On an iphone, huh? Qt exists for OS X so there is no reason to think it won't exist on iPhone too. When you hear Opera ASA saying "We will run on iPhone, if SDK is powerful enough", they mean "If it is powerful enough for Qt/iPhone".
Also as you mentioned iPhone... If I was a Linux/FreeBSD guy, I would be alerted if Apple acquired Trolltech, not Nokia. Nokia is famous for NEVER changing a working thing, ever.
"I don't see Nokia as interested in the Linux desktop"
While I understand your arguments it would now be a relatively easy way for Nokia to sneakin to that business. Before this buyout it would have been "impossible".
Don't forget that the margins of the mobile phone industry may be diminishing and that the distinction between a mobile phone and a laptop is blurred more and more. Nokia is spreading its risks. Who knows what a laptop's wireless connection will look like in five years. I don't, but I guess Nokia now is better prepared to not only know, but also to adapt and dictate.
- Funny is, Nokia can sell a Linux Desktop to the non technical masses. N800 is a Linux desktop tablet.
The year of Linux Desktop! This is bordering on a parody of itself now- any more and it'll become a Slashdot cliche like Natalie Portman, Soviet Russia and friends.
It's been said every year for almost ten years, so can we call it the decade of Linux on the desktop instead?;-) I don't see a serious problem with Linux on Desktop if we are speaking about enterprise/business desktops. Also saying as a OS X user here who despises Ubuntu guys "It is out fashioned, lets drop PPC official support" short sighted decision.
And yet you still can't get an Apple with a BD drive or burner directly from Apple yet, despite everyone and their mother saying that you'd be able to only a few short weeks ago. BluRay Disc recording currently costs $600 with additional software needed. Why the heck I should buy a Apple branded BluRay drive while Lacie firewire external BD exists?
Should Apple also ship H264 encoder cards in their brand to show their support to the format too?
Current BluRay customers with such prices and camera prices are prosumers. They already have specific companies they do business with and trust. There is no point putting a Apple brand $800 BluRay recorder to Apple shop and only earn some excuses for trolls calling everything Apple does expensive.
It doesn't need to be a IT genius to figure Apple wouldn't ship BluRay built in drives inside Macs since: It is a new technology, people would feel robbed if they saw Pioneer releasing half priced but double speed drive (ask DVD-R early people), it is a complete hassle to replace built in drive, companies already shipping external BD-R for early adopters. Finally, did you see the feedback about a COMPLETELY OPTIONAL solid state drive on Macbook Air?
At some point, some 10.5.x update with "updated DVD Player with BD support" or "BD Player included" single liner will ship, that will be the time to think about buying BluRay.
Whether you burn a one-off disc on your Mac Pro or send a title out for commercial replication, you can have confidence that your DVDs will play back on a wide range of set-top players and computers. Burn your own discs in a wide variety of formats, including double-layer DVDs. For commercial replication, choose one of the traditional red laser formats or double the capacity on your HD DVD disc by using a blue laser format. Whoever wrote it, has no clue how professional productions work. HD-DVD or even Blu-Ray has no place on a sentence where red laser mentioned. Alternative to Red Laser based stuff is a SCSI or cheaper ATA tower RAID actually transported to target company. Movie studios don't sit and burn their own DVDs to replicate, a DVD dedicated company with literally hundreds of DVD decks and computer configurations to check and absolutely make sure it is OK needed.
Also lets say person has another point. A completely Mac based production house will create movie, do the final touches and...? Send their movie to a Windows supporting production house for final HD-DVD work. Why? Because their childish spoiled fat kid rival refused to support OS X in any manner.
In Movie business, if you don't ship OS X support, you are a joke. Ask Adobe going with AVI based Premiere. Also see how easy to implement a complete framework even with consumer level products like Roxio Toast 8.
Apple can be officially part of BluRay group. It doesn't matter. Look, there is developer.apple.com out there, Xcode, everything required to write a complete HD-DVD support framework, even a HD-DVD Player.app. It is exact same deal for Linux too. It is all open.
I like Toshiba but they were extremely wrong to go with Microsoft which sees everything functioning on non-Windows OS as a loss.
So does everyone here hate HD DVD because of some orrational hatred of Microsoft? I personally like HD DVD for it's cheaper price and the lack of heavy handed tactics used to try and force us all to convert.
One of us. One of us. One of us. OS X, the de facto standard on Movie production doesn't have any kind of HD-DVD support. Nothing. XCode is there, driverkit, quicktime SDK, extensive documentation, top class developer accounts, the fact of being number 1 mac software vendor.
Where is HDVD support for OS X?
Why a rich consumer (not pro) can write BluRay discs via Toast+BluRay firewire recorder but professionals can't? Because there is Microsoft involved. Basic. If you start a new system, format, go with a real professional company who actually cares about the formats reach.
Here's hoping HD DVD's troubles means that they'll remove all the "secure path" BS from Windows 7. They only did it to placate Hollywood, and it's a major reason why Vista had developmental problems. (Note, they'd have had to do it too if they were supporting Blu-ray instead - the point though is that I'd like to see Microsoft throw a tantrum and remove a "feature" they should never have added in the first place.)
Mac users hate to admit it but as a Mac user myself, someone should check how many Windows XP/Vista licenses have MS sold to Intel Mac users. That number would be wrong... How many Boot Camps have Mac users downloaded? Only from Versiontracker.com, it is 90.000 total downloads. That is an insane number for Mac software scene. Adobe Reader which is there since beginning of history has total 854.000 downloads.
It is a sad fact but MS is not going anywhere. Even if you say "I will run only Mac while having Intel chip", when you buy a EA game, you are buying a Windows game , using Microsoft technologies such as DirectX.
I was expecting companies who got rid of the "endian" and "altivec" issues ship OS X native applications. What they did? They pack Windows applications and ship as OS X applications generally costing higher than Windows.
MSFT shares are up 3% today after another strong rise yesterday, after announcing their financial results and outlook. and Apple, introducing a completely new concept of high end luxury laptops, announcing an insane major OS upgrade adoption rate, completely creating a blockbuster HD movie rental device (which can be software updated,free) hits horrible values because their customer base have chosen iPhone, a lot more expensive device with huge revenues rather than plain iPod.
What a justice eh? I hate to defend them because of those clueless fanboys but really, they didn't deserve that kind of stock market hit.
From TFA - "All reports thus far say the compromised servers are running Linux and Apache."
"And it only affects windows clients. So how is this problem not your typical someone cracked your machine? Oh wait, I smell Microsoft FUD"
Are you really that illiterate? Just an FYI - Microsoft doesn't make Apache OR Linux. If compromised severs are being used, it is certainly not the type that "only affects windows clients". Duh. Only here would such blatant anti-MS bullshit get modded "Insightful". I took a way more "insightful" shit this morning. So, Mac planet is not alone discrediting every single security alert as "FUD":)
It seems there are other people who sees a story validated by 4 different, independent security companies as FUD. Apache is planets number 1 webserver and Linux is number 1 Webserver OS. What else would a blackhat supported by mafia would target? It is not like "I am proving Linux is unsecure", it is "I have purchased a previously unknown compromised account list and I am using it to infect millions of MS Windows users running popular but unpatched software, we will make millions from that zombie army".
Mozilla as spun off in 1998 was never the dominant browser. By the time Mozilla was open sourced 10 years ago, IE was the dominant browser by a significant margin. If the browser was still dominant, I doubt Netscape would have ever open sourced it. Can you imagine current Firefox if it was opensourced back in Netscape 3 days when first signs of MS monster waking up and Netscape was still shipping a very good browser showing IE from MS a joke? I remember just like we laughed as Silverlight/Zune today, we laughed at IE 2.0. We saw it as a spoiled rich kids "If you don't play with me, I am going to buy a better toy from store" kind of thing.
I think CmdrTaco also deserves a mention for this anniversary.
"Add the final piece of data to the mix:Netscape is losing money as well as browser market share. What's a company to do? Maybe the solution is simple:GPL Netscape's Source Code.
So now that you've stopped laughing, let's talk about this seriously for a moment."
You are saying like the author says "there will be 5 computers on this planet".:)
Back in 2000, Mozilla was a horrible, lost its focus complete slow/bloated thing. It has changed when Mozilla people sit down and think what is wrong and that thinking ended up in Firefox, browser today and its companion Thunderbird.
Go back in time thanks to Wayback machine to the time that flame was written:
"Mozilla 0.6 Released Mozilla 0.6 is a milestone release based on the same branch as Netscape 6."
With such low UID I assume you have seen that disaster named Netscape 6. You haven't seen it totally if you were using a modern OS like Linux that time. You should be running Windows 98 to experience it totally:) Also remember, this is few months later. For the Netscape/Mozilla community that time, 0.6 was a great milestone. You can now imagine how was Mozilla while author is writing that article.
That is the "Mozilla" author speaks about and it is (thank God) dead.
That reminds me of 2001 when it seems nearly everyone on Slashdot claimed that Mozilla 1.0 would never ship, and nothing I said would convince them it was just around the corner. In seven years I'll probably remember how everyone kept complaining about the memory leak so many of us could never see. Mozilla could take off when they finally figured not everyone on Earth is interested in some college students geek fantasy implementations. Everyone seem to know about Firefox these days, ask them if they have ever seen/used Mozilla pre 1.0. Did we forget the Netscape 6.0 scandal release from AOL? Did they break the code? No, they hurried with release and packaged a horrible product abusing the still known brand Netscape and few remaining die hard supporters.
Mozilla could achieve success when they finally admitted there is an issue with their product. Memory leaks will be really fixed when majority of Mozilla developers/supporters figure that people doesn't buy RAM to cover their programming mistakes and stop posting spoiled rich college kid message replies like "Buy more RAM" without figuring the "cheap chip" they mention could be someone's weekly income.
You will also figure most of people saying "memory leak" will say (or won't care to say) "it is fixed" when Firefox 3 uses native OS'es technologies to display data.
BTW while writing this message, Safari from OS X Leopard 10.5.1 uses 400 MB of RAM;)
You'll want to mod me down so as not to attract attention to this issue, but I'd honestly like to know... I usually browse at a level of 4 or higher but sometimes, when there are still few comments to a story, I'll drop down to -1. My question is, does every story have all of this racism and homophobia nonsense attached to it, or is this something new? If it's a long standing thing, are there any theories as to why people bother with stuff like that on a site like Slashdot? They just get modded down and aren't even seen by most people (I, of course, assume most people are like me), so why do they bother?
Hope someone answers before I get modded into oblivion with the trolls:) Organized trolling, either by already known entities (g***) or some wannabe copycats. Cure is the same exact thing: Ignore the trolls.
In our ideal World, Apple has lots of machines having freely installed (donated by vendor) Adobe, AVID, Cleaner stuff and they also have couple of top downloaded freeware/shareware. When they package new final build update, they are testing it against those very critical apps which is the core pro business of Apple to see if any obvious horrible failure happens. If it happens, they call/mail their internal contact from respective company to release a fix or help diagnosing issue.
Are we really making this up? Or is it "If it compiles, ship it" ?
I better tell again for Video pros: You should be using a secured (firewall, _offline_ virus scan,local network connected only) Apple machine with ONLY recommended, tested OS X build by your vendor. You aren't a iPhone or Apple TV user to jump to all updates. For example if you are a AVID professional user, you should check this page: http://www.avid.com/onlinesupport/supportcontent.asp?productID=97&contentID=9941&browse= . See, they say: Avid Xpress Pro 5.7.2 (Jun 07) OS 10.4.9 QuickTime 7.1.6
He's modded as Troll because QuickTime is the media layer foundation of video editing apps on OS X. As much as you might despise the QuickTime Player application (and with good reason), there's a whole lot more to QuickTime than just that. Simply "not using" it isn't an option. Not only OS X, Quicktime Framework is layer of near all serious applications including Adobe/AVID functionality. Also Cameras/Video cams having mpeg4/h264 (e.g. HD consumer level) needs Quicktime to work fine with Windows as MSFT is still fantasizing about their ideal "everyone is using WMV/AVI and we are giving shit to OS X/Linux" World which basically FAILED.
When professionals speak about "Quicktime breaking things", they don't mean they can't watch those HD trailers with that Apple Player, they are meaning Quicktime FRAMEWORK (aka lib, dll, vxd whatever) is broken.
If you can manually uninstall entire Quicktime (along with framework) even on Windows, say bye to AVID, half of Adobe Apps functionality.
There are 2 major classes of Video/Sound editors. "AVI Based" and "Quicktime (Mov) Based". Majority of real pro stuff is "Quicktime Based", Adobe Premiere Pro can be counted as "AVI based"
This is a open request from all those security "professional" sites, professional "support" sites.
1) If you don't know what Quicktime Framework means for media industry, DON'T suggest to remove it. Some super clueless admin or non technical may actually do it and that means a huge downtime. E.g. you may not be able to watch local news at 7 PM. "Quicktime on Production machines" means this: http://developer.apple.com/quicktime/ , not this: http://www.apple.com/quicktime/
2) Support sites: Please note in a VERY SERIOUS manner that downgrading Quicktime means making it open to all documented/undocumented issues and user/admin should really elevate the systems security (enable firewall, get commercial one etc) or if it is a real production machine, even disconnect it from Internet in hardware level.
By suggesting to downgrade Quicktime 7.4 (current) to earlier version, you are also suggesting that user will be open to these exploits. They are also all documented as the new update shippped. http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=307301
For actual media professionals, admins: Please ask Adobe, AVID, Autodesk etc. before updating Quicktime or simply check their pages, forums. For AVID, you shouldn't be even running 10.4.11 yet. They recommend 10.4.10 for now. Not because they are old fashioned, the "run software update and click all updates" method is for ordinary end user, not you.
We speak about a OS which its filesystem was coded by a Microsoft engineer himself. Yes, the famous HFS (ages ahead of FAT) is a MS filesystem. For some people, NTFS is just a very major upgrade of HFS. Are you sure you aren't talking about HPFS? HFS is an Apple filesystem, as far as I know... Yea, apologies. I was messing with HFS for 2-3 days (Time Machine) so it slipped to my mind. I didn't want to reply to my own post since it just misses a letter:)
Since lots of folks are bringing up arguments about why OS/2 ended up where it is, I'll throw in my two cents.
It's 1996, and I'm working at a university where the department IT guy is a rabid OS/2 fanatic. The whole department ran on Warp, but this brand new version of NT (4.0) has just come out with a Win95-like interface but decent internals, so the battle was on.
One day I wander down to the campus bookstore. They have copies of OS/2 in stock- the version with TCP/IP and a web browser was something like $200. Next to it was the development kit, in a plain box- $700.
On the other shelf is a copy of WinNT 4.0. $99. That $99 was the full version, and it included a full copy of Visual C++ as well.
IBM simply didn't care about the academic market at all. MS cares a *lot*- they learned from Apple that if you get people hooked earlier they are stuck with you for life.
A current example. IBM PPC970 (MP) is the PowerPC G5 which Apple abandoned because of "no mobile option". It is a very high performance CPU if coded right. The issue is, it really needs some very highly optimized compiler.
As far as I know, Intel and AMD guys are helping Gcc guys in every single case to further optimize their compilers. We all see the degree of help Apple gets for XCode from Intel publicly.
The point is: IBM Still tries to sell XL Compiler for PPC using mainframe resellers as channels for $600! Also it has not been updated so it won't work with new XCode (as far as I figure as user). I am not speaking about entire XL Compiler tree (which includes AIX etc), they didn't bother to make XL Compiler for OSX some kind of freeware or something very cheap so we can donate to open source projects. In fact, they could donate it free to some scientific, graphics open source freeware. They didn't bother at all.
I heard from Apple developers that it is not some sort of "magic" thing but it really explains the attitude of IBM.
It is IBM, they are showing they take petition serious and seriously answering it in physical form.
I remember getting OS/2 Warp 3 one week after its USA release in Istanbul along with 450 PAGES of Turkish manual which describes the system at insane levels of detail. It is 2008 now and I still remember it. That was one of the times I figured why they are called "Big Blue".
You really have some misconception of IBM's image. Typewriters? Some Lawyer with IBM logo printed papers answering on behalf of IBM?
IBM also have a good clue how evil MS can be. MS did everything to undermine the OS/2, they didn't give a shit to Big Blue. They undermined their OWN OS, can you believe? I think IBM, being almost century old has enough experience with MS.
Let me give another example. http://versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/3046 (Mulberry) The author of it had to purchase his OWN CODE to make it open source. I also think he deserves more recognition for that.
As far as I remember, Pegasus had similar problems resulting from 3rd party frameworks but I don't follow Windows scene these times so I could be wrong.
It's not necessarily just Microsoft's code in OS/2 that is obstructing an OSS release.
There is likely code from other 3rd parties in there, and I expect that some of those companies simply aren't around any more, so resolving ownership in those cases may simply be too difficult, more trouble than it's worth, or just flat-out impossible.
Chip H. Even if all those companies setup a conference to sign a joint agreement that OS/2 source will be completely open based on GPL, I think those companies , e.g. IBM in size of a small country will have to spend millions of dollars for legal costs. Look to Apple, they can't add features to their own device (iPod touch) without charging their customers and driving them mad.
Don't forget thousands of patent trolls waiting to see slightest stupid idea of them implemented one way or another. The target is huge, IBM, the big blue. If your junk makes slightest sense (in law), they won't bother and pay millions to settle it outside court. MS will be target too.
Meanwhile Sun spent a few years leading up to the OpenSolaris project fixing those exact same issues... Half of Solaris wasn't coded, touched by Microsoft. That is a company which even Big Blue doesn't want to mess with.
We speak about a OS which its filesystem was coded by a Microsoft engineer himself. Yes, the famous HFS (ages ahead of FAT) is a MS filesystem. For some people, NTFS is just a very major upgrade of HFS.
Slashdot Mirror
Also as you mentioned iPhone... If I was a Linux/FreeBSD guy, I would be alerted if Apple acquired Trolltech, not Nokia. Nokia is famous for NEVER changing a working thing, ever.
While I understand your arguments it would now be a relatively easy way for Nokia to sneakin to that business. Before this buyout it would have been "impossible".
Don't forget that the margins of the mobile phone industry may be diminishing and that the distinction between a mobile phone and a laptop is blurred more and more. Nokia is spreading its risks. Who knows what a laptop's wireless connection will look like in five years. I don't, but I guess Nokia now is better prepared to not only know, but also to adapt and dictate.
- Funny is, Nokia can sell a Linux Desktop to the non technical masses. N800 is a Linux desktop tablet.
Nokia is already a huge player in Linux desktop. http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/pc/ref=pd_ts_pc_nav That N800 is Linux, nothing else and it is top selling computer on Amazon.
That tablet runs Opera which even EXISTS thanks to Qt from Trolltech they bought.
It's been said every year for almost ten years, so can we call it the decade of Linux on the desktop instead?
Should Apple also ship H264 encoder cards in their brand to show their support to the format too?
Current BluRay customers with such prices and camera prices are prosumers. They already have specific companies they do business with and trust. There is no point putting a Apple brand $800 BluRay recorder to Apple shop and only earn some excuses for trolls calling everything Apple does expensive.
It doesn't need to be a IT genius to figure Apple wouldn't ship BluRay built in drives inside Macs since: It is a new technology, people would feel robbed if they saw Pioneer releasing half priced but double speed drive (ask DVD-R early people), it is a complete hassle to replace built in drive, companies already shipping external BD-R for early adopters. Finally, did you see the feedback about a COMPLETELY OPTIONAL solid state drive on Macbook Air?
At some point, some 10.5.x update with "updated DVD Player with BD support" or "BD Player included" single liner will ship, that will be the time to think about buying BluRay.
O RLY?:
Versatile DVD Mastering
Whether you burn a one-off disc on your Mac Pro or send a title out for commercial replication, you can have confidence that your DVDs will play back on a wide range of set-top players and computers. Burn your own discs in a wide variety of formats, including double-layer DVDs. For commercial replication, choose one of the traditional red laser formats or double the capacity on your HD DVD disc by using a blue laser format. Whoever wrote it, has no clue how professional productions work. HD-DVD or even Blu-Ray has no place on a sentence where red laser mentioned. Alternative to Red Laser based stuff is a SCSI or cheaper ATA tower RAID actually transported to target company. Movie studios don't sit and burn their own DVDs to replicate, a DVD dedicated company with literally hundreds of DVD decks and computer configurations to check and absolutely make sure it is OK needed.
Also lets say person has another point. A completely Mac based production house will create movie, do the final touches and...? Send their movie to a Windows supporting production house for final HD-DVD work. Why? Because their childish spoiled fat kid rival refused to support OS X in any manner.
In Movie business, if you don't ship OS X support, you are a joke. Ask Adobe going with AVI based Premiere. Also see how easy to implement a complete framework even with consumer level products like Roxio Toast 8.
Apple can be officially part of BluRay group. It doesn't matter. Look, there is developer.apple.com out there, Xcode, everything required to write a complete HD-DVD support framework, even a HD-DVD Player.app. It is exact same deal for Linux too. It is all open.
I like Toshiba but they were extremely wrong to go with Microsoft which sees everything functioning on non-Windows OS as a loss.
One of us.
One of us.
One of us. OS X, the de facto standard on Movie production doesn't have any kind of HD-DVD support. Nothing. XCode is there, driverkit, quicktime SDK, extensive documentation, top class developer accounts, the fact of being number 1 mac software vendor.
Where is HDVD support for OS X?
Why a rich consumer (not pro) can write BluRay discs via Toast+BluRay firewire recorder but professionals can't? Because there is Microsoft involved. Basic. If you start a new system, format, go with a real professional company who actually cares about the formats reach.
Mac users hate to admit it but as a Mac user myself, someone should check how many Windows XP/Vista licenses have MS sold to Intel Mac users. That number would be wrong... How many Boot Camps have Mac users downloaded? Only from Versiontracker.com, it is 90.000 total downloads. That is an insane number for Mac software scene. Adobe Reader which is there since beginning of history has total 854.000 downloads.Here's hoping HD DVD's troubles means that they'll remove all the "secure path" BS from Windows 7. They only did it to placate Hollywood, and it's a major reason why Vista had developmental problems. (Note, they'd have had to do it too if they were supporting Blu-ray instead - the point though is that I'd like to see Microsoft throw a tantrum and remove a "feature" they should never have added in the first place.)
It is a sad fact but MS is not going anywhere. Even if you say "I will run only Mac while having Intel chip", when you buy a EA game, you are buying a Windows game , using Microsoft technologies such as DirectX.
I was expecting companies who got rid of the "endian" and "altivec" issues ship OS X native applications. What they did? They pack Windows applications and ship as OS X applications generally costing higher than Windows.
What a justice eh? I hate to defend them because of those clueless fanboys but really, they didn't deserve that kind of stock market hit.
"And it only affects windows clients. So how is this problem not your typical someone cracked your machine? Oh wait, I smell Microsoft FUD"
Are you really that illiterate? Just an FYI - Microsoft doesn't make Apache OR Linux. If compromised severs are being used, it is certainly not the type that "only affects windows clients". Duh. Only here would such blatant anti-MS bullshit get modded "Insightful". I took a way more "insightful" shit this morning. So, Mac planet is not alone discrediting every single security alert as "FUD"
It seems there are other people who sees a story validated by 4 different, independent security companies as FUD. Apache is planets number 1 webserver and Linux is number 1 Webserver OS. What else would a blackhat supported by mafia would target? It is not like "I am proving Linux is unsecure", it is "I have purchased a previously unknown compromised account list and I am using it to infect millions of MS Windows users running popular but unpatched software, we will make millions from that zombie army".
I don't get why people gets defensive.
That was a evil joke from MS but they have also hit themselves since blue screen means BSOD of Windows for many.
Also here is one of the first people suggesting Netscape should go open source _immediately_ by taking the risk of being laughed at. It will surprise you if you didn't see it:
http://web.archive.org/web/19980113192359/slashdot.org/slashdot.cgi?mode=article&artnum=425
I think CmdrTaco also deserves a mention for this anniversary.
"Add the final piece of data to the mix:Netscape is losing money as well as browser market share. What's a company to do? Maybe the solution is simple:GPL Netscape's Source Code.
So now that you've stopped laughing, let's talk about this seriously for a moment."
You are saying like the author says "there will be 5 computers on this planet".
Back in 2000, Mozilla was a horrible, lost its focus complete slow/bloated thing. It has changed when Mozilla people sit down and think what is wrong and that thinking ended up in Firefox, browser today and its companion Thunderbird.
Go back in time thanks to Wayback machine to the time that flame was written:
http://web.archive.org/web/20001218010700/http://www.mozilla.org/
"Mozilla 0.6 Released
Mozilla 0.6 is a milestone release based on the same branch as Netscape 6."
With such low UID I assume you have seen that disaster named Netscape 6. You haven't seen it totally if you were using a modern OS like Linux that time. You should be running Windows 98 to experience it totally
That is the "Mozilla" author speaks about and it is (thank God) dead.
Mozilla could achieve success when they finally admitted there is an issue with their product. Memory leaks will be really fixed when majority of Mozilla developers/supporters figure that people doesn't buy RAM to cover their programming mistakes and stop posting spoiled rich college kid message replies like "Buy more RAM" without figuring the "cheap chip" they mention could be someone's weekly income.
You will also figure most of people saying "memory leak" will say (or won't care to say) "it is fixed" when Firefox 3 uses native OS'es technologies to display data.
BTW while writing this message, Safari from OS X Leopard 10.5.1 uses 400 MB of RAM
Hope someone answers before I get modded into oblivion with the trolls
In our ideal World, Apple has lots of machines having freely installed (donated by vendor) Adobe, AVID, Cleaner stuff and they also have couple of top downloaded freeware/shareware. When they package new final build update, they are testing it against those very critical apps which is the core pro business of Apple to see if any obvious horrible failure happens. If it happens, they call/mail their internal contact from respective company to release a fix or help diagnosing issue.
Are we really making this up? Or is it "If it compiles, ship it" ?
I better tell again for Video pros: You should be using a secured (firewall, _offline_ virus scan,local network connected only) Apple machine with ONLY recommended, tested OS X build by your vendor. You aren't a iPhone or Apple TV user to jump to all updates. For example if you are a AVID professional user, you should check this page: http://www.avid.com/onlinesupport/supportcontent.asp?productID=97&contentID=9941&browse= .
See, they say:
Avid Xpress Pro 5.7.2 (Jun 07) OS 10.4.9 QuickTime 7.1.6
When professionals speak about "Quicktime breaking things", they don't mean they can't watch those HD trailers with that Apple Player, they are meaning Quicktime FRAMEWORK (aka lib, dll, vxd whatever) is broken.
If you can manually uninstall entire Quicktime (along with framework) even on Windows, say bye to AVID, half of Adobe Apps functionality.
There are 2 major classes of Video/Sound editors. "AVI Based" and "Quicktime (Mov) Based". Majority of real pro stuff is "Quicktime Based", Adobe Premiere Pro can be counted as "AVI based"
This is a open request from all those security "professional" sites, professional "support" sites.
1) If you don't know what Quicktime Framework means for media industry, DON'T suggest to remove it. Some super clueless admin or non technical may actually do it and that means a huge downtime. E.g. you may not be able to watch local news at 7 PM. "Quicktime on Production machines" means this: http://developer.apple.com/quicktime/ , not this: http://www.apple.com/quicktime/
2) Support sites: Please note in a VERY SERIOUS manner that downgrading Quicktime means making it open to all documented/undocumented issues and user/admin should really elevate the systems security (enable firewall, get commercial one etc) or if it is a real production machine, even disconnect it from Internet in hardware level.
By suggesting to downgrade Quicktime 7.4 (current) to earlier version, you are also suggesting that user will be open to these exploits. They are also all documented as the new update shippped.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=307301
For actual media professionals, admins: Please ask Adobe, AVID, Autodesk etc. before updating Quicktime or simply check their pages, forums. For AVID, you shouldn't be even running 10.4.11 yet. They recommend 10.4.10 for now. Not because they are old fashioned, the "run software update and click all updates" method is for ordinary end user, not you.
It's 1996, and I'm working at a university where the department IT guy is a rabid OS/2 fanatic. The whole department ran on Warp, but this brand new version of NT (4.0) has just come out with a Win95-like interface but decent internals, so the battle was on.
One day I wander down to the campus bookstore. They have copies of OS/2 in stock- the version with TCP/IP and a web browser was something like $200. Next to it was the development kit, in a plain box- $700.
On the other shelf is a copy of WinNT 4.0. $99. That $99 was the full version, and it included a full copy of Visual C++ as well.
IBM simply didn't care about the academic market at all. MS cares a *lot*- they learned from Apple that if you get people hooked earlier they are stuck with you for life.
A current example. IBM PPC970 (MP) is the PowerPC G5 which Apple abandoned because of "no mobile option". It is a very high performance CPU if coded right. The issue is, it really needs some very highly optimized compiler.As far as I know, Intel and AMD guys are helping Gcc guys in every single case to further optimize their compilers. We all see the degree of help Apple gets for XCode from Intel publicly.
The point is: IBM Still tries to sell XL Compiler for PPC using mainframe resellers as channels for $600! Also it has not been updated so it won't work with new XCode (as far as I figure as user). I am not speaking about entire XL Compiler tree (which includes AIX etc), they didn't bother to make XL Compiler for OSX some kind of freeware or something very cheap so we can donate to open source projects. In fact, they could donate it free to some scientific, graphics open source freeware. They didn't bother at all.
I heard from Apple developers that it is not some sort of "magic" thing but it really explains the attitude of IBM.
For EOL announcement (while I saw it sell for $600), http://www-306.ibm.com/software/awdtools/xlcpp/features/macosx/xlcpp-mac.html
It is IBM, they are showing they take petition serious and seriously answering it in physical form.
I remember getting OS/2 Warp 3 one week after its USA release in Istanbul along with 450 PAGES of Turkish manual which describes the system at insane levels of detail. It is 2008 now and I still remember it. That was one of the times I figured why they are called "Big Blue".
You really have some misconception of IBM's image. Typewriters? Some Lawyer with IBM logo printed papers answering on behalf of IBM?
They can license the right to use to Serenity systems but they don't "own" it totally. A clue about how deep MS ties is: HPFS is owned by MS, invented by own engineer. http://www.2ka.mipt.ru/~alexp/docs/programming/formats/hpfs.pdf
IBM also have a good clue how evil MS can be. MS did everything to undermine the OS/2, they didn't give a shit to Big Blue. They undermined their OWN OS, can you believe? I think IBM, being almost century old has enough experience with MS.
Let me give another example. http://versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/3046 (Mulberry) The author of it had to purchase his OWN CODE to make it open source. I also think he deserves more recognition for that.
As far as I remember, Pegasus had similar problems resulting from 3rd party frameworks but I don't follow Windows scene these times so I could be wrong.
There is likely code from other 3rd parties in there, and I expect that some of those companies simply aren't around any more, so resolving ownership in those cases may simply be too difficult, more trouble than it's worth, or just flat-out impossible.
Chip H. Even if all those companies setup a conference to sign a joint agreement that OS
Don't forget thousands of patent trolls waiting to see slightest stupid idea of them implemented one way or another. The target is huge, IBM, the big blue. If your junk makes slightest sense (in law), they won't bother and pay millions to settle it outside court. MS will be target too.
We speak about a OS which its filesystem was coded by a Microsoft engineer himself. Yes, the famous HFS (ages ahead of FAT) is a MS filesystem. For some people, NTFS is just a very major upgrade of HFS.