Deliberately and maliciously broke what Real had done? DUH! You seem to be under the impression that Apple and Real are supposed to be buddy-buddies. Here's a little news flash that might help you out here: Apple and Real are competitors!! They have been competing for years so I'm confused that you didn't know this. Remember Quicktime? Yeah, it's kind of important to Apple and it's kind of in direct competition with what Real's been offering for years. Now they're competing with music stores.
We already know that Real tried to make a deal with Apple, but Apple refused (probably because Real didn't have anything of value that could match what they wanted from Apple). So they hacked the iPod themselves and you seem to think Apple is supposed to sit there and be happy about it?
My advice to you, my friend, is that you never go into business. You wouldn't last a day.
You wouldn't "port" Direct3D, you would only have to write a library with the same API as Direct3D. It doesn't matter what underlying system code the real Direct3D uses; you don't even need the code to be able to write this. There will undoubtedly be code on the system you're writing your library clone for that will accomplish the same things that the real Direct3D does. In this case, you would most likely just map Direct3D calls to OpenGL equivalents.
Yeah right, that's hilarious! You obviously know nothing about hollywood. The Mac is still the number one tool and Photoshop is still the number one professional image editor.
They don't have to prove they "did not know" something. It's the prosecutor's job to prove that they did know something, which is equally difficult. At least that's how the U.S. legal system usually works.
While it is quite obvious that software sells hardware (otherwise, what would the hardware do), it should be emphasized that the important thing is the quality and type of the software, not quantity. There is way more software written for the Windows platform, yet other platforms are doing just fine. There's no doubt that Mac OS X and the professional software available for that platform is selling Apple's computers for them.
Well, it's the Unix way: small programs with one (ideally) or very few functions. It's the Windows way to have huge 'suites' of programs. I'm not saying one way is better than the other, but the Unix way does have the benefit of simplifying things. I.E.: If I want to browse the web, I launch a web browser and only relevant code (for web browsing) is loaded. If I wanted to read email, I'd launch an email client. No reason to have an email client load every time I launch my browser if nine times out of ten I will only be browsing the web.
Nowadays with dynamic libraries, it makes less of an impact performance-wise, but I think the simplification argument in favor of the Unix way is still valid.
This guy has a valid point, and to mod him down as if this argument isn't valid is just silly. Mod points shouldn't be used to kill people who you happen to disagree with.
Well my PowerMac 7300 (180Mhz) is still running like a champ and it's about nine years old. Granted, Mac OS isn't very fun to use on it, but NetBSD works fine.
Gotta love the fact that Linux and other free operating systems (yeah linux is a kernel blah blah blah) give you the power to choose. Fortunately for Apple, however, most people (who have used it) really like OS X.
Actually, there is a remote. It doesn't come with the iPod, but it's there. That's one good thing about the iPod, accessories galore! Yeah, most of them are over-priced, but oh well.
Also, you just need to face the fact that Ogg support just doesn't matter to 99.999% of the general population. Just be glad like we all should be that the iPod isn't the only choice we have. If/when ogg gains acceptance by a lot more people, then I think it's a given that the iPod will support it. FM-radio on the other hand would be a great feature. I do wish it had radio.
Marketshare has little to do with it. Statistically speaking, it doesn't make sense for anyone to spend any resources on a Mac port any more than it would for a Linux port. But Mac ports are profitable anyway. The only conclusion is that Mac users must buy more software and indeed that is the case. The same isn't true for the Linux "community." In fact I would say some Linux users are getting a little too used to getting all their software for free.
Never built your own AMD computer have you? The last one I built had a barton 2500+ (overclocked to a 3200+), 512MB ram (256 dual channel of course), and a 19" flatscreen with nice flat-panel speakers. The gfx card is just a cheap Nvidia card, but the reciever of the computer was only interesting in playing Warcaft III and so it worked perfectly. Final cost was $700 including monitor, speakers, input devices, etc). It was so expensive because I didn't start with spare parts from another computer, all new stuff.
My point is that games aren't (or shouldn't be) an incentive for anyone to switch to a Mac. My main machine is a Mac (I do software development as a hobby and I do it on the Mac because it's fun). The Mac I have is what I use most often. But as far as games go, not only is the hardware more expensive, the games are more expensive (usually), and there's still the fact that the games are (again usually) released pretty far after the Windows release. Just my two bits.
Blizzard has their own 'Mac team,' that's why they can be so fast. It's lead by John Stiles of emulation.net fame. But there really aren't many companies that do that. It just seems to be easier to either hire the port done or just not support the Mac for many companies.:shrug:
Go have a look at how much software *requires* OS X 10.3. So what do people do with 10.2 ?
You have a valid point. This actually is Apple's fault. The problem is that Apple's yearly releases add so much more cool stuff not only for users but for developers, too. The big example for Jaguar to Panther is Cocoa bindings, which makes rapid development much simpler. Obviously you can't blame the developers for using the cool stuff Apple gives them, so it is indeed Apple's fault.
I suggest you write to Apple and voice your opinion that they should stop adding cool stuff to their operating system. That seems to be what you want.
Oh it really isn't what you want? Then you should probably stop standing on both sides of the fence. It looks like a very uncomfortable position.
Only Apple releases security patches for Jaguar, so your argument makes no sense. You're not paying for security, you pay for features. If you don't care about the new features then you obviously have no incentive to upgrade and you can keep your money. Not hard.
1. Everything is free. 2. Everything encoded in a new revolutionary format which features greater than CD quality, and all files magically don't take any space to store or time to download. 3. Everything is without DRM. 4. Despite it being a new format, it automatically plays on every device in existance anyway. 5. Every piece of music ever composed is available and audiobooks of every book written. 6. Revolutionary new searching technology brings you right to what you're looking for the first time every time whether you knew you were looking for it or not. 7. The store brings about world peace.
THink about the fact that when a security hole is found...there is usually a fix/patch for it within a two days....or less.
Are there any numbers anywhere to suggest that they are patched faster or are you just speculating? Just because it's possible that patches will be rapidly available doesn't mean they are.
Not to mention with the vast amounts of people working on the code...security holes and bugs usually get found and fixed on the code side of things before anyone from the outside finds them.
This is simply not the case. Do you think that programmers sit around and pour over already written code? Of course we don't! We write new code and fix problems as they're reported. What percent of security holes would you estimate are found by reading code rather than being found by using the software and/or seeing someone else exploit the problem? I would estimate less than 1% (not a statistic, just an estimate). Programmers simply don't spend there time doing that.
Just because the source code is available to read doesn't mean anyone reads it in search of holes. It's time this myth died.
Sendmail isn't rewritten every few years and neither is Windows. If you're going to say sendmail is 25 years old, you at least have to admit to the age that Windows really is: almost 20 years old. W2K is about five years old making your statement accurate, you're just being misleading comparing the entire age of one piece of software versus the age of a single version of another.
1. If Apple had it's way, the Hymn project would be dead.
Um, no. The RIAA wants it dead. If hymn affects Apple's business at all, it's helping sales. Apple made one "attempt" to block hymn (probably to appease the RIAA), but has turned a blind eye ever since.
I don't think anyone Real, Apple or otherwise wants to sell DRMed files
Well said. I think that's basically what it all boils down to. Without the stupid complaining music industry, it would just be a matter of which non-DRM'd music format a certain online store uses is technically superior (and of course price). Now we have to deal with all this DRM crap.
If Apple's OS and the Apple user experience is so superior to the Windows experience, why does Apple have 3% market share?
Because that wasn't (and isn't) where they want to compete. They are aimed at the professional high-end desktop market. They've never had a cheap entry-level option--they still don't. They're pretty much like Sun, only they get their chips from moto and ibm, and obviously the two companies haven't put their research money in exactly the same places.
Was it the right choice for Apple? Was it right for Sun? Did they screw up? It could be fun to conjecture, but it's really just water under the bridge.
All we can do is look back and thank God they didn't turn out as Microsoft. Whether it was due to not licensing or not catering to the low-end market or something else it just doesn't matter.
Anybody else notice "Attorney General of IDADHO" in the letter? Not only is Idaho the only state capitalized, it's also the only state spelled wrong. Weird.
Slashdot Mirror
Right... and now Blizzard is feeling the pain.
Deliberately and maliciously broke what Real had done? DUH! You seem to be under the impression that Apple and Real are supposed to be buddy-buddies. Here's a little news flash that might help you out here: Apple and Real are competitors!! They have been competing for years so I'm confused that you didn't know this. Remember Quicktime? Yeah, it's kind of important to Apple and it's kind of in direct competition with what Real's been offering for years. Now they're competing with music stores.
We already know that Real tried to make a deal with Apple, but Apple refused (probably because Real didn't have anything of value that could match what they wanted from Apple). So they hacked the iPod themselves and you seem to think Apple is supposed to sit there and be happy about it?
My advice to you, my friend, is that you never go into business. You wouldn't last a day.
You wouldn't "port" Direct3D, you would only have to write a library with the same API as Direct3D. It doesn't matter what underlying system code the real Direct3D uses; you don't even need the code to be able to write this. There will undoubtedly be code on the system you're writing your library clone for that will accomplish the same things that the real Direct3D does. In this case, you would most likely just map Direct3D calls to OpenGL equivalents.
Yeah right, that's hilarious! You obviously know nothing about hollywood. The Mac is still the number one tool and Photoshop is still the number one professional image editor.
They don't have to prove they "did not know" something. It's the prosecutor's job to prove that they did know something, which is equally difficult. At least that's how the U.S. legal system usually works.
While it is quite obvious that software sells hardware (otherwise, what would the hardware do), it should be emphasized that the important thing is the quality and type of the software, not quantity. There is way more software written for the Windows platform, yet other platforms are doing just fine. There's no doubt that Mac OS X and the professional software available for that platform is selling Apple's computers for them.
Well, it's the Unix way: small programs with one (ideally) or very few functions. It's the Windows way to have huge 'suites' of programs. I'm not saying one way is better than the other, but the Unix way does have the benefit of simplifying things. I.E.: If I want to browse the web, I launch a web browser and only relevant code (for web browsing) is loaded. If I wanted to read email, I'd launch an email client. No reason to have an email client load every time I launch my browser if nine times out of ten I will only be browsing the web.
Nowadays with dynamic libraries, it makes less of an impact performance-wise, but I think the simplification argument in favor of the Unix way is still valid.
This guy has a valid point, and to mod him down as if this argument isn't valid is just silly. Mod points shouldn't be used to kill people who you happen to disagree with.
Probably true, but I've never put much stock into slashdot karma. I just say it how it is. I'm sorry if it happened to offend you.
Well my PowerMac 7300 (180Mhz) is still running like a champ and it's about nine years old. Granted, Mac OS isn't very fun to use on it, but NetBSD works fine.
Gotta love the fact that Linux and other free operating systems (yeah linux is a kernel blah blah blah) give you the power to choose. Fortunately for Apple, however, most people (who have used it) really like OS X.
Actually, there is a remote. It doesn't come with the iPod, but it's there. That's one good thing about the iPod, accessories galore! Yeah, most of them are over-priced, but oh well.
Also, you just need to face the fact that Ogg support just doesn't matter to 99.999% of the general population. Just be glad like we all should be that the iPod isn't the only choice we have. If/when ogg gains acceptance by a lot more people, then I think it's a given that the iPod will support it. FM-radio on the other hand would be a great feature. I do wish it had radio.
Marketshare has little to do with it. Statistically speaking, it doesn't make sense for anyone to spend any resources on a Mac port any more than it would for a Linux port. But Mac ports are profitable anyway. The only conclusion is that Mac users must buy more software and indeed that is the case. The same isn't true for the Linux "community." In fact I would say some Linux users are getting a little too used to getting all their software for free.
Never built your own AMD computer have you?
The last one I built had a barton 2500+ (overclocked to a 3200+), 512MB ram (256 dual channel of course), and a 19" flatscreen with nice flat-panel speakers. The gfx card is just a cheap Nvidia card, but the reciever of the computer was only interesting in playing Warcaft III and so it worked perfectly.
Final cost was $700 including monitor, speakers, input devices, etc). It was so expensive because I didn't start with spare parts from another computer, all new stuff.
My point is that games aren't (or shouldn't be) an incentive for anyone to switch to a Mac. My main machine is a Mac (I do software development as a hobby and I do it on the Mac because it's fun). The Mac I have is what I use most often. But as far as games go, not only is the hardware more expensive, the games are more expensive (usually), and there's still the fact that the games are (again usually) released pretty far after the Windows release. Just my two bits.
Blizzard has their own 'Mac team,' that's why they can be so fast. It's lead by John Stiles of emulation.net fame. But there really aren't many companies that do that. It just seems to be easier to either hire the port done or just not support the Mac for many companies. :shrug:
I suggest you write to Apple and voice your opinion that they should stop adding cool stuff to their operating system. That seems to be what you want.
Oh it really isn't what you want? Then you should probably stop standing on both sides of the fence. It looks like a very uncomfortable position.
Only Apple releases security patches for Jaguar, so your argument makes no sense. You're not paying for security, you pay for features. If you don't care about the new features then you obviously have no incentive to upgrade and you can keep your money. Not hard.
1. Everything is free.
2. Everything encoded in a new revolutionary format which features greater than CD quality, and all files magically don't take any space to store or time to download.
3. Everything is without DRM.
4. Despite it being a new format, it automatically plays on every device in existance anyway.
5. Every piece of music ever composed is available and audiobooks of every book written.
6. Revolutionary new searching technology brings you right to what you're looking for the first time every time whether you knew you were looking for it or not.
7. The store brings about world peace.
Duh!
Just because the source code is available to read doesn't mean anyone reads it in search of holes. It's time this myth died.
I don't think anyone Real, Apple or otherwise wants to sell DRMed files
Well said. I think that's basically what it all boils down to. Without the stupid complaining music industry, it would just be a matter of which non-DRM'd music format a certain online store uses is technically superior (and of course price). Now we have to deal with all this DRM crap.
If Apple's OS and the Apple user experience is so superior to the Windows experience, why does Apple have 3% market share?
Because that wasn't (and isn't) where they want to compete. They are aimed at the professional high-end desktop market. They've never had a cheap entry-level option--they still don't. They're pretty much like Sun, only they get their chips from moto and ibm, and obviously the two companies haven't put their research money in exactly the same places.
Was it the right choice for Apple? Was it right for Sun? Did they screw up? It could be fun to conjecture, but it's really just water under the bridge.
All we can do is look back and thank God they didn't turn out as Microsoft. Whether it was due to not licensing or not catering to the low-end market or something else it just doesn't matter.
Anybody else notice "Attorney General of IDADHO" in the letter? Not only is Idaho the only state capitalized, it's also the only state spelled wrong. Weird.