In know that there are GNU tool OS X and certainly I know about bash. That's because "chsh/bin/zsh" was one of the first commands I typed into "Terminal" once I got my Mac.
Well, I would estimate about 30% - 40% of MacOS X is free. The Kernel of course and then a few dozed under the hut tools like Postfix, Fetchmail, the X Server and so on. Check http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html for details.
Only if the victim can't / won't reproduce afterwards. I know it is cynical but the idea of natural selection is to deselect the unfit before reproduction.
I agree with you here - and I am not condemning what Psystar does. I a just against the Apple-Monopoly part.
But then - if you where to put Porsche spare part engines purchased from the grey marked into Kias and advertise them them as Porsche Engined Cars "Almost as good as the original" - Maybe - just maybe - Porsche would sue you as well.
Surly you would not look at a General Motors store! So why would you expect a Mac System at Dell then?
And if you wanted a VW Beagle with a Porsche Engine then neither a VW nor a Porsche dealer would be helpful - you would have to go to one of the small "pimp my car" shops which would custom build what you desire.
And still neither Ford, nor GM, nor VW nor Porsche are considered a monopole.
This is now the 3rd of 4th "lost data" article here on/. and all where about "copies leaked". How long until the/. editors take note of the difference.
But then: maybe there are no/. editors - they are just a myth - maybe it's just a random number generator which pulls random articles off the Firehose....
For clarity, this article will call the two varieties UpperCamelCase and lowerCamelCase. Some people and organizations use the term camel case only for lower camel case, and refer to upper camel case as Pascal case.
Yes I did. The main terms are UpperCamelCase and lowerCamelCase. CamelCase is for for both. PascalCase is just another word for UpperCamelCase.
But I guess one can argue about the finer points for ever.
I take it you never heard of Symbian Signed and Java Verified then. I fact I do write my own calculator (http://uiq3.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Office/FX-602P) and it will only work properly when you hack you phone to deactivate Java Verified.
So No: the iPhone is not the only phone which needs hacking.
A calculator will know that the result to the question above is 7 while most of those calculators bundled with a smartphone will give 9 as a result.
In fact about 85% of the calculators you can buy for a smartphone will give the wrong result of 9 as well.
And none of the calculators you can buy for a smartphone can be programmed. MyCalul for Symbian 9 has formula evaluation - which is good - but still not programmable.
The only programmable calculators for a smart phones I know of are the one I wrote myself (http://uiq3.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Office/FX-602P) and Free42 (http://free42.sourceforge.net/).
Both of which are simulations of real calculators (Casio FX-602P and HP 42 respectively). And that is telling in it self.
And for Laptops the situation is the same - mostly I use an HP 16C Emulator and my FX-602P Simulator. Mac OS has a nice Calculator - almost as good as an HP 16C but not programmable.
Actually I wanted to buy an HP 16C - but they go for $300 and more at eBay. And this is telling as well considering that HP stopped producing them 1989.
Oh, and don't claim you hated Microsoft prior to 1995, you know it's a lie.
Well I disliked Microsoft ever since Dos 3.1 (and had no contact with M$ products before). In fact I used DR-Dos if at all possible. M$ products always where something I only used if I where paid for or absolutely had to.
Of course I am not quite sure when my dislike turned into outright hate - but it must have been around the time when M$ betrayed IBM over OS/2.
Thanks for clarifying that. Still OS/2 2.0, released in April 1992, had the ability to display "non file system object". Any (former) OS/2 developer (or user with knowledge of low lever working) will tell you that what you just described it is the main feature which makes the OS/2 workplace shell the best GUI shell ever.
As for handling ZIP: IBM never bothered but it was available to the WPS as third-party extension.
Are you sure you want to change the extension from ".jpg" to ".txt"? If you make this change, your document may open in a different application.
That doesn't look to me like it's using extended attributes for file types, or like it can cope with all the extensions being the same...
Actually I am not surprised. There are enough applications which won't attach Uniform Type Identifiers or type and creator codes tupples when creating a file and therefore both OS/2 and Mac OS X support them.
Mind you I have to say that OS/2 still is ahead of any other OS in the use of extended attributes for file types and other uses - while Mac OS X even went a step back from Mac OS 9 be making extension mandatory in there user interface guideline:-( .
Also I spoke of "no extension" that is renaming the file from "foo.jpg" to just "foo". But I still expect a warning if you do that (not at home - can't test it right now). And if the "com.apple.FinderInfo" EA is not attached to the file (i.E. the Jpeg was created with GIMP) then it is very likely that you won't be able to open the file afterwards.
And last not least: My postings in this thread are a bit on the "which list side of live" and do not fully reflect present reality. Sorry if that was not clear from the beginning.
Windows and Linux don't have fall back mechanism for file systems which don't support extended attributes natively. That might be the reason they don't use them.
Linux could just use magic(5) which although slower would be fairly reliable.
True magic can replace one use of extended attributes. It can't replace the others. OS/2 for example had an EA called ".ICON" - which allowed you to set an icon for every file or directory.
Slashdot Mirror
... that has already been observed here on /.
In know that there are GNU tool OS X and certainly I know about bash. That's because "chsh /bin/zsh" was one of the first commands I typed into "Terminal" once I got my Mac.
Martin
Well, I would estimate about 30% - 40% of MacOS X is free. The Kernel of course and then a few dozed under the hut tools like Postfix, Fetchmail, the X Server and so on. Check http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html for details.
Martin
Wasn't that an AirBook beside his chair? So why was he bashing Apple then?
But then at least the Darwin kernel is open source [1] and with MacPorts [2] he could himself a GNU/Darwin open source system.
Just kidding of course...
Martin
[1] http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/
[1] http://www.macports.org/
... but how do I know it's not a very cunning scammer with a very well done mock side?
Only if the victim can't / won't reproduce afterwards. I know it is cynical but the idea of natural selection is to deselect the unfit before reproduction.
Martin
I agree with you here - and I am not condemning what Psystar does. I a just against the Apple-Monopoly part.
But then - if you where to put Porsche spare part engines purchased from the grey marked into Kias and advertise them them as Porsche Engined Cars "Almost as good as the original" - Maybe - just maybe - Porsche would sue you as well.
That's an old idea - using transparent compression to gain more memory...
So by your rationale because since Porsche Engines are only sold in Porsche Cars then Porsche has monopolistic behaviour and should be punished?
Ok, in real live Porsche also sells OEM engines for other manufactures but let's ignore that now for the sake of argument.
So what is wrong with selling your own OS only with your own Computer?
Surly you would not look at a General Motors store! So why would you expect a Mac System at Dell then?
And if you wanted a VW Beagle with a Porsche Engine then neither a VW nor a Porsche dealer would be helpful - you would have to go to one of the small "pimp my car" shops which would custom build what you desire.
And still neither Ford, nor GM, nor VW nor Porsche are considered a monopole.
This is now the 3rd of 4th "lost data" article here on /. and all where about "copies leaked". How long until the /. editors take note of the difference.
But then: maybe there are no /. editors - they are just a myth - maybe it's just a random number generator which pulls random articles off the Firehose....
Martin
No you are right - because it's all of them. See my other post about
Sony Ericsson a little down. Early adopter get screwed left right centre.
Strange how history repeats itself and how companies won't learn from the mistakes of there competitors.
Sony Ericsson too produced a buggy phone:
P990i firmware thread: http://my-symbian.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27799 (683 pages)
P1i firmware thread: http://my-symbian.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33404 (39 pages)
Latest m600i firmware: http://my-symbian.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27899 (77 pages)
Sony Ericsson too refused to inform / listen to there customers:
Open Letter to SE: http://my-symbian.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34441 (31 pages)
Signatures to Open Letter: http://my-symbian.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34461 (24 pages)
And guess what: Sony Ericsson later announced an unexpected slowing of sales and cancels products:
Shake-Up at Sony Ericsson: http://my-symbian.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36312
Paris and Beibei dead and buried: http://my-symbian.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37057
Of course Apple only got one mobile phone so they can't bury it. Besides: I think the smart phone market at a hole is somehow in a mess.
Martin
Did you even read the link you posted?
Yes I did. The main terms are UpperCamelCase and lowerCamelCase. CamelCase is for for both. PascalCase is just another word for UpperCamelCase.
But I guess one can argue about the finer points for ever.
Martin
That's PascalCase. This is camelCase.
Nope: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CamelCase
Sure - but Hello World does not need any "Capabilities" which which require you to sign your application.
Martin
I take it you never heard of Symbian Signed and Java Verified then. I fact I do write my own calculator (http://uiq3.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Office/FX-602P) and it will only work properly when you hack you phone to deactivate Java Verified.
So No: the iPhone is not the only phone which needs hacking.
Martin
A calculator will know that the result to the question above is 7 while most of those calculators bundled with a smartphone will give 9 as a result.
In fact about 85% of the calculators you can buy for a smartphone will give the wrong result of 9 as well.
And none of the calculators you can buy for a smartphone can be programmed. MyCalul for Symbian 9 has formula evaluation - which is good - but still not programmable.
The only programmable calculators for a smart phones I know of are the one I wrote myself (http://uiq3.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Office/FX-602P) and Free42 (http://free42.sourceforge.net/).
Both of which are simulations of real calculators (Casio FX-602P and HP 42 respectively). And that is telling in it self.
And for Laptops the situation is the same - mostly I use an HP 16C Emulator and my FX-602P Simulator. Mac OS has a nice Calculator - almost as good as an HP 16C but not programmable.
Actually I wanted to buy an HP 16C - but they go for $300 and more at eBay. And this is telling as well considering that HP stopped producing them 1989.
Martin
Truecrypt already got that features - Only you will need the pass-phrase and the file.
Martin
Oh, and don't claim you hated Microsoft prior to 1995, you know it's a lie.
Well I disliked Microsoft ever since Dos 3.1 (and had no contact with M$ products before). In fact I used DR-Dos if at all possible. M$ products always where something I only used if I where paid for or absolutely had to.
Of course I am not quite sure when my dislike turned into outright hate - but it must have been around the time when M$ betrayed IBM over OS/2.
Thanks for clarifying that. Still OS/2 2.0, released in April 1992, had the ability to display "non file system object". Any (former) OS/2 developer (or user with knowledge of low lever working) will tell you that what you just described it is the main feature which makes the OS/2 workplace shell the best GUI shell ever.
As for handling ZIP: IBM never bothered but it was available to the WPS as third-party extension.
Martin
Sure there is a tree view in MAC OS X - it is merged with the details (list) view. Open a folder in list view and click on the little triangle.
Martin
Only the Mighty-Mouse has 3 buttons and a 4 way scroll point and a cunning design which looks like there are no buttons at all.
Martin
That doesn't look to me like it's using extended attributes for file types, or like it can cope with all the extensions being the same...
Actually I am not surprised. There are enough applications which won't attach Uniform Type Identifiers or type and creator codes tupples when creating a file and therefore both OS/2 and Mac OS X support them.
Mind you I have to say that OS/2 still is ahead of any other OS in the use of extended attributes for file types and other uses - while Mac OS X even went a step back from Mac OS 9 be making extension mandatory in there user interface guideline :-( .
Also I spoke of "no extension" that is renaming the file from "foo.jpg" to just "foo". But I still expect a warning if you do that (not at home - can't test it right now). And if the "com.apple.FinderInfo" EA is not attached to the file (i.E. the Jpeg was created with GIMP) then it is very likely that you won't be able to open the file afterwards.
And last not least: My postings in this thread are a bit on the "which list side of live" and do not fully reflect present reality. Sorry if that was not clear from the beginning.
Martin
Suggested Reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Type_Identifier
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10-4.ars/11
http://developer.apple.com/macosx/uniformtypeidentifiers.html
Windows and Linux don't have fall back mechanism for file systems which don't support extended attributes natively. That might be the reason they don't use them.
Linux could just use magic(5) which although slower would be fairly reliable.
True magic can replace one use of extended attributes. It can't replace the others. OS/2 for example had an EA called ".ICON" - which allowed you to set an icon for every file or directory.
Martihn
Martin