everything I've read about other countries(primarily the European Union) suggests that broadband there is mostly DSL, mostly too expensive, and not widely offered.
Really? Here (in Sweden) connections of 4 to 10 Mbps, symmetrical, aren't unusual in flats/apartments. That's generally a 10 or 100 Mbps Ethernet network in the building, connected to a fibre-optic area network, which is in turn connected to the vendor's national backbone... dunno if there's a TLA for that. I pay 225 SEK/month (about 20 USD) for 10 Mbps, flat-rate, which is a lot cheaper than a (pay-per-minute) modem connection for just about beyond a small volume of e-mail.
BS. All those non-power users are doing just fine right-clicking away on Windows. Apple's usability research that led to the choice of one button mice was conducted back in an era where 95% of computer users had no idea what a mouse was.
Incorrect. Later usability tests consistently show that the vast majority of windows users do not understand the difference between mouse buttons.
but there is no reason they shouldn't have been shipping 2/3 button mice for the last several years.
There's an excellent reason: for most users (approximately the complement of the set of users who read/.) multiple buttons are severely confusing, and remain so indefinitely. Power users may, at their oprion, aquire special hardware to meet their special desires.
The IPv4 loopback address "127.0.0.1" is represented in IPv6 as "::1".
Actually, the IPv4 loopback address "127.0.0.1" is represeneted in IPv6 as "::127.0.0.1" (or "::FFFF:127.0.0.1"). The IPv6 loopback address, on the other hand, is "::1".
I just wish they'd paid attention to their own research and development when they dreamt up the GUI for Quicktime 4. Is it as tacky and awkward under the Mac OS as it is under the Windows OS?
Yes. The QT 5p2 player is significantly improved, but it's still candyfloss... not to mention iTunes, iDVD, iMovie etc. and parts of Mac OS X... Steve is good at creating excitement, but not so good at creating interfaces.
Hmm... consider the potential of this combined with a laser retinal display and a wearable computer. If you wore long sleeves, the only external evidence would be a slightly bulky pair of glasses[1] with a wire down your shirt (unless it used Bluetooth...), and you'd have your hands free. To use the computer, press a switch on your watch to activate a virtual keyboard and/or mouse, or a more task-oriented gesture interface.
Hmm, all I need now is a few non-geek applications <sef>
[1] Although AFAIAA LRDs haven't got this far... yet.
Actually, the Mac OS supports up to 8 buttons, via the Cursor Device Manager. However, as far as I am aware the extra buttons are only directly supported by games, via InputSprocket.
Classic was not in the list of API sets I was talking about. The essential point of my post is that Carbon apps are not "less pre-emptive" than Cocoa or BSD apps.
I wasn't talking about power consumption of the CPU, just the overtones of the statement itself irked me.
Ah. You mean that a superficially subjectively environmentally-hostile attitude is Evil, but superficial environmentally-hostile lifestyles are merely human nature? Or is this only true if the pecieved attitude in question is displayed by Apple?
Commoditizing computers is taking longer than expected, but it will be done. I think Apple's attemts are better than Microsofts. It's a lesser-of-two-evils thing.
It looks like the old standard Mac keyboard, without the keypad. (Full-size keys, except the F and arrow keys which are half-sized). It doesn't run across the whole width becuase the screen is very wide for a portable.
OS X will ship with Apache. There's a simple GUI (under the name of "personal web sharing" or some such) which appears to allow each user to enable/disable sharing of a folder (inferred from pics on Apple's site). Presumably more advanced GUIs will be written by third parties, and of course the fiddling-with-files interface is still there.
If it's a BSD program,
or if it's a Cocoa (OPENSTEP) program,
or if it's a Carbon program written to the MP library (other Carbon apps will NOT be MP aware),
For all these categories the situation is the same: programs are pre-emtively multi-tasked over all processors with respect to each other; individual programs are threaded if they explicitly spawn threads.
Slashdot Mirror
Bugger. All that cognitive effort gone to waste.
but there is no reason they shouldn't have been shipping 2/3 button mice for the last several years.
/.) multiple buttons are severely confusing, and remain so indefinitely. Power users may, at their oprion, aquire special hardware to meet their special desires.
There's an excellent reason: for most users (approximately the complement of the set of users who read
HTH, HAND
Hmm, all I need now is a few non-geek applications <sef>
[1] Although AFAIAA LRDs haven't got this far... yet.
I don't get it.
If it takes you seconds to switch between mouse and keyboard, you're sufficiently handicapped to be well outside of the core market.
Actually, the Mac OS supports up to 8 buttons, via the Cursor Device Manager. However, as far as I am aware the extra buttons are only directly supported by games, via InputSprocket.
Classic was not in the list of API sets I was talking about. The essential point of my post is that Carbon apps are not "less pre-emptive" than Cocoa or BSD apps.
Commoditizing computers is taking longer than expected, but it will be done. I think Apple's attemts are better than Microsofts. It's a lesser-of-two-evils thing.
The apple menu isn't back. There's a new menu with an apple icon as its title, bit it's not the apple menu, it's a system-wide command menu.
No, no control strip. They're trying to cram it into the dock (yes, that too) by allowing system preference panels to be docked and have custom menus.
It looks like the old standard Mac keyboard, without the keypad. (Full-size keys, except the F and arrow keys which are half-sized). It doesn't run across the whole width becuase the screen is very wide for a portable.
OS X will ship with Apache. There's a simple GUI (under the name of "personal web sharing" or some such) which appears to allow each user to enable/disable sharing of a folder (inferred from pics on Apple's site). Presumably more advanced GUIs will be written by third parties, and of course the fiddling-with-files interface is still there.
Seriously, where is it written that their goal is to dominate the market? The goal is to turn a profit. Great products are a side benefit.
Yes, you can. A lot of things don't, but you can. If, for instance, you work with Cinema 4D and Photoshop, 2 533s is a pretty good deal.