If I read this right, then this may be the way that I can being back the rainbow colors to my Mac's apple logo!
The other use is that I could change the color to match the graphite, cheap silver paint or beige of the Intel/AMD machines for a little stealth work and sneak my Mac past the IT trolls.
Whee, time for some Hollywood-style computing, baby!
Just one last point: whether the laptop the poster mentioned is suitable or not is moot: the poster wanted to point out how much he would save in comparision to the original price. It was about the education discount, rebutting the poster before who had lamented that it was nonexistant.
To continue to attack this is called "attacking a straw man", and is a logical fallacy. It is a strategy, however, that is popular in political debates and also known as "forcing a detour" or online as "hijacking the thread". However, I don't want you to think I'm accusing you of that: I mention this merely to help you recognise this in others' arguments.
The problem is really with the media. Amazon ought to know this: after all, their reviews in other media (books, video) sometimes carry the disclaimer "this review refers to the hardcover version" or something similar.
And yes, I can imagine a movie critic slamming the DVD release of a movie due to poor quality, and writing a synopsis like "Great movie, but the DVD is to terrible to buy".
Why does it surprise me that you're comparing a top-of-the-line laptop with a 17" screen with an entry-level desktop machine? Do you also compare subcompacts with delivery trucks? After all, they're both methods of transport.
The parent poster was referring to the size of the rebate on premium machines. For schools, Apple has the eMac and the iBook. I especially like the iBook cart solution, where the computers, printer and scanner can be wheeled from one classroom to the next according to usage needs. Far too often I see the PC's (Macs included) either spread out too thin or collecting dust.
I think the main thing to remember is that with Jobs at the controls, Apple was never market-share oriented. Apple is more interested in opening horizons (the Apple II was the first computer most schools could even afford) and has often flopped when it tries to do commodity business stuff (the Apple III, Lisa, clone licensing).
I own a 12" PowerBook, but it doesn't have the PC card slot. Something had to go in order to get it into that teensy form.
I don't miss the slot. Until now, I've hooked my cameras up over the USB and FireWire ports, and most of those 5-in-1 card readers work fine anyways...
If you look at Apple's ad text, you'll notice that they've adopted "Alan Smithee" as their replacement for "John Doe". The whole Apple Works example uses a ficticious Smithee family, and other you can see the name Alan Smithee in screenshots.
If I were to chop the monitor off of the iMac, it would only be for one of two purposes:
1. I want to place the screen away from the computer for some reason. However, the current iMac limits the cases where this would be true.
2. I want a home server, something that uses a remote-control for video and audio output. Something that will serve up my iPod playlists to my stereo when my office computer is turned off. If I can replace my DVD player with it, so much the better.
Now, what I really, really want from Apple is a way to reduce waste when I upgrade. Why not make it possible in the future to swap out the guts of a consumer-level Mac, and put your new Mac in the old case? Why not make a better program to replace the guts of an iMac where the monitor is still in fine working order?
The things that most creatives like about Apple nowadays is the user interface. In comparison to MS Windows variants, the dialogs, placement of menu commands and other such doohickeys bring a net plus in workflow. You get your work done faster on a Mac, with less hassle.
The actual rendering times of various filters are irrelevant when compared to sush minor details as keyboard shortcuts, color management and print quality.
Re:Maybe it's not about money, but about convenien
on
.Mac Alternatives?
·
· Score: 1
Right on.
It's about independance. If Apple should ever decide to kill the.mac service, who do you turn to?
What if you want to emulate the.mac goodness in your closed shop, and keep the traffic in the intranet?
It's these little things that Apple needs to address. I'd love to use a.mac setup to replace our Lotus Domino servers, but that's because I'm the lone Machead in a company full of Microsoft certified types.
The current philosophy at Apple is that one button is the default, but that context-clicking is available. You are not bound by any sort of either/or choice, and can use two-button mice if you want. You can even use three-, four- or five-button mice, if that's what tickles your fancy.
This patent looks like it might eventually be a good idea, but Apple wanted to make sure they were the ones to do it. Since it more resembles a jog dial than a scroll wheel, it might be more intuitive for video and audio usage, not just vertical scrolling. It just needs to be run through a lot of ergonomic and semiotic testing first.
If this does make it out of the testing labs, then my guess is that it will be offered as an added-cost option, like the old deluxe keyboards versus the smaller ones 680x0 macs came with.
Comparing a data format to a license agreement is not exactly logical. One is a definition of how the data in interpreted, the other is a definition of conditions concerning how said data may be used or shared. It's like comparing oranges and plastic bowls.
The GPL may be "viral" but it's not contagious, especially in comparison to any NDA-based code-sharing scheme. An NDA infects the programmer that agrees to it, effectively eliminating any chance of working on related projects due to contamination. Since the contested code is obscured, it is practically impossible to prove that the debated afterproduct doesn't use that code (or very expensive to prove). Since the GPL-code is open to scrutiny, proof of infection (or that the contested code is "clean") is easier. The virus cannot spread without an injection.
The difference between GPL infection and NDA infection is that NDA infection is almost always fatal (for the infected code), often killing the code before the virus can spread. GPL infections are mostly benign (from the code's viewpoint), and leave the code alive to become a carrier to transmit the GPL to its offspring. It is also possible to remove a GPL infection from code, should that prove necessary.
(So am I agree or disagreeing with you? Neither- I'm just ranting off on a tangernt.)
I doubt that the Iraqi forces even use/rely on GPS at all. The US Army's conceit here is that the enemy is also dependant on high-tech toys. Instead, the Iraqis may let the invaders roam the countryside, and ambush them in the towns and cities.
As Somalia showed, sometimes it pays to use antique radios and equipment so out-of-date that the Americans no longer have any equipment that can intercept or jam. And all of the concern about Saddam's "smoke trenches" is focused on how it's supposed to foil smart bombs, whereas it's more likely to rob house-to-house fighters the chance to spot ambushes from afar. Empty chemrounds may be fired to keep Americans nervous and in full MOPP gear (extremely uncomfortable in the desert, and could cause dehydration by sweating). Nothing that requires GPS accuracy.
Sure America has a decisive military advantage, if the enemy fights fairly.
Nasty pro-Microsoft! No biscuit! Why not mention the Handspring Treo, Symbian AND the PocketPC offerings?;-)
Seriously, the problem isn't so much the size of the thing but the fact that the form size required fot both equipment and a good interface is still too large to be wristwatch-carryable. Having to put the device in your pocket means that the device is dependant on what you wear having pockets (or a proper belt for the belt clip, for that matter). The interface is what's preventing this from happening at the moment, as cell phones are already starting to become too small for comfortable usage.
Now, if they could make a flexible screen for PDAs that could be rolled up and stored in a holder the size of a fat pen, *that* would be cool. Laptops could be replaced by a tube form with the screen and keyboard stored in a venetian blind-style holder. Even better would be if the screen behaved like electronic paper, retaining the last image when the power is turned off.
I agree with you that the application ought to be irrelevant, but I have yet to find an operating system that agrees with this. OpenDoc was the last real progress in this direction, but that's history.
The problem is that for heavy lifting, you still need applications, be they Photoshop, FreeHand, Director or InDesign. They are tools, and the OS is the toolbox. (To carry this analogy further, things like FreeHand and Illustrator aren't just tools, but a bunch of tools chained to the particular toolbox. What we need are tools we can use without having to open up the rest of the toolbox, and then the OS becomes the workshop in our analogy.)
Still, the whole issue of whether a program can run without open windows or not is better solved with the Dock, as it gives a visual clue that the application is still active despite not having any open windows. And this is a subject that the comparison site covers in much more detail.
"Windows is chided for having a menubar for every application. I think this is a good thing. I find it convinent. When using OS X if I want to access a menu in a application that isn't in focus, I have to switch to that application by clicking on a window it owns, then using the menu bar. In Windows, I can just click IMMEDIATLY on the mendu that I want. That article a while ago that talked about "cruft" explained why Mac did things that way. The windows way is superior (IMHO), but he doens't agree with me. Fine. The option-click thing above is also cruft."
I tend to agree with the website and not you. I use the mouse and menus a lot, since I can't always trust the keyboard shortcuts. After all, Microsoft and Apple can't really dictate to Macromedia and Adobe how their programs ought to run. Since I use these menus, I often end up hitting the wrong one in Windows NT, most often one in a window behind the one I'm working in. It also means inconsistant menus between programs, as Dreamweaver has separate windows for each HTML file, but Fireworks, Photoshop and a whole lot of other programs use a window-in-a-window thingy, which makes stacking application windows harder.
The other problem is that each menu bar eats up screen space. That then increases the amunt of visual clutter om my screen, and inconsistant palette behavior only adds to the mess.
Option-clicking on a menu had the main purpose of hiding functions for non-powerusers, or for providing access for easter eggs. Its other purpose, namely providing alternate functions for dialogue box buttons (turning an "escape" button into a "revert" button, for example) are hard to replicate with a programmed mouse button, since the dialogue on the box button changes to reflect the keyboard state. (That said, I've also noticed that Adobe uses the option key on Windows NT as well. I guess it can be platform-independant)
"Application vs Window. I don't remember if this was mentioned, but this has always annoyed me about Macs. In windows, if I close Word or some other program by clicking on the "close" button on the top right of the window, it closes. On a Mac, the window closes but the application stays open. This wouldn't be a problem for notepad or somesuch, but for large programs like Word, Photoshop, and other things, this can eat ALOT of memeory. This too, is cruft."
This is also something that, in all honesty, should be on/off switchable. On the Mac, I often close all windows of a program, yet leave it running in the background. That lets me access files without having to go through the splash screen every single time. On a computer with less RAM, it might be a problem, but I tend to run 8 or so programs simultaneously on both systems. And don't forget the bad old days of System 7 to Mac OS 9, where you really were limited by installed memory and the preemptive multitasking.
That said, I find my work goes faster on a Mac, mainly because of things like navigating through "open" and "save" dialogue boxes, window management and other little things. It's like comparing a Mercedes to a Lexus; the choice is heavily influenced not only by price and service, but by how the car feels in day-to-day driving.
If I understand this correctly, then the students are allowed to look at the NT source code. But aren't they now "contaminated" by exposure? They now cannot work on any other project without Microsoft screaming bloody murder about them taking knowledge of their oh-so-important OS with them.
Another thing is that Microsoft did pay Apple...for Windows 1.0. When Microsoft refused to re-license from Apple for Windows 3.0, that is what set off the lawsuit. Apple sued, and also argued that they borrowed not only the look and feel, but copied the underlying code as well. Apple didn't sue Atari or Commodore becasue they didn't license from Apple and renege like Microsoft did.
1. I can't replicate your results. My Mac laptop is just as fast as the company laptop from HP, but with better battery life.
2. Also not replicable. I see comperable prices for comparable laptops.
3. Businesses often fall into "single supplieer syndrome". That's a given, and unfortunate. Still, Apple has no problems moving laptops. I don't quite get your point, unless you're telling me I ought to say "baa".
4. Well, I guess you can thank Apple for making FireWire a standard, eh?;)
5. The G3 PowerBooks had this function, but Apple abandoned it. They decided that the benefits it provided weren't enough to enter the new case design. Considering that these expansion slots aren't uniform between laptop manufacturers, I can accept this. Third-party hardware for these things is expensive nowadays, even on the PC side.
6. "First and foremost"? Adobe's cash cows are still the MacOS programs. Illustrator is fighting an uphill battle against CorelDraw, but enjoys equal footing with Macromedia Freehand on the Mac side. And both are easier to use on the Mac than the PC due to little factors like PostScript printer integration and Apple's Navigation Services.
7. Your comment about grephics cards is probably the most mystifying. Ever since the bad old days of System 7.5 (and probably even earlier), Apple has supported multiple monitors, usually one monitor per graphics card. One of the reasons I'm buying the 12" PowerBook instead of the iBook is the independant external monitor support.
Oh, and I don't think I've purchased any of your games, unless you work for Ambrosia.
Judging from the setup, it looked more like an ad for threedegrees than a real article. The MSN logo, the MSNBC logo, and the gushing "try threedegree's features!" link insert left me wondering how much of Mr. Levy's article got trimmed by the editors.
Still, describing it as perfect for the Kelly Osbourne crowd is subtly damning praise. Associating a media-created star who acts rebellious for ratings with a Microsoft product...but more likely I'm reading too much into this, or crediting Mr. Levy too much.
I used to serve in a US base in Germany that was once home to a fighter squadron (Christiansen Barracks). The main runway was converted into the main road trunk.
After the Army left, the Germans finally sold the barracks. Now there's no trace of its former military background, just the unusually straight (for Germany) main road in the new suburb called Bindlacher Berg near Bayreuth.
This is one thing that really stands out. I buy a lot of hybrid CD's, mostly learning games for my daughter's Mac. Unfortunately, since the stores don't have MacOS-only software, it doesn't get conted as a sale for MacOS systems. They see no reason to accomodate Apple owners.
If the consumer wants Linux, there's no reason why Microsoft (or the hardware manufactures) should register this as a Windows sale. Doing so will only aggravate the situation in the long term, as it skews perceptions.
Not really. Without Microsoft, the OS and the programs living on it wouldn't be as important. Amigas and Atari STs might still be viable home platforms, since IBM wasn't really interested in home sales. Data wouldn't be quite so locked into monoculture formats. Viruses and Worms wouldn't propagate as fast, since each OS has a different hook.
Games would be rarer on business machines, and the underlying code of games would be cleaner for porting purposes. Sony might have made the Playstation more like a home computer, or rather the Sega Dreamcast would have had a better chance at life.
Hardware would be just as cheap, since manufacturers don't like having to redesign connectors. Drivers between OS's might become standardised to ease cross-platform adaptation.
And Linux would still be a hobby OS, since there wouldn't be that "anything but Microsoft" push that helped Linux achieve critical mass. But still, that alternate universe is wierd, funky and (IMNSHO) fun.
The EU was waiting to see if the US courts were going to spank Microsoft first. Since the result isn't satisfactory for the EU, the EU will start taking matters into their own hands.
Granted, this will at first only affect customers in the EU, but that a big market. Microsoft can't just soak up the punishment without shareholders revolting. And caving in to the EU means that customers elsewhere will want the same benefits. Microsoft will then see themselves pressured to meet their demands or fork their development.
The wheels of justice are slow, but we're all so used to instant results that it gets frustrating too soon. Sometimes it pays to be patient and persistant.
One little thing I have to point out:the EU antitrust case will be decided by bureaucrats who are "untouchable". They've been insulated from interference by member states, much less foreigners like the USA. Any decision they come to will be pretty much removed from political interference. Current signals suggest that MS lobbying has even backfired.
Europeans are upset by the fact that the EU is not a democratic institution but a bureaucratic one. Ironically, it may be to their favour in this case.
Slashdot Mirror
If I read this right, then this may be the way that I can being back the rainbow colors to my Mac's apple logo!
The other use is that I could change the color to match the graphite, cheap silver paint or beige of the Intel/AMD machines for a little stealth work and sneak my Mac past the IT trolls.
Whee, time for some Hollywood-style computing, baby!
Just one last point: whether the laptop the poster mentioned is suitable or not is moot: the poster wanted to point out how much he would save in comparision to the original price. It was about the education discount, rebutting the poster before who had lamented that it was nonexistant.
To continue to attack this is called "attacking a straw man", and is a logical fallacy. It is a strategy, however, that is popular in political debates and also known as "forcing a detour" or online as "hijacking the thread". However, I don't want you to think I'm accusing you of that: I mention this merely to help you recognise this in others' arguments.
The problem is really with the media. Amazon ought to know this: after all, their reviews in other media (books, video) sometimes carry the disclaimer "this review refers to the hardcover version" or something similar.
And yes, I can imagine a movie critic slamming the DVD release of a movie due to poor quality, and writing a synopsis like "Great movie, but the DVD is to terrible to buy".
Why does it surprise me that you're comparing a top-of-the-line laptop with a 17" screen with an entry-level desktop machine? Do you also compare subcompacts with delivery trucks? After all, they're both methods of transport.
The parent poster was referring to the size of the rebate on premium machines. For schools, Apple has the eMac and the iBook. I especially like the iBook cart solution, where the computers, printer and scanner can be wheeled from one classroom to the next according to usage needs. Far too often I see the PC's (Macs included) either spread out too thin or collecting dust.
I think the main thing to remember is that with Jobs at the controls, Apple was never market-share oriented. Apple is more interested in opening horizons (the Apple II was the first computer most schools could even afford) and has often flopped when it tries to do commodity business stuff (the Apple III, Lisa, clone licensing).
I own a 12" PowerBook, but it doesn't have the PC card slot. Something had to go in order to get it into that teensy form.
I don't miss the slot. Until now, I've hooked my cameras up over the USB and FireWire ports, and most of those 5-in-1 card readers work fine anyways...
If you look at Apple's ad text, you'll notice that they've adopted "Alan Smithee" as their replacement for "John Doe". The whole Apple Works example uses a ficticious Smithee family, and other you can see the name Alan Smithee in screenshots.
If I were to chop the monitor off of the iMac, it would only be for one of two purposes:
1. I want to place the screen away from the computer for some reason. However, the current iMac limits the cases where this would be true.
2. I want a home server, something that uses a remote-control for video and audio output. Something that will serve up my iPod playlists to my stereo when my office computer is turned off. If I can replace my DVD player with it, so much the better.
Now, what I really, really want from Apple is a way to reduce waste when I upgrade. Why not make it possible in the future to swap out the guts of a consumer-level Mac, and put your new Mac in the old case? Why not make a better program to replace the guts of an iMac where the monitor is still in fine working order?
The things that most creatives like about Apple nowadays is the user interface. In comparison to MS Windows variants, the dialogs, placement of menu commands and other such doohickeys bring a net plus in workflow. You get your work done faster on a Mac, with less hassle.
The actual rendering times of various filters are irrelevant when compared to sush minor details as keyboard shortcuts, color management and print quality.
Right on.
.mac service, who do you turn to?
.mac goodness in your closed shop, and keep the traffic in the intranet?
.mac setup to replace our Lotus Domino servers, but that's because I'm the lone Machead in a company full of Microsoft certified types.
It's about independance. If Apple should ever decide to kill the
What if you want to emulate the
It's these little things that Apple needs to address. I'd love to use a
Sigh...
The current philosophy at Apple is that one button is the default, but that context-clicking is available. You are not bound by any sort of either/or choice, and can use two-button mice if you want. You can even use three-, four- or five-button mice, if that's what tickles your fancy.
This patent looks like it might eventually be a good idea, but Apple wanted to make sure they were the ones to do it. Since it more resembles a jog dial than a scroll wheel, it might be more intuitive for video and audio usage, not just vertical scrolling. It just needs to be run through a lot of ergonomic and semiotic testing first.
If this does make it out of the testing labs, then my guess is that it will be offered as an added-cost option, like the old deluxe keyboards versus the smaller ones 680x0 macs came with.
It's called pre-emptive reservation. Securing a domain name to prevent competitors and detractors from using it against you.
A lot of companies learned this lesson the hard way with top-level-domains like microsoftsucks.com, fuckapple.org, and so on.
Comparing a data format to a license agreement is not exactly logical. One is a definition of how the data in interpreted, the other is a definition of conditions concerning how said data may be used or shared. It's like comparing oranges and plastic bowls.
The GPL may be "viral" but it's not contagious, especially in comparison to any NDA-based code-sharing scheme. An NDA infects the programmer that agrees to it, effectively eliminating any chance of working on related projects due to contamination. Since the contested code is obscured, it is practically impossible to prove that the debated afterproduct doesn't use that code (or very expensive to prove). Since the GPL-code is open to scrutiny, proof of infection (or that the contested code is "clean") is easier. The virus cannot spread without an injection.
The difference between GPL infection and NDA infection is that NDA infection is almost always fatal (for the infected code), often killing the code before the virus can spread. GPL infections are mostly benign (from the code's viewpoint), and leave the code alive to become a carrier to transmit the GPL to its offspring. It is also possible to remove a GPL infection from code, should that prove necessary.
(So am I agree or disagreeing with you? Neither- I'm just ranting off on a tangernt.)
I doubt that the Iraqi forces even use/rely on GPS at all. The US Army's conceit here is that the enemy is also dependant on high-tech toys. Instead, the Iraqis may let the invaders roam the countryside, and ambush them in the towns and cities.
As Somalia showed, sometimes it pays to use antique radios and equipment so out-of-date that the Americans no longer have any equipment that can intercept or jam. And all of the concern about Saddam's "smoke trenches" is focused on how it's supposed to foil smart bombs, whereas it's more likely to rob house-to-house fighters the chance to spot ambushes from afar. Empty chemrounds may be fired to keep Americans nervous and in full MOPP gear (extremely uncomfortable in the desert, and could cause dehydration by sweating). Nothing that requires GPS accuracy.
Sure America has a decisive military advantage, if the enemy fights fairly.
Nasty pro-Microsoft! No biscuit! Why not mention the Handspring Treo, Symbian AND the PocketPC offerings? ;-)
Seriously, the problem isn't so much the size of the thing but the fact that the form size required fot both equipment and a good interface is still too large to be wristwatch-carryable. Having to put the device in your pocket means that the device is dependant on what you wear having pockets (or a proper belt for the belt clip, for that matter). The interface is what's preventing this from happening at the moment, as cell phones are already starting to become too small for comfortable usage.
Now, if they could make a flexible screen for PDAs that could be rolled up and stored in a holder the size of a fat pen, *that* would be cool. Laptops could be replaced by a tube form with the screen and keyboard stored in a venetian blind-style holder. Even better would be if the screen behaved like electronic paper, retaining the last image when the power is turned off.
I agree with you that the application ought to be irrelevant, but I have yet to find an operating system that agrees with this. OpenDoc was the last real progress in this direction, but that's history.
The problem is that for heavy lifting, you still need applications, be they Photoshop, FreeHand, Director or InDesign. They are tools, and the OS is the toolbox. (To carry this analogy further, things like FreeHand and Illustrator aren't just tools, but a bunch of tools chained to the particular toolbox. What we need are tools we can use without having to open up the rest of the toolbox, and then the OS becomes the workshop in our analogy.)
Still, the whole issue of whether a program can run without open windows or not is better solved with the Dock, as it gives a visual clue that the application is still active despite not having any open windows. And this is a subject that the comparison site covers in much more detail.
Allow me to disagree...
"Windows is chided for having a menubar for every application. I think this is a good thing. I find it convinent. When using OS X if I want to access a menu in a application that isn't in focus, I have to switch to that application by clicking on a window it owns, then using the menu bar. In Windows, I can just click IMMEDIATLY on the mendu that I want. That article a while ago that talked about "cruft" explained why Mac did things that way. The windows way is superior (IMHO), but he doens't agree with me. Fine. The option-click thing above is also cruft."
I tend to agree with the website and not you. I use the mouse and menus a lot, since I can't always trust the keyboard shortcuts. After all, Microsoft and Apple can't really dictate to Macromedia and Adobe how their programs ought to run. Since I use these menus, I often end up hitting the wrong one in Windows NT, most often one in a window behind the one I'm working in. It also means inconsistant menus between programs, as Dreamweaver has separate windows for each HTML file, but Fireworks, Photoshop and a whole lot of other programs use a window-in-a-window thingy, which makes stacking application windows harder.
The other problem is that each menu bar eats up screen space. That then increases the amunt of visual clutter om my screen, and inconsistant palette behavior only adds to the mess.
Option-clicking on a menu had the main purpose of hiding functions for non-powerusers, or for providing access for easter eggs. Its other purpose, namely providing alternate functions for dialogue box buttons (turning an "escape" button into a "revert" button, for example) are hard to replicate with a programmed mouse button, since the dialogue on the box button changes to reflect the keyboard state. (That said, I've also noticed that Adobe uses the option key on Windows NT as well. I guess it can be platform-independant)
"Application vs Window. I don't remember if this was mentioned, but this has always annoyed me about Macs. In windows, if I close Word or some other program by clicking on the "close" button on the top right of the window, it closes. On a Mac, the window closes but the application stays open. This wouldn't be a problem for notepad or somesuch, but for large programs like Word, Photoshop, and other things, this can eat ALOT of memeory. This too, is cruft."
This is also something that, in all honesty, should be on/off switchable. On the Mac, I often close all windows of a program, yet leave it running in the background. That lets me access files without having to go through the splash screen every single time. On a computer with less RAM, it might be a problem, but I tend to run 8 or so programs simultaneously on both systems. And don't forget the bad old days of System 7 to Mac OS 9, where you really were limited by installed memory and the preemptive multitasking.
That said, I find my work goes faster on a Mac, mainly because of things like navigating through "open" and "save" dialogue boxes, window management and other little things. It's like comparing a Mercedes to a Lexus; the choice is heavily influenced not only by price and service, but by how the car feels in day-to-day driving.
If I understand this correctly, then the students are allowed to look at the NT source code. But aren't they now "contaminated" by exposure? They now cannot work on any other project without Microsoft screaming bloody murder about them taking knowledge of their oh-so-important OS with them.
Another thing is that Microsoft did pay Apple...for Windows 1.0. When Microsoft refused to re-license from Apple for Windows 3.0, that is what set off the lawsuit. Apple sued, and also argued that they borrowed not only the look and feel, but copied the underlying code as well. Apple didn't sue Atari or Commodore becasue they didn't license from Apple and renege like Microsoft did.
1. I can't replicate your results. My Mac laptop is just as fast as the company laptop from HP, but with better battery life.
;)
2. Also not replicable. I see comperable prices for comparable laptops.
3. Businesses often fall into "single supplieer syndrome". That's a given, and unfortunate. Still, Apple has no problems moving laptops. I don't quite get your point, unless you're telling me I ought to say "baa".
4. Well, I guess you can thank Apple for making FireWire a standard, eh?
5. The G3 PowerBooks had this function, but Apple abandoned it. They decided that the benefits it provided weren't enough to enter the new case design. Considering that these expansion slots aren't uniform between laptop manufacturers, I can accept this. Third-party hardware for these things is expensive nowadays, even on the PC side.
6. "First and foremost"? Adobe's cash cows are still the MacOS programs. Illustrator is fighting an uphill battle against CorelDraw, but enjoys equal footing with Macromedia Freehand on the Mac side. And both are easier to use on the Mac than the PC due to little factors like PostScript printer integration and Apple's Navigation Services.
7. Your comment about grephics cards is probably the most mystifying. Ever since the bad old days of System 7.5 (and probably even earlier), Apple has supported multiple monitors, usually one monitor per graphics card. One of the reasons I'm buying the 12" PowerBook instead of the iBook is the independant external monitor support.
Oh, and I don't think I've purchased any of your games, unless you work for Ambrosia.
Judging from the setup, it looked more like an ad for threedegrees than a real article. The MSN logo, the MSNBC logo, and the gushing "try threedegree's features!" link insert left me wondering how much of Mr. Levy's article got trimmed by the editors.
Still, describing it as perfect for the Kelly Osbourne crowd is subtly damning praise. Associating a media-created star who acts rebellious for ratings with a Microsoft product...but more likely I'm reading too much into this, or crediting Mr. Levy too much.
I used to serve in a US base in Germany that was once home to a fighter squadron (Christiansen Barracks). The main runway was converted into the main road trunk.
After the Army left, the Germans finally sold the barracks. Now there's no trace of its former military background, just the unusually straight (for Germany) main road in the new suburb called Bindlacher Berg near Bayreuth.
This is one thing that really stands out. I buy a lot of hybrid CD's, mostly learning games for my daughter's Mac. Unfortunately, since the stores don't have MacOS-only software, it doesn't get conted as a sale for MacOS systems. They see no reason to accomodate Apple owners.
If the consumer wants Linux, there's no reason why Microsoft (or the hardware manufactures) should register this as a Windows sale. Doing so will only aggravate the situation in the long term, as it skews perceptions.
Not really. Without Microsoft, the OS and the programs living on it wouldn't be as important. Amigas and Atari STs might still be viable home platforms, since IBM wasn't really interested in home sales. Data wouldn't be quite so locked into monoculture formats. Viruses and Worms wouldn't propagate as fast, since each OS has a different hook.
Games would be rarer on business machines, and the underlying code of games would be cleaner for porting purposes. Sony might have made the Playstation more like a home computer, or rather the Sega Dreamcast would have had a better chance at life.
Hardware would be just as cheap, since manufacturers don't like having to redesign connectors. Drivers between OS's might become standardised to ease cross-platform adaptation.
And Linux would still be a hobby OS, since there wouldn't be that "anything but Microsoft" push that helped Linux achieve critical mass. But still, that alternate universe is wierd, funky and (IMNSHO) fun.
The EU was waiting to see if the US courts were going to spank Microsoft first. Since the result isn't satisfactory for the EU, the EU will start taking matters into their own hands.
Granted, this will at first only affect customers in the EU, but that a big market. Microsoft can't just soak up the punishment without shareholders revolting. And caving in to the EU means that customers elsewhere will want the same benefits. Microsoft will then see themselves pressured to meet their demands or fork their development.
The wheels of justice are slow, but we're all so used to instant results that it gets frustrating too soon. Sometimes it pays to be patient and persistant.
One little thing I have to point out:the EU antitrust case will be decided by bureaucrats who are "untouchable". They've been insulated from interference by member states, much less foreigners like the USA. Any decision they come to will be pretty much removed from political interference. Current signals suggest that MS lobbying has even backfired.
Europeans are upset by the fact that the EU is not a democratic institution but a bureaucratic one. Ironically, it may be to their favour in this case.