I think this whole line of argument can be summed up as "I like X, but I bought Y, and now I am unhappy that Y does not work like X."
Pretty much, yeah. I think that's what TFA is all about, too. Really it's not that anything's wrong with OS X, it's just tempting to think that, it having Unix underpinnings (even shipping with an X server, at least back in the day) it might be a comfortable environment for Unix users seeking a laptop software platform that's a bit easier to manage than a typical Linux distro.
In my case, I simply didn't realize until a couple years into OS X that a Linux environment really was what I wanted. Just having the same software on both the laptop and desktop makes it a lot easier to migrate data from one to the other...
I started with OS 10.3 and was hesitant to upgrade when 10.4 came out - that cut me off from a lot of commercial apps and a lot of free software pretty quickly.
As for installing Linux - as I said the big drawback is I'd lose video acceleration. (No NVidia binary-only drivers for PowerPC - at least not last I checked)
Others have noted that the hardware in question could run Linux, natively or through a VM, etc... And from that perspective I think it is fair to say that the Macbook purchase isn't the disaster that it's sort of portrayed to be here.
But I can relate to this guy's reaction. I think he, like me, fell into the trap of believing that Mac OS X (having Unix underpinnings and a certain amount of Unix software pre-installed) could be a good choice to work together with Linux systems.
And certainly I'd say his prospects are better than they were for me with my Powerbook - hardware that was dead-ended about a year after I bought it, and an OS version that was soon replaced, with all sorts of software leaving the previous version behind... And a native install of Linux wasn't as good an option for my machine as it would be for an Intel-based Mac: it would pretty much mean giving up on graphics acceleration...
But even without the difficulties I experienced, I think there's a basic problem: if you approach the platform with one set of expectations and the OS delivers something else, you're not going to be happy with the platform. I thought OS X would be good for me because it was (I thought) a Unix base with a nice front-end, good support and good availability of commercial apps. The problem I had wasn't with the system, it was with my expectations, and what specifically I wanted (ultimately) out of the system.
In particular, it turns out I wanted Linux. I wanted to run the same software as I was running on my other Linux systems, without a big hassle. Running Mac OS X makes that a bit awkward. Obviously running Linux has its own share of drawbacks but personally that suited me better in the end.
Talent indeed. It is like this kid is standing on the shoulders of giants.
We all do, really. The only reason science can approach the mysteries it faces today is because countless past men of science have already solved countless other problems for them.
They will not even come close to succeeding, and here's the proof:
how many of these lawsuits found anyone guilty of anything? How many have settled due to a judgment? Answer: zero. The only settlement to date, was a private one with samsung where samsung buckled to MS and did not go to court at all.
But that's the thing. If Microsoft comes after you with a patent lawsuit, your choices are to either cave to their demands, or fight a costly legal battle (and then, possibly, be forced to cave to their demands.)
It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, only whether you have the money to stand up to a very powerful rival company.
I'm a huge Futurama fan; but after watching the first 5-6 episodes of this past "new" season I really thought they'd lost their touch.
I don't know - I think Futurama has always had its misses. To me the worst is when they take the ship to the planet Allegoricon 8, the planet where everything that's going on exactly mimics something from the 20th or 21st century, but with a few minor changes.
"Attack of the Killer App" and "Proposition Infinity" come to mind as recent examples... "A Taste of Freedom" was in this vein as well.
I don't think Apple refusing to sell and app in the app store is censorship. Here's the wikipedia definition: "Censorship is the suppression of speech or other communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body."
Limiting distribution of any app does not have the impact as stated by the definition above.
Yes it does. "Media outlet or other controlling body." That's Apple in this case.
So how is it hate speech to say "lifestyle X is wrong" but it is not hate speech to say "Believing 'lifestyle X is wrong' is wrong"?
Because "lifestyle X" (where X = homosexuality) doesn't have any negative impact on anyone not engaging in it, while actively pursuing an agenda that seeks to shame and discriminate against people who participate in that lifestyle does?
It is not you* that I hate, it's not even your* ignorance that I hate. It's the fact that you* try to force others to conform to your* beliefs that I hate.
(* for values of "you" in the set of "people who are self-righteous meddling douchebags")
Having sexual intercourse with someone of the same gender is usually a choice (Assuming there is no gun to your head). It is at least as much a choice as being overweight, underweight, or continuing an addiction. As a matter of fact, in some cases stopping an addiction can be deadly, but refraining from homosexual relationships is not.
Perhaps not directly. But depression can kill you (i.e. suicide) - and depression and/or suicide could be the end result of a misguided attempt to fight one's own natural tendencies.
Thanks for injecting some rationality here. This is the thing I can't understand: if someone wants to change their gender, that's something that's seen as acceptable, even if a bit unusual. If someone wants to change their sexual orientation, it's presumed that someone with an agenda must have brainwashed that person and the community that shares their (original) orientation takes offence.
The barriers to changing sexual orientation are harder to spot. Changing gender successfully may mean overcoming certain secondary sex characteristics, physical barriers which are difficult or costly to overcome. Changing sexual orientation is a matter of changing one's behavior, and changing one's mind. The barriers that exist are intangible, and can therefore be hard to appreciate - it is difficult to change a habit that has taken root.
I do think it's important to consider, in a situation like that - where you "want to change" but "can't" - that change may simply not be right for you. If you have to fight against your own self that ferociously - there had better be some substantial payoff to make it worthwhile.
Where is the left wing crying "censorship"? Censorship is bad no matter who does it.
Hey, I'll support this viewpoint.
IMO, Apple has no business dictating what programs people can and can't use on their iPhones. And, by the same token, Apple should not be held responsible for every piece of software on that platform.
society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong. do you know how many cops die breaking up domestic situations? how much time and money is wasted? your money?
Hm, you make a good point, we need to put a stop to this right away!
From now on, police should not respond to domestic violence complaints!
You know, it's very handy to know that if you're in the middle of typing a Slashdot comment and the power goes out, your message will be terminated with a dash ("-") character and posted for you... In some cases the Slashdot emergency autoposter will even insert other helpful information like "+++ ATH NO CARRIER".
Nintendo's decided to revive one of their own slogans for the 3DS launch:
To be honest, that seems like a reasonable life considering what it is doing.
The capabilities of the 3DS are damn cool. In that much, we agree.
But it's also a portable gaming system. Portability, and independence from being tethered to a charger, are very important criteria for such a device. 4.5 hours is plenty for a single play session: but the idea of a portable gaming system is that you can bring it with you - places where it may not be possible (or at least not convenient) to plug in and charge for a while.
Let's say I'm taking this thing to an anime convention...
(Frank Drebin and Captain Hocken, in unison: "Okay. I'm taking this thing to an anime convention.")
Well. Anyway: it's a con center. Of course there are outlets around. But technically you're not allowed to use them. And in many of the places you'd want to play video games (i.e. waiting in line to do different stuff) you probably wouldn't even have access to an outlet. Add up a few play sessions (like an hour or two in the game room playing against other people, a half hour each in a few different lines) and you may not make it through the day without a recharge. And, of course, all this is assuming you actually get that 4.5 hours, and not some lesser amount...
It's no good having a portable system that's too big to conveniently carry around - but it's also not much use having a portable system whose battery life is so short that you can't ignore the problem of charging a lot of the time. Once the battery dies, the thing is dead weight...
Slashdot Mirror
"Just imagine a world, where Elvis couldn’t play due to Rock and Roll patent held by a guy called, Jackie Brenston."
So what this guy is saying, patents on music would be a good thing.
No, no... He's just saying that Jackie Brenston is a terrible name for someone with a Rock and Roll patent.
I think this whole line of argument can be summed up as "I like X, but I bought Y, and now I am unhappy that Y does not work like X."
Pretty much, yeah. I think that's what TFA is all about, too. Really it's not that anything's wrong with OS X, it's just tempting to think that, it having Unix underpinnings (even shipping with an X server, at least back in the day) it might be a comfortable environment for Unix users seeking a laptop software platform that's a bit easier to manage than a typical Linux distro.
In my case, I simply didn't realize until a couple years into OS X that a Linux environment really was what I wanted. Just having the same software on both the laptop and desktop makes it a lot easier to migrate data from one to the other...
I started with OS 10.3 and was hesitant to upgrade when 10.4 came out - that cut me off from a lot of commercial apps and a lot of free software pretty quickly.
As for installing Linux - as I said the big drawback is I'd lose video acceleration. (No NVidia binary-only drivers for PowerPC - at least not last I checked)
Others have noted that the hardware in question could run Linux, natively or through a VM, etc... And from that perspective I think it is fair to say that the Macbook purchase isn't the disaster that it's sort of portrayed to be here.
But I can relate to this guy's reaction. I think he, like me, fell into the trap of believing that Mac OS X (having Unix underpinnings and a certain amount of Unix software pre-installed) could be a good choice to work together with Linux systems.
And certainly I'd say his prospects are better than they were for me with my Powerbook - hardware that was dead-ended about a year after I bought it, and an OS version that was soon replaced, with all sorts of software leaving the previous version behind... And a native install of Linux wasn't as good an option for my machine as it would be for an Intel-based Mac: it would pretty much mean giving up on graphics acceleration...
But even without the difficulties I experienced, I think there's a basic problem: if you approach the platform with one set of expectations and the OS delivers something else, you're not going to be happy with the platform. I thought OS X would be good for me because it was (I thought) a Unix base with a nice front-end, good support and good availability of commercial apps. The problem I had wasn't with the system, it was with my expectations, and what specifically I wanted (ultimately) out of the system.
In particular, it turns out I wanted Linux. I wanted to run the same software as I was running on my other Linux systems, without a big hassle. Running Mac OS X makes that a bit awkward. Obviously running Linux has its own share of drawbacks but personally that suited me better in the end.
Talent indeed. It is like this kid is standing on the shoulders of giants.
We all do, really. The only reason science can approach the mysteries it faces today is because countless past men of science have already solved countless other problems for them.
They will not even come close to succeeding, and here's the proof:
how many of these lawsuits found anyone guilty of anything? How many have settled due to a judgment? Answer: zero.
The only settlement to date, was a private one with samsung where samsung buckled to MS and did not go to court at all.
But that's the thing. If Microsoft comes after you with a patent lawsuit, your choices are to either cave to their demands, or fight a costly legal battle (and then, possibly, be forced to cave to their demands.)
It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, only whether you have the money to stand up to a very powerful rival company.
I'm a huge Futurama fan; but after watching the first 5-6 episodes of this past "new" season I really thought they'd lost their touch.
I don't know - I think Futurama has always had its misses. To me the worst is when they take the ship to the planet Allegoricon 8, the planet where everything that's going on exactly mimics something from the 20th or 21st century, but with a few minor changes.
"Attack of the Killer App" and "Proposition Infinity" come to mind as recent examples... "A Taste of Freedom" was in this vein as well.
But when the show is good, it's great. :)
I don't think Apple refusing to sell and app in the app store is censorship. Here's the wikipedia definition:
"Censorship is the suppression of speech or other communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body."
Limiting distribution of any app does not have the impact as stated by the definition above.
Yes it does. "Media outlet or other controlling body." That's Apple in this case.
Ah, you know, I love a good logical paradox...
And just wondering why the "censorship icon" is missing from this story. Yes, it may be disgusting, but it's not illegal. It IS however, censorship.
Mod parent up!
Also, bowties are cool.
So how is it hate speech to say "lifestyle X is wrong" but it is not hate speech to say "Believing 'lifestyle X is wrong' is wrong"?
Because "lifestyle X" (where X = homosexuality) doesn't have any negative impact on anyone not engaging in it, while actively pursuing an agenda that seeks to shame and discriminate against people who participate in that lifestyle does?
It is not you* that I hate, it's not even your* ignorance that I hate. It's the fact that you* try to force others to conform to your* beliefs that I hate.
(* for values of "you" in the set of "people who are self-righteous meddling douchebags")
Having sexual intercourse with someone of the same gender is usually a choice (Assuming there is no gun to your head). It is at least as much a choice as being overweight, underweight, or continuing an addiction. As a matter of fact, in some cases stopping an addiction can be deadly, but refraining from homosexual relationships is not.
Perhaps not directly. But depression can kill you (i.e. suicide) - and depression and/or suicide could be the end result of a misguided attempt to fight one's own natural tendencies.
Thanks for injecting some rationality here. This is the thing I can't understand: if someone wants to change their gender, that's something that's seen as acceptable, even if a bit unusual. If someone wants to change their sexual orientation, it's presumed that someone with an agenda must have brainwashed that person and the community that shares their (original) orientation takes offence.
The barriers to changing sexual orientation are harder to spot. Changing gender successfully may mean overcoming certain secondary sex characteristics, physical barriers which are difficult or costly to overcome. Changing sexual orientation is a matter of changing one's behavior, and changing one's mind. The barriers that exist are intangible, and can therefore be hard to appreciate - it is difficult to change a habit that has taken root.
I do think it's important to consider, in a situation like that - where you "want to change" but "can't" - that change may simply not be right for you. If you have to fight against your own self that ferociously - there had better be some substantial payoff to make it worthwhile.
Where is the left wing crying "censorship"? Censorship is bad no matter who does it.
Hey, I'll support this viewpoint.
IMO, Apple has no business dictating what programs people can and can't use on their iPhones. And, by the same token, Apple should not be held responsible for every piece of software on that platform.
That's nothing, we're all doing a great job of forgetting TJ Hooker.
Nick At Nite did a marathon run of the series, but unfortunately I missed it 'cause I was in the middle of a cross-country trip on the hood of a car.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU2ftCitvyQ
Nice. I'm glad they didn't go with autotune, I like it as it is...
And here we have another one who celebrated the new century a year early due to poor math skills, and proud of it.
According to your math, his first decade was only 9 years long.
Maybe he's counting time in the womb?
society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong. do you know how many cops die breaking up domestic situations? how much time and money is wasted? your money?
Hm, you make a good point, we need to put a stop to this right away!
From now on, police should not respond to domestic violence complaints!
You clearly don't know what you're talking aboot, buddy.
Hmm... I agree. Let's outlaw stripclubs.
But if we do that, where's your mom going to get the cash to buy her blow?
The phrase is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating."
When will people stop being stupid?
Heh, good one. It looks like the upper hand is on the other foot, now!
You know, it's very handy to know that if you're in the middle of typing a Slashdot comment and the power goes out, your message will be terminated with a dash ("-") character and posted for you... In some cases the Slashdot emergency autoposter will even insert other helpful information like "+++ ATH NO CARRIER".
Nintendo's decided to revive one of their own slogans for the 3DS launch:
"Now you're playing with power! Portable pow-
Yep, proof once again that Genesis does what NINTENDON'T!
Hm, guess you really are just a troll. Oh well.
To be honest, that seems like a reasonable life considering what it is doing.
The capabilities of the 3DS are damn cool. In that much, we agree.
But it's also a portable gaming system. Portability, and independence from being tethered to a charger, are very important criteria for such a device. 4.5 hours is plenty for a single play session: but the idea of a portable gaming system is that you can bring it with you - places where it may not be possible (or at least not convenient) to plug in and charge for a while.
Let's say I'm taking this thing to an anime convention...
(Frank Drebin and Captain Hocken, in unison: "Okay. I'm taking this thing to an anime convention.")
Well. Anyway: it's a con center. Of course there are outlets around. But technically you're not allowed to use them. And in many of the places you'd want to play video games (i.e. waiting in line to do different stuff) you probably wouldn't even have access to an outlet. Add up a few play sessions (like an hour or two in the game room playing against other people, a half hour each in a few different lines) and you may not make it through the day without a recharge. And, of course, all this is assuming you actually get that 4.5 hours, and not some lesser amount...
It's no good having a portable system that's too big to conveniently carry around - but it's also not much use having a portable system whose battery life is so short that you can't ignore the problem of charging a lot of the time. Once the battery dies, the thing is dead weight...