I've read a lot of comments that the.99 price is great or horrible or the service is stupid becasue it doens't support yourt favorite audio format or it's dumb because it's mac only...but let's think about something here...
IT HASN'T BEEN ANNOUNCED YET!!!!!
There are a lot of options here, and the truth of the matter is we don't know what, if anything, Apple will unveil. Hell, maybe they'll charge.89 for a song, or maybe 1.59. Or maybe they'll run a buy two songs get one free, or maybe they won't do anything. Maybe it will be Wndows compatible and maybe it will only be compatible with OS 9 (okay, so that one is a bit farfetched)
The only thing that is certain here is that no matter what happens...a journalist will find a way to say that this signals the death of Apple Computer.
A boycott is only helpful if it actually can hurt the intended target.
If slashdotters boycotte the entertainment inudstry en masse, we would still only account for a tiny fraction of the MPAA/RIAA's customer base. The dip in sales would be hardly noticeable and rasily explained away
The problem is, online communities have a greatly exagerated sense of self-worth. We take for granted that people even know what MPAA is. Ask 100 people on the street what it is and you'll get 90 different answers. Even after telling someone what the MPAA is, they will simply shrug and say, okay. Getting THEM to protest MPAA actions would be like getting a slashdotter to announce an undying love for Microsoft. It will never happen.
The only thing we can do is make noise. Keep yelling, keep comlaining. Write your senator and congressmen. He who yells loudest, wins.
Quark version 4 was written to run on system 7 and later...Therefore...they could not adopt the OS 8 Appearance manager (also called platinum)
The statement about the UI being proprietary is sheer ignorance. The UI for version 4 is based on the OS 7 Appearance manager. Keep in mind that version 4 was released in 1997, when the Mac market was split between OS 7 and OS 8. Quark didn't adopt the OS 8 Appearance manager because that would have meant abandoning OS 7. Granted, using Quark version 4 today looks a little funny
Version 5 of Quark runs in only 8.6 and higher...and does comply with the OS 8 Appearance Manager. My guess is you are one of the people that didn't upgrade to 5 because it wasn't carbon (or Quark's insane pricing scheme was a drawback). I can understand that, but don't fall into the trap of comparing software written in 1997 with software written today.
On another note...I've never had any problems with Quark's shortcuts. To each his own I suppose
I once had a long conversation with a long time Windows system admin about why Mac fans are so fanatical to their systems. (I'm more than comfortable in front of many OS's, but I love the Mac most of all)
He kept saying that he understood why people would like the Mac, but couldn't unerstand the religious like cultism that permeates many in the mac community. We discussed everything that is mention ed in the article. But I kept coming back to a point someone had mentioned to me years ealier.
It's about getting it.
I don't mean this in a condescending way, though it may sound like it at first. People who use and love Macs just 'get it.' I'm not even sure if I can explain what 'it' is. There is something about the Mac, about Apple computers, and it's hard to put into words.
Many people don't get it. Most people never will. There is nothing wrong with that. Getting it doesn't make one any smarter or any better than anyone else. It doesn't open up the knigdom of heaven for someone when they 'get it.' It doesn't grant you riches. It doesn't entitle you to anything other than knowing that other people love something you have come to love. "Getting it' encites an enthusiasm in people. And these people simply don't understand how other people don't 'get it.'
It isn't about Apple's marketing or PR machine. Apple has succeeded often in spite of itself as Amelio unabashedly admits. It isn't about style, it isn't about performance, it isn't about hating Microsoft, it isn't even really about computers.
When I see people 'get it' for the first time, it's almost like I'm 'getting it' for the first time as well. It's as if I feed off their enthusiasm and become more enthusiastic myself.
Mac fanatics know that Apple is just like any other company, driven by profits and greed. We know that when you boil it all down, Macs aren't really any better than the competition. We know that the Mac has an uphill battle to gain even a tiny marketshare. We know that there will be those who will lodge very articulate and reasonable objections to the Mac platform...It simply isn't important.
There is something we just 'get.' It just makes sense to us.
The only thing I can liken it to is the phenomonon of performers like The Beatles and Elvis. They weren't the best artists of their time. They didn't have the best voices and weren't the most attractive. There was something special they had that just drew people to them. No one could put a word to it. Call it charm, call it mystique...there was something undeniable about them.
I have no idea if any of this makes any sense...if not, I'm sorry for wasting your time. If it does, well then, I'm not as high as I thought I was.
If you replace "Windows PC" in this article with "typewriter" and then read it again you'll see how it looks to a Mac user.
That's one of the most insightful statements I've ever read on/. Mac users will always look at PC's with that kind of atitude. There is nothing Microsoft can do, nothing any PC maker can do to change that perception. It doesn't help that most PC's still come in monolithic beige boxes, furthering the belief that PC makers are behind the times
Linodws, in their defense of the name used the argument that Microsoft had abandoned the word Windows because they didn't fight to protect their copyright.
Now Microsoft is trying to do just that, which will call into question their very right to use the name. The term 'window' and 'windowing system' were used years before Microsoft had even considered a gui. They at least date back to Apple's original Graphical User Interface guidelines manual in the early 80's.
Hell, even the name Windows supposedly came from an inside joke at MS. When Bill Gates was previewing the alpha for what became Windows 1.0, he whined: "This has panels. The Mac has windows. I want windows!"
I don't blame MS for trying to protect it's copyright, but it's a battle they are likely going to lose to anyone who wants to fight it. The law says Microsoft has to defend it's copyright, up until the Lindows case, they hadn't...
As one of the most famous spokesmen for a company that enjoyed tremendous success during the.com craze, why do you think the bubble burst and what is your outlook on the future for.coms that survived (Priceline, Amazon, etc.?)
You mean all this time, I had a choice in operating systems?
A lot of people have been saying that they use windows because it has all the programs/games/warez/etc... but one must point out that it is the user that dictates what platform has what. If the public wants a thingamijig to do something to a doohickey... whoever creates the thingamijig will create it for the platform we want it created on. If we keep using Windows...they will keep writing software to run on it exclusively.
And if our democracy has taught me anything it's that he who yells the loudest, wins.
How did you come to the conclusion that the XBox is technically superior? Technically, I believe that the PS2 is superior
an argument could be made either way for saying one is better than the other... but the parent on this is correct. it is all about the killer apps, and Sony has made sure their box has them
The Xbox is a great piece of tech. Real gamers know it. Thats why in the states its outselling the GameCube
That's terribly faulty logic.
The Playstation2 is outselling the Xbox, so does that mean it is a better piece of tech than the Xbox? If anything, the PS2 is the worst piece of hardware of the bunch.
The resosn the Xbox is selling better than the gamecube is that Nintendo can't shake the image of being a console maker for a younger crowd. Older gamers (the majority of the market) prefer a console for more mature gamers, which is why the PS2 and Xbox are doing better in the states
Re:A better solution....
on
Review: EyeTV
·
· Score: 1
how does it beat EyeTV hands down?
Yes it is slightly better resolution....but is twice as expensive.
Firewire is a red herring here. The uncompressed cable signal isn't even as fast as 1.2 MB/sec, so "much better throughput" is irrelevant.
So what if the road can handle a thousand cars a day if there are only 20 cars in the city?
Don't get me wrong, I'd like the better resolution, but the formac device isn't *that* much better than EyeTV
Editing can be easier than that
on
Review: EyeTV
·
· Score: 3, Informative
From EyeTV, export to quicktime movie.
then use this killer utility to split the file (at time intervals) and rejoin components.
Much easier than what you are doing, IMO. I've been recording Simpson's episodes for a month now and I delete the commericals from the file each night.
the new.6 release of Chimera is absolutely screaming fast. Much more stable as well, it is quickly becoming the "best in Class" browser in OS X.
Slow? No. Slower? yes
on
Is Mac OS X Slow?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
As a long-time, self-described Mac fanatic, I must say that OS X is slower than OS 9, though I would not call it slow.
Typically, I see the OS X behave slowly in Finder more than anything else. Within applications, I don't see much (if any) performance hit, but when switching to finder or minimizing a window, OS X can be very slow sometimes. This has improved a lot from 10.0, but it is still MUCH slower than OS 9.
Application launch time is another area in which Apple needs to work on. They instituted a new pre-binding mechanism into jagwire, but it has had very little effect on launch time.
The pols don't want to be burned again like they were burned when the dot com bubble burst. A lot of people lost a lot of money and politicians don't want to be linked to that.
also the PDF's were not created in MS Word at least. They were made in Corel WordPerfect. (On the PDF, look under File>document info>general in Acrobat)
I'm not saying that Apple is a great company and deserves unwarranted praise from the/. crowd, but just because Apple is in it for profit does not mean Apple is, or ever will be as bad as Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
NeXt was founded in 86, so no....but the rest of your argument bears some merit
IT HASN'T BEEN ANNOUNCED YET!!!!!
There are a lot of options here, and the truth of the matter is we don't know what, if anything, Apple will unveil. Hell, maybe they'll charge .89 for a song, or maybe 1.59. Or maybe they'll run a buy two songs get one free, or maybe they won't do anything. Maybe it will be Wndows compatible and maybe it will only be compatible with OS 9 (okay, so that one is a bit farfetched)
The only thing that is certain here is that no matter what happens...a journalist will find a way to say that this signals the death of Apple Computer.
Best.Post.Ever.
Fox News is run by Roger Ailes for Christ's sake...a two bit Republican strategist from the Reagan-Bush era.
your math is wrong...it should be 2 million copies of office, not 200,000
If slashdotters boycotte the entertainment inudstry en masse, we would still only account for a tiny fraction of the MPAA/RIAA's customer base. The dip in sales would be hardly noticeable and rasily explained away
The problem is, online communities have a greatly exagerated sense of self-worth. We take for granted that people even know what MPAA is. Ask 100 people on the street what it is and you'll get 90 different answers. Even after telling someone what the MPAA is, they will simply shrug and say, okay. Getting THEM to protest MPAA actions would be like getting a slashdotter to announce an undying love for Microsoft. It will never happen.
The only thing we can do is make noise. Keep yelling, keep comlaining. Write your senator and congressmen. He who yells loudest, wins.
The statement about the UI being proprietary is sheer ignorance. The UI for version 4 is based on the OS 7 Appearance manager. Keep in mind that version 4 was released in 1997, when the Mac market was split between OS 7 and OS 8. Quark didn't adopt the OS 8 Appearance manager because that would have meant abandoning OS 7. Granted, using Quark version 4 today looks a little funny
Version 5 of Quark runs in only 8.6 and higher...and does comply with the OS 8 Appearance Manager. My guess is you are one of the people that didn't upgrade to 5 because it wasn't carbon (or Quark's insane pricing scheme was a drawback). I can understand that, but don't fall into the trap of comparing software written in 1997 with software written today.
On another note...I've never had any problems with Quark's shortcuts. To each his own I suppose
He kept saying that he understood why people would like the Mac, but couldn't unerstand the religious like cultism that permeates many in the mac community. We discussed everything that is mention ed in the article. But I kept coming back to a point someone had mentioned to me years ealier.
It's about getting it.
I don't mean this in a condescending way, though it may sound like it at first. People who use and love Macs just 'get it.' I'm not even sure if I can explain what 'it' is. There is something about the Mac, about Apple computers, and it's hard to put into words.
Many people don't get it. Most people never will. There is nothing wrong with that. Getting it doesn't make one any smarter or any better than anyone else. It doesn't open up the knigdom of heaven for someone when they 'get it.' It doesn't grant you riches. It doesn't entitle you to anything other than knowing that other people love something you have come to love. "Getting it' encites an enthusiasm in people. And these people simply don't understand how other people don't 'get it.'
It isn't about Apple's marketing or PR machine. Apple has succeeded often in spite of itself as Amelio unabashedly admits. It isn't about style, it isn't about performance, it isn't about hating Microsoft, it isn't even really about computers.
When I see people 'get it' for the first time, it's almost like I'm 'getting it' for the first time as well. It's as if I feed off their enthusiasm and become more enthusiastic myself.
Mac fanatics know that Apple is just like any other company, driven by profits and greed. We know that when you boil it all down, Macs aren't really any better than the competition. We know that the Mac has an uphill battle to gain even a tiny marketshare. We know that there will be those who will lodge very articulate and reasonable objections to the Mac platform...It simply isn't important.
There is something we just 'get.' It just makes sense to us.
The only thing I can liken it to is the phenomonon of performers like The Beatles and Elvis. They weren't the best artists of their time. They didn't have the best voices and weren't the most attractive. There was something special they had that just drew people to them. No one could put a word to it. Call it charm, call it mystique...there was something undeniable about them.
I have no idea if any of this makes any sense...if not, I'm sorry for wasting your time. If it does, well then, I'm not as high as I thought I was.
That's one of the most insightful statements I've ever read on /. Mac users will always look at PC's with that kind of atitude. There is nothing Microsoft can do, nothing any PC maker can do to change that perception. It doesn't help that most PC's still come in monolithic beige boxes, furthering the belief that PC makers are behind the times
Now Microsoft is trying to do just that, which will call into question their very right to use the name. The term 'window' and 'windowing system' were used years before Microsoft had even considered a gui. They at least date back to Apple's original Graphical User Interface guidelines manual in the early 80's.
Hell, even the name Windows supposedly came from an inside joke at MS. When Bill Gates was previewing the alpha for what became Windows 1.0, he whined: "This has panels. The Mac has windows. I want windows!"
I don't blame MS for trying to protect it's copyright, but it's a battle they are likely going to lose to anyone who wants to fight it. The law says Microsoft has to defend it's copyright, up until the Lindows case, they hadn't...
A day late and a dollar short, if you ask me.
No. Windows users couldn't possibly be worse off
As one of the most famous spokesmen for a company that enjoyed tremendous success during the .com craze, why do you think the bubble burst and what is your outlook on the future for .coms that survived (Priceline, Amazon, etc.?)
A lot of people have been saying that they use windows because it has all the programs/games/warez/etc... but one must point out that it is the user that dictates what platform has what. If the public wants a thingamijig to do something to a doohickey... whoever creates the thingamijig will create it for the platform we want it created on. If we keep using Windows...they will keep writing software to run on it exclusively.
And if our democracy has taught me anything it's that he who yells the loudest, wins.
Buy an PS2 - money goes to Japan's economy, helping the world's economy
Buy a Gamecube - see PS2
Buy an X-Box - watch as M$ adds to their 30 bil warchest, helping no one but M$
On top of that, many, many games are produced in the US, so buying games does add to the US economy regardelss of platform
an argument could be made either way for saying one is better than the other... but the parent on this is correct. it is all about the killer apps, and Sony has made sure their box has them
That's terribly faulty logic. The Playstation2 is outselling the Xbox, so does that mean it is a better piece of tech than the Xbox? If anything, the PS2 is the worst piece of hardware of the bunch.
The resosn the Xbox is selling better than the gamecube is that Nintendo can't shake the image of being a console maker for a younger crowd. Older gamers (the majority of the market) prefer a console for more mature gamers, which is why the PS2 and Xbox are doing better in the states
Yes it is slightly better resolution....but is twice as expensive.
Firewire is a red herring here. The uncompressed cable signal isn't even as fast as 1.2 MB/sec, so "much better throughput" is irrelevant.
So what if the road can handle a thousand cars a day if there are only 20 cars in the city?
Don't get me wrong, I'd like the better resolution, but the formac device isn't *that* much better than EyeTV
then use this killer utility to split the file (at time intervals) and rejoin components.
Much easier than what you are doing, IMO. I've been recording Simpson's episodes for a month now and I delete the commericals from the file each night.
Hey this is the best thing I've heard since Saturday November 09, @02:00AM... ...oh wait.
the new .6 release of Chimera is absolutely screaming fast. Much more stable as well, it is quickly becoming the "best in Class" browser in OS X.
Typically, I see the OS X behave slowly in Finder more than anything else. Within applications, I don't see much (if any) performance hit, but when switching to finder or minimizing a window, OS X can be very slow sometimes. This has improved a lot from 10.0, but it is still MUCH slower than OS 9.
Application launch time is another area in which Apple needs to work on. They instituted a new pre-binding mechanism into jagwire, but it has had very little effect on launch time.
The pols don't want to be burned again like they were burned when the dot com bubble burst. A lot of people lost a lot of money and politicians don't want to be linked to that.
It's all over except the grand-reopening under the MSN name.
also the PDF's were not created in MS Word at least. They were made in Corel WordPerfect. (On the PDF, look under File>document info>general in Acrobat)
I'm not saying that Apple is a great company and deserves unwarranted praise from the /. crowd, but just because Apple is in it for profit does not mean Apple is, or ever will be as bad as Microsoft.