But you can't have an open-source DVD Audio player, because to make a DVD Audio player you have to agree to enforce (and keep secret) the consumer copy-prevention mechanisms required.
Yes, but vendors have all hell shipping binary drivers for linux, since there is explicitly no backward or forward-compatible APIs across minor kernel versions. This is partially because in GNU-speak, Binary == bad - binary driver support is worse than no support at all.
It is because Apple supports video cards. Microsoft just provides a minimal set of options common across all of them, and leaves graphics cards manufacturers on their own. So they differentiate themselves by who can add the most # of rows and nested screens of options that the software utilizing the hardware should be responsible for, and have control over.
I've never felt the urge to tweak the windows driver to lie about features to various running apps to see if they perform better, I expect when paying $50 for a game that they have tested against the video card I have and have figured the best settings themselves. Of course this is easier for Apple, where you can go into one room in Cupertino and test every released configuration over the last decade.
First: Has anyone actually seen a torrent of this? has anyone seen it available for download someplace? Expect it to be > 1 single-layer DVD. I think the "anonymous reader" is just making shit up. Second: This runs on very limited hardward. Mind-bogglingly limited hardware. If you do not have the exact board the DTK ships with, it will not work. You could conceivably hack Darwin to support more hardware, but you aren't going to add any sort of good graphics driver support, because all newer video hardware drivers are closed-source (I blame the DVD consortium and Macrovision). Finally: There is no promise that the existing DTK will continue to work in the future. This build of the OS may be the only thing that ever runs on them.
The only conceivable ways a non-Apple hardware vendor will ever ship with OS X is by 1) operating illegally 2) Apple providing the hardware boxes to be branded per Apple's allowances ("HP iMac"), or 3) making a deal requiring that Apple "blesses" and fully QA's the OEM's hardware.
If you doubt this, go find a Mac and look at the "Display" control panel. Then compare this to the windows equivalent clusterfuck. This is only possible because Apple, not some random vendor, defines the UI to meet the needs of their users across their limited supported hardware vendors. Supported features get rolled out in new hardware and in the OS simulataneously, unlike the Microsoft world.
Another, oh, I dunno, perhaps _slightly_ more important reason for choosing a BSD over linux is that they already had it from NeXT, the kernel developers were from NeXT, and they had to ship a new operating system _yesterday_ to keep from going out of business?
The way that Microsoft is hoping to fix this in longhorn is that even an Administrator can only run user apps with 'normal' permissions unless they have configured policy for the app.
One could imagine a 'sandbox' like java has for binaries - the process only has r/w access to stdin, stdout and stderr by default, with an additional "privilege manager" used to negotiate more. The privilege manager would have user-facing UI, such as "do you wish to allow this user to do x/y/z". Thus UI tasks such as choosing a file may pipe their requests through this manager interface as well.
So you are saying that if an administrator wants to install software, they have a nice management tool to handle it and packages maintained as part of the distribution. If the user wants to install the same version of a piece of software already in the package database for their own use, they need to manually track down dependancies and build from source in their home folder?
I think people are in denial that this is a problem. - The security model of (most) Linux systems still assumes the fact that a binary being on the hard disk means that it should be entitled to every single permission associated with the user when run. - Users need to understand a priviledge escalation model (sudo) and be given permission by a site-wide administrator in order to install anything, includng prepackaged documentation. This is good sometimes, but there is no way for an adminstrator to say that user installs are ok, without giving some form of limited root access.
Current 'consumer' operating systems certainly aren't perfect on this account in terms of security, but those security issues are already acknowledged and being worked on.
Except, this move was planned long before the KHTML people came back and complained about lack of cooperation (or more appropriately - complained about perceived cooperation).
That event may have sped things along, but my understanding from the people on the project is that they have wanted this for a long time.
So, the response was prepared before the critisms ever arrived:)
That is just one reason, the other being that they usually will have licensed technology that is covered under trade secrets, or consider their own tech a trade secret.
But yes, The memory management unit only protects memory from the CPU. A hardware device which uses main memory can be exploited to get past all operating system memory management. For example, unprotected blitting access could allow you to blit kernel space into an off-screen buffer, patch, and blit back your exploit.
Given the admitted architectural flaws in the Microsoft Windows platform, I doubt that Apple even at 95% market share could have the severity of vulnerabilities that Microsoft enjoys today. Of course, to prevent arguments I won't tell you my measure of severity:)
Oh, you are definately underplaying linux and windows zealots. And you are forgetting things like
Free software zealots are people who think anything which isn't free software should be stolen and that the developers are bad people who deserve to be hurt. These are people who threaten me bodily harm because I upgraded from a linux desktop to a powerbook.
Microsoft zealots are people who think anything Microsoft does is hands-down the best thing in the industry, and refuse to even read reviews of other products, let alone allow evaluations. These people literally think Bill Gates shits platinum blocks. Thankfully I have not run into many of these people since school, because I choose to work for java/unix shops.
That, and I have learned to have great patience with these people, the same as I strive to show towards victoms of other types of serious disabilities.
Personally, I'd be happier if they completely dropped swing support on the Mac,or at least removed aqua L&F.
There is a proliferation of really horrid java applications on the Mac because people don't understand that you cannot WORA and have GUI make sense. Users of different operating systems have different needs and expectations, even when they are equivalent 'types' of users with relatively equal computer experience.
Are you talking about the new C++-derivative language support? You want std::string, not System::String. Without a qualifier, it will probably want to use the second form.
And yes, you have to use references ( "^" ) for managed types, not pointers. References move by the whims of the garbage collector.
Better get used to it - it is a proposed for ECMA (and later ISO) standardization. The version in the VS.Net 2003 release is basically gone now, swapped out for the iso-proposed version in VS 2005. Benefits include full managed STL support, but unfortunately existing C++ examples will probably require editing before compilation will work.
I believe KDE and GCC are now both waiting on a 1.2 release, that fixes many of the 'slowness' issues these projects have hit.
CVS import is unfortunately underoptimized, because usually people only do it once.
It is also very difficult to do, because you have to infer correlation between files in order to create a proper revision history - file-level commits means you need to do a substantial amount of scanning in order to figure out which files were part of a commit, and non-atomic commit means that the files may actually have different timestamps.
Actually, Larry has refused to sell licenses to people involved with other SCM systems in the past; there is no reason to think that policy has changed. The options were probabably
1. Linus switches SCM systems 2. Linus switches companies 3. Linus or OSDL buy Bitmover
I'm sure right now lots of independant parties are trying to work together and find solutions - am I expected by society to wait for them to do this, or am I allowed in this fictitious world to try to find my own solutions independantly?
Actually, slowness in subversion is usually easily shown to be due to the stateless point at which it starts operations. It has to scan all the directories (and some # of files) to decide what the local filesystem state is before it can begin the network operation. In most cases the actual network operation is as fast as it can be, it is the local working copy operation which hurts you. There are certainly things at the filesystem level which could be done to make all operations (on all fileystems, across all source control systems) faster.
Wow, detention of people is a far shot away from a business not being able to deliver an order confirmation. If I don't get an order confirmation, I will do the same thing I would do if I didn't get my actual order - call the business.
In an ideal world businesses would have some sort of clout with the ISPs which host them - you are their customer, after all. Even in a non-ideal world you can choose to host your business with a different ISP, one that doesn't play nice with spammers.
So boo-hoo, cry me a river. Running a legitimate business online on a spam-friendly ISP is like opening a fancy restaurant in the ghetto. Fancy that, it affects parts of your business, and affects your customers.
Re:If this isn't a joke, it means Java 1.5 arrives
on
Mac OS X Tiger Goes Gold
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You obviously have no clue - for a start you don't have to 'port' Java applications to OS X - they run as is, also your post has absolutely nothing to do with the post you are replying to - the parent doesn't mention anything about how much effort Apple puts into java.
It is developers who think that Java applications run as-is who are responsible for the shitty java applications on OS X today.
It takes a handful of lines to switch to the mac menu bar (instead of window-mounted menus), but nobody does it. Java apps which 'run' on the mac are often not even tested to see how they behave.
I would never advertise my mac client software as 'java software', because users now consider that a badge of warning. If it is a good mac app, the fact that it has java code in it shouldn't even cross the user's mind.
Slashdot Mirror
But you can't have an open-source DVD Audio player, because to make a DVD Audio player you have to agree to enforce (and keep secret) the consumer copy-prevention mechanisms required.
Yes, but vendors have all hell shipping binary drivers for linux, since there is explicitly no backward or forward-compatible APIs across minor kernel versions. This is partially because in GNU-speak, Binary == bad - binary driver support is worse than no support at all.
In Soviet Russia, A Beowulf Cluster imagines YOU
Surely you have heard of the IBM PC and PC-Compatibles?
It is because Apple supports video cards. Microsoft just provides a minimal set of options common across all of them, and leaves graphics cards manufacturers on their own. So they differentiate themselves by who can add the most # of rows and nested screens of options that the software utilizing the hardware should be responsible for, and have control over.
I've never felt the urge to tweak the windows driver to lie about features to various running apps to see if they perform better, I expect when paying $50 for a game that they have tested against the video card I have and have figured the best settings themselves. Of course this is easier for Apple, where you can go into one room in Cupertino and test every released configuration over the last decade.
First:
Has anyone actually seen a torrent of this? has anyone seen it available for download someplace? Expect it to be > 1 single-layer DVD.
I think the "anonymous reader" is just making shit up.
Second:
This runs on very limited hardward. Mind-bogglingly limited hardware. If you do not have the exact board the DTK ships with, it will not work. You could conceivably hack Darwin to support more hardware, but you aren't going to add any sort of good graphics driver support, because all newer video hardware drivers are closed-source (I blame the DVD consortium and Macrovision).
Finally:
There is no promise that the existing DTK will continue to work in the future. This build of the OS may be the only thing that ever runs on them.
The only conceivable ways a non-Apple hardware vendor will ever ship with OS X is by
1) operating illegally
2) Apple providing the hardware boxes to be branded per Apple's allowances ("HP iMac"), or
3) making a deal requiring that Apple "blesses" and fully QA's the OEM's hardware.
If you doubt this, go find a Mac and look at the "Display" control panel. Then compare this to the windows equivalent clusterfuck. This is only possible because Apple, not some random vendor, defines the UI to meet the needs of their users across their limited supported hardware vendors. Supported features get rolled out in new hardware and in the OS simulataneously, unlike the Microsoft world.
You mean the Windows Driver Architecture? Yeah, I'm sure microsoft has no patents on that...
Another, oh, I dunno, perhaps _slightly_ more important reason for choosing a BSD over linux is that they already had it from NeXT, the kernel developers were from NeXT, and they had to ship a new operating system _yesterday_ to keep from going out of business?
The way that Microsoft is hoping to fix this in longhorn is that even an Administrator can only run user apps with 'normal' permissions unless they have configured policy for the app.
One could imagine a 'sandbox' like java has for binaries - the process only has r/w access to stdin, stdout and stderr by default, with an additional "privilege manager" used to negotiate more. The privilege manager would have user-facing UI, such as "do you wish to allow this user to do x/y/z". Thus UI tasks such as choosing a file may pipe their requests through this manager interface as well.
So you are saying that if an administrator wants to install software, they have a nice management tool to handle it and packages maintained as part of the distribution. If the user wants to install the same version of a piece of software already in the package database for their own use, they need to manually track down dependancies and build from source in their home folder?
I think people are in denial that this is a problem.
- The security model of (most) Linux systems still assumes the fact that a binary being on the hard disk means that it should be entitled to every single permission associated with the user when run.
- Users need to understand a priviledge escalation model (sudo) and be given permission by a site-wide administrator in order to install anything, includng prepackaged documentation. This is good sometimes, but there is no way for an adminstrator to say that user installs are ok, without giving some form of limited root access.
Current 'consumer' operating systems certainly aren't perfect on this account in terms of security, but those security issues are already acknowledged and being worked on.
Except, this move was planned long before the KHTML people came back and complained about lack of cooperation (or more appropriately - complained about perceived cooperation).
:)
That event may have sped things along, but my understanding from the people on the project is that they have wanted this for a long time.
So, the response was prepared before the critisms ever arrived
how about re: security-related
That is just one reason, the other being that they usually will have licensed technology that is covered under trade secrets, or consider their own tech a trade secret.
But yes, The memory management unit only protects memory from the CPU. A hardware device which uses main memory can be exploited to get past all operating system memory management. For example, unprotected blitting access could allow you to blit kernel space into an off-screen buffer, patch, and blit back your exploit.
Given the admitted architectural flaws in the Microsoft Windows platform, I doubt that Apple even at 95% market share could have the severity of vulnerabilities that Microsoft enjoys today. Of course, to prevent arguments I won't tell you my measure of severity :)
Oh, you are definately underplaying linux and windows zealots. And you are forgetting things like
Free software zealots are people who think anything which isn't free software should be stolen and that the developers are bad people who deserve to be hurt. These are people who threaten me bodily harm because I upgraded from a linux desktop to a powerbook.
Microsoft zealots are people who think anything Microsoft does is hands-down the best thing in the industry, and refuse to even read reviews of other products, let alone allow evaluations. These people literally think Bill Gates shits platinum blocks. Thankfully I have not run into many of these people since school, because I choose to work for java/unix shops.
That, and I have learned to have great patience with these people, the same as I strive to show towards victoms of other types of serious disabilities.
Personally, I'd be happier if they completely dropped swing support on the Mac ,or at least removed aqua L&F.
There is a proliferation of really horrid java applications on the Mac because people don't understand that you cannot WORA and have GUI make sense. Users of different operating systems have different needs and expectations, even when they are equivalent 'types' of users with relatively equal computer experience.
Are you talking about the new C++-derivative language support? You want std::string, not System::String. Without a qualifier, it will probably want to use the second form.
And yes, you have to use references ( "^" ) for managed types, not pointers. References move by the whims of the garbage collector.
Better get used to it - it is a proposed for ECMA (and later ISO) standardization. The version in the VS.Net 2003 release is basically gone now, swapped out for the iso-proposed version in VS 2005. Benefits include full managed STL support, but unfortunately existing C++ examples will probably require editing before compilation will work.
It does swing.
I believe KDE and GCC are now both waiting on a 1.2 release, that fixes many of the 'slowness' issues these projects have hit.
CVS import is unfortunately underoptimized, because usually people only do it once.
It is also very difficult to do, because you have to infer correlation between files in order to create a proper revision history - file-level commits means you need to do a substantial amount of scanning in order to figure out which files were part of a commit, and non-atomic commit means that the files may actually have different timestamps.
Actually, Larry has refused to sell licenses to people involved with other SCM systems in the past; there is no reason to think that policy has changed. The options were probabably
1. Linus switches SCM systems
2. Linus switches companies
3. Linus or OSDL buy Bitmover
I'm sure right now lots of independant parties are trying to work together and find solutions - am I expected by society to wait for them to do this, or am I allowed in this fictitious world to try to find my own solutions independantly?
Actually, slowness in subversion is usually easily shown to be due to the stateless point at which it starts operations. It has to scan all the directories (and some # of files) to decide what the local filesystem state is before it can begin the network operation. In most cases the actual network operation is as fast as it can be, it is the local working copy operation which hurts you. There are certainly things at the filesystem level which could be done to make all operations (on all fileystems, across all source control systems) faster.
Check the IP addresses they are sent from - I bet you they are not from some hot, male yahoo at one of these web-based email providers.
Wow, detention of people is a far shot away from a business not being able to deliver an order confirmation. If I don't get an order confirmation, I will do the same thing I would do if I didn't get my actual order - call the business.
In an ideal world businesses would have some sort of clout with the ISPs which host them - you are their customer, after all. Even in a non-ideal world you can choose to host your business with a different ISP, one that doesn't play nice with spammers.
So boo-hoo, cry me a river. Running a legitimate business online on a spam-friendly ISP is like opening a fancy restaurant in the ghetto. Fancy that, it affects parts of your business, and affects your customers.
It is developers who think that Java applications run as-is who are responsible for the shitty java applications on OS X today.
It takes a handful of lines to switch to the mac menu bar (instead of window-mounted menus), but nobody does it. Java apps which 'run' on the mac are often not even tested to see how they behave.
I would never advertise my mac client software as 'java software', because users now consider that a badge of warning. If it is a good mac app, the fact that it has java code in it shouldn't even cross the user's mind.