But with computers we can get all the upsides of more features with none of the downsides (at least in software), so it makes no sense. It's like putting less books in a library if you had practically unlimited space and low fetch time.
The problem is that software is not immune from feature-bloat. There isn't unlimited "space" and the fetch-time is usually measured in the number of clicks to perform some function.
The UI has now become every bit as important as the functions it presents.
The bigger issue with Android is that its creator just bought HTC's competitor, making Google both supplier and competition to HTC.
Samsung has since announced that it is still heavily developing its own Bada OS, and now HTC is talking of their own OS as well. Coincidence? Of course not!
Its not that they will ditch Android, they wont, at least for now. But they need something there so that if Google ever play dodgy with Android, for example giving "Motorola" an unfair advantage, then they have something to fall back on.
You'll notice that almost all Android phone manufacturers also ship WinMo phones. They dont like putting all their eggs in one basket - and rightly so.:-)
Doesn't TM just store the files in a normal directory structure on disk? In theory you could navigate it using a terminal and find the file(s) you want.
If it is the file system or the disk that has failed, well that could happen to any form of backup.
I'm new to Apple stuff, but from what I've seen of TM it didn't seem that complicated - just a nice interface on top of something like rsync.
I could be wrong though...and I'm using Linux right now so cant check it.
Both are new and emerging products, very unlikely they would discontinue them. The "rumours" you mentioned are without substance.
Also, the only prediction that holds any weight would be that OSX will eventually limit apps to only what's on the App Store, but I cant see it being the same level of restriction as on iOS. Any such limitation would need to be bypassable by a setting that anyone can turn on/off.
To clarify, I see them making the default setting that you have to get all apps from the App Store. If you want to download/install apps obtained from other sources (eg. the vendor's own website) you would need to enable "external sources" in the Settings panel (which you would be free to do).
They wont go further than this - it would spell the death of the platform. As I see it, the iDevices are really just there to draw people to the Mac. The mac & OSX are still Apple's main product - their HOME market if you like. The other devices are simply there as candy to bring people over to their platform.
Once you have an iPhone/iPad, and a collection of content in iTunes, its just a small extra step to make your next "PC" purchase a Mac, with the promise that it will integrate much better with the rest of your Apple stuff which you have been accumulating.
I mean you can get a Mac Mini quad-core running Lion Server, which serves up your iTunes content and you can control iTunes using any iOS device.
I think you can even use Apple TV to stream iTunes content that is located on another server (eg. the mac mini just mentioned) on your network, and the iOS device should still work to control that...
I could be wrong about certain details - I've never used any of the above enough to know...but from what I've heard it should be possible or very close to..."out of the box".
Some of that redundancy is called "companies competing with each other".
I agree with you from a consumer viewpoint, but I cant see how it would work without companies going out of business and people losing their jobs.
On the other hand, it would probably just speed up a process that is already happening...I think we'll see everything move to data networks eventually...as consumer demand increases.
Still, consumer demand isn't the only factor - here in Australia we have the public literally screaming for media delivered over internet but the media companies would rather sue consumers than offer them what they want. They probably figure they could make more money suing the public than they would otherwise get from selling their movies legitimately. Its a twisted world where the legal system is turned into a place of business.
in any case, it seemed to assume that networks only have one pc attached to each end.
For a home of just 2-3 "computers" (quite normal these days, particularly when you count all mobile devices as "computers"), Gigabit could very easily be maxed out.
sorry, forgot I wasn't logged in - above post is from me. replies welcome. not trying to argue religion - leave the religion out - I just want answers to my questions...and I cant promise there are not more questions to follow. I just find it hard to follow...surely I'm not alone.
It was purely because the original post I replied to had given a fair amount of personal info to back up the claim...whereas the replies hadn't even given any such weight to theirs.
It wasn't meant to be taken so seriously...merely just an observation.
So based on that specific context - no it couldn't be applied to any AC. I just felt that the use of AC had specific relevance in this case - and it turns out a few people disagree.
You are allowed to disagree...just like I stand by what I said.:-) Have a good day.
Why pass a law that means companies will try not to hire people? The way the world is going, they are already trying to replace people with machines, so your proposal would just accelerate that goal.
You have to remember that it isn't wrong for a company to be successful.
I wonder what the results would have been on something like debian or arch or fedora? It is well known that Canonical's implementation of linux in Ubuntu is one of the slowest commercial distributions out there. They trade speed for features (or bloat depending on your perspective).
I suspect Unity could be the culprit - they really should've used kubuntu for a more even playing field.
but in any case, the headline should've read "ubuntu" and not "linux"
More like "ubuntu is slower than PC-BSD ". Pretty close to what you suggested but I'm sure you could compare unity to KDE on a completely different system with different linux distros and get different results.
whilst I agree that ubuntu doesn't represent linux for performance, I'd be very surprised if any other distros except the recompile-everything ones perform that much better.
When I hear people complain of bloat, it usually means they dont understand how software works. The ONLY bloat that could possibly slow things down is either more layers of abstraction (which Ubuntu doesn't do) or more things running in the background.
The fact is though, that Ubuntu's software stack is nearly identical to that of fedora, opensuse, and any other mainstream distro.
Maybe they run more services by default, I dont know. But if they're running the same kernel, the same desktop, and the same graphics driver, I cant see how Ubuntu would be that much different to any other distro with respect to performance.
Phoronix probably even has hard numbers to back this up, since they do this kind of stuff - but I haven't looked.
Look you might be right about the dangers TooMuchToDo faces...but my comment had nothing to do with that. I'm not defending anything other than his guts for putting those details up there.
Read what I posted to the other AC here...its all about the context.
It was a specific situation where TooMuchToDo gave a fair amount of personal info to prove a point, and the only replies he got were from people too scared to show their face. Their replies were probably justified, but why hide when the original poster clearly didn't?
I thought it was clear what I meant - that I wasn't talking generally. It was just ironic that the people replying to TooMuchToDo were not prepared to come back on equal terms.
I also didn't deal with the content at all - because I wasn't really interested in that side of it.
Maybe you disagree and think my point is not relevant...that's fine. But its still amusing that you guys who replied to me also did so under AC. Sure, you're allowed to...but it was actually supporting my argument...are you embarrassed about what you wrote?
Normally, AC doesn't mean anything..but here, in this thread, now it does...because the context was about someone saying, "here's a bunch of details about me, personally, which I'm using to make a point". Its implicit that if you want to make a decent counter-argument, you also need to back it up in a similar way...
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, that makes 256 numbers. Shall we continue?
Programmer Day wasn't in the requirements. Show me the spec and I'll have it ready when its done.
There, FTFY ;)
Its built on UNIX - it is multi-user from the ground up. You can sudo and you can also su to another user in a terminal and run apps as that user.
You may be thinking of windows, where the multi-user stuff is very poorly done, and an afterthought.
Just make one that works well - that should put you in the top 10 at least.
If the developers are doing more work so that the users don't have to do as much work, then they are doing it right.
If the options menu had a search feature (like Windows 7's Start menu) then it would be easy to find, wouldn't it?
Only if you knew what words to search for.
But with computers we can get all the upsides of more features with none of the downsides (at least in software), so it makes no sense. It's like putting less books in a library if you had practically unlimited space and low fetch time.
The problem is that software is not immune from feature-bloat. There isn't unlimited "space" and the fetch-time is usually measured in the number of clicks to perform some function.
The UI has now become every bit as important as the functions it presents.
The bigger issue with Android is that its creator just bought HTC's competitor, making Google both supplier and competition to HTC.
Samsung has since announced that it is still heavily developing its own Bada OS, and now HTC is talking of their own OS as well. Coincidence? Of course not!
Its not that they will ditch Android, they wont, at least for now. But they need something there so that if Google ever play dodgy with Android, for example giving "Motorola" an unfair advantage, then they have something to fall back on.
You'll notice that almost all Android phone manufacturers also ship WinMo phones. They dont like putting all their eggs in one basket - and rightly so. :-)
Doesn't TM just store the files in a normal directory structure on disk? In theory you could navigate it using a terminal and find the file(s) you want.
If it is the file system or the disk that has failed, well that could happen to any form of backup.
I'm new to Apple stuff, but from what I've seen of TM it didn't seem that complicated - just a nice interface on top of something like rsync.
I could be wrong though...and I'm using Linux right now so cant check it.
Both are new and emerging products, very unlikely they would discontinue them. The "rumours" you mentioned are without substance.
Also, the only prediction that holds any weight would be that OSX will eventually limit apps to only what's on the App Store, but I cant see it being the same level of restriction as on iOS. Any such limitation would need to be bypassable by a setting that anyone can turn on/off.
To clarify, I see them making the default setting that you have to get all apps from the App Store. If you want to download/install apps obtained from other sources (eg. the vendor's own website) you would need to enable "external sources" in the Settings panel (which you would be free to do).
They wont go further than this - it would spell the death of the platform. As I see it, the iDevices are really just there to draw people to the Mac. The mac & OSX are still Apple's main product - their HOME market if you like. The other devices are simply there as candy to bring people over to their platform.
Once you have an iPhone/iPad, and a collection of content in iTunes, its just a small extra step to make your next "PC" purchase a Mac, with the promise that it will integrate much better with the rest of your Apple stuff which you have been accumulating.
Its an ingenious plan.
Cant you already do this?
I mean you can get a Mac Mini quad-core running Lion Server, which serves up your iTunes content and you can control iTunes using any iOS device.
I think you can even use Apple TV to stream iTunes content that is located on another server (eg. the mac mini just mentioned) on your network, and the iOS device should still work to control that...
I could be wrong about certain details - I've never used any of the above enough to know...but from what I've heard it should be possible or very close to..."out of the box".
is it still piracy if you copy the ROM from a machine you paid for and own?
Some of that redundancy is called "companies competing with each other".
I agree with you from a consumer viewpoint, but I cant see how it would work without companies going out of business and people losing their jobs.
On the other hand, it would probably just speed up a process that is already happening...I think we'll see everything move to data networks eventually...as consumer demand increases.
Still, consumer demand isn't the only factor - here in Australia we have the public literally screaming for media delivered over internet but the media companies would rather sue consumers than offer them what they want. They probably figure they could make more money suing the public than they would otherwise get from selling their movies legitimately. Its a twisted world where the legal system is turned into a place of business.
in any case, it seemed to assume that networks only have one pc attached to each end.
For a home of just 2-3 "computers" (quite normal these days, particularly when you count all mobile devices as "computers"), Gigabit could very easily be maxed out.
I'm pretty sure every airline knows where their planes are at any given moment.
Unless this was a private plane, I find it surprising that something wasn't tracking its location.
They found the missing link - it said "404 - File Not Found"
sorry, forgot I wasn't logged in - above post is from me. replies welcome. not trying to argue religion - leave the religion out - I just want answers to my questions...and I cant promise there are not more questions to follow. I just find it hard to follow...surely I'm not alone.
Read my replies to the other comments.
It was purely because the original post I replied to had given a fair amount of personal info to back up the claim...whereas the replies hadn't even given any such weight to theirs.
It wasn't meant to be taken so seriously...merely just an observation.
So based on that specific context - no it couldn't be applied to any AC. I just felt that the use of AC had specific relevance in this case - and it turns out a few people disagree.
You are allowed to disagree...just like I stand by what I said. :-) Have a good day.
How?
Why pass a law that means companies will try not to hire people? The way the world is going, they are already trying to replace people with machines, so your proposal would just accelerate that goal.
You have to remember that it isn't wrong for a company to be successful.
actually i forgot about unity - yes that part is different to the others. and it could well be the culprit here.
they should've used kubuntu...
I wonder what the results would have been on something like debian or arch or fedora? It is well known that Canonical's implementation of linux in Ubuntu is one of the slowest commercial distributions out there. They trade speed for features (or bloat depending on your perspective).
I suspect Unity could be the culprit - they really should've used kubuntu for a more even playing field.
but in any case, the headline should've read "ubuntu" and not "linux"
More like "ubuntu is slower than PC-BSD ". Pretty close to what you suggested but I'm sure you could compare unity to KDE on a completely different system with different linux distros and get different results.
If you have to modify either system to get it to work better, then what's the point of the benchmark?
whilst I agree that ubuntu doesn't represent linux for performance, I'd be very surprised if any other distros except the recompile-everything ones perform that much better.
When I hear people complain of bloat, it usually means they dont understand how software works. The ONLY bloat that could possibly slow things down is either more layers of abstraction (which Ubuntu doesn't do) or more things running in the background.
The fact is though, that Ubuntu's software stack is nearly identical to that of fedora, opensuse, and any other mainstream distro.
Maybe they run more services by default, I dont know. But if they're running the same kernel, the same desktop, and the same graphics driver, I cant see how Ubuntu would be that much different to any other distro with respect to performance.
Phoronix probably even has hard numbers to back this up, since they do this kind of stuff - but I haven't looked.
Look you might be right about the dangers TooMuchToDo faces...but my comment had nothing to do with that. I'm not defending anything other than his guts for putting those details up there.
Read what I posted to the other AC here...its all about the context.
It was a specific situation where TooMuchToDo gave a fair amount of personal info to prove a point, and the only replies he got were from people too scared to show their face. Their replies were probably justified, but why hide when the original poster clearly didn't?
I thought it was clear what I meant - that I wasn't talking generally. It was just ironic that the people replying to TooMuchToDo were not prepared to come back on equal terms.
I also didn't deal with the content at all - because I wasn't really interested in that side of it.
Maybe you disagree and think my point is not relevant...that's fine. But its still amusing that you guys who replied to me also did so under AC. Sure, you're allowed to...but it was actually supporting my argument...are you embarrassed about what you wrote?
Normally, AC doesn't mean anything..but here, in this thread, now it does...because the context was about someone saying, "here's a bunch of details about me, personally, which I'm using to make a point". Its implicit that if you want to make a decent counter-argument, you also need to back it up in a similar way...