Way back Next made a Cocoa runtime (AppKit, Foundation Kit, etc) available on Windows. It was called the Yellow Box. People could develop an app on their Next machine and the 'fat' binary could run on a myriad of platforms. It was neat.
MS officers could end up in club Fed for what they've pulled over the years.
Hahahahahahahaha!
It'll be a cold day in hell when any MS officer is indicted. The Arthur Anderson 'clean-up' was just a fucking dog and pony show. The Federal government has NO desire to clean up the system - it's painfully obvious.
Enron, Anderson, and MCI are the tip of the iceberg, corruption-wise. As far as the Gov is concerned, they WERE the iceberg. As long as there is a show made of breaking up corruption, the sheeple will be happy. That the corruption still festers worse than before is of no concern to the representatives, the judicial system, or the common man. As long as the Reps get their campaign funding, the Justice folks get ever-tougher anti-crime legislation, and the people get their Swanson's Hungry Man Dinners and their Yu-Gi-Oh, there will be no clean-up.
You must've had a flaky box, or a flaky disk, or something.
I have only experienced two kernel panics in the past 1.5 years with my Powerbook.
1. rm -rf * in the root directory as UID 0 (don't ask). 2. Logic board blew. Machine would KP on boot.
I have jammed USB, Firewire , and a myriad of PCMCIA cards into this thing, unmounted drives at the wrong time, etc that would have annhilated a Linux(2.4.x) install, but OS X just occasionally pops up the odd dialog box.
Seriously, you probably were playing with 10.0 or 10.1, 10.2 is rock solid.
Unless, of course, IBM along with other vendors now agreed in advance to cave in at the last moment and fuck linux over in the end. Maybe this is where part of IBM's 1 Billion Dollar (pinkie in mouth) investment in linux went, and IBM is SCO's secret 'licensee' (seeing as how MS already had a Unix license but bought a new one, they are obviously the other, more visible power behind this move). Personally I think Larry Ellison is the other secret backer of SCO here, but we can never be too paranoid.
I think this story will get a lot more bizarre, and weird shit will be happening for years to come. It also shows MS and some unnamed party (parties?!?) is getting quite desperate at this stage.
Windows XP is, in a way, derived from VMS, yet calling it "a VMS" is rubbish.
Your analogy holds no water, because, even though Windows XP is, in a very distant way, somewhat related to VMS, it is in no way decended from it.
Unix was a bunch of code that a bunch of people licensed and re-licensed, and specifically ALL of the BSD's (Open, Net, Free, Darwin) that still live are decended from BSD directly. Linux has all new code, unlike the BSDs, but it reimplements Unix to such a degree that it is, for all intents and purposes, Unix. It just isn't related except in spirit to Unix.
The open group is quite unnecessary nowadays, and should be replaced by a website proffering a set of compliance tests that anybody can run. I'll pay hosting for the first year!
Shit, they licensed Unix way back when they made AUX! I know that Next also licensed Unix from whoever owned it at the time, so for fuck's sake, they've already got 2 Unix licenses! I have always wondered if the other Unix companies (Sun, SGI, IBM, DEC, HP, etc...) had to buy a new Unix license for each version or type of OS that they had, or did they use the same one all along? For example, when SunOS became Solaris, and there was substantial feature change (breakage) to the whole OS, did they have to run out and buy a new Unix license, or did they use the old one that they still had for SunOS?
I would think that sooner or later somebody at Apple will remember that they, too, have one and quite possibly two Unix licenses of their own, and the case'll be thrown out.
The problem isn't the adequacy of the machines. The problems lie with the administration.
The district or school IT people obviously were looking to avoid deploying any new Macs. The head honchos are sure to be your typical PC advocate VBer who somehow got promoted and / or tenured by the district. The solution may be for the one or two Mac advocates among the faculty and staff to share the job. I have also read about schools sucessfully running student-administered machines. If you have a few good kids, you can provide incentives to keep the system running smoothly. Just like in a corporate setting, they also keep each other honest. Have a definate security policy and actually OBEY IT.
Instead of filtering all the machines web access, which won't work against clever kids anyway, just have the parents sign something to the effect of 'my child can use the unrestricted Internet' and if the parent refuses, deny access to the Web apps for that kid (with the kid being in the correct group, and using Apple's handy Capabilities... button, one can strictly control their computing environment), and if a kid is good and desires shell access or someting, give him a restricted one first. The idea here is that all of the really advanced computer users among the students will be able to establish a level of trust and responsibility gradually.
Schools, on the local level, get funding through bond issues. If there are enough rich people, who probably send their kids to private school anyway, the bond issue will get voted down every time.
Another problem to tackle with education and funding re: the rich is this: In many communities, one doesn't get paid to be on the city council (a full-time job) so that leaves only the rich to do the job. They already have enough money to eat and live without having to worry about a full-time job.
We had this thing called Openstep for Mach, and we kind of like updated the Openstep API and called it Cocoa. Then, it was already like 1999 and we thought 'Jeez, we'd better put a newer UNIX than 4.3 BSD on there, so FreeBSD was there and we used it. But we used like version 3.0 of FreeBSD, so we had to kind of port what we could of FreeBSD 4.5 to Darwin, and next year we'll probably have FreeBSD 4.8 under the hood. Anyway, the documentation is a mess!
So, do you think the SCO company officers were sitting around the office drinking one morning and said "Well, this is it. We don't have any course of action but to try suing IBM (!?!?!?!?) for ONE BILLION DOLLARS!" I think that the fellas in charge of SCO are kind of doing their job as SOMEBODY's double agent - trying to kill Unix and Linux from the inside. Who wants both Unix and Linux to die?
First suspects are the still-living Unix licencees - IBM, Sun, SGI, Apple, Digital / Compaq / HP (contracted to DiCP) Fujitsu / Siemans, and a few others. I kind of doubt that any of these companies are in on it. One or more of these parties may have made a secret deal with SCO as well, but that's a special case.
Microsoft is a special case as well. I believe they already had a Unix licence from way back. Why spend 8 million on something they already owned? I think just as another fellow said, Larry Ellison will come forward as the other person.
It could be that a VC outfit has bought a unix license as venture capital, to be rewarded if SCO wins. Kind of like horse betting.
If you are turly interested in quality, you would have.WAVs or AIFFs of everything anyway. The file formats supported are just done so in software, so new ones can and are added with upgrades of the firmware.
Some of the bugs that have been encountered on OS X only happen on HFS+. I have a feeling that their VFS module for HFS+ still has some interesting bugs left within. Again, speed is about equal for both formats, at least on my machine, and again I am coming from Linux and Free / NetBSD here so don't assume I need your crufty app anyway! For fuck's sake, the TCP stack is 'largely a byproduct of having BSD code' along with a good portion of the rest of the system.
Don't even cry to me about case sensitivity. That's the stupidest thing. Files only have names so that HUMANS can easily deal with them. Otherwise they'd all have numbers -- it's all the same to the computer, right?
Are you fucking retarded? They already do! They call these 'numbers' inodes. Maybe you should grab a pen and some paper here and write some fo this down. Files have one or more names so programs can interact with them. Files can be manipulated by more than one program in the real world. Case sensitivity does indeed have uses. If you don't like having to use caps, then don't name your file with caps! You are a whiny little bitch, ain't ya?
No, I have a real reason for using UFS. It has a mature implementation on OS X, and I experience no strangeness from it on the network with other boxen. It is also a relatively long-lived filesystem, whereas a HFS+ partition will tend to accumulate unused but UNALLOCATABLE disk space over time, thus keeping slime like Symantec in business.
HFS+ isn't a toy filesystem exactly, but it needs some serious overhaul. It was almost as if it were designed with the occasional reformat as a necessary design choice.
Since the filesystem layer is fully virtualized, we shall see newer and more interesting formats than HFS+ in future versions of OS X.
Duh, it is Microsoft. Who knows how much treasure in 'licencing fees' they have paid SCO to put in the war chest? The silly thing is that this sort of crap would be legally binding for business and individulas around the world, ESPECIALLY the EU, because they were stupid enough to 'normalize' a bunch of copyright and trademark laws through treaty with the US.
I guess other countries already know what it means to treat with the US by now, though.
I'm hoping that the SCO cruft has all been removed from the development branch of the kernel, and that the kernel dev team is working overtime to check the versioning software to erase any SCO droppings left over!
I believe that Apple likes to hold on to good people, whereas I see an operation like MS or SCO viewing programmers as all basically equivalent units to each other.
That may just be my impression, but I know that Steve likes to keep good folks close by.
On a completely unrelated note, it'd be cool if Apple Research was brough back into operation.
I have always thought that tis is a messed up way of doing business. I have always viewed a print shop like this: If they couldn't accept a file from me, THEY were SOL. After all, there are good printers out there who will work with you, and not against you.
I have always laughed at the sneering record-store guy attitude that many print houses, and other businesses in fact, employees take. It's like this - I can always spend my money at your competitor, so don't make me!
Slashdot Mirror
Way back Next made a Cocoa runtime (AppKit, Foundation Kit, etc) available on Windows. It was called the Yellow Box. People could develop an app on their Next machine and the 'fat' binary could run on a myriad of platforms. It was neat.
MS officers could end up in club Fed for what they've pulled over the years.
Hahahahahahahaha!
It'll be a cold day in hell when any MS officer is indicted. The Arthur Anderson 'clean-up' was just a fucking dog and pony show. The Federal government has NO desire to clean up the system - it's painfully obvious.
Enron, Anderson, and MCI are the tip of the iceberg, corruption-wise. As far as the Gov is concerned, they WERE the iceberg. As long as there is a show made of breaking up corruption, the sheeple will be happy. That the corruption still festers worse than before is of no concern to the representatives, the judicial system, or the common man. As long as the Reps get their campaign funding, the Justice folks get ever-tougher anti-crime legislation, and the people get their Swanson's Hungry Man Dinners and their Yu-Gi-Oh, there will be no clean-up.
It's better to allow the user to shoot themselves in the foot than never run at all.
You must've had a flaky box, or a flaky disk, or something.
I have only experienced two kernel panics in the past 1.5 years with my Powerbook.
1. rm -rf * in the root directory as UID 0 (don't ask).
2. Logic board blew. Machine would KP on boot.
I have jammed USB, Firewire , and a myriad of PCMCIA cards into this thing, unmounted drives at the wrong time, etc that would have annhilated a Linux(2.4.x) install, but OS X just occasionally pops up the odd dialog box.
Seriously, you probably were playing with 10.0 or 10.1, 10.2 is rock solid.
This will be almost like a new episode of Slashdot Radio!
They're probably redesigning a 970 that they can slap on any old Powerbook motherboard right now.
Powerbook 5300 mark 2 anybody?
Unless, of course, IBM along with other vendors now agreed in advance to cave in at the last moment and fuck linux over in the end. Maybe this is where part of IBM's 1 Billion Dollar (pinkie in mouth) investment in linux went, and IBM is SCO's secret 'licensee' (seeing as how MS already had a Unix license but bought a new one, they are obviously the other, more visible power behind this move). Personally I think Larry Ellison is the other secret backer of SCO here, but we can never be too paranoid.
I think this story will get a lot more bizarre, and weird shit will be happening for years to come. It also shows MS and some unnamed party (parties?!?) is getting quite desperate at this stage.
Just find every instance in the CVS of Unix and replace it with 'Not Unix'!
Windows XP is, in a way, derived from VMS, yet calling it "a VMS" is rubbish.
Your analogy holds no water, because, even though Windows XP is, in a very distant way, somewhat related to VMS, it is in no way decended from it.
Unix was a bunch of code that a bunch of people licensed and re-licensed, and specifically ALL of the BSD's (Open, Net, Free, Darwin) that still live are decended from BSD directly. Linux has all new code, unlike the BSDs, but it reimplements Unix to such a degree that it is, for all intents and purposes, Unix. It just isn't related except in spirit to Unix.
The open group is quite unnecessary nowadays, and should be replaced by a website proffering a set of compliance tests that anybody can run. I'll pay hosting for the first year!
Shit, they licensed Unix way back when they made AUX! I know that Next also licensed Unix from whoever owned it at the time, so for fuck's sake, they've already got 2 Unix licenses! I have always wondered if the other Unix companies (Sun, SGI, IBM, DEC, HP, etc...) had to buy a new Unix license for each version or type of OS that they had, or did they use the same one all along? For example, when SunOS became Solaris, and there was substantial feature change (breakage) to the whole OS, did they have to run out and buy a new Unix license, or did they use the old one that they still had for SunOS?
I would think that sooner or later somebody at Apple will remember that they, too, have one and quite possibly two Unix licenses of their own, and the case'll be thrown out.
Yeah, and even though the hacker girl is technically correct, I still laugh so hard that I almost die when I hear her say that.
No, it'll have to be GNU/nix pronounced "New-nix."
The problem isn't the adequacy of the machines. The problems lie with the administration.
The district or school IT people obviously were looking to avoid deploying any new Macs. The head honchos are sure to be your typical PC advocate VBer who somehow got promoted and / or tenured by the district. The solution may be for the one or two Mac advocates among the faculty and staff to share the job. I have also read about schools sucessfully running student-administered machines. If you have a few good kids, you can provide incentives to keep the system running smoothly. Just like in a corporate setting, they also keep each other honest. Have a definate security policy and actually OBEY IT.
Instead of filtering all the machines web access, which won't work against clever kids anyway, just have the parents sign something to the effect of 'my child can use the unrestricted Internet' and if the parent refuses, deny access to the Web apps for that kid (with the kid being in the correct group, and using Apple's handy Capabilities... button, one can strictly control their computing environment), and if a kid is good and desires shell access or someting, give him a restricted one first. The idea here is that all of the really advanced computer users among the students will be able to establish a level of trust and responsibility gradually.
Talk about string-conciousness there!
Schools, on the local level, get funding through bond issues. If there are enough rich people, who probably send their kids to private school anyway, the bond issue will get voted down every time.
Another problem to tackle with education and funding re: the rich is this: In many communities, one doesn't get paid to be on the city council (a full-time job) so that leaves only the rich to do the job. They already have enough money to eat and live without having to worry about a full-time job.
This way it'll hurt. The purging will in no way provide a real punishment for cheating.
This way it at leat costs them their game license. Next time don't cheat!
We had this thing called Openstep for Mach, and we kind of like updated the Openstep API and called it Cocoa. Then, it was already like 1999 and we thought 'Jeez, we'd better put a newer UNIX than 4.3 BSD on there, so FreeBSD was there and we used it. But we used like version 3.0 of FreeBSD, so we had to kind of port what we could of FreeBSD 4.5 to Darwin, and next year we'll probably have FreeBSD 4.8 under the hood. Anyway, the documentation is a mess!
Love,
Steve Jobs
So, do you think the SCO company officers were sitting around the office drinking one morning and said "Well, this is it. We don't have any course of action but to try suing IBM (!?!?!?!?) for ONE BILLION DOLLARS!" I think that the fellas in charge of SCO are kind of doing their job as SOMEBODY's double agent - trying to kill Unix and Linux from the inside. Who wants both Unix and Linux to die?
First suspects are the still-living Unix licencees - IBM, Sun, SGI, Apple, Digital / Compaq / HP (contracted to DiCP) Fujitsu / Siemans, and a few others. I kind of doubt that any of these companies are in on it. One or more of these parties may have made a secret deal with SCO as well, but that's a special case.
Microsoft is a special case as well. I believe they already had a Unix licence from way back. Why spend 8 million on something they already owned? I think just as another fellow said, Larry Ellison will come forward as the other person.
It could be that a VC outfit has bought a unix license as venture capital, to be rewarded if SCO wins. Kind of like horse betting.
If you are turly interested in quality, you would have .WAVs or AIFFs of everything anyway. The file formats supported are just done so in software, so new ones can and are added with upgrades of the firmware.
Some of the bugs that have been encountered on OS X only happen on HFS+. I have a feeling that their VFS module for HFS+ still has some interesting bugs left within. Again, speed is about equal for both formats, at least on my machine, and again I am coming from Linux and Free / NetBSD here so don't assume I need your crufty app anyway! For fuck's sake, the TCP stack is 'largely a byproduct of having BSD code' along with a good portion of the rest of the system.
Don't even cry to me about case sensitivity. That's the stupidest thing. Files only have names so that HUMANS can easily deal with them. Otherwise they'd all have numbers -- it's all the same to the computer, right?
Are you fucking retarded? They already do! They call these 'numbers' inodes. Maybe you should grab a pen and some paper here and write some fo this down. Files have one or more names so programs can interact with them. Files can be manipulated by more than one program in the real world. Case sensitivity does indeed have uses. If you don't like having to use caps, then don't name your file with caps! You are a whiny little bitch, ain't ya?
No, I have a real reason for using UFS. It has a mature implementation on OS X, and I experience no strangeness from it on the network with other boxen. It is also a relatively long-lived filesystem, whereas a HFS+ partition will tend to accumulate unused but UNALLOCATABLE disk space over time, thus keeping slime like Symantec in business.
HFS+ isn't a toy filesystem exactly, but it needs some serious overhaul. It was almost as if it were designed with the occasional reformat as a necessary design choice.
Since the filesystem layer is fully virtualized, we shall see newer and more interesting formats than HFS+ in future versions of OS X.
Hopefully.
Duh, it is Microsoft. Who knows how much treasure in 'licencing fees' they have paid SCO to put in the war chest? The silly thing is that this sort of crap would be legally binding for business and individulas around the world, ESPECIALLY the EU, because they were stupid enough to 'normalize' a bunch of copyright and trademark laws through treaty with the US.
I guess other countries already know what it means to treat with the US by now, though.
I'm hoping that the SCO cruft has all been removed from the development branch of the kernel, and that the kernel dev team is working overtime to check the versioning software to erase any SCO droppings left over!
Probably not, but they should.
I believe that Apple likes to hold on to good people, whereas I see an operation like MS or SCO viewing programmers as all basically equivalent units to each other.
That may just be my impression, but I know that Steve likes to keep good folks close by.
On a completely unrelated note, it'd be cool if Apple Research was brough back into operation.
Sweet. Then, hopefully, IBM will see the light and start porting over some of the neater features of AIX to Linux.
One word for anyone who has had a hard time submitting a file to a press house:
Postscript. (or PDF).
I have always thought that tis is a messed up way of doing business. I have always viewed a print shop like this: If they couldn't accept a file from me, THEY were SOL. After all, there are good printers out there who will work with you, and not against you.
I have always laughed at the sneering record-store guy attitude that many print houses, and other businesses in fact, employees take. It's like this - I can always spend my money at your competitor, so don't make me!