The quote has fairly massive flaws If God is by his nature, supremely worthy of worship, then not worshipping him is a terrible wrong, making any human virtues somewhat irrelevant. And if God's moral standard is at a certain level, then human definitions of virtue will always fall short.
You could only come to that conclusion if you ignored all the other tenets of Christianity e.g. murder being wrong, life being purposeful because it is commanded by God and provides opportunities to serve him and enjoy him.
I'd imagine the issue is frequency. The people most concerned about swapping batteries probably plan on having a couple that they use consecutively and would be opening the computer to swap them far more frequently than anyone doing a RAM or hard drive replacement would need to. The more times you open the case, the more often something can go wrong.
If people correct others, they should make sure they're right or just not do it. If it's boring, don't bother to reply to it. By doing so you mss out on the opportunity to mod us down for being off-topic.
Where have you seen Apple use "MacOS"? If you haven't, then it's wrong.
I don't think it matters all that much
Yet you went out of your way to correct someone else. If you're going to correct someone, isn't it better to be sure that you're it right?
but when there is no space, it is always cased the "MacOS" way, not "MACOS".
Who suggested it should be in all-caps?
Exactly - it is just lay-term, marketing stuff. Hip, kewl, non-technical common reference.
No, it's not a lay-term. What does the iPhone run? OS X according to Apple. Also, marketing != non-technical e.g. Apple can only market Mac OS X as UNIX because it has been technically certified as such.
Well, we just agree to disagree.
Then you disagree with Apple, whose opinion matters more than either of ours.
Saying "Mac OS Ten Version Ten point Four" is just redundant and silly to me.
That amy be, but it's the scheme Apple have gone with. Go to 'About This Mac' in the Apple menu and you'll discover that. Check System Profiler and you'll get the very similar "Mac OS X 10.5.6".
Not really. If you just said "MS Windows", that doesn't imply it runs on 3.11 or 95 does it?
No, but that's Windows, not the Mac. It is standard practice to differentiate between classic versions of Mac OS and Mac OS X by using "Mac OS" and "Mac OS X" because that's how they're branded.
If you want to be specific, you add the version/rev to it: "Mac OS 10.3 and above"
Then why did you initially 'correct' "OS X" to "MacOS" when you were in fact reducing the information available in doing so?
Funny, for many, many years, I have seen it written both ways. I just searched and found lots and lots of occurrences
Where? Has Microsoft ever used it? If they have, then fair enough, but I just tried Googling and despite me inputting "MS-Windows", it just returns hits for "MS Windows".
but calling it just "DOS" would be completely incorrect, just like calling something "windows"; both are entirely too generic and presumptuous
That would be one of the reasons its capitalise i.e. "Windows", not "windows" - if you're quoting, make sure you're quoting correctly, particularly when this all started with you correcting someone else.
which Microsoft loves, of course...
Would you say this is comparable to your use of the generic "MacOS" instead of the more specific "Mac OS X"?
just like "word" instead of "MS Word" or "office" instead of "MS Office"
Where do they do it, other than places where the Microsoft branding is already clearly visible? Even on their own site its called "Microsoft Office [version] [year]".
MacOS is (and always has been) the name of the operating system Apple uses, it is the Macintosh Operating System. The current version is 10, which came after version 9, which came after version 8. In a marketing spiff, they often write the "10" as a roman numeral "X", but if you look in the code and such, it is 10. The subversions follow the "10", such as "10.1", "10.2", etc. It is also pronounced "Mac Oh Ess Ten" not "Mac Oh Ess Ekess".
"OS X" is more of a brand than a version number now, with Mac versions and non-Mac versions. Among the Mac versions, it is more correct to say "Mac OS X version 10.4.11" than "Mac OS X version 4.11 or "Mac OS 10.4.11", making it quite a distinctly different naming system to the classic days i.e. the "X" belongs more properly with the OS brand than with the version.
If you were to correct "OSX" to "MacOS' you would be implying that the software runs on classic Mac OS i.e. versions through to 9. If software runs only on one of the versions of Mac OS X then it is misleading to state "MacOS" (which means nothing) or "Mac OS" which is typically used to mean versions 1-9 specifically.
Don't be sceptical about the "MS" in "MS-Windows". "Windows" are things that let light in, in a building or car. Or they are generic representations of program input/output areas on any computer screen.
I wasn't 'sceptical about the MS,' I was 'somewhat sceptical about that hyphen.'
"MS-Windows" or "Microsoft Windows" is the name of their OS (and always has been).
I'm not familiar with any occasion on which Microsoft have referred to it as "MS-Windows." I can only find "MS Windows." You're probably getting confused with MS-DOS which does have a hyphen.
"Ubuntu" is just one Linux distro. The software runs on Linux, not just Ubuntu.
What part of me saying 'Amending Ubuntu to Linux seems like accurate, useful information though.' made you think I didn't agree with or understand that?
If you're going to correct someone, you should really get it right yourself. There was never any 'MacOS', and 'Mac OS' is so old now that I doubt more than a handful of companies make applications for it. 'Mac OS X' is the correct terminology. I'm also somewhat sceptical about that hyphen in 'MS-Windows'. Amending Ubuntu to Linux seems like accurate, useful information though.
Let me get this straight, you berate them for not being innovative (despite not having played the game and not knowing much about the gameplay), then say they should bring back a 12 year old game?
I loved the Myth series (well, mainly Myth II, never played Myth III and heard it was rubbish), but rereleasing it would hardly be innovative. The way they've adapted the RTS to a console sounds interesting though.
I'm not disagreeing that the Internet is used heavily today, I'm denying that it is a distinctive that helps Apple. Pretty much any computer can access the Internet and Flash performance is actually quite on the Mac. It also suffers from compatibility problems with some sights because of the lack of IE. The attractiveness of Macs lies elsewhere.
Thank you! I was beginning to go a bit nuts wondering how I was supposed to get it working. Signed up for the labs, but then there was no information on what to do next.
No I am not overstating. With the exception of games (which is still the reason people get PC's) Most of these apps have shrunk to a handful of companies.
I'm not quite sure what that sentence is supposed to mean. You can't deny that those are pretty big apps and arguable among the most important for most users.
And many of those apps have both Mac and PC ports.
That was a large part of my point: compatibility between applications and doc types is more important than the Internet.
But if you looked at software of the past. I remember when software stores were Full to the brim with PC only apps. Now the PC software has shrunk to a couple of rows, in the store, and one row about 50% Mac and you may see a Linux distro mixed in it.
I don't know where you're posting from, but I've never seen a Linux distro on a shelf in the UK, except in university-run shops. To be fair though, I'm very rarely in computer shops, not that I see what that has to do with anything. A lot of computers come bundled with software or people buy off the Internet (Which is somewhat different to running the apps on the Internet).
You probably don't remember all the Crap software they use to sell
I remember the ZX Spectrum, so I remember quite a bit of rubbish software.
that we now can go to the web and access the same stuff and more.
There's a lot of software, but it's pretty rubbish, by and large and fundamentally restricted in what it can do. Google Docs does not compare with Microsoft Office.
Even Games those cheap Shareware bundles Disks are gone and most of them are Flash Based games you can play online.
I don't think people are buying Macs in order to play Flash games. Especially considering the performance of Flash on a Mac.
If you unplug you computer from the internet for a month you will probably realize how much you need your connection. Where before you could function very well without internet or a modem connection.
I suspect I would see how reliant I have become on it, but how little I really need it. If someone can't function without the net then I'd be worried about them. Besides, that's not the argument. You were claiming that the Internet is the reason for the popularity of Macs. Given that the experience is in no way superior on a Mac, compared to on a PC, I fail to see how that claim holds water. Apple's ads certainly don't focus on it. If you took a computer without an Internet connection, but loaded up with Microsoft Office, Photoshop, Aperture, Final Cut Pro, iLife, etc. and compared it to a computer with an Internet connection, but no ability to run those applications or open their documents, which would more people be interested in buying?
People buy Macs as opposed to other PCs for a reason, so you have to ask what is distinctive about them. I'd say:
hardware design
user interface
software compatibility (e.g. can run Office better than Linux)
software exclusives (e.g. Final Cut Pro)
image (related to hardware design and to a certain extent the interface)
You're overstating the Internet case. Most applications are not dependent on the Internet e.g. Microsoft Office, Photoshop, iWorks, Aperture, Final Cut, 3D modellers, games, etc. Part of the appeal of the iMac (and a heavily advertised point) was that it was very easy to get online with, but it's not as big a factor as you make it out to be. More efficient business practices, a tighter focus on a win-able, profitable market (i.e. not competing in the low-margin, bottom-end market), an up-to-date OS, continued compatibility with Office and superb consumer applications are bigger factors. Without access to the Internet, Macs would be ignored, yes, but Internet access isn't the reason to get one.
Company of Heroes wasn't the first RTS to use squads and cover. The Close Combat series was using it close to a decade ago, to great effect, along with limited supply of ammunition and a morale system.
Apple once granted permission to make an Apple 2 clone to a company that did that and made it LOTS better. Apple sued and won on the basis of "We said you could make a clone, not embarrass us by making it way better!"
This is the story of the Apple IIe and the Franklin computer. It is one of the ugliest things I have seen happen in the business world and I will never forget it and the company associated with it.
I just checked the Apple v. Franklin Wikipedia article and there's no mention there that they ever granted permission for Franklin to make clones. Was there another case and if so, do you have any information on it?
Isn't Psystar installing retail copies of Mac OS X? I'm pretty sure that Apple isn't selling them OEM versions and they'd be fools to buy a Mac in order to get an OEM version to put on their own machine.
As I've already pointed out, the Psalms are poetic so claiming that via a literal interpretation, they make scientific statements, is ludicrous. Similarly, the inicdent in Joshua seems a figure of speech we still use today, hence my references to sunset and sunrise. From the perspective of those watch, the sun appeared to stop in the sky. It wasn't a scientific statement regarding heliocentrism or geocentrism.
That period strongly held onto the belief that the earth is the center of the universe. There are church papers supporting this.
It was commonly believed at the time by the overwhelming majority of people, including a big chunk of astronomers, that the sun moved round the earth. After all, it didn't feel like the earth was moving and it looked like the sun was. When they read those passages, they would have seen then as consistent with such a view, but they were mishandling scripture. The Wikipedia article on Modern Geocentrism is quite good on this.
In all fairness the church did reverse it's position....in 1985.
Are you talking about the Roman Catholic church? I have no great interest in their position of matters, but I doubt that they were still holding geocentric views in 1984.
If you're so certain about this, why not provide evidence? 'you damned well know' isn't a logical argument and sounds more like the rantings of a conspiracy theorist than someone with a genuine interest in the truth of historical events (or scientific ones for that matter).
Weird. I can see how that would be somewhat off-putting. I suppose you could get round it by splitting each track in two, but it really shouldn't be necessary to have to go looking for workarounds.
I'm sorry if you misunderstood my post, but I wasn't trying to say anything about my beliefs but rather how people in the past attempted to justify the idea that the earth was the center of the universe by citing the bible.
I think we actually agree, but by saying that the OT alludes to geocentrism, it looked like you were saying that the Bible suggests geocentrism as a scientific model, which it doesn't. It can be mistakenly read in that way, but if it's a mistake, then you can't say to alludes to the idea. Grammar pedantry really.
The longest word isn't found in the 'a much better answer' link, but rather the other one, somewhat misleadingly. The word, in case you're interested, is supposed to be 'devertebrated', though the Oxford English Dictionary doesn't recognise it.
There's nearly 2,000 shorter words that can typed with only the left hand -- including one word that's even longer.
How exactly can shorter words include a longer one?
There's no reason a standard USB interface couldn't have been decided upon by various media players that allowed digital playback and user interface to be exposed in both directions, but instead we have the iPhone dock connector in cars and on stereos.
Actually, a standard USB interface couldn't possibly provide such functionality because one end must be the host and the other the peer, but your suggestion requires that the media player be able to function as both (unless you're talking about having one USB interface for connecting to the computer, where the media player is the peer, and another interface for connecting devices to, where the media player is the host). Any USB interface which deviates from this practice is by definition non-standard.
The prevailing cosmology, which the church was more than happy to throw people in jail for questioning, was that the Earth was the center of the universe because it was created by God as the divine home for Man.
Happy to throw people in jail? Really? That's a bit odd when you consider that On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres was prefaced by a Lutheran theologian, dedicated to the Pope and been prompted to be written by the Archbishop of Capua. Even a cursory glance at Wikipedia would make that clear. Why do you think the church was throwing people in jail? over astronomy? A big chunk of astronomers were clerics or funded by the church.
Slashdot Mirror
The quote has fairly massive flaws If God is by his nature, supremely worthy of worship, then not worshipping him is a terrible wrong, making any human virtues somewhat irrelevant. And if God's moral standard is at a certain level, then human definitions of virtue will always fall short.
You could only come to that conclusion if you ignored all the other tenets of Christianity e.g. murder being wrong, life being purposeful because it is commanded by God and provides opportunities to serve him and enjoy him.
I'd imagine the issue is frequency. The people most concerned about swapping batteries probably plan on having a couple that they use consecutively and would be opening the computer to swap them far more frequently than anyone doing a RAM or hard drive replacement would need to. The more times you open the case, the more often something can go wrong.
If people correct others, they should make sure they're right or just not do it. If it's boring, don't bother to reply to it. By doing so you mss out on the opportunity to mod us down for being off-topic.
Where have you seen Apple use "MacOS"? If you haven't, then it's wrong.
Yet you went out of your way to correct someone else. If you're going to correct someone, isn't it better to be sure that you're it right?
Who suggested it should be in all-caps?
No, it's not a lay-term. What does the iPhone run? OS X according to Apple. Also, marketing != non-technical e.g. Apple can only market Mac OS X as UNIX because it has been technically certified as such.
Then you disagree with Apple, whose opinion matters more than either of ours.
That amy be, but it's the scheme Apple have gone with. Go to 'About This Mac' in the Apple menu and you'll discover that. Check System Profiler and you'll get the very similar "Mac OS X 10.5.6".
No, but that's Windows, not the Mac. It is standard practice to differentiate between classic versions of Mac OS and Mac OS X by using "Mac OS" and "Mac OS X" because that's how they're branded.
Then why did you initially 'correct' "OS X" to "MacOS" when you were in fact reducing the information available in doing so?
Where? Has Microsoft ever used it? If they have, then fair enough, but I just tried Googling and despite me inputting "MS-Windows", it just returns hits for "MS Windows".
That would be one of the reasons its capitalise i.e. "Windows", not "windows" - if you're quoting, make sure you're quoting correctly, particularly when this all started with you correcting someone else.
Would you say this is comparable to your use of the generic "MacOS" instead of the more specific "Mac OS X"?
Where do they do it, other than places where the Microsoft branding is already clearly visible? Even on their own site its called "Microsoft Office [version] [year]".
No. It's Mac OS - note the space, check the trademark, read the Wikipedia article, look at the image.
"OS X" is more of a brand than a version number now, with Mac versions and non-Mac versions. Among the Mac versions, it is more correct to say "Mac OS X version 10.4.11" than "Mac OS X version 4.11 or "Mac OS 10.4.11", making it quite a distinctly different naming system to the classic days i.e. the "X" belongs more properly with the OS brand than with the version.
If you were to correct "OSX" to "MacOS' you would be implying that the software runs on classic Mac OS i.e. versions through to 9. If software runs only on one of the versions of Mac OS X then it is misleading to state "MacOS" (which means nothing) or "Mac OS" which is typically used to mean versions 1-9 specifically.
I wasn't 'sceptical about the MS,' I was 'somewhat sceptical about that hyphen.'
I'm not familiar with any occasion on which Microsoft have referred to it as "MS-Windows." I can only find "MS Windows." You're probably getting confused with MS-DOS which does have a hyphen.
What part of me saying 'Amending Ubuntu to Linux seems like accurate, useful information though.' made you think I didn't agree with or understand that?
If you're going to correct someone, you should really get it right yourself. There was never any 'MacOS', and 'Mac OS' is so old now that I doubt more than a handful of companies make applications for it. 'Mac OS X' is the correct terminology. I'm also somewhat sceptical about that hyphen in 'MS-Windows'. Amending Ubuntu to Linux seems like accurate, useful information though.
Let me get this straight, you berate them for not being innovative (despite not having played the game and not knowing much about the gameplay), then say they should bring back a 12 year old game?
I loved the Myth series (well, mainly Myth II, never played Myth III and heard it was rubbish), but rereleasing it would hardly be innovative. The way they've adapted the RTS to a console sounds interesting though.
I'm not disagreeing that the Internet is used heavily today, I'm denying that it is a distinctive that helps Apple. Pretty much any computer can access the Internet and Flash performance is actually quite on the Mac. It also suffers from compatibility problems with some sights because of the lack of IE. The attractiveness of Macs lies elsewhere.
Thank you! I was beginning to go a bit nuts wondering how I was supposed to get it working. Signed up for the labs, but then there was no information on what to do next.
I'm not quite sure what that sentence is supposed to mean. You can't deny that those are pretty big apps and arguable among the most important for most users.
That was a large part of my point: compatibility between applications and doc types is more important than the Internet.
I don't know where you're posting from, but I've never seen a Linux distro on a shelf in the UK, except in university-run shops. To be fair though, I'm very rarely in computer shops, not that I see what that has to do with anything. A lot of computers come bundled with software or people buy off the Internet (Which is somewhat different to running the apps on the Internet).
I remember the ZX Spectrum, so I remember quite a bit of rubbish software.
There's a lot of software, but it's pretty rubbish, by and large and fundamentally restricted in what it can do. Google Docs does not compare with Microsoft Office.
I don't think people are buying Macs in order to play Flash games. Especially considering the performance of Flash on a Mac.
I suspect I would see how reliant I have become on it, but how little I really need it. If someone can't function without the net then I'd be worried about them. Besides, that's not the argument. You were claiming that the Internet is the reason for the popularity of Macs. Given that the experience is in no way superior on a Mac, compared to on a PC, I fail to see how that claim holds water. Apple's ads certainly don't focus on it. If you took a computer without an Internet connection, but loaded up with Microsoft Office, Photoshop, Aperture, Final Cut Pro, iLife, etc. and compared it to a computer with an Internet connection, but no ability to run those applications or open their documents, which would more people be interested in buying?
People buy Macs as opposed to other PCs for a reason, so you have to ask what is distinctive about them. I'd say:
Not the Internet.
You're overstating the Internet case. Most applications are not dependent on the Internet e.g. Microsoft Office, Photoshop, iWorks, Aperture, Final Cut, 3D modellers, games, etc. Part of the appeal of the iMac (and a heavily advertised point) was that it was very easy to get online with, but it's not as big a factor as you make it out to be. More efficient business practices, a tighter focus on a win-able, profitable market (i.e. not competing in the low-margin, bottom-end market), an up-to-date OS, continued compatibility with Office and superb consumer applications are bigger factors. Without access to the Internet, Macs would be ignored, yes, but Internet access isn't the reason to get one.
Company of Heroes wasn't the first RTS to use squads and cover. The Close Combat series was using it close to a decade ago, to great effect, along with limited supply of ammunition and a morale system.
Clearly a work of the lunatic fringe.
I just checked the Apple v. Franklin Wikipedia article and there's no mention there that they ever granted permission for Franklin to make clones. Was there another case and if so, do you have any information on it?
Isn't Psystar installing retail copies of Mac OS X? I'm pretty sure that Apple isn't selling them OEM versions and they'd be fools to buy a Mac in order to get an OEM version to put on their own machine.
As I've already pointed out, the Psalms are poetic so claiming that via a literal interpretation, they make scientific statements, is ludicrous. Similarly, the inicdent in Joshua seems a figure of speech we still use today, hence my references to sunset and sunrise. From the perspective of those watch, the sun appeared to stop in the sky. It wasn't a scientific statement regarding heliocentrism or geocentrism.
It was commonly believed at the time by the overwhelming majority of people, including a big chunk of astronomers, that the sun moved round the earth. After all, it didn't feel like the earth was moving and it looked like the sun was. When they read those passages, they would have seen then as consistent with such a view, but they were mishandling scripture. The Wikipedia article on Modern Geocentrism is quite good on this.
Are you talking about the Roman Catholic church? I have no great interest in their position of matters, but I doubt that they were still holding geocentric views in 1984.
If you're so certain about this, why not provide evidence? 'you damned well know' isn't a logical argument and sounds more like the rantings of a conspiracy theorist than someone with a genuine interest in the truth of historical events (or scientific ones for that matter).
That is utterly irrelevant to USB. The functionality of devices or meaning of terms in networking has no bearing on hardware specifications.
Weird. I can see how that would be somewhat off-putting. I suppose you could get round it by splitting each track in two, but it really shouldn't be necessary to have to go looking for workarounds.
I think we actually agree, but by saying that the OT alludes to geocentrism, it looked like you were saying that the Bible suggests geocentrism as a scientific model, which it doesn't. It can be mistakenly read in that way, but if it's a mistake, then you can't say to alludes to the idea. Grammar pedantry really.
Whatever dictionary that comes with Mac OS X 10.4 returns 3 words with 13 letters:
aftercataract
devertebrated
tesseradecade
The longest word isn't found in the 'a much better answer' link, but rather the other one, somewhat misleadingly. The word, in case you're interested, is supposed to be 'devertebrated', though the Oxford English Dictionary doesn't recognise it.
How exactly can shorter words include a longer one?
Actually, a standard USB interface couldn't possibly provide such functionality because one end must be the host and the other the peer, but your suggestion requires that the media player be able to function as both (unless you're talking about having one USB interface for connecting to the computer, where the media player is the peer, and another interface for connecting devices to, where the media player is the host). Any USB interface which deviates from this practice is by definition non-standard.
Firewire would have worked though.
Happy to throw people in jail? Really? That's a bit odd when you consider that On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres was prefaced by a Lutheran theologian, dedicated to the Pope and been prompted to be written by the Archbishop of Capua. Even a cursory glance at Wikipedia would make that clear. Why do you think the church was throwing people in jail? over astronomy? A big chunk of astronomers were clerics or funded by the church.