How about more coding, less bitching about how Microsoft feels about what should be someone's personal business. I'm no fan of bigotry, but a corporate workplace is not the place for email storms of this nature.
Why the hell not? If my company can take a stand for righteousness, then I will by all means encourage them to do so by all means available to me, and applaud all who do so. Business is about making money, but not exclusively. Business can affect social policy, both for the positive and the negative. If Microsoft can do something to make the world a more judicial place, then so much the better.
As a "Mac zealot", I unhesitatingly say "good job, Microsoft." The more people who stand up to those extreme right-wing theocrats the better.
He's had to install AOL's AIM just to talk with his co-workers.
Small suggestion: try Adium for an IM client. Among other things, it works with multiple services, and allows you to customize the colors of your message windows.
More on topic, I can confirm that Tiger breaks the Cisco VPN. Very annoying.
Like I said, not a big deal, his posts are all intelligent. It just sounds too much like supposed Sega employee Samir Gupta, constantly mentioning he worked there.
True. Sucks that there are jerks out there like that guy who spoil it for others. This guy could be a great resource, or he could be a total fraud. *shrug*
Hafta see. I've enjoyed his comments. Here's hoping he's not scamming us all.
Maybe he does work with that team. If he works for Apple, the pronoun "we" is entirely correct.
There is no way to tell for sure, if course, but he seems as knowledgeable about this things as anyone around here. Yes, impostors happen. I just think we'd be better served arguing on what he says rather than on how he phrases it. Making an issue out of his usage of "we" seems a bit pedantic to me.
Isn't half the attraction to OS X for geeks how its not that much different from Linux or BSD from the console?
I'm sure some do. But in the aggregate most users will balance something like this against the benefits gained. There are those who are also experimental enough who will try this, and if they find it to be a better implementation will then port it over to other *nix variants, leading to a new "standard".
rc.d, cron, etc. may be the way other unices do things right now, but that in and of itself is not justification enough to be married to such mechanisms in perpetuity. Sometimes it's beneficial to *cough* you know, "think different."
I have been using MS operating systems since DOS 3.0. I stopped 14 months ago and have been extremely satisfied. Windows has nothing to offer that even makes it competitive. They have spent the last several years playing catchup, and from published reports have nothing new to offer even in their next version of the OS.
No thanks. I am proudly a Mac owner now, because I value well engineered products, especially computers. (I'm a developer.)
Also - is it really practical to write Mac GUI apps (business, personal, that kind of stuff) using some high-level language (like Python or Ruby).
Define "high level language.":) The three most popular choices for doing Cocoa development are Objective-C, Java, and Python. Obj-C and Java are the ones "officially" supported by Apple, and have the largest user base, but PyObjC is a bridge between the two languages that (among other things) lets you write Cocoa apps in pure Python.
I'm a heretic these days in that I prefer Java to Python, but the choice is availble to you should your opinion differ.
n the United States. On the open market. Of course, once something goes black market, the markup goes sky high, so the people who sell arms in that fashion would make EVEN MORE MONEY by it becoming illegal, allowing them to acquire and resell even more powerful stuff.
So what are you implying? That because it would cost more to make illegal, but not wholly prevent it, that we shouldn't even bother?
The Quicksilver you linked to is a completely different app that serves a totally different purpose. I'm not sure why your tone is so derogatory, but the Quicksilver I am talking about allows you to hit a global hotkey and have immediate access to contacts, files, IM buddies, bookmarks, IRC chat rooms, your iTunes library, etc. Emailing an attachment to someone becomes a matter of ~9 keystrokes, no matter what you are doing.
Again, all I'm saying is that in my experience the software for Mac tends to be better than the software for Windows that does the same thing (again, with the exception of Filezilla.) And FYI: I use both OSes extensively; I still use Windows at work.
So why is this guy saying that we shouldn't have public discussion (not referendums, mind you) about such a revolutionary technology as nanotech? Because it makes the profitmongering more difficult. That's why. The part of the article that I quoted above summarizes the attitude of the author perfectly: "shut up, shut up, shut up - I can make a lot of money with this, so you've better shut up about anything negative we might face when developing nanotech".
Exactly. The belief that the market will take care of everything bad all by its lonesome is just asinine. It's religious in a way: the market is perfect and holy, and the government is evil and wicked. It's stupid mainly because it is so grossly simplistic.
Just because money is to be made at something doesn't mean that it is risk-free or unworthy of regulation. This is a potentially very dangerous technology. Examining that and working towards prevention of abuse is just the wise thing to do. If it is possible for someone to use nanotech to make machines that present a realistic threat to the general population, then by all means we can and should look at taking legal steps to prevent such abuse.
Snake oil salesmen and abuse. If you claim some drug does something, you must be able to prove it. Similarly, while it may in fact cure the cold, it shouldn't cause fungus to grow out of your nose. Both are classes where the law is used to great benefit.
So let me get this right. You bought everything you needed in the first place, you've only had your system for a little over a year, and you think the fact that you've spent nothing on hardware since then has something to do with it being a Mac?
What else would it have to do with? I've had no hardware problems at all, and I've used it just as extensively as my previous systems. (More, actually, because it hosts much of my DVD collection.)
I had the opposite experience to you with Apple in the early 80s and have never thought of going back to one of their machines. I was very frustrated, the machine was inferior, it was VERY much overpriced, and to top it all off I couldn't buy the software I needed without mail ordering or having someone drive me to a shop about an hour away.
*shrug* That was a long time ago. My experience has been different, and I have never needed a piece of software that isn't available. In fact, I've had the opposite experience: most software on the Mac is better than the Windows equivalent. Things like QuickSilver, the Unison newsreader, and Pages do not, to my knowledge, have couterparts on Windows. The only thing I have not found for the Mac is the FTP client Filezilla. Everything other piece of Mac software I have used has either been comparable to or better than the PC equivalent.
Interesting considering most people agree that gaming is about the most intensive thing you can make your computer do.
It's not about performance, it's about release schedules. PCs are better at games because they get more titles sooner. Performance-wise Macs are comparable to high-end PC gaming systems.
In any case, I know Mac users who do realize Apple is fallible, but they are rare and you probably won't find them on/.
I prefer Macs because I have experience with both PCs and Macs. Macs are better machines. It has nothing to do with zealotry; I've tried both, and found the differences to be substantial enough to warrant "switching."
I thought about switching. But I am cheap. Not so cheap I won't spend money on quality, but more of a frugal cheap. I want to know exactly where the extra $$ is going, what I am getting for it. I don't blow cash on good advertising, or on hype. I'd rather save it.
I completely agree with your sentiment, but sometimes hype isn't hype and is, rather, truth. Macs are better machines, in every aspect except for gaming. I named my second son after Ben Franklin; his frugality is one of the many characteristics I admire about the man. I'm no spendthrift.
I bought a G5 a little over a year ago. Up until then I was purely a PC guy, from DOS 3.0 to WinXP. On average I was spending $400/yr on hardware: memory, CPUs, HDs, etc. Since I got the G5 (a 1.8GHz with 1G RAM), my hardware outlay has been exactly $0. Not to mention the fact that it has been as stable as a rock, whereas with Windows for various reasons I was having to reinstall the OS at least once a year, which I hated and took time I would rather not spend.
My PowerMac was $1600, and I have never once regretted spending that money, and consider myself frugal over the long run for spending it. Sometimes a higher initial investment pays out over the long term. That's been my experience here. If a PowerMac is out of your range, perhaps you could try a mini; they're $500, and are apparently quite a good machine.
Now, software. I have spent $0 there, as well. A friend of mine had a copy of Office he let me borrow, and every other piece of software I needed came preinstalled on the box: Quicken, Mail, iCal, iPhoto, etc. I did buy iLife '04 for $20 at Fry's, but that had a $20 mail in rebate, so there's that. I use Camino (think Gecko rendering engine with Cocoa look-and-feel) for a browser, and the open source software available is volumnious. I've never needed a piece of software that I couldn't find.
Your mileage may vary, but I've been very happy (as opposed to frequently frustrated) with my home computer ever since I "switched." I've never even had to crack open the case, although I have done so just to check it out. But the combination of rock-solid hardware with elegant, stable, secure software is extremely satisfying.
"Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply."
For some reason, I think there is more truth there than most of us would like to believe or admit.
And I dislike the idea of giving up control of my hardware to one company.
I'm afraid I don't understand your objection here. What hardware is proprietary on a Mac? I have a G5 at home, and all of the components have standard interfaces: Firewire, USB, AGP, DIMM, etc. The only thing that I guess you could call proprietary is the CPU, but other hardware can be swapped out as needed with components that would work just as well in a PC.
And besides, what bout folks like me who dual-boot OS X and Debian?
I'm not in a flambait mood, so please don't take this that way, but why do you do that? What does Debian give you that OS X doesn't, or vice versa? I'm honestly curious, this is not an attack on your choice. I think it's interesting, I'm just curious as to the why of it.
Re:Anyone really using XServes?
on
Return of the Mac
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Obviously there are some clusters of them that make the news all the time. I'm not trying to troll, just wondering if there's a future for Xserve beyond niche markets.
There was a/. thread discussing this a few days ago on a Mac related topic, I forget which. The person posting the root message was complaining that Apple has no direct sales mechanism in place for corporate environments. If you want to buy XServes for your org, you need to do it through their website like everyone else. Also, support contracts are apparently different, and amount to "go to the Apple store."
I don't know how valid this is, but if true then I doubt XServes will make significant inroads. Enterprise organizations require high levels of support, and like to have the name of someone they can call in a pinch.
I bet you also voted for whoever your favorite actor told you to.
Sheep. Baaaaaaa! B-a-a-a-a!
Sometimes taking unspoken advise from those whom you respect is a conscious choice, not mindless groupthink. There are developers out there who are better than I am, and when they speak, I listen. I also pay attention to what tools they use. This is neither blind nor foolish, when not taken to an extreme.
Slashdot Mirror
How about more coding, less bitching about how Microsoft feels about what should be someone's personal business. I'm no fan of bigotry, but a corporate workplace is not the place for email storms of this nature.
Why the hell not? If my company can take a stand for righteousness, then I will by all means encourage them to do so by all means available to me, and applaud all who do so. Business is about making money, but not exclusively. Business can affect social policy, both for the positive and the negative. If Microsoft can do something to make the world a more judicial place, then so much the better.
As a "Mac zealot", I unhesitatingly say "good job, Microsoft." The more people who stand up to those extreme right-wing theocrats the better.
Rumor has it that he paid for that UID. Don't know anything more than that, just the rumor.
He's had to install AOL's AIM just to talk with his co-workers.
Small suggestion: try Adium for an IM client. Among other things, it works with multiple services, and allows you to customize the colors of your message windows.
More on topic, I can confirm that Tiger breaks the Cisco VPN. Very annoying.
Like I said, not a big deal, his posts are all intelligent. It just sounds too much like supposed Sega employee Samir Gupta, constantly mentioning he worked there.
True. Sucks that there are jerks out there like that guy who spoil it for others. This guy could be a great resource, or he could be a total fraud. *shrug*
Hafta see. I've enjoyed his comments. Here's hoping he's not scamming us all.
There is no way to tell for sure, if course, but he seems as knowledgeable about this things as anyone around here. Yes, impostors happen. I just think we'd be better served arguing on what he says rather than on how he phrases it. Making an issue out of his usage of "we" seems a bit pedantic to me.
Man. I really wish we could get critical reviews.
Try this one from ars technica, if you haven't already. It's fairly detailed, and not as amateurish, nor is it worshipful.
Meaty goodness.
We're all very impressed if you work for Apple, but the chest-thumping is getting a little tiresome.
What pronoun would you suggest he use?
Isn't half the attraction to OS X for geeks how its not that much different from Linux or BSD from the console?
I'm sure some do. But in the aggregate most users will balance something like this against the benefits gained. There are those who are also experimental enough who will try this, and if they find it to be a better implementation will then port it over to other *nix variants, leading to a new "standard".
rc.d, cron, etc. may be the way other unices do things right now, but that in and of itself is not justification enough to be married to such mechanisms in perpetuity. Sometimes it's beneficial to *cough* you know, "think different."
I have been using MS operating systems since DOS 3.0. I stopped 14 months ago and have been extremely satisfied. Windows has nothing to offer that even makes it competitive. They have spent the last several years playing catchup, and from published reports have nothing new to offer even in their next version of the OS.
No thanks. I am proudly a Mac owner now, because I value well engineered products, especially computers. (I'm a developer.)
Define "high level language." :) The three most popular choices for doing Cocoa development are Objective-C, Java, and Python. Obj-C and Java are the ones "officially" supported by Apple, and have the largest user base, but PyObjC is a bridge between the two languages that (among other things) lets you write Cocoa apps in pure Python.
I'm a heretic these days in that I prefer Java to Python, but the choice is availble to you should your opinion differ.
n the United States. On the open market. Of course, once something goes black market, the markup goes sky high, so the people who sell arms in that fashion would make EVEN MORE MONEY by it becoming illegal, allowing them to acquire and resell even more powerful stuff.
So what are you implying? That because it would cost more to make illegal, but not wholly prevent it, that we shouldn't even bother?
What's this then?
http://www.quicksilvermail.net/
The Quicksilver you linked to is a completely different app that serves a totally different purpose. I'm not sure why your tone is so derogatory, but the Quicksilver I am talking about allows you to hit a global hotkey and have immediate access to contacts, files, IM buddies, bookmarks, IRC chat rooms, your iTunes library, etc. Emailing an attachment to someone becomes a matter of ~9 keystrokes, no matter what you are doing.
Again, all I'm saying is that in my experience the software for Mac tends to be better than the software for Windows that does the same thing (again, with the exception of Filezilla.) And FYI: I use both OSes extensively; I still use Windows at work.
But it will prevent people from profiting from those weapons, at least on the open market. No solution is perfect. We can only do our best.
So why is this guy saying that we shouldn't have public discussion (not referendums, mind you) about such a revolutionary technology as nanotech? Because it makes the profitmongering more difficult. That's why. The part of the article that I quoted above summarizes the attitude of the author perfectly: "shut up, shut up, shut up - I can make a lot of money with this, so you've better shut up about anything negative we might face when developing nanotech".
Exactly. The belief that the market will take care of everything bad all by its lonesome is just asinine. It's religious in a way: the market is perfect and holy, and the government is evil and wicked. It's stupid mainly because it is so grossly simplistic.
Just because money is to be made at something doesn't mean that it is risk-free or unworthy of regulation. This is a potentially very dangerous technology. Examining that and working towards prevention of abuse is just the wise thing to do. If it is possible for someone to use nanotech to make machines that present a realistic threat to the general population, then by all means we can and should look at taking legal steps to prevent such abuse.
The free market is great, except when it isn't.
But what's the reason for #3?
Snake oil salesmen and abuse. If you claim some drug does something, you must be able to prove it. Similarly, while it may in fact cure the cold, it shouldn't cause fungus to grow out of your nose. Both are classes where the law is used to great benefit.
So let me get this right. You bought everything you needed in the first place, you've only had your system for a little over a year, and you think the fact that you've spent nothing on hardware since then has something to do with it being a Mac?
What else would it have to do with? I've had no hardware problems at all, and I've used it just as extensively as my previous systems. (More, actually, because it hosts much of my DVD collection.)
I had the opposite experience to you with Apple in the early 80s and have never thought of going back to one of their machines. I was very frustrated, the machine was inferior, it was VERY much overpriced, and to top it all off I couldn't buy the software I needed without mail ordering or having someone drive me to a shop about an hour away.
*shrug* That was a long time ago. My experience has been different, and I have never needed a piece of software that isn't available. In fact, I've had the opposite experience: most software on the Mac is better than the Windows equivalent. Things like QuickSilver, the Unison newsreader, and Pages do not, to my knowledge, have couterparts on Windows. The only thing I have not found for the Mac is the FTP client Filezilla. Everything other piece of Mac software I have used has either been comparable to or better than the PC equivalent.
Interesting considering most people agree that gaming is about the most intensive thing you can make your computer do.
It's not about performance, it's about release schedules. PCs are better at games because they get more titles sooner. Performance-wise Macs are comparable to high-end PC gaming systems.
In any case, I know Mac users who do realize Apple is fallible, but they are rare and you probably won't find them on /.
I prefer Macs because I have experience with both PCs and Macs. Macs are better machines. It has nothing to do with zealotry; I've tried both, and found the differences to be substantial enough to warrant "switching."
If that makes me a zealot, then so be it.
I thought about switching. But I am cheap. Not so cheap I won't spend money on quality, but more of a frugal cheap. I want to know exactly where the extra $$ is going, what I am getting for it. I don't blow cash on good advertising, or on hype. I'd rather save it.
I completely agree with your sentiment, but sometimes hype isn't hype and is, rather, truth. Macs are better machines, in every aspect except for gaming. I named my second son after Ben Franklin; his frugality is one of the many characteristics I admire about the man. I'm no spendthrift.
I bought a G5 a little over a year ago. Up until then I was purely a PC guy, from DOS 3.0 to WinXP. On average I was spending $400/yr on hardware: memory, CPUs, HDs, etc. Since I got the G5 (a 1.8GHz with 1G RAM), my hardware outlay has been exactly $0. Not to mention the fact that it has been as stable as a rock, whereas with Windows for various reasons I was having to reinstall the OS at least once a year, which I hated and took time I would rather not spend.
My PowerMac was $1600, and I have never once regretted spending that money, and consider myself frugal over the long run for spending it. Sometimes a higher initial investment pays out over the long term. That's been my experience here. If a PowerMac is out of your range, perhaps you could try a mini; they're $500, and are apparently quite a good machine.
Now, software. I have spent $0 there, as well. A friend of mine had a copy of Office he let me borrow, and every other piece of software I needed came preinstalled on the box: Quicken, Mail, iCal, iPhoto, etc. I did buy iLife '04 for $20 at Fry's, but that had a $20 mail in rebate, so there's that. I use Camino (think Gecko rendering engine with Cocoa look-and-feel) for a browser, and the open source software available is volumnious. I've never needed a piece of software that I couldn't find.
Your mileage may vary, but I've been very happy (as opposed to frequently frustrated) with my home computer ever since I "switched." I've never even had to crack open the case, although I have done so just to check it out. But the combination of rock-solid hardware with elegant, stable, secure software is extremely satisfying.
"Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply."
For some reason, I think there is more truth there than most of us would like to believe or admit.
And I dislike the idea of giving up control of my hardware to one company.
I'm afraid I don't understand your objection here. What hardware is proprietary on a Mac? I have a G5 at home, and all of the components have standard interfaces: Firewire, USB, AGP, DIMM, etc. The only thing that I guess you could call proprietary is the CPU, but other hardware can be swapped out as needed with components that would work just as well in a PC.
Note the username above the post to which you replied. Feel silly now? =)
Goddammit. Yes. :)
And besides, what bout folks like me who dual-boot OS X and Debian?
I'm not in a flambait mood, so please don't take this that way, but why do you do that? What does Debian give you that OS X doesn't, or vice versa? I'm honestly curious, this is not an attack on your choice. I think it's interesting, I'm just curious as to the why of it.
Obviously there are some clusters of them that make the news all the time. I'm not trying to troll, just wondering if there's a future for Xserve beyond niche markets.
There was a /. thread discussing this a few days ago on a Mac related topic, I forget which. The person posting the root message was complaining that Apple has no direct sales mechanism in place for corporate environments. If you want to buy XServes for your org, you need to do it through their website like everyone else. Also, support contracts are apparently different, and amount to "go to the Apple store."
I don't know how valid this is, but if true then I doubt XServes will make significant inroads. Enterprise organizations require high levels of support, and like to have the name of someone they can call in a pinch.
I bet you also voted for whoever your favorite actor told you to.
Sheep. Baaaaaaa! B-a-a-a-a!
Sometimes taking unspoken advise from those whom you respect is a conscious choice, not mindless groupthink. There are developers out there who are better than I am, and when they speak, I listen. I also pay attention to what tools they use. This is neither blind nor foolish, when not taken to an extreme.