"Killing off entire generations of mosquitos with cheap insecticides like DDT could save hundreds of thousands of lives each year. Unfortunately donor nations, such as the U.S., tend to balk at paying for DDT, which is banned in the U.S. Thus, lives are lost."
...as opposed to them and their children and their children's children dying slow, lingering deaths from cancer.
"The Macintosh was indisputably years ahead of every other PC platform in terms of user-interface design."
And a couple of years later, the Amiga was at the same point. And Beta was better than VHS, etc., etc., ad nauseum. It's not performance or technological superiority that guarantees success, but money and advertising.
"They won't make a new Newton for the same reason why they won't make a new Apple// computer, they want to move on to other things."
They couldn't bring back the Newton now even if Jobs wanted too. The people responsible for the Newton OS are long gone. IIRC, the OS guys left just after Newton, Inc. was reabsorbed back into Apple. And without the Newton OS, it wouldn't be a Newton.
http://talk.smaller.com/Forum1/HTML/002284.html (See ninth post down, by "Ex Newton OS Engineer.")
"At one time Apple almost considered using a PalmOS device. Remember that is what the Newton would be competing against."
There were prototypes at the time (late 1997) that WERE about that form factor. Had the Newton not been "Steved" six years ago, who knows how far the Newton could have come?
Well, obviously that's your opinion. But the judge had already warned MS about their "trademark," and it's quite likely that Robertson would have brought up the fact that MS tried three previous times to trademark "Windows" and was denied each time. Then, inexplicably, MS is granted a trademark on a generic word. I doubt MS wants the court looking into that too closely.
No internet via the one analog cable compny here, and Sprint owns all the phone lines, so if I want broadband, it's $45 for 512K, $60 for 1.5M (or $53 and $75, respectively, if you don't sign up for a year).
Still, an OS shouldn't even allow an outside executable to execute, at least not without making absolutely sure the user understands the possible consequences. And if it's a computer at work, not even then.
...and those are no less a genetic manipulation. The only difference is that, rather than happening in a lab, these dogs were inter-bred for years and years, countless generations of inbreeding, until they, like the Persian cats, mutate to the point of having continuous sinus problems due their misshappen snouts.
If that's okay with the free-rangers and anti-fur folk, then this fish should be okay, too.
These things aren't going to survive in the wild if released. Geez. There's a reason why albinos are rare in nature: they stick out like a sore thumb! Considering that other, bigger (predatory) fish see in color, as to oh, birds like ospreys and fish-hawks, just how many minutes do you give this "evil genetic mutant" before he's lunch?
True, and the same in other disciplines
on
Does IT Matter?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As a metrologist, I am acutely aware that my job is not a "valued added" function. I work for an aerospace company that is one of the 30 companies whose stocks make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average. What I do, day in and day out, does not help sell product. What I mean is, consumers expect their avionics to meet spec. They do not expect to pay extra to have the test equipment that was used to align these devices calibrated; they take that for granted. As such, it adds no saleable quality to the end product. If aerospace companies could do without a calibration department, they would certainly do so. Luckily (from my point of view) certain agencies DO understand the importance of having measurements based on traceable national and international standards (like the FAA, and ISO). And hopefully it will help make the difference between your airliner landing on that runway in the fog, and touching down in the swamp just to the left. But still, my job function is considered "indirect" and does not help sell the product.
I see IT as being in the same same boat...companies NEED an effective IT department to stay competitive, but consumers are not willing to pay extra for it. It is a foregone conclusion by consumers that effcient companies have an effective IT infrastructure.
Like calibration, IT is not likely to be missed until the effects of its disappearance are noticed.
Realistically, why would you expect a person to even know the difference between a made-for-Mac iPod and a made-for-PC iPod when they both look identical?
If two seemingly identical iPods are not expected to operate the same way, why do they have the same connectors? Hell, even being different colors would help here. White for Mac, and black (or blue or red or chartreuse) for PC.
The bottom line is, even if the operating instructions specifically stated not to use it on another OS, in italics, bolded, and quotated, it should have just refused to load. It should never have BROKEN the hardware to the point where it was worthless with ANY operating system.
Apple needs to fool-proof it better, and send new iPods to those customers whose Apple iPods were broken by Apple software.
Anything less tells me not to recommend iPods to anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent.
cheap insecticides like DDT could save hundreds of
thousands of lives each year. Unfortunately donor
nations, such as the U.S., tend to balk at paying
for DDT, which is banned in the U.S. Thus, lives
are lost."
But have the exploits been fixed? That's the real question. I patched Kerberos earlier today. What's Microsoft's mean response time, hmmmmm?
"The Macintosh was indisputably years ahead of every other PC platform in terms of user-interface design."
And a couple of years later, the Amiga was at the same point. And Beta was better than VHS, etc., etc., ad nauseum. It's not performance or technological superiority that guarantees success, but money and advertising.
Duh.
Hmmm. He sure is a beady-eyed little fuck, isn't he?
"They won't make a new Newton for the same reason why they won't make a new Apple // computer, they want to move on to other things."
They couldn't bring back the Newton now even if Jobs wanted too. The people responsible for the Newton OS are long gone. IIRC, the OS guys left just after Newton, Inc. was reabsorbed back into Apple. And without the Newton OS, it wouldn't be a Newton.
http://talk.smaller.com/Forum1/HTML/002284.html (See ninth post down, by "Ex Newton OS Engineer.")
"At one time Apple almost considered using a PalmOS device. Remember that is what the Newton would be competing against."
There were prototypes at the time (late 1997) that WERE about that form factor. Had the Newton not been "Steved" six years ago, who knows how far the Newton could have come?
Yeah! What he said.
>
Well, obviously that's your opinion. But the judge had already warned MS about their "trademark," and it's quite likely that Robertson would have brought up the fact that MS tried three previous times to trademark "Windows" and was denied each time. Then, inexplicably, MS is granted a trademark on a generic word. I doubt MS wants the court looking into that too closely.
As a Linux user, I feel I simply must point out that you misspelled sesquepedalianism.
http://www.coffeekid.com/
http://www.sweetmarias.com/
Home-roasting your own beans is the only way to go.
All the more reason for the Linux Thought Leader to "obliterate most of Utah, sco.com name servers and all."
All these planets are yours, except Mars.
Attempt no landings there.
No internet via the one analog cable compny here, and Sprint owns all the phone lines, so if I want broadband, it's $45 for 512K, $60 for 1.5M (or $53 and $75, respectively, if you don't sign up for a year).
After all, the AT&T vs BSD case was sealed, too.
...or PDP-11 and put your stuff in there.
Still, an OS shouldn't even allow an outside executable to execute, at least not without making absolutely sure the user understands the possible consequences. And if it's a computer at work, not even then.
>
Yes, I've often thought that. Very strange.
...and those are no less a genetic manipulation. The only difference is that, rather than happening in a lab, these dogs were inter-bred for years and years, countless generations of inbreeding, until they, like the Persian cats, mutate to the point of having continuous sinus problems due their misshappen snouts.
If that's okay with the free-rangers and anti-fur folk, then this fish should be okay, too.
These things aren't going to survive in the wild if released. Geez. There's a reason why albinos are rare in nature: they stick out like a sore thumb! Considering that other, bigger (predatory) fish see in color, as to oh, birds like ospreys and fish-hawks, just how many minutes do you give this "evil genetic mutant" before he's lunch?
This is a non-problem.
Luddites.
...since my Nikon CP800 uses FAT but predates this patent announcement, but I just sent Microsoft $0.25... in pennies.
Now SCO's gonna want $2800 for a license.
As a metrologist, I am acutely aware that my job is not a "valued added" function. I work for an aerospace company that is one of the 30 companies whose stocks make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average. What I do, day in and day out, does not help sell product. What I mean is, consumers expect their avionics to meet spec. They do not expect to pay extra to have the test equipment that was used to align these devices calibrated; they take that for granted. As such, it adds no saleable quality to the end product. If aerospace companies could do without a calibration department, they would certainly do so. Luckily (from my point of view) certain agencies DO understand the importance of having measurements based on traceable national and international standards (like the FAA, and ISO). And hopefully it will help make the difference between your airliner landing on that runway in the fog, and touching down in the swamp just to the left. But still, my job function is considered "indirect" and does not help sell the product.
I see IT as being in the same same boat...companies NEED an effective IT department to stay competitive, but consumers are not willing to pay extra for it. It is a foregone conclusion by consumers that effcient companies have an effective IT infrastructure.
Like calibration, IT is not likely to be missed until the effects of its disappearance are noticed.
No one forced you to work for that company. You knew (or should have known) what you were getting into. Most companies DO own your off-time creations.
I suppose that if you're worried about your employer getting your code, you could always get a job where you ask, "Would you like fries with that?"
Keep It Simple Stupid.
Realistically, why would you expect a person to even know the difference between a made-for-Mac iPod and a made-for-PC iPod when they both look identical?
If two seemingly identical iPods are not expected to operate the same way, why do they have the same connectors? Hell, even being different colors would help here. White for Mac, and black (or blue or red or chartreuse) for PC.
The bottom line is, even if the operating instructions specifically stated not to use it on another OS, in italics, bolded, and quotated, it should have just refused to load. It should never have BROKEN the hardware to the point where it was worthless with ANY operating system.
Apple needs to fool-proof it better, and send new iPods to those customers whose Apple iPods were broken by Apple software.
Anything less tells me not to recommend iPods to anyone.
...and they disavow any responsibility? WTF?