In the Apple LawSuit department
on
Mac Rants
·
· Score: 1
c|net is reporting that Apple is letting the mole they caught "worker bee" off the hook pretty lightly
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-6804697.html
"Hubbard said he'll work to see that what he learns at Apple about software, such as user interface design, is applied to FreeBSD. And
he hopes there will be cooperation between Apple and FreeBSD on subjects such as support for Universal Serial Bus and Firewire, two
methods for plugging peripherals such as digital cameras into computers."
http://investor.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0- 9900-1028-6384175-0.html?tag=pt.yahoo.fin..ne
The Human genome may lend credibility to "evolution" but can have nothing to say about how evolution occurs. Evolution is one thing, it simply states that something has happened. Darwinism, on the other hand (Neo-darwinism, punctuated equilibrium, survival of the fittest, etc.), states that evolution occurs by means of natural selection on random mutations. An idea for which there remains not a single shred of evidence after more than 100 years as the reigning hypothesis.
One can dispute Darwin and still believe in evolution, but Science has been so successful brainwashing us all that anything critical of Darwinism MUST be Christian Creationism. What did Darwin know of viral and bacterial transposition of genetic material? For that matter what did Darwin know of genetics? Some day, we may as well all know that the function of natural selection, if it has any, is to maintain the status quo of a species, exactly the opposite of what Darwin thought, and that the rise of new species, comes about through other mechanisms not yet unknown and understood (for an alternative mechanism read Sheldrakes theory of Morphic Resonance, and while you may laugh a brainwashed laugh, some of Lamark's ideas are still showing signs of life), or perhaps not through any "mechanism" at all, but simply as an emergent property of an extremely complex system called life.
You miss the point entirely. Allowing Aqua skins to proliferate not only rips off Apple's hard work, more importantly the themes devalue Aqua and what it means. The Aqua ripoffs proliferate the idea that Aqua itself is just a skin, when what is revolutionary about Aqua is the Quartz rendering engine, the built-in transparency, the animations, how great the text looks, quicktime channels playing in the background, and most of all how easy it is to use in comparison. All the things that aren't really there in a beige skin. They may think they are flattering Apple, when de facto they are just crapping all over it.
Your analogy of open-source being equivalent to carts and buggies of old is just lame. And the idea that historically trade secrets didn't exist is even lamer. Have you ever heard of Porcelain? How about Silk? Clockmaking? Tulips? Medicine? You are hardly one to complain about blanket BS statements.
From the Mac perspective, the Linux camp seems to be made up of three factions:
1. The HardCore OpenSource Group--People who believe all software should be free and for whom their OS is a political statement. OSX will obviously do nothing for this bunch.
2. The MyUnix Crowd--People who want to see power zen of Unix on the desktop because it's what they know and love, but who aren't bought in to the hardcore opensource dogma. OSX has the potential to siphon off a sizable percentage of this group as OSX takes the evolution of Unix into the desktop market in an instantaneous and mainstream way, and they find that a pretty exciting opportunity, maybe even where they want to be.
3. The SoftCore OpenSource bunch--These are the people who want to like and use Linux because it is cool and because it's anti-MicroSoft and it isn't that weenie MacOS. But the reality for these users is that Linux is not really convenient or practical for them, yet, and for much of what they really do on they are actually Windozers or Macheads, though they wear the Linux badge. You know who these people are if I do. It's quite possible that MacOSX could attract a large portion of this group also.
The shift from DVD to CDRW is a big one as Apple has pinned its star on a Desktop Video revolution, and now must shift gears as consumers demand a built-in CDRW for the MP3 revolution and phenom. Adding CDRW means dropping DVD ROM and DVD playback as standard features in all Macs, though no doubt DVD will remain standard in the PowerBooks. Presumably when the new iMacs come out next month they also will have CD/RW drives instead of the usual DVDROM. There's a lot of speculation about external Superdrives from Apple, but I think that is highly unlikely. Much more realistic is a Superdriven iMac, as the combination of iMac/iMovie/iDVD could be a terrific desktop video solution for under $2K. Apple will want to keep the Superdrive out of the hands of Beige to help distinguish and drive sales to Macs. Need proof of that--just look at their sexy trio of top notch monitors--all are now Mac only. Superdrives seem headed for the high end iMac because of the two tiered DVD authoring software. There's the full featured $995 DVD Studio Pro package and then there's the consumer oriented iDVD package that comes bundled free with the Superdrive. The combo drives that can burn CDs and read DVDs (but not burn) aren't expected to appear in Macs until the summer. Looks to me like DVD RAM has bit the shed. You can't even Build-to-order a DVD-RAM Mac anymore.
Jobs said demand for the high end the models is expected to be too high for them to be available for MP configs yet. He said if you want a 667 or 733 in Feb, better order it now.
This
screenshot shows a vertical dock. The grab is supposedly of a newer build of OSX than the Public Beta, one with a more customizable
interface--most notably a movable dock (duh--Steve takes out the vertical option to make the weenies all shout in unison--Give us choices!! And Steve obliges--Sheesh) and notice the resurrection of the sacred
Apple menu, which when confirmed will be great news for old school
Mac faithful. This
screenshot shows Terminal app with the dock moving commands (which don't work in PB btw)
and this
screenshot shows a configuration of the finder (file browser)
with what looks like windowshade widget and a what is being called a "shelf" The links came from a Danish
MacOSX site and I found them on this
thread at MacNN where the guy who posted them goes by the name JLL.
Look at it this way:
Since the dualies came out the best-selling G4 Tower was the low-end single-cpu G4 400. That's not good. Since the dualies came out G4 Tower sales have dropped precipitously. That's even worse. Consider also that Apple's big inventory problems all the pundits are flapping about right now are confined almost entirely to the Dualie G4s (and low-end Cubes and low end PBs). Everyone knows the dualies only offer a performance edge for MP enhanced apps, and there aren't too many of them yet, or much use for that second CPU besides the pure Photoshop box. Until OSX is out that is. Then consider that 733 MHz (or whatever) G4s are going to be in mighty short supply for awhile, unlike all those 450s and 500s that MOT has been cranking out since forever and Apple could afford to almost give away. Also consider that these new G4 733s (or whatever) have DUAL AltiVec Units, so there are already two Vector brains on the new single G4s for those Photoshop vs Pentia Bake-offs SteveJobs just llloooves to show off to the faithful.
Whoever said that dualies will be kept on for OSX servers doesn't have a clue. Apple's current OSX server (v1.2) does not support SMP at all! That's why all the server configs Apple sells today are SINGLE cpu G4 500s. There will be no MultiProcessing Servers of any sort from Apple until after OSX is released and the Server bundle is upgraded to v2, or however they repackage/brand it. Real MP boxes will be back then in a big way. REAL MP boxes like Quad 800s (or whatever) that will need much more serious bandwidth on the bus than 133MHz. So look for new MP OSX Server boxes with higher speed buses (so those extra processors are used efficiently), and a case design to make the guys in the back room drool, all sometime after MacWorld Tokyo (Feb 24) when OSX is expected to ship. The chips running on them might also come from a surprising source. What good are multiple vector units in a Quadbox Server? The rumors are already flying of new high speed IBM PPC 801s on the horizon that are G4s (in that they are good for MP) only without Motorola's AltiVec parts. Maybe Apple will call them G3.5s...
Apple most likely didn't pay anything. From their press release it says they "licensed Amazon.com's 1-Click patent and trademark for use on its Apple Online Store (www.apple.com), as part of an e-commerce patent cross-licensing agreement."
Better ask what would Amazon want of comparable value that Apple has?
Apple's been flapping lately how launching desktop video, miniaturizing desktops, and reinventing the Operating System aren't the only things they've got up their sleeve (those free virtual reality authoring tools do look kinda interesting). Sure Stevie's arrogant but if they do have some cool beeans on the vine--from a straight business perspective it makes all the sense in the world for them to clamp down as tighter than a legal wad on the security. Certainly if the alternative costs them the ONLY edge in the market they have. Still can't escape the conclusion that they WANT a reputation for being silly hard-ass overprotective zealots.
What you are referring to is IBM and Dell's intention
to begin offering wireless networking in their laptops later this
year. Apple has been shipping its built-in Airport wireless networking
for over a year, having debuted with the original iBook last summer.
Every Mac made today comes with a built-in Airport antenna and is ready to accept the optional $99 Airport card. Like Apple's
Airport, both IBM & Dell products will be based on the same
802.11 standard, but cost significantly more than the Apple products.
Here's
the story you probably read.
What makes Apple different from other boxmakers is that it integrates hardware and software for a better computing experience because it makes both parts of the widget. No other boxmaker has that advantage, not Dell, not Compaq, not anyone else. This is WHY there are no Mac clones, It's why Apple could take a gamble on adopting USB and change the industry, It's how they got Firewire going. It's why Macs are the only PCs currently shipping with built-in wireless networking, it's why Apple can design and engineer cool looking computers while WebPCs and iPaqs look pathetic and are sales flops. It's why plug and play WORKS in Macs. Integrated boxes are Apple's FOCUS. If Apple ever ports MacOS to Intel it will still only happen on an Apple box and Apple hardware, otherwise they are just another Dell and the last thing Apple is going to do now is turn beige. Apple is a HARDWARE company because right now that's where money comes from. It doesn't have to be that way but there it is, and not looking like it's going to change much in the near future either.
By the way, Macs have the HIGHEST margins in the boxmaking industry (between 27 & 29%) and everything Apple got from Xerox Parc was paid for with cash and stock at a price Xerox was more than happy with.
If you accept there being even a little truth to the gross generalizations that MacOS is the desktop OS of choice for the consumer world, and that Linux is the desktop OS of choice for the nerd world, it's apparent that both Mac and Linux platforms can each potentially gorge themselves on Wintel marketshare for ages to come without ever needing to even rub elbows, much less waste themselves in a new jihad of OS flamewars. Wintel will ultimately win if it is able to divide and conquer Linux and Apple, or Linux and Apple will win if they are able to divide and conquer Wintel. Raymond's acne-d ignorance of what is going on in the Mac community, is at the same time a reflection of how clueless the MacOS community is to even the very existence of Linux, let alone what it's about. As a Mac friend put it, "Why would you want to know that?"
Jobs talked about this just recently during the discussion period at the end of last quarter's webcasted
Analyst
meeting. There's also some other very interesting SJ gumflapping there--select the Q&A
session from the 4 links. Anyways
the gist of what he said was that Apple does lots of market research,
but sometimes the designers and engineers or management feels strongly enough about something to override
the results of focus groups who after all don't often really have much insight into the future or what is currently technologically possible, and gave several examples of this, concluding that if they had only paid attention
to focus groups, the iMac would never have been made. This was in the context of an interesting story he related about how the Walkman came into being, how Sony's CEO had to fight against all the corporate market people and focus groups, and company buraucracy to get it made. The Q&A session makes very interesting listening for anyone who has an attitude one way or another about Steve Jobs or how Apple thinks different.
And you are flapping your nether gums and know nothing of which you speak. Apple has had an SMP API in the OS since before the 9600, and has been developing it steadily for nearly a decade. OS9 uses that extra processor itself, it just can't make SMP available to Apps not specially written to use the API. But the daddy App, the finder, does take full advantage of dual processors. Apple has chosen not to make a big deal of MP until OSX is shipping because OSX will bring SMP to all carbonized Apps whether they are written to take advantage of SMP or not. That will be a HUGE deal. Imagine that on YOUR operating system! Today, on OS9 Photoshop isn't the only production app that takes advantage of the Mac's MP libs, MediaCleaner uses them, SoundJam uses them. Apparently even Q3A can use them. Today Apple has MP boxes shipping because in just a month or so OSX beta will be out, and all the beta apps that will come with it will be FULLY SMP aware. Imagine that on YOUR operating system.
Slashdot Mirror
c|net is reporting that Apple is letting the mole they caught "worker bee" off the hook pretty lightly http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-6804697.html
"Hubbard said he'll work to see that what he learns at Apple about software, such as user interface design, is applied to FreeBSD. And he hopes there will be cooperation between Apple and FreeBSD on subjects such as support for Universal Serial Bus and Firewire, two methods for plugging peripherals such as digital cameras into computers." http://investor.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0- 9900-1028-6384175-0.html?tag=pt.yahoo.fin..ne
One can dispute Darwin and still believe in evolution, but Science has been so successful brainwashing us all that anything critical of Darwinism MUST be Christian Creationism. What did Darwin know of viral and bacterial transposition of genetic material? For that matter what did Darwin know of genetics? Some day, we may as well all know that the function of natural selection, if it has any, is to maintain the status quo of a species, exactly the opposite of what Darwin thought, and that the rise of new species, comes about through other mechanisms not yet unknown and understood (for an alternative mechanism read Sheldrakes theory of Morphic Resonance, and while you may laugh a brainwashed laugh, some of Lamark's ideas are still showing signs of life), or perhaps not through any "mechanism" at all, but simply as an emergent property of an extremely complex system called life.
You mean it's all Raskin's fault. Raskin invented the Macintosh.
You miss the point entirely. Allowing Aqua skins to proliferate not only rips off Apple's hard work, more importantly the themes devalue Aqua and what it means. The Aqua ripoffs proliferate the idea that Aqua itself is just a skin, when what is revolutionary about Aqua is the Quartz rendering engine, the built-in transparency, the animations, how great the text looks, quicktime channels playing in the background, and most of all how easy it is to use in comparison. All the things that aren't really there in a beige skin. They may think they are flattering Apple, when de facto they are just crapping all over it.
Your analogy of open-source being equivalent to carts and buggies of old is just lame. And the idea that historically trade secrets didn't exist is even lamer. Have you ever heard of Porcelain? How about Silk? Clockmaking? Tulips? Medicine? You are hardly one to complain about blanket BS statements.
From the Mac perspective, the Linux camp seems to be made up of three factions:
1. The HardCore OpenSource Group--People who believe all software should be free and for whom their OS is a political statement. OSX will obviously do nothing for this bunch.
2. The MyUnix Crowd--People who want to see power zen of Unix on the desktop because it's what they know and love, but who aren't bought in to the hardcore opensource dogma. OSX has the potential to siphon off a sizable percentage of this group as OSX takes the evolution of Unix into the desktop market in an instantaneous and mainstream way, and they find that a pretty exciting opportunity, maybe even where they want to be.
3. The SoftCore OpenSource bunch--These are the people who want to like and use Linux because it is cool and because it's anti-MicroSoft and it isn't that weenie MacOS. But the reality for these users is that Linux is not really convenient or practical for them, yet, and for much of what they really do on they are actually Windozers or Macheads, though they wear the Linux badge. You know who these people are if I do. It's quite possible that MacOSX could attract a large portion of this group also.
The shift from DVD to CDRW is a big one as Apple has pinned its star on a Desktop Video revolution, and now must shift gears as consumers demand a built-in CDRW for the MP3 revolution and phenom. Adding CDRW means dropping DVD ROM and DVD playback as standard features in all Macs, though no doubt DVD will remain standard in the PowerBooks. Presumably when the new iMacs come out next month they also will have CD/RW drives instead of the usual DVDROM. There's a lot of speculation about external Superdrives from Apple, but I think that is highly unlikely. Much more realistic is a Superdriven iMac, as the combination of iMac/iMovie/iDVD could be a terrific desktop video solution for under $2K. Apple will want to keep the Superdrive out of the hands of Beige to help distinguish and drive sales to Macs. Need proof of that--just look at their sexy trio of top notch monitors--all are now Mac only. Superdrives seem headed for the high end iMac because of the two tiered DVD authoring software. There's the full featured $995 DVD Studio Pro package and then there's the consumer oriented iDVD package that comes bundled free with the Superdrive. The combo drives that can burn CDs and read DVDs (but not burn) aren't expected to appear in Macs until the summer. Looks to me like DVD RAM has bit the shed. You can't even Build-to-order a DVD-RAM Mac anymore.
The first superdrive was Apple's 2MB Floppy
Jobs said demand for the high end the models is expected to be too high for them to be available for MP configs yet. He said if you want a 667 or 733 in Feb, better order it now.
This screenshot shows a vertical dock. The grab is supposedly of a newer build of OSX than the Public Beta, one with a more customizable interface--most notably a movable dock (duh--Steve takes out the vertical option to make the weenies all shout in unison--Give us choices!! And Steve obliges--Sheesh) and notice the resurrection of the sacred Apple menu, which when confirmed will be great news for old school Mac faithful. This screenshot shows Terminal app with the dock moving commands (which don't work in PB btw) and this screenshot shows a configuration of the finder (file browser) with what looks like windowshade widget and a what is being called a "shelf" The links came from a Danish MacOSX site and I found them on this thread at MacNN where the guy who posted them goes by the name JLL.
Look at it this way: Since the dualies came out the best-selling G4 Tower was the low-end single-cpu G4 400. That's not good. Since the dualies came out G4 Tower sales have dropped precipitously. That's even worse. Consider also that Apple's big inventory problems all the pundits are flapping about right now are confined almost entirely to the Dualie G4s (and low-end Cubes and low end PBs). Everyone knows the dualies only offer a performance edge for MP enhanced apps, and there aren't too many of them yet, or much use for that second CPU besides the pure Photoshop box. Until OSX is out that is. Then consider that 733 MHz (or whatever) G4s are going to be in mighty short supply for awhile, unlike all those 450s and 500s that MOT has been cranking out since forever and Apple could afford to almost give away. Also consider that these new G4 733s (or whatever) have DUAL AltiVec Units, so there are already two Vector brains on the new single G4s for those Photoshop vs Pentia Bake-offs SteveJobs just llloooves to show off to the faithful. Whoever said that dualies will be kept on for OSX servers doesn't have a clue. Apple's current OSX server (v1.2) does not support SMP at all! That's why all the server configs Apple sells today are SINGLE cpu G4 500s. There will be no MultiProcessing Servers of any sort from Apple until after OSX is released and the Server bundle is upgraded to v2, or however they repackage/brand it. Real MP boxes will be back then in a big way. REAL MP boxes like Quad 800s (or whatever) that will need much more serious bandwidth on the bus than 133MHz. So look for new MP OSX Server boxes with higher speed buses (so those extra processors are used efficiently), and a case design to make the guys in the back room drool, all sometime after MacWorld Tokyo (Feb 24) when OSX is expected to ship. The chips running on them might also come from a surprising source. What good are multiple vector units in a Quadbox Server? The rumors are already flying of new high speed IBM PPC 801s on the horizon that are G4s (in that they are good for MP) only without Motorola's AltiVec parts. Maybe Apple will call them G3.5s...
Apple most likely didn't pay anything. From their press release it says they "licensed Amazon.com's 1-Click patent and trademark for use on its Apple Online Store (www.apple.com), as part of an e-commerce patent cross-licensing agreement." Better ask what would Amazon want of comparable value that Apple has?
Apple's been flapping lately how launching desktop video, miniaturizing desktops, and reinventing the Operating System aren't the only things they've got up their sleeve (those free virtual reality authoring tools do look kinda interesting). Sure Stevie's arrogant but if they do have some cool beeans on the vine--from a straight business perspective it makes all the sense in the world for them to clamp down as tighter than a legal wad on the security. Certainly if the alternative costs them the ONLY edge in the market they have. Still can't escape the conclusion that they WANT a reputation for being silly hard-ass overprotective zealots.
Does it make me evil if I buy Cheerios instead of Cocoa Puffs?
What you are referring to is IBM and Dell's intention to begin offering wireless networking in their laptops later this year. Apple has been shipping its built-in Airport wireless networking for over a year, having debuted with the original iBook last summer. Every Mac made today comes with a built-in Airport antenna and is ready to accept the optional $99 Airport card. Like Apple's Airport, both IBM & Dell products will be based on the same 802.11 standard, but cost significantly more than the Apple products. Here's the story you probably read.
What makes Apple different from other boxmakers is that it integrates hardware and software for a better computing experience because it makes both parts of the widget. No other boxmaker has that advantage, not Dell, not Compaq, not anyone else. This is WHY there are no Mac clones, It's why Apple could take a gamble on adopting USB and change the industry, It's how they got Firewire going. It's why Macs are the only PCs currently shipping with built-in wireless networking, it's why Apple can design and engineer cool looking computers while WebPCs and iPaqs look pathetic and are sales flops. It's why plug and play WORKS in Macs. Integrated boxes are Apple's FOCUS. If Apple ever ports MacOS to Intel it will still only happen on an Apple box and Apple hardware, otherwise they are just another Dell and the last thing Apple is going to do now is turn beige. Apple is a HARDWARE company because right now that's where money comes from. It doesn't have to be that way but there it is, and not looking like it's going to change much in the near future either. By the way, Macs have the HIGHEST margins in the boxmaking industry (between 27 & 29%) and everything Apple got from Xerox Parc was paid for with cash and stock at a price Xerox was more than happy with.
How many killer apps start on the Mac these days,
Wake Up! Ever hear of FinalCutPro? How about iMovie? How about iDisk?
If you accept there being even a little truth to the gross generalizations that MacOS is the desktop OS of choice for the consumer world, and that Linux is the desktop OS of choice for the nerd world, it's apparent that both Mac and Linux platforms can each potentially gorge themselves on Wintel marketshare for ages to come without ever needing to even rub elbows, much less waste themselves in a new jihad of OS flamewars. Wintel will ultimately win if it is able to divide and conquer Linux and Apple, or Linux and Apple will win if they are able to divide and conquer Wintel. Raymond's acne-d ignorance of what is going on in the Mac community, is at the same time a reflection of how clueless the MacOS community is to even the very existence of Linux, let alone what it's about. As a Mac friend put it, "Why would you want to know that?"
Can't /. come up with any *real* material about Macs and Apple
technologies to discuss? How about this
piece for starters?
Jobs talked about this just recently during the discussion period at the end of last quarter's webcasted Analyst meeting. There's also some other very interesting SJ gumflapping there--select the Q&A session from the 4 links. Anyways the gist of what he said was that Apple does lots of market research, but sometimes the designers and engineers or management feels strongly enough about something to override the results of focus groups who after all don't often really have much insight into the future or what is currently technologically possible, and gave several examples of this, concluding that if they had only paid attention to focus groups, the iMac would never have been made. This was in the context of an interesting story he related about how the Walkman came into being, how Sony's CEO had to fight against all the corporate market people and focus groups, and company buraucracy to get it made. The Q&A session makes very interesting listening for anyone who has an attitude one way or another about Steve Jobs or how Apple thinks different.
CNBC today revealed on air that one of the John/Jane Does (most likely the primary John/Jane Doe) that Apple is chasing after in their suit is a message board poster named "Workerbee" who posted on the Yahoo APPL message board as well as AppleInsider's Future Hardware message boards, and who posted pictures (on a Geocities website which disappeared today) of Apple's multiprocessing mobo and an early version of Apple's new optical mouse long before either were announced. Louismg on Raging Bull's AAPL stock board compiled a list of links to Workerbee's posts earlier today which can be seen here. The accuracy of Workerbee's posts on a wide variety of Apple hardware projects (Mouse, keyboard, Cube, MPs, iMacs, etc.) leads to the obvious conclusion that he or she must be an Apple employee. In one of his or her last posts before disappearing, Workerbee confirms the ZDnet story that Apple has a cinema-screened Powerbook packing a G4 ready to roll soon, and might even have been the source for the scoop.
And you are flapping your nether gums and know nothing of which you speak. Apple has had an SMP API in the OS since before the 9600, and has been developing it steadily for nearly a decade. OS9 uses that extra processor itself, it just can't make SMP available to Apps not specially written to use the API. But the daddy App, the finder, does take full advantage of dual processors. Apple has chosen not to make a big deal of MP until OSX is shipping because OSX will bring SMP to all carbonized Apps whether they are written to take advantage of SMP or not. That will be a HUGE deal. Imagine that on YOUR operating system! Today, on OS9 Photoshop isn't the only production app that takes advantage of the Mac's MP libs, MediaCleaner uses them, SoundJam uses them. Apparently even Q3A can use them. Today Apple has MP boxes shipping because in just a month or so OSX beta will be out, and all the beta apps that will come with it will be FULLY SMP aware. Imagine that on YOUR operating system.
That plan has been in place for a while, and is the reason whyOS9 doesn't run on non-g3's and I believe OS 8.6 was the cuttoff on powerpc's.
You are way off. DP4 runs on PCI based 603 and 604 Macs TODAY (look here). OS9 runs on all PPC Macs.
OSX will run on all PCI based Macs, including the non-G3 and G4 ones. The only caveat is that Apple does not intend to support OSX on those boxes.
Here's a MacCentral story updating the situation: http://www.maccentral.com/news/0007/21.trouble.sht ml