About Dashboard, try this:
First put a few widgets on your dashboard. Then logout and login. Launch Terminal, extend its window all the way down so you can see a lot of processes, and launch top. Now invoke Dashboard, and move your widgets so you can see the terminal window. See those new 'DashboardC' processes that just popped up, eating your RAM (and sometimes your CPU). They weren't here before.
You can read in the Dashboard technology brief (http://images.apple.com/macosx/pdf/MacOSX_Dashboa rd_TB.pdf), page 5: 'Each widget runs as a separate UNIX process in its own environment, or "sandbox," and is restricted to the same privileges as the user running it'.
However if you really want to deactivate it, try Onyx, it's just a tickbox to mark or not in one of the panes.
As for Spotlight, don't misunderstand me, I also think it could use some beefing, I just objected to using it as a launcher (I'm not even planning to abandon QS when Leopard comes, even if Spotlight improves as a launcher as Apple announced). In fact I even removed the Apps from its index, so as to make it just a file search and nothing else. May I suggest trying Spotlaser to help with your searches?
I don't see how it would be useful for file searching that Spotlight would learn your search behaviour. Are you always searching for the same files with Spotlight? The reason why it's nice that QS learns your idiosyncrasies is that it's useful when you're launching apps.
Quicksilver was developed as a launcher first, Spotlight as a file searching utility. They are complementary.
Let me give you my experience: before Tiger was released (no Spotlight), I tried to see if QS could be used as 'Spotlight under Panther'. I set it up to index all my docs (in the latest version of QS, you do that under the 'catalog' tab). That was on a 867MHz G4 PowerBook (not too far from your machine). QS became totally unresponsive, unusable for anything, not even a file launcher. (I haven't tried to do the same on the Macbook yet.)
And really, that's understandable, I have over 60000 document files, but only about 1000 executables. In total QS must have an index for about 2000 items max (settings, address book, other stuff).
Oh and by the way, neither QS nor Spotlight search the hard drive, they both search in their index.
As for Dashboard, it doesn't take any memory/CPU until you activate it the first time. The easiest is to remove it from your Dock, and disable anything that would activate it (see the Dashboard prefpane? select nothing as the key to launch it).
It's not even hard to install amarok! Go to http://fink.sf.net/, download and setup fink, enable 'unstable' in FinkCommander so that you can find amarok in the list, hit install and you're done!
Yes exactly!
And frankly, as a Mac user, Steve Jobs has done a much better job for me than any consumer rights group: he has allowed for Mac users to be able to buy music online, something they could not do if there wasn't an iTunes Store. Because almost everything else is under a Microsoft format unreadable on a Mac.
And I say this as someone who never bought anything on the iTunes Store. But at least I have the option. Something Norwegian Mac users won't have in a few months when Apple is forced to close the Norwegian iTunes Store.
Besides those stupid European consumer rights groups would never have opened their big mouths if 'everybody' used PlaysForSure, that is everybody except the few that use Macs or Linux.
Everybody seems to join the Apple/Steve Jobs bashing these days. What they completely forget is that if the iTunes Store didn't exist, nobody would ask for music without DRM. Simply because 95% of music players would only play DRM'd WMA, and everything would 'interoperate' under Microsoft's God given right to monopolize whatever they touch.
Maybe Apple and Jobs had no obligation to sign anything, that's right.
However, when the iTunes Music Store was launched, there was nowhere a Mac user could go to buy music online (maybe there was, but I never knew any). Everywhere it was WMA! OS X users couldn't play WMA files until Nov.7, 2003, that is well after the iPod was released. So even if Apple had wanted to licence WMA playback on iPod (which they arguably wouldn't), it wouldn't have made sense at all, since you wouldn't be able to read the files on the accompanying Mac!
So again, they could have done without signing the contracts, true, but that would have left us Mac users completely unable to fill iPod with anything else than ripped CDs and 'pirated' music.
Consider downgrading to the white MacBook and get the 2GB RAM instead. In fact, that's exactly what I've done. And I even took the RAM directly from Apple, because it's supported by Apple. And actually the price wasn't that bad, considering that if I had to buy 2 sticks of 1 GB RAM, and try to re-sell the 2 sticks of 512MB, I would probably still have paid more than just the upgrade price. However, the upgrade price for the hard disk is steep, and for little more than the price of the 120GB upgrade, I got myself a nice 160GB plus a USB enclosure for the shipping 80GB which I kept as an external HD.
Oh, and the MacBook really can use the 2GB RAM, it's even a shame it can't take more. I still have huge swaps after long sessions with Parallels, Acrobat, Mail, iTunes, and a whole bunch of tabs in Safari and/or Firefox.
It's most probably simply what's kept them alive all these years, and still keeps them alive! Face it, guys, even if Apple were to licence OS X to whomever wants it on their computers, there won't be a rush where 50% of computers will sell with OS X within a few months, not even 25%. Only a handful of manufacturers will dip their toes shipping OS X in the beginning. A couple of months is all the time it would take for MS to 'renegotiate' Windows prices with this handful of manufacturers that want to ship OS X, thereby sinking their Windows based business, which would still be their cash-cow long after they start selling OS X. That is, if they're still able to do any business. At the same time, the Microsoft Mac Business Unit may or may not unexpectedly vanish, and MS Office for Mac may or may not continue to be developed. You can guess how appealing Mac OS X can be without MS Office (it's the first piece of software on TFA's must have list).
And don't hold your breath anticipating the DOJ trying to stop that.
Nope, the market is not ready for OS X on generic machines. Not until everybody switches to the OpenDocument format.
At the risk of being redundant, please do yourself a treat and install Quicksilver (http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/). It may look a bit scary at first since it's extremely customizable, but once you make the jump, you will hurt when using a Mac that doesn't have it installed.
Don't know how it is in the US, but here in Sweden I received mail ads advertising new PCs equipped with XP this last monday. Some are Media Center editions. Not a single one with Vista though.
Do you mean to say that MS Office v.X was ready by March 24, 2001, the day Mac OS X 10.0 was released? Or would you think it would have been ready by September 25, 2001, the day Mac OS 10.1 was released?
How about Windows Media Player for Mac OS X, released only 3&1/2 years into OS X?
Imagine if all poor countries start to bargain their resources and make real money from them! How can Bill Gates continue to look good by providing charity? He'll die and be remembered as the greedy monopolist instead of the nice charitable man!
Sorry, this is/., there had to be some kind of Microsoft or Bill Gates reference somewhere;)
they are the ones most likely to rely on major international support
Exactly! And since they've seen how lousy international support can be, and how they can't afford the price for the vaccine anyway (with or without international support), well, they decided to take the matter in their own hands!
then their pride should certainly forbid them from accepting any humanitarian help after the tsunami
I guess they'd like to be like the US for New Orleans, no need for int. support if you can deal with the matter by yourself.
I'm sorry, but no. Nobody's catching up. Any other player than the iPod has the scroll wheel? No? Of course not, they'd have Apple lawyers on their asses in no time. So, unless another music player comes with a scroll wheel, it'll have a very hard time being as usable as an iPod. We'll have to wait until the next paradigm shift until that happens (the same way a scroll wheel was a paradigm shift when introduced on a portable music player). The iPod is the ONLY music player with which you can go through your whole music library without lifting your thumb up (or any other finger for that matter).
I believe it's exactly the same thing as with mice. Does anybody still buy/use mice without a scroll wheel? Would you use one? I haven't seen a mouse without one lately, it's more like they're getting two (eg Logitech MX Revolution). Even trackballs have scroll wheels now.
Sure, but that's because there was a tangible benefit to creating the Euro zone: lower transaction costs, for one thing. There is no such benefit to changing our currency.
You'll get no argument from me on that point. I never thought the contrary. You probably won't gain much. Don't do it.
Making it harder to counterfeit is a benefit, but we're already taking steps to do that without radically changing our system.
I guess it would be possible not to change radically your system and still have different sized bills. Like only changing the length and not the width? Some other people in this discussion were talking about colors or more depth.
The implication seems to be that any plan that doesn't cause widespread economic collapse is a bargain. Is that really what you meant?
No. You're pushing it and you know it. I'll say this again, very clearly I hope: nobody in Europe ever talks about the cost of having had to change for new bills and coins, neither in direct or indirect cost (like changing vending machines modules, training people, reprogramming ATMs, etc). It probably means that it wasn't that difficult to bear after all. Actually I'd say it was more like "business as usual", since it was the same cost as getting new national banknotes and coins, and those things were happening more or less regularly anyway.
I'll summarize in a few words my main idea: it's doable, and probably looks much more difficult than it really is. But I'm neither an American voter or taxpayer, so I'll shut up here.
Good night, it's getting late.
Your link is a bit light on details, especially when it's been written 3 years before the real appearance of coins and notes. I haven't been able to find a clear figure, but let's assume yours is right. In this article, however, some economist seems to imply that the cost will be recouped within 5 years. It's specifically for Dutch businesses, but I don't see why it would be different everywhere else.
Now, I think the cost of changing mere bits of paper and metals must have been chump change compared to the lost ability to run deficits or devaluate, for example (Germany seems to have suffered a lot from that).
In addition, $100bn might look like a lot to us mere mortals, but if you spread it over countless businesses (the small article actually doesn't even say if the affected businesses include those of UK, Sweden, Denmark, others), it probably is much less impressive. Just think about the war in Iraq, more than $300bn and counting, and it doesn't look to me like the population of the US is starving, neither are the businesses collapsing. Plus, the US is not in the same situation as the EU, and it's absolutely not needed to change everything in just a few weeks: a few years would do.
Now, honestly, I don't care that much if you change your bills or not, as I'm not planning on simultaneously going blind and moving to the US anyway. I was just saying, if the EU can do it without being too affected (and honestly, we don't hear that many businesses complaining on this side), it's not out of reach of the US.
Finally, and sorry for this long piece, I'm sorry but I absolutely don't see how raising the bar makes counterfeiting easier. It's not like the banknotes and the coins were changed each and every year and confusing the hell out of the people. It's more like with home scanners and printers getting so advanced, it would have been really easy for any dude with less than $500 equipment to be able to start counterfeiting if no change was introduced.
Boo-boo ! A few years ago, 11 countries of the EU almost all simultaneously changed their coins and bills in a matter of a few weeks*. Surely, a strong big boy like the US can do it, no?
*Not only that, but even before the Euro, several countries (I'm thinking e.g. of Germany and France) used to change coins and bills regularly, to up the difficulty against counterfeiters.
Yeah, like German cars never use Continental, Vredestein or Fulda. Or Italian cars that never use Pirelli, or British cars that don't use Good Year. Sorry, but this was a lame example. This is simply due to agreements, it wouldn't look very good for Michelin to have french cars with Pirelli out of the factory. Same for others.
Then there's the question that *really* puzzles me. I always heard the story of how Apple makes most of its revenue off its hardware sales, and that sounded reasonable enough, then we get an Apple and find out even point releases are sold seperately as upgrades.
Then I guess it must have been very puzzling for you to have to pay full price for those 3 point releases that Windows 95 (aka Win 4.0), Windows 98 (aka Win 4.10), Windows Me (aka Win 4.90) are, and those 2 point releases that Windows 2000 (aka NT 5.0) and Windows XP (aka NT 5.1) are likewise. Don't believe me ? See for yourself. I'd be curious to know what version number Vista has...
The point is, there is no codified way of linking version numbers to the importance of the release (I mean no ANSI or ISO standard), so software makers play with the numbers as they like in order to market their product in the best possible light (who would buy NT 5.1 when they already have NT 5.0 ? Now when you call it XP, that's another beast !)
There's the rollermouse, among other solutions. A bit on the expensive side at $200, but you see it quite often in administration offices and health care centers here in Sweden, so I suppose it must be good. Of course it's swedish, so that must have had an effect on its ubiquity here.
... is coming to an end !
This year Apple announces the move to Intel, and the first Apple made non-1-button mouse ! After 21 years of Macintosh !
Not only hell has frozen over, but the cold wave is now reaching Earth !
I fully agree with you, we should get rid of DST alltogether, everywhere. It screws my biological clock continuously and we already live in a world that is all too artificial. And I also prefer it when it's dark in the evening, as I'm particularly affected by late exposure to sunlight, which is exacerbated by being a mediterranean living in Scandinavia. That and having so much changes in the exposure time throughout the year.
However, I also remember why DST has been put into place: to save energy and oil. And given the current price of oil and the depletion in reserves (even if it there's 100 years or more left, it's still soon), I'd say it's not such a bad idea to save on that. All in all, I don't really know... Is there a good solution ?
Slashdot Mirror
About Dashboard, try this:a rd_TB.pdf), page 5: 'Each widget runs as a separate UNIX process in its own environment, or "sandbox," and is restricted to the same privileges as the user running it'.
First put a few widgets on your dashboard. Then logout and login. Launch Terminal, extend its window all the way down so you can see a lot of processes, and launch top. Now invoke Dashboard, and move your widgets so you can see the terminal window. See those new 'DashboardC' processes that just popped up, eating your RAM (and sometimes your CPU). They weren't here before.
You can read in the Dashboard technology brief (http://images.apple.com/macosx/pdf/MacOSX_Dashbo
However if you really want to deactivate it, try Onyx, it's just a tickbox to mark or not in one of the panes.
As for Spotlight, don't misunderstand me, I also think it could use some beefing, I just objected to using it as a launcher (I'm not even planning to abandon QS when Leopard comes, even if Spotlight improves as a launcher as Apple announced). In fact I even removed the Apps from its index, so as to make it just a file search and nothing else.
May I suggest trying Spotlaser to help with your searches?
Have fun spotlighting!
I don't see how it would be useful for file searching that Spotlight would learn your search behaviour. Are you always searching for the same files with Spotlight? The reason why it's nice that QS learns your idiosyncrasies is that it's useful when you're launching apps.
Quicksilver was developed as a launcher first, Spotlight as a file searching utility. They are complementary.
Let me give you my experience: before Tiger was released (no Spotlight), I tried to see if QS could be used as 'Spotlight under Panther'. I set it up to index all my docs (in the latest version of QS, you do that under the 'catalog' tab). That was on a 867MHz G4 PowerBook (not too far from your machine). QS became totally unresponsive, unusable for anything, not even a file launcher. (I haven't tried to do the same on the Macbook yet.)
And really, that's understandable, I have over 60000 document files, but only about 1000 executables. In total QS must have an index for about 2000 items max (settings, address book, other stuff).
Oh and by the way, neither QS nor Spotlight search the hard drive, they both search in their index.
As for Dashboard, it doesn't take any memory/CPU until you activate it the first time. The easiest is to remove it from your Dock, and disable anything that would activate it (see the Dashboard prefpane? select nothing as the key to launch it).
It's not even hard to install amarok! Go to http://fink.sf.net/, download and setup fink, enable 'unstable' in FinkCommander so that you can find amarok in the list, hit install and you're done!
Here's an analogy:
iPod=PC-box
iPod firmware=Windows
iTunes Store music=shareware sold online that works on Windows only*
So when's the Norwegian ombudsman going to threaten shareware developers? And how about e-books? Online magazine subscriptions?
*Except you can't just burn a piece of shareware on a CD to make it work on Linux.
Yes exactly!
And frankly, as a Mac user, Steve Jobs has done a much better job for me than any consumer rights group: he has allowed for Mac users to be able to buy music online, something they could not do if there wasn't an iTunes Store. Because almost everything else is under a Microsoft format unreadable on a Mac.
And I say this as someone who never bought anything on the iTunes Store. But at least I have the option. Something Norwegian Mac users won't have in a few months when Apple is forced to close the Norwegian iTunes Store.
Besides those stupid European consumer rights groups would never have opened their big mouths if 'everybody' used PlaysForSure, that is everybody except the few that use Macs or Linux.
Everybody seems to join the Apple/Steve Jobs bashing these days. What they completely forget is that if the iTunes Store didn't exist, nobody would ask for music without DRM. Simply because 95% of music players would only play DRM'd WMA, and everything would 'interoperate' under Microsoft's God given right to monopolize whatever they touch.
Maybe Apple and Jobs had no obligation to sign anything, that's right.
However, when the iTunes Music Store was launched, there was nowhere a Mac user could go to buy music online (maybe there was, but I never knew any). Everywhere it was WMA! OS X users couldn't play WMA files until Nov.7, 2003, that is well after the iPod was released. So even if Apple had wanted to licence WMA playback on iPod (which they arguably wouldn't), it wouldn't have made sense at all, since you wouldn't be able to read the files on the accompanying Mac!
So again, they could have done without signing the contracts, true, but that would have left us Mac users completely unable to fill iPod with anything else than ripped CDs and 'pirated' music.
Consider downgrading to the white MacBook and get the 2GB RAM instead. In fact, that's exactly what I've done. And I even took the RAM directly from Apple, because it's supported by Apple. And actually the price wasn't that bad, considering that if I had to buy 2 sticks of 1 GB RAM, and try to re-sell the 2 sticks of 512MB, I would probably still have paid more than just the upgrade price. However, the upgrade price for the hard disk is steep, and for little more than the price of the 120GB upgrade, I got myself a nice 160GB plus a USB enclosure for the shipping 80GB which I kept as an external HD.
Oh, and the MacBook really can use the 2GB RAM, it's even a shame it can't take more. I still have huge swaps after long sessions with Parallels, Acrobat, Mail, iTunes, and a whole bunch of tabs in Safari and/or Firefox.
It's most probably simply what's kept them alive all these years, and still keeps them alive! Face it, guys, even if Apple were to licence OS X to whomever wants it on their computers, there won't be a rush where 50% of computers will sell with OS X within a few months, not even 25%. Only a handful of manufacturers will dip their toes shipping OS X in the beginning.
A couple of months is all the time it would take for MS to 'renegotiate' Windows prices with this handful of manufacturers that want to ship OS X, thereby sinking their Windows based business, which would still be their cash-cow long after they start selling OS X. That is, if they're still able to do any business. At the same time, the Microsoft Mac Business Unit may or may not unexpectedly vanish, and MS Office for Mac may or may not continue to be developed. You can guess how appealing Mac OS X can be without MS Office (it's the first piece of software on TFA's must have list). And don't hold your breath anticipating the DOJ trying to stop that.
Nope, the market is not ready for OS X on generic machines. Not until everybody switches to the OpenDocument format.
At the risk of being redundant, please do yourself a treat and install Quicksilver (http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/). It may look a bit scary at first since it's extremely customizable, but once you make the jump, you will hurt when using a Mac that doesn't have it installed.
Don't know how it is in the US, but here in Sweden I received mail ads advertising new PCs equipped with XP this last monday. Some are Media Center editions. Not a single one with Vista though.
Do you mean to say that MS Office v.X was ready by March 24, 2001, the day Mac OS X 10.0 was released? Or would you think it would have been ready by September 25, 2001, the day Mac OS 10.1 was released?
How about Windows Media Player for Mac OS X, released only 3&1/2 years into OS X?
Imagine if all poor countries start to bargain their resources and make real money from them! How can Bill Gates continue to look good by providing charity? He'll die and be remembered as the greedy monopolist instead of the nice charitable man! /., there had to be some kind of Microsoft or Bill Gates reference somewhere ;)
Sorry, this is
they are the ones most likely to rely on major international support
Exactly! And since they've seen how lousy international support can be, and how they can't afford the price for the vaccine anyway (with or without international support), well, they decided to take the matter in their own hands!
then their pride should certainly forbid them from accepting any humanitarian help after the tsunami
I guess they'd like to be like the US for New Orleans, no need for int. support if you can deal with the matter by yourself.
Of course there's a point to make!
I wouldn't feel safe being the Indonesian president!
I'm sorry, but no. Nobody's catching up. Any other player than the iPod has the scroll wheel? No? Of course not, they'd have Apple lawyers on their asses in no time. So, unless another music player comes with a scroll wheel, it'll have a very hard time being as usable as an iPod. We'll have to wait until the next paradigm shift until that happens (the same way a scroll wheel was a paradigm shift when introduced on a portable music player). The iPod is the ONLY music player with which you can go through your whole music library without lifting your thumb up (or any other finger for that matter).
I believe it's exactly the same thing as with mice. Does anybody still buy/use mice without a scroll wheel? Would you use one? I haven't seen a mouse without one lately, it's more like they're getting two (eg Logitech MX Revolution). Even trackballs have scroll wheels now.
I guess it would be possible not to change radically your system and still have different sized bills. Like only changing the length and not the width? Some other people in this discussion were talking about colors or more depth.
No. You're pushing it and you know it. I'll say this again, very clearly I hope: nobody in Europe ever talks about the cost of having had to change for new bills and coins, neither in direct or indirect cost (like changing vending machines modules, training people, reprogramming ATMs, etc). It probably means that it wasn't that difficult to bear after all. Actually I'd say it was more like "business as usual", since it was the same cost as getting new national banknotes and coins, and those things were happening more or less regularly anyway.
I'll summarize in a few words my main idea: it's doable, and probably looks much more difficult than it really is. But I'm neither an American voter or taxpayer, so I'll shut up here.
Good night, it's getting late.
Your link is a bit light on details, especially when it's been written 3 years before the real appearance of coins and notes. I haven't been able to find a clear figure, but let's assume yours is right. In this article, however, some economist seems to imply that the cost will be recouped within 5 years. It's specifically for Dutch businesses, but I don't see why it would be different everywhere else.
Now, I think the cost of changing mere bits of paper and metals must have been chump change compared to the lost ability to run deficits or devaluate, for example (Germany seems to have suffered a lot from that).
In addition, $100bn might look like a lot to us mere mortals, but if you spread it over countless businesses (the small article actually doesn't even say if the affected businesses include those of UK, Sweden, Denmark, others), it probably is much less impressive. Just think about the war in Iraq, more than $300bn and counting, and it doesn't look to me like the population of the US is starving, neither are the businesses collapsing. Plus, the US is not in the same situation as the EU, and it's absolutely not needed to change everything in just a few weeks: a few years would do.
Now, honestly, I don't care that much if you change your bills or not, as I'm not planning on simultaneously going blind and moving to the US anyway. I was just saying, if the EU can do it without being too affected (and honestly, we don't hear that many businesses complaining on this side), it's not out of reach of the US.
Finally, and sorry for this long piece, I'm sorry but I absolutely don't see how raising the bar makes counterfeiting easier. It's not like the banknotes and the coins were changed each and every year and confusing the hell out of the people. It's more like with home scanners and printers getting so advanced, it would have been really easy for any dude with less than $500 equipment to be able to start counterfeiting if no change was introduced.
Boo-boo ! A few years ago, 11 countries of the EU almost all simultaneously changed their coins and bills in a matter of a few weeks*. Surely, a strong big boy like the US can do it, no?
*Not only that, but even before the Euro, several countries (I'm thinking e.g. of Germany and France) used to change coins and bills regularly, to up the difficulty against counterfeiters.
Yeah, like German cars never use Continental, Vredestein or Fulda. Or Italian cars that never use Pirelli, or British cars that don't use Good Year. Sorry, but this was a lame example. This is simply due to agreements, it wouldn't look very good for Michelin to have french cars with Pirelli out of the factory. Same for others.
Then there's the question that *really* puzzles me. I always heard the story of how Apple makes most of its revenue off its hardware sales, and that sounded reasonable enough, then we get an Apple and find out even point releases are sold seperately as upgrades.
Then I guess it must have been very puzzling for you to have to pay full price for those 3 point releases that Windows 95 (aka Win 4.0), Windows 98 (aka Win 4.10), Windows Me (aka Win 4.90) are, and those 2 point releases that Windows 2000 (aka NT 5.0) and Windows XP (aka NT 5.1) are likewise. Don't believe me ? See for yourself.
I'd be curious to know what version number Vista has...
The point is, there is no codified way of linking version numbers to the importance of the release (I mean no ANSI or ISO standard), so software makers play with the numbers as they like in order to market their product in the best possible light (who would buy NT 5.1 when they already have NT 5.0 ? Now when you call it XP, that's another beast !)
There's the rollermouse, among other solutions. A bit on the expensive side at $200, but you see it quite often in administration offices and health care centers here in Sweden, so I suppose it must be good. Of course it's swedish, so that must have had an effect on its ubiquity here.
... is coming to an end !
This year Apple announces the move to Intel, and the first Apple made non-1-button mouse ! After 21 years of Macintosh ! Not only hell has frozen over, but the cold wave is now reaching Earth !
I fully agree with you, we should get rid of DST alltogether, everywhere. It screws my biological clock continuously and we already live in a world that is all too artificial.
And I also prefer it when it's dark in the evening, as I'm particularly affected by late exposure to sunlight, which is exacerbated by being a mediterranean living in Scandinavia. That and having so much changes in the exposure time throughout the year.
However, I also remember why DST has been put into place: to save energy and oil. And given the current price of oil and the depletion in reserves (even if it there's 100 years or more left, it's still soon), I'd say it's not such a bad idea to save on that.
All in all, I don't really know... Is there a good solution ?
Depends if you have a PowerBook G3/iBook clamshell or a newer model ;-)
That's it, forget the cheese and the wine, I'm moving to the US !
Man, how dumb this is I can't belive it !