I would show the kids this video at the beginning of the class year. Half of the people in the clip are scientists. Let them dream a bit and hopefully one will become passionate to change things too in science.
Even though it may not be better than Firefox, which I've been happily using on my corporate laptop side by side my personal laptop with Safari, I am interested in having only one application for both platforms. It's just easy to have the same exact look and feel on two platforms for me. So perhaps for that 1% of all computer users that use both a Mac and a Windows box, this is going to be a good solution.
Just my 2c.
Well, there may be one type of consumers that profits from this scheme: the casual gamer. I don't play games that much and certainly never play a game all the way through (where are the days as a kid in front of the SNES:-).
This new scheme might create some games that are cheap upfront. This would be great for consumers like myself that never use the full content available anyway.
It is my understanding that the more important one is, the less one wants to communicate. If people need them, they will do their best to find these people. And people need important people all the time it seems. I'm pretty sure presidents, popular star & very young children get all the attention they want (perhaps the last group is the exception, although there might not be that much difference...).
Bottom line: all those people you see communicating do it because they feel they want to or have to. Very important it probably isn't, and neither are these over-attention seekers.
With all innovation, it changes the dynamics of the marketplace. You need three major technologies for digital cameras: Glass, eg. optics, Sensor technology and Image processing.
The first technology is what the original camera manufacturers are good at, the other two technologies is where all the new players step in. Sony has been making digital video cameras for a long time, they have amazing experience with electronic miniaturisation and production. Canon too as a matter of fact. Leica has not for example, that's why they now produce wonderful lenses for other manufacturers (and keep a dying line of cameras going - but I'm not sure how well they are doing).
Last, as with any consumer product, aesthetics and operability are important, and people use digital cameras in a slightly different way than old film based ones. It may not be a bad idea to start designing these without any preconceptions from a begone era.
I think microsoft is right on the ball with cheap software for thailand, but perhaps already too late. Let's see if china is just strong-arming for a similar deal...or really going for linux.
Microsoft is facing a looming battle from local (asian) programmers that are used to linux. In the end it's always these kind of social choices that dictate if a business lives or dies. Combine government choices (germany, brazil, now china) with small clusters of companies like Red Hat and breeding schools like MIT and some Indian institutes and Microsoft is facing a real struggle with a strong product backed-up by dedicated companies, customers, workforce and policy.
It usually takes ten years or so for these find of impacts to unfold...every signal right now points to a slow corruption of the windows OS.
Luxology Demo at WWDC real-app benchmark response
on
G5 Benchmark Roundup
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Check out these articles from macobserver and the website of luxology on their view of G5 performance. The whole spec-crap is totally irrelevant. Only applications matter:
I think apple did a reasonably good comparison, as much as would be possible. I don't like these spec-indexes too much anyway as more things factor in.
What I do like is the real-world application performance. I was much more impressed by the photoshop, etc. comparisons (Mathematica: comparison to higher end unix-workstations!) than those silly benchmark numbers. Real tests that finish twice as fast are more impressive and less deceptive (well, a bit anyways).
So now we wait...for panther, for the G5's and for the G5 powermac (could be some time though...sigh). I am already happy that apple is back on track, if their product is even any faster than other platforms: good for them...and us. Even other platforms must welcome some competition, right?
After all the whining out there about wether this is a hoax, marketing hype or a simple mistake let's not forget that if this is true it truly is insanely great news.
Two 970's at 2 GHz with bus bandwith! Earlier (leaked) numbers of tests put the 970 at between 1.5 and 2.5 times as fast as a pentium 4. That makes these machines the equivalent of a 6-10 GHz machine. Now of course, we'll have to wait and see and two procs are not doubly as efficient as one but great news this would be nonetheless.
I just want to add that the post on the artist ("John Fogerty sued for sounding like John Fogerty! [cmt.com]") is not comparable to my post: Fogerty is clearly a case where the IP has been established by contract and parties fight over the contracts. My point is different, being on the intellect of an employee.
In many countries in Europe, an employee retains the rights to his intellectual capacity and skills.
This does not mean that he can use all the material he produced at his former employer but it does mean that he can use his intellect how he sees fit. This would include finding solutions to problems that are part of his normal work. Now the big question is how much such "snippets of code" are normal work routines or real intellectual property of his former employer.
I would assume that, for programmers, there exist a great many problems that you would use similer code for. This would mean you should be able to use the same solutions used at your former employer for those same type of problems.
If a company finds a really innovative way of doing things there is always the possibility of taking the IP route: getting something patented. If you haven't done that and didn't keep your solution a tight secret, chances are it's too common to protect from copying or you didn't invent it in the first place.
Now, of course, the situation in the US is different than European countries and with respect to the law system on these kind of IP issues the US system may differ greatly. (I have been amazed many times before)
I think this is a very smart, but somewhat risky move. 80% is a lot of computers for a lot of people. I sure hope that this will not cause major chaos as these kind of overhauls do tend to cause. Government institutions can be notoriously bad at implenting new technology (although exceptions appear of course). I am not sure how Brazil is doing at the moment, but I hope this move will not interfere with what is already a weak economic situation.
What Brazil may hope to achieve is jumpstarting a good developer community and user base by this action and jump the gun on other countries in the world giving them a competitive advantage in the future. I wish them all the best...
What is so incredebly tricky about this is the legal aspect of it. Microsoft is pushing its IE-Windows integration to the fullest, exactly why everyone is all over them (with their monopoly and so on). By claiming that custumors demand the kind of features only Apple can provide because of their OS-browser integration and thus that they cannot develop anymore for the mac because of the integration between Safari and the OS they make their own case for the integration of IE and windows stronger. "Hey, when "our competitors" are doing this, we should also be allowed so, right?"
On a positive note the macbusiness unit also stated that the coming office for mac will not be the last.
First of all both the EU and Russia are highly succesful in the launching business. The Ariane 4 was at one point responsible for over 40% of all commercial launches and still is very successful. The Ariana 5 has seen some significant setbacks with all those errors but still is (will be) a very competitive launcher. The russian launchers, while based on sixties technology have been refined and re-engineered to an enormous ammount for decades and were and still are very competitive. For most commercial apps the shuttle program is outrageously expensive and even the US itself relies on convential rockets (which they also make of course) for many launches. Another problem in general for the US, and more limited for the EU, is that the international space station is costing a lot more than expected (nuttin'new, right?) and this is affecting other projects. This problem is even larger due to the fact that -for now- we need the shuttle as a servicing vehicle for the ISS
Now for those GPS systems: first of all to clear that bit up: you need a few dozen to make sure always at least three (but better four or five) are visible everywhere on earth (except usually the poles due to orbit mechanics) for triangulation methods. Second of all Europe is not happy with the position the military takes in the GPS system of the US: we saw this many times with both Gulf wars that the US decided to downgrade the system accuracy for everyone but themselves (the military that is). In general people are a bit tired of the US policy to foreign countries with the change from Clinton to Bush (I don't want to take sides on the last war in this comment but in general popularity and support of the US bombed in the EU recently (as in from 60% to 25%), even in the normally pro-US United Kingdom). The military funding of many system in the US is what makes the EU sometimes a bit scared and makes it want to develop its own system, and the anti-US feelings in the population make these kind of projects a lot easier to get funded. Now, wether or not we need another system if another question but it takes time to launch so many sattelites for a new GPS system, so China is still busy get everything up there, as it will also take Europe time to fully deploy. Even more, if the US and the EU can/want work together these GPS system can also complement eachother.
Only a -very small- part of the US higher education system is considered that highly. Namely, only schools like MIT, Harvard, Princeton, etc. (not in any order or those schools specifically). The majority of the "college system" in the US is not -that- great compared to Europe for example. But a few institutes really stand out though. Compared to Europe the system shows more diversity in the quality.
In general, these top-level schools are considered so highly because they guide their students to a high level of abstract thinking, needed to solve the "big" scientific problems. (and, well, I guess make lots of money in some businesses, but that's another story...).
Therefore this development is good in a limited way, but must NEVER lower the standards of abstract thinking of students.
Have been brainstorming a bit about this subject in the past: why haven't the mobile phone producers and network operators integrated instant messenging ( real-time! ) contact list with the phonebook in our cell phones?
Just like with IM programs buddies could than update their own profile and this would show up in everyone's phone. My friends use this to keep track where everybody is and what they are upto all the time!
It would require both new functionality of the phones and more significantly, a cheap broadcasting technique similar to SMS. But it would rock, I think!
Slashdot Mirror
It's people that you admire. It's role-models that inspire. Case in point: Apple's commercial 'The crazy ones': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUfH-BEBMoY&mode=re lated&search= (link is to the first youtube hit I found - there's probably a million others)
I would show the kids this video at the beginning of the class year. Half of the people in the clip are scientists. Let them dream a bit and hopefully one will become passionate to change things too in science.
Even though it may not be better than Firefox, which I've been happily using on my corporate laptop side by side my personal laptop with Safari, I am interested in having only one application for both platforms. It's just easy to have the same exact look and feel on two platforms for me. So perhaps for that 1% of all computer users that use both a Mac and a Windows box, this is going to be a good solution. Just my 2c.
Well, there may be one type of consumers that profits from this scheme: the casual gamer. I don't play games that much and certainly never play a game all the way through (where are the days as a kid in front of the SNES :-).
This new scheme might create some games that are cheap upfront. This would be great for consumers like myself that never use the full content available anyway.
It is my understanding that the more important one is, the less one wants to communicate. If people need them, they will do their best to find these people. And people need important people all the time it seems. I'm pretty sure presidents, popular star & very young children get all the attention they want (perhaps the last group is the exception, although there might not be that much difference...).
Bottom line: all those people you see communicating do it because they feel they want to or have to. Very important it probably isn't, and neither are these over-attention seekers.
With all innovation, it changes the dynamics of the marketplace. You need three major technologies for digital cameras: Glass, eg. optics, Sensor technology and Image processing.
The first technology is what the original camera manufacturers are good at, the other two technologies is where all the new players step in. Sony has been making digital video cameras for a long time, they have amazing experience with electronic miniaturisation and production. Canon too as a matter of fact. Leica has not for example, that's why they now produce wonderful lenses for other manufacturers (and keep a dying line of cameras going - but I'm not sure how well they are doing).
Last, as with any consumer product, aesthetics and operability are important, and people use digital cameras in a slightly different way than old film based ones. It may not be a bad idea to start designing these without any preconceptions from a begone era.
Also, it seems a company called Apple did get the mix between usability and security right.
Not everyone agrees, but most people seem to think that OS X is more secure than any windows version, especially 'out-of-the-box'.
Most people also seem to find it more 'usable'...and good looking.
The new iBook will have the normal G4 velocity engine.
If it wasn't in the tech specs before...it is now.
Sorry people, any article on beer OR linux that doesn't mention Heineken is not worth its salt!
Bud is only the biggest selling beer because it is huge in the USA. Heineken reigns supreme it most of the rest of the world.
- brought to you from the objective Netherlands (home of Heineken)
I think microsoft is right on the ball with cheap software for thailand, but perhaps already too late. Let's see if china is just strong-arming for a similar deal...or really going for linux.
Microsoft is facing a looming battle from local (asian) programmers that are used to linux. In the end it's always these kind of social choices that dictate if a business lives or dies. Combine government choices (germany, brazil, now china) with small clusters of companies like Red Hat and breeding schools like MIT and some Indian institutes and Microsoft is facing a real struggle with a strong product backed-up by dedicated companies, customers, workforce and policy.
It usually takes ten years or so for these find of impacts to unfold...every signal right now points to a slow corruption of the windows OS.
Check out these articles from macobserver and the website of luxology on their view of G5 performance. The whole spec-crap is totally irrelevant. Only applications matter:
Luxology's response
The mac observer on GP performance
I think apple did a reasonably good comparison, as much as would be possible. I don't like these spec-indexes too much anyway as more things factor in.
What I do like is the real-world application performance. I was much more impressed by the photoshop, etc. comparisons (Mathematica: comparison to higher end unix-workstations!) than those silly benchmark numbers. Real tests that finish twice as fast are more impressive and less deceptive (well, a bit anyways).
So now we wait...for panther, for the G5's and for the G5 powermac (could be some time though...sigh). I am already happy that apple is back on track, if their product is even any faster than other platforms: good for them...and us. Even other platforms must welcome some competition, right?
After all the whining out there about wether this is a hoax, marketing hype or a simple mistake let's not forget that if this is true it truly is insanely great news.
Two 970's at 2 GHz with bus bandwith! Earlier (leaked) numbers of tests put the 970 at between 1.5 and 2.5 times as fast as a pentium 4. That makes these machines the equivalent of a 6-10 GHz machine. Now of course, we'll have to wait and see and two procs are not doubly as efficient as one but great news this would be nonetheless.
Oh yeah.
I just want to add that the post on the artist ("John Fogerty sued for sounding like John Fogerty! [cmt.com]") is not comparable to my post: Fogerty is clearly a case where the IP has been established by contract and parties fight over the contracts. My point is different, being on the intellect of an employee.
But you understood that, right?
In many countries in Europe, an employee retains the rights to his intellectual capacity and skills.
This does not mean that he can use all the material he produced at his former employer but it does mean that he can use his intellect how he sees fit. This would include finding solutions to problems that are part of his normal work. Now the big question is how much such "snippets of code" are normal work routines or real intellectual property of his former employer.
I would assume that, for programmers, there exist a great many problems that you would use similer code for. This would mean you should be able to use the same solutions used at your former employer for those same type of problems.
If a company finds a really innovative way of doing things there is always the possibility of taking the IP route: getting something patented. If you haven't done that and didn't keep your solution a tight secret, chances are it's too common to protect from copying or you didn't invent it in the first place.
Now, of course, the situation in the US is different than European countries and with respect to the law system on these kind of IP issues the US system may differ greatly. (I have been amazed many times before)
There seem to be quite a lot of slots "to be announced" at the WWDC, especially for tuesday...
Is this normal? Could these be demonstrations of new products? Ideas, anyone?
I think this is a very smart, but somewhat risky move. 80% is a lot of computers for a lot of people. I sure hope that this will not cause major chaos as these kind of overhauls do tend to cause. Government institutions can be notoriously bad at implenting new technology (although exceptions appear of course). I am not sure how Brazil is doing at the moment, but I hope this move will not interfere with what is already a weak economic situation.
What Brazil may hope to achieve is jumpstarting a good developer community and user base by this action and jump the gun on other countries in the world giving them a competitive advantage in the future. I wish them all the best...
What is so incredebly tricky about this is the legal aspect of it. Microsoft is pushing its IE-Windows integration to the fullest, exactly why everyone is all over them (with their monopoly and so on). By claiming that custumors demand the kind of features only Apple can provide because of their OS-browser integration and thus that they cannot develop anymore for the mac because of the integration between Safari and the OS they make their own case for the integration of IE and windows stronger. "Hey, when "our competitors" are doing this, we should also be allowed so, right?"
On a positive note the macbusiness unit also stated that the coming office for mac will not be the last.
See if I can contribute some bits to this topic:
First of all both the EU and Russia are highly succesful in the launching business. The Ariane 4 was at one point responsible for over 40% of all commercial launches and still is very successful. The Ariana 5 has seen some significant setbacks with all those errors but still is (will be) a very competitive launcher. The russian launchers, while based on sixties technology have been refined and re-engineered to an enormous ammount for decades and were and still are very competitive. For most commercial apps the shuttle program is outrageously expensive and even the US itself relies on convential rockets (which they also make of course) for many launches. Another problem in general for the US, and more limited for the EU, is that the international space station is costing a lot more than expected (nuttin'new, right?) and this is affecting other projects. This problem is even larger due to the fact that -for now- we need the shuttle as a servicing vehicle for the ISS
Now for those GPS systems: first of all to clear that bit up: you need a few dozen to make sure always at least three (but better four or five) are visible everywhere on earth (except usually the poles due to orbit mechanics) for triangulation methods. Second of all Europe is not happy with the position the military takes in the GPS system of the US: we saw this many times with both Gulf wars that the US decided to downgrade the system accuracy for everyone but themselves (the military that is). In general people are a bit tired of the US policy to foreign countries with the change from Clinton to Bush (I don't want to take sides on the last war in this comment but in general popularity and support of the US bombed in the EU recently (as in from 60% to 25%), even in the normally pro-US United Kingdom). The military funding of many system in the US is what makes the EU sometimes a bit scared and makes it want to develop its own system, and the anti-US feelings in the population make these kind of projects a lot easier to get funded. Now, wether or not we need another system if another question but it takes time to launch so many sattelites for a new GPS system, so China is still busy get everything up there, as it will also take Europe time to fully deploy. Even more, if the US and the EU can/want work together these GPS system can also complement eachother.
Only a -very small- part of the US higher education system is considered that highly. Namely, only schools like MIT, Harvard, Princeton, etc. (not in any order or those schools specifically). The majority of the "college system" in the US is not -that- great compared to Europe for example. But a few institutes really stand out though. Compared to Europe the system shows more diversity in the quality. In general, these top-level schools are considered so highly because they guide their students to a high level of abstract thinking, needed to solve the "big" scientific problems. (and, well, I guess make lots of money in some businesses, but that's another story...). Therefore this development is good in a limited way, but must NEVER lower the standards of abstract thinking of students.
Have been brainstorming a bit about this subject in the past: why haven't the mobile phone producers and network operators integrated instant messenging ( real-time! ) contact list with the phonebook in our cell phones? Just like with IM programs buddies could than update their own profile and this would show up in everyone's phone. My friends use this to keep track where everybody is and what they are upto all the time! It would require both new functionality of the phones and more significantly, a cheap broadcasting technique similar to SMS. But it would rock, I think!