You think that the FDA should approve things simply based on the fact that people need them without considering whether or not they are actually safe?
The FDA will go through the process on anything that a company is willing to pay for the process on and is willing to go through all of the hassle of clinical trials. THe FDA does not decide what drugs are going to be put through the process, the drug companies do. In fact the FDA even has fast-track systems for things that are needed.
If the wrong things are comming to the system it is not the FDA at fault, but rather the drug companies chasing profit. (one could argue that that is what they are obliged to do as companies)
And what exactly would you consider the "appropriate ammounts" for welfare? I ask because that is not a trivial question. The fact that the current amounts are "wrong" is as much a function of there being no empirical way of determining the right amount as it is about disagreement about that amount.
But the foreign policy one I do agree with you on.
That works as long as there is only a binary choice. If you make the relativly small change of adding in Islam to that argument, and take the hard-liners approach[1] in either you wind up going to hell in at least one case regardless of what decision you make. And the more relgions you add in the worse your chances get.
[1] "Our God is the only God and the only way to heaven is thourgh our way of worshiping him."
What I find funny about that old chestnut was that when Windows 95 came out it was even more chatty when it was setting up domain browser masters. In fact a company I worked for had so many computers that when they did their Windows 95 roll-out the domain browser master elections became a near-constant thing that completely saturated the network. And evey time it got saturated the entire election process had to begin from scratch.
They had Microsoft out for a week before they finally figured out what was happining and that they needed to have a single WindowsNT computer on every network segement whose sole job was to stay up and be the master computer (NT had a higher election number by default so it always won elections, simplifying the process). Their network was out of commission (except the OS/2 computers) for a week.
At the same time there were multiple hundreds of Macintosh computers at the University and despite being "chatty" I never saw them saturate a network.
Once you get past the "creating a black hole" part, the size of it reallly does not matter. As long as it can start sucking matter into it it will eventually get arround to devoring all matter around it. And as long as you don't start introducing pesky things like real numbers into the conversation, superconductors do product environment that are on the way to how we think that black holes are created in.
You are correct that the comand line version is there. But in the Apache config file the lines enabling the so's are commented out. So for Apache is it turned off.
Actually, this is most definaely the case. Durring the Paleoproterozoic era Cyanobacteria evolved and strted pumping out oxygen which killed off all of their anaerobic ancestors. This was known as the Oxygen Catastrophe, and is one of the great mass extinction events, in fact probably the most complete culling of life on this planet.
Prior to that there was very little free oxygen in the atmosphere, so the majority of life that lives on the surface today could not have survived at that time. And here we are talking about everything from single-celled organisms on up.
RoR is simply going to be included. Nothing more at the moment on that count. Apple already has a easy-to-use database solution for Objective-C applications in CoreData (though I wish they would make it multi-user/computer capable).
And PHP is already included in the OS, you just have to turn it on. This is somewhat good from a security standpoint, but I wish they would put in a button to turn it on (next to the one to turn on Apache).
10.4 will still be primarily 32bit, with 64bit sections where it really matters (the processing libraries for large-data-set apps). It looks like 10.5 is going to be much more 64bit from stem-to-stern with paralell libraries (some changes in the 64bit versions that will mark a change.. because it was an easy place to put the transition) for 32bit and 64bit.
But do note that moving most of the code to running in 64bit mode does not make it faster. In theory you can make 32bit code that uses the new features in the cips without taking the extra overhead of everything going 64bit.
Since the memory controller seems to limit the computer to 3Gigs there is not going to be much improvement simply because the processor is 64bit. There will be some improvement because of a number of limitations in the i86 specs (most noteably the register starvation problem), but the big effects of a 64bit processor will go to waste.
And in case anyone is thinking of responding that 64bit math will be faster: the floating point and integer units have been 64bit for quuite some time. There are a few points where the data paths will get wider with this change, but generally that has not been an issue.
The DVD consortium has been leaning on manufactures who liscence the DVD standard (all of them) to put this firmware restriction in place on all of their drives. If you can still find new drives that do not have this restriction on the market I would be surprised. And even the supply of drives that have been sitting on a shelf for a while without the restriction is probably starting to get small.
Sadly, it looks like the DVD consortium is going to get away with this bit of colusion and abuse of monopoly.
But what everyone was clamoring for was a G4, this is when the iMac was on a G3. So Apple provided, and few people showed up. I was in education at that time, and the Cube was really what everyone was clamoring for, but no-one had done the work to figure out how much it was going to cost.
I still have a Cube at home, and love it for the small quite computer that it is. But I think it might finally get replaced with one of the new 20" iMacs.... once I get done paying for my vacation...
One thing that Linux does worse at then Windows? Despite being a real Windows anti-fan, I can easily answer that question: WPA on WiFi. Actually WiFi in general.
This is a real problem for Linux. You can get there, but only for certain hardware, and there is often a lot of blood sacrifice involved. I have even seen WiFi drivers that kernel panic linux. There is a good argument that this is because the vendors are not supporting linux, and have heavily restricted access to the driver APIs. But you still cannot count it as a place where linux is superior to Windows.
There are lots of other places were linux is simply not polished enough... or better said: is rather rough. It has been improving, but still has a long way to go.
Since people legitimately using 10.5 Developer Preview are all under NDA (since we got it at WWC and they were very meticulous about making sure you knew the conditions under which you were receiving the disks), we really can't be very specific. Since it is out in the press, I can say that the Preview is very focused on Developers, and most of what we need to get working on products so that they are ready for 10.5 when it ships (in "Spring"... whatever that means).
This is not a OS version that most people should be using. It is not ready for release, and there are very obviously places where Apple will be making large changes to the user experience. And from talking to the Engineers at the conference it quickly became obvious (from where they had to stop talking) that what developers have been given is quite a bit behind what Apple has in-house, and was specifically chosen to allow us to do our jobs without giving away everything.
Every computer that is (legally/reliably) capable of running MacOS (X) already has a copy, so every MacOS X retail box is an upgrade. There is no "full" version like there is for Windows. But Apple does not put in the upgrade file checks to look for older versions so people get confused. $129 is the "upgrade" price.
Thats just what I want: my iPod and my headphones to be in a race to see who can run out of batteries first! Bluletooth headphones are fine for cell phones, where they spend the majority of their time waiting for something to happen (a call), but in an application where they would constantly be receiving... wow would that suck. Not to mention the extra drain on the iPod's battery.
Eventually someone will come up with a protocol that can do this on limited power, but bluetooth is not the answer in that space.
Actually, no matter what these options have already appeared on Apple's books as options and are nothing new to the bottom line. The only thing new to this is that the fact that they were post-dataed options rather than regular options was not disclosed. No change in the numbers, just a change in what lines they go under.
This is a serious issue, and Apple appears to be actively cooperating in investigating itself, so it will probably wind up as a black mark, and possibly a fine (already disclosed in Apples earnings estimates), but that will probably be it.
The guys I am talking to say that Microsoft will be releasing a version in December, but that it will only be to fulfill their contractual obligations to large institutions that they sold subscriptions to. They do not actually expect that code to be legitimately used. This will probably be the end of Microsoft being able to sell subscriptions like that.
Actually.... they are not using the onboard WiFi for the attack at all. They are using an external WiFi adapter, and since they are using a MacBook (in the video it is a black computer with an Apple... that means a MacBook) that almost definitely means they are using a USB adapter.
So MacBooks are not normally venerable to this sort of attack: they went out of their way to introduce third-party hardware that opened the door to the attack. I am not saying that Apple should not work to close even that door, but that it is not usually a valid attack. Oh... and there is a good chance that the PowerBook could well be venerable in the some way, but there might be something particular to x86, or a bridge chip, or... or... or...
Or unless it goes into an elliptical orbit that happens to be intercepting with its point of origin (read: pretty likely). Unless you can make that orbit very narrow at perigee, narrow enough that you get atmospheric drag from the sun (read: lots of energy), or happen to stumble across another gravity well (like Venus), you can pretty much bet that it is going to wind up back in your lap at some point. Welcome to orbital mechanics 101.
So your argument is that non-pro software is not optimized to use expensive pro-level hardware? How is that news or important?
If your needs justify the expense of a Quad-core computer, then your needs also justify the expense of the professional software needed to drive it properly. After all, "professional" means that you are making money doing that.
While you do mention that Apple generally includes things that other manufactures do, I think you brush that off a bit too quickly. In the Apple computer that you mention here are a few of the things you forgot to mention:
Capacity of 16GB of memory. (the Dell maxes out at 8) The video card has a Dual-Link DVI capable of driving 30" displays. (not on the standard Dell, probably an option) Apple has two 4x PCI-Express slots and one 8x slot open. (the dell has one 1x and one 8x open.. but in fairness does have the space for SLI) The Apple has FireWire 800, which if you are doing video is a god-send. (not an option on the Dell... you just can't pump that data over the busses if it is not connected to the NorthBridge and expect to have decent performance) Optical audio in and out (probably an add-in option on the Dell... possibly third-party)
Go look at Dell's site for things that have those sorts of specs and you will be in the "Workstation" class products, and you will be looking at a large price jump.
And your summary judgement that the G5 is not as good as the Pentium D is very arguable. The two processors are in the same class as each other, to the point where saying either one of them is "faster" is misleading at best. You have to be very specific about what "faster" means in order to have an honest comparison. Anything else is simply a lie.
And as to the prices you say that Apple "has to" have. I think that Apple's continued existence over the last few decades means that they have a good idea what they "have to" do. And if you look at products that are comparable (and I challenge you to find a product that is comparable to the Mac mini... remember size is a real feature) I think that your illusions of Mac's being significantly more expensive disappear.
And that investigation would reveal that Apple is also providing servers, wireless nodes (carts), service for the duration, training for the teachers (god help those poor trainers), and extensive support. I think your math is missing some components.
Slashdot Mirror
You think that the FDA should approve things simply based on the fact that people need them without considering whether or not they are actually safe?
The FDA will go through the process on anything that a company is willing to pay for the process on and is willing to go through all of the hassle of clinical trials. THe FDA does not decide what drugs are going to be put through the process, the drug companies do. In fact the FDA even has fast-track systems for things that are needed.
If the wrong things are comming to the system it is not the FDA at fault, but rather the drug companies chasing profit. (one could argue that that is what they are obliged to do as companies)
And what exactly would you consider the "appropriate ammounts" for welfare? I ask because that is not a trivial question. The fact that the current amounts are "wrong" is as much a function of there being no empirical way of determining the right amount as it is about disagreement about that amount.
But the foreign policy one I do agree with you on.
That works as long as there is only a binary choice. If you make the relativly small change of adding in Islam to that argument, and take the hard-liners approach[1] in either you wind up going to hell in at least one case regardless of what decision you make. And the more relgions you add in the worse your chances get.
[1] "Our God is the only God and the only way to heaven is thourgh our way of worshiping him."
What I find funny about that old chestnut was that when Windows 95 came out it was even more chatty when it was setting up domain browser masters. In fact a company I worked for had so many computers that when they did their Windows 95 roll-out the domain browser master elections became a near-constant thing that completely saturated the network. And evey time it got saturated the entire election process had to begin from scratch.
They had Microsoft out for a week before they finally figured out what was happining and that they needed to have a single WindowsNT computer on every network segement whose sole job was to stay up and be the master computer (NT had a higher election number by default so it always won elections, simplifying the process). Their network was out of commission (except the OS/2 computers) for a week.
At the same time there were multiple hundreds of Macintosh computers at the University and despite being "chatty" I never saw them saturate a network.
Once you get past the "creating a black hole" part, the size of it reallly does not matter. As long as it can start sucking matter into it it will eventually get arround to devoring all matter around it. And as long as you don't start introducing pesky things like real numbers into the conversation, superconductors do product environment that are on the way to how we think that black holes are created in.
You are correct that the comand line version is there. But in the Apache config file the lines enabling the so's are commented out. So for Apache is it turned off.
Actually, this is most definaely the case. Durring the Paleoproterozoic era Cyanobacteria evolved and strted pumping out oxygen which killed off all of their anaerobic ancestors. This was known as the Oxygen Catastrophe, and is one of the great mass extinction events, in fact probably the most complete culling of life on this planet.
Prior to that there was very little free oxygen in the atmosphere, so the majority of life that lives on the surface today could not have survived at that time. And here we are talking about everything from single-celled organisms on up.
A couple of notes:
RoR is simply going to be included. Nothing more at the moment on that count. Apple already has a easy-to-use database solution for Objective-C applications in CoreData (though I wish they would make it multi-user/computer capable).
And PHP is already included in the OS, you just have to turn it on. This is somewhat good from a security standpoint, but I wish they would put in a button to turn it on (next to the one to turn on Apache).
10.4 will still be primarily 32bit, with 64bit sections where it really matters (the processing libraries for large-data-set apps). It looks like 10.5 is going to be much more 64bit from stem-to-stern with paralell libraries (some changes in the 64bit versions that will mark a change.. because it was an easy place to put the transition) for 32bit and 64bit.
But do note that moving most of the code to running in 64bit mode does not make it faster. In theory you can make 32bit code that uses the new features in the cips without taking the extra overhead of everything going 64bit.
Since the memory controller seems to limit the computer to 3Gigs there is not going to be much improvement simply because the processor is 64bit. There will be some improvement because of a number of limitations in the i86 specs (most noteably the register starvation problem), but the big effects of a 64bit processor will go to waste.
And in case anyone is thinking of responding that 64bit math will be faster: the floating point and integer units have been 64bit for quuite some time. There are a few points where the data paths will get wider with this change, but generally that has not been an issue.
The DVD consortium has been leaning on manufactures who liscence the DVD standard (all of them) to put this firmware restriction in place on all of their drives. If you can still find new drives that do not have this restriction on the market I would be surprised. And even the supply of drives that have been sitting on a shelf for a while without the restriction is probably starting to get small.
Sadly, it looks like the DVD consortium is going to get away with this bit of colusion and abuse of monopoly.
But what everyone was clamoring for was a G4, this is when the iMac was on a G3. So Apple provided, and few people showed up. I was in education at that time, and the Cube was really what everyone was clamoring for, but no-one had done the work to figure out how much it was going to cost.
I still have a Cube at home, and love it for the small quite computer that it is. But I think it might finally get replaced with one of the new 20" iMacs.... once I get done paying for my vacation...
One thing that Linux does worse at then Windows? Despite being a real Windows anti-fan, I can easily answer that question: WPA on WiFi. Actually WiFi in general.
This is a real problem for Linux. You can get there, but only for certain hardware, and there is often a lot of blood sacrifice involved. I have even seen WiFi drivers that kernel panic linux. There is a good argument that this is because the vendors are not supporting linux, and have heavily restricted access to the driver APIs. But you still cannot count it as a place where linux is superior to Windows.
There are lots of other places were linux is simply not polished enough... or better said: is rather rough. It has been improving, but still has a long way to go.
Since people legitimately using 10.5 Developer Preview are all under NDA (since we got it at WWC and they were very meticulous about making sure you knew the conditions under which you were receiving the disks), we really can't be very specific. Since it is out in the press, I can say that the Preview is very focused on Developers, and most of what we need to get working on products so that they are ready for 10.5 when it ships (in "Spring"... whatever that means).
This is not a OS version that most people should be using. It is not ready for release, and there are very obviously places where Apple will be making large changes to the user experience. And from talking to the Engineers at the conference it quickly became obvious (from where they had to stop talking) that what developers have been given is quite a bit behind what Apple has in-house, and was specifically chosen to allow us to do our jobs without giving away everything.
Every computer that is (legally/reliably) capable of running MacOS (X) already has a copy, so every MacOS X retail box is an upgrade. There is no "full" version like there is for Windows. But Apple does not put in the upgrade file checks to look for older versions so people get confused. $129 is the "upgrade" price.
Thats just what I want: my iPod and my headphones to be in a race to see who can run out of batteries first! Bluletooth headphones are fine for cell phones, where they spend the majority of their time waiting for something to happen (a call), but in an application where they would constantly be receiving... wow would that suck. Not to mention the extra drain on the iPod's battery.
Eventually someone will come up with a protocol that can do this on limited power, but bluetooth is not the answer in that space.
Actually, no matter what these options have already appeared on Apple's books as options and are nothing new to the bottom line. The only thing new to this is that the fact that they were post-dataed options rather than regular options was not disclosed. No change in the numbers, just a change in what lines they go under.
This is a serious issue, and Apple appears to be actively cooperating in investigating itself, so it will probably wind up as a black mark, and possibly a fine (already disclosed in Apples earnings estimates), but that will probably be it.
Hey Dave!
The guys I am talking to say that Microsoft will be releasing a version in December, but that it will only be to fulfill their contractual obligations to large institutions that they sold subscriptions to. They do not actually expect that code to be legitimately used. This will probably be the end of Microsoft being able to sell subscriptions like that.
Of course... just after I post this becomes available (new to me anyways). So it looks like it only being a third-party driver exploit was a red herring: the built-in chipset is venerable, and Apple is aware of it and already working with the vendor for a solution.
You are correct on the 802.11n count, but the Intel-based Apple portables already support 802.11a, they just don't advertise it.
Actually.... they are not using the onboard WiFi for the attack at all. They are using an external WiFi adapter, and since they are using a MacBook (in the video it is a black computer with an Apple... that means a MacBook) that almost definitely means they are using a USB adapter.
So MacBooks are not normally venerable to this sort of attack: they went out of their way to introduce third-party hardware that opened the door to the attack. I am not saying that Apple should not work to close even that door, but that it is not usually a valid attack. Oh... and there is a good chance that the PowerBook could well be venerable in the some way, but there might be something particular to x86, or a bridge chip, or... or... or...
Or unless it goes into an elliptical orbit that happens to be intercepting with its point of origin (read: pretty likely). Unless you can make that orbit very narrow at perigee, narrow enough that you get atmospheric drag from the sun (read: lots of energy), or happen to stumble across another gravity well (like Venus), you can pretty much bet that it is going to wind up back in your lap at some point. Welcome to orbital mechanics 101.
Lets see... you can almost afford a coffee there!
So your argument is that non-pro software is not optimized to use expensive pro-level hardware? How is that news or important?
If your needs justify the expense of a Quad-core computer, then your needs also justify the expense of the professional software needed to drive it properly. After all, "professional" means that you are making money doing that.
While you do mention that Apple generally includes things that other manufactures do, I think you brush that off a bit too quickly. In the Apple computer that you mention here are a few of the things you forgot to mention:
Capacity of 16GB of memory. (the Dell maxes out at 8)
The video card has a Dual-Link DVI capable of driving 30" displays. (not on the standard Dell, probably an option)
Apple has two 4x PCI-Express slots and one 8x slot open. (the dell has one 1x and one 8x open.. but in fairness does have the space for SLI)
The Apple has FireWire 800, which if you are doing video is a god-send. (not an option on the Dell... you just can't pump that data over the busses if it is not connected to the NorthBridge and expect to have decent performance)
Optical audio in and out (probably an add-in option on the Dell... possibly third-party)
Go look at Dell's site for things that have those sorts of specs and you will be in the "Workstation" class products, and you will be looking at a large price jump.
And your summary judgement that the G5 is not as good as the Pentium D is very arguable. The two processors are in the same class as each other, to the point where saying either one of them is "faster" is misleading at best. You have to be very specific about what "faster" means in order to have an honest comparison. Anything else is simply a lie.
And as to the prices you say that Apple "has to" have. I think that Apple's continued existence over the last few decades means that they have a good idea what they "have to" do. And if you look at products that are comparable (and I challenge you to find a product that is comparable to the Mac mini... remember size is a real feature) I think that your illusions of Mac's being significantly more expensive disappear.
And that investigation would reveal that Apple is also providing servers, wireless nodes (carts), service for the duration, training for the teachers (god help those poor trainers), and extensive support. I think your math is missing some components.