Sorry to be snippy, but I've been breaking my back on this article and 90% of the criticisms are from people who haven't even read the damn thing (not you, but... people...)
The article is good for a solid "power UNIX user" but in writing such an article you're being ignorant of the 99% of the population that would rather purchase refined/supported commercial software rather then digging around for freeware.
I am a true "power user". I need programs such as Final Cut Pro, Logic, Pro Tools, Microsoft Office, Photoshop, Quark, In Design, Illustrator, Flash MX, Quicken, DVD Studio Pro, etc. Being introduced to linux in 1996 I had anticipated that Linux would have similar apps available by at least 2001 so I could quit using windows. I HATED macs due to the confinements in Mac OS 9 (and prior). I wanted a unix option so I could continue my unix development and navigations in the shells, but needed the professional apps. Once i caught wind of Mac OSX which would bring the professional apps into a UNIX environment I salivated. It was everything I wanted.
I now have been using Macs since about 2001 or 2002. I forget when I switched over. But ever since the switch to mac I have more time then ever to do my hobbies away from the computer instead of spending time fussing over maintenance of my machines. I can buy a new mac and have it up and running out of the box with the apps I need in almost no time at all. I never have questions of compatibility or stability, it just works.
Sure, I have to pay $20 for an app here or there (Transmit by panic.com is an amazing sftp/ftp app, colloque is a great irc chat app, mac the ripper does the trick and "password repository" by pomola.com is fabulous) and I pay for commercial softwares to remain competitive and stable. But the alternative of being on Windows and rebuilding my machine constantly (ghost helps, but come on!) or being on Linux and digging for "free software" and updates regularly is a waste of time for a professional.
You seem impressed that you spent your 30 days writing up how you felt about OSX, but being ignorant to other parties other than yourself is very adolescent and selfish. Wake up, the world is bigger than you.
There's something this guy failed to mention, maybe because it completely blows his argument out of the water. But for people like me that have been gaming for a long time, we know the answer.
Mutli-Disc games. Yes that's right, Final Fantasy did it, so did many other games.
Sure you've got to put a lot of redundant data in there but acting like you're limited to 1 disc per game is a straw man argument. Need more space? Add more discs. Simple. Something you've forgotten is that when trying to "make money" you want to keep costs down. One of the most expensive costs is manufacturing and packaging. If you are stuck to multi-disc distribution for your game you will be eating profits because you couldn't squeeze it into one disc. I'd imagine the company FUNDING the game would rather make the mpegs a little more gritty and the sound quality more compressed rather than expand to a second or third disc.
I don't imagine microsoft to care too much about these numbers. Eventually everyone will be running vista either because they bought a new machine and that's what it came with OR because microsoft will drop service packs for previous winnt, win2k, winxp.
I'm just pointing out the lack of consistency in application of antitrust laws. I am perfectly capable of installing/uninstalling any browser from any OS.
Uh, are you seriously comparing "Safari" being preloaded to "Internet Explorer" being preloaded in windows? Safari is an "application", it's not embedded into the other applications nor does it break anything to remove it. Removing components of Internet Explorer in windows completely blows up the machine and renders several other components useless. Very very different.
Both governments say they are trying to wean state agencies from Microsoft's proprietary Windows to the open-source Linux operating system, which is developed by a global community of programmers who freely share their code.
I think GNU projects are great and linux has become a huge success in the server market especially on a corporate level. I would venture to say that linux is doing BETTER in the commercial environments then it is in the free world. While Linux claims to be "free" I think it's fascinating at how much money goes into Linux development and commercial support. I recall IBM investing millions into Linux, let alone the cost of commercials promoting the brand at the super bowl a few years ago.
Sure, the Richard Stallman's of the world might neglect IBM's contributions (and other funding) but think about this. Without IBM doing commercials trying to show how great Linux is, how could they pitch using Linux to their fortune 500 companies if they just thought it was a bunch of free stuff thrown together?
I have always loved GNU Linux and everything around it. But it is anything but "free". The only thing "free" in regaurds to Linux is the license states that nobody can sell a product containing code or compilations of the code and derivatives of the code have to be available to the public. I believe all the major Linux developers are all hired by some sort of corporation being paid to work on the GNU project. Such as Red Hat or IBM or Novell. Honestly, how many "free" developers are actually out there doing things for "free" for Linux?
About 10 years ago I felt that linux was 5 years away from taking over commercial offerings from Microsoft. Ironically, instead of Linux being ready around 2002 it was Mac OSX which derived from the BSD family. And at that time I thought Linux was still about 5 years away from taking over commercial offereings, but I believe that Linux has now found it's place and will stay where it is.
Commercial vendors love Linux servers. This is where the money is, this is where the focus will be and will stay. I have and will always love Linux as a server, but please don't claim it's free. RedHat Linux SERVER platforms are one of the most expensive operating systems available. Support contracts are expensive and the initial licenses are way expensive. Much much much more expensive than Microsoft Windows, Mac OSX, Solaris, AIX, and HP-UX. Especially since when you buy the hardware from most vendors it includes an included software license of either Solaris, AIX, or HP-UX.
How long has Vista BETAs been available to developers? Why was this not discovered until vista launched?
A similar thing happened when I updated to Mac OSX 10.4 (Tiger). My VPN software I use to get into work was not "tiger compatible" for almost 5 months. I didn't blame Apple for this, this was the fault of the developers of the software not staying ontop of the game. Their excuse was that they do not develop on beta versions of an operating system because things tend to change too frequently for the final launch. So it was more efficient for them to wait for the final release of the OS and then begin development.
I suppose that makes sense for a small time company like Nortel, but not for a shop like Apple. They should have put this release out while testing with Vista betas.
Goodness.... Everyone replied to my post bagging on it saying how bad windows sucks too. What about Mac OSX? I have had several grandpa's and grandma's who have purchased mac laptops and have had been running ever since they bought it. upgrades and all.
Ever since 1994 I've been saying, "Linux isn't ready today, but it will be in about 5 years." How is it that linux always stays about 5 years behind commercial offerings such as MacOSX and Windows?
One can argue that linux is far superior to Windows or MacOSX to just about anyone and how they have their grandma using linux, but the reality is that without someone totally tech savvy sitting there behind this "grandma" and practically doing everything for her, she wouldn't be using it. I guarantee the stories about "grandma" using linux are begin with, "I put my grandma's computer together and installed linux for her and set it all up perfect for her. She uses it no problem."
Give me a story where grandma bought a computer and installed linux and has it running for a few years without any problems, then we'll talk.
So the $499 / $599 isn't subsidized, so why the hell are people going to be stuck in 2 year contracts? So they get a phone for a primium price AND locked into a 2 year contract. Doesn't make any sense, one or the other.
Being the father of websphere, I would imagine this guy to have his run of it and full of corporate burnout. He's looking for a job with less responsibilities to where he can be in a room and give a bunch of ideas and tell others to execute. Collect his cash and go home. He's going to work 9am - 4pm four days a week max and be sitting pretty.
Liken it unto Emit Smith taking a possition at the Cardnials to finish his carrer. It's easy money, it's a day job, like taking candy from a baby.
The Apple product hasn't been released yet. Being that they "announced" a product with a name, it's not for sale yet. So technically no damage has been done YET. So Apple probably figured that the negotiations with the iPhone trademark would be resolved prior to release date of the product which is sometime in JUNE!
The part that Cisco is pissed about is the fact that apple's iPhone isn't compatible with the cisco iPhone family of products. Apple wanted just the name, not the technology, so cisco is pissed.
Makes sense to me. Apple should have just called it "?Phone" (Apple Phone) like iTV went to ?TV because of existing iTV products on the market. And mind you, being the product is currently VAPORWARE until June, it still could.
I have had the most fun on the 360, followed very closely by the Wii and I have had NO fun with any of the PS3 games. Sony has already lost this war, and everyone knows it.
Boy oh boy. You obviously know nothing about these consoles. The XBox is a powerful machine, but the PS3 is THREE times more powerful. Sure, the games are currently "alright" on the PS3. But you have to consider, you can play just about all the PS2 games on the PS3 and the XBOX 360 has been out for an entire year. You're basing who's going to win based on what's currently out for XBox 360 to what's out for PS3. Comparing a year's running to a new launch is ridiculous. You hold onto that PS3, you watch. That thing is going to be putting that XBox 360 to shame. If anyone is to blame is you for running out and buying a launch console expecting it to have more amazing games then a console that has an entire year's worth of titles out for it.
Pressing ENTER in finder is to rename a file. To execute something or open something press CMD+DOWN ARROW to open something. CMD+UP ARROW to go up a directory.
Well, where there's dark, there's light. In otherwords, connect the continents with a few huge long cables and have collectors in each time zone to help carry the weight.
Think it's insane to drag long cables across continents? Read about the Transaltlantic Cable sometime.. Huh, maybe there's enough old copper still connecting the continents already to not have to run any new wires? That'd make it even easier!
People tend to buy into the whole branding thing. People aren't as clear as Mac or PC users. People are either a DELL user or GATEWAY or HP or APPLE or IBM or Toshiba or ETC. Apple has always been the leader in the creative world. Technology of today is allowing even average people to become more creative. With more average people thinking they're creative, this will drive people to buy the 'creative platform of choice'. A mac.
It would seem a few years ago I was the only mac user in my group of friends. It now seems every single one of my friends has either a mac in ADDITION to their PC or have exchanged their PCs for Macs. These are interesting times. I only HATE microsoft because I used to lead a life of tech support for my job and friends and family. Friends and family always used to come to me to help them with their myrid of problems. Every incompetent windows user has a somewhat savey techie behind them formating their drive, installing windows, cleaing up viruses, installing programs, fixing things, etc. I got sick of being that person. I tell people now to buy macs. They buy a mac and generally just use their computer to get things done. No more fuss.
[rant]
If microsoft can ever prove to me that their applications can do what they promise then I will jump on the microsoft bandwagon. Prove to me that updates will no longer crash my machine, prove to me that re-installing my operating system (which seems to occur frequently with microsoft) isn't going to take 2 hours of loading and 4 more hours of installing fixes -- patches -- updates -- combined with 35 reboots. It's the reboots that are so dang painful. To click on a patch and watch all the other patches you just clicked all go 'grey' and have a dialog box pop up that says, "Sorry, this patch has to be installed individually." BUT EVERY PATCH has to be installed individually. What the hell? Prove to me that your operating system can run for 2 years without having to be reinstalled for some random reason to get the speed of the machine back to what it used to be.
[sigh] . . . [/sigh]
My beef with microsoft is real and valid. I have now been running a mac exclusively for just around 4 years now. My latest mac is about 1 or 2 years old. I got it from the apple store pre-loaded with OSX 10.4. I have yet to re-install it. Has run perfect just as expected this whole time. Sure, a mac has it's qwerks, but if you're sick of microsoft, the apple qwerks are much fewer and far between than dealing with microsoft's.
I am so sick of Microsoft's operating systems and pointless OFFICE upgrades forcing corporate america's hands into wasting money on software and hardware resulting in firing REAL EMPLOYEES that actually give value to the business. Ever since Windows 2000 and Office 97 I haven't seen any significant reason for anyone to upgrade the operating system or office. The only reason people upgrade office is because microsoft gets away with making the new versions of their office documents backwards incompatible. This upgrade is "easy" for corporate america which then affects personal and small business because they can't open excel or word documents from the "big boys" making them have to spend the $350 to upgrade.
As far as anything beyond Windows 2000, there is little to no reason for any corporation to upgrade from windows 98se or Windows 2000 OTHER THAN virus and security patch support from microsoft and other third parties. Microsoft has not felt any squeeze ever since being declaired a 'MONOPOLY'. One of the results of this verdict should be that they should have to maintain SECURITY PATCHES for previous versions of windows and make their FORWARD PRODUCTS of office backwards compatible BY DEFAULT not by choice.
Please, make the maddness stop! Do not upgrade your hardware just to hand over more money to microsoft.
Look into Macs, Look into Linux, anything than giving more money to microsoft. All they do with their money is grow and intrude and ruin more markets. (ie. Zune, XBox 360)
You think microsoft has really "innovated and expanded" the markets they have intruded? HECK NO!
Look at the current game console market. Ever since the XBOX now there are hardly any "exclusive console" titles, everyone makes games that are genericly engineered for ALL the consoles. They don't spend the time focusing releases on a single console any more. Game developers don't want to limit their customer base so they make their game's graphics and controls generic to port to all consoles. In the end this affects the consumers poorly because the games are all kinda "BLAH". Sure, microsot has helped bring some great first person shooters (halo) to the world, BUT that game was already being developed for the PS2 PRIOR to Microsoft purchasing the title and making them reengineer the game instead of finish it up as good as it was going to be. Halo would have been BETTER if microsoft wasn't in the picture. imagine that.
Some ideas are good and are adopted by both, some fall by the wayside. I don't look in my garage at my Ford and my Toyota and freak out; "OMG! Both Vehicles have 4 wheels, 4 doors, and a steering wheel! The Toyota must be copyng the Ford!" It's just natural evolution. That's the best way to do stuff
I actually know an engineer that worked for a major car manufacturer. He told me a story at how in the 60s they came out with a way to make the car quieter with attaching diffuser type things on the frame. Well, some how from design to assembly the diffusers were actually installed incorrectly but the entire line that year remained with the incorrect installation of the diffusers on the frame. They fixed the problem in the following year's assembly but when they did their routine purchase and disassemble of a competitor's vehicle they noticed they had been copied exactly, even to the extent of installing the diffusers incorrectly on the frame.
In the case of APPLE vs Microsoft it's not hard to see who is copying who. If you look at the history of "Windows", some of the best pieces were created by 3rd parties and purchased by Microsoft. ie. DOS, Citrix Remote Desktop, etc. Microsoft has been a viable contender in the market mostly because their software had worked on "cheep hardware". It has never been a question of which operating system was more refined or "better" for various tasks. The honest answer is each operating system has it's place. Windows has still been my "gaming platform" of choice and do not use it for anything but gaming since I switched to Mac. Hopefully the XBOX or PS3 will be powerful enough that I can get rid of the crash prone, virus infested, re-install every 6 months windows machine for good.
That's my non-biased opinion. =)
But all kidding asside I really think we're at a critical juncture where we will see some radical changes. Vista no longer is the "poor man's OS". It's too fat and slow. It can't run on anything less than an expensive system. Mac's now run windows beautifully. People have the option to buy a mac to "try it" and then if they don't like it, use it as a Windows Vista machine. From microsoft's perspective you would think they don't care if you buy vista to install on your mac, but they probably do. They don't want you to play around with MacOSX too long or you get used to it and unafraid of the differences.
The number one reason people don't buy macs is because they're afraid to have to relearn everything or be incomptable. Get people comfortable with the new environment and they realize it aint so bad then they stop booting into windows. Then from then on the next version of Windows comes out and they don't even flinch to purchase it... Obviously this is why Microsoft is removing the "VB Scripting" from the next version of Office for Mac. I honestly believe that with the whole "monopoly status" of microsoft, they should have to justify a reason of REMOVING functionality from a product that has been there for years. This is the first step for microsoft to try to break compatibility further to secure their investment.
Crazy times.... apple on intel, apple assisting to boot into windows, microsoft butchering their flagship OFFICE product, bluray vs hddvd, dogs and cats living together, etc... crazy times.
How long do you think it will take for myspace to go the way of napster? Going from something 'rogue' and home grown, to then shut down by some lawsuit, purchased by some corporate structure thinking they could rescue it and regulate it and bring it back?
I saw this situation creeping up on me pretty heavily. I was doing a lot at work, and I'd come home to relax to a slew of friend's and family computers that needed care. I found the best way to deter friend's and family was by giving them recommendations to buy expensive "complete" systems with support contracts. Everyone is looking for a FREEBE or a "deal". As soon as I recommended people to buy mac with "apple care" or Dell systems with support contracts they stopped calling.
Sure, this seems heartless or selfish, but the truth is those higher end systems were every bit as good as whatever I could build for them, and not all that much more expensive. In the end they were more happy and thanked me because they had more time to use their computers.
In trying to keep this a non-biased post I will interject just one last observation. The people that I recommended to buy macs and did are still using the same computers from three years ago and are still happy. The ones that went with dell most all got tons of viruses and had a lot of support calls, not quite as happy, but it was their choice.
I would switch in a heartbeat IF and ONLY IF the Tivo was a DUAL Tuner Tivo. I already use COX for internet but I CHOOSE to pay more for COX internet because I want to continue using the DirecTV Dual Tuner Tivo that I have grown to love. A single tuner Tivo doesn't cover the real needs of the lame network programming. They all try to compete with the best timeslots. Without the dual tuner you can't get all the main shows recorded.
But if they were to make the dual tuner TIVO happen with Cox' service. I would be there in a heartbeat and give up DirecTV.
I work for a pretty major company doing the unix stuff, but you wouldn't believe the trouble our windows guys have installing a fresh machine. We have a big enough company that there are rogue viruses running throughout the company on various people's laptops or even servers that haven't had patches on them or whatever. Viruses do not only come in from the outside through the "firewalls" any more. Any network that allows laptop computers that come in and out of the office are going to bring their dirty laundry right through the front door. Sure, they do their best to keep them off, but they "sneek in".
When the windows guys go to install a fresh copy of Windows 2000 on a box connected to our network, you can gaurentee that machine has a virus before they can install the patches on the machine. They typically install the box off the network and then 'sneeker net' the service packs and other patches onto the machine before plugging it into the network.
Protecting the machine from the outside is not the only concern. Sorry fellas, his complaint is legit.
Slashdot Mirror
The article is good for a solid "power UNIX user" but in writing such an article you're being ignorant of the 99% of the population that would rather purchase refined/supported commercial software rather then digging around for freeware.
I am a true "power user". I need programs such as Final Cut Pro, Logic, Pro Tools, Microsoft Office, Photoshop, Quark, In Design, Illustrator, Flash MX, Quicken, DVD Studio Pro, etc. Being introduced to linux in 1996 I had anticipated that Linux would have similar apps available by at least 2001 so I could quit using windows. I HATED macs due to the confinements in Mac OS 9 (and prior). I wanted a unix option so I could continue my unix development and navigations in the shells, but needed the professional apps. Once i caught wind of Mac OSX which would bring the professional apps into a UNIX environment I salivated. It was everything I wanted.
I now have been using Macs since about 2001 or 2002. I forget when I switched over. But ever since the switch to mac I have more time then ever to do my hobbies away from the computer instead of spending time fussing over maintenance of my machines. I can buy a new mac and have it up and running out of the box with the apps I need in almost no time at all. I never have questions of compatibility or stability, it just works.
Sure, I have to pay $20 for an app here or there (Transmit by panic.com is an amazing sftp/ftp app, colloque is a great irc chat app, mac the ripper does the trick and "password repository" by pomola.com is fabulous) and I pay for commercial softwares to remain competitive and stable. But the alternative of being on Windows and rebuilding my machine constantly (ghost helps, but come on!) or being on Linux and digging for "free software" and updates regularly is a waste of time for a professional.
You seem impressed that you spent your 30 days writing up how you felt about OSX, but being ignorant to other parties other than yourself is very adolescent and selfish. Wake up, the world is bigger than you.
Mutli-Disc games. Yes that's right, Final Fantasy did it, so did many other games.
Sure you've got to put a lot of redundant data in there but acting like you're limited to 1 disc per game is a straw man argument. Need more space? Add more discs. Simple. Something you've forgotten is that when trying to "make money" you want to keep costs down. One of the most expensive costs is manufacturing and packaging. If you are stuck to multi-disc distribution for your game you will be eating profits because you couldn't squeeze it into one disc. I'd imagine the company FUNDING the game would rather make the mpegs a little more gritty and the sound quality more compressed rather than expand to a second or third disc.
I don't imagine microsoft to care too much about these numbers. Eventually everyone will be running vista either because they bought a new machine and that's what it came with OR because microsoft will drop service packs for previous winnt, win2k, winxp.
I think GNU projects are great and linux has become a huge success in the server market especially on a corporate level. I would venture to say that linux is doing BETTER in the commercial environments then it is in the free world. While Linux claims to be "free" I think it's fascinating at how much money goes into Linux development and commercial support. I recall IBM investing millions into Linux, let alone the cost of commercials promoting the brand at the super bowl a few years ago.
Sure, the Richard Stallman's of the world might neglect IBM's contributions (and other funding) but think about this. Without IBM doing commercials trying to show how great Linux is, how could they pitch using Linux to their fortune 500 companies if they just thought it was a bunch of free stuff thrown together?
I have always loved GNU Linux and everything around it. But it is anything but "free". The only thing "free" in regaurds to Linux is the license states that nobody can sell a product containing code or compilations of the code and derivatives of the code have to be available to the public. I believe all the major Linux developers are all hired by some sort of corporation being paid to work on the GNU project. Such as Red Hat or IBM or Novell. Honestly, how many "free" developers are actually out there doing things for "free" for Linux?
About 10 years ago I felt that linux was 5 years away from taking over commercial offerings from Microsoft. Ironically, instead of Linux being ready around 2002 it was Mac OSX which derived from the BSD family. And at that time I thought Linux was still about 5 years away from taking over commercial offereings, but I believe that Linux has now found it's place and will stay where it is.
Commercial vendors love Linux servers. This is where the money is, this is where the focus will be and will stay. I have and will always love Linux as a server, but please don't claim it's free. RedHat Linux SERVER platforms are one of the most expensive operating systems available. Support contracts are expensive and the initial licenses are way expensive. Much much much more expensive than Microsoft Windows, Mac OSX, Solaris, AIX, and HP-UX. Especially since when you buy the hardware from most vendors it includes an included software license of either Solaris, AIX, or HP-UX.
How long has Vista BETAs been available to developers? Why was this not discovered until vista launched?
A similar thing happened when I updated to Mac OSX 10.4 (Tiger). My VPN software I use to get into work was not "tiger compatible" for almost 5 months. I didn't blame Apple for this, this was the fault of the developers of the software not staying ontop of the game. Their excuse was that they do not develop on beta versions of an operating system because things tend to change too frequently for the final launch. So it was more efficient for them to wait for the final release of the OS and then begin development.
I suppose that makes sense for a small time company like Nortel, but not for a shop like Apple. They should have put this release out while testing with Vista betas.
Goodness .... Everyone replied to my post bagging on it saying how bad windows sucks too. What about Mac OSX? I have had several grandpa's and grandma's who have purchased mac laptops and have had been running ever since they bought it. upgrades and all.
Ever since 1994 I've been saying, "Linux isn't ready today, but it will be in about 5 years." How is it that linux always stays about 5 years behind commercial offerings such as MacOSX and Windows?
One can argue that linux is far superior to Windows or MacOSX to just about anyone and how they have their grandma using linux, but the reality is that without someone totally tech savvy sitting there behind this "grandma" and practically doing everything for her, she wouldn't be using it. I guarantee the stories about "grandma" using linux are begin with, "I put my grandma's computer together and installed linux for her and set it all up perfect for her. She uses it no problem."
Give me a story where grandma bought a computer and installed linux and has it running for a few years without any problems, then we'll talk.
So the $499 / $599 isn't subsidized, so why the hell are people going to be stuck in 2 year contracts? So they get a phone for a primium price AND locked into a 2 year contract. Doesn't make any sense, one or the other.
Being the father of websphere, I would imagine this guy to have his run of it and full of corporate burnout. He's looking for a job with less responsibilities to where he can be in a room and give a bunch of ideas and tell others to execute. Collect his cash and go home. He's going to work 9am - 4pm four days a week max and be sitting pretty.
Liken it unto Emit Smith taking a possition at the Cardnials to finish his carrer. It's easy money, it's a day job, like taking candy from a baby.
The Apple product hasn't been released yet. Being that they "announced" a product with a name, it's not for sale yet. So technically no damage has been done YET. So Apple probably figured that the negotiations with the iPhone trademark would be resolved prior to release date of the product which is sometime in JUNE!
The part that Cisco is pissed about is the fact that apple's iPhone isn't compatible with the cisco iPhone family of products. Apple wanted just the name, not the technology, so cisco is pissed.
Makes sense to me. Apple should have just called it "?Phone" (Apple Phone) like iTV went to ?TV because of existing iTV products on the market. And mind you, being the product is currently VAPORWARE until June, it still could.
Boy oh boy. You obviously know nothing about these consoles. The XBox is a powerful machine, but the PS3 is THREE times more powerful. Sure, the games are currently "alright" on the PS3. But you have to consider, you can play just about all the PS2 games on the PS3 and the XBOX 360 has been out for an entire year. You're basing who's going to win based on what's currently out for XBox 360 to what's out for PS3. Comparing a year's running to a new launch is ridiculous. You hold onto that PS3, you watch. That thing is going to be putting that XBox 360 to shame. If anyone is to blame is you for running out and buying a launch console expecting it to have more amazing games then a console that has an entire year's worth of titles out for it.
And for the record, read this DEVELOPER's Viewpoint of which console is going to win. This was posted on slashdot not too long ago.
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061222/adams_
Pressing ENTER in finder is to rename a file. To execute something or open something press CMD+DOWN ARROW to open something. CMD+UP ARROW to go up a directory.
I think this is one of the first times a video game soundtrack is actually in iTunes....
/ viewAlbum?id=193140985&s=143441
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa
Well, where there's dark, there's light. In otherwords, connect the continents with a few huge long cables and have collectors in each time zone to help carry the weight.
Think it's insane to drag long cables across continents? Read about the Transaltlantic Cable sometime.. Huh, maybe there's enough old copper still connecting the continents already to not have to run any new wires? That'd make it even easier!
The thing that is interesting to me is looking at not just the market share, but the market sales.
8 .html
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061019-802
It goes DELL, HP, GATEWAY, then APPLE.
People tend to buy into the whole branding thing. People aren't as clear as Mac or PC users. People are either a DELL user or GATEWAY or HP or APPLE or IBM or Toshiba or ETC. Apple has always been the leader in the creative world. Technology of today is allowing even average people to become more creative. With more average people thinking they're creative, this will drive people to buy the 'creative platform of choice'. A mac.
It would seem a few years ago I was the only mac user in my group of friends. It now seems every single one of my friends has either a mac in ADDITION to their PC or have exchanged their PCs for Macs. These are interesting times. I only HATE microsoft because I used to lead a life of tech support for my job and friends and family. Friends and family always used to come to me to help them with their myrid of problems. Every incompetent windows user has a somewhat savey techie behind them formating their drive, installing windows, cleaing up viruses, installing programs, fixing things, etc. I got sick of being that person. I tell people now to buy macs. They buy a mac and generally just use their computer to get things done. No more fuss.
[rant]
If microsoft can ever prove to me that their applications can do what they promise then I will jump on the microsoft bandwagon. Prove to me that updates will no longer crash my machine, prove to me that re-installing my operating system (which seems to occur frequently with microsoft) isn't going to take 2 hours of loading and 4 more hours of installing fixes -- patches -- updates -- combined with 35 reboots. It's the reboots that are so dang painful. To click on a patch and watch all the other patches you just clicked all go 'grey' and have a dialog box pop up that says, "Sorry, this patch has to be installed individually." BUT EVERY PATCH has to be installed individually. What the hell? Prove to me that your operating system can run for 2 years without having to be reinstalled for some random reason to get the speed of the machine back to what it used to be.
[sigh] . . . [/sigh]
My beef with microsoft is real and valid. I have now been running a mac exclusively for just around 4 years now. My latest mac is about 1 or 2 years old. I got it from the apple store pre-loaded with OSX 10.4. I have yet to re-install it. Has run perfect just as expected this whole time. Sure, a mac has it's qwerks, but if you're sick of microsoft, the apple qwerks are much fewer and far between than dealing with microsoft's.
[/rant]
I am so sick of Microsoft's operating systems and pointless OFFICE upgrades forcing corporate america's hands into wasting money on software and hardware resulting in firing REAL EMPLOYEES that actually give value to the business. Ever since Windows 2000 and Office 97 I haven't seen any significant reason for anyone to upgrade the operating system or office. The only reason people upgrade office is because microsoft gets away with making the new versions of their office documents backwards incompatible. This upgrade is "easy" for corporate america which then affects personal and small business because they can't open excel or word documents from the "big boys" making them have to spend the $350 to upgrade.
As far as anything beyond Windows 2000, there is little to no reason for any corporation to upgrade from windows 98se or Windows 2000 OTHER THAN virus and security patch support from microsoft and other third parties. Microsoft has not felt any squeeze ever since being declaired a 'MONOPOLY'. One of the results of this verdict should be that they should have to maintain SECURITY PATCHES for previous versions of windows and make their FORWARD PRODUCTS of office backwards compatible BY DEFAULT not by choice.
Please, make the maddness stop! Do not upgrade your hardware just to hand over more money to microsoft.
Look into Macs, Look into Linux, anything than giving more money to microsoft. All they do with their money is grow and intrude and ruin more markets. (ie. Zune, XBox 360)
You think microsoft has really "innovated and expanded" the markets they have intruded? HECK NO!
Look at the current game console market. Ever since the XBOX now there are hardly any "exclusive console" titles, everyone makes games that are genericly engineered for ALL the consoles. They don't spend the time focusing releases on a single console any more. Game developers don't want to limit their customer base so they make their game's graphics and controls generic to port to all consoles. In the end this affects the consumers poorly because the games are all kinda "BLAH". Sure, microsot has helped bring some great first person shooters (halo) to the world, BUT that game was already being developed for the PS2 PRIOR to Microsoft purchasing the title and making them reengineer the game instead of finish it up as good as it was going to be. Halo would have been BETTER if microsoft wasn't in the picture. imagine that.
I actually know an engineer that worked for a major car manufacturer. He told me a story at how in the 60s they came out with a way to make the car quieter with attaching diffuser type things on the frame. Well, some how from design to assembly the diffusers were actually installed incorrectly but the entire line that year remained with the incorrect installation of the diffusers on the frame. They fixed the problem in the following year's assembly but when they did their routine purchase and disassemble of a competitor's vehicle they noticed they had been copied exactly, even to the extent of installing the diffusers incorrectly on the frame.
In the case of APPLE vs Microsoft it's not hard to see who is copying who. If you look at the history of "Windows", some of the best pieces were created by 3rd parties and purchased by Microsoft. ie. DOS, Citrix Remote Desktop, etc. Microsoft has been a viable contender in the market mostly because their software had worked on "cheep hardware". It has never been a question of which operating system was more refined or "better" for various tasks. The honest answer is each operating system has it's place. Windows has still been my "gaming platform" of choice and do not use it for anything but gaming since I switched to Mac. Hopefully the XBOX or PS3 will be powerful enough that I can get rid of the crash prone, virus infested, re-install every 6 months windows machine for good.
That's my non-biased opinion. =)
But all kidding asside I really think we're at a critical juncture where we will see some radical changes. Vista no longer is the "poor man's OS". It's too fat and slow. It can't run on anything less than an expensive system. Mac's now run windows beautifully. People have the option to buy a mac to "try it" and then if they don't like it, use it as a Windows Vista machine. From microsoft's perspective you would think they don't care if you buy vista to install on your mac, but they probably do. They don't want you to play around with MacOSX too long or you get used to it and unafraid of the differences.
The number one reason people don't buy macs is because they're afraid to have to relearn everything or be incomptable. Get people comfortable with the new environment and they realize it aint so bad then they stop booting into windows. Then from then on the next version of Windows comes out and they don't even flinch to purchase it... Obviously this is why Microsoft is removing the "VB Scripting" from the next version of Office for Mac. I honestly believe that with the whole "monopoly status" of microsoft, they should have to justify a reason of REMOVING functionality from a product that has been there for years. This is the first step for microsoft to try to break compatibility further to secure their investment.
Crazy times .... apple on intel, apple assisting to boot into windows, microsoft butchering their flagship OFFICE product, bluray vs hddvd, dogs and cats living together, etc... crazy times.
HAHAHHA, EXACTLY! I thought this movie's technical stuff rocked, but dialog, script, story, just didn't work.
How long do you think it will take for myspace to go the way of napster? Going from something 'rogue' and home grown, to then shut down by some lawsuit, purchased by some corporate structure thinking they could rescue it and regulate it and bring it back?
Sure, this seems heartless or selfish, but the truth is those higher end systems were every bit as good as whatever I could build for them, and not all that much more expensive. In the end they were more happy and thanked me because they had more time to use their computers.
In trying to keep this a non-biased post I will interject just one last observation. The people that I recommended to buy macs and did are still using the same computers from three years ago and are still happy. The ones that went with dell most all got tons of viruses and had a lot of support calls, not quite as happy, but it was their choice.
I would switch in a heartbeat IF and ONLY IF the Tivo was a DUAL Tuner Tivo. I already use COX for internet but I CHOOSE to pay more for COX internet because I want to continue using the DirecTV Dual Tuner Tivo that I have grown to love. A single tuner Tivo doesn't cover the real needs of the lame network programming. They all try to compete with the best timeslots. Without the dual tuner you can't get all the main shows recorded.
But if they were to make the dual tuner TIVO happen with Cox' service. I would be there in a heartbeat and give up DirecTV.
I work for a pretty major company doing the unix stuff, but you wouldn't believe the trouble our windows guys have installing a fresh machine. We have a big enough company that there are rogue viruses running throughout the company on various people's laptops or even servers that haven't had patches on them or whatever. Viruses do not only come in from the outside through the "firewalls" any more. Any network that allows laptop computers that come in and out of the office are going to bring their dirty laundry right through the front door. Sure, they do their best to keep them off, but they "sneek in".
When the windows guys go to install a fresh copy of Windows 2000 on a box connected to our network, you can gaurentee that machine has a virus before they can install the patches on the machine. They typically install the box off the network and then 'sneeker net' the service packs and other patches onto the machine before plugging it into the network.
Protecting the machine from the outside is not the only concern. Sorry fellas, his complaint is legit.
That's pretty intense. It looks kinda' faked cause of the cuts but real enough to believe it.
Mod parent up.