I want a magsafe universal power adapter that has an optical thunderbolt cable running down it. Dock? Who needs a dock? Attach mag adapter and your desktop power adapter then has the ports that you need in it. Can still be cheaper/smaller ones used for travel w/o the ports/thunderbolt.
And, I think overall, if companies didn't spend the money designing and stocking multiple power supplies they'd make more money than what they are doing now selling expensive power adapters. Users would also be happier, thus more likely to buy. Vendor might even get away with NOT including a power adapter in the box. Doubly so if it works on more than just laptops like the claim.
Overall better for the world as well waste less resources/store less junk because power supplies can outlive the gadget they are hooked to. Also, companies can be encouraged to make better more efficient power supplies. Right now you have to take what you get.
Apple at least keeps cables and power adapters around a long time, but it's even better if EVERYONE used the same cables/power supply.
The real threat will be an increase in the amount of video streamed and watched over the internet, NOT an increase in the video size.
Twitter commentary and Facebook will not be a huge increase in network bandwidth. Small bits of text. It's NOTHING. Text entered by humans. You can be the fastest typist EVER and you won't even touch what an audio stream is. You might say that everyone wants to provide their own audio tracks -- but that'll still pale to the existing skype traffic, which we're handling right now.
Sound might get more resolution, but we're already at the point where sound is a tiny portion of a movie. And there' s a limit to what the human ear can hear, and we're pretty close to that already.
You are also ignoring any increase in compression. We're much better at compressing sound and video than we were 10 years ago, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that we'll get better still in the next 10 years. This will offset some of the increase in resolution.
Really, the only driver in traffic (looking at file sizes) is video.
The highest resolution movies considered right now are 4k (4096×3072) or about 6x what 1080p is. We can pretty much guarantee that with the adoption rates of tvs that it'll take at least a decade to get there. No one is even making screens at that resolution that cost less than $30k yet. 3D might change that, but at present, it seems 3D will fizzle out. And it's only (at worst) a 2x increase in the video size, but a 3D compression algorithm would likely change that to a small % over a 2d movie (the 3D frames are largely the same).
Google is able to deliver in small doses, the network they are talking about, it'll only get easier to implement in the years to come. That network would serve up a 4k movie in 1.5 minutes assuming 15 seconds for a 1080p movie (maybe they aren't using 1080p for the 15 second quote though).
In other words, you are harping on a 10x increase in traffic due to file sizes, in the face of a 100x increase in bandwidth (10Mb to 1Gb).
As I said, the real threat will be the increased # of hours of video that people watch over the internet. That can scale higher than 10x, as people shift from watching video through cable/broadcast to over the internet.
Apple DID NOT liberally rip off Xerox. They PAID Xerox to use what they found, and then improved upon it. For instance, overlapping windows? Apple came up with that, not Xerox.
Apple's done enough wrong, but let's hold them to the crimes they actually did.
The information that the original poster was referring to is here: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/apple/2010/07/01/mac-ssd-performance-trim-in-osx/2
Even though the article is recent, the model that they tested in the Mid-2009 MB Air, not the current model. That means the controller chip is at least a 1.5 years old, and most likely is not one of the new super-modern SSD controllers.
The bullet point is, "OS X needs TRIM", what you're really asking is "OS X shouldn't degrade performance of an SSD the more it's used". This apparently doesn't happen, though to be sure it'd need to be retested with a 3rd party SSD. But I certainly trust facts and figures rather than people making claims w/o anything other "well it needs TRIM".
And OS X gives the users several options on where to store iTunes data, it's trivial to move that off to another partition. You can even move the entire user profile to another drive if you want to.
I want a mag safe adapter to be the standard, with one addition: add an optional light peek connector.
Then the standardized docking connection IS the standard power supply. Though you could still use a cheaper, power-only mag safe adapter when needed.
This is really the analogy that you're going with? I know that it's technically true: Apple does indeed transmit a new digital copy each time someone purchases an app. But it not really the essence of what Apple does.
A developer submits an app, and verifies that they have the right to do so. Apple then sells the app for them, and collects the money, takes their cut for running the store, and then sends the money along to the developer.
In this case, Apple is selling the bits it got "in good faith" on consignment.
It's no more possible for Apple to confirm that the copyright is correct on all these items, than it is for YouTube to police all it's videos. And, unlike YouTube, Apple has a contract with the developer, and knows exactly who should be held responsible.
Similarly, if Apple sold a song through iTMS, that a publisher gave to it, I don't see any reasonable method for Apple to know if the rights are correct on it.
BTW, this will be true for Any electronic download service (XBOX, PS3, Amazon for music/tv), etc.
And it's true for any store. Best Buy is ok to sell the same illegal bits because they are affixed to a physical media?
I'm going to make the simple obvious point: Adobe doesn't make Flash for any mobile phone.
Flash Lite is not the "full flash experience" that Adobe is talking about.
Flash 10.1 for Android is not going to be out for a few months, and it's over a year late, despite full support of the OS vendor (google).
Yes, once it's here, Apple still won't allow it. But, right now? Apple is not allowing something that Adobe doesn't make. Somehow this is Apple's fault.
Adobe has a lousy track record on mobile devices. Demonstrate a working Mobile Flash. Once Adobe does that, THEN Adobe can start whining. It's this pre-mature whining that annoys me.
I'll give them the right to start whining about the SDK change that nixed Flash CS5 generating iPhone apps. I understood what Job's said, but it's wrong, not relevant, and short sighted.
And yes, it'd be much better to evaluate the tool first, instead of banning outright. If you're going to ban a tool for reasons like this, it might be nice to have some objective criteria: Tools that do not do X, Y, Z and apps they generate, are banned from the iPhone store. That means that Apple shipping OS 4, would update the list, and maybe Flash CS5 would be banned until it supported some new features, but it would still be allowed to create OS 3 version apps (though Apple would probably stop accepting OS 3 apps).
Nitpick: Flash CS5 doesn't compile to Objective-C, it compiles to ARM code (just like the Obj-c compiler would.)
Psystar's claim is that they buy commercially available leopard disks and use them.
I've not bought a retail version of Leopard lately, but there is still a pretty good chance that it's 10.5.0. After all, it'll boot any machine that did not come with leopard (and hence, has it's own restore disks). Not sure why Apple would go through the effort to make a new version, the only pay off is to save bandwidth starved users from downloading a combo update.
Just because Apple shipped macs with 10.5.1... 10.5.6, doesn't mean you can buy the disks. The only way to get them is to buy a new mac.
Though, I guess you can claim that THOSE disks don't have a copyright, and thus you are copying them. Buy one new mac, get a leopard disk and use it.
But, since you get hit for "only costs", Apple can claim these non-retail disks cost more. And, in fact they do as they contain iLife and an emergency disk. As well as some effort to make them run on the new machine (which wouldn't run the current version of OS X when they were released).
And, that pre-supposes that Apple has to re-register point releases to get the full benefit of Copyright protection. If I fixed some errata in a published book, and did not re-file the copyright, is it still fully protected? And is this what 10.5.1 is?
How much change is needed before someone has to re-file?
You limit to significant open source programs that have to originate on Mac OS X.
That's right, let's compare vs. Linux (1991) vs. OS X (2001).
And, since you said, 'significant', this makes it a bit harder, as to be significant, something generally has to be around for awhile, reducing OS X's ability to produce something.
And guys like you crack me up, as, a bunch of significant open source programs did not originate on Linux - the Gnu tools, gcc, perl, Apache, X11, python, samba, java, and I'm sure the list goes on.
I couldn't find out where mysql started. But that's three letters out of LAMP that didn't originate on Linux. Linux could not have originated ON Linux by definition, and I'd have a hard time counting it anyway, since it owes heavily to Unix in design and implementation. (Note: this is not a knock on Linus, or Linux, just if you're getting picky, w/o Minux or UNIX linux would not exist.)
Apple has made contributions back to open source, the easy example here is KHTML which even ended up changing it's name to WebKit.
Apple has originated open source projects as well. Take a look at iCal Server, which is an open source, cross platform Calendar server written in python.
launchd is open source, and I vaugley recall that it inspired some changes in Linux booting.
Others have noted several user supplied open source projects.
It's hardly a one way street Open Source -> Apple.
It's not impossible to report a security bug to apple and get a response.
Though a misunderstanding of UNIX permissions, I reported what I thought was a security problem to apple. Apple responded, followed up with me, by then I'd figured out that I was a moron, and what I could do to make what I want happen.
The main point was that Apple was quick to respond (hours). I can't imagine that they'd be any less responsive for a REAL security problem, that the reporter could demonstrate.
If you're curious on what I was stupid about, if you own the directory, you can overwrite any file in that directory, no matter who owns the file. It did not seem right, but it is standard UNIX behavior (Linux, OS X, Solaris all behave this way). OS X even has a fix for this by setting the immutable flag with chflags.
It turns out that this is even used in the MOAB. You can overwrite some of the sticky bit files if you are an admin (w/o authenticating) because the folder is owned by the admin group. Then, when fix permissions is run, it'll reset the sticky bit and make the file owned by root again. Then you just run the file, and get instant root access.
Any sticky bit root programs need to be in a folder owned by root/wheel, have no write permission except by the root user, and the same for the individual file.
And fix permissions should be updated to use a tripwire on anything it gives sticky bit permissions to, so it can also note if someone has tried to change a file that, by definition, is a possible attack vector. And it wouldn't hurt to mark them as immuatable with schg.
The MOAB people are really bright, but also out for the notoriety. They claim that "you can't fix this, as a repair permissions will undo all this".
Which is wrong, and they should know it. For one, you can mark those files as immutable, which will prevent their being over-written w/o using super user privs (instead of just admin privs). And even root can't overwrite an immutable file w/o removing the flag first. If the attacker already has root privs, you've already lost, and they won't be messing with this.
Secondly, you can easily hack repair permissions to have the settings you want on those files. Just make an installer package which over-writes those files, with the permissions you want. Once that package is installed, repair permissions should keep the permissions the way you've set them. I've not tested that, but it should work.
Mach is the microkernel. Darwin contains Mach + the BSD layer. I should have been a bit more correct in my terminology,
As I stated: there is a kext (kernel extension) which is loaded to add the TPM stuff to the kernel. It's optional code that is loaded, check/System/Library/Extensions on an OS X box to see what kinds of kexts are typical. Most of them are drivers.
It is not about the kernel. Did anyone read the damn thread?
THE KERNEL IS FINE! Darwin (the kernel) compiles and runs fine w/o TPM.
Rosetta - binary translation software used to run PPC code on Intel chips , software not written by Apple - requires TPM to run.
It turns out that Apple has not yet ported all the pieces of the GUI yet to native intel code, in specfic the ATSServer is not, a service which handles fonts for the GUI.
No TPM => No Rosetta => no PPC code emulation => no ATSSERVER => No GUI. Stock OS X also won't boot, as it is geared to boot directly into the GUI.
THE KERNEL DOES NOT REQUIRE TPM. There is a kext (kernel extension) that handles this.
So, since Rosetta won't launch w/o TPM, the GUI won't boot w/o it. At least until Apple ports the ATSSERVER , I can't imagine they'll ship Intel Macs with it being emulated.
This is important: Aside from Rosetta, which is not written by Apple, No code in OS X requires TPM. Well, aside from the kext that adds the TPM functions that Rosetta needs.
So for now, no reason to panic, but you'll want to keep an eye to see if the kext is used by anything else.
But, too bad Sony didn't take Jobs up on his offer (and maybe this suit had something to do with him making the offer).
If the Beatles won't take money...they MIGHT take their own music back. If Jobs could get Jackson and Sony to sell the music to Apple....they could give it to Apple Records in return for settling the suit.
In the end it comes down to $$, but I don't think money alone (or maybe it'd take a bunch of money) would liberate the Beatles music.
But, having McCarthy on the board of Apple woudn't be bad. He's got a bunch of power and influence and owns a lot of music personally. (He went on a buying spree after Jacko knifed him by buying his music.)
If the deal came with getting an exclusive for Beatles tunes for electronic sales....it wouldn't be bad.
Still, I don't know UK law...but Apple Records stopped doing business as Apple Records for several years. I don't know why this should mean that Apple Computer owes them a ton of money (some money maybe...but not tons of money).
While I agree with your general statement, let's put this in some perspective.
Yes, ITMS only works on OS X. Supporting OS 9 would have meant supporting another operating system (ITMS relies upon WebCore the heart of Safari). Apple was clear from the onset of OS X that there would be a time when OS 9 was no longer supported for new hw and software. We're four years into the OS X transition now (five if you count the pubic beta release), I'm not all that upset that OS 9 is not supported.
Sure, MS does better. They still release things for Win98. Win95 is not longer supported. So we know that eight years is "ok" for not support. However, I think most of the 98 support comes from supporting ME, which is only three years old.
THe most recent version of iTunes requires Mac OS X 10.1.5, but that's a free upgrade from 10.0.
And, when Mac users (of which I am one) complain about "OS X not installing on older hw", ask them HOW OLD the hw in question is. Then do some math, figure out what the comparable Windows box was at the time, and see if you'd want to be running XP on it.
I'm running Panther quite nicely on a computer that is over four years old. Quartz Extreme doesn't work (it's too much for PCI despite all the hacks) but Expose works fine. And I hear that it runs fine on a B&W G3, which in January will be a five year old computer.
Each release of OS X has gotten faster, so my old hw is better supported than ever before.
I strongly suppect that only machines w/ AGP will be supported by Mac OS 10.4. By then my machine will be five years old and will still run Panther (which will likely have a few more years of support on it as well). There may be a few more machines that get toasted, as I suspect the cut off will be "Quartz Extreme Support". The support for the hw will likely be "buy a new graphics card". The writing was on the wall when QE was announced in Jagaur. But, if I turn out to be right, we'll still hear the complaining.
You reboot your iBook? Why? I take mine to work and back (switching networks) and never reboot. I just put it to sleep and drive home. The infrequent reboots for OS upgrades don't bother me. I'll grant that boot times should be faster, but each successive OS X update has increased boot speed. And, as I said, it's just not something that I do.
If you bought a stock iBook, my suggestion is to shell out for a bit more money and get memory. Mac OS X really likes to have at least 256MB and actually takes advantage of more memory. Just pick up a 512MB SO-DIMM, you'll notice the difference.
I use several PC laptops, and my iBook comes accross well in comparison. Sure it could be faster, but I don't describe it as "lagging".
Apple currently charges for upgrades to some of it's iApps, even ones listed in the CNET article.
Upgrades to iMovie and iDVD are not free. Visit the Apple Store and check if you don't believe me. It's more research than the author of the article did.
"Consumers will have to pay for new versions of iDVD, iPhoto and iMovie, which will be sold together as a bundle. Previously, Apple had offered upgrades to its digital media, or "i" applications, for free."
Which, as I said is wrong. You have to pay for upgrades to two of those products right now, and iPhoto2 doesn't exist. So it's no stretch to assume that you might have to pay for it (even though version 1 was free).
Also, it's good that apple will charge for them. This means that people w/ third party DVD drives can now use iDVD legally.
The article also calls Jaguar the first "significant upgrade to OS X" totally igoring OS 10.1, which was a free update. Again, basic facts are wrong.
I'm surprised that I seem to be the first person to point this out. Everyone else seems to be taking the "newly charging" thing as gospel.
Now, the only thing outstanding is if Apple is going to keep giving those apps away for free w/ new machines. You have to pay to upgrade but new machines have always come w/ the most recent version for free. I suspect this longstanding practice will remain.
(New macs come w/ iMovie2, but people who bought machines w/ iMovie1 on it have to pay to upgrade.)
Try reading this nice article about updating SAMBA when your ip changes. Since it shows you how to run a shell script when your ip changes, hopefully this will allow you to do what you want.
http://www.culater.net/osd/samba/samba.html
There's some info from Apple: http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/Network ing/SysConfigOverview926/index.html?http://develop er.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/Networking/SysConfigO verview926/SysConfigOverview926c.html
And it's not what you want, but if you want to change locations from the command line, you need to look at the nice command/usr/sbin/scselect. (Take a look in/usr/sbin and/usr/bin for a bunch of nice Apple Command line tools. Rare if it has a man page though.)
What I want to be able to do is to be able to run a script when my laptop wakes up. Still haven't found something nice for that. I can run a program in the background all the time that gets notified of power events, but I'm sure that Apple already has something running which will do this. (I want to use a command line tool to sniff for wireless access points, and depending on what is found, switch my location. I can do it all...if I run the script manually, I just want it to run automatically on wakeup.)
Re:Bah! This is what you need for a diskless firew
on
Tiny Boxen
·
· Score: 1
For an American source check here:
http://synertrontech.com/
They have various models of the LIGHT. I haven't ordered one yet. There weren't any prices on the page, but they responded w/ a price list via email and are willing to sell in Qty 1.
I don't have the price list on me (it's on my desktop) but I seem to recall that the 3 NIC system was around $350.
(1) There have already been comments from Apple about upgrading firmware from OS X. Apple is aware of this and is working on it.
(2) Diskwarrior for OS X was on display at Macworld NY. Saw it w/ my own eyes. It should be shipping shortly, they had to wait until Jaguar was released, and then allow time for final testing. If you use Norton Utils to repair your disks, you deserve the corruption that will ensue.
(3) BFD. For the machines that you need that for, they'll still run OS 9. And I'm sure that Apple will continue to update System Profiler as it's been updated for every major update of OS X. Though the Jag command line version launches the GUI version now (unlike 10.1.5).
Apple did not later include the 68k emulator w/ the PowerPC macs, it shipped day one. It was needed as part of the OS still had 68k code in it. The transition from 68k to PPC was smooth.
And, Apple already provides a way for users to run their OS 7/8/9 apps in OS X. That's what Classic is. It allows older mac apps to run unchanged in OS X.
This announcement simply stated that NEW (as in models not currently for sale) won't boot in OS 9. In January, any model currently for sale will still boot OS 9. It's only when apple releases the next model iMac/PowerMac/iBook/PowerBook G4 after January that the machine will only boot into OS X. It will still be able to run old apps under Classic in OS X.
The article heading is misleading, it's only for new macintosh models, not currently shipping macs. Apple is not going to cripple any machine that currently boots into OS 9, they just will not add support to OS 9 to boot any new hardware that is introduced after January. A subtle but important distinction. And since eWeek was claiming that Apple would cripple existing machines...eWeek was wrong.
Classic runs much better (and boots way faster) under Jaguar anyway, reducing the need for OS 9 booting. If Apple makes more improvments before they ship new hw (a given), there will be even fewer reasons to need to boot into OS 9.
I'm doing the same thing right now, and the junk PC I'm using is loud, at least next to my other machines that I've spent the time/$ quieting.
When I get everything configured, I plan to replace the hardware. Via just released the EPIA 5000 and 800 boards. The Epia 5000 has on board LAN, sound, and video. The CPU is not speedy, it's about the speed of a P233, but requires no active cooling. The total is $98. You can't upgrade anything (CPU is surface mounted) and you only get one PCI Slot. But, depending on what you're doing, it can fit the bill. If you need more speed, $10 more gets you the Epia 800 (though it needs a small fan). If you need more power/PCI slots, you can upgrade to using a Micro-ATX board and use a VIA C3 (also needs minimal cooling)
You can get a Mini-ITX case w/ the power supply external (so no heat inside the case, and still no fan) for $72 (of course there are other neat cases). Toss in some memory, a network card, and some disk and you're done. I'm just going to put in a normal HD, it shouldn't be used much. If it makes too much noise I'll replace it with a laptop drive or a baracuda.
I'm going to add a USB-Ethernet adaptor ($5) so I can segment off my wireless base station. It should be more than fast enough to keep up (I'll know next week). I'm still looking for a working OS X VPN solution. I want to firewall off the wireless and use a VPN to get though the firewall. I might have to wait for Jaguar for that. Then I could use IPSec (hopefully the Epia 5000 is fast enough to handle IPSec over wireless.).
While this costs more than what you've got lying around, it's more than fast enough for a router and it'll be totally silent.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a story from last month (Dec 12 2012), and it's for all TWC customers. http://news.yahoo.com/time-warner-cable-boosts-internet-speeds-50-standard-022153999.html
I want a magsafe universal power adapter that has an optical thunderbolt cable running down it. Dock? Who needs a dock? Attach mag adapter and your desktop power adapter then has the ports that you need in it. Can still be cheaper/smaller ones used for travel w/o the ports/thunderbolt.
And, I think overall, if companies didn't spend the money designing and stocking multiple power supplies they'd make more money than what they are doing now selling expensive power adapters. Users would also be happier, thus more likely to buy. Vendor might even get away with NOT including a power adapter in the box. Doubly so if it works on more than just laptops like the claim.
Overall better for the world as well waste less resources/store less junk because power supplies can outlive the gadget they are hooked to. Also, companies can be encouraged to make better more efficient power supplies. Right now you have to take what you get.
Apple at least keeps cables and power adapters around a long time, but it's even better if EVERYONE used the same cables/power supply.
Twitter commentary and Facebook will not be a huge increase in network bandwidth. Small bits of text. It's NOTHING. Text entered by humans. You can be the fastest typist EVER and you won't even touch what an audio stream is. You might say that everyone wants to provide their own audio tracks -- but that'll still pale to the existing skype traffic, which we're handling right now.
Sound might get more resolution, but we're already at the point where sound is a tiny portion of a movie. And there' s a limit to what the human ear can hear, and we're pretty close to that already.
You are also ignoring any increase in compression. We're much better at compressing sound and video than we were 10 years ago, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that we'll get better still in the next 10 years. This will offset some of the increase in resolution.
Really, the only driver in traffic (looking at file sizes) is video.
The highest resolution movies considered right now are 4k (4096×3072) or about 6x what 1080p is. We can pretty much guarantee that with the adoption rates of tvs that it'll take at least a decade to get there. No one is even making screens at that resolution that cost less than $30k yet. 3D might change that, but at present, it seems 3D will fizzle out. And it's only (at worst) a 2x increase in the video size, but a 3D compression algorithm would likely change that to a small % over a 2d movie (the 3D frames are largely the same).
Google is able to deliver in small doses, the network they are talking about, it'll only get easier to implement in the years to come. That network would serve up a 4k movie in 1.5 minutes assuming 15 seconds for a 1080p movie (maybe they aren't using 1080p for the 15 second quote though).
In other words, you are harping on a 10x increase in traffic due to file sizes, in the face of a 100x increase in bandwidth (10Mb to 1Gb).
As I said, the real threat will be the increased # of hours of video that people watch over the internet. That can scale higher than 10x, as people shift from watching video through cable/broadcast to over the internet.
Apple DID NOT liberally rip off Xerox. They PAID Xerox to use what they found, and then improved upon it. For instance, overlapping windows? Apple came up with that, not Xerox. Apple's done enough wrong, but let's hold them to the crimes they actually did.
The information that the original poster was referring to is here: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/apple/2010/07/01/mac-ssd-performance-trim-in-osx/2 Even though the article is recent, the model that they tested in the Mid-2009 MB Air, not the current model. That means the controller chip is at least a 1.5 years old, and most likely is not one of the new super-modern SSD controllers. The bullet point is, "OS X needs TRIM", what you're really asking is "OS X shouldn't degrade performance of an SSD the more it's used". This apparently doesn't happen, though to be sure it'd need to be retested with a 3rd party SSD. But I certainly trust facts and figures rather than people making claims w/o anything other "well it needs TRIM". And OS X gives the users several options on where to store iTunes data, it's trivial to move that off to another partition. You can even move the entire user profile to another drive if you want to.
I want a mag safe adapter to be the standard, with one addition: add an optional light peek connector. Then the standardized docking connection IS the standard power supply. Though you could still use a cheaper, power-only mag safe adapter when needed.
A developer submits an app, and verifies that they have the right to do so. Apple then sells the app for them, and collects the money, takes their cut for running the store, and then sends the money along to the developer.
In this case, Apple is selling the bits it got "in good faith" on consignment.
It's no more possible for Apple to confirm that the copyright is correct on all these items, than it is for YouTube to police all it's videos. And, unlike YouTube, Apple has a contract with the developer, and knows exactly who should be held responsible.
Similarly, if Apple sold a song through iTMS, that a publisher gave to it, I don't see any reasonable method for Apple to know if the rights are correct on it.
BTW, this will be true for Any electronic download service (XBOX, PS3, Amazon for music/tv), etc.
And it's true for any store. Best Buy is ok to sell the same illegal bits because they are affixed to a physical media?
YouTube does this every day.
I'm going to make the simple obvious point: Adobe doesn't make Flash for any mobile phone. Flash Lite is not the "full flash experience" that Adobe is talking about. Flash 10.1 for Android is not going to be out for a few months, and it's over a year late, despite full support of the OS vendor (google). Yes, once it's here, Apple still won't allow it. But, right now? Apple is not allowing something that Adobe doesn't make. Somehow this is Apple's fault. Adobe has a lousy track record on mobile devices. Demonstrate a working Mobile Flash. Once Adobe does that, THEN Adobe can start whining. It's this pre-mature whining that annoys me. I'll give them the right to start whining about the SDK change that nixed Flash CS5 generating iPhone apps. I understood what Job's said, but it's wrong, not relevant, and short sighted. And yes, it'd be much better to evaluate the tool first, instead of banning outright. If you're going to ban a tool for reasons like this, it might be nice to have some objective criteria: Tools that do not do X, Y, Z and apps they generate, are banned from the iPhone store. That means that Apple shipping OS 4, would update the list, and maybe Flash CS5 would be banned until it supported some new features, but it would still be allowed to create OS 3 version apps (though Apple would probably stop accepting OS 3 apps). Nitpick: Flash CS5 doesn't compile to Objective-C, it compiles to ARM code (just like the Obj-c compiler would.)
The copyright is for "10.5" not "10.5.0".
Psystar's claim is that they buy commercially available leopard disks and use them.
I've not bought a retail version of Leopard lately, but there is still a pretty good chance that it's 10.5.0. After all, it'll boot any machine that did not come with leopard (and hence, has it's own restore disks). Not sure why Apple would go through the effort to make a new version, the only pay off is to save bandwidth starved users from downloading a combo update.
Just because Apple shipped macs with 10.5.1 ... 10.5.6, doesn't mean you can buy the disks. The only way to get them is to buy a new mac.
Though, I guess you can claim that THOSE disks don't have a copyright, and thus you are copying them. Buy one new mac, get a leopard disk and use it.
But, since you get hit for "only costs", Apple can claim these non-retail disks cost more. And, in fact they do as they contain iLife and an emergency disk. As well as some effort to make them run on the new machine (which wouldn't run the current version of OS X when they were released).
And, that pre-supposes that Apple has to re-register point releases to get the full benefit of Copyright protection. If I fixed some errata in a published book, and did not re-file the copyright, is it still fully protected? And is this what 10.5.1 is?
How much change is needed before someone has to re-file?
You limit to significant open source programs that have to originate on Mac OS X.
That's right, let's compare vs. Linux (1991) vs. OS X (2001).
And, since you said, 'significant', this makes it a bit harder, as to be significant, something generally has to be around for awhile, reducing OS X's ability to produce something.
And guys like you crack me up, as, a bunch of significant open source programs did not originate on Linux - the Gnu tools, gcc, perl, Apache, X11, python, samba, java, and I'm sure the list goes on.
I couldn't find out where mysql started. But that's three letters out of LAMP that didn't originate on Linux. Linux could not have originated ON Linux by definition, and I'd have a hard time counting it anyway, since it owes heavily to Unix in design and implementation. (Note: this is not a knock on Linus, or Linux, just if you're getting picky, w/o Minux or UNIX linux would not exist.)
Apple has made contributions back to open source, the easy example here is KHTML which even ended up changing it's name to WebKit.
Apple has originated open source projects as well. Take a look at iCal Server, which is an open source, cross platform Calendar server written in python.
launchd is open source, and I vaugley recall that it inspired some changes in Linux booting.
Others have noted several user supplied open source projects.
It's hardly a one way street Open Source -> Apple.
It's not impossible to report a security bug to apple and get a response.
Though a misunderstanding of UNIX permissions, I reported what I thought was a security problem to apple. Apple responded, followed up with me, by then I'd figured out that I was a moron, and what I could do to make what I want happen.
The main point was that Apple was quick to respond (hours). I can't imagine that they'd be any less responsive for a REAL security problem, that the reporter could demonstrate.
If you're curious on what I was stupid about, if you own the directory, you can overwrite any file in that directory, no matter who owns the file. It did not seem right, but it is standard UNIX behavior (Linux, OS X, Solaris all behave this way). OS X even has a fix for this by setting the immutable flag with chflags.
It turns out that this is even used in the MOAB. You can overwrite some of the sticky bit files if you are an admin (w/o authenticating) because the folder is owned by the admin group. Then, when fix permissions is run, it'll reset the sticky bit and make the file owned by root again. Then you just run the file, and get instant root access.
Any sticky bit root programs need to be in a folder owned by root/wheel, have no write permission except by the root user, and the same for the individual file.
And fix permissions should be updated to use a tripwire on anything it gives sticky bit permissions to, so it can also note if someone has tried to change a file that, by definition, is a possible attack vector. And it wouldn't hurt to mark them as immuatable with schg.
The MOAB people are really bright, but also out for the notoriety. They claim that "you can't fix this, as a repair permissions will undo all this".
Which is wrong, and they should know it. For one, you can mark those files as immutable, which will prevent their being over-written w/o using super user privs (instead of just admin privs). And even root can't overwrite an immutable file w/o removing the flag first. If the attacker already has root privs, you've already lost, and they won't be messing with this.
Secondly, you can easily hack repair permissions to have the settings you want on those files. Just make an installer package which over-writes those files, with the permissions you want. Once that package is installed, repair permissions should keep the permissions the way you've set them. I've not tested that, but it should work.
Mach is the microkernel. Darwin contains Mach + the BSD layer. I should have been a bit more correct in my terminology,
/System/Library/Extensions on an OS X box to see what kinds of kexts are typical. Most of them are drivers.
As I stated: there is a kext (kernel extension) which is loaded to add the TPM stuff to the kernel. It's optional code that is loaded, check
Rosetta talks to this kext before it launches.
THE KERNEL IS FINE! Darwin (the kernel) compiles and runs fine w/o TPM.
Rosetta - binary translation software used to run PPC code on Intel chips , software not written by Apple - requires TPM to run.
It turns out that Apple has not yet ported all the pieces of the GUI yet to native intel code, in specfic the ATSServer is not, a service which handles fonts for the GUI.
No TPM => No Rosetta => no PPC code emulation => no ATSSERVER => No GUI. Stock OS X also won't boot, as it is geared to boot directly into the GUI. THE KERNEL DOES NOT REQUIRE TPM. There is a kext (kernel extension) that handles this.
So, since Rosetta won't launch w/o TPM, the GUI won't boot w/o it. At least until Apple ports the ATSSERVER , I can't imagine they'll ship Intel Macs with it being emulated.
This is important: Aside from Rosetta, which is not written by Apple, No code in OS X requires TPM. Well, aside from the kext that adds the TPM functions that Rosetta needs.
So for now, no reason to panic, but you'll want to keep an eye to see if the kext is used by anything else.
The Beatles don't own all their music.
Sony and Michael Jackson own some of it.
But, too bad Sony didn't take Jobs up on his offer (and maybe this suit had something to do with him making the offer).
If the Beatles won't take money...they MIGHT take their own music back. If Jobs could get Jackson and Sony to sell the music to Apple....they could give it to Apple Records in return for settling the suit.
In the end it comes down to $$, but I don't think money alone (or maybe it'd take a bunch of money) would liberate the Beatles music.
But, having McCarthy on the board of Apple woudn't be bad. He's got a bunch of power and influence and owns a lot of music personally. (He went on a buying spree after Jacko knifed him by buying his music.)
If the deal came with getting an exclusive for Beatles tunes for electronic sales....it wouldn't be bad.
Still, I don't know UK law...but Apple Records stopped doing business as Apple Records for several years. I don't know why this should mean that Apple Computer owes them a ton of money (some money maybe...but not tons of money).
While I agree with your general statement, let's put this in some perspective.
Yes, ITMS only works on OS X. Supporting OS 9 would have meant supporting another operating system (ITMS relies upon WebCore the heart of Safari). Apple was clear from the onset of OS X that there would be a time when OS 9 was no longer supported for new hw and software. We're four years into the OS X transition now (five if you count the pubic beta release), I'm not all that upset that OS 9 is not supported.
Sure, MS does better. They still release things for Win98. Win95 is not longer supported. So we know that eight years is "ok" for not support. However, I think most of the 98 support comes from supporting ME, which is only three years old.
THe most recent version of iTunes requires Mac OS X 10.1.5, but that's a free upgrade from 10.0.
And, when Mac users (of which I am one) complain about "OS X not installing on older hw", ask them HOW OLD the hw in question is. Then do some math, figure out what the comparable Windows box was at the time, and see if you'd want to be running XP on it.
I'm running Panther quite nicely on a computer that is over four years old. Quartz Extreme doesn't work (it's too much for PCI despite all the hacks) but Expose works fine. And I hear that it runs fine on a B&W G3, which in January will be a five year old computer.
Each release of OS X has gotten faster, so my old hw is better supported than ever before.
I strongly suppect that only machines w/ AGP will be supported by Mac OS 10.4. By then my machine will be five years old and will still run Panther (which will likely have a few more years of support on it as well). There may be a few more machines that get toasted, as I suspect the cut off will be "Quartz Extreme Support". The support for the hw will likely be "buy a new graphics card". The writing was on the wall when QE was announced in Jagaur. But, if I turn out to be right, we'll still hear the complaining.
You reboot your iBook? Why? I take mine to work and back (switching networks) and never reboot. I just put it to sleep and drive home. The infrequent reboots for OS upgrades don't bother me. I'll grant that boot times should be faster, but each successive OS X update has increased boot speed. And, as I said, it's just not something that I do.
If you bought a stock iBook, my suggestion is to shell out for a bit more money and get memory. Mac OS X really likes to have at least 256MB and actually takes advantage of more memory. Just pick up a 512MB SO-DIMM, you'll notice the difference.
I use several PC laptops, and my iBook comes accross well in comparison. Sure it could be faster, but I don't describe it as "lagging".
Apple currently charges for upgrades to some of it's iApps, even ones listed in the CNET article.
Upgrades to iMovie and iDVD are not free. Visit the Apple Store and check if you don't believe me. It's more research than the author of the article did.
"Consumers will have to pay for new versions of iDVD, iPhoto and iMovie, which will be sold together as a bundle. Previously, Apple had offered upgrades to its digital media, or "i" applications, for free."
Which, as I said is wrong. You have to pay for upgrades to two of those products right now, and iPhoto2 doesn't exist. So it's no stretch to assume that you might have to pay for it (even though version 1 was free).
Also, it's good that apple will charge for them. This means that people w/ third party DVD drives can now use iDVD legally.
The article also calls Jaguar the first "significant upgrade to OS X" totally igoring OS 10.1, which was a free update. Again, basic facts are wrong.
I'm surprised that I seem to be the first person to point this out. Everyone else seems to be taking the "newly charging" thing as gospel.
Now, the only thing outstanding is if Apple is going to keep giving those apps away for free w/ new machines. You have to pay to upgrade but new machines have always come w/ the most recent version for free. I suspect this longstanding practice will remain.
(New macs come w/ iMovie2, but people who bought machines w/ iMovie1 on it have to pay to upgrade.)
Try reading this nice article about updating SAMBA when your ip changes. Since it shows you how to run a shell script when your ip changes, hopefully this will allow you to do what you want.
k ing/SysConfigOverview926/index.html?http://develop er.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/Networking/SysConfigO verview926/SysConfigOverview926c.html
/usr/sbin/scselect. (Take a look in /usr/sbin and /usr/bin for a bunch of nice Apple Command line tools. Rare if it has a man page though.)
http://www.culater.net/osd/samba/samba.html
There's some info from Apple: http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/Networ
And it's not what you want, but if you want to change locations from the command line, you need to look at the nice command
What I want to be able to do is to be able to run a script when my laptop wakes up. Still haven't found something nice for that. I can run a program in the background all the time that gets notified of power events, but I'm sure that Apple already has something running which will do this. (I want to use a command line tool to sniff for wireless access points, and depending on what is found, switch my location. I can do it all...if I run the script manually, I just want it to run automatically on wakeup.)
For an American source check here:
http://synertrontech.com/
They have various models of the LIGHT. I haven't ordered one yet. There weren't any prices on the page, but they responded w/ a price list via email and are willing to sell in Qty 1.
I don't have the price list on me (it's on my desktop) but I seem to recall that the 3 NIC system was around $350.
(1) There have already been comments from Apple about upgrading firmware from OS X. Apple is aware of this and is working on it.
(2) Diskwarrior for OS X was on display at Macworld NY. Saw it w/ my own eyes. It should be shipping shortly, they had to wait until Jaguar was released, and then allow time for final testing. If you use Norton Utils to repair your disks, you deserve the corruption that will ensue.
(3) BFD. For the machines that you need that for, they'll still run OS 9. And I'm sure that Apple will continue to update System Profiler as it's been updated for every major update of OS X. Though the Jag command line version launches the GUI version now (unlike 10.1.5).
To correct a few facts that you have wrong.
Apple did not later include the 68k emulator w/ the PowerPC macs, it shipped day one. It was needed as part of the OS still had 68k code in it. The transition from 68k to PPC was smooth.
And, Apple already provides a way for users to run their OS 7/8/9 apps in OS X. That's what Classic is. It allows older mac apps to run unchanged in OS X.
This announcement simply stated that NEW (as in models not currently for sale) won't boot in OS 9. In January, any model currently for sale will still boot OS 9. It's only when apple releases the next model iMac/PowerMac/iBook/PowerBook G4 after January that the machine will only boot into OS X. It will still be able to run old apps under Classic in OS X.
Classic runs much better (and boots way faster) under Jaguar anyway, reducing the need for OS 9 booting. If Apple makes more improvments before they ship new hw (a given), there will be even fewer reasons to need to boot into OS 9.
Press Release
The quote: "all new Mac® models will only boot into Mac® OS X as the start-up operating system"
When I get everything configured, I plan to replace the hardware. Via just released the EPIA 5000 and 800 boards. The Epia 5000 has on board LAN, sound, and video. The CPU is not speedy, it's about the speed of a P233, but requires no active cooling. The total is $98. You can't upgrade anything (CPU is surface mounted) and you only get one PCI Slot. But, depending on what you're doing, it can fit the bill. If you need more speed, $10 more gets you the Epia 800 (though it needs a small fan). If you need more power/PCI slots, you can upgrade to using a Micro-ATX board and use a VIA C3 (also needs minimal cooling)
You can get a Mini-ITX case w/ the power supply external (so no heat inside the case, and still no fan) for $72 (of course there are other neat cases). Toss in some memory, a network card, and some disk and you're done. I'm just going to put in a normal HD, it shouldn't be used much. If it makes too much noise I'll replace it with a laptop drive or a baracuda.
I'm going to add a USB-Ethernet adaptor ($5) so I can segment off my wireless base station. It should be more than fast enough to keep up (I'll know next week). I'm still looking for a working OS X VPN solution. I want to firewall off the wireless and use a VPN to get though the firewall. I might have to wait for Jaguar for that. Then I could use IPSec (hopefully the Epia 5000 is fast enough to handle IPSec over wireless.).
While this costs more than what you've got lying around, it's more than fast enough for a router and it'll be totally silent.
There are already perl scripts which do this, though I've never tested them myself.
t vl isting.php
A brief run at Google found these:
http://freeguide-tv.sourceforge.net/
http://www.cherrynebula.net/projects/tvlisting/