The third-party PPC machines didn't have this problem
That's because the PPC clone companies, with the exception of Power, had no R&D budget... at all.
Some of them, like Motorolla, also spent $0 marketing their product. Why bother when a review in Macworld will get you plenty of sales?
Finally, most of them used cheaper hardware than Apple traditionally went with. They were basically selling performas in PC cases.
None of the clone vendors did anything to expand the Macintosh market, contrary to the predictions of those who had been calling for it. All they did was put out a "me too" product for less money and steal customers away from Apple, which would be great except none of them could possibly survive without Apple's ongoing OS development, and none of them wanted to share the cost of that work. (They continually balked at Apple's licensing costs, and were bitching and moaning about that price right up to the day that Jobs pulled the plug.)
Can we someday have a discussion about any inventor anywhere without some geek invoking the name of Nikola Tesla?
Okay, great, you know who Tesla was. We are all happy for you. Now never bother us with his sad story again.
Steering back onto the topic, I would say that Woz has achieved all the wealth and fame that he actually wanted, and if he wanted more he would have had it. On his own terms, he is a total and complete success. That is why he is not a bazillionaire; he never wanted to be anything more or less than a really great engineer and inventor.
(This message brought to you by a fan of Thomas Edison, the Wizard on Menlo Park. Deal with it, pink boy!)
I think the real question here is, will my kids be able to control the weather by mind control or shoot laser beams out from their eyes if I continue to use a cell phone? And will society fear them?
Several states in the US have passed the same law. It's a good idea. Studies have shown that a person chatting on a cell phone is just as likely to get into an accident as a drunk driver.
Buying from OPEC is almost always cheaper than drilling it ourselved. Environmental zealots seem to think that oil rigs in Iran are less of a threat to the globe than oil rigs in Texas. Also, land and labor are cheaper over there.
You are right though, that every time we threaten to step up our own oil production, OPEC tends to cave on their price-fixing.
OOO! I love that! Let's get behind/.'s lawsuit over the use of forward slashes and dots in http://www.olympics.org! Don't sue the olympic committee, just ask NIC to remove their domain, and any others they own that use some combination of "/" and "."
I suggest that everybody contact Michael Payne, the Marketing Director of the IOC and let him know what you think. The address is:
Michael Payne, Marketing Director C/O International Olympic Committee Château de Vidy 1007 Lousanne, Switzerland
Or, if you don't mind the phone bill, call them at 41.21.621.6111.
Or fax them. (41.21.621.6216)
If you would rather pester the Organizing Committee for e-mail addresses of who to contact, call them in Salt Lake City, toll free, at 1-800-212-2002 (Fax: 1-800-364-7644)
On the other hand, SCO Unixware is still doomed. Your biases may cause you to believe otherwise, but that isn't going to save Unixware.
Thanks for the FUD. I'll get busy burning my O'Reilly Korn book right away, since all I need is BASH from now on.
Sorry, but you still sound exactly like the Microsoft astroturfers who were proclaiming the death of Apple two years ago. You may not like it, but there are a lot of companies who still want to run UNIX (real UNIX, as in SVR4) on x86 systems. Companies like USWest (now part of Qwest), Seimens, etc.
I use Linux at home, and lots of little mom & pop companies also use it, but the kings of the NASDAQ exchange live on Solaris, AIX, HPUX, Win2k, and yes... SCO. Deal with it, Pink Boy.
Your comments about the transistion time issues reminds me of the discussions that Russia was having about Glasnost and capitalism in the late 1980's.
Some adviser from America was pointing out to them that converting some of the economy to a free market while keeping communism intact was "sort of like saying that we are converting traffic to have cars drive on the right instead of the left, but this year we will start with just the trucks and vans."
Environmentalists might not be such big cheerleaders for electric cars if/when we start throwing out about 200,000 huge-assed batteries every year. They tend to create a lot more landfill problems than a rusted-out gas tank.
Yep. They hybrids do get some of their charge from braking. It was a great idea.
For those that don't know, Honda and Toyota have itty bitty cars on the market now that get "up to" 70 MPG by having an electrical motor "assist" a tiny, underpowered gas engine. Government subsidies make them suprisingly affordable, but their range is not very far, they gotta spend some time recharging just like the full-on electrics, they're really small, they don't accelerate much or take hills very well, and I would hate to get into an accident with one.
I took a long hard look at the Honda a couple months ago, and read a lot of reviews from people who drove them. IMHO, they offer the worst of both worlds, but they offer a certain amount of geek appeal to folks who like to "Drive Different".
You will probably be spanked down to -1 for that comment, but you happen to be right. Just yesterday,/. ran a "story" about how SCO is for sale, and they are dropping UNIX for Mandrake Linux, and they are doomed if they don't... All based on a pro-Linux opinion piece that some hack slapped together on a lazy afternoon.
Maybe it will happen, but there is a difference between rumors and news.
If a software company pays them money to focus on certain aspects of a product when performing a review, they are obliged to take the money otherwise the shareholders can sue them for lost revenue. This is how free markets work: there is no place for weaklings.
Not really. If a publication exists to review products, and takes bribes, and people find out about it, nobody will read them anymore. Bye bye, revenue stream. Nice knowing you, high share values.
Shareholders can not sue a company for protecting their market. For that matter, they will never sue a company for turning down business that is outside of their scope. (If you are in the business of taking money from companies to issue press releases, that is one thing, but if you are a journalistic publication, then you are not in the review-selling business.)
For that matter, when is the last time you ever heard of any stockholder trying to sue any company that they are part-owner of??? That's like going to court to demand money from yourself.
You know, I keep hearig these conspiracy theories about the oil companies fearing alternative fuel and suppressing it, but that's a little like thinging the makers of Camel cigarettes are going to fear Menthols.
What I'm trying to say here is that if everyone switches to propane, Standard/Mobil and the other oil giants would just become propane companies. They would continue to be filthy stinking rich.
It might change over the next few years, but right now, liquid fuel is still the very best way to run your car. It's cheap. It takes less cargo space that gasseous fuels. It weighs less than a lead-acid battery storing the same ammount of power. It's abundant. It burns relatively clean (yes, enough air pollution to kill you if you sit in a garage full of it, but not nearly as bad as burning yard waste or coal.) It's easy and safe to transport (as long as you have naval support getting you through the Persian Gulf).
When you drive a battery car, you are charging it from the power grid. Unless you live in an area that relies on all nuclear power or windmills or something, you are getting your power from oil or coal burning generators. Those big plants run a lot more efficiently than a typical car engine, but you are going through many transfers of power (burn fuel to turn generator to send power along wire to feed outlet to charge battery to turn motor to push car), and those of you who took physics in high school should know that the more you transfer energy, the more you lose some of it.
Alternate fuels look promising, but most of them are in a gasseous state, which means putting a huge tank in your vehicle. Don't expect to see natural gas Harley-Davidson hogs on the road anytime soon.
Solar looks good, if you want a one-man car with a top speed of 30 and don't mind staying home on cloudy days.
Electrical induction motors are kind of spiffy, but they are also a ways off.
So, there you go... we need gas for now. When something better comes along, I will be first in line to switch, but I have been shopping for a non-gasoline car for quite some time now, and have yet to see one with half the appeal of the Ford Crown Victoria or even my '91 Mazda Pickup.
Re:X GUI's are nice if you dont use the mouse...
on
X Windows Must Die!
·
· Score: 1
True, but if I want consistancy, I can always boot up my Mac.
I tend to look at Linux as a geek/hacker OS, and therefore flexibility is far more desirable than rigidly enforced UI behavior.
There are some people who really want to see Linux become the "next Windows", or at least a "Windows killer" in the consumer market... The day that happens, I guarantee you the geeks will have moved on to something else.
World domination by Linux just isn't that important to me, I guess. (Nor is Gnome... good ol' BASH is good enough for most of the things I use my Linux boxen for anyway.)
I agree. The lack of a standard GUI is a feature, not a bug. One of the things I like best about Linux is that you are free to "roll yer own" UI. Pick a manager, load an environment on it, tweak it to taste.
Sooner or later, Red Hat, Debian, and the other big distro players might someday agree on an ideal standard setup for a Linux GUI. I'm betting it will look a lot like Gnome/Enlightenment. If that's what the standard will be like, I say let's stick with the chaos we have now.
It reminds me of the time I was watching the movie "Quiggly Down Under" with my gf.
There's a scene in that movie where the bad guys are brutally driving the natives off a cliff. Quggly pulls out his rifle and starts shooting at the bad cowboys.
At no point during this mass-murder scene, followed by the sight of people being shot did she react at all.
Then one of the bad cowboys that was shot stubled off the cliff, taking his horse with him. As horse and rider fell through the air, she loudly cried out "Oh my God! The poor horse!"
I have seen that movie a few times since then, and every time there are a few people in the group that watch unblinking as the the aboriginies are butchered on the sharp rocks, but are horrified at the depiction of a horse in peril. I blame Disney.
(No animals were hurt during the making of that movie. The horse that went off the cliff was fake, so don't even try to make a case about the horse not being a willing stuntman, you vegan zealots.)
You are obviously lying about being a French Canadian, because if you were you would have written your post in French first, using bold letters, and then again in English with smaller text.:)
Slashdot Mirror
That's because the PPC clone companies, with the exception of Power, had no R&D budget... at all.
Some of them, like Motorolla, also spent $0 marketing their product. Why bother when a review in Macworld will get you plenty of sales?
Finally, most of them used cheaper hardware than Apple traditionally went with. They were basically selling performas in PC cases.
None of the clone vendors did anything to expand the Macintosh market, contrary to the predictions of those who had been calling for it. All they did was put out a "me too" product for less money and steal customers away from Apple, which would be great except none of them could possibly survive without Apple's ongoing OS development, and none of them wanted to share the cost of that work. (They continually balked at Apple's licensing costs, and were bitching and moaning about that price right up to the day that Jobs pulled the plug.)
Okay, great, you know who Tesla was. We are all happy for you. Now never bother us with his sad story again.
Steering back onto the topic, I would say that Woz has achieved all the wealth and fame that he actually wanted, and if he wanted more he would have had it. On his own terms, he is a total and complete success. That is why he is not a bazillionaire; he never wanted to be anything more or less than a really great engineer and inventor.
(This message brought to you by a fan of Thomas Edison, the Wizard on Menlo Park. Deal with it, pink boy!)
I think the real question here is, will my kids be able to control the weather by mind control or shoot laser beams out from their eyes if I continue to use a cell phone? And will society fear them?
Several states in the US have passed the same law. It's a good idea. Studies have shown that a person chatting on a cell phone is just as likely to get into an accident as a drunk driver.
If you have a long trip planned, you will get a lot more range and better gas milage with a fully-charged battery.
You are right though, that every time we threaten to step up our own oil production, OPEC tends to cave on their price-fixing.
I suggest that everybody contact Michael Payne, the Marketing Director of the IOC and let him know what you think. The address is:
Michael Payne, Marketing Director
C/O International Olympic Committee
Château de Vidy
1007 Lousanne, Switzerland
Or, if you don't mind the phone bill, call them at 41.21.621.6111.
Or fax them. (41.21.621.6216)
If you would rather pester the Organizing Committee for e-mail addresses of who to contact, call them in Salt Lake City, toll free, at 1-800-212-2002 (Fax: 1-800-364-7644)
Thanks for the FUD. I'll get busy burning my O'Reilly Korn book right away, since all I need is BASH from now on.
Sorry, but you still sound exactly like the Microsoft astroturfers who were proclaiming the death of Apple two years ago. You may not like it, but there are a lot of companies who still want to run UNIX (real UNIX, as in SVR4) on x86 systems. Companies like USWest (now part of Qwest), Seimens, etc.
I use Linux at home, and lots of little mom & pop companies also use it, but the kings of the NASDAQ exchange live on Solaris, AIX, HPUX, Win2k, and yes... SCO. Deal with it, Pink Boy.
Well, I guess now we know where the expression "pardon my french" comes from.
This is a good chance to demonstrate a weakness of Babelfish. The AC's disguisting comment translated as "eat a tank of marde, pi kisses your mother".
Okay, the word "should" finally tipped me off.
Shame on me for not realizing that you were trolling earlier.
Some adviser from America was pointing out to them that converting some of the economy to a free market while keeping communism intact was "sort of like saying that we are converting traffic to have cars drive on the right instead of the left, but this year we will start with just the trucks and vans."
Environmentalists might not be such big cheerleaders for electric cars if/when we start throwing out about 200,000 huge-assed batteries every year. They tend to create a lot more landfill problems than a rusted-out gas tank.
For those that don't know, Honda and Toyota have itty bitty cars on the market now that get "up to" 70 MPG by having an electrical motor "assist" a tiny, underpowered gas engine. Government subsidies make them suprisingly affordable, but their range is not very far, they gotta spend some time recharging just like the full-on electrics, they're really small, they don't accelerate much or take hills very well, and I would hate to get into an accident with one.
I took a long hard look at the Honda a couple months ago, and read a lot of reviews from people who drove them. IMHO, they offer the worst of both worlds, but they offer a certain amount of geek appeal to folks who like to "Drive Different".
Maybe it will happen, but there is a difference between rumors and news.
Not really. If a publication exists to review products, and takes bribes, and people find out about it, nobody will read them anymore. Bye bye, revenue stream. Nice knowing you, high share values.
Shareholders can not sue a company for protecting their market. For that matter, they will never sue a company for turning down business that is outside of their scope. (If you are in the business of taking money from companies to issue press releases, that is one thing, but if you are a journalistic publication, then you are not in the review-selling business.)
For that matter, when is the last time you ever heard of any stockholder trying to sue any company that they are part-owner of??? That's like going to court to demand money from yourself.
What I'm trying to say here is that if everyone switches to propane, Standard/Mobil and the other oil giants would just become propane companies. They would continue to be filthy stinking rich.
It might change over the next few years, but right now, liquid fuel is still the very best way to run your car. It's cheap. It takes less cargo space that gasseous fuels. It weighs less than a lead-acid battery storing the same ammount of power. It's abundant. It burns relatively clean (yes, enough air pollution to kill you if you sit in a garage full of it, but not nearly as bad as burning yard waste or coal.) It's easy and safe to transport (as long as you have naval support getting you through the Persian Gulf).
When you drive a battery car, you are charging it from the power grid. Unless you live in an area that relies on all nuclear power or windmills or something, you are getting your power from oil or coal burning generators. Those big plants run a lot more efficiently than a typical car engine, but you are going through many transfers of power (burn fuel to turn generator to send power along wire to feed outlet to charge battery to turn motor to push car), and those of you who took physics in high school should know that the more you transfer energy, the more you lose some of it.
Alternate fuels look promising, but most of them are in a gasseous state, which means putting a huge tank in your vehicle. Don't expect to see natural gas Harley-Davidson hogs on the road anytime soon.
Solar looks good, if you want a one-man car with a top speed of 30 and don't mind staying home on cloudy days.
Electrical induction motors are kind of spiffy, but they are also a ways off.
So, there you go... we need gas for now. When something better comes along, I will be first in line to switch, but I have been shopping for a non-gasoline car for quite some time now, and have yet to see one with half the appeal of the Ford Crown Victoria or even my '91 Mazda Pickup.
I tend to look at Linux as a geek/hacker OS, and therefore flexibility is far more desirable than rigidly enforced UI behavior.
There are some people who really want to see Linux become the "next Windows", or at least a "Windows killer" in the consumer market... The day that happens, I guarantee you the geeks will have moved on to something else.
World domination by Linux just isn't that important to me, I guess. (Nor is Gnome... good ol' BASH is good enough for most of the things I use my Linux boxen for anyway.)
Sooner or later, Red Hat, Debian, and the other big distro players might someday agree on an ideal standard setup for a Linux GUI. I'm betting it will look a lot like Gnome/Enlightenment. If that's what the standard will be like, I say let's stick with the chaos we have now.
I'm not sure why one person marked me as "informative" for being such an obvious smart-ass either, but that happened to be the most recent moderation.
Well, that's good. Because if you were saying all that I would have had no idea what the hell you were talking about.
Peace, and long life, friend.
There's a scene in that movie where the bad guys are brutally driving the natives off a cliff. Quggly pulls out his rifle and starts shooting at the bad cowboys.
At no point during this mass-murder scene, followed by the sight of people being shot did she react at all.
Then one of the bad cowboys that was shot stubled off the cliff, taking his horse with him. As horse and rider fell through the air, she loudly cried out "Oh my God! The poor horse!"
I have seen that movie a few times since then, and every time there are a few people in the group that watch unblinking as the the aboriginies are butchered on the sharp rocks, but are horrified at the depiction of a horse in peril. I blame Disney.
(No animals were hurt during the making of that movie. The horse that went off the cliff was fake, so don't even try to make a case about the horse not being a willing stuntman, you vegan zealots.)
This message was paid for by the George W. Bush for President Committee.
You are obviously lying about being a French Canadian, because if you were you would have written your post in French first, using bold letters, and then again in English with smaller text. :)
For that matter, maybe a newer version of Napster could include a "preview" app that extracts a random 5-second chunk of the music.