system7 with its core os and extensions attaching to it, they invented plug-ins before browsers were even invented...
The MacOS extention mechanism was nothing like "plug-ins" -- There was not a defined "extention API" as with a browser, they were they were system call traps and often relied totally on undocumented behavior.
Someone could write such extensions for any OS, but it's generally considered to be a bad practice. As the unstable, conflicting mess of MacOS extentions proved.
Page Threshold = 50 posts Story has 200 posts, 4 pages First thread is 101 posts.
Slashdot will show the first thread on pages 1, 2, and 3. Page 4 will show the last 50 posts The other 49 and their posts and threads will be invisible unless you go into nested mode.
Slashdot is served gzipped, so that is probably more like 1-3% in network traffic.
I'm pretty skeptical that you could justify the dev costs based on bandwidth $. It was more of the "right thing to do" type thing (as well as possibly enabling new features like a dhtml interface, etc.)
A better gross simplification is this: The W3C never bothered standardizing existing practice, circa 1997. Therefore there's numerous "works everywhere" de facto HTML attributes that are not actually part of the official standards.
(Most of these attributes were pre-CSS and IMO should have been documented as legacy, but the W3C was in a pissy-fight with Netscape at the time, and refused to anninot everything they invented.)
There's been many many reports of enormous memory usage with Firefox, even with all windows and tabs closed. It's great you are immune, but that doesn't mean the other guy's system is hosed.
1) User runs Evil Installer with sudo 2) Evil Installer makes a private copy of bash and set it as setuid root. 3) Evil Application runs as a normal user but can execute anything it wants as root.
In otherwords, this is only trival protection against a trojan.
Besides the domain name, the site is a clone of the US mozilla.org site. Users would have no way of knowing it's not an official site. Since there's been several security incidents related to the site, yes, Mozilla should protect their good name, and that is what trademark law was designed for. The fans can always set up mozillafans.or.kr or something.
Incorrect -- The official US Windows Firefox installers have an authenticode digital signature -- if they had infected the win binaries, the shell complains and users would have been able to easily see something was amiss.
(Also, I wouldn't be surpised if they have pgp sigs somewhere for the Linux tarballs, but that takes work to verify.)
Google is an advertising company. Microsoft is a software company with a small division that does advertising.
Yes Google does interesting technology, but it's all tangential to their core business of selling ad-views and click-throughs. There's nothing about Google that will ever threaten MS's core markets.
For the last 10 years, nobody's been saying "Yahoo is going to take out Microsoft", for obvious reasons. Google is the same business as Yahoo, just with sexier technology.
(Similar argument about the iPod -- it's another press-invented battle with a MS side business.)
A classic example of a Mac User cutting off his nose to spite his face. The #1 devtool vendor is going to release something that will put more software on Macs,\ -- you would think Mac users would like that, but instead this guy starts going off about how his "garden of pure ideology" needs less programs, not more.
And "Cocoa, or go to hell", what kind of retarded comment is that? If you really believed that, your Mac would be next to useless.
This has NEVER happened with Windows, and I've run all of them.
I dispute that. The core OS of every version of Windows NT improved over the previous version. However, over time, more and more background services and eye candy appear, causing primarily memory bloat. But, give it enough memory and turn down the services and the newer version of Windows is always faster than the last.
I haven't seen any huge improvement interactive feel in OS X since 10.2, and 10.0/10.1 were such abortions they shouldn't count. Tiger firmly goes down the Windows route by requiring more memory and running more background stuff.
> Most people won't be "upgrading"... they will be buying new computers with it preloaded.
That's true of every OS ever sold.
> MHO it would do more for them to "donate" $100Mil to Dell, IBM, and HP.
If you read the article, the $100M is going to software developers, to encourage the addition of Vista-specific features. Particuarlly, the move from GDI to Avalon is a big recode that most vendors would probably rather avoid.
The EE is just an attempt to add differentation when they ran out of Mhz headroom with the P4 design. There really is a customer base that wants the most expensive version of everything, so I can't blame them for selling it.
There's noting in your little lecture which reflects industry experience or knowlege -- it's all bits of information one could have picked up reading Computer Shopper.
While the "Overcooked Celery" may be a home-build legend, the reports from a year later were that such systems tended to suffer from premature failure, and the Mhz benchmarking overstated the actual performance. Meaning it wasn't really as good as the real thing. YMMV.
Regardless, since the K7 came out, Intel hasn't pulled such a stunt. Since then, they've exploited any opporutnity where high-end parts have high yeilds (see Northwood.)
Yup, AMD has historically had less than 20% marketshare, and historically, they've sold every chip they could make. Their problem is they can't afford or invent the fab tech to get their production rate up. If they could make more chips, they'd sell them.
AMD's biggest problem is that they've only just realized that "Like Intel, but CHEEP" doesn't make enough profit to keep up with the capital investment required.
Again, even if every accusation from AMD is true, the fact is that Intel kept them in the game by (A) giving away their patents and (B) not bankrupting them when they had the chance to do so. This is far from your cut-n-dried anti-trust case (like MS 'cutting off the air supply' from Nutscrape.) At least on the design/manufacturing level, Intel has just plain beaten AMD.
I would say your neighbor only understood a small part of the process. Intel, as a whole, has a damn good idea how many chips they can produce a given Mhz, otherwise they could never properly set pricing or meet orders.
Slashdot Mirror
system7 with its core os and extensions attaching to it, they invented plug-ins before browsers were even invented...
The MacOS extention mechanism was nothing like "plug-ins" -- There was not a defined "extention API" as with a browser, they were they were system call traps and often relied totally on undocumented behavior.
Someone could write such extensions for any OS, but it's generally considered to be a bad practice. As the unstable, conflicting mess of MacOS extentions proved.
Here's the bug:
Page Threshold = 50 posts
Story has 200 posts, 4 pages
First thread is 101 posts.
Slashdot will show the first thread on pages 1, 2, and 3.
Page 4 will show the last 50 posts
The other 49 and their posts and threads will be invisible unless you go into nested mode.
Slashdot is served gzipped, so that is probably more like 1-3% in network traffic.
I'm pretty skeptical that you could justify the dev costs based on bandwidth $. It was more of the "right thing to do" type thing (as well as possibly enabling new features like a dhtml interface, etc.)
A better gross simplification is this: The W3C never bothered standardizing existing practice, circa 1997. Therefore there's numerous "works everywhere" de facto HTML attributes that are not actually part of the official standards.
(Most of these attributes were pre-CSS and IMO should have been documented as legacy, but the W3C was in a pissy-fight with Netscape at the time, and refused to anninot everything they invented.)
There's been many many reports of enormous memory usage with Firefox, even with all windows and tabs closed. It's great you are immune, but that doesn't mean the other guy's system is hosed.
To clarify my previous point:
1) User runs Evil Installer with sudo
2) Evil Installer makes a private copy of bash and set it as setuid root.
3) Evil Application runs as a normal user but can execute anything it wants as root.
In otherwords, this is only trival protection against a trojan.
Not really, because installers can easly set something as setuid-root. This is done ocassionally on OSX for things like copy protection.
Besides the domain name, the site is a clone of the US mozilla.org site. Users would have no way of knowing it's not an official site. Since there's been several security incidents related to the site, yes, Mozilla should protect their good name, and that is what trademark law was designed for. The fans can always set up mozillafans.or.kr or something.
Incorrect -- The official US Windows Firefox installers have an authenticode digital signature -- if they had infected the win binaries, the shell complains and users would have been able to easily see something was amiss.
(Also, I wouldn't be surpised if they have pgp sigs somewhere for the Linux tarballs, but that takes work to verify.)
They do own and control the international trademark used by that domain name (I hope). Maybe they should be more careful who they loan it to.
I have the same question about thunderbird.
Google is an advertising company.
Microsoft is a software company with a small division that does advertising.
Yes Google does interesting technology, but it's all tangential to their core business of selling ad-views and click-throughs. There's nothing about Google that will ever threaten MS's core markets.
For the last 10 years, nobody's been saying "Yahoo is going to take out Microsoft", for obvious reasons. Google is the same business as Yahoo, just with sexier technology.
(Similar argument about the iPod -- it's another press-invented battle with a MS side business.)
Technical management. The problems with Copeland were architectural despite all the ass-stomping at Apple.
A classic example of a Mac User cutting off his nose to spite his face. The #1 devtool vendor is going to release something that will put more software on Macs,\ -- you would think Mac users would like that, but instead this guy starts going off about how his "garden of pure ideology" needs less programs, not more.
And "Cocoa, or go to hell", what kind of retarded comment is that? If you really believed that, your Mac would be next to useless.
This has NEVER happened with Windows, and I've run all of them.
I dispute that. The core OS of every version of Windows NT improved over the previous version. However, over time, more and more background services and eye candy appear, causing primarily memory bloat. But, give it enough memory and turn down the services and the newer version of Windows is always faster than the last.
I haven't seen any huge improvement interactive feel in OS X since 10.2, and 10.0/10.1 were such abortions they shouldn't count. Tiger firmly goes down the Windows route by requiring more memory and running more background stuff.
> Most people won't be "upgrading"... they will be buying new computers with it preloaded.
That's true of every OS ever sold.
> MHO it would do more for them to "donate" $100Mil to Dell, IBM, and HP.
If you read the article, the $100M is going to software developers, to encourage the addition of Vista-specific features. Particuarlly, the move from GDI to Avalon is a big recode that most vendors would probably rather avoid.
There are a -lot- of extensions for download modification, though.
Is there one that just gets rid of the download manager? I prefer the old-style dialogs as seen in IE or NS4.
The EE is just an attempt to add differentation when they ran out of Mhz headroom with the P4 design. There really is a customer base that wants the most expensive version of everything, so I can't blame them for selling it.
There's noting in your little lecture which reflects industry experience or knowlege -- it's all bits of information one could have picked up reading Computer Shopper.
Whatever patent deal Intel has with AMD, they were at least somewhat motivated by anti-trust concerns.
While the "Overcooked Celery" may be a home-build legend, the reports from a year later were that such systems tended to suffer from premature failure, and the Mhz benchmarking overstated the actual performance. Meaning it wasn't really as good as the real thing. YMMV.
Regardless, since the K7 came out, Intel hasn't pulled such a stunt. Since then, they've exploited any opporutnity where high-end parts have high yeilds (see Northwood.)
None of my post in this thread have been moderated up, Mr. Insane Gibberish-talking Mac-Wino Hobo.
Yup, AMD has historically had less than 20% marketshare, and historically, they've sold every chip they could make. Their problem is they can't afford or invent the fab tech to get their production rate up. If they could make more chips, they'd sell them.
AMD's biggest problem is that they've only just realized that "Like Intel, but CHEEP" doesn't make enough profit to keep up with the capital investment required.
Again, even if every accusation from AMD is true, the fact is that Intel kept them in the game by (A) giving away their patents and (B) not bankrupting them when they had the chance to do so. This is far from your cut-n-dried anti-trust case (like MS 'cutting off the air supply' from Nutscrape.) At least on the design/manufacturing level, Intel has just plain beaten AMD.
I would say your neighbor only understood a small part of the process. Intel, as a whole, has a damn good idea how many chips they can produce a given Mhz, otherwise they could never properly set pricing or meet orders.