That doesn't matter - it's *up to Apple* how it licenses its software, just as it's up to any individual developer how they licence their code - GPL/BSD/Apache/Proprietary/Other etc.
It doesn't matter if you disagree with it, it's their choice, and if it's legal for a commercial entity to ignore Apple's software licence then the same applies to any other software licence. As it happens, the legal decision went the right way. If you hate Apple then consider that a necessary evil that they "won" - the real victory is that (had the result gone the other way), then all that GPL code is as good as public domain, since there would be no way to enforce the licence. "Tivoisation" would be protected.
And every time they leave a void with no Microsoft Office on a platform used by *a lot* of people they run the risk of a serious competitor to Office being able to squeeze in.
It's not just the Windows OS they have to look at - they have a lot to lose by leaving a large hole in Office-format-coverage. Your argument also doesn't seem to mesh with their current strategy. The Mac version of Office is doing rather well, and has seen increased development and the best sales ever - sounds a lot like what a software company would want: cross platform success.
Doggedly holding onto the "everyone on Windows" model is what will kill them, and they know it
(also, for the record, not that it matters, I'm a scientist. I am well aware that 22/7 is a rational number, as is any representation of Pi that write down (short of the actual symbol itself, or the definition in words). I didn't think it was necessary to qualify that I knew that fact for a simple wordplay joke on the name of the company and a common shorthand representation of that number.
I'm surprised you didn't take offence at my suggestion that they only sell a non-integer fraction of goods that only come in integer units, since that doesn't make sense in real life.
I'm also not a know-it-all - there's an awful lot I don't know!
Tell that to the UK government who crashed a train into one of those containers at 100mph (on film, and in front of an audience) to test the survivability. (It did not break open).
The UK government demonstrated the strength of the containers used back in 1985 by crashing a train into one at 100mph - the container survived intact. There's a youtube video of it linked further up thread.
If Psystar's selling of OS X against the licence (ie, free to ignore Apple's software licence at will for commercial gain) was ruled legal then the effect on things like the GPL would be catastrophic.
If one company is free to ignore a software licence and has been backed up by a court in such an enterprise, then what chance does the GPL have? Psystar could have rolled up some GPL code into their distribution, modified it and refused to release changes. How is that any different to wilfully ignoring Apple's licence terms for OS X?
Just because you disagree with them? That lawsuit affected all licences.
They could have released a machine that was 99% of what they had, just with no copy of OS X provided and they would have been fine (they're essentially selling a normal PC at this point). What you can't do commercially is sell OS X running on non-Apple hardware unless you're Apple themselves and you release it under a different licence.
That's not the same thing is it? In your post before you called me a "cynical Apple shill". So which is it? Backing off from that assertion because you know you've got nothing to back it with except the fact that I disagree with you on a discussion site? (I'll let you absorb and process how silly that sounds that it is even being mentioned).
My posts don't follow the lockstep "Apple/Sony/MS/Facebook is eeeeeevil", but that does not make me a shill, or an apologist; it just means I hold a different opinion (and one that is not always positive to Apple, which you'd know if you'd ever read my posts).
The simple fact of the matter is that it's become impossible to discuss anything "touchy" on this site constructively - Android, Linux, Open Source, Apple, Climate Change - when any comment that is not overwhelmingly on the "side" of slashdot is hammered.
I was accused of being a hypocrite because I held an opinion that one of Apple's lawsuits was wrong while another one was right, for goodness sake. That's not being a hypocrite, that's having an opinion that they're not 100% evil or 100% good - apparently that sort of nuanced opinion is frowned upon and you have to be either totally black or totally white.
I'm not paid by Apple, I have no professional relationship with them or any other firm. I'm not paid to post on/. and I'm not paid for my opinions in any other capacity.
I have unpopular opinions, but I'm not being paid for them. Take that for what it's worth - clearly not much, since you've already decided with no evidence.
That was my point - back then creating working dies at 22 nm, which is as good as we can do right now really, would have been laughed at by some. "That's only 100 or so atoms! Good luck!"
The team doing this has demonstrated that they can be much more accurate with single atom placement than in the past, so I don't doubt we'll be building at the single atom scale in mass production eventually, and probably within my lifetime easily.
Pretty much - that's how transistors work. The phosphorous has a extra electron (compared to the silicon) and the combination forms an extrinsic semiconductor, which you then use to make junctions and transistors and diodes etc.
Just having the phosphorus atom isolated doesn't do much for you, so I think the article is referring to "silicon based computers of today" without really thinking about it properly - you still need to dope it to make it useful for making computer chips, despite it already being an intrinsic semiconductor.
That was my first thought exactly. One rule and set of ethics for them, another set for everyone else and any time the spotlight is on them it's "persecution".
Shares a lot in common with the way religious fundamentalists operate, too. "You're oppressing my religious freedom by not allowing me to force my beliefs on others! That's unfair!"
Either way, I've been on slashdot for over 10 years, are you suggesting that I've been paid all this time?
While I may be verbose (is that really a negative point, on a discussion site full of supposedly intelligent people?!), I'm certainly not "cultivating a user farm" - what does that even mean?
I have tried LO (and it's earlier parent OO) and it was almost a full replacement for Office for me but the spreadsheet app was lacking a couple of features, especially in terms of simple graphing.
I should try the latest version though and compare, since the last time I looked was shortly after the fork.
Why should Microsoft base its decisions on what other companies do?
Microsoft sells software. Apple sells hardware (with software that exists to drive hardware sales). It's not really in Apple's interest to have lots of cross platform apps made by itself unless they facilitate hardware sales - like iTunes on Windows.
Microsoft, on the other hand, should be writing for every platform it can get its hands on, since their money comes from the software sales.
Well, MS gets much less than 70% of the price of the boxed version that they sell in the physical Apple store. Maybe they'll get a special deal with Apple but don't count on it.
Slashdot Mirror
That doesn't matter - it's *up to Apple* how it licenses its software, just as it's up to any individual developer how they licence their code - GPL/BSD/Apache/Proprietary/Other etc.
It doesn't matter if you disagree with it, it's their choice, and if it's legal for a commercial entity to ignore Apple's software licence then the same applies to any other software licence. As it happens, the legal decision went the right way. If you hate Apple then consider that a necessary evil that they "won" - the real victory is that (had the result gone the other way), then all that GPL code is as good as public domain, since there would be no way to enforce the licence. "Tivoisation" would be protected.
And every time they leave a void with no Microsoft Office on a platform used by *a lot* of people they run the risk of a serious competitor to Office being able to squeeze in.
It's not just the Windows OS they have to look at - they have a lot to lose by leaving a large hole in Office-format-coverage. Your argument also doesn't seem to mesh with their current strategy. The Mac version of Office is doing rather well, and has seen increased development and the best sales ever - sounds a lot like what a software company would want: cross platform success.
Doggedly holding onto the "everyone on Windows" model is what will kill them, and they know it
Relax cupcake, it was A JOKE.
Goodness me.
(also, for the record, not that it matters, I'm a scientist. I am well aware that 22/7 is a rational number, as is any representation of Pi that write down (short of the actual symbol itself, or the definition in words). I didn't think it was necessary to qualify that I knew that fact for a simple wordplay joke on the name of the company and a common shorthand representation of that number.
I'm surprised you didn't take offence at my suggestion that they only sell a non-integer fraction of goods that only come in integer units, since that doesn't make sense in real life.
I'm also not a know-it-all - there's an awful lot I don't know!
Tell that to the UK government who crashed a train into one of those containers at 100mph (on film, and in front of an audience) to test the survivability. (It did not break open).
The UK government demonstrated the strength of the containers used back in 1985 by crashing a train into one at 100mph - the container survived intact. There's a youtube video of it linked further up thread.
So is oxygen at high partial pressures.
But speaking of heavy metals, most of them are chemically pretty toxic. Chelate them out of the bloodstream for good health!
No, it's Proview's attempt to make some money - they're in financial trouble now and are looking for a fast buck.
If Psystar's selling of OS X against the licence (ie, free to ignore Apple's software licence at will for commercial gain) was ruled legal then the effect on things like the GPL would be catastrophic.
If one company is free to ignore a software licence and has been backed up by a court in such an enterprise, then what chance does the GPL have? Psystar could have rolled up some GPL code into their distribution, modified it and refused to release changes. How is that any different to wilfully ignoring Apple's licence terms for OS X?
Just because you disagree with them? That lawsuit affected all licences.
They could have released a machine that was 99% of what they had, just with no copy of OS X provided and they would have been fine (they're essentially selling a normal PC at this point). What you can't do commercially is sell OS X running on non-Apple hardware unless you're Apple themselves and you release it under a different licence.
Yes, but some humour is required to interpret the joke.
I could have written 3.14159 units, but that is also rational. If I'd written Pi in that line, the joke doesn't work.
Also, you forgot to log in.
Then like a man in orthopaedic shoes, I stand corrected.
That's not the same thing is it? In your post before you called me a "cynical Apple shill". So which is it? Backing off from that assertion because you know you've got nothing to back it with except the fact that I disagree with you on a discussion site? (I'll let you absorb and process how silly that sounds that it is even being mentioned).
My posts don't follow the lockstep "Apple/Sony/MS/Facebook is eeeeeevil", but that does not make me a shill, or an apologist; it just means I hold a different opinion (and one that is not always positive to Apple, which you'd know if you'd ever read my posts).
The simple fact of the matter is that it's become impossible to discuss anything "touchy" on this site constructively - Android, Linux, Open Source, Apple, Climate Change - when any comment that is not overwhelmingly on the "side" of slashdot is hammered.
I was accused of being a hypocrite because I held an opinion that one of Apple's lawsuits was wrong while another one was right, for goodness sake. That's not being a hypocrite, that's having an opinion that they're not 100% evil or 100% good - apparently that sort of nuanced opinion is frowned upon and you have to be either totally black or totally white.
Then you're incorrect, at least about me.
I'm not paid by Apple, I have no professional relationship with them or any other firm. I'm not paid to post on /. and I'm not paid for my opinions in any other capacity.
I have unpopular opinions, but I'm not being paid for them. Take that for what it's worth - clearly not much, since you've already decided with no evidence.
That was my point - back then creating working dies at 22 nm, which is as good as we can do right now really, would have been laughed at by some. "That's only 100 or so atoms! Good luck!"
The team doing this has demonstrated that they can be much more accurate with single atom placement than in the past, so I don't doubt we'll be building at the single atom scale in mass production eventually, and probably within my lifetime easily.
They're stopping at 22/7 sales.
I told them they were being irrational, but there's no stopping them.
Pretty much - that's how transistors work. The phosphorous has a extra electron (compared to the silicon) and the combination forms an extrinsic semiconductor, which you then use to make junctions and transistors and diodes etc.
Just having the phosphorus atom isolated doesn't do much for you, so I think the article is referring to "silicon based computers of today" without really thinking about it properly - you still need to dope it to make it useful for making computer chips, despite it already being an intrinsic semiconductor.
Didn't they say the same thing about reducing die sizes to the nanometre scale?
The attempted IT upgrade of the NHS springs to mind.
So much money burning on giant piles, with black smoke billowing out.
So it's not open source enough?
It wasn't open source at all until recently!
If you use Symantec you'll certainly be throwing *something* at them.
That was my first thought exactly. One rule and set of ethics for them, another set for everyone else and any time the spotlight is on them it's "persecution".
Shares a lot in common with the way religious fundamentalists operate, too. "You're oppressing my religious freedom by not allowing me to force my beliefs on others! That's unfair!"
They were hoping to nose ahead in the legal proceedings.
How do we know it's not you?
Either way, I've been on slashdot for over 10 years, are you suggesting that I've been paid all this time?
While I may be verbose (is that really a negative point, on a discussion site full of supposedly intelligent people?!), I'm certainly not "cultivating a user farm" - what does that even mean?
I have tried LO (and it's earlier parent OO) and it was almost a full replacement for Office for me but the spreadsheet app was lacking a couple of features, especially in terms of simple graphing.
I should try the latest version though and compare, since the last time I looked was shortly after the fork.
Why should Microsoft base its decisions on what other companies do?
Microsoft sells software. Apple sells hardware (with software that exists to drive hardware sales). It's not really in Apple's interest to have lots of cross platform apps made by itself unless they facilitate hardware sales - like iTunes on Windows.
Microsoft, on the other hand, should be writing for every platform it can get its hands on, since their money comes from the software sales.
Well, MS gets much less than 70% of the price of the boxed version that they sell in the physical Apple store. Maybe they'll get a special deal with Apple but don't count on it.