OS X uses the extension for file type information. No extension, no type.
That's not necessarily so. There's file extension, followed by Uniform Type ID HFS+ metadata, followed by HFS FourCC Type/Creator metadata (if the first is not present, the second decides, etc). The resource fork doesn't actually contain filetype data, it was only that ResEdit gave you an easy way of editing the file's HFS FourCC type and Creator.
If you're really stuck trying to figure out a filetype, you could run file(1) on it, it might be able to guess certain vector files correctly. And once you know it, you can set the extension.
Having seen both sources, how would you counterpoint the two? How do you think the different organizational styles of the two vendors -- MS on one side, hippies on the other;) -- is reflected in the large-scale implementation of the kernels? Is source code documentation, comments, organization of headers different?
Sounds like a class to me! But what's your opinion?
Remember, if the phone is sold without subsidy, it is also sold without a contract
I've seen that assertion a few times on this thread. Why do people believe this the case? Is there some sort of law or something that says you cannot contract for service if you buy an unsubsidized phone?
It's a moot point anyways for the near term, as Cingular is the "exclusive" provider of service to iPhones for the first 2 years. Even if cancelled your service, you'd get no visual voicemail, and your phone features will probably brick as well without some hacking.
That said, I have Cingular, am happy with their service, sorta loathe my Treo, and there's a $600 pile of money in my money market account with "iPhone" all over it. Now I just gotta figure out how to get a timecode calculator widget on it:D
10.3.6 to 10.3.9 is a free upgrade and takes a minute to do, they really should do it at least for the security patches.
Did you try building against the 10.3 or 10.2 sdk instead of the 10.4 one? It't in the build settings pane in XCode
Mach-O didn't change from 10.3 to 10.4, did you try tweaking your arch settings in Xcode, or maybe adding a build step that runs lipo(1) on your binaries before packaging them?
I'd love to see this particular issue documented, cause I have a few apps that people run on all manner of 10.3-10.4, I build ppc on 10.4, and I've never had a problem.
That's why it's called an "upgrade." They sell software for money -- the act of exchanging a completed software package and support in exchange for monetary remuneration is actually quite common;).
Just to make something clear that is not so clear in the summary: Boot Camp is included with Leopard, it is free with Leopard. It is BETA on Tiger, and if you wish to use the supported final Boot Camp on Tiger after Leopard is released, you will have to pay.
This is an inducement to upgrade. If they let you just keep BootCamp for free, without wrapping it up in something else you paid for, then the SOX fairy would surely turn them into a pumpkin.
I hope every lobbyist is working overtime to fix this damn GAAP rule. It makes sense on paper, but the implementation is "Retarded".
If Microsoft can't make the application work as advertised or disclosed, they should offer a different set of features.
This is the best evidence yet that this whole "squirting" business was invented by an uninformed marketing department, that wasn't aware of the real-world limitations Microsoft's partners were going to place on the system.
For example, I'm sure someone would love to sell a radio that shows album art, but if doing so requires an internet connection for the radio, and regular updates of radio schedules from a web service, and rights negotiations, and on, and on, and on, the someone might want to consider selling something that would actually work, as opposed to something that's got bullet points up the wazoo but doesn't.
It isn't MS's fault the music is restricted, any more than it's Apple's in their case, but Microsoft's implementation within its restrictions is broken, and not going to win it converts in the MP3 market. Given, of course, that they're really serious about taking a share of the MP3 player market, or if all this isn't some twisted "tactical" maneuver to "position" some "platform" for some reason known but to Chair-Man.
Earphones that measure your skin conductance while listening to songs, and then auto-rate the song based on your pleasure response. On the back end an E-bid style site allows music producers to buy the marketing data.
There was a good AC post about it in the "Ruby as a Lisp" posting a few days ago:
It basically has to do with the fact that Unicode uses Han Unification to cause Chinese and Japanese ideograms to share codepoints, and Japanese aren't down with that, so they use Shift-JIS. Check the postings that reply to it for a big digression on the issue;)
Please read about parallelization and how many algorithms, particularly ones that act over sets of data, can be broken into "parallel" and "serial" elements. If your language implies the two and provides syntax to richly describe these, the compiler can smartly break your program down into threads (or procs or distributed procs) and make the parallel ops magically happen at once, without the programmer dealing with threading or synchronization or any of that other junk (and getting a huge boost in performance on a distributed processors).
It's not just about multi-cores, it's about 1000 CPU clusters. In such languages, as a trivial example, you can write a one-liner that will take every integer from 1 to 1,000,000,000,000,000 and sieve out the primes, and the language can implicitly give integers 1-100,000 to one CPU, 100,001-200,000 to the next, and so on.
That'd be like a 70s guy asking what's the point of having a general purpose computer when you can have perfectly good word processing machines and tabulating machines?
1970s Guy: "Why none, sir, I have my secretary do all of my typing and accounting does the invoicing! I value my free time and enjoy being able to delegate certain responsibilities, such as drafting memoranda, managing my schedule, and keeping my correspondence organized, to a human being who knows her job."
Mr. Hindsight: "But you could save a lot of money!"
1970s Guy: "I see what you're saying, but I think you're making a false comparison. I (like you, probably) make most of my purchasing decisions based not just on dollars-and-cents efficiency, but on certain values I hold. You seem to value 'open standards' and are opposed to 'walled gardens,' while I value 'getting my memos typed.' I will generally pay a premium for a solution if it's easier to use than the others. It might cost me more money in the future to migrate from my easy-to-use solution to another, but frankly I can't tell, because I can't see the future, and I don't want to bet on a miserable-but-open solution and wait for it to improve."
Mr. Hindsight: "One day they'll take away all your secretaries."
1970s Guy: "Who the hell answers the phones!?"
Mr. Hindsight: "Computers that give you a list of options, and try to guess what number you say!"
1970s Guy: "I think I'm going to pour myself a stiff one. Executives still have wet bars in their offices in the future, right?"
This evening I went to slashdot, and I found an article about something I had never heard of before, and found the topic fascinating. Thank you for exposing those of us who hadn't heard of demoscening to something new.
At least there aren't any more damn iPhone stories!;p
Now consider what you'd have on screen during your one hour "the secret lives of routers". I'm a card-carrying geek, but I'd rather watch the 35-and-over curling finals.
You'd think that, but SLOM had episodes like "The Secret Life of the Washing Machine" or "...Vacuum Cleaner" and was able to make it absolutely riveting, or at least quite fun, mainly by exploring the history of the thing and the relationship it has with humans.
The router episode would HAVE to start with the story of Strowger inventing the automated phone switch, so that the undertaker down the street didn't steal all his business. This story is very human and instantly gives viewers and example of Quality-of-Service and the importance of Net Neutrality (and how it's been an issue since the VERY beginning).
From there you move to the idea of networks, maybe telling the story of how the first transatlantic cable was laid, and how they had to go back twice to re-hook it, and how they had to cut down forests to get enough gutta-percha to water-proof the thing. You could also talk about networks by starting with the story of Karl Gauss walking the bridges of Konigsberg.
This is why you need a really cool guy telling the story. It's not "How it works" or "How to fix it," it's "How has it come to be, and why?"
If you were to buy it without the service, it's questionable how useful it would be, since Cingular is the only provider that has the tech infrastructure to support the features on these phones-- you couldn't get a T-Mobile SIM and make it work the way its supposed to, if at all, assuming you could get one unlocked or unlock it by some means. Without cell service, the thing is basically a lifedrive with a smaller screen but without DocumentsToGo.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not necessarily so. There's file extension, followed by Uniform Type ID HFS+ metadata, followed by HFS FourCC Type/Creator metadata (if the first is not present, the second decides, etc). The resource fork doesn't actually contain filetype data, it was only that ResEdit gave you an easy way of editing the file's HFS FourCC type and Creator.
If you're really stuck trying to figure out a filetype, you could run file(1) on it, it might be able to guess certain vector files correctly. And once you know it, you can set the extension.
Having seen both sources, how would you counterpoint the two? How do you think the different organizational styles of the two vendors -- MS on one side, hippies on the other ;) -- is reflected in the large-scale implementation of the kernels? Is source code documentation, comments, organization of headers different?
Sounds like a class to me! But what's your opinion?
If you've gotten to this leaf in the thread, allow me to be the first to welcome you to Linux on the Desktop!
You left out LISP interpreter, and that would just about cover it.
I've seen that assertion a few times on this thread. Why do people believe this the case? Is there some sort of law or something that says you cannot contract for service if you buy an unsubsidized phone?
It's a moot point anyways for the near term, as Cingular is the "exclusive" provider of service to iPhones for the first 2 years. Even if cancelled your service, you'd get no visual voicemail, and your phone features will probably brick as well without some hacking.
That said, I have Cingular, am happy with their service, sorta loathe my Treo, and there's a $600 pile of money in my money market account with "iPhone" all over it. Now I just gotta figure out how to get a timecode calculator widget on it :D
Aza Raskin, the owner of the company, is the son of Macintosh co-creator and User Interface Il Duce Jeff Raskin.
Of course, the patch will cost you $1.99 B).
Aha! You cursEd Linux shill ;) , OOXML is standardized by ECMA, and this is what earned them their accelerated process.
What is unstated, of course, is that ECMA would standardize a Tuna Melt if you paid your fees on time.
If you want the Quicktime Pro features, consider QTAmateur. Every feature in Pro, and batch convert on top of that, for frees.
A couple things:
I'd love to see this particular issue documented, cause I have a few apps that people run on all manner of 10.3-10.4, I build ppc on 10.4, and I've never had a problem.
That's why it's called an "upgrade." They sell software for money -- the act of exchanging a completed software package and support in exchange for monetary remuneration is actually quite common ;).
Just to make something clear that is not so clear in the summary: Boot Camp is included with Leopard, it is free with Leopard. It is BETA on Tiger, and if you wish to use the supported final Boot Camp on Tiger after Leopard is released, you will have to pay.
This is an inducement to upgrade. If they let you just keep BootCamp for free, without wrapping it up in something else you paid for, then the SOX fairy would surely turn them into a pumpkin.
I hope every lobbyist is working overtime to fix this damn GAAP rule. It makes sense on paper, but the implementation is "Retarded".
If Microsoft can't make the application work as advertised or disclosed, they should offer a different set of features.
This is the best evidence yet that this whole "squirting" business was invented by an uninformed marketing department, that wasn't aware of the real-world limitations Microsoft's partners were going to place on the system.
For example, I'm sure someone would love to sell a radio that shows album art, but if doing so requires an internet connection for the radio, and regular updates of radio schedules from a web service, and rights negotiations, and on, and on, and on, the someone might want to consider selling something that would actually work, as opposed to something that's got bullet points up the wazoo but doesn't.
It isn't MS's fault the music is restricted, any more than it's Apple's in their case, but Microsoft's implementation within its restrictions is broken, and not going to win it converts in the MP3 market. Given, of course, that they're really serious about taking a share of the MP3 player market, or if all this isn't some twisted "tactical" maneuver to "position" some "platform" for some reason known but to Chair-Man.
Earphones that measure your skin conductance while listening to songs, and then auto-rate the song based on your pleasure response. On the back end an E-bid style site allows music producers to buy the marketing data.
Microsoft: What do you want to think today?
Damn autolinky didn't work!
There was a good AC post about it in the "Ruby as a Lisp" posting a few days ago:
It basically has to do with the fact that Unicode uses Han Unification to cause Chinese and Japanese ideograms to share codepoints, and Japanese aren't down with that, so they use Shift-JIS. Check the postings that reply to it for a big digression on the issue ;)
Please read about parallelization and how many algorithms, particularly ones that act over sets of data, can be broken into "parallel" and "serial" elements. If your language implies the two and provides syntax to richly describe these, the compiler can smartly break your program down into threads (or procs or distributed procs) and make the parallel ops magically happen at once, without the programmer dealing with threading or synchronization or any of that other junk (and getting a huge boost in performance on a distributed processors).
It's not just about multi-cores, it's about 1000 CPU clusters. In such languages, as a trivial example, you can write a one-liner that will take every integer from 1 to 1,000,000,000,000,000 and sieve out the primes, and the language can implicitly give integers 1-100,000 to one CPU, 100,001-200,000 to the next, and so on.
For anyone who thinks only a moron could die this particular way:
Tycho Brahe
Indulge me in a little play extempore:
Mr. Hindsight:
1970s Guy: "Why none, sir, I have my secretary do all of my typing and accounting does the invoicing! I value my free time and enjoy being able to delegate certain responsibilities, such as drafting memoranda, managing my schedule, and keeping my correspondence organized, to a human being who knows her job."
Mr. Hindsight: "But you could save a lot of money!"
1970s Guy: "I see what you're saying, but I think you're making a false comparison. I (like you, probably) make most of my purchasing decisions based not just on dollars-and-cents efficiency, but on certain values I hold. You seem to value 'open standards' and are opposed to 'walled gardens,' while I value 'getting my memos typed.' I will generally pay a premium for a solution if it's easier to use than the others. It might cost me more money in the future to migrate from my easy-to-use solution to another, but frankly I can't tell, because I can't see the future, and I don't want to bet on a miserable-but-open solution and wait for it to improve."
Mr. Hindsight: "One day they'll take away all your secretaries."
1970s Guy: "Who the hell answers the phones!?"
Mr. Hindsight: "Computers that give you a list of options, and try to guess what number you say!"
1970s Guy: "I think I'm going to pour myself a stiff one. Executives still have wet bars in their offices in the future, right?"
This evening I went to slashdot, and I found an article about something I had never heard of before, and found the topic fascinating. Thank you for exposing those of us who hadn't heard of demoscening to something new.
At least there aren't any more damn iPhone stories! ;p
Please note, however, the battery is an iPod-style battery. You can't replace it.
DOS ain't done until Lotus won't run?
Of course in that case, from MSFTs perspective that was a feature, not a bug.
Sorry, I meant Euler on the bridges of Konigsberg
You'd think that, but SLOM had episodes like "The Secret Life of the Washing Machine" or "...Vacuum Cleaner" and was able to make it absolutely riveting, or at least quite fun, mainly by exploring the history of the thing and the relationship it has with humans.
The router episode would HAVE to start with the story of Strowger inventing the automated phone switch, so that the undertaker down the street didn't steal all his business. This story is very human and instantly gives viewers and example of Quality-of-Service and the importance of Net Neutrality (and how it's been an issue since the VERY beginning).
From there you move to the idea of networks, maybe telling the story of how the first transatlantic cable was laid, and how they had to go back twice to re-hook it, and how they had to cut down forests to get enough gutta-percha to water-proof the thing. You could also talk about networks by starting with the story of Karl Gauss walking the bridges of Konigsberg.
This is why you need a really cool guy telling the story. It's not "How it works" or "How to fix it," it's "How has it come to be, and why?"
If you were to buy it without the service, it's questionable how useful it would be, since Cingular is the only provider that has the tech infrastructure to support the features on these phones-- you couldn't get a T-Mobile SIM and make it work the way its supposed to, if at all, assuming you could get one unlocked or unlock it by some means. Without cell service, the thing is basically a lifedrive with a smaller screen but without DocumentsToGo.