While it's true that QEMU runs on Mac OS X and various other OSes and Architectures than x86, the article points to a page where the author talks about QEMU Accelerator. QEMU Accelerator is described as being comparable to Virtual PC in the way it works, with most of the code being run natively without translation/emulation, so unless you're running Mac OS X on an x86 CPU, there is no way that the QEMU Accelerator module could possibly work.
So, in conclusion...
It is true, and it always has been that QEMU Accellerator can only run x86 binaries on x86 processors, and indeed, it does only work on x86 processors.
Other than that, I agree with everything you said.
"Here's a hint: Use of profanity does not automatically euqate an act of flamebaiting. It can be used as a genuine expression of frustration and exasperation."
You have to admit that they're pretty good at some things
Like making money, getting away with breaking the law, and software installs are a breeze in windows, just browse the web for a while and software just installs itself without any help.
"Absolutely, it all boils down to money. And part of higher returns is having returning customers. Customers are more likely to return if they have positive image of a company. Which brings me back to my original claim. If indeed the trackpads are identical or within a certain threshold of similarity (which it appears that they are) then it would be a pre-designed crippling of functionality for the same software (OS X 10.3 in this case) to function differently based upon hardware differences other than the trackpad. In my opinion, this is a sleazy thing to do and all I have claimed is that it will be a factor in my choosing to return to Apple for my future computing needs.
The new trackpads are connected via USB rather than ADB, so the scrolling functionality of the new trackpads is coded in the AppleUSBMouse.kext driver, not AppleADBMouse.kext like the "W-Enhanced" hack. The scroll trackpads are manufactured by Apple themselves rather than a third party company (Synaptics) like the W-Enhanced ADB trackpads on previous PowerBooks and iBooks.
To me it seems reasonable to assume two things based on these facts; That the trackpads probably don't use the same protocols to communicate with the computer, and that the hardware is different enough for Apple to piss off the supplier of iPod scroll wheels by ordering fewer trackpads from them.
Apple have provided new hardware that supports a new feature. Just because it's possible to hack the driver to simulate the functionality of their last model doesn't mean Apple have any responsibility to provide anything at all to you.
Apple are a company, they work on a system of making sure that there is going to be a return on money they invest. There's no incentive to Apple to pay developers to hack this into the driver for old powerbooks, nor is there any incentive to tie their QA people up with issues relating to a hacked feature that's not going to generate any revenue.
Finally though, stop being such a spoilt brat. You don't have the right to have this feature just because other people who waited until now to buy a powerbook do. Your computer still works exactly the way it did before the new model came out. But even better, you can download a modified driver that adds a feature that Apple thought they had to develop new hardware, and piss off a major supplier to support.
If I were to villify Intel, it wouldn't be for sticking with the x86 instruction set.
I'd villify them for...
Building the 8086 down to such a super low cost, by crippling them with a pitifully small number of interrupts, registers and DMA channels, they knew it was a bad idea but went ahead with the design anyway.
Making a chip (the 286) with an enhanced 16-bit mode, but no way to switch back to real mode (fixed in the 386) which resulted in the 16 bit mode of the chip being nearly useless.
Failing to properly address the I/O problems of the first generation processor until the fifth generation CPU.
Forever upping x86 core speeds in an attempt to convince punters that GHz == instructions executed, despite it meaning that the chips would fail more, and make computers noisier and hotter.
And finally, copying AMDs 64bit architecture without giving any credit.:)
Damn straight. It wasn't Xerox that invented the GUI, it dates back at least as far as Douglas Englebart's research at Stanford in the late 60's.
Xerox certainly advanced the game a very long way from Englebart's original concepts, but there's little doubt that they took a lot of their ideas from the system he demonstrated in 1968, which included a very basic form of GUI, a mouse, and local area networking.
There is no doubt in my mind that Englebart's ideas were the inspiration for the Alto and Star computers that Xerox created, and which inspired Apple to adopt the GUI and mouse for their next generation of computers.
Neither of Xerox's GUI computers were commercially successful, and Microsoft's early attempts at GUIs were embarassingly poor, and laughably unsuccessful. Microsoft may have commercialised the GUI successfully now, but Apple did it right the first time. Several years before Microsoft released a usable version of Windows.
You may dislike Apple, but that doesn't give you the right to try to belittle the company's achievements, or rewrite history.
1) The key developers don't really care about making it cross platform, instead they want OpenOffice to take over the entire desktop, hiding the OS GUI from view.
2) It looks terrible on any OS, but really piss poor on the Mac
3) You need to run X to use it on the mac, X is hidden in an extra package somewhere and has to be purposely installed.
4) It doesn't support even the most basic interation with other programs.
OpenOffice seems fine to windows and Linux users, because the interface in Linux and Windows are almost identical, on the Mac it looks like steaming poo, and more importantly doesn't work like the rest of the system.
Why would I, or anyone else for that matter, pay for some unemployed stranger to work on an unsatisfactory program, when I could well end up with some monstrosity that works barely better than the X11 version.
When my pipes clog, I can call a person with a proven track record of making pipes flow again, who is employed in that line of work and making a living at it.
It would take an enormous amount of money to get a company with a proven track record of creating Mac applications to port OpenOffice to the platform properly. After spending the thousands of dollars to get it ported by a reputable company, I would then be compelled to gift it back to the community again.
I somehow suspect that most reputable companies would be reluctant to give out their source code as well as porting, probably adding an extra cost.
Yeah, except for a few trivial things, it could happen. Hey, frogs could grow claws and live in toilets too!
I doubt it's gonna happen this way either, but I'm gonna pretend I think it's possible just to make conversation.
IBM is a company focused on growing its services biz and Apple has none.
Apple having no services business means that there's an opportunity for IBM to sell their cutomers Apple servers using IBMs own low-end chips, creating a migration path to bigger iron from the same vendor, the differences between OSes means that such a migration would be difficult to manage, but even more so without big blue's help.
Apple is primarily a B2C company and IBM is B2B.
True, but there is some convergence between Apple and IBMs products (low end servers and SANs). Plus IBM are going to be needing to recommend a desktop vendor to their customers now that they aren't selling in that market anymore. Having a friend in the corporate market like IBM could easily give Apple's computers some credence, especially since they run a Unix OS now.
Cultural differences make east vs west like the definition of homogenized
Apple and IBM have already formed some major alliances, and not all of them have fallen flat on their faces. I'm not entirely convinced that Apple couldn't work as a division of IBM. However, as a fairly recent (and mild) convert to the Apple religion it does worry me a bit to think of Apple being IBMified.
It makes me wonder how many Apple jihadi are priming their explosive vests and making plans to travel to Armonk, NY as I type.
Steve Jobs and his amazing ego
That probably would be the biggest barrier to any kind of buyout/merger/alliance, but Jobs has proven during his time at NeXT that the ideas he holds nearest and dearest can change when faced with bankrupcy or buyout. Plus he's responsible for plunging Apple back into the dark depths of profitability and quite a few hit product lines since his return. I'd be more worried about him taking over IBM than causing a huge rift, given his current superstar CEO status and the history of the NeXT/Apple and Pixar/Disney episodes.
Because software patents are to protect ideas, not inventions, like real patents.
Copyright already does what patents on real-world inventions do, in that they provide protection against direct plagiarism of someone's work for a period sufficient to commercialise that product.
Software patents protect ideas, so that if I come up with the idea of a piece of software that can find dead pixels on a CRT display by filling the screen with blue, green and red respectively, I can patent that idea, and prevent anyone else from using it. The specific implementation of that software is already covered by copyright, but idea of displaying a screenful of solid colour for the purposes of identifying display defects is not, so that's where patents come in.
Neat huh? so in a few years once all the blatantly obvious good ideas are patented, only developers armed with a bevy of lawyers and patents and prepared to grapple with other patent holders will be able to sell software in the U.S.
God bless the rest of the world where freedom is important.
I've used two types of cellular data in Linux, one was a Nokia 5110, the 5110 does not behave like a regular modem, and doesn't do GPRS. It was neccessary to use a utility called Gnokii to emulate a modem, the other type was actually two different Ericsson phones, a t39m and a t68i.
Both act like a normal modem when connected via a serial cable, and like a modem attached to a standard bluetooth serial device (though I haven't tried using bluetooth in Linux). The only caveat was finding out the AT commands to connect to the GPRS network, but it's all standard PPP over a standard (pretend, in the case of gnokii) serial modem.
The ericssons were certainly a refreshing change from shitty soft modems that need drivers and don't work in any OS except windows. I assume there must be plenty of other cellphones out there that act like standard devices.
"Are you kidding? I can buy a brand new Dell for $499 (not a corporate version, but who cares)with a 15" flat screen. Sure, it's not as fast or as good as the G5, but I can buy a new one every year for the next 5. Don't tell me you will use that G5 longer than that, and I'll have the latest tech every two years."...and in 5 years that brand new bottom-of-the-line $500 Dell computer finally will be as fast as the 5 year dual G5.
Windows is the exception, not the rule when it comes to failing to migrate OS installs from machine to machine.
Just about every distribution of Linux is capable of being configured to autodetect hardware, but in the case of taking the harddrive and all the expansion cards out of the old machine like you did with solaris, it wouldn't matter if it wasn't configured to autodetect hardware.
Mac OS X is another example, probably a fairer comparison because both Apple and Sun manufacture the OS and the hardware. A friend booted his G5 directly from my PowerBook's hard drive through a Firewire cable, it booted perfectly on the G5, and on my machine after he finished playing. The only difference was it took about 15-20 seconds longer to boot since OS X was unable to use some of it's quick startup trickery because some drivers had changed.
I've seen/done OS migrations on machines running DOS, AmigaOS, Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Windows 9x, Mac OS 9 & Mac OS X. Windows NT is the only OS that I've ever seen that throws a hissyfit when you move it from machine to machine. Sure in a Linux disto without hardware detection it might not work perfectly after the move, but at least it's in a state where with a few magic commandline incantations you can determine and install the correct drivers.
It's just another example of the shit Microsoft's victims are willing to accept from their abusers.
You were the one suggesting Apple should give away all their source, and work on more than the one (1) platform (x86) that windows works on. And that if they did that they would somehow be on a level playing field with MS, who give away none (nada, zip, 0%) of their operating system in source code form, or for free.
I fail to follow your logic. You fail to follow my english. I guess we're at an impasse until you attend english as a second language courses.
Just get a Mac you cheap bastard - all you have to do is cut down on unneccessary expenses. You don't need food. Plus if you get the 17 inch laptop, it'll make a nice heater/light, and double as a waterproof steeped roof for your new cardboard-box-house when it rains.:)
Slashdot Mirror
don't cubes have six sides?
truth.
While it's true that QEMU runs on Mac OS X and various other OSes and Architectures than x86, the article points to a page where the author talks about QEMU Accelerator. QEMU Accelerator is described as being comparable to Virtual PC in the way it works, with most of the code being run natively without translation/emulation, so unless you're running Mac OS X on an x86 CPU, there is no way that the QEMU Accelerator module could possibly work.
So, in conclusion...
It is true, and it always has been that QEMU Accellerator can only run x86 binaries on x86 processors, and indeed, it does only work on x86 processors.
Other than that, I agree with everything you said.
Pleasure to be of service :)
"Here's a hint: Use of profanity does not automatically euqate an act of flamebaiting. It can be used as a genuine expression of frustration and exasperation."
No it fucking can't, you bullshitting bastard.
You have to admit that they're pretty good at some things
Like making money, getting away with breaking the law, and software installs are a breeze in windows, just browse the web for a while and software just installs itself without any help.
"Absolutely, it all boils down to money. And part of higher returns is having returning customers. Customers are more likely to return if they have positive image of a company. Which brings me back to my original claim. If indeed the trackpads are identical or within a certain threshold of similarity (which it appears that they are) then it would be a pre-designed crippling of functionality for the same software (OS X 10.3 in this case) to function differently based upon hardware differences other than the trackpad. In my opinion, this is a sleazy thing to do and all I have claimed is that it will be a factor in my choosing to return to Apple for my future computing needs.
The new trackpads are connected via USB rather than ADB, so the scrolling functionality of the new trackpads is coded in the AppleUSBMouse.kext driver, not AppleADBMouse.kext like the "W-Enhanced" hack. The scroll trackpads are manufactured by Apple themselves rather than a third party company (Synaptics) like the W-Enhanced ADB trackpads on previous PowerBooks and iBooks.
To me it seems reasonable to assume two things based on these facts; That the trackpads probably don't use the same protocols to communicate with the computer, and that the hardware is different enough for Apple to piss off the supplier of iPod scroll wheels by ordering fewer trackpads from them.
No one is forcing you to upgrade anything.
Apple have provided new hardware that supports a new feature. Just because it's possible to hack the driver to simulate the functionality of their last model doesn't mean Apple have any responsibility to provide anything at all to you.
Apple are a company, they work on a system of making sure that there is going to be a return on money they invest. There's no incentive to Apple to pay developers to hack this into the driver for old powerbooks, nor is there any incentive to tie their QA people up with issues relating to a hacked feature that's not going to generate any revenue.
Finally though, stop being such a spoilt brat. You don't have the right to have this feature just because other people who waited until now to buy a powerbook do. Your computer still works exactly the way it did before the new model came out. But even better, you can download a modified driver that adds a feature that Apple thought they had to develop new hardware, and piss off a major supplier to support.
If I were to villify Intel, it wouldn't be for sticking with the x86 instruction set.
:)
I'd villify them for...
Building the 8086 down to such a super low cost, by crippling them with a pitifully small number of interrupts, registers and DMA channels, they knew it was a bad idea but went ahead with the design anyway.
Making a chip (the 286) with an enhanced 16-bit mode, but no way to switch back to real mode (fixed in the 386) which resulted in the 16 bit mode of the chip being nearly useless.
Failing to properly address the I/O problems of the first generation processor until the fifth generation CPU.
Forever upping x86 core speeds in an attempt to convince punters that GHz == instructions executed, despite it meaning that the chips would fail more, and make computers noisier and hotter.
And finally, copying AMDs 64bit architecture without giving any credit.
Heh, you're just jealous because your computer is beige.
pff... It better be more advanced than that. I've got a shotgun that can do what you mention.
Damn straight. It wasn't Xerox that invented the GUI, it dates back at least as far as Douglas Englebart's research at Stanford in the late 60's.
Xerox certainly advanced the game a very long way from Englebart's original concepts, but there's little doubt that they took a lot of their ideas from the system he demonstrated in 1968, which included a very basic form of GUI, a mouse, and local area networking.
There is no doubt in my mind that Englebart's ideas were the inspiration for the Alto and Star computers that Xerox created, and which inspired Apple to adopt the GUI and mouse for their next generation of computers.
Neither of Xerox's GUI computers were commercially successful, and Microsoft's early attempts at GUIs were embarassingly poor, and laughably unsuccessful. Microsoft may have commercialised the GUI successfully now, but Apple did it right the first time. Several years before Microsoft released a usable version of Windows.
You may dislike Apple, but that doesn't give you the right to try to belittle the company's achievements, or rewrite history.
Here are my gripes with OpenOffice on OS X
1) The key developers don't really care about making it cross platform, instead they want OpenOffice to take over the entire desktop, hiding the OS GUI from view.
2) It looks terrible on any OS, but really piss poor on the Mac
3) You need to run X to use it on the mac, X is hidden in an extra package somewhere and has to be purposely installed.
4) It doesn't support even the most basic interation with other programs.
OpenOffice seems fine to windows and Linux users, because the interface in Linux and Windows are almost identical, on the Mac it looks like steaming poo, and more importantly doesn't work like the rest of the system.
Why would I, or anyone else for that matter, pay for some unemployed stranger to work on an unsatisfactory program, when I could well end up with some monstrosity that works barely better than the X11 version.
When my pipes clog, I can call a person with a proven track record of making pipes flow again, who is employed in that line of work and making a living at it.
It would take an enormous amount of money to get a company with a proven track record of creating Mac applications to port OpenOffice to the platform properly. After spending the thousands of dollars to get it ported by a reputable company, I would then be compelled to gift it back to the community again.
I somehow suspect that most reputable companies would be reluctant to give out their source code as well as porting, probably adding an extra cost.
I used to have a 667Mhz PBG4 with an IR port.
Eat up martha!
BTW, what is an alternative? Could All Seeing Eye be the replacement?
I don't see how, since they don't offer anything for Mac or Linux.
Yeah, except for a few trivial things, it could happen. Hey, frogs could grow claws and live in toilets too!
I doubt it's gonna happen this way either, but I'm gonna pretend I think it's possible just to make conversation.
IBM is a company focused on growing its services biz and Apple has none.
Apple having no services business means that there's an opportunity for IBM to sell their cutomers Apple servers using IBMs own low-end chips, creating a migration path to bigger iron from the same vendor, the differences between OSes means that such a migration would be difficult to manage, but even more so without big blue's help.
Apple is primarily a B2C company and IBM is B2B.
True, but there is some convergence between Apple and IBMs products (low end servers and SANs). Plus IBM are going to be needing to recommend a desktop vendor to their customers now that they aren't selling in that market anymore. Having a friend in the corporate market like IBM could easily give Apple's computers some credence, especially since they run a Unix OS now.
Cultural differences make east vs west like the definition of homogenized
Apple and IBM have already formed some major alliances, and not all of them have fallen flat on their faces. I'm not entirely convinced that Apple couldn't work as a division of IBM. However, as a fairly recent (and mild) convert to the Apple religion it does worry me a bit to think of Apple being IBMified.
It makes me wonder how many Apple jihadi are priming their explosive vests and making plans to travel to Armonk, NY as I type.
Steve Jobs and his amazing ego
That probably would be the biggest barrier to any kind of buyout/merger/alliance, but Jobs has proven during his time at NeXT that the ideas he holds nearest and dearest can change when faced with bankrupcy or buyout. Plus he's responsible for plunging Apple back into the dark depths of profitability and quite a few hit product lines since his return. I'd be more worried about him taking over IBM than causing a huge rift, given his current superstar CEO status and the history of the NeXT/Apple and Pixar/Disney episodes.
If you're referring to being fucked up the arse, I think Windows users are the ones lubing and bearing the buttocks every time they start their PC.
That's what I thought too, before I heard of software patents.
Because software patents are to protect ideas, not inventions, like real patents.
Copyright already does what patents on real-world inventions do, in that they provide protection against direct plagiarism of someone's work for a period sufficient to commercialise that product.
Software patents protect ideas, so that if I come up with the idea of a piece of software that can find dead pixels on a CRT display by filling the screen with blue, green and red respectively, I can patent that idea, and prevent anyone else from using it. The specific implementation of that software is already covered by copyright, but idea of displaying a screenful of solid colour for the purposes of identifying display defects is not, so that's where patents come in.
Neat huh? so in a few years once all the blatantly obvious good ideas are patented, only developers armed with a bevy of lawyers and patents and prepared to grapple with other patent holders will be able to sell software in the U.S.
God bless the rest of the world where freedom is important.
I've used two types of cellular data in Linux, one was a Nokia 5110, the 5110 does not behave like a regular modem, and doesn't do GPRS. It was neccessary to use a utility called Gnokii to emulate a modem, the other type was actually two different Ericsson phones, a t39m and a t68i.
Both act like a normal modem when connected via a serial cable, and like a modem attached to a standard bluetooth serial device (though I haven't tried using bluetooth in Linux). The only caveat was finding out the AT commands to connect to the GPRS network, but it's all standard PPP over a standard (pretend, in the case of gnokii) serial modem.
The ericssons were certainly a refreshing change from shitty soft modems that need drivers and don't work in any OS except windows. I assume there must be plenty of other cellphones out there that act like standard devices.
"Are you kidding? I can buy a brand new Dell for $499 (not a corporate version, but who cares)with a 15" flat screen. Sure, it's not as fast or as good as the G5, but I can buy a new one every year for the next 5. Don't tell me you will use that G5 longer than that, and I'll have the latest tech every two years." ...and in 5 years that brand new bottom-of-the-line $500 Dell computer finally will be as fast as the 5 year dual G5.
Completely unremarkable.
Windows is the exception, not the rule when it comes to failing to migrate OS installs from machine to machine.
Just about every distribution of Linux is capable of being configured to autodetect hardware, but in the case of taking the harddrive and all the expansion cards out of the old machine like you did with solaris, it wouldn't matter if it wasn't configured to autodetect hardware.
Mac OS X is another example, probably a fairer comparison because both Apple and Sun manufacture the OS and the hardware. A friend booted his G5 directly from my PowerBook's hard drive through a Firewire cable, it booted perfectly on the G5, and on my machine after he finished playing. The only difference was it took about 15-20 seconds longer to boot since OS X was unable to use some of it's quick startup trickery because some drivers had changed.
I've seen/done OS migrations on machines running DOS, AmigaOS, Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Windows 9x, Mac OS 9 & Mac OS X. Windows NT is the only OS that I've ever seen that throws a hissyfit when you move it from machine to machine. Sure in a Linux disto without hardware detection it might not work perfectly after the move, but at least it's in a state where with a few magic commandline incantations you can determine and install the correct drivers.
It's just another example of the shit Microsoft's victims are willing to accept from their abusers.
You were the one suggesting Apple should give away all their source, and work on more than the one (1) platform (x86) that windows works on. And that if they did that they would somehow be on a level playing field with MS, who give away none (nada, zip, 0%) of their operating system in source code form, or for free.
I fail to follow your logic. You fail to follow my english. I guess we're at an impasse until you attend english as a second language courses.
Just get a Mac you cheap bastard - all you have to do is cut down on unneccessary expenses. You don't need food. Plus if you get the 17 inch laptop, it'll make a nice heater/light, and double as a waterproof steeped roof for your new cardboard-box-house when it rains. :)