But students and hobbyists can't necessarily afford a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro. Instead, they buy an iMac or MacBook, or those already owning a PC that runs Windows or Linux might buy a Mac mini and a KVM switch.
Any reasonably modern Mac can run XCode. You don't need a Mac Pro to make iOS apps. You can do it on a $400 used Mac Mini. I've seen it done.
If a "walled" console-like experience becomes the norm for home computing, how would one go about earning enough experience to qualify for a devkit?
Anyone can make an iOS app for free with free tools that run on pretty much any Mac. You have to pay $99 to deploy it to actual physical phones. No one is going to be stopped from learning about making iOS apps because of this.
You can have a $299 locked-down iPhone, or a $398 iPhone that you can do whatever the hell you want to. Or, you can get a $299 iPhone and jailbreak it and do whatever the hell you want to it -- no one cares either way.
You know what the $99 is for? It's paying Apple to generate a cert for *you* so that every one else who has an iPhone can be cryptographically assured that they are not running malware or other crap. This is a good thing, and it's no different than having to pay for an ssl cert, or paying MS to sign your kernel drivers, etc etc. The price might be different, but the concept is the same. Users don't want to trust you. They want to trust their vendor. The $99 is almost completely besides the point.
I believe the radio in the 3gs is physically not capable of behaving like an access point. I could be wrong, but that's what I remember from the time that I had one.
I don't begrudge Apple for being unwilling/unable to add the coolest new features to the 3GS, but if the jailbreak community can take better care of me then I guess that's where I'll have to go.
I believe the radio in the 3gs is physically not capable of behaving like an access point. I could be wrong, but that's what I remember from the time that I had one.
Theoretically, doesn't the population at large benefit from creating an culture that is conducive to creating art? I rarely go to museums, but it is my understanding that the NEA puts a great deal of financial effort into many of the things that hang on those walls. What's the difference between childless adults fostering education compared to artistically-agnostic (either due to disability or disinterest) adults fostering the creation of art?
Finally! The inability to have a real full screen application was one of the most frustrating aspects of transitioning to Mac OS X.
The upcoming "Full-screen" feature is not the same as Windows' "maximize" button. It causes the app to use 100% of the screen, hiding the doc and the menubar and window decorations and anything else that is not the app. It is the same thing that some other apps (eg, Lightroom, Photoshop) have done on their own for a while. This is just Apple adding similar functionality to the apps that ship with OS X. More third-party apps will probably support this too, because, depending on the app, it can be a very nice way to do things.
It is technically subtly different from "maximize", but the user experience is quite different.
Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping. If you order for regular 5-7 day delivery, they pick, pack and label your parcel, and then let it age on a warehouse shelf for a few days. If you pay for overnight or Prime, they don't age it. Amazon Prime is a racket, a profit center, not free shipping.
It's not like there is a continuous flow of infinite-capacity trucks rolling by the warehouse 24/7. Both Amazon and the shipping company have to maximize shipment density and at the same time minimize delivery time. One way to do this is to create artificial segments of shipping via pricing. The customers who pay less get a less certain delivery window. The customers who pay more get priority on that night's truck (or however they work it). It's not like the trucks drive faster if you pay more. You are paying more for priority in the logistics chain, which is well worth it for some people.
Note that this is an article from The New York Times Magazine, not the daily paper. They do confuse the brands on their site, but they are separate things. One is a journalistic daily broadsheet (that, true, has its own problems) the other is, well, a magazine. The magazine is about art and culture and general goings ons. It is not journalism, it is just people writing about stuff that they notice or feel is worthy of writing about.
He says he doesn't need "adult supervision" anymore? Well the child is the worst to judge these things.
No, it is Eric Schmidt who said "Day-to-day adult supervision no longer needed!" It should be taken as "The founders no longer need an experienced management guy to run their company. They have matured over the last few years, and I think they'll do fine on their own."
Amazon claims that a feature that only they offer helps prevent vendor lock-in?!?
No:
Today's release of Elastic Beanstalk is built for Java developers using the familiar Apache Tomcat software stack, which ensures easy portability if you ever want to move your applications. Elastic Beanstalk is designed so that it can be extended to support multiple development stacks and programming languages in the future.
Compare this to, say, writing an app using AppEngine and the lack of lock-in becomes clearer.
There's plenty of artists that just need to suck it up and accept that the world has changed. Consumers have picked up the tiniest inkling of purchasing power over the music industry, and we're going to use it. Call it packback for a lifetime of 20 bucks for an album with three worthy tracks.
This issue is a contract dispute over an agreement reached over 40 years ago. It's not fair to slam these guys for not foreseeing how the details of that agreement would be applicable to the current marketplace. These living artists are trying to exert whatever control they have over their own legacy.
I seriously doubt Pink Floyd is looking for a small amount of additional money, they are some of the most successful and wealthy musicians ever to live.
This issue is more akin to, say, Led Zeppelin objecting to their label issuing a censored version of their record so Walmart would sell it. It's perfectly acceptable for an artist to argue in good faith about the details of their agreement with a label, especially as the context of those details evolves dramatically over time.
The articles that you linked to are incomprehensible.
If you have a problem with the notion that a bigoted murder is a bigger problem than a plain murder, that's fine. But maybe you should make that point.
Ranting about unrelated and alleged 1st amendment violations and specious injustices in the building permit process is not helping your case.
So while you may see hate crime as some sort of "equalizer" others see it for what it is: payback.
The logic and value of having "hate crimes" on the books may not be immediately obvious, but it does exist. When someone is brutally assaulted because of some inherent property of their being, it has a chilling effect on others. It is traumatizing to people who were unrelated to the event. It is similar to terrorism.
Compare: 1) a bar brawl that results in a patron getting brutally stabbed to death and 2) a group of KKK members chaining a black man to their truck and dragging him through town.
Both are brutal, needless murders, but can you really not see that one is far more deplorable and damaging than the other?
The intent is not to "equalize" anything or to "payback" anything. The intent to categorize crimes that impact a larger number of people as larger crimes.
You can debate that point if you want, because that is the actual point of having "hate crimes."
Some of the things you mention are just false though. I notice no difference with text rendering on my HD screen, the chrome takes up less room than both IE and FF*, although not Chrome, the form elements look identical to the ones rendered in any other browser...URL input also is no different...seemingly you have simply made these things up.
I should have clarified -- I'm on OS X. I assure you that I am not making anything up. HTML forms don't look anything like Cocoa forms, text rendering is different from every other app's text rendering, image rendering seems to use sRGB, on and on. The url autocomplete menu is a free-floating rounded thing with sub-menus and things that look like links but aren't.
Everywhere I look, it just seems like there is no attention to detail. It may well be that it is a better experience on Windows or Linux. Is it?
I keep trying Opera and I keep being disappointed. I guess it's just not for me. The text rendering is worse, the chrome takes up more room, the form elements are not native looking, the url input seems more rudimentary than others, its image rendering doesn't seem to be color-space-aware, and its rendering quirks are somehow louder than other browsers' quirks.
It may very well be numerically faster than other browsers, but it doesn't feel faster. I don't really care if a gmail inbox takes 5 seconds to render -- I can always switch away and read twitter or whatever in the meantime. Opera does have many UI innovations, but they always seem to lack polish to my eye.
I just want a browser that is "fast enough", gets out of my way, and is thoughtfully designed for human interaction. It is my impression that Chrome, Safari, and Firefox are all better in this regard.
I don't mean this to be a dig against Opera or the people who make it. I realize that it takes an extraordinary amount of effort and magic to produce Opera. I'm just curious why people like it, and if it will ever make it beyond a niche product on the desktop.
[...] I asked to read the contract.
The store workers had never had anyone ask, so they didn't know where it was.
Took them a long time to find a copy.
It was pretty nasty, but from memory [...]
How do you function in life spending your time reading every last bit of every last detail of every last "contract" you enter into? I had to terminate a Sprint contract because I moved to a place where I couldn't get service. According to my "contract" with Sprint, it was all my fault and I owed them thousands of dollars. Of course in actuality, I didn't. We parted ways after a quick phone call, and it was fine.
Do you pore over the signs on the door of a super market before you go in? Do you read all the licence and copyright agreements before you update your OS? Do you go outside before you memorize every aspect of your city's civic code?
Or do you just have a bone to pick with AT&T? I'm seriously curious...
Probably Beatles music has been beamed in the direction of Alpha Centuri.
Not going to happen. Perhaps the biggest copyright wtf in the history of humanity: "Astronomer and science popularizer Carl Sagan had wanted [Here Comes The Sun] to be included on the Voyager Golden Record, copies of which were attached to both spacecraft of the Voyager program to provide any entity that recovered them a representative sample of human civilization. Although The Beatles favoured the idea, EMI refused to release the rights and when the probes were launched in 1977 the song was not included." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_Comes_The_Sun#Voyager_proposal
Because learning to entertain oneself on rainy days is part of growing up. At age 4, kids definitely shouldn't be spending any time in front of a computer screen.
Why has the computer become this pariah of a contraption to Monday-morning parents? What did kids do before Gutenberg? Before electricity? Before mass-produced toys like Lego or Lincoln Logs? Before board games? If you ask this of someone like Laura Ingalls Wilder, she will tell you that they were bored out of their minds and knew nearly nothing about the world they lived in.
There is nothing intrinsically harmful about a kid using a mouse to manipulate a screen. There are ways to use a computer that build social skills. Kids have an opportunity to learn something while they entertain themselves.
Once a day I make dinner for my kids, and I obviously cannot attend to them while I do so. I have to help them find something to do that will keep them occupied. Playing with Clifford The Big Red Dog or whatever for 30 minutes a day is not harmful, and it's the best choice for giving the kids something to do. Playing a game like Guitar Hero with friends is a truly enriching and fun experience.
It is true that letting your kid stay cooped up in their darkened room playing some FPS 16 hours per day *is* harmful. But there is a ton of middle ground here, and no shortage of appropriate uses that a four year old might have for a computer. Having a computer in the house is not a harmful or hurtful thing. Get over it.
Slashdot Mirror
But students and hobbyists can't necessarily afford a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro. Instead, they buy an iMac or MacBook, or those already owning a PC that runs Windows or Linux might buy a Mac mini and a KVM switch.
Any reasonably modern Mac can run XCode. You don't need a Mac Pro to make iOS apps. You can do it on a $400 used Mac Mini. I've seen it done.
If a "walled" console-like experience becomes the norm for home computing, how would one go about earning enough experience to qualify for a devkit?
Anyone can make an iOS app for free with free tools that run on pretty much any Mac. You have to pay $99 to deploy it to actual physical phones. No one is going to be stopped from learning about making iOS apps because of this.
You can have a $299 locked-down iPhone, or a $398 iPhone that you can do whatever the hell you want to. Or, you can get a $299 iPhone and jailbreak it and do whatever the hell you want to it -- no one cares either way.
You know what the $99 is for? It's paying Apple to generate a cert for *you* so that every one else who has an iPhone can be cryptographically assured that they are not running malware or other crap. This is a good thing, and it's no different than having to pay for an ssl cert, or paying MS to sign your kernel drivers, etc etc. The price might be different, but the concept is the same. Users don't want to trust you. They want to trust their vendor. The $99 is almost completely besides the point.
I believe the radio in the 3gs is physically not capable of behaving like an access point. I could be wrong, but that's what I remember from the time that I had one.
http://intelliborn.com/mywi.html
Yup, I was wrong. There was an earlier iPhone that did not have the right radio to do this. Thanks for the link.
I don't begrudge Apple for being unwilling/unable to add the coolest new features to the 3GS, but if the jailbreak community can take better care of me then I guess that's where I'll have to go.
I believe the radio in the 3gs is physically not capable of behaving like an access point. I could be wrong, but that's what I remember from the time that I had one.
Theoretically, doesn't the population at large benefit from creating an culture that is conducive to creating art? I rarely go to museums, but it is my understanding that the NEA puts a great deal of financial effort into many of the things that hang on those walls. What's the difference between childless adults fostering education compared to artistically-agnostic (either due to disability or disinterest) adults fostering the creation of art?
True Grit was a remake.
Actually, to be precise, it was a second adaptation of the book. Joel and Ethan Coen hadn't even watched the John Wayne version since they were kids.
Finally! The inability to have a real full screen application was one of the most frustrating aspects of transitioning to Mac OS X.
The upcoming "Full-screen" feature is not the same as Windows' "maximize" button. It causes the app to use 100% of the screen, hiding the doc and the menubar and window decorations and anything else that is not the app. It is the same thing that some other apps (eg, Lightroom, Photoshop) have done on their own for a while. This is just Apple adding similar functionality to the apps that ship with OS X. More third-party apps will probably support this too, because, depending on the app, it can be a very nice way to do things. It is technically subtly different from "maximize", but the user experience is quite different.
Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping. If you order for regular 5-7 day delivery, they pick, pack and label your parcel, and then let it age on a warehouse shelf for a few days. If you pay for overnight or Prime, they don't age it. Amazon Prime is a racket, a profit center, not free shipping.
It's not like there is a continuous flow of infinite-capacity trucks rolling by the warehouse 24/7. Both Amazon and the shipping company have to maximize shipment density and at the same time minimize delivery time. One way to do this is to create artificial segments of shipping via pricing. The customers who pay less get a less certain delivery window. The customers who pay more get priority on that night's truck (or however they work it). It's not like the trucks drive faster if you pay more. You are paying more for priority in the logistics chain, which is well worth it for some people.
And what if I call Osama every other day? I land on a no-fly list? (even though calling Osama is not a crime...)
calling the POTUS is not a crime.
You should read more carefully :)
The Times is slipping.
Note that this is an article from The New York Times Magazine, not the daily paper. They do confuse the brands on their site, but they are separate things. One is a journalistic daily broadsheet (that, true, has its own problems) the other is, well, a magazine. The magazine is about art and culture and general goings ons. It is not journalism, it is just people writing about stuff that they notice or feel is worthy of writing about.
This is a worthwhile read and the regex was fun to implement. http://haacked.com/archive/2007/08/21/i-knew-how-to-validate-an-email-address-until-i.aspx
This is the regex that Mail::RFC2822::Address uses, which seems to be the most comprehensive: http://ex-parrot.com/~pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html
I have no idea how that was authored...
In any case, probably the only 100% way to validate an email address is to accept any string and try to send an email with an "is-valid" link in it.
He says he doesn't need "adult supervision" anymore? Well the child is the worst to judge these things.
No, it is Eric Schmidt who said "Day-to-day adult supervision no longer needed!" It should be taken as "The founders no longer need an experienced management guy to run their company. They have matured over the last few years, and I think they'll do fine on their own."
Amazon claims that a feature that only they offer helps prevent vendor lock-in?!?
No:
Today's release of Elastic Beanstalk is built for Java developers using the familiar Apache Tomcat software stack, which ensures easy portability if you ever want to move your applications. Elastic Beanstalk is designed so that it can be extended to support multiple development stacks and programming languages in the future.
Compare this to, say, writing an app using AppEngine and the lack of lock-in becomes clearer.
There's plenty of artists that just need to suck it up and accept that the world has changed. Consumers have picked up the tiniest inkling of purchasing power over the music industry, and we're going to use it. Call it packback for a lifetime of 20 bucks for an album with three worthy tracks.
This issue is a contract dispute over an agreement reached over 40 years ago. It's not fair to slam these guys for not foreseeing how the details of that agreement would be applicable to the current marketplace. These living artists are trying to exert whatever control they have over their own legacy.
I seriously doubt Pink Floyd is looking for a small amount of additional money, they are some of the most successful and wealthy musicians ever to live.
This issue is more akin to, say, Led Zeppelin objecting to their label issuing a censored version of their record so Walmart would sell it. It's perfectly acceptable for an artist to argue in good faith about the details of their agreement with a label, especially as the context of those details evolves dramatically over time.
The articles that you linked to are incomprehensible.
If you have a problem with the notion that a bigoted murder is a bigger problem than a plain murder, that's fine. But maybe you should make that point.
Ranting about unrelated and alleged 1st amendment violations and specious injustices in the building permit process is not helping your case.
Microsoft owns Expedia [...]
No, they do not. That is false.
So while you may see hate crime as some sort of "equalizer" others see it for what it is: payback.
The logic and value of having "hate crimes" on the books may not be immediately obvious, but it does exist. When someone is brutally assaulted because of some inherent property of their being, it has a chilling effect on others. It is traumatizing to people who were unrelated to the event. It is similar to terrorism.
Compare: 1) a bar brawl that results in a patron getting brutally stabbed to death and 2) a group of KKK members chaining a black man to their truck and dragging him through town.
Both are brutal, needless murders, but can you really not see that one is far more deplorable and damaging than the other?
The intent is not to "equalize" anything or to "payback" anything. The intent to categorize crimes that impact a larger number of people as larger crimes.
You can debate that point if you want, because that is the actual point of having "hate crimes."
"M" is the roman numeral for "1,000". In financial contexts, "MM" means "1,000,000" (1,000 x 1,000)
Some of the things you mention are just false though. I notice no difference with text rendering on my HD screen, the chrome takes up less room than both IE and FF*, although not Chrome, the form elements look identical to the ones rendered in any other browser...URL input also is no different...seemingly you have simply made these things up.
I should have clarified -- I'm on OS X. I assure you that I am not making anything up. HTML forms don't look anything like Cocoa forms, text rendering is different from every other app's text rendering, image rendering seems to use sRGB, on and on. The url autocomplete menu is a free-floating rounded thing with sub-menus and things that look like links but aren't.
Everywhere I look, it just seems like there is no attention to detail. It may well be that it is a better experience on Windows or Linux. Is it?
I keep trying Opera and I keep being disappointed. I guess it's just not for me. The text rendering is worse, the chrome takes up more room, the form elements are not native looking, the url input seems more rudimentary than others, its image rendering doesn't seem to be color-space-aware, and its rendering quirks are somehow louder than other browsers' quirks.
It may very well be numerically faster than other browsers, but it doesn't feel faster. I don't really care if a gmail inbox takes 5 seconds to render -- I can always switch away and read twitter or whatever in the meantime. Opera does have many UI innovations, but they always seem to lack polish to my eye.
I just want a browser that is "fast enough", gets out of my way, and is thoughtfully designed for human interaction. It is my impression that Chrome, Safari, and Firefox are all better in this regard.
I don't mean this to be a dig against Opera or the people who make it. I realize that it takes an extraordinary amount of effort and magic to produce Opera. I'm just curious why people like it, and if it will ever make it beyond a niche product on the desktop.
Sounds familiar.
[...] I asked to read the contract. The store workers had never had anyone ask, so they didn't know where it was. Took them a long time to find a copy. It was pretty nasty, but from memory [...]
How do you function in life spending your time reading every last bit of every last detail of every last "contract" you enter into? I had to terminate a Sprint contract because I moved to a place where I couldn't get service. According to my "contract" with Sprint, it was all my fault and I owed them thousands of dollars. Of course in actuality, I didn't. We parted ways after a quick phone call, and it was fine.
Do you pore over the signs on the door of a super market before you go in? Do you read all the licence and copyright agreements before you update your OS? Do you go outside before you memorize every aspect of your city's civic code?
Or do you just have a bone to pick with AT&T? I'm seriously curious...
Probably Beatles music has been beamed in the direction of Alpha Centuri.
Not going to happen. Perhaps the biggest copyright wtf in the history of humanity: "Astronomer and science popularizer Carl Sagan had wanted [Here Comes The Sun] to be included on the Voyager Golden Record, copies of which were attached to both spacecraft of the Voyager program to provide any entity that recovered them a representative sample of human civilization. Although The Beatles favoured the idea, EMI refused to release the rights and when the probes were launched in 1977 the song was not included." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_Comes_The_Sun#Voyager_proposal
On most browsers/clients/systems - you can "hover" over a hyperlink and see the URL it's going to. Not so with iOS
If you touch-and-hold a url in mobile safari, you are presented with popup that contains the complete url.
Because learning to entertain oneself on rainy days is part of growing up. At age 4, kids definitely shouldn't be spending any time in front of a computer screen.
Why has the computer become this pariah of a contraption to Monday-morning parents? What did kids do before Gutenberg? Before electricity? Before mass-produced toys like Lego or Lincoln Logs? Before board games? If you ask this of someone like Laura Ingalls Wilder, she will tell you that they were bored out of their minds and knew nearly nothing about the world they lived in.
There is nothing intrinsically harmful about a kid using a mouse to manipulate a screen. There are ways to use a computer that build social skills. Kids have an opportunity to learn something while they entertain themselves.
Once a day I make dinner for my kids, and I obviously cannot attend to them while I do so. I have to help them find something to do that will keep them occupied. Playing with Clifford The Big Red Dog or whatever for 30 minutes a day is not harmful, and it's the best choice for giving the kids something to do. Playing a game like Guitar Hero with friends is a truly enriching and fun experience.
It is true that letting your kid stay cooped up in their darkened room playing some FPS 16 hours per day *is* harmful. But there is a ton of middle ground here, and no shortage of appropriate uses that a four year old might have for a computer. Having a computer in the house is not a harmful or hurtful thing. Get over it.