I find myself skeptical of the launchpad claim. I suspect that someone if confusing code-signing here. since 10.4 apple has been ramping up the strictness of code signing for apps. as of 10.6 unsigned apps can no longer open ports on the firewall without explicit user permission and all unsigned apps spew warnings to the system.log when launched. This is actually mildly annoying if you are writing and testing compiled binaries for your own intranet since it means that you need to distribute a key to all the people on your intranet if you want the apps to not spew silent warnings to the system log. (e.g. commands that you want to run millions of times get slowed down by such spewing). But you can self sign things so this does not impede anything and is merely a minor nuiscance and I put up with it because of the obvious benefits to my own security for having signed apps.
I suspect what is going on for launchpad is that unsigned apps won't work in launchpad. Thus you have to have them signed by some one with a trusted cert for them to work out of the box. It may be that, and I don't know, that you could have the installer self-sign the app at install time as a work around.
ANyhow thats what I suspect. This is a sedeffect of the highly desirable code-signing and not just a requirement to pay apple to use an OS feature.
there are at least 10 times as many bacterial cells as "human" cells in our bodies and you can run many different bacteria on a human. So one might consider oneself bacteria and the body just a vehicle for your bacteria. Except for Bill O'reily. Bateria refuse to grow in him.
The guys who ported Quake to Mac, say objective C, is C. It runs just as fast as C. ObjectiveC allegedly has slower method dispatch (as opposed to C-function calls) but tests show it's fast or faster than C++ (i.e. a tie as far as apples and oranges can be comapred)
ObjectiveC is what C++ and Java were trying to achieve but failed. The C++ books keep getting thicker and thicker to the point that they are increasing in width faster than the speed of light. (this is allowed because they contain no information and consume rather than create energy.) C++ reminds me of the woman in Terry Gilliam's Brazil that kept getting more plastic surgery to correct the mistakes of the last one till she was reduced to goo.
Meanwhile ObjectiveC has stayed lean and effective, while having the major advantages of java available.
Did you see the picture of the case he chose? He says he chose it because the HP blackbird case is one of the highest quality aluminum cases he could find. I had to laugh. Having looked inside a mac tower case it's just astonishing that such a spagetti looking case could be considered "high quality". In the end perhaps the case as little to do with the function of a computer. But one of the main points of building your own is aesthetics and as far as that goes mac cases are the best you can possible get.
Just $30 to have someone install firmware without any risk to me if they brick it, not mess up my warantee, , create my user account. THink about it $30 is a smoking deal. I don't know what your hourly rate is but I'd pay that i a snap. Even if you were an expert at this and could do it in a flash it's still not worth my time. You must be retarded or earn minimum wage if you think they are ripping people off.
THat's the way it works on servers I agree. But every time I have set up my firewall I end up with having to assigne one port on the outside to a specific machine on the inside. So one machine consumes the entire port no matter what remote machine is connecting to that port. THere is no option to do otherise on the nat configuration software. Perhaps this just a limit of the routers I have but I have had 5 different ones and they all behaved that way.
Yes and even if it were true in concept one can be sure that they do the accounting in the most generous fashion. Still one can probably assume the relative ranking of various industries is useful.
Here is something I wonder about. Why do any employers connect their emplyees to the internet? Would it not be a much better idea to have nearly all computers connect to a private intra-net. That way the business functions can all get done. No personal e-mails or outside web paged pretty much means no trojans.
Yes a few people will need to communicate outside for their jobs. Give them a second computer. This will be cheap compared to the consequences of having your business operations hacked.
So that just leaves the corporate website to secure which while non-trivial it is now decoupled from the bussiness operations.
Thus I wonder what the problem with this is likely to be. Seems like a no brainer to me.
Let's think about this shall we. there are 64K port addresses if I am not mistaken. that's effectively two quads IF you used them optimally. for inside the nat there are only 3 quads x 3 prefixs (169,192, 10). SO that gives us a little bit more than 5.2 quads. But that assumes every nat in the stack does everything perfectly.
Now you might isn't that 5.2 quads worth of addresses? No because each computer is going to be using multiple ports.
So this won't work. it's a bandaid however that will delay the inevitable probably by about a factor of I'd say 256 or so. Which is not bad. but it will require some strict use and people not needing static IPs.
And we all see how android is filled with back doors and hemmoraging data. Moreover google is now back peddling and starting to lock things down. Sometime you want freedom sometime you want security. I'll take freedom on my desktop and security on my phone. why? because in the future the phone will be my credit card and for that I want something close to trusted plat form computing.
the good news is you have a choice. DOn't buy an iphone, get your freedom, and as the singer said, perhaps nothing left to lose.
People love apple and it's fabuously high quality ineffebly well designed products. Media's write stories about things people are interested in or find fascinating.
The weird thing here is that somehow people think this works in reverse. That the media is supposed to somehow find something people dont' care about and make it fascinating. E.g. Linux. SOny walkmans, corvettes, and basketball got media attention because people got excited about them about them and not the reverse.
How does this actually work? It's usually hard to write a program that can print itself out. And to do that in so few characters would be even harder. However it looks like this one is somehow cheating and asking the containing document to tell it it's own content. But I'm not a good java script programmer to understand it.
This baptism thing has me confused. If every entity has a soul then why not baptize my dog? Is it because the dog has to ask or at a minimum be cabable of understanding what it means? Well then what about babies then. Is there baptizement meaningless until they reconfirm it later in life? Finally what about all the bacteria in my gut. Do we share a common soul?
If the sole criteria is that you have to be a sentient entity cable of accepting christ as your savior, at least potentially (to cover the baby loophole) then I suppose this ought to include Gorillas then since they are able to converse by sign language and thus have the potential for religious instruction.
Ping can claim 180 million user IDs. Sure most of them are not active. One can say the same about facebook as well. At least the apple one's are unique and probably actually represent more than one person (families usually have just one) where as facebook has multiple ids per person sometimes.
That does not indicate usage but it does indicate that the inertial barrier to entry and required critical mass is already overcome for this to be considered ubiquitously available. Social networks are useless if your freinds are not likely to bother joing that service. But if they are already joined and then you invite them to your circle, its easy.
But as for being a backdoor, this is an odd question. Backdoor to what. THe objective of facebook is more facebook. But apple sells computrs and a computer ecosystem based on ease of use. Ping is only valuable to apple if it sells more apples. Okay maybe they make a few bucks on the music too. But it's a step away from their bussiness model to suppose that getting into the social network bussiness is their objective. It only makes sense I think as a me too. THey dont' want to be caught with iTV and Itunes that lacks a social network and discover that android or windows 7 has one.
the other thing is the timing is great for this for markeing the ipod touch. namely that video conferencing capability. Everyone who uses it reports the same thing. It's not that you can't do video conferecing with skyp[e or something, it's that it's so easy--provided you belong to club cupertino. With the ipod this is going to be something kids use all the time I think. video calls from your room. what a great time to layer on what kids love: social networks and making sure they listen to the same trendy pop music. It's a dynamite combo.
thus the point is to sell more ipods. and this nails the demogrpahic.
* You can not mount a network hard drive (without hacking it)
* You can not mount a usb hard drive (without hacking it)
* Format support is very limited. For example: you can not play xvid, divx and a bunch of other formats
I think you're currently better off connecting a computer to your tv and run VLC on it... unless of course you like apple dictating what technology and media you have access to.
How much is your time worth? It's $99 !!! No cables, no computer in the loop. You can use your computer while the kids watch the video. And if you need to do all the BS you want you can just do that on your computer and stream in in H264 to the device. Don't give me some rubbish about the transcode from xvid ruining the picture quality. If you care about that then you are 0.00001% of the market.
I just can picture it using the voice of king Julien saying "Just look at me, just look" or "You may now give the royal sponge bath". Though I think it might do better to say "it applies the lotion to its skin or it gets the hose"
Read the second page of the article, fool
on
The Case For Oracle
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You would have done better to keep reading. The WHOLE POINT of the case is that the open source lice grants access to the patents on the Java IF and ONLY IF you fully implement java and USE THE JVM. since Dalvik does not use the Java byte code it clearly violates the open source lic terms and thus is open to a patent suit.
Jezzus, read the second page of the article, moran
on
The Case For Oracle
·
· Score: 1
Java (the language) is free and open. Java (the trademark) is not. Provided google is not doing business advertising "Android - with Java(tm)!", they're doing nothing wrong. Oracle owns ONLY the trademark.
Wrong according to the article. The article quote Bruce Perens saying that the open source lic grants free access to the patents IF there is complete implementation not a subset or No lic. They have clearly violated the lic, therefor have no patent protection.
This is a patent case not a branding case. It would not matter if Google said it was using Java or not. By reimplementing part of Java they unambiguously violate the patents.
Some of jobs reasoning was good and some was in substantial. Clearly he had some motivation to see it the way he did but that does not make the issies he raised vanish.
One of the most substantial is who gets to set the common denominator. If you innovate a new feature in your device, say haptic response, and flash does not support it, you are sort of at the mercy of adobe.
Conversely, of course is the embrace and extend effect we all know and hate. Internet Explorer defined the web non-standards and held things back. People wrote to the IE specific features and things borke on standards based browsers. Flash currently lets you do more than open standards do particularly in the area of DRM, advertising, paid content and feedback to the server. As a result people who need that will write for it. People for whom it is the easiest way to implement something, say bank security, will use it. It will be has hard to get rid of as IE.
Meanwhile as I said, while extending in some ways it will homogenize the device capabilities an limit innovation in that realm.
Since Apple has a history of bringing new features to devices early and depricating old ones early, they are right to see flash as harmful to them.
But from the point of view of taming a lot of different phone manufactured tweaked versions of Android or Symbian or windows 7, or simply writing cross platform flash is going to win unless the standards catch up soon.
The big surprise is that it's round not rectangular. the current one is 7.75" x 5.81" the round one is 7.6" in diameter, which has exactly the same area. But it's round so it's more aesthetically pleasing. You can hold it from any orientation and it's the same simplifying the interface. There is a single button is in the middle on the back.
I exaggerated a little. Actually, the pixels are hexagonal so there are six preferred orientations to avoid weird aliasing effects. However, the surprise is that with the new Retinal display density anti-aliasing is not a problem any more! SO unless you are in the 2% of people that can resolve the retinal display at 2 feet from your eye then, yes, for practical purposes, it can be held at any angle. The speakers use a bose wave guide technology for a deep base response despite the low volume. Additionally, the screen glass has an array of ultrasonic transducers that create a sensation to your finger tips as they touch the screen providing both haptic feedback as well as allowing it to sense how hard you are pressing the screen. The camera itself is integrated into the screen smack in the center so you can hold it up like a mirror and not get any weird off-axis ("up nose") view for the facetime video conferencing.
Slashdot Mirror
I find myself skeptical of the launchpad claim. I suspect that someone if confusing code-signing here. since 10.4 apple has been ramping up the strictness of code signing for apps. as of 10.6 unsigned apps can no longer open ports on the firewall without explicit user permission and all unsigned apps spew warnings to the system.log when launched. This is actually mildly annoying if you are writing and testing compiled binaries for your own intranet since it means that you need to distribute a key to all the people on your intranet if you want the apps to not spew silent warnings to the system log. (e.g. commands that you want to run millions of times get slowed down by such spewing). But you can self sign things so this does not impede anything and is merely a minor nuiscance and I put up with it because of the obvious benefits to my own security for having signed apps.
I suspect what is going on for launchpad is that unsigned apps won't work in launchpad. Thus you have to have them signed by some one with a trusted cert for them to work out of the box. It may be that, and I don't know, that you could have the installer self-sign the app at install time as a work around.
ANyhow thats what I suspect. This is a sedeffect of the highly desirable code-signing and not just a requirement to pay apple to use an OS feature.
I loved ozzie's music. He should bite the head off balmer like a bat.
there are at least 10 times as many bacterial cells as "human" cells in our bodies and you can run many different bacteria on a human. So one might consider oneself bacteria and the body just a vehicle for your bacteria. Except for Bill O'reily. Bateria refuse to grow in him.
The guys who ported Quake to Mac, say objective C, is C. It runs just as fast as C. ObjectiveC allegedly has slower method dispatch (as opposed to C-function calls) but tests show it's fast or faster than C++ (i.e. a tie as far as apples and oranges can be comapred)
Mod parent up. Nice explanation.
ObjectiveC is what C++ and Java were trying to achieve but failed. The C++ books keep getting thicker and thicker to the point that they are increasing in width faster than the speed of light. (this is allowed because they contain no information and consume rather than create energy.) C++ reminds me of the woman in Terry Gilliam's Brazil that kept getting more plastic surgery to correct the mistakes of the last one till she was reduced to goo.
Meanwhile ObjectiveC has stayed lean and effective, while having the major advantages of java available.
try it before you lash out at me.
Did you see the picture of the case he chose? He says he chose it because the HP blackbird case is one of the highest quality aluminum cases he could find. I had to laugh. Having looked inside a mac tower case it's just astonishing that such a spagetti looking case could be considered "high quality". In the end perhaps the case as little to do with the function of a computer. But one of the main points of building your own is aesthetics and as far as that goes mac cases are the best you can possible get.
Just $30 to have someone install firmware without any risk to me if they brick it, not mess up my warantee, , create my user account. THink about it $30 is a smoking deal. I don't know what your hourly rate is but I'd pay that i a snap. Even if you were an expert at this and could do it in a flash it's still not worth my time. You must be retarded or earn minimum wage if you think they are ripping people off.
THat's the way it works on servers I agree. But every time I have set up my firewall I end up with having to assigne one port on the outside to a specific machine on the inside. So one machine consumes the entire port no matter what remote machine is connecting to that port. THere is no option to do otherise on the nat configuration software. Perhaps this just a limit of the routers I have but I have had 5 different ones and they all behaved that way.
Yes and even if it were true in concept one can be sure that they do the accounting in the most generous fashion. Still one can probably assume the relative ranking of various industries is useful.
Here is something I wonder about. Why do any employers connect their emplyees to the internet? Would it not be a much better idea to have nearly all computers connect to a private intra-net. That way the business functions can all get done. No personal e-mails or outside web paged pretty much means no trojans.
Yes a few people will need to communicate outside for their jobs. Give them a second computer. This will be cheap compared to the consequences of having your business operations hacked.
So that just leaves the corporate website to secure which while non-trivial it is now decoupled from the bussiness operations.
Thus I wonder what the problem with this is likely to be. Seems like a no brainer to me.
Let's think about this shall we. there are 64K port addresses if I am not mistaken. that's effectively two quads IF you used them optimally. for inside the nat there are only 3 quads x 3 prefixs (169,192, 10). SO that gives us a little bit more than 5.2 quads. But that assumes every nat in the stack does everything perfectly.
Now you might isn't that 5.2 quads worth of addresses? No because each computer is going to be using multiple ports.
So this won't work. it's a bandaid however that will delay the inevitable probably by about a factor of I'd say 256 or so. Which is not bad. but it will require some strict use and people not needing static IPs.
And we all see how android is filled with back doors and hemmoraging data. Moreover google is now back peddling and starting to lock things down. Sometime you want freedom sometime you want security. I'll take freedom on my desktop and security on my phone. why? because in the future the phone will be my credit card and for that I want something close to trusted plat form computing.
the good news is you have a choice. DOn't buy an iphone, get your freedom, and as the singer said, perhaps nothing left to lose.
People love apple and it's fabuously high quality ineffebly well designed products. Media's write stories about things people are interested in or find fascinating.
The weird thing here is that somehow people think this works in reverse. That the media is supposed to somehow find something people dont' care about and make it fascinating. E.g. Linux. SOny walkmans, corvettes, and basketball got media attention because people got excited about them about them and not the reverse.
How does this actually work? It's usually hard to write a program that can print itself out. And to do that in so few characters would be even harder. However it looks like this one is somehow cheating and asking the containing document to tell it it's own content. But I'm not a good java script programmer to understand it.
This baptism thing has me confused. If every entity has a soul then why not baptize my dog? Is it because the dog has to ask or at a minimum be cabable of understanding what it means? Well then what about babies then. Is there baptizement meaningless until they reconfirm it later in life? Finally what about all the bacteria in my gut. Do we share a common soul?
If the sole criteria is that you have to be a sentient entity cable of accepting christ as your savior, at least potentially (to cover the baby loophole) then I suppose this ought to include Gorillas then since they are able to converse by sign language and thus have the potential for religious instruction.
Ping can claim 180 million user IDs. Sure most of them are not active. One can say the same about facebook as well. At least the apple one's are unique and probably actually represent more than one person (families usually have just one) where as facebook has multiple ids per person sometimes.
That does not indicate usage but it does indicate that the inertial barrier to entry and required critical mass is already overcome for this to be considered ubiquitously available. Social networks are useless if your freinds are not likely to bother joing that service. But if they are already joined and then you invite them to your circle, its easy.
But as for being a backdoor, this is an odd question. Backdoor to what. THe objective of facebook is more facebook. But apple sells computrs and a computer ecosystem based on ease of use. Ping is only valuable to apple if it sells more apples. Okay maybe they make a few bucks on the music too. But it's a step away from their bussiness model to suppose that getting into the social network bussiness is their objective. It only makes sense I think as a me too. THey dont' want to be caught with iTV and Itunes that lacks a social network and discover that android or windows 7 has one.
the other thing is the timing is great for this for markeing the ipod touch. namely that video conferencing capability. Everyone who uses it reports the same thing. It's not that you can't do video conferecing with skyp[e or something, it's that it's so easy--provided you belong to club cupertino. With the ipod this is going to be something kids use all the time I think. video calls from your room. what a great time to layer on what kids love: social networks and making sure they listen to the same trendy pop music. It's a dynamite combo.
thus the point is to sell more ipods. and this nails the demogrpahic.
You can use your ipod or iphone as an input dev to the apple TV, and that's even more expressive than just a keyboard.
* You can not mount a network hard drive (without hacking it)
* You can not mount a usb hard drive (without hacking it)
* Format support is very limited. For example: you can not play xvid, divx and a bunch of other formats
I think you're currently better off connecting a computer to your tv and run VLC on it... unless of course you like apple dictating what technology and media you have access to.
How much is your time worth? It's $99 !!! No cables, no computer in the loop. You can use your computer while the kids watch the video. And if you need to do all the BS you want you can just do that on your computer and stream in in H264 to the device. Don't give me some rubbish about the transcode from xvid ruining the picture quality. If you care about that then you are 0.00001% of the market.
I never see my hard disk data rate maxing out my connection speed, so I con't understand why all this emphasis on faster connections.
I just can picture it using the voice of king Julien saying "Just look at me, just look" or "You may now give the royal sponge bath". Though I think it might do better to say "it applies the lotion to its skin or it gets the hose"
You would have done better to keep reading. The WHOLE POINT of the case is that the open source lice grants access to the patents on the Java IF and ONLY IF you fully implement java and USE THE JVM. since Dalvik does not use the Java byte code it clearly violates the open source lic terms and thus is open to a patent suit.
Your rant is gibberish.
Reposting as necessary:
Java (the language) is free and open. Java (the trademark) is not. Provided google is not doing business advertising "Android - with Java(tm)!", they're doing nothing wrong. Oracle owns ONLY the trademark.
Wrong according to the article. The article quote Bruce Perens saying that the open source lic grants free access to the patents IF there is complete implementation not a subset or No lic. They have clearly violated the lic, therefor have no patent protection.
This is a patent case not a branding case. It would not matter if Google said it was using Java or not. By reimplementing part of Java they unambiguously violate the patents.
Read the article.
Some of jobs reasoning was good and some was in substantial. Clearly he had some motivation to see it the way he did but that does not make the issies he raised vanish.
One of the most substantial is who gets to set the common denominator. If you innovate a new feature in your device, say haptic response, and flash does not support it, you are sort of at the mercy of adobe.
Conversely, of course is the embrace and extend effect we all know and hate. Internet Explorer defined the web non-standards and held things back. People wrote to the IE specific features and things borke on standards based browsers. Flash currently lets you do more than open standards do particularly in the area of DRM, advertising, paid content and feedback to the server. As a result people who need that will write for it. People for whom it is the easiest way to implement something, say bank security, will use it. It will be has hard to get rid of as IE.
Meanwhile as I said, while extending in some ways it will homogenize the device capabilities an limit innovation in that realm.
Since Apple has a history of bringing new features to devices early and depricating old ones early, they are right to see flash as harmful to them.
But from the point of view of taming a lot of different phone manufactured tweaked versions of Android or Symbian or windows 7, or simply writing cross platform flash is going to win unless the standards catch up soon.
The big surprise is that it's round not rectangular. the current one is 7.75" x 5.81" the round one is 7.6" in diameter, which has exactly the same area. But it's round so it's more aesthetically pleasing. You can hold it from any orientation and it's the same simplifying the interface. There is a single button is in the middle on the back.
I exaggerated a little. Actually, the pixels are hexagonal so there are six preferred orientations to avoid weird aliasing effects. However, the surprise is that with the new Retinal display density anti-aliasing is not a problem any more! SO unless you are in the 2% of people that can resolve the retinal display at 2 feet from your eye then, yes, for practical purposes, it can be held at any angle. The speakers use a bose wave guide technology for a deep base response despite the low volume. Additionally, the screen glass has an array of ultrasonic transducers that create a sensation to your finger tips as they touch the screen providing both haptic feedback as well as allowing it to sense how hard you are pressing the screen. The camera itself is integrated into the screen smack in the center so you can hold it up like a mirror and not get any weird off-axis ("up nose") view for the facetime video conferencing.
it's going magic.