I'm sorry, but i did not find "WebObjects" mentioned once in the two relevant PDF's. The only thing is that the JBoss Admin app is a WO App, given the.woa in the url of the webbased program. I'd expect seamless JBoss integration, but seamless WebObjects integration?
"Xserve and WebObjects Power iTunes Music Store" writes Jim Dalrymple on MacCentral. "Apple based the store on Mac OS X Server and Web Objects 5.2 using Xserves and Xserve RAIDs to store the more than 200,000 songs available to the public." [Jun 03 2003]
So Apple or webobjects developers, fill us in. What ever happened to the the XServe serving the iTunes Music store running WebObjects? Any future FileMaker lookalike plans?
If you watch the video's you find at the last page of ExtremeTech you see a huge difference in filesize between RealMedia, Windows Media File format, and QuickTime format. Gives the average visitor the impression that WMF has better compression ratio. What you don't see if you don't open all formats, is the higher quality of the QT version. Near fraud - or pseudo journalism.
Well, how many of the seven million Eminem fans who bought the album, own a Macintosh, capable of running iTunes, do have an internet connection and live in the United States?
If you could change provider without losing your phone number, well that would improve service and drop prices. Exactly what a governement regulation imposes here in Belgium.
[Redundant] For all quick Mac OS X Server searches start with http://www.apple.com then tab "Mac OS X" then menu item "Server" then gray bar "Resources" Which gives: http://www.apple.com/server/resources.html
If you want to learn ABOUT computers, buy a cheap or second hand intel and install Linux.
If you want to play games, buy a playstation or whatever.
If you want to WORK WITH a computer, buy yourself a Mac.
If you want to work ON a computer AND have a very clever cousin living nextdoor with lots of spare time and a long experience with Windows, listen to him and buy that Wintel machine he recommends.
Since Mac OS X & Darwin you can do the first three with one machine.
I recently read a weblog from a young yet experienced programmer. He clearly states that programs should be written with easy readable statements. Because the code should be the documentation, and will become the facts, surviving any design tool, paper or specification that led to it.
I agree completely with him. Sometimes programming compares to the art of writing, or even philosphy.
Well documented and readable code also covers the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle. That does not mean that the concept shouldn't be created or documented. It means that the code digs in far greater detail to what are the exact businessrules. Therefor it is imperative that the syntax of the language helps to the readability. Closing the gap between the problem space and the solution space as much as possible, is the real achievement. Writing readable code is a great way to do just that.
What Apple needs is cheaper, expandable, rackable server hardware for the new Mac OS X Server OS, no wow, no show.
Luckily their WebObjects Java webapplication server framework runs on FreeBSD, Linux on Intel hardware. If not I wouldn't be happy at all.
BSD derivate Darwin and open source QuickTime Steamer runs on Intel.
The Objective-C Cocoa frameworks did run on Intel, Motorola 68xxx, HP and Sun before they did on PPC. NeXT apps had FAT binaries that did run from any hardware platform over to any platform the OS supported.
Now MacOS X app wrapperdirectories have their architecture dependent binaries in a directory, seperate from the resources directory. At the moment there is only one such architecture directory: "MacOS". Who says we won't see a second one?
I was told that apart from the CPU / cache there is little difference between Apple or Intel hardware.
So, running on Intel or standard server hardware components would surely help them into the enterprise market.
For the rest, my guess is that the Classic MacOS 9 app or the Carbon libraries are not ready for Intel architecture.
I don't understand much from marketing, but making the short term move to Intel is a BSD-Quartz-Cocoa-only matter. I'm afraid all current tedious Carbon ports could possibly not benefit from it. I think this is not what Apple wants for their developer community. Correct me if my guess is wrong.
What is morphing?
----------------
Transformations between images. Run the examples *.xmovie with Motion.app (included) or Xanthus Craftman and you will get the picture:~)
Features:
--------
- Morphing between still images.
- Output:.xmovie movies. (Really just a catalog with tiffs)
- Multihost rendering. - Several input formats (TIFF, EPS, RIB...)
- Online help.
- Runs on NEXTSTEP3.2 on NeXT, Intel, SPARC and HP PA-RISC hardware.
The mail volume of a 1000 students using plain text for their mails uses as much diskspace and bandwith as approximatly 50 to 80 students using a wordprocessor to send or get their messages.
Not to mention the time lost on formatting the damn thing.
The same for anybody else...
Now that would be a gain.
And I am not calculating the fatties Word is producing.
As such a gift card is as vulnerable to theft as anything else in your wallet, this isn't even an subject to write about. Unless...
Didn't you notice that MSNBC wants you to go to the safest shopping mall around: MSN shopping online! Pretty assimilated with the rest of the page is this clear message. Now we know the reason of the fud. I wonder how much of this poison goes unnoticed.
It is not because Visa or Mastercard are already doing this, that there is no problem. And yes, it's obvious you see it as an anti-Microsoft action.
It is more Michael's article that brought me to the subject, years ago. Passport just reminded me of that article. And I am still convinced that technically it should be possible to postpone revealing your identity online until the moment you actually buy a product or service. Everything what happens before that should stay anonymous.
-- Speaking of Passport: I was particularly upset when I got my "Passport" for "free", even after explicitly declining the proposition during a MSN Messenger update. MS imposed a Hotmail account with its MSN Messenger subscribtion. The Hotmail account splitted to create that free Passport account. With Passport is sure goes in the wrong direction with far more implications involved than VISA's or MC's tracking of buying habits. Passport is far more pro-active. And many Passport users seem to never have had the chance to think, let alone say no.
And could someone convince me that Passport enabled sites actually never see [part of] your identity without your consent?
... so it will defend (the value of) it. I explained lately how I got my Passport account. Not with my consent. This is the most anti-democratic construct I've ever seen grow in the U.S.
... ZDNet wants to underscore the appearance that MS has competition. This appearance is good for MS. (apart from the Opens Source competition). How funny ZDNet brings this out, before Mono has even been announced... Announcing an announcement.
Weird boys, those MSofties.
How strongly do they need non MS-only.NET or what?
Just because I'm extremely happy not to have chosen Oracle or Sybase or Informix: You should definitly try out FrontBase
everything you've asked for - and more - much more:
A free SIX months developers licence with all options active. An active dev-community. A no-nonsense support - even if you only have a free developers license.
Scalable license scheme, SQL92 compliant, row level privs... Mac OS X Mac OS X Server RedHat 6.x SuSE 6.x (Intel and Power PC) YellowDog Linux Debian Linux Stormix Mandrake Linux FreeBSD Solaris HP-UX Windows NT go and read the specs!
I have on of the first cubes, and those microfractures, well I will take one more last look now...
Well, they still are tiny, tiny molding lines, completely harmless, and you have to be a pure purist to be offended by them, or...
you must be making money on Intel hardware.
Why me? I have a NeXT - discontinued, I have an iMate - discontinued, I have a Cube -...discontinued.
Because: I still use the NeXT frequently (SolidThinking), my son is inseparable from his iMate, and my wife loves the Cube because she can't hear it's there.
Compared to now, the living room sounded like a machine room. We used to feel like we were going deaf when those older machines were shut down. That sudden silence.
I'm not reaaly familiar with what.NET really is - but then again, who is. But my IT nose detects a very nasty smell under.NET's lid. So here is in short a request to think about my little private paranoia.
I am convinced that.NET _needs_ an Open Source involvement to be successfull..NET will need lots of GNU-Linux instances running.NET-aware implementations to help them try to make it a clogging de-facto _Internet_ standard THEY control for a change.
While talking about control: for what it's worth: isn't.NET a perfect interim step towards _control_ over content-structure (something one step beyond XML)? Or do I see things that are not there (yet)?
This.NET thing will only work as it is meant to work if *many* developers respect it more or less.. especially those whose code is still less dependent from MS architecture. They will need those guys for the success of.NET.
So they will lower the ethical bar bit by bit, until a enough sheep jumped over it.
Do not forget, the ultimate magnet AND target of.NET is *content*, more specific it is really about control over content description, encryption and packaging and maybe even transport.
The licensing and technical issue is only a diversion of our attention.
It all boils down again to one sober observation: the Answer is not Microsoft. It is the Question. The Answer is "No".
This is simply a case of "selling" one product and force the buyer to buy another product or service even if that buyer don't agree with the terms of use of that other product.
In Belgium this is in fact illegal: (dutch)koppelverkoop or "conditional sale" (even for "free" - as you pay with your trackable identity or information, turned into a saleable negotiable item).
My MS Messenger service (I once needed to contact technical support people) forced me to use a hotmail account, which asked me to sign up for a PassPort account. I refused the latter, only noticing a couple of days later I could SIGN OFF my Passport account. MS used my hotmail account to ram an unwanted "free" PassPort down my throat.
To be correct: I think MS stole my "secure" identity to sell as a product to others.
PassPort is a separate product with very high market value, which increases with every sign-up, so your "free" account is really an extra asset for MS.
Besides the doubtful tactic of MS, it is scary. MS has the potential to have a monopolistic global identification system just waiting to be adopted by those governments, let's see in a few years what has happened.
(Even the UK government has now a public(!) official site (made by MS) that is only secured thru MS Windows compatible products and access software (IE) - speaking of UK stupidity)
So who's in command here?
Most posts I read don't believe it, talk of hype. I can understand that it is hard to believe, especially when standing on the "sound" side.
But Microsoft is consumer good, even for Mr. average CEO-consumer. Even politicians are super-consumers.
It's strange that the article from Katz does not mention MS PassPort. The arrogance in this PassPort idea alone is repulsive.
Let me tell you what happened:
I had to sign up MS Messenger to be able to "reach" some technical assistance I needed. I was forced to take a Hotmail account to have the Messenger service.
A few weeks later Messenger proposed to upgrade itself. I pushed "Later". A week later again, I chose "Later". Till I pushed "Ok". Then it proposed to get an account to "Passport", which I consequently refused.
Guess what: Next time clicked the "you have mail" in Messenger, Hotmail showed I could optionally logout of my MS PassPort account?? !!!!!
Mr Consumer will eat everything they feed him.
*** EVERYTHING. ***
Every one I talk about this answers "What do you want to do about it?"
Prepare for a big indigestion in ten years, when your kids will ask you where you were when it happened.
Cultural sell-out.
Will we say "Wir haben es nicht gewusst?"
GPL at the expense of a business model?
on
Mundie Responds
·
· Score: 2
A commercial business model is a way of achieving a goal. It is not a goal in itself.
If the GPL can achieve the same goal as a commercial businessmodel, but draining less financial or human resources from the rest of the community, then the GPL is superior to that model, and so serves the community in a better way.
That's the whole point.
Add to that the fact that the quality with which lots of GPL'd distris hit their target is higher than their commercial equivalent!
I'm downloading hundreds of ringtones a day with my Ear-ster hardware device. Once and a while I upload one of them to my cell phone using the Composer software the manufacturer installed on it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but i did not find "WebObjects" mentioned once in the two relevant PDF's. The only thing is that the JBoss Admin app is a WO App, given the .woa in the url of the webbased program. I'd expect seamless JBoss integration, but seamless WebObjects integration?
"Xserve and WebObjects Power iTunes Music Store" writes Jim Dalrymple on MacCentral. "Apple based the store on Mac OS X Server and Web Objects 5.2 using Xserves and Xserve RAIDs to store the more than 200,000 songs available to the public." [Jun 03 2003]
So Apple or webobjects developers, fill us in. What ever happened to the the XServe serving the iTunes Music store running WebObjects?
Any future FileMaker lookalike plans?
WebObjects Inc. ?
While you guys r at it, how does a Maccer or Linux user checks it if there is no Windows PC available?
If you watch the video's you find at the last page of ExtremeTech you see a huge difference in filesize between RealMedia, Windows Media File format, and QuickTime format. Gives the average visitor the impression that WMF has better compression ratio.
What you don't see if you don't open all formats, is the higher quality of the QT version.
Near fraud - or pseudo journalism.
Well, how many of the seven million Eminem fans who bought the album, own a Macintosh, capable of running iTunes, do have an internet connection and live in the United States?
If you could change provider without losing your phone number, well that would improve service and drop prices. Exactly what a governement regulation imposes here in Belgium.
[Redundant]
;-)
For all quick Mac OS X Server searches start with http://www.apple.com
then tab "Mac OS X"
then menu item "Server"
then gray bar "Resources"
Which gives:
http://www.apple.com/server/resources.html
Neat.
AYS
Since Mac OS X & Darwin you can do the first three with one machine.
I recently read a weblog from a young yet experienced programmer. He clearly states that programs should be written with easy readable statements.
Because the code should be the documentation, and will become the facts, surviving any design tool, paper or specification that led to it.
I agree completely with him. Sometimes programming compares to the art of writing, or even philosphy.
Well documented and readable code also covers the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle. That does not mean that the concept shouldn't be created or documented. It means that the code digs in far greater detail to what are the exact businessrules. Therefor it is imperative that the syntax of the language helps to the readability.
Closing the gap between the problem space and the solution space as much as possible, is the real achievement. Writing readable code is a great way to do just that.
What Apple needs is cheaper, expandable, rackable server hardware for the new Mac OS X Server OS, no wow, no show.
Luckily their WebObjects Java webapplication server framework runs on FreeBSD, Linux on Intel hardware. If not I wouldn't be happy at all.
BSD derivate Darwin and open source QuickTime Steamer runs on Intel.
The Objective-C Cocoa frameworks did run on Intel, Motorola 68xxx, HP and Sun before they did on PPC. NeXT apps had FAT binaries that did run from any hardware platform over to any platform the OS supported.
Now MacOS X app wrapperdirectories have their architecture dependent binaries in a directory, seperate from the resources directory. At the moment there is only one such architecture directory: "MacOS". Who says we won't see a second one?
I was told that apart from the CPU / cache there is little difference between Apple or Intel hardware.
So, running on Intel or standard server hardware components would surely help them into the enterprise market.
For the rest, my guess is that the Classic MacOS 9 app or the Carbon libraries are not ready for Intel architecture.
I don't understand much from marketing, but making the short term move to Intel is a BSD-Quartz-Cocoa-only matter. I'm afraid all current tedious Carbon ports could possibly not benefit from it. I think this is not what Apple wants for their developer community. Correct me if my guess is wrong.
Morph 1.1
:~)
s c/
.xmovie movies. (Really just a catalog with tiffs)
AD 13-Nov-1996:
What is morphing?
----------------
Transformations between images. Run the examples *.xmovie with Motion.app (included) or Xanthus Craftman and you will get the picture
http://www.peak.org/ftp/pub/next/apps/graphics/mi
Features:
--------
- Morphing between still images.
- Output:
- Multihost rendering.
- Several input formats (TIFF, EPS, RIB...)
- Online help.
- Runs on NEXTSTEP3.2 on NeXT, Intel, SPARC and HP PA-RISC hardware.
The mail volume of a 1000 students using plain text for their mails uses as much diskspace and bandwith as approximatly 50 to 80 students using a wordprocessor to send or get their messages.
Not to mention the time lost on formatting the damn thing.
The same for anybody else...
Now that would be a gain.
And I am not calculating the fatties Word is producing.
The main and english entry to the official euro information site, with clear info and views from a lot of angles.
As such a gift card is as vulnerable to theft as anything else in your wallet, this isn't even an subject to write about. Unless...
Didn't you notice that MSNBC wants you to go to the safest shopping mall around: MSN shopping online! Pretty assimilated with the rest of the page is this clear message. Now we know the reason of the fud. I wonder how much of this poison goes unnoticed.
Well, ok, there is a problem with some browsers.
Many websites are broken because they were designed for a specific browser, when viewed using another.
But it's not the browser here, it's still the web-owner/designer's fault...
It is not because Visa or Mastercard are already doing this, that there is no problem. And yes, it's obvious you see it as an anti-Microsoft action.
It is more Michael's article that brought me to the subject, years ago. Passport just reminded me of that article. And I am still convinced that technically it should be possible to postpone revealing your identity online until the moment you actually buy a product or service. Everything what happens before that should stay anonymous.
-- Speaking of Passport: I was particularly upset when I got my "Passport" for "free", even after explicitly declining the proposition during a MSN Messenger update. MS imposed a Hotmail account with its MSN Messenger subscribtion. The Hotmail account splitted to create that free Passport account. With Passport is sure goes in the wrong direction with far more implications involved than VISA's or MC's tracking of buying habits. Passport is far more pro-active. And many Passport users seem to never have had the chance to think, let alone say no.
And could someone convince me that Passport enabled sites actually never see [part of] your identity without your consent?
... so it will defend (the value of) it. I explained lately how I got my Passport account. Not with my consent. This is the most anti-democratic construct I've ever seen grow in the U.S.
... ZDNet wants to underscore the appearance that MS has competition. This appearance is good for MS. (apart from the Opens Source competition). How funny ZDNet brings this out, before Mono has even been announced... Announcing an announcement.
.NET or what?
Weird boys, those MSofties.
How strongly do they need non MS-only
A free SIX months developers licence with all options active. An active dev-community. A no-nonsense support - even if you only have a free developers license.
Scalable license scheme, SQL92 compliant, row level privs...
Mac OS X
Mac OS X Server
RedHat 6.x
SuSE 6.x (Intel and Power PC)
YellowDog Linux
Debian Linux
Stormix
Mandrake Linux
FreeBSD
Solaris
HP-UX
Windows NT
go and read the specs!
Those guys react as if they were your collegues!
Well, they still are tiny, tiny molding lines, completely harmless, and you have to be a pure purist to be offended by them, or ...
you must be making money on Intel hardware.
Why me? I have a NeXT - discontinued, I have an iMate - discontinued, I have a Cube - ...discontinued.
Because: I still use the NeXT frequently (SolidThinking), my son is inseparable from his iMate, and my wife loves the Cube because she can't hear it's there.
Compared to now, the living room sounded like a machine room. We used to feel like we were going deaf when those older machines were shut down. That sudden silence.
I'm not reaaly familiar with what .NET really is - but then again, who is. But my IT nose detects a very nasty smell under .NET's lid. So here is in short a request to think about my little private paranoia.
.NET _needs_ an Open Source involvement to be successfull. .NET will need lots of GNU-Linux instances running .NET-aware implementations to help them try to make it a clogging de-facto _Internet_ standard THEY control for a change.
.NET a perfect interim step towards _control_ over content-structure (something one step beyond XML)? Or do I see things that are not there (yet)?
I am convinced that
While talking about control: for what it's worth: isn't
This .NET thing will only work as it is meant to work if *many* developers respect it more or less.. especially those whose code is still less dependent from MS architecture. They will need those guys for the success of .NET.
.NET is *content*, more specific it is really about control over content description, encryption and packaging and maybe even transport.
So they will lower the ethical bar bit by bit, until a enough sheep jumped over it.
Do not forget, the ultimate magnet AND target of
The licensing and technical issue is only a diversion of our attention.
It all boils down again to one sober observation: the Answer is not Microsoft. It is the Question. The Answer is "No".
This is simply a case of "selling" one product and force the buyer to buy another product or service even if that buyer don't agree with the terms of use of that other product.
In Belgium this is in fact illegal: (dutch)koppelverkoop or "conditional sale" (even for "free" - as you pay with your trackable identity or information, turned into a saleable negotiable item).
My MS Messenger service (I once needed to contact technical support people) forced me to use a hotmail account, which asked me to sign up for a PassPort account. I refused the latter, only noticing a couple of days later I could SIGN OFF my Passport account. MS used my hotmail account to ram an unwanted "free" PassPort down my throat.
To be correct: I think MS stole my "secure" identity to sell as a product to others.
PassPort is a separate product with very high market value, which increases with every sign-up, so your "free" account is really an extra asset for MS.
Besides the doubtful tactic of MS, it is scary. MS has the potential to have a monopolistic global identification system just waiting to be adopted by those governments, let's see in a few years what has happened.
(Even the UK government has now a public(!) official site (made by MS) that is only secured thru MS Windows compatible products and access software (IE) - speaking of UK stupidity)
So who's in command here?
Most posts I read don't believe it, talk of hype. I can understand that it is hard to believe, especially when standing on the "sound" side.
But Microsoft is consumer good, even for Mr. average CEO-consumer. Even politicians are super-consumers.
It's strange that the article from Katz does not mention MS PassPort. The arrogance in this PassPort idea alone is repulsive.
Let me tell you what happened:
I had to sign up MS Messenger to be able to "reach" some technical assistance I needed. I was forced to take a Hotmail account to have the Messenger service.
A few weeks later Messenger proposed to upgrade itself. I pushed "Later". A week later again, I chose "Later". Till I pushed "Ok". Then it proposed to get an account to "Passport", which I consequently refused.
Guess what: Next time clicked the "you have mail" in Messenger, Hotmail showed I could optionally logout of my MS PassPort account?? !!!!! Mr Consumer will eat everything they feed him.
*** EVERYTHING. ***
Every one I talk about this answers "What do you want to do about it?"
Prepare for a big indigestion in ten years, when your kids will ask you where you were when it happened.
Cultural sell-out. Will we say "Wir haben es nicht gewusst?"
If the GPL can achieve the same goal as a commercial businessmodel, but draining less financial or human resources from the rest of the community, then the GPL is superior to that model, and so serves the community in a better way.
That's the whole point.
Add to that the fact that the quality with which lots of GPL'd distris hit their target is higher than their commercial equivalent!
End of discussion?
I'm downloading hundreds of ringtones a day with my Ear-ster hardware device. Once and a while I upload one of them to my cell phone using the Composer software the manufacturer installed on it.
Perfectly legal to me.