Maybe you want to do a documentary on how documentaries slant information... in which case the raw footage, particularly that which isn't part of the final cut, is what interests you.
/*begin OT rant If I could get the raw footage for some of these crappy "news magazine" shows (Dateline NBC, Primetime Live, 60 Minutes, 20/20, etc.) the shows might have some value to me.
Virtually every episode of every one of these shows I've ever seen is obviously (badly) edited to present a slanted view on the topic. Even when their slant happens to agree with mine (not very often!), it pisses me off. If I already have an opinion on the topic, I want it challenged and I want both sides presented objectively so others who haven't formed an opinion can do so effectively.
Every time I see someone interviewed on one of those shows, I imagine the interviewee in his/her living room screaming "That's not what I said!" as I'm watching it. /*end OT rant
To bring this back on topic, I kinda dig the idea Cringely's kicking around. For episodes of his show dealing with subjects/people that I'm particularly interested in it would be really cool to see the raw footage. For things slightly less interesting to me, the "nerd" edition would fit the bill.
I'm no expert on the Telecom industry, but I've been hearing and reading these same predictions for 6 or 7 years now. Over that entire period, there was always some "telecom guru" or another predicting an imminent bandwidth shortage. None of them ever happened.
The beauty of capitalism is that where there is a demand, someone will create a supply because there's money to be made. In this case, more so because there is already so much unlit fiber there. SOMEONE will find a way to acquire it and get it lit if there is that much demand.
OTOH, the anticompetitive nature of the large Telcos concerns me somewhat. I wonder If I would have some sort of broadband access available to my rural home if SBC wasn't making so much money by making sure ISDN is my only option?
...By law, you have the right to not put your Social Security Number on your driver's license.
I wonder if this is still the case. The following is excerpted from Claire Wolfe's essay "Land Mine Legislation"
A law requiring that all states begin issuing drivers licenses carrying Social Security numbers and "security features" (such as magnetically coded fingerprints and personal records) by October 1, 2000. "...A Federal agency may not accept for any identification-related purpose a drivers' license, or other comparable identification document, issued by a State, unless the license or document satisfies the [requirements set forth in this legislation]. In other words, drivers licenses and government non-driver IDs will still look different in all 50 states, but they will, in fact, be part of a national ID system. If your drivers license doesn't meet the federal standard -- no Social Security, no passport, no federal contracts, no "benefits." And just try cashing a check at your federally regulated bank.
In her footnotes she includes the following footnote for the above paragraph:
(De-facto National ID Card) Began life in the Immigration Control and Financial Responsibility Act of 1996, sections 111, 118, 119, 127 and 133; was eventually folded into the Omnibus Appropriations Act, HR 3610 (which was itself formerly called the Defense Appropriations Act -- but we wouldn't want to confuse anyone, here, would we?); became public law 104-208 on 9/30/96; see sections 656 and 657 among others
I haven't looked this up myself to verify but I have read it other places as well.
I would suggest following the link and reading the entire essay. It's quite enlightening.
I particularly like section (2) of paragraph (c) "Exceptions".
It's really thoughtful of these fascist pricks to take the time to write out an exception that says in essence, "If the whole thing happens outside of our jurisdiction where none of our laws apply, we'll let it slide."
Where'd the "home-defense" dept. come from on Slashdot?
Are you a closet gun-nut, Michael?
Just last Wednesday in the Slash forum on subscriptions, someone asked Rob how he would describe himself politically. I don't quite remember all of his meandering, ungrounded answer but he ended with something like "No one should be allowed to own guns." (I tried to find a link to the forum log but couldn't.)
I can only assume that CmdrTaco is opposed to anyone defending their home and probably would not approve of this story.
(Disclaimer: I love/. and openly admire Rob's net accomplishments. I expect I would find him personable if I met him. But... anyone who wants to take my guns is violent and my enemy -- or ignorant on the issue. I suspect Rob is just mostly ignorant on this topic, just like I'm mostly ignorant of Perl so I don't really hold it against him.)
Linux was a lot like a girl named Allison that I used to date. She was a hot redhead with large, firm breasts in most of my honors classes.
Anyone else wondering what her breasts were like in the rest of his classes? And what would make them transmogrify from one class to the next? Maybe that's why she acted so crazy! That's freaky, man!
There is no "good guy" any more is there? A politician's a politician.
politician: (root word politics from the Latin, poli, meaning "many" and tics, "a tiny, bloodsucking parasite")
(For those that don't already know, I didn't come up with that. I probably didn't even quote it right, but I think it's amusing and accurate. Was it Mark Twain that first said that... or Dave Barry...? I can't remember.)
As the parent post says, he has become quite arrogant... and I daresay a bit jealous of Steve Jobs.
Please understand, I've been what is called a "Mac Fanatic" since I first saw one in 1984. I now make my living on NT, AIX, Linux, etc. but still prefer to use Mac OS X at home.
At least once I day a cuss (under my breath, or, often loudly) NT 4 because it is HORRID interface design. And this is AFTER I moved the task bar to the top so the Start "drop-down" menu doesn't "drop-up" (with "Shutdown" being the first thing you encounter on the Start "drop-up" menu!), created "shortcuts" (that don't work completely or intuitively) to all my drives on the desktop, etc. to mimic the interface Jef created in, what, 1980? 1982? (with improvements since, of course)
But he needs to lighten up now. He is, IMHO, the Father of the GUI. (I'm not trolling and don't want to rehash old Xerox PARC arguments. I'm talking about mainstream markets.) But he's been really hard on OS X's Aqua interface and I like it. There are things in Aqua that I, personally, think are a step backward. But I can modify those THROUGH PREFERENCE SETTINGS (or other easy modifications) to be more like what I'm used to, and overall, I think OS X is the coolest OS in the history of personal computing. ("You got your point-and-click ease in my powerful OS!" "You got your powerful OS in my point-and-click ease!") Two great tastes that taste great together.
My message to Jef is: Rest on your laurels or continue to innovate. Either way I can respect you. But don't become the guy that makes his living by criticizing what others are doing. That's John Dvorak's job.
The point of the bill, as I read it, is to put high-speed Internet access on a par with telephone service, in that it should be available to everyone. The bill requires that high-speed access be available through every bell central office, or CO, within five years; and it requires that every loop from that CO, regardless of distance, be capable of providing high-speed service at the customer's request. If the loop cannot support high-speed access, then the telco must use other technology to deliver the service.
Pardon me for adding appropriate emphasis, but this is almost everything that's wrong with America. Government can not require anything that the market will not support without someone paying for it.
I speak as someone who loves my rural home with the only exception being: I pay $118/month for 128k dialup ISDN because it's my only choice. (OK, my best choice, for now -- Starband costs $600 up front for less than 3x the speed and a whole lot more latency. Not enough to justify it for me.)
As much as I envy my co-workers who pay $49/month for DSL or broadband cable that's, on average, 3-6 times as fast as my connection and always on to boot, I realize that I have no right to high speed Internet access. I chose to live here. This sacrifice, thought it sucks, is worth it for me and my family. I don't expect anyone or any company to spend money they cannot recoup just to satisfy my net speed-lust. Nor will they.
Government guns will only make matters worse. Every word I changed to bold type in the quoted section of your post requires violence to accomplish. As does everything government does. And someone will have to pay for it.
I agree. I read the court transcript (and not the stories).
Seems to me this script kiddie is an idiot and should be tried and convicted of defacing the property of others.
Seems to me also, that the prosecutor and FBI agent in this court hearing are not all that concerned with his real crimes. They want to whip everyone into a frenzy about his intentions to blow up stuff, even though, as near as I can tell from the transcript, most of it they presented was wildly exaggerated or outright fabricated.
Typical. If they really thought he was as dangerous as they now are claiming, why wasn't he arrested when the executed their search warrant?
Don't misunderstand. I have no desire to defend the tripe on his website. But I don't see an idiot-exclusion clause in the First Amendment.
I've been reluctant to use the MS IM client because it didn't appear they had fully integrated it's virus abilities with all their other software. Now that it's part of a fully integrated Microsoft Virus Productivity Suite, I'm ready!
Can anybody tell me where I can sign up for one of those Passport Universal Identifier and Cybercash Wallets and get the MS implant in my right hand or forehead?
Could the Slashdot posse please understand: you never met Phillip. He can't code (just READ the book and cut through the crap; analyze his 'facts'), and people who meet him instinctively dislike him. You can't run a company if everyone hates you.
I met Phillip and instinctively liked him. But then I'm not envious of his success like many are. (Like him or not, the man has some significant accomplishments.)
One point of irony related to your assertion that he can't code: I was in one of Phillip's internet seminars a few months ago and he mentioned Slashdot. He said (not verbatim, best recollection), "When the guys at Slashdot released the Slashcode source Rob Malda said it might not be the cleanest code because much of it was written when he was just learning. He wasn't kidding! That's the ugliest code I've ever seen. But it works and they have built a very successful web community on it."
(I have no opinion of either as I am a novice coder. Personally, I admire the accomplishments of Rob Malda and Phillip Greenspun.)
Point well taken -- LinuxPPC is still quite important in many places (and I had forgotten about the new PPC Open mobos when I posted).
However, my specific contention was with the previous poster implying that the quote in question backed up his assertion that many Macs can't run OS X, when, in fact, only one group listed in the quote, PowerMacs, have anything to do with Macintosh.
The 22" Apple display has got to be some sort of loss leader for Apple - most competetors charge about $4000 for the same spec monitor.
I've also often thought that the Cinema Display is one of the best price/value products Apple has ever produced. It deserves much more promotion than they give it, IMHO. But then, maybe they couldn't support the demand...
I don't think it's a loss leader, though. (For one thing, that's definitely not Steve Jobs' style of business.)
I think it probably has something to do with Apple's large investment a few years back in one of only a handful of companies that actually produce LCD screens. I can't remember for sure, but I think it might have been Samsung? Anyway, terms of the deal included priority access for Apple to LCD screens and I suspect (but don't know) that they would also get a price break.
Let's ignore that not even all Macs can run OS X, here's a quote from the interview:
"The PPC tree has it's own complexities, mostly because we have to deal with a large set of very different machines and CPUs. From the PowerMacs, PRePs & CHRP, the 4xx and 8xx based embedded platforms, and even IBM pSeries and iSeries servers."
Just to clarify: There are indeed many Macs that can't run OS X but that quote is irrelevant to that point as he covers all Macs with the "PowerMacs" designation. All the rest are embedded platforms that have nothing at all to do with Macintosh. (Excepting, of course, a few 5+ year-old clones that might fall in the "PRePs" and "CHRP" classifications.)
Then you certainly have not tried the following thing:
-Install forms 4.5 now. Forms 4.5 is year 2000 complient, the installer crashes (!)(there is a patch but.....)
-use plsql records in a 7.3.4. DB. Bye bye instance.
-use designer 2000 1.2.
I just installed Forms 4.5 for someone yesterday. No crash. No patch.
I'm a systems analyst for a distributed application that runs on 40 Oracle 7.3.4 servers (39 production, one test) for a Fortune 100 company. They all have PL/SQL based forms (somewheres around 40-50 forms, IIRC, most multi-page and all multi-block) running against them 24/7, 364-5. Never had a "bye-bye instance" (in the 14 months I've been involved, anyway).
I also use Designer 2000 with no problems, though I'm not sure of the version as it's at my office and I'm not.
I'm no Oracle guru, though some of the DBAs I work with, are. Maybe that's the difference? Better DBAs?
I'm sorry your experience was so bad, though I'm not surprised. I've never found any Mac competence at Circuit City (or CompuSA, Sears, etc.).
I'm fortunate to have one of the first few Apple Stores within 25 miles of my (very rural) home here in Texas.
The day OS X 10.1 was released, I went in and got an upgrade CD. After spending a few minutes drooling over the 22" Cinema Display, I went to the counter and asked if they had the 10.1 upgrade CDs. I was immediately handed the package from a stack on the counter -- no questions asked. AFTER handing it to me, the guy said, "You have OS X already installed, right?" I said "yes" and was on my way.
I discovered when I got home it was the full install (along with the 9.2 upgrade for Classic).
I was thoroughly impressed that I was required to show no proof of purchase. A wonderful customer service experience -- especially considering that it was a FREE UPGRADE.
Granted, OS X 10.0 rightfully should have been a beta. But 10.1 kicks the proverbial ass!
The way Apple handled this upgrade process sets a new standard, IMHO.
Re:Where is accountability to the public?
on
Echelon in the News
·
· Score: 1
How does the public know who to NOT vote for if a mistake is made with Echelon? How does the public even know if a mistake has been made?
While it's not a complete solution, the first step is to stop voting for anyone that has "R" or "D" next to their name on a ballot. While pretending to be adversaries they collude to expand their collective power by continuously eroding our freedoms, thus we end up with things like Echelon.
Until the people wake up and realize that every person inside the Beltway (for starters) is concerned only with maintaining and expanding their own power, there is no hope for the future of this once-great Republic. We need to break the stranglehold that Democrats and Republicans jointly hold on government and its power at almost every level in this country. Only then will we have honest discourse or debate on any issue, much less the hope of some accountability.
I agree with most of what you said. However... I have to pick a couple of nits. You said:
"Microsoft is still a monopoly, true, but for the first time since DOS, they have a competitor (Linux). Linux's growth rate is outpacing Microsoft on desktops and, more importantly, servers (where.NET will be controlled). ONE misstep, and Microsoft could find Linux with 10% or more of the desktop market, and StarOffice/OpenOffice being rolled out en masse on corporate desktops. To be honest, I believe that this process will continue. It's inevitable that Linux, because of the fact it's the only true cross-platform, scalable mainstream OS on the market, will eventually gain a greater number of desktop users than Apple."
IIRC, the Macintosh operating system and Apple IIx were dominant (small "d" -- at the very least a *major* competitor) in the business market until at least the release of Windows 3.1 in 1991. That was seven years (after the release of Macintosh in 1984) that Microsoft was playing catch-up big-time. And badly. It wasn't *really* until "Chicago" (Windows 95) was released that they reached monopolistic ability in the market. Even then, I believe it was at least in small part due to horrific mismanagement at Apple.
Second, I'm not sure how you can claim that Linux is "the only true cross-platform, scalable mainstream OS on the market" in light of OS X. I will be the first to admit that OS X has a ways to go but Apple is quite apparently committed to it with a *lot* more organization and financial backing than Linux. (And have you seen the Cocoa development environment? Unbelievably impressive.)
I'm not knocking Linux. I've used and I like what it represents. But it has NO marketing behind it to speak of (as compared to OS X) and couldn't in it's wettest dream hope to be as pretty, let alone as usable for the average office worker.
I'm a Macintosh fan (there's the disclaimer) but realistic. And I still see no way in hell that Linux (at least in it's current incarnation) will ever have more *desktops* than Macintosh... unless Apple hits another "dark age" in management. Which is never out of the question.
While I agree with you that blaming the new management entirely for the financial downturn is not fair in this economic environment, I disagree with you that Philip and his co-founders were not entirely responsible for the past profits. aD is a service business and any service business is built on the quality of the people.
Philip, Jin, Eve, et. al. built this company and to say that they were lucky because there happened to be a dot-com boom at the time is ridiculous and ignores the fact that this company was profitable from the moment they opened the doors. Their revenue stream came from customers, not wild-eyed, delirious investors. That hardly compares to the other "dot-commers".
Despite my reluctance to assign full blame for the current financial troubles to the VCs, I believe the company would still be profitable (if less so) in spite of the "dot-com bust" if not for their incredible incompetence. An agressive, hungry, $20 million/year startup should not have any executive making over $200,000 in salary, much less a couple dozen of them. It seems Philip knew this. The VCs management apparently doesn't. Perhaps they are motivated by something other than the company's future?
Turning down an offer from Microsoft to be the first enterprise solution available on.NET also won't go into the "Brilliant Moves" Hall of Fame. And don't get me started on their original intention (that they appear, for now, to be backing away from) to close the source and license the software. That strategy led to a half-cooked product that is not only failing to grow market share, it's causing loss of market share and alienating developers. Each of these mistakes they made over Philip's objections.
Most amazing, though, is the hubris of these sharks essentially hi-jacking a company of which they only own 30% and then suing the shareholders that own the other 70%, naming the corporation as a plaintiff and squandering $250,000 of the defendants' money to do it! How can a majority owner be sued by his own company?
I had the privilege last Friday (the day after/. ran the original story on this lawsuit) to attend Philip's One Day Internet Applications Seminar and chat with him. In response to questions about this situation he said, "I don't care about control of the company but I'm a shareholder and I have to protect my investment. The company has been losing money ever since the current management took over." Unlike some characterizations of him that I have read, that doesn't sound to me like a guy with an ego problem. It seems very practical to me.
Just 2 cents from a Philip Greenspun admirer. (I have doubled my income in the last 2 years in part as a result of things I learned from Philip.)
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe you want to do a documentary on how documentaries slant information ... in which case the raw footage, particularly that which isn't part of the final cut, is what interests you.
/*begin OT rant
If I could get the raw footage for some of these crappy "news magazine" shows (Dateline NBC, Primetime Live, 60 Minutes, 20/20, etc.) the shows might have some value to me.
Virtually every episode of every one of these shows I've ever seen is obviously (badly) edited to present a slanted view on the topic. Even when their slant happens to agree with mine (not very often!), it pisses me off. If I already have an opinion on the topic, I want it challenged and I want both sides presented objectively so others who haven't formed an opinion can do so effectively.
Every time I see someone interviewed on one of those shows, I imagine the interviewee in his/her living room screaming "That's not what I said!" as I'm watching it.
/*end OT rant
To bring this back on topic, I kinda dig the idea Cringely's kicking around. For episodes of his show dealing with subjects/people that I'm particularly interested in it would be really cool to see the raw footage. For things slightly less interesting to me, the "nerd" edition would fit the bill.
I'm no expert on the Telecom industry, but I've been hearing and reading these same predictions for 6 or 7 years now. Over that entire period, there was always some "telecom guru" or another predicting an imminent bandwidth shortage. None of them ever happened.
The beauty of capitalism is that where there is a demand, someone will create a supply because there's money to be made. In this case, more so because there is already so much unlit fiber there. SOMEONE will find a way to acquire it and get it lit if there is that much demand.
OTOH, the anticompetitive nature of the large Telcos concerns me somewhat. I wonder If I would have some sort of broadband access available to my rural home if SBC wasn't making so much money by making sure ISDN is my only option?
...By law, you have the right to not put your Social Security Number on your driver's license.
I wonder if this is still the case. The following is excerpted from Claire Wolfe's essay "Land Mine Legislation"
A law requiring that all states begin issuing drivers licenses carrying Social Security numbers and "security features" (such as magnetically coded fingerprints and personal records) by October 1, 2000. "...A Federal agency may not accept for any identification-related purpose a drivers' license, or other comparable identification document, issued by a State, unless the license or document satisfies the [requirements set forth in this legislation]. In other words, drivers licenses and government non-driver IDs will still look different in all 50 states, but they will, in fact, be part of a national ID system. If your drivers license doesn't meet the federal standard -- no Social Security, no passport, no federal contracts, no "benefits." And just try cashing a check at your federally regulated bank.
In her footnotes she includes the following footnote for the above paragraph:
(De-facto National ID Card) Began life in the Immigration Control and Financial Responsibility Act of 1996, sections 111, 118, 119, 127 and 133; was eventually folded into the Omnibus Appropriations Act, HR 3610 (which was itself formerly called the Defense Appropriations Act -- but we wouldn't want to confuse anyone, here, would we?); became public law 104-208 on 9/30/96; see sections 656 and 657 among others
I haven't looked this up myself to verify but I have read it other places as well.
I would suggest following the link and reading the entire essay. It's quite enlightening.
Informative link. Thanks.
I particularly like section (2) of paragraph (c) "Exceptions".
It's really thoughtful of these fascist pricks to take the time to write out an exception that says in essence, "If the whole thing happens outside of our jurisdiction where none of our laws apply, we'll let it slide."
The arrogance is truly mind-boggling.
Where'd the "home-defense" dept. come from on Slashdot?
/. and openly admire Rob's net accomplishments. I expect I would find him personable if I met him. But... anyone who wants to take my guns is violent and my enemy -- or ignorant on the issue. I suspect Rob is just mostly ignorant on this topic, just like I'm mostly ignorant of Perl so I don't really hold it against him.)
Are you a closet gun-nut, Michael?
Just last Wednesday in the Slash forum on subscriptions, someone asked Rob how he would describe himself politically. I don't quite remember all of his meandering, ungrounded answer but he ended with something like "No one should be allowed to own guns." (I tried to find a link to the forum log but couldn't.)
I can only assume that CmdrTaco is opposed to anyone defending their home and probably would not approve of this story.
(Disclaimer: I love
Linux was a lot like a girl named Allison that I used to date. She was a hot redhead with large, firm breasts in most of my honors classes.
Anyone else wondering what her breasts were like in the rest of his classes? And what would make them transmogrify from one class to the next? Maybe that's why she acted so crazy! That's freaky, man!
Or, maybe I just misread it.
There is no "good guy" any more is there? A politician's a politician.
politician: (root word politics from the Latin, poli, meaning "many" and tics, "a tiny, bloodsucking parasite")
(For those that don't already know, I didn't come up with that. I probably didn't even quote it right, but I think it's amusing and accurate. Was it Mark Twain that first said that... or Dave Barry...? I can't remember.)
As the parent post says, he has become quite arrogant... and I daresay a bit jealous of Steve Jobs.
Please understand, I've been what is called a "Mac Fanatic" since I first saw one in 1984. I now make my living on NT, AIX, Linux, etc. but still prefer to use Mac OS X at home.
At least once I day a cuss (under my breath, or, often loudly) NT 4 because it is HORRID interface design. And this is AFTER I moved the task bar to the top so the Start "drop-down" menu doesn't "drop-up" (with "Shutdown" being the first thing you encounter on the Start "drop-up" menu!), created "shortcuts" (that don't work completely or intuitively) to all my drives on the desktop, etc. to mimic the interface Jef created in, what, 1980? 1982? (with improvements since, of course)
But he needs to lighten up now. He is, IMHO, the Father of the GUI. (I'm not trolling and don't want to rehash old Xerox PARC arguments. I'm talking about mainstream markets.) But he's been really hard on OS X's Aqua interface and I like it. There are things in Aqua that I, personally, think are a step backward. But I can modify those THROUGH PREFERENCE SETTINGS (or other easy modifications) to be more like what I'm used to, and overall, I think OS X is the coolest OS in the history of personal computing. ("You got your point-and-click ease in my powerful OS!" "You got your powerful OS in my point-and-click ease!") Two great tastes that taste great together.
My message to Jef is: Rest on your laurels or continue to innovate. Either way I can respect you. But don't become the guy that makes his living by criticizing what others are doing. That's John Dvorak's job.
The point of the bill, as I read it, is to put high-speed Internet access on a par with telephone service, in that it should be available to everyone. The bill requires that high-speed access be available through every bell central office, or CO, within five years; and it requires that every loop from that CO, regardless of distance, be capable of providing high-speed service at the customer's request. If the loop cannot support high-speed access, then the telco must use other technology to deliver the service.
Pardon me for adding appropriate emphasis, but this is almost everything that's wrong with America. Government can not require anything that the market will not support without someone paying for it.
I speak as someone who loves my rural home with the only exception being: I pay $118/month for 128k dialup ISDN because it's my only choice. (OK, my best choice, for now -- Starband costs $600 up front for less than 3x the speed and a whole lot more latency. Not enough to justify it for me.)
As much as I envy my co-workers who pay $49/month for DSL or broadband cable that's, on average, 3-6 times as fast as my connection and always on to boot, I realize that I have no right to high speed Internet access. I chose to live here. This sacrifice, thought it sucks, is worth it for me and my family. I don't expect anyone or any company to spend money they cannot recoup just to satisfy my net speed-lust. Nor will they.
Government guns will only make matters worse. Every word I changed to bold type in the quoted section of your post requires violence to accomplish. As does everything government does. And someone will have to pay for it.
I agree. I read the court transcript (and not the stories).
Seems to me this script kiddie is an idiot and should be tried and convicted of defacing the property of others.
Seems to me also, that the prosecutor and FBI agent in this court hearing are not all that concerned with his real crimes. They want to whip everyone into a frenzy about his intentions to blow up stuff, even though, as near as I can tell from the transcript, most of it they presented was wildly exaggerated or outright fabricated.
Typical. If they really thought he was as dangerous as they now are claiming, why wasn't he arrested when the executed their search warrant?
Don't misunderstand. I have no desire to defend the tripe on his website. But I don't see an idiot-exclusion clause in the First Amendment.
I've been reluctant to use the MS IM client because it didn't appear they had fully integrated it's virus abilities with all their other software. Now that it's part of a fully integrated Microsoft Virus Productivity Suite, I'm ready!
Can anybody tell me where I can sign up for one of those Passport Universal Identifier and Cybercash Wallets and get the MS implant in my right hand or forehead?
Could the Slashdot posse please understand: you never met Phillip. He can't code (just READ the book and cut through the crap; analyze his 'facts'), and people who meet him instinctively dislike him. You can't run a company if everyone hates you.
I met Phillip and instinctively liked him. But then I'm not envious of his success like many are. (Like him or not, the man has some significant accomplishments.)
One point of irony related to your assertion that he can't code: I was in one of Phillip's internet seminars a few months ago and he mentioned Slashdot. He said (not verbatim, best recollection), "When the guys at Slashdot released the Slashcode source Rob Malda said it might not be the cleanest code because much of it was written when he was just learning. He wasn't kidding! That's the ugliest code I've ever seen. But it works and they have built a very successful web community on it."
(I have no opinion of either as I am a novice coder. Personally, I admire the accomplishments of Rob Malda and Phillip Greenspun.)
Point well taken -- LinuxPPC is still quite important in many places (and I had forgotten about the new PPC Open mobos when I posted).
However, my specific contention was with the previous poster implying that the quote in question backed up his assertion that many Macs can't run OS X, when, in fact, only one group listed in the quote, PowerMacs, have anything to do with Macintosh.
Cheers
The 22" Apple display has got to be some sort of loss leader for Apple - most competetors charge about $4000 for the same spec monitor.
I've also often thought that the Cinema Display is one of the best price/value products Apple has ever produced. It deserves much more promotion than they give it, IMHO. But then, maybe they couldn't support the demand...
I don't think it's a loss leader, though. (For one thing, that's definitely not Steve Jobs' style of business.)
I think it probably has something to do with Apple's large investment a few years back in one of only a handful of companies that actually produce LCD screens. I can't remember for sure, but I think it might have been Samsung? Anyway, terms of the deal included priority access for Apple to LCD screens and I suspect (but don't know) that they would also get a price break.
I know I want one!
Let's ignore that not even all Macs can run OS X, here's a quote from the interview:
"The PPC tree has it's own complexities, mostly because we have to deal with a large set of very different machines and CPUs. From the PowerMacs, PRePs & CHRP, the 4xx and 8xx based embedded platforms, and even IBM pSeries and iSeries servers."
Just to clarify: There are indeed many Macs that can't run OS X but that quote is irrelevant to that point as he covers all Macs with the "PowerMacs" designation. All the rest are embedded platforms that have nothing at all to do with Macintosh. (Excepting, of course, a few 5+ year-old clones that might fall in the "PRePs" and "CHRP" classifications.)
Then you certainly have not tried the following thing:
-Install forms 4.5 now. Forms 4.5 is year 2000 complient, the installer crashes (!)(there is a patch but.....)
-use plsql records in a 7.3.4. DB. Bye bye instance.
-use designer 2000 1.2.
I just installed Forms 4.5 for someone yesterday. No crash. No patch.
I'm a systems analyst for a distributed application that runs on 40 Oracle 7.3.4 servers (39 production, one test) for a Fortune 100 company. They all have PL/SQL based forms (somewheres around 40-50 forms, IIRC, most multi-page and all multi-block) running against them 24/7, 364-5. Never had a "bye-bye instance" (in the 14 months I've been involved, anyway).
I also use Designer 2000 with no problems, though I'm not sure of the version as it's at my office and I'm not.
I'm no Oracle guru, though some of the DBAs I work with, are. Maybe that's the difference? Better DBAs?
I'm sorry your experience was so bad, though I'm not surprised. I've never found any Mac competence at Circuit City (or CompuSA, Sears, etc.).
I'm fortunate to have one of the first few Apple Stores within 25 miles of my (very rural) home here in Texas.
The day OS X 10.1 was released, I went in and got an upgrade CD. After spending a few minutes drooling over the 22" Cinema Display, I went to the counter and asked if they had the 10.1 upgrade CDs. I was immediately handed the package from a stack on the counter -- no questions asked. AFTER handing it to me, the guy said, "You have OS X already installed, right?" I said "yes" and was on my way.
I discovered when I got home it was the full install (along with the 9.2 upgrade for Classic).
I was thoroughly impressed that I was required to show no proof of purchase. A wonderful customer service experience -- especially considering that it was a FREE UPGRADE.
Granted, OS X 10.0 rightfully should have been a beta. But 10.1 kicks the proverbial ass!
The way Apple handled this upgrade process sets a new standard, IMHO.
While it's not a complete solution, the first step is to stop voting for anyone that has "R" or "D" next to their name on a ballot. While pretending to be adversaries they collude to expand their collective power by continuously eroding our freedoms, thus we end up with things like Echelon.
Until the people wake up and realize that every person inside the Beltway (for starters) is concerned only with maintaining and expanding their own power, there is no hope for the future of this once-great Republic. We need to break the stranglehold that Democrats and Republicans jointly hold on government and its power at almost every level in this country. Only then will we have honest discourse or debate on any issue, much less the hope of some accountability.
Might I humbly suggest that one start here?
IIRC, the Macintosh operating system and Apple IIx were dominant (small "d" -- at the very least a *major* competitor) in the business market until at least the release of Windows 3.1 in 1991. That was seven years (after the release of Macintosh in 1984) that Microsoft was playing catch-up big-time. And badly. It wasn't *really* until "Chicago" (Windows 95) was released that they reached monopolistic ability in the market. Even then, I believe it was at least in small part due to horrific mismanagement at Apple.
Second, I'm not sure how you can claim that Linux is "the only true cross-platform, scalable mainstream OS on the market" in light of OS X. I will be the first to admit that OS X has a ways to go but Apple is quite apparently committed to it with a *lot* more organization and financial backing than Linux. (And have you seen the Cocoa development environment? Unbelievably impressive.)
I'm not knocking Linux. I've used and I like what it represents. But it has NO marketing behind it to speak of (as compared to OS X) and couldn't in it's wettest dream hope to be as pretty, let alone as usable for the average office worker.
I'm a Macintosh fan (there's the disclaimer) but realistic. And I still see no way in hell that Linux (at least in it's current incarnation) will ever have more *desktops* than Macintosh... unless Apple hits another "dark age" in management. Which is never out of the question.
While I agree with you that blaming the new management entirely for the financial downturn is not fair in this economic environment, I disagree with you that Philip and his co-founders were not entirely responsible for the past profits. aD is a service business and any service business is built on the quality of the people.
.NET also won't go into the "Brilliant Moves" Hall of Fame. And don't get me started on their original intention (that they appear, for now, to be backing away from) to close the source and license the software. That strategy led to a half-cooked product that is not only failing to grow market share, it's causing loss of market share and alienating developers. Each of these mistakes they made over Philip's objections.
/. ran the original story on this lawsuit) to attend Philip's One Day Internet Applications Seminar and chat with him. In response to questions about this situation he said, "I don't care about control of the company but I'm a shareholder and I have to protect my investment. The company has been losing money ever since the current management took over." Unlike some characterizations of him that I have read, that doesn't sound to me like a guy with an ego problem. It seems very practical to me.
Philip, Jin, Eve, et. al. built this company and to say that they were lucky because there happened to be a dot-com boom at the time is ridiculous and ignores the fact that this company was profitable from the moment they opened the doors. Their revenue stream came from customers, not wild-eyed, delirious investors. That hardly compares to the other "dot-commers".
Despite my reluctance to assign full blame for the current financial troubles to the VCs, I believe the company would still be profitable (if less so) in spite of the "dot-com bust" if not for their incredible incompetence. An agressive, hungry, $20 million/year startup should not have any executive making over $200,000 in salary, much less a couple dozen of them. It seems Philip knew this. The VCs management apparently doesn't. Perhaps they are motivated by something other than the company's future?
Turning down an offer from Microsoft to be the first enterprise solution available on
Most amazing, though, is the hubris of these sharks essentially hi-jacking a company of which they only own 30% and then suing the shareholders that own the other 70%, naming the corporation as a plaintiff and squandering $250,000 of the defendants' money to do it! How can a majority owner be sued by his own company?
I had the privilege last Friday (the day after
Just 2 cents from a Philip Greenspun admirer. (I have doubled my income in the last 2 years in part as a result of things I learned from Philip.)