Who has the infrastructure to account and pay for this sort of stuff? Professional broadcasters, mostly.
There's no need for accounting. If you're a small fry, here's how it works. One day a guy in a cheap suit shows up and says "I'm from ASCAP. I notice you play music around here. And have a television on. So you owe us $xxx per year. Now how would like to pay for that?"
Don't like his figure? Tough. Either pay it or get sued out of business. There's no negotiating. It's one easy payment.
In short: With Spotlight, you can find anything on your computer as quickly as you type.
Well, I was about to reply to this saying it's bullshit, that spotlight is much slower than that. And of course I wanted some actual numbers to back me up. So I did a search. And I have to admit it really did find things as quickly as I could type it.
This is a big change from when I first installed 10.4. I don't know if the indexing wasn't complete, or if they made a big improvement in 10.4.1, but now it's really, really useful. I tried several more searches and each was as fast.
In the current earthly year of 2005 A.D., 59768 B.C. equates to -61806 A.D.
No it doesn't. It would if A.D. started at 2005, but it doesn't. What year it happens to be right now has nothing to do with anything. Unless of course you're late for work.
I wonder at what point the potential benefits outweigh the potential alteration/damage? Who knows what would be revealed?
Patience. Why take some clear risk when perhaps some years down the road a less risky technique will be developed? We have only one copy, but we have plenty of time.
You do know that the linked page was A PARODY, right?
Well shoot. Is it? Even reading it again with that in mind, it doesn't seem like much of a parody. But maybe I'm just being dense. I've done it before.
Hmm. Looking at the URL, I notice it's canarytrap.com. which I think is a way of giving out information colored in such a way to trace its origin.
So not really a parody, but also certainly not a credible source.
Now, a cynical person could see the closed-source companies pointing to this sort of error message, as a reason why large corporates ought not to use OSS, specifically MySQL (lack of scalability).
From that error message it looks to me like maybe a new database connection is being made for each post. That, of course, is not a good idea.
Say ASOT, if they track you down and fire you, will you come back and tell us the story? I very much appreciate and enjoy your posts, but given Apple's attitude about things I gotta figure they're looking for you.
since in 1950s it was absolutely obvious that nobody can or will make more than a few transistors on one silicon crystal. Before that it was ridiculous to even suggest that one can talk to someone else over large distances. Before that nobody doubted that Earth was flat.
A specious argument. By that logic you can do *anything* you want.
While Tiger Direct has a (if somewhat sleazy) case
They have always been somewhat sleazy. Years ago, in the early days of 900 numbers, they turned their ordering line into a 900 number(!). And they were in no big hurry to wrap up the conversation, routinely putting people on hold at two bucks a minute.
This guy gets off on representing himself as an Apple employee. Maybe a janitor?
He knows an awful lot for a janitor. A prolific a poster as he has been, and attracting so many nay-sayers, it's pretty darn impressive that no one's been able to take him to task on anything he's said. Maybe a few nibbles around the edges, but that it. I couldn't do it, and I've been involved with Macs since the original 128k.
Yeah, yeah - DRM. But the PDF/book is worth reading
Well it's easy to reject DRM when you aren't interested in the D. If you're going to take a stand against it, you have to do it even when you'd like to have what's being restricted.
Note: I am not commenting on DRM itself. Just pointing out that "yeah yeah DRM, but it's good so who cares!" is not a consistent position.
It's hard for me to see a downside to faster boot.
You seem to have interpreted my comment to mean I am in favor of longer boot times. Such an interpretation is, well, bizarre. As I said in another post, I'd of course prefer that it boot instantly, like a light bulb.
I boot my desktops every day and every time I think that the process is unnecessarily slow.
Unnecessarily? based on what, a hunch? Or have you investigated the boot process and found places where you could make it faster? If you mean to say undesireably slow, then yeah, I'm with you all the way. I'd like it to be as ready in the same way a light bulb is ready. In fact, if it were I'd be more inclined to shut it down occasionally.
Slashdot Mirror
I did. He lost me when he said "How the proletariat got in my pajamas I'll never know."
Yeah, but at least they came up with that on their own.
There's no need for accounting. If you're a small fry, here's how it works. One day a guy in a cheap suit shows up and says "I'm from ASCAP. I notice you play music around here. And have a television on. So you owe us $xxx per year. Now how would like to pay for that?"
Don't like his figure? Tough. Either pay it or get sued out of business. There's no negotiating. It's one easy payment.
Well, I was about to reply to this saying it's bullshit, that spotlight is much slower than that. And of course I wanted some actual numbers to back me up. So I did a search. And I have to admit it really did find things as quickly as I could type it.
This is a big change from when I first installed 10.4. I don't know if the indexing wasn't complete, or if they made a big improvement in 10.4.1, but now it's really, really useful. I tried several more searches and each was as fast.
No it doesn't. It would if A.D. started at 2005, but it doesn't. What year it happens to be right now has nothing to do with anything. Unless of course you're late for work.
Patience. Why take some clear risk when perhaps some years down the road a less risky technique will be developed? We have only one copy, but we have plenty of time.
OK, I give up. No doubt I'm missing the obvious, but I can't figure it out.
Well shoot. Is it? Even reading it again with that in mind, it doesn't seem like much of a parody. But maybe I'm just being dense. I've done it before.
Hmm. Looking at the URL, I notice it's canarytrap.com. which I think is a way of giving out information colored in such a way to trace its origin.
So not really a parody, but also certainly not a credible source.
And if his pee were darker and thick than normal then I guess he would boldly go where no man had gone before.
I think it'd be better if you'd choose a different way from "belief" to express your acceptance of the notion of evolution.
Maybe you're right, but I think it's OK the way it is. I read it more as "[the notion of] patches..."
From that error message it looks to me like maybe a new database connection is being made for each post. That, of course, is not a good idea.
No, I don't. That's what has me baffled.
Say ASOT, if they track you down and fire you, will you come back and tell us the story? I very much appreciate and enjoy your posts, but given Apple's attitude about things I gotta figure they're looking for you.
Used to be the case, but not any more. In fact, even if your passport is valid but is within six months of expiring they won't let you in.
It's to keep the morons from using it for page widening.
looking at his posts, I'm guessing he's just trolling, and he created that account to do so.
If you really were a scientist you'd know the difference between a theory and a hypothesis.
A specious argument. By that logic you can do *anything* you want.
They have always been somewhat sleazy. Years ago, in the early days of 900 numbers, they turned their ordering line into a 900 number(!). And they were in no big hurry to wrap up the conversation, routinely putting people on hold at two bucks a minute.
He knows an awful lot for a janitor. A prolific a poster as he has been, and attracting so many nay-sayers, it's pretty darn impressive that no one's been able to take him to task on anything he's said. Maybe a few nibbles around the edges, but that it. I couldn't do it, and I've been involved with Macs since the original 128k.
Well it's easy to reject DRM when you aren't interested in the D. If you're going to take a stand against it, you have to do it even when you'd like to have what's being restricted.
Note: I am not commenting on DRM itself. Just pointing out that "yeah yeah DRM, but it's good so who cares!" is not a consistent position.
You seem to have interpreted my comment to mean I am in favor of longer boot times. Such an interpretation is, well, bizarre. As I said in another post, I'd of course prefer that it boot instantly, like a light bulb.
Unnecessarily? based on what, a hunch? Or have you investigated the boot process and found places where you could make it faster? If you mean to say undesireably slow, then yeah, I'm with you all the way. I'd like it to be as ready in the same way a light bulb is ready. In fact, if it were I'd be more inclined to shut it down occasionally.