I think the "Repair Permissions" thing should be extended to check/repair/normalise user home directory permissions too.
I am speaking about the "Reset home directory permissions" functionality inside Leopard DVD boot to be an option for disk utility. Also Disk Utility should alert users about SUID files whether they got BOM or not and label it clearly without creating panic. They say "These messages are true but not cause of concern". No, it is a very big concern. An unexpected SUID file on Unix is always a concern.
BTW, people calling the permission repair process "voodoo" are generally very advanced users, system admins and advanced developers. It is not put for them at first place, it is for average end user. That average end user has potential to share his/her home directory with whole planet to make sure his/her friend gets a single document from his Documents folder. I am speaking about some functionality to revert them to sane permissions. I guess they already do some stuff via ACL on Leopard but one can't repair the ACL without booting from Leopard DVD which is a real pain.
On OS X, sandboxing is different. Please read couple of pages from Apple mailing lists before comparing it to its bad photocopy. OS X hasn't got a problem with Applications running under normal user account so there is no community to educate with stick (like MS does).
Safari.app will be able to say "Here are my directories and the system calls I will make". So Safari won't even see a Framework or System folder. Way more detail at http://www.318.com/techjournal/?p=107
On OS X Leopard, there are couple of deep level technologies already having sandbox technology (spotlight and bonjour) and Apple is preparing it for general developer use.
OS X "stupid security" dialogue works well, so damn well that it is able to figure out Adobe AIR Applications user installed over the web. The "stupid dialogue" could be a life saver in future. I am not speaking about the Windows horrible copy.
Code signing is not like the Verisign pyramid scheme on Windows, ANY Developer can sign their application free. People actually adopt it, even including Adium X like open source applications. There is no "Apple certified" or "Verisign Secure" junk, it is application signing which is meant to benefit the user and developer. By signing it, you just make sure your files aren't tampered after user trusts it so no lamers taking advantage of your application (and users trust). There are no other advantages, OS X treats your Application just like unsigned Applications. It is not the signing in Microsoft Windows. If user updates unsigned Application, OS will prompt if he/she wants to grant access since there is no way making sure that it is the same binary from very same developer user trusted at first place. If user updates a developer signed binary in a normal way and the signature is the same, it doesn't prompt.
It is free market with the restrictions of OS/Framework at critical decisions just like it should be in 2008. Someone tries to create Lisa on mobile space.
DRM goes away when customer gets rid of it and market gives up as result. In current scene nobody can start a crusade against DRM and go chapter 11 in matter of months. Nokia or others can't say "We removed DRM, down with establishment". It is up to CUSTOMER to reject DRM for alternatives. E.g. iPhone people won't buy from iTMS, they will go for emusic or whatever is open. You guys expecting Nokia, Sony, Apple to do heroical things. No. It is up to customer.
In Symbiand, if your application floods memory, it gets ass kicked by low memory framework. Only System Application marked applications are free of it but that marking requires a very strict certification process. Also lets not forget the user factor. If your app uses lots of ram and CPU, it doesn't have future in users handset. User says "oh crap" and reaches to "Application manager" to get rid of it. It is all open market with Symbian Inc. (foundation) governing the borders. It is how those die hard rivals work on same OS even before the "foundation". It is more like Java scene.
Yes they bought "your" Qt just to close the evil Qt which they have been using for years. It is a major evil Nokia conspiracy.Like, they didn't want a common, proven framework for OS/CPU neutral future.
Signing policy prevents viruses. Ask Nokia why they were forced to it. Lots of stuff can already run self signed, what Nokia and others doesn't want unsigned applications do is basically root access. Lets not confuse who to blame (Cabir) and the people who robotically accepts every warning their device displays. It is still better than draconian Apple policy, I hope one day those DRM whiners will figure Apple iPhone is a DRM providers dream and have balls to say it. Deep level firmware hacking doesn't count as openness,
Near all Symbian phones have dual CPU but you wouldn't want a SMP aware Symbian phone. Why? Because the main CPU does a very critical thing, call handling. Whatever happens in background must not prevent user from calling and especially emergency calls.
Not ass kicked perhaps and iphone is still a complete prison compared to Symbian and even Windows mobile but one must admit that iPhone changed lots of things at Nokia and Symbian scene.
When you enter http://www.s60.com/ , it says "Open to new features" which is exactly true. Now Nokia and Symbian is way more open source friendly and they even ship a POSIX framework and openly support Pyhton development which already creates wonders. Nobody would even imagine Nokia releasing a web server running in mobile phones along with all open source frameworks. As owner of the first ever Symbian hit, 7650 I can easily tell you.
What they had to do is discipline the known 3rd party commercial developers and popular symbian shops to prevent them from shipping trivial software for ridiculous prices. The open source Symbian will generate a flow of good quality software to the OS and their smart phones.
If MS dared to do such changes, they wouldn't be in todays shape now. You know, that 1990s 16 bit junk written in Visual Basic must not have problem finding its data file.
Ask it to your Telecom Operator. They probably rely on it on a very mission critical server, usual on telecoms. HP/UX and Tru64.
They opened their own filesystem in GPL V2, not V3 even. If you don't have anything to do with a filesystem which is tested in real life scenarios for years in various organisations, you can ignore or just appreciate.
I think Sun Microsystems as a company got used to non appreciating idiots after decades. Apple is slowly getting used to too. I don't see many Apple AC people trying to explain some misconceptions anymore. As you mention ZFS, HP opened their one of crown jewels to public, Tru64 Unix'es filesystem even in Linux kernel compatible GPL V2 license. Where is the cheering?
Well, Google, Nokia, Sun (J2ME) aren't Apple. They can't take ridicilous decisions like "one store, we will review code, no multi tasking, no background running for you!".
If they had such luxuries, Android would release with a comical EULA like iPhone. They miss "apple apologists" feature:)
Even J2ME phones started to multitask, e.g. Sony Ericsson sub $100 ones.
Re:Google Andriod is about to be hit by a steamrol
on
Android Phones Delayed
·
· Score: 1
Google already tries to re-invent wheel since there is J2ME, everyone including their Youtube can ship successfully in J2ME to huge number of devices. Yahoo themselves gave up the native C++ (on S60) for J2ME on "Yahoo Go!" 2.x+ . Why? Well, it seems it serves them what they need.
I think Google knows the power of Qt since Google Earth can ship on 3 different platforms (and Symbian S60?) thanks to it.
I fail to understand what Google wants to do with Android. It is not my big concern, my software and hardware vendors already have support for it. I can't understand why not go for J2ME advancement and preparation of desktop Java on Devices. Yes, Desktop Java in 1-2 years on high end smart phones. Memory and CPU is slowly becoming non issue.
Doesn't it sound like "Silverlight" to you? I mean, there is Flash, everyone happily uses it and produces stuff on it and some rich software company comes up with "Silverlight".
It is also part of technology problem. The "In" part of Wintel gang wasn't caring about 64bit (Until AMD Opteron) and things were not like PowerPC which is designed with 64bit in mind from the ground. See, Windows 32bit people still see 3.2 GB free or something and there is no Apple to say "We are going 64bit, adopt or die", they still struggle to support 16bit junk programs.
First of all, in 1994-1995 Toaster on Amiga really started to show its age. Secondly, Toaster is a professional workstation type system while Adobe Premiere is end user friendly just like todays AVID vs Adobe Premiere. The most important of all, I am trying to show the Microsoft and how it basically stopped time by being the only player in market. In 1991, people on PC had DOS, DOS 5 (not sure about version), it showed characters on its black screen and it needed massive hacks running to fake multitasking. On ease of usability, I would look at Apple Macintosh tools of 1990s. BTW Toaster is still being used especially at TV news desks which it is selected over others for getting things done fast and on relatively cheap PCs in satellite/uplink/news type work. It is a really fast tool to get things done if you get used to it.
We are 5 or even 10 years behind in computing thanks to MS. Think about it. Who wasn't in 32bit computing except MS customers back in 1995? Did you see the Netscape 4 demos which seriously drove them into panic that time? Now we are beginning to talk about Web services in freaking 2008 and people still suffer when they try it with IE. You better watch Archive.org "computer chronicles" videos and think what would happen if MS wasn't in scene with their business tactics and backwards products. http://www.archive.org/details/computerchronicles People were video editing on their Amigas back in 1991 for instance.
There was something else already, Windows and PC was the clone of it and it wasn't cheaper at all. Compare the original IBM to Apple prices. I think people can't think that the community chose that Text based horrible junk over Apple GUI and they think Apple came later to scene. It is the IBM who missed the personal computing revolution and dealt with MS in panic while MS didn't even have a single line of code in their hands.
IBM didn't heroically open their platform, they were forced to it. There are still some old school small computer shops advertising or requiring 100% IBM compatible. People should look at the reasoning of that percentage number.
I had 32bit Amiga 1200 back in 1992 or something. I turned it on, said "Wow it is fast", liked new workbench and there is that "32 bit" thing. Basically every program was already in 32bit.
Amiga crashed very bad financially so I moved to x86/PC in Win 3.1/95 Schizophrenia age (my worst mistake, should be Apple).
It was like surreal people were still in 16/32 bit age, being amazed to Windows 95. It is still same way to me, even running OS X Leopard. E.g. I had 64bit command line/linux back in 2003 with my first G5 1600 switched from PC at last, so it was 64bit processor, I could install 8 gig of RAM. Now imagine I switch back to Vista 64 bit and watch people saying how cool 64bit is after 5 years.
We shouldn't have Atari ST or Amiga so we could really get impressed by these things:) It is still effecting, e.g. after the magnificent Word Processing tools in Amiga, I can't get so much excited about the Apple Pages 08. I had much of the functionality back in Amiga 1200.
It looks like media, especially the ones known to be very close to MSFT started re-polishing BillG. This happens after someone took his job joked with companies prestige with 40+ billion dollars in hand. Lets watch... Especially check CNET News.com lately, you will figure what I mean.
Slashdot Mirror
http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/Security/RN-CodeSigning/
It has nothing to do with iPhone things store or Microsoft. It is YOU who sign the application, the developer, freely.
I can't blame you for the misunderstanding, thanks to iPhone model for that.
I think the "Repair Permissions" thing should be extended to check/repair/normalise user home directory permissions too.
I am speaking about the "Reset home directory permissions" functionality inside Leopard DVD boot to be an option for disk utility. Also Disk Utility should alert users about SUID files whether they got BOM or not and label it clearly without creating panic. They say "These messages are true but not cause of concern". No, it is a very big concern. An unexpected SUID file on Unix is always a concern.
BTW, people calling the permission repair process "voodoo" are generally very advanced users, system admins and advanced developers. It is not put for them at first place, it is for average end user. That average end user has potential to share his/her home directory with whole planet to make sure his/her friend gets a single document from his Documents folder. I am speaking about some functionality to revert them to sane permissions. I guess they already do some stuff via ACL on Leopard but one can't repair the ACL without booting from Leopard DVD which is a real pain.
On OS X, sandboxing is different. Please read couple of pages from Apple mailing lists before comparing it to its bad photocopy. OS X hasn't got a problem with Applications running under normal user account so there is no community to educate with stick (like MS does).
Safari.app will be able to say "Here are my directories and the system calls I will make". So Safari won't even see a Framework or System folder. Way more detail at http://www.318.com/techjournal/?p=107
On OS X Leopard, there are couple of deep level technologies already having sandbox technology (spotlight and bonjour) and Apple is preparing it for general developer use.
OS X "stupid security" dialogue works well, so damn well that it is able to figure out Adobe AIR Applications user installed over the web. The "stupid dialogue" could be a life saver in future. I am not speaking about the Windows horrible copy.
Code signing is not like the Verisign pyramid scheme on Windows, ANY Developer can sign their application free. People actually adopt it, even including Adium X like open source applications. There is no "Apple certified" or "Verisign Secure" junk, it is application signing which is meant to benefit the user and developer. By signing it, you just make sure your files aren't tampered after user trusts it so no lamers taking advantage of your application (and users trust). There are no other advantages, OS X treats your Application just like unsigned Applications. It is not the signing in Microsoft Windows. If user updates unsigned Application, OS will prompt if he/she wants to grant access since there is no way making sure that it is the same binary from very same developer user trusted at first place. If user updates a developer signed binary in a normal way and the signature is the same, it doesn't prompt.
Read this for more info:
http://adiumx.com/blog/2008/04/adium-application-security-and-your-keychain/
It is free market with the restrictions of OS/Framework at critical decisions just like it should be in 2008. Someone tries to create Lisa on mobile space.
DRM goes away when customer gets rid of it and market gives up as result. In current scene nobody can start a crusade against DRM and go chapter 11 in matter of months. Nokia or others can't say "We removed DRM, down with establishment". It is up to CUSTOMER to reject DRM for alternatives. E.g. iPhone people won't buy from iTMS, they will go for emusic or whatever is open.
You guys expecting Nokia, Sony, Apple to do heroical things. No. It is up to customer.
In Symbiand, if your application floods memory, it gets ass kicked by low memory framework. Only System Application marked applications are free of it but that marking requires a very strict certification process.
Also lets not forget the user factor. If your app uses lots of ram and CPU, it doesn't have future in users handset. User says "oh crap" and reaches to "Application manager" to get rid of it.
It is all open market with Symbian Inc. (foundation) governing the borders. It is how those die hard rivals work on same OS even before the "foundation". It is more like Java scene.
Yes they bought "your" Qt just to close the evil Qt which they have been using for years. It is a major evil Nokia conspiracy.Like, they didn't want a common, proven framework for OS/CPU neutral future.
Signing policy prevents viruses. Ask Nokia why they were forced to it. Lots of stuff can already run self signed, what Nokia and others doesn't want unsigned applications do is basically root access.
Lets not confuse who to blame (Cabir) and the people who robotically accepts every warning their device displays.
It is still better than draconian Apple policy, I hope one day those DRM whiners will figure Apple iPhone is a DRM providers dream and have balls to say it. Deep level firmware hacking doesn't count as openness,
Near all Symbian phones have dual CPU but you wouldn't want a SMP aware Symbian phone. Why? Because the main CPU does a very critical thing, call handling. Whatever happens in background must not prevent user from calling and especially emergency calls.
Not ass kicked perhaps and iphone is still a complete prison compared to Symbian and even Windows mobile but one must admit that iPhone changed lots of things at Nokia and Symbian scene.
When you enter http://www.s60.com/ , it says "Open to new features" which is exactly true. Now Nokia and Symbian is way more open source friendly and they even ship a POSIX framework and openly support Pyhton development which already creates wonders. Nobody would even imagine Nokia releasing a web server running in mobile phones along with all open source frameworks. As owner of the first ever Symbian hit, 7650 I can easily tell you.
What they had to do is discipline the known 3rd party commercial developers and popular symbian shops to prevent them from shipping trivial software for ridiculous prices. The open source Symbian will generate a flow of good quality software to the OS and their smart phones.
It doesn't matter. User has freedom to multitask and pick their applications to multitask. SE gives them the option, it is their choice.
If MS dared to do such changes, they wouldn't be in todays shape now. You know, that 1990s 16 bit junk written in Visual Basic must not have problem finding its data file.
Ask it to your Telecom Operator. They probably rely on it on a very mission critical server, usual on telecoms. HP/UX and Tru64.
They opened their own filesystem in GPL V2, not V3 even. If you don't have anything to do with a filesystem which is tested in real life scenarios for years in various organisations, you can ignore or just appreciate.
I think Sun Microsystems as a company got used to non appreciating idiots after decades. Apple is slowly getting used to too. I don't see many Apple AC people trying to explain some misconceptions anymore.
As you mention ZFS, HP opened their one of crown jewels to public, Tru64 Unix'es filesystem even in Linux kernel compatible GPL V2 license. Where is the cheering?
Well, Google, Nokia, Sun (J2ME) aren't Apple. They can't take ridicilous decisions like "one store, we will review code, no multi tasking, no background running for you!".
If they had such luxuries, Android would release with a comical EULA like iPhone. They miss "apple apologists" feature :)
Even J2ME phones started to multitask, e.g. Sony Ericsson sub $100 ones.
Google already tries to re-invent wheel since there is J2ME, everyone including their Youtube can ship successfully in J2ME to huge number of devices. Yahoo themselves gave up the native C++ (on S60) for J2ME on "Yahoo Go!" 2.x+ . Why? Well, it seems it serves them what they need.
The biggest problem of J2ME is the very advanced coding needed for the UI. SonyEricsson seems to have a solution: http://developer.sonyericsson.com/site/global/newsandevents/latestnews/newsapr08/p_project_capuchin_announcement.jsp , they will use Flash Lite 3 in J2ME so designers can go for whatever they need.
I think Google knows the power of Qt since Google Earth can ship on 3 different platforms (and Symbian S60?) thanks to it.
I fail to understand what Google wants to do with Android. It is not my big concern, my software and hardware vendors already have support for it. I can't understand why not go for J2ME advancement and preparation of desktop Java on Devices. Yes, Desktop Java in 1-2 years on high end smart phones. Memory and CPU is slowly becoming non issue.
Doesn't it sound like "Silverlight" to you? I mean, there is Flash, everyone happily uses it and produces stuff on it and some rich software company comes up with "Silverlight".
It is also part of technology problem. The "In" part of Wintel gang wasn't caring about 64bit (Until AMD Opteron) and things were not like PowerPC which is designed with 64bit in mind from the ground. See, Windows 32bit people still see 3.2 GB free or something and there is no Apple to say "We are going 64bit, adopt or die", they still struggle to support 16bit junk programs.
First of all, in 1994-1995 Toaster on Amiga really started to show its age. Secondly, Toaster is a professional workstation type system while Adobe Premiere is end user friendly just like todays AVID vs Adobe Premiere.
The most important of all, I am trying to show the Microsoft and how it basically stopped time by being the only player in market. In 1991, people on PC had DOS, DOS 5 (not sure about version), it showed characters on its black screen and it needed massive hacks running to fake multitasking.
On ease of usability, I would look at Apple Macintosh tools of 1990s.
BTW Toaster is still being used especially at TV news desks which it is selected over others for getting things done fast and on relatively cheap PCs in satellite/uplink/news type work. It is a really fast tool to get things done if you get used to it.
Now the Java platform is something you can really produce even great desktop software (even with Sun!), they are with .NET in scene playing games.
Hitting it back in 2000s wasn't enough, now it needs another hit. They can't handle competition at all.
We are 5 or even 10 years behind in computing thanks to MS. Think about it. Who wasn't in 32bit computing except MS customers back in 1995? Did you see the Netscape 4 demos which seriously drove them into panic that time? Now we are beginning to talk about Web services in freaking 2008 and people still suffer when they try it with IE.
You better watch Archive.org "computer chronicles" videos and think what would happen if MS wasn't in scene with their business tactics and backwards products.
http://www.archive.org/details/computerchronicles
People were video editing on their Amigas back in 1991 for instance.
There was something else already, Windows and PC was the clone of it and it wasn't cheaper at all. Compare the original IBM to Apple prices. I think people can't think that the community chose that Text based horrible junk over Apple GUI and they think Apple came later to scene. It is the IBM who missed the personal computing revolution and dealt with MS in panic while MS didn't even have a single line of code in their hands.
IBM didn't heroically open their platform, they were forced to it. There are still some old school small computer shops advertising or requiring 100% IBM compatible. People should look at the reasoning of that percentage number.
Perhaps people shouldn't ignore the "Pirates of Silicon Valley" and watch/read it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirates_of_silicon_valley
Well, MS guy changed sex so what? Unix scene has much more interesting people, even the authors of current de-facto standard Unix software.
Compare this from TFA to this on Flickr, same times.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12693492@N04/1339024810/ --> Woz and Sjobs
http://ndn.newsweek.com/media/36/microsoft-bill-gates-technology-company-BZ04-wide-horizontal.jpg --> MS
I had 32bit Amiga 1200 back in 1992 or something. I turned it on, said "Wow it is fast", liked new workbench and there is that "32 bit" thing. Basically every program was already in 32bit.
Amiga crashed very bad financially so I moved to x86/PC in Win 3.1/95 Schizophrenia age (my worst mistake, should be Apple).
It was like surreal people were still in 16/32 bit age, being amazed to Windows 95. It is still same way to me, even running OS X Leopard. E.g. I had 64bit command line/linux back in 2003 with my first G5 1600 switched from PC at last, so it was 64bit processor, I could install 8 gig of RAM. Now imagine I switch back to Vista 64 bit and watch people saying how cool 64bit is after 5 years.
We shouldn't have Atari ST or Amiga so we could really get impressed by these things :) It is still effecting, e.g. after the magnificent Word Processing tools in Amiga, I can't get so much excited about the Apple Pages 08. I had much of the functionality back in Amiga 1200.
It looks like media, especially the ones known to be very close to MSFT started re-polishing BillG. This happens after someone took his job joked with companies prestige with 40+ billion dollars in hand.
Lets watch... Especially check CNET News.com lately, you will figure what I mean.