AT&T is regulated by the FCC. The contract has a termination clause which generally works out fairly close to a fair price for the subsidy he got on his original phone. The policies are regulated by the FCC and the FCC agrees.
If you mean the retina the screen is gigantic effectively. Otherwise the 650M should be good for most games comparable to a $50 desktop video card. I'll agree if you are throwing 1/3rd of your money into the video card you aren't really talking a generic desktop but a specialized gaming unit. So your $500 PC isn't crappy at all for that function. Those specialized gaming units exist in laptops too.
You do have a point. You may be right, and I may be over thinking this. There has been a genuine change of tone in the last decade and a half here./. use to stand for something positive, much of which has been achieved. Maybe it is just cynicism from age:
rMBP = Retina MacBook Pro. That's a high end laptop not a desktop.
On an iPod I agree with you, more storage space is better. I haven't upgraded in many years or even used my iPod but the 1.8" HDD with lots of storage are IMHO vastly preferable for that sort of devices where speed won't matter.
As for why not pop a 2.5" drive in at that point, size.
I don't agree with you. Lets take my rMBP 4 cores that are all fairly fast, a bit slower than a good desktops core but by a small fraction. 16 gig of fast ram. 450 MB/sec on the hard drive which is comparable to many RAIDs. A plugged in drive with another few terabytes of storage.
Those specs are far better than any workstation I've ever owned and are roughly comparable to OpenVMS systems that served thousands of users 15 years ago.
Obviously if I need huge power my laptop won't cut it. But I'm not sure any sane desktop would cut it either. There is a fairly narrow band of stuff I can't do on my laptop that I can do without something like a server cluster. Not enough for me to own a desktop. I can understand owning a $40k server at home, I can't really see much use for a desktop.
Now my phone isn't close to my laptop spec wise. It is somewhere in between the laptop I bought in 1997 when I still did own a desktop for "real work" and the laptop (mobile workstation) I bought in 2001 where I finally stepped away from desktop PCs at all (though I still used UNIX workstations and various servers all the time for more complex work). I suspect my next phone roughly in June will be comparable to that 2001 machine. Would I be ready to give up laptops for that machine, yet. No way. Can I picture that by 2020 I will, absolutely.
I'd disagree with your characterization but agree with the spirit of your remarks.
What I'd say is that Apple has always, for decades, made a strong distinction between their professional development community that uses professional tools and must be receiving direction from Apple; and the amateur community whose development tools should be secondary and directed from the professional community. The distinction part is totally alien to UNIX culture which aims for blurry lines between developers and users. The direction part is totally alien to either Windows or UNIX culture. While Microsoft may put out guidelines they don't actually expect anyone except hardware manufacturers to feel bound by them. I think with Apple's success large numbers of people suddenly became aware of Apple's developer culture, and at the same time Apple needed to acculturate a huge number of people into their developer culture.
I don't really believe the issue was about running your own programs on your own device, obviously people skilled enough to do that are skilled enough to bypass Apple's light mechanisms for preventing that. Rather the issue is allowing for the redistribution of software in a way that doesn't depend on developer level skills and at the same time doesn't depend on Apple approvals.
Who wants to blur the lines? Everyone. I haven't owned a desktop in a decade, I just plugged a laptop into an external keyboard and monitor. There is no good reason long term the laptop couldn't go and the same process work for a phone.
Back in the 1990s the/. crowd didn't hate Apple. Apple products were a niche products aimed at people in the creative arts and no one really claimed Linux has software that was good for the creative artist. When Apple acquired NeXT there was a lot of enthusiasm for Apple taking Unix / Linux software mainstream and creating millions of people that knew at least partially how to get around the Unix command line (though a BSD variant). The fink project creating a bridge between the Debian community and the BSD Mac community helped as well.
There was some tension as OSX became the dominant Unix desktop system rather than Linux because of the cost differences. The Linux community began to see how in practice Apple might be undermining the move towards Linux and not just supporting it. There were obviously minor flare ups like when the culture of Apple conflicted with the KDE culture and it became clear that Apple was having some trouble fully integrating with the Open Source community. But the real mass tension and widespread dislike of Apple didn't start on/. until Android.
The bias against spinny storage is just mindless iCult nonsense.
I own the rMBP I'm getting 450MB/sec which is faster than many good quality spinning RAID systems. I'd love to have more space, and I'd prefer something like the fusion drive. But no it isn't just mindless iCult nonsense.
As far as I can tell Microsoft accidentally violated the terms of the GPL. When they were made aware of this they immediately ceased violating and worked hard to bring themselves into compliance. They might very well if there is a small damages claim by someone with standing pay.
Linux sold great on Dells for many years. They've had some problems with desktop users and Dells but Linux was core to Dell's server business, it allowed them to get rid of their OEM SCO in the early 1990s while still having a strong server presence.
Panic? Y2K was a time when a huge amount of investment to upgrade systems occurred. It was a surge for everyone in IT when all sorts of projects that hadn't been able to get funding were able to get funding. Oh for those older people, it gives a great chance to contract writing programs in languages or using techniques younger people don't know. Those old Assembly language, C, Paradox, FoxPro... skills will be back in vogue.
.dll hell is programs conflicting with each other. In other words
1) you have OS version X 2) you install application A which installs dll R 3) you install applications B which overwrites R with S and A no longer runs.
That's.dll hell. That's what Microsoft solved. That's not the problem you are facing. The problem you are facing is
1) you have OS version X 2) you install application A which installs dll R and that doesn't work with X
That's OS incompatibility, no dll hell. An entirely different problem.
Look above I think you are merging two responses. The Gnome 2 / Gnome 3 counter was citing your example in response to someone who was disputing that such problems exist at all.
As for the Windows 2K machine example, that's not.dll hell. That's just incompatibility with newer versions essentially. You shouldn't have an older VBRUN.DLL that's essentially an OS specific file not a program specific file. I can't blame Microsoft for that one at all.
I wouldn't unify all Unixes here. Unixes used all sorts of approaches and the distribution RPM/DEB system originated with Linux Sun for example more or les encouraged static linking and using the/opt filesystem for complex installs which was never the culture on Linux.
As for a counter example to your position. Gnome 3 and Gnome 2 cannot coexist. That was the entire reason for Mate and what GP was complaining about. I've run into "dll hell" a lot with packages that required 2 versions of MySQL for example.
Though this hasn't bit me too much it has hit others, it most certainly was not the case that.so were fully versioned though they often have/had major version numbers. That issue was one of the main reasons for Enterprise distributions which don't update those libraries for fear of breaking VAR applications.
Just a quick suggestion. Do "man screen". If you are just talking about VIM sessions then you can use the 1980s multitasking built into an individual terminal.
From the perspective of the Gnome group how exactly is that broken? They've made it hard for you to use a product they want you to switch away from. That sounds like they are accomplishing their objective, you just dislike their objective.
As for.DLL hell and Linux. Linux has always had "DLL hell" that's why distributions caught on so quickly vs. configure / make / install. The only system without.DLL hell funny enough is Windows XP and newer since they did a lot of work to avoid it.
GP was asking what if OO had had corporate support.
First off OO is an integrated office suite not a word processor. So saying that we don't need an integrated office suite because there were open source word processors doesn't mean much.
As for LaTeX in particular. Fundamentally a typesetting engine is a not a word processor. That's like saying you don't need a car because you own a television. As for it scaling up to books no question, I've used it for much larger documents than that. If does fall apart badly when you start scaling to print streams in hundreds of thousands of pages which typesetting engines in business do handle but LaTeX doesn't handle well. LaTeX is free and feature rich and interesting but lets not oversell what it does.
Open Office exists because of Sun. They are the ones that opened up the Star Office code base. They also funded OO for years taking it from a very so / so product to something that really is clearly a serious office suite in terms of features roughly on par with Microsoft Office (sans enterprise extensions).
As for the rest, you are making good points. Next time there is an IPv6 conference I'm going to ask. Bringing back tables strikes me as a huge tragedy. I'd rather large companies have to use variable prefixes, but you could very well be right. Do you have any cites?
I would assume for geolocation regardless of what the ISP does the/64s will be cleanly marked. Unless of routing is insane the IP addresses are going to follow something like a physical infrastructure. Right now no one is bothering to geolocate IPv6 addresses since their isn't much B2C.
\As for the non table routing, maybe I am wrong on that one. Other people are saying the same.
I wouldn't use the routing code in Linux. Linux isn't used for high performance routers. What you want is IOS (Cisco's not Apple's).
As far as your post I agree with most of it other than the existence of routing tables. My understanding is that there will be no complex lookups. So while it is not the case globally, it will be the case that in individual router will be making a routing decision based on very simple criteria unlike today where there is a table lookup.
Most people understand the difference between learning fire safety for a day and being a fireman. They understand that learning CPR doesn't make them emergency room doctor. A few basic tools isn't supposed to teach them what professional programmers do except in a vague sense.
Slashdot Mirror
AT&T is regulated by the FCC. The contract has a termination clause which generally works out fairly close to a fair price for the subsidy he got on his original phone. The policies are regulated by the FCC and the FCC agrees.
If you mean the retina the screen is gigantic effectively. Otherwise the 650M should be good for most games comparable to a $50 desktop video card. I'll agree if you are throwing 1/3rd of your money into the video card you aren't really talking a generic desktop but a specialized gaming unit. So your $500 PC isn't crappy at all for that function. Those specialized gaming units exist in laptops too.
You do have a point. You may be right, and I may be over thinking this. There has been a genuine change of tone in the last decade and a half here. /. use to stand for something positive, much of which has been achieved. Maybe it is just cynicism from age:
"We'd live the life we choose. We'd fight and never loose. For we were young and sure to have our way"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KODZtjOIPg
rMBP = Retina MacBook Pro. That's a high end laptop not a desktop.
On an iPod I agree with you, more storage space is better. I haven't upgraded in many years or even used my iPod but the 1.8" HDD with lots of storage are IMHO vastly preferable for that sort of devices where speed won't matter.
As for why not pop a 2.5" drive in at that point, size.
I don't agree with you. Lets take my rMBP
4 cores that are all fairly fast, a bit slower than a good desktops core but by a small fraction.
16 gig of fast ram.
450 MB/sec on the hard drive which is comparable to many RAIDs.
A plugged in drive with another few terabytes of storage.
Those specs are far better than any workstation I've ever owned and are roughly comparable to OpenVMS systems that served thousands of users 15 years ago.
Obviously if I need huge power my laptop won't cut it. But I'm not sure any sane desktop would cut it either. There is a fairly narrow band of stuff I can't do on my laptop that I can do without something like a server cluster. Not enough for me to own a desktop. I can understand owning a $40k server at home, I can't really see much use for a desktop.
Now my phone isn't close to my laptop spec wise. It is somewhere in between the laptop I bought in 1997 when I still did own a desktop for "real work" and the laptop (mobile workstation) I bought in 2001 where I finally stepped away from desktop PCs at all (though I still used UNIX workstations and various servers all the time for more complex work). I suspect my next phone roughly in June will be comparable to that 2001 machine. Would I be ready to give up laptops for that machine, yet. No way. Can I picture that by 2020 I will, absolutely.
I'd disagree with your characterization but agree with the spirit of your remarks.
What I'd say is that Apple has always, for decades, made a strong distinction between their professional development community that uses professional tools and must be receiving direction from Apple; and the amateur community whose development tools should be secondary and directed from the professional community. The distinction part is totally alien to UNIX culture which aims for blurry lines between developers and users. The direction part is totally alien to either Windows or UNIX culture. While Microsoft may put out guidelines they don't actually expect anyone except hardware manufacturers to feel bound by them. I think with Apple's success large numbers of people suddenly became aware of Apple's developer culture, and at the same time Apple needed to acculturate a huge number of people into their developer culture.
I don't really believe the issue was about running your own programs on your own device, obviously people skilled enough to do that are skilled enough to bypass Apple's light mechanisms for preventing that. Rather the issue is allowing for the redistribution of software in a way that doesn't depend on developer level skills and at the same time doesn't depend on Apple approvals.
Agree. And you know who else agrees, Apple. They've consistently argued that PC's / OSX devices and iOS devices have different functions.
Who wants to blur the lines? Everyone. I haven't owned a desktop in a decade, I just plugged a laptop into an external keyboard and monitor. There is no good reason long term the laptop couldn't go and the same process work for a phone.
Back in the 1990s the /. crowd didn't hate Apple. Apple products were a niche products aimed at people in the creative arts and no one really claimed Linux has software that was good for the creative artist. When Apple acquired NeXT there was a lot of enthusiasm for Apple taking Unix / Linux software mainstream and creating millions of people that knew at least partially how to get around the Unix command line (though a BSD variant). The fink project creating a bridge between the Debian community and the BSD Mac community helped as well.
There was some tension as OSX became the dominant Unix desktop system rather than Linux because of the cost differences. The Linux community began to see how in practice Apple might be undermining the move towards Linux and not just supporting it. There were obviously minor flare ups like when the culture of Apple conflicted with the KDE culture and it became clear that Apple was having some trouble fully integrating with the Open Source community. But the real mass tension and widespread dislike of Apple didn't start on /. until Android.
The bias against spinny storage is just mindless iCult nonsense.
I own the rMBP I'm getting 450MB/sec which is faster than many good quality spinning RAID systems. I'd love to have more space, and I'd prefer something like the fusion drive. But no it isn't just mindless iCult nonsense.
As far as I can tell Microsoft accidentally violated the terms of the GPL. When they were made aware of this they immediately ceased violating and worked hard to bring themselves into compliance. They might very well if there is a small damages claim by someone with standing pay.
That's what you would want violators to do.
Linux sold great on Dells for many years. They've had some problems with desktop users and Dells but Linux was core to Dell's server business, it allowed them to get rid of their OEM SCO in the early 1990s while still having a strong server presence.
Panic? Y2K was a time when a huge amount of investment to upgrade systems occurred. It was a surge for everyone in IT when all sorts of projects that hadn't been able to get funding were able to get funding. Oh for those older people, it gives a great chance to contract writing programs in languages or using techniques younger people don't know. Those old Assembly language, C, Paradox, FoxPro... skills will be back in vogue.
Why panic?
.dll hell is programs conflicting with each other. In other words
1) you have OS version X
2) you install application A which installs dll R
3) you install applications B which overwrites R with S and A no longer runs.
That's .dll hell. That's what Microsoft solved. That's not the problem you are facing. The problem you are facing is
1) you have OS version X
2) you install application A which installs dll R and that doesn't work with X
That's OS incompatibility, no dll hell. An entirely different problem.
@dbill --
Look above I think you are merging two responses. The Gnome 2 / Gnome 3 counter was citing your example in response to someone who was disputing that such problems exist at all.
As for the Windows 2K machine example, that's not .dll hell. That's just incompatibility with newer versions essentially. You shouldn't have an older VBRUN.DLL that's essentially an OS specific file not a program specific file. I can't blame Microsoft for that one at all.
I wouldn't unify all Unixes here. Unixes used all sorts of approaches and the distribution RPM/DEB system originated with Linux Sun for example more or les encouraged static linking and using the /opt filesystem for complex installs which was never the culture on Linux.
As for a counter example to your position. Gnome 3 and Gnome 2 cannot coexist. That was the entire reason for Mate and what GP was complaining about. I've run into "dll hell" a lot with packages that required 2 versions of MySQL for example.
Though this hasn't bit me too much it has hit others, it most certainly was not the case that .so were fully versioned though they often have/had major version numbers. That issue was one of the main reasons for Enterprise distributions which don't update those libraries for fear of breaking VAR applications.
Just a quick suggestion. Do "man screen". If you are just talking about VIM sessions then you can use the 1980s multitasking built into an individual terminal.
From the perspective of the Gnome group how exactly is that broken? They've made it hard for you to use a product they want you to switch away from. That sounds like they are accomplishing their objective, you just dislike their objective.
As for .DLL hell and Linux. Linux has always had "DLL hell" that's why distributions caught on so quickly vs. configure / make / install. The only system without .DLL hell funny enough is Windows XP and newer since they did a lot of work to avoid it.
GP was asking what if OO had had corporate support.
First off OO is an integrated office suite not a word processor. So saying that we don't need an integrated office suite because there were open source word processors doesn't mean much.
As for LaTeX in particular. Fundamentally a typesetting engine is a not a word processor. That's like saying you don't need a car because you own a television. As for it scaling up to books no question, I've used it for much larger documents than that. If does fall apart badly when you start scaling to print streams in hundreds of thousands of pages which typesetting engines in business do handle but LaTeX doesn't handle well. LaTeX is free and feature rich and interesting but lets not oversell what it does.
Open Office exists because of Sun. They are the ones that opened up the Star Office code base. They also funded OO for years taking it from a very so / so product to something that really is clearly a serious office suite in terms of features roughly on par with Microsoft Office (sans enterprise extensions).
I copied this from ARIN.
As for the rest, you are making good points. Next time there is an IPv6 conference I'm going to ask. Bringing back tables strikes me as a huge tragedy. I'd rather large companies have to use variable prefixes, but you could very well be right. Do you have any cites?
I would assume for geolocation regardless of what the ISP does the /64s will be cleanly marked. Unless of routing is insane the IP addresses are going to follow something like a physical infrastructure. Right now no one is bothering to geolocate IPv6 addresses since their isn't much B2C.
\As for the non table routing, maybe I am wrong on that one. Other people are saying the same.
I don't agree obviously. I'd say that basic computer literacy involves knowing how to communicate with computers.
I wouldn't use the routing code in Linux. Linux isn't used for high performance routers. What you want is IOS (Cisco's not Apple's).
As far as your post I agree with most of it other than the existence of routing tables. My understanding is that there will be no complex lookups. So while it is not the case globally, it will be the case that in individual router will be making a routing decision based on very simple criteria unlike today where there is a table lookup.
Most people understand the difference between learning fire safety for a day and being a fireman. They understand that learning CPR doesn't make them emergency room doctor. A few basic tools isn't supposed to teach them what professional programmers do except in a vague sense.