Also, Adobe have nothing to do with Apple, so their patches (if true) are all about fixing their own code. You might like to follow your own point next time you post.
Just like you think Mac users are whiney fan-boys because you come into contact with a lot of them, anyone in tech support thinks that users are stupid at tech, because they come into contact with a lot of them.
And just as the larger group of Mac users are just normal people doing their thing, the larger group of computer users are normal people doing their thing.
Ask *anyone* in tech support, in any business. I've asked a few in different businesses and the answer's always the same.
The blog entry seemed pretty reasonable to me. He was in a job for a long time, got stale, realised it and got out for greener pastures. Lots of technical people do that, and it's a good thing for them.
I particularly liked the part where the bozo with the "mission critical" computer didn't back it up. If it's mission critical, you have redundancy. If you don't have redundancy, it's not mission critical - you've already decided you can survive without it.
So using Windows on a PC gives you insight into transistor theory, electronics design principles and application development techniques?
No?
Unless you mean that things break all the time so you are forced to learn how Windows operates, then your point is a poor one. If you did mean that, then your point is that Windows requires too much effort for any but the rarest of users.
I know electronics theory. I know programming languages. I've used computers since 1981. I use a Mac because it works and I don't have to spend time screwing around just to keep it running nicely.
As for your last point - that's just a moronic troll.
Do you have any idea how much Microsoft have earmarked for Windows Vista promotions? It's far more than Apple spends on marketing in any five year period.
Do you believe then that Vista is one fifth as good as OS X?
Amazing logic you've got there, and a solid grasp of the business world.
So the closed-source company with apparent links to the incumbent government and a record of blocking any attempts to investigate their code turn out to have security flaws?
Okay - closed-source versus open-source is a non-issue, but I expected something like this from Diebold sooner or later.
I'm seriously worried though. Here in Australia a lot of ATMs have been replaced recently with shiny new Diebold machines. I've no doubt they're harder to hack, but it's not an encouraging sign.
I was thinking of that case when a small user (personal or business) might depend on a device that's obseleted, but they've got neither the money nor the skill to fix it themselves.
I guess it's unlikely. Possible, but in the minor list of worries.
Okay, it's a terrible theory, but then so are many theories. They just don't stand up.
Apple are the only ones writing their own service manuals. That's hardly a monopoly in any legal sense though. If you really think it is, send a complaint off to your local politician. That costs nothing and may start the ball rolling.
So... who else should be writing Apple hardware service manuals? Who are Apple locking out of this lucrative market?
Sadly, I think "Justice" is the title of a judge in the UK, Australia and several other countries. Justice Patterson would be the proper way to refer to me if I was a judge.
The "Mr" is odd though. I wonder if the author was trying to avoid using "Mr Mann" as a name...
Clearly Apple hates profit, which is why they ignore the crucial anonymous coward market so sought after by other laptop manufacturers.
I had a look at the Dell site, and found that the smaller laptops don't have any options for graphics, but the larger ones do. Why can't Dell just make it happen?
Yeah, we're all running Doom 3 on our current iBooks. The Radeon9200 is more than enough for all the graphical effects. And I'm sure Quake 4 will run just fine on the Intel GMA950.
Yes, there are fewer Mac games than PC games, but that's got nothing to do with how demanding the available games actually are.
I work at a fortune 10 company, and we use Win2K on the desktops. Unless the plan was always for skipping XP in favour of Vista, then I fully expect we'll migrate to XP in the next year and Vista around 3 years after that.
A delay of a few months or even a year won't seriously harm our plans - we'd never touch Vista for a long time anyway.
Win98 desktops? Really! Before Win2K we were on NT4!
It's got almost a mythical status amongst those of us using Macs back then. We were holding out for it, only to see delays, failures, features moved into the 'normal' Mac OS (although that was a good thing), and then final defeat.
Did you get the beta as part of your Apple work, or was it ever available 'in the wild' ?
Your definition of 'monopoly' is invalid, and thus your argument fails.
Apple does not have a monopoly over Mac operating systems, because Mac operating systems is not a valid market. The actual market includes Windows and Linux, as well as any other operating system. Even the specious claim that 'you can only install OS X on a Mac' is now voided by Boot Camp.
Apple has about 3% of the market. That just can't be called a monopoly.
All online music stores with artists that people have heard of will have DRM. Otherwise they don't get the contract to sell music online.
(I'm discounting allofmp3.com here because they don't actually pay money to artists, unless a hundredth of a cent sounds like money to you.)
Physical CDs are more often encumbered with 'protection' these days. I've ripped all of them except Jack Johnson albums without any problems. Strange about those two Jack Johnson albums my wife has though.
So we're left with the choice of DRM online music, 'protected' CDs or no music.
Guess what most people won't consider.
You're perfectly free to get all zealous about DRM and how evil it is. Go nuts. Put in a couple of jabs at Apple while you're at it (I notice jabs at the far worse subscription services were missing, but that's off topic). But if you put the choice between standing with you and the three musicians outside the RIAA or actually listening to the music we want to and accepting the compromise of DRM, then you'll be awfully lonely on your side.
A billion votes are against you so far. Probably 1.1 billion by now. Then there are the other music services.
Popularity doesn't mean it's right or good, but it doesn't mean it's stupid or wrong either.
It only pays fees after the artist registers for them. How many do you think did that?
And given that songs are sold for a few cents, how much do you think the artist gets? One-tenth of a cent? One-hundredth of a cent?
Woo.
It's nothing more than sanctioned piracy. I'd be willing to bet that no international artist ever gets a cent from sites like allofmp3. Until I hear that *actual* money is paid to artists, and see *real* cases, I will have to believe that no-one gets a cent except allofmp3.
Slashdot Mirror
Good troll, completely unbelievable.
Also, Adobe have nothing to do with Apple, so their patches (if true) are all about fixing their own code. You might like to follow your own point next time you post.
Just like you think Mac users are whiney fan-boys because you come into contact with a lot of them, anyone in tech support thinks that users are stupid at tech, because they come into contact with a lot of them.
And just as the larger group of Mac users are just normal people doing their thing, the larger group of computer users are normal people doing their thing.
Ask *anyone* in tech support, in any business. I've asked a few in different businesses and the answer's always the same.
This blog poster's attitude is nothing unusual.
The blog entry seemed pretty reasonable to me. He was in a job for a long time, got stale, realised it and got out for greener pastures. Lots of technical people do that, and it's a good thing for them.
I particularly liked the part where the bozo with the "mission critical" computer didn't back it up. If it's mission critical, you have redundancy. If you don't have redundancy, it's not mission critical - you've already decided you can survive without it.
So using Windows on a PC gives you insight into transistor theory, electronics design principles and application development techniques?
No?
Unless you mean that things break all the time so you are forced to learn how Windows operates, then your point is a poor one. If you did mean that, then your point is that Windows requires too much effort for any but the rarest of users.
I know electronics theory. I know programming languages. I've used computers since 1981. I use a Mac because it works and I don't have to spend time screwing around just to keep it running nicely.
As for your last point - that's just a moronic troll.
You know, Apple patch their stuff pretty quickly. I've not heard of a single user being bitten by a security exploit through OS X.
Perhaps you can do more research on *actual* vulnerabilities rather than *theoretical* vulnerabilities.
OS X has some holes. They get fixed when they're discovered. Deal with it.
Do you have any idea how much Microsoft have earmarked for Windows Vista promotions? It's far more than Apple spends on marketing in any five year period.
Do you believe then that Vista is one fifth as good as OS X?
Amazing logic you've got there, and a solid grasp of the business world.
Apple don't write games, but they're happy to help those that do:
http://www.apple.com/games/
Maybe you need to do a little looking around before making a blanket statement.
So the closed-source company with apparent links to the incumbent government and a record of blocking any attempts to investigate their code turn out to have security flaws?
Okay - closed-source versus open-source is a non-issue, but I expected something like this from Diebold sooner or later.
I'm seriously worried though. Here in Australia a lot of ATMs have been replaced recently with shiny new Diebold machines. I've no doubt they're harder to hack, but it's not an encouraging sign.
That's pretty good.
I was thinking of that case when a small user (personal or business) might depend on a device that's obseleted, but they've got neither the money nor the skill to fix it themselves.
I guess it's unlikely. Possible, but in the minor list of worries.
Although I appreciate a clean, cruft-less kernel, wouldn't lack of backwards compatibility doom all dfriver projects to eternal development?
Great for hobbyists, but lethal for anyone wanting to write drivers. Today's working driver would be tomorrow's kernel panic factory.
What happens to less popular drivers? Do they just die for lack of skilled people to work on them when the kernel changes?
In theory, *everything* is a monopoly!
I've got a monopoly on being me!
Okay, it's a terrible theory, but then so are many theories. They just don't stand up.
Apple are the only ones writing their own service manuals. That's hardly a monopoly in any legal sense though. If you really think it is, send a complaint off to your local politician. That costs nothing and may start the ball rolling.
So... who else should be writing Apple hardware service manuals? Who are Apple locking out of this lucrative market?
Sadly, I think "Justice" is the title of a judge in the UK, Australia and several other countries. Justice Patterson would be the proper way to refer to me if I was a judge.
The "Mr" is odd though. I wonder if the author was trying to avoid using "Mr Mann" as a name...
Clearly Apple hates profit, which is why they ignore the crucial anonymous coward market so sought after by other laptop manufacturers.
I had a look at the Dell site, and found that the smaller laptops don't have any options for graphics, but the larger ones do. Why can't Dell just make it happen?
Maybe there's no profit for them there.
Yeah, we're all running Doom 3 on our current iBooks. The Radeon9200 is more than enough for all the graphical effects. And I'm sure Quake 4 will run just fine on the Intel GMA950.
Yes, there are fewer Mac games than PC games, but that's got nothing to do with how demanding the available games actually are.
Good point, but the original link on the thread allowed download of the entire service manual, not just a picture or a page.
Semantics are everything
The point is that they posted the *whole* of the service manual. That can't be justified under Fair Use law.
I'll sort of second these comments.
I work at a fortune 10 company, and we use Win2K on the desktops. Unless the plan was always for skipping XP in favour of Vista, then I fully expect we'll migrate to XP in the next year and Vista around 3 years after that.
A delay of a few months or even a year won't seriously harm our plans - we'd never touch Vista for a long time anyway.
Win98 desktops? Really! Before Win2K we were on NT4!
PC? Mac? What are you talking about?
You must be one of those hackers I heard about on the news.
Why would you buy RAM from any computer manufacturer? They always overcharge. Apple are at the far end of that curve, and this is very well known.
So why buy their RAM? Masochism? A desperate need to give money away?
I buy third party RAM for my Macs. Always have, always will.
Have you actually seen the ads? It's just two guys, one in a suit and the other in casual clothes. Clothes you'd see on any street near you.
There were no halos, no bright tunnels of light, just clothes.
You read too much into an ad.
Really? How does it run?
It's got almost a mythical status amongst those of us using Macs back then. We were holding out for it, only to see delays, failures, features moved into the 'normal' Mac OS (although that was a good thing), and then final defeat.
Did you get the beta as part of your Apple work, or was it ever available 'in the wild' ?
Your definition of 'monopoly' is invalid, and thus your argument fails.
Apple does not have a monopoly over Mac operating systems, because Mac operating systems is not a valid market. The actual market includes Windows and Linux, as well as any other operating system. Even the specious claim that 'you can only install OS X on a Mac' is now voided by Boot Camp.
Apple has about 3% of the market. That just can't be called a monopoly.
So what are the options?
All online music stores with artists that people have heard of will have DRM. Otherwise they don't get the contract to sell music online.
(I'm discounting allofmp3.com here because they don't actually pay money to artists, unless a hundredth of a cent sounds like money to you.)
Physical CDs are more often encumbered with 'protection' these days. I've ripped all of them except Jack Johnson albums without any problems. Strange about those two Jack Johnson albums my wife has though.
So we're left with the choice of DRM online music, 'protected' CDs or no music.
Guess what most people won't consider.
You're perfectly free to get all zealous about DRM and how evil it is. Go nuts. Put in a couple of jabs at Apple while you're at it (I notice jabs at the far worse subscription services were missing, but that's off topic). But if you put the choice between standing with you and the three musicians outside the RIAA or actually listening to the music we want to and accepting the compromise of DRM, then you'll be awfully lonely on your side.
A billion votes are against you so far. Probably 1.1 billion by now. Then there are the other music services.
Popularity doesn't mean it's right or good, but it doesn't mean it's stupid or wrong either.
It only pays fees after the artist registers for them. How many do you think did that?
And given that songs are sold for a few cents, how much do you think the artist gets? One-tenth of a cent? One-hundredth of a cent?
Woo.
It's nothing more than sanctioned piracy. I'd be willing to bet that no international artist ever gets a cent from sites like allofmp3. Until I hear that *actual* money is paid to artists, and see *real* cases, I will have to believe that no-one gets a cent except allofmp3.
Nothing - check the news. The new legislation (it was never a lawsuit, only proposed laws) has been neutered by the government.