The name is generic. Like "Office", which was used to describe office suites during the eighties well before Microsoft adopted the name for their suite.
I don't seem to remember any (maybe one or two). AppleWorks, BeagleWorks, Microsoft Works, Claris Works. Microsoft Office apparently comes from Apple's vision of the Macintosh Office. A great way to get into the corporate market, this is exactly the kind of enabling software that Office is to support this setup.
It's reasonable to say that the two products have the same derivation for the name, rather than one being derived from the other.
Adobe 'invented' the Illustrator name. Everyone else used [blah]Draw. Illustrator is a drawing program, as opposed to a paint program. 'Illustration' as category of graphics packages doesn't exist (vector based graphics packages are drawing programs, raster based graphics packages are painting programs).
No one would have a problem with KDraw, and IMO it's a much better name. MacDraw, Corel Draw, etc. KIllustrator is obviously following Illustrator, and my Mom, who uses Illustrator a lot, would get fooled ("oh, this is the Linux version of Illustrator", assuming that I explained Linux & KDE to her).
One thing to keep in mind is that Macross was a much more mature show than Robotech, intended for an older audience.
The Macross Saga of Robotech had countless scenes cut out for violence and other things that they felt were inappropriate for children. Also I think they wanted more time for commercials.
Watching it now, it seems the attitude was "kids are dumb," and they really dumbed down the story. For example, there's a love triangle in Macross. In Robotech, they made one of the characters a ditsy brat who was relatively easy to dump.
They are very different stories based on the same animation source. I find much more to appreciate in the Japanese version.
When I was in school (I'm able to say 'was' now, cool), I ended up shelling out CDN $500 for a Palm III. Damn it was worth it! I stopped missing exams, assignments, etc. Pencil & paper never cut it for me, except for all the doodling I would do with it. Even the cheapest Palm is as useful as my Palm III, and trust me, if you think you need it, it will serve you well.
A Palm's a great tool for a student, even a poor one. I've been using computers all my life, and can't find myself organized unless I do it digitally. I'm actually using it much less now than I did in school; anyone who says students don't need such things are being ignorant.
iPaq probably does serve as a better toy, but get what you need. I'm sure a Palm-based device makes a better organizational tool for the price.
The latest version is surprisingly stable (most bugs are in the UI, not the rendering engine) and uses about half as much RAM as 'zilla
Have you used Gecko without Mozilla? It's mind-blowingly fast. Mozilla's XML UI is (I think) the slowdown.
The mac builds come with PPEmbed, which is Gecko embeded in a PowerPlant application. The paramedics had to peel me off the floor.
Also, if you filter JavaScripts and animated GIFs using a local proxy like Proxomitron, even Netscape 4.7 becomes rock stable (I can use it for days without a single crash). Really, if you don't want to use IE, don't use it.
Hmm. I use the Mac verison of Netscape 4. It never crashes (tip: keep Java off).
I also use Netscape 4 on FreeBSD. It rarely core dumps, I use it for days, sometimes weeks. Perhaps mileage varies on the sites you visit:P
Apple seems to design on "Make it look cool, and they will come"
This is really uninformed. Aqua is still very much a work in progress, and visibly rough around the edges. The basic usability is there, and the rest is being worked on. Even then, it's evolved a lot since DP2.
Apple was working on the core OS right until the very end... and they're still working on it. The UI group was working on top of a moving target. User interface issues aren't as important until flocks of native apps start coming to the system. They've released the core usability right now to the masses, and they're getting feedback and adjusting to it.
Anyone who thinks this is FreeBSD 3 with a gui slapped on top is being really naive; it's a new OS through and through. User land utilities are borrowed from other projects. You can actually install OS X without the BSD subsystem (it's an option to not install it). This operating system is Mach.
Windows 2000 is the better example of what both companies needed to do
to insure future growth and legacy compatiblity. It wins the match, but
the real winner overall is GNU/ the Open Source Movement.
This is just silly. The old Mac OS was binary compatible down to apps written in 1984. The new Mac OS is Unix based. There's going to be a few issues.
Even then, Classic works wonderfully. The only rough edges are where the borders between the two environments meet, such as copy & paste (sometimes it refuses to carry over from one to the next). They've fixed a lot of problems like that since the 10.0 release (now at 10.0.3). Many things are even faster thanks to better system plumbing, like file access.
Apple/// developers and customers were told the platform had a 5 year future. Killed in 2.5 years.
The Apple/// was killed because the product launch sucked. I don't think the 3 users and 2 developers were crying about it much.
Apple ][ Forever (yea, right)
Yeah, right! That thing had an insanely great lifespan; and I can still play Super Puckman on my//e emulator on my G4:)
OpenDOC
OpenDoc. I loved OpenDoc.
OpenDoc got killed for a variety of reasons.
Novell, the company with the septic touch(TM), promised to port it to Windows. The windows port went to crap.
Apple's stock sucked and John C. Dvorak probably said something about Apple's death being nigh.
If any idiot with a clue had to choose between shoving two object technologies down developers' throats, or just shoving OpenStep down developers' throats, the idiot would choose OpenStep. They paid $450 million for it.
Newton
I loved those things. Never bought one though; too damn expensive. My Palm is pretty cool though. I don't like knocking the Newton, because it was awesome, but I don't need a full-fledged computer in my pocket. I can code lisp on my Palm, what more do I need:)
You didn't mention QuickDraw GX. I still miss GX. But it died for valid reasons too...
Apple is a company that creates and promises everything. But you can make money doing that, unless if you're Sony (unfulfillment of promises is made up for by Sony's marketing budget).
Games aren't dead on OS X or for Apple. It's just not their time to shine yet. It's not the OS's time to shine yet.
So if Apple slaps the developers about, they can bail to a larger market of Unix running GNUStep.
I'm a fan of GNUstep, but going that route isn't an out for developers. They'd still make more cash on the Mac platform. Additionally, I think if you write GNUstep code you have to GPL your code.
I have no interest in purchasing an over-price Macintosh computer. They're too restrictive and limited.
What are you talking about? Restrictive and limited? Every Mac comes with Firewire & USB. Basic expandibility is not an issue. G4 towers come with 5 slots, 10/100/1000 Ethernet, and at least CD-RWs. And don't call it overpriced unless if you've bought one recently and used it for a year. I've dealt with my share of PCs and I'll gladly say a G4 is worth every penny.
So, please, what are you talking about? Is it restrictive because it's difficult to upgrade your motherboard, get 3rd party hardware support, such as vid cards? If so, what difference would your own PPC platform make?
That comment sounds more like "I don't want a Mac."
If object A is dependant on a certain public member always being available from object B and suddenly the variable is assigned different types of values or used in another way, the object A will have to be changed to accept the changes in B.
One of my biggest gripes of C++ is that when you call a method, you're actually executing a function. OK, in any language this is true, but a C++ method isn't any more flexible than a function.
In Objective-C, which is a dynamic OO language (not strongly staticly typed like C++), objects respond to messages (implemented by methods). Methods have unique signatures. For example,
- (void) setSize:(NSSize)size;
This is a message that any object can respond to if it supports "settting a size." NSSize is a two-dimension size thing (x,y). If you had an object that represented a file, it might respond to
- (void) setFileSize:(unsigned long) inBytes;
But it should not respond to:
- (void) setSize:(unsigned long) size;
The compiler will give you a warning if you do, saying that the receiving object may only implement sizeSize:(NSSize). But code will execute fine, as long as you know that the types are fine. The compiler will also check this for you if you give it the types of the objects (which you pretty much always do).
Objects are designed to talk to other objects. If you stick to a set of rules (the OpenStep/GNUstep frameworks define a great set of ground rules), you can have objects communicate with other objects easily, and not have your code bug-ridden.
Better yet, in Objective-C, you can define optional behaviour.
if ([monitoringObject respondsToSelector(@selector(sizeChanged:ofObject: )))
[monitoringObject sizeChanged:foobar ofObject:sizeableObject];
else ;//monitoringObject doesn't need this info.
(a note to the confused; when you send a message, the runtime "selects" a method to respond to it. That's why you see "selector" up there.)
Not the greatest example of why you would want it, but the important distinction between Obj-C and C++/Java is that you are thinking about how objects communicate, as opposed to how object types work with other types.
A truly modular lanuage would be great for a Open Source language
Slashdot Mirror
The name is generic. Like "Office", which was used to describe office suites during the eighties well before Microsoft adopted the name for their suite.
I don't seem to remember any (maybe one or two). AppleWorks, BeagleWorks, Microsoft Works, Claris Works. Microsoft Office apparently comes from Apple's vision of the Macintosh Office. A great way to get into the corporate market, this is exactly the kind of enabling software that Office is to support this setup.
It's reasonable to say that the two products have the same derivation for the name, rather than one being derived from the other.
Adobe 'invented' the Illustrator name. Everyone else used [blah]Draw. Illustrator is a drawing program, as opposed to a paint program. 'Illustration' as category of graphics packages doesn't exist (vector based graphics packages are drawing programs, raster based graphics packages are painting programs).
No one would have a problem with KDraw, and IMO it's a much better name. MacDraw, Corel Draw, etc. KIllustrator is obviously following Illustrator, and my Mom, who uses Illustrator a lot, would get fooled ("oh, this is the Linux version of Illustrator", assuming that I explained Linux & KDE to her).
One thing to keep in mind is that Macross was a much more mature show than Robotech, intended for an older audience.
The Macross Saga of Robotech had countless scenes cut out for violence and other things that they felt were inappropriate for children. Also I think they wanted more time for commercials.
Watching it now, it seems the attitude was "kids are dumb," and they really dumbed down the story. For example, there's a love triangle in Macross. In Robotech, they made one of the characters a ditsy brat who was relatively easy to dump.
They are very different stories based on the same animation source. I find much more to appreciate in the Japanese version.
Again, coming back to 'poor student...'
When I was in school (I'm able to say 'was' now, cool), I ended up shelling out CDN $500 for a Palm III. Damn it was worth it! I stopped missing exams, assignments, etc. Pencil & paper never cut it for me, except for all the doodling I would do with it. Even the cheapest Palm is as useful as my Palm III, and trust me, if you think you need it, it will serve you well.
A Palm's a great tool for a student, even a poor one. I've been using computers all my life, and can't find myself organized unless I do it digitally. I'm actually using it much less now than I did in school; anyone who says students don't need such things are being ignorant.
iPaq probably does serve as a better toy, but get what you need. I'm sure a Palm-based device makes a better organizational tool for the price.
Have you used Gecko without Mozilla? It's mind-blowingly fast. Mozilla's XML UI is (I think) the slowdown.
The mac builds come with PPEmbed, which is Gecko embeded in a PowerPlant application. The paramedics had to peel me off the floor.
Also, if you filter JavaScripts and animated GIFs using a local proxy like Proxomitron, even Netscape 4.7 becomes rock stable (I can use it for days without a single crash). Really, if you don't want to use IE, don't use it.
Hmm. I use the Mac verison of Netscape 4. It never crashes (tip: keep Java off).
I also use Netscape 4 on FreeBSD. It rarely core dumps, I use it for days, sometimes weeks. Perhaps mileage varies on the sites you visit :P
This is really uninformed. Aqua is still very much a work in progress, and visibly rough around the edges. The basic usability is there, and the rest is being worked on. Even then, it's evolved a lot since DP2.
Apple was working on the core OS right until the very end... and they're still working on it. The UI group was working on top of a moving target. User interface issues aren't as important until flocks of native apps start coming to the system. They've released the core usability right now to the masses, and they're getting feedback and adjusting to it.
Anyone who thinks this is FreeBSD 3 with a gui slapped on top is being really naive; it's a new OS through and through. User land utilities are borrowed from other projects. You can actually install OS X without the BSD subsystem (it's an option to not install it). This operating system is Mach.
Windows 2000 is the better example of what both companies needed to do to insure future growth and legacy compatiblity. It wins the match, but the real winner overall is GNU/ the Open Source Movement.
This is just silly. The old Mac OS was binary compatible down to apps written in 1984. The new Mac OS is Unix based. There's going to be a few issues.
Even then, Classic works wonderfully. The only rough edges are where the borders between the two environments meet, such as copy & paste (sometimes it refuses to carry over from one to the next). They've fixed a lot of problems like that since the 10.0 release (now at 10.0.3). Many things are even faster thanks to better system plumbing, like file access.
Apple /// developers and customers were told the platform had a 5 year future. Killed in 2.5 years.
The Apple /// was killed because the product launch sucked. I don't think the 3 users and 2 developers were crying about it much.
Apple ][ Forever (yea, right)
Yeah, right! That thing had an insanely great lifespan; and I can still play Super Puckman on my //e emulator on my G4 :)
OpenDOC
OpenDoc. I loved OpenDoc.
OpenDoc got killed for a variety of reasons.
Newton
I loved those things. Never bought one though; too damn expensive. My Palm is pretty cool though. I don't like knocking the Newton, because it was awesome, but I don't need a full-fledged computer in my pocket. I can code lisp on my Palm, what more do I need :)
You didn't mention QuickDraw GX. I still miss GX. But it died for valid reasons too...
Apple is a company that creates and promises everything. But you can make money doing that, unless if you're Sony (unfulfillment of promises is made up for by Sony's marketing budget).
Games aren't dead on OS X or for Apple. It's just not their time to shine yet. It's not the OS's time to shine yet.
So if Apple slaps the developers about, they can bail to a larger market of Unix running GNUStep.
I'm a fan of GNUstep, but going that route isn't an out for developers. They'd still make more cash on the Mac platform. Additionally, I think if you write GNUstep code you have to GPL your code.
What are you talking about? Restrictive and limited? Every Mac comes with Firewire & USB. Basic expandibility is not an issue. G4 towers come with 5 slots, 10/100/1000 Ethernet, and at least CD-RWs. And don't call it overpriced unless if you've bought one recently and used it for a year. I've dealt with my share of PCs and I'll gladly say a G4 is worth every penny.
So, please, what are you talking about? Is it restrictive because it's difficult to upgrade your motherboard, get 3rd party hardware support, such as vid cards? If so, what difference would your own PPC platform make?
That comment sounds more like "I don't want a Mac."
One of my biggest gripes of C++ is that when you call a method, you're actually executing a function. OK, in any language this is true, but a C++ method isn't any more flexible than a function.
In Objective-C, which is a dynamic OO language (not strongly staticly typed like C++), objects respond to messages (implemented by methods). Methods have unique signatures. For example,
- (void) setSize:(NSSize)size;
This is a message that any object can respond to if it supports "settting a size." NSSize is a two-dimension size thing (x,y). If you had an object that represented a file, it might respond to
- (void) setFileSize:(unsigned long) inBytes;
But it should not respond to:
- (void) setSize:(unsigned long) size;
The compiler will give you a warning if you do, saying that the receiving object may only implement sizeSize:(NSSize). But code will execute fine, as long as you know that the types are fine. The compiler will also check this for you if you give it the types of the objects (which you pretty much always do).
Objects are designed to talk to other objects. If you stick to a set of rules (the OpenStep/GNUstep frameworks define a great set of ground rules), you can have objects communicate with other objects easily, and not have your code bug-ridden.
Better yet, in Objective-C, you can define optional behaviour.
if ([monitoringObject respondsToSelector(@selector(sizeChanged:ofObject: )))
;//monitoringObject doesn't need this info.
[monitoringObject sizeChanged:foobar ofObject:sizeableObject];
else
(a note to the confused; when you send a message, the runtime "selects" a method to respond to it. That's why you see "selector" up there.)
Not the greatest example of why you would want it, but the important distinction between Obj-C and C++/Java is that you are thinking about how objects communicate, as opposed to how object types work with other types.
A truly modular lanuage would be great for a Open Source language
dude.... http://gnustep.org. We'd love your help.
ok, we're not building a language, but of modularity is what you want, help us complete this stuff :)