FairPlay limits filesharing, it doesn't prevent it. Computers just have to be on a local network and they can listen to all your music whenever you want.
Sorry, this is wrong.
Computers just have to be on a local network and they can listen to all your unencrypted, non-DRM, non-iTMS music whenever they want (after you enable this feature - you can also restrict sharing to certain playlists, or require a password, if you want). However, to play encrypted iTMS tracks (whether purchased, or given away for free, such as audio recordings of 9/11 Committee hearings), each client must be "authorized" with your e-mail address and iTMS password. A limited number of computers may be authorized with your account at a time; I believe the current limit is 7 (originally 5). Internet access is required to authorize or deauthorize a computer; this is how Apple keeps track of how many computers have been authorized with your account (also, authorization works by logging into the iTMS with your e-mail address and password, and downloading the corresponding encryption key).
Size and power draw (read: heat dissipation) are rather more important than maximum transfer rate when choosing a disk drive for this kind of application.
Yes, where "this kind of application" means 6.5"x6.5"x2", but I doubt anyone would have been any less happy with, say, 7.5"x7.5"x3". It's a valid point.
Sorry, you're wrong here - Macs are just not gaming machines, unfortunately. Many games are never ported to the Mac platform (e.g. Halflife), most are ported months or years after the initial x86 release, new games require faster Macs than what us mortals can afford, and old games aren't Mac OS X native so they run (poorly) under emulation.
And I say this as a long-time Mac lover, typing this on my iBook G4 which I love dearly, but on which Warcraft 3 is slow, UT runs in Classic (which doesn't seem to support multiple mouse buttons), Quake 3 also runs in Classic because the native port is even worse, and the UT2k4 demo doesn't even render the title screen correctly. Granted, this machine is nearly a year old now; perhaps a Mac mini would fare better with newer games (and the Classic issue should now be moot). Even still, Counterstrike isn't going to happen. I've been using Macs seriously since System 6, but I can't recommend them as a gaming platform until more game developers take the platform seriously, doing side-by-side development and releasing dual-platform hybrid CDs (a few do this already, of course).
Why are the registrars responsible for this step, and not the central registry itself? There's an awful lot of trust involved here, and this could happen with any registrar that happened to have a bug in their systems. I bet there's a way to exploit this from many registrars other than Melbourne IT that just haven't been found yet.
Because then Verisign would be liable when this sort of thing happened, and they don't want to be.
If you're referring to Apple's iWork that was announced last Tuesday and will be available this Friday, I don't think it really counts as an "office suite." It's just a word processor and presentation software. I suspect that they'd have to at least include a spreadsheet for it to count as an office suite.
I'd be very surprised if they don't - but they're focusing on one piece at a time (Keynote, then Pages, then...) and releasing them that way, instead of developing them all at once (spreading resources thin). I'd expect a spreadsheet to be next, then a database - perhaps a front-end to SQLite.
So if it is based on OOo in some way, they did a phenomenal job at fixing it up!
It isn't. It was easier for Apple to start from scratch, than to add a nice UI to OOo. Besides, they'd have to release it as open-source, and they'd rather charge $79.
Yes, camping out is stupid, but not because of Fandango. I saw Episode II on opening day, and the theater wasn't even full. Try going to a matinee showing; there's a reason they're cheaper: they're less popular than evening showings.
Camping out for Episode I may have been reasonable, but now people know better. However, I'll probably go on opening day again, because I share the irrational optimism that another poster mentioned - Episode III has the potential to make I and II not suck, by tying them together in previously unseen ways with IV-V-VI.
During the keynote, Steve Jobs said the Pages templates would be filled with greek text. I thought, what if you speak greek? Well now that I see the templates...It looks like latin to me! Can't he tell the difference?
Apparently he can't, which is unfortunate. If you'd like to generate your own random Latin text, try this.
"Hard Drive" by David Pogue is a novel involving a computer virus that causes files to be deleted, and due to poor application design (rather than abort with an error, it returns data from a different file instead), a hospital patient dies because the doctor was responding to incorrect test results.
It's a good book, though obviously a little dated now. It discusses something VERY similar to the Spotlight technology in Mac OS X 10.4.
No truly scientific person can believe in a god or gods because such gods are generally defined to be undetectable. A completely undetectable supreme being is exactly equivalent to no supreme being at all, and insisting belief in that which cannot be demonstrated is completely and totally contrary to what we call Science.
No truly scientific person can disbelieve in a god or gods because, since such gods are generally defined to be undetectable, their existence cannot be disproven. Insisting disbelief in that which cannot be demonstrated to not exist is completely and totally contrary to what we call Science.
How's that? A bit contrived, but did I make my point?
That's what Occam's Razor is for. As in the simplest explanation that fits the evidence is usually best (paraphrase). God, being unprovable, will rarely (if ever) fit these criteria.
Why must you assume that evolution by random chance over billions of years is a simpler explanation for the evidence than intelligent design by a divine Creator? Why do you base all your conclusions on the initial basic assumption that God is very very unlikely to exist? Sure, if you start with the assumption that God doesn't exist and then try to find evidence to the contrary, you're going to have a hard time. Try starting with the assumption that God does exist, and try to find evidence to the contrary - you might be surprised to find that this is also difficult.
Of course neither the existence nor nonexistence of God can be proven scientifically, so you're right, it comes down to which explanation seems simpler. This is where I believe you've reached the wrong conclusion.
It means that what things we have had revealed to us, such as the "time in heaven" relation to "time here," are symbolic.
Most of the time, this is blatently obvious when you look at the actual text: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. I don't see how that could be reasonably interpreted as anything other than symbolic. It doesn't mean that one day is precisely equal to one thousand years, it means that God is timeless, God is above time, God exists outside of time, time is not relevant to God. Is this really that difficult a concept?
Yes, but the new versions of Windows generally are one of the reasons that people purchase a new computer.
I respectfully disagree. It has been my experience that malware and registry corruption are the main reasons people buy a new computer: their old one no longer works as well as they think it should (it's slow, it crashes, they get weird errors, things are broken), and it's easier to buy a new one than to try to fix the old one (and not that much more expensive, since they'd have to pay somebody to fix it, then pay somebody else to solve the new problems created by the first guy).
Safari 1.2.4 (v125.12) on Mac OS X 10.3.7 (7S215), the latest publicly-available versions. Firefox 1.0 (Gecko/20041107) on the same system also passed.
Slashdot Mirror
Now this to me implies that he's (pretending to be) originally from Guildford. If so, why the hell does he have an american accent?
Because he's not pretending very well. He also thought that the name "Ford Prefect" would be nicely inconspicuous, as you'll recall.
Or maybe I'm reading too much into it
Way too much.
"I may be a pretty sad case, but I don't write jokes in base 13!" - Douglas Adams
That may not be an accurate quote, since it looks like there are a few variants in the wording floating around, but he did say something about that.
FairPlay limits filesharing, it doesn't prevent it. Computers just have to be on a local network and they can listen to all your music whenever you want.
Sorry, this is wrong.
Computers just have to be on a local network and they can listen to all your unencrypted, non-DRM, non-iTMS music whenever they want (after you enable this feature - you can also restrict sharing to certain playlists, or require a password, if you want). However, to play encrypted iTMS tracks (whether purchased, or given away for free, such as audio recordings of 9/11 Committee hearings), each client must be "authorized" with your e-mail address and iTMS password. A limited number of computers may be authorized with your account at a time; I believe the current limit is 7 (originally 5). Internet access is required to authorize or deauthorize a computer; this is how Apple keeps track of how many computers have been authorized with your account (also, authorization works by logging into the iTMS with your e-mail address and password, and downloading the corresponding encryption key).
I hope he found some peace, and that his publicist hasn't found a way to contact him about his deadlines yet.
Why? He loved deadlines - he loved the whooshing sound they made as they went by.
Posting pictures of Bill ol Gates in pimp mode made sense. He's was a lonely guy!
You mean this?
You beat me to it. :-P
Size and power draw (read: heat dissipation) are rather more important than maximum transfer rate when choosing a disk drive for this kind of application.
Yes, where "this kind of application" means 6.5"x6.5"x2", but I doubt anyone would have been any less happy with, say, 7.5"x7.5"x3". It's a valid point.
The mac mini is a "decent" game system.
Sorry, you're wrong here - Macs are just not gaming machines, unfortunately. Many games are never ported to the Mac platform (e.g. Halflife), most are ported months or years after the initial x86 release, new games require faster Macs than what us mortals can afford, and old games aren't Mac OS X native so they run (poorly) under emulation.
And I say this as a long-time Mac lover, typing this on my iBook G4 which I love dearly, but on which Warcraft 3 is slow, UT runs in Classic (which doesn't seem to support multiple mouse buttons), Quake 3 also runs in Classic because the native port is even worse, and the UT2k4 demo doesn't even render the title screen correctly. Granted, this machine is nearly a year old now; perhaps a Mac mini would fare better with newer games (and the Classic issue should now be moot). Even still, Counterstrike isn't going to happen. I've been using Macs seriously since System 6, but I can't recommend them as a gaming platform until more game developers take the platform seriously, doing side-by-side development and releasing dual-platform hybrid CDs (a few do this already, of course).
Why are the registrars responsible for this step, and not the central registry itself? There's an awful lot of trust involved here, and this could happen with any registrar that happened to have a bug in their systems. I bet there's a way to exploit this from many registrars other than Melbourne IT that just haven't been found yet.
Because then Verisign would be liable when this sort of thing happened, and they don't want to be.
If you're referring to Apple's iWork that was announced last Tuesday and will be available this Friday, I don't think it really counts as an "office suite." It's just a word processor and presentation software. I suspect that they'd have to at least include a spreadsheet for it to count as an office suite.
I'd be very surprised if they don't - but they're focusing on one piece at a time (Keynote, then Pages, then...) and releasing them that way, instead of developing them all at once (spreading resources thin). I'd expect a spreadsheet to be next, then a database - perhaps a front-end to SQLite.
So if it is based on OOo in some way, they did a phenomenal job at fixing it up!
It isn't. It was easier for Apple to start from scratch, than to add a nice UI to OOo. Besides, they'd have to release it as open-source, and they'd rather charge $79.
Yes, camping out is stupid, but not because of Fandango. I saw Episode II on opening day, and the theater wasn't even full. Try going to a matinee showing; there's a reason they're cheaper: they're less popular than evening showings.
Camping out for Episode I may have been reasonable, but now people know better. However, I'll probably go on opening day again, because I share the irrational optimism that another poster mentioned - Episode III has the potential to make I and II not suck, by tying them together in previously unseen ways with IV-V-VI.
During the keynote, Steve Jobs said the Pages templates would be filled with greek text. I thought, what if you speak greek? Well now that I see the templates...It looks like latin to me! Can't he tell the difference?
Apparently he can't, which is unfortunate. If you'd like to generate your own random Latin text, try this.
Privatize the FBI! I'm sure Halliburton would love that contract, but McDonald's would surely also be in the bidding.
You seem awfully confident that the contract would be open to bidding...
Wow, IE 5, I've been waiting to see what the Internet would look like fresh technology like that. Will it match my brand new blueberry iBook?
Yes, that's one of the exciting new features - choose from 9 different colors, including blueberry and tangerine.
The first Mac did not have have a start menu. Just the icons on the desktop UI.
Presumably by "analog to a start menu" he meant the Apple Menu, which has indeed existed since the original Mac.
"Hard Drive" by David Pogue is a novel involving a computer virus that causes files to be deleted, and due to poor application design (rather than abort with an error, it returns data from a different file instead), a hospital patient dies because the doctor was responding to incorrect test results.
It's a good book, though obviously a little dated now. It discusses something VERY similar to the Spotlight technology in Mac OS X 10.4.
Music too - consider how much great classical music was written on commission, and how much of that was religious.
No truly scientific person can believe in a god or gods because such gods are generally defined to be undetectable. A completely undetectable supreme being is exactly equivalent to no supreme being at all, and insisting belief in that which cannot be demonstrated is completely and totally contrary to what we call Science.
No truly scientific person can disbelieve in a god or gods because, since such gods are generally defined to be undetectable, their existence cannot be disproven. Insisting disbelief in that which cannot be demonstrated to not exist is completely and totally contrary to what we call Science.
How's that? A bit contrived, but did I make my point?
That's VERY interesting. I agree, it's a damn good writeup, and not something I'd ever heard before. Thanks.
That's what Occam's Razor is for. As in the simplest explanation that fits the evidence is usually best (paraphrase). God, being unprovable, will rarely (if ever) fit these criteria.
Why must you assume that evolution by random chance over billions of years is a simpler explanation for the evidence than intelligent design by a divine Creator? Why do you base all your conclusions on the initial basic assumption that God is very very unlikely to exist? Sure, if you start with the assumption that God doesn't exist and then try to find evidence to the contrary, you're going to have a hard time. Try starting with the assumption that God does exist, and try to find evidence to the contrary - you might be surprised to find that this is also difficult.
Of course neither the existence nor nonexistence of God can be proven scientifically, so you're right, it comes down to which explanation seems simpler. This is where I believe you've reached the wrong conclusion.
It means that what things we have had revealed to us, such as the "time in heaven" relation to "time here," are symbolic.
Most of the time, this is blatently obvious when you look at the actual text: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. I don't see how that could be reasonably interpreted as anything other than symbolic. It doesn't mean that one day is precisely equal to one thousand years, it means that God is timeless, God is above time, God exists outside of time, time is not relevant to God. Is this really that difficult a concept?
Yes, but the new versions of Windows generally are one of the reasons that people purchase a new computer.
I respectfully disagree. It has been my experience that malware and registry corruption are the main reasons people buy a new computer: their old one no longer works as well as they think it should (it's slow, it crashes, they get weird errors, things are broken), and it's easier to buy a new one than to try to fix the old one (and not that much more expensive, since they'd have to pay somebody to fix it, then pay somebody else to solve the new problems created by the first guy).
Except for the 17 popups that Firefox generated. I thought Firefox had a popup blocker? Apparently, it doesn't work. You call that flying colors?
Worked fine for me in Firefox 1.0 on Mac OS X. Are you sure you didn't enable popups in the preferences?
Safari 1.2.4 (v125.12) on Mac OS X 10.3.7 (7S215), the latest publicly-available versions. Firefox 1.0 (Gecko/20041107) on the same system also passed.
Most people don't upgrade their OS, they buy a new machine with the new OS on it.