I am saddened by the total immaturity of people towards this Developer. The Omnigroup is probably one of the more innovative and clever of the OS X app writers. For all the nil points people point out about Omniweb, I can point out good ones. Of course, you get the ad filtering and pop up blocking. You get Shortcuts, which I'm surprised no one has mentioned. Want to search for an image on Google? Just define it in shortcuts as image@... and then the google search string. Now all you do is "image [query]" and boom, it's there. Speech recognition if you need it. Link extraction. The info panel for downloading individual page elements as well as being able to stop laggish elements from loading. A nice HTML editor which I was surprised by to see in a browser. Also, using the floating text input panel to write up this comment is "not too shabby". Alt dragging links is useful in some instances. Remembering window size, et al. I could go on and on. The thing is, for what I visit, Omniweb renders the sites excellently, at an acceptable speed and it filters out the garbage. What's to trash on this thing? And it's not as if the developer's going out and saying, "Ha ha ha! Look, fools, our browser doesn't support CSS... love us." Nah, they admit it, and are working on solving their problems. Also, I think part of NeXT's problem was they alienated developers. Not good. And it's happening again.
Oh, really? I suppose that NeXT (Cocoa)'s famous Yellowbox library of OOP code design must have escaped your notice? Not only does Mac OS X have apps, not only are they great programs with fantastic interoperability (tell me, is there anything like the "Services" menu in ANY other OS... if so, awesome) but Cocoa is one of the top rated and most favorably reviewed IDEs ever. Built in, without work, you'll get full Unicode text support, kerning ligatures, speech recognition, a nice color selection palette, and all the other nicities OS X includies. Do we have apps? Yes. Do we have the best environment (s) in which to design them? Of course. I will not tolerate the argument that Macs have no programs. It's not been rebuttalled in recent times.:) I could point out the fact that Tim Berners Lee made the Web with Cocoa (NeXTSTEP)... and so commenting here wouldn't be possible without the technologies OS X is built from, but... yeah, that's no big deal.
Yes it?s time to rethink client/server game querying... Out of curiosity, as I don't quite understand the technology behind it, how would something like Rendezvous work for such a purpose? It's open-source, intended for cross-platform use and supposedly automatically can find and query servers, I guess. Is that how this thing works?
Interesting. Zen Buddhism and inspiration seem to go hand in hand quite often. Like, the time when SJ motivated the Mac team with the quote "The Journey is the reward."
Omniweb, if you're on Mac OS X. Probably one of the most elegant browsers ever. We've had pop-up blocking since... well 2000 or sooner, ad-blocking (or source blocking) since the same time, shortcuts to go to the parts of sites that matter, s... blah blah blah. http://www.omnigroup.com/products/omniweb/
Currently, you can still be called to take surveys. I work as a Market Research Associate and, as far as I know, the FCC does not regulate this industry, yet. However, companies will provide Do Not Call lists as a courtesy.
Do you support other media players, such as Real or Windows Media?
QuickTime uses the standardized Real-Time Transport Protocol Suite (RTP/RTCP), which Real and Windows Media use proprietary protocols. It is unlikely that we will support Real or Windows Media in the near future.
I really shouldn't respond to AC's, much less trolls, but... The funny thing is, it's like games, it desensitizes you. You play a game in which you're killing people and it's a lot easier to do it in real life. Just as the scenarios depicted in porn make one desensitized to perverted and socially destabalizing internet.
Also, as for being a loser, at least I'm not afraid to have my name by what I say. Until you can post without cowardice, I'd like you to keep silent.
Society is made of basic social units. And, the one that an individual encounters first is, generally, the family. In whatever form it takes in today's world. Now, as a child, I'd want a family with loving parents, and a supportive background. Porn, however, does not encourage this. It encourages cheap sex, that humans are objects, and screw any consequences of having sex. Get an abortion, it's cheaper, right? So many people I talk to these days have no father for two reasons, either they were drunks, or thoughts that porn placed in their heads lead them to abandon their wives, girlfriends, secretaries, whichever. Or, it's a very shallow relationship. I think it is for this reason, the stability of families, that religion (and I have no respect for any "religion" which does not support families) would be against pornography. Thank you.
I give a vote for Omniweb. First, beautiful rendering. Second, it's Cocoa, and thus you get all the benefits of services, which I cannot stress enough. Third, in Omniweb, you have a nice HTML editor with error checking. Fourth, ad blocking and pop up blocking. Fifth, shortcuts... which I realized are really quite useful. It's just I overlooked them, because with Omniweb using them is ubiquitous. I've grown accustomed to searching Versiontracker by typing vt "query", Google by typing Go "search", a dictionary site by Define "word", etc. In and of itself, that's a cool feature... but being fully Cocoa, I can combine this with services. A good example is when I'm talking in Fire and someone wants me to look something up for them. Simply Go "Search" Apple+A and then Control Shift U. Boom, search. That's convience. True, we need tabbed browsing and speed enhancements. But, I'm willing to deal with those short commings.
AMD now stands for: Amish Micro Devices. They're building components for use in butterchurns, now, after finding out it was a much more lucrative market.
For the Mac, we have ...
on
Gnutella2?
·
· Score: 1
For OS X, there's a nice GNUtella client called Acquisition . It's got a clean interface, does find files, has resumable transfer, works, etc. I've been able to download a couple of DivX/AVI files off of it, as well as some apps. Gnutella's probably the best protocol we have on the Mac, at this time, and hearing complaints about the others (WinMX for Windows, or KazaA, etc.) I really don't think it's that bad.
An organization called the Omnigroup , a well-respected Mac and NeXT-era developer has some interesting concepts by way of gaming. For instance, more games that use time as an effect. Or, Dragon flight simulators. Interesting. It's a new perspective. Then, we have the legendary game of Myst. What's popular about it? There was no killing. There was, originally, no 3-D. It almost could be done in HTML, these days. Minus some transition effects. Yet, aside from the Sims, Myst was the greatest selling game of all time.
The answer is hinted at, in the title. Myst-ery. Yes. It made players wonder. Human beings can't resist a good question. Myst's question was "Who is innocent, and why would the other destroy these ages?" In the end, one got a twist. I don't think there's been any equivalent to Myst. Not even the sequels. It's a brilliant idea. Worlds contained within books. Entire worlds that one creates. If only a next generation game could allow one to "write" an age and live in it. That'd own. Combine this with the technology as seen at Reuter's. (Search for "Scientists Shake Hands over the Internet"). I don't have the URL, as I saved the file as PDF, so I can watch for when this technology comes out into the public.
No, this is not off-topic, or a troll. That's just a grabber.
Why I ask that question is I want people to look at the rating system of Slashdot. Do valuable comments usually get modded up? I believe so. And the trolls, the annoyances get modded down.
Now, let's apply this in real time. Let's apply this to IRC. I know, it sounds flawed, so you need someone (with integrity) at the top to select the first moderators. And users of IRC would have points based on what they say. This could be run by a bot, or whatever. Insightful, and intelligent readers and posters (good grammar, non-offensive language, etc.) would get 'modded up'. Script kiddies get modded down.
Also, channels should ALWAYS be moderated. A moderation bot can demoderate the fools. I find this far more effective than bans and kicks. Usually, there's an auto-rejoin feature that I'm sure you're all aware. Kick... boom, the idiot is back. Not a very powerful reinforcement of a channel/network's rules.
But, you presume guilt. You make people apply for a nick and auto-voice, and suddenly, there's a lot tighter control. One has to register to use this community. It becomes a priviledge.
As for the script kiddies... well, they're harmless. Auto/ignore does wonders. Well, if you have it. I don't. That's when you need good ops or intelli-bots.
On the Mac front, we have two major Cocoa multi-client contenders. Fire and a very beautiful client which is called Proteus, link unrecalled. Anyways, there the OS X answer to Trillian and Fire is open source to boot.
Mod parent up. Those who know of NeXT can see how, prior to XP, Windows was nearly a complete rip-off of the NeXT interface. Window controls, the dock... etc. I'd love for a "Stepper" (NeXT veteran) to come out and point out these things more clearly.
The -only- reason I keep Word on my system is "grammar check". Other than that, it's features aren't something that isn't offered by other W. Processing apps. Now, what I would like to see (or hear of) is a Mac OS X grammar service. For all of OS X apps, anywhere. At least Cocoa apps. That would kick. Just like the spelling service helps a lot! Sorry, that probably is off topic, but I've been looking a -long- time for an OS X grammar service. Hrm.
"The journey, however, is more important than the destination." Sounds a lot like what Steve Jobs said to the early Mac team. Why is that important? Well, for example, the Mac (which as a previous poster mentioned) has been around for a -long- time (along with the death mentionings). But, I think the attitude of the road, rather than the goal may work for Linux. It's a vague concept to understand or see clearly.
... I support Apple whole heartedly. I can understand why the.Mac venture began. But, what sickens me, recently, is none of the profit making methods they've been concocting. No, what bothers me is Sherlock 3. Obviously, the idea came from a company who once was a "privileged developer" of Apple's: Karelia . They made this amazing internet tool, called Watson, which does exactly what Sherlock 3 plans on doing. Apple stole their idea and has not, in any way, compensated them. I admire Apple, up to a point. But, pulling Microsoftian shit on a privileged developer does not bode well for me or for them.
History orientation: Back then, Microsoft was IBM's toy. Apple (mistakenly) never perceived them to be as ruthless and manipulative as they were. Before the launch of the Mac, Steve Jobs said something to the effect of: "There are two major technical milestones in our industry." *slide of Apple II* "The Apple II computer." *slide of IBM PC* "And the IBM PC. We plan on launching the next great mile stone..." Anyways, it goes to show that "1984" was targeted at IBM, and not M$FT.
But, wasn't the Mac heavily used in a little project that had something to do with humans and genomes? Dah, can't remember what that was called, so it must not be important. And then, there's this little organization called... ooh, SETI, I think. Something like that. Anyways, if I recall correctly, much of the processing time has been done by Macintoshes (disproportionately to market share, in fact).
And then, remember the whole library of applications that the Mac can use from Unix... and uh... Windows, windows, no don't start hiding now. I'm sorry...
The fact is Apple does give a damn, because it has to. The operating system must be checked and supported to maintain the market share which Apple must viciously battle Microsoft to maintain.
I agree on paragraph II, for the most part. UNIX for idiots is needed. And, as for Unix's GUI, let's put it plain and simple: X-Windows sucks. I'm sorry to have offended anyone, but I come from the standpoint of an Aqua user... (which, as far as I know -being based on Quartz/PDF - is one of the best windowing systems ever). Just one thing peeved me a little. You say "I hate Apple computers." But, you seem to like the OS. Want a good OS (X)? Then buy a good computer. Macs have steadily improved and are very competitive (consumer iMac with Super Drive... mayhaps that doesn't suit your needs... anyone?) with PCs. As Apple continues to expand it's marketshare, albeit slowly, we can continue to see prices drop and, let's face it, innovation to improve.
Open source and Apple are the only real lights of the industry. In hardware, everyone tries to kiss Microsnuff's ass, so innovation is slow. Apple can develop independent of them. In software, the PC space kisses Microsnuff's ass. And so, software is also limited that way. Unless, of course, you go open source. But Open Source itself is not so great. The reason I say this is because it tries too much to imitate closed source. Gimp to be Photoshop StarOffice to be MS Office, etc. And all of that's great. Still, the non-opensource is better. Why I say, then, that open-source is innovative is the fact that it has potential. To break the mold. To create new categories of applications. The Mac's killer app was Photoshop and image editing. Apple II had Visicalc. The IBM PC had a random assortment of junk. My question is, what's open-source's killer app?
Slashdot Mirror
I am saddened by the total immaturity of people towards this Developer. The Omnigroup is probably one of the more innovative and clever of the OS X app writers. For all the nil points people point out about Omniweb, I can point out good ones. Of course, you get the ad filtering and pop up blocking. You get Shortcuts, which I'm surprised no one has mentioned. Want to search for an image on Google? Just define it in shortcuts as image@ ... and then the google search string. Now all you do is "image [query]" and boom, it's there. Speech recognition if you need it. Link extraction. The info panel for downloading individual page elements as well as being able to stop laggish elements from loading. A nice HTML editor which I was surprised by to see in a browser. ... love us." Nah, they admit it, and are working on solving their problems.
Also, using the floating text input panel to write up this comment is "not too shabby". Alt dragging links is useful in some instances. Remembering window size, et al. I could go on and on. The thing is, for what I visit, Omniweb renders the sites excellently, at an acceptable speed and it filters out the garbage. What's to trash on this thing? And it's not as if the developer's going out and saying, "Ha ha ha! Look, fools, our browser doesn't support CSS
Also, I think part of NeXT's problem was they alienated developers. Not good. And it's happening again.
Oh, really? I suppose that NeXT (Cocoa)'s famous Yellowbox library of OOP code design must have escaped your notice? Not only does Mac OS X have apps, not only are they great programs with fantastic interoperability (tell me, is there anything like the "Services" menu in ANY other OS ... if so, awesome) but Cocoa is one of the top rated and most favorably reviewed IDEs ever. :) I could point out the fact that Tim Berners Lee made the Web with Cocoa (NeXTSTEP) ... and so commenting here wouldn't be possible without the technologies OS X is built from, but ... yeah, that's no big deal.
Built in, without work, you'll get full Unicode text support, kerning ligatures, speech recognition, a nice color selection palette, and all the other nicities OS X includies. Do we have apps? Yes. Do we have the best environment (s) in which to design them? Of course.
I will not tolerate the argument that Macs have no programs. It's not been rebuttalled in recent times.
The URL should be: http://www.apple.com/macosx/jaguar/rendezvous.html
Yes it?s time to rethink client/server game querying ...
Out of curiosity, as I don't quite understand the technology behind it, how would something like Rendezvous work for such a purpose? It's open-source, intended for cross-platform use and supposedly automatically can find and query servers, I guess. Is that how this thing works?
Just out of curiosity on the lines of this whole rethinking thing, can someone explain to me what a technology like Apple's rendezvous do for gaming?
Interesting. Zen Buddhism and inspiration seem to go hand in hand quite often. Like, the time when SJ motivated the Mac team with the quote "The Journey is the reward."
Omniweb, if you're on Mac OS X. Probably one of the most elegant browsers ever. We've had pop-up blocking since ... well 2000 or sooner, ad-blocking (or source blocking) since the same time, shortcuts to go to the parts of sites that matter, s... blah blah blah.
http://www.omnigroup.com/products/omniweb/
Currently, you can still be called to take surveys. I work as a Market Research Associate and, as far as I know, the FCC does not regulate this industry, yet. However, companies will provide Do Not Call lists as a courtesy.
Do you support other media players, such as Real or Windows Media?
QuickTime uses the standardized Real-Time Transport Protocol Suite (RTP/RTCP), which Real and Windows Media use proprietary protocols. It is unlikely that we will support Real or Windows Media in the near future.
I really shouldn't respond to AC's, much less trolls, but ...
The funny thing is, it's like games, it desensitizes you. You play a game in which you're killing people and it's a lot easier to do it in real life. Just as the scenarios depicted in porn make one desensitized to perverted and socially destabalizing internet.
Also, as for being a loser, at least I'm not afraid to have my name by what I say. Until you can post without cowardice, I'd like you to keep silent.
Society is made of basic social units. And, the one that an individual encounters first is, generally, the family. In whatever form it takes in today's world. Now, as a child, I'd want a family with loving parents, and a supportive background.
Porn, however, does not encourage this. It encourages cheap sex, that humans are objects, and screw any consequences of having sex. Get an abortion, it's cheaper, right? So many people I talk to these days have no father for two reasons, either they were drunks, or thoughts that porn placed in their heads lead them to abandon their wives, girlfriends, secretaries, whichever. Or, it's a very shallow relationship.
I think it is for this reason, the stability of families, that religion (and I have no respect for any "religion" which does not support families) would be against pornography. Thank you.
I give a vote for Omniweb. First, beautiful rendering. Second, it's Cocoa, and thus you get all the benefits of services, which I cannot stress enough. Third, in Omniweb, you have a nice HTML editor with error checking. Fourth, ad blocking and pop up blocking. Fifth, shortcuts ... which I realized are really quite useful. It's just I overlooked them, because with Omniweb using them is ubiquitous. I've grown accustomed to searching Versiontracker by typing vt "query", Google by typing Go "search", a dictionary site by Define "word", etc. In and of itself, that's a cool feature ... but being fully Cocoa, I can combine this with services. A good example is when I'm talking in Fire and someone wants me to look something up for them. Simply Go "Search" Apple+A and then Control Shift U. Boom, search. That's convience. True, we need tabbed browsing and speed enhancements. But, I'm willing to deal with those short commings.
AMD now stands for:
Amish Micro Devices.
They're building components for use in butterchurns, now, after finding out it was a much more lucrative market.
For OS X, there's a nice GNUtella client called Acquisition . It's got a clean interface, does find files, has resumable transfer, works, etc.
I've been able to download a couple of DivX/AVI files off of it, as well as some apps. Gnutella's probably the best protocol we have on the Mac, at this time, and hearing complaints about the others (WinMX for Windows, or KazaA, etc.) I really don't think it's that bad.
An organization called the Omnigroup , a well-respected Mac and NeXT-era developer has some interesting concepts by way of gaming. For instance, more games that use time as an effect. Or, Dragon flight simulators. Interesting. It's a new perspective.
Then, we have the legendary game of Myst. What's popular about it? There was no killing. There was, originally, no 3-D. It almost could be done in HTML, these days. Minus some transition effects. Yet, aside from the Sims, Myst was the greatest selling game of all time.
The answer is hinted at, in the title. Myst-ery. Yes. It made players wonder. Human beings can't resist a good question. Myst's question was "Who is innocent, and why would the other destroy these ages?" In the end, one got a twist. I don't think there's been any equivalent to Myst. Not even the sequels. It's a brilliant idea. Worlds contained within books. Entire worlds that one creates.
If only a next generation game could allow one to "write" an age and live in it. That'd own. Combine this with the technology as seen at Reuter's. (Search for "Scientists Shake Hands over the Internet"). I don't have the URL, as I saved the file as PDF, so I can watch for when this technology comes out into the public.
No, this is not off-topic, or a troll. That's just a grabber.
... boom, the idiot is back. Not a very powerful reinforcement of a channel/network's rules.
/ignore does wonders. Well, if you have it. I don't. That's when you need good ops or intelli-bots.
Why I ask that question is I want people to look at the rating system of Slashdot. Do valuable comments usually get modded up? I believe so. And the trolls, the annoyances get modded down.
Now, let's apply this in real time. Let's apply this to IRC. I know, it sounds flawed, so you need someone (with integrity) at the top to select the first moderators. And users of IRC would have points based on what they say. This could be run by a bot, or whatever. Insightful, and intelligent readers and posters (good grammar, non-offensive language, etc.) would get 'modded up'. Script kiddies get modded down.
Also, channels should ALWAYS be moderated. A moderation bot can demoderate the fools. I find this far more effective than bans and kicks. Usually, there's an auto-rejoin feature that I'm sure you're all aware. Kick
But, you presume guilt. You make people apply for a nick and auto-voice, and suddenly, there's a lot tighter control. One has to register to use this community. It becomes a priviledge.
As for the script kiddies... well, they're harmless. Auto
I'm sorry. I didn't know of the Fire link above. Please do not mod me down as ... what? ... repetitive.
On the Mac front, we have two major Cocoa multi-client contenders. Fire and a very beautiful client which is called Proteus, link unrecalled. Anyways, there the OS X answer to Trillian and Fire is open source to boot.
Mod parent up. ... etc. I'd love for a "Stepper" (NeXT veteran) to come out and point out these things more clearly.
Those who know of NeXT can see how, prior to XP, Windows was nearly a complete rip-off of the NeXT interface. Window controls, the dock
The -only- reason I keep Word on my system is "grammar check". Other than that, it's features aren't something that isn't offered by other W. Processing apps. Now, what I would like to see (or hear of) is a Mac OS X grammar service. For all of OS X apps, anywhere. At least Cocoa apps. That would kick. Just like the spelling service helps a lot! Sorry, that probably is off topic, but I've been looking a -long- time for an OS X grammar service. Hrm.
"The journey, however, is more important than the destination."
Sounds a lot like what Steve Jobs said to the early Mac team. Why is that important? Well, for example, the Mac (which as a previous poster mentioned) has been around for a -long- time (along with the death mentionings). But, I think the attitude of the road, rather than the goal may work for Linux. It's a vague concept to understand or see clearly.
... I support Apple whole heartedly. I can understand why the .Mac venture began. But, what sickens me, recently, is none of the profit making methods they've been concocting. No, what bothers me is Sherlock 3. Obviously, the idea came from a company who once was a "privileged developer" of Apple's: Karelia . They made this amazing internet tool, called Watson, which does exactly what Sherlock 3 plans on doing. Apple stole their idea and has not, in any way, compensated them. I admire Apple, up to a point. But, pulling Microsoftian shit on a privileged developer does not bode well for me or for them.
History orientation: ..."
Back then, Microsoft was IBM's toy. Apple (mistakenly) never perceived them to be as ruthless and manipulative as they were.
Before the launch of the Mac, Steve Jobs said something to the effect of:
"There are two major technical milestones in our industry."
*slide of Apple II*
"The Apple II computer."
*slide of IBM PC*
"And the IBM PC. We plan on launching the next great mile stone
Anyways, it goes to show that "1984" was targeted at IBM, and not M$FT.
But, wasn't the Mac heavily used in a little project that had something to do with humans and genomes? Dah, can't remember what that was called, so it must not be important. And then, there's this little organization called ... ooh, SETI, I think. Something like that. Anyways, if I recall correctly, much of the processing time has been done by Macintoshes (disproportionately to market share, in fact).
... and uh ... Windows, windows, no don't start hiding now. I'm sorry ...
And then, remember the whole library of applications that the Mac can use from Unix
The fact is Apple does give a damn, because it has to. The operating system must be checked and supported to maintain the market share which Apple must viciously battle Microsoft to maintain.
... (which, as far as I know -being based on Quartz/PDF - is one of the best windowing systems ever). Just one thing peeved me a little. You say "I hate Apple computers." But, you seem to like the OS. Want a good OS (X)? Then buy a good computer. Macs have steadily improved and are very competitive (consumer iMac with Super Drive ... mayhaps that doesn't suit your needs ... anyone?) with PCs. As Apple continues to expand it's marketshare, albeit slowly, we can continue to see prices drop and, let's face it, innovation to improve.
I agree on paragraph II, for the most part. UNIX for idiots is needed. And, as for Unix's GUI, let's put it plain and simple: X-Windows sucks. I'm sorry to have offended anyone, but I come from the standpoint of an Aqua user
Open source and Apple are the only real lights of the industry. In hardware, everyone tries to kiss Microsnuff's ass, so innovation is slow. Apple can develop independent of them. In software, the PC space kisses Microsnuff's ass. And so, software is also limited that way. Unless, of course, you go open source. But Open Source itself is not so great. The reason I say this is because it tries too much to imitate closed source. Gimp to be Photoshop StarOffice to be MS Office, etc. And all of that's great. Still, the non-opensource is better. Why I say, then, that open-source is innovative is the fact that it has potential. To break the mold. To create new categories of applications. The Mac's killer app was Photoshop and image editing. Apple II had Visicalc. The IBM PC had a random assortment of junk. My question is, what's open-source's killer app?