I never had a problem with that. Yes, if you double-clicked the file, it would try to open the program indicated by its creator code, regardless of the file type code. But it was always possible to either drag-and-drop onto a different application, or use the File->Open menu option within any appropriate application.
I think "fear" may be part of it -warrented or not. But I see two major differences between my childhood and my kids'.
First, I grew up in a very small rural town in the midwest. When I went outside, I could grab a baseball and bat, walk out to the yard, and hit the ball as hard as I could without having to worry about it going over a neighbors fence or into the street. If I got bored with that, I could get out a bow or BB gun and do some target shooting. When it was time for a game, just about every block had enough space for a softball game, and basketball hoops could be found on just about every garage. My kids have to get to a park (10 min walk, or bike) to play ball (every back yard in our suburban neighborhood is fenced). That's where the "fear" comes in. Most places I went as a kid, there were adults nearby who I knew and who knew me. That's not true when my kids are at the park, even to meet friends, unless I go with them.
The second is that regardless of how hard I try to prevent it, my kids end up with too many structured activities. Some are sports, some are not. But the problem (IMO) is the time lost going to and from activities. Unfortunately that's a lot of lost time they could otherwise spend playing.
Beneath the violence and the ethnic stereotypes, another trend appears: to keep up with entertainment like ''24,'' you have to pay attention, make inferences, track shifting social relationships. This is what I call the Sleeper Curve: the most debased forms of mass diversion -- video games and violent television dramas and juvenile sitcoms -- turn out to be nutritional after all.
Can't argue with the examples you've given. IIRC one of the example programs they used for contemporary shows was "24", but there are many other examples where there really is nothing comparable in "old TV". As another example, if you're a "Battlestar Galactica" fan, compare the new show to the old one WRT to plot complexity and the intermingling of arcs.
I really wish I could find that study/article, because it really addressed the fallacy of "television as mindless entertainment". Yes, some of it comes close (as you pointed out), but some takes a lot of mental accuity -a lot more than it used to.
A little history first --This is the reason that many years ago, the networks worked together (sort of) to carefully time their advertising so that it all runs at once. You flip the channel, and all the other channels have their adverts running in time-sync.
Therein lies the true cause of obesity in the US. If you're only choice is sit and watch the commercials or hit the refrigerator for a snack...
Some of the DVDs we got for the kids are so bad I ripped them, eliminated the cruft, then burned a DVD that actually starts playing the movie when inserted into the player. The kids are happier, I'm happier, and the original is safe in the cabinet.
That's right. Thanks to DRM and the DMCA, I can't skip/FF all the junk on the original, but I can easily make a full quality copy without the restrictions.
At least with VHS tapes I could use a marker to write the time point where the movie started on the tape. Then I could FF there before hitting play. I thought technology would save me from that tedium.
My limited Google skills are failing me, but there was an article about a year ago comparing the level of mental activity required for watching contemporary television vs. older television shows. It compared the single storyline/arc per episode of older shows with the multiple arcs spanning entire seasons in contemporary television. The complexity of integrating all the threads if information in current television is staggering compared to what it used to be. Many television shows of today (not all) actually do require quite a bit of active mental activity.
If anyone has or finds a pointer to that article, I'd love to read it again.
Now, I understand that some in the Windoze community may be used to being told that something will be ready at a certain time....and then the date is pushed back [cough]Longhorn[cough], but Apple has been pretty much on or ahead of schedule in recent years.
If, by recent years you mean years after breaking the G4 500 MHz barrier, you're right. I'm as big a Mac fan as any, but Apple hasn't always hit with their long-term predictions.
How many different languages/localizations does Win2k workstation support?
Apple does not do hardware specific installs. If you install it on a G5, the same install will boot and run every Mac that came before that meets the minimum hardware requirements. Not to mention that support for most peripherals are installed as well.
I'm not sure if that space incudes what's necessary for the dev tools too, or not.
The amount of free drive space required to install any app or OS (Win/Mac/Linux...) does not necessarily reflect the final size of the install. Often extra space is required during the installation procedure for scratch/temp files.
It still a pretty big install though, but I generally worry more about how much RAM an OS requires than the drive space.
If I had a dollar for every new up and coming MP3 player that was supposed to be an iPod killer...
Which is why I wonder about how much of a "monopoly" Apple really has. Its not like there aren't new competitors entering the market on a regular basis. Its not like their position is so stable that they don't have to keep pushing and innovating to stay ahead of Real, MS and some of the other players.
In all seriousness, why doesn't Apple sell Leopard for like $99 to PC users?
Because, for better or worse, Apple sees itself as a hardware company. The only reason they do software is to sell computers. The only reason the iTunes Music Store exists is to sell iPods. Over the years, people have (reasonbly) suggested Apple do all sorts of things WRT software. But if it wasn't aimed at selling hardware, Apple didn't do it.
Another way of looking at it, why should Apple share the profits with the likes of Dell?
And don't forget that around that time IBM had the PPC 620(?) that included a 386 core. It never made it to market. I don't know if that was due to legal, technical or financial issues.
So what you're saying is a joint ESA/NASA project is doomed to failure.
We have enough trouble with the footmeter problem. Allowing NASA to calculate how many liters of fuel are needed to send a probe a billion miles could be a real problem.
Just out of curiousity, is the same true goint the other direction (milli-, micro-, nano-...)?
This was many years ago, and not in Minnesota, but the worst mosquito problem I ever encountered was playing a high school baseball game, played near a wooded, marshy area, after dark, under the lights. The game was called off after the 3rd inning because of mosquitos -you couldn't throw a ball or swing a bat without hitting some. Standing still at the plate waiting for the pitch was torture. Fortunately, the pitcher didn't want to stand too still too long either. The umpire apologized to the coaches for not calling it earlier. He initially thought we could make it through 5 innings to make it an officially completed game, but soon realized he wouldn't last that long.
Some people tried coungint their bites after we were safely away, but I don't think it was possible to get an accurate count.
Not every time. Just the first time you run an application that has never been run before. Its actually a very good idea IMO. That way you know that supposed image file you just opened actually caused a program to run on your computer that has never run before. If an image viewer you've used before opens, no warning is given. It happens rarely enough that it is quite useful.
I understand that (that's why the blade and handle were patented, the shaving cream formula a secret). But it seems that both can be used to prevent other products from interoperating. Apple's FairPlay DRM may have several forms of "protection". Their may be patents involved in how it works, the actual implementation code would by copyrighted, and key parts of the methods may be kept secret to prevent reverse-engineering.
For better or worse, all those "protections" are there to prevent Product A from one company from working with Product B from another.
I know I don't have the legal/business vocabulary down, but I understood the "expenses" to be limited to more direct costs the law firm has to pay out to 3rd parites -like hiring expert witnesses, costs related to taking depositions, travel costs...
That doesn't mean it couldn't be abused to a degree...
But then don't all patents and trade secrets d othe same?
If I patent a new type of razor blade that only works with my patented handle, aren't consumers forced to use both if they want to use either? Or if the blade only works with my secret shaving cream formula?
Is the shaving system (music system) the product, or are the individual pieces the products?
The final compromise asserts that companies should share the required technical data with any rival that wants to offer compatible music players and online stores,
So for music from the iTMS, the "technical data" is to burn to CD, rip to mp3, transfer to music player of choice.
To play on the iPod, other music stores just need to sell music in non-protected form (AAC or mp3).
Note that AFAIK (from summarized English translations) it says nothing of the process being free, easy, or lossless.
They may have. There were many items in the "Final Disclosure" that IBM did not challenge as being insufficiently described. Meaning they probably did have line numbers, file and version listed. Since the actual list is under seal, none of us know for sure. This was just the first stroke of the axe, cutting out all alleged instances of misuse that have not been sufficiently specified.
In the next stage, the summary judgement phase, IBM may ask the judge to toss out more. However the bar for summary judgment is pretty high (the "facts" are not in dispute), but that doesn't mean we can't expect more of the instances of alleged misuse to be axed at this step too.
Anything remaining would then be left for a jury to decide.
Slashdot Mirror
I never had a problem with that. Yes, if you double-clicked the file, it would try to open the program indicated by its creator code, regardless of the file type code. But it was always possible to either drag-and-drop onto a different application, or use the File->Open menu option within any appropriate application.
I think "fear" may be part of it -warrented or not. But I see two major differences between my childhood and my kids'.
First, I grew up in a very small rural town in the midwest. When I went outside, I could grab a baseball and bat, walk out to the yard, and hit the ball as hard as I could without having to worry about it going over a neighbors fence or into the street. If I got bored with that, I could get out a bow or BB gun and do some target shooting. When it was time for a game, just about every block had enough space for a softball game, and basketball hoops could be found on just about every garage. My kids have to get to a park (10 min walk, or bike) to play ball (every back yard in our suburban neighborhood is fenced). That's where the "fear" comes in. Most places I went as a kid, there were adults nearby who I knew and who knew me. That's not true when my kids are at the park, even to meet friends, unless I go with them.
The second is that regardless of how hard I try to prevent it, my kids end up with too many structured activities. Some are sports, some are not. But the problem (IMO) is the time lost going to and from activities. Unfortunately that's a lot of lost time they could otherwise spend playing.
Can't argue with the examples you've given. IIRC one of the example programs they used for contemporary shows was "24", but there are many other examples where there really is nothing comparable in "old TV". As another example, if you're a "Battlestar Galactica" fan, compare the new show to the old one WRT to plot complexity and the intermingling of arcs.
I really wish I could find that study/article, because it really addressed the fallacy of "television as mindless entertainment". Yes, some of it comes close (as you pointed out), but some takes a lot of mental accuity -a lot more than it used to.
A little history first --This is the reason that many years ago, the networks worked together (sort of) to carefully time their advertising so that it all runs at once. You flip the channel, and all the other channels have their adverts running in time-sync.
Therein lies the true cause of obesity in the US. If you're only choice is sit and watch the commercials or hit the refrigerator for a snack...
Some of the DVDs we got for the kids are so bad I ripped them, eliminated the cruft, then burned a DVD that actually starts playing the movie when inserted into the player. The kids are happier, I'm happier, and the original is safe in the cabinet.
That's right. Thanks to DRM and the DMCA, I can't skip/FF all the junk on the original, but I can easily make a full quality copy without the restrictions.
At least with VHS tapes I could use a marker to write the time point where the movie started on the tape. Then I could FF there before hitting play. I thought technology would save me from that tedium.
My limited Google skills are failing me, but there was an article about a year ago comparing the level of mental activity required for watching contemporary television vs. older television shows. It compared the single storyline/arc per episode of older shows with the multiple arcs spanning entire seasons in contemporary television. The complexity of integrating all the threads if information in current television is staggering compared to what it used to be. Many television shows of today (not all) actually do require quite a bit of active mental activity.
If anyone has or finds a pointer to that article, I'd love to read it again.
For a sample,
Now, I understand that some in the Windoze community may be used to being told that something will be ready at a certain time....and then the date is pushed back [cough]Longhorn[cough], but Apple has been pretty much on or ahead of schedule in recent years.
If, by recent years you mean years after breaking the G4 500 MHz barrier, you're right. I'm as big a Mac fan as any, but Apple hasn't always hit with their long-term predictions.
Yes, comparing one company's PR with another company's beta results in some fairly... fruitless... comparisons.
Some additional factors to consider.
How many different languages/localizations does Win2k workstation support?
Apple does not do hardware specific installs. If you install it on a G5, the same install will boot and run every Mac that came before that meets the minimum hardware requirements. Not to mention that support for most peripherals are installed as well.
I'm not sure if that space incudes what's necessary for the dev tools too, or not.
The amount of free drive space required to install any app or OS (Win/Mac/Linux...) does not necessarily reflect the final size of the install. Often extra space is required during the installation procedure for scratch/temp files.
It still a pretty big install though, but I generally worry more about how much RAM an OS requires than the drive space.
If I had a dollar for every new up and coming MP3 player that was supposed to be an iPod killer...
Which is why I wonder about how much of a "monopoly" Apple really has. Its not like there aren't new competitors entering the market on a regular basis. Its not like their position is so stable that they don't have to keep pushing and innovating to stay ahead of Real, MS and some of the other players.
In all seriousness, why doesn't Apple sell Leopard for like $99 to PC users?
Because, for better or worse, Apple sees itself as a hardware company. The only reason they do software is to sell computers. The only reason the iTunes Music Store exists is to sell iPods. Over the years, people have (reasonbly) suggested Apple do all sorts of things WRT software. But if it wasn't aimed at selling hardware, Apple didn't do it.
Another way of looking at it, why should Apple share the profits with the likes of Dell?
And don't forget that around that time IBM had the PPC 620(?) that included a 386 core. It never made it to market. I don't know if that was due to legal, technical or financial issues.
So what you're saying is a joint ESA/NASA project is doomed to failure.
We have enough trouble with the footmeter problem. Allowing NASA to calculate how many liters of fuel are needed to send a probe a billion miles could be a real problem.
Just out of curiousity, is the same true goint the other direction (milli-, micro-, nano-...)?
Try here. for Apple's official description of how it works.
This was many years ago, and not in Minnesota, but the worst mosquito problem I ever encountered was playing a high school baseball game, played near a wooded, marshy area, after dark, under the lights. The game was called off after the 3rd inning because of mosquitos -you couldn't throw a ball or swing a bat without hitting some. Standing still at the plate waiting for the pitch was torture. Fortunately, the pitcher didn't want to stand too still too long either. The umpire apologized to the coaches for not calling it earlier. He initially thought we could make it through 5 innings to make it an officially completed game, but soon realized he wouldn't last that long.
Some people tried coungint their bites after we were safely away, but I don't think it was possible to get an accurate count.
Not every time. Just the first time you run an application that has never been run before. Its actually a very good idea IMO. That way you know that supposed image file you just opened actually caused a program to run on your computer that has never run before. If an image viewer you've used before opens, no warning is given. It happens rarely enough that it is quite useful.
For the first account, yes. For all admin accounts??? For a non-admin account -no (used for my youngest kid on a non-networked Mac).
I understand that (that's why the blade and handle were patented, the shaving cream formula a secret). But it seems that both can be used to prevent other products from interoperating. Apple's FairPlay DRM may have several forms of "protection". Their may be patents involved in how it works, the actual implementation code would by copyrighted, and key parts of the methods may be kept secret to prevent reverse-engineering.
For better or worse, all those "protections" are there to prevent Product A from one company from working with Product B from another.
I know I don't have the legal/business vocabulary down, but I understood the "expenses" to be limited to more direct costs the law firm has to pay out to 3rd parites -like hiring expert witnesses, costs related to taking depositions, travel costs...
That doesn't mean it couldn't be abused to a degree...
I'm not saying its a good solution, I'm just pointing out that according to the proposed law (as far as I understand it), that would be sufficient.
IMO pointing out a potential deficiency is helping. Doesn't mean I can do much about it though.
But then don't all patents and trade secrets d othe same?
If I patent a new type of razor blade that only works with my patented handle, aren't consumers forced to use both if they want to use either? Or if the blade only works with my secret shaving cream formula?
Is the shaving system (music system) the product, or are the individual pieces the products?
So for music from the iTMS, the "technical data" is to burn to CD, rip to mp3, transfer to music player of choice.
To play on the iPod, other music stores just need to sell music in non-protected form (AAC or mp3).
Note that AFAIK (from summarized English translations) it says nothing of the process being free, easy, or lossless.
They may have. There were many items in the "Final Disclosure" that IBM did not challenge as being insufficiently described. Meaning they probably did have line numbers, file and version listed. Since the actual list is under seal, none of us know for sure. This was just the first stroke of the axe, cutting out all alleged instances of misuse that have not been sufficiently specified.
In the next stage, the summary judgement phase, IBM may ask the judge to toss out more. However the bar for summary judgment is pretty high (the "facts" are not in dispute), but that doesn't mean we can't expect more of the instances of alleged misuse to be axed at this step too.
Anything remaining would then be left for a jury to decide.
At least that's how I understand the process.