Considering how much vendor lockin Apple likes to push I wouldn't say they are interested in open source system or libraries either unless it benefits them a lot. The system are most probably based on open source software because MacOS was such old crap and their new OS project failed to deliver so they needed something better without all the work and well, with the right license it was just there to grap.
Same for the browser, much easier to start of with the things the KDE-people had already done instead of starting all over. And the half-forked situation which existed between webkit and khtml kind of tells a story about how much they care about open source aswell (sure both camps need to try to work together for it to work so of course it was probably not only Apples fault.)
Example of closed stuff are the whole OS, their machines, I won't count AAC since it was an improved codec, the file formats used for iWork (If they change to ODF if possible then it's fine), data libraries for iPhoto, Aperture, iTunes, Garageband,...
So on so on. That part of Apple is a major PITA, too bad some of the software isn't there yet on the open source platforms because then I wouldn't use an Apple product.
Which, as have already been said, was because Apples solution for third part applications on the iPhone was using javascript and a faster solution would be better. Also Javascript performance have increased a hell of a lot in all the browsers lately, feel free to check numbers for IE and Opera as well. Javascript performance have gotten important with all the AJAX apps. But yes, feel free to claim all AJAX websites was made because Firefox 3.0 was released as well.
I don't see why one would want to use a mouse for such a task at all either. I mean, I have a perfectly good keyboard, it's got a good hundred or so of "buttons" and one can even press multiple of them at the same time to get even more combinations! Such as command-w.
I use to complain about how much RAM Safari leaks, how it always fucks up in the end and how it doesn't help if I close all my tabs because the browser will still use a bunch of ram.
Sure, I admit I have multiple windows open, 6-7 maybe? And quite a few tabs in them, maybe 50? And this time it has even been running for multiple days! (Thought I have been at my moms place without Internet for 2-3 days so that's probably why it haven't crashed already, I mean, those day put no additional load on it.)
And yes, Adobes flash bullshit may be one of the reason it crashes, but I don't care, Apple don't give me an option to not have that bullshit and all webpages have a ridiculous amount of flash bullshit banners on them.
And what annoys me the most is that WHEN Safari crashes (which are within a day more often, ranging from an hour to 2 days.) all my tabs are lost for all eternity with all the information I was waiting to look at.
So how does Firefox 3 do? Well, I admit my current Firefox 3 feels a little sluggish, and it takes a while for it to react as it should.. But look what happened when I accidently started to close it down a couple of days ago:
Well, beat that... Firefox 3 is apologized for somewhat sluggish performance.
Pithelmet for Safari are decent but you are supposed to pay for it and it's more often not updated for the latest version of Safari. Adblock plus and flashblock are free. Though I'd prefer to remove flash at all if only youtube and dsfanboy / gametrailers let me watch videos as VIDEOS.
And of course they can disable the DRM. I would assume some of their developers was like "oh well I'll link the crack for those who need it" and well..
How does it matter? One need a cdkey anyway (atleast to play on bnet, for single player a crack would do), so I'd say it's safe enough to know that I have an original CD. They could even get my bnet accounts and current keys / keys from that case.
And earlier when they required the CD I thought it was a reasonable request to get a CD for free since they have their stupid copy protection to begin with.
Except with programs which breaks the copy protection you can't backup the CD either.
But I've borrowed a friends instead... (On a mac ROC CD when you played TFT wasn't enough either, it's in Windows, fucked up because I hate looking for the CD and I never used NoCD crack once I had the original because I didn't wanted to risk getting banned from bnet.)
And no, I have no idea why they bother to check for the CD, it will be broken anyway so why bother about it?
Yeah, after killing all those females leading to a male surplus the only solution is to kill a bunch of males aswell!...
Are there really such a huge difference?
World factbook: Age structure:
Definition Field Listing 0-14 years: 20.1% (male 142,085,665/female 125,300,391) 15-64 years: 71.9% (male 491,513,378/female 465,020,030) 65 years and over: 8% (male 50,652,480/female 55,472,661) (2008 est.
Sure it's noticable, but not huge. Some men have to do without a woman, or share. But I live in Sweden and is without one anyway so what's the big deal? =P
1) Step 1... n) Step n n+1) Patent step 1 to n. n+2) Wait until someone actually figure out what to do with it / how to turn it into a profit. n+3) "Hey, that was my idea!" n+4) Profit!
Such a well known method and still no step-posters have figured it out until this day.
I was thinking that ok, some charity organisations are probably not evil, but then again isn't that exactly what gives them more money? If they behaved to bad they may get under the spotlight, get no more donations and bye bye with that.
Ah, thanks for the info, I didn't doubted it would be impossible to put a game on the harddrive, but since Microsoft cheeped out / intelligently decided that the console couldn't cost too much and it lost harddrive and hd-dvd as default it's been hard to trust that that functionality will be there, sure "requires harddrive" are no more different than "requires 20 slots on memory card", but still system requirements on a console game is a little weird and if it was a piece which couldn't be upgraded many people would feel betrayed.
Ok, 120GB is an improvement, but still the dual layer BD-discs holds 50GB or what is it? Not many games of that size will fit in there.. All I knew was that the first disk was 20GB and that it cost 995 sek if I remember correctly, which is more than half the price of the 360 Arcade currently, ie very expensive for something not worth much at all and which should had been there from the beginning (just as Apples hardware options.)
Also I would assume many game developers feel it may be a bad move to require a harddrive if less consumers have it, or for HD-DVD if the optional drive would still be there.
But currently I can't say that 360 seems like a bad console, Arcade version cost 1900 sek where Wii costs 2400 sek and PS3 cost 3900. I don't know how the game situation looks nowadays but from what I've understood on others comments the PS3 don't offer much in the game world which the 360 lacks, so the 360 seems like the definite best value of the three.
Nintendo as always gets the most profit though, selling an overclocked gamecube with a new controller for 2400 sek instead of 700 sek as the gamecube was in the late days of it's life:)
(360 elite cost 3300 so not that price worthy longer, still a better value than a Wii but as the Nintendo fanboy/rescuer I am I know what I'd prefer... If only Wii did HD as well:))
If I was Sony I'd feel kind of betrayed and fooled by Microsoft into the "I can overspec you!"-race where they had to throw in a super expensive drive just to not lose the war and then Microsoft opted out for a much cheaper alternative, effectively putting a stopp to Sonys lead. (And since games are made for multiple platforms I doubt PS3 owners really get the best value/performance they can get since developers may think of the other platforms as well and try to make things similar on all platforms.)
Anyhow, sorry for spam and thanks for you information:)
I never said it shouldn't be in the kernel, I asked why he needed to have it in the kernel.
I'd gladly use the same argument for most of the other components as well unless there was a huge performance hit.
I don't like ALSA because it's Linux only, I'd prefer OSS. It's probably there for speed and also because if it wasn't the average Linux users would complain so much / not get it to work.
Because all network stuff is in the kernel?
I don't know if there are any license issues, but maybe it was easier to implement outside it and less tied to the OS, also if it went inside the kernel maybe there would be so many chefs and patches and fiddling around with the code that it would be hard to maintain in a cross-OS fashion.
To have writable NTFS in Linux only covered under GPL and don't have support in lots of other OSes would suck. (That may even be the reason, maybe it is GPL but doesn't infect the kernel so to speak.)
Slashdot Mirror
Considering how much vendor lockin Apple likes to push I wouldn't say they are interested in open source system or libraries either unless it benefits them a lot. The system are most probably based on open source software because MacOS was such old crap and their new OS project failed to deliver so they needed something better without all the work and well, with the right license it was just there to grap.
Same for the browser, much easier to start of with the things the KDE-people had already done instead of starting all over. And the half-forked situation which existed between webkit and khtml kind of tells a story about how much they care about open source aswell (sure both camps need to try to work together for it to work so of course it was probably not only Apples fault.)
Example of closed stuff are the whole OS, their machines, I won't count AAC since it was an improved codec, the file formats used for iWork (If they change to ODF if possible then it's fine), data libraries for iPhoto, Aperture, iTunes, Garageband, ...
So on so on. That part of Apple is a major PITA, too bad some of the software isn't there yet on the open source platforms because then I wouldn't use an Apple product.
Which, as have already been said, was because Apples solution for third part applications on the iPhone was using javascript and a faster solution would be better. Also Javascript performance have increased a hell of a lot in all the browsers lately, feel free to check numbers for IE and Opera as well. Javascript performance have gotten important with all the AJAX apps. But yes, feel free to claim all AJAX websites was made because Firefox 3.0 was released as well.
Maybe because Apple would never release a product with a user interface even remotely close to anything office classic?
And I'm glad they don't. What I can't understand is why Staroffice/OpenOffice tried so hard to copy something so bad.
I don't see why one would want to use a mouse for such a task at all either. I mean, I have a perfectly good keyboard, it's got a good hundred or so of "buttons" and one can even press multiple of them at the same time to get even more combinations! Such as command-w.
Was 4 windows and 40 tabs it seems, but no-one cares anyway :D
Well, Apple still got things to learn.
I use to complain about how much RAM Safari leaks, how it always fucks up in the end and how it doesn't help if I close all my tabs because the browser will still use a bunch of ram.
Here is a screenshot of my Safari 3.1.1 in OS X:
http://img224.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bild198rz4.png
Sure, I admit I have multiple windows open, 6-7 maybe? And quite a few tabs in them, maybe 50? And this time it has even been running for multiple days! (Thought I have been at my moms place without Internet for 2-3 days so that's probably why it haven't crashed already, I mean, those day put no additional load on it.)
And yes, Adobes flash bullshit may be one of the reason it crashes, but I don't care, Apple don't give me an option to not have that bullshit and all webpages have a ridiculous amount of flash bullshit banners on them.
And what annoys me the most is that WHEN Safari crashes (which are within a day more often, ranging from an hour to 2 days.) all my tabs are lost for all eternity with all the information I was waiting to look at.
So how does Firefox 3 do? Well, I admit my current Firefox 3 feels a little sluggish, and it takes a while for it to react as it should.. But look what happened when I accidently started to close it down a couple of days ago:
http://img501.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bild194nq1.png
Well, beat that ... Firefox 3 is apologized for somewhat sluggish performance.
Pithelmet for Safari are decent but you are supposed to pay for it and it's more often not updated for the latest version of Safari. Adblock plus and flashblock are free. Though I'd prefer to remove flash at all if only youtube and dsfanboy / gametrailers let me watch videos as VIDEOS.
To me it's not just a question about what will happens first as much as what is more likely to happen at all.
Why would it introduce bugs?
And of course they can disable the DRM. I would assume some of their developers was like "oh well I'll link the crack for those who need it" and well ..
How does it matter? One need a cdkey anyway (atleast to play on bnet, for single player a crack would do), so I'd say it's safe enough to know that I have an original CD. They could even get my bnet accounts and current keys / keys from that case.
And earlier when they required the CD I thought it was a reasonable request to get a CD for free since they have their stupid copy protection to begin with.
Except with programs which breaks the copy protection you can't backup the CD either.
But Blizzard doesn't replace them do they? Afaik they ask for money for a replacement disk :(
This is my TFT-CD:
http://cdcrack.istheshit.net/
But I've borrowed a friends instead...
(On a mac ROC CD when you played TFT wasn't enough either, it's in Windows, fucked up because I hate looking for the CD and I never used NoCD crack once I had the original because I didn't wanted to risk getting banned from bnet.)
And no, I have no idea why they bother to check for the CD, it will be broken anyway so why bother about it?
Warcraft 3 v1.21b patch didn't had any changes in the game except nocd, which was indeed very nice, one do wonder why it took them so long though.
http://pc.qj.net/Warcraft-3-patch-v1-21b-released-with-no-CD-feature/pg/49/aid/113191
Last time I ever download anything -Ubisoft!
Yeah, after killing all those females leading to a male surplus the only solution is to kill a bunch of males aswell! ...
Are there really such a huge difference?
World factbook:
Age structure:
Definition Field Listing
0-14 years: 20.1% (male 142,085,665/female 125,300,391)
15-64 years: 71.9% (male 491,513,378/female 465,020,030)
65 years and over: 8% (male 50,652,480/female 55,472,661) (2008 est.
Sure it's noticable, but not huge. Some men have to do without a woman, or share. But I live in Sweden and is without one anyway so what's the big deal? =P
I don't know, maybe because high tech projects can lead to more income?
And they probably have some pride / weapons was important / ..
n step joke is a totally different story!
Or tie a rop to it, fill it with stones and fasten the rope around your waist and take it for a walk.
You mean like so?
1) Step 1 ...
n) Step n
n+1) Patent step 1 to n.
n+2) Wait until someone actually figure out what to do with it / how to turn it into a profit.
n+3) "Hey, that was my idea!"
n+4) Profit!
Such a well known method and still no step-posters have figured it out until this day.
You want to join our wanking group yourself as well? Please do, everyone is welcome .. Just ask for it and someone will give you a helping hand.
But isn't this also the opinion for the two biggest american parties as well? Pro capitalism and low taxes?
I don't know much about american politics but us americans are very rich together, have some very rich people and some very poor, right?
Well, can you tell me one company which does not?
I was thinking that ok, some charity organisations are probably not evil, but then again isn't that exactly what gives them more money? If they behaved to bad they may get under the spotlight, get no more donations and bye bye with that.
Ah, thanks for the info, I didn't doubted it would be impossible to put a game on the harddrive, but since Microsoft cheeped out / intelligently decided that the console couldn't cost too much and it lost harddrive and hd-dvd as default it's been hard to trust that that functionality will be there, sure "requires harddrive" are no more different than "requires 20 slots on memory card", but still system requirements on a console game is a little weird and if it was a piece which couldn't be upgraded many people would feel betrayed.
Ok, 120GB is an improvement, but still the dual layer BD-discs holds 50GB or what is it? Not many games of that size will fit in there .. All I knew was that the first disk was 20GB and that it cost 995 sek if I remember correctly, which is more than half the price of the 360 Arcade currently, ie very expensive for something not worth much at all and which should had been there from the beginning (just as Apples hardware options.)
Also I would assume many game developers feel it may be a bad move to require a harddrive if less consumers have it, or for HD-DVD if the optional drive would still be there.
But currently I can't say that 360 seems like a bad console, Arcade version cost 1900 sek where Wii costs 2400 sek and PS3 cost 3900. I don't know how the game situation looks nowadays but from what I've understood on others comments the PS3 don't offer much in the game world which the 360 lacks, so the 360 seems like the definite best value of the three.
Nintendo as always gets the most profit though, selling an overclocked gamecube with a new controller for 2400 sek instead of 700 sek as the gamecube was in the late days of it's life :)
(360 elite cost 3300 so not that price worthy longer, still a better value than a Wii but as the Nintendo fanboy/rescuer I am I know what I'd prefer... If only Wii did HD as well :))
If I was Sony I'd feel kind of betrayed and fooled by Microsoft into the "I can overspec you!"-race where they had to throw in a super expensive drive just to not lose the war and then Microsoft opted out for a much cheaper alternative, effectively putting a stopp to Sonys lead. (And since games are made for multiple platforms I doubt PS3 owners really get the best value/performance they can get since developers may think of the other platforms as well and try to make things similar on all platforms.)
Anyhow, sorry for spam and thanks for you information :)
Can't we just agree that all companies will behave badly if they think they can earn more money on it?
Are you? Also isn't it small? And doesn't some 360s lack hard drive? And doesn't the harddrive cost a lot? How big is it?
Earlier I used to belive the 360 would cost as much or more than the PS3 with the same equipment and during it's whole life.
Now I don't know because it's so very cheap, but I guess the PS3 have fallen in price as well and live gold still cost money.
http://www.ntfs-3g.org/performance.html
Doesn't look that slow to me, slower than ext3 but eventually faster than XFS and FAT32 for instance, and both of them are within the kernel.
I never said it shouldn't be in the kernel, I asked why he needed to have it in the kernel.
I'd gladly use the same argument for most of the other components as well unless there was a huge performance hit.
I don't like ALSA because it's Linux only, I'd prefer OSS. It's probably there for speed and also because if it wasn't the average Linux users would complain so much / not get it to work.
Because all network stuff is in the kernel?
I don't know if there are any license issues, but maybe it was easier to implement outside it and less tied to the OS, also if it went inside the kernel maybe there would be so many chefs and patches and fiddling around with the code that it would be hard to maintain in a cross-OS fashion.
To have writable NTFS in Linux only covered under GPL and don't have support in lots of other OSes would suck. (That may even be the reason, maybe it is GPL but doesn't infect the kernel so to speak.)