it's things like this that make me wonder why people were so up in arms about gmail's privacy. google has consistently, time and time again, tried to do good things like this and in general is interested in being a benevolent company. i think much if it might have to do with the original owners still commanding much of the company, but i just want to say that i hope google never changes it's stance on putting the user's experience above anything else.
does anyone know if this is the full version (including pro) or the student/teacher edition? i heard the pro version was not going to be released until vpc 7 is done. i doubt there's any difference between any of the versions though *shrug*
mac on most occasions has the same software as windows, and it's almost always higher quality. in some cases there are even some unique programs that don't exist for windows like subethaedit. we had itunes for the longest time (which greatly rivaled WMP) though windows users are fortunate now to have it.
and does that make it right? it used to be illegal for black people to sit on a certain part of the bus, or for rape victims to get an abortion but it's not anymore.
if everyone's breaking the law, then it's a sure sign that the law is flawed.
i'm not really an expert on the physics of aerodynamics but wouldn't bumps be completely contradictory to things like fluid dynamics? I can understand the whale flipper shape making a difference, but the bumps just seem like unnecessary drag.
How is Microsoft a Monopoly if Apple exists?
because they control the vast amount of the computing market. you don't have to own all 100% of it just to be declared a monopoly. perhaps you should also keepup with the news. the US and the EU have declared microsoft a monopoly.
If that makes Microsoft a monopoly doesn't that make Apple an even worse monopoly (they control the hardware AND the software)?
sigh. i sometimes wonder if people will ever understand the truth about apple. apple makes the case, the motherboard, the power supply, and the operating system. that's IT. every other component of a mac (including the cpu, video card, hard disk, ram, cdrom, lcds, crts, etc, etc) is standard. if some other company came along and implemented a ppc chip that implemented the same instruction set as the g3-g5 chips and used hardware components (ethernet, video, sound) that are compatible with os x's drivers and implement the openfirmware STANDARD then it will run os x. now that may not be legal according to the EULA but you can do it. worst case you can run linux on your machine, or freebsd, or the various other free *nix operating systems that run just FINE on ppc hardware. heck even windows nt 4 ran on mac hardware (albeit a long time ago, not anymore). if you want more ppc hardware, send a nice letter to amd and intel to implement more ppc compatible chips. send a letter to the various mobo manufacterers to implement more motherboards that agree to said specs. its no different than companies implementing intel's x86 specs. stop spreading FUD
the turing machine wasn't so surprising after learning push-down automata. it was evident that the push-down automata, not being able to represent languages like L = { a^i b^j ^k | i != j != b != k }, was too limited for general computability. The turing machine was just the natural theoretical progression of computablility based on simple algorithm deduction. we can generate anything using a turing machine if we can come up with an algorithm for it.
the interesting thing about turing machines though is how they are maximal and nothing additional makes the turing machine more powerful (like non-determinism, multiple tapes, two way tapes, etc) because those can all be simulated with a regular turing machine using an algorithm adjustment.
the apple was originally just flat colored. they made it rainbow at the time because apple was the first to come out with color displays for consumer desktop machines, and wanted to emphasize this using the new logo.
man, my friend constantly complained about the speed of her laptop. i kept telling her that she can't run a modern OS with only 128mb of ram including a bunch of other apps and expect it to never page out to hard disk. *sigh* of course for $50 she could have fixed this, but constantly refused to spend even that much after spending $1000.
check it out. http://otierney.net/images/osxbooted.png. it took about 10 hours to install, but it works. the finder has glitches (i'm trying to find a fix). namely the finder will launch / then crash, repeat. i think the cdrom is causing this, so i'll post more a screenshots with apps running once i get that far.
well, with mozilla it's hard to say much about doing one thing well, but firefox is quite good at just browsing the web. however they aren't talking about making mozilla a desktop environment, they are talking about building a desktop environment out of XUL. this would be just as separate from mozilla as firefox is from thunderbird.
i agree with you. really, i do. the job market can be less forgiving than that though. plus there's a whole 10 and more years worth of perfectly working c++ code that has to be maintained and companies can't just afford to throw it away.
now if you're in the position of starting a project/company yourself, obviously avoiding c++ is a good thing from the start.
oop is a good solution. by no means the best, but good. the thing is certain problems are inherintly procedural, some are functional, others are oop, a few are logical, and even aspect oriented. the point is easy programming methodology has a use and as such should be applied where that use is best. if you told all AI programmers to stop coding and lisp and redo it all in C, they'd laugh at you.
computer science 101: pick the right tool for the job.
i'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke or what. smalltalk is a well done OOP language. objective-c is what c++ SHOULD have been. (which for those who don't know is a smalltalk/c derivative).
the client is nice, and works great in os x. one thing you have to consider though is if your laptop gets stolen, there's a very high chance the hard drive will be wiped before the thief even gets a chance to boot your old machine. besides, if you password protect your login (which you should) then they won't get anywhere and will need to format in the first place.
in usability 101 they make you design a clock, radio, phone and cd player into one physical device. the point of the exercise is to show that it's very hard, if not impossible, to do it well. you don't seem to understand that the very people you're directing outlook towards (average users at a business) are the very people who are going to have the most usability issues with a piece of do-everything software like outlook. it's not impossible to make a set of integrated applications separate. all it takes is good design. whereas if you look at outlook, it's nearly impossible to make it easy to use due to the nature that one is cramming 5+ functions into one application. you spread out the focus, reduce the usability, and in general, increase resources consumed (since most people only do one task at a time). if you need to switch between those tasks often and this is difficult in your particular opertaing system, then that is a problem with your window manager NOT with the application.
Slashdot Mirror
it's things like this that make me wonder why people were so up in arms about gmail's privacy. google has consistently, time and time again, tried to do good things like this and in general is interested in being a benevolent company. i think much if it might have to do with the original owners still commanding much of the company, but i just want to say that i hope google never changes it's stance on putting the user's experience above anything else.
does anyone know if this is the full version (including pro) or the student/teacher edition? i heard the pro version was not going to be released until vpc 7 is done. i doubt there's any difference between any of the versions though *shrug*
there's a difference between non-violent civil disobedience and anarchy. i'd hope you can recognize the difference :/
mac on most occasions has the same software as windows, and it's almost always higher quality. in some cases there are even some unique programs that don't exist for windows like subethaedit. we had itunes for the longest time (which greatly rivaled WMP) though windows users are fortunate now to have it.
and does that make it right? it used to be illegal for black people to sit on a certain part of the bus, or for rape victims to get an abortion but it's not anymore.
if everyone's breaking the law, then it's a sure sign that the law is flawed.
i'm not really an expert on the physics of aerodynamics but wouldn't bumps be completely contradictory to things like fluid dynamics? I can understand the whale flipper shape making a difference, but the bumps just seem like unnecessary drag.
How is Microsoft a Monopoly if Apple exists?
because they control the vast amount of the computing market. you don't have to own all 100% of it just to be declared a monopoly. perhaps you should also keep up with the news. the US and the EU have declared microsoft a monopoly.
If that makes Microsoft a monopoly doesn't that make Apple an even worse monopoly (they control the hardware AND the software)?
sigh. i sometimes wonder if people will ever understand the truth about apple. apple makes the case, the motherboard, the power supply, and the operating system. that's IT. every other component of a mac (including the cpu, video card, hard disk, ram, cdrom, lcds, crts, etc, etc) is standard. if some other company came along and implemented a ppc chip that implemented the same instruction set as the g3-g5 chips and used hardware components (ethernet, video, sound) that are compatible with os x's drivers and implement the openfirmware STANDARD then it will run os x. now that may not be legal according to the EULA but you can do it. worst case you can run linux on your machine, or freebsd, or the various other free *nix operating systems that run just FINE on ppc hardware. heck even windows nt 4 ran on mac hardware (albeit a long time ago, not anymore). if you want more ppc hardware, send a nice letter to amd and intel to implement more ppc compatible chips. send a letter to the various mobo manufacterers to implement more motherboards that agree to said specs. its no different than companies implementing intel's x86 specs. stop spreading FUD
yes, luckily. and not your sisters, your brothers, and your mom and dads too.
yes. and you could develop on your mac for some time now by installing mono via darwinports or fink.
i'd mod you up if i could :) very informative.
sigh, and sadly that intolerance still exists today with gay marrage (or gay civil union, whatever you want to call it).
the turing machine wasn't so surprising after learning push-down automata. it was evident that the push-down automata, not being able to represent languages like L = { a^i b^j ^k | i != j != b != k }, was too limited for general computability. The turing machine was just the natural theoretical progression of computablility based on simple algorithm deduction. we can generate anything using a turing machine if we can come up with an algorithm for it.
the interesting thing about turing machines though is how they are maximal and nothing additional makes the turing machine more powerful (like non-determinism, multiple tapes, two way tapes, etc) because those can all be simulated with a regular turing machine using an algorithm adjustment.
the apple was originally just flat colored. they made it rainbow at the time because apple was the first to come out with color displays for consumer desktop machines, and wanted to emphasize this using the new logo.
man, my friend constantly complained about the speed of her laptop. i kept telling her that she can't run a modern OS with only 128mb of ram including a bunch of other apps and expect it to never page out to hard disk. *sigh* of course for $50 she could have fixed this, but constantly refused to spend even that much after spending $1000.
shame we have little to no chance of getting a half-life 2 mac port since the whole game depends heavily on direct-x 9.
oh well, i'll happily give money to the companies that care about cross-platform development (id software & epic games).
check it out. http://otierney.net/images/osxbooted.png. it took about 10 hours to install, but it works. the finder has glitches (i'm trying to find a fix). namely the finder will launch / then crash, repeat. i think the cdrom is causing this, so i'll post more a screenshots with apps running once i get that far.
well, with mozilla it's hard to say much about doing one thing well, but firefox is quite good at just browsing the web. however they aren't talking about making mozilla a desktop environment, they are talking about building a desktop environment out of XUL. this would be just as separate from mozilla as firefox is from thunderbird.
well, i'm sitting here starring at the mac os x install screen. definitely not bullshit :)
what is the D&E, and since when were there "specs" for which c++ was designed.
one of qemu's goals is to do x86 to ppc code translation for projects like darwine. i'm not sure that your last statement is entirely true.
i agree with you. really, i do. the job market can be less forgiving than that though. plus there's a whole 10 and more years worth of perfectly working c++ code that has to be maintained and companies can't just afford to throw it away.
now if you're in the position of starting a project/company yourself, obviously avoiding c++ is a good thing from the start.
oop is a good solution. by no means the best, but good. the thing is certain problems are inherintly procedural, some are functional, others are oop, a few are logical, and even aspect oriented. the point is easy programming methodology has a use and as such should be applied where that use is best. if you told all AI programmers to stop coding and lisp and redo it all in C, they'd laugh at you.
computer science 101: pick the right tool for the job.
i'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke or what. smalltalk is a well done OOP language. objective-c is what c++ SHOULD have been. (which for those who don't know is a smalltalk/c derivative).
the client is nice, and works great in os x. one thing you have to consider though is if your laptop gets stolen, there's a very high chance the hard drive will be wiped before the thief even gets a chance to boot your old machine. besides, if you password protect your login (which you should) then they won't get anywhere and will need to format in the first place.
in usability 101 they make you design a clock, radio, phone and cd player into one physical device. the point of the exercise is to show that it's very hard, if not impossible, to do it well. you don't seem to understand that the very people you're directing outlook towards (average users at a business) are the very people who are going to have the most usability issues with a piece of do-everything software like outlook. it's not impossible to make a set of integrated applications separate. all it takes is good design. whereas if you look at outlook, it's nearly impossible to make it easy to use due to the nature that one is cramming 5+ functions into one application. you spread out the focus, reduce the usability, and in general, increase resources consumed (since most people only do one task at a time). if you need to switch between those tasks often and this is difficult in your particular opertaing system, then that is a problem with your window manager NOT with the application.