Apple wont get deals with big vendors like sony, or others if they allow limitless distribution in all directions. Apple has a 5 copy policy per account. That is you could put same app on up to 5 devices.
GPL3 requires no limits. Their business model will not allow limitless distribution. Microsoft saw what happend to apple when they had apps under the gpl3 license on appstore. MS just makes sure they don't get that problem.
Apple might still have apps there that goes under GPL3, but if anyone complain they will be removed.
Yes, and they have never had such environment on earth that they could form spontaneously and eventually form the first cell. In the environment where amino acids form spontaneously the cell dies. In the environment where cells thrive amino acids don't form spontaneously.
The best documentation we have of evolution is the documentation of the pilt down man. Today's science builds still on that hoax and we have learned nothing.
When saying been documented, also give the reference or I can tell you it's a lie.
Same thing, GPLv3 is not compatible with Apple Appstore either. Apple did not ban, but removed software when copyright holder complained.
The issue was that Appstore allows 5 copies to run on same account. GPLv3 says infinite. So It isn't really Apples fault either. But the copyright holder who complained. He's btw working for nokia.
They are amino acids. Which need to be in quite harsh environment to form. An environment where a "cell" would not survive. It's a paradox that needs to be solved.
Well the scientist had that view some decades ago, but they seem to say today that those ammonia acids simply can't have formed on earth spontaneously. Even the scientist showing how amino acids form,cant remember name early-mid 1900, has changed his opinion about that part.
Today he's of the opinion that we are planted by aliens. The biologic soup theorist.
Well before the iMac all macs had SCSI ports usually both internal and external. Sometimes they had different scsi controllers for internal (faster) and external the old original scsi port. Still faster than anything on the average pc out there. True you could equip the PC with faster SCSI card, but you needed a PCI PC then. The macs NuBus was running at 1/2 of PCI speed and the standard PC bus back then was running on 1/8 of PCI speed, just cant remember the name of that bus. Never had to deal with it, just laughed about it as I used mac and saw the difference i IO speeds.
The PCs back then where quite fast in CPU performance, the 386s n early 486. But IO was terrible. The motorola chips used by Apple n Commodore where quite much more capable, but where not spinning as fast. But only with the 386 Intel started to compete with motorola chips on performance.
Symantec and Shphos you can't trust. The only AV app maker that I take seriously when commenting on macosx is F-Secure. They been honest so far. And they been saying they return to the mac platform when there is a need of doing so. They haven't yet returned, but they have a beta out.
But I would never want to scan for windows malware on my mac. It would use too much juice of my mac, similarly to what it does on my PC. So no, I want Mac specific AV software only, but not just yet I still handle it manually.
Problem is I don't want set it once as that setting will be wrong in an other situation.
As pre osx, If I made an jpg in photoshop then it would open in photoshop, not in e.g. graphic converter. But if I made the jpg in Graphic converter the file would open in that Application.
Only if the creator applications wasn't available on the system it would fallback to file type and open in the application that supported that file type.
So setting it once would not give me the correct behavior, as setting it would only give me correct behavior sometimes, but then other times wrong.
But you don't seem to understand, as you want to associate one file type to one specific Application. But that is exactly the behavior I don't want. I know I can still choose what app each individual file should open in on macosx 10.6. But When creating lots of files from an app that is no fun.
Yeah, I agree, but there is a difference between being secure against active hackers that target your system, and being secure against automated malware.
True the OSX house today has more doors and windows to crack which burglars welcome. But it's still pretty tight house against the cockroaches. The Win7 and maybe Vista house is quite the opposite. Less tight and the cockroaches get's in more easily, but has few doors or windows for burglars to crack.
No they are not, as they where not valid in the -80s, back then a smaller platform (by market share) had more viruses than the other platform what had almost 90% market share.
Yes it was the old champions Mac vs PC. And Mac had more Viruses in the -80, market share has been even less than now.
Acording to F-Secure Macs had more viruses than PC's in the -80s and early -90s. The PC took the crown around 1992-1993 from the Mac with more viruses.
Macs had even less market share back then. Market shares has very little to do with how much malware there is for a platform. If it's easy to make malware for a platform there will be malware. If it's hard to make it, there will be little or no malware.
True, that is why mac users try to buy the hardware when they release new hardware. In my memory the first XServers where very cost competitive. But in the end of their retail lifetime that would be the opposite. It's typical Apple.
wasn't launchd n lauchctl only halfway deployed in 10.4? cron was still there as the main thing?
Not sure, I've just recently started to learn to work with launchctl, and that is 10.6. So I'm the noob here, but I like it so far, and while I have not that much experience with cron either the little I've seen, I like launchctl more. Gives you features that cron doesn't.
I was kinda shocked first time i noticed that sshd wasn't running but I still was able to connect remotely. I like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Because of differences in distribution.
Apple wont get deals with big vendors like sony, or others if they allow limitless distribution in all directions. Apple has a 5 copy policy per account. That is you could put same app on up to 5 devices.
GPL3 requires no limits. Their business model will not allow limitless distribution. Microsoft saw what happend to apple when they had apps under the gpl3 license on appstore. MS just makes sure they don't get that problem.
Apple might still have apps there that goes under GPL3, but if anyone complain they will be removed.
Yes, and they have never had such environment on earth that they could form spontaneously and eventually form the first cell. In the environment where amino acids form spontaneously the cell dies. In the environment where cells thrive amino acids don't form spontaneously.
The best documentation we have of evolution is the documentation of the pilt down man. Today's science builds still on that hoax and we have learned nothing.
When saying been documented, also give the reference or I can tell you it's a lie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Ow u fancy sudo rm -f / in your linux...
Well, why linux when there is osx?
Which they can't nor can Apple.
They haven't banned GPL, but GPLv3
Same thing, GPLv3 is not compatible with Apple Appstore either. Apple did not ban, but removed software when copyright holder complained.
The issue was that Appstore allows 5 copies to run on same account. GPLv3 says infinite. So It isn't really Apples fault either. But the copyright holder who complained. He's btw working for nokia.
Why so upset with royalties. WebM is not a standard compared to ISO/IEC 14496.
Standards bring us forward, free doesn't just look at linux GUI's just a rip of, of Windows.
They have together with Apple actually.
Well courts have ruled otherwise than you say. So that is not how they work.
Yeap, but why don't ms guys jump on the future an eat an Apple?
They are amino acids. Which need to be in quite harsh environment to form. An environment where a "cell" would not survive. It's a paradox that needs to be solved.
Well the scientist had that view some decades ago, but they seem to say today that those ammonia acids simply can't have formed on earth spontaneously. Even the scientist showing how amino acids form,cant remember name early-mid 1900, has changed his opinion about that part.
Today he's of the opinion that we are planted by aliens. The biologic soup theorist.
Well before the iMac all macs had SCSI ports usually both internal and external. Sometimes they had different scsi controllers for internal (faster) and external the old original scsi port. Still faster than anything on the average pc out there. True you could equip the PC with faster SCSI card, but you needed a PCI PC then. The macs NuBus was running at 1/2 of PCI speed and the standard PC bus back then was running on 1/8 of PCI speed, just cant remember the name of that bus. Never had to deal with it, just laughed about it as I used mac and saw the difference i IO speeds.
The PCs back then where quite fast in CPU performance, the 386s n early 486. But IO was terrible. The motorola chips used by Apple n Commodore where quite much more capable, but where not spinning as fast. But only with the 386 Intel started to compete with motorola chips on performance.
Symantec and Shphos you can't trust. The only AV app maker that I take seriously when commenting on macosx is F-Secure. They been honest so far. And they been saying they return to the mac platform when there is a need of doing so. They haven't yet returned, but they have a beta out.
But I would never want to scan for windows malware on my mac. It would use too much juice of my mac, similarly to what it does on my PC.
So no, I want Mac specific AV software only, but not just yet I still handle it manually.
Sigh you are miss informed, and that is accordingly to F-secure.
m/s^2
And we are talking about viruses in the -1984 to 1992(3) period when macs had more viruses.
So macro viruses weren't even on the table. BTW wasn't the first malicious computer virus made on a Apple][?
hmm seems so, if a poem is malicious?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_virus#Virus_programs
Was no Office back then....
But there was Excel and Word.
Problem is I don't want set it once as that setting will be wrong in an other situation.
As pre osx, If I made an jpg in photoshop then it would open in photoshop, not in e.g. graphic converter. But if I made the jpg in Graphic converter the file would open in that Application.
Only if the creator applications wasn't available on the system it would fallback to file type and open in the application that supported that file type.
So setting it once would not give me the correct behavior, as setting it would only give me correct behavior sometimes, but then other times wrong.
But you don't seem to understand, as you want to associate one file type to one specific Application. But that is exactly the behavior I don't want. I know I can still choose what app each individual file should open in on macosx 10.6. But When creating lots of files from an app that is no fun.
Yeah, I agree, but there is a difference between being secure against active hackers that target your system, and being secure against automated malware.
True the OSX house today has more doors and windows to crack which burglars welcome. But it's still pretty tight house against the cockroaches. The Win7 and maybe Vista house is quite the opposite. Less tight and the cockroaches get's in more easily, but has few doors or windows for burglars to crack.
Jepp but what about memory injection? Taking a dump is a report from a app that has privileges to read the whole memory. The kernel?
No they are not, as they where not valid in the -80s, back then a smaller platform (by market share) had more viruses than the other platform what had almost 90% market share.
Yes it was the old champions Mac vs PC. And Mac had more Viruses in the -80, market share has been even less than now.
The point is invalid, but few accept the facts.
Acording to F-Secure Macs had more viruses than PC's in the -80s and early -90s. The PC took the crown around 1992-1993 from the Mac with more viruses.
Macs had even less market share back then. Market shares has very little to do with how much malware there is for a platform. If it's easy to make malware for a platform there will be malware. If it's hard to make it, there will be little or no malware.
True, that is why mac users try to buy the hardware when they release new hardware. In my memory the first XServers where very cost competitive. But in the end of their retail lifetime that would be the opposite. It's typical Apple.
Yes it is, when the standard behavior should be that it opens in it's creator application as it has always done on Mac until 10.6
wasn't launchd n lauchctl only halfway deployed in 10.4? cron was still there as the main thing?
Not sure, I've just recently started to learn to work with launchctl, and that is 10.6. So I'm the noob here, but I like it so far, and while I have not that much experience with cron either the little I've seen, I like launchctl more. Gives you features that cron doesn't.
I was kinda shocked first time i noticed that sshd wasn't running but I still was able to connect remotely. I like that.