The graphics were Mac OS lookalikes, although, like many Hollywood "computer" interfaces, it was running some nonexistent variant of the operating system. The windows, widgets and such are obviously Mac OS-derivative.
Funny that while 85% of the personal computer desktops are running Windows, that nearly 85% of the advertising about computer products or services show a Mac OS desktop or browser. (Well, I know why, but I'll let some other geniuses in on the subject.)
Are people still grousing about Rush Limbaugh after nearly 10 years?
Grow up.
Like every other person here, Limbaugh just has an opinion, nothing more. If you get your panties in a bunch just because Limbaugh exercises his right of free speech (no matter how bombastic some feel he is) about this issue, then you are missing the point of this whole topic. How you react to the exercise of rights of other's free speech isn't protected by the Constitution. That's your problem.
That said, I live in Indianapolis, and know intimately what the local government has tried to do. A noble gesture, but one that was doomed to fail because they tried to make the ordinance too broad-reaching. Apparently, somebody here who hadn't played a video game since "Pong" couldn't swallow the nature of the current video games. (Got a few holier-than-thous here in the midwest.) Can't restrict the kids without restricting the adults, basically.
I do believe in the need for such measurements for our youngest minors, but perhaps one way to restrict games that shouldn't be played by minors could include:
1) Placing video games in a bar. Minors can't enter a bar.
2) Selling video games as one would alcohol and tobacco. An simple age check is required.
That way, we don't have to have our legislature wasting time and money making up new ways to add more stupid, redundant laws to the books. But, like sex, older minors will find a way to play if unsupervised in their purchases.
Mac OS X has a lot going for it in the rendering department--but not now. It's still too young and unproven, and hasn't the high-end tools that places like Pixar (which, to note, is Steve Job's OTHER CEO gig) and Dreamworks.
But the fact that they are moving to a "lighter" UNIX family brand makes an eventual OS X transition possible. OS X needs a year more for additional maturity and development of the apps needed. OS X still rocks in digital video development, and as the OS is optimized for better speed and performance, smaller shops will make OS X a serious consideration.
The reviewer weighed heavily on the fact that the Sony had more software versus the iMac in terms of video editing. This is the same kind of lunacy that confuses PC users that Apple tries to avoid. Better--if the PC can't do everything with only product, why bother?
There was the matter of comparing an entry-level system vs. a packed PC workstation (a significant reason why this box cost almost twice as much). Such PC/Mac reviews are victim to this common disparity, but the Macintosh product usually manages to hold its own despite the overmatched competition.
Other glaring problems: iMac uses FireWire and a slew of other ports that compensate for its lack of INTERNAL expansiion, which wasn't mentioned, but Sony's FireWire-licensed iLink was. The review seemed intent on talking about the iMac based on its appearance ("clever") rather than how it performs and the plethora of ports it offers. The review spoke only of Sony's ports in detail.
Page 1 noted that Sony's drive can burn DVD-RWs--a feature that Apple avoids now because there are several standards in DVD-RW that are fighting for dominance, so there really ISN'T a standard there. There were more items that indicated that the reviewers weren't the most versed Mac OS users.
Another bit of "Pot, meet Kettle" stuff involved the reviewer's complaint of having to register the computer when it first starts up. This "requirement" is nothing compared to Windows XP's requirement to register, which, if ignored, shuts down the OS after a few days until you do register. OS X doesn't have an install limit (technically--legally, that's another matter), but Windows XP cannot be casually copied. Apple, unlike Microsoft, doesn't take your registration info and pound you into its marketing machine via the OS. There's very, very little advertising and over-helping in OS X.
This review has a bit of a bias as a result of the reviewers inexperience, but overall it shows that the iMac does hold its own, but the reviewers like the PC "give me X*N number of solutions to one problem" approach. I'm happy that PS chose a Sony PC to compare to the iMac--Sony is the only company that, in my opinion, has strong industry design that could rightly compare itself to Apple products.
I hold my breath when a new Nimda-class worm starts to spread. It kills Internet performance on my cable modem (operated through Road Runner, yet another AOL Time Warner collective) as many Windows users don't have proper protection set and propagate the virus nastily. I can't be infected; I use Mac OS 9 or X. But it drags network access to the ground and kicks it around for hours.
Fortunately, RR appears to deactivate accounts that are virus-ridden if no action is taken, which reduces the problem. Still, my Mac OS firewall dutifully records Code Red and Nimda attacks as well as the usual crackers trying to crack the very-difficult-to-crack Mac OS.
Thanks, Microsoft, for introducing software that helps inconvenience EVERYONE on the Internet.
Quark has milked its dominance in DTP for too long. Adobe tends to get its products polished by version 3, and its InDesign 2 product has received very positive reviews over QXP 5. The fact that QXP isn't supported natively in OS X is a nail in Quark's complacency coffin.
I'm not a big fan of QXP due to its history of annoying and serious bugs that caused all manner of stability and reliability problems. I do wish them success, but unfortunately they either have a lot of legacy issues or they really think that other companies won't be a problem while they take their sweet time to port. OS X's printing isn't perfect, but the fundamental PS support is there and works well enough, so that's a poor excuse.
Ask Lotus (1-2-3) about the consequences of complacency in the marketplace. Microsoft laughs all the way to the bank.
?l, it's -- I don't mean to be facetious, but capitalism is something that's hard for me to defend, because it seems to work. (Laughter.)
That's like Lucifer saying, "Evil is something that's hard for me to defend, because it seems to work."
What a crock of marketing shit. He says that GPL software can't be sold. Sure it can, in the form of tech support. MS doesn't sell their software, either. They sell a LICENSE to use their software. MS always owns the code. And that's what they object to in terms of the GPL.
And in other MS news of a recent acquisition (a classic): http://bbspot.com/news/2000/4/MS_Buys_E vil.html
Say you have a young daughter who, at 7 years old, is a whiz at math and has great promise. Then, say that you have a new baby son. A year later, the 1 year old has learned to do the same thing as the now-8 year old, only slower.
It's a simple way to say that Mac OS X is really a "1.0" product, folks. NOTHING like this OS has been put together to do the things it does. Other posters indicated that many of us would trade speed for stability, and I fall in that camp, too.
The original Mac OS became quite refined and swift from the OS level after many years of development. Windows 95 wasn't all that optimized at its introduction but its successors do well in this area. Yet Microsoft sacrifices stability AND security for speed.
Mac OS X is pleasing to the eye, but graphic pros know a slug when they see it. Still, time will fix it. Now that Apple has solved most of the serious feature deficits and bugs (or at least knows of them), they can concentrate on optimization--big time.
How much performance and happiness did you get out of Windows 1.0? Linux 1.0? Cut the new kid some slack. It's doing good for a 1 year old.
Oh...OmniWeb rocks for general viewing. Loading 200+ posts from Slashdot is much faster than IE, which has to load ALL the posts before you can view them. Cocoa also adds antialiasing to text that makes web browsing great.
In comparison to web browsing in Windows and Mac OS 9, things a little slower in OS 10.1. But then, IE won't kill my OS when it crashes, and my OS X system has never suffered an OS X kernel panic for over a year. I'll take that over the speed thing any day, for now.
I've been reading enough whiny posts about Mac OS X's speed and stability to ask everyone a single important question:
How much usefulness did you get out of Windows 1.0? Out of Linux 1.0?
Mac OS X is the culmination of many tried and true technologies and a few new ones. For a 1.0 product (which it really is as opposed to merely a tenth OS revision of the Mac OS), it's got a LOT of power and potential.
I've used Macs since their move to the hierarchal file system (true nesting of subdirectories). That was 1986 or so. The Finder at the time wasn't close to multitasking anything like Mac OS 8, there was no such thing as virtual memory, the Mac Plus was a rather underpowered little beast...
....and nothing could tear it from my fingers, because there was still nothing like it.
The original Mac OS took 17 years to mature to what it is now. That's a long time in computing years, and Apple won't have that much luxury to make OS X as robust and mature.
But, considering the code base and the venerable ancestry that BSD and Mach have had, this is a beautiful, powerful baby. Flawed, to be sure, but how much productive work has your 1 year old done?
The 10.2 update will continue the speed increases. By 10.5, perhaps in less than 2 years this OS will be righteous.
Just don't treat it like OS 9 or you'll hose it good (don't move standard apps from Applications or get too crazy yet). This is a Macintosh operating system, and Apple's a little new to this UNIX desktop thing.
Re:Friendly tip for the Internet Explorer update
on
MS Office and IE Exploits
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I've just sent this same information to Macintouch.com, and I'll repeat it here:
Mac OS X is UNIX, and, like many versions of OS, doesn't expect you to tweak your system around like in Mac OS 9.
Don't do it. Leave ALL preinstalled Mac OS X applications exactly where they are. If you need to access them conveniently, place their icons in the Dock, the desktop, some folder, or use a third-party solution. Changing around the location (or probably name) of applications is the quick way of hosing a Mac OS X installation to the point where reinstallation is required.
When other UNIX users need to activate an app from another location, they use symlinks or other method. But their apps stay put. So should it be with Mac OS X. Leave stuff alone unless you are a UNIX admin and Mac OS X programmer employed by Apple (hmm..a subtle way of saying "don't.")
Other for-profit companies may not appreciate such exclusion-by-patent tactics, either.
While Linux and other GPL operating systems and code may not have millions of dollars or a legal team capable of challenging such tactics, large companies such as Apple (which uses a version of Samba in Mac OS X, has a few billion dollars, and a dedicated, rabid legal team) and Sun would be happy to take on MS on this issue, particularly since they are a proven monopoly and have that disadvantage as the "bully."
The only problem is that neither Apple or any other company will do anything until it directly threatens their interests. I wouldn't expect them to do anything about the effects that this MS action has on GPL software and products proper.
Sounds like you guys had a lot of fun working on it. If it weren't for that annoying life and family thing, I'd be shooting up, too (Uh..rockets, that is...)
While I don't think Sun would martyr itself just to challenge Microsoft, it's a good possibility that IBM could try to buy more Java rights or buy the technology outright from Sun, if a merger isn't in the cards.
Java is a innovative (and I use this term judiciously) technology which Microsoft has not been able to successfully clone, copy, or kill, yet. It is Sun's current anchor for relevancy amongst its main competitors. I can't see Sun letting go Java without a lot of compensation or litigation.
I'm a model rocket enthusiast as well. You're right--there are rules for specific model rockets (1 pound or less, no use of metal, et al.) The National Association of Rocketry set these rules.
But there is such a thing as amateur rocketry, which has a different, more complex set of rules. I don't want to talk much more about this since I don't participate, but these people have massive rockets that fly to substantial heights with very high impulse engines. I don't know if the NAR is the sanctioning body for these people, but, provided they follow the rules for these devices from whatever body provides them, it shouldn't be a problem.
Otherwise, people like Dick Rutan and other amateur rocketry fans would have a very hard time trying to win the X Prize (http://www.xprize.org/).
Re:The Question Isn't Whether UNIX is dead...
on
Unix Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 2
Good one! Guess I'm a pervert, then! : )
Re:The Question Isn't Whether UNIX is dead...
on
Unix Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 4, Funny
To add to the girl/OS analogies (loved the articles, by the way, John--thanks for the contributions):
BeOS was the super smart, sexy girl you lusted over, never asked out when you had the chance, and has disappeared from the Earth (probably married, likely dead).
OS/2 was that beautiful college associate professor that killed herself before you asked her out because she was a crazy recluse whose professors told her she would be passed over for promotion yet again.
Windows 3.1 was like that talking Barbie doll of your sister's whose hair you cut off after hearing it say "Math is hard" for the 3,000th time.
The Question Isn't Whether UNIX is dead...
on
Unix Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 5, Funny
...but why Microsoft Windows considers itself really alive.
Windows is a teenager--and a rude, aggressive, unpredictable one at that--compared to the various Unixen out there.
To paraphrase "Dark Paladin" in a recent article about his Mac OS X conversion: Microsoft Windows is like your class president that didn't do shit. Linux is like a super-smart, sexy redhead girlfriend that's also a bit insane. Mac OS X is like the geeky girl at school who shed her braces and became a total hottie--and still wants to spend all her time hanging around with you.
Much of the crap such as noted on this topic is based on Microsoft technology, which, as we all know, is quite invasive and unsecure.
With WINE, perhaps, something like this might work on a x86 box with Linux, but all that pop-up ads may do on a Mac OS system, perhaps, is ask if the item could be downloaded, and, once downloaded, sit unused, unrecognized--the Mac OS doesn't do ActiveX per se.
Of course, using a PC emulator such as Virtual PC removes such insulation.
Blizzard is one of those great software companies that, literally, help keep Macintosh gaming legitimate. For them to create an update for D2 for Mac OS X is such a sign.
Other companies, from Freeverse and Ambrosia (hail Andrew Welch, god of Code), to Aspyr Media (bless them for Tomb Raider, Sims, and Deus Ex ports, et al.) all show that the good games do come to the Macintosh, and the future for games look good.
However, Apple needs to work on a better HID software solution. We went from InputSprockets (a nice and highly flexible solution) to nothing in OS X. If complex games such as Descent are to be ported, joysticks and other devices must be fully supported.
I'll repeat what others have noted about the update: OS X has good OpenGL, but those with nVidia video may suffer performance problems or even (gasp!) kernel panics. Software rendering works great, and is actually faster than OpenGL with less overhead.
Like other OS before it, try to avoid running a gazzillon apps while D2 is running. It still needs a respectable RAM amount, even though the OS allocates it now. And, keep Classic off--its a resource hog.
For Microsoft to build a campaign against UNIX would be like Coke or Pepsi promoting a campaign against the evils of water.
UNIX is the backbone of the Internet. It started with university and military computers, and is still based on these technologies. It has spawned many successful clones and variants, including BSD, Mac OS X, Linux, Solaris, IRIX, and many more. And virtually ALL of these versions work well together and can exchange code.
Not that this is surprising, but Microsoft is arrogant to point of giving the finger to God. This is really a sign is disrespect for everything built over the years by the blood, sweat and tears of the first network pioneers.
Unisys sounds like it has little to lose since it's been sitting on its corporate butt so long that even the oldest of us have forgotten what they've recently done in the computing world.
I'm not making a righteous stand for just the UNIX world. Microsoft is really a company with poor ethical practices and should be recognized as such.
Microsoft could have it all by realizing that practically all its major competitors have a UNIX base in their OS, even Apple. Instead of fighting the UNIX family, they could cash in simply and easily by moving the Windows NT/XP base to a true UNIX base, and create (the usual closed-source) apps in UNIX versions that can be compiled for virtually every UNIX family OS. (Not that everyone would want the apps, but at least it would be there..)
But NOOOOOO...
I was ranting on how OSS was too disorganized to fight MS in certain market attacks--that OSS lacks a defined leader. This instance is an exception. There are plenty of corporate makers and users of UNIX who might jump on the big MS "screw you" bandwagon and even pump up some cash in the corporate and legal system to get MS to shut their corporate pie hole.
Pissing off the U.S. Government is one thing. Pissing off other big businesses is quite another.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you here AGAIN?
7 5083)
You've made this illogical, identical post once before. Made as much sense then, as now. (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=31361&cid=33
Try writing something new (and correct) for a change.
The graphics were Mac OS lookalikes, although, like many Hollywood "computer" interfaces, it was running some nonexistent variant of the operating system. The windows, widgets and such are obviously Mac OS-derivative.
Funny that while 85% of the personal computer desktops are running Windows, that nearly 85% of the advertising about computer products or services show a Mac OS desktop or browser. (Well, I know why, but I'll let some other geniuses in on the subject.)
Grow up.
Like every other person here, Limbaugh just has an opinion, nothing more. If you get your panties in a bunch just because Limbaugh exercises his right of free speech (no matter how bombastic some feel he is) about this issue, then you are missing the point of this whole topic. How you react to the exercise of rights of other's free speech isn't protected by the Constitution. That's your problem.
That said, I live in Indianapolis, and know intimately what the local government has tried to do. A noble gesture, but one that was doomed to fail because they tried to make the ordinance too broad-reaching. Apparently, somebody here who hadn't played a video game since "Pong" couldn't swallow the nature of the current video games. (Got a few holier-than-thous here in the midwest.) Can't restrict the kids without restricting the adults, basically.
I do believe in the need for such measurements for our youngest minors, but perhaps one way to restrict games that shouldn't be played by minors could include:
1) Placing video games in a bar. Minors can't enter a bar.
2) Selling video games as one would alcohol and tobacco. An simple age check is required.
That way, we don't have to have our legislature wasting time and money making up new ways to add more stupid, redundant laws to the books. But, like sex, older minors will find a way to play if unsupervised in their purchases.
Mac OS X has a lot going for it in the rendering department--but not now. It's still too young and unproven, and hasn't the high-end tools that places like Pixar (which, to note, is Steve Job's OTHER CEO gig) and Dreamworks.
But the fact that they are moving to a "lighter" UNIX family brand makes an eventual OS X transition possible. OS X needs a year more for additional maturity and development of the apps needed. OS X still rocks in digital video development, and as the OS is optimized for better speed and performance, smaller shops will make OS X a serious consideration.
The reviewer weighed heavily on the fact that the Sony had more software versus the iMac in terms of video editing. This is the same kind of lunacy that confuses PC users that Apple tries to avoid. Better--if the PC can't do everything with only product, why bother?
There was the matter of comparing an entry-level system vs. a packed PC workstation (a significant reason why this box cost almost twice as much). Such PC/Mac reviews are victim to this common disparity, but the Macintosh product usually manages to hold its own despite the overmatched competition.
Other glaring problems: iMac uses FireWire and a slew of other ports that compensate for its lack of INTERNAL expansiion, which wasn't mentioned, but Sony's FireWire-licensed iLink was. The review seemed intent on talking about the iMac based on its appearance ("clever") rather than how it performs and the plethora of ports it offers. The review spoke only of Sony's ports in detail.
Page 1 noted that Sony's drive can burn DVD-RWs--a feature that Apple avoids now because there are several standards in DVD-RW that are fighting for dominance, so there really ISN'T a standard there. There were more items that indicated that the reviewers weren't the most versed Mac OS users.
Another bit of "Pot, meet Kettle" stuff involved the reviewer's complaint of having to register the computer when it first starts up. This "requirement" is nothing compared to Windows XP's requirement to register, which, if ignored, shuts down the OS after a few days until you do register. OS X doesn't have an install limit (technically--legally, that's another matter), but Windows XP cannot be casually copied. Apple, unlike Microsoft, doesn't take your registration info and pound you into its marketing machine via the OS. There's very, very little advertising and over-helping in OS X.
This review has a bit of a bias as a result of the reviewers inexperience, but overall it shows that the iMac does hold its own, but the reviewers like the PC "give me X*N number of solutions to one problem" approach. I'm happy that PS chose a Sony PC to compare to the iMac--Sony is the only company that, in my opinion, has strong industry design that could rightly compare itself to Apple products.
I hold my breath when a new Nimda-class worm starts to spread. It kills Internet performance on my cable modem (operated through Road Runner, yet another AOL Time Warner collective) as many Windows users don't have proper protection set and propagate the virus nastily. I can't be infected; I use Mac OS 9 or X. But it drags network access to the ground and kicks it around for hours.
Fortunately, RR appears to deactivate accounts that are virus-ridden if no action is taken, which reduces the problem. Still, my Mac OS firewall dutifully records Code Red and Nimda attacks as well as the usual crackers trying to crack the very-difficult-to-crack Mac OS.
Thanks, Microsoft, for introducing software that helps inconvenience EVERYONE on the Internet.
Quark has milked its dominance in DTP for too long. Adobe tends to get its products polished by version 3, and its InDesign 2 product has received very positive reviews over QXP 5. The fact that QXP isn't supported natively in OS X is a nail in Quark's complacency coffin.
I'm not a big fan of QXP due to its history of annoying and serious bugs that caused all manner of stability and reliability problems. I do wish them success, but unfortunately they either have a lot of legacy issues or they really think that other companies won't be a problem while they take their sweet time to port. OS X's printing isn't perfect, but the fundamental PS support is there and works well enough, so that's a poor excuse.
Ask Lotus (1-2-3) about the consequences of complacency in the marketplace. Microsoft laughs all the way to the bank.
Hmmm. Well, I guess you can extend that logic even further as Mac OS X has BSD and Mach underpinnings, which make it's age go back further.
But I think my point stands, since no UNIX OS has really been point together with the features that this thing has.
?l, it's -- I don't mean to be facetious, but capitalism is something that's hard for me to defend, because it seems to work. (Laughter.)
E vil.html
That's like Lucifer saying, "Evil is something that's hard for me to defend, because it seems to work."
What a crock of marketing shit. He says that GPL software can't be sold. Sure it can, in the form of tech support. MS doesn't sell their software, either. They sell a LICENSE to use their software. MS always owns the code. And that's what they object to in terms of the GPL.
And in other MS news of a recent acquisition (a classic):
http://bbspot.com/news/2000/4/MS_Buys_
Your logic and facts == a steaming pile of horseshit.
There is no magic to the Mac OS, old or new. You have no facts, only accusations.
Shouldn't you go back posting more of your "insight" on CNN TalkBack or Rosie or something?
I appreciate a good point (pro-Mac or not) but nothing pisses me off more than some newbie to the Mac who wastes our time and electrons.
Say you have a young daughter who, at 7 years old, is a whiz at math and has great promise. Then, say that you have a new baby son. A year later, the 1 year old has learned to do the same thing as the now-8 year old, only slower.
It's a simple way to say that Mac OS X is really a "1.0" product, folks. NOTHING like this OS has been put together to do the things it does. Other posters indicated that many of us would trade speed for stability, and I fall in that camp, too.
The original Mac OS became quite refined and swift from the OS level after many years of development. Windows 95 wasn't all that optimized at its introduction but its successors do well in this area. Yet Microsoft sacrifices stability AND security for speed.
Mac OS X is pleasing to the eye, but graphic pros know a slug when they see it. Still, time will fix it. Now that Apple has solved most of the serious feature deficits and bugs (or at least knows of them), they can concentrate on optimization--big time.
How much performance and happiness did you get out of Windows 1.0? Linux 1.0? Cut the new kid some slack. It's doing good for a 1 year old.
Oh...OmniWeb rocks for general viewing. Loading 200+ posts from Slashdot is much faster than IE, which has to load ALL the posts before you can view them. Cocoa also adds antialiasing to text that makes web browsing great.
In comparison to web browsing in Windows and Mac OS 9, things a little slower in OS 10.1. But then, IE won't kill my OS when it crashes, and my OS X system has never suffered an OS X kernel panic for over a year. I'll take that over the speed thing any day, for now.
I've been reading enough whiny posts about Mac OS X's speed and stability to ask everyone a single important question:
How much usefulness did you get out of Windows 1.0? Out of Linux 1.0?
Mac OS X is the culmination of many tried and true technologies and a few new ones. For a 1.0 product (which it really is as opposed to merely a tenth OS revision of the Mac OS), it's got a LOT of power and potential.
I've used Macs since their move to the hierarchal file system (true nesting of subdirectories). That was 1986 or so. The Finder at the time wasn't close to multitasking anything like Mac OS 8, there was no such thing as virtual memory, the Mac Plus was a rather underpowered little beast...
....and nothing could tear it from my fingers, because there was still nothing like it.
The original Mac OS took 17 years to mature to what it is now. That's a long time in computing years, and Apple won't have that much luxury to make OS X as robust and mature.
But, considering the code base and the venerable ancestry that BSD and Mach have had, this is a beautiful, powerful baby. Flawed, to be sure, but how much productive work has your 1 year old done?
The 10.2 update will continue the speed increases. By 10.5, perhaps in less than 2 years this OS will be righteous.
Just don't treat it like OS 9 or you'll hose it good (don't move standard apps from Applications or get too crazy yet). This is a Macintosh operating system, and Apple's a little new to this UNIX desktop thing.
I've just sent this same information to Macintouch.com, and I'll repeat it here:
Mac OS X is UNIX, and, like many versions of OS, doesn't expect you to tweak your system around like in Mac OS 9.
Don't do it. Leave ALL preinstalled Mac OS X applications exactly where they are. If you need to access them conveniently, place their icons in the Dock, the desktop, some folder, or use a third-party solution. Changing around the location (or probably name) of applications is the quick way of hosing a Mac OS X installation to the point where reinstallation is required.
When other UNIX users need to activate an app from another location, they use symlinks or other method. But their apps stay put. So should it be with Mac OS X. Leave stuff alone unless you are a UNIX admin and Mac OS X programmer employed by Apple (hmm..a subtle way of saying "don't.")
IE for Mac OS X can now be downloaded from Microsoft's web site. (http://www.microsoft.com/mac)
Other for-profit companies may not appreciate such exclusion-by-patent tactics, either.
While Linux and other GPL operating systems and code may not have millions of dollars or a legal team capable of challenging such tactics, large companies such as Apple (which uses a version of Samba in Mac OS X, has a few billion dollars, and a dedicated, rabid legal team) and Sun would be happy to take on MS on this issue, particularly since they are a proven monopoly and have that disadvantage as the "bully."
The only problem is that neither Apple or any other company will do anything until it directly threatens their interests. I wouldn't expect them to do anything about the effects that this MS action has on GPL software and products proper.
...should think about a few things with their ad campaign.
The biggest one is that cows are FEMALE, yet their spokescow has a nice baratone voice.
Transgendered cow, maybe? I wonder how good it would taste after a few hours of grilling.
Sounds like you guys had a lot of fun working on it. If it weren't for that annoying life and family thing, I'd be shooting up, too (Uh..rockets, that is...)
While I don't think Sun would martyr itself just to challenge Microsoft, it's a good possibility that IBM could try to buy more Java rights or buy the technology outright from Sun, if a merger isn't in the cards.
Java is a innovative (and I use this term judiciously) technology which Microsoft has not been able to successfully clone, copy, or kill, yet. It is Sun's current anchor for relevancy amongst its main competitors. I can't see Sun letting go Java without a lot of compensation or litigation.
I'm a model rocket enthusiast as well. You're right--there are rules for specific model rockets (1 pound or less, no use of metal, et al.) The National Association of Rocketry set these rules.
But there is such a thing as amateur rocketry, which has a different, more complex set of rules. I don't want to talk much more about this since I don't participate, but these people have massive rockets that fly to substantial heights with very high impulse engines. I don't know if the NAR is the sanctioning body for these people, but, provided they follow the rules for these devices from whatever body provides them, it shouldn't be a problem.
Otherwise, people like Dick Rutan and other amateur rocketry fans would have a very hard time trying to win the X Prize (http://www.xprize.org/).
Good one! Guess I'm a pervert, then! : )
To add to the girl/OS analogies (loved the articles, by the way, John--thanks for the contributions):
BeOS was the super smart, sexy girl you lusted over, never asked out when you had the chance, and has disappeared from the Earth (probably married, likely dead).
OS/2 was that beautiful college associate professor that killed herself before you asked her out because she was a crazy recluse whose professors told her she would be passed over for promotion yet again.
Windows 3.1 was like that talking Barbie doll of your sister's whose hair you cut off after hearing it say "Math is hard" for the 3,000th time.
...but why Microsoft Windows considers itself really alive.
Windows is a teenager--and a rude, aggressive, unpredictable one at that--compared to the various Unixen out there.
To paraphrase "Dark Paladin" in a recent article about his Mac OS X conversion: Microsoft Windows is like your class president that didn't do shit. Linux is like a super-smart, sexy redhead girlfriend that's also a bit insane. Mac OS X is like the geeky girl at school who shed her braces and became a total hottie--and still wants to spend all her time hanging around with you.
Much of the crap such as noted on this topic is based on Microsoft technology, which, as we all know, is quite invasive and unsecure.
With WINE, perhaps, something like this might work on a x86 box with Linux, but all that pop-up ads may do on a Mac OS system, perhaps, is ask if the item could be downloaded, and, once downloaded, sit unused, unrecognized--the Mac OS doesn't do ActiveX per se.
Of course, using a PC emulator such as Virtual PC removes such insulation.
Blizzard is one of those great software companies that, literally, help keep Macintosh gaming legitimate. For them to create an update for D2 for Mac OS X is such a sign.
Other companies, from Freeverse and Ambrosia (hail Andrew Welch, god of Code), to Aspyr Media (bless them for Tomb Raider, Sims, and Deus Ex ports, et al.) all show that the good games do come to the Macintosh, and the future for games look good.
However, Apple needs to work on a better HID software solution. We went from InputSprockets (a nice and highly flexible solution) to nothing in OS X. If complex games such as Descent are to be ported, joysticks and other devices must be fully supported.
I'll repeat what others have noted about the update: OS X has good OpenGL, but those with nVidia video may suffer performance problems or even (gasp!) kernel panics. Software rendering works great, and is actually faster than OpenGL with less overhead.
Like other OS before it, try to avoid running a gazzillon apps while D2 is running. It still needs a respectable RAM amount, even though the OS allocates it now. And, keep Classic off--its a resource hog.
For Microsoft to build a campaign against UNIX would be like Coke or Pepsi promoting a campaign against the evils of water.
UNIX is the backbone of the Internet. It started with university and military computers, and is still based on these technologies. It has spawned many successful clones and variants, including BSD, Mac OS X, Linux, Solaris, IRIX, and many more. And virtually ALL of these versions work well together and can exchange code.
Not that this is surprising, but Microsoft is arrogant to point of giving the finger to God. This is really a sign is disrespect for everything built over the years by the blood, sweat and tears of the first network pioneers.
Unisys sounds like it has little to lose since it's been sitting on its corporate butt so long that even the oldest of us have forgotten what they've recently done in the computing world.
I'm not making a righteous stand for just the UNIX world. Microsoft is really a company with poor ethical practices and should be recognized as such.
Microsoft could have it all by realizing that practically all its major competitors have a UNIX base in their OS, even Apple. Instead of fighting the UNIX family, they could cash in simply and easily by moving the Windows NT/XP base to a true UNIX base, and create (the usual closed-source) apps in UNIX versions that can be compiled for virtually every UNIX family OS. (Not that everyone would want the apps, but at least it would be there..)
But NOOOOOO...
I was ranting on how OSS was too disorganized to fight MS in certain market attacks--that OSS lacks a defined leader. This instance is an exception. There are plenty of corporate makers and users of UNIX who might jump on the big MS "screw you" bandwagon and even pump up some cash in the corporate and legal system to get MS to shut their corporate pie hole.
Pissing off the U.S. Government is one thing. Pissing off other big businesses is quite another.