::humpf:: Literature about this has already been posted in numerous places on the web (mozilla.org for example). Heck, even Dave Hyatt, Camino's creator, has discussed this.
But, hey, here's a start; http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/dave/archiv es/2002_ 06.html#002737
That blog entry is old and deals with OmniWeb, however the OmniGroup decided not to use gecko for many of the same reasons that apple also decided not to use gecko.
Someone will have to figure out how to get a Mac boot ROM onto a non-apple PPC box. This could be fairly tricky... however if you give a bunch of *nix geeks some cheep PPC 970's, someone WILL figure this out.
It's nice to see a P2P app that actually launches without a hitch when using the shell in OS X:) I don't know if I will use this often, however the "unix" client is well documented and very easy to install. I love when things "just work":)
That article, and a million others like it (written by folks who don't know much about the Mac's browser market), claim that Safari came along and was sooo awesome that IE's development on the Mac platform had no choice but to fizzle out.
Honestly, that couldn't be anything further from the truth.
Microsoft hasn't legitimately updated Mac IE for -years-. Of course, they've released small fixes for critical bugs and security updates; however, that's it. Mac IE on OS X was littered with hundreds of horribly annoying, very obvious, bugs that have been present since it shipped with Mac OS X Public Beta in 2000. That's almost 3 years!
Just about every OS X user loathed IE X. It was slow, it crashed, it had UI problems, and it had rendering problems that it's OS 9 cousin didn't have.
Apple -had- to make Safari. Microsoft was going to let Mac IE rot until Mac users were forced to adopt a better default system browser. Yet, OmniWeb was not standards compliant, Mozilla was too slow with quartz and didn't have a Mac like UI, Opera was still full of bugs, etc.
But then Camino/Chimera came along.:) Apple began to look at hiring Dave Hyatt and possibly adopting Camino since they were the only glimmer of hope we had to browse the web with any dignity. The only problem with Camino was, as Dave himself has mentioned, that it didn't have a native rendering engine. A gecko browser has less speed potential (among other things) then a native browser. So, what did Apple do? They hired Dave, took a bunch of the great concepts that Camino had, ported KHTML over to X (since it could run natively unlike gecko), got some additional Apple developers, started building in Cocoa, and had Safari beta 1 out in only a few months.
If Microsoft really gave a damn about IE X they could've built an awesome cocoa browser within 6 to 8 months. Shess... they HAVE enough money. Or, at the very least, they could've fixed the hundreds of tiny bugs that IE X already has. If they did that, there would be no Safari....well, at least not now.
MS is getting back to it's old dirty tactics with the Mac market. They're killing IE, they bought VPC, and they are suing the makers of Real PC. Soon, they only way to check your JavaScript with MS JScript or HTML in Tasman will be to have access to an x86 box. Moreover, soon IE exclusive web sites will be Windows exclusive.
Fact of the matter is that Mac and Linux users are communists bastards who support terrorism through the use of free office software and so called "standards." These people loath democracy. They hate the fact that a multinational corporate body can influence it's elected officials with innovation and outstanding security measures. Things like this can only be legitimately achieved through a large company.
If we don't allow voting to be Windows specific, and built upon.Net, then the terrorists win.
(PS:...that of course was sarcastic... but you already knew that, didn't you?)
ehh, no offense, but I don't think that was the best analogy.
Do you license your pens? Or have you ever purchased 1 pen, reverse engineered it over night, copied it, and then distributed boxes of bootleg Dr. Grips freely in your home town?
Data is not really a physical thing... so you can really compare it to something you can touch and feel.
Ehh, FinalCut is a better product. It has a much better UI, handles 24p h4 video perfectly, and does quite few things that Premiere needs 3rd party hardware to accomplish. Moreover, FinalCut on a PowerBook is typically a much more robust portable solution the Premiere on a PC laptop.
FinalCut's video/audio solutions have surpassed that of Premiere's during the past two major releases. Over the past 12 months FinalCut has become -the- pro video editing solution for MacOSX.
Honestly, it makes no sense to keep selling Premiere on OS X. Adobe would be loosing money. Now that FinalCut's feature set is mature, Mac user are migrating away from Premiere. Furthermore, a lot of Digital Video folks are migrating to OS X simply to use Final Cut or Final Cut Express.
In SF there is some sort of center for blind people near Mission St by the freeway on-ramp. About 2O feet in the air, on the top of the building, there is a huge braille sign made with 12in dots.
Everytime I drive by that sign I laugh my a** off. Seriously, who was the idiot that came up with that idea? A blind person would have to rent a cherry picker in order to read that thing.
It's been said a hundred time before; however, I'm going to say it again.... every other major PC and Semicondcutor manufacturer does this stuff.
Intel says they have the fastest solutions, AMD says they have the fastest solutions, and Apple/IBM says they have the fastest solutions. People have been putting skewed test results on the web for years.
Honestly, I'm not going to take any of these benchmarks for real. I want to see a review from ARS Technica or John Carmack.:)
Not true, big artists like RadioHead probably get much more then 12% of an album sale. It all depends on who you sign with, what you sign, how much your distributors sell you album for, and how much retailers sell your album for.
Fort example... sometimes big artists own their own label and pull in most of the profits; sometimes artist are big enough to get fairly lucrative deals from an existing label; sometimes artist get screwed and only make money after their label has been comp'ed for production and marketing (ie. We take the first million... you get a percentage of what's left); sometimes albums are expensive at wholesale, causing stores to make little money off of them if they make them down to an entising price; etc etc
There is no standard way of dealing with this stuff.
But regardless, I think these artist are tripping. First of, labels/artist don't have to pay for printing and distributing these albums. They're digital and always there once they have been ripped.
Secondly, individual tracks are usually more expensive from Apple. (ie. Buying a 15 track album is $10, yet buying 15 individual songs is $15). The vast majority of sales from Apple have been from selling complete albums. Complete albums are cheeper if you intend to buy a lot of tracks from an artist at the Apple store. Moreover, mixed-CDs of random songs get very very old after a while.
And, hey, don't these artists realize that this is what their fans want? People want to have the freedom to download individual songs whenever they want. It's easy to snag b-sides, you can shop for music in the buff at 3am, and you can build you're own "greatest hits" album if you wish.
All in all, as an artist, it really depends on the label you sign with and the contract you sign. You could make 80% of album sales, you could make 5% of album sales, or you could make 0% of album sales.
This is something that can't really be broken down into a pie chart of percentages unless you're going to average everything.
Typically, if you're good, have a large fan base, and are smart, you'll make a lot of money. However, if your not very good, dumb, or both, you're probably going to get screwed.
Checking one's work in IE is very important for Mac web developers. Most people don't use Gecko or KHTML based browsers.
No doubt, WinIE is fairly different from Mac IE; however, it sure was nice to have -some- sort of Tasman browser on Mac OS.
Now Mac IE's dead, VPC has an unstable future, and MS is taking the developers of RealPC to court.... eeeeeehhh... this doesn't look like a great time to be a mac web developer:(.
Regardless of the fact I've always hated writing in cursive, it is a completely impractical writing style in this day and age. Few people ever get good at it, and I'm utterly sick of trying to decipher seemingly encrypted sloppy cursive Chirstmas cards and thank-you notes.
Apple's individual songs may cost 20cents more, however there is no monthly fee, puchasing music is quicker, the UI is better, yada yada yada. Moreover, albums via iTunesMS are still priced at around 10bucks.
Rhapsody makes sence if you're one of those annoying people who downloads a ton of random tracks all day long; however, if you're like me, you purchase an album every now and then, and a few random songs every once and a while. For most people the iTunesMS will be cheeper and less of a pain in the neck.
Hopefully iTunes for Windows will be out soon... or perhaps Apple could create an API for third party clients. That would rock.
I think this has more to do with Davis bailing out everyone and their mother a few months ago. The man's a corporate whore, and now his actions have significantly hurt CA finacially.
Anyone else knowtice that the acronym for the "Musicians Against the Copyrighting of Samples" is "MACOS"?
I pulled up that site and was confused for a bit. All I saw was a MacOS logo with a big strike through it. I thought I stumbled upon some random geek's Mac hatred site;)
So, who washes off that port-o-potty's keyboard. There's no way in hell I'm touching that thing after every man woman and child has wiped their a** and surfed the web.
Slashdot Mirror
::humpf:: Literature about this has already been posted in numerous places on the web (mozilla.org for example). Heck, even Dave Hyatt, Camino's creator, has discussed this.
v es/2002_ 06.html#002737
But, hey, here's a start;
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/dave/archi
That blog entry is old and deals with OmniWeb, however the OmniGroup decided not to use gecko for many of the same reasons that apple also decided not to use gecko.
Someone will have to figure out how to get a Mac boot ROM onto a non-apple PPC box. This could be fairly tricky... however if you give a bunch of *nix geeks some cheep PPC 970's, someone WILL figure this out.
It's nice to see a P2P app that actually launches without a hitch when using the shell in OS X :) I don't know if I will use this often, however the "unix" client is well documented and very easy to install. I love when things "just work" :)
That article, and a million others like it (written by folks who don't know much about the Mac's browser market), claim that Safari came along and was sooo awesome that IE's development on the Mac platform had no choice but to fizzle out.
:) Apple began to look at hiring Dave Hyatt and possibly adopting Camino since they were the only glimmer of hope we had to browse the web with any dignity. The only problem with Camino was, as Dave himself has mentioned, that it didn't have a native rendering engine. A gecko browser has less speed potential (among other things) then a native browser. So, what did Apple do? They hired Dave, took a bunch of the great concepts that Camino had, ported KHTML over to X (since it could run natively unlike gecko), got some additional Apple developers, started building in Cocoa, and had Safari beta 1 out in only a few months.
...well, at least not now.
Honestly, that couldn't be anything further from the truth.
Microsoft hasn't legitimately updated Mac IE for -years-. Of course, they've released small fixes for critical bugs and security updates; however, that's it. Mac IE on OS X was littered with hundreds of horribly annoying, very obvious, bugs that have been present since it shipped with Mac OS X Public Beta in 2000. That's almost 3 years!
Just about every OS X user loathed IE X. It was slow, it crashed, it had UI problems, and it had rendering problems that it's OS 9 cousin didn't have.
Apple -had- to make Safari. Microsoft was going to let Mac IE rot until Mac users were forced to adopt a better default system browser. Yet, OmniWeb was not standards compliant, Mozilla was too slow with quartz and didn't have a Mac like UI, Opera was still full of bugs, etc.
But then Camino/Chimera came along.
If Microsoft really gave a damn about IE X they could've built an awesome cocoa browser within 6 to 8 months. Shess... they HAVE enough money. Or, at the very least, they could've fixed the hundreds of tiny bugs that IE X already has. If they did that, there would be no Safari.
MS is getting back to it's old dirty tactics with the Mac market. They're killing IE, they bought VPC, and they are suing the makers of Real PC. Soon, they only way to check your JavaScript with MS JScript or HTML in Tasman will be to have access to an x86 box. Moreover, soon IE exclusive web sites will be Windows exclusive.
This is really obnoxious.
Fact of the matter is that Mac and Linux users are communists bastards who support terrorism through the use of free office software and so called "standards." These people loath democracy. They hate the fact that a multinational corporate body can influence it's elected officials with innovation and outstanding security measures. Things like this can only be legitimately achieved through a large company.
.Net, then the terrorists win.
...that of course was sarcastic... but you already knew that, didn't you?)
If we don't allow voting to be Windows specific, and built upon
(PS:
ehh, no offense, but I don't think that was the best analogy.
Do you license your pens? Or have you ever purchased 1 pen, reverse engineered it over night, copied it, and then distributed boxes of bootleg Dr. Grips freely in your home town?
Data is not really a physical thing... so you can really compare it to something you can touch and feel.
I hope these guys spend as much money on product development and licencing as the did for that expensive a** website.
I think that thing was able to fire laser beams out of my monitor.
Well, It's my opinion. However, similar opinions are typically usually found among anyone who's used Final Cut 4 and Premier 6.5.
But hey, it sure would be nice to see someone run a big comparison with Final Cut Pro/Express, Avid Xpress DV, and Premiere 6.5.
Ehh, FinalCut is a better product. It has a much better UI, handles 24p h4 video perfectly, and does quite few things that Premiere needs 3rd party hardware to accomplish. Moreover, FinalCut on a PowerBook is typically a much more robust portable solution the Premiere on a PC laptop.
FinalCut's video/audio solutions have surpassed that of Premiere's during the past two major releases. Over the past 12 months FinalCut has become -the- pro video editing solution for MacOSX.
Honestly, it makes no sense to keep selling Premiere on OS X. Adobe would be loosing money. Now that FinalCut's feature set is mature, Mac user are migrating away from Premiere. Furthermore, a lot of Digital Video folks are migrating to OS X simply to use Final Cut or Final Cut Express.
Well a printer cartridge will print for a few weeks/months... unlike Dom Perignon which can't get you drunk for a few weeks/months.
In SF there is some sort of center for blind people near Mission St by the freeway on-ramp. About 2O feet in the air, on the top of the building, there is a huge braille sign made with 12in dots.
Everytime I drive by that sign I laugh my a** off. Seriously, who was the idiot that came up with that idea? A blind person would have to rent a cherry picker in order to read that thing.
Hey Apple... turn on the toys, do the tests, and shut these defensive Wintel users up ;)
Actually, the new DP PowerMacs are 39.2 pounds, the older mirrored door DP G4's are 42 pounds.
;)
So, ya, they're heavy as hell... but not as heavy as the older models
It's been said a hundred time before; however, I'm going to say it again.... every other major PC and Semicondcutor manufacturer does this stuff.
:)
Intel says they have the fastest solutions, AMD says they have the fastest solutions, and Apple/IBM says they have the fastest solutions. People have been putting skewed test results on the web for years.
Honestly, I'm not going to take any of these benchmarks for real. I want to see a review from ARS Technica or John Carmack.
I'm glad to see some geeks actually protesting about tech-injustice. Now, if only we can motivate and organize protests against Microsoft :)
Not true, big artists like RadioHead probably get much more then 12% of an album sale. It all depends on who you sign with, what you sign, how much your distributors sell you album for, and how much retailers sell your album for.
Fort example... sometimes big artists own their own label and pull in most of the profits; sometimes artist are big enough to get fairly lucrative deals from an existing label; sometimes artist get screwed and only make money after their label has been comp'ed for production and marketing (ie. We take the first million... you get a percentage of what's left); sometimes albums are expensive at wholesale, causing stores to make little money off of them if they make them down to an entising price; etc etc
There is no standard way of dealing with this stuff.
But regardless, I think these artist are tripping. First of, labels/artist don't have to pay for printing and distributing these albums. They're digital and always there once they have been ripped.
Secondly, individual tracks are usually more expensive from Apple. (ie. Buying a 15 track album is $10, yet buying 15 individual songs is $15). The vast majority of sales from Apple have been from selling complete albums. Complete albums are cheeper if you intend to buy a lot of tracks from an artist at the Apple store. Moreover, mixed-CDs of random songs get very very old after a while.
And, hey, don't these artists realize that this is what their fans want? People want to have the freedom to download individual songs whenever they want. It's easy to snag b-sides, you can shop for music in the buff at 3am, and you can build you're own "greatest hits" album if you wish.
All in all, as an artist, it really depends on the label you sign with and the contract you sign. You could make 80% of album sales, you could make 5% of album sales, or you could make 0% of album sales.
This is something that can't really be broken down into a pie chart of percentages unless you're going to average everything.
Typically, if you're good, have a large fan base, and are smart, you'll make a lot of money. However, if your not very good, dumb, or both, you're probably going to get screwed.
You're missing the point. Yes... it sucked, yet Mac IE was a Mac web developers only native access to Tasman, MS J-Script, etc.
Checking one's work in IE is very important for Mac web developers. Most people don't use Gecko or KHTML based browsers.
No doubt, WinIE is fairly different from Mac IE; however, it sure was nice to have -some- sort of Tasman browser on Mac OS.
Now Mac IE's dead, VPC has an unstable future, and MS is taking the developers of RealPC to court.... eeeeeehhh... this doesn't look like a great time to be a mac web developer
Agreed. I think quite a few of us are getting sick of geeks complaining about various variants not being "UNIXâ."
If it looks like a duck and qwacks like a duck.... it's probably Unix.
Cursive is only good for my signature.
Regardless of the fact I've always hated writing in cursive, it is a completely impractical writing style in this day and age. Few people ever get good at it, and I'm utterly sick of trying to decipher seemingly encrypted sloppy cursive Chirstmas cards and thank-you notes.
Apple's individual songs may cost 20cents more, however there is no monthly fee, puchasing music is quicker, the UI is better, yada yada yada. Moreover, albums via iTunesMS are still priced at around 10bucks.
Rhapsody makes sence if you're one of those annoying people who downloads a ton of random tracks all day long; however, if you're like me, you purchase an album every now and then, and a few random songs every once and a while. For most people the iTunesMS will be cheeper and less of a pain in the neck.
Hopefully iTunes for Windows will be out soon... or perhaps Apple could create an API for third party clients. That would rock.
I think this has more to do with Davis bailing out everyone and their mother a few months ago. The man's a corporate whore, and now his actions have significantly hurt CA finacially.
Anyone else knowtice that the acronym for the "Musicians Against the Copyrighting of Samples" is "MACOS"?
;)
I pulled up that site and was confused for a bit. All I saw was a MacOS logo with a big strike through it. I thought I stumbled upon some random geek's Mac hatred site
So, who washes off that port-o-potty's keyboard. There's no way in hell I'm touching that thing after every man woman and child has wiped their a** and surfed the web.