People aren't ready to give up on computer gaming and until they are, Mac has nothing.
Give up on computer gaming? I think you overestimate the amount of hard core gamers. Mac game support may turn off the few people who are hardcore gamers too lazy or cheap to dual-boot to Windows to play. But for everyone who doesn't game, it's no big deal. It's a slight pain if you are a casual gamer, but since a lot of games get ported eventually and casual gamers don't necessarily demand the game on launch day or need the latest and greatest, they'll be fine. I have no problem finding something to play when I want to play a game. It may be different or older than your game, but it's still entertaining.
Apple doesn't care about gamers since they tend to build their own machines and would not receive any benefit from OS X. The rest of the world, who use productivity applications or just web-surf and check email, can benefit.
I want a desktop with drive bays and expansion slots
You (and the slashdot crowd as a whole) are pretty unique on that point. Most people wouldn't touch the insides of their computer if their life depended on it. Between a major multi-hundred dollar upgrade and paying the Best Buy guy (or the neighborhood geek) for a few man-hours ($75-100 or so) to install it, the price tag for a general system upgrade climbs to the point where another computer is more worthwhile.
So would the best solution is to try to run 3d FPS games to see if they work?
Well, this is Vista. In theory, most PCs should be able to run some of the 3D effects (maybe not all of them). So you should notice a lack of the 3D effects all of a sudden, and a huge slowdown as Windows is no longer relying on the video card for desktop drawing.
Ok, but here's the catch. You could have an OS that prints money for you, but if the end user can't figure it out, it's pretty useless. I think the real issue here is whether or not people or developrs can use the features, and in all the cases, Apple hit the homerun MS missed. When it's poorly-done version in a server OS, or a user-un-friendly feature in some Linux distros, it doesn't really help much, because no one can use it. The point is, out of the box, a mildy tech-inclined person (anyone smart enough to figure out how to download Firefox or iTunes w/o much help) can use Time Machine or Spaces. 90% of the market aren't gonna use it if they can't find it or can't figure it out. Look at Office 11 (yes, I'm going there, Thurott). One of the things I've heard is people finding "new features" in it, and MS getting credit for adding things when all it did was make them visible (not hidden 8 layers deep).
And spotlight compared to windows search? I'd say Sherlock probably beat Windows Search out, and Spotlight has the slight advantage of being near-instant (YMMV, I search 45-75 GBs on a 1.33 GHz G4).
And the big thing here is this: Apple is accusing MS of direct rip-offs (similar icons, similar UIs, etc) in addition to copying features, whereas Thurott is accusing Apple of having similar features to Windows.
There is a project underway at OO.o with apparently (non-public) alpha-level results. I'd be tempted to help - once I get a Mac Pro and learn some Cocoa and/or Java (I only know C++)
Well, the MPAA knows that if Circuit City gets away with it, I can get away with it. And they probably would love to see ripped movies as "proof of wrong-doing". They can't let CC get away with it, and beside, CC is in the position of being able to pay thousands per infringement.
They're defeating encryption without permission. Same as if you or I use deCSS to do the same thing. It's illegal whether or not we commit infringement. Dumb Law, needs to go.
They must have thought this through. You don't do something risky like this if you're a massive business. They must have talked to a lawyer and have A) a loophole, or B) a license to do this (sharing profits with MPAA?). I mean, million or billion dollar companies are careful to avoid these sorts of lawsuit-risking moves, simply because they're a huge target.
The "good" part is that most people have their DVD sets already hooked to their audiophile monsters anyway (for dolby effects and all the other goodies that come with today's DVD movies), so it's only logical that they would accept a DVD as a music medium, too.
My only speakers are on my iBook. When I buy a desktop, I'll be spending $50 on speakers. I think most of the middle class USA falls more in line with my setup (although I'm more low-end than usual) than your monster audio Home Theatre setup.
Can't play it in existing CD-players, can't rip it to MP3 players: Do they expect me to carry my laptop around with me? I find that I listen to 80-90 percent of my music while mobile - running, driving, walking to class - places where I don't want to carry another player just for one record company's music.
Not to mention, no mixing, no randomized playlists, and I have to carry a bunch of DVDs around with me?
Steps to make yourself vulnerable:
1) Buy a 3rd party wireless card
2) Install faulty 3rd party drivers
3) Somehow bless 3rd party card so it's default instead of airport
4) Running as an admin, turn on airport, don't find any preferred networks, join a random one, which happens to be the hacker's.
In short, it's pretty hard to accidentally do this. Also auto-wireless-connect requires you to turn Airport on. It finds trusted/known networks first, and prompts if the network is not previously known. Also - you sometimes need the admin password if you're not an admin.
It's true that Apple is traditionally aggressive legally. It may be that they don't think it's worth it to nail a few hundred or a few thousand hackintoshes when they're selling hundreds of thousands of Macs a month. But if the movement grows beyond a small community and into a larger and viable threat to Mac sales, you bet Apple will try anything. They don't have to win, they just have to have a strong enough case to be able to bring financial advantages to bear.
Identification and analysis for software compatibility is a different ball game from hacking it to put it on different hardware.
The point remains that if you download or upload a cracked version, you're "distributing" copyrighted materials improperly. I don't know which country you're from, but in most of them, that's a legal issue. Hypothetically, if you bought a retail copy of OS X (possible when the UB version of Leopard came out) and modified it yourself, and used it in a non-commercial environment, you have a chance at some of the interesting legal arguments you're making. Maybe they (osx86 project) can make a script that takes a Leopard DVD and converts it into a cracked disk image, and distribute the script. That could circumvent a lot of the issues. I still wouldn't advertise the fact that you've got a hackintosh though.
I'm not saying there aren't loopholes The one you mention seems geared towards software developer's fair use rights. I am not a lawyer, but I'm sure a lawyer or a bunch them could find arguments for and against every loophole and fight it out somewhere. There won't be a solution that is easy, legal, and free. There may be one that is illegal, free and easy, and one that is hard, $129, and semi-legal, but neither of those will catch on outside of a hacking community.
I mentioned libdvdcss because it is something that might otherwise be fair-use (non-commercial playing of a DVD on a Linux computer), but involves breaking technical encryption measures and thus has DMCA (and WIPO copyright treaty) implications.
Most countries in the WTO have similar laws to the DMCA because the DMCA was forced on those countries and the US by the World Intellectual Property Organization Treaty.
As far as I understand it, the DMCA comes into effect when you break a software licensing agreement. Additionally, it has an effect whether or not you are out to do something that would be otherwise infringing. For instance, a lot of uses of DeCSS were/are to view DVDs on Linux, but that doesn't help legitimize DeCSS.
MS supports the Windows install in Boot Camp. It's a retail Windows install. Also, in the US and in most other countries, hackintoshes are illegal via the DMCA or other anti-hacking laws. Anything which breaks encryption without the creator's permission is illegal.
Unless Apple breaks people out of the "computers as a commodity" role. I think personally, that's something that people who are 35 and up think. People who have had computers "added" to their lives. My parents do email and web-browsing (on a G3 iMac), and maybe use Appleworks. That's it.
I am a total nerd. I want all the performance I can afford, and the power and stability of a Mac.
My sister isn't a geek. But she (and over half of the people at my college, and probably hers as well) uses her computer for a lot more. She has a digital camera, plays with iPhoto and uses the iSight in iMovie. When she's 35, married, and thinking about the home computer, she won't be thinking of computers as a commodity.
People have more to spend on computers, they just need to be convinced that the $1000-1500 range of computers is worthwhile to even look at.
You can't run x86 OSX legally on non-Apple hardware, and the difficulty is non-trivial. It's not a quick download away, and you have to do a bit of work. I'd say Boot Camp is easier, and it is legal and supported.
Isn't that pointless? I mean, hypothetically speaking, if SCO wins and can go after Linux users, it'll have somehow nullified the GPLv2 (since it must have distributed this code in its own Caldera Linux). Which means that every line of Caldera Linux that isn't SCO written (probably millions of lines) is a potential $125,000 against SCO per distribution. At a minimum of 10 million GPL'd lines in Caldera, that works out to at least $1.25 billion per copy of Caldera. If SCO wins, it dies in retaliation.
More to the point, if I commit any civil offense (ignoring criminal implications for the moment) and get sued, does that mean that the case can't be publicized or proceed until the government says it's OK? Doesn't that give the government utter cart blanche?
2. Falsely accuse IBM of giving Linux SCO code - code that SCO themselves released under the GPL in the form of Caldera Linux (later SCO OpenLinux)
If SCO wins, and proves that IBM stole code from SCO's OS, that'd mean there was code in there that violated the GPL. Therefore, couldn't RMS and Linus sue SCO for $120k * every line of code in Caldera * every copy ever sold?
Slashdot Mirror
People aren't ready to give up on computer gaming and until they are, Mac has nothing.
Give up on computer gaming? I think you overestimate the amount of hard core gamers. Mac game support may turn off the few people who are hardcore gamers too lazy or cheap to dual-boot to Windows to play. But for everyone who doesn't game, it's no big deal. It's a slight pain if you are a casual gamer, but since a lot of games get ported eventually and casual gamers don't necessarily demand the game on launch day or need the latest and greatest, they'll be fine. I have no problem finding something to play when I want to play a game. It may be different or older than your game, but it's still entertaining.
Apple doesn't care about gamers since they tend to build their own machines and would not receive any benefit from OS X. The rest of the world, who use productivity applications or just web-surf and check email, can benefit.
I want a desktop with drive bays and expansion slots
You (and the slashdot crowd as a whole) are pretty unique on that point. Most people wouldn't touch the insides of their computer if their life depended on it. Between a major multi-hundred dollar upgrade and paying the Best Buy guy (or the neighborhood geek) for a few man-hours ($75-100 or so) to install it, the price tag for a general system upgrade climbs to the point where another computer is more worthwhile.
Exceptions: geeks, gamers, professionals.
So would the best solution is to try to run 3d FPS games to see if they work?
Well, this is Vista. In theory, most PCs should be able to run some of the 3D effects (maybe not all of them). So you should notice a lack of the 3D effects all of a sudden, and a huge slowdown as Windows is no longer relying on the video card for desktop drawing.
Ok, but here's the catch. You could have an OS that prints money for you, but if the end user can't figure it out, it's pretty useless. I think the real issue here is whether or not people or developrs can use the features, and in all the cases, Apple hit the homerun MS missed. When it's poorly-done version in a server OS, or a user-un-friendly feature in some Linux distros, it doesn't really help much, because no one can use it. The point is, out of the box, a mildy tech-inclined person (anyone smart enough to figure out how to download Firefox or iTunes w/o much help) can use Time Machine or Spaces. 90% of the market aren't gonna use it if they can't find it or can't figure it out. Look at Office 11 (yes, I'm going there, Thurott). One of the things I've heard is people finding "new features" in it, and MS getting credit for adding things when all it did was make them visible (not hidden 8 layers deep).
And spotlight compared to windows search? I'd say Sherlock probably beat Windows Search out, and Spotlight has the slight advantage of being near-instant (YMMV, I search 45-75 GBs on a 1.33 GHz G4).
And the big thing here is this: Apple is accusing MS of direct rip-offs (similar icons, similar UIs, etc) in addition to copying features, whereas Thurott is accusing Apple of having similar features to Windows.
My mistake. I freely concede that I got the *BSDs confused.
Everyone but FreeBSD uses a partially closed-source driver for the cards from the company they hacked on video.
There is a project underway at OO.o with apparently (non-public) alpha-level results. I'd be tempted to help - once I get a Mac Pro and learn some Cocoa and/or Java (I only know C++)
Well, the MPAA knows that if Circuit City gets away with it, I can get away with it. And they probably would love to see ripped movies as "proof of wrong-doing". They can't let CC get away with it, and beside, CC is in the position of being able to pay thousands per infringement.
In what way would this violate the DMCA?
They're defeating encryption without permission. Same as if you or I use deCSS to do the same thing. It's illegal whether or not we commit infringement. Dumb Law, needs to go.
They must have thought this through. You don't do something risky like this if you're a massive business. They must have talked to a lawyer and have A) a loophole, or B) a license to do this (sharing profits with MPAA?). I mean, million or billion dollar companies are careful to avoid these sorts of lawsuit-risking moves, simply because they're a huge target.
The "good" part is that most people have their DVD sets already hooked to their audiophile monsters anyway (for dolby effects and all the other goodies that come with today's DVD movies), so it's only logical that they would accept a DVD as a music medium, too.
My only speakers are on my iBook. When I buy a desktop, I'll be spending $50 on speakers. I think most of the middle class USA falls more in line with my setup (although I'm more low-end than usual) than your monster audio Home Theatre setup.
Can't play it in existing CD-players, can't rip it to MP3 players: Do they expect me to carry my laptop around with me? I find that I listen to 80-90 percent of my music while mobile - running, driving, walking to class - places where I don't want to carry another player just for one record company's music.
Not to mention, no mixing, no randomized playlists, and I have to carry a bunch of DVDs around with me?
Now that's a surefire flop.
Steps to make yourself vulnerable:
1) Buy a 3rd party wireless card
2) Install faulty 3rd party drivers
3) Somehow bless 3rd party card so it's default instead of airport
4) Running as an admin, turn on airport, don't find any preferred networks, join a random one, which happens to be the hacker's.
In short, it's pretty hard to accidentally do this. Also auto-wireless-connect requires you to turn Airport on. It finds trusted/known networks first, and prompts if the network is not previously known. Also - you sometimes need the admin password if you're not an admin.
It's true that Apple is traditionally aggressive legally. It may be that they don't think it's worth it to nail a few hundred or a few thousand hackintoshes when they're selling hundreds of thousands of Macs a month. But if the movement grows beyond a small community and into a larger and viable threat to Mac sales, you bet Apple will try anything. They don't have to win, they just have to have a strong enough case to be able to bring financial advantages to bear.
Identification and analysis for software compatibility is a different ball game from hacking it to put it on different hardware.
The point remains that if you download or upload a cracked version, you're "distributing" copyrighted materials improperly. I don't know which country you're from, but in most of them, that's a legal issue. Hypothetically, if you bought a retail copy of OS X (possible when the UB version of Leopard came out) and modified it yourself, and used it in a non-commercial environment, you have a chance at some of the interesting legal arguments you're making. Maybe they (osx86 project) can make a script that takes a Leopard DVD and converts it into a cracked disk image, and distribute the script. That could circumvent a lot of the issues. I still wouldn't advertise the fact that you've got a hackintosh though.
I'm not saying there aren't loopholes The one you mention seems geared towards software developer's fair use rights. I am not a lawyer, but I'm sure a lawyer or a bunch them could find arguments for and against every loophole and fight it out somewhere. There won't be a solution that is easy, legal, and free. There may be one that is illegal, free and easy, and one that is hard, $129, and semi-legal, but neither of those will catch on outside of a hacking community.
I mentioned libdvdcss because it is something that might otherwise be fair-use (non-commercial playing of a DVD on a Linux computer), but involves breaking technical encryption measures and thus has DMCA (and WIPO copyright treaty) implications.
Will this run Vista at a decent speed, or should I wait for the Rev B and SP1?
Most countries in the WTO have similar laws to the DMCA because the DMCA was forced on those countries and the US by the World Intellectual Property Organization Treaty.
As far as I understand it, the DMCA comes into effect when you break a software licensing agreement. Additionally, it has an effect whether or not you are out to do something that would be otherwise infringing. For instance, a lot of uses of DeCSS were/are to view DVDs on Linux, but that doesn't help legitimize DeCSS.
MS supports the Windows install in Boot Camp. It's a retail Windows install. Also, in the US and in most other countries, hackintoshes are illegal via the DMCA or other anti-hacking laws. Anything which breaks encryption without the creator's permission is illegal.
There is no reason to use Windows. I can't find something that Windows does better than Mac
What if I like the boot chime, you insensitive clod?
Unless Apple breaks people out of the "computers as a commodity" role. I think personally, that's something that people who are 35 and up think. People who have had computers "added" to their lives. My parents do email and web-browsing (on a G3 iMac), and maybe use Appleworks. That's it.
I am a total nerd. I want all the performance I can afford, and the power and stability of a Mac.
My sister isn't a geek. But she (and over half of the people at my college, and probably hers as well) uses her computer for a lot more. She has a digital camera, plays with iPhoto and uses the iSight in iMovie. When she's 35, married, and thinking about the home computer, she won't be thinking of computers as a commodity.
People have more to spend on computers, they just need to be convinced that the $1000-1500 range of computers is worthwhile to even look at.
You can't run x86 OSX legally on non-Apple hardware, and the difficulty is non-trivial. It's not a quick download away, and you have to do a bit of work. I'd say Boot Camp is easier, and it is legal and supported.
Isn't that pointless? I mean, hypothetically speaking, if SCO wins and can go after Linux users, it'll have somehow nullified the GPLv2 (since it must have distributed this code in its own Caldera Linux). Which means that every line of Caldera Linux that isn't SCO written (probably millions of lines) is a potential $125,000 against SCO per distribution. At a minimum of 10 million GPL'd lines in Caldera, that works out to at least $1.25 billion per copy of Caldera. If SCO wins, it dies in retaliation.
You misunderstand what 4x4 means. 4x4 means 4 processors, 4 graphics cards. 4 processors is a dual-dual setup of two FXs. 4 graphics cards is Quad SLI
There is a plan for a successor, which is 8x8. That's 2 quad-core chips and a Quad SLI of "dual-core" graphics cards.
More to the point, if I commit any civil offense (ignoring criminal implications for the moment) and get sued, does that mean that the case can't be publicized or proceed until the government says it's OK? Doesn't that give the government utter cart blanche?
2. Falsely accuse IBM of giving Linux SCO code - code that SCO themselves released under the GPL in the form of Caldera Linux (later SCO OpenLinux)
If SCO wins, and proves that IBM stole code from SCO's OS, that'd mean there was code in there that violated the GPL. Therefore, couldn't RMS and Linus sue SCO for $120k * every line of code in Caldera * every copy ever sold?