Why would you even consider using ANY form of RPC to sync data?!?!? RPC is Remote Procedure Call. It's supposed to call a function on a remote location and get the result. Not for syncing 8 megs of data.
Instead implementing something like SyncML would make sense.
Some may argue "well, but what if it says it's a picture file, but turns out to be a trojaned app?" Doesn't matter; I can set the app's icon to look like that of a picture file, and you're just as screwed when you double-click on it.
Sure. But the fact that the picture was binhexed should tip you off. Since noone it their right mind would binhex something that don't acturlly require it (like a resource fork dependant file - like a mac app).
Anyway. This MIGHT just be an issue with how the 'file helpers' in IE has been set by default. I am unable to confirm tho. But I doubt anyone would code something specifically... Even M$.
For the non Mac users I can say that the problem is that IE decodes MacBinary and BinHex automatically while downloading (it's an option that's on by default). And IE will then follow the settings in 'File Helpers' on the decoded file instead of the orginal one.
I think the problem Apple really had. Was the themes the guy made for various window managers. It's perfectly understandable that Apple won't want others to make an OS that looks exactly like theirs.
That it hits the Mozilla theme seems like an error of Apple legal department. Applications are free to try and match their UI to look like the rest of the OS.
This is the worst comparison I have ever seen. I mean... Isn't 11 NT boxes going to require much more support than 1 Linux (IBM) mainframe? Or even more than 11 Linux mainframes.
And how can they compare the functionality of mailboxes to that of Exchange. I thought the point about Exchange is that it does more than email.
I donno about being a legend. But I think we can safely say that Carmack is one of the best 3D programmers out there. And a person who seriously considers the current alternatives and oppertunities in his field.
As for making new stuff... Well. No offence. But I wouldn't define Carmack as a game developer. As far as I can see. It seems he is much more interrested in pushing the limit of how good 3D a computer can generate. In many ways it seems much more like personal research than making games. As I see it that's what all the other guys at id is doing... Using his work to make games.
As for id doing something new... Well... I'm not sure if I would take anything else serious from id than FPS games... Right now it is not exactly a company known for it's rich storylines or huge details of realism... I'm not sure their current team would do very well at doing much else than great looking action games with perhaps a couple of good excuses to blow everything in sight to pices.
Wow. I was moderated a troll... And here I thought people would find it funny. Or maybe insightful. In any event I would consider it something to think about if it truly won't work with backlighting. My Palm is bad enough in semi dark lighting. Not being able to turn on the light would make is next to useless.
Well... Donno about you guys. But I am off to buy stocks in companies making flashlights RIGHT NOW! I can't WAIT to have the same trouble using my portable in dark places as I would have reading a book...
Anyone tried to read with a flashlight in the mouth or balancing it on the ear to read in a car? Or maybe holding it with one hand while struggling to turn the pages without dropping the book or the flashlight?
I wonder if how long it will take before it becomes a feature of portables that they have a build in telescope arm with a halogen light on the end. And for the first half year of selling these babies the good deals will include a MagLight and an extra set of AA's.
Oh well. Not all steps forward can truly be all forward.
iTunes is released the same day as Mac OS X. However it is not a Mac OS component. It a free downloadable pice of Apple software. So it will ship like that.
And they could juggle manpower that way too. Since after the GM have been made no changes can be made for the shipping OS. So they can work on getting other Appe software out. Announces is: iTunes, iMovie and a preview version of AppleWorks 6.1
Correct - except that was Rhapsody. But drivers lacked. So only a very small number of machines would run it.
Acturlly to this day Mac OS X compiles on Intel hardware (something Apple does to make sure they can once again move to another processor family if need be). But from there to acturlly run... Well a whole lot of Intel platform drivers would have to be made.
First of all you seem to not understand the message of the article... It sayes that Mac OS X is Unix for the MASSES... As in NOT sys admins.
But apart from that you are not really in touch with reality. Since when did it become the job of an OS to provide CDRW support and USB drivers for 3rd party stuff?
Mac OS X has one of the best driver structures I have seen. Basically ALL kinds of drivers have been unified under one API (known as IOKit). And for most standard type devices very little code is needed to make one specific for that device. I will give you it's poorly documented. But OTOH the implementation and a lot of Apples drivers is Open Source under Darwin. So a dedicated developer would be able to figure it out. But since the OS have pretty much just become a stable target from a developers viewpoint (since Apple have improved on the core OS design almost all the way to the final candidates).
Anyway you slice it. Apple have again proved that they show the way for the rest of the computer industry. By combining open source with a final product that 'normal' users can acturlly use I think they have hit something that will shake M$ in it's roots if it ever get's on the Intel PC marked. Although that product is not likely to be Mac OS X itself.
Well.. Someone else pointed out that it runs on plenty of arch's... But anyway. Every heard of Mac OS X... THAT's basically BSD with a NeXT derived GUI on top of it... So PPC works too...
Anyway. At the danger of being called a troll. Explain to me how a 'everything that remotly used our software must be open source' license (GPL) is better than a 'we basically don't care how you use our code. We just have fun making it' license (BSD)? Except if you are one of those 'information wants to be free' people that think open source will solve all problems in the software industry...
No. Mac OS X don't use use an X window compatible window manager. Their window manager/2D graphics system is much more related to Display Postscript. Although it is based on PDF and not PS. And it does not (I think) have any space between the system and the window that makes it possible to run the interface of an app on another machine (Display Postscrip on NeXT did that).
1)
They won't for a long time. Apple don't make a lot of money on their software. Not compared to the hardware. So selling it to a platform they don't make money off would be shooting themselves in the foot.
2)
No. You don't get it. Apple needs their hardware sales to survive.
3)
Can you say existing userbase? Mac OS is the second largest OS. And the only other really consumer oriented one (if you count Windows as a consumer oriented OS;).
BeOS is largly uninterresting since they have to build it all up from the ground. They need to convert both users and developers to their platform. And that is VERY hard to do since one will usually not come without the other already being there (much like the chicken and the egg thing).
OTOH Apple have both a fair share of developers and users. And they have made an relativly easy convertion path available to developers of Mac OS apps. And if everything goes well. Apple will have moved a good percentage of their userbase a year from now. And developers can the seriously start using the platforms advantages (instead of just converting apps).
THAT is what it is all about! If this was just another Linux, BSD or BeOS with a fancy window manager. Nobody would really care.
Argh. If you have any right to the Developer Previews that's out there. You would know that something like that would exactly be the case. Nobody (well.. Maybe M$) can spare the resources to toptrim a DP to get close to final poduct proformance.
It's been mentioned so many times. And everytime I am surpriced how it can come as a surprice to anyone that a DP version is neither stable or fast.
1) MOSX (the semi official short) is based on BSD as it is what the OS'es it's been build on was based on (all that NeXT stuff;)
2) DPS is out. It's been replaced by a PDF based imaging model that's been build without using Adobe code. So it's free of that license fee Adobe used to charge NeXT.
Well.. It might be for the better they just scrap the whole thing and let someone else take over. Since they don't seem to have gotten past the metric conversion problems that ruiend the last Mars mission. Just look at the article:
"Pluto is also the smallest - just 2,300 miles (1,400 kilometers) in diameter."
Since when is miles a smaller unit then klicks? Noe if they switched around those numbers they would still be off a bit. But not by much;)
Well. The problem is that hard links is a feature of the filesystem. And while UFS has it. HFS and HFS+ don't. They will work on UFS but not (at least in the same way) on HFS(+)
Well. Although many of like to see a arrogant and monopolistic corp like M$ get more open. And generally likes when the computer world get more open for that matter. It does not mean we are all fanatically Cyberpunks. (you know that 'info wants to be free' subculture that William Gibson named in 1984 - quite by chance I'm sure).
It's something diffrent when a number of people's life get's endangered when they are fighting one of the western worlds enemies. These people are HERO's dammit;).
Anyway. I think we can all agree that we want an open world where we all live in peace and share the info for the quicker and better develeopment of the human race. But this does not exactly help with that...
What WO basically does right now is making a Cocoa App with a HTML interface. So yeah you would get a good look at Cocoa development by trying WO.
Unfurtunatly it seems Apple wants to break some of that by making WO5 100% Java (that's how I understood it). And with that also making it quite a lot slower (Java in a VM just isn't as fast as a machine compiled code - and since they say deply everywhere it has to be in a VM).
That's the whole point about the Classic and Carbon environments. Classic will run old apps with no change. And Carbon runs old apps recompiled and slightly modified to run in it. And most developers committed to the Carbon path have promised releases around the time Mac OS X is released.
But look at www.stepwise.com for a db of apps for Mac OS X. There's at least a webbrowser (OmniWeb 4)
No. Linux isn't really mainstream. Mac OS is the only OS apart from Windows * that have been close at the 10% marketshare. And that's what Mac OS X is going to take over from.
I have from a pretty good source that the Apperance Manager's Themes support (from Mac OS 8.5+) will make it for Mac OS X. At least for Carbon (I'm not sure if that means it won't be global). Unfurtunatly the files used have not been officially documented.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would you even consider using ANY form of RPC to sync data?!?!? RPC is Remote Procedure Call. It's supposed to call a function on a remote location and get the result. Not for syncing 8 megs of data.
Instead implementing something like SyncML would make sense.
Some may argue "well, but what if it says it's a picture file, but turns out to be a trojaned app?" Doesn't matter; I can set the app's icon to look like that of a picture file, and you're just as screwed when you double-click on it.
Sure. But the fact that the picture was binhexed should tip you off. Since noone it their right mind would binhex something that don't acturlly require it (like a resource fork dependant file - like a mac app).
Anyway. This MIGHT just be an issue with how the 'file helpers' in IE has been set by default. I am unable to confirm tho. But I doubt anyone would code something specifically... Even M$.
For the non Mac users I can say that the problem is that IE decodes MacBinary and BinHex automatically while downloading (it's an option that's on by default). And IE will then follow the settings in 'File Helpers' on the decoded file instead of the orginal one.
This is likely to be the stupidest thing I have ever heard. Is it really true that the 'pro's want flawed games with bugs they can exploit.
I would think that skill and strategy would be the biggest factor in what makes people good at a game. And not the knowledge of some bug/flaw.
I think the problem Apple really had. Was the themes the guy made for various window managers. It's perfectly understandable that Apple won't want others to make an OS that looks exactly like theirs.
That it hits the Mozilla theme seems like an error of Apple legal department. Applications are free to try and match their UI to look like the rest of the OS.
This is the worst comparison I have ever seen. I mean... Isn't 11 NT boxes going to require much more support than 1 Linux (IBM) mainframe? Or even more than 11 Linux mainframes.
And how can they compare the functionality of mailboxes to that of Exchange. I thought the point about Exchange is that it does more than email.
Hmmm... If I remember correctly the 'Z-Trigger' is the 'gun trigger' like button on the controller of the N64...
So they patented a system for locking on to a target by using their controllers 'Z-Trigger' ?
I donno about being a legend. But I think we can safely say that Carmack is one of the best 3D programmers out there. And a person who seriously considers the current alternatives and oppertunities in his field.
As for making new stuff... Well. No offence. But I wouldn't define Carmack as a game developer. As far as I can see. It seems he is much more interrested in pushing the limit of how good 3D a computer can generate. In many ways it seems much more like personal research than making games. As I see it that's what all the other guys at id is doing... Using his work to make games.
As for id doing something new... Well... I'm not sure if I would take anything else serious from id than FPS games... Right now it is not exactly a company known for it's rich storylines or huge details of realism... I'm not sure their current team would do very well at doing much else than great looking action games with perhaps a couple of good excuses to blow everything in sight to pices.
Wow. I was moderated a troll... And here I thought people would find it funny. Or maybe insightful. In any event I would consider it something to think about if it truly won't work with backlighting. My Palm is bad enough in semi dark lighting. Not being able to turn on the light would make is next to useless.
;)
Ah well... The jury have spoken.
Well... Donno about you guys. But I am off to buy stocks in companies making flashlights RIGHT NOW! I can't WAIT to have the same trouble using my portable in dark places as I would have reading a book...
Anyone tried to read with a flashlight in the mouth or balancing it on the ear to read in a car? Or maybe holding it with one hand while struggling to turn the pages without dropping the book or the flashlight?
I wonder if how long it will take before it becomes a feature of portables that they have a build in telescope arm with a halogen light on the end. And for the first half year of selling these babies the good deals will include a MagLight and an extra set of AA's.
Oh well. Not all steps forward can truly be all forward.
iTunes is released the same day as Mac OS X. However it is not a Mac OS component. It a free downloadable pice of Apple software. So it will ship like that.
And they could juggle manpower that way too. Since after the GM have been made no changes can be made for the shipping OS. So they can work on getting other Appe software out. Announces is: iTunes, iMovie and a preview version of AppleWorks 6.1
Correct - except that was Rhapsody. But drivers lacked. So only a very small number of machines would run it.
Acturlly to this day Mac OS X compiles on Intel hardware (something Apple does to make sure they can once again move to another processor family if need be). But from there to acturlly run... Well a whole lot of Intel platform drivers would have to be made.
First of all you seem to not understand the message of the article... It sayes that Mac OS X is Unix for the MASSES... As in NOT sys admins.
But apart from that you are not really in touch with reality. Since when did it become the job of an OS to provide CDRW support and USB drivers for 3rd party stuff?
Mac OS X has one of the best driver structures I have seen. Basically ALL kinds of drivers have been unified under one API (known as IOKit). And for most standard type devices very little code is needed to make one specific for that device. I will give you it's poorly documented. But OTOH the implementation and a lot of Apples drivers is Open Source under Darwin. So a dedicated developer would be able to figure it out. But since the OS have pretty much just become a stable target from a developers viewpoint (since Apple have improved on the core OS design almost all the way to the final candidates).
Anyway you slice it. Apple have again proved that they show the way for the rest of the computer industry. By combining open source with a final product that 'normal' users can acturlly use I think they have hit something that will shake M$ in it's roots if it ever get's on the Intel PC marked. Although that product is not likely to be Mac OS X itself.
Well.. Someone else pointed out that it runs on plenty of arch's... But anyway. Every heard of Mac OS X... THAT's basically BSD with a NeXT derived GUI on top of it... So PPC works too...
Anyway. At the danger of being called a troll. Explain to me how a 'everything that remotly used our software must be open source' license (GPL) is better than a 'we basically don't care how you use our code. We just have fun making it' license (BSD)? Except if you are one of those 'information wants to be free' people that think open source will solve all problems in the software industry...
No. Mac OS X don't use use an X window compatible window manager. Their window manager/2D graphics system is much more related to Display Postscript. Although it is based on PDF and not PS. And it does not (I think) have any space between the system and the window that makes it possible to run the interface of an app on another machine (Display Postscrip on NeXT did that).
;)
So yes. They are Apple and oranges
1) They won't for a long time. Apple don't make a lot of money on their software. Not compared to the hardware. So selling it to a platform they don't make money off would be shooting themselves in the foot. 2) No. You don't get it. Apple needs their hardware sales to survive. 3) Can you say existing userbase? Mac OS is the second largest OS. And the only other really consumer oriented one (if you count Windows as a consumer oriented OS ;).
BeOS is largly uninterresting since they have to build it all up from the ground. They need to convert both users and developers to their platform. And that is VERY hard to do since one will usually not come without the other already being there (much like the chicken and the egg thing).
OTOH Apple have both a fair share of developers and users. And they have made an relativly easy convertion path available to developers of Mac OS apps. And if everything goes well. Apple will have moved a good percentage of their userbase a year from now. And developers can the seriously start using the platforms advantages (instead of just converting apps).
THAT is what it is all about! If this was just another Linux, BSD or BeOS with a fancy window manager. Nobody would really care.
Argh. If you have any right to the Developer Previews that's out there. You would know that something like that would exactly be the case. Nobody (well.. Maybe M$) can spare the resources to toptrim a DP to get close to final poduct proformance.
It's been mentioned so many times. And everytime I am surpriced how it can come as a surprice to anyone that a DP version is neither stable or fast.
A couple of points...
;)
1) MOSX (the semi official short) is based on BSD as it is what the OS'es it's been build on was based on (all that NeXT stuff
2) DPS is out. It's been replaced by a PDF based imaging model that's been build without using Adobe code. So it's free of that license fee Adobe used to charge NeXT.
Well.. It might be for the better they just scrap the whole thing and let someone else take over. Since they don't seem to have gotten past the metric conversion problems that ruiend the last Mars mission. Just look at the article:
;)
"Pluto is also the smallest - just 2,300 miles (1,400 kilometers) in diameter."
Since when is miles a smaller unit then klicks? Noe if they switched around those numbers they would still be off a bit. But not by much
Well. The problem is that hard links is a feature of the filesystem. And while UFS has it. HFS and HFS+ don't. They will work on UFS but not (at least in the same way) on HFS(+)
Well. Although many of like to see a arrogant and monopolistic corp like M$ get more open. And generally likes when the computer world get more open for that matter. It does not mean we are all fanatically Cyberpunks. (you know that 'info wants to be free' subculture that William Gibson named in 1984 - quite by chance I'm sure).
;).
It's something diffrent when a number of people's life get's endangered when they are fighting one of the western worlds enemies. These people are HERO's dammit
Anyway. I think we can all agree that we want an open world where we all live in peace and share the info for the quicker and better develeopment of the human race. But this does not exactly help with that...
Hmmm... It seems to me the guy finding out the info was there used quite a diffucult way of getting the 'cencored' data.
Of the info is there he could just have opened it in some vector graphics app that can import PDF (Like Illustrator) and remove the boxes...
Ah well. Maybe he didn't have one around.
What WO basically does right now is making a Cocoa App with a HTML interface. So yeah you would get a good look at Cocoa development by trying WO.
Unfurtunatly it seems Apple wants to break some of that by making WO5 100% Java (that's how I understood it). And with that also making it quite a lot slower (Java in a VM just isn't as fast as a machine compiled code - and since they say deply everywhere it has to be in a VM).
That's the whole point about the Classic and Carbon environments. Classic will run old apps with no change. And Carbon runs old apps recompiled and slightly modified to run in it. And most developers committed to the Carbon path have promised releases around the time Mac OS X is released.
But look at www.stepwise.com for a db of apps for Mac OS X. There's at least a webbrowser (OmniWeb 4)
No. Linux isn't really mainstream. Mac OS is the only OS apart from Windows * that have been close at the 10% marketshare. And that's what Mac OS X is going to take over from.
;)
Now the question is if it will sell
I have from a pretty good source that the Apperance Manager's Themes support (from Mac OS 8.5+) will make it for Mac OS X. At least for Carbon (I'm not sure if that means it won't be global). Unfurtunatly the files used have not been officially documented.