Man, will you guys get your sh!t together? Now we have the same story twice on the main page, right next to each other.
I know, I know--it's a community, you aren't journalists, blah blah blah. But it's sloppy and lame and you can't MISS IT if you just look at the damn front page of the site.
"End-users of Open Source software have as much, if not more, of an obligation to be helpful to developers as developers have to be helpful to end-users."
You are living in Candyland if you think that's true...I'd advise you to get used to this kind of feedback, because real people in the real world give this kind of "feedback" all the live-long day.
"No, you probably just aren't familiar with the shell. Many very good typists get very frustrated with UNIX because of the need to understand the shell."
You bonehead--she can't be wrong about what her own requirements are.
You do not get a faster SuperDrive than you currently have. You'd know that if you had actually read the page you linked to rather than spasmodically sending it straight to Slashdot. From the same page:
"Will this update enable my 2x SuperDrive to write at a higher speed? This update enables you to read from and write to the new media, but it does not increase the speed of the drive."
As I said the other day, I thought that previewing was supposed to help improve accuracy?
"Its people like you that pressure companies to produce CRAP. If apple wishes to take longer, either because of missing marketing peices, inventory issues, or fixing problems with its design, LET THEM."
Fine. Then let them make more accurate "estimations" in the future...a lot of people are sick of their track record on this, and rampant Apple apologizing isn't going to help them.
"It seems Apple hit it's deadline of 7-10 weeks after all."
Well, perhaps--after blowing right by the February ship date that Steve Jobs stated at Macworld. I'm not too terribly impressed--they really need to make their announcements more realistic, because I no longer believe them and refuse to preorder anything. I know a lot of folks who are doing the same.
Re:Separating Content from Presentation a Good Thi
on
Office 2003 and XML
·
· Score: 1
"Everyone I know who uses Macs alot (real computer people, not just people who only use AOL or something like that) have bought 2+ button mice for their Macs, because they are simply superior in usuability."
One of the reasons Macs rock is that application designers are forced to design for a one-button mouse--not hiding vital features up in contextual menus that only show up when your mouse is in a certain part of the screen. That's one of the biggest unsung reasons Macs will stay defaulting to one mouse--it makes better design.
And as you point out, it's a whole $10 to get a different mouse, depending on your preference--it can be more, but it doesn't have to be. So I can't see this as a serious "problem" with the platform.
I think it's odd that this "review" treats the word "singularity" as though the above constructed meaning is common knowledge. I knew what it meant, but it's very poor writin to assume that everyone will.
"Show me real data, or shut the fuck up. An anecdote from a biased, self-serving viewpoint is not data."
What are you, some kind of robot? It's not data--it's his own observations, and they are well constructed. He never claims to be writing some kind of sociology thesis...and your criticisms are so overblown and, frankly, "without data" that I suspect you didn't actually read the piece.
You would hardly be alone at Slashdot in that regard, I'm afraid.
Agreed. It was a great article, and I am shocked at how incredibly few folks seem to have even skimmed it--it really changes my own opinions about/., which seems to be another case of a social system with very little connection to a larger world.
"not the dual 1.25GHz machines that sell for $4500+."
This is really specious--you'd have to tweak and add crap to a system to hell and back to get that mac at that price point. Go to their store, check online--that is just silly.
Re:Musings on CPU and UI Performance
on
Is Mac OS X Slow?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Good message. One point:
"They're just not. In fact, they tend to run (slightly) slower, clock for clock, in SPECmarks."
The fact that SPEC is optimized for x86 plays a role as well.
Slashdot Mirror
You can get it now at Software Update in System Preferences, or if you rae feeling kicky download the stand-alone installer at:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=
Please mod this parent down...what a waste of flesh.
Thatr may be true of FCP2 and FCP3, but did you even read the list of what's included with FCP4?
I didn't think so, Mr. Lost-My-Train-Of-Thought-While-Rambling-Barely-Co
Man, will you guys get your sh!t together? Now we have the same story twice on the main page, right next to each other.
I know, I know--it's a community, you aren't journalists, blah blah blah. But it's sloppy and lame and you can't MISS IT if you just look at the damn front page of the site.
Bah...that's just a reductio ad absurdum arguement. In this case that obviously isn't going on.
"End-users of Open Source software have as much, if not more, of an obligation to be helpful to developers as developers have to be helpful to end-users."
You are living in Candyland if you think that's true...I'd advise you to get used to this kind of feedback, because real people in the real world give this kind of "feedback" all the live-long day.
"No, you probably just aren't familiar with the shell. Many very good typists get very frustrated with UNIX because of the need to understand the shell."
You bonehead--she can't be wrong about what her own requirements are.
They weren't misconceptions--she just didn't want to have to buy a new system, and her old rig wouldn't run XP.
You do not get a faster SuperDrive than you currently have. You'd know that if you had actually read the page you linked to rather than spasmodically sending it straight to Slashdot. From the same page:
"Will this update enable my 2x SuperDrive to write at a higher speed?
This update enables you to read from and write to the new media, but it does not increase the speed of the drive."
As I said the other day, I thought that previewing was supposed to help improve accuracy?
I thought the previewing system was going to help prevent duplication?
In other words, this article was already posted at
They can't call it 10.5--they will run out of points before they hit 11, and for marketing they want to keep calling it OS X.
I'm posting this from the most recent nightly that compiled, and it isn't unstable in use...everything after 3-14-03 seems to be solid. YMMV.
I agree, but it's not Apple's fault that the rest of the industry can't integrate style and functionality in one package.
"Its people like you that pressure companies to produce CRAP. If apple wishes to take longer, either because of missing marketing peices, inventory issues, or fixing problems with its design, LET THEM."
Fine. Then let them make more accurate "estimations" in the future...a lot of people are sick of their track record on this, and rampant Apple apologizing isn't going to help them.
"It seems Apple hit it's deadline of 7-10 weeks after all."
Well, perhaps--after blowing right by the February ship date that Steve Jobs stated at Macworld. I'm not too terribly impressed--they really need to make their announcements more realistic, because I no longer believe them and refuse to preorder anything. I know a lot of folks who are doing the same.
Agreed.
"Everyone I know who uses Macs alot (real computer people, not just people who only use AOL or something like that) have bought 2+ button mice for their Macs, because they are simply superior in usuability."
One of the reasons Macs rock is that application designers are forced to design for a one-button mouse--not hiding vital features up in contextual menus that only show up when your mouse is in a certain part of the screen. That's one of the biggest unsung reasons Macs will stay defaulting to one mouse--it makes better design.
And as you point out, it's a whole $10 to get a different mouse, depending on your preference--it can be more, but it doesn't have to be. So I can't see this as a serious "problem" with the platform.
Your *corrections* are really just nitpicks.
I think it's odd that this "review" treats the word "singularity" as though the above constructed meaning is common knowledge. I knew what it meant, but it's very poor writin to assume that everyone will.
"Show me real data, or shut the fuck up. An anecdote from a biased, self-serving viewpoint is not data."
What are you, some kind of robot? It's not data--it's his own observations, and they are well constructed. He never claims to be writing some kind of sociology thesis...and your criticisms are so overblown and, frankly, "without data" that I suspect you didn't actually read the piece.
You would hardly be alone at Slashdot in that regard, I'm afraid.
"Allow me to take this opportunity to state that the whole nerd mythology is a load of crap."
That's nice...maybe we'd be more interested in your fascinating observations if you had read the fucking article.
Agreed. It was a great article, and I am shocked at how incredibly few folks seem to have even skimmed it--it really changes my own opinions about
Replace "may interfere" with "incredibly unlikely to interfere" and you've got it. The FAA is, quite logically, a paranoid organization.
"not the dual 1.25GHz machines that sell for $4500+."
This is really specious--you'd have to tweak and add crap to a system to hell and back to get that mac at that price point. Go to their store, check online--that is just silly.
Good message. One point:
"They're just not. In fact, they tend to run (slightly) slower, clock for clock, in SPECmarks."
The fact that SPEC is optimized for x86 plays a role as well.