I had heard that Sun use forth for their OpenBoot proms...
Yep. Sun use Open Firmware, as do Apple Macs. Open Firmware (or IEEE-1275 - those wacky IEEE names) uses Forth. Even if the rest of the machine is hosed you'll still be able to use forth. Err - great:-/
Re:a "BUILD YOUR OWN $800 G4" how too + parts link
on
Build Your Own PowerPC?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
You might also enjoy
this thread from the arstechnica forums. The joy, the pain, the smell of frying components...
The main problem building a Mac PPC using a refurbished motherboard seemed to be the power supply,
IIRC. Needs a 28v trickle feed.
It's attempting to do exactly what passport does (which you may or may not like). The specs are available, and Sun have released an opensource Identity Server.
I dunno. If you need a server to tell you your identity...
URLs are names for resources whose name is sufficient to resolve the resource. Eg nntp:<some server>/<message id>. To resolve it look at the URL. You have the protocol, server, and message id so you can just ask that server for the message named by the URL.
URNs aren't URLs. Eg news:<message id>. Resolving this requires knowing, say, a news server and its protocol.
So (as another poster said) mailto:<blah> is a URN since resolving to the actual mailbox <blah> requires more knowledge than the URI gives. http:<blah>, by contrast, is a URL. Resolving that is trivial given this URI.
Probably not entirely correct, but you get the idea. See the RFC above for tortuous detail.
And a quantum link any 3rd party can couple a 2nd quatum link to the primary. This is not noted because this is no measurement.
The properties of a two body system in a pure state are different to that in a mixed state. The state of the system will then have changed and that can be detected, despite the lack of a 'measurement'.
Nice try, tho'
Re:HOWTO: Configuring Exchange to publish Free/Bus
on
Apple Releases iCal
·
· Score: 1
I'm afraid I know nothing about Outlook - someone else was doing the importing..
Sorry:-( I can help with xemacs tho';-)
Re:HOWTO: Configuring Exchange to publish Free/Bus
on
Apple Releases iCal
·
· Score: 1
We tried this at work today (got it at ~10am BST so plenty of tinkering time).
Outlook seems to be ok with simple events, but it barfed importing a repeating event with people attached.
Not sure whether it was attendees or repeating that caused the problem.
So you have to be careful iCal->Outlook. Reverse didn'tseem to cause any problems in our (limited) tests.
Ok, that was quite a list. I'll bet someone has replied as I type, but here are some replies.
Keyboard. Hmm, try turning on 'full keyboard access' in System Prefs. You can now hop around the UI using just the keyboard. As for delete word etc. try emacs equivalents (work in all cocoa apps at least). There are alternatives as well. I just use those since I devote brain space to the damn things.
Multiple desktops. space (http://space.sourceforge.net) does a little of what you want. However I agree, Apple should add it themselves.
Themes. Colors are ok, but I generally against the ui makeover that some apps seem to delight in. They usually just cover for faults in the original UI. (not an original pov, I should add).
Scriptability. I think you should look at scripting again. There are many languages for scripting, including (IIRC) javascript. They just hook into AppleEvents which provides the underlying functionality. They can also go over the network (see sharing - allow remote apple events).
Stupid messages. I'm surprised by this, since Apple are generally pretty good at this. But they aren't perfect. I think asking whether it is ok to continue is fine, but I don't know the details of the case you cite.
Widget usefulness. Let's hear it for the volume dial on QT 4 (was that the one?). Terrible. They seem to have been fixing these (QT has certainly improved). The worst offenders seem to be Apple's own media apps, which is pretty bad.
I think some of your points are valid, but OS X is generally pretty good. They seem to have half an idea about this stuff.
Phew. I was just contemplating how the hell to explain the bizarre situation in the UK. Excellent summary. But will people believe it is this screwy?
The BBFC demonstrate a very British stupidity - they would prefer 'compromise' I suspect. It's madness.
For example, try calling them the 'British Board of Film Censorship'. It makes them very cross. The 'C' is for 'Classification', they don't censor, merely suggest cuts. However (for the reasons explained above) ignoring their suggestions is foolhardy.
Explaining the fine distinction between 'censor' and 'classifier' in this case is left as an exercise for the reader.
(They have become less censor^H^H^H^H^H more liberal, to their credit)
I went to see this on the Saturday (erm - was that the first showing?). Happily it was the director's cut - none of that 'my-name-is-deckard-and-I-catch-androids-blah-blah ' foolishness.
Pluses: Boy, those models were detailed. I expected the city to look a little dodgy, but they held up well at the increased size.
Minuses: Optically intense. IMAX films are (duh;-) filmed with the size in mind. Bladerunner was not. Amusing example: whole cinema seemed to be watching tennis when the text came up at the start - they spanned a good 150 degrees of my vision. I came out literally wide eyed and feeling rather strange, as did several friends. Beer was the cure:-)
Have you tried mozilla built as Mach-O? (look here for details).
This is mozilla built with a Carbon front end and BSD backend. You'll find it's noticeably faster than the CFM (pure carbon) version. I found mozilla much more impressive in this version (though it has some glitches.
Prebuilt versions are available... somewhere. Try searching the mozilla macosx groups. OTOH it isn't hard to build. Just slow.
From this interview, it sounds like the GNUStep folks have the Foundation side of Cocoa pretty well in hand, but it looks like AppKit (all of the GUI stuff) is not done.
That's broadly correct. The foundation kit is at the 'release 1' level. To clarify, that is (roughly) the non-GUI stuff. Some might feel that's not very useful, but it is a very mature api containing a wealth of very useful classes for arrays, strings, dictionaries (hashes/associative arrays).
The appkit portion (GUI, tools for applications which handle single and multiple documents, including loading and saving) is at 0.7. It works pretty well, but isn't complete.
Beyond that there is the support for services (eg every application can get spell checking cheap) and distributed objects, which is pretty nice.
But why use gnustep? Well, I'm a pretty lame programmer but I managed to put together a simple app using some existing Java classes in a couple of hours. Hours in which I effectively started out not knowing anything about OpenStep. Getting to a functional level of knowledge in ObjC was even quicker (something I'd never really managed in C++). If I was even half competent I could have whipped up something really impressive. I suspect Java programmers will find the transition easy. The Java classes are - erm - 'haunting familiar';-)
Writing a front end for, say, gnupg, which could encrypt text in other apps probably isn't too hard in gnustep. And, of course, it could be ported to Mac OS X trivially.
But I should add some caveats:
The c++/ObjC bridge has died (AFAIK). This is, I suspect, one of the major reasons why new (to Mac) apps are ported to Carbon.
Don't expect Gnustep to have Qt or Gtk widgets soon. Gnustep essentially has it's own widgets, and various 'backends' which know how to draw graphics primitives - in X or dps for example. It's not simple to add backends for high level toolkits.
Finally, you mentioned the lack of AppleScript/Apple events, Quicktime, and Quartz. I don't think Apple events are that important, but other two are is. It's pretty trivial to do all kinds of fancy stuff using quicktime and quartz, and many authors use it on mac os x graphics apps. That, I suspect, might prohibit many ports to Gnustep.
Finally, the apps that make life easy in Mac OS X (Interface Builder and Project Builder) have Gnustep equivalents (respectively Gorm and Project Centre), but they aren't complete. This isn't a major issue, but they would round the project off nicely.
But I hope people try it. Learning Cocoa isn't brilliant, but it was useful - even for GnuStep and Gorm. And I'd like to see the Mac OS X GUI infested with filthy, commie, free software.;-)
A religion can't have trade secrets, given that they don't trade per se. Scientology, however, is not merely a religion but a highly litigious, corrupt, and basically unpleasant company - or rather group of companies. They abuse many of their employees (the 'rehabilitation project force'), indulge in espionage, and try to destroy critics (this behaviour is part of the 'faith'). Nice.
That people concentrate on its religious aspect is highly misleading. The organization is the problem. The Freezone is Scientology minus the organisation - the mafia as a belief about strong families, not the crime, if you want an analogy. They're still misguided, IMHO, but that's not a crime.
If you live in London you might like to voice your concerns at the Scientology shop on Tottenham Court Road (number 68) tomorrow (Saturday) afternoon. I'll be there, having a word with them;-)
Wouldn't a port of gtk suffice? True, there are some apps out there which are 'pure X' (and I admire the hackers that wrote them) but I would think that porting Qt and Gtk to MacOS X would cover a great deal of the problems you mention.
Indeed, there is a ban on hardened blades in Robot Wars (UK - or whatever) - but the reason was amply demonstrated last season when one team used one and it shattered. Ouch. The evil spinning flywheel was called hypnodisc. It's first two opponents (I swear!) were chosen for their particularly weak armour. Well, seemed like a coincidence to me;-)
I think Apple use a combination of Netscape/Solaris & MacOS X. They used the former for ages, but are gradually switching over to the latter (at least, that's what they _say_). They do use Web Objects to power their store (and, my, aren't those URLs big;-), so there's one thing in their defence. -- Your mother's a tracer!
Re:Friggin Netscape crashed on me the 1st attempt
on
The Code Book
·
· Score: 2
The point about quantum cypto being unbreakable is this: current (non-quant) methods are falible because of their very nature. Large-number factoring, for example, is tedious, with no shortcuts (unless the film 'Sneakers' is correct;-). But that's just a pragmatic issue. In principle it could be cracked (given a few millenia).
Quantum crypto, on the other hand, uses nature itself to help privacy. Listening in on my PGP email is simply impractical (and would be very dull - believe me). But to listen in on a quantum conversation without being detected would require breaking physical laws.
The worry, of course, is that quantum mechanics isn't the whole truth. But that is another story.
Slashdot Mirror
(could be just me, of course)
HTH
We, the people of the Caribbean and Latin America have more than enough bananas. Please send no more.
Yep. Sun use Open Firmware, as do Apple Macs. Open Firmware (or IEEE-1275 - those wacky IEEE names) uses Forth. Even if the rest of the machine is hosed you'll still be able to use forth. Err - great :-/
The main problem building a Mac PPC using a refurbished motherboard seemed to be the power supply, IIRC. Needs a 28v trickle feed.
Anyway, worth a read.
For the uninformed:
Liberty Alliance Project. Sun, Novell, RSA, HP, IBM... the list goes on and on.
It's attempting to do exactly what passport does (which you may or may not like). The specs are available, and Sun have released an opensource Identity Server.
I dunno. If you need a server to tell you your identity...
It's the infernal Sorenson 3 (IIRC xine can play the other sorenson codecs, yes?). So here is the:
Obligatory link to the crossover plugin. Very good etc
But QT6 does support mpeg 4 (as was said). We just need some way to make people use it.
Put simply:
URLs are a (proper) subset of URIs
URIs are the union of URLs and URNs
URLs are names for resources whose name is sufficient to resolve the resource. Eg nntp:<some server>/<message id>. To resolve it look at the URL. You have the protocol, server, and message id so you can just ask that server for the message named by the URL.
URNs aren't URLs. Eg news:<message id>. Resolving this requires knowing, say, a news server and its protocol.
So (as another poster said) mailto:<blah> is a URN since resolving to the actual mailbox <blah> requires more knowledge than the URI gives. http:<blah>, by contrast, is a URL. Resolving that is trivial given this URI.
Probably not entirely correct, but you get the idea. See the RFC above for tortuous detail.
Now IRIs, well...
And a quantum link any 3rd party can couple a 2nd quatum link to the primary. This is not noted because this is no measurement.
The properties of a two body system in a pure state are different to that in a mixed state. The state of the system will then have changed and that can be detected, despite the lack of a 'measurement'.
Nice try, tho'
I'm afraid I know nothing about Outlook - someone else was doing the importing..
:-( I can help with xemacs tho' ;-)
Sorry
We tried this at work today (got it at ~10am BST so plenty of tinkering time).
Outlook seems to be ok with simple events, but it barfed importing a repeating event with people attached.
Not sure whether it was attendees or repeating that caused the problem.
So you have to be careful iCal->Outlook. Reverse didn'tseem to cause any problems in our (limited) tests.
MPEG 2 support was in the jaguar beta I played with. Definitely not in the new version, tho'
Grr.
Ok, that was quite a list. I'll bet someone has replied as I type, but here are some replies.
Keyboard. Hmm, try turning on 'full keyboard access' in System Prefs. You can now hop around the UI using just the keyboard. As for delete word etc. try emacs equivalents (work in all cocoa apps at least). There are alternatives as well. I just use those since I devote brain space to the damn things.
Multiple desktops. space (http://space.sourceforge.net) does a little of what you want. However I agree, Apple should add it themselves.
Themes. Colors are ok, but I generally against the ui makeover that some apps seem to delight in. They usually just cover for faults in the original UI. (not an original pov, I should add).
Scriptability. I think you should look at scripting again. There are many languages for scripting, including (IIRC) javascript. They just hook into AppleEvents which provides the underlying functionality. They can also go over the network (see sharing - allow remote apple events).
Stupid messages. I'm surprised by this, since Apple are generally pretty good at this. But they aren't perfect. I think asking whether it is ok to continue is fine, but I don't know the details of the case you cite.
Widget usefulness. Let's hear it for the volume dial on QT 4 (was that the one?). Terrible. They seem to have been fixing these (QT has certainly improved). The worst offenders seem to be Apple's own media apps, which is pretty bad.
I think some of your points are valid, but OS X is generally pretty good. They seem to have half an idea about this stuff.
Hmm. I wondered about this, and found this on the dev list.
From what I read the substanitve reason seems to be potential IPR problems (Apple's clause is vague, but worrying), rather than technical issues.
hth
The BBFC demonstrate a very British stupidity - they would prefer 'compromise' I suspect. It's madness.
For example, try calling them the 'British Board of Film Censorship'. It makes them very cross. The 'C' is for 'Classification', they don't censor, merely suggest cuts. However (for the reasons explained above) ignoring their suggestions is foolhardy.
Explaining the fine distinction between 'censor' and 'classifier' in this case is left as an exercise for the reader.
(They have become less censor^H^H^H^H^H more liberal, to their credit)
Pluses: Boy, those models were detailed. I expected the city to look a little dodgy, but they held up well at the increased size.
Minuses: Optically intense. IMAX films are (duh ;-) filmed with the size in mind. Bladerunner was not. Amusing example: whole cinema seemed to be watching tennis when the text came up at the start - they spanned a good 150 degrees of my vision. I came out literally wide eyed and feeling rather strange, as did several friends. Beer was the cure :-)
This is mozilla built with a Carbon front end and BSD backend. You'll find it's noticeably faster than the CFM (pure carbon) version. I found mozilla much more impressive in this version (though it has some glitches.
Prebuilt versions are available ... somewhere. Try searching the mozilla macosx groups. OTOH it isn't hard to build. Just slow.
That's broadly correct. The foundation kit is at the 'release 1' level. To clarify, that is (roughly) the non-GUI stuff. Some might feel that's not very useful, but it is a very mature api containing a wealth of very useful classes for arrays, strings, dictionaries (hashes/associative arrays). The appkit portion (GUI, tools for applications which handle single and multiple documents, including loading and saving) is at 0.7. It works pretty well, but isn't complete.
Beyond that there is the support for services (eg every application can get spell checking cheap) and distributed objects, which is pretty nice.
But why use gnustep? Well, I'm a pretty lame programmer but I managed to put together a simple app using some existing Java classes in a couple of hours. Hours in which I effectively started out not knowing anything about OpenStep. Getting to a functional level of knowledge in ObjC was even quicker (something I'd never really managed in C++). If I was even half competent I could have whipped up something really impressive. I suspect Java programmers will find the transition easy. The Java classes are - erm - 'haunting familiar' ;-)
Writing a front end for, say, gnupg, which could encrypt text in other apps probably isn't too hard in gnustep. And, of course, it could be ported to Mac OS X trivially.
But I should add some caveats:
But I hope people try it. Learning Cocoa isn't brilliant, but it was useful - even for GnuStep and Gorm. And I'd like to see the Mac OS X GUI infested with filthy, commie, free software. ;-)
pldms
That people concentrate on its religious aspect is highly misleading. The organization is the problem. The Freezone is Scientology minus the organisation - the mafia as a belief about strong families, not the crime, if you want an analogy. They're still misguided, IMHO, but that's not a crime.
If you live in London you might like to voice your concerns at the Scientology shop on Tottenham Court Road (number 68) tomorrow (Saturday) afternoon. I'll be there, having a word with them ;-)
Wouldn't a port of gtk suffice? True, there are some apps out there which are 'pure X' (and I admire the hackers that wrote them) but I would think that porting Qt and Gtk to MacOS X would cover a great deal of the problems you mention.
Indeed, there is a ban on hardened blades in Robot Wars (UK - or whatever) - but the reason was amply demonstrated last season when one team used one and it shattered. Ouch. The evil spinning flywheel was called hypnodisc. It's first two opponents (I swear!) were chosen for their particularly weak armour. Well, seemed like a coincidence to me ;-)
I think Apple use a combination of Netscape/Solaris & MacOS X. They used the former for ages, but are gradually switching over to the latter (at least, that's what they _say_). They do use Web Objects to power their store (and, my, aren't those URLs big ;-), so there's one thing in their defence. -- Your mother's a tracer!
The point about quantum cypto being unbreakable is this: current (non-quant) methods are falible because of their very nature. Large-number factoring, for example, is tedious, with no shortcuts (unless the film 'Sneakers' is correct ;-). But that's just a pragmatic issue. In principle it could be cracked (given a few millenia).
Quantum crypto, on the other hand, uses nature itself to help privacy. Listening in on my PGP email is simply impractical (and would be very dull - believe me). But to listen in on a quantum conversation without being detected would require breaking physical laws.
The worry, of course, is that quantum mechanics isn't the whole truth. But that is another story.