It's a style thing more than it is a grammar thing, but I'd call him out on the parallelism of his list of common errors. He starts with two noun phrases. Then he throws in an independent clause! What's that about?
Microsoft was using contracts and pricing controls to restrict OEMs from bundling other browsers/media players; they forced it so that their browser and media player to be the only thing installed by default.
Apple isn't using contracts and pricing controls to prohibit anyone from running their software.
In a related point, saying Apple can't bundle their own software on their own machines would be stupid; the point of the whole MS case was to allow manufacturers to bundle what the want. Apple is a manufacturer. Should they be the only one that is forced to ship softwareless machines?
On the pertinence of necessity in bundling cases:
There is none! Microsoft used that in their defense as a reason (or excuse, depending on your point of view) for why they were bundling. They weren't taken to court for it. Companies can bundle non-vital applications with their operating systems. They're called features!
Cars don't need radios. If Ford had a monopoly, should they be forced to sell radio-less cars for competitions sake?
You're wrong for several reasons. First is that you don't seem to understand the Microsoft case. OEMs COULDN'T install an alternative. Ya know, hence the suit?
Second, Apple would get written up with the marketshare. I agree and said as much in my post. But bundling wouldn't be a part of the case at all, unless they were including extra crap to jack prices up that people didn't want; Apple's bundled software doesn't jack the price up. They basically give you hundreds of dollars in free software with each machine.
When has Apple cloned software? The ONLY example I can think of is Sherlock 3 and Watson. One application isn't really enough support for that sort of claim.
And no, Apple doesn't prohibit anyone from selling Apple products. Any business can become an authorized reseller.
Even if Apple were a monopoly and the goverment could use anti-trust laws to regulate it, they couldn't force them to not bundle things with their computers. They make the whole thing; it's not really "bundling."
Think about it this way. It would be absurd for a hypothetically monopolistic Ford to be forced to "unbundle" their steering wheels or their leather interiors in order to allow consumers choice of Toyota steering wheels and interiors.
Microsoft's business practices were an abuse of their power because they prohibited other companies (like Dell and Gateway) from installing competitors products. Apple's bundling isn't like that.
A monopolistic Apple's bundling could hurt consumers and bring about an anti-trust case, but there are really no parallels to the Microsoft case.
Strict behaviorism was found to be an incomplete theory over 50 years ago, bud. Cognition and physiology play a large role in psychology. That is to say, conditioning can't control everything.
You could pick up a load of these features on OS X for free.
Spotlight = Quicksilver, only Spotlight is better just like it is better than Copernic/Google Toolbar/MSN Toolbar. It's real-time searching unlike Google Desktop Search, it's easily integrated by developers into other apps (like it is into Apple Mail, Safari, and Address Book; those three aren't), it's extendable to search more file types, and since it's built into the OS, it will be widely supported.
I also should note that somehow it was newsworthy to have database driven metadata search when it was going to be a feature in Longhorn.
Safari RSS = Firefox, only Firefox has a crappy non-standard user interface.
Dashboard = nothing on any platform. It's like Konfabulator and those others in that it lets you run widgets, but Windows and OS X both already come with widgets like a calculator and a calendar. What Dashboard is that those others isn't is a free development environment that lets you write apps entirely in HTML and Javascript and that also lets you access the entire Cocoa framework.
AIM profiles in iChat = AIM profiles in AIM, only the iChat doesn't suck and slow you down.
New fonts = New fonts on the web, only these fonts are actually designed to work well and look nice instead of to make your party invitations difficult to decipher. Also, Microsoft didn't release any new fonts, they announced them as a Longhorn feature. Imagine that, an OS vendor plugging new fonts as an OS feature!
RAID Support is a crappy feature, though. Still, the point is that these features are really features. They are an improvement upon what was available before and what's available for other platforms.
No, Spotlight can use rich meta-data as well. This page has an example of the kind of metadata you can search for with Spotlight -- the keywords section would probably be pulled from the JPEG EXIF data, plus it can search Finder comments. Also, developers can write Spotlight plugins that index even more metadata; a developer could theoretically write a plugin that scans and searches even the colors in a photograph, for example.
Yeah, but they stay on until the get a signal to turn off, so the refresh rate doesn't matter as far as health concerns. Flicker is the main concern with refresh rate, and LCDs don't flicker.
Re:Apple computer shipments are actually on the ri
on
Re-Imagining Apple
·
· Score: 1
If only iTunes weren't introduced 8 months before the iPod.
However, you seem to have missed the point. I said, "You don't have to pay for something for a company to monopolize it." You (the consumer) don't (doesn't) have to pay for it. Just as broadcasters must be kept from using anti-competitive practices with advertisers (where the money comes from), so Google must be kept abuses with their advertisers.
I maybe wasn't clear before, so I'll say it now. Just because you don't pay Google doesn't mean they don't get money or that they can't break monopoly laws.
But the trusted sites zone is determined by the content of the pages (ActiveX? Javascript? Java? VBScript?) and the IP address (local or Internet.) It's not a list maintained by Microsoft (or in this case, AOL.)
Slashdot Mirror
'til mid-2006, according to Apple.
It's a style thing more than it is a grammar thing, but I'd call him out on the parallelism of his list of common errors. He starts with two noun phrases. Then he throws in an independent clause! What's that about?
On the merits of the case:
Microsoft was using contracts and pricing controls to restrict OEMs from bundling other browsers/media players; they forced it so that their browser and media player to be the only thing installed by default.
Apple isn't using contracts and pricing controls to prohibit anyone from running their software.
In a related point, saying Apple can't bundle their own software on their own machines would be stupid; the point of the whole MS case was to allow manufacturers to bundle what the want. Apple is a manufacturer. Should they be the only one that is forced to ship softwareless machines?
On the pertinence of necessity in bundling cases:
There is none! Microsoft used that in their defense as a reason (or excuse, depending on your point of view) for why they were bundling. They weren't taken to court for it. Companies can bundle non-vital applications with their operating systems. They're called features!
Cars don't need radios. If Ford had a monopoly, should they be forced to sell radio-less cars for competitions sake?
Nope.
You're wrong for several reasons. First is that you don't seem to understand the Microsoft case. OEMs COULDN'T install an alternative. Ya know, hence the suit?
Second, Apple would get written up with the marketshare. I agree and said as much in my post. But bundling wouldn't be a part of the case at all, unless they were including extra crap to jack prices up that people didn't want; Apple's bundled software doesn't jack the price up. They basically give you hundreds of dollars in free software with each machine.
When has Apple cloned software? The ONLY example I can think of is Sherlock 3 and Watson. One application isn't really enough support for that sort of claim.
And no, Apple doesn't prohibit anyone from selling Apple products. Any business can become an authorized reseller.
Like USB and Firewire and DVD burners showed up in Apple machines when they were commodity items?
Even if Apple were a monopoly and the goverment could use anti-trust laws to regulate it, they couldn't force them to not bundle things with their computers. They make the whole thing; it's not really "bundling."
Think about it this way. It would be absurd for a hypothetically monopolistic Ford to be forced to "unbundle" their steering wheels or their leather interiors in order to allow consumers choice of Toyota steering wheels and interiors.
Microsoft's business practices were an abuse of their power because they prohibited other companies (like Dell and Gateway) from installing competitors products. Apple's bundling isn't like that.
A monopolistic Apple's bundling could hurt consumers and bring about an anti-trust case, but there are really no parallels to the Microsoft case.
Watch it with that loofa.
See this demo on mozilla.org or search for designmode on Google.
It's the thing that powers the Blogger interface.
Watch Activity Monitor. It doesn't launch until the first time you call it up. Disable the key commands to bring it up and it'll never start.
It's part of Darwin (the free, APSL base of OS X.) The source is included in the other source files of Darwin.
Try installing it with the P-P-P-Powerbook in Fire Wire! target disk mode.
Strict behaviorism was found to be an incomplete theory over 50 years ago, bud. Cognition and physiology play a large role in psychology. That is to say, conditioning can't control everything.
Yeah, it was in Photoshop 5.5.
You could pick up a load of these features on OS X for free.
Spotlight = Quicksilver, only Spotlight is better just like it is better than Copernic/Google Toolbar/MSN Toolbar. It's real-time searching unlike Google Desktop Search, it's easily integrated by developers into other apps (like it is into Apple Mail, Safari, and Address Book; those three aren't), it's extendable to search more file types, and since it's built into the OS, it will be widely supported.
I also should note that somehow it was newsworthy to have database driven metadata search when it was going to be a feature in Longhorn.
Safari RSS = Firefox, only Firefox has a crappy non-standard user interface.
Dashboard = nothing on any platform. It's like Konfabulator and those others in that it lets you run widgets, but Windows and OS X both already come with widgets like a calculator and a calendar. What Dashboard is that those others isn't is a free development environment that lets you write apps entirely in HTML and Javascript and that also lets you access the entire Cocoa framework.
AIM profiles in iChat = AIM profiles in AIM, only the iChat doesn't suck and slow you down.
New fonts = New fonts on the web, only these fonts are actually designed to work well and look nice instead of to make your party invitations difficult to decipher. Also, Microsoft didn't release any new fonts, they announced them as a Longhorn feature. Imagine that, an OS vendor plugging new fonts as an OS feature!
RAID Support is a crappy feature, though. Still, the point is that these features are really features. They are an improvement upon what was available before and what's available for other platforms.
No, Spotlight can use rich meta-data as well. This page has an example of the kind of metadata you can search for with Spotlight -- the keywords section would probably be pulled from the JPEG EXIF data, plus it can search Finder comments. Also, developers can write Spotlight plugins that index even more metadata; a developer could theoretically write a plugin that scans and searches even the colors in a photograph, for example.
Yeah, but they stay on until the get a signal to turn off, so the refresh rate doesn't matter as far as health concerns. Flicker is the main concern with refresh rate, and LCDs don't flicker.
If only iTunes weren't introduced 8 months before the iPod.
Wouldn't it be ironic
No. That would not be ironic.
Prettier? I don't think most Mac users care that it's pretty; they care that it works better.
I forgot that jokes weren't allowed on slashdot. Thanks for the reminder.
Apple is the new Microsoft.
No, I can't, because the FCC does its job.
However, you seem to have missed the point. I said, "You don't have to pay for something for a company to monopolize it." You (the consumer) don't (doesn't) have to pay for it. Just as broadcasters must be kept from using anti-competitive practices with advertisers (where the money comes from), so Google must be kept abuses with their advertisers.
I maybe wasn't clear before, so I'll say it now. Just because you don't pay Google doesn't mean they don't get money or that they can't break monopoly laws.
You are right that Google isn't a monopoly, but you don't have to pay for something for a company to monopolize it.
I don't pay companies for broadcast TV, but there is still a regulatory agency to prevent abuses (like an illegal monopoly.)
Ahh, I see that now. I had only skimmed it before. I wonder if they will sell the list or anything now.
But the trusted sites zone is determined by the content of the pages (ActiveX? Javascript? Java? VBScript?) and the IP address (local or Internet.) It's not a list maintained by Microsoft (or in this case, AOL.)