The ignorance of Linux users who know nothing about Mac OS X is equalled only by the ignorance of Mac users who know nothing by any flavor of Linux which is equalled only by the ignorance of WinShit users who know nothing about MacOS X which is equalled by the ignorance of WinDumbButts who know nothing about Linux which is equalled by.......
If you don't know anything about it why don't you find out instead of guessing and speculating? These threads on SlashDot that (try to) discuss Mac OS X make as much sense as a discuss on (any Mac site) that discusses the lack of any merit whatsover of WinPickANumber.
The what is Darwin messages result in the total inability of anyone to use the search engine on SlashDot to find out anything remotely accurate about what it is, what BSD it's based on, and whether or not OS X is based on it (it isn't; it's based on a fork of it).
Fortunately the kiddies on eBay don't have a clue. Good place to sell Macs, bad place to buy.
It's been that way for years which provides yet another example of the *quality* investment you make in a Mac.
My G4 DP 450 with DVD ROM and then BTO Radeon card cost 3 grand 2 years ago.
Compare all three of these features to the same categories today.
These new G4 Towers at the same price will rock and roll for the same money and will do so in every category, not to mention the effect on Photoshop, iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, and iPhoto (best of the lot), with all (but Photoshop naturally), freebies.
Life is good. With OS X those Wintel junkies can take their 2.2 GHz do-nothings and eat my dust. I ordered one two hours ago. Supposed to ship in "early February."
What day of the month is it? LOL at the Wintel types. Let's see you take tthose Intels and Athlons and do something in the form of work or fun, except move around the desktop while hoping your Directory doesn't become corrupted.
MacGIMP should really rock on the new Towers and new iMacs shipping today.
And last but not least MacOS X is going to sizzle in the GUI or via the command line.
(Did I mention? My Apple stock went up in value today.:-)
(Did I remember to mention cocoa OS X games with the new graphics card? All the clueless can dream about booting from Linux into Windoze and running their PC games. I'll take mine cocoa on Mac OS X, thank you very much and to heck with the Wintel ports.)
a sad day to remember
on
Apollo 1
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
While many Slashdot readers will not recall the sad events of 1967, a bit younger than I perhaps, I remember it too well. I was about to finish my undergraduate studies and like many of my generation had an intense interest in the Apollo project.
Too many today write off Apollo as a waster of funds and one of little accomplishment. It was anything but that. It was the fulfillment of the dream of President John F. Kennedy, a symbol of mankind's thirst for knowledge.
Symbols can be costly and unnecessary, and all too often are, but Apollo was anything but that. Those who died will always be remembered as the trail blazers for those who would one day walk on the moon.
And when that happened the whole world tuned in. The peoples of our planet everything that a television set could be found sat glued to the tube with the expansion of the possibilies for the future a much clearer and important vision than being locked in the mud and muck of daily toil.
These men died for a reason, a reason in which we who read this thread all have an interest. They sacrified their lives for the sake of the future.
I have spent some time, not enough perhaps, browsing the remembrance that NASA has. But it was in part written, I can easily tell, by those who weren't there and done that. You had to be there to share the grief, but you had to, and most did, keep hope alive.
I lift my fist in their memory and with my thoughts of their great moment.
What an outstanding link you provided.
I only wish that the excellent new photo discussed in the article was so easily available in downloadable format.
While the information with the original article was quite good, in general, of providing a discussion of the who, what, where and when of the Horsehead, the information at your link to heritage.stsci.edu site was even better.
Many thanks for your excellent and informative link. I missed that on the Heritage site when originally posted somehow. Such contributions are what make Slashdot worth reading. After clicking my way through the assorted trolls and too often inane remarks it is a pleasure to see a post like yours!
What a terrible shame to waste the bandwidth with a review, of any kind, about yet another bash 'em in the face and kick 'em in the groin movie.
These things were a genre that was past their prime in about 1979. Grow up kiddies and see the light. Try reading a book, ANY book, as obviously the prospects of finding something of iterest, no matter WHAT it is, will be better than a time waster like this.
(Alas and alack, now I've contributed to the waste of bandwidth myself!)
The code and the hardware are distant cousins.
They don't talk to each other. They coexist. And they rarely see each other except at Christmas.
Like testing WinXP binaries on a Commodore running an emulator.
Try testing "future" software on "future" hardware. Too much BS here to suit me.
(Carmack doesn't have a clue about such stuff.....all bow down and weep.)
The same information has been in The Register twice, yesterday or day before being the most recent.
There's no rule against emailing the fools at the DOJ twice.
Draker failed at Linux gaming. He's right, the market's there. It might have helped if he'd realized, contrary to his comments, that there are now native Mac games because of OS X.
The opportunities should be obvious. Working with native Linux and Mac games would have given him an even bigger market. OS X wasn't born yesterday. Several other developers and programmers with solid *nix backgrounds are now working on Mac games. Some have already shipped.
Good, new interesting games for Linux and the Mac makes more sense for quality games for both Linux and Mac users. Both markets need all the users they can get.
Draker failed. He's no hero. Too many in technology wear the dark glasses too long. If you fail you're a failure. And giving out "advise" as he does in the interview should make one wonder, why should I listen to this guy?
Do Linux users really want ports of Windows games? Do Mac users? Now the Mac users are getting them with a *nix kernal running the boat and Linux users are out of gas, the biggest and best source of ports is gone.
No "rescue" needed. Someone else needs to step up to provide the *native* games Linux users will buy and want. Very handy for the next guy, hopefully, to also do them for Mac.
At least the GUI wouldn't look like Windows for either the penguins or the mac heads. Bigger market than just one platform for native *nix stuff. Someone gofer it.
2 of those quad letter words in one sentence, mon?
heh. you read keats by any chance?
personally i think the good olde boys should be only flying first class. just limit them to one trip per decade.
With all due respect, and I mean nothing by this comment, the uninformed shall inherit the earth.
For years I've seen too many Linux users (and all the servers in my company are running Linux at my direction) hide in their own world. That's great for the average geek that wants to bang around and due what he likes, but the day comes when making a schekel or two requires something more.
I hate to see the Linux platform stuck on the server/enterprise dime. Please don't tell me about KDE et al. I can't believe the desktop Linux box will ever find a home out in the greater world.
Stuff like this new Mac and OS X may or may not be where things are going. But I think everyone needs to keep an open mind, and it's not like it's impossible to view QuickTime.
Sure, I know it ain't open source and costs twenty bucks, but the web ain't free and it ain't gonna be free. I can't stand the fact that the net I knew in 1989 is dead, buried, and gone forever sometimes.
You don't know what the enemy is really doing unless you sleep with the enemy once in awhile. There's the world we all like and would like to see, but there's a real world out there that we can't beat over the head unless we know where to find the head.
Thots. I respect all of the points made in your post.
Re:More information from the keynote
on
New iMac Announced
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
No the IBM doesn't. Watch the videos on the Apple site. The IBM doesn't have the "mobility" of the neck in moving the monitor around. And the IBM doesn't ship with iDVD, iTunes, iPhoto, and iMovie, nor does it have OS X with Darwin under the hood and Apache ready to be launched. This new iMac will add the best of both worlds, the *nix and the GUI/Applications needs. Too many Linux users live in their own little world. Have a good friend who bought a TiBook and runs nothing but Mandrake on it, getting ready to add OS X. Name of the game is partitions. Run Mac OS 9, OS X, the Darwin *nix (including X Windows), and your favorite flavor of Linux. The drive in these new puppies is big enough for all four. And say goodbye to Microsoft forever.:-)
What is all this jazz about you can't do this or that, say Windows X, under OS X?
There's an explantion of how to set up mod_ssl in PDF, installing links (the browser), even an OS X port of zork from Unix, and a Solution Guide written for the novice for installing XFree86 (the X Window Server for OS X), fink, WindowMaker and GIMP, among other things, at http://homepage.mac.com/rgriff/index.html This "home page" is really a download site and has other items and belongs to the guy who does MacOSXHints at http://www.macoshints.com/. They speak a little Unix and Linux there in the forums. What _is_ this problem about X Windows on a Macintosh running OSX?
Mac people have been putting up Linux and FreeBSD web sites for years. We talk a little *nix ourselves, we just prefer the colorful flavored brand and like having the best of all *nix worlds in one.:-)
Why fool around with Office for Unix? Run it on a Mac. Exchange files in business easily. Run Windows 98, 2k, or XP under VPI 5.0 (OS X version). Boot into suse or redhat, pick your flavor, all on one drive. Use all the "classic" software like Photoshop 6 or Quark Express while running Classic under OSX, both coming to OS X in carbon or cocoa form in 2002. Let's see, there's Adobe Illustrator X and Macromedia's Freehand 10, there's a complete business suite for small business in OS9 or OSX, and students may be interested to know that the two top math apps used in grad schools are available in X, along with a host of biological science and chemistry apps. Many of the BeOS folks are moving back to X.
Sales pitch? You betcha Red Ryder. I used to do Unix, then Linux, and now I do it all with a base of OS X with built in Apache and a host of *nix shipping with the user version of X, not to mention a Developer's Toolkit tossed in with everything from the basics (like a free compiler) to advanced scripting support with AppleScript Studio, a free download if you sign up for Apple Developer Connection. Cost: free. http://www.apple.com/macosx/
Did I mention that Darwin is open source, a derivative of FreeBSD, and is the heart of Mac OS X?
Hey dudes, this is where *nix for the desktop is headed, jump on board.
Sadly you're correct.......not only is information about how many Gandalfs can dance on the head of the pin missing, but we learn nothing further of what happened to Radagast, the Brown or the Blue Wizards.
OTOH one never knows without reading the History of TLOR, ed. by Chris Tolkien.
But what would have motivated the Poet to waste time with numbers and the counting of them anyway??
Force is all Microsoft understands.
This is about the possibility of growing Linux market share among the average business user class. Grandma Jones and Secretary Sally might use Linux if Office were available.
Forcing the monopolistic Microsoft to produce a product which would erode their own market share is too good to be true IMHO.
Many present Linux users have no use for the product. Fine. This is all about growing market share and anything that helps Linux in that regard is good.
Sooner or later IMO Linux is going to need to make some accomodations to run software that isn't open source. Many users are already doing it by dual booting to Windows.
Office is an absolute requirement in *today's* business world. It ain't going away soon. I'd rather have a business user running Office on a Linux box rather than Wintel any day.
Simple as that. MS through illegal monopolistic practices has gained unfair market share. Anything to grow Linux (or any other *nix vs. Windows, Mac, or whatever) is good for the computing community and Linux.
Love it or hate it (I mostly hate it) it's a necessity in a desktop business environment.
Actually the versions for Mac (2001 for OS9 and Office X for OSX) aren't that bad. They're not all that great, but they function. Sort of. Partly. Mostly. Hmmm....
The OS X version for Mac is actually pretty decent and follows the Mac interface quite well. It's *relatively* free of bugs.
The GUI for Linux? Dunno what Mr. Bill & Co. would go for. The Mac unit functions seperately from the legions of drones that do the Windows version. Given a situation like that the product should be fairly decent.
This is a killer app in business. Like it or not. I think it would enhance and bring a lot of new users to the Linux platform, both individual and network users. There's nothing really comparable or compatible anywhere in the *nix world. Star Office? Gimme a break.
And anything that's good for Linux (or the Mac) is bad for Windows. Any other questions?:)
Slashdot Mirror
The ignorance of Linux users who know nothing about Mac OS X is equalled only by the ignorance of Mac users who know nothing by any flavor of Linux which is equalled only by the ignorance of WinShit users who know nothing about MacOS X which is equalled by the ignorance of WinDumbButts who know nothing about Linux which is equalled by.......
If you don't know anything about it why don't you find out instead of guessing and speculating? These threads on SlashDot that (try to) discuss Mac OS X make as much sense as a discuss on (any Mac site) that discusses the lack of any merit whatsover of WinPickANumber.
The what is Darwin messages result in the total inability of anyone to use the search engine on SlashDot to find out anything remotely accurate about what it is, what BSD it's based on, and whether or not OS X is based on it (it isn't; it's based on a fork of it).
::rolleyes::
headed back for the mississippi.....
Fortunately the kiddies on eBay don't have a clue. Good place to sell Macs, bad place to buy.
:-)
It's been that way for years which provides yet another example of the *quality* investment you make in a Mac.
My G4 DP 450 with DVD ROM and then BTO Radeon card cost 3 grand 2 years ago.
Compare all three of these features to the same categories today.
These new G4 Towers at the same price will rock and roll for the same money and will do so in every category, not to mention the effect on Photoshop, iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, and iPhoto (best of the lot), with all (but Photoshop naturally), freebies.
Life is good. With OS X those Wintel junkies can take their 2.2 GHz do-nothings and eat my dust. I ordered one two hours ago. Supposed to ship in "early February."
What day of the month is it? LOL at the Wintel types. Let's see you take tthose Intels and Athlons and do something in the form of work or fun, except move around the desktop while hoping your Directory doesn't become corrupted.
MacGIMP should really rock on the new Towers and new iMacs shipping today.
And last but not least MacOS X is going to sizzle in the GUI or via the command line.
(Did I mention? My Apple stock went up in value today.
(Did I remember to mention cocoa OS X games with the new graphics card? All the clueless can dream about booting from Linux into Windoze and running their PC games. I'll take mine cocoa on Mac OS X, thank you very much and to heck with the Wintel ports.)
While many Slashdot readers will not recall the sad events of 1967, a bit younger than I perhaps, I remember it too well. I was about to finish my undergraduate studies and like many of my generation had an intense interest in the Apollo project. Too many today write off Apollo as a waster of funds and one of little accomplishment. It was anything but that. It was the fulfillment of the dream of President John F. Kennedy, a symbol of mankind's thirst for knowledge. Symbols can be costly and unnecessary, and all too often are, but Apollo was anything but that. Those who died will always be remembered as the trail blazers for those who would one day walk on the moon. And when that happened the whole world tuned in. The peoples of our planet everything that a television set could be found sat glued to the tube with the expansion of the possibilies for the future a much clearer and important vision than being locked in the mud and muck of daily toil. These men died for a reason, a reason in which we who read this thread all have an interest. They sacrified their lives for the sake of the future. I have spent some time, not enough perhaps, browsing the remembrance that NASA has. But it was in part written, I can easily tell, by those who weren't there and done that. You had to be there to share the grief, but you had to, and most did, keep hope alive. I lift my fist in their memory and with my thoughts of their great moment.
What an outstanding link you provided. I only wish that the excellent new photo discussed in the article was so easily available in downloadable format. While the information with the original article was quite good, in general, of providing a discussion of the who, what, where and when of the Horsehead, the information at your link to heritage.stsci.edu site was even better. Many thanks for your excellent and informative link. I missed that on the Heritage site when originally posted somehow. Such contributions are what make Slashdot worth reading. After clicking my way through the assorted trolls and too often inane remarks it is a pleasure to see a post like yours!
What a terrible shame to waste the bandwidth with a review, of any kind, about yet another bash 'em in the face and kick 'em in the groin movie. These things were a genre that was past their prime in about 1979. Grow up kiddies and see the light. Try reading a book, ANY book, as obviously the prospects of finding something of iterest, no matter WHAT it is, will be better than a time waster like this. (Alas and alack, now I've contributed to the waste of bandwidth myself!)
This clearly deserves a higher rating because of the original nature of the idea.
.edu sites anymore, but the lack of adequate storage for legitimate student use remains all too uncommon.
Sure, it's not uncommon on
The code and the hardware are distant cousins. They don't talk to each other. They coexist. And they rarely see each other except at Christmas. Like testing WinXP binaries on a Commodore running an emulator. Try testing "future" software on "future" hardware. Too much BS here to suit me. (Carmack doesn't have a clue about such stuff.....all bow down and weep.)
Amen baby. The fact that some IS mgr picks something for use does not make it useful.
After all, look at the number of IS types that pick IIS for their servers.
The same information has been in The Register twice, yesterday or day before being the most recent. There's no rule against emailing the fools at the DOJ twice.
Draker failed at Linux gaming. He's right, the market's there. It might have helped if he'd realized, contrary to his comments, that there are now native Mac games because of OS X.
The opportunities should be obvious. Working with native Linux and Mac games would have given him an even bigger market. OS X wasn't born yesterday. Several other developers and programmers with solid *nix backgrounds are now working on Mac games. Some have already shipped.
Good, new interesting games for Linux and the Mac makes more sense for quality games for both Linux and Mac users. Both markets need all the users they can get.
Draker failed. He's no hero. Too many in technology wear the dark glasses too long. If you fail you're a failure. And giving out "advise" as he does in the interview should make one wonder, why should I listen to this guy?
Do Linux users really want ports of Windows games? Do Mac users? Now the Mac users are getting them with a *nix kernal running the boat and Linux users are out of gas, the biggest and best source of ports is gone.
No "rescue" needed. Someone else needs to step up to provide the *native* games Linux users will buy and want. Very handy for the next guy, hopefully, to also do them for Mac.
At least the GUI wouldn't look like Windows for either the penguins or the mac heads. Bigger market than just one platform for native *nix stuff. Someone gofer it.
2 of those quad letter words in one sentence, mon? heh. you read keats by any chance? personally i think the good olde boys should be only flying first class. just limit them to one trip per decade.
heh, man
woz knows. he ain't gonna jump for no b.s. stuff it will be kewl what the ever it may be.
Who to root for when you have only two in the race and both are losers?
Your remark about the "one click licensing fees" is most shameful don't you think?
LOLOLOLOLO
The author of this gem needs to quit his job at Wal Mart and go to work for his hero, Bill Gates.
Dull and boring is beautiful!
Be careful next time you go to the movies. They have them in nasty color now not just black and white.
With all due respect, and I mean nothing by this comment, the uninformed shall inherit the earth.
For years I've seen too many Linux users (and all the servers in my company are running Linux at my direction) hide in their own world. That's great for the average geek that wants to bang around and due what he likes, but the day comes when making a schekel or two requires something more.
I hate to see the Linux platform stuck on the server/enterprise dime. Please don't tell me about KDE et al. I can't believe the desktop Linux box will ever find a home out in the greater world.
Stuff like this new Mac and OS X may or may not be where things are going. But I think everyone needs to keep an open mind, and it's not like it's impossible to view QuickTime.
Sure, I know it ain't open source and costs twenty bucks, but the web ain't free and it ain't gonna be free. I can't stand the fact that the net I knew in 1989 is dead, buried, and gone forever sometimes.
You don't know what the enemy is really doing unless you sleep with the enemy once in awhile. There's the world we all like and would like to see, but there's a real world out there that we can't beat over the head unless we know where to find the head.
Thots. I respect all of the points made in your post.
*anything* they get out of is a positive
No the IBM doesn't. Watch the videos on the Apple site. The IBM doesn't have the "mobility" of the neck in moving the monitor around. And the IBM doesn't ship with iDVD, iTunes, iPhoto, and iMovie, nor does it have OS X with Darwin under the hood and Apache ready to be launched. This new iMac will add the best of both worlds, the *nix and the GUI/Applications needs. Too many Linux users live in their own little world. Have a good friend who bought a TiBook and runs nothing but Mandrake on it, getting ready to add OS X. Name of the game is partitions. Run Mac OS 9, OS X, the Darwin *nix (including X Windows), and your favorite flavor of Linux. The drive in these new puppies is big enough for all four. And say goodbye to Microsoft forever. :-)
only one reason of many that LOTR should never have been made into a movie in the first place.... read the book, don't see the movies.....
yes, i died in the polluted river of all the anti-mac geek speak....
What is all this jazz about you can't do this or that, say Windows X, under OS X?
:-)
There's an explantion of how to set up mod_ssl in PDF, installing links (the browser), even an OS X port of zork from Unix, and a Solution Guide written for the novice for installing XFree86 (the X Window Server for OS X), fink, WindowMaker and GIMP, among other things, at http://homepage.mac.com/rgriff/index.html This "home page" is really a download site and has other items and belongs to the guy who does MacOSXHints at http://www.macoshints.com/. They speak a little Unix and Linux there in the forums. What _is_ this problem about X Windows on a Macintosh running OSX?
Mac people have been putting up Linux and FreeBSD web sites for years. We talk a little *nix ourselves, we just prefer the colorful flavored brand and like having the best of all *nix worlds in one.
Why fool around with Office for Unix? Run it on a Mac. Exchange files in business easily. Run Windows 98, 2k, or XP under VPI 5.0 (OS X version). Boot into suse or redhat, pick your flavor, all on one drive. Use all the "classic" software like Photoshop 6 or Quark Express while running Classic under OSX, both coming to OS X in carbon or cocoa form in 2002. Let's see, there's Adobe Illustrator X and Macromedia's Freehand 10, there's a complete business suite for small business in OS9 or OSX, and students may be interested to know that the two top math apps used in grad schools are available in X, along with a host of biological science and chemistry apps. Many of the BeOS folks are moving back to X.
Sales pitch? You betcha Red Ryder. I used to do Unix, then Linux, and now I do it all with a base of OS X with built in Apache and a host of *nix shipping with the user version of X, not to mention a Developer's Toolkit tossed in with everything from the basics (like a free compiler) to advanced scripting support with AppleScript Studio, a free download if you sign up for Apple Developer Connection. Cost: free. http://www.apple.com/macosx/
Did I mention that Darwin is open source, a derivative of FreeBSD, and is the heart of Mac OS X?
Hey dudes, this is where *nix for the desktop is headed, jump on board.
(duh....what a rant).......
Sadly you're correct.......not only is information about how many Gandalfs can dance on the head of the pin missing, but we learn nothing further of what happened to Radagast, the Brown or the Blue Wizards.
OTOH one never knows without reading the History of TLOR, ed. by Chris Tolkien.
But what would have motivated the Poet to waste time with numbers and the counting of them anyway??
Force is all Microsoft understands. This is about the possibility of growing Linux market share among the average business user class. Grandma Jones and Secretary Sally might use Linux if Office were available. Forcing the monopolistic Microsoft to produce a product which would erode their own market share is too good to be true IMHO. Many present Linux users have no use for the product. Fine. This is all about growing market share and anything that helps Linux in that regard is good. Sooner or later IMO Linux is going to need to make some accomodations to run software that isn't open source. Many users are already doing it by dual booting to Windows. Office is an absolute requirement in *today's* business world. It ain't going away soon. I'd rather have a business user running Office on a Linux box rather than Wintel any day. Simple as that. MS through illegal monopolistic practices has gained unfair market share. Anything to grow Linux (or any other *nix vs. Windows, Mac, or whatever) is good for the computing community and Linux.
Excellent comment.
:)
Love it or hate it (I mostly hate it) it's a necessity in a desktop business environment.
Actually the versions for Mac (2001 for OS9 and Office X for OSX) aren't that bad. They're not all that great, but they function. Sort of. Partly. Mostly. Hmmm....
The OS X version for Mac is actually pretty decent and follows the Mac interface quite well. It's *relatively* free of bugs.
The GUI for Linux? Dunno what Mr. Bill & Co. would go for. The Mac unit functions seperately from the legions of drones that do the Windows version. Given a situation like that the product should be fairly decent.
This is a killer app in business. Like it or not. I think it would enhance and bring a lot of new users to the Linux platform, both individual and network users. There's nothing really comparable or compatible anywhere in the *nix world. Star Office? Gimme a break.
And anything that's good for Linux (or the Mac) is bad for Windows. Any other questions?