Used "Goo Gone" many times for similar things and it removes even very old and dirty sticker glue just perfectly. Cut from their site: Goo Gone safely removes: gum tar crayon fresh paint tree sap oil and grease blood ink asphalt scuff marks tape and tape residue makeup, lipstick and mascara adhesives candle wax kitchen grease shoe polish soap scum bumper stickers duct tape bicycle chain grease
Legal delivering of video content is a good thing and I'm really waiting for it. But I see a lot of competition here already. Netflix costs less than $20 a month and you can get 10-15 movies in perfect quality for this money. I'd pay some money for convenience of downloading, +$20 at most for very good quality. So to shift me someone should sell this content for $3-$4 per 1.5 hour, or $2-$3/hour - not more. Another problem here are cable providers - those who sell internet access may like the idea, because this would increase amount of installations, but also they may start selling the content on their own and they can make prices very competitive. And bandwidth usage - I can imagine how "happy" they'll become when everybody will start downloading those gigabytes of content at around 6pm every day and they are not getting a penny from their resources exhaustion.
There is really no need to be harsh. You could just say, that Apple is desperately fighting for the market share. This is a God-given right of any business. This means it should sell a lot and amount of geeks is very numbered, so pleasing them makes no business sense at all. Normal people are the suffering part now, because modern computing is really overcomplicated and not human friendly at all. This is a geek's kingdom now and geeks are natives in it, so they don't really need to be taken care of - they'll do fine in any situation. The fact that geeks like Apple's products is a good sign and can be used as a technical quality metric as long as Apple is _not_ trying to please them.
Man, you are getting a little irrational. I don't know what unix scared you to death in your childhood - gotta admit they may be really scary, but you have to do something about this. I actually never thought before what really makes some systems part of unix-kind. I just know this as soon as I see a system, like you always can tell that this is a cat even if you cannot recognize if it's a lion, tiger or panther. And I worked (installed, configured) with a lot of different OSes. Linuxes, whole bunch of *BSDs, aix, solaris, hp-ux, netware, ms-dos, vxWorks, cisco IOS, BeOS, QNX... Oh, forgot that Windows spawn. That's what I did for living and this was never for fun - believe it or not. So, please, don't use that what you imply by "your definition of Unix is so absurdly broad". Unix term is broad, but you can't fit Netware or IOS there - they are way too different. And I don't think that now anybody could define strictly what is Unix in any way, but listing systems which believe that they are Unixes. So in some sense, Apple has a right to say that Mac OS X is not a Unix - they make it and they decide. But, believe me, on that low level of terminal it is old good Unix. On upper levels of Cocoa and so on it's not and IOKit probably is too weird for unix too. And as long as this Unix part is _required_ to run Mac OS X you may say whatever you want, but nobody is going to believe you:) And there is no problem with that at all. It still looks like a cat, admittedly different, but a CAT.
Well, I think your Unix and my Unix are different unixes. For me this is just some OS family - Linux tree, BSD tree, hp-ux, aix and so on. A very broad term, like "insects" or "animals". So Photoshop cannot run on Unix because Unix is not an OS for a long time. There is no such thing as Unix drivers anymore and rc.d is not a crucial part of any Unix, because all of them can be reconfigured to work without it. And in reverse - OS X 10.4 can be configured to use rc.d, it will work and will not loose it's personality:)
People may say a lot of wrong things and you don't have to jump out of your socks every time when someone wants to compile an "unix driver" on Mac OS X (go find this driver first:) Actually I think Apple has a really good coverage for two very important audiences - "Unix" word attracting geeks and tech. elite, "Mac, Apple, iPod" - normal people. And geeks don't care about meaning of "Mac", they want unix on well designed hardware with cool graphics, gcc, gnu tools and all that things. And normal people don't care about "Unix", because they just don't know what that means, but they know really good what's iPod, iTunes and Apple. No worries, go get some life instead:)
What is important is that huge amount of software developed for different unixes can be compiled on OS X with very low efforts and that you cannot remove the Unix-base from OS X without killing the system. That's why I know that OS X is one of the Unixes and at the same time it is The Best and The Only human friendly Unix in the World, simply the Best Desktop OS in the World and may be even one of the Best Server OSes in the World.
Most of people don't even know what the heck that unix is. And that thin margin between "is" and "-based" you are catching to is really irrelevant, it just reflects your personal emphasis. For me OS X is Unix, you say it's based on Unix. Who cares? It's like to say - my parents are Armenian and I'm an American. Ok, you are indeed an American, but this doesn't make you less Armenian genetically speaking and your parents probably still think that you are an Armenian.:)
As many pointed before this is really hard to believe that Apple paying for memory more than single customer with his puny mail order at some small online shop . I think there is another explanation. Instead of selling memory at market price you selling it simply twice more and in result loosing roughly half of orders. So in total you have same amount of profit, but twice less custom orders (which are pain and cost more of course). I don't mind actually. The only problem I have with your "memory politics" is that you don't offer 0 memory option! So I still had to pay premium price for that idiotic 256MB as part of my Mac Mini standard package, then order an upgrade and sell old memory on ebay for totally miserable money. Even with all these movements and cost of putty knife (to open Mini) this was cheaper then Apple's upgrade to 512.
The self validation looks ok for a side effect of XML, nothing more.
Boot time would be a big plus, but my TiBook G4 1Ghz/1GB still takes about 25 sec out of my life between gray screen and login prompt:)
The Property List Editor - you guys should be ashamed of this product, according to About window it wasn't touched since 2002, it's primitive, inconvenient and doesn't really help at all.
On other side - I love the idea to replace whole bunch of daemons, scripts and configs with one process and single format. Even though XML is rather misanthropic format, if it's system wide this is still very big advantage. If you would just make some nice and human friendly XML editor with integrated support for all Apple's plist types, help, search and so on - this would be nice.
And it looks like it doesn't support indexing for compressed files. I tried zip and gzip. For some reason I thought this should work. Also it doesn't like plain-text files without extension or with unknown extension, but assigning TEXT type with SetFile or renaming to *.txt helps and now I've finally managed to index my precious man pages. "mdfind" instead of "apropos" in command line - ah, what a fun!:)
It's not exactly plain text - this is troff format, some kind of markup language. If they would index it as plain text this would work in most cases, I agree. I think what happens here is that spotlight actually recognize this format as troff, but doesn't have an importer for it, so just skipping. If it would recognize it as plain text it would work. This is just wild guess - didn't dig really deep into into it yet. I'm pretty sure this will be fixed very soon in one or another way.
Ok, got it. You are obviously not competent enough in this area and simply don't understand the context. I'll just file a bug through ADC or write that stupid importer myself.
Strictly speaking you can control what to index - from what I've learned for this short time the spotlight system looks flexible and well designed. The problem here is that it doesn't understand format of man pages in it's current state, so it cannot index content of man pages and this is rather disappointing. They also not providing any alternative - you can't search through man pages and you don't have any other searchable source for this kind of information.
Are you trying to offend me, switch topic or both? Please state your intent.
I don't want to go into irrelevant discussions about meaning of word "basic", purpose and target audience of XCode and so on. I'm just wondering why man pages excluded from spotlight search.
Your explanation about cryptic output for parent doesn't work, sorry. I'm a parent and I don't mind:) Just kidding. Here is real example - I search for word "fork". This is very basic system call in all unixes. Spotlight returns me a lot of things, most of which look like this:/Developer/Examples/Xgrid/GridMandelbrot/GMMainWin dowController.m
This is what I'd call cryptic - it's searching through some code, which is not even documentation, but skipping man page for "fork" which IS document.
Spotlight has preferences, isn't it? And if I managed to install XCode that would be logical to have an ability to search through some basic system documentation? I know you hate command line, Terminal.app and all that "cryptic" unix things, but some people need it, I'd say most of people who use Terminal.app and/or has XCode installed. And don't underestimate modern school papers:)
You guys (I mean OS vendors) sometimes simply beyond of my understanding. F.e. I was simply shocked when discovered that The Spotlight almighty and wonderful completely ignores man pages coming with Tiger and even if I run mdimport manually on/usr/share/man it doesn't understand man page format. Let me cite:
"What the hell were you people thinking?":)
Slashdot Mirror
Used "Goo Gone" many times for similar things and it removes even very old and dirty sticker glue just perfectly.
Cut from their site:
Goo Gone safely removes: gum tar crayon fresh paint tree sap oil and grease blood ink asphalt scuff marks tape and tape residue makeup, lipstick and mascara adhesives candle wax kitchen grease shoe polish soap scum bumper stickers duct tape bicycle chain grease
http://www.magicamerican.com/googone.shtml
Shame on me - of course it should be 5-7-5. But it is definitely related to man's natural world. Let's fix the obvious part a little:
I am, in fact, male
So we have that in common -
He said he was too
I think it's even better now.
I am, in fact, male
He said he was too
So we have that in common
Good Haiku. You are gifted, but I still don't understand - he "was", you "are". So could you elaborate on that thing you guys still have in common?
Not bad.
But your account name is not good enough - you should use something like "As Heard On Radio" or "Weather Forecast".
BTW - are those rumors about wide screen 15" iBook true? Or dual core G4 PowerBooks?
Legal delivering of video content is a good thing and I'm really waiting for it. But I see a lot of competition here already. Netflix costs less than $20 a month and you can get 10-15 movies in perfect quality for this money. I'd pay some money for convenience of downloading, +$20 at most for very good quality. So to shift me someone should sell this content for $3-$4 per 1.5 hour, or $2-$3/hour - not more.
Another problem here are cable providers - those who sell internet access may like the idea, because this would increase amount of installations, but also they may start selling the content on their own and they can make prices very competitive. And bandwidth usage - I can imagine how "happy" they'll become when everybody will start downloading those gigabytes of content at around 6pm every day and they are not getting a penny from their resources exhaustion.
There is really no need to be harsh.
You could just say, that Apple is desperately fighting for the market share. This is a God-given right of any business.
This means it should sell a lot and amount of geeks is very numbered, so pleasing them makes no business sense at all. Normal people are the suffering part now, because modern computing is really overcomplicated and not human friendly at all. This is a geek's kingdom now and geeks are natives in it, so they don't really need to be taken care of - they'll do fine in any situation.
The fact that geeks like Apple's products is a good sign and can be used as a technical quality metric as long as Apple is _not_ trying to please them.
Man, you are getting a little irrational. I don't know what unix scared you to death in your childhood - gotta admit they may be really scary, but you have to do something about this. :) And there is no problem with that at all. It still looks like a cat, admittedly different, but a CAT.
I actually never thought before what really makes some systems part of unix-kind. I just know this as soon as I see a system, like you always can tell that this is a cat even if you cannot recognize if it's a lion, tiger or panther. And I worked (installed, configured) with a lot of different OSes. Linuxes, whole bunch of *BSDs, aix, solaris, hp-ux, netware, ms-dos, vxWorks, cisco IOS, BeOS, QNX... Oh, forgot that Windows spawn. That's what I did for living and this was never for fun - believe it or not. So, please, don't use that what you imply by "your definition of Unix is so absurdly broad".
Unix term is broad, but you can't fit Netware or IOS there - they are way too different. And I don't think that now anybody could define strictly what is Unix in any way, but listing systems which believe that they are Unixes. So in some sense, Apple has a right to say that Mac OS X is not a Unix - they make it and they decide. But, believe me, on that low level of terminal it is old good Unix. On upper levels of Cocoa and so on it's not and IOKit probably is too weird for unix too. And as long as this Unix part is _required_ to run Mac OS X you may say whatever you want, but nobody is going to believe you
Well, I think your Unix and my Unix are different unixes. For me this is just some OS family - Linux tree, BSD tree, hp-ux, aix and so on. A very broad term, like "insects" or "animals". So Photoshop cannot run on Unix because Unix is not an OS for a long time. There is no such thing as Unix drivers anymore and rc.d is not a crucial part of any Unix, because all of them can be reconfigured to work without it. And in reverse - OS X 10.4 can be configured to use rc.d, it will work and will not loose it's personality :)
:) Actually I think Apple has a really good coverage for two very important audiences - "Unix" word attracting geeks and tech. elite, "Mac, Apple, iPod" - normal people. And geeks don't care about meaning of "Mac", they want unix on well designed hardware with cool graphics, gcc, gnu tools and all that things. And normal people don't care about "Unix", because they just don't know what that means, but they know really good what's iPod, iTunes and Apple. No worries, go get some life instead :)
:)
People may say a lot of wrong things and you don't have to jump out of your socks every time when someone wants to compile an "unix driver" on Mac OS X (go find this driver first
What is important is that huge amount of software developed for different unixes can be compiled on OS X with very low efforts and that you cannot remove the Unix-base from OS X without killing the system. That's why I know that OS X is one of the Unixes and at the same time it is The Best and The Only human friendly Unix in the World, simply the Best Desktop OS in the World and may be even one of the Best Server OSes in the World.
Amen
Most of people don't even know what the heck that unix is. And that thin margin between "is" and "-based" you are catching to is really irrelevant, it just reflects your personal emphasis. For me OS X is Unix, you say it's based on Unix. Who cares? It's like to say - my parents are Armenian and I'm an American. Ok, you are indeed an American, but this doesn't make you less Armenian genetically speaking and your parents probably still think that you are an Armenian. :)
As many pointed before this is really hard to believe that Apple paying for memory more than single customer with his puny mail order at some small online shop . I think there is another explanation. Instead of selling memory at market price you selling it simply twice more and in result loosing roughly half of orders. So in total you have same amount of profit, but twice less custom orders (which are pain and cost more of course). I don't mind actually. The only problem I have with your "memory politics" is that you don't offer 0 memory option! So I still had to pay premium price for that idiotic 256MB as part of my Mac Mini standard package, then order an upgrade and sell old memory on ebay for totally miserable money. Even with all these movements and cost of putty knife (to open Mini) this was cheaper then Apple's upgrade to 512.
:)
But of course, we still love Apple
The self validation looks ok for a side effect of XML, nothing more.
:)
Boot time would be a big plus, but my TiBook G4 1Ghz/1GB still takes about 25 sec out of my life between gray screen and login prompt
The Property List Editor - you guys should be ashamed of this product, according to About window it wasn't touched since 2002, it's primitive, inconvenient and doesn't really help at all.
On other side - I love the idea to replace whole bunch of daemons, scripts and configs with one process and single format. Even though XML is rather misanthropic format, if it's system wide this is still very big advantage. If you would just make some nice and human friendly XML editor with integrated support for all Apple's plist types, help, search and so on - this would be nice.
And it looks like it doesn't support indexing for compressed files. I tried zip and gzip. For some reason I thought this should work. Also it doesn't like plain-text files without extension or with unknown extension, but assigning TEXT type with SetFile or renaming to *.txt helps and now I've finally managed to index my precious man pages. "mdfind" instead of "apropos" in command line - ah, what a fun! :)
Oh boy. Just try this command as an example in terminal: /usr/share/man/man1/ipcs.1
file
This is not a rocket science, really.
It's not exactly plain text - this is troff format, some kind of markup language. If they would index it as plain text this would work in most cases, I agree. I think what happens here is that spotlight actually recognize this format as troff, but doesn't have an importer for it, so just skipping. If it would recognize it as plain text it would work. This is just wild guess - didn't dig really deep into into it yet. I'm pretty sure this will be fixed very soon in one or another way.
Ok, got it. You are obviously not competent enough in this area and simply don't understand the context. I'll just file a bug through ADC or write that stupid importer myself.
Strictly speaking you can control what to index - from what I've learned for this short time the spotlight system looks flexible and well designed. The problem here is that it doesn't understand format of man pages in it's current state, so it cannot index content of man pages and this is rather disappointing. They also not providing any alternative - you can't search through man pages and you don't have any other searchable source for this kind of information.
Are you trying to offend me, switch topic or both? Please state your intent. :) Just kidding. Here is real example - I search for word "fork". This is very basic system call in all unixes. Spotlight returns me a lot of things, most of which look like this: /Developer/Examples/Xgrid/GridMandelbrot/GMMainWin dowController.m
This is what I'd call cryptic - it's searching through some code, which is not even documentation, but skipping man page for "fork" which IS document.
I don't want to go into irrelevant discussions about meaning of word "basic", purpose and target audience of XCode and so on. I'm just wondering why man pages excluded from spotlight search. Your explanation about cryptic output for parent doesn't work, sorry. I'm a parent and I don't mind
Spotlight has preferences, isn't it? And if I managed to install XCode that would be logical to have an ability to search through some basic system documentation? I know you hate command line, Terminal.app and all that "cryptic" unix things, but some people need it, I'd say most of people who use Terminal.app and/or has XCode installed. And don't underestimate modern school papers :)
You guys (I mean OS vendors) sometimes simply beyond of my understanding. F.e. I was simply shocked when discovered that The Spotlight almighty and wonderful completely ignores man pages coming with Tiger and even if I run mdimport manually on /usr/share/man it doesn't understand man page format. Let me cite:
"What the hell were you people thinking?" :)