Reminds me of the dilbert series where Dilbert has a gadget rivalry with one of his co-workkers. The two finally meet in a hallway and have a stand-off, western style. Both draw at the same but, but Dilbert's rival wins (rings all of Dilbert's gadgets) because his gadgets have speed dial.
I wrote an article about how I'm against closing the system and submitted it to Artificial Cheese.
For convenience, here's a copy:
Wired is running an article about Apple's recent actions to disallow OS tweaking. I'd like to congratulate Apple for taking a move to completely alienate a market they have worked for years to please.
To see why Apple's move is wrong, you have to do some thinking on your own. Why did Apple open source their system? They wanted code monkeys to "go ape" with the source, right? They must have wanted that, because their other markets (graphic designers and internet surfing grandmas) don't care.
Now ask yourself this. What do code monkeys want? They want things open. They want things they can change. Code monkeys are never happy with what's given to them. If they were, they wouldn't have bothered to learn a programming language, and they wouldn't spend hours upon hours looking through source code.
So why would you make a invitation gesture with one hand, and push people away with the other?
Apple claims to do it for our own good. They hold the opinion that they know what's best for interface related issues, and that code monkeys should only concern themselves with boring subjects such as how the OS handles virtual memory, how to patch security issues, and why audio sometimes skips on certain multiprocessor machines.
But for God's sake, even Apple can't follow their own guidelines. If you read them, you'll see things saying to only use the brushed steel interface for programs dealing directly with media or hardware. That makes sense. Apple uses it for iPhoto, QuickTime, and Final Cut Pro. They also use it for iChat. Does iChat have anything to do with media or hardware? Absolutely not.
Even a code monkey wouldn't make a stupid mistake like that.
So Apple. I'm begging you. Please don't shoot yourself in the foot like this. You spent so much time creating an open system, and wasting your time closing it again is absurd. Not only is it absurd, but it's driving away the very customers you worked incredibly hard to earn.
I know whenever someone claims "it just feels faster", people jump on them saying it's merely the pre-binding, the cleared RAM, whatever. But let me tell you, this update really does make things faster. How do I know? I just bought this dual 1GHz g4, and everything was just pre-bound, and I've been adding new software, so my RAM gets cleared plenty.
Window moving, web pages loading, even photoshop. This computer is even quicker than before. I swear.
When the second moon was discovered I wondered if there was the face of a woman on it (remember "the man on the moon" from when you were a kid?). That's good. I'm all for eqaulity.
But now that there are three, I wonder what should be on this one. The face of a she-man/transvestite? The face of an ape?
I'm sure Rumsfeld would be happy to blast George Dubya's face on there in no time (this is unrelated to the transvestite suggestion mentioned earlier, merely a reflection on the trigger happy habits of some individuals running the country).
True, a lot of batches of chips are better suited towards certain clockrates. But stable chips, like I mentioned in my post, can usually be flexible. Low MHz G3s were like this. They marked them as whatever consumer demand dictated. Sometimes they split batches that behaved identically half and half.
Finally, astronomy for people such as myself with small attention spans. This is huge! It's just what the science needs to gain entire new audiences.....whoah! Something shiny!
There are a lot of people criticizing Apple for purposefully limiting this feature. To these people I would point out the fact that Apple isn't the only company to do this. For example, processor companies sell thousands of chips that are identical, except for their clockrate. Many processor batches are so stable that they can be turned into whatever people will pay for. In fact, Intel used to take a batch of Pentium 2 chips, give half of them half as much L2 cache, and sell them as Celerons. At heart, however, they were still just Pentium 2s.
Apple's no better than the rest of the industry, but they certainly aren't any worse.
I'm running the release version of Jaguar, and as of right now there is no update available (using Software Update). I guess they're punishing the early early adoptors and waiting until the release date.
Although I can only argue from my own experiences, my integrated trackball was wonderful, hardly got dirty, and NEVER broke. In fact, I used it so much that the click-button snapped right off, yet the track ball components never failed.
Maybe Apple just made a better one than the competitors.
I think that most people here are missing the point. I've scanned the discussions, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but everybody is sticking to the argument about speed. This machine is faster, that machine is faster. Apple will do this because of speed, and Apple will do that because of speed. Whoah, whoah! Apple doesn't really care that much about speed!
Think about it. Sure, they try to ship the newest and the greatest processors when they can, but do you honestly think they'd still be in the AIM partnership if all they cared about was speed? Of course not. The key to understanding Apple is knowing what they value. What do they value? Being the God of their customer's computers.
Think about it. Apple is constantly building walls between itself and the community. They control all hardware. They are the sole producers of the OS. They approve all drivers. They produce many of the basic Applications one might use (Office Suite, photo program, movie making, burning software, music player, calendar program, scanning software, chatting program, email program). They produce a server that has heavy integration with Macintosh clients. They have a web hosting business that integrates heavily with OS X. The list of internal Apple ties is endless. Sure, you could make the argument that Apple has lots of ties to outside companies and products, but Apple branches out to them (for example, see the digital hub) instead of the companies coming to Apple.
Apple is building a contained Mac world. They have been forever. Switching to x86 chips would mean losing a lot of control. If they can sacrifice a little bit of speed for a lot of containment, they'll do it in a heartbeat. If you go by Michael Kanellos's stupid argument, Apple will dump their current sound cards and switch to Creative cards within the next couple years as well, because of their better performance. Do you honestly think Apple will want to start relying on another company to produce drivers, tech support, etc.? Apple will produce everything that they can, and when they can't produce it they will invest heavily in a company that can, and set up a strict partnership.
Earlier I mentioned the AIM partnership. Apple doesn't just buy their chips from the cheapest dealer on the street. They were integrating when that partnership was created, and they continue to integrate today. They won't throw away years and years of work to form a new integration with Intel as a part. It would go completely against Apple's plan.
I agree. I started out on Linux, moved to FreeBSD, and ended my search for the "right" OS with NetBSD. I found that even somewhat mainstream hardware wasn't supported on FreeBSD, while NetBSD already had every problem worked out.
Net also just seems higher quality. FreeBSD ports would shove stuff all over my system, but NetBSD has a very well laid out tree where files go. FreeBSD seems to be quick to jump on the bandwagon, but NetBSD seems to do it right.
Just my 2 cents. I never tried out NetBSD until FreeBSD didn't work. Since then, I've installed it on all my boxes, even those that are supported by FreeBSD.
Screen refresh rates are in Hz, which is a frequency. I don't remember much from my physics days, but a screen refresh of 75 Hz means it refreshes 75 times per second.
Even if Apple used slow monitors, it would only be slow by 1 or 2 seventy-fifths of a second. In short, impossible to notice.
Where you do notice this is with shadows or cursors and things. Nobody wants movement shadows (they look horrible on DVDs and games).
As far as I know, however, Apple flatscreens have EXCELLENT refresh rates. Since that's up for debate, I'll simply retain my original point. Web browsing using a Mac is not a monitor issue.
You're not telling the Slashdot crowd anything new. EVERYONE knows that Apple RAM is expensive. You didn't?
I've never bought more than the bare amount of RAM on an Apple system. I wish i could buy my computer without RAM. But don't come on here acting like you've discovered something new. WE KNOW ALREADY.
I just sent Roxio another e-mail telling them I'm pissed. The URL to do so is here.
This is the message I sent:
Your Toast project manager has been busy! He's been telling all the Mac faithful that even though the new EULA for Toast says you can use DRM, you won't. Is this a promise? Are we supposed to take his word for it? Because honestly, when confronted between believing a legal document, or some "Toast Manager", I believe the legal document. As far as I'm concerned, as long as the Toast EULA says you can use malware, YOU'RE USING MALWARE. If you're not now, you will later, and that scares me. Once again, I am no longer your customer.
Slashdot Mirror
At this point wouldn't Microsoft ban your login/password? Or perhaps might they notify your ISP of what you're doing?
They're not going to sit idle while their entire database is massacred.
I wonder if gigabit ethernet has better latency though.
Anyone know?
Thanks man. You sure know your dilbert!
Reminds me of the dilbert series where Dilbert has a gadget rivalry with one of his co-workkers. The two finally meet in a hallway and have a stand-off, western style. Both draw at the same but, but Dilbert's rival wins (rings all of Dilbert's gadgets) because his gadgets have speed dial.
"Speed Dial. Fool."
Can someone find that cartoon?
Wired is running an article about Apple's recent actions to disallow OS tweaking. I'd like to congratulate Apple for taking a move to completely alienate a market they have worked for years to please.
To see why Apple's move is wrong, you have to do some thinking on your own. Why did Apple open source their system? They wanted code monkeys to "go ape" with the source, right? They must have wanted that, because their other markets (graphic designers and internet surfing grandmas) don't care.
Now ask yourself this. What do code monkeys want? They want things open. They want things they can change. Code monkeys are never happy with what's given to them. If they were, they wouldn't have bothered to learn a programming language, and they wouldn't spend hours upon hours looking through source code.
So why would you make a invitation gesture with one hand, and push people away with the other?
Apple claims to do it for our own good. They hold the opinion that they know what's best for interface related issues, and that code monkeys should only concern themselves with boring subjects such as how the OS handles virtual memory, how to patch security issues, and why audio sometimes skips on certain multiprocessor machines.
But for God's sake, even Apple can't follow their own guidelines. If you read them, you'll see things saying to only use the brushed steel interface for programs dealing directly with media or hardware. That makes sense. Apple uses it for iPhoto, QuickTime, and Final Cut Pro. They also use it for iChat. Does iChat have anything to do with media or hardware? Absolutely not.
Even a code monkey wouldn't make a stupid mistake like that.
So Apple. I'm begging you. Please don't shoot yourself in the foot like this. You spent so much time creating an open system, and wasting your time closing it again is absurd. Not only is it absurd, but it's driving away the very customers you worked incredibly hard to earn.
Cool stuff. I guess you learn something new every day. :)
Thanks for the info.
I know whenever someone claims "it just feels faster", people jump on them saying it's merely the pre-binding, the cleared RAM, whatever. But let me tell you, this update really does make things faster. How do I know? I just bought this dual 1GHz g4, and everything was just pre-bound, and I've been adding new software, so my RAM gets cleared plenty.
Window moving, web pages loading, even photoshop. This computer is even quicker than before. I swear.
Due to security reasons, Apple defaults to not automatically check for updates.
:)
Why it overwrote your previous prefs, I don't know. Maybe they were just being extra sure.
I run a web hosting company. Send me a zip of the site (brian@tobinhosting.com) and I'll mirror the stuff.
:)
Temporarily, of course.
He could use IMAP. That would take care of the mail syncing issue.
I use IMAP to sync my Outlook and Webmail.
When the second moon was discovered I wondered if there was the face of a woman on it (remember "the man on the moon" from when you were a kid?). That's good. I'm all for eqaulity.
But now that there are three, I wonder what should be on this one. The face of a she-man/transvestite? The face of an ape?
I'm sure Rumsfeld would be happy to blast George Dubya's face on there in no time (this is unrelated to the transvestite suggestion mentioned earlier, merely a reflection on the trigger happy habits of some individuals running the country).
It's kind of late, but I wrote my 2 cents about the article on Artificial Cheese. Here's a link.
4 /348
And here it is pasted: http://artificialcheese.com/story/2002/8/31/16104
Ooooooooohhhhh. Cool. :)
True, a lot of batches of chips are better suited towards certain clockrates. But stable chips, like I mentioned in my post, can usually be flexible. Low MHz G3s were like this. They marked them as whatever consumer demand dictated. Sometimes they split batches that behaved identically half and half.
I'm sure other chip makers do the same thing.
But it's not moving. I lost interest in like 5 seconds. :)
Finally, astronomy for people such as myself with small attention spans. This is huge! It's just what the science needs to gain entire new audiences.....whoah! Something shiny!
There are a lot of people criticizing Apple for purposefully limiting this feature. To these people I would point out the fact that Apple isn't the only company to do this. For example, processor companies sell thousands of chips that are identical, except for their clockrate. Many processor batches are so stable that they can be turned into whatever people will pay for. In fact, Intel used to take a batch of Pentium 2 chips, give half of them half as much L2 cache, and sell them as Celerons. At heart, however, they were still just Pentium 2s.
Apple's no better than the rest of the industry, but they certainly aren't any worse.
I'm running the release version of Jaguar, and as of right now there is no update available (using Software Update). I guess they're punishing the early early adoptors and waiting until the release date.
The reason they're being platform agnostic is because Apple gets royalties for every Firewire card sold. They own the patent.
Smart busines move.
Although I can only argue from my own experiences, my integrated trackball was wonderful, hardly got dirty, and NEVER broke. In fact, I used it so much that the click-button snapped right off, yet the track ball components never failed.
Maybe Apple just made a better one than the competitors.
I think that most people here are missing the point. I've scanned the discussions, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but everybody is sticking to the argument about speed. This machine is faster, that machine is faster. Apple will do this because of speed, and Apple will do that because of speed. Whoah, whoah! Apple doesn't really care that much about speed!
Think about it. Sure, they try to ship the newest and the greatest processors when they can, but do you honestly think they'd still be in the AIM partnership if all they cared about was speed? Of course not. The key to understanding Apple is knowing what they value. What do they value? Being the God of their customer's computers.
Think about it. Apple is constantly building walls between itself and the community. They control all hardware. They are the sole producers of the OS. They approve all drivers. They produce many of the basic Applications one might use (Office Suite, photo program, movie making, burning software, music player, calendar program, scanning software, chatting program, email program). They produce a server that has heavy integration with Macintosh clients. They have a web hosting business that integrates heavily with OS X. The list of internal Apple ties is endless. Sure, you could make the argument that Apple has lots of ties to outside companies and products, but Apple branches out to them (for example, see the digital hub) instead of the companies coming to Apple.
Apple is building a contained Mac world. They have been forever. Switching to x86 chips would mean losing a lot of control. If they can sacrifice a little bit of speed for a lot of containment, they'll do it in a heartbeat. If you go by Michael Kanellos's stupid argument, Apple will dump their current sound cards and switch to Creative cards within the next couple years as well, because of their better performance. Do you honestly think Apple will want to start relying on another company to produce drivers, tech support, etc.? Apple will produce everything that they can, and when they can't produce it they will invest heavily in a company that can, and set up a strict partnership.
Earlier I mentioned the AIM partnership. Apple doesn't just buy their chips from the cheapest dealer on the street. They were integrating when that partnership was created, and they continue to integrate today. They won't throw away years and years of work to form a new integration with Intel as a part. It would go completely against Apple's plan.
I agree. I started out on Linux, moved to FreeBSD, and ended my search for the "right" OS with NetBSD. I found that even somewhat mainstream hardware wasn't supported on FreeBSD, while NetBSD already had every problem worked out.
Net also just seems higher quality. FreeBSD ports would shove stuff all over my system, but NetBSD has a very well laid out tree where files go. FreeBSD seems to be quick to jump on the bandwagon, but NetBSD seems to do it right.
Just my 2 cents. I never tried out NetBSD until FreeBSD didn't work. Since then, I've installed it on all my boxes, even those that are supported by FreeBSD.
Screen refresh rates are in Hz, which is a frequency. I don't remember much from my physics days, but a screen refresh of 75 Hz means it refreshes 75 times per second.
Even if Apple used slow monitors, it would only be slow by 1 or 2 seventy-fifths of a second. In short, impossible to notice.
Where you do notice this is with shadows or cursors and things. Nobody wants movement shadows (they look horrible on DVDs and games).
As far as I know, however, Apple flatscreens have EXCELLENT refresh rates. Since that's up for debate, I'll simply retain my original point. Web browsing using a Mac is not a monitor issue.
You're not telling the Slashdot crowd anything new. EVERYONE knows that Apple RAM is expensive. You didn't?
I've never bought more than the bare amount of RAM on an Apple system. I wish i could buy my computer without RAM. But don't come on here acting like you've discovered something new. WE KNOW ALREADY.
Three words for you. Crucial.com
I just sent Roxio another e-mail telling them I'm pissed. The URL to do so is here.
This is the message I sent:
Your Toast project manager has been busy! He's been telling all the Mac faithful that even though the new EULA for Toast says you can use DRM, you won't. Is this a promise? Are we supposed to take his word for it? Because honestly, when confronted between believing a legal document, or some "Toast Manager", I believe the legal document. As far as I'm concerned, as long as the Toast EULA says you can use malware, YOU'RE USING MALWARE. If you're not now, you will later, and that scares me. Once again, I am no longer your customer.