This is an "already been solved" problem, and even has a dedicated IP address range (224-239.x.x.x). The multicasting solution is the optimal solution for this type of problem - identical information being broadcast "live" to millions or hundreds of millions of locations.
I have been experimenting on my own network with multicasting in TCP/IP and couldn't figure out how to make multicasting work on a 'interested' receiver basis, it just kept broadcasting the data to every machine on the network, whether interested or not.
Sounds like someone in the open source community should step up and start a project to replace flash and silver light for that matter. Mozilla are you listening?
Adobe cares about the folks buying expensive site and server licenses. Those guys don't really care about you because there aren't enough of ya to have much impact on their website's success, so why should adobe invest in your platform, besides the bare minimum quality implementation as a hedge in case desktop linux becomes more important some day.
I would be inclined to believe you if the Windows version of Flash didn't have a large amount of issues too. Which in theory, is supposed to be this platform that has all these "folks buying expensive site and server licenses".
As I sit reading my morning paper online I still cannot view the embedded videos due to auto-detection of my Flash player not working. One in every three or four YouTube videos crashes the browser
This stuff can all be seen as anecdotal from both sides, but still, interesting to discuss.
Well I guess the question is, how did that "apple products are supposed to be good" thought get into their head? Apple certainly has slick marketing, no doubt, but it's not like they're beaming subliminal messages into people while they sleep.
It's also the media hype around their products. You hear Apple everywhere, people are bound to take notice subconsciously even if they aren't paying attention.
Is it word of mouth?
No, I haven't met many iPhone users who actually approved of the device even though they showed off a few things.
Are a lot of iPhone buyers getting them because they love their iPods and figure that Apple can get the phone thing right as well?
The majority of people I know who have iPhones never had a iPod (I know 15 people who own a iPhone, 3 of which had a iPod before - note: I know far more people with a blackberry, you can pretty much guess what kind of people I associate with). I am certain quite a few of those people I know got it because it was 'trendy' at the time.
There's been lots of media hype about the iPhone, no doubt, but the majority of what I've read in the past year has said that the iPhone is a good product. Many professional tech critics as well as less technologically focused writers have said good things about it, and for a lot of people that's good enough.
funny enough, I've heard the opposite about the iPhone -- usually long rants about how it offers nothing unique in British news articles.
Even the iPhone commercials don't strike me as particularly shallow or trendy. They mostly just show some of the basic functions of the phone, and how they're accomplished.
I don't own a TV, nor do I want one. I'm not even sure if Apple actually advertises in the UK or if it's just the mobile phone operator.
Look at Windows, apparently the fact that Vista hardly runs on current-gen or last-gen hardware isn't a problem.
Vista seems to run fine on current generation hardware. I don't recall Microsoft promoting running Vista on last generation hardware by the way.
Except that you can actually write standard HTML for a default web browser and it would render correctly? Compare that to IE where about every single line of code has to be duplicated to work on it.
And that has nothing to do with having access to the source code of the browser. I will restate the question:
How does having access to the sourcecode of a web browser in OS X make OS X more flexible?
Number 1, easier to port applications to.
I have written numerous cross-platform applications, and it is quite obvious you have no experience with doing so. This has nothing to do with making it easier to port applications to a specific platform. I can even come up with plenty of instances where I had hell with porting things to OS X.
Such as: standardized cross platform OpenGL code that works between Windows, Linux, Solaris would not work on OS X, without special workarounds for buggy drivers and Apple's OpenGL bugs. The state of handling OpenGL on OS X is so bad, that Codeweavers have to specifically write special hacks for each and every game that they support on crossover games for OS X due to the numerous bug issues - They don't have to do this with the Linux port, at all.
The POSIX environment on OS X is broken, I have had so many issues getting pthreads that work fine under Windows with it's POSIX subsystem, Linux the BSDs that it's ridicules that Windows POSIX subsystem does it properly when OS X, which is supposed to be a certified "Unix" environment does not.
Number 2, easier to write applications for if you don't own the OS.
What? A good developer kit makes it easier to write applications for a OS, not OS sourcecode.
As for Samba and etc, if Apple finds a bug that the other developers haven't found yet, it gets fixed both places and vice versa.
Apple has a terrible reputation for fixes. Often, they seem to ignore fixes until some major OS X release that usually requires people to pay for an upgrade. This is especially a huge problem on OS X server - where they can't even package things to work out of the box. Such as packaging the only version of PHP that doesn't work with Squirrel mail that they package by default with the system. Using broken Samba setups etc.
An NDA kinda violates all of these points to make things OSS. Just because you can see the source doesn't mean that it is open source.
I didn't say it was opensource. I said you can get access to the entirety of Windows' sourcecode under NDAs, while you cannot at all with OS X. The only stuff that appears to be opensource in OS X, is the Darwin kernel - which is so terrible nobody wants to use it and why there isn't really a Darwin community. The only other opensource bits in OS X that I can think of are the projects started as opensource in the opensource community that have what some people refer to as 'viral licensing' which prevents Apple from close sourcing the projects.
I really don't see the additional 'flexibility' in OS X over Windows that you claim. Maybe you should give some practical examples?
You do realize that the iPhone is not $600 anymore, right? (If you want to start including the monthly fees too, then do the same with every other phone you want to compare the phone to.
Okay. My phone was free with a 12 month contract for £12 a month or I could of chosen the pay-as-you-go option and got it for £50.
This £12 contact includes 100 mix-match points (one point can be used for a phone call minute or message), 300 minutes of the first three minutes of any phone call free. Of course I can get a more expensive contract if I wanted. This is the plan I currently use.
It doesn't have a touch screen, but it has the ability to do Skype (doing it over the regular voice network, so you save battery life) and MSN for free. Battery life seems to last me for four-five days at a time. Works with Linux distributions just fine and has access to the wide mobile phone j2me repositories of software.
Now, I compare this the iPhone 3g, the 8GB model will cost just £99 on a new £30 per month tariff for 18 months with 75 free minutes, 125 texts. Poor battery life, the plan gives me less minutes and texts I will literally never use and a touch screen which I'm not too interested in.
(Although for some reason they list visual voice mail as a 'feature' with this tariff -- Okay? I get my voice mail as MMS messages on my phone which is 'visual' too...)
Yeah... I still think the phone I have is cheaper and better for my uses (particularly for the free communications I can get with Skype).
I think you're overestimating the size of the Apple fanboy market. That crowd certainly exists, but you're going to have a hard time convincing me that everyone who's got an iPhone got it just because it has an Apple logo on the back.
Quite a few regular Joe user I meet actually believe that "Apple products are supposed to be good", because they don't even do any research or such before they go out and get a phone, I see them buying iPhones - if they can afford it.
While they may not be "fanboys", they certainly are sheep.
The original poster's opinion coincide with my own.
You fall into the common trap of seeing apple's products as technically inferior, assuming technical is all that matters.
I don't automatically assume Apple's products are inferior. I find out they are. Additionally, that is not all that matters to me. It actually has to do what it says, decently. Looking at the subject of this article, it seems the iPhone isn't being a very good mobile phone.
My research is done, and Apple won.
Why do you think I care about what you are buying? I don't.
Now fast forward to the present iphone 3g and I go sometimes 5 minutes with that frackin Call Failed.... crap. Already had at least 20 dropped calls.
...
OVERALL the best personal tech experience I have EVER had and I know a lot of other peeps who feel the same way. ( and REAL peeps, not internet chat room forum, wow clan peeps. real flesh and blood peeps.)
the FACT is, linux is not familiar to the typical user, not user friendly to the typical user, and expanding it is nowhere near intuitive enough for the typical user, and in the event that a user DOES have a problem on linux, the typical user is entirely screwed.
I discovered otherwise when observing regular Joe use Linux.
A western parallel might be something like the fact that it's rude to stare at people with deformities or missing an eye etc. Of course you can see it, but it's polite to pretend not to notice. I expect people with deformities might feel a bit uneasy about having their pictures online where people can stare all they like, and worse link to and distribute those pictures without permission.
Not really a good parallel, since I am aware of a few western sites that do this anyway.
The real problem with Windows security is that there are LOTS of programs out there that will not run unless the user is an administrator.
Which programs? The only time I have encountered a problem where a application wanted administrator access was for update support.
I've encountered permission problems before - very rarely however, where a application wants to write to the software's program files directory, which was easily resolved by allowing the group 'users' to write to that directory.
I stop now joking. I really appreciate that Thunderbird now deflate. What use for RSS ou newsgroups or Calendar for the most people ? And why not having these functions as addons, for having Tb lightweight enough for being used on... say... an eee pc ?
I use Kontact on my laptop and Eee PC. Both are running Kubuntu hardy.
I use the calendar, e-mail, RSS, news group and notes features of Kontact.
Slashdot Mirror
I have been experimenting on my own network with multicasting in TCP/IP and couldn't figure out how to make multicasting work on a 'interested' receiver basis, it just kept broadcasting the data to every machine on the network, whether interested or not.
Are you sure this issue has been resolved?
Source?
FOSS flash player (incomplete): http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/
FOSS silverlight (also incomplete): http://www.mono-project.com/Moonlight
I get this on Windows and OS X too. Considering my hardware runs stuff like Unreal Tournament 3 at max settings - it's quite surprising.
We've had plenty of those already.
I just use the version 10 beta of Flash that supports Pulse.
I would be inclined to believe you if the Windows version of Flash didn't have a large amount of issues too. Which in theory, is supposed to be this platform that has all these "folks buying expensive site and server licenses".
Works fine for me. Get a better distribution.
I disabled the font tag in the gecko engine and visited Google. Worked fine.
This stuff can all be seen as anecdotal from both sides, but still, interesting to discuss.
It's also the media hype around their products. You hear Apple everywhere, people are bound to take notice subconsciously even if they aren't paying attention.
No, I haven't met many iPhone users who actually approved of the device even though they showed off a few things.
The majority of people I know who have iPhones never had a iPod (I know 15 people who own a iPhone, 3 of which had a iPod before - note: I know far more people with a blackberry, you can pretty much guess what kind of people I associate with). I am certain quite a few of those people I know got it because it was 'trendy' at the time.
funny enough, I've heard the opposite about the iPhone -- usually long rants about how it offers nothing unique in British news articles.
I don't own a TV, nor do I want one. I'm not even sure if Apple actually advertises in the UK or if it's just the mobile phone operator.
You are not a furry.
Vista seems to run fine on current generation hardware. I don't recall Microsoft promoting running Vista on last generation hardware by the way.
And that has nothing to do with having access to the source code of the browser. I will restate the question:
How does having access to the sourcecode of a web browser in OS X make OS X more flexible?
I have written numerous cross-platform applications, and it is quite obvious you have no experience with doing so. This has nothing to do with making it easier to port applications to a specific platform. I can even come up with plenty of instances where I had hell with porting things to OS X.
Such as: standardized cross platform OpenGL code that works between Windows, Linux, Solaris would not work on OS X, without special workarounds for buggy drivers and Apple's OpenGL bugs. The state of handling OpenGL on OS X is so bad, that Codeweavers have to specifically write special hacks for each and every game that they support on crossover games for OS X due to the numerous bug issues - They don't have to do this with the Linux port, at all.
The POSIX environment on OS X is broken, I have had so many issues getting pthreads that work fine under Windows with it's POSIX subsystem, Linux the BSDs that it's ridicules that Windows POSIX subsystem does it properly when OS X, which is supposed to be a certified "Unix" environment does not.
What? A good developer kit makes it easier to write applications for a OS, not OS sourcecode.
Apple has a terrible reputation for fixes. Often, they seem to ignore fixes until some major OS X release that usually requires people to pay for an upgrade. This is especially a huge problem on OS X server - where they can't even package things to work out of the box. Such as packaging the only version of PHP that doesn't work with Squirrel mail that they package by default with the system. Using broken Samba setups etc.
I didn't say it was opensource. I said you can get access to the entirety of Windows' sourcecode under NDAs, while you cannot at all with OS X. The only stuff that appears to be opensource in OS X, is the Darwin kernel - which is so terrible nobody wants to use it and why there isn't really a Darwin community. The only other opensource bits in OS X that I can think of are the projects started as opensource in the opensource community that have what some people refer to as 'viral licensing' which prevents Apple from close sourcing the projects.
I really don't see the additional 'flexibility' in OS X over Windows that you claim. Maybe you should give some practical examples?
Species five six one eight.
Human.
Origin grid: 325.
Physiology: inefficient, below average cranial capacity, limited regenerative abilities.
There is a difference between avoiding and refusing entirely claiming there is no problem. Apple tends to claim the latter.
I don't consider the sourcecode to a web browser component making OS X "more flexible".
But does it actually make OS X more flexible? I don't believe so. What are you going to do with the source to a web browser component, seriously?
What are you going to do with Apple's customization of Samba? CUPS?
If you sign some NDAs, you can get access to the entire Windows sourcecode.
I disagree.
Okay. My phone was free with a 12 month contract for £12 a month or I could of chosen the pay-as-you-go option and got it for £50.
This £12 contact includes 100 mix-match points (one point can be used for a phone call minute or message), 300 minutes of the first three minutes of any phone call free. Of course I can get a more expensive contract if I wanted. This is the plan I currently use.
It doesn't have a touch screen, but it has the ability to do Skype (doing it over the regular voice network, so you save battery life) and MSN for free. Battery life seems to last me for four-five days at a time. Works with Linux distributions just fine and has access to the wide mobile phone j2me repositories of software.
Now, I compare this the iPhone 3g, the 8GB model will cost just £99 on a new £30 per month tariff for 18 months with 75 free minutes, 125 texts. Poor battery life, the plan gives me less minutes and texts I will literally never use and a touch screen which I'm not too interested in.
(Although for some reason they list visual voice mail as a 'feature' with this tariff -- Okay? I get my voice mail as MMS messages on my phone which is 'visual' too...)
Yeah... I still think the phone I have is cheaper and better for my uses (particularly for the free communications I can get with Skype).
Quite a few regular Joe user I meet actually believe that "Apple products are supposed to be good", because they don't even do any research or such before they go out and get a phone, I see them buying iPhones - if they can afford it.
While they may not be "fanboys", they certainly are sheep.
The original poster's opinion coincide with my own.
I don't automatically assume Apple's products are inferior. I find out they are. Additionally, that is not all that matters to me. It actually has to do what it says, decently. Looking at the subject of this article, it seems the iPhone isn't being a very good mobile phone.
Why do you think I care about what you are buying? I don't.
...
I love Steve's reality distortion field.
I discovered otherwise when observing regular Joe use Linux.
Not really a good parallel, since I am aware of a few western sites that do this anyway.
Which programs? The only time I have encountered a problem where a application wanted administrator access was for update support.
I've encountered permission problems before - very rarely however, where a application wants to write to the software's program files directory, which was easily resolved by allowing the group 'users' to write to that directory.
In the UK, the database will hunt you down for money if you use "free TV".
Do you have a site with some of these replies posted? Also your homepage (linked in Slashdot) has been taken over by some advertising lunatic.
I use Kontact on my laptop and Eee PC. Both are running Kubuntu hardy.
I use the calendar, e-mail, RSS, news group and notes features of Kontact.
How do I do this with kmail and Thunderbird then?