I was born in 66. I think you can see the decline in animation as analogous to the decline in the parks (DisneyLand DisneyWorld).
I will always have a soft spot for the Disney parks. I have very magical memories of the rides an attractions - PeterPan ride with the flying chairs, Haunted House, GE Theater, Eastern Airlines - If you had wings, the 360 degree movie screens in the Monsanto theater, animatronic presidents, etc. etc.
I feel like DisneyWorld was on the cutting edge of creating a theatric experience using the latest in high-tech tools. No one over the years has really duplicated this experience. Unfortunately, Disney seems to have rested on it's laurels over the past 20 years. I often wonder how amazing the parks could be if they were really pushing the boundaries like they used to and were using the latest in computers, lasers, robotics, networking, material sciences, etc. But, like everyone else, they have succumbed to the quarter to quarter business model.
installer patches will rapidly be developed and widely spread to allow MacOS-X-Intel to be installed on any x86-based system
Yeah, but not distributed by any company with an addressd to mail the summons to.
(thereby increasing the popularity and spread of MacOS-X,
EXACTLY.
Apart from their industrial design, which is absolutely first rate, there will be nothing to recommend Apple-designed boxes over dirt-cheap clones.
Except that Apple already convinces people to pay a premium for their hardware and there won't BE any legitimate clones on the market.
System performance will be below par compared to other Intel-based offerings,
Why would you think that? OS X will blow Windows out of the water.
The reverse transition will also be true: People will try installing Windows on an Intel-based Apple box. Apple will try (and fail) to prevent this, too.
Phil Shiller said tonight that they won't try to stop it.
Moving to the Intel-based platforms places Apple in direct competition with Microsoft. The relationship between Apple and Microsoft has long been one of, shall we say, détente.
It will still be in detente for years to come before Apple finally put Windows out of it's misery. Actually, I don't want Windows to go away. I just want it to know it's place.
They will then run smack-bang into the same wall Jean-Louis Gassée did when he tried to get BeOS bundled with PCs -- Microsoft won't let them.
Another great thing about MacIntel is that Apple can't be shut out of any kind of monoploy on DRM that Windows may have enjoyed as it relates to Intel's serialization dealie.
Yeah, but, you know, those bake-offs only really convinced us folk who had to run video-editing and Photoshop. We knew the PowerPC was pretty decent and we ate it up. Now we are being presented with reasonable analysis by his Steveness and we eat that up.
As for the consumer, Intel=good. America=Apple Pie, etc.
As for you geeks, I can feel your ice starting to melt.
"Given their track record with iPod DRM, i wouldn't put it past them, either."
Oh come now. Everybody knows DRM sucks, but Apple struck an extremely reasonable compromise. Without companies like Apple, the interests of people who have a clue would not be currently represented at the market level at all. Bill would be so far in bed with the RIAA that you'd have to check in with the RIAA every day before you played your music.
Apple DRM is the least intrusive in the business and they'd make it far less intrusive if they could. They get it.
I don't think that the point of this particular part of the article was that cells wouldn't mutate. The point was that the beneficial mutations won't have an automatic propagation vector because humans are increasingly getting to the point where we don't allow those with non-beneficial gene mutations to die off.
I think the allure here is that the building blocks can eventually be extremely small, and, since they are uniform, easily shipped to, say, Mars.
Since every part must be constructed from the same basic building block, construction algorithms will be the same (or similar) regardless of the component. I would imagine this rules out surprises and the need for specialized spare parts.
Furthermore, inventory considerations and calculations are greatly reduced as the relative importance and fragility of various parts does not need to be assessed.
So, while it's not replicating itself from raw materials, I think this is a logical first step.
Yeah, Apple would be crazy to listen to Slashdotters as a focus group, but wouldn't it want to disseminate information to the developer community?
Apple is a clever company with clever people. Surely they realize how important the "network" factor is. Surely they realize that little rocks dropped in this pond spread pretty far?
I am not going to sugar-coat this, ASOT, we alpha geeks that evangelize Apple in our spare time don't do it to help Apple financially - we do it because it's the right thing to do.
Are you, like, risking something by your comments? Or are you part of an intentional, low-key information distribution conduit through which Apple is attempting to coop OSS geeks?
Yeah, but what if you're not downloading it? What if you are streaming it. If Batman lasts 2 hours, surely you can download 148 MB in 2 hours - minus the buffer.
I imagine Apple feels like people want to own music - something they will listen to thousands of times - more than they want to own videos - which they may only watch a few times.
This would also be easier to sell to the Hollywood paranoids.
I imagine, rather, that in typical Jobs style, he will want to bypass regular video and shoot for HD video. This fits in with his pattern of being 10 years ahead and it also means he doesn't enter the already crowded field of NetFlix, BlockBuster, Time Warner, etc. It also fits in with the "year of HD" talk, the MacWorld stuff with Sony's pres., the fact that HD is already built into their video editing suites, and all the rest of the rumors floating around out there.
The more I think about it, the more I was right to call it "Funky".
So, it won't auto-execute, but do I really want to acquire a folder full of spam widgets just by surfing around? If I want that, I use WIndows.
Also, what if the widgets are named like widgets I trust? I might launch one on accident. I don't know how much damage widget code can do, but I stand by my assertion that it sounds "funky".
So, no, I am not "clinging on to some sort of criticism".
"Or were you just still trying to cling on to some sort of criticism of Apple with an argument that is basically nothing more than "yeah but..." "
Relax. I love Apple.
By saying "funky", I mean I don't know if I fully understand the ramifications. The thrust of this thread seems to be it's a serious security breach. I don't see it, but crackers tend to find the most ingenius ways to get into shit and I am saying I would have to know more.
Maybe you could answer the questions I posed. Is it really a big deal? It sounds to me that Safari is just choosing a certain directory to put the widgets in. There is no "auto-install" as far as I can tell.
Is this "installed" or just put into a certain directory.
If the widget auto-executed, then that would seem like a REALLY bad idea. But, if "installed" just means the widget is placed where Dashboard expects to find widgets, that seems less unsafe.
You would still have to consciously decide to activate the widget in Dashboard, right? At that point you're at the same security level as any widget regardless of where the browser put it on your system.
Still sounds funky, but not like the sky is falling.
No offense, bit give the hardware options shit a rest already. How often do you buy a computer, once every couple of years? Buy an Apple. If it's not the best when a couple of years are up, by something else. Me thinks ideology is getting in the way of practicality.
"seems too gimped for anything more than what my grandparents would use a PC for"
Well, it's not a Corvette, but it's not a Chevette either. I have a 15" PowerBook - which is about on par with the Mini and I have no problem editing video, manipulating large Photoshop files, recording narration, ripping CDs, etc. etc. - usually doing several things at once. The mini has a dedicated ATI Radeon 9200 graphics chip with 32MB VRAM and the G4 is no slouch.
Slashdot Mirror
I was born in 66. I think you can see the decline in animation as analogous to the decline in the parks (DisneyLand DisneyWorld).
I will always have a soft spot for the Disney parks. I have very magical memories of the rides an attractions - PeterPan ride with the flying chairs, Haunted House, GE Theater, Eastern Airlines - If you had wings, the 360 degree movie screens in the Monsanto theater, animatronic presidents, etc. etc.
I feel like DisneyWorld was on the cutting edge of creating a theatric experience using the latest in high-tech tools. No one over the years has really duplicated this experience. Unfortunately, Disney seems to have rested on it's laurels over the past 20 years. I often wonder how amazing the parks could be if they were really pushing the boundaries like they used to and were using the latest in computers, lasers, robotics, networking, material sciences, etc. But, like everyone else, they have succumbed to the quarter to quarter business model.
installer patches will rapidly be developed and widely spread to allow MacOS-X-Intel to be installed on any x86-based system
Yeah, but not distributed by any company with an addressd to mail the summons to.
(thereby increasing the popularity and spread of MacOS-X,
EXACTLY.
Apart from their industrial design, which is absolutely first rate, there will be nothing to recommend Apple-designed boxes over dirt-cheap clones.
Except that Apple already convinces people to pay a premium for their hardware and there won't BE any legitimate clones on the market.
System performance will be below par compared to other Intel-based offerings,
Why would you think that? OS X will blow Windows out of the water.
The reverse transition will also be true: People will try installing Windows on an Intel-based Apple box. Apple will try (and fail) to prevent this, too.
Phil Shiller said tonight that they won't try to stop it.
Moving to the Intel-based platforms places Apple in direct competition with Microsoft. The relationship between Apple and Microsoft has long been one of, shall we say, détente.
It will still be in detente for years to come before Apple finally put Windows out of it's misery. Actually, I don't want Windows to go away. I just want it to know it's place.
They will then run smack-bang into the same wall Jean-Louis Gassée did when he tried to get BeOS bundled with PCs -- Microsoft won't let them.
You're living in the past.
Many creative types who depend on their computers for their livelihood upgrade computers about every 2 to 3 years anyway to stay competitive.
I haven't seen this mentioned:
Another great thing about MacIntel is that Apple can't be shut out of any kind of monoploy on DRM that Windows may have enjoyed as it relates to Intel's serialization dealie.
Hold on, it takes a minute for me to switch processors I am defending....
Takes another sip of kool-aid. Head spins around.
OK, I'm ready.
You see, the "strongest processor roadmap" means more than just the fastest chip, it also means low-power, versatility, wi-max etc.
Yeah, but, you know, those bake-offs only really convinced us folk who had to run video-editing and Photoshop. We knew the PowerPC was pretty decent and we ate it up. Now we are being presented with reasonable analysis by his Steveness and we eat that up.
As for the consumer, Intel=good. America=Apple Pie, etc.
As for you geeks, I can feel your ice starting to melt.
Color me stoked.
"Given their track record with iPod DRM, i wouldn't put it past them, either."
Oh come now. Everybody knows DRM sucks, but Apple struck an extremely reasonable compromise. Without companies like Apple, the interests of people who have a clue would not be currently represented at the market level at all. Bill would be so far in bed with the RIAA that you'd have to check in with the RIAA every day before you played your music.
Apple DRM is the least intrusive in the business and they'd make it far less intrusive if they could. They get it.
Wait a couple of years. This is the first step towards world domination.
Insert rubbing hands and evil laugh.
Seriously, Steve has a plan for us all.
I don't think that the point of this particular part of the article was that cells wouldn't mutate. The point was that the beneficial mutations won't have an automatic propagation vector because humans are increasingly getting to the point where we don't allow those with non-beneficial gene mutations to die off.
640kb should be enough for anybody.
Is the Slashdot Main Page some sort of temple that must not be defiled?
What if the story was about a new video card, is that pimping?
I think Slashdot should cover geek things in general - be they scientific, technical, or cultural.
I think the allure here is that the building blocks can eventually be extremely small, and, since they are uniform, easily shipped to, say, Mars.
Since every part must be constructed from the same basic building block, construction algorithms will be the same (or similar) regardless of the component. I would imagine this rules out surprises and the need for specialized spare parts.
Furthermore, inventory considerations and calculations are greatly reduced as the relative importance and fragility of various parts does not need to be assessed.
So, while it's not replicating itself from raw materials, I think this is a logical first step.
nothing can go wrong... go wrong... go wrong... go wrong...
Yeah, Apple would be crazy to listen to Slashdotters as a focus group, but wouldn't it want to disseminate information to the developer community?
Apple is a clever company with clever people. Surely they realize how important the "network" factor is. Surely they realize that little rocks dropped in this pond spread pretty far?
I am not going to sugar-coat this, ASOT, we alpha geeks that evangelize Apple in our spare time don't do it to help Apple financially - we do it because it's the right thing to do.
You sound legit to me.
Are you, like, risking something by your comments? Or are you part of an intentional, low-key information distribution conduit through which Apple is attempting to coop OSS geeks?
Yeah, but what if you're not downloading it? What if you are streaming it. If Batman lasts 2 hours, surely you can download 148 MB in 2 hours - minus the buffer.
I imagine Apple feels like people want to own music - something they will listen to thousands of times - more than they want to own videos - which they may only watch a few times.
This would also be easier to sell to the Hollywood paranoids.
I imagine, rather, that in typical Jobs style, he will want to bypass regular video and shoot for HD video. This fits in with his pattern of being 10 years ahead and it also means he doesn't enter the already crowded field of NetFlix, BlockBuster, Time Warner, etc. It also fits in with the "year of HD" talk, the MacWorld stuff with Sony's pres., the fact that HD is already built into their video editing suites, and all the rest of the rumors floating around out there.
The more I think about it, the more I was right to call it "Funky".
So, it won't auto-execute, but do I really want to acquire a folder full of spam widgets just by surfing around? If I want that, I use WIndows.
Also, what if the widgets are named like widgets I trust? I might launch one on accident. I don't know how much damage widget code can do, but I stand by my assertion that it sounds "funky".
So, no, I am not "clinging on to some sort of criticism".
Relax. I love Apple.
By saying "funky", I mean I don't know if I fully understand the ramifications. The thrust of this thread seems to be it's a serious security breach. I don't see it, but crackers tend to find the most ingenius ways to get into shit and I am saying I would have to know more.
Maybe you could answer the questions I posed. Is it really a big deal? It sounds to me that Safari is just choosing a certain directory to put the widgets in. There is no "auto-install" as far as I can tell.
Is this "installed" or just put into a certain directory.
If the widget auto-executed, then that would seem like a REALLY bad idea. But, if "installed" just means the widget is placed where Dashboard expects to find widgets, that seems less unsafe.
You would still have to consciously decide to activate the widget in Dashboard, right? At that point you're at the same security level as any widget regardless of where the browser put it on your system.
Still sounds funky, but not like the sky is falling.
take the blue pill!
## Sue fan sites
#Please name one other company that sues their fan sites.
Please name one other company that HAS fan sites.
No offense, bit give the hardware options shit a rest already. How often do you buy a computer, once every couple of years? Buy an Apple. If it's not the best when a couple of years are up, by something else. Me thinks ideology is getting in the way of practicality.
"seems too gimped for anything more than what my grandparents would use a PC for"
Well, it's not a Corvette, but it's not a Chevette either. I have a 15" PowerBook - which is about on par with the Mini and I have no problem editing video, manipulating large Photoshop files, recording narration, ripping CDs, etc. etc. - usually doing several things at once. The mini has a dedicated ATI Radeon 9200 graphics chip with 32MB VRAM and the G4 is no slouch.