AppleScript does have a comparison from the UNIX world - shell scripting. AppleScript is the natural extension of shell scripting into a GUI environment.
Yes, the language itself is a travesty, but thena gain, so is bash. And just like with shell scripting, there are all sorts of convenient replacements, like the AppleScript-JavaScript bridge.
1. Not all Mac users use OSS browsers. A good number of Mac users still use IE for OS X. (It doesn't get deleted when you upgrade to versions of OS X that don't include IE.) Also, Safari is not OSS.
2. There was more resistance to IE during the first round of browser wars when everyone was using Netscape and Netscape was just as aggressive about trying to extend web standards. (JavaScript, anyone?)
3. There's nothing stopping MS from re-releasing IE on the Mac. They've got it carbonized and everything, ready to go.
That's what I see refurbished ones (i.e., the cartridge slot has to be in working order) going for around here.
It has a huge library of games that are still relatively popular. It has been out of production for a very long time. It has massive nostalgia value. And with that spring-loaded cartridge mechanism, it's not exaclty built to last.
I predict that their REALLY extreme tactic will be to start throwing every "extension" they can think of into IE, especially ones that break compatibility with other browsers and webservers.
Well, every "extension" except for security, that is. =D
There are so many things that are likely to go wrong long before dust on the solar panels disables the rover that the mission planners probably decided it wasn't worth the added cost, weight, or complexity.
No, I think that the issue is not the dock cutting items off, it's that the "Internet Explorer" label above the dock is obscuring the processor information in the "About This Mac" window.
From the parts of the megahertz number that are showing, we can tell it's a 3-digit number ending in 7 with the first two digits having rounded tops, so the insinuation is that this screenshot could really have been taken from OS X running on something like an 9877Mhz PPC G3 rather than PearPC on an XBox.
Random conspiracy theory, yes. But still kind of interesting.
How could you ron OS X on a machine without replacing the x86 CPU with a PPC CPU, which would require replacing the motherboard, which would include switching from BIOS to OpenFirmware, which would require replacing the graphics card and some other crap.
And if this is the case, is it running on an XBox or is it a PowerBook that has been case modded to look like an XBox.
that or they'e really running Darwin on the XBox, which is a different thing entirely.
Bah, give me a vehicle that does that with minimal overall energy costs.
Zero emissions is great except that you open the doors to things like hydrogen fuel cells, which are dirtier than cars in terms of air pollution, but sweep the problem under the carpet.
What I'd like to see is a challenge to produce a vehicle that is actually energy efficient so we can get away from this fad of preying on the public's general lack of understanding of the laws of thermodynamics by proposing all of these incredibly clever high tech non-solutions to our energy problems.
Re:What the hell are you talking about?
on
Can Coal Be Green?
·
· Score: 1
(Yes, I know I'm being trolled and I shouldn't be qualifying the parent by responding to it. But I will anyway. weeeeeee.)
The reason for looking for cleaner energy and reducend energy consumption isn't so we can all sit around and pretend our farts smell like roses.
The idea is to reduce pollution and all of the bad things it does. (And if you don't think pollution from burning things like coal is a problem, go look at any old sculpture or building in an area where acid rain is an issue and try to say that again.) We can reduce these emissions either by consuming less energy (thus needing to burn less fuel) or by producing the energy in "cleaner" ways.
Clean in quotes because there are about eight bazillion definitions of clean. One person will argue coal is the cleanest because it doesn't kill salmon and doesn't run the risk of any serious radiological disasters. Another will argue for hydroelectric because it doesn't release large amounts of carbon dioxide and toxic chemicals into the atmosphere. The argument over whether or not nuclear power is clean and safe is a real funhouse.
But the one thing that everyone can agree on is that, from a pollution standpoint, using less energy is always cleaner. Your assertion that we shouldn't try to pollute less because we will always pollute at least a little bit is asinine.
I suppose next you'll be arguing that I shouldn't bother taking a couple aspirin and should just go for the whole bottle instead because "it is absolute retardation" to think that taking less drugs somehow makes it non-poisonous.
Heck, the GameBoy Color had much worse graphics than any of the original Game Boy's competitors, but it was much more successful.
And I think it's rather telling that you can walk into a Wal-Mart or Target and still be able to find GameBoy Color games for sale. Amazing graphics just really doesn't seem to be what's driving the handheld console market at all.
Re:The long tail is already here
on
The Long Tail
·
· Score: 1
Huh, your long tail is bands I've seen on TV like Wilco and Radiohead, and bands you can find on iTMS?
Not meaning to be all indie or anything, but if I were to start listing long tail bands I'd start with Trans Am, Hem, and Negativland and start working my way out towards stuff like Ritchie Hawtin (Plastikman), Shellac, and Rondellus.
I've not been particularly lucky finding any of that on iTMS, which is why I don't use it.
I did the same with my PalmOS handheld for classes that didn't require complicated diagrams or mathematical notation.
Graffiti was up to the task, but I wouldn't dream of trying it in Graffiti 2. Little things like having to pause for a full second before putting a space after a word ending in L have destroyed my ability to jot notes without thinking about it.
I gotta say, I've been wanting a feature like that on PalmOS since the day I got my first Visor.
Add in the ability to link different pieces of data (so if I have an appointment with somebody I can tap that person's name to bring up their contact info, and also include a link to a checklist of stuff I need to get done for that meeting, for example), and my Palm handheld might livie up to its name as a personal digital assistant rather than being a glorified address book and e-book reader.
The situation is more complicated than that. The your taxes are so high is because the social safety net was never designed to handle our current economic climate. We have a workforce that is barely growing (declining birth rate) combined with a retired population that is mushrooming (better medical care). The vast majority of our social safety net spending goes to supporting senior citizens.
Even retired people who did save responsibly are finding that they need social security and medicare because they didn't plan on spending the last five years of their lives dishing out money on palliative care and wonder treatments that are expensive beyond anything they could have concieved of. Heck, a lot of them didn't even plan on spending those five years alive.
Anyway, the gist is that they are costing more per person. And because the workforce is not growing nearly as quickly as the retired population is, your share of the cost of taking care of them is becoming proportionally larger.
Assuming that we don't want to turn the future into Soylent Green or Logan's Run, this doesn't leave us much safety net to cut. I haven't read the 2004 or 2005 budgets carefully enough to be sure of the exact numbers, but I do know that in the 2005 budget nondiscretionary spending accounts for only about 10% of the budget.
I have no idea how much of that is social safety net and how much is police and fire stations and pavement and all, so let's say half. We'll also throw any emotions out the door and cut all of that 5% of the budget, even the human services and all of that.
So with all of that cut out, you've gone from paying 50% of your income in taxes to paying 47.5% of your income in taxes.
Not that I feel sorry for you, anyway. If you're earning enough to be paying 50% in income tax, you are still bringing enough home after taxes to be investing an amount at least equal to my annual income before taxes each year. And you'd still have enough disposable income laying around to live in a huge house and drive a BMW.
Re:Not outsourcing - from a business point of view
on
Inside Wal-Mart IT
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Over the long run, the market will do the right thing if you let it be.
The long run is nice and all, but it doesn't really matter to those of us whose lives are nasty, brutish, and, above all, short. If I lost my job to outsourcing or some other business fad and an economist came along and said, "your pain doesn't matter because things will smooth out in a decade or two," I'd probably end up doing something that would put me in jail.
Agreed. The real problem is that there are wacko shrinks out there who think that anything that shows up in the DSM must be treated. Such as the company shrink who made a member of my family take lithium to treat the bereavment she was still experiencing a week after her fiancee died in a car wreck. (true story)
I don't want a stop to the research and classification of various mental states. I want the psychological/psychiatric community to sit down and create some real standards for treatment, including some strict ethics and punishments for their violation. If a physician started prescribing morphine for stubbed toes, he'd run the risk of losing his license (we'll worry about the chronic problem of prescribing antibiotics for viral illnesses later), he'd lose his license, while the shrink community hasn't even gotten around to saying "it's something we should maybe consider not doing, we think."
Or worse yet, we still have Freudian analysts getting licensed and offering their "treatment." This would be like if the AMA licensed doctors who practised the purging of various bodily humors in order to restore their balance.
Slashdot Mirror
AppleScript does have a comparison from the UNIX world - shell scripting. AppleScript is the natural extension of shell scripting into a GUI environment.
Yes, the language itself is a travesty, but thena gain, so is bash. And just like with shell scripting, there are all sorts of convenient replacements, like the AppleScript-JavaScript bridge.
w00t.
1. Not all Mac users use OSS browsers. A good number of Mac users still use IE for OS X. (It doesn't get deleted when you upgrade to versions of OS X that don't include IE.) Also, Safari is not OSS.
2. There was more resistance to IE during the first round of browser wars when everyone was using Netscape and Netscape was just as aggressive about trying to extend web standards. (JavaScript, anyone?)
3. There's nothing stopping MS from re-releasing IE on the Mac. They've got it carbonized and everything, ready to go.
Three acronyms for ya:
CRLF
CR
LF
We have three major computer platforms, and three different standards for the line terminator in plaintext files.
Of course there are too many standards.
That's what I see refurbished ones (i.e., the cartridge slot has to be in working order) going for around here.
It has a huge library of games that are still relatively popular. It has been out of production for a very long time. It has massive nostalgia value. And with that spring-loaded cartridge mechanism, it's not exaclty built to last.
Supply and demand.
OK, so they've got the embrace done.
I predict that their REALLY extreme tactic will be to start throwing every "extension" they can think of into IE, especially ones that break compatibility with other browsers and webservers.
Well, every "extension" except for security, that is. =D
It's not even a Mac. It's an Apple-1. This is several years before anyone even thought of the Lisa, let alone the Mac.
one at a time, those 78 NES would go for $200 apiece if all of them are in good condition.
Methinks the person who wins this would do well to keep one or two of each system, and then turn around and sell the rest to make a fat profit.
There are so many things that are likely to go wrong long before dust on the solar panels disables the rover that the mission planners probably decided it wasn't worth the added cost, weight, or complexity.
After all, it's a space mission, Katamari Damacy.
No, I think that the issue is not the dock cutting items off, it's that the "Internet Explorer" label above the dock is obscuring the processor information in the "About This Mac" window.
From the parts of the megahertz number that are showing, we can tell it's a 3-digit number ending in 7 with the first two digits having rounded tops, so the insinuation is that this screenshot could really have been taken from OS X running on something like an 9877Mhz PPC G3 rather than PearPC on an XBox.
Random conspiracy theory, yes. But still kind of interesting.
(Can't RTFA 'cos it's slashdotted)
How could you ron OS X on a machine without replacing the x86 CPU with a PPC CPU, which would require replacing the motherboard, which would include switching from BIOS to OpenFirmware, which would require replacing the graphics card and some other crap.
And if this is the case, is it running on an XBox or is it a PowerBook that has been case modded to look like an XBox.
that or they'e really running Darwin on the XBox, which is a different thing entirely.
EULA
Bah, give me a vehicle that does that with minimal overall energy costs.
Zero emissions is great except that you open the doors to things like hydrogen fuel cells, which are dirtier than cars in terms of air pollution, but sweep the problem under the carpet.
What I'd like to see is a challenge to produce a vehicle that is actually energy efficient so we can get away from this fad of preying on the public's general lack of understanding of the laws of thermodynamics by proposing all of these incredibly clever high tech non-solutions to our energy problems.
(Yes, I know I'm being trolled and I shouldn't be qualifying the parent by responding to it. But I will anyway. weeeeeee.)
.
The reason for looking for cleaner energy and reducend energy consumption isn't so we can all sit around and pretend our farts smell like roses.
The idea is to reduce pollution and all of the bad things it does. (And if you don't think pollution from burning things like coal is a problem, go look at any old sculpture or building in an area where acid rain is an issue and try to say that again.) We can reduce these emissions either by consuming less energy (thus needing to burn less fuel) or by producing the energy in "cleaner" ways
Clean in quotes because there are about eight bazillion definitions of clean. One person will argue coal is the cleanest because it doesn't kill salmon and doesn't run the risk of any serious radiological disasters. Another will argue for hydroelectric because it doesn't release large amounts of carbon dioxide and toxic chemicals into the atmosphere. The argument over whether or not nuclear power is clean and safe is a real funhouse.
But the one thing that everyone can agree on is that, from a pollution standpoint, using less energy is always cleaner. Your assertion that we shouldn't try to pollute less because we will always pollute at least a little bit is asinine.
I suppose next you'll be arguing that I shouldn't bother taking a couple aspirin and should just go for the whole bottle instead because "it is absolute retardation" to think that taking less drugs somehow makes it non-poisonous.
Heck, the GameBoy Color had much worse graphics than any of the original Game Boy's competitors, but it was much more successful.
And I think it's rather telling that you can walk into a Wal-Mart or Target and still be able to find GameBoy Color games for sale. Amazing graphics just really doesn't seem to be what's driving the handheld console market at all.
Huh, your long tail is bands I've seen on TV like Wilco and Radiohead, and bands you can find on iTMS?
Not meaning to be all indie or anything, but if I were to start listing long tail bands I'd start with Trans Am, Hem, and Negativland and start working my way out towards stuff like Ritchie Hawtin (Plastikman), Shellac, and Rondellus.
I've not been particularly lucky finding any of that on iTMS, which is why I don't use it.
Now there won't be any place where I can go to avoid the tourists
What about Euro Disney?
Right. If a few seconds above the 100km mark is space flight, then I have been able to fly unaided ever since I first learned to jump.
Have you ever tried to bong a Newcastle? Because let me tell you, that's a one-way ticket to the bathroom.
I did the same with my PalmOS handheld for classes that didn't require complicated diagrams or mathematical notation.
Graffiti was up to the task, but I wouldn't dream of trying it in Graffiti 2. Little things like having to pause for a full second before putting a space after a word ending in L have destroyed my ability to jot notes without thinking about it.
I gotta say, I've been wanting a feature like that on PalmOS since the day I got my first Visor.
Add in the ability to link different pieces of data (so if I have an appointment with somebody I can tap that person's name to bring up their contact info, and also include a link to a checklist of stuff I need to get done for that meeting, for example), and my Palm handheld might livie up to its name as a personal digital assistant rather than being a glorified address book and e-book reader.
4) 100%
I didn't buy my iPod to steal music. I bought my iPod because I can't fit both my entire CD collection and a passenger in my car at the same time.
The situation is more complicated than that. The your taxes are so high is because the social safety net was never designed to handle our current economic climate. We have a workforce that is barely growing (declining birth rate) combined with a retired population that is mushrooming (better medical care). The vast majority of our social safety net spending goes to supporting senior citizens.
Even retired people who did save responsibly are finding that they need social security and medicare because they didn't plan on spending the last five years of their lives dishing out money on palliative care and wonder treatments that are expensive beyond anything they could have concieved of. Heck, a lot of them didn't even plan on spending those five years alive.
Anyway, the gist is that they are costing more per person. And because the workforce is not growing nearly as quickly as the retired population is, your share of the cost of taking care of them is becoming proportionally larger.
Assuming that we don't want to turn the future into Soylent Green or Logan's Run, this doesn't leave us much safety net to cut. I haven't read the 2004 or 2005 budgets carefully enough to be sure of the exact numbers, but I do know that in the 2005 budget nondiscretionary spending accounts for only about 10% of the budget.
I have no idea how much of that is social safety net and how much is police and fire stations and pavement and all, so let's say half. We'll also throw any emotions out the door and cut all of that 5% of the budget, even the human services and all of that.
So with all of that cut out, you've gone from paying 50% of your income in taxes to paying 47.5% of your income in taxes.
Not that I feel sorry for you, anyway. If you're earning enough to be paying 50% in income tax, you are still bringing enough home after taxes to be investing an amount at least equal to my annual income before taxes each year. And you'd still have enough disposable income laying around to live in a huge house and drive a BMW.
Over the long run, the market will do the right thing if you let it be.
The long run is nice and all, but it doesn't really matter to those of us whose lives are nasty, brutish, and, above all, short. If I lost my job to outsourcing or some other business fad and an economist came along and said, "your pain doesn't matter because things will smooth out in a decade or two," I'd probably end up doing something that would put me in jail.
I'm not a shrink, but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Exactly
Agreed. The real problem is that there are wacko shrinks out there who think that anything that shows up in the DSM must be treated. Such as the company shrink who made a member of my family take lithium to treat the bereavment she was still experiencing a week after her fiancee died in a car wreck. (true story)
I don't want a stop to the research and classification of various mental states. I want the psychological/psychiatric community to sit down and create some real standards for treatment, including some strict ethics and punishments for their violation. If a physician started prescribing morphine for stubbed toes, he'd run the risk of losing his license (we'll worry about the chronic problem of prescribing antibiotics for viral illnesses later), he'd lose his license, while the shrink community hasn't even gotten around to saying "it's something we should maybe consider not doing, we think."
Or worse yet, we still have Freudian analysts getting licensed and offering their "treatment." This would be like if the AMA licensed doctors who practised the purging of various bodily humors in order to restore their balance.