Yes you do, you are not thinking of all that is needed to make a battery removable.
The battery itself needs a case.
There needs to be a reliable connection point between the battery and the laptop (requires more space)
The laptop frame needs to add support structures to compensate for the total lack of support coming from the battery area. (kinda like a convertible car)
The laptop needs an inside match to the battery case for it to fit in nicely, and to prevent dirt from entering the laptop case.
There has to be a latch system to secure the battery case to the laptop case.
ALL OF THE ABOVE TAKE SPACE!!! Space that is free to be used for a bigger battery if the it is non-removable.
you can probably take it to a service location to have the battery changed
That's a good point, if I know that the battery can be replaced, I have no problem with the new system, but I can't buy it if I don't know for sure...
<sarcasm>No, the battery is welded to the uni-body laptop frame, to replace the battery costs $4k and your left arm.</sarcasm>
iPods, iPhones, etc. all have enclosed "non-removable" batteries that can be replaced, either through Apple themselves or through third-party replacement kits. The Apple Air laptop has a similarly non-removable battery that can be replaced (only 7 screws between you and the battery, not bad). I really don't think Apple will go to great lengths to make it impossible so it should be similar to iPods and the rest.
Heck, this is why Apple swapped to the magnetic power plug! Why are the rest of the connections less important?
They swapped to the magnetic power plug to prevent the problem of people tripping over the power cord causing the laptop to fly across the room.
Apple does offer a close solution if you buy one of their new displays, it comes with a cable that splits to three connections for the laptop: power, display, and USB (goes to a built in USB hub).
The thing you forgot is that lots of docs were used to extend the number of ports available on the laptop, I remember one I had that contained an additional 5 ports (not including display, keyboard, mouse, and ones already present on the laptop) on the dock, so you could plug it in and get it all. There was even an option on mine to have expanded ram on the doc for the laptop to use.
Not a pain, just lots of downloading. All games and demos you download from the PSN store can be re-downloaded (go to PSN store, one of the icons in the top right is "downloads", which is a list of all the downloads you have ever done on your PS3), it's the saves you want to transfer to a memory stick to transfer to your new console. (I've been through this from the standpoint of putting a new HD in my PS3, 160gb baby!)
After looking into this a bit, it seems MS was in a rush to get the console out a year before the PS3, they also made several last-minute decisions (mainly the HD) that got in the way of the cooling (which is what is causing the RROD), also when an engineer found the DVD Scratching issue they decided not to do anything (vs two fixes that would cost them $$)
Both issues have come back to haunt them, the cooling issue still causes RROD on even newer models, and the DVD Scratching issue as well is still around on the newer models.
In short, MS was in to big of a rush to fix the problems so they passed them onto the consumer (why is anyone surprised?).
I for one like my PS3 and have no intention of getting a 360, there may be more games for it and more people playing but with such attitudes from the company I just don't want any part of it, I want to play games, not be waiting for it to come back from repair again.
Just what would that command do? I've never played around enough with Bash to understand that command (and I'm too busy with other projects/languages to give it a try), and No, I will not try it and find out...
I keep wanting to see Apple make use of it in OS X Servers, since OS X is x86/PowerPC agnostic. However OS X Snow Leopard is going to be x86 only... bummer... "Grand Central" sounds like something perfectly made for the Cell processor.
* Co-developed the most powerful consumer electronic chip on the planet along with IBM and Toshiba
Not like it will actually be *used*. Its not based on the x86 architecture which eliminates it from being used on both Windows PCs and Macs. And honestly, the speed of the media the console is reading from is a much larger bottleneck than its CPU.
Right, it's not x86, it's Power PC. That leaves Windows out of the running (who cares?) but Linux/Unix can run it no problem, IBM sells Bladeservers that run it, there are several companies trying to get into the daughter card processor market with the Cell processor. In theory OSX Leopard/Tiger could be modified to run on the Cell processor, both OS's are x86/PowerPC agnostic.
* Help push through the next gen media format BluRay and included it in the PS3
...And what is so great about BluRay? Honestly, I don't see BluRay lasting longer than DVD, and I imagine that 3-4 years from now there will be some other major new format. BluRay is good for today, but I don't see it improving anything in the long term.
yah.... I have trouble arguing with this... Mainly because the arguments you are trying to use aren't actually negatives... kinda like trying to argue against going outside because the sky is blue... Try again with an actual argument.
* Massively upgraded their first party developer studio array to over 20 compared to only 10 for Nintendo and, lol, 3 for Microsoft
...And name me some of Sony's first party games. Nintendo has Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, and loads of other recognizable characters that are sure-fire sellers. Microsoft at least has Halo which is a sure-fire sale. But what does Sony have? Nothing.
Metal Gear Solid 4 (ign score 10)
Resistance (9.1)
Resistance 2 (9.5)
Motorstorm (8.9)
Motorstorm: Pacific Rift (8.3)
Ratchet & Clank, Tools of Destruction (9.4)
Little Big Planet (9.5)
Grand Turismo 5 Prologue (8.5)
Siren: Blood Curse (8.4)
Valkyria Chronicles (9.0)
That looks like a bit more then just 'nothing'... in fact, those look like some highly rated games... what does Microsoft have again? Halo 3 rated a good 9.5, and how many of the above are rated at or above a 9.5? And that's all you could name for the XBox?
* Developed the incredible and gigantic Home online service
...Which most people hate. Just look at this comments thread.
Actually agree with you there, no interest in PS3 Home...
... the PSN store, while good, isn't spectacular, no argument there.
* Created the console with most enormous graphical power advantage over its competitors ever in console history
...Which looks no better than the 360 honestly. And only looks marginally better when compared to the Wii over a standard definition TV.
While your statement about how it compares to the 360 works, you comparison against the Wii is just plain dumb... Of course it looks no better on standard def! It's designed for High Def! That is one of the dumbest arguments I've seen, get a High Def TV and see how the Wii graphics suck in comparison to a PS3 or 360 running 1080i (can the 360 push it that high? not sure).
Face it, this generation Sony can't compete with Nintendo and MS.
Sony is competing, it's not doing the greatest but it's there and selling more. They've made some dumb decisions, (home), some smart decisions (BlueRay FTW!) and have made progress... who knows, they may just pull out in the lead this generation after all...
This is a possibility, and if it ever turns out to be the case I will be disappointed, but for the moment I will attempt to trust the guy and assume he is telling the truth for now.
This guy is really showing some strength and intelligence, he has made a public apology, and is working with the teacher instead of continuing the rant. The teacher has gotten a serious shaking up from the OSS community (through the blog) and he is doing his best to make a win of this situation.
This could have very easily degenerated into some serious verbal warfare, lawsuits, etc.
While I was interested by the first blog post and kept watch for followup, this second post makes me want to really keep an eye on this guy, actions like this apology are usually a sign of someone that should be listened to.
Exactly! Any reliance on an external source (even if it's your own external source) should be able to handle that external source going down, that's just good coding.
All those complaints about products crashing or going down because of this should really yell at the developers of that product, they didn't do basic failure handling.
They caved to the Music Companies demands for variable pricing (iTunes refuses to price on 'demand' but leave everything at 99c)
Music companies don't like iTunes dominance in the market, they tried giving Amazon DRM Free music to try and make it more attractive then iTunes
There might have also been demands that Apple force the sale of Albums (vs single tracks) at the Music Companies whim, but I'm not sure if that was part of this or other negotiations...
You state that Apple is trying to get rid of DRM. Let's go with that theory for a moment. My question is, do you believe that Apple is going to swap out their customers' protected files with DRM ones?
Joey
Actually they did. When EMI and Apple signed the deal to release EMI music DRM free they offered "upgrade" for 30c to DRM free for the first month or so, then they dropped the price for the DRM free to the same price as the DRM encumbered music (and I think the "upgrade" dropped to being free as well). Also other music companies are now starting to release music as DRM free, if you have purchased it before (within a certain time period) you can go to iTunes Plus and upgrade to DRM free.
Why do people keep going on about the 'iTunes lock-in'? It is equivalent to Zune Marketplace, and any other mp3 player + music manager combo (there have been many over the years). I had a Rio MP3 player before an iPod, it had a music manager that only worked with the Rio, and I had to switch to iTunes when I got my iPod... so what??
As for the DRM, Apple is trying to get rid of DRM in their music. EMI is selling all their stuff through iTunes without DRM, the other music labels are selling DRM-free music through Amazon but won't through iTunes because they don't like the market share iTunes has. When MS brought out the Zune they stiffed all their 'partners' (victims) who had bought into the 'playsforsure' DRM (which the Zune didn't play), is that anything like what Apple has done with iTunes?
What is your logic for going after iTunes as being anything worse then is already out on the market from damn near everyone else? From what I can see, Apple is trying to be better but is shackled by others (music labels), vs MS who seems to like screwing people and companies over.
#1: If Windows became as Secure as OS X (as hard to write viruses for) then the 'market share' would effect the number of viruses written.
#2: Given the likelyhood of the above, 'market share' will never come into the equation.
You completely passed over that part of the comment... I'm not saying that market share has nothing to do at all whatsoever with virus writers, I'm saying it's only a small percentage of the equation (something like 1%) and the rest is ease-of-creation. Since windows will always be easier to write viruses for (considering MS's constant commitment to backwards compatibility) the market share will never be a meaningful part of the equation, and there will always be significantly more viruses for Windows than for OS X, even if OS X gains a higher "market share" than windows.
I actually trust the 'page hits' stat more then the 'units sold' stat. The 'units sold' stat does not cover anything more then new units this year, there is no accounting for junking old systems, wiping and installing linux, etc. The 'page hits' sold is only based on usage, which doesn't really care if the unit is new or old, just that it's connected and used on the internet. If you have a sufficiently broad spectrum of websites covered by the stat tracking you can get a fairly good idea of the number of units out in the market. (at least for the user side, server side is more difficult, especially when considering internal servers that have no exposure to the internet).
So I guess what I'm saying is that both are inaccurate in different ways, I just think that the 'page hits' are closer to the truth.
Market share isn't the reason there isn't a virus for OS X, I mean, come on now, there's a virus for linux on iPod! A virus that depends on hacked hardware that only a few thousand people are doing! How does 'market share' handle that one?
The biggest reason there isn't a virus for OS X is that it's so difficult, as the parent mentioned, to get anywhere. The only things out there for OS X are things that rely on the user's stupidity (which is potentially unlimited) to install and infect, but that isn't a virus, it's a trojan, or spyware, or something like that.
Market share will never come into the equation, it will always be the ease of making the virus. If by some chance windows overnight became as secure as OS X, then we will see viruses for OS X, then when the security is equally difficult we will see market share being the reason for the number of viruses on a system. But we're talking about Windows becoming secure and well-coded to prevent hacking, that'll never happen, so Market Share will never become a factor.
Until the point where windows is as secure as OS X (or hell freezes over, whichever comes first), OS X will always have few, if any, viruses, even if it becomes the market leader.
I would have felt more comfortable with this if she was convicted on they conspiracy charges, but the charges that she is convicted on can easily be misapplied as precedent for convicting people who sign up under a different name.
For this case the conviction might make some sort of sense, but for a legal precedent it's dangerous.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes you do, you are not thinking of all that is needed to make a battery removable.
ALL OF THE ABOVE TAKE SPACE!!! Space that is free to be used for a bigger battery if the it is non-removable.
you can probably take it to a service location to have the battery changed
That's a good point, if I know that the battery can be replaced, I have no problem with the new system, but I can't buy it if I don't know for sure...
<sarcasm>No, the battery is welded to the uni-body laptop frame, to replace the battery costs $4k and your left arm.</sarcasm>
iPods, iPhones, etc. all have enclosed "non-removable" batteries that can be replaced, either through Apple themselves or through third-party replacement kits. The Apple Air laptop has a similarly non-removable battery that can be replaced (only 7 screws between you and the battery, not bad). I really don't think Apple will go to great lengths to make it impossible so it should be similar to iPods and the rest.
Heck, this is why Apple swapped to the magnetic power plug! Why are the rest of the connections less important?
They swapped to the magnetic power plug to prevent the problem of people tripping over the power cord causing the laptop to fly across the room.
Apple does offer a close solution if you buy one of their new displays, it comes with a cable that splits to three connections for the laptop: power, display, and USB (goes to a built in USB hub).
The thing you forgot is that lots of docs were used to extend the number of ports available on the laptop, I remember one I had that contained an additional 5 ports (not including display, keyboard, mouse, and ones already present on the laptop) on the dock, so you could plug it in and get it all. There was even an option on mine to have expanded ram on the doc for the laptop to use.
Not a pain, just lots of downloading. All games and demos you download from the PSN store can be re-downloaded (go to PSN store, one of the icons in the top right is "downloads", which is a list of all the downloads you have ever done on your PS3), it's the saves you want to transfer to a memory stick to transfer to your new console. (I've been through this from the standpoint of putting a new HD in my PS3, 160gb baby!)
After looking into this a bit, it seems MS was in a rush to get the console out a year before the PS3, they also made several last-minute decisions (mainly the HD) that got in the way of the cooling (which is what is causing the RROD), also when an engineer found the DVD Scratching issue they decided not to do anything (vs two fixes that would cost them $$)
Both issues have come back to haunt them, the cooling issue still causes RROD on even newer models, and the DVD Scratching issue as well is still around on the newer models.
In short, MS was in to big of a rush to fix the problems so they passed them onto the consumer (why is anyone surprised?).
I for one like my PS3 and have no intention of getting a 360, there may be more games for it and more people playing but with such attitudes from the company I just don't want any part of it, I want to play games, not be waiting for it to come back from repair again.
Until people start getting fingerprints all over them, at which point the will smudge... yah... I want in on that...
bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
Just what would that command do? I've never played around enough with Bash to understand that command (and I'm too busy with other projects/languages to give it a try), and No, I will not try it and find out...
Yah but two anecdote's don't make a parable... right?
It's not just the herbal = good, it's the level of BS so prevalent in much of it. What cracked me up recently was a label on a Burt's Bees product.
"Chemical free" the label touts.
Stop me if I'm going too fast, but if it really is "chemical free" what's in it?
... beeswax?
I keep wanting to see Apple make use of it in OS X Servers, since OS X is x86/PowerPC agnostic. However OS X Snow Leopard is going to be x86 only... bummer... "Grand Central" sounds like something perfectly made for the Cell processor.
* Co-developed the most powerful consumer electronic chip on the planet along with IBM and Toshiba
Not like it will actually be *used*. Its not based on the x86 architecture which eliminates it from being used on both Windows PCs and Macs. And honestly, the speed of the media the console is reading from is a much larger bottleneck than its CPU.
Right, it's not x86, it's Power PC. That leaves Windows out of the running (who cares?) but Linux/Unix can run it no problem, IBM sells Bladeservers that run it, there are several companies trying to get into the daughter card processor market with the Cell processor. In theory OSX Leopard/Tiger could be modified to run on the Cell processor, both OS's are x86/PowerPC agnostic.
* Help push through the next gen media format BluRay and included it in the PS3
yah.... I have trouble arguing with this... Mainly because the arguments you are trying to use aren't actually negatives... kinda like trying to argue against going outside because the sky is blue... Try again with an actual argument.
* Massively upgraded their first party developer studio array to over 20 compared to only 10 for Nintendo and, lol, 3 for Microsoft
That looks like a bit more then just 'nothing'... in fact, those look like some highly rated games... what does Microsoft have again? Halo 3 rated a good 9.5, and how many of the above are rated at or above a 9.5? And that's all you could name for the XBox?
* Developed the incredible and gigantic Home online service
Actually agree with you there, no interest in PS3 Home...
... the PSN store, while good, isn't spectacular, no argument there.
* Created the console with most enormous graphical power advantage over its competitors ever in console history
While your statement about how it compares to the 360 works, you comparison against the Wii is just plain dumb... Of course it looks no better on standard def! It's designed for High Def! That is one of the dumbest arguments I've seen, get a High Def TV and see how the Wii graphics suck in comparison to a PS3 or 360 running 1080i (can the 360 push it that high? not sure).
Face it, this generation Sony can't compete with Nintendo and MS.
Sony is competing, it's not doing the greatest but it's there and selling more. They've made some dumb decisions, (home), some smart decisions (BlueRay FTW!) and have made progress... who knows, they may just pull out in the lead this generation after all...
This is a possibility, and if it ever turns out to be the case I will be disappointed, but for the moment I will attempt to trust the guy and assume he is telling the truth for now.
This guy is really showing some strength and intelligence, he has made a public apology, and is working with the teacher instead of continuing the rant. The teacher has gotten a serious shaking up from the OSS community (through the blog) and he is doing his best to make a win of this situation.
This could have very easily degenerated into some serious verbal warfare, lawsuits, etc.
While I was interested by the first blog post and kept watch for followup, this second post makes me want to really keep an eye on this guy, actions like this apology are usually a sign of someone that should be listened to.
actually I was thinking:
Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start
Exactly! Any reliance on an external source (even if it's your own external source) should be able to handle that external source going down, that's just good coding.
All those complaints about products crashing or going down because of this should really yell at the developers of that product, they didn't do basic failure handling.
Amazon got DRM free for two reasons:
There might have also been demands that Apple force the sale of Albums (vs single tracks) at the Music Companies whim, but I'm not sure if that was part of this or other negotiations...
You state that Apple is trying to get rid of DRM. Let's go with that theory for a moment. My question is, do you believe that Apple is going to swap out their customers' protected files with DRM ones?
Joey
Actually they did. When EMI and Apple signed the deal to release EMI music DRM free they offered "upgrade" for 30c to DRM free for the first month or so, then they dropped the price for the DRM free to the same price as the DRM encumbered music (and I think the "upgrade" dropped to being free as well). Also other music companies are now starting to release music as DRM free, if you have purchased it before (within a certain time period) you can go to iTunes Plus and upgrade to DRM free.
Why do people keep going on about the 'iTunes lock-in'? It is equivalent to Zune Marketplace, and any other mp3 player + music manager combo (there have been many over the years). I had a Rio MP3 player before an iPod, it had a music manager that only worked with the Rio, and I had to switch to iTunes when I got my iPod... so what??
As for the DRM, Apple is trying to get rid of DRM in their music. EMI is selling all their stuff through iTunes without DRM, the other music labels are selling DRM-free music through Amazon but won't through iTunes because they don't like the market share iTunes has. When MS brought out the Zune they stiffed all their 'partners' (victims) who had bought into the 'playsforsure' DRM (which the Zune didn't play), is that anything like what Apple has done with iTunes?
What is your logic for going after iTunes as being anything worse then is already out on the market from damn near everyone else? From what I can see, Apple is trying to be better but is shackled by others (music labels), vs MS who seems to like screwing people and companies over.
let me reiterate:
#1: If Windows became as Secure as OS X (as hard to write viruses for) then the 'market share' would effect the number of viruses written.
#2: Given the likelyhood of the above, 'market share' will never come into the equation.
You completely passed over that part of the comment... I'm not saying that market share has nothing to do at all whatsoever with virus writers, I'm saying it's only a small percentage of the equation (something like 1%) and the rest is ease-of-creation. Since windows will always be easier to write viruses for (considering MS's constant commitment to backwards compatibility) the market share will never be a meaningful part of the equation, and there will always be significantly more viruses for Windows than for OS X, even if OS X gains a higher "market share" than windows.
To add to your point, Vista is XP with a service patch and a spiffy UI, so windows virus writers have a huge market to go after (XP and Vista) :)
I actually trust the 'page hits' stat more then the 'units sold' stat. The 'units sold' stat does not cover anything more then new units this year, there is no accounting for junking old systems, wiping and installing linux, etc. The 'page hits' sold is only based on usage, which doesn't really care if the unit is new or old, just that it's connected and used on the internet. If you have a sufficiently broad spectrum of websites covered by the stat tracking you can get a fairly good idea of the number of units out in the market. (at least for the user side, server side is more difficult, especially when considering internal servers that have no exposure to the internet).
So I guess what I'm saying is that both are inaccurate in different ways, I just think that the 'page hits' are closer to the truth.
It doesn't matter, they will still laugh at you when you get your next windows virus. :)
NOTE: the above does not apply if you are running a Unix/Linux based OS.
Mid 90's? so win 95? how did the security of Unix compare to the security of windows 95?
Maybe they stopped laughing at Unix security because they found something else that truly showed how bad security could be. :)
Market share isn't the reason there isn't a virus for OS X, I mean, come on now, there's a virus for linux on iPod! A virus that depends on hacked hardware that only a few thousand people are doing! How does 'market share' handle that one?
The biggest reason there isn't a virus for OS X is that it's so difficult, as the parent mentioned, to get anywhere. The only things out there for OS X are things that rely on the user's stupidity (which is potentially unlimited) to install and infect, but that isn't a virus, it's a trojan, or spyware, or something like that.
Market share will never come into the equation, it will always be the ease of making the virus. If by some chance windows overnight became as secure as OS X, then we will see viruses for OS X, then when the security is equally difficult we will see market share being the reason for the number of viruses on a system. But we're talking about Windows becoming secure and well-coded to prevent hacking, that'll never happen, so Market Share will never become a factor.
Until the point where windows is as secure as OS X (or hell freezes over, whichever comes first), OS X will always have few, if any, viruses, even if it becomes the market leader.
I would have felt more comfortable with this if she was convicted on they conspiracy charges, but the charges that she is convicted on can easily be misapplied as precedent for convicting people who sign up under a different name.
For this case the conviction might make some sort of sense, but for a legal precedent it's dangerous.