That's how it works in the US - if you want to open up a postpaid cell account you'll have to give them the info they need to access your credit report. And the agencies use your SSN to identify you. Game over.
Don't like that? Get a prepaid cellphone. You probably won't be able to buy the "hottest" models or just-launched phones like the Pre (iPhones aren't available for prepaid, either). With the CDMA providers (Sprint and Verizon) it's a PITA to change anything but you can get the GSM phone of your choice when it's available unlocked and then use it with an AT&T or T-Mobile prepaid account SIM. No credit checks or SSN required that way.
(Also, if you have a cheap-ish phone on a contract and it breaks, you can replace it with a prepaid phone from the same vendor and that way be able to get a replacement without affecting contract issues. I did this for my in-laws when their phone broke.)
The whole point here is that the single-button mouse isn't a design failure at all. It's a decision that was made in order to make it easier to build a system that didn't require an alt-click for anything. When Macs were first designed, the mouse was a new thing entirely to most folks.
I actually like that the system works fine with one button, but takes advantage of two.
If you want to talk about an Apple design failure, instead of talking about the one-button mouse in general (because that's not a clear failure at all), talk about the horrible "hockey-puck" mouse that Apple introduced with the iMac and stayed on the scene far too long. That sold more two-button mice than anything else because the ergonomics were so horrible that users went running to alternative mice as soon as they realized they could use them!
Also in the "what were they thinking" category is the current Apple Bluetooth keyboard, with the minimal laptop key layout. The old wireless keyboard was so much better it's remarkable they haven't done anything to bring the old layout back.
And I really miss the ability to turn Macs on from the keyboard - one of the nice things ADB brought to the table.
The more important point is that the UI is designed so it can be operated perfectly well with only one mouse button. There are "power" options, but there's no reason a user has to change from single button usage unless they want to. Telling a user to "click on the button" is a lot simpler than telling them to "click or right-click". Apple's always been about keeping that part of the experience simple by default.
Problem is that Windows users and the Slashdot audience by default want the most options and have learned to not mind right-clicking, so the fact that Apple has it as an option instead of a default is mistakenly seen as a flaw. It's not a flaw, nor is it an advantage. It's just different.
Huh? Which Mac was that? All the original Macs (the 128, 512, and Plus, along with the SE series and Classic) had the power switch on the back. The NuBus Macs (Mac II onwards up until the middle of the PPC era) powered up via their ADB keyboards.
There was an optional reset switch you could attach to the lower side of the computer, I guess that could look like a power button - but that was originally a user option to install (most didn't that I recall) and the later Macs had a slightly recessed reset button.
Not for nothing, but that's just not true anymore. Hasn't been for quite a few years. Ever since the Mighty Mouse (the one with the trackball) became standard, it's been a 2-button mouse. It's just that the Mac UI was designed to be single-button friendly and the mouse operates in single button mode by default. If you are clever enough a user to want to right-click, it's simple enough to just go to the System Preference pane for your mouse and turn it on.
Mice with two hardware buttons Just Work as well. And the method of right-clicking on a laptop touchpad (two-finger click) is simple and intuitive, and all software-based.
Now if you don't like the ergonomics of the Apple mouse (I don't, and I use a Dell Bluetooth mouse with my Mac) that's fine and a legitimate complaint. But to claim that Apple requires you to Control-click when that's been no more than an option for years just shows ignorance.
Delta updates contain both PPC and Intel code for all changes since the last point release (10.5.6). Combo updates contain all updated code for both platforms since 10.5 was released in 2007. This is why the standalone installers are so huge.
If you install via Software Update, the update will only be delta code for your processor platform - much smaller.
MS does similar with Windows Update/Microsoft Update, which is one of the reasons it takes a longer time to process. In most cases, you can download a version of the update for admins which will be the equivalent of a combo update on Apple, but for only the X86 family.
Apple updaters will shrink with Snow Leopard - Snow Leopard is Intel-only.
MacBook Air: $1799 for 1.6 GHz processor with a 120GB SATA drive (1.8" single platter), or $2499 for a 1.86 GHz processor and a 128GB SSD. Both use the nVidia GeForce 9400M chipset/graphics.
Dell Adamo: $1999 for 1.2 GHz processor, 128GB SSD. With 4GB RAM, 1.4 GHz processor, and an AT&T 3g card - $2699.
Sure, it's a HDD instead of the SSD in the low-end Air, but both models are faster, both are lighter, and both base configs cost less than the Dells.
More seriously, I see a decent number of Airs in my clients' offices. Nowhere near as many as other Mac (and Windows) portables, but one client alone has six of them (they use them with Verizon cards on construction sites). They fill a niche quite well - the "ultimate PowerPoint system" where the user well may have another main desktop computer and uses the Air for travel and presentations.
The Adamo isn't horrible, but it's not too much of an Air-killer - Dell will have their work cut out for them just competing against the Windows subnotes that are even better and have nicer designs.
When the Adamo was first announced a month or so ago, I remember seeing the pictures on Engadget and saying to myself "not too bad industrial design for a Dell". The "for a Dell" is key.
So it costs more than the Air, but has a crappier chipset. It does have more ports, which is good, and unlike the Air it can hold 4GB of RAM. It's also a little bigger, a little heavier, and it has way less processor in it. Plus it comes with Vista - though it's at least the x64 edition, it still will have that much more in driver compatibility issues as a result, and it's still only a Home edition. For that kind of coin, you'd think they would at least provide Ultimate.
And how again is this Dell's MacBook Air killer? The best thing I can say about it so far is it's a little better-looking than most Dell laptops. But I think they're going to sell about 3 of these.
It's just an interpretation of accounting rules. Nothing sinister. The first time this came up was with the 802.n enabler for early MacBook Pro models. They came out with n-capable radios but didn't start shipping anything officially for about 4 months afterwards. When they released the new Macs with "official" support they decided that the n feature would be considered new. So they included it with purchases of the n-version base stations and made it a $1.99 download for users who did not buy a base station but had a machine that they wanted it with.
It's a little goofy, but not sinister. They've stated very clearly that they recognize iPhone revenue on a subscription basis and therefore feel they can add features at no cost. And the reason folks only get things like MMS now is simple too:
There's only so many features that a software team can add in a given timeframe. Period. Cut & Paste is a really nice "wanna have", but if it had cost me another feature that might not have been so hot. I certainly wanted Exchange ActiveSync support more than I wanted MMS. What got announced today is the features that made the cut to be polished and added to 3.0. Nothing more, nothing less.
In June, 3.0 will ship, I'll update my phone to it, and soon afterwards we'll get the updates, bugfixes, and such that come for a while afterwards once the world gets the code. And if you don't want to spend the coin for software on your iPod Touch, don't. It'll still play music fine without it.
Not only that, but sometime this year there'll probably be a minor update to the iPhone hardware, too. Either at the same time as 3.0 ships or soon afterwards. Shh. Don't tell anybody.
That was my only "rats" about these - I was hoping for a quad-core iMac as at least a BTO option for the high end. Especially since these new models support 8GB of RAM.
Otherwise it was a pretty decent batch of gear, and they also dropped pricing on a lot of the BTO options as well for the other Macs. Keeps them competitive until the next major redesign.
Not for nothing, but we have a six-year-old of our own. We walk him to school and wake him up in the morning, but the rest is his job to do. He needs to get up, go to the bathroom, brush his teeth, pick out clothes, get dressed, and go downstairs for breakfast. He is allowed to feed himself juice and cereal - if he wants something cooked (toast or eggs, for instance) we make it for him. We pack his lunch in the morning as well, but he needs to put it in his backpack before we leave to walk to school.
We are there for him, and we escort him down the street, but he's pretty much on his own. We call it "teaching responsibility". In a couple of years if he's ready he'll be able to walk to school on his own, too.
But we're holding off on the driving thing a while longer, I think...
After all, Apple is having so much trouble selling iPhones and attracting a developer community that open-sourcing the iPhone is the only way to survive... Wait, what? Apple already has the top-selling smartphone? They already have a huge developer community and thousands of applications in less than six months of having this OS on the market? They've all but killed Palm, made a huge dent in Microsoft's Windows Mobile business, and forced RIM to come out with a poorly-regarded "me too" touchscreen phone while eating market share?
Well, I guess that's how poorly things are going for Apple with a closed design. There's lots of valid reasons why Apple might be well-served to open up more of their iPhone code, but it's not like the current strategy has exactly failed miserably. Right now iPhone is in a pretty enviable place from a development point of view. Apple is early in the 2.0 cycle, and hasn't even implemented all the promised features for developers yet (like central push notification and true turn-by-turn GPS capabilities), and they still have a massive base of developers who are leveraging their Cocoa code and methods to produce iPhone software.
Not to mention that touch in general is a full-fledged platform for Apple. Not just phones, but iPods and likely other devices. Build for the platform and you run on all the devices (unlike, say, RIM's multiple platforms). And they have teh sexy as well in their hardware and UI designs, so there's consumer appeal (compared to, say, the skins manufacturers have had to overlay on Windows Mobile to make it less hostile to users).
There's always going to be people who want to tweak their phone, or run Linux on it because it has a CPU and RAM. But the mass market doesn't give a darn if iPhones are open or closed. They don't care if Android is open, either. They just care that the devices are cool and useful, and that there's plenty of nice software to run that's easy to get. iPhone is leading in that race now, and as long as they're all that, nobody important gives a darn otherwise.
Here's my take on it - you can get a job, depending on the job. It probably won't be a great one, and you'll have to work that much harder to establish yourself on merit.
My own abbreviated story behind that rationale: I went to college for a couple of years in the '80s. Left and got an entry-level (at the time) job doing training and support for a computer store. I mainly drifted between sales and support jobs at resellers for several years and made squat, but it was a way to be in the biz. Then one of my customers hired me to run the systems they'd installed. From there, I wound up gaining enough real-world experience (and, as we grew, I got a small staff to manage) to be useful. When it became time to move on, though, my lack of a degree was a factor. I wound up with a good job after that, and gained more experience and expertise (along with a larger staff), but that job went away when the office I worked at got shrunk back in '03. And the lack of a degree was definitely a factor again in looking for jobs afterwards - in fact, there was one I would have absolutely gotten (I found this out after the fact), but for that lack.
I wound up striking out on my own, and have managed to do quite well with my own company (we employ several other people as well), but that's really the first job where it hasn't mattered somewhat. I'm probably at a point now where age and experience outweigh the lack of formal credentials. But it took over 20 years to get there. So as much as you don't _need_ a degree, it certainly makes life easier, especially early on.
It doesn't have to be an IT-related degree, though. I'd say study whatever interests you the most, so long as you take at least some classes to help you with what you want to do for a living.
Going back in history, here were the versions and reasons for numbering (I was in the channel back in those days so I still remember a lot of this):
Windows 1.0 - program launcher that competed with things like Desqview.
Windows 2.x - A full "environment" that also shipped as a runtime for programs that required a GUI on DOS. PageMaker was a good example, it came with the Windows runtime. Also available as a version with rudimentary 386 support
Windows 3.0 - This was the first version of Windows most users saw back then. It supported 386 mode fully, and was really the first version to be used as a full-time GUI by most folks. They made a huge retail push back then to get it out there. Windows 3 was the first version to be produced post-IBM split and pretty much killed the OS/2 market in infancy.
Windows 3.1 was an improvement to 3.0. It also was released around the same time as the first NT version, so for marketing reasons NT 1.0 was labeled as NT 3.1, so as to help them differentiate between the "pro" and "consumer" Windows versions.
3.11, Windows for Workgroups, etc. were all branches off this tree.
Windows NT continued to evolve to the 3.5 and 3.51 branches. Meanwhile, Microsoft kept working on a DOS-based version of Windows that was initially called "Chicago" in-house and was versioned as Windows 4.0. That became Windows 95 when it shipped. Windows 95 was the basis for Windows 95 OSR2 (added initial USB support and some other stuff), Windows 98, and finally Windows ME. Thus endeth the DOS-based line of Windows.
Meanwhile, Windows NT was revved up to 4.0, gaining the Windows 95 GUI and moving video and printing into the kernel. This bought big performance improvements but at the cost of introducing us to the modern BSOD (most fatal errors back then seemed to trace down to the video drivers). NT 4 became the basis for NT 5.0, which became known to us as Windows 2000.
Windows 200 introduced USB support to Windows, along with some of the usability improvements that were in consumer Windows at the time and also brought us Active Directory - their attempt to dethrone Novell as directory services king.
It worked.
Windows 2000 still really wasn't a "consumer-worthy" OS, so for NT 5.1 they focused on the user experience. They prettied up the UI, added features like System Restore, and split the desktop OS into Home and Professional versions. It became Windows XP.
Meanwhile on the server side, Microsoft was taking that same kernel and rebuilding it into a successor to Windows 2000 Server. It, in turn, became Windows 2003 Server (version 5.2).
The next project was to produce a successor OS. The codebase got revved up to what became Windows 6.0, and it wound up coming out as Windows Vista and, after a year's more development the server version became Windows Server 2008. Both are based on the 6.0 codebase.
So now comes Windows 7.0 - the server version will be AKA Windows Server 2008 R2 and will break into a 64-bit version only.
So the numbering overlapped for a while, but if you look at the original Windows history and then pick up NT from there it mostly makes sense. There have been some branches and dead ends (All the 16-bit Windows versions after 95, CE, XP Embedded), but the main line goes 16-bit to 95, then picks up 32-bit with NT and goes 32-bit and up only with 2000 (5.0) and beyond.
I send in checks for all bills. We log them in the checkbook so we have a written backup, and then I do all the data entry and balancing in Quicken. Takes about 15 minutes a week - my wife writes the checks, I do the data entry.
We also do a couple of unique things (at least in the US) - we pay everything in full, and send in the payment the same week we get the bill. Usually within a day or two. And we keep enough of a cash cushion in our accounts that we never worry about overdrafts.
I've looked into payment systems but I just don't have the trust necessary. The closest we've come is that when my wife was working she would pay all the bills she could (her cellphone, office phone, storage unit, and gas) with her company credit card and then just fill out the expense reports. But that wasn't money coming out of our own accounts - her company paid it and she just had to reconcile the bill.
We probably pay $8 or so per month in postage that we might not have to with bill pay systems, but I don't think it's that costly. And we know our accounts aren't being tapped without our approval.
- There are three other smartphone makers. RIM, Palm, and Microsoft. In the case of RIM, they make all their devices and are quite restrictive. They also enable admins to lock them down even further via policy. I manage a few Blackberry servers for clients of mine - they work great, but you can in fact lock them down aggressively and a lot of admins want them to do so.
- Microsoft has no such automatic restrictions, but they seal off the OS from entry. You can at least port apps from Win32 and adapt them, and the APIs are well-documented.
- Palm has no real restrictions at all, but the OS is still closed.
- None of these offer an easy way for non-technical users to download and install applications on their phones.
- With regard to DRM, you're making my point for me. There were no stores because the labels were insisting on draconian DRM measures and all strongly supported subscription music. Apple broke the logjam with a reasonable compromise and the market responded by giving Apple a dominant market share. Labels finally noticed and began lifting DRM requirements and Apple's been fully behind that movement. When available, tracks with no DRM are priced the same as tracks with DRM. Apple has a lot of leverage, but they don't make the rules. The labels do. Apple's supposed to stay out of the marketplace because they can't measure up to your ideological purity test?
- Outsourcing/offshoring: no, they aren't significantly different. They have some engineering and support resources overseas. They have the vast majority in the US. They also are a global company, selling and supporting products in almost every country. That's life. I've seen the financials as well, and most of the other companies I am interested in or invested in. They are, if anything, less outsourced than any of their major competitors (Microsoft, HP, Dell...)
The original Mac factory that was built in 1983 was famously described by Apple as a place where they just about trucked in sand and produced Macs. Those days are over. Forever.
- As for those final couple of points - no point in arguing the "user experience/price argument" again here. It gets done enough on Slashdot. Suffice it to say that there is likely a reason why Apple's market share over the last several years has been growing faster than the rest of the industry's. And also probably why Apple had sold so darned many iPhones in the last 13 months.
It indicates that either the market as a whole likes what Apple is doing and the view that Apple is evil is silly, or it indicates that your position on Apple is the One True Belief (facts be darned), and all the people buying them are mere sheep who are blinded by cute TV ads.
I'll cast my vote with the masses. Is Apple perfect? Of course not. But they do a pretty good job of making computers and devices that are easy for the masses to use, work well (usually better than the competition), and provide a minimum of real-world encumbrances.
iPhones are not far more restrictive than any carrier phone ever was. Palm and Windows Mobile have been open to all comers. Everything else has had some form of restriction or another, and carriers in general have been very restrictive about what is and is not allowed. What Apple did was make development easy, but introduce a central clearinghouse for apps. Even then, you're free to develop your app however (so long as it meets carrier requirements), and you can charge what you want - including $0. I really don't see how that is an issue. If you want a 100% open phone, buy an OpenMoko and play with it to your hearts' content. If you want a phone with a closed OS but the ability to develop software as you like without restrictions, get a Treo or a WinMob phone.
If you want a phone that's not 100% open but fairly easy to develop for and that gives you a really effective clearinghouse to get your app out to the public, get an iPhone.
The other point you make is that DRM was dying before iTunes. Horsepuckey. There were no widespread online music stores before iTunes. MP3.com was selling a handful of unencumbered files, and they continue to do so, but they weren't that popular then and remain fairly obscure - they have a lot of small labels and indy music but not much mainstream stuff. I think Rhapsody was around then with their subscription model, but only just. Apple was the first mainstream music store, and they managed to get a relatively loose form of DRM for their music. As their market share increased, labels realized that their only hope of breaking iTunes' control was to give other stores something that iTunes lacked - so that's what started the trend away from DRM. And as they've been allowed, iTunes has been putting up tracks with no DRM, as well.
Finally, as far as outsourcing goes, Apple's not too much different from every other company. Nobody manufactures their own stuff anymore - it's not worth it, Including Apple. Apple has the vast majority of their support and engineering staff here in the US, and minimal resources elsewhere. They are probably a little better than most comparable firms when it comes to keeping core business function here, but manufacturing is gone and it's never coming back.
Look, for reasons of religious purity you may well feel the One True Path is to have an Ubuntu desktop built from the finest hand-picked components and syncing to an OpenMoko phone that you wrote all the code for. Most people don't. They don't want to do that, and they couldn't give a darn if you do. What they want is a computer that works pretty well, isn't too expensive, and runs the programs they want. Can be a Mac, usually going to be Windows, never going to be Linux. And they want a swank mobile phone that does cool stuff for them and impresses people when they whip it out of their pockets. Hence iPhones. Apple is good at that stuff, and therefore their company is perceived by the market to be extraordinarily valuable.
Hey, I have a great idea! Let's protest the fact that a computer company makes computers and software that doesn't fit our ideology by crowding their stores, pissing off a bunch of employees who are paid to answer tech support questions instead of discussing politics, and making customers who need support miserable. That attention will really help us make software free - they'll all quake in fear because of us!
As much as I admire the goal of Free Software and like the tools produced under both Open Source and Free Software terms, that's just plain stupid. What a bunch of douches.
I dunno - I think once you hit that kind of capacity you can pretty much own the notebook market. Right now, mainstream notebook disk sizes are in the 160-250GB size range, with 320 generally available and I believe 500 GB drives are just starting to arrive. Most notebooks aren't at the high end of capacity, though.
I don't think SSD will make an impact in desktops anytime soon, but if I can put an SSD in my notebook and gain a little speed, some battery life, and better shock resistance without giving up any serious capacity (heck, my 2-month-old MacBook Pro has a 250GB HDD in it right now), depending on the price differential I'll probably be all over it.
Also worth thinking about (though it's not in the submitter's link) - I read a couple of releases on this drive yesterday, and though they aren't giving production prices yet they claim that multi-level cells will make it cheaper than the older models. Between that and the natural speed of price cuts, this drive may be at competitive HD pricing levels sooner than we expect. If I can get a 256GB SSD at a 25% price premium to a HDD of the same size (like you suggest), I think it would be pretty much a no-brainer. That 250GB HDD is only about $150 or so - maybe even less.
My tech skills have never (and I mean never) been inclined towards programming. It was always by far my weakest point. Anything more than a simple shell script has always been beyond me (despite that, I've managed to have a decent career in IT because there are a lot of things other than programming I can do well, fortunately).
Then HyperCard came out. It is still the only programming environment that I understood immediately. Within a few months, I'd produced several applications of varying usefulness (a guitar tuner, a lotto application that automatically tailored to each state's game, and a train layout app) that I happily posted around for downloading and even got a few dollars for. I re-wrote my resume as a stack, and sent it around on a floppy when I was jobhunting (This was before the Mac ghetto era of the early '90s). I could do things with HyperCard that I never was able to master with conventional languages.
Basically, in my eyes, HyperCard was the best chance ever at a programming environment for average people. It had plenty of flaws, and never even properly made the transition to PPC (let alone today's era), but it was an amazing tool - especially for the era. I do still miss it now.
10 years ago I was running IT at an ad agency. I had one person working for me and I also ran the prepress production area. I resigned to take a job near my home that would advance my career (after 6 years there), and gave six weeks' notice, with a week's vacation that was pre-scheduled in the mix. I spent the ensuing month working really hard to make sure all my knowledge was documented for my successor, worked on managing a good transition, and a decade later I still occasionally do work for them and have keycard access to the building. I gave them everything I had in me, and I was well-rewarded for it and remain on very good terms.
I then spent five years at my next employer. It was a mid-sized insurance company that was acquired after I'd been there a year and a half. For the first year we remained fully independent, and I managed the IT department there. After a year we began integrating functions, and over time it was obvious to me that the center of gravity for the combined company would be far away - I made it known that I had no interest in relocation when they asked about it and then, ultimately, they eliminated my department at the office I was at.
Most of my staff were given departure dates - I was sent out immediately, though, since policy said that IT management had to be booted out right away. I didn't take it personally - it just got me an extra two months' paid vacation with benefits.
Whatever, the point is to be as professional as you can and don't take things personally. You did your job, you were paid your money, and if they want to make do without you during your notice period, fine. Enjoy the Slashdot posts, tell people how to do things if they ask, and get ready for the new job.
Looking at Verizon's coverage maps, EVDO is available now across virtually the entire Cape (including pretty much the whole Seashore) and most of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket as well. Until this year I've always planned my annual Vineyard trip to only rent places where there's Internet access available - this year I can just use my EVDO card, which is a big plus.
I have a massive general-interest book collection (about 6 full bookcases in my house plus more in storage). I read 4-8 library books per month. I buy books frequently, and I also have a big technical library that I only refer to when I need it. I even have two bookcases in my office (which isn't that big) for the fraction of tech books I think I need handy. I also have all sorts of gadgets and computers. I have an old Newton. I've got an iPhone, I've owned Palms and PocketPCs as well over the years. They are all OK for reading, but none have replaced paper for me except in very limited circumstances. So I may not fit the profile they are looking for, but I am an the pretty far end of the reading scale.
To realistically have a shot at dethroning books in my life, a device would have to:
- Weigh a pound or maybe even less. - Have a battery life of at least 24 hours (of usage - not just standby) on a single charge. - Be rugged enough to handle the same kind of conditions as books. - Tactile comfort. Plenty of it. - Easy loading of content, including stuff I download myself (PDF manuals, for instance). - Wireless? Sure. That'd be nice too. - Cheap enough that I won't be bitter if I lose it or have it swiped. - My library needs to support it.
In other words, not for at least a couple more generations of reader. Maybe never. Paper is cheap - really cheap. If I buy a book for $10-$20 and I take care of it reasonably well, it'll still be there 20-30 years from now. My 6-year-old son reads books now that my wife and I owned when we were kids. Those books are almost 40 years old, and they are still useful today. If I buy a Kindle now, I'm probably looking to get rid of it in 2-3 years.
I think that for the foreseeable future (at least 5-10 years) e-books are at best a niche product.
I'm not aware of any current drive-by attacks that'll take out Vista, either. For all the heaps of suck Vista brings to the table, it is significantly more secure by default than its predecessors. Most of the attacks of that nature that have worked applied to XP systems, and many of those in turn were pre-SP2/IE7.
That said, when clients of mine buy new Dells with XP today, they ship with roughly 90+ security patches to XP non-applied, and IE6 still loaded. And that's how they are imaged at the factory. For what it's worth, one (usual) advantage to an Apple system is that it is usually much closer to a current fully patched state when it's removed from the box. Of course, that's because Apple ties builds of their software very tightly to a particular model - if I buy a MacBook Pro today it'll come with 10.5.2, period. There's no option to buy it with 10.4, or even 10.5.0 for that matter. Since product cycles on Macs tend to last in the 6-9 month range, they are unlikely to ever be more than 2-3 OS revisions behind current.
It's good that I can buy older software on a PC, but it also opens the door when it comes to exploits.
Slashdot Mirror
That's how it works in the US - if you want to open up a postpaid cell account you'll have to give them the info they need to access your credit report. And the agencies use your SSN to identify you. Game over.
Don't like that? Get a prepaid cellphone. You probably won't be able to buy the "hottest" models or just-launched phones like the Pre (iPhones aren't available for prepaid, either). With the CDMA providers (Sprint and Verizon) it's a PITA to change anything but you can get the GSM phone of your choice when it's available unlocked and then use it with an AT&T or T-Mobile prepaid account SIM. No credit checks or SSN required that way.
(Also, if you have a cheap-ish phone on a contract and it breaks, you can replace it with a prepaid phone from the same vendor and that way be able to get a replacement without affecting contract issues. I did this for my in-laws when their phone broke.)
The whole point here is that the single-button mouse isn't a design failure at all. It's a decision that was made in order to make it easier to build a system that didn't require an alt-click for anything. When Macs were first designed, the mouse was a new thing entirely to most folks.
I actually like that the system works fine with one button, but takes advantage of two.
If you want to talk about an Apple design failure, instead of talking about the one-button mouse in general (because that's not a clear failure at all), talk about the horrible "hockey-puck" mouse that Apple introduced with the iMac and stayed on the scene far too long. That sold more two-button mice than anything else because the ergonomics were so horrible that users went running to alternative mice as soon as they realized they could use them!
Also in the "what were they thinking" category is the current Apple Bluetooth keyboard, with the minimal laptop key layout. The old wireless keyboard was so much better it's remarkable they haven't done anything to bring the old layout back.
And I really miss the ability to turn Macs on from the keyboard - one of the nice things ADB brought to the table.
The more important point is that the UI is designed so it can be operated perfectly well with only one mouse button. There are "power" options, but there's no reason a user has to change from single button usage unless they want to. Telling a user to "click on the button" is a lot simpler than telling them to "click or right-click". Apple's always been about keeping that part of the experience simple by default.
Problem is that Windows users and the Slashdot audience by default want the most options and have learned to not mind right-clicking, so the fact that Apple has it as an option instead of a default is mistakenly seen as a flaw. It's not a flaw, nor is it an advantage. It's just different.
Huh? Which Mac was that? All the original Macs (the 128, 512, and Plus, along with the SE series and Classic) had the power switch on the back. The NuBus Macs (Mac II onwards up until the middle of the PPC era) powered up via their ADB keyboards.
There was an optional reset switch you could attach to the lower side of the computer, I guess that could look like a power button - but that was originally a user option to install (most didn't that I recall) and the later Macs had a slightly recessed reset button.
Not for nothing, but that's just not true anymore. Hasn't been for quite a few years. Ever since the Mighty Mouse (the one with the trackball) became standard, it's been a 2-button mouse. It's just that the Mac UI was designed to be single-button friendly and the mouse operates in single button mode by default. If you are clever enough a user to want to right-click, it's simple enough to just go to the System Preference pane for your mouse and turn it on.
Mice with two hardware buttons Just Work as well. And the method of right-clicking on a laptop touchpad (two-finger click) is simple and intuitive, and all software-based.
Now if you don't like the ergonomics of the Apple mouse (I don't, and I use a Dell Bluetooth mouse with my Mac) that's fine and a legitimate complaint. But to claim that Apple requires you to Control-click when that's been no more than an option for years just shows ignorance.
Delta updates contain both PPC and Intel code for all changes since the last point release (10.5.6). Combo updates contain all updated code for both platforms since 10.5 was released in 2007. This is why the standalone installers are so huge.
If you install via Software Update, the update will only be delta code for your processor platform - much smaller.
MS does similar with Windows Update/Microsoft Update, which is one of the reasons it takes a longer time to process. In most cases, you can download a version of the update for admins which will be the equivalent of a combo update on Apple, but for only the X86 family.
Apple updaters will shrink with Snow Leopard - Snow Leopard is Intel-only.
The little USB ones. I've got one, too. Hardly sticks out from the laptop.
MacBook Air: $1799 for 1.6 GHz processor with a 120GB SATA drive (1.8" single platter), or $2499 for a 1.86 GHz processor and a 128GB SSD. Both use the nVidia GeForce 9400M chipset/graphics.
Dell Adamo: $1999 for 1.2 GHz processor, 128GB SSD. With 4GB RAM, 1.4 GHz processor, and an AT&T 3g card - $2699.
Sure, it's a HDD instead of the SSD in the low-end Air, but both models are faster, both are lighter, and both base configs cost less than the Dells.
More seriously, I see a decent number of Airs in my clients' offices. Nowhere near as many as other Mac (and Windows) portables, but one client alone has six of them (they use them with Verizon cards on construction sites). They fill a niche quite well - the "ultimate PowerPoint system" where the user well may have another main desktop computer and uses the Air for travel and presentations.
The Adamo isn't horrible, but it's not too much of an Air-killer - Dell will have their work cut out for them just competing against the Windows subnotes that are even better and have nicer designs.
When the Adamo was first announced a month or so ago, I remember seeing the pictures on Engadget and saying to myself "not too bad industrial design for a Dell". The "for a Dell" is key.
So it costs more than the Air, but has a crappier chipset. It does have more ports, which is good, and unlike the Air it can hold 4GB of RAM. It's also a little bigger, a little heavier, and it has way less processor in it. Plus it comes with Vista - though it's at least the x64 edition, it still will have that much more in driver compatibility issues as a result, and it's still only a Home edition. For that kind of coin, you'd think they would at least provide Ultimate.
And how again is this Dell's MacBook Air killer? The best thing I can say about it so far is it's a little better-looking than most Dell laptops. But I think they're going to sell about 3 of these.
It's just an interpretation of accounting rules. Nothing sinister. The first time this came up was with the 802.n enabler for early MacBook Pro models. They came out with n-capable radios but didn't start shipping anything officially for about 4 months afterwards. When they released the new Macs with "official" support they decided that the n feature would be considered new. So they included it with purchases of the n-version base stations and made it a $1.99 download for users who did not buy a base station but had a machine that they wanted it with.
It's a little goofy, but not sinister. They've stated very clearly that they recognize iPhone revenue on a subscription basis and therefore feel they can add features at no cost. And the reason folks only get things like MMS now is simple too:
There's only so many features that a software team can add in a given timeframe. Period. Cut & Paste is a really nice "wanna have", but if it had cost me another feature that might not have been so hot. I certainly wanted Exchange ActiveSync support more than I wanted MMS. What got announced today is the features that made the cut to be polished and added to 3.0. Nothing more, nothing less.
In June, 3.0 will ship, I'll update my phone to it, and soon afterwards we'll get the updates, bugfixes, and such that come for a while afterwards once the world gets the code. And if you don't want to spend the coin for software on your iPod Touch, don't. It'll still play music fine without it.
Not only that, but sometime this year there'll probably be a minor update to the iPhone hardware, too. Either at the same time as 3.0 ships or soon afterwards. Shh. Don't tell anybody.
That was my only "rats" about these - I was hoping for a quad-core iMac as at least a BTO option for the high end. Especially since these new models support 8GB of RAM.
Otherwise it was a pretty decent batch of gear, and they also dropped pricing on a lot of the BTO options as well for the other Macs. Keeps them competitive until the next major redesign.
Not for nothing, but we have a six-year-old of our own. We walk him to school and wake him up in the morning, but the rest is his job to do. He needs to get up, go to the bathroom, brush his teeth, pick out clothes, get dressed, and go downstairs for breakfast. He is allowed to feed himself juice and cereal - if he wants something cooked (toast or eggs, for instance) we make it for him. We pack his lunch in the morning as well, but he needs to put it in his backpack before we leave to walk to school.
We are there for him, and we escort him down the street, but he's pretty much on his own. We call it "teaching responsibility". In a couple of years if he's ready he'll be able to walk to school on his own, too.
But we're holding off on the driving thing a while longer, I think...
After all, Apple is having so much trouble selling iPhones and attracting a developer community that open-sourcing the iPhone is the only way to survive... Wait, what? Apple already has the top-selling smartphone? They already have a huge developer community and thousands of applications in less than six months of having this OS on the market? They've all but killed Palm, made a huge dent in Microsoft's Windows Mobile business, and forced RIM to come out with a poorly-regarded "me too" touchscreen phone while eating market share?
Well, I guess that's how poorly things are going for Apple with a closed design. There's lots of valid reasons why Apple might be well-served to open up more of their iPhone code, but it's not like the current strategy has exactly failed miserably. Right now iPhone is in a pretty enviable place from a development point of view. Apple is early in the 2.0 cycle, and hasn't even implemented all the promised features for developers yet (like central push notification and true turn-by-turn GPS capabilities), and they still have a massive base of developers who are leveraging their Cocoa code and methods to produce iPhone software.
Not to mention that touch in general is a full-fledged platform for Apple. Not just phones, but iPods and likely other devices. Build for the platform and you run on all the devices (unlike, say, RIM's multiple platforms). And they have teh sexy as well in their hardware and UI designs, so there's consumer appeal (compared to, say, the skins manufacturers have had to overlay on Windows Mobile to make it less hostile to users).
There's always going to be people who want to tweak their phone, or run Linux on it because it has a CPU and RAM. But the mass market doesn't give a darn if iPhones are open or closed. They don't care if Android is open, either. They just care that the devices are cool and useful, and that there's plenty of nice software to run that's easy to get. iPhone is leading in that race now, and as long as they're all that, nobody important gives a darn otherwise.
Here's my take on it - you can get a job, depending on the job. It probably won't be a great one, and you'll have to work that much harder to establish yourself on merit.
My own abbreviated story behind that rationale: I went to college for a couple of years in the '80s. Left and got an entry-level (at the time) job doing training and support for a computer store. I mainly drifted between sales and support jobs at resellers for several years and made squat, but it was a way to be in the biz. Then one of my customers hired me to run the systems they'd installed. From there, I wound up gaining enough real-world experience (and, as we grew, I got a small staff to manage) to be useful. When it became time to move on, though, my lack of a degree was a factor. I wound up with a good job after that, and gained more experience and expertise (along with a larger staff), but that job went away when the office I worked at got shrunk back in '03. And the lack of a degree was definitely a factor again in looking for jobs afterwards - in fact, there was one I would have absolutely gotten (I found this out after the fact), but for that lack.
I wound up striking out on my own, and have managed to do quite well with my own company (we employ several other people as well), but that's really the first job where it hasn't mattered somewhat. I'm probably at a point now where age and experience outweigh the lack of formal credentials. But it took over 20 years to get there. So as much as you don't _need_ a degree, it certainly makes life easier, especially early on.
It doesn't have to be an IT-related degree, though. I'd say study whatever interests you the most, so long as you take at least some classes to help you with what you want to do for a living.
Going back in history, here were the versions and reasons for numbering (I was in the channel back in those days so I still remember a lot of this):
Windows 1.0 - program launcher that competed with things like Desqview.
Windows 2.x - A full "environment" that also shipped as a runtime for programs that required a GUI on DOS. PageMaker was a good example, it came with the Windows runtime. Also available as a version with rudimentary 386 support
Windows 3.0 - This was the first version of Windows most users saw back then. It supported 386 mode fully, and was really the first version to be used as a full-time GUI by most folks. They made a huge retail push back then to get it out there. Windows 3 was the first version to be produced post-IBM split and pretty much killed the OS/2 market in infancy.
Windows 3.1 was an improvement to 3.0. It also was released around the same time as the first NT version, so for marketing reasons NT 1.0 was labeled as NT 3.1, so as to help them differentiate between the "pro" and "consumer" Windows versions.
3.11, Windows for Workgroups, etc. were all branches off this tree.
Windows NT continued to evolve to the 3.5 and 3.51 branches. Meanwhile, Microsoft kept working on a DOS-based version of Windows that was initially called "Chicago" in-house and was versioned as Windows 4.0. That became Windows 95 when it shipped. Windows 95 was the basis for Windows 95 OSR2 (added initial USB support and some other stuff), Windows 98, and finally Windows ME. Thus endeth the DOS-based line of Windows.
Meanwhile, Windows NT was revved up to 4.0, gaining the Windows 95 GUI and moving video and printing into the kernel. This bought big performance improvements but at the cost of introducing us to the modern BSOD (most fatal errors back then seemed to trace down to the video drivers). NT 4 became the basis for NT 5.0, which became known to us as Windows 2000.
Windows 200 introduced USB support to Windows, along with some of the usability improvements that were in consumer Windows at the time and also brought us Active Directory - their attempt to dethrone Novell as directory services king.
It worked.
Windows 2000 still really wasn't a "consumer-worthy" OS, so for NT 5.1 they focused on the user experience. They prettied up the UI, added features like System Restore, and split the desktop OS into Home and Professional versions. It became Windows XP.
Meanwhile on the server side, Microsoft was taking that same kernel and rebuilding it into a successor to Windows 2000 Server. It, in turn, became Windows 2003 Server (version 5.2).
The next project was to produce a successor OS. The codebase got revved up to what became Windows 6.0, and it wound up coming out as Windows Vista and, after a year's more development the server version became Windows Server 2008. Both are based on the 6.0 codebase.
So now comes Windows 7.0 - the server version will be AKA Windows Server 2008 R2 and will break into a 64-bit version only.
So the numbering overlapped for a while, but if you look at the original Windows history and then pick up NT from there it mostly makes sense. There have been some branches and dead ends (All the 16-bit Windows versions after 95, CE, XP Embedded), but the main line goes 16-bit to 95, then picks up 32-bit with NT and goes 32-bit and up only with 2000 (5.0) and beyond.
I send in checks for all bills. We log them in the checkbook so we have a written backup, and then I do all the data entry and balancing in Quicken. Takes about 15 minutes a week - my wife writes the checks, I do the data entry.
We also do a couple of unique things (at least in the US) - we pay everything in full, and send in the payment the same week we get the bill. Usually within a day or two. And we keep enough of a cash cushion in our accounts that we never worry about overdrafts.
I've looked into payment systems but I just don't have the trust necessary. The closest we've come is that when my wife was working she would pay all the bills she could (her cellphone, office phone, storage unit, and gas) with her company credit card and then just fill out the expense reports. But that wasn't money coming out of our own accounts - her company paid it and she just had to reconcile the bill.
We probably pay $8 or so per month in postage that we might not have to with bill pay systems, but I don't think it's that costly. And we know our accounts aren't being tapped without our approval.
To join the argument full-tilt:
- There are three other smartphone makers. RIM, Palm, and Microsoft. In the case of RIM, they make all their devices and are quite restrictive. They also enable admins to lock them down even further via policy. I manage a few Blackberry servers for clients of mine - they work great, but you can in fact lock them down aggressively and a lot of admins want them to do so.
- Microsoft has no such automatic restrictions, but they seal off the OS from entry. You can at least port apps from Win32 and adapt them, and the APIs are well-documented.
- Palm has no real restrictions at all, but the OS is still closed.
- None of these offer an easy way for non-technical users to download and install applications on their phones.
- With regard to DRM, you're making my point for me. There were no stores because the labels were insisting on draconian DRM measures and all strongly supported subscription music. Apple broke the logjam with a reasonable compromise and the market responded by giving Apple a dominant market share. Labels finally noticed and began lifting DRM requirements and Apple's been fully behind that movement. When available, tracks with no DRM are priced the same as tracks with DRM. Apple has a lot of leverage, but they don't make the rules. The labels do. Apple's supposed to stay out of the marketplace because they can't measure up to your ideological purity test?
- Outsourcing/offshoring: no, they aren't significantly different. They have some engineering and support resources overseas. They have the vast majority in the US. They also are a global company, selling and supporting products in almost every country. That's life. I've seen the financials as well, and most of the other companies I am interested in or invested in. They are, if anything, less outsourced than any of their major competitors (Microsoft, HP, Dell...)
The original Mac factory that was built in 1983 was famously described by Apple as a place where they just about trucked in sand and produced Macs. Those days are over. Forever.
- As for those final couple of points - no point in arguing the "user experience/price argument" again here. It gets done enough on Slashdot. Suffice it to say that there is likely a reason why Apple's market share over the last several years has been growing faster than the rest of the industry's. And also probably why Apple had sold so darned many iPhones in the last 13 months.
It indicates that either the market as a whole likes what Apple is doing and the view that Apple is evil is silly, or it indicates that your position on Apple is the One True Belief (facts be darned), and all the people buying them are mere sheep who are blinded by cute TV ads.
I'll cast my vote with the masses. Is Apple perfect? Of course not. But they do a pretty good job of making computers and devices that are easy for the masses to use, work well (usually better than the competition), and provide a minimum of real-world encumbrances.
I'll call you on three of these points:
iPhones are not far more restrictive than any carrier phone ever was. Palm and Windows Mobile have been open to all comers. Everything else has had some form of restriction or another, and carriers in general have been very restrictive about what is and is not allowed. What Apple did was make development easy, but introduce a central clearinghouse for apps. Even then, you're free to develop your app however (so long as it meets carrier requirements), and you can charge what you want - including $0. I really don't see how that is an issue. If you want a 100% open phone, buy an OpenMoko and play with it to your hearts' content. If you want a phone with a closed OS but the ability to develop software as you like without restrictions, get a Treo or a WinMob phone.
If you want a phone that's not 100% open but fairly easy to develop for and that gives you a really effective clearinghouse to get your app out to the public, get an iPhone.
The other point you make is that DRM was dying before iTunes. Horsepuckey. There were no widespread online music stores before iTunes. MP3.com was selling a handful of unencumbered files, and they continue to do so, but they weren't that popular then and remain fairly obscure - they have a lot of small labels and indy music but not much mainstream stuff. I think Rhapsody was around then with their subscription model, but only just. Apple was the first mainstream music store, and they managed to get a relatively loose form of DRM for their music. As their market share increased, labels realized that their only hope of breaking iTunes' control was to give other stores something that iTunes lacked - so that's what started the trend away from DRM. And as they've been allowed, iTunes has been putting up tracks with no DRM, as well.
Finally, as far as outsourcing goes, Apple's not too much different from every other company. Nobody manufactures their own stuff anymore - it's not worth it, Including Apple. Apple has the vast majority of their support and engineering staff here in the US, and minimal resources elsewhere. They are probably a little better than most comparable firms when it comes to keeping core business function here, but manufacturing is gone and it's never coming back.
Look, for reasons of religious purity you may well feel the One True Path is to have an Ubuntu desktop built from the finest hand-picked components and syncing to an OpenMoko phone that you wrote all the code for. Most people don't. They don't want to do that, and they couldn't give a darn if you do. What they want is a computer that works pretty well, isn't too expensive, and runs the programs they want. Can be a Mac, usually going to be Windows, never going to be Linux. And they want a swank mobile phone that does cool stuff for them and impresses people when they whip it out of their pockets. Hence iPhones. Apple is good at that stuff, and therefore their company is perceived by the market to be extraordinarily valuable.
Hey, I have a great idea! Let's protest the fact that a computer company makes computers and software that doesn't fit our ideology by crowding their stores, pissing off a bunch of employees who are paid to answer tech support questions instead of discussing politics, and making customers who need support miserable. That attention will really help us make software free - they'll all quake in fear because of us!
As much as I admire the goal of Free Software and like the tools produced under both Open Source and Free Software terms, that's just plain stupid. What a bunch of douches.
I dunno - I think once you hit that kind of capacity you can pretty much own the notebook market. Right now, mainstream notebook disk sizes are in the 160-250GB size range, with 320 generally available and I believe 500 GB drives are just starting to arrive. Most notebooks aren't at the high end of capacity, though.
I don't think SSD will make an impact in desktops anytime soon, but if I can put an SSD in my notebook and gain a little speed, some battery life, and better shock resistance without giving up any serious capacity (heck, my 2-month-old MacBook Pro has a 250GB HDD in it right now), depending on the price differential I'll probably be all over it.
Also worth thinking about (though it's not in the submitter's link) - I read a couple of releases on this drive yesterday, and though they aren't giving production prices yet they claim that multi-level cells will make it cheaper than the older models. Between that and the natural speed of price cuts, this drive may be at competitive HD pricing levels sooner than we expect. If I can get a 256GB SSD at a 25% price premium to a HDD of the same size (like you suggest), I think it would be pretty much a no-brainer. That 250GB HDD is only about $150 or so - maybe even less.
My tech skills have never (and I mean never) been inclined towards programming. It was always by far my weakest point. Anything more than a simple shell script has always been beyond me (despite that, I've managed to have a decent career in IT because there are a lot of things other than programming I can do well, fortunately).
Then HyperCard came out. It is still the only programming environment that I understood immediately. Within a few months, I'd produced several applications of varying usefulness (a guitar tuner, a lotto application that automatically tailored to each state's game, and a train layout app) that I happily posted around for downloading and even got a few dollars for. I re-wrote my resume as a stack, and sent it around on a floppy when I was jobhunting (This was before the Mac ghetto era of the early '90s). I could do things with HyperCard that I never was able to master with conventional languages.
Basically, in my eyes, HyperCard was the best chance ever at a programming environment for average people. It had plenty of flaws, and never even properly made the transition to PPC (let alone today's era), but it was an amazing tool - especially for the era. I do still miss it now.
10 years ago I was running IT at an ad agency. I had one person working for me and I also ran the prepress production area. I resigned to take a job near my home that would advance my career (after 6 years there), and gave six weeks' notice, with a week's vacation that was pre-scheduled in the mix. I spent the ensuing month working really hard to make sure all my knowledge was documented for my successor, worked on managing a good transition, and a decade later I still occasionally do work for them and have keycard access to the building. I gave them everything I had in me, and I was well-rewarded for it and remain on very good terms.
I then spent five years at my next employer. It was a mid-sized insurance company that was acquired after I'd been there a year and a half. For the first year we remained fully independent, and I managed the IT department there. After a year we began integrating functions, and over time it was obvious to me that the center of gravity for the combined company would be far away - I made it known that I had no interest in relocation when they asked about it and then, ultimately, they eliminated my department at the office I was at.
Most of my staff were given departure dates - I was sent out immediately, though, since policy said that IT management had to be booted out right away. I didn't take it personally - it just got me an extra two months' paid vacation with benefits.
Whatever, the point is to be as professional as you can and don't take things personally. You did your job, you were paid your money, and if they want to make do without you during your notice period, fine. Enjoy the Slashdot posts, tell people how to do things if they ask, and get ready for the new job.
Looking at Verizon's coverage maps, EVDO is available now across virtually the entire Cape (including pretty much the whole Seashore) and most of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket as well. Until this year I've always planned my annual Vineyard trip to only rent places where there's Internet access available - this year I can just use my EVDO card, which is a big plus.
They only got EVDO on the islands last fall.
I have a massive general-interest book collection (about 6 full bookcases in my house plus more in storage). I read 4-8 library books per month. I buy books frequently, and I also have a big technical library that I only refer to when I need it. I even have two bookcases in my office (which isn't that big) for the fraction of tech books I think I need handy. I also have all sorts of gadgets and computers. I have an old Newton. I've got an iPhone, I've owned Palms and PocketPCs as well over the years. They are all OK for reading, but none have replaced paper for me except in very limited circumstances. So I may not fit the profile they are looking for, but I am an the pretty far end of the reading scale.
To realistically have a shot at dethroning books in my life, a device would have to:
- Weigh a pound or maybe even less.
- Have a battery life of at least 24 hours (of usage - not just standby) on a single charge.
- Be rugged enough to handle the same kind of conditions as books.
- Tactile comfort. Plenty of it.
- Easy loading of content, including stuff I download myself (PDF manuals, for instance).
- Wireless? Sure. That'd be nice too.
- Cheap enough that I won't be bitter if I lose it or have it swiped.
- My library needs to support it.
In other words, not for at least a couple more generations of reader. Maybe never. Paper is cheap - really cheap. If I buy a book for $10-$20 and I take care of it reasonably well, it'll still be there 20-30 years from now. My 6-year-old son reads books now that my wife and I owned when we were kids. Those books are almost 40 years old, and they are still useful today. If I buy a Kindle now, I'm probably looking to get rid of it in 2-3 years.
I think that for the foreseeable future (at least 5-10 years) e-books are at best a niche product.
I'm not aware of any current drive-by attacks that'll take out Vista, either. For all the heaps of suck Vista brings to the table, it is significantly more secure by default than its predecessors. Most of the attacks of that nature that have worked applied to XP systems, and many of those in turn were pre-SP2/IE7.
That said, when clients of mine buy new Dells with XP today, they ship with roughly 90+ security patches to XP non-applied, and IE6 still loaded. And that's how they are imaged at the factory. For what it's worth, one (usual) advantage to an Apple system is that it is usually much closer to a current fully patched state when it's removed from the box. Of course, that's because Apple ties builds of their software very tightly to a particular model - if I buy a MacBook Pro today it'll come with 10.5.2, period. There's no option to buy it with 10.4, or even 10.5.0 for that matter. Since product cycles on Macs tend to last in the 6-9 month range, they are unlikely to ever be more than 2-3 OS revisions behind current.
It's good that I can buy older software on a PC, but it also opens the door when it comes to exploits.