X86 is the standard for computers made by companies such as Acer, Compaq, Dell, E-Machines, Gateway, HP, IBM, etc etc. Go to any company that isn't a graphic design firm and you'll find X86 based computers. They are the standard because they own 95% of the market. That is what defines a standard, what the majority chooses to use.
Simply because there is a small percentage of users who go with something else does not mean x86 is any less the standard. There are still betamax VCR's out there that some people do use. You can still find them. Does that mean that VHS has some kind of valid competition? I don't think so.
Since when have Macs NOT given software errors? Since when have any systems not given software errors? The myth that Macs have some kind of magic stability is patently false. They're every bit as flaky and unstable as Windows based PC's.
The reason Macs don't tend to have resource conflicts is there's never been much stuff available for them hardware wise to begin with that didn't plug into the SCSI or serial ports. How is that an advantage? The PCI based powermacs only worked with a relative handful of cards, ones which the makers were willing to write mac drivers for. IRQ conflicts can be a pain, and they still are even after PCI was supposed to have fixed them for PCs, but I'd rather go through that pain and have a wide selection of components to choose from than not be able to get something I want for my system.
Apple HAS made shoddy drivers. Remember the problems they had a few years ago with their drivers for IDE hard drives? OS8 shipped with bad drivers that made systems such as the 6500's unstable. Having a bad serial port driver is one thing, or even a video driver that isn't quite perfect. But having a bad disk driver is pretty bad. They did fix it very quickly, but not before several customers brought their systems back because they didn't work.
There is also a lot of good and well designed hardware being sold. This is because the market for PC's is HUGE. With multiple companies all competing with each other for a piece of the pie, it is inevitable that not all the products will be of the same quality.
I've worked as a PC technician off and on since the late 80's, so I think I know a thing or two about their hardware. You buy good quality stuff and you're not going to have problems, at least no more than you'll have with a Mac. I don't think I have to tell you that not all the Macs Apple made were of the best quality. Remember the performa line? Remember the powerbook 1400 series? Or the powerbook 5300's that could catch fire when you charged the battery? Apple has also made some very good quality products as well. PC products vary in quality too. Ever hear of PC-Chips? They make the most God awful cheap garbage motherboards ever to curse the world. Ever hear of Tyan or Asus? They make very high quality boards that I'd be proud to put in a system. This is how things usually go when consumers have a choice. The same holds true for other things such as TV's, stereos, shoes, automobiles, sheet rock, mayonaisse, etc etc.
So if you've been bitten by cheapy parts or systems in the past then I do feel sorry for you. But don't please don't jump to the conclusion that you got bit because it was a PC that did the biting.
Also Apple is going to have a harder time hitting that well defined target you speak of as time goes by.
What do you think is going to happen 12 months from now when both AMD and Intel have chips running at or damned year 2 Ghz? When Via, ALI, Intel, AMD, and even Sis are all creating powerful motherboard chipsets for these CPUs? When Nvidia, 3dfx, Matrox, and ALI are marketing amazing video cards/chipsets and fighting tooth and toe-nail for a bigger piece of the video card market? What do you think will happen?
The real reason why the Macs are stuck at 500Mhz is that Apple screwed IBM and Motorola on CHRP and now neither of those companies is willing to spend money to help Apple out. Don't believe me, do a little research on it. The original plan was for CHRP systems to replace Macs and for both IBM and Motorola to produce them as well as Apple. The idea was to create a new type of open standard PC. This was what Apple originally agreed to do. But in classic Cupertino style they did an about face and screwed the entire deal. So now if Apple wants a high Mhz cpu, they're going to have to pay dearly for it. Between being the black widow of the computer industry and shooting themselves in the foot, its a wonder Apple is even in business.
As for Be, where would they be if they were still trying to sell BeBoxes? Out of business because they weren't selling. This is exactly what I was talking about when I said people wouldn't be willing to buy new or extra hardware just to use a different OS.
Long gone are the days when there was room for multiple architechtures in mass market computers. This is something that both Steve Jobs and Jean Louis Gasseee learned the hard way at Next and Be. For better or worse the x86 architecture is the standard. Why? Because it is an open standard fueled by heated competition. Look at any catagory of component in a PC. For each there are multiple firms competing for customers. That competition breeds innovation. As the market for computers grows, which it has been doing at near exponential rates for many years as the internet has become popular, that competition will increase accordingly.
If Apple expects to compete in this market they need to realize they aren't going to be able to do it with oddball hardware, even if that hardware is theoretically better. The only way Apple is going to survive and prosper in the long run is by leveraging the PC's vast market share to promote their own products, namely OSX. Will life for them be the financial miracle of old? No, but at least they'll still be in the game and at this point that will be a miracle in and of itself.
There is an online petition for Apple to port OSX to x86 here. I think this is something they need to do. Their ability to compete using proprietary hardware which is more expensive than commodity PC's is only going to worsen as time goes by.
They should leverage the PC and gain a portion of its massive market instead of trying to hold on to their own separate market, which is tiny in comparison and progressively getting smaller.
A new OS isn't going to be enough to convince very many to replace their hardware. But offer that new OS for the hardware they already own and you'll have yourself some customers. Customers equal money and market share and Apple needs all it can get of both.
Actually I'd say its cultural bias, not racism. I work in a university where 90% of our student workers are from every damned place on this earth other than the USA. Some of them can communicate quite well. Others can't. The problem isn't that they don't understand english, they can't speak it. The TOEFL test tests WRITTEN english skills, not one'a ability to pronounce it so that native speakers of the language can understand. By now I'm used to having to ask them to repeat themselves, usually more than once. At first it was quite irritating, but I've gotten used to it.
Being from the south, I know all about racism. I grew up in an environment of intense institutionalized racism. The comments made here bear little resemblance to that.
I don't know if I'd call having the foreign workers stay a corporate manager's dream or not. As it is now the foreign workers are cheap labor because they're bound to the company that pays for them to be here. If they were allowed and encouraged to stay on their own, then the price of their services might go up which would be good for everyone. As it is now they're little more than slaves. Its kind of hard for a free man to compete with a slave for work you know.
There is no shortage of tech workers. There simply isn't a surplus. Companies with positions to fill don't want to pay any more than they have to for qualified people. Tech workers are in high demand, meaning wages will be high. But if you can bring someone in from somewhere else who is equally as qualified, and pay him less, well wages just went down.
Personally I think we should encourage intelligent educated people to emigrate to the US. We should accept them with open arms. Why? Because they will be the basis of our future, both economic and politcal. In the future human know how will be the most precious resource. If most of the people with above average minds live here in the US, what would that do for our position in world affairs? When our people can literally out-think people from other countries what will that do for our ability to compete with those countries? America is a nation of emigrants and children of emigrants. Right now we are the dominant nation on this earth. But that can change. Once upon a time the British Empire covered 3/4 of the world. Today Britian is simply another country in europe. So the question becomes, what can we do to help maintain and improve our position in a world which is increasingly hostile towards us? I'd say draining our future competitor's most precious resource is one damned good way to do it.
Lee
That has never been in dispute. It's also not relevant when it comes to KDE because only two programs had outside code in them, if what I've read is accurate.
In the end its not about licenses but ideology. Stallman is upset that his dream of Free Unix has gotten out of his control. He doesn't like the idea of anyone using owned owned software in his precious GNU system, open source or not. So when the KDE team did that with the Qt libraries and made a successful product, he threw a fit and fell in it. Now all of a sudden Qt has been released under the GPL, something that should be a wet dream come true for him. But does he say "Thats great, and kudo's to Troll Tech!" No, he continues to attack people who were never his enemies, making himself look like a horse's ass in the process.
IQ wise the man is a genius, EQ wise he's Forrest Gump.
Actually I'd say it is my fault for testing out the latest mozilla milestone here on slashdot.
Never before have have I had any problems with the formatting of any of my posts regardless of the platform or browswer I used to submit them.
Had I been aware that mozilla would have this problem, I most certainly would have used "br" and "p" where needed, in brackets instead of quotes naturally.
As you can clearly see, with regular old netscape, the paragraph formatting is easily achieved with simple carriage returns.
Is that supposed to hurt my feelings? Seriously, do you really think that your calling me names is going to bother me? I feel sorry for someone who feels they have to lash out at others and try to hurt them. Did something traumatic happen to you that made you this way? Attacking other people isn't going to make the pain that you feel go away. Passing the abuse on to other people makes you no better than the one who abused you. Counselling can help you ok?
Don't blame me if mozilla didn't send the line an paragraph breaks I inserted into the text through. It came out as a run-on paragraph, it was not typed as such.
I've been hacker (!cracker) for almost 20 years now and for as long as I can remember there have been people moaning and complaining about computers being hard to use. But the plain fact is, computers are not hard to use, they are hard to learn to use. Just like anything else which requires skill, computers require time and effort to master.
GUI's and other such interface advances work to make working the the computer less alien and confusing to a new person by presenting files and programs in terms of pictures or some other easily grasped analogy. But these don't make computers any less complex, all they do is hide that complexity. When things break, which they always will, the complexity hits you square on the nose. This is why most computer problems that come in to techs nowadays are software problems or pure ignorance on the part of the user, not hardware failures. Ten years ago the opposite was true.
Once upon a time if someone owned a computer and used that computer, they had a pretty good idea what was going on with it. When things broke they had some chance of fixing it, and fixing it right. Today the average computer user is as oblivious to what goes on under the hood of their systems as they are of quantum physics. Arthur C. Clarke once said that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. The reason why computer technology is like magic to the average person is that our culture has not caught up with the technology. Once it does the problem will solve it self. Cars are not mysterious things to most people. A person might not be able to rebuild an engine or even change their oil, but they have some idea what is going on in the engine compartment, and they aren't afraid of their cars. Of course there are always going to be people who are exeptions, but generally this is true. This is because cars have been a part of our world for almost a century. No one makes claims that cars need to be easier to drive. Instead everyone understands that driving is a skill and one that must be mastered over time. Once mastered, driving a car is second nature. This is exactly how it is with computers. In todays world computer literacy is every bit as important as the ability to read. There are few jobs other than manual labor where computers aren't used. They are an integral part of any business. As such they need to be effective tools. A computer is only as effective as the ability of a person to use it.
Someone else once said that if you make a system even and idiot can use, only idiots will use them. I find this to be very true. Dumbing down a computer to satisfy those who are not willing to master it is ultimately counterproductive. In the end you have a computer that anyone can use, but which is not useful for much of anything. Great music is not played on a piano with 3 keys.
Now I'm not saying that everyone out there should should be uber-gurus capable of debugging code in their head, in binary. But people should be able to make use of windows or the MacOS (or even Linux) and master the applications they use on a daily basis. The truth is they aren't going to get any easier to use in the future. With software companies constantly adding new features to their products to justify costly upgrade cycles every 2 or 3 years, software stands to become more and more convoluted. Now if the software companies were smart, they would spend their time and energy figuring out how to better implement the features they have now and make their software run more efficiently, but that is another issue.
You can make something user friendly, or you can make it idiot friendly. The two are not the same thing. Making something user friendly means making it easy to use, efficient to use, even if there is an initial learning curve involved. Keyboard shortcuts in applications are a perfect example of this. They take time to learn, but once master they make a program far more easy to use. Making something idiot friendly means trying to remove or lessen its learning curve to the detriment of its usefulness. All technology requires knowledge and skill to make use of it. The sooner people understand this and work towards gaining that knowledge and skill, the sooner they'll realize just how easy computers really are.
Lee
Long before I found out that the moon was of special importance in magic (or at least some kinds), I would find myself feeling strange emotions whenever I would look up at the moon at night. I believe in reincarnation and some of the feelings and thoughts I had gave me the impression that the moon was of some special importance to me in the past. I would be happy to see it. Whenever I'd be out and I would look up at it, at the first glance these feelings would always hit me. They are hard to describe. I would be filled with a sense of possibility and excitement. That is the best way I can put it and even that isn't a very good description. These feelings were perplexing because I didn't have the memories to go along with them that would explain why I felt that way.
Later on I found out that the moon was important to various kinds of magic and was seen as the source of magical power. When I first heard the term "drawing down the moon" I realized that was what my emotions were about. That when I would stand out in my backyard and lookup at it and be filled with these powerful emotions, that that was what I was unconsciously trying to do. This explained an awful lot. You see while I don't believe in magic per se, I do believe in the ability of people to influence reality by the power of their will. Its something I've done all my life. Once upon a time I could change the weather. If I wanted it to rain, it would rain. I would sit in class on boring days and look out the window making the rain stop and start and stop again. I never got rained on when I was outside because I'd just reach up into the clouds and desire for the rain to stop, and it would. But then something bad happened. I came out here to Arizona in '92 and I didn't like how dry it was. So I encouraged the weather to change and for rain to fall. There were flash flood in phoenix and the interstate between Phoenix and Tucson was washed out in a couple of places. But the truly bad thing was that people died because of it. I dont know their names but I do know I'm responsible for their deaths. Ever since I realized this my influence over the weather has been gone. Actually I don't really think it is gone, I think I'm holding myself back from using it. I'm sorry for the deaths of those people and this is my subconscious way of keeping it from happening again. Maybe someday I'll get over this and have better mastery of this ability so that such things won't happen again. Phoenix is a desert, I was wrong to try and change that and others paid the ultimate price for my foolishness. Of course if I tell people these things they'll think I'm crazy, so I don't.
There are other less impressive things I can still do, such as predict with 90+% accuracy the outcome of coin tosses. If I think about it and try to figure out what will happen my accuracy goes to shit. But if I just let go and let the answer come to me I'll get it right almost always. My sister is even more talented in these areas than I am. Being female that only makes sense. Unfortunately she made the mistake of trying to talk to spirits and got a hold of a demon. The bastard set up house in the extra room of our house. I come home to find this malignant presence in one room and my sister terrified and in tears in the other room. I contronted the demon and eventually got him to leave but not before he put the screws to me including trying to possess my body. Not fun. Now my sister is a super devout christian who thinks anything that isn't christian is satanic. There is evil in the world but most of what I've experienced has been me and not other entities and I can't see how I'm satanic.
I'm also a computer geek/nerd/hacker (but not cracker). I always have been. When I was a young child and I first heard the word computer I knew it was something special and wonderful even though I didn't know what it was. Seems "magic" isn't the only thing I've dealt with in past lives. I've got a lot of talent with computers and understand things easily which others have difficulty with. I also have "magical" abilities with computers and other electronic things. Computers begin working just because I show up to look at the problem. This is a common thing I see with others who have ability in this area too. Now there are people who are into computers because computers are popular now. They aren't like me and their mindset and talents are not like mine. I was a computer geek long before being one was "cool." I'm the real deal you know? I'm sure there are lots of others here who are the same.
To some of you I've come accross as a nutcase, or an idiot or both. But those of you who have seen or experienced the kinds of things I've described know I'm not. In either case I just hope this post doesn't get flagged as flamebait or as the ravings of the insane. I was originally going to post it anonymously but not I've decided not to.
You must be new to this country. How's life in Cuba been?
Intellectual property law is a cornerstone of the western legal system. The developers of KDE hold the copyright on their code. They can license it to as many different parties under as many different terms as they see fit. In this case they have licensed it under the GPL. By doing so they are not transferrring their copyright to anyone and they are not forfeiting their copyright. As the copyright holders they do not license the code to themselves. They license it to others who want to use the code under that license. These users are the ones who are bound by the GPL, not the copyright holders whose right to use that code isn't derived from the GPL but from their copyright. Releasing code under the GPL does NOT place it in the public domain. Linus Torvalds holds copyright on the portions of the linux kernel which he wrote. Don't believe me? Check the source code yourself. As the copyright holder he can do anything he damned well pleases with his code, including release binary code without the source. Why? Because he is not bound by the terms of the GPL. He is not a licensee of the kernel code, but the licensor. Of course he is not the only person who holds copyright over portions of the kernel, so please don't try to misconstrue what I've written as meaning Linus can put out complete binary only kernels. He can put out binary images of the portions he holds the copyright on only, which would be pretty useless all by themselves.
This isn't mother Russia. A person's IP rights aren't tossed out the window the moment they release something under the GPL.
If I'm wrong about this, why weren't the KDE developers sued by the FSF for violating the GPL? They weren't sued because they aren't bound by the GPL, the case would have been laughed out of court. The only people they could sue would be you and I for linking to the QT libraries in violation of the GPL which WE ARE subject to. Seeing as how the FSF is not the licensor of the KDE code, that too would be laughed out of court. So in the end all Stallman could do was pout and moan about a situation he didn't like but which he had not control over.
There is a strong assumption in our culture that if someone is young, that anything and everything they see, hear, taste or touch is going to have some kind of profound influence on who they are and the content of their character.
I've never been able to reconcile this assumption with reality. A person's basic personality is set by the time they reach elementary school. Also, people are not tape recorders. The things we know and understand about the world stem from our own conclusions based on observation. Our conclusions may change as we go through life, but at no time are we changed by some outside force, especially a video game or a movie or a song. If someone bases their view of the world off a violent video game, it is because they are mentally ill. Don't blame the game because a crazy person chose to play it. They'd be crazy whether they played it or not.
All of this seems perfectly obvious to most people when discussing those over 18. But the moment "children" become the topic logic goes out the window and is replaced by hysteria and just plain stupidity.
Basically what I'm really trying to say is that the world needs to learn that video games and movies aren't responsible when a kid goes bad. If they were we'd have a nation full of bad kids. Instead we have what we've always had, a nation of more or less normal average kids with a few bad seeds thrown into the mix. Don't let those bad seeds determine policy concerning the other 98% who aren't nutcases.
If you're a good person, a good parent, and you live a life that sets a good example for your children and you're there for them and involved in their life, then they're going to turn out fine. No number of video games or movies or "obscene" lyrics in songs is going to make one bit of difference. However if you're not a good parent, if you are abusive towards your children and a terror in their lives, or you neglect them and aren't there when they need help or guidance, then they're probably going to up as broken individuals with emotional scars, which may or may not manifest as antisocial behavior. Now if you've got a fruitcake for a kid then all bets are off.
Its time that people woke up and realized that conscious thought and moral consideration don't begin at 18. They begin the first time an infant looks around himself and tries to understand what he sees. I used to think that everyone did know this and only pretended otherwise as an excuse to discriminate against the young. For a long time that seemed to be the only possible reason. But now I think that maybe people really do believe that young people are imbiciles, unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy or right and wrong. Does that make sense to anyone here? It certainly doesn't make sense to me.
I'm 28 years old, so I'm not some kid who is "too young to understand." I don't have children of my own, but when I do I'm not going to make the mistake of underestimating them and treating them as possessions or pets with the power of speech. Exactly how I'll treat them and exactly what I'll do as a parent I can't say. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. But I can say that they'll have my respect and my treatment of them will be based upon their actions, not their birthday.
As for K-mart, its their bottom line. If they don't want to sell video games this is a very good way to do it.
Well the DMCA is an american law isn't it? So why are statements about "this country" so strange? I live in america and this is an american legal issue. Please don't expect me to speak in international terms about national issues. The internet may be international, but the issues discussed on it don't have to be. As for what effect the DMCA has in other countries, I don't know. I'm a computer expert, not an expert on international law.
Like I said, vote for a 3rd party candidate. Voting isn't about picking the horse that is most likely to win, it is about making your directing the course of our government.
Voting for a 3rd party candidate is often like saying "none of the above" to the major party candidates, but that sends a message too. Big brother isn't keeping track of who you vote for, but the fact that some anonymous person voted for party X is noted.
What you're saying goes right back to the idea that our votes are wasted. You've been sold on a lie ok? Your vote is only wasted if you don't use it.
Politicians DO monitor the views of the people. They conduct poll, they do studies, etc. etc. Then they figure out which types are most likely to vote and those are the people whose views get represented in government. The groups less likely to vote are just plain screwed. Increased voter turnout WOULD change the function of government because politicians owe us for their jobs. You are right that the average person is oblivious to politics, but isn't the the exact thing I said was the problem? People don't care because they've been taught that it is futile to care. So rather than worry about things they feel powerless to change, they simply look the other way or bury their head in the sand. But the secret is, they can change things.
The single most important thing that each of us can do is vote. Calling and writing your congressman may help, but ultimately it is what we do on election day that matters most.
The majority of people in this country don't vote. The politicians know this. They keep very close tabs on what kind of people do vote because these are the people the politicians must keep happy in order to stay in office. Why do you think politicians from both major parties continuously pander to senior citizens? Why do you think Gore is proposing that the rest of us pay for their prescription drugs? Because senior citizens vote more than any other age group in america. Therefore what they want and need will always be represented and taken into account when any decision is made on capitol hill or the white house
Laws like the DMCA get passed because we aren't holding our elected officials accountable for how they vote. The average person is oblivious to whats happening in their government. All they know is what they hear on TV, which most of the time is nothing but propaganda put out by rival political factions. Everyone knows that Clinton was getting it on with a 24 year old intern, but how many people know what bills he signed and vetoed last year? How many are aware of executive directives he issued and their effects?
But whats really sad is the fact that we're all being had. Not voting has been covertly promoted for some time now. The idea that our vote doesn't count has been spoon fed to us by those who don't want to see us vote. Here we are in a country where the government is ultimately controlled by the people. Today most of them have been suckered into laying that power and responsibility down and walking away from it. Later, when that forfeited power is used against them, they do nothing but pout or maybe complain to each other and wonder what the world is coming to.
It may not be possible to fool all of the people all of the time. But clearly it is possible to fool enough of the people enough of the time (or make them look the other way) to pass legislation which screws over everyone all of the time.
Want to see it change? Want the DMCA and similar issues,such as the MPAA's desire to prevent you from taping TV shows, become nothing more than a bad dream? Then vote. Don't like any of the major party candidates? Vote for one from a "3rd party."
To stand by and watch as our country is ruined makes you just as guilty as the ones doing it.
I really do with we had an "E" selection on ballots. "E" for none of the above. The power to vote for none of the candidates would be a powerful medium for political protest. I suspect that if there were an "E" selection, "E" would win the upcoming presidential race by a landslide.
I personally hope that Al Gore wins. Not because I'm a democrat and not because I'm anti-republican. I hope he wins for the simple reason that the republicans control congress. Having a democrat in the white house maintains the balance of power which the ignorant call "gridlock." This balance is what keeps the extremists and special intrest groups from eating the rest of us alive. This nation would teeter and fall should either party gain a clear majority. Maybe we need a few libertarians or Green party candidates in the mix to really stir things up and keep the jackals fighting amongst themselves.
Lee
Bob Metcalfe is not psychic nor a psychologist.
on
Bob Metcalfe On NPR
·
· Score: 3
Just remember that he was the one who predicted the fall of the internet, citing that its popularity was just a fad.
Being a good engineer doesn't make you good at seeing what uses people will put products created by engineers to. An engineer only understands the motivational structure of other engineers, unless he or she is uncommonly perceptive. It is possible that Metcalfe could be so perceptive. Of course his idea that the internet was doomed buries that idea six feet under.
I expect to see him on the Psychic Friends Network sitting beside Dionne Warwick any day now.
RMS has been in the free software business longer than almost anyone. Without him there would be no Linux. Unfortunately some of the things he says and does only rub everyone else the wrong way and cause him to lose credibility.
The man is paranoid, but not without reason. He's been around long enough to remember AT&T's clampdown on unix and the fragmentation of unix which came after. In fact these were the reasons the FSF was founded and the GNU project started. He doesn't want to see the free software community and its code become the hostages of corporate greed the way Unix was.
He is a zealot, an extremist. He jumps at the shadows of shadows and cries that the sky is falling. But the truth is, he may be right. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. While I usually don't agree with the attitude behind what he says, I do recognize that ultimately he is simply looking out for the best interests of the community. By taking the hard line view, he compensates for all the rest of us who see licensing issues as an excuse to moan and complain (a view Stallman unfortunately promotes through words and deeds) instead of the critical issue that they are. Stallman's consistent defense of free software against all possible corruption is similar to the ACLU's defense of the first amendment. In both cases their extremism is puzzling, until you understand the historical reasons for it. In the case of free software, it is to prevent another unix debacle. In the case of the first amendment, it is to hold fast and true the rights of us all.
So don't be too hard on Stallman. He is annoying, and often full of himself. But without him where would we be?
The KDE developers developed their own code, which of course meant it was theirs, and then placed it under the GPL. To say that they somehow violated their own rights by linking it to the Qt libs is absurd. The code is theirs, they can do whatever the hell they want with it.
Slashdot Mirror
X86 is the standard for computers made by companies such as Acer, Compaq, Dell, E-Machines, Gateway, HP, IBM, etc etc. Go to any company that isn't a graphic design firm and you'll find X86 based computers. They are the standard because they own 95% of the market. That is what defines a standard, what the majority chooses to use.
Simply because there is a small percentage of users who go with something else does not mean x86 is any less the standard. There are still betamax VCR's out there that some people do use. You can still find them. Does that mean that VHS has some kind of valid competition? I don't think so.
Lee
Since when have Macs NOT given software errors? Since when have any systems not given software errors? The myth that Macs have some kind of magic stability is patently false. They're every bit as flaky and unstable as Windows based PC's.
The reason Macs don't tend to have resource conflicts is there's never been much stuff available for them hardware wise to begin with that didn't plug into the SCSI or serial ports. How is that an advantage? The PCI based powermacs only worked with a relative handful of cards, ones which the makers were willing to write mac drivers for. IRQ conflicts can be a pain, and they still are even after PCI was supposed to have fixed them for PCs, but I'd rather go through that pain and have a wide selection of components to choose from than not be able to get something I want for my system.
Apple HAS made shoddy drivers. Remember the problems they had a few years ago with their drivers for IDE hard drives? OS8 shipped with bad drivers that made systems such as the 6500's unstable. Having a bad serial port driver is one thing, or even a video driver that isn't quite perfect. But having a bad disk driver is pretty bad. They did fix it very quickly, but not before several customers brought their systems back because they didn't work.
Lee
There is also a lot of good and well designed hardware being sold. This is because the market for PC's is HUGE. With multiple companies all competing with each other for a piece of the pie, it is inevitable that not all the products will be of the same quality.
I've worked as a PC technician off and on since the late 80's, so I think I know a thing or two about their hardware. You buy good quality stuff and you're not going to have problems, at least no more than you'll have with a Mac. I don't think I have to tell you that not all the Macs Apple made were of the best quality. Remember the performa line? Remember the powerbook 1400 series? Or the powerbook 5300's that could catch fire when you charged the battery? Apple has also made some very good quality products as well. PC products vary in quality too. Ever hear of PC-Chips? They make the most God awful cheap garbage motherboards ever to curse the world. Ever hear of Tyan or Asus? They make very high quality boards that I'd be proud to put in a system. This is how things usually go when consumers have a choice. The same holds true for other things such as TV's, stereos, shoes, automobiles, sheet rock, mayonaisse, etc etc.
So if you've been bitten by cheapy parts or systems in the past then I do feel sorry for you. But don't please don't jump to the conclusion that you got bit because it was a PC that did the biting.
Also Apple is going to have a harder time hitting that well defined target you speak of as time goes by.
Lee
It can't make profits on hardware it can't sell.
What do you think is going to happen 12 months from now when both AMD and Intel have chips running at or damned year 2 Ghz? When Via, ALI, Intel, AMD, and even Sis are all creating powerful motherboard chipsets for these CPUs? When Nvidia, 3dfx, Matrox, and ALI are marketing amazing video cards/chipsets and fighting tooth and toe-nail for a bigger piece of the video card market? What do you think will happen?
The real reason why the Macs are stuck at 500Mhz is that Apple screwed IBM and Motorola on CHRP and now neither of those companies is willing to spend money to help Apple out. Don't believe me, do a little research on it. The original plan was for CHRP systems to replace Macs and for both IBM and Motorola to produce them as well as Apple. The idea was to create a new type of open standard PC. This was what Apple originally agreed to do. But in classic Cupertino style they did an about face and screwed the entire deal. So now if Apple wants a high Mhz cpu, they're going to have to pay dearly for it. Between being the black widow of the computer industry and shooting themselves in the foot, its a wonder Apple is even in business.
As for Be, where would they be if they were still trying to sell BeBoxes? Out of business because they weren't selling. This is exactly what I was talking about when I said people wouldn't be willing to buy new or extra hardware just to use a different OS.
Long gone are the days when there was room for multiple architechtures in mass market computers. This is something that both Steve Jobs and Jean Louis Gasseee learned the hard way at Next and Be. For better or worse the x86 architecture is the standard. Why? Because it is an open standard fueled by heated competition. Look at any catagory of component in a PC. For each there are multiple firms competing for customers. That competition breeds innovation. As the market for computers grows, which it has been doing at near exponential rates for many years as the internet has become popular, that competition will increase accordingly.
If Apple expects to compete in this market they need to realize they aren't going to be able to do it with oddball hardware, even if that hardware is theoretically better. The only way Apple is going to survive and prosper in the long run is by leveraging the PC's vast market share to promote their own products, namely OSX. Will life for them be the financial miracle of old? No, but at least they'll still be in the game and at this point that will be a miracle in and of itself.
Lee
There is an online petition for Apple to port OSX to x86 here. I think this is something they need to do. Their ability to compete using proprietary hardware which is more expensive than commodity PC's is only going to worsen as time goes by.
They should leverage the PC and gain a portion of its massive market instead of trying to hold on to their own separate market, which is tiny in comparison and progressively getting smaller.
A new OS isn't going to be enough to convince very many to replace their hardware. But offer that new OS for the hardware they already own and you'll have yourself some customers. Customers equal money and market share and Apple needs all it can get of both.
Lee
Actually I'd say its cultural bias, not racism. I work in a university where 90% of our student workers are from every damned place on this earth other than the USA. Some of them can communicate quite well. Others can't. The problem isn't that they don't understand english, they can't speak it. The TOEFL test tests WRITTEN english skills, not one'a ability to pronounce it so that native speakers of the language can understand. By now I'm used to having to ask them to repeat themselves, usually more than once. At first it was quite irritating, but I've gotten used to it.
Being from the south, I know all about racism. I grew up in an environment of intense institutionalized racism. The comments made here bear little resemblance to that.
Lee
I don't know if I'd call having the foreign workers stay a corporate manager's dream or not. As it is now the foreign workers are cheap labor because they're bound to the company that pays for them to be here. If they were allowed and encouraged to stay on their own, then the price of their services might go up which would be good for everyone. As it is now they're little more than slaves. Its kind of hard for a free man to compete with a slave for work you know.
Lee
There is no shortage of tech workers. There simply isn't a surplus. Companies with positions to fill don't want to pay any more than they have to for qualified people. Tech workers are in high demand, meaning wages will be high. But if you can bring someone in from somewhere else who is equally as qualified, and pay him less, well wages just went down. Personally I think we should encourage intelligent educated people to emigrate to the US. We should accept them with open arms. Why? Because they will be the basis of our future, both economic and politcal. In the future human know how will be the most precious resource. If most of the people with above average minds live here in the US, what would that do for our position in world affairs? When our people can literally out-think people from other countries what will that do for our ability to compete with those countries? America is a nation of emigrants and children of emigrants. Right now we are the dominant nation on this earth. But that can change. Once upon a time the British Empire covered 3/4 of the world. Today Britian is simply another country in europe. So the question becomes, what can we do to help maintain and improve our position in a world which is increasingly hostile towards us? I'd say draining our future competitor's most precious resource is one damned good way to do it. Lee
You're preaching to the choir buddy.
That has never been in dispute. It's also not relevant when it comes to KDE because only two programs had outside code in them, if what I've read is accurate.
In the end its not about licenses but ideology. Stallman is upset that his dream of Free Unix has gotten out of his control. He doesn't like the idea of anyone using owned owned software in his precious GNU system, open source or not. So when the KDE team did that with the Qt libraries and made a successful product, he threw a fit and fell in it. Now all of a sudden Qt has been released under the GPL, something that should be a wet dream come true for him. But does he say "Thats great, and kudo's to Troll Tech!" No, he continues to attack people who were never his enemies, making himself look like a horse's ass in the process.
IQ wise the man is a genius, EQ wise he's Forrest Gump.
Lee
Actually I'd say it is my fault for testing out the latest mozilla milestone here on slashdot.
Never before have have I had any problems with the formatting of any of my posts regardless of the platform or browswer I used to submit them.
Had I been aware that mozilla would have this problem, I most certainly would have used "br" and "p" where needed, in brackets instead of quotes naturally.
As you can clearly see, with regular old netscape, the paragraph formatting is easily achieved with simple carriage returns.
Lee
Is that supposed to hurt my feelings? Seriously, do you really think that your calling me names is going to bother me? I feel sorry for someone who feels they have to lash out at others and try to hurt them. Did something traumatic happen to you that made you this way? Attacking other people isn't going to make the pain that you feel go away. Passing the abuse on to other people makes you no better than the one who abused you. Counselling can help you ok?
Lee
Don't blame me if mozilla didn't send the line an paragraph breaks I inserted into the text through. It came out as a run-on paragraph, it was not typed as such.
Lee
I've been hacker (!cracker) for almost 20 years now and for as long as I can remember there have been people moaning and complaining about computers being hard to use. But the plain fact is, computers are not hard to use, they are hard to learn to use. Just like anything else which requires skill, computers require time and effort to master. GUI's and other such interface advances work to make working the the computer less alien and confusing to a new person by presenting files and programs in terms of pictures or some other easily grasped analogy. But these don't make computers any less complex, all they do is hide that complexity. When things break, which they always will, the complexity hits you square on the nose. This is why most computer problems that come in to techs nowadays are software problems or pure ignorance on the part of the user, not hardware failures. Ten years ago the opposite was true. Once upon a time if someone owned a computer and used that computer, they had a pretty good idea what was going on with it. When things broke they had some chance of fixing it, and fixing it right. Today the average computer user is as oblivious to what goes on under the hood of their systems as they are of quantum physics. Arthur C. Clarke once said that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. The reason why computer technology is like magic to the average person is that our culture has not caught up with the technology. Once it does the problem will solve it self. Cars are not mysterious things to most people. A person might not be able to rebuild an engine or even change their oil, but they have some idea what is going on in the engine compartment, and they aren't afraid of their cars. Of course there are always going to be people who are exeptions, but generally this is true. This is because cars have been a part of our world for almost a century. No one makes claims that cars need to be easier to drive. Instead everyone understands that driving is a skill and one that must be mastered over time. Once mastered, driving a car is second nature. This is exactly how it is with computers. In todays world computer literacy is every bit as important as the ability to read. There are few jobs other than manual labor where computers aren't used. They are an integral part of any business. As such they need to be effective tools. A computer is only as effective as the ability of a person to use it. Someone else once said that if you make a system even and idiot can use, only idiots will use them. I find this to be very true. Dumbing down a computer to satisfy those who are not willing to master it is ultimately counterproductive. In the end you have a computer that anyone can use, but which is not useful for much of anything. Great music is not played on a piano with 3 keys. Now I'm not saying that everyone out there should should be uber-gurus capable of debugging code in their head, in binary. But people should be able to make use of windows or the MacOS (or even Linux) and master the applications they use on a daily basis. The truth is they aren't going to get any easier to use in the future. With software companies constantly adding new features to their products to justify costly upgrade cycles every 2 or 3 years, software stands to become more and more convoluted. Now if the software companies were smart, they would spend their time and energy figuring out how to better implement the features they have now and make their software run more efficiently, but that is another issue. You can make something user friendly, or you can make it idiot friendly. The two are not the same thing. Making something user friendly means making it easy to use, efficient to use, even if there is an initial learning curve involved. Keyboard shortcuts in applications are a perfect example of this. They take time to learn, but once master they make a program far more easy to use. Making something idiot friendly means trying to remove or lessen its learning curve to the detriment of its usefulness. All technology requires knowledge and skill to make use of it. The sooner people understand this and work towards gaining that knowledge and skill, the sooner they'll realize just how easy computers really are. Lee
Long before I found out that the moon was of special importance in magic (or at least some kinds), I would find myself feeling strange emotions whenever I would look up at the moon at night. I believe in reincarnation and some of the feelings and thoughts I had gave me the impression that the moon was of some special importance to me in the past. I would be happy to see it. Whenever I'd be out and I would look up at it, at the first glance these feelings would always hit me. They are hard to describe. I would be filled with a sense of possibility and excitement. That is the best way I can put it and even that isn't a very good description. These feelings were perplexing because I didn't have the memories to go along with them that would explain why I felt that way.
Later on I found out that the moon was important to various kinds of magic and was seen as the source of magical power. When I first heard the term "drawing down the moon" I realized that was what my emotions were about. That when I would stand out in my backyard and lookup at it and be filled with these powerful emotions, that that was what I was unconsciously trying to do. This explained an awful lot. You see while I don't believe in magic per se, I do believe in the ability of people to influence reality by the power of their will. Its something I've done all my life. Once upon a time I could change the weather. If I wanted it to rain, it would rain. I would sit in class on boring days and look out the window making the rain stop and start and stop again. I never got rained on when I was outside because I'd just reach up into the clouds and desire for the rain to stop, and it would. But then something bad happened. I came out here to Arizona in '92 and I didn't like how dry it was. So I encouraged the weather to change and for rain to fall. There were flash flood in phoenix and the interstate between Phoenix and Tucson was washed out in a couple of places. But the truly bad thing was that people died because of it. I dont know their names but I do know I'm responsible for their deaths. Ever since I realized this my influence over the weather has been gone. Actually I don't really think it is gone, I think I'm holding myself back from using it. I'm sorry for the deaths of those people and this is my subconscious way of keeping it from happening again. Maybe someday I'll get over this and have better mastery of this ability so that such things won't happen again. Phoenix is a desert, I was wrong to try and change that and others paid the ultimate price for my foolishness. Of course if I tell people these things they'll think I'm crazy, so I don't.
There are other less impressive things I can still do, such as predict with 90+% accuracy the outcome of coin tosses. If I think about it and try to figure out what will happen my accuracy goes to shit. But if I just let go and let the answer come to me I'll get it right almost always. My sister is even more talented in these areas than I am. Being female that only makes sense. Unfortunately she made the mistake of trying to talk to spirits and got a hold of a demon. The bastard set up house in the extra room of our house. I come home to find this malignant presence in one room and my sister terrified and in tears in the other room. I contronted the demon and eventually got him to leave but not before he put the screws to me including trying to possess my body. Not fun. Now my sister is a super devout christian who thinks anything that isn't christian is satanic. There is evil in the world but most of what I've experienced has been me and not other entities and I can't see how I'm satanic.
I'm also a computer geek/nerd/hacker (but not cracker). I always have been. When I was a young child and I first heard the word computer I knew it was something special and wonderful even though I didn't know what it was. Seems "magic" isn't the only thing I've dealt with in past lives. I've got a lot of talent with computers and understand things easily which others have difficulty with. I also have "magical" abilities with computers and other electronic things. Computers begin working just because I show up to look at the problem. This is a common thing I see with others who have ability in this area too. Now there are people who are into computers because computers are popular now. They aren't like me and their mindset and talents are not like mine. I was a computer geek long before being one was "cool." I'm the real deal you know? I'm sure there are lots of others here who are the same.
To some of you I've come accross as a nutcase, or an idiot or both. But those of you who have seen or experienced the kinds of things I've described know I'm not. In either case I just hope this post doesn't get flagged as flamebait or as the ravings of the insane. I was originally going to post it anonymously but not I've decided not to.
Lee
You must be new to this country. How's life in Cuba been?
Intellectual property law is a cornerstone of the western legal system. The developers of KDE hold the copyright on their code. They can license it to as many different parties under as many different terms as they see fit. In this case they have licensed it under the GPL. By doing so they are not transferrring their copyright to anyone and they are not forfeiting their copyright. As the copyright holders they do not license the code to themselves. They license it to others who want to use the code under that license. These users are the ones who are bound by the GPL, not the copyright holders whose right to use that code isn't derived from the GPL but from their copyright. Releasing code under the GPL does NOT place it in the public domain. Linus Torvalds holds copyright on the portions of the linux kernel which he wrote. Don't believe me? Check the source code yourself. As the copyright holder he can do anything he damned well pleases with his code, including release binary code without the source. Why? Because he is not bound by the terms of the GPL. He is not a licensee of the kernel code, but the licensor. Of course he is not the only person who holds copyright over portions of the kernel, so please don't try to misconstrue what I've written as meaning Linus can put out complete binary only kernels. He can put out binary images of the portions he holds the copyright on only, which would be pretty useless all by themselves.
This isn't mother Russia. A person's IP rights aren't tossed out the window the moment they release something under the GPL.
If I'm wrong about this, why weren't the KDE developers sued by the FSF for violating the GPL? They weren't sued because they aren't bound by the GPL, the case would have been laughed out of court. The only people they could sue would be you and I for linking to the QT libraries in violation of the GPL which WE ARE subject to. Seeing as how the FSF is not the licensor of the KDE code, that too would be laughed out of court. So in the end all Stallman could do was pout and moan about a situation he didn't like but which he had not control over.
Poor Richard...
There is a strong assumption in our culture that if someone is young, that anything and everything they see, hear, taste or touch is going to have some kind of profound influence on who they are and the content of their character.
I've never been able to reconcile this assumption with reality. A person's basic personality is set by the time they reach elementary school. Also, people are not tape recorders. The things we know and understand about the world stem from our own conclusions based on observation. Our conclusions may change as we go through life, but at no time are we changed by some outside force, especially a video game or a movie or a song. If someone bases their view of the world off a violent video game, it is because they are mentally ill. Don't blame the game because a crazy person chose to play it. They'd be crazy whether they played it or not.
All of this seems perfectly obvious to most people when discussing those over 18. But the moment "children" become the topic logic goes out the window and is replaced by hysteria and just plain stupidity.
Basically what I'm really trying to say is that the world needs to learn that video games and movies aren't responsible when a kid goes bad. If they were we'd have a nation full of bad kids. Instead we have what we've always had, a nation of more or less normal average kids with a few bad seeds thrown into the mix. Don't let those bad seeds determine policy concerning the other 98% who aren't nutcases.
If you're a good person, a good parent, and you live a life that sets a good example for your children and you're there for them and involved in their life, then they're going to turn out fine. No number of video games or movies or "obscene" lyrics in songs is going to make one bit of difference. However if you're not a good parent, if you are abusive towards your children and a terror in their lives, or you neglect them and aren't there when they need help or guidance, then they're probably going to up as broken individuals with emotional scars, which may or may not manifest as antisocial behavior. Now if you've got a fruitcake for a kid then all bets are off.
Its time that people woke up and realized that conscious thought and moral consideration don't begin at 18. They begin the first time an infant looks around himself and tries to understand what he sees. I used to think that everyone did know this and only pretended otherwise as an excuse to discriminate against the young. For a long time that seemed to be the only possible reason. But now I think that maybe people really do believe that young people are imbiciles, unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy or right and wrong. Does that make sense to anyone here? It certainly doesn't make sense to me.
I'm 28 years old, so I'm not some kid who is "too young to understand." I don't have children of my own, but when I do I'm not going to make the mistake of underestimating them and treating them as possessions or pets with the power of speech. Exactly how I'll treat them and exactly what I'll do as a parent I can't say. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. But I can say that they'll have my respect and my treatment of them will be based upon their actions, not their birthday.
As for K-mart, its their bottom line. If they don't want to sell video games this is a very good way to do it.
>
Lee Reynolds
Well the DMCA is an american law isn't it? So why are statements about "this country" so strange? I live in america and this is an american legal issue. Please don't expect me to speak in international terms about national issues. The internet may be international, but the issues discussed on it don't have to be. As for what effect the DMCA has in other countries, I don't know. I'm a computer expert, not an expert on international law.
Lee Reynolds
Like I said, vote for a 3rd party candidate. Voting isn't about picking the horse that is most likely to win, it is about making your directing the course of our government.
Voting for a 3rd party candidate is often like saying "none of the above" to the major party candidates, but that sends a message too. Big brother isn't keeping track of who you vote for, but the fact that some anonymous person voted for party X is noted.
What you're saying goes right back to the idea that our votes are wasted. You've been sold on a lie ok? Your vote is only wasted if you don't use it.
Politicians DO monitor the views of the people. They conduct poll, they do studies, etc. etc. Then they figure out which types are most likely to vote and those are the people whose views get represented in government. The groups less likely to vote are just plain screwed. Increased voter turnout WOULD change the function of government because politicians owe us for their jobs. You are right that the average person is oblivious to politics, but isn't the the exact thing I said was the problem? People don't care because they've been taught that it is futile to care. So rather than worry about things they feel powerless to change, they simply look the other way or bury their head in the sand. But the secret is, they can change things.
Lee Reynolds
The single most important thing that each of us can do is vote. Calling and writing your congressman may help, but ultimately it is what we do on election day that matters most.
The majority of people in this country don't vote. The politicians know this. They keep very close tabs on what kind of people do vote because these are the people the politicians must keep happy in order to stay in office. Why do you think politicians from both major parties continuously pander to senior citizens? Why do you think Gore is proposing that the rest of us pay for their prescription drugs? Because senior citizens vote more than any other age group in america. Therefore what they want and need will always be represented and taken into account when any decision is made on capitol hill or the white house
Laws like the DMCA get passed because we aren't holding our elected officials accountable for how they vote. The average person is oblivious to whats happening in their government. All they know is what they hear on TV, which most of the time is nothing but propaganda put out by rival political factions. Everyone knows that Clinton was getting it on with a 24 year old intern, but how many people know what bills he signed and vetoed last year? How many are aware of executive directives he issued and their effects?
But whats really sad is the fact that we're all being had. Not voting has been covertly promoted for some time now. The idea that our vote doesn't count has been spoon fed to us by those who don't want to see us vote. Here we are in a country where the government is ultimately controlled by the people. Today most of them have been suckered into laying that power and responsibility down and walking away from it. Later, when that forfeited power is used against them, they do nothing but pout or maybe complain to each other and wonder what the world is coming to.
It may not be possible to fool all of the people all of the time. But clearly it is possible to fool enough of the people enough of the time (or make them look the other way) to pass legislation which screws over everyone all of the time.
Want to see it change? Want the DMCA and similar issues,such as the MPAA's desire to prevent you from taping TV shows, become nothing more than a bad dream? Then vote. Don't like any of the major party candidates? Vote for one from a "3rd party."
To stand by and watch as our country is ruined makes you just as guilty as the ones doing it.
Lee Reynolds
I really do with we had an "E" selection on ballots. "E" for none of the above. The power to vote for none of the candidates would be a powerful medium for political protest. I suspect that if there were an "E" selection, "E" would win the upcoming presidential race by a landslide.
I personally hope that Al Gore wins. Not because I'm a democrat and not because I'm anti-republican. I hope he wins for the simple reason that the republicans control congress. Having a democrat in the white house maintains the balance of power which the ignorant call "gridlock." This balance is what keeps the extremists and special intrest groups from eating the rest of us alive. This nation would teeter and fall should either party gain a clear majority. Maybe we need a few libertarians or Green party candidates in the mix to really stir things up and keep the jackals fighting amongst themselves.
Lee
Just remember that he was the one who predicted the fall of the internet, citing that its popularity was just a fad.
Being a good engineer doesn't make you good at seeing what uses people will put products created by engineers to. An engineer only understands the motivational structure of other engineers, unless he or she is uncommonly perceptive. It is possible that Metcalfe could be so perceptive. Of course his idea that the internet was doomed buries that idea six feet under.
I expect to see him on the Psychic Friends Network sitting beside Dionne Warwick any day now.
Lee
RMS has been in the free software business longer than almost anyone. Without him there would be no Linux. Unfortunately some of the things he says and does only rub everyone else the wrong way and cause him to lose credibility.
The man is paranoid, but not without reason. He's been around long enough to remember AT&T's clampdown on unix and the fragmentation of unix which came after. In fact these were the reasons the FSF was founded and the GNU project started. He doesn't want to see the free software community and its code become the hostages of corporate greed the way Unix was.
He is a zealot, an extremist. He jumps at the shadows of shadows and cries that the sky is falling. But the truth is, he may be right. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. While I usually don't agree with the attitude behind what he says, I do recognize that ultimately he is simply looking out for the best interests of the community. By taking the hard line view, he compensates for all the rest of us who see licensing issues as an excuse to moan and complain (a view Stallman unfortunately promotes through words and deeds) instead of the critical issue that they are. Stallman's consistent defense of free software against all possible corruption is similar to the ACLU's defense of the first amendment. In both cases their extremism is puzzling, until you understand the historical reasons for it. In the case of free software, it is to prevent another unix debacle. In the case of the first amendment, it is to hold fast and true the rights of us all.
So don't be too hard on Stallman. He is annoying, and often full of himself. But without him where would we be?
Lee
The KDE developers developed their own code, which of course meant it was theirs, and then placed it under the GPL. To say that they somehow violated their own rights by linking it to the Qt libs is absurd. The code is theirs, they can do whatever the hell they want with it.
This was scored as redundant?