You missed my point completely. There are no real commercial quality applications like Photoshop, Quark XPress, Flash, Director, Illustrator, PageMaker, InDesign, Freehand, Premiere, AfterEffects, Final Cut Pro, etc. for Linux yet. There are some apps striving to attain a level of maturity comparable to these, but they are a long way off. The GIMP is nowhere near ready for full on deplyment as a commercial grade image editor, though it is making prgress. There is nothing even close to InDesign, XPress or Illustrator. Flash? Ha! Director? Ha!
I realize that film studios, especially those dealing with CGI, are delving into Linux and writing custom software for it, but that stuff isn't going to make it onto shelves in nice shiny shrink wrap. Also, the cost of the systems upon which this software is being developed can only be afforded by big studios. That's where the PowerMac and Final Cut Pro comes in, especially considering Apple just bought Nothing Real. This will bring the cost of high powered video editing and 2/3d compositing into the realm of the individual.
Also, don't get me wrong. I think Linux is a fabulous OS and is getting better and better as time goes by. I just don't think we're going to see it shipped by default on boxes made by Compaq, Acer, Gateway, Dell , Apple or Sony any time soon.
Linux is still finding it's place in the computer world and right now it's greatest strengths are in the server and back end world.
I'd defintiely agree that inadequate is a better word, but it still doesn't really satisfy me. The fact that a mouse can be unplugged and a new one can replace it is fantastic. I'd say that the mouse is inadequate for the user's needs, but the actual computer and platform still does. The beauty is that said person can go to CompUSA or any other computer store and purchase as cheap or as expensive a mouse as he or she needs. If Apple's one button mouse/trackpad doesn't suit my needs (which it does in my case) I can replace it with almost any other USB mouse. Linux and Windows also, although you might run into some driver issues there. No biggie though.
Anyone who stresses out and complains a lot about a mouse's lack of buttons has other issues to deal with beyond this simple input devide.
The user shouldn't need to change they way they work to fit the hardware. If the hardware doesn't do the job the user needs its the hardware thats broken not the user.
Software should allow the user to modify the way that input devices and peripherals interact with the hardware.
I can make my Wacom tablet pretty much behave like a mouse if I want to and that is definitely not the original intent of that device. I really don't care for multi-button mice, so i only ever use the left button and still use keyboard modifiers. Let's say someone is completely used to using a multi-button trackball? If the machine only comes with a 5 button mouse and not a 3 button trackball, does that mean that the hardware is broken? No, it simply means that the user has to go out and purchase a new input device to better suit their needs.
Apple makes a one button mouse/trackpad because it suits the needs of the vast majority of their trarget market. Wintel machines ship with a multi-button mouse because it satisfies the needs of the vast majority of their target market. Linux and *NIX users seem to need mice with 2 to 5 buttons and sometimes a scroll wheel. Seems kind of strange that the people who need a GUI the least are the ones who are pickiest about mice.
Hallelujah! I think the GIMP, Killustrator and the other projects are great and show a lot of promise for actually becoming professional level apps in the future. I hope the momentum doesn't fizzle out. I can't use them for the professional work I currently do, but I like playing around with them and watching their progress. And they're definitely making progress. However, until end user usability and consistency is addressed, these apps won't be ready for prime time use by professional creatives.
Personally, I would love to see a computing world where people using differing file formats and applications can share documents freely and easily. I would love to be able to give someone my Photoshop file that I created on a mac, hand it over to a web guru running Linux and have him/her be able to see my layers, effects, etc. and be able to tweak it as necessary in whatever app he/she is using. Maybe he/she wouldn't be able to modify it with the same toolset that PS6 has, but it would be neat if he/she could at least work with the file format.
While we're talking about it, world peace might be pretty cool too.
Yeah, but if they want to do anything like professional image editing, page layout or broadcast quality video (for under $20k!) they won't be able to do it in Linux. The GIMP, though a cool tool, is still not up to the task at the same level as Photoshop. There is nothing even close to Quark XPress, InDesign, Illustrator or Freehand. No Final Cut Pro, Premiere, AfterEffects, Director or Flash. Or at least anything you can buy at a decent computer store.
Granted, there are a gazillion text editors, some office suites with varying levels of compatibility with Office, web servers, database apps, HTML editors and some barebones image and page layout things, etc. However, until the pro/consumer apps that everyone is familiar with reach a certain level of maturity, Linux is not going to be a contender in the home or creative consumer markets.
I'm sure the infrastructure of Linux is there to support such mature applications, but until organizations get, well, organized, and start addressing the issue of END USERS and not just the people who work in the back end of the computing world, people are going to choose Windows and Mac OS over Linux.
I guess I just don't get it. I've used multi button selectors on my Dell laptop yet I still go back to using the keyboard for simple function like copy and paste and save and close, etc. It has always just seemed faster to me. On my iBook I just option drag, control click, command click, simple drag, etc. I can do everything I need in Linux and the Mac OS without the benefit of a multi button mouse. I don't mean to dimish the benefit of a multi-button mouse. Everyone has their own preference for working at peak efficiency, but I just can't understand how the lack of a multi-button selection device would be the deal breaker for choosing a piece of hardware when the keyboard offers comparable options.
Don't count? Why not? They're programs that people use all the time. I and many others use Quark XPress, Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, PageMaker, InDesign, Premiere, AfterEffects, LiveMotion, Macromedia Freehand, Director and Flash all day every day. So, since the Linux crowd has yet to develop programs that can handle these formats, they don't count?
I'm not defensive about it. I just don't understand why x86 users complain about it so much when they could remedy the situation for very little money. The ability to use 5 mouse buttons is in the OS and the ability to remap your keyboard to mimic a 5 button mouse on a laptop also exists.
Personally, I'm perfectly content with 1 button and using keyboard modifiers. I've used multi buton mice in the past and personally I don't like it. Too much reliance on the mouse and I'm faster on the keyboard.
There are ways around hardware "limitations" if you look hard enough or are willing to adapt and possibly even evolve as a result.
One of the killer things about my OS X Powerbook is how I can plug my digital camera or FireWire cd burner and it not only has a driver, it already knows what to do with the device. With my camera, it automatically asks me if I want to transfer all the pictures off the camera.
I'm in film school. Yesterday in class I had to sit through a four hour lecture on use of the school's brand new Dual 1Ghz Powermac. Now, I've been using Mac's since the 512 came out and PC's since Windows 3.1 and have been doing web UI design for about 6 years. In essence I know a thing or two about good UI.
The IT guy at school was driving me nuts teaching people the basics of dealing with the OS X UI. Click this icon here. Then click this button here. Then, drag this here and click this button. This is a folder, etc. Yes, it drove me nuts, but only because I have been using and configuring Mac's for so long.
The beauty of the demonstration came when we plugged in the JVC MiniDV camera without any drivers. Final Cut Pro was then in complete control of the camera via FireWire. It was incredible. There were no drivers for OS X that came with the camera. It just worked, plain and simple!
The funny thing is, people were having trouble with the OS level UI metaphor because of their exposure to Windows only. However, once they got into FCP and just saw things work without hassle, they were able to get in and get some serious real time video editing done. I still wanted to smack peoples' hands with rulers for using the mouse instead of keyboard shortcuts, but the fact that they were able to get in and work so quickly really impressed me with Apple's engineering depsite some of the OS level UI problems I have with OS X.
Now, if Linux can get to this level of sophisitcation and simplicity, I'll be very very impressed. Linux really needs to embrace IEEE 1394 if it wants to make inroads on the desktop and be part of the digital hub.
I don't understand why so many people think creating an end user simplifed install of Linux will result in a proprietized version of the OS. You can still have the terminal and all the customization goodies under the hood. Why is it then so impossible to develop a distro that has this but hides it from those who don't want to see it or really have no need to ever see it. I have a Dell laptop that I would love to use more frequently. I installed SuSe 7.0 on it and have played around a lot with it, but I can't make it my desktop of choice because I can't really do anything useful with it. Again, I'm a film student and a professional graphic designer.
I'd love to see Linux become useful for people other than the Linux crowd.
Apple tried this with OpenDoc in the early to mid 90's. I'm not sure why it didn't take off, but I certainly liked the idea.
I wish Adobe would adopt an approach like this. Their programs are so similar on the UI front and even to a certain extent their tool sets. I'd love to be able to take a feature from Photoshop, combine it with a feature from LiveMotion, Illustrator and After Effects and slam it through GoLive (and clean up with BBEdit).
Linux/*NIX apps have a better chance of succeeding at this because many of the apps out there don't have up to 15 years of legacy code in them.
Ok, well, what's the difference between using a multiple button selection device on a laptop and using modifier keys to do the same thing? You're still essentially pressing keys to mimic a multi-button mouse. My left pinky finger has become quite adept at modifying mouse commands on my iBook. I don't miss my one button or multi-button mouse at all while using my laptop.
I don't like Macs any more than I like Windows. In fact, I'd say I like the OS less because it's even more restrictive than Windows is (you have to buy very specific hardware, all approved by Apple, and most of it overly expensive). I see no justification or need for cooperation between Linux developers and Apple.
The very fact that OS X and Linux are *NIX derivatives and POSIX environments is a very compelling reason for Linux and OS X developers to cooperate. Many Linux apps could get some serious attention if they got into the hands of OS X users and vice versa. Don't dismiss the signifigance of OS X just because you are not part of Apple's taget market demographic. Apple primarily sells to people who don't ever want to open their machines except to install some RAM and want a front end UI that's more advanced, simple and consistent than KDE or Gnome. (Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of KDE and think Gnome shows some potential.)
What gets me about your previous post is that, even though you may have had a reasoned opinion, you couched it in very typical anti-mac dogma. Yes, their machinery is developed and controlled by Apple, but their hardware serves a very specific function and very well. So much so that people like me in the creative professions will pay a premium to never really have to worry about the guts of their computer because it just works and runs the apps I need better than on any other platform.
What do you think their plan for making a profit is? It's by producing a superior product, both hardware and software. And in my opinion they are doing just that. Hallelujah!
I'm sick of people wasting bytes rehashing the same anti-mac rhetoric over and over. If this were a well thought out criticism, I'd welcome it, but this is just yet another kneejerk Linux geek shouting the same crap again. If you don't like Mac's, don't buy one. Period. I happen to use the more than enything else and find them to be very nimble and useful tools.
This is precisely why M$ is in such hot water. They can withhold Office, IE and Outlook if Apple releases OS X for Intel. They can use their various monopolies to create a huge barrier to entrance into the x86 market for Apple. A clear sign of a malignant monopoly.
If Apple wants to compete in the commodity hardware space, they need to get big OEM deals signed. Dell, Compaq, IBM, Sony, etc. And which of those is really going to stand up to M$ threatening to remove their Windows licenses if they start shipping PC's with OS X? IBM maybe, but without Dell, the whole thing falls apart.
Just think about how hard it is to get Linux on a computer from a major manufacturer and you'll get an idea of why Apple hasn't made the switch.
Next all industries will have to publish all blueprints, schematics, and etc. I'd rather have to deal with so called monopolies than this socialist rubbish.
One of the tenets of capitalism is that there is no barrier to entry into the market and that a company should be able to compete on their own merits. Should a company be so successful that it attains monopoly status, that's perfecctly legal and fine.
However, when a company uses it's monopoly in one market to force it's way into another market, that's another thing. It's illegal and helps to create a barrier to market entrance for other smaller companies.
Microsoft has created a huge barrier to entry into various markets. Just try and get a browser developed and hope to have a marketshare of greater than 1%. Opera, OmniWeb, iCab, Konqueror. All very good, very compelling products, but they don't come bolted on to Windows, so where's the compelling reason for the average consumer to spend the time downloading the file or even pay for the product? There isn't one. M$ has made sure of that.
M$ should hand over the source code. Experts should figure out whether or not IE can be seperated from the system and have it still work. Right now consumers do not have a choice of browsers in any real sense. They get IE and there is no real reason for them to use anything else as it is an extra expense and/or big hassle from their point of view.
The government doesn't want to tell M$ how to do business, it just wants to set up rules for them to follow so that some semblance of just competition is restored to the marketplace.
M$ didn;t get where they are today by creating new, exciting or innovative products. They got there through rehashing other companies' products, marketing said products better than anyone else and generally intimidating anyone who chose to step into the ring with them.
If they also have to release Office source (not that I expect they'd have to, since Office was never part of the whole comingling thing), get all those open source projects to properly read and write Office formats.
I heard a rumor several years ago that something like 60% of the code for Office is embedded in the source for Windows. So whether you own Office or not, a large portion of it is already booted up.
The limited-play DVD format is a compelling alternative to video rental as it presents indisputable advantages to consumers, content providers, retail stores, distributors and disc manufacturers. For the consumer, a limited-play disc at the same price as a rental offers a quantum leap in convenience and flexibility of use.
In reading through this press release there is no actual mention of what these consumer benefits are. We have a patent on something new and we can make a lot of money doing it, therefore it must be good for consumers!
Well, Dauger Research is touting their 1 page manual and right they should. The simplicity in setting up this cluster is pretty amazing. The link is to a 46 PAGE technical document that goes into much greater detail. Still a couple of hundred pages shorter than the referenced Linux manual.
Now, if people would stop bashing Apple's documentation and realize that it is Dauger Research who wrote the documentation for Pooch, I'd be very appreciative.
Slashdot Mirror
Can AppleWorks save out to .doc format? If it could do that reliably, that would be quite the coup.
You missed my point completely. There are no real commercial quality applications like Photoshop, Quark XPress, Flash, Director, Illustrator, PageMaker, InDesign, Freehand, Premiere, AfterEffects, Final Cut Pro, etc. for Linux yet. There are some apps striving to attain a level of maturity comparable to these, but they are a long way off. The GIMP is nowhere near ready for full on deplyment as a commercial grade image editor, though it is making prgress. There is nothing even close to InDesign, XPress or Illustrator. Flash? Ha! Director? Ha!
I realize that film studios, especially those dealing with CGI, are delving into Linux and writing custom software for it, but that stuff isn't going to make it onto shelves in nice shiny shrink wrap. Also, the cost of the systems upon which this software is being developed can only be afforded by big studios. That's where the PowerMac and Final Cut Pro comes in, especially considering Apple just bought Nothing Real. This will bring the cost of high powered video editing and 2/3d compositing into the realm of the individual.
Also, don't get me wrong. I think Linux is a fabulous OS and is getting better and better as time goes by. I just don't think we're going to see it shipped by default on boxes made by Compaq, Acer, Gateway, Dell , Apple or Sony any time soon.
Linux is still finding it's place in the computer world and right now it's greatest strengths are in the server and back end world.
Maybe inadequate is a better word.
I'd defintiely agree that inadequate is a better word, but it still doesn't really satisfy me. The fact that a mouse can be unplugged and a new one can replace it is fantastic. I'd say that the mouse is inadequate for the user's needs, but the actual computer and platform still does. The beauty is that said person can go to CompUSA or any other computer store and purchase as cheap or as expensive a mouse as he or she needs. If Apple's one button mouse/trackpad doesn't suit my needs (which it does in my case) I can replace it with almost any other USB mouse. Linux and Windows also, although you might run into some driver issues there. No biggie though.
Anyone who stresses out and complains a lot about a mouse's lack of buttons has other issues to deal with beyond this simple input devide.
The user shouldn't need to change they way they work to fit the hardware. If the hardware doesn't do the job the user needs its the hardware thats broken not the user.
Software should allow the user to modify the way that input devices and peripherals interact with the hardware.
I can make my Wacom tablet pretty much behave like a mouse if I want to and that is definitely not the original intent of that device. I really don't care for multi-button mice, so i only ever use the left button and still use keyboard modifiers. Let's say someone is completely used to using a multi-button trackball? If the machine only comes with a 5 button mouse and not a 3 button trackball, does that mean that the hardware is broken? No, it simply means that the user has to go out and purchase a new input device to better suit their needs.
Apple makes a one button mouse/trackpad because it suits the needs of the vast majority of their trarget market. Wintel machines ship with a multi-button mouse because it satisfies the needs of the vast majority of their target market. Linux and *NIX users seem to need mice with 2 to 5 buttons and sometimes a scroll wheel. Seems kind of strange that the people who need a GUI the least are the ones who are pickiest about mice.
Hallelujah! I think the GIMP, Killustrator and the other projects are great and show a lot of promise for actually becoming professional level apps in the future. I hope the momentum doesn't fizzle out. I can't use them for the professional work I currently do, but I like playing around with them and watching their progress. And they're definitely making progress. However, until end user usability and consistency is addressed, these apps won't be ready for prime time use by professional creatives.
Personally, I would love to see a computing world where people using differing file formats and applications can share documents freely and easily. I would love to be able to give someone my Photoshop file that I created on a mac, hand it over to a web guru running Linux and have him/her be able to see my layers, effects, etc. and be able to tweak it as necessary in whatever app he/she is using. Maybe he/she wouldn't be able to modify it with the same toolset that PS6 has, but it would be neat if he/she could at least work with the file format.
While we're talking about it, world peace might be pretty cool too.
Yeah, but if they want to do anything like professional image editing, page layout or broadcast quality video (for under $20k!) they won't be able to do it in Linux. The GIMP, though a cool tool, is still not up to the task at the same level as Photoshop. There is nothing even close to Quark XPress, InDesign, Illustrator or Freehand. No Final Cut Pro, Premiere, AfterEffects, Director or Flash. Or at least anything you can buy at a decent computer store.
Granted, there are a gazillion text editors, some office suites with varying levels of compatibility with Office, web servers, database apps, HTML editors and some barebones image and page layout things, etc. However, until the pro/consumer apps that everyone is familiar with reach a certain level of maturity, Linux is not going to be a contender in the home or creative consumer markets.
I'm sure the infrastructure of Linux is there to support such mature applications, but until organizations get, well, organized, and start addressing the issue of END USERS and not just the people who work in the back end of the computing world, people are going to choose Windows and Mac OS over Linux.
I guess I just don't get it. I've used multi button selectors on my Dell laptop yet I still go back to using the keyboard for simple function like copy and paste and save and close, etc. It has always just seemed faster to me. On my iBook I just option drag, control click, command click, simple drag, etc. I can do everything I need in Linux and the Mac OS without the benefit of a multi button mouse. I don't mean to dimish the benefit of a multi-button mouse. Everyone has their own preference for working at peak efficiency, but I just can't understand how the lack of a multi-button selection device would be the deal breaker for choosing a piece of hardware when the keyboard offers comparable options.
Don't count? Why not? They're programs that people use all the time. I and many others use Quark XPress, Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, PageMaker, InDesign, Premiere, AfterEffects, LiveMotion, Macromedia Freehand, Director and Flash all day every day. So, since the Linux crowd has yet to develop programs that can handle these formats, they don't count?
Burning karma at a phenomenal rate today!
I'm not defensive about it. I just don't understand why x86 users complain about it so much when they could remedy the situation for very little money. The ability to use 5 mouse buttons is in the OS and the ability to remap your keyboard to mimic a 5 button mouse on a laptop also exists.
Personally, I'm perfectly content with 1 button and using keyboard modifiers. I've used multi buton mice in the past and personally I don't like it. Too much reliance on the mouse and I'm faster on the keyboard.
There are ways around hardware "limitations" if you look hard enough or are willing to adapt and possibly even evolve as a result.
I believe you've just been trolled.
maybe, but MUST the troll be in the article itself? Can't that be saved for the discussion thread?
Doesn't taco have something better to do with his editorial powers than begin a thread with a troll?
.psd
.qxd
.ai
.fla
.ind
.fh9
.pm7
.dir
One of the killer things about my OS X Powerbook is how I can plug my digital camera or FireWire cd burner and it not only has a driver, it already knows what to do with the device. With my camera, it automatically asks me if I want to transfer all the pictures off the camera.
I'm in film school. Yesterday in class I had to sit through a four hour lecture on use of the school's brand new Dual 1Ghz Powermac. Now, I've been using Mac's since the 512 came out and PC's since Windows 3.1 and have been doing web UI design for about 6 years. In essence I know a thing or two about good UI.
The IT guy at school was driving me nuts teaching people the basics of dealing with the OS X UI. Click this icon here. Then click this button here. Then, drag this here and click this button. This is a folder, etc. Yes, it drove me nuts, but only because I have been using and configuring Mac's for so long.
The beauty of the demonstration came when we plugged in the JVC MiniDV camera without any drivers. Final Cut Pro was then in complete control of the camera via FireWire. It was incredible. There were no drivers for OS X that came with the camera. It just worked, plain and simple!
The funny thing is, people were having trouble with the OS level UI metaphor because of their exposure to Windows only. However, once they got into FCP and just saw things work without hassle, they were able to get in and get some serious real time video editing done. I still wanted to smack peoples' hands with rulers for using the mouse instead of keyboard shortcuts, but the fact that they were able to get in and work so quickly really impressed me with Apple's engineering depsite some of the OS level UI problems I have with OS X.
Now, if Linux can get to this level of sophisitcation and simplicity, I'll be very very impressed. Linux really needs to embrace IEEE 1394 if it wants to make inroads on the desktop and be part of the digital hub.
I don't understand why so many people think creating an end user simplifed install of Linux will result in a proprietized version of the OS. You can still have the terminal and all the customization goodies under the hood. Why is it then so impossible to develop a distro that has this but hides it from those who don't want to see it or really have no need to ever see it. I have a Dell laptop that I would love to use more frequently. I installed SuSe 7.0 on it and have played around a lot with it, but I can't make it my desktop of choice because I can't really do anything useful with it. Again, I'm a film student and a professional graphic designer.
I'd love to see Linux become useful for people other than the Linux crowd.
Apple tried this with OpenDoc in the early to mid 90's. I'm not sure why it didn't take off, but I certainly liked the idea.
I wish Adobe would adopt an approach like this. Their programs are so similar on the UI front and even to a certain extent their tool sets. I'd love to be able to take a feature from Photoshop, combine it with a feature from LiveMotion, Illustrator and After Effects and slam it through GoLive (and clean up with BBEdit).
Linux/*NIX apps have a better chance of succeeding at this because many of the apps out there don't have up to 15 years of legacy code in them.
Ok, well, what's the difference between using a multiple button selection device on a laptop and using modifier keys to do the same thing? You're still essentially pressing keys to mimic a multi-button mouse. My left pinky finger has become quite adept at modifying mouse commands on my iBook. I don't miss my one button or multi-button mouse at all while using my laptop.
(Maybe If Apple released TiBook's with 3 mouse buttons I'd at least have an option ;)
Aaaaaargh! With OS X you can use a 5 button mouse if you'd like! Just go and buy one! Can we please let this rest already!
when I could play Warcraft II via tcp/ip or plain old AppleTalk. Sob.
I don't like Macs any more than I like Windows. In fact, I'd say I like the OS less because it's even more restrictive than Windows is (you have to buy very specific hardware, all approved by Apple, and most of it overly expensive). I see no justification or need for cooperation between Linux developers and Apple.
The very fact that OS X and Linux are *NIX derivatives and POSIX environments is a very compelling reason for Linux and OS X developers to cooperate. Many Linux apps could get some serious attention if they got into the hands of OS X users and vice versa. Don't dismiss the signifigance of OS X just because you are not part of Apple's taget market demographic. Apple primarily sells to people who don't ever want to open their machines except to install some RAM and want a front end UI that's more advanced, simple and consistent than KDE or Gnome. (Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of KDE and think Gnome shows some potential.)
What gets me about your previous post is that, even though you may have had a reasoned opinion, you couched it in very typical anti-mac dogma. Yes, their machinery is developed and controlled by Apple, but their hardware serves a very specific function and very well. So much so that people like me in the creative professions will pay a premium to never really have to worry about the guts of their computer because it just works and runs the apps I need better than on any other platform.
What do you think their plan for making a profit is? It's by producing a superior product, both hardware and software. And in my opinion they are doing just that.
Hallelujah!
I'm sick of people wasting bytes rehashing the same anti-mac rhetoric over and over. If this were a well thought out criticism, I'd welcome it, but this is just yet another kneejerk Linux geek shouting the same crap again. If you don't like Mac's, don't buy one. Period. I happen to use the more than enything else and find them to be very nimble and useful tools.
This is precisely why M$ is in such hot water. They can withhold Office, IE and Outlook if Apple releases OS X for Intel. They can use their various monopolies to create a huge barrier to entrance into the x86 market for Apple. A clear sign of a malignant monopoly.
If Apple wants to compete in the commodity hardware space, they need to get big OEM deals signed. Dell, Compaq, IBM, Sony, etc. And which of those is really going to stand up to M$ threatening to remove their Windows licenses if they start shipping PC's with OS X? IBM maybe, but without Dell, the whole thing falls apart.
Just think about how hard it is to get Linux on a computer from a major manufacturer and you'll get an idea of why Apple hasn't made the switch.
Next all industries will have to publish all blueprints, schematics, and etc. I'd rather have to deal with so called monopolies than this socialist rubbish.
One of the tenets of capitalism is that there is no barrier to entry into the market and that a company should be able to compete on their own merits. Should a company be so successful that it attains monopoly status, that's perfecctly legal and fine.
However, when a company uses it's monopoly in one market to force it's way into another market, that's another thing. It's illegal and helps to create a barrier to market entrance for other smaller companies.
Microsoft has created a huge barrier to entry into various markets. Just try and get a browser developed and hope to have a marketshare of greater than 1%. Opera, OmniWeb, iCab, Konqueror. All very good, very compelling products, but they don't come bolted on to Windows, so where's the compelling reason for the average consumer to spend the time downloading the file or even pay for the product? There isn't one. M$ has made sure of that.
M$ should hand over the source code. Experts should figure out whether or not IE can be seperated from the system and have it still work. Right now consumers do not have a choice of browsers in any real sense. They get IE and there is no real reason for them to use anything else as it is an extra expense and/or big hassle from their point of view.
The government doesn't want to tell M$ how to do business, it just wants to set up rules for them to follow so that some semblance of just competition is restored to the marketplace.
M$ didn;t get where they are today by creating new, exciting or innovative products. They got there through rehashing other companies' products, marketing said products better than anyone else and generally intimidating anyone who chose to step into the ring with them.
If they also have to release Office source (not that I expect they'd have to, since Office was never part of the whole comingling thing), get all those open source projects to properly read and write Office formats.
I heard a rumor several years ago that something like 60% of the code for Office is embedded in the source for Windows. So whether you own Office or not, a large portion of it is already booted up.
Adjust your sodium intake as necessary.
The limited-play DVD format is a compelling alternative to video rental as it presents indisputable advantages to consumers, content providers, retail stores, distributors and disc manufacturers. For the consumer, a limited-play disc at the same price as a rental offers a quantum leap in convenience and flexibility of use.
In reading through this press release there is no actual mention of what these consumer benefits are. We have a patent on something new and we can make a lot of money doing it, therefore it must be good for consumers!
This is just freaking crazy!
http://www.daugerresearch.com/pooch/PoochManualX.1 .pdf
Well, Dauger Research is touting their 1 page manual and right they should. The simplicity in setting up this cluster is pretty amazing. The link is to a 46 PAGE technical document that goes into much greater detail. Still a couple of hundred pages shorter than the referenced Linux manual.
Now, if people would stop bashing Apple's documentation and realize that it is Dauger Research who wrote the documentation for Pooch, I'd be very appreciative.
Two words:
Virtual PC