Except that "textbooks are given to children, not to schools."
There is a difference--a huge difference--between voting with your wallet and abandoning sales from that company because you are pissed with their practice, and refusing to develop an application that might--at most--get a reference on one of Apple's download pages and will predominantly be used--not by Apple employees--but by a small subset of the community.
"Too bad, obviously the guy was fully capable of programming yet Apple thought he was "incompetent"."
Maybe "incompetence" referred to some other, more nebulous, quality. Maybe they were unsatisfied with his hygine, or his appearance. Perhaps he is a damn good coder but can't keep to documentation or follow orders. Perhaps he is a God of Programming(tm) but can't communicate with others (and the managers were getting sick of slipping pizza boxes under the door).
We, as outsiders, can do nothing but speculate but don't assume that "incompetence" had anything to do with the quality of his code.
...or is this guy talking more about his/dedication/ than the/quality of his work/ as to why they should have kept him?
I don't know why this guy got fired--perhaps they weren't satisfied with his work, perhaps there were politics involved, perhaps they needed to trim their staff and he wasn't valuable enough to keep--I don't know. What I do know is that he seems to be saying that he deserved to keep the job because he wanted the job and was dedicated to it--not because he was particularly qualified to keep it.
Also, this has just marginarlly above a 0% chance of become "the killer app" on MacOS X. A good app? Perhaps. Widely used? Maybe. A killer app that everyone downloads right after getting a mac? Not a chance.
I've used Abiword. It's good, but it isn't *that* good.
1) If the mac was only using one processor, then while a dual system is still faster (OS tasks can be sent to the other processor, other apps have more of a pipeline to be scheduled in, &c) it is nowhere near the point of using all of its processors.
2) Two single processors have advantages and disadvantages when compared to one faster processor. Some of the advantages include that it will feel more responsive and will actually be faster when performing lots of smaller or a mixed group of CPU based tasks. When performing a single large tasks (such as what AE tends to do without this hack), each one independently, the dual processor system suffers greatly.
Dual processor machines are just completely different beasts--adding their MHz and comparing them that way is a very poor way of scaling them per MHz against a single processor system, since it is completely and totally nonrepresentative of how the systems work.
" Until they stole whatever you were trying to secure either for themselves or because someone offered them a lot of money. "
This happens all of the time with non-felons. Point?
", but I'd never knowingly hire people who committed crimes applicable to my business or the job for which they're being hired."
That is your call. I might depending on circumstances--do I trust him for the job and the risk I am putting him in? Is he the best qualified individual I can find at this level of pay for the job?
Despite that these two situations are completely and totally unrelated (one is intrusive the other is not), it depends on the situation.
*Does being a convincted rapist give him a particular insight into how to spot other rapists?
*Is he better at stopping--not just rapists--but other toughs and would-be assailants for his experience? Is he the best for the job?
*What level am I willing to trust him to and is the amount of trust required for the job less than the amount I trust this individual? (This does not just apply to felons, it applies to everyone).
You shouldn't hire someone because they have a criminal record, but you shouldn't dismiss them just because they are a convicted felon. Consider the entire picture and make the *best* decision for you and your company.
Lets say there is a master thief, the real-world equivalent of what we see in so many movies (Entraptment, Ocean's 11, The Saint, &c). This individual is caught and convicted, _serves their time_, and is let back out into the world.
You run a hiring firm that specializes in security systems for businesses.
This person would be *ideal* for your networks and/even if they never reformed/ they would still be a valuable asset.
"With OSX, each user also has a public "drop box" that is visible and world writeable via Rendezvous. "
True, IFF you actually enable it. That being said, simply being *writeable* isn't a problem, you can clean it out without *any* difficulty.
If you need more a more secure setup, these can also be enabled with the click of a button--all up to how you want to handle it. I also *think* you could also chmod it to prevent anyone from writing to it, but that's another matter.
This guy is doomed from the get-go. He can't install a Macintosh Operating system on the thing--it is in the licensing that you cannot install it on a non-Apple system, IIRC--and the users can't legally install one, he will be completely unsupported by Apple and prone to their every whim, and is going to have all sorts of hell getting off the ground just as a startup in this economy.
That being said, it is a fun news item to see up and one that keeps getting bounced around the community:-)
You have no choice under MacOS X but to password protect all users and all connection protocols are turned off by default. You would have to specifically enable sharing and remote login and even then the password is still there.
Um, that would be in part because DSL works through phone lines and is severely distance sensative (you have to be close to a base station--the further away you are the slower the connection).
Cable requires, well, a cable company that services your area and that is willing to provide cable modem service.
Where ht is the height of the transmitting antenna and hr is the height of the receiving antenna (in feet, I don't feel like looking up the conversion). R is in nautical miles.
One nautical mile is 1.1508 miles in distance.
Thus, to get a reception of 31 miles assuming a receiver that is on the ground and ideal conditions...
You would need an antenna that was 480 feet off the ground.
To obtain a 25 mile horizon, it is almost 170 feet less.
This is, of course, under ideal conditions (no atmospheric distortions, ideal antenna, no silly things like mountain ranges blocking the signel, &c).
This is also assuming my memory, the original reference, and my math are all correct:-)
"Do a search for the bugs Apple has introduced to IPSec and GCC."
No need, I am dealing with a bug in Apple's gcc3.1 as we speak.
In response I use Apple's gcc for things where the bugs do not exist and gcc3.3 (compiled from cvs) for times when they do. A good craftsman never blames his tools, but always tries to make sure that his tools are up to his own specification.
Apple did introduce a few bugs, they also removed a few. It's the way it goes.
"Where on the Jaguar disc can I find XFee86?""
What you are doing here is called "not reading what I wrote".
"I can safely say they ARE trying to do everything for me and let's try an analogy:"
Not at all. Not all of their machines ship with AppleWorks, for instance (mine didn't), QuickBooks is not in-house by any means, and they are (or at least were) offering a steeply discounted version of Microsoft Office.
They are not trying to do a lot of things for me. I have to purchase Keynote separately, download TeTeX on my own, &c. Considering how small of a percentage of users ever write anything in LaTeX or see LaTeX code...
"Why can't Apple's out-of-the-box Unix be as compelling to RedHat users as say, their Final Cut Pro is to Avid users?"
This would be called a "false analogy".
"I don't want to get into 'my Apple loyalty is bigger than yours' but it is my 13-year admiration of their complete product line"
I've been using macs since 1984 and have owned or had as family computers over 10 macs (Original, Plus, SE, LC, Centris 650, 7100, G3MT, iMac, iBook, and a 12" PowerBook). I used to subscribe to the MacMarines mailing list and was (and still am) a Mac Evangelist.
I also have done a lot of work with Linux and ran my systems in dual boot (with LinuxPPC or MkLinux, depending on the system) until the release of MacOS X 10.1.
Yes, I also ran MacOS X 10.0 and even the MacOS X 10.0 Public Beta.
"ot shipping with a working package manager "
Is it annoying? Sure. Can it be worked around? Easily and through commonly available (and easily installable) means. Therefore I do not complain.
"explain how I perform the equivalent of 'rpm -e apache' on a freshly-installed Mac OS X box?"
1) Apache comes preinstalled.
2) Try fink.sourceforge.net
3) Once again, this is called "not reading what I wrote"
"Kudos to Fink and and GNU/Darwin to finding workarounds to this situation."
I don't consider it "a workaround," I consider it "adding useful functionality to a system."
There is a *big* difference between those two.
". I simply don't understand why it is a problem in the first place."
Neither do I (though I have a few guesses involving Apple's tech support getting swamped with phone calls from people trying to install Unix software and thinking that Apple supported it since they were using an Apple utility), however, considering we are on 10.2, and are about to go to 10.3, Apple mentions Fink on their website, and now Apple has a publically available X11 implementation, why are you still up in arms?
"That was on Mac OS X 1.0 install disc 3?"
Once again, "not reading what I wrote."
I don't care whether it was on the 10.0 install disc. I doubt I could *find* my copy of the 10.0 install disc if I went looking for it.
Also, when it is readily available via the internet or through CDs, why is it a problem if it doesn't ship with it? Oh boo hoo, it takes that much longer to get working?
"These guys seem to: www.macdevcenter.com Do you put O'Reilly and Associates in the same Trolling Idiot category as you put me?"
I'm going to venture a guess that they would be chugging along just fine if XonX were the only implementation of XFree86 involved on the Mac and we all were using OrobusOSX.
They are also not "traditional workstation users" by any stretch of the imagination, which is what you claimed. Nor do they seem to be whining, like what yo
"Instead of trying to create software that piggybacks on GNU/OS X why aren't they working on GNU/Darwin?"
Maybe because there isn't such a thing as GNU/OS X?
Less flippantly (but only slightly): Maybe because the purpose of fink is to improve the ease of UNIX integration with Apple's MacOS X?
"It seems to me that they don't like apple very much for some reason."
You must not have read the same article I did.
The one that said: <<Overall, the mood at Apple seems to be friendly towards Fink, they refer to us in various places of their homepage, for example.>>
" Political reasons maybe?"
No, it would be for "political reasons" if they suddenly started working working exclusively on the GNU-Darwin project.
"Maybe they should have bought PCs instead of a MAC and run linux."
You do realize that it isn't an acronym? Mac, short for Macintosh.
You also realize that most of us use OSX because we happen to like OSX and because it works for us? *Not* for solely political reasons?
"They can't seem to get that NIH attitude out of their heads even when they go open source."
You mean like USB, Ultra ATA, and Gigabit Ethernet? Yeah! Apple needs to be more standards compliant damn it and support... oh, they *do* support them and have for quite some time.
Or do you mean things like gcc3.1, gprof, XFree86, libtool, automake, KHTML, &c?
"Fink and GNU/Darwin are clean up efforts in reponse to Apple's failure to:"
You do realize that it isn't Apple's responsability to do everything for you?
Boo hoo! it didn't ship with TeTeX, how am I ever supposed to do my document typesetting! They must not be serious about the Unix community or they would include such essentials that of course 90+% of their userbase--both users and developers--is going to use.
" X11 from day one. "
I don't suppose that you have heard of the XonX project?
"useable AND would have convinced more traditional workstation users that Apple is serious about open environments."
This statement does not grok. Most "tradiational workstation users" don't give a damn whether Apple is "serious about open environments."
"The official X11 for OS X package remains in beta to this day."
Considering it was released in January and we are on Beta 3 right now, which is more than useable. It took Mozilla how long to get through its own Beta stage?
"Fully embrace a mainstream open source OS. "
'They have done so much that no-one else in the field ever has... but damn them! They aren't doing enough!'
Am I getting the gist of your argument?
You do realize that, for the vast majority of us, we try to use what works best for us and do not choose our platform soley on the basis of religious zeal.
" I don't care how black-turtle-kneck-sweater cool the MACH kernel is"
The variant of mach they are using is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike mach. It has been so heavily revised it isn't even funny.
"If they aren't ready with a mechanism for weekly or daily patches,"
You mean like CVS?
Incidentally, so Apple left something for groups to do--such as produce fink--what is your point?
Also, am I the only one who doesn't install the newest library just because its available? Seriously, you do realize I have software that I need to have work?
"But does it actually work though? A lot of Apple (particularly network I've noticed) stuff looks great in black and white but simply screws up all the time in practice. ARD and Mac Manager for example."
Um, I have not had a problem with anything vaguely related to networking since I upgraded to 10.1.
I don't use Apple Remote Desktop, so I can't speak to that, but Mac Manager is not Apple Software.
Also: While I don't know about Shake in particular I *have* been using Rendezvous with *zero* problems for a variety of other tasks.
"Ah, now we can be quite certain that you don't have the foggiest idea what you're talking about. Carbon is not "ugly-looking." It's just an API. It doesn't look like anything."
Well... actually it does, though it may not be obvious through the User Interface.
It is the difference between looking at handwritten, strict xhtml code and looking at the output from telling MS Word to create an HTML document.
Carbon just feels... unclean in comparison to Cocoa.
Slashdot Mirror
Try the 12" PowerBook. It is still inexpensive as can be and comes with Bluetooth.
The only updates I've seen where "a large number of their improvements were bug fixes" have been the free upgrades through softwareupdate.
Lets look at just a few of the features in 10.2:
Quartz Extreme -- This isn't a "bug fix"--it is a complete overhaul of the rendering engine.
Rendezvous -- Again, a new feature.
Spring Loaded Folders -- We had this back in 9.x, but it is new to MacOS X.
A Character Pallete -- New in 10.2
AAC and MPEG4 built in -- New in 10.2
Internet Sharing -- New and extremely useful. It is absolutely wonderful and is simple to configure.
It allows Windows to connect to a MacOS X file server through the system preferences dialogue.
System Preferences for configuring a Firewall.
Security -- Smart card, long user name, and remote login that can be configured through system preferences.
Junk Mail handling in Mail.
Updated to use CUPS for printing.
*BLUETOOTH*
Built-in handwriting recognition.
Where in this list do you see a "bug fix"?
Except that "textbooks are given to children, not to schools."
There is a difference--a huge difference--between voting with your wallet and abandoning sales from that company because you are pissed with their practice, and refusing to develop an application that might--at most--get a reference on one of Apple's download pages and will predominantly be used--not by Apple employees--but by a small subset of the community.
"Too bad, obviously the guy was fully capable of programming yet Apple thought he was "incompetent"."
Maybe "incompetence" referred to some other, more nebulous, quality. Maybe they were unsatisfied with his hygine, or his appearance. Perhaps he is a damn good coder but can't keep to documentation or follow orders. Perhaps he is a God of Programming(tm) but can't communicate with others (and the managers were getting sick of slipping pizza boxes under the door).
We, as outsiders, can do nothing but speculate but don't assume that "incompetence" had anything to do with the quality of his code.
...or is this guy talking more about his /dedication/ than the /quality of his work/ as to why they should have kept him?
I don't know why this guy got fired--perhaps they weren't satisfied with his work, perhaps there were politics involved, perhaps they needed to trim their staff and he wasn't valuable enough to keep--I don't know. What I do know is that he seems to be saying that he deserved to keep the job because he wanted the job and was dedicated to it--not because he was particularly qualified to keep it.
Also, this has just marginarlly above a 0% chance of become "the killer app" on MacOS X. A good app? Perhaps. Widely used? Maybe. A killer app that everyone downloads right after getting a mac? Not a chance.
I've used Abiword. It's good, but it isn't *that* good.
" Does gcc or MetroWorks compile binaries that are optimized for altivec but have slower code for older processors?"
It is simple enough to check and several of the libraries that are commonly used (as opposed to directly using the altivec commands) do exactly this.
" Adobe could have rewritten some key functions to be altivec optimized. "
The vast majority of designers who use Adobe on the Mac have at least one G4.
". Furthermore, Apple has been adding free/lowcost software that competes with Adobe and other manufacturors."
Last I checked, half of Adobe's profit came from the Macintosh--at the least on certain product lines.
Do you know *anything* about SMP?
1) If the mac was only using one processor, then while a dual system is still faster (OS tasks can be sent to the other processor, other apps have more of a pipeline to be scheduled in, &c) it is nowhere near the point of using all of its processors.
2) Two single processors have advantages and disadvantages when compared to one faster processor. Some of the advantages include that it will feel more responsive and will actually be faster when performing lots of smaller or a mixed group of CPU based tasks. When performing a single large tasks (such as what AE tends to do without this hack), each one independently, the dual processor system suffers greatly.
Dual processor machines are just completely different beasts--adding their MHz and comparing them that way is a very poor way of scaling them per MHz against a single processor system, since it is completely and totally nonrepresentative of how the systems work.
"iMovie3 on the other hand, sux so hard it would put Miss Lewinsky to shame."
That being said, iMovie 3 is free and better than any other free editor I have ever seen.
I also should say that, in my limited working with it, I have not had any problems.
For those who are doing more than making home movies, Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Express are reasonably priced.
" Until they stole whatever you were trying to secure either for themselves or because someone offered them a lot of money. "
This happens all of the time with non-felons. Point?
", but I'd never knowingly hire people who committed crimes applicable to my business or the job for which they're being hired."
That is your call. I might depending on circumstances--do I trust him for the job and the risk I am putting him in? Is he the best qualified individual I can find at this level of pay for the job?
Despite that these two situations are completely and totally unrelated (one is intrusive the other is not), it depends on the situation.
*Does being a convincted rapist give him a particular insight into how to spot other rapists?
*Is he better at stopping--not just rapists--but other toughs and would-be assailants for his experience? Is he the best for the job?
*What level am I willing to trust him to and is the amount of trust required for the job less than the amount I trust this individual? (This does not just apply to felons, it applies to everyone).
You shouldn't hire someone because they have a criminal record, but you shouldn't dismiss them just because they are a convicted felon. Consider the entire picture and make the *best* decision for you and your company.
Lets say there is a master thief, the real-world equivalent of what we see in so many movies (Entraptment, Ocean's 11, The Saint, &c). This individual is caught and convicted, _serves their time_, and is let back out into the world.
/even if they never reformed/ they would still be a valuable asset.
You run a hiring firm that specializes in security systems for businesses.
This person would be *ideal* for your networks and
"With OSX, each user also has a public "drop box" that is visible and world writeable via Rendezvous. "
True, IFF you actually enable it. That being said, simply being *writeable* isn't a problem, you can clean it out without *any* difficulty.
If you need more a more secure setup, these can also be enabled with the click of a button--all up to how you want to handle it. I also *think* you could also chmod it to prevent anyone from writing to it, but that's another matter.
Prettymuch.
:-)
This guy is doomed from the get-go. He can't install a Macintosh Operating system on the thing--it is in the licensing that you cannot install it on a non-Apple system, IIRC--and the users can't legally install one, he will be completely unsupported by Apple and prone to their every whim, and is going to have all sorts of hell getting off the ground just as a startup in this economy.
That being said, it is a fun news item to see up and one that keeps getting bounced around the community
It will cost you about the same, be 3 times more efficient, and won't lock you into proprietary Microsoft crap.
(Yes, you can install Linux on a Dell, you can also install Linux on a Mac).
Besides, Apple's online store is much nicer.
You have no choice under MacOS X but to password protect all users and all connection protocols are turned off by default. You would have to specifically enable sharing and remote login and even then the password is still there.
Um, that would be in part because DSL works through phone lines and is severely distance sensative (you have to be close to a base station--the further away you are the slower the connection).
Cable requires, well, a cable company that services your area and that is willing to provide cable modem service.
R = 1.23(sqrt(ht) + sqrt(hr))
:-)
Where ht is the height of the transmitting antenna and hr is the height of the receiving antenna (in feet, I don't feel like looking up the conversion). R is in nautical miles.
One nautical mile is 1.1508 miles in distance.
Thus, to get a reception of 31 miles assuming a receiver that is on the ground and ideal conditions...
You would need an antenna that was 480 feet off the ground.
To obtain a 25 mile horizon, it is almost 170 feet less.
This is, of course, under ideal conditions (no atmospheric distortions, ideal antenna, no silly things like mountain ranges blocking the signel, &c).
This is also assuming my memory, the original reference, and my math are all correct
" (Or maybe I just underestimate the stupidity of people)"
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
(yes, taken blatantly from a bumper sticker).
"Do a search for the bugs Apple has introduced to IPSec and GCC."
No need, I am dealing with a bug in Apple's gcc3.1 as we speak.
In response I use Apple's gcc for things where the bugs do not exist and gcc3.3 (compiled from cvs) for times when they do. A good craftsman never blames his tools, but always tries to make sure that his tools are up to his own specification.
Apple did introduce a few bugs, they also removed a few. It's the way it goes.
"Where on the Jaguar disc can I find XFee86?""
What you are doing here is called "not reading what I wrote".
"I can safely say they ARE trying to do everything for me and let's try an analogy:"
Not at all. Not all of their machines ship with AppleWorks, for instance (mine didn't), QuickBooks is not in-house by any means, and they are (or at least were) offering a steeply discounted version of Microsoft Office.
They are not trying to do a lot of things for me. I have to purchase Keynote separately, download TeTeX on my own, &c. Considering how small of a percentage of users ever write anything in LaTeX or see LaTeX code...
"Why can't Apple's out-of-the-box Unix be as compelling to RedHat users as say, their Final Cut Pro is to Avid users?"
This would be called a "false analogy".
"I don't want to get into 'my Apple loyalty is bigger than yours' but it is my 13-year admiration of their complete product line"
I've been using macs since 1984 and have owned or had as family computers over 10 macs (Original, Plus, SE, LC, Centris 650, 7100, G3MT, iMac, iBook, and a 12" PowerBook). I used to subscribe to the MacMarines mailing list and was (and still am) a Mac Evangelist.
I also have done a lot of work with Linux and ran my systems in dual boot (with LinuxPPC or MkLinux, depending on the system) until the release of MacOS X 10.1.
Yes, I also ran MacOS X 10.0 and even the MacOS X 10.0 Public Beta.
"ot shipping with a working package manager "
Is it annoying? Sure. Can it be worked around? Easily and through commonly available (and easily installable) means. Therefore I do not complain.
"explain how I perform the equivalent of 'rpm -e apache' on a freshly-installed Mac OS X box?"
1) Apache comes preinstalled.
2) Try fink.sourceforge.net
3) Once again, this is called "not reading what I wrote"
"Kudos to Fink and and GNU/Darwin to finding workarounds to this situation."
I don't consider it "a workaround," I consider it "adding useful functionality to a system."
There is a *big* difference between those two.
". I simply don't understand why it is a problem in the first place."
Neither do I (though I have a few guesses involving Apple's tech support getting swamped with phone calls from people trying to install Unix software and thinking that Apple supported it since they were using an Apple utility), however, considering we are on 10.2, and are about to go to 10.3, Apple mentions Fink on their website, and now Apple has a publically available X11 implementation, why are you still up in arms?
"That was on Mac OS X 1.0 install disc 3?"
Once again, "not reading what I wrote."
I don't care whether it was on the 10.0 install disc. I doubt I could *find* my copy of the 10.0 install disc if I went looking for it.
Also, when it is readily available via the internet or through CDs, why is it a problem if it doesn't ship with it? Oh boo hoo, it takes that much longer to get working?
"These guys seem to: www.macdevcenter.com Do you put O'Reilly and Associates in the same Trolling Idiot category as you put me?"
I'm going to venture a guess that they would be chugging along just fine if XonX were the only implementation of XFree86 involved on the Mac and we all were using OrobusOSX.
They are also not "traditional workstation users" by any stretch of the imagination, which is what you claimed. Nor do they seem to be whining, like what yo
"Instead of trying to create software that piggybacks on GNU/OS X why aren't they working on GNU/Darwin?"
Maybe because there isn't such a thing as GNU/OS X?
Less flippantly (but only slightly): Maybe because the purpose of fink is to improve the ease of UNIX integration with Apple's MacOS X?
"It seems to me that they don't like apple very much for some reason."
You must not have read the same article I did.
The one that said:
<<Overall, the mood at Apple seems to be friendly towards Fink, they refer to us in various places of their homepage, for example.>>
" Political reasons maybe?"
No, it would be for "political reasons" if they suddenly started working working exclusively on the GNU-Darwin project.
"Maybe they should have bought PCs instead of a MAC and run linux."
You do realize that it isn't an acronym? Mac, short for Macintosh.
You also realize that most of us use OSX because we happen to like OSX and because it works for us? *Not* for solely political reasons?
Yum, a troll.
"They can't seem to get that NIH attitude out of their heads even when they go open source."
You mean like USB, Ultra ATA, and Gigabit Ethernet? Yeah! Apple needs to be more standards compliant damn it and support... oh, they *do* support them and have for quite some time.
Or do you mean things like gcc3.1, gprof, XFree86, libtool, automake, KHTML, &c?
"Fink and GNU/Darwin are clean up efforts in reponse to Apple's failure to:"
You do realize that it isn't Apple's responsability to do everything for you?
Boo hoo! it didn't ship with TeTeX, how am I ever supposed to do my document typesetting! They must not be serious about the Unix community or they would include such essentials that of course 90+% of their userbase--both users and developers--is going to use.
" X11 from day one. "
I don't suppose that you have heard of the XonX project?
"useable AND would have convinced more traditional workstation users that Apple is serious about open environments."
This statement does not grok. Most "tradiational workstation users" don't give a damn whether Apple is "serious about open environments."
"The official X11 for OS X package remains in beta to this day."
Considering it was released in January and we are on Beta 3 right now, which is more than useable. It took Mozilla how long to get through its own Beta stage?
"Fully embrace a mainstream open source OS. "
'They have done so much that no-one else in the field ever has... but damn them! They aren't doing enough!'
Am I getting the gist of your argument?
You do realize that, for the vast majority of us, we try to use what works best for us and do not choose our platform soley on the basis of religious zeal.
" I don't care how black-turtle-kneck-sweater cool the MACH kernel is"
The variant of mach they are using is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike mach. It has been so heavily revised it isn't even funny.
"If they aren't ready with a mechanism for weekly or daily patches,"
You mean like CVS?
Incidentally, so Apple left something for groups to do--such as produce fink--what is your point?
Also, am I the only one who doesn't install the newest library just because its available? Seriously, you do realize I have software that I need to have work?
"But does it actually work though? A lot of Apple (particularly network I've noticed) stuff looks great in black and white but simply screws up all the time in practice. ARD and Mac Manager for example."
Um, I have not had a problem with anything vaguely related to networking since I upgraded to 10.1.
I don't use Apple Remote Desktop, so I can't speak to that, but Mac Manager is not Apple Software.
Also: While I don't know about Shake in particular I *have* been using Rendezvous with *zero* problems for a variety of other tasks.
Read their testing methodology and look at their system configurations and the answer will become immediately evident.
Not to mention that Photoshop forces the graphics card to render everything twice, and initial page reads like an advertisement for Dell...
"You'd think that Slashdot would want to present both sides evenly."
/., you must be new here...
Welcome to
"Ah, now we can be quite certain that you don't have the foggiest idea what you're talking about. Carbon is not "ugly-looking." It's just an API. It doesn't look like anything."
Well... actually it does, though it may not be obvious through the User Interface.
It is the difference between looking at handwritten, strict xhtml code and looking at the output from telling MS Word to create an HTML document.
Carbon just feels... unclean in comparison to Cocoa.
Thus, yes, you *can* say that about APIs.