So, where can I get a guaranteed legal version of Leopard? I've got a G4 Powerbook that I never upgraded, and it seems that Apple doesn't sell 10.5 anymore.
I'd look for one posted on Craigslist, or even post a "wanted" ad of your own. That way before you buy you can see the media firsthand and verify it's a factory disc and not a burned copy. Just make sure you get a regular retail copy -- ie. not the gray restore disc that came with a specific Mac. Those typically refuse to install on anything but the model it came with.
That was exactly my thought with the original post. Unless you're a hardcore gamer (really most of the general population isn't) or your'e running a server (which probably violates your terms of service for your home DSL/cable connection anyway) you'd never even know the difference.
It's just an academic question at this point, but why are all these new addresses neeeded?
Yes, I know NAT isn't a real solution for a shortage of addresses. But really, the vast majority of Internet-connected devices don't need a public address.
Home Internet connections, cell phones, etc. have no need for public addresses. Which begs the question, are these companies just being selfish in requesting so many more? I don't see any real legitimate need. And if this is the case, why are they still actually being given more?
This is partially true, but it's not as if the sophistication of native apps will stop either. Web apps are behind now, and I think they will remain behind in the future, because they're not native code making full use of native APIs.
There are already plenty of web-based apps that will run fine on any mobile device that uses a WebKit-based browser –meaning iPhone, iPod touch, Android, Palm's WebOS, and more. Examples range from a Twitter client called Hahlo, to Google Reader. This is nothing new and nothing exciting.
I like Mozilla and their products, but web apps on mobile are the same old story as web apps on the desktop. Native apps will always be better, and any advantages that web apps may have had are easily compensated by making your native app able to sync its data to online services.
It's painful how badly the original article frames the relationship between Firefox, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey. Here are a few basic facts about Firefox/Thunderbird/Mozilla, though not necessarily in exact chronological order...
- Netscape started Mozilla as an open source foundation on which future versions of Netscape would be based. - The all-in-one browser suite was called Mozilla, and the rendering engine therein is Gecko. - The Mozilla suite was the basis of Netscape 6 and 7. - A browser-only version (Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox) was created. - A mail/news-only version was also spun off as Thunderbird. - Eventually Netscape 8 and 9 were also released, but based on Firefox rather than the suite. - Thanks to the growing popularity of the standalone apps, the Mozilla suite was turned into an unsupported (by the organization/corporation, anyway) community project, and renamed to SeaMonkey to avoid confusion over who was developing it.
The main point to take away from this is Firefox and Thunderbird are based on SeaMonkey, not the other way around. A lot of code from Firefox and Thunderbird comes back to SeaMonkey, however, which is frequently a source of confusion for users.
Besides, webmail is today's king. This is why "Seamonkey" is often forgotten.
For many people webmail is king, but real desktop email clients still have a lot to offer. Even if I primarily used a webmail interface (which I don't), I would still want a desktop email app around for its ability to easily interact with other desktop applications -- for example handling attachments generated by your other apps to hand off to your mail client. Or even just the "Send Link" or equivalent menu item in your web browser to quickly email someone the address of the page you're viewing. Webmail has matured a lot in the last few years, but it lacks a certain level of polish that won't be possible until web apps become true peers of desktop software.
Great advice. It's also important to make sure you do it in an environment that you like. I got into tech/IT jobs because computers were my hobby, not my actual field of study in college. But I quickly hated each job I got. Either I felt exploited and unappreciated, or I hated an aspect of my job such as too much time spent doing phone support.
About a year and a half ago I found a job doing IT for a couple technology-heavy K-8 schools. For once I actually enjoy my job -- or at least don't hate getting up in the morning -- because I feel valued and appreciated by the staff and students. And even if I put in unpaid overtime once in a while, at least it feels like it's for a good cause.
So once you've decided what you enjoy doing, you really need to find a tolerable place to do it. Your coworkers and overall work environment can turn an "I like doing this" job into something you hate overnight.
I know mobile browsing has traditionally been a pain, but outside of work I actually do more browsing and emailing from my iPhone than from my personal computer.
Sorry if I sound like an Apple apologist. For the sake of disclosure, I do have an iPhone and I use and support/manage Macs as my day job -- about 700 of them.
Anyway, I think pushing an enterprise config utility to all their Windows users was most likely a simple mistake. I'm guessing someone who manages their update service accidentally put it in the "make available to everyone" category instead of "make available to people who have an older version of the same utility" category. What's the point? I can't think of anything Apple would stand to gain by doing this deliberately.
Nothing is being blocked. Apple is simply discontinuing their own support for Palm devices. Palm itself stopped officially supporting Macs years ago. There's nothing preventing users from running third-party software to sync.
In addition to the other points made above, consider that anyone competent to do the job could grant themselves remote access while you're not looking. If you select your level of support based on a notion that you can trust some types of support people more or less than others, you are choosing them for the wrong reasons. First determine what level of support you need -- full-time onsite employee, part-time onsite employee, or outsourced support that may or may not do all work in person. Once you've made that decision, choose someone with a decent reputation or references to do the job for you.
I first heard of Bing two days ago thanks to an ad on Hulu. That ad featured a woman with a necklace made of hot dogs, and said nothing about search engines or that Bing was even tech-related. For all they said in the ad it could have just as easily been a sports commentary hour. Great job building brand awareness.
Why would I want to? Personally it's because any time I hit a page with a Java applet the browser hangs for a while as everything is loaded. Even on a relatively recent computer with 2GB+ of RAM.
I'd like to disable Java but I work at a school district where...
- Our Internet filter keeps you authenticated with a popup that embeds a Java applet
- Our Internet filter admin interface is Java
- Our wireless network login uses a Java applet to authenticate your username and password
- Our student record database runs on Oracle with a Java interface
Basically if I disabled Java I could only access one or two superfluous file servers on the LAN, and only using an Ethernet cable. Not gonna happen, unfortunately.
If you don't restrict your e-mailing to regular work hours, you're an "emailaholic"?
Indeed, and having a smartphone changes one's habits too. I may not look at it for hours if I have something interesting going on, but if I am just lounging around I may respond the moment I hear my iPhone ding. I'm not constantly looking it, but my mail is always within reach. Some might classify that as addiction, but I just see it as a matter of convenience and extending people the courtesy of responding quickly if I am free when their message comes in.
Surely for the users. I'm no whiz developer but I do know that anyone with Apple's resources could make a Twitter clone virtually overnight. It really doesn't do all that much.
I think that Twitter could go hand-in-hand with Apple's iLife software suite and the iPhone, still existing as a social network, but driven by a desire to advertise what you can do with a Mac.
They recently added support for publishing photos to Flickr and Facebook, for example. Next what if they included the option to announce new uploads of photos, movies, iWeb sites, etc. on Twitter? That in and of itself wouldn't make money for Apple, but it's a great way of letting a huge audience see the creations that their users have published.
Give it time, you'll like the Beatles. Everyone starts off disliking the Beatles and thinking they're over-rated until they reach the age of about 18-19 and start to discover proper music.
If you can't respect the Beatle's work then you're really out of touch with all they have done.
I respectfully disagree. I liked the Beatles when I was in high school, but as I moved through my twenties I changed my mind. I can still enjoy Sergeant Pepper from time to time, but I can't stand listening to much else the Beatles or its members did. To me it sounds just as contrived saccharine as today's pop music, just a different style so people get away with being nostalgic about it.
To me it seems like the definitions are pretty clear, yet people take a lot of liberties with the meanings. I've always had the understanding that...
Alpha = Somewhat usable but not feature-complete and probably pretty unstable.
Beta = Feature-complete but still has plenty of bugs to work out.
RC = A candidate for, well, release! If no major problems are found it may be sent out the door as a standard public release with no further changes.
Maybe from the combined cost of an iPhone original plan which includes the voice?
Which only makes sense if the OP's only alternative to getting an iPhone would be getting no phone at all.
Also I bet there's a decent overlap between potential satellite radio subscribers and potential iPhone/gPhone users. That is, people who have some disposable income and are into gadgets. And for many it's a given that they'll own an iPhone...
The real choice some of us would face is iPhone vs. iPhone + satellite radio. Sure, satellite radio is cheaper than an iPhone service plan if you set it up as an either/or choice. But there's limited value in subscribing if you're going to own the iPhone anyway.
Apple does have a monopoly over the areas they've defined -- the iPhone among them.
But you are right -- the one difference is that Apple isn't quite big enough. Do you think they would behave any better if they were?
To imply that Apple has a monopoly on iPhones is a misapplication of the term. You can't have a monopoly on a specific product line, because generally there is only one company that ever even *makes* a product line. Otherwise it wouldn't be their product and their brand. Apple doesn't have a monopoly on iPhones any more than George Foreman has a monopoly on George Foreman grills.
...though the iPhone would actually be $149 after the special offer. That is, of course, ignoring the phone service contract, but its up-front price is *not* $449 as implied by the parent post.
Re:Establishing de facto (open source) standard ?
on
ECMAScript 4.0 Is Dead
·
· Score: 1
Interesting, thanks for the info. I have a MobileMe account though I rarely use the web interface. I was unaware of these issues.
Slashdot Mirror
So, where can I get a guaranteed legal version of Leopard? I've got a G4 Powerbook that I never upgraded, and it seems that Apple doesn't sell 10.5 anymore.
I'd look for one posted on Craigslist, or even post a "wanted" ad of your own. That way before you buy you can see the media firsthand and verify it's a factory disc and not a burned copy. Just make sure you get a regular retail copy -- ie. not the gray restore disc that came with a specific Mac. Those typically refuse to install on anything but the model it came with.
That was exactly my thought with the original post. Unless you're a hardcore gamer (really most of the general population isn't) or your'e running a server (which probably violates your terms of service for your home DSL/cable connection anyway) you'd never even know the difference.
It's just an academic question at this point, but why are all these new addresses neeeded?
Yes, I know NAT isn't a real solution for a shortage of addresses. But really, the vast majority of Internet-connected devices don't need a public address.
Home Internet connections, cell phones, etc. have no need for public addresses. Which begs the question, are these companies just being selfish in requesting so many more? I don't see any real legitimate need. And if this is the case, why are they still actually being given more?
This is partially true, but it's not as if the sophistication of native apps will stop either. Web apps are behind now, and I think they will remain behind in the future, because they're not native code making full use of native APIs.
There are already plenty of web-based apps that will run fine on any mobile device that uses a WebKit-based browser –meaning iPhone, iPod touch, Android, Palm's WebOS, and more. Examples range from a Twitter client called Hahlo, to Google Reader. This is nothing new and nothing exciting.
I like Mozilla and their products, but web apps on mobile are the same old story as web apps on the desktop. Native apps will always be better, and any advantages that web apps may have had are easily compensated by making your native app able to sync its data to online services.
It's painful how badly the original article frames the relationship between Firefox, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey. Here are a few basic facts about Firefox/Thunderbird/Mozilla, though not necessarily in exact chronological order...
- Netscape started Mozilla as an open source foundation on which future versions of Netscape would be based.
- The all-in-one browser suite was called Mozilla, and the rendering engine therein is Gecko.
- The Mozilla suite was the basis of Netscape 6 and 7.
- A browser-only version (Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox) was created.
- A mail/news-only version was also spun off as Thunderbird.
- Eventually Netscape 8 and 9 were also released, but based on Firefox rather than the suite.
- Thanks to the growing popularity of the standalone apps, the Mozilla suite was turned into an unsupported (by the organization/corporation, anyway) community project, and renamed to SeaMonkey to avoid confusion over who was developing it.
The main point to take away from this is Firefox and Thunderbird are based on SeaMonkey, not the other way around. A lot of code from Firefox and Thunderbird comes back to SeaMonkey, however, which is frequently a source of confusion for users.
Besides, webmail is today's king. This is why "Seamonkey" is often forgotten.
For many people webmail is king, but real desktop email clients still have a lot to offer. Even if I primarily used a webmail interface (which I don't), I would still want a desktop email app around for its ability to easily interact with other desktop applications -- for example handling attachments generated by your other apps to hand off to your mail client. Or even just the "Send Link" or equivalent menu item in your web browser to quickly email someone the address of the page you're viewing. Webmail has matured a lot in the last few years, but it lacks a certain level of polish that won't be possible until web apps become true peers of desktop software.
Great advice. It's also important to make sure you do it in an environment that you like. I got into tech/IT jobs because computers were my hobby, not my actual field of study in college. But I quickly hated each job I got. Either I felt exploited and unappreciated, or I hated an aspect of my job such as too much time spent doing phone support.
About a year and a half ago I found a job doing IT for a couple technology-heavy K-8 schools. For once I actually enjoy my job -- or at least don't hate getting up in the morning -- because I feel valued and appreciated by the staff and students. And even if I put in unpaid overtime once in a while, at least it feels like it's for a good cause.
So once you've decided what you enjoy doing, you really need to find a tolerable place to do it. Your coworkers and overall work environment can turn an "I like doing this" job into something you hate overnight.
I know mobile browsing has traditionally been a pain, but outside of work I actually do more browsing and emailing from my iPhone than from my personal computer.
Sorry if I sound like an Apple apologist. For the sake of disclosure, I do have an iPhone and I use and support/manage Macs as my day job -- about 700 of them.
Anyway, I think pushing an enterprise config utility to all their Windows users was most likely a simple mistake. I'm guessing someone who manages their update service accidentally put it in the "make available to everyone" category instead of "make available to people who have an older version of the same utility" category. What's the point? I can't think of anything Apple would stand to gain by doing this deliberately.
Nothing is being blocked. Apple is simply discontinuing their own support for Palm devices. Palm itself stopped officially supporting Macs years ago. There's nothing preventing users from running third-party software to sync.
In addition to the other points made above, consider that anyone competent to do the job could grant themselves remote access while you're not looking. If you select your level of support based on a notion that you can trust some types of support people more or less than others, you are choosing them for the wrong reasons. First determine what level of support you need -- full-time onsite employee, part-time onsite employee, or outsourced support that may or may not do all work in person. Once you've made that decision, choose someone with a decent reputation or references to do the job for you.
I first heard of Bing two days ago thanks to an ad on Hulu. That ad featured a woman with a necklace made of hot dogs, and said nothing about search engines or that Bing was even tech-related. For all they said in the ad it could have just as easily been a sports commentary hour. Great job building brand awareness.
Not a bad idea... thanks.
Why would I want to? Personally it's because any time I hit a page with a Java applet the browser hangs for a while as everything is loaded. Even on a relatively recent computer with 2GB+ of RAM.
I'd like to disable Java but I work at a school district where...
- Our Internet filter keeps you authenticated with a popup that embeds a Java applet
- Our Internet filter admin interface is Java
- Our wireless network login uses a Java applet to authenticate your username and password
- Our student record database runs on Oracle with a Java interface
Basically if I disabled Java I could only access one or two superfluous file servers on the LAN, and only using an Ethernet cable. Not gonna happen, unfortunately.
If you don't restrict your e-mailing to regular work hours, you're an "emailaholic"?
Indeed, and having a smartphone changes one's habits too. I may not look at it for hours if I have something interesting going on, but if I am just lounging around I may respond the moment I hear my iPhone ding. I'm not constantly looking it, but my mail is always within reach. Some might classify that as addiction, but I just see it as a matter of convenience and extending people the courtesy of responding quickly if I am free when their message comes in.
Surely for the users. I'm no whiz developer but I do know that anyone with Apple's resources could make a Twitter clone virtually overnight. It really doesn't do all that much. I think that Twitter could go hand-in-hand with Apple's iLife software suite and the iPhone, still existing as a social network, but driven by a desire to advertise what you can do with a Mac. They recently added support for publishing photos to Flickr and Facebook, for example. Next what if they included the option to announce new uploads of photos, movies, iWeb sites, etc. on Twitter? That in and of itself wouldn't make money for Apple, but it's a great way of letting a huge audience see the creations that their users have published.
Give it time, you'll like the Beatles. Everyone starts off disliking the Beatles and thinking they're over-rated until they reach the age of about 18-19 and start to discover proper music.
If you can't respect the Beatle's work then you're really out of touch with all they have done.
I respectfully disagree. I liked the Beatles when I was in high school, but as I moved through my twenties I changed my mind. I can still enjoy Sergeant Pepper from time to time, but I can't stand listening to much else the Beatles or its members did. To me it sounds just as contrived saccharine as today's pop music, just a different style so people get away with being nostalgic about it.
Anyone still on Win2K can, of course, upgrade to Firefox if they're willing.
To me it seems like the definitions are pretty clear, yet people take a lot of liberties with the meanings. I've always had the understanding that...
Alpha = Somewhat usable but not feature-complete and probably pretty unstable.
Beta = Feature-complete but still has plenty of bugs to work out.
RC = A candidate for, well, release! If no major problems are found it may be sent out the door as a standard public release with no further changes.
Maybe from the combined cost of an iPhone original plan which includes the voice?
Which only makes sense if the OP's only alternative to getting an iPhone would be getting no phone at all.
Also I bet there's a decent overlap between potential satellite radio subscribers and potential iPhone/gPhone users. That is, people who have some disposable income and are into gadgets. And for many it's a given that they'll own an iPhone...
The real choice some of us would face is iPhone vs. iPhone + satellite radio. Sure, satellite radio is cheaper than an iPhone service plan if you set it up as an either/or choice. But there's limited value in subscribing if you're going to own the iPhone anyway.
Apple does have a monopoly over the areas they've defined -- the iPhone among them.
But you are right -- the one difference is that Apple isn't quite big enough. Do you think they would behave any better if they were?
To imply that Apple has a monopoly on iPhones is a misapplication of the term. You can't have a monopoly on a specific product line, because generally there is only one company that ever even *makes* a product line. Otherwise it wouldn't be their product and their brand. Apple doesn't have a monopoly on iPhones any more than George Foreman has a monopoly on George Foreman grills.
...though the iPhone would actually be $149 after the special offer. That is, of course, ignoring the phone service contract, but its up-front price is *not* $449 as implied by the parent post.
Interesting, thanks for the info. I have a MobileMe account though I rarely use the web interface. I was unaware of these issues.