[quote]Ant writes "According to MacSlash's story, a recent post on OpenOffice.org said no MacOS X work has been done since 2003 and that there are no longer any plans for an Aqua version 'due to various licensing, political, and fundamental engineering difficulties'.:("[/quote]
I not sure why people are blaming/flaming Sun like a bunch of idiots.
It is never a good idea to jump to an extreme conclusion,
Sun is only one sponsor, IBM, various governments and business users also contribute levels of funding.
Apple is to produce an Office suite very soon, and the OpenOffice may be related,
Apple recently likes the stability and cut costs of open source software.
The MAC osx core is based upon the linux Kernel
Safari was based on the code base of Konqueror webbrowser
Iwork based on OpenOffice is quite probable.
It takes years to produce a fully functional Office Suite and maybe Apple has quietly funded OOo and contributed apple coders
to produce a better functioning OOo suite to suit MAC OSX better.
actually Internet Explorer 5 for Machintosh was the best browser ever made runs circles around IE for windows and Safari and as much as i hate to say Firefox on MAC.
It stuck to the standard very closely , fabulous CSS1 & 2 support
It didnt support ActiveX:)
and the only problem was some sites recognised it as IE 5 for windows and asked for update to IE6 (win32)
theres a few ActiveX plugins for Firefox and one i saw was platform independant:)
[quote]So you're afraid to use Internet Explorer, but you still trust Microsoft enough to let them update your system without your screening their patches? I guess your tinfoil hat is just a fashion statement...[/quote]
what the hell? hmm
so what do you even do when they come in and you verify/screen them?
you cant do a bloody damn thing at all, but read the information MS gives you. an.EXE is just a file name, the information tag labeled on is theoretically from MS.
do you disasemble and reverse compile each and every MS patch to verify it is a Authentic?
does what it says? will fix your problem?
test it yourself on a test bed PC?
No! with windows you dont have that luxuary
And do not question another posters ittelligence especially when you dont have any grounds to do so.
In the last year ive only seen small few 1 site that uses activeX, all of which used it to have physical access to the files on you harddrive (virus scanners sleath security scanners)
not many public sites use ActiveX bar Microsoft owned Websites winupdate.
Corporate now thats a different story, but every business has upgrade cycles 5-10 years for their infrastructure, and swift competition from Linux, Opensource and new entry range MACs may encourage a change and adoption of something that will last longer and be more compatible Java or Javascript (gmail proves Webbased applications can be non platform discrimitory).
MS even employed JAVA for webmessenger the portable MSN client.
There is a good chance MS may just give up on ActiveX even if they just rename it.
The name is tainted and invokes fear in IT.
this was actually announced in july last year that MS chose to adopt amd64 in future and discontinuwe the ia64 system. hense why intel reverse engineered the amd 64 bit extension set
Why on earth did MS since the days of 95 not build or at least buy an Antivirus company?
i spose and Adware program is close, but not good enough.
Only Microsoft knows the most inner workings of windows the best. Far better then anyone else at detecting viruses and removing virii without breaking things, in thier software. Share resources with the core system (like office does) to lower the resources that some AV programs use
norton is a massive burden when it comes to the GUI.
[And the Firefox developers aren't even trying to fix the bugs people want fixed. Like the bug about needing a "FAST BACK BUTTON" like in opera (has over 100 votes at bugzilla and they wont fix it) or even a rewind.]
dude that isn't a bug (bug = error glitch)
the Moz team dev chose for it to behave that way
i spose they regret it now.
but would you give them a break
that is a core feature it can't be fixed with an extension or little patch.
they are going to have to change the core a bit.
It will probably show up in februrary/march when Firefox 1.1 is released.
He was layed off from the company who owned his patent on the technology
so blame them not SONY and certainly not RIAA
but the story sounds really suss
he hypothesised that movies could be stored on it
i very much doubt any1 in the sixties would have thought even dreamed movies/film in digital was at all possible at the time.
he has a glass plates that sported his technology
hope it does infringe any RIAA copyrights
they will knock down his door only non John-doe case in years
i know i wrote it like that but line breaks dont display here
i meant 186 286 386 486 were all indiviual
Ppro, 2 & 3 were the same core more or less[/br]
[/br]
P4 was a new core[/br]
[/br]
Pm is a Ppro reused more or less[/br]
Intel isn't very Innovative are they??
186
286
386
486
586 Pentium 1, pro 2 & 3 all use the same core
686 Pentium 4 1st in nearly 10 years to use a new core.
Dorthan (aka Pentium Mobile one possible succesor is base
you guessed it on the 586 architecture mostly influenced by the Tualitin P3)
Pentium-M on linux actually detects as a Pentium PRO:)
intel Pentium Pro core remained the same throughout Pentium 2 & 3 lifecycles but AMD knocked on their door with a higher performing Athlon so the created a completely new core I686 aka the Pentium 4
How many of you when using IE accidentally!!!!! clicked a damn popup ad. or a banner,
this was an unfair survey.
I will onlu trust a survey on directed customers who buy something.
and as i have a minor medical dislike for FLASHING ADS
and i refused to visit such sites. and avoided the companies resorting to such things.
(but noe have the adblok power.)
Slashdot Mirror
[quote]Ant writes "According to MacSlash's story, a recent post on OpenOffice.org said no MacOS X work has been done since 2003 and that there are no longer any plans for an Aqua version 'due to various licensing, political, and fundamental engineering difficulties'. :("[/quote]
I not sure why people are blaming/flaming Sun like a bunch of idiots.
It is never a good idea to jump to an extreme conclusion,
Sun is only one sponsor, IBM, various governments and business users also contribute levels of funding.
Apple is to produce an Office suite very soon, and the OpenOffice may be related,
Apple recently likes the stability and cut costs of open source software.
The MAC osx core is based upon the linux Kernel
Safari was based on the code base of Konqueror webbrowser
Iwork based on OpenOffice is quite probable.
It takes years to produce a fully functional Office Suite and maybe Apple has quietly funded OOo and contributed apple coders
to produce a better functioning OOo suite to suit MAC OSX better.
actually Internet Explorer 5 for Machintosh was the best browser ever made runs circles around IE for windows and Safari and as much as i hate to say Firefox on MAC. It stuck to the standard very closely , fabulous CSS1 & 2 support It didnt support ActiveX :)
and the only problem was some sites recognised it as IE 5 for windows and asked for update to IE6 (win32)
theres a few ActiveX plugins for Firefox and one i saw was platform independant :)
[quote]So you're afraid to use Internet Explorer, but you still trust Microsoft enough to let them update your system without your screening their patches? I guess your tinfoil hat is just a fashion statement...[/quote] what the hell? hmm so what do you even do when they come in and you verify/screen them? you cant do a bloody damn thing at all, but read the information MS gives you. an .EXE is just a file name, the information tag labeled on is theoretically from MS.
do you disasemble and reverse compile each and every MS patch to verify it is a Authentic?
does what it says? will fix your problem?
test it yourself on a test bed PC?
No! with windows you dont have that luxuary
And do not question another posters ittelligence especially when you dont have any grounds to do so.
In the last year ive only seen small few 1 site that uses activeX, all of which used it to have physical access to the files on you harddrive (virus scanners sleath security scanners)
not many public sites use ActiveX bar Microsoft owned Websites winupdate.
Corporate now thats a different story, but every business has upgrade cycles 5-10 years for their infrastructure, and swift competition from Linux, Opensource and new entry range MACs may encourage a change and adoption of something that will last longer and be more compatible Java or Javascript (gmail proves Webbased applications can be non platform discrimitory).
MS even employed JAVA for webmessenger the portable MSN client.
There is a good chance MS may just give up on ActiveX even if they just rename it.
The name is tainted and invokes fear in IT.
this was actually announced in july last year that MS chose to adopt amd64 in future and discontinuwe the ia64 system. hense why intel reverse engineered the amd 64 bit extension set
Why on earth did MS since the days of 95 not build or at least buy an Antivirus company? i spose and Adware program is close, but not good enough. Only Microsoft knows the most inner workings of windows the best. Far better then anyone else at detecting viruses and removing virii without breaking things, in thier software. Share resources with the core system (like office does) to lower the resources that some AV programs use norton is a massive burden when it comes to the GUI.
[And the Firefox developers aren't even trying to fix the bugs people want fixed. Like the bug about needing a "FAST BACK BUTTON" like in opera (has over 100 votes at bugzilla and they wont fix it) or even a rewind.] dude that isn't a bug (bug = error glitch) the Moz team dev chose for it to behave that way i spose they regret it now. but would you give them a break that is a core feature it can't be fixed with an extension or little patch. they are going to have to change the core a bit. It will probably show up in februrary/march when Firefox 1.1 is released.
lol MSY :P,
ever had them helping you then they answer the phone and start chatting :P
i'm too lazy to go to Malvern hope Mulgrave opens very soon :)
He was layed off from the company who owned his patent on the technology so blame them not SONY and certainly not RIAA but the story sounds really suss he hypothesised that movies could be stored on it i very much doubt any1 in the sixties would have thought even dreamed movies/film in digital was at all possible at the time. he has a glass plates that sported his technology hope it does infringe any RIAA copyrights they will knock down his door only non John-doe case in years
i know i wrote it like that but line breaks dont display here i meant 186 286 386 486 were all indiviual Ppro, 2 & 3 were the same core more or less[/br] [/br] P4 was a new core[/br] [/br] Pm is a Ppro reused more or less[/br]
just thought i'd remind of the fact Centrinio is not an actual chip :)
its a marketing slogin for the
Intel Pentium M and Intel Chipset bundle
Intel isn't very Innovative are they?? 186 286 386 486 586 Pentium 1, pro 2 & 3 all use the same core 686 Pentium 4 1st in nearly 10 years to use a new core. Dorthan (aka Pentium Mobile one possible succesor is base you guessed it on the 586 architecture mostly influenced by the Tualitin P3) Pentium-M on linux actually detects as a Pentium PRO :)
intel Pentium Pro core remained the same throughout
Pentium 2 & 3 lifecycles
but AMD knocked on their door with a higher performing Athlon so the created a completely new core I686 aka the Pentium 4
How many of you when using IE accidentally!!!!! clicked a damn popup ad. or a banner, this was an unfair survey. I will onlu trust a survey on directed customers who buy something. and as i have a minor medical dislike for FLASHING ADS and i refused to visit such sites. and avoided the companies resorting to such things. (but noe have the adblok power.)