Apple is monopolizing by only allowing one mouse button.
Right-clicking is no more difficult, and is often identical to, Control-clicking.
Or did you not know you could do that? (sniggers at a so-called Mac guru)
Are Apple ever going to allow a second button to do the same function as Control-click? No. Monopolizing. Only Apple make one-button mice, so the mice bought for Macs are made by Apple.
No, it didn't. I dragged it over the IE icon. I dragged it over the Mozilla icon. I dragged it over the icons for Simpletext, Dreamweaver, GoLive and Fireworks.
But the Mac was having none of that.
I opened each of the apps in turn, first trying to drag the file into the document window, and then into the icon in the open applications tearoff.
But the Mac was having none of that.
I eventually found that it is possible to force the Mac OS to ignore the metadata by opening the app, then holding shift while selecting open from the file menu, then finding the file (in that miniscule, non-resizable open dialog). I fail to see how that is easy in any way. I mean, shift clicking a menu item? Sure, use modifiers to change the menu that appears when clicked, but there is no visual difference. Just the hell is a Mac luser supposed to figure that out?
As for custom icons - you can change the colour. That's it.
Hopefully, more apps will use the Windows Installer service, the best thing to come out of Microsoft since... erm...
ok, the best thing to come out of Microsoft.
With it, any action the installer performs is logged with a unique ID. Which can then be automagically undone, correctly.
I first noticed how cool this was when I had to install a plugin into a specific folder for each of three browsers (IE, Netscape or Mozilla). I just called the CopyFile function during the installation for each component, and I got the unistallation routine completely free!
You can have a specific file open in a slide show, or a specific file open in Photoshop, but that will usually have nothing to do with which app you want to open which file at which time.
And, IMNSHO, file type and application have fuck all to do with the filesystem. Make it metadata in the file if you must (though an OS supplied (an user-configurable) application association system is the best way (this is not limited to file extensions, you could use mime-types or a resource-fork like repository somewhere in the OS)), but please please please don't make it so that you can't do something as simple as move it onto another filesystem without losing data!
Win2k remembers every application you used to open a file type using the "Open with...", and stores it in a submenu to the right of "Open with...". It also gives you an option of choosing "Other.." which brings up a dialog of all known apps, or then you can choose any executable anywhere on your machine. You can even make it default, and the extra options stay there.
As for file typing being in Control Panel? It is!
Control Panel/Folder Options, File Types tab. Maybe it would make more sense to be called "Explorer Options", but most people wouldn't know the Desktop is called Explorer, and would think it something to do with IE. "My Computer Options" would be confused with System Properties.
But it's right there. If anyone wants to change a setting, they can do so easily by clicking the Start button, finding Control Panel, and they can find File Types from there.
Also, the File Types tab in 2k is far easier to use and makes more sense that that in 9x.
Do you think that anyone using Mac OSX for the first time would find how to change the application a file opens with? Nope, it's nowhere on the Apple Menu, or in System Preferences. Instead, you have to select the file, then Get Info from the File menu, then select "Opens with" from the drop-down menu. Not even an old-school Mac user would think of looking there!
Are you under the impression that somehow Apple don't have a monopoly? You can only run their software on their hardware. Sounds like a monopoly to me.
And I pointed out, file extensions date from the pre-unix days. Are you to call the systems around then a monopoly?
This, more than the evangelism that goes with the religion, is why I hate Macs.
I was first introduced to this when I tried to open an.html file. But the machine was having none of that. It thought it knew better. "No, no", it seemed to say, "you don't want to be opening that, you don't know where it's been".
"Could not open the file because the application that created it wasn't found" (Right before a "Sorry a system error occurred. Error type 7. Restart" - patronising twat of a machine!)
An HTML file for fucks sake! Plain text with markup! Opens in IE, Mozilla or Simpletext. Just open the fucking file!
"Sorry, Dave. I can't let you do that, Dave."
It had a file extension. It was UTF-8. It was a plain and simple bastarding HTML file. And the Mac sat smugly. And refused to open it.
In the end I had to copy it across to a Windows machine and back.
And this guy at Salon thinks that's easier?
In Windows, whenever an app steals a file extension (which only happens during installation, not whenever I open a file), I take it right back, maybe leaving it in as an option on the context menu. I have Notepad on the SendTo menu, so I can always open anything as if were text. I can make.java and.class (and even.rpm - with a cute ickle picture of tux) files look purty by drawing my own icons.
Can I do any such thing on a Mac? No. I'm stuck with the icon whichever app chose for it. If I save an HTML file from dreamweaver, I can't view it in IE without dragging it into an IE window. If I save it from fireworks, it has a different icon again. Very soon it gets impossible to tell the difference between files. A.css can have the same icon as a.php3, but another.css could have the same icon as a.png.
And that's less confusing?
People are so blinded by Jobs-worship that they forget to realise that someone else is doing The Right Thing. A file type is as distinct from it's creator as it could possibly be. OSX is better, though. Guess what - it uses file extensions when the resource fork is missing. And it lets you change the app a particular file type opened with, relatively easy. But there can only be one app which opens a particular file type. Which is the Wrong Thing.
File types are not a Windows idea. They date from the pre-unix days. It makes it easy to tell what a file is by looking at it's name - handy on a teletype, or even by ftp. It also makes it easy to change a files meaning without changing its content (eg txt to html). It separates the content of a file from the application used to create it.
Another poster noted that you can drag a file onto any applications icon in Mac OS. So? That's not new. Windows does it, and so does KDE (I think - can't check right now).
Registered file types are not a means of Microsoft brainwashing. They are simply the best way to handle file typing (I know that sounds weird). mime-types are fine, until a file has unrecognised type, and is not so easy to change. File type and creator metadata is just plain wrong.
Remember: just because you don't have a clue, doesn't mean Bill Gates is out to brainwash you (hey, that rhymes...).
True. Electrons in an average electrical potential (say 5V) move through copper at a few centrimetres per second. By contrast, the speed of propogation the electrical field is c (300, 000, 000 metres per second), 9 orders of magnitude faster. It's the speed of the field that matters, not the electrons themselves.
I never said you can't make a supercomputer out of Macs, in the same way you make a supercomputer out of e-machines. I was responding to the fallacy that a single desktop computer is a supercomputer. By definition, a supercomputer is one which is far more powerful than a desktop.
A single Mac is not a supercomputer, despite what Apple say. A single G4 is not even as powerful as a single P3. But string either of them together, and you can have a nice cluster.
Unfortunately, Apple shipped SMP machines long before any SMP-capable OS. And didn't tell their lusers that that second G4 was idling at 500MHz. They just run photoshop filters and say 'I'm sure that one went faster, just then'.
The reason people think Macs are good for Graphic Design is because Graphic Designers think they're good.
Enormous FPU performance with three simultaneous instructions and one GFLOP at 500 MHz (1 billion floating-point number operations per second) with 80 bit floating-point numbers. Two GFLOP with MMX and 3DNow! instructions. That at least equals Pentium III's performance with full utilization of Katmai. The 3DNow! engine has even been improved comparing to the K6-3.
Yeah, they're talking about an Athlon, and it's only 1GFlop, but it's quite an old article, the Athlon still being in Slot 1 form.
Or, from Intels site (use lynx because it refreshes to a missing page)
The adder and multiplier were placed on different ports. This allows for simultaneous dispatch of 2-wide addition and 2-wide multiplication operations. This boosts the peak performance two more times when compared to the Pentium II, and hence, it allows 2.2 GFLOP/sec peak at 550 MHz. The new units developed on the Pentium III and modified P6 units are shown in color in Figure 3
Which also reveals that the PII was capable of 1GFlop.
Moral of today's story:
Search before flamebaiting, please.
there is always a layer for translation to simpler operations
True. Every computer interprets instructions, right the way down to the simplest level of switching a gate on or off.
The difference between RISC and CISC is the instruction set exposed to the programmer (compiler, interpreter, whatever), and thus the number of memory accesses needed to implement something complex. But if you were to believe Apple advertising (which anyone who actually buys Apples must do...), you would think less instructions is better.
I was simply demonstrating that anything Apple tell their lusers is believed, whether it's true, fabricated, or just hiding certain facts (like the relative floating point performance of the G4).
Yes, we all saw the Apple ads for the G4 being capable of 1GFlop. What you didn't see, was that the Pentium III 500 was capable of ~2GFlop. Now that can run an 1GHz. You also didn't see that AMD's Athlon, having a superscalar FPU, is faster than a P3. And now they can run at 1.6GHz. The P4 has new instructions to speed up certain types of multimedia processing as well. By contrast, the G4 is only now approaching 1GHz. Go figure (as you Americans say..:o)
An Apple is not a supercomputer.
RISC does not mean faster. It allows for simpler design which can lead to increased speed, but as we have seen, Apple have consistently failed to compete with Intel and AMD (not that they even make thier own chips...). CISC is actually a good idea, since with the huge speed differential between CPU and memory, and the introduction of cache, the bottleneck in any system is the memory bandwidth. Think for a moment : why did Intel add instructions to the x86 architecture in every iteration? Because its faster having one instruction doing something complex, than many simple ones, simply because of the reduced frequency of memory access. In todays computers, RISC doesn't mean anything, since memory, storage and network bandwidth is the bottleneck.
The moral of this story:
1: Don't believe Apple's advertising.
2: Don't believe what a Mac Zealot will tell you about RISC or some other claptrap.
3: Get ppc Mandrake if you're unfortunate enough to have actually bought a G4.
Yes, I use Macs. Daily. And I hate Apple. But my PHB is a Mac zealot. It frightens the hell out of me seeing all our company's work being stored on a Mac (OS9 (no pre-emption, memory protection, RAID, journalling, or anything you would want for a server...)).
Yes, Classic is a Mach process and all that yada yada yada.
My point was that Classic is still as unstable as it ever was. And this security hole only affects Classic, not OSX, or even OS9. J Random Binary is still capable of nuking your home directory, and the OS9 System Folder even if it can't damage your OSX installation. So like I said, use OSX if you must, but don't install Classic if you care about your data.
And it's only Classic [blech] apps than are executed automatically. So its not a Unix problem. Its a Mac OS problem. The fact that their OS (their being Mac OS, not that hideous mutation of BSD) has only one privilige level is the worry. Any random binary can scribble over the memory of any other app (thank you Apple, for failing to include memory protection), even the OS itself, including filesystems drivers! Ever wonder why it tells you restart after a random app crashes (which is often) ? Because it could have (and probably did), nuke all the data another app was working with, which will in turn crash and nuke another app...
Anyway, back ontopic... If you want a secure Unix OS, use Linux, or [Net|Free|Open]BSD. At a pinch you can use OSX (But whatever you don't DON'T install Classic. And log in as a normal user. And reenable the root account so you can disable sudo (but with a nice strong password)). If you want a pretty [blech] gui with transparency and animated menus and the "genie-in-a-bottle" effect, but don't care about your data, then by all means, use Mac OS.
Think different? Different what, colours? How about you just think for a moment...
3. This is what the US does anyway. They fund countries fighting against their enemies and then when they bite the hand that feeds, they strike back with military force. ie Iran/Iraq, Afghanistan/Russia. Oh, didn't you know that US funded Osama Bin Laden during the cold war?
"Restrictions are in place for our own safety"
Noone can be accidentally hurt by cryptography. The point that nobody seems to be saying is that terrorists can cooridnate their actions WITHOUT cryptography. And definitely without backdoored versions.
"Goverment phone taps do not bother me because I know the only reason the.gov would want to tap my phones is if I were doing something bad "
Such as burning the flag or saying something wrong or voting for Al Gore. Seriously, this is flying in the face your constitution. As someone said on a previous thread "Just because you have nothing to hide doesn't mean you have nothing to fear."
A thread on this article a bit further up mentions that we need to tell people what crypto is, rather than explaining how it works. Your description of the locked box is the clearest message I've read here (it even helped me understand crypto better. I could actually implement this in ~1 minute using perl and/dev/random). This is the message we have to get to the normals.
"At least its just a portion of your civil liberties that's being sacrificed"
Well, there goes another one. And now that we don't have privacy, what about cruel and unusual punishment? That's got to go too. How about freedom of speech? The right to express an opinion that the government is wrong?
Crytpography will soon be doublethink (the Party can use it to keep us secure by not allowing us to be secure). Anything else is Newspeak.
No, the purpose of cryptography is to buy stuff online without your credit card numbers being read by others.
The purpose of cryptography is to ensure that a piece of software you downloaded is authentic and hasn't been trojanned.
The purpose of cryptography is to talk to your friends about personal stuff without it being known by stalkers.
The purpose of cryptography is to ensure that a message really did come from a particular person, and wasn't altered in any way or read by anyone else.
That is not only wrong, but stupid. If that were so, why will it be called a 'pluggable' look and feel?
All you need is a package which implements the look and feel, and then tell the UIManager to use it.
Comme ça
javax.swing.UIManager.setLookAndFeel("MyLookAndF ee lClassName");
And you can very easily have the windows look&feel because it is part of the standard JDK. Sun's JDK, that is, not Apple's half-assed buggy-as-hell version in OSX, where they try to get you to use their own non-standard APIs, tying you to thier platform (deja-vu anyone?).
But what if you were to take Apple's Aqua PLAF from their java implementation and run it on another platform? Would they still sue? After all, java is supposed to be cross-platform. You're not stealing, you're using their software. You're not even recompiling! But because it's not on OSX, they will get the lawyers round. Hopefully, Sun would sue Apple instead....
This is not redundant. It is frighteningly close to the truth. Dubya is gun happy. And now he needs absolutely no excuse to continue his fathers idiotic star wars programme. He can shoot planes out of the sky and claim that they were being hijacked. He can arrest anyone and claim they were terrorists. He can read your email, have you followed, have you shot, on the suspicion of terrorism. And how do you define terrorism now? Anyone who speaks out against America.
The name of 'Osama Bin Laden' (is that even a real person?) is being used a propoganda target, just as Milosovic before him, Hussein, Gaddafi, and on and on....
Dubya never actually started a war with China (despite how much he wanted to), because they have nukes now. But now he's found a new target. A small country without a UN recognised government. A country with thousands of innocent civilians who will be killed when the US sends in their bombs. A country with a volunteer army and no major weaponry. And no hope of defence from the slaughter that America will bring. It will be another Vietnam, except the US will be even more ruthless, killing innocents from afar with laser-guided weaponry.
Think about this for a moment. Number of people killed on September 11th : 6000+
Number of people killed by the US in Iran, Iraq, Cuba, Serbia, Bosnia, Vietnam : Millions.
America is the new Ingsoc. Dubya is Big Brother. Afghanistan is the Enemy. Osama Bin Laden is Emanuel Goldstein.
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
That's not the problem. The problem is that people like Rambus can sit on a standards commitee, steer it the way they want, and then file patents. Which get granted. And cause untold harm to the entire industry.
Preventing anyone entering the cockpit would be extremely dangerous if the pilot(s) were incapacitaed in some way. It has happened before. Passengers have had to land planes. If they couldn't get to the cockpit, there would be no hope. While it would prevent hijacking, it would be too dangerous.
A better idea may be to have planes controllable from the ground. In the vent of a hijacking, the ground can take over. Then the military security would be needed in the ground control..
Slashdot Mirror
Apple is monopolizing by only allowing one mouse button.
Right-clicking is no more difficult, and is often identical to, Control-clicking.
Or did you not know you could do that? (sniggers at a so-called Mac guru)
Are Apple ever going to allow a second button to do the same function as Control-click? No. Monopolizing. Only Apple make one-button mice, so the mice bought for Macs are made by Apple.
No, it didn't. I dragged it over the IE icon. I dragged it over the Mozilla icon. I dragged it over the icons for Simpletext, Dreamweaver, GoLive and Fireworks.
But the Mac was having none of that.
I opened each of the apps in turn, first trying to drag the file into the document window, and then into the icon in the open applications tearoff.
But the Mac was having none of that.
I eventually found that it is possible to force the Mac OS to ignore the metadata by opening the app, then holding shift while selecting open from the file menu, then finding the file (in that miniscule, non-resizable open dialog). I fail to see how that is easy in any way. I mean, shift clicking a menu item? Sure, use modifiers to change the menu that appears when clicked, but there is no visual difference. Just the hell is a Mac luser supposed to figure that out?
As for custom icons - you can change the colour. That's it.
Dolt. Read the post. He did that. It didn't work.
Hopefully, more apps will use the Windows Installer service, the best thing to come out of Microsoft since... erm...
ok, the best thing to come out of Microsoft.
With it, any action the installer performs is logged with a unique ID. Which can then be automagically undone, correctly.
I first noticed how cool this was when I had to install a plugin into a specific folder for each of three browsers (IE, Netscape or Mozilla). I just called the CopyFile function during the installation for each component, and I got the unistallation routine completely free!
Gotta love InstallShield!
You can have a specific file open in a slide show, or a specific file open in Photoshop, but that will usually have nothing to do with which app you want to open which file at which time.
And, IMNSHO, file type and application have fuck all to do with the filesystem. Make it metadata in the file if you must (though an OS supplied (an user-configurable) application association system is the best way (this is not limited to file extensions, you could use mime-types or a resource-fork like repository somewhere in the OS)), but please please please don't make it so that you can't do something as simple as move it onto another filesystem without losing data!
Win2k remembers every application you used to open a file type using the "Open with...", and stores it in a submenu to the right of "Open with...". It also gives you an option of choosing "Other.." which brings up a dialog of all known apps, or then you can choose any executable anywhere on your machine. You can even make it default, and the extra options stay there.
As for file typing being in Control Panel? It is!
Control Panel/Folder Options, File Types tab. Maybe it would make more sense to be called "Explorer Options", but most people wouldn't know the Desktop is called Explorer, and would think it something to do with IE. "My Computer Options" would be confused with System Properties.
But it's right there. If anyone wants to change a setting, they can do so easily by clicking the Start button, finding Control Panel, and they can find File Types from there.
Also, the File Types tab in 2k is far easier to use and makes more sense that that in 9x.
Do you think that anyone using Mac OSX for the first time would find how to change the application a file opens with? Nope, it's nowhere on the Apple Menu, or in System Preferences. Instead, you have to select the file, then Get Info from the File menu, then select "Opens with" from the drop-down menu. Not even an old-school Mac user would think of looking there!
Are you under the impression that somehow Apple don't have a monopoly? You can only run their software on their hardware. Sounds like a monopoly to me.
And I pointed out, file extensions date from the pre-unix days. Are you to call the systems around then a monopoly?
This, more than the evangelism that goes with the religion, is why I hate Macs.
.html file. But the machine was having none of that. It thought it knew better. "No, no", it seemed to say, "you don't want to be opening that, you don't know where it's been".
.java and .class (and even .rpm - with a cute ickle picture of tux) files look purty by drawing my own icons.
.css can have the same icon as a .php3, but another .css could have the same icon as a .png.
I was first introduced to this when I tried to open an
"Could not open the file because the application that created it wasn't found" (Right before a "Sorry a system error occurred. Error type 7. Restart" - patronising twat of a machine!)
An HTML file for fucks sake! Plain text with markup! Opens in IE, Mozilla or Simpletext. Just open the fucking file!
"Sorry, Dave. I can't let you do that, Dave."
It had a file extension. It was UTF-8. It was a plain and simple bastarding HTML file. And the Mac sat smugly. And refused to open it.
In the end I had to copy it across to a Windows machine and back.
And this guy at Salon thinks that's easier?
In Windows, whenever an app steals a file extension (which only happens during installation, not whenever I open a file), I take it right back, maybe leaving it in as an option on the context menu. I have Notepad on the SendTo menu, so I can always open anything as if were text. I can make
Can I do any such thing on a Mac? No. I'm stuck with the icon whichever app chose for it. If I save an HTML file from dreamweaver, I can't view it in IE without dragging it into an IE window. If I save it from fireworks, it has a different icon again. Very soon it gets impossible to tell the difference between files. A
And that's less confusing?
People are so blinded by Jobs-worship that they forget to realise that someone else is doing The Right Thing. A file type is as distinct from it's creator as it could possibly be. OSX is better, though. Guess what - it uses file extensions when the resource fork is missing. And it lets you change the app a particular file type opened with, relatively easy. But there can only be one app which opens a particular file type. Which is the Wrong Thing.
File types are not a Windows idea. They date from the pre-unix days. It makes it easy to tell what a file is by looking at it's name - handy on a teletype, or even by ftp. It also makes it easy to change a files meaning without changing its content (eg txt to html). It separates the content of a file from the application used to create it.
Another poster noted that you can drag a file onto any applications icon in Mac OS. So? That's not new. Windows does it, and so does KDE (I think - can't check right now).
Registered file types are not a means of Microsoft brainwashing. They are simply the best way to handle file typing (I know that sounds weird). mime-types are fine, until a file has unrecognised type, and is not so easy to change. File type and creator metadata is just plain wrong.
Remember: just because you don't have a clue, doesn't mean Bill Gates is out to brainwash you (hey, that rhymes...).
True. Electrons in an average electrical potential (say 5V) move through copper at a few centrimetres per second. By contrast, the speed of propogation the electrical field is c (300, 000, 000 metres per second), 9 orders of magnitude faster. It's the speed of the field that matters, not the electrons themselves.
Which is why they want to outlaw encryption - so they can open you email without anyone knowning...
Just because you have nothing to hide, doesn't mean you have nothing to fear.
NYTimes.com doesn't allow you to sign up with the email address me@privacy.net...
I never said you can't make a supercomputer out of Macs, in the same way you make a supercomputer out of e-machines. I was responding to the fallacy that a single desktop computer is a supercomputer. By definition, a supercomputer is one which is far more powerful than a desktop.
A single Mac is not a supercomputer, despite what Apple say. A single G4 is not even as powerful as a single P3. But string either of them together, and you can have a nice cluster.
Unfortunately, Apple shipped SMP machines long before any SMP-capable OS. And didn't tell their lusers that that second G4 was idling at 500MHz. They just run photoshop filters and say 'I'm sure that one went faster, just then'.
The reason people think Macs are good for Graphic Design is because Graphic Designers think they're good.
A quick Google reveals the following
Enormous FPU performance with three simultaneous instructions and one GFLOP at 500 MHz (1 billion floating-point number operations per second) with 80 bit floating-point numbers. Two GFLOP with MMX and 3DNow! instructions. That at least equals Pentium III's performance with full utilization of Katmai. The 3DNow! engine has even been improved comparing to the K6-3.
Yeah, they're talking about an Athlon, and it's only 1GFlop, but it's quite an old article, the Athlon still being in Slot 1 form.
Or, from Intels site (use lynx because it refreshes to a missing page)
The adder and multiplier were placed on different ports. This allows for simultaneous dispatch of 2-wide addition and 2-wide multiplication operations. This boosts the peak performance two more times when compared to the Pentium II, and hence, it allows 2.2 GFLOP/sec peak at 550 MHz. The new units developed on the Pentium III and modified P6 units are shown in color in Figure 3
Which also reveals that the PII was capable of 1GFlop.
Moral of today's story:
Search before flamebaiting, please.
there is always a layer for translation to simpler operations
True. Every computer interprets instructions, right the way down to the simplest level of switching a gate on or off.
The difference between RISC and CISC is the instruction set exposed to the programmer (compiler, interpreter, whatever), and thus the number of memory accesses needed to implement something complex. But if you were to believe Apple advertising (which anyone who actually buys Apples must do...), you would think less instructions is better.
I was simply demonstrating that anything Apple tell their lusers is believed, whether it's true, fabricated, or just hiding certain facts (like the relative floating point performance of the G4).
Feel free to disagree.
Yes, we all saw the Apple ads for the G4 being capable of 1GFlop. What you didn't see, was that the Pentium III 500 was capable of ~2GFlop. Now that can run an 1GHz. You also didn't see that AMD's Athlon, having a superscalar FPU, is faster than a P3. And now they can run at 1.6GHz. The P4 has new instructions to speed up certain types of multimedia processing as well. By contrast, the G4 is only now approaching 1GHz. Go figure (as you Americans say.. :o)
An Apple is not a supercomputer.
RISC does not mean faster. It allows for simpler design which can lead to increased speed, but as we have seen, Apple have consistently failed to compete with Intel and AMD (not that they even make thier own chips...). CISC is actually a good idea, since with the huge speed differential between CPU and memory, and the introduction of cache, the bottleneck in any system is the memory bandwidth. Think for a moment : why did Intel add instructions to the x86 architecture in every iteration? Because its faster having one instruction doing something complex, than many simple ones, simply because of the reduced frequency of memory access. In todays computers, RISC doesn't mean anything, since memory, storage and network bandwidth is the bottleneck.
The moral of this story:
1: Don't believe Apple's advertising.
2: Don't believe what a Mac Zealot will tell you about RISC or some other claptrap.
3: Get ppc Mandrake if you're unfortunate enough to have actually bought a G4.
Yes, I use Macs. Daily. And I hate Apple. But my PHB is a Mac zealot. It frightens the hell out of me seeing all our company's work being stored on a Mac (OS9 (no pre-emption, memory protection, RAID, journalling, or anything you would want for a server...)).
Yes, Classic is a Mach process and all that yada yada yada.
My point was that Classic is still as unstable as it ever was. And this security hole only affects Classic, not OSX, or even OS9. J Random Binary is still capable of nuking your home directory, and the OS9 System Folder even if it can't damage your OSX installation. So like I said, use OSX if you must, but don't install Classic if you care about your data.
And it's only Classic [blech] apps than are executed automatically. So its not a Unix problem. Its a Mac OS problem. The fact that their OS (their being Mac OS, not that hideous mutation of BSD) has only one privilige level is the worry. Any random binary can scribble over the memory of any other app (thank you Apple, for failing to include memory protection), even the OS itself, including filesystems drivers! Ever wonder why it tells you restart after a random app crashes (which is often) ? Because it could have (and probably did), nuke all the data another app was working with, which will in turn crash and nuke another app...
Anyway, back ontopic... If you want a secure Unix OS, use Linux, or [Net|Free|Open]BSD. At a pinch you can use OSX (But whatever you don't DON'T install Classic. And log in as a normal user. And reenable the root account so you can disable sudo (but with a nice strong password)). If you want a pretty [blech] gui with transparency and animated menus and the "genie-in-a-bottle" effect, but don't care about your data, then by all means, use Mac OS.
Think different? Different what, colours? How about you just think for a moment...
1. Don't buy them
2. Don't buy them
3. This is what the US does anyway. They fund countries fighting against their enemies and then when they bite the hand that feeds, they strike back with military force. ie Iran/Iraq, Afghanistan/Russia. Oh, didn't you know that US funded Osama Bin Laden during the cold war?
4. Boycott Adobe
"Restrictions are in place for our own safety"
.gov would want to tap my phones is if I were doing something bad "
Noone can be accidentally hurt by cryptography. The point that nobody seems to be saying is that terrorists can cooridnate their actions WITHOUT cryptography. And definitely without backdoored versions.
"Goverment phone taps do not bother me because I know the only reason the
Such as burning the flag or saying something wrong or voting for Al Gore. Seriously, this is flying in the face your constitution. As someone said on a previous thread "Just because you have nothing to hide doesn't mean you have nothing to fear."
A thread on this article a bit further up mentions that we need to tell people what crypto is, rather than explaining how it works. Your description of the locked box is the clearest message I've read here (it even helped me understand crypto better. I could actually implement this in ~1 minute using perl and /dev/random). This is the message we have to get to the normals.
Not to moderators : Mod parent up. A lot.
"At least its just a portion of your civil liberties that's being sacrificed"
Well, there goes another one. And now that we don't have privacy, what about cruel and unusual punishment? That's got to go too. How about freedom of speech? The right to express an opinion that the government is wrong?
Crytpography will soon be doublethink (the Party can use it to keep us secure by not allowing us to be secure). Anything else is Newspeak.
No, the purpose of cryptography is to buy stuff online without your credit card numbers being read by others.
The purpose of cryptography is to ensure that a piece of software you downloaded is authentic and hasn't been trojanned.
The purpose of cryptography is to talk to your friends about personal stuff without it being known by stalkers.
The purpose of cryptography is to ensure that a message really did come from a particular person, and wasn't altered in any way or read by anyone else.
And you liken that to slavery?
That is not only wrong, but stupid. If that were so, why will it be called a 'pluggable' look and feel?
F ee lClassName");
All you need is a package which implements the look and feel, and then tell the UIManager to use it.
Comme ça
javax.swing.UIManager.setLookAndFeel("MyLookAnd
And you can very easily have the windows look&feel because it is part of the standard JDK. Sun's JDK, that is, not Apple's half-assed buggy-as-hell version in OSX, where they try to get you to use their own non-standard APIs, tying you to thier platform (deja-vu anyone?).
But what if you were to take Apple's Aqua PLAF from their java implementation and run it on another platform? Would they still sue? After all, java is supposed to be cross-platform. You're not stealing, you're using their software. You're not even recompiling! But because it's not on OSX, they will get the lawyers round. Hopefully, Sun would sue Apple instead....
This is not redundant. It is frighteningly close to the truth. Dubya is gun happy. And now he needs absolutely no excuse to continue his fathers idiotic star wars programme. He can shoot planes out of the sky and claim that they were being hijacked. He can arrest anyone and claim they were terrorists. He can read your email, have you followed, have you shot, on the suspicion of terrorism. And how do you define terrorism now? Anyone who speaks out against America.
The name of 'Osama Bin Laden' (is that even a real person?) is being used a propoganda target, just as Milosovic before him, Hussein, Gaddafi, and on and on....
Dubya never actually started a war with China (despite how much he wanted to), because they have nukes now. But now he's found a new target. A small country without a UN recognised government. A country with thousands of innocent civilians who will be killed when the US sends in their bombs. A country with a volunteer army and no major weaponry. And no hope of defence from the slaughter that America will bring. It will be another Vietnam, except the US will be even more ruthless, killing innocents from afar with laser-guided weaponry.
Think about this for a moment. Number of people killed on September 11th : 6000+
Number of people killed by the US in Iran, Iraq, Cuba, Serbia, Bosnia, Vietnam : Millions.
America is the new Ingsoc. Dubya is Big Brother. Afghanistan is the Enemy. Osama Bin Laden is Emanuel Goldstein.
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
That's not the problem. The problem is that people like Rambus can sit on a standards commitee, steer it the way they want, and then file patents. Which get granted. And cause untold harm to the entire industry.
And what if something happens to the pilot?
Preventing anyone entering the cockpit would be extremely dangerous if the pilot(s) were incapacitaed in some way. It has happened before. Passengers have had to land planes. If they couldn't get to the cockpit, there would be no hope. While it would prevent hijacking, it would be too dangerous.
A better idea may be to have planes controllable from the ground. In the vent of a hijacking, the ground can take over. Then the military security would be needed in the ground control..