I understand your point, but disagree. You would've been right in the past, but times have changed. The slow economy is like a bunch of Indians to the cowboys of the PC industry, and it's time for the computer companies to circle the wagons--combine resources for mutual benefit.
No computer company or technology is an island into itself. Everyone wants to sell. Only Microsoft, for the most part, generates products that are truly proprietary, where no other OS or hardware can be made to co-operate. Would the people who sell Linux software mind if the Mac people bought their software? Hell, no! Would the vendors who normally sell PC-related hardware or software at COMDEX mind if it turned out they could add several million Linux users with just a tweak of their product? No way.
Only Microsoft would not join in the defense as they are the robber barons sitting on the hill, watching for their opportunity to scavenge or exploit. That's business.
...except for "Enterprise." That show returns to the original ST way of telling a story without any real technobabble or trying to push bad science. It's just story with a good set of characters that have neuroses, strengths, and, most of all, humor.
I normally go see the ST movies like Hilary climbed mountains. Not anymore. I knew what TNG would offer me, and I chose my time to see "Two Towers" twice. (Damn fine movie.) Never mind that I've never read Tolkien, but I enjoy it nonetheless, and look forward to reading it in full. I have read the Harry Potter books, and enjoyed the movies all the same because it simply told a believable, intriguing story.
Perhaps I just switched to things more tasteful and artful. Like WB and the bad Superman and Batman sequels, Berman and Paramount don't realize that self-parody and camp, along with just piss-poor story making, does not mean that ST fans are going to see their movies like a herd of lemmings. The original fans are much older and want better. There are other good fantasy and SF that demands our attention and our money. (Yes, even the Star Wars prequels.)
That, and I, too, believe that Paramount is driving the ST world into the ground faster than the lamented Shuttle Columbia...and with far less interest as to why.
COMDEX had its place, but in its commodity-based market, it couldn't pay the bills. LinuxWorld is stimulating intellectually but has problems paying for space. Macworld Expo is prosperous but has exhibit decline as well.
Why not combine them all into a single expo in San Francisco? Mac OS X and Linux are second cousins in terms of the OS and have developed a symbiosis of sorts. Many products for Mac OS X work with Linux--and a show such as this would encourage vendors to make such products work.
Every computer uses the technologies hawked at COMDEX, so it should break even, at least.
And all would benefit from the larger crowds, and less expensive space.
I picked SF since Apple has been inclined to stay closer to home for their shows and have considered backing out of other Macworlds in NY and Boston. An East Coast or Midwestern show might more fiscal sense, but I don't know which would be have more exhibitor and visitor oomph.
I was one of EarthLink's earlier subscribers, and appreciated its services, which were quite reliable.
My business needs required something faster than dial-up, so when EarthLink offered DSL, I applied. At the time, however, DSL wasn't available for my part of the city (a medium-large midwestern one--think race cars), so Time Warner Cable's RoadRunner service was my only option.
Today, as a result of court agreements and such, EarthLink and AOL can provide their services through cable and DSL options, but the carriers (the cable and phone companies that own these lines) don't advertise the options much, from what I see.
I use Comcast High-Speed service today, which works OK, but they have tech support that's about as bright as a bag of coal.
I agree that the Internet was a fascination for some, and now a relatively expensive one to those who don't use it much. So, many of the users who've signed off are probably the "sightseers."
High-speed access is still a bit too expensive for most, despite the faster speeds. Paying twice to 2.5 times as much isn't a strong marketing point.
X Window is a graphical interface with one big strength--it can be ported and used on many different UNIX operating systems and hardware. And that's its disadvantage, too.
X is really only the engine, not the chassis or dashboard. To get that, you need to select from a sordid number of window managers with various qualities in design. X doesn't suck. It's interfaces do.
Linux will continue to struggle to get good drivers and codecs because commercial groups have little to gain from making one unless they can get you to buy something of theirs for their trouble.
I would recommend a Mac--since he's not using a IRIX box, which is designed with strong graphic work in mind, other PC implementations will leave him cold. However, he's peeing up a flagpole with XEmacs, I think.
Java Stays Alive Despite MS
on
The Future of Java?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
It's never been too late for Java, any more than its too late for other less popular but powerful languages. Just because Perl is around doesn't make TK, or AppleScript, or Python any less useful, for instance.
I've found that Java is great for complex applications that need cross-platform ability when programmers can't spend too much time in making that compatibility happen. Mac OS X is among the strongest Java clients around, and it shows every time I download a raw JAR and just use it. YMMV, but Java has a lot of warmth left in its cup, and, if other platforms aside from MS continue to support, we'll all get free refills.
(Sorry for the many metaphors. Haven't had my cup of coffee this morning--ack, I did it again...)
As a very longtime Mac user and technician, I'd have to agree. Apple was very late in finding alternative speed for their boxes when Motorola's problems appeared, and now they're paying for their dawdling.
Take a look at the new desktops. These systems have everything going for them in terms of speed EXCEPT the processors. A two-processor system should go like a bat out of hell, but the current crop matches, not excels, in speed tests with single-processor Macs of a comparable speed. The processors are bottlenecked. These new desktops were designed with faster or more efficient processors in mind, and they didn't come.
Apple is also experiencing the same problem that has plagued PC makers: Customers realize they DON'T have to upgrade to a whole new system. There's not a big reason to move to a new computer unless your Mac is beige. Also, unlike previous Macs, all Macs produced since the Blue & White have stronger upgrade options, so you could toss in a cheaper processor upgrade rather than buy a new box.
Apple is backed in a corner again. This time, its the economy and customer buying trends. Remember when Apple backed itself in a corner with mismanagement in the 1990s? I wouldn't count Apple out, especially since now a new processor with much stronger specfications may arrive later this year that will bring the Power Mac line back to comparable performance terms to its PC counterparts.
To activate GOD mode, tap GAS GAS BRAKE BRAKE BRAKE.
To switch to MIB Speeder mode: BRAKE GAS GAS BRAKE BRAKE BRAKE GAS BRAKE.
WARNING: The PS2 console accessory that allows drivers to play "Grand Theft Auto III" while driving has resulted in serious injury and death. Sony cannot be held liable...
Apple normally doesn't throw out this kind of information, and if so, they do it quietly.
But if the information is true, it's really not an indication that the iMac is disappearing, but being revised. The iMac is still a very popular computer and is not a failure in any instance. The 15" systems were discontinued only because the 17" systems arrived.
Count on the new iMac with the same 17" display, but with improved processor speed, and optimized for Jaguar.
I had a PowerBook FireWire ("Pizmo"), a G3 system, running OS X 10.2.3 and 384MB RAM of late. Nice, but it lagged badly when I was running Virtual PC 5. It worked, mind you, but I couldn't do anything else with the 'Book.
Enter my new 1GHz system, with 768MB RAM. Because Virtual PC 5 is optimized for G4 chips, as well as the performance updates of 10.2.3, Virtual PC is a welcome and powerful member of my applications at work. In fact, as I type this, Virtual PC is running an instance of Windows 2000 Professional with 256MB RAM allocated to the environment, connected to my company network, while about 4 Mac OS X apps are running without any slowdowns. I could probably switch on Red Hat 8 in addition without any slowdowns if I wanted.
An iBook is good, but the G4 chip is designed for heavy loads in Mac OS X. If you are a power user that needs multiple environments from an emulator or through other UNIX software such as X Window, the 1GHz system is worth the extra expense. Just load it up with RAM.
Don't get the G4 PowerBook for super-heavy games. While it comes with a Mobile Radeon 9000 with 64MB RAM, it's a functional arrangement for Quake-engined games such as Jedi Knight II and Return to Castle Wolfenstein, but not the optimal one. On the other hand, what PC laptop out there could actually play any of the popular PC games with a Quake or Unreal engine?
Umm Intel was pushing USB long before Apple used it.
Intel pushed USB, but Microsoft didn't, and that was all that mattered, pre-1998. USB had no backers because the PC industry is resistant to change for fear of affecting the bottom line adversely.
I remember in 1997 when dozens of Compaq workstations appeared at my workplace with USB cables--but no operating system that supported it. The USB drivers in Windows 95 OSR2 were busted and practically unusable. There were very, very few USB devices.
In comes Apple, who didn't create USB, but just took an otherwise useful serial bus and installed it in all Macintosh systems since, starting with the iMac in 1998. That very act alone lit a fire under the computer industry's ass, and USB has been commonplace every since.
Also Apple gave away Darwin so they could get free R&D, and talk to me when a quicktime client is available for Linux.
OF COURSE Apple is giving away Darwin to make Mac OS X stronger. Does that make it or other operating systems that do the same thing (giving itself away) any less worthy? I would think not.
As for something that can run QuickTime: you can start here. It ain't official, but many software projects in the *nix world aren't anyway. Besides, why would Apple make a QuickTime client that competes against their own OS? Duh...!
I guess I won't bother mentioning that Apple is as suit happy as Disney as well. Oh well I did anyway.;)
Think a little harder on that and then post again.
I'm not expecting Apple to go completely OS anytime soon. But I'm sure a hell not going to forget their proprietary, suithappy past and start slapping them on the back just yet.
A little food for thought: Compaq is a proprietary box. They make proprietary drivers that work only in specific models. They may run Windows, but not without a lot of help from Compaq.
You throw around the "p" word as if owning something or the sole right to change it makes it less worthy. Everything worth something has a proprietary component. Even Linux. Your nose is bleeding from sitting so high on your horse.
Apple is a business, and it is not out there to impress you or cause a revolution. If it can give away something to help their bottom line, great. If it can leverage its technologies to get more computers sold, that's fine. Can it still benefit you, presumed Linux user? Sure. Could Apple lapse back to its own ways? Maybe, but the market forces would destroy it.
There was a time, not long ago, where Apple made interesting, even innovative technology--but designed it so it worked only with its Macintosh hardware.
It's great for the industry and many others that Apple is slowly crawling out of the mindset that all of their products must work strictly with a Mac. Their move to Mac OS X would be contradictory to such a philosophy since *nix is a widely supported and tinkerable OS.
The iPod is mostly a glorified FireWire drive, so this software doesn't impress me as much as the relative enthusiasm of developers to make it work. Even if you don't use it, Mac OS X and the iPod is a nice catalyst for a drab, uninventive computer industry at the moment.
...does exist, and is alive and well for its size.
Since it's not really represented on either review page (for obvious reasons of market size), I'll throw in my $0.02 on selected games I've seen or played that were ported to Mac OS X this year. No real ranking except for overall value, out of 5 stars. (YMMV)
Star Wars: Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast. (***-1/2) Nothing is more fun than the powers of a Jedi Knight with a lightsaber in a very realistic (for Star Wars) environment. AI isn't bad. Humor is prevalent. Single-player game is great--once. Not as strong a replay value, any mods out on the 'net notwithstanding. Needs very powerful hardware since this Q3A-derived game apparently had some hooks in its PC version that aren't available for Mac OS, despite the point that I had a more powerful G4 and video card than on a PC I used for playing that version. As a result, the game can lag in some maps. Multiplayer is good, especially since MP supports multiple processors. Combine with high-speed connection, and you're the Emperor.
Return to Castle Wolfenstein: (*****) Artful, authentic, realistic single-player. Great replay value since the diversity of how to accomplish a mission can be modified. Its multiplayer game shines brightest, with great maps and strong diversity in four soldier classes.
Medal of Honor II: Allied Assault: (*****). Just play the Omaha Beach at Normandy level to know the art that this game represents. Very good AI, ultra-realistic.
Other notables: Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos (If you bought one for your PC, you have the Mac version, too) No One Lives Forever Soldier of Fortune II The Sims: Hot Date The Sims: Vacation
Not that this hasn't been hashed around before, but Mac OS X uses XNU, which has elements of the Mach microkernel but is, in effect, more like a typical kernel found in other UNIX-styled operating systems.
X Window is not included with Mac OS X, but you can install it just by downloading a binary installer from XDarwin or compile it from the main XFree86 distribution, which supports Mac PPC hardware now.
This moon hoax crap is as disrespectful as burning a flag. It's not the flag under attack, but the men and women who sacrificed time and their lives so that you could actually exercise the right to express your feelings by...burning the flag.
OK--it's circular, but you get my meaning. Denying an accomplishment is a very personal thing. No wonder why Aldrin took a slug at that harrassing hoaxmonger. Bad enough that he got second fiddle to Neil on the first moon landing, but then for some nose-picking assclown to come up and claim you didn't go at all, well, that's personal.
Gus Grissom, Roger Chaffee, Ed White, Mr. Freeman, C.C. Williams, Mr. See, Mike Smith, Judy Resnik, Ms. McAuliffe, Mr. Onizuka, Mr. McNair, and quite a few more people died in the process of training or actually going to space. Their tombstones aren't fake. Their loss to their family aren't fake. Their motivations were never fake. The blood, sweat, and tears given up so we could stand on that ball of rock wasn't fake.
Personally, I think the moon hoax people are fake.
(Reposted from my blog, but I couldn't say it any better.)
Trust me: Don't blindly install everything that Apple provides via Software Update.
Specifically, you need to read the instructions for all updates before you begin any update.
I've been reading lots of readers caught in gotchas caused by the Power Mac G4 Mirrored Drive Doors Firmware Update, the Mac OS X 10.2.2. update, and other installations. For many of these users, the problem comes down to neglecting to think about what you're doing. Hell, even I've been guilty of doing this a few weeks ago when I updated my MDD Power Mac to 10.2.2, knowing that it would hose my computer due to a bug with the HP printing software that causes its drivers to hog processing time until your Mac slows to a crawl or kernel panics.
And why did I do it? Because I wasn't thinking. I was caught in that Macintosh mode of thinking where we expect the moon and the stars from anything that Apple provides to us, especially if it's a freebie. It's a different psychology than what some PC users may understand, where caution is much stronger than in the Macintosh world. When most Mac users buy software, we rip the CD from the case, install the software, and damn any manuals or instructions that come with the program. In the earlier years of the Macintosh, this wasn't as much of a problem because of the simpler design. However, this ain't your dad's Mac. It's your Mac, and it's running not only a different Mac OS, but likely has a dramatically different hardware design that requires a little more care.
Professionals and home users need to use some common sense steps for any software update or install:
1) READ the instructions about any software installation or update. 2) UNDERSTAND what the update or install is supposed to do. If you don't understand the purpose of a particular update, don't install it until you find someone that knows and can explain it to you. 3) WAIT several days after an update is introduced before you even THINK about installing an update. If there are real problems with the software itself, this problem will show itself from the many trouble reports you'l see on the Internet. In other words, let other more careless people "beta-test" the updates for you in advance.
Two good places to visit for trouble reports are MacFixit or Apple's Discussion Boards on their Support Page.
4) READ the instructions for the update again. 5) PRINT a copy of the instructions BEFORE you begin. 6) DETERMINE A PLAN to revert the change (if the update allows it) 7) DECIDE if the update is really worth installing.
Remember that users who have tweaked their Mac OS X installation dramatically (read: against Apple's recommended configuration) may experience a bad time. If you have hacked an old Mac (read: not an original G3 or G4) to run Mac OS X, you should already know that you're running the bleeding edge of compatibility.
It's a good thing that we have BSD underneath our Mac OS GUI. It leaves many more possibilities for repairs or changes, unlike in the old Mac OS 9 days where we'd have to wait for Apple to get with the problem and provide a fix. A good example: after the HP printer software problem appeared with the 10.2.2 update, several enterprising people developed several workarounds and temporary fixes while Apple and HP slowly find an official solution. [Update: The fix is part of the 10.2.3 update.]
Your mileage may vary with any update. Don't experience "Go Fever" with your Macintosh, or things could blow up real good.
That explains a great deal, and does give more acceptability to the Ebrahimi conference story.
If you're right, QuarkXPress is going to lose its #1 ranking in DTP in the coming 5 years. Not just for Macs, but for PCs as well--the prepress community and the service bureaus they work will prefer to support a single product. And, moving from QXP to InDesign isn't that hard for most.
I've been working with computer book publishing in one capacity or another over the past 9 years: as a technical editor, author, and computer tech.
It used to be that you could go into your local chain bookstore such as Barnes & Noble and find at least 1 full back-to-back aisle of computer books of all kinds: self-help, programming, graphic arts, certification. Today, the whole book industry is depressed, but the computer book publishers have been hit hardest in my opinion.
No need for self-help books--the advances of both Windows and Mac OS, as well as their ubiquity among the public, means that fewer users need them. Geeks like us are never a large community and sometimes would rather slit our wrists than buy a book, so programming and administration books have dipped sharply in sales (I personally know--I co-wrote one of them).
So today, you'll find a few certification books along with a slightly larger group of programming books, and a very tiny amount of self-help books. If it weren't for Amazon, my book wouldn't be around.
In my opinion, part of the problem comes from the lack of true creativity or innovation in the industry. The Microsoft juggernaut and its "embrace and extend" philosophy (read: assimilate, compromise, or condemn) is partly to blame for this. The lack for computer industry members to consider something new or different is another part.
Not to toot Apple's horn (I do primarily work with Apple products and comment on them a lot here, so I might sound like a shrill), but they are among a handful of companies that are resisting the fears and dropping out new ideas--not anything necessarily innovative, but perhaps core application ideas that spur new ideas that sell products. Examples: "The digital hub," "multimedia," "desktop publishing," movie making, the use of USB, etc.
As I said, Apple and said companies didn't invent or design these ideas, but should be credited with its popularization in the industry, which forms the basis for a spurt of PC sales.
Quark doesn't have shareholders to impress for profits. Likewise, no shareholders means less pressure to make a Mac OS X move.
I've already stated my two cents on my blog about Quark's machinations. I do have one item to add: Quark appears to have hedged its bets. It knew full well of Apple's commitment with Mac OS X over 3 years ago. However, like many companies, they've been burned when Apple changed gears on their OS plan and announced several Yet Another Operating System Plans in the latter 1990's.
So Quark went on with its Mac OS 9 version of QuarkXPress (5.0) just in case Apple's OS X plans got chucked. Now that OS X appears entrenched and with direction, Quark is working on the OS X version. The question why they are so slow to port is up to speculation.
However, I don't feel that Quark's new OS X product will compare to InDesign 2, which has had a larger head start in both Mac OS 9 and now a Mac OS X version. It only takes two or three versions of an Adobe product before it has refined into a competitive product.
It's even possible that Quark has lost programming staffing and has had a harder time porting. That's just speculation, but it's yet another idea that makes you go "hmmmm."
I think, between our two comments, lies the truth.
Apple does use 4.4BSD subsystem elements for 10.2--it says so in their documentation and its man pages are peppered with this reference. The rest of your information does clarify any oversimplifications or other inaccuracies...thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand your point, but disagree. You would've been right in the past, but times have changed. The slow economy is like a bunch of Indians to the cowboys of the PC industry, and it's time for the computer companies to circle the wagons--combine resources for mutual benefit.
No computer company or technology is an island into itself. Everyone wants to sell. Only Microsoft, for the most part, generates products that are truly proprietary, where no other OS or hardware can be made to co-operate. Would the people who sell Linux software mind if the Mac people bought their software? Hell, no! Would the vendors who normally sell PC-related hardware or software at COMDEX mind if it turned out they could add several million Linux users with just a tweak of their product? No way.
Only Microsoft would not join in the defense as they are the robber barons sitting on the hill, watching for their opportunity to scavenge or exploit. That's business.
...except for "Enterprise." That show returns to the original ST way of telling a story without any real technobabble or trying to push bad science. It's just story with a good set of characters that have neuroses, strengths, and, most of all, humor.
I normally go see the ST movies like Hilary climbed mountains. Not anymore. I knew what TNG would offer me, and I chose my time to see "Two Towers" twice. (Damn fine movie.) Never mind that I've never read Tolkien, but I enjoy it nonetheless, and look forward to reading it in full. I have read the Harry Potter books, and enjoyed the movies all the same because it simply told a believable, intriguing story.
Perhaps I just switched to things more tasteful and artful. Like WB and the bad Superman and Batman sequels, Berman and Paramount don't realize that self-parody and camp, along with just piss-poor story making, does not mean that ST fans are going to see their movies like a herd of lemmings. The original fans are much older and want better. There are other good fantasy and SF that demands our attention and our money. (Yes, even the Star Wars prequels.)
That, and I, too, believe that Paramount is driving the ST world into the ground faster than the lamented Shuttle Columbia...and with far less interest as to why.
COMDEX had its place, but in its commodity-based market, it couldn't pay the bills. LinuxWorld is stimulating intellectually but has problems paying for space. Macworld Expo is prosperous but has exhibit decline as well.
Why not combine them all into a single expo in San Francisco? Mac OS X and Linux are second cousins in terms of the OS and have developed a symbiosis of sorts. Many products for Mac OS X work with Linux--and a show such as this would encourage vendors to make such products work.
Every computer uses the technologies hawked at COMDEX, so it should break even, at least.
And all would benefit from the larger crowds, and less expensive space.
I picked SF since Apple has been inclined to stay closer to home for their shows and have considered backing out of other Macworlds in NY and Boston. An East Coast or Midwestern show might more fiscal sense, but I don't know which would be have more exhibitor and visitor oomph.
I was one of EarthLink's earlier subscribers, and appreciated its services, which were quite reliable.
My business needs required something faster than dial-up, so when EarthLink offered DSL, I applied. At the time, however, DSL wasn't available for my part of the city (a medium-large midwestern one--think race cars), so Time Warner Cable's RoadRunner service was my only option.
Today, as a result of court agreements and such, EarthLink and AOL can provide their services through cable and DSL options, but the carriers (the cable and phone companies that own these lines) don't advertise the options much, from what I see.
I use Comcast High-Speed service today, which works OK, but they have tech support that's about as bright as a bag of coal.
I agree that the Internet was a fascination for some, and now a relatively expensive one to those who don't use it much. So, many of the users who've signed off are probably the "sightseers."
High-speed access is still a bit too expensive for most, despite the faster speeds. Paying twice to 2.5 times as much isn't a strong marketing point.
X Window is a graphical interface with one big strength--it can be ported and used on many different UNIX operating systems and hardware. And that's its disadvantage, too.
X is really only the engine, not the chassis or dashboard. To get that, you need to select from a sordid number of window managers with various qualities in design. X doesn't suck. It's interfaces do.
Linux will continue to struggle to get good drivers and codecs because commercial groups have little to gain from making one unless they can get you to buy something of theirs for their trouble.
I would recommend a Mac--since he's not using a IRIX box, which is designed with strong graphic work in mind, other PC implementations will leave him cold. However, he's peeing up a flagpole with XEmacs, I think.
It's never been too late for Java, any more than its too late for other less popular but powerful languages. Just because Perl is around doesn't make TK, or AppleScript, or Python any less useful, for instance.
I've found that Java is great for complex applications that need cross-platform ability when programmers can't spend too much time in making that compatibility happen. Mac OS X is among the strongest Java clients around, and it shows every time I download a raw JAR and just use it. YMMV, but Java has a lot of warmth left in its cup, and, if other platforms aside from MS continue to support, we'll all get free refills.
(Sorry for the many metaphors. Haven't had my cup of coffee this morning--ack, I did it again...)
As a very longtime Mac user and technician, I'd have to agree. Apple was very late in finding alternative speed for their boxes when Motorola's problems appeared, and now they're paying for their dawdling.
Take a look at the new desktops. These systems have everything going for them in terms of speed EXCEPT the processors. A two-processor system should go like a bat out of hell, but the current crop matches, not excels, in speed tests with single-processor Macs of a comparable speed. The processors are bottlenecked. These new desktops were designed with faster or more efficient processors in mind, and they didn't come.
Apple is also experiencing the same problem that has plagued PC makers: Customers realize they DON'T have to upgrade to a whole new system. There's not a big reason to move to a new computer unless your Mac is beige. Also, unlike previous Macs, all Macs produced since the Blue & White have stronger upgrade options, so you could toss in a cheaper processor upgrade rather than buy a new box.
Apple is backed in a corner again. This time, its the economy and customer buying trends. Remember when Apple backed itself in a corner with mismanagement in the 1990s? I wouldn't count Apple out, especially since now a new processor with much stronger specfications may arrive later this year that will bring the Power Mac line back to comparable performance terms to its PC counterparts.
To activate GOD mode, tap GAS GAS BRAKE BRAKE BRAKE.
To switch to MIB Speeder mode: BRAKE GAS GAS BRAKE BRAKE BRAKE GAS BRAKE.
WARNING: The PS2 console accessory that allows drivers to play "Grand Theft Auto III" while driving has resulted in serious injury and death. Sony cannot be held liable...
Apple normally doesn't throw out this kind of information, and if so, they do it quietly.
But if the information is true, it's really not an indication that the iMac is disappearing, but being revised. The iMac is still a very popular computer and is not a failure in any instance. The 15" systems were discontinued only because the 17" systems arrived.
Count on the new iMac with the same 17" display, but with improved processor speed, and optimized for Jaguar.
I had a PowerBook FireWire ("Pizmo"), a G3 system, running OS X 10.2.3 and 384MB RAM of late. Nice, but it lagged badly when I was running Virtual PC 5. It worked, mind you, but I couldn't do anything else with the 'Book.
Enter my new 1GHz system, with 768MB RAM. Because Virtual PC 5 is optimized for G4 chips, as well as the performance updates of 10.2.3, Virtual PC is a welcome and powerful member of my applications at work. In fact, as I type this, Virtual PC is running an instance of Windows 2000 Professional with 256MB RAM allocated to the environment, connected to my company network, while about 4 Mac OS X apps are running without any slowdowns. I could probably switch on Red Hat 8 in addition without any slowdowns if I wanted.
An iBook is good, but the G4 chip is designed for heavy loads in Mac OS X. If you are a power user that needs multiple environments from an emulator or through other UNIX software such as X Window, the 1GHz system is worth the extra expense. Just load it up with RAM.
Don't get the G4 PowerBook for super-heavy games. While it comes with a Mobile Radeon 9000 with 64MB RAM, it's a functional arrangement for Quake-engined games such as Jedi Knight II and Return to Castle Wolfenstein, but not the optimal one. On the other hand, what PC laptop out there could actually play any of the popular PC games with a Quake or Unreal engine?
Well, I was selling death sticks and making a handsome profit until some Jedi told me to go home and rethink my life...
So, maybe I'll become something less profitable, like a sysadmin...
Umm Intel was pushing USB long before Apple used it.
;)
Intel pushed USB, but Microsoft didn't, and that was all that mattered, pre-1998. USB had no backers because the PC industry is resistant to change for fear of affecting the bottom line adversely.
I remember in 1997 when dozens of Compaq workstations appeared at my workplace with USB cables--but no operating system that supported it. The USB drivers in Windows 95 OSR2 were busted and practically unusable. There were very, very few USB devices.
In comes Apple, who didn't create USB, but just took an otherwise useful serial bus and installed it in all Macintosh systems since, starting with the iMac in 1998. That very act alone lit a fire under the computer industry's ass, and USB has been commonplace every since.
Also Apple gave away Darwin so they could get free R&D, and talk to me when a quicktime client is available for Linux.
OF COURSE Apple is giving away Darwin to make Mac OS X stronger. Does that make it or other operating systems that do the same thing (giving itself away) any less worthy? I would think not.
As for something that can run QuickTime: you can start here. It ain't official, but many software projects in the *nix world aren't anyway. Besides, why would Apple make a QuickTime client that competes against their own OS? Duh...!
You can also stream QuickTime for free from Linux. Reviews indicate this is the best streaming server out there, even compared to MS and Real.
I guess I won't bother mentioning that Apple is as suit happy as Disney as well. Oh well I did anyway.
Think a little harder on that and then post again.
I'm not expecting Apple to go completely OS anytime soon. But I'm sure a hell not going to forget their proprietary, suithappy past and start slapping them on the back just yet.
A little food for thought: Compaq is a proprietary box. They make proprietary drivers that work only in specific models. They may run Windows, but not without a lot of help from Compaq.
You throw around the "p" word as if owning something or the sole right to change it makes it less worthy. Everything worth something has a proprietary component. Even Linux. Your nose is bleeding from sitting so high on your horse.
Apple is a business, and it is not out there to impress you or cause a revolution. If it can give away something to help their bottom line, great. If it can leverage its technologies to get more computers sold, that's fine. Can it still benefit you, presumed Linux user? Sure. Could Apple lapse back to its own ways? Maybe, but the market forces would destroy it.
There was a time, not long ago, where Apple made interesting, even innovative technology--but designed it so it worked only with its Macintosh hardware.
It's great for the industry and many others that Apple is slowly crawling out of the mindset that all of their products must work strictly with a Mac. Their move to Mac OS X would be contradictory to such a philosophy since *nix is a widely supported and tinkerable OS.
The iPod is mostly a glorified FireWire drive, so this software doesn't impress me as much as the relative enthusiasm of developers to make it work. Even if you don't use it, Mac OS X and the iPod is a nice catalyst for a drab, uninventive computer industry at the moment.
...does exist, and is alive and well for its size.
Since it's not really represented on either review page (for obvious reasons of market size), I'll throw in my $0.02 on selected games I've seen or played that were ported to Mac OS X this year. No real ranking except for overall value, out of 5 stars. (YMMV)
Star Wars: Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast. (***-1/2) Nothing is more fun than the powers of a Jedi Knight with a lightsaber in a very realistic (for Star Wars) environment. AI isn't bad. Humor is prevalent. Single-player game is great--once. Not as strong a replay value, any mods out on the 'net notwithstanding. Needs very powerful hardware since this Q3A-derived game apparently had some hooks in its PC version that aren't available for Mac OS, despite the point that I had a more powerful G4 and video card than on a PC I used for playing that version. As a result, the game can lag in some maps. Multiplayer is good, especially since MP supports multiple processors. Combine with high-speed connection, and you're the Emperor.
Return to Castle Wolfenstein: (*****) Artful, authentic, realistic single-player. Great replay value since the diversity of how to accomplish a mission can be modified. Its multiplayer game shines brightest, with great maps and strong diversity in four soldier classes.
Medal of Honor II: Allied Assault: (*****). Just play the Omaha Beach at Normandy level to know the art that this game represents. Very good AI, ultra-realistic.
Other notables:
Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos (If you bought one for your PC, you have the Mac version, too)
No One Lives Forever
Soldier of Fortune II
The Sims: Hot Date
The Sims: Vacation
Japan is a very space-conscious country. This may sell reasonably well just because it takes little room.
Whether its tech specs are decent, I don't know. I can't read Japanese!
Not that this hasn't been hashed around before, but Mac OS X uses XNU, which has elements of the Mach microkernel but is, in effect, more like a typical kernel found in other UNIX-styled operating systems.
X Window is not included with Mac OS X, but you can install it just by downloading a binary installer from XDarwin or compile it from the main XFree86 distribution, which supports Mac PPC hardware now.
In fact, if you really want to, why not build your own Darwin kernel?
This moon hoax crap is as disrespectful as burning a flag. It's not the flag under attack, but the men and women who sacrificed time and their lives so that you could actually exercise the right to express your feelings by...burning the flag.
OK--it's circular, but you get my meaning. Denying an accomplishment is a very personal thing. No wonder why Aldrin took a slug at that harrassing hoaxmonger. Bad enough that he got second fiddle to Neil on the first moon landing, but then for some nose-picking assclown to come up and claim you didn't go at all, well, that's personal.
Gus Grissom, Roger Chaffee, Ed White, Mr. Freeman, C.C. Williams, Mr. See, Mike Smith, Judy Resnik, Ms. McAuliffe, Mr. Onizuka, Mr. McNair, and quite a few more people died in the process of training or actually going to space. Their tombstones aren't fake. Their loss to their family aren't fake. Their motivations were never fake. The blood, sweat, and tears given up so we could stand on that ball of rock wasn't fake.
Personally, I think the moon hoax people are fake.
Apparently you hadn't had your morning coffee.
(Reposted from my blog, but I couldn't say it any better.)
Trust me: Don't blindly install everything that Apple provides via Software Update.
Specifically, you need to read the instructions for all updates before you begin any update.
I've been reading lots of readers caught in gotchas caused by the Power Mac G4 Mirrored Drive Doors Firmware Update, the Mac OS X 10.2.2. update, and other installations. For many of these users, the problem comes down to neglecting to think about what you're doing. Hell, even I've been guilty of doing this a few weeks ago when I updated my MDD Power Mac to 10.2.2, knowing that it would hose my computer due to a bug with the HP printing software that causes its drivers to hog processing time until your Mac slows to a crawl or kernel panics.
And why did I do it? Because I wasn't thinking. I was caught in that Macintosh mode of thinking where we expect the moon and the stars from anything that Apple provides to us, especially if it's a freebie. It's a different psychology than what some PC users may understand, where caution is much stronger than in the Macintosh world. When most Mac users buy software, we rip the CD from the case, install the software, and damn any manuals or instructions that come with the program. In the earlier years of the Macintosh, this wasn't as much of a problem because of the simpler design. However, this ain't your dad's Mac. It's your Mac, and it's running not only a different Mac OS, but likely has a dramatically different hardware design that requires a little more care.
Professionals and home users need to use some common sense steps for any software update or install:
1) READ the instructions about any software installation or update.
2) UNDERSTAND what the update or install is supposed to do. If you don't understand the purpose of a particular update, don't install it until you find someone that knows and can explain it to you.
3) WAIT several days after an update is introduced before you even THINK about installing an update. If there are real problems with the software itself, this problem will show itself from the many trouble reports you'l see on the Internet. In other words, let other more careless people "beta-test" the updates for you in advance.
Two good places to visit for trouble reports are MacFixit or Apple's Discussion Boards on their Support Page.
4) READ the instructions for the update again.
5) PRINT a copy of the instructions BEFORE you begin.
6) DETERMINE A PLAN to revert the change (if the update allows it)
7) DECIDE if the update is really worth installing.
Remember that users who have tweaked their Mac OS X installation dramatically (read: against Apple's recommended configuration) may experience a bad time. If you have hacked an old Mac (read: not an original G3 or G4) to run Mac OS X, you should already know that you're running the bleeding edge of compatibility.
It's a good thing that we have BSD underneath our Mac OS GUI. It leaves many more possibilities for repairs or changes, unlike in the old Mac OS 9 days where we'd have to wait for Apple to get with the problem and provide a fix. A good example: after the HP printer software problem appeared with the 10.2.2 update, several enterprising people developed several workarounds and temporary fixes while Apple and HP slowly find an official solution.
[Update: The fix is part of the 10.2.3 update.]
Your mileage may vary with any update. Don't experience "Go Fever" with your Macintosh, or things could blow up real good.
You must mean PowerPC support for PC motherboards. PowerPC support for Macintosh systems from both ATI and nVidia are alive and well for Radeon and GeForce cards in these computers.
I'll be damned.
That explains a great deal, and does give more acceptability to the Ebrahimi conference story.
If you're right, QuarkXPress is going to lose its #1 ranking in DTP in the coming 5 years. Not just for Macs, but for PCs as well--the prepress community and the service bureaus they work will prefer to support a single product. And, moving from QXP to InDesign isn't that hard for most.
I've been working with computer book publishing in one capacity or another over the past 9 years: as a technical editor, author, and computer tech.
It used to be that you could go into your local chain bookstore such as Barnes & Noble and find at least 1 full back-to-back aisle of computer books of all kinds: self-help, programming, graphic arts, certification. Today, the whole book industry is depressed, but the computer book publishers have been hit hardest in my opinion.
No need for self-help books--the advances of both Windows and Mac OS, as well as their ubiquity among the public, means that fewer users need them. Geeks like us are never a large community and sometimes would rather slit our wrists than buy a book, so programming and administration books have dipped sharply in sales (I personally know--I co-wrote one of them).
So today, you'll find a few certification books along with a slightly larger group of programming books, and a very tiny amount of self-help books. If it weren't for Amazon, my book wouldn't be around.
In my opinion, part of the problem comes from the lack of true creativity or innovation in the industry. The Microsoft juggernaut and its "embrace and extend" philosophy (read: assimilate, compromise, or condemn) is partly to blame for this. The lack for computer industry members to consider something new or different is another part.
Not to toot Apple's horn (I do primarily work with Apple products and comment on them a lot here, so I might sound like a shrill), but they are among a handful of companies that are resisting the fears and dropping out new ideas--not anything necessarily innovative, but perhaps core application ideas that spur new ideas that sell products. Examples: "The digital hub," "multimedia," "desktop publishing," movie making, the use of USB, etc.
As I said, Apple and said companies didn't invent or design these ideas, but should be credited with its popularization in the industry, which forms the basis for a spurt of PC sales.
Thanks. As far as the "whole story," I'm a fan of the popular opinion that Quark's management are a bunch of idiots with poor direction.
You're absolutely right on the delayed releases. Why, for the love of God, why?!
Quark doesn't have shareholders to impress for profits. Likewise, no shareholders means less pressure to make a Mac OS X move.
I've already stated my two cents on my blog about Quark's machinations. I do have one item to add: Quark appears to have hedged its bets. It knew full well of Apple's commitment with Mac OS X over 3 years ago. However, like many companies, they've been burned when Apple changed gears on their OS plan and announced several Yet Another Operating System Plans in the latter 1990's.
So Quark went on with its Mac OS 9 version of QuarkXPress (5.0) just in case Apple's OS X plans got chucked. Now that OS X appears entrenched and with direction, Quark is working on the OS X version. The question why they are so slow to port is up to speculation.
However, I don't feel that Quark's new OS X product will compare to InDesign 2, which has had a larger head start in both Mac OS 9 and now a Mac OS X version. It only takes two or three versions of an Adobe product before it has refined into a competitive product.
It's even possible that Quark has lost programming staffing and has had a harder time porting. That's just speculation, but it's yet another idea that makes you go "hmmmm."
I think, between our two comments, lies the truth.
Apple does use 4.4BSD subsystem elements for 10.2--it says so in their documentation and its man pages are peppered with this reference. The rest of your information does clarify any oversimplifications or other inaccuracies...thanks.