Yes it was. The port from OS9 to OSX was expensive. Steve Jobs needed to show that his new platform would be viable. It was iffy if Microsoft and Adobe were going to support it and Apple's marketshare was falling and would continue to fall for more years. Microsoft could very easily have stepped away from the platform. A strong public contractual commitment made it clear that the new OSX platform would be viable.
Copyright law has been clear for a long time. If X is designed in such a way so that it only works with a pre-existing Y then X is a derived work of Y. That's not even controversial. Yes it has been tried, and the results in case law are crystal clear.
The advantage is not so much in writing but rather in learning to write. The more natural the syntax the less time it takes to get semi proficient in the language. Obviously "Add one to number of gadgets, storing result as number of gadgets" is much easier to understand. The code explains itself. Also it doesn't tend to lend itself to combinations. nGadgets++ tends to get combined with other statements since it is so short. Overtime and very quickly people start to like more compressed syntax but for initial learning, more expressive syntax is useful. The same reason Dr. Seuss is useful to learn to read English.
Why? As a customer you have to decide to whom to give your business generally on partial information. Companies do vary in their quality and ethics. A company with a tradition of treating you well and being ethical is more likely to do so in the future. Moreover company's products have serial correlation in terms of tradeoffs. If they make ones you approve of that's more likely in the future.
Company systems should be using Apple's server support solution and their admin can make an informed decision about it and do what they want. People running Runescape can just run in another browser.
The Enterprise SDK lets you push out new provisioning files to managed devices. If you were to send an invalid provisioning file the app wouldn't run. Presuming that Apple can do anything you can do with the Enterprise SDK... does that count as a cite?
Apple runs dozens of these protection services. The average end user has no idea where they do. Apple's position is pretty clear. If you don't know enough to be able to use launchctl and see what Apple is loading you don't know enough to make an informed decision about what should be running.
How is it OK? Because you are running Apple's anti-malware tool and have configured it to pull the list from Apple's servers. A list which you can at will. So if you don't like it.
a) Disable their anti-malware b) Pull the definitions from somewhere else c) Modify the file however you want.
That just makes me wonder what else apple has access to???
Yeah it is isn't like Apple writes books on the design on Darwin, documents the add on services and makes the whole things open source. Oh wait.
I'm not seeing this here. But since this is/. if you want to override:
look for your/System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes.bundle/Contents/Resources/XProtect.meta.plist downgrade the java version. So for today this means change: from:<string>1.6.0_37-b06-435</string> to: <string>1.6.0_37-b06-434</string>
I have problems with "should". This could create more openness. Leasing or lending customers equipment has always been differently regulated than pure lending. If GM issues a lease on a GM car it isn't subject to the same scrutiny as if BofA does. Banks are not supposed to be making unprofitable loans but inside leasing companies may choose to. My car company issues a lease with a negative return to even out their production and thereby cut their average cost of production for cars and increase their bottom line throughout the year. You could argue they should be forced to disclose that they are essentially cutting the price several thousand dollars, not really giving me a special lease. And I guess I could see that in the name of full disclosure. But given how few people understand leases, I'm not sure it would matter.
Take for example the iPhone under Verizon. Verizon pays out $420-480 depending on price. Their collateral if you default is $350. That wouldn't be tolerated from the FDIC or SEC. But the FCC understands that people who spend $199-399 for a phone on an expensive data plan are good customers in other ways and Verizon is fine with being on the hook $70-130 to land them. They are fine losing money on the loans.
No the quality your experience. I meant what I said. I can imagine an older BlackBerry is a very nice dumb phone and you are having a better experience with that than you would with a $50 phone. I'm unclear how that would contradict my position.
That's because of Sprint. Sprint wholesale (the part of Sprint that sells to MVNO) is where Sprint is making most of their money. Sprint retail is fading as a percentage. The MVNOs aren't really setup for the kinds of extensive testing the carriers do. But if you are willing to self support you can generally successfully move between MVNOs assuming the devices are compatible./.ers should be fine.
That $15 / mo is going up in the last two quarters.
The reason you bill doesn't decrease is the carriers long ago realized that the total qualify of your cellular experience is heavily dependent on the quality of your handset. Consumers systematically under appreciate this, so carriers are acting in the public's interest by creating structures to shift costs from the monthly reoccurring side of the ledger to the biennial handset purchase.
As for why carriers don't let you use smartphones with no data plan. The FCC is encouraging mixed pricing in the prepay market. In the postpay market many parts of plans are run at a loss and others are sold at outrageous markups. This tends to all net out to a fair price but they aren't setup to allow people to carve up these plans a la carte. The prepay plans are setup for that.
I'd say the FCC represents the enlightened self interest of the carriers. They represent consumers in so far as carrier's short term interests could choose them to do things to consumers to negative that they harm their long term interests.
You can get pure minute plans in the United States. Page Plus which is essentially Verizon has them. There is no physical SIM because the network is CDMA but close enough. There are some networks like that on GSM. As for the minutes expiring, I've had that happen in Europe as well.
As far as prices their are geographic concentration issues which make it much more expensive to provide service in the United States than Europe.
Slashdot Mirror
OS/2 was mostly dead at that point was was VMS. You are thinking earlier in the 1990s.
Yes it was. The port from OS9 to OSX was expensive. Steve Jobs needed to show that his new platform would be viable. It was iffy if Microsoft and Adobe were going to support it and Apple's marketshare was falling and would continue to fall for more years. Microsoft could very easily have stepped away from the platform. A strong public contractual commitment made it clear that the new OSX platform would be viable.
Copyright law has been clear for a long time. If X is designed in such a way so that it only works with a pre-existing Y then X is a derived work of Y. That's not even controversial. Yes it has been tried, and the results in case law are crystal clear.
The advantage is not so much in writing but rather in learning to write. The more natural the syntax the less time it takes to get semi proficient in the language. Obviously "Add one to number of gadgets, storing result as number of gadgets" is much easier to understand. The code explains itself. Also it doesn't tend to lend itself to combinations. nGadgets++ tends to get combined with other statements since it is so short. Overtime and very quickly people start to like more compressed syntax but for initial learning, more expressive syntax is useful. The same reason Dr. Seuss is useful to learn to read English.
How does Apple know what Java apps to whitelist?
Your number is too low for you to be acting this young.
Why? As a customer you have to decide to whom to give your business generally on partial information. Companies do vary in their quality and ethics. A company with a tradition of treating you well and being ethical is more likely to do so in the future. Moreover company's products have serial correlation in terms of tradeoffs. If they make ones you approve of that's more likely in the future.
OK then everything is month to month. So what's the problem?
There are a ton of AT&T MVNOs. I think Net10 will allow you to do that. StraightTalk... I'd just make a 1/2 dozen phone calls.
Company systems should be using Apple's server support solution and their admin can make an informed decision about it and do what they want. People running Runescape can just run in another browser.
The Enterprise SDK lets you push out new provisioning files to managed devices. If you were to send an invalid provisioning file the app wouldn't run. Presuming that Apple can do anything you can do with the Enterprise SDK... does that count as a cite?
Apple runs dozens of these protection services. The average end user has no idea where they do. Apple's position is pretty clear. If you don't know enough to be able to use launchctl and see what Apple is loading you don't know enough to make an informed decision about what should be running.
How is it OK? Because you are running Apple's anti-malware tool and have configured it to pull the list from Apple's servers. A list which you can at will. So if you don't like it.
a) Disable their anti-malware
b) Pull the definitions from somewhere else
c) Modify the file however you want.
Yeah it is isn't like Apple writes books on the design on Darwin, documents the add on services and makes the whole things open source. Oh wait.
Apple doesn't write Java, Oracle does. If you want a work around you are talking to the wrong large company.
The "fools at Apple" make the security system a standard XML file which is editable by admins. You can do anything you want with it.
You shouldn't be emailing this to users. Apple offers administrative servers that allow you to make the change directly. The charge is I think $50.
I'm not seeing this here. But since this is /. if you want to override:
look for your /System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes.bundle/Contents/Resources/XProtect.meta.plist
downgrade the java version. So for today this means change:
from:<string>1.6.0_37-b06-435</string>
to: <string>1.6.0_37-b06-434</string>
Porting is sort of an anti-loyalty program if you think about it.
I have problems with "should". This could create more openness. Leasing or lending customers equipment has always been differently regulated than pure lending. If GM issues a lease on a GM car it isn't subject to the same scrutiny as if BofA does. Banks are not supposed to be making unprofitable loans but inside leasing companies may choose to. My car company issues a lease with a negative return to even out their production and thereby cut their average cost of production for cars and increase their bottom line throughout the year. You could argue they should be forced to disclose that they are essentially cutting the price several thousand dollars, not really giving me a special lease. And I guess I could see that in the name of full disclosure. But given how few people understand leases, I'm not sure it would matter.
Take for example the iPhone under Verizon. Verizon pays out $420-480 depending on price. Their collateral if you default is $350. That wouldn't be tolerated from the FDIC or SEC. But the FCC understands that people who spend $199-399 for a phone on an expensive data plan are good customers in other ways and Verizon is fine with being on the hook $70-130 to land them. They are fine losing money on the loans.
No the quality your experience. I meant what I said. I can imagine an older BlackBerry is a very nice dumb phone and you are having a better experience with that than you would with a $50 phone. I'm unclear how that would contradict my position.
That's because of Sprint. Sprint wholesale (the part of Sprint that sells to MVNO) is where Sprint is making most of their money. Sprint retail is fading as a percentage. The MVNOs aren't really setup for the kinds of extensive testing the carriers do. But if you are willing to self support you can generally successfully move between MVNOs assuming the devices are compatible. /.ers should be fine.
I've ported numbers. The carriers allow it and make it sensibly straight forward enough.
Well then he can terminate the contract without penalty at will. Both he and AT&T are on a month by month situation.
That $15 / mo is going up in the last two quarters.
The reason you bill doesn't decrease is the carriers long ago realized that the total qualify of your cellular experience is heavily dependent on the quality of your handset. Consumers systematically under appreciate this, so carriers are acting in the public's interest by creating structures to shift costs from the monthly reoccurring side of the ledger to the biennial handset purchase.
As for why carriers don't let you use smartphones with no data plan. The FCC is encouraging mixed pricing in the prepay market. In the postpay market many parts of plans are run at a loss and others are sold at outrageous markups. This tends to all net out to a fair price but they aren't setup to allow people to carve up these plans a la carte. The prepay plans are setup for that.
I'd say the FCC represents the enlightened self interest of the carriers. They represent consumers in so far as carrier's short term interests could choose them to do things to consumers to negative that they harm their long term interests.
You can get pure minute plans in the United States. Page Plus which is essentially Verizon has them. There is no physical SIM because the network is CDMA but close enough. There are some networks like that on GSM. As for the minutes expiring, I've had that happen in Europe as well.
As far as prices their are geographic concentration issues which make it much more expensive to provide service in the United States than Europe.