Slashdot Mirror
Steve Jobs Interview with Time Magazine
broohaha wrote to us with the
online version of Time's interview with Steve Jobs. It's the cover of this week's edition, and gives an interesting perspective into the labyrinth of his mind. The most interesting part is the Pixar stuff, IMHO. Just waiting for Toy Story II right now.
The clones were killing Apple. They were supposed to be expanding Apple's market in niches that didn't compete with Apple, yet they started eating significantly into the high-margin product lines that Apple gets most of its revenue from. If the clones weren't killed, Apple would probably be gone by now. When Apple is more profitable, then it might be time to bring the clones back.
and i don't mean jobs.
when i read the article, all the time subscription ads on the right hand side, abnout halfway down the page, featured a time cover with bill gates' mug on the front...
did somebody plan that?
- Entertaining Bits from the Ancient Kernel Tree
Please point out a stupid comment...
Not something you disagree with, but something
that is STUPID. INCORRECT. FACTUALLY ERRANT.
You can't do it.
-WW
DOS applications were starting to pick up on it despite the horrid CGA they had to work with initially -- and it wasn't because Jobs did the Mac. The Windowing GUI was inevitable and obvious to people with money as well as most personal computer programmers, especially once Tesler had already popularized it with his 1981 Byte magazine article.
Dynamic, late-binding programming environments that highly leverage the sparse nerd matrix out there -- like Smalltalk, Python, etc. -- are, however _still_ struggling to make it past the concrete barriers Jobs poured into the OO culture with the Mac.
When Jobs passed up Smalltalk for Object Pascal, and then again, with Next, passed up Smalltalk for Objective C, he set a pattern that continues to this day when Sun passed up that sun-of-Smalltalk, Self and went with that son-of-Objective-C, Java.
Gutting the superstructure of technology while maintaining appearances isn't leadership.
Seastead this.
Strangely, basically every computer generated effect in any movie or tv show is rendered in Pixar's PhotoRealistic Renderman, the standard for quality CGI output.
Anyone else suspicious about the picture of Bill Gates on the cover of Time on the pages of the article?
I am... watch yourself, Bill.
No argument. Ours cost us less, but that's because my old man was an electrical engineer and we designed and built the S-100 cards ourselves. We even did photo-etching ourselves on some of our later cards. Fun. Educational.
;-)
No, my nitpick consisted simply of pointing out that the Apple was not that innovative in a technical sense. It was hardly the first computer with swappable cards. That's all. I'm not saying that it wasn't the market breakthrough. It certainly was. Not everyone was ready to be their own engineer and software developer. The Apple ][ was a consumer item. The CP/M based S-100 bus machines were computers for computer people who couldn't afford 370's at home (and didn't have the raised floor
Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
Wow, I could get 250K/s w/ my 5200 w/ 10BaseT, and I've got over 600K/sec sustained w/ my G3 and 100BaseT both with my cable connection(the first w/ a net server, the second w/ my ISP, but I've got > 500K/s w/ net servers)
Your network must be a piece of shit.
You are describing the Macintosh Script Editor, except for the fact that it's not always on. You turn it on or off when you want to record a script for a particular repetitive task. When you're done recording, you can edit, modify and save the script as an application. I use it all the time.
Excelent! I did not know that, it sounds cool.. Is it as powerful as say Perl or something? The always on part may not be a good idea anywho.. it makes life easier, but ONLY if the AI is good enough. Now, it sounds like maybe ApleScript could be designed to nudge the average user into using the scripting langauge, i.e. it should be mildly in your face so that people actually use it, just not so much that it interfers with life, but that is sorta just cosmetics. I'll look at this langauge next time i'm arround a Mac.
Now, there is something to be said for having data abstractions available.. Dose AppleScript just simulate ckicks and stuff or do aplications provide a higher level interface to themselves? One of the things we may see eventually is derived user interfaces, i.e. the aplication provided ONLY the higher level access and ``themes programms'' or something would actually derive the interface from it. A system like this, if possible, would be especially ammenable to GUI scripting langauges since once you understood kinda how the interface derivation worked you would understand something about all your applications.
Have you seem the Plan9 interface? It is kinda interesting.. All the menus are built on the cut and paste. The idea being it is better to just make cut and paste efficent enough to simulate menus then actually create seperate menuing stuff.
Jeff
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
>anyone involved in the real world can tell you that linux/xeon is the only way to go for rendring and 3d animation/modeling.
Except for that little problem with almost none of the "real world" modeling/animation/rendering software having been ported to linux yet... (e.g. Pixar's) or that niggling detail of minimal support for 3d hardware acceleration in a window.
Other than that, yeah, Linux ROCKS for 3D content development...
Agreed. I always figured we'd be about DOS 67 by now, if not for Apple. Think about it.
How is does creating and marketing a computer to the General Public make Apple a niche player? Certainly they are targetting the G4 systems to those who need the power the most. But I don't believe that building a computer for the 95% of the population that doesn't understand computers (but just wants one that works) makes them a 'niche player.'
Stockholders aren't stupid. If they didn't like the direction Apple was taking, AAPL would still be selling at 13.
--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Umm...the two million people who bought iMacs in the last year, the 200,000 people who have preordered iBooks, and the however many people who bought the blue and white G3's seem to trust Apple just fine.
Motorola found a serious bug in one of their processors. I think it's a Good Thing that they halted production, rather than let them go out to the public. Other companies *cough*Intel*cough* would have shipped the chips, and spent a pile of money on marketing convincing people that there wasn't really a problem. While I'd like to see Apple handle the situation better (like, how about an extra 128mb RAM in exchange for the 50mHz in clock speed?), the fact that they're doing ANYTHING is, to me, a positive sign.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Well almost, besides that one guy Linus :) If apple got its act together, and worked really hard at compatibility and other issues/standards that microsoft and the PC industry have moved towards, they could win. =) --Brian
>Why is it that whenever an Apple topic comes up, some bozo feels the need to make some completely random comment with absolutely no foundation in truth? Did you know that Jobs had to club baby seals to fund Apple in the early days?
Jobs' point is not that the user SHOULDN'T know what's in the box, it's that they NEEDN'T know what's inside the box. Anybody who's picked up a telephone with a neophyte user on the other end should agree.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
They still use co-operative multi-tasking, instead of pre-emptive, because they made an ideological decision before, and the developer community is not aware enough to yell about it
This statement is laughable. Actually, most all of your statements are laughable, but the rest have been pretty well addressed by other people.
They did not use cooperative multitasking because of an ideological decision. I challenge you: compare a well-done cooperative system versus a well-done preemptive system on an 8MHz 68000 machine with 128k of memory which is generally running only one or two programs at once. (Remember, the original Mac did have those funky Desk Accessories which could run concurrently with the current program, and can be considered to be a seperate process.) Guess which one is faster? I'll let you figure it out. (HINT: It's the one Apple actually went with.) Once the decision was made, it was pretty much stuck. Retrofitting a preemptive tasking system onto the OS once the hardware had picked up enough to handle it would have been an absolute nightmare.
You ought to hang around the Mac developer community more before you say that we aren't aware enough to complain. Among the ones I hang out with, about half of all our complaining is directed toward either the lack of preemptive multitasking or memory protection in MacOS. It's a big issue, and Apple knows it, which is why they're releasing MacOS X. Again, retrofitting these features onto the old system would be far too painful. If you don't believe me, write some down 'n' dirty Mac programs and see the tricks the MacOS goes through to ensure you can still run an application from 1983 on a modern system. It's ugly.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
1) A tokenized Forth graphics engine.
2) Smalltalk.
The Forth graphics engine was originally intended to grow from a programmable replacement of the NAPLPS videotex graphics protocol, into a silicon implementation of a stack machine upon which byte codes, compiled from Smalltalk would be executed. At least that's the direction in which I had hoped to see the Viewtron videotex terminal evolve when I originated the dynamically downloaded tokenized Forth graphics protocol as a replacement for NAPLPS in 1981 and discussed these ideas with the folks at Xerox PARC prior to the genesis of Postscript and Lisa.
If Charles Moore could produce an economical 10MIPS 16 bit Forth engine on a 10K ECL gate array on virtually zero bucks back then, why couldn't Jobs with all his resources produce a silicon Postscript engine with power enough to execute Smalltalk?
Somehow a Forth interpreter made it into the first Mac, as did Postscript, but Smalltalk just didn't.
The Motorola 68000 family just didn't have the power. It may have been better than the Intel 86 family, but that really isn't saying much, now is it?
Seastead this.
So, not only do you want to be able to "muck around" in the box, you want Apple to bail you out if you break it? Sounds pretty damn contradictory to me. I've never understood why people think Macs are less hackable than PC's. Jesus, I work on HP PC's daily that have a sticker on the back that voids your warranty if you crack the case. It's not like Steve Jobs is going to break your fingers if you fire up ResEdit and do horrible things to the memory space...but don't expect his company to help you pick up the pieces!
My mommy told me when I was very young...if you mess with stuff, you'll probably break it.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
ummm... you can specify a startup disk which it boots off automatically. Why would you _have_ to press the option key just to startup? that is just stupid, and no, apple is not that dim.
Yes, a default boot partition can be saved in PRAM.
The 'Option key' option is, well, an option. You would use this to bypass the default.
--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Apple didn't "steal" the GUI from anyone, the idea of the GUI was set on paper during the 60s, long long before Xerox ever started on it. That and Xerox was only doing R&D, no products were ever planed hense no theft. Apple came along, striked a deal, and the rest is history. That, and what Xerox was doing with the GUI was drasticly drasticly different from what Apple did with it. Heres some examples of the differences in a quote from David Every - "There were overlapping windows, but there was no direct manipulation of those windows. To move the window you selected an option, from the one Menu that you had for each window, and you entered the new size or location of the window into a dialog (using numerical coordinates).There were icons, but icons were not associated with files -- they were more actions (buttons). They were using icons as verbs (do this, or do that) -- Apple made them into nouns, objects (that each represented data) that you manipulated. There wasn't that much direct manipulation, and most of the usage of the multiple windows was so that you could have multiple character terminals (like DOS) open at the same time. Contrast this with a Mac and you see that Apple went way way beyond what they saw." Some change huh? Jobs didn't "mess up" with NeXT, they were just far too ahead of their time. They did things 15 years ago that companies like Be are just now starting to seriously approach. It was the first *True* Object Oriented operating system (Be tries, but it is not one in the truest sense), which ment rapid application development. (and I mean *rapid*) Case in point, Quake 2 was ported to Mac O.S. X Server (which is heavily based on the NeXT codebase, and is truely Object Oriented) fully in just two weeks, contrast that with the several months of porting the same game to the tradition Mac O.S. - see what I'm getting at? Mac O.S. X will be much more then just Unix with a usable GUI, it will be entirely *revolutionary* - NeXT never made it big, but Macintosh already has tons of support. Personality issues? Sure, he's not the most honest person around - but who is?
I fly off the handle a lot, too, but I wouldn't
have made a comment like that based on ONE
experience, especially if I wasn't POSITIVE that
the network was setup correctly, and not saturated.
-WW
I really liked his use of the royal 'we' throghout the interview. It's very 'Jobsian'. I'm going to start doing that in meetings. It'll be fun.
example:
them: What are your priorities for this week.
Me: This week 'we' will be optimizing the epl templates.
They will think I'm a god -oh yeah, that'll rock...
Were it not for Jobs, those innovations we now take for granted may have died a slow death in a lab somewhere in Palo Alto... or at least they'd have been embraced by the market much later, and our current state of the art would still be a few years off (Windows 1.0, anyone?).
Ah, but history never reveals its alternatives.
--
--
Think Green... Burn only 100% recycled dinosaurs in you car.
Actually, it was the AUDIO people who were really put off by the lack of expansion slots - the photo-video people didn't really give much of a rat's ass, 3 was pretty much sufficient for a pair of SCSI cards, and a high-end video card.
But with the FireWire and USB, this situation is near to being remedied (as soon as all those nifty mainstream FireWire devices come out!)
"The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
How ironic that some lame slashdotter can label a man, whom many have acknowledged (even his detractors) to be a visionary force, as "myopic".
I guess listening to this kind of drivel is the price of admission here.
Hates people who have stupid little sigs
Steve Jobs fully understands why the current MacOS is crap. He wasn't responsible for it -- they booted him well before Apple's long period of stagnation. He came to Apple to fix those problems. He was off trying to make something good (NEXTSTEP), and the BSD Unix foundation that Apple is now using came from the fruits of his labor at NeXT.
As for Apple using NEXTSTEP's BSD/Mach as the foundation for MacOS instead of trying to roll their own.. well, wouldn't you? I think it's a more intelligent decision. Why are you criticizing Apple for not developing it all in-house. Part of running an intelligent business is knowing when it's cost-effective to go outside rather than home-grow. And further, since Apple acquired NeXT, one could argue that Apple is developing their OS fully in-house now.
>Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
Huh? There must be something very wrong with your setup. My machine easily saturates our 10BaseT. Plus, I remember Jobs nearly saturating a 100BaseT when he demoed OS8.6 and was comparing file transfer to NT.
Anyway, YMMV, but your claim is clearly circumspect.
Yo
C'mon, girl. You can stop posting AC now
(If I had a moderator widget, I'dve upped this one)
--
--
Think Green... Burn only 100% recycled dinosaurs in you car.
I'm sorry but Apple won't win any points from me for using a unix kernel. Real-time is the way to go.
---
Yup.. But that was Amilleo's plan.. not Steves.
Big difference.
--------------------------------
Probably.
I have a nice deal with my place of work, namely that I'm employed there. Nevertheless, I stand up to them and fight them on a nearly daily basis. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
You're right. I've seen these, plus a few hundred more. My collection runs from Marmalaid Boy to Urotsukidoji, including all of Ghibli's releases.
You'll do better to watch them subtitled, btw. Dubs are usually pretty bad.
Amen to that.
Boy, has this drifted, or what. Oh well, email wasn't an option.
--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
>As for Beos, only the kernel is proprietary,
>every thing else is completely open.
Really?
Show me the source for:
1. The 'twitcher'
2. The tracker
3. NetPositive
4. Their TCP/IP implementation
5. The underlying code behind replicants
...while you're at it, show me where Be says I could integrate this into my own operating system. I'd love to see Apple take on some of the special benefits behind the BeOS.
Not so open, is it?
As much as I like Be, the whole "Apple is stopping us" argument is tired and dead. First Apple shouldn't be obligated to support a competing OS - even though I personally think it'd be in their best interest in this case. Apple's supposed closed nature hasn't stopped the Linux community (LinuxPPC, Yellow Dog, even MkLinux). Even weirder still, such closed companies rarely release large chunks of their own source code to the public (Darwin).
I have the utmost respect for Be, but their argument is pretty much defunct. I'd much rather they simply outright state that their PowerPC users don't hold the same importance that they used to, and quit shifting the blame. Then again, people might realize that Intel - Be's biggest investor - is being anticompetitive.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
- Jeff
Um, From what I know Steve Jobs scares me.
The Silicon Valley movie confirmed that his so-called reality bubble is even more evident today than years ago. He puts worse a spin on things than Microsoft.
Dont get me wrong.. The stuff he has apple doing now is great! The iMac and artistic cases are taking some business sectors by storm where you would usually see PC/WinNT boxen.
Too bad Gil killed Newton.. Then we would have two good PDA devices. I wish it never died.
Killing the Clones was stupid too. Just as they get good marketshare Steve just goes off on his proprietary path. Oh well.
I fear that Steve Jobs is jelous that Bill gets all the great stuff, and now he gets to show off in a Time article influnced by his reality bubble. Too bad that second place in this world means the back seat.
-- dieman - Scott Dier
Cant wait to get my hands on one of those things. Too bad aple has not been releasing the specs. The way I see it is those things are a nice cheep platfrom to run risc linux on.
As far as steve jobs I don't care much for him. IBM has been doing far more to help linux.
It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
The Option key method is used when you want to boot form a non-default volume. You are supposed to set the default boot volume (HD partition, CD, etc) using the Startup Device control panel, although I believe this still works only for MacOS. In the meantime, you must use special utilities to modify the NVRAM, or use a method similar to BootX, to boot non-Apple OS's.
What happens when the power is restored after an outage (and a graceful UPS shutdown)? Must I go to work at 3AM to hold down the Option key?
No, in that case the computer uses the default partition dictated by the NVRAM parameters.
Ok, I guess I have not made myself clear enough.. My point is not that every computer should be used for everything, but that people get so much more out of having the power of a pogramming language to tie together the things that they use the computer for (like using perl -e now).. and that the development of psudo-programming langauages with: (a) power (like perl), (b) connection to the applications and data the person uses (like scripting langauges in general), and (c) a smoth learning curve (so that even people who can not just go out and learn to programm will eventually see how to make there lives better by getting the computer to do some grunt work for them) Is ultimatly more importent the any ammount of push button prettiness. Th reason for this is that the Church-Turing Thesis say that the push button prettiness can not make people's lives better in the way that a programming langauge can.. while there is no known limit on the smoothness of the learniong curve associated to a langauge, i.e. We should be spending more time making the programming easier.. not the initial usage.
As for your palm pilot example: more efficent data menipulation tools would probable be a welcome extension.
Here is an example of something that could make life easier for everyone.. an X-Windows based AI script writer. It just sits in the corner of your screen making scripts to do everything you are repetitvly doing (like clicking on mp3s to DL them); then when you find yourself doing something repetitive, you just click over to the script writer and modify it's half writen script to meat you specific criteria. What would happen is the script writer would no understand why you were doing what you were doing (like how you picked the files to DL), but it would have pre-writen some of the grunt parts of the algorithm.
Jeff
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Oh yeah... Forgot
What ever Pixar does will be eclipsed by square when their first motion picture comes out.
Square can get rendered graphics movies into the general mainstream and not just kid stuff with their talents.
Just look at the FF8 movies. Even compared to the whole mini-movie that Pixar did of the chess dudes they are both very close.
Personally, I thought the chess dude was a tad too animated in facial expressions. Yet again, more kiddie stuff.
-- dieman - Scott Dier
Over a hundred damn posts about a six page interview, and what do I have in the way of insightful, informative, and funny?
Apple rulz!!
Apple sux!!!
Serves me right for waiting until the third day to use my points I guess.
I wouldn't praise Pixar too much, they're being blown away by Foundation Imaging's work on Roughnecks: The Starship Trooper Chronicles, which has some of the best CGI ever. Plus Foundation has an impossible production schedule, seeing how Roughnecks' premire was rushed.
Some of the things he attibutes to Apple as reasons why it's great are pretty right-on the mark though.
Example: Apple WAS able to add USB to their boxes without worry about anything. They just did it. But I don't know if I wholly agree with his reasoning why. It seems to me that apple could make a jump like this precisely because they'd become a small niche-player in the industry. The smaller warrior always moves faster.
Werd.
Beos was never part of Apple's OS plan. There was rumors in 1996 or 97 of a buyout, but that was pre-Steve. And if the Be people wanted to run on the G3's they could have asked the LinuxPPC people for the specs. I'm running this on an iMac running LinuxPPC and it runs fine. How is any of this the fault of either Apple in general or Steve Jobs in particular?
Tee hee! Tee hee! Oh, you kidder. Ch-chuck, you smoke too much crack.
Yes, which makes sense, considering their intended user is the Average Person and not the Unix Guru.
Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
Really! Maybe your server is running NT or something. On my home network with a Mac client talking to a Linux server I have no such problems..
Why is it that whenever an Apple topic comes up, some bozo feels the need to make some completely random comment with absolutely no foundation in truth? MacOS, despite its limitations, is quite capable of saturating a 10Mb link and does almost as well with 100BaseT. Please, get a life, check your 'facts' and stop spouting rubbish.
I hope that I wasn't the only one un-nerved by Bill looking over my shoulder as I read the article!g if)
(in the time ad http://image.pathfinder.com/time/images/timelink.
seibed
oh please, that silly sun equipment is just way too overpriced and slow to be considered a real rendering solution. it has very little scalability and a piss poor price/performance ratio.
anyone involved in the real world can tell you that linux/xeon is the only way to go for rendring and 3d animation/modeling.
let's look no further than titanic...point proved.
linux is the *only* wave of the future.
get on the boat now, or drown.
...Linux ain't fer sale!
**>>BELCH
Tell, me a better solution that will play dvd movies, come with sensible amount of ram and drive space, compact in size(big issue), a bit trendy(hey I live downtown), and comes with ethernet and a modem, and finally, sensible in price. After you tell me a better solution, I shall proclaim myself sucker.
One thing that really jumped out at me in the interview was his mellow attitude. If I recall correctly, he's been described as a controlling megalomaniac... I don't know if anybody's heard the "Employee Number One" anecdote, so here goes:
Apple decided to issue all the employees name badges and ID numbers, since the company had grown beyond the point where everybody knew everybody. Wozniak was assigned number 1, Jobs number 2, etc. Jobs couldn't stand being number 2, despite the fact that Woz really was Apple at that point... So Jobs went ahead and assigned himself Employee Number Zero, since it hadn't been taken yet, and it placed him above everyone else.
In the end I much prefer the ability to configure my own look and feel from modern WM's to anything apple has produced. Trust me, there is a major difference in philosophy from Unix users and macintosh users. Unix users are not going to flock to Mac OS X because of the look and feel.
What makes you think you CAN'T do this on a Mac?
http://www.kaleidoscope.net/
Probably MORE schemes for Kaleidoscope than there are themes for any Unix WMs. Sure the source is closed, and the authors expect $25 of your hard-earned cash... Open-source has yet to make inroads on the Mac. Still, the main scheme editor is none other than ResEdit, which is free (as in beer).
Apple's own implementation of this feature fell somewhat short, so they dropped it. There were few complaints.
--B
Uhm.... pardon me, but it's not the TCP/IP stack that cares about files... it just juggles packets.
You should be looking at your FTP software if it crashed when saving large files.
You'll eat it and you'll like it.
I find it amusing to watch SGI go for Linux and Debian, because it might end up that my old software group at Pixar will use my hobby project as their interactive operating system. Some of them were quite resistant to Linux when I left.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Just so you're aware, I'm smoking crack, too.
Hee hee!
Simple things like insisting Apple go with more expensive, but image-enhancing, multicolor labels for the Apple cassettes made Apple the BMW of the PC business (at least until he got his clocked cleaned by IBM...)
The day my HS lab got a lab full of Apple IIe's was the day the world changed for me (and I had been hacking on a TRS-80 for a year before that).
Roll on Steve! You da man! :)
=td=
The Mach kernel in Mac OS X is real-time. Check your facts before posting.
Huh!
"Steve" is this Samoan guy with a journalism degree from Pago Pago Technical College. His real name is "Ubiquitous Bullshitus", but he says "Call me Steve!" -so we all do. Anyway, he was the recently announced winner (you must have heard of this) of the 1999 Nobel Prize for Relentless Smack-Talking. It's a great honor, and Time Magazine is fortunate to be interviewing him.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
off topic... but i laughed out loud
First posts rule..
Yeah.. yeah... first posts kick ass.
___
"I know kung-fu."
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
I know who you are. And you're a dumbass. Soon I may come over there and whup you.
Interesting rhetorical gymnastics. Too bad they're either misleading or flat out wrong.
I think it is telling that Apple views its mission to make sure that the common user does not understand "the black box"
The very quote you use says "don't need", as opposed to "make sure..does not". Quite a different logical meaning there. Perhaps you would be happier with a car or television that *forced* the user to be intimate with it's underlying technology? Maybe you should have to manually set the fuel-air ratio in your Honda? Screw channels, you should have to manually tune your TV. The entire computing world is built upon the concept of functional abstraction, otherwise we'd be trying to send web pages using assembly language. Apple is trying to 'abstract' up to the user level by integrating software and hardware. Many users may not know how a computer works. So what? Perhaps, God forbid, they actually want to do other things with their lives.
Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
Gee, that's funny, my cable modem dowloaded a file the other night at 180KB/s. That pipe seems pretty full to me. Perhaps my Macs are running NT without my knowledge...
Apple finally realized that to get consumers you need to get their workplace
Hardly. I don't see Sony products anywhere in my workplace, and they seem to do okay. People bought two million iMacs because they were easy to use and looked cool (at least to their eyes), while the computers at work were neither. Frankly, I'd be less likely to buy the same product I see at work (phone, VCR, company car) because I know PHBs only care about buying what the herd mentality tells them they should buy, and what fits with the corporate culture. They're gonna buy the white Ford Taurus GL, not the SHO, and surely not a Beetle/Audi TT/Ferrari/anything mildy interesting. As people see how clueless some IT departments are, they'll come to the same conclusion about computers.
Not only can their product not work at that level, but they have no interest in developing one that can (MS at least used the OS/2 code they had written for IBM to make NT)
So the world needs another kernel? Avie Tevanian did a lot of work on what became the Mach kernel. Avie worked for Steve at NeXT. Apple bought NeXT. A lot of the other technology (e.g., QuickTime) was "homegrown" at Apple. People used to complain that Apple had NIH-syndrome. Now you criticize them because they didn't reinvent the wheel? So what are we to make of companies that now support Linux? How about IBM? Is this an indictment against OS/2 and AIX, or is it just good business? How about SGI and IRIX?
So what if Jobs has his own ideology about technology? Since Apple is a vertical integrator, they will never dominate the overall market. You can take Steve's vision or leave it. If I don't like Saab's vision for the automobile, I don't buy one, but I'm not frightened by them. I'm more frightened by a company that's wants to have a piece of everything. Now who could that be?
O jaded and incoherent one, what the Hell are you talking about?
BeOS is proprietary - BSD is not. Apple chose BSD because its open and free. BSD has full SMP, true multithreading/tasking better than BeOS and a fully journaled filesystem when they port EXT3 or SGIs XFS.
His products sell, his products' have inspired all of consumer electronics, over 90% of iMac owners are on the internet, and Apple's stock has travelled from $14 to over $70.
I'm still looking for why people are "scared" of him, why they don't "get" him, and feel compelled to bag on his goals.
Everything he's done at Apple has helped Apple and made better products and made everyone involved money.
Last time i checked, even people that use Linux would like to accomplish goals like that.
___
"I know kung-fu."
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
When someone's telling you why the Mac sux and they say "co-operative multitasking" you know that the almost worthless debate has become completely worthless. It's equivalent to saying you use NT instead of Linux because NT has a microkernel and Linux doesn't. It's way too much of an over simplification.
To developers it isn't an oversimplification. Writing software to run on Macs is a pain in the ass because they don't support pre-emptive multitasking. There are just some things you can't do with cooperative multitasking.
The real break through in user interface is not some push button GUI.. it is a Programming Langauge which has a really good learning curve.. and that has access to all the information the user wants to menipulate. Light weight programming needs to be something a user can not help but do in there every day life ... one day programming should be though of like driving a car is today.
Mmmmm ... yummy AppleScript. Easy to learn, natural language syntax, object-oriented, controls the whole computer and many of the apps. Built into every sweet, sweet Apple pie. Tasty.
When you buy a company you buy their code too. Apple could have bought Be, things were going towards that when they decided against it. BSD is not as fully threaded as the BeOS the Mach microkernel probably is but BSD is running on top of that.
(As a former AU/X user, I just have to chip in.)
For those who might not have experienced AU/X, it was a full blown System V UNIX that ran some Mac II and Quadra hardware. '
The cool thing about it was that MacOS 7 booted on top of AU/X as a UNIX process, giving you full access to Mac programs along side your Unix command shell. Note that there was no GUI for the Unix programs - you couldn't run X Windows with the MacOS running. This meant either Unix command programs or un-modern MacOS programs, but no nice Mac GUI for Unix programs.
The uncool thing about AU/X was that GNU banned it, so no gcc meaning lots of software was not accessible.
Anyways, as you said, Apple *could* have ported A/UX to PowerMacs, but that would mean big licence fees to UNIX, inc. Much better to salvage the cool part (MacOS-on-UNIX , aka "Blue Box" or "Classic"), and port that to an open platform like Mach/BSD.
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
His quote... "I'm actually getting ready to put a 45 mg fiber to my house, because I want to find out what that will be like..." pretty much sums up why Steve will always have a little place in my heart. Besides the fact that he helped to found apple, you ungrateful bastards! How much do you owe this man? -Nathan
The Apple ][, besides being first-to-market with a complete solution, was also much cheaper than your average CP/M machine in those days.
(*80/S100/CPM machines were primarily kit machine or put together by local retailers. I think the Apple ][ debuted at $2500, while CP/M machines were double that price once you got all the parts.
The CP/M machine were also very fractured from a hardware standpoint, with a number of competing video and disk drive standards. This problem wasn't really solved until IBM introduced it's own CP/M 'clone', the PC. Before then, the #1 selling CP/M computer was actually the Apple ][ with an optional Z80 card made by Microsoft of all people.)
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
I really enjoyed his comments about having 50-100 top people at the apex of the pyramid (10K employees) and the energy/talent just flows through the campany. He really is a great leader and motivator.
But the obsession with defending vertical corporate strategies in computing made me a little wary, especially after the recent Be/Gassee criticism of Apple.
For example, I'd like to know just how open Apple is with all the specs for those mobos, which Linux will need is it is to be anything but a server on them.
I like a lot of the philosophy, I think that kind of optimism is important for the future of tech, but the whole fascination with control is unsettling.
Oh yeah, JON KATZ is a moron, when is the last time you saw a military coup in the USA?
Here is an example of something that could make life easier for everyone.. an X-Windows based AI script writer. It just sits in the corner of your screen making scripts to do everything you are repetitvly doing (like clicking on mp3s to DL them); then when you find yourself doing something repetitive, you just click over to the script writer and modify it's half writen script to meat you specific criteria.
You are describing the Macintosh Script Editor, except for the fact that it's not always on. You turn it on or off when you want to record a script for a particular repetitive task. When you're done recording, you can edit, modify and save the script as an application. I use it all the time.
The Mac even has a script menu that sits in the upper right all the time (if you choose to use it) so you can access OS-level scripts and application-level scripts that you've recorded or written within applications. Mac users trade scripts with each other. "Hey, here's a script that keeps two folders synchronized, no matter where they are." ... "Here's a script that sorts files into separate folders depending on file type." ... "Here's a script that launches your mail client at a certain time and checks mail and then quits."
I thought it was funny that you described AppleScript in your first message, where you said the Mac was too limited and for stupid people, and what they really need is easy programming, but it got beyond funny when you described the Script Editor, too.
The beauty of the Mac is that the complexity is not in your face, so it's easy to learn. Unfortunately, people who want to sneer at the Mac use one for a minute or two and think they've seen the whole thing. All of the things you'd do with a GUI/CLI can also be done with a Mac, just within the one interface, which happens to be a GUI. Our command line are flexible scripts that can be treated as applications or attached to other objects to make the objects smarter.
it was talking to a Sun Ultra10
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars --Oscar Wilde
Grrr. my nick is "Forward the Light Brigade"...
My opinion of Jobs is finally starting to form a bit. The way he phrases his sentences is very familiar, much like the way very smart people I know phrase things, with confidence. Probably my two favorite things he said in the interview were the comment about normal vs. talented people, and woz. He said that a small group of very talented people can do much greater things than ANY number of normal people. And I think that is definately correct. He also said that the normal 'talented' label applies to usually only 30% better than normal, with twice as good being VERY good. Then he says woz was 25 times or more better than average. Wow. That's a compliment. Anyhoo... I dunno bout you guys, but I like reading these kind of stories, a bit of the history of computing, a bit of its future.
abrams's advice: when eating an elephant, take one bite at a time.
--
--
Think Green... Burn only 100% recycled dinosaurs in you car.
i'd love to work for this guy - he's probably the ultimate salesman ever invented. It's a wonder he's managed to screw up practically everything he touched (screwed xerox's parc with its GUI which lead to MacCrapOS, messed up and had to close down NeXT, got booted outta apple) with that sort of personality.
But only, I presume, in the form of a BEOWULF CLUSTER, you dumb prick?
well it was very reproduceable, and that collision domain was not saturated at all (I tried this transfer several times as the OS crashed 100MB in each time... and in between transfering from one Sun to another on that domain I had no such problems, near 1MB/s
(100x)
Not to say that that is the structural limitation of Macs, but they have severe issues... the crashing due to large transfers for example.. it could be an older version, but it was a G3.. what MACOS version that is I do not know, but as a fairly recent computer it is hard to believe that it is THAT outdated...
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars --Oscar Wilde
Grrr. my nick is "Forward the Light Brigade"...
Why would I want a Unix with a 1984 look and feel(mac)? Honestly, I never could figure out why macintosh users were so amazed at the macintosh look and feel, to me it was never anything special even after I used if for some time. In the end I much prefer the ability to configure my own look and feel from modern WM's to anything apple has produced. Trust me, there is a major difference in philosophy from Unix users and macintosh users. Unix users are not going to flock to Mac OS X because of the look and feel.
As long as the reality is "You shouldn't have to much around...but you can if you want to", and not "You shouldn't have to much around, so we're going to keep you from doing so", then I'm happy.
Given Mac OS X's BSD underpinnings, I'm (fairly) confident that muck-around ability will exist in future Mac OS's. How supported it will be is another issue. =/
pooptruck
interesting, eh?
if the post has LINUX in it, it must be "interesting, insightful, or truth".
hey moderators, suck my dick you pathetic linux zealot bitches.
oh yeah, IRIX RULES!
now moderate me to flamebait and chant "Linus Uber Alles" 20 times.
I have BeOS installed on a spare drive on my home Mac, and on a spare partition on my work PC. I've used it since the Preview Release (i.e. 1997) I love the snappy feel of the OS, and particularly the strong underpinnings the OS has for real time applications like audio. The fact is, though, that there's been precious little (detectable) forward motion in the OS (from a user point of view) since the preview release 18 or so months ago. It seems like so much of their effort is being split trying to support umpteen million video card, sound card, and motherboard combinations while the stuff that drew me to the OS back in '97 has slowed to a crawl. Anyway, I wish Be luck, but for me that boat's already sailed.
I did not claim they try to make them hard to understand per se, they occlude the internal machinery, meaning "understanding" macOS is nothing more than playing with ResEdit...
I may not have used Macs much, but somethings are universal, and this was more of a comment on Jobs than Macs...
they have some saving grace, but his direction is a poor one for Apple... being a niche player is not a good place to be, and I think he is doing his shareholders a disservice even if they do not recognize it as such
Of course these are my opinions and I do not own Apple stock. You obviously disagree. Viva la difference
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars --Oscar Wilde
Grrr. my nick is "Forward the Light Brigade"...
There is a lot of talk about how importent it is to make things easy to use, but unfortuantly most of the people talking (like Jobs) do not really understand what a computer is.. (Now, that I have your attention I can make my point)
A computer is not a typewriter.. it is not a video game.. it is not a spell checker.. and it is not all of those things. It is a machine which represents a model of computation equivelent to a turing machine.. meaning that it can run any algorithm, i.e. do anything you can figure out how to tell it to do. The importent part of this is the ANYTHING part. Jobs may make a few simple jobs (pun) easier for a few stupid people.. and this is a good thing.. but it is not what we CAN do with a computer.
The truth is NO ONE can make a ``supper easy to use'' model of computation equivelent to a turing machine.. Not Jobs.. not Bill Gates.. Not Anybody. Note: ``supper easy to use'' is DEFINED to mean no need to understand logic or basic flow control of some sort in this statment. This is just the Chuch-Turing Thesis applied to user interface design.
The real break through in user interface is not some push button GUI.. it is a Programming Langauge which has a really good learning curve.. and that has access to all the information the user wants to menipulate. Light weight programming needs to be something a user can not help but do in there every day life..
I'd say the closest thing we have to this today is shell scripting and maybe Excel type things, but one day programming should be though of like driving a car is today.
Jeff
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Much of what Jobbs says is important in the interview directly contradicts Apple's actions regarding the apple // series. Sure the mac's architecture has some advantages over x86 architecture, but lots of people got shafted over it.
Also, It's silly to credit one salesman as the source of the desktop publishing revolution. Somebody else invented it, Jobbs sold it. Does this make Jobbs an innovator? Hardly!
Holy shit!!!
Ok, some people may disagree with what I said, but check out the moderations:
Moderation Totals:Troll=1, Insightful=1, Interesting=3, Overrated=4, Total=9.
!!!!
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars --Oscar Wilde
Grrr. my nick is "Forward the Light Brigade"...
Steve referenced the fact that he has a T1 in his house, and no matter where he is, he can always get to his "stuff". Sounds like he's still using OpenStep - maybe on his Toshiba laptop he had while at NeXT.
In comparing auto mechanics with "computer savvy people," you are starting with your assumption and deriving the rest from there.
The real "computer savvy" people are usually intelligent people who have taken time and effort to educate and discipline themselves (either formally or not so formally) in computers. There is a reason why the word "engineer" is added to so many computer related jobs. Network engineer, Computer engineer, Software Engineer: each of these jobs heavily require complex thinking, reading, and most of all, analysis. All of these skills carry over into other parts of life, including politics, religion, etc. It's not that these skills actually make our opinions right, it just means that we can support our decisions with rational arguments, either to convince others, or just to make ourselves more confident in our own opinions.
This is the difference between computer tech and a mechanic. Mechanics are looked down on because most of them are not really mechanics, but wrench monkeys: high-school drop outs who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty.
In the end, your argument can be applied to almost any proffession:
Physicians are just like mechanics, except they know a lot about fixing people.
Engineers are just like mechanics, except they just know a lot about building things.
God is just like a mechanic, except he just knows a lot about making Universes.
Do any of the above really make sense? Not really, unless you do some fancy word and mind tricks.
And one last point, about computer professionals looking down on users for stupid mistakes: it's the same in any specialized field:
Dumbass! You didn't change the oil in 50,000 miles!
Moron! You can't build a house on a flood plane and not get wet!
Freak! Ofcourse weight doesn't effect acceleration(in the first order).
I could go on rambling, but I can sense your eyes drooping already....
I have talked to so many people who claim they only like watching Anime when they're subtitled. I think they're wrong, for this reason: 1. I watch a movie for images....not to read. I read volumes and volumes of books as it is, when I read a book...I read. When I want to watch a movie, I want to be moved by the images, color, beauty of what the animators spent so long rendering either by hand or computer. Reading subtitles slows this down and distracts from the movie. 2. All animated movies...no matter when or where they're from are dubbed. Either they're dubbed in Japannese or English or German or whatever. No cartoon has an original voice, actors still have to go into a studio and read lines. 3. Having said all this, I ABHORE baddly done dubs. I did like "Kikki's Delivery Service", "Ghost in the Machine" was also good. If they English version is done right and with a good budget, you can't tell the difference. I've shown both of these movies to people that have never seen anime and they didn't know they were done in Japan...enough said. Also, Princess Mononoke, from what I can tell, looks good also...but I don't think they they were going to drop the ball on something that big. P.S. I WOULD rather watch a live action movie with subtitles though. But there is a big difference...real people speaking and mouthing real words that would make dubbing very obvious. So to sum up, I would rather see a dubbed version of an anime movie than the subtitled one...but only if it's a quality dub. If it's not, then I would rather just not watch the movie at all....subtitled or not. I'd rather not see a bunch of subtitled words screwing up the beautiful artwork.
You have no clue. Low quality? Care to explain this? Of course you can't...because you only did this to troll for flames didn't you. Why not grow up.
Did I say OSS? I never said Beos was open source. I ment that there are no hidden API's a la Microcrap, everything is well documented, and they include many GNU utilities. Programs like netpositive are NOT part of the Beos damnit, they are software that come with Beos!!! BE is selling an operating system not letting you integrate their tech. When you buy a boxed set from a Linux distro it comes with closed software(the most common used to be staroffice) .Show me the source for those programs. If BE tried to force a port of Beos onto the current macs they would get their asses sued off by apple. The only way that Beos could be ported to the Gx macs is by reverse engineering, which is illegal for a company to do to another companies product. So apple is stopping BE from porting.Apple not cooperating is stopping BE. Nobody ever said apple is obligated to support Beos on the mac. It was just assumed that apple would welcome Be's technology. Why would apple turn down the chance to have its users have a choice is oses? How the hell is Intel investing in BE being "anti-competative"?
The CGI on Roughnecks looks good, but then again so does stuff from a kid running Lightwave on a computer in his bedroom.
Pixar doesn't have to worry, Foundation Imaging isn't breaking any new ground here. Nothing like winning the first Oscar for a totally CGI short in 1988 (Tin Toy), or having the first feature length CGI movie (Toy Story...which was also the highest grossing movie the year it came out).
But it's a good show, they're just no Pixar.
Obviously you never used an Amiga.
The first Amiga was based on an 8MHz (actually 7.14) 68000 with 256k ram. Yes thats right, 256k, not 128, but that was about a year later than the Mac, and the extra memory was partially offset by the fact that it was *color* and higher resolution than the early Macintoshes, hence requiring more memory to display the graphics.
The Amiga had fully pre-emptive multitasking from day 1, using a well written and extremely efficient Microkernal architechture, with dynamic loading libraries and fully asyncronous IO, among things.
Part of the reason it was so small and fast was that the entire microkernal was written in hand coded assembly.
If you're interested in specifics, there is a *very* good interview with Carl Sassenrath, the designer of the Amiga kernel, at
http://technetcast.ddj.com/tnc_981120.html
I challenge you to say that the 8Mhz early Macintoshes, (Mac 128 to 512 or Mac Classic) were faster than the early Amiga's for real world applications. No way.
I think a few points should be made about what Jobs didn't say. First off, he never mentioned NextStep - except for once as an aside.
Second, he didn't say a thing about Apple Enterprise.
I think it's very telling. Jobs is planning on selling consumer black-boxes, he's made that fairly clear. I don't think he can make it any clearer than he doesn't want to sell to corporate America. Odd, that -- his return to Apple was on the coat-tails of NEXT Software, which is now Apple Enterprise, which he didn't mention once in his interview...
-- "In order to have power, I must be taken seriously." -Mojo Jojo
I remember a TV special a while back where Pixar was explaining their choice in computers. It had nothing to do with price/performance, but rather performance/cubic foot... They liked the suns because they were so small they could stack tons and tons of them in a relatively small area and get much more processing power than they could by trying to fit Onyx's or anything else into that area.
I think that shows that there are so many other factors to consider when you're in need of processing power... Yeah alphas are cheap, but whose going to sell you 400 quad alpha systems and ships them standard in low profile enclosures?
anyone involved in the real world can tell you that linux/xeon is the only way to go for rendring and 3d animation/modeling.
You're just crazy! For one, so many studios and/or software companies would need to report their solutions to Linux. For two Xeon is a bum when it comes to the highend... Yeah, it's 25% faster than PIII's, but compared to Alpha, SPARC, MIPS, PA-RISC, PowerPC, it's the bottom of the barrell so far as floating point performance goes... and that's what you need for rendering... lots of it...
Sounds like typical Jobsian "NO PC" overkill and stupidity. But I guess we've all come to accept that from him.
Uhm, clearly you don't know the meaning of Real Time in this context (OS), or you would have avoided to post.
Like pretty much everything Jobs has done, Pixar is of low quality, high hype, and gets caught up in the mainstream media. But unlike being forced to use NT in a corporate environment, nobody's making you pay $7 to see a silly computer-generated cartoon or $25 to get it on DVD for the living room.
The first computer I ever used was an Apple ][+, but jeez -- if they'd wasted time trying to make the early Macs backwards compatible with Apple ]['s they would have never gotten them out of the door. One of the reasons so many computers are such a complete pain in the ass today is the degree of reverse compatibility they maintain with the IBM PC Model 5150 from 1981.
I think you misunderstood. Apple views its mission to make sure that the common user does not have to understand "the black box"
This is similar to the way we no longer have to manually adjust the choke and ignition timing to enable us to start our cars in the morning. Of course those of us who know how still can, if we wish. But we don't have to start our grandmother's cars for them.
--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
No, homey, just noticeing what an idiot you are. It must suck to be so stupid.
It would be nice for you if you were right, but you're wrong. I have a number of Windows apps open at all times and my RC5 take a hit of maybe 5% when they are idle (like when I'm typing this). And I don't care how damned spiffy your developers are, a co-op kernel sucks a river of shit.
You go, girl!
Hey! That wasn't very nice! Now, go right over there and kiss him.
While every computer may be a universal computer (Turing Machine) in the sense that it can run any algorithm, few (actually, none) are used in this manner. Every computer may have infinite *potential* uses, but the actual uses are bounded by the applications it runs. It may be replication of a physical product like a CD or DVD player, it may be something which has no physical analog like a Web browser, or perhaps something in-between like a word processor.
AFAIK, my Palm Pilot is a Turing Machine, but it is simple to use because it is limited to a certain set of apps. Could someone port The Gimp to it? Well, yes, but obviously the form factor of the Palm does not lend itself to that use. This particular *physical* instantiation of a Turing Machine is limited in functionality.
To a lesser degree, the same is still true of the home PC. To the extent that one can identify the uses for a particular computer -- web, e-mail, word processing, games -- one can make it "super easy" to use. Obviously, if you then load Mathematica or AutoCAD onto the machine, it may no longer be easy to use, but that is driven by the complexity of the application.
Not really but maybe you'll read this... Say what you will but the man has had more influence on small computer systems than anyone else in history. Because of Steve-o many killer products (devloped or ripped-off) have been brought to market: -the mouse -the networked laser printer -expansion slots (Apple II) -cheap 24 bit video -drag and drop file system not to mention... -the menu / dialog driven GUI Pretty visionary guy. Plus Toy Story rocks.
While it's not going to win any awards for bangs-for-bucks, Pixar are using a bunch of nice Sun hardware for their render-farm - 120 E4500s and 4.5 terabytes of disc storage, totaling 1680 CPUs. List price has lots of zeros.... Sun press release.
Guys, isn't this an obvious troll?
The trolls come from all directions these days,
pro/anti/Linux/Sun/Apple/BeOS/Intel/Katz/Taco.
Just remember, when you get angry at a post, probably that comment was a troll.
sigh.
Rule #1.
Pixar will only be eclipsed by Pixar.
Square is about as "kid stuff" as it gets. The whole 'acid trip in a fun park' bullshit is getting rather tired as a vehicle for storyless, meaningless, tits an' ass Japanimation.
My advice if this stuff turns you on, go out and get laid kids.
The FF8 movie was tweaked MoCap. How do we insult animator's where I'm from, we call them MoCap tweakers. You go figure.
Gerry's Game (thats the chess dude to you) is considered by animators, even the tweaker's at Square, to be a paradigm of the art of animation. An almost faultless display of every aspect of putting a story to film. Camera, lighting, composition, colour design, timing, editing and on and on.
The lesson here is even you can have a worthless opinion, but if you don't have a clue, don't embarrass yourself by telling everyone.
From the article
... well.. frightening...
Apple and Pixar are the same in that regard--they both deliver a product that has immense technology unerpinnings and yet they both strive to say you don't need to know anything about this techology in order to use it. In the case of Apple, we're going to make it easy as possible to use this.
I think it is telling that Apple views its mission to make sure that the common user does not understand "the black box"
(this is made more clear by the context of that quote, its on page 3)
And that summarizes why most of macOS's limitations are still here (absent macOS X, which I will address as proof-of-point)
They still use co-operative multi-tasking, instead of pre-emptive, because they made an ideological decision before, and the developer community is not aware enough to yell about it (or Apple does not care, after all, their focus is the consumer, not the developer, as Steve Jobs would say)
Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
the common user will (a) prob not notice until DSL becomes more common, and (b) prob not notice even then.. "oh it will take 20 minutes, ok let me go get some coffee"
Apple finally realized that to get consumers you need to get their workplace, and in order to do that, you need to have a server as well as a workstation. I think it is telling they brought in BSD... Not only can their product not work at that level, but they have no interest in developing one that can (MS at least used the OS/2 code they had written for IBM to make NT)
I guess I find Jobs frightening; his myopia regarding the industry does not manifest itself as simple ostrich-in-the-sand, which would have meant he would have gone out of business long ago, but rather he superimposes ideology on technology to such an extent as to be
Another quote:
You said "corporate" and "technical" as if they go together. Technology has nothing to do with the corporate world. I don't see technology and the corporate world as being necessarily intertwined, any more than art and the corporate world are intertwined.
especially when we are talking about their TECHNOLOGY budgets!.. Jobs wants to take an appliance and make a social statement out of it, when it is an appliance, that ought to work as well as it can, not be a vehicle for social meaning...
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars --Oscar Wilde
Grrr. my nick is "Forward the Light Brigade"...
Well, it is the Monty Python aniversary...
It's all very well in practice, but it will never work in theory.
Wood-fired pizza oven in THE CANTEEN!!!! I want to work for Apple, even if all they make are multi-coloured suicide booths.
Where did you find the trailer? I've been looking around Disney's site, and can't find anything...
This is just the usual clueless Apple bashing. He even admits himself to almost never having used macs. But of course he considers himself an expert anyway!
:-).
The only technical claim, about Mac TCP/IP speed, has been shown to be wrong by a factor 100 or so by several other posters.
The claim that MacOS uses co-operative multi-tasking beacuse of some idelogical decision is absurd. What ideology, exactly, would that be? In reality preemptive multitasking just cannot be retrofitted into MacOS, and Apple has been working hard (if not always successfully...) for almost 10 years to replace it.
The claim that Apple tries to make their products hard to understand is too silly to comment on.
If the BSD comment is meant to mean anything, I can't decipher what it is (but I'm sure it is wrong
The only thing sadder that techno macho posturing from people who don't actually know what they're talking about, is probably those who moderate it up as "Insightful".
Bah!
Do a search on Disney's page for Fantasia, or check out Ain't It Cool News and Dark Horizons. There are actually four QTs I know of: A section on the Firebird, a section on the Carnival of the Animals, one that I haven't seen, and the trailer. Collect 'em all! Amaze your friends!
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
run, do not walk, to your software archive, pull that old 68k Mac out from mothballs, load up A/UX 3.0 ..... you mean you want it like that? but you HAVE it like that already (ok so it's 10 years old and only runs on 68k macs - porting's easy these days - if they wanted A/UX on PPCs it would have happened in 6 months) .... it's just that Apple threw it away and now seem to want to do it again from scratch .... oh well
You have absolutely no taste. I'm glad I don't know you.
Is it just me or was there a CRAPLOAD of typos in that article? You would think that Time would at least proofread what goes on their webpage.... Then again, it could just be the OCR software.....
NO, apple choose BSD because of the license. They are able to take BSD and make their own proprietary version. Yes ext3/xfs are coming, but when???? Beos has RIGHT NOW(what I think)is the best file system that is cheaply and commonly avaliable. As for Beos, only the kernel is proprietary, every thing else is completely open. They even use the bash shell for their terminal window. Apple was just being stupid/greedy. Now they(apple) won't work with BE so that Beos can be ported to the new Gx processors. In other words apple is doing their very best to stop Beos from running on apple hardware. Why is apple being an A$$hole ???
Some Newton facts.
:-)
When Gil took over, many expected him to kill the Newton. Instead, he came out with a statement in favor of the PDA concept, and the Newton as being Apple's PDA play
When Jobs was brought on, and the Newton group was making rumblings of leaving, Gil started the spin off...thus stopping the wholesale defection of the Newton developers
(Go read comp.newton back then...much happyness and joy over the prospect of a spin off)
Mr Jobs TRIED knifing Scully, and instead was handed his head. Scullys public baby was the Newton. Upon Jobs return he worked to kill the Newton.
"Apple makes computers. Computers have keyboards. Where's the Keyboard?" Said at the 1997 developers conference by Jobs.
On the announcement of the cancellation of the spin-off, 32 of the developers quit en-mass and left for Palm. (within 2 weeks...had to have the offer letters in hand
From what *I* know, it looks like Gil was pro-newton, and Jobs was driven by his petty ego.
no taste...waitafrigginminit! steve, i know thats you! does woz read slashdot too?
-- your knees hurt, don't they?
Why would I want a computer with a 1950's look and feel (unix)?
... a CLI, I guess.
Honestly, that's not a good way to do your logic. You're comparing Apples to
Nice Jobs, Steve: You
have to be a little nuts to
take on Microsoft and
Disney. But Steve Jobs,
CEO of Apple and Pixar,
is just crazy enough to try.
Now, with a new crop of
iMacs set to ship and a
new Toy Story on the way,
he's at the top of both his
games.
Umm, doesn't steve have deals with both of them?
obApple: They're actually doing really well, despite the G4 not shipping in the quantities they need it to. (Personally I couldn't care less about bugs that only appear over the rated speed. There's nothing new about chips running into problems over the rated speed...) The new iMacs are going to sell amazingly well, and iBooks and G4s are getting into the channels. Jobs is not an especially great guy, in fact he's a creep. The difference between Steve and Bill is merely that Steve is an egomaniac and Bill's a megalomaniac. I wonder if they've ever been seen together irl... hm...
But it's undeniable that Steve has been doing good stuff for Apple for the past couple years. This doesn't necessarily translate as good stuff for the consumers, esp those of us who had clones and/or used Linux or BeOS. But even then there's still a need for a strong Apple as a foundation. So I'm cool with Steve running the show. He just can't slack off, with his helicopter and handicapped parking spot.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
No contest. Steve hands down. One of the major problems with linux, is that it does not have a salesperson. Linus will put the audience to sleep, and Eric is worse than Mussolini crossing his arms on the pulpet. Imagine when Apple releases MacOS X client, AND IT WORKS. Unix with the MacOS look and feel? Yikes! Oh boy, seems to make linux look pretty ugly, but hey its open. Question is, who cares about that. Yea, yea I know. Linux this...linux that. Ouch boys, I just bought a iMac, DV special edition. Perfect for my undersized Manhattan studio.
I'm looking forward to the day that the editors here credit Bill G with having "labyrinthine mind" :)
nice to hear Apple is still innovating - for a while there I thought Microsoft® was going to run out of new ideas to copy.
Chuck
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
I love Linux and I would also love to have a mac with Mac OS X client on it. There is enough room in this world for both.
Mmmmm WindowMaker. Small, fast, and feature rich.
Uh, no.. you don't. It seems he's mellowed with age (he doesn't say 'you are shit!'..now it's 'your work is shit!'), but back in the day, you took the stairs, because if you ended up in the elevator with Steve, it might be hazardous to your career.
Thanks for that link to the interview with Carl Sassenrath, the designer of the Amiga OS. You made my day, DBMandrake.
The Amiga hardware and system software were thoughtfully designed and powerful, but the quality didn't stop there. You could get books that explained everything in detail- down to the schematics and subroutines. What a difference from the "Ignorance Is Cool" culture of the Mac!
Here's that interview again:
http://technetcast.ddj.com/tnc_981120.html
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. -Albert Einstein
Kaleidascope looked like changing colors and pixmaps for the buttons. That's not too difficult. Now, show me a Kalidescope theme that puts the min/max/kill buttons on the right of the window, moves the scroll bar to the left, allows you to use a keyboard combination to switch your mouse to window-resize mode or window-move mode, has multiple virtual desktops, and adds a ``next'' button which will switch your focus to the next window and bring it to the top of the stack? Doesn't sound nearly as configurable as E with a GTK theme, does it?
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
Let's see, you don't acknowledge the obvious ignorance you displayed even after it was displayed to you a zillion times, then try to switch gears and complain about something entirely unrelated to your original list of gripes.
The internal machine isn't entirely occluded, or it'd be impossible to use. Mac users know how, or can figure it out. Regardless of the current moves of Apple, it's making more money than it has in years, and its products still shine, and it continues to innovate like no other large company.
If you disagree with that, fine. But you ought to feel some obligation to have valid reasons for your disagreement.
I'm not going to help you with that part, though.
J.
damned vulpine http://sb.drtwister.com/
Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
You're absolutely smoking crack. I've seen transfer rates as high as 600k/sec (maybe 800?) on a G3 with a cable modem. What you may not know is that a lot of the networking was rewritten about a year ago for Mac OS 8.5.
For that matter, serial ISDN modems on the Mac for some time (perhaps still) performed better than their PC counterparts, do to the fact that Mac serial ports hit 230k, and PC wintel ports topped out a 165k. CNET had a story on this sometime back.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
If someone _must_ hold the Option key down to open the Startup Manager, this is unacceptable for any server (unless the user can specify a default boot partition and write it to firmware NVRAM).
What happens when the power is restored after an outage (and a graceful UPS shutdown)? Must I go to work at 3AM to hold down the Option key?
~ACBasically, after years of being surronded by computer "savvy" people, being one myself, and spending hours upon hours upon hours with them on IRC, messageboards, everywhere else...I've come to the colnclusion that they're basically the equivalent of auto mechanics, just hipper (to the general public) and more self rigtheous. Auto mechanics are looked down upon...bu tthey know cars inside and out. A great portion of every day of their lives probably revolves around cars and thoughts of automobiles in some way. Stuff that Joe and Joanne Public have no clue whatsoever about.
A profession is a profession, but it's kind of annoying how computer "mechanics" somehow get this idea that they're all knowing intellectual gods because they know computers inside and out...or how to use Linux...that knowing these things makes their viewpoints right, most enlightened, godly. I doubt auto mechanics suffer these same delusions. "Pfft, fucking average people are sooo stupid. The morons didn't even know all they had to do was this, to X, and their problem would be solved. Oh, since I'm an auto mechanic, my viewpoints on politics, competing products, lifestyle choices, spirituality, history, etc. are also the correct ones. We're better than 99% of the population...simpletons!"
It's been said that there's a sucker born every minute. Don't blame me, you're the one who actually bought a mac.
He's the kind of guy who would be a local celeb if he sold used cars, or an employee of the month if he worked at a home electronics store. He's the kind of guy who women believe when he talks, etc. etc.
I don't know why everyone confuses sales tactics with some kind of vision or genius. Jobbs is not an innovator, he is a packager. He tells people what they want to hear: "you can buy a technologically superior computer for under $1000".
Most people like to hear things like that because it makes them feel good. Everyone forgets the adage that if something seems too good to be true it probably is.
People don't realize that the number-one product that Jobbs has sold is himself. People believe that he is a creative geinus... people believe that he has changed the world. He has sold a lot of colored plastic, nothing more.