Excellent point. This could lead to another boom in laying fiber backbones by large content providers who may find paying extra to an ISP isn't worth it, or consortiums and groups coming together to create their own backbones and fiber networks.
Its only a matter of time before someone says "I'm not going to take this anymore!", and many of the companies targeted in this tiered system have the capital hanging around to create their own networks. Oh the irony in ending monopolies by using such practices against those with enough $$$ to compete against you.
Regardless of whether the argument is valid or not, these security software firms need to start improving their software for Mac users to take them seriously. If security is so important, then why is Virex 7.x such a horrible product. Norton AV for Mac is not much better. Apple was giving away McAfee Virex for free to.Mac users for several months until there were so many complaints with the product, that they stopped offering it. I have had to disable Norton AV on computers because it prevented with many graphic design and video applications from working properly. Plus, in an enterprise environment, its almost impossible to get your Mac anti-virus clients working with the Windows client's management tools. In most cases you have to have seperate management tools, despite the products coming from the same company.
Perhaps they will start making profits off of Macintosh computers when the quality of their software meets or exceeds the standards of their Windows counterpart. Everyone acknowledges that there are risks of receiving a virus on the Mac, including Apple, who includes ClamAV with Mac OS X 10.4 by default (though its command line only). Maybe people will take them seriously when getting a virus becomes more of a risk than installing their buggy anti-virus software.
I doubt its worth responding to, but I have the urge to anyway, even at this late hour.
I'm an Apple owner and the biggest thing that I absolutely hate about the Apple community are Apple evangelists. They are second only to Linux zealots in terms of making me want to punch them in the throat. You can't say hello without them insulting Windows and making "M$" jokes - it's extraordinarily childish.
.
Hmm, are you actually posting in regards to my response? I made no "M$" jokes, though I'm sure some were made throughout the thread. I have actually been a DOS/Windows user much longer than I have been a Mac user. Since my daily job involves technical support, I have had to learn both Windows XP and Mac OS X inside and out for several years now. Is the only way I cannot be considered a zealot is to not respond at all, when I feel misinformation is being written?
Explorer doesn't do any harm when it's not running.
Actually it can. Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer can execute code in the background if a virus is written properly. This is how a lot of spyware works. Many of the spyware applications can launch pop-up windows in Internet Explorer, even when its closed. From what I understand, Mac OS X WebKit can't launch code itself- applications are written to take advantage of this code being available in the operating system, but the code itself isn't being executed. I know this sounds like its the same, but its different. Someone with better computer programming skills on both the Mac and Windows platform can probably explain it better.
But DRM is evil - except when Apple uses it in iTunes?
But suing bloggers over product announcements is evil - except when Apple does it?
So Internet Explorer is a commonly used and bundled OS component - and this makes Microsoft "evil"?
What does Apple have to do to be considered evil in your eyes? Genocide? Become successful and sell millions of copies of it's OS, gaining a significant proportion of the market share?
Actually my reference to good and evil is directed more to the thread I am responding to, who states that Microsoft is considered evil by integrating Internet Explorer into Windows, and hence Apple is evil for integrating web kit. I feel neither company neither good nor evil. It's hard to qualify any multi-billion dollar corporation as one or the other. My main point is that though they both share common goals for OS integration, the two technologies being discussed are drastically different, and web kit is much more benign at this point than the technologies integrated into Windows. That may not always be the case in the future, but it is right now. Perhaps I used poor etiquitte in submitting a normal smiley face instead of a wink [;-) ] to illustrate my sarcasm and half-hearted conclusion to my post. I'll make sure to use my sarcasm tags the next time I post.
[sarcasm]Then again, i may not post regarding Apple technologies in the future, in order to avoid the punch in the throat that may be coming;-),[/sarcasm]
Actually, if you snoop around the OS, you can remove many of the built in modules that you are worried about by removing them from the/System/Library/Frameworks folder. All of the web kit stuff is located in the WebKit.framework folder.
Although its not documented, many of these frameworks can be removed without harming the operating system as a whole, and, if you aren't planning on using any of Apple's pre-installed applications, then many of them can be removed. I have only done this to see what cripples the system, and what doesn't, during testing. On my personal workstation, I leave all of the frameworks installed.
Where I think people are missing the point is that Internet Explorer cannot be removed from Windows XP without crippling the user's computer experience. Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer share a lot of code, so removing one hurts the usage of others. On the Mac, integrated web browsing is provided by Safari and Web Kit. These tools are not used to browse files, which is instead carried out by the Finder.
Mac OS X is a much more modular OS than Windows XP. I think this is partly due to design, and party due to neccesity with Mac OS X being based on Unix.
I can delete Safari from any version of Mac OS X it runs on. Can you uninstall Internet Explorer from your current verion of Windows XP?
What I am leading to here is that Apple builds features into Mac OS X, and then creates modular applications that take advantage of them, or allows you to disable these features in the operating system. Plus, other applications built by third party developers can take advantage of the features (such as OmniWeb with WebKit) as well. No one who installs Mac OS X is forced to leave Safari, iChat AV, Mail, iCal, etc installed on their computer. They can delete them and then choose to install Firefox, Thunderbird, Adium, and Sunbird, and there is no penalty to the user.
Again, try doing that to Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, or Microsoft Messenger, without a third party XP hacking tool. You can hide those applications to the user, but can never fully delete them.
If Apple builds torrenting into 10.5, I'm sure there won't be anything that prevents you from running the normal bittorent clients that are already available for your standard pirating needs.
And that, my friend, is the difference between good and evil:-)
The WMDs had been used extensively, with our support, during the Iran-Iraq war
This explains the stalemate in the war between Iran and Iraq. With the DRM being too restrictive, the Windows Media Devices became an ineffective weapon. Realizing this, the US government went back to the drawing board and funded those technologies that are now in the iPod.
You are correct. The iMac G3 was the first to have only USB ports. The Blue & White Power Mac G3 was the second, followed by the "Lombard" PowerBook G3.
Although Apple may not have been the first to use USB, they were the first to remove the legacy ports to force peripheral and accessory manufacturers to introduce USB based devices. They were also one of the first computer manufacturers to encourage the ports use. I remember installing multiple labs of Dell Optiplex Gn+ and GXi workstations with USB disabled by default in the BIOS. It was until a year or two later that USB was enabled by default on all of their Optiplex models. Plus, Microsoft's OS USB support really didn't work well until Windows 98 (for DOS based) and Windows 2000 (NT based OS) were released.
I can say for sure that in it's present form that this bill will not pass the French Senate. Why? Because one of the biggest record companies in the world is based out of France. Universal Music Group is a wholly owned subsidiary of Vivendi Universal. Though its a multi-national, mega-corporation, it has main offices in France, and its stock trades on the French Stock Exchange.
That is Universal Music's web page that discusses digital downloads, and all of the online retailers that provide digital downloads of UMG's artists. Scroll down to the bottom, and UMG lists fnacmusic.com as a French vendor of their music downloads.
What do you know, fnacmusic.com uses Windows Media Player and the Windows Media DRM for the sale of their music. So tell me, why would the French government attempt to cripple the sales of the online music of one of the largest French corporations (and one of the largest French tax revenue generators)?
The fact of the matter is, the members of the French legislature today voted on something that they don't quite understand. It sounded good. Everyone is pointing it towards opening up the iPod, the ITMS, and Fairplay. Who this really aggrivates, however, is Microsoft. Microsoft, just like Apple, has no desire to open up its DRM schemes to work with Media Players that do not support them. Imagine Windows Media Player DRM for Linux? I don't think so. Politicans can easily get caught up in the hype just like we can.
As we speak, Microsoft is lobbying to have this law modified in some way that will prevent itself from having to modify its own DRM to satisfy the new law, and it will be lobbying through its powerful partner in Vivendi Universal. Universal Music Group wants DRM. In the end, the record companies would like to control the DRM, not the software companies, but their not there yet. Regardless, Universal Music group would have to take a step backwards if Apple and Microsoft had to re-engineer their DRM's or change their policies on licensing. Because the DRM is in the hands of Apple, Microsoft, Real, and Sony, the music companies loose out while this legislation gets bashed to pieces by everyone who has a stake in the music industry.
Maybe the end product of this legislation will be signifigantly modified enough that we can all say its biased against Apple and its products, but at this point, everyone is screwed, and Microsoft, Vivendi Universal, and their partners, have the most to loose, and the French Senate will hear this soon enough.
It must be a slow news day. It's a short article with not much analysis. It is good to see an article comparing the business practices of Linux Vendor vs Linux Vendor compared to the usual Linux Vendor vs Microsoft we usually get.
It's not that the majority of us have something to hide. It's the feeling of satisfaction that we don't have to hide from our government. There is a difference.
Many INNOCENT people get hurt when the system of checks of balances that keep our government and our society stable are thrown out of equilibrium.
This is very easy to setup... especially in Tiger:
/Applications/Utilities/Keychain Access Open the Keychain Access preferences
Enable "Show status in menu bar"
A little lock icon now displays up in the menu bar, next to the clock.
Click on the new lock icon
Select lock screen.
Granted, its not the CTRL-ALT-DEL and then "Lock workstation" solution, but once you have it setup, its easier to lock a screen on the Mac, than on Windows.
You are definitely on to something. Apple recently reported some excellent desktop/laptop sales numbers. I think everyone is now pushing to get the final revisions of all of the PowerPC hardware available from Apple before the switch. Many are concerned about how reliable initial versions of the Intel architecture will be in terms of hardware, as well as the performance of "emulated" software. It looks like there are enough people concerned about this that it will drive Mac hardware and software sales 'till the new hardware is introduced. I don't believe the Intel based Power Macs will be big sellers until support for PPC from software vendors begins to wind down- however, it will be the opposite for Powerbooks and iBooks.
Very good point. I haven't used AVID's products, but if you are using software that was released around the same time as your hardware was, then your theory will hold true. Unfortunately, I manage a lab at an university, and the faculty request that the software versions be updated regularly to keep with the times. Although AVID might fly on a G4, Final Cut Studio is a dog on anything older than a 1.25 GHz G4, and Motion won't even allow itself to be installed if you don't have an up-to-date video card. Regardless, the prospects of getting a few of these "quad" G5 makes me droooooole...
These are some of the most expandible workstations Apple has ever released. 16GB of RAM and a TB of storage makes a killer multimedia editing workstation all around. If you are weary of the Intel switchover, the time to buy is now. The workstations should hold you over well into the second and third revisions of Apple Intel hardware at least.
Wow, did Western Digital plot to have your family killed? What a vendetta!
All hard drive manufacturers have gone through cycles of poor quality and reliability. Maxtor, Seagate, IBM/Hitatchi (remember the "DeathStar") have all had the same problems. In all my years of repairing and building desktops, I can say I have had the most problems with Seagates and (the now owned by Maxtor) Quantum drives. If you ask someone else, they'll give you a different answer too.
This drive has a 5 year warranty. Most other Western Digital's have a 3 year warranty, even if you buy the OEMs (in most cases). And read the articles above for what 1 million hrs MTBF means!
You are absolutely right. The iPod does not store files by artist/album/song like iTunes does. It instead creates a hashed folder everytime you add songs to the iPod. Each sync session creates new folders with audio files in it. The iPod's software dynamically scans these folders for new tracks, and updates menu information via any tags that are embedded in the files. If Creative patented how the files are stored on the device, then the iPod does not violate this patent at all.
Regardless, the vagueness of the patent, such as the definition of a digital music device (a laptop with iTunes could be a digital music device) leaves plenty of prior art around to challenge the patent if Creative gets lawsuit crazy.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent point. This could lead to another boom in laying fiber backbones by large content providers who may find paying extra to an ISP isn't worth it, or consortiums and groups coming together to create their own backbones and fiber networks.
Its only a matter of time before someone says "I'm not going to take this anymore!", and many of the companies targeted in this tiered system have the capital hanging around to create their own networks. Oh the irony in ending monopolies by using such practices against those with enough $$$ to compete against you.
Sorry for the excessive bold. Hit Submit instead of Preview.
Regardless of whether the argument is valid or not, these security software firms need to start improving their software for Mac users to take them seriously. If security is so important, then why is Virex 7.x such a horrible product. Norton AV for Mac is not much better. Apple was giving away McAfee Virex for free to .Mac users for several months until there were so many complaints with the product, that they stopped offering it. I have had to disable Norton AV on computers because it prevented with many graphic design and video applications from working properly. Plus, in an enterprise environment, its almost impossible to get your Mac anti-virus clients working with the Windows client's management tools. In most cases you have to have seperate management tools, despite the products coming from the same company.
Perhaps they will start making profits off of Macintosh computers when the quality of their software meets or exceeds the standards of their Windows counterpart. Everyone acknowledges that there are risks of receiving a virus on the Mac, including Apple, who includes ClamAV with Mac OS X 10.4 by default (though its command line only). Maybe people will take them seriously when getting a virus becomes more of a risk than installing their buggy anti-virus software.
Hmm, are you actually posting in regards to my response? I made no "M$" jokes, though I'm sure some were made throughout the thread. I have actually been a DOS/Windows user much longer than I have been a Mac user. Since my daily job involves technical support, I have had to learn both Windows XP and Mac OS X inside and out for several years now. Is the only way I cannot be considered a zealot is to not respond at all, when I feel misinformation is being written?
Actually it can. Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer can execute code in the background if a virus is written properly. This is how a lot of spyware works. Many of the spyware applications can launch pop-up windows in Internet Explorer, even when its closed. From what I understand, Mac OS X WebKit can't launch code itself- applications are written to take advantage of this code being available in the operating system, but the code itself isn't being executed. I know this sounds like its the same, but its different. Someone with better computer programming skills on both the Mac and Windows platform can probably explain it better.
Actually my reference to good and evil is directed more to the thread I am responding to, who states that Microsoft is considered evil by integrating Internet Explorer into Windows, and hence Apple is evil for integrating web kit. I feel neither company neither good nor evil. It's hard to qualify any multi-billion dollar corporation as one or the other. My main point is that though they both share common goals for OS integration, the two technologies being discussed are drastically different, and web kit is much more benign at this point than the technologies integrated into Windows. That may not always be the case in the future, but it is right now. Perhaps I used poor etiquitte in submitting a normal smiley face instead of a wink [
[sarcasm]Then again, i may not post regarding Apple technologies in the future, in order to avoid the punch in the throat that may be coming
Actually, if you snoop around the OS, you can remove many of the built in modules that you are worried about by removing them from the /System/Library/Frameworks folder. All of the web kit stuff is located in the WebKit.framework folder.
Although its not documented, many of these frameworks can be removed without harming the operating system as a whole, and, if you aren't planning on using any of Apple's pre-installed applications, then many of them can be removed. I have only done this to see what cripples the system, and what doesn't, during testing. On my personal workstation, I leave all of the frameworks installed.
Where I think people are missing the point is that Internet Explorer cannot be removed from Windows XP without crippling the user's computer experience. Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer share a lot of code, so removing one hurts the usage of others. On the Mac, integrated web browsing is provided by Safari and Web Kit. These tools are not used to browse files, which is instead carried out by the Finder.
Mac OS X is a much more modular OS than Windows XP. I think this is partly due to design, and party due to neccesity with Mac OS X being based on Unix.
The difference:
:-)
I can delete Safari from any version of Mac OS X it runs on. Can you uninstall Internet Explorer from your current verion of Windows XP?
What I am leading to here is that Apple builds features into Mac OS X, and then creates modular applications that take advantage of them, or allows you to disable these features in the operating system. Plus, other applications built by third party developers can take advantage of the features (such as OmniWeb with WebKit) as well. No one who installs Mac OS X is forced to leave Safari, iChat AV, Mail, iCal, etc installed on their computer. They can delete them and then choose to install Firefox, Thunderbird, Adium, and Sunbird, and there is no penalty to the user.
Again, try doing that to Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, or Microsoft Messenger, without a third party XP hacking tool. You can hide those applications to the user, but can never fully delete them.
If Apple builds torrenting into 10.5, I'm sure there won't be anything that prevents you from running the normal bittorent clients that are already available for your standard pirating needs.
And that, my friend, is the difference between good and evil
The WMDs had been used extensively, with our support, during the Iran-Iraq war
This explains the stalemate in the war between Iran and Iraq. With the DRM being too restrictive, the Windows Media Devices became an ineffective weapon. Realizing this, the US government went back to the drawing board and funded those technologies that are now in the iPod.
Brilliant!
Although Apple may not have been the first to use USB, they were the first to remove the legacy ports to force peripheral and accessory manufacturers to introduce USB based devices. They were also one of the first computer manufacturers to encourage the ports use. I remember installing multiple labs of Dell Optiplex Gn+ and GXi workstations with USB disabled by default in the BIOS. It was until a year or two later that USB was enabled by default on all of their Optiplex models. Plus, Microsoft's OS USB support really didn't work well until Windows 98 (for DOS based) and Windows 2000 (NT based OS) were released.
Check out this link: http://consumers.umusic.com/dmd/retailers/index.ht ml
That is Universal Music's web page that discusses digital downloads, and all of the online retailers that provide digital downloads of UMG's artists. Scroll down to the bottom, and UMG lists fnacmusic.com as a French vendor of their music downloads.
Another link: http://www.fnacmusic.com/toolboxmenu/telecharger.a spx
What do you know, fnacmusic.com uses Windows Media Player and the Windows Media DRM for the sale of their music. So tell me, why would the French government attempt to cripple the sales of the online music of one of the largest French corporations (and one of the largest French tax revenue generators)?
The fact of the matter is, the members of the French legislature today voted on something that they don't quite understand. It sounded good. Everyone is pointing it towards opening up the iPod, the ITMS, and Fairplay. Who this really aggrivates, however, is Microsoft. Microsoft, just like Apple, has no desire to open up its DRM schemes to work with Media Players that do not support them. Imagine Windows Media Player DRM for Linux? I don't think so. Politicans can easily get caught up in the hype just like we can.
As we speak, Microsoft is lobbying to have this law modified in some way that will prevent itself from having to modify its own DRM to satisfy the new law, and it will be lobbying through its powerful partner in Vivendi Universal. Universal Music Group wants DRM. In the end, the record companies would like to control the DRM, not the software companies, but their not there yet. Regardless, Universal Music group would have to take a step backwards if Apple and Microsoft had to re-engineer their DRM's or change their policies on licensing. Because the DRM is in the hands of Apple, Microsoft, Real, and Sony, the music companies loose out while this legislation gets bashed to pieces by everyone who has a stake in the music industry.
Maybe the end product of this legislation will be signifigantly modified enough that we can all say its biased against Apple and its products, but at this point, everyone is screwed, and Microsoft, Vivendi Universal, and their partners, have the most to loose, and the French Senate will hear this soon enough.
It must be a slow news day. It's a short article with not much analysis. It is good to see an article comparing the business practices of Linux Vendor vs Linux Vendor compared to the usual Linux Vendor vs Microsoft we usually get.
Relax. Have a Coke and a smile.
It's not that the majority of us have something to hide. It's the feeling of satisfaction that we don't have to hide from our government. There is a difference.
Many INNOCENT people get hurt when the system of checks of balances that keep our government and our society stable are thrown out of equilibrium.
This is very easy to setup... especially in Tiger:
/Applications/Utilities/Keychain Access
Open the Keychain Access preferences
Enable "Show status in menu bar"
A little lock icon now displays up in the menu bar, next to the clock.
Click on the new lock icon
Select lock screen.
Granted, its not the CTRL-ALT-DEL and then "Lock workstation" solution, but once you have it setup, its easier to lock a screen on the Mac, than on Windows.
You are definitely on to something. Apple recently reported some excellent desktop/laptop sales numbers. I think everyone is now pushing to get the final revisions of all of the PowerPC hardware available from Apple before the switch. Many are concerned about how reliable initial versions of the Intel architecture will be in terms of hardware, as well as the performance of "emulated" software. It looks like there are enough people concerned about this that it will drive Mac hardware and software sales 'till the new hardware is introduced. I don't believe the Intel based Power Macs will be big sellers until support for PPC from software vendors begins to wind down- however, it will be the opposite for Powerbooks and iBooks.
Very good point. I haven't used AVID's products, but if you are using software that was released around the same time as your hardware was, then your theory will hold true. Unfortunately, I manage a lab at an university, and the faculty request that the software versions be updated regularly to keep with the times. Although AVID might fly on a G4, Final Cut Studio is a dog on anything older than a 1.25 GHz G4, and Motion won't even allow itself to be installed if you don't have an up-to-date video card. Regardless, the prospects of getting a few of these "quad" G5 makes me droooooole...
These are some of the most expandible workstations Apple has ever released. 16GB of RAM and a TB of storage makes a killer multimedia editing workstation all around. If you are weary of the Intel switchover, the time to buy is now. The workstations should hold you over well into the second and third revisions of Apple Intel hardware at least.
Wow, did Western Digital plot to have your family killed? What a vendetta!
All hard drive manufacturers have gone through cycles of poor quality and reliability. Maxtor, Seagate, IBM/Hitatchi (remember the "DeathStar") have all had the same problems. In all my years of repairing and building desktops, I can say I have had the most problems with Seagates and (the now owned by Maxtor) Quantum drives. If you ask someone else, they'll give you a different answer too.
This drive has a 5 year warranty. Most other Western Digital's have a 3 year warranty, even if you buy the OEMs (in most cases). And read the articles above for what 1 million hrs MTBF means!
None of these lawsuits have to do with patents!
You are absolutely right. The iPod does not store files by artist/album/song like iTunes does. It instead creates a hashed folder everytime you add songs to the iPod. Each sync session creates new folders with audio files in it. The iPod's software dynamically scans these folders for new tracks, and updates menu information via any tags that are embedded in the files. If Creative patented how the files are stored on the device, then the iPod does not violate this patent at all. Regardless, the vagueness of the patent, such as the definition of a digital music device (a laptop with iTunes could be a digital music device) leaves plenty of prior art around to challenge the patent if Creative gets lawsuit crazy.