There was ONE "Planet of the Apes" novel, written by Pierre Boulle. It shares virtually NONE of the story of the series of films, aside from the central premise of a planet where the roles of apes and humans were reversed, and where there were characters named Zira, Cornelius, and Dr. Zaius.
In the novel, the story itself is being read by a pair of vacationing married apes in their space yaught who come across the story, handwritten, which they recover from a bottle floating through space. The story itself follows travellers from Earth who quite intentionally travel to a distant planet -- not some unexplained time travel anomoly that lands them on future Earth - where they discover the upside down Apes planet.
The book ends with the earth travelers returning once again to earth, only to discover that it has, also, come to be dominated by Apes. The moral of the story is that human hubris on more than one planet led to the outcome of ape ascendency, like it was some sort of evolutionary progression.
None of the backstory presented in the sequels has anything to do with the novel, except only superfically. There was never any nuclear war, never any mutant subterranean humans, never any future ape child switched at birth with a dumb present day child after its parents were killed, who later led the ape revolt.
The ape planet in the book was a completely modern equivalent to 20th century earth; not some silly place with vivisection-practicing scientist apes who nonetheless live in mud houses without electricity, and who reject the notion of flight as a scientific impossibility.
Whatever "books" you read as a child are figments of your imagination.
For all of you who are shrieking about how outrageously overpriced ARD seems to be, compared to the "free" Microsoft Remote Desktop Connection or VNC, a few important points that nobody else has managed to mention:
VNC only does ONE thing: it allows remote control of machines graphically (screen sharing). In order to do any of the things one might wish to do to a remote machine, you have to SEE its desktop and perform those tasks as if you were actually sitting at the other computer. There is no way to perform tasks simultaneously on multiple remote computers, or to simply send instructions to the remote computer, except by controlling it and manually performing them using mouse/keyboard just as you would if you were sitting there. The VNC protocol is essentially bitmapped and everything being done - every frame of every screenful of data - has to be transmitted continuously, and all you get is a mirror image of the remote computer's screen.
RDC is functionally similar to VNC, with the following additions:
(1) In addition to screen sharing, you can also optionally map your printers and disks so that they appear on the remote computer while you're controlling it, so you could, for instance, print a work document and send it to your printer wherever you happen to be at, or put a software installation CD in your drive wherever you happen to be at, and then install that software onto the remote computer because it would also appear in its My Computer as an available drive. Likewise, you can map sounds on the remote computer to yours so that you can hear them.
(2) The RDC protocol is (for lack of a better term) vector-based, meaning that instead of transmitting the remote computer's screen image pixel-by-pixel, this is all performed using the RDC display language. To use an anology, if VNC is a bitmapped inkjet printer, RDC is a postscript printer. This makes the RDC protocol much faster, and remote control is significantly snappier and more responsive as a result. This also means that the desktop you are controlling does not need to be appear identically on both machines; consequently, if the remote computer has a giant widescreen monitor and you're connecting to it on a laptop with a much smaller screen, you don't have to choose between everything being scaled down in size to fit or having to scroll around in order to view the total desktop area; the placement of the taskbar and desktop icons will be adjusted to fit your screen's size.
Comparing RDC and VNC, they mostly have the same features and work the same way: whatever you need to accomplish on the remote computer has to be done by screen sharing and performing the tasks as if you were sitting at the other machine.
Apple Remote Desktop is a VASTLY different product.
First of all, yes, ARD does have a screen sharing capability, just like VNC and RDC, and apparently uses a VNC server as the underlying mechanism. The ARD client component has been a standard part of Mac OS X since Panther (10.3) and can be installed on any other machines free of charge. So any Mac can BE controlled remotely either right out of the box or by installing the client which doesn't have a cost. Any Mac can CONTROL another one with any VNC client, without purchasing any copies of the full ARD product for either machine. Of course, if you do have the full ARD product, it allows you to remotely control any other computer that either has the ARD client OR is running the VNC server, including *nix and Windows machines.
However, beyond screen sharing, ARD does a ton of other things that neither RDC or VNC do at all, period, including:
(1) A huge number of tasks can be performed on a remote computer simply by transmitting commands to that computer -- NOT by viewing its screen and then manually performing the task. This includes everything from shutting a machine down to installing software packages and executing UNIX commands and shell scripts. NONE of these tasks require you to actually view the remote computer's sc
I'm a Coke drinker who was planning to buy Pepsi specifically to win some free songs, but I never once found a single iTunes Pespi product anywhere where I live, in Springfield, Missouri, or in Kansas City, or in Southern California when I went there for a visit. I even wrote an e-mail to Apple complaining about this, which went unanswered. So, if anything is to blame for the low numbers, this would be it.
Slashdot Mirror
Novelizations of the actual movies don't really count as original source material.
There was ONE "Planet of the Apes" novel, written by Pierre Boulle. It shares virtually NONE of the story of the series of films, aside from the central premise of a planet where the roles of apes and humans were reversed, and where there were characters named Zira, Cornelius, and Dr. Zaius.
In the novel, the story itself is being read by a pair of vacationing married apes in their space yaught who come across the story, handwritten, which they recover from a bottle floating through space. The story itself follows travellers from Earth who quite intentionally travel to a distant planet -- not some unexplained time travel anomoly that lands them on future Earth - where they discover the upside down Apes planet.
The book ends with the earth travelers returning once again to earth, only to discover that it has, also, come to be dominated by Apes. The moral of the story is that human hubris on more than one planet led to the outcome of ape ascendency, like it was some sort of evolutionary progression.
None of the backstory presented in the sequels has anything to do with the novel, except only superfically. There was never any nuclear war, never any mutant subterranean humans, never any future ape child switched at birth with a dumb present day child after its parents were killed, who later led the ape revolt.
The ape planet in the book was a completely modern equivalent to 20th century earth; not some silly place with vivisection-practicing scientist apes who nonetheless live in mud houses without electricity, and who reject the notion of flight as a scientific impossibility.
Whatever "books" you read as a child are figments of your imagination.
For all of you who are shrieking about how outrageously overpriced ARD seems to be, compared to the "free" Microsoft Remote Desktop Connection or VNC, a few important points that nobody else has managed to mention:
VNC only does ONE thing: it allows remote control of machines graphically (screen sharing). In order to do any of the things one might wish to do to a remote machine, you have to SEE its desktop and perform those tasks as if you were actually sitting at the other computer. There is no way to perform tasks simultaneously on multiple remote computers, or to simply send instructions to the remote computer, except by controlling it and manually performing them using mouse/keyboard just as you would if you were sitting there. The VNC protocol is essentially bitmapped and everything being done - every frame of every screenful of data - has to be transmitted continuously, and all you get is a mirror image of the remote computer's screen.
RDC is functionally similar to VNC, with the following additions:
(1) In addition to screen sharing, you can also optionally map your printers and disks so that they appear on the remote computer while you're controlling it, so you could, for instance, print a work document and send it to your printer wherever you happen to be at, or put a software installation CD in your drive wherever you happen to be at, and then install that software onto the remote computer because it would also appear in its My Computer as an available drive. Likewise, you can map sounds on the remote computer to yours so that you can hear them.
(2) The RDC protocol is (for lack of a better term) vector-based, meaning that instead of transmitting the remote computer's screen image pixel-by-pixel, this is all performed using the RDC display language. To use an anology, if VNC is a bitmapped inkjet printer, RDC is a postscript printer. This makes the RDC protocol much faster, and remote control is significantly snappier and more responsive as a result. This also means that the desktop you are controlling does not need to be appear identically on both machines; consequently, if the remote computer has a giant widescreen monitor and you're connecting to it on a laptop with a much smaller screen, you don't have to choose between everything being scaled down in size to fit or having to scroll around in order to view the total desktop area; the placement of the taskbar and desktop icons will be adjusted to fit your screen's size.
Comparing RDC and VNC, they mostly have the same features and work the same way: whatever you need to accomplish on the remote computer has to be done by screen sharing and performing the tasks as if you were sitting at the other machine.
Apple Remote Desktop is a VASTLY different product.
First of all, yes, ARD does have a screen sharing capability, just like VNC and RDC, and apparently uses a VNC server as the underlying mechanism. The ARD client component has been a standard part of Mac OS X since Panther (10.3) and can be installed on any other machines free of charge. So any Mac can BE controlled remotely either right out of the box or by installing the client which doesn't have a cost. Any Mac can CONTROL another one with any VNC client, without purchasing any copies of the full ARD product for either machine. Of course, if you do have the full ARD product, it allows you to remotely control any other computer that either has the ARD client OR is running the VNC server, including *nix and Windows machines.
However, beyond screen sharing, ARD does a ton of other things that neither RDC or VNC do at all, period, including:
(1) A huge number of tasks can be performed on a remote computer simply by transmitting commands to that computer -- NOT by viewing its screen and then manually performing the task. This includes everything from shutting a machine down to installing software packages and executing UNIX commands and shell scripts. NONE of these tasks require you to actually view the remote computer's sc
I'm a Coke drinker who was planning to buy Pepsi specifically to win some free songs, but I never once found a single iTunes Pespi product anywhere where I live, in Springfield, Missouri, or in Kansas City, or in Southern California when I went there for a visit. I even wrote an e-mail to Apple complaining about this, which went unanswered. So, if anything is to blame for the low numbers, this would be it.