You know, it's a good idea to have some idea what you're talking about before you run your mouth off. Credit card debt is only one small part of a credit check. If the phone company loses your payment, you get a tick against you. If you don't have enough debt, you get a tick against you. If you aren't married, you get a tick against you. If someone requests a credit check, you get a tick against you (banks don't like it when you shop around).
Actually, you'd probably have rather poor credit. You have to take on debt to generate a good credit rating. Also, you could very easily be vaulted into a very negative credit rating. If your phone company started misplacing some of its mail, you would get dinged for that, regardless of who's fault it was. Unless you happen to send all your bills in by registered mail, and you're willing to sue for libel, you have no defense.
The estate does. If society deems to give more to the relatives of the deceased than itself, it has the right to do so, but certainly not the obligation.
The objection isn't so much that a few troublemakers get through, but rather that many non-troublemakers get caught. There is absolutely no defense to a mark on your credit record, and companies aren't required to provide any justification for their claims.
If it required an innocent until proven guilty trial to put something on a credit report, you'd have a point, but its quite the opposite.
Companies have agendas. Apple makes a great deal of money out of hardware, you expect them to suddenly gain a saints halo and rewrite os x to work on an PC?
No, I expect them to license OS X and allow hardware vendors to write device drivers for it. OS X *does* run on any processor with SSE2, and many without with a little tweaking which would be trivial for Apple to do (as has been done by people outside Apple, without access to source). The *only* reason Apple doesn't ship OS X cds for commodity hardware is to enforce vendor lock in. Even Microsoft doesn't have quite that gall.
Really, because OS X only supports one vendor's hardware, where as Linux supports almost all. OS X does have a more polished GUI, but it is sorely lacking in hardware support.
There's a pretty big difference between being barred from actively refusing someone's business and being forced to make substantial investments to accept it.
I'm certain they would have, as no one is paying ATI or Nvidia to write Linux drivers.
I would imagine you're right about that list, for the most part. Intel probably did help a lot, they're very good about that, and I have personal experience to back that up. All of those things are *highly* standardized, though, and it would be the same for any OS vendor. Apple wouldn't have any trouble getting hardware vendors to write drivers, and they would do the standard certification deal, where the outside vendors pay Apple to certify their drivers in exchange for the right to say it works with Mac OS.
Yes, like all those IT directors getting arrested and fined for putting all their files into Microsoft Office format.
That is, unfortunately, a necessary case of vendor lock in. While there are suitable office replacements (I'm entirely happy with OpenOffice for my needs), none of them can reliably handle MS Office files, which are a necessity for interbusiness communications. No one company could change that, its an issue for governments. Not many businesses absolutely have to use Mac OS, though, and those that do will still have to produce portable files to send outside.
Unnecessarily wasting money can, technically, be a breach of fiduciary duty, but not in practice. Anything that could be reasonably considered a business activity is safe. Fiduciary duty means you are obliged to act only in the interest of the person you are bound to. Locking yourself to a vendor would be acting in that vendor's interest at the expense of your company's. If you can justify it, you're fine. That means showing something Apple can do that none of its competitors can. Anything outside of graphic design is SoL for that.
It takes effort and time on the part of a skilled and experienced developer to create a driver for a given piece of hardware, why would Apple want to pay good money and stretch their developer resources thinner for hardware that they will never ship? I think unneccesarily wasting money is also a "breach of fiduciary duty" as you are so fond of saying.
Who do you think writes the ATI drivers for Mac OS. It isn't Apple.
You are biased, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. You wouldn't care. You're frothing at the mouth because someone doesn't think your pet format is the best in all cases.
The problem with that strategy is that it makes OS X entirely unsuitable to 90% of the market, and 100% of the corporate market (unnecessarily tying your company to a single vendor is a breach of fiduciary duty, and thus illegal.)
There are no legitimate technical reasons for Apple not to be selling OS X for other systems. It is entirely corporate strategy, it has nothing to do with things "just working", and everything to do with vendor lock in.
So? If HP doesn't sell the sort of laptop I want, I can buy a Toshiba, or Dell, or Compaq, or Acer, or Asus or...
OS X can be run on any modern x86 system. It isn't the non-Apple vendors withholding something that prevents you from running it. The extra "choice" of OS X on MacBooks is entirely artificial. Apple is attempting to enforce a vendor lock in, which is why anyone with any sense will stay far away until they pull their head out of their ass. On the corporate side, buying Apple products could be considered a breach of fiduciary duty due to this.
Well, partly there's the fact that hardware mp3 decoders are very much a commodity. Its a very well understood and solved problem, where as ogg is not. Whether its worth the licensing fees or not is a moot point; an ogg only player would not be profitable to produce. Any ARM chip is going to be vastly larger than any dedicated mp3 decoder.
The real question is, is ogg support worth the extra hardware cost? The answer is no, unless you were already going to put more generalized hardware in anyway, to support something like PaysForSure. Even then, it might not be.
I wonder what will happen with ogg once the patents on the mp3 format expire. It isn't *that* much better, so it'll probably just fade away.
I wouldn't agree, but it is a reasonable arguement in some sectors. However, it completely falls apart when applied to standards, which mp3 certainly is. Sandisk can't go and roll their own audio compression algorithm, because it wouldn't be compatable with the standardized files everyone uses. (Which is also why no one uses ogg vorbis...)
There needs to be a method to deal with generification in patents.
Slashdot Mirror
Think about how that reflects upon you, simpleton.
To the assertion that an undocumented API is better than a fully documented, unimplemented API?
You know, it's a good idea to have some idea what you're talking about before you run your mouth off. Credit card debt is only one small part of a credit check. If the phone company loses your payment, you get a tick against you. If you don't have enough debt, you get a tick against you. If you aren't married, you get a tick against you. If someone requests a credit check, you get a tick against you (banks don't like it when you shop around).
Actually, you'd probably have rather poor credit. You have to take on debt to generate a good credit rating. Also, you could very easily be vaulted into a very negative credit rating. If your phone company started misplacing some of its mail, you would get dinged for that, regardless of who's fault it was. Unless you happen to send all your bills in by registered mail, and you're willing to sue for libel, you have no defense.
The estate does. If society deems to give more to the relatives of the deceased than itself, it has the right to do so, but certainly not the obligation.
The objection isn't so much that a few troublemakers get through, but rather that many non-troublemakers get caught. There is absolutely no defense to a mark on your credit record, and companies aren't required to provide any justification for their claims.
If it required an innocent until proven guilty trial to put something on a credit report, you'd have a point, but its quite the opposite.
Companies have agendas. Apple makes a great deal of money out of hardware, you expect them to suddenly gain a saints halo and rewrite os x to work on an PC?
No, I expect them to license OS X and allow hardware vendors to write device drivers for it. OS X *does* run on any processor with SSE2, and many without with a little tweaking which would be trivial for Apple to do (as has been done by people outside Apple, without access to source). The *only* reason Apple doesn't ship OS X cds for commodity hardware is to enforce vendor lock in. Even Microsoft doesn't have quite that gall.
Really, because OS X only supports one vendor's hardware, where as Linux supports almost all. OS X does have a more polished GUI, but it is sorely lacking in hardware support.
Then they have to either contract someone to produce that good or service, or do without. Just like I do with my desire for a jet powered lawn mower.
There's a pretty big difference between being barred from actively refusing someone's business and being forced to make substantial investments to accept it.
But I can't stick a Memory Stick(TM)(RM)(OMG)(WTF)(BBQ) into anything else, either. Everything else uses SD cards.
The conversation is over. I addressed all of your points. If you did not understand them, have a grown up help you.
They have the contact details by definition, so there's no reason they couldn't be contacting people and asking permission put them in the database.
How about if we pretend its a dairy farm, or paper plant?
I'm certain they would have, as no one is paying ATI or Nvidia to write Linux drivers.
I would imagine you're right about that list, for the most part. Intel probably did help a lot, they're very good about that, and I have personal experience to back that up. All of those things are *highly* standardized, though, and it would be the same for any OS vendor. Apple wouldn't have any trouble getting hardware vendors to write drivers, and they would do the standard certification deal, where the outside vendors pay Apple to certify their drivers in exchange for the right to say it works with Mac OS.
Yes, like all those IT directors getting arrested and fined for putting all their files into Microsoft Office format.
That is, unfortunately, a necessary case of vendor lock in. While there are suitable office replacements (I'm entirely happy with OpenOffice for my needs), none of them can reliably handle MS Office files, which are a necessity for interbusiness communications. No one company could change that, its an issue for governments. Not many businesses absolutely have to use Mac OS, though, and those that do will still have to produce portable files to send outside.
Unnecessarily wasting money can, technically, be a breach of fiduciary duty, but not in practice. Anything that could be reasonably considered a business activity is safe. Fiduciary duty means you are obliged to act only in the interest of the person you are bound to. Locking yourself to a vendor would be acting in that vendor's interest at the expense of your company's. If you can justify it, you're fine. That means showing something Apple can do that none of its competitors can. Anything outside of graphic design is SoL for that.
It takes effort and time on the part of a skilled and experienced developer to create a driver for a given piece of hardware, why would Apple want to pay good money and stretch their developer resources thinner for hardware that they will never ship? I think unneccesarily wasting money is also a "breach of fiduciary duty" as you are so fond of saying.
Who do you think writes the ATI drivers for Mac OS. It isn't Apple.
You are biased, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. You wouldn't care. You're frothing at the mouth because someone doesn't think your pet format is the best in all cases.
You lose, goodbye. Don't bother responding.
The problem with that strategy is that it makes OS X entirely unsuitable to 90% of the market, and 100% of the corporate market (unnecessarily tying your company to a single vendor is a breach of fiduciary duty, and thus illegal.)
There are no legitimate technical reasons for Apple not to be selling OS X for other systems. It is entirely corporate strategy, it has nothing to do with things "just working", and everything to do with vendor lock in.
I'm not particularily biased in either way, but you quite obviously are. Find me a $20 player that can play ogg files, then we'll talk.
That's hardly a low end player.
So? If HP doesn't sell the sort of laptop I want, I can buy a Toshiba, or Dell, or Compaq, or Acer, or Asus or...
OS X can be run on any modern x86 system. It isn't the non-Apple vendors withholding something that prevents you from running it. The extra "choice" of OS X on MacBooks is entirely artificial. Apple is attempting to enforce a vendor lock in, which is why anyone with any sense will stay far away until they pull their head out of their ass. On the corporate side, buying Apple products could be considered a breach of fiduciary duty due to this.
I imagine there are quite a few more Dell laptops than Macs.
Well, partly there's the fact that hardware mp3 decoders are very much a commodity. Its a very well understood and solved problem, where as ogg is not. Whether its worth the licensing fees or not is a moot point; an ogg only player would not be profitable to produce. Any ARM chip is going to be vastly larger than any dedicated mp3 decoder.
The real question is, is ogg support worth the extra hardware cost? The answer is no, unless you were already going to put more generalized hardware in anyway, to support something like PaysForSure. Even then, it might not be.
I wonder what will happen with ogg once the patents on the mp3 format expire. It isn't *that* much better, so it'll probably just fade away.
I wouldn't agree, but it is a reasonable arguement in some sectors. However, it completely falls apart when applied to standards, which mp3 certainly is. Sandisk can't go and roll their own audio compression algorithm, because it wouldn't be compatable with the standardized files everyone uses. (Which is also why no one uses ogg vorbis...)
There needs to be a method to deal with generification in patents.
It's fine on a desktop with a high powered general purpose processor, but less so in a hardware implementation.