Stop violating other people's rights and this won't be a problem.
My fancy new 42" 1080p television has an optical digitial out that will ONLY play downsampled 2 channel audio out of it because 'I might be a pirate'. Who's rights did I violate for that to happen again?
I've been trying to get a multi-computer shared library (all ripped from the CDs I store in the attic) like this working for about 10 years now, and even still nothing works right. Who's rights did I violate to cause every software developer to shelve those features because 'I might be a pirate'?
My car CD player can play a lot of different audio formats, but I can't seem to find the place where I can activate my (one remaining, mind you) FairPlay account. Instead, I'm required to go with a much lower song per disk ratio. Who's rights did I violate for that to happen?
I'm sick and fucking tired of being an accidental casualty of this idiotic war.
I love that things marked $4.99 cost $4.99 when you get to the register.
- Beautiful land.
Can't argue with that. To boot, there is a little bit of everything for everyone: forests, rivers, mountains, deserts, ocean, etc.
- Everybody drives like they're 80 years old.
This is true. The only thing that saves your sanity is that you get three lanes on I-5 between Salem and Portland. Anything further south and you're guaranteed to be stuck behind the cadillac going 66 passing the semi going 65. Of course, anywhere else in the state you're stuck with two lane highways.
- Beautiful weather in May and June.
This is true for the central Willamette valley, but not universal. Central Oregon gets just the right amount of snow in the wintertime to be absolutely gorgeous without the piles of suck that usually accompany snow. The coast never gets too hot in the summer. The mountains and foothills are idyllic from April through November. Also, I personally like the fact that during the time it took to compose this post, the weather outside went from freak spring snow to blue, sunny sky. In Eugene.
- Cold, awful, nonstop rain in the winter.
Again, only true from (roughly) Salem northward and all along the coast. There are a lot of mountain ranges in Oregon that provide rain-shades for the rest of the state.
- Very unattractive women (and men, most likely).
Not in any of the places I've lived (Bend, Eugene and Portland). I will agree that Salem has some seriously heinous looking people, however.
- Generally, the people are not too bright.
OK - I'm seeing the pattern. You really need to get the hell out of Salem. If you weren't tipped off by the fact that that's where we send the politicians, I'm not sure what more we can do for you. Ever been to Sacramento? Olympia? Same principals in play there...
- If you are sensitive to airborne pollen, you will be absolutely miserable in the spring.
Again, this is specific to the Willamette Valley. Central Oregon is virtually allergen free (aside from a short Juniper pollen season) and the coast is fairly mellow. However, there's a reason for the urban legend that 'Willamette' means 'Valley of Sickness' in some Native American tongue. I always feel bad for the people who wander the streets wearing surgical masks all spring. Then I wonder why the hell they haven't moved yet.
I'll finish this up with my standard 'I'm considering moving to Oregon response': It's terrible, you'd hate it. Don't move here.
Also, we have the best beer in the world here. If you get a chance, pick up a Total Domination IPA (brewed here in Eugene by Ninkasi) - you won't regret it. You hear that, Germany?! You've been beat!
Trey n' Matt don't strike me as the suicidal type. There are far too many people in the world who will dedicate their lives to ending yours unpleasantly if you do something like that, and more of them than you might think own computers.
I have arranged a dump truck full of sand to be sent around to your place. Hopefully it gets there in time.
As much as I hate the Security Theater we have going on at airports these days, I fully endorse any effort to forcibly remove cans of man-whore stench from the public. That shit should be considered a chemical weapon the way you people apply it.
Hint: If you can smell yourself, it's WAY too strong.
That'd work just fine - as long as none of the applications released under that key violated the restrictions. At that point, the key would be revoked and all apps distributed under that key would be pulled.
You cannot install any apps on the actual phone without a certificate. Period. XCode will throw a build error if you try. I'd provide a link to the relevant section in the documentation, but you have to have the SDK to read them. For proof, look in the 'iPhone OS Programming Guide'. In the 'Development Environment' chapter read the 'Working With a Device' section.
I downloaded the SDK yesterday. You cannot even BUILD a deployable target without the key. It throws an actual build error indicating that it cant find your key in the Keychain.
The only thing you can do without the key, from what I can tell, is run apps in the simulator (which sucks, by the way).
You can download and view all the porn you want on your iPhone. The web browser is completely unrestricted and there is no filter at all in iPhoto. There's also a camera so you can make your own porn.
The only thing you can't do is create a porn-specific application and then get it distributed through Apple's store.
In addition to that, XCode will NOT build your app for deployment unless you have the key in your Keychain already. So, in effect, you cannot test on the actual device without a developer key. Period. The only thing you can do without a key is run in the simulator.
This is based on actually trying to build a test app for deployment without a key, by the way. You actually get a build error.
you must pick 2 of the 5 options listed below and incorporate them into your Developer Applications. These options include
Advertising
Buddy Info
Expressions and Buddy Icons
AIM Start Page
AIM Toolbar
Just to be clear, these requirements don't apply to Plugins, Bots or the use of the Presence Indicators. Please note that if your application exceeds 100,000 peak simultaneous users, you must implement Advertising as described below as one of your two options.
I think I have a different definition of 'open, uninhibited access' than Wired.
I'm not claiming that context isn't important at all - context is critically important to humor. I'm claiming that the context didn't materially change once the identity of the author was discovered. The material, as presented in the intended medium (a blog posting by fake steve jobs), didn't undergo a context change at all once the author was known. Would the material somehow be retroactively funnier if it was discovered that George Carlin wrote it? Knowing the actual author is tangential in this case.
I'll immediately admit that discovering that it was George Carlin would be funny in and of itself, but would it somehow change the humor value of the previous work? I don't think so.
I've already conceded that you're correct that from Apple's perspective (ie, the technical perspective) it is considered an 'upgrade'. My point, however, is that it's not marketed as such, has no technical limitation enforcing it and for all intents and purposes, is simply a full system installer.
The most important bit in my mind when using the price to compare against Windows licenses is the fact that it is NOT marketed, labeled or packaged as an upgrade. From the consumer's perspective, therefore, it's not an upgrade - and skewing the numbers by comparing it to Windows upgrade pricing is misleading.
Huh - OK. I guess I find things that are funny to be funny because they're funny. Maybe you lose a bit of potential meta-humor when you imagine the author as something specific in your head, and then that changes - but if the material is funny, it shouldn't matter who wrote it. The guys premise, style and delivery has remained the same, after all.
But far be it from me to tell you what you should find funny - I just think it's interesting.
Yeah - I actually had a bit about it being a framework in my first draft, but chopped it to make the points cleaner. You'll note that I actually talk about Ruby and not RoR in that section.
Of course, anybody using a well engineered MVC framework is going to write cleaner code - no matter the language.
Before, he was some guy I didn't know that wasn't Steve Jobs. Now, he's some guy I don't know that isn't Steve Jobs. So, in your world, humor comes from not knowing a person's name? Interesting.
Or are you one of those "I liked them until they got popular" kind of guys?
Let's try this again. Buy a retail copy of Leopard. Put together your own system using parts known to work for OS X. Install that copy of Leopard on that hardware you did not buy from Apple. The software on the disk is not an upgrade - it installs a full version of the system on any hardware it recognizes. Period. No keys, no phone home, no dongle.
So, you can compare the cost of OS X to the upgrade cost for Windows (since, as you state, you've probably paid for the initial OS X version with the hardware purchase) or, you can compare the same cost of OS X to the full retail cost for Windows (since you may not have any previous version of OS X). For comparative purposes, it functions like the full retail install of Vista and not like an upgrade, and it is disingenuous at best to equate them as such. I'm sure Apple prices it exactly as you describe - but you're blurring the lines to call it an 'upgrade' package when there is no such requirement at all and more importantly, there is no difference in practice.
I've been writing clean MVC based Perl code for web applications for years - I know that it's well suited for the job and I'm not disputing that in the least. However, it is quite easy to write obfuscated garbage in Perl - just as easy as it is to write clean and elegant code. Thus, I declared it 'neutral' on that spectrum.
Not really. I've written MVC applications using a homebrew template engine as the view component in PHP, and it wasn't hard. The only real issue with PHP is that it makes it too easy to program badly... programming well in it is no harder than other languages.
The lack of namespaces and the dizzying array of functions included in the core libraries makes it difficult to write clean code. I didn't say it couldn't be done. In fact, I started the comment by saying that you could write good code in any language, but some make it easy and some make it harder. It's great that you can write clean PHP with solid MVC patterns. I do it when I have to as well, but I feel like I'm fighting the language to do it.
I was expecting the standard litany of anti-perl 'wrong tool for the job' comments in this article, but the 'four things' you're not supposed to do made me laugh:
1) Real-time or high-performance applications.
Check. No discussion necessary, but did it even need to be pointed out? Really, if you're even thinking about doing real-time apps in any interpreted language, you need to have your head examined.
2) As a replacement for shell scripts.
The example provided points out that using a simplistic perl script that calls 'system' to move files around generates a lot of needless sub shells and processes. OK - good point. However, in the example he provides, he replaces the inefficient perl script with an efficient perl script. How does that help make your point? Unless the point is 'try to write good code' - which isn't language specific.
3) As a web scripting language
This is just short-sighted and stupid, and the author suggests we use PHP or Ruby on Rails. OK - there are a lot of choices here, and all of them have advantages and disadvantages. But after reading that I should be using PHP, this quote made me spit coffe on my keyboard: "You should especially avoid using perl for traditional CGI-style form processing; this code tends to be hard to read and maintain because the HTML ends up inlined inside the perl code." Clean, elegant and properly designed code can be written in any language. Some languages encourage this, some make it difficult. Ruby encourages, but I'd stake my reputation on the claim that PHP makes it very hard. Perl is neutral on that spectrum.
4) In an obfuscated fashion
Check. No discussion necessary, but did it even need to be pointed out? Oh, I used that one already.
because Leopard's an upgrade (and some $80 cheaper at that)
Apple does not sell upgrades. Take a blank disk, that copy of OS X (whichever version you want) and install. Period. You can bitch at them for not selling upgrades, but you don't get to call that thing they actually sell an 'upgrade package'.
Apple doesn't support network booting from Wireless connections.
My point was that just because they don't currently support it doesn't mean that it's not possible. There's nothing stopping it technically other than the promise of extremely poor performance. If you're just interested in getting bootstrapped into a NetRestore session, however, then who cares about performance. All it would take is adding 802.11n support into EFI - which may or may not already exist, for all I know. It's not like they have to support a myriad of card manufacturers.
#1 - The Time Capsule. Haven't we had wireless NAS's since 802.11 became a standard? I've got a USB-2 external drive that does my backups now. This announcement does absolutely nothing for me.
To be fair, the real feature is the seamless integration with Time Machine - not the fact that it's a NAS/WiFi base. If this makes it easy for my wife to back her data up from her desktop and her laptop without having to figure it out, it's a win. With a 1TB version, all four computers in our house can be automatically backed up with Time Machine by simply hitting the 'on' switch. I think that's pretty cool. To boot, it's reasonably priced for the features - which is odd for Apple peripheral gear.
Everything else you said I agree with for the most part, however.
Slashdot Mirror
My fancy new 42" 1080p television has an optical digitial out that will ONLY play downsampled 2 channel audio out of it because 'I might be a pirate'. Who's rights did I violate for that to happen again?
I've been trying to get a multi-computer shared library (all ripped from the CDs I store in the attic) like this working for about 10 years now, and even still nothing works right. Who's rights did I violate to cause every software developer to shelve those features because 'I might be a pirate'?
My car CD player can play a lot of different audio formats, but I can't seem to find the place where I can activate my (one remaining, mind you) FairPlay account. Instead, I'm required to go with a much lower song per disk ratio. Who's rights did I violate for that to happen?
I'm sick and fucking tired of being an accidental casualty of this idiotic war.
I love that things marked $4.99 cost $4.99 when you get to the register.
Can't argue with that. To boot, there is a little bit of everything for everyone: forests, rivers, mountains, deserts, ocean, etc.
This is true. The only thing that saves your sanity is that you get three lanes on I-5 between Salem and Portland. Anything further south and you're guaranteed to be stuck behind the cadillac going 66 passing the semi going 65. Of course, anywhere else in the state you're stuck with two lane highways.
This is true for the central Willamette valley, but not universal. Central Oregon gets just the right amount of snow in the wintertime to be absolutely gorgeous without the piles of suck that usually accompany snow. The coast never gets too hot in the summer. The mountains and foothills are idyllic from April through November. Also, I personally like the fact that during the time it took to compose this post, the weather outside went from freak spring snow to blue, sunny sky. In Eugene.
Again, only true from (roughly) Salem northward and all along the coast. There are a lot of mountain ranges in Oregon that provide rain-shades for the rest of the state.
Not in any of the places I've lived (Bend, Eugene and Portland). I will agree that Salem has some seriously heinous looking people, however.
OK - I'm seeing the pattern. You really need to get the hell out of Salem. If you weren't tipped off by the fact that that's where we send the politicians, I'm not sure what more we can do for you. Ever been to Sacramento? Olympia? Same principals in play there...
Again, this is specific to the Willamette Valley. Central Oregon is virtually allergen free (aside from a short Juniper pollen season) and the coast is fairly mellow. However, there's a reason for the urban legend that 'Willamette' means 'Valley of Sickness' in some Native American tongue. I always feel bad for the people who wander the streets wearing surgical masks all spring. Then I wonder why the hell they haven't moved yet.
I'll finish this up with my standard 'I'm considering moving to Oregon response': It's terrible, you'd hate it. Don't move here.
Also, we have the best beer in the world here. If you get a chance, pick up a Total Domination IPA (brewed here in Eugene by Ninkasi) - you won't regret it. You hear that, Germany?! You've been beat!
As much as I hate the Security Theater we have going on at airports these days, I fully endorse any effort to forcibly remove cans of man-whore stench from the public. That shit should be considered a chemical weapon the way you people apply it.
Hint: If you can smell yourself, it's WAY too strong.
That'd work just fine - as long as none of the applications released under that key violated the restrictions. At that point, the key would be revoked and all apps distributed under that key would be pulled.
You cannot install any apps on the actual phone without a certificate. Period. XCode will throw a build error if you try. I'd provide a link to the relevant section in the documentation, but you have to have the SDK to read them. For proof, look in the 'iPhone OS Programming Guide'. In the 'Development Environment' chapter read the 'Working With a Device' section.
I downloaded the SDK yesterday. You cannot even BUILD a deployable target without the key. It throws an actual build error indicating that it cant find your key in the Keychain.
The only thing you can do without the key, from what I can tell, is run apps in the simulator (which sucks, by the way).
You can download and view all the porn you want on your iPhone. The web browser is completely unrestricted and there is no filter at all in iPhoto. There's also a camera so you can make your own porn.
The only thing you can't do is create a porn-specific application and then get it distributed through Apple's store.
In addition to that, XCode will NOT build your app for deployment unless you have the key in your Keychain already. So, in effect, you cannot test on the actual device without a developer key. Period. The only thing you can do without a key is run in the simulator.
This is based on actually trying to build a test app for deployment without a key, by the way. You actually get a build error.
Additionally, most standard EMACS key bindings are supported. Is that 'real' enough for you?
I'm not claiming that context isn't important at all - context is critically important to humor. I'm claiming that the context didn't materially change once the identity of the author was discovered. The material, as presented in the intended medium (a blog posting by fake steve jobs), didn't undergo a context change at all once the author was known. Would the material somehow be retroactively funnier if it was discovered that George Carlin wrote it? Knowing the actual author is tangential in this case.
I'll immediately admit that discovering that it was George Carlin would be funny in and of itself, but would it somehow change the humor value of the previous work? I don't think so.
Speaking of tangents...
I've already conceded that you're correct that from Apple's perspective (ie, the technical perspective) it is considered an 'upgrade'. My point, however, is that it's not marketed as such, has no technical limitation enforcing it and for all intents and purposes, is simply a full system installer.
The most important bit in my mind when using the price to compare against Windows licenses is the fact that it is NOT marketed, labeled or packaged as an upgrade. From the consumer's perspective, therefore, it's not an upgrade - and skewing the numbers by comparing it to Windows upgrade pricing is misleading.
Huh - OK. I guess I find things that are funny to be funny because they're funny. Maybe you lose a bit of potential meta-humor when you imagine the author as something specific in your head, and then that changes - but if the material is funny, it shouldn't matter who wrote it. The guys premise, style and delivery has remained the same, after all.
But far be it from me to tell you what you should find funny - I just think it's interesting.
Yeah - I actually had a bit about it being a framework in my first draft, but chopped it to make the points cleaner. You'll note that I actually talk about Ruby and not RoR in that section.
Of course, anybody using a well engineered MVC framework is going to write cleaner code - no matter the language.
Before, he was some guy I didn't know that wasn't Steve Jobs. Now, he's some guy I don't know that isn't Steve Jobs. So, in your world, humor comes from not knowing a person's name? Interesting.
Or are you one of those "I liked them until they got popular" kind of guys?
Let's try this again. Buy a retail copy of Leopard. Put together your own system using parts known to work for OS X. Install that copy of Leopard on that hardware you did not buy from Apple. The software on the disk is not an upgrade - it installs a full version of the system on any hardware it recognizes. Period. No keys, no phone home, no dongle.
So, you can compare the cost of OS X to the upgrade cost for Windows (since, as you state, you've probably paid for the initial OS X version with the hardware purchase) or, you can compare the same cost of OS X to the full retail cost for Windows (since you may not have any previous version of OS X). For comparative purposes, it functions like the full retail install of Vista and not like an upgrade, and it is disingenuous at best to equate them as such. I'm sure Apple prices it exactly as you describe - but you're blurring the lines to call it an 'upgrade' package when there is no such requirement at all and more importantly, there is no difference in practice.
I've been writing clean MVC based Perl code for web applications for years - I know that it's well suited for the job and I'm not disputing that in the least. However, it is quite easy to write obfuscated garbage in Perl - just as easy as it is to write clean and elegant code. Thus, I declared it 'neutral' on that spectrum.
I was expecting the standard litany of anti-perl 'wrong tool for the job' comments in this article, but the 'four things' you're not supposed to do made me laugh:
1) Real-time or high-performance applications.Check. No discussion necessary, but did it even need to be pointed out? Really, if you're even thinking about doing real-time apps in any interpreted language, you need to have your head examined.
2) As a replacement for shell scripts.The example provided points out that using a simplistic perl script that calls 'system' to move files around generates a lot of needless sub shells and processes. OK - good point. However, in the example he provides, he replaces the inefficient perl script with an efficient perl script. How does that help make your point? Unless the point is 'try to write good code' - which isn't language specific.
3) As a web scripting languageThis is just short-sighted and stupid, and the author suggests we use PHP or Ruby on Rails. OK - there are a lot of choices here, and all of them have advantages and disadvantages. But after reading that I should be using PHP, this quote made me spit coffe on my keyboard: "You should especially avoid using perl for traditional CGI-style form processing; this code tends to be hard to read and maintain because the HTML ends up inlined inside the perl code." Clean, elegant and properly designed code can be written in any language. Some languages encourage this, some make it difficult. Ruby encourages, but I'd stake my reputation on the claim that PHP makes it very hard. Perl is neutral on that spectrum.
4) In an obfuscated fashionCheck. No discussion necessary, but did it even need to be pointed out? Oh, I used that one already.
It's not a treadmill if you actually cover ground.
To be fair, the real feature is the seamless integration with Time Machine - not the fact that it's a NAS/WiFi base. If this makes it easy for my wife to back her data up from her desktop and her laptop without having to figure it out, it's a win. With a 1TB version, all four computers in our house can be automatically backed up with Time Machine by simply hitting the 'on' switch. I think that's pretty cool. To boot, it's reasonably priced for the features - which is odd for Apple peripheral gear.
Everything else you said I agree with for the most part, however.