Umm...OK. I live in Seattle and I think you'd have been better off picking Chicago, Minneapolis or some other American city for your joke. It rarely ever gets below freezing here, and has snowed all of...I believe twice in the city in the last three years. I've seen colder winters and more snow in Texas--literally.
My Powerbook boots faster than my new Thinkpad. So this could go the other way. Apple fans could find that the Apple hardware my behave considerably different.
Not flaming or trolling, just posing the question(s): Is this because your Thinkpad is booting Windows, or because it has an Intel chip? (Or both? Or neither?)
Compared to Halliburton or McDonnell-Douglas or Boeing, Microsoft is strictly amateur hour.
Not knowing the stats, I'd tend to agree that Halliburton, Boeing and others of that ilk could have bigger or more longstanding influence in general, but I wouldn't say Microsoft is so far down on the list as to be "amateur hour." Who has more potential to affect the entire working infrastructure of the government and its offices (and the associated costs, more importantly) than they do? Not many companies.
You know, stifling the competition and marketplace survival are not mutually exclusive. The fact is, the competition was killing Apple, so they eliminated the competition. Plain and simple.
Perhaps to split hairs, I fail to see how surviving and *stifling* are the same thing. One former implies you're in a weak position, the latter a strong position.
But more to the point, you said, "People are complaining about how Apple used OS licensing to basically kill off the clones." Complaining? How can you complain about a company reversing a position to survive? What would you and the poster to whom I was responding have them do? License themselves out of existence? What would be the point? Had these manufacturers eroded Apple's bottom line on the hardware side, Apple likely wouldn't have survived and the companies would have imploded (as clonemakers, at least) anyway.
People are complaining about how Apple used OS licensing to basically kill off the clones. That sounds a lot like stifling the competition to me.
Apple killed off clone-making when they saw it cut too much into their revenue to sustain it. That's what sounds like stifling competition to you.
People say it here all the time: Apple is a hardware company. Trying an experiment--that a lot of people had been whining about/clamoring for/criticizing over--and pulling the plug it when it cut into their own primary line of revenue doesn't sound a bit like stifling the competition to me. It sounds like marketplace survival.
It is funny that nobody ever thinks of Apple when they mention questionable business practices - the McMac thing was just one way they stifled the competition.
I think it's funny that people used to scream about how ridiculous it was that Apple didn't license their OS years before, and now years after they finally tried it, someone reflects on it stifling the competition.
Right. I didn't say (or at least, mean to imply) that they started from scratch by being the original authors of all the components. I said it wasn't a bad idea to "start over," which in my opinion is what Apple did since FreeBSD, NeXTstep and most of the core technologies behind the GUI layer are not found in System 9.
Whether Microsoft chose to re-write in.Net, or use portions of pre-existing work, redoing the basis of your OS sure seems like starting over to me, and one might argue, starting from scratch.
I guess the question is: Did someone believe that EVERY SINGLE PIECE of the next Windows OS would be based on.NET? i.e. a complete redesign of every single facet of the OS from the ground up? That would be an incredibly risky gamble on Microsoft's part wouldn't it? Does everyone remember what happened to Netscape when it decided to scrap its codebase and start from scratch?
Yeah. Risky to be sure. And I do remember what happened to Netscape. But do you remember what happened to Apple when they decided to start over from scratch with their OS? It's not *always* a bad idea to start over.
So don't look at it as being canceled, rather, it's just the natural result of its evolution--becoming the absolute smallest and topic-focused convention it could possibly be.
"Smallest" as in zero attendees and exhibitors.
Re:Business Our Way
on
Hacking Mac OS X
·
· Score: 5, Informative
They don't, for the most part, stock replacement parts. They don't do anything but the most basic repairs.
I have to chime in here. I have a refurbished dual G5 in which one of the processors stopped showing up. The guy at the Genius bar told me it could be anything from an improperly seated processor to a bad CPU or logic board -- both of which were parts that they had in stock and could fix within a day or two. Luckily, it the processor wasn't firmly "in place" and it just took a bit of reassembly.
They had it diagnosed and back to me in less than 24 hours, no charge. And I don't have Applecare on the machine. My opinion is that Apple hardware is great, but regardless, I've had few occasions to have to get repairs over the years. And when I have, it's been a relatively painless experience. I never had to ship anything in or wait for some obscure supply-chain hopscotch to get a part.
A number of other comments in this post give me pause, but I'm not qualified to respond so I'll just say "hmmm...OK, whatever" to the rest, and admit people's experiences vary.
I am not saying it will but the story submitted missed out on the fact that people already pay reoccuring charges to access to stuff that they can get free elsewhere.
Examples: Cell Phones : The amounts people dump on these is stupendous.
XM/Sirius : Can't get reception unless you pay.
Cable/Satellite : Same again. Sure you can get it another way but your paying for a package.
Mmmmaybe...but I'd like to point out that people are accustomed to owning their music. After decades of doing so, we want to own the records, tapes, CDs (and now song files) that we purchased, traded for or "acquired."
People have not been accustomed to "owning" unlimited air time for cell calls, radio broadcasts or TV broadcasts because that's how it's always been; there was little or no alternative. We only put up with the radio thing because it has largely been free, and we could buy our own copies of the music. And we are moving towards expecting to own something with TV as more and more shows wind up on DVD.
I dunno, I just feel like given the alternative, people will embrace the ability to own, rather than rent this kind of thing. (If I could buy a $400 phone and never pay for airtime, I'd almost always opt for that rather than the, say, $100 phone with charges for calls.)
Yeah, you're probably right. I'm sure it happens a lot, even without rumors. You're also right that it was likely worsened in this case by the ThinkSecret factor. Especially if other articles like the CNN one mentioned it.
I suppose a simple Web search would answer my question, but I'd be interested to know if there are recent stories similar to this surrounding other product launches (like game consoles or something relatively resembling the cult-like environment of Apple products) where hype, rumor and trade secrets made things a little more "interesting" than normal. Anyone know other examples like this?
Plus, did you see how wildly Apple's stock was swinging around all these rumors? we are talking 7% in a day market cap swings - that is big stuff for a teenager to be toying with.
That is precisely the problem. Well said, parent. An interesting point from a CNN article on the day of the launch: "The new products expand Apple's four-year-old "digital hub" and could broaden Apple's market considerably, analysts said. But rumor sites had anticipated the new products, and Apple shares fell nearly 4 percent."
When you announce a product launch like Apple did and the shares actually fall, and are attributed to the rumors, I'd expect them (or Microsoft or IBM or anyone else) to act.
I haven't used it, but I have a good friend who uses Flexcar here in Seattle.
According to her, it's not a "dream solution." There has been a time or two when the car in the spot closest to her apartment hasn't been available on short notice, etc. etc. But Flexcar did ultimately make it possible for her to make the leap to get rid of her personal car altogether. She lives and works downtown and uses the bus system, but was holding on to her car for that one-Saturday-a-month when she would make the big grocery store run, do the miscellaneous errands that took her to other parts of the city, and/or pick up something too big to carry alone on a bus.
Without Flexcar, she would have had to meet the expense of keeping the car around for those odd occasions, as Seattle is not quite ready for most young professional types to live by public transportation alone, a la New York City.
Interesting. Not to discount your experience with Craig's list, but I've had pretty much the opposite experience and having (no exaggeration) zero problems in any of my use of the sit:. I found one long-term contract job and several freelance projects, and hired a couple of freelancers to do work for me. I bought three pieces of good furniture and a couple of collectibles, in addition to concert tickets. I went out with three or four different girls--one I ended up dating long term, and one I'm still friends with. There were a couple of psycho-billy girls, to be sure. But that just about matches the success rate of any guy I know in "real world" scenarios!
Yep, there are nutjobs, ripoffs and scams, not to mention spam-posts that I flag regularly in my almost daily use of Craig's list. But if you are smart enough to read between the lines and use a little caution, you can get quite a lot out of the site if it's popular in your city. (On that note, I use it in Seattle, and I have friends in New York and San Francisco that swear by it for all kinds of things.)
And in the several years that I've used eBay, I have had a completely spotless experience. No cases of fraud, no sellers or buyers who have backed out. Not that it doesn't happen; I'm sure it does. But as I said, exercise a little caution, read between the lines...I don't see any reason why you can't have an experience that is at least as good as in the real world. Because, on the other hand, I've had plenty of sucky experiences with items for sale and jobs posted in the good old want ads of the local paper.
Like I said, not trying to discount your experience. But I don't think the drawbacks you mention are enough to discourage use of these community-based sites given the amount of success they've seen and the people who do have positive experiences with them. I mean, I could poke some holes in the moderation system of/. and all the rrreally hilarious supposedly +5 funnies, the supposed statistics and research that people throw around as fact to support a rant, and the religious zeal people espouse for one operating system or another to cloud issues...but here I am, day after day, reading and using the site.
Lastly, "crunchy-granola-ess" comments aside, community building around sites seems to work. (Had a look at Amazon.com lately? Reviews, recommendations, wish lists.) I don't know if you have information to demonstrate that Craig's list has been a financial failure, but I for one can't see it as the practical failure you describe. And I've got a lot of friends who feel the same.
I am not suggesting that we have "The Seattle Software Party". I don't think that polluting the Port of Seattle would accomplish anything in this case. I am simply suggesting that you should each give your law makers a history lesson to remind them of the consequences of government caving to big business and not protecting the people.
Amen, brother. And people here in Washington state are already beginning to get that very point. [Seattle Weekly]
...and you can get back to me later on a promise I'll make: I'll kiss your ass on Main Street if and when you can demonstrate to me in the remotely near future that the iPod fails in the marketplace simply because it doesn't offer Ogg support, or likewise that any other portable audio device that has a slew of great features fails to make it in the marketplace because they don't offer Ogg support.
OK, I'm not trying to be a smart ass. I know a number of people on/. have made the case as to why Ogg matters to them and a few other folks. And that's fine, we all have wish lists. But the marketplace as a whole doesn't even know what Ogg is. I know close to thirty people that have iPods. I'd be shocked if any of them have heard of Ogg.
It would absolutely blow my mind if Creative "brings this battle" because they "improve their Ogg support and offer it on more models." Nobody--or hardly anyone--cares.
Not trying to be a smart ass, genuinely, but it seems odd to read so many posts claiming how this won't work or how stupid it is for the US Gov to be spending money on this *instead* of some other line of defense.
I guess we can poke holes in how well it works or won't work according to what amounts to a beta test, even though few if any of us are experts in the field, and when we haven't seen the military intelligence or internal studies that were used to push this initiative through.
But isn't it safe to assume the government isn't exactly putting all their eggs in one basket on this deal? That there are several other initiatives going on, some we know about and some we don't?
I'm no US Gov apologist, and not a troll. Just thinking (typing) out loud.
Re:This is one reason apple has failed...
on
NeXTSTEP To Mac OS X
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Failed? It's hard to see Apple as a "failed" company with successes like the iMac, the iPod, iTMS and recent financial figures. I confess I haven't checked stock price and financial statements, but I understand anecdotaly that Apple is doing quite well, "niche" or not.
Don't make someone bust out the old argument of market share and comparisons to companies like Lexus, etc. etc. You're just not a "success" unless you become some sort of a monopoly, is that it?
I'd better go enjoy my G5 since Apple has so miserably failed and is, true to predictions since about 1990, about to close its doors.
Haha...my thought was:
Did hot girls work with computers in '71? I bet that guy in the Haggar suit is looking to "punch her tape," if you know what I'm saying. "Sock it to me!!"
Slashdot Mirror
Umm...OK. I live in Seattle and I think you'd have been better off picking Chicago, Minneapolis or some other American city for your joke. It rarely ever gets below freezing here, and has snowed all of...I believe twice in the city in the last three years. I've seen colder winters and more snow in Texas--literally.
"...freezing cold Seattle winters...", "...melting snow..."
Freezing cold? Melting snow? Are you sure you live in Seattle?
My Powerbook boots faster than my new Thinkpad. So this could go the other way. Apple fans could find that the Apple hardware my behave considerably different.
Not flaming or trolling, just posing the question(s): Is this because your Thinkpad is booting Windows, or because it has an Intel chip? (Or both? Or neither?)
Compared to Halliburton or McDonnell-Douglas or Boeing, Microsoft is strictly amateur hour.
Not knowing the stats, I'd tend to agree that Halliburton, Boeing and others of that ilk could have bigger or more longstanding influence in general, but I wouldn't say Microsoft is so far down on the list as to be "amateur hour." Who has more potential to affect the entire working infrastructure of the government and its offices (and the associated costs, more importantly) than they do? Not many companies.
You know, stifling the competition and marketplace survival are not mutually exclusive. The fact is, the competition was killing Apple, so they eliminated the competition. Plain and simple.
Perhaps to split hairs, I fail to see how surviving and *stifling* are the same thing. One former implies you're in a weak position, the latter a strong position.
But more to the point, you said, "People are complaining about how Apple used OS licensing to basically kill off the clones." Complaining? How can you complain about a company reversing a position to survive? What would you and the poster to whom I was responding have them do? License themselves out of existence? What would be the point? Had these manufacturers eroded Apple's bottom line on the hardware side, Apple likely wouldn't have survived and the companies would have imploded (as clonemakers, at least) anyway.
People are complaining about how Apple used OS licensing to basically kill off the clones. That sounds a lot like stifling the competition to me.
Apple killed off clone-making when they saw it cut too much into their revenue to sustain it. That's what sounds like stifling competition to you.
People say it here all the time: Apple is a hardware company. Trying an experiment--that a lot of people had been whining about/clamoring for/criticizing over--and pulling the plug it when it cut into their own primary line of revenue doesn't sound a bit like stifling the competition to me. It sounds like marketplace survival.
It is funny that nobody ever thinks of Apple when they mention questionable business practices - the McMac thing was just one way they stifled the competition.
I think it's funny that people used to scream about how ridiculous it was that Apple didn't license their OS years before, and now years after they finally tried it, someone reflects on it stifling the competition.
Right. I didn't say (or at least, mean to imply) that they started from scratch by being the original authors of all the components. I said it wasn't a bad idea to "start over," which in my opinion is what Apple did since FreeBSD, NeXTstep and most of the core technologies behind the GUI layer are not found in System 9.
Whether Microsoft chose to re-write in .Net, or use portions of pre-existing work, redoing the basis of your OS sure seems like starting over to me, and one might argue, starting from scratch.
I guess the question is: Did someone believe that EVERY SINGLE PIECE of the next Windows OS would be based on .NET? i.e. a complete redesign of every single facet of the OS from the ground up? That would be an incredibly risky gamble on Microsoft's part wouldn't it? Does everyone remember what happened to Netscape when it decided to scrap its codebase and start from scratch?
Yeah. Risky to be sure. And I do remember what happened to Netscape. But do you remember what happened to Apple when they decided to start over from scratch with their OS? It's not *always* a bad idea to start over.
So don't look at it as being canceled, rather, it's just the natural result of its evolution--becoming the absolute smallest and topic-focused convention it could possibly be.
"Smallest" as in zero attendees and exhibitors.
They don't, for the most part, stock replacement parts. They don't do anything but the most basic repairs.
I have to chime in here. I have a refurbished dual G5 in which one of the processors stopped showing up. The guy at the Genius bar told me it could be anything from an improperly seated processor to a bad CPU or logic board -- both of which were parts that they had in stock and could fix within a day or two. Luckily, it the processor wasn't firmly "in place" and it just took a bit of reassembly.
They had it diagnosed and back to me in less than 24 hours, no charge. And I don't have Applecare on the machine. My opinion is that Apple hardware is great, but regardless, I've had few occasions to have to get repairs over the years. And when I have, it's been a relatively painless experience. I never had to ship anything in or wait for some obscure supply-chain hopscotch to get a part.
A number of other comments in this post give me pause, but I'm not qualified to respond so I'll just say "hmmm...OK, whatever" to the rest, and admit people's experiences vary.
The PC is *not* dead. But he is infected with a number of viruses and not doing entirely well.
I am not saying it will but the story submitted missed out on the fact that people already pay reoccuring charges to access to stuff that they can get free elsewhere.
Examples:
Cell Phones : The amounts people dump on these is stupendous.
XM/Sirius : Can't get reception unless you pay.
Cable/Satellite : Same again. Sure you can get it another way but your paying for a package.
Mmmmaybe...but I'd like to point out that people are accustomed to owning their music. After decades of doing so, we want to own the records, tapes, CDs (and now song files) that we purchased, traded for or "acquired."
People have not been accustomed to "owning" unlimited air time for cell calls, radio broadcasts or TV broadcasts because that's how it's always been; there was little or no alternative. We only put up with the radio thing because it has largely been free, and we could buy our own copies of the music. And we are moving towards expecting to own something with TV as more and more shows wind up on DVD.
I dunno, I just feel like given the alternative, people will embrace the ability to own, rather than rent this kind of thing. (If I could buy a $400 phone and never pay for airtime, I'd almost always opt for that rather than the, say, $100 phone with charges for calls.)
Yeah, you're probably right. I'm sure it happens a lot, even without rumors. You're also right that it was likely worsened in this case by the ThinkSecret factor. Especially if other articles like the CNN one mentioned it.
I suppose a simple Web search would answer my question, but I'd be interested to know if there are recent stories similar to this surrounding other product launches (like game consoles or something relatively resembling the cult-like environment of Apple products) where hype, rumor and trade secrets made things a little more "interesting" than normal. Anyone know other examples like this?
Plus, did you see how wildly Apple's stock was swinging around all these rumors? we are talking 7% in a day market cap swings - that is big stuff for a teenager to be toying with.
That is precisely the problem. Well said, parent. An interesting point from a CNN article on the day of the launch: "The new products expand Apple's four-year-old "digital hub" and could broaden Apple's market considerably, analysts said. But rumor sites had anticipated the new products, and Apple shares fell nearly 4 percent."
When you announce a product launch like Apple did and the shares actually fall, and are attributed to the rumors, I'd expect them (or Microsoft or IBM or anyone else) to act.
I haven't used it, but I have a good friend who uses Flexcar here in Seattle.
According to her, it's not a "dream solution." There has been a time or two when the car in the spot closest to her apartment hasn't been available on short notice, etc. etc. But Flexcar did ultimately make it possible for her to make the leap to get rid of her personal car altogether. She lives and works downtown and uses the bus system, but was holding on to her car for that one-Saturday-a-month when she would make the big grocery store run, do the miscellaneous errands that took her to other parts of the city, and/or pick up something too big to carry alone on a bus.
Without Flexcar, she would have had to meet the expense of keeping the car around for those odd occasions, as Seattle is not quite ready for most young professional types to live by public transportation alone, a la New York City.
Interesting. Not to discount your experience with Craig's list, but I've had pretty much the opposite experience and having (no exaggeration) zero problems in any of my use of the sit:. I found one long-term contract job and several freelance projects, and hired a couple of freelancers to do work for me. I bought three pieces of good furniture and a couple of collectibles, in addition to concert tickets. I went out with three or four different girls--one I ended up dating long term, and one I'm still friends with. There were a couple of psycho-billy girls, to be sure. But that just about matches the success rate of any guy I know in "real world" scenarios!
Yep, there are nutjobs, ripoffs and scams, not to mention spam-posts that I flag regularly in my almost daily use of Craig's list. But if you are smart enough to read between the lines and use a little caution, you can get quite a lot out of the site if it's popular in your city. (On that note, I use it in Seattle, and I have friends in New York and San Francisco that swear by it for all kinds of things.)
And in the several years that I've used eBay, I have had a completely spotless experience. No cases of fraud, no sellers or buyers who have backed out. Not that it doesn't happen; I'm sure it does. But as I said, exercise a little caution, read between the lines...I don't see any reason why you can't have an experience that is at least as good as in the real world. Because, on the other hand, I've had plenty of sucky experiences with items for sale and jobs posted in the good old want ads of the local paper.
Like I said, not trying to discount your experience. But I don't think the drawbacks you mention are enough to discourage use of these community-based sites given the amount of success they've seen and the people who do have positive experiences with them. I mean, I could poke some holes in the moderation system of /. and all the rrreally hilarious supposedly +5 funnies, the supposed statistics and research that people throw around as fact to support a rant, and the religious zeal people espouse for one operating system or another to cloud issues...but here I am, day after day, reading and using the site.
Lastly, "crunchy-granola-ess" comments aside, community building around sites seems to work. (Had a look at Amazon.com lately? Reviews, recommendations, wish lists.) I don't know if you have information to demonstrate that Craig's list has been a financial failure, but I for one can't see it as the practical failure you describe. And I've got a lot of friends who feel the same.
The poster's grandfather wrote his letters during WWII over email? I wonder who his ISP was.
I am not suggesting that we have "The Seattle Software Party". I don't think that polluting the Port of Seattle would accomplish anything in this case. I am simply suggesting that you should each give your law makers a history lesson to remind them of the consequences of government caving to big business and not protecting the people.
Amen, brother. And people here in Washington state are already beginning to get that very point. [Seattle Weekly]...and you can get back to me later on a promise I'll make: I'll kiss your ass on Main Street if and when you can demonstrate to me in the remotely near future that the iPod fails in the marketplace simply because it doesn't offer Ogg support, or likewise that any other portable audio device that has a slew of great features fails to make it in the marketplace because they don't offer Ogg support.
/. have made the case as to why Ogg matters to them and a few other folks. And that's fine, we all have wish lists. But the marketplace as a whole doesn't even know what Ogg is. I know close to thirty people that have iPods. I'd be shocked if any of them have heard of Ogg.
OK, I'm not trying to be a smart ass. I know a number of people on
It would absolutely blow my mind if Creative "brings this battle" because they "improve their Ogg support and offer it on more models." Nobody--or hardly anyone--cares.
Not trying to be a smart ass, genuinely, but it seems odd to read so many posts claiming how this won't work or how stupid it is for the US Gov to be spending money on this *instead* of some other line of defense.
I guess we can poke holes in how well it works or won't work according to what amounts to a beta test, even though few if any of us are experts in the field, and when we haven't seen the military intelligence or internal studies that were used to push this initiative through.
But isn't it safe to assume the government isn't exactly putting all their eggs in one basket on this deal? That there are several other initiatives going on, some we know about and some we don't?
I'm no US Gov apologist, and not a troll. Just thinking (typing) out loud.
Failed? It's hard to see Apple as a "failed" company with successes like the iMac, the iPod, iTMS and recent financial figures. I confess I haven't checked stock price and financial statements, but I understand anecdotaly that Apple is doing quite well, "niche" or not.
Don't make someone bust out the old argument of market share and comparisons to companies like Lexus, etc. etc. You're just not a "success" unless you become some sort of a monopoly, is that it?
I'd better go enjoy my G5 since Apple has so miserably failed and is, true to predictions since about 1990, about to close its doors.
And I wonder what the iPod and iMac would look like--or would we have them at all--if Apple hadn't gotten Jobs back.
Haha...my thought was: Did hot girls work with computers in '71? I bet that guy in the Haggar suit is looking to "punch her tape," if you know what I'm saying. "Sock it to me!!"
God, I love living in Seattle. First, stories like this, now Wimax. Grunge is dead! Long live wireless!