You forgot one more provision, you aren't associated with an enterprise account.
I which case you can't. The Apple approved method of compiling software is registering as a developer. Apple does not permit non developers to compile and run software on their hardware. That's a developer activity and there is no reason a non developer should be doing that sort of thing. If you want to be compiling software, Apple wants you registered and getting information and updates from them.
. Still, if MS Word can open TCP connections to arbitrary hosts
No reason for MS Word to have access to the network at all directly. So most likely that will be shut off. Which stops the spam problem and the proxy attack.
can get a copy of every word document on your system
Only those documents registered to Word for editing. Word documents in other applications like say a reader / viewer or a document manager wouldn't be accessible.
mine for bitcoins on your CPU.
Probably not. There is no reason that Word would have to have extensive background processes so the system would see this as a zombie and terminate Word until the next run.
I love the Fujitsu laptop. Fujitsu plus OneNote is one of the few things I considered switching back to Windows for. But I'm trying to figure out what the input device for desktops would cost. Obviously far less than a full laptop.
You aren't reading what I wrote. You even quoted it "Apple certainly has never been anything but supportive and helpful when it comes to developers running code on iOS"
Developers can create provisioning files they don't need Cydia.
I agree with you there. I was horrified when DEC and SGI folded to Windows Server as inevitable. Sun continued the fight bravely but LAMP was a ray of light in some very dark days.
I agree with you there. I was horrified when DEC folded to Windows Server as inevitable. SGI and Sun continued the fight bravely but LAMP was a ray of light in some very dark days.
KDE has never been the clear winner. Before GNOME, it had license incompatabilities
I think you are forgetting the United Linux initiative and the players involved. This could have been a standard (at least for enterprise Linux). Had Gnome not happened then the Sun / RedHat push towards standardization: RedHat, Java Desktop, Progeny Linux and UserLinux... never happens and thus Ubuntu's adoption of Gnome never happens. Debian legal's issues with KDE / QT are real but I think they get resolved. Gnome was a gross overreaction to a license mess.
I need a VERY fast SSD, plenty of memory and LOTS of screen space.
If you need a performance laptop you shouldn't be using the Air. Apple has never marketed the Air as a performance machine. I'm on the retina, I have 450m/sec drives, 16g of ram and 5m of screen space.
What really is killing Linux (or why it's never really taken off) is the fragmentation issues. Sure, choice is a good thing but in the present implementation of these available choices full QC (the boring stuff) is rarely done. This leaves a system lacking "spit-n-polish". A good example of this fragmentation is KDE vs. Gnome(2) libraries. Although different under the hood, are they really all that different to the average user?
I agree with your point but just for future reference: libraries are a terrible example of where fragmentation has led to lack of QC. Both GTK and QT have rather good QC. Its the actual GUIs themselves that lack QC, because the amount of labor required for GUI QC is orders of magnitude greater than that required for library QC.
There is no reason to expect OSX to be any better in this regard
There is a big reason. Apple is moving most of their ecosystem's applications to a sandboxing model. So by default applications have very low system permissions outside their own data.
I'm on the retina, its a wonderful machine and I haven't for a second questioned the purchase. But I wouldn't recommend it for Linux yet. Its too cutting edge on the video features, Linux can't drive a 5m display with a Nvidia 650M card yet. Give it another 2 years.
you've gotta wonder why their own (pre OSX) efforts were so poor.
IMHO two things
1) Scope creep. No one had the authority to tell various subgroups within Apple no. 2) Hardware requirements. Copeland was several years earlier and there was a much greater effort on getting it to run on lower end hardware. For example they wanted you to be able to boot the system and run 1 application in 4m of RAM.
right now it's still at the mercy in the way that Apple allows code outside of Appstore to run. They could alter the deal.
Well that's true of all OSes. Canonical could just as easily decided to close off their system to other repositories. That being said, Apple certainly has never been anything but supportive and helpful when it comes to developers running code on iOS. They protect end users, not developers./. people tend to fall into the end user category because they don't register as developers, but then want developer access. MacPorts is seen by them as developer oriented software not general end user software.
You aren't paying for installing software, installing software is free. You do pay though for the right to issue provisioning files, that is to be a registered developer. You do pay to be a signing authority and having the ability to manage phones.
Apple does not want unsupported end users. Every piece of software has to have someone who is a responsible party. Either that responsible party will be Apple, a developer or an enterprise that has agreed to step in and provide support. Apple doesn't offer an option of being unsupported. There is no such thing as legitimate unsupported software for iOS.
But that is far far different than the claim that Apple doesn't allow you to install your own software.
Understood. I don't know what Cintiq would cost in quantity. We know that stylus touch screen devices with an LCD can be made cheaper so I suspect something like the Cintiq but perhaps slightly worse resolution.
Slashdot Mirror
Understood but if the cintiq were being produced at 10m unit / month and in lower quality?
You forgot one more provision, you aren't associated with an enterprise account.
I which case you can't. The Apple approved method of compiling software is registering as a developer. Apple does not permit non developers to compile and run software on their hardware. That's a developer activity and there is no reason a non developer should be doing that sort of thing. If you want to be compiling software, Apple wants you registered and getting information and updates from them.
. Still, if MS Word can open TCP connections to arbitrary hosts
No reason for MS Word to have access to the network at all directly. So most likely that will be shut off. Which stops the spam problem and the proxy attack.
can get a copy of every word document on your system
Only those documents registered to Word for editing. Word documents in other applications like say a reader / viewer or a document manager wouldn't be accessible.
mine for bitcoins on your CPU.
Probably not. There is no reason that Word would have to have extensive background processes so the system would see this as a zombie and terminate Word until the next run.
I love the Fujitsu laptop. Fujitsu plus OneNote is one of the few things I considered switching back to Windows for. But I'm trying to figure out what the input device for desktops would cost. Obviously far less than a full laptop.
You aren't reading what I wrote. You even quoted it "Apple certainly has never been anything but supportive and helpful when it comes to developers running code on iOS"
Developers can create provisioning files they don't need Cydia.
OSX did benefit. Apple's marketshare had falled to about 2% prior to Vista. With Vista's failure OSX doubled share to 4% in a matter of a few months.
Sorry for the previous version. Should have read
I agree with you there. I was horrified when DEC and SGI folded to Windows Server as inevitable. Sun continued the fight bravely but LAMP was a ray of light in some very dark days.
Ignore this version.
I agree with you there. I was horrified when DEC folded to Windows Server as inevitable. SGI and Sun continued the fight bravely but LAMP was a ray of light in some very dark days.
I remember the rumors that Windows 7 would have a UNIX run-time environment (or maybe I dreamed that).
Sort of. I think what you mean is: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc779522(v=ws.10).aspx
Microsoft has gone back and forth several times with creating a more Unixy interface to their kernel. For example the XP version was: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=274
KDE has never been the clear winner. Before GNOME, it had license incompatabilities
I think you are forgetting the United Linux initiative and the players involved. This could have been a standard (at least for enterprise Linux). Had Gnome not happened then the Sun / RedHat push towards standardization: RedHat, Java Desktop, Progeny Linux and UserLinux... never happens and thus Ubuntu's adoption of Gnome never happens. Debian legal's issues with KDE / QT are real but I think they get resolved. Gnome was a gross overreaction to a license mess.
I need a VERY fast SSD, plenty of memory and LOTS of screen space.
If you need a performance laptop you shouldn't be using the Air. Apple has never marketed the Air as a performance machine. I'm on the retina, I have 450m/sec drives, 16g of ram and 5m of screen space.
Huh? 5 years ago OSX had about 6% marketshare, and Linux was around 1.5%. OSX overtook Linux somewhere in the OSX 10.1 days.
They do get counted. There are firms that measure these sorts of things.
1) They do surveys of computer users.
2) They look at support contracts.
3) They look at secondary software like browser market share.
What really is killing Linux (or why it's never really taken off) is the fragmentation issues. Sure, choice is a good thing but in the present implementation of these available choices full QC (the boring stuff) is rarely done. This leaves a system lacking "spit-n-polish". A good example of this fragmentation is KDE vs. Gnome(2) libraries. Although different under the hood, are they really all that different to the average user?
I agree with your point but just for future reference: libraries are a terrible example of where fragmentation has led to lack of QC. Both GTK and QT have rather good QC. Its the actual GUIs themselves that lack QC, because the amount of labor required for GUI QC is orders of magnitude greater than that required for library QC.
In the US it is 12% now BTW. And in terms of laptops over $1000 (i.e. usage among people that really care) it is in the mid 80s.
There is no reason to expect OSX to be any better in this regard
There is a big reason. Apple is moving most of their ecosystem's applications to a sandboxing model. So by default applications have very low system permissions outside their own data.
I'm on the retina, its a wonderful machine and I haven't for a second questioned the purchase. But I wouldn't recommend it for Linux yet. Its too cutting edge on the video features, Linux can't drive a 5m display with a Nvidia 650M card yet. Give it another 2 years.
you've gotta wonder why their own (pre OSX) efforts were so poor.
IMHO two things
1) Scope creep. No one had the authority to tell various subgroups within Apple no.
2) Hardware requirements. Copeland was several years earlier and there was a much greater effort on getting it to run on lower end hardware. For example they wanted you to be able to boot the system and run 1 application in 4m of RAM.
Fedora?
right now it's still at the mercy in the way that Apple allows code outside of Appstore to run. They could alter the deal.
Well that's true of all OSes. Canonical could just as easily decided to close off their system to other repositories. That being said, Apple certainly has never been anything but supportive and helpful when it comes to developers running code on iOS. They protect end users, not developers. /. people tend to fall into the end user category because they don't register as developers, but then want developer access. MacPorts is seen by them as developer oriented software not general end user software.
MacPorts is not 3rd party, MacOSForge is Apple: http://www.whois.com/whois/macosforge.org
As for friendly it is based on a BSD ports system. Fink, (http://www.finkproject.org/) which is 3rd party, uses apt-get just like Ubuntu.
You aren't paying for installing software, installing software is free. You do pay though for the right to issue provisioning files, that is to be a registered developer. You do pay to be a signing authority and having the ability to manage phones.
Apple does not want unsupported end users. Every piece of software has to have someone who is a responsible party. Either that responsible party will be Apple, a developer or an enterprise that has agreed to step in and provide support. Apple doesn't offer an option of being unsupported. There is no such thing as legitimate unsupported software for iOS.
But that is far far different than the claim that Apple doesn't allow you to install your own software.
Understood. I don't know what Cintiq would cost in quantity. We know that stylus touch screen devices with an LCD can be made cheaper so I suspect something like the Cintiq but perhaps slightly worse resolution.
Obviously a generic electronic device with rounded corners has prior art so either your interpretation is wrong or the patent is worthless.