'Well, Terry, as I always say, "we skipped the light fandango, turning cartwheels across the floor, I was getting kind of seasick, but the crowd called out for more!"'
'Why Jimmy, that's very profound! What does it mean?'
I think Apple are close to being on the right track, but otherwise I have to disagree. Apple are not expensive. Others are too cheap. They attract the price-conscious and cut corners on production. Economics 101. Then your Gateway falls apart, and what does that tell you? Worse: I've seen useless Gateway laptops that cost a lot more than almost anything Apple had to offer at the time, laptops that couldn't even work as advertised - and in the showroom. No, I will take quality any day, and if quality costs a bit more, I will pay it, for I profit in the long run.
I am not sure if it's genius on Apple's part to choose Unix, or instead that they knew Steve and Avie had the best system going, the best system ever seen, both for development and for use, and that Steve and Avie already chose Unix - and for reasons which were particular to NeXT, and not Apple.
There's been speculation about whether Apple should have chosen Be, but after peeking inside, I think it's obvious to anyone that Apple made the right move there.
Using X11 to port to OS X is only winning half the battle anyway - with, I think, its vector in the wrong direction - and Ranger Rick has, what I can gather, used Carbon or the equivalent for the ports - not Cocoa.
How hard would it be - and what obstacles would there be, legal and otherwise - to using Objective-C and Cocoa? On KDE itself?
doesn't seem as fast as IE to load or as responsive on low-end hardware
The 'low-end hardware' bit I can understand, but traditionally, IE has cheated in two respects:
1. It plays dirty tricks, tries to foul up Netscape/Moz starts, and the Moz code has to go hunting in the Registry for all the booby traps and remove them first.
2. Windows loads most of the IE engine on startup. MS used to have a 'Preload' key in the Registry which could be turned off. If you turned it off, IE was slow as molasses to start. MS have removed the key now, and what I've heard, on XP Moz loads about as fast as IE. But that's only what I've heard.
I doubt they'd do anything as blatant as making Linux impossible to run
Why do you doubt that? They did it with Sun, with Novell, with QuickTime, with Netscape - and they were the uncontested bullies of the market then. Now they've got their backs to the wall and are desperate.
Moz source back then was riddled with comments about all the hoops the browser had to go through to recover after a Registry attack by IE. Avie Tevanian's testimony in DC tells a story of how IE 4 went in and sabotaged QT on Windows with the same technique.
Windows is already doing funny things when threatened with a different OS. It won't co-exist.
Microsoft stop at nothing. That much is clear to everyone. Why should they stop at stopping Linux?
It's kindergarten defensive coding: anyone with even less than half a brain does not use strcat without first being DAMN sure the destination's got enough room.
This is a beginner's mistake, aka Microsoft Mistake.
I think what really matters is how these films survive over time. Long was it Tolkien could not be done: you could do Star Wars, you could do anything, but you couldn't do Tolkien. Others tried and failed.
A few movie critics are beginning to talk not about the fantasy of JRR but the fantasy of Jackson, as if the latter's interpretation will in some way supersede the literary accomplishment of the former.
This can very well happen, although it certainly is not Jackson's intention. What these movies must do over time is enhance the LoTR experience, not replace it.
I think what Jobs/Apple have done here is admirable, and they certainly deserve credit for their hard work and dedication.
At least they don't sit around all day at/. Some of those Apple people actually have an education! And many of them know how to spell! And none of them sit at home on the dole and pretend they're better than everyone else.
Amazing - they actually 'do' things, and not just talk about them!
Yes, that's very good. His tag at the bottom all but sums it up. Others wander in darkness, and simply cannot believe all this GUI stuff could ever have been done well.
Normally I would accuse an author writing something like this of smoking something illegal in most corners of the world, but this is such a pile of steaming fecal matter that I just have to ask what planet the author has been living on, and why couldn't they just stay there?
'Only from sites you navigate to'
on
Friday Security Fun
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
'For example, not from advertisers on those sites'
So reads the third cookie option in Safari, but it's not true. You'll find '.doubleclick.net' in there all the time, and I doubt any of you are wandering over to DoubleClick to check out the action.
And any domain for a cookie beginning with a '.' means 'any URL in that domain' - and that is NOT just 'from sites you navigate to'.
Slashdot Mirror
'Well, Terry, as I always say, "we skipped the light fandango, turning cartwheels across the floor, I was getting kind of seasick, but the crowd called out for more!"'
'Why Jimmy, that's very profound! What does it mean?'
'Well, Terry, I'm fucked if I know!'
(From Alan Parker's The Commitments)
I think Apple are close to being on the right track, but otherwise I have to disagree. Apple are not expensive. Others are too cheap. They attract the price-conscious and cut corners on production. Economics 101. Then your Gateway falls apart, and what does that tell you? Worse: I've seen useless Gateway laptops that cost a lot more than almost anything Apple had to offer at the time, laptops that couldn't even work as advertised - and in the showroom. No, I will take quality any day, and if quality costs a bit more, I will pay it, for I profit in the long run.
I am not sure if it's genius on Apple's part to choose Unix, or instead that they knew Steve and Avie had the best system going, the best system ever seen, both for development and for use, and that Steve and Avie already chose Unix - and for reasons which were particular to NeXT, and not Apple.
There's been speculation about whether Apple should have chosen Be, but after peeking inside, I think it's obvious to anyone that Apple made the right move there.
It doesn't use X. Not what I can see. It would appear to use Carbon.
OK, I gotta ask the perhaps not-so-obvious.
Using X11 to port to OS X is only winning half the battle anyway - with, I think, its vector in the wrong direction - and Ranger Rick has, what I can gather, used Carbon or the equivalent for the ports - not Cocoa.
How hard would it be - and what obstacles would there be, legal and otherwise - to using Objective-C and Cocoa? On KDE itself?
I may very well spring for a low-end iBook
They're great work-horses and worth every penny. The g/f has one. They're great boxes.
I think it's a great effort. As to why, what did Sir Edmund Hillary say about why he climbed Mount Everest?
doesn't seem as fast as IE to load or as responsive on low-end hardware
The 'low-end hardware' bit I can understand, but traditionally, IE has cheated in two respects:
1. It plays dirty tricks, tries to foul up Netscape/Moz starts, and the Moz code has to go hunting in the Registry for all the booby traps and remove them first.
2. Windows loads most of the IE engine on startup. MS used to have a 'Preload' key in the Registry which could be turned off. If you turned it off, IE was slow as molasses to start. MS have removed the key now, and what I've heard, on XP Moz loads about as fast as IE. But that's only what I've heard.
'It rains nine months a year in Seattle.'
-- Dennis
'I know!'
-- Annie
Your post could easily become a classic.
I doubt they'd do anything as blatant as making Linux impossible to run
Why do you doubt that? They did it with Sun, with Novell, with QuickTime, with Netscape - and they were the uncontested bullies of the market then. Now they've got their backs to the wall and are desperate.
Moz source back then was riddled with comments about all the hoops the browser had to go through to recover after a Registry attack by IE. Avie Tevanian's testimony in DC tells a story of how IE 4 went in and sabotaged QT on Windows with the same technique.
Windows is already doing funny things when threatened with a different OS. It won't co-exist.
Microsoft stop at nothing. That much is clear to everyone. Why should they stop at stopping Linux?
'It's Miller Time!'
-- Peter Venkman, PhD
Uh, maybe it's not obvious, maybe it is, but how does anyone ever know the source accurately represents the product?
Whenever I read
'delivers enhanced functionality and improved reliability'
I realise they're not going to tell me anything.
Why can't they mix up the language just a bit, up their credibility?
It's kindergarten defensive coding: anyone with even less than half a brain does not use strcat without first being DAMN sure the destination's got enough room.
This is a beginner's mistake, aka Microsoft Mistake.
I think what really matters is how these films survive over time. Long was it Tolkien could not be done: you could do Star Wars, you could do anything, but you couldn't do Tolkien. Others tried and failed.
A few movie critics are beginning to talk not about the fantasy of JRR but the fantasy of Jackson, as if the latter's interpretation will in some way supersede the literary accomplishment of the former.
This can very well happen, although it certainly is not Jackson's intention. What these movies must do over time is enhance the LoTR experience, not replace it.
Only time will tell.
I think what Jobs/Apple have done here is admirable, and they certainly deserve credit for their hard work and dedication.
/. Some of those Apple people actually have an education! And many of them know how to spell! And none of them sit at home on the dole and pretend they're better than everyone else.
At least they don't sit around all day at
Amazing - they actually 'do' things, and not just talk about them!
They deserve full credit.
It rains horizontally in Lund.
Well anyway...
You have to be in the right zone to take these courses.
[[self allocWithZone:[[NSApplication sharedApplication] zone]] init];
Thank you, jcr. It was Brad Cox who owned StepStone and who invented Objective-C, and didn't he patent the language?
A lot of other companies didn't use it, what I understand, because they couldn't access it.
What a shame...
Yes, that's very good. His tag at the bottom all but sums it up. Others wander in darkness, and simply cannot believe all this GUI stuff could ever have been done well.
Whatever happened to kdyke?
This is very encouraging. What is needed is support from educational institutions like this. Objective-C can cure the IT world of its C++ woes.
The guy's a total moron. Ignore him.
Under the article this gem:
Normally I would accuse an author writing something like this of smoking something illegal in most corners of the world, but this is such a pile of steaming fecal matter that I just have to ask what planet the author has been living on, and why couldn't they just stay there?
OK, gotta get back to my code now.
Well yeah, a man's gotta know his limitations...
'For example, not from advertisers on those sites'
So reads the third cookie option in Safari, but it's not true. You'll find '.doubleclick.net' in there all the time, and I doubt any of you are wandering over to DoubleClick to check out the action.
And any domain for a cookie beginning with a '.' means 'any URL in that domain' - and that is NOT just 'from sites you navigate to'.