A few days ago I submitted my résumé to a temp agency, in PDF format. They sent it back, saying "I was unable to read your resume, since it's in Acrobat format. Could you please send it again in MS Word?" I obliged (I'd actually composed it with Word 98/Mac), but was somewhat disgusted by this sorry state of affairs.
They way monopolies are punished is by breaking them up.
Not always. Sometimes they're just regulated by the government. For example, local phone companies have what's called a "natural monopoly" in their respective areas; their policies are heavily regulated and they're prevented from entering certain other markets, but they're allowed to keep their monopolies (at least for now).
There are other solutions than a breakup. I can't think of any examples at the moment (IANAL, etc.), but Microsoft wants the judge to consider some of these alternatives (of course, Microsoft's proposal is stupid and doesn't solve anything, but that's at least what they're trying to do).
...the choice of OS would be kind of like choosing between Dell and Micron...
Considering that one of the most popular OSs is Windows, I was kinda thinking the choice would be a bit more like between a Packard Bell and a Micron....
--
Re:How to make Money on this
on
Iridium Saved?
·
· Score: 1
What about mutant sea bass? Are those OK? Less red tape.....
....except that the Mac OS has been trying to emulate the functionality of a second mouse button for about the last three years, and has been hindered by Apple's refusal to support multiple-button mice. Now that they're finally making a mouse that, well, would have several buttons if they were buttons, hopefully they'll start suporting multiple-button mice, which will be better for everyone.
While it may be logical to assume that Apple's new keyboard will also be wireless, many of details of the new peripheral are still yet unknown.
I'll bet you anything they'll build the RF transceiver for the mouse into the keyboard. Think about it - building it into the computer would be silly (they'd have to make some case design changes, especially for the iMac, and the new mouse wouldn't work with any older Macs). Having a little box plugging into a USB port and taking up valuable desk space while not really doing much of anything would be pretty lame as well.
For anyone who shelled out $50 for a MacAlly iKey or similar replacement keyboard, you're probably out of luck if you want one of these mice - you'll have to get the new Apple keyboard too.
As for not having any buttons, I do seriously wonder how they'll get it to work well, especially for newbies that are even more dependant on the "pressing a button" concept. But on the plus side, it sounds like we're finally getting a decent multiple-buton mouse!
The next question is, will there be any OS-level support for second and third mouse buttons, or will the you have to map, um, a squeeze on the right side of the mouse, to a control-click, which applications must then interpret as the signal for a contextual menu (preventing them from using control-clicks as other types of input)?
What about "Parody of Metallica.mp3" or "Lame Metallica-wannabe band" or recordings of a live Metallica concert (which they explicitly said were OK to trade on Napster)?
Hopefully Apple will release Cocoa for Win32 and other platforms. Releasing Carbon for other platforms would seem somewhat silly, but is always possible.
If Apple releases Cocoa for Win32 and Linux, it becomes the ideal environment for cross-platform application development - and since the best of those platforms is Mac OS X on PowerPC, more app support means Apple sells more hardware, which just might be enough to convince them to do it.
Excellent observations. Why is Apple doing it, while the rest of the world is bumbling around aimlessly? Let's consider:
Back in the '70s, Apple created the first personal computer that came pre-assembled; with every other personal computer, you had to buy the pieces and then put them together, probably in your own case. IBM later released the IBM PC, and others followed suit.
In the '80s, Apple created the first graphical user interface in which objects such as files were represented by icons on the screen. All previous attempts at GUIs used icons to represent actions, not objects. Microsoft later released Windows, and you know the rest.
At the same time, Apple released a computer that used durable, 3.5" floppy disks, instead of the old 5.25" really-floppy disks. 3.5" floppies had been available previously, but Apple's product created enough demand to cause serious shortages of 3.5" floppy disks - for awhile, many stores were rationing them, or charging ridiculous prices. Now, everyone uses them.
In the '90s, Apple created a computer whose primary interface to peripherals was USB. Although USB ports had been included on every PC motherboard sold within the previous two years or so, nobody cared, and there weren't many peripherals available. Now there are piles of USB peripherals available, most of which come in fruit-colored translucent plastics. Dell, Compaq and others have since announced PCs that ship with USB as the primary peripheral interface.
I could go on, but the point is, Apple has a history of consistently pushing things forward, and Mac OS X is no exception.
Does anyone have a link to the actual proposal submitted by the Computer and Communications Industry Association and Software and Information Industry Association? I'd like to read that before forming too strong an opinion on it....
Unlike Java, Cocoa is a pretty complete API set, so there wouldn't be much incentive to write for Microsoft-specific extensions. Plus, considering the growing popularity of the Mac as a consumer platform, it'd be stupid to throw away that compatibility.
And the difference between Microsoft and Apple when it comes to Open Source is, while Microsoft releases excerpts of their code to select developers who pay boatloads of money and sign restrictive NDAs, I can get the source code to Darwin and Apple's other open-source projects for free. True, it's not as open a license as some would like, but their heart appears to be in the right place.
There were several posts about it on MacInTouch. Dropping the Solaris port was purely my speculation, and could very well be wrong, but it sounds like the MSIE/Mac team has been moved over to WebTV, and many of them are looking for new jobs, both within and outside of Microsoft.
Splitting up Microsoft is NOT intended to hurt Microsoft; it's intended to prevent them from illegally abusing their monopoly power in the future by tying their products together and leveraging one monopoly to promote another. The DoJ's proposed split would create two companies, Windows and Microsoft. Windows would still have an OS monopoly, but the playing field would be a bit more level, and alternatives such as Linux, Mac OS X, etc. would have better luck competing with them - prompting Windows to actually try to produce decent software for once.
Then there would be Microsoft, essentially the Microsoft we know today, minus Windows - not seriously hurt, but now with an incentive to support Sun, Apple, Linux, etc. Microsoft would be free to develop applications for alternative operating systems, and no longer have an incentive to cripple their non-Windows ports.
They're working on it. The G4e or G4+ (revised G4 without the problems that are currently keeping clock rates and yields low) should be out later this year, and the G5 (much better architecture) should be next year sometime. Motorola's roadmap is here and IBM's PowerPC site is here.
Hmm, so now IBM is making Alphas for Compaq, PowerPCs for Apple, Crusoes for Transmeta... What's next, Athlons for AMD?
Actually I heard a rumor awhile back that Apple, IBM and Motorola were considering inviting AMD to join the PowerPC Alliance, so AMD could help out with fab; it makes sense, considering that AMD and Motorola already cross-license a lot of technologies.
What systems current support 128 bits? Extrapolating from history, when will they become dominate? 32 bits is adequate for user apps, but 64 bits is really a necessity for large scale apps (databases, etc.). It really seems 128 bits would only be needed for apps larger than those that exist today.
The PowerPC G4 uses 32-bit integer units, 64-bit float units, and a 128-bit vector processing unit; the technical details are here.
Slashdot Mirror
--
Not always. Sometimes they're just regulated by the government. For example, local phone companies have what's called a "natural monopoly" in their respective areas; their policies are heavily regulated and they're prevented from entering certain other markets, but they're allowed to keep their monopolies (at least for now).
There are other solutions than a breakup. I can't think of any examples at the moment (IANAL, etc.), but Microsoft wants the judge to consider some of these alternatives (of course, Microsoft's proposal is stupid and doesn't solve anything, but that's at least what they're trying to do).
Considering that one of the most popular OSs is Windows, I was kinda thinking the choice would be a bit more like between a Packard Bell and a Micron....
--
--
--
--
I'll bet you anything they'll build the RF transceiver for the mouse into the keyboard. Think about it - building it into the computer would be silly (they'd have to make some case design changes, especially for the iMac, and the new mouse wouldn't work with any older Macs). Having a little box plugging into a USB port and taking up valuable desk space while not really doing much of anything would be pretty lame as well.
For anyone who shelled out $50 for a MacAlly iKey or similar replacement keyboard, you're probably out of luck if you want one of these mice - you'll have to get the new Apple keyboard too.
As for not having any buttons, I do seriously wonder how they'll get it to work well, especially for newbies that are even more dependant on the "pressing a button" concept. But on the plus side, it sounds like we're finally getting a decent multiple-buton mouse!
The next question is, will there be any OS-level support for second and third mouse buttons, or will the you have to map, um, a squeeze on the right side of the mouse, to a control-click, which applications must then interpret as the signal for a contextual menu (preventing them from using control-clicks as other types of input)?
--
--
--
If Apple releases Cocoa for Win32 and Linux, it becomes the ideal environment for cross-platform application development - and since the best of those platforms is Mac OS X on PowerPC, more app support means Apple sells more hardware, which just might be enough to convince them to do it.
--
Back in the '70s, Apple created the first personal computer that came pre-assembled; with every other personal computer, you had to buy the pieces and then put them together, probably in your own case. IBM later released the IBM PC, and others followed suit.
In the '80s, Apple created the first graphical user interface in which objects such as files were represented by icons on the screen. All previous attempts at GUIs used icons to represent actions, not objects. Microsoft later released Windows, and you know the rest.
At the same time, Apple released a computer that used durable, 3.5" floppy disks, instead of the old 5.25" really-floppy disks. 3.5" floppies had been available previously, but Apple's product created enough demand to cause serious shortages of 3.5" floppy disks - for awhile, many stores were rationing them, or charging ridiculous prices. Now, everyone uses them.
In the '90s, Apple created a computer whose primary interface to peripherals was USB. Although USB ports had been included on every PC motherboard sold within the previous two years or so, nobody cared, and there weren't many peripherals available. Now there are piles of USB peripherals available, most of which come in fruit-colored translucent plastics. Dell, Compaq and others have since announced PCs that ship with USB as the primary peripheral interface.
I could go on, but the point is, Apple has a history of consistently pushing things forward, and Mac OS X is no exception.
--
http://www.ccianet.org/amicus5-19-00.htm
--
--
"PHP 4.0 is out! It's not on their Web site yet, but it's out!"
"Oh wait, never mind, that wasn't it; it's not out yet."
"OK, it's out now! Really this time! Go get it!"
"Mozilla M16 is out!"
"Oh wait, never mind, those are just development builds, labelled the same way they've been labelled for the last several weeks."
--
And the difference between Microsoft and Apple when it comes to Open Source is, while Microsoft releases excerpts of their code to select developers who pay boatloads of money and sign restrictive NDAs, I can get the source code to Darwin and Apple's other open-source projects for free. True, it's not as open a license as some would like, but their heart appears to be in the right place.
--
--
--
--
What about a Beowulf cluster of...
oh wait, never mind.
--
Then there would be Microsoft, essentially the Microsoft we know today, minus Windows - not seriously hurt, but now with an incentive to support Sun, Apple, Linux, etc. Microsoft would be free to develop applications for alternative operating systems, and no longer have an incentive to cripple their non-Windows ports.
--
--
Actually I heard a rumor awhile back that Apple, IBM and Motorola were considering inviting AMD to join the PowerPC Alliance, so AMD could help out with fab; it makes sense, considering that AMD and Motorola already cross-license a lot of technologies.
--
The PowerPC G4 uses 32-bit integer units, 64-bit float units, and a 128-bit vector processing unit; the technical details are here.
--
--
Huh? What does Intel technology have anything to do with this?
--
--