What I feel is needed is a true 3rd party, not 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th parties, such as Green, Tea Party, Libertarian; we need an agreeable third party that can compete against the two majors without a lot of interference from small parties. We need a consensus third party.
There are issues on which the Greens and Libertarians can find consensus; both the Greens and the Libertarians oppose a strike on Syria and both the Greens and the Libertarians oppose government spying. Some other issues, not so much....
The radicals and tones are an essential portion of the language, removing them would be like taking English words and removing the spaces and punctuation marks. It would turn it into a mess.
Apple does not have lots of innovative products. It did not invent the iphone, it acquired it.
What company did Apple buy that was making the iPhone? (Or do you mean by "iphone" something other than what most people think of when they hear "iPhone", or mean by "acquired" something other than is usually meant by "acquired"?)
As for Apple it basically has a computer market that really hasn't grown for a long time (and with a big exodus of managers/execs to the more profitable divisions), a high end phones/apps market, a shrinking music player market, and a music market.
So you're presumably calling the iPad a high end (and presumably rather large and and devoid of non-VoIP phone capability) phone?
Maybe we in the USA are the only ones conscious of these egregious violations of the American ideal and tradition of open and accountable government?
Or maybe we're not. (Perhaps, in that case, more like the German ideal of open and accountable government, due to somewhat recent memories of other traditions.)
Either the other countries don't (then the NSA is the big bully), or the other countries are much better at not getting caught (then the NSA is the idiot).
Or other countries do, but not to the extent that the NSA does, so nobody's been as motivated as Edward Snowden to leak the information or look for ways in which those other countries' equivalents might have affected things (which amounts to "NSA is the big bully, some other countries have their own bullies but they're not as big as the NSA").
Um , no they dont and no the are not. . They subcontract all of the manufacturing of all their products to Chinese companies. Apple doesn't build squat. Here from there own web site:
Long-Term Supply Agreements
The Company has entered into long-term agreements to secure the supply of certain inventory components. Under certain of these agreements, which expire between 2013 and 2022, the Company has made prepayments for the future purchase of inventory components and has acquired capital equipment to use in the manufacturing of such components.
so they do appear to be investing some amount of money in manufacturing infrastructure, apparently by buying it themselves for use by their subcontractors.
Scott Adams once divided markets into four quadrants, with the axes being "stupid" vs. "smart" and "rich" vs. "poor", advising people to go for the "stupid and rich" quadrant (poor, and they can't spend a lot of money on your products; smart, and it's a lot more work to convince people to buy your product).
The Nokia insider seems to really like that quadrant; as the article says:
Ironically Nuovo feels the answer to Apple’s conundrum can be found in re-examining Nokia history, and one of its enduring success stories, Vertu.
Vertu is a manufacturer of luxury mobile phones, which have sold for as much as $US300,000 a piece. It was conceived by Nuovo and eventually spun out as a separate private concern.
Cellphones for people who really need the bearings for the buttons to be made from ruby.
Yes, it was in snow leopard. It is still cutting edge, as no other OS has anything similar throughout the OS.
GCD might be cutting-edge, but it does not itself make Mavericks a cutting-edge version of OS X, given that it dates back to Snow Leopard, and it doesn't belong in a list whose other members are features new in Mavericks. In the list "interrupt coalescing, memory compression, grand central dispatch, app nap.", at least one of these things is not like the others, as the saying goes, and, if by "interrupt coalescing" you mean "timer coalescing", exactly one of those things is not like the others.
(As for "interrupt coalescing", I have no reason to believe that, for example, jerbun's comment in this Gizmodo story:
My best guess is that they are essentially doing this: Interrupt Coalescing
This taken from the "Time Coalescing" statement from which I am making the assumption that they really mean "Interrupt Coalescing."
The basic idea is that instead of waking up the processor every single time some sort of I/O needs to be done by a peripheral, they let some of them wait a little longer. Not all I/O is latency dependent, and as such the wake-up time can be postponed. This means that a series of interrupts can be handled all at once, and then the processor can go back to sleep.
I'm more inclined to go with Apple's own description of it in their "OS X Mavericks Core Technologies Overview" document, which indicates that it shifts the times of events scheduled to happen sufficiently close together in time so that, instead of happening at a time as close as possible to the scheduled time, they happen at times further from their scheduled time in a fashion that allows more of them to be handled within one timer-based wakeup. One consequence of this might be that fewer timer interrupts occur (as I remember, XNU was made tickless at least as far back as Lion, so there aren't periodic timer interrupts), but that particular bit of interrupt coalescing - it only concerns timer interrupts - isn't the main goal, and is arguably not a goal at all, just a side-effect of reducing the number of timer-based wakeups from sleep.)
The two Lions are broken in many ways. The two that I dislike most are the "looks just like your paper calendar" craziness that was overflowing the whole UI
At least for Calendar and Address Book^W^WContacts, both are fixed in Mavericks.
and whatever it is that they've done with memory management that causes 4GB to be too little to really work on. This last one gripes me because I bought a 4GB MacBook Air because (silly me) 4GB had been more than plenty for my Snow Leopard systems.
It wasn't enough for my Snow Leopard MBP (admittedly, a zillion Safari windows, occasional firing up of various VMware Fusion VMs to do libpcap and/or Wireshark development work, and native development work on libpcap/tcpdump/Wireshark isn't exactly a typical load), and isn't enough for the other Snow Leopard MBP in the household (no development work or Fusion, but somewhere between.1 and.5 zillion Safari windows, and occasional Chrome windows on sites where Chrome sucks less than Safari - I'm looking at you, mlslistings.com).
Apple needs to address legacy support and stop abandoning old software and data. Just because they want to move forward doesn't mean we as users want to give up access to our existing data. We need an operating system that supports all software. This should include all versions of the iOS, MacOSX, MacClassic, AppleII, etc. Even DOS, CPM and Windows. Offering universal emulation is possible - Apple hardware has the computing power and Apple Corporation has the resources. Doing this would set them apart and above all other vendors.
Yes, it'll set them above all other vendors in terms of "spending time and energy on a small group of users who will probably not contribute enough to their bottom like to make the investment make sense". Anybody who cares about CP/M apps, for example, should go get a copy of CP/M if they don't have one already and an emulator for a Z80-based PC and solve their problem that way, not expect Apple or Microsoft or any other OS vendor to care.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
I'm a Toyota guy and I want a supercar. Toyota doesn't make one.
Slashdot Mirror
Am I the only one at /. that doesn't want to entrust the welfare of my fellow Americans' national security to international corporations? WTF?
And corporations with no activities outside the US would be better?
Suggestion #4:
What I feel is needed is a true 3rd party, not 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th parties, such as Green, Tea Party, Libertarian; we need an agreeable third party that can compete against the two majors without a lot of interference from small parties. We need a consensus third party.
Sure. Let's try to figure out a party that can provide a consensus between people who support a party whose platform calls for, among other things, "restoration of a federally funded entitlement program to support children, families, the unemployed, elderly and disabled, with no time limit on benefits. This program should be funded through the existing welfare budget, reductions in military spending and corporate subsidies, and a fair, progressive income tax." and people who support a party whose platform calls for, among other things, "the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution." Good luck with that....
There are issues on which the Greens and Libertarians can find consensus; both the Greens and the Libertarians oppose a strike on Syria and both the Greens and the Libertarians oppose government spying. Some other issues, not so much....
That still doesn't help with the homophones.
I.e., the words that are pronounced the same, with the same tones (and presumably not easily distinguished in the fashion that "read" and "red" are)?
The radicals and tones are an essential portion of the language, removing them would be like taking English words and removing the spaces and punctuation marks. It would turn it into a mess.
Radicals, maybe, but there do exist tonal languages written with an accented version of the Roman alphabet.
Apple does not have lots of innovative products. It did not invent the iphone, it acquired it.
What company did Apple buy that was making the iPhone? (Or do you mean by "iphone" something other than what most people think of when they hear "iPhone", or mean by "acquired" something other than is usually meant by "acquired"?)
As for Apple it basically has a computer market that really hasn't grown for a long time (and with a big exodus of managers/execs to the more profitable divisions), a high end phones/apps market, a shrinking music player market, and a music market.
So you're presumably calling the iPad a high end (and presumably rather large and and devoid of non-VoIP phone capability) phone?
Maybe we in the USA are the only ones conscious of these egregious violations of the American ideal and tradition of open and accountable government?
Or maybe we're not. (Perhaps, in that case, more like the German ideal of open and accountable government, due to somewhat recent memories of other traditions.)
Or other countries do
E.g. the UK (GCHQ). Not as big a bully as the NSA, but....
Either the other countries don't (then the NSA is the big bully), or the other countries are much better at not getting caught (then the NSA is the idiot).
Or other countries do, but not to the extent that the NSA does, so nobody's been as motivated as Edward Snowden to leak the information or look for ways in which those other countries' equivalents might have affected things (which amounts to "NSA is the big bully, some other countries have their own bullies but they're not as big as the NSA").
One person claims that the A5 encryption algorithm for GSM wasn't as strong as the Germans thought it should be; if true, it doesn't explicitly indicate which countries objected to the stronger encryption (it speaks of it being a French algorithm, but that doesn't ipso facto mean that the French spearheaded that).
Um , no they dont and no the are not. . They subcontract all of the manufacturing of all their products to Chinese companies. Apple doesn't build squat. Here from there own web site:
http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/our-suppliers.html
And from their latest Form 10-Q:
so they do appear to be investing some amount of money in manufacturing infrastructure, apparently by buying it themselves for use by their subcontractors.
Scott Adams once divided markets into four quadrants, with the axes being "stupid" vs. "smart" and "rich" vs. "poor", advising people to go for the "stupid and rich" quadrant (poor, and they can't spend a lot of money on your products; smart, and it's a lot more work to convince people to buy your product).
The Nokia insider seems to really like that quadrant; as the article says:
Cellphones for people who really need the bearings for the buttons to be made from ruby.
Erm, ok then Lara. Or is it, "Dr. Jones"?
Thank you for dragging me into a dungeon of fanfic.
You're delusional if you think America is the land of the free.
Maybe it was, but it isn't anymore. Today's America imprisons millions
"Was" must date back before the early-to-mid 1980's. And I'm not sure about various times in the past (and periods before that, modulo a lower population in those times).
How quickly we forget 9/11. If our government had been more vigilant in who crosses our border, it would have never happened.
Yeah, if we hadn't let this guy over here, we might never have had the 9/11 attacks.
I got stopped because I have dual citizenship and the guy couldn't stop saying "We don't recognize dual citizenship here".
Some guys need to be locked in a room whose only other contents are certain documents and not let out until they truly understand those documents.
"paranoia" about the NSA's scope creep
"Scope creep", singular? So there's only one person at the NSA looking at us with a periscope? As long as he's not putting it in Uranus....
Aren't you the same ones
girlintraining is only one person, so I'm not sure why you're using the plural "ones" here.
My fetid penis and your rancid asshole were meant to be together!
Only if you use a Trojan.
Yes, it was in snow leopard. It is still cutting edge, as no other OS has anything similar throughout the OS.
GCD might be cutting-edge, but it does not itself make Mavericks a cutting-edge version of OS X, given that it dates back to Snow Leopard, and it doesn't belong in a list whose other members are features new in Mavericks. In the list "interrupt coalescing, memory compression, grand central dispatch, app nap.", at least one of these things is not like the others, as the saying goes, and, if by "interrupt coalescing" you mean "timer coalescing", exactly one of those things is not like the others.
(As for "interrupt coalescing", I have no reason to believe that, for example, jerbun's comment in this Gizmodo story:
is a good guess.
I'm more inclined to go with Apple's own description of it in their "OS X Mavericks Core Technologies Overview" document, which indicates that it shifts the times of events scheduled to happen sufficiently close together in time so that, instead of happening at a time as close as possible to the scheduled time, they happen at times further from their scheduled time in a fashion that allows more of them to be handled within one timer-based wakeup. One consequence of this might be that fewer timer interrupts occur (as I remember, XNU was made tickless at least as far back as Lion, so there aren't periodic timer interrupts), but that particular bit of interrupt coalescing - it only concerns timer interrupts - isn't the main goal, and is arguably not a goal at all, just a side-effect of reducing the number of timer-based wakeups from sleep.)
You've never seen the refurbished link on their site?
If you haven't, here's where they sell refurbished equipment, and, yes, selling refurbished Macs, at least, predated Jobs's death.
The two Lions are broken in many ways. The two that I dislike most are the "looks just like your paper calendar" craziness that was overflowing the whole UI
At least for Calendar and Address Book^W^WContacts, both are fixed in Mavericks.
and whatever it is that they've done with memory management that causes 4GB to be too little to really work on. This last one gripes me because I bought a 4GB MacBook Air because (silly me) 4GB had been more than plenty for my Snow Leopard systems.
It wasn't enough for my Snow Leopard MBP (admittedly, a zillion Safari windows, occasional firing up of various VMware Fusion VMs to do libpcap and/or Wireshark development work, and native development work on libpcap/tcpdump/Wireshark isn't exactly a typical load), and isn't enough for the other Snow Leopard MBP in the household (no development work or Fusion, but somewhere between .1 and .5 zillion Safari windows, and occasional Chrome windows on sites where Chrome sucks less than Safari - I'm looking at you, mlslistings.com).
Apple needs to address legacy support and stop abandoning old software and data. Just because they want to move forward doesn't mean we as users want to give up access to our existing data. We need an operating system that supports all software. This should include all versions of the iOS, MacOSX, MacClassic, AppleII, etc. Even DOS, CPM and Windows. Offering universal emulation is possible - Apple hardware has the computing power and Apple Corporation has the resources. Doing this would set them apart and above all other vendors.
Yes, it'll set them above all other vendors in terms of "spending time and energy on a small group of users who will probably not contribute enough to their bottom like to make the investment make sense". Anybody who cares about CP/M apps, for example, should go get a copy of CP/M if they don't have one already and an emulator for a Z80-based PC and solve their problem that way, not expect Apple or Microsoft or any other OS vendor to care.
I'm a Toyota guy and I want a supercar. Toyota doesn't make one.
Yes they do.
Well, "made"; their Web site says "all 500 units sold".
Curring edge features: interrupt coalescing, memory compression, grand central dispatch, app nap.
Presumably you're either referring to changes to GCD or expanding the use of GCD, given that GCD first appeared in OS X in Snow Leopard.
They better hope Dr. Light doesn't work for Microsoft.
So what does he have to do with anything called "Mavericks"?