I can't speak for others except those who I've spoken to. Most of the people I know are techies. Most of them have switched to Macs over the past four or so years. Most of them not because of the logo but because they now spend less time fighting the machine to work at all and more time actually working on the stuff they care about.
Most of the people I speak to are techies (in the 30 years I've been in the IT/Telecoms/Security industry). I've met 4 who use Apple machines in all that time, two of them were American trainers on courses - yes, I'm Europe based where Macs are nowhere near as prevalent, admittedly.
I use Linux and XP myself. I do regular maintenance on both because I don't want malware or unauthorised people getting in, I apply security updates. If you believe you can get away with not doing the same on a Mac, especially with the poor security track record of Safari, then your are delusional.
Likewise, no single OS distribution - Linux, Windows, whatever - gives me all I need straight out of the box. Therefore I tweak stuff to be how I want it - this is not "fighting" the machine, this is making it work better to how I want so I save time in future.
I'm not the one yelling here. Any issues of your that I accidentally touched upon? Sorry for that. If you let someone calmer read my post you'll notice I was calmly pointing out that this MSI gadget will have its market segment, but comparing it with the iPad is just dumb because they don't appeal to the same kind of customers. Just like a Porsche and a Rolls Royce don't fight over customers because few buyers of the one would be convinced to instead buy the other due to some minor change or update.
I was yelling because you made generalised sweeping statements that had no place in fact.
If you do not believe the MSI will be a competitor to iPad, then you are even more delusional. They are both tablet computing devices, Jobs himself said iPad is a "netbook killer", he himself made the comparison.
Well, if you like the unix tools/APIs, and enjoy using a shell, but expect a bit of spit and polish in your email client, web browser
Okay, enlighten me - what does an email client in OS X give me that I cannot get in another OS? I currently use Mozilla Thunderbird. It supports IMAP and multiple mailboxes. I can theme it and extend it. It's stable. It runs on both OSes (XP and Linux) that I use. It has an intuitive GUI...
I'm not sure there's much else I need an email client to do, quite frankly.
I don't understand your question, but allow me to expand on my last response.
If the OP is crowing about OS X being built on UNIX, then what's the reason for that? The whole point of OS X is that the power at the heart of UNIX (namely putting together simple tools in interesting ways to automate certain tasks) is hidden from the average user - therefore the statement is completely irrelevant, otherwise the OP would be using a "true" UNIX-like OS.
The only reason I can come up with that he would make that statement is by saying "UNIX" he really means "not Windows", and is therefore just making an elitist statement about being different from (or better than) people who do use Windows.
I am merely asking him to explain why he thinks OS X running on a BSD UNIX core would be better than, say, it running on a Windows kernel or core.
There've been so many "iPod killers" (and then "iPhone killers") over the years, I've lost count. All of them try to outdo the Apple offering in tech specs. Guess what? Specs matter little. People don't buy iPods because they are the best technology. People don't buy Macs because they're the fastest, best machines around.
Exactly right. They buy them for the little silver Apple logo that gives them a feeling of elitism that they can push down the throats of the unwashed masses. And if you don't believe me, I dare you or any other Apple Fanboi to remove the logo from any one of your devices...
That is techie thinking and the world doesn't revolve around it. That's the kind of people who are still sad that VHS won the format war and not Betamax. That wonder why Linux doesn't dominate the desktop.
I'm a computer techie with 30+ years experience, mostly Linux/UNIX guy. I care not one iota about Linux dominating the desktop, it's good at doing some jobs I need to do just as Windows XP is good at doing other jobs I need to do.
And if my nephew comes over saying his Windows PC has stopped working, then his kind uncle fixes it and gives it back to him with Windows working on it. Please do not assume everyone who uses Linux is a zealot because then you just bring your own ignorance to the fore.
Incidentally, in that 30 years experience, the only Apple device I have ever owned is my iPod Touch - my missus gave it to me for free, it's a great little portable gadget but has given me no inclination to buy anything else by Apple... if anything, it's locked-down nature (fine for a little music player) steered me away from buying an iPhone to an Android-based HTC phone that is an open platform.
MSI thinks "wouldn't it be neat if the feature list would contain this and that and here's one more and add a kitchen sink while you're at it" Android and Linux hackers think "wouldn't it be neat if I could hack it and make it do whatever I want, given enough time and boredom?"
Why do have this inability to accept that a lot of people PREFER to customise devices the way they want to, rather than just use it as it's supplied? I don't tinker because I'm "bored", I tinker because I ENJOY it, I learn a lot while doing it and quite like all my gadgets and computers to talk to each other in OPEN, EASILY-SCALEABLE PROTOCOLS that aren't reliant on my buying everything from one evil corporation that I don't necessarily trust. WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM???
I understand the MSI will have better anti-sperm smear protection than the iPad... mind you, it will need it because being MSI-using adults, we'll be given enough responsibility to go and do what we like on the Internet, rather than being reigned in constantly by "Poppa Jobs" and his cronies.
I've actually spent a considerable amount of time setting up my iPod Touch - updating the (not free) firmware, setting up IMAP and iCal calendars, loading music and apps onto it...
I'd also expect to see fairly regular security updates to it based on the large security holes in Safari - I'd much rather "tinker" and feel a bit more secure rather than handing over the responsibility for my data over to a company that has a somewhat "lax" attitude to fixing bugs.
Isn't this a contradiction? I thought the idea of OS X was to hide command-line interfaces from the user so that any computer newbie could use them - yet here you are crowing about how it's built on an OS whose inherent power is from being able to put together powerful stuff at the command-line?
To be honest, the iPad is a great marketing ploy by Apple.
It plays right into the hands of the fanbois who regularly need something new with an Apple logo on it to bolster up their elitism - for $500 (minimum) they have something to push down the throats of the rest of us; it makes them feel good, Apple profit and the rest of us know they've just gone and bought nothing more than a bigger iPod Touch.
I just keep seeing over and over again, with my own experience and through others, what a positive experience it is to use Apple products and what a hassle it is to use non-Apple products.
I've used computers for 30+ years, never found a need to own an Apple product until my missus gave me her iPod Touch after buying a Blackberry phone late last year. For a freebie, the Touch is a neat little device, a great little music player and lets me surf the Internet/read emails if I walk into a wi-fi hotspot with nothing else but it in my pocket.
But as a result of owning the Touch, I have not bought any other Apple products, the combinations of Windows XP and Linux on my various desktop/laptop/netbook PCs still suit me just fine, thanks very much.
Oh, apologies, I did by a HTC Hero phone running Android because whilst a locked-down music player is no biggie, a locked down phone is - so being given the Touch saved me a whole heap of potentially wasted money on an iPhone.
People dismissed the iPod and iPhone, when they first came out and then each time a competitor took a step ahead. Things like, where's the camera? Where's the video? Where's the radio tuner? And still today, where's the camera flash? Where's Adobe flash? Etc., etc. And yet, they sell extremely well, dominating their respective markets. Why? Because there's something about Apple's designs that taps into people emotionally. They're fun, they're endearing, they've got style. People like that, and people pay for it.
Like I said, never paid Apple for anything and the HTC Touch is an iPhone beater for me - the interface is as good as it is on the Touch but it's not locked down to Apple, I can stick what I like on it because I'm an adult. Therefore, for me, it's an iPhone beater.
I need to find a computing device that costs twice the price of a netbook, has about 1/10 the storage capacity but a similar-screen.
It definitely must not be able to multitask and I don't want it to be able to play any Flash video.
Oh, and because I don't get away from my computer very much, I am suffering from muscle wasteage and cannot lift anything weighing more than about 3/4 kilogram.
With Google "Don't be evil" is a shibboleth that sets an aspirational goal which, as so often happens in the real world, may only be honored in the breech.
IANAL but I thought a shibboleth was a Lovecraftian horror monster from my AD&D days, then I remembered it's actually an aboleth.
However an aboleth is a malevolent slimy eel creature, so I guess the comparison to Microsoft is probably quite sound...
But I have noticed on the back of pretty much all of the boxed PC games at my local Game store that the each game's requirements now quote differently depending on whether you're running XP or Vista - and the difference for Vista is usually an additional 0.5GB of memory plus a slightly faster CPU.
So it does suggest that Vista has considerably more overhead than XP.
To be honest, I don't necessarily need every device I own to be able to run Linux, I've no problem with someone sticking on their own OS platform if it's appropriate to the device.
But what I do want to be able to do is put on the appropriate apps that allow me to use the device the way I want to.
For example, I've used Linux (and UNIX) for years, longer than I've used Windows, but only recently has it been good enough as MY primary desktop OS - mainly because with older mobile phones I've had, they've only synced email, calendars and contacts via Outlook and MS Activesync.
I have an iPod Touch my missus gave to me, it's a neat little device with some neat features - and if I walk into a wi-fi hotspot with it in my pocket, I can stop and surf the Internet a bit... great.
But it's not open enough for me and when I renewed my mobile contract recently I went for the HTC Hero running Android... fantastic! Now I've ditched MS Office and Outlook completely, it syncs with Gmail, Google Calendars and Contacts, plus I've got Mozilla Thunderbird, Sunbird and OpenOffice running on all my various Linux and XP desktop and laptop/netbook machines.
Okay, let's see if the iPad gets Firefox, Sunbird and Thunderbird so I can then install them and copy across the standard configs I use over to it - then I'll eat my words. But somehow, I don't think that will happen...
Open source software isn't inherently good or bad, but the concept of openness isn't something that always best suits the needs of most consumers or something that will always serve them well.
In what way? TCP/IP is open and from it the Internet itself emerged...
Or how about publishing important public documents only in, say, a proprietary Word document format, such that only someone who can afford to buy Microsoft Office can read them?
Or how about the field I work in, namely VoIP server security? At the moment, we (like most other telecoms companies) are moving away from proprietary protocols to the open SIP protocol - meaning that any SIP device can talk to any other SIP device or PBX?
Sorry, I see NOTHING negative in open protocols.
I think that the GP would have been better off saying computer skills more so than programming skills as there are a lot of computer users that might not know how to download and install programs.
I'm a computer user with around 30+ years experience, I work in OS security, I do shell-scripting and programming. Just before Christmas, my missus bought herself a Blackberry phone and gave me her iPod Touch. It's a neat little device but the first Apple device I've ever owned, I'm also one of these people who buys CD music and rips it himself. It even took me the best part of half a day to update the Touch firmware, install iTunes and connect to the store to download some apps to it. Why's this any easier than double-clicking an icon to install a piece of software, yet millions of people do it every day?
They're all appliances that the user doesn't attempt to install additional software on or modify in any way.
Computers used to be great big metal frames of valves and electronics installed in big rooms, completely different to modern desktop PCs - yet we call them all "computers". The iPad connects to the Internet, lets you control what you view and listen to, it lets you play games, watch video and play music. Just because it looks different doesn't mean it's not a "computer" in the broadest definition.
This probably isn't as prevalent in the younger generations, but I've worked with a lot of people who use computers and don't understand how to do this things.
Agreed, and maybe it's because they don't know how to update software, install virus checkers and stay away from dodgy Internet sites that is the biggest problem...
They're all appliances that the user doesn't attempt to install additional software on or modify in any way.
That's not strictly true - potentially anything you download from the Internet could be a piece of malware that can run on the device you've downloaded it to.
Free software doesn't guarantee that it's virus free. I recall a while back that someone had slipped some form of malware into the Vietnamese language pack for Firefox without anyone noticing. I'm also free to grab an open source program and add malware of my own and redistribute a malware-laden binary and fool users into downloading it. They lack the computing skills to know how to use MD5 or even the knowledge of what MD5 actually is. I also recall that at one point there was an exploit where arbitrary code buried within a particular image format would execute due to vulnerabilities in the software used to display it.
If I put on my "paranoid" head for one moment, then strictly speaking you should never download and run any software from an untrusted source - this is why you have Public Key Encryption and, as you say, MD5 checksumming to help you in determining the trustworthiness of the source. That's the same for open or closed source software - but being able to examine the source code does give you an extra guarantee that is not there with closed source.
Besides which, I'm no "Open Source Nazi", there's room for both free and commercial software, even I have a handful of paid for and registered Windows apps I cannot do without!
DRM executed properly is a good idea. It allows the owners to control their creation. In the past, it has always been too obtrusive. Now that it will be transparent to users, is it so evil?
Yes.
How about spending the R&D dollars on creating elaborate DRM mechanisms, the EvilCorps cut the price of the actual products, or make better quality products for the same money?
And how about as a consumer, I get the option of legally buying something just ONCE but the ability to listen to it or watch it free of charge whenever I want?
Or how about I get the option of loading a PC game I've legally bought onto a laptop that has no built in optical drive and NOT having to resort to a "No CD" crack in order to not have to carry the game disk and an external CD drive about with me all of the time?
The EvilCorps can go do what they hell they like to software, video and music pirates but I have no intention of being inconvenienced or abused as a legal user.
Create a completely open environment like what has been so much of a success in desktop linux ( some people here won't realize that's sarcasm ). o I'm Linux user, not fanboi, but I need to correct your statement somewhat.
Linux's open environment has made it a great success in the server market (where it has almost completely displaced traditional commercial UNIX servers) and in the embedded market (where more consumer devices than either you or I could ever fully visualise) are running it.
Linux has made some small inroads into the desktop (not that it bothers most real users of it anyway) but the fact is that whilst the source code to Windows is closed, it has good programming support from Microsoft meaning that you can code and install pretty much what you want on it - therefore in that respect it's already a fairly open platform.
Presumably this is the new Apple security strategy then - namely, rather than fixing bugs on an OS that runs on a computer, the solution is to not call the device a computer... brilliant in it's evil geniusness!
So as a security consultant I guess you lose your job if a system is stable huh?
Sorry, I don't follow the logic that led you to make the above statement - besides which, just because a system is stable does not mean it's secure or not running a piece of malware somewhere.
This is the real problem I have with the fanbois, as it happens. Too many of you think you know what you're talking about but then end up getting out of your depth and making some very strange statements. How about just saying "I don't know" just like I do when someone asks me what the problem with their car is.... there, at least I made use of your mechanic analogy anyway.
I am an experienced user, and I've also reinstalled windows on account of the same malware you're talking about so many times that I feel like Microsoft should pay me for my lost time.
Take that one up with Steve Ballmer, that's not something I can respond to.
Your argument doesn't hold up, because open access also means more access for the people that want to dump malware on your system.
Nope, sorry, just took a look at my original posting, not once did I use the term "open access". It is entirely possible to have an "open source" system (e.g. one of the many Linux servers I do security on) which is almost completely locked down to access from external parties (e.g. the very job I do). Again, you need to go educate yourself a bit more.
And maybe there are more that don't, but that didn't stop every windows system I've ever run from ending up crippled by people out to make a buck, or prove they have some power.
Again, sorry, I don't understand this statement whatsoever or indeed see its relevance to this discussion.
So you're saying that Windows is deliberately crippled by people who want to make money from it? Well, yes, Microsoft have registration keys and WGA running to restrict pirated keys - I've never used OS X but I'm assuming Apple must do something similar with every boxed OS they sell. Again, this maybe something you want to put to Steve Ballmer... I do use XP regularly but I'm mostly a Linux/UNIX guy.
Even so, I will defend Windows XP somewhat because I don't recall the last time I got a piece of malware on it - I don't use IE or Outlook, I virus scan it once a week and stay away from pirated software, that's about it. Plus it runs a whole heap of OSS software and the registration key is valid, so I can't say mine's crippled in any way...
The pad is aimed at a sector of society that doesn't care about everything we complain about here.
In which case, why make so much hoohah about it here?
They just want an appliance, like a fridge. Like they did with the iPhone apple is again doing a good job of making the technology accessible to the masses.
I thought Apple have made a particularly bad job of the iPhone. It's too restrictive and locked down. I just got myself a HTC Hero running Android, it just works and is all open communications, so it syncs nicely with my Linux and Windows PCs.
I do own an iPod Touch, it's a nice little music player that does a bit of Internet surfing, but the HTC's interface is just as good and nowhere near as locked down.
Were I a consultant I'd rather be advising people on a few limited things to do to close holes in a carefully designed system than scaring the hell out of them with the vast ocean of possible problems and tenuous patches
Erm, how can you close holes in an iPad - it's a closed system. You are entirely reliant upon suckling at Steve Job's milky teat in the hope he fixes it for you with some new firmware you can download - which, presumably, he will charge you for, like he did with OS3.1 upgrades on the Touch... Funny that, I'm no MS fanboi but I've never paid them for a Service Pack.
and the cat and mouse game of running from program to program to avoid malware.
I'll leave you with this one - this seems a random collection of phrases, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here.
Don't necessarily ignore any of the other advice here but with the last two Gentoo Linux builds I've done using Xorg Server v1.6.5, the detection was pretty much automatic.
One was an ATI HD 3200 based laptop which, once I'd put the proprietary ATI drivers in place, didn't need anything added to xorg.conf, plus it detects the external display fine as well when plugged in; the other was an NVIDIA 7600GT based desktop which, again when I put the NVIDIA proprietary drivers in place, worked with only a few lines in xorg.conf, and that was because I had to get xorg to ignore the built in graphics card on the PC mobo which the BIOS wouldn't let me physically disable.
It is just worth starting Xorg and seeing what happens - if it's still not write, then start building an xorg.conf.
Wow, I really must get myself some of those happy drugs racing around your system!
The kind of "freedom" that is the hallmark of Richard Stallman, GNU and EFF is very simple -if you have programming skills you are free. Otherwise, you are, well, unfit.
Erm, precisely what "programming skills" do you need to hit a download link on a web page to get yourself a copy of Firefox, OpenOffice.org, etc. etc.? Have you not heard of "pre-compiled binary installation packages"?
The basic problem is that the "open" computing platform has pretty much failed the consumer.
Those are GOOD drugs!
Pray tell me, what "open" embedded platforms are likely to be running in that DVD player in your lounge? Or in your car's engine management system? Or that widescreen TV of yours? Or the wireless router that let's you connect to the Internet? Or in all those other "consumer" devices you now own?
No matter what security features are implemented in software, consumers will circumvent them to obtain what they believe they want: free software, porn, money, etc. The end result is a compromised computer that is no longer completely under the control of the user. And such computers can have a very negative impact on all users everywhere.
Sorry, please explain how downloading free software or porno automatically compromises your computer? If anything, downloading close-sourced cracked commercial software that's attached to a virus is a likelier cause.
And not that I would call myself in any way a "porno expert", I don't recall anybody yet being able to embed a virus in a non- self-executable data file like a mucky picture or video...
The average consumer has no way to utilise the sort of programming freedom that Stallman would like to see people have.
No, of course not. And that's why Firefox hasn't captured around 30% of browser usage on the Internet... man, you're one spaced-out monkey!
And if an application is found to be bad after it is released it can be "recalled".
I assume by "recalled" you mean "disabled" - in the same way that I might say "keep paying me your software rental money or your OS and all its applications will be... ahem... 'recalled'". Just like being mugged by a brick wrapped in a piece of soft fur...
If we had this today for Windows there would be no spam epidemic, no malware and little or no phishing.
Wow! You *REALLY* believe this, don't you? So Mac OS X doesn't get any SPAM emails, not ever? And no OS X user has ever been phished via a web browser? I think when you come down a little, you need to get yourself on "Basic Computing 101", my friend...
We are certainly going to see less and less "freedom" for users in the name of keeping out the bad stuff.
Right, I'm getting a bit bored with this science fiction dribble coming out of your drug-addled brain so let me put it simply:
1. Open Source software (i.e. "free software" simplistically for you) means that the source code is subject to constant peer review - this means lots of little eyes looking all over it a lot of the time, thus making it virtually impossible to put any malware in it.
2. Due to the above statement, you can therefore consider viruses and malware to be *CLOSED SOURCE* software - otherwise some spotty geek with access to the source code would see the naughtly little things being done by the malware and let everyone else know...
3. Therefore, if you do not have access to the source code of a Windows OS or latest piece of Apple Eyecandyware, then you do not know what is going on under the surface.
4. Therefore, in a closed system, you are at more risk of malware.
Case closed, now please pop some downers and join us back here in the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
I see... so you mean to tell me that your love of OS X has absolutely nothing to do with the "eye candy" of the user interface.
Also, you clumsily avoided my original question - what more do you need an email client to do that I did not cover?
...to "Ramming home the news that Apple have released a new product this week, Part 234".
Thanks.
I can't speak for others except those who I've spoken to. Most of the people I know are techies. Most of them have switched to Macs over the past four or so years. Most of them not because of the logo but because they now spend less time fighting the machine to work at all and more time actually working on the stuff they care about.
Most of the people I speak to are techies (in the 30 years I've been in the IT/Telecoms/Security industry). I've met 4 who use Apple machines in all that time, two of them were American trainers on courses - yes, I'm Europe based where Macs are nowhere near as prevalent, admittedly.
I use Linux and XP myself. I do regular maintenance on both because I don't want malware or unauthorised people getting in, I apply security updates. If you believe you can get away with not doing the same on a Mac, especially with the poor security track record of Safari, then your are delusional.
Likewise, no single OS distribution - Linux, Windows, whatever - gives me all I need straight out of the box. Therefore I tweak stuff to be how I want it - this is not "fighting" the machine, this is making it work better to how I want so I save time in future.
I'm not the one yelling here. Any issues of your that I accidentally touched upon? Sorry for that. If you let someone calmer read my post you'll notice I was calmly pointing out that this MSI gadget will have its market segment, but comparing it with the iPad is just dumb because they don't appeal to the same kind of customers. Just like a Porsche and a Rolls Royce don't fight over customers because few buyers of the one would be convinced to instead buy the other due to some minor change or update.
I was yelling because you made generalised sweeping statements that had no place in fact.
If you do not believe the MSI will be a competitor to iPad, then you are even more delusional. They are both tablet computing devices, Jobs himself said iPad is a "netbook killer", he himself made the comparison.
Well, if you like the unix tools/APIs, and enjoy using a shell, but expect a bit of spit and polish in your email client, web browser
Okay, enlighten me - what does an email client in OS X give me that I cannot get in another OS? I currently use Mozilla Thunderbird. It supports IMAP and multiple mailboxes. I can theme it and extend it. It's stable. It runs on both OSes (XP and Linux) that I use. It has an intuitive GUI...
I'm not sure there's much else I need an email client to do, quite frankly.
I don't understand your question, but allow me to expand on my last response.
If the OP is crowing about OS X being built on UNIX, then what's the reason for that? The whole point of OS X is that the power at the heart of UNIX (namely putting together simple tools in interesting ways to automate certain tasks) is hidden from the average user - therefore the statement is completely irrelevant, otherwise the OP would be using a "true" UNIX-like OS.
The only reason I can come up with that he would make that statement is by saying "UNIX" he really means "not Windows", and is therefore just making an elitist statement about being different from (or better than) people who do use Windows.
I am merely asking him to explain why he thinks OS X running on a BSD UNIX core would be better than, say, it running on a Windows kernel or core.
There've been so many "iPod killers" (and then "iPhone killers") over the years, I've lost count. All of them try to outdo the Apple offering in tech specs. Guess what? Specs matter little. People don't buy iPods because they are the best technology. People don't buy Macs because they're the fastest, best machines around.
Exactly right. They buy them for the little silver Apple logo that gives them a feeling of elitism that they can push down the throats of the unwashed masses. And if you don't believe me, I dare you or any other Apple Fanboi to remove the logo from any one of your devices...
That is techie thinking and the world doesn't revolve around it. That's the kind of people who are still sad that VHS won the format war and not Betamax. That wonder why Linux doesn't dominate the desktop.
I'm a computer techie with 30+ years experience, mostly Linux/UNIX guy. I care not one iota about Linux dominating the desktop, it's good at doing some jobs I need to do just as Windows XP is good at doing other jobs I need to do.
And if my nephew comes over saying his Windows PC has stopped working, then his kind uncle fixes it and gives it back to him with Windows working on it. Please do not assume everyone who uses Linux is a zealot because then you just bring your own ignorance to the fore.
Incidentally, in that 30 years experience, the only Apple device I have ever owned is my iPod Touch - my missus gave it to me for free, it's a great little portable gadget but has given me no inclination to buy anything else by Apple... if anything, it's locked-down nature (fine for a little music player) steered me away from buying an iPhone to an Android-based HTC phone that is an open platform.
MSI thinks "wouldn't it be neat if the feature list would contain this and that and here's one more and add a kitchen sink while you're at it"
Android and Linux hackers think "wouldn't it be neat if I could hack it and make it do whatever I want, given enough time and boredom?"
Why do have this inability to accept that a lot of people PREFER to customise devices the way they want to, rather than just use it as it's supplied? I don't tinker because I'm "bored", I tinker because I ENJOY it, I learn a lot while doing it and quite like all my gadgets and computers to talk to each other in OPEN, EASILY-SCALEABLE PROTOCOLS that aren't reliant on my buying everything from one evil corporation that I don't necessarily trust. WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM???
I understand the MSI will have better anti-sperm smear protection than the iPad... mind you, it will need it because being MSI-using adults, we'll be given enough responsibility to go and do what we like on the Internet, rather than being reigned in constantly by "Poppa Jobs" and his cronies.
I've actually spent a considerable amount of time setting up my iPod Touch - updating the (not free) firmware, setting up IMAP and iCal calendars, loading music and apps onto it...
I'd also expect to see fairly regular security updates to it based on the large security holes in Safari - I'd much rather "tinker" and feel a bit more secure rather than handing over the responsibility for my data over to a company that has a somewhat "lax" attitude to fixing bugs.
I like MacOS. Especially because it's UNIX.
Isn't this a contradiction? I thought the idea of OS X was to hide command-line interfaces from the user so that any computer newbie could use them - yet here you are crowing about how it's built on an OS whose inherent power is from being able to put together powerful stuff at the command-line?
To be honest, the iPad is a great marketing ploy by Apple.
It plays right into the hands of the fanbois who regularly need something new with an Apple logo on it to bolster up their elitism - for $500 (minimum) they have something to push down the throats of the rest of us; it makes them feel good, Apple profit and the rest of us know they've just gone and bought nothing more than a bigger iPod Touch.
I just keep seeing over and over again, with my own experience and through others, what a positive experience it is to use Apple products and what a hassle it is to use non-Apple products.
I've used computers for 30+ years, never found a need to own an Apple product until my missus gave me her iPod Touch after buying a Blackberry phone late last year. For a freebie, the Touch is a neat little device, a great little music player and lets me surf the Internet/read emails if I walk into a wi-fi hotspot with nothing else but it in my pocket.
But as a result of owning the Touch, I have not bought any other Apple products, the combinations of Windows XP and Linux on my various desktop/laptop/netbook PCs still suit me just fine, thanks very much.
Oh, apologies, I did by a HTC Hero phone running Android because whilst a locked-down music player is no biggie, a locked down phone is - so being given the Touch saved me a whole heap of potentially wasted money on an iPhone.
People dismissed the iPod and iPhone, when they first came out and then each time a competitor took a step ahead. Things like, where's the camera? Where's the video? Where's the radio tuner? And still today, where's the camera flash? Where's Adobe flash? Etc., etc. And yet, they sell extremely well, dominating their respective markets. Why? Because there's something about Apple's designs that taps into people emotionally. They're fun, they're endearing, they've got style. People like that, and people pay for it.
Like I said, never paid Apple for anything and the HTC Touch is an iPhone beater for me - the interface is as good as it is on the Touch but it's not locked down to Apple, I can stick what I like on it because I'm an adult. Therefore, for me, it's an iPhone beater.
Wow! But is it possible to be a virgin in two things simultaneously?
I need to find a computing device that costs twice the price of a netbook, has about 1/10 the storage capacity but a similar-screen.
It definitely must not be able to multitask and I don't want it to be able to play any Flash video.
Oh, and because I don't get away from my computer very much, I am suffering from muscle wasteage and cannot lift anything weighing more than about 3/4 kilogram.
Can somebody please assist? Thanks.
With Google "Don't be evil" is a shibboleth that sets an aspirational goal which, as so often happens in the real world, may only be honored in the breech.
IANAL but I thought a shibboleth was a Lovecraftian horror monster from my AD&D days, then I remembered it's actually an aboleth.
However an aboleth is a malevolent slimy eel creature, so I guess the comparison to Microsoft is probably quite sound...
I can admit to never having used Vista.
But I have noticed on the back of pretty much all of the boxed PC games at my local Game store that the each game's requirements now quote differently depending on whether you're running XP or Vista - and the difference for Vista is usually an additional 0.5GB of memory plus a slightly faster CPU.
So it does suggest that Vista has considerably more overhead than XP.
Well at least that clears things up for me - I definitely won't be paying $500 for an interim test platform then.
To be honest, I don't necessarily need every device I own to be able to run Linux, I've no problem with someone sticking on their own OS platform if it's appropriate to the device.
But what I do want to be able to do is put on the appropriate apps that allow me to use the device the way I want to.
For example, I've used Linux (and UNIX) for years, longer than I've used Windows, but only recently has it been good enough as MY primary desktop OS - mainly because with older mobile phones I've had, they've only synced email, calendars and contacts via Outlook and MS Activesync.
I have an iPod Touch my missus gave to me, it's a neat little device with some neat features - and if I walk into a wi-fi hotspot with it in my pocket, I can stop and surf the Internet a bit... great.
But it's not open enough for me and when I renewed my mobile contract recently I went for the HTC Hero running Android... fantastic! Now I've ditched MS Office and Outlook completely, it syncs with Gmail, Google Calendars and Contacts, plus I've got Mozilla Thunderbird, Sunbird and OpenOffice running on all my various Linux and XP desktop and laptop/netbook machines.
Okay, let's see if the iPad gets Firefox, Sunbird and Thunderbird so I can then install them and copy across the standard configs I use over to it - then I'll eat my words. But somehow, I don't think that will happen...
Open source software isn't inherently good or bad, but the concept of openness isn't something that always best suits the needs of most consumers or something that will always serve them well.
In what way? TCP/IP is open and from it the Internet itself emerged...
Or how about publishing important public documents only in, say, a proprietary Word document format, such that only someone who can afford to buy Microsoft Office can read them?
Or how about the field I work in, namely VoIP server security? At the moment, we (like most other telecoms companies) are moving away from proprietary protocols to the open SIP protocol - meaning that any SIP device can talk to any other SIP device or PBX?
Sorry, I see NOTHING negative in open protocols.
I think that the GP would have been better off saying computer skills more so than programming skills as there are a lot of computer users that might not know how to download and install programs.
I'm a computer user with around 30+ years experience, I work in OS security, I do shell-scripting and programming. Just before Christmas, my missus bought herself a Blackberry phone and gave me her iPod Touch. It's a neat little device but the first Apple device I've ever owned, I'm also one of these people who buys CD music and rips it himself. It even took me the best part of half a day to update the Touch firmware, install iTunes and connect to the store to download some apps to it. Why's this any easier than double-clicking an icon to install a piece of software, yet millions of people do it every day?
They're all appliances that the user doesn't attempt to install additional software on or modify in any way.
Computers used to be great big metal frames of valves and electronics installed in big rooms, completely different to modern desktop PCs - yet we call them all "computers". The iPad connects to the Internet, lets you control what you view and listen to, it lets you play games, watch video and play music. Just because it looks different doesn't mean it's not a "computer" in the broadest definition.
This probably isn't as prevalent in the younger generations, but I've worked with a lot of people who use computers and don't understand how to do this things.
Agreed, and maybe it's because they don't know how to update software, install virus checkers and stay away from dodgy Internet sites that is the biggest problem...
They're all appliances that the user doesn't attempt to install additional software on or modify in any way.
That's not strictly true - potentially anything you download from the Internet could be a piece of malware that can run on the device you've downloaded it to.
Free software doesn't guarantee that it's virus free. I recall a while back that someone had slipped some form of malware into the Vietnamese language pack for Firefox without anyone noticing. I'm also free to grab an open source program and add malware of my own and redistribute a malware-laden binary and fool users into downloading it. They lack the computing skills to know how to use MD5 or even the knowledge of what MD5 actually is. I also recall that at one point there was an exploit where arbitrary code buried within a particular image format would execute due to vulnerabilities in the software used to display it.
If I put on my "paranoid" head for one moment, then strictly speaking you should never download and run any software from an untrusted source - this is why you have Public Key Encryption and, as you say, MD5 checksumming to help you in determining the trustworthiness of the source. That's the same for open or closed source software - but being able to examine the source code does give you an extra guarantee that is not there with closed source.
Besides which, I'm no "Open Source Nazi", there's room for both free and commercial software, even I have a handful of paid for and registered Windows apps I cannot do without!
But there is no excuse for locking down
DRM executed properly is a good idea. It allows the owners to control their creation. In the past, it has always been too obtrusive. Now that it will be transparent to users, is it so evil?
Yes.
How about spending the R&D dollars on creating elaborate DRM mechanisms, the EvilCorps cut the price of the actual products, or make better quality products for the same money?
And how about as a consumer, I get the option of legally buying something just ONCE but the ability to listen to it or watch it free of charge whenever I want?
Or how about I get the option of loading a PC game I've legally bought onto a laptop that has no built in optical drive and NOT having to resort to a "No CD" crack in order to not have to carry the game disk and an external CD drive about with me all of the time?
The EvilCorps can go do what they hell they like to software, video and music pirates but I have no intention of being inconvenienced or abused as a legal user.
Create a completely open environment like what has been so much of a success in desktop linux ( some people here won't realize that's sarcasm ).
o
I'm Linux user, not fanboi, but I need to correct your statement somewhat.
Linux's open environment has made it a great success in the server market (where it has almost completely displaced traditional commercial UNIX servers) and in the embedded market (where more consumer devices than either you or I could ever fully visualise) are running it.
Linux has made some small inroads into the desktop (not that it bothers most real users of it anyway) but the fact is that whilst the source code to Windows is closed, it has good programming support from Microsoft meaning that you can code and install pretty much what you want on it - therefore in that respect it's already a fairly open platform.
Presumably this is the new Apple security strategy then - namely, rather than fixing bugs on an OS that runs on a computer, the solution is to not call the device a computer... brilliant in it's evil geniusness!
... iThink500DollarsIsFarTooExpensiveForSomethingSoLockedDown.
Or are we using that one for Apple's mobile telephone thingy?
So as a security consultant I guess you lose your job if a system is stable huh?
Sorry, I don't follow the logic that led you to make the above statement - besides which, just because a system is stable does not mean it's secure or not running a piece of malware somewhere.
This is the real problem I have with the fanbois, as it happens. Too many of you think you know what you're talking about but then end up getting out of your depth and making some very strange statements. How about just saying "I don't know" just like I do when someone asks me what the problem with their car is.... there, at least I made use of your mechanic analogy anyway.
I am an experienced user, and I've also reinstalled windows on account of the same malware you're talking about so many times that I feel like Microsoft should pay me for my lost time.
Take that one up with Steve Ballmer, that's not something I can respond to.
Your argument doesn't hold up, because open access also means more access for the people that want to dump malware on your system.
Nope, sorry, just took a look at my original posting, not once did I use the term "open access". It is entirely possible to have an "open source" system (e.g. one of the many Linux servers I do security on) which is almost completely locked down to access from external parties (e.g. the very job I do). Again, you need to go educate yourself a bit more.
And maybe there are more that don't, but that didn't stop every windows system I've ever run from ending up crippled by people out to make a buck, or prove they have some power.
Again, sorry, I don't understand this statement whatsoever or indeed see its relevance to this discussion.
So you're saying that Windows is deliberately crippled by people who want to make money from it? Well, yes, Microsoft have registration keys and WGA running to restrict pirated keys - I've never used OS X but I'm assuming Apple must do something similar with every boxed OS they sell. Again, this maybe something you want to put to Steve Ballmer... I do use XP regularly but I'm mostly a Linux/UNIX guy.
Even so, I will defend Windows XP somewhat because I don't recall the last time I got a piece of malware on it - I don't use IE or Outlook, I virus scan it once a week and stay away from pirated software, that's about it. Plus it runs a whole heap of OSS software and the registration key is valid, so I can't say mine's crippled in any way...
The pad is aimed at a sector of society that doesn't care about everything we complain about here.
In which case, why make so much hoohah about it here?
They just want an appliance, like a fridge. Like they did with the iPhone apple is again doing a good job of making the technology accessible to the masses.
I thought Apple have made a particularly bad job of the iPhone. It's too restrictive and locked down. I just got myself a HTC Hero running Android, it just works and is all open communications, so it syncs nicely with my Linux and Windows PCs.
I do own an iPod Touch, it's a nice little music player that does a bit of Internet surfing, but the HTC's interface is just as good and nowhere near as locked down.
Were I a consultant I'd rather be advising people on a few limited things to do to close holes in a carefully designed system than scaring the hell out of them with the vast ocean of possible problems and tenuous patches
Erm, how can you close holes in an iPad - it's a closed system. You are entirely reliant upon suckling at Steve Job's milky teat in the hope he fixes it for you with some new firmware you can download - which, presumably, he will charge you for, like he did with OS3.1 upgrades on the Touch... Funny that, I'm no MS fanboi but I've never paid them for a Service Pack.
and the cat and mouse game of running from program to program to avoid malware.
I'll leave you with this one - this seems a random collection of phrases, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here.
Don't necessarily ignore any of the other advice here but with the last two Gentoo Linux builds I've done using Xorg Server v1.6.5, the detection was pretty much automatic.
One was an ATI HD 3200 based laptop which, once I'd put the proprietary ATI drivers in place, didn't need anything added to xorg.conf, plus it detects the external display fine as well when plugged in; the other was an NVIDIA 7600GT based desktop which, again when I put the NVIDIA proprietary drivers in place, worked with only a few lines in xorg.conf, and that was because I had to get xorg to ignore the built in graphics card on the PC mobo which the BIOS wouldn't let me physically disable.
It is just worth starting Xorg and seeing what happens - if it's still not write, then start building an xorg.conf.
Wow, I really must get myself some of those happy drugs racing around your system!
The kind of "freedom" that is the hallmark of Richard Stallman, GNU and EFF is very simple -if you have programming skills you are free. Otherwise, you are, well, unfit.
Erm, precisely what "programming skills" do you need to hit a download link on a web page to get yourself a copy of Firefox, OpenOffice.org, etc. etc.? Have you not heard of "pre-compiled binary installation packages"?
The basic problem is that the "open" computing platform has pretty much failed the consumer.
Those are GOOD drugs!
Pray tell me, what "open" embedded platforms are likely to be running in that DVD player in your lounge? Or in your car's engine management system? Or that widescreen TV of yours? Or the wireless router that let's you connect to the Internet? Or in all those other "consumer" devices you now own?
No matter what security features are implemented in software, consumers will circumvent them to obtain what they believe they want: free software, porn, money, etc. The end result is a compromised computer that is no longer completely under the control of the user. And such computers can have a very negative impact on all users everywhere.
Sorry, please explain how downloading free software or porno automatically compromises your computer? If anything, downloading close-sourced cracked commercial software that's attached to a virus is a likelier cause.
And not that I would call myself in any way a "porno expert", I don't recall anybody yet being able to embed a virus in a non- self-executable data file like a mucky picture or video...
The average consumer has no way to utilise the sort of programming freedom that Stallman would like to see people have.
No, of course not. And that's why Firefox hasn't captured around 30% of browser usage on the Internet... man, you're one spaced-out monkey!
And if an application is found to be bad after it is released it can be "recalled".
I assume by "recalled" you mean "disabled" - in the same way that I might say "keep paying me your software rental money or your OS and all its applications will be... ahem... 'recalled'". Just like being mugged by a brick wrapped in a piece of soft fur...
If we had this today for Windows there would be no spam epidemic, no malware and little or no phishing.
Wow! You *REALLY* believe this, don't you? So Mac OS X doesn't get any SPAM emails, not ever? And no OS X user has ever been phished via a web browser? I think when you come down a little, you need to get yourself on "Basic Computing 101", my friend...
We are certainly going to see less and less "freedom" for users in the name of keeping out the bad stuff.
Right, I'm getting a bit bored with this science fiction dribble coming out of your drug-addled brain so let me put it simply:
1. Open Source software (i.e. "free software" simplistically for you) means that the source code is subject to constant peer review - this means lots of little eyes looking all over it a lot of the time, thus making it virtually impossible to put any malware in it.
2. Due to the above statement, you can therefore consider viruses and malware to be *CLOSED SOURCE* software - otherwise some spotty geek with access to the source code would see the naughtly little things being done by the malware and let everyone else know...
3. Therefore, if you do not have access to the source code of a Windows OS or latest piece of Apple Eyecandyware, then you do not know what is going on under the surface.
4. Therefore, in a closed system, you are at more risk of malware.
Case closed, now please pop some downers and join us back here in the real world.