Thanks for the tip. According to Google it's actually "wooly-headed" instead of "fuzzy-headed". Sig updated, and your secret is safe with me (although possibly not with the other million readers).
Um, no. Carbon is a transitional API, designed to make it easy for OS 9 apps to migrate to OS X. It's not bad, but it's procedural and requires you do to tons of stuff by hand that Cocoa gives you for free. If you're writing a new Mac OS X app, there's very little reason to use Carbon.
if I do something really profound (like Disney's Mickey mouse) and then 50 years down the line it's suddenly public property, I don't want to be alive when that happens!
That doesn't make a great deal of sense. What's so terrible about a work that you've produced entering the public domain?
It's truly amazing how many people have difficulty with this concept. Not that I really mind; because of them my credit card company can pay me 1% cash back without getting any interest payments from me.
Obviously it depends on your individual situation. College certainly can be a good investment, but it's worth considering whether a $25k/year tuition is really going to pay off compared to a $8k/year state school.
He's right on credit card debt; short of real emergencies there is absolutely no reason to carry a balance.
IMO, only the extraordinarily naive would be investing in stocks right now - maybe when the DJIA hits 5000.
And if the Dow doesn't hit 5000 then when do you get back in? After the crash in 1987 there were people who were proud of themselves because they "saw it coming" and pulled out. But then many of them stayed out of the market believing it was heading even lower, and missed the subsequent gains which were more than the losses they avoided. Market timing generally doesn't work; dollar cost averaging generally does.
Umm, saying "no thanks" to telemarketers has exactly the same effect on their bottom line as using technology to prevent the call from going through. Are you going to claim it's our moral duty to buy crap from these people so they can send their kids to college?
I don't want to be sued because some idiot misused or ran a virus infected version of my executable and bad things happened to that PC. I don't want to be sued when the same idiot installs an older software application that overwrites a bunch of MFC and ATL DLL's and then complains that "it dunnit work no more - yee haw"
You want a disclaimer of warranty, which is separate from the use-controlling and rights-removing aspects of a EULA. You don't need a EULA, you just need a notice that says "This software is provided as is, with no express or implied warranty, the publisher is not responsible for any loss or damage, etc, etc".
I do mind the circumvention parts of it, but I think they're unnecessary (considering the fact that they have never even been enforced).
Huh? The DeCSS ruling was based on the anti-circumvention clauses, and there have been lots of legal threats made on those grounds (Felten, bnetd, etc).
Yeah, and ultimately I don't have much of a problem with that. I have a lot less of a problem with the DMCA than I have with basic standard copyright law.
That's certainly a...unique viewpoint. You don't see a problem with making it illegal to distribute software that could conceivably be used for copyright infringement, even when it has perfectly legitimate uses as well? The DMCA has already been invoked against a program that twiddles a single bit in a file; hex editors and debuggers can't be far behind.
it seems that the dems at least understand the technology a little better
It's hard to say, but you're probably right. Not that this is always a benefit, since this can lead them to decide that they have enough understanding to set policy when they don't (e.g. Clipper Chip). As they say, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
Who is going to protect my right(I'm a recording artist) to make a living off of my work?
You have no such right. You have the right to try to make a living, but no right to succeed. And you certainly do not have the right to cripple all computing devices because they could potentially be used in ways that might affect your sales.
Let's just hope that the Democrats win a majority again this year -- they've been much more sensitive to technology issues than the Republicans.
Very arguable. Fritz is the obvious counterexample, but aside from that the Clinton adminstration was pushing the Clipper chip and encryption controls, and supported the CDA and DMCA. I'm not in any way suggesting that Republicans are blameless; there are good guys and bad guys on both sides of the aisle on these issues.
And the easiest way to get that is to provide technical barriers to replace the legal ones. Technical barriers like... DRM.
DRM is useless without DMCA-style laws backing it up. The problem is that there's always going to be tools like DeCSS that clearly have both legitimate and illegitimate uses. For DRM to be the slightest bit effective, these tools have to be prohibited.
It's not locked down at all. You can find the Aqua widgets, change them to your purple polka-dotted theme and go on your merry way. Apple is just not offering or supporting tools to do this.
Yeah, me too. And the reason I clicked on this thread is that I am seeing my optometrist tomorrow. If they can come up with a way for me to be unconscious during the procedure, I'll consider it, but until then I'm not doing any eye operation featuring the terms "suck", "grab", "blade", and "slice".
Regardless of the merits of Apple's actions that you cited, neither has anything to do with the APSL. Darwin is free and the UI layers aren't; this has always been the case.
Motorola lagging behind Intel is really simple market perception
Unfortunately, it's not just perception. A 1.0GHz G4 may compete favorably with a 1.4GHz P4, but against 2.8GHz the G4's better architecture is just overpowered by brute force. The megahertz gap may be an illusion, but the gigahertz gap isn't.
You'd have to pry my TiBook from my cold dead hands, but it's undeniable that Apple needs to do something about the processor situation, and soon.
No they don't. In 1997 they bought $150 million of non-voting AAPL stock, but they have since sold it.
Apple has been directly challenging MS with their "Switcher" add campaign for sometime now and nothing but updates for MS products have been released.
Yes, but MS spokesmen have been making public statements about how Mac Office sales are "disappointing" and they may have to "reevaluate" continuing support. I wouldn't be surprised if MS halts Mac development next year. If Apple management is at all competent they will have contingency plans, possibly involving OpenOffice.
Look at the economy, it has to be every one else's fault but the administration's.
You mean the economy that started tanking well before the 2000 election and which was further damaged by revalations of criminal acts which occurred during the previous administration? Yes, that's clearly Bush's fault. Come on.
Isreal basically doing what Bush moans that Iraq might do in the future
I must have missed the stories about Israel using weapons of mass destruction on civilians. Or for that matter, the stories of Israeli suicide bombers deliberately targeting Palestinian women and children.
Me either. Still holding out for the possibly mythical G5/Power4 though.
Adaptec, Nvidia, and ATI are the only manufacturers who support the Mac.
For graphics ATI and Nvidia pretty much cover the bases. Hard drives aren't Mac-specific, just drop in a Western Digital or Seagate, format it using OS X's Disk Utility, and go. What else do you need?
Why does an action that is fine for an individual to do become bad if he instead pays someone else to do for him? That's just an irrational anti-business mentality.
IIRC the MAI case involved a contractor performing maintenance on a third party's machines. Because the contractor was not the "owner" of the software, 17 USC 117 did not apply and loading software into RAM was a copyright infringement. Obviously this is a ludicrous situation; it means that you are a copyright violator if you've ever turned on someone else's computer, with or without their permission.
Fair-use is fine, as long as I am not trying to make a profit from the movie.
AFAIK, making a profit does not automatically invalidate a fair-use defense.
It would be no different than if someone were to take an O'Reilly book, replace a few words here and there, remove a chapter, and try and sell the thing as the original.
If you try to pass it off as the original, then yes it is and should be illegal because you're misrepresenting what you're selling. But if you clearly identify it as an altered copy (as CleanFlicks does), what's the problem?
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the tip. According to Google it's actually "wooly-headed" instead of "fuzzy-headed". Sig updated, and your secret is safe with me (although possibly not with the other million readers).
If you are porting your java-based massive application to Mac, than ObjC is probably out.
That's not necessarily the case. Cocoa can (mostly) transparently manipulate Java objects from Objective C. See here for more info.
Um, no. Carbon is a transitional API, designed to make it easy for OS 9 apps to migrate to OS X. It's not bad, but it's procedural and requires you do to tons of stuff by hand that Cocoa gives you for free. If you're writing a new Mac OS X app, there's very little reason to use Carbon.
That doesn't make a great deal of sense. What's so terrible about a work that you've produced entering the public domain?
It's truly amazing how many people have difficulty with this concept. Not that I really mind; because of them my credit card company can pay me 1% cash back without getting any interest payments from me.
He's right on credit card debt; short of real emergencies there is absolutely no reason to carry a balance.
And if the Dow doesn't hit 5000 then when do you get back in? After the crash in 1987 there were people who were proud of themselves because they "saw it coming" and pulled out. But then many of them stayed out of the market believing it was heading even lower, and missed the subsequent gains which were more than the losses they avoided. Market timing generally doesn't work; dollar cost averaging generally does.
Umm, saying "no thanks" to telemarketers has exactly the same effect on their bottom line as using technology to prevent the call from going through. Are you going to claim it's our moral duty to buy crap from these people so they can send their kids to college?
You want a disclaimer of warranty, which is separate from the use-controlling and rights-removing aspects of a EULA. You don't need a EULA, you just need a notice that says "This software is provided as is, with no express or implied warranty, the publisher is not responsible for any loss or damage, etc, etc".
Huh? The DeCSS ruling was based on the anti-circumvention clauses, and there have been lots of legal threats made on those grounds (Felten, bnetd, etc).
Yeah, and ultimately I don't have much of a problem with that. I have a lot less of a problem with the DMCA than I have with basic standard copyright law.
That's certainly a...unique viewpoint. You don't see a problem with making it illegal to distribute software that could conceivably be used for copyright infringement, even when it has perfectly legitimate uses as well? The DMCA has already been invoked against a program that twiddles a single bit in a file; hex editors and debuggers can't be far behind.
It's hard to say, but you're probably right. Not that this is always a benefit, since this can lead them to decide that they have enough understanding to set policy when they don't (e.g. Clipper Chip). As they say, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
Three words: Fugitive Slave Act.
You have no such right. You have the right to try to make a living, but no right to succeed. And you certainly do not have the right to cripple all computing devices because they could potentially be used in ways that might affect your sales.
Very arguable. Fritz is the obvious counterexample, but aside from that the Clinton adminstration was pushing the Clipper chip and encryption controls, and supported the CDA and DMCA. I'm not in any way suggesting that Republicans are blameless; there are good guys and bad guys on both sides of the aisle on these issues.
DRM is useless without DMCA-style laws backing it up. The problem is that there's always going to be tools like DeCSS that clearly have both legitimate and illegitimate uses. For DRM to be the slightest bit effective, these tools have to be prohibited.
It's not locked down at all. You can find the Aqua widgets, change them to your purple polka-dotted theme and go on your merry way. Apple is just not offering or supporting tools to do this.
Yeah, me too. And the reason I clicked on this thread is that I am seeing my optometrist tomorrow. If they can come up with a way for me to be unconscious during the procedure, I'll consider it, but until then I'm not doing any eye operation featuring the terms "suck", "grab", "blade", and "slice".
Regardless of the merits of Apple's actions that you cited, neither has anything to do with the APSL. Darwin is free and the UI layers aren't; this has always been the case.
Unfortunately, it's not just perception. A 1.0GHz G4 may compete favorably with a 1.4GHz P4, but against 2.8GHz the G4's better architecture is just overpowered by brute force. The megahertz gap may be an illusion, but the gigahertz gap isn't.
You'd have to pry my TiBook from my cold dead hands, but it's undeniable that Apple needs to do something about the processor situation, and soon.
No they don't. In 1997 they bought $150 million of non-voting AAPL stock, but they have since sold it.
Apple has been directly challenging MS with their "Switcher" add campaign for sometime now and nothing but updates for MS products have been released.
Yes, but MS spokesmen have been making public statements about how Mac Office sales are "disappointing" and they may have to "reevaluate" continuing support. I wouldn't be surprised if MS halts Mac development next year. If Apple management is at all competent they will have contingency plans, possibly involving OpenOffice.
You mean the economy that started tanking well before the 2000 election and which was further damaged by revalations of criminal acts which occurred during the previous administration? Yes, that's clearly Bush's fault. Come on.
Isreal basically doing what Bush moans that Iraq might do in the future
I must have missed the stories about Israel using weapons of mass destruction on civilians. Or for that matter, the stories of Israeli suicide bombers deliberately targeting Palestinian women and children.
Me either. Still holding out for the possibly mythical G5/Power4 though.
Adaptec, Nvidia, and ATI are the only manufacturers who support the Mac.
For graphics ATI and Nvidia pretty much cover the bases. Hard drives aren't Mac-specific, just drop in a Western Digital or Seagate, format it using OS X's Disk Utility, and go. What else do you need?
Why does an action that is fine for an individual to do become bad if he instead pays someone else to do for him? That's just an irrational anti-business mentality.
IIRC the MAI case involved a contractor performing maintenance on a third party's machines. Because the contractor was not the "owner" of the software, 17 USC 117 did not apply and loading software into RAM was a copyright infringement. Obviously this is a ludicrous situation; it means that you are a copyright violator if you've ever turned on someone else's computer, with or without their permission.
AFAIK, making a profit does not automatically invalidate a fair-use defense.
It would be no different than if someone were to take an O'Reilly book, replace a few words here and there, remove a chapter, and try and sell the thing as the original.
If you try to pass it off as the original, then yes it is and should be illegal because you're misrepresenting what you're selling. But if you clearly identify it as an altered copy (as CleanFlicks does), what's the problem?