I don't think that MS bashing is always the correct position just because the writer feels he doesn't like the look of Bill Gates' glasses.
He was referring to MS' "PlaysForSure" DRM which MS abruptly abandoned when the Zune came out. All users who had purchased music with PlaysForSure DRM were screwed and could not transfer a single track to their Zune. This is a far cry from not liking Bill Gates' glasses--this is a legitimate gripe and one that Apple has certainly never pulled. Therefore, it remains odd for Apple to be the poster child for DRM abuse when there is a much larger abuser staring us all in the face.
1. Not every MOAB was a bug in the OS, or even in an Apple product. So "every single day" really means "every 2nd or 3rd day", if he was indeed referring to MOAB.
2. I have strong doubts that MOAB could have been turned into YOAB--there would not be 365 bugs to find. Therefore Gates' claim badly needs a "for a month" qualifier to even come close to veracity.
3. Even the worst OS-related MOAB findings did not demonstrate a Mac being "taken over totally". Removal of some files, or corruption of the OS to the point of requiring a reinstall, sure. But most were conceptual; they "may allow code execution", which is so vague it's unclear as to just how far any of them could have been taken. Therefore it's literally impossible for Gates to know that "taken over totally" was even a potential outcome.
Let's be clear here: we welcome constructive, reasoned criticism. Gates' rant was anything but.
Is it just me or does Gates seem to be turning into the Howard Hughes of our era? He doesn't have the beard or long fingernails yet, but he sure does have the disconnect from reality and the money to stay that way.
you just opened yourself up to a potential lawsuit for business defamation
1. I don't actually recall him mentioning the exact name of his employer, so nobody has specifically been defamed.
2. If they actually do sue him, then it is completely within his rights to publish those filings as they are a matter of public record. Defamation is something that is opinion and/or unprovable. Here he could easily prove that they filed and therefore the situation doesn't come under the heading of defamation.
Where I work we are required to give three months notice.
Please tell us in what state you work. If it is an "at will" state, then the law says you are not at all required to give 3 months notice. Very few employees will ever be able to do that anyway--if I am offered a job by another company, it is very unlikely they will be willing to wait 3 months for me to come there. They're hiring because they have work that needs to be done now, not 90 days from now.
Come to think of it, please tell us what company you work for so we can avoid ever applying for a job there. Seriously.
it's perfectly OK for Universities to fire those that don't hold up the group think and for Virgin Air's Richard Branson to give a $3 billion donation to the global warming cause. The Sierra Club Foundation 2004 budget was $91 million and the Natural Resources Defense Council had a $57 million budget for the same year. Compare that to the often media derided Competitive Enterprise Institute's small $3.6 million annual budget.
And none of that has anything whatsoever to do with the fact that ExxonMobil is paying for specific conclusions. That is a simple fact that you are either unwilling or unable to accept: That a "scientist" who answers ExxonMobil's offer only gets paid if they provide the answer that is in ExxonMobil's financial best interest. That is not science, that is mercenaryism, and the sooner you stop trying to defend it the less silly you (and ExxonMobil) will seem.
Go watch the movie "The Corporation" and your question will be answered. And no, it's not a propaganda film--it's a very even-handed documentary that analyzes the concept of a corporation. It examines just what you said--that the people in a company are often kind folks outside of work, but how the attitude of the group can change when they gather towards a common goal of making money. On the flip side, it also examines how the public often mis-perceives corporations as evil when the corporation is really simply just doing what it was designed to do--make a profit. Highly recommended viewing. http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0379225/
Hmmmmmmn. I still don't really see a difference between govt taxing earnings & govt taxing prizes.
I do. The point of taxes is for the gov't to take a portion of something you win/earn. Taxing him $25K is not taking a portion of his trip, it is taking money he does not and never did have. To me that is not in any way the same thing as the gov't taking a cut of a purely monetary prize and leaving him with the remainder. One scenario leaves him richer and the other leaves him poorer.
The article states "We believe they use Google Earth to identify the most vulnerable areas such as tents."
The satellite photos Google uses are updated every few years at best. If the UK forces had left their tents in the same place for years, it's not Google they should have been worried about, it's their commanders. But I somehow doubt those tents were left intact for such a long time, so the Telegraph is dishing out a pile of BS here.
OS X server and apple raid? Do they even have a one percent share?
How does percentage market share have anything whatsoever to do with power? By your reasoning, cheap Chevys or Skodas would be the most powerful cars on the road instead of the Koenigsegg or Pagani Zonda. You weren't just grasping at straws with that statement, you missed the straws altogether.
Aren't these just check off products so Apple can say they offer a server and a raid device. I suppose that apple fanatic sites might buy them, but they are a pretty limited product line.
Oh, so Virginia Tech only chose XServes to build their supercomputer with because they were Mac Fanbois, not because they wanted the fastest, best rackmount servers they could find?
There is no possible way 31 separate security holes could exist;
Kidding aside, I'll be impressed if he's able to locate 31 distinctly separate, true security holes in 31 days. He'll find some to be sure, but I predict he'll try to stretch some into two and others will be either "by design" or only security holes if you use the term very loosely. But we'll see.
"That's the whole point: for them to use it. Why do you think the Gaim folks started libgaim in the first place? If the Adium devs come across a bug in libgaim, they file it or offer a patch just like anyone else."
So your original contention that the Adium folks have done a favor to libgaim is bullshit then.
Um, no, both his points are in complete agreement--that Adium helps libgaim. In one way by porting to another platform and another by helping find & fix bugs. It seems as if you were grasping at another way of contradicting him and completely missed.
"The Cocoa APIs do not exist on Windows or Linux, neither does the Objective-C runtime. "
Why not? I tell you why not, it's because Apple chooses not to. This goes back to the whole selfishness of the apple crowd.
Anyway the same thing can be said of the win32 API.
The Apple crowd is not being one iota more selfish than the Microsoft crowd--neither one shares its APIs with the other. So I guess the Apple crowd isn't as selfish as you are convinced they are, eh?
The point is that the vast majority of the open source community shuns proprietary frameworks in favor of open frameworks, even if they choose proprietary frameworks they choose the ones that are cross platform.
So we are all expected to sink to the lowest common denominator? If so, I assume your web browser of choice is lynx? After all, we can't develop extra features for an app just because it's running on a computer that has, say, a GUI. (Keep in mind any argument you make against this can also be an argument against your opposition to porting to MacOS.)
"And they're right to be resentful of it because the user experience blows. They're not obligated to tolerate it silently."
Oh the humanity!!!. I really feel your suffering there. Imagine that. Tolerating the UI of a program somebody gave you for free. Oh the agony of it all.
Right...to hell with anyone trying to improve things & do them better.
"We have standards. Expecting developers to live up to those standards isn't being "spoiled". "Spoiled" is when everyone writes web pages to cater to one platform's broke-ass browser. Spoiled is getting every game first and not having to wait a year, if it even comes out. We're not beggars, so we're allowed to be choosers. Deal with it."
Bhahaha. Deal with it!!!. Yes we will all bow down to your demands and rewrite all of our apps in cocoa.
Apparently you're not able to remember statements from paragraph to paragraph. He specifically advocated developing a common back end to all apps and only customizing the GUI. That does not in any way, shape, or form mean "rewrite all our apps in cocoa".
Look man you keep making my point over and over again. There is nothing to be gained from an open source project making any effort to port to the mac. All they will get is the likes of you shitting on them constantly while not lifting a finger to help.
Again with the short memory. Remember how he said that Adium, just like all other ports, tracks and reports bugs back to libgaim? Or is selective memory the only way you can keep from admitting that you might be wrong about this?
They all have to deal with your attitude.
I'll take his "we can do better" attitude any day over your "I've learned to eat dung and like it, so everyone else should too" one.
Why would anybody want to deal with people like you without getting paid for it?
Because maybe he's only hostile towards people with closed minds. Those whose minds are open see that he actually has good ideas and they get along great.
I think the point was that we the common folk get to surrender our life savings, educations, cars homes, etc., while the CEO gets off just giving his kids a stern talkning-to (okay, he's a CEO so it qualifies as worse that the talking-to I got as a kid).
Actually, I expect his kids got a speech something like this:
Guys, I'm the f---ing CEO of Warner Music. How do you think it looks when my own family pirates music? C'mon, THINK!
OK, we need to do some damage control: Here's $1000 for each of you from my pocket change. Go erase the downloaded files and buy legal ones. Hurry!
I assure you, the talkings-to I got as a kid did not go like that.
I recently spec'ed out a MythTV box with an 80gb hard drive and hardware MPEG encoding and a nice media center case for $350
Every few months someone claims to be able to make a better TiVo using MythTV for the same price. But invariably when one goes to do it, they find it costs twice as much as claimed. No box for $350 is going to sit quietly in your entertainment center; it will be a PC-shaped box with a loud fan. And, no, you can't do other things with it besides MythTV; it's in your entertainment center, not at a desk. It doesn't have a keyboard or mouse because there's no room for those in an entertainment center. And it's connected to a TV, not a monitor, so you can't see anything but TV resolution. So undertaking to build one's own PVR will cost more and be less convenient than a TiVo or ReplayTV. And it will be less reliable as the MythTV software crashes or otherwise misbehaves. That is what TiVo and ReplayTV bring you--reliability in a nice, small, quiet form factor that just work. These are two technologies that are not going to merge because of physical realities, not programming hurdles.
Just pick the one that gives you the BEST HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN for the LEAST MONEY. Why does that have to be so difficult?
Spoken like someone who hasn't tried to choose a healthcare plan lately. Dude, my company gives us 6 plans to choose from and even then it's hours and hours of comparing fine print to see what they do & don't cover and for how much co-pay in each and every case. You have to be a really good number cruncher to be able to figure out the best choice for you AND you have to be a great prognosticator of your future health. And I'm single. I can't imagine how much harder it would be if I had a wife and newborn to worry about.
Oh, and the reason it "has to be so difficult" is because the companies purposely make it difficult. Their beancounters figured out long ago that the harder they make it to decipher the plans, the fewer claims they get because their customers can't figure out if they're covered or not, or how to file claims, or whether they can appeal denials of coverage. It's a serious racket. So let's not act like this is child's play.
he only statement you got correct here is MAYBE number 1, that its expensive to get a good machine
Actually, that was the one statement of his that I thought was most obviously wrong. The Mac/PC price difference may have been true 5 years ago but now definitly is bunk. There have been endless threads here on/. this year proving that comparably equipped Macs and PCs are now price-even.
his is an Apple product feasibility study, isn't it?
If it had been, the site would have been Mac-compatible. It wasn't. Visiting it in Safari and Firefox 2, it is completely non-functional (yes, I have the latest Flash player installed.)
Judicial activism to me is any decision which is pretty obviously wrong.
Then you're redefining it. Judicial activism is any decision where the decision is wrong legally and constitutionally.
Herein lies a fundamental problem: Many folks seem to use the term differently and may not even agree on a standard definition. Republicans (not to single out the right, but I don't recall any Democrats using the term in their campaign ads) seem to define Judicial Activism as "any decision we don't agree with" and have used it to decry, among other decisions, Roe v. Wade. Meanwhile, it seems to be nearly unanimaous among those of all political persuasions in this thread that, like it or not, Roe is correct both legally and constitutionally. So let's not condemn each other for defining the term differently, when the defintion is being continuously mauled in the popular media.
IANAL, but what you say makes sense. That is, the bar assn. would appear to be a monopoly, and as such one would think it would be subject to certain restrictions. That is, if the use their position as the only entity that will allow lawyers to work to force a laywer to choose between their livelihood and being able to express first admendment rights to free speech, then would the bar not be potentially violating Taft Hartley anti-trust regulations?
Poverty is generally measured, not by how little you have, but by how much less you have than average.
Yeah, and that's wrong. That is a totally corrupted perception of freedom.
If you ride a bike to work, live in a small house, feed your family and are happy, and I drive one of my BMWs to work, live in a big house, feed my family and am happy, does that make you less free that me?
You compared two citizens within a single country. Your example is invalid because within a single country they are compared against the same average. We are comparing different countries now, not within a single country; that is the only way you can have two different averages. Get it?
Compare a U.S. citizen to a Turkish citizen. Each makes (the equivalent of) $60000 per year. The American buys a BMW and takes out a 30 year mortgage on a big house. Because the average income in Turkey is lower, the Turk, with that same income, can pay off the mortgage on an equivalently large house in a few short years or could actually afford an entire small house with no mortgage at all. As a result, the Turk is considerably more free because he is not shackled with debt like the American is.
I call bullshit. Poverty is not "generally measured, not by how little you have, but by how much less you have than average." Poverty is the inability to sustain a way of life.
Not surprisingly, because of your U.S.-centric vision, you missed his point.
If you have $50000 and a guy in Costa Rica has $50000, the guy in Costa Rica is considerably more wealthy than you. This is because the average net worth and income in Costa Rica is so much lower than the U.S.
$50000 in Costa Rica will buy many more meals (I regularly paid under $3/meal in restaurants there), groceries, services, and property than it will in the U.S. That is all he was trying to say. Try to think outside the U.S. borders every once in a while. The U.S. is not the end all be all of human existence.
What happens when your computer crashes and your iPod is the only place you have your music stored? Or if you buy a new computer and want to use your iPod to migrate your music?
In the first case, Apple's official stance is that you should have kept a backup. No, I'm not being a troll or a hardass, I'm serious: Apple will not allow you to redownload songs you have purchased. Once you download them the first time, the onus is completely on you to keep them safe.
In the second case, Apple provides you the ability to authorize & deauthorize your Macintoshes as you buy new ones and retire old ones. If you want to use your iPod to transfer your music library (and this is not a recommended methodology), you must use the iPod's data functionality, not its music functionality. That is, drag copy your music to the iPod icon on your desktop and use the iPod as an external HD. Apple's officially recommended methods for data transfer including using your iDisk on.Mac, using the Data Migration tool that pops up on screen when you perform a new install of MacOS X, or putting one of the Macs into Target Disk Mode and connecting them directly via firewire.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Not every MOAB was a bug in the OS, or even in an Apple product. So "every single day" really means "every 2nd or 3rd day", if he was indeed referring to MOAB.
2. I have strong doubts that MOAB could have been turned into YOAB--there would not be 365 bugs to find. Therefore Gates' claim badly needs a "for a month" qualifier to even come close to veracity.
3. Even the worst OS-related MOAB findings did not demonstrate a Mac being "taken over totally". Removal of some files, or corruption of the OS to the point of requiring a reinstall, sure. But most were conceptual; they "may allow code execution", which is so vague it's unclear as to just how far any of them could have been taken. Therefore it's literally impossible for Gates to know that "taken over totally" was even a potential outcome.
Let's be clear here: we welcome constructive, reasoned criticism. Gates' rant was anything but.
Is it just me or does Gates seem to be turning into the Howard Hughes of our era? He doesn't have the beard or long fingernails yet, but he sure does have the disconnect from reality and the money to stay that way.
2. If they actually do sue him, then it is completely within his rights to publish those filings as they are a matter of public record. Defamation is something that is opinion and/or unprovable. Here he could easily prove that they filed and therefore the situation doesn't come under the heading of defamation.
Come to think of it, please tell us what company you work for so we can avoid ever applying for a job there. Seriously.
Go watch the movie "The Corporation" and your question will be answered. And no, it's not a propaganda film--it's a very even-handed documentary that analyzes the concept of a corporation. It examines just what you said--that the people in a company are often kind folks outside of work, but how the attitude of the group can change when they gather towards a common goal of making money. On the flip side, it also examines how the public often mis-perceives corporations as evil when the corporation is really simply just doing what it was designed to do--make a profit. Highly recommended viewing. http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0379225/
The satellite photos Google uses are updated every few years at best. If the UK forces had left their tents in the same place for years, it's not Google they should have been worried about, it's their commanders. But I somehow doubt those tents were left intact for such a long time, so the Telegraph is dishing out a pile of BS here.
-Kurt
Um, no, both his points are in complete agreement--that Adium helps libgaim. In one way by porting to another platform and another by helping find & fix bugs. It seems as if you were grasping at another way of contradicting him and completely missed.
The Apple crowd is not being one iota more selfish than the Microsoft crowd--neither one shares its APIs with the other. So I guess the Apple crowd isn't as selfish as you are convinced they are, eh?
So we are all expected to sink to the lowest common denominator? If so, I assume your web browser of choice is lynx? After all, we can't develop extra features for an app just because it's running on a computer that has, say, a GUI. (Keep in mind any argument you make against this can also be an argument against your opposition to porting to MacOS.)
Right...to hell with anyone trying to improve things & do them better.
Apparently you're not able to remember statements from paragraph to paragraph. He specifically advocated developing a common back end to all apps and only customizing the GUI. That does not in any way, shape, or form mean "rewrite all our apps in cocoa".
Again with the short memory. Remember how he said that Adium, just like all other ports, tracks and reports bugs back to libgaim? Or is selective memory the only way you can keep from admitting that you might be wrong about this?
I'll take his "we can do better" attitude any day over your "I've learned to eat dung and like it, so everyone else should too" one.
Because maybe he's only hostile towards people with closed minds. Those whose minds are open see that he actually has good ideas and they get along great.
-Kurt
I assure you, the talkings-to I got as a kid did not go like that.
-Kurt
-Kurt
Oh, and the reason it "has to be so difficult" is because the companies purposely make it difficult. Their beancounters figured out long ago that the harder they make it to decipher the plans, the fewer claims they get because their customers can't figure out if they're covered or not, or how to file claims, or whether they can appeal denials of coverage. It's a serious racket. So let's not act like this is child's play.
-Kurt
I swear the differences between Queen's English and American English are increasing, not decreasing....
-Kurt
-K
-Kurt
IANAL, but what you say makes sense. That is, the bar assn. would appear to be a monopoly, and as such one would think it would be subject to certain restrictions. That is, if the use their position as the only entity that will allow lawyers to work to force a laywer to choose between their livelihood and being able to express first admendment rights to free speech, then would the bar not be potentially violating Taft Hartley anti-trust regulations?
Compare a U.S. citizen to a Turkish citizen. Each makes (the equivalent of) $60000 per year. The American buys a BMW and takes out a 30 year mortgage on a big house. Because the average income in Turkey is lower, the Turk, with that same income, can pay off the mortgage on an equivalently large house in a few short years or could actually afford an entire small house with no mortgage at all. As a result, the Turk is considerably more free because he is not shackled with debt like the American is.
-Kurt
If you have $50000 and a guy in Costa Rica has $50000, the guy in Costa Rica is considerably more wealthy than you. This is because the average net worth and income in Costa Rica is so much lower than the U.S.
$50000 in Costa Rica will buy many more meals (I regularly paid under $3/meal in restaurants there), groceries, services, and property than it will in the U.S. That is all he was trying to say. Try to think outside the U.S. borders every once in a while. The U.S. is not the end all be all of human existence.
-Kurt
Not just the States. It was London that would not allow any carry on bags at all for a month; even the U.S. didn't get that uptight.
-Kurt
In the second case, Apple provides you the ability to authorize & deauthorize your Macintoshes as you buy new ones and retire old ones. If you want to use your iPod to transfer your music library (and this is not a recommended methodology), you must use the iPod's data functionality, not its music functionality. That is, drag copy your music to the iPod icon on your desktop and use the iPod as an external HD. Apple's officially recommended methods for data transfer including using your iDisk on .Mac, using the Data Migration tool that pops up on screen when you perform a new install of MacOS X, or putting one of the Macs into Target Disk Mode and connecting them directly via firewire.
-Kurt