The suits at the majors aren't ready for an iTunes and it's simplicity/freedom for Windows yet (that why we don't have one yet).
I thought that the reason was that it isn't done yet.
Qute from site: "PC users will be able to enjoy downloading songs from the iTunes Music Store when it is released for the Windows platform by the end of this year."
When I do commercial web development, the usual idea is that the company doesn't want excuses about why some customers are being turned away. They want the exposure and the developer had damned well be able to deliver it. If only one customer visits the site in Netscape 3.0, but that customer wants to make a massive purchase then that customer had better not be turned away with a message about upgrading their browser. Companies that do business online are not trying to shape the future of browser demographics. They are trying to sell things.
As far as your dismissal of a 5% increase in exposure, I'm baffled. What company wouldn't want a 5% increase in exposure? If your business makes (on average) $10 per visitor and you have 1 million unique visitors, ignoring 5% loses you $500,000. That's more that it would cost to make sure that any site is cross-browser compatible.
They could achieve the same benefit from a sbelf load sensor or something. It looks like it's being used so that the camera doesn't always have to be on. I think that people jump on this because of the RFIDs, but that it isn't that big a deal otherwise. Hell, if they have RFIDs anyway, why not just catch shoplifters by detecting them at the door?
Your credit card company sucks. I've reversed charges at least four times -- over the phone. The fraud happened for the following reasons:
1) Sombody got a new card of mine w/out me ever seeing it. It could have been from my mail box?
2) A gas station charged me at two locations miles apart at the same time.
3) A subscription company failed to cancel my account even after it was requested twice.
4) An online merchant sent me an inferior product to the one I ordered refused to respond to phone or e-mail inquiries.
These happened on three different credit cards backed by different companies. All the charges were cancelled with no hassle. In one case, the charge was cancelled instantly. In the others I had to wait for at least one statement to pass.
That's what logs are for. Every time a fallback is invoked, log it. The fall back keeps you running acceptably. The log helps you get back to 100% performance.
Re:Alas, it is already too late.
on
The Big Kerplop
·
· Score: 1
The article about the school says thet kids were getting hurt when the rules were not followed.
If some kid things that you "tag" someone by knocking them down or something, I'd say that's a valid reason to require adult supervision.
BTW, that was the point of the new rule. Tag is not banned, it simply must be supervised to make sure kids aren't getting hurt. That doesn't sound half as bad as what you said.
under OS-X, 90% of the "useful" progs run setuid root anyway, so again, you basically have every user a superuser. Why switch between equally useless (or open to abuse, depending on your perspective) accounts?
The specs clearly list two PCCard slots, four USB2 ports, and a Firewire port. A wide variety of 802.11 and Bluetooth devices can be plugged into those interfaces.
But the Mac has much faster FireWire, and a PCMCIA slot left over even with 802.11g and Bluetooth. So those arguments (except for USB2) don't hold water.
It looks like they caught and surpassed apple in this case.
The Toshiba would be clearly better except for the fact that the it is 3lbs heavier, has no support for 802.11g or bluetooth, is bigger in every dimension, has a tray loading drive, has no L3 cache (vs 1MB DDR on the PB), no built-in mic, 10/100 enet (vs 10/100/1000), one FireWire 400 port (vs 1 FW 800 and 1 FW 400) and less than half the battery life.
Where the Toshiba actually is better: Price. It is expandable to 2GB Ram while the PB maxes out at 1GB. It has a bigger L2 cache (512k vs 256k). It also burns CD-Rs twice as fast (but not CD-RWs)
Unfortunately, unlike the PB, you can't buy it with any empty ram slots. You are stuck with those useless 256MB sticks if you want to upgrade. Heck, you can't even change the ram at all before purchase.
IIRC, the Pentiums used in laptops have to scale way down to meet even their meager battery life estimates, so the Mac will even be faster for non-altivec tasks. I may be wrong on this point, but the rest stands.
Oh, and the Mac has that oh-so-cool glowing keyboard with ambient light sensor.
It's not arrogance, it's reality. It costs a company millions of dollars a year to maintain a speech research group and the number of commercial research labs that still do this kind of work is dwindling. Apple isn't making that kind of investment; in fact, Apple gutted their entire research lab.
The arrogant part is here:
USA TODAY: Nobody used OS/2.
BG: Are you kidding? I mean, let's be serious. That was IBM, a company 15 times our size. Name a bank that didn't use OS/2. OS/2 was IBM's product, and the IBM army marched behind that product. People always think today's competition is somehow different and unique in some way. Let's be serious. I mean, we've had to bet the company many times on big technological advances. We bet on the 16-bit PC. We bet on graphical user interface. We bet on the NT technology base. Now we're in the process of betting on a combination of technologies called.Net; Longhorn Web services go along with that. You always have to do something very dramatic to move things up to the next level. Who has the guts and the willingness to do risk-taking to get ink into the standard user interface? Who else is going to push that forward? Who else has the guts to get speech, get the recognition levels up, get the learning levels up in the standard interface? We've chosen to do that. If we didn't believe in those things we wouldn't be increasing the R&D budget the way that we are.
He acts as if all those innovations happened because MS had the "guts" to make them happen. The truth is that MS didn't work on any of those things until others had proved them. The risks he touts were minimal. The innovation was mostly duplication of proven concepts. That was the point I was making in my post.
I was pointing out that others had already done all of Bill's "gutsy" and innovative stuff before MS even thought of them. I used Apple as an example because, if I'm looking to prove that MS was not the first to do something, I look first to Apple. It's usually a good place to start.
No, Gates is right in that regard: Microsoft has one of the best speech recognizers around. Apple doesn't have the resources to come even close; Apple has almost completely gutted their research labs. Where Gates is wrong is in thinking that having the best speech recognizer matters.
No, Gates is very wrong. Gates implied that nobody else had the guts to try. My Performa 6200CD had decent speech recognition for commands (not dictation) in 1994. Apple was working on speech recognition since at least the the beginning of PPC use.
MS might be doing good work in speech recognition, but they aren't the only company with the "guts" to do it. Hell, if you include speech recognition outside of the OS level, there's IBM with ViaVoice and Dragon's Naturally Speaking. I'm sure there are others. Gate's arrogance at claiming that only MS can do this is astounding.
That's the truth. I mean, it's bad enough that the dead tree manual is a joke, but there are missing man pages! I have to ssh to my linux box to look up some commands. Apple's own commands are often entirely undocumented and don't respond to --help or -h.
Bill has questions. I have answers.
on
Bill Gates On Linux
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Gates: Who has the guts and the willingness to do risk-taking to get ink into the standard user interface?
That's not undocumented. That has been the standard functionality of the OS since at least System 7.0. Holding down option while activating an app hides the app you just left. Command-Option activating an app shows only that app.
Well, WebSphere Studio reccomends 768MB. I also need to run test browsers (Moz & Konq), Konsole, gimp, gaim (inter-office messaging), etc. In order to avoid paging like crazy, it would be nice to have enough ram to keep everything in physical memory.
Back before System 7, I used to load entire applications into ram (I had 4mb in a Mac Plus) to improve system speed. In portable enviroments (PB 165c) I used to do the same (under System 7) to conserve battery life by not spinning the HD at all.
Additionally, tasks like DVD authoring would benefit from enough ram to hold most of the DVD in memory at once.
If we could moderate articles, it would be moderated in the same fashion. Look at the end of the article. As another poster noted, that part proves it as flamebait.
Apple doesn't make G5 processors. IBM does. I wonder what the scores would be using IBM's compiler? Oh, that's right! Apple did use the compiler that most OS X developers will actually use for writing applications. Just as they used the compiler that most Linux developers will use on the Linux machine.
The whole article is designed to attract flames. Thus, it is Flamebait!
It's easy, just reffer to the ISBN number. Those are not copyrightable. You could do all kinds of things in this fassion: alternate soundtracks, subtitles, etc. These could be combined with the DVD data at the player level.
I use a Fujitsu Stylistic 1200 tablet computer. I can write my notes and add graphics. I just need to find a good wordprocessor to use it with as I'm sick of using Wordpad and paint. I'm still working on getting handwriting recongnition in Linux, for the most part, everyone seems to be interested in graffiti like systems.
There was a link to an interview posted in the last discussion of iTMS sales numbers. In that interview, Jobs said that Apple will begin working on independant music once they've finished uploading all the files that the big 5 have given them. Right now they're really busy just uploading.
Slashdot Mirror
The suits at the majors aren't ready for an iTunes and it's simplicity/freedom for Windows yet (that why we don't have one yet).
I thought that the reason was that it isn't done yet.
Qute from site: "PC users will be able to enjoy downloading songs from the iTunes Music Store when it is released for the Windows platform by the end of this year."
When I do commercial web development, the usual idea is that the company doesn't want excuses about why some customers are being turned away. They want the exposure and the developer had damned well be able to deliver it. If only one customer visits the site in Netscape 3.0, but that customer wants to make a massive purchase then that customer had better not be turned away with a message about upgrading their browser. Companies that do business online are not trying to shape the future of browser demographics. They are trying to sell things.
As far as your dismissal of a 5% increase in exposure, I'm baffled. What company wouldn't want a 5% increase in exposure? If your business makes (on average) $10 per visitor and you have 1 million unique visitors, ignoring 5% loses you $500,000. That's more that it would cost to make sure that any site is cross-browser compatible.
They could achieve the same benefit from a sbelf load sensor or something. It looks like it's being used so that the camera doesn't always have to be on. I think that people jump on this because of the RFIDs, but that it isn't that big a deal otherwise. Hell, if they have RFIDs anyway, why not just catch shoplifters by detecting them at the door?
Your credit card company sucks. I've reversed charges at least four times -- over the phone. The fraud happened for the following reasons:
1) Sombody got a new card of mine w/out me ever seeing it. It could have been from my mail box?
2) A gas station charged me at two locations miles apart at the same time.
3) A subscription company failed to cancel my account even after it was requested twice.
4) An online merchant sent me an inferior product to the one I ordered refused to respond to phone or e-mail inquiries.
These happened on three different credit cards backed by different companies. All the charges were cancelled with no hassle. In one case, the charge was cancelled instantly. In the others I had to wait for at least one statement to pass.
That's what logs are for. Every time a fallback is invoked, log it. The fall back keeps you running acceptably. The log helps you get back to 100% performance.
The article about the school says thet kids were getting hurt when the rules were not followed.
If some kid things that you "tag" someone by knocking them down or something, I'd say that's a valid reason to require adult supervision.
BTW, that was the point of the new rule. Tag is not banned, it simply must be supervised to make sure kids aren't getting hurt. That doesn't sound half as bad as what you said.
under OS-X, 90% of the "useful" progs run setuid root anyway, so again, you basically have every user a superuser. Why switch between equally useless (or open to abuse, depending on your perspective) accounts?
This is just not true.
The specs clearly list two PCCard slots, four USB2 ports, and a Firewire port. A wide variety of 802.11 and Bluetooth devices can be plugged into those interfaces.
But the Mac has much faster FireWire, and a PCMCIA slot left over even with 802.11g and Bluetooth. So those arguments (except for USB2) don't hold water.
This illustrates the point exactly. Why should people with no knowledge or experience in a particular subject be trusted to make judgements?
I used OxyClean to clean about a gallon of pure blackberry juice spilled on the carpet. That stuff works.
I have an Ionic Breeze. You can smell it working and you can see the dust it grabs. It's just a giant capacitor. How could it not work?
In any case, the point is this: If you don't know anything about the science involved how can you judge whether or not to admit it in court?
It looks like they caught and surpassed apple in this case.
The Toshiba would be clearly better except for the fact that the it is 3lbs heavier, has no support for 802.11g or bluetooth, is bigger in every dimension, has a tray loading drive, has no L3 cache (vs 1MB DDR on the PB), no built-in mic, 10/100 enet (vs 10/100/1000), one FireWire 400 port (vs 1 FW 800 and 1 FW 400) and less than half the battery life.
Where the Toshiba actually is better:
Price. It is expandable to 2GB Ram while the PB maxes out at 1GB. It has a bigger L2 cache (512k vs 256k). It also burns CD-Rs twice as fast (but not CD-RWs)
Unfortunately, unlike the PB, you can't buy it with any empty ram slots. You are stuck with those useless 256MB sticks if you want to upgrade. Heck, you can't even change the ram at all before purchase.
IIRC, the Pentiums used in laptops have to scale way down to meet even their meager battery life estimates, so the Mac will even be faster for non-altivec tasks. I may be wrong on this point, but the rest stands.
Oh, and the Mac has that oh-so-cool glowing keyboard with ambient light sensor.
The arrogant part is here:
He acts as if all those innovations happened because MS had the "guts" to make them happen. The truth is that MS didn't work on any of those things until others had proved them. The risks he touts were minimal. The innovation was mostly duplication of proven concepts. That was the point I was making in my post.
I was pointing out that others had already done all of Bill's "gutsy" and innovative stuff before MS even thought of them. I used Apple as an example because, if I'm looking to prove that MS was not the first to do something, I look first to Apple. It's usually a good place to start.
No, Gates is right in that regard: Microsoft has one of the best speech recognizers around. Apple doesn't have the resources to come even close; Apple has almost completely gutted their research labs. Where Gates is wrong is in thinking that having the best speech recognizer matters.
No, Gates is very wrong. Gates implied that nobody else had the guts to try. My Performa 6200CD had decent speech recognition for commands (not dictation) in 1994. Apple was working on speech recognition since at least the the beginning of PPC use.
MS might be doing good work in speech recognition, but they aren't the only company with the "guts" to do it. Hell, if you include speech recognition outside of the OS level, there's IBM with ViaVoice and Dragon's Naturally Speaking. I'm sure there are others. Gate's arrogance at claiming that only MS can do this is astounding.
Mac OS X is, in general, an underdocumented OS.
That's the truth. I mean, it's bad enough that the dead tree manual is a joke, but there are missing man pages! I have to ssh to my linux box to look up some commands. Apple's own commands are often entirely undocumented and don't respond to --help or -h.
Gates: Who has the guts and the willingness to do risk-taking to get ink into the standard user interface?
Me: Apple
Gates: Who else has the guts to get speech, get the recognition levels up, get the learning levels up in the standard interface?
Me: Apple
That's not undocumented. That has been the standard functionality of the OS since at least System 7.0. Holding down option while activating an app hides the app you just left. Command-Option activating an app shows only that app.
Well, WebSphere Studio reccomends 768MB. I also need to run test browsers (Moz & Konq), Konsole, gimp, gaim (inter-office messaging), etc. In order to avoid paging like crazy, it would be nice to have enough ram to keep everything in physical memory.
Back before System 7, I used to load entire applications into ram (I had 4mb in a Mac Plus) to improve system speed. In portable enviroments (PB 165c) I used to do the same (under System 7) to conserve battery life by not spinning the HD at all.
Additionally, tasks like DVD authoring would benefit from enough ram to hold most of the DVD in memory at once.
RAM is good
If we could moderate articles, it would be moderated in the same fashion. Look at the end of the article. As another poster noted, that part proves it as flamebait.
Apple doesn't make G5 processors. IBM does. I wonder what the scores would be using IBM's compiler? Oh, that's right! Apple did use the compiler that most OS X developers will actually use for writing applications. Just as they used the compiler that most Linux developers will use on the Linux machine.
The whole article is designed to attract flames. Thus, it is Flamebait!
It's easy, just reffer to the ISBN number. Those are not copyrightable. You could do all kinds of things in this fassion: alternate soundtracks, subtitles, etc. These could be combined with the DVD data at the player level.
Actually the auther debunks that myth here.
I think that's SCO's point. They are begging to be bought.
Thanks for the tip. They hanve free shipping and seem to have good prices on many cd's, but my favorite is this:
Boats, Beaches, Bars & Ballads [Box]
Why Pay $59.98?
Our Price: $59.98
Why not G3 too? Plus, aren't the 970's going to be called G5? Do you have any proof to back up your accusation?
I use a Fujitsu Stylistic 1200 tablet computer. I can write my notes and add graphics. I just need to find a good wordprocessor to use it with as I'm sick of using Wordpad and paint. I'm still working on getting handwriting recongnition in Linux, for the most part, everyone seems to be interested in graffiti like systems.
He also claims to have used the name since June of 1979 for "providing access to an electronic bulletin board in the field of adult entertainment."
There was a link to an interview posted in the last discussion of iTMS sales numbers. In that interview, Jobs said that Apple will begin working on independant music once they've finished uploading all the files that the big 5 have given them. Right now they're really busy just uploading.