Basically, you would need to check that none of the free apps you have allowed to use iCloud has turned freemium, paid or otherwise changed its status.
Nor do I. But then I wouldn't be surprised if Photoshop was not supported on the next generation of consumer macs either.
I'm sorry to say this, but someone spiked your morning tea with something serious and possibly illegal. How exactly do you suppose this is going to work, technically? You are aware that there's no "Photoshop chip" in your iMac, yes? It would be quite a challenge to build a computer that supports other apps, but not Photoshop. Seriously, whatever that drug was someone put into your tea, you should see a doctor, just to make sure.
I see plenty.
Was that before or after the tea?:-)
No, seriously - name it. Don't just say you have it. Evidence only counts if presented.
I could easily see
Yes, but that is in your mind. I can easily imagine Windows 10 being fantastic and wiping the floor with OS X, also it will only run on ARM computers, prompting the death of Intel. It will be based on FreeBSD, of course, and it will drop support for keyboard and mouse and only allow voice input.
Now, back to the real world, show me not your fantasies, but what actual evidence you have that they aren't just some made-up stuff. Basically, disprove my tea theory.;-)
Yes, one commissioner has said that he's going to bring it back again and again.
The summary misses something important, though: That EU MEPs have made it very clear what they think of that strategy. Shooting yourself in the foot is a really attractive option compared to the equivalent of telling the judge up front that you're going to appeal his ruling anyways - when he knows that he will also preside over the appeal case.
No it doesn't add up as a method for paying for free apps.
It does if you consider everything. Allowing free, but not paid, apps to use the iCloud API would be a) the kind of fragmentation Apple dislikes and b) require constant checking if every unknown party plays by the rules.
but I could see the next
I can't. Do you have any supporting evidence? Because I kind of grow tired of the typical slashdot jumping-to-conclusion. You know, the stuff where someone posts A ==> B conveniently ignoring the 20 or so intermediate steps that may or may not ever happen.
I don't see any evidence into that direction. The App Store is convenient and will probably take in a lot of the Apple software, especially that of smaller companies and indie authors. But I don't see Adobe putting Photoshop there.
It adds up because it's the only way free apps fit into that system, and Apple wants free apps because they drive sales. They make it up on the paid apps and the hardware. It's like the free re-fills for your soft drinks or any other "free" offering from a commercial entity.
Of course Apple wants to have people use the App Store. I don't see them forcing it, though. Very likely will never happen because a number of big names are out there for Mac Software who won't be using the App Store.
Strawman, and one so horrible you really need to go back to "bad rhetorics 101".
Last I checked, we were talking about a device that monitors for a crash (you already have a dozen sensors like that in your car essentially doing that, like the ones that deploy the airbags) and then calling 911 so an ambulence can be dispatched to your location.
You are thinking about some remote possibility that one could do with similar technology. Basically, you're saying that we should make cars illegal because you want to prevent World War III and tanks also use combustion engines. You are ignoring that there is much more technology needed, you can't turn a VW Beetle into an M1 Abrahams easily (in fact, it'd be easier to build an M1 from scratch) and that tanks are only a small part of the thing you're afraid of.
If you are afraid of constant monitoring by the government and/or your insurance company, there are dozens of other things you should worry a lot more about than this.
Somewhere there's someone working out a plan to adjust billboards to advertise just the right products as you drive by, and somewhere someone is working out a plan to sell police more electronic monitoring software to track people.
Just what I supposed would follow as arguments.
You magically missed pretty much every important word in the original, didn't you? Like "emergency" and "crash"?
Yours is the classical strawman, related to the original proposal through a family tree that would put european noble families to shame, such a remote relative that DNA testing wouldn't show it.
Sorry, anecdotal evidence isn't. No matter how outlandish and insane a conspiracy theory, I am sure you can always find at least one anecdote that strongly supports it.
I'm sure there is corruption and lobbyism at the EU level. In fact, I would be very much surprised if there weren't. At the same time, there are reasonable decisions made (if you need an anecdote: The rejection of ACTA by every subcommittee discussing it).
They port individual features across the OSes, true. But I've owned iPhones ever since the original iPhone 2007, that's almost 5 years now. My desktop OS X experience hasn't changed all that much. A few features, yes. A few changes to common apps such as address book and iCal, not all of them I applaud. Launchpad is new, but I never use it (Alfred does a better job on an iMac) and it's not forced on you in the least.
In fact, the main common feature seems to be that the Mac has an App Store too, now.
The sky is falling! They want to track us all! It's an evil government scheme for total surveilance! You are going to be monitored, it's Big Brother all over again. I thought it was 2012 and not 1984?
What for? Nobody ever gets into a car crash with nobody else around, especially in Europe. It's all a ploy by car manufacturers to sell something we don't need for a huge markup. Follow the money!
I don't want that in my car! The RF/EM/ESP/GPS/energy emissions will cause cancer! It's an evil alien ploy to... I don't know. Where's my tinfoil hat?
Oh yeah, it's an evil conspiracy. Sure. "They" will monitor every car in the world through this, because... uh... no idea.
Funny how geeks have become innovation-phobic. It used to be the other way around.
...stop trying to be a visionary - you aren't. Your record on future predictions equals that of the world cup animal oracles.
Sure the PC will change - it always does. But the world isn't "moving to" tablets, it is adopting tablets. Most tablet owners also own a PC and for that reason alone don't want the two to be identical. One tool for the one job, another tool for a different job. Some people are happy with just one of the two, that's fine, too. Yes, some people now use a tablet instead of a PC because what they used to use the PC for is better done by a tablet, there just weren't any.
MS more than anyone should know this. Their second cash cow is MS Office, after all - something that nobody really wants on a tablet for any serious work. Sure, the iPad office apps (Pages, Numbers, Keynote) are bestsellers - because people want to read and update their documents on the road. But it is not only my own opinion that serious office work doesn't get done on a tablet. And if you need business numbers, look at the sales figures for notebooks and netbooks. Not exactly dead in the waters, are they? So even in the mobile computing market, there's still an interest in real computers in addition to tablets.
MS is missing the boat - again - because they are so out of touch with what the users want. That's the true secret of the Apple success - the give people something they want, sometimes something they didn't even know they wanted. Sure, it's a "our way or the highway" offering, but MS still thinks they dominate computing so much that they can get people to follow them anywhere - and that hasn't been true for a decade.
you can easily eat up all the memory or introduce a buffer overload vulnerability if you're not paying attention
But that also means you can actually manage your memory.
I once wrote a large-scale simulation in C, because the "intelligence" of memory management in every other language would've blown the memory I had available. In C I could make sure that it uses the precise amount of bytes I needed and not a single more (and single bytes matter if you take them times 16 million elements to simulate).
That article could've only been written by someone who isn't a coder. If you are a coder and you can't code C then you aren't a coder. Seriously.
C is a great language. It's the AK47 of programming languages - rough, barebones, you definitely need to know how to handle one because it doesn't do all the handholding for you, but you can drop it in the mud, drive a tank over it, pick it up and fire it - and it will fire. None of that 10,000 library dependencies crap.
Learning to code in C - and I don't mean "hello world", I mean a real program with input validation, safe pointer handling and your own memory management - puts you in a great position to write good code in every other programming language.
Basically, people who don't know C are doomed to repeat the same old mistakes. The problem is that most other languages are a lot more forgiving. And thus your errors don't get noticed so easily, until they've accumulated to create a security issue. In C, if your memory handling sucks, you get a buffer overflow and often a hard crash. If you don't handle your input correctly - crash. And so on.
Back at university, when I was the assistent for the C programming course, students hated me for the 100 ways I could make their precious little programs crash. But those who got their code past me had learnt to write safe code, and I'm taking bets that they still do so today.
How about a demonstration gone violent? Both parties were at the demonstration, but it is unclear if they ever talked to each other. You can't even prove if they've seen each other. But it was the same event and they did the same things. And they might have (unknowingly) supported each other, e.g. one threw a stone which drove police back which the user used to do something else.
IANAL, but this is the real-world example that comes closest IMHO. If you'd join in these circumstances, you should join BT users. If you wouldn't, then you shouldn't.
I still do, thank you. With more and more of the world coming online, most of the new(er) users are not computer-experts (those have been online for a long time already). So naturally, those new(er) users will choose service that provide what they need.
That doesn't mean that millions of people still run their own mail servers and will continue to do so.
Language wars are so 20th century. Can we grow up? The perceived differences between languages are much larger than the real ones, and the quality of the programmer and the programming methodology and environment are ten times more important than the choosen language.
Great software is written in every language, just like crap software is written in every language. Get over it.
I personally happen to like PHP, but if you want to use Python or Ruby or Java or Brainfuck, then I don't care. Whatever works for you.
it's a real pain in the ass to launch an app on Mac OSX that is not docked,
You have never used Launchpad, Quicksilver or Alfred, apparently - the last two being so much genius that they have been copied all over the place, from KDE to Windows.
My OS X desktop is the most convenient place to launch apps that I have ever had, and that includes various windows versions, various Linux desktops and window managers, some BSD and Solaris and mobile environments from Palm to iOS.
And frankly, if you think that the applications directory - which is at least sorted by name of the application and gives you large icons if you want it - is a mess compared to the Start directory - which sorts and subdirectories by the name of the publisher, an idea that would've easily won any and all contests for "worst sorting method possible" - then you have mental problems that most professionals would refuse to come near.
So it took MS almost 20 years to reverse on something that was a stupid decision from the start? And they've replaced it with something... worse, from a user-interface perspective?
Oh well, people will just accept it as always. If you had any hope left for the human race, the way they follow a leader no matter how much he sucks is your evidence that your hopes are misplaced.
But generals and military bureaucrats are always trying to fight the last big war over again.
Almost. They are trying to fight the last big victory over again. Defeat, contrary to common perception, isn't much of a lesson unless it is crushing.
Germany was successful in WW2 initially because after WW1 they had completely reworked their military. France was crushed because it held to the WW1 strategies, and initial deployments of US troops were slaughtered on the battlefield until the US had re-worked their training program.
There's a lot of truth in your first paragraph, but it falls short of the whole truth. The various industry associations are mainly representing the top 1% of authors. For the european countries, with its collecting agencies for public performances, most of the money goes to the top artists as well, so much that artists have begun to leave those associations because they don't see their advantage anymore.
So yes, the RIAA/MPAA does work for the artists - as well as the producers, distributors and a dozen others in the system. And in many cases, the artist, while always at the forefront in the propaganda, ist the one getting the short end of the stick. Fortunately, artists are not only waking up, they are also discovering that for the 2nd paragraph of yours, they don't need a good part of the system anymore, they can do it themselves.
No, it isn't. This is how for most of history, a tiny fraction of business has worked. Lately, that has turned into the primary business philosophy. So much that I fear I have to remind everyone of the other one, that was dominant for most of history: Stable, reliable profits, not increasing profits. When you operate a small family business - the kind that 99.999% of all businesses ever in history have been like - then your incentive is to feed your family and generally earn a living. Growth is nice, but it isn't your primary focus. There was a time when the profit of a company was what mattered. Today, it is the growth rate - and if you have had even basic maths, you know that exponential growth is not sustainable in the long run. Thus, an economic system focussed on growth will do exactly what ours has been doing ever since we left the middle ages: Boom-bust-cycles. Because that is the only way to beat the rules and sustain exponential growth: You need to reset the counter to some much lower value every once in a while.
The evil part about it is that most businesses (by number of corporations and in many countries still by number of employees) are still working on the "profit" instead of the "growth" model. And they go bust, too.
Whether you like Apple or not, they have a different business model from Google and Facebook. For Apple, you are the customer. For Google and Facebook, you are the product they sell. That's an important difference.
Your.sig reveals the flaws in your thinking better than your comment above, but it is of the same kind.
You can not compare one with the other. Have you failed to notice how the content industry is behind all the anti-piracy propaganda, while authors and musicians are mostly busy doing what they've always done?
What needs changing is not only the law, but also the content distribution system. Once the authors get more than a couple cents from that CD that I didn't buy, we can talk about unjust laws and author rights, deal?
Slashdot Mirror
???
Basically, you would need to check that none of the free apps you have allowed to use iCloud has turned freemium, paid or otherwise changed its status.
Nor do I. But then I wouldn't be surprised if Photoshop was not supported on the next generation of consumer macs either.
I'm sorry to say this, but someone spiked your morning tea with something serious and possibly illegal. How exactly do you suppose this is going to work, technically? You are aware that there's no "Photoshop chip" in your iMac, yes? It would be quite a challenge to build a computer that supports other apps, but not Photoshop. Seriously, whatever that drug was someone put into your tea, you should see a doctor, just to make sure.
I see plenty.
Was that before or after the tea? :-)
No, seriously - name it. Don't just say you have it. Evidence only counts if presented.
I could easily see
Yes, but that is in your mind. I can easily imagine Windows 10 being fantastic and wiping the floor with OS X, also it will only run on ARM computers, prompting the death of Intel. It will be based on FreeBSD, of course, and it will drop support for keyboard and mouse and only allow voice input.
Now, back to the real world, show me not your fantasies, but what actual evidence you have that they aren't just some made-up stuff. Basically, disprove my tea theory. ;-)
Yes, one commissioner has said that he's going to bring it back again and again.
The summary misses something important, though: That EU MEPs have made it very clear what they think of that strategy. Shooting yourself in the foot is a really attractive option compared to the equivalent of telling the judge up front that you're going to appeal his ruling anyways - when he knows that he will also preside over the appeal case.
No it doesn't add up as a method for paying for free apps.
It does if you consider everything. Allowing free, but not paid, apps to use the iCloud API would be a) the kind of fragmentation Apple dislikes and b) require constant checking if every unknown party plays by the rules.
but I could see the next
I can't. Do you have any supporting evidence? Because I kind of grow tired of the typical slashdot jumping-to-conclusion. You know, the stuff where someone posts A ==> B conveniently ignoring the 20 or so intermediate steps that may or may not ever happen.
I don't see any evidence into that direction. The App Store is convenient and will probably take in a lot of the Apple software, especially that of smaller companies and indie authors. But I don't see Adobe putting Photoshop there.
It adds up because it's the only way free apps fit into that system, and Apple wants free apps because they drive sales. They make it up on the paid apps and the hardware. It's like the free re-fills for your soft drinks or any other "free" offering from a commercial entity.
Of course Apple wants to have people use the App Store. I don't see them forcing it, though. Very likely will never happen because a number of big names are out there for Mac Software who won't be using the App Store.
Strawman, and one so horrible you really need to go back to "bad rhetorics 101".
Last I checked, we were talking about a device that monitors for a crash (you already have a dozen sensors like that in your car essentially doing that, like the ones that deploy the airbags) and then calling 911 so an ambulence can be dispatched to your location.
You are thinking about some remote possibility that one could do with similar technology. Basically, you're saying that we should make cars illegal because you want to prevent World War III and tanks also use combustion engines. You are ignoring that there is much more technology needed, you can't turn a VW Beetle into an M1 Abrahams easily (in fact, it'd be easier to build an M1 from scratch) and that tanks are only a small part of the thing you're afraid of.
If you are afraid of constant monitoring by the government and/or your insurance company, there are dozens of other things you should worry a lot more about than this.
Somewhere there's someone working out a plan to adjust billboards to advertise just the right products as you drive by, and somewhere someone is working out a plan to sell police more electronic monitoring software to track people.
Just what I supposed would follow as arguments.
You magically missed pretty much every important word in the original, didn't you? Like "emergency" and "crash"?
Yours is the classical strawman, related to the original proposal through a family tree that would put european noble families to shame, such a remote relative that DNA testing wouldn't show it.
Just for example
Sorry, anecdotal evidence isn't. No matter how outlandish and insane a conspiracy theory, I am sure you can always find at least one anecdote that strongly supports it.
I'm sure there is corruption and lobbyism at the EU level. In fact, I would be very much surprised if there weren't. At the same time, there are reasonable decisions made (if you need an anecdote: The rejection of ACTA by every subcommittee discussing it).
True, I forgot about the scroll reversal.
As for the iCloud API - the way I take it is that you're not paying for the API, but for use of the iCloud infrastructure.
Can't see that.
They port individual features across the OSes, true. But I've owned iPhones ever since the original iPhone 2007, that's almost 5 years now. My desktop OS X experience hasn't changed all that much. A few features, yes. A few changes to common apps such as address book and iCal, not all of them I applaud. Launchpad is new, but I never use it (Alfred does a better job on an iMac) and it's not forced on you in the least.
In fact, the main common feature seems to be that the Mac has an App Store too, now.
Allow me to sum up the first 5000 or so comments:
Oh yeah, it's an evil conspiracy. Sure. "They" will monitor every car in the world through this, because... uh... no idea.
Funny how geeks have become innovation-phobic. It used to be the other way around.
...stop trying to be a visionary - you aren't. Your record on future predictions equals that of the world cup animal oracles.
Sure the PC will change - it always does. But the world isn't "moving to" tablets, it is adopting tablets. Most tablet owners also own a PC and for that reason alone don't want the two to be identical. One tool for the one job, another tool for a different job. Some people are happy with just one of the two, that's fine, too. Yes, some people now use a tablet instead of a PC because what they used to use the PC for is better done by a tablet, there just weren't any.
MS more than anyone should know this. Their second cash cow is MS Office, after all - something that nobody really wants on a tablet for any serious work. Sure, the iPad office apps (Pages, Numbers, Keynote) are bestsellers - because people want to read and update their documents on the road. But it is not only my own opinion that serious office work doesn't get done on a tablet. And if you need business numbers, look at the sales figures for notebooks and netbooks. Not exactly dead in the waters, are they? So even in the mobile computing market, there's still an interest in real computers in addition to tablets.
MS is missing the boat - again - because they are so out of touch with what the users want. That's the true secret of the Apple success - the give people something they want, sometimes something they didn't even know they wanted. Sure, it's a "our way or the highway" offering, but MS still thinks they dominate computing so much that they can get people to follow them anywhere - and that hasn't been true for a decade.
you can easily eat up all the memory or introduce a buffer overload vulnerability if you're not paying attention
But that also means you can actually manage your memory.
I once wrote a large-scale simulation in C, because the "intelligence" of memory management in every other language would've blown the memory I had available. In C I could make sure that it uses the precise amount of bytes I needed and not a single more (and single bytes matter if you take them times 16 million elements to simulate).
That article could've only been written by someone who isn't a coder. If you are a coder and you can't code C then you aren't a coder. Seriously.
C is a great language. It's the AK47 of programming languages - rough, barebones, you definitely need to know how to handle one because it doesn't do all the handholding for you, but you can drop it in the mud, drive a tank over it, pick it up and fire it - and it will fire. None of that 10,000 library dependencies crap.
Learning to code in C - and I don't mean "hello world", I mean a real program with input validation, safe pointer handling and your own memory management - puts you in a great position to write good code in every other programming language.
Basically, people who don't know C are doomed to repeat the same old mistakes. The problem is that most other languages are a lot more forgiving. And thus your errors don't get noticed so easily, until they've accumulated to create a security issue. In C, if your memory handling sucks, you get a buffer overflow and often a hard crash. If you don't handle your input correctly - crash. And so on.
Back at university, when I was the assistent for the C programming course, students hated me for the 100 ways I could make their precious little programs crash. But those who got their code past me had learnt to write safe code, and I'm taking bets that they still do so today.
A bank robbery seems the wrong metaphor here.
How about a demonstration gone violent? Both parties were at the demonstration, but it is unclear if they ever talked to each other. You can't even prove if they've seen each other. But it was the same event and they did the same things. And they might have (unknowingly) supported each other, e.g. one threw a stone which drove police back which the user used to do something else.
IANAL, but this is the real-world example that comes closest IMHO. If you'd join in these circumstances, you should join BT users. If you wouldn't, then you shouldn't.
Remember when people ran their own mail servers?
I still do, thank you. With more and more of the world coming online, most of the new(er) users are not computer-experts (those have been online for a long time already). So naturally, those new(er) users will choose service that provide what they need.
That doesn't mean that millions of people still run their own mail servers and will continue to do so.
Language wars are so 20th century. Can we grow up? The perceived differences between languages are much larger than the real ones, and the quality of the programmer and the programming methodology and environment are ten times more important than the choosen language.
Great software is written in every language, just like crap software is written in every language. Get over it.
I personally happen to like PHP, but if you want to use Python or Ruby or Java or Brainfuck, then I don't care. Whatever works for you.
it's a real pain in the ass to launch an app on Mac OSX that is not docked,
You have never used Launchpad, Quicksilver or Alfred, apparently - the last two being so much genius that they have been copied all over the place, from KDE to Windows.
My OS X desktop is the most convenient place to launch apps that I have ever had, and that includes various windows versions, various Linux desktops and window managers, some BSD and Solaris and mobile environments from Palm to iOS.
And frankly, if you think that the applications directory - which is at least sorted by name of the application and gives you large icons if you want it - is a mess compared to the Start directory - which sorts and subdirectories by the name of the publisher, an idea that would've easily won any and all contests for "worst sorting method possible" - then you have mental problems that most professionals would refuse to come near.
So it took MS almost 20 years to reverse on something that was a stupid decision from the start? And they've replaced it with something... worse, from a user-interface perspective?
Oh well, people will just accept it as always. If you had any hope left for the human race, the way they follow a leader no matter how much he sucks is your evidence that your hopes are misplaced.
But generals and military bureaucrats are always trying to fight the last big war over again.
Almost. They are trying to fight the last big victory over again. Defeat, contrary to common perception, isn't much of a lesson unless it is crushing.
Germany was successful in WW2 initially because after WW1 they had completely reworked their military. France was crushed because it held to the WW1 strategies, and initial deployments of US troops were slaughtered on the battlefield until the US had re-worked their training program.
No, same here. Looked at the before/after pictures and thought "seriously?"
There's a lot of truth in your first paragraph, but it falls short of the whole truth. The various industry associations are mainly representing the top 1% of authors. For the european countries, with its collecting agencies for public performances, most of the money goes to the top artists as well, so much that artists have begun to leave those associations because they don't see their advantage anymore.
So yes, the RIAA/MPAA does work for the artists - as well as the producers, distributors and a dozen others in the system. And in many cases, the artist, while always at the forefront in the propaganda, ist the one getting the short end of the stick. Fortunately, artists are not only waking up, they are also discovering that for the 2nd paragraph of yours, they don't need a good part of the system anymore, they can do it themselves.
Basically, yes. But that's not new. What's new is that they are CEOs and business tycoons instead of kings and popes.
This is how business has always worked.
No, it isn't. This is how for most of history, a tiny fraction of business has worked. Lately, that has turned into the primary business philosophy. So much that I fear I have to remind everyone of the other one, that was dominant for most of history: Stable, reliable profits, not increasing profits. When you operate a small family business - the kind that 99.999% of all businesses ever in history have been like - then your incentive is to feed your family and generally earn a living. Growth is nice, but it isn't your primary focus. There was a time when the profit of a company was what mattered. Today, it is the growth rate - and if you have had even basic maths, you know that exponential growth is not sustainable in the long run. Thus, an economic system focussed on growth will do exactly what ours has been doing ever since we left the middle ages: Boom-bust-cycles. Because that is the only way to beat the rules and sustain exponential growth: You need to reset the counter to some much lower value every once in a while.
The evil part about it is that most businesses (by number of corporations and in many countries still by number of employees) are still working on the "profit" instead of the "growth" model. And they go bust, too.
I agree on that.
Whether you like Apple or not, they have a different business model from Google and Facebook. For Apple, you are the customer. For Google and Facebook, you are the product they sell. That's an important difference.
Your .sig reveals the flaws in your thinking better than your comment above, but it is of the same kind.
You can not compare one with the other. Have you failed to notice how the content industry is behind all the anti-piracy propaganda, while authors and musicians are mostly busy doing what they've always done?
What needs changing is not only the law, but also the content distribution system. Once the authors get more than a couple cents from that CD that I didn't buy, we can talk about unjust laws and author rights, deal?