there are many hints in the upcoming Lion version of the OS of a further tilt towards the iOS look and feel. With iTunes offering the Mac App store and following the same model as used for iDevices it is not hard to imagine that OS X changes enough to where it requires "FOR SECURITY PURPOSES" that you use only iTunes to load software onto your Mac and "JAILBROKEN" Macs will not be eligible..
Despite not owning any Apple products, I could imagine them pushing a silent update to all devices that simply blocks the site in question. Or starting to sign their software cryptographically, and making sure their systems only accept valid signatures. Or any other way, actually...
You know what helps against that ? Wrapping your computer in tinfoil. In fact, you should save some to make yourself a hat too, just in case...
Who says Apple feels threatened ? Seems to me like Apple's AppStore have already had the beneficial effect of making the competition improve their offerings. A win for consumers and so indirectly for Apple as well.
They've been competing with each other for good while now with iTunes and the Amazon MP3 Store. It's a pretty logical extension of Amazon's business to sell everything online that can be sold online.
You should check out Haiku (the open source BeOS clone) they are pretty focused on multitasking and the playing multiple videos at once demo is part of their shtick.
All you've managed to demonstrate is that you're not very good at finding proof and possibly quite gullible. "Fact-based" indeed, you cant even tell the difference between a causal survey and proper research (CLUE BY FOUR, real research does not use the word "believe"). Especially when you don't have access to the raw data and methodology.
I said a little more factual and while not proper research it's at least better than to argue purely based on opinion as you are doing, as shown by more broad statements about what mac users supposedly believe above. Are you psychic ? Because then Mr. Randi has a prize for you. Anyway the argument seems to be descending into ad-hominem so I'll take my "clue by four" from your sig.
I meant anti-fraud more like the way banks can stop a money transfer going through by/to Kadafi for example or can stop transactions suspected of money laundering activities.
It'll never happen. A lot more mac users are designers and hipsters, just like than the stereotypes suggest and these people just would just accept it.
Your willingness to pre-judge people on something as random as what type of computer they prefer is striking. Macs, like PC's are used by a broad variety of people (slightly skewed towards the more educated because macs are targeted towards the mid and high end of the market.)
I've worked as a net admin for 4 years, I also worked as tech support for 3 before that. Part of my duties was looking after a design and marketing subsidiary and inhouse dev team, none of the admins or developers had Macs, they were running Windows or dual booting with Linux (OK, one of the JEEE guys was running Solaris only). Only the designers were Mac users, I think you're projecting the world you'd like to live in onto the world we actually live in.
So my anecdotal evidence clashes with your anecdotal evidence. Let's go slightly more fact-based. This survey says 'Mac users are 21 percent more likely to believe they are 'computer-savvy gearheads.'" So there you go, mac users are likely to describe themselves as power users. This is your cue to bite back with a sarcastic remark about self delusional hipsters.
I don't have to show an ID or give my person information out to get a disposable pay as you go phone.
This could be great for anonymous shopping, provided you use a pay as you go phone.
I'm betting your Google Wallet will have to be associated with a google account, you know in case of fraud (or some other excuse.) The website describes associating it with a credit card or charging it with a prepay card so there'll be some communication to the internet going on behind the scene leaking all sorts of juicy information back to Google.
Why do you accept it on your iPad, then? Or even your iPhone for that matter? The "it's a phone" excuse doesn't work for the iPad, and even that excuse is poor for today's smart phones.
It seems "right" for the platform. I don't want to surf around, downloading apps and generally cluttering up the place (like I do on my mac.) Encapsulating available apps in a centralized repository accessed through an app itself seems natural. It also reduces initial fears or inhibitions inexperienced users have about installing software and encourages paying (though relatively low amounts) for software. Yes, I would probably be in favor of competing stores having access to the device just on principle, though the quality of apps in the Cydia (jailbreak) store isn't really encouraging. Overall the system works, for iOS - I don't see it working for the mac.
They'll follow the money. Don't bet they won't sacrifice the existing power user base to follow the trend.
Maybe, it might also be partly the culture that carried over from NeXT though it would be anyone's guess if that would survive a focus shift inside the company. That's not for the near future though.
Which just supports the parent's argument. It wouldn't be surprising if the desktop was just phased into the iPad at some point.
No, the only danger I see is if the bottom falls out of the computer market because too many people switch to iOS devices or similar. But again, this isn't for the near future: Apple hasn't even got cloud syncing yet which they NEED to abandon their current model of the computer as media hub from which all personal portable devices are synced. Personally I could see a future where the pc loses emphasis in favor of iPad like devices that'll be used for most, but not all, tasks but it'll never completely go away and neither will the mac.
I remember getting the Saddam virus on my Amiga, now both the man and the platform are ancient history... if you'll excuse, me I have some heavy drinking to do.
Here you go ! It's 86DOS but as wikipedia explains :
"86-DOS was an operating system developed and marketed by Seattle Computer Products for its Intel 8086-based computer kit. Initially known as QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) the name was changed to 86-DOS once SCP started licensing the operating system."
I probably have a different perspective since I work as a unix sysadmin and so most mac heads work with either came to mac because it's an easy to use unix system or have been computer geeks their entire life and started on Apple computers. There's a lot of these people out there though, like I said a lot more than I think people give credit for. And OSX generously caters to geeks.
They already accept it on their iPhones and iPads, not that much of a leap for them there. And even if a few power users rejected it, that's not the audience that Apple would be targeting anyway.
The slippery slope argument, eh ? As an iPhone/iPad user and power user I sure as hell wouldn't want such a system on my mac unless, as I said, I could opt out. Also as I have previously stated there are a LOT of mac power users, don't fall for stereotypes. As for Apple not targeting them, I suggest you take a hard look at OSX, especially tools like Automator, Services, system-wide scripting with Applescript, the myriad of developer tools and command line utilities OSX ships with, etc., etc. For people who supposedly don't like power users they spend a lot of their effort developing their OS in ways to please them.
There would be a HUGE demand for such a secure computer amongst the general public (especially as malware and identity theft have become more and more common). They would probably start by offering a specific line of PCs with this as a "feature" (and/or offering it as an option on all their PC's at purchase), and eventually make it the default. It would actually be a very smart move (from a business perspective)
They don't such a PC, they have the iPad to fill that niche and there is a huge demand for it. For people who need a physical keyboard there's the iPad keyboard dock and a dongle to import photographs from a digital camera. You are coming at this problem from the geek perspective assuming people want a so-called "full computer" (i.e. traditional screen+box+keyboard setup), they don't they just want access to some functionality which the iPad provides in an attractive, secure, easy to use package.
"I really miss the 'clicky' IBM Model M keyboards from the mid and late '80"
You can still get these
"which could kill an accidentally triggered program, along with the Unix Control-C and kill -9 for command line Unix. I'm not sure if anything exists that can do that as quickly at the GUI level. "
Right-click & "force quit" using OSX' dock, or CMD-q
"XEDIT had the ability to restrict the file to a part, and have all editing commands, such as 'go to top/search and replace/select to bottom,' only work on that part of the file."
Use Jedit.
"This let me write macros that were globally available."
Services in OSX.
"Almost 30 years ago, there was a "see" program for the IBM PC -- I don't recall whether it was a.com or.exe file -- that allowed users to view, search and subsequently edit the bytes comprising executable images."
That policy has probably changed now since Apple has publicly acknowledged the threat and announced a fix, as well as publishing how to remove it. That's their M.O. : nobody gabs until word comes down from the mother-ship.
It'll never happen. A lot more mac users are power users than the stereotypes suggest and these people just wouldn't accept it. At most they could go with an opt-out system. Otherwise I think app-stores are more of a positive evolution than people give them credit for, when they are not shoved down your throat that is. The signing of software to guarantee that it hasn't been modified or tampered with is a no-brainer, a bit like having shrink-wrap around a box-set of physical media.
Sure but if your kid installs this under his/her account then mommy & daddy are still safe, for now at least. And it'll be a lot easier to purge something that didn't have admin rights from the system.
True but if they were capable of using a real exploit wouldn't they do so directly ? The more work these asshats have to do to get into the system the more chance there is of detecting and/or stopping them at some intermediate point.
So that means it's now running with only user privileges instead of admin rights, which seems like a slight improvement for those dumb enough to install it.
Slashdot Mirror
there are many hints in the upcoming Lion version of the OS of a further tilt towards the iOS look and feel. With iTunes offering the Mac App store and following the same model as used for iDevices it is not hard to imagine that OS X changes enough to where it requires "FOR SECURITY PURPOSES" that you use only iTunes to load software onto your Mac and "JAILBROKEN" Macs will not be eligible..
FUD
Nah, the pain in the ass of getting them to work is the core of the experience, makes it more authentic ;-)
Despite not owning any Apple products, I could imagine them pushing a silent update to all devices that simply blocks the site in question. Or starting to sign their software cryptographically, and making sure their systems only accept valid signatures. Or any other way, actually...
You know what helps against that ? Wrapping your computer in tinfoil. In fact, you should save some to make yourself a hat too, just in case...
Who says Apple feels threatened ? Seems to me like Apple's AppStore have already had the beneficial effect of making the competition improve their offerings. A win for consumers and so indirectly for Apple as well.
They've been competing with each other for good while now with iTunes and the Amazon MP3 Store. It's a pretty logical extension of Amazon's business to sell everything online that can be sold online.
Um, the lack of that doesn't make it not an app store.
Agreed, the centralized billing/account managing system is what makes it a store.
You should check out Haiku (the open source BeOS clone) they are pretty focused on multitasking and the playing multiple videos at once demo is part of their shtick.
All you've managed to demonstrate is that you're not very good at finding proof and possibly quite gullible. "Fact-based" indeed, you cant even tell the difference between a causal survey and proper research (CLUE BY FOUR, real research does not use the word "believe"). Especially when you don't have access to the raw data and methodology.
I said a little more factual and while not proper research it's at least better than to argue purely based on opinion as you are doing, as shown by more broad statements about what mac users supposedly believe above. Are you psychic ? Because then Mr. Randi has a prize for you. Anyway the argument seems to be descending into ad-hominem so I'll take my "clue by four" from your sig.
I meant anti-fraud more like the way banks can stop a money transfer going through by/to Kadafi for example or can stop transactions suspected of money laundering activities.
It'll never happen. A lot more mac users are designers and hipsters, just like than the stereotypes suggest and these people just would just accept it.
Your willingness to pre-judge people on something as random as what type of computer they prefer is striking. Macs, like PC's are used by a broad variety of people (slightly skewed towards the more educated because macs are targeted towards the mid and high end of the market.)
I've worked as a net admin for 4 years, I also worked as tech support for 3 before that. Part of my duties was looking after a design and marketing subsidiary and inhouse dev team, none of the admins or developers had Macs, they were running Windows or dual booting with Linux (OK, one of the JEEE guys was running Solaris only). Only the designers were Mac users, I think you're projecting the world you'd like to live in onto the world we actually live in.
So my anecdotal evidence clashes with your anecdotal evidence. Let's go slightly more fact-based. This survey says 'Mac users are 21 percent more likely to believe they are 'computer-savvy gearheads.'" So there you go, mac users are likely to describe themselves as power users. This is your cue to bite back with a sarcastic remark about self delusional hipsters.
Oh yes it is!
I don't have to show an ID or give my person information out to get a disposable pay as you go phone.
This could be great for anonymous shopping, provided you use a pay as you go phone.
I'm betting your Google Wallet will have to be associated with a google account, you know in case of fraud (or some other excuse.) The website describes associating it with a credit card or charging it with a prepay card so there'll be some communication to the internet going on behind the scene leaking all sorts of juicy information back to Google.
Why do you accept it on your iPad, then? Or even your iPhone for that matter? The "it's a phone" excuse doesn't work for the iPad, and even that excuse is poor for today's smart phones.
It seems "right" for the platform. I don't want to surf around, downloading apps and generally cluttering up the place (like I do on my mac.) Encapsulating available apps in a centralized repository accessed through an app itself seems natural. It also reduces initial fears or inhibitions inexperienced users have about installing software and encourages paying (though relatively low amounts) for software. Yes, I would probably be in favor of competing stores having access to the device just on principle, though the quality of apps in the Cydia (jailbreak) store isn't really encouraging. Overall the system works, for iOS - I don't see it working for the mac.
They'll follow the money. Don't bet they won't sacrifice the existing power user base to follow the trend.
Maybe, it might also be partly the culture that carried over from NeXT though it would be anyone's guess if that would survive a focus shift inside the company. That's not for the near future though.
Which just supports the parent's argument. It wouldn't be surprising if the desktop was just phased into the iPad at some point.
No, the only danger I see is if the bottom falls out of the computer market because too many people switch to iOS devices or similar. But again, this isn't for the near future: Apple hasn't even got cloud syncing yet which they NEED to abandon their current model of the computer as media hub from which all personal portable devices are synced. Personally I could see a future where the pc loses emphasis in favor of iPad like devices that'll be used for most, but not all, tasks but it'll never completely go away and neither will the mac.
I remember getting the Saddam virus on my Amiga, now both the man and the platform are ancient history ... if you'll excuse, me I have some heavy drinking to do.
Here you go ! It's 86DOS but as wikipedia explains :
"86-DOS was an operating system developed and marketed by Seattle Computer Products for its Intel 8086-based computer kit. Initially known as QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) the name was changed to 86-DOS once SCP started licensing the operating system."
Me too :-) I've got a CD full of these old abandonware OS's somewhere and got most of them working.
I probably have a different perspective since I work as a unix sysadmin and so most mac heads work with either came to mac because it's an easy to use unix system or have been computer geeks their entire life and started on Apple computers. There's a lot of these people out there though, like I said a lot more than I think people give credit for. And OSX generously caters to geeks.
They already accept it on their iPhones and iPads, not that much of a leap for them there. And even if a few power users rejected it, that's not the audience that Apple would be targeting anyway.
The slippery slope argument, eh ? As an iPhone/iPad user and power user I sure as hell wouldn't want such a system on my mac unless, as I said, I could opt out. Also as I have previously stated there are a LOT of mac power users, don't fall for stereotypes. As for Apple not targeting them, I suggest you take a hard look at OSX, especially tools like Automator, Services, system-wide scripting with Applescript, the myriad of developer tools and command line utilities OSX ships with, etc., etc. For people who supposedly don't like power users they spend a lot of their effort developing their OS in ways to please them.
There would be a HUGE demand for such a secure computer amongst the general public (especially as malware and identity theft have become more and more common). They would probably start by offering a specific line of PCs with this as a "feature" (and/or offering it as an option on all their PC's at purchase), and eventually make it the default. It would actually be a very smart move (from a business perspective)
They don't such a PC, they have the iPad to fill that niche and there is a huge demand for it. For people who need a physical keyboard there's the iPad keyboard dock and a dongle to import photographs from a digital camera. You are coming at this problem from the geek perspective assuming people want a so-called "full computer" (i.e. traditional screen+box+keyboard setup), they don't they just want access to some functionality which the iPad provides in an attractive, secure, easy to use package.
"I really miss the 'clicky' IBM Model M keyboards from the mid and late '80"
You can still get these
"which could kill an accidentally triggered program, along with the Unix Control-C and kill -9 for command line Unix. I'm not sure if anything exists that can do that as quickly at the GUI level. "
Right-click & "force quit" using OSX' dock, or CMD-q
"XEDIT had the ability to restrict the file to a part, and have all editing commands, such as 'go to top/search and replace/select to bottom,' only work on that part of the file."
Use Jedit.
"This let me write macros that were globally available."
Services in OSX.
"Almost 30 years ago, there was a "see" program for the IBM PC -- I don't recall whether it was a .com or .exe file -- that allowed users to view, search and subsequently edit the bytes comprising executable images."
It's called a hex editor, there thousands of 'em.
That policy has probably changed now since Apple has publicly acknowledged the threat and announced a fix, as well as publishing how to remove it. That's their M.O. : nobody gabs until word comes down from the mother-ship.
It's an ongoing joke, he's been challenged to use the word "ladyboy" in every comment he makes.
It'll never happen. A lot more mac users are power users than the stereotypes suggest and these people just wouldn't accept it. At most they could go with an opt-out system. Otherwise I think app-stores are more of a positive evolution than people give them credit for, when they are not shoved down your throat that is. The signing of software to guarantee that it hasn't been modified or tampered with is a no-brainer, a bit like having shrink-wrap around a box-set of physical media.
Sure but if your kid installs this under his/her account then mommy & daddy are still safe, for now at least. And it'll be a lot easier to purge something that didn't have admin rights from the system.
True but if they were capable of using a real exploit wouldn't they do so directly ? The more work these asshats have to do to get into the system the more chance there is of detecting and/or stopping them at some intermediate point.
And now it can do less damage because it's running without admin privileges. Should be a lot easier to remove too.
So that means it's now running with only user privileges instead of admin rights, which seems like a slight improvement for those dumb enough to install it.