Camino is actually a nice name, IMO. iBrowse (suggested by another commenter) is pretty funny, but I think that runs into the Legal problem again.
Camino -- "road" -- is not bad metaphorically, either. I think of a pleasant drive on the coast, as apposed to calling it, oh... "New Jersey Turnpike, The Browser."
Chimera was a *better*, but Camino is a good enough replacement, and the fact that it's a nice browser is more important;)
I've been reading a little bit on the mini-itx.com site because I like the idea of a low-power TV/TiVo (and at the price of those EPIAs, esp. the older ones, you could attach a cheap optical drive and a small monitor, make a knoppix terminal for any room in the house).
I wonder how soon the GHz variety (and by that I mean one that is on par with Intel / AMD GHz processors) will be available fanless from VIA; that's the breaking point I'm looking for, having just assembled an Athlon system in the SS40 case from Shuttle. (For which I wish I had had smaller fingers, btw;))
The problem is the mechanism -- it had better be bulletproof, so spammers don't figure out how to successfully declare themselves opt-in (besides claiming so in a footer like 90% of them do now anyhow;))
You're right -- there are a lot of one-off emails that you could have no way of whitelisting in advance. Besides which, I dislike white-list-only approaches because that would be ceding too much to the power of the spammers.
That is, the interface (to its credit!) looks a lot like MythTV. That's important because it means the control interface could be used on a variety of low-res output devices, like those little LCD panels for the car. (How much do those cost these days?) Interfaces built on the assumption of a high-res monitor degrade poorly, but this one looks well done.
Wrapping it all up in guaranteed-working hardware etc is a smart idea of the sort that people have been whining for it for a long time. Glad these guys actually did it:)
Some wishlist items for the next generation:
1) provisions for monitor-less use as a car entertainment system (there are EPIA systems which I think would have enough power to do what this box does, and I believe there are 12v power supplies for them, too).
2) I don't see anything on there about Ogg playback (or FLAC for that matter), and these would both be necessary features in the perfect Anything Box. I don't have any music in FLAC yet, but I know I will in the near future.
Those are pretty trivial complaints, of course:) -- easy enough to add audio playback formats. I'm sure that these could sell well at a price close to $400. If the developers are reading, I'm offering:)
One detail: How aware will the client software have to be of the newfangledness?:)
Whitelisting is a good approach, that would take care of certain things, but cancellable tokens I think are more iffy. What I'd rather see is a system of *cashable* tokens such that I could optionally charge for spam, rather than the default being sender pay.
Actually, I just wanted to make sure that the submission wasn't misinterpreted to mean that "Microsoft" was planning to implement this system, and that it's still ("just") a research project.
It sounds like a decent idea to me, but with certain thorns. The biggest one is What about legitimate, truly-opt-in mailing lists? Email is a genuinely low-cost communication method for non-profit groups (not just official tax-exempt non-profit groups,I mean all kinds of clubs, associations, groups of friends, etc.), and a per-email fee intended to hinder junkmail could also pinch a lot of people I wish it wouldn't. Maybe in the end that would be a fair tradeoff, but as spam filters get better (and ISPs get more aggressive about blocking spam on their side), I'm skeptical of that.
Also, some people send a lot of short emails; does charging per-email make sense vs. (for instance) per-byte?
And as for my opinions of Microsoft, well, you're free to read my earlier comments about Microsoft if you want to learn that;)
Microsoft is a company that sells software (which is with small and niggly exceptions source-secret software), employs a bunch of people (most of whom probably are not *actually* the devil), is run as a public corporation (which adds lots of bureaucratic, buck-shifting fun to the mix), and -- all else aside, just for a moment -- has had a big a role in lowering the cost of personal computing as any other company or group. Microsoft's desktop software (things like Office, etc), whatever you think of it, represents much better value than was available not many years ago. Partly that's because there *wasn't* any such thing as certain pieces of software that are now available to run on Windows.
You may agree with me that source secrecy is a big snag in whether you should want to pay for or use a particular piece of software, or you may say "If it works, who cares whether the source is there?" And no one can make that decision for you.
My biggest problem with Microsoft is related to that though -- my beef is that they end up as a money sink for a *lot* of money taken from the public in the form of taxes, and which is supposed to be spent in a way that maximizes public good. That's the whole justification for taxes in the first place. I can think of no way that "the public good" is better served by buying software which is as license-crippled as Microsoft's than by financing (and financing modifications if need be) the development of open source software. I happen to like the GPL, but the BSD license (or similar) is what I'd like to see on state-funded software; anyone who'd like can spin off a GPL version, no harm / no foul. The FSF should have a bot that checks when new tax-funded software is released, and issues a GPL'd version, posts it to a web site:)
If you say to this stance "Ha! Why should the government be in the software development business?" note that the government already *is* in this business, only they're currently financing software in a way that does not make it very available to the public. That's "The Public."
I've said before and still believe that Microsoft *could* become the world's largest open source vendor, and still make a lot of money at it. IBM's approach shows that boxed software is not the only way to make money, and (the other side of the coin) being confident enough to work with open software is a selling point.
History is still happening; I wonder what Microsoft would do if the Federal government made source code disclosure (one scenario would be that source code disclosure be disclosed, but only after a specified time spent in escrow) a requirement of software purchases, for both security auditing and general-welfare reasons.
That sounds quixotic, but it's what they should do.
1) Triage:) -- that is, figure out exactly what software licenses are killing you that actually are disposable. If you're running a proprietary library-running application that you can't easily replace, that might have to stick around for a bit. But if you're using Microsoft Office for memos and printing out bulletin-board items, OpenOffice.org (even with the ever-present quirks) might be a chink where free software can save you money. In many (schools / companies / organizations of all kinds), there are *some* computers used for the hard-to-replace stuff, and some on which Windows (for instance) is only there because no one has thought that a computer could *not* have Windows on it.
If you have any net-browsing terminals in the library, for instance, what OS are they running? Granted, existing ones may be a sunk expense, but as the calendar pages turn, do you need to replace them with the Dells-running-Windows that my local library does?
2) Knoppix. Even if it doesn't lead to the higher-ups instantly dropping all current software and hardware, making pilgrimages to Lourdes, etc, demo-ing Knoppix is a great way to show that Yes, there are word-processing apps, spreadsheets, (very nice) web browsers, etc. If your library has any computers for kids to use, I suggest the version of Knoppix from OSEF (http://osef.org/) version -- it's the ISO mentioned which is (as of today) still high up on their front page.
timothy
boy, that sure turned ugly!
on
Baked Apple
·
· Score: 1
Dear Powerbook owner:
In an effort to clear some of the junk out of your house, now that your TiBook is not as attractive as it should be, I can for a small fee collect it from you and get that eyesore out of your life.
Left the corrected version previewed but saved in a tab. Since I'd previewed, and it looked fine to me, I was wondering what the comments were talking about. Braintremor, sorry.
you wrote: "Thanks for the debate... I've enjoyed it:) And if you wish to continue this debate... I welcome your comments and look forward to reading them."
Well, I think we've both said more than enough. My opinion of Apple hardware (and maybe of their OSes as well) is more ambivalent than yours; oh well -- work and play with the stuff you prefer:)
You're right, you can't build a Mac using non-Apple guts, at least when it comes to the motherboard. (The peripherals are pretty standard, though.) If that's the biggest factor to you, then I can't make you think otherwise, and wouldn't want to:) Though I like my iBook, and find that moving stuff between the iBook and my Linux systems is not the pain that it once was, for non-portables I currently prefer X86 machines for the same reasons you name.
Likewise with the preference for internal vs. external storage etc; I like external devices for their portability and interchangeability -- for me, it's a lot simpler to move an external CD burner from machine to machine than actually install / uninstall / reinstall an internal one, and it means I don't have to buy a burner for each machine. Everyone will have different tradeoff points, and it sounds like ours are very different. Nothing wrong with that!
File formats / data exchange are what matter more to me; one big reason I generally prefer open software (open source / Free) is that it encourages open file formats. I'd like to be relatively unconcerned with the actual hardware doing the work as I write, draw, search for a link on google, etc, as long as I can move stuff from one machine to another as necessary / appropropriate / useful / fun.
My biggest objection to Macs (esp. the desktop ones) is aesthetic -- they're just too precious. I like computers to be less conspicuous than Apple does. Can't blame the designers, who want to make them distinctive and interesting, but I *can* disagree with their design choices:) My compact shuttle case is a bit precious, too, but to me it's at least somewhat more neutral and utilitarian looking. So long as it runs a nice OS with loads of software available, I don't care what the chip is; if Shuttle decided to get into the PPC market and sell little "almost Mac cubes" on which I could run, say, Yellow Dog linux, I'd be interested. Terrasoft is selling some big Antec-cased PPC systems, but I may have already purchased my last way-too-big computer. (And their little Bricks, though cool, seem like more money than I want to spend on a fairly limited machine...)
Good things: sharp screen; moderate weight; decent battery life; built-in DVD player; user interface in general and specifically OS X (which became usable enough with 10.2 that I have not booted into OS 9 since upgrading); decent included apps; above average case design (like the magnetic hinge with nothing to snag on); iMovie; iTunes (which now supports ogg); internal 802.11 (which can turn an equpped iBook into a wireless basestation).
Mediocre things: speakers (lousy, even at close range); keyboard (awful; about average for laptops and better than many, but still awful... my sister's iBook had a broken D key, and I snapped off my delete key when I installed the Airport card); trackpad (it'll never happen, but how I wish Apple instead of IBM had invented the eraserpoint); power cord (feels flimsy, slips out unbeknownst to the user...); speed (though I'm spoiled by the speed of Blackbox and other Linux WMs).
Depending on what you think about software, the fact that OS X is closed source may bother you, may not. I prefer Free software in general; so far though, I've been reluctant to risk disappointment / problems, and I have kept OS X on the iBook.
However, when I'm at home, OS aside, I generally prefer a big monitor, a responsive keyboard, and a quicker-feeling machine, which is why I type this from a machine running Mandrake 9, and am installing Red Hat on another machine yea verily even as I type this.
CmdrWass wrote: "You won't see me own a mac until the day comes that they open the hardware standards and there is good competition for hardware. In other words, until I can build a mac from spare parts, you won't see me owning one."
Instinctively, I agree with that -- don't want to be stuck with something dependent on one company etc.
However, a couple of things mitigate that fear:
- there are enough standard-enough parts n' ports (ethernet, CD-ROMs, firewire and USB, IDE hard drives, etc... can't count video cards, I guess) that Macs are less different from PCs than they used to be in the days when just exchanging floppies between Windows and Mac OS was a big pain. Now (for instance) I frequently transfer things between Mac and Linux machine with a little 65MB memory key that cost me $35 at a computer show:) (And next year, maybe 128MB will cost the same amount...) I have an external CD burner that works under Linux and Mac OS X, scanner likewise. Enough components live *outside* the box that the computer itself isn't always as important as it seems...
- file formats: there are quite a few that are legitimately cross platform. Depending on what you do with a computer, they might not fill all your needs, but for many people, RTF / PFD / html / JPEG / mp3 / ogg and other very cross-platform file formats mean a lot more than the OS being used to open / use / manipulate / save them. Double-edged sword, though, since so many apps love to create difficult-to-share filetypes by default, so if that *is* a concern, it is probably a deal killer. [Ahem]
- there are non-Apple OSes that run on Apple's hardware (a few varieties of Linux, and at least the three biggest *BSDs). Now I'll admit this is a roundabout argument, but... even if no one else can produce Macs per se, Apple knows that they are not alone in the world, and the ability to switch hardware platforms without switching OS has got to affect their pricing. (Not that Apple laptops are badly priced, all things considered... go price some non-Apple 17", super-thin, aluminum-clad notebooks;)) Even though it's not direct, it's definitely competition. And that's just for people willing / anxious to run Free software; even for Mac OS-only users, Windows laptops (which cannot run OS X) are obviously competition; people need computers, not necessarily Apple computers.
Yes, seeing Mark Spencer talk about Asterisk last weekend is one reason I was thinking of this:)
And (afaics) it wouldn't need a modem, really -- just a telephone interface. Mark demonstrated little USB adapters which can be used to interface a normal phone line to a computer for the purposes of attaching a standard phone or headset when you're making your VoIP calls:)
However, I am not certain about whether it works PC <--> USB dongle <--> outside connection, or only PC <--> USB dongle <--> deskside phone.
The "ex-girlfriend feature" he explained (if she called on her cell, her call was re-directed to her landline and vice versa) had the audience chortling:)
[Slow zoom, from closeup to extreme closeup, onto a telephone or computer with exaggerated blinking lights to show activity]
Recorded voice: "Hi! You're reached my telephone number. If you'd like to agree to be charged up to $10/minute at my sole discretion, please hit the "1" key now! I don't charge my friends, but if you're wasting my time with an unsolicited sales call generated by a database, please be advised that your calls are valuable to me."
[Medium closeup: telemarketer, with can of soda in one hand, hangs up, frustrated]
Should have parsed it more though, you're right. Since I'm not a big gamer, I didn't realize how many slashdot readers had never heard of it. Any game *I've* heard about I usually figure is so famous that mentioning it in the company of heavy gamers would be enough to cause a lull in the conversation as the antiquity of my knowledge is awkwardly acknowledged...
Sorry, I was in a bit of a foul mood (well, at least sarcastic) when I posted the "yet here you are" responses. If you want to read a longer version, I just wrote another (perhaps boring) comment...
Complaining about Slashdot's moderation system is a fine and legitimate thing to do -- but I'm honestly puzzled by the folks who spend a lot of time both griping about the site's moderation.. and posting offtopic comments:)
If you have tweaks you think would make the moderation system better, or suggestions for better moderation systems altogether, why not suggest them on sourceforge, where the coders can act on them? Rob does read email, too, but the FAQ specifically addresses this... the malice of a small handful of people means that Rob and the other coders spend a lot of time trying to make the moderation less "gameable" and more of a helpful, positive tool for making the discussion more enjoyable / useful / however-you-want-to-see-it. Mitigating the Beavis factor, in other words -- and Slashdot is the doorstep that a few delinquents use to leave their flaming paper bags. Constantly.
You've probably seen people in bars / clubs / stores / public parks [wherever;)] sourly complaining about how badly it sucks to be wherever they are. My response was flippant, but I mean it with a smile, not trying to be a jerk. It's like the widely applicable punchline "Well stop doing that!"
I'd like everyone who reads the site to be happy, but I can't enforce that:) [Brian: "There's no pleasing some people." Ex-Leper: "That's just what Jesus said!"]
It's true that Slashdot has a history, that Rob's "site just got popular," etc, but the lengthy diary entry someone posted into this story's comments I think shows how these topics are anything but ignored. Constant tweaking is bound to constantly leave some people upset with any particular change, but the intent is to improve the system, and I certainly think the overall moderation system (loosely speaking -- including, say, the foes / friends aspects of it) has gotten a lot better.
That was my favorite on the TI as well. Sorry, but I don't know of any version for the PC... that was an addictive game; I would not mind finding the old TI one day and having a nice game of Parsec, though:) (That and playing with the speech synthesizer... fun to make it approximate the dirty words which it would not actually say.)
Slashdot Mirror
Camino is actually a nice name, IMO. iBrowse (suggested by another commenter) is pretty funny, but I think that runs into the Legal problem again.
... "New Jersey Turnpike, The Browser."
;)
Camino -- "road" -- is not bad metaphorically, either. I think of a pleasant drive on the coast, as apposed to calling it, oh
Chimera was a *better*, but Camino is a good enough replacement, and the fact that it's a nice browser is more important
timothy
Thanks for the linked articles!
;))
I've been reading a little bit on the mini-itx.com site because I like the idea of a low-power TV/TiVo (and at the price of those EPIAs, esp. the older ones, you could attach a cheap optical drive and a small monitor, make a knoppix terminal for any room in the house).
I wonder how soon the GHz variety (and by that I mean one that is on par with Intel / AMD GHz processors) will be available fanless from VIA; that's the breaking point I'm looking for, having just assembled an Athlon system in the SS40 case from Shuttle. (For which I wish I had had smaller fingers, btw
timothy
The problem is the mechanism -- it had better be bulletproof, so spammers don't figure out how to successfully declare themselves opt-in (besides claiming so in a footer like 90% of them do now anyhow ;))
You're right -- there are a lot of one-off emails that you could have no way of whitelisting in advance. Besides which, I dislike white-list-only approaches because that would be ceding too much to the power of the spammers.
timothy
That is, the interface (to its credit!) looks a lot like MythTV. That's important because it means the control interface could be used on a variety of low-res output devices, like those little LCD panels for the car. (How much do those cost these days?) Interfaces built on the assumption of a high-res monitor degrade poorly, but this one looks well done.
:)
:) -- easy enough to add audio playback formats. I'm sure that these could sell well at a price close to $400. If the developers are reading, I'm offering :)
Wrapping it all up in guaranteed-working hardware etc is a smart idea of the sort that people have been whining for it for a long time. Glad these guys actually did it
Some wishlist items for the next generation:
1) provisions for monitor-less use as a car entertainment system (there are EPIA systems which I think would have enough power to do what this box does, and I believe there are 12v power supplies for them, too).
2) I don't see anything on there about Ogg playback (or FLAC for that matter), and these would both be necessary features in the perfect Anything Box. I don't have any music in FLAC yet, but I know I will in the near future.
Those are pretty trivial complaints, of course
timothy
One detail: How aware will the client software have to be of the newfangledness? :)
Whitelisting is a good approach, that would take care of certain things, but cancellable tokens I think are more iffy. What I'd rather see is a system of *cashable* tokens such that I could optionally charge for spam, rather than the default being sender pay.
Tim
Actually, I just wanted to make sure that the submission wasn't misinterpreted to mean that "Microsoft" was planning to implement this system, and that it's still ("just") a research project.
It sounds like a decent idea to me, but with certain thorns. The biggest one is What about legitimate, truly-opt-in mailing lists? Email is a genuinely low-cost communication method for non-profit groups (not just official tax-exempt non-profit groups,I mean all kinds of clubs, associations, groups of friends, etc.), and a per-email fee intended to hinder junkmail could also pinch a lot of people I wish it wouldn't. Maybe in the end that would be a fair tradeoff, but as spam filters get better (and ISPs get more aggressive about blocking spam on their side), I'm skeptical of that.
Also, some people send a lot of short emails; does charging per-email make sense vs. (for instance) per-byte?
And as for my opinions of Microsoft, well, you're free to read my earlier comments about Microsoft if you want to learn that;)
Tim
Microsoft is a company that sells software (which is with small and niggly exceptions source-secret software), employs a bunch of people (most of whom probably are not *actually* the devil), is run as a public corporation (which adds lots of bureaucratic, buck-shifting fun to the mix), and -- all else aside, just for a moment -- has had a big a role in lowering the cost of personal computing as any other company or group. Microsoft's desktop software (things like Office, etc), whatever you think of it, represents much better value than was available not many years ago. Partly that's because there *wasn't* any such thing as certain pieces of software that are now available to run on Windows.
:)
You may agree with me that source secrecy is a big snag in whether you should want to pay for or use a particular piece of software, or you may say "If it works, who cares whether the source is there?" And no one can make that decision for you.
My biggest problem with Microsoft is related to that though -- my beef is that they end up as a money sink for a *lot* of money taken from the public in the form of taxes, and which is supposed to be spent in a way that maximizes public good. That's the whole justification for taxes in the first place. I can think of no way that "the public good" is better served by buying software which is as license-crippled as Microsoft's than by financing (and financing modifications if need be) the development of open source software. I happen to like the GPL, but the BSD license (or similar) is what I'd like to see on state-funded software; anyone who'd like can spin off a GPL version, no harm / no foul. The FSF should have a bot that checks when new tax-funded software is released, and issues a GPL'd version, posts it to a web site
If you say to this stance "Ha! Why should the government be in the software development business?" note that the government already *is* in this business, only they're currently financing software in a way that does not make it very available to the public. That's "The Public."
I've said before and still believe that Microsoft *could* become the world's largest open source vendor, and still make a lot of money at it. IBM's approach shows that boxed software is not the only way to make money, and (the other side of the coin) being confident enough to work with open software is a selling point.
History is still happening; I wonder what Microsoft would do if the Federal government made source code disclosure (one scenario would be that source code disclosure be disclosed, but only after a specified time spent in escrow) a requirement of software purchases, for both security auditing and general-welfare reasons.
That sounds quixotic, but it's what they should do.
timothy
150 miles from anywhere? :)
:) -- that is, figure out exactly what software licenses are killing you that actually are disposable. If you're running a proprietary library-running application that you can't easily replace, that might have to stick around for a bit. But if you're using Microsoft Office for memos and printing out bulletin-board items, OpenOffice.org (even with the ever-present quirks) might be a chink where free software can save you money. In many (schools / companies / organizations of all kinds), there are *some* computers used for the hard-to-replace stuff, and some on which Windows (for instance) is only there because no one has thought that a computer could *not* have Windows on it.
A couple of suggestions:
1) Triage
If you have any net-browsing terminals in the library, for instance, what OS are they running? Granted, existing ones may be a sunk expense, but as the calendar pages turn, do you need to replace them with the Dells-running-Windows that my local library does?
2) Knoppix. Even if it doesn't lead to the higher-ups instantly dropping all current software and hardware, making pilgrimages to Lourdes, etc, demo-ing Knoppix is a great way to show that Yes, there are word-processing apps, spreadsheets, (very nice) web browsers, etc. If your library has any computers for kids to use, I suggest the version of Knoppix from OSEF (http://osef.org/) version -- it's the ISO mentioned which is (as of today) still high up on their front page.
timothy
Dear Powerbook owner:
In an effort to clear some of the junk out of your house, now that your TiBook is not as attractive as it should be, I can for a small fee collect it from you and get that eyesore out of your life.
Contact me when you decide to move on.
timothy
I didn't know that site generated any popups.
:)
OTOH, popups are no longer as hateful to me, since they went away
(popup ads are quite bothersome though, when sitting at a computer without a worthy browser installed.)
timothy
No, I just left it in a tab after I previewed, didn't realize I hadn't updated / thought I had. Sorry!
timothy
Left the corrected version previewed but saved in a tab. Since I'd previewed, and it looked fine to me, I was wondering what the comments were talking about. Braintremor, sorry.
timothy
you wrote: "Thanks for the debate... I've enjoyed it :) And if you wish to continue this debate... I welcome your comments and look forward to reading them."
:)
Well, I think we've both said more than enough. My opinion of Apple hardware (and maybe of their OSes as well) is more ambivalent than yours; oh well -- work and play with the stuff you prefer
timothy
You're right, you can't build a Mac using non-Apple guts, at least when it comes to the motherboard. (The peripherals are pretty standard, though.) If that's the biggest factor to you, then I can't make you think otherwise, and wouldn't want to :) Though I like my iBook, and find that moving stuff between the iBook and my Linux systems is not the pain that it once was, for non-portables I currently prefer X86 machines for the same reasons you name.
:) My compact shuttle case is a bit precious, too, but to me it's at least somewhat more neutral and utilitarian looking. So long as it runs a nice OS with loads of software available, I don't care what the chip is; if Shuttle decided to get into the PPC market and sell little "almost Mac cubes" on which I could run, say, Yellow Dog linux, I'd be interested. Terrasoft is selling some big Antec-cased PPC systems, but I may have already purchased my last way-too-big computer. (And their little Bricks, though cool, seem like more money than I want to spend on a fairly limited machine ...)
Likewise with the preference for internal vs. external storage etc; I like external devices for their portability and interchangeability -- for me, it's a lot simpler to move an external CD burner from machine to machine than actually install / uninstall / reinstall an internal one, and it means I don't have to buy a burner for each machine. Everyone will have different tradeoff points, and it sounds like ours are very different. Nothing wrong with that!
File formats / data exchange are what matter more to me; one big reason I generally prefer open software (open source / Free) is that it encourages open file formats. I'd like to be relatively unconcerned with the actual hardware doing the work as I write, draw, search for a link on google, etc, as long as I can move stuff from one machine to another as necessary / appropropriate / useful / fun.
My biggest objection to Macs (esp. the desktop ones) is aesthetic -- they're just too precious. I like computers to be less conspicuous than Apple does. Can't blame the designers, who want to make them distinctive and interesting, but I *can* disagree with their design choices
Cheers,
timothy
I have an iBook.
... my sister's iBook had a broken D key, and I snapped off my delete key when I installed the Airport card); trackpad (it'll never happen, but how I wish Apple instead of IBM had invented the eraserpoint); power cord (feels flimsy, slips out unbeknownst to the user ...); speed (though I'm spoiled by the speed of Blackbox and other Linux WMs).
Good things: sharp screen; moderate weight; decent battery life; built-in DVD player; user interface in general and specifically OS X (which became usable enough with 10.2 that I have not booted into OS 9 since upgrading); decent included apps; above average case design (like the magnetic hinge with nothing to snag on); iMovie; iTunes (which now supports ogg); internal 802.11 (which can turn an equpped iBook into a wireless basestation).
Mediocre things: speakers (lousy, even at close range); keyboard (awful; about average for laptops and better than many, but still awful
Depending on what you think about software, the fact that OS X is closed source may bother you, may not. I prefer Free software in general; so far though, I've been reluctant to risk disappointment / problems, and I have kept OS X on the iBook.
However, when I'm at home, OS aside, I generally prefer a big monitor, a responsive keyboard, and a quicker-feeling machine, which is why I type this from a machine running Mandrake 9, and am installing Red Hat on another machine yea verily even as I type this.
timothy
CmdrWass wrote: "You won't see me own a mac until the day comes that they open the hardware standards and there is good competition for hardware. In other words, until I can build a mac from spare parts, you won't see me owning one."
... can't count video cards, I guess) that Macs are less different from PCs than they used to be in the days when just exchanging floppies between Windows and Mac OS was a big pain. Now (for instance) I frequently transfer things between Mac and Linux machine with a little 65MB memory key that cost me $35 at a computer show :) (And next year, maybe 128MB will cost the same amount ...) I have an external CD burner that works under Linux and Mac OS X, scanner likewise. Enough components live *outside* the box that the computer itself isn't always as important as it seems ...
... even if no one else can produce Macs per se, Apple knows that they are not alone in the world, and the ability to switch hardware platforms without switching OS has got to affect their pricing. (Not that Apple laptops are badly priced, all things considered ... go price some non-Apple 17", super-thin, aluminum-clad notebooks;)) Even though it's not direct, it's definitely competition. And that's just for people willing / anxious to run Free software; even for Mac OS-only users, Windows laptops (which cannot run OS X) are obviously competition; people need computers, not necessarily Apple computers.
Instinctively, I agree with that -- don't want to be stuck with something dependent on one company etc.
However, a couple of things mitigate that fear:
- there are enough standard-enough parts n' ports (ethernet, CD-ROMs, firewire and USB, IDE hard drives, etc
- file formats: there are quite a few that are legitimately cross platform. Depending on what you do with a computer, they might not fill all your needs, but for many people, RTF / PFD / html / JPEG / mp3 / ogg and other very cross-platform file formats mean a lot more than the OS being used to open / use / manipulate / save them. Double-edged sword, though, since so many apps love to create difficult-to-share filetypes by default, so if that *is* a concern, it is probably a deal killer. [Ahem]
- there are non-Apple OSes that run on Apple's hardware (a few varieties of Linux, and at least the three biggest *BSDs). Now I'll admit this is a roundabout argument, but
timothy
Mark did the speaking, but the "ex-girlfriend system" belonged to someone else, and he was just relaying the information. Just wanted to be clear :)
timothy
Yes, seeing Mark Spencer talk about Asterisk last weekend is one reason I was thinking of this :)
:)
:)
And (afaics) it wouldn't need a modem, really -- just a telephone interface. Mark demonstrated little USB adapters which can be used to interface a normal phone line to a computer for the purposes of attaching a standard phone or headset when you're making your VoIP calls
However, I am not certain about whether it works PC <--> USB dongle <--> outside connection, or only PC <--> USB dongle <--> deskside phone.
The "ex-girlfriend feature" he explained (if she called on her cell, her call was re-directed to her landline and vice versa) had the audience chortling
timothy
[Medium Closeup: telemarketer dials]
[SFX: ringing phone]
[SFX: an audible click, followed by a recording]
[Slow zoom, from closeup to extreme closeup, onto a telephone or computer with exaggerated blinking lights to show activity]
Recorded voice: "Hi! You're reached my telephone number. If you'd like to agree to be charged up to $10/minute at my sole discretion, please hit the "1" key now! I don't charge my friends, but if you're wasting my time with an unsolicited sales call generated by a database, please be advised that your calls are valuable to me."
[Medium closeup: telemarketer, with can of soda in one hand, hangs up, frustrated]
[Extreme closeup: hand crushing soda can]
Well, it *was* listed under the topic "Games" :)
...
Should have parsed it more though, you're right. Since I'm not a big gamer, I didn't realize how many slashdot readers had never heard of it. Any game *I've* heard about I usually figure is so famous that mentioning it in the company of heavy gamers would be enough to cause a lull in the conversation as the antiquity of my knowledge is awkwardly acknowledged
timothy
seanw:
...
Sorry, I was in a bit of a foul mood (well, at least sarcastic) when I posted the "yet here you are" responses. If you want to read a longer version, I just wrote another (perhaps boring) comment
timothy
Complaining about Slashdot's moderation system is a fine and legitimate thing to do -- but I'm honestly puzzled by the folks who spend a lot of time both griping about the site's moderation .. and posting offtopic comments :)
... the malice of a small handful of people means that Rob and the other coders spend a lot of time trying to make the moderation less "gameable" and more of a helpful, positive tool for making the discussion more enjoyable / useful / however-you-want-to-see-it. Mitigating the Beavis factor, in other words -- and Slashdot is the doorstep that a few delinquents use to leave their flaming paper bags. Constantly.
;)] sourly complaining about how badly it sucks to be wherever they are. My response was flippant, but I mean it with a smile, not trying to be a jerk. It's like the widely applicable punchline "Well stop doing that!"
:) [Brian: "There's no pleasing some people." Ex-Leper: "That's just what Jesus said!"]
If you have tweaks you think would make the moderation system better, or suggestions for better moderation systems altogether, why not suggest them on sourceforge, where the coders can act on them? Rob does read email, too, but the FAQ specifically addresses this
You've probably seen people in bars / clubs / stores / public parks [wherever
I'd like everyone who reads the site to be happy, but I can't enforce that
It's true that Slashdot has a history, that Rob's "site just got popular," etc, but the lengthy diary entry someone posted into this story's comments I think shows how these topics are anything but ignored. Constant tweaking is bound to constantly leave some people upset with any particular change, but the intent is to improve the system, and I certainly think the overall moderation system (loosely speaking -- including, say, the foes / friends aspects of it) has gotten a lot better.
timothy
That was my favorite on the TI as well. Sorry, but I don't know of any version for the PC ... that was an addictive game; I would not mind finding the old TI one day and having a nice game of Parsec, though :) (That and playing with the speech synthesizer ... fun to make it approximate the dirty words which it would not actually say.)
timothy
and yet, here you are.
And yet ... here you are.