Recent episodes of L&O have at least mentioned the "crime scene unit", though often it's because the geek is wrong, spouting off technobabble to an exasperated detective, or both.
Navy NCIS goes in for the HackerOS (tm) style of computer security. Like most of the detective shows on television, it also doesn't give two shits about civil rights, though, in this case, Gibbs also gets to play the Gitmo/Gulag card.
The application she used was a real sgi application called fsn. No, it's not generic unix, but SGI doesn't get to sell multi-thousand dollar graphics cards if all it supports is "generic" unix.
And why not? A certain dictionary defines philistine as "A smug, ignorant, especially middle-class person who is regarded as being indifferent or antagonistic to artistic and cultural values." It is not incompatible with "excessive concern with being or appearing to be proper, modest, or righteous."
Now, perhaps the ancient Philistines were artistes, smugly displaying their contempt for religious prudery, but words evolve.
It has long been surmised by certain prudish philistines that directors "objectionable content" insert objectionable content only to gain a commercially useful notoriety; if freed of the demands of Mammon, directors would realize their artistic ambitions in a more "family friendly" manner. Allowing consumers to skip gratuitous violence and nudity would therefore damage the commercial value of the film, and must not be allowed.
This is NOT a boilerplate section 8. This is almost certainly Italy. Compare the language of the Italian treaty with the language of the other treaties! The "United Nation Treaty Series" contains many complete texts.
I am currently conducting a more complete search of US MLATs using wget -r and grep.
Many thanks to my brother Michael who initiated this laborius search of treaty provisions..
TREATY WITH THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC ON MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
TREATY DOC. 98-25
1982 U.S.T. LEXIS 225
November 9, 1982, Date-Signed...
ARTICLE 8
Protecting Confidentiality and Restricting Use of Evidence and Information
1. When necessary, the Requested State may require that evidence and information provided, and information derived therefrom, be kept confidential in accordance with stated conditions. Nevertheless, disclosure may be made where necessary as evidence in a public proceeding.
2. If deemed necessary, the Requesting State may request that the application for assistance, the contents of the request and its supporting documents, and the granting of such assistance be kept confidential.
3. The Requesting State shall not use evidence obtained, nor information derived [*16] therefrom, for purposes other than those stated in a request without the prior consent of the Requested State....
Cayman Islands: "Article 8. Taking Testimony and Producing Evidence in the Territory of the Requested Party..."
Libya: (no article 8)
Spain: "Article 8. Takiing Testimony or Evidence in the Requested State..."
Mexico: "Article VIII Limitations..."
Austria: "Article 8. Testimony or Evidence on the Requested State..."
Hungary: "Article 8. Testimony or Evidence in the Requested State..."
Belgium: "Article 8. Procedures Concerning Admissibility of Evidence..."
France: "Article 8. Execution of Requests..."
Switzerland: "Article 8. Applicable Procedure..."
Netherlands: "Article 8. Transferring Persons in Custody to the Requested State..."
United Kingdom: "Article 8. Taking Testimony and Producing Evidence in the Territory of the Requested Party..."
Australia: "Article 8. Taking Evidence in the Requested State..."
Israel: "Article 8. Statements, Testimony or Evidence Before Authorities of the Requested State..."
Turkey: "Article 8. Additional Evidence and Information..."
Philippines: "Article 8. Taking Testimony or Eviedence in the Requested State..." (misspelling is official)
Luxembourg: "Article 8. Testimony, Statements, or Evidence in the Requested State..."
Uruguay: "Article 8. Postponement of or Conditions for Execution..."
South Korea: "Article 8. Testimony or Evidence in the Requested State..."
First, what's with the %ull format specifier in sprintf - is that even a valid format specifier?
Next, why subtract 2 from your buffer length when printing?
Finally, why bother with the "printprime" and sprintf function altogether - is there anything wrong with: if (prime) printf("%llu\n",candidate); Hmm. Perhaps I didn't get much sleep when I typed^W pasted the code into emacs and compiled it on my powermac, but it seems that that piece of code ensures that only x86 machines can properly run the code. All the program did was output a long list of zeros.
I did try converting the program into C++, but massive slowdowns ensued. The eternal dilemma-- correctness or speed.
Often, cluster builders test their systems with a submaximal number of nodes (so as to detect nasty bugs, and so forth). "Project Columbia" actually benched 51870 GFlops. And NEC's SX-8 is still close to vaporware.
Notice how the BlueGene/L folks released a benchmark just barely enough to beat the reigning Earth Simulator. Then, when NASA released its monster, they added nodes in earnest, retaking the "title".
No, I'm simply suggesting that those adhering to single-issue politics actually take the time to research their positions. The DMCA passed the House and Senate with veto-proof majorities. Not that Clinton would care to veto it-- the law itself implements two treaties: WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. Both were signed by Clinton and subsequently ratified by the Senate.
I would like to think that the implementing legislation needn't be as harsh as the DMCA turned out to be. In typical slashdot fashion, my naivety is reinforced by the fact that I have not read the treaties.
I have briefly scanned the text, though, and discovered this gem:
The term of protection granted by this Convention shall be the life of the author and fifty years after his death.
Agreed statements Concerning the WIPO Copyright Treaty, Article 7
The DMCA is not an argument for geeks to vote Republican. It's an argument for geeks to vote for candidates that support some sanity in Copyright law. In some cases, those candidates may even be Democrats.
In 2003, Reps. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), Spencer Bachus (R-AL), Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) and John Doolittle (R-Calif.) introduced HR 107: Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act of 2003. Perhaps you might donate to their campaigns, assuming, of course, that the bill met with your satisfaction. I think the bill died in committee, though.
Gentlemen, we have an opportunity to finally bring this war to a satisfactory conclusion. We have recently been apprised that our enemy's Department of Agriculture has unwisely invested in assets that appear to violate the intellectual property of Monsanto, until now a neutral power in this struggle of ours. But now, we can persuade Monsanto that their intellectual property has been trespassed upon, and we have faith that they will now commit their Intellectual Property division to our now mutual struggle. The end of the war is in sight!
It's actually been a long time since someone released a mac game (commercially) that used the mac interface. Koei used to do it, but now, game designers redesign the game interface for every game, usually sacrificing readability in the process.
Of course, now that Apple's redesigned the widget set, the Aqua controls might be a tad intrusive,
It's traditional to cite such things. It often makes for a stronger argument, assuming the facts support it.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (Public Law 105-304) was sponsored in the House by a Howard Coble, a republican (NC-6th). In the senate, it was sponsored by Orrin Hatch, also a Republican (UT).
The Democrats extended copyrights.
The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (Public Law 105-298) was also sponsored by Orrin Hatch. It was named for a Republican congressman. In the House, it was sponsored by, (get this!) Howard Coble of North Carolina.
Yeah yeah, some Democrats are listed as cosponsors. And both bills did garner the votes of both Republicans and Democrats. Details, details.
Maria Teresa Thierstein Simoes-Ferreira married John Heinz III in 1966. John Heinz's family owned large shares of the HJ Heinz ketchup company, but his father (Jack Heinz) was the last to play an active role in management. In the late 1980s, the family diversified their assets, and divested themselves of most of their HJ Heinz shares.
John Heinz entered politics in 1971 when he successfully ran for the House, (as a Republican.) In 1976, he entered the Senate, and served until his death in 1991. Subsequently, Theresa Heinz inherited much of John Heinz's fortune, the remainder devolving to various charitable foundations and family trusts.
In 1995, Theresa Heinz married Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.
There's a rival site that attempts to use "meta analysis" techniques to crack that stubborn +/-3% margin of error. I'm not all that well versed in statistics, so I can't comment with any degree of reliability, but it might be worth a look.
Predicted median with undecideds: Kerry 280 EV, Bush 258 EV Median outcome, decided voters only: Kerry 252 EV, Bush 286 EV
The author of the site, Sam Wang, has published some of his methodology in the form of a matlab/octave script.
Interesting. This article rapidly approaches archival status, though, and further comments might not be possible.
It's probably not going to possible to full delineate Raskin's contributions until (and unless) the full "Book of Macintosh" is published. Perhaps the stanford archive might release more materials.
The original subthread discussed the importance of a reliable and stable kernel to the user interface. Others disagreed, stating that the kernel has nothing to do with user interface.
I brought up Raskin because he contributed a number of rather important ideas to how a user might interact with his Macintosh design, but many of those ideas were pretty abstract, and don't fit into the rather limited concept of "user interface" as understood by most slashdotters: the Mac's GUI was designed by Hertzfeld and Atkinson, not by Raskin.
Perhaps Hertzfeld's ego is large. However, one should note Raskin's reaction to the original macintosh.
-- I preferred trackballs and tablets to the mouse, and I had experimental evidence favoring those devices-- people have taken that to mean I didn't want to have a graphic input device, which I considered absolutely essential. But I also thought it was smart not to force people to use the graphic input device unnecessarily. Bill Atkinson had a different dream, which was to do everything graphically, and never touch the keyboard, which is, unfortunately, impossible. In my scheme you'd use the graphic input device when you need graphics, and otherwise you'd use the keyboard, which is how I was designing it. After I left that was largely thrown out, and it became this thing-- I call it a "hand to mouse existence"-- where you move back and forth [demonstrates] much too much.
I was not really pleased with the way the Mac came out in terms of ease of use. I was certainly pleased with the attractive appearance of the interface, but in terms of usability it was far inferior-- though one can only guess-- to what would have come out had I been left in charge of the project. Would it have sold as well, or better? We'll never know. I can't answer that question. But it certainly would have been easier to use. But as such, even with what I considered some downgrading of the quality of the interface, it was still far better than anything else out there at the time. I figure that even if I had done no more than orient Apple and the Macintosh project to being user interface-oriented, rather than hardware oriented, that would have been a significant achievement. That some of the actual widgets and things that I designed also got through is nice, too.
Raskin's design choices lost out to Atkinson's. Atkinson's quirky interface, and the consequent emphasis on the mouse, remains present in MacOSX. Raskin's own contribution is "dated and irrelevant", as he puts it.
It may prove enlightening to check that paper for updates-- as the november 8 deadline approaches, particularly competitive teams may submit new scores as they jockey for position.
Slashdot may have announced the news at 10:45, but this particularly silly post of mine demonstrates, I had the news 6 and half hours early, from Dongara's paper.
I don't know how much Dell's Tungsten cluster cost but those guys went online last year and got ranked #4 (just behind this Mac cluster) and they're #5 or something now. These bozos have spent a year fscking around with upgrades and from the theoretical #3 (as they were taken out since the cluster couldn't enter production) will have dropped to #7 or more in the next ranking.... My my. you're hostile.
Tungsten is a 9.8 TFlop machine. It's interesting, but it's not as powerful as the 12.5 TFlop VT machine. I don't see the point of having a standard Intel+GigE+Linux cluster "standard." Standards promote complacency.
Besides, 10 TFlop computers are old hat. NASA has a 52 TFlop (Rpeak) monster called "Project Columbia." It looks like BlueGene's designers might just have to settle for a #2 rating after all. Perhaps they have yet to release their final benchmark?
What's this about fibre channel? System X uses Infiniband as its primary communications fabric.
Infiniband for communications fabric
twenty-four 96-port switches with 10/20 Gb fabric (depending on duplex)
fat-tree topology
choke point is the bus: it is faster to send data across the room than the motherboard. Half the nodes can talk to the other half at the same time: 1.25GB/s
I don't think Apple deserves any of the credit. They made the case for the xServe? and the OS.. nothing hardware. Once again its an IBM feat. The Apple zealots on here are too much. They make Linux zealots look intelligent.
Thank you. Thank you. All of my friends laughed at me when I said I didn't need a motherboard-- I could save a bundle instead and just use a breadboard.
Jef did not want to incorporate what became the two most definitive aspects of Macintosh technology - the Motorola 68000 microprocessor and the mouse pointing device. Jef preferred the 6809, a cheaper but weaker processor which only had 16 bits of address space and would have been obsolete in just a year or two, since it couldn't address more than 64Kbytes. He was dead set against the mouse as well, preferring dedicated meta-keys called "leap keys" to do the pointing. He became increasingly alienated from the team, eventually leaving entirely in the summer of 1981, when we were still just getting started, and the final product utilitized very few of the ideas in the Book of Macintosh. In fact, if the name of the project had changed after Steve took over in January 1981, and it almost did (see Bicycle), there wouldn't be much reason to correlate it with his ideas at all.
You're missing the point. Not one of these things has anything to do with the user interface. User experience, yes, but the user interface is a subset of the overall user experience that these technical matters have nothing to do with.
Jeff Raskin left the Macintosh project early on. About the only thing he contributed to the Mac's design was his insistence on a modeless interface. But according to your strict semantic construction, he didn't help design a man machine interface-- he only contributed to the "user experience".
The Macintosh was successful in part because all applications, even the games, used a consistent interface. You'd probably relegate that "consistency" element to the "user experience" ghetto. It's a common mistake--many creators of poorly designed applications use the common elements of various widget sets in new and exciting ways, forgetting that it is the consistency of the interface and not the mere presence of various widgets that make for a usable program.
But virtual memory, multitasking, and protected memory ultimately have quite a lot to do with the user interface. Virtual memory allows a user to run a great many programs at once, without having to worry too much about cleaning up-- no need to close the web browser before writing a letter; no need to worry about memory fragmentation.
Protected memory ensures that if a misbehaving program crashes, the entire system isn't brought to a screaming halt. It's annoying when one's word processor crashes while one is writing a letter. It's even more annoying when the entire system is brought down as well, necessitating a lengthy reboot cycle. A user of a protected memory system need not worry about running finicky programs in the background, or discovering that an application really doesn't like being run on Tuesdays or months ending with "r"-- a program crash need not bring everything on the computer to a screeching halt.
As for multitasking-- the macs used to feature cooperative multitasking-- wherein each program would voluntarily give up control of the system. I suppose this might have been a boon for running a Real-Time Application, but many programs proved to be resource hogs. Ultimately, if one is running multiple programs at once, each with the same degree of urgency, it's better to let the operating system handle prioritizing time-slicing.
Now, some might still argue that puny humans are only capable of doing one thing at a time, and that it would be better to focus one's efforts on a single-tasking operating system-- but I believe most people are familiar with the practice of letting one's email client fetch mail in the background while responding to silly slashdot posts.
Slashdot Mirror
And why do none of the CSI techs never wear headcover while leaning over a crime scene looking for evidence; hairs, dandruff, etc?
It's a common site on modern British police procedurals-- everybody wears disposable white bunny suits at a crime scene.
Recent episodes of L&O have at least mentioned the "crime scene unit", though often it's because the geek is wrong, spouting off technobabble to an exasperated detective, or both.
Navy NCIS goes in for the HackerOS (tm) style of computer security. Like most of the detective shows on television, it also doesn't give two shits about civil rights, though, in this case, Gibbs also gets to play the Gitmo/Gulag card.
The application she used was a real sgi application called fsn. No, it's not generic unix, but SGI doesn't get to sell multi-thousand dollar graphics cards if all it supports is "generic" unix.
And why not? A certain dictionary defines philistine as "A smug, ignorant, especially middle-class person who is regarded as being indifferent or antagonistic to artistic and cultural values." It is not incompatible with "excessive concern with being or appearing to be proper, modest, or righteous."
Now, perhaps the ancient Philistines were artistes, smugly displaying their contempt for religious prudery, but words evolve.
It has long been surmised by certain prudish philistines that directors "objectionable content" insert objectionable content only to gain a commercially useful notoriety; if freed of the demands of Mammon, directors would realize their artistic ambitions in a more "family friendly" manner. Allowing consumers to skip gratuitous violence and nudity would therefore damage the commercial value of the film, and must not be allowed.
This is NOT a boilerplate section 8. This is almost certainly Italy. Compare the language of the Italian treaty with the language of the other treaties! The "United Nation Treaty Series" contains many complete texts.
...
...
I am currently conducting a more complete search of US MLATs using wget -r and grep.
Many thanks to my brother Michael who initiated this laborius search of treaty provisions..
TREATY WITH THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC ON MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
TREATY DOC. 98-25
1982 U.S.T. LEXIS 225
November 9, 1982, Date-Signed
ARTICLE 8
Protecting Confidentiality and Restricting Use of Evidence and Information
1. When necessary, the Requested State may require that evidence and information provided, and information derived therefrom, be kept confidential in accordance with stated conditions. Nevertheless, disclosure may be made where necessary as evidence in a public proceeding.
2. If deemed necessary, the Requesting State may request that the application for assistance, the contents of the request and its supporting documents, and the granting of such assistance be kept confidential.
3. The Requesting State shall not use evidence obtained, nor information derived [*16] therefrom, for purposes other than those stated in a request without the prior consent of the Requested State.
Cayman Islands: "Article 8. Taking Testimony and Producing Evidence in the Territory of the Requested Party..."
Libya: (no article 8)
Spain: "Article 8. Takiing Testimony or Evidence in the Requested State..."
Mexico: "Article VIII Limitations..."
Austria: "Article 8. Testimony or Evidence on the Requested State..."
Hungary: "Article 8. Testimony or Evidence in the Requested State..."
Belgium: "Article 8. Procedures Concerning Admissibility of Evidence..."
France: "Article 8. Execution of Requests..."
Switzerland: "Article 8. Applicable Procedure..."
Netherlands: "Article 8. Transferring Persons in Custody to the Requested State..."
United Kingdom: "Article 8. Taking Testimony and Producing Evidence in the Territory of the Requested Party..."
Australia: "Article 8. Taking Evidence in the Requested State..."
Israel: "Article 8. Statements, Testimony or Evidence Before Authorities of the Requested State..."
Turkey: "Article 8. Additional Evidence and Information..."
Philippines: "Article 8. Taking Testimony or Eviedence in the Requested State..." (misspelling is official)
Luxembourg: "Article 8. Testimony, Statements, or Evidence in the Requested State..."
Uruguay: "Article 8. Postponement of or Conditions for Execution..."
South Korea: "Article 8. Testimony or Evidence in the Requested State..."
First, what's with the %ull format specifier in sprintf - is that even a valid format specifier?
Next, why subtract 2 from your buffer length when printing?
Finally, why bother with the "printprime" and sprintf function altogether - is there anything wrong with:
if (prime) printf("%llu\n",candidate);
Hmm. Perhaps I didn't get much sleep when I typed^W pasted the code into emacs and compiled it on my powermac, but it seems that that piece of code ensures that only x86 machines can properly run the code. All the program did was output a long list of zeros.
I did try converting the program into C++, but massive slowdowns ensued. The eternal dilemma-- correctness or speed.
Often, cluster builders test their systems with a submaximal number of nodes (so as to detect nasty bugs, and so forth). "Project Columbia" actually benched 51870 GFlops. And NEC's SX-8 is still close to vaporware.
Notice how the BlueGene/L folks released a benchmark just barely enough to beat the reigning Earth Simulator. Then, when NASA released its monster, they added nodes in earnest, retaking the "title".
I would like to think that the implementing legislation needn't be as harsh as the DMCA turned out to be. In typical slashdot fashion, my naivety is reinforced by the fact that I have not read the treaties.
I have briefly scanned the text, though, and discovered this gem:
Agreed statements Concerning the WIPO Copyright Treaty, Article 7
The DMCA is not an argument for geeks to vote Republican. It's an argument for geeks to vote for candidates that support some sanity in Copyright law. In some cases, those candidates may even be Democrats.
In 2003, Reps. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), Spencer Bachus (R-AL), Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) and John Doolittle (R-Calif.) introduced HR 107: Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act of 2003. Perhaps you might donate to their campaigns, assuming, of course, that the bill met with your satisfaction. I think the bill died in committee, though.
Gentlemen, we have an opportunity to finally bring this war to a satisfactory conclusion. We have recently been apprised that our enemy's Department of Agriculture has unwisely invested in assets that appear to violate the intellectual property of Monsanto, until now a neutral power in this struggle of ours. But now, we can persuade Monsanto that their intellectual property has been trespassed upon, and we have faith that they will now commit their Intellectual Property division to our now mutual struggle. The end of the war is in sight!
It's actually been a long time since someone released a mac game (commercially) that used the mac interface. Koei used to do it, but now, game designers redesign the game interface for every game, usually sacrificing readability in the process.
Of course, now that Apple's redesigned the widget set, the Aqua controls might be a tad intrusive,
Let's make this clear:
The Democrats created the DMCA.
It's traditional to cite such things. It often makes for a stronger argument, assuming the facts support it.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (Public Law 105-304) was sponsored in the House by a Howard Coble, a republican (NC-6th). In the senate, it was sponsored by Orrin Hatch, also a Republican (UT).
The Democrats extended copyrights.
The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (Public Law 105-298) was also sponsored by Orrin Hatch. It was named for a Republican congressman. In the House, it was sponsored by, (get this!) Howard Coble of North Carolina.
Yeah yeah, some Democrats are listed as cosponsors. And both bills did garner the votes of both Republicans and Democrats. Details, details.
Not that it's much on topic. but here goes...
Maria Teresa Thierstein Simoes-Ferreira married John Heinz III in 1966. John Heinz's family owned large shares of the HJ Heinz ketchup company, but his father (Jack Heinz) was the last to play an active role in management. In the late 1980s, the family diversified their assets, and divested themselves of most of their HJ Heinz shares.
John Heinz entered politics in 1971 when he successfully ran for the House, (as a Republican.) In 1976, he entered the Senate, and served until his death in 1991. Subsequently, Theresa Heinz inherited much of John Heinz's fortune, the remainder devolving to various charitable foundations and family trusts.
In 1995, Theresa Heinz married Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.
There's a rival site that attempts to use "meta analysis" techniques to crack that stubborn +/-3% margin of error. I'm not all that well versed in statistics, so I can't comment with any degree of reliability, but it might be worth a look.
Predicted median with undecideds: Kerry 280 EV, Bush 258 EV
Median outcome, decided voters only: Kerry 252 EV, Bush 286 EV
The author of the site, Sam Wang, has published some of his methodology in the form of a matlab/octave script.
Interesting. This article rapidly approaches archival status, though, and further comments might not be possible.
It's probably not going to possible to full delineate Raskin's contributions until (and unless) the full "Book of Macintosh" is published. Perhaps the stanford archive might release more materials.
The original subthread discussed the importance of a reliable and stable kernel to the user interface. Others disagreed, stating that the kernel has nothing to do with user interface.
I brought up Raskin because he contributed a number of rather important ideas to how a user might interact with his Macintosh design, but many of those ideas were pretty abstract, and don't fit into the rather limited concept of "user interface" as understood by most slashdotters: the Mac's GUI was designed by Hertzfeld and Atkinson, not by Raskin.
Bookmaking is perfectly legal in Britain.
It may prove enlightening to check that paper for updates-- as the november 8 deadline approaches, particularly competitive teams may submit new scores as they jockey for position.
Slashdot may have announced the news at 10:45, but this particularly silly post of mine demonstrates, I had the news 6 and half hours early, from Dongara's paper.
I don't know how much Dell's Tungsten cluster cost but those guys went online last year and got ranked #4 (just behind this Mac cluster) and they're #5 or something now. These bozos have spent a year fscking around with upgrades and from the theoretical #3 (as they were taken out since the cluster couldn't enter production) will have dropped to #7 or more in the next ranking....
My my. you're hostile.
Tungsten is a 9.8 TFlop machine. It's interesting, but it's not as powerful as the 12.5 TFlop VT machine. I don't see the point of having a standard Intel+GigE+Linux cluster "standard." Standards promote complacency.
Besides, 10 TFlop computers are old hat. NASA has a 52 TFlop (Rpeak) monster called "Project Columbia." It looks like BlueGene's designers might just have to settle for a #2 rating after all. Perhaps they have yet to release their final benchmark?
source
I don't think Apple deserves any of the credit. They made the case for the xServe? and the OS .. nothing hardware. Once again its an IBM feat. The Apple zealots on here are too much. They make Linux zealots look intelligent.
Thank you. Thank you. All of my friends laughed at me when I said I didn't need a motherboard-- I could save a bundle instead and just use a breadboard.
You're missing the point. Not one of these things has anything to do with the user interface. User experience, yes, but the user interface is a subset of the overall user experience that these technical matters have nothing to do with.
Jeff Raskin left the Macintosh project early on. About the only thing he contributed to the Mac's design was his insistence on a modeless interface. But according to your strict semantic construction, he didn't help design a man machine interface-- he only contributed to the "user experience".
The Macintosh was successful in part because all applications, even the games, used a consistent interface. You'd probably relegate that "consistency" element to the "user experience" ghetto. It's a common mistake--many creators of poorly designed applications use the common elements of various widget sets in new and exciting ways, forgetting that it is the consistency of the interface and not the mere presence of various widgets that make for a usable program.
But virtual memory, multitasking, and protected memory ultimately have quite a lot to do with the user interface. Virtual memory allows a user to run a great many programs at once, without having to worry too much about cleaning up-- no need to close the web browser before writing a letter; no need to worry about memory fragmentation.
Protected memory ensures that if a misbehaving program crashes, the entire system isn't brought to a screaming halt. It's annoying when one's word processor crashes while one is writing a letter. It's even more annoying when the entire system is brought down as well, necessitating a lengthy reboot cycle. A user of a protected memory system need not worry about running finicky programs in the background, or discovering that an application really doesn't like being run on Tuesdays or months ending with "r"-- a program crash need not bring everything on the computer to a screeching halt.
As for multitasking-- the macs used to feature cooperative multitasking-- wherein each program would voluntarily give up control of the system. I suppose this might have been a boon for running a Real-Time Application, but many programs proved to be resource hogs. Ultimately, if one is running multiple programs at once, each with the same degree of urgency, it's better to let the operating system handle prioritizing time-slicing.
Now, some might still argue that puny humans are only capable of doing one thing at a time, and that it would be better to focus one's efforts on a single-tasking operating system-- but I believe most people are familiar with the practice of letting one's email client fetch mail in the background while responding to silly slashdot posts.