> Its also possible that Ken has enginieered a > great many of these so-called "evidence" logs > and irc sessions as a disinformation/smear > campaign.
Well, an IRC admin who used to work with JP testified to his antics. (NO, I don't know that that post itself wasn't made up but I'm pretty it was genuine).
> indulging in Ad Homenem attacks
One of whose attacks was the instagatory attack, not to the person himself, but to his admins who hosted his site, smearing his name and threatening his data.
which is why I prefaced my comments with "If this is really true and there is no mitigating circumstance explaining Harvard's bizarre and rash actions then..."
Many of the main posts said that there was something fishy about it and it didn't exactly add up...that there was a side of the story not heard...not enough facts...
I agree, it's pretty dumb I can see why they were showing it off at an *art* show...
I tried navigating (apparently a big no-no in "non-linear" browsing), clicking on things, and finally got "Nothing is here" all over. Great.
I can see the understand the attempt to make the web one large, navigable, landscape...but please, don't let artists do it...(it does have artistic value though, IMHO)
> Seriously, though, making an attractive but > different case design isn't really *that* hard. > I just don't understand why the PC and clone > makers can't seem to do it. Maybe they need new > blood in the ranks.
Well actually they have been doing it. Intel had some wierd-looking AIO machines, as did another company in a previous Slashdot post, as well as several others I can't remember (I think IBM may have had one). Admittedly they did come out after the iMac, but they did all look different. The reason PC makers typically DON'T invest in making these type of units is because the typical PC consumer just doesn't care. They really aren't marketing these new AIOs to the current PC consumers...they are just trying to get a share of the newbies who are attracted by case design. My guess is that since PC market is rather healthy, nobody is really making a full-hearted attempt at doing these things nicely.
Hey, while everybody is bashing PC makers for lack of innovation...where is the Apple equivalent of the Gateway Destination huh (seeing as Apple is more geared towards computers-as-appliances)? I'd say that's sorta innovative...at least I haven't seen it done anywhere else (well maybe WebTV, but that's really different).
> Yes and no. It's a good thing for computers to > have some kind of removable read/write storage, > but floppies are obsolete
Perhaps the *technology* is obsolete, but the utility is not. I use floppies on almost a daily basis (even though I have a Zip drive). Depends on who you talk to. In any case, I really can't see how anybody can claim that the *removal* of a standard and virtually free piece of hardware is innovation. I can see the *addition* of a new one, but the removal?? The mouse is pretty old technology too, but no computer maker would try to sell a computer without a mouse with the hopes, like Apple's, that there would be USB replacements in no time.
> If the iMac included a floppy drive, no one > would use it anyway.
Not according to the iMac efloppy site. You pay them to replicate on the net your floppy drive. You upload and download stuff. Is that stupid or what? Why would I wan't to wait for upload and download if I can just walk accross the room?? I had an argument on a Mac Yahoo board with some guy who was trying to show me that it was morally OK to him to use the internet (and it's precious bandwidth) as his personal floppy replacement (as that efloppy site does). I could probably run my OS from a remote site...doesn't mean I DO it...there is no reason for the unnecessary network traffic.
> to stop persecuting inovators like Bill Gates > and Microsoft - the leading inovators of some of > the most poserful computer systems around ^^^^^^^^ heh, I like this. computer systems full of posers.:p
> After all, the free market system, the greatest > economic system ever, has valued Bill at more > money than all of the people who came before > him. Who are you to compain?
Well, I remember that those train people made a lot of money. And then there was a telephone company...
Free markets thrive on competition. Once there is no competition in the market it is no longer free. That's why they call monopolies "anti-competitive". Basically, no one is allowed to "win", so that all players are winners to some degree (unless of course they're inept, in which case it's their own fault).
> And you know what? I'm FREE to break into your > apartment and steal your computer. But unless I > can sell your computer for a decent PRICE, it > won't be worthwhile.
Um, I don't get where you got that analogy from...how is replicating the format of a site with custom content the same as breaking into the site, stealing the code and then reselling it as your own? BTW, you're not FREE to break into my apartment. You are FREE to make a site called Slashdit and replicate the Slashdot format and post your *OWN* content. In fact, I think Rob has gratiously released the Slashdot engine.
The CORRECT analogy would be that you are FREE to look at my computer, guess at how it was built and designed, replicate it, and THEN sell it for a better price. In reality it is very difficult to do this.
> Do you have a job? Do you do homework at your > school (you are so clueless, you must be a > student)?
Are the petty comments really necessary?
> I suppose we're FREE to steal your work
Well, *I'd* gladly let you TAKE it (and not claim it as your own...even GPLed source retains copyrights I believe), but it probably technically belongs to my employer.
> Because after all, you should be spending > time doing work instead of squabbling over > people claiming your work as their own.
Yes you are right, I should be. That is what a copyright ensures. I'd let you TAKE it and even USE it if you didn't claim you originated it. Actually I have a freeware page and, drum roll, I let people TAKE my work.
The obvious analogy is that PC makers are somehow claiming that they originated the design. Given Apple's marketing, the success of the iMac, and the lameness of the copy, it is not really even feasible for them to attempt this...that it is so obvious precludes any deception.
> How would you like it if Microsoft made a ripoff > of the linux kernel, called it Billinux and used > it to compete with linux?
I WOULD like it. I would LOVE it. They CAN. It's GPLed. Go ahead Microsoft. Attempt to make a better product. Doesn't look like you've tried that in a while. Everybody wins in that case! More options, more freedom, more software. My guess, though, is that Microsoft, for various reasons, would not, or could not, pull it off.
> What this dumbass company has done is no > different than copying a book or magazine's > entire layout and claiming credit for it
Um, so what. I don't read books and magazine's for their layout, do you? Do you read NewsWeek and say, "Wow, this layout is so informative and educational"??? Go ahead magazines. Copy each other's formats. I'll pick the one with the best content.
> this is about a blatant copy of the design of > the iMac and marketing it like that PC company > came up with the design.
Perhaps...but I don't think anybody really believes they came up with it. If Apple stops marketing it like it was brilliant and innovative, then PC companies can stop pretending they came up with it.
Re: The point is that Apple IS the innovator here
on
iMac Clone Gets Sued
·
· Score: 1
> Everyone seems to be missing this point...
> The iMac represented a computer that was > designed from the start to be easy to use for > anyone.
And therefore nobody should follow suit and attempt to design a computer that is easy to use for everybody from the start? Come on. I don't get what your "point" is. Apple's creed has been the above since it's inception. Therefore the iMac is not innovative. Yeah it has an All In One case, but as you say, they did that before, like a decade ago.
> It also represented an attempt to make the > computer a more fashionable accesory in the > home, not just a beige box with wires > everywhere...
Well, no. An AIO unit was the solution to the wire problem (regardless of manufacturer). You can get AIO VCR/TV combos for this purpose. Yes, it did attempt to make it more fashionable...but umm...I still don't see how this procludes others from doing the same. There is nothing new about trying to make something intuitive and fashionable. If they have a patent, which proves they actually invented something, then they could probably win this...regardless of how it would make them look to consumers.
> Bollocks. Who want's some scabby coloured case > for their pc when they could have one which > actually looks good. I know that I may be no > design guru, but I like to have my house looking > nice... not like a technophobe's nightmare...
I do. I want a scabby, ugly-ass, stupid-looking case, as long as the *contents* meet my requirements. If the contents do meet my requirements then a nicer case is a superficial thing...if the one I have doesn't work or scares technophobes whose opinions I happen to care about might change it. I won't pay a premium just for a look. I could shop at Gap if I wanted to do that.
Although the "Apple-is-enabling-ignorance" is somewhat true, it really isn't a relevant argument. From the dawn of computers we have been trying to make interfaces more intuitive and easy for their operators to use. Given population distribution, this would seem to indicate that at least some of them would have to be oversimplified (not everybody is a techie). Not everybody needs to learn assembler...they should at least read the manuals though.
Probably. Did they get the approval of *Ghandi's* or *Einstein's* estate to use them to sell their computers (which really sorta turns my stomach)? THAT I would like to know.
I don't mind Jeff Goldblum selling they're stuff though. Dead people can't make decisions about products though. It's just co-opting a meme.
Re:so I can make a Mercury Cougar clone....
on
iMac Clone Gets Sued
·
· Score: 1
Yes, you can...you just probably can't name it that. But if it gets 10 miles/gallon, with a top speed of 30 mph, and falls apart after a few months nobody will care what it looks like. The point is not what shape it is, but what it delivers. Cars look so much alike, I can't even tell some of them apart from a distance besides they're little logo. If Ford sues you for the shape of the body you use, what will people think about Ford cars themselves?
> If this flies I am going out and start my own > web site, and call it Slashdit, complete with > exact copies of the page layout, news stories > and everything.
And you know what? You're FREE to. But unless your site has better CONTENT (content is the key here), nobody will care. TONS of sites are set up like Slashdot (the ubiquitous "weblog" format). Each has content appealing to its target audience. Slashdot isn't Slashdot because of perty pictures and layout (although Rob does pour tons of effort into making this great)...it's Slashdot because of its discussion. CAN Apple throw a fit and sue people over this? Yes, probably. Will it make them look good, like they're a part of the computing community they purportedly serve...not to me. Yes Apple has been ripped off in the past. But whining can't replace real innovation and. By fervently fighting this, Apple is making the stand and the statement that they are a company that sells curvy plastic cases, and not technology.
I think Apple should be spending time porting MacOS instead of squabbling over their different-thinking plastic casing.
Is *this* Apple's response to EVERYTHING? How immature and bratty. It just shows that Jobs wants Apple to be more a primadonna than to actually develop cool technology (which I don't think anything of that nature has been done since Woz left). Here's an idea: instead of relying on shiny plastic to sell your product, what about perhaps including cool technology that copycats CAN'T beat?
Apple, at a time when you desperately need to reinvent your image, you get no respect for this.
>We would also have gone to the metric year of ten >months.
Actually some clockmakers preemptively started making decimal clocks (there used to be one at my old high school for some reason...you could never figure out when class was over!). They never caught on. The metric system, as you indicate, is no better than any other, besides the fact that human brains can understand decimal arithmetic more easily (for some reason). The metric system would not work well for a calendaring system. The time system we use dates back to the Shumarians' (yes..Sh) 60-based system (60 seconds a minute, 60 min/hr, etc.). This works out very well and is intuitive. Months are based on the cycle of the moon...of which there happen to be ~12 per year. If we wanted to be like the Romans, time would actually progress faster during daylight in the winter (due to the usage of sundials to tell time), so that the average "day" would be shorter in winter. It just doesn't make sense to apply a decimal system to everything. In fact, in some very important ways, forcing the usage of a sole numbering system is very restrictive and dangerous (where would computers be without bin, hex, oct?). Just like language, mathematics is merely a medium for ideas and thoughts...it shouldn't arbitrarily be cast into one form.
Check out the Kha0s link on Slashdot today...I read somewhere it is based on an open-standards encrypted filesystem, "Matt Blaze's CFS"? It'll be open source, so perhaps the filesystem could be used or extended for a CryptNettish application?
Maybe somebody should archive Slashdot...I'm sure there's something JP (or anybody else) might not like here...
This is ridiculous... I hope, that if this is actually true, and there isn't some tremendous mitigating circumstance explaining Harvard's bizarre and rash actions, that they and AO get sued into the dirt...
The net community must show that this kind of bullying will not be permitted in our community
Slashdot Mirror
> Its also possible that Ken has enginieered a
> great many of these so-called "evidence" logs
> and irc sessions as a disinformation/smear
> campaign.
Well, an IRC admin who used to work with JP testified to his antics. (NO, I don't know that that post itself wasn't made up but I'm pretty it was genuine).
> indulging in Ad Homenem attacks
One of whose attacks was the instagatory attack, not to the person himself, but to his admins who hosted his site, smearing his name and threatening his data.
which is why I prefaced my comments with "If this is really true and there is no mitigating circumstance explaining Harvard's bizarre and rash actions then..."
Many of the main posts said that there was something fishy about it and it didn't exactly add up...that there was a side of the story not heard...not enough facts...
I think people have found that it is faster to just manually find and double-click the song they want to play than to converse with their computer.
Yes, there probably is room for a new paradigm, but it should be Human Factors people doing it, not artists...
I agree, it's pretty dumb
I can see why they were showing it off at an *art* show...
I tried navigating (apparently a big no-no in "non-linear" browsing), clicking on things, and finally got "Nothing is here" all over. Great.
I can see the understand the attempt to make the web one large, navigable, landscape...but please, don't let artists do it...(it does have artistic value though, IMHO)
Neither Mac nor *nix has Java 1.2 support (JVM) yet (AFAIK)
???
I have to admit...this post made no sense to me...maybe I'm just thinking linearly though...
I think it's really cool that this was [apparently] written in Java...go Java...
ok, i'm done
> Seriously, though, making an attractive but
> different case design isn't really *that* hard.
> I just don't understand why the PC and clone
> makers can't seem to do it. Maybe they need new
> blood in the ranks.
Well actually they have been doing it. Intel had some wierd-looking AIO machines, as did another company in a previous Slashdot post, as well as several others I can't remember (I think IBM may have had one). Admittedly they did come out after the iMac, but they did all look different. The reason PC makers typically DON'T invest in making these type of units is because the typical PC consumer just doesn't care. They really aren't marketing these new AIOs to the current PC consumers...they are just trying to get a share of the newbies who are attracted by case design. My guess is that since PC market is rather healthy, nobody is really making a full-hearted attempt at doing these things nicely.
Hey, while everybody is bashing PC makers for lack of innovation...where is the Apple equivalent of the Gateway Destination huh (seeing as Apple is more geared towards computers-as-appliances)? I'd say that's sorta innovative...at least I haven't seen it done anywhere else (well maybe WebTV, but that's really different).
> Yes and no. It's a good thing for computers to
> have some kind of removable read/write storage,
> but floppies are obsolete
Perhaps the *technology* is obsolete, but the utility is not. I use floppies on almost a daily basis (even though I have a Zip drive). Depends on who you talk to. In any case, I really can't see how anybody can claim that the *removal* of a standard and virtually free piece of hardware is innovation. I can see the *addition* of a new one, but the removal?? The mouse is pretty old technology too, but no computer maker would try to sell a computer without a mouse with the hopes, like Apple's, that there would be USB replacements in no time.
> If the iMac included a floppy drive, no one
> would use it anyway.
Not according to the iMac efloppy site. You pay them to replicate on the net your floppy drive. You upload and download stuff. Is that stupid or what? Why would I wan't to wait for upload and download if I can just walk accross the room?? I had an argument on a Mac Yahoo board with some guy who was trying to show me that it was morally OK to him to use the internet (and it's precious bandwidth) as his personal floppy replacement (as that efloppy site does). I could probably run my OS from a remote site...doesn't mean I DO it...there is no reason for the unnecessary network traffic.
> to stop persecuting inovators like Bill Gates :p
> and Microsoft - the leading inovators of some of
> the most poserful computer systems around
^^^^^^^^
heh, I like this. computer systems full of posers.
> After all, the free market system, the greatest
> economic system ever, has valued Bill at more
> money than all of the people who came before
> him. Who are you to compain?
Well, I remember that those train people made a lot of money. And then there was a telephone company...
Free markets thrive on competition. Once there is no competition in the market it is no longer free. That's why they call monopolies "anti-competitive". Basically, no one is allowed to "win", so that all players are winners to some degree (unless of course they're inept, in which case it's their own fault).
if neither is innovatIVE then neither is AN innovatION
> And you know what? I'm FREE to break into your
> apartment and steal your computer. But unless I
> can sell your computer for a decent PRICE, it
> won't be worthwhile.
Um, I don't get where you got that analogy from...how is replicating the format of a site with custom content the same as breaking into the site, stealing the code and then reselling it as your own? BTW, you're not FREE to break into my apartment. You are FREE to make a site called Slashdit and replicate the Slashdot format and post your *OWN* content. In fact, I think Rob has gratiously released the Slashdot engine.
The CORRECT analogy would be that you are FREE to look at my computer, guess at how it was built and designed, replicate it, and THEN sell it for a better price. In reality it is very difficult to do this.
> Do you have a job? Do you do homework at your
> school (you are so clueless, you must be a
> student)?
Are the petty comments really necessary?
> I suppose we're FREE to steal your work
Well, *I'd* gladly let you TAKE it (and not claim it as your own...even GPLed source retains copyrights I believe), but it probably technically belongs to my employer.
> Because after all, you should be spending
> time doing work instead of squabbling over
> people claiming your work as their own.
Yes you are right, I should be. That is what a copyright ensures. I'd let you TAKE it and even USE it if you didn't claim you originated it. Actually I have a freeware page and, drum roll, I let people TAKE my work.
The obvious analogy is that PC makers are somehow claiming that they originated the design. Given Apple's marketing, the success of the iMac, and the lameness of the copy, it is not really even feasible for them to attempt this...that it is so obvious precludes any deception.
> How would you like it if Microsoft made a ripoff
> of the linux kernel, called it Billinux and used
> it to compete with linux?
I WOULD like it. I would LOVE it. They CAN. It's GPLed. Go ahead Microsoft. Attempt to make a better product. Doesn't look like you've tried that in a while. Everybody wins in that case! More options, more freedom, more software. My guess, though, is that Microsoft, for various reasons, would not, or could not, pull it off.
> What this dumbass company has done is no
> different than copying a book or magazine's
> entire layout and claiming credit for it
Um, so what. I don't read books and magazine's for their layout, do you? Do you read NewsWeek and say, "Wow, this layout is so informative and educational"??? Go ahead magazines. Copy each other's formats. I'll pick the one with the best content.
> this is about a blatant copy of the design of
> the iMac and marketing it like that PC company
> came up with the design.
Perhaps...but I don't think anybody really believes they came up with it. If Apple stops marketing it like it was brilliant and innovative, then PC companies can stop pretending they came up with it.
> Everyone seems to be missing this point...
> The iMac represented a computer that was
> designed from the start to be easy to use for
> anyone.
And therefore nobody should follow suit and attempt to design a computer that is easy to use for everybody from the start? Come on. I don't get what your "point" is. Apple's creed has been the above since it's inception. Therefore the iMac is not innovative. Yeah it has an All In One case, but as you say, they did that before, like a decade ago.
> It also represented an attempt to make the
> computer a more fashionable accesory in the
> home, not just a beige box with wires
> everywhere...
Well, no. An AIO unit was the solution to the wire problem (regardless of manufacturer). You can get AIO VCR/TV combos for this purpose. Yes, it did attempt to make it more fashionable...but umm...I still don't see how this procludes others from doing the same. There is nothing new about trying to make something intuitive and fashionable. If they have a patent, which proves they actually invented something, then they could probably win this...regardless of how it would make them look to consumers.
> Bollocks. Who want's some scabby coloured case
> for their pc when they could have one which
> actually looks good. I know that I may be no
> design guru, but I like to have my house looking
> nice... not like a technophobe's nightmare...
I do. I want a scabby, ugly-ass, stupid-looking case, as long as the *contents* meet my requirements. If the contents do meet my requirements then a nicer case is a superficial thing...if the one I have doesn't work or scares technophobes whose opinions I happen to care about might change it. I won't pay a premium just for a look. I could shop at Gap if I wanted to do that.
Although the "Apple-is-enabling-ignorance" is somewhat true, it really isn't a relevant argument. From the dawn of computers we have been trying to make interfaces more intuitive and easy for their operators to use. Given population distribution, this would seem to indicate that at least some of them would have to be oversimplified (not everybody is a techie). Not everybody needs to learn assembler...they should at least read the manuals though.
They might as well sue Be. BeOS GUI is VERY MacOS-like.
And Microsoft should sue whoever does fvwm95, then.
No. NEITHER is innovation as far as I'm concerned.
Probably. Did they get the approval of *Ghandi's* or *Einstein's* estate to use them to sell their computers (which really sorta turns my stomach)? THAT I would like to know.
I don't mind Jeff Goldblum selling they're stuff though. Dead people can't make decisions about products though. It's just co-opting a meme.
Yes, you can...you just probably can't name it that. But if it gets 10 miles/gallon, with a top speed of 30 mph, and falls apart after a few months nobody will care what it looks like. The point is not what shape it is, but what it delivers. Cars look so much alike, I can't even tell some of them apart from a distance besides they're little logo. If Ford sues you for the shape of the body you use, what will people think about Ford cars themselves?
> If this flies I am going out and start my own
> web site, and call it Slashdit, complete with
> exact copies of the page layout, news stories
> and everything.
And you know what? You're FREE to. But unless your site has better CONTENT (content is the key here), nobody will care. TONS of sites are set up like Slashdot (the ubiquitous "weblog" format). Each has content appealing to its target audience. Slashdot isn't Slashdot because of perty pictures and layout (although Rob does pour tons of effort into making this great)...it's Slashdot because of its discussion. CAN Apple throw a fit and sue people over this? Yes, probably. Will it make them look good, like they're a part of the computing community they purportedly serve...not to me. Yes Apple has been ripped off in the past. But whining can't replace real innovation and. By fervently fighting this, Apple is making the stand and the statement that they are a company that sells curvy plastic cases, and not technology.
I think Apple should be spending time porting MacOS instead of squabbling over their different-thinking plastic casing.
Is *this* Apple's response to EVERYTHING?
How immature and bratty. It just shows that Jobs wants Apple to be more a primadonna than to actually develop cool technology (which I don't think anything of that nature has been done since Woz left). Here's an idea: instead of relying on shiny plastic to sell your product, what about perhaps including cool technology that copycats CAN'T beat?
Apple, at a time when you desperately need to reinvent your image, you get no respect for this.
>We would also have gone to the metric year of ten
>months.
Actually some clockmakers preemptively started making decimal clocks (there used to be one at my old high school for some reason...you could never figure out when class was over!). They never caught on. The metric system, as you indicate, is no better than any other, besides the fact that human brains can understand decimal arithmetic more easily (for some reason). The metric system would not work well for a calendaring system. The time system we use dates back to the Shumarians' (yes..Sh) 60-based system (60 seconds a minute, 60 min/hr, etc.). This works out very well and is intuitive. Months are based on the cycle of the moon...of which there happen to be ~12 per year. If we wanted to be like the Romans, time would actually progress faster during daylight in the winter (due to the usage of sundials to tell time), so that the average "day" would be shorter in winter. It just doesn't make sense to apply a decimal system to everything. In fact, in some very important ways, forcing the usage of a sole numbering system is very restrictive and dangerous (where would computers be without bin, hex, oct?). Just like language, mathematics is merely a medium for ideas and thoughts...it shouldn't arbitrarily be cast into one form.
Check out the Kha0s link on Slashdot today...I read somewhere it is based on an open-standards encrypted filesystem, "Matt Blaze's CFS"? It'll be open source, so perhaps the filesystem could be used or extended for a CryptNettish application?
Maybe somebody should archive Slashdot...I'm sure there's something JP (or anybody else) might not like here...
This is ridiculous...
I hope, that if this is actually true, and there isn't some tremendous mitigating circumstance explaining Harvard's bizarre and rash actions, that they and AO get sued into the dirt...
The net community must show that this kind of bullying will not be permitted in our community
Yes, I went there too...
People really should take a look at it...
I'm not saying I believe it all, but it is eye-opening
BTW, what evidence is there for a "threat" to the lives of JP and his family?