No, SystemUIServer is the process that runs Apple's menu do-dads, like the battery indicator, volume menu, iChat menu, keychain menu, clock, spotlight menu... basically, everything in the top right corner. Except for menus that 3rd party applications add, which are always to the left of the SystemUIServer items.
Originally, developers could inject their own menus into it if they figured out Apple's undocumented API for it. However, Apple shut that down (in 10.2, I think) since an unstable menu would destabilize all of Apple's menus. They're all run in the same address space, presumably to allow Apple to cut some corners in their command-drag reordering system. After 10.2, some developers hacked it to allow them to inject other menus into it. Maybe that's what Apple is trying to stop.
About the main difference in Visual Studio 2005's C++ is that Code Insight crashes a lot. I mean a lot. Thankfully, the Whole Tomato tool mentioned elsewhere in the thread doesn't.
You've made an incorrect assumption there: That a work that contains a copyrighted smaller work will be considered unique for copyright purposes. We know this is not the case.
They're not that different. Just as there are a finite number of ways to do something, there are also a finite number of melodies that any human ear would consider music.
I'm not sure why this isn't clear. Microsoft offers both an upgrade and a "full" license for various editions of Windows. The full license is in case you bought a bare PC without Windows. Apple, on the other hand, offers only a retail upgrade of Mac OS X. This assumes you already have a license to use Mac OS, since it will only install on a Mac.
I'm not denying you can wipe your hard drive. I'm saying that the "retail" box corresponds to what most people think of as an "upgrade," except that until recently Apple didn't need anything to enforce it. Yes, granted, I worded it poorly.:)
If you installed it on a Mac, you installed it on a computer you had a license to use it on.
I'm not talking about how the discs are built, I'm talking about how the license works. Your Mac purchase includes a license for Mac OS. Any particular retail box updates one license to the version in the box. There's basically no way to buy a "full" license for Mac OS except for buying a Mac.
Not especially. There's never been a full retail copy of Mac OS X available. The most Apple made available is an all upgrade that works on any system that previously ran Mac OS (i.e. any Macintosh).
Comparisons to Microsoft are interesting, but not valid. You can not buy a Mac without a license for some variety of Mac OS.
Yes, a quick trip to google would have answered most of the ones with any substance at all. (Perhaps the people asking questions were using MSN Search?)
Honestly, I think RMS's ego has always been driving his train. It's just that for a time, it was convenient. I think it ceased to be convenient around the time that the term Open Source started to gain on Free Software.
I don't think I phrased my objection to your original post very well. What I objected to was you offering an uneducated, non-nonsensical and even slightly bigoted rant as a superior alternative to customer surveys. Yes, customer surveys are not perfect, but your rant is hardly better founded in reality. Quite the opposite.
I'll certainly agree that there are better options to surveys. How could I possibly object to that?
Err, hello? Surveys of customers is reality when it comes to customer satisfaction. Why would you possibly think otherwise? Are you really arrogant enough to propose that you know better than the consumer what he liked and didn't?
(Actually, reading the rest of the post, it seems you probably are. Nevermind.)
I realize you are trying to provide a hypothetical case here, but for the record Macs do not autoplay iPods. So the scenario you describe really is completely impossible on the Mac. There is simply no automatic attack vector on freshly mounted disks like there is on Windows.
Mind you, if there was an application there labeled "iPod Update" users might double click it. For it to be that specific, though, it would have to be malware that was not common but something written and places specifically for iPod creation. That would make it an inside job and that would put whatever virus checking procedure they might have had at risk as well.
Honestly, it probably should be an embedded system (running Linux, if you like) without a GUI or any other possible way for people on the line to wreck it.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems like your question ought to be addressed to those plugin developers: "Why haven't you created a simple way to turn off what FIrefox 2 does yet?"
No, SystemUIServer is the process that runs Apple's menu do-dads, like the battery indicator, volume menu, iChat menu, keychain menu, clock, spotlight menu... basically, everything in the top right corner. Except for menus that 3rd party applications add, which are always to the left of the SystemUIServer items.
Originally, developers could inject their own menus into it if they figured out Apple's undocumented API for it. However, Apple shut that down (in 10.2, I think) since an unstable menu would destabilize all of Apple's menus. They're all run in the same address space, presumably to allow Apple to cut some corners in their command-drag reordering system. After 10.2, some developers hacked it to allow them to inject other menus into it. Maybe that's what Apple is trying to stop.
Even so, it's a really odd pick for encryption.
About the main difference in Visual Studio 2005's C++ is that Code Insight crashes a lot. I mean a lot. Thankfully, the Whole Tomato tool mentioned elsewhere in the thread doesn't.
...and the biggest difference to developers, years of whining "Why won't your program work with 10.3?"
You've made an incorrect assumption there: That a work that contains a copyrighted smaller work will be considered unique for copyright purposes. We know this is not the case.
They're not that different. Just as there are a finite number of ways to do something, there are also a finite number of melodies that any human ear would consider music.
I'm not sure why this isn't clear. Microsoft offers both an upgrade and a "full" license for various editions of Windows. The full license is in case you bought a bare PC without Windows. Apple, on the other hand, offers only a retail upgrade of Mac OS X. This assumes you already have a license to use Mac OS, since it will only install on a Mac.
I'm not denying you can wipe your hard drive. I'm saying that the "retail" box corresponds to what most people think of as an "upgrade," except that until recently Apple didn't need anything to enforce it. Yes, granted, I worded it poorly. :)
If you installed it on a Mac, you installed it on a computer you had a license to use it on.
I'm not talking about how the discs are built, I'm talking about how the license works. Your Mac purchase includes a license for Mac OS. Any particular retail box updates one license to the version in the box. There's basically no way to buy a "full" license for Mac OS except for buying a Mac.
Not especially. There's never been a full retail copy of Mac OS X available. The most Apple made available is an all upgrade that works on any system that previously ran Mac OS (i.e. any Macintosh).
Comparisons to Microsoft are interesting, but not valid. You can not buy a Mac without a license for some variety of Mac OS.
Yes, a quick trip to google would have answered most of the ones with any substance at all. (Perhaps the people asking questions were using MSN Search?)
With a day or two between takes to regrow the stubble? Or a dozen actors, each with one chance?
Who unbloated Java? Or do you just mean everything else is equally bloated now?
Honestly, I think RMS's ego has always been driving his train. It's just that for a time, it was convenient. I think it ceased to be convenient around the time that the term Open Source started to gain on Free Software.
Hey, that was my thought!
Pluto Nash x 2?
I don't think I phrased my objection to your original post very well. What I objected to was you offering an uneducated, non-nonsensical and even slightly bigoted rant as a superior alternative to customer surveys. Yes, customer surveys are not perfect, but your rant is hardly better founded in reality. Quite the opposite.
I'll certainly agree that there are better options to surveys. How could I possibly object to that?
Err, hello? Surveys of customers is reality when it comes to customer satisfaction. Why would you possibly think otherwise? Are you really arrogant enough to propose that you know better than the consumer what he liked and didn't?
(Actually, reading the rest of the post, it seems you probably are. Nevermind.)
And you're saying that is an indicator of product quality? Evidence, please.
Dude, 24 hours is more secure for Internet Explorer.
Yeah. But looking at it, I bet it is similar enough to the same of a regular CD that most mechanisms would *try* to load it...
I realize you are trying to provide a hypothetical case here, but for the record Macs do not autoplay iPods. So the scenario you describe really is completely impossible on the Mac. There is simply no automatic attack vector on freshly mounted disks like there is on Windows.
Mind you, if there was an application there labeled "iPod Update" users might double click it. For it to be that specific, though, it would have to be malware that was not common but something written and places specifically for iPod creation. That would make it an inside job and that would put whatever virus checking procedure they might have had at risk as well.
Their response was to fix their procedure so the problem could never repeat. What's so meager?
I know it isn't. I'm just saying it probably should be. :)
Honestly, it probably should be an embedded system (running Linux, if you like) without a GUI or any other possible way for people on the line to wreck it.