Yes, Steve Jobs bought it from Lucasfilms in 1986. From here:
Lasseter had been working for Lucasfilm for three years when company owner George Lucas decided to divest the computer division and concentrate solely on filmmaking. It was then that Jobs stepped in and bought the division to form Pixar. For the US$10 million (£6.3 million) sale price, Jobs got a core group of about 45 talented Lucasfilm people, including Lasseter's cadre of animators and technical virtuosos, as well as the rights to some of the Lucas technology.
Searching the internet for downloads and running downloaded apps to install is a very 1990's way of installing software. Its hard to believe Windows users don't have App repositories yet.
How is that any less worse than having to dig up third-party repositories or searching the internet for packages to install software that isn't in your OS's repository?
The point of my statement was one that his claim that using embryos for stem cells leads to the notion that slavery is okay is fucking stupid. It's the same nonsense that the same right-wing fucktards say when they try to claim that decriminalizing consensual homosexual sex was supposed to lead to this widespread beastiality and the legalizing of pedophilia. They're both fallacious arguments with no basis in reality.
And they aren't always up to date, certain software you might want could have been removed from them (XMMS for example with later versions of Ubuntu), or they just never included certain software in the first place.
Searching the internet for downloads and running downloaded apps to install is a very 1990's way of installing software. Its hard to believe Windows users don't have App repositories yet.
App repositories are only good if they are always up to date. One can go to Ubuntu forums, as an example, to find numerous stories of people having to go outside of the repositories to find the latest versions of apps or to find apps that aren't in the repository. Sure, repositories can help to ease in installing and finding software but they aren't this perfect magic bullet as people like you like to claim. If they were why is there any need of a mechanism to add 3rd party repositories in apt?
Simply to say that embryos aren't people is to apply the same logic used to pardon the continuation of slavery.
Except that under the law one has to actually be born to become a citizen and gain the rights of citizenship. So no, they aren't "people" in the legal sense. Also, your argument is just the same slippery slope nonsense as the people who argue that the decriminalizing of consensual homosexual sex is going to lead to widespread beastiality and pedophilia.
And? Even at one patent that are still heavily invested in H.264, MP4 (which they also hold patents on) and AAC. I see no good reason for them financially to drop all those years of investments in this formats to go to Ogg and Theora.
Re:...Now help standardize on non-proprietary code
on
What To Expect From HTML5
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That and Apple is a holder of H.264 and MP4 patents.
Re:...Now help standardize on non-proprietary code
on
What To Expect From HTML5
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
They're pulling people away from Flash because they want to be the gateway to Internet content, via the sweet deal with MPEG LA (who owns the H.264 patent) that will keep other players--especially open source software--out of the market.
This is so wrong it's not even funny. MPEG LA doesn't own the H.264 patents. MPEG LA is a firm that licenses the patent pool to H.264 and numerous other technologies.
If Apple really had our best interests at heart, they would be either 1) pushing Ogg Theora as a baseline video standard, or 2) working to release H.264 into the public domain so that everyone can use the arguably "better" codec.
Since Apple owns patents to H.264 I doubt you are going to see them doing either.
In fact, speaking of an unencumbered codec, have you noticed that Safari, by deliberate choice, does not support Ogg Theora?
Why are you surprised by this? Apple is a patent holder to H.264. Why would they want to support a video codec that is a rival to a technology in which they hold patents?
It's rather straightforward actually, companies are kept efficient due to the profit/loss mechanism, if a company is horrible inefficient it loses money and this inefficiency is clearly visible through accounting.
That is unless that same company is cooking the books like we've seen plenty of in the last 2+ decades.
And am I the only one who finds it fucking cynical in the extreme, to force you to surrender your email address just so you can use the printable version and skip the advertising crud ?
They only want to provide such a feature to members of the site. What's cynical about that?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Steve Jobs bought it from Lucasfilms in 1986. From here:
Lasseter had been working for Lucasfilm for three years when company owner George Lucas decided to divest the computer division and concentrate solely on filmmaking. It was then that Jobs stepped in and bought the division to form Pixar. For the US$10 million (£6.3 million) sale price, Jobs got a core group of about 45 talented Lucasfilm people, including Lasseter's cadre of animators and technical virtuosos, as well as the rights to some of the Lucas technology.
Yes. Jobs bought Pixar from Lucasfilms
Maybe it should be run by people who have no ties to corporations and who develop open source software only.
So people who have no relevancy to the world.
So are you referring to IBM? Oracle? Intel?
Because not all areas of even the US have broadband penetration?
Are you getting paid? And if not, why not? And if so, why are you trying to do this over the phone?
Because some people are actually nice and want to help out their friends and family?
Third party repositories are still better than random app off random webpage.
Why? Any person can set up a random repository.
Nothing is a magic bullet, but you knew that already.
Which runs contrary to what the GP was attempting to project.
No go back under your bridge.
*yawn* Get some better material, kiddo.
It's not, novice users should not be installing non-repository apps at all.
Why? What if they want something that is more up to date than what is in the repository or what if the application they want has been removed?
Of course since I am responding to a troll I am sure you will insist on making more silly claims.
How am I a troll? Because I bring up legitimate issues that have appeared on various linux forums such as Ubuntu Forums?
Searching the internet for downloads and running downloaded apps to install is a very 1990's way of installing software. Its hard to believe Windows users don't have App repositories yet.
How is that any less worse than having to dig up third-party repositories or searching the internet for packages to install software that isn't in your OS's repository?
The point of my statement was one that his claim that using embryos for stem cells leads to the notion that slavery is okay is fucking stupid. It's the same nonsense that the same right-wing fucktards say when they try to claim that decriminalizing consensual homosexual sex was supposed to lead to this widespread beastiality and the legalizing of pedophilia. They're both fallacious arguments with no basis in reality.
Of course, but his claim is just a fallacious slippery slope argument.
And they aren't always up to date, certain software you might want could have been removed from them (XMMS for example with later versions of Ubuntu), or they just never included certain software in the first place.
Searching the internet for downloads and running downloaded apps to install is a very 1990's way of installing software. Its hard to believe Windows users don't have App repositories yet.
App repositories are only good if they are always up to date. One can go to Ubuntu forums, as an example, to find numerous stories of people having to go outside of the repositories to find the latest versions of apps or to find apps that aren't in the repository. Sure, repositories can help to ease in installing and finding software but they aren't this perfect magic bullet as people like you like to claim. If they were why is there any need of a mechanism to add 3rd party repositories in apt?
Simply to say that embryos aren't people is to apply the same logic used to pardon the continuation of slavery.
Except that under the law one has to actually be born to become a citizen and gain the rights of citizenship. So no, they aren't "people" in the legal sense. Also, your argument is just the same slippery slope nonsense as the people who argue that the decriminalizing of consensual homosexual sex is going to lead to widespread beastiality and pedophilia.
it was just present on the phone's flash drive waiting to try to infect any OS stupid enough to automatically run programs from untrusted devices.
Since when is my own phone an "untrusted device"?
Yes, it's native, and they are optimizing for OpenCL and other Mac-specific stuff.
Since when was OpenCL Mac-specific?
And? Even at one patent that are still heavily invested in H.264, MP4 (which they also hold patents on) and AAC. I see no good reason for them financially to drop all those years of investments in this formats to go to Ogg and Theora.
Does Apple hold any patents on H.264? So many people seem to hold patent on parts of H.264 that I am not sure who does and does not.
Yes. They also hold patents to MP4 as well.
That and Apple is a holder of H.264 and MP4 patents.
They're pulling people away from Flash because they want to be the gateway to Internet content, via the sweet deal with MPEG LA (who owns the H.264 patent) that will keep other players--especially open source software--out of the market.
This is so wrong it's not even funny. MPEG LA doesn't own the H.264 patents. MPEG LA is a firm that licenses the patent pool to H.264 and numerous other technologies.
If Apple really had our best interests at heart, they would be either 1) pushing Ogg Theora as a baseline video standard, or 2) working to release H.264 into the public domain so that everyone can use the arguably "better" codec.
Since Apple owns patents to H.264 I doubt you are going to see them doing either.
In fact, speaking of an unencumbered codec, have you noticed that Safari, by deliberate choice, does not support Ogg Theora?
Why are you surprised by this? Apple is a patent holder to H.264. Why would they want to support a video codec that is a rival to a technology in which they hold patents?
Why would they choose to support a codec that is a rival (theora) to one in which they hold patents (H.264)?
It's rather straightforward actually, companies are kept efficient due to the profit/loss mechanism, if a company is horrible inefficient it loses money and this inefficiency is clearly visible through accounting.
That is unless that same company is cooking the books like we've seen plenty of in the last 2+ decades.
And one of them was Apple's, another was Mozilla's and another was an independent 3rd party's test suite.
Because I am worth more than the 0.001 cents they will get for selling my email to spammers ?
Since when did they ever do such a thing? Secondly, even if they did what is cynical about that?
And am I the only one who finds it fucking cynical in the extreme, to force you to surrender your email address just so you can use the printable version and skip the advertising crud ?
They only want to provide such a feature to members of the site. What's cynical about that?