80000 died in the bombing of Nagasaki. In the 20th century, 100000 people died simply mining coal, in the US alone and the US has a better safety record than most. It's too depressing to look up more numbers.
and people with an interest in engineering things for the world to benefit from and making a living in the process have a very well qualified criticism.
Yeah, and the proper response to that is, "Then don't fucking use GPL code. Really, it's not that hard. Christ."
You're wrong: the distinction between species is, in fact, arbitrary and unresolvable in any self-consistent manner. Here's just one example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species
This doesn't mean it's not useful to talk about dogs being a different species than tapeworms, just that saying "Okay, fine, you have amply demonstrated evidence of one particular species changing over time, but you have not shown me that species changing into another one!" and acting like you won the argument makes you the problem.
"The funny thing that I am complaining about a hypothetical yet realistic threat; while Net Neutrality seeks to impose regulation to solve a problem we not only have not had but have no signs of having soon."
I have to ask: what the fuck is wrong with you? Copyright is a monopoly on reproduction. Okay. What part of buying something and selling it again involves reproduction in any fucking shape or form? Where in this process is the copy made? It's like, you're writing in standard English, but all I read is meaningless bullshit, so I ask again, what the fuck is wrong with you?
I came to this party late, so still at 0. Anyway...
Regarding OP, I read that as, "Let people have guns, and murder, robbery, and other violent crime rates will go down." I don't think he was looking at deaths by shooting (suicides, accidental, and crime-related), or even deaths in general, but overall crime statistics, which 'total gun deaths' doesn't really address.
Part of what makes this hard to analyze is that there are two distinct portions of each graph: the 'low gun control' (strictness ~40), and they have radically different behavior: low gun control states have essentially no correlation between strictness and any violent crime metrics, while for higher gun control states, the correlation is positive for murder and robbery, negative for rape, and null for 'property crimes' (slightly positive for 'overall' violent crime).
Another interesting thing, though, is that in pretty much all (except rape) statistics, both the highest and lowest crime rates are found in the 'low gun control' states; this suggests to me that crime rates have less to do with the availability of guns than with other factors particular to each state.
Regarding your last point, Washington DC is currently an experiment-in-progress.
The problem with your data is that it counts 'gun deaths', not crime levels. Your data includes suicides and accidental shootings with the violent crime. That's a very convenient set of data to present if your agenda is to outlaw gun ownership, but it's a bit disingenuous.
So I'm going to counter with a few graphs of my own.
This is the one you already made: gun laws on the x axis, gun deaths on the y. I guess most people can be convinced there's a negative correlation there. Let's move on.
That's gun laws versus murder rates (source: http://www.infoplease.com/us/statistics/crime-rate-state.html). Suddenly the correlation is much less obvious. On the low end of strictness, data is all over the place, and on the high end, as availability of guns goes down, murders actually go up.
So, yeah. I don't think anyone would argue that more guns leads to more gun-related deaths (which the data you provided does show, however weakly), but we were never arguing about gun deaths. We were arguing about crime, where the correlations are much less clear-cut.
For letters of recommendation... http://das.sagepub.com/cgi/content/short/14/2/191 "Letters written for female applicants were found to differ systematically from those written for male applicants..."
The legal system is part of the government. Losing this sort of lawsuit then is by definition the government stifling dissent. Or, to put it another way, without the government in place, the person bringing the lawsuit would be shit out of luck trying to punish someone for their speech.
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
The reason software requires a license is due to the fact that running a program requires a copy of it to be made from the external representation (disk, CD-ROM, DVD) to internal storage (memory). Only the copyright holder, by default, is allowed to do this. In order to allow others to use the program without breaking copyright law, current law says that they must be granted a license.
You're wrong. 17 USC section 117:
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided... that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner
I don't usually follow the gaming press, but it is impossible to have missed Spore, so big was the hype surrounding it. You should know that I am not what you would call a 'hardcore' gamer; I don't spend ten hours a day in front of a computer, I don't have ten level 80s in World of Warcraft, and I can't say that I particularly enjoy totally pwning myself some noobs. That puts me square in the center of the Spore target audience, and, I hope, makes me qualified to write the following review.
I shall begin with getting the game.
There was a package outside my door yesterday morning; I guess the mailman had left it while I was still asleep. I brought it inside and took it into the kitchen. I poured a scoop of coffee into the machine and started to unwrap it while I waited for my coffee to brew.
It was, indeed, Spore. The game box is pretty standard, with the cover picture, naturally, not being related to the gameplay in any way. In the box was a manual and an install disk. My coffee maker dinged before I could examine them closely. I poured myself a cup and took a sip. I had been expecting it to wake me up, but for some reason it just made me angry.
I popped the disk into my laptop and began the install; I had expected it to take a few minutes, given the sheer mass of content it would have to move, so I was pleasantly surprised when it launched the game almost instantly, taking me directly into...
Part I: Cell Mode
In cell mode, you control a protozoa (the box-shaped critter) at the very beginning of its evolutionary journey. You use the mouse to guide it as it swims around the primordial soup, devouring lesser microbes; the goal is to eat and avoid being eaten.
I guided my cell to swim around a little, eating the floating icons, and generally dominating the game space.
Some time later, I advanced enough to begin using the editors (more on that later), and began designing fantastic new creatures.
After about two hours, I started making some real progress: a little notice popped up saying that the evolutionary battery was running low. Surely, I thought, I will soon evolve. Then my laptop turned off, the game apparently over.
Part II: Initial Thoughts
I was somewhat disappointed with Spore. Not only had the advanced multi-cellular features been cut, but the ending felt unfulfilling and tacked-on. Seeing some sort of cutscene congratulating me on my victory would have been nice; at the very least, I would have expected Maxis to run the credits.
Then again, it's an interesting bit of commentary on the state of our society that they needed to shut down my computer, surely as a way to combat ever-increasing rates of video game addiction. While gaming is entertaining, there is a whole wide world outside the glow of the monitor; thank you, Maxis, for reminding us of that. Taking their message to heart, I got up from the computer and found the list of things I had been putting off...
Part III: Replay
I returned to the Spore this morning, having spent the rest of that day fixing my car's brakes, painting the garage, and reading with my son. I started a new game, hoping to see some of the content I might have missed the first time through, but this time I beat it less than a minute.
Part IV: The Editors
I don't understand the hype about the customizability, as that part of the game is really nothing special. In fact, I was halfway through the game before could edit my creature at all. Sure, it's nice to be able to change the its basic color scheme (through the handy, though somewhat clunky, 'Appearence Settings' box), but you can't change its shape or the structure of its markings, nor can you add things on to it. It's entertaining to see the sorts of beasts you can make, once you figure out yo
Dear reader, I have a confession to make: I love Microsoft. I love it more than I love my family. This ought not come as a surprise to any that know me: a long line of jaded ex girlfriends will laugh bitterly and recall the passion they could never share in, and those few that can call themselves my friends accept that, on Patch Tuesday, their lives are nothing to me.
But above even my love for Bill Gates' corporate loin product is my love for my work. It is a sacred task that has been assigned to me, and I dare not let friends, nor family, nor even software allegiances stand in the way of the fairness and impartiality that is my trademark.
But why do I tell you this? Why do I bare my soul in such a vulgar fashion? It is that you may understand: even now, I will not let my love blind me; I do not write from the perspective of an enamored lover, nor a too-faithful user. No, it is as a Genuine Microsoft User hungry for the Next Best Thing that I pen this, my review of Windows Vista.
Part I: Making the Switch
"Aha," you are saying, having been inundated by countless negative reviews, "He will surely realize that Vista is in every way a downgrade from previous Microsoft products; he will slowly become disillusioned with its clunkiness, bloat, and arbitrary changes made only for the sake of justifying an overzealous Vice President's salary. Over the course of many painful pages, he will finally renounce his love for the Monopolist, and end with an impassioned plea for the adoption of the obviously superior Apple OSX while a swelling orchestral piece rises in the background."
Alas, no. Such a review, while undoubtedly entertaining, would be as far from the truth as, say, religion. No, this is most assuredly a glowingly positive testimonial: Windows Vista is easily the best operating system on the market today. Such an assertion, I realize, may offend some of my readers' base sensibilities; if that is the case, kindly allow me to show you to the exit.
But I have, once again, gotten ahead of myself. Firstly, why I choose to review the Vistas now, rather than immediately following the January launch, bears explaining.
It was a cloudy Monday morning, some two months back, when my erstwhile laptop, a venerable old Compaq, gave up the ghost. The screen, which had been flaky for a number of weeks, finally quit altogether.
After a brief mourning period, I began scouring the print classifieds, searching for a replacement. I soon found one, a dual-core offering from Hewlett Packard. The $600 price tag--considerably less than my weekly escort--made its purchase, and my subsequent review, a foregone conclusion. It arrived the following Thursday, in the hands of a perky blonde UPS driver; I christened it Alex, turned it on, transferred my data (a breeze thanks to Microsoft's new Streaming Automatic External Backup Restore technology), configured it to suit my needs, and resumed my work.
I have been using it, very happily, ever since and, today, shall pass judgment.
Part II: New Features (and what they mean for you)
Aero:
This brand new DirectX-based desktop rendering engine was the focus of Microsoft's Vista promotional materials. It is easy to see why: Vista with Aero is stunning; it puts, in this writer's humble opinion, all other human achievements to shame.
I have been to the Louvre; I have seen the works of the masters, of Monet and Michaelangelo. My heart swelled, and I nearly wept at the sight. But the feeling I get when I gaze at Aero... even that cannot compare. It is more than my simple words can express. My screenshots are but pale reflections of its splendor.
You must experience it yourself: study the subtle interplay between light and shadow, feel the cool ephemer
Despite having no friends, no life, no education no job, and no prospects, despite the war in Iraq, a plunging dollar, the looming energy crisis, global warming, and the sheer horror of being alive in this day and age, this morning, I woke up happy, for today would be my most exciting review: OSX 10.5 was being released.
I am not normally one to get excited about reviewing a product, especially if it is my first time using it; usually there is a feeling of trepidation about stepping outside my comfort zone, but today, it is notably absent. Perhaps because I have been following this product since its inception, living the Apple lifestyle in preparation, and becoming fully engrossed by the user community. The experience has been like a second birth to me, and the release of 10.5 is the wonderful culmination.
But I should back up. For those of you who have been living normal, healthy lives, 10.5, also known as the Leopard is the single most anticipated OSX release of all time, packed with 300 new features that would surely leave its competitors (the monolithic Microsoft and agile Linux) stunned and possibly bleeding as it whizzes by in a blur of growing market share and spots.
Apple Inc., the Cupertino-based personal electronics company behind the Leopard, burst into the public view in 2001 with the introduction of the phenomenally popular iPod music player. Apple then followed up that success with the iPhone brand cellular phone, which has sold a whopping 1.4 million units since its summer debut. Today, Apple hopes to leverage that success to bootstrap its long-stagnant personal computing platform, the Mac.
For the last decade, the Mac has maintained a relatively constant 5% share of the global computing market. In recent months, however, increasing disillusionment with the new Microsoft Vista operating system has pushed more and more people into Apple's open arms, but the uptake has been slow. The release of the Leopard, Apple hopes, will be the impetus for users to peek beyond the simple familiarity of Windows. Drawn by the prospect of a bigger and better world, they will slowly venture beyond their thatched grass huts into the thrilling unknown. The Leopard will then snatch them up and drag them into its stylish and intuitive tree to feast.
Or so it is planned. But will Apple be able to succeed where so many others have failed? Will it finally be able to wrest control of the desktop from the Monopolist? Yes, of course. But it is my duty as a reviewer to show, not just tell. So join me as I prepare to drink deeply of the Steve Jobs Kool-Aid and plunge myself into the Leopard, to prove this Apple revolution is truly the way of the future.
Part 1: Getting OSX
3:30 p.m.
The cold rain pours down outside, but under the glass roof of the Christiana Mall, it is warm and dry. Twenty yards away is the only Apple Store for miles, and consequently where one must go for the latest Apple releases.
Though I had arrived early, there is already a sizable line, stretching back to where I find myself now. The head of it, I am told, had been waiting since early morning, growing progressively more excited as the day wore on. His manic energy is infectious, it seems, and the light buzz of excitement percolating through the crowd quickly set my nerves on edge in the best possible way. This, I reflect, is better than most drugs.
I strike up conversation with the man waiting impatiently in front of me. When I ask him what he intends to do with the Leopard when he brings it home, he stares at me for twenty minutes. His steady gaze says more than any words could, and when he tells me he will teach it to love, and then maybe make a movie, I weep for the sheer joy that wells up in my heart. He holds me, understanding.
5:57 p.m.
The excitement has reached an almost painful level. It is a silent buzz permeating the very air; the crowd is l
Slashdot Mirror
If you use the GPL you don't want to share code. You want software freedom. That's kind of the point.
80000 died in the bombing of Nagasaki. In the 20th century, 100000 people died simply mining coal, in the US alone and the US has a better safety record than most. It's too depressing to look up more numbers.
and people with an interest in engineering things for the world to benefit from and making a living in the process have a very well qualified criticism.
Yeah, and the proper response to that is, "Then don't fucking use GPL code. Really, it's not that hard. Christ."
You're wrong: the distinction between species is, in fact, arbitrary and unresolvable in any self-consistent manner. Here's just one example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species
This doesn't mean it's not useful to talk about dogs being a different species than tapeworms, just that saying "Okay, fine, you have amply demonstrated evidence of one particular species changing over time, but you have not shown me that species changing into another one!" and acting like you won the argument makes you the problem.
"The funny thing that I am complaining about a hypothetical yet realistic threat; while Net Neutrality seeks to impose regulation to solve a problem we not only have not had but have no signs of having soon."
Really? Really? I mean, really?
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Comcast-Throttling-Saga-Finally-Ends-Get-bUp-Tob-16-109293
What short memories shills have.
That gets your money back; it does nothing to ensure this sort of thing doesn't happen again.
Granted. But if it doesn't taste okay, it most likely isn't.
I have to ask: what the fuck is wrong with you? Copyright is a monopoly on reproduction. Okay. What part of buying something and selling it again involves reproduction in any fucking shape or form? Where in this process is the copy made? It's like, you're writing in standard English, but all I read is meaningless bullshit, so I ask again, what the fuck is wrong with you?
I came to this party late, so still at 0. Anyway...
Regarding OP, I read that as, "Let people have guns, and murder, robbery, and other violent crime rates will go down." I don't think he was looking at deaths by shooting (suicides, accidental, and crime-related), or even deaths in general, but overall crime statistics, which 'total gun deaths' doesn't really address.
Part of what makes this hard to analyze is that there are two distinct portions of each graph: the 'low gun control' (strictness ~40), and they have radically different behavior: low gun control states have essentially no correlation between strictness and any violent crime metrics, while for higher gun control states, the correlation is positive for murder and robbery, negative for rape, and null for 'property crimes' (slightly positive for 'overall' violent crime).
Another interesting thing, though, is that in pretty much all (except rape) statistics, both the highest and lowest crime rates are found in the 'low gun control' states; this suggests to me that crime rates have less to do with the availability of guns than with other factors particular to each state.
Regarding your last point, Washington DC is currently an experiment-in-progress.
The problem with your data is that it counts 'gun deaths', not crime levels. Your data includes suicides and accidental shootings with the violent crime. That's a very convenient set of data to present if your agenda is to outlaw gun ownership, but it's a bit disingenuous.
So I'm going to counter with a few graphs of my own.
First, http://img339.imageshack.us/i/89312727.png/
This is the one you already made: gun laws on the x axis, gun deaths on the y. I guess most people can be convinced there's a negative correlation there. Let's move on.
I assert that suicides contribute a significant amount to that correlation. In support, I present http://img691.imageshack.us/i/96131586.png/ (source: http://www.afsp.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewpage&page_id=05114FBE-E445-7831-F0C1494E2FADB8EA) as support. The shape of the two graphs is pretty similar. This kind of makes sense, because guns are a pretty effective way to kill yourself, but I digress. Instead...
http://img249.imageshack.us/i/21700353.png/
That's gun laws versus murder rates (source: http://www.infoplease.com/us/statistics/crime-rate-state.html). Suddenly the correlation is much less obvious. On the low end of strictness, data is all over the place, and on the high end, as availability of guns goes down, murders actually go up.
The same trend repeats with violent crime ( http://img220.imageshack.us/i/72421515.png/), property crime ( http://img260.imageshack.us/i/21861589.png/), and robbery ( http://img176.imageshack.us/i/84688439.png/). Interestingly, though, not with rape ( http://img519.imageshack.us/i/45149589.png/); can't really explain that one.
So, yeah. I don't think anyone would argue that more guns leads to more gun-related deaths (which the data you provided does show, however weakly), but we were never arguing about gun deaths. We were arguing about crime, where the correlations are much less clear-cut.
Unless you happen to be an end-user. Then you can go pound sand.
Being moderated "Funny" must be hella demoralizing.
The key word there is 'fraudulently'. That means, to be illegal, you have to try to use the altered coin as real currency.
You asked for it...
A summary of some literature:
http://www.brown.edu/Administration/Provost/Advance/Valian%20Power%20Leadership%20&%20Politics.pdf
For peer-review...
http://www.advancingwomen.org/files/7/127.pdf
"Peer reviewers cannot judge scientific merit independent of gender."
For letters of recommendation...
http://das.sagepub.com/cgi/content/short/14/2/191
"Letters written for female applicants were found to differ systematically from those written for male applicants..."
There's a lot out there.
The legal system is part of the government. Losing this sort of lawsuit then is by definition the government stifling dissent. Or, to put it another way, without the government in place, the person bringing the lawsuit would be shit out of luck trying to punish someone for their speech.
Either way, you're wrong.
I see what you did there.
You auk not go there, friend.
The reason software requires a license is due to the fact that running a program requires a copy of it to be made from the external representation (disk, CD-ROM, DVD) to internal storage (memory). Only the copyright holder, by default, is allowed to do this. In order to allow others to use the program without breaking copyright law, current law says that they must be granted a license.
You're wrong. 17 USC section 117:
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided... that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner
So, in short, software licenses are bullshit.
Part 0: Preamble
I don't usually follow the gaming press, but it is impossible to have missed Spore, so big was the hype surrounding it. You should know that I am not what you would call a 'hardcore' gamer; I don't spend ten hours a day in front of a computer, I don't have ten level 80s in World of Warcraft, and I can't say that I particularly enjoy totally pwning myself some noobs. That puts me square in the center of the Spore target audience, and, I hope, makes me qualified to write the following review.
I shall begin with getting the game.
There was a package outside my door yesterday morning; I guess the mailman had left it while I was still asleep. I brought it inside and took it into the kitchen. I poured a scoop of coffee into the machine and started to unwrap it while I waited for my coffee to brew.
It was, indeed, Spore. The game box is pretty standard, with the cover picture, naturally, not being related to the gameplay in any way. In the box was a manual and an install disk. My coffee maker dinged before I could examine them closely. I poured myself a cup and took a sip. I had been expecting it to wake me up, but for some reason it just made me angry.
I popped the disk into my laptop and began the install; I had expected it to take a few minutes, given the sheer mass of content it would have to move, so I was pleasantly surprised when it launched the game almost instantly, taking me directly into...
Part I: Cell Mode
In cell mode, you control a protozoa (the box-shaped critter) at the very beginning of its evolutionary journey. You use the mouse to guide it as it swims around the primordial soup, devouring lesser microbes; the goal is to eat and avoid being eaten.
I guided my cell to swim around a little, eating the floating icons, and generally dominating the game space.
Some time later, I advanced enough to begin using the editors (more on that later), and began designing fantastic new creatures.
After about two hours, I started making some real progress: a little notice popped up saying that the evolutionary battery was running low. Surely, I thought, I will soon evolve. Then my laptop turned off, the game apparently over.
Part II: Initial Thoughts
I was somewhat disappointed with Spore. Not only had the advanced multi-cellular features been cut, but the ending felt unfulfilling and tacked-on. Seeing some sort of cutscene congratulating me on my victory would have been nice; at the very least, I would have expected Maxis to run the credits.
Then again, it's an interesting bit of commentary on the state of our society that they needed to shut down my computer, surely as a way to combat ever-increasing rates of video game addiction. While gaming is entertaining, there is a whole wide world outside the glow of the monitor; thank you, Maxis, for reminding us of that. Taking their message to heart, I got up from the computer and found the list of things I had been putting off...
Part III: Replay
I returned to the Spore this morning, having spent the rest of that day fixing my car's brakes, painting the garage, and reading with my son. I started a new game, hoping to see some of the content I might have missed the first time through, but this time I beat it less than a minute.
Part IV: The Editors
I don't understand the hype about the customizability, as that part of the game is really nothing special. In fact, I was halfway through the game before could edit my creature at all. Sure, it's nice to be able to change the its basic color scheme (through the handy, though somewhat clunky, 'Appearence Settings' box), but you can't change its shape or the structure of its markings, nor can you add things on to it. It's entertaining to see the sorts of beasts you can make, once you figure out yo
He, for example, failed to consider all the good things Vista did.
And that was the biggest flaw you saw? That's, uh... good! No, you're right, that's the only thing wrong with it.
Dear reader, I have a confession to make: I love Microsoft. I love it more than I love my family. This ought not come as a surprise to any that know me: a long line of jaded ex girlfriends will laugh bitterly and recall the passion they could never share in, and those few that can call themselves my friends accept that, on Patch Tuesday, their lives are nothing to me.
But above even my love for Bill Gates' corporate loin product is my love for my work. It is a sacred task that has been assigned to me, and I dare not let friends, nor family, nor even software allegiances stand in the way of the fairness and impartiality that is my trademark.
But why do I tell you this? Why do I bare my soul in such a vulgar fashion? It is that you may understand: even now, I will not let my love blind me; I do not write from the perspective of an enamored lover, nor a too-faithful user. No, it is as a Genuine Microsoft User hungry for the Next Best Thing that I pen this, my review of Windows Vista.
Part I: Making the Switch
"Aha," you are saying, having been inundated by countless negative reviews, "He will surely realize that Vista is in every way a downgrade from previous Microsoft products; he will slowly become disillusioned with its clunkiness, bloat, and arbitrary changes made only for the sake of justifying an overzealous Vice President's salary. Over the course of many painful pages, he will finally renounce his love for the Monopolist, and end with an impassioned plea for the adoption of the obviously superior Apple OSX while a swelling orchestral piece rises in the background."
Alas, no. Such a review, while undoubtedly entertaining, would be as far from the truth as, say, religion. No, this is most assuredly a glowingly positive testimonial: Windows Vista is easily the best operating system on the market today. Such an assertion, I realize, may offend some of my readers' base sensibilities; if that is the case, kindly allow me to show you to the exit.
But I have, once again, gotten ahead of myself. Firstly, why I choose to review the Vistas now, rather than immediately following the January launch, bears explaining.
It was a cloudy Monday morning, some two months back, when my erstwhile laptop, a venerable old Compaq, gave up the ghost. The screen, which had been flaky for a number of weeks, finally quit altogether.
After a brief mourning period, I began scouring the print classifieds, searching for a replacement. I soon found one, a dual-core offering from Hewlett Packard. The $600 price tag--considerably less than my weekly escort--made its purchase, and my subsequent review, a foregone conclusion. It arrived the following Thursday, in the hands of a perky blonde UPS driver; I christened it Alex, turned it on, transferred my data (a breeze thanks to Microsoft's new Streaming Automatic External Backup Restore technology), configured it to suit my needs, and resumed my work.
I have been using it, very happily, ever since and, today, shall pass judgment.
Part II: New Features (and what they mean for you)
Aero:
This brand new DirectX-based desktop rendering engine was the focus of Microsoft's Vista promotional materials. It is easy to see why: Vista with Aero is stunning; it puts, in this writer's humble opinion, all other human achievements to shame.
I have been to the Louvre; I have seen the works of the masters, of Monet and Michaelangelo. My heart swelled, and I nearly wept at the sight. But the feeling I get when I gaze at Aero... even that cannot compare. It is more than my simple words can express. My screenshots are but pale reflections of its splendor.
You must experience it yourself: study the subtle interplay between light and shadow, feel the cool ephemer
9:00 a.m.
Despite having no friends, no life, no education no job, and no prospects, despite the war in Iraq, a plunging dollar, the looming energy crisis, global warming, and the sheer horror of being alive in this day and age, this morning, I woke up happy, for today would be my most exciting review: OSX 10.5 was being released.
I am not normally one to get excited about reviewing a product, especially if it is my first time using it; usually there is a feeling of trepidation about stepping outside my comfort zone, but today, it is notably absent. Perhaps because I have been following this product since its inception, living the Apple lifestyle in preparation, and becoming fully engrossed by the user community. The experience has been like a second birth to me, and the release of 10.5 is the wonderful culmination.
But I should back up. For those of you who have been living normal, healthy lives, 10.5, also known as the Leopard is the single most anticipated OSX release of all time, packed with 300 new features that would surely leave its competitors (the monolithic Microsoft and agile Linux) stunned and possibly bleeding as it whizzes by in a blur of growing market share and spots.
Apple Inc., the Cupertino-based personal electronics company behind the Leopard, burst into the public view in 2001 with the introduction of the phenomenally popular iPod music player. Apple then followed up that success with the iPhone brand cellular phone, which has sold a whopping 1.4 million units since its summer debut. Today, Apple hopes to leverage that success to bootstrap its long-stagnant personal computing platform, the Mac.
For the last decade, the Mac has maintained a relatively constant 5% share of the global computing market. In recent months, however, increasing disillusionment with the new Microsoft Vista operating system has pushed more and more people into Apple's open arms, but the uptake has been slow. The release of the Leopard, Apple hopes, will be the impetus for users to peek beyond the simple familiarity of Windows. Drawn by the prospect of a bigger and better world, they will slowly venture beyond their thatched grass huts into the thrilling unknown. The Leopard will then snatch them up and drag them into its stylish and intuitive tree to feast.
Or so it is planned. But will Apple be able to succeed where so many others have failed? Will it finally be able to wrest control of the desktop from the Monopolist? Yes, of course. But it is my duty as a reviewer to show, not just tell. So join me as I prepare to drink deeply of the Steve Jobs Kool-Aid and plunge myself into the Leopard, to prove this Apple revolution is truly the way of the future.
Part 1: Getting OSX
3:30 p.m.
The cold rain pours down outside, but under the glass roof of the Christiana Mall, it is warm and dry. Twenty yards away is the only Apple Store for miles, and consequently where one must go for the latest Apple releases.
Though I had arrived early, there is already a sizable line, stretching back to where I find myself now. The head of it, I am told, had been waiting since early morning, growing progressively more excited as the day wore on. His manic energy is infectious, it seems, and the light buzz of excitement percolating through the crowd quickly set my nerves on edge in the best possible way. This, I reflect, is better than most drugs.
I strike up conversation with the man waiting impatiently in front of me. When I ask him what he intends to do with the Leopard when he brings it home, he stares at me for twenty minutes. His steady gaze says more than any words could, and when he tells me he will teach it to love, and then maybe make a movie, I weep for the sheer joy that wells up in my heart. He holds me, understanding.
5:57 p.m.
The excitement has reached an almost painful level. It is a silent buzz permeating the very air; the crowd is l
The sort of thing you describe would be fucking annoying.