Dude, if you're so concerned about your iPod looking shiny and smooth, why would you hide its shiny smoothness in a protective case? Why be so careful pulling it out of its case--to avoid scratching it? It's just going to go back inside anyway!
Is it resale value? You're not going to get much out of a 10 GB iPod these days, so there must be another reason, right? I just don't get it. I think I'll probably never understand.
Thanks for the reply. Some of these screenshots look great, others look ass-ugly, if straightforward, but I guess all's well as long as it's (sigh) themeable. Though I wish they wouldn't rely on theming to make it look good.
Screenshots only tell half the story, though. How about responsiveness? Visual cues? I don't care about useless animations like in XP, but little things like zooms, fades, wipes, even subtle blinking UI elements can really give you a sense that you know what's going on, that you're in control. It doesn't sound like you've had firsthand experience with MythTV, but do you know of a theme that uses these things to good effect?
Configuration aside, how does MythTV's interface compare to TiVo's? I mean, what approach to aesthetics and usability does MythTV take? Cluttery? Simple? Configurable? Do the available remote controls compare favorably to TiVo's?
This is the stuff Google doesn't help with, and I don't know where to try out a MythTV box without going through the hassle of setting it up myself. Basically I'm asking this. Does TiVo : MythTV:: Mac OS X : Linux+Gnome/KDE, or is the situation somewhat better?
All wealth is relative. All of it. What wouldn't J.P. Morgan (of Rudolph's nose) have given for the safe and reliable plastic surgery now available to every middle-class worker in the developed world? What wouldn't Louis XIV (king, not band) give for indoor plumbing, if only he weren't French and desired to bathe? Would Batswanans feel poor if there were only Africa to compare their status to, and not the rest of the world?
I say nothing, nothing, and no, but feel free to draw your own conclusions here.
Imaginative, but way off the mark. For one thing, you point out that if energy is free, then given enough time, you could do anything--extracting minerals, R&D, growing food, &c. But have you considered that time itself is the most valuable commodity of all? And time will never be free, even if aforementioned R&D grants us immortality. Neither will energy, for that matter, for the same reason. The scenario you describe would definitely make a great screenplay, but in reality? Not a chance.
Yeah, you have to wonder he means by "a biologically useful pace." I assume he means chemical reactions proceeding slow enough for us to recognize it as life, but isn't it just as possible for life to exist in high-energy (explosive) conditions, only too fast for us to realize it's there? And why couldn't there be life in frozen oceans with chemical reactions too slow for us to recognize? Hmm.
Yeah, that's true. The AC pointed out that magnet schools aren't really "public" schools in the same sense that Jobs' kids attend public schools, which is probably more germane to the discussion.
I don't know where you live, but in NYC our mayor (Bloomberg, you know him) has done a lot to improve the quality of education, mostly by ending social promotion and appointing an ed. chancellor who gives a damn: Joel Klein. You probably know him too.
During the Democratic mayoral primaries, someone asked the candidates if they'd send their children to public or private schools. They basically either lied and said they'd send their kids to public school, or weaseled out of the question. If only one of them would have the balls to propose a school voucher system without religious overtones, I think voters here would cream themselves, even if the teacher's union would impale the brains behind the act.
Yeah, that's what Museveni says, and the abstinence-first strings attached to PEPFAR are certainly part of the problem, since (as I guess you know) "abstinence-first" programs become in practice abstinence-only, and in any case necessarily demonize sexuality and spread half-truths downplaying the efficacy of condoms. But don't underestimate the power of public stature. It certainly doesn't help matters that Museveni's wife uses her platform to push this message of misplaced morality, by campaigning against condom use, signing billboards promoting "A" and "B" at the expense of "C", and so on.
I think you misunderstood me. Putting ideology before science and public health disgusts me, particularly when it comes to life-and-death matters like these. The consequences here and now of abstinence-only education, terrible though they are, amount to nothing compared to the horror it will inflict in years to come. It's fucking revolting.
Uganda's program of "ABC" used to be "Abstain," "Be faithful," "use a Condom." This policy was indeed breathtakingly effective at stopping AIDS from the '80s to the late '90s.
However, since de-emphasizing the "C" part (due not entirely to Bush administration policy, admittedly, but also to Museveni's wife's pro-abstinence views), the virus is once again spreading.
I understand that Uganda is often mentioned as an example of morality and abstinence triumphing over other forms of sex ed, and I don't blame you for not being fully informed. But the truth is likelier the exact opposite.
Wish I could stay and discuss this, but I have appointments to keep. If you're interested in learning more, I suggest this article from the (liberal? conservative?) Economist.
OK, it's offtopic, but how can you possibly believe abstinence-only education is a success in combating AIDS, particularly in an information-poor place like Africa? Abstinence-only education is ineffective at best; at worst, it drowns out other messages that are more pragmatic and more successful in curbing the rate of HIV infection.
I grant you that smart, reasonable people may disagree on issues like gay marriage, "intelligent design," tax breaks, etc., but all credible research shows that the most effective programs to stop the spread of AIDS, in Africa and elsewhere, have been those that teach condom use and freely distribute prophylactics, not those that teach abstinence. For better or worse, abstinence-only education has proven futile. So how on earth do you live with yourself with the knowledge that you're okay with condemning a generation of African children to a lifetime of poverty and ill health? A lifetime needlessly stricken by AIDS?
You know how in politics, candidates pray not to be endorsed by Al Sharpton, because he actually turns voters off? Without passing judgment on Al, it's the same idea here with OGG. File format of losers, kiss of death. Hope this helps.
I don't know about DC, Philly, and LA, but NYC has some of the best public schools in the nation, although admission to these is somewhat selective. Private high schools here are for fuckups who weren't admitted to Stuy, Bronx Science, or Brooklyn Tech who happen to have rich parents.
He's charging you for the development and maintenance of the iTMS interface, as well as for the not insignificant cost of negotiating deals with the labels for distribution and sale. I'll gladly pay him--what is it, 5 cents a song?--to do all that dirty work for me.
Incidentally, and offtopic, this is exactly why the Mac Human Interface Guidelines put the OK/Accept (default) button in the lower-right corner. If you're right-handed, it's the easiest and most natural place to hit a button.
The Economist this week has pretty much the same article, but since it's in The Economist it's, you know, automatically better: "The resurrection of Steve Jobs."
Ugh, I hope Apple doesn't. That's my vanity talking, but I also think it would represent a gaping chink in the seamless user-centric image Apple tries to present. Why should anyone care that "Intel's inside" as long as the machine does what you want it to do? It's totally irrelevant. It's extra information the user has no need to be saddled with.
If I were Steve, I'd consider a small logo in print ads, but to hell with the three-note tune, and I'd sooner remove my pancreas than put stickers on a Mac. But then, I'm not Steve.
"If Steve could charge 10K for the 'honor' of owning one of his machines, he'd do it in a heartbeat."
Bullshit. Explain the Mac mini, then.
You want arrogance? Arrogance is Microsoft's and Dell's satisfaction that their products are "good enough" for you and me, and expecting users to conform to their awkward designs. On the other hand you have Apple, whose eagerness to make its hardware and software accessible to everyone--i.e. intuitive "for the rest of us"--is the most meaningful sort of humility.
And if this eagerness, nay, devotion leads the Mac to be more expensive than your average "good enough" PC, which I'll allow it very well may, then you're mistaken to characterize it as the result of some obsession with class or status symbolism.
You say Apple's culture innovates because of external pressure rather than internal motivation, but that's hard to see, given the passion for forward-thinking, human-oriented design shared by the company's management and senior engineers. It's a passion you can't fake in interviews, a passion evident in the strict tolerances and attention to detail in every Apple product I can name (yes, even the hockey puck mouse). It's a passion curiously lacking, on the whole, in companies like Dell and Microsoft. And you honestly believe Apple as top dog would have stagnated as much as Microsoft?
Even throughout the 90s, despite Steve's absence at the top, Apple led the industry with RISC, keyboard placement on laptops, trackpads, UI improvements, audio I/O, onboard networking, CD-ROM, digital photography. Hell, even the Newton... the list goes on. These aren't just "a few bright spots" produced by a company fighting for its survival--it's a pattern of evidence that innovation (can I call it innovation?) at Apple was alive and well even without nurture from management.
I don't see Apple's corporate culture, or Steve Jobs himself, as arrogant in the least. They care about the consumer more than anyone else in the computer industry, as long as said consumer has good taste and a passion for design. They do not, however, give the consumer what he wants, because what the consumer wants per se is often something that sucks (that is why design is a profession, not a hobby). I suppose I can see why some people chafe at that--the stupid philistines.
Yeah, but even then it'd be a pain. You still wouldn't be able to feel your way around the keypad, "semi-blind" (?) or otherwise. The buttons would still have to be massively oversized for our fat, clumsy fingers, just like all other touch screen interfaces. In short, it's just the wrong solution.
I don't see why Apple needs to be married to the scroll wheel idea if it gets in the way of a device's other functions. Maybe they could replace it with a scroll wheel type thing on the side of the phone? Or make the LCD touch sensitive and make it respond to gestures (not cram it full of tiny buttons)? There must be something they can do.
It would blow, the way you describe it. People rely on tactile feedback to be able to hit buttons. Chances are you can probably dial a number without having to look at the keypad on your phone. Now think about trying to do the same thing with a touch screen display.
Buffer overflow in AppKit for Mac OS X 10.3.9 and 10.4.2 allows external user-complicit attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted Rich Text Format (RTF) file.
Now remember that Mail.app uses AppKit to view RTF-formatted emails, and Safari uses it to view RTF documents. So if you so much as read your email, whether in Mail.app or Gmail, you could inadvertently infect yourself with a worm, and you wouldn't even know. And if this worm spreads via your Address Book email addresses--well, as a Mac user, you're likely to know a lot of other Mac users, aren't you? It could even use Spotlight to find every email address on your hard disk. The more the merrier, with very little extra effort for the worm.
Is it "automated"? It's close enough. Some of the best-known Windows worms of yore required you to open email attachments, and this hypothetical worm would require even less effort to spread.
What's more, I expect Mac virus authors to be more creative than their PC counterparts (it'd be a disgrace if they weren't, really). So maybe your worm does something ugly like grab a bunch of random documents from your home directory and send them to everyone in your address book. Financial projections, confidential company presentations, those steamy letters to your college roommate. SSNs and salaries of everyone in your department. Plans for the hydrogen bomb. This thing would be indiscriminate. Chaos reigns.
Anyway, there's a whole lot more vulnerabilities where that came from. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to figure out how to wreak havoc in the Mac-using world.
Yeah, I really hope the Firefox team can get their act together for the Mac version. Until then, there's SafariStand for FlashBlock and SafariBlock for AdBlock, which work pretty well despite the funny names.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, if you're so concerned about your iPod looking shiny and smooth, why would you hide its shiny smoothness in a protective case? Why be so careful pulling it out of its case--to avoid scratching it? It's just going to go back inside anyway!
Is it resale value? You're not going to get much out of a 10 GB iPod these days, so there must be another reason, right? I just don't get it. I think I'll probably never understand.
Thanks for the reply. Some of these screenshots look great, others look ass-ugly, if straightforward, but I guess all's well as long as it's (sigh) themeable. Though I wish they wouldn't rely on theming to make it look good.
Screenshots only tell half the story, though. How about responsiveness? Visual cues? I don't care about useless animations like in XP, but little things like zooms, fades, wipes, even subtle blinking UI elements can really give you a sense that you know what's going on, that you're in control. It doesn't sound like you've had firsthand experience with MythTV, but do you know of a theme that uses these things to good effect?
Configuration aside, how does MythTV's interface compare to TiVo's? I mean, what approach to aesthetics and usability does MythTV take? Cluttery? Simple? Configurable? Do the available remote controls compare favorably to TiVo's?
:: Mac OS X : Linux+Gnome/KDE, or is the situation somewhat better?
This is the stuff Google doesn't help with, and I don't know where to try out a MythTV box without going through the hassle of setting it up myself. Basically I'm asking this. Does TiVo : MythTV
All wealth is relative. All of it. What wouldn't J.P. Morgan (of Rudolph's nose) have given for the safe and reliable plastic surgery now available to every middle-class worker in the developed world? What wouldn't Louis XIV (king, not band) give for indoor plumbing, if only he weren't French and desired to bathe? Would Batswanans feel poor if there were only Africa to compare their status to, and not the rest of the world?
I say nothing, nothing, and no, but feel free to draw your own conclusions here.
Imaginative, but way off the mark. For one thing, you point out that if energy is free, then given enough time, you could do anything--extracting minerals, R&D, growing food, &c. But have you considered that time itself is the most valuable commodity of all? And time will never be free, even if aforementioned R&D grants us immortality. Neither will energy, for that matter, for the same reason. The scenario you describe would definitely make a great screenplay, but in reality? Not a chance.
Yeah, you have to wonder he means by "a biologically useful pace." I assume he means chemical reactions proceeding slow enough for us to recognize it as life, but isn't it just as possible for life to exist in high-energy (explosive) conditions, only too fast for us to realize it's there? And why couldn't there be life in frozen oceans with chemical reactions too slow for us to recognize? Hmm.
Yeah, that's true. The AC pointed out that magnet schools aren't really "public" schools in the same sense that Jobs' kids attend public schools, which is probably more germane to the discussion.
I don't know where you live, but in NYC our mayor (Bloomberg, you know him) has done a lot to improve the quality of education, mostly by ending social promotion and appointing an ed. chancellor who gives a damn: Joel Klein. You probably know him too.
During the Democratic mayoral primaries, someone asked the candidates if they'd send their children to public or private schools. They basically either lied and said they'd send their kids to public school, or weaseled out of the question. If only one of them would have the balls to propose a school voucher system without religious overtones, I think voters here would cream themselves, even if the teacher's union would impale the brains behind the act.
Yeah, that's what Museveni says, and the abstinence-first strings attached to PEPFAR are certainly part of the problem, since (as I guess you know) "abstinence-first" programs become in practice abstinence-only, and in any case necessarily demonize sexuality and spread half-truths downplaying the efficacy of condoms. But don't underestimate the power of public stature. It certainly doesn't help matters that Museveni's wife uses her platform to push this message of misplaced morality, by campaigning against condom use, signing billboards promoting "A" and "B" at the expense of "C", and so on.
I think you misunderstood me. Putting ideology before science and public health disgusts me, particularly when it comes to life-and-death matters like these. The consequences here and now of abstinence-only education, terrible though they are, amount to nothing compared to the horror it will inflict in years to come. It's fucking revolting.
-- pomo (poster of the AC comment)
Uganda's program of "ABC" used to be "Abstain," "Be faithful," "use a Condom." This policy was indeed breathtakingly effective at stopping AIDS from the '80s to the late '90s.
However, since de-emphasizing the "C" part (due not entirely to Bush administration policy, admittedly, but also to Museveni's wife's pro-abstinence views), the virus is once again spreading.
I understand that Uganda is often mentioned as an example of morality and abstinence triumphing over other forms of sex ed, and I don't blame you for not being fully informed. But the truth is likelier the exact opposite.
Wish I could stay and discuss this, but I have appointments to keep. If you're interested in learning more, I suggest this article from the (liberal? conservative?) Economist.
OK, it's offtopic, but how can you possibly believe abstinence-only education is a success in combating AIDS, particularly in an information-poor place like Africa? Abstinence-only education is ineffective at best; at worst, it drowns out other messages that are more pragmatic and more successful in curbing the rate of HIV infection.
I grant you that smart, reasonable people may disagree on issues like gay marriage, "intelligent design," tax breaks, etc., but all credible research shows that the most effective programs to stop the spread of AIDS, in Africa and elsewhere, have been those that teach condom use and freely distribute prophylactics, not those that teach abstinence. For better or worse, abstinence-only education has proven futile. So how on earth do you live with yourself with the knowledge that you're okay with condemning a generation of African children to a lifetime of poverty and ill health? A lifetime needlessly stricken by AIDS?
-- pomo (the original AC)
You know how in politics, candidates pray not to be endorsed by Al Sharpton, because he actually turns voters off? Without passing judgment on Al, it's the same idea here with OGG. File format of losers, kiss of death. Hope this helps.
I don't know about DC, Philly, and LA, but NYC has some of the best public schools in the nation, although admission to these is somewhat selective. Private high schools here are for fuckups who weren't admitted to Stuy, Bronx Science, or Brooklyn Tech who happen to have rich parents.
He's charging you for the development and maintenance of the iTMS interface, as well as for the not insignificant cost of negotiating deals with the labels for distribution and sale. I'll gladly pay him--what is it, 5 cents a song?--to do all that dirty work for me.
Incidentally, and offtopic, this is exactly why the Mac Human Interface Guidelines put the OK/Accept (default) button in the lower-right corner. If you're right-handed, it's the easiest and most natural place to hit a button.
I hear GNOME does the same thing.
"Nintendo would do well to ... Increase perceived 'style.' Appeal to those who consider themselves too "cool" for video games"
I think that's exactly what they intend to do with the Revolution, no?
The Economist this week has pretty much the same article, but since it's in The Economist it's, you know, automatically better: "The resurrection of Steve Jobs."
Ugh, I hope Apple doesn't. That's my vanity talking, but I also think it would represent a gaping chink in the seamless user-centric image Apple tries to present. Why should anyone care that "Intel's inside" as long as the machine does what you want it to do? It's totally irrelevant. It's extra information the user has no need to be saddled with.
If I were Steve, I'd consider a small logo in print ads, but to hell with the three-note tune, and I'd sooner remove my pancreas than put stickers on a Mac. But then, I'm not Steve.
Photoshop?
"If Steve could charge 10K for the 'honor' of owning one of his machines, he'd do it in a heartbeat."
Bullshit. Explain the Mac mini, then.
You want arrogance? Arrogance is Microsoft's and Dell's satisfaction that their products are "good enough" for you and me, and expecting users to conform to their awkward designs. On the other hand you have Apple, whose eagerness to make its hardware and software accessible to everyone--i.e. intuitive "for the rest of us"--is the most meaningful sort of humility.
And if this eagerness, nay, devotion leads the Mac to be more expensive than your average "good enough" PC, which I'll allow it very well may, then you're mistaken to characterize it as the result of some obsession with class or status symbolism.
That's if you ask me, which I guess you didn't.
You say Apple's culture innovates because of external pressure rather than internal motivation, but that's hard to see, given the passion for forward-thinking, human-oriented design shared by the company's management and senior engineers. It's a passion you can't fake in interviews, a passion evident in the strict tolerances and attention to detail in every Apple product I can name (yes, even the hockey puck mouse). It's a passion curiously lacking, on the whole, in companies like Dell and Microsoft. And you honestly believe Apple as top dog would have stagnated as much as Microsoft?
Even throughout the 90s, despite Steve's absence at the top, Apple led the industry with RISC, keyboard placement on laptops, trackpads, UI improvements, audio I/O, onboard networking, CD-ROM, digital photography. Hell, even the Newton... the list goes on. These aren't just "a few bright spots" produced by a company fighting for its survival--it's a pattern of evidence that innovation (can I call it innovation?) at Apple was alive and well even without nurture from management.
I don't see Apple's corporate culture, or Steve Jobs himself, as arrogant in the least. They care about the consumer more than anyone else in the computer industry, as long as said consumer has good taste and a passion for design. They do not, however, give the consumer what he wants, because what the consumer wants per se is often something that sucks (that is why design is a profession, not a hobby). I suppose I can see why some people chafe at that--the stupid philistines.
Yeah, that, or preserving malaria and tuberculosis vaccines, which need to be kept refrigerated in order to remain effective.
Yeah, but even then it'd be a pain. You still wouldn't be able to feel your way around the keypad, "semi-blind" (?) or otherwise. The buttons would still have to be massively oversized for our fat, clumsy fingers, just like all other touch screen interfaces. In short, it's just the wrong solution.
I don't see why Apple needs to be married to the scroll wheel idea if it gets in the way of a device's other functions. Maybe they could replace it with a scroll wheel type thing on the side of the phone? Or make the LCD touch sensitive and make it respond to gestures (not cram it full of tiny buttons)? There must be something they can do.
It would blow, the way you describe it. People rely on tactile feedback to be able to hit buttons. Chances are you can probably dial a number without having to look at the keypad on your phone. Now think about trying to do the same thing with a touch screen display.
I disagree that the Mac world is mostly safe. Take a look at this recently patched OS X vulnerability:
Now remember that Mail.app uses AppKit to view RTF-formatted emails, and Safari uses it to view RTF documents. So if you so much as read your email, whether in Mail.app or Gmail, you could inadvertently infect yourself with a worm, and you wouldn't even know. And if this worm spreads via your Address Book email addresses--well, as a Mac user, you're likely to know a lot of other Mac users, aren't you? It could even use Spotlight to find every email address on your hard disk. The more the merrier, with very little extra effort for the worm.
Is it "automated"? It's close enough. Some of the best-known Windows worms of yore required you to open email attachments, and this hypothetical worm would require even less effort to spread.
What's more, I expect Mac virus authors to be more creative than their PC counterparts (it'd be a disgrace if they weren't, really). So maybe your worm does something ugly like grab a bunch of random documents from your home directory and send them to everyone in your address book. Financial projections, confidential company presentations, those steamy letters to your college roommate. SSNs and salaries of everyone in your department. Plans for the hydrogen bomb. This thing would be indiscriminate. Chaos reigns.
Anyway, there's a whole lot more vulnerabilities where that came from. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to figure out how to wreak havoc in the Mac-using world.
Yeah, I really hope the Firefox team can get their act together for the Mac version. Until then, there's SafariStand for FlashBlock and SafariBlock for AdBlock, which work pretty well despite the funny names.