So, like I said, the patent system (USPTO is also responsible for registering trademarks) is a failure. Apple can register "app store", Microsoft can register "Windows", etc.
Since the patent/trademark system keeps existing and working, Apple is in their right to enforce the trademark that was granted to them. If the term was generic, the USPTO shouldn't have granted the trademark in the first place.
And not to mention that there are synonyms for "app store" or that one can come up with different ideas, like Google. They call their application store "Android Marketplace" and it's doing well without "app store" in its name, AFAIK.
Well... It's obvious -- not from the effing article, but from reality -- that when Apple patented the term "App Store", the competition didn't give a damn.
Now that Apple got success with their "app[lication] store" and with phrases like "there's an app for that", competition wants to downplay that. They say: we also have "apps", not just Apple.
My point is: it's not about the term being generic; it's about what Apple intended when they started using the term "app" for marketing purposes and patented the derivative term "app store". It's about Apple defending their strategy. The "app store" patent is important for that and the patent was granted, so they have to enforce it.
In the end, all of this only proves that patents are ridiculous. Apple themselves used the "Windows" trademark as an example...
* Nicer: run cat-5e in the walls, ending in nice 8P8C receptacles; * Not-as-nice-but-completely-functional: run an off-the-shelf 50-foot patch cord, routed close to the baseboard.
I said it was one of my gripes, but didn't explain it properly. Most people want to use Wi-Fi because they don't want the burden associated with cabling. Also, most of them think that Wi-Fi is newer, better and faster than "traditional" cabled networks, which is almost entirely fictional. Wi-Fi is not a drop-in replacement for cabled Ethernet, and this is my gripe. And I didn't even mention security...
So, I agree with you that an iPhone, Android, iPad or whatever mobile phone or tablet are true mobile devices and need wireless connectivity in order to be used in their intended ways. But, even then, they can't be used without problems, because Wi-Fi -- be it 802.11b or 802.11n -- isn't perfect when used in the 2.4GHz band.
I could say that Wi-Fi is not and never will be perfect, as RF systems are very hard to implement even on licensed bands, where regulatory bodies will try and make sure that the spectrum is used correctly.
Sorry for my attitude, but are you really telling us that you used a Yagi antenna in an indoor environment? That would be kind of insane...
Wi-Fi *is* a nightmare, period. My business provides mobility solutions for the SMB market and we often design wireless networks in industrial environments. The choice of antennas and the power and channel settings on the APs shall be carefully tuned, as to avoid interference from other RF sources, neighboring networks and the reflectivity of the walls and ceilings. It's not easy at all...
That's one of my gripes with Wi-Fi popularization. For example, lots of people use Wi-Fi in small apartments, when Ethernet cabling would do just fine, just because they want to choose to access the web on their couches, kitchen or desk. Caveat: the distance between the kitchen and the couch is often much less than 10 feet.
So, their network is accessible from two stories up or down in the building, because the transmitter power can't be reduced and the AP is transmitting at 20dBm (100mW). At this power level, the attenuation from the walls won't block the signal. In fact, you can get signal through two or three brick walls at this level.
So, if you live in a building in a big city, there's no channel you can use without problems, as the only non-overlapping channels in the 2.4GHz band are 1, 6 and 11. If you can use 802.11a (or 802.11n in the 5.2GHz band), there are more channels to choose from, but most (cheap) equipment and wireless NICs only use the 2.4GHz band!
So, the problem with Wi-Fi is much bigger than "tinfoil-like insulation that may block signals" or other construction materials. It's a technology that isn't simple enough to troubleshoot for the average user. Even most IT personnel don't know enough about RF to set up and troubleshoot a wireless network!
Dude... I don't know what's wrong with that, but that sucker on a skateboard made me laugh my ass off... It was so surreal to the point it was just plain stupid.
I say that as a skateboarder. At the time that movie was released, being on a skateboard wasn't as badass as they intended to mean...
Now, "War Games" is the best "hacker movie" ever made, even when you factor in the supercomputer destruction scene.
And, adding to that, the Amazon rainforest is not being destroyed for sugar cane culture. It's for the rare wood, that is used to make furniture which gets exported to the USA and Europe.
Then, they use the "free space" for pasture (cattle) and soybeans. And then they export the meat and soybeans to the USA and Europe.
Oh, and by the way, too much rain is bad for sugar cane culture.
Apple's not at the Microsoft level. Remember that hundreds of PC manufacturers are legally selling computers with Windows with and without Microsoft's blessing.
Apple's not at Microsoft "level" when you think about units shipped. There are many ways in which you can compare companies...
Now, I don't get this "with and without Microsoft's blessing" thing. If you're talking about small stores that sell custom-built computers with a copy of Windows, they are doing it with Microsoft's blessing, because they can sell an OEM version with a mobo or hard disk.
I can only equate the expression "without Microsoft's blessing" with "piracy". Is that what you really mean?
There is an open and competitive market for PCs and PC components, keeping prices low and pushing innovation forward.
I also don't get this. The PC manufacturers don't really innovate in technology that much, not even Apple. Aside from the multitouch stuff and industrial design, there isn't much to see. And Apple has been better than any other PC manufacturer in this, IMHO.
The PC component manufacturers, on the other hand, show some real innovation. For example, AMD and NVidia are releasing better GPU's almost every month! In the CPU front, AMD also fights Intel and it's a very intense fight, as I see. Synaptics created the iPod's click wheel. Some other companies have some very advanced multitouch technologies. Apple and other PC manufacturers just use these technologies.
But, even then, I don't see that many innovators. There are two or three big contenders for any kind of PC component. I don't really think that RealTek, for example, really matter in the network controller chips market. Atheros and Broadcom beat the hell out of them, single-handedly. So, these non-innovators only help to drive prices down. It's good, but having a lot of different suppliers doesn't mean shit to innovation. In the end, all that matters are the good ones.
Even though Windows is non-free and closed-source software, it has still created a vast hardware ecosystem with low barriers to entry.
Windows did not create this market. DOS was there long before and you can't really blame it all on Microsoft. IBM was there to define the hardware platform. It's very well known history for any slashdotter.
Nobody can say this about Apple, who are still working to the 1960s proprietary hardware business model, and still behaving as if the PC revolution never happened.
You can't say that about Apple, because it has nothing to do with them. Standardized hardware platforms and licensing software to 3rd parties is not Apple's business model. It never was and never will be, I think. And they seem to be going pretty well with their "closed ecosystem" business model.
About the PC revolution, it's arguable. The true revolution will happen when computers are really easy to use and don't get in the way of the user, like a toaster, refrigerator or microwave oven. No one pulled it as of yet.
I second that... Itronix (now part of General Dynamics) and Motorola are pioneers in this kind of product. They have been offering fully rugged notebooks for years.
These notebooks can stand sand storms, rain, 5 or 6-feet drops and extreme temperatures. They're mainly used in government applications, like public safety and the like. I've heard the ML900 (http://www.motorola.com/Business/US-EN/Business+Product+and+Services/Mobile+Computers/Rugged+Notebooks/ML910_US-EN) from Motorola has been used in the Operation Desert Storm with success.
I have used NetBSD for the same purposes as yttrstein, I think. For example, my firewall, which uses ipfilter on a bridge interface.
There's not much besides the kernel and the most basic packages. The system fits in a few megabytes and runs from a CF card (a spare 128MB card I had in my old digital camera), no swap.
I don't have any window servers and the only way to access the machine is from a serial console.
This is not the issue. The original timeline specified Vista SP2 being released before 7. The question was if the new release date for Vista SP2 would be set before the release of Windows 7.
Adding to your explanation, Apple still releases updates to Tiger, even after almost 18 months after they released Leopard. It's very important that people running older versions still get fixes...
Sure they can! Can you trust Microsoft when the subject is "deadlines"? The question is not if Vista SP2 will be out before Windows 7. The question is how many weeks, months or years will Windows 7 be delayed!?
Well... I am one of the people here looking at this problem seriously and acknowledging that it does exist, doing tests and stuff.
I am a Mac user, but I am not being a stupid zealot and dismissing the problem as if it's just some minor glitch.
That said, I can now proceed on correcting you.
Itunes, safari, flash and quicktime are on just about 99.9% of Macs out there, between those 4 products there is hardly a day goes by that there isn't a publicly known vulnerability Come on, check the facts! I don't really know jack about Flash bugs, but saying that "hardly a day goes... blah blah" is false. iTunes, Safari and QuickTime have their issues, but you're exagerating.
Slashdot Mirror
Yea, you're right: it's a trademark.
So, like I said, the patent system (USPTO is also responsible for registering trademarks) is a failure. Apple can register "app store", Microsoft can register "Windows", etc.
Since the patent/trademark system keeps existing and working, Apple is in their right to enforce the trademark that was granted to them. If the term was generic, the USPTO shouldn't have granted the trademark in the first place.
And not to mention that there are synonyms for "app store" or that one can come up with different ideas, like Google. They call their application store "Android Marketplace" and it's doing well without "app store" in its name, AFAIK.
I'm just being pedantic here, but some car stereos used a serial connection to control a disc changer...
1. USB already dominates the market.
2. Thunderbolt is a solution for a very specific problem, which not that many users have. Just like Firewire, it has a place in some niches.
3. USB [3.0] and Thunderbolt can co-exist and none of them have to be included in every "mobo" from now on.
And their notion of "expensive" is something like US$10. So, that's why they buy PCs, not Macs.
Well... It's obvious -- not from the effing article, but from reality -- that when Apple patented the term "App Store", the competition didn't give a damn.
Now that Apple got success with their "app[lication] store" and with phrases like "there's an app for that", competition wants to downplay that. They say: we also have "apps", not just Apple.
My point is: it's not about the term being generic; it's about what Apple intended when they started using the term "app" for marketing purposes and patented the derivative term "app store". It's about Apple defending their strategy. The "app store" patent is important for that and the patent was granted, so they have to enforce it.
In the end, all of this only proves that patents are ridiculous. Apple themselves used the "Windows" trademark as an example...
By "both options" I meant:
* Nicer: run cat-5e in the walls, ending in nice 8P8C receptacles;
* Not-as-nice-but-completely-functional: run an off-the-shelf 50-foot patch cord, routed close to the baseboard.
Damn! You just beat me! I was checking before making a Portal or Half Life reference...
Well... I as considering both options. One is nicer, but both are completely functional.
I said it was one of my gripes, but didn't explain it properly. Most people want to use Wi-Fi because they don't want the burden associated with cabling. Also, most of them think that Wi-Fi is newer, better and faster than "traditional" cabled networks, which is almost entirely fictional. Wi-Fi is not a drop-in replacement for cabled Ethernet, and this is my gripe. And I didn't even mention security...
So, I agree with you that an iPhone, Android, iPad or whatever mobile phone or tablet are true mobile devices and need wireless connectivity in order to be used in their intended ways. But, even then, they can't be used without problems, because Wi-Fi -- be it 802.11b or 802.11n -- isn't perfect when used in the 2.4GHz band.
I could say that Wi-Fi is not and never will be perfect, as RF systems are very hard to implement even on licensed bands, where regulatory bodies will try and make sure that the spectrum is used correctly.
Sorry for my attitude, but are you really telling us that you used a Yagi antenna in an indoor environment? That would be kind of insane...
Wi-Fi *is* a nightmare, period. My business provides mobility solutions for the SMB market and we often design wireless networks in industrial environments. The choice of antennas and the power and channel settings on the APs shall be carefully tuned, as to avoid interference from other RF sources, neighboring networks and the reflectivity of the walls and ceilings. It's not easy at all...
That's one of my gripes with Wi-Fi popularization. For example, lots of people use Wi-Fi in small apartments, when Ethernet cabling would do just fine, just because they want to choose to access the web on their couches, kitchen or desk. Caveat: the distance between the kitchen and the couch is often much less than 10 feet.
So, their network is accessible from two stories up or down in the building, because the transmitter power can't be reduced and the AP is transmitting at 20dBm (100mW). At this power level, the attenuation from the walls won't block the signal. In fact, you can get signal through two or three brick walls at this level.
So, if you live in a building in a big city, there's no channel you can use without problems, as the only non-overlapping channels in the 2.4GHz band are 1, 6 and 11. If you can use 802.11a (or 802.11n in the 5.2GHz band), there are more channels to choose from, but most (cheap) equipment and wireless NICs only use the 2.4GHz band!
So, the problem with Wi-Fi is much bigger than "tinfoil-like insulation that may block signals" or other construction materials. It's a technology that isn't simple enough to troubleshoot for the average user. Even most IT personnel don't know enough about RF to set up and troubleshoot a wireless network!
Dude... I don't know what's wrong with that, but that sucker on a skateboard made me laugh my ass off... It was so surreal to the point it was just plain stupid.
I say that as a skateboarder. At the time that movie was released, being on a skateboard wasn't as badass as they intended to mean...
Now, "War Games" is the best "hacker movie" ever made, even when you factor in the supercomputer destruction scene.
mmeister, Blink Tag and SoupIsGoodFood_42,
Can't you see that Gilmoure was being sarcastic?
Pilsen and lager are the most common beers here in Brazil. Basically, they have no taste.
I like IPA, vintage ale, brown ale, schwarzbier, rauchbier, stout... There's a lot to choose from and they're all heavy and tasteful.
Well... I like to drink it pure. I think you call it "cowboy-style" or something like that.
And I never went to college. I dropped out of high-school before finishing it, 14 years ago. And never looked back...
I'll take these advices and try some real bourbon.
In the meantime, I'll stick with my true passion: dark beers.
And, adding to that, the Amazon rainforest is not being destroyed for sugar cane culture. It's for the rare wood, that is used to make furniture which gets exported to the USA and Europe.
Then, they use the "free space" for pasture (cattle) and soybeans. And then they export the meat and soybeans to the USA and Europe.
Oh, and by the way, too much rain is bad for sugar cane culture.
We have "flex-fuel" cars in Brazil for quite some time now and you can mix gasoline and ethanol the way you please without destroying the motor.
So, maybe USA needs better motors, not getting rid of ethanol.
...which is why I drink Scotch. Because it's made from barley while Bourbon is made from corn. It's bad ethanol for drinking too.
I see you're not from Tennessee.
Neither do I, but I love Jack Daniel's. I just don't like that they call it "whiskey", when it's bourbon.
Lucky you. You don't have a sugar cartel controlling supply and jacking up prices like we do.
Yes, we have. This cartel makes ethanol and sugar. When they're losing on the sugar, they jack up alcohol prices and vice-versa.
They employ some of the poorest people in Brazil, who work their asses of for cheap money.
It seems the USA and Brazil are not that different...
Apple's not at the Microsoft level. Remember that hundreds of PC manufacturers are legally selling computers with Windows with and without Microsoft's blessing.
Apple's not at Microsoft "level" when you think about units shipped. There are many ways in which you can compare companies...
Now, I don't get this "with and without Microsoft's blessing" thing. If you're talking about small stores that sell custom-built computers with a copy of Windows, they are doing it with Microsoft's blessing, because they can sell an OEM version with a mobo or hard disk.
I can only equate the expression "without Microsoft's blessing" with "piracy". Is that what you really mean?
There is an open and competitive market for PCs and PC components, keeping prices low and pushing innovation forward.
I also don't get this. The PC manufacturers don't really innovate in technology that much, not even Apple. Aside from the multitouch stuff and industrial design, there isn't much to see. And Apple has been better than any other PC manufacturer in this, IMHO.
The PC component manufacturers, on the other hand, show some real innovation. For example, AMD and NVidia are releasing better GPU's almost every month! In the CPU front, AMD also fights Intel and it's a very intense fight, as I see. Synaptics created the iPod's click wheel. Some other companies have some very advanced multitouch technologies. Apple and other PC manufacturers just use these technologies.
But, even then, I don't see that many innovators. There are two or three big contenders for any kind of PC component. I don't really think that RealTek, for example, really matter in the network controller chips market. Atheros and Broadcom beat the hell out of them, single-handedly. So, these non-innovators only help to drive prices down. It's good, but having a lot of different suppliers doesn't mean shit to innovation. In the end, all that matters are the good ones.
Even though Windows is non-free and closed-source software, it has still created a vast hardware ecosystem with low barriers to entry.
Windows did not create this market. DOS was there long before and you can't really blame it all on Microsoft. IBM was there to define the hardware platform. It's very well known history for any slashdotter.
Nobody can say this about Apple, who are still working to the 1960s proprietary hardware business model, and still behaving as if the PC revolution never happened.
You can't say that about Apple, because it has nothing to do with them. Standardized hardware platforms and licensing software to 3rd parties is not Apple's business model. It never was and never will be, I think. And they seem to be going pretty well with their "closed ecosystem" business model.
About the PC revolution, it's arguable. The true revolution will happen when computers are really easy to use and don't get in the way of the user, like a toaster, refrigerator or microwave oven. No one pulled it as of yet.
I second that... Itronix (now part of General Dynamics) and Motorola are pioneers in this kind of product. They have been offering fully rugged notebooks for years.
These notebooks can stand sand storms, rain, 5 or 6-feet drops and extreme temperatures. They're mainly used in government applications, like public safety and the like. I've heard the ML900 (http://www.motorola.com/Business/US-EN/Business+Product+and+Services/Mobile+Computers/Rugged+Notebooks/ML910_US-EN) from Motorola has been used in the Operation Desert Storm with success.
It's a very niche-specific product, though.
I second the "small and stable" argument.
I have used NetBSD for the same purposes as yttrstein, I think. For example, my firewall, which uses ipfilter on a bridge interface.
There's not much besides the kernel and the most basic packages. The system fits in a few megabytes and runs from a CF card (a spare 128MB card I had in my old digital camera), no swap.
I don't have any window servers and the only way to access the machine is from a serial console.
Works like a charm: over 2 years uptime now.
This is not the issue. The original timeline specified Vista SP2 being released before 7. The question was if the new release date for Vista SP2 would be set before the release of Windows 7.
Adding to your explanation, Apple still releases updates to Tiger, even after almost 18 months after they released Leopard. It's very important that people running older versions still get fixes...
Sure they can! Can you trust Microsoft when the subject is "deadlines"? The question is not if Vista SP2 will be out before Windows 7. The question is how many weeks, months or years will Windows 7 be delayed!?
So, can someone explain to me how an exploit can get root of there's no root account?
Simple: the root account exists by default. It's not accessible and you can't log-in with it by default. But it's there.I am a Mac user, but I am not being a stupid zealot and dismissing the problem as if it's just some minor glitch.
That said, I can now proceed on correcting you. Itunes, safari, flash and quicktime are on just about 99.9% of Macs out there, between those 4 products there is hardly a day goes by that there isn't a publicly known vulnerability Come on, check the facts! I don't really know jack about Flash bugs, but saying that "hardly a day goes... blah blah" is false. iTunes, Safari and QuickTime have their issues, but you're exagerating.