Do you want big, commercial interests to take interest in linux or not? Face facts. The average Joe Blow does not want to recompile the kernel, check for dependancies or make an application.
They also do not want to be relegated to choosing from poorly implemented GUI apps. What they do want is to use a platform with closed source GUI applications they are familiar with. Without these apps, linux will never take a significant chunk of the desktop market.
I think open source is great for infrastructure but I do not have confidence in them providing the GUI and desktop applications because, quite frankly, most OSS GUIs suck monkey balls.
If Apple Corpse goes through with this, they may loose any future revenue they may have enjoyed from music sales. Don't forget that Apple Computers has a lot of influence in the music business and a lot of musicians use macs. The Beatles are has-beens.
If they do go through with the extortion lawsuit, I'd encourage everyone to stop buying Beatles music and pirate it instead. Or stop listening to it altogether. Those bloody sell-outs symbolize everything that is wrong with the music industry and the legal system.
They have betrayed everything they claimed to stand for.
Excuse me?.jar files are.zip files renamed, they are not.tar files. I was talking about the directory structures of an executable.jar file compared with a app file.
Java was inspired by NeXT Step/OpenStep API (now known as Cocoa). This should not be a surprise considering that Sun was one of the members of the OpenStep Consortium until they pulled out.
A concrete example of this is the directory structure of a.jar file. It's quite similar to a.app package and it's sub folders.
Well damn, I guess iWork is designed as a replacement for Appleworks, not Office. Apple stated this already. Why are so you confused as to who they are targeting with this? If you are looking a revision abilities, then you are obviously a business user and should stick with Word.
There is no need for revision tools in a home user application. Perhaps they will add it in later versions but we are talking about a version 1.0 product here.
"YOU can also ignore the data, and realize that the only reason AAC is popular is because the ITMS doesn't offer MP3's (encrypted or un-encrypted) for sale as an option. You can also ignore the data points that no audio CD players play AAC, no car systems play AAC, no players besides Apple and HP play AAC, and that if the iPod didn't also play MP3's, it would be the same sort of colossal failure that Sony ATRAC-only playing players have been."
Man would it hurt you to use google and do a search for AAC players? Come on. You are confusing AAC (non-DRM) with iTMS DRMed-ACC. The former is something you can create by ripping your own CD's, will play with a a few non-apple portable players (including Creative, Samsung and Nokia) and programs like Real Player, VLC etc on the PC/Mac.
FYI, as a Canadian, I bought my iPod in 2002 which was long before iTMS came to Canada (Dec 1st 2004). The iPod was also popular in Europe before the Euro store opened and it is popular in Asia even though there is no iTMS there. You were saying?
Does C/C++ worry you? What about Perl or Python or Ruby?
Yes, a malicious program could nuke a home directory on "any" OS. What is your point? Are you saying users should not have control over there home folder? Come on man.
At least with OS X, the worst you can do is nuke your home folder with stupidity. You won't hose the entire system.
Why do you think Apple provides a Backup app with.MAC? Backup your home folder regularly and don't get software/widgets from untrusted sources.
Have a look around at versiontracker.com in the OS X section. There you will find many open source apps which make use of other open source projects. These projects help bring more public attention towards these very open source projects.
Now look at the landscape of the PC market. The vast majority use Windows. Most of them have no interest in running any variety of *nix OS and they don't want to use Cygwin. How exactly are you supposed to easily port open source apps to windows?
Look at all of the spyware on windows in the freeware apps. Look at all of the people developing closed source applications with stolen open source code on windows. CherryOS anyone?
Now with this picture, which platform should you be focusing on outside of linux? Mac OS X or windows. Windows may have a lot of marketshare but your application is likely to be either copied quickly by a closed source developer or just lost in the sea of crapware with better marketing.
How do you like the contributions to KHTML that Apple provided? What about the PPC additions to GCC?
They are fully compliant with the licenses of the software they use and modify. Did they have to give the Streaming Server to Open Source? No. Did they have to open source Rendezvous? No.
ECC memory? Do most PC's used as workstations in businesses have ECC memory? No, of course not. Most business takes place at sea level anyway where ECC memory is largely irrelevant given that the atmosphere has filtered out most of the cosmic radiation at that altitude.
ECC memory is only a requirement for server clusters, not workstations. Stop spreading FUD.
I happen to use an extensive list of shareware and open source applications without any problems at home.
I have not experienced any problems with open source applications which include the dependencies within the.app package. I don't see it as a "good thing" to have a linux equivalent so/dll hell happening where you have various applications overwriting libraries with newer/less stable ones for the sake of adding additional features.
Rare is the case that an OS update (other than windows) will break a lot of applications. I have not experienced any broken apps from any OS X updates other than gui hacking tools but they were quickly updated by their authors.
Me? A Mac zealot without a clue about other platforms? I will have you know that I get "paid" to write in house software on both the Windows and Linux platforms.
Did you know that the.app package evolved on the NextStep/OpenStep platform? Interestingly enough, Sun and HP were originally part of the group OpenStep group and if you look at the directory structure of a Java.jar file (renamed.zip), you will see how similar it is to the.app package directory tree. Also, Java was heavily influenced by Objective C. You could say that both Java and.jar files were the direct result of Sun's involvement with the OpenStep platform.
Read up on NeXT and OpenStep and then perhaps we can have an intelligent exchange of ideas. Learning about that platform will help you understand OS X better.
Please enlighten us as to how it is a "pain" to install, update and uninstall software with drag and drop. Do tell.
Klik seems to take us back to the cumbersome systems that Windows and Macintosh use, where you have to download applications and worry about when they are going to get upgraded and whether the different pieces that are installed are going to be compatible. That is not progress.
The.app packages that OS X use combine the dependencies within the.app directory so you don't have to worry about incompatibilities or causing problems with other apps in case the version of the dependencies an app uses has bugs in it which might become exposed when used with a different app. Since the dependencies are included, they get updated when you upgrade the.app. Difficult huh? Uninstalling is as easy as deleting the.app package.
Instead of spreading FUD, take some time to RTFA, read the info on the project website and learn something about the OSes you would criticize.
If you look at the architecture http://klik.atekon.de/architecture/, you will see that it was heavily inspired by the.app structure from NeXTStep/OS X and mountable.DMG disk images from OS X.
Integration has little do with code quality. There have been quite a few exploits for Mozilla as well. Stop spreading FUD.
The security issues in IE have to do with design decisions with regard to the security model and what you can execute from the browser.
Safari will only suffer the same security issues if they designed it in the same way as IE regardless of how integrated it is. I do not foresee them going an "ActiveX" route for Safari.
What we are forgetting is Apple is not suing for money but rather for this guy to reveal his sources. This should not be a problem for him since he is "not" an accredited journalist.
Apple has an obligation to their shareholders to find out who is leaking the information.
Then don't install them or drag them to trash. This is not windows. There is no registry or anything else to worry about.
Come on now, this is just a strawman though. How do you know you won't want to use those apps later? HD space is cheap and plentiful these days so your "excuse/complaint" is moot anyway.
Unlike windows, most apps have zero affect on the system other than taking up some HD space.
Re:It's ALL about the software, stupid!
on
Apple Releases Mac Mini
·
· Score: 2, Informative
iDVD now supports output to disk image files and third-party DVD burners.
Are you guys trying to tell me that some Joe Sixpack with no journalism credentials and no obligation to report accurate and truthful information is now considered media? Please. There has to be a minimum standard of journalistic integrity/training before you should be able to use the "freedom of the press".
If this guy was a "real" journalist with real journalistic ethics, he would have known it was wrong/illegal to publish trade secrets, especially if there was no compelling reason such as protection of the public interest. If this guy is trying to use the "freedom of press" defence then he is demeaning the entire journalism industry.
I won't shed one tear for some irresponsible "fanboy" with delusions of grandeur getting his ass handed to him by corporate lawyers.
You were saying?
Not even IBM open sources everything. Come on now man.
Do you really expect them to open source Quartz/Quartz Extreme? Let's be realistic. They have to protect trade secrets and keep them away from MSFT. The 60's were over a long time ago man. Many of those "evil" closed source products help fund the open source you enjoy. Do you think those open source developers don't have day jobs in IT? Money does not grow on trees pal and developers don't work for free on larger projects.
Apple pays its developers to contribute code fixes back to those projects you use on linux everyday because it helps them in the end of the day when they use the software in their own OS. They just don't make a big deal out of it like IBM does.
Slashdot Mirror
They also do not want to be relegated to choosing from poorly implemented GUI apps. What they do want is to use a platform with closed source GUI applications they are familiar with. Without these apps, linux will never take a significant chunk of the desktop market.
I think open source is great for infrastructure but I do not have confidence in them providing the GUI and desktop applications because, quite frankly, most OSS GUIs suck monkey balls.
I'm ok with that as long as they look like that Blonde one in Battlestar Galactica or like Kristina Loken from T3.
If they do go through with the extortion lawsuit, I'd encourage everyone to stop buying Beatles music and pirate it instead. Or stop listening to it altogether. Those bloody sell-outs symbolize everything that is wrong with the music industry and the legal system.
They have betrayed everything they claimed to stand for.
App:/ ref_otherimpl.hdf
http://mozart.chat.net/~jeske/Projects/OpenBundle
Compare that with various .jar file types:
and
A concrete example of this is the directory structure of a .jar file. It's quite similar to a .app package and it's sub folders.
There is no need for revision tools in a home user application. Perhaps they will add it in later versions but we are talking about a version 1.0 product here.
Why? Compatibility should be acheived through import/export of other formats.
How about using the main menu? All options are available there.
It has some bad artifacts:
http://www.airwindows.com/encoders/oggvorbis/ including pre-echo.
Man would it hurt you to use google and do a search for AAC players? Come on. You are confusing AAC (non-DRM) with iTMS DRMed-ACC. The former is something you can create by ripping your own CD's, will play with a a few non-apple portable players (including Creative, Samsung and Nokia) and programs like Real Player, VLC etc on the PC/Mac.
FYI, as a Canadian, I bought my iPod in 2002 which was long before iTMS came to Canada (Dec 1st 2004). The iPod was also popular in Europe before the Euro store opened and it is popular in Asia even though there is no iTMS there. You were saying?
Prices? Go compare the price of CD's in brick and mortar stores.
Yes, a malicious program could nuke a home directory on "any" OS. What is your point? Are you saying users should not have control over there home folder? Come on man.
At least with OS X, the worst you can do is nuke your home folder with stupidity. You won't hose the entire system.
Why do you think Apple provides a Backup app with .MAC? Backup your home folder regularly and don't get software/widgets from untrusted sources.
Did Apple charge for the upgrade from 10.2 to 10.3? Yes. Did MSFT charge for the update from NT 5.0 (Windows 200 Pro) to 5.1 (XP)? Yes.
Stop trolling and sign up for an account coward.
Now look at the landscape of the PC market. The vast majority use Windows. Most of them have no interest in running any variety of *nix OS and they don't want to use Cygwin. How exactly are you supposed to easily port open source apps to windows?
Look at all of the spyware on windows in the freeware apps. Look at all of the people developing closed source applications with stolen open source code on windows. CherryOS anyone?
Now with this picture, which platform should you be focusing on outside of linux? Mac OS X or windows. Windows may have a lot of marketshare but your application is likely to be either copied quickly by a closed source developer or just lost in the sea of crapware with better marketing.
http://www.apple.com/opensource/
How do you like the contributions to KHTML that Apple provided? What about the PPC additions to GCC?
They are fully compliant with the licenses of the software they use and modify. Did they have to give the Streaming Server to Open Source? No. Did they have to open source Rendezvous? No.
ECC memory is only a requirement for server clusters, not workstations. Stop spreading FUD.
I have not experienced any problems with open source applications which include the dependencies within the .app package. I don't see it as a "good thing" to have a linux equivalent so/dll hell happening where you have various applications overwriting libraries with newer/less stable ones for the sake of adding additional features.
Rare is the case that an OS update (other than windows) will break a lot of applications. I have not experienced any broken apps from any OS X updates other than gui hacking tools but they were quickly updated by their authors.
Me? A Mac zealot without a clue about other platforms? I will have you know that I get "paid" to write in house software on both the Windows and Linux platforms.
Did you know that the .app package evolved on the NextStep/OpenStep platform? Interestingly enough, Sun and HP were originally part of the group OpenStep group and if you look at the directory structure of a Java .jar file (renamed .zip), you will see how similar it is to the .app package directory tree. Also, Java was heavily influenced by Objective C. You could say that both Java and .jar files were the direct result of Sun's involvement with the OpenStep platform.
Read up on NeXT and OpenStep and then perhaps we can have an intelligent exchange of ideas. Learning about that platform will help you understand OS X better.
Please enlighten us as to how it is a "pain" to install, update and uninstall software with drag and drop. Do tell.
Klik seems to take us back to the cumbersome systems that Windows and Macintosh use, where you have to download applications and worry about when they are going to get upgraded and whether the different pieces that are installed are going to be compatible. That is not progress.
The .app packages that OS X use combine the dependencies within the .app directory so you don't have to worry about incompatibilities or causing problems with other apps in case the version of the dependencies an app uses has bugs in it which might become exposed when used with a different app. Since the dependencies are included, they get updated when you upgrade the .app. Difficult huh? Uninstalling is as easy as deleting the .app package.
Instead of spreading FUD, take some time to RTFA, read the info on the project website and learn something about the OSes you would criticize.
It's a good start.
The security issues in IE have to do with design decisions with regard to the security model and what you can execute from the browser.
Safari will only suffer the same security issues if they designed it in the same way as IE regardless of how integrated it is. I do not foresee them going an "ActiveX" route for Safari.
Apple has an obligation to their shareholders to find out who is leaking the information.
Come on now, this is just a strawman though. How do you know you won't want to use those apps later? HD space is cheap and plentiful these days so your "excuse/complaint" is moot anyway.
Unlike windows, most apps have zero affect on the system other than taking up some HD space.
iDVD now supports output to disk image files and third-party DVD burners.
If this guy was a "real" journalist with real journalistic ethics, he would have known it was wrong/illegal to publish trade secrets, especially if there was no compelling reason such as protection of the public interest. If this guy is trying to use the "freedom of press" defence then he is demeaning the entire journalism industry.
I won't shed one tear for some irresponsible "fanboy" with delusions of grandeur getting his ass handed to him by corporate lawyers.
You were saying?
Not even IBM open sources everything. Come on now man.
Do you really expect them to open source Quartz/Quartz Extreme? Let's be realistic. They have to protect trade secrets and keep them away from MSFT. The 60's were over a long time ago man. Many of those "evil" closed source products help fund the open source you enjoy. Do you think those open source developers don't have day jobs in IT? Money does not grow on trees pal and developers don't work for free on larger projects.
Apple pays its developers to contribute code fixes back to those projects you use on linux everyday because it helps them in the end of the day when they use the software in their own OS. They just don't make a big deal out of it like IBM does.