Frankly, it kinda makes me wonder why more people aren't raving about Quartz. I guess it's probably because most people don't understand it. If you're not a fairly intensive Mac programmer, you probably just don't know about it. The information is all out there, but it's extremely detailed, and kind of overwhelming.
Thanks for the explanation. I was making a joke, but that does excuse the inaccuracy.
In 2001, I got to attend the WWDC Early Bird session on Quartz. I came away *awed* about Quartz.
But you aren't talking about this kind of a difference. Its like asking whether it is harder to be the CEO of IBM vs. CEO of Microsoft. IBM has far more employees, but I doubt that the sheer number of people makes Sam Palmisano's job 10X as difficult as Steve Balmer's. For managing people above a certain number, the number just becomes "many".
I think it had to do with developers not adopting it for several good reasons.
Apple had just come out with several new technology initiatives that required or would have required significant new investment by third party developers which ultimately were dropped by Apple. I point to things like Dylan, Publish and Subscribe, Quickdraw GX, Power Talk, AOCE, and a host of other things.
So, having been burned several times, Apple comes out with this OpenDoc thing and wants people to develop "parts" of an application. Now, think about it from a business perspective. You're going to create a part. Can you sell this part? How will the user use the Part? Will it interact reliably with the application that "contains" it? If the app has a bug and your Part doesn't work right, how will you provide technical support? How can you do support when the number of configuration options is open ended?
OK. Now think about a company considering making an application container. This would allow people to make these "Parts". If the Part doesn't work right, who takes the tech support call? This is not a trivial issue because the call probably costs you $10 or more. Companies are always trying to reduce their call volume and certain want to reduce it for calls they shouldn't be taking in the first place (like for someone else's software.)
Could you charge extra for an Open Doc enabled application? If not, why make one when you could make a regular app that you can have more control over the user's experience.
Speaking of which: Marketing people love being able to brand things and make an app have a consistant look and feel for the brand. I always have to argue with them to get them to follow platform UI guidelines - and it is an uphill battle. The only way I can win is by pointing out that Mac users hate things that don't look "Mac like" and pointing to the failure of Word 6 as an example. Do you think for a minute that I would be able to win an argument that said we should give up control over the app's look and feel so that other companies can make money by shipping what are essentially plugins to our software? I don't think so.
And finally, I knew that OpenDoc was a failure when Apple called me on the phone and asked me personally to develop OpenDoc parts. Yes, it nice to be noticed, but I also knew they wouldn't be calling me if they were desperate. And since an Open Doc part by itself would be pretty useless, I didn't see any advantage in being the only guest at that party.
Oh, and AppleScript was introduced with System 7 BTW.
It's pretty easy to brag about your computer's great PDF handling when the whole graphics subsystem is built on PDF. Windows users do not have this luxury. Taunting them about it is cruel. Be nicer.
The problem I see with enforcing this state by state is when I buy a computer in one state and then transport it to another and try to dispose of it. Also, mail order houses and PC manufacturers like Dell will have to keep track of 50 sets of regulations. This is not efficient and is in fact a pain in the ass for everyone involved I think. It is much easier with a national law.
And I would not accept at face value that the Federal government is more inept than the state government at running programs. Show some proof on this.
There is one difference I can think of. It is not illegal to throw away paper, glass bottles, or aluminum cans. However, it is illegal to throw away CRTs (and presumably other PC parts) in most (all in the US?) places. So, not wanting to bother is one thing. Becoming a criminal (misdemenor? felony?) is another thing. Second, I throw away cans every day, but how often do I throw away computers/monitors? Once every few years? Also, companies dispose of far more PCs than individuals do and typically companies don't like to break the law if they can avoid it . (Yes, there are counter examples, but on something like this where there are big fines and taking it to a recycle center is already paid for?)
First of all, in many places (such as here in Oregon where I live), we have to pay a deposit to buy soda in cans or bottles. The deposit is in addition to the price of the can/bottle of soda. If you recycle, you often get this as a "refund". Some people game the system by buying cans/bottles in one locale and taking them to another where the deposit is higher (as in the Seinfeld episode where Kramer and Numan try to do this in a mail truck.)
Second, there are pretty good reasons why your Pentium 1 motherboard cannot be a Pentium 5 motherboard that have nothing to do with the electrical engineer who designed it "not being creative enough" or "the government trying to scam you". The fact is that you would not be happy if the P5 were on the P1 mother board because you would not gain much extra speed from having the P5 on there as the bus would be far too slow. The bus speed is only one of many similar problems you would have with such a scheme.
Third, electronics companies are in fact moving to more environmentally friendly manufacturing techniques. At my company, we are currently making a transition between normal type electronics and moving to "lead free" electronics for our circuit boards. One of the electrical engineers on my team was pissed recently when he had to redesign a circuit board to be lead free for this initiative. (He wasn't pissed because of the redesign. He was pissed because he originally started to design it as lead free and was told by his boss to design it "leaded" and then after doing all the work over again to create the regular design, had to re-do it again to make it lead free.)
BTW. Lead free electronics manufacturing requires higher temperatures for the board to be "baked" because it takes more heat to melt lead free solder. Also, I learned recently (I'm a software guy and knew nothing about hardware before I came to this particular company) that newer type circuit boards typically can have circuits at several levels within the board and have parts on both sides of the board. Its pretty interesting.
Archimede's principle dictates that an object will displace its weight in water
I hate to be nitpicky, but not exactly. If an object cannot displace its own weight in water, then it will sink to the bottom. But for floating objects, your statement is correct.
The rest of your post is well reasoned and yes, there are people doing this (mostly in the second and third world). However, computer parts often contain very toxic substances. Unfortunately, heating these parts to the temperatures needed to melt metal results in the release of gases, some of which are very toxic. So, doing what you are describing can be hazardous to your health. People in Mexico and China and similar places that are recycling PC parts under improper conditions to get precious (or sometimes just valuable) metals are in fact getting ill from doing this.
OMFG! You mean that *typing* was some kind of forced pre-requisite for taking other computer classes - EVEN THOUGH YOU HAD ALREADY TAKEN IT IN MIDDLE SCHOOL????
OMFG!!!! Had the people in charge of your school had their fscking BRAINS REMOVED??
Class 1: Typing. Not on computers - on typewriters.
Would a computer really have helped you to learn to type better? I doubt it. I learned to type on an electric typewriter in 1979 and as I recall I did not really have any problem learning on it or transferring my skills to computers later (with the exception of the Atari 400.)
NewtonScript (not included in either list) was a really nice language based on the language "Self" (included in both lists) that was used to program the Apple Newton devices. In fact, the Newton OS itself had many important pieces that were implemented in NewtonScript.
It may have been obscure, but it was important to me as I made my living for a few years writing code in this language. It was really nice. When the Newton was canceled and I switched to C++, I kept having a feeling for years that I was writing inelegant code because of the elegance of NewtonScript.
BTW NewtonScript is not the same language as AppleScript and they are not really related. NewtonScript was created by Walter Smith.
My experience is that Microsoft employees, at least the engineering staff: developers, QA - I don't have knowledge about IT support staff or about non-technical people- is that they aren't very much different than other people in the industry with one small exception: you don't typically see people who express highly anti-microsoft views. (Mildly anti-microsoft: yes. Pro linux: yes, Pro mac: yes - but again not disproportionate to any other company.) If someone can't think of anything good about MS, they probably won't work there.)
I wonder if Microsoft employees use a disproportionately large number of MACs, or are more likely to be Firefox users.
No, they are not disproportionately Macintosh users compared to the rest of the software industry (unless they work for MacBU). No, they do not hate their employer. No, they are not more likely to use Firefox compared to other software professionals at other companies.
Even when Apple was "almost bancrupt", they were sitting on $1 Billion + cash reserve and no debt. Before they started having problems they had a reserve of like $4 Billion. It is unsurprising that they have increased their cash position to $5 billion given that the company has been very well managed by Mr. Jobs.
Imagine sitting down to finish a chess game for someone else. You could easily defeat your opponent in a new game, except that in the game you are finishing, you are already behind - by a lot.
In those situations, you are willing to play more daringly than normal. You pull out all the stops. Still, it takes a long time to turn the game around if you are able to do it at all. You are trying to postpone defeat as long as possible and maybe regain some lost ground.
So, that's what I think Jobs has been doing at Apple since he came back. He has pretty much done everything perfectly since then. He has played a good game and maximized Apple's resources to first keep them in business, second keep them from being bought, and third get to the point where they can start having hit products and build marketshare again. Yes, they were in serious trouble. In fact, I think Apple came as close to not surviving as a company can come. If it hadn't been for the cult following, they would not have made it. Some Mac users who were willing to buy overpriced, underpowered machines running OS 7/8 instead of microkernel based Windows alternatives really made the difference. If Windows 2000 had come out 2 years earlier, I can't see how Apple could have stayed in business.
But, they pulled it out. And today a modern Macintosh running MacOS X is a rock solid, nice computer that has a decent software library. Carbon worked. Apps were ported. Mr. Ive created industrial designs that helped get people to look at a Mac and helped get the press to write about something related to Apple that wasn't a speculation on when they were going out of business.
I'm completely amazed at how well managed Apple has become as a company and how they have pulled out all the stops to stay alive. And its really nice to see the market share numbers up for pretty much the first time ever!
I love my Mac and I love Apple. I'm not interested in "converting" people to become Mac users myself. And I understand the criticisms people have about Apple. They have certainly done a lot of things that made me angry over the years and wince at decisions they were making - right up until Jobs took over. And then they canceled the Newton which really hurt me badly because I was making my living writing software for the Newton at the time. But they were willing to explain the decision about the Newton and they promised that things would be different - and they are. The difference between Apple of 1995 and Apple today is so huge. I trust what Apple tells me today. I did not trust Apple in 1995 (although I could easily get inside information about what they were going to do that isn't available today.)
My wife says that. On the other hand, my daughter is begging me to buy her an iPod Shuffle.
I think this is another case where rational predictions may miss the mark. Conventional wisdom was that the iPod was too expensive in the first place. Conventional wisdom was that the iPod mini would fail. Conventional wisdom is that no one will buy a shuffle. Still, I know tons of people who want one. Our local Apple shop had 200 in stock and sold out of them in less than 2 hours.
I also submit that dropping the AppleII was Apple's single most biggest failure and blunder of the kind that usually kills a company like Commodore squandering their Amiga potential.
I don't see how Apple dropping the Apple II for the Mac is any different than Commodore dropping the 64 for the Amiga or Atari dropping the 8Bit line for the ST.
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up
on
Top 10 Apple Flops
·
· Score: 1
You are claiming you couldn't get an Apple IIe fixed in 1985. I call bullshit.
The government runs the schools they are in. Therefore when the government oppresses them in schools, they feel oppressed. Duh.
Forcing kids to attend school is anti-freedom. Forcing parents to send kids to school is anti-freedom. The government gets by with it because age discrimination is allowed in our society. This is also anti-freedom.
If you think America is a free country, think again. Your rights to act as you wish are abridged arbitrarily. Sometimes that abridgement wouldn't stand up in court, but most people can't afford to go to court to protect their rights.
Police can and do demand to see your ID (even if you are not driving a car). This was recently upheld by the supreme court. (Your papers please?)
Have you ever heard of a policeman who was convicted for shooting someone? All they have to say is "Oh, I thought he had a gun." and they can kill you for no reason. Given that they have the ability to murder you for any or no reason, you have no freedom at all.
I am totally not trolling here. This is what I think. I have lived all my life in the US and this country makes me sick with its hypocracy.
They have annouced pro products at WWDC before. Year before last, they annouced the G5 at WWDC. There was another year where they announced new PowerBooks at WWDC.
Slashdot Mirror
Frankly, it kinda makes me wonder why more people aren't raving about Quartz. I guess it's probably because most people don't understand it. If you're not a fairly intensive Mac programmer, you probably just don't know about it. The information is all out there, but it's extremely detailed, and kind of overwhelming.
Thanks for the explanation. I was making a joke, but that does excuse the inaccuracy.
In 2001, I got to attend the WWDC Early Bird session on Quartz. I came away *awed* about Quartz.
What the heck does being a .net programmer have to do with the availability of software on the Mac?
And yes, I do (somewhat) disagree. For sure some software packages for PC aren't available on the Mac. But the reverse is true as well.
But you aren't talking about this kind of a difference. Its like asking whether it is harder to be the CEO of IBM vs. CEO of Microsoft. IBM has far more employees, but I doubt that the sheer number of people makes Sam Palmisano's job 10X as difficult as Steve Balmer's. For managing people above a certain number, the number just becomes "many".
I think it had to do with developers not adopting it for several good reasons.
Apple had just come out with several new technology initiatives that required or would have required significant new investment by third party developers which ultimately were dropped by Apple. I point to things like Dylan, Publish and Subscribe, Quickdraw GX, Power Talk, AOCE, and a host of other things.
So, having been burned several times, Apple comes out with this OpenDoc thing and wants people to develop "parts" of an application. Now, think about it from a business perspective. You're going to create a part. Can you sell this part? How will the user use the Part? Will it interact reliably with the application that "contains" it? If the app has a bug and your Part doesn't work right, how will you provide technical support? How can you do support when the number of configuration options is open ended?
OK. Now think about a company considering making an application container. This would allow people to make these "Parts". If the Part doesn't work right, who takes the tech support call? This is not a trivial issue because the call probably costs you $10 or more. Companies are always trying to reduce their call volume and certain want to reduce it for calls they shouldn't be taking in the first place (like for someone else's software.)
Could you charge extra for an Open Doc enabled application? If not, why make one when you could make a regular app that you can have more control over the user's experience.
Speaking of which: Marketing people love being able to brand things and make an app have a consistant look and feel for the brand. I always have to argue with them to get them to follow platform UI guidelines - and it is an uphill battle. The only way I can win is by pointing out that Mac users hate things that don't look "Mac like" and pointing to the failure of Word 6 as an example. Do you think for a minute that I would be able to win an argument that said we should give up control over the app's look and feel so that other companies can make money by shipping what are essentially plugins to our software? I don't think so.
And finally, I knew that OpenDoc was a failure when Apple called me on the phone and asked me personally to develop OpenDoc parts. Yes, it nice to be noticed, but I also knew they wouldn't be calling me if they were desperate. And since an Open Doc part by itself would be pretty useless, I didn't see any advantage in being the only guest at that party.
Oh, and AppleScript was introduced with System 7 BTW.
Funny/Insightful...parent post has it all.
It's pretty easy to brag about your computer's great PDF handling when the whole graphics subsystem is built on PDF. Windows users do not have this luxury. Taunting them about it is cruel. Be nicer.
Does this depend on what it is? Even a little?
The problem I see with enforcing this state by state is when I buy a computer in one state and then transport it to another and try to dispose of it. Also, mail order houses and PC manufacturers like Dell will have to keep track of 50 sets of regulations. This is not efficient and is in fact a pain in the ass for everyone involved I think. It is much easier with a national law.
And I would not accept at face value that the Federal government is more inept than the state government at running programs. Show some proof on this.
There is one difference I can think of. It is not illegal to throw away paper, glass bottles, or aluminum cans. However, it is illegal to throw away CRTs (and presumably other PC parts) in most (all in the US?) places. So, not wanting to bother is one thing. Becoming a criminal (misdemenor? felony?) is another thing. Second, I throw away cans every day, but how often do I throw away computers/monitors? Once every few years? Also, companies dispose of far more PCs than individuals do and typically companies don't like to break the law if they can avoid it . (Yes, there are counter examples, but on something like this where there are big fines and taking it to a recycle center is already paid for?)
First of all, in many places (such as here in Oregon where I live), we have to pay a deposit to buy soda in cans or bottles. The deposit is in addition to the price of the can/bottle of soda. If you recycle, you often get this as a "refund". Some people game the system by buying cans/bottles in one locale and taking them to another where the deposit is higher (as in the Seinfeld episode where Kramer and Numan try to do this in a mail truck.)
Second, there are pretty good reasons why your Pentium 1 motherboard cannot be a Pentium 5 motherboard that have nothing to do with the electrical engineer who designed it "not being creative enough" or "the government trying to scam you". The fact is that you would not be happy if the P5 were on the P1 mother board because you would not gain much extra speed from having the P5 on there as the bus would be far too slow. The bus speed is only one of many similar problems you would have with such a scheme.
Third, electronics companies are in fact moving to more environmentally friendly manufacturing techniques. At my company, we are currently making a transition between normal type electronics and moving to "lead free" electronics for our circuit boards. One of the electrical engineers on my team was pissed recently when he had to redesign a circuit board to be lead free for this initiative. (He wasn't pissed because of the redesign. He was pissed because he originally started to design it as lead free and was told by his boss to design it "leaded" and then after doing all the work over again to create the regular design, had to re-do it again to make it lead free.)
BTW. Lead free electronics manufacturing requires higher temperatures for the board to be "baked" because it takes more heat to melt lead free solder. Also, I learned recently (I'm a software guy and knew nothing about hardware before I came to this particular company) that newer type circuit boards typically can have circuits at several levels within the board and have parts on both sides of the board. Its pretty interesting.
Archimede's principle dictates that an object will displace its weight in water
I hate to be nitpicky, but not exactly. If an object cannot displace its own weight in water, then it will sink to the bottom. But for floating objects, your statement is correct.
The rest of your post is well reasoned and yes, there are people doing this (mostly in the second and third world). However, computer parts often contain very toxic substances. Unfortunately, heating these parts to the temperatures needed to melt metal results in the release of gases, some of which are very toxic. So, doing what you are describing can be hazardous to your health. People in Mexico and China and similar places that are recycling PC parts under improper conditions to get precious (or sometimes just valuable) metals are in fact getting ill from doing this.
OMFG! You mean that *typing* was some kind of forced pre-requisite for taking other computer classes - EVEN THOUGH YOU HAD ALREADY TAKEN IT IN MIDDLE SCHOOL????
OMFG!!!! Had the people in charge of your school had their fscking BRAINS REMOVED??
Class 1: Typing. Not on computers - on typewriters.
Would a computer really have helped you to learn to type better? I doubt it. I learned to type on an electric typewriter in 1979 and as I recall I did not really have any problem learning on it or transferring my skills to computers later (with the exception of the Atari 400.)
NewtonScript (not included in either list) was a really nice language based on the language "Self" (included in both lists) that was used to program the Apple Newton devices. In fact, the Newton OS itself had many important pieces that were implemented in NewtonScript.
It may have been obscure, but it was important to me as I made my living for a few years writing code in this language. It was really nice. When the Newton was canceled and I switched to C++, I kept having a feeling for years that I was writing inelegant code because of the elegance of NewtonScript.
BTW NewtonScript is not the same language as AppleScript and they are not really related. NewtonScript was created by Walter Smith.
My experience is that Microsoft employees, at least the engineering staff: developers, QA - I don't have knowledge about IT support staff or about non-technical people- is that they aren't very much different than other people in the industry with one small exception: you don't typically see people who express highly anti-microsoft views. (Mildly anti-microsoft: yes. Pro linux: yes, Pro mac: yes - but again not disproportionate to any other company.) If someone can't think of anything good about MS, they probably won't work there.)
I wonder if Microsoft employees use a disproportionately large number of MACs, or are more likely to be Firefox users.
No, they are not disproportionately Macintosh users compared to the rest of the software industry (unless they work for MacBU). No, they do not hate their employer. No, they are not more likely to use Firefox compared to other software professionals at other companies.
I base this on having worked there in the past.
Even when Apple was "almost bancrupt", they were sitting on $1 Billion + cash reserve and no debt. Before they started having problems they had a reserve of like $4 Billion. It is unsurprising that they have increased their cash position to $5 billion given that the company has been very well managed by Mr. Jobs.
Imagine sitting down to finish a chess game for someone else. You could easily defeat your opponent in a new game, except that in the game you are finishing, you are already behind - by a lot.
In those situations, you are willing to play more daringly than normal. You pull out all the stops. Still, it takes a long time to turn the game around if you are able to do it at all. You are trying to postpone defeat as long as possible and maybe regain some lost ground.
So, that's what I think Jobs has been doing at Apple since he came back. He has pretty much done everything perfectly since then. He has played a good game and maximized Apple's resources to first keep them in business, second keep them from being bought, and third get to the point where they can start having hit products and build marketshare again. Yes, they were in serious trouble. In fact, I think Apple came as close to not surviving as a company can come. If it hadn't been for the cult following, they would not have made it. Some Mac users who were willing to buy overpriced, underpowered machines running OS 7/8 instead of microkernel based Windows alternatives really made the difference. If Windows 2000 had come out 2 years earlier, I can't see how Apple could have stayed in business.
But, they pulled it out. And today a modern Macintosh running MacOS X is a rock solid, nice computer that has a decent software library. Carbon worked. Apps were ported. Mr. Ive created industrial designs that helped get people to look at a Mac and helped get the press to write about something related to Apple that wasn't a speculation on when they were going out of business.
I'm completely amazed at how well managed Apple has become as a company and how they have pulled out all the stops to stay alive. And its really nice to see the market share numbers up for pretty much the first time ever!
I love my Mac and I love Apple. I'm not interested in "converting" people to become Mac users myself. And I understand the criticisms people have about Apple. They have certainly done a lot of things that made me angry over the years and wince at decisions they were making - right up until Jobs took over. And then they canceled the Newton which really hurt me badly because I was making my living writing software for the Newton at the time. But they were willing to explain the decision about the Newton and they promised that things would be different - and they are. The difference between Apple of 1995 and Apple today is so huge. I trust what Apple tells me today. I did not trust Apple in 1995 (although I could easily get inside information about what they were going to do that isn't available today.)
My wife says that. On the other hand, my daughter is begging me to buy her an iPod Shuffle.
I think this is another case where rational predictions may miss the mark. Conventional wisdom was that the iPod was too expensive in the first place. Conventional wisdom was that the iPod mini would fail. Conventional wisdom is that no one will buy a shuffle. Still, I know tons of people who want one. Our local Apple shop had 200 in stock and sold out of them in less than 2 hours.
I also submit that dropping the AppleII was Apple's single most biggest failure and blunder of the kind that usually kills a company like Commodore squandering their Amiga potential.
I don't see how Apple dropping the Apple II for the Mac is any different than Commodore dropping the 64 for the Amiga or Atari dropping the 8Bit line for the ST.
You are claiming you couldn't get an Apple IIe fixed in 1985. I call bullshit.
Can you post a link to the story? (About the 9 year old being tried as an adult.) I tried googling for it and found nothing.
We have to deal with this on an infrequent basis, where people actually do sign up for things, and then whine and snivel when mail comes.
Then stop creating webforms that automatically check the box saying that people want your spam.
The government runs the schools they are in. Therefore when the government oppresses them in schools, they feel oppressed. Duh.
Forcing kids to attend school is anti-freedom. Forcing parents to send kids to school is anti-freedom. The government gets by with it because age discrimination is allowed in our society. This is also anti-freedom.
If you think America is a free country, think again. Your rights to act as you wish are abridged arbitrarily. Sometimes that abridgement wouldn't stand up in court, but most people can't afford to go to court to protect their rights.
Police can and do demand to see your ID (even if you are not driving a car). This was recently upheld by the supreme court. (Your papers please?)
Have you ever heard of a policeman who was convicted for shooting someone? All they have to say is "Oh, I thought he had a gun." and they can kill you for no reason. Given that they have the ability to murder you for any or no reason, you have no freedom at all.
I am totally not trolling here. This is what I think. I have lived all my life in the US and this country makes me sick with its hypocracy.
They have annouced pro products at WWDC before. Year before last, they annouced the G5 at WWDC. There was another year where they announced new PowerBooks at WWDC.
Its interesting that anyone who is worried about the national debt is considered a "liberal" now.