Stop peddling this nonsense. It never says anything about "physical AND virtual". The words don't read that way that and MS isn't interpreting it that way. End of story.
>It's the latency benefit I'm more interested in that transfer rates.
Fine. Buy the 160GB and make a 100GB partition. Use the 60GB only for archival. Now you've got the same latency as the 100GB and can stop trolling here.
Maybe they're a software company that hides the value of the product in the hardware? (People are more willing to spend big on hardware than software). After all, ask a Mac user if they'd rather have MacOS on a Dell machine, or Windows on a Mac Machine, and they'd go for the former.
Here's my statement: Apple is a software company. (Just to be devil's advocate).
I suspect Jobs is ambitious enough to want it ALL. He wants to be a huge software AND hardware company, and he is prepared to stay the course rather than make a quick gambit of increasing only software share by opening OSX to PCs.
You greatly exagerate. For a start, they certainly don't make $300 on a Mac Mini. Secondly, you assume that everyone will stop buying their hardware, when an equally valid assumption is that selling it on PCs would be cream on the top. (The truth is somewhere in the middle). Thirdly, they have ten billion in the bank. No venture is going to bankrupt them.
Whatever the merits of that idea, I don't think that's likely. However they could sell a $10 licence for generic PCs that expires after 3 months to let people try out the OS.
Sure UNIX is crap. But it's also lightyears better than all the other mainstream crap. It's the best crap on the market. Maybe someone one day will make some research OS mainstream. Until then...
>PlaysForSure still exists, and those that bought PFS music can still buy many PFS players. They >won't buy Zunes, but how does that mean that they were "FUCKED by Microsoft"? They can buy still >buy PFS players, just as they could before Zune.
Yes you can still buy PFS player... BUT FOR HOW LONG?? Analysts are predicting that Zune won't take iPod market share but it will take the share of non-iPod players. So MS is aiming to sink the PFS community with a new entrant.
Not that I've got my finger right on the pulse of FS development, but I find it hard to believe that ext3 is soon going to equal Reiserfs for all cases. Perhaps for a typical case, but ReiserFS was supposed to allow a lot of stuff that was not feasible with ext3 like efficiently having really small files, using the FS as a database, and a lot of other potentially groundbreaking research and abilities. I hope none of the good ideas get lost.
>"USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a >virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system."
>Conclusion: All it's saying here is that I can't use the same copy of the software for the physical machine AND in >a virtualized environment.
Dear Microsoft troll with "the reading comprehension of a 5th-grader": Bullshit.
It says "You may not use the software installed within a virtual hardware system". Period. End of Story. There is no mention of "physical AND virtual".
You could define a ++ macro, but most Scheme programmers, who are functional programming zealots would consider it bad style.
Yes Scheme is a fine langauge for writing Windows gui programs, or at least it would be if it wasn't so hard to find a top notch development environment and professional cross platform gui toolkit that is ready to pick up and use.
The problem with looping as opposed to recursive, is that recursive is functional programming and thus it is easier to prove the code correct. Looping has side-effects, and thus it is more prone to bugs. None of this makes sense to the VB raised programmer for which for every nail, VB is the hammer.
Besides which Scheme has looping, it is just that it is implemented using the more primitive construct of tail recursion. Scheme gives you the power to invent your own control constructs.
What the world needs is either one of those military grade cases or the Japanese bullet proof case for the new iPod shuffle released last week. That would be soooo k001.
I'm going the opposite direction to most people. I started off with Linux because it was far superior to other options back in the nineties. When Win XP came out I slowly reduced my use of Linux because XP was "good enough", it didn't crash, it runs games and iTunes and some other progs I need. I use cywin to make it somewhat Unix-like. Now I've had enough of Windows, it's fallen behind where it should be, but Linux is still too unfriendly for the rest of the family. It's still hard to set up hardware, and the gui, while similar to Windows on the surface, still has an underlying clunkyness still. So I'm moving to OSX shortly. I still like Linux and hope one day it will lose the clunkyness, but life is too short to be spending hours hacking around problems and I'm too old for that crap now.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop peddling this nonsense. It never says anything about "physical AND virtual". The words don't read that way that and MS isn't interpreting it that way. End of story.
50 million more sites or 50 million more domain name squatters?
>It's the latency benefit I'm more interested in that transfer rates.
Fine. Buy the 160GB and make a 100GB partition. Use the 60GB only for archival. Now you've got the same latency as the 100GB and can stop trolling here.
Go for it. I doubt Apple's market share will move one bit from people buying old G3 towers and filling it with PC components.
Maybe they're a software company that hides the value of the product in the hardware? (People are more willing to spend big on hardware than software). After all, ask a Mac user if they'd rather have MacOS on a Dell machine, or Windows on a Mac Machine, and they'd go for the former.
Here's my statement: Apple is a software company. (Just to be devil's advocate).
I don't think there's anything stopping anyone making an OSX virtualization product. In fact, I think VMWare is working on it.
I suspect Jobs is ambitious enough to want it ALL. He wants to be a huge software AND hardware company, and he is prepared to stay the course rather than make a quick gambit of increasing only software share by opening OSX to PCs.
You greatly exagerate. For a start, they certainly don't make $300 on a Mac Mini. Secondly, you assume that everyone will stop buying their hardware, when an equally valid assumption is that selling it on PCs would be cream on the top. (The truth is somewhere in the middle). Thirdly, they have ten billion in the bank. No venture is going to bankrupt them.
Whatever the merits of that idea, I don't think that's likely. However they could sell a $10 licence for generic PCs that expires after 3 months to let people try out the OS.
If Jon doesn't sell his wares, he'll probably release it on the net and Apple will be even worse off.
Sure UNIX is crap. But it's also lightyears better than all the other mainstream crap. It's the best crap on the market. Maybe someone one day will make some research OS mainstream. Until then...
If you meet a girl, you want to make sure she is "PLAYS FOR SURE".
>PlaysForSure still exists, and those that bought PFS music can still buy many PFS players. They
>won't buy Zunes, but how does that mean that they were "FUCKED by Microsoft"? They can buy still
>buy PFS players, just as they could before Zune.
Yes you can still buy PFS player... BUT FOR HOW LONG?? Analysts are predicting that Zune won't take iPod market share but it will take the share of non-iPod players. So MS is aiming to sink the PFS community with a new entrant.
Hmm, I see the headlines now. MS is sued in a Napster style case for contributory infringement.
Not that I've got my finger right on the pulse of FS development, but I find it hard to believe that ext3 is soon going to equal Reiserfs for all cases. Perhaps for a typical case, but ReiserFS was supposed to allow a lot of stuff that was not feasible with ext3 like efficiently having really small files, using the FS as a database, and a lot of other potentially groundbreaking research and abilities. I hope none of the good ideas get lost.
Are you kidding? Computers is a high paying, generally short hours, low stress job. If this gives you a divorce, anything would.
Wine Is Not an Emulator - WINE. Wine does not utilize Windows.
> You'll realize that drag-and-drop is a better installation method.
Mac OS installation truely rocks.
>"USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a
>virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system."
>Conclusion: All it's saying here is that I can't use the same copy of the software for the physical machine AND in
>a virtualized environment.
Dear Microsoft troll with "the reading comprehension of a 5th-grader": Bullshit.
It says "You may not use the software installed within a virtual hardware system". Period. End of Story. There is no mention of "physical AND virtual".
You could define a ++ macro, but most Scheme programmers, who are functional programming zealots would consider it bad style.
Yes Scheme is a fine langauge for writing Windows gui programs, or at least it would be if it wasn't so hard to find a top notch development environment and professional cross platform gui toolkit that is ready to pick up and use.
The problem with looping as opposed to recursive, is that recursive is functional programming and thus it is easier to prove the code correct. Looping has side-effects, and thus it is more prone to bugs. None of this makes sense to the VB raised programmer for which for every nail, VB is the hammer.
Besides which Scheme has looping, it is just that it is implemented using the more primitive construct of tail recursion. Scheme gives you the power to invent your own control constructs.
What the world needs is either one of those military grade cases or the Japanese bullet proof case for the new iPod shuffle released last week. That would be soooo k001.
I find it hard to believe rebooting it could corrupt the file system. Are you sure you have a clue?
You can also use Active Corners. Configure it so that you move the mouse to the corner and the desktop appears.
I'm going the opposite direction to most people. I started off with Linux because it was far superior to other options back in the nineties. When Win XP came out I slowly reduced my use of Linux because XP was "good enough", it didn't crash, it runs games and iTunes and some other progs I need. I use cywin to make it somewhat Unix-like. Now I've had enough of Windows, it's fallen behind where it should be, but Linux is still too unfriendly for the rest of the family. It's still hard to set up hardware, and the gui, while similar to Windows on the surface, still has an underlying clunkyness still. So I'm moving to OSX shortly. I still like Linux and hope one day it will lose the clunkyness, but life is too short to be spending hours hacking around problems and I'm too old for that crap now.