And while they do have ethernet cards, they aren't networked
That's just odd. What's the point of having the cards? Furthermore, what's the point of having HTML classes without internet connectivity? You could bring your iBook to school and use the crossover cable to get files off it. Or get a USB floppy drive. Unnetworked machines are a dying breed.
Somehow, the damn floppy has got to die. They're slow, unreliable (I've had dozens fail on me), and hold practically nothing. Anything that's small enough to fit on a floppy can be emailed or posted on a web/ftp site.
We've been using floppies for, what, 15 years? The industry just gets stagnant on stuff like this. How did we evolve from 5 1/4" floppies anyway? The process needs to be repeated.
Ummm... the G3/G4 have the logicboard (motherboard) on the door, so that when you fold it out, everthing is laid out before you. This is not the same thing as just making the case easy to open.
Joe Public will probably never try to custom install an OS on his own.[...]Just like Joe Public doesn't switch out of the Windows GUI and play around in DOS, even though he could.
This is a great misperception. Microsoft was the first to figure out this connection, and only recently has Apple started to catch on (perhaps because of Steve Jobs). The casual users start out as just that: casual users. They want something easy to use, something to just read email on, browse the web, type stuff up. But then they start playing games. They see how cool some of these games look and realize that they need bigger and badder hardware to play these games well.
Then, when you finish a game, what do you do? Maybe make a quick web page to publish cheats you found in the game? Sure. Launch Frontpage Express. Then you realize you want to put some more interesting stuff on your page, like the current date and a stock ticker. So you learn a bit more HTML and maybe some JavaScript. Then you realize you want to setup a feedback form. What's the next logical step? Something that works well with FrontPage. ASP! (I like PHP, but that's a different story)
What Microsoft has figured out (and Apple is just starting to remember), is that consumers start out as consumers, but almost universally, start looking for more things to do with their machine. They start tweaking settings, dabbling in scripting, putting up web sites. This futzing eventually turns into programming, system administration and other professions. If Apple or Microsoft come in on the ground floor, and offer more powerful products to consumers as they continue their evolution, each side will continue to work with each other. NT didn't become popular on its technical merits. It was because it was the next logical choice for all the millions of people using Windows 95/98. They think "well, I know Windows, so I can probably use NT". Unix seemed too intimidating.
Likewise, people that were attracted by the Mac's visual appeal probably had an artist or designer sleeping somewhere inside of them. These people were not interested as much in code and motherboards, as they were expressing themselves in art form. When the time came to let their creativity loose, they simply chose the more powerful version of what they had already used and loved: a PowerMac. People who think the Mac is better for 2D graphics and design, sound, user interface, etc. because of the tools available are mixing up cause and effect. Those tools are present on the platform because the users are attracted by the Mac's presence. Let's face it, Windows is ugly and Linux is... well... Enlightment is interesting.
If you want the best payoff, you have to invest at the ground floor -- new consumers.
So much for it being the exclusive OS of inexperienced teens.
I don't think the article was suggesting that Linux advocates are mostly inexperienced teens, but rather inexperienced evangelists. At some point over the past couple years (perhaps due to some normalized leadership at Apple), Mac advocates realized that yelling at the top of their lungs at journalists generally doesn't help. Presenting clear, concise cases, and giving credit where credit is due gets you a lot farther. I believe the article was suggesting that a larger percentage of the Linux camp (I'm a hybrid advocate, so I'm allowed to say this:) has not yet figured this out.
For example, for a long time, there was a sentiment in Mac users that anything from Microsoft sucked and was not to be trusted, end of story. Well, things have changed. Microsoft has delivered quality products to the Mac platform since Macworld '98. So they have redeemed themselves to some degree by doing that.
However, I've encountered a lot of Linux advocates (many of them Slashdotters), that simply refuse to acknowlodge the fact there there are any redeeming values in the Mac. This doesn't make me think "Oh gee, the Mac sucks. I guess I should be using Linux on my desktop." It just puts a bad taste in my mouth.
Give credit where credit is due. WindowMaker/Enlightenment/GNOME/KDE are not perfect. The Mac GUI is very polished and quite evolved. There are subtle features that you can't find by using a Mac for one day. Likewise, Linux is worlds more stable than Mac OS is. Linux and the Mac will never improve if we don't acknowledge the pros and cons of each. And members of each group must be able put themselves in another person's shoes and realize the values they hold high in a computer experience may not perfectly match another's. While you may not mind configuring an X server, that is a very distasteful process to others. And NOT always because they are "morons" as one person in the article implies. I'm a systems administartor (Linux), as well as a designer (Mac), but that doesn't mean I want to worry about which version of XFree I'm using when I launch Photoshop.
AMD's Athlon appears to be faster than the G4 from what little benchmarks I've been able to find
As I understand it, G4's integer performance does not vary greatly from the G3 (at least not more than what you would expect from a 400-500mhz jump). It's the FPU performance that's off the scale, particularly when applications are written to specifically take advantage of the 128-bit vector unit (Velocity Engine/AltiVec).
Things like media encoding, SETI@Home, Photoshop, scientic modeling simulation programs, anything with heavy number crunching really flies on G4s. Of particular interest is the fact that the G4 is quite good at the type of calculations required for cryptography.
Additionally, 7400 (G4) requires little power, and produces very little heat, which means it should have no trouble transitioning to PowerBooks relatively soon. No supercooling required!:)
I thought the problem with all the Windows scripting was that you couldn't write to files. Was that fixed? Also, do any of those Windows scripting languages provide more than OS-level scripting?
For example, with AppleScript, you can tell an email client grab an attachment from email, send it to Word (hiss!), convert it into HTML, send it to Adobe GoLive, format it, then use an FTP client to put it on the web. Then send an email to the original sender to let them know their doc is on the web -- all in on simple script. Pretty cool.
The example Phil Schiller (Apple VP) always uses at press events in something on the order of launching a script that grabs images from a Quark document, exports them to the web site, and catalogs them in a database. Although last time, it was all done over TCP/IP (new to Mac OS 9).
I'm not sure how powerful Windows Scripting Host is but "LARGE amount of control" doesn't quite quantify it enough for me. Can it do the type of stuff described above?
I think that one of the real important features of linux is that it is easy to use. Typing ntsysv is _so_ much easier than going start...setting...control panel...services.
I really hope this is just dry humor.
This may be the fundamental problem. Hardcore Linux users are unable to discern the difference between easy and hard to use.
The problem is that many confuse "easy to use" with "easy to learn". In my experience, they are generally (but not always) inversely correlated -- the harder something is to learn, the easier it is to do something once you've learned it. Conversely, the easier something is to learn, the longer it takes to accomplish something once you've learned it.
That doesn't make any sense at all to me. But anyone who is able to use "inversely correlated" in a normal conversation may have a different perspective.:)
This is a completely honest question: why does slashdot think this search engine is so great? The results are okay, about the same as any other search engine. The interface isn't what I'd call "clean" or "good". It's just barren. I'd be very surprised if the no banner thing lasts.
As preferable as it would be to focus on the positive, that's not really going to serve the purpose in this case.
I'm sure we'd have no problem gathering up 350 pro-OSS companies in a few months' time. But no one would really read that. How much good would it do if police departments only kept records on law-abiding citizens? That's the wrong way to approach the problem.
It's going to be far more useful and effective to have a list of say, 15 anti-OSS companies, rather than 350 pro-OSS companies, although the best situation is to have both.
There are five interested individuals so far (including me).
This is a quite disturbing idea, but is also quite easy to solve -- in concept, at least. Compile a blacklist of anti-OSS/Linux companies. Give the list a prominent position on Slashdot. Mail the list around to opt-in participants on a weekly basis. Encourage mirroring and reposting of the list. I'm sure open source developers would be willing to participate -- Apache, PHP.net, OReilly.com, Perl.com.
What this will do is prevent talented inviduals from applying to the blacklisted companies. This scares the heck out of recruiters. They ability to attract new talent is based largely on how well the environment will suit their needs. And something this drastic would certainly attract mainstream media attention in fairly short order.
Perhaps even Microsoft-only shops (no Solaris, Mac, Apache etc) would get dinged even more.
But there would be some things to consider:
1) Need to verify and rate the claims of anti-OSS situations. Moderators would be a must. Abuse of power could potentially be a problem.
2) Make it clear that this is a positive thing. Explain how companies can take advantage of the benefits of open source, and get themselves un-blacklisted at the same time.
3) Make it clear that you don't have to use/only/ open source software.
4) Possibly inform/advocate OSS software that has commercial software qualities -- support contracts, shrinkwrapped packages, established support sites, sample code. Anything to ease the transition.
I would be willing to lead this charge. If anyone is interested, contact me. Maybe we can start a list to discuss our options.
Finally, I wonder how many of these companies are using open source software and don't realize it? If they're using Apache, Perl, Sendmail -- they're at least part of the way there, right?
I wonder if I can get a MacOS rebate (like the wintel rebate scheme)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the alleged goal with the wintel rebate was that Microsoft was charging hardware vendors to ship their machines with Windows. Apple doesn't charge Apple to ship its own machines with Mac OS, at least not in nearly in the same way.
Although some people will never be able to grasp the concept, part of the Mac value proposition is that the lines between the hardware and the softwware are blurred a bit more. The industry will always attempt to box Apple into a "hardware company" or a "software company", when it's actually both: a computer company.
A problem I've run into more than once (on RedHat) is that you can set Apache's MaxClients directive is high as you like, but you're eventually going to hit a kernel limit, regardless of your hardware.
#define NR_TASKS 512/* On x86 Max 4092, or 4090 w/APM configured. */
For the life of me, I cannot figure out why this is set at 512. Recompiling the kernel can be a really aggrivating experience for those who come from a background of not having to recompile kernels. So this is just another thing that makes Linux unnecessarily diffcult. What would be ideal is that the installer prompts you for this number, and creates a kernel based on your requirements.
control the instances of your web server to re something reasonable
That doesn't well solve the problem. Sure, your box still gives you a command prompt, but web surfers out there are still not able to get to your site because there are no available httpds.
I believe the issue we're dealing with is how to allow a heck of a lot of people come in and use the site, not simply get stopped at the door.
Yankees.com is a disaster. The fonts are too small to read (a sure sign of Windows-centricness), it's slow as sin, the applet causes weird things to happen in my browser, and there's signs of gratitous use of technology everywhere.
Did anyone actually see the ads that the judges chose?
Other computer-generated ideas included an image of a bullet-shaped car, suggesting the car's speed, and a cuckoo shaped like a jet plane popping out of a cuckoo clock to show an airline's punctuality.
Are these judges on crack? A bullet-shaped car? A cuckoo clock? THESE are supposed to be creative? Those are some of the worst ideas I've ever heard. However, they're right on par with the mediocre I see from most ad agencies.
For example, "Intel Inside" was heralded as this marketing marvel, yet I see it and think: "Ok. Great. Thanks."
The issue isn't that the computers are that creative, is that the ad execs are not. I know. I've been in two many meetings where horrible ideas like this were well-received by managers.
Of course, this would only happen if they were open sourcing MacOS to compete with LinuxPPC.
Compete with LinuxPPC. Hmmmm... okay.
Anyway, as far as open sourcing Mac OS, they've made great leaps towards that. I'm not sure how much sense it would make to open source Mac OS 8.x. But they have open-sourced the foundation for Mac OS X. Mac OS X (Consumer), Mac OS X Server and Darwin all come from the same bloodline.
The largest difference is the windowing evironments. The other difference at this point is that Mac OS X Server and Darwin are using Mach 2.5 (modified) and developers builds of Mac OS X Consumer is using Mach 3.0. Though perhaps that has changed for Darwin through community efforts.
While there is certainly a dark side to this issue: the argument that Apple is abusing its position, there is a another dimension to be aware of.
The huge G4 introduction at Seybold was a major step in reminding the world that there are more options out there than Windows running on Intel.
If a company such as Newer Technology or XLR8 shipped a card with the G4 on it first, Apple's announcement would have been pretty anticlimatic. No one is going to be able to generate more interest in the G4 than Apple. So, IMHO, it's overall better for the Mac industry (and all non-Wintel platforms everywhere), if Jobs gets first shot at promoting something like this.
And I know what some people are thinking: "Free market -- it's Apple's fault if they don't ship first." But it's not that simple. Apple has to ramp up tremendous volume before they are able to ship a product, which is something upgrade board manufacturers do not have to do. This gives them the illusion of being significantly faster than Apple at getting things to market.
This was the exact same issue with PowerComputing. They came out with faster machines before Apple did, but they could do this because they had so few customers. For example, I believe PowerComputing shipped 200,000 machines TOTAL in the several years they were in business (all to Apple's high-end, high-margin customers), whereas Apple has received 140,000 preorders for the iBook alone in the last two months.
So, in the end, these tiny little hardware vendors would give the Mac market a short-term gain, in exchange for a long term loss. It's much better for the platform (and all non-Wintel platforms everywhere) if Apple gets to make a big show about new techology.
So while blocking upgrades is pretty drastic, I don't think it would be unreasonable for powerpc upgraders to wait until Apple brings major new chips to market before they ship theirs.
Based on some quotes that I'm not able to reference at the moment, it seems this is how Jon Rubenstein (Apple hardware VP) feels as well. Upgrade cards add value, but it's not in the platform's best interest to be leading the way.
It's not a black-and-white issue by any means, and I welcome other viewpoints.
I'm just gonna lose it if I hear one more post like this. For some reason, people (even some Slashdotters) are eternally blind to the real problem with Microsoft. And it sure as hell ain't marketing. Of course they're not killing people. But you have to realize the significance of Microsoft controlling computers. Computers are at the heart of our world. Everything revolves around them. They are information source, entertainment sources, gateways to communication. Computers and design are my passion. They are what I want to do with some significant part of my life. To have a single company walk up and dictate what that will look like is frightening. People hardly realize what Microsoft is trying to control -- personal computers, household appliances, cable access, internet access, press/media, games, web servers, web browsers, document management. You name it. The problem is, too many people see computers as merely and industry -- purely dollars, which is SO frustrating to me. For me, computers are a canvas. They are what I use to create artwork in many forms -- design, programming, websites. The equivalent of Windows taking over everything for me, is the equivalent of somebody telling me "you can no longer use the color red in your artwork." That's the significance. Do you really want somebody to dictate to you how to write software, how to create artwork, how to access information? I sure as hell don't. But it's apathetic people like you that are going to allow it to. Just because it's not literally life and death, doesn't mean it's not worth fighting for. Our society holds the arts at a very high value as well. - Scott ------ Scott Stevenson
"The new PowerPC G4, architected by Apple, Motorola and IBM, is the first microprocessor that can deliver a sustained performance of over one gigaflop. In fact, it has a theoretical peak performance of four gigaflops."
You should have seen the Photoshop and scientific model demos.
If Apple keeps this up, I'm just going to start endorsing my paychecks checks to One Infinite Loop.
BTW, you can only get a cinema display w/ a G4, not separate. What will PC users do?
According to an Apple rep, the display will only be available with a G4 for some period of time up front, then it will be generally available. I suppose this is so they can guage demand for the world's most bad ass display for $4000, and ramp up according.
But good gravy the G4 + the cinema display are GORGEOUS up close. It finally feels like the future is here.
Now we just need Mac OS X (or if you're bold, using MOSX Server).
Slashdot Mirror
And while they do have ethernet cards, they aren't networked
That's just odd. What's the point of having the cards? Furthermore, what's the point of having HTML classes without internet connectivity? You could bring your iBook to school and use the crossover cable to get files off it. Or get a USB floppy drive. Unnetworked machines are a dying breed.
Somehow, the damn floppy has got to die. They're slow, unreliable (I've had dozens fail on me), and hold practically nothing. Anything that's small enough to fit on a floppy can be emailed or posted on a web/ftp site.
We've been using floppies for, what, 15 years? The industry just gets stagnant on stuff like this. How did we evolve from 5 1/4" floppies anyway? The process needs to be repeated.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Ummm... the G3/G4 have the logicboard (motherboard) on the door, so that when you fold it out, everthing is laid out before you. This is not the same thing as just making the case easy to open.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
That's a horrible metaphor.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Joe Public will probably never try to custom install an OS on his own.[...]Just like Joe Public doesn't switch out of the Windows GUI and play around in DOS, even though he could.
This is a great misperception. Microsoft was the first to figure out this connection, and only recently has Apple started to catch on (perhaps because of Steve Jobs). The casual users start out as just that: casual users. They want something easy to use, something to just read email on, browse the web, type stuff up. But then they start playing games. They see how cool some of these games look and realize that they need bigger and badder hardware to play these games well.
Then, when you finish a game, what do you do? Maybe make a quick web page to publish cheats you found in the game? Sure. Launch Frontpage Express. Then you realize you want to put some more interesting stuff on your page, like the current date and a stock ticker. So you learn a bit more HTML and maybe some JavaScript. Then you realize you want to setup a feedback form. What's the next logical step? Something that works well with FrontPage. ASP! (I like PHP, but that's a different story)
What Microsoft has figured out (and Apple is just starting to remember), is that consumers start out as consumers, but almost universally, start looking for more things to do with their machine. They start tweaking settings, dabbling in scripting, putting up web sites. This futzing eventually turns into programming, system administration and other professions. If Apple or Microsoft come in on the ground floor, and offer more powerful products to consumers as they continue their evolution, each side will continue to work with each other. NT didn't become popular on its technical merits. It was because it was the next logical choice for all the millions of people using Windows 95/98. They think "well, I know Windows, so I can probably use NT". Unix seemed too intimidating.
Likewise, people that were attracted by the Mac's visual appeal probably had an artist or designer sleeping somewhere inside of them. These people were not interested as much in code and motherboards, as they were expressing themselves in art form. When the time came to let their creativity loose, they simply chose the more powerful version of what they had already used and loved: a PowerMac. People who think the Mac is better for 2D graphics and design, sound, user interface, etc. because of the tools available are mixing up cause and effect. Those tools are present on the platform because the users are attracted by the Mac's presence. Let's face it, Windows is ugly and Linux is... well... Enlightment is interesting.
If you want the best payoff, you have to invest at the ground floor -- new consumers.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
So much for it being the exclusive OS of inexperienced teens.
I don't think the article was suggesting that Linux advocates are mostly inexperienced teens, but rather inexperienced evangelists. At some point over the past couple years (perhaps due to some normalized leadership at Apple), Mac advocates realized that yelling at the top of their lungs at journalists generally doesn't help. Presenting clear, concise cases, and giving credit where credit is due gets you a lot farther. I believe the article was suggesting that a larger percentage of the Linux camp (I'm a hybrid advocate, so I'm allowed to say this
For example, for a long time, there was a sentiment in Mac users that anything from Microsoft sucked and was not to be trusted, end of story. Well, things have changed. Microsoft has delivered quality products to the Mac platform since Macworld '98. So they have redeemed themselves to some degree by doing that.
However, I've encountered a lot of Linux advocates (many of them Slashdotters), that simply refuse to acknowlodge the fact there there are any redeeming values in the Mac. This doesn't make me think "Oh gee, the Mac sucks. I guess I should be using Linux on my desktop." It just puts a bad taste in my mouth.
Give credit where credit is due. WindowMaker/Enlightenment/GNOME/KDE are not perfect. The Mac GUI is very polished and quite evolved. There are subtle features that you can't find by using a Mac for one day. Likewise, Linux is worlds more stable than Mac OS is. Linux and the Mac will never improve if we don't acknowledge the pros and cons of each. And members of each group must be able put themselves in another person's shoes and realize the values they hold high in a computer experience may not perfectly match another's. While you may not mind configuring an X server, that is a very distasteful process to others. And NOT always because they are "morons" as one person in the article implies. I'm a systems administartor (Linux), as well as a designer (Mac), but that doesn't mean I want to worry about which version of XFree I'm using when I launch Photoshop.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
G4's use a core-based design approach
I believe you mean "multiple core design". All CPUs have something that passes as a core.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
AMD's Athlon appears to be faster than the G4 from what little benchmarks I've been able to find
:)
As I understand it, G4's integer performance does not vary greatly from the G3 (at least not more than what you would expect from a 400-500mhz jump). It's the FPU performance that's off the scale, particularly when applications are written to specifically take advantage of the 128-bit vector unit (Velocity Engine/AltiVec).
Things like media encoding, SETI@Home, Photoshop, scientic modeling simulation programs, anything with heavy number crunching really flies on G4s. Of particular interest is the fact that the G4 is quite good at the type of calculations required for cryptography.
Additionally, 7400 (G4) requires little power, and produces very little heat, which means it should have no trouble transitioning to PowerBooks relatively soon. No supercooling required!
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I don't remember Apple ever supporting REXX, though maybe NeXT did?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I thought the problem with all the Windows scripting was that you couldn't write to files. Was that fixed? Also, do any of those Windows scripting languages provide more than OS-level scripting?
For example, with AppleScript, you can tell an email client grab an attachment from email, send it to Word (hiss!), convert it into HTML, send it to Adobe GoLive, format it, then use an FTP client to put it on the web. Then send an email to the original sender to let them know their doc is on the web -- all in on simple script. Pretty cool.
The example Phil Schiller (Apple VP) always uses at press events in something on the order of launching a script that grabs images from a Quark document, exports them to the web site, and catalogs them in a database. Although last time, it was all done over TCP/IP (new to Mac OS 9).
I'm not sure how powerful Windows Scripting Host is but "LARGE amount of control" doesn't quite quantify it enough for me. Can it do the type of stuff described above?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I think that one of the real important features of linux is that it is easy to use. Typing ntsysv is _so_ much easier than going start...setting...control panel...services.
I really hope this is just dry humor.
This may be the fundamental problem. Hardcore Linux users are unable to discern the difference between easy and hard to use.
The problem is that many confuse "easy to use" with "easy to learn". In my experience, they are generally (but not always) inversely correlated -- the harder something is to learn, the easier it is to do something once you've learned it. Conversely, the easier something is to learn, the longer it takes to accomplish something once you've learned it.
That doesn't make any sense at all to me. But anyone who is able to use "inversely correlated" in a normal conversation may have a different perspective.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
This is a completely honest question: why does slashdot think this search engine is so great? The results are okay, about the same as any other search engine. The interface isn't what I'd call "clean" or "good". It's just barren. I'd be very surprised if the no banner thing lasts.
What's the big deal?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
As preferable as it would be to focus on the positive, that's not really going to serve the purpose in this case.
I'm sure we'd have no problem gathering up 350 pro-OSS companies in a few months' time. But no one would really read that. How much good would it do if police departments only kept records on law-abiding citizens? That's the wrong way to approach the problem.
It's going to be far more useful and effective to have a list of say, 15 anti-OSS companies, rather than 350 pro-OSS companies, although the best situation is to have both.
There are five interested individuals so far (including me).
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
This is a quite disturbing idea, but is also quite easy to solve -- in concept, at least. Compile a blacklist of anti-OSS/Linux companies. Give the list a prominent position on Slashdot. Mail the list around to opt-in participants on a weekly basis. Encourage mirroring and reposting of the list. I'm sure open source developers would be willing to participate -- Apache, PHP.net, OReilly.com, Perl.com.
What this will do is prevent talented inviduals from applying to the blacklisted companies. This scares the heck out of recruiters. They ability to attract new talent is based largely on how well the environment will suit their needs. And something this drastic would certainly attract mainstream media attention in fairly short order.
Perhaps even Microsoft-only shops (no Solaris, Mac, Apache etc) would get dinged even more.
But there would be some things to consider:
1) Need to verify and rate the claims of anti-OSS situations. Moderators would be a must. Abuse of power could potentially be a problem.
2) Make it clear that this is a positive thing. Explain how companies can take advantage of the benefits of open source, and get themselves un-blacklisted at the same time.
3) Make it clear that you don't have to use
4) Possibly inform/advocate OSS software that has commercial software qualities -- support contracts, shrinkwrapped packages, established support sites, sample code. Anything to ease the transition.
I would be willing to lead this charge. If anyone is interested, contact me. Maybe we can start a list to discuss our options.
Finally, I wonder how many of these companies are using open source software and don't realize it? If they're using Apache, Perl, Sendmail -- they're at least part of the way there, right?
More statements on company sites noting the use of open source software couldn't hurt, either, could it?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I wonder if I can get a MacOS rebate (like the wintel rebate scheme)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the alleged goal with the wintel rebate was that Microsoft was charging hardware vendors to ship their machines with Windows. Apple doesn't charge Apple to ship its own machines with Mac OS, at least not in nearly in the same way.
Although some people will never be able to grasp the concept, part of the Mac value proposition is that the lines between the hardware and the softwware are blurred a bit more. The industry will always attempt to box Apple into a "hardware company" or a "software company", when it's actually both: a computer company.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
A problem I've run into more than once (on RedHat) is that you can set Apache's MaxClients directive is high as you like, but you're eventually going to hit a kernel limit, regardless of your hardware.
/usr/src/linux/include/linux/tasks.h, you'll find this:
/* On x86 Max 4092, or 4090 w/APM configured. */
In
#define NR_TASKS 512
For the life of me, I cannot figure out why this is set at 512. Recompiling the kernel can be a really aggrivating experience for those who come from a background of not having to recompile kernels. So this is just another thing that makes Linux unnecessarily diffcult. What would be ideal is that the installer prompts you for this number, and creates a kernel based on your requirements.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
control the instances of your web server to re something reasonable
That doesn't well solve the problem. Sure, your box still gives you a command prompt, but web surfers out there are still not able to get to your site because there are no available httpds.
I believe the issue we're dealing with is how to allow a heck of a lot of people come in and use the site, not simply get stopped at the door.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Yankees.com is a disaster. The fonts are too small to read (a sure sign of Windows-centricness), it's slow as sin, the applet causes weird things to happen in my browser, and there's signs of gratitous use of technology everywhere.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Did anyone actually see the ads that the judges chose?
Other computer-generated ideas included an image of a bullet-shaped car, suggesting the car's speed, and a cuckoo shaped like a jet plane popping out of a cuckoo clock to show an airline's punctuality.
Are these judges on crack? A bullet-shaped car? A cuckoo clock? THESE are supposed to be creative? Those are some of the worst ideas I've ever heard. However, they're right on par with the mediocre I see from most ad agencies.
For example, "Intel Inside" was heralded as this marketing marvel, yet I see it and think: "Ok. Great. Thanks."
The issue isn't that the computers are that creative, is that the ad execs are not. I know. I've been in two many meetings where horrible ideas like this were well-received by managers.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Do you really believe this contributed to the conversation in a positive, constructive way?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Of course, this would only happen if they were open sourcing MacOS to compete with LinuxPPC.
Compete with LinuxPPC. Hmmmm... okay.
Anyway, as far as open sourcing Mac OS, they've made great leaps towards that. I'm not sure how much sense it would make to open source Mac OS 8.x. But they have open-sourced the foundation for Mac OS X. Mac OS X (Consumer), Mac OS X Server and Darwin all come from the same bloodline.
The largest difference is the windowing evironments. The other difference at this point is that Mac OS X Server and Darwin are using Mach 2.5 (modified) and developers builds of Mac OS X Consumer is using Mach 3.0. Though perhaps that has changed for Darwin through community efforts.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
While there is certainly a dark side to this issue: the argument that Apple is abusing its position, there is a another dimension to be aware of.
The huge G4 introduction at Seybold was a major step in reminding the world that there are more options out there than Windows running on Intel.
If a company such as Newer Technology or XLR8 shipped a card with the G4 on it first, Apple's announcement would have been pretty anticlimatic. No one is going to be able to generate more interest in the G4 than Apple. So, IMHO, it's overall better for the Mac industry (and all non-Wintel platforms everywhere), if Jobs gets first shot at promoting something like this.
And I know what some people are thinking: "Free market -- it's Apple's fault if they don't ship first." But it's not that simple. Apple has to ramp up tremendous volume before they are able to ship a product, which is something upgrade board manufacturers do not have to do. This gives them the illusion of being significantly faster than Apple at getting things to market.
This was the exact same issue with PowerComputing. They came out with faster machines before Apple did, but they could do this because they had so few customers. For example, I believe PowerComputing shipped 200,000 machines TOTAL in the several years they were in business (all to Apple's high-end, high-margin customers), whereas Apple has received 140,000 preorders for the iBook alone in the last two months.
So, in the end, these tiny little hardware vendors would give the Mac market a short-term gain, in exchange for a long term loss. It's much better for the platform (and all non-Wintel platforms everywhere) if Apple gets to make a big show about new techology.
So while blocking upgrades is pretty drastic, I don't think it would be unreasonable for powerpc upgraders to wait until Apple brings major new chips to market before they ship theirs.
Based on some quotes that I'm not able to reference at the moment, it seems this is how Jon Rubenstein (Apple hardware VP) feels as well. Upgrade cards add value, but it's not in the platform's best interest to be leading the way.
It's not a black-and-white issue by any means, and I welcome other viewpoints.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I'm just gonna lose it if I hear one more post like this. For some reason, people (even some Slashdotters) are eternally blind to the real problem with Microsoft. And it sure as hell ain't marketing. Of course they're not killing people. But you have to realize the significance of Microsoft controlling computers. Computers are at the heart of our world. Everything revolves around them. They are information source, entertainment sources, gateways to communication. Computers and design are my passion. They are what I want to do with some significant part of my life. To have a single company walk up and dictate what that will look like is frightening. People hardly realize what Microsoft is trying to control -- personal computers, household appliances, cable access, internet access, press/media, games, web servers, web browsers, document management. You name it. The problem is, too many people see computers as merely and industry -- purely dollars, which is SO frustrating to me. For me, computers are a canvas. They are what I use to create artwork in many forms -- design, programming, websites. The equivalent of Windows taking over everything for me, is the equivalent of somebody telling me "you can no longer use the color red in your artwork." That's the significance. Do you really want somebody to dictate to you how to write software, how to create artwork, how to access information? I sure as hell don't. But it's apathetic people like you that are going to allow it to. Just because it's not literally life and death, doesn't mean it's not worth fighting for. Our society holds the arts at a very high value as well. - Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I'm getting so tired of trying to read through 280 other posts just to see if my point has been made already or not.
Some notes:
- FireWire is just getting started. They only showed up in Apple machines in January.
- FireWire is widely used in consumer video cameras
- Of course Intel wants USB over FireWire -- it's their standard!
- FireWire is hardly Apple-only. I know at least Sony has it on their machines
- USB 2.0 is still a ways off. FireWire is here today, and anybody can have it.
- As I understand it, FireWire 2.0 will be 800Mb/s, vs the current 400.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
"The new PowerPC G4, architected by Apple, Motorola and IBM, is the first microprocessor that can deliver a sustained performance of over one gigaflop. In fact, it has a theoretical peak performance of four gigaflops."
You should have seen the Photoshop and scientific model demos.
If Apple keeps this up, I'm just going to start endorsing my paychecks checks to One Infinite Loop.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
BTW, you can only get a cinema display w/ a G4, not separate. What will PC users do?
According to an Apple rep, the display will only be available with a G4 for some period of time up front, then it will be generally available. I suppose this is so they can guage demand for the world's most bad ass display for $4000, and ramp up according.
But good gravy the G4 + the cinema display are GORGEOUS up close. It finally feels like the future is here.
Now we just need Mac OS X (or if you're bold, using MOSX Server).
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson