With the exception of 10.0 --> 10.1, which meant going from a godawful beta to a usable OS, I think you're right. Historically (back to the System 7 days, if not before) even-numbered point releases of the Mac OS have been when Apple introduced new features, and odd-numbered point releases have been when those features actually worked right.
I'll jump on that bandwagon. But how do you interpolate the second point release increments? Nine dot two dot two ? (:
I'm a big Mac fan -- *love* my iMac. But I'm not sure about Leopard. That is, Time Machine and Spaces looks neat. But not neat enough for me to shell out $150 for an upgrade.
Tiger is awesome, those new feature all-in-all are pretty minor improvements.
Now, if Jobs' TOP SECRET stuff is impressive, that may make a difference. But so far, I'm not seeing enough in Leopard for me to open my wallet.
boxlight
OS X has never been worth the upgrade in single increments. Nor have most other software packages (Adobe in particular) but there are plenty of people who only upgrade every-other release. Going from 10.3 to 10.5 makes sense.
Additionally, like other slashdotters have commented, it's not what you see that you're paying for. It's what you don't see. Much like a sys admin - it's what you don't see them doing that you're paying the big bucks for.
Would it not be more correct to make the exact definition of the verb "google" to be "to use the Google.com search engine to search for information on the internet"? I mean, with the current definition, a person could say, "Yeah, I just googled it on MSN." I'm surprised Google hasn't gone after the dictionary to get the definition changed.
I fully agree. Using 'google' as a verb is not the issue. The problem is the generalization of the term.
To google is to use google.com to search for sites on the interweb. To yahoo is to use yahoo.com to search for sites on the interweb. To dog pile is to use dogpile.com to search for sites on the interweb.
B) I have vague memories of various geekish ramblings about how it should be illegal to run unsecured operating systems. And now that it's about half way to law we're all skeptic.
Why the skeptizism? We as a geek community don't like Microsoft. We as a young society don't like our current government.
So they suddenly want everything patched and we're skeptic that it's because the patches include monitoring software. But we've been saying that about auto updates ever since MS started using them.
...a $200 controller. I guess that fits the pricing scheme of a $600 console.
A $200 controller with a 4.3" 16:9 TFT LCD screen at 480 x 272 pixel and 16.77 million colors. Not to mention built in stereo speakers and headphone jack.
I think this is one thing that consoles could use. Especially with the popularity of things like Madden football, video board / card games, or anything that has multiple players with secret information.
The Dreamcast had the ability to have a display in the controller, and I know there were at least a few games that used it. The problem with having optional features on a console is that they don't get used by the game developers. How many PS2 games actually took advantage of the USB ports, or the i.Link port? I can think of three FPS PS2 games that supported keyboard / mouse input. If the hardware producer (Sony in this case) is going to include a really cool feature / option they need to motivate the game developers to use it.
Wireless "everything" is hugely overhyped. Yes, a wireless mouse is nice because it doesn't snag, but why do I need a wireless printer? Or a wireless monitor? Or anything else that's largely static for its lifetime?
I'm with you on this one. I understand wireless for items that move, but what's the need for even a wireless keyboard? A wireless keyboard is actually less useful than a wired one which commonly provides USB hub access. I want Apple to make a Firewire keyboard with a cradle for a rechargable wireless mouse. It could also be a firewire / USB hub. And heck, an iPod dock as well!
The other issue is radio overlap. Even if you only have two or three things in your house or appartment you have to worry about your neighbors too. Instead of everything being wireless, clusters of devices could be wired together and share a single wireless uplink to the network. All my devices at my television (PS2, XBox, TiVo, HTPC,...) are wired to a switch which has a wireless uplink. It works marvelously. Also all the stationary devices in my office (computer, wife's computer, two servers, printer,...) are connected the same way. I have 8+ devices sharing two wireless signals.
And as far as PDA sync'ing over Bluetooth is conserned, is it really that cumbersome to plug the damn thing in? After all, USB will deliver far superior throughput. The time you 'waste' plugging it in will be overcome by the speed of the wire vs the speed of the air.
Unfortunately it doesn't really exist and it's not an iPod interface, but I could see someone hacking such a device into existance. And it selling well.
11 pages for one article? It starts at 100, and gives you no option to click through to the top ten. next-gen.biz are pageview whores, and deserve their ad-free printable version link to be published.
It's true that Apple attracts a certain "I don't know what" kind of person. Apple's success, however, is not based on its cosmetic appeal. Apple offers much more beyond just its good looks. It's like Apple and and its users signed up on eHarmony and found each other. If Vista is stable and easy to use, then MS won't need the glitz and glamour to attract customers since they already have a majority of the customers. MS will only have to retain customers, which it can do with a great Vista release.
I'm going to have to call BULL SHIT on this one. Ask anyone who bought a Mac for the first time after OS X 10.2 what their primary appeal was and they'll tell you because of its looks, both hardware and software. They "fell in love" with the way it looks. Apple puts form before function, and that's what sells.
And furthermore, "It's like Apple and and its users signed up on eHarmony and found each other.", which one are you working for, Apple or eHarmony? Damn.
If milk does a body good, then reinstalls do a Windows or OS X system good. In my many experiences reinstalling a year+ old OS from scratch gets at least 10% performance back from the hardware. And it probably frees up a considerable amount of disk space. And this is an extremely easy friendly-neighborhood-geek thing to do, and scores you just as many (if not more) friend points than doing the difficult things like tracking down bizzar drivers for obscure hardware.
Nearly as I can tell there is absolutely nothing secure about a secret question. By definition it is a way to circumvent a moderately secure password system.
Frankly I think it's a way for the company issuing the account to get just a little bit more information about you. Mother's maiden name? Name of high school? I think birth city is another common one. Sounds like a way of linking you to other people.
Personally I always pick the most obtuse question and give it a completely false answer. Then, as usual, don't forget my password.
My wife and I played the alphabet game of sci-fi species while on our latest road trip. When we returned home I tried to look up letters we had difficulty with. There were a few lists of species, but they were all missing one or another major component - some had Star Trek, but not Babylon 5, or had Babylon 5 but not Farscape, or, well you get the idea.
This Sci-Fi encyclopedia is a damn fine idea and I might just throw in a few submissions of my own. Where's the petition I sign to get this one rolling?
I'm not a chemical engineer but that sounds rather complex compaired with just picking up the food, looking at it, feeling if its firm, etc.
Engineers of all makes and models tend to over think a problem making it more complex than it needs to be. Reminds me of a "Home Improvement" (Tim Allen's sitcom) episode where they had a group of housewives on the show to do basic household maintenance instruction. Working on a running toilet one of the hosts (Al or Tim) says the toilet is running because the water level in the tank is too high. To adjust this we turn the floater bulb so it is shorter on the stem. One of the ladies in the group shouts out "Or just bend the bar."
Often times the simplest answer is the correct one. And it's almost always the easiest (:
They employ fewer cashiers so the line ups for them are longer. The stupid consumer sees that there is no one at the self-checkout so goes there instead. See how that works? The grocery store manipulates the consumers into using the self checkout and the consumers are so stupid that they thank the grocery store for allowing them to do all the work themselves.
You didn't fall for it did you? People who use the self-checkout are almost as stupid as those that use the loyalty cards (Oh thank you so much for spying on my purchases mr. grocer). Its funny how many people here fall for these scams, but at the same time laugh at those who get infected with spyware and fooled 419 scams.
At my store the number of cashiers hasn't changed more than one or two lines, which is insignificant. And there have always only been one or two cashiers during slow hours. The difference is that they removed about three unused cashier lines to install the four self-check stations and moved one cashier to monitor them. In effect they've increased their checkout throughput. People who can check themselves out (the stupid ones, as you so elequantly put it) have four options for checkout and the smart ones who refuse to evolve can be processed by a paid checker.
And about the 'loyalty cards', us stupid people fill out the form with false information. Try giving it an age over 65 and a lot of places will give you an additional discount on senior days (Tuesday in my town). And if you're using a credit card they're spying on your purchases anyway. BRILLIANT!
I can see this being used in advertising to make people more comfortable with a new product. Kind of spooky to think about. Again. Wait, no, I haven't seen that before.
They're also taking a chomp out of grocery chain profits since I refuse to shop at a store that forces me to do their work for them. What's next, stores that make you stock their shelves?
They're not forcing you to do anything! Quit looking at the world through communist eyes and realize that the self-checkout is purely for your convenience. If you don't want to use it, don't. The cashier lanes are still there.
I'm not a professional grocery clerk, so don't bitch about my speed. I often have to look at the package to see where the UPC symbol is located, or unwrinkle it so it will scan properly. Sometimes I have to key in the barely readable number below the UPC symbol when it doesn't scan. Then there's the produce. I picked up several onions, and, no, I'm not an expert on onions. The computer wants to know which of eight types of onions I'm buying. Hell if I know, the round ones.
The store is wasting my time so they can cut their head count. Fuck them.
I completely disagree and find your closing statement to not only be ignorant but assinine.
If you have items in your basket that you know you will have difficulty with at the self-check line don't use the self-check line. It's not like they're forcing you to. It's there as a convenience to the shopper.
I for one love the self-check lines. Yes there are people who create bottlenecks, but the longer these devices are in service the more customers who will become accustomed to useing them. And I believe the reason why they often appear abandoned (as someone else mentioned) is not because they're not being used but rather because they are so fast that people spend very little time there. Stand for an hour and watch for yourself during a busy time (perhaps around 6pm on weekdays? I honestly don't know their highwater times) and I'm sure you'll find that a lot of customers breeze through the self-check lines. Someone with more initiative than myself could even check to see the 'rate of items scanned' by the cluster of self-checks monitored by one employee versus an employee-operated checkout line. Our Kroger (grocery store) has four self-checks with one employee - I would imagine during busy hours the throughput of four self-checks is about 50% faster than a single lane employee-operated checkout. In self-check you're dealing with a bunch of smaller quantities, less nimble operators, and a bunch more transactions which take roughly the same amount of time no matter who's operating the machine. But it's all going four at a time.
I always thought that AMD and Nvidia were the better combo. Besides the ATI Drivers suck for Linux, where a large percent of the enthusiast market's interests lie. Isn't AMD still more of an enthusists processor until it can get into one of the top vendor's machines?
I think, then, what you're looking for could come from this merger. AMD being the less expensive of the major CPU producers is a first choice for the free Unix group, and they know it. Maybe joining with ATI will cause the joined company to become a stronger hardware vendor for the Linux group. There are many desktop Linux hardware vendors that use AMD / ATI combos already.
The real question is what they're going to call themselves. They've got two As and an I M T and D to mix around.
Slashdot Mirror
With the exception of 10.0 --> 10.1, which meant going from a godawful beta to a usable OS, I think you're right. Historically (back to the System 7 days, if not before) even-numbered point releases of the Mac OS have been when Apple introduced new features, and odd-numbered point releases have been when those features actually worked right.
I'll jump on that bandwagon. But how do you interpolate the second point release increments? Nine dot two dot two ? (:
I'm a big Mac fan -- *love* my iMac. But I'm not sure about Leopard. That is, Time Machine and Spaces looks neat. But not neat enough for me to shell out $150 for an upgrade.
Tiger is awesome, those new feature all-in-all are pretty minor improvements.
Now, if Jobs' TOP SECRET stuff is impressive, that may make a difference. But so far, I'm not seeing enough in Leopard for me to open my wallet.
boxlight
OS X has never been worth the upgrade in single increments. Nor have most other software packages (Adobe in particular) but there are plenty of people who only upgrade every-other release. Going from 10.3 to 10.5 makes sense.
Additionally, like other slashdotters have commented, it's not what you see that you're paying for. It's what you don't see. Much like a sys admin - it's what you don't see them doing that you're paying the big bucks for.
That's pretty funny coming from someone that used the word "interweb."
;)
Yeah, I thought so too
Would it not be more correct to make the exact definition of the verb "google" to be "to use the Google.com search engine to search for information on the internet"? I mean, with the current definition, a person could say, "Yeah, I just googled it on MSN." I'm surprised Google hasn't gone after the dictionary to get the definition changed.
I fully agree. Using 'google' as a verb is not the issue. The problem is the generalization of the term.
To google is to use google.com to search for sites on the interweb.
To yahoo is to use yahoo.com to search for sites on the interweb.
To dog pile is to use dogpile.com to search for sites on the interweb.
The definitions are wrong. It's time to educate.
I'm probably talking out my ass, but here goes ...
A) I agree with. It's weird, and I'm skeptic.
B) I have vague memories of various geekish ramblings about how it should be illegal to run unsecured operating systems. And now that it's about half way to law we're all skeptic.
Why the skeptizism?
We as a geek community don't like Microsoft.
We as a young society don't like our current government.
So they suddenly want everything patched and we're skeptic that it's because the patches include monitoring software. But we've been saying that about auto updates ever since MS started using them.
But wouldn't a smaller fixed wing setup be more stable and reliable? And perhaps be able to do ground launches instead of being dropped from a plane?
...a $200 controller. I guess that fits the pricing scheme of a $600 console.
A $200 controller with a 4.3" 16:9 TFT LCD screen at 480 x 272 pixel and 16.77 million colors. Not to mention built in stereo speakers and headphone jack.
I think this is one thing that consoles could use. Especially with the popularity of things like Madden football, video board / card games, or anything that has multiple players with secret information.
The Dreamcast had the ability to have a display in the controller, and I know there were at least a few games that used it. The problem with having optional features on a console is that they don't get used by the game developers. How many PS2 games actually took advantage of the USB ports, or the i.Link port? I can think of three FPS PS2 games that supported keyboard / mouse input. If the hardware producer (Sony in this case) is going to include a really cool feature / option they need to motivate the game developers to use it.
Wireless "everything" is hugely overhyped. Yes, a wireless mouse is nice because it doesn't snag, but why do I need a wireless printer? Or a wireless monitor? Or anything else that's largely static for its lifetime?
...) are wired to a switch which has a wireless uplink. It works marvelously. Also all the stationary devices in my office (computer, wife's computer, two servers, printer, ...) are connected the same way. I have 8+ devices sharing two wireless signals.
I'm with you on this one. I understand wireless for items that move, but what's the need for even a wireless keyboard? A wireless keyboard is actually less useful than a wired one which commonly provides USB hub access. I want Apple to make a Firewire keyboard with a cradle for a rechargable wireless mouse. It could also be a firewire / USB hub. And heck, an iPod dock as well!
The other issue is radio overlap. Even if you only have two or three things in your house or appartment you have to worry about your neighbors too. Instead of everything being wireless, clusters of devices could be wired together and share a single wireless uplink to the network. All my devices at my television (PS2, XBox, TiVo, HTPC,
And as far as PDA sync'ing over Bluetooth is conserned, is it really that cumbersome to plug the damn thing in? After all, USB will deliver far superior throughput. The time you 'waste' plugging it in will be overcome by the speed of the wire vs the speed of the air.
Apparently someone did decide to make it... http://www.ohmibod.com/ Crazy, huh?
... holy shit!
That's the coolest thing I've seen for the iPod
iBrator!
Unfortunately it doesn't really exist and it's not an iPod interface, but I could see someone hacking such a device into existance. And it selling well.
11 pages for one article? It starts at 100, and gives you no option to click through to the top ten. next-gen.biz are pageview whores, and deserve their ad-free printable version link to be published.
... http://www.next-gen.biz/page11.html.
You could just change the web address for page 11
It's true that Apple attracts a certain "I don't know what" kind of person. Apple's success, however, is not based on its cosmetic appeal. Apple offers much more beyond just its good looks. It's like Apple and and its users signed up on eHarmony and found each other. If Vista is stable and easy to use, then MS won't need the glitz and glamour to attract customers since they already have a majority of the customers. MS will only have to retain customers, which it can do with a great Vista release.
I'm going to have to call BULL SHIT on this one. Ask anyone who bought a Mac for the first time after OS X 10.2 what their primary appeal was and they'll tell you because of its looks, both hardware and software. They "fell in love" with the way it looks. Apple puts form before function, and that's what sells.
And furthermore, "It's like Apple and and its users signed up on eHarmony and found each other.", which one are you working for, Apple or eHarmony? Damn.
If milk does a body good, then reinstalls do a Windows or OS X system good. In my many experiences reinstalling a year+ old OS from scratch gets at least 10% performance back from the hardware. And it probably frees up a considerable amount of disk space. And this is an extremely easy friendly-neighborhood-geek thing to do, and scores you just as many (if not more) friend points than doing the difficult things like tracking down bizzar drivers for obscure hardware.
Nearly as I can tell there is absolutely nothing secure about a secret question. By definition it is a way to circumvent a moderately secure password system.
Frankly I think it's a way for the company issuing the account to get just a little bit more information about you. Mother's maiden name? Name of high school? I think birth city is another common one. Sounds like a way of linking you to other people.
Personally I always pick the most obtuse question and give it a completely false answer. Then, as usual, don't forget my password.
My wife and I played the alphabet game of sci-fi species while on our latest road trip. When we returned home I tried to look up letters we had difficulty with. There were a few lists of species, but they were all missing one or another major component - some had Star Trek, but not Babylon 5, or had Babylon 5 but not Farscape, or, well you get the idea.
This Sci-Fi encyclopedia is a damn fine idea and I might just throw in a few submissions of my own. Where's the petition I sign to get this one rolling?
I'm not a chemical engineer but that sounds rather complex compaired with just picking up the food, looking at it, feeling if its firm, etc.
Engineers of all makes and models tend to over think a problem making it more complex than it needs to be. Reminds me of a "Home Improvement" (Tim Allen's sitcom) episode where they had a group of housewives on the show to do basic household maintenance instruction. Working on a running toilet one of the hosts (Al or Tim) says the toilet is running because the water level in the tank is too high. To adjust this we turn the floater bulb so it is shorter on the stem. One of the ladies in the group shouts out "Or just bend the bar."
Often times the simplest answer is the correct one. And it's almost always the easiest (:
They employ fewer cashiers so the line ups for them are longer. The stupid consumer sees that there is no one at the self-checkout so goes there instead. See how that works? The grocery store manipulates the consumers into using the self checkout and the consumers are so stupid that they thank the grocery store for allowing them to do all the work themselves.
You didn't fall for it did you? People who use the self-checkout are almost as stupid as those that use the loyalty cards (Oh thank you so much for spying on my purchases mr. grocer). Its funny how many people here fall for these scams, but at the same time laugh at those who get infected with spyware and fooled 419 scams.
At my store the number of cashiers hasn't changed more than one or two lines, which is insignificant. And there have always only been one or two cashiers during slow hours. The difference is that they removed about three unused cashier lines to install the four self-check stations and moved one cashier to monitor them. In effect they've increased their checkout throughput. People who can check themselves out (the stupid ones, as you so elequantly put it) have four options for checkout and the smart ones who refuse to evolve can be processed by a paid checker.
And about the 'loyalty cards', us stupid people fill out the form with false information. Try giving it an age over 65 and a lot of places will give you an additional discount on senior days (Tuesday in my town). And if you're using a credit card they're spying on your purchases anyway. BRILLIANT!
I question your nerdituide.
I can see this being used in advertising to make people more comfortable with a new product. Kind of spooky to think about. Again. Wait, no, I haven't seen that before.
They're also taking a chomp out of grocery chain profits since I refuse to shop at a store that forces me to do their work for them. What's next, stores that make you stock their shelves?
They're not forcing you to do anything! Quit looking at the world through communist eyes and realize that the self-checkout is purely for your convenience. If you don't want to use it, don't. The cashier lanes are still there.
I'm not a professional grocery clerk, so don't bitch about my speed. I often have to look at the package to see where the UPC symbol is located, or unwrinkle it so it will scan properly. Sometimes I have to key in the barely readable number below the UPC symbol when it doesn't scan. Then there's the produce. I picked up several onions, and, no, I'm not an expert on onions. The computer wants to know which of eight types of onions I'm buying. Hell if I know, the round ones.
The store is wasting my time so they can cut their head count. Fuck them.
I completely disagree and find your closing statement to not only be ignorant but assinine.
If you have items in your basket that you know you will have difficulty with at the self-check line don't use the self-check line. It's not like they're forcing you to. It's there as a convenience to the shopper.
I for one love the self-check lines. Yes there are people who create bottlenecks, but the longer these devices are in service the more customers who will become accustomed to useing them. And I believe the reason why they often appear abandoned (as someone else mentioned) is not because they're not being used but rather because they are so fast that people spend very little time there. Stand for an hour and watch for yourself during a busy time (perhaps around 6pm on weekdays? I honestly don't know their highwater times) and I'm sure you'll find that a lot of customers breeze through the self-check lines. Someone with more initiative than myself could even check to see the 'rate of items scanned' by the cluster of self-checks monitored by one employee versus an employee-operated checkout line. Our Kroger (grocery store) has four self-checks with one employee - I would imagine during busy hours the throughput of four self-checks is about 50% faster than a single lane employee-operated checkout. In self-check you're dealing with a bunch of smaller quantities, less nimble operators, and a bunch more transactions which take roughly the same amount of time no matter who's operating the machine. But it's all going four at a time.
Double you double you double you dot make your own dot com.
You're talking about a piece of paper with a bunch of commands printed on it, right?
Dude, they were hardly innocent. They ran around outside butt naked for crying out loud!
`Round these parts we call that gettin nekkid. Adam and Eve were most definitely nekkid.
I always thought that AMD and Nvidia were the better combo. Besides the ATI Drivers suck for Linux, where a large percent of the enthusiast market's interests lie. Isn't AMD still more of an enthusists processor until it can get into one of the top vendor's machines?
;)
I think, then, what you're looking for could come from this merger. AMD being the less expensive of the major CPU producers is a first choice for the free Unix group, and they know it. Maybe joining with ATI will cause the joined company to become a stronger hardware vendor for the Linux group. There are many desktop Linux hardware vendors that use AMD / ATI combos already.
The real question is what they're going to call themselves. They've got two As and an I M T and D to mix around.
ADMITA
DAMIT'A!
MIATAD
TADMIA
ITADMA
The list is practically endless
And bug fixes.
Not like big oil can do anything about it.
Except for paying off the car manufacturers to keep them in business.