Also, to the person who responded saying FireWire 800 isn't twice as fast as USB 2 because USB 2 operates at 480 Mbps: you should look at the real life performance of USB - both 1 and 2. It's far short of the theoretical maximum; in the case of USB 2, often well under 400 Mbps. So FireWire 800 is more than twice as fast. Even 400 Mbps FireWire is often faster than USB 2.
However, it's really beside the point if FireWire 800 is faster than USB 2 if the device you wish to connect only has a USB 2 interface. FireWire may be the superior interface and technology for many high-speed tasks, but many consumer devices feature USB 2. It certainly can't hurt to be able to connect to the widest variety of devices possible. FireWire - not only because of speed, but because of features and the flexibility of the standard - will continue to be chosen for high end audio, video, specialty storage and networking, smart home interconnectivity, etc. Look at plasma HDTVs and DVD-A players: you won't see USB 2 on those. But it would be nice for Mac users to pick up a third-party USB 2 scanner, DVD recorder, camera, etc., and be able to take full advantage of the peripheral's connectivity (many of these devices may even have FireWire versions, or versions with both USB 2 and FireWire. But the item in stock and on the shelf at Best Buy always seems to be the USB 2-only version...that's what it really comes down to for some).
Dave:
I've talked to our business affairs manager and this is the response he asked me to give people who wrote in looking for additional information:
This outcome is the result of business and legal negotiations and we do not discuss those negotiations. If you are asking whether this in any way reflects on Apple QuickTime's technology, the answer is no -- business and legal issues, not technological ones, led to this outcome.
I apologize if that's not the answer you're looking for.
Paul
> From: Dave Schroeder [mailto:das@doit.wisc.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:59 PM > To: nprhelp@npr.org > Subject: Re: QuickTime > > > NPR.org had been offering some of its audio in the Apple QuickTime > > format under an arrangement with Apple QuickTime. We regret that we > > were unable to reach mutually acceptable terms for a new arrangement > > with Apple QuickTime. As a result, NPR is unable to continue offering > > its content in this format. > > I'd like more information about this. Since the QuickTime Streaming > technology is free and has no licensing restrictions, what do you mean > you were "unable to reach mutually acceptable terms for a new > arrangement"? There is nothing that needs to be arranged with Apple, or > purchased from Apple (unless they were subsidizing your broadcast, or > providing facilities and/or equipment, and did not wish to do this any > longer). > > Awaiting your reply, > > Dave Schroeder > University of Wisconsin - Madison
NPR has to purchase NOTHING for this. QTSS, and their existing equipment with QuickTime frameworks, is all they need to stream this, and they don't need to pay for any codecs to do it. Either:
1.) They now want (more) money from Apple to do it, or
2.) Apple must not want to pay them to do it (any longer).
Please point me to where I or anyone else is required to "purchase" codecs from Apple for QuickTime either for streaming or playback (other than MPEG-2).
(This assumes NPR is using QTSS on Mac OS X Server, the only platform where it is supported by Apple.)
To enable the debug menu, which allows for viewing of various debug information, masquerading as other browsers, complete list of keyboard and mouse shortcuts, and lax security certificate checking, execute the following command as the logged-in user while Safari is not running:
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Billionaire oilman Marvin Davis would drop his bid to acquire the entertainment assets of Franco-American conglomerate Vivendi Universal if Vivendi sells Universal Music to Apple Computer Inc., a source familiar with the situation said Friday.
The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Davis was uninterested in pursuing his $15 billion bid for Vivendi Universal Entertainment if Vivendi either sold its music group to Apple, which sources have confirmed it is in talks to do, or pulls the unit off the market entirely.
"The Davis proposal from the beginning has always been for all the entertainment assets, and the music group is essential," the source said. "The transaction doesn't make sense without it."
The source then added, "If this (the Apple deal) were to happen or if Vivendi was to decide they would keep the music group, the Davis proposal would be withdrawn."
This would seem to throw a wrench in the works.
Or they could go for the 64-bit IBM PowerPC 970 with 32-bit backward compatibility and AltiVec that has "APPLE, USE ME, I'M YOUR NEXT PROCESSOR" written all over it.
And let's not forget that these security updates are due to exploits and holes in the software of the OSS community at large (sendmail, samba, openssl, openssh), not due to Apple's own bungling or inattention to security.
I keep hearing people say things like "Bush wasn't elected," as if there were some truth to the statement. I hoped it was just bitterness at defeat that would eventually die down. But apparently the bitterness or blindness of some knows no bounds. So let me set the record straight, once and for all.
Bush was elected. There is no sense in which it is correct to say that he was not. We have a system of elections, determined by written law, and that system and law was followed at every step.
Some say Bush didn't win the "national popular" vote, as if the total number of votes means anything. It doesn't. Our law defines an electoral college system, and there is no such thing as a national popular vote.
Some say the Supreme Court of the United States stepped in and handed the election to Bush, as if the Supreme Court is not the final arbiter of Constitutionality of election law. It is such, as defined in Article II Section 1 and Amendment 14.
Some say that the decision of the Supreme Court was invalid because it was partisan, that if you look at the 5-4 decision, it is the conservatives voting in favor of Bush, with the liberals in favor of Gore. Actually, the decision that the Florida recount was unconstitutional by breach of due process was 7-2, including all but the two most liberal members of the court; if the vote was partisan by vote makeup as we've been told, then it was the two liberals who were partisan. Of course, even if the decision in Bush's favor were partisan, it wouldn't invalidate the election (despite damaging the integrity of the Supreme Court), but this is just another example of people ignoring the facts of the matter.
So you can disagree with the outcome, but you cannot reasonably say that Bush didn't win the election, unless you believe the election procedures should be determined by something other than the law that defines them, and our system of law that interprets them. To continue to say he wasn't elected is to ignore the factual truth of the matter.
As others have said, the "10-client" limitation is for AppleShare file sharing (Apple File Protocol, or AFP) connections only. Nothing else about the server is restricted or limited in any way.
Sorry it can't be linked directly, but if you go to http://store.apple.com/, click "Apple Software" under "Software and Books" on the left, and scroll down to "Mac OS X Server v10.2 (10-User Lic.)", you will see:
A 10 User license should be used if your server load is no more than 10 simultaneous file sharing connections (for more connections, please select the Unlimited license).
I realize dupes are nothing new on slashdot, but:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/10/ 1414229
This was ALREADY RUN on this very site, in this very section, on Feb 10, the day of Xserve RAID's introduction. This fact is also mentioned several times in the comments of *this* article.
And it was prominently displayed alternating between both the large, main feature, and one of the 3 smaller features. This was huge a month ago; every Mac site (and slashdot) carried it.
When you start it up, it says something to the effect of "I'll walk you through the startup." and then does a number of things WITHOUT MY PERMISSION. First, it creates a ~/Documents/widgets directory. It doesn't warn me about this until after it is done.
Guess we'd better also string up Adobe (Acrobat), Oracle (Corporate Time), Qualcomm (Eudora), Apple (Final Cut family), Microsoft (Office), and Connectix (Virtual PC) for putting things in ~/Library/Documents...
Then it launches a bunch of mini-apps; again, it does not ask me if this is ok.
That's the authors' judgement call about how to start the application. Your comment would be the same as saying "Microsoft Office started the PROJECT GALLERY without my permission!"
I ended up in a state where I had all these weird things on my screen
The setup assistant tells you it's opening up a few sample widgets for you, just to get you familiar with it. It also tells you that you may close any or all of them.
and no application in my dock/ This thing is running but I have no way to shut it down. I had to open Terminal to kill the app.
LOL! The setup assistant also tells you that Konfabulator is controlled and accessed via its menu extra, which is represented by two little gears on your menu bar. It's got a "Quit" option right there.
This thing breaks the entire Apple human Interface guidelines
No it doesn't, as everything you've said so far is wrong.
it sticks applications in the users Documents directory which should never be done
They're not applications at all. (You could also argue that this, and quite a bit of the other stuff placed in Documents, would be more appropriately placed in ~/Library, but that's another discussion altogether.)
and to add insult upon injury, it only runs clocks and stuff -- there is no way to write your own application that I could see.
Oh, this is especially hilarious! You apparently didn't look at Konfabulator's website at all, nor did you take two seconds to look at any of the widgets, which are all just text JavaScript code that can be rewritten or modified in any way, nor did you see the fully documented reference for creating widgets, nor did you apparently even READ the post you responded to! Do you think that it's through some magic that the widget library exists? That there is no way to write code, yet people somehow manage, by miracle of miracles, to be doing it?
Konfabulator is a runtime engine for scripting languages. It allows very functional applets, which Konfabulator calls widgets, to be written quickly without higher level language knowledge. It's $25 shareware.
All the widgets that come with it are useless to me.
The widgets that come with it are merely very simple examples! You can make a widget to do that task you've always wanted to do even if you have no programming knowledge. A widget that does about anything can be made with about a page of code.
OMG, the widgets are just eye candy that take up to much desk space!@ Plus, I have menu extras that do everything!@
1. Then make a widget that is whatever size YOU want it to be!
2. Make a widget that ISN'T eye candy (in your opinion), and displays the data however YOU want!
3. The widgets that come with Konfabulator are simple examples, to show the kinds of things that can be done, while also being visually pleasing.
4. The size issue has been discussed at length. The response seems to indicate the ability to actively scale any widget just didn't make it into 1.0. (I don't speak for the authors, but that was my interpretation.)
Konfabulator still isn't worth it to me...like I said, I have menu extras and docklings that do all this stuff!
If you can't see any purpose for Konfabulator, and can't think beyond applications you already have, and are stuck on the size of the default widgets, then you have utterly, totally missed the point of Konfabulator: to let people with very minimal programming language, i.e. almost anyone, make a small application that does whatever they want it to and looks however they want it to; the ability to actively obtain and display information by any scripted action, or to cause events to occur by any scripted action, all in the interface of your choosing.
The widget library is all clocks and newsreaders!@
Konfabulator has only been out for a week, and relatively few people know about it. There are already over 75 widgets. Yes, there are a lot of people who are just "skinning" the existing widgets, but this is the beginning. There are two people who can benefit from Konfabulator: those who are willing to write a little JavaScript, and those who are talented with artwork and graphics. There's nothing wrong with 20 beautiful clocks that people may want to choose from. Lots more widgets will continue to come.
OMG, they used Java??! Java is slow as HIZZELL on Mac OS X
1. Uh, this is JavaScript, not Java. They have nothing to do with one another.
2. As an aside, Java on Mac OS X is not slow.
This is Active Desktop all over again.
No, it's not, because this doesn't suck.
This is bullshit! They're charging you $25 so that YOU have to go out and do the work of making widgets!!
Look, you can decide if this thing is worth $25 to you or not. They're not charging $25 for the default widgets; they're charging $25 for an easy-to-use and innovative programming/scripting framework. The default widgets are JUST EXAMPLES. Also, we'd better warn Metrowerks to stop charging for CodeWarrior, after all, CodeWarrior is useless unless you actually make an application with it!
By the way, anyone reading this at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, we have a site license for Konfabulator. Email for info.
I still don't get it/think Konfabulator is usless/think it costs to much.
Well, no one's forcing you to use it. Sorry you don't see the value in being able to quickly whip up little mini-apps that can do pretty much anything, AND be visually pleasing!
EE Times weighs in, without the sensationalism
on
WiFi Woes With .11g
·
· Score: 5, Informative
In this article, EE Times looks at some of the same issues.
However, some of the same misinformation prevails:
And in an environment of mixed.11b and.11g basestations, Krewell said, clients will automatically default to the lower 11-Mbit/s bandwidth of.11b.
Not true on two counts.
First, the only reason that a/b access points don't do this is because they're basically two different access points in one box! If a b/g access point had essentially two access points - one b, and one g - within itself, it wouldn't need to scale back either! Which brings me to...
Second, g clients don't scale back to 11 when b clients are present. They will get slower, but only because of the way the packets are interspersed. When 802.11b is present on an interface where g is present, everything, including b clients, will slow a little bit; by about a third. But g clients will not slow to 11.
Also, Apple's equipment has the ability to force b or g only, if needed in a particular installation.
Ultimately, one Apple design manager said, chip sets will support all three WLAN standards, eliminating any conflicts. Indeed, Intel intends to initially ship.11b chips for its Banias notebook platform, following that up with.11a/b combo chips within three months, and probably add support for.11g by the end of the year, Krewell said.
Looks to my like it'll be a wash in the end, and I'd rather have g, albeit a draft g, right now (which, if there are any changes, will most certainly be updated to the final g via a firmware update). I can still connect to all b access points, and have increased speed when connected to my g access point (connected via 100mbit ethernet) today.
Note: this was posted wirelessly over draft 802.11g-Draft6.
No, this will most certainly not happen...
on
Mac OS X 10.2.4 Is Out
·
· Score: 3, Informative
...to everyone, and the fact that it happened to this one poster is a fluke. As far as that goes, it shouldn't happen to *anyone*, but as with every OS update, there will be a very, very small subset of people who say "it fouled up my x" or "totally screwed my settings for y", but the vast, vast majority of people have no problems at all.
I don't have any problems with any of the key points brought up in the article, when applied to terrorism. As I read through the sections thought to be the most egregious, I'm just nodding along going "mm hmm", "sounds good", "hell yeah", and "why aren't we already doing this?"
The only problem, of course, is who defines "terrorism"?
The early graphite-colored AirPort Base Stations had a very widespread nasty problem of failing because of two capacitors failing - two Lelon capacitors. Apple acknowledged the problem within a certain serial number range (PW940XXXXXXX through PW952XXXXXX), and fixed the problem for customers out of warranty. However, Apple continued using the same apparently-faulty Lelon caps, and graphite base stations continute to fail. All that's needed is to replace these two capacitors; see this site for background information, and a picture of the Lelon capacitor compared to others. It's significantly smaller, considering the voltage and capacitance ratings, than other similar capacitors. Since it's a Lelon (one of the brands mentioned in the article), and because one of the supposed benefits of the secret electrolyte was to be able to make the caps smaller, it now seems clear what went on here. Apple hasn't made the graphite base stations for some time now, but they kept using the same faulty Lelon caps until the very end.
For anyone who wants to repair their base station - the symptom is all red lights, continuing to power cycle, and perhaps even a faint hissing noise coming from the failed capacitors - I recommend Radio Shack 35V 220uF electrolytics (272-1029). They're small enough that the base station doesn't have to be modified (the hardest part of some of the suggested replacements), and seem to work fine. I've replaced a few with these now, and they've all been working like a charm.
Slashdot Mirror
- 9-pin twisted pair copper (standard for FireWire 800)
Apple also has an interesting and informative FireWire 800/IEEE-1394b tech briefStandard CAT-5
Step-index plastic fiber
Hard polymer-clad plastic fiber
Glass fiber
Also, to the person who responded saying FireWire 800 isn't twice as fast as USB 2 because USB 2 operates at 480 Mbps: you should look at the real life performance of USB - both 1 and 2. It's far short of the theoretical maximum; in the case of USB 2, often well under 400 Mbps. So FireWire 800 is more than twice as fast. Even 400 Mbps FireWire is often faster than USB 2.
However, it's really beside the point if FireWire 800 is faster than USB 2 if the device you wish to connect only has a USB 2 interface. FireWire may be the superior interface and technology for many high-speed tasks, but many consumer devices feature USB 2. It certainly can't hurt to be able to connect to the widest variety of devices possible. FireWire - not only because of speed, but because of features and the flexibility of the standard - will continue to be chosen for high end audio, video, specialty storage and networking, smart home interconnectivity, etc. Look at plasma HDTVs and DVD-A players: you won't see USB 2 on those. But it would be nice for Mac users to pick up a third-party USB 2 scanner, DVD recorder, camera, etc., and be able to take full advantage of the peripheral's connectivity (many of these devices may even have FireWire versions, or versions with both USB 2 and FireWire. But the item in stock and on the shelf at Best Buy always seems to be the USB 2-only version...that's what it really comes down to for some).
Here's a reply that I got from NPR asking for more information:
From: NPRHelp1
Date: Thu Apr 17, 2003 1:29:08 PM America/Chicago
To: "'Dave Schroeder'"
Subject: RE: QuickTime
Dave:
I've talked to our business affairs manager and this is the response he
asked me to give people who wrote in looking for additional information:
This outcome is the result of business and legal negotiations and we do
not discuss those negotiations. If you are asking whether this in any way
reflects on Apple QuickTime's technology, the answer is no -- business and
legal issues, not technological ones, led to this outcome.
I apologize if that's not the answer you're looking for.
Paul
> From: Dave Schroeder [mailto:das@doit.wisc.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:59 PM
> To: nprhelp@npr.org
> Subject: Re: QuickTime
>
> > NPR.org had been offering some of its audio in the Apple QuickTime
> > format under an arrangement with Apple QuickTime. We regret that we
> > were unable to reach mutually acceptable terms for a new arrangement
> > with Apple QuickTime. As a result, NPR is unable to continue offering
> > its content in this format.
>
> I'd like more information about this. Since the QuickTime Streaming
> technology is free and has no licensing restrictions, what do you mean
> you were "unable to reach mutually acceptable terms for a new
> arrangement"? There is nothing that needs to be arranged with Apple, or
> purchased from Apple (unless they were subsidizing your broadcast, or
> providing facilities and/or equipment, and did not wish to do this any
> longer).
>
> Awaiting your reply,
>
> Dave Schroeder
> University of Wisconsin - Madison
NPR has to purchase NOTHING for this. QTSS, and their existing equipment with QuickTime frameworks, is all they need to stream this, and they don't need to pay for any codecs to do it. Either:
1.) They now want (more) money from Apple to do it, or
2.) Apple must not want to pay them to do it (any longer).
Please point me to where I or anyone else is required to "purchase" codecs from Apple for QuickTime either for streaming or playback (other than MPEG-2).
(This assumes NPR is using QTSS on Mac OS X Server, the only platform where it is supported by Apple.)
Macheads with the computer world so very Windows focused why do you still buy macs?
Have you ever used a Mac? And I mean, really used one, and not just screwed around with it for 2 minutes?
If you did, you'd answer your own question.
And probably be trying to think of ways to save up to buy a new Mac.
Indeed, it has been said that the fact Apple does not allow clones is the worst possible alternative...
...except for all others.
and then relaunch Safari. A new menu entitled "Debug" should be available.
Reuters story
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Billionaire oilman Marvin Davis would drop his bid to acquire the entertainment assets of Franco-American conglomerate Vivendi Universal if Vivendi sells Universal Music to Apple Computer Inc., a source familiar with the situation said Friday.
The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Davis was uninterested in pursuing his $15 billion bid for Vivendi Universal Entertainment if Vivendi either sold its music group to Apple, which sources have confirmed it is in talks to do, or pulls the unit off the market entirely.
"The Davis proposal from the beginning has always been for all the entertainment assets, and the music group is essential," the source said. "The transaction doesn't make sense without it."
The source then added, "If this (the Apple deal) were to happen or if Vivendi was to decide they would keep the music group, the Davis proposal would be withdrawn." This would seem to throw a wrench in the works.
Or they could go for the 64-bit IBM PowerPC 970 with 32-bit backward compatibility and AltiVec that has "APPLE, USE ME, I'M YOUR NEXT PROCESSOR" written all over it.
And let's not forget that these security updates are due to exploits and holes in the software of the OSS community at large (sendmail, samba, openssl, openssh), not due to Apple's own bungling or inattention to security.
From pudge's blog:
I keep hearing people say things like "Bush wasn't elected," as if there were some truth to the statement. I hoped it was just bitterness at defeat that would eventually die down. But apparently the bitterness or blindness of some knows no bounds. So let me set the record straight, once and for all.
Bush was elected. There is no sense in which it is correct to say that he was not. We have a system of elections, determined by written law, and that system and law was followed at every step.
Some say Bush didn't win the "national popular" vote, as if the total number of votes means anything. It doesn't. Our law defines an electoral college system, and there is no such thing as a national popular vote.
Some say the Supreme Court of the United States stepped in and handed the election to Bush, as if the Supreme Court is not the final arbiter of Constitutionality of election law. It is such, as defined in Article II Section 1 and Amendment 14.
Some say that the decision of the Supreme Court was invalid because it was partisan, that if you look at the 5-4 decision, it is the conservatives voting in favor of Bush, with the liberals in favor of Gore. Actually, the decision that the Florida recount was unconstitutional by breach of due process was 7-2, including all but the two most liberal members of the court; if the vote was partisan by vote makeup as we've been told, then it was the two liberals who were partisan. Of course, even if the decision in Bush's favor were partisan, it wouldn't invalidate the election (despite damaging the integrity of the Supreme Court), but this is just another example of people ignoring the facts of the matter.
So you can disagree with the outcome, but you cannot reasonably say that Bush didn't win the election, unless you believe the election procedures should be determined by something other than the law that defines them, and our system of law that interprets them. To continue to say he wasn't elected is to ignore the factual truth of the matter.
As others have said, the "10-client" limitation is for AppleShare file sharing (Apple File Protocol, or AFP) connections only. Nothing else about the server is restricted or limited in any way.
Sorry it can't be linked directly, but if you go to http://store.apple.com/, click "Apple Software" under "Software and Books" on the left, and scroll down to "Mac OS X Server v10.2 (10-User Lic.)", you will see:
A 10 User license should be used if your server load is no more than 10 simultaneous file sharing connections (for more connections, please select the Unlimited license).
Please point me to where I can get a dual or quad Xeon system for $2800 from a commercial vendor that will provide support for it. Thanks.
I realize dupes are nothing new on slashdot, but: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/10/ 1414229
This was ALREADY RUN on this very site, in this very section, on Feb 10, the day of Xserve RAID's introduction. This fact is also mentioned several times in the comments of *this* article.
...AND in this very thread!!! http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=56543&ci d=5477731
And it was prominently displayed alternating between both the large, main feature, and one of the 3 smaller features. This was huge a month ago; every Mac site (and slashdot) carried it.
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/10/ 1414229
A: About the same as Apple's academic discounts!
Apple Federal Home Page
How to buy for federal agencies and miltary - Includes:
Using a GSA SmartPay purchasing card
Apple Federal Store (for SmartPay) or Apple Retail stores
Federal Employee Purchase Program, via Apple Federal Employee Purchase Store or Apple Retail stores at Tyson's Corner, Clarendon, VA, or Towson, MD
Any number of various federal, GSA, and military contract resellers
Then just use these instructions, provided by Apple, for installing Perl 5.8 in Mac OS X's default location for perl.
When you start it up, it says something to the effect of "I'll walk you through the startup." and then does a number of things WITHOUT MY PERMISSION. First, it creates a ~/Documents/widgets directory. It doesn't warn me about this until after it is done.
Guess we'd better also string up Adobe (Acrobat), Oracle (Corporate Time), Qualcomm (Eudora), Apple (Final Cut family), Microsoft (Office), and Connectix (Virtual PC) for putting things in ~/Library/Documents...
Then it launches a bunch of mini-apps; again, it does not ask me if this is ok.
That's the authors' judgement call about how to start the application. Your comment would be the same as saying "Microsoft Office started the PROJECT GALLERY without my permission!"
I ended up in a state where I had all these weird things on my screen
The setup assistant tells you it's opening up a few sample widgets for you, just to get you familiar with it. It also tells you that you may close any or all of them.
and no application in my dock/ This thing is running but I have no way to shut it down. I had to open Terminal to kill the app.
LOL! The setup assistant also tells you that Konfabulator is controlled and accessed via its menu extra, which is represented by two little gears on your menu bar. It's got a "Quit" option right there.
This thing breaks the entire Apple human Interface guidelines
No it doesn't, as everything you've said so far is wrong.
it sticks applications in the users Documents directory which should never be done
They're not applications at all. (You could also argue that this, and quite a bit of the other stuff placed in Documents, would be more appropriately placed in ~/Library, but that's another discussion altogether.)
and to add insult upon injury, it only runs clocks and stuff -- there is no way to write your own application that I could see.
Oh, this is especially hilarious! You apparently didn't look at Konfabulator's website at all, nor did you take two seconds to look at any of the widgets, which are all just text JavaScript code that can be rewritten or modified in any way, nor did you see the fully documented reference for creating widgets, nor did you apparently even READ the post you responded to! Do you think that it's through some magic that the widget library exists? That there is no way to write code, yet people somehow manage, by miracle of miracles, to be doing it?
Konfabulator: USELESS and HARMFUL.
Your post: USELESS and HARMFUL.
Uh, wtf?
Konfabulator is a runtime engine for scripting languages. It allows very functional applets, which Konfabulator calls widgets, to be written quickly without higher level language knowledge. It's $25 shareware.
All the widgets that come with it are useless to me.
The widgets that come with it are merely very simple examples! You can make a widget to do that task you've always wanted to do even if you have no programming knowledge. A widget that does about anything can be made with about a page of code.
OMG, the widgets are just eye candy that take up to much desk space!@ Plus, I have menu extras that do everything!@
1. Then make a widget that is whatever size YOU want it to be!
2. Make a widget that ISN'T eye candy (in your opinion), and displays the data however YOU want!
3. The widgets that come with Konfabulator are simple examples, to show the kinds of things that can be done, while also being visually pleasing.
4. The size issue has been discussed at length. The response seems to indicate the ability to actively scale any widget just didn't make it into 1.0. (I don't speak for the authors, but that was my interpretation.)
Konfabulator still isn't worth it to me...like I said, I have menu extras and docklings that do all this stuff!
If you can't see any purpose for Konfabulator, and can't think beyond applications you already have, and are stuck on the size of the default widgets, then you have utterly, totally missed the point of Konfabulator: to let people with very minimal programming language, i.e. almost anyone, make a small application that does whatever they want it to and looks however they want it to; the ability to actively obtain and display information by any scripted action, or to cause events to occur by any scripted action, all in the interface of your choosing.
The widget library is all clocks and newsreaders!@
Konfabulator has only been out for a week, and relatively few people know about it. There are already over 75 widgets. Yes, there are a lot of people who are just "skinning" the existing widgets, but this is the beginning. There are two people who can benefit from Konfabulator: those who are willing to write a little JavaScript, and those who are talented with artwork and graphics. There's nothing wrong with 20 beautiful clocks that people may want to choose from. Lots more widgets will continue to come.
OMG, they used Java??! Java is slow as HIZZELL on Mac OS X
1. Uh, this is JavaScript, not Java. They have nothing to do with one another.
2. As an aside, Java on Mac OS X is not slow.
This is Active Desktop all over again.
No, it's not, because this doesn't suck.
This is bullshit! They're charging you $25 so that YOU have to go out and do the work of making widgets!!
Look, you can decide if this thing is worth $25 to you or not. They're not charging $25 for the default widgets; they're charging $25 for an easy-to-use and innovative programming/scripting framework. The default widgets are JUST EXAMPLES. Also, we'd better warn Metrowerks to stop charging for CodeWarrior, after all, CodeWarrior is useless unless you actually make an application with it!
By the way, anyone reading this at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, we have a site license for Konfabulator. Email for info.
I still don't get it/think Konfabulator is usless/think it costs to much.
Well, no one's forcing you to use it. Sorry you don't see the value in being able to quickly whip up little mini-apps that can do pretty much anything, AND be visually pleasing!
In this article, EE Times looks at some of the same issues.
.11b and .11g basestations, Krewell said, clients will automatically default to the lower 11-Mbit/s bandwidth of .11b.
.11b chips for its Banias notebook platform, following that up with .11a/b combo chips within three months, and probably add support for .11g by the end of the year, Krewell said.
However, some of the same misinformation prevails:
And in an environment of mixed
Not true on two counts.
First, the only reason that a/b access points don't do this is because they're basically two different access points in one box! If a b/g access point had essentially two access points - one b, and one g - within itself, it wouldn't need to scale back either! Which brings me to...
Second, g clients don't scale back to 11 when b clients are present. They will get slower, but only because of the way the packets are interspersed. When 802.11b is present on an interface where g is present, everything, including b clients, will slow a little bit; by about a third. But g clients will not slow to 11.
Also, Apple's equipment has the ability to force b or g only, if needed in a particular installation.
Ultimately, one Apple design manager said, chip sets will support all three WLAN standards, eliminating any conflicts. Indeed, Intel intends to initially ship
Looks to my like it'll be a wash in the end, and I'd rather have g, albeit a draft g, right now (which, if there are any changes, will most certainly be updated to the final g via a firmware update). I can still connect to all b access points, and have increased speed when connected to my g access point (connected via 100mbit ethernet) today.
Note: this was posted wirelessly over draft 802.11g-Draft6.
...to everyone, and the fact that it happened to this one poster is a fluke. As far as that goes, it shouldn't happen to *anyone*, but as with every OS update, there will be a very, very small subset of people who say "it fouled up my x" or "totally screwed my settings for y", but the vast, vast majority of people have no problems at all.
Well, it's already updated to 0.2.1.
/etc/X11, to use quartz-wm instead of twm. This is the only change since v0.2."
"Installer now defaults to replacing
I don't have any problems with any of the key points brought up in the article, when applied to terrorism. As I read through the sections thought to be the most egregious, I'm just nodding along going "mm hmm", "sounds good", "hell yeah", and "why aren't we already doing this?"
The only problem, of course, is who defines "terrorism"?
Think about that for a while.
The early graphite-colored AirPort Base Stations had a very widespread nasty problem of failing because of two capacitors failing - two Lelon capacitors. Apple acknowledged the problem within a certain serial number range (PW940XXXXXXX through PW952XXXXXX), and fixed the problem for customers out of warranty. However, Apple continued using the same apparently-faulty Lelon caps, and graphite base stations continute to fail. All that's needed is to replace these two capacitors; see this site for background information, and a picture of the Lelon capacitor compared to others. It's significantly smaller, considering the voltage and capacitance ratings, than other similar capacitors. Since it's a Lelon (one of the brands mentioned in the article), and because one of the supposed benefits of the secret electrolyte was to be able to make the caps smaller, it now seems clear what went on here. Apple hasn't made the graphite base stations for some time now, but they kept using the same faulty Lelon caps until the very end.
For anyone who wants to repair their base station - the symptom is all red lights, continuing to power cycle, and perhaps even a faint hissing noise coming from the failed capacitors - I recommend Radio Shack 35V 220uF electrolytics (272-1029). They're small enough that the base station doesn't have to be modified (the hardest part of some of the suggested replacements), and seem to work fine. I've replaced a few with these now, and they've all been working like a charm.