Pick something besides AWT/Swing, and your users need to download and install it. That lessens the chances that they pick your program, or that they will even be able to pick it - after all, every third-party library needed decreases the chances that all of them have been ported to the target platform.
Bundle the necessary libraries with your app, and don't use libraries that require a separate download. It's all about the licensing.
The way it currently stands, a computer makes using an iPod easier, but it's not essential. For instance, Linux can be loaded and used, albeit with an interface not designed for such. Include a special dock with a few extra buttons (delete, for example), and you're in business. Another possibility is the appearance of special DVD players that have an iPod interface, like that which can now be found in many car stereos.
I find the whole notion quite intriguing, and very possible.
If somebody came up with a real-time version of a game like chess that was sufficiently fun that it became popular, I bet people would still play the old version too.
Remember Archon? EA once-upon-a-time put out good games. They should bring it back, with updated graphics, and make network play an option. I'd buy.
yeah i would hope adium runs ok on a g3, just like i'd expect vi to run ok on a g3.
Yes, vi runs just fine.
next thing you're going to do is tell me how well Calculator runs on your g3?:P
Yes, it does, although I don't use it. The point is, a G3 with OS X does everything I require of a computer. I'm not into gaming, and I'm not compiling any large amount of source code. I'm glad that you found a G4 to meet your needs. But your needs are not mine.
maybe TextEdit or iTerm "runs great", but applications like Firefox -- you will spend lots of time waiting.
Yeah, things like TextEdit. And XCode, and Adium and Remote Desktop and Mail and Interface Builder and... Firefox? Yeah, it doesn't run so well. But as I understand it, I'm not alone in my dissatisfaction with the state of Firefox on OS X.
OSX barely runs at all on a G3 these days (you can coerce it, but it's awful). can't imagine how painful a $100 laptop would be.
I just recently upgraded to a 500MHz G3 laptop from a 300 MHz G3 laptop. Both run OS X (10.4 now, 10.3 then). Both run great, and while the G3 300 required XPostFacto to get 10.3 loaded, it didn't require any great 'coercion'. You really should check your facts before posting.
I have added 4 links to the Finder toolbar (not sidebar) - 'bin', 'sbin', 'private', and 'usr'. But that doesn't let me browse to '\Volumes\some_connected_ipod\iPod_Control\Music\' . Perhaps a folder action would do the trick.
Do a Google. It's common knowledge that Apple uses the iTunes Music Store to sell iPods. Apple has confirmed this. If the iTMS is in the black, it's a recent occurrence.
I ran a BBS off of a Franklin Ace 1000 with an AppleCat modem and an added second floppy drive. My mom finally agreed to get me my own phone line after answering one too many carrier signals. I still have the disks floating around. The Red Dragon Inn, it was called. This was back in the mid-late eighties.
Personally, I'd like it to cycle through the three: default/resized, fit-to-content, fit-to-screen. As for working between windows, it's usually not convenient for me to have more than one window showing unless I'm doing a drag-n-drop. I tend to cycle through windows as necessary either via cmd-` or cmd-tab.
One of the reasons for having the resize control at the bottom right only (just under the scroll arrows) is to free up more space along the window edges. Safari, for instance, has a top border only by default, although a bottom can be added via View->Show Status Bar. If you wanna bitch about resizing, how about the fact that OS X resizes to the max presented in the window, and not to cover the whole screen? Drives me nuts. I also don't like that the Dock isn't always recognized as being placed somewhere other than at the bottom; I keep it on the left edge, and windows sometimes open up behind the Dock instead of compensating for it's position.
I think there was a Simpsons episode that satirized the technique. Anyone know which one?
Episode 11 - Bart Gets Famous Bart's walking down a hallway with Krusty, who's explaining how studios sometimes reuse scenes to save cash. The same doorway and cleaning woman cycle across the background.
How about Visual Studio?... I can whip up a usable, very functional Windows app in seconds. Try doing that on any other platform.
And I can whip up a usable, very functional app in seconds that compiles to 3 platforms using REALbasic. If I want a Cocoa OS X app, I can use Xcode and Interface Builder, both of which are free. Other platforms have similiar, and some would argue better, IDE solutions.
For years one of the biggest complaints regarding Virtual PC was its crappy graphics support. When Microsoft bought it from Connectix, there was talk that native graphics card support would be added, although it seems not to be the case at this time. What exactly is meant by native support, if not that the virtual machine has access to the graphics card? Couldn't graphics API calls be passed directly to the card? Most cards these days (AFAIK) support OpenGL to some extent at least; couldn't these calls be passed directly? Or does 'native support' simply mean that whatever card is in the computer is also emulated by the guest OS? Does any of this make sense, or am I completely lost?
I hope you're just kidding, or really ignorant. There's no virtualization solution out there that's even close to be somewhat usable for games.
Chalk it up to ignorance. I'm not a gamer and use a Mac, so emulation has met all my Windows needs. I have a basic understanding of the difference between emulation and virtualization, and know games suck under emulation. But I am certainly am not so familiar that I would know games suck under virtualization as well, or why. If the virtualized OS has access to hardware, and games nowadays seem to rely on the GPU as much if not more so than the CPU, then where is the performance hit? Does the host OS really use up that many CPU cycles? Couldn't it be coded such that the host OS gets almost completely out of the way, and allows the virtualized OS almost complete control? A google of the topic returns some interesting articles, but none seem to address the gaming issue in any real detail.
But distinguishing yourself in a design which, like I said, for most people is irrelevant because it's still just a computer that few people see, and a higher price, isn't going to bring people in the doors.
You seem to forget that it was a design, not an OS, that helped save Apple in the late '90s. You remember? It was called the iMac, it was shaped like a gumdrop, came in pretty colors, and was touted by people like Martha Stewart for its aesthetics, not its OS. If it had run Windows, Apple would have sold even more.
and noticed that iTunes software CAN control an external player:
No, it can't. iTunes can't change the radio station on a stereo. It can't change tracks on a CD that's playing on the stereo. It can't turn the stereo on or off. All that iTunes and Airport Express do is utilize auxilory input jacks, and in order to do so I must first get off my ass, walk over to the stereo, and manually select aux input.
Slashdot Mirror
The contest home page has a list at the bottom of all donators. The largest donation is $1,111.11, the smallest a penny.
(tig)
Bundle the necessary libraries with your app, and don't use libraries that require a separate download. It's all about the licensing.
(tig)
The way it currently stands, a computer makes using an iPod easier, but it's not essential. For instance, Linux can be loaded and used, albeit with an interface not designed for such. Include a special dock with a few extra buttons (delete, for example), and you're in business. Another possibility is the appearance of special DVD players that have an iPod interface, like that which can now be found in many car stereos.
I find the whole notion quite intriguing, and very possible.
(tig)
Remember Archon? EA once-upon-a-time put out good games. They should bring it back, with updated graphics, and make network play an option. I'd buy.
(tig)
Yes, vi runs just fine.
Yes, it does, although I don't use it. The point is, a G3 with OS X does everything I require of a computer. I'm not into gaming, and I'm not compiling any large amount of source code. I'm glad that you found a G4 to meet your needs. But your needs are not mine.
(tig)
I just recently upgraded to a 500MHz G3 laptop from a 300 MHz G3 laptop. Both run OS X (10.4 now, 10.3 then). Both run great, and while the G3 300 required XPostFacto to get 10.3 loaded, it didn't require any great 'coercion'. You really should check your facts before posting.
(tig)
I have added 4 links to the Finder toolbar (not sidebar) - 'bin', 'sbin', 'private', and 'usr'. But that doesn't let me browse to '\Volumes\some_connected_ipod\iPod_Control\Music\' . Perhaps a folder action would do the trick.
(tig)
What if you ride the bus, or use some other form of public transportation?
(tig)
Do a Google. It's common knowledge that Apple uses the iTunes Music Store to sell iPods. Apple has confirmed this. If the iTMS is in the black, it's a recent occurrence.
(tig)
I ran a BBS off of a Franklin Ace 1000 with an AppleCat modem and an added second floppy drive. My mom finally agreed to get me my own phone line after answering one too many carrier signals. I still have the disks floating around. The Red Dragon Inn, it was called. This was back in the mid-late eighties.
(tig)
Personally, I'd like it to cycle through the three: default/resized, fit-to-content, fit-to-screen. As for working between windows, it's usually not convenient for me to have more than one window showing unless I'm doing a drag-n-drop. I tend to cycle through windows as necessary either via cmd-` or cmd-tab.
(tig)
One of the reasons for having the resize control at the bottom right only (just under the scroll arrows) is to free up more space along the window edges. Safari, for instance, has a top border only by default, although a bottom can be added via View->Show Status Bar.
If you wanna bitch about resizing, how about the fact that OS X resizes to the max presented in the window, and not to cover the whole screen? Drives me nuts. I also don't like that the Dock isn't always recognized as being placed somewhere other than at the bottom; I keep it on the left edge, and windows sometimes open up behind the Dock instead of compensating for it's position.
(tig)
Oops, wrong episode. Disregard in it's entirety.
(tig)
Episode 11 - Bart Gets Famous
Bart's walking down a hallway with Krusty, who's explaining how studios sometimes reuse scenes to save cash. The same doorway and cleaning woman cycle across the background.
(tig)
And I can whip up a usable, very functional app in seconds that compiles to 3 platforms using REALbasic. If I want a Cocoa OS X app, I can use Xcode and Interface Builder, both of which are free.
Other platforms have similiar, and some would argue better, IDE solutions.
(tig)
Actually, that statement has been refuted.
link
link
lots o' links
(tig)
No, it's definitely Q-36.
(tig)
For years one of the biggest complaints regarding Virtual PC was its crappy graphics support. When Microsoft bought it from Connectix, there was talk that native graphics card support would be added, although it seems not to be the case at this time. What exactly is meant by native support, if not that the virtual machine has access to the graphics card? Couldn't graphics API calls be passed directly to the card? Most cards these days (AFAIK) support OpenGL to some extent at least; couldn't these calls be passed directly? Or does 'native support' simply mean that whatever card is in the computer is also emulated by the guest OS?
Does any of this make sense, or am I completely lost?
(tig)
Chalk it up to ignorance. I'm not a gamer and use a Mac, so emulation has met all my Windows needs. I have a basic understanding of the difference between emulation and virtualization, and know games suck under emulation. But I am certainly am not so familiar that I would know games suck under virtualization as well, or why. If the virtualized OS has access to hardware, and games nowadays seem to rely on the GPU as much if not more so than the CPU, then where is the performance hit? Does the host OS really use up that many CPU cycles? Couldn't it be coded such that the host OS gets almost completely out of the way, and allows the virtualized OS almost complete control? A google of the topic returns some interesting articles, but none seem to address the gaming issue in any real detail.
(tig)
Why not use virtualization?
(tig)
You seem to forget that it was a design, not an OS, that helped save Apple in the late '90s. You remember? It was called the iMac, it was shaped like a gumdrop, came in pretty colors, and was touted by people like Martha Stewart for its aesthetics, not its OS. If it had run Windows, Apple would have sold even more.
(tig)
No, it can't. iTunes can't change the radio station on a stereo. It can't change tracks on a CD that's playing on the stereo. It can't turn the stereo on or off. All that iTunes and Airport Express do is utilize auxilory input jacks, and in order to do so I must first get off my ass, walk over to the stereo, and manually select aux input.
(tig)
...insert foot. :-)
(tig)
You do know that '/*' and '*/' are the comment delimiters for C, and that anything that falls between them is ignored by the C compiler?
(tig)