I wasn't thinking of full-fledged programs created using a pirated copy of OSX, I was talking more along the lines of cool little shareware or freeware programs that Windows has millions of while OSX has thousands.
OSX is getting better on the shareware/freeware side of things, but they still have a lot of ground to catch up.
This is a good thing for Apple
on
OSx86 Cracked Again
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Ultimately Apple had to have known that OSX would be cracked. Did they care? I don't think so. Sure, they used a few security measures to make sure that it wasn't extremely easy to do, but getting OSX into geeks' hands is a good thing, even if they don't pay for the OS. Why? Because if this crack becomes widespread, you can be sure that a bunch of cool little third party apps for OSX will follow as geeks find different ways to get OSX to do what they want.
This won't impact Apple's bottom line negatively because those same geeks wouldn't have used OSX if they needed to pay for it. But if it's free to them and they start writing apps for it, OSX only becomes more and more viable for the paying customer as these geeks spend some quality time with the OS.
And if people get Windows to boot on a Macbook, who knows... We might start seeing geeks running a Linux/XP/OSX Macbook, which would be the ultimate geek laptop due to OSX's ability to terminal into Unix. You'd have the ultimate quad-boot machine available.
"BTW, those numbers are with ALL settings turned down under Rosetta and with the settings under Universal at the half mark excepting terrain distance, which is maxed out."
Whoever said that the difference between Rosetta and Universal wasn't much is either running the 256meg ATI card or is legally blind.
I'm running 1 gig of RAM on the 17" iMac with the 128meg card and I was testing the beta Universal patch for about 1 1/2 weeks before it was released, meaning I've logged about 20 hours under Universal over the past 3 weeks.
Under Rosetta, I was pulling 3-7 fps in Org all day, every day. Under the Universal patch, that is up to a respectable 22-25 fps consistently with no spiking. In STV, under Rosetta the difference was considerably smaller with 12-16 fps and after patching to Universal, it jumped to 17-24 fps. Not a huge jump, but it took the game from "aggravating" to "acceptable".
BTW, those numbers are with ALL settings turned down under Rosetta and with the settings at the half mark excepting terrain distance, which is maxed out. If I was to crank everything down under the Universal patch, I'd be pulling 35-40+ fps damned near everywhere (I tried it for a few hours but decided that the distance draw was more important than 10-15 fps).
As with any new market, one company comes out strong and dominates the market with a superior product during the infantile stage of the boom. Ultimately if there is money to be made in the market (and obviously there is here), other companies will catch up and balance it out over time.
iTunes has only been out for about 4-5 years and only in past 24 months has it really started to dominate.
With this sort of reasoning, Palm should have been sued in 1999 when the PDA market was taking off.
Look at Palm today. They're a mere shadow of the company they were in 1999 due to the rest of the industry catching up and ultimately surpassing them.
I personally know at least 20 "professional" designers. As in people who make the entirety of their living from designing.
How many of these people do not have a copy of Photoshop on their work computer? Zero. How many of them even have GIMP installed on their computers? Two or three, I think.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing GIMP. It's a good program that works wonderfully, especially considering it's OSS. But how can a program be considered professional when it won't even work in CMYK? Just try sending a job off to a printer sometime with it packed full of RGB images and watch how quickly that file is rejected and shot right back at you.
I'm a professional graphic designer and have been for 6 years now, with over 10 years experience in Photoshop.
GIMP cannot compare at the professional level. It lacks the extensive layer manipulation tools, channels, filters, etc. found in Photoshop.
GIMP is a wonderful open source program that will work for 95% of the population, and work well doing what they need. But to mistake it with the professional calibre of Photoshop is folly.
They never collected the information. It was sent to the iTunes store and immediately discarded.
And turning it around in a matter of less than a week is good customer service no matter what you say. MS would never do an about face that quickly...
Now if only we could get Apple to release a laptop with more than one trackpad button, we'd all be in heaven.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know... UBRSBTYBCC* is pretty catchy to me...
*Upper Black Rock Spire Brought To You By Coca-Cola®
In Soviet Russia, DRM drains you!
Sorry, somebody had to say it.
I wasn't thinking of full-fledged programs created using a pirated copy of OSX, I was talking more along the lines of cool little shareware or freeware programs that Windows has millions of while OSX has thousands.
OSX is getting better on the shareware/freeware side of things, but they still have a lot of ground to catch up.
Ultimately Apple had to have known that OSX would be cracked. Did they care? I don't think so. Sure, they used a few security measures to make sure that it wasn't extremely easy to do, but getting OSX into geeks' hands is a good thing, even if they don't pay for the OS. Why? Because if this crack becomes widespread, you can be sure that a bunch of cool little third party apps for OSX will follow as geeks find different ways to get OSX to do what they want.
This won't impact Apple's bottom line negatively because those same geeks wouldn't have used OSX if they needed to pay for it. But if it's free to them and they start writing apps for it, OSX only becomes more and more viable for the paying customer as these geeks spend some quality time with the OS.
And if people get Windows to boot on a Macbook, who knows... We might start seeing geeks running a Linux/XP/OSX Macbook, which would be the ultimate geek laptop due to OSX's ability to terminal into Unix. You'd have the ultimate quad-boot machine available.
That should have read:
"BTW, those numbers are with ALL settings turned down under Rosetta and with the settings under Universal at the half mark excepting terrain distance, which is maxed out."
Whoever said that the difference between Rosetta and Universal wasn't much is either running the 256meg ATI card or is legally blind.
I'm running 1 gig of RAM on the 17" iMac with the 128meg card and I was testing the beta Universal patch for about 1 1/2 weeks before it was released, meaning I've logged about 20 hours under Universal over the past 3 weeks.
Under Rosetta, I was pulling 3-7 fps in Org all day, every day. Under the Universal patch, that is up to a respectable 22-25 fps consistently with no spiking. In STV, under Rosetta the difference was considerably smaller with 12-16 fps and after patching to Universal, it jumped to 17-24 fps. Not a huge jump, but it took the game from "aggravating" to "acceptable".
BTW, those numbers are with ALL settings turned down under Rosetta and with the settings at the half mark excepting terrain distance, which is maxed out. If I was to crank everything down under the Universal patch, I'd be pulling 35-40+ fps damned near everywhere (I tried it for a few hours but decided that the distance draw was more important than 10-15 fps).
As with any new market, one company comes out strong and dominates the market with a superior product during the infantile stage of the boom. Ultimately if there is money to be made in the market (and obviously there is here), other companies will catch up and balance it out over time.
iTunes has only been out for about 4-5 years and only in past 24 months has it really started to dominate.
With this sort of reasoning, Palm should have been sued in 1999 when the PDA market was taking off.
Look at Palm today. They're a mere shadow of the company they were in 1999 due to the rest of the industry catching up and ultimately surpassing them.
One Cell to rule them all, One Cell to find them, One Cell to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
I personally know at least 20 "professional" designers. As in people who make the entirety of their living from designing.
How many of these people do not have a copy of Photoshop on their work computer? Zero. How many of them even have GIMP installed on their computers? Two or three, I think.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing GIMP. It's a good program that works wonderfully, especially considering it's OSS. But how can a program be considered professional when it won't even work in CMYK? Just try sending a job off to a printer sometime with it packed full of RGB images and watch how quickly that file is rejected and shot right back at you.
I'm a professional graphic designer and have been for 6 years now, with over 10 years experience in Photoshop. GIMP cannot compare at the professional level. It lacks the extensive layer manipulation tools, channels, filters, etc. found in Photoshop. GIMP is a wonderful open source program that will work for 95% of the population, and work well doing what they need. But to mistake it with the professional calibre of Photoshop is folly.
They never collected the information. It was sent to the iTunes store and immediately discarded. And turning it around in a matter of less than a week is good customer service no matter what you say. MS would never do an about face that quickly... Now if only we could get Apple to release a laptop with more than one trackpad button, we'd all be in heaven.