I'd say you should forget about this. Brasil is in shambles, Argentina is even worse. Chile might be passable, but it's still a far cry from anywhere in Europe. All the other countries plain suck, either to live or work in.
As someone else mentioned before, these places are worth visiting, not living in.
These are *consumer* prices... Effectively, what they are doing is financing the thing, splitting the huge amount into smaller monthly payments.
And you know what, it might actually work for countries where people (read: consumers) can't afford to go out and buy a copy of Office for the equivalent of US$300 or so. Paying that little a month is much more feasible.
Of course, it would be much better to make the software cheaper and finance it properly than have people pay to have the software be tied to a central server, but in the end, it's just Microsoft's (totally backwards) way of fighting rampant piracy...
They are still going forward with it in Brazil, where they announced the whole subscription thing in a big bash with Terra Lycos. Check out the little banner on the front page:
I agree with this... Everything in the Microsoft/ASP world is commercial. The simplest of the functionalities that you'll have to add will cost you $29.95. Things like file upload require you third-party modules.
Of course, there's people that are stuck with Microsoft, and people that don't mind being tied to all these third-parties. I'd much rather use PHP/Perl, where everything's open and free.
No, there's no over reacting whatsoever. Or do you think it's fair for Microsoft to "own" whatever piece of YOUR code you send to/from a Hotmail account? Or a book you're writing? Or an image... You get the idea (I hope you do).
This is what I find plain unacceptable. Don't blame Apple or the OS if it's clearly some fault either in your hardware or in your current installation!
Zillions of others have installed the OS on the same model of hardware that you have. So, either you take it as a conspiracy against you (rather unlikely), or you'd better send your computer back to Apple so they can fix whatever's broken with it, since that's most likely the case!
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you knew anything about the MacOS (I don't blame you if you don't), you'd know that it won't "crash", it'll just tell you it's not possible to run that application because you're out of memory.
Now, with OS X, users will be able to launch as many applications as they want, regardless of how much memory they've got. This will, of course, make people's computer seem slow, if they're running more applications than their memory capacity can handle. But that is true for any other OS out there! Windows NT crawls once you hit VM severely, and that is supposed to be a server OS!
BeOS is leaner, faster, has no software, and probably won't exist 6 months from now.
Unix OTOH is big, bulky, has tons of software, has been around for ages, and probably will exist for a good bunch of years.
Complicated APIs? Carbon is basically the old Toolbox, with a few things missing (for improvement's sake). It's there just so the new MacOS doesn't suffer from the BeOS syndrome of lack of developers.
Cocoa is the NeXT/Openstep APIs. They've been around far longer than the ever changing BeOS APIs, and with them, Apple gained a number of experienced developers who are providing great software, stuff that was totally out of reach of Mac users (as well as Be users). I'm using one of those applications right now, and it's a complete joy to use (OmniWeb).
Overall, I'm glad Jobs ditched Gassee and its half-baked OS (yes, Be is the half-baked OS).
Re:OSX has more jewlery hanging on it than Mr. T
on
OS X
·
· Score: 1
What are you talking about...
I've ran my two laptops, side to side. PowerBook G4 500 with the default 256mb RAM and OS X, and a Toshiba Tecra, 750mhz, 192mhz RAM, with Mandrake 7.2.
*Everything* under both Gnome AND KDE was so much slower. Launching apps, moving windows, typing, browsing, everything.
Get over it. OS X is what Gnome/KDE should've been if they weren't so busy trying to emulate the flawed Windows interface.
. Emacs works just fine. vi too:)
. Python (1.x) is included, 2.0 compiles fine. Perl/PHP also works. Don't know about PostgreSQL, but mySQL compiles, no problem.
. No built-in X Server. You'll have to install XFree86 yourself, and use a hack to run it along with Aqua.
. NFS works fine.
. Yes. The Office applications will be run on the "Classic" environment, which is basically MacOS 9, but they will be made fully OS X native by summer. IE is already native, but it's horrible. You can use it if you absolutely must to, but I'd rather use OmniWeb or any of the alternatives.
Where was Linux? Quite simply, powering and serving Internet pages for all the moronic MS trolls like you.
You're just simply wrong in believing Microsoft brought ease of use to the net. Macs had browsers and easier connecting options way before Windows (Winsock anyone?).
If anything, Microsoft hindered the development of the Internet, with its own proprietary extensions and late-coming browser, which is now known for opening a huge hope in people's computer (which is, btw, the topic of this thread).
Re:Didn't Steve Jobs Speak at MacWorld about....
on
Another Look At OS X
·
· Score: 1
Hardware assist, not hardware decoding. Big difference.
Yes, but those were also running the old MacOS 8.xx, which is a far cry from the new OS X when it comes to proper multitasking.
Re:Didn't Steve Jobs Speak at MacWorld about....
on
Another Look At OS X
·
· Score: 1
I honestly don't believe this is the problem. If you can burn CDs reliably on MacOS 8.x (even 7.x!) at 12x, with archaic scheduling and multitasking capabilities, it shouldn't be a problem for a Unix-derived OS.
People have misinterpreted the problem. The fact is not that OS X can't burn CDs or play DVDs. It's just that *Apple's* applications that perform those tasks aren't ready. Of course, that doesn't mean a third-party can't write software to do just that.
I don't see why it would be "odd". What is the purpose of Java anyway? Isn't it so you can code in one platform and use in many others?
Apple is pushing Java 2 big time, and if developers are confortable with OS X and Apple's tools, why should they use any other platform, one that they're probably less interested in?
Ah, your comparison between Wine and the Classic layer in OS X is completely surreal. The level of performance on the latter is at least 10 times better than the former. I suggest you give OS X a good try before you make those statements. Oh, and there is actually a chance of MS (or Adobe, for that matter) releasing native OS X applications, which is more than you can say for any other OS that is not Microsoft's.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say you should forget about this. Brasil is in shambles, Argentina is even worse. Chile might be passable, but it's still a far cry from anywhere in Europe. All the other countries plain suck, either to live or work in. As someone else mentioned before, these places are worth visiting, not living in.
These are *consumer* prices... Effectively, what they are doing is financing the thing, splitting the huge amount into smaller monthly payments.
And you know what, it might actually work for countries where people (read: consumers) can't afford to go out and buy a copy of Office for the equivalent of US$300 or so. Paying that little a month is much more feasible.
Of course, it would be much better to make the software cheaper and finance it properly than have people pay to have the software be tied to a central server, but in the end, it's just Microsoft's (totally backwards) way of fighting rampant piracy...
They are still going forward with it in Brazil, where they announced the whole subscription thing in a big bash with Terra Lycos. Check out the little banner on the front page:
Terra Brazil
The deal would be that Terra would host Microsoft's applications, and users would also pay through Terra's systems.
The price? About US$6 upfront, plus about US$13 monthly.
I agree with this... Everything in the Microsoft/ASP world is commercial. The simplest of the functionalities that you'll have to add will cost you $29.95. Things like file upload require you third-party modules. Of course, there's people that are stuck with Microsoft, and people that don't mind being tied to all these third-parties. I'd much rather use PHP/Perl, where everything's open and free.
Perhaps they're only covering open source tools/non-commercial tools.
Python is still too slow for anything but the most basic web services. At least that's my experience, but of course, YMMV.
No, there's no over reacting whatsoever. Or do you think it's fair for Microsoft to "own" whatever piece of YOUR code you send to/from a Hotmail account? Or a book you're writing? Or an image... You get the idea (I hope you do).
This is what I find plain unacceptable. Don't blame Apple or the OS if it's clearly some fault either in your hardware or in your current installation!
Zillions of others have installed the OS on the same model of hardware that you have. So, either you take it as a conspiracy against you (rather unlikely), or you'd better send your computer back to Apple so they can fix whatever's broken with it, since that's most likely the case!
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you knew anything about the MacOS (I don't blame you if you don't), you'd know that it won't "crash", it'll just tell you it's not possible to run that application because you're out of memory.
Now, with OS X, users will be able to launch as many applications as they want, regardless of how much memory they've got. This will, of course, make people's computer seem slow, if they're running more applications than their memory capacity can handle. But that is true for any other OS out there! Windows NT crawls once you hit VM severely, and that is supposed to be a server OS!
BeOS is leaner, faster, has no software, and probably won't exist 6 months from now.
Unix OTOH is big, bulky, has tons of software, has been around for ages, and probably will exist for a good bunch of years.
Complicated APIs? Carbon is basically the old Toolbox, with a few things missing (for improvement's sake). It's there just so the new MacOS doesn't suffer from the BeOS syndrome of lack of developers.
Cocoa is the NeXT/Openstep APIs. They've been around far longer than the ever changing BeOS APIs, and with them, Apple gained a number of experienced developers who are providing great software, stuff that was totally out of reach of Mac users (as well as Be users). I'm using one of those applications right now, and it's a complete joy to use (OmniWeb).
Overall, I'm glad Jobs ditched Gassee and its half-baked OS (yes, Be is the half-baked OS).
What are you talking about...
I've ran my two laptops, side to side. PowerBook G4 500 with the default 256mb RAM and OS X, and a Toshiba Tecra, 750mhz, 192mhz RAM, with Mandrake 7.2.
*Everything* under both Gnome AND KDE was so much slower. Launching apps, moving windows, typing, browsing, everything.
Get over it. OS X is what Gnome/KDE should've been if they weren't so busy trying to emulate the flawed Windows interface.
Let's see:
:)
. Emacs works just fine. vi too
. Python (1.x) is included, 2.0 compiles fine. Perl/PHP also works. Don't know about PostgreSQL, but mySQL compiles, no problem.
. No built-in X Server. You'll have to install XFree86 yourself, and use a hack to run it along with Aqua.
. NFS works fine.
. Yes. The Office applications will be run on the "Classic" environment, which is basically MacOS 9, but they will be made fully OS X native by summer. IE is already native, but it's horrible. You can use it if you absolutely must to, but I'd rather use OmniWeb or any of the alternatives.
All the recent mid-to-high end iMacs (about a year ago) have SVGA out. Your point?
Where was Linux? Quite simply, powering and serving Internet pages for all the moronic MS trolls like you.
You're just simply wrong in believing Microsoft brought ease of use to the net. Macs had browsers and easier connecting options way before Windows (Winsock anyone?).
If anything, Microsoft hindered the development of the Internet, with its own proprietary extensions and late-coming browser, which is now known for opening a huge hope in people's computer (which is, btw, the topic of this thread).
Hardware assist, not hardware decoding. Big difference.
Yes, but those were also running the old MacOS 8.xx, which is a far cry from the new OS X when it comes to proper multitasking.
I honestly don't believe this is the problem. If you can burn CDs reliably on MacOS 8.x (even 7.x!) at 12x, with archaic scheduling and multitasking capabilities, it shouldn't be a problem for a Unix-derived OS.
People have misinterpreted the problem. The fact is not that OS X can't burn CDs or play DVDs. It's just that *Apple's* applications that perform those tasks aren't ready. Of course, that doesn't mean a third-party can't write software to do just that.
I liked OmniWeb, but it still has major issues with fonts/CSS. Oh, and no XML either.
I don't see why it would be "odd". What is the purpose of Java anyway? Isn't it so you can code in one platform and use in many others?
Apple is pushing Java 2 big time, and if developers are confortable with OS X and Apple's tools, why should they use any other platform, one that they're probably less interested in?
Ah, your comparison between Wine and the Classic layer in OS X is completely surreal. The level of performance on the latter is at least 10 times better than the former. I suggest you give OS X a good try before you make those statements. Oh, and there is actually a chance of MS (or Adobe, for that matter) releasing native OS X applications, which is more than you can say for any other OS that is not Microsoft's.