In order for MS to unseat Google they have to be (MS execs read this carefully) BETTER.
You couldn't be more wrong. Microsoft is rarely better than the competition; they know, and they don't care. They just have to be the default. If getting MS search is one less click than getting Google search, and it's good enough, I wouldn't want to be a Google investor.
Google being better will matter to those folks that are particular. News flash: most folks aren't. Microsoft's strength is that they understand this better than IBM, Apple, BeOS, Palm, or any one of a 100 other tech companies whom I just can't seem to recall any more.
Why should I pay the same price for a book that has inferior readability, will self-destruct, and doesn't have distribution/printing costs, which I know full well to be 50% of the cost of regular book?
I have great hope for technical eBooks that I can access from a PDA--I have more than a few 750 page technical manuals that I sure wish I could search for keywords + carry 3 at a time to the crapper. But since there is no cost of printing and no cost of shipping, why in the hell are they as expensive?
There were some rumors that Apple would sue Motorola for breach of contract once Apple fully migrated to the IBM processor; I don't think that's happened 100% yet, but Apple's pretty close. The suit would've been based on the grounds that Moto didn't give Apple the year warning they were required to that they were going to end their desktop PPC chip, which necessitated Apple scrambling to find a replacement--originally, IBM didn't have a lot of interest in supplying Apple, and only bolted on the AltiVec co-processor at a later date.
I strongly suspect that this relationship is related to terms to arise out of an out of court settlement between Moto and Apple--it's clearly no longer in Apple's interest to sue Moto, so this was worth something to Moto (if the suit had any merit; but it sounded like it may well have.)
I don't know if it's better for Apple or for Moto to play iTMS music on Moto phones; but it does mean that QT is there instead of WMA, which is indeed worth something to Apple. My hunch is that Apple was awarded this privilege for free, and in return they'd drop the suit.
It'd be good if this lead to a test in court of the validity of shrinkwrap licences
More likely, Apple will release a iPod update with COOL NEW FEATURES L@@K which oh yeah, btw, breaks compatibility with real-purchased songs.
So then your iPod will not play your Real purchased library, until Real reverse-engineers it again, and who knows how long that'd take. So you'd have perhaps hundreds of dollars of songs on your iPod that you couldn't get to for an indefinite period of time; and Apple would just shrug their shoulders when you complain.
This scenario and confusion is what email would have been like if standards weren't set and available for free use--imagine only being able to send an email to someone with the same service.
Instead, the selfless designers of internet protocols gave away their idea such that it could be implemented by anyone anywhere, and email is a valuable tool.
Compared to the greedy bastards that are trying to "own" IM, so the end result is that IM is barely more than a toy.
How do you classify Yellow Dog Linux as 'old'? They update it regularly, in my experience--I guess you can't get nightly builds, or even once a month; but it's not that far behind.
And it's probably your best bet. Unless you want to hack on Darwin, which gets rid of the non-free parts of OS X.
Depends on your interests? I have quite a few subscriptions to Apple mail lists and Mac-Mgrs but if you're not a Mac guy you're not likely to care very much.
And when IBM winds up owning these patents--after winning their countersuit with SCO and acquiring SCO's patents as the only available compensation--IBM will be able to either rape or simply end the relationship with MSFT. Leaving SFU dead in the water.
Is that so far-fetched a scenario? I'm surprised that MSFT is betting on SCO.
It would ottally depersonalize the support experience. No longer would customers deal with people, some faceless entity would just grab their computer and fix it.
Not to mention, and I think this is important--if you can fix a user's computer without leaving your desk, that same job can be done for less in India. Remote Is Not Your Friend--much better to retain the comfort of face-to-face interaction, and to build interpersonal relationships; call it a value add.
If you train your users to be comfortable with remote interaction, what difference to them does it make if the remote operator is down the hall, in another building, or on a different continent?
I'm interested to know more about your experience working with the iTMS. I know that CD Baby was enthused at first, but eventually grew frustrated; has Apple worked those kinds of issues out? How many songs have you actually sold? How fast did Apple get your music up there? etc?
The MS people always ended up saying that SQL server might not be as good as oracle but it was "good enough for what you need to do" and "a hell of a lot cheaper".
That same argument, true or not, was used by Microsoft against Apple. Gates is even quoted saying exactly that at the end of "Pirates of Silicon Valley." Worked out pretty well for them, indeed; it's ironic that they apparently think that they're immune to their own prescription.
The natural conclusion of the "race to the bottom" is to end at free...
The fact is that the Mac, prior to OS X, is adequate for most company tasks, but has major problems of its own
My understanding--and that's all that it is, as I have much more experience with Macs than with Windows--is that up until Windows 2000, Macs were much easier to network, in terms of filesharing, connecting to the internet, and connecting to network resources. Most of this was due to AppleTalk, with it's selfdiscovery; it allowed you to put a resource on the network, or become a resource yourself, and every other Mac on the network could find it in two clicks that were themselves intuitive.
That's not to argue some of the ills of AppleTalk; and if you could set up Windows 98 peer-to-peer as easily I'm sure that someone else will post it. But that's my impression, that Apple's Chooser made life wonderful for end users, and was much easier than Windows discovery protocols.
I challenge you to find an Apple-made program using brushed-metal that doesn't conform to the above guideline.
Apple Remote Desktop v 2.0.
Good pic if you haven't seen it yet. I think it's 100% stupid, too, and I don't mind the metal on most apps, really; but for an Enterprise Admin tool, it adds "pretty" when you really need better efficiency.
I work with SunRays, and this feature of them is great. However, I have solved the problem of having desktops all over my house with a single laptop + wireless.
I've always felt that I'd rather pay for my own internet; otherwise, my employer has the legal ability to eavesdrop on my internet as then it's just another extension of their business. I really don't need them knowing the kind of pr0n I favor, nor, more realistically, to whom I'm sending my resume. I feel pretty certain that, as the bill payer, they have the ability to audit my usage.
On the other hand, I don't have a cellphone. If my employer wishes to reach me when I can't be expected to be at my office phone, he'll need to buy one for me.
Anecdotes != data. I'm sure Starbucks has spent millions determining their demographics.
Indeed they did. From the Article: Schultz and MacKinnon came to believe that the core Starbucks customer, an affluent 25- to 50-year-old who's likelier to be tuned in to NPR than to MTV
They determined that their customer is more likely to be a talk show radio listener than a music listener. And yet they plan to offer music, and not talk radio sessions, in their stores? I think they're letting their "vision" get in the way of their research.
As an NPR listener myself, I tune in precisely because it doesn't have any music, and I don't usually buy music. Why does Starbuck's think that they can sell me some?
I saw your USB requirement only after I had posted.
I don't know how practical it would be for you, but I think you'd be able to use the Macs in an Apple Store on a sporadic basis. Particularly if you're upfront about the project, you might get some assistance (gcc installed on the machine you want to work on, for example). When I worked in a Apple Store, we (unofficially) helped a small-time movie director edit their movie. They came in during the weekday, when we were otherwise slow, and we just let them be.
However, the essence of your point remains: you have x86 machines lying around, as do many other folks; although you'd be interested in including the Mac in your project, to target a different architecture and different OS you need access to a machine on which to do it, and they're harder to find at OSS prices. I can't argue with that, other to say that you might have some luck finding a used (or refurbed) machine for $400-$500, but maybe even that is too much.
I know this is/., but please take your blinders off. Not all Democrats hate Microsoft and big business and not all Republicans find Free Software to be communism.
An interesting corollary to this is that Rush Limbaugh is a big Apple fan, and has complained that if Apple would just pull it's head out of it's liberal ass and advertise on his show they would garner a big growth in marketshare.
Although when I last read that it was before Gore joined the Apple board and before Jobs was an adviser to Kerry; so Rush may have adopted a new technology since, as those affiliations move the marker from just "liberal-leaning" to active Democratic sponsor.
I'm quite sure I can find links for the above if anyone doubts me.
It would be nice if Apple had some way for developers like me to get loaned or cheap equipment.
Is the Sourceforge Compile Farm what you're looking for? Listed as available:
Apple Mac OS X 10.1 Server on Apple Mac G4 (PPC) with Fink
Apple Mac OS X 10.2 Server on Apple Mac G4 (PPC) with Fink
HTH. I haven't used it, so don't know the hoops required to use it. And, it doesn't directly address your need--you can compile and run the app, naturally, but you wouldn't be able to see the GUI interaction, if your app has one.
Try mapping your extra buttons to Expose functions. That'll make you REALLY wonder if Apple System Engineers use Apple mice.
If only third-party BlueTooth mice didn't suck so much. Microsoft's mouse, normally good, will periodically fail to connect and then I'm mouseless for a day or so.
Slashdot Mirror
In order for MS to unseat Google they have to be (MS execs read this carefully) BETTER.
You couldn't be more wrong. Microsoft is rarely better than the competition; they know, and they don't care. They just have to be the default. If getting MS search is one less click than getting Google search, and it's good enough, I wouldn't want to be a Google investor.
Google being better will matter to those folks that are particular. News flash: most folks aren't. Microsoft's strength is that they understand this better than IBM, Apple, BeOS, Palm, or any one of a 100 other tech companies whom I just can't seem to recall any more.
Why should I pay the same price for a book that has inferior readability, will self-destruct, and doesn't have distribution/printing costs, which I know full well to be 50% of the cost of regular book?
I have great hope for technical eBooks that I can access from a PDA--I have more than a few 750 page technical manuals that I sure wish I could search for keywords + carry 3 at a time to the crapper. But since there is no cost of printing and no cost of shipping, why in the hell are they as expensive?
There were some rumors that Apple would sue Motorola for breach of contract once Apple fully migrated to the IBM processor; I don't think that's happened 100% yet, but Apple's pretty close. The suit would've been based on the grounds that Moto didn't give Apple the year warning they were required to that they were going to end their desktop PPC chip, which necessitated Apple scrambling to find a replacement--originally, IBM didn't have a lot of interest in supplying Apple, and only bolted on the AltiVec co-processor at a later date.
I strongly suspect that this relationship is related to terms to arise out of an out of court settlement between Moto and Apple--it's clearly no longer in Apple's interest to sue Moto, so this was worth something to Moto (if the suit had any merit; but it sounded like it may well have.)
I don't know if it's better for Apple or for Moto to play iTMS music on Moto phones; but it does mean that QT is there instead of WMA, which is indeed worth something to Apple. My hunch is that Apple was awarded this privilege for free, and in return they'd drop the suit.
If you lie down with dogs, you might wake up with fleas.
It'd be good if this lead to a test in court of the validity of shrinkwrap licences
More likely, Apple will release a iPod update with COOL NEW FEATURES L@@K which oh yeah, btw, breaks compatibility with real-purchased songs.
So then your iPod will not play your Real purchased library, until Real reverse-engineers it again, and who knows how long that'd take. So you'd have perhaps hundreds of dollars of songs on your iPod that you couldn't get to for an indefinite period of time; and Apple would just shrug their shoulders when you complain.
So if you use urine, does it taste worse? Or better?
Isn't Office for the Mac in that division as well?
It'd be interesting to know how the Xbox numbers compare to the Office:Mac numbers if so--I suspect one is carrying the other.
Releases of iTunes often include subtle changes in the licensing model
If by "often" you mean "once."
This scenario and confusion is what email would have been like if standards weren't set and available for free use--imagine only being able to send an email to someone with the same service.
Instead, the selfless designers of internet protocols gave away their idea such that it could be implemented by anyone anywhere, and email is a valuable tool.
Compared to the greedy bastards that are trying to "own" IM, so the end result is that IM is barely more than a toy.
How do you classify Yellow Dog Linux as 'old'? They update it regularly, in my experience--I guess you can't get nightly builds, or even once a month; but it's not that far behind.
And it's probably your best bet. Unless you want to hack on Darwin, which gets rid of the non-free parts of OS X.
Depends on your interests? I have quite a few subscriptions to Apple mail lists and Mac-Mgrs but if you're not a Mac guy you're not likely to care very much.
And when IBM winds up owning these patents--after winning their countersuit with SCO and acquiring SCO's patents as the only available compensation--IBM will be able to either rape or simply end the relationship with MSFT. Leaving SFU dead in the water.
Is that so far-fetched a scenario? I'm surprised that MSFT is betting on SCO.
It would ottally depersonalize the support experience. No longer would customers deal with people, some faceless entity would just grab their computer and fix it.
Not to mention, and I think this is important--if you can fix a user's computer without leaving your desk, that same job can be done for less in India. Remote Is Not Your Friend--much better to retain the comfort of face-to-face interaction, and to build interpersonal relationships; call it a value add.
If you train your users to be comfortable with remote interaction, what difference to them does it make if the remote operator is down the hall, in another building, or on a different continent?
I'm interested to know more about your experience working with the iTMS. I know that CD Baby was enthused at first, but eventually grew frustrated; has Apple worked those kinds of issues out? How many songs have you actually sold? How fast did Apple get your music up there? etc?
The MS people always ended up saying that SQL server might not be as good as oracle but it was "good enough for what you need to do" and "a hell of a lot cheaper".
That same argument, true or not, was used by Microsoft against Apple. Gates is even quoted saying exactly that at the end of "Pirates of Silicon Valley." Worked out pretty well for them, indeed; it's ironic that they apparently think that they're immune to their own prescription.
The natural conclusion of the "race to the bottom" is to end at free...
The fact is that the Mac, prior to OS X, is adequate for most company tasks, but has major problems of its own
My understanding--and that's all that it is, as I have much more experience with Macs than with Windows--is that up until Windows 2000, Macs were much easier to network, in terms of filesharing, connecting to the internet, and connecting to network resources. Most of this was due to AppleTalk, with it's selfdiscovery; it allowed you to put a resource on the network, or become a resource yourself, and every other Mac on the network could find it in two clicks that were themselves intuitive.
That's not to argue some of the ills of AppleTalk; and if you could set up Windows 98 peer-to-peer as easily I'm sure that someone else will post it. But that's my impression, that Apple's Chooser made life wonderful for end users, and was much easier than Windows discovery protocols.
I challenge you to find an Apple-made program using brushed-metal that doesn't conform to the above guideline.
Apple Remote Desktop v 2.0.
Good pic if you haven't seen it yet. I think it's 100% stupid, too, and I don't mind the metal on most apps, really; but for an Enterprise Admin tool, it adds "pretty" when you really need better efficiency.
I work with SunRays, and this feature of them is great. However, I have solved the problem of having desktops all over my house with a single laptop + wireless.
I've always felt that I'd rather pay for my own internet; otherwise, my employer has the legal ability to eavesdrop on my internet as then it's just another extension of their business. I really don't need them knowing the kind of pr0n I favor, nor, more realistically, to whom I'm sending my resume. I feel pretty certain that, as the bill payer, they have the ability to audit my usage. On the other hand, I don't have a cellphone. If my employer wishes to reach me when I can't be expected to be at my office phone, he'll need to buy one for me.
Anecdotes != data. I'm sure Starbucks has spent millions determining their demographics.
Indeed they did. From the Article:
Schultz and MacKinnon came to believe that the core Starbucks customer, an affluent 25- to 50-year-old who's likelier to be tuned in to NPR than to MTV
They determined that their customer is more likely to be a talk show radio listener than a music listener. And yet they plan to offer music, and not talk radio sessions, in their stores? I think they're letting their "vision" get in the way of their research.
As an NPR listener myself, I tune in precisely because it doesn't have any music, and I don't usually buy music. Why does Starbuck's think that they can sell me some?
I saw your USB requirement only after I had posted.
I don't know how practical it would be for you, but I think you'd be able to use the Macs in an Apple Store on a sporadic basis. Particularly if you're upfront about the project, you might get some assistance (gcc installed on the machine you want to work on, for example). When I worked in a Apple Store, we (unofficially) helped a small-time movie director edit their movie. They came in during the weekday, when we were otherwise slow, and we just let them be.
However, the essence of your point remains: you have x86 machines lying around, as do many other folks; although you'd be interested in including the Mac in your project, to target a different architecture and different OS you need access to a machine on which to do it, and they're harder to find at OSS prices. I can't argue with that, other to say that you might have some luck finding a used (or refurbed) machine for $400-$500, but maybe even that is too much.
I know this is
An interesting corollary to this is that Rush Limbaugh is a big Apple fan, and has complained that if Apple would just pull it's head out of it's liberal ass and advertise on his show they would garner a big growth in marketshare.
Although when I last read that it was before Gore joined the Apple board and before Jobs was an adviser to Kerry; so Rush may have adopted a new technology since, as those affiliations move the marker from just "liberal-leaning" to active Democratic sponsor.
I'm quite sure I can find links for the above if anyone doubts me.
The appointees to various agencies (FCC, Commerce, NSF, NIH) will make key decisions about tech
You forgot "DOJ".
It would be nice if Apple had some way for developers like me to get loaned or cheap equipment.
Is the Sourceforge Compile Farm what you're looking for? Listed as available:
- Apple Mac OS X 10.1 Server on Apple Mac G4 (PPC) with Fink
- Apple Mac OS X 10.2 Server on Apple Mac G4 (PPC) with Fink
HTH. I haven't used it, so don't know the hoops required to use it. And, it doesn't directly address your need--you can compile and run the app, naturally, but you wouldn't be able to see the GUI interaction, if your app has one.Try mapping your extra buttons to Expose functions. That'll make you REALLY wonder if Apple System Engineers use Apple mice.
If only third-party BlueTooth mice didn't suck so much. Microsoft's mouse, normally good, will periodically fail to connect and then I'm mouseless for a day or so.