You'd have to be living under a rock to think Apple never develops anything (BTW, ever heard of Geico? Just wondering).
Rather than chasing after your red herring about RAND, my comment was a response to the accusation of patent troll. The classic patent troll enforces patents for things that they don't manufacturer or have no intent of manufacturing. Hence my facetiousness in the comment. If you choose to think of a troll more generically, then that's up to you, but that's not what I was referencing.
Apple is a scummy patent troll, and I hope they sued out of business.
Damn straight! Buying up and creating patents, never making a single product, and then going and suing the real manufacturers of products when they violate their unused IP! TROLLS!
The slashdot of today reminds me of USENET after the AOL crowd was released from their cages. Minus the capslock of course. You'd think that at a supposed nerd hangout you wouldn't have to be arguing with someone about the difference between a self propagating piece of software and a social engineering trick. Yet that seems to be the norm, if evidenced by the bulk of comments on this article (and this article isn't alone in this).
You might want to get caught up on OS X. The application launch system asks for permission (and has been asking for a while, i.e. it's not new to 10.7, although it's more refined in 10.7) of things that were downloaded before allowing them to launch. As to random files on CDs/USB, I couldn't say. I don't recall the last time I used a CD or launched something from a USB, so I have no experience with that level of functionality.
Because it doesn't seem nearly as impressive. This is the same reason that fires are reported in acres rather than square miles, and wind chill or heat index are used to report weather extremes.
even the Republicans are okay with non-embryonic stem cells
So it's all about the fetuses.
I see...
I would point out that this was initially Clinton's executive order, but since we have over a decade worth of people referring to this as "Bush's ban" when it wasn't Bush nor a ban, I suppose it's way too late to be quibbling over facts.
By the way, I would think exchange and email servers are quite critical for business functions
Sadly they are critical. That's why we lost so many thousands of man-hours in productivity at my previous job due to the Exchange servers randomly dying. I don't doubt that you'll dismiss the IT guys as being a bunch of noobs, etc. but it was the largest Exchange installation in the world at the time, so that seems unlikely. During the 10 years I worked there, you could count on Exchange going down for at least an hour during any quarter and you could expect to lose connectivity for several minutes at a time during any week. There's no way they could ever make a claim anywhere close to 5 9's with it.
for example, how do you connect to a remote PC with bash and run your commands there? Oh, you can't.
Wrong. I use ssh for that these days, although in the past the uu- and r- commands were used. Do you really think that Microsoft is the only company that realized that remote administration is a good thing? My God -- they were the last ones to the party.
You know what's difficult to comprehend? Well over 200 million iPods have been sold and you're claiming that you don't know anyone that has iTunes installed on Windows. And now you're making it sound as if you don't even known anyone with an iPod. Either you really are extremely limited in your knowledge of or interactions with other people, or you were just talking smack and have gotten all pissy because you got called on it. After that "apple jammed up their ass" comment, I suspect the latter.
Wow. Okay, scratch my sarcasm. It really is a small bubble. So no iPod users on Windows either? Some of them don't mount as flash drives so you're stuck with iTunes (at least from a practical standpoint – there are workarounds but Windows users are less likely than Linux users to hunt them down).
I hate Word. Excel I'm okay with, but when it comes down to doing something moderately complicated, I'm more likely to throw Mathematica/Maple or MATLAB at the problem. That said, there are what should be simple things that I've struggled to do in GoogleDocs that I actually was able to manage in Word. And Word is really a pretty crappy program (particularly if you do any technical docs). Try doing something as simple as an outline in either of them when the outline format doesn't fit any of their pre-canned formats. It's a royal pain in the ass. But Word still ended up being better than Google Docs.
Man, that must be a little bubble if you don't know any Windows users with iPhones. Unless you're saying that not one of them used iTunes to activate their phones or that those that did immediately followed this up by uninstalling iTunes. Both are possible, but seem unlikely to me.
... most people who I know have macs don't use any of those.
There you have it... proof positive! I'll need to register your comment with a DOI for further citation. Until then, I think it would be safe to refer to this as "Haedrian's Llaw".
Now that CT is no longer editing, the only thing that makes it to the frontpage through my filter is Unknown Lamer. Frankly, that's been rather helpful since it really makes/. look like the wasteland that it has become.
My only real quibble is perhaps one of semantics. There's more the same between NeXTStep & OS X than there is different, and had they not started with NeXTStep, OS X would be a lot different. As to the timeline, I think you're forgetting OS X Server 1.0 which came out in '98 or '99, (I just checked -- Wikipedia say it was March of '99), so that's closer to 2 years than 4, which isn't much time to roll out an entire operating system. To me it would be like saying XP isn't NT.
Anyway, I didn't mean to grief you about it. I just see OS X as Jobs' way of bringing NeXT to the masses by leveraging the power of Apple. I do wish they'd fix the Finder. It's for too "NeXTian" for my taste.
Other than your belief that people only buy Apple because it's trendy, or that maybe anecdotal evidence suggests that superficial high school kids treat it as a status symbol... do you have anything which supports this assertion?
No, it's just that he's an expert on purses and is trying to put that expertise to good use.
Did you mean to respond to someone else? I was responding to AC about OS X being a niche OS. Perhaps that was you. The NeXT portion of it that you wrote tagged with your UID wasn't at issue, or at least not to me.
Killing the clone market was the best thing Steve could have done. The clones weren't the best hardware (overall), and with clones you end up with the problem MS faces constantly -- a poorly integrated system that has to try to accommodate far too many configs which means you just can't regression test properly. The only plus side to the clone market would be that Apple would have to compete on specs with other companies as to CPU choice and graphics, which is something they've fallen behind on since Jobs returned. But other than that, when clone XYZ turns out to be a piece of crap, the users response is typically going to be "Apple sucks!", regardless of whether it's an Apple issue or a clone vendor issue.
Anyway, that aside, I'm in agreement with the response that was made that OS X is NeXT. Steve didn't manage to make it work out with that company, so he rebadged it and called it a Mac & OS X. Philosophically and underpinning-wise, it's the same computer. Perhaps not as godawful expensive, but there's not a lot of difference between them. Rather than rendering to the screen with PostScript, OS X uses PDF. There's still the MACH kernel (although Darwin has certainly moved a lot, the remnants are still there, so perhaps not as good of an example). The same APIs came along and the development tools are (okay, were) the same. About all they did was modded the UI and added some of the MacOS touches (thankfully they ditched that ridiculous non-functional Apple badge at top center after the beta).
I'm not convinced that MacOS was in any position to challenge anyone. As you may recall, it was still a cooperative multitasking system (was it 8 that brought the much touted threaded Finder? Or was that 9?) . You mentioned Pink, etc., but I don't see that these things were ever going to see the light of day. I commented elsewhere on this article that Jobs came in and actually made decisions, whereas it seemed that under Sculley they had no real direction. Stuff was constantly in flux with no commitment to a path that was going to get done, come hell or high water. Hence still have a horribly outdated MacOS that was utterly incapable of running with the big boys. The interface was wonderfully self-consistent, but that's about it.
Wow. I didn't really mean to blather on that much. If it comes off like a rant, it didn't feel like one when I was typing it. I was mostly just "thinking out loud".
Steve Jobs is very particular attention to details.
Exactly! If you don't think Steve has been MIA, give Lion a whirl. I can't imagine Steve ever letting it get out the door. The attention to detail just isn't there.
iOS is OS X. Even more than so than OS X is NeXTStep. I suppose you could almost argue that OS X is becoming iOS starting with the Lion release. With 200 million iOS devices alone, and a decade worth of OS X sales, I think the "Uh, no." applies to your claim of niche just as well.
RIP Sculley, I loved the Newton, your greatest creation.
FTFY. I'm always surprised by the number of people that seem to forget that Jobs was missing from Apple during that period. The same period that saw the creation of Firewire, ADB (which was eventually supplanted by USB over a decade later), use of MIT's NuBus, the PPC (including the emulation-migration from 68k to PPC), multimedia on the Mac... really, lots of good things happened at Apple while Jobs was gone. That said, it was a much better company with him back. Probably largely due to his ability to say "Yes" or "No" and then see stuff through, rather than the scattershot approach that seemed to plague them through "The Pepsi Years".
Defiance strikes me as being relatively active. This seems very passive. I think "Ignores" would be a better description. Defiance also conjures up images of insubordination, which would imply that a single member of the Australian Parliament is Apple's superior. Again, I'm not sure it fits. [That's not a dig on Parliament, just how I see things. It's not like they're blowing off a direct subpoena from a governing body to which they submit.]
In fact, the more I think about it, the more it sounds like some politician trying to get a story going due to a fragile ego.
I also have an iPhone 3G (3GS if we're being pedantic). So could you tell me how to *change* my SMS tone to one of my own choosing without jailbreaking the phone? Because all mine lets me do is *select* from the six tones that Apple put on the phone.
The iPhone doesn't even let you *change* times in the alarm application. All they let you do is *select* from a predefined set of times. Crazy.
Slashdot Mirror
You'd have to be living under a rock to think Apple never develops anything (BTW, ever heard of Geico? Just wondering).
Rather than chasing after your red herring about RAND, my comment was a response to the accusation of patent troll. The classic patent troll enforces patents for things that they don't manufacturer or have no intent of manufacturing. Hence my facetiousness in the comment. If you choose to think of a troll more generically, then that's up to you, but that's not what I was referencing.
> Even patent trolls start out with one victim
Oh please. Apple is no "victim."
Apple is a scummy patent troll, and I hope they sued out of business.
Damn straight! Buying up and creating patents, never making a single product, and then going and suing the real manufacturers of products when they violate their unused IP! TROLLS!
10002$ dscl localhost -passwd /Search/Users/konohitowa
New Password:
Permission denied. Please enter user's old password:
The slashdot of today reminds me of USENET after the AOL crowd was released from their cages. Minus the capslock of course. You'd think that at a supposed nerd hangout you wouldn't have to be arguing with someone about the difference between a self propagating piece of software and a social engineering trick. Yet that seems to be the norm, if evidenced by the bulk of comments on this article (and this article isn't alone in this).
You might want to get caught up on OS X. The application launch system asks for permission (and has been asking for a while, i.e. it's not new to 10.7, although it's more refined in 10.7) of things that were downloaded before allowing them to launch. As to random files on CDs/USB, I couldn't say. I don't recall the last time I used a CD or launched something from a USB, so I have no experience with that level of functionality.
Because it doesn't seem nearly as impressive. This is the same reason that fires are reported in acres rather than square miles, and wind chill or heat index are used to report weather extremes.
So it's all about the fetuses.
I see...
I would point out that this was initially Clinton's executive order, but since we have over a decade worth of people referring to this as "Bush's ban" when it wasn't Bush nor a ban, I suppose it's way too late to be quibbling over facts.
Sadly they are critical. That's why we lost so many thousands of man-hours in productivity at my previous job due to the Exchange servers randomly dying. I don't doubt that you'll dismiss the IT guys as being a bunch of noobs, etc. but it was the largest Exchange installation in the world at the time, so that seems unlikely. During the 10 years I worked there, you could count on Exchange going down for at least an hour during any quarter and you could expect to lose connectivity for several minutes at a time during any week. There's no way they could ever make a claim anywhere close to 5 9's with it.
Doh! I responded with the same info before reading this (although your response was a lot better than mine).
Wrong. I use ssh for that these days, although in the past the uu- and r- commands were used. Do you really think that Microsoft is the only company that realized that remote administration is a good thing? My God -- they were the last ones to the party.
You know what's difficult to comprehend? Well over 200 million iPods have been sold and you're claiming that you don't know anyone that has iTunes installed on Windows. And now you're making it sound as if you don't even known anyone with an iPod. Either you really are extremely limited in your knowledge of or interactions with other people, or you were just talking smack and have gotten all pissy because you got called on it. After that "apple jammed up their ass" comment, I suspect the latter.
Wow. Okay, scratch my sarcasm. It really is a small bubble. So no iPod users on Windows either? Some of them don't mount as flash drives so you're stuck with iTunes (at least from a practical standpoint – there are workarounds but Windows users are less likely than Linux users to hunt them down).
I hate Word. Excel I'm okay with, but when it comes down to doing something moderately complicated, I'm more likely to throw Mathematica/Maple or MATLAB at the problem. That said, there are what should be simple things that I've struggled to do in GoogleDocs that I actually was able to manage in Word. And Word is really a pretty crappy program (particularly if you do any technical docs). Try doing something as simple as an outline in either of them when the outline format doesn't fit any of their pre-canned formats. It's a royal pain in the ass. But Word still ended up being better than Google Docs.
Man, that must be a little bubble if you don't know any Windows users with iPhones. Unless you're saying that not one of them used iTunes to activate their phones or that those that did immediately followed this up by uninstalling iTunes. Both are possible, but seem unlikely to me.
... most people who I know have macs don't use any of those.
There you have it... proof positive! I'll need to register your comment with a DOI for further citation. Until then, I think it would be safe to refer to this as "Haedrian's Llaw".
iOS?
Now that CT is no longer editing, the only thing that makes it to the frontpage through my filter is Unknown Lamer. Frankly, that's been rather helpful since it really makes /. look like the wasteland that it has become.
My only real quibble is perhaps one of semantics. There's more the same between NeXTStep & OS X than there is different, and had they not started with NeXTStep, OS X would be a lot different. As to the timeline, I think you're forgetting OS X Server 1.0 which came out in '98 or '99, (I just checked -- Wikipedia say it was March of '99), so that's closer to 2 years than 4, which isn't much time to roll out an entire operating system. To me it would be like saying XP isn't NT.
Anyway, I didn't mean to grief you about it. I just see OS X as Jobs' way of bringing NeXT to the masses by leveraging the power of Apple. I do wish they'd fix the Finder. It's for too "NeXTian" for my taste.
No, it's just that he's an expert on purses and is trying to put that expertise to good use.
Did you mean to respond to someone else? I was responding to AC about OS X being a niche OS. Perhaps that was you. The NeXT portion of it that you wrote tagged with your UID wasn't at issue, or at least not to me.
Killing the clone market was the best thing Steve could have done. The clones weren't the best hardware (overall), and with clones you end up with the problem MS faces constantly -- a poorly integrated system that has to try to accommodate far too many configs which means you just can't regression test properly. The only plus side to the clone market would be that Apple would have to compete on specs with other companies as to CPU choice and graphics, which is something they've fallen behind on since Jobs returned. But other than that, when clone XYZ turns out to be a piece of crap, the users response is typically going to be "Apple sucks!", regardless of whether it's an Apple issue or a clone vendor issue.
Anyway, that aside, I'm in agreement with the response that was made that OS X is NeXT. Steve didn't manage to make it work out with that company, so he rebadged it and called it a Mac & OS X. Philosophically and underpinning-wise, it's the same computer. Perhaps not as godawful expensive, but there's not a lot of difference between them. Rather than rendering to the screen with PostScript, OS X uses PDF. There's still the MACH kernel (although Darwin has certainly moved a lot, the remnants are still there, so perhaps not as good of an example). The same APIs came along and the development tools are (okay, were) the same. About all they did was modded the UI and added some of the MacOS touches (thankfully they ditched that ridiculous non-functional Apple badge at top center after the beta).
I'm not convinced that MacOS was in any position to challenge anyone. As you may recall, it was still a cooperative multitasking system (was it 8 that brought the much touted threaded Finder? Or was that 9?) . You mentioned Pink, etc., but I don't see that these things were ever going to see the light of day. I commented elsewhere on this article that Jobs came in and actually made decisions, whereas it seemed that under Sculley they had no real direction. Stuff was constantly in flux with no commitment to a path that was going to get done, come hell or high water. Hence still have a horribly outdated MacOS that was utterly incapable of running with the big boys. The interface was wonderfully self-consistent, but that's about it.
Wow. I didn't really mean to blather on that much. If it comes off like a rant, it didn't feel like one when I was typing it. I was mostly just "thinking out loud".
cheers
Steve Jobs is very particular attention to details.
Exactly! If you don't think Steve has been MIA, give Lion a whirl. I can't imagine Steve ever letting it get out the door. The attention to detail just isn't there.
iOS is OS X. Even more than so than OS X is NeXTStep. I suppose you could almost argue that OS X is becoming iOS starting with the Lion release. With 200 million iOS devices alone, and a decade worth of OS X sales, I think the "Uh, no." applies to your claim of niche just as well.
RIP Sculley, I loved the Newton, your greatest creation.
FTFY. I'm always surprised by the number of people that seem to forget that Jobs was missing from Apple during that period. The same period that saw the creation of Firewire, ADB (which was eventually supplanted by USB over a decade later), use of MIT's NuBus, the PPC (including the emulation-migration from 68k to PPC), multimedia on the Mac... really, lots of good things happened at Apple while Jobs was gone. That said, it was a much better company with him back. Probably largely due to his ability to say "Yes" or "No" and then see stuff through, rather than the scattershot approach that seemed to plague them through "The Pepsi Years".
Defiance strikes me as being relatively active. This seems very passive. I think "Ignores" would be a better description. Defiance also conjures up images of insubordination, which would imply that a single member of the Australian Parliament is Apple's superior. Again, I'm not sure it fits. [That's not a dig on Parliament, just how I see things. It's not like they're blowing off a direct subpoena from a governing body to which they submit.]
In fact, the more I think about it, the more it sounds like some politician trying to get a story going due to a fragile ego.
I also have an iPhone 3G (3GS if we're being pedantic). So could you tell me how to *change* my SMS tone to one of my own choosing without jailbreaking the phone? Because all mine lets me do is *select* from the six tones that Apple put on the phone.
The iPhone doesn't even let you *change* times in the alarm application. All they let you do is *select* from a predefined set of times. Crazy.