The controversey isn't about the *art* it is about the *artist* and the authenticity of the painting. It's exactly identical to the controversey that exists at a flea market when someone is caught stapling fake mimeographed 'Certificate of Authenticity' on a highly collectable Elvis Clock (either kind-the one where it's Elvis' name on a fake guitar body, or the one where the clock is in Elvis belly)
The point is, it's all about speculators and untalented people and their drive to make money. And the 'marks' they victimize by creating a frenzy of scarcity around certain items.
This is happening in the 'tech' world as well. There was a certain amount of controversey recently over someone selling a close replica of the Apple I computer on eBay. It had the same chips in the same layout on the board, but was clearly marked in etched-in text on the board as a modern copy. "But what if the new owner scrubs that off and tries to sell it as authentic!!!" people cried. People who buy into the "rarity-as-valuable" thing get panicky whenever anybody challanges their assignment of value.
It has little to do with 'trademark' or IP concerns when it enters the true 'collectable' scene, as it usually concerns items long out of production, so none of the accrued value of the 'rare' items goes to the creator.
Usually Credit Unions are 'sweet deal' organizations, where the members are allowed in based on some qualifying criteria, like who your employer is. He probably CAN'T quit and move to another Credit Union. He can quit and go to any crumby bank. Likely the services won't be as good at a regular bank.
Be fair. The fact that Jobs isn't a programmer or techie, just someone who exploits programmers and techies to do his bidding, doesn't make him an idiot. It makes him a user of people, but not an idiot. He's more of a 'design guy' type. You know, the guy who sits in a meeting room adding features and bullshit that somebody else has to implement.
Us tech folks generally revile that sort of person.
Sure but without spending on the latest tech, you'll get behind Intel and that's something IBM cannot afford..
It's something IBM could afford, but are not interested in. It's just a pissing match between Intel and AMD over irrelevant specsmanship. IBM is in the business of producing Buisiness Machines.
Motorola dropped out of the PowerPC consortium awhile back specificially because they wanted out of the pissing match.
Naw, Apple put Power Architecture chips in their systems for year after year. But they sell to a different market than anybody else using Power chips, and don't have the resources to do their own silicon.
Me, I'm resentful of what the whole 'PowerPC consortium' did to Motorola. They were one great silicon producer, but dealing closely with Apple did them significant damage.
If Linux is just the kernel and/or software-flaw statistics need to be split amongst the many OSes based on the Linux kernel, then there are many tiny OSes based on the Linux kernel, all statistically insignificant.
Solaris has at least several percent market share, if you don't count the 30,000,000 six year old children counted as 'users' in the statistics because so many people have a 'home computer.' (kind of the Trabant of computing)
Are you telling me the Itanium instruction set and whatever AMD is calling their 64 bit architecture this week's instruction set are identical? I thought there were specific differences where the 64 bit features come to play.
The whole point of DTP is polish. To produce a document which isn't just useful, it's stunning.
Hogwash. Every display ad, and every magazine page in print today was produced using 'Desktop Publishing' tools. And almost NONE of it is 'stunning.' If you want 'stunning' hold still while someone with a cluestick stuns you on the back of the head.
Please explain to us what *is* desktop publishing, then. You keep knocking down what anybody suggests, but you've not defined a set of parameters? Are you referring to one or several pieces of proprietary software that you can't do without? Are you talking about 'color calibrated monitors'? There are many things that get termed 'desktop publishing' which include packages that ran on the Macintosh SE. There isn't anything that ran on the Macintosh SE that can't and isn't duplicated in modern software on the freenixes.
You're not a princess sitting on a velvet cushion, you know, who can have suitors all line up and say 'yes' or 'no' to each prospect. You've got to participate in the process.
With Apple moving to intel this is little reason for hard core PC not to consider it anymore.
You aren't making any sense. If Company JJ (hypothetical vendor) decided to produce a proprietary design that just happened to use the same intel processor line, it would still be a proprietary design and I'd still have to buy that specific company's hardware (and hope the company wasn't going out of business, or wandering off to become a music distributor and possibly dump the desktop PC market) to use their much vaunted OS.
Now, if I could select from an array of ATX motherboards at Fry's Electronics, the case of my choice, and also buy a shrinkwrapped box containing the 'OSX' Operating System to install on it, it might be different. As it is, Apple's product line is far more restrictive than what almost anybody else sells on the market. Certainly more restrictive than the encryption and region coding on DVDs. There are multiple vendors for DVD players and DVD drives to pick from, afterall.
but for me there is a new networking & audio stacks, XPS & totally cool new printing system, transactional FS, and a lot more interesting stuff.
Interesting is a good choice of words. You sound like the kind of person who enjoys digging in and tweaking things. Isn't there a Chinese proverb "May you lead an interesting life which is NOT meant to be taken as good wishes for somebody's future?
To me, what I visualize when I think of someone all eager to dig into the latest collection of broken Microsoft beta features and half-complete 'innovations' is a dog and some roadkill. The dog finds the roadkill so 'interesting' that it will actually roll in it.
If you choose to use a convergent Operating System (one where the developers have been at it for a long time and it evolves, not 'Disto of the Week/month/year' or a Windoze, where it all gets ripped out and redone on a regular basis) you'll reap the benefits of long consistent development. I haven't had a swearing match with a NetBSD install in forever, and I install it on a LOT of weird hardware. Similarly, there are a few good Linux-based OSes (Slackware comes to mind) where this is also the case.
Or you can just buy into a single source solution and pay extra for a turnkey Solaris box or something from Apple.
The concept of a 'sexy case' isn't just ugly, it sounds repulsive.
I swear they should be required to bundle a spraypaint can full of beige paint with some of the case monstrosities on the market, in case the new owner comes to his/her senses someday.
That's why some of us stopped at Windows 2000. With W2K there's no 'validation' needed, and it's the last Microsoft OS without it. I also have an early version of Office 2000 that doesn't require 'validaton' after installing. I have a good collection of the Windows 2000 'service pack' binaries and am ready and willing to 'hunker down' and just use that for the forseeable future. I can take the Windows machine offline, or stick it on a subnet not routed to the Internet, as almost all my Internet connectivity these days is on _this_ box which runs NetBSD.
I'll never run XP and probably never this 'Vista' either. There's no compelling reason for me to do so.
Your concept of those you oppose is rather flawed. Better work on your understanding of them, because your caricatures only earn 'insightful' markups in an echo chamber like this one. You'll be in trouble out in the real world.
I only have two computers here newer than five years old, and they're the only two machines with Windows on them. And they're not the most used systems.
Mac OS X is not a UNIX. Microsoft Windows NT with SFU installed can be just as much a 'UNIX' as Mac OS X. Oh, with one distinction. Microsoft Windows NT with SFU installed is certified as a UNIX(tm).
When you 'open up the sides of the case' you entirely undermine the designed airflow of the case, and it's easy to make critical parts of the system hotter. Perhaps you have your cables routed poorly and are blocking airflow. Or perhaps you're just 'showing off' by cracking that case to demonstrate you're a real tech wiz. ("He knows how to hold a phillips screwdriver. He must be a real Computer Wiz")
China didn't 'realize' they were behind. The Party knew that all along. The Great Leap Forward was just their clone of a Leninist rapid-industrialization blitz, a copy of the Russian bloodbath from earlier in the century.
Slashdot Mirror
The controversey isn't about the *art* it is about the *artist* and the authenticity of the painting. It's exactly identical to the controversey that exists at a flea market when someone is caught stapling fake mimeographed 'Certificate of Authenticity' on a highly collectable Elvis Clock (either kind-the one where it's Elvis' name on a fake guitar body, or the one where the clock is in Elvis belly)
The point is, it's all about speculators and untalented people and their drive to make money. And the 'marks' they victimize by creating a frenzy of scarcity around certain items.
This is happening in the 'tech' world as well. There was a certain amount of controversey recently over someone selling a close replica of the Apple I computer on eBay. It had the same chips in the same layout on the board, but was clearly marked in etched-in text on the board as a modern copy. "But what if the new owner scrubs that off and tries to sell it as authentic!!!" people cried. People who buy into the "rarity-as-valuable" thing get panicky whenever anybody challanges their assignment of value.
It has little to do with 'trademark' or IP concerns when it enters the true 'collectable' scene, as it usually concerns items long out of production, so none of the accrued value of the 'rare' items goes to the creator.
Thanks for the correction. I was 'winging it' on the 'interesting life/times' thing.
Usually Credit Unions are 'sweet deal' organizations, where the members are allowed in based on some qualifying criteria, like who your employer is. He probably CAN'T quit and move to another Credit Union. He can quit and go to any crumby bank. Likely the services won't be as good at a regular bank.
Have you seen the die size on some of those big silicon monsters??
Be fair. The fact that Jobs isn't a programmer or techie, just someone who exploits programmers and techies to do his bidding, doesn't make him an idiot. It makes him a user of people, but not an idiot. He's more of a 'design guy' type. You know, the guy who sits in a meeting room adding features and bullshit that somebody else has to implement.
Us tech folks generally revile that sort of person.
Sure but without spending on the latest tech, you'll get behind Intel and that's something IBM cannot afford..
It's something IBM could afford, but are not interested in. It's just a pissing match between Intel and AMD over irrelevant specsmanship. IBM is in the business of producing Buisiness Machines.
Motorola dropped out of the PowerPC consortium awhile back specificially because they wanted out of the pissing match.
Naw, Apple put Power Architecture chips in their systems for year after year. But they sell to a different market than anybody else using Power chips, and don't have the resources to do their own silicon.
Me, I'm resentful of what the whole 'PowerPC consortium' did to Motorola. They were one great silicon producer, but dealing closely with Apple did them significant damage.
You missed my point, it seems.
If Linux is just the kernel and/or software-flaw statistics need to be split amongst the many OSes based on the Linux kernel, then there are many tiny OSes based on the Linux kernel, all statistically insignificant.
Solaris has at least several percent market share, if you don't count the 30,000,000 six year old children counted as 'users' in the statistics because so many people have a 'home computer.' (kind of the Trabant of computing)
Are you telling me the Itanium instruction set and whatever AMD is calling their 64 bit architecture this week's instruction set are identical? I thought there were specific differences where the 64 bit features come to play.
The whole point of DTP is polish. To produce a document which isn't just useful, it's stunning.
Hogwash. Every display ad, and every magazine page in print today was produced using 'Desktop Publishing' tools. And almost NONE of it is 'stunning.' If you want 'stunning' hold still while someone with a cluestick stuns you on the back of the head.
Please explain to us what *is* desktop publishing, then. You keep knocking down what anybody suggests, but you've not defined a set of parameters? Are you referring to one or several pieces of proprietary software that you can't do without? Are you talking about 'color calibrated monitors'? There are many things that get termed 'desktop publishing' which include packages that ran on the Macintosh SE. There isn't anything that ran on the Macintosh SE that can't and isn't duplicated in modern software on the freenixes.
You're not a princess sitting on a velvet cushion, you know, who can have suitors all line up and say 'yes' or 'no' to each prospect. You've got to participate in the process.
With Apple moving to intel this is little reason for hard core PC not to consider it anymore.
You aren't making any sense. If Company JJ (hypothetical vendor) decided to produce a proprietary design that just happened to use the same intel processor line, it would still be a proprietary design and I'd still have to buy that specific company's hardware (and hope the company wasn't going out of business, or wandering off to become a music distributor and possibly dump the desktop PC market) to use their much vaunted OS.
Now, if I could select from an array of ATX motherboards at Fry's Electronics, the case of my choice, and also buy a shrinkwrapped box containing the 'OSX' Operating System to install on it, it might be different. As it is, Apple's product line is far more restrictive than what almost anybody else sells on the market. Certainly more restrictive than the encryption and region coding on DVDs. There are multiple vendors for DVD players and DVD drives to pick from, afterall.
but for me there is a new networking & audio stacks, XPS & totally cool new printing system, transactional FS, and a lot more interesting stuff.
Interesting is a good choice of words. You sound like the kind of person who enjoys digging in and tweaking things. Isn't there a Chinese proverb "May you lead an interesting life which is NOT meant to be taken as good wishes for somebody's future?
To me, what I visualize when I think of someone all eager to dig into the latest collection of broken Microsoft beta features and half-complete 'innovations' is a dog and some roadkill. The dog finds the roadkill so 'interesting' that it will actually roll in it.
If you choose to use a convergent Operating System (one where the developers have been at it for a long time and it evolves, not 'Disto of the Week/month/year' or a Windoze, where it all gets ripped out and redone on a regular basis) you'll reap the benefits of long consistent development. I haven't had a swearing match with a NetBSD install in forever, and I install it on a LOT of weird hardware. Similarly, there are a few good Linux-based OSes (Slackware comes to mind) where this is also the case.
Or you can just buy into a single source solution and pay extra for a turnkey Solaris box or something from Apple.
The concept of a 'sexy case' isn't just ugly, it sounds repulsive.
I swear they should be required to bundle a spraypaint can full of beige paint with some of the case monstrosities on the market, in case the new owner comes to his/her senses someday.
Of couse at on point, support stops for XP.
That's why some of us stopped at Windows 2000. With W2K there's no 'validation' needed, and it's the last Microsoft OS without it. I also have an early version of Office 2000 that doesn't require 'validaton' after installing. I have a good collection of the Windows 2000 'service pack' binaries and am ready and willing to 'hunker down' and just use that for the forseeable future. I can take the Windows machine offline, or stick it on a subnet not routed to the Internet, as almost all my Internet connectivity these days is on _this_ box which runs NetBSD.
I'll never run XP and probably never this 'Vista' either. There's no compelling reason for me to do so.
Did I miss anything?
Uh, what were you aiming at?
Your concept of those you oppose is rather flawed. Better work on your understanding of them, because your caricatures only earn 'insightful' markups in an echo chamber like this one. You'll be in trouble out in the real world.
I've said it before, I'll say it again- if RSS was called SpeedFeed every user would have to have it.
Naw, just the meth users would have it.
Why do you need Web Mail while on the job?
I only have two computers here newer than five years old, and they're the only two machines with Windows on them. And they're not the most used systems.
Well, if you're going to split apart all the OSes based on the Linux kernel for bug counting, it will also be necessary to do so for usage statistics.
.005% of the market share.
So what does that mean? It means Microsoft and Mac OS X are the ONLY operating systems with more than
Satisfied?
Mac OS X is not a UNIX. Microsoft Windows NT with SFU installed can be just as much a 'UNIX' as Mac OS X. Oh, with one distinction. Microsoft Windows NT with SFU installed is certified as a UNIX(tm).
When you 'open up the sides of the case' you entirely undermine the designed airflow of the case, and it's easy to make critical parts of the system hotter. Perhaps you have your cables routed poorly and are blocking airflow. Or perhaps you're just 'showing off' by cracking that case to demonstrate you're a real tech wiz. ("He knows how to hold a phillips screwdriver. He must be a real Computer Wiz")
China didn't 'realize' they were behind. The Party knew that all along. The Great Leap Forward was just their clone of a Leninist rapid-industrialization blitz, a copy of the Russian bloodbath from earlier in the century.
Yes, but those few AMD parts outrun the Intel parts. Like the highly successful Alpha parts did in their time.
Don't you see? There's a pattern here.