You of course realize that gcc itself has a lot of extensions not compatible with the C or C++ standard. For this reason, a lot of Open Source code, including the Linux kernel, only compiles with gcc.
CAN-2004-1134 is a buffer overflow issue. The Mac is susceptible to buffer overflows.
Take e.g. the iSync issue. Apple doesn't go into details, but if you do a Google search on "isync vulnerability" you will find:
"The vulnerability is caused due to a boundary error in the handling of the "-v" and "-a" command line options. This can be exploited to cause a buffer overflow by supplying an overly long argument (over 4096 bytes). Successful exploitation allows execution of arbitrary code with the privileges of the mRouter application."
A proof of concept exploit can be found at. It opens a root shell.
When the PowerPC jumps to a subroutine, the return address is stored in the lr register. The first thing the prolog code in the subroutine does, is to put the address on the stack (freeing up the register for further function calls). So, a would-be hacker can overwrite the return address.
For a description of how to take advantage of buffer overflows on the Mac, see "Smashing The Mac For Fun & Profit".
I have no doubt that at some point in the future Apple will provide a 64-bit GUI API. That one can grab data from a database > 4 GB and display it in a window without jumping through hoops, seems natural to me.
Tiger is NOT fully 64-bit. The memory system supports 64-bit pointers. But you can't write a 64-bit GUI application. Carbon and Cocoa are not 64-bit.
A 64-bit application has to be broken into two executables, a 32-bit GUI front-end and a 64-bit engine.
One of the new features in Tiger is support for Access Control Lists (ACL). Microsoft have had that for how long? At least since Windows NT 4.
So, stop the press. Apple is copying Microsoft, and they are behind by more than 8 years.
My advice to Steve Jobs: "Grow up".
I'm well aware that Apple developed the technology that went into IEEE 1394. But developing the technology and incorporating it into a computer are two different things.
Sony wanted a way to hook their video cameras up to a computer. Hence they were one of the first, if not the first, to license the technology. And, they incorporated it into their computers way ahead of Apple.
No. Sony shipped computers with IEEE-1394 more than a year before Apple. Sony uses the name iLink instead of FireWire.
But you are correct that Apple was late with USB. Dell started shipping computers with USB in March 1997. More than a year before Apple introduced the iMac.
Using a longer time period even out outliers.
How much do you think Dell has grown over the same period? HP? How much has the PC market grown over the last 5 years.
Apple sold 1,377,000 computers in Q1-2000. They just announced their Q1-2005 numbers. They sold 1,046,000 computers in that quater. That is a decline in absolute numbers by 24% over 5 years.
The claim that "Since the iMac, Apple's market share has been steadily increasing,..." is simply false.
In fiscal 1999, the first full year after the introduction of the iMac, Apple had sales of 3.5 millions computers. In fiscal 2004 they sold 3.3 millions computers. So, in terms of absolute numbers they are down. In terms of market share they are down a lot.
gcc has some 56 pages of extensions to C/C++. Can you compile the Linux kernel with a strictly conforming compiler, I don't think so.
How is that different?
Yes, Intel is really afraid of Microsoft. That is why they have invested in companies like Be and RedHat.
Of course Intel is also developing software for Linux, like their C/C++ compiler.
And to really show who is their daddy, they develop graphics drivers for Linux.
If you want to setup an online store, you can license WMA-DRM. Likewise, if you are manufacturing MP3 players, you can license WMA-DRM.
That makes WMA-DRM more open (less proprietary) than Apple's DRM.
Wrong. Because of the Consent Decree with DoJ, the top 10 OEMs have the exact same contract for preloading Windows. No room for Microsoft to pressure any of them individually. At the same time, no room for any of the companies to pressure Microsoft.
Here is a quote from the PowerPC 601 Microprocessor manual (Chapter 4, Cache and Memory Unit Operation): "The PowerPC 601 microprocessor contains a 32-Kbyte, eight-way set associative, unified (instruction and data) cache." And yes, the 601 has an instruction for flushing the unified cache (dcbi).
No Apple doesn't have any security problems.
Let's see within the last week they have closed at least two exploitable buffer overrun holes.
Of course Apple doesn't call them that. Instead they use euphemism.
"AppleFileServer: Fixes CAN-2004-0430 to improve the handling of long passwords."
Now go and read
atstake.
Or, "QuickTime 6.5.1: Fixes CAN-2004-0431 where playing a malformed.mov (movie) file could cause QuickTime to terminate."
Now go and read eeye.
No problems at all.
The file format for MPEG-4 is based on QuickTime's file format.
The audio format and video format used in MPEG-4 are not Apple technologies. Heck, Microsoft unlike Apple is one of the patent holders for the video format.
Try to play a MPEG-4 file using one of the more advanced profiles in QuickTime. You can't. Apple only supports MPEG-4 Simple Profile.
Nonsense.
As part of the consent decree with DOJ, the top ten OEMs have exactly the same contract. Microsoft cannot threaten them, and they cannot threaten Microsoft. The price is fixed. Approximately $50 for the XP Home Edition and $100 for XP Pro.
When my G5 stands idle, I can't hear it at all.
However, try to run the hardware test (all fans on max), then it becomes the noisiest computer I have ever heard.
Apple calls it FairPlay (newspeak), and suddenly it is OK with the/. crowd???
First of all Apple's attempt of DRM is ridiculous. It is trivial to circumvent. The content security has the elementary bug of having the content in clear in a buffer.
But here is a test. Rip a CD with DRM in WMP. Now move the ripped file to a different computer and try to play it. WMP automatically launches IE and allows you to transfer your license (yes, there is a limit). No personal information is needed. Try to do the same between two Macintosh computers. You have to register the second computer with Apple. Including full name, address and credit card number.
Apple had no support for Hebrew and Arabic and a lot of other languages in OS X 10.0. The first version of Office for OS X targeted OS X 10.1 which did not have support for Hebrew and Arabic. 10.1 was released 9/25/2001. Office X was released 11/19/2001. It wasn't before Apple release OS X 10.2 (8/26/2002) that the OS had support for Hebrew and Arabic.
Microsoft has just announced a new version of Office for OS X (to be released in Q2). I would be surprised if it did not have support for Hebrew and Arabic.
You couldn't find any documentation about codepages on Apple's developer site could you?
Yes, the Mac has different "encodings". But they are not called codepages. So, my statement that there are no codepages on the Mac is correct.
I would have been a little more impressed if you had done a search on Apple's developer site.
Mac OS does not have codepages. There are ways of translating between codepages on Windows and the Mac. That is what the "install dozens of Mac codepages within Windows" is about. Those are codepages on Windows that does not require translation (or only very simple translation) when converting a document to the Mac. Hence you get visually exactly the same document.
But those (codepages) are descriptions for Windows .
Slashdot Mirror
You of course realize that gcc itself has a lot of extensions not compatible with the C or C++ standard. For this reason, a lot of Open Source code, including the Linux kernel, only compiles with gcc.
CAN-2004-1134 is a buffer overflow issue. The Mac is susceptible to buffer overflows.
Take e.g. the iSync issue. Apple doesn't go into details, but if you do a Google search on "isync vulnerability" you will find:
"The vulnerability is caused due to a boundary error in the handling of the "-v" and "-a" command line options. This can be exploited to cause a buffer overflow by supplying an overly long argument (over 4096 bytes). Successful exploitation allows execution of arbitrary code with the privileges of the mRouter application."
A proof of concept exploit can be found at. It opens a root shell.
When the PowerPC jumps to a subroutine, the return address is stored in the lr register. The first thing the prolog code in the subroutine does, is to put the address on the stack (freeing up the register for further function calls). So, a would-be hacker can overwrite the return address. For a description of how to take advantage of buffer overflows on the Mac, see "Smashing The Mac For Fun & Profit".
I have no doubt that at some point in the future Apple will provide a 64-bit GUI API. That one can grab data from a database > 4 GB and display it in a window without jumping through hoops, seems natural to me.
Tiger is NOT fully 64-bit. The memory system supports 64-bit pointers. But you can't write a 64-bit GUI application. Carbon and Cocoa are not 64-bit.
A 64-bit application has to be broken into two executables, a 32-bit GUI front-end and a 64-bit engine.
One of the new features in Tiger is support for Access Control Lists (ACL). Microsoft have had that for how long? At least since Windows NT 4.
So, stop the press. Apple is copying Microsoft, and they are behind by more than 8 years.
My advice to Steve Jobs: "Grow up".
I'm well aware that Apple developed the technology that went into IEEE 1394. But developing the technology and incorporating it into a computer are two different things. Sony wanted a way to hook their video cameras up to a computer. Hence they were one of the first, if not the first, to license the technology. And, they incorporated it into their computers way ahead of Apple.
No. Sony shipped computers with IEEE-1394 more than a year before Apple. Sony uses the name iLink instead of FireWire.
But you are correct that Apple was late with USB. Dell started shipping computers with USB in March 1997. More than a year before Apple introduced the iMac.
Apple starts its fiscal year October 1. Hence the result they reported was for Q1-2005.
Using a longer time period even out outliers.
How much do you think Dell has grown over the same period? HP? How much has the PC market grown over the last 5 years.
Apple sold 1,377,000 computers in Q1-2000. They just announced their Q1-2005 numbers. They sold 1,046,000 computers in that quater. That is a decline in absolute numbers by 24% over 5 years.
The claim that "Since the iMac, Apple's market share has been steadily increasing, ..." is simply false.
In fiscal 1999, the first full year after the introduction of the iMac, Apple had sales of 3.5 millions computers. In fiscal 2004 they sold 3.3 millions computers. So, in terms of absolute numbers they are down. In terms of market share they are down a lot.
gcc has some 56 pages of extensions to C/C++. Can you compile the Linux kernel with a strictly conforming compiler, I don't think so.
How is that different?
Yes, Intel is really afraid of Microsoft. That is why they have invested in companies like Be and RedHat.
Of course Intel is also developing software for Linux, like their C/C++ compiler.
And to really show who is their daddy, they develop graphics drivers for Linux.
If you want to setup an online store, you can license WMA-DRM. Likewise, if you are manufacturing MP3 players, you can license WMA-DRM. That makes WMA-DRM more open (less proprietary) than Apple's DRM.
Steve Jobs wasn't the first to talk about a digital hub. Microsoft used the concept in the press release for Windows Me in September 2000 http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/09/14/micro soft.windowsme.reut/.
Wrong. Because of the Consent Decree with DoJ, the top 10 OEMs have the exact same contract for preloading Windows. No room for Microsoft to pressure any of them individually. At the same time, no room for any of the companies to pressure Microsoft.
Here is a quote from the PowerPC 601 Microprocessor manual (Chapter 4, Cache and Memory Unit Operation): "The PowerPC 601 microprocessor contains a 32-Kbyte, eight-way set associative, unified (instruction and data) cache." And yes, the 601 has an instruction for flushing the unified cache (dcbi).
No Apple doesn't have any security problems. .mov (movie) file could cause QuickTime to terminate."
Let's see within the last week they have closed at least two exploitable buffer overrun holes.
Of course Apple doesn't call them that. Instead they use euphemism.
"AppleFileServer: Fixes CAN-2004-0430 to improve the handling of long passwords."
Now go and read atstake.
Or, "QuickTime 6.5.1: Fixes CAN-2004-0431 where playing a malformed
Now go and read eeye.
No problems at all.
The file format for MPEG-4 is based on QuickTime's file format.
The audio format and video format used in MPEG-4 are not Apple technologies. Heck, Microsoft unlike Apple is one of the patent holders for the video format.
Try to play a MPEG-4 file using one of the more advanced profiles in QuickTime. You can't. Apple only supports MPEG-4 Simple Profile.
Nonsense.
As part of the consent decree with DOJ, the top ten OEMs have exactly the same contract. Microsoft cannot threaten them, and they cannot threaten Microsoft. The price is fixed. Approximately $50 for the XP Home Edition and $100 for XP Pro.
When my G5 stands idle, I can't hear it at all.
However, try to run the hardware test (all fans on max), then it becomes the noisiest computer I have ever heard.
Apple calls it FairPlay (newspeak), and suddenly it is OK with the /. crowd???
First of all Apple's attempt of DRM is ridiculous. It is trivial to circumvent. The content security has the elementary bug of having the content in clear in a buffer.
But here is a test. Rip a CD with DRM in WMP. Now move the ripped file to a different computer and try to play it. WMP automatically launches IE and allows you to transfer your license (yes, there is a limit). No personal information is needed. Try to do the same between two Macintosh computers. You have to register the second computer with Apple. Including full name, address and credit card number.
Apple had no support for Hebrew and Arabic and a lot of other languages in OS X 10.0. The first version of Office for OS X targeted OS X 10.1 which did not have support for Hebrew and Arabic. 10.1 was released 9/25/2001. Office X was released 11/19/2001. It wasn't before Apple release OS X 10.2 (8/26/2002) that the OS had support for Hebrew and Arabic.
Microsoft has just announced a new version of Office for OS X (to be released in Q2). I would be surprised if it did not have support for Hebrew and Arabic.
You couldn't find any documentation about codepages on Apple's developer site could you?
Yes, the Mac has different "encodings". But they are not called codepages. So, my statement that there are no codepages on the Mac is correct.
I would have been a little more impressed if you had done a search on Apple's developer site.
Mac OS does not have codepages. There are ways of translating between codepages on Windows and the Mac. That is what the "install dozens of Mac codepages within Windows" is about. Those are codepages on Windows that does not require translation (or only very simple translation) when converting a document to the Mac. Hence you get visually exactly the same document. But those (codepages) are descriptions for Windows .