Nope, you're just a jackass pretending they know what they're talking about. I have no idea if there's a no-money rule now or was one in the beginning, but there were DEFINITELY people selling food and other things 15 years ago. Try knowing what you're talking about before spouting off.
I'm not saying its a good idea, I'm just disputing that many people are averse to putting the fate of their files online. Sure, paranoid geeks and corporations have resistance to this notion. That's not many people. The masses couldn't give less of a shit about this point.
Universal Binary means it does work on PPC. I run 10.4 on a Powerbook G4, and I can run the latest of most of the software I need regularly. A few things are not the latest version, like Open Office, but the PPC version is still available.
I wouldn't say this effect is really that much different from the Windows world, although MS does make a lot more effort to keep backwards compatibility (to a fault).
Yeah, it's pretty bloody pathetic. It's a tiny city, 7x7 miles, and what's more it's right next to Apple HQ, and is the site of the flagship Apple Store. You would think that, at least in SF, the shit would work right.
Really? What happens when you shut down? Do you not experience the guest aborting? On OS X we've got the rendering glitches, and that's gotten far worse in 3.0, but there's also crashing of the VM, leading to an "Aborted" state.
Interesting that the feature gets far less stable when it leaves "experimental" status. It's unfortunate, because it tarnishes an otherwise mostly stellar piece of software. At least 3D isn't enabled by default.
FYI, there's actually 4 tracks on a cassette tape. Each side has two tracks for left and right, and they are interleaved from top to bottom: left side 1, right side 2, right side 1, left side 2.
Add/Remove: Miles ahead of anything MacOSX and Microsoft has EVER done. Takes care of everything FOR you: downloading, updating, installing, etc. Just search for what you want through the left side or in the search tab.
I agree with your general argument that a default Ubuntu install is rather full-featured. However, this point is just wrong. Add/Remove only contains a small subset of the available packages, forcing the user to find, learn and deal with one of several less-user-friendly package managers like Synaptic.
Moreover, where do users actually find out about particular Applications? They don't sit around browsing package manager lists or Add/Remove. They typically find out about them on the web. Here's the typical process for the user after finding a reference to an application on the web:
Ubuntu: Remember the process of using one of several package management systems, not all of which offer everything; find the package in question, the name of which may or may not be related to the common name or purpose of the app; deal with repository issues if the software does not reside within the currently active repositories; install the software; figure out where the software got installed and launch it.
OS X: Click the link in the article to the software's download page; launch the downloaded disk image; copy the software to the Applications folder or wherever else the user wants; launch the software.
How is Ubuntu "miles ahead of anything OS X has ever done" in this regard? There are plenty of collections of free applications for OS X, some maintained by Apple and some not.
Wait, if the server market is hyper-competetive, then there's no serious anti-trust issue right? I mean, would you call the desktop OS market "hyper-competetive"?
I happen to be in the first image that comes up in the Google image search for "keytar". Thus, I have received several snapshots from friends finding this image in random places around the world. If I was anything other than thrilled by this fact, do you think I would be in that picture in the first place?
Seriously, cameras don't steal your soul. Everyone has images of themselves posted to the internet these days, with or without their knowledge or consent. There's not a damn thing you can do about it. Get over it.
News flash - when you appear in public, people can see you!
Yeah, well that's the long story isn't it? Its pretty much bloody awful across the board. Why do you think AT&T is able to offer such shitty service? If there was a much better option, they would have to actually compete.
Uh, we also have Blackberries, and from our experience they are 10x buggier than the iPhones. The people with iPhones? Almost zero support requests. The people with Blackberries? Constant problems.
As an IT person at an organization that uses iPhones for both phone service and Exchange support, I can state definitively that the instant it is possible to part with AT&T we would do so. They SUCK.
Don't get me wrong, we are happy enough with the iPhones that we will stay with AT&T as long as the exclusive agreement lasts, but listen up AT&T, you are expendable and we would GLADLY drop your ass. We and everyone else is fed up with your BS.
My point is that Apple has designed the phone and the store that they want to design, and that's their business. As soon as Apple sues someone under the DMCA for making a product available for the iPhone or for installing a product on their iPhone, then your analogy has some bearing.
Right, but I have to agree with the GP -- this is an R&D guy talking about creating a sponge that can contract on demand (yeah, that's simplifying a bit). Its neat, but its a LONG way from a cell phone that turns itself into a laptop. The stupid author is conveniently ignoring the difficult part, which is that a cell phone is not a sponge or just a blob of material. It has a processor, a display, etc.
The R&D guy was essentially bringing up the cell phone thing as an example a problem where shape is a limitation. Then the page-hit-whoring author turns it into, "OMFG, Intel will have a shape-shifting cellphone in 3-5 years!"
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, you're just a jackass pretending they know what they're talking about. I have no idea if there's a no-money rule now or was one in the beginning, but there were DEFINITELY people selling food and other things 15 years ago. Try knowing what you're talking about before spouting off.
I'm not saying its a good idea, I'm just disputing that many people are averse to putting the fate of their files online. Sure, paranoid geeks and corporations have resistance to this notion. That's not many people. The masses couldn't give less of a shit about this point.
Until YouTube starts offering online editing.
Yeah, that's why nobody uses gmail.
Universal Binary means it does work on PPC. I run 10.4 on a Powerbook G4, and I can run the latest of most of the software I need regularly. A few things are not the latest version, like Open Office, but the PPC version is still available.
I wouldn't say this effect is really that much different from the Windows world, although MS does make a lot more effort to keep backwards compatibility (to a fault).
Let me guess, San Francisco?
That was the sound of a joke going over your turban.
In the grand tradition of webcams, shouldn't the first 3D webcam have been a static shot of a coffee maker? I mean really.
Bah.
I tried to watch the vid, but that dude's lips freak me out.
Yeah, it's pretty bloody pathetic. It's a tiny city, 7x7 miles, and what's more it's right next to Apple HQ, and is the site of the flagship Apple Store. You would think that, at least in SF, the shit would work right.
I guess it must be rocket science.
Well, I'm posting this from an AT&T 3G connection, and I can say it's absolutely relia[[&2$188:..NO CARRIER
Really? What happens when you shut down? Do you not experience the guest aborting? On OS X we've got the rendering glitches, and that's gotten far worse in 3.0, but there's also crashing of the VM, leading to an "Aborted" state.
Interesting that the feature gets far less stable when it leaves "experimental" status. It's unfortunate, because it tarnishes an otherwise mostly stellar piece of software. At least 3D isn't enabled by default.
At least running on an OS X 10.5.7 host, 3D is definitely not yet stable - even OpenGL which is not listed as "experimental".
See here: http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=19352
Other than that, VirtualBox is very polished in general. 3D is just not a feature that works yet, and should not be used in a production environment.
FYI, there's actually 4 tracks on a cassette tape. Each side has two tracks for left and right, and they are interleaved from top to bottom: left side 1, right side 2, right side 1, left side 2.
Add/Remove: Miles ahead of anything MacOSX and Microsoft has EVER done. Takes care of everything FOR you: downloading, updating, installing, etc. Just search for what you want through the left side or in the search tab.
I agree with your general argument that a default Ubuntu install is rather full-featured. However, this point is just wrong. Add/Remove only contains a small subset of the available packages, forcing the user to find, learn and deal with one of several less-user-friendly package managers like Synaptic.
Moreover, where do users actually find out about particular Applications? They don't sit around browsing package manager lists or Add/Remove. They typically find out about them on the web. Here's the typical process for the user after finding a reference to an application on the web:
Ubuntu: Remember the process of using one of several package management systems, not all of which offer everything; find the package in question, the name of which may or may not be related to the common name or purpose of the app; deal with repository issues if the software does not reside within the currently active repositories; install the software; figure out where the software got installed and launch it.
OS X: Click the link in the article to the software's download page; launch the downloaded disk image; copy the software to the Applications folder or wherever else the user wants; launch the software.
How is Ubuntu "miles ahead of anything OS X has ever done" in this regard? There are plenty of collections of free applications for OS X, some maintained by Apple and some not.
Wait, if the server market is hyper-competetive, then there's no serious anti-trust issue right? I mean, would you call the desktop OS market "hyper-competetive"?
I happen to be in the first image that comes up in the Google image search for "keytar". Thus, I have received several snapshots from friends finding this image in random places around the world. If I was anything other than thrilled by this fact, do you think I would be in that picture in the first place?
Seriously, cameras don't steal your soul. Everyone has images of themselves posted to the internet these days, with or without their knowledge or consent. There's not a damn thing you can do about it. Get over it.
News flash - when you appear in public, people can see you!
Yep! You got it.
Yeah, well that's the long story isn't it? Its pretty much bloody awful across the board. Why do you think AT&T is able to offer such shitty service? If there was a much better option, they would have to actually compete.
Uh, we also have Blackberries, and from our experience they are 10x buggier than the iPhones. The people with iPhones? Almost zero support requests. The people with Blackberries? Constant problems.
As an IT person at an organization that uses iPhones for both phone service and Exchange support, I can state definitively that the instant it is possible to part with AT&T we would do so. They SUCK.
Don't get me wrong, we are happy enough with the iPhones that we will stay with AT&T as long as the exclusive agreement lasts, but listen up AT&T, you are expendable and we would GLADLY drop your ass. We and everyone else is fed up with your BS.
My point is that Apple has designed the phone and the store that they want to design, and that's their business. As soon as Apple sues someone under the DMCA for making a product available for the iPhone or for installing a product on their iPhone, then your analogy has some bearing.
And I should be able to walk into Macy's and set up a booth to sell the beer I brew in my basement...right?
Right, but I have to agree with the GP -- this is an R&D guy talking about creating a sponge that can contract on demand (yeah, that's simplifying a bit). Its neat, but its a LONG way from a cell phone that turns itself into a laptop. The stupid author is conveniently ignoring the difficult part, which is that a cell phone is not a sponge or just a blob of material. It has a processor, a display, etc.
The R&D guy was essentially bringing up the cell phone thing as an example a problem where shape is a limitation. Then the page-hit-whoring author turns it into, "OMFG, Intel will have a shape-shifting cellphone in 3-5 years!"
Go have some coffee and read it again.