I would have to say vis a vis the Photoshop question: the Mac is great for it. Colour correction is a big bonus, and MacOS is set up to implement it as cleanly as possible. It is built from the OS up. Add the fact that Adobe started on the Mac and only the Mac for its first few years and the answer becomes obvious: Adobe is dedicated to the Mac platform, The users are dedicated to Photoshop, so it is reasonable to assume the users have become dedicated to MacOs through the use of Photoshop. Rinse and Repeat. This is a good reason to always have a market for Apple so long as Adobe is around. I don't see Adobe having any problems in the near future in keeping afloat.
Yeah, didn't M$FT try to develop a little fucked format that was unfucked within a week? They are proponents of SDMI and watermarked music.
Then again, I cannot see how napster is going to make money.. perhaps Banner ads?
buahahahahahhaha
*snort* sorry.. anyhoo, the whole offspring/Napster logo thing is a trademark, not a copyright, but that must've been obvious to everyone but the author.
Also, Napster will not connect a new user from anything but its own client. I had to DL Napster (2.some megs opposed to 150k for gnapster blech) and fill in some new Demographics fields. I wonder if this is how they make money: by selling your demographics? Perhaps that is the plan. Get demographics, and match them to song titles. Sell them to record companies.
If so, they are going to be surprised by the results, I'd wager, what with everyone grabbing remixes and parodies, that the numbers won't reflect EmptyVee.
Good point AC. That score of 12.0 on grade level points to an inability to write for the web. This medium does not tolerate boredom in its readers. If the colum is full screen, it becomes quite easy to get lost in a typical Katz article. Even what I am writing now, in a 40 column window becomes too much when viewed at full screen. Katz seems to have written more for "the Atlantic Monthly" or "Wired" than for Slashdot. It's not really his fault -- he writes well enough, but the lack of technical readability in this article makes the prospect of reading it rather uninviting. Not only for most standard documents should you write at 7.0 or 8.0 grade level, but you should also "chunk up" your story to keep attention on the web. Too bad the format of Slashdot is rather lacking in this respect.
Red Hat isn't a distro for the people who want the latest and greatest updates as soon as possible. It's a distro for those who require a very tested solution.
Perhaps you can tell us what happens every ".0" release then. From what I recall, there was once an expression in reference to RedHat: "wait for the.1".
It's no a troll, it's the truth. I hated the Alpha RedHat distro.. Sig 11 city on the install
Re:Bell Labs is not a disinterested party.
on
The History of UNIX
·
· Score: 1
Great, now I have to pull out 'ol operation Mindcrime again. It's my "sail away" (cartmann)..
I think it is interesting to see the "baby bells" becoming their parents again. Rather scary. However, the FCC didn't split them up, so there was no rule about getting back together.
I really wouldn't see why a unified phone system would be too bad. At least I'd have DSL by now (or 2 years ago) but I don't want another BT after hearing what those poor blokes in UK have to go through. Pity that, and the whole BBC thing. But at least BBC has some quality programming, and a good website.
In fact, This page will crash netscape 4.7x for some reason. It has an identical structure to the rest of the site, but unless you turn css off, it crashes NS. Strangest damn thing.
OK, I didn't notice they were under "32 bit microprocessors" at Motorola's site. They mention the 64 bit data path, but that is not the measure of a chip. Even the Power3 chip is 32 bit which makes me think that perhaps it's fine if the Motorola 7400 is only 32 bit. So is everything else on that end, so it's all good. At least it is still RISC, even though the intel clones have been high in numbers. Now a 2.4 ghz Alpha is looking tastier and tastier.
Then again, perhaps we can put a 64 bit sticker on it to make it faster.
This homepage has the name of some cards you may try. It also details some linux stuff, but most of that should work out of the box with windows. BSD should support it as well somewhere.
I was not aware of this problem. Perhaps they should rethink the terms of the agreement to allow IBM to use the G3/G4 in RS/6000 systems just so they can trounce the supercomputer field once again. Power3 chips aren't bad though, and I doubt Apple won't use those anytime soon (note: these are not the same as g3 to those who don't know..) since the g4 is already the better chip. I can understand IBM's reluctance to produce though. The have no motivator from their own research than money.
You are correct, of course, but the point of the matter is they pretty much invented USB as well. USB is an extension of the ADB connector. So they should get even more cred than they do!
You may want to run cable to that iMac. The AirPort module is $300. If you had an iBook or powerbook, the cost becomes more justifyable. If you have a few newer Macs it is a good solution as well. You could put 11mbps wavelan cards on your pcs, and it would justify the airport as well.
I can see how a 10 frame difference may be noticable, but.1? That is more along the lines of wasting you time. Don't get me wrong -- I've not been impressed with an ATi chipset yet.. Then again, they aren't that bad if all you do is Photoshop work. Apple picked the Rage 128 Pro for its color correction ability, and not it's Quake framerate. Life, and design firms and small businesses run on the 2D specs, not the 3D. The card may suck, but it fits the bill at the right price.
"They are running a chipset that is not Intel or even AMD. It is RISC, and it is a 64 Bit chip"
For starters, a chipset is/are the ASIC(s) that interface the MPU to the rest of the system, not the MPU itself so it cannot be RISC. Secondly the G4 is not a 64 bit processor.
I realise you may be speaking about the AMD or Intel chips. Please pardon my structure. Otherwise:
I'm certain you'd post that under your actual user name so motorola can sue you for libel.
I've seen Macs wig out from time to time, and Yes, that is a function of their OS, and yes, there is a case for crippling in the past, but tell me this: When you go from a Pentium II to a Pentium IV, do you have to chang motherboards. If you are like most people, yes, because you have to either purchase a new machine (consumer) or a new motherboard due to insufficient clocking options. If you want to upgrade to a new Athlon, it's a new mobo or system as well. Honestly, upgradability is really not an issue to me personally, as when I upgrade, it's usually at the point where I go AT->ATX or Pentium -> PII -> PIV or ->Athlon anyways. Even new ram standards puts you in a fix.
I ask you this: do you really use a Macintosh and experience crashes, or do you go by the "word" of people on the net? To me at work, crashes are a common thing on my Windows machine. Crashes at home on windows or linux are quite uncommon. Could it then be the OS (fixable) not the processor (Motorola, tested no matter what you think.. er FUD about it)? Have you thought of that, or is it "mac bad mac bad" to your mind.
BTW: this "untested" no R&D processor also runs RS/6000 systems with little difficulty. I doubt IBM would go for the "no R&D" line you espouse.
The NeXT cube failed because it was $9000+, was a lot more proprietary than current Macs, and was set for the busines market. They didn't bite. The maybe sold a total of 1,000 in their entire existence. Current Macs have USB/Firewire for pretty much everything, making them very compatible with modern "non-legacy" PCs that Intel, by the way, is pushing.
I thought people bought iMacs because they wanted a simple, elegant system that surfs the web and looks cute. I didn't know they were going to hot-rod it. The Wintel side and the Apple side of the personal computer coin are quite different. iMacs are more like the sub-$1000 PCs, yet the bottom is surprisingly functional out of the box, and the top of the line is good for digital video. If you are serious about keeping up, buy a G4 system, and chip it up with a third party kit when they become available. They are definite long-term systems, and I think they will be around for a long while.
I am a PC weenie too, but I think some people are really giving Apple an unfair shake in not catching up on facts. As far as untested hardware, and Apple staying in a "safe zone" I say Phooey.
They are running a chipset that is not Intel or even AMD. It is RISC, and it is a 64 Bit chip.
They were early complete adopters of both firewire and USB.
They have actually made computers stand out. While not a technological limb, it is one the walked out on and stood proud. The real slow-pokes are in the wintel clone market.
Not only do they have these foreign Motorola chips putting them in a niche, they also now have 2 models with Multiple Processors as standard systems. I see very little companies in the WT market offering this.
As for Jobs, he is a jerk that gets things done. It is highly doubtful that he "spanked" ATi other than omitting them from the keynote. The radeons will not be ready next month. End of story.
That said, I can see where Apple is falling behind. The need to:
Run the system bus at 133MHz
Light a fire under IBM and Motorola. (Think G4e @ 600mhz)
Get OSX out the door to take advantage of the MP
Even this proprietary connection can be good, save for the fact Apple will have a solution "next month" for those who just want to buy a monitor for an older G3 or G4. It is all relative. It really is apples and oranges
I once read that the human persistence of vision is equal to 26 frames / second. In the case of a FPS that gets.1 fps with one card than another when both rates are above 60fps, there is no perceived difference. Benchmark numbers are mental masturbation. Features are what it's all about.
Besides, who needs to run Shogo at 1600x1200? I'd be damned if I've ever played a game over 800x600.. after that point, all the detail in the world wouldn't matter... and 10 frames less than the TNT2 still isn't that big a deal. It is still 14 frames over Persistence of Vision.
The Rage 128 Pro may be bad at 3D, but it is good at the staple of the Macintosh in the first place -- Photoshop and other 2D applications. It is pretty much a Business line card with better than normal 2D performance. It is time for something better, though. I seriously doubt Jobs was spanking them. The Radeons will not be available until September. The cubes are before then. He may have intended to speak about the Radeon and reniged, but I doubt they had a system to demonstrate with the radeon.
The thing I want to know is why couldn't Apple just say to ATI, "We need x amount of radeons" and ATI would make them. There, they didn't need to tell ATI anything about the cube. They simply needed to order the cards.
Besides, didn't ATI announce their Radeon was coming out in September? Apple would not be able to put them in cubes shipping in August then, would they?
There is a very small core taking care of the software. A lot of us are users who at the end of the day working with computers, perhaps just want a free OS to check mail and surf the web. For the most part we don't want to put in another 8 hours debugging un-mapped, un-documented, and un-planned code. For the most part we run the most "stabile" version in a program, collected by a package tool.
Every once in a while we may compile something. But for the most part, we have neither the time, nor the inclination to code. This may explain the popularity of Netscape 4.x, AND the lack of programmers for Mozilla. A lack of eyeballs is due to both the "works good enough" mentality from years of commercial OS use, and the above mentioned apathy.
If you complain, then fix it. If you can't fix it, find someone who can, or email the primary author. If they give a nasty response, then use another program. This is certainly possible with 10 ICQ programs, 5 Napster clones, 3 Gnutella clients, and 15+ browsers. There is your freedom.
This is not the case. We are losing money every minute our sponsor's ads are not being shown, and we are losing credibility every time a reader sees a 404 error. Please understand the trouble we're having. Thank you,
Funny, their ads look fine to me... and since when do ads make more money back than you spend in ISP fees for a year? I'd like to know, because I'd put ads on my site if I thought it would generate revenue.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and Apple only makes iMacs. Re-read the article.
I would have to say vis a vis the Photoshop question: the Mac is great for it. Colour correction is a big bonus, and MacOS is set up to implement it as cleanly as possible. It is built from the OS up. Add the fact that Adobe started on the Mac and only the Mac for its first few years and the answer becomes obvious: Adobe is dedicated to the Mac platform, The users are dedicated to Photoshop, so it is reasonable to assume the users have become dedicated to MacOs through the use of Photoshop. Rinse and Repeat. This is a good reason to always have a market for Apple so long as Adobe is around. I don't see Adobe having any problems in the near future in keeping afloat.
Yeah, didn't M$FT try to develop a little fucked format that was unfucked within a week? They are proponents of SDMI and watermarked music.
Then again, I cannot see how napster is going to make money.. perhaps Banner ads?
buahahahahahhaha
*snort* sorry.. anyhoo, the whole offspring/Napster logo thing is a trademark, not a copyright, but that must've been obvious to everyone but the author.
Also, Napster will not connect a new user from anything but its own client. I had to DL Napster (2.some megs opposed to 150k for gnapster blech) and fill in some new Demographics fields. I wonder if this is how they make money: by selling your demographics? Perhaps that is the plan. Get demographics, and match them to song titles. Sell them to record companies.
If so, they are going to be surprised by the results, I'd wager, what with everyone grabbing remixes and parodies, that the numbers won't reflect EmptyVee.
good.
Good point AC. That score of 12.0 on grade level points to an inability to write for the web. This medium does not tolerate boredom in its readers. If the colum is full screen, it becomes quite easy to get lost in a typical Katz article. Even what I am writing now, in a 40 column window becomes too much when viewed at full screen. Katz seems to have written more for "the Atlantic Monthly" or "Wired" than for Slashdot. It's not really his fault -- he writes well enough, but the lack of technical readability in this article makes the prospect of reading it rather uninviting. Not only for most standard documents should you write at 7.0 or 8.0 grade level, but you should also "chunk up" your story to keep attention on the web. Too bad the format of Slashdot is rather lacking in this respect.
Hrm, I thought it was funny.. guess not many people watched Bubblegum Crisis...
Red Hat isn't a distro for the people who want the latest and greatest updates as soon as possible. It's a distro for those who require a very tested solution.
Perhaps you can tell us what happens every ".0" release then. From what I recall, there was once an expression in reference to RedHat: "wait for the .1".
It's no a troll, it's the truth. I hated the Alpha RedHat distro.. Sig 11 city on the install
Great, now I have to pull out 'ol operation Mindcrime again. It's my "sail away" (cartmann)..
I think it is interesting to see the "baby bells" becoming their parents again. Rather scary. However, the FCC didn't split them up, so there was no rule about getting back together.
I really wouldn't see why a unified phone system would be too bad. At least I'd have DSL by now (or 2 years ago) but I don't want another BT after hearing what those poor blokes in UK have to go through. Pity that, and the whole BBC thing. But at least BBC has some quality programming, and a good website.
In fact, This page will crash netscape 4.7x for some reason. It has an identical structure to the rest of the site, but unless you turn css off, it crashes NS. Strangest damn thing.
OK, I didn't notice they were under "32 bit microprocessors" at Motorola's site. They mention the 64 bit data path, but that is not the measure of a chip. Even the Power3 chip is 32 bit which makes me think that perhaps it's fine if the Motorola 7400 is only 32 bit. So is everything else on that end, so it's all good. At least it is still RISC, even though the intel clones have been high in numbers. Now a 2.4 ghz Alpha is looking tastier and tastier.
Then again, perhaps we can put a 64 bit sticker on it to make it faster.
This homepage has the name of some cards you may try. It also details some linux stuff, but most of that should work out of the box with windows. BSD should support it as well somewhere.
I was not aware of this problem. Perhaps they should rethink the terms of the agreement to allow IBM to use the G3/G4 in RS/6000 systems just so they can trounce the supercomputer field once again. Power3 chips aren't bad though, and I doubt Apple won't use those anytime soon (note: these are not the same as g3 to those who don't know..) since the g4 is already the better chip. I can understand IBM's reluctance to produce though. The have no motivator from their own research than money.
You are correct, of course, but the point of the matter is they pretty much invented USB as well. USB is an extension of the ADB connector. So they should get even more cred than they do!
You may want to run cable to that iMac. The AirPort module is $300. If you had an iBook or powerbook, the cost becomes more justifyable. If you have a few newer Macs it is a good solution as well. You could put 11mbps wavelan cards on your pcs, and it would justify the airport as well.
I can see how a 10 frame difference may be noticable, but .1? That is more along the lines of wasting you time. Don't get me wrong -- I've not been impressed with an ATi chipset yet.. Then again, they aren't that bad if all you do is Photoshop work. Apple picked the Rage 128 Pro for its color correction ability, and not it's Quake framerate. Life, and design firms and small businesses run on the 2D specs, not the 3D. The card may suck, but it fits the bill at the right price.
I realise you may be speaking about the AMD or Intel chips. Please pardon my structure. Otherwise:
From the Motorola spec sheet:
So the data bus is 64 bit, does this not make the chip 64 bit? If not, please correct me.
I'm certain you'd post that under your actual user name so motorola can sue you for libel.
I've seen Macs wig out from time to time, and Yes, that is a function of their OS, and yes, there is a case for crippling in the past, but tell me this: When you go from a Pentium II to a Pentium IV, do you have to chang motherboards. If you are like most people, yes, because you have to either purchase a new machine (consumer) or a new motherboard due to insufficient clocking options. If you want to upgrade to a new Athlon, it's a new mobo or system as well. Honestly, upgradability is really not an issue to me personally, as when I upgrade, it's usually at the point where I go AT->ATX or Pentium -> PII -> PIV or ->Athlon anyways. Even new ram standards puts you in a fix.
I ask you this: do you really use a Macintosh and experience crashes, or do you go by the "word" of people on the net? To me at work, crashes are a common thing on my Windows machine. Crashes at home on windows or linux are quite uncommon. Could it then be the OS (fixable) not the processor (Motorola, tested no matter what you think.. er FUD about it)? Have you thought of that, or is it "mac bad mac bad" to your mind.
BTW: this "untested" no R&D processor also runs RS/6000 systems with little difficulty. I doubt IBM would go for the "no R&D" line you espouse.
The NeXT cube failed because it was $9000+, was a lot more proprietary than current Macs, and was set for the busines market. They didn't bite. The maybe sold a total of 1,000 in their entire existence. Current Macs have USB/Firewire for pretty much everything, making them very compatible with modern "non-legacy" PCs that Intel, by the way, is pushing.
I thought people bought iMacs because they wanted a simple, elegant system that surfs the web and looks cute. I didn't know they were going to hot-rod it. The Wintel side and the Apple side of the personal computer coin are quite different. iMacs are more like the sub-$1000 PCs, yet the bottom is surprisingly functional out of the box, and the top of the line is good for digital video. If you are serious about keeping up, buy a G4 system, and chip it up with a third party kit when they become available. They are definite long-term systems, and I think they will be around for a long while.
I am a PC weenie too, but I think some people are really giving Apple an unfair shake in not catching up on facts. As far as untested hardware, and Apple staying in a "safe zone" I say Phooey.
As for Jobs, he is a jerk that gets things done. It is highly doubtful that he "spanked" ATi other than omitting them from the keynote. The radeons will not be ready next month. End of story.
That said, I can see where Apple is falling behind. The need to:
Even this proprietary connection can be good, save for the fact Apple will have a solution "next month" for those who just want to buy a monitor for an older G3 or G4. It is all relative. It really is apples and oranges
I once read that the human persistence of vision is equal to 26 frames / second. In the case of a FPS that gets .1 fps with one card than another when both rates are above 60fps, there is no perceived difference. Benchmark numbers are mental masturbation. Features are what it's all about.
Besides, who needs to run Shogo at 1600x1200? I'd be damned if I've ever played a game over 800x600.. after that point, all the detail in the world wouldn't matter... and 10 frames less than the TNT2 still isn't that big a deal. It is still 14 frames over Persistence of Vision.
Point of order -- Maxtor, not IBM, supplies a majority of Mac Drives.
The Rage 128 Pro may be bad at 3D, but it is good at the staple of the Macintosh in the first place -- Photoshop and other 2D applications. It is pretty much a Business line card with better than normal 2D performance. It is time for something better, though. I seriously doubt Jobs was spanking them. The Radeons will not be available until September. The cubes are before then. He may have intended to speak about the Radeon and reniged, but I doubt they had a system to demonstrate with the radeon.
The thing I want to know is why couldn't Apple just say to ATI, "We need x amount of radeons" and ATI would make them. There, they didn't need to tell ATI anything about the cube. They simply needed to order the cards.
Besides, didn't ATI announce their Radeon was coming out in September? Apple would not be able to put them in cubes shipping in August then, would they?
And a mantra is all it is.
There is a very small core taking care of the software. A lot of us are users who at the end of the day working with computers, perhaps just want a free OS to check mail and surf the web. For the most part we don't want to put in another 8 hours debugging un-mapped, un-documented, and un-planned code. For the most part we run the most "stabile" version in a program, collected by a package tool.
Every once in a while we may compile something. But for the most part, we have neither the time, nor the inclination to code. This may explain the popularity of Netscape 4.x, AND the lack of programmers for Mozilla. A lack of eyeballs is due to both the "works good enough" mentality from years of commercial OS use, and the above mentioned apathy.
If you complain, then fix it. If you can't fix it, find someone who can, or email the primary author. If they give a nasty response, then use another program. This is certainly possible with 10 ICQ programs, 5 Napster clones, 3 Gnutella clients, and 15+ browsers. There is your freedom.
This is not the case. We are losing money every minute our sponsor's ads are not being shown, and we are losing credibility every time a reader sees a 404 error. Please understand the trouble we're having. Thank you,
Funny, their ads look fine to me... and since when do ads make more money back than you spend in ISP fees for a year? I'd like to know, because I'd put ads on my site if I thought it would generate revenue.