This requires.Net framework 2.0!!! So much for running on legacy hardware.
Also how exactly does this surpass a linux shell? (In which you can do practically everything)
Saying that many apps are _capable_ of running without Altivec when they're designed to use it is like saying Windows XP is _capable_ of running on a Pentium 2 with 64mb of RAM. Sure its possible, but I don't want to be the one who has to use it.
speaking as a developer who's looking at migrating Altivec code to SSE (or possibly non-optimised code), I can promise you its not 100%. Sure the process isn't that hard and Apple's documentation is really quite good, but its frustrating none the less.
yes, but you don't say that you 'built' the desk when it comes from IKEA do you? Someone else built it, you just put it together. Same thing with many VS apps.
Welcome to the wonderful world of Apple's global market pricing scheme. As the product gets more expensive the gap widens.
Eg:
30gb Video iPod: $US299 (~$AU399). Apple.com.au's price: $AU449
Entry level Mac Mini: $US499 (~$AU665). Apple.com.au's price: $AU799
15" PowerMac: $US1999 (~$AU2665). Apple.com.au's price: $AU3199
Dear user, you are valued and important to the Microsoft Corporation. We understand that you've paid a lot of money for out product and we really appreciate it. We encourage you to share this program with your friends if you find it to be of a high quality and might be of use to them. We also really appreciate any comments and feedback you may have about the software, particularly if you experience difficulty with it. We hope your enjoy using our product.
Ohhh you mean I'm not meant to edit that file before I install it?
no its not because its not being actively protected, its because trademarking something still allows people to use it. A trademark prohibits other people from using that name/slogan for their own product, it does not stop them referencing that object by its name.
Whats the point in naming something if people aren't allowed to use the name?
Using a logo is completely different to using a name. Saying "Made for iPod" is simply a statement of fact, you can't trademark the use of the entire english language.
I'm not sure about the US, but here in Australia its not uncommon to see advertisements comparing two named products. Both names are trademarked but a comparison (providing its legitimate) is perfectly legal as its simply a statement of fact.
Since when does saying "Made for iPod" mean that you have to pay dues to Apple? If I make an aftermarket product for a particular car I don't have to pay a license to the original manufacturer. In fact in the automobile industry you can even make OEM spec replacement parts without having to pay a license.
I'm sorry modifying that cardboard box to make said device is a clear attempt to circumvent the copy protection built into it. Thus you are in violation of DMCA and your device, any instructions on how to make the device and anything you created with the device are illegal.
sure I agree. But if the developer of software xyz is going to the effort of making a universal binary then in 80% of cases they just need only VERY minor adjustments and a recompile to have a PPC version and a x86 version.
Yes I realise that maintaining two versions is a pain but you don't take the performance hit of universal binaries and really, the differences are tiny.
ok keeping developers on their toes by switching platform might be good once in a while....But to see yet another platform change from Apple in the near future would just be painful.
The pirating is reduced because the earlier version is the only one that has been hacked. You can bet your last dollar that Apple have made it harder to hack this newer version and are twisting peoples arms to upgrade by not allowing newer binaries to be backward compatible.
"Universal binaries built with Xcode 2.2 and the new copy of Mac OS X 10.4.2 for Intel will also fail to run on systems running the older version of the operating system."
I know that updating for bugfixes is the right things to do... But there's not much incentive to upgrade if your 'universal' binaries won't work on the previous developer system. Does anyone else think that the whole universal binaries idea is a waste of time? Sure its handy where writing two versions is next to impossible, but realistically, thats not very often.
Whilst the mini may not even be close to the fastest Mac offering it still does a damn good job. I've got the 1.4ghz version and laoded it with ram and its considerably faster to use than my P4 2.8ghz XP machine.
The mini falls down when I've got 5+ apps running though.
I think its more a matter of not really caring because they're about to releace version 9. Opera are doing just fine in the embedded markets so they're not desperate for cash.
I do think its a great idea to get people hooked before the new release though.
Slashdot Mirror
This requires .Net framework 2.0!!! So much for running on legacy hardware.
Also how exactly does this surpass a linux shell? (In which you can do practically everything)
pfft, web based tapestry making has been around for ages.
Saying that many apps are _capable_ of running without Altivec when they're designed to use it is like saying Windows XP is _capable_ of running on a Pentium 2 with 64mb of RAM. Sure its possible, but I don't want to be the one who has to use it.
speaking as a developer who's looking at migrating Altivec code to SSE (or possibly non-optimised code), I can promise you its not 100%. Sure the process isn't that hard and Apple's documentation is really quite good, but its frustrating none the less.
Except for the fact that SSE3 is a core component of OSX on x86 and currently no AMD chips (to the best of my knowlege) have SSE3 capabilties.
why... That's not MS sharing the IE love, its them trying to open up Macs to virus', those dirty scoundrels!
yes, but you don't say that you 'built' the desk when it comes from IKEA do you? Someone else built it, you just put it together. Same thing with many VS apps.
Welcome to the wonderful world of Apple's global market pricing scheme. As the product gets more expensive the gap widens.
Eg:
30gb Video iPod: $US299 (~$AU399). Apple.com.au's price: $AU449
Entry level Mac Mini: $US499 (~$AU665). Apple.com.au's price: $AU799
15" PowerMac: $US1999 (~$AU2665). Apple.com.au's price: $AU3199
And so on and so forth.....
and when that sticker "falls off" before purchase?
My copy of MS Office's EULA says:
Dear user, you are valued and important to the Microsoft Corporation. We understand that you've paid a lot of money for out product and we really appreciate it. We encourage you to share this program with your friends if you find it to be of a high quality and might be of use to them. We also really appreciate any comments and feedback you may have about the software, particularly if you experience difficulty with it. We hope your enjoy using our product.
Ohhh you mean I'm not meant to edit that file before I install it?
no its not because its not being actively protected, its because trademarking something still allows people to use it. A trademark prohibits other people from using that name/slogan for their own product, it does not stop them referencing that object by its name.
Whats the point in naming something if people aren't allowed to use the name?
Using a logo is completely different to using a name. Saying "Made for iPod" is simply a statement of fact, you can't trademark the use of the entire english language.
I'm not sure about the US, but here in Australia its not uncommon to see advertisements comparing two named products. Both names are trademarked but a comparison (providing its legitimate) is perfectly legal as its simply a statement of fact.
Since when does saying "Made for iPod" mean that you have to pay dues to Apple? If I make an aftermarket product for a particular car I don't have to pay a license to the original manufacturer. In fact in the automobile industry you can even make OEM spec replacement parts without having to pay a license.
I'm sorry modifying that cardboard box to make said device is a clear attempt to circumvent the copy protection built into it. Thus you are in violation of DMCA and your device, any instructions on how to make the device and anything you created with the device are illegal.
Clearly you are also a terrorist.
sure I agree. But if the developer of software xyz is going to the effort of making a universal binary then in 80% of cases they just need only VERY minor adjustments and a recompile to have a PPC version and a x86 version.
Yes I realise that maintaining two versions is a pain but you don't take the performance hit of universal binaries and really, the differences are tiny.
ok keeping developers on their toes by switching platform might be good once in a while....But to see yet another platform change from Apple in the near future would just be painful.
The pirating is reduced because the earlier version is the only one that has been hacked. You can bet your last dollar that Apple have made it harder to hack this newer version and are twisting peoples arms to upgrade by not allowing newer binaries to be backward compatible.
"Universal binaries built with Xcode 2.2 and the new copy of Mac OS X 10.4.2 for Intel will also fail to run on systems running the older version of the operating system."
I know that updating for bugfixes is the right things to do... But there's not much incentive to upgrade if your 'universal' binaries won't work on the previous developer system. Does anyone else think that the whole universal binaries idea is a waste of time? Sure its handy where writing two versions is next to impossible, but realistically, thats not very often.
this guy didn't fail to use technical means, its just that his technical means was redirecting to another (public, freely accessible etc) website.
They actually just changed the Firefox installer to say something else and renamed firefox.exe to iexplore.exe
Whilst the mini may not even be close to the fastest Mac offering it still does a damn good job. I've got the 1.4ghz version and laoded it with ram and its considerably faster to use than my P4 2.8ghz XP machine.
The mini falls down when I've got 5+ apps running though.
Well kinda
I think its more a matter of not really caring because they're about to releace version 9. Opera are doing just fine in the embedded markets so they're not desperate for cash.
I do think its a great idea to get people hooked before the new release though.
how is it still a game console? My PC has more games on it.
The hardware and software are virtually identical. Where is the distinction between PC and game console? The case it comes in?
So my X-box... Running an intel x86 chip and linux, with a keyboard and mouse...
Is it a desktop yet?