Maybe one of (IBM, RedHat, VA Linux) could acquire Apple, depose CEO For Life Steven Jobs, open up the specs to some of their proprietary "standards," welcome the cloners back with open arms, and use the LinuxPPC as a base to sell hardware. Hmm.
Why bother? Another company (can't recall the name ATM) is making PPC based computers right now, specifically for LinuxPPC/Yellow Dog Linux and possibly BeOS if they can get the guys at Be to listen.
Buying out Apple just kills Apple. That's great, if all you want is to leech their ideas out to other companies (though I agree with you on the Steve Jobs bit... brilliant guy, but an egomaniac). I do agree they should open up some of their technology (QuickTime comes to mind) but other parts are theirs. The entire reason for keeping them is so that you'll have a reason to buy a Mac. Opening up their key tech just means Wintel systems can start using those ideas; and with Apple's market share at the moment, that's a death knell.
Hey, maybe if more people bought Macs, they'd be safe in letting some of that stuff go...;)
What completely freaked me out about the whole Look and Feel case was that Apple was so clearly in the wrong - it had licensed it's technology to Microsoft - and that it had *did not plan* for the possibility that it wouldn't win the case. I love and use Apple products, but there's no excuse for arrogance and NIH.
Actually, the problem was that Apple's lawyers didn't read the fine print. They signed over certain ideas to Microsoft for Windows, in the belief that such ideas would only be allowed in Windows 1.0, and they would re-negotiate the deal if MS wanted to put out a 2.0 later. Unfortunately, the deal was so poorly worded, the courts agreed that Apple had effectively signed off on those features for all versions of Windows thereafter. Oops.
The last time I read USENET was gosh..almost 2 years ago. Full of spam, threads that went all over the place, crossposting galore. I have since given up and am using/..
The best thing is to find a newsreader that supports regular expressions in its killfile/filtering feature. With the right expression watching the Newsgroups header, you can filter out crossposts easily, add in filters for subject matter and usernames, and take out most of the junk.
What would problably work in this day and age would be a WDP (Web Death Penalty). Block port 80 from and to known ISPs that spam. Boy will that get people's attention.
Interesting idea, but how would such a system work? Any ideas folks?
One thing people keep forgetting, is that the sites on the web are a real, tangible resource. Too many people think it's something beyond their grasp, 'magical', or too hard to understand.
The best way I can liken this, is to the bookstore metaphor.
Treat the 'net as downtown in a busy city. You have your shops, libraries, coffee houses, and yes, your porn bookstores. There are drug dealers, gangs, cops, beggars, buisnessmen, children and saints walking in and out of these places.
For the most part, you wouldn't let your child go wandering about in this part of town. Heck, you wouldn't let them wander far from the house. Once they get to their teenage years, you give them some leeway, because you trust they know what's dangerous, and what to avoid. They'll get into trouble sometimes, but for the most part, you're still there with them when they want to go downtown, or you know they're with someone responsible. If you don't trust them, you'd better be more strict, and more communicative... before long, it'll be out of your hands, and they'll be in a situation they'll have to deal with without you around if they get in too deep.
Yes, this places a lot of weight on the parents. That's what parents do: raise, educate, and protect their children. At some point, you have to trust the child, and hopefully by then they're deserving of it.
Now, sometimes those kids are going to try to sneak into that adult bookstore or video shop. If you're there, well they can't. If not, things have already moved out of your control: they're doing what they want anyway. But, if the guy at the bookshop is the least bit responsible (or at least fears the law) he'll make them leave as soon as he finds out they're there.
It's trickier at the library or regular bookstore. There are things in those magazines and books you may consider offensive or inappropriate, but are generally available. Rennaisance artwork is full of nudes and, in some cases, sexual acts. Articles on racism, sex and violence are on the magazine racks. In this case, the child has free run over all the material available unless you're there to point them towards things they should be looking at, instead of things they shouldn't.
Okay, so what's the point of all this? Mainly, parenting belongs to the parents. No one else can substitute for it, and law enforcement, while sometimes helpful, is generally an ineffective deterrent. If you let your child roam the net unsupervised, they'll find whatever they want. If you rely on commercial blockers, they may filter out the worst stuff, yet on the other hand, they may prevent your teenage daughter from viewing a site that helps her understand the changes she's going through, in a way some parents just can't explain.
The biggest flaw so far, is that the real adult shops have proprietors who watch the doors, and check IDs as you come it. It's not perfect, but it keeps most kids out, and doesn't inconvenience adults a whit. Online, similar measures have only been taken halfheartedly. There's no real way to verify someone's age; the only partially effective solution I've seen is credit cards, and that doesn't prevent a kid from sneaking daddy's wallet for a few minutes. Also, it doesn't help for freely distributed material, such as Usenet posts and artwork or texts on the web you may find objectionable.
The latter, you can't prevent except through parental supervision. If someone drops a copy of Playboy on the street and your kid finds it, there's not going to be a PornCop to scoop it up away from them, or even just an overprotective good citizen nearby. Those things just happen. Hopefully your child is prepared for it, and trusts you enough to tell you about it, and talk about what they saw.
Commercial endeavors, on the other hand, need to be regulated. Unfortunately, the only solution I can determine is to adopt a country-wide ID system, rather than state-to-state ones which have varying codes and such available. Individual states could still provide specific information on those cards (drivers liscences, age limits, etc.), and that info could be submitted to the commercial site via card reader or simply inputting digits the way you do a credit card. Admittedly, it's not much better than a straight credit card system. The only other option is to put visual IDs on file with such sites, and have someone on the other end checking you out with a webcam... not a good option, IMHO.
The biggest problem I see, is that many such commercial sites get most of their revenues through banner ads, instead of direct sales. I say this: regulation that all commercial sites carrying adult content must verify the age of their visitor before allowing access. As a clause, any site which gains income from banner ads would be classified as commercial.
This way, people can still make their own amateur pictures, artwork or writing available, while anyone trying to make a quick buck off it is regulated. Hard core sites tend to be commercial, because they can't afford to keep up the cost of hardware and bandwith as they get flooded... personal art, writing, and some amateur sites aren't hit as badly, and can probably survive on their own. The difference being, such things aren't thrown in your face... these places are personal, which means they aren't putting their own banners out, and not necessarily submitting to search engines either.
Also, collection sites tend to use ad banners for revenue. This would keep kids from getting to such sites, whose purpose really is for collecting such material for distribution, making masses of various sexual pictures/stories available in one spot. This also prevents kids from getting at Usenet posts through places like DejaNews, since they have banners as well, and would fall under the commercial, carrying adult content category. It's up to the parents to restrict access to Usenet readers on their own machine though.
This isn't perfect. Nothing will be. But it's the best solution I can find: applying current laws to commercial porn sites, while allowing most artwork and information resources to survive.
The biggest flaw I can think of might be large information sources (museum websites, medical journals, etc.) getting affected as well. Some of them may rely on ad banners to earn enough revenue to justify the cost. I'm at a loss on this, other than removing the banners or requiring the verification system (which isn't terribly bad... it's a minor nit for adults, and children can get more out of museum artwork when an adult can help explain it to them anyway).
As an aside, I have nothing against adult material. Heck, I have my own stash, paper and on disk. It's fun sometimes, but doesn't rule my life. I believe in teaching kids about their bodies at an early age (proper names, protecting themselves, etc.), and about sex before puberty, so they know what's going on when their body changes. However, they don't necessarily need to see the bad side of sex in all it's gory glory. Taught why you feel it's bad (and what it means) yes, see it acted out/graphically described before them on a screen, no. In that case, I subscribe to the mostly parental/minor governmental regulation idea, which does mean some use of a blocker at times, though that's just a crutch. In libraries? Nope. Not necessary if the above legislation is in place.
In this regard, adults who want porn can get it when they want, while kids who've been taught not to sneak daddy's credit cards won't be able to. Kids with no such qualms, well, those are a different problem altogether, and topic for a different debate.
We have to take resposibility for what we want others to see. Yes, you have a right to view *anything* you want to. I'm not denying that. I'll even fight for it. However, you do not have the right to make that material available to others.
No offense, but that's a flat-out contradiction in terms. If I create something (political leaflet, artwork, anything), I don't have the right to share it?
Just the other day, a poem that I submitted as part of my college work was read before my class. This work of mine did contain what some would consider 'vulgar' words and phrases, because it was necessary for the point I was trying to make. Everyone in that class knew that was something that was permitted in our work, and they would probably encounter it. Some may have been offended by it in the end. But they're still in the class.
By your statement though, because it was a public situation, even though they chose to be there, I had no right to share this poem because of its content. May I ask how you justify this?
Now, I'll tackle something else...
Well, I do believe in censorship. There are some things which are not appropriate for some people. I believe rather strongly in kids being protected from things like porn and vulgarity.
Realistically we can't expect kids to monitor themselves. Some teenage boy sees "All Naked - All The Time" ad, odds are he's going to have a look. Libraries and other public access places are institutes we encourage students and minors to go to. To grant them access to places where they can see pornography, and then condemn them when they explore, seems a little hypocritical.
I have to ask, if you don't trust your child to avoid things you've taught them are bad for them, why do you let them roam freely? Would you let them walk downtown, wherever they wanted? Then why leave them unattended at the library or other public places, if you know they can find porn there just as well as a bookstore?
Basically, all I can say is, parents are the only true 'net nannies' that work. If you find it offensive, explain what it is to your kids, and why it's a bad thing. If you think they'll still try to find it, then make sure they have supervision while on the computer. Don't have the time? Sorry... these are your kids. Make the time.
Censorship is a good and necessary thing. It just needs to be handled better. I do agree that the "blacklist" should be open. If I install the software, I want to be able to modify what gets banned and what doesn't. The censors do not have *that* right. I'm an adult. Treat me like one.
This is one point I think we all agree on. If you're an adult, you have the right to see what you want. Want an auto-blocker? Fine, that's your right. Want to see the worst hardcore XXX you can fine? That's your right too. We all make our own choices, and that's one thing we can't afford to give up.
"We are no longer protecting are children - we are oppressing them. It won't be long now... "
Until...what? Parents send their kids off to slaughter? They wipe their minds clean? Serve them with cocktails?
Until parents take their children for granted. Which many already do...
PARENTS LOVE THEIR KIDS. They have a DUTY to them. This attitude is no less frustrating to me now than it was to my parents when I espoused the same laughably self-important histrionics when I was a teenager.
Good parents love their kids. I don't know how many abusive and hateful people I've seen mistreating their kids in my life. I don't know how many times I've seen parents treat their children as butlers and maids, or just another paycheck.
And no, I don't think all parents are like that. My parents were very loving and encouraging througout my life (if a little overprotective at times).
I think the point is, children should be taught and, yes, watched to make sure they don't hurt themselves. But a lot of the time, they're simply treated like idiots who need to be 'straightened out' rather than people who are still learning.
From the look of it, there appears to be two tiny speakers built onto the front of the SongBoy. I may be wrong on that, but that's how the design looks to me. And I'm sure there's a headphone jack built in, so you don't annoy other people on the bus that don't want to hear 'Ray of Light' again for the 5th day in a row.;)
The worst part isn't 'specialized hardware'... there are USB headphones/speakers/mics in development now or already shipping. The problem is cost: most of them are $50 and up.:P
The ergonomic issue is a good point, but not a universal one. My eyes are shot, but that's from years upon years of reading to fill my hours during childhood. I never even had a computer until I was 14 or so. Basically, we need to teach kids the whole of taking better care of themselves, not just in front of the computer.
Actually, you're just about right. A month or so back an official statement was made that OS X would support pre-G3 macs, but only after the initial release. In other words, the first shipping copies will only be guaranteed to run on G3/G4 Macs, with 60x compatibility and fixes released by Apple afterwards. You can still install it on older Macs, but there's no guarantee it will work properly right off the bat.
If you're referring to the red-yellow-green buttons, those are respectively Close-Minimize-Maximize buttons. The purple one on the right I'm not sure about, but that may be the new button for the Windowshade option (where the whole window 'rolls up' to be just the bar at the top).
First of all, thank you for your part in creating one of the best computer companies on the planet. Now, on to the question:
Taking a look at things right now, it seems there hasn't been a major change in the way computer operating systems work in over 30 years. Every major operating system to be released this year is, directly or in concept, based on Unix. And while Unix is a great system, it's still incredibly old when you consider that computers only a year old are considered 'slow' by some, and machines 5 years old typically can't run current edition OSes. Other than the invention/adoption of the GUI, no radical changes have occured in the basic OS.
So, my question is, what do you consider the biggest obstacle in designing the next Big Thing in operating systems? Why are 30 year old ideas just now being accepted in the mainstream, and why haven't other concepts taken root during that time? Or is this as good as it gets with the current computing mindset?
MacOS has a nifty answer to this problem: the Keychain. It's a feature built into the system that allows you to store your passwords in a single file, which is then encrypted using a 56-bit cypher (not the strongest, but then again, I don't expect to be raided by the NSA anytime soon.:) ). When a program that supports the Keychain requests a password, they Keychain pops up a dialog box requesting you to type in your master password. Optionally, it will then remind you which program is asking for access to your passwords, just in case you didn't notice which one had, to prevent Trojan Horse requests and such.
It's extremely convenient, but only a few programs support it right now. More are being updated for compatibility as we speak, but it's great for keeping track of your passwords using one master key.
I think part of it can be compared to a couple who are both doctors. If one comes home, and the spouse asks "How was your day?", would you really want them telling you they would've done a different procedure, or made a different diagnosis?
Don't get me wrong... sometimes it's great to have someone who does understand your work/hobby. Other times though, it just leads to friction and problems. I suppose it depends on the individual.
So I agree with you, don't exclude all geeks from your dating, but it's something to be a little wary of until you find out how it's going to work.
Most modern operating systems will let you switch keyboard layouts easily. On Mac OS 8.5/8.6, Dvorak is already loaded, so you just go to the Keyboard Control Panel, select Dvorak and you're ready. It also enables a menu icon allowing you to easily switch back and forth between the two should you need it. And as someone else said, once you learn the new layout, you won't even have to look at the keyboard to type.
On the flip side, the benefits of Dvorak are marginal at best. It's never been proven one way or the othe which layout is better. I stick with QWERTY though, since it'd be rough for me to switch mentally back and forth when I have to use the campus computers.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe one of (IBM, RedHat, VA Linux) could acquire Apple, depose CEO For Life Steven Jobs, open up the specs to some of their proprietary "standards," welcome the cloners back with open arms, and use the LinuxPPC as a base to sell hardware. Hmm.
;)
Why bother? Another company (can't recall the name ATM) is making PPC based computers right now, specifically for LinuxPPC/Yellow Dog Linux and possibly BeOS if they can get the guys at Be to listen.
Buying out Apple just kills Apple. That's great, if all you want is to leech their ideas out to other companies (though I agree with you on the Steve Jobs bit... brilliant guy, but an egomaniac). I do agree they should open up some of their technology (QuickTime comes to mind) but other parts are theirs. The entire reason for keeping them is so that you'll have a reason to buy a Mac. Opening up their key tech just means Wintel systems can start using those ideas; and with Apple's market share at the moment, that's a death knell.
Hey, maybe if more people bought Macs, they'd be safe in letting some of that stuff go...
What completely freaked me out about the whole Look and Feel case was that Apple was so clearly in the wrong - it had licensed it's technology to Microsoft - and that it had *did not plan* for the possibility that it wouldn't win the case. I love and use Apple products, but there's no excuse for arrogance and NIH.
Actually, the problem was that Apple's lawyers didn't read the fine print. They signed over certain ideas to Microsoft for Windows, in the belief that such ideas would only be allowed in Windows 1.0, and they would re-negotiate the deal if MS wanted to put out a 2.0 later. Unfortunately, the deal was so poorly worded, the courts agreed that Apple had effectively signed off on those features for all versions of Windows thereafter. Oops.
The last time I read USENET was gosh..almost 2 years ago. Full of spam, threads that went all over the place, crossposting galore. I have since given up and am using /..
The best thing is to find a newsreader that supports regular expressions in its killfile/filtering feature. With the right expression watching the Newsgroups header, you can filter out crossposts easily, add in filters for subject matter and usernames, and take out most of the junk.
What would problably work in this day and age would be a WDP (Web Death Penalty). Block port 80 from and to known ISPs that spam. Boy will that get people's attention.
Interesting idea, but how would such a system work? Any ideas folks?
One thing people keep forgetting, is that the sites on the web are a real, tangible resource. Too many people think it's something beyond their grasp, 'magical', or too hard to understand.
The best way I can liken this, is to the bookstore metaphor.
Treat the 'net as downtown in a busy city. You have your shops, libraries, coffee houses, and yes, your porn bookstores. There are drug dealers, gangs, cops, beggars, buisnessmen, children and saints walking in and out of these places.
For the most part, you wouldn't let your child go wandering about in this part of town. Heck, you wouldn't let them wander far from the house. Once they get to their teenage years, you give them some leeway, because you trust they know what's dangerous, and what to avoid. They'll get into trouble sometimes, but for the most part, you're still there with them when they want to go downtown, or you know they're with someone responsible. If you don't trust them, you'd better be more strict, and more communicative... before long, it'll be out of your hands, and they'll be in a situation they'll have to deal with without you around if they get in too deep.
Yes, this places a lot of weight on the parents. That's what parents do: raise, educate, and protect their children. At some point, you have to trust the child, and hopefully by then they're deserving of it.
Now, sometimes those kids are going to try to sneak into that adult bookstore or video shop. If you're there, well they can't. If not, things have already moved out of your control: they're doing what they want anyway. But, if the guy at the bookshop is the least bit responsible (or at least fears the law) he'll make them leave as soon as he finds out they're there.
It's trickier at the library or regular bookstore. There are things in those magazines and books you may consider offensive or inappropriate, but are generally available. Rennaisance artwork is full of nudes and, in some cases, sexual acts. Articles on racism, sex and violence are on the magazine racks. In this case, the child has free run over all the material available unless you're there to point them towards things they should be looking at, instead of things they shouldn't.
Okay, so what's the point of all this? Mainly, parenting belongs to the parents. No one else can substitute for it, and law enforcement, while sometimes helpful, is generally an ineffective deterrent. If you let your child roam the net unsupervised, they'll find whatever they want. If you rely on commercial blockers, they may filter out the worst stuff, yet on the other hand, they may prevent your teenage daughter from viewing a site that helps her understand the changes she's going through, in a way some parents just can't explain.
The biggest flaw so far, is that the real adult shops have proprietors who watch the doors, and check IDs as you come it. It's not perfect, but it keeps most kids out, and doesn't inconvenience adults a whit. Online, similar measures have only been taken halfheartedly. There's no real way to verify someone's age; the only partially effective solution I've seen is credit cards, and that doesn't prevent a kid from sneaking daddy's wallet for a few minutes. Also, it doesn't help for freely distributed material, such as Usenet posts and artwork or texts on the web you may find objectionable.
The latter, you can't prevent except through parental supervision. If someone drops a copy of Playboy on the street and your kid finds it, there's not going to be a PornCop to scoop it up away from them, or even just an overprotective good citizen nearby. Those things just happen. Hopefully your child is prepared for it, and trusts you enough to tell you about it, and talk about what they saw.
Commercial endeavors, on the other hand, need to be regulated. Unfortunately, the only solution I can determine is to adopt a country-wide ID system, rather than state-to-state ones which have varying codes and such available. Individual states could still provide specific information on those cards (drivers liscences, age limits, etc.), and that info could be submitted to the commercial site via card reader or simply inputting digits the way you do a credit card. Admittedly, it's not much better than a straight credit card system. The only other option is to put visual IDs on file with such sites, and have someone on the other end checking you out with a webcam... not a good option, IMHO.
The biggest problem I see, is that many such commercial sites get most of their revenues through banner ads, instead of direct sales. I say this: regulation that all commercial sites carrying adult content must verify the age of their visitor before allowing access. As a clause, any site which gains income from banner ads would be classified as commercial.
This way, people can still make their own amateur pictures, artwork or writing available, while anyone trying to make a quick buck off it is regulated. Hard core sites tend to be commercial, because they can't afford to keep up the cost of hardware and bandwith as they get flooded... personal art, writing, and some amateur sites aren't hit as badly, and can probably survive on their own. The difference being, such things aren't thrown in your face... these places are personal, which means they aren't putting their own banners out, and not necessarily submitting to search engines either.
Also, collection sites tend to use ad banners for revenue. This would keep kids from getting to such sites, whose purpose really is for collecting such material for distribution, making masses of various sexual pictures/stories available in one spot. This also prevents kids from getting at Usenet posts through places like DejaNews, since they have banners as well, and would fall under the commercial, carrying adult content category. It's up to the parents to restrict access to Usenet readers on their own machine though.
This isn't perfect. Nothing will be. But it's the best solution I can find: applying current laws to commercial porn sites, while allowing most artwork and information resources to survive.
The biggest flaw I can think of might be large information sources (museum websites, medical journals, etc.) getting affected as well. Some of them may rely on ad banners to earn enough revenue to justify the cost. I'm at a loss on this, other than removing the banners or requiring the verification system (which isn't terribly bad... it's a minor nit for adults, and children can get more out of museum artwork when an adult can help explain it to them anyway).
As an aside, I have nothing against adult material. Heck, I have my own stash, paper and on disk. It's fun sometimes, but doesn't rule my life. I believe in teaching kids about their bodies at an early age (proper names, protecting themselves, etc.), and about sex before puberty, so they know what's going on when their body changes. However, they don't necessarily need to see the bad side of sex in all it's gory glory. Taught why you feel it's bad (and what it means) yes, see it acted out/graphically described before them on a screen, no. In that case, I subscribe to the mostly parental/minor governmental regulation idea, which does mean some use of a blocker at times, though that's just a crutch. In libraries? Nope. Not necessary if the above legislation is in place.
In this regard, adults who want porn can get it when they want, while kids who've been taught not to sneak daddy's credit cards won't be able to. Kids with no such qualms, well, those are a different problem altogether, and topic for a different debate.
Thoughts? Flames? Narn Bat Squad?
No offense, but that's a flat-out contradiction in terms. If I create something (political leaflet, artwork, anything), I don't have the right to share it?
Just the other day, a poem that I submitted as part of my college work was read before my class. This work of mine did contain what some would consider 'vulgar' words and phrases, because it was necessary for the point I was trying to make. Everyone in that class knew that was something that was permitted in our work, and they would probably encounter it. Some may have been offended by it in the end. But they're still in the class.
By your statement though, because it was a public situation, even though they chose to be there, I had no right to share this poem because of its content. May I ask how you justify this?
Now, I'll tackle something else...
Well, I do believe in censorship. There are some things which are not appropriate for some people. I believe rather strongly in kids being protected from things like porn and vulgarity.
Realistically we can't expect kids to monitor themselves. Some teenage boy sees "All Naked - All The Time" ad, odds are he's going to have a look. Libraries and other public access places are institutes we encourage students and minors to go to. To grant them access to places where they can see pornography, and then condemn them when they explore, seems a little hypocritical.
I have to ask, if you don't trust your child to avoid things you've taught them are bad for them, why do you let them roam freely? Would you let them walk downtown, wherever they wanted? Then why leave them unattended at the library or other public places, if you know they can find porn there just as well as a bookstore?
Basically, all I can say is, parents are the only true 'net nannies' that work. If you find it offensive, explain what it is to your kids, and why it's a bad thing. If you think they'll still try to find it, then make sure they have supervision while on the computer. Don't have the time? Sorry... these are your kids. Make the time.
Censorship is a good and necessary thing. It just needs to be handled better. I do agree that the "blacklist" should be open. If I install the software, I want to be able to modify what gets banned and what doesn't. The censors do not have *that* right. I'm an adult. Treat me like one.
This is one point I think we all agree on. If you're an adult, you have the right to see what you want. Want an auto-blocker? Fine, that's your right. Want to see the worst hardcore XXX you can fine? That's your right too. We all make our own choices, and that's one thing we can't afford to give up.
Hope that didn't sound too harsh.
Until...what? Parents send their kids off to slaughter? They wipe their minds clean? Serve them with cocktails?
Until parents take their children for granted. Which many already do...
PARENTS LOVE THEIR KIDS. They have a DUTY to them. This attitude is no less frustrating to me now than it was to my parents when I espoused the same laughably self-important histrionics when I was a teenager.
Good parents love their kids. I don't know how many abusive and hateful people I've seen mistreating their kids in my life. I don't know how many times I've seen parents treat their children as butlers and maids, or just another paycheck.
And no, I don't think all parents are like that. My parents were very loving and encouraging througout my life (if a little overprotective at times).
I think the point is, children should be taught and, yes, watched to make sure they don't hurt themselves. But a lot of the time, they're simply treated like idiots who need to be 'straightened out' rather than people who are still learning.
From the look of it, there appears to be two tiny speakers built onto the front of the SongBoy. I may be wrong on that, but that's how the design looks to me. And I'm sure there's a headphone jack built in, so you don't annoy other people on the bus that don't want to hear 'Ray of Light' again for the 5th day in a row. ;)
The worst part isn't 'specialized hardware'... there are USB headphones/speakers/mics in development now or already shipping. The problem is cost: most of them are $50 and up. :P
The ergonomic issue is a good point, but not a universal one. My eyes are shot, but that's from years upon years of reading to fill my hours during childhood. I never even had a computer until I was 14 or so. Basically, we need to teach kids the whole of taking better care of themselves, not just in front of the computer.
Actually, you're just about right. A month or so back an official statement was made that OS X would support pre-G3 macs, but only after the initial release. In other words, the first shipping copies will only be guaranteed to run on G3/G4 Macs, with 60x compatibility and fixes released by Apple afterwards. You can still install it on older Macs, but there's no guarantee it will work properly right off the bat.
If you're referring to the red-yellow-green buttons, those are respectively Close-Minimize-Maximize buttons. The purple one on the right I'm not sure about, but that may be the new button for the Windowshade option (where the whole window 'rolls up' to be just the bar at the top).
First of all, thank you for your part in creating one of the best computer companies on the planet. Now, on to the question:
Taking a look at things right now, it seems there hasn't been a major change in the way computer operating systems work in over 30 years. Every major operating system to be released this year is, directly or in concept, based on Unix. And while Unix is a great system, it's still incredibly old when you consider that computers only a year old are considered 'slow' by some, and machines 5 years old typically can't run current edition OSes. Other than the invention/adoption of the GUI, no radical changes have occured in the basic OS.
So, my question is, what do you consider the biggest obstacle in designing the next Big Thing in operating systems? Why are 30 year old ideas just now being accepted in the mainstream, and why haven't other concepts taken root during that time? Or is this as good as it gets with the current computing mindset?
MacOS has a nifty answer to this problem: the Keychain. It's a feature built into the system that allows you to store your passwords in a single file, which is then encrypted using a 56-bit cypher (not the strongest, but then again, I don't expect to be raided by the NSA anytime soon. :) ). When a program that supports the Keychain requests a password, they Keychain pops up a dialog box requesting you to type in your master password. Optionally, it will then remind you which program is asking for access to your passwords, just in case you didn't notice which one had, to prevent Trojan Horse requests and such.
It's extremely convenient, but only a few programs support it right now. More are being updated for compatibility as we speak, but it's great for keeping track of your passwords using one master key.
I think part of it can be compared to a couple who are both doctors. If one comes home, and the spouse asks "How was your day?", would you really want them telling you they would've done a different procedure, or made a different diagnosis?
Don't get me wrong... sometimes it's great to have someone who does understand your work/hobby. Other times though, it just leads to friction and problems. I suppose it depends on the individual.
So I agree with you, don't exclude all geeks from your dating, but it's something to be a little wary of until you find out how it's going to work.
Most modern operating systems will let you switch keyboard layouts easily. On Mac OS 8.5/8.6, Dvorak is already loaded, so you just go to the Keyboard Control Panel, select Dvorak and you're ready. It also enables a menu icon allowing you to easily switch back and forth between the two should you need it. And as someone else said, once you learn the new layout, you won't even have to look at the keyboard to type.
On the flip side, the benefits of Dvorak are marginal at best. It's never been proven one way or the othe which layout is better. I stick with QWERTY though, since it'd be rough for me to switch mentally back and forth when I have to use the campus computers.