I have 780 random passwords which the very high risk ones changes weekly automatically thanks to 1Password which integrated to all native OS X browsers and Firefox.
Firefox developers should get a trial of it to see what they miss by not using system keychain. Opera too. In fact, Opera supported the keychain and switched to Wand.dat for no reason.
It shouldn't support Mac Keychain as well as it didn't support Colorsync for years. It should never, ever ship with a spotlight indexer too.
You know, they hate such system wide, free to use, documented OS X features. The OS X Firefox should never be better with more features than Windows or (God forbid) Linux Firefox.
So Opera can't be better than Firefox or any other browser on certain aspect for what reason?
You should see my BS meter when I see someone at/. bitches about Opera and I am not a Opera Desktop user, I use Safari with 1Password and I don't really know 99% of my passwords at all.
It is backed by a gigantic dotcom giant which is de facto standard search tool. It is fairly safe to call it major browser since the day it got shipped as non beta.
Just put "Google Chrome" link to Google.com index, see what happens:)
I couldn't test it (I am on PPC) but I tested near everything claiming 3D concept of interface even including the Linux ones I built from source.
If Apple is the company which made a Mach/NeXT/FreeBSD/BSD Lite and even MacOS mixture "easiest used Desktop ever", I wonder if they would be the ones to make a really usable 3d desktop.
There is another patent from Apple about gestures being done without touching the screen surface. It was a story recently. When you mix both, something promising may happen.
J2ME security model, Symbian Security model which nears a billion installed base wouldn't do a mistake like that and yet there is no "Nokia Store" prison or "Sun Store" lock in.
It can't be used as excuse for Apple draconian policies. Apple's security policy on iPhone is: Nobody should never, ever compete with their iTunes on device.
They should buy a Symbian S60 or even a modern J2ME handset and see how strict you gotta be on communications network which user pays for bytes. Google embraced and extended J2ME but passed its sandbox/security model?
Everyone keeps hating Symbian and J2ME security model but it seems as the only way to make best of both open competition and security. Nokia and others learned it very hard and expensive way.
My new principle is, I won't buy a OS X antivirus until Kaspersky/F-Secure ships their products which will detect real threats and I won't take Eee PC serious until Apple releases a similar thing.
If you know Nokia 9xxx series and recent E90 and announced N97, you can understand why I can't take Eee PC bandwagon serious. A E90 will do a lot more than any Eee PC and it has a OS which was designed to work in such form and usage. I have like 2-3 months uptime on a Nokia 9300 doing everything, device doesn't even have native shutdown or restart functionality.
Lenovo, Dell and HP can do it in future (or now) because they have huge factories, all their understanding of a computer is still something you can install Windows somehow and run it.
Some tip for Eee PC. Go to a store and find some Eee PC running XP, right click on taskbar and run "task monitor". You will feel sorry for that poor Atom chip when you see the processes. If Apple has a OS in hand which just needs good memory (~1-2 GB) to run at almost zero CPU and they don't ship a Eee PC like thing, they must know something. Steve Jobs is still right on his remark about Tablet PC, "The form is wrong".
OS X has big ass NeXT Dock (crippled a bit,see real one on WindowMaker) since it is a full object oriented operating system down to its own Objective C and Frameworks.
MS still emulates OS X Dock with.lnk etc. tiny files and it still has no idea about objects natively. For Windows Taskbar, IE is there because it has ie.lnk file to read. For Apple, Safari is a link to a filesystem executable object that can handle html files and urls. E.g. you can move Safari.app from its own Applications dir and it will still launch or you can drag a browser object to Safari icon to view it.
They put a thing same size and good looking (even better?) as OS X Dock and yet plain ignore the real thing.
The only thing which goes even beyond that object madness is OS/2 Workspace shell and funnily, it has MS code in it so IBM can't share it with OSS community.
For MS, Internet (TCP/IP) is still something which can't run alone.
On a Machine with not TCP/IP installed, run "Internet Setup Wizard" or something. You will see it installs Client for MS Networks, File and Printer sharing for MS Networks and TCP/IP (thanks for not forgetting).
MS can't admit people may connect to TCP/IP bare network and become "connected". They have to install MS Networks junk. While not bad as Steve Gibson claims, it also opens port 139 and FILTERs it with a Firewall. Lets not forget the famous 135 which you may still see on your firewall/router logs. Blaster is still alive.
And we sit here arguing why Windows can't be saved.
I bet they didn't get calls from whining big, old fashion coding companies about their compatibility is broken or their 100.000 installed VB6 apps doesn't launch. Lets not forget the famous $10 adapter making bunch whining about driver model.
That is the magic, that is what happened between the great promised Vista and real Vista. I bet it happens right now.
I suggest it since I know the user profile of Wordpad and Write (yes, true) using people. They just want a fast Word processor to do everyday stuff and some even uses for big text only things.
Abiword is both. It is both massively backwards compatible and it has real word processor features which MS would never dare to put or it would kill Word sales. Apple has cut some Textedit features too, MacOS one was better I heard.
It has become a huge PR scheme lately. E.g. even Nokia thinks they better don't bundle any games, apps with their N97 micro laptop.
While OS X is not really effected by apps being "there", Apple claims same stuff on Snow Leopard and tricks users. There is also a collective hate against PPC users (who doesn't upgrade) by Intel purists. They think PPC portion of code in Universal binary somehow "slows down" their system. That is never the case. If I found out "Intel" code slowed down my OS X as PPC user, I would got rid of Apple for rest of my life.
At least Apple has some big (and real) reasons about why Snow Leopard will beat hell out of previous OS X in performance as pure 64bit on x86/ Quicktime X framework, lack of deep level Carbon and of course OpenCL and Grand Central stuff.
I keep seeing "Windows 7 is faster" but how is it faster? E.g. like rewritten and MS got rid of the performance killing level backwards compatibility or some high end Windows utils installed way of faster? I am afraid the latter is true.
You can see what MS understands from Modular lately.
Just install.NET 3.5 SP1 to a clean windows installation and see what modularly got installed. We were calling Java bulky right?
It installs.NET 2.0 SP1,.NET 3.0 SP1, add 3-5 security updates and still leaves.NET 1.0 unpatched so you head to windows update for another 1.1 update.
Worse is, they do every trick on the book to hide the true space.NET occupies while poor Java naively reports a whopping (!) 130 MB. Also.NET also does things behind users back like compilation after install on next reboot, in another user name, hidden from a bit technical user not knowing "show all users processes"
I gave.NET example on purpose since it is supposed to be coded in new way of MS. We see how infected it is with MS traditions already.
I don't buy both Windows 7 is fast or even "Snow Leopard is amazing fast". Lets see them both when real life usage happens. I installed OS/2 Warp 4 to Virtual PC recently, it beats everything even including OS X leopard on an emulated CPU. You know why? Because it is not actually used:) No apps or real life usage.
Windows will be fast when MS finally admits Unix model was right, they get rid of that registry thing, they don't excuse idiotic programming, excuse massive hacks without any future guarantee.
Re:This article should be tagged "nostalgia"
on
Slackware 12.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
You would be surprised how many large workstation, server installations use Slackware. A very big example could be weatherunderground.com
I am on OS X and I still use my knowledge from Slackware. If I had to use a x86/Linux, it would be either Slackware or Debian.
no background allowance, no allowance of integrating to system, no allowance of "duplicating functionality", no allowance of interpreting.
iPhone (official) apps are indeed plugins. They have less power than a completely unsigned J2ME app which gets the ultimate sandbox punishment from java security model.
OS X and the entire suite of Mac apps are designed in a way to never, ever bug the user (designer) while he is working on a project. Windows always had colour management, at least Adobe etc. pro apps installed their own colour management.
Once the designer gets "Updates available for your OS, click here to install them" stealing the focus, Windows loses. The magic of OS X is, it is a Unix/NeXT OS but can be still used as "cooperative multitasking" (politely, not multi tasking) machine. That is what designers love.
Either they are insane cult members or they are recently switched to Mac people. Perhaps they are ones who never coded a single commercial quality app in their lives.
I use Mr. Hockenberry'es code, iPulse which is a design miracle for 5 years straight. It is a system monitoring tool and it runs whenever my system is up. Not a single crash, memory leak or anything. It is currently selling for $12.95, I guess I paid the same price.
What if he hired a Cocoa beginner developer who had no experience, the massive amounts of "hacks" which iPulse target user profile uses, no idea about how long will the app be running and shipped it for $5?
I hope the "overpaid" developers will never cease to exist. That is what makes OS X and its Application availability (in terms of quality, not quantity) so good.
What they need is slowly learning Symbian C++ (especially after open source) and slowly start to ship their apps in _same quality_ to Symbian. Windows Mobile seems way harder for a Cocoa developer since it is all.NET stuff it seems.
When some of top quality apps ship of Symbian too, Apple won't be that comfortable with their decisions. A developer may say "So you don't handle the comment abuse? Remove my app from store".
If they all sit and code iPhone only apps, they give great power to Apple about their products.
Imagine coding something like http://www.quickoffice.com/ and Apple somehow decides "iPhone enterprise edition" and triggers kill switch on your app using an excuse like "but it does do excel macros, it is against rules".
The real limiting factor is iPhone community which is totally unhealthy. "Cry me a river" etc. type crap comments from people who doesn't even have a clue about what developing a professional application is or who Hockenberry and Icon Factory is.
It seems Symbian will be my mobile operating system for many years. Not like it is great, it has a huge, democratic community who doesn't shoot the messenger. Also a healthy competition between commercial apps, freeware and even open source. It is all up to user to pick that.sis or.sisx or even.jar file from web browser.
I also blame iPhone only developers. They should keep releasing their stuff for Symbian and even Windows Mobile too. Relying on App Store and iPhone really looks like risky especially with such community.
It is in fact re-inventing J2ME in Google way. I still fail to understand the point of Android rather than being re-inventing an already invented and successful (Look to getjar.com scene, numbers) J2ME.
Programmers demand real C and C++ to code bigger, commercial apps. iPhone, Symbian, Windows Mobile offers it. For "write once and ship for millions", J2ME is there and it is in fact way successful than many think. Opera Mini for example.
They killed way better "Write" (from WIN16) just because they figured people are happily using it instead of MS Word in many cases. The "Wordpad" is MS Write with shaved features. The name itself advertises "Word" and uses "Pad" like "Notepad", e.g. simple crap which can't be relied on.
I am sure the Symbian Foundation releases will have Wmedia (DRM), the entire OMA DRM Framework and binary stuff like Flash Lite (whatever version at that time). If MS/Nokia doesn't play games, it will also have real Silverlight mobile, possibly with DRM. Lets not forget the Realplayer stuff too. That is "open source" which costed Nokia 500 million dollars or something. It is how much open you can get in current market and reality.
Google Android doesn't have such "evil" things because its market share is minimal, Google doesn't care about the network providers demands (they are huge) and the user profile isn't dying to buy "protected wmedia files" to play on their handset.
People should figure one thing, smartphone and not-so-dumb phones beat the PC market in numbers. It is a huge market and this isn't a time to do heroic things. See they even let Walmart sell their high end flagship product just to make investors happy... I think these people doesn't know how huge is the market Apple plays in.
Apple is not in Microsoft's position to begin with. By first release of OS X, they invented "hybrid" way of doing things. Just like OS X kernel is both a micro and monolithic kernel, OS X is both open source and closed source.
OS X on iPhone is in very early stages and yet you can get the idea about the stuff used from the actual OSX/Darwin source. It is not like they re-coded everything.
We already have a Symbian going open source (IMHO in Apple OSX way) and Google Android. It is not like Symbian/Nokia will open source the OMA/DRM etc. stuff, deep level GSM/3G stuff too.
Slashdot Mirror
I have 780 random passwords which the very high risk ones changes weekly automatically thanks to 1Password which integrated to all native OS X browsers and Firefox.
Firefox developers should get a trial of it to see what they miss by not using system keychain. Opera too. In fact, Opera supported the keychain and switched to Wand.dat for no reason.
It shouldn't support Mac Keychain as well as it didn't support Colorsync for years. It should never, ever ship with a spotlight indexer too.
You know, they hate such system wide, free to use, documented OS X features. The OS X Firefox should never be better with more features than Windows or (God forbid) Linux Firefox.
So Opera can't be better than Firefox or any other browser on certain aspect for what reason?
You should see my BS meter when I see someone at /. bitches about Opera and I am not a Opera Desktop user, I use Safari with 1Password and I don't really know 99% of my passwords at all.
It is backed by a gigantic dotcom giant which is de facto standard search tool. It is fairly safe to call it major browser since the day it got shipped as non beta.
Just put "Google Chrome" link to Google.com index, see what happens :)
I couldn't test it (I am on PPC) but I tested near everything claiming 3D concept of interface even including the Linux ones I built from source.
If Apple is the company which made a Mach/NeXT/FreeBSD/BSD Lite and even MacOS mixture "easiest used Desktop ever", I wonder if they would be the ones to make a really usable 3d desktop.
There is another patent from Apple about gestures being done without touching the screen surface. It was a story recently. When you mix both, something promising may happen.
It doesn't give ANY credibility to Apple.
J2ME security model, Symbian Security model which nears a billion installed base wouldn't do a mistake like that and yet there is no "Nokia Store" prison or "Sun Store" lock in.
Here is Symbian security model (295K pdf) http://www.symbian.com/files/rx/file3202.pdf
J2ME security (Symbian also carries J2ME) http://developers.sun.com/mobility/midp/articles/permissions/
It can't be used as excuse for Apple draconian policies. Apple's security policy on iPhone is: Nobody should never, ever compete with their iTunes on device.
They should buy a Symbian S60 or even a modern J2ME handset and see how strict you gotta be on communications network which user pays for bytes. Google embraced and extended J2ME but passed its sandbox/security model?
Everyone keeps hating Symbian and J2ME security model but it seems as the only way to make best of both open competition and security. Nokia and others learned it very hard and expensive way.
My new principle is, I won't buy a OS X antivirus until Kaspersky/F-Secure ships their products which will detect real threats and I won't take Eee PC serious until Apple releases a similar thing.
If you know Nokia 9xxx series and recent E90 and announced N97, you can understand why I can't take Eee PC bandwagon serious. A E90 will do a lot more than any Eee PC and it has a OS which was designed to work in such form and usage. I have like 2-3 months uptime on a Nokia 9300 doing everything, device doesn't even have native shutdown or restart functionality.
Lenovo, Dell and HP can do it in future (or now) because they have huge factories, all their understanding of a computer is still something you can install Windows somehow and run it.
Some tip for Eee PC. Go to a store and find some Eee PC running XP, right click on taskbar and run "task monitor". You will feel sorry for that poor Atom chip when you see the processes. If Apple has a OS in hand which just needs good memory (~1-2 GB) to run at almost zero CPU and they don't ship a Eee PC like thing, they must know something. Steve Jobs is still right on his remark about Tablet PC, "The form is wrong".
And it is still a Taskbar.exe.
OS X has big ass NeXT Dock (crippled a bit,see real one on WindowMaker) since it is a full object oriented operating system down to its own Objective C and Frameworks.
MS still emulates OS X Dock with .lnk etc. tiny files and it still has no idea about objects natively. For Windows Taskbar, IE is there because it has ie.lnk file to read. For Apple, Safari is a link to a filesystem executable object that can handle html files and urls. E.g. you can move Safari.app from its own Applications dir and it will still launch or you can drag a browser object to Safari icon to view it.
They put a thing same size and good looking (even better?) as OS X Dock and yet plain ignore the real thing.
The only thing which goes even beyond that object madness is OS/2 Workspace shell and funnily, it has MS code in it so IBM can't share it with OSS community.
For MS, Internet (TCP/IP) is still something which can't run alone.
On a Machine with not TCP/IP installed, run "Internet Setup Wizard" or something. You will see it installs Client for MS Networks, File and Printer sharing for MS Networks and TCP/IP (thanks for not forgetting).
MS can't admit people may connect to TCP/IP bare network and become "connected". They have to install MS Networks junk. While not bad as Steve Gibson claims, it also opens port 139 and FILTERs it with a Firewall. Lets not forget the famous 135 which you may still see on your firewall/router logs. Blaster is still alive.
And we sit here arguing why Windows can't be saved.
I bet they didn't get calls from whining big, old fashion coding companies about their compatibility is broken or their 100.000 installed VB6 apps doesn't launch. Lets not forget the famous $10 adapter making bunch whining about driver model.
That is the magic, that is what happened between the great promised Vista and real Vista. I bet it happens right now.
I suggest it since I know the user profile of Wordpad and Write (yes, true) using people. They just want a fast Word processor to do everyday stuff and some even uses for big text only things.
Abiword is both. It is both massively backwards compatible and it has real word processor features which MS would never dare to put or it would kill Word sales. Apple has cut some Textedit features too, MacOS one was better I heard.
It has become a huge PR scheme lately. E.g. even Nokia thinks they better don't bundle any games, apps with their N97 micro laptop.
While OS X is not really effected by apps being "there", Apple claims same stuff on Snow Leopard and tricks users. There is also a collective hate against PPC users (who doesn't upgrade) by Intel purists. They think PPC portion of code in Universal binary somehow "slows down" their system. That is never the case. If I found out "Intel" code slowed down my OS X as PPC user, I would got rid of Apple for rest of my life.
At least Apple has some big (and real) reasons about why Snow Leopard will beat hell out of previous OS X in performance as pure 64bit on x86/ Quicktime X framework, lack of deep level Carbon and of course OpenCL and Grand Central stuff.
I keep seeing "Windows 7 is faster" but how is it faster? E.g. like rewritten and MS got rid of the performance killing level backwards compatibility or some high end Windows utils installed way of faster? I am afraid the latter is true.
You can see what MS understands from Modular lately.
Just install .NET 3.5 SP1 to a clean windows installation and see what modularly got installed. We were calling Java bulky right?
It installs .NET 2.0 SP1, .NET 3.0 SP1, add 3-5 security updates and still leaves .NET 1.0 unpatched so you head to windows update for another 1.1 update.
Worse is, they do every trick on the book to hide the true space .NET occupies while poor Java naively reports a whopping (!) 130 MB. Also .NET also does things behind users back like compilation after install on next reboot, in another user name, hidden from a bit technical user not knowing "show all users processes"
I gave .NET example on purpose since it is supposed to be coded in new way of MS. We see how infected it is with MS traditions already.
I don't buy both Windows 7 is fast or even "Snow Leopard is amazing fast". Lets see them both when real life usage happens. I installed OS/2 Warp 4 to Virtual PC recently, it beats everything even including OS X leopard on an emulated CPU. You know why? Because it is not actually used :) No apps or real life usage.
Windows will be fast when MS finally admits Unix model was right, they get rid of that registry thing, they don't excuse idiotic programming, excuse massive hacks without any future guarantee.
You would be surprised how many large workstation, server installations use Slackware. A very big example could be weatherunderground.com
I am on OS X and I still use my knowledge from Slackware. If I had to use a x86/Linux, it would be either Slackware or Debian.
Some of us still want to use Linux in Linux way.
no background allowance, no allowance of integrating to system, no allowance of "duplicating functionality", no allowance of interpreting.
iPhone (official) apps are indeed plugins. They have less power than a completely unsigned J2ME app which gets the ultimate sandbox punishment from java security model.
OS X and the entire suite of Mac apps are designed in a way to never, ever bug the user (designer) while he is working on a project. Windows always had colour management, at least Adobe etc. pro apps installed their own colour management.
Once the designer gets "Updates available for your OS, click here to install them" stealing the focus, Windows loses. The magic of OS X is, it is a Unix/NeXT OS but can be still used as "cooperative multitasking" (politely, not multi tasking) machine. That is what designers love.
Either they are insane cult members or they are recently switched to Mac people. Perhaps they are ones who never coded a single commercial quality app in their lives.
I use Mr. Hockenberry'es code, iPulse which is a design miracle for 5 years straight. It is a system monitoring tool and it runs whenever my system is up. Not a single crash, memory leak or anything. It is currently selling for $12.95, I guess I paid the same price.
What if he hired a Cocoa beginner developer who had no experience, the massive amounts of "hacks" which iPulse target user profile uses, no idea about how long will the app be running and shipped it for $5?
I hope the "overpaid" developers will never cease to exist. That is what makes OS X and its Application availability (in terms of quality, not quantity) so good.
What they need is slowly learning Symbian C++ (especially after open source) and slowly start to ship their apps in _same quality_ to Symbian. Windows Mobile seems way harder for a Cocoa developer since it is all .NET stuff it seems.
When some of top quality apps ship of Symbian too, Apple won't be that comfortable with their decisions. A developer may say "So you don't handle the comment abuse? Remove my app from store".
If they all sit and code iPhone only apps, they give great power to Apple about their products.
Imagine coding something like http://www.quickoffice.com/ and Apple somehow decides "iPhone enterprise edition" and triggers kill switch on your app using an excuse like "but it does do excel macros, it is against rules".
The real limiting factor is iPhone community which is totally unhealthy. "Cry me a river" etc. type crap comments from people who doesn't even have a clue about what developing a professional application is or who Hockenberry and Icon Factory is.
It seems Symbian will be my mobile operating system for many years. Not like it is great, it has a huge, democratic community who doesn't shoot the messenger. Also a healthy competition between commercial apps, freeware and even open source. It is all up to user to pick that .sis or .sisx or even .jar file from web browser.
I also blame iPhone only developers. They should keep releasing their stuff for Symbian and even Windows Mobile too. Relying on App Store and iPhone really looks like risky especially with such community.
It is in fact re-inventing J2ME in Google way. I still fail to understand the point of Android rather than being re-inventing an already invented and successful (Look to getjar.com scene, numbers) J2ME.
Programmers demand real C and C++ to code bigger, commercial apps. iPhone, Symbian, Windows Mobile offers it. For "write once and ship for millions", J2ME is there and it is in fact way successful than many think. Opera Mini for example.
They killed way better "Write" (from WIN16) just because they figured people are happily using it instead of MS Word in many cases. The "Wordpad" is MS Write with shaved features. The name itself advertises "Word" and uses "Pad" like "Notepad", e.g. simple crap which can't be relied on.
I am sure the Symbian Foundation releases will have Wmedia (DRM), the entire OMA DRM Framework and binary stuff like Flash Lite (whatever version at that time). If MS/Nokia doesn't play games, it will also have real Silverlight mobile, possibly with DRM. Lets not forget the Realplayer stuff too. That is "open source" which costed Nokia 500 million dollars or something. It is how much open you can get in current market and reality.
Google Android doesn't have such "evil" things because its market share is minimal, Google doesn't care about the network providers demands (they are huge) and the user profile isn't dying to buy "protected wmedia files" to play on their handset.
People should figure one thing, smartphone and not-so-dumb phones beat the PC market in numbers. It is a huge market and this isn't a time to do heroic things. See they even let Walmart sell their high end flagship product just to make investors happy... I think these people doesn't know how huge is the market Apple plays in.
Apple is not in Microsoft's position to begin with. By first release of OS X, they invented "hybrid" way of doing things. Just like OS X kernel is both a micro and monolithic kernel, OS X is both open source and closed source.
Lots of stuff there: http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html
OS X on iPhone is in very early stages and yet you can get the idea about the stuff used from the actual OSX/Darwin source. It is not like they re-coded everything.
We already have a Symbian going open source (IMHO in Apple OSX way) and Google Android. It is not like Symbian/Nokia will open source the OMA/DRM etc. stuff, deep level GSM/3G stuff too.
They don't have such chance to make it non vulnerable unless they scrap entire backwards compatibility.
A more mad solution would be the thing Apple did. Run the older OS in a virtual machine in its own thread (trublue, MacOS Classic support).
MS can't take such big decisions so, anything claimed for Windows 7 is a joke. If one can run Wordpad from XP in Windows 7, it is not secure.