I'm *glad* Apple doesn't restrict itself to only in-house designs. They *can* and *do* use products designed elsewhere if it can offer them a competitive advantage...
Lucent 802.11b cards, AMD based base stations, and not Portal designed mp3 player and UI by Pixo.
Now if they can only work together with AMD and NVIDIA to introduce a new low cost entry level Mac ($500 range) and use DAISY type runtime optimzation and recompilation in the OS to make it hardware agnostic...
They view the UTSA as not being based on Constitutional principles, and therefore not clashing at all with 1st Amendment or the Constitution...
While the harm to the defendent is minor for not posting DeCSS and the harm to the plaintiff for having DeCSS posted is considerable, the cost of abridging the 1st Amendment rights of Bunner outweight the need of the DVDCCA(?) to keep DeCSS off the net.
That source code *is* speech, especially between computer programmers and is a language unto them the way Hebrew is or Russian is...
That if the 1st Amendment cannot be restricted over matters of national security, it can hardly be restricted in a matter of this level...
That copyright law does have an expiration date for it's protections, but that UTSA *does not*, or that the UTSA does not make allowances for fair use... Man, this is good!
I dunno if I'm looking forward to it... Awesome product... hideous company... Now, if they spun off the Mac Business Unit, with, say, 20% stock ownership...
Of course it's not *quite* ready yet. Office isn't out yet, for example.
Still, would the comparison change drastically when OS X is ready for primetime?
A Unix on the desktop that is stable and powerful and full featured *and* intuitive? With Windows connectivity, as well as Office apps, and Unix connectivity?
Adobe not only has to pay for engineer time (which may or may not be equal to the open source efforts), but management, marketing, support/IT, legal, and equipment(including buildings)
On top of that, they have ~40 products and ~5 technologies to support.
Not only that, for the most part, they aren't *imitating* another product; they have to design, test, and distribute their products that Open Source guys don't have to worry about.
Is it actually a Carbon app using the Aqua widget library, or self made transparency and widgets?
If they use the widget libraries that Apple provides, then they would get transparency, soft shadows, the widgets, and a bunch of other things 'for free' without having to design and redesign the widget set. Otherwise it may run afoul of Apple Legal, like the old Mozilla Aqua skin.
Just like they did the Aqua for Mozilla on OS X; their point being he'd be free to use the Aqua look and feel if he called the Carbon or Cocoa libraries to create the widgets, transparencies, and so on. I don't think he does (please correct me if I'm wrong!).
If he isn't, than anyone can recompile it for a Linux box and then use the Aqua look and feel, which is gonna get Apple's panties in a twist.
Yeah, so that's a different problem altogether; there's no 'muscle memory', no fixed location where mounted drives get placed (actually, I think in OS X they *always* get mounted on the desktop + the root Finder view, so that may be better; always pop a Finder window and look at the root location)
You don't even have to do that:)
You could have a perfectly legal open directory of mp3s ripped from your own CDs.
The point is that you could ostensibly hack into the RIAA computers and wipe out their entire infrastructure because you *suspected* from you IP logs that they had infringed on some of your copyright, where your copyright is a documentation piece on how your CD collection is organized.
Then you just say 'Oops, I could have sworn this IP belonged to the RIAA'
With the point being that the law that allows such cowboy justice is inherently wrong.
I'm really surprised no one has mentioned this as a fund-raising activity for NASA, yet. Sex in zero G, and what could possible be more romantic than the ultimate sunset or the ultimate moonrise? A week of no stress, no gravity, pampered and catered, and sex in zero G!
There is a valid reason why you don't throw out the prevailing theory even though it can be shown to be incorrect.
We *know* that Newtonian physics is incorrect. It doesn't describe quantum mechanics or relativistic physics, *at all*, yet it is still used.
Where it does work, it's still useful. The same holds true with evolution or the big bang.
The big bang itself may be questioned, but the rest of the theories that imply the big bang *work* and will continue to work even if the big bang itself is wrong.
That being the case, we won't throw out General Relativity until a better model exists because GR does account for EM, QM, photonics, and most of everything else.
Even when we find a successor to GR, GUTS or whatever, GR will still be used in spot cases because as an approximation it is still good enough.
Slashdot Mirror
The OS and UI are dependent on Portal Player and Pixo, so if you want to mess around with the OS/UI, go to them.
:)
Still, it makes me wonder how hard it would be to hack it make it so uploaded mp3s via FireWire are playble, and thus make it PC compatible
I'm *glad* Apple doesn't restrict itself to only in-house designs. They *can* and *do* use products designed elsewhere if it can offer them a competitive advantage...
Lucent 802.11b cards, AMD based base stations, and not Portal designed mp3 player and UI by Pixo.
Now if they can only work together with AMD and NVIDIA to introduce a new low cost entry level Mac ($500 range) and use DAISY type runtime optimzation and recompilation in the OS to make it hardware agnostic...
They view the UTSA as not being based on Constitutional principles, and therefore not clashing at all with 1st Amendment or the Constitution...
While the harm to the defendent is minor for not posting DeCSS and the harm to the plaintiff for having DeCSS posted is considerable, the cost of abridging the 1st Amendment rights of Bunner outweight the need of the DVDCCA(?) to keep DeCSS off the net.
That source code *is* speech, especially between computer programmers and is a language unto them the way Hebrew is or Russian is...
That if the 1st Amendment cannot be restricted over matters of national security, it can hardly be restricted in a matter of this level...
That copyright law does have an expiration date for it's protections, but that UTSA *does not*, or that the UTSA does not make allowances for fair use... Man, this is good!
How about I speculate; we discover that dark matter exists, and that it outnumbers regular matter 9:1
Knowing it exists, we can start trying to find, create, and control it.
N years later we have dark constructs.
Without even having the theories about the universe showing there is dark matter, we don't find it or about it's properties, capabilities, and uses.
Why not Mac OS X, then?
BSD core foundation; you can telnet administer them, right?
It will run... Office (Word, Entourage, Excel, etc), IE 5, Photoshop(in Classic, I know), Eudora, etc.
Oh cool.
I dunno if I'm looking forward to it... Awesome product... hideous company... Now, if they spun off the Mac Business Unit, with, say, 20% stock ownership...
Of course it's not *quite* ready yet. Office isn't out yet, for example.
Still, would the comparison change drastically when OS X is ready for primetime?
A Unix on the desktop that is stable and powerful and full featured *and* intuitive? With Windows connectivity, as well as Office apps, and Unix connectivity?
Get your Windows apps! PowerPoint, Word, Excel, Entourage, etc! Get your Unix apps and services!
It does everything *except* Windows!
Where does this leave the newly birthed Mac OS X?
Man, just had to reply. Good flame!
I wanna see a Darwin port to the Gamecube...
$199, no HD, but still... nifty.
Nani?
Darwin runs on the Mac platform and the x86 platform...
What driver stuff are you talking about?
It's a ~$200 machine...
It's PPC (Okay, not MIPS or ARM), but wouldn't it be cool to get OS X, or at least Darwin, running on it?
It's got DVD (sorta), a G3, an ATI chipset... and since Darwin *is* Open Source, it's entirely possible to get Darwin running on it.
It may be possible, once Darwin runs, to get OS X to run!
Adobe not only has to pay for engineer time (which may or may not be equal to the open source efforts), but management, marketing, support/IT, legal, and equipment(including buildings)
On top of that, they have ~40 products and ~5 technologies to support.
Not only that, for the most part, they aren't *imitating* another product; they have to design, test, and distribute their products that Open Source guys don't have to worry about.
Is it actually a Carbon app using the Aqua widget library, or self made transparency and widgets?
If they use the widget libraries that Apple provides, then they would get transparency, soft shadows, the widgets, and a bunch of other things 'for free' without having to design and redesign the widget set. Otherwise it may run afoul of Apple Legal, like the old Mozilla Aqua skin.
Just like they did the Aqua for Mozilla on OS X; their point being he'd be free to use the Aqua look and feel if he called the Carbon or Cocoa libraries to create the widgets, transparencies, and so on. I don't think he does (please correct me if I'm wrong!).
:)
If he isn't, than anyone can recompile it for a Linux box and then use the Aqua look and feel, which is gonna get Apple's panties in a twist.
Someone said two weeks; we'll see
It should be a Slashdot poll.
Yeah, so that's a different problem altogether; there's no 'muscle memory', no fixed location where mounted drives get placed (actually, I think in OS X they *always* get mounted on the desktop + the root Finder view, so that may be better; always pop a Finder window and look at the root location)
Which OS implemented it first?
Okay, that was a pointless jab.
Only halfway kinda-sorta
The icon will sit there even if no disk is actually mounted, right?
So it's sorta an empty icon. On a Mac, that's not the case.
For trash, when you select the CD-ROM or mounted drive or whatever... guess what happens? The Trashcan icon *changes*. It becomes an eject icon.
Other than that you can *also* press the eject button, the f-12 key, or Apple-E.
On a Mac, the fifth window is accessable by right-clicking on the IE icon in the Dock and selecting the fifth window.
Or, if you use a single button mouse, ctrl-clicking. Or keeping the button depressed until the contextual menu pops up.
Point being, I think the MacOS UI is better, not everywhere, but in most places.
Instead of 50 items in the task bar (5 windows per app, 10 apps), you have 10 icons in the Dock with context windows of 5 entries each.
Cause they're competition. New blood, competition, and rivalry prevent stagnation, inbreeding, and decay.
You don't even have to do that :)
You could have a perfectly legal open directory of mp3s ripped from your own CDs.
The point is that you could ostensibly hack into the RIAA computers and wipe out their entire infrastructure because you *suspected* from you IP logs that they had infringed on some of your copyright, where your copyright is a documentation piece on how your CD collection is organized.
Then you just say 'Oops, I could have sworn this IP belonged to the RIAA'
With the point being that the law that allows such cowboy justice is inherently wrong.
Collects random lego bricks and then builds another 'Jitter' from the parts!
I'm really surprised no one has mentioned this as a fund-raising activity for NASA, yet. Sex in zero G, and what could possible be more romantic than the ultimate sunset or the ultimate moonrise? A week of no stress, no gravity, pampered and catered, and sex in zero G!
There is a valid reason why you don't throw out the prevailing theory even though it can be shown to be incorrect.
We *know* that Newtonian physics is incorrect. It doesn't describe quantum mechanics or relativistic physics, *at all*, yet it is still used.
Where it does work, it's still useful. The same holds true with evolution or the big bang.
The big bang itself may be questioned, but the rest of the theories that imply the big bang *work* and will continue to work even if the big bang itself is wrong.
That being the case, we won't throw out General Relativity until a better model exists because GR does account for EM, QM, photonics, and most of everything else.
Even when we find a successor to GR, GUTS or whatever, GR will still be used in spot cases because as an approximation it is still good enough.