And yet, no word from Slashdot on the dead people casting absentee votes for Democrats as reported recently.
I think it's just honest accounting/mechanical errors on both sides, and political devotees want to make conspiracy theories out of it. Unfortunately, most of the media leans left (according to a UCLA/Stanford study), so only the Republican conspiracies get reported while all the Democratic corruption (if a Republican did what Reid did with his real estate, it'd be all over the news) gets buried. Anyone who followed the election closely in 2004 remembers the shenanigans from both sides (people were even slashing the tires of GOP voting vans!), yet people selectively remember only the Republican shenanigans two years later. Odd how that works.
In other words, STFU with your goddamn conspiracies, you loony wingnuts/moonbats. You fuck up politics and turn it into a big playground with two lines of children throwing spitwads back and forth and tattling to the teachers about various things.
Uh, there are a ton of specialized pieces now, and it's been written about on Slashdot before. Obviously you can make other things, but it shifts the focus of the Lego brand toward building Star Wars toys that just so happen can be used to make...other Star Wars toys.. Hence, it dilutes the original Lego goals.
I mean that it turns Lego into a bunch of Star Wars toys you have to put together yourself instead of a bunch of pieces that allow you to build any toy you want, which was what made them so great.
MPEG-4 is just as standard and cross-platform as MPEG-1 was. Blame Microsoft for not supporting it because they want you to use the hilarious "WMV" format for everything.
I count through SP2 since it was free (like saying advances with 10.4.8 don't count).
SP2 came out years after XP, and all it really did was update the firewall, add a Welcome Center, and recompile some DLLs using the latest Visual Studio. I'm not counting advances in 10.4.8 because those kinds of free minor updates from Apple are mostly bug fixes.
W2K hyperthreading didn't really work, it just saw two processors, meaning upgrading your 2xSMP box to hyperthreading chips put you beyond 2K's two-processor limit.
You said SMP before, not Hyperthreading. Of course Windows 2000 didn't support Hyperthreading because it wasn't around when Windows 2000 was released! Intel doesn't even use Hyperthreading anymore.
For CD writers, you had to have a CD writing program for 2K, not so for XP.
Again, bundling in a CD writing wizard is hardly a major feature.
By firewall I didn't mean the advanced TCP/IP settings, I meant the ZoneAlarm copy.
Bundling a crippled firewall isn't a major feature, either.
And system restore works better in XP than ME.
System Restore is simply a background process that takes snapshots of system files.
And don't forget remote assistance and included ZIP (finally got something I had with Norton Desktop in the early 90s).
Wow! Zip support! That's definitely worth $250 for Windows XP Professional!
As I said before, all of this could just have easily been in a Windows 2000 Plus! pack.
And you dismissed all the improvements in Server 2003, and they should be included since there will be an OS X 10.5 Server.
I dismissed Server 2003 because we were talking about the difference between 2000 and XP.
I think the comparison is apt, and gets the point across to MS-only users who can't understand paying for a dot release just because it has a dot in it.
The comparison is hardly apt, and you ignored the Arstechnica articles I linked as well as the list of new APIs and fundamental architectural updates I mentioned in OS X Tiger that far surpass the level of changes introduced in XP, which barely had any new APIs and technologies at all compared to 2000.
I'm going to repeat a comment I made the other day: Just because you think piracy is "free advertising" doesn't mean software companies should give up all their intellectual property and copyrights.
Better security doesn't count because SP2 which came years later. DLL backup was in 2000, as was symmetric multithreading. CD writer support was in 2000 (I assume you mean built-in CD writer support, which is a minor feature). The firewall was in 2000, and System Restore came from Windows ME and is hardly a major feature by itself.
Basically, aside from the goofy Luna theme that was hacked in after Apple revealed Aqua, everything you listed could have been in a Microsoft Plus! pack.
IOW, Windows 2000 to Windows XP is about the same jump as a dot release in OS X, and both cost money.
So far, you haven't offered much to support such a claim. OS X Tiger, for instance, introduced entire developer APIs like Core Image/Core Video/Core Data, ACLs, updated the kernel with a new locking scheme, introduced a 64-bit UNIX addressing space, introduced a metadata indexing service with kernel notification hooks, introduced a widget layer, and much more.
Maybe I'm missing the point here, but why would anyone pay the asking price of just under a hundred quid for a minor revision?
Because it's not a minor revision. Maybe you should take a look at someArstechnicareviews to see how much changes in each OS X release.
You also have to remember that Apple doesn't reveal their products until just before release, and we've only been given a developer API peek at Leopard. MacWorld '07 will be the big Leopard reveal.
There were some major major differences between XP and 2000, and I can understand Microsoft paying for these.
And then you make this inane comment. There were major differences between XP and 2000?
It should be noted that one of the reasons Apple is shipping Ruby on Rails is that Rails was developed on Macs, all the major Rails developers use Macs, and the preferred editor is a Mac application called Textmate.
Anyone think Apple jumped on the RoR bandwagon a little too soon? The whole "movement" has lost a lot of steam and it doesn't appear to be the silver bullet everyone originally thought it was.
Normally, I demand facts and evidence to back up assertions, but because you wrote it so eloquently and described something shiny, I think I'm going to let it slide this time and simply believe everything you say.
I agree, and that's why you sometimes hear conflicting positions within the party. Unfortunately, if you criticize these big money guys who are taking over, they will chase you out of the party. Look at Lieberman.
Why do Mac fanbois keep spreading this Vista FUD about "seperate purchase required for 64-bit support."
Because Microsoft's engineers lack the talent to implement the 32-bit/64-bit universal binary technology that Apple employs that makes it so you don't have to purchase separate 32-bit and 64-bit versions of an application. 32-bit apps and device drivers run 100% natively (unlike Vista's slower 64-bit translation layer), and 64-bit binaries are provided in the same bundle.
If you think this would be so bad, why don't you mention the fact that the new MacBook Pro has a 32-bit version of OS X installed and a seperate version (Leapord) needs to be bought to have 64-bit OS X?
Because it doesn't have anything to do with this discussion. Again, Apple's superior engineering skills have provided us with universal binaries, so transitioning to 64-bit is a completely seamless process that you won't even have to deal with. On Windows, you have to deal with broken drivers and slow application compatibility, which means most people will be running the 32-bit Vista even though they have 64-bit processors.
Apple will make Microsoft's 64-bit support look like amateur hour. Since Vista already looks like a toy, it's one more reason Vista will be a sales flop.
What's FUD about it? It's all true. Vista costs more ($400!) and has draconian EULA restrictions, WGA, bloated system requirements, no universal binary 32-bit/64-bit support, and more.
Nearly all the Democrats voted to go to war too. I love how the Democrats have successfully gotten everyone to forget that in this election. Guess that's what happens when you have collusion with the media to push your stories, like the Foley scandal, and making sure the media doesn't call you on your hypocrisy by pointing out your support for Studds (who actually did sleep with an underage page).
Actually, I suspect it's more to do with the fact that Apple makes most of its money on the hardware, so it can be more lax when it comes to OS X copyright protection because you've already paid them for the computer. OS X has at least 15% worldwide install base with 18 million users according to IDC, and Macs are highly prevalent in academic institutions (half of the machines sold at both Princeton and Harvard are Macs according to their campus stores), so it's not like there's no juicy target.
Mac OS X requires no serial number or activation. It's really quite nice. Compared to Vista and its high prices, draconian EULA, separate purchase required for 64-bit support, and bloated system requirements, Leopard makes Vista look amateur.
...and in the last Apple article, there were people claiming Apple needed to leave the hardware business and stick to software. Poor Apple. I'm sure a tear falls from Steve Jobs' cheek over the fact he can't please both sides as he signs another record earnings statement.
This is the point where all the Mac users point out that Mac OS X has had system-wide spell-checking for all text input fields for years, and that this is nothing new to them (grammar checking coming in Leopard).
Slashdot Mirror
Zune is a rebranded Toshiba Gigabeat, not a PocketPC.
And yet, no word from Slashdot on the dead people casting absentee votes for Democrats as reported recently.
I think it's just honest accounting/mechanical errors on both sides, and political devotees want to make conspiracy theories out of it. Unfortunately, most of the media leans left (according to a UCLA/Stanford study), so only the Republican conspiracies get reported while all the Democratic corruption (if a Republican did what Reid did with his real estate, it'd be all over the news) gets buried. Anyone who followed the election closely in 2004 remembers the shenanigans from both sides (people were even slashing the tires of GOP voting vans!), yet people selectively remember only the Republican shenanigans two years later. Odd how that works.
In other words, STFU with your goddamn conspiracies, you loony wingnuts/moonbats. You fuck up politics and turn it into a big playground with two lines of children throwing spitwads back and forth and tattling to the teachers about various things.
Uh, there are a ton of specialized pieces now, and it's been written about on Slashdot before. Obviously you can make other things, but it shifts the focus of the Lego brand toward building Star Wars toys that just so happen can be used to make...other Star Wars toys.. Hence, it dilutes the original Lego goals.
Why are you arguing with me?
I mean that it turns Lego into a bunch of Star Wars toys you have to put together yourself instead of a bunch of pieces that allow you to build any toy you want, which was what made them so great.
The sets are cool, but it dilutes the Lego brand.
It's sad to see a beloved company from my childhood not doing so well these days. I wish for lower prices and less movie tie-ins.
Mac devs getting into the fun with some Halloween themes in their latest builds.
MPEG-4 is just as standard and cross-platform as MPEG-1 was. Blame Microsoft for not supporting it because they want you to use the hilarious "WMV" format for everything.
SP2 came out years after XP, and all it really did was update the firewall, add a Welcome Center, and recompile some DLLs using the latest Visual Studio. I'm not counting advances in 10.4.8 because those kinds of free minor updates from Apple are mostly bug fixes.
You said SMP before, not Hyperthreading. Of course Windows 2000 didn't support Hyperthreading because it wasn't around when Windows 2000 was released! Intel doesn't even use Hyperthreading anymore.
Again, bundling in a CD writing wizard is hardly a major feature.
Bundling a crippled firewall isn't a major feature, either.
System Restore is simply a background process that takes snapshots of system files.
Wow! Zip support! That's definitely worth $250 for Windows XP Professional!
As I said before, all of this could just have easily been in a Windows 2000 Plus! pack.
I dismissed Server 2003 because we were talking about the difference between 2000 and XP.
The comparison is hardly apt, and you ignored the Arstechnica articles I linked as well as the list of new APIs and fundamental architectural updates I mentioned in OS X Tiger that far surpass the level of changes introduced in XP, which barely had any new APIs and technologies at all compared to 2000.
No, it's not. Market share is a measure of percentage of annual sales, not annual piracy.
I'm going to repeat a comment I made the other day: Just because you think piracy is "free advertising" doesn't mean software companies should give up all their intellectual property and copyrights.
Basically, aside from the goofy Luna theme that was hacked in after Apple revealed Aqua, everything you listed could have been in a Microsoft Plus! pack.
So far, you haven't offered much to support such a claim. OS X Tiger, for instance, introduced entire developer APIs like Core Image/Core Video/Core Data, ACLs, updated the kernel with a new locking scheme, introduced a 64-bit UNIX addressing space, introduced a metadata indexing service with kernel notification hooks, introduced a widget layer, and much more.
Because it's not a minor revision. Maybe you should take a look at some Arstechnica reviews to see how much changes in each OS X release.
You also have to remember that Apple doesn't reveal their products until just before release, and we've only been given a developer API peek at Leopard. MacWorld '07 will be the big Leopard reveal.
And then you make this inane comment. There were major differences between XP and 2000?
It should be noted that one of the reasons Apple is shipping Ruby on Rails is that Rails was developed on Macs, all the major Rails developers use Macs, and the preferred editor is a Mac application called Textmate.
Normally, I demand facts and evidence to back up assertions, but because you wrote it so eloquently and described something shiny, I think I'm going to let it slide this time and simply believe everything you say.
What is "OS-X?" I've heard of Mac OS X, but never OS-X. Is that like OS/X or OSx86?
As usual, this story is posted by our good friend kdawson, the editor who thought the Enlightenment icon was a state of being.
I agree, and that's why you sometimes hear conflicting positions within the party. Unfortunately, if you criticize these big money guys who are taking over, they will chase you out of the party. Look at Lieberman.
Because Microsoft's engineers lack the talent to implement the 32-bit/64-bit universal binary technology that Apple employs that makes it so you don't have to purchase separate 32-bit and 64-bit versions of an application. 32-bit apps and device drivers run 100% natively (unlike Vista's slower 64-bit translation layer), and 64-bit binaries are provided in the same bundle.
Because it doesn't have anything to do with this discussion. Again, Apple's superior engineering skills have provided us with universal binaries, so transitioning to 64-bit is a completely seamless process that you won't even have to deal with. On Windows, you have to deal with broken drivers and slow application compatibility, which means most people will be running the 32-bit Vista even though they have 64-bit processors.
Apple will make Microsoft's 64-bit support look like amateur hour. Since Vista already looks like a toy, it's one more reason Vista will be a sales flop.
What's FUD about it? It's all true. Vista costs more ($400!) and has draconian EULA restrictions, WGA, bloated system requirements, no universal binary 32-bit/64-bit support, and more.
Nearly all the Democrats voted to go to war too. I love how the Democrats have successfully gotten everyone to forget that in this election. Guess that's what happens when you have collusion with the media to push your stories, like the Foley scandal, and making sure the media doesn't call you on your hypocrisy by pointing out your support for Studds (who actually did sleep with an underage page).
Actually, I suspect it's more to do with the fact that Apple makes most of its money on the hardware, so it can be more lax when it comes to OS X copyright protection because you've already paid them for the computer. OS X has at least 15% worldwide install base with 18 million users according to IDC, and Macs are highly prevalent in academic institutions (half of the machines sold at both Princeton and Harvard are Macs according to their campus stores), so it's not like there's no juicy target.
Mac OS X requires no serial number or activation. It's really quite nice. Compared to Vista and its high prices, draconian EULA, separate purchase required for 64-bit support, and bloated system requirements, Leopard makes Vista look amateur.
...and in the last Apple article, there were people claiming Apple needed to leave the hardware business and stick to software. Poor Apple. I'm sure a tear falls from Steve Jobs' cheek over the fact he can't please both sides as he signs another record earnings statement.
This is the point where all the Mac users point out that Mac OS X has had system-wide spell-checking for all text input fields for years, and that this is nothing new to them (grammar checking coming in Leopard).