Virginia Tech used Infiniband to wire up their G5 cluster. It's basically very fast I/O with some good logic built-in - "The technology addresses reliability by creating multiple redundant paths between nodes (reducing hardware that needs to be purchased)." is basically the same as the change from linear, Token Ring-ish networks to big Ethernet meshes like the Internet. I don't claim to know much at all about this, but seemingly it's the superior alternative today, and it sounds like it should be as well.
Not really - Darwin is similar to FreeBSD more than anything, and it hasn't gotten UNIX certification anyway. (Although they do use the name a lot in their ads.)
Well, for one, changing keyboard and mouse bindings is a general pain in the ass. Even if we forget about how long it takes on a normal install, I can seriously tell you that it took me about two *hours* to set them up the first time around, mainly because I didn't know how to do it, and the Help didn't. It still doesn't seem right to me that I had to type everything in - it could at least offer autocomplete.
Add/remove toolbars or buttons? Have you ever been into Preferences?:P The first few times I installed Firefox/Firebird I kept going in to Preferences to tweak it to sensible defaults, but it turns out that Firefox has, if nothing else, defaults that match my tastes closer. Settings-wise, I can run on a vanilla Firefox for weeks without feeling I have to scratch an itch. I never got that with Opera. Sure enough there are some values to tweak in about:config - which would be Firefox's advanced and developer debug preferences put together - but it still takes far shorter than Opera's preferences! And there's nothing stopping you from installing ten extensions in a row and *then* restarting it once. That's how I usually do it.
I'm not stuck on Firefox. I simply think it's a better browser to use on Windows - at least for *me* to use personally, which I thought I was clear about. Firefox isn't for everyone, Opera isn't for everyone, and my favorite browser on Windows doesn't have to be my favorite browser everywhere; I'm writing this in OmniWeb on a Mac, because it offers so much more than can be added with extensions in Firefox or compensated for with functionality beyond the browser in Opera that I'm willing to forget it's not as extensible.
I'm not exactly happy as a clam that you think I'm lying about my experiences. But what I'm continually seeing is this war between tricked-out-Firefox users and Opera users. I have the rare position in having been on both side of the fence, and they're both good browsers and they both have their downsides, but I just think that for the moment, Firefox is the better browser for the vast majority, because Opera does some things in ways that no other browser does.
Opera is far more lightweight than Firefox, but still more functional. It's more compact as an executable. I agree. My main argument is that every time I've installed Opera - I've used it for several periods of a few months before Firefox, then Firebird, became a viable option and indeed I even bought it - I've felt quite simply overwhelmed by the interface and have had to configure it to half an hour to make it make more sense. I can't even begin to imagine how a novice might feel - although this is okay. Opera's not aimed for newbies. I'm not trying to nail it on the wrong premises. (It's not aimed at cheap people either.)
Anyway, the fact remains that I haven't ever felt overwhelmed by Firefox, that the ten extensions I have installed haven't ever conflicted (although I'm unfit to be able to determine if this is dumb luck or if it's the norm) and that it has proven to, in this particular setup, constantly use less memory than Opera when doing similar tasks. I agree that there are upsides and downsides to both approaches - extensibility vs integrated. But it still takes me less time to set up a fresh Firefox install with the extensions I need than configure a fresh Opera install. Yes, that's because I know which extensions to install, but I also know what options to set in Opera, so it doesn't change a damn thing.
I'm not a fan of Opera's interface, even with the Windows skin and I personally don't think it fits in. It'd be nice for a system with an apparent bend for integrating things to also integrate into the look and feel of the rest of my programs. I'm just saying.
All in all I think Opera is a very nice browser that certainly has it merits, especially if you want to use it as all the other things it is, but that doesn't mean that its best days are ahead of it, that its position on the market is strengthening or that a browser bent on power by extensibility can't work just as well or indeed better for a lot of people. And I personally think that extensibility wouldn't work in Opera because the technologies that are making extensions happen are a lot of abstractions (Javascript access to the built in objects, cross platform UI building) - the same thing that makes Firefox and the Mozilla suite have a heavier base in the first place.
I don't think they overlooked it as much as they had trouble implementing other, basic programming in the first place. The technical limits were relatively tight during development and from what I've heard it took insane amounts of effort to get it to the point where it could ship on schedule in the first place. I'm not saying it couldn't have been done - but I'm also saying that a good object-oriented library is hard to built from the start. It took NeXT several years on more modern hardware with far less restrictions, and Apple really needed the Mac out when they released it.
My father has been working with computers ever since the 512K Mac. He's an Excel formula wizard, he surfs the web effortlessly, he even knows a fairly big part of programming principles and he handles Windows and Mac OS X equally good. He can't tell Sponsored Ads from the search results at Google, though.
It's foolish to assume that everyone who know how to start up a computer will even begin to realize why there are two buttons on a mouse. (To perform two different functions.) Why computer cases need to be so big. (For cooling purposes and to be able to fit new parts, and because the motherboard is so big.) Why Linux is so complicated to them. (Because it wasn't designed to be easy to them.) There are people here even who don't understand why Word has so many features! (Because a) Microsoft needs to sell upgrades and b) it may be true that you only use 20% of the features, but when tens of millions of people each have a different 20% set, it adds up.)
There will be computer illiterates for as long as there will be computers, just as there will be computer problems while there are computer solutions. How many percent of the population do you think have your kind of capabilities? My guess is lower than 20%.
I believe Raskin made a lot of sense, while he did abuse the word "invent" a bit too much for my tastes.
Finally, I'll have to disagree with one point in the grandparent post - not all things are accessible via a choice in the main menu. It's supposed to be that way, and it's a good way, but it's not necessarily true as the situation stands today even in the Finder.
What's the big deal? If the iPod has a standard Firewire connector you don't even have to buy the cable from Apple. Get one from your local computer store or Newegg.com or Cyberguys.com and save a few bucks. Get one with a 4-pin connector to fit your PC laptop if it doesn't have a standard 6-pin connector. I would have to do this for my laptop.
The big deal is that the iPod's connector is a proprietary/special one, and that a FireWire cable with one end of it fitting the iPod costs $19 from Apple. (There are solutions like the converter PocketDock, which unfortunately costs $18.95...)
Why is the iPod using this connector? With the very first iPods, they had a FW jack right up in the corner. No USB in sight. And so, when they redesigned it for the first time after having introduced it to Windows users earlier (with the, for all other intents and purposes "revision" (like how Wednesday's update was a revision to the iPod photo line, not a new generation) to the first generation iPod, it was called the second generation because they changed the scroll wheel to a non-mechanical one) they decided to put USB2 in.
Only one problem, if you were to backtrack Steve Jobs' sayings - they hadn't yet figured out how to charge via USB2. The USB2 cable for the third generation iPod was split - both a USB2 connector for going into your computer, and a FW connector for going into the AC adapter - and indeed the dock connector handles USB2 and FW not only both, but also *simultaneously*, which was key to implementing this.
However, these problems are gone, but now I guess the dock connector is here to stay, because I don't see a better kind of connector to stick on it that would allow both USB2 and FireWire - not to mention that there are dozens if not hundreds of accessories outright -depending- on the dock connector being there, including every car kit worth mentioning.
Point: Opera's an odd bird. To me, Firefox looks decidedly more "Windows-like" out of the box on Windows than Opera looks "[platform]-like" on any platform. (Opera even looks and works a bit different from the other downloaded programs on my cellphone.) This is because Opera is built with the mindset that people want everything, and in order to be able to focus on that and stay multi-platform, they can't develop fitting and different UIs for every platform (they can try their best for most, though, I'll give them that much credit).
Opera is a closed, albeit stuffed, box. Firefox is extensible, light (on features) and open. The majority of the features you can get in Opera you can also get in Firefox, but without having to use everything else. I agree that it's silly to invent XUL (which uses most of the resources) - but you have to realize that for rapid development of the multi-platform browser to be tenable, you'd have to abstract it down to some common bits any way you choose to do it.
iPod Updater 2005-02-22 contains the same software versions as iPod Updater 2005-01-11 for all other iPod models. Aha! I predict the next firmware upgrade on 2005-03-33.
A strong part of being a savant - or being autistic for that matter - seems to be about being obsessive with details. Quote from the article:
"Tammet has never been able to work 9 to 5. It would be too difficult to fit around his daily routine. For instance, he has to drink his cups of tea at exactly the same time every day. Things have to happen in the same order: he always brushes his teeth before he has his shower. "I have tried to be more flexible, but I always end up feeling more uncomfortable. Retaining a sense of control is really important. I like to do things in my own time, and in my own style, so an office with targets and bureaucracy just wouldn't work.""
I'm wondering what, for him, constitutes a habit. How's a habit formed? What kind of granularity is involved? If he can't follow a habit for whatever reason, what effect does it have on him and the special abilities he has, on top of the probable (and indeed confirmed) uncomfortable feeling?
How's this sound? "Complete background record and happenings of everyday life for 16 years eventually drove a 16-year old to kill. Or maybe it was just on a whim. We don't know." Ten bucks says it's closer to the truth.
If this is all about breaking those kinds of limits, who's to say it wasn't because of that porn web site he snuck into the weeks before the murder? Or because of those three sips of beer he had when he was 14? I can't express my hate enough for dumbing these things down to one pivotal event.
"Every-fucking-topic some OSX troll shoes his stupid platform in"
You know, there's a reason that "but does it run Linux?" is a running gag around here. If you can't tolerate multiple OSes, you may find you're on the wrong site.
"Look you obnoxious pricks -- not everyone digs your fucking Macs." Not everyone digs your fucking hatred either. Claiming friendship with the GPL and then leashing out against one of the companies that are starting to build more and more of their software based on open source technologies? Obnoxious indeed.
What these "trolls" are trying to do is inform you that "hey, our OS does this too" or "hey, here's another solution to this problem". This is different -how- from what people running any other variant of *NIX do all day on Slashdot, over-zealously or not?
True. If your point was that subs are not bad business - good work. Have a cookie. Go rest.
If your point was that Real or Napster will make more money, however, Apple still wins because they profit more than anyone else on the other parts of the puzzle - the media device and the (very) occasional Mac sale.
The Carbon (C?) manuals seem to be kind of daft with only lots of procedural listing. Look at any Cocoa class page and you'll find it's a little more exhaustive. They also go through a lot of trouble to seperate the "theory" or "anatomy of" parts from the actual "this method/function does this and this constant means that" parts, but once you find the right links it's smooth sailing more often than not.
I think this article was meant to stir up controversy first and spread truth second. I think he knows that there are a lot of people who use an unprotected PC for years and never have any trouble. It's all great food for thought and a possible scenario, but it's not a probable scenario. I believe that something like this will happen, but on a much smaller scale. For example, Joe Sixpack wouldn't drop his Dell and sprint for the closest Apple Store five seconds after finishing the column, but it's certainly possible that there'll be more people considering a Mac for their next purchase.
Just rest assured that not all Mac users are flaming Mac fans, trying to convert everyone.
Slashdot Mirror
He may have hidden under Windows, but at least he saw everything!
Yes, to 42.
I always thought the last bug was defined as the bug fixed just before the last bug.
Virginia Tech used Infiniband to wire up their G5 cluster. It's basically very fast I/O with some good logic built-in - "The technology addresses reliability by creating multiple redundant paths between nodes (reducing hardware that needs to be purchased)." is basically the same as the change from linear, Token Ring-ish networks to big Ethernet meshes like the Internet. I don't claim to know much at all about this, but seemingly it's the superior alternative today, and it sounds like it should be as well.
Nice gag, but they're slot-loaded.
Not really - Darwin is similar to FreeBSD more than anything, and it hasn't gotten UNIX certification anyway. (Although they do use the name a lot in their ads.)
Which is the result of Slashdot using crappy HTML.
Well, for one, changing keyboard and mouse bindings is a general pain in the ass. Even if we forget about how long it takes on a normal install, I can seriously tell you that it took me about two *hours* to set them up the first time around, mainly because I didn't know how to do it, and the Help didn't. It still doesn't seem right to me that I had to type everything in - it could at least offer autocomplete.
Add/remove toolbars or buttons? Have you ever been into Preferences? :P The first few times I installed Firefox/Firebird I kept going in to Preferences to tweak it to sensible defaults, but it turns out that Firefox has, if nothing else, defaults that match my tastes closer. Settings-wise, I can run on a vanilla Firefox for weeks without feeling I have to scratch an itch. I never got that with Opera. Sure enough there are some values to tweak in about:config - which would be Firefox's advanced and developer debug preferences put together - but it still takes far shorter than Opera's preferences! And there's nothing stopping you from installing ten extensions in a row and *then* restarting it once. That's how I usually do it.
I'm not stuck on Firefox. I simply think it's a better browser to use on Windows - at least for *me* to use personally, which I thought I was clear about. Firefox isn't for everyone, Opera isn't for everyone, and my favorite browser on Windows doesn't have to be my favorite browser everywhere; I'm writing this in OmniWeb on a Mac, because it offers so much more than can be added with extensions in Firefox or compensated for with functionality beyond the browser in Opera that I'm willing to forget it's not as extensible.
I'm not exactly happy as a clam that you think I'm lying about my experiences. But what I'm continually seeing is this war between tricked-out-Firefox users and Opera users. I have the rare position in having been on both side of the fence, and they're both good browsers and they both have their downsides, but I just think that for the moment, Firefox is the better browser for the vast majority, because Opera does some things in ways that no other browser does.
Opera is far more lightweight than Firefox, but still more functional. It's more compact as an executable. I agree. My main argument is that every time I've installed Opera - I've used it for several periods of a few months before Firefox, then Firebird, became a viable option and indeed I even bought it - I've felt quite simply overwhelmed by the interface and have had to configure it to half an hour to make it make more sense. I can't even begin to imagine how a novice might feel - although this is okay. Opera's not aimed for newbies. I'm not trying to nail it on the wrong premises. (It's not aimed at cheap people either.)
Anyway, the fact remains that I haven't ever felt overwhelmed by Firefox, that the ten extensions I have installed haven't ever conflicted (although I'm unfit to be able to determine if this is dumb luck or if it's the norm) and that it has proven to, in this particular setup, constantly use less memory than Opera when doing similar tasks. I agree that there are upsides and downsides to both approaches - extensibility vs integrated. But it still takes me less time to set up a fresh Firefox install with the extensions I need than configure a fresh Opera install. Yes, that's because I know which extensions to install, but I also know what options to set in Opera, so it doesn't change a damn thing.
I'm not a fan of Opera's interface, even with the Windows skin and I personally don't think it fits in. It'd be nice for a system with an apparent bend for integrating things to also integrate into the look and feel of the rest of my programs. I'm just saying.
All in all I think Opera is a very nice browser that certainly has it merits, especially if you want to use it as all the other things it is, but that doesn't mean that its best days are ahead of it, that its position on the market is strengthening or that a browser bent on power by extensibility can't work just as well or indeed better for a lot of people. And I personally think that extensibility wouldn't work in Opera because the technologies that are making extensions happen are a lot of abstractions (Javascript access to the built in objects, cross platform UI building) - the same thing that makes Firefox and the Mozilla suite have a heavier base in the first place.
I don't think they overlooked it as much as they had trouble implementing other, basic programming in the first place. The technical limits were relatively tight during development and from what I've heard it took insane amounts of effort to get it to the point where it could ship on schedule in the first place. I'm not saying it couldn't have been done - but I'm also saying that a good object-oriented library is hard to built from the start. It took NeXT several years on more modern hardware with far less restrictions, and Apple really needed the Mac out when they released it.
My father has been working with computers ever since the 512K Mac. He's an Excel formula wizard, he surfs the web effortlessly, he even knows a fairly big part of programming principles and he handles Windows and Mac OS X equally good. He can't tell Sponsored Ads from the search results at Google, though.
It's foolish to assume that everyone who know how to start up a computer will even begin to realize why there are two buttons on a mouse. (To perform two different functions.) Why computer cases need to be so big. (For cooling purposes and to be able to fit new parts, and because the motherboard is so big.) Why Linux is so complicated to them. (Because it wasn't designed to be easy to them.) There are people here even who don't understand why Word has so many features! (Because a) Microsoft needs to sell upgrades and b) it may be true that you only use 20% of the features, but when tens of millions of people each have a different 20% set, it adds up.)
There will be computer illiterates for as long as there will be computers, just as there will be computer problems while there are computer solutions. How many percent of the population do you think have your kind of capabilities? My guess is lower than 20%.
I believe Raskin made a lot of sense, while he did abuse the word "invent" a bit too much for my tastes.
Finally, I'll have to disagree with one point in the grandparent post - not all things are accessible via a choice in the main menu. It's supposed to be that way, and it's a good way, but it's not necessarily true as the situation stands today even in the Finder.
What's the big deal? If the iPod has a standard Firewire connector you don't even have to buy the cable from Apple. Get one from your local computer store or Newegg.com or Cyberguys.com and save a few bucks. Get one with a 4-pin connector to fit your PC laptop if it doesn't have a standard 6-pin connector. I would have to do this for my laptop.
The big deal is that the iPod's connector is a proprietary/special one, and that a FireWire cable with one end of it fitting the iPod costs $19 from Apple. (There are solutions like the converter PocketDock, which unfortunately costs $18.95...)
Why is the iPod using this connector? With the very first iPods, they had a FW jack right up in the corner. No USB in sight. And so, when they redesigned it for the first time after having introduced it to Windows users earlier (with the, for all other intents and purposes "revision" (like how Wednesday's update was a revision to the iPod photo line, not a new generation) to the first generation iPod, it was called the second generation because they changed the scroll wheel to a non-mechanical one) they decided to put USB2 in.
Only one problem, if you were to backtrack Steve Jobs' sayings - they hadn't yet figured out how to charge via USB2. The USB2 cable for the third generation iPod was split - both a USB2 connector for going into your computer, and a FW connector for going into the AC adapter - and indeed the dock connector handles USB2 and FW not only both, but also *simultaneously*, which was key to implementing this.
However, these problems are gone, but now I guess the dock connector is here to stay, because I don't see a better kind of connector to stick on it that would allow both USB2 and FireWire - not to mention that there are dozens if not hundreds of accessories outright -depending- on the dock connector being there, including every car kit worth mentioning.
Which they didn't with the first iPod mini, which included USB -and- FireWire cables, and every non-shuffle iPod released between then and Wednesday?
I'd need to know, first, if you're a 22 year old college student living in the dorms.
Point: Opera's an odd bird. To me, Firefox looks decidedly more "Windows-like" out of the box on Windows than Opera looks "[platform]-like" on any platform. (Opera even looks and works a bit different from the other downloaded programs on my cellphone.) This is because Opera is built with the mindset that people want everything, and in order to be able to focus on that and stay multi-platform, they can't develop fitting and different UIs for every platform (they can try their best for most, though, I'll give them that much credit).
Opera is a closed, albeit stuffed, box. Firefox is extensible, light (on features) and open. The majority of the features you can get in Opera you can also get in Firefox, but without having to use everything else. I agree that it's silly to invent XUL (which uses most of the resources) - but you have to realize that for rapid development of the multi-platform browser to be tenable, you'd have to abstract it down to some common bits any way you choose to do it.
Remind me again - which of Opera, Firefox and IE exist on multiple platforms and manages to not fit in anywhere?
iPod Updater 2005-02-22 contains the same software versions as iPod Updater 2005-01-11 for all other iPod models. Aha! I predict the next firmware upgrade on 2005-03-33.
What's that?
Oh. Damn.
A strong part of being a savant - or being autistic for that matter - seems to be about being obsessive with details. Quote from the article:
"Tammet has never been able to work 9 to 5. It would be too difficult to fit around his daily routine. For instance, he has to drink his cups of tea at exactly the same time every day. Things have to happen in the same order: he always brushes his teeth before he has his shower. "I have tried to be more flexible, but I always end up feeling more uncomfortable. Retaining a sense of control is really important. I like to do things in my own time, and in my own style, so an office with targets and bureaucracy just wouldn't work.""
I'm wondering what, for him, constitutes a habit. How's a habit formed? What kind of granularity is involved? If he can't follow a habit for whatever reason, what effect does it have on him and the special abilities he has, on top of the probable (and indeed confirmed) uncomfortable feeling?
I knew he was!
How's this sound? "Complete background record and happenings of everyday life for 16 years eventually drove a 16-year old to kill. Or maybe it was just on a whim. We don't know." Ten bucks says it's closer to the truth.
If this is all about breaking those kinds of limits, who's to say it wasn't because of that porn web site he snuck into the weeks before the murder? Or because of those three sips of beer he had when he was 14? I can't express my hate enough for dumbing these things down to one pivotal event.
It's because of everything, stupid.
"Every-fucking-topic some OSX troll shoes his stupid platform in"
You know, there's a reason that "but does it run Linux?" is a running gag around here. If you can't tolerate multiple OSes, you may find you're on the wrong site.
"Look you obnoxious pricks -- not everyone digs your fucking Macs."
Not everyone digs your fucking hatred either. Claiming friendship with the GPL and then leashing out against one of the companies that are starting to build more and more of their software based on open source technologies? Obnoxious indeed.
What these "trolls" are trying to do is inform you that "hey, our OS does this too" or "hey, here's another solution to this problem". This is different -how- from what people running any other variant of *NIX do all day on Slashdot, over-zealously or not?
True. If your point was that subs are not bad business - good work. Have a cookie. Go rest.
If your point was that Real or Napster will make more money, however, Apple still wins because they profit more than anyone else on the other parts of the puzzle - the media device and the (very) occasional Mac sale.
The Carbon (C?) manuals seem to be kind of daft with only lots of procedural listing. Look at any Cocoa class page and you'll find it's a little more exhaustive. They also go through a lot of trouble to seperate the "theory" or "anatomy of" parts from the actual "this method/function does this and this constant means that" parts, but once you find the right links it's smooth sailing more often than not.
I think this article was meant to stir up controversy first and spread truth second. I think he knows that there are a lot of people who use an unprotected PC for years and never have any trouble. It's all great food for thought and a possible scenario, but it's not a probable scenario. I believe that something like this will happen, but on a much smaller scale. For example, Joe Sixpack wouldn't drop his Dell and sprint for the closest Apple Store five seconds after finishing the column, but it's certainly possible that there'll be more people considering a Mac for their next purchase.
Just rest assured that not all Mac users are flaming Mac fans, trying to convert everyone.