I hit the nail on the head and my thumb is perfectly fine. You clearly are not able to separate the target markets of SGI and Apple. They are not the same. Also, Sun uses AMD for their workstations, for a reasonable price, but are not targeted at the same market as Apple either.
When talking about the economic behaviors of population groups it's pretty much all about money. Very few people are going to spend oodles of extra cash simply so they can get kudos from some group of whacko environmentalists; the benefit has to be more immediate, tangible, and proven to actually work.
Hybrid cars aren't any of these things. They're a waste of resources, a waste of tax dollars (subsidies!), and worst of all - they aren't that much more efficient than an economy sedan. Big whoop."
Using the word 'whacko' immediately discredits your post. Your feelings/opinions are clearly defined. Using the term 'big whoop' seriously questions your age and/or maturity.
My wife's Honda Insight has a lifetime fuel economy of 61 MPG for over 120,000 miles. What economy sedan gets that fuel economy? None. My wife also reduced her fuel costs per month from $240 to $80. But, the main reason she bought it is because she cares about the environment. The Honda Insight is also an SULEV. The fuel cost savings were a great benefit. If it was safe to do so, both her and I would ride our bikes to work, but we cannot. If it was all about the money, she would have considered buying a VW TDI with similar fuel economy. There are absolute and definable benefits to owning and driving a Hybrid.
That's great. But what you have to understand is that your feelings are just that - your feelings. No one else is obligated to feel the same way you do about "the Earth", and most people are going to make the rational economic choice rather than the irrational one.
If you want people to join you in saving the planet, you're going to have to show them how it personally benefits them, most likely by putting cash back in their wallets. Telling them it'll "help the ecology" or some such ephemeral rot isn't going to impress them.
That is also false. Hybrids were beginning to become popular before the recent gas cost increases. And they will continue to remain popular even after Iraqi/Alaskan/etc. oil starts flowing into the US in the near future. In this case, your feelings/opinions are not based on fact. And what you believe is 'rational' and 'irrational' is completely subjective. Your views have already been clearly defined. It does not mean anyone else shares your feelings/opinions nor does it make them any more vaild.
To share a point, EVERYWHERE my wife and I drive in her Honda Insight, we get a ton of questions a praise from complete strangers everywhere we stop. Roughly 99% of them were in the process of saving to buy one, talking to a Toyota dealership for a Prius (which currently has a 6 month waiting list from the factory), or are planning on owning one in the next 1-2 years.
Also, not everyone in the world is selfish. There are people who believe in doing what is right, not just what benefits only them.
"Fool cells", what a moron. The Honda FCX Hydrogen Fuel Cell car is being driven TODAY in California and is much less than 10 years away. As a matter of fact, one family in California is currently leasing one for everyday use, and Honda is very happy with the results so far.
COMPLETELY WRONG. Your post is NOT a +5. It is a -1 Troll.
My wife and I have owned a Honda Insight since 2000. My wife travels about 60% interstate and 40% city. The lifetime fuel economy on the odometer with 127, 326 miles as of today is 60.1 MPG. Some of the other local Insight owners, who send photographs to the local Honda dealership, are averaging 70-85 MPG for over 100,000 miles.
Idiots like you, who have no idea what they are talking about, spread their ignorance around and is one of the main things keeping hybrids from larger mass adoption. I read crap like this on 'news' websites too, who are wrong, which is even worse.
How you drive the car determines your fuel economy more than anything.
Like SGI, Apple should have the similarity between common x86 hardware and Apple specific x86 hardware end at the CPU pins. Just because Apple wants to use x86 CPU's does not mean they have to let anything else from the CPU pins back be common x86 compatible. That would easily solve the pirating problem.
Your post is a crock of shit. And it is blatantly obvious that you do not use OS X nor have you ever used OS X. You are simply a Windows/Linux user without a clue in the world what he is talking about. How does it feel to regurgitate back what you read on Slashdot without having any actual knowledge of the subject?
The only piece of Apple sanctioned hardware that I use with OS X is the CPU/motherboard itself. The wireless Bluetooth mouse, Bluetooth cellphone, external Firewire HDD's, external Firewire DVD, OEM ATI Radeon video card, external USB printer, Linksys/Cisco wireless network base station, non-Apple LCD monitor, USB pen drive, etc. and EVERYTHING works perfectly with OS X (I am running 10.4.2).
OS X is BY FAR technically and usably superior to Microsoft Windows in every aspect. A hardware driver is a hardware driver. If a company, such as ATI, can make a stable hardware driver for Windows they can make a stable hardware driver for OS X. The simple fact that until OS X Apple has had a small hardware market does not imply that Apple's are only stable because they only have to run on a small market of hardware. Those are not the same things. Your logic is false. And it is false for every person who regurgitates it back on Slashdot.
Yes, as a matter of fact I am better than 85% of all drivers on the road.
Not only have I earned multiple SCCA Regional racing championship awards, but I am also a fully licensed Rally America ProRally competitor. As a matter of fact, I can easily say that I am better than 95% of the drivers on the road. And the people who drive better than me are both younger than me and older than me, so age has nothing to do with driving talents, skills, or abilities.
What causes the most accidents are not pot holes, rabbits, etc. but inattentive and inexperienced/untalented/apathetic/skill-less drivers. The most dangerous people on the road are not the ones who are speeding (with the exception of people who drag race in cities). The following people are dangerous at any speed and usually cause the mass majority of accidents at speeds slower than the post speed limits:
1) People driving SUV's/mini-vans/trucks/etc. while talking on their cellphones, staring in the mirror at their make-up, driving erratic speeds, weaving in and out of traffic, no use of blinkers anywhere anytime, yelling at their kids, etc.
2) People driving 5-10mph slower than the posted speed limit in the fast lane.
3) People >65 years of age who physically and mentally cannot drive safely on the road any longer.
4) People who should not be driving in the rain or snow because they do not understand how to drive under those conditions.
5) People who do not have the proper vehicle/tires to drive in slippery conditions.
6) People who are simply bad drivers.
7) People who do not buy high quality tires (i.e. bald and/or cheap tires, mismatched tires, etc.) and do not perform regular maintenance on their vehicles/tires/etc. (yearly four wheel alignment, balance, tread depth testing, monthly inflation, etc.)
8) And more...
And the saying some people use, such as "when I was 25, I was stupid, and I thought I was invincible...but now that I am older I know better..." is complete bullshit. When you were 25, you were an idiot then. Go blow smoke up someone else's ass. While statistically the worst drivers on the road are 16-21 and 60+, it does not mean everyone is a bad driver in those age groups. The most dangerous drivers I have ever met are between the ages of 30-50, for many of the reasons I pointed out above. What gives younger drivers such a bad reputation is that they have both a lack of experience and a lack of responsibility (if you are legally able to drive at 16, the legal definition of adulthood should start at 16 too). And due to that inexperience, when they make a mistake it is usually fairly large. But, while there are stupid 16 year old drivers, if they survive, they simply turn into stupid 40 year old drivers. The stupid 40 year olds just happen to survive more often. And the problem with the truly older drivers is that they are simply physically and mentally unable to drive safely. What that means is that in the US it should me much more difficult for anyone to obtain their license at any age and testing for a license should be regular. Like I said, not everyone is the same. The most competitive driver's I have ever met have been between the ages of 18-50+. Age is only one factor to driving safely.
Another point, is that my state raised its speed limits about 10 years ago from 55mph to 70mph on all major highways. The accident and fatality rates have actually DROPPED since then. So, tree-hugger logic about faster speed limits==more accidents and deaths is a crock of shit. People learned to drive more attentively on the highways in my state and today's cars (at least the Japanese/German cars - the US cars are still crap) are easily capable of being safe at much higher rates of speed. Also, since we have about 1 deer crossing every 50 feet (this is a rough estimate/joke) people are used to just hitting the damn things head on, instead of swerving to avoid
Are you using OS X on a fully supported machine and peripherals with a properly installed copy of OS X? It doesn't sound like it at all.
I develop full-time on both Windows XP and OS X (10.4.2). I have had to reboot Windows XP fairly rarely due to crashes of some sort, but I have to reboot Windows XP fairly often due to gradual system degradation. OS X, on the other hand, I have never yet had to reboot due to a hard lock up and have only had to reboot otherwise because I turn off the computer for the weekends when I am not at work.
I would personally disregard your post in light of other people's experience's with OS X, including my own. Your experiences are not the majority and definitely sound like they are to do with other factors involved with your installation and use of OS X.
Your post says to everyone who programs for a living on non-trivial projects that you have no idea what you are talking about. Your last sentence is completely non-sensical rubbish.
All major modern IDE's today (VS.NET, XCode, etc.) are absolutely excellent at everything that they do and include features your list of software does not even begin to offer. And each of them are infinitely extendable/extensible by using a plugins architecture, among other excellent features.
I am a software engineer and I develop full-time in Java using Borland JBuilder 2005. The 'Intellisense' in JBuilder 2005 is absolutely excellent as well as all of its other features. I would rank JBuilder 2005 right up there on the same level as VS.NET 2005.
Starting with JBuilder 2006, Borland is planning to move the entire JBuilder IDE to Eclipse. I have tried Eclipse, but only for a few minutes here and there. I plan to move to Eclipse full-time in the future, once JBuilder moves to an Eclipse base.
Does anyone have any extensive experience with both IDE's to be able to give a clear and objective comparison between them both? Thanks.
I was being sarcastic about buying a new inkjet printer every month. But it is in no way cheaper to buy a ~$290 color laser jet printer and ~$125 per color for the cartidges ($290 + ($125x3) = $665), even if they last slightly longer than a throw-away inkjet printer and a mountain of inkjet cartridges($33 + $38 = $71). You are talking about comparing a B&W laser printer, which would be pointless to own, with a color inkjet printer. Unlike a college dorm room student, my wife and I require printing in both B&W and Color and it simply depending on what we are printing. I am neither going to fuck around trying to find a way to print color documents when I need to with only a B&W laser printer nor am I going to spend >$600 for a color laser printer whose cartidges are $125 a piece.
Sure buddy. Which is why the ink cartridge that comes with it lasts just as long as the replacement cartridges. You can go back into your conspiracy theory closet now and worry about the evil ink jet cartidge companies.
That is not true whatsoever. My wife is currently working under a graduate research grant in Biology which was granted to her because of the overall betterment of scientific undestanding which her work will give. There is no significant problem that her work is aiming to solve. When her work is finished, she will continue in her studies under another research grant under the same premise.
There are only a few people who feel that their information needs to be presented to the masses in an alarmist fashion. And then there are people like you who make broadly ignorant statements about all scientists and research grants because of those few alarmist type people.
What people don't get is that companies make their money from replacement cartridges.
For example, it ends up that a refill cartridge for my ink jet printer costs me $38 at Wal-Mart, but a brand new HP Deskjet 3740 USB costs me $33. So, instead of buying ink jet replacement cartridges, I simply buy a new printer every single month.
Sure, it is incredibly wasteful, but I enjoy saving the ~$5 a month, having a brand new printer every month, and playing the system against itself.
Yeah, ASSCAR in Space. How fucking boring. Let's watch a bunch of ignorant rednecks fly around in circles in space. The only bonus would be that once they crash into each other, maybe some other them would actually get jettisoned out into space forever never to be seen again.
Of course, ignorant rednecks making it into Space is highly unlikely anyways. They will be too busy trying to convince people in Kansas that creationism is real.
Of course, by the time Space racing becomes a reality, IRL (Indy) be have replaced ASSCAR anyways, since Indy is what ASSCAR always wishing it could be. And Formula One will still have a cloned version of Michael Shumacher racing to a win every time.
In the future of space racing, my heart will still be with the one true motorsport...Rally. Except, instead of WRC, it will be SSRC or GRC. That would kick ass.
"My point is that all of these OS wars, and I use - actively - all three major flavors. And I know I can't be alone. Why use only a hammer to build a house when you have so many different tools in your toolbox?"
Because your analogy is false. That is one of the most piss poor and overused bits of mis-logic that gets said on Slashdot. There is something called 'the best tool for the job'. To correct the errors in your logic, there are tools which are the best choice for more than one criteria and just because there are choices, does not mean all of the choices are equally as good.
What kind of developer are you? i.e. What software do you produce? In any case, you are making a incorrect analogy between having to run multiple OS's on one computer (lack of funding? Emulators are not the best choice to use due to adding additional unknown/uncontrolled variables to your testing) because you need to test software on multiple platforms due to a business marketing decision and saying that no single OS is better than another. Those are two completely separate points.
There are OS wars because there are OS's which are the best and are exceptional at everything that they do. In this case, Mac OS X 10.4. It is all the Unix power you wish Windows had with all of the UI and well thought out consistent design that you wish Linux had. Essentially, a better Unix/OS and UI than both Linux and Windows. I recently switched after using and programming in a combination of DOS, Windows (all versions), OS/2, NeXtStep, BeOS, Solaris, Linux, and Mac OS (1-9) for the past 20 years. There really is nothing better than OS X and OS X is only going to get better in the future (read the dev docs). On top of that, Microsoft Office 2004 is excellent on the Macintosh and the Macintosh gaming environment is just beginning to get hot (if that is your main requirement). So, Mac OS X has essentially everything a user needs.
In a lot of cases, there are not multiple tools in the tool box. There is almost always one tool which is perfect for almost everything.
PS - I would also like to add the when I plugged in my Firewire digital camcorder in under Linux all I got was an 'unknown device'. How long did I want to spend trying to fuck around with kernel modules, custom configuration scripts, and the rest under Linux? Zero. I don't want to waste my time with that shit any more. So, I plugged the same digital camcorder in under Mac OS X 10.4.2 and it just worked. No problem.
And trying to play any decent form of video codec is practically a joke too. How many different video programs do I have to wade through under Linux where I've have to hack a Windows DLL's into my/usr/xxx/xxx or whatever directory just to get sub-par video performance?
Like I said, Linux is still a major pain in the ass and is highly unsuitable as a daily use desktop OS.
I wish Linux will someday become a great desktop OS, as my Intel machine is in need of a removal of Windows. But to compare Linux today with Mac OS X is simply foolish.
I switched to Mac OS X from Linux after 10 years because Linux sucks as a desktop OS. There is nothing easier to do in Linux than on OS X.
Case in point, you can spend practically forever fucking around with Linux trying to find software to make a decent video file. Then you spend practically forver trying to make your Firewire DVD burner work with the less than second rate free burner software included in Linux. On OS X, I simply made the video with a few clicks of the mouse and burned the DVD just as easier. Plug-and-play simple. Plus, the interface is excellent. OS X is exactly what Linux wishes it could be. I have spent a ton of my life fucking around with Linux. I want to get something done now. Mac OS X just plain works. Simple, easy, and reliable.
Plus, I can open Office 2004 and complete other work at the same time, no compatibility or free (read bad) import/export filters.
Linux is fun to play with, and maybe someday Linux will reach the level of OS X 10.0, but as an every day desktop OS no way.
It's not the technology which is unreliable, but the software drivers which are unreliable. For example, I was getting extremely frustrated that my Linksys 802.11g network was not working for shit in my apartment building (WPC54G and WRT54G). Even 15ft away my Windows XP laptop would lose signal, take 5-10 minutes to log back on (I use WPA), and generally pick up and drop the connection seemingly at random. I went through every knowledge base article on Linksys website, downloaded all the latest BIOS's for the router, and was literally 30 seconds from throwing the whole fucking network out the window. Then I bought an Apple iBook with built-in wireless (Airport) for my fiancee. I plugged in the iBook, logged into Apple OS X 10.4, and the first window that greeted me was the network password for WPA for my wireless network (and there are about 5 wireless networks in my apartment building). I typed in the password and the network just came up and started working, nothing else involved. HOLY F'ING SHIT, YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME. In the months we have had the iBook, we have never lost a signal nor had a failed sign-on. My Windows XP laptop is still acting the same way it was acting before. Un-f'ing believable.
Moral of the story is that the networking is not always to blame.
You will just have to change the way you think. In this case, you will have to change the way you think about your ideas of buttons and physical clicking sensations.
I am currently build an industrial touchscreen HMI and I have been loving every second of it. Almost every existing idea of how a person would normally interact with a computer has to be rethought to work with only a touchscreen in mind. It has been a truly enlightening experience and very rewarding, especially for thoughts on future projects. Not putting physical clicking buttons on a mouse is the exact same type of idea. Brilliant of Apple.
The people who dislike the touchscreen HMI are always the ones who are afraid of change in any capacity, whether the change is good or not. Those people are highly unfortunate.
Ex-fucking-actly. I have run a side business for the past almost 10 years consisting of computer setup, installation, and training. Unless the person I am training is in their middle 20's or younger -and- grew up with a computer, NOBODY understands left click/right click/control click/shift click/top menu/dragging/dropping/etc. They are horribly confused as to why some menu items are on the top, some menu items are on some right/shift/option click, and which one to use if the same option appears in both places. The Windows interface is HIGHLY UNINTUITIVE. I Thank Apple for forcing programmers to think when they are building interfaces.
You are spot on to reality in this case. Reality is that the mass majority of people have not used a computer and it is not natural and intuitive to them.
WTF? You sound like a completely ignorant and arrogant baffoon. You need to learn respect kid.
You don't the right to a damn thing before it is fully scientifically reviewed. And you do not have a Ph.D, so your life and career does not ride on completely accurate and fully reviewed scientific discovery and achievement. Therefore, you should only deal with the things you are qualified to speak about and deal with. Your arrogance is unfounded.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect the reasoning is that Madden, every year, is either the #1 or #2 top-selling game in the US market, if not the world.
The US != The World. The US is a small fraction of the world, as a matter of fact.
Global sales figures for Madden Football would be interesting. I have not seen Madden played outside of the US much at all.
And the US gaming market is not much larger than Europe or Japan.
I hit the nail on the head and my thumb is perfectly fine. You clearly are not able to separate the target markets of SGI and Apple. They are not the same. Also, Sun uses AMD for their workstations, for a reasonable price, but are not targeted at the same market as Apple either.
So, your counterpoint was meaningless.
When talking about the economic behaviors of population groups it's pretty much all about money. Very few people are going to spend oodles of extra cash simply so they can get kudos from some group of whacko environmentalists; the benefit has to be more immediate, tangible, and proven to actually work.
Hybrid cars aren't any of these things. They're a waste of resources, a waste of tax dollars (subsidies!), and worst of all - they aren't that much more efficient than an economy sedan. Big whoop."
Using the word 'whacko' immediately discredits your post. Your feelings/opinions are clearly defined. Using the term 'big whoop' seriously questions your age and/or maturity.
My wife's Honda Insight has a lifetime fuel economy of 61 MPG for over 120,000 miles. What economy sedan gets that fuel economy? None. My wife also reduced her fuel costs per month from $240 to $80. But, the main reason she bought it is because she cares about the environment. The Honda Insight is also an SULEV. The fuel cost savings were a great benefit. If it was safe to do so, both her and I would ride our bikes to work, but we cannot. If it was all about the money, she would have considered buying a VW TDI with similar fuel economy. There are absolute and definable benefits to owning and driving a Hybrid.
That's great. But what you have to understand is that your feelings are just that - your feelings. No one else is obligated to feel the same way you do about "the Earth", and most people are going to make the rational economic choice rather than the irrational one.
If you want people to join you in saving the planet, you're going to have to show them how it personally benefits them, most likely by putting cash back in their wallets. Telling them it'll "help the ecology" or some such ephemeral rot isn't going to impress them.
That is also false. Hybrids were beginning to become popular before the recent gas cost increases. And they will continue to remain popular even after Iraqi/Alaskan/etc. oil starts flowing into the US in the near future. In this case, your feelings/opinions are not based on fact. And what you believe is 'rational' and 'irrational' is completely subjective. Your views have already been clearly defined. It does not mean anyone else shares your feelings/opinions nor does it make them any more vaild.
To share a point, EVERYWHERE my wife and I drive in her Honda Insight, we get a ton of questions a praise from complete strangers everywhere we stop. Roughly 99% of them were in the process of saving to buy one, talking to a Toyota dealership for a Prius (which currently has a 6 month waiting list from the factory), or are planning on owning one in the next 1-2 years.
Also, not everyone in the world is selfish. There are people who believe in doing what is right, not just what benefits only them.
"Fool cells", what a moron. The Honda FCX Hydrogen Fuel Cell car is being driven TODAY in California and is much less than 10 years away. As a matter of fact, one family in California is currently leasing one for everyday use, and Honda is very happy with the results so far.
COMPLETELY WRONG. Your post is NOT a +5. It is a -1 Troll.
My wife and I have owned a Honda Insight since 2000. My wife travels about 60% interstate and 40% city. The lifetime fuel economy on the odometer with 127, 326 miles as of today is 60.1 MPG. Some of the other local Insight owners, who send photographs to the local Honda dealership, are averaging 70-85 MPG for over 100,000 miles.
Idiots like you, who have no idea what they are talking about, spread their ignorance around and is one of the main things keeping hybrids from larger mass adoption. I read crap like this on 'news' websites too, who are wrong, which is even worse.
How you drive the car determines your fuel economy more than anything.
Like SGI, Apple should have the similarity between common x86 hardware and Apple specific x86 hardware end at the CPU pins. Just because Apple wants to use x86 CPU's does not mean they have to let anything else from the CPU pins back be common x86 compatible. That would easily solve the pirating problem.
I think it is pretty much accepted that tools aren't quite as snappy on Mac OS X as on pc's
Like what?
Your post is a crock of shit. And it is blatantly obvious that you do not use OS X nor have you ever used OS X. You are simply a Windows/Linux user without a clue in the world what he is talking about. How does it feel to regurgitate back what you read on Slashdot without having any actual knowledge of the subject?
The only piece of Apple sanctioned hardware that I use with OS X is the CPU/motherboard itself. The wireless Bluetooth mouse, Bluetooth cellphone, external Firewire HDD's, external Firewire DVD, OEM ATI Radeon video card, external USB printer, Linksys/Cisco wireless network base station, non-Apple LCD monitor, USB pen drive, etc. and EVERYTHING works perfectly with OS X (I am running 10.4.2).
OS X is BY FAR technically and usably superior to Microsoft Windows in every aspect. A hardware driver is a hardware driver. If a company, such as ATI, can make a stable hardware driver for Windows they can make a stable hardware driver for OS X. The simple fact that until OS X Apple has had a small hardware market does not imply that Apple's are only stable because they only have to run on a small market of hardware. Those are not the same things. Your logic is false. And it is false for every person who regurgitates it back on Slashdot.
Yes, as a matter of fact I am better than 85% of all drivers on the road.
Not only have I earned multiple SCCA Regional racing championship awards, but I am also a fully licensed Rally America ProRally competitor. As a matter of fact, I can easily say that I am better than 95% of the drivers on the road. And the people who drive better than me are both younger than me and older than me, so age has nothing to do with driving talents, skills, or abilities.
What causes the most accidents are not pot holes, rabbits, etc. but inattentive and inexperienced/untalented/apathetic/skill-less drivers. The most dangerous people on the road are not the ones who are speeding (with the exception of people who drag race in cities). The following people are dangerous at any speed and usually cause the mass majority of accidents at speeds slower than the post speed limits:
1) People driving SUV's/mini-vans/trucks/etc. while talking on their cellphones, staring in the mirror at their make-up, driving erratic speeds, weaving in and out of traffic, no use of blinkers anywhere anytime, yelling at their kids, etc.
2) People driving 5-10mph slower than the posted speed limit in the fast lane.
3) People >65 years of age who physically and mentally cannot drive safely on the road any longer.
4) People who should not be driving in the rain or snow because they do not understand how to drive under those conditions.
5) People who do not have the proper vehicle/tires to drive in slippery conditions.
6) People who are simply bad drivers.
7) People who do not buy high quality tires (i.e. bald and/or cheap tires, mismatched tires, etc.) and do not perform regular maintenance on their vehicles/tires/etc. (yearly four wheel alignment, balance, tread depth testing, monthly inflation, etc.)
8) And more...
And the saying some people use, such as "when I was 25, I was stupid, and I thought I was invincible...but now that I am older I know better..." is complete bullshit. When you were 25, you were an idiot then. Go blow smoke up someone else's ass. While statistically the worst drivers on the road are 16-21 and 60+, it does not mean everyone is a bad driver in those age groups. The most dangerous drivers I have ever met are between the ages of 30-50, for many of the reasons I pointed out above. What gives younger drivers such a bad reputation is that they have both a lack of experience and a lack of responsibility (if you are legally able to drive at 16, the legal definition of adulthood should start at 16 too). And due to that inexperience, when they make a mistake it is usually fairly large. But, while there are stupid 16 year old drivers, if they survive, they simply turn into stupid 40 year old drivers. The stupid 40 year olds just happen to survive more often. And the problem with the truly older drivers is that they are simply physically and mentally unable to drive safely. What that means is that in the US it should me much more difficult for anyone to obtain their license at any age and testing for a license should be regular. Like I said, not everyone is the same. The most competitive driver's I have ever met have been between the ages of 18-50+. Age is only one factor to driving safely.
Another point, is that my state raised its speed limits about 10 years ago from 55mph to 70mph on all major highways. The accident and fatality rates have actually DROPPED since then. So, tree-hugger logic about faster speed limits==more accidents and deaths is a crock of shit. People learned to drive more attentively on the highways in my state and today's cars (at least the Japanese/German cars - the US cars are still crap) are easily capable of being safe at much higher rates of speed. Also, since we have about 1 deer crossing every 50 feet (this is a rough estimate/joke) people are used to just hitting the damn things head on, instead of swerving to avoid
Are you using OS X on a fully supported machine and peripherals with a properly installed copy of OS X? It doesn't sound like it at all.
I develop full-time on both Windows XP and OS X (10.4.2). I have had to reboot Windows XP fairly rarely due to crashes of some sort, but I have to reboot Windows XP fairly often due to gradual system degradation. OS X, on the other hand, I have never yet had to reboot due to a hard lock up and have only had to reboot otherwise because I turn off the computer for the weekends when I am not at work.
I would personally disregard your post in light of other people's experience's with OS X, including my own. Your experiences are not the majority and definitely sound like they are to do with other factors involved with your installation and use of OS X.
Your post says to everyone who programs for a living on non-trivial projects that you have no idea what you are talking about. Your last sentence is completely non-sensical rubbish.
All major modern IDE's today (VS.NET, XCode, etc.) are absolutely excellent at everything that they do and include features your list of software does not even begin to offer. And each of them are infinitely extendable/extensible by using a plugins architecture, among other excellent features.
I am a software engineer and I develop full-time in Java using Borland JBuilder 2005. The 'Intellisense' in JBuilder 2005 is absolutely excellent as well as all of its other features. I would rank JBuilder 2005 right up there on the same level as VS.NET 2005.
Starting with JBuilder 2006, Borland is planning to move the entire JBuilder IDE to Eclipse. I have tried Eclipse, but only for a few minutes here and there. I plan to move to Eclipse full-time in the future, once JBuilder moves to an Eclipse base.
Does anyone have any extensive experience with both IDE's to be able to give a clear and objective comparison between them both? Thanks.
I was being sarcastic about buying a new inkjet printer every month. But it is in no way cheaper to buy a ~$290 color laser jet printer and ~$125 per color for the cartidges ($290 + ($125x3) = $665), even if they last slightly longer than a throw-away inkjet printer and a mountain of inkjet cartridges($33 + $38 = $71). You are talking about comparing a B&W laser printer, which would be pointless to own, with a color inkjet printer. Unlike a college dorm room student, my wife and I require printing in both B&W and Color and it simply depending on what we are printing. I am neither going to fuck around trying to find a way to print color documents when I need to with only a B&W laser printer nor am I going to spend >$600 for a color laser printer whose cartidges are $125 a piece.
Sure buddy. Which is why the ink cartridge that comes with it lasts just as long as the replacement cartridges. You can go back into your conspiracy theory closet now and worry about the evil ink jet cartidge companies.
That is not true whatsoever. My wife is currently working under a graduate research grant in Biology which was granted to her because of the overall betterment of scientific undestanding which her work will give. There is no significant problem that her work is aiming to solve. When her work is finished, she will continue in her studies under another research grant under the same premise.
There are only a few people who feel that their information needs to be presented to the masses in an alarmist fashion. And then there are people like you who make broadly ignorant statements about all scientists and research grants because of those few alarmist type people.
What people don't get is that companies make their money from replacement cartridges.
For example, it ends up that a refill cartridge for my ink jet printer costs me $38 at Wal-Mart, but a brand new HP Deskjet 3740 USB costs me $33. So, instead of buying ink jet replacement cartridges, I simply buy a new printer every single month.
Sure, it is incredibly wasteful, but I enjoy saving the ~$5 a month, having a brand new printer every month, and playing the system against itself.
Yeah, ASSCAR in Space. How fucking boring. Let's watch a bunch of ignorant rednecks fly around in circles in space. The only bonus would be that once they crash into each other, maybe some other them would actually get jettisoned out into space forever never to be seen again.
Of course, ignorant rednecks making it into Space is highly unlikely anyways. They will be too busy trying to convince people in Kansas that creationism is real.
Of course, by the time Space racing becomes a reality, IRL (Indy) be have replaced ASSCAR anyways, since Indy is what ASSCAR always wishing it could be. And Formula One will still have a cloned version of Michael Shumacher racing to a win every time.
In the future of space racing, my heart will still be with the one true motorsport...Rally. Except, instead of WRC, it will be SSRC or GRC. That would kick ass.
"My point is that all of these OS wars, and I use - actively - all three major flavors. And I know I can't be alone. Why use only a hammer to build a house when you have so many different tools in your toolbox?"
Because your analogy is false. That is one of the most piss poor and overused bits of mis-logic that gets said on Slashdot. There is something called 'the best tool for the job'. To correct the errors in your logic, there are tools which are the best choice for more than one criteria and just because there are choices, does not mean all of the choices are equally as good.
What kind of developer are you? i.e. What software do you produce? In any case, you are making a incorrect analogy between having to run multiple OS's on one computer (lack of funding? Emulators are not the best choice to use due to adding additional unknown/uncontrolled variables to your testing) because you need to test software on multiple platforms due to a business marketing decision and saying that no single OS is better than another. Those are two completely separate points.
There are OS wars because there are OS's which are the best and are exceptional at everything that they do. In this case, Mac OS X 10.4. It is all the Unix power you wish Windows had with all of the UI and well thought out consistent design that you wish Linux had. Essentially, a better Unix/OS and UI than both Linux and Windows. I recently switched after using and programming in a combination of DOS, Windows (all versions), OS/2, NeXtStep, BeOS, Solaris, Linux, and Mac OS (1-9) for the past 20 years. There really is nothing better than OS X and OS X is only going to get better in the future (read the dev docs). On top of that, Microsoft Office 2004 is excellent on the Macintosh and the Macintosh gaming environment is just beginning to get hot (if that is your main requirement). So, Mac OS X has essentially everything a user needs.
In a lot of cases, there are not multiple tools in the tool box. There is almost always one tool which is perfect for almost everything.
PS - I would also like to add the when I plugged in my Firewire digital camcorder in under Linux all I got was an 'unknown device'. How long did I want to spend trying to fuck around with kernel modules, custom configuration scripts, and the rest under Linux? Zero. I don't want to waste my time with that shit any more. So, I plugged the same digital camcorder in under Mac OS X 10.4.2 and it just worked. No problem.
/usr/xxx/xxx or whatever directory just to get sub-par video performance?
And trying to play any decent form of video codec is practically a joke too. How many different video programs do I have to wade through under Linux where I've have to hack a Windows DLL's into my
Like I said, Linux is still a major pain in the ass and is highly unsuitable as a daily use desktop OS.
I wish Linux will someday become a great desktop OS, as my Intel machine is in need of a removal of Windows. But to compare Linux today with Mac OS X is simply foolish.
Like what?
I switched to Mac OS X from Linux after 10 years because Linux sucks as a desktop OS. There is nothing easier to do in Linux than on OS X.
Case in point, you can spend practically forever fucking around with Linux trying to find software to make a decent video file. Then you spend practically forver trying to make your Firewire DVD burner work with the less than second rate free burner software included in Linux. On OS X, I simply made the video with a few clicks of the mouse and burned the DVD just as easier. Plug-and-play simple. Plus, the interface is excellent. OS X is exactly what Linux wishes it could be. I have spent a ton of my life fucking around with Linux. I want to get something done now. Mac OS X just plain works. Simple, easy, and reliable.
Plus, I can open Office 2004 and complete other work at the same time, no compatibility or free (read bad) import/export filters.
Linux is fun to play with, and maybe someday Linux will reach the level of OS X 10.0, but as an every day desktop OS no way.
Buy a wireless signal booster for ~$50 and stop complaining.
Also, the latest wireless standard is 54Mbps, not 100Mbps.
It's not the technology which is unreliable, but the software drivers which are unreliable. For example, I was getting extremely frustrated that my Linksys 802.11g network was not working for shit in my apartment building (WPC54G and WRT54G). Even 15ft away my Windows XP laptop would lose signal, take 5-10 minutes to log back on (I use WPA), and generally pick up and drop the connection seemingly at random. I went through every knowledge base article on Linksys website, downloaded all the latest BIOS's for the router, and was literally 30 seconds from throwing the whole fucking network out the window. Then I bought an Apple iBook with built-in wireless (Airport) for my fiancee. I plugged in the iBook, logged into Apple OS X 10.4, and the first window that greeted me was the network password for WPA for my wireless network (and there are about 5 wireless networks in my apartment building). I typed in the password and the network just came up and started working, nothing else involved. HOLY F'ING SHIT, YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME. In the months we have had the iBook, we have never lost a signal nor had a failed sign-on. My Windows XP laptop is still acting the same way it was acting before. Un-f'ing believable.
Moral of the story is that the networking is not always to blame.
You will just have to change the way you think. In this case, you will have to change the way you think about your ideas of buttons and physical clicking sensations.
I am currently build an industrial touchscreen HMI and I have been loving every second of it. Almost every existing idea of how a person would normally interact with a computer has to be rethought to work with only a touchscreen in mind. It has been a truly enlightening experience and very rewarding, especially for thoughts on future projects. Not putting physical clicking buttons on a mouse is the exact same type of idea. Brilliant of Apple.
The people who dislike the touchscreen HMI are always the ones who are afraid of change in any capacity, whether the change is good or not. Those people are highly unfortunate.
Ex-fucking-actly. I have run a side business for the past almost 10 years consisting of computer setup, installation, and training. Unless the person I am training is in their middle 20's or younger -and- grew up with a computer, NOBODY understands left click/right click/control click/shift click/top menu/dragging/dropping/etc. They are horribly confused as to why some menu items are on the top, some menu items are on some right/shift/option click, and which one to use if the same option appears in both places. The Windows interface is HIGHLY UNINTUITIVE. I Thank Apple for forcing programmers to think when they are building interfaces.
You are spot on to reality in this case. Reality is that the mass majority of people have not used a computer and it is not natural and intuitive to them.
It is called FULL SCIENTIFIC REVIEW.
WTF? You sound like a completely ignorant and arrogant baffoon. You need to learn respect kid.
You don't the right to a damn thing before it is fully scientifically reviewed. And you do not have a Ph.D, so your life and career does not ride on completely accurate and fully reviewed scientific discovery and achievement. Therefore, you should only deal with the things you are qualified to speak about and deal with. Your arrogance is unfounded.