I sell Macs for a living. In terms of processing power, for the consumer-targeted lines of products it can reasonably be argued that you get more processing power for your buck with a Wintel machine. However, very few of my potential customers are concerned with such things. I'd say maybe 50-60% even bother asking about what sort of Pentium an 800 Mhz G4 (the CPU in a flat-panel iMac) is equivalent to. Home users care about applications, and about not having to deal with driver conflicts and the Blue Screen of Death. When a potential "switcher" comes into the store, I mention OS X's stability, then start showing the iApps. And that's usually all it takes.:-)
One of the employees at my Apple Store has two Apple tattoos, an "open Apple" and a "closed Apple", on the inside of his wrists. I believe they are on the correct left/right sides.:-)
Re:The Finder still needs work
on
Is Mac OS X Slow?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Have you considered the speed of the drive and the differences between HFS+ and either FAT32 or NTFS? While I'm sure Finder code has something to do with it, HFS has always been slow for dealing with large quantities of files. Perhaps if someone tried this using MacOS X with a UFS volume...
I work at an Apple Store. I launch programs on the demo machines all day long and show off all kinds of different features. The only thing that seems slow to me is the length of time that the slower G3 machines take to initially open iPhoto, which involves literally reading, decompressing, and scaling hundreds of images for display on the screen at the same time. And that only takes a few seconds.
Has anyone seen the new accessibility feature for users with visual impairment? The OS will magnify, on the fly, any part of the screen up to something like 24x... fully anti-aliased. The magnification follows the mouse pointer, and as you move it around the screen there is no hesitancy at all.
Thanks to how it's implemented, using command-tab to switch applications is almost useless because the system flashes the Dock icons too quickly to see what program is next. And don't forget the always-fun demo of clicking 5 or 6 dock icons in quick succession, only to watch all the programs launch and draw their interfaces simultaneously in just a few seconds.
I don't think there is anything in the OS that slows down its responsiveness to the user. If someone wants to get into the power of the hardware -- running benchmarks and such -- that's a whole other argument. But it has little to do with "MacOS is slow".
From what I've seen, there aren't any component devices out there that a) do what you want, and b) don't cost an arm and a leg. In the mean time, you might just burn MP3s to cd-rw discs and use a cheapo DVD player. For the money, it's probably the best solution.
Um... no lead? When you make a silicon integrated circuit chip the end product contains something like 1/1000th of the raw materials used to make it. The rest of the components, like the drives, may not be quite as bad, but who are they trying to kid?! Eco-friendly my *ss.
If UCSD's attorneys determine that the university is at risk of liability or non-compliance with the law, the tax-paying citizens of California should be glad that they are attempting to stay within the lines. It is the place of private citizens using private money to fight unjust or unconstitutional laws. And anyone who says UCSD is overstepping reasonable interpretation better not have "IANAL" anywhere in their comment.:-P
So, if your Sims eat a ton of Big Macs, do they fatten up, get hardened arteries, and have heart attacks? I hope EA is sticking with the "reality" theme.
"Grid-provided" electric just isn't the way to go. Most folks that are looking to eliminate fossil fuel engines from cars are now working on hydrogen-based fuel cells. The reasons for this are fairly simple:
"Electric cars" that charge off the power grid are just moving their fossil fuel consumption over to a power plant (unless the power is provided by nuclear generation, which has its own huge set of problems).
With a non-material "fuel", there is a wait time associated with recharing. It takes a lot less time to fill up a hydrogen tank (or even swap an empty one for a full one) then it does to recharge a big bank of batteries.
A reasonably-sized efficient fuel cell would be revolutionary far beyond personal conveyances. Rather than persue research that would result in, at best, a full-scale version of toys kids have played with for years, why not work on a method of power generation that could vastly change the way we physically structure our societies and make giant leaps towards restoring Earth's natural capital?
Groups like the Rocky Mountain Institute have been pushing fuel cell cars for a decade (search their site for "hypercar"). It's nice of the auto industry to catch up.:-)
Richard Feynman is another fabulous example of this. Here's a link to Amazon for a book about him and his art. He became interested in drawing and got very good at it. If you can find this book, it's worth a look, if just for all the pictures and the entertaining introduction by Mr Feynman himself.
I feel that the best projects have a guiding vision channeled through an individual or small group. However, I think it's useful to point out that from a philosophical perspective the whole point of Open Source is a total lack of control. Think of it from an evolutionary/capitalist perspective: if your project provides the most value, and doesn't run into any logistical/political problems that torpedo it, contributors will be happy to continue with your vision. However, if someone has a better idea, his *should* come out on top. Put bluntly, from this perspective you have no right to be in charge if you aren't the best person for the job. If the project's vision as you see it is guided mostly by what would make it most useful for you, you'll just have to hope that many other people share your needs.
Um... the big IM-ers are for-profit companies. They may some day decide that a "strategic balance" (a la the US and USSR) is best, but for now there is still growth to be had and they are in COMPETITION. Why on earth does anyone think they are going to unify or purposely allow cross-network access?
I look to Jabber as the foundation of sensible IM-ing; users are screenname@jabber.server.address, and messaging users on multiple "services" is just a matter of adding them to your buddy list. No funky add-ons or protocol descriptors needed. Only problem is, Jabber isn't useful as a revenue generator. But what if IM-ing simply became a standard ISP feature? If each ISP ran a Jabber-type server, you'd just need someone's email address to reach him.
Since IM-ing is obviously becoming as widely used as email, why isn't it a part of the standard service package? If distributed, like Jabber, I can't see it placing a huge burden on even very small ISPs.
"Whatever the cause..."
on
Baked Alaska
·
· Score: 2
Whatever the cause, temperatures in Alaska have risen by seven degrees in the last 30 years.
I think that quote says exactly why this is an interesting story that has little implication for the larger debate about our environment. I am the first to declare that all the industrial toxins and whatnot we're pumping into our atmosphere are having negative effects. However, one of the main arguments that's always made in global warming discussions is that climate change has been a constant over the history of the Earth. We simply don't know how much human actions are responsible for what we're experiencing now. So while I'm sure increased rates in asthma, cancers, and birth defects in some places are probably industry related, I'm not convinced about a bunch of wackos who live on an ice shelf losing their "land".
Obviously, some expert is going to have to sit down for the court and determine if the product for QuickTime and the product for Macromedia really are different. But if they're not, Apple has a totally valid lawsuit. A (legal and reasonable) contract is a contract. Apple agreed to pay $4.5 Million based on getting exclusive use of the (very, very good) software. If someone else can use it, that seriously dilutes its value to Apple, and there's no reason for them to have paid so much for it.
There's certainly been enough talk about just plain blocking all email coming in from Chinese domains thanks to spam issues. What about temporarily shutting direct network links to an entire country as a matter of national security? It seems to me, especially if attacks are impinging upon military networks, that the government could justify ordering ISPs to shut down certain connections. After all, once these "attacks" cross into American networks they are physically within the country, and that certainly falls under our military's jurisdiction.
Obviously, standard "attacker" procedures would include finding ways to hide your tracks by finding other routes. However, the snipping of links like that sends a strong diplomatic message that has serious non-tangible effects. For example, if multinational companies are unable to reliably maintain informational links with offices in China, they'll pick up and leave. China desperately doesn't want something like that to happen.
I fail to see how anything in this article differs substantially from anything said about globalization pre-9/11... especially by Jon Katz. I guess next week we'll be treated to a similarly-rehashed version of the (already useless) discussion of whether globalization is a good thing.
Hey editors, if you're hurting for money (see also: subscriptions), maybe you should tell Katz that either he comes up with original material or you're taking him off the payroll.
It's awfully sad that this is the first comment to get modded up to 4 for this story. Kid, anyone who equates fighting against clearly unconstitutional oppression on the basis of irrelevant genetic characteristics (read: the civil rights movement) with a bunch of snot-nosed brats not wanting to pay for other people's labor is beyond pathetic. Your comment is an insult to anyone who's been insulted, beaten, or worse in the course of their struggle for equality. Fellow moderators, I'm disappointed in you.
I'm not particularly trying to flame, but if someone's gonna mod up comments like this it seems a response is required.
I guess someone towing the usually whiney l33t/. line had to get modded up. Who are you to tell someone how much money they should be allowed to make? If you don't like how they make their money, don't give them any of yours, and don't take what they have to offer either. But if other people are happy to buy into the system, that's their decision.
I also like when you mention how great it is that starving artists are happy to let you copy their music. I thought the whole point is to actually help those people make a living. I'm sure encouraging people to pass around free digital copies accomplishes that in wonderful fashion.
Finally, did someone appoint you the arbiter of who is a "true artist"? Give me a break.
I was sort of amazed at the line about making users who only play 5 hours a month feel involved or meaningful to the game universe. I can't imagine an entertainment persuit less suited to extremely casual commitment than RPGs of any variety. This is particularly true for the medium in discussion, which continues to run 24/7. If you're in a D&D group, at least the action stops when you go home. MMORPGs inherently only appeal to people with a fairly particular interest and a high level of commitment. For goodness' sake, the whole point is to *immerse* yourself an another universe! How do you immerse in just 5 hours?;-)
Haha... you ever see the movie "The Distinguished Gentleman" with Eddie Murphy? There's a very similar discussion among some representatives about a bill they just voted on. Of course, neither has a clue what the bill is, but a group of schoolkids asks and, well...;-D
I think someone should point this out every time a new piece of rotten legislation gets proposed. Do NOT email your representative. Do NOT send them a form letter. CALL THEIR OFFICES. SEND OR FAX THEM LETTERS YOU COMPOSED YOURSELF, PREFERABLY HANDWRITTEN. Have everyone you know or can convince do this. This is the ONLY way (other than thousands of dollars in contributions) that you will actually influence votes. And, as always, BE POLITE, BUT DON'T HESITATE TO EXPLICITELY STATE THAT VOTING FOR THIS BILL WILL COST HIM/HER YOUR VOTE.
Though the eventual effect of the ruling may stink, it can't be denied that in light of existing regulations the decision-makers have a point. The primary use of the lines in cable systems at this point is indeed information delivery, whether it be TV signals or data, and there are no open-access laws for info delivery services. It's sort of like the ruling declaring PayPal is not a bank noted in an earlier Slashdot story today. What these decisions recognize is that the underlying legal structure needs to be updated to better recognize new technologies. I think we tend to expect these pseudo-legislative regulatory agencies like the FCC to be the top-level policy makers in their domains. In reality, the Congress needs to deal with these issues so that the regulatory agencies can put fair rules in place.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps the problem is that you think you have free will... ;-)
I sell Macs for a living. In terms of processing power, for the consumer-targeted lines of products it can reasonably be argued that you get more processing power for your buck with a Wintel machine. However, very few of my potential customers are concerned with such things. I'd say maybe 50-60% even bother asking about what sort of Pentium an 800 Mhz G4 (the CPU in a flat-panel iMac) is equivalent to. Home users care about applications, and about not having to deal with driver conflicts and the Blue Screen of Death. When a potential "switcher" comes into the store, I mention OS X's stability, then start showing the iApps. And that's usually all it takes. :-)
One of the employees at my Apple Store has two Apple tattoos, an "open Apple" and a "closed Apple", on the inside of his wrists. I believe they are on the correct left/right sides. :-)
Have you considered the speed of the drive and the differences between HFS+ and either FAT32 or NTFS? While I'm sure Finder code has something to do with it, HFS has always been slow for dealing with large quantities of files. Perhaps if someone tried this using MacOS X with a UFS volume...
Has anyone seen the new accessibility feature for users with visual impairment? The OS will magnify, on the fly, any part of the screen up to something like 24x... fully anti-aliased. The magnification follows the mouse pointer, and as you move it around the screen there is no hesitancy at all.
Thanks to how it's implemented, using command-tab to switch applications is almost useless because the system flashes the Dock icons too quickly to see what program is next. And don't forget the always-fun demo of clicking 5 or 6 dock icons in quick succession, only to watch all the programs launch and draw their interfaces simultaneously in just a few seconds.
I don't think there is anything in the OS that slows down its responsiveness to the user. If someone wants to get into the power of the hardware -- running benchmarks and such -- that's a whole other argument. But it has little to do with "MacOS is slow".
From what I've seen, there aren't any component devices out there that a) do what you want, and b) don't cost an arm and a leg. In the mean time, you might just burn MP3s to cd-rw discs and use a cheapo DVD player. For the money, it's probably the best solution.
I think it's great Google was added to the suit. It'll take someone with reasonably deep pockets to get this guy's ridiculous witch hunt shut down.
Um... no lead? When you make a silicon integrated circuit chip the end product contains something like 1/1000th of the raw materials used to make it. The rest of the components, like the drives, may not be quite as bad, but who are they trying to kid?! Eco-friendly my *ss.
If UCSD's attorneys determine that the university is at risk of liability or non-compliance with the law, the tax-paying citizens of California should be glad that they are attempting to stay within the lines. It is the place of private citizens using private money to fight unjust or unconstitutional laws. And anyone who says UCSD is overstepping reasonable interpretation better not have "IANAL" anywhere in their comment. :-P
A company could get a bundle for selling the customer list from registrations. You'd have some seriously targeted advertising possibilities.
So, if your Sims eat a ton of Big Macs, do they fatten up, get hardened arteries, and have heart attacks? I hope EA is sticking with the "reality" theme.
"Grid-provided" electric just isn't the way to go. Most folks that are looking to eliminate fossil fuel engines from cars are now working on hydrogen-based fuel cells. The reasons for this are fairly simple:
"Electric cars" that charge off the power grid are just moving their fossil fuel consumption over to a power plant (unless the power is provided by nuclear generation, which has its own huge set of problems).
With a non-material "fuel", there is a wait time associated with recharing. It takes a lot less time to fill up a hydrogen tank (or even swap an empty one for a full one) then it does to recharge a big bank of batteries.
A reasonably-sized efficient fuel cell would be revolutionary far beyond personal conveyances. Rather than persue research that would result in, at best, a full-scale version of toys kids have played with for years, why not work on a method of power generation that could vastly change the way we physically structure our societies and make giant leaps towards restoring Earth's natural capital?
Groups like the Rocky Mountain Institute have been pushing fuel cell cars for a decade (search their site for "hypercar"). It's nice of the auto industry to catch up. :-)
Richard Feynman is another fabulous example of this. Here's a link to Amazon for a book about him and his art. He became interested in drawing and got very good at it. If you can find this book, it's worth a look, if just for all the pictures and the entertaining introduction by Mr Feynman himself.
I feel that the best projects have a guiding vision channeled through an individual or small group. However, I think it's useful to point out that from a philosophical perspective the whole point of Open Source is a total lack of control. Think of it from an evolutionary/capitalist perspective: if your project provides the most value, and doesn't run into any logistical/political problems that torpedo it, contributors will be happy to continue with your vision. However, if someone has a better idea, his *should* come out on top. Put bluntly, from this perspective you have no right to be in charge if you aren't the best person for the job. If the project's vision as you see it is guided mostly by what would make it most useful for you, you'll just have to hope that many other people share your needs.
I look to Jabber as the foundation of sensible IM-ing; users are screenname@jabber.server.address, and messaging users on multiple "services" is just a matter of adding them to your buddy list. No funky add-ons or protocol descriptors needed. Only problem is, Jabber isn't useful as a revenue generator. But what if IM-ing simply became a standard ISP feature? If each ISP ran a Jabber-type server, you'd just need someone's email address to reach him.
Since IM-ing is obviously becoming as widely used as email, why isn't it a part of the standard service package? If distributed, like Jabber, I can't see it placing a huge burden on even very small ISPs.
I think that quote says exactly why this is an interesting story that has little implication for the larger debate about our environment. I am the first to declare that all the industrial toxins and whatnot we're pumping into our atmosphere are having negative effects. However, one of the main arguments that's always made in global warming discussions is that climate change has been a constant over the history of the Earth. We simply don't know how much human actions are responsible for what we're experiencing now. So while I'm sure increased rates in asthma, cancers, and birth defects in some places are probably industry related, I'm not convinced about a bunch of wackos who live on an ice shelf losing their "land".
Obviously, some expert is going to have to sit down for the court and determine if the product for QuickTime and the product for Macromedia really are different. But if they're not, Apple has a totally valid lawsuit. A (legal and reasonable) contract is a contract. Apple agreed to pay $4.5 Million based on getting exclusive use of the (very, very good) software. If someone else can use it, that seriously dilutes its value to Apple, and there's no reason for them to have paid so much for it.
There's certainly been enough talk about just plain blocking all email coming in from Chinese domains thanks to spam issues. What about temporarily shutting direct network links to an entire country as a matter of national security? It seems to me, especially if attacks are impinging upon military networks, that the government could justify ordering ISPs to shut down certain connections. After all, once these "attacks" cross into American networks they are physically within the country, and that certainly falls under our military's jurisdiction.
Obviously, standard "attacker" procedures would include finding ways to hide your tracks by finding other routes. However, the snipping of links like that sends a strong diplomatic message that has serious non-tangible effects. For example, if multinational companies are unable to reliably maintain informational links with offices in China, they'll pick up and leave. China desperately doesn't want something like that to happen.
Just some food for thought.
Hey editors, if you're hurting for money (see also: subscriptions), maybe you should tell Katz that either he comes up with original material or you're taking him off the payroll.
It's awfully sad that this is the first comment to get modded up to 4 for this story. Kid, anyone who equates fighting against clearly unconstitutional oppression on the basis of irrelevant genetic characteristics (read: the civil rights movement) with a bunch of snot-nosed brats not wanting to pay for other people's labor is beyond pathetic. Your comment is an insult to anyone who's been insulted, beaten, or worse in the course of their struggle for equality. Fellow moderators, I'm disappointed in you.
I guess someone towing the usually whiney l33t /. line had to get modded up. Who are you to tell someone how much money they should be allowed to make? If you don't like how they make their money, don't give them any of yours, and don't take what they have to offer either. But if other people are happy to buy into the system, that's their decision.
I also like when you mention how great it is that starving artists are happy to let you copy their music. I thought the whole point is to actually help those people make a living. I'm sure encouraging people to pass around free digital copies accomplishes that in wonderful fashion.
Finally, did someone appoint you the arbiter of who is a "true artist"? Give me a break.
I was sort of amazed at the line about making users who only play 5 hours a month feel involved or meaningful to the game universe. I can't imagine an entertainment persuit less suited to extremely casual commitment than RPGs of any variety. This is particularly true for the medium in discussion, which continues to run 24/7. If you're in a D&D group, at least the action stops when you go home. MMORPGs inherently only appeal to people with a fairly particular interest and a high level of commitment. For goodness' sake, the whole point is to *immerse* yourself an another universe! How do you immerse in just 5 hours? ;-)
Haha... you ever see the movie "The Distinguished Gentleman" with Eddie Murphy? There's a very similar discussion among some representatives about a bill they just voted on. Of course, neither has a clue what the bill is, but a group of schoolkids asks and, well... ;-D
I think someone should point this out every time a new piece of rotten legislation gets proposed. Do NOT email your representative. Do NOT send them a form letter. CALL THEIR OFFICES. SEND OR FAX THEM LETTERS YOU COMPOSED YOURSELF, PREFERABLY HANDWRITTEN. Have everyone you know or can convince do this. This is the ONLY way (other than thousands of dollars in contributions) that you will actually influence votes. And, as always, BE POLITE, BUT DON'T HESITATE TO EXPLICITELY STATE THAT VOTING FOR THIS BILL WILL COST HIM/HER YOUR VOTE.
Though the eventual effect of the ruling may stink, it can't be denied that in light of existing regulations the decision-makers have a point. The primary use of the lines in cable systems at this point is indeed information delivery, whether it be TV signals or data, and there are no open-access laws for info delivery services. It's sort of like the ruling declaring PayPal is not a bank noted in an earlier Slashdot story today. What these decisions recognize is that the underlying legal structure needs to be updated to better recognize new technologies. I think we tend to expect these pseudo-legislative regulatory agencies like the FCC to be the top-level policy makers in their domains. In reality, the Congress needs to deal with these issues so that the regulatory agencies can put fair rules in place.