It's cheap, it's better for games than all but the most amped-up PCs, and when technology improves you can throw it away and buy a new one without getting all teary-eyed about your $3,000 investment down the drain.
Are there really many spoiled brats out there who just throw out $3,000 machines? Surely, once you have a good case, upgrading and staying current can't be too difficult. Even if this were impossible, a nice $3,000 machine would make a great, if over-powered, server of some kind.
The problem is that I already do everything I want, efficiently and well, with my Linux and Windows boxes. I don't really have any need to get a Mac of any kind and it won't let me do something I don't already do (or can't program if I can only find it on OSX).
As a Mac user, I have to say, don't get a Mac. Really, I don't mean this in a bad way. If you're satisfied with your current setup, there's absolutely no need to learn a new technology just to stay current or trendy.
I got my PowerBook last year because I need to do a bunch of scientific computation, need portability, and realized that although Windows dual-booting with linux on a laptop would work, the total cost of ownership would be higher. I mean, I'd have to invest time figuring out how to make everything work (I hadn't used Windows for about 5 years prior). OS X "just works" for trivial tasks, and the unix subsystem works just as easily as Debian's. And my PowerBook and OS X are just sexy.:-)
At any rate, these are just computers after all. Smart users use the best tool for the job given their needs and constraints.
Is the important thing the kernel or the rest of the OS?
Though the question is clearly rhetorical, you're on the verge of making a great point. Kernel design has stabilized horizontally in the last few years, so that the fastest kernel is only marginally faster than average. Although I wish Apple had been a bit smarter about memory management in Darwin/OS X, ease of use is my primary criterion choosing OS X over Debian. (And Fink lets me use Debian's only real ease-of-use trump -- the ability to easily install open source software via apt-get).
(This is made worse because the Gimp is one of our most needed programs, but the implementation of X for the Mac doesn't understand Macintosh aliases as being links. [There's probably a good reason for this, but I don't know it.])
It's because aliases aren't really symbolic links. They're userland files the Finder can parse. The Unix shells don't have this technology built in. If you really need to use Gimp and links together, there's no way to do it but using the terminal. (Maybe I should write a little graphical utility...)
Last I dealt with Debian's PPC mailing list, there was talk of doing an OS X port of Debian. I think we/they concluded that such a port would conflict with Fink's work too much.
I remember the time I was climbing Ayres rock and almost fell 70 meters. My ropes got tangled and I had to cut loose. But I accidentally cut the wrong one. I immediately started to slide down the side, until I managed to get a two fingered hold on the rock face. I was losing it. I was totally panicked. I mean, I thought I was about to die and couldn't do anything about it. My fingers just couldn't take it. But then I realized that I had eaten 25 hits of acid a few hours before and that I've never even been to Australia. It was like, WHOA, man.
Here I am really confused, I suppose from not following Apple very much. MacOS X is certainly useful to Apple, seems to be advancing well enough, so is Darwin some free source spinoff which is going nowhere? I had thought Darwin was Apple code, but maybe I have not been paying enough attention to know better.
OS X can be split up into two layers. There's the Darwin layer (a Mach microkernel hooked up to a FreeBSD kernel) and then the Apple layer (Carbon, Cocoa, Quartz, and so on -- all of Apple's proprietary technologies). I don't remember the particulars, but Apple released Darwin as an open source operating system. This was done by design. This is a good thing for Apple unix geeks -- there's plenty of documentation on-line for Darwin so that anyone with Panther and the dev tools can modify OS X as much as they want.
I can't really get past this...so you're saying that because it has been obtained once somewhere along the line legally, that any "sharing" from then on is absolutely justified, no matter how many times removed, and no matter how widely it is "shared"? How can you make that logical jump?
Maybe you're just passing the buck onto genetics when in fact there's a sociological phenomenon occurring. Of course, you couldn't know that, since your genetics prevented you from studying sociology.
Who the hell is a stereotypical guy? We're all just people with unique perspectives. Thinking about "stereotypical people" is the sort of mindset that allows you to apply vague, ill-defined, and yet negative stereotypes to individuals.
I'm a mathematician -- geeky to the point of chic -- but I understand people well enough to know you're full of shit.
No, and that's part of the point. Apple's UI guidelines are designed so that you only need ONE mouse button for full functionality. A second mouse button (or CTRL-click) can improve efficiency for the rest of us, but that's not what the average e-mail checking soccer mom is after.
You're a moron. Any four sided-figure with four right angles is a rectangle. Do you deny that a square is four-sided? Do you deny that a square has four right angles?
Furthermore, you're a moron. There is no such thing as a "3D square" since squares are two-dimensional plane figures. However, there is an analogy between squares and cubes -- a square is to a rectangle as a cube is to a rectangular prism.
People often use the linguistic fragment "lol" when they're just marginally amused, as opposed to actually laughing aloud. Well, let me tell you something bucko. lol. And I mean it.
Wrong. Once the Darwin kernel is installed, this can be treated like any BSD/Linux distro. In particular, XWindow runs, so you can have all the pretty UI elements you desire.
Untrue. Darwin can be installed on just about any machine where Windows would run, in addition to New World Macs. And with XPostFacto, it'll run on Old World Macs too.
Errm, why was this modded "over rated"? Coming up with a file sharing system that exploits this is trivial.
1. Encode Harry Potter using an analogue of ROT-13.
2. Stick it in a temporary directory.
3. Write a copyright notice for the jumbled file and stick it in the directory.
As the copyright owner for the *jumbled* file, you are free to distribute it to whomever you'd like. If the MPAA gives you shit, you note that the file named "Harry Potter 3" does not conflict with any trademarks because it is just a string of jumbled data and hit them with the DMCA for modifying it (presumably via the ROT-13 analogue) without permission.
That article is as crappy now as it was when it first came out. Seriously suggesting that a person should work (hard, even!) to advance in a caste system is socialization at its worst.
Nobody needs more than a few good friends. Obviously having more is nice, but to paraphrase the great Dave Chapelle, the trench coat mafia had six members. That's more good friends than I had in high school. Shit, that's three-on-three on a half-court.
Obviously, if "nerds" someplace are getting beat on by "jocks," they need to stand up for themselves. But popularity, by and large, is just an excuse for "nerds" not to do anything about their frustrations.
Slashdot Mirror
It's cheap, it's better for games than all but the most amped-up PCs, and when technology improves you can throw it away and buy a new one without getting all teary-eyed about your $3,000 investment down the drain.
Are there really many spoiled brats out there who just throw out $3,000 machines? Surely, once you have a good case, upgrading and staying current can't be too difficult. Even if this were impossible, a nice $3,000 machine would make a great, if over-powered, server of some kind.
The problem is that I already do everything I want, efficiently and well, with my Linux and Windows boxes. I don't really have any need to get a Mac of any kind and it won't let me do something I don't already do (or can't program if I can only find it on OSX).
:-)
As a Mac user, I have to say, don't get a Mac. Really, I don't mean this in a bad way. If you're satisfied with your current setup, there's absolutely no need to learn a new technology just to stay current or trendy.
I got my PowerBook last year because I need to do a bunch of scientific computation, need portability, and realized that although Windows dual-booting with linux on a laptop would work, the total cost of ownership would be higher. I mean, I'd have to invest time figuring out how to make everything work (I hadn't used Windows for about 5 years prior). OS X "just works" for trivial tasks, and the unix subsystem works just as easily as Debian's. And my PowerBook and OS X are just sexy.
At any rate, these are just computers after all. Smart users use the best tool for the job given their needs and constraints.
Is the important thing the kernel or the rest of the OS?
Though the question is clearly rhetorical, you're on the verge of making a great point. Kernel design has stabilized horizontally in the last few years, so that the fastest kernel is only marginally faster than average. Although I wish Apple had been a bit smarter about memory management in Darwin/OS X, ease of use is my primary criterion choosing OS X over Debian. (And Fink lets me use Debian's only real ease-of-use trump -- the ability to easily install open source software via apt-get).
(This is made worse because the Gimp is one of our most needed programs, but the implementation of X for the Mac doesn't understand Macintosh aliases as being links. [There's probably a good reason for this, but I don't know it.])
It's because aliases aren't really symbolic links. They're userland files the Finder can parse. The Unix shells don't have this technology built in. If you really need to use Gimp and links together, there's no way to do it but using the terminal. (Maybe I should write a little graphical utility...)
Last I dealt with Debian's PPC mailing list, there was talk of doing an OS X port of Debian. I think we/they concluded that such a port would conflict with Fink's work too much.
Locksmiths don't make doors secure -- mechanical engineers do. Locksmiths are *paid* to pick locks.
You must either have a tiny pecker or be really timid in the sack. Durex constantly break.
I remember the time I was climbing Ayres rock and almost fell 70 meters. My ropes got tangled and I had to cut loose. But I accidentally cut the wrong one. I immediately started to slide down the side, until I managed to get a two fingered hold on the rock face. I was losing it. I was totally panicked. I mean, I thought I was about to die and couldn't do anything about it. My fingers just couldn't take it. But then I realized that I had eaten 25 hits of acid a few hours before and that I've never even been to Australia. It was like, WHOA, man.
Here I am really confused, I suppose from not following Apple very much. MacOS X is certainly useful to Apple, seems to be advancing well enough, so is Darwin some free source spinoff which is going nowhere? I had thought Darwin was Apple code, but maybe I have not been paying enough attention to know better.
OS X can be split up into two layers. There's the Darwin layer (a Mach microkernel hooked up to a FreeBSD kernel) and then the Apple layer (Carbon, Cocoa, Quartz, and so on -- all of Apple's proprietary technologies). I don't remember the particulars, but Apple released Darwin as an open source operating system. This was done by design. This is a good thing for Apple unix geeks -- there's plenty of documentation on-line for Darwin so that anyone with Panther and the dev tools can modify OS X as much as they want.
I can't really get past this...so you're saying that because it has been obtained once somewhere along the line legally, that any "sharing" from then on is absolutely justified, no matter how many times removed, and no matter how widely it is "shared"? How can you make that logical jump?
Ever heard of mathematical induction?
Maybe you're just passing the buck onto genetics when in fact there's a sociological phenomenon occurring. Of course, you couldn't know that, since your genetics prevented you from studying sociology.
Who the hell is a stereotypical guy? We're all just people with unique perspectives. Thinking about "stereotypical people" is the sort of mindset that allows you to apply vague, ill-defined, and yet negative stereotypes to individuals.
I'm a mathematician -- geeky to the point of chic -- but I understand people well enough to know you're full of shit.
ignore me.
Indeed!
What the hell is subspace?
Obviously not. "For every action...", after all.
No, and that's part of the point. Apple's UI guidelines are designed so that you only need ONE mouse button for full functionality. A second mouse button (or CTRL-click) can improve efficiency for the rest of us, but that's not what the average e-mail checking soccer mom is after.
Yeah, at the local arcade for a quarter for 3 "men."
You're a moron. Any four sided-figure with four right angles is a rectangle. Do you deny that a square is four-sided? Do you deny that a square has four right angles?
Furthermore, you're a moron. There is no such thing as a "3D square" since squares are two-dimensional plane figures. However, there is an analogy between squares and cubes -- a square is to a rectangle as a cube is to a rectangular prism.
People often use the linguistic fragment "lol" when they're just marginally amused, as opposed to actually laughing aloud. Well, let me tell you something bucko. lol. And I mean it.
Wrong. Once the Darwin kernel is installed, this can be treated like any BSD/Linux distro. In particular, XWindow runs, so you can have all the pretty UI elements you desire.
Untrue. Darwin can be installed on just about any machine where Windows would run, in addition to New World Macs. And with XPostFacto, it'll run on Old World Macs too.
Yeah, I guess you're right. It was Rock. I think.
Errm, why was this modded "over rated"? Coming up with a file sharing system that exploits this is trivial.
1. Encode Harry Potter using an analogue of ROT-13. 2. Stick it in a temporary directory. 3. Write a copyright notice for the jumbled file and stick it in the directory.
As the copyright owner for the *jumbled* file, you are free to distribute it to whomever you'd like. If the MPAA gives you shit, you note that the file named "Harry Potter 3" does not conflict with any trademarks because it is just a string of jumbled data and hit them with the DMCA for modifying it (presumably via the ROT-13 analogue) without permission.
Put a compact disc (or foil?) under a glass bowl in the microwave. Set on high. Look at the pretty flowing lights.
That article is as crappy now as it was when it first came out. Seriously suggesting that a person should work (hard, even!) to advance in a caste system is socialization at its worst.
Nobody needs more than a few good friends. Obviously having more is nice, but to paraphrase the great Dave Chapelle, the trench coat mafia had six members. That's more good friends than I had in high school. Shit, that's three-on-three on a half-court.
Obviously, if "nerds" someplace are getting beat on by "jocks," they need to stand up for themselves. But popularity, by and large, is just an excuse for "nerds" not to do anything about their frustrations.
Camus is a good start.
What for? Breaking laws is much easier than changing them.