I think this is an incredibly bad idea, which will further split the Apple product line. Consider how much trouble Apple had when they switched from 68XXX CPU to the PPC chip, and initially, most third party apps ran in emulation and slowly. The same thing just happened between OS9/OSX, again, many "classic" apps had to run in emulation.
So what happens when you take your "Mac" copy of Photoshop and try and run it on an Apple x86 box? Does it fork into an Intel binary, or is there going to be an additional layer of emulation to further slow it down?
I think things are already fractured at Apple, a move to x86 will simply fracture it more.
The reasons Apple wouldn't do an Intel Mac are blatently clear to anyone who has observed the marketplace at all.
Apple sells premium priced machines to a die-hard, hard-core following of graphic designers, musicians and video editors. These are people willing to pay extra for a quiet, good-looking machine as part of their studio.
If the machine were built from an Intel chip, it would kill the core audience of Mac followers. They can't point to their machine and proclaim how different it is from "regular" PCs, it would be noisy because the Intel chips run hotter and therefore require more fans, and with an Intel chip, it would remove the barrier between common and premium home computers.
Would you buy a BMW with a Chevy engine in it? Probably not. So why would you buy a Mac with an Intel chip in it?
Apple knows that with the core audience, the computer they buy says something about them, just like the car they drive. It must be 'different', so there's an aura of prestige.
Apple hasn't made a computer for the common man since the Apple II -- they have always priced themselves for the premium buyer who wants something better than average.
My Cable modem is SLOW as it is, imagine how slow it would be if everyone was using broadband! Your cable modem service would be slower than a 56k connection!
Cable modem wasn't DESIGNED to handle "everyone" on Broadband. That's why the prices are high, because if the prices were lower, everyone would sign up, and then everyone would learn what a sham it all was.
This way the Market bears what it can, those on the upside of the digital divide sign up, pay more, and get better service.
So, we've already got a 'tail-less' airplane, now we want to make one without ailerons or flaps as well? With vectored thrust, isn't a matter of time before we have a wingless, tailless, control-surface-less airplane that can also hover?
Or, is that what they are tesing at area 51? (start humming the X-files theme for more mood)...
And for those of you who are asking about the Wright bros. patent, the government can ignore patent any time they want, just ask the family of Robert Goddard.
I'm not complaining about the Rod Stewart sounding song -- somebody else will likely do it for me.... I'm complaining about the opening title's visuals.
They are trying to show these space "firsts", like the moonlanding, and the first warp drive ship -- but please, where are the Russians in all this?
I mean, they show Alan Shepard, which is fine, but where the hell is Yuri Gagarin? If they really wanted to present a history of Earth space travel, it needs to be more balanced.
Esign Chekov would be displeased with this vision of the Future -- where only Americans have gone into Space.
Obviously you've never read Candide? Satire does exist far beyond socio-political climate in which it was created, *if it's good enough*.
My guess is that 100 years from now, Hitchhiker's will be required reading in some College level courses.
But my guess is that you've never read either book I've cited here, as, judging by the drivel you spouted, I doubt you're literate beyond the Junior-High-School level.
What percentage of the Jury owned and used a computer on a daily basis? If it was a small percentage, do you feel you were really given justice by a jury of your peers?
RedBull (the beverage) was hyped relentlessly in the Playstation game Wipeout XL. In fact, when I'd first started playing the game, I'd never even *heard* of RedBull. It wasn't unitl a friend in California sent me some that I even knew the stuff was real.
So, why not do this all the time? If they are willing to do it for the reviewers, then dispense with the Audio Cassette and CD formats entirely, and just sell self-running albums in stores, complete with headphones.
The RIAA could put the Audio Equipment manufacturers out of business, leaving only Sony, who's a record company and Audio Equipment maker all in one.
Maybe that's what Steve Ballmer was jumping up and down about, shouting "Developers Developers Developers Developers!". According to Microsoft, bad code is GOOD.
Foist bad code onto the public, make money. When public complains about the Bad code, make them pay MORE to upgrade to slightly better bad code.
And so on.
Bad code is good, because with good code, you only get paid ONCE. With bad code, you get paid FOREVER.
Well, there I think you've hit it on the head. If you take an existing practice and simply apply it to a new, emerging technology, is it really a new idea?
For example, if I now patent "action process done via PDA", or "via cell-phone", do I get to sue Ebay when their auctions are available via these two other devices?
Simply taking an existing practice and applying it to a DEVICE isn't "an invention" that should be patent-able.
Do you get the feeling that stupid laws do not get revised until somebody gets killed over it?
I imagine a time where someone patents "Typing on a computer keyboard makes letters appear on the computer screen", and then tries to sue all computer users in the US.
It won't be until someone shuts him up by putting a bullet in his head that the government will wake up and say "You know, this 'patent the obvious' thing really doesn't work."
The only other way would be to patent "Winning a presidential election by changing the voter cards in Florida", and then trying to sue Dubya.
Until there's enough clamor to change the laws in this country, stupid laws stay on the books.
Maybe someone should write their congressman, and propose that "Frivilous LAwsuits" be defined as "A terrorist act", and them we can send all the lawyers to jail. Or a firing squad.
I learned the Truth at seventeen, That P2P is met with Lawyer Teams. And High School file sharing friends, destroyed by thought control bends.
We all play the game, but when we dare, to download songs, is it unfair? Inventing email accounts unknown, causing profit losses to the bone, that call and say "Don't download that!" but we think that Napster was just phat.
Is Red Hat the Microsoft of Linux? Well sure, but if your definition of Microsoft is: "Fairly dominant OS distribution with a good set of bundled applications that's easy to install, reliable and actually comes with support."
Now, as much as the Anti-MS faction is here, that's a fair assessment of MS products, and a fair assesment of Red Hat.
Is Red Hat a domineering, conceited bunch of bastards trying to send modern computing backwards a hundred years by creating bloated, buggy garbage that is marketed to destroy any competing and probably superior product? I don't think so, even though the above statement is *also* a fair assesment of Microsoft.
Therefore, Red Hat is like Microsoft, but only like one side of Microsoft.
But rather, I wish that Microsoft was more like Red Hat.
Let me create an analogy for a minute. Let's say I'm some prankster, and I call up the Local Telco here (Verizon) and say I want to foward the number of IBM to my home phone instead. Now, if Verizon were as stupid as Verisign, all I'd have to do is fax them a change order on IBM stationery, and it would go through and all of IBM's business would come to my home phone. Don't you think IBM would hold the phone company responsible if it took them a long time to resolve the situation (or even let it happen in the first place!)
Point is -- Verisign still thinks it's the wild west out here on the net, and they don't provide customer service of any kind. Furthermore, they are completely incapable of providing the services they offer. Criminal negligence is prosecutable. The fact that it's easier to change IBM's domian than it is to change IBM's phone number shows the maturity of the phone company -- they've already had to deal with pranks like that for decades.
And the fact that Verisign has no provision for knowing how to deal with these situations, and furthermore doesn't follow standard business practices (such as those provided by a phone company) makes them responsible for both "letting it happen in the first place" and "dragging their heels to fix the problem once it became clear what happened".
And I say.... Bounce a gravition particle beam off the main deflector dish. That's the way we do things lad, we're making shit up as we wish. The Klingons and the Romulans, pose no threat to us! 'Cause if we find we're in a bind, we just make some shit up.
You wrote: Incidentally, there is concern in the press that Spider-Man may peak too early because it opened on so many screens; however, I'm sure it was intentional, as they knew they had to make as much money as possible in the two weeks before AOTC opened.
Actually, how many screens it opens on has to do with how much of an opening weekend they want, because many of the unions have contracts that state that so-and-so people in the production get a precentage of the Opening weekend take. This is why opening weekends are so important to folks in Hollywoodland. Because some people get a cut of that $114 million.
Remember that Studios often go out of their way to cook the books so that they can claim that movies never make any money, (I think Eddie Murphy's still waiting for his take on Berverly Hills Cop) because this way they don't have to pay out. They also don't have to pay taxes.
As such, many people negotiated so that their take was based on a percentage of opening weekend rather than a take based on overall profit.
That's why every movie has to open BIG -- and then if it makes money after that, it's icing on the cake. Then the studio gets to make money after the opening weekend.
And isn't it ironic that when I click on the link to the the Yahoo story about a guy busted for copying DVDs, a Yahoo Advertisement pops under my browser with an ad for software that allows me to copy DVDs....
Come on, didn't you just *know* it was going to suck when the commercials proclaim it as "The Cinematic Event of the Year" or something like that -- whenever they use that kind of language in the commercial, it's usually becuase no reviewer had anything good to say about it -- not even when they misquote the movie reviewer!
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is an incredibly bad idea, which will further split the Apple product line. Consider how much trouble Apple had when they switched from 68XXX CPU to the PPC chip, and initially, most third party apps ran in emulation and slowly. The same thing just happened between OS9/OSX, again, many "classic" apps had to run in emulation.
So what happens when you take your "Mac" copy of Photoshop and try and run it on an Apple x86 box? Does it fork into an Intel binary, or is there going to be an additional layer of emulation to further slow it down?
I think things are already fractured at Apple, a move to x86 will simply fracture it more.
The reasons Apple wouldn't do an Intel Mac are blatently clear to anyone who has observed the marketplace at all.
Apple sells premium priced machines to a die-hard, hard-core following of graphic designers, musicians and video editors. These are people willing to pay extra for a quiet, good-looking machine as part of their studio.
If the machine were built from an Intel chip, it would kill the core audience of Mac followers. They can't point to their machine and proclaim how different it is from "regular" PCs, it would be noisy because the Intel chips run hotter and therefore require more fans, and with an Intel chip, it would remove the barrier between common and premium home computers.
Would you buy a BMW with a Chevy engine in it? Probably not. So why would you buy a Mac with an Intel chip in it?
Apple knows that with the core audience, the computer they buy says something about them, just like the car they drive. It must be 'different', so there's an aura of prestige.
Apple hasn't made a computer for the common man since the Apple II -- they have always priced themselves for the premium buyer who wants something better than average.
My Cable modem is SLOW as it is, imagine how slow it would be if everyone was using broadband! Your cable modem service would be slower than a 56k connection!
Cable modem wasn't DESIGNED to handle "everyone" on Broadband. That's why the prices are high, because if the prices were lower, everyone would sign up, and then everyone would learn what a sham it all was.
This way the Market bears what it can, those on the upside of the digital divide sign up, pay more, and get better service.
Duh.
http://www.savekaryn.com is a site where Karyn wants visitors to her site to pay off her credit card debt via donations.
Doesn't that sound like an infringment of Amazon's patent?
If so, then this could be a good thing!
So, we've already got a 'tail-less' airplane, now we want to make one without ailerons or flaps as well? With vectored thrust, isn't a matter of time before we have a wingless, tailless, control-surface-less airplane that can also hover?
Or, is that what they are tesing at area 51? (start humming the X-files theme for more mood)...
And for those of you who are asking about the Wright bros. patent, the government can ignore patent any time they want, just ask the family of Robert Goddard.
I'm not complaining about the Rod Stewart sounding song -- somebody else will likely do it for me.... I'm complaining about the opening title's visuals.
They are trying to show these space "firsts", like the moonlanding, and the first warp drive ship -- but please, where are the Russians in all this?
I mean, they show Alan Shepard, which is fine, but where the hell is Yuri Gagarin? If they really wanted to present a history of Earth space travel, it needs to be more balanced.
Esign Chekov would be displeased with this vision of the Future -- where only Americans have gone into Space.
Obviously you've never read Candide? Satire does exist far beyond socio-political climate in which it was created, *if it's good enough*.
My guess is that 100 years from now, Hitchhiker's will be required reading in some College level courses.
But my guess is that you've never read either book I've cited here, as, judging by the drivel you spouted, I doubt you're literate beyond the Junior-High-School level.
What percentage of the Jury owned and used a computer on a daily basis? If it was a small percentage, do you feel you were really given justice by a jury of your peers?
I agree with your post but your sig makes no sense. You can't live in the future, only the present.
Well, you know what they say....
It's not the present, it's the thought that counts.
BWahhahahahahaha.
Sorry.
RedBull (the beverage) was hyped relentlessly in the Playstation game Wipeout XL. In fact, when I'd first started playing the game, I'd never even *heard* of RedBull. It wasn't unitl a friend in California sent me some that I even knew the stuff was real.
Now it's all over the place. Co-incedence?
So, why not do this all the time? If they are willing to do it for the reviewers, then dispense with the Audio Cassette and CD formats entirely, and just sell self-running albums in stores, complete with headphones.
The RIAA could put the Audio Equipment manufacturers out of business, leaving only Sony, who's a record company and Audio Equipment maker all in one.
Maybe that's what Steve Ballmer was jumping up and down about, shouting "Developers Developers Developers Developers!". According to Microsoft, bad code is GOOD.
Foist bad code onto the public, make money. When public complains about the Bad code, make them pay MORE to upgrade to slightly better bad code.
And so on.
Bad code is good, because with good code, you only get paid ONCE. With bad code, you get paid FOREVER.
Well, there I think you've hit it on the head. If you take an existing practice and simply apply it to a new, emerging technology, is it really a new idea?
For example, if I now patent "action process done via PDA", or "via cell-phone", do I get to sue Ebay when their auctions are available via these two other devices?
Simply taking an existing practice and applying it to a DEVICE isn't "an invention" that should be patent-able.
I used to run a BBS on my C=64 that had a buy/sell area, and I'll bet I still have the message boards on a floppy somewhere...
In fact, before there was eBay, a later BBS I had (run on First Class software on a Mac), also had a buy/sell message board.
Do you get the feeling that stupid laws do not get revised until somebody gets killed over it?
I imagine a time where someone patents "Typing on a computer keyboard makes letters appear on the computer screen", and then tries to sue all computer users in the US.
It won't be until someone shuts him up by putting a bullet in his head that the government will wake up and say "You know, this 'patent the obvious' thing really doesn't work."
The only other way would be to patent "Winning a presidential election by changing the voter cards in Florida", and then trying to sue Dubya.
Until there's enough clamor to change the laws in this country, stupid laws stay on the books.
Maybe someone should write their congressman, and propose that "Frivilous LAwsuits" be defined as "A terrorist act", and them we can send all the lawyers to jail. Or a firing squad.
I learned the Truth at seventeen,
That P2P is met with Lawyer Teams.
And High School file sharing friends,
destroyed by thought control bends.
We all play the game, but when we dare,
to download songs, is it unfair?
Inventing email accounts unknown,
causing profit losses to the bone,
that call and say "Don't download that!"
but we think that Napster was just phat.
It isn't all it seems, at seventeen...
Is Red Hat the Microsoft of Linux? Well sure, but if your definition of Microsoft is: "Fairly dominant OS distribution with a good set of bundled applications that's easy to install, reliable and actually comes with support."
Now, as much as the Anti-MS faction is here, that's a fair assessment of MS products, and a fair assesment of Red Hat.
Is Red Hat a domineering, conceited bunch of bastards trying to send modern computing backwards a hundred years by creating bloated, buggy garbage that is marketed to destroy any competing and probably superior product? I don't think so, even though the above statement is *also* a fair assesment of Microsoft.
Therefore, Red Hat is like Microsoft, but only like one side of Microsoft.
But rather, I wish that Microsoft was more like Red Hat.
Actually, Intel should hit 4GHz in about 6 or 8 months, right on schedule with Moore's "law". The Processor Mhz "jmups" will get bigger and bigger.
Oppps!
See, they can make a mistake here. I guess Linux isn't all it's cracked up to be then, eh?
Let me create an analogy for a minute. Let's say I'm some prankster, and I call up the Local Telco here (Verizon) and say I want to foward the number of IBM to my home phone instead. Now, if Verizon were as stupid as Verisign, all I'd have to do is fax them a change order on IBM stationery, and it would go through and all of IBM's business would come to my home phone. Don't you think IBM would hold the phone company responsible if it took them a long time to resolve the situation (or even let it happen in the first place!)
Point is -- Verisign still thinks it's the wild west out here on the net, and they don't provide customer service of any kind. Furthermore, they are completely incapable of providing the services they offer. Criminal negligence is prosecutable. The fact that it's easier to change IBM's domian than it is to change IBM's phone number shows the maturity of the phone company -- they've already had to deal with pranks like that for decades.
And the fact that Verisign has no provision for knowing how to deal with these situations, and furthermore doesn't follow standard business practices (such as those provided by a phone company) makes them responsible for both "letting it happen in the first place" and "dragging their heels to fix the problem once it became clear what happened".
Just my 2 cents.
And I say....
Bounce a gravition particle beam
off the main deflector dish.
That's the way we do things lad,
we're making shit up as we wish.
The Klingons and the Romulans,
pose no threat to us!
'Cause if we find
we're in a bind,
we just make some shit up.
You wrote:
Incidentally, there is concern in the press that Spider-Man may peak too early because it opened on so many screens; however, I'm sure it was intentional, as they knew they had to make as much money as possible in the two weeks before AOTC opened.
Actually, how many screens it opens on has to do with how much of an opening weekend they want, because many of the unions have contracts that state that so-and-so people in the production get a precentage of the Opening weekend take. This is why opening weekends are so important to folks in Hollywoodland. Because some people get a cut of that $114 million.
Remember that Studios often go out of their way to cook the books so that they can claim that movies never make any money, (I think Eddie Murphy's still waiting for his take on Berverly Hills Cop) because this way they don't have to pay out. They also don't have to pay taxes.
As such, many people negotiated so that their take was based on a percentage of opening weekend rather than a take based on overall profit. That's why every movie has to open BIG -- and then if it makes money after that, it's icing on the cake. Then the studio gets to make money after the opening weekend.
Ain't those jerks in La-La-Land keen?
Think about it -- doesn't every "story" here on Slashdot start with "According to this link...", and takes you to a deep link within a news site?
.. well.. news?
How's that going to affect Taco's biz? Imagine if we can't link to the relevent article -- doesn't then news cease to be
And isn't it ironic that when I click on the link to the the Yahoo story about a guy busted for copying DVDs, a Yahoo Advertisement pops under my browser with an ad for software that allows me to copy DVDs....
Does anybody else find this completely screwed?
Come on, didn't you just *know* it was going to suck when the commercials proclaim it as "The Cinematic Event of the Year" or something like that -- whenever they use that kind of language in the commercial, it's usually becuase no reviewer had anything good to say about it -- not even when they misquote the movie reviewer!