So...people waiting for the next big thing in iPods from Apple are tantamount to the iPod losing its "cool". I hope this guy didn't offer to eat his own hat if he was wrong and the next iPod update exceeds sales of the previous versions.
What is wrong with an 80 hour work week? I do here in America. No one is forcing me to. I do it because I have goals that I want to achieve. Where in history did some omnipotent power declare a 40 hour work week? I got my work ethic because my grandfather worked from sunup to past sundown as a farmer and a barber. And from my father often worked double shifts while working on the Saturn engines for the Apollo program. Would I prefer to play all day...actually...no. I like to be productive. Do I like to play? Yes. And I reward my hard work and more importantly my productivity by doing just that.
My grandfather used to say (he heard it from others I am sure) he only worked half days. What he meant was 12 hours a day seven days a week. Yes, he did take time off to do non-work things.
**Note: this response is not targeted specifically at your posting. Rather your posting was just where my response to all the 80 hour work weeks are immoral comments. So please don't take it personally or even feel a need to personally respond since it was not directed at you.
You may want to check your power to those machines. I don't doubt that you have problems with them, but that number of problems for that few machines seems odd to me - and I've managed an account that had thousands of Macs, thousands of Windows machines, and thousands of various UNIX machines in one facility. My statistical analysis of the reliability of the various machines/OS environments leads me to believe that you suffer from some bad power to those machines (low voltages, dirty, etc.).
As I understand it, Spotlight is the realization of a technology that Apple originally introduced internally called "V-Twin". This was in the early '90's - I don't recall the exact year but it was either '91 or '92. Now, V-Twin may have had its original genesis in another technology, but it certainly was not anything that Microsoft had.
BTW...I am glad to see that Apple continues to pick up great people like Dominic. They did the same thing with the people at CaffieneSoft - the makers of Tiffany3 and PixelNhance. Those products went away quietly while Apple picked up the programmers (happened to also be the owners) and then Core Image was born. Very nice stuff.
OS X worked fine, in the early versions. I used it in product beginning with the beta version of OS X. Was it improved upon as time went on? You bet. But it worked fine for my organization and my clients.
As to exactly what changed between 10.0.x and and 10.1.x, I don't have the link nor the list. However, in general, a lot of frameworks were updated and added to-mostly in the Carbon realm. A lot of the legacy developers demanded better support for things that only Cocoa application had access to among other things.
True, it is temporarily combat ineffective. However, being able to take hits, the be repaired to fight again (with crew mostly intact) is far more desirable than reading headlines about a ship being sent to Davy Jones' Locker with no hope of recovery and all hands lost.
I have to agree with the parent's question regarding the modding of the grandparent. I don't particularly care what operating system I use-I just want the best tool for my productivity. So when the grandparent cited what appears to be the truth about Microsoft's "innovation" technique, I read it and thought, "sounds about right." But if they do a better job than Apple has done with the same features, then I'll use Windows instead. Same goes for Linux or any other operating system that comes down the pike.
OS 9 only screamed when you only ran one-maybe two applications at the same time. I would never have dreamed of trying to run the 15-20 explicitly instantiated applications (plus only God knows how many system instantiated processes) on an OS 9 box and expect it to be fast. And that is not counting the number of reboots I would have to make throughout the day.
Read the article before posting (or nag the editors for better summaries. They are talking about the stand-alone QuickTime Player and not the underlying QuickTime frameworks.
Agreed! But as many people as I see that are Mac fanatics, I see just as many that are anti-Mac fanatics. It is that approach that lead to a very poorly researched and written article that, if I did not give the benefit of a doubt, would believe that it was intended to deliberately spread FUD about OS X.
The only people with brains and with the knowledge to hack a Mac only do it for money. There is no fame or reputation involved. There is no academic interest. There is no proving all the Mac fan-boys wrong motivation. This is a world of pure money.
First, let me say that if a user can exploit an OS X vulnerability from a true user account (not admin) to gain root, then that is very bad. However, that has not been proven. The supposed hack has not been proven or the claim of unpublished vulnerabilities (of which the hacker said there were many) been proven.
The real problem for the majority of OS X users and security is the decision Apple made in the interest of convenience. When you first set up a computer, the first user is an Admin user. This is the account that the majority of home and small business users will use daily for their work. Apple does nothing to educate or guide users in setting up a daily work non-admin account and a separate admin account for maintaining the computer. Very many people fall into the realm of only running from the original admin account. This is simply not a good practice.
A better solution would be to give people the option of taking the more convenient but less secure set up or the more secure set up from the very beginning. And even after people have chosen the less secure one, give people an easy option to change the configuration without having to think about it much.
Most Macintosh users are used to using 6-7 application at the same time. Just a minor thing and forgivable since you are probably not a Mac user. Examples of apps constantly running on even 400 MHz G3 iMacs:
- Word processor - Browser - E-mail - MP3 Player - Photo Manager/Editor - PDF Viewer - Calendar application
That is just an example that I know intimately because it is my wife's that I took a look at to she what she was running. She rarely ever closes an application once she has opened it. And she happily runs her day multitasking away with nary a complaint. I asked her if she wanted a new iMac or PowerBook/MacBook Pro. Her response was, " Why? My computer does everything I need." But I do know that, in the case, her ignorance is bliss. I know that is she were to try a new dual-core iMac, she would not question it - especially with the number of applications that she runs.
However, I have to say that I am very happy with the longevity of the Macintosh (and very, very low maintenance) for the typical daily use of non-geeks.
I do agree with you that I would have expected things like applications to open so much faster and not be the cookers that the new silicone has tended to be. Hopefully, all the makers can fix that. I think that the competition between IBM, Freescale, Intel, and AMD are good things and I hope to see it-the competition-to continue. We all benefit.
Now if only Apple would release a Universal OS build that would allow me to run on each of those CPU makers.
Are you going to account for increased population? Add to that more people are gaining modern conveniences - everything from cars to electric toasters and light bulbs. Combine the two and even though we may get more and more efficient devices, we are very unlikely to actually reduce energy consumption world-wide. We can slow the need for a short while, but we need and can have even better energy resources. Necessity is the mother of invention.
In case you have not noticed, you are in a severe minority of aficionados that Apple is not marketing to. But hey, if a 17" form factor is the only thing holding you back from putting an Apple product into your equipment rack, then consider an Xserve!
- You are an IT worker and not one of the teachers who are wanted need for educating the kids. - You make a "decent" salary. For the purpose of my post I'll assume about $30,000 US.
Solution:
Resign from your position and introducing the teachers and students to Macintosh. Find the older kids and maybe even a teacher or two who are interested in computers and introduce them to the Apple Support Site and various very useful forums. Then resign and let the school use what would have been your salary to replace the aging Windows machines with Mac minis. Allowing for $1,000 a machine including any additional hardware that might be needed (monitors, keyboards, and/or mice), that would mean you could just about double the number of computers the school currently has. With that few number of Macs, any "interested" older child or teacher could easily do what little maintenance is needed.
Actually, yes, I do. I can personally tell you about several Windows installations (up-to-date with updates) with anti-virus software (up-to-date), that were still completely taken down by malware. In fact, the antivirus software was specifically attacked and rendered useless in several of the cases. The users do not make a habit of opening anything that they do not know exactly who it is from.
So, yes, I know that many of the stories that we read about are from users who keep their systems up-to-date and use a bit of common sense. Yet Windows is still compromised.
I can't speak for Linux (too many distros to even begin speaking about all of them). I cannot tell you if OS X will survive a concerted attack like Windows gets. No really knows until it happens (that goes for the supporters and critics equally). But I can tell you that Windows is full of problems even for prudent and prepared people. That much has been proven to me and that is what I tell my clients.
First, this is a bad hole - that much of the story is correct. However,/.'s comments that you can activate this problem by simply visiting a web site is absolute bunk. You have to download a file to your computer and have the automatic "safe file open" option turned on or you much specifically open the file yourself. You would think a geek site would be more anal and accurate.
But, this is something that Apple needs to fix. Files that don't match their extension should be handled.
They do have a copy you can run on *your* hardware. Just pay them currently $1,299 US and you get a nice little iMac to call "your hardware". Hey it even saves you the trouble of an install. Hey if you want to get work done instead of being a hobbyist, then you are truly in luck. The operating system is already tested and certified with your new hardware. Think of the time and frustration savings.
If the $1,299 is too steep for you, then be patient. Apple is sure to release a lower priced version of the operating system with different hardware to call your own very soon.
Slashdot Mirror
So...people waiting for the next big thing in iPods from Apple are tantamount to the iPod losing its "cool". I hope this guy didn't offer to eat his own hat if he was wrong and the next iPod update exceeds sales of the previous versions.
What is wrong with an 80 hour work week? I do here in America. No one is forcing me to. I do it because I have goals that I want to achieve. Where in history did some omnipotent power declare a 40 hour work week? I got my work ethic because my grandfather worked from sunup to past sundown as a farmer and a barber. And from my father often worked double shifts while working on the Saturn engines for the Apollo program. Would I prefer to play all day...actually...no. I like to be productive. Do I like to play? Yes. And I reward my hard work and more importantly my productivity by doing just that.
My grandfather used to say (he heard it from others I am sure) he only worked half days. What he meant was 12 hours a day seven days a week. Yes, he did take time off to do non-work things.
**Note: this response is not targeted specifically at your posting. Rather your posting was just where my response to all the 80 hour work weeks are immoral comments. So please don't take it personally or even feel a need to personally respond since it was not directed at you.
Clinton is the one that turned down having Osama delivered to him on a silver platter.
Clinton is no longer in office. Vince Foster was the last to suffer that unfortunate demise. So I don't think that this judge in an any danger.
You may want to check your power to those machines. I don't doubt that you have problems with them, but that number of problems for that few machines seems odd to me - and I've managed an account that had thousands of Macs, thousands of Windows machines, and thousands of various UNIX machines in one facility. My statistical analysis of the reliability of the various machines/OS environments leads me to believe that you suffer from some bad power to those machines (low voltages, dirty, etc.).
As I understand it, Spotlight is the realization of a technology that Apple originally introduced internally called "V-Twin". This was in the early '90's - I don't recall the exact year but it was either '91 or '92. Now, V-Twin may have had its original genesis in another technology, but it certainly was not anything that Microsoft had.
BTW...I am glad to see that Apple continues to pick up great people like Dominic. They did the same thing with the people at CaffieneSoft - the makers of Tiffany3 and PixelNhance. Those products went away quietly while Apple picked up the programmers (happened to also be the owners) and then Core Image was born. Very nice stuff.
OS X worked fine, in the early versions. I used it in product beginning with the beta version of OS X. Was it improved upon as time went on? You bet. But it worked fine for my organization and my clients.
As to exactly what changed between 10.0.x and and 10.1.x, I don't have the link nor the list. However, in general, a lot of frameworks were updated and added to-mostly in the Carbon realm. A lot of the legacy developers demanded better support for things that only Cocoa application had access to among other things.
To paraphrase Guy Kawasaki:
Get it working.
Get it working right.
Get it working fast.
Sounds right to me.
True, it is temporarily combat ineffective. However, being able to take hits, the be repaired to fight again (with crew mostly intact) is far more desirable than reading headlines about a ship being sent to Davy Jones' Locker with no hope of recovery and all hands lost.
I have to agree with the parent's question regarding the modding of the grandparent. I don't particularly care what operating system I use-I just want the best tool for my productivity. So when the grandparent cited what appears to be the truth about Microsoft's "innovation" technique, I read it and thought, "sounds about right." But if they do a better job than Apple has done with the same features, then I'll use Windows instead. Same goes for Linux or any other operating system that comes down the pike.
OS 9 only screamed when you only ran one-maybe two applications at the same time. I would never have dreamed of trying to run the 15-20 explicitly instantiated applications (plus only God knows how many system instantiated processes) on an OS 9 box and expect it to be fast. And that is not counting the number of reboots I would have to make throughout the day.
I'll take OS X any day over OS 9.
Read the article before posting (or nag the editors for better summaries. They are talking about the stand-alone QuickTime Player and not the underlying QuickTime frameworks.
Sure they have, it is called Safari.
Agreed! But as many people as I see that are Mac fanatics, I see just as many that are anti-Mac fanatics. It is that approach that lead to a very poorly researched and written article that, if I did not give the benefit of a doubt, would believe that it was intended to deliberately spread FUD about OS X.
The only people with brains and with the knowledge to hack a Mac only do it for money. There is no fame or reputation involved. There is no academic interest. There is no proving all the Mac fan-boys wrong motivation. This is a world of pure money.
First, let me say that if a user can exploit an OS X vulnerability from a true user account (not admin) to gain root, then that is very bad. However, that has not been proven. The supposed hack has not been proven or the claim of unpublished vulnerabilities (of which the hacker said there were many) been proven.
The real problem for the majority of OS X users and security is the decision Apple made in the interest of convenience. When you first set up a computer, the first user is an Admin user. This is the account that the majority of home and small business users will use daily for their work. Apple does nothing to educate or guide users in setting up a daily work non-admin account and a separate admin account for maintaining the computer. Very many people fall into the realm of only running from the original admin account. This is simply not a good practice.
A better solution would be to give people the option of taking the more convenient but less secure set up or the more secure set up from the very beginning. And even after people have chosen the less secure one, give people an easy option to change the configuration without having to think about it much.
Nope, he specifically stated "most consumers". The kind of people you are referring to are probably considered pros or prosumers.
Most Macintosh users are used to using 6-7 application at the same time. Just a minor thing and forgivable since you are probably not a Mac user. Examples of apps constantly running on even 400 MHz G3 iMacs:
- Word processor
- Browser
- E-mail
- MP3 Player
- Photo Manager/Editor
- PDF Viewer
- Calendar application
That is just an example that I know intimately because it is my wife's that I took a look at to she what she was running. She rarely ever closes an application once she has opened it. And she happily runs her day multitasking away with nary a complaint. I asked her if she wanted a new iMac or PowerBook/MacBook Pro. Her response was, " Why? My computer does everything I need." But I do know that, in the case, her ignorance is bliss. I know that is she were to try a new dual-core iMac, she would not question it - especially with the number of applications that she runs.
However, I have to say that I am very happy with the longevity of the Macintosh (and very, very low maintenance) for the typical daily use of non-geeks.
I do agree with you that I would have expected things like applications to open so much faster and not be the cookers that the new silicone has tended to be. Hopefully, all the makers can fix that. I think that the competition between IBM, Freescale, Intel, and AMD are good things and I hope to see it-the competition-to continue. We all benefit.
Now if only Apple would release a Universal OS build that would allow me to run on each of those CPU makers.
Are you going to account for increased population? Add to that more people are gaining modern conveniences - everything from cars to electric toasters and light bulbs. Combine the two and even though we may get more and more efficient devices, we are very unlikely to actually reduce energy consumption world-wide. We can slow the need for a short while, but we need and can have even better energy resources. Necessity is the mother of invention.
In case you have not noticed, you are in a severe minority of aficionados that Apple is not marketing to. But hey, if a 17" form factor is the only thing holding you back from putting an Apple product into your equipment rack, then consider an Xserve!
Assumptions:
- You are an IT worker and not one of the teachers who are wanted need for educating the kids.
- You make a "decent" salary. For the purpose of my post I'll assume about $30,000 US.
Solution:
Resign from your position and introducing the teachers and students to Macintosh. Find the older kids and maybe even a teacher or two who are interested in computers and introduce them to the Apple Support Site and various very useful forums. Then resign and let the school use what would have been your salary to replace the aging Windows machines with Mac minis. Allowing for $1,000 a machine including any additional hardware that might be needed (monitors, keyboards, and/or mice), that would mean you could just about double the number of computers the school currently has. With that few number of Macs, any "interested" older child or teacher could easily do what little maintenance is needed.
[let the linux fan boy flames begin!]
Actually, yes, I do. I can personally tell you about several Windows installations (up-to-date with updates) with anti-virus software (up-to-date), that were still completely taken down by malware. In fact, the antivirus software was specifically attacked and rendered useless in several of the cases. The users do not make a habit of opening anything that they do not know exactly who it is from.
So, yes, I know that many of the stories that we read about are from users who keep their systems up-to-date and use a bit of common sense. Yet Windows is still compromised.
I can't speak for Linux (too many distros to even begin speaking about all of them). I cannot tell you if OS X will survive a concerted attack like Windows gets. No really knows until it happens (that goes for the supporters and critics equally). But I can tell you that Windows is full of problems even for prudent and prepared people. That much has been proven to me and that is what I tell my clients.
First, this is a bad hole - that much of the story is correct. However, /.'s comments that you can activate this problem by simply visiting a web site is absolute bunk. You have to download a file to your computer and have the automatic "safe file open" option turned on or you much specifically open the file yourself. You would think a geek site would be more anal and accurate.
But, this is something that Apple needs to fix. Files that don't match their extension should be handled.
Clearly you don't.
Back to you.
They do have a copy you can run on *your* hardware. Just pay them currently $1,299 US and you get a nice little iMac to call "your hardware". Hey it even saves you the trouble of an install. Hey if you want to get work done instead of being a hobbyist, then you are truly in luck. The operating system is already tested and certified with your new hardware. Think of the time and frustration savings.
If the $1,299 is too steep for you, then be patient. Apple is sure to release a lower priced version of the operating system with different hardware to call your own very soon.