I sorry but what's the point. Companies wih monopolies leveraging their monopolies to expand into new markets? The hell you say. Who'd a thunk it possible. That like posting an article that a lion killed a zebra. I am apathetic to the plight of the zebra because I am not on the menu. Equally, I could care less about Google's problems because I can always change the default search engine. Moreover, I don't even use Windows or IE.
For the record, I do use Google search engine 99% of the time more out of habit rather than any loyalty. Although, I don't like all the crap (buzzlogs, enterainment news, and the like) that is on Yahoo and MSN website.
I am not the type to place anyone on a pedestal, but damn, good job Jobs. Man, that reality distortion field was must have been set so high, those negotiators didn't have a chance. They must have believe in free love, down with big brother, and Macs are the faster PC's on Earth. Later, when the effects wore off, they were dumbfounded when they realized that the terms of the contract were the same as before.
Ah yet another prediction that Mac OS X is going to be swarm with viruses. Yawn!!! What is this, the 10000th one? This article should be modded -1 Redundant. Here the theme, "As soon as its it marketshare get bigger, the viruses will come. Apple won't be ready. You'll see". But, if I go online and search today for Mac OS X viruses, I can't find any information about specific viruses or stories about infection. Hell, I couldn't infect my Mac if I wanted too!!! It is obvious we are still in hypothetical land. Equally obvious, virus writers are going to attack the platform with the largest marketshare and Apple has been in single digits for the past 8 years. So, why am I going to spring money for antivirus subscription when there is no virii out there. But, I'll bet one day that they will be right. Shit, a broken watch is right twice a day. Until then, I going to keep on computing with an extra $60 in my pocket.
Has anyone ever consider that a pyramid might actually be the easiest thing to build? Lacking advanced materials (steel) and an in-depth knowledge of physics, they are not going to build skyscrapers or even a medieval cathedral. I don't know jack about architecture but I can pile a bunch of bricks up in the shape of a pyramid.
Oh really, did she get those teeth fixed? I can't believe a women so smart hasn't heard of braces! Mod me offtopic, see if I care. It needed to be said!!!
I finally figure out how he comes up with these illogical predictions. Cringley is in insane!!! The first line says it all.
Over the past three weeks, we've laid out in this column
He uses WE to describe himself but he is the only one writing the articles. He obviously has multiple personality disorder. There is more than one person in there and apparently no one is home. Though, he could also think he is a Borg, but that too is equally insane.
Given that core-duo are so much faster than the g4, I figured Apple would drop the price on the PowerPC models. Guess not!! Yeah, I heard about the emminent demise of the 12" Model. But, with such the delay we are seeing in the Macbook, they must be bringing out a new design. One where the the weight will be in the 4 pound range. I suspect that there won't much a need for a 12" notebook with that out.
Wow, he got all that from Apple release of Boot Camp. His article me of another contemporary article of a man who traded up to apartment from a red paper-clip. I just thought the release was becasue Apple wanted to sell more Macs and sales are down due to the transition. Whether via virtualization or Apple directly using Windows API, Windows program will run on top of Mac OSX in the future. The question with virtualization is speed and direct access to hardware. Alternatively, using Windows API raises the question of appearance and consistency of interface. Apple's interface is not exactly like Windows. Menus are different and located in different places. Borders are also very different. In addition, keyboard combinations will be different. For example, the difference between using alt-f4 versus Command-Q. So, Windows programs are just going to bring in inconsistency to Mac OSX that Apple goes through great pains to avoid. It will screw up people who have become accustomed to certain way thing work in Mac OS X and mess up their work flows. One other problem is it will discourage developer from Mac OSX native programs. I am sure Apple doesn't wants that.
Ah yes, you use the force to describe the mass. I am familiar with those experiment. But, they relied on macroscopic force to describe mass which may be problematic when applied to a single electron and the spectra which come from the discrete energy level that arises from the Hamiltonian that assumes mass is invariant (which it probally is compared to the potential). So again, what is mass? You mention distance which in our own perception is the separation between two points. How do you phyically describe mass for an electron or even something smaller than that quarks. Granted, we hold it to be intrinsic like spin. It is a useful concept and vital part of our mathematical modeling in QM. But, why is it so important to our description of energy quanta. Does one particle know the mass of another? If so, how?
Are their instruments more precise than that? But, I found mass as an paradox when I look at it in Quantum Mechanics. We still use it in the Hamiltonian but we also rely on the electron as a dimensionless wave disturbance. Also, on a macroscopic level, we measure mass relative to other in Earth's gravity, but in Quantum Mechanics we don't factor it in because it is so small. How do we really know what the mass of the electron is. We need a more fundamental definition of what mass is before we can rely on mass ratios like mu.
The true victim of the Microsoft monopoly is Microsoft. I could see the writing on the wall with Windows ME. Microsoft was no longer the underdog but the standard, so there was little incentive to get features right. Windows XP was an improvement but fast forward 5 years later and we know it had (has) major issues. But again, it seemed that Microsoft was more interested in milking its monopoly than getting it right. Now Vista is on the horizon, will they finally get it right? I don't believe so. The broken promises section seems to illustrate that Microsoft bit off more than they could chew. They had to copy OSX but they had to completely outdo Apple. That was the problem beacause while Apple was improving the OS in little jumps, Microsoft engineers were throwing away months of coding to start over. Now, OSX will be pretty close to Vista when it comes and they may have to move Vista out to show something for their years of work (what is the bug-o-meter going to read for Vista). Also, I think the bloated system requirements was for the sake of OEMs selling more expensive PCs than providing the user with innovation. I am glad I move off of Windows when I did because this is silly. Apple, being the underdog, has good incentive to get it right.
Microsoft wants to remain relevant with the OEMs. The way to keep that secure is to make sure that OEM will still offer Windows with their servers. Virtualization's emergence may redefine the importance of the operating system. It is spreading from high end server right down to the desktop. Microsoft will be keen to support competitors operating systems including Linux because Linux certianly will support Windows via VMWare/Xen. Otherwise, OEMs will begin bundling Linux over Windows with the knowlegde that it can always be install after market as a virtual OS. When that happens Microsoft loses clout with the OEMs which may trickle down to destops. Also, the other reason is to compete to be the host OS and not the virtual one because the customer may rely more on that OS than the virtual one and is more likely to invest more in it.
I declare a flamewar!!! There is no Linux snob snobbier than I. Let me begin. Haha, you Linux still used the command line. That is so 80's. Wake up and smell the 21st century. Gnome, you call that ugly piece of crap, a window manger. Where is the bouncing icons? Get a mac, you can still used the cli because if you haven't heard "it works well in both centuries" Haha. As for Window users, just shutdown the computer now and use it to keep the door open on windy days. Haha. Read the sig for any more inspiration.
That is the purpose of the OSI, to foster cooperation between Open Source and Closed. The gpl purpose is to foster freedom.
You are incorrect. Fundamentally, the purpose of GPL is cooperation. It allows for cooperation from different entities without any particular one profiting from the work. It provides trust that no one is going to exploit the effort of others. Otherwise, no one is going to volunteer to help develop the software. GPL allows software to grow and evolve without capital.
Freedom.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Users won't be to use their hardware to the full capacity because you want the manufacturers to develop driver according to your rules. That is freedom. Being force to use Windows and being subject to Microsoft abusive monopolistic practices because your job requires a functioning computer and Linux takes too much time and effort to get it to work. That is freedom. GPL is the only reason Linux is on map and not another BeOS or OS/2. Fine, I concede that, but, the open-source community should not look to cut out proprietary vendors. Good useul software is sometimes closed. Leave it to the end user to decide if that is a problem. Focus on improving your software.
The end is when you can't control updates on "your" machine, and can only run the software your lease allows. Think: playing a DVD you bought, on a computer you bought, in your home, for private viewing...can't be done unless you buy an approved OS. Your advocacy to "give the user what they want", today, at any cost, precludes affecting the evolution of the industry.
I don't think any OS vendor does that today. No one forces updates down your throat. DRM is fact of life and entities have a legitimate copyright to protect their right. It is a fundamental foundation of our society. But ultimately, competition prevents anyone from enacting obtrusive policies with it. Take Fair Play vs. Play4Sure. Fair Play is the dominant because it is the least obtrusive. You can do pretty much anything you want under it, except making an enterprise of sharing the music for which you don't own the copyright. Fairplay allows me more freedom than traditional CD's do. I can definitely live with that. If Linux can't provide competition because the end-user can't use it, then open source advocates can't affect the obtrusive policies of Microsoft or Apple(?) and promote "freedom". Competition get those guys to listen.
Finally, I reiterate point that the end result of software is to provide the user with a function. Otherwise, the software just serves as a statement. That is pretty inefficeint way to voice your disapproval. There can be a synergy between open source and closed source. Mac OS X illustrates this pretty well. It is by far the best OS on the market because Apple does cooperate well with the open source community. But, it also gives the developer the choice about how its software is distributed (ah, freedom again). It provides a stable canvas where open-source or proprietary developers can create something useful. The end user gets a very functional computer to do whatever and has an viable alternative to Windows. The developer can see their ideas grow and evolve or they can choose to just make a buck (this is America guys). It their choice. Its freedom all around.
I hereby reiterate my call to fire Zonk. Another Dvorak piece that is completely absurd and absolutely illogical posted by the one and only. I felt my IQ points evaporating away as I read each sentence. Man, I can't even finish this damn post. So, Zonk YOU'RE FIRED
That is exactly why Linux is the Third World of operating systems. This guy does not know what the user needs nor does he care. This is exactly why Linux can never be an alternative to Windows for a non-technical user. Open source is not always better than closed source. Moreover, it is useless if a user can't get it to function correctly.
I find this fanaticism in the open source community is what's crippling Linux. OMG, some are actually considering using code in the kernel to block proprietary drivers. Imagine the problems that is going to cause for the end user. That's insane, but that is the mentality in the open source community that puts the GPL over the user. The gpl purpose is to foster cooperation not to force it. If an entity believe its needs to protect its IP, then why does that preclude their software from operating with GPL software. Majority of users (99%) want something that just works. They don't care about proprietary, open source, or philosophy. They don't have a CS degree nor care to get one. They don't even read the EULA. They just want the function which coincidentally is the purpose of making software. The end is function! The end is the user! GPL is just a means to get there but it is not the only way.
I wonder if the problem that Linux is still like this in 2006 is because "free" developers place the GPL above the user. I personally don't see Ubuntu changing this mentality. It is a shame because they are all about choice but the non-technical user can't choose Linux over Windows.
Is this any more convenient than using a notebook. Wifi generally found in an area where you can sit down (ie offices, coffee shops, your home) and pop out your notebook. I never had to access the web while I was walking on the street. Personally, I enjoy my escapes from the web (I don't want it everywhere). Besides, the real hurdle to computing on the go is a reliable voice interface. Forget the stylus and the keyboard, just tell the thing what you want like you would a human being. "Open the Web...Take me to Slashdot...I want read such and such article"
Lenovo hasn't change much deviated much from IBM. There is still a close relationship. My boss got a discount on the new T60 because he owned stock in IBM. Moreover, I believe that there has been no personel change in the Thinkpad division. Everyone is the same from the engineer to the director. Thinkpads has always been very reliable and I don't think that has change yet or will do so in the near future. However, Lenovo have to prove themselves by keeping this reliability before they can think about growing marketshare by driving down prices.
Slashdot Mirror
I sorry but what's the point. Companies wih monopolies leveraging their monopolies to expand into new markets? The hell you say. Who'd a thunk it possible. That like posting an article that a lion killed a zebra. I am apathetic to the plight of the zebra because I am not on the menu. Equally, I could care less about Google's problems because I can always change the default search engine. Moreover, I don't even use Windows or IE.
For the record, I do use Google search engine 99% of the time more out of habit rather than any loyalty. Although, I don't like all the crap (buzzlogs, enterainment news, and the like) that is on Yahoo and MSN website.
Ha-ha!
I am not the type to place anyone on a pedestal, but damn, good job Jobs. Man, that reality distortion field was must have been set so high, those negotiators didn't have a chance. They must have believe in free love, down with big brother, and Macs are the faster PC's on Earth. Later, when the effects wore off, they were dumbfounded when they realized that the terms of the contract were the same as before.
Ah yet another prediction that Mac OS X is going to be swarm with viruses. Yawn!!! What is this, the 10000th one? This article should be modded -1 Redundant. Here the theme, "As soon as its it marketshare get bigger, the viruses will come. Apple won't be ready. You'll see". But, if I go online and search today for Mac OS X viruses, I can't find any information about specific viruses or stories about infection. Hell, I couldn't infect my Mac if I wanted too!!! It is obvious we are still in hypothetical land. Equally obvious, virus writers are going to attack the platform with the largest marketshare and Apple has been in single digits for the past 8 years. So, why am I going to spring money for antivirus subscription when there is no virii out there. But, I'll bet one day that they will be right. Shit, a broken watch is right twice a day. Until then, I going to keep on computing with an extra $60 in my pocket.
Has anyone ever consider that a pyramid might actually be the easiest thing to build? Lacking advanced materials (steel) and an in-depth knowledge of physics, they are not going to build skyscrapers or even a medieval cathedral. I don't know jack about architecture but I can pile a bunch of bricks up in the shape of a pyramid.
XXXXXXXAAXXXXXXX
XXXXXAAAAAAXXXXX
XXXAAAAAAAAAAXXX
XAAAAAAAAAAAAAAX
Condoleezza Rice's bizzare change in appearance
Oh really, did she get those teeth fixed? I can't believe a women so smart hasn't heard of braces! Mod me offtopic, see if I care. It needed to be said!!!
Oh wait... They already are our overlords and they suck at it. Oh, nevermind!!!
I finally figure out how he comes up with these illogical predictions. Cringley is in insane!!! The first line says it all.
Over the past three weeks, we've laid out in this column
He uses WE to describe himself but he is the only one writing the articles. He obviously has multiple personality disorder. There is more than one person in there and apparently no one is home. Though, he could also think he is a Borg, but that too is equally insane.
Given that core-duo are so much faster than the g4, I figured Apple would drop the price on the PowerPC models. Guess not!! Yeah, I heard about the emminent demise of the 12" Model. But, with such the delay we are seeing in the Macbook, they must be bringing out a new design. One where the the weight will be in the 4 pound range. I suspect that there won't much a need for a 12" notebook with that out.
Dude, you must kiiled on those research papers in college...Some notes? sheesh!
Wow, he got all that from Apple release of Boot Camp. His article me of another contemporary article of a man who traded up to apartment from a red paper-clip. I just thought the release was becasue Apple wanted to sell more Macs and sales are down due to the transition. Whether via virtualization or Apple directly using Windows API, Windows program will run on top of Mac OSX in the future. The question with virtualization is speed and direct access to hardware. Alternatively, using Windows API raises the question of appearance and consistency of interface. Apple's interface is not exactly like Windows. Menus are different and located in different places. Borders are also very different. In addition, keyboard combinations will be different. For example, the difference between using alt-f4 versus Command-Q. So, Windows programs are just going to bring in inconsistency to Mac OSX that Apple goes through great pains to avoid. It will screw up people who have become accustomed to certain way thing work in Mac OS X and mess up their work flows. One other problem is it will discourage developer from Mac OSX native programs. I am sure Apple doesn't wants that.
Ah yes, you use the force to describe the mass. I am familiar with those experiment. But, they relied on macroscopic force to describe mass which may be problematic when applied to a single electron and the spectra which come from the discrete energy level that arises from the Hamiltonian that assumes mass is invariant (which it probally is compared to the potential). So again, what is mass? You mention distance which in our own perception is the separation between two points. How do you phyically describe mass for an electron or even something smaller than that quarks. Granted, we hold it to be intrinsic like spin. It is a useful concept and vital part of our mathematical modeling in QM. But, why is it so important to our description of energy quanta. Does one particle know the mass of another? If so, how?
Are their instruments more precise than that? But, I found mass as an paradox when I look at it in Quantum Mechanics. We still use it in the Hamiltonian but we also rely on the electron as a dimensionless wave disturbance. Also, on a macroscopic level, we measure mass relative to other in Earth's gravity, but in Quantum Mechanics we don't factor it in because it is so small. How do we really know what the mass of the electron is. We need a more fundamental definition of what mass is before we can rely on mass ratios like mu.
The true victim of the Microsoft monopoly is Microsoft. I could see the writing on the wall with Windows ME. Microsoft was no longer the underdog but the standard, so there was little incentive to get features right. Windows XP was an improvement but fast forward 5 years later and we know it had (has) major issues. But again, it seemed that Microsoft was more interested in milking its monopoly than getting it right. Now Vista is on the horizon, will they finally get it right? I don't believe so. The broken promises section seems to illustrate that Microsoft bit off more than they could chew. They had to copy OSX but they had to completely outdo Apple. That was the problem beacause while Apple was improving the OS in little jumps, Microsoft engineers were throwing away months of coding to start over. Now, OSX will be pretty close to Vista when it comes and they may have to move Vista out to show something for their years of work (what is the bug-o-meter going to read for Vista). Also, I think the bloated system requirements was for the sake of OEMs selling more expensive PCs than providing the user with innovation. I am glad I move off of Windows when I did because this is silly. Apple, being the underdog, has good incentive to get it right.
Microsoft wants to remain relevant with the OEMs. The way to keep that secure is to make sure that OEM will still offer Windows with their servers. Virtualization's emergence may redefine the importance of the operating system. It is spreading from high end server right down to the desktop. Microsoft will be keen to support competitors operating systems including Linux because Linux certianly will support Windows via VMWare/Xen. Otherwise, OEMs will begin bundling Linux over Windows with the knowlegde that it can always be install after market as a virtual OS. When that happens Microsoft loses clout with the OEMs which may trickle down to destops. Also, the other reason is to compete to be the host OS and not the virtual one because the customer may rely more on that OS than the virtual one and is more likely to invest more in it.
I declare a flamewar!!! There is no Linux snob snobbier than I. Let me begin. Haha, you Linux still used the command line. That is so 80's. Wake up and smell the 21st century. Gnome, you call that ugly piece of crap, a window manger. Where is the bouncing icons? Get a mac, you can still used the cli because if you haven't heard "it works well in both centuries" Haha. As for Window users, just shutdown the computer now and use it to keep the door open on windy days. Haha. Read the sig for any more inspiration.
That is the purpose of the OSI, to foster cooperation between Open Source and Closed. The gpl purpose is to foster freedom.
You are incorrect. Fundamentally, the purpose of GPL is cooperation. It allows for cooperation from different entities without any particular one profiting from the work. It provides trust that no one is going to exploit the effort of others. Otherwise, no one is going to volunteer to help develop the software. GPL allows software to grow and evolve without capital.
Freedom.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Users won't be to use their hardware to the full capacity because you want the manufacturers to develop driver according to your rules. That is freedom. Being force to use Windows and being subject to Microsoft abusive monopolistic practices because your job requires a functioning computer and Linux takes too much time and effort to get it to work. That is freedom. GPL is the only reason Linux is on map and not another BeOS or OS/2. Fine, I concede that, but, the open-source community should not look to cut out proprietary vendors. Good useul software is sometimes closed. Leave it to the end user to decide if that is a problem. Focus on improving your software.
The end is when you can't control updates on "your" machine, and can only run the software your lease allows. Think: playing a DVD you bought, on a computer you bought, in your home, for private viewing...can't be done unless you buy an approved OS. Your advocacy to "give the user what they want", today, at any cost, precludes affecting the evolution of the industry.
I don't think any OS vendor does that today. No one forces updates down your throat. DRM is fact of life and entities have a legitimate copyright to protect their right. It is a fundamental foundation of our society. But ultimately, competition prevents anyone from enacting obtrusive policies with it. Take Fair Play vs. Play4Sure. Fair Play is the dominant because it is the least obtrusive. You can do pretty much anything you want under it, except making an enterprise of sharing the music for which you don't own the copyright. Fairplay allows me more freedom than traditional CD's do. I can definitely live with that. If Linux can't provide competition because the end-user can't use it, then open source advocates can't affect the obtrusive policies of Microsoft or Apple(?) and promote "freedom". Competition get those guys to listen.
Finally, I reiterate point that the end result of software is to provide the user with a function. Otherwise, the software just serves as a statement. That is pretty inefficeint way to voice your disapproval. There can be a synergy between open source and closed source. Mac OS X illustrates this pretty well. It is by far the best OS on the market because Apple does cooperate well with the open source community. But, it also gives the developer the choice about how its software is distributed (ah, freedom again). It provides a stable canvas where open-source or proprietary developers can create something useful. The end user gets a very functional computer to do whatever and has an viable alternative to Windows. The developer can see their ideas grow and evolve or they can choose to just make a buck (this is America guys). It their choice. Its freedom all around.
I hereby reiterate my call to fire Zonk. Another Dvorak piece that is completely absurd and absolutely illogical posted by the one and only. I felt my IQ points evaporating away as I read each sentence. Man, I can't even finish this damn post. So, Zonk YOU'RE FIRED
Right on! I think this whole is just crippling Linux and making sure it not useful to anyone outside of a small subset of hackers and hobbyists
That is exactly why Linux is the Third World of operating systems. This guy does not know what the user needs nor does he care. This is exactly why Linux can never be an alternative to Windows for a non-technical user. Open source is not always better than closed source. Moreover, it is useless if a user can't get it to function correctly.
I find this fanaticism in the open source community is what's crippling Linux. OMG, some are actually considering using code in the kernel to block proprietary drivers. Imagine the problems that is going to cause for the end user. That's insane, but that is the mentality in the open source community that puts the GPL over the user. The gpl purpose is to foster cooperation not to force it. If an entity believe its needs to protect its IP, then why does that preclude their software from operating with GPL software. Majority of users (99%) want something that just works. They don't care about proprietary, open source, or philosophy. They don't have a CS degree nor care to get one. They don't even read the EULA. They just want the function which coincidentally is the purpose of making software. The end is function! The end is the user! GPL is just a means to get there but it is not the only way.
I wonder if the problem that Linux is still like this in 2006 is because "free" developers place the GPL above the user. I personally don't see Ubuntu changing this mentality. It is a shame because they are all about choice but the non-technical user can't choose Linux over Windows.
You shouldn't need a CS degree to browse the WEB. Just a thought
Is this any more convenient than using a notebook. Wifi generally found in an area where you can sit down (ie offices, coffee shops, your home) and pop out your notebook. I never had to access the web while I was walking on the street. Personally, I enjoy my escapes from the web (I don't want it everywhere). Besides, the real hurdle to computing on the go is a reliable voice interface. Forget the stylus and the keyboard, just tell the thing what you want like you would a human being. "Open the Web...Take me to Slashdot...I want read such and such article"
Lenovo hasn't change much deviated much from IBM. There is still a close relationship. My boss got a discount on the new T60 because he owned stock in IBM. Moreover, I believe that there has been no personel change in the Thinkpad division. Everyone is the same from the engineer to the director. Thinkpads has always been very reliable and I don't think that has change yet or will do so in the near future. However, Lenovo have to prove themselves by keeping this reliability before they can think about growing marketshare by driving down prices.