For the record, nothing (outside of fixing a label typo) ever takes an hour of development time, especially in an existing older code base.
It's easy to claim how simple the solution is, but we don't know how the whole system works -- so any guess as to the "amount of effort" is nothing more than farting after a good bowl of chili.
Also, it is an issue of management. Having to make sure this recording is DRM'd and *that* recording is not sounds like one gigantic management headache to me.
Kudos to Jobs for publicly going after the recording companies especially given the European issues and the fact that most of these companies are European companies. They seem to want their cake and yours and mine while their stuffing their face eating their own. Greedy bastards!
RIAA -- you want interoperability? Remove DRM. I guarantee 100% interoperability. Sadly that translates to "you want.... DRM... 100% interoperability" in the minds of the idiot Record Execs.
My concern is that this seems more like a publicity/smear campaign than a public service. Has Apple been notified of these critical bugs and been given a reasonable timeframe to resolve them? Or is this an issue of trying to surprise Apple by showing there are bugs in their code?
A Reality check -- most software is riddled with bugs (thousands and thousands).
We claim we want a completely bug free/super secure software, but the fact is we are not willing to pay for it. Would you pay $1K-2K for a copy of your favorite OS? Or for your favorite program? And you won't mind if it takes 2-3 years for that feature you wanted to be properly qualified in the next version, right?
The currently economy says that we aren't willing to do that. We want our software cheap and our features fast. As it is, we're pissed when software cycles are greater than 18 month cycles (look at Vista and Adobe CS3). Adobe was pressured to release a beta of Photoshop because they couldn't deliver the new functionality (Intel Mac support) in a reasonable time for the customer (that being RIGHT NOW).
So what exactly is the point of a 31-day, PUBLIC, security bugfest?
A more accurate description is that Microsoft charges you a premium for running Vista on a Virtual Machine.
Ironically, one great use for virtual machines (in the software development world) is to test with different configurations, which you'll be able to do with all versions except HOME. You'll have to run that on a separate PC.
In general, MS is full of crap with their licensing approach here. I need neither the features or functionality of Business or Ultimate, other than I want to run it on a VM on my Mac (vs. a Bootcamp approach). It won't cause me to pay more for a product I don't need or want, instead, I'll stick with XP until they get their head out of their ass or I can kiss that crappy Window OS off once and for all (given MS recent missteps, that could been sooner than expected).
Plus, as I understand it, you cannot boot from a ZFS volume -- which would make it pretty hard to run your OS on.
I think this is a first step. Initial ZFS support now for non-boot volumes and then when boot volumes are supported, they have the option to move to the new format.
"Sour grapes" seems to be the favored response to anyone that questions this effort.
To clarify again (I've said this in several posts now). My issue is not that they fleeced the developers, my issue is that the MacHeist team is claiming this altruistic actions. Both the "Week of the Independent Developer" and the portion to charity are part of the marketing plan to appeal to people's sense of not only getting a great deal -- but also doing something good in the process.
As for the giving a portion to charity for good will -- I have no problem with that. It's a good marketing approach, benefits the charities and makes the customer feel they're doing good in the process. The (RED) label items like iPod (RED) and the AMD Lance Armstrong laptop are examples of this.
Now the "Week of the Independent Developer" is the only issue that I have. *I* believe that this is misleading. The terms of the agreement (as they've been described) don't really offer the benefits to the developer that seemed to be professed. If they would have simply said "We've got a bundle of cool software and a portion of the revenues are going to charity", I wouldn't be chiming in.
I'm pretty sure I know why Wil Shipley joined in. DL 1.x has been out a while and is in fact near the end of its cycle. I'm sure DL 2.x is coming within a few months and Shipley hopes to increase sales not only from exposure with this, but also getting some portion to upgrade from 1.x to 2.x -- thus the soon to be deprecated DL 1.x becomes a promotional tool before it leaves.
I agree that if the developer chooses a bad deal for themselves, it is their doing. I don't have a gripe with the deal. The gripe I have is that MacHeist themselves as carrying the sword for Independent Mac Developers. The current "benefit" is that developers are getting $0.29 per unit. The reality is that they're not carrying the sword. And if they wouldn't have tried to claim such, we wouldn't be here now.
But they don't care, because all this publicity just increases their sales.
> How do you know? The terms of the contract have not been publicly announced.
Based your argument, the 20% of lots assertion can be questioned as well.
My estimate is based on the offer to Gus Mueller that WAS made public and the fairly public acknowledgment by another that the offer was similar. To date, there has been no denial that the terms mentioned thus far are not accurately reflected.
I'm fine with business is business, as long as it is represented honestly.
The MacHeist folks were pushing this bundle as being much more beneficial to the independent developers than it really was. Case in point, several folks have said "Hey, I wouldn't normally buy this -- so they got an extra sale from me and I feel better about supporting the developer." The reality is that independent developer got maybe a $1 (if they're lucky) from the guy and can only pray that they won't have to answer a single support call.
While I don't agree with the terms of the bundle (and would decline the offer myself), I don't have an issue with them making the deal. I *DO* have an issue with them marketing it as benefiting the small independent developers. If they would have left that out -- I think it wouldn't be the issue that it currently is in the community.
Business is business and being dishonest about your motives is being dishonest about your motives. But of course, the whole point of their "Week of the Independent Developer" was to take advantage of the belief that buying this bundle was a way to support the efforts of the developers involved. The facts thus far seem to question whether this is actually the case.
It's not unlike a charity that claims to help some disadvantaged kids/group and it turns out only 5% or less of the contributions ever makes it to those kids/group. Would you be as willing to partake in that charity if you knew that 95% of it went to pay for lofty salaries, corporate perks, and what not?
I agree.. I think the issue is that MacHeist is declaring their efforts as "The Week of the Independent Mac Developer". The truth behind it is that it isn't anywhere near as beneficial as the MacHeist folks claim it to be.
If they want to create a bundle and rip off shareware developers that buy into their program, that's one thing. But to claim some altruistic notion that they're efforts are for the benefit of independent Mac (shareware) developers is what sickens me.
You guys are high.. it's not 20%, in fact it gets down to around 2-3%. If ONLY it were a 20% cut.
As a developer, I know that there are costs associated with the marketing and sales of my software, but I think 95%+ of the profits is too high a price. It is effectively worse than the mechanism that RIAA uses. I don't believe that RIAA does flat fee contracts for artists music. It may be a tiny percentage, but at least it's a percentage. The difference is that with flat fee, each additional copy sold means the price per copy goes down more and more.
Wil Shipley is probably doing it because DL 1 has been out for quite some time and he's soon to release Delicious Library 2. So this becomes a promo giveaway of the last version, with the hope of some of them upgrading to DL 2. I doubt he would be giving away Delicious Library 2 in this ordeal.
You need to remove the fractions of a cent first and get the unit of measure in cents (or pennies).
If the rate is.002 cents per KB. Then 1000 KB would be 2 cents. Make sure person agrees this is correct. If I used 36 * 1000 KB, that would be 36 * 2 cents = 72 cents.
Sadly, people are easily confused by decimals and fractions (part of our no fractions in a child left behind program -- which 5 out of 3 children fail),. The solution is to get the unit of measure to FULL CENT values first, and then calculate the result in full cent increments.
You may need to provide a written proof to show how it works, step by step. Sigh.
On the legal front, if they quoted and verified numerous times (which they did) the rate of.002 cents/KB, there is a reasonable chance that a judge in small claims court would agree. It would be fun to watch Judge Milian listen to the tape and try and teach the Verizon folks math. That would make for some good TV.
I wouldn't involve a lawyer unless your goal is to actually try and prove fraud (a tough fight since clearly they have stupidity as their main defense).
The Electoral College only affects a race every 4 years. The ballots affect elections every single year. That said, the Electoral process is broken as well. Having spent many years in states where I didn't agree with the predominant party, I have been disenfranchised for a long time.:-)
Perhaps I'm too jaded.. but the system has failed.
The two party system is so corrupt that the only options available are to vote for the lesser of two evils. I think my vote is worth more than that.
Not that I expect anything to change, no matter which party takes control. Before the Republicans took over in 1994, we were promised term limits if they gained power. That was fine until they were in power, then they weren't so keen on giving up power. When there are Representatives and Senators that have been in office longer than I've been alive, it disgusts me.
Congressmen are nothing more than leeches on society, drunk on power. There is no sense of duty to the Constitution, nor to their real constituents. The only people they cater to are the "contributors" whose interests are often in direct opposition to that of the folks that elected the Congressmen.
Add to the mix electronic ballets which have been shown to be easily hacked with absolutely no voter verifiable paper trail, and your vote means nothing anymore. Vote for who you want, because we've already decided how we're going to count "your vote", regardless of your wishes.
Both the Democrats and Republicans propagate this broken system. While they minority party may scream and shout about reform, once they gain power, their view quickly changes.
As someone who has been an Apple developer since 1989, the assertions made in this article are ludicrous at best. They show signs of someone that has perhaps read about the company's history, but not been involved with them in any significant way (nor was it researched with any depth).
That this meaningless trash makes it onto Slashdot and Digg simply amazes me.
and i didnt say to stop the train for everyone else.
Also, USB came out in 1996, that's 10 years ago. 10 years to adopt USB vs. PS/2 and Parallel ports. What's that, about 5 generations of computing (assuming Moore's law)?
Yes -- I do think you're holding up the train for everyone else by wanting to keep Parallel ports. IMHO, The argument for keeping it was quite valid for a 2-3 years after USB came out, but it is time to say good-bye and move on. 10 years is plenty long enough to migrate.
and i didnt say to stop the train for everyone else.
Really? If we kept all the legacy ports, where is the incentive to push for devices to use USB? In fact, that's exactly what was happening early on. USB was available, but it was generally ignored. Then Apple came along and said "Bye bye legacy ports -- USB is the future". With that came better drivers and more devices that supported USB.
With that push, the train wouldn't have moved on from ADB (in Apple's case). In fact, the PC world hasn't moved on. Many bundled keyboards & mice are still PS/2 based, rather than USB. IMHO, Legacy ports drive lethargy.
true, but apple pulled a fast one when going all usb and friends have had problems installing the latest msn messenger client old "older" but fully working win98 install
Apple didn't make you go out and buy a new Mac that only had USB.
As a software developer, I know the pains of trying to maintain compatibility with older Operating Systems as each year progresses. Sometimes the amount of effort to support an older version of the OS is just horrific. The end result of that 95% of the users that are using Win98SE or whatever later version of the OS lose out on functionality while you try and appease the folks with the really old OS.
It's not like Apple or others are changing peripheral interfaces with each new machine. Apple went to USB 1.0 (then 2.0, which remains compatible) and has continued to support that for the past 8-9 years.
If companies would drive users forward, we'd still have 32MB hard drives, 16MB of RAM maximums. The web wouldn't be nearly as interesting in only text mode.
The train has to keep moving. You aren't required to get on if you don't want (I know folks that are still using Apple II machines to run their businesses), but it's not fair to stop the train for everyone else.
hey, i dont have a problem with progress, i just dont want it forced down my throat. ie, i can replace my tv, my printer or whatever else, when said item is broken, not while its fully working.
That's fine.. but a computer maker shouldn't be held hostage in making progress because you have a 8 year-old printer that you want to keep using. Most printers built in the past several years offer USB. In fact, many don't even offer parallel ports anymore.
Ultimately, it isn't forced down your throat. You are free to just keep using your old computer with your printer and you'll be fine.
That new server sat unused for over 6 months until the company released a USB dongle
This is a catch-22. As long as there is no incentive to move towards a USB dongle, the company sees no need. If the majority of motherboards dropped the parallel port, these guys would be FORCED to switch over pronto to keep their business afloat. Mind you, USB has been around for 10 years now. There is no excuse.
Btw.. parallel port dongles are a pain to deal with. I've had my share of hassles associated with them as well. It's a total hack!
sorry but the last think i need is for some corp to tell me that i have to toss my working paralell port printer just because im buying a new computer from them.
It's this mentality that has kept HDTV from replacing the 50+ year old technology. I don't want my TV that I bought 20 years ago to stop working!! Oh my!!
Most new printers (bought in the last 4-5 years) have multiple interfaces, parallel, USB and becoming more common: network.
Your attitude would guarantee we would never move forward with processors, RAM, disk drives, virtually anything related to computers. Luckily, the industry leader (Apple) doesn't share this attitude. There are always ways to work around legacy issues -- but we shouldn't be held back by your inability to embrace the future.
How can you ever expect to make any forward progress if you cling to the past?
It is exactly why the OP believes that Apple played a key role in actually making USB and Firewire mainstream. Motherboards could be simpler in design or, perhaps more importantly, new functionality could be added in its place. I would rather see 3-4 new USB ports instead of a stupid legacy port.
It's like buying a car with a ski rack when you live in Florida. Yes, just ignore the ski rack if you don't use it. Clearly you missed the real point.
it's this kind of rewritting of history that pissess me off. Apple came to the USB game late. what they did different was that they dropped all legacy support at the same time. USB was intoduced in January 1996. the iMac shipped (with ONLY USB ports) in August 1997.
What Apple did was drive USB into the mainstream. No, they weren't the first ones, but by dropping all the legacy support and going USB-only, they signaled a change, which has yet to be completed on the PC side (most PCs still come with COM and PARALLEL ports.. God help us all).
Firewire (an apple created technology!) took even longer for apple to adopt! it was introduced in 1995, and shipped built-in in 1999. Sony may have even beaten apple to that game!
Again, I think the real point is that Apple again drove this more into the mainstream.
The OP is partly correct in that USB and Firewire on PCs were not commonplace before Apple made them defaults on their hardware. Hell, there are still a lot of PS/2 keyboards and mice floating around TODAY. I wish that the PC manufacturers had the courage to finally drop old keyboard ports, COM ports and Parallel ports -- welcome to the 21st Century!
Because Apple controls both the hardware and software side of the equation, it can push these things through much quicker than the PC world. No, they didn't invent it -- but they brought into the mainstream (much like they did with MP3 players )
Slashdot Mirror
For the record, nothing (outside of fixing a label typo) ever takes an hour of development time, especially in an existing older code base.
It's easy to claim how simple the solution is, but we don't know how the whole system works -- so any guess as to the "amount of effort" is nothing more than farting after a good bowl of chili.
Also, it is an issue of management. Having to make sure this recording is DRM'd and *that* recording is not sounds like one gigantic management headache to me.
.... DRM ... 100% interoperability" in the minds of the idiot Record Execs.
Kudos to Jobs for publicly going after the recording companies especially given the European issues and the fact that most of these companies are European companies. They seem to want their cake and yours and mine while their stuffing their face eating their own. Greedy bastards!
RIAA -- you want interoperability? Remove DRM. I guarantee 100% interoperability. Sadly that translates to "you want
My concern is that this seems more like a publicity/smear campaign than a public service. Has Apple been notified of these critical bugs and been given a reasonable timeframe to resolve them? Or is this an issue of trying to surprise Apple by showing there are bugs in their code?
A Reality check -- most software is riddled with bugs (thousands and thousands).
We claim we want a completely bug free/super secure software, but the fact is we are not willing to pay for it. Would you pay $1K-2K for a copy of your favorite OS? Or for your favorite program? And you won't mind if it takes 2-3 years for that feature you wanted to be properly qualified in the next version, right?
The currently economy says that we aren't willing to do that. We want our software cheap and our features fast. As it is, we're pissed when software cycles are greater than 18 month cycles (look at Vista and Adobe CS3). Adobe was pressured to release a beta of Photoshop because they couldn't deliver the new functionality (Intel Mac support) in a reasonable time for the customer (that being RIGHT NOW).
So what exactly is the point of a 31-day, PUBLIC, security bugfest?
A more accurate description is that Microsoft charges you a premium for running Vista on a Virtual Machine.
Ironically, one great use for virtual machines (in the software development world) is to test with different configurations, which you'll be able to do with all versions except HOME. You'll have to run that on a separate PC.
In general, MS is full of crap with their licensing approach here. I need neither the features or functionality of Business or Ultimate, other than I want to run it on a VM on my Mac (vs. a Bootcamp approach). It won't cause me to pay more for a product I don't need or want, instead, I'll stick with XP until they get their head out of their ass or I can kiss that crappy Window OS off once and for all (given MS recent missteps, that could been sooner than expected).
Sounds a lot like Minority Report.
You got charged with a pre-crime and were locked away because you were going to do something criminal.
Plus, as I understand it, you cannot boot from a ZFS volume -- which would make it pretty hard to run your OS on.
I think this is a first step. Initial ZFS support now for non-boot volumes and then when boot volumes are supported, they have the option to move to the new format.
"Sour grapes" seems to be the favored response to anyone that questions this effort.
To clarify again (I've said this in several posts now). My issue is not that they fleeced the developers, my issue is that the MacHeist team is claiming this altruistic actions. Both the "Week of the Independent Developer" and the portion to charity are part of the marketing plan to appeal to people's sense of not only getting a great deal -- but also doing something good in the process.
As for the giving a portion to charity for good will -- I have no problem with that. It's a good marketing approach, benefits the charities and makes the customer feel they're doing good in the process. The (RED) label items like iPod (RED) and the AMD Lance Armstrong laptop are examples of this.
Now the "Week of the Independent Developer" is the only issue that I have. *I* believe that this is misleading. The terms of the agreement (as they've been described) don't really offer the benefits to the developer that seemed to be professed. If they would have simply said "We've got a bundle of cool software and a portion of the revenues are going to charity", I wouldn't be chiming in.
I'm pretty sure I know why Wil Shipley joined in. DL 1.x has been out a while and is in fact near the end of its cycle. I'm sure DL 2.x is coming within a few months and Shipley hopes to increase sales not only from exposure with this, but also getting some portion to upgrade from 1.x to 2.x -- thus the soon to be deprecated DL 1.x becomes a promotional tool before it leaves.
I agree that if the developer chooses a bad deal for themselves, it is their doing. I don't have a gripe with the deal. The gripe I have is that MacHeist themselves as carrying the sword for Independent Mac Developers. The current "benefit" is that developers are getting $0.29 per unit. The reality is that they're not carrying the sword. And if they wouldn't have tried to claim such, we wouldn't be here now.
But they don't care, because all this publicity just increases their sales.
> How do you know? The terms of the contract have not been publicly announced.
Based your argument, the 20% of lots assertion can be questioned as well.
My estimate is based on the offer to Gus Mueller that WAS made public and the fairly public acknowledgment by another that the offer was similar. To date, there has been no denial that the terms mentioned thus far are not accurately reflected.
I'm fine with business is business, as long as it is represented honestly.
The MacHeist folks were pushing this bundle as being much more beneficial to the independent developers than it really was. Case in point, several folks have said "Hey, I wouldn't normally buy this -- so they got an extra sale from me and I feel better about supporting the developer." The reality is that independent developer got maybe a $1 (if they're lucky) from the guy and can only pray that they won't have to answer a single support call.
While I don't agree with the terms of the bundle (and would decline the offer myself), I don't have an issue with them making the deal. I *DO* have an issue with them marketing it as benefiting the small independent developers. If they would have left that out -- I think it wouldn't be the issue that it currently is in the community.
Business is business and being dishonest about your motives is being dishonest about your motives. But of course, the whole point of their "Week of the Independent Developer" was to take advantage of the belief that buying this bundle was a way to support the efforts of the developers involved. The facts thus far seem to question whether this is actually the case.
It's not unlike a charity that claims to help some disadvantaged kids/group and it turns out only 5% or less of the contributions ever makes it to those kids/group. Would you be as willing to partake in that charity if you knew that 95% of it went to pay for lofty salaries, corporate perks, and what not?
I agree.. I think the issue is that MacHeist is declaring their efforts as "The Week of the Independent Mac Developer".
The truth behind it is that it isn't anywhere near as beneficial as the MacHeist folks claim it to be.
If they want to create a bundle and rip off shareware developers that buy into their program, that's one thing.
But to claim some altruistic notion that they're efforts are for the benefit of independent Mac (shareware) developers is what sickens me.
You guys are high.. it's not 20%, in fact it gets down to around 2-3%. If ONLY it were a 20% cut.
As a developer, I know that there are costs associated with the marketing and sales of my software, but I think 95%+ of the profits is too high a price. It is effectively worse than the mechanism that RIAA uses. I don't believe that RIAA does flat fee contracts for artists music. It may be a tiny percentage, but at least it's a percentage. The difference is that with flat fee, each additional copy sold means the price per copy goes down more and more.
Wil Shipley is probably doing it because DL 1 has been out for quite some time and he's soon to release Delicious Library 2. So this becomes a promo giveaway of the last version, with the hope of some of them upgrading to DL 2. I doubt he would be giving away Delicious Library 2 in this ordeal.
You need to remove the fractions of a cent first and get the unit of measure in cents (or pennies).
.002 cents per KB. Then 1000 KB would be 2 cents. Make sure person agrees this is correct.
.002 cents/KB, there is a reasonable chance that a judge in small claims court would agree. It would be fun to watch Judge Milian listen to the tape and try and teach the Verizon folks math. That would make for some good TV.
If the rate is
If I used 36 * 1000 KB, that would be 36 * 2 cents = 72 cents.
Sadly, people are easily confused by decimals and fractions (part of our no fractions in a child left behind program -- which 5 out of 3 children fail),.
The solution is to get the unit of measure to FULL CENT values first, and then calculate the result in full cent increments.
You may need to provide a written proof to show how it works, step by step. Sigh.
On the legal front, if they quoted and verified numerous times (which they did) the rate of
I wouldn't involve a lawyer unless your goal is to actually try and prove fraud (a tough fight since clearly they have stupidity as their main defense).
The Electoral College only affects a race every 4 years. The ballots affect elections every single year. That said, the Electoral process is broken as well. Having spent many years in states where I didn't agree with the predominant party, I have been disenfranchised for a long time. :-)
Perhaps I'm too jaded.. but the system has failed.
The two party system is so corrupt that the only options available are to vote for the lesser of two evils. I think my vote is worth more than that.
Not that I expect anything to change, no matter which party takes control. Before the Republicans took over in 1994, we were promised term limits if they gained power. That was fine until they were in power, then they weren't so keen on giving up power. When there are Representatives and Senators that have been in office longer than I've been alive, it disgusts me.
Congressmen are nothing more than leeches on society, drunk on power. There is no sense of duty to the Constitution, nor to their real constituents. The only people they cater to are the "contributors" whose interests are often in direct opposition to that of the folks that elected the Congressmen.
Add to the mix electronic ballets which have been shown to be easily hacked with absolutely no voter verifiable paper trail, and your vote means nothing anymore. Vote for who you want, because we've already decided how we're going to count "your vote", regardless of your wishes.
Both the Democrats and Republicans propagate this broken system. While they minority party may scream and shout about reform, once they gain power, their view quickly changes.
As someone who has been an Apple developer since 1989, the assertions made in this article are ludicrous at best. They show signs of someone that has perhaps read about the company's history, but not been involved with them in any significant way (nor was it researched with any depth).
That this meaningless trash makes it onto Slashdot and Digg simply amazes me.
Next on the agenda, Boy Scouts will be offering merit badges for *NOT* farting in someone's face and *NOT* peeing on the toilet seat.
and i didnt say to stop the train for everyone else.
Also, USB came out in 1996, that's 10 years ago. 10 years to adopt USB vs. PS/2 and Parallel ports. What's that, about 5 generations of computing (assuming Moore's law)?
Yes -- I do think you're holding up the train for everyone else by wanting to keep Parallel ports. IMHO, The argument for keeping it was quite valid for a 2-3 years after USB came out, but it is time to say good-bye and move on. 10 years is plenty long enough to migrate.
and i didnt say to stop the train for everyone else.
Really? If we kept all the legacy ports, where is the incentive to push for devices to use USB? In fact, that's exactly what was happening early on. USB was available, but it was generally ignored. Then Apple came along and said "Bye bye legacy ports -- USB is the future". With that came better drivers and more devices that supported USB.
With that push, the train wouldn't have moved on from ADB (in Apple's case). In fact, the PC world hasn't moved on. Many bundled keyboards & mice are still PS/2 based, rather than USB. IMHO, Legacy ports drive lethargy.
true, but apple pulled a fast one when going all usb
and friends have had problems installing the latest msn messenger client old "older" but fully working win98 install
Apple didn't make you go out and buy a new Mac that only had USB.
As a software developer, I know the pains of trying to maintain compatibility with older Operating Systems as each year progresses. Sometimes the amount of effort to support an older version of the OS is just horrific. The end result of that 95% of the users that are using Win98SE or whatever later version of the OS lose out on functionality while you try and appease the folks with the really old OS.
It's not like Apple or others are changing peripheral interfaces with each new machine. Apple went to USB 1.0 (then 2.0, which remains compatible) and has continued to support that for the past 8-9 years.
If companies would drive users forward, we'd still have 32MB hard drives, 16MB of RAM maximums. The web wouldn't be nearly as interesting in only text mode.
The train has to keep moving. You aren't required to get on if you don't want (I know folks that are still using Apple II machines to run their businesses), but it's not fair to stop the train for everyone else.
hey, i dont have a problem with progress, i just dont want it forced down my throat.
ie, i can replace my tv, my printer or whatever else, when said item is broken, not while its fully working.
That's fine.. but a computer maker shouldn't be held hostage in making progress because you have a 8 year-old printer that you want to keep using. Most printers built in the past several years offer USB. In fact, many don't even offer parallel ports anymore.
Ultimately, it isn't forced down your throat. You are free to just keep using your old computer with your printer and you'll be fine.
That new server sat unused for over 6 months until the company released a USB dongle
This is a catch-22. As long as there is no incentive to move towards a USB dongle, the company sees no need. If the majority of motherboards dropped the parallel port, these guys would be FORCED to switch over pronto to keep their business afloat. Mind you, USB has been around for 10 years now. There is no excuse.
Btw.. parallel port dongles are a pain to deal with. I've had my share of hassles associated with them as well. It's a total hack!
sorry but the last think i need is for some corp to tell me that i have to toss my working paralell port printer just because im buying a new computer from them.
It's this mentality that has kept HDTV from replacing the 50+ year old technology. I don't want my TV that I bought 20 years ago to stop working!! Oh my!!
Most new printers (bought in the last 4-5 years) have multiple interfaces, parallel, USB and becoming more common: network.
Your attitude would guarantee we would never move forward with processors, RAM, disk drives, virtually anything related to computers. Luckily, the industry leader (Apple) doesn't share this attitude. There are always ways to work around legacy issues -- but we shouldn't be held back by your inability to embrace the future.
You don't need legacy ports? Then don't use them!
How can you ever expect to make any forward progress if you cling to the past?
It is exactly why the OP believes that Apple played a key role in actually making USB and Firewire mainstream. Motherboards could be simpler in design or, perhaps more importantly, new functionality could be added in its place. I would rather see 3-4 new USB ports instead of a stupid legacy port.
It's like buying a car with a ski rack when you live in Florida. Yes, just ignore the ski rack if you don't use it. Clearly you missed the real point.
it's this kind of rewritting of history that pissess me off. Apple came to the USB game late. what they did different was that they dropped all legacy support at the same time. USB was intoduced in January 1996. the iMac shipped (with ONLY USB ports) in August 1997.
What Apple did was drive USB into the mainstream. No, they weren't the first ones, but by dropping all the legacy support and going USB-only, they signaled a change, which has yet to be completed on the PC side (most PCs still come with COM and PARALLEL ports.. God help us all).
Firewire (an apple created technology!) took even longer for apple to adopt! it was introduced in 1995, and shipped built-in in 1999. Sony may have even beaten apple to that game!
Again, I think the real point is that Apple again drove this more into the mainstream.
The OP is partly correct in that USB and Firewire on PCs were not commonplace before Apple made them defaults on their hardware. Hell, there are still a lot of PS/2 keyboards and mice floating around TODAY. I wish that the PC manufacturers had the courage to finally drop old keyboard ports, COM ports and Parallel ports -- welcome to the 21st Century!
Because Apple controls both the hardware and software side of the equation, it can push these things through much quicker than the PC world. No, they didn't invent it -- but they brought into the mainstream (much like they did with MP3 players )
From the article: In essence, happiness is overrated, says study author Tom Loveless.
You have an author named Loveless discussing how happiness is overrated.
Am I the only one chuckling at that?