What makes you think that a resume is more important to the American voter than rhetoric? Look at our current president, his resume was crap but his speech connects with people. Not all people certainly but enough of them. The Democrats lost the last two elections with a guy who was VP and a guy who had way more time in senate than both of the current candidates combined, but neither of them was a good public speaker.
If your going to vote based on who has the best chance to win, I wouldn't suggest basing that decision on the candidates resume.
And Clinton wants to make paying corporations for your health care mandatory. If your going to have universal health care, why not a single payer system that isn't there just to benefit the insurance companies.
Neither of these candidates are going to give us real universal healthcare.
Don't underestimate how important this is. If he can sway people then he can unite people. If you can get large groups of people behind the same thing then you are a great leader.
Sure you can do good or bad at actually running the country, but when it comes to uniting the country being a great public speaker and connecting with the largest number of people is more important than any other factor.
This assumes that your choice is based on who can unite people, but if the candidates are mostly the same, the one who gets people together is more likely to be elected. The Democrats have lost the last two elections because they nominated people who were not good public speaker. They could do it again.
not that I agree with any of the churches arguments but generally several fetuses are created, one or more is implanted but there are usually extra viable fetuses that are destroyed.
yep, shit like that is "your with us or your against us" doctrine. Either you agree with him or your not a "man of good will" and therefore you must be of bad will. Evil as it were.
When someone like Bush makes a such a statement people have no problem denouncing him for it, because its totally ridiculous. But when its the official spokesperson of god well, he must have a point.
we have had artificial insemination for a long time now. I don't recall any other popes calling it an affront to human dignity. Are test tube babies not allowed to be baptized because fertilization occurred outside the body? what about the natural children of test tube babies? Are they tainted as well?
In New Jersey many of the highways are toll roads and the rest stops are not allowed to charge more than the gas stations in the local area off the highway. I don't remember the toll structure there but in Mass it doesn't really cost more to get off the highway and back on... though the time it takes makes rest stops worth it even if they do cost more (and I have never confirmed that they do or do not).
well im not sure I would go that far. Ive seen some much worse APIs but yea, its not clean and elegant. Its been around for a very long time and does a lot to preserve backwards compatibility. At my last job I was working on educational software that had been shelved for years (still being sold, no new development) It was very old and way out of date and programmed by no less than 5 different sets of contractors over the years, but it still managed to use fairly modern quicktime installs. Sure we ran into issues from time to time because it was so badly written but the fact that it worked at all kind of amazed me.
It would be nice to see apple make a clean break with the old API. Deprecate it, don't advance it at all if possible and move forward with a new API. I'm not sure that this is as unlikely as you seem to think it is. Apple has been known to do such things in the past. I'm sure it would piss a lot of people off almost as much as it would make people happy. I know where I'm working now, such a change would be a huge amount of work to deal with, but if the old API was supported for a year or 2 it could be done. Some people would be left behind in all of this, with developers who are unwilling to update (the way quark treated the OS X shift) but it would be worth it in the long run.
OK, I don't think that apple did this intentionally to break Adobes products but Apple does have a competing product. Final Cut Pro, one of the fastest growing editors on the market. If they did not then this whole article would be totally freaking ridiculous because they would have nothing to gain.
As it is I don't think they have much to gain here but the fact that they have a competing product does add to the illusion of impropriety.
Still, Adobe has had access to developer builds of quicktime for quite some time. Its up to them to test them and adapt.
your assuming Adobe was using the interfaces properly in the first place. Its quite possible to get away with using APIs incorrectly in one version of software and have it break in the next version.
this is true. The developers did not have to rely on the media layer in the OS but realistically everyone does because the effort it would take to write a new layer is not worth it when there is a very robust layer available from the OS.
But this bring me to a larger point. Adobe has had access to developer builds of quicktime and easily could have worked on this problem before it was released to the public. At the very least they could have warned people not to upgrade quicktime until they had fixed this compatibility issue. Yes, sometimes new OSs and new media layers require some big changes to editing applications. Right now we are going through a ton of effort to support Vista and Leopard where I work as well as Quciktime but we started working on these things long before they were officially released to the public.
Application developers cannot assume that the world stands still around them.
Not all bugs get fixed and not all bugs will be fixed. In large scale commercial software development you have to pick and choose your battles very carefully. Some non critical bugs will be fixed because they are easy or they are in an area that is exposed enough to be an annoyance for many people. The automator bugs aren't likely to be fixed quickly because not that many people actually seem to use it (which is a shame, I love it personally)
But just for kicks I took a look at the release notes for 10.5.1. Some of these seem non critical but it can be hard to tell from the simple descriptions unless you are familiar with the bugs they are talking about. But look at those disk utility fixes. A progress bar? an false alert? These are not critical bugs but they are getting fixed in these free patches. Check out the fixes in iCal and Mail. These are not just high profile bugs that are getting press. Now admittedly apple may only roll up one of these when they have a major fix to push but that is a good thing. Patching minor non critical bugs constantly creates confusion so you let them pile up until you have a big bug with data loss when you move files across volumes. Then you pack them all up and ship them out.
I'm not saying apple is perfect when it comes to fixing bugs, but they do fix bugs between major releases... even non critical ones. As someone who develops large scale commercial applications I can understand some of the choices they make when it comes to resource allocation.
I don't know about flame bait but if you want to make a claim that apple breaks backwards compatibility you really need to back it up. Apple has done a lot to keep backwards compatibility despite several chip architecture changes over the years. Yes, they have deprecated APIs in OS X over the years but they generally give a lot of warning and the migration path is fairly trivial. Sure MS went out of their way to keep windows 16 apps running under win 32 but as I recall it didnt always work very well.
Vistas "XP Compatibility mode" doesn't work that well either. Ive been playing around with Knights of the old republic II. It came out a bit over 3 years ago and it runs reasonably well on my Mac book pro under parallels with windows XP. On my girlfriends vista machine (which is a lot beefier than my virtual windows box) it crashes after a few seconds even in compatibility mode (although the crashes are different).
The grandparent poster made a blanket statement without and evidence. Its a statement that cant be refuted because its has almost no content. The only thing you can do is write back and say "oh yea, says you." Its a statement that will be more likely to lead to an argument than a discussion. If the poster had backed up his statement I would agree with you but as it is, flame bait isn't all that far off. If I said the same exact thing about MS in the same way, I would expect to be modded similarly.
Manufactures agreements I don't have much problem with. If someone doesn't want you advertising their good below a certain price then they don't have to provide you those goods for sale.
The argument about cigarettes is a bit more apt, but remember, that is mostly in place to make cigarettes undesirable. Keeping the prices high has helped to stop people from smoking. Its is not a law in place to keep tobacconists in business the way the French law is supposed to keep book stores in business.
Kleenex are the things you blow your nose into... thats gross. Facial Tissues are a gentle and delicate cleansing product for your face *birds chirp* *sun shines*
from the picture I have seen the battery takes up a huge chunk of the machine itself. It looked like it stretched from one side to the other and filled more than half of the case front to back. It may be that making it removable would pose some challenges... for instance the battery itself may be providing much of the structure for the laptop.
perhaps they could have made it removable but it would have cost more, or made the laptop bigger. Engineering is all about tradeoffs.
since this laptop is presumably targeted at heavy travelers I think its a legitimate question since watching movies on a long flight is a nice reason to have a laptop with you. Then again I store rips of movies on my iPod for such trips and you could easily use that (or the internal drive) for such things if you wanted to watch on the laptop screen instead.
some people, like me, use laptops as primary machines, but some others use desktops primarily and only use laptops for checking email and surfing the web either from the road or from thier couch and go to the desktop for more power.
Clearly this is meant for people who travel a lot but want a fairly full powered computer so they dont need a desktop at home.
Its also twice as thick, weights 25% more, has a smaller screen and as you say comes with half the ram. Also, in order to get a similar battery time you need the extra big battery. Still a fairly good deal if the Thinkpad has everything you need but for some people the lighter computer with the larger screen might be worth the money.
Slashdot Mirror
What makes you think that a resume is more important to the American voter than rhetoric? Look at our current president, his resume was crap but his speech connects with people. Not all people certainly but enough of them. The Democrats lost the last two elections with a guy who was VP and a guy who had way more time in senate than both of the current candidates combined, but neither of them was a good public speaker.
If your going to vote based on who has the best chance to win, I wouldn't suggest basing that decision on the candidates resume.
And Clinton wants to make paying corporations for your health care mandatory. If your going to have universal health care, why not a single payer system that isn't there just to benefit the insurance companies.
Neither of these candidates are going to give us real universal healthcare.
He's definitely a better speaker
Don't underestimate how important this is. If he can sway people then he can unite people. If you can get large groups of people behind the same thing then you are a great leader.
Sure you can do good or bad at actually running the country, but when it comes to uniting the country being a great public speaker and connecting with the largest number of people is more important than any other factor.
This assumes that your choice is based on who can unite people, but if the candidates are mostly the same, the one who gets people together is more likely to be elected. The Democrats have lost the last two elections because they nominated people who were not good public speaker. They could do it again.
not that I agree with any of the churches arguments but generally several fetuses are created, one or more is implanted but there are usually extra viable fetuses that are destroyed.
I didn't know this and frankly, I find it quite disturbing. Thanks for the information though.
yep, shit like that is "your with us or your against us" doctrine. Either you agree with him or your not a "man of good will" and therefore you must be of bad will. Evil as it were.
When someone like Bush makes a such a statement people have no problem denouncing him for it, because its totally ridiculous. But when its the official spokesperson of god well, he must have a point.
we have had artificial insemination for a long time now. I don't recall any other popes calling it an affront to human dignity. Are test tube babies not allowed to be baptized because fertilization occurred outside the body? what about the natural children of test tube babies? Are they tainted as well?
Theres a loaded phrase if Ive ever heard one.
It takes all types... and as such, you can probably find someone aroused by pictures of just about anything.
well, if your alternative was wipe and reinstall, I guess this is worth a shot first right?
In New Jersey many of the highways are toll roads and the rest stops are not allowed to charge more than the gas stations in the local area off the highway. I don't remember the toll structure there but in Mass it doesn't really cost more to get off the highway and back on... though the time it takes makes rest stops worth it even if they do cost more (and I have never confirmed that they do or do not).
well im not sure I would go that far. Ive seen some much worse APIs but yea, its not clean and elegant. Its been around for a very long time and does a lot to preserve backwards compatibility. At my last job I was working on educational software that had been shelved for years (still being sold, no new development) It was very old and way out of date and programmed by no less than 5 different sets of contractors over the years, but it still managed to use fairly modern quicktime installs. Sure we ran into issues from time to time because it was so badly written but the fact that it worked at all kind of amazed me.
It would be nice to see apple make a clean break with the old API. Deprecate it, don't advance it at all if possible and move forward with a new API. I'm not sure that this is as unlikely as you seem to think it is. Apple has been known to do such things in the past. I'm sure it would piss a lot of people off almost as much as it would make people happy. I know where I'm working now, such a change would be a huge amount of work to deal with, but if the old API was supported for a year or 2 it could be done. Some people would be left behind in all of this, with developers who are unwilling to update (the way quark treated the OS X shift) but it would be worth it in the long run.
OK, I don't think that apple did this intentionally to break Adobes products but Apple does have a competing product. Final Cut Pro, one of the fastest growing editors on the market. If they did not then this whole article would be totally freaking ridiculous because they would have nothing to gain.
As it is I don't think they have much to gain here but the fact that they have a competing product does add to the illusion of impropriety.
Still, Adobe has had access to developer builds of quicktime for quite some time. Its up to them to test them and adapt.
your assuming Adobe was using the interfaces properly in the first place. Its quite possible to get away with using APIs incorrectly in one version of software and have it break in the next version.
Adobe is relying on the Quicktime media layer for much of its multimedia support. So yes, its quite likely that updating quicktime will break adobe.
this is true. The developers did not have to rely on the media layer in the OS but realistically everyone does because the effort it would take to write a new layer is not worth it when there is a very robust layer available from the OS.
But this bring me to a larger point. Adobe has had access to developer builds of quicktime and easily could have worked on this problem before it was released to the public. At the very least they could have warned people not to upgrade quicktime until they had fixed this compatibility issue. Yes, sometimes new OSs and new media layers require some big changes to editing applications. Right now we are going through a ton of effort to support Vista and Leopard where I work as well as Quciktime but we started working on these things long before they were officially released to the public.
Application developers cannot assume that the world stands still around them.
Not all bugs get fixed and not all bugs will be fixed. In large scale commercial software development you have to pick and choose your battles very carefully. Some non critical bugs will be fixed because they are easy or they are in an area that is exposed enough to be an annoyance for many people. The automator bugs aren't likely to be fixed quickly because not that many people actually seem to use it (which is a shame, I love it personally)
But just for kicks I took a look at the release notes for 10.5.1. Some of these seem non critical but it can be hard to tell from the simple descriptions unless you are familiar with the bugs they are talking about. But look at those disk utility fixes. A progress bar? an false alert? These are not critical bugs but they are getting fixed in these free patches. Check out the fixes in iCal and Mail. These are not just high profile bugs that are getting press. Now admittedly apple may only roll up one of these when they have a major fix to push but that is a good thing. Patching minor non critical bugs constantly creates confusion so you let them pile up until you have a big bug with data loss when you move files across volumes. Then you pack them all up and ship them out.
I'm not saying apple is perfect when it comes to fixing bugs, but they do fix bugs between major releases... even non critical ones. As someone who develops large scale commercial applications I can understand some of the choices they make when it comes to resource allocation.
so when apple releases 10.4.2 (a free upgrade from 10.4.1) that doesn't fix any bugs?
I don't know about flame bait but if you want to make a claim that apple breaks backwards compatibility you really need to back it up. Apple has done a lot to keep backwards compatibility despite several chip architecture changes over the years. Yes, they have deprecated APIs in OS X over the years but they generally give a lot of warning and the migration path is fairly trivial. Sure MS went out of their way to keep windows 16 apps running under win 32 but as I recall it didnt always work very well.
Vistas "XP Compatibility mode" doesn't work that well either. Ive been playing around with Knights of the old republic II. It came out a bit over 3 years ago and it runs reasonably well on my Mac book pro under parallels with windows XP. On my girlfriends vista machine (which is a lot beefier than my virtual windows box) it crashes after a few seconds even in compatibility mode (although the crashes are different).
The grandparent poster made a blanket statement without and evidence. Its a statement that cant be refuted because its has almost no content. The only thing you can do is write back and say "oh yea, says you." Its a statement that will be more likely to lead to an argument than a discussion. If the poster had backed up his statement I would agree with you but as it is, flame bait isn't all that far off. If I said the same exact thing about MS in the same way, I would expect to be modded similarly.
Manufactures agreements I don't have much problem with. If someone doesn't want you advertising their good below a certain price then they don't have to provide you those goods for sale.
The argument about cigarettes is a bit more apt, but remember, that is mostly in place to make cigarettes undesirable. Keeping the prices high has helped to stop people from smoking. Its is not a law in place to keep tobacconists in business the way the French law is supposed to keep book stores in business.
Kleenex are the things you blow your nose into... thats gross. Facial Tissues are a gentle and delicate cleansing product for your face *birds chirp* *sun shines*
Nobody wants to be Kleenex these days.
Not sidestepping policy issues == having "electability" problems
If you have a policy you are not electable.
from the picture I have seen the battery takes up a huge chunk of the machine itself. It looked like it stretched from one side to the other and filled more than half of the case front to back. It may be that making it removable would pose some challenges... for instance the battery itself may be providing much of the structure for the laptop.
perhaps they could have made it removable but it would have cost more, or made the laptop bigger. Engineering is all about tradeoffs.
since this laptop is presumably targeted at heavy travelers I think its a legitimate question since watching movies on a long flight is a nice reason to have a laptop with you. Then again I store rips of movies on my iPod for such trips and you could easily use that (or the internal drive) for such things if you wanted to watch on the laptop screen instead.
some people, like me, use laptops as primary machines, but some others use desktops primarily and only use laptops for checking email and surfing the web either from the road or from thier couch and go to the desktop for more power.
Clearly this is meant for people who travel a lot but want a fairly full powered computer so they dont need a desktop at home.
Its also twice as thick, weights 25% more, has a smaller screen and as you say comes with half the ram. Also, in order to get a similar battery time you need the extra big battery. Still a fairly good deal if the Thinkpad has everything you need but for some people the lighter computer with the larger screen might be worth the money.