That is because the Apple Store is a dynamically generated web service. It is served up via WebObjects and is linked directly to your current personal shopping session. There is a way to send pages, but you really can't use the links in your browser's URL field.
Since they have to analyze a lot of data, maybe using the AltiVec engine in the PPC and/or the additional processing made available using Core Image frameworks (for processing images gathered by radar, laser, GPS, etc. made their work easier, cheaper, faster, etc. If they start out with a base Linux or BSD install, those frameworks are not available.
Believe it or not, there is much more to OS X than just a pretty interface.
Because of the new and ever improving (arguably) frameworks that come with the most recent versions of OS X. Not to mention the IDE (Xcode). It is just a nice, out of the box package for doing development.
It doesn't have to mean that. But it does.
Anybody working an a team of humans ought to be able to explain what they are doing. If they can't, they are working with the wrong species.
Yep. That sounds just as stupid as what you wrote. Everyone has skills. Some people have stronger skill than other people. Do you have any idea how many good ideas have died because the "engineer" (term used loosely to cover a wide variety of people who create great stuff) was not able to persuade other people of the worth of the idea/product/service/etc.? Much. Do you know how much mediocre stuff gets into the world because the people in charge of it know how to persuade others to use/buy it? How about I just put Microsoft on the table as Exhibit 1.
- Boston Tea Party: A riot against a government that DID NOT provide for a method of peaceful demonstration/protest. You could be shot just for saying you did not like the King.
- Rodney King: Until you have had to deal with a known criminal on PCP, you do not know the fright that the police officers have to deal with when confronting a man like Rodney King. Should police officers be inhuman and above that level of fear/anger in their jobs, yes. And any police officer or other public official that goes beyond the limits should be punished. However, don't think Rodney King some poor downtrodden soul. He, as subsequent events proved, was just a low-level thug and crook on drugs. He just had the fortune to be filmed from a distance and gave the news stations good fodder to hoist onto us. There are real abuses of government power that we can only hope get filmed. This one was not it.
LA Riots: Just plain wrong and it is a shame that anyone defends them. They were not even close to the same level as the demonstrations in China. And to try to compare them demeans the acts of the brave citizens of China. The LA Riots were just the, to them, righteous anger of a few turned into a cover for more thugs to harm innocent people. These riots were neither necessary nor right.
Finally: Don't confuse the tool for the abuse of said tool. The ability of a government to disperse a crowd with non-lethal means is far more preferable than spraying a crowed with machine gun fire. If the government is wrongly dispersing crowds then hopefully the news organizations that get so much wrong will get it right and will enable our (USA) citizens to correct it.
BTW...I am not totally against violence to correct a corrupt government and neither are the founding fathers of the United States of America. In fact, they provided for just such a possibility by providing for the citizens to arm themselves with weapons like guns. Don't let any anti-gun proponent mislead you. The main reason for the right to keep and bear arms is because they new that every government eventually corrupts to the point that the citizens must do something - every government. And no government fears anything more than an armed population.
You should read history and the current perspectives of the people who lead the terrorists. Leaving them alone will accomplish nothing. If you are speaking about the current groups originating, but not limited to, the Middle East, then you are speaking about a group of leaders who see their "war" on the West ending with the complete destruction of all Western civilization. The West does not believe as they do and they work to exterminate it.
Leaving the Middle East alone will only result in their building their power base of operations from which to better organize their attacks. Just as they did in Afghanistan before they were directly attacked.
If you think that you will win them over to a peaceful word by leaving them alone, then maybe you should study people like them throughout history.
BTW...do not assume that I am speaking about all Middle Eastern or Muslim people here. I am not. But as is normally the case, there are a relatively few people that want to control the rest. Take the constant fighting in Iraq for example. The minority represented by the ousted political party previously run by Saddam Hussien is trying too kill and intimidate the current government and to generally disrupt infrastructure rebuilding within Iraq. It has very little to do with Western Civilization and everything to do with power.
Right. You achieve peace by acceding to the demands of any who wants to rule your life. You can just become their slave. Then they won't bomb you.
Yep, good idea. Wait, isn't being a slave supposed to be a bad thing? Hmmm. Maybe that isn't the answer either.
Maybe you should wake up. Some people are just evil and like to rule others. History is rife with examples. You don't have to do anything wrong to be attacked by people who want power. It is your choice how you respond. I choose to fight back.
I too hope that they open source it. But if they do, will anyone work on it? If you are having problems getting Wotonomy staffed with volunteers, how well will WO fare?
I don't know the answers about deploying on a J2EE container. Maybe someone here will step in and let us know.
And, your first comment about WO not getting any fanfare for the last five years is spot on. Too, bad, too.
No need for the apology. You were very polite just incorrect!
Seriously, I don't think you need a deployment license. The deliverable runs on virtually any J2EE server. That means you don't need a license to run the application you build with it.
It seems to me that Apple just greatly increased the value of developing on OS X without much fanfare. The no fanfare part is what worries me. WebObjects is a great development tool for web services. I hope that they are not trying to end-of-life it because I am planning on some of my products being built with it. And, I think it is a huge mistake for them not to trumpet its inclusion in Xcode 2.1 with Tiger. Once your typical LAMP developer gets their hands on it and gets over the learning curve, they love it.
Go to http://www.apple.com/webobjects/ and then scroll down to the bottom of the page. There you will see this nice little section:
Deploy painlessly
- Deploys to virtually any J2EE server or the WebObjects J2SE application server
- Provides easy scalability with built-in clustering support and low-cost licensing
- Supports Servlet/JSP, EJB, RMI-IIOP and JTA/JTS (J2EE technologies)
So...tell me why you need Tiger Server? We can save the why you should WANT Tiger Server for another thread.
Why does Apple bother when Microsoft Office and Open Office are available? Good question. The answer is because neither of those suites take advantage of the operating system like Apple produced products will. And, if either or both decide to bail out, that would leave the Mac with no office suite. And that is just not acceptable.
If the X86 hardware is faster, then why doesn't it outperform the Xserve clusters using Mac OS X and standard Apple hardware? Don't mistake bad benchmarking for good data. Don't believe me, go to the Super Computer web site (http://www.top500.org/lists/plists.php?Y=2004&M=1 1) where 5 of the top nine are PowerPC hardware. Number 7 on the list is built by using stock Xserves ordered directly from the on-line Apple Store and running Macintosh OS X. And, there are even faster Apple clusters in the wild that didn't even bother to try to compete for a ranking.
These are not marketing ploys. These are very expensive machines that are optimized to go as fast as they can to get the job done. No political bias...just go fast. The only X86 cluster in the list above a ranking of 9 has nearly twice the number of processors as the Virginia Tech cluster. Maybe you should spend a little less time pounding out Visual Basic programs and do some actual research before making statements like that.
IBM has also been shipping dual-core chips since about 2001. They are primarily server with some workstation installs. But, still, Intel can only claim to be the biggest chip maker to ship a dual-core chip.
Slashdot Mirror
That is because the Apple Store is a dynamically generated web service. It is served up via WebObjects and is linked directly to your current personal shopping session. There is a way to send pages, but you really can't use the links in your browser's URL field.
Since they have to analyze a lot of data, maybe using the AltiVec engine in the PPC and/or the additional processing made available using Core Image frameworks (for processing images gathered by radar, laser, GPS, etc. made their work easier, cheaper, faster, etc. If they start out with a base Linux or BSD install, those frameworks are not available. Believe it or not, there is much more to OS X than just a pretty interface.
Because of the new and ever improving (arguably) frameworks that come with the most recent versions of OS X. Not to mention the IDE (Xcode). It is just a nice, out of the box package for doing development. It doesn't have to mean that. But it does.
Let us see how reverse arrogance works. Hmmmmm...
Anybody working an a team of humans ought to be able to explain what they are doing. If they can't, they are working with the wrong species.
Yep. That sounds just as stupid as what you wrote. Everyone has skills. Some people have stronger skill than other people. Do you have any idea how many good ideas have died because the "engineer" (term used loosely to cover a wide variety of people who create great stuff) was not able to persuade other people of the worth of the idea/product/service/etc.? Much. Do you know how much mediocre stuff gets into the world because the people in charge of it know how to persuade others to use/buy it? How about I just put Microsoft on the table as Exhibit 1.
- Boston Tea Party: A riot against a government that DID NOT provide for a method of peaceful demonstration/protest. You could be shot just for saying you did not like the King. - Rodney King: Until you have had to deal with a known criminal on PCP, you do not know the fright that the police officers have to deal with when confronting a man like Rodney King. Should police officers be inhuman and above that level of fear/anger in their jobs, yes. And any police officer or other public official that goes beyond the limits should be punished. However, don't think Rodney King some poor downtrodden soul. He, as subsequent events proved, was just a low-level thug and crook on drugs. He just had the fortune to be filmed from a distance and gave the news stations good fodder to hoist onto us. There are real abuses of government power that we can only hope get filmed. This one was not it. LA Riots: Just plain wrong and it is a shame that anyone defends them. They were not even close to the same level as the demonstrations in China. And to try to compare them demeans the acts of the brave citizens of China. The LA Riots were just the, to them, righteous anger of a few turned into a cover for more thugs to harm innocent people. These riots were neither necessary nor right. Finally: Don't confuse the tool for the abuse of said tool. The ability of a government to disperse a crowd with non-lethal means is far more preferable than spraying a crowed with machine gun fire. If the government is wrongly dispersing crowds then hopefully the news organizations that get so much wrong will get it right and will enable our (USA) citizens to correct it. BTW...I am not totally against violence to correct a corrupt government and neither are the founding fathers of the United States of America. In fact, they provided for just such a possibility by providing for the citizens to arm themselves with weapons like guns. Don't let any anti-gun proponent mislead you. The main reason for the right to keep and bear arms is because they new that every government eventually corrupts to the point that the citizens must do something - every government. And no government fears anything more than an armed population.
You should read history and the current perspectives of the people who lead the terrorists. Leaving them alone will accomplish nothing. If you are speaking about the current groups originating, but not limited to, the Middle East, then you are speaking about a group of leaders who see their "war" on the West ending with the complete destruction of all Western civilization. The West does not believe as they do and they work to exterminate it. Leaving the Middle East alone will only result in their building their power base of operations from which to better organize their attacks. Just as they did in Afghanistan before they were directly attacked. If you think that you will win them over to a peaceful word by leaving them alone, then maybe you should study people like them throughout history. BTW...do not assume that I am speaking about all Middle Eastern or Muslim people here. I am not. But as is normally the case, there are a relatively few people that want to control the rest. Take the constant fighting in Iraq for example. The minority represented by the ousted political party previously run by Saddam Hussien is trying too kill and intimidate the current government and to generally disrupt infrastructure rebuilding within Iraq. It has very little to do with Western Civilization and everything to do with power.
Right. You achieve peace by acceding to the demands of any who wants to rule your life. You can just become their slave. Then they won't bomb you. Yep, good idea. Wait, isn't being a slave supposed to be a bad thing? Hmmm. Maybe that isn't the answer either. Maybe you should wake up. Some people are just evil and like to rule others. History is rife with examples. You don't have to do anything wrong to be attacked by people who want power. It is your choice how you respond. I choose to fight back.
I too hope that they open source it. But if they do, will anyone work on it? If you are having problems getting Wotonomy staffed with volunteers, how well will WO fare? I don't know the answers about deploying on a J2EE container. Maybe someone here will step in and let us know. And, your first comment about WO not getting any fanfare for the last five years is spot on. Too, bad, too.
No need for the apology. You were very polite just incorrect! Seriously, I don't think you need a deployment license. The deliverable runs on virtually any J2EE server. That means you don't need a license to run the application you build with it. It seems to me that Apple just greatly increased the value of developing on OS X without much fanfare. The no fanfare part is what worries me. WebObjects is a great development tool for web services. I hope that they are not trying to end-of-life it because I am planning on some of my products being built with it. And, I think it is a huge mistake for them not to trumpet its inclusion in Xcode 2.1 with Tiger. Once your typical LAMP developer gets their hands on it and gets over the learning curve, they love it.
Go to http://www.apple.com/webobjects/ and then scroll down to the bottom of the page. There you will see this nice little section: Deploy painlessly - Deploys to virtually any J2EE server or the WebObjects J2SE application server - Provides easy scalability with built-in clustering support and low-cost licensing - Supports Servlet/JSP, EJB, RMI-IIOP and JTA/JTS (J2EE technologies) So...tell me why you need Tiger Server? We can save the why you should WANT Tiger Server for another thread.
Why does Apple bother when Microsoft Office and Open Office are available? Good question. The answer is because neither of those suites take advantage of the operating system like Apple produced products will. And, if either or both decide to bail out, that would leave the Mac with no office suite. And that is just not acceptable.
If the X86 hardware is faster, then why doesn't it outperform the Xserve clusters using Mac OS X and standard Apple hardware? Don't mistake bad benchmarking for good data. Don't believe me, go to the Super Computer web site (http://www.top500.org/lists/plists.php?Y=2004&M=1 1) where 5 of the top nine are PowerPC hardware. Number 7 on the list is built by using stock Xserves ordered directly from the on-line Apple Store and running Macintosh OS X. And, there are even faster Apple clusters in the wild that didn't even bother to try to compete for a ranking.
These are not marketing ploys. These are very expensive machines that are optimized to go as fast as they can to get the job done. No political bias...just go fast. The only X86 cluster in the list above a ranking of 9 has nearly twice the number of processors as the Virginia Tech cluster. Maybe you should spend a little less time pounding out Visual Basic programs and do some actual research before making statements like that.
IBM has also been shipping dual-core chips since about 2001. They are primarily server with some workstation installs. But, still, Intel can only claim to be the biggest chip maker to ship a dual-core chip.