Why would OSX have to support all hardware out there? Why would Apple have to change ANYTHING? Hell, I'd suggest Apple not provide any support for any Psystar machines, even if the specs are identical to an authentic Mac.
That said, Psystar should be able to buy license of OSX and install them and support them themselves. Apple's selling the OS, they should not be able to limit how people use them. As a poster said earlier... if you buy a Sony Blu-Ray disc, do you think you should be limited by the license to only playing it on a Sony player with a Sony TV?
So... the right of first sale can be precluded by a click-through EULA? I don't think so. If Psystar pays retail prices for the OS, they should be able to do whatever the hell they want to with it. They should be able to toss it in a bonfire and burn it (environmental damage notwithstanding), play frisbee with it, give them to homeless people or install it on computers and then sell the computers. Apple should not be able to tell them what they can do with it, especially if they're purchasing the OS at retail. "Re-sellers" are not anything special. They can only get permissions ABOVE AND BEYOND standard consumer rights by keeping the supplier happy, not less than normal rights. Even if I pissed off NVidia by writing a bad review, I still have every legal right to buy one of their cards and sell it again.
Once every "few years"? Try every "few days". I have a big yard, lots of flowers and vegetables and such, and that takes a lot of supplies and work. I also do my own work on most things in my house, and move my own furniture. Just bought a new couch the other week, had to use a truck to get it to the house.
Just because you live in a loft apartment and have a Prius doesn't make you better than people that live further out, and it doesn't make you more environmentally conscious. Your living situation is built on the work of people who DO use trucks.
Fortunately, I'm lucky enough to be able to afford an efficient commuter car and a truck, so I use each as it's most efficient to do so. But your attitude smacks way too much of the "I don't even OWN a tv" syndrome. I reiterate, get over yourself, you yuppie twit.
The problem is with those types of solar plants they are highly dependent on direct sunlight. Places like Florida that are very sunny but still have lots of high clouds can't use them... they just don't get hot enough. They are great where they work (mostly the southwest in the USA), but they are not a universally workable solution.
I'm not saying we shouldn't invest in it. I'm saying we shouldn't focus on it to the exclusion of other tried and true technologies like nuclear.
Oh so high and mighty, Mr. "I don't drive a truck so I'm better than you". Did it ever occur to you that there are a significant number of people that actually need trucks even if only part of the time? And not everyone has the money to have multiple vehicles so they could drive something more economical when they didn't have to, say, haul things around?
It's great to be on your high horse, but when you need a new water heater or washer and dryer in your place, you need to get a truck to haul it. Better hope you don't have a yard or want to add on to your house, either... oh, wait. You just consume and pay other people to have trucks to do things for you and act smug because you don't have one.
Get over yourself. Not everyone who owns a truck is part of the problem.
Pictures that represent objects should act the same in throughout same system. Creating a separate context in which you get to say,"no no, they work differently here" is rarely ever NOT a mistake.
They DO act the same. You've got it backwards... the Desktop as a folder AND as an interface is where you get things acting differently in different contexts. The KDE4 desktop makes interface separate from data. They're fixing the thing you call a mistake. You have to have a plasmoid to display a folder's contents if you want data on your desktop, which is completely in keeping with the concept. They also always act the same... you never see a folder on the desktop in KDE4, you never see a program icon. It's in a plasmoid or in the file browser and they always do the same thing. It's doing exactly what you say is good, but you keep claiming that it's bad.
The paradigm change is that the desktop is no longer a folder, like I said before. In that context, "file types" and "icons" no longer have near the same meaning. That's why Plasmoids are desktop things. Plasmoid/desktop=interface, folder=data. It's a clear delineation between the concepts rather than the "desktop is a folder" idea that we've had until now.
I still contend that it's a "it's not what I'm used to!" issue because it seems like you still don't understand that, and you explicitly stated that "The desktop in KDE 3.x and prior, as well as Mac and Windows" all work that way, the way you like and the way you're used to.
As for Silverlight, since it offers no benefit over Flash, and since even Microsoft Gold Partners have told me that they use Flash unless forced to use Silverlight, I think it will be a non-competitor unless Microsoft starts shipping it with the OS (maybe they do in Vista - if so, then Flash is dead no matter how good it is)
I would love to see the antitrust lawsuits fly if they did that. Microsoft is already on the wrong foot in the EU, and lost the case in the US (even if nothing changed). There is NO way they can argue that Silverlight is core to the OS, and anything other than an add-on, so there's no way they could argue that it's not product-tying, which is a big no-no when you're a monopoly.
Yeah, but lying to the senate is perjury. Every single one of their lawyers and executives should not pass go, not collect $200, and go straight to jail.
Desktop sharing, that's a fair point. But your second point falls squarely under the "it's not what I'm used to!" camp. After getting used to it, it makes a fair bit of sense that Desktop is not a "special" folder. There are NO "special" folders, just folders, period, end of story. Set up however many desktop views of whatever folders you want.
Sure, the extra effects are overdone. But that's kinda the point. The normal and low levels of effects work fine, and feel comfortable without calling attention to themselves though.
Really? No problems with those particular tasks? videoproblems due to Vista's design are well-known, as well as numerous other performance problems such as file copying while listening to music.
And what is RA3? Red Alert 3? If you're wanting to run a program designed for WINDOWS you need Wine installed first. Linux isn't Windows, which is apparently very hard for lots of people (like you) to understand. After that, you just pop the disc in, and install. You might consider playing a better programmed game, though... even under Windows, the entire C&C series network code and performance sucks balls.
How is it less usable? Because it's not what you're used to? I mean, there are things like Amarok2 not having media player integration yet which is a very valid complaint. But KDE4.2 is pretty much usable as it is.
That said, I'm using KDE3.5 on Ubuntu 8.04 for my work machine because I need to have it stable and secure. But I really like Ubuntu 9.04 and KDE4.2 so far on my personal laptop.
So it's the standard Windows-user "It's not what I'm used to, so I don't like it" thing?
We don't care if you use Linux. If you don't, it doesn't affect us. You aren't a customer to be served. You're a possible member of the community, but given how needy, dismissive, complaining and demanding you seem to be in your posts and your apparent unwillingness to help make things better, it looks like we're better off without you.
Same thing would happen. Ubuntu is much more secure out of the box, not to mention it doesn't even run 99% of the malware out there. Set them both with the same user password, and the Windows machine would be much more likely to be owned.
Computers are great for doing math. But computers operate on the GIGO principle. Even in college I saw lots of people get into trouble because they just plugged numbers in. They didn't have the experience or understanding overall that would have let them realize that the answer they were writing down was a few orders of magnitude off.
Yeah. Those google maps and such are all useless. Why would I want the ability to interactively scroll around on the map? If I didn't find the right place the first time, I'd rather click a button and reload the whole page!
Slashdot Mirror
There, fixed that for you
Why would OSX have to support all hardware out there? Why would Apple have to change ANYTHING? Hell, I'd suggest Apple not provide any support for any Psystar machines, even if the specs are identical to an authentic Mac.
That said, Psystar should be able to buy license of OSX and install them and support them themselves. Apple's selling the OS, they should not be able to limit how people use them. As a poster said earlier... if you buy a Sony Blu-Ray disc, do you think you should be limited by the license to only playing it on a Sony player with a Sony TV?
So... the right of first sale can be precluded by a click-through EULA? I don't think so. If Psystar pays retail prices for the OS, they should be able to do whatever the hell they want to with it. They should be able to toss it in a bonfire and burn it (environmental damage notwithstanding), play frisbee with it, give them to homeless people or install it on computers and then sell the computers. Apple should not be able to tell them what they can do with it, especially if they're purchasing the OS at retail. "Re-sellers" are not anything special. They can only get permissions ABOVE AND BEYOND standard consumer rights by keeping the supplier happy, not less than normal rights. Even if I pissed off NVidia by writing a bad review, I still have every legal right to buy one of their cards and sell it again.
Once every "few years"? Try every "few days". I have a big yard, lots of flowers and vegetables and such, and that takes a lot of supplies and work. I also do my own work on most things in my house, and move my own furniture. Just bought a new couch the other week, had to use a truck to get it to the house.
Just because you live in a loft apartment and have a Prius doesn't make you better than people that live further out, and it doesn't make you more environmentally conscious. Your living situation is built on the work of people who DO use trucks.
Fortunately, I'm lucky enough to be able to afford an efficient commuter car and a truck, so I use each as it's most efficient to do so. But your attitude smacks way too much of the "I don't even OWN a tv" syndrome. I reiterate, get over yourself, you yuppie twit.
The problem is with those types of solar plants they are highly dependent on direct sunlight. Places like Florida that are very sunny but still have lots of high clouds can't use them... they just don't get hot enough. They are great where they work (mostly the southwest in the USA), but they are not a universally workable solution.
I'm not saying we shouldn't invest in it. I'm saying we shouldn't focus on it to the exclusion of other tried and true technologies like nuclear.
Oh so high and mighty, Mr. "I don't drive a truck so I'm better than you". Did it ever occur to you that there are a significant number of people that actually need trucks even if only part of the time? And not everyone has the money to have multiple vehicles so they could drive something more economical when they didn't have to, say, haul things around?
It's great to be on your high horse, but when you need a new water heater or washer and dryer in your place, you need to get a truck to haul it. Better hope you don't have a yard or want to add on to your house, either... oh, wait. You just consume and pay other people to have trucks to do things for you and act smug because you don't have one.
Get over yourself. Not everyone who owns a truck is part of the problem.
They DO act the same. You've got it backwards... the Desktop as a folder AND as an interface is where you get things acting differently in different contexts. The KDE4 desktop makes interface separate from data. They're fixing the thing you call a mistake. You have to have a plasmoid to display a folder's contents if you want data on your desktop, which is completely in keeping with the concept. They also always act the same... you never see a folder on the desktop in KDE4, you never see a program icon. It's in a plasmoid or in the file browser and they always do the same thing. It's doing exactly what you say is good, but you keep claiming that it's bad.
The paradigm change is that the desktop is no longer a folder, like I said before. In that context, "file types" and "icons" no longer have near the same meaning. That's why Plasmoids are desktop things. Plasmoid/desktop=interface, folder=data. It's a clear delineation between the concepts rather than the "desktop is a folder" idea that we've had until now.
I still contend that it's a "it's not what I'm used to!" issue because it seems like you still don't understand that, and you explicitly stated that "The desktop in KDE 3.x and prior, as well as Mac and Windows" all work that way, the way you like and the way you're used to.
I would love to see the antitrust lawsuits fly if they did that. Microsoft is already on the wrong foot in the EU, and lost the case in the US (even if nothing changed). There is NO way they can argue that Silverlight is core to the OS, and anything other than an add-on, so there's no way they could argue that it's not product-tying, which is a big no-no when you're a monopoly.
mp3 won't go below 32kbps, and nor will Ogg Vorbis... what encoding are you using?
Yeah, but lying to the senate is perjury. Every single one of their lawyers and executives should not pass go, not collect $200, and go straight to jail.
Desktop sharing, that's a fair point. But your second point falls squarely under the "it's not what I'm used to!" camp. After getting used to it, it makes a fair bit of sense that Desktop is not a "special" folder. There are NO "special" folders, just folders, period, end of story. Set up however many desktop views of whatever folders you want.
Sure, the extra effects are overdone. But that's kinda the point. The normal and low levels of effects work fine, and feel comfortable without calling attention to themselves though.
Really? No problems with those particular tasks? video problems due to Vista's design are well-known, as well as numerous other performance problems such as file copying while listening to music.
And what is RA3? Red Alert 3? If you're wanting to run a program designed for WINDOWS you need Wine installed first. Linux isn't Windows, which is apparently very hard for lots of people (like you) to understand. After that, you just pop the disc in, and install. You might consider playing a better programmed game, though... even under Windows, the entire C&C series network code and performance sucks balls.
You do realize that Mark Shuttleworth (Ubuntu founder) is from South Africa, where there are a lot of black people, and the name Ubuntu is an African word?
Just because the demographics of the users you know are mostly white males doesn't mean they all are, you self-centered twit.
How is it less usable? Because it's not what you're used to? I mean, there are things like Amarok2 not having media player integration yet which is a very valid complaint. But KDE4.2 is pretty much usable as it is.
That said, I'm using KDE3.5 on Ubuntu 8.04 for my work machine because I need to have it stable and secure. But I really like Ubuntu 9.04 and KDE4.2 so far on my personal laptop.
No. I'm saying completely disabling Javascript is stupid on the current web, it doesn't matter WHAT browser you use.
Fanboy much?
The telecoms are the ones who wasted the money for no benefit, even though that is specifically what it was for. They are not blameless.
So it's the standard Windows-user "It's not what I'm used to, so I don't like it" thing?
We don't care if you use Linux. If you don't, it doesn't affect us. You aren't a customer to be served. You're a possible member of the community, but given how needy, dismissive, complaining and demanding you seem to be in your posts and your apparent unwillingness to help make things better, it looks like we're better off without you.
Same thing would happen. Ubuntu is much more secure out of the box, not to mention it doesn't even run 99% of the malware out there. Set them both with the same user password, and the Windows machine would be much more likely to be owned.
I use Opera on my phone all the time. It's a great browser. But I don't disable Javascript on it.
Computers are great for doing math. But computers operate on the GIGO principle. Even in college I saw lots of people get into trouble because they just plugged numbers in. They didn't have the experience or understanding overall that would have let them realize that the answer they were writing down was a few orders of magnitude off.
Who's on first?
No features, either. Oh well... the web was perfected in 1993. We should ignore any changes since then, as they're simply useless.
Yeah. Those google maps and such are all useless. Why would I want the ability to interactively scroll around on the map? If I didn't find the right place the first time, I'd rather click a button and reload the whole page!