Since Segway comes with speed governors, it would be just as simple to mandate they be dialed down to their slowest setting until there was more experience with it. When cars were introduced, the same thing happened. Eventually, when people understand the issues, reasonable accomodations can be made.
I believe that this is BillG's way of encouraging all MS shareholders to get behind the Bush tax plan. You get your $0.08 'training dividend' right now but if the tax plan fails or gets very watered down, the shareholder's get it in the neck. They've committed to dividends going forward now and they are likely to raise it considerably... if the tax plan passes.
Independence Day was stupid on many levels but you're not giving them a fair shake.
There would have been significant amount of inter-ship traffic that would have confirmed that they have idiot IT management too (let's have all systems running one OS in one huge monoculture). They did have that one ship for several decades as well so the CPUs and instruction sets were probably very well known (we did know partially how to run the craft, remember?).
Bill Gates is hoarding cash.
What does he know that you don't?
Didn't MS just declare their first dividend? I think that what he knew was that he was out of ideas and he didn't feel like getting an effective tax bracket of 70% (corporate rate plus personal income tax).
Somebody has got to be Intel/Microsoft. Until OF makes one of their reference designs, nobody else is going to touch it. Why put OF in if the OS isn't going to support it or the biggest hardware player in x86 isn't going to support it?
I think that the x86 market would become viable only when BIOS in that world becomes IEEE-1275 (open firmware) compliant. That's really the last of the major hassles to shift things over.
I can't for the life of me figure out why, at least in their 'legacy free' reference designs, they don't make it an option for x86.
Apple could probably support IBM's RS/6000 line as well as they have the same CPU. There it would only need added drivers.
But then again Apple might see this as eating into their hardware sales (or maybe not). Personally I think Sun and IBM are both perfect candidates to become Apple compatible vendors. It fits into their high-end chic image in a way that is much more corporate and would fit both sides.
Re:Why spend more recreating Linux on Apple hardwa
on
Apple Reports Q1 Loss
·
· Score: 1
Only you'd have a box that could run MS-Office reliably if that was what you needed as well as many other software titles unavailable on Linux, you'd also get this very good thing called Cocoa (Objective-C) which gives you system services like OS level spell checking (hey, I added a word to the dictionary in one program and it no longer gets flagged anywhere in the system) pretty much for free.
You'd also a system which would work straight out of the box for most uses so unless you do that tweaking for entertainment, you'd be doing less of it.
Actually, you have the ability to extend the functionality of the product. You just can't use Apple's SDK to do it outside the terms of the SDK license. If you would write a program that would make a non-local computer look like it was on the local network so Rendezvous would pick it up, you would have created the ability to share across the Internet (using the demo'd Apple software under development) without the need to use the SDK.
Let's see, Microsoft coded their news media review copies of win 95 to throw false errors when it was loaded on top of a DR-DOS system, they claimed that the Win32 api was completely open to ISVs and there was a chinese wall between the app programmers and system programmers at MS (later found ot be a lie) sucking many ISVs into their development environment at least in part on the strength of this lie, they flat out stole force feedback technology for their sidewinder joystick, etc, etc, etc.
MS has had a well documented history of corporate wrongdoing and its finally starting to catch up with them now that they've been formally labelled a monopoly, something that roughly translates into a sign on your back that says "hit me, I'm a pinata" for future corporate lawsuits.
Apple, whatever its history (and I'm not a great fan of Apple legal either) is now putting out technologies that are standard compliant. If iCal starts going wrong and becomes proprietary, I can take my old iCal and write out.ics files that other calendaring systems can read. This sort of thing is being introduced all up and down the Apple software line. It makes it difficult for future management to create lock-in because customers will always have alternatives and are likely to jump at the earliest sign of a shift away from standards compliance.
Actually, if you knew what you were doing, (and yes, most mac users didn't) you could always peel back the eye candy of Mac OS (even prior to X) and make it do neat and wonderful stuff. Apple just made the childproofing slightly harder to undo than other OS offerings like, say, DOS/Windows 3.1.
For most people, that *is* user friendly because getting past the wrapping for a lot of people is usually something done by accident and a scary experience akin to falling through lake ice.
Today, of course, Mac OS X makes it very easy to get at a lot more of the internals and Interface Builder/Project Builder shipping on all macs means that hacking extra commands into virtually any application is very, very easy to do (a fact that most OS X users have yet to awake to but they will). But Apple doesn't *force* you to put in the dev tools and they don't *force* you in most circumstances to fire up Terminal.app. Childproofing is not a bad thing because when it comes to computers, an astonishingly large percentage of users are functionally children.
But copyrights and patents aren't property in the same sense as corporeal property is so the argument *is* different.
Even in corporeal property, rights of occupation mean that building something out of somebody else's property does eventually grant you rights if the original owner doesn't protest the situation for long enough. For example, if a fence is put on the wrong place, 'stealing' a foot from your neighbor and he doesn't protest, after a certain number of years (the number varies by jurisdiction) the fence line becomes the property line.
My in-laws just bought such a property and discovered that the old 50 year old fence was not on the official line. They built the new fence on the same line and are going on as before. Eventually, when my wife and I inherit, we'll file to fix the lines officially but the fence line determined that property for a good 20 years in that particular jurisdiction.
The only reason this is true is that the information revolution has not been applied to shareholders and the collective ethics and morals of the shareholders are not being expressed through management so all that management has as guidence is the lowest common denominator, make money, as their corporate marching orders.
The problem of Disney would be cured if a majority of shareholders in that corporation believed that what Disney management was doing is wrong and voted accordingly. The underlying legislation has been passed (digital signatures), now all that need happen is a great shareholder meeting place that would enable issue by issue proxies being issued by shareholders in order to change corporate behavior.
Apple's website has a section for all the open source programs they're contributing back to the community. The url is at http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ and by my count they're hosting about a dozen different projects. Perhaps you might take a look before you comment further. The stuff that's interesting to me is OpenPlay (which challenges the DirectX franchise), Darwin Streaming Server, Rendezvous, and Webcore but your mileage may vary and you might find their contributions to CUPS to be more of interest.
It isn't like this stuff is very hidden. When they published Safari, they immediately dumped back their code changes to the kde team. Look it up if you don't believe me.
No, I'm not that into anti-nuclear hysteria. The death toll for Three Gorges (when it's built) breaking would run in the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions in one great wall of water while the actual projected death toll at Chernobyl (a plant with no containment, a dangerous design, purposefully disengaged safety systems, and a flawed testing suite) is less and can be lowered with further cleanup efforts (now that the area is going capitalist, they're more likely to have that money).
Three Gorges v. Three Mile Island? It wouldn't even be close.
Of course, plumbing errors at the Three Gorges complex or Hoover dam might bring the analogy back in balance compared to computer errors in banking et al.
Let's face it, this really is about small systems like PCs and not multi-million dollar systems that have always been serviced by vendor certified technicians. Bringing in large, mission critical systems is pretty much a red herring.
Actually, computer shops (at least the large ones) would want licensing because the cost would drive a bunch of their competitors out of the business. Licensing is often used as a barrier to entry to keep out competition and artificially raise prices. This happens often with hair care and taxis. I'd hate to add computer repair to the list.
I'm reasonably sure that you could add an executable to a bundle, change a menu to include a command linking to that executable and add features that way. I can see how it might be a difficult hack, but I think it might be possible.
As for the utility of tabs, I find that I like them. They are useful for advanced users
Since I (and probably a lot of other people) had never even heard of KHTML until Steve Jobs brought it up in his keynote, doesn't the vast amount of free advertising (plus code improvements) constitute something more than stealing?
Free advertising in exchange for free software does not sound like theft to me. And if the developers didn't want commercial entities doing things like Safari, they could have licensed under GPL instead of LGPL. Using LGPL was a conscious choice and they probably have gotten exactly what they wanted.
Slashdot Mirror
Since Segway comes with speed governors, it would be just as simple to mandate they be dialed down to their slowest setting until there was more experience with it. When cars were introduced, the same thing happened. Eventually, when people understand the issues, reasonable accomodations can be made.
I believe that this is BillG's way of encouraging all MS shareholders to get behind the Bush tax plan. You get your $0.08 'training dividend' right now but if the tax plan fails or gets very watered down, the shareholder's get it in the neck. They've committed to dividends going forward now and they are likely to raise it considerably... if the tax plan passes.
Independence Day was stupid on many levels but you're not giving them a fair shake.
There would have been significant amount of inter-ship traffic that would have confirmed that they have idiot IT management too (let's have all systems running one OS in one huge monoculture). They did have that one ship for several decades as well so the CPUs and instruction sets were probably very well known (we did know partially how to run the craft, remember?).
Bill Gates is hoarding cash.
What does he know that you don't?
Didn't MS just declare their first dividend? I think that what he knew was that he was out of ideas and he didn't feel like getting an effective tax bracket of 70% (corporate rate plus personal income tax).
Somebody has got to be Intel/Microsoft. Until OF makes one of their reference designs, nobody else is going to touch it. Why put OF in if the OS isn't going to support it or the biggest hardware player in x86 isn't going to support it?
I think that the x86 market would become viable only when BIOS in that world becomes IEEE-1275 (open firmware) compliant. That's really the last of the major hassles to shift things over.
I can't for the life of me figure out why, at least in their 'legacy free' reference designs, they don't make it an option for x86.
Apple could probably support IBM's RS/6000 line as well as they have the same CPU. There it would only need added drivers.
But then again Apple might see this as eating into their hardware sales (or maybe not). Personally I think Sun and IBM are both perfect candidates to become Apple compatible vendors. It fits into their high-end chic image in a way that is much more corporate and would fit both sides.
Only you'd have a box that could run MS-Office reliably if that was what you needed as well as many other software titles unavailable on Linux, you'd also get this very good thing called Cocoa (Objective-C) which gives you system services like OS level spell checking (hey, I added a word to the dictionary in one program and it no longer gets flagged anywhere in the system) pretty much for free.
You'd also a system which would work straight out of the box for most uses so unless you do that tweaking for entertainment, you'd be doing less of it.
Actually, you have the ability to extend the functionality of the product. You just can't use Apple's SDK to do it outside the terms of the SDK license. If you would write a program that would make a non-local computer look like it was on the local network so Rendezvous would pick it up, you would have created the ability to share across the Internet (using the demo'd Apple software under development) without the need to use the SDK.
Let's see, Microsoft coded their news media review copies of win 95 to throw false errors when it was loaded on top of a DR-DOS system, they claimed that the Win32 api was completely open to ISVs and there was a chinese wall between the app programmers and system programmers at MS (later found ot be a lie) sucking many ISVs into their development environment at least in part on the strength of this lie, they flat out stole force feedback technology for their sidewinder joystick, etc, etc, etc.
.ics files that other calendaring systems can read. This sort of thing is being introduced all up and down the Apple software line. It makes it difficult for future management to create lock-in because customers will always have alternatives and are likely to jump at the earliest sign of a shift away from standards compliance.
MS has had a well documented history of corporate wrongdoing and its finally starting to catch up with them now that they've been formally labelled a monopoly, something that roughly translates into a sign on your back that says "hit me, I'm a pinata" for future corporate lawsuits.
Apple, whatever its history (and I'm not a great fan of Apple legal either) is now putting out technologies that are standard compliant. If iCal starts going wrong and becomes proprietary, I can take my old iCal and write out
Actually, if you knew what you were doing, (and yes, most mac users didn't) you could always peel back the eye candy of Mac OS (even prior to X) and make it do neat and wonderful stuff. Apple just made the childproofing slightly harder to undo than other OS offerings like, say, DOS/Windows 3.1.
For most people, that *is* user friendly because getting past the wrapping for a lot of people is usually something done by accident and a scary experience akin to falling through lake ice.
Today, of course, Mac OS X makes it very easy to get at a lot more of the internals and Interface Builder/Project Builder shipping on all macs means that hacking extra commands into virtually any application is very, very easy to do (a fact that most OS X users have yet to awake to but they will). But Apple doesn't *force* you to put in the dev tools and they don't *force* you in most circumstances to fire up Terminal.app. Childproofing is not a bad thing because when it comes to computers, an astonishingly large percentage of users are functionally children.
But copyrights and patents aren't property in the same sense as corporeal property is so the argument *is* different.
Even in corporeal property, rights of occupation mean that building something out of somebody else's property does eventually grant you rights if the original owner doesn't protest the situation for long enough. For example, if a fence is put on the wrong place, 'stealing' a foot from your neighbor and he doesn't protest, after a certain number of years (the number varies by jurisdiction) the fence line becomes the property line.
My in-laws just bought such a property and discovered that the old 50 year old fence was not on the official line. They built the new fence on the same line and are going on as before. Eventually, when my wife and I inherit, we'll file to fix the lines officially but the fence line determined that property for a good 20 years in that particular jurisdiction.
The only reason this is true is that the information revolution has not been applied to shareholders and the collective ethics and morals of the shareholders are not being expressed through management so all that management has as guidence is the lowest common denominator, make money, as their corporate marching orders.
The problem of Disney would be cured if a majority of shareholders in that corporation believed that what Disney management was doing is wrong and voted accordingly. The underlying legislation has been passed (digital signatures), now all that need happen is a great shareholder meeting place that would enable issue by issue proxies being issued by shareholders in order to change corporate behavior.
Well since it's now decided that retroactive increase is constitutional, wouldn't that make retroactive decrease just as constitutional?
Apple's website has a section for all the open source programs they're contributing back to the community. The url is at http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ and by my count they're hosting about a dozen different projects. Perhaps you might take a look before you comment further. The stuff that's interesting to me is OpenPlay (which challenges the DirectX franchise), Darwin Streaming Server, Rendezvous, and Webcore but your mileage may vary and you might find their contributions to CUPS to be more of interest.
It isn't like this stuff is very hidden. When they published Safari, they immediately dumped back their code changes to the kde team. Look it up if you don't believe me.
too late.
No, I'm not that into anti-nuclear hysteria. The death toll for Three Gorges (when it's built) breaking would run in the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions in one great wall of water while the actual projected death toll at Chernobyl (a plant with no containment, a dangerous design, purposefully disengaged safety systems, and a flawed testing suite) is less and can be lowered with further cleanup efforts (now that the area is going capitalist, they're more likely to have that money).
Three Gorges v. Three Mile Island? It wouldn't even be close.
Of course, plumbing errors at the Three Gorges complex or Hoover dam might bring the analogy back in balance compared to computer errors in banking et al.
Let's face it, this really is about small systems like PCs and not multi-million dollar systems that have always been serviced by vendor certified technicians. Bringing in large, mission critical systems is pretty much a red herring.
Actually, computer shops (at least the large ones) would want licensing because the cost would drive a bunch of their competitors out of the business. Licensing is often used as a barrier to entry to keep out competition and artificially raise prices. This happens often with hair care and taxis. I'd hate to add computer repair to the list.
I'm reasonably sure that you could add an executable to a bundle, change a menu to include a command linking to that executable and add features that way. I can see how it might be a difficult hack, but I think it might be possible.
As for the utility of tabs, I find that I like them. They are useful for advanced users
Though, as a cocoa bundle, it is remarkably open to hacking by 3rd parties. Could tabbed browsing be hacked on by modifying the nibs?
I would suspect that the final might come with some nifty applescripts to transfer over your bookmarks. Remember, it's beta.
Since I (and probably a lot of other people) had never even heard of KHTML until Steve Jobs brought it up in his keynote, doesn't the vast amount of free advertising (plus code improvements) constitute something more than stealing?
Free advertising in exchange for free software does not sound like theft to me. And if the developers didn't want commercial entities doing things like Safari, they could have licensed under GPL instead of LGPL. Using LGPL was a conscious choice and they probably have gotten exactly what they wanted.
Since it's open source, I suspect that tabs et al will get added in eventually.
Perhaps it's because for 60%+ of the servers out there, it actually makes things slower and for 100% of the servers, it makes it less reliable.