As some have already commented. My first thought was: this is the return of Newton.
Besides, will airlines allow passengers to turn the iPhone on? They explicitly say not to turn on their mobile phones. It'd be a bummer if I can't watch video or listen to music on a long flight.
Actually, the Japanese constitution (9th paragraph) states that the only use of armed forces can be for self defense. That said, there is a plethora of laws that forbid it from doing even that.
Here is the translation of Article 9 found at Wikipedia.
ARTICLE 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.
That it allows Japan to have self defence forces is a rather forced interpretation.
The Japanese self decense army is under prepared, under staffed, and does not have the necessary equipment. We have no missiles. Our jet fighters were deliberately modified so that they don't have fuel tanks large enough to fly a round trip to Korea and back.
I'm not sure if F-15s and Mitsubishi F-2s cannot fly sorties to North Korea from Japanese bases, not that I see point in doing that. It does not seem F-15J/DJs were in any way modified to reduce their range, either. IIRC, the range of the F-15 became an issue in the parliament when its introduction was discussed. Also, now JASDF has tankers.
The old Model 66 assault rifle, when dis-assembled, broke down into 30-some odd parts, including some very small springs, which my brother says would be impossible to re-build in the field. People lose parts when undergoing re-build training in the baracks!
Type 64 (not 66) rifle may have been PIA to maintain, but current infantry weapon is Type 89. I don't think it's not much inferior to any modern assault rifle. And I highly doubt small differences in personal weapons are strategically that significant.
Even the high-mobility vehicles, the Japanese version of the Hummer HMMV (built by Toyota under the civilian model name Mega Cruiser), simply resembles the U.S. Hummer, but in reality is not even close in functionality.
It's not like HMMVs did not have major problems not having armours. Japan also brought light armoured vehicles to Iraq.
Overall, the parent post reads very much like a typical sentiment of a Japanese person living in Japan. The problem I see is that they are not exposed to international media and do not know how much self-perception is different from perception from outside. Most of the Japanese see China and South Korea as some sort of bullies who always mention and exaggerate what the Japanese did during the WWII. This must come as a great shock for the Chinese and South Koreans who are genuinely scared of the Japanese behaviour in the first half of the 20th century. Just like they see Japan as the victim during the WWII (another big surprise for those who are not Japanese), they still feel that they are isolated and have no friend.
There is also a sensationalism with regard to North Korea. There are some factions of nationalists in Japan who capitalize on the actions of North Korea. They tend to overhype the danger of North Korea. I find this very dangerous.
North Korea always seemed to be seeking for attention. They don't seem to like the fact that the US is paying more attention to Iran, or a south Korean becoming the general secretary of the UN. As long as they get attention, they seem happy. I also figure that anybody, including South Korea,
At the time of this posting, the parent is modded troll. But it's actually pretty funny. Admittedly, It took me a while to understand what the poster was trying to say, though. And I am a Japanese.
The parent has got to be one of the most successful troll in the history of/. Just amazing how many took the bait. Not only that, he was off topic (TFA is about slow development of Vista) but avoided to pick the obvious "Dupe!" comment. I'm so impressed.
I would mod you insightful if I had mod points. That certainly was the point of Nagarjuna even though he spent lot more than two sentences, hoping that people would get it, but even after him, a lot about Buddhism, even including about what he meant to say, was written, which shows we never get it.
It's kind of hard to believe this is real with the name like Kuwatsch (rhymes with the word quatsch, "bullshit"). But if this is real, I'm sure that the co-workers try to be as jolly as possible with the famed german seriousness.
I agree that there should be some distinctions between various parts of Asia. But dividing it into two would be just silly. What about Central Asia (various -sthans in ex-USSR and parts of China), Southeast Asia (Indochina peninsula, Indonesia, Philippins, etc.)? And Middle-East used to be part of Asia as well (Near East). And North Asia (Siberia, and possibly Mongol?).
From the European (Greco-Roman) perspective, anything beyond the Bosporus strait was Orient/Asia.
From the modern "North American" (not to offend Canadians) common usage, Asia typically means East Asia (China, including Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, typically South Korea, and Japan). I've even heard of Northeast Asia (Japan, Korea?). Darn, It's very hard to be politically correct.
You know, it has become a custom around here to mod up funny comments as interesting or informative so that the poster gets karma. Besides, modding funny comments as interesting or informative is also funny. I would meta-mod such mod as funny if I could.
Re:Thank you IMDb!
on
IMDb Turns 15
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Did you try searching for Kevin Bacon? You will eventually find out the actor's name.
Nice to see a fellow graduate from PENN. I did part of my studies on the sixth floor of the Williams, too. I'm not a linguist, but a Sanskritist.
Anyhow, I always had the impression that historical linguistics had an easier time establishing methodologies depending on Indo-European languages. Those languages don't take a pro to notice similarities between its family members. Using one of your examples, stuff like father vs. pit.r (skt), mother vs. maat.r (skt) are easy enough to figure out they are related. It looks like Indo-European languages are easier to work out because they are rather young (9000 years old?).
However, being a native speaker of the language that the talks about its origin become often political (Japanese), I felt methodologies established using Indo-European languages were not working well in some other areas. Probably because languages like Japanese borrowed so many words from surrounding languages. People probably kept coming in waves. (I note the language is your field as well. I followed your link. BTW, I spent my childhood in Kumamoto.) So, I'm curious if the method mentioned in the article will be widely accepted.
I didn't know Sanskrit was such a popular language. But (deliberate) ignorance is pretty saddening. I'm a Sanskritist.
First of all, "vista" actually exists in Sanskrit. Citing from Monier Williams Sanskrit-English Dictonary: vista m. (ifc. f. aa) a partic. weight of gold (= 80 Raktikaas or a Karsha of 16 Maashas, about half an ounce troy), Praayashc.
Also, some misconceptions with regard to Sanskrit:
1) Sanskrit is a South Asian language, not Southeast Asian. (Parts of Southeast Asian cultures used Sanskrit in times, such as in Cambodia, Indonesia. In that regard, Sanskrit was known among East Asian cultures via Buddhism.)
2) Sanskrit is a language, Devanagari is a script (as another poster points out). Sanskrit can be transcribed in many scripts. In fact, many many South Asian scripts were traditionally used to write down Sanskrit.
3) Another post about the word "vistara" is pretty much correct. But note that many of them are the same word declined differently. The ablative case (vistarata.h/vistaraat) and the instrumental case (vistare.na) are the most often used.
I guess the parent poster wanted to be just funny. So, the parent post should be modded accordingly.
I'm a Japanese. Once in my junior high days (7th grade for you 'mericans), I got so bored with the math class that I decided to memorize Pi on the textbook. It had something like 47 digits. It took no time and during that 45 minutes session, I memorized it. I still seem to remember it.
Curiously, the Pi World Ranking List had meny Japanese and Indian names. This is sort of understandable. Both cultures used to emphasize on memorizing texts for a long long time. Up until my grandfather's generation, being educated meant being able to recite the whole Confucius, and some other assorted Chinese classics. In my schooldays, too, we were forced to memorize bunch of stuff that turned out to be useless (pi was not one of them though:). Coming up with a mnemonic is kinda part of culture. The way I used to memorize pi was to cut it at every four digits and try to associate some kind of logic with each chunk. For example, 3.14 1592 6535 8979 3238 4626 each of four digit groups seems to have some kind of pattern, except the first one, no?
In India, too, traditional education for Brahmins started as memorizing the Veda transmitted to their family. There still are some people who can recite a whole Veda. Those people tended to memorize other stuff as well.
Probably for the Japanese and Indians, memorizing some long strings that don't make sense is not that a strange thing.
By the way, I am a Sanskritist, not a mathematician.
Maybe MS should aquire Apple (which probably is never going to happen, given the highly anti-competitive nature of such an acquisition) and get Jobs as the interim CEO as Apple did to NeXT. Then MS will be Apple and everybody will be happy.
Lots of people have already pointed out he lived 57 years after his visit to post-nuke Nagasaki.
I would like to post a comment as someone who knows some people who were there that day.
There certainly is a strange thing about the effect of the bomb to people. I have no statistics, but my anecdotal experience shows that those who are still alive 60 years after their experience are extremely healthy.
My father was 14 and was 2.5km from the ground zero. He, obviously unscathed, visited the ground zero after a day or two. He is 74 now and plays tennis every day. He does get his conditions checked every year as a survivor. He is apparently an interesting case because he does have half the amount of white blood cells compared to normal. This is somewhat consistent with the well-known effect of radiation. Still, he doesn't even catch cold.
And my father is not an exception. There is a rather well known view among Nagasaki population that some survivors are extremely healthy. This may simply mean that they survived because they are extremely strong. There might be a correlation but it would be really hard to tell which is the cause and which is the effect. Some people may be just lucky that their damaged genes have better ability to repair itself.
On the other hand, people are now starting to talk about the effect on the third generation. There seem to be some concern that instead of the second generation, symptoms are appearing in the third generation. The effect of the bombing in terms of how much the radiation affects the genes is understandably hard to prove. There are many many other factors, and it is practically impossible to isolate the experience in a nuked environment as the major cause of mutation.
Personally, I don't have an opinion whether dropping the a-bombs is justified. It's history and that's what happend, we cannot change it. But if I'm pressed, I'd personally think because of the bomb, I'm here. If there had been no bomb in Nagasaki that day, my father may not have survived till the end of the war. It's well-known that teenager boys had been recruited to become Kamikaze attacker. An elder brother of his was being trained to be one. Another year or so, my father would probably have become one.
Every time I think about the bomb, I have a strange feeling. If my father had been killed on that day, I would not be here to think about the bomb. It was obviously a major event in his life although he always talks about it in a calm manner. I think he is a cool guy.
Wrong. Japan was trying to surrender to Americans before the Soviets enter the war. Note that Japan and the Soviet Union had a pact not to invade each other. Only after Hiroshima did the Soviets break the pact and declared war against Japan. The participation of the Soviets to the war is considered one of the deciding factors for Japan to unconditionally surrender, in addition to the two atomic bombs.
Companies from the countries will split an annual investment of $1.84m (£1.01m) for research over the next three years, Japan's trade ministry said.
That sounds like an awful little money for such a project. I'm really not sure if they actually are planning to build working planes.
On the other hand, this makes some sense. The French not only participated in Concorde, but have been making supersonic fighter jets for a long time. It appears France is only country who can still build supersonic jets with 100% ingenious technology. And it's a major member of the European consortium (Airbus).
There have long been a frustration in the Japanese aerospace industry that the Americans banned them from pursuing cutting edge aerospace technology after the WWII. It is a commonly held view that the US didn't want Japan to acquire know-how in that area so that she can independently develop and compete in the military aircraft field. (Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, and Subaru used to make airplanes. Look where they went.) So, the US kept supplying technology to Japan while not allowing ingenious know-how to accumulate.
A famous incidence was when the Japanese were planning a new fighter/attack plane. Those in the uniform wanted to go ingenious design (they always want to go domestic even when the equipment is prohibitively expensive), but because of the pressure from the States, it became a joint project between Japan and the US based on F-16 design. The result Mitsubishi F-2 is mediocre at best.
I would imagine there is a genuine fear that aerospace industry gets monopolised by Americans in the near future among other countries. So, a supersonic passenger plane appears to be a good excusable exercise to develop and accumulate the technology, especially when Americans are not seriously doing it.
Am I the only one getting tired of this sort of things posted again and again? Will this continue till the day when a Mac with intel inside ships?
Lots of folks miss some important points.
How do you define OS X running on a PC?
The most important part of OS X already runs on x86, right? Cf. Darwin.
The part that doesn't give you the same OS X experience on a PC right now is Carbon/Cocoa/Quartz and the assorted technology that stays closed source.
Did people forget how those who have had unsupported Macs run OS X on their machine? Install Darwin first, and then install the rest second. The installer wouldn't install OS X on those machines, but it runs... unsupported.
Do Apple discourage those who install OS X on unsupported machines implementing some prevention mechanism? No.
They don't seem to care. Perhaps they balance between the gain for implementing such a measure and the loss of sales for not implementing. It will take a lot of effort and bad PR to make sure OS X doesn't run on unsupported hardware, while they don't probably gain much. Those who have obsolete hardware might just get pissed and buy a PC from somewhere.
Another point to consider is that XCode uses gcc as backend. This is why it is so easy to compile applications created with XCode as Universal binary. I would think it's a matter of makefiles used by XCode. One can compile Universal Binary today. I am not sure if Intel compiler can be used by the time Mac with intel ships. I somehow doubt that majority of the OS will be compiled with Intel compiler.
What may happen when the Mac with intel ships is that probably the components of the OS, all the way up to the applications may have some odd compiler switches turned on that utilize some features only available to the CPU available to the said Mac. Such a software may just crash when run on a CPU that don't support those features. They can choose to ensure maximum compatibility with all the available x86 platform, but probably Apple won't bother.
What Apple at this moment is telling us when they say "They won't allow OS X to run on just about any PC" is probably the installer will refuse to install OS X if the PC didn't come from Apple.
But this doesn't mean that OS X cannot be installed on those machines. Using the same method as used by people with obsolete Macs, OS X might install. And it will boot to the point where one doesn't have GUI.
Still, it may not run properly. Lots of components may just crash, the driver may not be available for, say, network cards.
Some lucky falks with the right combination of hardware might be able to run OS X without much hassle. But they are not supported. They cannot call Apple asking how to install the damn thing on their Dell.
This, I think, is as far as Apple will go. Some pepole probably can run OS X, but it will require lots of effort and some luck. For all practical purposes, installing OS X on generic PC wil not pay off. If one needs some specific combination of hardware to run OS X, she might as well buy a stylish Mac. Perhaps it is possible to build a PC that can run OS X, buying parts from NewEgg or even Tiger Direct (!), but why bother when you can get a legitimate copy of OS X with certain levels of support from Apple? This is probably a good measure of copy protection.
I think the position of Apple with regard to piracy is that they don't care. They know that pirating OS X to run on generic PCs don't make economic sense, on the one hand, and on the other hand, they don't encourage people to install OS X on generic PCs. It is far less likely that Apple considers piracy as a chance to expand their market share.
Slashdot Mirror
That's 30.48 cm, correct?
I'd be looking forward to seeing anyone coding in XCode on the iPhone.
As some have already commented. My first thought was: this is the return of Newton.
Besides, will airlines allow passengers to turn the iPhone on? They explicitly say not to turn on their mobile phones. It'd be a bummer if I can't watch video or listen to music on a long flight.
No, that's not true!
At the end she says: "Dare ano hito? (Who is he?) Otaku-poku nai? (Doesn't he look like an otaku/nerd?)"
Here is the translation of Article 9 found at Wikipedia.
That it allows Japan to have self defence forces is a rather forced interpretation.
I'm not sure if F-15s and Mitsubishi F-2s cannot fly sorties to North Korea from Japanese bases, not that I see point in doing that. It does not seem F-15J/DJs were in any way modified to reduce their range, either. IIRC, the range of the F-15 became an issue in the parliament when its introduction was discussed. Also, now JASDF has tankers.
Type 64 (not 66) rifle may have been PIA to maintain, but current infantry weapon is Type 89. I don't think it's not much inferior to any modern assault rifle. And I highly doubt small differences in personal weapons are strategically that significant.
It's not like HMMVs did not have major problems not having armours. Japan also brought light armoured vehicles to Iraq.
Overall, the parent post reads very much like a typical sentiment of a Japanese person living in Japan. The problem I see is that they are not exposed to international media and do not know how much self-perception is different from perception from outside. Most of the Japanese see China and South Korea as some sort of bullies who always mention and exaggerate what the Japanese did during the WWII. This must come as a great shock for the Chinese and South Koreans who are genuinely scared of the Japanese behaviour in the first half of the 20th century. Just like they see Japan as the victim during the WWII (another big surprise for those who are not Japanese), they still feel that they are isolated and have no friend.
There is also a sensationalism with regard to North Korea. There are some factions of nationalists in Japan who capitalize on the actions of North Korea. They tend to overhype the danger of North Korea. I find this very dangerous.
North Korea always seemed to be seeking for attention. They don't seem to like the fact that the US is paying more attention to Iran, or a south Korean becoming the general secretary of the UN. As long as they get attention, they seem happy. I also figure that anybody, including South Korea,
At the time of this posting, the parent is modded troll. But it's actually pretty funny. Admittedly, It took me a while to understand what the poster was trying to say, though. And I am a Japanese.
The parent has got to be one of the most successful troll in the history of /. Just amazing how many took the bait. Not only that, he was off topic (TFA is about slow development of Vista) but avoided to pick the obvious "Dupe!" comment. I'm so impressed.
Yeah, I guess that's why I keep coming back to
I would mod you insightful if I had mod points. That certainly was the point of Nagarjuna even though he spent lot more than two sentences, hoping that people would get it, but even after him, a lot about Buddhism, even including about what he meant to say, was written, which shows we never get it.
It's kind of hard to believe this is real with the name like Kuwatsch (rhymes with the word quatsch, "bullshit"). But if this is real, I'm sure that the co-workers try to be as jolly as possible with the famed german seriousness.
I agree that there should be some distinctions between various parts of Asia. But dividing it into two would be just silly. What about Central Asia (various -sthans in ex-USSR and parts of China), Southeast Asia (Indochina peninsula, Indonesia, Philippins, etc.)? And Middle-East used to be part of Asia as well (Near East). And North Asia (Siberia, and possibly Mongol?).
From the European (Greco-Roman) perspective, anything beyond the Bosporus strait was Orient/Asia.
From the modern "North American" (not to offend Canadians) common usage, Asia typically means East Asia (China, including Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, typically South Korea, and Japan). I've even heard of Northeast Asia (Japan, Korea?). Darn, It's very hard to be politically correct.
You know, it has become a custom around here to mod up funny comments as interesting or informative so that the poster gets karma. Besides, modding funny comments as interesting or informative is also funny. I would meta-mod such mod as funny if I could.
Did you try searching for Kevin Bacon? You will eventually find out the actor's name.
Nice to see a fellow graduate from PENN. I did part of my studies on the sixth floor of the Williams, too. I'm not a linguist, but a Sanskritist.
Anyhow, I always had the impression that historical linguistics had an easier time establishing methodologies depending on Indo-European languages. Those languages don't take a pro to notice similarities between its family members. Using one of your examples, stuff like father vs. pit.r (skt), mother vs. maat.r (skt) are easy enough to figure out they are related. It looks like Indo-European languages are easier to work out because they are rather young (9000 years old?).
However, being a native speaker of the language that the talks about its origin become often political (Japanese), I felt methodologies established using Indo-European languages were not working well in some other areas. Probably because languages like Japanese borrowed so many words from surrounding languages. People probably kept coming in waves. (I note the language is your field as well. I followed your link. BTW, I spent my childhood in Kumamoto.) So, I'm curious if the method mentioned in the article will be widely accepted.
Wrong capitalization. Should be NeXT86... no?
I didn't know Sanskrit was such a popular language. But (deliberate) ignorance is pretty saddening. I'm a Sanskritist.
First of all, "vista" actually exists in Sanskrit. Citing from Monier Williams Sanskrit-English Dictonary: vista m. (ifc. f. aa) a partic. weight of gold (= 80 Raktikaas or a Karsha of 16 Maashas, about half an ounce troy), Praayashc.
Also, some misconceptions with regard to Sanskrit:
1) Sanskrit is a South Asian language, not Southeast Asian. (Parts of Southeast Asian cultures used Sanskrit in times, such as in Cambodia, Indonesia. In that regard, Sanskrit was known among East Asian cultures via Buddhism.)
2) Sanskrit is a language, Devanagari is a script (as another poster points out). Sanskrit can be transcribed in many scripts. In fact, many many South Asian scripts were traditionally used to write down Sanskrit.
3) Another post about the word "vistara" is pretty much correct. But note that many of them are the same word declined differently. The ablative case (vistarata.h/vistaraat) and the instrumental case (vistare.na) are the most often used.
I guess the parent poster wanted to be just funny. So, the parent post should be modded accordingly.
I'm a Japanese. Once in my junior high days (7th grade for you 'mericans), I got so bored with the math class that I decided to memorize Pi on the textbook. It had something like 47 digits. It took no time and during that 45 minutes session, I memorized it. I still seem to remember it.
:). Coming up with a mnemonic is kinda part of culture. The way I used to memorize pi was to cut it at every four digits and try to associate some kind of logic with each chunk. For example, 3.14 1592 6535 8979 3238 4626 each of four digit groups seems to have some kind of pattern, except the first one, no?
Curiously, the Pi World Ranking List had meny Japanese and Indian names. This is sort of understandable. Both cultures used to emphasize on memorizing texts for a long long time. Up until my grandfather's generation, being educated meant being able to recite the whole Confucius, and some other assorted Chinese classics. In my schooldays, too, we were forced to memorize bunch of stuff that turned out to be useless (pi was not one of them though
In India, too, traditional education for Brahmins started as memorizing the Veda transmitted to their family. There still are some people who can recite a whole Veda. Those people tended to memorize other stuff as well.
Probably for the Japanese and Indians, memorizing some long strings that don't make sense is not that a strange thing.
By the way, I am a Sanskritist, not a mathematician.
Maybe MS should aquire Apple (which probably is never going to happen, given the highly anti-competitive nature of such an acquisition) and get Jobs as the interim CEO as Apple did to NeXT. Then MS will be Apple and everybody will be happy.
"They are delicious."
No.
Lots of people have already pointed out he lived 57 years after his visit to post-nuke Nagasaki.
I would like to post a comment as someone who knows some people who were there that day.
There certainly is a strange thing about the effect of the bomb to people. I have no statistics, but my anecdotal experience shows that those who are still alive 60 years after their experience are extremely healthy.
My father was 14 and was 2.5km from the ground zero. He, obviously unscathed, visited the ground zero after a day or two. He is 74 now and plays tennis every day. He does get his conditions checked every year as a survivor. He is apparently an interesting case because he does have half the amount of white blood cells compared to normal. This is somewhat consistent with the well-known effect of radiation. Still, he doesn't even catch cold.
And my father is not an exception. There is a rather well known view among Nagasaki population that some survivors are extremely healthy. This may simply mean that they survived because they are extremely strong. There might be a correlation but it would be really hard to tell which is the cause and which is the effect. Some people may be just lucky that their damaged genes have better ability to repair itself.
On the other hand, people are now starting to talk about the effect on the third generation. There seem to be some concern that instead of the second generation, symptoms are appearing in the third generation. The effect of the bombing in terms of how much the radiation affects the genes is understandably hard to prove. There are many many other factors, and it is practically impossible to isolate the experience in a nuked environment as the major cause of mutation.
Personally, I don't have an opinion whether dropping the a-bombs is justified. It's history and that's what happend, we cannot change it. But if I'm pressed, I'd personally think because of the bomb, I'm here. If there had been no bomb in Nagasaki that day, my father may not have survived till the end of the war. It's well-known that teenager boys had been recruited to become Kamikaze attacker. An elder brother of his was being trained to be one. Another year or so, my father would probably have become one.
Every time I think about the bomb, I have a strange feeling. If my father had been killed on that day, I would not be here to think about the bomb. It was obviously a major event in his life although he always talks about it in a calm manner. I think he is a cool guy.
Wrong. Japan was trying to surrender to Americans before the Soviets enter the war. Note that Japan and the Soviet Union had a pact not to invade each other. Only after Hiroshima did the Soviets break the pact and declared war against Japan. The participation of the Soviets to the war is considered one of the deciding factors for Japan to unconditionally surrender, in addition to the two atomic bombs.
That sounds like an awful little money for such a project. I'm really not sure if they actually are planning to build working planes.
On the other hand, this makes some sense. The French not only participated in Concorde, but have been making supersonic fighter jets for a long time. It appears France is only country who can still build supersonic jets with 100% ingenious technology. And it's a major member of the European consortium (Airbus).
There have long been a frustration in the Japanese aerospace industry that the Americans banned them from pursuing cutting edge aerospace technology after the WWII. It is a commonly held view that the US didn't want Japan to acquire know-how in that area so that she can independently develop and compete in the military aircraft field. (Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, and Subaru used to make airplanes. Look where they went.) So, the US kept supplying technology to Japan while not allowing ingenious know-how to accumulate.
A famous incidence was when the Japanese were planning a new fighter/attack plane. Those in the uniform wanted to go ingenious design (they always want to go domestic even when the equipment is prohibitively expensive), but because of the pressure from the States, it became a joint project between Japan and the US based on F-16 design. The result Mitsubishi F-2 is mediocre at best.
I would imagine there is a genuine fear that aerospace industry gets monopolised by Americans in the near future among other countries. So, a supersonic passenger plane appears to be a good excusable exercise to develop and accumulate the technology, especially when Americans are not seriously doing it.
Am I the only one getting tired of this sort of things posted again and again? Will this continue till the day when a Mac with intel inside ships?
Lots of folks miss some important points.
How do you define OS X running on a PC?
The most important part of OS X already runs on x86, right? Cf. Darwin.
The part that doesn't give you the same OS X experience on a PC right now is Carbon/Cocoa/Quartz and the assorted technology that stays closed source.
Did people forget how those who have had unsupported Macs run OS X on their machine? Install Darwin first, and then install the rest second. The installer wouldn't install OS X on those machines, but it runs... unsupported.
Do Apple discourage those who install OS X on unsupported machines implementing some prevention mechanism? No.
They don't seem to care. Perhaps they balance between the gain for implementing such a measure and the loss of sales for not implementing. It will take a lot of effort and bad PR to make sure OS X doesn't run on unsupported hardware, while they don't probably gain much. Those who have obsolete hardware might just get pissed and buy a PC from somewhere.
Another point to consider is that XCode uses gcc as backend. This is why it is so easy to compile applications created with XCode as Universal binary. I would think it's a matter of makefiles used by XCode. One can compile Universal Binary today. I am not sure if Intel compiler can be used by the time Mac with intel ships. I somehow doubt that majority of the OS will be compiled with Intel compiler.
What may happen when the Mac with intel ships is that probably the components of the OS, all the way up to the applications may have some odd compiler switches turned on that utilize some features only available to the CPU available to the said Mac. Such a software may just crash when run on a CPU that don't support those features. They can choose to ensure maximum compatibility with all the available x86 platform, but probably Apple won't bother.
What Apple at this moment is telling us when they say "They won't allow OS X to run on just about any PC" is probably the installer will refuse to install OS X if the PC didn't come from Apple.
But this doesn't mean that OS X cannot be installed on those machines. Using the same method as used by people with obsolete Macs, OS X might install. And it will boot to the point where one doesn't have GUI.
Still, it may not run properly. Lots of components may just crash, the driver may not be available for, say, network cards.
Some lucky falks with the right combination of hardware might be able to run OS X without much hassle. But they are not supported. They cannot call Apple asking how to install the damn thing on their Dell.
This, I think, is as far as Apple will go. Some pepole probably can run OS X, but it will require lots of effort and some luck. For all practical purposes, installing OS X on generic PC wil not pay off. If one needs some specific combination of hardware to run OS X, she might as well buy a stylish Mac. Perhaps it is possible to build a PC that can run OS X, buying parts from NewEgg or even Tiger Direct (!), but why bother when you can get a legitimate copy of OS X with certain levels of support from Apple? This is probably a good measure of copy protection.
I think the position of Apple with regard to piracy is that they don't care. They know that pirating OS X to run on generic PCs don't make economic sense, on the one hand, and on the other hand, they don't encourage people to install OS X on generic PCs. It is far less likely that Apple considers piracy as a chance to expand their market share.
That's ResEdit, which has been around since the beginning of the classic Mac OS... System 1?