Apart from a few very very good high volume apps like Firefox, I'd be hard put to name an OSS product that I use daily, weekly or even monthly. And I am extremely enthousiastic about it all. But when it comes to ease of installation and ease of use there is not very much that is appealing out there. I keep versions of the Gimp, office apps, editors and the like around just for the hell of it, but apart from checking the apps out, I don't use them. Not to do any amount of real work.
Which doesn't mean it's bad, it just means that the people working on it aren't in it to make it work for the maximum amount of people. Which isn't a bad thing!!!!! But which does come in the way of "we'll conquer the world with our OSS".
While I think this review isn't worth the pixels it was written on, you can't deny most people can't be bothered with Linux for good reasons. And those who can will for the most part have very good reasons for doing so, but aren't mainstream.
Now, the same thing doesn't apply for most server side applications. I'm blown away by what is out there for free, under various licenses. It's incredible. These apps aren't exactly written for the average user, but most are written with the average webmaster or sys admin in mind. And it is mind blowing. Things we'd try and envision ten years ago for xxx$ paying clients are just up for grabs and work as advertised, are maintained and have a huge community of developers if you want to customize.
I've done a redesign (and some recoding) of SMF and am even allowed under its license to sell the result (as installation service). The people at Lewis software and most of the community are really encouraging. I've done all the work with proprietary software though, couldn't really have done it otherwise. Not in any economical way. The software may be free, my time isn't. I am reasonably sure there are not more than ten people around who could have done what I did on the graphics in the same amount of time with the Gimp, for instance. And these ten would probably run circles around me in just about every app, including pencil and paper.
It's hard to read bad things about your favorite OS, and this guy imo proves you can't be objective about that, he isn't by a long shot. But I just can't see the average desktop user switch to Ubunto or any other distro as things are now today.
I can see more OSS projects become hugely mainstream though. And hopefully that will give raise to an OSS desktop that is aimed from start to finish to a wide audience of average users.
You don't do professional work in the Gimp, especially not if your work needs to be used by others as well.
If you're talking about casual use, or the lone ranger who actually can do everything with the Gimp (haven't met him, but I'm sure he exists), fine. But your arguments don't count when set in the real world. Sure you can use this or that program, but if your work needs to fit in a larger workflow that means dick. Because you can always use a pen and paper, which works amazingly well for most things (and would really be a good idea for a lot of people). But doesn't really interface well with for instance OOo...
I can use my mac for almost everything, and since I prefer it, I use your kind of reasoning a lot to justify the extra effort when using a piece of software that has a far nicer PC equivalent, but there are still a lot of jobs around which would force me to work on a PC, for good reasons. Not nice or even logical reasons, but the kind of bitchie reasons like "Framemaker only works on PC or Solaris". Tough going trying to do that on Linux or mac when your work place IS Framemaker.
Well, first of all, your numbers are wrong. But since we're both painting with a broad brush, who cares.
Second, the point you're making is sort of the point I was making. Actually spending that money differently won't solve anything. But it could. The numbers and projects come from UN studies and programs actually being implemented and then extrapolated and put against the military spending of one year. And could theoretically be applied on a world wide scale. But they can't of course. So, whatever numbers we use, it's all a pipe dream. But one important enough to keep dreaming.
Third, achieving the goals of any project is very important, but making the effort even more so. After all, you can't possibly suggest that our defense projects achieve the goals that we dare to put out in public? They achieve lots of goals, but not the ones we could compare with "solving world hunger". They don't make the world a better place for instance.
Otoh, the same argument that those in favor of even more sophisticated and interesting ways to disembowel their fellow man constantly use can be used to defend spending on social wellfare and other so called non-economical spending. Imagine a world without that. You don't have to, I've been to some of the places where they don't do that sort of thing. It's incredibly cruel to devide the people you meet into categories like "whatever happens to your health, if it's even mildly life threatening, you're a gonner" and "a new heart? why certainly sir, just grab your check book". Hearing their political representatives say proudly they have closed a lucrative deal with the US to modernize their military makes you want to buy one of those sophisticated toys yourself and do some localized surgery. Especially when said politicians keep getting in the way of each and every humanitarian effort because it is "destabilizing" while not spending one penny themselves because why should they?
So, while I might think the money could be better spent, it's quite safe for you or anybody else to suggest otherwise. We're all just pissing in the wind and in a hundred years we'll all be dead.
Which brings me back to my real point: thank god some physicists are looking at warp drive. They actually look beyond the here and now, which is a major accomplishment and it serves no real purpose to let those guys work on world hunger.
Indeed. Call it the human factor getting in the way. Which is why I said it doesn't make sense to lament the fact that some physics guys are looking at warp drive instead of world hunger.
I'm not going against the military budget per se. Well, um, actually I am. I'm naive that way. It was just the grossest example I could find of taking things out of context just because you feel the world should be different.
So, to summarize, while solutions are simple, implementing them is not. I'm sure it's not too hard to interpret my ramblings that way. And my main point was: it's no use to lament the fact that physicists are looking at warp drives to solve interesting puzzles instead of looking at for instance world hunger. Lots of people look at that, find solutions which are in itself simple enough but need too much good will and sustained effort (and not only from the haves, also the have nots, or the haves among those countries that have lots of have nots).
"that they're planning to conquest other worlds instead of fixing the one they live in:-/"
Which sounds like a real argument but isn't. While it would be nice to fix this world, the one and the other have nothing to do with each other. And I'd rather the high and wild physics guys would keep their attention fixed safely somewhere outside the solar system I'm living in thank you (just joking, but a grain of real concern nevertheless;-).
This planet is unfixable, nobody cares enough. A lot of people care, just not enough. And apart from some professional care takers' opinions and programs, the average solution put forward by your average shocked person are laughable. So if we're really messing it up too far, well, maybe we'll try and clean up a little. Let's hope we find viable alternatives for our more messy activities before we pass some critical treshold.
For the rest, just look at every humanitarian, ecological or political issue that in itself forms a sizeable threat to us or this planet. See if you like how we're "fixing" it. Not that some people aren't doing what they can and some organizations aren't great. Just, if you look at it all, you realize it isn't a bad idea to have some mad scientists look outside the solar system as well. They wouldn't be any good anyway in finding "solutions for this planet".
Most things are easily fixed anyway. It just takes investments (paid with money), sustained effort and lots of coordinated actions. Starting with good will between people with opposing viewpoints and different interests. Ahahahaha.
Simply put: take the combined budget of the US and Europe on military spending for ONE year, and you already have the money to fund half a century of all programs on acknowledged "big" problems like poverty, disease, education, clean water, most environmental issues etc etc etc. on a world scale, yes sir.
Problem is, even saying this is deemed political, liberal etc etc etc. So, while most problems are easily solved, we think it makes more sense to invest in a better club to hit our neighbor with. And well, for a talking monkey society that even makes a sort of horrible sense. After all, how can you trust that other alpha male and his friends NOT to kick your country in the bollocks and steal your mates? You can't, you just can't. Even Bush starts to make sense with his pre-emptive strike thing (the bloody uber-religious idiot fascist), which is fancy for "I saw you looking at my mate, so I'll kick you inna fork FIRST".
So, in short, without all the emotion: let's just try to do what we can on ALL fronts that aren't at least directly geared at killing us off as fast as possible, eh? Warp? Bloody good idea. Helping mankind? Sounds great.
Bet you half a dollar we'll have warp drive first.
I am a full blown apple fan and I would want to buy a mini, hook it up to a tv and do fun things.
But ah, um, I wouldn't be able to replace any of my other gear. Not really. So media center? I don't know. Not that I'd buy a PC to try and do that. I'm just not the kind of guy who'd replace my easy gear to do it all painfully. And that's what it seems to be with some people I know. It works. Sort of. Most of the time. For most things. Come to think of it, they didn't throw away anything either. Apart from one person who seems to have gotten it right. But he's not into games. Ah well.
Maybe media extension or something. Another appliance. Not a replacement. Not by far.
Although it could be worth it to digitize all my audio (would need some serious disk space for that). I'll probably just wait for the next great thing, or the next. Ah, coveting shiny white boxes... Nerd or fashion victim?
Welll, the reason is partly political (she already has a man in the house) and partly practical. I live 900 km's removed and don't want to have them adhere to something I'm not able to support. I gave tips, and they went "uhuh" at the right moments, but it didn't really change anything. There's not much I can do about her habit of clicking on everything she receives. It's too much "fun" and too much part of her social life, amazing.
BTW I am a bit sensitive to "them" and "they", anyway: apologies.
I'm not proud of OS X. I'm glad. Big difference. It doesn't tell you anything about me except that I prefer one environment over another. Why? pffffwrt, who cares. My reasons might very well not apply to you, even if they apply to "they".
I don't care about games, but occasionally I need to test stuff. Especially if it needs to run on windows only. I can hardly expect my clients to become "they" after all.
Apart from games, some pretty good software still hasn't made it on the mac or was discontinued (Framemaker). I'm more into software than into OS. So if a piece of great soft comes out on windows only, I still want to try it. But it's pretty much clear that a lot of great consumer software (a large part of my fascination) works better on the mac. Keep in mind this sentence only works if you define "consumer software" not as "they toys" but as stuff in the category of toaster, vcr and other one to twenty trick ponies.
Lastly, some "they's" are families. Some of those "they's" will need to do things in windows for various reasons (school, work,...) and still want to have the pleasure of a computer that's more household applience/communication thingy (skype, e-mail, chat,...) than virus catcher. Yes, this was a "they" argument, but not a bad one, I do have to maintain the family computers so I'm pretty sensitive to all that shit.
And every time I'm at my sister's I can't believe all the crap I have to remove in order to get her box running again. Every time. Is she stupid? No. She's just not your average geek. I never have to do that kind of stuff with my father in law who's over 70, uses a mac for an incredible amount of stuff but still doesn't understand anything about computers, security and all that. I do have to explain him a lot of stuff like "where did all those little buttons on top of Word go?" (toolbars) or "what is a right mouse click?" or my all time favorite "what's a window?". Things I never have to explain to my sister who knows her way around office better than most. Even if she has the annoying habit to click on everything her friends send her by mail:-(
If I were you I'd just keep with the hacks out there. You seem to be the kind of person who can get around the odd incompatibility or two.
Wishing Apple would become a software company won't make it so. They need their hardware if alone to sell their software. And even without all the economical reasons, they are a company largely driven by what they enjoy to do (provided they perceive a market for their brainchilds). And they enjoy hardware/software integration to the point that they become "products" instead of one nailed on the other. That's their thing, I don't see them changing that.
I appreciate you asking the question, it's valid. But there are plenty of reasons to be able to run Windows even if you don't need it every day/week/month. It's annoying to have a second machine wasting space just because once in a while you really can't do without.
Example: if your client uses windows, and you have to make stuff for him, you want it to work in his crappy IE browser on his crappy OS. I can try to get him to switch browsers, or even platforms. But that's not what I'm paid for, it's frowned upon, it's bad business even if it's good advice. The number of clients who don't even know the difference between their OS and browser, or the existence of alternatives can get you an idea of how futile it is to try and change their habits. And I can't tell them I program on a mac, because "that's not a real computer, is it?"...
Two remarks: 1) The USA white population is largely made up by Eurotrash. So, with that in mind one could easily find more charitable theories, e.g. for the hispanic and white population one could just as easily say that the USA is peopled by the most enterprising people of those ethnic groups, those that didn't mind leaving everything behind and start over again, those filled with an enterprising pioneering spirit blablablah. My point? It's a funny old (new?) world. And btw for the black population one could claim that those who survived slave catching, transport and decades of oppression clearly were the best examples of their population. Please note that I don't believe one word of what I'm writing... It's just that my viewpoints at this point are as valid as any other.
2) Cultural differences can be a much bigger factor than genetic make up. e.g. some indian tribes have embraced western ways to a large extend in order to gain influence, get better living standards and even to maintain their own cultural values as they see fit. Others haven't. There's a large historical factor there as well. It isn't easy for a given tribe to do certain things when decimated more than other tribes, kicked into a wilderness and submitted to infertility programs just a bit more zealously than other tribes. But some anthropological studies suggest that some success stories are in hindsight predictable because those tribes had a culture that already was more enterprising and flexible than their neighbor's.
imo if you really want to go there, you have to be scientific about it. Not political correct. And that's not easy. You want to pick one possible instrument and make it fit the whole spectrum of human behavior, sociology etc etc. Good luck.
That's not fair. Haven't you noticed the macs are now white instead of gummy? So our passwords are now more in line with the new vibe. "Shiny" seems to do quite well...
I am pretty die hard apple, but a friend of mine has his mini PC thingy with media center for about a year and a half now. It does some things with OSS, like the DVD functionality, and it runs Windows home edition or something for the rest. It isn't flawless or particularly elegant, but I'd say it's still a bit ahead, even if it doesn't appeal to me. Too fiddly by far. He has it built in his couch (ha!) and hooked up to his flatscreen, and complemented with a nice little speaker system. All in all pretty good. It's a bit silly to claim Apple's superiority in the living room at the moment.
I think the factor here for not designing totally new stuff too soon is that they want to put the unfamiliar intel stuff (new chip set, and for apple users, something totally new, even if on a totally irrelevant level for most consumers) into an already familiar design. I wouldn't put amazing on the product, but I'm not in marketing, so that doesn't count.
Anyway, your perspective is not typical, wouldn't you say? As a mainstream low price mass market (they wish) product, the features and form factor are pretty amazing (until the next thing comes along). This sentence doesn't work if you leave out words like mainstream, you have to see the whole picture, and since the words amazing and fun are used in a marketing context, it's silly to use them outside of their context. Marketing speak is a bit silly by definition and in any context, but marketing in itself isn't.
Your area of expertise takes you ahead of the market and makes you see lots of specialized products. I bet you aren't easily impressed (you lucky bastard!)
That's right, let yourself be defined by what you use. Do tell what other things you stick to for fear of what others think about you. And do tell what specialized blogs with weird crowds you visit to come to that opinion.
Sorry, just had to write that. IMO what's worse than stupid is people taking total enthousiasts so serious. They don't deserve the attention, not positively nor negatively. If people froth at the mouth, smile, wave and find a better place to be. Enthousiasm can be obnoxious, but almost every otherwise sane person has his/her area of stupidity. For some it's computers, even down to the OS, for others it's cars, cats, model trains, pigeons, fashion,...
And if you think weirdness is reserved strictly (or even largely, or even moderately) to the Linux/Apple crowd you obviously haven't looked at die hard windows fans closely. And they are out there in numbers. However, they're as easily ignored as Apple/linux fans.
I know my area of weirdness, it's OS's in general. I tend to be enthousiastic (really silly even) to most things Apple, but if I see something good in Windows, you can see me smile goofily just as easy. Does that make me sane?
It's so much fun, I hope they do this more. You know, announce fun new products. Then we can see everyone go crazy (yey, FTL or cold fusion, what do you think?). Oh, and you know what, you can also check their stock prices!!!!!! God, what fun we have.
Why should you? Haven't you ever seen anybody act irrational about things they like? Ha! Half the people I know who are into audio are almost religious about their particular setup. You should see them talking to each other. Worse than religion or politics. I'm cool, my setup is a dream - or a nightmare, depending on what your needs are. If you're not into it, clearly you wouldn't want big speakers, 2 times two hundred extremely loud watts amplification, pre amp, some weird almost surround system and a separate ground in order not to get electrocuted every time you want to adjust the volume from 1 to oh perhaps 1,25... This takes more place and uses more energy than most people's installation, and that's only the sound part of it, now add maniac pickup etc etc. You have to be a bit irrational about it, no? But I can - if I feel like it - talk extremely rational about it. Maybe not with a straight face anymore...
A friend of my father always tells me pc's are so much better than macs. I mostly tell him that I know, I have a pc, it is made by apple. I have had numerous other pc's made by other people. PC's are nice. A while back he confessed to me he could never have a mac, because then he couldn't buy anything new for it every two weeks. The guy is over sixty, I've known him for more than thirty years. He needs to tinker far more than he needs to e-mail. Before he fiddled with his frankenstein computer it was model trains.
He thinks his computer is the best in the world and can talk about it for hours. Clearly I don't hate him for this. And I can tell you, even a mac mini is better than a beast that has to be kick started, and can alternatively be used to scare big mammals or blow away walls and furniture - if it works...
There's lots of good solutions out there, why would it upset someone that I'd consider Apple's offer? I haven't a single compressed audio file and still have tons of LP's. But hey, moving to a smaller place I am going to replace my rediculously big Dynaco stereo and outlandishly good B&W speakers for something practical. And get rid of the analog stuff, it's too bulky. That's a horrible horrible thing to say, I know. Still.
All my stuff is second hand, haven't paid more than the price of that hifi thing, which made a lot of people jealous, I can tell you, so having to spend that amount for something new doesn't sound too bad, if it's worth it. Which only my ears can tell you, It may surprise you, but opiniated asses don't do better than my ears in that respect. And I have pretty good ears.
I'm looking to fill a room a lot smaller than I'm used to, that's a big consideration. I'm also now married with kid. And I'm not a practicing musician anymore. All that begs for something practical. And since yes, you can play other stuff from that hifi (you sure know what you write about), I am still considering it.
I always judged with my ears. Not being prepared to listen to something because other people think it's not a cool brand seems a bit silly.
But maybe you're right, you know, I mean, sure, you listened to that hifi thingy before you wrote this, right?
This gets a bit personal, I know, but I find it amazing how stupid people can get over brands. Apple haters are actually a LOT more pathetic than apple lovers imo.
"Anyone who throws their stereo away for the Ipod Hifi is a complete moron."
Don't agree at all. I'm moving from a house to a brand new appartment. The place is significantly smaller. I'm looking to replace my stereo for something small, good sounding in a smaller space and practical. My gear takes loads of space, consumes heaps of energy and is about 30 years old. Now, it still sounds good, but I shouldn't kid myself. I will never turn that volume over 20%. And lots of newer gear actually sounds better, even if it hasn't got that totally cool look. I won't be able to place my (BIG b&w) speakers anywhere near ideal, so where does that leave this moron, I ask you.
Maybe the hifi is not the solution, but the few objective tests already out there have shown it isn't too bad. Couple that with an inexpensive music server (and if I'm the one maintaining it, why not dish out $100 extra for the mini?) and a wireless network and I'll be able to gain a lot of space and have something that my kid won't instantly die from if she decides to see what makes it tick...
As for true hifi, there are lots of setups saying stupid things, 90% of bose gear for instance. I bet the hifi sounds better than most bose solutions. And if that's the case, the price is almost right (knock off $100 and it'll actually be cheapish).
So, when I saw the hifi, while not buying totally into the marketing fluff, my reaction was more "mmmm" than "urg".
Slashdot Mirror
Talking desktop for a minute:
Apart from a few very very good high volume apps like Firefox, I'd be hard put to name an OSS product that I use daily, weekly or even monthly. And I am extremely enthousiastic about it all. But when it comes to ease of installation and ease of use there is not very much that is appealing out there. I keep versions of the Gimp, office apps, editors and the like around just for the hell of it, but apart from checking the apps out, I don't use them. Not to do any amount of real work.
Which doesn't mean it's bad, it just means that the people working on it aren't in it to make it work for the maximum amount of people. Which isn't a bad thing!!!!! But which does come in the way of "we'll conquer the world with our OSS".
While I think this review isn't worth the pixels it was written on, you can't deny most people can't be bothered with Linux for good reasons. And those who can will for the most part have very good reasons for doing so, but aren't mainstream.
Now, the same thing doesn't apply for most server side applications. I'm blown away by what is out there for free, under various licenses. It's incredible. These apps aren't exactly written for the average user, but most are written with the average webmaster or sys admin in mind. And it is mind blowing. Things we'd try and envision ten years ago for xxx$ paying clients are just up for grabs and work as advertised, are maintained and have a huge community of developers if you want to customize.
I've done a redesign (and some recoding) of SMF and am even allowed under its license to sell the result (as installation service). The people at Lewis software and most of the community are really encouraging. I've done all the work with proprietary software though, couldn't really have done it otherwise. Not in any economical way. The software may be free, my time isn't. I am reasonably sure there are not more than ten people around who could have done what I did on the graphics in the same amount of time with the Gimp, for instance. And these ten would probably run circles around me in just about every app, including pencil and paper.
It's hard to read bad things about your favorite OS, and this guy imo proves you can't be objective about that, he isn't by a long shot. But I just can't see the average desktop user switch to Ubunto or any other distro as things are now today.
I can see more OSS projects become hugely mainstream though. And hopefully that will give raise to an OSS desktop that is aimed from start to finish to a wide audience of average users.
You don't do professional work in the Gimp, especially not if your work needs to be used by others as well.
If you're talking about casual use, or the lone ranger who actually can do everything with the Gimp (haven't met him, but I'm sure he exists), fine. But your arguments don't count when set in the real world. Sure you can use this or that program, but if your work needs to fit in a larger workflow that means dick. Because you can always use a pen and paper, which works amazingly well for most things (and would really be a good idea for a lot of people). But doesn't really interface well with for instance OOo...
I can use my mac for almost everything, and since I prefer it, I use your kind of reasoning a lot to justify the extra effort when using a piece of software that has a far nicer PC equivalent, but there are still a lot of jobs around which would force me to work on a PC, for good reasons. Not nice or even logical reasons, but the kind of bitchie reasons like "Framemaker only works on PC or Solaris". Tough going trying to do that on Linux or mac when your work place IS Framemaker.
"How in the hell is Microsoft still in business?"
Because OS X is for kids and girls, linux is communist and windows is productive and wholesome american?
arg arg arg need blue sky and sunshine now arg arg
Well, first of all, your numbers are wrong. But since we're both painting with a broad brush, who cares.
Second, the point you're making is sort of the point I was making. Actually spending that money differently won't solve anything. But it could. The numbers and projects come from UN studies and programs actually being implemented and then extrapolated and put against the military spending of one year. And could theoretically be applied on a world wide scale. But they can't of course. So, whatever numbers we use, it's all a pipe dream. But one important enough to keep dreaming.
Third, achieving the goals of any project is very important, but making the effort even more so. After all, you can't possibly suggest that our defense projects achieve the goals that we dare to put out in public? They achieve lots of goals, but not the ones we could compare with "solving world hunger". They don't make the world a better place for instance.
Otoh, the same argument that those in favor of even more sophisticated and interesting ways to disembowel their fellow man constantly use can be used to defend spending on social wellfare and other so called non-economical spending. Imagine a world without that.
You don't have to, I've been to some of the places where they don't do that sort of thing. It's incredibly cruel to devide the people you meet into categories like "whatever happens to your health, if it's even mildly life threatening, you're a gonner" and "a new heart? why certainly sir, just grab your check book". Hearing their political representatives say proudly they have closed a lucrative deal with the US to modernize their military makes you want to buy one of those sophisticated toys yourself and do some localized surgery. Especially when said politicians keep getting in the way of each and every humanitarian effort because it is "destabilizing" while not spending one penny themselves because why should they?
So, while I might think the money could be better spent, it's quite safe for you or anybody else to suggest otherwise. We're all just pissing in the wind and in a hundred years we'll all be dead.
Which brings me back to my real point: thank god some physicists are looking at warp drive. They actually look beyond the here and now, which is a major accomplishment and it serves no real purpose to let those guys work on world hunger.
Indeed. Call it the human factor getting in the way. Which is why I said it doesn't make sense to lament the fact that some physics guys are looking at warp drive instead of world hunger.
I'm not going against the military budget per se. Well, um, actually I am. I'm naive that way. It was just the grossest example I could find of taking things out of context just because you feel the world should be different.
I'm prepared to go with that, but that's just word games. If you genuinly don't see my point, let's leave it at that.
So, to summarize, while solutions are simple, implementing them is not. I'm sure it's not too hard to interpret my ramblings that way. And my main point was: it's no use to lament the fact that physicists are looking at warp drives to solve interesting puzzles instead of looking at for instance world hunger. Lots of people look at that, find solutions which are in itself simple enough but need too much good will and sustained effort (and not only from the haves, also the have nots, or the haves among those countries that have lots of have nots).
Cheers.
"that they're planning to conquest other worlds instead of fixing the one they live in :-/"
;-).
Which sounds like a real argument but isn't. While it would be nice to fix this world, the one and the other have nothing to do with each other. And I'd rather the high and wild physics guys would keep their attention fixed safely somewhere outside the solar system I'm living in thank you (just joking, but a grain of real concern nevertheless
This planet is unfixable, nobody cares enough. A lot of people care, just not enough. And apart from some professional care takers' opinions and programs, the average solution put forward by your average shocked person are laughable. So if we're really messing it up too far, well, maybe we'll try and clean up a little. Let's hope we find viable alternatives for our more messy activities before we pass some critical treshold.
For the rest, just look at every humanitarian, ecological or political issue that in itself forms a sizeable threat to us or this planet. See if you like how we're "fixing" it. Not that some people aren't doing what they can and some organizations aren't great. Just, if you look at it all, you realize it isn't a bad idea to have some mad scientists look outside the solar system as well. They wouldn't be any good anyway in finding "solutions for this planet".
Most things are easily fixed anyway. It just takes investments (paid with money), sustained effort and lots of coordinated actions. Starting with good will between people with opposing viewpoints and different interests. Ahahahaha.
Simply put: take the combined budget of the US and Europe on military spending for ONE year, and you already have the money to fund half a century of all programs on acknowledged "big" problems like poverty, disease, education, clean water, most environmental issues etc etc etc. on a world scale, yes sir.
Problem is, even saying this is deemed political, liberal etc etc etc. So, while most problems are easily solved, we think it makes more sense to invest in a better club to hit our neighbor with. And well, for a talking monkey society that even makes a sort of horrible sense. After all, how can you trust that other alpha male and his friends NOT to kick your country in the bollocks and steal your mates? You can't, you just can't. Even Bush starts to make sense with his pre-emptive strike thing (the bloody uber-religious idiot fascist), which is fancy for "I saw you looking at my mate, so I'll kick you inna fork FIRST".
So, in short, without all the emotion: let's just try to do what we can on ALL fronts that aren't at least directly geared at killing us off as fast as possible, eh? Warp? Bloody good idea. Helping mankind? Sounds great.
Bet you half a dollar we'll have warp drive first.
I am a full blown apple fan and I would want to buy a mini, hook it up to a tv and do fun things.
But ah, um, I wouldn't be able to replace any of my other gear. Not really. So media center? I don't know. Not that I'd buy a PC to try and do that. I'm just not the kind of guy who'd replace my easy gear to do it all painfully. And that's what it seems to be with some people I know. It works. Sort of. Most of the time. For most things. Come to think of it, they didn't throw away anything either. Apart from one person who seems to have gotten it right. But he's not into games. Ah well.
Maybe media extension or something. Another appliance. Not a replacement. Not by far.
Although it could be worth it to digitize all my audio (would need some serious disk space for that). I'll probably just wait for the next great thing, or the next. Ah, coveting shiny white boxes... Nerd or fashion victim?
Whoah, it's late.
Welll, the reason is partly political (she already has a man in the house) and partly practical. I live 900 km's removed and don't want to have them adhere to something I'm not able to support. I gave tips, and they went "uhuh" at the right moments, but it didn't really change anything. There's not much I can do about her habit of clicking on everything she receives. It's too much "fun" and too much part of her social life, amazing.
BTW I am a bit sensitive to "them" and "they", anyway: apologies.
Well, let me be "they" for just a bit.
...) and still want to have the pleasure of a computer that's more household applience/communication thingy (skype, e-mail, chat, ...) than virus catcher. Yes, this was a "they" argument, but not a bad one, I do have to maintain the family computers so I'm pretty sensitive to all that shit.
:-(
I'm not proud of OS X. I'm glad. Big difference. It doesn't tell you anything about me except that I prefer one environment over another. Why? pffffwrt, who cares. My reasons might very well not apply to you, even if they apply to "they".
I don't care about games, but occasionally I need to test stuff. Especially if it needs to run on windows only. I can hardly expect my clients to become "they" after all.
Apart from games, some pretty good software still hasn't made it on the mac or was discontinued (Framemaker). I'm more into software than into OS. So if a piece of great soft comes out on windows only, I still want to try it. But it's pretty much clear that a lot of great consumer software (a large part of my fascination) works better on the mac.
Keep in mind this sentence only works if you define "consumer software" not as "they toys" but as stuff in the category of toaster, vcr and other one to twenty trick ponies.
Lastly, some "they's" are families. Some of those "they's" will need to do things in windows for various reasons (school, work,
And every time I'm at my sister's I can't believe all the crap I have to remove in order to get her box running again. Every time. Is she stupid? No. She's just not your average geek. I never have to do that kind of stuff with my father in law who's over 70, uses a mac for an incredible amount of stuff but still doesn't understand anything about computers, security and all that. I do have to explain him a lot of stuff like "where did all those little buttons on top of Word go?" (toolbars) or "what is a right mouse click?" or my all time favorite "what's a window?". Things I never have to explain to my sister who knows her way around office better than most. Even if she has the annoying habit to click on everything her friends send her by mail
If I were you I'd just keep with the hacks out there. You seem to be the kind of person who can get around the odd incompatibility or two.
Wishing Apple would become a software company won't make it so. They need their hardware if alone to sell their software. And even without all the economical reasons, they are a company largely driven by what they enjoy to do (provided they perceive a market for their brainchilds). And they enjoy hardware/software integration to the point that they become "products" instead of one nailed on the other. That's their thing, I don't see them changing that.
But then again, I didn't see intel coming either.
BTW, sorry for the crappy OS part. That's not a true mark of wisdom, more sort of an accurate indicator of frustration :-|
I appreciate you asking the question, it's valid. But there are plenty of reasons to be able to run Windows even if you don't need it every day/week/month. It's annoying to have a second machine wasting space just because once in a while you really can't do without.
Example: if your client uses windows, and you have to make stuff for him, you want it to work in his crappy IE browser on his crappy OS. I can try to get him to switch browsers, or even platforms. But that's not what I'm paid for, it's frowned upon, it's bad business even if it's good advice. The number of clients who don't even know the difference between their OS and browser, or the existence of alternatives can get you an idea of how futile it is to try and change their habits. And I can't tell them I program on a mac, because "that's not a real computer, is it?"...
Two remarks:
1) The USA white population is largely made up by Eurotrash. So, with that in mind one could easily find more charitable theories, e.g. for the hispanic and white population one could just as easily say that the USA is peopled by the most enterprising people of those ethnic groups, those that didn't mind leaving everything behind and start over again, those filled with an enterprising pioneering spirit blablablah. My point? It's a funny old (new?) world. And btw for the black population one could claim that those who survived slave catching, transport and decades of oppression clearly were the best examples of their population. Please note that I don't believe one word of what I'm writing... It's just that my viewpoints at this point are as valid as any other.
2) Cultural differences can be a much bigger factor than genetic make up. e.g. some indian tribes have embraced western ways to a large extend in order to gain influence, get better living standards and even to maintain their own cultural values as they see fit. Others haven't. There's a large historical factor there as well. It isn't easy for a given tribe to do certain things when decimated more than other tribes, kicked into a wilderness and submitted to infertility programs just a bit more zealously than other tribes. But some anthropological studies suggest that some success stories are in hindsight predictable because those tribes had a culture that already was more enterprising and flexible than their neighbor's.
imo if you really want to go there, you have to be scientific about it. Not political correct. And that's not easy. You want to pick one possible instrument and make it fit the whole spectrum of human behavior, sociology etc etc. Good luck.
That's not fair. Haven't you noticed the macs are now white instead of gummy? So our passwords are now more in line with the new vibe. "Shiny" seems to do quite well...
Ohmygod, more hype!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)
Yep.
I am pretty die hard apple, but a friend of mine has his mini PC thingy with media center for about a year and a half now. It does some things with OSS, like the DVD functionality, and it runs Windows home edition or something for the rest. It isn't flawless or particularly elegant, but I'd say it's still a bit ahead, even if it doesn't appeal to me. Too fiddly by far.
He has it built in his couch (ha!) and hooked up to his flatscreen, and complemented with a nice little speaker system. All in all pretty good.
It's a bit silly to claim Apple's superiority in the living room at the moment.
I think the factor here for not designing totally new stuff too soon is that they want to put the unfamiliar intel stuff (new chip set, and for apple users, something totally new, even if on a totally irrelevant level for most consumers) into an already familiar design. I wouldn't put amazing on the product, but I'm not in marketing, so that doesn't count.
Anyway, your perspective is not typical, wouldn't you say? As a mainstream low price mass market (they wish) product, the features and form factor are pretty amazing (until the next thing comes along). This sentence doesn't work if you leave out words like mainstream, you have to see the whole picture, and since the words amazing and fun are used in a marketing context, it's silly to use them outside of their context. Marketing speak is a bit silly by definition and in any context, but marketing in itself isn't.
Your area of expertise takes you ahead of the market and makes you see lots of specialized products. I bet you aren't easily impressed (you lucky bastard!)
That's right, let yourself be defined by what you use. Do tell what other things you stick to for fear of what others think about you. And do tell what specialized blogs with weird crowds you visit to come to that opinion.
...
Sorry, just had to write that. IMO what's worse than stupid is people taking total enthousiasts so serious. They don't deserve the attention, not positively nor negatively. If people froth at the mouth, smile, wave and find a better place to be. Enthousiasm can be obnoxious, but almost every otherwise sane person has his/her area of stupidity. For some it's computers, even down to the OS, for others it's cars, cats, model trains, pigeons, fashion,
And if you think weirdness is reserved strictly (or even largely, or even moderately) to the Linux/Apple crowd you obviously haven't looked at die hard windows fans closely. And they are out there in numbers. However, they're as easily ignored as Apple/linux fans.
I know my area of weirdness, it's OS's in general. I tend to be enthousiastic (really silly even) to most things Apple, but if I see something good in Windows, you can see me smile goofily just as easy. Does that make me sane?
It's so much fun, I hope they do this more. You know, announce fun new products. Then we can see everyone go crazy (yey, FTL or cold fusion, what do you think?). Oh, and you know what, you can also check their stock prices!!!!!!
God, what fun we have.
Why should you? Haven't you ever seen anybody act irrational about things they like? Ha! Half the people I know who are into audio are almost religious about their particular setup. You should see them talking to each other. Worse than religion or politics. I'm cool, my setup is a dream - or a nightmare, depending on what your needs are. If you're not into it, clearly you wouldn't want big speakers, 2 times two hundred extremely loud watts amplification, pre amp, some weird almost surround system and a separate ground in order not to get electrocuted every time you want to adjust the volume from 1 to oh perhaps 1,25... This takes more place and uses more energy than most people's installation, and that's only the sound part of it, now add maniac pickup etc etc. You have to be a bit irrational about it, no? But I can - if I feel like it - talk extremely rational about it. Maybe not with a straight face anymore...
A friend of my father always tells me pc's are so much better than macs. I mostly tell him that I know, I have a pc, it is made by apple. I have had numerous other pc's made by other people. PC's are nice. A while back he confessed to me he could never have a mac, because then he couldn't buy anything new for it every two weeks. The guy is over sixty, I've known him for more than thirty years. He needs to tinker far more than he needs to e-mail. Before he fiddled with his frankenstein computer it was model trains.
He thinks his computer is the best in the world and can talk about it for hours. Clearly I don't hate him for this. And I can tell you, even a mac mini is better than a beast that has to be kick started, and can alternatively be used to scare big mammals or blow away walls and furniture - if it works...
There's lots of good solutions out there, why would it upset someone that I'd consider Apple's offer? I haven't a single compressed audio file and still have tons of LP's. But hey, moving to a smaller place I am going to replace my rediculously big Dynaco stereo and outlandishly good B&W speakers for something practical. And get rid of the analog stuff, it's too bulky. That's a horrible horrible thing to say, I know. Still.
All my stuff is second hand, haven't paid more than the price of that hifi thing, which made a lot of people jealous, I can tell you, so having to spend that amount for something new doesn't sound too bad, if it's worth it. Which only my ears can tell you, It may surprise you, but opiniated asses don't do better than my ears in that respect. And I have pretty good ears.
I'm looking to fill a room a lot smaller than I'm used to, that's a big consideration. I'm also now married with kid. And I'm not a practicing musician anymore. All that begs for something practical. And since yes, you can play other stuff from that hifi (you sure know what you write about), I am still considering it.
I always judged with my ears. Not being prepared to listen to something because other people think it's not a cool brand seems a bit silly.
But maybe you're right, you know, I mean, sure, you listened to that hifi thingy before you wrote this, right?
This gets a bit personal, I know, but I find it amazing how stupid people can get over brands. Apple haters are actually a LOT more pathetic than apple lovers imo.
The mini doesn't need to be a big seller, it must be a reason to enter a store and then you go for the imac anyway...
"Anyone who throws their stereo away for the Ipod Hifi is a complete moron."
Don't agree at all. I'm moving from a house to a brand new appartment. The place is significantly smaller. I'm looking to replace my stereo for something small, good sounding in a smaller space and practical. My gear takes loads of space, consumes heaps of energy and is about 30 years old. Now, it still sounds good, but I shouldn't kid myself. I will never turn that volume over 20%. And lots of newer gear actually sounds better, even if it hasn't got that totally cool look. I won't be able to place my (BIG b&w) speakers anywhere near ideal, so where does that leave this moron, I ask you.
Maybe the hifi is not the solution, but the few objective tests already out there have shown it isn't too bad. Couple that with an inexpensive music server (and if I'm the one maintaining it, why not dish out $100 extra for the mini?) and a wireless network and I'll be able to gain a lot of space and have something that my kid won't instantly die from if she decides to see what makes it tick...
As for true hifi, there are lots of setups saying stupid things, 90% of bose gear for instance. I bet the hifi sounds better than most bose solutions. And if that's the case, the price is almost right (knock off $100 and it'll actually be cheapish).
So, when I saw the hifi, while not buying totally into the marketing fluff, my reaction was more "mmmm" than "urg".