If any of you follow financial news, companies are reporting additional gains from exchange rates, and some years report losses...
Prices are set in local markets based upon localized demand and competition (limited monopoly pricing power from brand, even in a relatively competitive market), etc.
Right now, it is cheaper for Germans to buy German cars sold in America and reimport them, because even with the cost of shipping the car from the states, the Euro is so strong on the dollar that it results in the importing the American made German car is cheaper.
Companies set prices (usually with local subsidiaries because of assinine international tax laws) in each country. Many companies will engage in "hedging" with the currency derivative market, because they aren't in the business of currency speculation (although if it should work out in the long run, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, then paying the commissions on those trades isn't economically intelligent, but it's important for hitting quarterly/annual numbers, joys of public accounting).
However, the price will be set in the European market based upon the prevailing price there. However, that is in part because of Apple's limited "monopoly" pricing power (note, this is NOT monopoly a la anti-trust, it's in a competitive market with highly similiar substitute goods, like CDs, pirated music, etc.), but only Apple sets the price for iTMS downloads.
One of the things that the Internet and digital transfers has the potential to do is destroy regionalized pricing, at least within the English (and then Spanish, etc.) speaking world. In that scenario, Apple could set prices in each store based upon local trends, but consumers could buy from whichever store TODAY's currency price makes most beneficial. That is great for consumers, but lousy for corporate profits (then they ALWAYS lose on the currency fluctuation, because the business goes to whatever is cheapest that day).
However, a Euro price that isn't identical to US pricing with TODAY'S rate of exchange makes sense. The Euro is up something like 30% on the Dollar in the past 12 months. If that trend reverses, and 1 $ = 1 E again, then a Euro price of 55 cents would devastate Apple. The Euro was established at a price level to make the nominal exchange of Euros to Dollars approx. 1:1, which would obviously fluctuate.
Consumers in general are more interested in pricing in their local currency then international pricing. Although the Internet has changed things SLIGHTLY, in general, most consumers don't engage in International trade, but rather buy from an organization that has imported the products for them. Hence Amazon has localized businesses, Apple set up local Apple AND now iTMS to price in the local currency. Cars are priced in each local market.
However, the free flow of information will reduce that ability over time, which is a good thing, but you shouldn't be shocked that it isn't instant.
I love the BSDs, first played with them when Linux was a toy. When we were evaluating OSes for our Web Servers, we installed an OpenBSD machine and a Redhat machine and went to lunch. When I got back from lunch, before we could go to work, I was fielding calls that my new Redhat machines was launching attacks in Germany. We decided not to use Redhat at that point.
We recently started playing with FreeBSD 5 and RHEL 3 for comparisons... Quite frankly, I MUCH prefer the BSD ports to up2date, they are terrific. Both OSes are pretty good in the performance departments (OpenBSD while a rock, just couldn't perform).
Why did I switch to Redhat?
Redhat is simply moving in a direction that I like. Getting the machines to talk to our LDAP Server and Kerberos KDC (an OS X Server that does our central directory system) is a joke, as was straight LDAP before we started playing with Kerberos.
Adding software is a bit easier in BSD-land, because if I need to switch compile-time options, the ports are MUCH easier to work with than SRPMS. Granted that compiling source on Linux is easier, because most developers target Linux first, however, source tarballs are great for testing, not so great to roll out and keep track of across my networks.
Redhat support, while pretty mediocre at the low-end (RHEL 3.0 ES, $350/machine or so), I can put support requests in and get a response over time and get things escalated to engineering. With Apple Support, it's even worse, I can fill something out on Apple's bug report/feature request site, but I can't find out if they are doing anything on it.
It's a dilemma for a small company, you don't have the money to get the GOOD support from a top company, but dealing with a small company may get you personal service, but not the capabilities of the big boys.
FreeBSD is a GREAT system, and the ports/packages are a DREAM to work with.
The greatest thing about a BSD is how streamlined/stripped down the core is, then it is off to ports to configure.
The worst thing about a BSD is how streamlined/stripped down the core is, as making network configuration changes is just harder/more time-consuming, with multiple files to change.
FreeBSD, great OS, just not offering the easy-to-use Enterprise features that Redhat provides. Without the easy integration, it just isn't as easy for my little business to take advantage of everything that I can with Redhat.
Got an AWESOME deal on two iMacs from the previous generation that they were basically giving away at the Apple Store. They wouldn't be priced that low unless they were seriously trying to move the product.
I'd expect another G4 rev to the iMac, but who knows.
When I got certified on NT 4, it was heavily implied that when NT 5 shipped, NT 3.51 would be retired (MCSE Track) and NT 4 would last until NT 5.5 or NT 6. When Win2K shipped, they decided that they wanted to forklist upgrade the industry, so they would pressure us to upgrade my retiring our certification early.
Having been one of the peons that was busy ripping out NetWare installs and installing NT Networks, I was floored at being mistreated that way. As a result, we run lots of Linux and OpenBSD servers, and OS X Workstations. The only Windows machines at my company are old machines we picked up to run the Google Toolbar, Check browser compatibility, or run Quickbooks. Outside of the accounting machine, the rest are running old Windows versions that came with the machines when we inherited them.
Back in the day, you had to prove to be educational for.edu (my high school grabbed their.edu before K-12 got sent to the backwaters of k-12.city.state.ud, proof non-profit for.org, and proof network infrastructure for.net... otherwise you got stuck with.com. Everyone wanted.net,.com was for everyone else...
Perhaps we can all take off our tinfoil hats and realize the REAL reason Microsoft bought VirtualPC...
1. They've been trying to divorce themselves from Intel for the better part of a decade... The point of a monopoly is to extract monopoly rents... they currently split those...
2. If they could virtualize all pre-Longhorn calls into a clean emulation layer, then they don't have to "maintain" them... i.e. they could leave Win32 sitting there in its happy emulation layer forever, simply maintaining that one layer that talks to the OS via the CLR... In that world, they can move everything to CLR, and legacy Win32 runs in the VM that gets recompiled all the time.
3. Look at an old (pre NT 4) Win32 diagram... the Win32 subsystem was just a subsystem, with equal billing to POSIX and others... the idea was to be able to have the flexibility, but it didn't work out that way, as the Windows/DOS combination took 10 years to transition away from... moving the Win32 subsystem into a virtual layer underneath CLR (like WOW - Windows On Windows) would make maintenance easier...
Remember, sales growth is pretty flat for Microsoft, but they need to keep increasing earnings. Lowering development costs could DRASTICALLY increase earnings, so Microsoft could see 15% earnings growth on flat sales... look at Phillip Morris, declining market (decreases around 1%/year IIRC), increasing earnings each year, happy owners.
WWW pre web users is irrelevant. The Internet has two useful critical functions, email and file transfer, i.e. SMTP and HTTP (formerly FTP).
Credit whomever you want with the WWW, it was no more useful than Gopher until Mosaic proved that a graphical browser could exist (neat proof of concept) and then Netscape CREATED the modern Web.
To credit Tim Berners Lee because you discount the pre-web Internet and NOT be crediting Netscape is nothing short of absurd...
Netscape BUILT the modern web Internet, and did it with US Venture funding, because the American economy lets you take risks easily, and has pools of capital for those taking them.
Linux moved from being a toy to a real powerhouse because of what Red Hat did with venture funding.
America's biggest strength it its capital markets, and nobody's dumb ideas like government funded "venture capital" funds will duplicate what an unfettered flow of capital does.
For anyone that hasn't been to MIT's campus, the place is in a warehouse district. Sure the view from the River looks beautiful with Killian Court, but the otherside of the campus is pretty gross. The computer science buildings (32, 34, and 36 IIRC) were on a nearly abandonned ally, and walking in/out of that building late at night was creepy, I can't imagine what the girls in Course 6 (EECS) thought, or perhaps that is why they didn't stay late for labs...
The new building here is in a even less school-like location, right near major roads. If you were a parent and saw that building, you'd probably forbid your son to wander there in the middle of the night, and you definitely would fear your daughter being there.
Forget terrorism, forget equipment, how about the fact that you have 18-25 year olds working in those buildings at all hours of the night... and in the Winter, Boston gets cold, the last thing you want is some psychofrenic homeless man sneaking in the sleep and scaring/assaulting people (my Office, in a nicer area of Greater Boston was left unlocked one night and we had that problem)...
You want to explain to a Massachusetts Jury that the school took all reasonable precautions and isn't liable for a student being assaulted/killed/raped, because security measures would have infringed upon privacy?
Sorry, but MIT needs to look out for the safety of its people... I expect a bunch of liberty/security quotes, but this IS NOT an infringement on ANYTHING, but gives some measurable level of security.
I respect RMS, he's a personal hero for what he has accomplished, but MIT isn't his personal playground, and his desire to come and go as he pleases with nobody knowing is NOT more important that the safety of those grad students that the faculty use as free (paid by grant) labor...:)
Marketshare, whatever, it's irrelevant. Earnings are all that matter.
The problem with low marketshare, harder for third parties to make money selling software. Well, Apple makes more and more of the software that people use. As the open source stuff gets up to snuff, and we have Qt/Aqua, GTK/Aqua (no idea how mature or complete that is), and work on KDE/Aqua (there is also talk of a Qt/KDE platform... i.e. you could build a Qt app and have it use KDE widgets on KDE, Qt widgets on non-KDE Unix, Aqua widgets, Windows widgets, etc.), etc., and Apple becomes "another Unix" so the Free Software/Open Source stuff will become an EASY port.
Marketshare COULD have been irrelevant if Sun didn't screw up Java so badly (cross platform desktop with Windows and Sun support, when the ONLY interest in cross-platform at the time was Windows / Mac OS... maybe a little OS/2), but it will become that way with the current evolution in Free/Open Source Software.
OS X and Unix are similar enough that as the GUI toolkits port over, a "native" OS X version becomes easy, and adding OS X polish becomes doable. Making an App play nicely in KDE/OS X or GNOME/OS X becomes MUCH easier if you just need to modify the front end a bit, and the core functions the same.
Forget beleaguered, Apple is a nice company making nice money again.
I just want more and more from them so that I happily cut them bigger and bigger checks each year... that means that using Apple software, I make more and more money. Who knows, get good in OS X Server and my production servers may move from Linux to OS X.
Alex Microsoft Certified System Engineer, Citrix Certified Administrator, and running a growing Mac network with Linux servers with one Windows machine for Quickbooks.
Each year we seem to buy machines in May (just in time to miss the free upgrade for the OS), get OS on a developer machine, update our in-house applications, roll out across our small office.
Yeah, it costs money, but we've gotten functionality and improvements that have made our in-house applications faster and more reliable, so I'm happy.
Also, there is no obligation to buy the upgrades, we were going to skip Panther, but then Expose was so incredible, we upgraded all our developers. Instead of building on Panther to deploy on Jaguar, we just bought a bunch of Jaguar updates.
The Jaguar Server -> Panther Server was an INCREDIBLE change, and I look forward to Tiger Server for more polish.
So it's a GOOD thing. Customers get the option of getting new features/more productive, and Apple Shareholders get to increase earnings by selling more to the same (or slightly shrinking) market.
So rather then fighting for marketshare, Apple is selling more/customer.
Charge me the same $400 as RHEL-ES, and let me download an ISO that day and get my "media kit" in the mail...
Instead of just CDs that ship out two weeks later, charge for an "Enterprise" edition, $200 so it is reasonable, that includes the ability to download the ISOs, get a kit in a mail, and some extra stickers.:)
Ironically, I just finished installing 2 OpenBSD machines in the past couple of days, just finished up one about 5 minutes ago. Unfortunately, while they get the software up on a mirror quickly, everytime we buy the CDs they don't ship out for weeks after the downloaders grabbed them... makes it a bit discouraging to buy the CDs, which we used to do (several copies) each release...
But now that OpenBSD is only on Firewalls, no webservers, it's less pressing.
If North Korea wants to hit us, they can smuggle a suitcase bomb. The problem with terrorism is the lack of nuclear deterance, they aren't afraid that we'll hit them back.
The entire THEORY behind Bush's War on Terror is to hold governments accountable, and therefore not be willing to support terrorism.
North Korea is less likely to give Islamists nuclear material if we could track it to them and respond by nuking the shit out of them.
It gives deterance back, will therefore hopefully never be used.
We never launched our Cold War nukes, but if you think that they didn't make us safer... well then we disagree on 50 years of global history.
For starters, while LSB is terrific as a concept, it's a designed-by-committee kind of situation. It gives you the same problem that POSIX does, it can't be cutting edge.
When Apple or Microsoft put out something new as a standard, it becomes the default immediately. Win32 withered on a vine with NT, but Windows 95 made it real. The new libraries that came with later versions were allowed, to some extent, to be packaged with the OS. The only reason that DirectX took off was that games included the installer so that they could keep pushing the envelope.
LSB is always going to lag the releases, which is a bit problematic. Also, without a GOOD installation process (Apple has one, Linux should IMMEDIATELY adopt sudo and use a GUI sudo like OS X), there is no easy way to install new libraries.
The reality is that vendors are going to support limited distributions. That COULD be 1 distribution, it COULD be 5 distributions. However, there is no way that you can support "LSB 1.3 or higher," as you'd need to test it and explain how to install it in those scenarios.
Realistically, OpenOffice/StarOffice is basically at the point where you can set up Linux desktops for non-power users. Those that don't need the heavy automation that Excel offers will be fine (even if Star Office HAS those features, if it is differently done, it is too much of a pain to retrain), but better interoperability will help.
Linux will become a corporate desktop, and that will be the start. Linux will become a viable home computer for people that want to work from home and surf the web. The application issue matters less and less, as computers are more about the Internet than anything else.
Ignore the digital toys market, let Apple and Microsoft fight there. That market isn't about functionality so much as experience, let them play there. Then plan to go there in 3 years when it is a well known market and easy for open source.
Let it become like hardware. Those that need the best pay the premium and R&D costs. Then the middle solution exists, 80% functionality, 20% cost, then the generic version (open source instead of Taiwanese manufacturers) comes in.
LSB isn't the solution... at least not yet. The solution is corporate desktops with controlled libraries, and some consolidation in the Linux market. I mean corporate consolidaiton, not hacker consolidation. The open source stuff will run anywhere, but the corporate software market will consolidate on 1-2 solutions.
The reason that devleoping for Windows (and OS X) is easy is that you KNOW what libraries are there. If you require Win98 or higher, you just target those APIs. When NT4 was big, you would see things like NT4 SP3 as the requirements.
The problem with releasing software on Linux is that there is nothing to support. A RedHat 9 installation can have all sorts of libraries, so you say glibc x.y, kdelib x.y, etc., and end up with dozens of requirements.
The exitance of KDE and GNOME is irrelevant.
If RedHat version X including in the installation a core set of libraries (regardless of server or workstation configuration) then you could just say "supports RedHat 3.0 or higher).
The problem is the dependancy issue, which would NOT be an issue if the System installed the libraries by default, regardless of applications.
That is the "Linux" problem, you CAN'T release commercial software easily because the support is a nightmare.
The KDE vs. GNOME isn't really a big deal, as a Corporate Desktop (the first step in a desktop market) can easily specify roll-outs. That's Linux's (and OS X's) advantage.
Windows was NOT built in a network-centric way, and roaming profiles & home directories are handled FAR worse than the Unix way.
The problem is that you can end up with a nightmare because distributions don't have standard libraries.
Look, if the car starts bouncing, I know I have a flat tire. If the engine is having problems, a red light on my dashboard tells me to take the car in. When the car struggled to shift gears, I knew it was a transmission problem. The CAR informs me of what is needed and I take it to the specialist. The basic maintenance schedule is given to you when you buy your car, there are no surprises.
Regarding a license... you need a license because with an automobile because the misuse of an automobile can endanger others.
Look, I'm a computer engineer by training, know my way around Unix, know my way around NT (MCSE, CCA from old career), and know my way around a CLI. Guess what, when I want to put together a business model, I want a graphical spreadsheet that is out of my way. Do I know ALL the Excel functions? No, but I know the ones I use regularly, and the help system gets me through the rest.
I have no desire to memorize arcane commands, I want to build the business model. Will I learn arcane commands to speed things up? Sure, but on MY schedule, NOT yours. I buy the machine to let me get my work done, and I pay the premium for a laptop to do so on the road, and I pay the (admitted small these days) Apple premium to have wireless support that is amazing and to be able to have my Unix applications on the road. These are all my choices.
Guess what, I don't pay Open Source programmers, so they don't have to listen to me. However, don't complain that I don't have an open source desktop when you put out bizarre GUIs that interfere with my workflow.
My Mac stays out of my way and lets me do work, MUCH faster than Windows or Linux would let me. In the end, that keeps Linux a step away from "global domination" or whatever the goal of the week is.
My computer should work for me, not the other way around. Sure, I had to demonstrate an understanding of traffic laws to get on the road. But guess what, EVERY car I drive is nearly identical, and the controls don't change. That consistent UI makes cars a success.
Windows has problems, no question. But it is "good enough" for most, and it is pretty cheap.
For a single-purpose machine, Linux is fine, I can train my people on 1-2 applications... If GNUStep was further along, or Qt didn't blow as a RAD tool, then our dedicated personnel would be on Linux machines and not eMacs. However, if you think that Linux is good enough for a business power user, you're sadly mistaken.
The integration of the Office Suite has been AMAZING for a few years, and the combination of Word, Excel, and Powerpoint is TERRIFIC for business users. Until GNU can mimick that power (NOT mimick the widgets, but the power and integration) then it is NOT a viable desktop system for the modern business power user.
If Viacom could sell the 30 second spot for $100k, then it costs them $100k to put their OWN ad in instead of selling it. It's an opportunity cost because of lost revenue.
INSTEAD, they have a feed that is being used by paying customers (other cable companies) and using it to push an agenda. When DirecTV contracted with Viacom, it was to carry their programming to paying customers (like me), not to carry their agenda.
They should NOT be able to use that space to push their agenda. Yes they "own" the content, but there are FCC rules regarding time for commercials, etc., they are supplying content to others...
The Telecom Act of 1996 had some REALLY nasty things that has encouraging MASSIVE consolidation at the expense of consumers. That was when they could designate television stations as must carry (so now cable companies and satellite companies would HAVE to carry the church channel), or require compensation for carriage.
At the time, the theory was that the CableCos were making money charging customers for cable, when 90% of the viewers were watching the networks... The Networks paid for a broadcast infrastructure and license that went unused.
Instead of Media companies bundled their networks with their cable channels... AND Viacom got an exemption to own two networks because otherwise UPN was unviable and would shut down... But CBS and UPN are REALLY cross-promoting and cross-licensing content, which has been to an unfair advantage there.
Look, I'm a Laissez-Faire conservative... but this IS NOT a free market, this is a heavily regulated market where the companies that can influence politician's futures via television converage have gotten the upper hand.
Good Samaritan laws (which is amusing if you know the history of the Samaritans... which is why their being a good one was noteworthy) normally protect someone... The general rule of thumb is that if you are trying to help, as a good samaritan, you are immune from lawsuits... It's the type of law that is on the books to protect people that are being good Americans from our out-of-control legal system.
There is probably a medical ethics law or something similar that you are thinking of.
Businesses run by unimaginative people with lots of political pull LOVE regulation. They LOVE being granted monopolies and "reasonable rates of return" that are set by the regulators that hope to get jobs in industry after leaving.
What private individual wouldn't love to get a 10% ROI guaranteed by the government (risk free) except those that are really daring and want to make more... 10% risk free is pretty good...
Some people LOVE regulation, it just isn't the cutthroat capitalist OR anyone that actually cares about the common welfare.
The whole point of the "concept car" was to explore and reconsider the auto-design process.
They put a group of women together to design a car for women, because most cars are primarily designed for main targetting men. The only vehicles that are designed focusing on women are minivans.
This was NOT to create a car for women, but to think about what changes Volvo could make to benefit all drivers. My having a "concept car" that is "by women, for women" that is vastly different from the existing cars on the market serves a useful purpose.
Most designs are iterations of previous designs. The early designers AND buyers were men. Creating a "women's car" create a series concepts that may not have been explored.
The goal isn't a "feminine" car, it's a DIFFERENT car, and the "female perspective" was a way of getting them.
Will all cars have welded hoods? Probably not. Will some? Probably.
If there is a market for "disposable cars" that have limited resale factor and are only serviced 1/year at the dealership (at a fixed fee), then the welded shut cars will exist.
A few summers ago in New York, when my wife and I were dating, we went to the observatory on the Empire State Building. I hadn't been to the one on the World Trade Center since I was a kid, but we weren't up for two in one trip. We figured that we'd get to the WTC next time.. Well that liberty of movement wasn't taken away by the Justice Department...
Bring up your problems with the guy that hired you. Be polite, not demanding. He didn't write the contract, and he didn't stipulate the terms. Have a copy of them in writing (and digitally to give him an email later). He can send it to legal, and they can make the changes.
Beyond that however, do you want to be excused for a prior business relationship or ANY business relationship. As an employer, I'd have no problem granting an exception for their existing business, but ANYTHING off hours... maybe it's because we have a small business, but I wouldn't want anyone on my staff spending excessive amounts of time trying to develop a business on the side.
Knee-jerk Slashdotisms aside, I'm not personally interested in funding your startup. If I am, I expect a piece of the action, not simply your being distracted and tired from moonlighting at the job.
But that's just me, each company is different.
And before you bitch at me, no I don't think that I own my employees. However, I have my beliefs and expectations, and if someone doesn't want to exist within those beliefs and expectations, they can seek employment elsewhere.
Absolutely an impressive school. 10 years ago, they were a joke. Now they built a national reputation via their football team, so people have heard of them, and projects like this put them on the map. When I looked at schools, they never entered the equation. If I was looking at engineering schools today, I'm sure that I would end up applying there.
This is a school with great self promotion and is going to go places. Unlike places like MIT, they don't sit on their Laurels, they are exploding.
I expect that in 20 years, they'll be considered one of the elite engineering schools. Kinda neat to have your college degree appreciate in value because the school gets better. I can't imagine that you don't get a decent engineering education at any engineering focused school, and this research project is a brilliant PR stunt.
If you run a Mac network, you can do really cool stuff with Automount points. All my Macs mount a/Network/Application,/Network/Library, and a few other mount points thrown in. The GUI land includes/Network/Library in the search path for stuff, (/System/Library for system installed stuff,/Library for stuff installed by the Admin, ~/Library for stuff installed by you, nice and clean and straightforward).
Each AFP mount counts against the license, no biggie... 7 Macs, all permenantly connected, and we had 3 connections left for laptops.
Incorrect. While all my connections, once logged in, go through one AFP connection, the Automount connections are done anonymously. Oh no, 2 AFP connections from machine->server, anonymous automounts, then w/ permissions mounts. It's worse! Each automount creates it's OWN connection.
So we were automounting:/Network/Applications (server installed apps with drag-and-drop, really nice)/Network/Library (frameworks for custom Cocoa apps, etc)/Network/Software (software installers, why not, right)... and the Users share, that unfortunately can't be automounted as/Network/Users
well, I had 4 (at the time) automounts, so the first two machines to boot were fine, but machine 3 was all messed up.
Took forever to diagnose and realize that we needed an unlimited license.
Took a few hours with Apple support to diagnose, and they didn't figure out the problem until I started at Server Admin and had the problem. Users couldn't log in, because starting with machine 3, they couldn't get their home directories.
I REALLY like OS X Server's admin tools. LDAP went from scary and impossible to point-and-click. However, even with Panther Server, MUCH better than Jaguar Server, it has some issues.
Grin, I'm not questioning that ST:TOS didn't tackle social issues... I just am sympathetic to some of the blatant ones (like the half-black/half-white one).
I like a quasi in-your-face anti-racism episode. But even in that case, it was slightly hidden behind metaphor.
The episode that I am talking about was outright saying "terrorists are nice guys" and implying (no more veiled than the half-white/half-black episode) that Jewish people persecute the nice, friendly Arab terrorists.
Slashdot Mirror
If any of you follow financial news, companies are reporting additional gains from exchange rates, and some years report losses...
Prices are set in local markets based upon localized demand and competition (limited monopoly pricing power from brand, even in a relatively competitive market), etc.
Right now, it is cheaper for Germans to buy German cars sold in America and reimport them, because even with the cost of shipping the car from the states, the Euro is so strong on the dollar that it results in the importing the American made German car is cheaper.
Companies set prices (usually with local subsidiaries because of assinine international tax laws) in each country. Many companies will engage in "hedging" with the currency derivative market, because they aren't in the business of currency speculation (although if it should work out in the long run, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, then paying the commissions on those trades isn't economically intelligent, but it's important for hitting quarterly/annual numbers, joys of public accounting).
However, the price will be set in the European market based upon the prevailing price there. However, that is in part because of Apple's limited "monopoly" pricing power (note, this is NOT monopoly a la anti-trust, it's in a competitive market with highly similiar substitute goods, like CDs, pirated music, etc.), but only Apple sets the price for iTMS downloads.
One of the things that the Internet and digital transfers has the potential to do is destroy regionalized pricing, at least within the English (and then Spanish, etc.) speaking world. In that scenario, Apple could set prices in each store based upon local trends, but consumers could buy from whichever store TODAY's currency price makes most beneficial. That is great for consumers, but lousy for corporate profits (then they ALWAYS lose on the currency fluctuation, because the business goes to whatever is cheapest that day).
However, a Euro price that isn't identical to US pricing with TODAY'S rate of exchange makes sense. The Euro is up something like 30% on the Dollar in the past 12 months. If that trend reverses, and 1 $ = 1 E again, then a Euro price of 55 cents would devastate Apple. The Euro was established at a price level to make the nominal exchange of Euros to Dollars approx. 1:1, which would obviously fluctuate.
Consumers in general are more interested in pricing in their local currency then international pricing. Although the Internet has changed things SLIGHTLY, in general, most consumers don't engage in International trade, but rather buy from an organization that has imported the products for them. Hence Amazon has localized businesses, Apple set up local Apple AND now iTMS to price in the local currency. Cars are priced in each local market.
However, the free flow of information will reduce that ability over time, which is a good thing, but you shouldn't be shocked that it isn't instant.
Alex
I love the BSDs, first played with them when Linux was a toy. When we were evaluating OSes for our Web Servers, we installed an OpenBSD machine and a Redhat machine and went to lunch. When I got back from lunch, before we could go to work, I was fielding calls that my new Redhat machines was launching attacks in Germany. We decided not to use Redhat at that point.
We recently started playing with FreeBSD 5 and RHEL 3 for comparisons... Quite frankly, I MUCH prefer the BSD ports to up2date, they are terrific. Both OSes are pretty good in the performance departments (OpenBSD while a rock, just couldn't perform).
Why did I switch to Redhat?
Redhat is simply moving in a direction that I like. Getting the machines to talk to our LDAP Server and Kerberos KDC (an OS X Server that does our central directory system) is a joke, as was straight LDAP before we started playing with Kerberos.
Adding software is a bit easier in BSD-land, because if I need to switch compile-time options, the ports are MUCH easier to work with than SRPMS. Granted that compiling source on Linux is easier, because most developers target Linux first, however, source tarballs are great for testing, not so great to roll out and keep track of across my networks.
Redhat support, while pretty mediocre at the low-end (RHEL 3.0 ES, $350/machine or so), I can put support requests in and get a response over time and get things escalated to engineering. With Apple Support, it's even worse, I can fill something out on Apple's bug report/feature request site, but I can't find out if they are doing anything on it.
It's a dilemma for a small company, you don't have the money to get the GOOD support from a top company, but dealing with a small company may get you personal service, but not the capabilities of the big boys.
FreeBSD is a GREAT system, and the ports/packages are a DREAM to work with.
The greatest thing about a BSD is how streamlined/stripped down the core is, then it is off to ports to configure.
The worst thing about a BSD is how streamlined/stripped down the core is, as making network configuration changes is just harder/more time-consuming, with multiple files to change.
FreeBSD, great OS, just not offering the easy-to-use Enterprise features that Redhat provides. Without the easy integration, it just isn't as easy for my little business to take advantage of everything that I can with Redhat.
Got an AWESOME deal on two iMacs from the previous generation that they were basically giving away at the Apple Store. They wouldn't be priced that low unless they were seriously trying to move the product.
I'd expect another G4 rev to the iMac, but who knows.
When I got certified on NT 4, it was heavily implied that when NT 5 shipped, NT 3.51 would be retired (MCSE Track) and NT 4 would last until NT 5.5 or NT 6. When Win2K shipped, they decided that they wanted to forklist upgrade the industry, so they would pressure us to upgrade my retiring our certification early.
Having been one of the peons that was busy ripping out NetWare installs and installing NT Networks, I was floored at being mistreated that way. As a result, we run lots of Linux and OpenBSD servers, and OS X Workstations. The only Windows machines at my company are old machines we picked up to run the Google Toolbar, Check browser compatibility, or run Quickbooks. Outside of the accounting machine, the rest are running old Windows versions that came with the machines when we inherited them.
Alex
Back in the day, you had to prove to be educational for .edu (my high school grabbed their .edu before K-12 got sent to the backwaters of k-12.city.state.ud, proof non-profit for .org, and proof network infrastructure for .net... otherwise you got stuck with .com. Everyone wanted .net, .com was for everyone else...
The web changed that a bit...
Alex
Perhaps we can all take off our tinfoil hats and realize the REAL reason Microsoft bought VirtualPC...
1. They've been trying to divorce themselves from Intel for the better part of a decade... The point of a monopoly is to extract monopoly rents... they currently split those...
2. If they could virtualize all pre-Longhorn calls into a clean emulation layer, then they don't have to "maintain" them... i.e. they could leave Win32 sitting there in its happy emulation layer forever, simply maintaining that one layer that talks to the OS via the CLR... In that world, they can move everything to CLR, and legacy Win32 runs in the VM that gets recompiled all the time.
3. Look at an old (pre NT 4) Win32 diagram... the Win32 subsystem was just a subsystem, with equal billing to POSIX and others... the idea was to be able to have the flexibility, but it didn't work out that way, as the Windows/DOS combination took 10 years to transition away from... moving the Win32 subsystem into a virtual layer underneath CLR (like WOW - Windows On Windows) would make maintenance easier...
Remember, sales growth is pretty flat for Microsoft, but they need to keep increasing earnings. Lowering development costs could DRASTICALLY increase earnings, so Microsoft could see 15% earnings growth on flat sales... look at Phillip Morris, declining market (decreases around 1%/year IIRC), increasing earnings each year, happy owners.
Alex
WWW pre web users is irrelevant. The Internet has two useful critical functions, email and file transfer, i.e. SMTP and HTTP (formerly FTP).
Credit whomever you want with the WWW, it was no more useful than Gopher until Mosaic proved that a graphical browser could exist (neat proof of concept) and then Netscape CREATED the modern Web.
To credit Tim Berners Lee because you discount the pre-web Internet and NOT be crediting Netscape is nothing short of absurd...
Netscape BUILT the modern web Internet, and did it with US Venture funding, because the American economy lets you take risks easily, and has pools of capital for those taking them.
Linux moved from being a toy to a real powerhouse because of what Red Hat did with venture funding.
America's biggest strength it its capital markets, and nobody's dumb ideas like government funded "venture capital" funds will duplicate what an unfettered flow of capital does.
For anyone that hasn't been to MIT's campus, the place is in a warehouse district. Sure the view from the River looks beautiful with Killian Court, but the otherside of the campus is pretty gross. The computer science buildings (32, 34, and 36 IIRC) were on a nearly abandonned ally, and walking in/out of that building late at night was creepy, I can't imagine what the girls in Course 6 (EECS) thought, or perhaps that is why they didn't stay late for labs...
:)
The new building here is in a even less school-like location, right near major roads. If you were a parent and saw that building, you'd probably forbid your son to wander there in the middle of the night, and you definitely would fear your daughter being there.
Forget terrorism, forget equipment, how about the fact that you have 18-25 year olds working in those buildings at all hours of the night... and in the Winter, Boston gets cold, the last thing you want is some psychofrenic homeless man sneaking in the sleep and scaring/assaulting people (my Office, in a nicer area of Greater Boston was left unlocked one night and we had that problem)...
You want to explain to a Massachusetts Jury that the school took all reasonable precautions and isn't liable for a student being assaulted/killed/raped, because security measures would have infringed upon privacy?
Sorry, but MIT needs to look out for the safety of its people... I expect a bunch of liberty/security quotes, but this IS NOT an infringement on ANYTHING, but gives some measurable level of security.
I respect RMS, he's a personal hero for what he has accomplished, but MIT isn't his personal playground, and his desire to come and go as he pleases with nobody knowing is NOT more important that the safety of those grad students that the faculty use as free (paid by grant) labor...
Alex
Earnings are up, that's all that matters.
Marketshare, whatever, it's irrelevant. Earnings are all that matter.
The problem with low marketshare, harder for third parties to make money selling software. Well, Apple makes more and more of the software that people use. As the open source stuff gets up to snuff, and we have Qt/Aqua, GTK/Aqua (no idea how mature or complete that is), and work on KDE/Aqua (there is also talk of a Qt/KDE platform... i.e. you could build a Qt app and have it use KDE widgets on KDE, Qt widgets on non-KDE Unix, Aqua widgets, Windows widgets, etc.), etc., and Apple becomes "another Unix" so the Free Software/Open Source stuff will become an EASY port.
Marketshare COULD have been irrelevant if Sun didn't screw up Java so badly (cross platform desktop with Windows and Sun support, when the ONLY interest in cross-platform at the time was Windows / Mac OS... maybe a little OS/2), but it will become that way with the current evolution in Free/Open Source Software.
OS X and Unix are similar enough that as the GUI toolkits port over, a "native" OS X version becomes easy, and adding OS X polish becomes doable. Making an App play nicely in KDE/OS X or GNOME/OS X becomes MUCH easier if you just need to modify the front end a bit, and the core functions the same.
Forget beleaguered, Apple is a nice company making nice money again.
I just want more and more from them so that I happily cut them bigger and bigger checks each year... that means that using Apple software, I make more and more money. Who knows, get good in OS X Server and my production servers may move from Linux to OS X.
Alex
Microsoft Certified System Engineer, Citrix Certified Administrator, and running a growing Mac network with Linux servers with one Windows machine for Quickbooks.
Each year we seem to buy machines in May (just in time to miss the free upgrade for the OS), get OS on a developer machine, update our in-house applications, roll out across our small office.
Yeah, it costs money, but we've gotten functionality and improvements that have made our in-house applications faster and more reliable, so I'm happy.
Also, there is no obligation to buy the upgrades, we were going to skip Panther, but then Expose was so incredible, we upgraded all our developers. Instead of building on Panther to deploy on Jaguar, we just bought a bunch of Jaguar updates.
The Jaguar Server -> Panther Server was an INCREDIBLE change, and I look forward to Tiger Server for more polish.
So it's a GOOD thing. Customers get the option of getting new features/more productive, and Apple Shareholders get to increase earnings by selling more to the same (or slightly shrinking) market.
So rather then fighting for marketshare, Apple is selling more/customer.
So all around, it's a good thing.
Charge me the same $400 as RHEL-ES, and let me download an ISO that day and get my "media kit" in the mail...
:)
Instead of just CDs that ship out two weeks later, charge for an "Enterprise" edition, $200 so it is reasonable, that includes the ability to download the ISOs, get a kit in a mail, and some extra stickers.
Alex
Ironically, I just finished installing 2 OpenBSD machines in the past couple of days, just finished up one about 5 minutes ago. Unfortunately, while they get the software up on a mirror quickly, everytime we buy the CDs they don't ship out for weeks after the downloaders grabbed them... makes it a bit discouraging to buy the CDs, which we used to do (several copies) each release...
But now that OpenBSD is only on Firewalls, no webservers, it's less pressing.
If North Korea wants to hit us, they can smuggle a suitcase bomb. The problem with terrorism is the lack of nuclear deterance, they aren't afraid that we'll hit them back.
The entire THEORY behind Bush's War on Terror is to hold governments accountable, and therefore not be willing to support terrorism.
North Korea is less likely to give Islamists nuclear material if we could track it to them and respond by nuking the shit out of them.
It gives deterance back, will therefore hopefully never be used.
We never launched our Cold War nukes, but if you think that they didn't make us safer... well then we disagree on 50 years of global history.
Alex
For starters, while LSB is terrific as a concept, it's a designed-by-committee kind of situation. It gives you the same problem that POSIX does, it can't be cutting edge.
When Apple or Microsoft put out something new as a standard, it becomes the default immediately. Win32 withered on a vine with NT, but Windows 95 made it real. The new libraries that came with later versions were allowed, to some extent, to be packaged with the OS. The only reason that DirectX took off was that games included the installer so that they could keep pushing the envelope.
LSB is always going to lag the releases, which is a bit problematic. Also, without a GOOD installation process (Apple has one, Linux should IMMEDIATELY adopt sudo and use a GUI sudo like OS X), there is no easy way to install new libraries.
The reality is that vendors are going to support limited distributions. That COULD be 1 distribution, it COULD be 5 distributions. However, there is no way that you can support "LSB 1.3 or higher," as you'd need to test it and explain how to install it in those scenarios.
Realistically, OpenOffice/StarOffice is basically at the point where you can set up Linux desktops for non-power users. Those that don't need the heavy automation that Excel offers will be fine (even if Star Office HAS those features, if it is differently done, it is too much of a pain to retrain), but better interoperability will help.
Linux will become a corporate desktop, and that will be the start. Linux will become a viable home computer for people that want to work from home and surf the web. The application issue matters less and less, as computers are more about the Internet than anything else.
Ignore the digital toys market, let Apple and Microsoft fight there. That market isn't about functionality so much as experience, let them play there. Then plan to go there in 3 years when it is a well known market and easy for open source.
Let it become like hardware. Those that need the best pay the premium and R&D costs. Then the middle solution exists, 80% functionality, 20% cost, then the generic version (open source instead of Taiwanese manufacturers) comes in.
LSB isn't the solution... at least not yet. The solution is corporate desktops with controlled libraries, and some consolidation in the Linux market. I mean corporate consolidaiton, not hacker consolidation. The open source stuff will run anywhere, but the corporate software market will consolidate on 1-2 solutions.
Alex
The reason that devleoping for Windows (and OS X) is easy is that you KNOW what libraries are there. If you require Win98 or higher, you just target those APIs. When NT4 was big, you would see things like NT4 SP3 as the requirements.
The problem with releasing software on Linux is that there is nothing to support. A RedHat 9 installation can have all sorts of libraries, so you say glibc x.y, kdelib x.y, etc., and end up with dozens of requirements.
The exitance of KDE and GNOME is irrelevant.
If RedHat version X including in the installation a core set of libraries (regardless of server or workstation configuration) then you could just say "supports RedHat 3.0 or higher).
The problem is the dependancy issue, which would NOT be an issue if the System installed the libraries by default, regardless of applications.
That is the "Linux" problem, you CAN'T release commercial software easily because the support is a nightmare.
The KDE vs. GNOME isn't really a big deal, as a Corporate Desktop (the first step in a desktop market) can easily specify roll-outs. That's Linux's (and OS X's) advantage.
Windows was NOT built in a network-centric way, and roaming profiles & home directories are handled FAR worse than the Unix way.
The problem is that you can end up with a nightmare because distributions don't have standard libraries.
Alex
Look, if the car starts bouncing, I know I have a flat tire. If the engine is having problems, a red light on my dashboard tells me to take the car in. When the car struggled to shift gears, I knew it was a transmission problem. The CAR informs me of what is needed and I take it to the specialist. The basic maintenance schedule is given to you when you buy your car, there are no surprises.
Regarding a license... you need a license because with an automobile because the misuse of an automobile can endanger others.
Look, I'm a computer engineer by training, know my way around Unix, know my way around NT (MCSE, CCA from old career), and know my way around a CLI. Guess what, when I want to put together a business model, I want a graphical spreadsheet that is out of my way. Do I know ALL the Excel functions? No, but I know the ones I use regularly, and the help system gets me through the rest.
I have no desire to memorize arcane commands, I want to build the business model. Will I learn arcane commands to speed things up? Sure, but on MY schedule, NOT yours. I buy the machine to let me get my work done, and I pay the premium for a laptop to do so on the road, and I pay the (admitted small these days) Apple premium to have wireless support that is amazing and to be able to have my Unix applications on the road. These are all my choices.
Guess what, I don't pay Open Source programmers, so they don't have to listen to me. However, don't complain that I don't have an open source desktop when you put out bizarre GUIs that interfere with my workflow.
My Mac stays out of my way and lets me do work, MUCH faster than Windows or Linux would let me. In the end, that keeps Linux a step away from "global domination" or whatever the goal of the week is.
My computer should work for me, not the other way around. Sure, I had to demonstrate an understanding of traffic laws to get on the road. But guess what, EVERY car I drive is nearly identical, and the controls don't change. That consistent UI makes cars a success.
Windows has problems, no question. But it is "good enough" for most, and it is pretty cheap.
For a single-purpose machine, Linux is fine, I can train my people on 1-2 applications... If GNUStep was further along, or Qt didn't blow as a RAD tool, then our dedicated personnel would be on Linux machines and not eMacs. However, if you think that Linux is good enough for a business power user, you're sadly mistaken.
The integration of the Office Suite has been AMAZING for a few years, and the combination of Word, Excel, and Powerpoint is TERRIFIC for business users. Until GNU can mimick that power (NOT mimick the widgets, but the power and integration) then it is NOT a viable desktop system for the modern business power user.
If Viacom could sell the 30 second spot for $100k, then it costs them $100k to put their OWN ad in instead of selling it. It's an opportunity cost because of lost revenue.
INSTEAD, they have a feed that is being used by paying customers (other cable companies) and using it to push an agenda. When DirecTV contracted with Viacom, it was to carry their programming to paying customers (like me), not to carry their agenda.
They should NOT be able to use that space to push their agenda. Yes they "own" the content, but there are FCC rules regarding time for commercials, etc., they are supplying content to others...
The Telecom Act of 1996 had some REALLY nasty things that has encouraging MASSIVE consolidation at the expense of consumers. That was when they could designate television stations as must carry (so now cable companies and satellite companies would HAVE to carry the church channel), or require compensation for carriage.
At the time, the theory was that the CableCos were making money charging customers for cable, when 90% of the viewers were watching the networks... The Networks paid for a broadcast infrastructure and license that went unused.
Instead of Media companies bundled their networks with their cable channels... AND Viacom got an exemption to own two networks because otherwise UPN was unviable and would shut down... But CBS and UPN are REALLY cross-promoting and cross-licensing content, which has been to an unfair advantage there.
Look, I'm a Laissez-Faire conservative... but this IS NOT a free market, this is a heavily regulated market where the companies that can influence politician's futures via television converage have gotten the upper hand.
Good Samaritan laws (which is amusing if you know the history of the Samaritans... which is why their being a good one was noteworthy) normally protect someone... The general rule of thumb is that if you are trying to help, as a good samaritan, you are immune from lawsuits... It's the type of law that is on the books to protect people that are being good Americans from our out-of-control legal system.
There is probably a medical ethics law or something similar that you are thinking of.
Businesses run by unimaginative people with lots of political pull LOVE regulation. They LOVE being granted monopolies and "reasonable rates of return" that are set by the regulators that hope to get jobs in industry after leaving.
What private individual wouldn't love to get a 10% ROI guaranteed by the government (risk free) except those that are really daring and want to make more... 10% risk free is pretty good...
Some people LOVE regulation, it just isn't the cutthroat capitalist OR anyone that actually cares about the common welfare.
The whole point of the "concept car" was to explore and reconsider the auto-design process.
They put a group of women together to design a car for women, because most cars are primarily designed for main targetting men. The only vehicles that are designed focusing on women are minivans.
This was NOT to create a car for women, but to think about what changes Volvo could make to benefit all drivers. My having a "concept car" that is "by women, for women" that is vastly different from the existing cars on the market serves a useful purpose.
Most designs are iterations of previous designs. The early designers AND buyers were men. Creating a "women's car" create a series concepts that may not have been explored.
The goal isn't a "feminine" car, it's a DIFFERENT car, and the "female perspective" was a way of getting them.
Will all cars have welded hoods? Probably not. Will some? Probably.
If there is a market for "disposable cars" that have limited resale factor and are only serviced 1/year at the dealership (at a fixed fee), then the welded shut cars will exist.
Alex
A few summers ago in New York, when my wife and I were dating, we went to the observatory on the Empire State Building. I hadn't been to the one on the World Trade Center since I was a kid, but we weren't up for two in one trip. We figured that we'd get to the WTC next time.. Well that liberty of movement wasn't taken away by the Justice Department...
Bring up your problems with the guy that hired you. Be polite, not demanding. He didn't write the contract, and he didn't stipulate the terms. Have a copy of them in writing (and digitally to give him an email later). He can send it to legal, and they can make the changes.
Beyond that however, do you want to be excused for a prior business relationship or ANY business relationship. As an employer, I'd have no problem granting an exception for their existing business, but ANYTHING off hours... maybe it's because we have a small business, but I wouldn't want anyone on my staff spending excessive amounts of time trying to develop a business on the side.
Knee-jerk Slashdotisms aside, I'm not personally interested in funding your startup. If I am, I expect a piece of the action, not simply your being distracted and tired from moonlighting at the job.
But that's just me, each company is different.
And before you bitch at me, no I don't think that I own my employees. However, I have my beliefs and expectations, and if someone doesn't want to exist within those beliefs and expectations, they can seek employment elsewhere.
Alex
Absolutely an impressive school. 10 years ago, they were a joke. Now they built a national reputation via their football team, so people have heard of them, and projects like this put them on the map. When I looked at schools, they never entered the equation. If I was looking at engineering schools today, I'm sure that I would end up applying there.
This is a school with great self promotion and is going to go places. Unlike places like MIT, they don't sit on their Laurels, they are exploding.
I expect that in 20 years, they'll be considered one of the elite engineering schools. Kinda neat to have your college degree appreciate in value because the school gets better. I can't imagine that you don't get a decent engineering education at any engineering focused school, and this research project is a brilliant PR stunt.
Alex
If you run a Mac network, you can do really cool stuff with Automount points. All my Macs mount a /Network/Application, /Network/Library, and a few other mount points thrown in. The GUI land includes /Network/Library in the search path for stuff, (/System/Library for system installed stuff, /Library for stuff installed by the Admin, ~/Library for stuff installed by you, nice and clean and straightforward).
/Network/Applications (server installed apps with drag-and-drop, really nice) /Network/Library (frameworks for custom Cocoa apps, etc) /Network/Software (software installers, why not, right) ... and the Users share, that unfortunately can't be automounted as /Network/Users
Each AFP mount counts against the license, no biggie... 7 Macs, all permenantly connected, and we had 3 connections left for laptops.
Incorrect. While all my connections, once logged in, go through one AFP connection, the Automount connections are done anonymously. Oh no, 2 AFP connections from machine->server, anonymous automounts, then w/ permissions mounts. It's worse! Each automount creates it's OWN connection.
So we were automounting:
well, I had 4 (at the time) automounts, so the first two machines to boot were fine, but machine 3 was all messed up.
Took forever to diagnose and realize that we needed an unlimited license.
Took a few hours with Apple support to diagnose, and they didn't figure out the problem until I started at Server Admin and had the problem. Users couldn't log in, because starting with machine 3, they couldn't get their home directories.
I REALLY like OS X Server's admin tools. LDAP went from scary and impossible to point-and-click. However, even with Panther Server, MUCH better than Jaguar Server, it has some issues.
Alex
Grin, I'm not questioning that ST:TOS didn't tackle social issues... I just am sympathetic to some of the blatant ones (like the half-black/half-white one).
I like a quasi in-your-face anti-racism episode. But even in that case, it was slightly hidden behind metaphor.
The episode that I am talking about was outright saying "terrorists are nice guys" and implying (no more veiled than the half-white/half-black episode) that Jewish people persecute the nice, friendly Arab terrorists.
I am NOT sympathetic to that.
Alex