Apple's iTMS would be in a better position to license AAC with Fairplay to cell phone makers like Nokia, Samsung, Sony/Ericsson, PalmSource. Lately, Motorola has slipped to number three.
This is also a compelling reason for the Tiger release to
have Firewall on by default, it would do even better in
studies like this if stealth mode was enabled as well.
Apple should enable all firewalls for the Jaguar and Panther systems with a security update and ask the
admin user if they want it off and without user intervention to
leave it on.
They also should have had a machine with Mac OSX with the
Firewall switched on or a 3rd party firewall like Norton. If they are going to publish Windows XP SP1 with Zonealarm as the least exposed and best protected system, they ought
to have a Mac OSX machine with the Firewall on. All the Macs and Windows XP machines at my work have the firewall enabled,
and when I run a Nessus scan which scans for all known vulnerabilities (for all platforms) firewalled Mac OSX and Windows XP machines do quite well. I think this study would be a little more balanced with a few alternative configurations for
both Mac and Linux.
I'd like to see better security protocols for Bluetooth. Vendors selling Bluetooth devices need to prevent their users from being
"bluejacked", "bluesnarfed" and "bluebugged" and DoS attacks
on their devices.
Now that I remember you're right. Out of curiousity how did the
car levitate and propel itself through the air. Its got to be more than the petrol powered engine? Any slashdotters have any theories on this?
I'm writing this whether or not people agree with me on this matter. Eight years of political darkness will be a turning point in US history. An epoch of change where the US will loose influence globally and alienate our existing alliances
in the world at large. Historically the US resembles the great
powers of the past at the beginning of the end of their zenith.
We can't claim to be the beacon of democracy and the advocate of freedom throughout the world. Our actions, especially in the past four years have been hypocritical and self righteous.
The election yesterday will reverberate in the decades to come and weaken the US as a military, economic and social superpower.
I'm voting for regime change tomorrow.
Hoping for a better future with better leadership
"There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in
Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on......shame on you...... Fool me... can't get fooled again."
I agree. At that price why not?
* Push email client
Goodlink
*Voice recorder
El'cheapo solution for me I use on my Treo 180. Call myself on my work voicemail and leave a message.
Comes in handy when I'm driving and need to record a memo
for myself.
As a Treo 180 user I user my university ISP dial up.
Its very useful and best of all its free for me. I
really do need a better Treo to get higher rez and
color maps from Mapquest or connect it to my Powerbook
via bluetooth as a wireless modem and I don't want to pay
extra carrier fees.
Contact your state attorney general office.
The more people complain about Paypals poor
and unscruplous practices, the more pressure States will
exert on the company.
BMW showed how not to do it with iDrive. Its been a big pain to
their customers. I have enough pain in the butt administrating
Windows computers at work. I don't need Microsoft to start making OS for cars as well, causing me more headaches by
numerous bugs and poor security.
Rather have an OS/2, BSD, QNX OS for my car. If they can use QNX on the Space Shuttle then its good enough for my car damn it.
"You know why? BECAUSE NONE OF OUR END-USERS LOG ON AS ADMINISTRATORS!!! That's it - it's that simple. They don't have Administrative rights, and they can't install spyware [or viruses, or worms]. [Of course, yours truly installs the latest security patches as soon as they appear, and has always had all of his users behind a fire wall, but that's not the important point here."
I've never had a virus, worm or spyware on our Solaris, Irix, HP-UX, Linux and Mac OSX machines. But boy are you wrong about Windows. Worms can hit your computer even if you are not logged on as administrator, so if you've never been hit then consider yourself lucky. Secondly, we have a 5 man team that loads Windows computers for our computer labs and they where
hit by all of the above, viruses, worms and spyware.
What annoys me is why does Microsoft allow folders like
C:\Program Files\Common Files\ to be vulnerable to Netsky?
The PC loadset team have to get 200 Windows Engineering applications running in the College of Engineering and I'm appauled at the amount of pop-ups that have occured on our systems, even though NONE of the students where administrators and these computers where configured by a team of PC experts. I'm pretty disgusted with Windows and have been advising our faculty members to switch to Mac OSX or Linux.
Windows by default allows users to write into the root of the C:\ drive and other undesired places. It is a MAJOR pain in the ass to lock down. Don't have to do that with BSD (Mac OSX), Unix, Linux boxes. Thank God.
If Windows was ported to PPC, most applications
wouldn't be rewritten or recompiled for the PPC
platform anyway. Case in point the DEC Alphas.
Many ISVs providing Win32 apps didn't write them
to be Alpha compatible.
I'd rather see a PPC CPU which allows code morphing
like Transmeta, has SMT and virtualized CPUs.
I still want to run Mac OSX, but use a keyboard combination
to toggle to Win XP for those few applications that I still
need on the XP platform. This would be a better solution than
having Windows ported to PPC, which has been tried and it didn't work.
Finding software for OS X/x86 will be just as hard, if not HARDER than it is for PPC. I don't own a Mac, actually, I use x86 hardware at home, but admin about 200 Macs at work.
Out of pure curiosity, what kind of OS are you running on
your x86 machine at home. I have both Windows 2000 and a
Mac OSX at home, plus BeOS I play around with for purposes
of nostalgia.
I admin a more mixed environment at work, which
these days has more PCs, Macs, Sun, HP(UX), SGIs, Linux boxes
in that order. Wish more people in my department would buy Macs and make my life a whole lot easier.
Lastly, Intel is making steps towards fixing the major architecture issues (real mode, for one thing) through a next-generation replacement for the BIOS. In a few years, we'll be past that point.
Intel may be taking steps towards addressing the BIOS issue,
but for right here and right now, they aren't there yet. I install
Windows, Linux, MacOSX, Irix and other systems at my work and Mac OSX target boot has been a real boon for me. Until then Intel boxes aren't there yet in terms of ease of use and administration. I have my Windows PC behind a Linux firewall router too, I don't have to be as concerned with my Mac OX systems. Regular scans of my network with Nessus show that Mac OX does very well in regards to security.
Have you tried to use the Image Capture.app ?
This application will grab any video and images off
any camera with USB, if iPhoto is unable to recognize
cameras. Out of curiousity what camera are you using,
because I haven't come across a camera that OSX can't
work with yet. I've seen it work with Canon, Nikon,
Olympus, Kodak cameras.
The review touched on many points, some which are valid like Apple's stubbornness
to provide a multi button mouse in this day and age. My point of contention in the article was
with the installation of applications in OSX and the elegance it offers compared to its Windows
counterpart. As a system administrator for a heterogeneous environments I would say that
Mac OSX is one of the easiest systems to maintain, reload and install applications.
The folder structure under OS X is probably the one thing that has taken me the longest to
get used to - mostly because I've been such a heavy DOS/Windows user that I still feel too
foreign with anything other than C:\Windows or Program Files. It's a shame, and even after
years of using *nix boxes at school, it's still something with which I'm not totally comfortable.
Because of that, I continue to feel that the folder structure under OS X is quite disorganized,
but there is also another reason why I don't feel as in touch with the location of all the files
under OS X as I'd like to be - and it comes down to how applications are installed.
Default Mac OSX (if one doesn't have OS9 installed as well). Very much the NeXTStep way.
Default Windows XP/2000 install.
C:\Documents and Settings
C:\Program Files
C:\Windows
The factory install from Dell for example will place extra folders like I386, DELL and other extra folders
in the root of the C:\ drive. Which brings me to the other issue. Windows still carries the legacy of
naming their drives by letters as was done in the prehistoric days of DOS.
Installing (and conversely, uninstalling) applications under OS X is quite possibly the most
disconnected feeling that the OS gave me, while at the same time, it was pleasantly easy.
How could installing an application possibly be made any easier than it already is? Well, to
install an application, you simply drag the application's installer to any folder on your hard
drive and it's "installed". Doing so actually triggers a number of files to be copied to various
places on your drive, but the fact that you are separated from that process, it really made
me feel like I wasn't in control of my system. On the flip side, installing and uninstalling
applications couldn't be easier. There are no full screen installers to deal with; just drag
and drop, and get back to work while the application installs. The fact that I don't know where
everything is being copied contributes to my feelings of file system disconnect. Then again,
maybe I'm being a bit too philosophical about my OSes.
I think his "philosophy" is too steep in Windows ideology to objectively appreciate the elegance
of Mac OSX installation. If one ever wanted to feel disconnected and lack of control, try using InstallShield for
Windows. Now when installing applications on a Windows computer the user has no ideas exactly where
all the DLLs and programs files are written into and what exactly is being modified with the registry.
Mac OSX relieves the user from the DLL nightmare and registry labyrinth. If one wants absolute
control then download the source file and read the make file, but thats a whole other ball game.
Update: A number of people have written to provide some clarity to this statement. It is not
the actual installation that copies files everywhere, in fact the installation is quite contained
with all files remaining in a single folder. It's the process of running an application that will copy
preferences over to your Preferences folder. The paragraph above as it stands does apply to
Microsoft Office 2004 but not the vast majority of OS X applications, this isn't the only way in
which Office 2004 differs
Most Asian countries have a computing monoculture. South Korea is no exception to that rule. Microsoft's Windows OS probably has 99.95% penetration that country. Although in recent years South Koreans are starting to question the wisdom
of being dependent on one OS for much of their commerce and infrastructure, after being badly hit by several internet worms.
Whether you are a Windows advocate or despise using Windows, no single OS should have that kind of pervasiveness.
Most Asians know better than to cultivate 100% soyabean or rice as their only crop. Much like the Irish learnt the hard way when the potato famine hit them.
So why is it that goverments are sadly unaware of this potential threat and risk to their country's economy and infrastructure?
This is not a criticism against the South Koreans, but to any goverment that has allowed this kind of vulnerability to exist.
The North Koreans are exploiting a potential weakness in their
neighbours dependancy on a single OS. Maybe this will be a wake up call for them to start looking at alternatives... BSDs, Mac OSX, Linux,...etc.
In our office we use Microsoft Office, Eudora (or an IMAP mail client) , Acrobat Pro, Filemaker,
Citirix client to interface with the Peoplesoft applications on
a server, Firefox and IE. All are available on both systems.
However, if there are specific Windows apps that need the user
to access over 5%-10% of their time, then they ought to use
a WIndows PC. In most of our cases we can get away with using
a decent Window 2003 server for those Macs that need a few Windows apps once in a while. Keeping the Windows client PCs down reduces our maintenance efforts.
Thats not a bad way to go. This would be more ideal for our needs:
1) Desktop machines can use Mac OSX (Mail.app, Microsoft Entourage, Lotus Notes)
2) Servers can be Solaris, OS/400, Linux (
Lotus Domino) or FreeBSD
Mac OSX by default is much more locked down than XP.
Forget using any version of Windows prior to 2000. I don't like the idea of allowing my users to shoot themselves in the foot.
Both servers and client should be locked down, with the server having a few extra levels of protection if its going to be the
backbone of your operations.
Dropping Itanium is a huge blow to HP's pride and I wouldn't be suprised if it completely demoralized their processor design team,
which was screwed a few items trying to tango with Intel.
Digital (DEC) was screwed by Intel when they showed their designs. HP let their own successful design of the PA-RISC slide, so did SGI MIPS. One can draw parallels how Windows NT would crush all the unixes (unices),
instead it was the BSDs and Linux offerings that ended up hurting the unix vendors. I kind of feel bad for SGI for investing much of their time and effort to make the Itanium a key piece of their Linux solution in their Altix line of servers. Time for them to start looking into making AMD 64 boxes. I was at a computer lab the other day and saw a Sun workstation
W1100z running Windows XP. Upon closer inspection some of the users where running Solaris and
the CPU was a AMD Opteron.
My guess is that they are trained on b/w images and this
will require retraining and major retooling of the hardware
and software.
Besides one needs to always refer
back to the real x-rays or cat scan data. Better to have a trained radiologist interpolating the b/w images, than a software engineering determining the color code scheme in software.
CRTs also have other advantages, of higher viewing angle than LCDs and higher color gamut
and larger dynamic range. I still prefer using a
LaCie Electron Blue CRT to do my
Photoshop work.
Most video cards RAMDACs are
limited to 8-bit (exceptions I can think of are SGI Onyx IR and
Tezro systems and other specialized gfx cards), CRTs could easily do 10-bit, 12-bit color
per pixel. If you're in the print and publishing industry you'll
still want to use a CRT unless the 21" CRT hulk is crowding
your workspace,
or a radiologist who needs
10-bit or greater grayscale
to discern which legions in the x-ray have a tumor. I don't want my radiologist looking at no 8-bit (256 shade) video card and monitor for my X-rays. I haven't seen any specs on what the OLEDs can do. All that stated is that its comparable, which is vague and ambiguous to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple's iTMS would be in a better position to license AAC with Fairplay to cell phone makers like Nokia, Samsung, Sony/Ericsson, PalmSource. Lately, Motorola has slipped to number three.
This is also a compelling reason for the Tiger release to have Firewall on by default, it would do even better in studies like this if stealth mode was enabled as well. Apple should enable all firewalls for the Jaguar and Panther systems with a security update and ask the admin user if they want it off and without user intervention to leave it on.
They also should have had a machine with Mac OSX with the Firewall switched on or a 3rd party firewall like Norton. If they are going to publish Windows XP SP1 with Zonealarm as the least exposed and best protected system, they ought to have a Mac OSX machine with the Firewall on. All the Macs and Windows XP machines at my work have the firewall enabled, and when I run a Nessus scan which scans for all known vulnerabilities (for all platforms) firewalled Mac OSX and Windows XP machines do quite well. I think this study would be a little more balanced with a few alternative configurations for both Mac and Linux.
Get Palm 6.1 (Cobalt) with BFS.
I'd like to see better security protocols for Bluetooth. Vendors selling Bluetooth devices need to prevent their users from being "bluejacked", "bluesnarfed" and "bluebugged" and DoS attacks on their devices.
Now that I remember you're right. Out of curiousity how did the car levitate and propel itself through the air. Its got to be more than the petrol powered engine? Any slashdotters have any theories on this?
Can't wait to power my Delorean with Mr. Fusion :)
America 2004 = Britain 1900?
American 2054 = Britain 1950?
"There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- ... ...shame on you ... ... Fool me ... can't get fooled again."
that says, fool me once, shame on
George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sep 17, 2002
I agree. At that price why not?
* Push email client
Goodlink
*Voice recorder
El'cheapo solution for me I use on my Treo 180. Call myself on my work voicemail and leave a message. Comes in handy when I'm driving and need to record a memo for myself.
As a Treo 180 user I user my university ISP dial up. Its very useful and best of all its free for me. I really do need a better Treo to get higher rez and color maps from Mapquest or connect it to my Powerbook via bluetooth as a wireless modem and I don't want to pay extra carrier fees.
Contact your state attorney general office. The more people complain about Paypals poor and unscruplous practices, the more pressure States will exert on the company.
Rather have an OS/2, BSD, QNX OS for my car. If they can use QNX on the Space Shuttle then its good enough for my car damn it.
I've never had a virus, worm or spyware on our Solaris, Irix, HP-UX, Linux and Mac OSX machines. But boy are you wrong about Windows. Worms can hit your computer even if you are not logged on as administrator, so if you've never been hit then consider yourself lucky. Secondly, we have a 5 man team that loads Windows computers for our computer labs and they where hit by all of the above, viruses, worms and spyware. What annoys me is why does Microsoft allow folders like C:\Program Files\Common Files\ to be vulnerable to Netsky? The PC loadset team have to get 200 Windows Engineering applications running in the College of Engineering and I'm appauled at the amount of pop-ups that have occured on our systems, even though NONE of the students where administrators and these computers where configured by a team of PC experts. I'm pretty disgusted with Windows and have been advising our faculty members to switch to Mac OSX or Linux. Windows by default allows users to write into the root of the C:\ drive and other undesired places. It is a MAJOR pain in the ass to lock down. Don't have to do that with BSD (Mac OSX), Unix, Linux boxes. Thank God.
I'd rather see a PPC CPU which allows code morphing like Transmeta, has SMT and virtualized CPUs. I still want to run Mac OSX, but use a keyboard combination to toggle to Win XP for those few applications that I still need on the XP platform. This would be a better solution than having Windows ported to PPC, which has been tried and it didn't work.
Out of pure curiosity, what kind of OS are you running on your x86 machine at home. I have both Windows 2000 and a Mac OSX at home, plus BeOS I play around with for purposes of nostalgia.
I admin a more mixed environment at work, which these days has more PCs, Macs, Sun, HP(UX), SGIs, Linux boxes in that order. Wish more people in my department would buy Macs and make my life a whole lot easier.
Intel may be taking steps towards addressing the BIOS issue, but for right here and right now, they aren't there yet. I install Windows, Linux, MacOSX, Irix and other systems at my work and Mac OSX target boot has been a real boon for me. Until then Intel boxes aren't there yet in terms of ease of use and administration. I have my Windows PC behind a Linux firewall router too, I don't have to be as concerned with my Mac OX systems. Regular scans of my network with Nessus show that Mac OX does very well in regards to security.
Have you tried to use the Image Capture.app ? This application will grab any video and images off any camera with USB, if iPhoto is unable to recognize cameras. Out of curiousity what camera are you using, because I haven't come across a camera that OSX can't work with yet. I've seen it work with Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Kodak cameras.
The folder structure under OS X is probably the one thing that has taken me the longest to get used to - mostly because I've been such a heavy DOS/Windows user that I still feel too foreign with anything other than C:\Windows or Program Files. It's a shame, and even after years of using *nix boxes at school, it's still something with which I'm not totally comfortable. Because of that, I continue to feel that the folder structure under OS X is quite disorganized, but there is also another reason why I don't feel as in touch with the location of all the files under OS X as I'd like to be - and it comes down to how applications are installed.
Default Mac OSX (if one doesn't have OS9 installed as well). Very much the NeXTStep way.
Also navigating through the file system using spatial view is more suited to older OS9 users. One can easily switch on column view by default
Default Windows XP/2000 install.
C:\Documents and Settings
C:\Program Files
C:\Windows
The factory install from Dell for example will place extra folders like I386, DELL and other extra folders in the root of the C:\ drive. Which brings me to the other issue. Windows still carries the legacy of naming their drives by letters as was done in the prehistoric days of DOS.
Installing (and conversely, uninstalling) applications under OS X is quite possibly the most disconnected feeling that the OS gave me, while at the same time, it was pleasantly easy. How could installing an application possibly be made any easier than it already is? Well, to install an application, you simply drag the application's installer to any folder on your hard drive and it's "installed". Doing so actually triggers a number of files to be copied to various places on your drive, but the fact that you are separated from that process, it really made me feel like I wasn't in control of my system. On the flip side, installing and uninstalling applications couldn't be easier. There are no full screen installers to deal with; just drag and drop, and get back to work while the application installs. The fact that I don't know where everything is being copied contributes to my feelings of file system disconnect. Then again, maybe I'm being a bit too philosophical about my OSes.
I think his "philosophy" is too steep in Windows ideology to objectively appreciate the elegance of Mac OSX installation. If one ever wanted to feel disconnected and lack of control, try using InstallShield for Windows. Now when installing applications on a Windows computer the user has no ideas exactly where all the DLLs and programs files are written into and what exactly is being modified with the registry. Mac OSX relieves the user from the DLL nightmare and registry labyrinth. If one wants absolute control then download the source file and read the make file, but thats a whole other ball game.
Update: A number of people have written to provide some clarity to this statement. It is not the actual installation that copies files everywhere, in fact the installation is quite contained with all files remaining in a single folder. It's the process of running an application that will copy preferences over to your Preferences folder. The paragraph above as it stands does apply to Microsoft Office 2004 but not the vast majority of OS X applications, this isn't the only way in which Office 2004 differs
Whether you are a Windows advocate or despise using Windows, no single OS should have that kind of pervasiveness. Most Asians know better than to cultivate 100% soyabean or rice as their only crop. Much like the Irish learnt the hard way when the potato famine hit them.
So why is it that goverments are sadly unaware of this potential threat and risk to their country's economy and infrastructure? This is not a criticism against the South Koreans, but to any goverment that has allowed this kind of vulnerability to exist. The North Koreans are exploiting a potential weakness in their neighbours dependancy on a single OS. Maybe this will be a wake up call for them to start looking at alternatives... BSDs, Mac OSX, Linux, ...etc.
However, if there are specific Windows apps that need the user to access over 5%-10% of their time, then they ought to use a WIndows PC. In most of our cases we can get away with using a decent Window 2003 server for those Macs that need a few Windows apps once in a while. Keeping the Windows client PCs down reduces our maintenance efforts.
1) Desktop machines can use Mac OSX (Mail.app, Microsoft Entourage, Lotus Notes)
2) Servers can be Solaris, OS/400, Linux ( Lotus Domino) or FreeBSD
Mac OSX by default is much more locked down than XP. Forget using any version of Windows prior to 2000. I don't like the idea of allowing my users to shoot themselves in the foot. Both servers and client should be locked down, with the server having a few extra levels of protection if its going to be the backbone of your operations.
Dropping Itanium is a huge blow to HP's pride and I wouldn't be suprised if it completely demoralized their processor design team, which was screwed a few items trying to tango with Intel. Digital (DEC) was screwed by Intel when they showed their designs. HP let their own successful design of the PA-RISC slide, so did SGI MIPS. One can draw parallels how Windows NT would crush all the unixes (unices), instead it was the BSDs and Linux offerings that ended up hurting the unix vendors. I kind of feel bad for SGI for investing much of their time and effort to make the Itanium a key piece of their Linux solution in their Altix line of servers. Time for them to start looking into making AMD 64 boxes. I was at a computer lab the other day and saw a Sun workstation W1100z running Windows XP. Upon closer inspection some of the users where running Solaris and the CPU was a AMD Opteron.
My guess is that they are trained on b/w images and this will require retraining and major retooling of the hardware and software. Besides one needs to always refer back to the real x-rays or cat scan data. Better to have a trained radiologist interpolating the b/w images, than a software engineering determining the color code scheme in software.
CRTs also have other advantages, of higher viewing angle than LCDs and higher color gamut and larger dynamic range. I still prefer using a LaCie Electron Blue CRT to do my Photoshop work. Most video cards RAMDACs are limited to 8-bit (exceptions I can think of are SGI Onyx IR and Tezro systems and other specialized gfx cards), CRTs could easily do 10-bit, 12-bit color per pixel. If you're in the print and publishing industry you'll still want to use a CRT unless the 21" CRT hulk is crowding your workspace, or a radiologist who needs 10-bit or greater grayscale to discern which legions in the x-ray have a tumor. I don't want my radiologist looking at no 8-bit (256 shade) video card and monitor for my X-rays. I haven't seen any specs on what the OLEDs can do. All that stated is that its comparable, which is vague and ambiguous to me.