This was a discussion on schools, I believe. While you're right that dust can kill a Mac as fast as a PC, you're not going to find many student rooms in a school that are that bad.
It's easy enough to say "they're great technically, but make a few spelling errors" but are you sure that's the case? I've found that, in general and over time, the single best metric for how well a person will perform a technical job is his or her writing skill.
Code written by a person who can't spell generally appears as if the person can't code either. I'm not just referring to a few spelling errors or bad edits; everyone makes those. But a resume or other document with a large number of errors is a real warning sign that too many overlook.
And if you can't spell programmer, you're certainly not going to be one on my team.
Basically, Nokia was looking for a new browser. They could have gone with open source or some sort of commercial license.
Nokia had a few options: KHTML, WebKit (which isn't KHTML, but rather a fork of KHTML), or Gecko. There's no deep hidden meaning here other than Nokia's developers found WebKit the best of the choices (whether for technical reasons or because of licensing).
No, I believe you're missing the point. It's a reasonable assumption when creating work that your copyrights will last for your lifetime. Should you happen to live longer than average, that assumption may be incorrect.
This isn't about producing more work today, this is about the logic behind producing that work years ago.
Actually, I have to disagree with this. If we're talkiing about strictly the lyrics/arrangement, it's listed as a McCartney/Lenon, and McCartney is still alive. If we're talking about the particular recording, so's Ringo. So there seems to be some benefit to extending it from 50. Granted, 100 is way too high, but 50 seems to be not enough...
Of course, that's assuming Paul and Ringo don't die before 2013, which is totally possible. Still, a "life+x years of individual(s) responsible" would seem to be a better idea than trying to predict how long people will live.
Since the transition is planned for 2006/2007, I'm thinking this will be the case. I hope so, anyway. x86/AMD64 is a lot more reasonable a hardware platform than IA32. Pretty much all legitimate technical objections to this move disappear if it is AMD64. (The exception is endianness. I hate debugging little endian dumps!)
Not to burst your bubble, but the delay on OO.o 2 is API and license, not CPU, and moving to x86 isn't going to fix that. Secondly, we have to rely on Microsoft to make Virtual PC run on the new platform at all. Finally, the big name apps running speed depends as much or more on the speed of Mac OS X. Wonderful OS that it is, it isn't especially speed-optimized for a lot of things.
Apple's iPod standard warranty (where they're not forced to do something better) is one year, but past six months you pay one way shipping.
Of course, if the anonymous troll -- err, coward -- dropped his iPod and cracked the screen, it probably isn't covered.
Warranty text follows. Yawn, I know. But in this case, it's fairly simple and clear...
Apple Computer, Inc. ("Apple") warrants the iPod and iSight product against defects in materials and workmanship for a period of one (1) year from the date of original purchase ("Warranty Period").
If a defect arises and a valid claim is received by Apple within the Warranty Period, at its option, Apple will (1) repair the product at no charge, using new or refurbished replacement parts, (2) exchange the product with a product that is new or which has been manufactured from new or serviceable used parts and is at least functionally equivalent to the original product, or (3) refund the purchase price of the product.
If a defect arises and a valid claim is received by Apple after the first one hundred and eighty (180) days of the Warranty Period, a shipping and handling charge will apply to any repair or exchange of the product undertaken by Apple.
Apple warrants replacement products or parts provided under this warranty against defects in materials and workmanship from the date of the replacement or repair for ninety (90) days or for the remaining portion of the original product's warranty, whichever provides longer coverage for you. When a product or part is exchanged, any replacement item becomes your property and the replaced item becomes Apple's property. When a refund is given, your product becomes Apple's property.
but the article wasn't about OS X as a desktop, it was OS X as a server. And OS X Server got rocked.
To be fair, the article was a bit about both. But yes, OS X as a server got rocked.
It was a very interesting article. I started the article as a Mac OS X user and remain one, but it opened my eyes a bit. With luck, Apple will eventually admit it is a problem and fix it. Mac OS X still my choice for development and small scale offline testing of web stuff, but I won't suggest it for the server room and will bring this article to the attention of anyone who does.
I think your Mac comment is a little too general, but...
My brother permanently damaged an Accord's seat by reversing the head rest as a joke (so the back was facing forward). He didn't expect it to fit. He didn't expect it to slide into place. And he certainly didn't expect that when he pulled it out he'd blow the internal mechanism that held it all in place.
Well, something, but not everything. Linux is built with GCC, and as already noted GCC isn't that great for the PowerPC. (Yet.) So what you're testing is hardware and compiler vs. hardware and compiler...
Of course, it'd be as close to meaningful as you can get.
agree with you; Intel probably becomes the new I. I mean, with everyone going off and using PowerPC in new stuff, Intel would be insane not to get some PowerPC experience somehow. It could be that in a few years, there are only two major players: x86 and PowerPC. Wouldn't Intel want a share of that? And what better way than scooping Apple from IBM?
Well, okay, scooping the Xbox from IBM would be even better, but the ship's probably sailed on that one.
However, on a less serious and more panicky level: With Motorola having gone and spun off Freescale, where is AIM going to get a new M? AIF just doesn't have the same "oomph" to it. AIF needs more oomph.
Someone wake up marketing: We have a crisis on our hands!
There is nothing in that design that makes the OS more stable.
Well, I have to disagree with this a little.
Darwin's designed to be deployable as a microkernel. Coding against a microkernel results in better code than coding against a macrokernel. Sure, it is ultimately built as a macrokernel and a lot of that safety gets compiled out, but just having targeted the more strict integration model it's somewhat more stable.
Yuck. Let me try a translation of that: Good design shines through, even if it is largely eliminated by optimizations.
(Keep in mind I'm arguing macrokernel vs. microkernel compiled as macrokernel. This is probably academic, as Linux probably has some of the same restrictions.)
There were major upgrades of Mac OS X in August 2002 (10.2), October 2003 (10.3) and April 2005 (10.4). 10.2 was either $99 or $129 (I forget); the others were $129. 10.1 was a minor update, either $29 (through Apple's up-to-date program), free (by borrowing the CD), or the cost of a CD (from a dealer).
Of course, Mac users who care to upgrade their OS every version are by definition a bit cutting edge. So they've probably bought a new Mac since 2001 (10.0), and haven't paid for all those upgrades.
So I figure the typical Mac user's probably spent abut $260 on Mac OS X upgrades over the last 3-4 years.
This is so blatantly obvious I'm shocked we keep seeing the "Mac OS X on x86!" stories. Intel is not x86. Apple is co-owner of PowerPC. Why would it shock anyone to have Intel making PowerPCs?
Well, I'll believe it when I see the official announcement.
But it's worth noting that Intel does more than just x86 chips. I could see Intel manufacturing a PowerPC-type processor. That would get Apple access to Intel's faster-paced chip development without any software redevelopment at all.
Slashdot Mirror
This was a discussion on schools, I believe. While you're right that dust can kill a Mac as fast as a PC, you're not going to find many student rooms in a school that are that bad.
There isn't, exactly... you do this by switching the monitor driver on the Monitor tab. So I guess I didn't read the post very well either...
I'd just as soon take an axe to the system giving me these problems, though. Some day maybe I will...
You didn't read the entire post. Actually, you seem to have stopped mid-way through the second sentence... :)
It's easy enough to say "they're great technically, but make a few spelling errors" but are you sure that's the case? I've found that, in general and over time, the single best metric for how well a person will perform a technical job is his or her writing skill.
Code written by a person who can't spell generally appears as if the person can't code either. I'm not just referring to a few spelling errors or bad edits; everyone makes those. But a resume or other document with a large number of errors is a real warning sign that too many overlook.
And if you can't spell programmer, you're certainly not going to be one on my team.
It has nothing to do with keeping bases covered.
Basically, Nokia was looking for a new browser. They could have gone with open source or some sort of commercial license.
Nokia had a few options: KHTML, WebKit (which isn't KHTML, but rather a fork of KHTML), or Gecko. There's no deep hidden meaning here other than Nokia's developers found WebKit the best of the choices (whether for technical reasons or because of licensing).
No, I believe you're missing the point. It's a reasonable assumption when creating work that your copyrights will last for your lifetime. Should you happen to live longer than average, that assumption may be incorrect.
This isn't about producing more work today, this is about the logic behind producing that work years ago.
If electronic voting was so unreliable, wouldn't a poll say that we did trust it?
*choke*
I wish I could say you're just being paranoid, but you just might be right...
Actually, I have to disagree with this. If we're talkiing about strictly the lyrics/arrangement, it's listed as a McCartney/Lenon, and McCartney is still alive. If we're talking about the particular recording, so's Ringo. So there seems to be some benefit to extending it from 50. Granted, 100 is way too high, but 50 seems to be not enough...
Of course, that's assuming Paul and Ringo don't die before 2013, which is totally possible. Still, a "life+x years of individual(s) responsible" would seem to be a better idea than trying to predict how long people will live.
I don't think it will be that hard to justify, actually. The argument will go something like this:
"Hey, now that Macs use Intel, can I run Mac OS X on my Windows box?"
"No. There's a lot more to a computer than just the processor it uses. A Mac is still not the same as a generic box."
Now whether or not the argument is true is up for debate, certainly, but I think it will satisfy non-techy users.
You are absolutely correct. The article makes no sense at all.
Since the transition is planned for 2006/2007, I'm thinking this will be the case. I hope so, anyway. x86/AMD64 is a lot more reasonable a hardware platform than IA32. Pretty much all legitimate technical objections to this move disappear if it is AMD64. (The exception is endianness. I hate debugging little endian dumps!)
Not to burst your bubble, but the delay on OO.o 2 is API and license, not CPU, and moving to x86 isn't going to fix that. Secondly, we have to rely on Microsoft to make Virtual PC run on the new platform at all. Finally, the big name apps running speed depends as much or more on the speed of Mac OS X. Wonderful OS that it is, it isn't especially speed-optimized for a lot of things.
Presumably, any 64-bit x86 chip they get a year from now will be AMD64.
Apple's iPod standard warranty (where they're not forced to do something better) is one year, but past six months you pay one way shipping.
Of course, if the anonymous troll -- err, coward -- dropped his iPod and cracked the screen, it probably isn't covered.
Warranty text follows. Yawn, I know. But in this case, it's fairly simple and clear...
Apple Computer, Inc. ("Apple") warrants the iPod and iSight product against defects in materials and workmanship for a period of one (1) year from the date of original purchase ("Warranty Period").
If a defect arises and a valid claim is received by Apple within the Warranty Period, at its option, Apple will (1) repair the product at no charge, using new or refurbished replacement parts, (2) exchange the product with a product that is new or which has been manufactured from new or serviceable used parts and is at least functionally equivalent to the original product, or (3) refund the purchase price of the product.
If a defect arises and a valid claim is received by Apple after the first one hundred and eighty (180) days of the Warranty Period, a shipping and handling charge will apply to any repair or exchange of the product undertaken by Apple.
Apple warrants replacement products or parts provided under this warranty against defects in materials and workmanship from the date of the replacement or repair for ninety (90) days or for the remaining portion of the original product's warranty, whichever provides longer coverage for you. When a product or part is exchanged, any replacement item becomes your property and the replaced item becomes Apple's property. When a refund is given, your product becomes Apple's property.
but the article wasn't about OS X as a desktop, it was OS X as a server. And OS X Server got rocked.
To be fair, the article was a bit about both. But yes, OS X as a server got rocked.
It was a very interesting article. I started the article as a Mac OS X user and remain one, but it opened my eyes a bit. With luck, Apple will eventually admit it is a problem and fix it. Mac OS X still my choice for development and small scale offline testing of web stuff, but I won't suggest it for the server room and will bring this article to the attention of anyone who does.
Outstanding article, really.
I think your Mac comment is a little too general, but...
My brother permanently damaged an Accord's seat by reversing the head rest as a joke (so the back was facing forward). He didn't expect it to fit. He didn't expect it to slide into place. And he certainly didn't expect that when he pulled it out he'd blow the internal mechanism that held it all in place.
Luckily, the owner didn't mind too much.
Well, something, but not everything. Linux is built with GCC, and as already noted GCC isn't that great for the PowerPC. (Yet.) So what you're testing is hardware and compiler vs. hardware and compiler...
Of course, it'd be as close to meaningful as you can get.
agree with you; Intel probably becomes the new I. I mean, with everyone going off and using PowerPC in new stuff, Intel would be insane not to get some PowerPC experience somehow. It could be that in a few years, there are only two major players: x86 and PowerPC. Wouldn't Intel want a share of that? And what better way than scooping Apple from IBM?
Well, okay, scooping the Xbox from IBM would be even better, but the ship's probably sailed on that one.
However, on a less serious and more panicky level: With Motorola having gone and spun off Freescale, where is AIM going to get a new M? AIF just doesn't have the same "oomph" to it. AIF needs more oomph.
Someone wake up marketing: We have a crisis on our hands!
There is nothing in that design that makes the OS more stable.
Well, I have to disagree with this a little.
Darwin's designed to be deployable as a microkernel. Coding against a microkernel results in better code than coding against a macrokernel. Sure, it is ultimately built as a macrokernel and a lot of that safety gets compiled out, but just having targeted the more strict integration model it's somewhat more stable.
Yuck. Let me try a translation of that: Good design shines through, even if it is largely eliminated by optimizations.
(Keep in mind I'm arguing macrokernel vs. microkernel compiled as macrokernel. This is probably academic, as Linux probably has some of the same restrictions.)
/me falls out of chair laughing
There were major upgrades of Mac OS X in August 2002 (10.2), October 2003 (10.3) and April 2005 (10.4). 10.2 was either $99 or $129 (I forget); the others were $129. 10.1 was a minor update, either $29 (through Apple's up-to-date program), free (by borrowing the CD), or the cost of a CD (from a dealer).
Of course, Mac users who care to upgrade their OS every version are by definition a bit cutting edge. So they've probably bought a new Mac since 2001 (10.0), and haven't paid for all those upgrades.
So I figure the typical Mac user's probably spent abut $260 on Mac OS X upgrades over the last 3-4 years.
Not to mention the story says in 2006. Shades of Osborne.
This is so blatantly obvious I'm shocked we keep seeing the "Mac OS X on x86!" stories. Intel is not x86. Apple is co-owner of PowerPC. Why would it shock anyone to have Intel making PowerPCs?
Well, I'll believe it when I see the official announcement.
But it's worth noting that Intel does more than just x86 chips. I could see Intel manufacturing a PowerPC-type processor. That would get Apple access to Intel's faster-paced chip development without any software redevelopment at all.