Let's not forget one major thing: drivers. Macs gan be the best thing after chocolate. However if you use PCs for real experimental science, computers are supposed to gather data. Good luck finding drivers for specialized hardware for Macs. That is why many labs uses PCs. Luckily many drivers are available for Linux too.
This unless you just run code or a website, of course. But then it's not a science lab anymore...;-)
I see lots of labs doing the switch to Linux machines. Easier (you can use the current hardware) and most of all, cheaper. If I am a PI in a project I'd rather spend money in lab equipment and less on computers. For this reason, I would personally not buy Macs, but mid range PCs, and install Linux on them. OpenOffice is good enough for presentation. If you rely on Word for your science paper, well, that's a big mistake to start with, regardless of the platform. LaTex is at its best under Linux. Because large clusters use Linux for the most part, libraries for calculation are vastly available. Unless you do lots of imaging (as you seem to be doing), the Mac won't give you any advantage.
Again, I rather buy new PCs and run Linux on them, than buying Macs. Nothing personal, but for my lab I prefer to use the money for science equipment.
So many times I tried to give away CDs to try (Ubuntu, the OpenCD, custom made). They all appreciate the gesture, but the CD goes in the dust, because they got the "real" version of whatever program (Office for example), not necessarily legally.
What I am trying to say is that handing out the CD is simply not enough. Lots of people would rather have pirated software they know than experiment with new one, unless you install those programs for them. They will not probably see the difference.
So full installation is the trick. Other wise it's a lost battle.
I don't think XPS will ever be able to take over PDF. Surely Word and Excel became so widely popular over WordPerfect or others, because of the general widespread presence of Windows. However those alternatives were anywhere near the popularity that PDF has today. Any OS but windows handles PDF natively. XPS will need some sort of programs for non-windows OSes including Macs (most likely) and Linux (unlikely). I have the feeling MS will push XPS as their standard, and using the monopoly they will try to kill PDF. However PDF will be there for a long time for the simple reason of its current presence. It's the same as saying: MS proposes a new format for HTML, non compatible. Will it change the web? No, I don't think so.
Short answer: Open standards != open source.
Long answer: I don't ask for government imposition of open source software. I am asking the government to use software which makes use of documented open standards. As in my example the Portable Document Format (PDF) is a very good example. It's fully own by Adobe (so not open source), but the specifications are available, and you can use them to create your (proprietary or not) applications. So you can by Adobe products, or you can easily find it available in Unix systems or in several programs.
This is the opposite of, say, MS Word. The format is closed, there are no specifications and documentations available. If you want to produce Word formatted document with non-MS products you have to reverse engineer. Relying on such a close format is wrong as Korea is experiencing.
BTW, this is the reason why MS is pushing for approval as standards of their formats. We don't live any more in the naive world where the software can be easily imposed to people by market monopoly. Some (smart) government started questioning the use of closed standards in public documents, and asking for use of open formats. By obtaining for their format the official status of "standard", MS will simply provide an answer from this requests of "openness".
Open source has nothing to do with it.
The problem is not Microsoft. The problem is countries relying on something which is not an OPEN standard, but that is controlled by a single companies may put you in jeopardy. I have no problem accepting windows as a standard. We all are using MS Word ".doc" format after all. What I have a problem with is my country being forcibly dependent on foreign technology, with no possibility to fix the problem. Again, it's not MS fault, it's simply the government making the bad decision of "outsourcing" completely that technology, and remain stuck with it.
So to answer to your question: I don't care what standard, and by the way Linux, Solaris, etc are not standards, just simple OS. By standard I mean a standardized set of instructions, fully and openly accessible, that can be implemented in programs that can run on several platforms. After all AES and SSL are simply that, so you can find them in several competing products. I can even accept proprietary but open standards (such as PDF) for the job.
You just missed completely my point. You are right to say that tat the time there was no standard.
However I wonder how other countries manage to use and develop cryptographical tools. In any case 1998 was 10 years ago. A smart thought would have been to develop an alternative, when the tools to develop it were finally opened and available.
This is where I see the problem. The use of tools which can be heavily broken by the same manufacturer that makes them in first place. Regardless of what you think about DirectX, it's not a standard, not open either. Everything goes well if the MS would decide to carry over from XP to Vista. THe problems starts when MS itself starts messing around with it breaking it.
In other words: you use MS Word. After few years, MS decides that their format needs "fixing" and it breaks. So if you upgrade you can't read your old stuff. Sure you can blame MS, but you should at least be conscious about your first initial wrong decision.
There is a lot of truth in what you say. The fact that a unified or standardized cellphone network does not exist n the US (different GSMs, CDMA) puts us in a similar situation as the Koreans. So you will be forced to buy locked phones or you encounter so many other issues when changing network provider. A more open system (or better a standardized system) where the network is standard and the same for every provider, the customer is not locked in a specific network and he/she can move to another without changing phone and going through the hassle of closing a contract. I think this is part of the reason why the so called "rechargeable" SIM cards enjoy such a popularity in Europe, while here they are barely existent.
This is exactly why the generalized use of proprietary and not standard software is a bad idea. Being the most common platform, doesn't make it a standard either since the all country relies on something you have totally no control about.
... how about applying all the necessary patches to your PC? How many people runs their computer "stock" which means totally unpatched? What if Matt's computer was still running Win XP SP1, with no patches? Why everybody is saying: "it could happen to you!" and not instead saying: "how safely patched was Matt's computer?". Win XP is not built safely, but I know lot's of people that use it with no spyware properly. Properly patched PCs, safer browsers, some anti-virus-spyware, firewalls, are all tools available (most of them free) to make your internet experience safer. Saying that it could happen to you, is very irresponsible. It's like saying: you could die in the car because cars have no airbags, belts, etc. Sorry, cars have these tools. You're irresponsible if you don't use them and more irresponsible as a parent if you don't force your kids to do the same.
I hope this story will teach people that security is the number one thing they should worry about when the buy a computer. Flashy interfaces, cool programs must come later in the scale of priorities. Be conscious regarding the OS you are running is VERY important. Windows is known to be very unreliable if patches are not applied. Mac and Linux are inherently more secure, but could also be vulnerable if not patched. So as a parent, I would start thinking more about the instrument I am allowing my kids to use. Is the computer safely patched? Do safer programs exist? Once parents will take personal care in making sure their PCs will be safe, then they could educate their kids to do so, as well as good Internet practices. If you expect your computer to be safe at all times without doing nothing to it, well, you are ingenuous, and waiting for troubles. Did anybody look at how well secured Matt's computer was?
In other words, would leave your kid drive the family car if you knew the brakes were not working?
Matt's story reminds me of that.
1. Old lady felt while walking was saved by her new iPhone, from which she called for help.
2. World hunger is now over. Thanks for the iPhone, people can easily be more conscious about the real problem of the world.
3. Whatever.
Confirming that the iPhone indeed is running a full version of OSX? I am very suspicious, simply because I cannot see why Apple would invest so much in developing a (closed) platform whose underpinnings simply do not exist (BSD not running on ARM).
You may be right. However it is pretty much unknown if Java is supported on the iPhone. The fact that it runs Safari, doesn't mean that it's the same as desktop Safari. If the device is running an ARM processor, both Java and Flash are most likely supported (simply because the plugins are for x86 only). As far as I can see only widgets are supported and they are neither Flash nor Java. It could be AJAX though, since JavaScript should be supported.
I am provocative here, but think about it, in terms of specs not target. The specs are VERY similar. Yes, the form factor is different, but many things are definitively similar. The biggest difference is the price, Nokia being 2.5x more expensive. Is it really worth?
I hope OLPC will show that you can produce these tablets at reasonable price and drive the overall market price down.
Why do I want to have my location known, by Apple, advertisers, Google, you name it? Isn't it enough to be tracked by the use of cellphones?
Most of the time I don't want people to know where I am.
But then again, it's Apple so it's cool. What's next? The cool iRFID, a new implant so we will not have to enter any info any more, because it's "there"?
Give me a break.
Palm licensed perpetually Palm OS 5, currently known as Garnet and used in many Palm PDAs and smartphones. This is has nothing to do with the future version of Access Linux, which Palm has yet to license. The problem with Palm OS 5 is that Access completely dropped support for it, because it is focusing all the effort into Access Linux. On the contrary Palm still believes there is potential in Palm OS 5.
There is an interesting issue with the name. Palm bought the exclusive right to use the name Palm OS from Acess a year or so ago. Access Linux is NOT going to be named Palm OS.
There is plenty of speculation about future moves from Palm. They are pretty tepid in licensing Access Linux, and the current move to use Palm OS 5 is a sign in this direction. Since now they have the right also to apply any modification to OS 5 and to use this technology in other products, I think they are going to build an emulation layer into Windows Mobile. In other words you would be able to use both Windows Mobile and Palm OS applications... If so there would be no need for a new, totally untested linux-based OS....
Slashdot Mirror
Let's not forget one major thing: drivers. Macs gan be the best thing after chocolate. However if you use PCs for real experimental science, computers are supposed to gather data. Good luck finding drivers for specialized hardware for Macs. That is why many labs uses PCs. Luckily many drivers are available for Linux too. This unless you just run code or a website, of course. But then it's not a science lab anymore... ;-)
I see lots of labs doing the switch to Linux machines. Easier (you can use the current hardware) and most of all, cheaper. If I am a PI in a project I'd rather spend money in lab equipment and less on computers. For this reason, I would personally not buy Macs, but mid range PCs, and install Linux on them. OpenOffice is good enough for presentation. If you rely on Word for your science paper, well, that's a big mistake to start with, regardless of the platform. LaTex is at its best under Linux. Because large clusters use Linux for the most part, libraries for calculation are vastly available. Unless you do lots of imaging (as you seem to be doing), the Mac won't give you any advantage. Again, I rather buy new PCs and run Linux on them, than buying Macs. Nothing personal, but for my lab I prefer to use the money for science equipment.
Oh go$h, could you please $top u$ing the $ sign in any word regarding Micro$oft? It's contagiou$...
So true....
So many times I tried to give away CDs to try (Ubuntu, the OpenCD, custom made). They all appreciate the gesture, but the CD goes in the dust, because they got the "real" version of whatever program (Office for example), not necessarily legally. What I am trying to say is that handing out the CD is simply not enough. Lots of people would rather have pirated software they know than experiment with new one, unless you install those programs for them. They will not probably see the difference. So full installation is the trick. Other wise it's a lost battle.
I don't think XPS will ever be able to take over PDF. Surely Word and Excel became so widely popular over WordPerfect or others, because of the general widespread presence of Windows. However those alternatives were anywhere near the popularity that PDF has today. Any OS but windows handles PDF natively. XPS will need some sort of programs for non-windows OSes including Macs (most likely) and Linux (unlikely). I have the feeling MS will push XPS as their standard, and using the monopoly they will try to kill PDF. However PDF will be there for a long time for the simple reason of its current presence. It's the same as saying: MS proposes a new format for HTML, non compatible. Will it change the web? No, I don't think so.
Short answer: Open standards != open source. Long answer: I don't ask for government imposition of open source software. I am asking the government to use software which makes use of documented open standards. As in my example the Portable Document Format (PDF) is a very good example. It's fully own by Adobe (so not open source), but the specifications are available, and you can use them to create your (proprietary or not) applications. So you can by Adobe products, or you can easily find it available in Unix systems or in several programs. This is the opposite of, say, MS Word. The format is closed, there are no specifications and documentations available. If you want to produce Word formatted document with non-MS products you have to reverse engineer. Relying on such a close format is wrong as Korea is experiencing. BTW, this is the reason why MS is pushing for approval as standards of their formats. We don't live any more in the naive world where the software can be easily imposed to people by market monopoly. Some (smart) government started questioning the use of closed standards in public documents, and asking for use of open formats. By obtaining for their format the official status of "standard", MS will simply provide an answer from this requests of "openness". Open source has nothing to do with it.
The problem is not Microsoft. The problem is countries relying on something which is not an OPEN standard, but that is controlled by a single companies may put you in jeopardy. I have no problem accepting windows as a standard. We all are using MS Word ".doc" format after all. What I have a problem with is my country being forcibly dependent on foreign technology, with no possibility to fix the problem. Again, it's not MS fault, it's simply the government making the bad decision of "outsourcing" completely that technology, and remain stuck with it. So to answer to your question: I don't care what standard, and by the way Linux, Solaris, etc are not standards, just simple OS. By standard I mean a standardized set of instructions, fully and openly accessible, that can be implemented in programs that can run on several platforms. After all AES and SSL are simply that, so you can find them in several competing products. I can even accept proprietary but open standards (such as PDF) for the job.
You just missed completely my point. You are right to say that tat the time there was no standard. However I wonder how other countries manage to use and develop cryptographical tools. In any case 1998 was 10 years ago. A smart thought would have been to develop an alternative, when the tools to develop it were finally opened and available. This is where I see the problem. The use of tools which can be heavily broken by the same manufacturer that makes them in first place. Regardless of what you think about DirectX, it's not a standard, not open either. Everything goes well if the MS would decide to carry over from XP to Vista. THe problems starts when MS itself starts messing around with it breaking it. In other words: you use MS Word. After few years, MS decides that their format needs "fixing" and it breaks. So if you upgrade you can't read your old stuff. Sure you can blame MS, but you should at least be conscious about your first initial wrong decision.
There is a lot of truth in what you say. The fact that a unified or standardized cellphone network does not exist n the US (different GSMs, CDMA) puts us in a similar situation as the Koreans. So you will be forced to buy locked phones or you encounter so many other issues when changing network provider. A more open system (or better a standardized system) where the network is standard and the same for every provider, the customer is not locked in a specific network and he/she can move to another without changing phone and going through the hassle of closing a contract. I think this is part of the reason why the so called "rechargeable" SIM cards enjoy such a popularity in Europe, while here they are barely existent.
This is exactly why the generalized use of proprietary and not standard software is a bad idea. Being the most common platform, doesn't make it a standard either since the all country relies on something you have totally no control about.
Funny the pack of cigarettes with the government mandatory sign: "Il fumo uccide" (smoking kills...) besides the smoking board...
... how about applying all the necessary patches to your PC? How many people runs their computer "stock" which means totally unpatched? What if Matt's computer was still running Win XP SP1, with no patches? Why everybody is saying: "it could happen to you!" and not instead saying: "how safely patched was Matt's computer?". Win XP is not built safely, but I know lot's of people that use it with no spyware properly. Properly patched PCs, safer browsers, some anti-virus-spyware, firewalls, are all tools available (most of them free) to make your internet experience safer. Saying that it could happen to you, is very irresponsible. It's like saying: you could die in the car because cars have no airbags, belts, etc. Sorry, cars have these tools. You're irresponsible if you don't use them and more irresponsible as a parent if you don't force your kids to do the same.
I hope this story will teach people that security is the number one thing they should worry about when the buy a computer. Flashy interfaces, cool programs must come later in the scale of priorities. Be conscious regarding the OS you are running is VERY important. Windows is known to be very unreliable if patches are not applied. Mac and Linux are inherently more secure, but could also be vulnerable if not patched. So as a parent, I would start thinking more about the instrument I am allowing my kids to use. Is the computer safely patched? Do safer programs exist? Once parents will take personal care in making sure their PCs will be safe, then they could educate their kids to do so, as well as good Internet practices. If you expect your computer to be safe at all times without doing nothing to it, well, you are ingenuous, and waiting for troubles. Did anybody look at how well secured Matt's computer was? In other words, would leave your kid drive the family car if you knew the brakes were not working? Matt's story reminds me of that.
1. Old lady felt while walking was saved by her new iPhone, from which she called for help. 2. World hunger is now over. Thanks for the iPhone, people can easily be more conscious about the real problem of the world. 3. Whatever.
...as far as I know. But you are the math student.
Confirming that the iPhone indeed is running a full version of OSX? I am very suspicious, simply because I cannot see why Apple would invest so much in developing a (closed) platform whose underpinnings simply do not exist (BSD not running on ARM).
You may be right. However it is pretty much unknown if Java is supported on the iPhone. The fact that it runs Safari, doesn't mean that it's the same as desktop Safari. If the device is running an ARM processor, both Java and Flash are most likely supported (simply because the plugins are for x86 only). As far as I can see only widgets are supported and they are neither Flash nor Java. It could be AJAX though, since JavaScript should be supported.
I am eager to know.
The only sure thing about the OLPC is the price (~150USD) and the fact that it will be produced.
I am provocative here, but think about it, in terms of specs not target. The specs are VERY similar. Yes, the form factor is different, but many things are definitively similar. The biggest difference is the price, Nokia being 2.5x more expensive. Is it really worth? I hope OLPC will show that you can produce these tablets at reasonable price and drive the overall market price down.
Why do I want to have my location known, by Apple, advertisers, Google, you name it? Isn't it enough to be tracked by the use of cellphones? Most of the time I don't want people to know where I am. But then again, it's Apple so it's cool. What's next? The cool iRFID, a new implant so we will not have to enter any info any more, because it's "there"? Give me a break.
Will we ever see Gnome 3.0?
codename: Jenny. Passphrase: Tommy Tutone
Palm licensed perpetually Palm OS 5, currently known as Garnet and used in many Palm PDAs and smartphones. This is has nothing to do with the future version of Access Linux, which Palm has yet to license. The problem with Palm OS 5 is that Access completely dropped support for it, because it is focusing all the effort into Access Linux. On the contrary Palm still believes there is potential in Palm OS 5. There is an interesting issue with the name. Palm bought the exclusive right to use the name Palm OS from Acess a year or so ago. Access Linux is NOT going to be named Palm OS. There is plenty of speculation about future moves from Palm. They are pretty tepid in licensing Access Linux, and the current move to use Palm OS 5 is a sign in this direction. Since now they have the right also to apply any modification to OS 5 and to use this technology in other products, I think they are going to build an emulation layer into Windows Mobile. In other words you would be able to use both Windows Mobile and Palm OS applications... If so there would be no need for a new, totally untested linux-based OS....