I'd have to agree, this isn't news, its an infomercial. Sure, the X300 may be a signal of where IBM/Lenovo want to take their laptop line, but then you could say that about *any* new product.
The difference with your case is that there are no features of Tiger that actually required Core Image to run (except for the sploosh effect when dropping a new widget on the dashboard, oddly enough). In fact, Tiger runs on hardware that not only won't support Core Image, but won't even support Quartz 2D Extreme, and all the features will be the same. In fact, Apple continues to improve its non Core-Image video drivers in each version, so you actually get better performance under Tiger than you would have on Jaguar.
Over in Redmond, however, its a different matter. These emails clearly show that MS knew that these specific Intel chipsets would not be able to run Vista effectively, and that they decided to allow these computers to be tagged as "Vista Ready" because they wanted to keep Intel happy. The result: more sales for these Intel chipsets, and thousands of computers that claim to be "Vista Ready" that simply weren't. I'd say they profited from misleading their customers, and that stinks.
If this weapons system can take out anti-satellite launch sites, then surely all the enemy needs to counter it is an anti-anti-anti-satellite weapons system?
No, it isn't just the Mac OS X kernel that is open-source. Almost all of the services (such as Apache, FTP, ssh, Samba), databases, webkit (Safari), compilers (gcc), interpreters and shells, file system, bonjour, quicktime streaming and security components (kerberos, etc) are derived from open-source. Apple has both taken greatly and contributed greatly to open-source.
As for it "not being designed for server use" I think you'll find the majority of the world's servers are running the exact same services as Mac OS X (49.75% of websites are run on Apache, for instance).
1. Privileges, an ordinary user can't mess up the entire system. Unless the user is *really* stupid, they are not root and therefore do not have Write privileges on system-critical files. So even if you ran "rm -rf/" as a normal user, you would only lose the files you had access to and not break the system. This is not entirely true. Yes, the root account is locked out by default, but the default "out of the box" user account is a super-user, and therefore if you ran "sudo rm -rf/" you really would have a problem. The only thing is the malicious software has to convince you to enter your password in order to do this.
This is a reason why I suggest, if you set up a Mac for a family you should keep the admin account to yourself, and give everyone else a user logon without admin rights. The Mac is marginally more secure than windows, but you still have to use judgement and commonsense.
The company I work for enforces a lot of these password "best practice" rules. Most of our systems require passwords to be exactly 8 characters long, contining one digit but not in the first or last position, and must be changed every month. I'm certain this only makes things less secure, as users have a tendency to use even dumber and less secure passwords under these rules.
For instance, if you instruct ten thousand users to change their password every month, then at least 500 of them will have "APRIL" or "APR" in their password at this very moment - even if you expressly forbid them to do this.
Having complicated rules like "You must use 8 characters, including a digit in the middle" means that helpdesk staff often need to explain to the user several times what their password can be, and what they might or might not be able to have. When the average luser is now spending 3 minutes asking helpdesk - quite loudly in a crowded office - whether "BENJIDOG4" is a good password or not - then you've instantly lost the security of the password. Would it be more secure to let the user set a password without any requirement for it to contain numbers, or is it more secure to include the requirement and have every second user holding a long and loud discussion with everyone around them about what they're putting in and why won't it frickin work?
I guess Zonk can't possibly be accused of being biased towards Apple. Two stories in a row on the front page stating that the media are being "unfair" to Microsoft by covering Apple's highly popular and successful product launches over the last few weeks like the video iPod, iPod Nano, iSight & remote control equipped iMacs, Quad-core PowerMac, new PowerBooks, "Aperture" Pro-photo software, iTunes video store... all released in the last 14 days.
I guess Zonk thinks the media should be reporting on all of Microsoft's great product releases over the last couple of weeks. Like... umm... err...
I'm sure it'll be different when Longhorn or XBox 360 are released, and we'll see that these "horribly biased" media companies report on Microsoft. And when the Playstation 3 comes out, the media will report on Sony. It's only to be expected. Reporting on new products that are likely to make a HUGE market impact is a sensible thing for a tech writer to do, and right now Apple's innovation machine is in overdrive.
Bob's phone sales in Milwaukee has decided that Nokia is better than Motorola. And Viadork Systems has decided that Toyotas are better than Mazdas.
Seriously, though, since when is this news?
Agreed. Symantec waving their arms at all the Mac and Firefox and open-source anti-virus users and shouting "You're not safe! You're not safe!" is self-serving propoganda, not news.
Thank god I wasn't the only one who found the image of Walt Mossberg driving at 70mph (which I'm pretty sure is an illegal speed in the USA) in a convertible with the top down playing Fountains of Wayne as loudly as possible and creaming over his new iPod to be the very image of what it is to be a "total wanker".
Then again, writing about all this and bragging about the fact you have an Apple product on its launch day is even worse.
I'm a long-time Apple fan, and I suspect that when the Nano is put through some REAL tests by audiophiles and design critics who actually take the time to test it carefully, it'll come up sparkling - for what it is: an ultra-portable music player.
And if they want more for the more popular songs, they will quickly find those songs less popular.
Does anyone else wonder if this might go the other way... that record companies will under-price or even give-away songs that they want to push up the charts?
I'm sure we've all heard stories of "payola" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola including the surprising incidents where record companies actually spent more money on expensive launch parties and giving away CD singles than they could possibly make back on the album. Surely, by freeing up the prices, these sort of practices could become a real concern.
Of course, I don't know what effect that would have on the industry, if any, but I am sure there is more to this argument than has been covered here.
Surely that means that any projects created in the Intel Developer Tools will only run on Intel macs...
However the comment that "...Intel has also not considered whether it will support Altivec instructions, a 128-bit vector execution unit in PowerPC G4 and G5 processors. Such support won't be in the early betas..." would suggest that they will be creating universal binaries and supporting PPC, allthough not using these non-Intel processors to their full potential.
Slashdot Mirror
http://motioncomputing.com/products/tablet_pc_c5.asp I have the Motion C5 here right now on trial, and can't help but notice the similarity.
I'd have to agree, this isn't news, its an infomercial. Sure, the X300 may be a signal of where IBM/Lenovo want to take their laptop line, but then you could say that about *any* new product.
The difference with your case is that there are no features of Tiger that actually required Core Image to run (except for the sploosh effect when dropping a new widget on the dashboard, oddly enough). In fact, Tiger runs on hardware that not only won't support Core Image, but won't even support Quartz 2D Extreme, and all the features will be the same. In fact, Apple continues to improve its non Core-Image video drivers in each version, so you actually get better performance under Tiger than you would have on Jaguar. Over in Redmond, however, its a different matter. These emails clearly show that MS knew that these specific Intel chipsets would not be able to run Vista effectively, and that they decided to allow these computers to be tagged as "Vista Ready" because they wanted to keep Intel happy. The result: more sales for these Intel chipsets, and thousands of computers that claim to be "Vista Ready" that simply weren't. I'd say they profited from misleading their customers, and that stinks.
If this weapons system can take out anti-satellite launch sites, then surely all the enemy needs to counter it is an anti-anti-anti-satellite weapons system?
No, it isn't just the Mac OS X kernel that is open-source. Almost all of the services (such as Apache, FTP, ssh, Samba), databases, webkit (Safari), compilers (gcc), interpreters and shells, file system, bonjour, quicktime streaming and security components (kerberos, etc) are derived from open-source. Apple has both taken greatly and contributed greatly to open-source. As for it "not being designed for server use" I think you'll find the majority of the world's servers are running the exact same services as Mac OS X (49.75% of websites are run on Apache, for instance).
This is a reason why I suggest, if you set up a Mac for a family you should keep the admin account to yourself, and give everyone else a user logon without admin rights. The Mac is marginally more secure than windows, but you still have to use judgement and commonsense.
The company I work for enforces a lot of these password "best practice" rules. Most of our systems require passwords to be exactly 8 characters long, contining one digit but not in the first or last position, and must be changed every month. I'm certain this only makes things less secure, as users have a tendency to use even dumber and less secure passwords under these rules. For instance, if you instruct ten thousand users to change their password every month, then at least 500 of them will have "APRIL" or "APR" in their password at this very moment - even if you expressly forbid them to do this. Having complicated rules like "You must use 8 characters, including a digit in the middle" means that helpdesk staff often need to explain to the user several times what their password can be, and what they might or might not be able to have. When the average luser is now spending 3 minutes asking helpdesk - quite loudly in a crowded office - whether "BENJIDOG4" is a good password or not - then you've instantly lost the security of the password. Would it be more secure to let the user set a password without any requirement for it to contain numbers, or is it more secure to include the requirement and have every second user holding a long and loud discussion with everyone around them about what they're putting in and why won't it frickin work?
I guess Zonk thinks the media should be reporting on all of Microsoft's great product releases over the last couple of weeks. Like ... umm ... err ...
I'm sure it'll be different when Longhorn or XBox 360 are released, and we'll see that these "horribly biased" media companies report on Microsoft. And when the Playstation 3 comes out, the media will report on Sony. It's only to be expected. Reporting on new products that are likely to make a HUGE market impact is a sensible thing for a tech writer to do, and right now Apple's innovation machine is in overdrive.
Bob's phone sales in Milwaukee has decided that Nokia is better than Motorola. And Viadork Systems has decided that Toyotas are better than Mazdas. Seriously, though, since when is this news?
Agreed. Symantec waving their arms at all the Mac and Firefox and open-source anti-virus users and shouting "You're not safe! You're not safe!" is self-serving propoganda, not news.
Not true. As of QuickTime 7, QuickTime has been migrated to Cocoa.
Then again, writing about all this and bragging about the fact you have an Apple product on its launch day is even worse.
I'm a long-time Apple fan, and I suspect that when the Nano is put through some REAL tests by audiophiles and design critics who actually take the time to test it carefully, it'll come up sparkling - for what it is: an ultra-portable music player.
And if they want more for the more popular songs, they will quickly find those songs less popular. Does anyone else wonder if this might go the other way ... that record companies will under-price or even give-away songs that they want to push up the charts?
I'm sure we've all heard stories of "payola" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola including the surprising incidents where record companies actually spent more money on expensive launch parties and giving away CD singles than they could possibly make back on the album. Surely, by freeing up the prices, these sort of practices could become a real concern.
Of course, I don't know what effect that would have on the industry, if any, but I am sure there is more to this argument than has been covered here.
Surely that means that any projects created in the Intel Developer Tools will only run on Intel macs... However the comment that "...Intel has also not considered whether it will support Altivec instructions, a 128-bit vector execution unit in PowerPC G4 and G5 processors. Such support won't be in the early betas..." would suggest that they will be creating universal binaries and supporting PPC, allthough not using these non-Intel processors to their full potential.