Please take advantage of using voice synthesis functions in the 3GS so we can take advantage of the excellent voice developed by Apple. In order to use these functions, several websites have discovered how to access this part of the API:
NSObject *v = [[NSClassFromString(@"VSSpeechSynthesizer") alloc] init];
[v startSpeakingString:@"All your base are belong to us"];
[v release];
I agree with you in principle, but to play the devil's advocate, consider this: Apple doesn't want to support the Pre in iTunes because it sets a precedence that they have to support devices that Apple does not make or endorse (they do allow some non-Apple devices to sync with iTunes; I wonder what the disposition is of those devices with this update). They do a lot of dickish moves, such as charging their iPod Touch users $10 for updates, but, as in those updates, there may be a legitimate reason why they should try to thwart attempts to support it.
Again, I'm not saying that what they did is right, but there is definitely room for a legitimate claim for them removing Palm Pre syncing ability since it never claimed to support it in the beginning (as the Pre is masquerading as a traditional iPod). Furthermore, purchased iTunes music are now DRM-free and the argument is that Palm should develop its own syncing software to transport the music to the device instead of piggybacking on the iTunes facilities.
Of course, I feel that Apple would be better served by creating an iTunes SDK, but it's their software and there are lots of different software and services available, including Amazon. Palm might have been better served by forming an alliance with Amazon and developing a client jointly with them. Now it leaves them in a precarious situation with many users wondering why their syncing no longer works.
It also sets a scary precedent that non-Apple hardware will not be supported on different parts of the OS X operating system. Mind you, I'm a Mac user, but I feel truly uneasy about this precedence. There may be legitimacy to removing support, but it also sets the precedence that Apple can remove support for competing hardware products in various components of the Apple operating system.
Exactly. In fact, it's so easy to get an unlocked iPhone 3GS in Hong Kong, and even includes full warranty service and AppleCare. Visit Apple Online Store - Hong Kong and you can purchase a fully-unlocked, iPhone 3GS without a contract and SIM restrictions so long as you have a Hong Kong shipping address. I'm sure the Chinese who are able to afford an iPhone 3GS will have no trouble traveling south and picking up on these phones for HK$ 6288.
What these telephone companies in China don't know is that Hong Kong is just three hours away from Shanghai. Knowing the acumen of Chinese customers, it won't take them long to learn that they should just purchase their phones in Hong Kong instead of getting screwed over by the Mainland companies.
Many will just sit there watching the static... It's not like they're not doing that now anyway!
They'll assume it's the Rapture and consult the Bible instead of TV Guide.
In all honesty, I can't see Apple pushing out an update to iTunes just to break syncing functionality with Pre. Aside from the fact that Apple alumni engineers developed the method of syncing, any update to iTunes could also break legacy support for older iPods.
Apple is pretty aware of an entire jailbreak community for months, yet hardly do they push out an update just to break what they perceive an "exploit." Perhaps the only time they have willfully tried to stop jailbreaking was the iPhone 1.1.2 update, but since the backlash of that surfaced to public media, they have relented. Although jailbreaking depends on a hardware exploit (which makes it harder to fix), Apple usually simply ignores the behavior, especially if it is one that would result in negative backlash.
My guess is that since they also support other players and want to avoid being seen as walking in Microsoft's footsteps, they will avoid making this an issue. It will probably be unlikely, but they may even list it as a supported music device in the knowledge base. Apple would be wise to avoid garnering a backlash, and even touch on anti-competitive practices.
With OS X, almost any one can use a CD or DVD without Autorun. All that's required to install from a CD is the ability to click on the icon in the folder. Mac software do this by setting a background on the Finder window with a large pointer indicating where to click if it requires installation, or an alias to the system Applications folder, where installation means copying the application bundle to the Applications folder. This is by far the most elegant solution.
Why can't Windows 7 do the same? Sure, it still inherits security problems, but at least code requires user interaction to get it going, while CDs can affect computers with rootkits unbeknownst to the user. You know a program that requests UAC or sudo privileges cannot be up to much good if it's on a CD.
Yes, I think it can work, but what would be a more open and accountable ways is to assign each voter a unique identifier and print out a receipt designating the entire vote transaction. At the end of the election, all results are available by precinct in Excel/CSV format with the vote choices and the UUID/vote selection. This system keeps anonymousness and also works with allowing individuals to take audit/verification into their own hand.
If you have a home virtual private networking service setup, or if you have access to a company virtual private networking service, why not just connect to your VPN? Problem is solved, connection is encrypted, and without the potential of tunnel hell or application incompatibility of port forwarding and tunneling.
Having said that, the censors at China are not that concerned of English offending content; it's more that they're worried about the uneducated public being incited by content online since content is so easily spread via the Internet, at the same time, it is also easy to organize protests online. If you already know English or you've been educated overseas, you're no longer someone they are targeting.
You raise a very good point about chicks, but the end of lecture halls is the end of an avenue of socializing. Don't get me wrong: a lot of smart people have social intelligence, but to take away a lecture hall experience is to some extent the closing of an avenue of meeting new people. Smart people, more often than not, lack in their abilities to socialize due to a huge prioritization of time spent on stuff that matters to them. Social intelligence is not logical, which is why many geeks suffer in social environments.
I'm a little bit dubious. The 3G used in T-Mobile USA operates on an odd band that only T-Mobile USA uses. Most of the world operate on the standard bands, so it's still difficult to say if this is an apples to apples test. The iPhone is compatible with most of the GSM/UMTS networks around the world, while the T-Mobile phone 3G features are more likely to only function in the US. Somebody needs to investigate this.
Yahoo started offering perpetual licenses in response to the Zimbra scare. Zimbra is also open-source, but you have to pay for the Outlook, iCal, and Mobile connectors.
It's easily one of the best collaboration packages with a few loose ends. Don't equate Zimbra with Yahoo just because Yahoo has lost its touch. I don't think Zimbra has lost its touch.
The Dalai Lama is a bit of a liar. He certainly never reminds his acolytes that the Tibetan exile community, lazy Lama included, was funded by the CIA (and George Soros). Michael Parenti, Ph.D has deconstructed the myths of Tibetan Buddhism and history in "Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth":
"Both the Dalai Lama and his advisor and youngest brother, Tendzin Choegyal, claimed that "more than 1.2 million Tibetans are dead as a result of the Chinese occupation." The official 1953 census--six years before the Chinese crackdown--recorded the entire population residing in Tibet at 1,274,000. Other census counts put the population within Tibet at about two million. If the Chinese killed 1.2 million in the early 1960s then almost all of Tibet, would have been depopulated, transformed into a killing field dotted with death camps and mass graves--of which we have no evidence. The thinly distributed Chinese force in Tibet could not have rounded up, hunted down, and exterminated that many people even if it had spent all its time doing nothing else.
Chinese authorities claim to have put an end to floggings, mutilations, and amputations as a form of criminal punishment. They themselves, however, have been charged with acts of brutality by exile Tibetans. The authorities do admit to "mistakes," particularly during the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution when the persecution of religious beliefs reached a high tide in both China and Tibet. After the uprising in the late 1950s, thousands of Tibetans were incarcerated. During the Great Leap Forward, forced collectivization and grain farming were imposed on the Tibetan peasantry, sometimes with disastrous effect on production. In the late 1970s, China began relaxing controls "and tried to undo some of the damage wrought during the previous two decades."
The title of Dalai Lama was in fact first conferred upon Sonam Gyatsu by the Mongol ruler Altan Khan in 1578. His two predecessors were given the title posthumously. Sonam Gyatsu was a part of the Ming and Qing Court. Part of the Chinese empire for sure.
A revisionist? No, I'm merely telling you that Tibet isn't the Shangri-La you might think it be. At the very least, you should rethink that. Read my response to gstoddart and abigor on "The Tibet Myth," penned by Yale Professor Michael Parenti. The fact is, after reading it, it makes you wonder why the Tibetans would want the Lamas to return.
"In 1937, another visitor, Spencer Chapman, wrote, 'The Lamaist monk does not spend his time in ministering to the people or educating them. . . . The beggar beside the road is nothing to the monk. Knowledge is the jealously guarded prerogative of the monasteries and is used to increase their influence and wealth.' "
I'm sad you think that way about Dalai Lama. I posted this to an earlier message, but here's an interesting read from Yale professor Michael Parenti called The Tibet Myth:
Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land [...] were owned by two social groups: the rich secular landlords and the rich theocratic lamas. The Dalai Lama himself "lived richly in the 1000-room, 14-story Potala Palace." [...]
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their peasant families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks. Once there, they were bonded for life. Tashi-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine. [...] Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. [...]
Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: "When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion." [...]
In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, breaking off hands, and hamstringing legs.There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master's cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who was raped and then had her nose sliced away.
Earlier visitors to Tibet commented on the theocratic despotism. In 1895, an Englishman, Dr. A. L. Waddell, wrote that the populace was under the "intolerable tyranny of monks" and the devil superstitions they had fashioned to terrorize the people. In 1904 Perceval Landon described the Dalai Lama's rule as "an engine of oppression." [...] As much as we might wish otherwise, feudal theocratic Tibet was a far cry from the romanticized Shangri La so enthusiastically nurtured by Buddhism's western proselytes.
I agree. And you are right, two wrongs don't make a right. But at the same time, most of the people only know one side of the story. I think it's safe to say that hearing two sides of the stories is always better than one, right?
On the topic of atrocities, the Tibetan atrocities to its own people as well as the Han people are also well documented. Michael Parenti of Yale University wrote in "The Tibetan Myth" that "earlier visitors to Tibet commented on the theocratic despotism [...] the populace was under the 'intolerable tyranny of monks' and the devil superstitions they had fashioned to terrorize the people." I wonder how many people actually knew how oppressed the monks were to the Tibetan people.
Of course, this doesn't justify the Chinese actions, but at the same time, it makes you wonder if the Dalai Lama is also the rightful replacement of Tibet. "In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, breaking off hands, and hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master's cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who was raped and then had her nose sliced away."
I honestly don't understand why people think the Falun Gong is great. They're honestly crazy, and while I don't think the Chinese government should stop them from practicing, I really think they should just let them be so people can see how crazy they really are. Most westerners are so enchanted with eastern cultures that have a cultish streak to it. Heck, most of the time they don't even know what it's it about. Ask an American to point out Tibet on a blank map.
What sucks about the Tibetan situation is that there's no true way to get the truth about the situation. Western media is enchanted with the idea of Tibet rather than the reality. Tibetans make up 40% of the population in Lhasa. We take the Dalai Lhama's word as gospel, even though he definitely has his own incentive to distort the truth. And we obviously can't get the straight talk from the Chinese government.
Sadly, it looks very hypocritical to the world when Americans condemn something like the Chinese control of Tibet, while our own country is occupying Iraq and committing our own human rights violations there. And we at least have the power to vote the bastards out of office!
My parents fled to Taiwan, Republic of China, at the end of the civil war. At first I believed the communists were evil, but it's become clear to me that for the first time in Chinese history that every person in China has a bowl of rice to eat. Whether you like them or not, you can't deny that they destroyed a two-thousand year class system.
I'm sure someone is going to find a way to criticize your argument about the openness of Apple, and its acceptance procedures/control, but I agree with you entirely. Apple has always required its developers to develop intuitive interfaces. It doesn't matter how good your technology is if you can't implement it in a way that is easy to understand.
If anything, Apple provides all the tools you need to meet this requirement. Objective-C along with Cocoa and its Core set of libraries (Foundation, Quartz, OS, etc) are very easy to use. Compare the time it takes to get a functional app using the Cocoa set of tools compared to most other SDKs. Apple fully supports its developers, but requires its developers to produce well-implemented ideas, not half-baked cakes.
In the end, the customer wins. If you look at Linux or Windows, you will see that there are plethora of apps that don't follow a unified user-interface. But the goals of those two platforms are entirely different--the freedom to make your app look good or look like crap. No two programs I download will likely have the same interface.
On OS X, though, I will most likely know what to expect when I download an app, and almost immediately know how to work with the user interface. This rarely happens on Windows or Linux given that unified interfaces on either platform has not been a reality (Linux: difference in opinions; Microsoft: difficult to use, developer stubbornness). On OS X, I know app support files will be placed in ~[user]/Library, and I know that my app will be bundled in an.app folder.
These are different opinions. For the hacker, they might appreciate the Linux philosophy (even though most things in Linux can be done in OS X). For the end-user who likes control, Windows may be a better choice. But for users who like to use a consistent interface, OS X is probably the closest to the ticket.
I use OS X because most apps written on OS X are standardized. Yes, Apple does cannibalize some of its developers, but there are tradeoffs. Apple acts in its own interests, which is to sell as many computers as it can, and by acting on its own interests, it tries to develop in a way that makes it easy for the user to jump start.
I wish I had mod points for your post--Steve Jobs exemplifies a self-made man. He never relied on the education system to get him where he is, he never worked a day of his life outside a company he didn't build. An entrepreneur is someone like Steve.
CEOs with MBAs are usually ruined because they rely on their so-called "experience." Usually that kind of experience is putting together a textbook model of the ideal organization.
I also want to add that most Macs offer an integrated experience. Lower-end Macs are notoriously difficult to customize, but they do offer a seamless experience and offer a top-of-the-line product that most manufacturers are unable to match.
Genius Bar support is fantastic. If you've just bought a new computer, they'll personally setup your computer and migrate the files for you. They'll order and replace most parts for you. The Genius Bar replaced my motherboard (in Apple speak, it is "Logic Board") and turned it around in one day. Can Psystar match that?
Also, what about the quality of the machine? When large companies such as Dell can't even control the quality of machines that well, what can we expect from a company like Psystar? Apple machines have been well-noted, except in the production of a minority of machines, to be quiet. I have an Early-2008 MacBook Pro Penryn, and it is the quietest machines I've bought to date. I can barely hear the fan, much less hear the hard drive seeking.
As this article points out, Psystar will continue to need hacks to get the updates working. We also don't know anything about the drivers or parts that OS X supports. Is this a machine that can perform?
So the question you need to ask yourself is, is it really worth saving a $100 for no Genius Bar support, more hacks to get the system working, a perhaps noisier system with cheaper parts? People need to understand that Macs offer an integrated experience. Apple is not selling the software or hardware separate; it's selling an experience.
Slashdot Mirror
TomTom,
Please take advantage of using voice synthesis functions in the 3GS so we can take advantage of the excellent voice developed by Apple. In order to use these functions, several websites have discovered how to access this part of the API:
NSObject *v = [[NSClassFromString(@"VSSpeechSynthesizer") alloc] init]; [v startSpeakingString:@"All your base are belong to us"]; [v release];
Source: High Caffeine Content 5-Jul-2009
The current voice just won't do. Need a voice synthesizer to help with driving. The Apple included one is much better.
I agree with you in principle, but to play the devil's advocate, consider this: Apple doesn't want to support the Pre in iTunes because it sets a precedence that they have to support devices that Apple does not make or endorse (they do allow some non-Apple devices to sync with iTunes; I wonder what the disposition is of those devices with this update). They do a lot of dickish moves, such as charging their iPod Touch users $10 for updates, but, as in those updates, there may be a legitimate reason why they should try to thwart attempts to support it.
Again, I'm not saying that what they did is right, but there is definitely room for a legitimate claim for them removing Palm Pre syncing ability since it never claimed to support it in the beginning (as the Pre is masquerading as a traditional iPod). Furthermore, purchased iTunes music are now DRM-free and the argument is that Palm should develop its own syncing software to transport the music to the device instead of piggybacking on the iTunes facilities.
Of course, I feel that Apple would be better served by creating an iTunes SDK, but it's their software and there are lots of different software and services available, including Amazon. Palm might have been better served by forming an alliance with Amazon and developing a client jointly with them. Now it leaves them in a precarious situation with many users wondering why their syncing no longer works.
It also sets a scary precedent that non-Apple hardware will not be supported on different parts of the OS X operating system. Mind you, I'm a Mac user, but I feel truly uneasy about this precedence. There may be legitimacy to removing support, but it also sets the precedence that Apple can remove support for competing hardware products in various components of the Apple operating system.
Exactly. In fact, it's so easy to get an unlocked iPhone 3GS in Hong Kong, and even includes full warranty service and AppleCare. Visit Apple Online Store - Hong Kong and you can purchase a fully-unlocked, iPhone 3GS without a contract and SIM restrictions so long as you have a Hong Kong shipping address. I'm sure the Chinese who are able to afford an iPhone 3GS will have no trouble traveling south and picking up on these phones for HK$ 6288.
What these telephone companies in China don't know is that Hong Kong is just three hours away from Shanghai. Knowing the acumen of Chinese customers, it won't take them long to learn that they should just purchase their phones in Hong Kong instead of getting screwed over by the Mainland companies.
Many will just sit there watching the static... It's not like they're not doing that now anyway!
They'll assume it's the Rapture and consult the Bible instead of TV Guide.
+1 Funny
In all honesty, I can't see Apple pushing out an update to iTunes just to break syncing functionality with Pre. Aside from the fact that Apple alumni engineers developed the method of syncing, any update to iTunes could also break legacy support for older iPods.
Apple is pretty aware of an entire jailbreak community for months, yet hardly do they push out an update just to break what they perceive an "exploit." Perhaps the only time they have willfully tried to stop jailbreaking was the iPhone 1.1.2 update, but since the backlash of that surfaced to public media, they have relented. Although jailbreaking depends on a hardware exploit (which makes it harder to fix), Apple usually simply ignores the behavior, especially if it is one that would result in negative backlash.
My guess is that since they also support other players and want to avoid being seen as walking in Microsoft's footsteps, they will avoid making this an issue. It will probably be unlikely, but they may even list it as a supported music device in the knowledge base. Apple would be wise to avoid garnering a backlash, and even touch on anti-competitive practices.
I should also clarify by what I mean on a CD--that is, anything created or produced by an RIAA company.
With OS X, almost any one can use a CD or DVD without Autorun. All that's required to install from a CD is the ability to click on the icon in the folder. Mac software do this by setting a background on the Finder window with a large pointer indicating where to click if it requires installation, or an alias to the system Applications folder, where installation means copying the application bundle to the Applications folder. This is by far the most elegant solution.
Why can't Windows 7 do the same? Sure, it still inherits security problems, but at least code requires user interaction to get it going, while CDs can affect computers with rootkits unbeknownst to the user. You know a program that requests UAC or sudo privileges cannot be up to much good if it's on a CD.
Yes, I think it can work, but what would be a more open and accountable ways is to assign each voter a unique identifier and print out a receipt designating the entire vote transaction. At the end of the election, all results are available by precinct in Excel/CSV format with the vote choices and the UUID/vote selection. This system keeps anonymousness and also works with allowing individuals to take audit/verification into their own hand.
If you have a home virtual private networking service setup, or if you have access to a company virtual private networking service, why not just connect to your VPN? Problem is solved, connection is encrypted, and without the potential of tunnel hell or application incompatibility of port forwarding and tunneling.
Having said that, the censors at China are not that concerned of English offending content; it's more that they're worried about the uneducated public being incited by content online since content is so easily spread via the Internet, at the same time, it is also easy to organize protests online. If you already know English or you've been educated overseas, you're no longer someone they are targeting.
You raise a very good point about chicks, but the end of lecture halls is the end of an avenue of socializing. Don't get me wrong: a lot of smart people have social intelligence, but to take away a lecture hall experience is to some extent the closing of an avenue of meeting new people. Smart people, more often than not, lack in their abilities to socialize due to a huge prioritization of time spent on stuff that matters to them. Social intelligence is not logical, which is why many geeks suffer in social environments.
It's actually extremely nutritious. Chinese people sell these snacks all over the place.
I'm a little bit dubious. The 3G used in T-Mobile USA operates on an odd band that only T-Mobile USA uses. Most of the world operate on the standard bands, so it's still difficult to say if this is an apples to apples test. The iPhone is compatible with most of the GSM/UMTS networks around the world, while the T-Mobile phone 3G features are more likely to only function in the US. Somebody needs to investigate this.
Yahoo started offering perpetual licenses in response to the Zimbra scare. Zimbra is also open-source, but you have to pay for the Outlook, iCal, and Mobile connectors.
It's easily one of the best collaboration packages with a few loose ends. Don't equate Zimbra with Yahoo just because Yahoo has lost its touch. I don't think Zimbra has lost its touch.
The Dalai Lama is a bit of a liar. He certainly never reminds his acolytes that the Tibetan exile community, lazy Lama included, was funded by the CIA (and George Soros). Michael Parenti, Ph.D has deconstructed the myths of Tibetan Buddhism and history in "Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth":
"Both the Dalai Lama and his advisor and youngest brother, Tendzin Choegyal, claimed that "more than 1.2 million Tibetans are dead as a result of the Chinese occupation." The official 1953 census--six years before the Chinese crackdown--recorded the entire population residing in Tibet at 1,274,000. Other census counts put the population within Tibet at about two million. If the Chinese killed 1.2 million in the early 1960s then almost all of Tibet, would have been depopulated, transformed into a killing field dotted with death camps and mass graves--of which we have no evidence. The thinly distributed Chinese force in Tibet could not have rounded up, hunted down, and exterminated that many people even if it had spent all its time doing nothing else.
Chinese authorities claim to have put an end to floggings, mutilations, and amputations as a form of criminal punishment. They themselves, however, have been charged with acts of brutality by exile Tibetans. The authorities do admit to "mistakes," particularly during the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution when the persecution of religious beliefs reached a high tide in both China and Tibet. After the uprising in the late 1950s, thousands of Tibetans were incarcerated. During the Great Leap Forward, forced collectivization and grain farming were imposed on the Tibetan peasantry, sometimes with disastrous effect on production. In the late 1970s, China began relaxing controls "and tried to undo some of the damage wrought during the previous two decades."
The title of Dalai Lama was in fact first conferred upon Sonam Gyatsu by the Mongol ruler Altan Khan in 1578. His two predecessors were given the title posthumously. Sonam Gyatsu was a part of the Ming and Qing Court. Part of the Chinese empire for sure.
A revisionist? No, I'm merely telling you that Tibet isn't the Shangri-La you might think it be. At the very least, you should rethink that. Read my response to gstoddart and abigor on "The Tibet Myth," penned by Yale Professor Michael Parenti. The fact is, after reading it, it makes you wonder why the Tibetans would want the Lamas to return.
"In 1937, another visitor, Spencer Chapman, wrote, 'The Lamaist monk does not spend his time in ministering to the people or educating them. . . . The beggar beside the road is nothing to the monk. Knowledge is the jealously guarded prerogative of the monasteries and is used to increase their influence and wealth.' "
I'm sad you think that way about Dalai Lama. I posted this to an earlier message, but here's an interesting read from Yale professor Michael Parenti called The Tibet Myth:
Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land [...] were owned by two social groups: the rich secular landlords and the rich theocratic lamas. The Dalai Lama himself "lived richly in the 1000-room, 14-story Potala Palace." [...]
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their peasant families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks. Once there, they were bonded for life. Tashi-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine. [...] Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. [...]
Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: "When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion." [...]
In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, breaking off hands, and hamstringing legs.There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master's cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who was raped and then had her nose sliced away.
Earlier visitors to Tibet commented on the theocratic despotism. In 1895, an Englishman, Dr. A. L. Waddell, wrote that the populace was under the "intolerable tyranny of monks" and the devil superstitions they had fashioned to terrorize the people. In 1904 Perceval Landon described the Dalai Lama's rule as "an engine of oppression." [...] As much as we might wish otherwise, feudal theocratic Tibet was a far cry from the romanticized Shangri La so enthusiastically nurtured by Buddhism's western proselytes.
I agree. And you are right, two wrongs don't make a right. But at the same time, most of the people only know one side of the story. I think it's safe to say that hearing two sides of the stories is always better than one, right?
On the topic of atrocities, the Tibetan atrocities to its own people as well as the Han people are also well documented. Michael Parenti of Yale University wrote in "The Tibetan Myth" that "earlier visitors to Tibet commented on the theocratic despotism [...] the populace was under the 'intolerable tyranny of monks' and the devil superstitions they had fashioned to terrorize the people." I wonder how many people actually knew how oppressed the monks were to the Tibetan people.
Of course, this doesn't justify the Chinese actions, but at the same time, it makes you wonder if the Dalai Lama is also the rightful replacement of Tibet. "In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, breaking off hands, and hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master's cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who was raped and then had her nose sliced away."
I honestly don't understand why people think the Falun Gong is great. They're honestly crazy, and while I don't think the Chinese government should stop them from practicing, I really think they should just let them be so people can see how crazy they really are. Most westerners are so enchanted with eastern cultures that have a cultish streak to it. Heck, most of the time they don't even know what it's it about. Ask an American to point out Tibet on a blank map.
What sucks about the Tibetan situation is that there's no true way to get the truth about the situation. Western media is enchanted with the idea of Tibet rather than the reality. Tibetans make up 40% of the population in Lhasa. We take the Dalai Lhama's word as gospel, even though he definitely has his own incentive to distort the truth. And we obviously can't get the straight talk from the Chinese government.
Sadly, it looks very hypocritical to the world when Americans condemn something like the Chinese control of Tibet, while our own country is occupying Iraq and committing our own human rights violations there. And we at least have the power to vote the bastards out of office!
My parents fled to Taiwan, Republic of China, at the end of the civil war. At first I believed the communists were evil, but it's become clear to me that for the first time in Chinese history that every person in China has a bowl of rice to eat. Whether you like them or not, you can't deny that they destroyed a two-thousand year class system.
I'm sure someone is going to find a way to criticize your argument about the openness of Apple, and its acceptance procedures/control, but I agree with you entirely. Apple has always required its developers to develop intuitive interfaces. It doesn't matter how good your technology is if you can't implement it in a way that is easy to understand.
If anything, Apple provides all the tools you need to meet this requirement. Objective-C along with Cocoa and its Core set of libraries (Foundation, Quartz, OS, etc) are very easy to use. Compare the time it takes to get a functional app using the Cocoa set of tools compared to most other SDKs. Apple fully supports its developers, but requires its developers to produce well-implemented ideas, not half-baked cakes.
In the end, the customer wins. If you look at Linux or Windows, you will see that there are plethora of apps that don't follow a unified user-interface. But the goals of those two platforms are entirely different--the freedom to make your app look good or look like crap. No two programs I download will likely have the same interface.
On OS X, though, I will most likely know what to expect when I download an app, and almost immediately know how to work with the user interface. This rarely happens on Windows or Linux given that unified interfaces on either platform has not been a reality (Linux: difference in opinions; Microsoft: difficult to use, developer stubbornness). On OS X, I know app support files will be placed in ~[user]/Library, and I know that my app will be bundled in an .app folder.
These are different opinions. For the hacker, they might appreciate the Linux philosophy (even though most things in Linux can be done in OS X). For the end-user who likes control, Windows may be a better choice. But for users who like to use a consistent interface, OS X is probably the closest to the ticket.
I use OS X because most apps written on OS X are standardized. Yes, Apple does cannibalize some of its developers, but there are tradeoffs. Apple acts in its own interests, which is to sell as many computers as it can, and by acting on its own interests, it tries to develop in a way that makes it easy for the user to jump start.
China's good at farming Olympic gold too!
I wish I had mod points for your post--Steve Jobs exemplifies a self-made man. He never relied on the education system to get him where he is, he never worked a day of his life outside a company he didn't build. An entrepreneur is someone like Steve.
CEOs with MBAs are usually ruined because they rely on their so-called "experience." Usually that kind of experience is putting together a textbook model of the ideal organization.
We are Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
On the bright side: no job means more time to play GTAIV!
I also want to add that most Macs offer an integrated experience. Lower-end Macs are notoriously difficult to customize, but they do offer a seamless experience and offer a top-of-the-line product that most manufacturers are unable to match.
Genius Bar support is fantastic. If you've just bought a new computer, they'll personally setup your computer and migrate the files for you. They'll order and replace most parts for you. The Genius Bar replaced my motherboard (in Apple speak, it is "Logic Board") and turned it around in one day. Can Psystar match that?
Also, what about the quality of the machine? When large companies such as Dell can't even control the quality of machines that well, what can we expect from a company like Psystar? Apple machines have been well-noted, except in the production of a minority of machines, to be quiet. I have an Early-2008 MacBook Pro Penryn, and it is the quietest machines I've bought to date. I can barely hear the fan, much less hear the hard drive seeking.
As this article points out, Psystar will continue to need hacks to get the updates working. We also don't know anything about the drivers or parts that OS X supports. Is this a machine that can perform?
So the question you need to ask yourself is, is it really worth saving a $100 for no Genius Bar support, more hacks to get the system working, a perhaps noisier system with cheaper parts? People need to understand that Macs offer an integrated experience. Apple is not selling the software or hardware separate; it's selling an experience.