Apple now has two highly successful, separate platforms that feed one another: it's iPod/iPhone platform (handheld) and its Mac platform (PC). As others have noted, the iPod isn't going anywhere; the iPhone/iTouch sub-platform is very compelling and has a lot of room to grow; the Mac is enjoying growth unprecedented in the platform's history (to my chagrin, largely thanks to Apple's defection to Intel, which allows people to replace their PCs with Mactels). The substantial growth seen in Mac market share will cause developers to take the platform a lot more seriously than they have in the past and may spur traditionally unfriendly developers to enter the Mac market. Apple's corporate image is great in most quarters. Now I'd love to see a consumer Mac tower for those who are never going to buy iMacs, but that's probably not coming any time soon.
"Even with all its security issues, what many do not realize is that no software company has spent more on security in the past decade than Microsoft."
I guess that goes to show us that security is one problem you can't just throw money at and make it go away.
Hey Doc, you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to trademarks. Trademark violations are usually a civil matter and not something the FBI would bother with. Now investigating fraud is obviously part of the FBI's domain. Also, trademark holders don't lose their trademarks if they fail to enforce their rights; they only lose the opportunity to obtain relief from an equity judgment (like an injunction) from a court and instead have to go through the longer and much more expensive litigation of a full case. IANAL.
I reject the notion that Safari is less safe than other browsers. There have been very few serious security flaws found in Safari, even after Apple opened the platform to Windows. I'd say Safari is one of the most secure browsers out there.
Think twice (and then three or four times for good measure) the next time someone tells you to vote Democrat in order to protect your rights. The Republicans may not be more than a couple of hairs better, but at least this boner didn't come from a Republican.
U.S. oversight is far preferable to U.N. oversight, which would be disastrous. Of course, I know U.S. influence over such a key resource is far from a panacea. You expressed my view really well, Toonol.
Yeah, they were robbed too, but we're really going to suffer the effects of it because of the expansion of entitlements, the expansion of beneficiaries and the expansion of the federal budget. The Baby Boomers are going to bankrupt these pyramid schemes, but that's just part of the fleecing we're experiencing. I forgot to mention the fact that the federal government has a vested interest in maintaing and increasing these broken systems since they bring in a tremendous amount of revenue. Retirees are paid off and then the rest of the money we're contributing is spent as part of general funds. Few wish to confront these issues. To his credit, G.W.B. attempted to get some reform through but his effort was doomed from the start because of timid Congressmen and corrupt lobbies like the AARP. Realize that entitlement reform will be one of the great contentious domestic battles of the next decades.
Let me preface this by pointing out I'm a generally conservative young Republican. We're in a generational battle with our parents and grandparents and (more directly) the politicians that come from them over redistribution of our wealth and misappropriation of our technology. They want to put the screws to young people to maintain control, whether it's economic control (in the case of robbing the young to pay the old Social Security and Medicare), or entertainment control (draconian legislation in favor of the media cartels), or electronic expression control (clamping down on the freedoms enjoyed currently online). And we'll continue to lose this battle unless there's a shift in the political paradigms over these issues.
Actually, one of my all time favorite professors first made the point to me. Now Mr. AC, if you think all your knowledge should be public, would you teach me everything you know about your profession for free? Would you mind giving me all your bank and brokerage account access logins? Would you give me your address, phone number, social security number, data of birth, etc.? If not me, would you want to give that to a government agent "for your own protection" and the good of society?
Are you completely sure about that? I'd like to wager a large sum of money against the MPAA not caring about DVD-quality sharing on a site like youtube.
Despite everything we've heard about defense against stupid patents, it seems clear that the Obviousness doctrine really doesn't matter to courts. And I hear thought the Supreme Court gave the doctrine a boost recently. I guess if you can't beat 'em, join 'em - I'm going to take a patent troll class, powered by BlackBoard!
Thank you, Mikkeles. So is it possible for any major provider to do this to any site on the planet? And if so, isn't the Internet a lot more vulnerable to attack by rogue entities than it should be?
To a certain extent you're right about Christianity but wrong about religions in general. Christianity hasn't acted that way in hundreds of years. Such behavior is condoned to a much greater extent in Islamic belief, where the manifest goal is global domination (institution of Sharia in all countries). Christianity teaches its followers to spread their faith, but the core message contained therein is much more peaceful. Judaism commands the nation of Israel to impose Jewish sovereignty over the land of Israel but only there and nowhere else.
Islam - Always Used to Getting its Own Way
on
Pakistan Blocks YouTube
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
As a religion Islam is the petulant, spoiled bully child on the playground - always accustomed to getting what it wants. If it doesn't get its own way, it resorts to acts of barbaric aggression.
and yet I have to concede that the Dell XPS One is an impressive looking AIO. I dare say its industrial design appears to be superior to the iMac's. It also bests the iMac with its TV tuner and Blu-ray option. I also have to admit that I'm typing on my office machine - an Inspiron - that I bought because Apple no longer offered a low-end laptop with dedicated graphics; consequently I have grown to appreciate Dell hardware. However, Dells will never run OS X (without hax0ring), and OS X is far superior to Windows. I am so much more productive on my G5 than on my Dell, but until I can justify purchasing a MacBook Pro for the office I'll be on my Inspiron. Even though Dell hardware may be nice for what it is, and even though I was justified in getting a Dell over a Mac for my business, I'd still opt for and recommend a Mac if at all possible.
The cartel will probably urge the US government to bomb the country into oblivion before it gets the opportunity to violate the sacrosanct copyright system.
Do law firms really have all that much IP to defend personally? Firms care about competent practice of the law. And I think it's would be a quite impressive credential indeed for a law student to take on a media cartel and win.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple now has two highly successful, separate platforms that feed one another: it's iPod/iPhone platform (handheld) and its Mac platform (PC). As others have noted, the iPod isn't going anywhere; the iPhone/iTouch sub-platform is very compelling and has a lot of room to grow; the Mac is enjoying growth unprecedented in the platform's history (to my chagrin, largely thanks to Apple's defection to Intel, which allows people to replace their PCs with Mactels). The substantial growth seen in Mac market share will cause developers to take the platform a lot more seriously than they have in the past and may spur traditionally unfriendly developers to enter the Mac market. Apple's corporate image is great in most quarters. Now I'd love to see a consumer Mac tower for those who are never going to buy iMacs, but that's probably not coming any time soon.
"Even with all its security issues, what many do not realize is that no software company has spent more on security in the past decade than Microsoft." I guess that goes to show us that security is one problem you can't just throw money at and make it go away.
Hey Doc, you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to trademarks. Trademark violations are usually a civil matter and not something the FBI would bother with. Now investigating fraud is obviously part of the FBI's domain. Also, trademark holders don't lose their trademarks if they fail to enforce their rights; they only lose the opportunity to obtain relief from an equity judgment (like an injunction) from a court and instead have to go through the longer and much more expensive litigation of a full case. IANAL.
I reject the notion that Safari is less safe than other browsers. There have been very few serious security flaws found in Safari, even after Apple opened the platform to Windows. I'd say Safari is one of the most secure browsers out there.
Think twice (and then three or four times for good measure) the next time someone tells you to vote Democrat in order to protect your rights. The Republicans may not be more than a couple of hairs better, but at least this boner didn't come from a Republican.
I saw it on The Lone Gunmen, and since they were right about 9/11 they must be right about Water Powers Cars too.
/. should honor the inauspicious occasion by renaming ACs "Tim Couches" for the day.
This story, the astrology story, this is news? Come on /., there must be better submissions than these.
U.S. oversight is far preferable to U.N. oversight, which would be disastrous. Of course, I know U.S. influence over such a key resource is far from a panacea. You expressed my view really well, Toonol.
Yeah, they were robbed too, but we're really going to suffer the effects of it because of the expansion of entitlements, the expansion of beneficiaries and the expansion of the federal budget. The Baby Boomers are going to bankrupt these pyramid schemes, but that's just part of the fleecing we're experiencing. I forgot to mention the fact that the federal government has a vested interest in maintaing and increasing these broken systems since they bring in a tremendous amount of revenue. Retirees are paid off and then the rest of the money we're contributing is spent as part of general funds. Few wish to confront these issues. To his credit, G.W.B. attempted to get some reform through but his effort was doomed from the start because of timid Congressmen and corrupt lobbies like the AARP. Realize that entitlement reform will be one of the great contentious domestic battles of the next decades.
Let me preface this by pointing out I'm a generally conservative young Republican. We're in a generational battle with our parents and grandparents and (more directly) the politicians that come from them over redistribution of our wealth and misappropriation of our technology. They want to put the screws to young people to maintain control, whether it's economic control (in the case of robbing the young to pay the old Social Security and Medicare), or entertainment control (draconian legislation in favor of the media cartels), or electronic expression control (clamping down on the freedoms enjoyed currently online). And we'll continue to lose this battle unless there's a shift in the political paradigms over these issues.
Actually, one of my all time favorite professors first made the point to me. Now Mr. AC, if you think all your knowledge should be public, would you teach me everything you know about your profession for free? Would you mind giving me all your bank and brokerage account access logins? Would you give me your address, phone number, social security number, data of birth, etc.? If not me, would you want to give that to a government agent "for your own protection" and the good of society?
Those who have nothing worth keeping secret from the public possess very little that is of value in their lives.
Are you completely sure about that? I'd like to wager a large sum of money against the MPAA not caring about DVD-quality sharing on a site like youtube.
Despite everything we've heard about defense against stupid patents, it seems clear that the Obviousness doctrine really doesn't matter to courts. And I hear thought the Supreme Court gave the doctrine a boost recently. I guess if you can't beat 'em, join 'em - I'm going to take a patent troll class, powered by BlackBoard!
Thank you, Mikkeles. So is it possible for any major provider to do this to any site on the planet? And if so, isn't the Internet a lot more vulnerable to attack by rogue entities than it should be?
The first poster to account properly for what happened to our precious "Internets" infrastructure will get a ton of karma.
To a certain extent you're right about Christianity but wrong about religions in general. Christianity hasn't acted that way in hundreds of years. Such behavior is condoned to a much greater extent in Islamic belief, where the manifest goal is global domination (institution of Sharia in all countries). Christianity teaches its followers to spread their faith, but the core message contained therein is much more peaceful. Judaism commands the nation of Israel to impose Jewish sovereignty over the land of Israel but only there and nowhere else.
As a religion Islam is the petulant, spoiled bully child on the playground - always accustomed to getting what it wants. If it doesn't get its own way, it resorts to acts of barbaric aggression.
Seriously, though, I have a feeling that IPv4 will be saved by an ingenious tech solution far in advance of the world running out of addresses.
Right, and the packages he's referring to are mostly system updates that cannot be cleanly rolled back without breaking the OS.
and yet I have to concede that the Dell XPS One is an impressive looking AIO. I dare say its industrial design appears to be superior to the iMac's. It also bests the iMac with its TV tuner and Blu-ray option. I also have to admit that I'm typing on my office machine - an Inspiron - that I bought because Apple no longer offered a low-end laptop with dedicated graphics; consequently I have grown to appreciate Dell hardware. However, Dells will never run OS X (without hax0ring), and OS X is far superior to Windows. I am so much more productive on my G5 than on my Dell, but until I can justify purchasing a MacBook Pro for the office I'll be on my Inspiron. Even though Dell hardware may be nice for what it is, and even though I was justified in getting a Dell over a Mac for my business, I'd still opt for and recommend a Mac if at all possible.
The cartel will probably urge the US government to bomb the country into oblivion before it gets the opportunity to violate the sacrosanct copyright system.
I wonder if you could get a sandwich with SCO stock right now. . . .
Do law firms really have all that much IP to defend personally? Firms care about competent practice of the law. And I think it's would be a quite impressive credential indeed for a law student to take on a media cartel and win.