itself are to be considered highly speculative. We will be watching developments in this story very closely -- if you believe you may be able to clarify matters, drop us a line!
This sounds like they don't get the point of rumour site to me?! If the stories are unconfirmed, and people want to check out "supposed" news, then why the hell waste your time and money stopping them. It's not like your sales department is promising these products, nor that anyone else is saying that these stories are for-sure things. What would tech be without the right to speculate?!
kick some CAD
Someone posted the text of the rumors on an AppleInsider message board, which you can get at below (about halfway down):
0 4621-2.html
http://forum.appleinsider.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/0
...I'd post them here myself, but I'd rather not incur the wrath of Apple's legal department.
Frankly, I think they have the right to ask that they be taken down, but it'd really come down to the courts as to what actually happens.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
> The best part is having them call up and ask for a "Mac Technician" (I'm just guessing, there is
>no certification process for macs, is there?)
Actually there is,you get the exam through Sylvan Prometric,but if you don't work for a certified shop good luck finding the documentation.And BTW is a real exam not like the PC equivalent A+ .
The best way to escape from a problem is to solve it. Alan Saporta
PowerMac Cube Update
What we need is legislation to punish corporations that bring this kind of "strategic lawsuit". The suit likely cannot stand on its own merit, but the cost of proving that in court is prohibitive to the defendant. Of course, it would be difficult getting something like this enacted, since the lawyers profit on every case brought to court, frivolous or not.
Yo dawg, I heard you like the Ackermann function, so OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD
MOSR is, to say the least, not highly regarded in the Mac community. Its stories generally turn out to be wrong, and it frequently retracts and modifies stories. As a result, very few people likely believed the MOSR articles. (Visit AppleInsider's Future Hardware forum to get a good feel for the average Mac user's feelings towards MOSR.)
Now, with MOSR's reputation in mind, put yourself in Apple's lawyers' shoes. MOSR has just posted an article about a cube-shaped Macintosh computer. If the article is false, then of course you don't do a thing. But if it's true, you also wouldn't do a thing. By threatening legal action, you would be confirming the product's existence, at least at the R&D level. Apple's lawyers would have to be brighter than that.
Then there's the whole issue of the fact that the lawyers have absolutely no legal ground whatsoever to stand on. MOSR is a rumors site. It is extremely unlikely that it obtained physical documentation of the computer's shape and specifications, especially when you take into account that MOSR was unsure whether the computer was an iMac or a PowerMac and that it changed its specifications at least twice, reducing the box from about 14" or 16" down to 12" at the last time I checked before the article was pulled. As such, I think I can say with confidence that they were not in copyright violation, and also that the information wasn't obtained by breaking an NDA. So Apple's lawyers would essentially be making an idle thread--something that could result in a countersuit yielding MOSR hundreds upon thousands of dollars.
It just doesn't add up. Perhaps MOSR did, in fact, receive an email, and perhaps the email really did ask them to be quiet, but that email could not have come from Apple Legal.
...the computers were only "not ready for prime time" because Xerox management didn't care about making consumer models. Everyone working there, down to the secretaries, had desktop computers with GUIs in the mid-'70s. There's a lot of overstatement on both sides about the relationship of the Mac UI to the Altos UI. The Mac definitely innovated, not just imitated, but at the same time it's disingenuous to imply that the PARC designers were just doodling in the dark until the Macintosh project came along. If Xerox's management had shown even the level of clue that Tandy's management did when Steve Leininger came to them with the TRS-80 (one of the only times "Tandy management" and "clue" could be used together), the computing landscape today might have been very, very different.
Doesn't this sound a lot like the sort of screed that the scientology lawyers are so famous for?
:wq
Moderate this to 5:
I sent fake details about the "Cube" last friday, as an experiment.
To my suprise, they were published.
I'm hoping to run an expose this week, maybe next, at themacjunkie.com.
Jonathan Apple
Can they legally hold us to making the above email confidential? I mean, shouldn't they have us aggree to that condition before sending us the message.
-- Superlame http://catpro.dragonfire.net/joshua/
While not admitting to the violations, MOSR did say on Saturday that Apple had cited suspected NDA violations. Amusingly, they printed this, along with a "We must remove this by Monday", in a "We're onto something, or they wouldn't claim NDA" manner... Also implying "If you don't read us regularly, you might miss the dirt we're forced to remove.
/., really. Rumor sites... tabloids for the geek masses...
Apple's overenthusiastic lawyers are good for mac rumor mongers' business...
MOSR is one of the less reliable sites... which is unsurprising, given their name... but I have always found their mock ups worth a chuckle. And they (and their competitor AppleInsider) did manage to give us advance warning about those candy boxes before they first showed up... by about six hours.
I dunno, seems like it's all just a joke at the mac fanatics' expense... or somesuch.
Sort of like that sci fi news network that's an optional on the right bar of
-- Still waiting for the Nike endorsement
After months of obscure reports and unreliable sources, two contacts with extremely solid track records have reported sightings of one of Apple's best-kept secrets -- its next-generation Desktop enclosure and the changes to its product line that will come with it.
While one of these new reports claims intently that the machine -- a near-perfect cube about 2/3 the size of a modern-day iMac -- will be a complete replacement for today's iMac line-up, the other is not so sure....and the remaining body of evidence is none too clear on whether this enclosure will be applied to the PowerMac or iMac spaces exclusively, or in both.
Setting that important detail aside for the moment, there is much exciting news about this new Cube that is of much greater reliability:
There are significant signs that this may be the long-rumored monitorless iMac; for example, the prototype sources have reported on does not appear to have external ports to accept PCI expansion cards. However, there does appear to be enough internal room for them if the external ports were added.
A related but as yet unconfirmed rumor states that Apple is moving away from including PCI slots by default in PowerMacs, instead wiring the Universal Motherboard Architecture's PCI controller to a small connector which would support an external PCI enclosure with any number of slots. Note that this would be much less expensive than a full-blown PCI Expansion Chassis, which connects a single internal PCI slot to any number of add-on slots via a costly PCI bridge chip and associated hardware. This scheme would merely move PCI expansion outside the default PowerMac enclosure to allow for more innovative small-footprint designs as well as support more than three PCI slots for those who need them.
For now, all but the details of the Cube enclosure itself are to be considered highly speculative. We will be watching developments in this story very closely -- if you believe you may be able to clarify matters, drop us a line!
There ought to be rules about how companies can go after people if their trade secrets get leaked.
I'm assuming that Apple considers their new computer designs to be trade secrets. If Apple didn't want the whole world to know, they should have kept tight security. If somehow the world found out what the new computers looked like, then that's tough cookies for Apple. They should be barred from trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle.
A parallel is found in the auto industry. Automakers have to transport cars around to get them from the shops to the test tracks. A lot of those cars are very top secret models not meant for production for a couple years or more. Many people who work for magazines like "Car and Driver" try to get spy shots of the vehicles as they are being transported or tested. The engineers know this, so they stick on a lot of fake plastic bumps on the car to hide the true shape from the photographers. If by chance a picture is published, then the magazines won one, and the automakers lost one. Better luck for GM next time - they'll probably try to beef up security somehow.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Because it would cost a lot. When you have an agreement with the company they would give you the OS for like 10 bucks a pop. As opposed to buying the OS at the store for about 85 dollars, without tax. Also it probably would've been illegal for them to do that since they aren't resellers, or something like that.
MS threatened me under NDA while I was testing Office 98 for Mac in beta. Every company does this. There are sites out there that get stuff pulled at MS's request.
What about MS's fucking government trial where they force their product on other companies (Dell, Compaq) and threaten other (NetScape, Apple, RealNetworks). So what were you saying about MS being the angel in this one? Apple isn't being split in two by big-brother for their anti-competative practices.
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
Of course at HQ they're going to be a bit concerned when rumors (like the Disney/pixar/whateverelse merger) proliferate unchecked and never seem to die.
I think the problem here isn't the fact that "rumor sites" exist, but instead, even after repeated denials by Apple, the rumors *STILL APPEAR* on the Net.
This event sure as heck isn't the downfall of "rumor sites", because I can't see how a company could get something that is true pulled without a large backlash.
This is another view of the world.
There are a few tasks I use my computer for. The main, day to day tasks are email, web browsing, stuff like that. Frankly, you can use most any system to do that (though linux is crippled in the browser department). I also write code (mostly for work or school) and music. The mac kicks anything's ass for music production. Code, well, that depends on the system it has to be run on. So there's a slight total tendency with these tasks to go to Mac, but that's not the whole reason.
When I look at Apple now, I see a company that is consistently looking at the paradigm of computing, of what we hold to be required or necessary, and is saying, "Does that annoying thing have to be that way?" A lot of times, the answer is "no", and they change it.
One example that comes to mind is the G4 flip-out case design. That is genius. I've done a lot of work fixing people's home computers and configuring systems in offices. It sucks. Working inside a PC case is an exercise in trying to do a very simple thing, like hook an IDE cable to a mboard the right way, while being inhibited in a million pointless ways, like having all the drive cages hanging over the mboard's IDE header. When I first saw that case, I was so impressed: "Why hasn't anyone done that before? It's so obvious. It's such a better way to do the same task, and it looks so cool. That is an object I want on my desk everyday."
There are other examples. The PowerPC is a better processor architecture than x86, Apple embraced it.
When it became apparent that Unix had some things to offer to the rest of the world, Apple integrated the interesting components into a still easy to use OS (I hope at least). This is a lot more appealing to me than using linux.
In Microsoft, I see a company that's basically just trying to figure out what immediate stopgap measure is needed to go on for another day (ASP, DOS, Win3.1, Win9x, VB). In linux, I see a community that basically borrowed a bunch of old, but good, ideas and is trying to play imitate-but-with-some-new-glitz in every market. There is nothing wrong with either of these approaches, I guess. I just don't want it on my desk.
jeb.
It sounds like Apple is utilizing trademark law and maybe trade secret law to have the rumors removed. You're right, there probably isn't an argument here for a copyright infringement. But, there could be a trademark infringement because you can essentially trademark a dress (trade dress), the look/appearance/feel of a product/place. For instance, McDonalds probably has a trademark on the appearance of its restaurants. A company could have a trademark on the appearance of its computer -- as long as it is unique/novel. I think I remember Apple bringing suit against e-Machines for 'copying' its iMac design/dress. As long as Apple could show a distinctive actistic style, they'd probably get protection. For trade secret law, Apple would have to show that this information is substantially secret -- how much did the public know about this information? Also, Apple needs to demonstrate that it has exercised reasonable precautions to keep the information a secret. I don't know much about the specifics of these rumors, but I'd bet by the mere fact that the rumors are abound, Apple hasn't taken reasonable precautions. If I was Apple, I'd go for the trade dress argument. Its product might be inherently distinctive here. None of this information should be construed to be legal advice, its just my worthless personal opinion.
OK. I had my first experience with Linux 2 weeks ago. Coming from a mixed Mac/Unix/Windows background it seemed incomprehensible that it would take me 20 minutes to figure out how to get a GUI that didn't display everything in Chinese or even longer to restart the computer. I don't find the OS intuitive at all and feel it's restrictive to the point of being useless. Most people that "love" Linux are practically married to it (why I don't know). So far, I find MacOS much easier to get around.
Why?
HELLO! FREE ADVERTISING! Adcritic.com is a haven of nothing but commercials. People go there to watch these commercials.
Smack! PEOPLE GO THERE TO *WATCH* *COMMERCIALS!*
"Hmmm, this website is hosting our advertising for free, and actually encouraging visitors to view ads for our product - with no expense to us, save the original development costs for the commercial. NO, THAT'S BAD. MAKE THEM PULL THE ADS."
That's the most descriptive example of "Think Different" that I have ever seen.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
Fact, fiction, or otherwise the 1st amendment allows anyone - any business - anything to say whatever they damn well please. Corporate law dictates (as far as I know) that a business must gain written permission to use copyrighted material (content) if it is to be re/sold. I honestly do think that far too many businesses out there are abusing legal decisions in lieu of our constutional rights. The right to have free association is also at odds here because I as a consumer decide whether or not to listen to a rumors site - not another business for me.
it's a complete fabrication. either ryan meader is a compulsive fantasist or there's a whole group out there who like to play at being a leet source. most likely some sort of complicity between the two.
anyway, the proof is at http://www.themacjunkie.com/archives/7.11.00.rumor s.html. either it's a rather neat sting. or i am the victim of some cunning triple bluff, which would kind of prove the point anyway.
I think it's time for all of us mac moonies to understand that the rumor sites are roughly on a par with the wwf (not the wildlife one): a circus performance in which real people may or may not get hurt but the whole thing is constructed for our prurience and the profit of a small number of dubious egomaniacs.
I wonder how much of this is motivated by Apple's frustration at the inaccuracy of the rumors sites? I mean, if anyone kept a MOSR scorecard, I think Ryan's accuracy would be in single digits.
Don't get me wrong, I read MOSR all the time, but I have come to view it as entertainment rather than a source of reliable information.
Sites like MOSR and AppleInsider are fun, and people want to believe what they read there. The problem is that inaccurate information can sometimes be harmful. Take the recent case of rumors preceding Apple's Worldwide Developers' Conference. MOSR was saying continuously that Mac OS X would ship at WWDC. A lot of people got excited about this and forgot that Apple had said earlier that the release version of OS X wouldn't ship until January.
At WWDC a *public beta* of OS X was announced. Instead of this being recognized as a Good Thing coming from Apple, a lot of people who believed the hype felt that the OS was now six months behind schedule.
I read MOSR the same way I find myself compelled to scan the headlines on the cover of the Weekly World News in the grocery store checkout line. Increasingly, I think the two have about the same level of reliability.
Sorry, I meant to list that as option C.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
I have obtained the actual message. This is not a joke, this is what Apple mailed to Ryan.
From cpyrt@apple.com Fri Jul 7 20:56:43 2000
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:28:28 -0700
From: Copyright Admin. <cpyrt@apple.com>
To: Ryan Meader <ryan@macosrumors.com>
Subject: NOTICE OF INFRINGEMENT
*Apple Confidential*
-NOT FOR POSTING OR REDISTRIBUTION-
Dear Ryan,
Re: www.macosrumors.com
It has been brought to our attention that you have posted an article on
the above web site titled, 'Apple's "Cube" desktop Mac confirmed'
(hereafter referred to as "the Article").
By posting the Article, you are improperly disclosing Apple's trade
secrets. Apple believes that the person(s) who disclosed the information
in the Article to you violated their non-disclosure agreement with Apple.
Consequently, Apple has never authorized the information to be disclosed
or published and your continued display of the Article could result in
your company being held for violating Apple's proprietary rights. Your
continued dissemination and use of this information is in violation of
Apple's statutory and other rights.
We believe, in good faith, that the information posted is being used in a
manner that is not authorized by Apple and that the information contained
in this email is accurate. Therefore, Apple demands that you cease and
desist from disseminating the Article posted at the referenced URL
immediately, including any hyperlinks to other locations where the
information or Article may be available from all web sites and servers
under your control.
Please immediately remove the Article and confirm in writing by Monday,
July 10, 2000 that you have removed the Article from your web site.
Apple reserves its right to seek immediate equitable and other relief,
including damages claims, should you fail to remove this material.
Thank your for your courtesy and immediate cooperation. I can be reached
at (408) 974-9994 should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Sue Runfola
Apple Computer, Inc.
Legal
Sue Runfola
Apple Legal
Copyright Administration
1 Infinite Loop, MS: 38-I
Cupertino, CA 95014
Phone: (408) 974-9994
Email: copyright@apple.com
Fax: (408) 974-5436
THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE PRIVILEGED AND MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSON(S) NAMED ABOVE. ANY OTHER
DISTRIBUTION, RE-TRANSMISSION, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE IS STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMISSION IN ERROR, PLEASE
NOTIFY ME IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE OR RETURN E-MAIL, AND DELETE THIS
FILE/MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM.
Well, how does that compare to when MS was selling CD's of Win2k betas?
MAC's what? Oh, you meant MACs ... or even maybe even Macs.
And who is that MAC person?
Stick with MS *and* Linux? That's an interesting combination...
just my blog and pix
How dare they protect their own product thats still in development from the public! How dare a company attempt to make money, what the fuck is wrong with them. Here all this time I thought they were out to make people happy and spread joy.
Say you're working on a new product to compete with someone, would you mind if I leaked some technical details and pictures?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Per Jamie's original article: ...from the "can't-get-more-alliteration-than-that-sorry" dept.
Apple Asks for Annullment of Advance Article
BMOC Busts Balls of Broadsheets
Cabalistic Computer Company Calls for cancellation of contraband communiques
Developers deride dampening of disclosures
... etc. etc.
The truth about trolls: They're just spammers, wasting our time/bandwidth and calling it 'free speech'
The hammer bounces off the screen, smacks the blond bimbo is the face, and millions of people realize that just because a computer smiles at you, that doesn't mean it is nice.
--
+&x
Ok, about 6 months ago there were apple rumors flying at slashdot that came from MOSR and Ryan Meader. I remember reading the forum here and finding the reply of one of MOSR's former employees. He clearly stated that Most of what appears on MOSR is completely false and non-substantiated by anyone from apple. Since Steve Jobs has taken apple over he's really put a lid on the rumor mill. I don't read MOSR anymore. They're a pile of crap with no connections with apple. They continually make up "news" to get hits on their website. The only real news that can be found is when apple has a press release...And then MOSR updates so late in the day that 10 other mac websites already covered it. MOSR is a waste of bandwidth.
Meader's well known in the mac community for pulling BS out of his butt about almost anything. Not just posting unfounded rumors, but making them up himself. I am very suspicious about whether Apple really did tell Meader to pull the story or if he just made that up to stir up some controversy.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Oh yeah, and Apple never gives socks or underwear...
As a side note, this tactic does not hurt MOSR in any way. In fact, it helps them. For last MacWorld Expo I was checking MOSR every hour for the 3 weeks leading up to The Day, just so I wouldn't miss that magic window of gossip. Talk about a way to boost hits/ad revenue!
2 1337 4 u!
Over at http://www.mosr.net/
They take Meader down a notch or two, especially when they call him on his BS posts.
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
http://www.cgchannel.com/cgelite/dimitrisladopoulo s/G5%20Server.jpg
-Davidu
# Hack the planet, it's important.
Well shit then 99% of the planet must piss you off.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Who says Apple Legal actually did anything. Ryan has pulled publicity stunts like this in the past where Apple supposedly requested information about future products be pulled down and no such product actually ever materializes. I think this is just another MOSR publicity stunt to attempt to give them veracity.
I used to read MOSR all the time, but I loose more and more respect for them everytime I hear about another one of Ryan's stunts. Mac rumors sites haven't had anything substantial since Jobs took the helm and clamped down on security. Since then, they've either shut down or started spewing nonsense. There are whole websites dedicated to debunking MOSR crap. They seem to have become inactive as the owners have gotten tired of pointing out the nonsense.
My favorite is still the live, secret streaming video feed they supposedly got from deep inside Apple's R&D labs. Riiiight.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
"Oh, they'll probably moderate this down".. "let the karma fall where it may.." ...appeals to moderators... WHO GIVES A SHIT!? NOBODY!!
You are not a fucking martyr. You are not in front of a moderator firing squad. You do not need to be so fucking melodramatic about it. So shut your GOD DAMNED HOLE about your FUCKING karma. Post a post or don't. Quit whining, you little fairy fucks.
There is no cube mac nor will there ever be a cube mac. Meader is full of sh*t. Apple did not contact him. Nothing on his site has ever come out being true.
Appleinsider has a similar story, only about "Mystic" the long rumored multi-processor G4.
c -enclosure.shtml
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/0007/mysti
Now, aside from why Apple would sell such a system without any SMP OS, and almost no MP-aware applications (perhaps Photoshop is the only Mac capable of taking even slight advantage of multiple processors on a couple of filters), why would Apple not tell AppleInsider to pull this article as well?
I think I can sum up that site in 2 words...
CAVEAT EMPTOR
And dont you forget it...
Confession: My primary box is a Win2k. (feel free to rip me a new one, but the thing just won't crash) This is not to say I dislike other OS's. I have an Imac, several boxes running Mandrake and a BeOs box. Love them all. My dislike of Mac stems from the heavy handed, self-indulgent attitude I see spewing forth from them. I agree that the Mac OS has some inherent advantages over Wintell, and probably always will. But the arrogance of the company and disregard for the needs of the end user (No floppy on Imac's and lack of upgrade capability as a prime example) choke me like a,.. well like a Mac user trying to use a PC. God forbid the hype actually works and you start to like the things, then you might put up a website, or (Gasp!) tell someone about it. Then you get sued. How they have managed to maintain a fan base, I have no idea. Maybe it's time they came down off the mountain and tried living life like a real human being instead of sitting on high and decreeing what we will like next.
Dirty Pirate Hooker
I feel that once information has become public, not matter the venue (company espionage, internal leak, etc.) that infomation becomes public doman.
Once an activity has begun, anything that is done will be discernable to someone. This regards the creation of software, hardware, company strategy, etc.
If you can't stand the idea of other people knowing about what you're doing, maybe you shouldn't be doing it.
And take your hands out of your pants!
This post encoded with ROT26. If you can read it, you've violated the DMCA. Handcuffs please, sergeant.
There is a Jihadist simulator at http://normad.webhostme.com/jihad.asp which tries to simulate an argument a Jihadists might have. While their posts are not usually random gibberish with computer terms thrown in, they are not that far off the path. They almost speak in tounges when excited.
But anyway they get consumers, small businesses, colleges, churches/temples, etc using Macs instead of PC Systems. They are usually overzealous and not every Mac User can be a Jihadist, it is an elite club. Maybe about 2 million out of 53 million Mac Users are Jihadists.
They hurt current Apple sales, and they keep people from buying hardware now because something better may be just around the corner.
This is the computer industry we're talking about. There is ALWAYS something better around the corner. That's why there are always jokes about how a computer is obsolete as soon as you buy it. Everybody knows that if they wait a few months, something better will be out there. Since there is always something better on the way, it doesn't really matter when you buy. You just buy when you need to buy.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
That should be MacOS Rumors, of course
---
seumas.com
On top of that, when I use any Mac app, I can intuitively go to "Edit->Preferences" to change the behavior of the program. On my PCs, sometimes it's in "Tools->Options", sometimes "Edit->Whatever", sometimes the File menu, and so on and so forth. I really do find the interface much more consistent and smooth when using my Mac. Insert Aqua ranting here
Plus at work, I have two scanners plugged into my machine. One works with Win2K, one will not because HP hasn't updated the drivers yet - this being the third driver codebase they'll have to maintain for Microsoft OS's (the alternative being to maintain only two and abandon NT4). Out of all the cards and peripherals I've added to my aging machine over the years, I think I've had to install drivers like once. And that was only for added functionality. One thing that bugs me about PC folk in general is their automatic reaction - "Apple MUST open their hardware!" Shouldn't "freedom of choice" include "the freedom to choose a closed hardware/software architecture"? Even if you think it's stupid, at least try to understand there are some of us that like this relationship, propietary ROMs and all (Of course, those only live on in spirit, but still :).
The only thing that's tempted me to switch primary platforms recently is the constant wear of going to PC-dominated offices every day, or checking Slashdot every day to see the same constant knee-jerk "MAC USERZ ARE ALL |D|0+5!" postings plastered all over any Apple-centric article. You wouldn't believe how much crap people give you when you work at an ISP or - god help you - an MIS department. Someday they'll tell my harrowing story. :) Oh well, could be worse - I could be an Amiga user! Now they're really crazy! *duck*