If it's a federal tax then does it matter which state you were driving in? They are considering this for Texas at the State level, to which I ask how do we charge all the out-of-staters using our roads on their way through?
They still gotta get from the train stop to the destination, however. But yes, I'm all for getting long-haul trucks off of our interstates, especially since most of our large cities with bad traffic have interstates running right through the middle of them.
Ah, just what the discussion needs--another grammar pedant!
Regardless, irrespective, irregardless all mean the same thing (note, irregardless is *generally* considered to be bad form and is *non-standard*, but doesn't mean it's not a word.)
Now I'm fixin' to mosey on o'er yonder before y'all tell me I ain't right.
One can be highly successful without competition. Success is not measured by being better than somebody else.
And save your anti-hippy Friedman stuff, as I'm not advocating anything of the sort. I'm merely stating that one is not successful at the expense of somebody else...both can be successful independently of each others' successes and failures.
You telling everyone else they should "compete to win" is about as anti-freedom of an example as I could ever come with on my own. "You should do whatever the hell you want" is freedom. I'm not even a Libertarian but I can understand that simple premise.
Fair enough (about different points in time). I've been using Apple stuff since 1987, so yeah, it all runs together after a while. I had a 2nd gen iPod, which was still expensive and somewhat exclusive at that time. I didn't buy it for its exclusivity, I bought it for its tech. Being a home OSX user with plentiful firewire ports and a fresh copy of the newly invented iTunes, my choice was pretty easy. THIS, I contend, is exactly the tech that made the iPod take off, especially after the technical changes were made for it to work with Windows PCs.
My contention is that people still argue exclusivity with $120 iPod nanos and touches and hell, even iPhones. Who DOESN'T have a $200-ish smart phone of some sort these days? How are white headphones exclusive when mostly all headphones are now white?
I use the term "slick" not to impress friends, but because it impressed ME. And the slickness of the UI is based on the technology PLUS the design. It wasn't all pretty shiny stuff that didn't work well--it was good software design as well (which is tech).
I didn't mean to "hint" you in particular--just this entire idea that people who don't like Apple users think we are trying to impress them or some nonsense like that. It says more about the person thinking that than the person using the Apple product. When I pop open my Macbook at the coffee shop it's because I want to check out the news while drinking a coffee. I'm not trying to impress the other 10 Macbook users around more, nor am I even trying to impress the Dell/HP/Whatever users around me. My computer cost roughly $1000, and anybody is free to purchase one, which is hardly impressive.
Yes, I see. Your lack of people skills is what is prohibiting my comprehension, evidently. Care to elaborate on my reading skills further?
You said, without specs, you'll just go off and make whatever you want and then the customer has to accept that, which is a horrible practice, and not at all how business works between a supplier and the customer. You should never start a single line of code until the requirements are hammered out, in place and agreed upon by all parties. Best case you might provide some nice ideas they like and accept, worst case is you do a bunch of work that you won't get paid for. And with your attitude, they won't hire you back either.
You and lots of people refuse to use it, but many people on slashdot LOVE it at the same time they will HATE the OSX store, even though they are the same model.
I'm just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy.
Nobody is saying Apple (or Steam) is supplying software you are "allowed" to use. The model lets you download stuff from the store OR buy it from Best Buy/Amazon/Wherever. If a supplier chooses to offer only download or only physical media, that's the supplier's call, not Apple's. Smart companies will continue to provide both for several years to come.
And if you don't think Steam is an unqualified success, then you haven't been paying attention.
That's where I was going, but I failed to address the "bootable" part, because it is obvious to anyone who knows how to use Disk Utility. You download the image, use disk utility to create a bootable image, then burn that to a disk or external drive and boot from that. I'm not sure why people think this is so unpossible.
I'm all in favor of death the disks as well, but I don't think we can jump to that conclusion based on this story...yet. I say give it another 5 years.
Yeah, I post the same sentiment at least twice a week. The editorializing by slashdot editors comes off as cheap trolling, but generates lots of comments.
I did the same. My old Macbook disk drive broke. I first made a disk image and transferred across the network (Leopard), then with Snow Leopard, I used the new "share your dvd drive" feature, whatever that's called. Slow, but good enough. Still faster to do it over wirelessly shared CD than a full install of Windows would take with the physical media.
Funny thing about that "development" part. My company used to by 100% Microsoft only certified partner, all that garbage. When iOS came out, we started seeing a Macbook Pro here and there around the office to develop on (in each case, in the beginning, it was a personal Mac brought from home). Fast forward two years, and the MBP is the preferred dev platform for many of our guys. Our IT guys hate them, most likely due to their own ignorance of Macs in enterprise and/or Macs not playing well in the established IT processes).
I'm pretty sure Apple knows this, so they are going to want to do everything possible to keep Macs open in effort to garner more interest and market share.
What exactly is not open about Macs? Perhaps OSX isn't as open as you'd like because you can't run it on a PC (legally), but Mac hardware can run anything (legally). I know several developers who own Macs (even though they'd never own a Mac because they wanted one) because they can legally and easily develop for anything (OSX, iOS, Android, Windows, Linux...pretty much anything they need to make money).
And, what you've failed to realize, is that most people think this is a good thing.
No shopping around. Don't have to go out to the store. No discs to keep track of. Just click a button and your software appears.
Funny how this is generally considered a good thing with Steam, but the Apple-haters will be out in full force denouncing this (proven successful with Steam) strategy.
More likely, someone realized that since OS X DVDs do NOT come with a License key, and you can already make an ISO image of them easily using the software built into OS X, why not just sell it through the App Store and let people download and burn their own image?
Exactly this. The article questioned just how would the poor soul who downloads Lion make a physical copy? Uhh, use the disk imaging utility that comes with every Mac and make an image of it, then burn it to a disk (or back it up to time machine, other backup drive, other computers in your house). I wouldn't be surprised that if you lost your download you would be able to redownload it (not that you can do this with iTunes, but I hear rumors...)
My older MacBook's cd player stopped working a couple years ago. I just upgraded it from Leopard to Snow Leopard by making a disk image, then copying the image to the MacBook desktop and running it from there. Really, every time articles pop up like this with faux problems, there is generally a very simple, and often preferred, workaround.
My work alone has over 5,000 Macs, so your "user base of thousands" quip isn't really that funny. I *think* I read 9% of computers on the planet run some form of OSX.
People *love* being told what they can and cannot do with their own computers.
I can't speak for all people (nor can you, but that won't stop you anyway), but I personally *love* being able to use a nicely designed machine with as little fuss as possible. I also *love* the fact that if I wanted to dork out on my machine I could boot into Linux or Windows as well.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's a federal tax then does it matter which state you were driving in? They are considering this for Texas at the State level, to which I ask how do we charge all the out-of-staters using our roads on their way through?
They still gotta get from the train stop to the destination, however. But yes, I'm all for getting long-haul trucks off of our interstates, especially since most of our large cities with bad traffic have interstates running right through the middle of them.
Still. If they have 1000 users they're still going to be spending more than 10k on network hardware.
I'd hate to work somewhere that has 1,000 users and only 100 computers.
Ah, just what the discussion needs--another grammar pedant!
Regardless, irrespective, irregardless all mean the same thing (note, irregardless is *generally* considered to be bad form and is *non-standard*, but doesn't mean it's not a word.)
Now I'm fixin' to mosey on o'er yonder before y'all tell me I ain't right.
So much for principles eh?
I received 132 emails for little blue pills. All it took was for me to click on one of them!
One can be highly successful without competition. Success is not measured by being better than somebody else.
And save your anti-hippy Friedman stuff, as I'm not advocating anything of the sort. I'm merely stating that one is not successful at the expense of somebody else...both can be successful independently of each others' successes and failures.
You telling everyone else they should "compete to win" is about as anti-freedom of an example as I could ever come with on my own. "You should do whatever the hell you want" is freedom. I'm not even a Libertarian but I can understand that simple premise.
It's also a very convenient way to receive goods, which is why it successful, and which is why the App Store on OSX will likely succeed as well.
Fair enough (about different points in time). I've been using Apple stuff since 1987, so yeah, it all runs together after a while. I had a 2nd gen iPod, which was still expensive and somewhat exclusive at that time. I didn't buy it for its exclusivity, I bought it for its tech. Being a home OSX user with plentiful firewire ports and a fresh copy of the newly invented iTunes, my choice was pretty easy. THIS, I contend, is exactly the tech that made the iPod take off, especially after the technical changes were made for it to work with Windows PCs.
My contention is that people still argue exclusivity with $120 iPod nanos and touches and hell, even iPhones. Who DOESN'T have a $200-ish smart phone of some sort these days? How are white headphones exclusive when mostly all headphones are now white?
I use the term "slick" not to impress friends, but because it impressed ME. And the slickness of the UI is based on the technology PLUS the design. It wasn't all pretty shiny stuff that didn't work well--it was good software design as well (which is tech).
I didn't mean to "hint" you in particular--just this entire idea that people who don't like Apple users think we are trying to impress them or some nonsense like that. It says more about the person thinking that than the person using the Apple product. When I pop open my Macbook at the coffee shop it's because I want to check out the news while drinking a coffee. I'm not trying to impress the other 10 Macbook users around more, nor am I even trying to impress the Dell/HP/Whatever users around me. My computer cost roughly $1000, and anybody is free to purchase one, which is hardly impressive.
Yes, I see. Your lack of people skills is what is prohibiting my comprehension, evidently. Care to elaborate on my reading skills further?
You said, without specs, you'll just go off and make whatever you want and then the customer has to accept that, which is a horrible practice, and not at all how business works between a supplier and the customer. You should never start a single line of code until the requirements are hammered out, in place and agreed upon by all parties. Best case you might provide some nice ideas they like and accept, worst case is you do a bunch of work that you won't get paid for. And with your attitude, they won't hire you back either.
You and lots of people refuse to use it, but many people on slashdot LOVE it at the same time they will HATE the OSX store, even though they are the same model.
I'm just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy.
Nobody is saying Apple (or Steam) is supplying software you are "allowed" to use. The model lets you download stuff from the store OR buy it from Best Buy/Amazon/Wherever. If a supplier chooses to offer only download or only physical media, that's the supplier's call, not Apple's. Smart companies will continue to provide both for several years to come.
And if you don't think Steam is an unqualified success, then you haven't been paying attention.
That's where I was going, but I failed to address the "bootable" part, because it is obvious to anyone who knows how to use Disk Utility. You download the image, use disk utility to create a bootable image, then burn that to a disk or external drive and boot from that. I'm not sure why people think this is so unpossible.
I'm all in favor of death the disks as well, but I don't think we can jump to that conclusion based on this story...yet. I say give it another 5 years.
Yeah, I post the same sentiment at least twice a week. The editorializing by slashdot editors comes off as cheap trolling, but generates lots of comments.
Well I for one will be getting it simply for better server tools for my home network.
I did the same. My old Macbook disk drive broke. I first made a disk image and transferred across the network (Leopard), then with Snow Leopard, I used the new "share your dvd drive" feature, whatever that's called. Slow, but good enough. Still faster to do it over wirelessly shared CD than a full install of Windows would take with the physical media.
No kidding. Not only does Apple NOT prohibit disk imaging, they include the software to do so with every Mac and provide directions on how to do it:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=DiskUtility/10.5/en/duh3.html
As usual, a FUDdy claim about Macs is easily squashed with a tiny amount of exposure to the platform and a google search.
Funny thing about that "development" part. My company used to by 100% Microsoft only certified partner, all that garbage. When iOS came out, we started seeing a Macbook Pro here and there around the office to develop on (in each case, in the beginning, it was a personal Mac brought from home). Fast forward two years, and the MBP is the preferred dev platform for many of our guys. Our IT guys hate them, most likely due to their own ignorance of Macs in enterprise and/or Macs not playing well in the established IT processes).
I'm pretty sure Apple knows this, so they are going to want to do everything possible to keep Macs open in effort to garner more interest and market share.
What exactly is not open about Macs? Perhaps OSX isn't as open as you'd like because you can't run it on a PC (legally), but Mac hardware can run anything (legally). I know several developers who own Macs (even though they'd never own a Mac because they wanted one) because they can legally and easily develop for anything (OSX, iOS, Android, Windows, Linux...pretty much anything they need to make money).
And, what you've failed to realize, is that most people think this is a good thing.
No shopping around. Don't have to go out to the store. No discs to keep track of. Just click a button and your software appears.
Funny how this is generally considered a good thing with Steam, but the Apple-haters will be out in full force denouncing this (proven successful with Steam) strategy.
Now I know that Apple's OS X license agreement says you can only run OS X on Apple hardware, but I also think that's an illegal restriction...
Are you an attorney or a judge that has ruled on the legality of the OSX EULA? What's that? No? Ok, thanks!
Techies and slashdot users in particular SUCK at predicting the future, particularly where Apple's concerned.
That's because they insist on calling Apple gear "fashion accessories" yet they themselves have no sense of fashion to begin with.
More likely, someone realized that since OS X DVDs do NOT come with a License key, and you can already make an ISO image of them easily using the software built into OS X, why not just sell it through the App Store and let people download and burn their own image?
Exactly this. The article questioned just how would the poor soul who downloads Lion make a physical copy? Uhh, use the disk imaging utility that comes with every Mac and make an image of it, then burn it to a disk (or back it up to time machine, other backup drive, other computers in your house). I wouldn't be surprised that if you lost your download you would be able to redownload it (not that you can do this with iTunes, but I hear rumors...)
My older MacBook's cd player stopped working a couple years ago. I just upgraded it from Leopard to Snow Leopard by making a disk image, then copying the image to the MacBook desktop and running it from there. Really, every time articles pop up like this with faux problems, there is generally a very simple, and often preferred, workaround.
My work alone has over 5,000 Macs, so your "user base of thousands" quip isn't really that funny. I *think* I read 9% of computers on the planet run some form of OSX.
People *love* being told what they can and cannot do with their own computers.
I can't speak for all people (nor can you, but that won't stop you anyway), but I personally *love* being able to use a nicely designed machine with as little fuss as possible. I also *love* the fact that if I wanted to dork out on my machine I could boot into Linux or Windows as well.