> As a consumer that is interested in actually watching TV the way it should be here in 2007/2008 I dont want your website, I want it in a way I can > download it and play it on my ipod or phone, not your crappy website.
Dude, it's 2007 - why can't your phone stream video? My smart phones since 2002 can stream video thanks to Symbian and Realplayer. Phones can stream video, "i"Phones can't:) In fact, phones supporting DVB-H can actually be called portable TVs too.
Hopefully that SDK announced will mean Helix/Real Player for iPhone. They already have significant expertise on ARM.
can you suggest an open source solution that the BBC can use instead of iPlayer that is not proprietary and works on Windows/Mac and Linux??? Just don't suggest any TV professional to use Ogg Theora format. They have given up VP3 (the actual format) some years ago.:)
There are 3 issues here:
1) Allergy to Real Networks who produces a media player down to AIX. Even after they opened entire source excluding codecs.l 2) Apple's Allergy to Linux/BSD and not producing Quicktime for those platforms. 3) Open Source Linux users allergy to closed source since Apple will want to keep Quicktime closed source binary.
So it is Flash. Flash container became standard and now people want Plan 9 support:)
Lets say I want to watch the World famous "Panorama" documentary from Istanbul.
"Sorry, this programme is only available to play in the UK (Why?)"
(yes, Why!?! indeed)
Explanation
"The BBC uses Geo-IP technology to identify where your are based on the location of your internet service provider (ISP). This ensures that only internet users in the UK can enjoy programmes on BBC iPlayer."
(Yes, make sure the people who can watch them with regular UHF TV set can pay for them!)
Further explanation: "Rights agreements mean that BBC iPlayer is only available to users in the UK. However, BBC Worldwide is working on an international version, which we will make available as soon as possible."
This is the usual MPAA/RIAA bullshit which you see all the time as a foreigner. The issue is: Content BELONGS to BBC, not a MPAA Hollywood movie company.
Are they (same gang pushed MS WMV) looking for a proof that BBC iPlayer Multiplatform is not needed and is a failure? Did Panorama producer call BBC in panic saying "Disable it to entire planet, I want them to download free torrents from pirate sites instead!" ?
It seems BBC is so mad about the feedback they got from their actual potential customers when they tried to pull a Windows Media Trick. Or... They -as many companies- see foreigners as potential thieves who will post torrent of their PAID CONTENT to Pirate sites.
$100 is a joke for us, people posting to Slashdot but their customers seem loving it.
I would pay $100/year for shell access to a XGrid enabled XServe Cluster, SSL enabled IMAP with Idle and SCP/rsync access but I am in 3% of population of 5% population. Apple doesn't care about me:)
Leave it to people purchasing it, it seems to fit their needs. Those are "Everything I use must be Apple, they rock" type of people and $100 could be joke for them.
Am I the only one that notices that Apple's response to every problem is a swift "let's delete this topic and pretend the problem doesn't exist"?.. Seems like bad business practise to me. It will be the same thing happening if same kind of issue is reported to Mozilla forums, Apache forums or anything. Security alerts should be sent to vendor directly and/or other vendors who may be interested. Not public. Even online games carry same rules. Try posting a thing like "This will sure crash your opponents machine on WoW" to WoW official forums, see what happens.
I am not defending Apple's ignorance and lack of security on such an expensive service but:
1) Did he post it to Apple bug reporter ( bugreporter.apple.com ) using "Security" from drop down menu? 2) Did he post it to security vendors (e.g. Intego would love this!) if Apple ignored the issue? 3) Did he post it to a lower profile mailing list such as Apple e-lists?
Publicly post a security issue to a general population, open web board which is intended for user to user support and get post deleted? Lets call Apple "bad guys" but lets not forget the security issues shouldn't be posted to general public. If he thinks he is punishing Apple, he is not doing it. Apple will continue to sell that overpriced thing to their die-hard users, the.Mac users (real victims) get further punished and risked instead.
Apple support forums are for people who wants semi-official support from Apple and they belong to Apple Inc./Admins. Usenet on the other hand is free, open and vendor neutral. If he posted same thing to Usenet, he would be flamed for same reasons though.
not a problem if you enable Private Browsing in Safari Private browsing means no cookies, no history, no downloads window/history. It is a bit overkill instead of Apple fixing the issue themselves. Also all should remember.Mac is not a free service, it is a very expensive online service.
(From Safari Help) When private browsing is turned on:
Webpages are not added to the history list.
The Downloads window is cleared so the name of anything you downloaded won't appear in the list. (To get rid of the downloaded item itself, you must delete it.)
Information isn't saved for AutoFill, including names and passwords.
Searches are not added to the pop-up menu in the Google search field.
Zero. The factually incorrect posts mostly cancel out the informative ones, and any knols left over are nullified by poor grammar and spelling. Slashdot is a blog allowing people to comment under story scoops, Slashdot does not claim to be a knowledge site or encyclopedia like Wikipedia does.
I have seen some great amount of information which was deleted from Wikipedia by some kids somehow got "Admin" status. I am personally looking elsewhere for information since that time. It is like CmdrTaco giving GNAA infinite Karma on some cases.
This could indeed happen on any system. I saw a Perl script in Linux just today that said ${directory}/file. The directory variable was empty and it tried to write to/file. Fortunately, it didn't have permissions to do anything damaging. Hopefully it would have been better written if it did run with those permissions.
Didn't Quake have an autoexec.bat file as a startup script? It can't happen on some systems like OS X.
There is no boot.ini -of course- but lets try deleting a system file necessary for booting
Ilgaz:etc ilgaz$ rm rc.common override rw-r--r-- root/wheel for rc.common?
That would happen.
Applications doesn't even need to care what are in root or system init directories since they are in/Applications , actually they are Directories looking like Applications. They just care about their own.app directory in/Applications .
Lets say they need to install/update a framework. Again, they will hit/Library/Frameworks , NOT/System/Library/Frameworks
It is a OS design issue, a lot deeper thing than game vendor (random victim) can fix. I call them victim since this happened on many other titles in one way or other.
Just a little Mod abuse here. Nice going. Ubuntu means horde of Digg Ubuntu fanatics get interested in topic, they also randomly get mod points UNTIL/. bans them from modding thanks to meta moderation.
I think it explains.
For example, I said a simple fact that Ubuntu doesn't officially support PowerPC, someone instantly sent my working HD-Video workstation to computer museum. That can't happen on any other kind of Linux. Someone (even including fans) would explain why it is not supported in polite terms.
Ubuntu's major problem is their fanatics and how they act on net. That issue instantly erases any credibility against commercial operating systems. I wonder what and who they will mod down when first signs of commercialism starts on their beloved distro. That PPC drop is a good sign for people wanting to see.
Has no one pointed out that the numbers are actually completely, utterly wrong? See Lubos and Thiagos (two high-ranking KDE and Qt devs) comments here:
In similar conditions KDE 3 consumed 97 MB on memory, whereas KDE 4 about 170 MB.
So really, it should be "KDE4 uses 75% more memory", which is actually incredibly lame, but doesn't make for as good a title. I'm absolutely amazed that usually cynical slashdot readers have accepted this so uncritically.
If you compare Opera 9.5 betas to Opera 9.2.4 , you will see they perform comically faster and better. One of the reasons everyone accepted could be the fact that KDE 3.x is Qt 3 app while KDE4 is Qt4 which uses everything natively. At least I thought "Of course, Qt 4" myself.
I can launch Konqueror via double clicking from OS X Finder, it is that native. For most people, native means less memory usage.
will be the earliest application. Remember when this was like e1394, or if you're sony i.Link. Those names never got any momentum, and they didn't push it. Heck, sony isn't too good at pushing standards anyway. Beta? Mini Disk? Memory Stick? Blueray has a chance.
Anyway, when apple calls it firewire2, then it'll get adopted. Lets hope their relations with Intel doesn't effect it. Intel isn't even on IEE1394 board. Firewire (400 and 800) is the reason why USB2 is still considered a joke in professional Video/Audio business for very legit reasons.
3200 standard is really needed in professional video business. Especially HD Field Cameras/Editing facilities need better bandwidth.
If Apple stays away from that standard, Sony should consider buying "Firewire" brand from Apple. i-link or IEE1394 really doesn't work. They should also make sure every Apple has option to adopt that standard, down to making PCI-(X) Cards for cheap prices.
Uh... yeah you can. OSX Leopard and Ubuntu both run great on Intel CPU's... and can dual boot. The days of PowerPC are over on the desktop (unless Amiga returns from its current purgatory), the only thing you can't do with OSX that you can with Ubuntu is install on arbitrary hardware. At least, not officially. Go to versiontracker.com , there are only 10-12 "Intel only" titles and all are in fact Windows binaries running under cider. In fact, it gives great clue about who can code and who can't.
I am not replacing a Video workstation. I thought it is generally "Apple" to be blamed for supporting fashion CPUs only. I am not buying a Xeon based workstation over my working Quad G5 just because some spoiled Ubuntu idiots think it is old fashioned.
Ever wonder why companies, home users don't trust to Linux and go buy $130 Leopard or $something Vista? Companies promise support and they don't discriminate CPUs.
Leopard works with pure 64bit capabilities under G5 with some auto threading. I couldn't care less about a spoiled south African billionaires Linux. If I need Linux, there is Debian, they don't follow "CPU Fashion" that much.
Ubuntu people have abandoned PowerPC from official distro including G5, Apple introduced pure 64bit OS X for G5 with release of Leopard. If you upgrade to Leopard, you will have a pure 64bit capable OS which also happens to run 32bit stuff just fine.
Their reason was "Lack of new hardware". That was really noted by PowerPC users, not just iMac G5 people, XServe G5 and Quad/Dual G5 Workstation users too.
You can't compare OS X Leopard to Ubuntu Linux for a simple reason. It doesn't exist "officially" on PowerPC Mac. Ubuntu showed something real bad for its image after that decision.
Of course, there is always real Debian, Yellow Dog and others for PPC people.
Except that you believe in Easter Bunny. OOXML has a spec, like, behave something that we don't have the specs for and won't get the details. Recursion to the unknown. Read up a bit on it and you'll find out. [Yes, you as well, you the moderator who thinks this as 'insightful'] 'Provably' means that you have the specs, and 'provably' means that MS implements the specs. Neither will be the case, since you don't have them, and they will not be implemented (at least not all 6000+b pages), you're screwed. Egg in your face, for believing those grandma's stories. Plus, they recently shifted the maintenance back from ISO to ECMA. That is, to a puppet of theirs. "ECMA, am I doing right ?" "Microsoft, you are doing wonderfully !" If you listen to MS and people on MS payroll, Windows Media is also an "open spec". I am glad the industry (especially TV/Satellite) is not buying it and they are keeping with true open/documented standards such as MPEG.
Look to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, MS VC-1 managed to get into them while there is perfectly suited and designed for this purpose (scalability) H264. Please note that "Sony" giant which is absolutely God on professional video is fighting with MSFT Gang (Hd-Dvd) risking billions but somehow they accept VC-1 to be part of Blu-Ray standard they built themselves.
MS figures they will lose.doc monopoly/dictatorship and they are in panic. For the "open" VC-1 standard, check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VC-1#Encoding_software . Encoding in the "open standard" requires Windows while OS X and Linux are very serious players in professional video scene.
MS is still not taken serious on professional video/audio but things are very different on Office. If that fake open standard manages to get validated somehow, industry will keep freezing another decade.
My how things change over time. Back in the day, Novell shipped solutions which showed MS products like someone's first BASIC program. People purchased Suse Linux just because they loved their attitude and level of support, not because MS threatened them with FUD.
I got Fink here on OS X and every time a Gnome thing compiles, I see some.NET or C# references, I am glad that they are usually things like "--disable C#"
Things really change fast in IT scene. There are people who are actually afraid one day Gnome may require Mono (.NET) to compile and they would have to move to other environments. I heard some stuff already requires it but not sure, I am away from Linux for years. (guess the reason!)
The day Gnome or anything related to Gnome requires anything having something to do with MSFT fake open source stuff, I am declining to install that to my tiny, rarely used OS X Unix/sw directory.
No one uses it, yet. It's not a pragmatic standard, and it's definitely not an "official" standard (as in ISO).
More likely than not, if I sent out DOCX files from my business, I would be asked to send either PDF or DOC.
Until OOXML is ubiquitous, which will not happen for several years, there is no reason to not push ODF instead, particularly because ODF's got quite a bit of momentum internationally. Especially if the ODF plugin for MS Office continues to work properly; there won't be a reason to switch to DOCX at all.
It is more than remotely realistic to have an office without OOXML support. Microsoft's latest offering for the Mac doesn't have it. The vast majority of Office users in the world don't have it. Competing software doesn't have it yet.
OOXML will not become a reality for several years, and hopefully, will never become a reality. If you have patience and interest in such things, check Novell's financial status and their "message board" at Yahoo Finance etc.
Especially before the MSFT "alliance". As I said, you must have patience:)
Novell sold out for a good reason. They were going down.
As for Suse? Things change and I don't think any IT/Enterprise decision maker would see it as a true alternative to MSFT solutions. In fact, on IBM Land, I don't think anyone would opt-in for Suse Enterprise over AIX or Redhat.
Suse, Novell etc. are things of past. They aren't the companies/distros we all knew and respected. I think people have hard time accepting the sad facts.
Mac users will always get away because they actually buy MS Office (forget Slashdot, digg etc. comments). MS makes huge money over Mac and it will grow after the "business friendly" decisions by Apple. For example, MS actually ships UNIX software when they ship MS Office for OS X Leopard.
I have real hard time to understand the Linux/FreeBSD using people defending MS things so there must be some monetary reason for it.
It is basic. As Apple removed most of deep level Carbon bindings, anything which will work natively on OS X Leopard are basically Unix software with Cocoa (like mega-openstep) Framework bindings. If you check how MSN Messenger works for years, it is one of most Unix-like Application. GUI and Daemon are separate.
So, MS can ship: Instant messengers, complete Office packages, advanced utilities as Remote desktop running under Unix. They have expertise and know-how enough to ship Virtual PC which even runs under Leopard without any alerts.
Did they ship ANYTHING for Linux in their entire history? That should explain their stance to anyone.
I wonder if there is anything worse than they did to their customers? Is it the USA cable monopoly situation in Canada too? Can't people switch to other ISP right away?
If I heard something like that, first thing I would do is switching to SSL in every occasion, even on webmail sign in. Of course, one wonders whether he/she should pay for such paranoia.
You know what? There is a software vendor which has a dark history and they got busted by Mac nerds (which they didn't expect) when they tried to bundle first ever Mac spyware with their (unfortunately) successful application. After they got busted and forums started to get heated up, they removed the junk control panel and they explained: "We were TESTING things".
Free as in Linux? No, free as in Microsoft! We have a new invention in hand. The first Spyware Operating System.
I would expect anything from MS but this thing really amazed and shocked me. Nothing less. MSFT have really disconnected itself from reality.
This is a time which average user BUYS a good anti spyware for $30 and swears at their software vendor (can be Adobe even) if any application connects to Internet without their permission even for a innocent thing as update checks.
Sounds like the Vista launch, pushed back a little further with each test version. Maybe its better for the KDE team to set a date like July 2008 and surprise everybody when they are ready to release it in January? As a person watching the process list on OS X Leopard (which costs,unlike KDE) and being amazed at syslogd hitting 100%, games perform half as fast, I like to congratulate KDE team for showing the professionalism which MS and Apple lacks recently.
I think this will pay off in long term. Everyone (including companies,IT pros) will know they release the stuff when it is truly ready. Not just "if it compiles, ship it" or they are effected by Digg etc. community at all.
And your changes are nullified by those same 8'th graders. Yes, they marked a mail company (one of most innovative) for SPAM just because some user described their unique features, accused one of legendary developers I accidentally know of "changing the history". In fact some other high profile developer can be responsible for that.
They have setup some closed group of "pseudo intellectual" cult there. Not surprised of that mailing list. I bet there is some invisible/secure IRC channel too.
That same #wikipedia that bans people for posting chat logs? Great company you keep. If you post any IRC channels chatlogs to web except 1-2 liner "bash.org" friendly, funny stuff, you will get banned.
I don't see a problem with that. I am not defending Wiki either, I personally boycott them for a long time. If they banned anyone for posting IRC logs to web without any permission, they are right though.
I must be pessimist these days but how does this compare to Mozilla foundations close ties to their number 1 "donator" Google Inc. and breach of user privacy planned for Firefox 3 by the excuse of "protecting user from threats"?
There are 2 dozens of comparable services from other companies including completely open, community based OpenDNS "phishtank".
For MS or even Apple, for a company, their stockholders good is more important than their paying customers. Do you think Apple thinks about their "Users" while making Google search default on Safari 3 for example? Along with referrer? You can't even change the search engine without hacking Safari resources.
I am more interested in "non profit organizations" who tries to make favor to their large donators on every chance they find along with "we are protecting user" excuse.
I see Apple.com... Where's Microsoft.com? Interesting is the Adobe. Adobe was comparable to a small computer shop at that time as far as they say and they registered their domain. Adobe took off with Apple embracing the postscript based on the Macworld article I saw recently.
"Three years later, in 1985, desktop publishing was unleashed when Warnock and Geschke teamed up with Steve Jobs to create a printer based on that computer language--the Apple LaserWriter with Adobe PostScript-- and that took advantage of the Mac's graphic interface. "
About Microsoft? I think people started to forget. MSFT thought the "Internet" will never take off and people will somehow get locked to their closed MSN Network. That is the reason of delay on IE 1.0 to ship (it was SOLD,inside Plus '95 pack) and Netscape took off.
They're public channels, why would anyone expect the conversations therein to be private? Heck, I run a loggerbot on the channels I op -- of course, the nick of that loggerbot is "GLoggerBot", so I guess it's not quite the same... They are "public" to the participants in the room (which includes your bot,as channel op) and nobody else. The "room" belongs to the channel operators and participants. Everything else is spying. It is not ethical. Technical possibility doesn't make it ethical.
Say what you want, but the masses aren't running to IRC anymore. It's Jabber, MSN, Yahoo chat etc that are being used. Now you can answer GP with smart questions like 'it's solved at the client level' and while you are right, the point is that there is a lot more development effort aimed at the IM market. Jabber (except conference), MSN, Yahoo are good for P2P communication, single person to single. Yahoo "chat rooms" are a disgrace and nothing else.
IRC is the de facto standard for conference chat since it is true multi platform, documented, can be truly secured (SSL) and it is extendible through "services".
I have never seen a MSN "chatroom" myself. In fact MSN guys attempted to run a IRC network once but as they are alergic to everything can be run on non Windows platforms, they gave up.
The IM Market hasn't progressed one step and in fact, it is going backwards. The "Offline IM" MS is bragging was introduced in stone ages of ICQ protocol. It _is_ closed standard except Jabber, the GAIM/Pidgin guys will never ever be able to provide same functionality MSN provides. Jabber is still not popular except corporate. MS can change couple of bits in packet headers and there goes your "modern" chatroom if you don't run XP/Vista.
The real alternative to IRC and it is years ahead is the Jabber conference protocol but it still didn't take off. If people keeps choosing closed junk over open protocols and keeps monkeying with MSN/AIM, it won't take off of course.
Slashdot Mirror
> download it and play it on my ipod or phone, not your crappy website.
Dude, it's 2007 - why can't your phone stream video? My smart phones since 2002 can stream video thanks to Symbian and Realplayer. Phones can stream video, "i"Phones can't
Hopefully that SDK announced will mean Helix/Real Player for iPhone. They already have significant expertise on ARM.
can you suggest an open source solution that the BBC can use instead of iPlayer that is not proprietary and works on Windows/Mac and Linux??? Just don't suggest any TV professional to use Ogg Theora format. They have given up VP3 (the actual format) some years ago.
There are 3 issues here:
1) Allergy to Real Networks who produces a media player down to AIX. Even after they opened entire source excluding codecs.l
2) Apple's Allergy to Linux/BSD and not producing Quicktime for those platforms.
3) Open Source Linux users allergy to closed source since Apple will want to keep Quicktime closed source binary.
So it is Flash. Flash container became standard and now people want Plan 9 support
Lets say I want to watch the World famous "Panorama" documentary from Istanbul.
"Sorry, this programme is only available to play in the UK (Why?)"
(yes, Why!?! indeed)
Explanation
"The BBC uses Geo-IP technology to identify where your are based on the location of your internet service provider (ISP). This ensures that only internet users in the UK can enjoy programmes on BBC iPlayer."
(Yes, make sure the people who can watch them with regular UHF TV set can pay for them!)
Further explanation:
"Rights agreements mean that BBC iPlayer is only available to users in the UK. However, BBC Worldwide is working on an international version, which we will make available as soon as possible."
This is the usual MPAA/RIAA bullshit which you see all the time as a foreigner. The issue is: Content BELONGS to BBC, not a MPAA Hollywood movie company.
Are they (same gang pushed MS WMV) looking for a proof that BBC iPlayer Multiplatform is not needed and is a failure? Did Panorama producer call BBC in panic saying "Disable it to entire planet, I want them to download free torrents from pirate sites instead!" ?
It seems BBC is so mad about the feedback they got from their actual potential customers when they tried to pull a Windows Media Trick. Or... They -as many companies- see foreigners as potential thieves who will post torrent of their PAID CONTENT to Pirate sites.
$100 is a joke for us, people posting to Slashdot but their customers seem loving it.
:)
I would pay $100/year for shell access to a XGrid enabled XServe Cluster, SSL enabled IMAP with Idle and SCP/rsync access but I am in 3% of population of 5% population. Apple doesn't care about me
Leave it to people purchasing it, it seems to fit their needs. Those are "Everything I use must be Apple, they rock" type of people and $100 could be joke for them.
I am not defending Apple's ignorance and lack of security on such an expensive service but:
1) Did he post it to Apple bug reporter ( bugreporter.apple.com ) using "Security" from drop down menu?
2) Did he post it to security vendors (e.g. Intego would love this!) if Apple ignored the issue?
3) Did he post it to a lower profile mailing list such as Apple e-lists?
Publicly post a security issue to a general population, open web board which is intended for user to user support and get post deleted? Lets call Apple "bad guys" but lets not forget the security issues shouldn't be posted to general public. If he thinks he is punishing Apple, he is not doing it. Apple will continue to sell that overpriced thing to their die-hard users, the
Apple support forums are for people who wants semi-official support from Apple and they belong to Apple Inc./Admins. Usenet on the other hand is free, open and vendor neutral. If he posted same thing to Usenet, he would be flamed for same reasons though.
(From Safari Help)
When private browsing is turned on:
Webpages are not added to the history list.
The Downloads window is cleared so the name of anything you downloaded won't appear in the list. (To get rid of the downloaded item itself, you must delete it.)
Information isn't saved for AutoFill, including names and passwords.
Searches are not added to the pop-up menu in the Google search field.
Cookies are deleted.
Zero. The factually incorrect posts mostly cancel out the informative ones, and any knols left over are nullified by poor grammar and spelling. Slashdot is a blog allowing people to comment under story scoops, Slashdot does not claim to be a knowledge site or encyclopedia like Wikipedia does.
I have seen some great amount of information which was deleted from Wikipedia by some kids somehow got "Admin" status. I am personally looking elsewhere for information since that time. It is like CmdrTaco giving GNAA infinite Karma on some cases.
Didn't Quake have an autoexec.bat file as a startup script? It can't happen on some systems like OS X.
There is no boot.ini -of course- but lets try deleting a system file necessary for booting
Ilgaz:etc ilgaz$ rm rc.common
override rw-r--r-- root/wheel for rc.common?
That would happen.
Applications doesn't even need to care what are in root or system init directories since they are in
Lets say they need to install/update a framework. Again, they will hit
It is a OS design issue, a lot deeper thing than game vendor (random victim) can fix. I call them victim since this happened on many other titles in one way or other.
I think it explains.
For example, I said a simple fact that Ubuntu doesn't officially support PowerPC, someone instantly sent my working HD-Video workstation to computer museum. That can't happen on any other kind of Linux. Someone (even including fans) would explain why it is not supported in polite terms.
Ubuntu's major problem is their fanatics and how they act on net. That issue instantly erases any credibility against commercial operating systems. I wonder what and who they will mod down when first signs of commercialism starts on their beloved distro. That PPC drop is a good sign for people wanting to see.
Has no one pointed out that the numbers are actually completely, utterly wrong? See Lubos and Thiagos (two high-ranking KDE and Qt devs) comments here:
http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/3138
See the original authors retraction, here:
http://www.jarzebski.pl/read/kde-3-5-vs-4-0-round-two.so
So really, it should be "KDE4 uses 75% more memory", which is actually incredibly lame, but doesn't make for as good a title. I'm absolutely amazed that usually cynical slashdot readers have accepted this so uncritically.
If you compare Opera 9.5 betas to Opera 9.2.4 , you will see they perform comically faster and better. One of the reasons everyone accepted could be the fact that KDE 3.x is Qt 3 app while KDE4 is Qt4 which uses everything natively. At least I thought "Of course, Qt 4" myself.I can launch Konqueror via double clicking from OS X Finder, it is that native. For most people, native means less memory usage.
Anyway, when apple calls it firewire2, then it'll get adopted. Lets hope their relations with Intel doesn't effect it. Intel isn't even on IEE1394 board. Firewire (400 and 800) is the reason why USB2 is still considered a joke in professional Video/Audio business for very legit reasons.
3200 standard is really needed in professional video business. Especially HD Field Cameras/Editing facilities need better bandwidth.
If Apple stays away from that standard, Sony should consider buying "Firewire" brand from Apple. i-link or IEE1394 really doesn't work. They should also make sure every Apple has option to adopt that standard, down to making PCI-(X) Cards for cheap prices.
I am not replacing a Video workstation. I thought it is generally "Apple" to be blamed for supporting fashion CPUs only. I am not buying a Xeon based workstation over my working Quad G5 just because some spoiled Ubuntu idiots think it is old fashioned.
Ever wonder why companies, home users don't trust to Linux and go buy $130 Leopard or $something Vista? Companies promise support and they don't discriminate CPUs.
Leopard works with pure 64bit capabilities under G5 with some auto threading. I couldn't care less about a spoiled south African billionaires Linux. If I need Linux, there is Debian, they don't follow "CPU Fashion" that much.
Ubuntu people have abandoned PowerPC from official distro including G5, Apple introduced pure 64bit OS X for G5 with release of Leopard. If you upgrade to Leopard, you will have a pure 64bit capable OS which also happens to run 32bit stuff just fine.
Their reason was "Lack of new hardware". That was really noted by PowerPC users, not just iMac G5 people, XServe G5 and Quad/Dual G5 Workstation users too.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PowerPCReview
You can't compare OS X Leopard to Ubuntu Linux for a simple reason. It doesn't exist "officially" on PowerPC Mac. Ubuntu showed something real bad for its image after that decision.
Of course, there is always real Debian, Yellow Dog and others for PPC people.
OOXML has a spec, like, behave something that we don't have the specs for and won't get the details. Recursion to the unknown. Read up a bit on it and you'll find out. [Yes, you as well, you the moderator who thinks this as 'insightful']
'Provably' means that you have the specs, and 'provably' means that MS implements the specs. Neither will be the case, since you don't have them, and they will not be implemented (at least not all 6000+b pages), you're screwed. Egg in your face, for believing those grandma's stories.
Plus, they recently shifted the maintenance back from ISO to ECMA. That is, to a puppet of theirs. "ECMA, am I doing right ?" "Microsoft, you are doing wonderfully !" If you listen to MS and people on MS payroll, Windows Media is also an "open spec". I am glad the industry (especially TV/Satellite) is not buying it and they are keeping with true open/documented standards such as MPEG.
Look to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, MS VC-1 managed to get into them while there is perfectly suited and designed for this purpose (scalability) H264. Please note that "Sony" giant which is absolutely God on professional video is fighting with MSFT Gang (Hd-Dvd) risking billions but somehow they accept VC-1 to be part of Blu-Ray standard they built themselves.
MS figures they will lose
MS is still not taken serious on professional video/audio but things are very different on Office. If that fake open standard manages to get validated somehow, industry will keep freezing another decade.
My how things change over time. Back in the day, Novell shipped solutions which showed MS products like someone's first BASIC program. People purchased Suse Linux just because they loved their attitude and level of support, not because MS threatened them with FUD.
I got Fink here on OS X and every time a Gnome thing compiles, I see some
Things really change fast in IT scene. There are people who are actually afraid one day Gnome may require Mono (.NET) to compile and they would have to move to other environments. I heard some stuff already requires it but not sure, I am away from Linux for years. (guess the reason!)
The day Gnome or anything related to Gnome requires anything having something to do with MSFT fake open source stuff, I am declining to install that to my tiny, rarely used OS X Unix
No one uses it, yet. It's not a pragmatic standard, and it's definitely not an "official" standard (as in ISO).
More likely than not, if I sent out DOCX files from my business, I would be asked to send either PDF or DOC.
Until OOXML is ubiquitous, which will not happen for several years, there is no reason to not push ODF instead, particularly because ODF's got quite a bit of momentum internationally. Especially if the ODF plugin for MS Office continues to work properly; there won't be a reason to switch to DOCX at all.
It is more than remotely realistic to have an office without OOXML support. Microsoft's latest offering for the Mac doesn't have it. The vast majority of Office users in the world don't have it. Competing software doesn't have it yet.
OOXML will not become a reality for several years, and hopefully, will never become a reality. If you have patience and interest in such things, check Novell's financial status and their "message board" at Yahoo Finance etc.
Especially before the MSFT "alliance". As I said, you must have patience
Novell sold out for a good reason. They were going down.
As for Suse? Things change and I don't think any IT/Enterprise decision maker would see it as a true alternative to MSFT solutions. In fact, on IBM Land, I don't think anyone would opt-in for Suse Enterprise over AIX or Redhat.
Suse, Novell etc. are things of past. They aren't the companies/distros we all knew and respected. I think people have hard time accepting the sad facts.
Mac users will always get away because they actually buy MS Office (forget Slashdot, digg etc. comments). MS makes huge money over Mac and it will grow after the "business friendly" decisions by Apple. For example, MS actually ships UNIX software when they ship MS Office for OS X Leopard.
I have real hard time to understand the Linux/FreeBSD using people defending MS things so there must be some monetary reason for it.
It is basic. As Apple removed most of deep level Carbon bindings, anything which will work natively on OS X Leopard are basically Unix software with Cocoa (like mega-openstep) Framework bindings. If you check how MSN Messenger works for years, it is one of most Unix-like Application. GUI and Daemon are separate.
So, MS can ship: Instant messengers, complete Office packages, advanced utilities as Remote desktop running under Unix. They have expertise and know-how enough to ship Virtual PC which even runs under Leopard without any alerts.
Did they ship ANYTHING for Linux in their entire history? That should explain their stance to anyone.
I wonder if there is anything worse than they did to their customers? Is it the USA cable monopoly situation in Canada too? Can't people switch to other ISP right away?
If I heard something like that, first thing I would do is switching to SSL in every occasion, even on webmail sign in. Of course, one wonders whether he/she should pay for such paranoia.
You know what? There is a software vendor which has a dark history and they got busted by Mac nerds (which they didn't expect) when they tried to bundle first ever Mac spyware with their (unfortunately) successful application. After they got busted and forums started to get heated up, they removed the junk control panel and they explained: "We were TESTING things".
That is why I couldn't stand not saying these.
I would expect anything from MS but this thing really amazed and shocked me. Nothing less. MSFT have really disconnected itself from reality.
This is a time which average user BUYS a good anti spyware for $30 and swears at their software vendor (can be Adobe even) if any application connects to Internet without their permission even for a innocent thing as update checks.
I think this will pay off in long term. Everyone (including companies,IT pros) will know they release the stuff when it is truly ready. Not just "if it compiles, ship it" or they are effected by Digg etc. community at all.
They have setup some closed group of "pseudo intellectual" cult there. Not surprised of that mailing list. I bet there is some invisible/secure IRC channel too.
I don't see a problem with that. I am not defending Wiki either, I personally boycott them for a long time. If they banned anyone for posting IRC logs to web without any permission, they are right though.
I must be pessimist these days but how does this compare to Mozilla foundations close ties to their number 1 "donator" Google Inc. and breach of user privacy planned for Firefox 3 by the excuse of "protecting user from threats"?
Firefox, if they don't give up insisting... Will send every single URL user visits to Google Inc. to prevent "phishing" by DEFAULT. See: http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/09/25/1622229.shtml
There are 2 dozens of comparable services from other companies including completely open, community based OpenDNS "phishtank".
For MS or even Apple, for a company, their stockholders good is more important than their paying customers. Do you think Apple thinks about their "Users" while making Google search default on Safari 3 for example? Along with referrer? You can't even change the search engine without hacking Safari resources.
I am more interested in "non profit organizations" who tries to make favor to their large donators on every chance they find along with "we are protecting user" excuse.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/09/11/adobe25/index.php
"Three years later, in 1985, desktop publishing was unleashed when Warnock and Geschke teamed up with Steve Jobs to create a printer based on that computer language--the Apple LaserWriter with Adobe PostScript-- and that took advantage of the Mac's graphic interface. "
About Microsoft? I think people started to forget. MSFT thought the "Internet" will never take off and people will somehow get locked to their closed MSN Network. That is the reason of delay on IE 1.0 to ship (it was SOLD,inside Plus '95 pack) and Netscape took off.
IRC is the de facto standard for conference chat since it is true multi platform, documented, can be truly secured (SSL) and it is extendible through "services".
I have never seen a MSN "chatroom" myself. In fact MSN guys attempted to run a IRC network once but as they are alergic to everything can be run on non Windows platforms, they gave up.
The IM Market hasn't progressed one step and in fact, it is going backwards. The "Offline IM" MS is bragging was introduced in stone ages of ICQ protocol. It _is_ closed standard except Jabber, the GAIM/Pidgin guys will never ever be able to provide same functionality MSN provides. Jabber is still not popular except corporate. MS can change couple of bits in packet headers and there goes your "modern" chatroom if you don't run XP/Vista.
The real alternative to IRC and it is years ahead is the Jabber conference protocol but it still didn't take off. If people keeps choosing closed junk over open protocols and keeps monkeying with MSN/AIM, it won't take off of course.