You can upgrade Mac hardware. You can upgrade the hard drive, the RAM, the video card. You can add additional cards. You can upgrade the CPUs. About the only thing you can't do is buy a new motherboard without buying a new machine. There's really nothing "locked" about the hardware, it's all industry standard parts.
Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate.
Yes, but it's also what's keeping them profitable. If they didn't limit the hardware base they'd have to jack up the OS price to something people wouldn't pay, to cover the support costs and loss of hardware revenue--and then go out of business.
Well, to me the interesting thing about Bill Gates is how pathetic his goals seem to be; or how limited the execution is compared to his apparent resources and abilities.
If I had Bill's money, I'd be funding a mission to Mars, building supercolliders, or something like that that would actually go down in history. Bill, on the other hand... he built himself a big house, lent money to people, and then gave the interest they paid back to charity; plus he made a few tiny (1% of net worth scale) donations himself.
Meanwhile Paul Allen is financing Burt Rutan's spaceflights; and Ted Turner has set up over a dozen "ranch" nature preserves with an area larger than the two smallest states put together, and created the Goodwill Games. Bill's sending checks to AIDS researchers seems very pedestrian and uninspired by comparison.
The Beatles "Yellow Submarine" is a good example. The DVD actually has the isolated musical score available on it, exactly the same music as the orchestral soundtrack CD; it also has the Beatles songs that are on the Yellow Submarine CD. The DVD was $9.99 many places, $20 at most. (It's now out of print.) The CDs are $14 for the songtrack and $15 for the orchestral soundtrack. The DVD had exactly the same music as the two CDs, for a third of the price. How does that make sense? (I bought the DVD and ripped the soundtrack from it instead of buying the CDs.)
Talking Heads "Stop Making Sense" CD is $19 MSRP. The DVD has the entire music content of the CD, plus the movie, plus an alternate studio mix of the entire music content of the CD, for $30. I bought the DVD and ripped it instead of buying the CD.
"South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut". $12 for the soundtrack CD, or $13 for the DVD and rip it yourself. Sure, you miss the 8 songs rerecorded by rap artists etc that weren't in the movie, but I didn't want those anyway; and the CD misses some songs that *were* in the movie.
If you think closed source software is a second best, why aren't you using Ekiga or Gizmo or one of the other open source standards-based SIP VOIP systems?
If a company releases a game for the 360 or ps3 and it features the same asset counts, texture resolutions, code base, etc of a current gen game, a publisher will wonder why the hell you arn't releasing it on the PS2 which has such a massive install base that PS2 exclusive games will continue getting made for another 4 or 5 years, most likely.
I was wondering if that was going to happen.
As I've watched the PS3 launch with its absurdly high price and failure to sell, I've been wondering if game makers wouldn't be better off just continuing to make leading-edge PS2 games for a few more years. After all, they'll run just as well on the PS3, and let's face it, there are a lot of genres where PS2 graphics are plenty good enough. So you get to target the biggest piece of the market, and if the PS3 takes off you can still sell to PS3 owners.
As a bonus, game makers who stuck with the PS2 generation could probably target the Wii as their second platform, using the mature libraries developed for the GameCube, and just have to add motion sensor controls.
When I saw Metroid Prime on the GameCube, I thought "Well, that's it, I don't really need graphics any better than this." Same is true of Ico on the PS2. Give me games that good and I'll keep buying indefinitely, even if they're not making use of PS3-like hardware.
Yeah, but the summary and the article aren't talking about UNIX(R), the all-caps trademark of the Open Group used for System V derivatives. Rather, they're talking about Unix, which is the name everyone uses to refer to the family of operating systems that are derivative of the design of the earlier Unix v7, and generally compliant with POSIX.
While "UNIX(R)" excludes the BSDs, "Unix" includes them, as well as including Mac OS X and probably arguably Linux too.
But even ignoring that, the whole premise of "UNIX(R) on big iron vs Linux on commodity hardware" is a false dichotomy anyway. You can run UNIX(R) on commodity hardware as Solaris, and you can run Linux on an IBM System z mainframe. It should really be an article about big iron vs multiple commodity x86 boxes, the whole OS question is orthogonal and largely irrelevant.
It seems likely to me that most people thought "Hmm, this page is suspicious", but that the obedience to authority (OTA) principles Milgram demonstrated made them go ahead and log in anyway.
It's not clear to me how you could fix the experiment to avoid OTA behavior overriding and destroying your actual data.
I'm more concerned about Gnome and Ubuntu partnering with Novell and Mono, to be honest. Stallman's a pretty harmless annoyance, as annoyances go, and he's more often right than wrong.
1. I don't think Linux was taking off in 1993. It was pretty raw in those days. Even I wasn't using it:-)
2. IBM already had its own Unix it had been supporting for decades. It only started supporting Linux because Linux had already started to beat out other Unix OSs.
3. Linus may be a "pragmatist" in some ways, but he still picked the GPL. And it's not like he didn't know of alternatives--he came from the Minix world, and knew about BSD.
4. I think that the guaranteed mutual sharing is exactly what brings all these disparate people together. Of course, not having Theo around also helps:-)
If you are working to help people be able to get an abortion, then you are quite simply pro-abortion.
Total bullshit.
When I help people fix Microsoft Windows so they can get their job done, that doesn't mean I'm pro-Windows. Quite the opposite, I explain to them that the brokenness is typical of Microsoft, and that they should switch.
When I drive someone to a restaurant and they order steak, that doesn't mean I'm pro-meat-eating. I remain a vegetarian. I'm just letting other people make their own choices.
You are falling into the "with me or against me" fallacy of thinking that neutrality is impossible. It isn't. There's a whole spectrum of positions on abortion, not just two polar extremes. There are plenty of us who are somewhere in the middle, and who think other people should be allowed to make their own moral choices within certain limits.
Personally, I give notice, and time it so that the notice period is just enough time to finish things up cleanly and not end up sitting around doing nothing. If you don't want me to do that, and would rather scrabble around trying to clean up the mess caused by my sudden departure, that's your choice as employer.
Their stunt shut down 93 North, the orange line, several Charles River bridges (which are heavily trafficked.)
No, the authorities shut down everything, in a massive overreaction to what was obviously an art project or a harmless prank.
My first thought on seeing a big flashing LED display attached to a bridge would be "Ah, MIT students playing again." I'm seriously surprised the Boston police didn't consider that the explanation. Are they unaware of all the previous MIT pranks?
If you regularly have to haul large amounts of stuff, then get a minivan. Safer than an SUV, for the occupants as well as everyone else. More fuel efficient than an SUV. More cargo space than an SUV.
Slashdot Mirror
You can upgrade Mac hardware. You can upgrade the hard drive, the RAM, the video card. You can add additional cards. You can upgrade the CPUs. About the only thing you can't do is buy a new motherboard without buying a new machine. There's really nothing "locked" about the hardware, it's all industry standard parts.
Yes, but it's also what's keeping them profitable. If they didn't limit the hardware base they'd have to jack up the OS price to something people wouldn't pay, to cover the support costs and loss of hardware revenue--and then go out of business.
Well, to me the interesting thing about Bill Gates is how pathetic his goals seem to be; or how limited the execution is compared to his apparent resources and abilities.
If I had Bill's money, I'd be funding a mission to Mars, building supercolliders, or something like that that would actually go down in history. Bill, on the other hand... he built himself a big house, lent money to people, and then gave the interest they paid back to charity; plus he made a few tiny (1% of net worth scale) donations himself.
Meanwhile Paul Allen is financing Burt Rutan's spaceflights; and Ted Turner has set up over a dozen "ranch" nature preserves with an area larger than the two smallest states put together, and created the Goodwill Games. Bill's sending checks to AIDS researchers seems very pedestrian and uninspired by comparison.
The Beatles "Yellow Submarine" is a good example. The DVD actually has the isolated musical score available on it, exactly the same music as the orchestral soundtrack CD; it also has the Beatles songs that are on the Yellow Submarine CD. The DVD was $9.99 many places, $20 at most. (It's now out of print.) The CDs are $14 for the songtrack and $15 for the orchestral soundtrack. The DVD had exactly the same music as the two CDs, for a third of the price. How does that make sense? (I bought the DVD and ripped the soundtrack from it instead of buying the CDs.)
Talking Heads "Stop Making Sense" CD is $19 MSRP. The DVD has the entire music content of the CD, plus the movie, plus an alternate studio mix of the entire music content of the CD, for $30. I bought the DVD and ripped it instead of buying the CD.
"South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut". $12 for the soundtrack CD, or $13 for the DVD and rip it yourself. Sure, you miss the 8 songs rerecorded by rap artists etc that weren't in the movie, but I didn't want those anyway; and the CD misses some songs that *were* in the movie.
If you think closed source software is a second best, why aren't you using Ekiga or Gizmo or one of the other open source standards-based SIP VOIP systems?
So, how many web sites can I log into via Liberty Alliance? Where can I get an ID?
I use OpenID every day. It's here and it works.
Well, if it's all-or-nothing he wants, it's nothing he gets from me. I buy my MP3s from emusic, bleep.com and so on.
I was wondering if that was going to happen.
As I've watched the PS3 launch with its absurdly high price and failure to sell, I've been wondering if game makers wouldn't be better off just continuing to make leading-edge PS2 games for a few more years. After all, they'll run just as well on the PS3, and let's face it, there are a lot of genres where PS2 graphics are plenty good enough. So you get to target the biggest piece of the market, and if the PS3 takes off you can still sell to PS3 owners.
As a bonus, game makers who stuck with the PS2 generation could probably target the Wii as their second platform, using the mature libraries developed for the GameCube, and just have to add motion sensor controls.
When I saw Metroid Prime on the GameCube, I thought "Well, that's it, I don't really need graphics any better than this." Same is true of Ico on the PS2. Give me games that good and I'll keep buying indefinitely, even if they're not making use of PS3-like hardware.
Tell that to Michael Jackson, Gary Glitter, Jonathan King...
Yeah, but the summary and the article aren't talking about UNIX(R), the all-caps trademark of the Open Group used for System V derivatives. Rather, they're talking about Unix, which is the name everyone uses to refer to the family of operating systems that are derivative of the design of the earlier Unix v7, and generally compliant with POSIX.
While "UNIX(R)" excludes the BSDs, "Unix" includes them, as well as including Mac OS X and probably arguably Linux too.
But even ignoring that, the whole premise of "UNIX(R) on big iron vs Linux on commodity hardware" is a false dichotomy anyway. You can run UNIX(R) on commodity hardware as Solaris, and you can run Linux on an IBM System z mainframe. It should really be an article about big iron vs multiple commodity x86 boxes, the whole OS question is orthogonal and largely irrelevant.
[Opinions mine, not IBMs.]
The iPhone is a smartphone like the iPod is a PDA.
It seems likely to me that most people thought "Hmm, this page is suspicious", but that the obedience to authority (OTA) principles Milgram demonstrated made them go ahead and log in anyway.
It's not clear to me how you could fix the experiment to avoid OTA behavior overriding and destroying your actual data.
Here are some of the top reasons why I end up rejecting use of open source code:
1. No description on the web site of features & system requirements.
2. No documentation for how to install or use it.
3. No stable release and/or still alpha.
4. Written in PHP.
Finding the code is the least of the problems.
I'm more concerned about Gnome and Ubuntu partnering with Novell and Mono, to be honest. Stallman's a pretty harmless annoyance, as annoyances go, and he's more often right than wrong.
I don't think so. $600 million, divided by 30 years, divided by 200 jobs = $100,000 per job per year.
Why not just give $100,000 a year to 200 people and cut out the middleman?
1. I don't think Linux was taking off in 1993. It was pretty raw in those days. Even I wasn't using it :-)
:-)
2. IBM already had its own Unix it had been supporting for decades. It only started supporting Linux because Linux had already started to beat out other Unix OSs.
3. Linus may be a "pragmatist" in some ways, but he still picked the GPL. And it's not like he didn't know of alternatives--he came from the Minix world, and knew about BSD.
4. I think that the guaranteed mutual sharing is exactly what brings all these disparate people together. Of course, not having Theo around also helps
Perhaps you should ponder the possibility that the success and growth of Linux is precisely because of the idealistic licensing.
State how many days of vacation you give, and make it generous.
State how many hours you expect people to work, and make it reasonable.
Those would be the two biggest reasons I'd avoid considering a startup.
Beyond that, have some examples of what you do. Have people there with technical skills so I can talk to them about how the work is done.
Hi, you must be new here.
Total bullshit.
When I help people fix Microsoft Windows so they can get their job done, that doesn't mean I'm pro-Windows. Quite the opposite, I explain to them that the brokenness is typical of Microsoft, and that they should switch.
When I drive someone to a restaurant and they order steak, that doesn't mean I'm pro-meat-eating. I remain a vegetarian. I'm just letting other people make their own choices.
You are falling into the "with me or against me" fallacy of thinking that neutrality is impossible. It isn't. There's a whole spectrum of positions on abortion, not just two polar extremes. There are plenty of us who are somewhere in the middle, and who think other people should be allowed to make their own moral choices within certain limits.
Personally, I give notice, and time it so that the notice period is just enough time to finish things up cleanly and not end up sitting around doing nothing. If you don't want me to do that, and would rather scrabble around trying to clean up the mess caused by my sudden departure, that's your choice as employer.
Except that it's crippled with region coding, which kills my interest in it... at least until someone releases a region-free Bluray player.
There are tons of PS3s in Texas. Took a couple of pictures in Fry's on Monday: http://www.flickr.com/photos/meta404/375546686/
No, the authorities shut down everything, in a massive overreaction to what was obviously an art project or a harmless prank.
My first thought on seeing a big flashing LED display attached to a bridge would be "Ah, MIT students playing again." I'm seriously surprised the Boston police didn't consider that the explanation. Are they unaware of all the previous MIT pranks?
If you regularly have to haul large amounts of stuff, then get a minivan. Safer than an SUV, for the occupants as well as everyone else. More fuel efficient than an SUV. More cargo space than an SUV.