Yes, since after all this was the *ONLY* way to do it, not like VLC couldn't play them without stripping htem off their DRM, not like the OSS community can't hack device firmware to add new features like, reading a particular format perhaps, after all it's not like this same community doesn't have every device to run linux.
Despite who is using it, it is still wrong because it strips teh security mechanism whereas VLC and brethren merely were capable of *playing* the product without breaking the law by stripping it of its DRM.
That "buck" arleady gives you music that you can play at home, in the car and while jogging, by using the iPod. You remember it, that thing that Apple markets as "the" cool thing to have.
yes, non-DRMed MP3s serve them extremely well by providing the pirates with perfectly ripped tunes that they know not to be purposely screwed over by the RIAA. AFter all it's not like you can't just give that MP3 to all your friends without having them need to pay for the artist's work( and a large "packaging" fee to the Label)
Yes, the community doesn't look bad for constantly hacking products to rip them off and make things freely available that shouldn't be after all, we do live in a communist society, everything should be free and doled out equally to all. Maybe we should have parades for the authors, after all they are heroes for stealing something merely because they couldn't have it.
yes, an iPod is an investment in a service since after all, it only plays iTMS music, it can't play a multitude of other non DRMed formats.
Yes, we should btite you since after all we shouldn't get in the way of your pirating things, its not like its illegal or anything.
Most music that young people listen to has very little semblance to what their parents listened to for the simple fact that thier tastes are dramatically different, after all the good "popular music" doesn't have a time frame for when it was made, it's whatever the hell I hear and like. I suggest you change radio stations and listen to something new music, since after all Bach and his cohorts did some time ago.
There is no difference, matter of fact the iTMS reverse engineering is worse.
In one case it's taking a free prroduct made available to all, and close sourcing it, or producing versions for which the source is unavailable.
In the other, it's taking a proprietary format and product, then stripping it of its security mechanisms, solely because some people still want everything to be free.
In one case, no LAWS are actually broken, yes you might violate the GPL, but guess what, there is no law that says you can't use or abuse the source merely a license that itself states that you don't have to abide by.
In the other, a long legal terms of use of provided prior to use. The product/service is not designed nor provided freely to all, there is and was no freely available version and in order to use the service/[roduct SEVERAL laws are broken, intellectual property is stolen, security measures are reverse engineered and lastly piracy is enabled by the stripping of those security mechanisms.
The reason why this looks so bad is simply that it clearly shows why Open Operating Systems don't do well in the commercial market, the users cannot be trusted to use your product without attempting to pirate it. As a matter of fact, the hubris and sense of entitlement of the OSS community is exactly why it will always be a niche and regarded as "a bunch of people that collectively don't want to pay for anything". VLC already allowed the playback of these files with one very important difference, it did not strip the file of it's DRM. That is a VERY important distinction, reverse engineering it is not the problem as the file requires the you yourself generated the key for a file you personally own. playfair strips it of that DRM and allows it for that pirated use since you no longer need the original key.
I enjoy free products, OSS provides so many good ones, however I don't feel like pirating something merely so that it is free. As software developers we all know every product/service is not magic and required lots of time and work, those of us that commercially write software realize that playair is a pirate's tool.
Congrats on the quality flamage, but you're lost on my point and yours. Mine was that OSS rarely creates anything original, but merely plays catch up to the efforts of others. I don't particularly care about neither your want nor need to use any particulat product as the point was already made.
As to your comments on Word and how it works, Word may be retarded in many regards, but guess what in all professional settings you need to use it or effortlessly interoperate with it.
The features that count for you may be "beyond" what MS has to offer, but the rest of the world still needs to use it and interoperate with it.
Lastly your point about products tied to one architecture fails because OSS products are generally tied to *nix platforms merely because those OSes might cover more possible hardware, does not mean they reach a larger perventage of users, which *nix still has yet to do.
No, Apple steps in when other companies provide lack luster products that cost them users if it is either a fundamental need or other products exist for another platform that make the Mac platform seem foolish for that niche.
In short, if you make garbage, don't expect Apple to owe you anything and not provide a superior product for users. However, if you make good software that users enjoy using you have nothign to worry about, ie. Ambrosia, and Panic software.
First of all, iTunes is superior to RhythmBox for several reasons, the primary being SPEED, have yo uever searched through a large amount of mp3s with the search input in RhythmBox versus iTunes? In iTunes it is near instantaneous, in RhythmBox, there is a long and painful pause while it processes. I am talking about a mere 2500 or so mp3 collection, even xmms has no problem sifting through them all quickly.
OpenOffice still lacks feature parity with Word, and instead adds gimmicky features like text autocompletion on words.
What your problem is, is that you seem to think that without supporting Linux, it somehow lacks a feature. That isn't a lack on the software's part. that is because Linux simply is not attractive as a desktop OS for software developers.
You already made the point that Linux is primarily a server OS and you didn't even mean to, however if you think that Apple is playing catch up to it, you simply are being naive. BSD has long outshined Linux in the server space in both support and reliability, OS X does not use the GNU toolset, it has the BSD toolset, which are similiar in only suficial apearance, the comamnds, and inputs differ on even the most basic commands such as ls. Not to say GNU tools haven't been used, they merely do not make up as much of OS X as you think.
Lastly, OSS software rarely ever creates anything original, and they are not as cross platform as you think since they all run under *nix platforms. What about windows? As you can see, your point really had no merit.
You seem to not realize something about your own post, all those efforts are catch up efforts to catch up to the tech that Apple has created and been improving with each OS revision, the tech MS claims will be in Longhorn. But the real problem is that you think they will exceed Apple's efforts, as of date, no OSS copy has ever surpassed the original.
OpenOffice from all discussion is always mentioned as good enough or just as good, never better than Microsoft Office.
We all know the GIMP is a joke in camparison to Photoshop.
RhythmBox is still slow and lack A LOT of features before it is anywhere near iTunes.
There are plenty more, but you get the idea, that copies are just that or even worse, poor subsititutes. OSS needs to provide better ORIGINAL products, not catch up solutions.
What could Apple possible have to gain from working with GNUStep? Other than letting OSS into it's coolness and gaining absolutely nothing in return
after all, GNUStep still looks basically like OpenStep did in the 80s, and combnied Linux + apple market share won't move Macs, Insanely great mac apps do that.
Also your naive if you think that GNUStep's only problem is it's drawing system as taht is completely independent of the API. GNUStep won't be a threat to Apple until it is more than "just good enough" or "about the same" it has to be amazing and magnitudes better than Cocoa before it starts moving Apple to do anything. Too bad or you that 7 year long stretch from 70% done to 70% done isn't helping any.
I already explained this but I'll do it again. Cocoa's classes are simple because the methodoligies and design paradigms are simple to follow. The string methods for dealing with paths are best served as part od NSString because an extra class is useless to do something so trivial and hiding it in non member functions ensures that people will always initially overlook them.
As for your gripe with NSAttributedString, it does not inherit from NSString, so why would you expect it to act the same? It's convenience methods are where all that magical "free" functionality comes from. They can load RTF and even Word documents because they are stylized text, so the formatting is non trivial and important.
You don't need an intimate knowledge of the APIs you need to know how to program and everything is unbelievably obvious. Cocoa is not designed to be to port applications to other platforms now from other platforms. Cocoa is designed to make Application Development to easy and so fast that much smaller groups can produce much larger apps.
Also your conclusion shows a lack of understanding of the article if you read it at all. Rhapsody did start out in idea to be the über development platform but those developers for whom it was being made complained about things they wanted, ie. not rewriting their apps and apple provided exactly what they wanted in the form of Carbon, having lost the entire multi-platform portability due to the majority of their apps going to be carbon, why continue to support all the other platforms. The tools are well designed, you merely lack the skillset to wield them effectively. As is the problem with OS nowadays, it puts too much power into the hands of people unable to wield them effectively.
3% market share:
Yes, if we repeat it enough then it must be true.
Developers don't trust Apple or Jobs:
I'll admit developers might be squirmish due to past history, but the point of the article was getting NEW developers people who have yet to work with Apple and can't develop any of these distrusts.
Too Many APIs:
Only an idiot would claim this as a problem. If you think everything is held together with duct tape you need to be introduced to a little document called SystemOverview.pdf trust me OS X is held together by much more sophisticated glues than duct tape. If the glue that held OS C together was duct tape, them that which holds Linux together would be happy thoughts and good wishes, Almost all those APIs interact with each other of one relies on the other. There is no MacOS API, nor NeXTStep, only Carbon and Cocoa.
As for appliances, that same argument must hold for Compaq/HP then as they now sell A LOT more types of media players than computers.
If your referring to when they discovered the second gate in the north pole, then IIRC the reason for that was the surge of power, which was siphoned off to the second gate as well as Major Carter and Colonel O'neill.
One gate would usurp the other, I believe in Season 3 they went over this with the russian gate. The gate with the strongest power source would be activated, like when the Russians had the DHD, it be default usurps any other dialing device so they had to be careful to coordinate all thier missions around the American stargate program's usage of thier gate.
Your an idiot sir, the show is so loosely based on the movie. The show is several magnitudes better than the movie was, normally when I introduce people to the series I present the movie as if were merely a history book. The movie was mediocre, but the TV show was initially a Showtime creation. Quality Sci Fi.
Conversely, they know if they killed off one of the main 4, the show would be dead in the water
You mean like they did with Daniel Jackson?
Worst case they just bring the character back to life..
You mean like they did with Daniel Jackson?
hey, its sci-fi anything is possible..
Nuh uh, It worked for Daniel Jackson since he didn't actually die, he ascended to a higher plane of existence. Anyone who has watched the show knows that though there is something special about Colonel Oneill's mind and DNA, he lacks the mentality necessary to ascend.
Yes, Season 5 was the best season to date, but guess what the Series must continue and Season 6's problem was the lack of Daniel Jackson. His ascension though great for him, was a problem for the rest of us in that now he was gone from the series. The second problem was the new focus on Black ops and government conspiracies, This is not the X Files, I don't need to see one show done badly inside of another. This brings me too the new Star Trek like arc with the X-303, again, I don't need to say one show done badly inside of another.
That said, I am actually looking forward to Atlantis, as it splits the series and hopefully puts all the BS that's not part of Stargate into another Series, then if it did badly the writers would come to the shocking realization that Stargate != Star Trek != X Files
Yes, OS/2 ran Mac OS X software. Software for a different OS and architecture that had yet to be written. That truly is an impressive operating system. It must also naitvely understand Lognhorn files which will be released in 2000-something.
Your wrong, That will not work for logging passwords. I have tested every KeyLogger for OS X to verfy apple's claims about the mechanism used for secure text inputs. Basically all secure text use different key grabbign methods outside of the standard ones so that you CAN NOT log them.
I repeat, OS X uses special key grabbing mechanism for secure text fields. Download Key loggers and try it out for yourself.
ipconfig does not make permanent changes on any UNIX. It makes changes until you restart. I would hope that most UNIX admins would realize that its better to understand how the system actually does it rather than relying solely on ipconfig since you can't really SSH into the machine when its networking isn't properly configured.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, since after all this was the *ONLY* way to do it, not like VLC couldn't play them without stripping htem off their DRM, not like the OSS community can't hack device firmware to add new features like, reading a particular format perhaps, after all it's not like this same community doesn't have every device to run linux.
Despite who is using it, it is still wrong because it strips teh security mechanism whereas VLC and brethren merely were capable of *playing* the product without breaking the law by stripping it of its DRM.
That "buck" arleady gives you music that you can play at home, in the car and while jogging, by using the iPod. You remember it, that thing that Apple markets as "the" cool thing to have.
yes, non-DRMed MP3s serve them extremely well by providing the pirates with perfectly ripped tunes that they know not to be purposely screwed over by the RIAA. AFter all it's not like you can't just give that MP3 to all your friends without having them need to pay for the artist's work( and a large "packaging" fee to the Label)
Yes, the community doesn't look bad for constantly hacking products to rip them off and make things freely available that shouldn't be after all, we do live in a communist society, everything should be free and doled out equally to all. Maybe we should have parades for the authors, after all they are heroes for stealing something merely because they couldn't have it.
yes, an iPod is an investment in a service since after all, it only plays iTMS music, it can't play a multitude of other non DRMed formats.
Yes, we should btite you since after all we shouldn't get in the way of your pirating things, its not like its illegal or anything.
Let me guess, your very old aren't you?
Most music that young people listen to has very little semblance to what their parents listened to for the simple fact that thier tastes are dramatically different, after all the good "popular music" doesn't have a time frame for when it was made, it's whatever the hell I hear and like. I suggest you change radio stations and listen to something new music, since after all Bach and his cohorts did some time ago.
There is no difference, matter of fact the iTMS reverse engineering is worse.
In one case it's taking a free prroduct made available to all, and close sourcing it, or producing versions for which the source is unavailable.
In the other, it's taking a proprietary format and product, then stripping it of its security mechanisms, solely because some people still want everything to be free.
In one case, no LAWS are actually broken, yes you might violate the GPL, but guess what, there is no law that says you can't use or abuse the source merely a license that itself states that you don't have to abide by.
In the other, a long legal terms of use of provided prior to use. The product/service is not designed nor provided freely to all, there is and was no freely available version and in order to use the service/[roduct SEVERAL laws are broken, intellectual property is stolen, security measures are reverse engineered and lastly piracy is enabled by the stripping of those security mechanisms.
The reason why this looks so bad is simply that it clearly shows why Open Operating Systems don't do well in the commercial market, the users cannot be trusted to use your product without attempting to pirate it. As a matter of fact, the hubris and sense of entitlement of the OSS community is exactly why it will always be a niche and regarded as "a bunch of people that collectively don't want to pay for anything". VLC already allowed the playback of these files with one very important difference, it did not strip the file of it's DRM. That is a VERY important distinction, reverse engineering it is not the problem as the file requires the you yourself generated the key for a file you personally own. playfair strips it of that DRM and allows it for that pirated use since you no longer need the original key.
I enjoy free products, OSS provides so many good ones, however I don't feel like pirating something merely so that it is free. As software developers we all know every product/service is not magic and required lots of time and work, those of us that commercially write software realize that playair is a pirate's tool.
Congrats on the quality flamage, but you're lost on my point and yours. Mine was that OSS rarely creates anything original, but merely plays catch up to the efforts of others. I don't particularly care about neither your want nor need to use any particulat product as the point was already made.
As to your comments on Word and how it works, Word may be retarded in many regards, but guess what in all professional settings you need to use it or effortlessly interoperate with it.
The features that count for you may be "beyond" what MS has to offer, but the rest of the world still needs to use it and interoperate with it.
Lastly your point about products tied to one architecture fails because OSS products are generally tied to *nix platforms merely because those OSes might cover more possible hardware, does not mean they reach a larger perventage of users, which *nix still has yet to do.
No, Apple steps in when other companies provide lack luster products that cost them users if it is either a fundamental need or other products exist for another platform that make the Mac platform seem foolish for that niche.
In short, if you make garbage, don't expect Apple to owe you anything and not provide a superior product for users. However, if you make good software that users enjoy using you have nothign to worry about, ie. Ambrosia, and Panic software.
First of all, iTunes is superior to RhythmBox for several reasons, the primary being SPEED, have yo uever searched through a large amount of mp3s with the search input in RhythmBox versus iTunes? In iTunes it is near instantaneous, in RhythmBox, there is a long and painful pause while it processes. I am talking about a mere 2500 or so mp3 collection, even xmms has no problem sifting through them all quickly.
OpenOffice still lacks feature parity with Word, and instead adds gimmicky features like text autocompletion on words.
What your problem is, is that you seem to think that without supporting Linux, it somehow lacks a feature. That isn't a lack on the software's part. that is because Linux simply is not attractive as a desktop OS for software developers.
You already made the point that Linux is primarily a server OS and you didn't even mean to, however if you think that Apple is playing catch up to it, you simply are being naive. BSD has long outshined Linux in the server space in both support and reliability, OS X does not use the GNU toolset, it has the BSD toolset, which are similiar in only suficial apearance, the comamnds, and inputs differ on even the most basic commands such as ls. Not to say GNU tools haven't been used, they merely do not make up as much of OS X as you think.
Lastly, OSS software rarely ever creates anything original, and they are not as cross platform as you think since they all run under *nix platforms. What about windows? As you can see, your point really had no merit.
You seem to not realize something about your own post, all those efforts are catch up efforts to catch up to the tech that Apple has created and been improving with each OS revision, the tech MS claims will be in Longhorn. But the real problem is that you think they will exceed Apple's efforts, as of date, no OSS copy has ever surpassed the original. OpenOffice from all discussion is always mentioned as good enough or just as good, never better than Microsoft Office. We all know the GIMP is a joke in camparison to Photoshop. RhythmBox is still slow and lack A LOT of features before it is anywhere near iTunes. There are plenty more, but you get the idea, that copies are just that or even worse, poor subsititutes. OSS needs to provide better ORIGINAL products, not catch up solutions. What could Apple possible have to gain from working with GNUStep? Other than letting OSS into it's coolness and gaining absolutely nothing in return after all, GNUStep still looks basically like OpenStep did in the 80s, and combnied Linux + apple market share won't move Macs, Insanely great mac apps do that. Also your naive if you think that GNUStep's only problem is it's drawing system as taht is completely independent of the API. GNUStep won't be a threat to Apple until it is more than "just good enough" or "about the same" it has to be amazing and magnitudes better than Cocoa before it starts moving Apple to do anything. Too bad or you that 7 year long stretch from 70% done to 70% done isn't helping any.
I already explained this but I'll do it again. Cocoa's classes are simple because the methodoligies and design paradigms are simple to follow. The string methods for dealing with paths are best served as part od NSString because an extra class is useless to do something so trivial and hiding it in non member functions ensures that people will always initially overlook them.
As for your gripe with NSAttributedString, it does not inherit from NSString, so why would you expect it to act the same? It's convenience methods are where all that magical "free" functionality comes from. They can load RTF and even Word documents because they are stylized text, so the formatting is non trivial and important.
You don't need an intimate knowledge of the APIs you need to know how to program and everything is unbelievably obvious. Cocoa is not designed to be to port applications to other platforms now from other platforms. Cocoa is designed to make Application Development to easy and so fast that much smaller groups can produce much larger apps.
Also your conclusion shows a lack of understanding of the article if you read it at all. Rhapsody did start out in idea to be the über development platform but those developers for whom it was being made complained about things they wanted, ie. not rewriting their apps and apple provided exactly what they wanted in the form of Carbon, having lost the entire multi-platform portability due to the majority of their apps going to be carbon, why continue to support all the other platforms. The tools are well designed, you merely lack the skillset to wield them effectively. As is the problem with OS nowadays, it puts too much power into the hands of people unable to wield them effectively.
3% market share: Yes, if we repeat it enough then it must be true.
Developers don't trust Apple or Jobs: I'll admit developers might be squirmish due to past history, but the point of the article was getting NEW developers people who have yet to work with Apple and can't develop any of these distrusts.
Too Many APIs: Only an idiot would claim this as a problem. If you think everything is held together with duct tape you need to be introduced to a little document called SystemOverview.pdf trust me OS X is held together by much more sophisticated glues than duct tape. If the glue that held OS C together was duct tape, them that which holds Linux together would be happy thoughts and good wishes, Almost all those APIs interact with each other of one relies on the other. There is no MacOS API, nor NeXTStep, only Carbon and Cocoa.
As for appliances, that same argument must hold for Compaq/HP then as they now sell A LOT more types of media players than computers.
Thanks again for trolling.
If your referring to when they discovered the second gate in the north pole, then IIRC the reason for that was the surge of power, which was siphoned off to the second gate as well as Major Carter and Colonel O'neill.
One gate would usurp the other, I believe in Season 3 they went over this with the russian gate. The gate with the strongest power source would be activated, like when the Russians had the DHD, it be default usurps any other dialing device so they had to be careful to coordinate all thier missions around the American stargate program's usage of thier gate.
That sucks for you, Season 5 was the best to date, and looking over the episode list of 4 alone you missed out on alot.
Your an idiot sir, the show is so loosely based on the movie. The show is several magnitudes better than the movie was, normally when I introduce people to the series I present the movie as if were merely a history book. The movie was mediocre, but the TV show was initially a Showtime creation. Quality Sci Fi.
Umm... the military does have civilian consultants. And the military also does have soldiers whose capacity is partially scientific.
What's wrong with that? I rather enjoy a beautiful, intelligent woman on top.
No thier wasn't. What you forget is that it was a planet with microscopic lifeforms that looked like water, but wasn't.
You can't use the Stargate with both source and destination as the same planet.
Basic gate 101, I thoguht everybody knew that.
Conversely, they know if they killed off one of the main 4, the show would be dead in the water
You mean like they did with Daniel Jackson?
Worst case they just bring the character back to life..
You mean like they did with Daniel Jackson?
hey, its sci-fi anything is possible..
Nuh uh, It worked for Daniel Jackson since he didn't actually die, he ascended to a higher plane of existence. Anyone who has watched the show knows that though there is something special about Colonel Oneill's mind and DNA, he lacks the mentality necessary to ascend.
Yes, Season 5 was the best season to date, but guess what the Series must continue and Season 6's problem was the lack of Daniel Jackson. His ascension though great for him, was a problem for the rest of us in that now he was gone from the series. The second problem was the new focus on Black ops and government conspiracies, This is not the X Files, I don't need to see one show done badly inside of another. This brings me too the new Star Trek like arc with the X-303, again, I don't need to say one show done badly inside of another.
That said, I am actually looking forward to Atlantis, as it splits the series and hopefully puts all the BS that's not part of Stargate into another Series, then if it did badly the writers would come to the shocking realization that Stargate != Star Trek != X Files
Yes, OS/2 ran Mac OS X software. Software for a different OS and architecture that had yet to be written. That truly is an impressive operating system. It must also naitvely understand Lognhorn files which will be released in 2000-something.
Where can I get this OS/2?
Your wrong, That will not work for logging passwords. I have tested every KeyLogger for OS X to verfy apple's claims about the mechanism used for secure text inputs. Basically all secure text use different key grabbign methods outside of the standard ones so that you CAN NOT log them.
I repeat, OS X uses special key grabbing mechanism for secure text fields. Download Key loggers and try it out for yourself.
ipconfig does not make permanent changes on any UNIX. It makes changes until you restart. I would hope that most UNIX admins would realize that its better to understand how the system actually does it rather than relying solely on ipconfig since you can't really SSH into the machine when its networking isn't properly configured.
Yes, but all those file systems are open source or open anyway.
From visiting the site, I'm gonna go out on a limg here and say this guy uses a mac. Im just guessing tho.