Oh please, that's such a meaningless cliché. If you saw an opportunity to make money (or otherwise advance your own interests) by fomenting rebellion against the status quo, why wouldn't you? Why wouldn't any company? In fact, it happens all the fucking time.
There are some people who appear to believe corporate interests are always and necessarily opposed to social responsibility. This is bullshit, and these people do damage to their own purported cause by setting up this false dichotomy.
Nothing you do is for free. Everything you do is designed to make others want to give you more of what you want. You're only human; what else would you expect?
You know what else provides a unified experience across all your machines? Running the same OS. Honestly, why did you bother buying a Mac if you were just going to use it to run the same shitty browser?
And make no mistake, Firefox is a piece of shit. Yeah, it's good enough for Linux and Windows, but compared to a genuine Mac application it stinks to hell.
I guess PC users are accustomed to living in filth, so maybe you don't notice it.
WebKit is more standards-compliant than Gecko (display: inline-block, I'm looking at you). And on top of that, Safari's a hell of a lot more Maclike than Firefox, which is a wretched PC port.
Seriously, how can you stand to use Firefox alongside real Mac applications? Do you just not notice how un-Maclike it behaves, let alone looks? Why would you buy a Mac only to ruin the experience with Firefox?
These before-and-after satellite images aren't being used as ironclad proof, in isolation; they're being used as supporting evidence. RTFA—but really now, shouldn't this have been obvious?
It strikes me that if you wanted to destroy the economy of New York City, you'd do no better than to prevent immigration. Even enforcing the (boneheaded) existing anti-immigration laws would be murder on America's economic engine. So in my estimation, the Minutemen, those redneck yahoo types, hysterical Republicans, Lou Dobbs, Tom Tancredo—they're doing the work of terrorists.
Yes. You can. They're fucking ID3 tags (or whatever the m4a equivalent is), nothing more, so you can strip them using your favorite tag editor. Even QuickTime Player will do the job, I believe.
Because you're defining "freedom of speech" in U.S.-centric terms. Purely for instance, take much of Europe, which doesn't construe freedom of speech to include Holocaust denial, but political criticism is tolerated much more by the government in power.
On the contrary, I think Apple equity is still terribly undervalued for the company's potential to become omnipresent in our lives, like a benevolent Microsoft or Whole Foods. It's taking longer than I'd have thought for institutional investors to realize this, but the foundations are there for future world domination.
Supported in the.NET framework the way mouse events are supported in Cocoa. A little bit of digging seems to provide an answer: up to five mouse buttons are now thus supported, by enumeration, which seems pretty fucking primitive compared to Cocoa's eschewal of enumeration in favor of something more extensible. But maybe I'm not looking in the right place?
As for why it matters, I remember having to simulate mouse buttons in an Exposé clone by setting the trigger as an unused function key, then setting the extra mouse buttons to simulate keypresses in the mouse driver, which is lame but consistent, in its lameness, with PC culture.
Not intended as a jab, but a serious question: Does Windows still lack native support for more than three mouse buttons at once? Or did they fix that in Vista?
Hurrrr. And then there are those of us who actually understand the reasoning behind the one-button philosophy, and are glad that Apple's stuck to its guns over the years. I'm not going to bother explaining it because chances are if you don't already understand it, you never will.
You can't put a price on not having to stare at the fugly Dell logo all day, and also on being able to live with yourself knowing you've supported the GOP via Michael Dell. But I suppose this is something PC 'tards will never understand.
That would work as well for Apple as it works in the PC world—that is, it would fucking suck. If you encounter an untraceable problem, how are you going to know whom to call for support? The software company or the hardware company? Are you going to pore through core dumps and panic logs to find out? Who the fuck has the time or patience for that?
It should work like this: you have an issue with a product, you call the company that made it, not some random third party behind the scenes. You don't sue YKK when your fly grinds your cock to hamburger, you sue Levi's. Why the PC world thinks the computer is some special case apart from every other fucking consumer product on the face of the planet is beyond me.
I work in finance and I have no fucking clue what you said. It's Friday night after a real bender of a workweek. Care to translate that to humanese?
If you're saying you think Apple equity's headed down, I'm afraid you're as clueless and unvisionary as a Ballmer. If the '90s were given to blandness and hegemony—fuck, even grunge was corporate—the '00s are about stark simplicity and elegance, the exact environment in which an Apple can thrive. Shit's only gonna snowball after the elections next year. You think Apple's big now, just wait a few years. It doesn't take a lifelong Mac fanboy like me to tell.
It's never going to happen, at least not with the current crop of Firefox devs. They can solicit for suggestions as much as they want, but the fact is that if they have to ask, they'll never know. As long as all the developers come from a PC heritage—even the Mac developers—the OS X version of Firefox is going to feel like a port from Windows/Linux land.
I'd suggest Safari loaded up with extensions as a good alternative. If you absolutely must use Gecko for some reason, even though it's bloated and less standards-compliant than WebKit, there's always Camino.
Speaking for myself, I will never, ever buy a notebook computer with its mouse button split inconveniently down the middle. And I have a feeling Apple caters more to my type than it does to yours.
GCC, the lowest common denominator; jack of all architectures, master of none? I'll take whichever compiler is optimized for the architectures I'm targeting, even if that means I have to juggle several different ones.
I think the assumption is that if your browser, in the year 2007, is too broken to view embedded object tags, you probably don't have the money to spend.
And if you're a dirty GNU/FSF type, Apple certainly doesn't want its stuff to be seen in public with you. Guilt by association and all that.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see that we disagree, because "for their own survival" and "to make the world a better place" aren't mutually exclusive.
Oh please, that's such a meaningless cliché. If you saw an opportunity to make money (or otherwise advance your own interests) by fomenting rebellion against the status quo, why wouldn't you? Why wouldn't any company? In fact, it happens all the fucking time.
There are some people who appear to believe corporate interests are always and necessarily opposed to social responsibility. This is bullshit, and these people do damage to their own purported cause by setting up this false dichotomy.
Nothing you do is for free. Everything you do is designed to make others want to give you more of what you want. You're only human; what else would you expect?
IOW, a copout argument.
You know what else provides a unified experience across all your machines? Running the same OS. Honestly, why did you bother buying a Mac if you were just going to use it to run the same shitty browser?
And make no mistake, Firefox is a piece of shit. Yeah, it's good enough for Linux and Windows, but compared to a genuine Mac application it stinks to hell.
I guess PC users are accustomed to living in filth, so maybe you don't notice it.
Here's one: http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
To be fair, Firefox renders text like shit on OS X, compared with Safari or any native Mac application.
WebKit is more standards-compliant than Gecko (display: inline-block, I'm looking at you). And on top of that, Safari's a hell of a lot more Maclike than Firefox, which is a wretched PC port.
Seriously, how can you stand to use Firefox alongside real Mac applications? Do you just not notice how un-Maclike it behaves, let alone looks? Why would you buy a Mac only to ruin the experience with Firefox?
These before-and-after satellite images aren't being used as ironclad proof, in isolation; they're being used as supporting evidence. RTFA—but really now, shouldn't this have been obvious?
It strikes me that if you wanted to destroy the economy of New York City, you'd do no better than to prevent immigration. Even enforcing the (boneheaded) existing anti-immigration laws would be murder on America's economic engine. So in my estimation, the Minutemen, those redneck yahoo types, hysterical Republicans, Lou Dobbs, Tom Tancredo—they're doing the work of terrorists.
Yes. You can. They're fucking ID3 tags (or whatever the m4a equivalent is), nothing more, so you can strip them using your favorite tag editor. Even QuickTime Player will do the job, I believe.
Because you're defining "freedom of speech" in U.S.-centric terms. Purely for instance, take much of Europe, which doesn't construe freedom of speech to include Holocaust denial, but political criticism is tolerated much more by the government in power.
Yeah, hence my explanation of "why it matters." Second paragraph.
On the contrary, I think Apple equity is still terribly undervalued for the company's potential to become omnipresent in our lives, like a benevolent Microsoft or Whole Foods. It's taking longer than I'd have thought for institutional investors to realize this, but the foundations are there for future world domination.
Supported in the .NET framework the way mouse events are supported in Cocoa. A little bit of digging seems to provide an answer: up to five mouse buttons are now thus supported, by enumeration, which seems pretty fucking primitive compared to Cocoa's eschewal of enumeration in favor of something more extensible. But maybe I'm not looking in the right place?
As for why it matters, I remember having to simulate mouse buttons in an Exposé clone by setting the trigger as an unused function key, then setting the extra mouse buttons to simulate keypresses in the mouse driver, which is lame but consistent, in its lameness, with PC culture.
Not intended as a jab, but a serious question: Does Windows still lack native support for more than three mouse buttons at once? Or did they fix that in Vista?
Hurrrr. And then there are those of us who actually understand the reasoning behind the one-button philosophy, and are glad that Apple's stuck to its guns over the years. I'm not going to bother explaining it because chances are if you don't already understand it, you never will.
(FWIW, I personally have a Logitech VX.)
You can't put a price on not having to stare at the fugly Dell logo all day, and also on being able to live with yourself knowing you've supported the GOP via Michael Dell. But I suppose this is something PC 'tards will never understand.
That would work as well for Apple as it works in the PC world—that is, it would fucking suck. If you encounter an untraceable problem, how are you going to know whom to call for support? The software company or the hardware company? Are you going to pore through core dumps and panic logs to find out? Who the fuck has the time or patience for that?
It should work like this: you have an issue with a product, you call the company that made it, not some random third party behind the scenes. You don't sue YKK when your fly grinds your cock to hamburger, you sue Levi's. Why the PC world thinks the computer is some special case apart from every other fucking consumer product on the face of the planet is beyond me.
And I suppose Fox News is liberal?
I work in finance and I have no fucking clue what you said. It's Friday night after a real bender of a workweek. Care to translate that to humanese?
If you're saying you think Apple equity's headed down, I'm afraid you're as clueless and unvisionary as a Ballmer. If the '90s were given to blandness and hegemony—fuck, even grunge was corporate—the '00s are about stark simplicity and elegance, the exact environment in which an Apple can thrive. Shit's only gonna snowball after the elections next year. You think Apple's big now, just wait a few years. It doesn't take a lifelong Mac fanboy like me to tell.
It's never going to happen, at least not with the current crop of Firefox devs. They can solicit for suggestions as much as they want, but the fact is that if they have to ask, they'll never know. As long as all the developers come from a PC heritage—even the Mac developers—the OS X version of Firefox is going to feel like a port from Windows/Linux land.
I'd suggest Safari loaded up with extensions as a good alternative. If you absolutely must use Gecko for some reason, even though it's bloated and less standards-compliant than WebKit, there's always Camino.
You don't "get it." This concept of "separate but equal" as applied to trackpad buttons would be a terrible stain on the Mac.
Speaking for myself, I will never, ever buy a notebook computer with its mouse button split inconveniently down the middle. And I have a feeling Apple caters more to my type than it does to yours.
GCC, the lowest common denominator; jack of all architectures, master of none? I'll take whichever compiler is optimized for the architectures I'm targeting, even if that means I have to juggle several different ones.
I think the assumption is that if your browser, in the year 2007, is too broken to view embedded object tags, you probably don't have the money to spend.
And if you're a dirty GNU/FSF type, Apple certainly doesn't want its stuff to be seen in public with you. Guilt by association and all that.