Well I, for one, welcome our fingertip to eye light refle-* oh who am I kidding, even an overload joke can't make that analogy less bad!
Granted, the Power6 is one monstrously powerful beast, but I can't see such a poor example confusing use "average people" any less than seeing a spec sheet filled with buzzwords.
How about this? What about the backbone connections that make up the very high speed "core" of the internet? While these are "phat pipes" they too have limited capacity and cost millions to add-to/upgrade. Who eats the cost when all these grand schemes for increasing speed to the "last mile" hit the wall at the so-called "heart" of the net?
On another note and, before you decide to mod me to oblivion, in my own humble opinion, my 3mbit downlink dsl connection is sufficient, it handles all but the most demanding live video without complaint. I have no problems with current download speeds, what I want to know is why I can't get faster UPLINK speeds, as a consumer level individual, than 768kbit up.
With the exception of FiOS (not available here btw), I have no way of remotely accessing my personal server(s) at speeds any greater than 768kbit no matter how fast of a connection I have with cable or DSL. Even moving to "business class" DSL yields the same limits.
No, a T1 or better is not an option, I don't need a commercial grade (and commercially priced) connection and while I would gladly pay a slightly larger monthly tariff for a larger slice of the outbound pie, I have no plans of dumping out $700 a month.
I will explain this very slowly and very carefully to you and "bright boy" who responded before you.
Mac OS X Leopard runs 32 bit AND 64 bit applications at once.
There will be a 32 bit version of CS4 for Mac OS X.
That means the ONE version that needs to be created for the Mac OS X platform WILL NOT be 64 bit native.
That is, you DO NOT need two write two separate applications to offer 64 bit AND 32 applications on a Mac OS X based machine. Only ONE.
In the case of CS4, the application will only run in 32 bit mode instead of being ABLE to run in 64 bit.
There IS NO separate 32 bit and 64 bit "platform" form Mac OS X.
In contrast, WINDOWS requires TWO versions of CS4 to be made, one to be compatible with the 32 bit platform and one to be fully compatible with the 64 bit platform.
There... I THINK I managed to break that down enough for you two geniuses.
Now I'll be accused of leaving out information or having slightly inaccurate details due to my attempt at simplification....
I do not remember Apple saying that Carbon would be discontinued... *siiigh*
Carbon is not being discontinued. It just won't be 64-bit like Cocoa.
...and I do not remember their suggesting that there was any reason to move to Cocoa _other than its intrinsic merits_.
Apple has been pushing developers for more than 9 years to move away from Carbon and use the "shiny new" Cocoa. Drop by Apple's developer page sometimes, it's not hard to find then urging you to use Cocoa. (And they make their related Carbon stuff harder to find! lol!)
You act as if planned and/or announced features/products have never been canceled or abandoned and Apple is the only one to ever do this. *COUGH!*M$VISTA*COUGH!**COUGH!*
They decided to cancel 64 bit support for carbon and announced it. It's not like they simply decided to ship the next update/version of Carbon as 32 bit only and never told anyone.
Adobe's fair warning came 10 years ago. Carbon has always been a stop-gap. IMHO, no amount of blame directed anywhere but straight at Adobe should be cast.
Hi, you must be "special". If a company makes such a statement (like not supporting CS4 on OS X), it is a good indicator that a Flash plugin for PPC is even more unlikely than before.
Please let me know if you would prefer less syllables, or a clue.
*whistles in disbelief*
No scratch that, it's not disbelief, I should expect it on/.
TFA says that there will be no 64bit version of CS4 for Mac OS X, not that they will not support it.
Someone is special and I don't think it was the poster before you.... Go away now, kthnxbi!
Carbon was initially meant to be a "type" of backward compatibility with old Mac OS "less than X" applications so that they would require minimal re-writes of code to allow the program to be Mac OS X "native".
Apple has been pushing people to use the "more native superior" Cocoa framework for a number of years now by not only urging programmers and developers to use Cocoa but, by also enhancing the speed, stability and capabilities of Cocoa while Carbon stagnated (comparatively) and Adobe has constantly and stubbornly refusing to re-write ANYTHING they make to use the superior Cocoa framework.
This has been the case since the "Photoshop 7 ver.2" generation of Adobe's Mac products.
Lightroom uses Cocoa because it was made from scratch. That's it. If it was a hold over from pre-X days, I would bet my geek creds that it would be written in carbon.
Yes, I do fully realize that re-coding all of Adobe's Creative Suite to the Cocoa framework is a monstrous task, but Adobe has been severely dragging their feet regarding the switch-over which, I might add, they "hoped for in CS2 and "promised" for CS3!
That totally happened..... oh wait, it didn't! So now Adobe is caught with their pants down and doesn't want to admit it, despite Apple saying "You're not supposed to use Carbon anymore!" for years.
So no, this is not Apple's fault. It's Adobe's and I look forward to seeing any counter-arguments!
Granted, there was a time when the citizens of this once great nation would give their lives to save a tiny plot of farmland out in the middle of nowhere.
But today, in our modern society, we wouldn't get off our asses to save the whole damn PLANET if it meant that we had to go a day without BROADBAND.
It also doesn't help that we have really, REALLY short attention spa* Ooo!! Something shiny!
Another point to ponder is imagine if they could use this material in a way that there TECHNICALLY wouldn't be much waste from current planet designs until they master this technology enough to generate electricity solely from it and traditional planets are being phased out.
While nuclear waste from current reactors is no longer good for creating the massive quantities of heat needed to run a steam turbine, the radiation levels stay extremely high for decades and the "waste" could be placed in a secondary, lower power, facility and used to create electrical power LONG after it's usefulness as traditional nuclear "fuel" has been expended.
This could help buy time for traditional plants to be pushed out smoothly because they would just be producing a lower grade "fuel" for the new plants. The possibilities and usefulness of this material is enormous. I can't wait to see how/when they decide to put this into production.
This is one product that could truly change the world for the better if it doesn't end up being vaporware!
that is why i prefer a windows mobile pda - because i have the choice.
You sure do!
Now, would you like viruses with that? How about a McCrash Burger? Maybe a Crapware shake? Because they all exist for Windows Mobile...
You cannot escape the fact that all these "Open" SDK's that will allow you to make anything for your platform of choice with no constraints will not lead to problems.
I have every intention, and then some, of buying an iPhone v.2.0 when it is released and using it as a tool. I want it to replace my aging iPod Photo, my cellphone and my aging (yet still mighty) Palm Tungsten T3. If I can manage having it replace my old laptop too... then that would be a bonus!
Currently all that is standing in my way is the new hardware has not been released and the lack of PDA functionality on the iPhone. I have no doubt that there will be some excellent To-Do programs, expense tracking and other PDA-esque style apps within days of the apps store launch, so problem technically solved. I'll of course be looking for other cool things such as SSH, maybe FTP, and of course Bluetooth file transfer/sync (come on Apple, I love ya' but wtf is up with the horrendously crippled bluetooth?!)
Call me a sheep if you want, but I don't plan on using the iPhone outside of the realm of "normal"... Heck, I don't use my Palm outside the realm of normal, despite the fact that I can.
Just like many other people, I rely on these things too much to want to mess with them... I would be much more upset if I was having software induced trouble preventing me from properly using my iPhone when I need it than having semi-reasonable restrictions on what you can make for it and publish to the public.
Personally, I don't see why they don't allow you to build and permanently transfer your own apps to your own iPhone that will let you do whatever you want. They didn't come from the Apps store or Apple and they are installed on a single device, so Apple is not responsible. I think this would make a larger number of the miscreants happy as source code is easy to share and all the desired hackabilty is available to those who know what they are doing.
In closing, while I'm not HAPPY about the restrictions, but I am also not complaining. I see their purpose and why they ARE NEEDED. People bitch when their stuff stops working... whether it is their fault or not. Period.
If you people want a hacker platform go get the Nokia N810 or something x86 or linux based and go nuts!
you end up with critical vulnerabilities in a browser installed on non-tech-savvy individuals' computers.
Sooooo... in other words you end up with EXACTLY what you had before with IE?
Safari is an excellent browser when compared to IE, it just happens to have a few holes in it, just like every other browser on the market, including but not limited to Firefox and Opera.
Also, they are not forcing you to install Safari, it's more of an offer to have a choice really...
Well, with the Chinese modding the weather using the methods described I, personally, can't wait for the first time nature decides to post a weather "Troll"!
Amusement abound!
Check you numbers again. These drives are 5400rpm that CAN spin up to 7200rpm speeds... what determines when they DO is another story.
Being "green" means you have to save power. To save power you sometimes have to sacrifice performance. It's a trade-off that is inescapable.
More of a question to me, is can this "Green Power" feature be disabled if desired instead of constantly dealing with the lower performance of these slower (yet less power hungry) drives?
If you're looking for the fastest of the fast and power savings be damned (Me, for example) just buy their standard Cavier drives. They're wicked fast and reliable for their low price.
I've run only WD drives for almost a decade and while I have had a few die on me here and there, it's inevitable with ANY hard drive, they perform well, cost less, run cool and are very quiet with excellent reliability. They are all I want in a drive, so I rely on them.
If all you are interested in is Christian "Rock" and Country... what the heck do you need Sirius or XM for? Go listen to a ClearChannel (read: all of them) standard broadcast radio station for free, that's pretty much all they offer...
I don't know why this was modded interesting. Sirius and XM know/knew their markets extremely well and offered a variety of ad free music that you couldn't find anywhere else across the nation. HOWEVER, they catered to the demands of their listeners and obviously, you are not one of their "popular demographics". No station or service is going to provide EXACTLY what you want or provide exactly what you want all the time. Things change, markets change and if they don't follow, they fade away.
GREAT! I hope no one from M$ reads slashdot or you just gave them the proverbial license to print money!
The second companies (i.e.- Macro$haft) even TEST THE WATERS as to whether a "subscription based OS" is a good idea, I'm freaking burning the world to ashes and then going to huddle in a corner with my Mac (assuming Jobs doesn't decide this is a good idea too) and my Linux box because it everything will be a lost cause.
World to Microsoft: Milking consumers for every cent they DON'T have is a bad idea! Also, while it would be stupid to even try it with business customers, you WILL try it anyhow because you THINK they can afford it and many will pay your ransom to use your poor software anyhow because they either have NO CHOICE or because you haven't yet crossed the line where it is less expensive to migrate everything over to some other software.
Keep digging your little hole MS, it's beginning to look decidedly grave-like and I look forward to the day the world finally kicks the dirt into it to finish covering your shattered empire.
I think the next step should be; EVERYONE Install Linux or Buy a Mac. At once.
Problem Temporarily solved and time that will be needed in order to implement the NEXT next logical step will be bought.
Of course, the NEXT next logical step is to kill every last one of these bottom feeding scum suckers in the face.
Good lord man! Don't you know that buying overpriced pre-alpha beta twaddle the very instant it hits the market is part of what makes you an American?! Stand up! Be proud! Whip out those credit cards and salute properly like a good consumer sheep!
Even my best friend (a hardcore Linux user) is so upset about these "restrictions" that he's practically craping broken glass about the whole SDK!
What the HELL is WRONG with you people?!!?
I challenge ANY ONE OF YOU to explain, in clear and reasonable terms, WHY Apple imposing some restriction on the type and scope of applications that can be developed for the iPhone is a bad thing?!
I mean HONESTLY, do you people WANT the same virus/spy/mal/adware ORGY that is the disaster we jokingly call Windows?!!!!???
If Apple DIDN'T impose SOME restrictions such as limiting interpreters which can be used in malicious ways and are impossible to control, providing quality control to filter out the mountains of buggy crash inducing CRAP that people will spew out, etc.... and then that is EXACTLY what all the money grubbing scum suckers will DO. They WOULD make viruses, they WOULD crash you iPhone so much you're swear it was NASCAR on Ice, they WOULD find a way to hijack your phone and they WOULD make your life with an iPhone a living HELL...
Surprise people, the iPhone is NOT a hacker platform! It's a CONSUMER platform and consumers want their devices to work. Every. Single. Time. No exceptions!
I, personally, think it's a bloody BRILLIANT idea and a wonderful way to not only distribute apps but also provide marketing and availability that so many great apps never get and remain in obscurity as well as ensure that consumers get quality programs that don't bork their new $400-$500 toy!
Hell, a GREAT analogy is to the console video game industry! In fact Apple's model is practically a photocopy of how Nintendo handles things except the Big N doesn't allow any Lee, Dick and Harry to program for the Wii!
Yet no one is getting their butt hairs in a knot about Sony or Nintendo or Microsofts gaming division about how THEY handle their software!
As for the little niggly stuff such as:
"The SDK only runs on a Mac!" - Yes, that sucks and i don't like it any more than you do, but tough noogies. It's APPLE'S development platform, they didn't even have to MAKE it. in fact they said they WERE NOT GOING TO when the iPhone was launched.... So in my mind, we ALREADY got a bonus because it EXISTS. So, Mac only? Yeah that sucks.
"They're restricting what us 'hackerz' can publish!" - To damn bad for you. Not only are you 1% of (exceptionally whiny) iPhone users BUT, (gasp!) the iPhone is not an open platform!!!
Even with the new SDk, it is STILL not an open playground for you to do what you want, just like the Wii or the Xbox 360 or the PS3. Apple has placed REASONABLE restrictions on what you can do, JUST LIKE WITH THE WII, THE PS3 AND THE XBOX 360! Deal with it.
Personally, the only thing I am wondering is if you can compile and install (via "debug" mode, etc...) your own personal application creations on your own iPhone... not to distribute, but for PERSONAL SINGLE USE on YOUR phone.... that would definitely placate the "I'll do whatever the hell I want with MY hardware" people...
Either way, as I wrap up here, If you don't like the rules Apple has set on the playground then LEAVE. The door is right there, it's open and unlocked. Go buy a Blackberry or a Palm or a Windows mobile device and develop for them. I'm not stopping you, neither is Apple.
I HONESTLY don't mind someone (Apple) keeping a casual and comparatively lax eye on the "children" when they are turned out to play. There is no law that says you should have the right to throw sand in everyone's face just because they want to use a copy of the toy you made. not every program is going to be made to better the iPhone people, there are a LOT of scum suckers out there.
Apple has done a good thing to let everyone play nice and yet still have some degree of freedom, or would you prefer have millions of developers writing applications to PWN your iPhone and turn it into a battleground of slow, crashing and malware threats...
Slashdot Mirror
Well I, for one, welcome our fingertip to eye light refle-* oh who am I kidding, even an overload joke can't make that analogy less bad!
Granted, the Power6 is one monstrously powerful beast, but I can't see such a poor example confusing use "average people" any less than seeing a spec sheet filled with buzzwords.
Wanted Dead or Alive: A Better Analogy!
How about this? What about the backbone connections that make up the very high speed "core" of the internet? While these are "phat pipes" they too have limited capacity and cost millions to add-to/upgrade. Who eats the cost when all these grand schemes for increasing speed to the "last mile" hit the wall at the so-called "heart" of the net?
On another note and, before you decide to mod me to oblivion, in my own humble opinion, my 3mbit downlink dsl connection is sufficient, it handles all but the most demanding live video without complaint. I have no problems with current download speeds, what I want to know is why I can't get faster UPLINK speeds, as a consumer level individual, than 768kbit up.
With the exception of FiOS (not available here btw), I have no way of remotely accessing my personal server(s) at speeds any greater than 768kbit no matter how fast of a connection I have with cable or DSL. Even moving to "business class" DSL yields the same limits.
No, a T1 or better is not an option, I don't need a commercial grade (and commercially priced) connection and while I would gladly pay a slightly larger monthly tariff for a larger slice of the outbound pie, I have no plans of dumping out $700 a month.
For 300% more $$$ than any other manufacturer....
*sigh and eye roll*
I will explain this very slowly and very carefully to you and "bright boy" who responded before you.
Mac OS X Leopard runs 32 bit AND 64 bit applications at once.
There will be a 32 bit version of CS4 for Mac OS X.
That means the ONE version that needs to be created for the Mac OS X platform WILL NOT be 64 bit native.
That is, you DO NOT need two write two separate applications to offer 64 bit AND 32 applications on a Mac OS X based machine. Only ONE.
In the case of CS4, the application will only run in 32 bit mode instead of being ABLE to run in 64 bit.
There IS NO separate 32 bit and 64 bit "platform" form Mac OS X.
In contrast, WINDOWS requires TWO versions of CS4 to be made, one to be compatible with the 32 bit platform and one to be fully compatible with the 64 bit platform.
There... I THINK I managed to break that down enough for you two geniuses.
Now I'll be accused of leaving out information or having slightly inaccurate details due to my attempt at simplification....
Carbon is not being discontinued. It just won't be 64-bit like Cocoa.
...and I do not remember their suggesting that there was any reason to move to Cocoa _other than its intrinsic merits_.Apple has been pushing developers for more than 9 years to move away from Carbon and use the "shiny new" Cocoa. Drop by Apple's developer page sometimes, it's not hard to find then urging you to use Cocoa. (And they make their related Carbon stuff harder to find! lol!)
You act as if planned and/or announced features/products have never been canceled or abandoned and Apple is the only one to ever do this. *COUGH!*M$VISTA*COUGH!**COUGH!*
They decided to cancel 64 bit support for carbon and announced it. It's not like they simply decided to ship the next update/version of Carbon as 32 bit only and never told anyone.
Adobe's fair warning came 10 years ago. Carbon has always been a stop-gap. IMHO, no amount of blame directed anywhere but straight at Adobe should be cast.
*whistles in disbelief*
No scratch that, it's not disbelief, I should expect it on
TFA says that there will be no 64bit version of CS4 for Mac OS X, not that they will not support it.
Someone is special and I don't think it was the poster before you.... Go away now, kthnxbi!
Personally, I'm taking Adobe to task on this one.
Carbon was initially meant to be a "type" of backward compatibility with old Mac OS "less than X" applications so that they would require minimal re-writes of code to allow the program to be Mac OS X "native".
Apple has been pushing people to use the "more native superior" Cocoa framework for a number of years now by not only urging programmers and developers to use Cocoa but, by also enhancing the speed, stability and capabilities of Cocoa while Carbon stagnated (comparatively) and Adobe has constantly and stubbornly refusing to re-write ANYTHING they make to use the superior Cocoa framework.
This has been the case since the "Photoshop 7 ver.2" generation of Adobe's Mac products.
Lightroom uses Cocoa because it was made from scratch. That's it. If it was a hold over from pre-X days, I would bet my geek creds that it would be written in carbon.
Yes, I do fully realize that re-coding all of Adobe's Creative Suite to the Cocoa framework is a monstrous task, but Adobe has been severely dragging their feet regarding the switch-over which, I might add, they "hoped for in CS2 and "promised" for CS3!
That totally happened..... oh wait, it didn't! So now Adobe is caught with their pants down and doesn't want to admit it, despite Apple saying "You're not supposed to use Carbon anymore!" for years.
So no, this is not Apple's fault. It's Adobe's and I look forward to seeing any counter-arguments!
This should be interesting!
Because we're fat, lazy, unmotivated and stupid.
Granted, there was a time when the citizens of this once great nation would give their lives to save a tiny plot of farmland out in the middle of nowhere.
But today, in our modern society, we wouldn't get off our asses to save the whole damn PLANET if it meant that we had to go a day without BROADBAND.
It also doesn't help that we have really, REALLY short attention spa* Ooo!! Something shiny!
More companies should create better mechanisms that protect their consumers instead.
Like smashing their hands with bricks every time they fall for a phishing attack and then come crying to them?
Another point to ponder is imagine if they could use this material in a way that there TECHNICALLY wouldn't be much waste from current planet designs until they master this technology enough to generate electricity solely from it and traditional planets are being phased out.
While nuclear waste from current reactors is no longer good for creating the massive quantities of heat needed to run a steam turbine, the radiation levels stay extremely high for decades and the "waste" could be placed in a secondary, lower power, facility and used to create electrical power LONG after it's usefulness as traditional nuclear "fuel" has been expended.
This could help buy time for traditional plants to be pushed out smoothly because they would just be producing a lower grade "fuel" for the new plants. The possibilities and usefulness of this material is enormous. I can't wait to see how/when they decide to put this into production.
This is one product that could truly change the world for the better if it doesn't end up being vaporware!
You sure do!
Now, would you like viruses with that? How about a McCrash Burger? Maybe a Crapware shake? Because they all exist for Windows Mobile...
You cannot escape the fact that all these "Open" SDK's that will allow you to make anything for your platform of choice with no constraints will not lead to problems.
I have every intention, and then some, of buying an iPhone v.2.0 when it is released and using it as a tool. I want it to replace my aging iPod Photo, my cellphone and my aging (yet still mighty) Palm Tungsten T3. If I can manage having it replace my old laptop too... then that would be a bonus!
Currently all that is standing in my way is the new hardware has not been released and the lack of PDA functionality on the iPhone. I have no doubt that there will be some excellent To-Do programs, expense tracking and other PDA-esque style apps within days of the apps store launch, so problem technically solved. I'll of course be looking for other cool things such as SSH, maybe FTP, and of course Bluetooth file transfer/sync (come on Apple, I love ya' but wtf is up with the horrendously crippled bluetooth?!)
Call me a sheep if you want, but I don't plan on using the iPhone outside of the realm of "normal"... Heck, I don't use my Palm outside the realm of normal, despite the fact that I can.
Just like many other people, I rely on these things too much to want to mess with them... I would be much more upset if I was having software induced trouble preventing me from properly using my iPhone when I need it than having semi-reasonable restrictions on what you can make for it and publish to the public.
Personally, I don't see why they don't allow you to build and permanently transfer your own apps to your own iPhone that will let you do whatever you want. They didn't come from the Apps store or Apple and they are installed on a single device, so Apple is not responsible. I think this would make a larger number of the miscreants happy as source code is easy to share and all the desired hackabilty is available to those who know what they are doing.
In closing, while I'm not HAPPY about the restrictions, but I am also not complaining. I see their purpose and why they ARE NEEDED. People bitch when their stuff stops working... whether it is their fault or not. Period.
If you people want a hacker platform go get the Nokia N810 or something x86 or linux based and go nuts!
you end up with critical vulnerabilities in a browser installed on non-tech-savvy individuals' computers.
Sooooo... in other words you end up with EXACTLY what you had before with IE?
Safari is an excellent browser when compared to IE, it just happens to have a few holes in it, just like every other browser on the market, including but not limited to Firefox and Opera.
Also, they are not forcing you to install Safari, it's more of an offer to have a choice really...
I fail to see the problem here.
Well, with the Chinese modding the weather using the methods described I, personally, can't wait for the first time nature decides to post a weather "Troll"! Amusement abound!
Or over-population...
Check you numbers again. These drives are 5400rpm that CAN spin up to 7200rpm speeds... what determines when they DO is another story. Being "green" means you have to save power. To save power you sometimes have to sacrifice performance. It's a trade-off that is inescapable. More of a question to me, is can this "Green Power" feature be disabled if desired instead of constantly dealing with the lower performance of these slower (yet less power hungry) drives? If you're looking for the fastest of the fast and power savings be damned (Me, for example) just buy their standard Cavier drives. They're wicked fast and reliable for their low price. I've run only WD drives for almost a decade and while I have had a few die on me here and there, it's inevitable with ANY hard drive, they perform well, cost less, run cool and are very quiet with excellent reliability. They are all I want in a drive, so I rely on them.
Mod parent +1 for common sense.
Thanks for beating me to it!
If all you are interested in is Christian "Rock" and Country... what the heck do you need Sirius or XM for? Go listen to a ClearChannel (read: all of them) standard broadcast radio station for free, that's pretty much all they offer...
I don't know why this was modded interesting. Sirius and XM know/knew their markets extremely well and offered a variety of ad free music that you couldn't find anywhere else across the nation. HOWEVER, they catered to the demands of their listeners and obviously, you are not one of their "popular demographics". No station or service is going to provide EXACTLY what you want or provide exactly what you want all the time. Things change, markets change and if they don't follow, they fade away.
Don't like it? That is why you buy an MP3 player.
Oh, your analogy is bad too.
Go ahead and mod me to oblivion, I don't care.
GREAT! I hope no one from M$ reads slashdot or you just gave them the proverbial license to print money!
The second companies (i.e.- Macro$haft) even TEST THE WATERS as to whether a "subscription based OS" is a good idea, I'm freaking burning the world to ashes and then going to huddle in a corner with my Mac (assuming Jobs doesn't decide this is a good idea too) and my Linux box because it everything will be a lost cause.
World to Microsoft: Milking consumers for every cent they DON'T have is a bad idea! Also, while it would be stupid to even try it with business customers, you WILL try it anyhow because you THINK they can afford it and many will pay your ransom to use your poor software anyhow because they either have NO CHOICE or because you haven't yet crossed the line where it is less expensive to migrate everything over to some other software.
Keep digging your little hole MS, it's beginning to look decidedly grave-like and I look forward to the day the world finally kicks the dirt into it to finish covering your shattered empire.
I think the next step should be; EVERYONE Install Linux or Buy a Mac. At once. Problem Temporarily solved and time that will be needed in order to implement the NEXT next logical step will be bought. Of course, the NEXT next logical step is to kill every last one of these bottom feeding scum suckers in the face.
Good lord man! Don't you know that buying overpriced pre-alpha beta twaddle the very instant it hits the market is part of what makes you an American?! Stand up! Be proud! Whip out those credit cards and salute properly like a good consumer sheep!
God Man Awaaaaaaaayyy!!!
...but because they fear it or because they are too lazy to learn how to use it.
These people do not bother me... It's the ones that are too incompetent to learn how to use one and try anyway.
Part of the reason Spam and malware still exists is because of these kinds of people.
I scoff at your meager 10TB drives! Hah!
I'm here to announce 100TB drives that can read and write at 10x the speed of your obsolete technology!
Pricing, manufacturing and delivery date will be announced at a slightly later date than yours!
Is everyone on this forsaken dirt ball retarded?
Even my best friend (a hardcore Linux user) is so upset about these "restrictions" that he's practically craping broken glass about the whole SDK!
What the HELL is WRONG with you people?!!?
I challenge ANY ONE OF YOU to explain, in clear and reasonable terms, WHY Apple imposing some restriction on the type and scope of applications that can be developed for the iPhone is a bad thing?!
I mean HONESTLY, do you people WANT the same virus/spy/mal/adware ORGY that is the disaster we jokingly call Windows?!!!!???
If Apple DIDN'T impose SOME restrictions such as limiting interpreters which can be used in malicious ways and are impossible to control, providing quality control to filter out the mountains of buggy crash inducing CRAP that people will spew out, etc.... and then that is EXACTLY what all the money grubbing scum suckers will DO. They WOULD make viruses, they WOULD crash you iPhone so much you're swear it was NASCAR on Ice, they WOULD find a way to hijack your phone and they WOULD make your life with an iPhone a living HELL...
Surprise people, the iPhone is NOT a hacker platform! It's a CONSUMER platform and consumers want their devices to work. Every. Single. Time. No exceptions!
I, personally, think it's a bloody BRILLIANT idea and a wonderful way to not only distribute apps but also provide marketing and availability that so many great apps never get and remain in obscurity as well as ensure that consumers get quality programs that don't bork their new $400-$500 toy!
Hell, a GREAT analogy is to the console video game industry! In fact Apple's model is practically a photocopy of how Nintendo handles things except the Big N doesn't allow any Lee, Dick and Harry to program for the Wii!
Yet no one is getting their butt hairs in a knot about Sony or Nintendo or Microsofts gaming division about how THEY handle their software!
As for the little niggly stuff such as:
"The SDK only runs on a Mac!" - Yes, that sucks and i don't like it any more than you do, but tough noogies. It's APPLE'S development platform, they didn't even have to MAKE it. in fact they said they WERE NOT GOING TO when the iPhone was launched.... So in my mind, we ALREADY got a bonus because it EXISTS. So, Mac only? Yeah that sucks.
"They're restricting what us 'hackerz' can publish!" - To damn bad for you. Not only are you 1% of (exceptionally whiny) iPhone users BUT, (gasp!) the iPhone is not an open platform!!!
Even with the new SDk, it is STILL not an open playground for you to do what you want, just like the Wii or the Xbox 360 or the PS3. Apple has placed REASONABLE restrictions on what you can do, JUST LIKE WITH THE WII, THE PS3 AND THE XBOX 360! Deal with it.
Personally, the only thing I am wondering is if you can compile and install (via "debug" mode, etc...) your own personal application creations on your own iPhone... not to distribute, but for PERSONAL SINGLE USE on YOUR phone.... that would definitely placate the "I'll do whatever the hell I want with MY hardware" people...
Either way, as I wrap up here, If you don't like the rules Apple has set on the playground then LEAVE. The door is right there, it's open and unlocked. Go buy a Blackberry or a Palm or a Windows mobile device and develop for them. I'm not stopping you, neither is Apple.
I HONESTLY don't mind someone (Apple) keeping a casual and comparatively lax eye on the "children" when they are turned out to play. There is no law that says you should have the right to throw sand in everyone's face just because they want to use a copy of the toy you made. not every program is going to be made to better the iPhone people, there are a LOT of scum suckers out there.
Apple has done a good thing to let everyone play nice and yet still have some degree of freedom, or would you prefer have millions of developers writing applications to PWN your iPhone and turn it into a battleground of slow, crashing and malware threats...