html is like air too - the quality can vary drastically.
If a band wants to charge for their recordings or performances they have every right (ethically and legally IMO). I am happy to pay for something I like. And I choose not to be a thief.
If you don't think that any pop or rock is worth the cost, then you only have the right to refuse the offer to sell. You don't get to rewrite the offer to suit your personal belief about the value.
My experience is that I have much prefered artists who also happened to have music as a "career."
I still like the idea of "DJ" as the one who seaches among the literally thousands of releases (each tuesday in the US) to find the gems. And I like the idea of quality control. And I like the idea of the personality of the DJ being part of that whole experience. And the sort of implied "take my word for it" because in the past they've been right again and again.
Hence the reason why when it comes to music WFMU is unbeatable.
It's still teresterial radio, but it's otherwise available on the internet at 128k for free, of course, you should pledge if you like.
* The reason the Mac OS runs so well is because it and the hardware it runs on are meant to run together.*
So technically windows may be the absolute most brilliant piece of software ever and is pushing the very limits of possiblity with its ability for massive interoperability.
Intel motherboard support is probably an easy likely place to start, if selling OS X to a larger market is teh goal. The vast majority of the time of course nearly everything is on the motherboard including the chipset, disk controllers, the NIC, the audio, and quite often the video. Intel really only has had a few dozen of these over the past years. There really isn't the zillions of configurations that people expect there are.
They of course don't have to try and support legacy products right away.
Of course, you realize that your precious macs are very likely going to have pretty much standard intel motherboards in them. That means that dell, who has 33% of the desktop computer market would be able to run OS X without any engineering obstacles at all. It's only going to be an arbitrary/business decision that closes that OS.
As far as wiring, that was a cool trick, not exactly revolutionary, the wires are there I believe they are just hidden. It's a trade off between flexibility and tidyness. You can't exactly add a scsi card and raid array to the inside of one those boxes. The G5 powermac is absolutely beautiful to look at inside and out.
I have to say that I really notice a trend that everything thats get modded up is pro apple corporation $ and pro status quo.
I've been moded as a troll for suggesting that apple hardward design isn't anything special (the industrial design is *quite* special)
The bottom line is that the same "generic" (or as I like to call it "standard") hardware is in macs as it is in PCs. The same manufacturers are manufacturing and the same materials are going in to it.
No one on here is really expert enough to know the financial implications of apple's decisions. But I really like OS X. I would love to see Apple compete more directly with microsoft and linux. Technically there is no reason os x shouldn't be able to run *perfectly* well on standard x86 hardware.
It seems like people are able to get linux working well on x86 hardware, and that's without the benefit of the existing hardware support relationships apple has.
anyway i'm glad you people like apple but get over it
and for the love of heaven stop with the car analogies.
responses by IT insiders who really have no understanding of the business picture.
You want responses from people who understand the small professional services firm.
My experience as an IT fence sitter in a small professional service firm is that if you were to recommend it, as the expert in the firm, the principals will be willing to pay for it.
I would simply make a list of your expected needs and spread it out over the best time periods to implement the changes.
If your owners are "cheap," don't try and be "strategic" into manipulating them into any more than they need. If they want the least expensive solution then your job is to find and make the least expesive solution work.
If they think throwing gobs of money at the systems will guarantee zero problems, then make sure and keep their expectations in check.
I like to point out that 4 hours of downtime costs X amount of employee time in $.
We use an outside consultant who we have basically full confidence in, and we simply just follow his suggestions.
-flexibilty/customization has very little to do with usability-especially if its just visual.
-bundled apps certainly doesn't have anything to do with usability
I've played with KDE and gnome a fair amount and neither particularly did much for me (I actually prefered GNOME but that might be because it was on a slow computer). Now OS X, that does it for me.
I have sawtooth G4 w/ AGP I think. If, for example I got a 1 ghz upgrade would it be almost as fast as if I had 1 ghz stock g4, or is the upgrade ghz rating not really an apples to apples way to look at things.
It's only a 400mhz, I have 512mb in it now.
I was thinking about a processor upgrade module. I don't know anything about macs, but it seemed like that would get me up to at least the current "low end "
I've been a PC person since 1984 when I was 9, but I have to say macs rule! I love the chassis I love the little pulsating sleep light.
On to world domination I hope
I left out the powerbook because I'm not really looking at laptops.
*Mac Mini..*
I wouldn't include any g4 in midrange
*As for the iMac, it will last through the same period as 2-3 PC systems so really the monitor point is a bit moot.*
really though?
I have a g4 400mhz, it's my first mac ever. I was just given it two weeks ago from a friend to play around on and it's great (OS X is great I mean). But that machine is 6 years old. It is far past its prime. On the other hand my old P4 1.5ghz from 3 years ago is very much still a servicable machine. By your reasoning, at this point both machines should need replacing, not just the mac.
A used low end single processor powermac g5 on craigslist at this point can be had for around $1300, so that's about as close as I can find to midrange.
I'd consider the emac another low end offering though.
I'm talking midrange of like 1000-1800
For $1000 I can get a PC with a digital flat screen a fast P4 processor.
The problem is there is no midrange product that seems reasonable to me.
Mac mini (Slow G4) + 17" monitor + mouse and key board = $900
You can get a lot of quality PC for that kind of money.
The g5 imac looks cool but it is well established that monitors can be modern and useful through at least 2 or 3 systems. You get the modern processor but at the cost of having to abandon your monitor if you upgrade (imaging ditching the 20" imac g5 monitor!)
Then the next offering starts at $1999, is the size of a server, presumably it had to be so big an aluminum and expensive to keep those G5s cool, but then they made the imac g5 which demonstrates that they could easily make a box with a reasonable price (for macs) and a g5 processor.
What I'd really like of course is that apple compete with microsoft directly and open up OS X to the rest of the hardware market. It's not like microsoft isn't making good money in software alone.
Slashdot Mirror
html is like air too - the quality can vary drastically.
If a band wants to charge for their recordings or performances they have every right (ethically and legally IMO). I am happy to pay for something I like. And I choose not to be a thief.
If you don't think that any pop or rock is worth the cost, then you only have the right to refuse the offer to sell. You don't get to rewrite the offer to suit your personal belief about the value.
My experience is that I have much prefered artists who also happened to have music as a "career."
I completely agree with your point.
I still like the idea of "DJ" as the one who seaches among the literally thousands of releases (each tuesday in the US) to find the gems. And I like the idea of quality control. And I like the idea of the personality of the DJ being part of that whole experience. And the sort of implied "take my word for it" because in the past they've been right again and again.
Hence the reason why when it comes to music WFMU is unbeatable.
It's still teresterial radio, but it's otherwise available on the internet at 128k for free, of course, you should pledge if you like.
'The worm only spreads to systems running on Windows 2000, XP and Server 2003'
this seemed funny to me. as if somehow not a significant portion of computers run those OSes
What are some examples of this?
I just have not been affected
*DO NOT PURCHASE SONGS BACKED BY THE RIAA.*
sorry I shan't participate in your little boycott.
If I like music on an RIAA label I will buy it.
Obviously this is more of a political issue than a music issue for you.
And talk about FUD! I haven't yet had the slightest of inconvience listening to CDs, ripping CDs and copying them to my ipods.
For you to think that there is some grand conspiracy is hillarious.
* The reason the Mac OS runs so well is because it and the hardware it runs on are meant to run together.*
So technically windows may be the absolute most brilliant piece of software ever and is pushing the very limits of possiblity with its ability for massive interoperability.
What is one to do if they don't wanna buy a new computer but don't wanna pirate?
why is pirating a forgone conclusion? I'm old fashion I guess and I think it's stealing. I don't even copy cds
Intel motherboard support is probably an easy likely place to start, if selling OS X to a larger market is teh goal. The vast majority of the time of course nearly everything is on the motherboard including the chipset, disk controllers, the NIC, the audio, and quite often the video. Intel really only has had a few dozen of these over the past years. There really isn't the zillions of configurations that people expect there are.
They of course don't have to try and support legacy products right away.
Of course, you realize that your precious macs are very likely going to have pretty much standard intel motherboards in them. That means that dell, who has 33% of the desktop computer market would be able to run OS X without any engineering obstacles at all. It's only going to be an arbitrary/business decision that closes that OS.
As far as wiring, that was a cool trick, not exactly revolutionary, the wires are there I believe they are just hidden. It's a trade off between flexibility and tidyness. You can't exactly add a scsi card and raid array to the inside of one those boxes. The G5 powermac is absolutely beautiful to look at inside and out.
I have to say that I really notice a trend that everything thats get modded up is pro apple corporation $ and pro status quo.
I've been moded as a troll for suggesting that apple hardward design isn't anything special (the industrial design is *quite* special)
The bottom line is that the same "generic" (or as I like to call it "standard") hardware is in macs as it is in PCs. The same manufacturers are manufacturing and the same materials are going in to it.
No one on here is really expert enough to know the financial implications of apple's decisions. But I really like OS X. I would love to see Apple compete more directly with microsoft and linux. Technically there is no reason os x shouldn't be able to run *perfectly* well on standard x86 hardware.
It seems like people are able to get linux working well on x86 hardware, and that's without the benefit of the existing hardware support relationships apple has.
anyway i'm glad you people like apple but get over it
and for the love of heaven stop with the car analogies.
The ipod has drm and people buy it.
Shouldn't you include dollar signs when speaking about anything to do with any entity that is for profit? Like Apple O$ X or corporate $upport.
responses by IT insiders who really have no understanding of the business picture.
You want responses from people who understand the small professional services firm.
My experience as an IT fence sitter in a small professional service firm is that if you were to recommend it, as the expert in the firm, the principals will be willing to pay for it.
I would simply make a list of your expected needs and spread it out over the best time periods to implement the changes.
If your owners are "cheap," don't try and be "strategic" into manipulating them into any more than they need. If they want the least expensive solution then your job is to find and make the least expesive solution work.
If they think throwing gobs of money at the systems will guarantee zero problems, then make sure and keep their expectations in check.
I like to point out that 4 hours of downtime costs X amount of employee time in $.
We use an outside consultant who we have basically full confidence in, and we simply just follow his suggestions.
I don't think we are talking about the same thing when we are talking about usability. oh well good day to you!
-flexibilty/customization has very little to do with usability-especially if its just visual.
-bundled apps certainly doesn't have anything to do with usability
I've played with KDE and gnome a fair amount and neither particularly did much for me (I actually prefered GNOME but that might be because it was on a slow computer). Now OS X, that does it for me.
*It's only their morals that are called into question.*
do slashdotters believe in morality?
What are some examples where KDE has better human interface than winxp?
One thing is certain, there are surely a lot of clever people at microsoft.
cool well I don't know if this is against the slashdot bandwidth code of conduct but thanks for all the info
JP
Thanks for the info
I have sawtooth G4 w/ AGP I think. If, for example I got a 1 ghz upgrade would it be almost as fast as if I had 1 ghz stock g4, or is the upgrade ghz rating not really an apples to apples way to look at things.
It's only a 400mhz, I have 512mb in it now. I was thinking about a processor upgrade module. I don't know anything about macs, but it seemed like that would get me up to at least the current "low end " I've been a PC person since 1984 when I was 9, but I have to say macs rule! I love the chassis I love the little pulsating sleep light. On to world domination I hope
*single-processor PowerMac*
that one was close to what i'm looking for but since they've ditched that, now they even have a bigger hole in their product line
*Powerbooks*
I left out the powerbook because I'm not really looking at laptops.
*Mac Mini..*
I wouldn't include any g4 in midrange
*As for the iMac, it will last through the same period as 2-3 PC systems so really the monitor point is a bit moot.*
really though?
I have a g4 400mhz, it's my first mac ever. I was just given it two weeks ago from a friend to play around on and it's great (OS X is great I mean). But that machine is 6 years old. It is far past its prime. On the other hand my old P4 1.5ghz from 3 years ago is very much still a servicable machine. By your reasoning, at this point both machines should need replacing, not just the mac.
A used low end single processor powermac g5 on craigslist at this point can be had for around $1300, so that's about as close as I can find to midrange.
I'd consider the emac another low end offering though. I'm talking midrange of like 1000-1800 For $1000 I can get a PC with a digital flat screen a fast P4 processor.
The problem is there is no midrange product that seems reasonable to me.
Mac mini (Slow G4) + 17" monitor + mouse and key board = $900
You can get a lot of quality PC for that kind of money.
The g5 imac looks cool but it is well established that monitors can be modern and useful through at least 2 or 3 systems. You get the modern processor but at the cost of having to abandon your monitor if you upgrade (imaging ditching the 20" imac g5 monitor!)
Then the next offering starts at $1999, is the size of a server, presumably it had to be so big an aluminum and expensive to keep those G5s cool, but then they made the imac g5 which demonstrates that they could easily make a box with a reasonable price (for macs) and a g5 processor.
What I'd really like of course is that apple compete with microsoft directly and open up OS X to the rest of the hardware market. It's not like microsoft isn't making good money in software alone.