> Really? Then ask yourself why Hitachi et al asked for it, and why the grand parent poster wrote "Linux is slowly becoming a microkernel" (certainly because monolithic kernel is great, eh?)
Hitachi et al want a stable driver API so they can write binary drivers. Linux doesn't want or need binary drivers. A stable driver API has nothing to do with the monolithic vs. microkernel debate.
> Ok, you're yet another ignorant fool and a blind zealot who believes that a legacy system designed in the 60's is suitable for desktop in the year 2007.
No, you're an ignorant fool and blind zealot who can't even remember what we're talking about.
> There is no stable (i.e. standardized) external driver API in the Linux kernel, so any further discussion in that direction is pointless and makes you look like a fool.
You completely ignored his comment, which stated that Linux does not have a stable external driver API by design. It's not necessary given Linux's development model, and it's not a flaw. In fact, it's a good thing. You're the fool for not seeing that, and for not reading the kernel documentation file he referenced.
I don't think the official sftp client allows reget, but the protocol supports resuming file transfers, and psftp (from the PuTTY suite) does have a reget. A lot of people think of PuTTY as just a set of Windows tools, but the source code is actually quite portable and it runs on Unix-like OSes fine.
> I required the people under me to NOT make decisions on incomplete information. On the other hand, if you had complete information you might have reached a different conclusion. Sure, I might be restrictive on sick days. But, do you know how many vacations and holidays my employees got? No, you don't. You also didn't know about my pay policies, or any number of other policies. That might have changed your mind.
Remember who you're responding to. I had no problem with your sick day policy. I had a problem with you saying that if a married couple worked for you, you would fire them right before Christmas to "teach them a lesson", independent of their work performance. That's sadistic. You're sadistic. I don't need to know anything else about you to know that I don't want to work under you.
> So you see, I had all the information I needed to know about you, and I also know that there's quite a lot of information about me that you did not have.
That's patently absurd. You don't know anything about my work ethic, my skills, or my past work experience. All you know is that I posted a comment on Slashdot saying like you sounded like you wouldn't be a good boss. And, in fact, I/didn't/ actually say in that comment that I'd never work for you. I said I thought you'd be unpleasant to work under. Had you offered me enough money, or good benefits, or whatever, that might offset the unpleasantness temporarily, though I'd have to think about it. On the other hand, you'd make a hiring decision based on a 10 word Slashdot comment. And you seriously think that's not a snap decision.
> You're still sticking to that "unpleasant person" theory. That's fine, but you don't know me. You do know that the people who worked for me are my friends now, so that pretty much disproves your theory.
No, it's possible to be a pleasant person as a friend without being a pleasant person as a supervisor.
> You're making a decision about what kind of person I am. I am making a decision about what kind of employee you would be. There's a difference. You might be a terrific fellow, but you make decisions without any real evidence.
I didn't make a decision about what kind of person you were. I said I thought you'd be a pretty unpleasant person/to work under/. I made a decision about what kind of boss you would be --- just like you made a decision about what kind of employee I would be. Our snap judgments were pretty much equivalent.
> I suppose paying 150% of the market rate doesn't offset anything else, does it?
It might be worth working under an unpleasant person, temporarily, for a high enough salary. Stress really messes up one's health, though, so long-term that's a bad strategy imo.
> Did you know that Benjamin Franklin was a publisher? Newspapers and almanacs, in fact. He also made a pile of dough and retired. Was it because he didn't like his job? I doubt that very much.
I didn't know he was in newspapers, but I did know he published almanacs. I have no clue how much Benjamin Franklin liked his career, and since he's been dead 200 years or so, I don't think you do either.
> I'm working hard to get Republicans elected, and if you haven't noticed it, we might need a little help with that in the near future. It's a real job, NOT for money, and most importantly, it proves me right, and it shows further that you just make shit up without real information.
That you're donating your time to get people with similar political beliefs to yours elected doesn't prove that you liked your job. In fact, it means that you like political campaigning more than your former job, which supports my claim that you didn't like it.
P.S. your website link goes to a 404 in case you didn't know
> I expected people who worked for me to make important decisions with something more than a sniff and a single data point.
Let me point out the irony that you just responded to my snap decision about you based on almost nothing by making a snap decision about me based on almost nothing:)
Anyway, technically I have two, and this is Slashdot. But, you do have to make decisions about where to work or whom to hire without knowing very much about someone personally, and if I had heard my would-be boss saying something like that, it would have at least given me strong reservations about accepting a job offer.
> If you're currently working, then your boss is a worse guy than me, and you're putting up with it. If he was any good, you'd be retired by now. I'm glad I could put some PERSPECTIVE on that for you.
Heh, funny:)
Sounds like you just got lucky, man. Maybe your company wrote the best software for managing dental records in the 1980s and made a bundle. There were plenty of ways to get rich with computers the past 20 years or so; some got lucky and found them, some got unlucky instead.
In any case, your comment further betrays what you value in life, and makes me all the less eager to work closely with you:
1. You're hypercompetitive:
You actually flamed me over a snarky offhand comment on Slashdot? wtf, man? 2. You don't really enjoy your work:
Otherwise, you'd still be doing it even though you're rich. 3. You assume that money is the only possible benefit of work:
"If he was any good, you'd be retired right now."
(3) is the thing that would give me the most pause about working under you. I want to enjoy my work. If I can also make a ton of money from it, then great, but if it's just enough to pay the bills that's fine, too.
But hey, the world's big enough for a lot of different types of people, and I can't think of any reason we'd ever have to work together. Have fun on your yacht:)
> If the husband and wife both worked for me, I'd fire both of them right before Christmas, because that's how you teach people it's stupid to put both eggs into one basket.
Well, I was actually with you with regard to your child sick day policy being generous, but this comment makes you sound like you were probably a pretty unpleasant guy to work under, though comparisons to Hitler might still be somewhat extreme..
> I've read enough of the science to be satisfied with it. I'm reasonably familiar with the standards of psych research, and it's certainly not all set in stone, but the preponderance of evidence right now is on the side of my claim, and at least there isn't any real evidence behind the grandparent's claim.
You still haven't provided any evidence. You just linked to seemingly random academic psychological articles on lying, none of which support your view.
I think it's more likely that/M$ sites/ are responsible for this. M$ is running a service called "Windows Live Blogs", which has been growing in membership recently. Each blog gets its own subdomain, so each blog counts as a separate "site". M$ of course uses IIS to host its blog service, so it looks to Netcraft like IIS is gaining market share. However, the gains are totally illusory; looking at SecuritySpace confirms that the problem is with the way Netcraft counts sites.
> The law is clear here as well; you CANNOT record a movie in a theater. Not even one frame. The act of filming ANY of the movie is illegal, so the crime has not been averted its already been committed.
n/m you're correct.
She's being charged under an unjust DMCAlike law. So, the law should be changed.
> The law is clear here as well; you CANNOT record a movie in a theater. Not even one frame. The act of filming ANY of the movie is illegal, so the crime has not been averted its already been committed.
I don't believe you. I think recording a 20 second clip is fair use. Prove me wrong.
> That's been scientifically proven untrue. The world needs a certain amount of harmless lying to grease the social wheels. It makes our society function better.
Science doesn't prove things. And psychology/sociology is so flaky that it's constantly crossing the line back and forth between science and BS. Maybe you should engage in a little more critical thought before becoming so convinced in the future.
The articles are indeed psychological research on lying, and some psychological research does just make the cut as science (I haven't looked at those articles in particular enough to tell whether it does), but the articles he links to don't support his claim that some lying is good.
Firefox works (actually Netscape 4 even works), but nothing except IE works in "Premium" mode, so you can't do advanced things like search messages. If I were to use Exchange Webmail as my primary email client, I'd want to do stuff like search messages. But you're right that for just checking mail, any browser is fine.
> I think we need to look at the intent of the life as well as the law. If I kill a pregnant woman, I get charge with 2 murders. If I attack a pregnant woman and cause a miscarriage, I get charge with murder.
Not so fast. State laws differ on this, and fetal homicide laws are currently being hijacked by political groups on both sides of the abortion debate to bolster their cases, so referring to them isn't really getting at any sort of deep, shared human intuition.
> In any event your suggestions would likely result in the storm troopers coming to my office and marching me out the door.
!
I misunderstood your previous comment, then. I assumed you meant that company policy was that the email/servers/ run on Exchange, not that you have to use Outlook to check your email on the client! Mandating an email server can be justified on a server consolidation basis (even though standardizing on Exchange is rather dumb); mandating an email client is truly nonsensical. I guess the concept of "webmail" is foreign to whatever brain-dead slug invented/that/ policy.
Well, certainly I wouldn't suggest you risk your job... may sanity return to your workplace soon:( Outlook runs in WINE but I'm not sure if that would satisfy their neurosis...
> Apps are not expendable. If they have a certain features that no other applications have, and those features either make things previously impossible possible, or cut down the time needed to do something, then those features are what you want, and you don't care what OS runs under the hood.
That's a good point. But, in general, if a feature is truly useful it'll be quickly (for proprietary) or very quickly (for OSS) implemented by the other apps in the same field. If it's not, you need to ask yourself whether this feature is truly necessary, or if you're going about the problem wrong, before concluding no apps that meet your needs exist.
For example, if the feature is something like, "automatically uploads data to an FTP server when IU close it down", perhaps what you really want is to export the data to a file and then upload to the web site with a shell script and command-line. This is a cooked example; please don't argue with me on it in particular. My point is that apps shouldn't all try to do everything because the result may be obscure bugs in all apps. If a feature is only implemented by a few apps, it may be because the other developers realize that this feature doesn't belong in the problem domain.
On the other hand, if the feature is something like, "can read the undocumented binary file format of proprietary product X", then your current system is rotten on the inside. Your data should always be in standard formats readable by many apps, and if it isn't, you need to change that as soon as possible rather than continuing to be locked in to a single vendor.
As far as Linux not technically being the best OS out there, I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that one. The hardware support is nice (and actually superior to Windows and OS X), that's true, but I don't see any advantage in application support, really... most apps that run on Linux also run on the BSDs and Solaris; porting between Unixes is easy. The main reason I currently find Linux technically superior is because of its excellent filesystem support. The FUSE project is truly supurb, and Linux's VFS layer also allows it to support a wide variety of filesystems in-kernel. It is true that ZFS is native to Solaris, though, and I'm watching closely how Linux responds to it.
> Codecs not verified to run on Linux listed here (http://soggie.soti.org/linux/linux-codecs/), here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_ codecs#Operating_system_support) and here (http://labs.divx.com/DivXLinuxCodec) are illegal to use without owning Windows. (all distros).
That's not entirely accurate... no one knows if they're illegal to use without owning Windows. What is known is that no one's ever gotten in trouble for it.
It probably is legal in Europe, and it might be legal in the U.S., too, given a recent Supreme Court decision which raised the quality bar for patents.
God damn, what field are you guys in? I'm not really involved in research yet, but from what I've looked at most journals in CS want PDF or LaTeX (and really prefer LaTeX). I'm told the physics and math people like LaTeX too.
> My only real complaint is that email is Microsoft Only (by decree)
You have a few alternatives (assuming you use Linux or can hack your Mac to run Linux stuff):
1. If they have the IMAP server turned on, Thunderbird works fine. 2. If they don't have the IMAP server turned on, badger them until they do. 3. If you can't get them to turn the IMAP server on, Evolution can connect without it (though it's hacky). 4. If NONE OF THAT works, then you can run IE6 under WINE and use the Exchange webmail interface.
Apps don't drive the OS I use. Apps are expendable -- if you can't switch to another one at the drop of a hat, should doing so be required, you're doing something wrong.
I use Konqueror and sometimes Opera, but if I had to switch to Firefox it would be no biggy.
I'm using Thunderbird right now but thinking of switching to CONE.
I write my OWN PIM suite and financial apps, thankyouverymuch... not trusting anyone else with those.
And I run Linux because it's technically the best operating system out there. But if Solaris has a few more home runs like ZFS I might switch that.
The OS is just a really big, really important app. Sacrificing it for lesser apps is a bad move.
By your use of this term, you don't know what it means. College students are almost all over 18 and therefore not minors; saying a university is "in loco parentis" with respect to them is nonsensical.
Slashdot Mirror
> Really? Then ask yourself why Hitachi et al asked for it, and why the grand parent poster wrote "Linux is slowly becoming a microkernel" (certainly because monolithic kernel is great, eh?)
Hitachi et al want a stable driver API so they can write binary drivers. Linux doesn't want or need binary drivers. A stable driver API has nothing to do with the monolithic vs. microkernel debate.
> Ok, you're yet another ignorant fool and a blind zealot who believes that a legacy system designed in the 60's is suitable for desktop in the year 2007.
No, you're an ignorant fool and blind zealot who can't even remember what we're talking about.
Hello trifish,
> There is no stable (i.e. standardized) external driver API in the Linux kernel, so any further discussion in that direction is pointless and makes you look like a fool.
You completely ignored his comment, which stated that Linux does not have a stable external driver API by design. It's not necessary given Linux's development model, and it's not a flaw. In fact, it's a good thing. You're the fool for not seeing that, and for not reading the kernel documentation file he referenced.
I don't think the official sftp client allows reget, but the protocol supports resuming file transfers, and psftp (from the PuTTY suite) does have a reget. A lot of people think of PuTTY as just a set of Windows tools, but the source code is actually quite portable and it runs on Unix-like OSes fine.
> I required the people under me to NOT make decisions on incomplete information. On the other hand, if you had complete information you might have reached a different conclusion. Sure, I might be restrictive on sick days. But, do you know how many vacations and holidays my employees got? No, you don't. You also didn't know about my pay policies, or any number of other policies. That might have changed your mind.
/didn't/ actually say in that comment that I'd never work for you. I said I thought you'd be unpleasant to work under. Had you offered me enough money, or good benefits, or whatever, that might offset the unpleasantness temporarily, though I'd have to think about it. On the other hand, you'd make a hiring decision based on a 10 word Slashdot comment. And you seriously think that's not a snap decision.
Remember who you're responding to. I had no problem with your sick day policy. I had a problem with you saying that if a married couple worked for you, you would fire them right before Christmas to "teach them a lesson", independent of their work performance. That's sadistic. You're sadistic. I don't need to know anything else about you to know that I don't want to work under you.
> So you see, I had all the information I needed to know about you, and I also know that there's quite a lot of information about me that you did not have.
That's patently absurd. You don't know anything about my work ethic, my skills, or my past work experience. All you know is that I posted a comment on Slashdot saying like you sounded like you wouldn't be a good boss. And, in fact, I
> You're still sticking to that "unpleasant person" theory. That's fine, but you don't know me. You do know that the people who worked for me are my friends now, so that pretty much disproves your theory.
No, it's possible to be a pleasant person as a friend without being a pleasant person as a supervisor.
> You're making a decision about what kind of person I am. I am making a decision about what kind of employee you would be. There's a difference. You might be a terrific fellow, but you make decisions without any real evidence.
/to work under/. I made a decision about what kind of boss you would be --- just like you made a decision about what kind of employee I would be. Our snap judgments were pretty much equivalent.
I didn't make a decision about what kind of person you were. I said I thought you'd be a pretty unpleasant person
> I suppose paying 150% of the market rate doesn't offset anything else, does it?
It might be worth working under an unpleasant person, temporarily, for a high enough salary. Stress really messes up one's health, though, so long-term that's a bad strategy imo.
> Did you know that Benjamin Franklin was a publisher? Newspapers and almanacs, in fact. He also made a pile of dough and retired. Was it because he didn't like his job? I doubt that very much.
I didn't know he was in newspapers, but I did know he published almanacs. I have no clue how much Benjamin Franklin liked his career, and since he's been dead 200 years or so, I don't think you do either.
> I'm working hard to get Republicans elected, and if you haven't noticed it, we might need a little help with that in the near future. It's a real job, NOT for money, and most importantly, it proves me right, and it shows further that you just make shit up without real information.
That you're donating your time to get people with similar political beliefs to yours elected doesn't prove that you liked your job. In fact, it means that you like political campaigning more than your former job, which supports my claim that you didn't like it.
P.S. your website link goes to a 404 in case you didn't know
umm ... network TV isn't dead, dude ... I watch it at least once a week. It's not dead. Seriously, get a TV and check yourself...
> I wouldn't have hired you either.
:)
:)
:)
Good.
> I expected people who worked for me to make important decisions with something more than a sniff and a single data point.
Let me point out the irony that you just responded to my snap decision about you based on almost nothing by making a snap decision about me based on almost nothing
Anyway, technically I have two, and this is Slashdot. But, you do have to make decisions about where to work or whom to hire without knowing very much about someone personally, and if I had heard my would-be boss saying something like that, it would have at least given me strong reservations about accepting a job offer.
> If you're currently working, then your boss is a worse guy than me, and you're putting up with it. If he was any good, you'd be retired by now. I'm glad I could put some PERSPECTIVE on that for you.
Heh, funny
Sounds like you just got lucky, man. Maybe your company wrote the best software for managing dental records in the 1980s and made a bundle. There were plenty of ways to get rich with computers the past 20 years or so; some got lucky and found them, some got unlucky instead.
In any case, your comment further betrays what you value in life, and makes me all the less eager to work closely with you:
1. You're hypercompetitive:
You actually flamed me over a snarky offhand comment on Slashdot? wtf, man?
2. You don't really enjoy your work:
Otherwise, you'd still be doing it even though you're rich.
3. You assume that money is the only possible benefit of work:
"If he was any good, you'd be retired right now."
(3) is the thing that would give me the most pause about working under you. I want to enjoy my work. If I can also make a ton of money from it, then great, but if it's just enough to pay the bills that's fine, too.
But hey, the world's big enough for a lot of different types of people, and I can't think of any reason we'd ever have to work together. Have fun on your yacht
> If the husband and wife both worked for me, I'd fire both of them right before Christmas, because that's how you teach people it's stupid to put both eggs into one basket.
Well, I was actually with you with regard to your child sick day policy being generous, but this comment makes you sound like you were probably a pretty unpleasant guy to work under, though comparisons to Hitler might still be somewhat extreme..
> I've read enough of the science to be satisfied with it. I'm reasonably familiar with the standards of psych research, and it's certainly not all set in stone, but the preponderance of evidence right now is on the side of my claim, and at least there isn't any real evidence behind the grandparent's claim.
You still haven't provided any evidence. You just linked to seemingly random academic psychological articles on lying, none of which support your view.
I think it's more likely that /M$ sites/ are responsible for this. M$ is running a service called "Windows Live Blogs", which has been growing in membership recently. Each blog gets its own subdomain, so each blog counts as a separate "site". M$ of course uses IIS to host its blog service, so it looks to Netcraft like IIS is gaining market share. However, the gains are totally illusory; looking at SecuritySpace confirms that the problem is with the way Netcraft counts sites.
> The law is clear here as well; you CANNOT record a movie in a theater. Not even one frame. The act of filming ANY of the movie is illegal, so the crime has not been averted its already been committed.
n/m you're correct.
She's being charged under an unjust DMCAlike law. So, the law should be changed.
> The law is clear here as well; you CANNOT record a movie in a theater. Not even one frame. The act of filming ANY of the movie is illegal, so the crime has not been averted its already been committed.
I don't believe you. I think recording a 20 second clip is fair use. Prove me wrong.
> That's been scientifically proven untrue. The world needs a certain amount of harmless lying to grease the social wheels. It makes our society function better.
Science doesn't prove things. And psychology/sociology is so flaky that it's constantly crossing the line back and forth between science and BS. Maybe you should engage in a little more critical thought before becoming so convinced in the future.
Click the links and you won't be so impressed.
The articles are indeed psychological research on lying, and some psychological research does just make the cut as science (I haven't looked at those articles in particular enough to tell whether it does), but the articles he links to don't support his claim that some lying is good.
> Plus, ACS guidelines generally specify Word files as the desired submission format.
m l
I can't find a statement of preferred format on the site, but they at least accept TeX files, according to this:
http://pubs.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/tex.ht
If you'd still like to use LaTeX, you may find the following page of interest.
http://www.tug.org/utilities/texconv/textopc.html
Thanks for your response, and have a nice day!
Firefox works (actually Netscape 4 even works), but nothing except IE works in "Premium" mode, so you can't do advanced things like search messages. If I were to use Exchange Webmail as my primary email client, I'd want to do stuff like search messages. But you're right that for just checking mail, any browser is fine.
> I think we need to look at the intent of the life as well as the law. If I kill a pregnant woman, I get charge with 2 murders. If I attack a pregnant woman and cause a miscarriage, I get charge with murder.
h tm
Not so fast. State laws differ on this, and fetal homicide laws are currently being hijacked by political groups on both sides of the abortion debate to bolster their cases, so referring to them isn't really getting at any sort of deep, shared human intuition.
From http://crime.about.com/od/issues/a/fetalhomicide.
"Currently, 30 states recognize the unlawful killing of an unborn child as homicide in at least some circumstances."
This means that 20 states do not.
> In any event your suggestions would likely result in the storm troopers coming to my office and marching me out the door.
/servers/ run on Exchange, not that you have to use Outlook to check your email on the client! Mandating an email server can be justified on a server consolidation basis (even though standardizing on Exchange is rather dumb); mandating an email client is truly nonsensical. I guess the concept of "webmail" is foreign to whatever brain-dead slug invented /that/ policy.
... may sanity return to your workplace soon :( Outlook runs in WINE but I'm not sure if that would satisfy their neurosis...
!
I misunderstood your previous comment, then. I assumed you meant that company policy was that the email
Well, certainly I wouldn't suggest you risk your job
> Apps are not expendable. If they have a certain features that no other applications have, and those features either make things previously impossible possible, or cut down the time needed to do something, then those features are what you want, and you don't care what OS runs under the hood.
... most apps that run on Linux also run on the BSDs and Solaris; porting between Unixes is easy. The main reason I currently find Linux technically superior is because of its excellent filesystem support. The FUSE project is truly supurb, and Linux's VFS layer also allows it to support a wide variety of filesystems in-kernel. It is true that ZFS is native to Solaris, though, and I'm watching closely how Linux responds to it.
That's a good point. But, in general, if a feature is truly useful it'll be quickly (for proprietary) or very quickly (for OSS) implemented by the other apps in the same field. If it's not, you need to ask yourself whether this feature is truly necessary, or if you're going about the problem wrong, before concluding no apps that meet your needs exist.
For example, if the feature is something like, "automatically uploads data to an FTP server when IU close it down", perhaps what you really want is to export the data to a file and then upload to the web site with a shell script and command-line. This is a cooked example; please don't argue with me on it in particular. My point is that apps shouldn't all try to do everything because the result may be obscure bugs in all apps. If a feature is only implemented by a few apps, it may be because the other developers realize that this feature doesn't belong in the problem domain.
On the other hand, if the feature is something like, "can read the undocumented binary file format of proprietary product X", then your current system is rotten on the inside. Your data should always be in standard formats readable by many apps, and if it isn't, you need to change that as soon as possible rather than continuing to be locked in to a single vendor.
As far as Linux not technically being the best OS out there, I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that one. The hardware support is nice (and actually superior to Windows and OS X), that's true, but I don't see any advantage in application support, really
> Codecs not verified to run on Linux listed here (http://soggie.soti.org/linux/linux-codecs/), here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_ codecs#Operating_system_support) and here (http://labs.divx.com/DivXLinuxCodec) are illegal to use without owning Windows. (all distros).
... no one knows if they're illegal to use without owning Windows. What is known is that no one's ever gotten in trouble for it.
That's not entirely accurate
It probably is legal in Europe, and it might be legal in the U.S., too, given a recent Supreme Court decision which raised the quality bar for patents.
God damn, what field are you guys in? I'm not really involved in research yet, but from what I've looked at most journals in CS want PDF or LaTeX (and really prefer LaTeX). I'm told the physics and math people like LaTeX too.
> My only real complaint is that email is Microsoft Only (by decree)
You have a few alternatives (assuming you use Linux or can hack your Mac to run Linux stuff):
1. If they have the IMAP server turned on, Thunderbird works fine.
2. If they don't have the IMAP server turned on, badger them until they do.
3. If you can't get them to turn the IMAP server on, Evolution can connect without it (though it's hacky).
4. If NONE OF THAT works, then you can run IE6 under WINE and use the Exchange webmail interface.
Apps don't drive the OS I use. Apps are expendable -- if you can't switch to another one at the drop of a hat, should doing so be required, you're doing something wrong.
... not trusting anyone else with those.
I use Konqueror and sometimes Opera, but if I had to switch to Firefox it would be no biggy.
I'm using Thunderbird right now but thinking of switching to CONE.
I write my OWN PIM suite and financial apps, thankyouverymuch
And I run Linux because it's technically the best operating system out there. But if Solaris has a few more home runs like ZFS I might switch that.
The OS is just a really big, really important app. Sacrificing it for lesser apps is a bad move.
> I agree - Apple wouldn't let much, if any, work be done on this before they intervened.
It wouldn't be Apple's choice. An API isn't copyrightable. If M$ could shut down WINE, don't you think they would have done so by now?
> In loco parentis
By your use of this term, you don't know what it means. College students are almost all over 18 and therefore not minors; saying a university is "in loco parentis" with respect to them is nonsensical.