What's really sad is I haven't given up on slasdot yet. Really should go just read the headlines and stop reading the articles-- to many bigoted idiots such as yourself.
You assume that "slashdot" means "geeks" and "geeks" mean "higher than average intelligence" but really the Linux community seems to really be AOL type people who are too cheap to pay for software--- rather than geeks who actually *write* software.
Unfortunately, other than the idea of Open Source and the Open Source methodology, the market is exclusively about making commodity software.
Linux is a commodity operating system (Unix) running a commodity UI (windows ripoff). It is not the source of innovation.
Making software that does what commercial software does and making it free is great-- but the software is all commodity- ideas that have been around for decades. I haven't seen any new applications "killer Apps" or not- that were really innovative starting on Linux.
Linux *does* encourage innovation, though, because it drives the value of commodity software to zero. If Linux didn't exist, there would still be people charging $1,000 for an x86 Unix install, because they could get away with it. Now if they want to charge $1,000 to their customers, they'd better innovate some value for that money.
Linux helps a lot on that front. And it also works to let companies like Apple opensource the commodity parts of their OS-- and spend their money working on the areas where they can be innovative.
By the way-- while I disagree with what this Mr. Silver said, the only troll here is you. You attack him and do so personally, and probably unfairly-- You don't get to decide the position someone is taking and tell them that they don't believe what they are saying. That's the height of offensiveness.
Unless you're the kind of person that shouldn't be using Linux in the first place
In other words, the kind of people who care about desktop operating systems.
As a Geek who has worked on advanced operating systems and spent a lot of time with Unix machines, it truly is the case that Linux isn't worth the time getting it all working. I get paid to get my software working on a server and I've certainly been using Unix long enough to be competent-- but still, the time differential is significant enough that OS X -- also being essentially free-- is a far better deal. And thats not accounting for the quality differential-- the desktop experience under OS X is just a LOT better.
Plus you get more bang for your buck with Apple hardware.
I applaud all the work to improve the usability of Linux on the Desktop, but poo-poohing the difficulty of the issue doesn't help it.
You really bought a Cisco WiFi card for $10? From a dot-com auction? Or are you saying you really can get a $10 WiFi card off the market? I haven't seen anything like this at Compusa.
1/10th of $99, is $9.90. I'm wondering if this wasn't yet another of the exagerations PC people make about Mac hardware being expensive eg "My Xbox has better graphics and was only $200!"
The product name is "Mac OS 10.1". The "Marketing" name is "Mac OS X".
The X is a ten.
I suspect they will either do 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, etc until they get to 10.9 which should take them 5 years, and then they release Mac OS 11. Which gives them 5 years with the X brand -- a bit too long.
Or they will make this next release Mac OS 10.5 and next year do Mac OS 11.
But this update is too much stuf not to rev the version number.
This is good for customers, but (due in part to imbeciles like those quoted above) not necessarily for shareholders.
I'd like to disagree with you on that one. Analysts can move a stock in the short term, but the long term results that shareholders get are determined solely by the performance of the company.
Apple's regular release schedule is probably good for this-- each time they do it they add significant value to the Mac platform. I don't think the $19 or $29 they get for a new OS is significant (for instance, all us Developers get it sent to us for free) revenue compared to the fact that EVERY MAC SHIPPING just got better.
The new features increaste the hardware value and support hardware sales.
And the way things are going, it probably won't be long before the percieved value of a Mac is as far ahead of Windows as it used to be.
Apple doesn't trade at the multiple of Microsoft because Apple's financials are not as good, and not as consistent as Microsoft.
Stock is, actually, one of the most fair evaluators-- Apple''s been performing well, but they need consistent results for a couple more years before their multiple will expand.
Microsoft, because they are in a more attractive segment (Software has a much higher gross profit margine than hardware) are going to continue to trade at a higher multiple than Apple.
But that said, it may mean that Apple is the better stock because Microsoft's value is fully realized in its current price, while Apple is discounted because of its spotty history and (short term) anaysts opinions.
As warren buffet has said "IF you're going to be buying steak do you want the price to be high or low?" When buying stock, you want a low price....
Dual AMD 1U Servers with identical specs to Apple's Xserve can be had sub-$1000 Xserve costs $5000.
This was claimed many times when the Xserve was announced, but interestingly, nobody was able to give a pointer to one.
Apparently these mythical cheap servers don't exist.
Since its rare for a server to have four drive bays, etc, and a new style 1U enclosure was created by Apple, I'm pretty confident htat you are simply telling a lie here.
They should send a coupon to every one of their Windows custoemrs which entitles them to a free copy of the Mac version of the software if they decide to switch to the Mac platform ("just send in a reciept for the purchase of a Mac in the past 3 months and we'll send you a free copy of the software")
Or something like that. Offer people a small incentive to switch and even if they don't you maintain their positive opinion.
They don't charge, strictly speaking, for this stuff. Only the people who have older machines that want it have to pay for it. If you have a new machine, it comes pre-loaded. This is a lack of revenue. The pay $$ for something, and then get very little return.
That's funny. Final Cut is $1000. So is Cinema tools. Shake and Rayz sell for tens of thousands of dollars right now, I doubt they will be coming "pre loaded" on machines.
Sure, Apple took final cut and made an iMovie version, and that is free, but that just causes lots of final cut sales. final cut has been a HUGE success-- pretty much taking over the low to mid- range video and film editing industry.
But then, I don't think you really know what you're talking about so you wouldn't have known that.
Not a good idea for Jobs to piss off Gates over something insignificant, to lose something of value. Gates has shown he is willing to lose $$ in the short term, on hopes of banking in the long term
Yeah, you really don't know what your'e talking about. Office is on the MAc because its extreemely profitable for Microsoft. I know this for a fact. If MS wanted to withhold it, they would be in trouble because Apple has a contractual obligation from them for it-- (and I'm not talking about the agreement that expired.) MS can't withdraw OFfice for the MAc, and they won't because even MS likes the couple billion in revenue it generates each year.
ANd hardware is not the market to make money, otherwise it would be Intel telling Microsoft what to do, not vice versa
I don't know of any evidence that Microsoft tells intel what to do. Intel tunes its microcode to support windows because it knows windows is a large customer. But Intel is not beholden to Microsoft.
Since "hardware isn't the place to make money" do you think Sony is stupid and should go into the software business?
Do you think Apple doesn't make money from software?
> PC version consumed 70% of their development and support costs That seems unlikely
No, I would expect that to be the case. Usually it is that way when you release a product on both platforms. I know this, I've done it.
Your costs on the PC side are much higher-- both in initial development, and in support. This is due to the poor quality of the development environment for Windows and the poor quality of the machines people buy- bad power supplies cause memory corruption, causes your program to crash and the computer illiterate mother isn't going to think that maybe she shouldn't have bought a computer from some fly by night company for $400-- she's going to wonder why your software doens't work.
Developing software for Windows is also more expensive because in order to get a unit of sales you have to spend more money to reach the customers-- there's a lot more competition. Whereas on the Mac side, getting the same unit of sales is a lot cheaper because theirs less competition for it.
The reason companies support windows at all (given this situation) is that marketing guys are idiots and not businessmen-- they never take into account the costs of development and costs of sales, they decide based on the size of the market. And non-marketing CEOs believe them.
There's a great opportunity for Mac software developers... but so few have taken it, that apple has started doing it itself.
Yeah, you should switch to a MAc. you get better hardware, at cheaper prices than a comperable PC.
You shouldn't whine that now you have the opportunity to upgrade to a superior platform. And you don't have to do it right away, keep using your current software and upgrade when you're ready to upgrade your machine.
BTW- your statements about slow RAM et. al. express ignorance about how PCs work. The performance is based on many factors. For instance, if you have two ram busses at 2/3 the speed of a machine with only one ram buss, you'll have a faster machine because ram bandwidth is cummulative.
Macs are faster than PCs in the same price category... and it takes a lot of misrepresentation to sustain the illusion that this isn't true-- but then, there are a lot of PC people who don't want to feel like idiots for wasting their money and therefore suspend disbelief.
I honestly don't think that the post was meant to demean anyone in that way, but face it, a high end mac can cost you over 3k, when you can put together a really good PC for under 1k.
Yeah, execpt that a low end mac that you can buy for $1K is superior to that "really good PC" you buought for the same price in every way-
faster, better software, better quality hardware.
People who compalain about being too poor to buy a mac are usually that way because they WASTED their money on a PC that cost too mcuh and delivered too little.
If you can't afford to upgrade *your* mac, don't be fooled by those cheap PCs. Hell, you could get an XBOX PC for only $200, with a killer pentium processor and a killer graphics card.
If you think they are the same as a mac, you're mistaken.
I bought a PowerMac 9600 from Boeing surplus for $75, managed to get OS X running on it, and now it works as a fileserver on my home network.
I don't know of any PCs from that era that could do the same thing using Windows software. Maybe Linux, sure, but not twith the quality of the aqua UI.
If you really are po and want to work at the low end, buy that elcheapo PC, but then you can't afford Logic anyway, right? Sheesh.
Any fair comparison finds that Macs are cheaper than PCs. The fact that you can get an XBOX for $200 does not make PCs cheaper. (And marginally better things for $400, etc.)
This is on topic because we're talking about software CHOICE- and whether Apple's pruchase of Emagic reduces it or not.
The FSF is right out of orwell-- they're NON-FREE software is "free" and those who use other software are "slaves".
First off, "free" software will never be the best. The draconian terms of the GPL mean that most professional developers will support BSD or free licenses, ratehr than the GPL. This means the GNU software gets less mindshare.
Secondly, you are not enslaved by non-gnu software. In fact, you are more free, as you can ship a product and actually sell it along with supporting the (truely) free software.
The communists in Russia claimed they were going to make everyone free, while they were actually acting to enslave everyone. FSF advocates this same party line-- you don't have the right to the output of your labor (if its software) it belongs to anyone who "needs" it.
Open Source (not "free") is a good idea-- and it will succeed where it does give people extra choices and provide good quality. Linux is a good example of this, and OpenBSD and its projects are another good example.
But you will never get innovation out of open source and certainly not out of free software. This is because innovation is really expensive, and there is no profitable business model yet for making back those costs with open or free software.
This is why proprietary software will continue to rule when it comes to innovative categories-- but commodity software, such as operating systems, will become open source.... because when its a commodity, the improvements you get are more valuable than the lost income. When its innovative, there are less people who can improve it and the expense is too high-- you have to recoup it.
Media software is the most innovative group right now-- therefore, Apple buying these media companies is giving it a lock on innovation. In 10 years, this will all be commodity software and the best software will be open sourced-- but only because the createor chose to give it away.
Certainly not because FSF crated it-- I waited a decade for GNU, and their failure to deliver the OS was for exactly these reasons... and that's why its called Linux.
I'm not flaming you for repeating this statistic-- its been repeated so much that when Apple says "if we get another %5 we double our market share!" its a joke! (Yet many people don't realize it.)
I don't think Apple has ever had only %5 of the market. And I'm certain the way this is calcuated- counting new machines sold from only *some* sources- is wrong. For instance, the way the %5 market share figure is calculated, ALL apple sales made thru the Apple store and thru local Apple dealers are ignored. Ising' that a huge chunk of apples sales?
Furthermroe, "Marketshare" is the number of machines that are in use-- that people can sell software into." That is not the same as the "number of machines sold". And its certainly not the same for "consumer" or "business" machines.
If you're making a video editing program, say, you don't assume that every business machine sold is a potential candidate-- cause a large percentage of those machines are servers, not client machines.
At one point Apple had %25 of the market. This was 1997 or so. And this was based on a scientific evaluation of the maket.
I think Apple's market share has slipped and is only %15 of the market now.
There are a lot of factos that people forget-- most PCs are discarded within 2 years, while a Mac's useful life is about 4 years. A large number of PCs end up essentially DOA because they die within the first year and are replaced, etc. And on top of that, most Apple sales are not counted by the Microsoft paid "Analysts" who say they have %5 of the market.
That %5 figure is due to the fact that hey can't say "zero %" and microsoft wants them to be enough to be competition but not enough to look like a threat.
First, Apple is, and always has been a large successful company with a very large warchest. The years when they were loosing money weren't nearly as bad as they were made out to be by the press- cause the press are idiots who think any company that looses 700Million one year is going under, but a company with $7billion in liquid assets can handlea couple down years.
And buy lots of these really tiny companies.
Secondly, of course they are discontinuing Windows support and Linux support. There is no reason to continue unprofitable and secondary platform support.
If you want to work with digital media, the Mac is where its at and it has been since Apple invented the market by releasing Quicktime in 1991.
There's nothing shady about what they are doing. If you don't like the Logic product, switch to a competitor. Soemehow, though, I doubt you've ever used logic and are just complaining.
As to force, this is a silly thing to complain about- you aren't forced to do anything. ITs not force when you freely choose to use the better project.
OH, Apple! You made the Mac SO GOOD I was *FORCED* into buying one! How dare you!
Come on, its obvious you're looking for an excuse to dislike Apple. People have been grasping at these straws since 1984. Its unfortunate that our society hates intellectualism so much that it bashes companies that put out great products and praises companies that use anti-competitive measures to succeed. Microsoft is a half assed operation all around, while Apple is first class...
I think there's a connection between this and the pro-football anti-education attitude of our school system.
You said: "Furthermore, MS hired the Mach MicroKernel developers to create WinNT way back in the day. These guys are excellent and experienced OS developers and they still work at Microsoft."
To which, I say Ha!
Sorry, I've worked for MS and in fact, worked on Cairo (Back when Cairo was going to be a next gen OS to replace NT, it has since been used to describe all kinds of things that weren't really Cairo, after Cairo was cancelled.)
Let me just say, without violating NDAs, that NT will never effectively compete with OS X for certain, and will probably have a tough time going against Linux.
I've had my hands on the code in question. It doesn't matter how many bright people MS hires (nevermind the fact that there will always be more brighter people who don't work for them, who are more likely to work on Linux) but the process and priorities MS uses in developing its code.
Quality isn't even in the top 5 priorities. They say otherwise, but everyone who works there knows its just talk, and how the process is broken.
Actually, maybe the titler will go in Final Cut, but the other thing this company makes is animated backgrounds for compositing into title sequences.
The next version of Jaguar will have Quartz extreme. Apple, the company that came up with the idea of the desktop picture, may be the first one with a desktop video-- since in Q Extreme, the entire UI is 3d Rendered textures, the desktop could easily be a quicktime movie loop.
ICANN has exceeded its authority, does not operate in an open fashion, and is dangerously unaccountable to Internet users, businesses and other key interest groups.'"
As if this isn't exactly what the US Government has done repeatedly over the years!
They exclude us from electing the people we want to elect-- we only get to choose between two parties, and all other parties are not allowed on the ballot (really). They pass unconstitutional taxes (income tax, was supposed to be temporary to support WWI-- that's the FIRST ONE, they changed the constitution to allow it, and never repealed it.)
They regularly pass unconstitutional restrictions on freedom of religion (The drug war and any regulation of marriage fall under this category). etc. etc. etc.
ICANN for all its problems is a lot less worrisome to me than the US Government, which has absolutely NO accountability to anyone, not even its own citizens.
The reason is this: Getting access to perl code you've written or integrating perl with an Obj-C API is really easy using this method.
If you write an application in Obj C (or Java-- actually Java would be my choice) you get to use interface builder to build your UI-- this is the best/fastest way to build a great UI. Then, its a simple matter of linking that UI to the perl scripts you've already written.
This can be done in a number of ways, the most explicit being to simply call the shell from within your ObjC application.
ObjC (despite my prior prejudice against it) is turning out to be a pretty decent and relatively easy language to learn. And, of course, when you consider Interface Builder its the best way to build an interface for any language-- just write minimal ObjC to tie your buttons, etc, to the bulk of your code.
I imagined you'll spend 3 hours learning the ObjC stuff and then be back on your way programming-- and actually get more productive than if you have a Perl Aqua UI to work with because it would be slower to specify that Aqua UI in Perl using the custom API (than using Interface Builder.)
So please, mod this parent up-- essentially the "bridge" is already there, its just "unconventional". Not "offtopic".
The hardware reset starts the machine reading at the beginning of its onboard ROM (or wherever the reset address is set to) and so it immediately starts executing code that wants the password.
The way around this is to grab a the hard drive out of the machine, and put it in an external firewire case, attach it to another machine that boots from its internal hard drive,and then you should be able to read all the data.
This password protection is basically a deterrant, but not ultimate security.
Slashdot Mirror
What's really sad is I haven't given up on slasdot yet. Really should go just read the headlines and stop reading the articles-- to many bigoted idiots such as yourself.
You assume that "slashdot" means "geeks" and "geeks" mean "higher than average intelligence" but really the Linux community seems to really be AOL type people who are too cheap to pay for software--- rather than geeks who actually *write* software.
But slashdot makes no distinction.
And factually so.
The difference in Linux is that you *can't* buy Office for it, but you CAN run OpenOffice on the Mac.
The developer tools are given away free to everyone-- grandma and grandpa too. Out of the box.
Your entire post is a list of factually false statements presented as facts.
Unfortunately, other than the idea of Open Source and the Open Source methodology, the market is exclusively about making commodity software.
Linux is a commodity operating system (Unix) running a commodity UI (windows ripoff). It is not the source of innovation.
Making software that does what commercial software does and making it free is great-- but the software is all commodity- ideas that have been around for decades. I haven't seen any new applications "killer Apps" or not- that were really innovative starting on Linux.
Linux *does* encourage innovation, though, because it drives the value of commodity software to zero. If Linux didn't exist, there would still be people charging $1,000 for an x86 Unix install, because they could get away with it. Now if they want to charge $1,000 to their customers, they'd better innovate some value for that money.
Linux helps a lot on that front. And it also works to let companies like Apple opensource the commodity parts of their OS-- and spend their money working on the areas where they can be innovative.
By the way-- while I disagree with what this Mr. Silver said, the only troll here is you. You attack him and do so personally, and probably unfairly-- You don't get to decide the position someone is taking and tell them that they don't believe what they are saying. That's the height of offensiveness.
Unless you're the kind of person that shouldn't be using Linux in the first place
In other words, the kind of people who care about desktop operating systems.
As a Geek who has worked on advanced operating systems and spent a lot of time with Unix machines, it truly is the case that Linux isn't worth the time getting it all working. I get paid to get my software working on a server and I've certainly been using Unix long enough to be competent-- but still, the time differential is significant enough that OS X -- also being essentially free-- is a far better deal. And thats not accounting for the quality differential-- the desktop experience under OS X is just a LOT better.
Plus you get more bang for your buck with Apple hardware.
I applaud all the work to improve the usability of Linux on the Desktop, but poo-poohing the difficulty of the issue doesn't help it.
You really bought a Cisco WiFi card for $10? From a dot-com auction? Or are you saying you really can get a $10 WiFi card off the market? I haven't seen anything like this at Compusa.
1/10th of $99, is $9.90. I'm wondering if this wasn't yet another of the exagerations PC people make about Mac hardware being expensive eg "My Xbox has better graphics and was only $200!"
Used to love code warrior.
But Project Builder has given me everything I've needed in an IDE and with rather good performance.
I've developed a couple products on it, and I get work done every day.
Furthermore, I haven't found many bugs in it, nor many inconsistencies that would justify the "crap" lable.
I understand you may prefer Codewarrior, it has its way, and its generally a great product.
But that doesn't mean PB sucks.
Apples development suit is by far the best out of the box OS bundled development suite I've ever seen....
And its worth noticing that nobody other than free OSs do that anymore.
Cheers to Apple for making Dev tools availible to everyone for free.
If codewarriors better, then bully for them. It doesn't have to be "either or".
They will.
The product name is "Mac OS 10.1". The "Marketing" name is "Mac OS X".
The X is a ten.
I suspect they will either do 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, etc until they get to 10.9 which should take them 5 years, and then they release Mac OS 11. Which gives them 5 years with the X brand -- a bit too long.
Or they will make this next release Mac OS 10.5 and next year do Mac OS 11.
But this update is too much stuf not to rev the version number.
This is good for customers, but (due in part to imbeciles like those quoted above) not necessarily for shareholders.
I'd like to disagree with you on that one. Analysts can move a stock in the short term, but the long term results that shareholders get are determined solely by the performance of the company.
Apple's regular release schedule is probably good for this-- each time they do it they add significant value to the Mac platform. I don't think the $19 or $29 they get for a new OS is significant (for instance, all us Developers get it sent to us for free) revenue compared to the fact that EVERY MAC SHIPPING just got better.
The new features increaste the hardware value and support hardware sales.
And the way things are going, it probably won't be long before the percieved value of a Mac is as far ahead of Windows as it used to be.
Apple doesn't trade at the multiple of Microsoft because Apple's financials are not as good, and not as consistent as Microsoft.
Stock is, actually, one of the most fair evaluators-- Apple''s been performing well, but they need consistent results for a couple more years before their multiple will expand.
Microsoft, because they are in a more attractive segment (Software has a much higher gross profit margine than hardware) are going to continue to trade at a higher multiple than Apple.
But that said, it may mean that Apple is the better stock because Microsoft's value is fully realized in its current price, while Apple is discounted because of its spotty history and (short term) anaysts opinions.
As warren buffet has said "IF you're going to be buying steak do you want the price to be high or low?" When buying stock, you want a low price....
YDL will install on some machines unsupported by more non-commercial distros. I'm in the process of getting it going on a 7300.
I bet it will work on your machine too.
Dual AMD 1U Servers with identical specs to Apple's Xserve can be had sub-$1000 Xserve costs $5000.
This was claimed many times when the Xserve was announced, but interestingly, nobody was able to give a pointer to one.
Apparently these mythical cheap servers don't exist.
Since its rare for a server to have four drive bays, etc, and a new style 1U enclosure was created by Apple, I'm pretty confident htat you are simply telling a lie here.
If you weren't you'd have provided an example.
See, since ugly old trolls like you never buy Macs or come to the AUG meetings, only the good looking boys in pink show up!
It sure makes for some fun meetings, but then, you wouldn't enjoy it so, we're glad you stay away!
You're right!
They should send a coupon to every one of their Windows custoemrs which entitles them to a free copy of the Mac version of the software if they decide to switch to the Mac platform ("just send in a reciept for the purchase of a Mac in the past 3 months and we'll send you a free copy of the software")
Or something like that. Offer people a small incentive to switch and even if they don't you maintain their positive opinion.
They don't charge, strictly speaking, for this stuff. Only the people who have older machines that want it have to pay for it. If you have a new machine, it comes pre-loaded. This is a lack of revenue. The pay $$ for something, and then get very little return.
That's funny. Final Cut is $1000. So is Cinema tools. Shake and Rayz sell for tens of thousands of dollars right now, I doubt they will be coming "pre loaded" on machines.
Sure, Apple took final cut and made an iMovie version, and that is free, but that just causes lots of final cut sales. final cut has been a HUGE success-- pretty much taking over the low to mid- range video and film editing industry.
But then, I don't think you really know what you're talking about so you wouldn't have known that.
Not a good idea for Jobs to piss off Gates over something insignificant, to lose something of value. Gates has shown he is willing to lose $$ in the short term, on hopes of banking in the long term
Yeah, you really don't know what your'e talking about. Office is on the MAc because its extreemely profitable for Microsoft. I know this for a fact. If MS wanted to withhold it, they would be in trouble because Apple has a contractual obligation from them for it-- (and I'm not talking about the agreement that expired.) MS can't withdraw OFfice for the MAc, and they won't because even MS likes the couple billion in revenue it generates each year.
ANd hardware is not the market to make money, otherwise it would be Intel telling Microsoft what to do, not vice versa
I don't know of any evidence that Microsoft tells intel what to do. Intel tunes its microcode to support windows because it knows windows is a large customer. But Intel is not beholden to Microsoft.
Since "hardware isn't the place to make money" do you think Sony is stupid and should go into the software business?
Do you think Apple doesn't make money from software?
Interesting.
> PC version consumed 70% of their development and support costs
That seems unlikely
No, I would expect that to be the case. Usually it is that way when you release a product on both platforms. I know this, I've done it.
Your costs on the PC side are much higher-- both in initial development, and in support. This is due to the poor quality of the development environment for Windows and the poor quality of the machines people buy- bad power supplies cause memory corruption, causes your program to crash and the computer illiterate mother isn't going to think that maybe she shouldn't have bought a computer from some fly by night company for $400-- she's going to wonder why your software doens't work.
Developing software for Windows is also more expensive because in order to get a unit of sales you have to spend more money to reach the customers-- there's a lot more competition. Whereas on the Mac side, getting the same unit of sales is a lot cheaper because theirs less competition for it.
The reason companies support windows at all (given this situation) is that marketing guys are idiots and not businessmen-- they never take into account the costs of development and costs of sales, they decide based on the size of the market. And non-marketing CEOs believe them.
There's a great opportunity for Mac software developers... but so few have taken it, that apple has started doing it itself.
Yeah, you should switch to a MAc. you get better hardware, at cheaper prices than a comperable PC.
You shouldn't whine that now you have the opportunity to upgrade to a superior platform. And you don't have to do it right away, keep using your current software and upgrade when you're ready to upgrade your machine.
BTW- your statements about slow RAM et. al. express ignorance about how PCs work. The performance is based on many factors. For instance, if you have two ram busses at 2/3 the speed of a machine with only one ram buss, you'll have a faster machine because ram bandwidth is cummulative.
Macs are faster than PCs in the same price category... and it takes a lot of misrepresentation to sustain the illusion that this isn't true-- but then, there are a lot of PC people who don't want to feel like idiots for wasting their money and therefore suspend disbelief.
I honestly don't think that the post was meant to demean anyone in that way, but face it, a high end mac can cost you over 3k, when you can put together a really good PC for under 1k.
Yeah, execpt that a low end mac that you can buy for $1K is superior to that "really good PC" you buought for the same price in every way-
faster, better software, better quality hardware.
People who compalain about being too poor to buy a mac are usually that way because they WASTED their money on a PC that cost too mcuh and delivered too little.
If you can't afford to upgrade *your* mac, don't be fooled by those cheap PCs. Hell, you could get an XBOX PC for only $200, with a killer pentium processor and a killer graphics card.
If you think they are the same as a mac, you're mistaken.
I bought a PowerMac 9600 from Boeing surplus for $75, managed to get OS X running on it, and now it works as a fileserver on my home network.
I don't know of any PCs from that era that could do the same thing using Windows software. Maybe Linux, sure, but not twith the quality of the aqua UI.
If you really are po and want to work at the low end, buy that elcheapo PC, but then you can't afford Logic anyway, right? Sheesh.
Any fair comparison finds that Macs are cheaper than PCs. The fact that you can get an XBOX for $200 does not make PCs cheaper. (And marginally better things for $400, etc.)
This is on topic because we're talking about software CHOICE- and whether Apple's pruchase of Emagic reduces it or not.
The FSF is right out of orwell-- they're NON-FREE software is "free" and those who use other software are "slaves".
First off, "free" software will never be the best. The draconian terms of the GPL mean that most professional developers will support BSD or free licenses, ratehr than the GPL. This means the GNU software gets less mindshare.
Secondly, you are not enslaved by non-gnu software. In fact, you are more free, as you can ship a product and actually sell it along with supporting the (truely) free software.
The communists in Russia claimed they were going to make everyone free, while they were actually acting to enslave everyone. FSF advocates this same party line-- you don't have the right to the output of your labor (if its software) it belongs to anyone who "needs" it.
Open Source (not "free") is a good idea-- and it will succeed where it does give people extra choices and provide good quality. Linux is a good example of this, and OpenBSD and its projects are another good example.
But you will never get innovation out of open source and certainly not out of free software. This is because innovation is really expensive, and there is no profitable business model yet for making back those costs with open or free software.
This is why proprietary software will continue to rule when it comes to innovative categories-- but commodity software, such as operating systems, will become open source.... because when its a commodity, the improvements you get are more valuable than the lost income. When its innovative, there are less people who can improve it and the expense is too high-- you have to recoup it.
Media software is the most innovative group right now-- therefore, Apple buying these media companies is giving it a lock on innovation. In 10 years, this will all be commodity software and the best software will be open sourced-- but only because the createor chose to give it away.
Certainly not because FSF crated it-- I waited a decade for GNU, and their failure to deliver the OS was for exactly these reasons... and that's why its called Linux.
There's a connection there.
I'm not flaming you for repeating this statistic-- its been repeated so much that when Apple says "if we get another %5 we double our market share!" its a joke! (Yet many people don't realize it.)
I don't think Apple has ever had only %5 of the market. And I'm certain the way this is calcuated- counting new machines sold from only *some* sources- is wrong. For instance, the way the %5 market share figure is calculated, ALL apple sales made thru the Apple store and thru local Apple dealers are ignored. Ising' that a huge chunk of apples sales?
Furthermroe, "Marketshare" is the number of machines that are in use-- that people can sell software into." That is not the same as the "number of machines sold". And its certainly not the same for "consumer" or "business" machines.
If you're making a video editing program, say, you don't assume that every business machine sold is a potential candidate-- cause a large percentage of those machines are servers, not client machines.
At one point Apple had %25 of the market. This was 1997 or so. And this was based on a scientific evaluation of the maket.
I think Apple's market share has slipped and is only %15 of the market now.
There are a lot of factos that people forget-- most PCs are discarded within 2 years, while a Mac's useful life is about 4 years. A large number of PCs end up essentially DOA because they die within the first year and are replaced, etc. And on top of that, most Apple sales are not counted by the Microsoft paid "Analysts" who say they have %5 of the market.
That %5 figure is due to the fact that hey can't say "zero %" and microsoft wants them to be enough to be competition but not enough to look like a threat.
Its essentially, a completely fabricated figure.
First, Apple is, and always has been a large successful company with a very large warchest. The years when they were loosing money weren't nearly as bad as they were made out to be by the press- cause the press are idiots who think any company that looses 700Million one year is going under, but a company with $7billion in liquid assets can handlea couple down years.
And buy lots of these really tiny companies.
Secondly, of course they are discontinuing Windows support and Linux support. There is no reason to continue unprofitable and secondary platform support.
If you want to work with digital media, the Mac is where its at and it has been since Apple invented the market by releasing Quicktime in 1991.
There's nothing shady about what they are doing. If you don't like the Logic product, switch to a competitor. Soemehow, though, I doubt you've ever used logic and are just complaining.
As to force, this is a silly thing to complain about- you aren't forced to do anything. ITs not force when you freely choose to use the better project.
OH, Apple! You made the Mac SO GOOD I was *FORCED* into buying one! How dare you!
Come on, its obvious you're looking for an excuse to dislike Apple. People have been grasping at these straws since 1984. Its unfortunate that our society hates intellectualism so much that it bashes companies that put out great products and praises companies that use anti-competitive measures to succeed. Microsoft is a half assed operation all around, while Apple is first class...
I think there's a connection between this and the pro-football anti-education attitude of our school system.
You said:
"Furthermore, MS hired the Mach MicroKernel developers to create WinNT way back in the day. These guys are excellent and experienced OS developers and they still work at Microsoft."
To which, I say Ha!
Sorry, I've worked for MS and in fact, worked on Cairo (Back when Cairo was going to be a next gen OS to replace NT, it has since been used to describe all kinds of things that weren't really Cairo, after Cairo was cancelled.)
Let me just say, without violating NDAs, that NT will never effectively compete with OS X for certain, and will probably have a tough time going against Linux.
I've had my hands on the code in question. It doesn't matter how many bright people MS hires (nevermind the fact that there will always be more brighter people who don't work for them, who are more likely to work on Linux) but the process and priorities MS uses in developing its code.
Quality isn't even in the top 5 priorities. They say otherwise, but everyone who works there knows its just talk, and how the process is broken.
Actually, maybe the titler will go in Final Cut, but the other thing this company makes is animated backgrounds for compositing into title sequences.
The next version of Jaguar will have Quartz extreme. Apple, the company that came up with the idea of the desktop picture, may be the first one with a desktop video-- since in Q Extreme, the entire UI is 3d Rendered textures, the desktop could easily be a quicktime movie loop.
That would be cool.
ICANN has exceeded its authority, does not operate in an open fashion, and is dangerously unaccountable to Internet users, businesses and other key interest groups.'"
As if this isn't exactly what the US Government has done repeatedly over the years!
They exclude us from electing the people we want to elect-- we only get to choose between two parties, and all other parties are not allowed on the ballot (really). They pass unconstitutional taxes (income tax, was supposed to be temporary to support WWI-- that's the FIRST ONE, they changed the constitution to allow it, and never repealed it.)
They regularly pass unconstitutional restrictions on freedom of religion (The drug war and any regulation of marriage fall under this category). etc. etc. etc.
ICANN for all its problems is a lot less worrisome to me than the US Government, which has absolutely NO accountability to anyone, not even its own citizens.
Please mod this parent up, its NOT off topic.
The reason is this: Getting access to perl code you've written or integrating perl with an Obj-C API is really easy using this method.
If you write an application in Obj C (or Java-- actually Java would be my choice) you get to use interface builder to build your UI-- this is the best/fastest way to build a great UI. Then, its a simple matter of linking that UI to the perl scripts you've already written.
This can be done in a number of ways, the most explicit being to simply call the shell from within your ObjC application.
ObjC (despite my prior prejudice against it) is turning out to be a pretty decent and relatively easy language to learn. And, of course, when you consider Interface Builder its the best way to build an interface for any language-- just write minimal ObjC to tie your buttons, etc, to the bulk of your code.
I imagined you'll spend 3 hours learning the ObjC stuff and then be back on your way programming-- and actually get more productive than if you have a Perl Aqua UI to work with because it would be slower to specify that Aqua UI in Perl using the custom API (than using Interface Builder.)
So please, mod this parent up-- essentially the "bridge" is already there, its just "unconventional". Not "offtopic".
No.
,and then you should be able to read all the data.
The hardware reset starts the machine reading at the beginning of its onboard ROM (or wherever the reset address is set to) and so it immediately starts executing code that wants the password.
The way around this is to grab a the hard drive out of the machine, and put it in an external firewire case, attach it to another machine that boots from its internal hard drive
This password protection is basically a deterrant, but not ultimate security.
I believe these are consistent-- they mean USB when they say Serial, as USB is a serial format.