Apple don't charge for service packs, unless you consider the major OS upgrade from (say) 10.3 to 10.4 a service pack.
If you're one of those 'easily confused by numbers' people, consider WinXP is WinNT 5.1, while Win2K is WinNT5.0 (according to internal versioning by Microsoft).
That troll died out a few years back for lack of interest. Perhaps you'd consider not digging up the dead troll to flog it once more, eh?
Nobody should expect that Vista is bug-free and perfect, but the difference here is the question: "Do you *tell* your customers that the software you're trying to sell them is being upgraded soon?"
Why would anyone buy an OS knowing that a service pack is being worked on? Unless there's a pressing reason, it's far more sensible to wait for the service pack and proceed from there. You know that you're getting a more stable, more secure product then.
I *swear* I've seen a Dilbert cartoon about this - Dilbert's trying to close a sale, the PHB comes into the room promising the *next* version's got everything they need and will leapfrog the competition, the customer gets nervous and the sale's lost. It's just amazing to see this play out in real life!
I don't think that bit about the court case is actually true, and I don't recall any stock purchase like that (there was the $150M in non-voting stock, but that was disposed of year ago). In fact, I don't think Microsoft own any Apple stock at all today.
Microsoft would have some impact on the US economy *if no-one else took their place.*
If Microsoft disappeared tomorrow, hordes of smaller companies would vie for that market. Apple and Linux would compete for the OS market, maybe with space for some new players (finally!), the business apps market would be split amongst many other companies - there are plenty of non-Microsoft word processors out there, and a few spreadsheets. Any space they exist in would be filled by competition once the 800-pound gorilla leaves the room.
I'd argue that the net effect would be higher overheads, more employment and more diversity with no net loss to the US economy. In fact, I'd be looking for a small net gain.
I always like how "Information should be free" is never followed by any personal information. When you ask these posters to post their home address or credit card number they say "but not that information!" So then it's "some information should be free" which weakens the whole thing.
"Information should be free (except personal information, embarrassing information about me or people I care for and any other information that I feel like vetoing later on)!"
So Apple may be about to licence FairPlay, or maybe they won't. The linked site doesn't provide anything to back up its story, or even quote unnamed Apple sources (a favourite of bad journalism).
We can discuss what this means until the cows come home, but surely it's better to wait for it to *actually* *happen* before we sacrifice millions of innocent pixels as we agonise over this?
I went to the Apple website to confirm this product was available before I posted one way or the other.
No, not on the front page. Not in the store either. Not in the news section... Hmm...
If there's no official Apple announcement, and the linked article doesn't name anyone from Apple, or link to any official document this seems like nothing more than a rumour.
It may be completely true, and that's when I'll get irritated (before spending the few dollars plus buying all new routers, modems, etc for several hundred dollars more). Until there's some indication that it's a *real* thing, I'll suspend judgement.
How can a theologian investigate past the point of the Bible, Koran, Torah, etc? You can't expect an answer to questions like "Why did God create the Universe in seven days?" or "Why wouldn't Satan win the war at the end, I mean, if he's the second-most powerful created being, why would he fight a war he knew he couldn't win? He can't be stupid if he managed to convince half of the angels to side with him." You can't actually go any further in the framework of religion and come up with anything more than speculation, and possible heresy.
Science will let you keep going further, until we reach some limit of exploration. That limit may be technical or theoretical, but it's always a temporary limit to be overcome so that science can progress further.
Is anyone else seeing the irony of a poster named "Billy Gates" decrying a company getting large sums of money?
But to the point - this isn't about greed. All the lawsuit is asking for is the opening of the books for independant auditing. There is absolutely no way to spin that negatively, but the studio has now descended into attempting it.
Stan Lee had a contract for a percentage of the profits of the films and merchandise, but the company didn't want to pay him. He sued and was awarded a cut of the profits.
And the reason the ozone hole now (and has for 15-20 years) covers Tasmania and other southern regions that have perfectly normal day/night cycles is..?
I speak as a Tasmanian who's seen the rise in skin cancer and seen all the alarm stories over the ozone hole.
Building is not a solution, so that leaves it up to the OS. I think when security is easy, this sort of thing (the bugging) shouldn't be possible. Apple do it well, but not well enough yet (when you authorise some installer, what is it *really* going to do? You know at a high level, but not the detail). Microsoft have done it horribly, but are getting much better.
In the meantime, my wife and I use our Macs and we're pretty happy about how that's working out.
The word's wrong then, and having worked in electronics and having a tertiary engineering qualification, I'm absolutely certain that most electronics mall staff are utterly clueless.
Acer may *manufacture* a laptop for another company, but that doesn't mean they spec or design the laptop. It's easy to require expensive or quality parts (usually the same thing) in manufacturing by design, and one product line has nothing whatsoever to do with another outside physical proximity.
OS X has 9 unpatched vulnerabilities of 87 listed, plus 1 partial fix. Oldest unpatched is Nov-2006. Win2K Pro has 24 unpatched vulnerabilities of 145 listed, plus 3 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is Oct-2002. WinXP Home has 29 unpatched vulnerabilities of 154 listed, plus 3 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is Sep-2002. WinXP Pro has 32 unpatched vulnerabilities of 169 listed, plus 2 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is Dec-2002. Linux 2.6.1 kernel has 19 unpatched vulnerabilities of 107 listed, plus 9 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is May-2004.
My interpretation is that based on these numbers, OS X looks pretty good! Of course, this month of Apple bugs might see the numbers rise somewhat.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for your post. I now know how to weight anything you say from this point onwards.
Apple don't charge for service packs, unless you consider the major OS upgrade from (say) 10.3 to 10.4 a service pack.
If you're one of those 'easily confused by numbers' people, consider WinXP is WinNT 5.1, while Win2K is WinNT5.0 (according to internal versioning by Microsoft).
That troll died out a few years back for lack of interest. Perhaps you'd consider not digging up the dead troll to flog it once more, eh?
Sounds like an Apple problem there. I'm pretty sure they knew Vista was on its way, so there's no excuse for a bad iTunes experience.
Nobody should expect that Vista is bug-free and perfect, but the difference here is the question: "Do you *tell* your customers that the software you're trying to sell them is being upgraded soon?"
Why would anyone buy an OS knowing that a service pack is being worked on? Unless there's a pressing reason, it's far more sensible to wait for the service pack and proceed from there. You know that you're getting a more stable, more secure product then.
I *swear* I've seen a Dilbert cartoon about this - Dilbert's trying to close a sale, the PHB comes into the room promising the *next* version's got everything they need and will leapfrog the competition, the customer gets nervous and the sale's lost. It's just amazing to see this play out in real life!
I agree, but choosing to do this through a third party can only look bad.
Why did they do that, if not to obscure the link between the post and themselves?
I don't think that bit about the court case is actually true, and I don't recall any stock purchase like that (there was the $150M in non-voting stock, but that was disposed of year ago). In fact, I don't think Microsoft own any Apple stock at all today.
Can you provide some details of your sources?
The parent is clearly not a troll, and being modded as such is just plain wrong.
That's just not true, and a cursory check at the NASDAQ site reveals he's not even in the top 100 (I stopped looking).
That troll was getting old five years ago, and then it died of natural causes. Let it stay dead.
Microsoft would have some impact on the US economy *if no-one else took their place.*
If Microsoft disappeared tomorrow, hordes of smaller companies would vie for that market. Apple and Linux would compete for the OS market, maybe with space for some new players (finally!), the business apps market would be split amongst many other companies - there are plenty of non-Microsoft word processors out there, and a few spreadsheets. Any space they exist in would be filled by competition once the 800-pound gorilla leaves the room.
I'd argue that the net effect would be higher overheads, more employment and more diversity with no net loss to the US economy. In fact, I'd be looking for a small net gain.
I always like how "Information should be free" is never followed by any personal information. When you ask these posters to post their home address or credit card number they say "but not that information!" So then it's "some information should be free" which weakens the whole thing.
"Information should be free (except personal information, embarrassing information about me or people I care for and any other information that I feel like vetoing later on)!"
Weren't there sections on the site, to help you find movies, TV series, applications, warez, etc?
It's hard to claim that they didn't know they were providing torrents for illegal material if they categorised it for users.
So Apple may be about to licence FairPlay, or maybe they won't. The linked site doesn't provide anything to back up its story, or even quote unnamed Apple sources (a favourite of bad journalism).
We can discuss what this means until the cows come home, but surely it's better to wait for it to *actually* *happen* before we sacrifice millions of innocent pixels as we agonise over this?
I went to the Apple website to confirm this product was available before I posted one way or the other.
No, not on the front page. Not in the store either. Not in the news section... Hmm...
If there's no official Apple announcement, and the linked article doesn't name anyone from Apple, or link to any official document this seems like nothing more than a rumour.
It may be completely true, and that's when I'll get irritated (before spending the few dollars plus buying all new routers, modems, etc for several hundred dollars more). Until there's some indication that it's a *real* thing, I'll suspend judgement.
That's... a *really* interesting idea. I'll think on this.
How can a theologian investigate past the point of the Bible, Koran, Torah, etc? You can't expect an answer to questions like "Why did God create the Universe in seven days?" or "Why wouldn't Satan win the war at the end, I mean, if he's the second-most powerful created being, why would he fight a war he knew he couldn't win? He can't be stupid if he managed to convince half of the angels to side with him." You can't actually go any further in the framework of religion and come up with anything more than speculation, and possible heresy.
Science will let you keep going further, until we reach some limit of exploration. That limit may be technical or theoretical, but it's always a temporary limit to be overcome so that science can progress further.
Is anyone else seeing the irony of a poster named "Billy Gates" decrying a company getting large sums of money?
But to the point - this isn't about greed. All the lawsuit is asking for is the opening of the books for independant auditing. There is absolutely no way to spin that negatively, but the studio has now descended into attempting it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/30/60II/mai n527513.shtml
Stan Lee had a contract for a percentage of the profits of the films and merchandise, but the company didn't want to pay him. He sued and was awarded a cut of the profits.
Not immediately relevant, but reminiscent.
The real problem with that is that Steve Wozniak doesn't have enough business acumen to lead a big company like Apple.
Imagine him negotiating with the RIAA.
Thanks for that! It looks very interesting, and I'm looking forward to trying this out after work tonight.
And the reason the ozone hole now (and has for 15-20 years) covers Tasmania and other southern regions that have perfectly normal day/night cycles is..?
I speak as a Tasmanian who's seen the rise in skin cancer and seen all the alarm stories over the ozone hole.
So..?
Can you outline why the price of a phone should be related to the price of a console, given that the two objects have few (if any) similarities?
Well, I'm ahead of the game there!
Building is not a solution, so that leaves it up to the OS. I think when security is easy, this sort of thing (the bugging) shouldn't be possible. Apple do it well, but not well enough yet (when you authorise some installer, what is it *really* going to do? You know at a high level, but not the detail). Microsoft have done it horribly, but are getting much better.
In the meantime, my wife and I use our Macs and we're pretty happy about how that's working out.
The word's wrong then, and having worked in electronics and having a tertiary engineering qualification, I'm absolutely certain that most electronics mall staff are utterly clueless.
Acer may *manufacture* a laptop for another company, but that doesn't mean they spec or design the laptop. It's easy to require expensive or quality parts (usually the same thing) in manufacturing by design, and one product line has nothing whatsoever to do with another outside physical proximity.
Excellent suggestion!
So, for the other 99% of users (you know, the ones who just want a computer that does what it's advertised to do), what's the solution?
Hmm... according to Secunia...
OS X has 9 unpatched vulnerabilities of 87 listed, plus 1 partial fix. Oldest unpatched is Nov-2006.
Win2K Pro has 24 unpatched vulnerabilities of 145 listed, plus 3 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is Oct-2002.
WinXP Home has 29 unpatched vulnerabilities of 154 listed, plus 3 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is Sep-2002.
WinXP Pro has 32 unpatched vulnerabilities of 169 listed, plus 2 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is Dec-2002.
Linux 2.6.1 kernel has 19 unpatched vulnerabilities of 107 listed, plus 9 partial fixes. Oldest unpatched is May-2004.
My interpretation is that based on these numbers, OS X looks pretty good! Of course, this month of Apple bugs might see the numbers rise somewhat.