You have to start somewhere. As you said, the mac-native game market is small... because the mac market is small. Getting people to buy Macs since they can also run Windows on it -- with the hopes that they'll start getting sucked into and liking Mac OS -- means the mac market share grows, and with it, the desire to play games there from more people.
I agree that right now it's mostly total PC geeks and not Apple's target market.
But that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of geeks out there that would buy an official version of Mac OS X that "just works."
There is an upside and a downside for Apple. Downside is it's harder to make OS X such a great experience when it's going on hardware they didn't build.
The upside, aside from any profit made from the sales, is that if they do a good enough job on it, you may be able to lure that person into buying an Apple computer the next time they need an upgrade.
My transition has been like this:
- Age 8 to 17, hardcore PC user and mac "hater" - Age 18 to 23, hardcore PC user and ambivalent mac spectator - Age 24-26, PC user and occasional Mac user (to help friends and family) - Age 26-28, iPod owner several times over, and fan of Mac OS X technology (still PC user) - Age 29, PowerMac G5 and Mac Mini user, and an Apple sticker on the back of my car.
THEY'VE WON.
I still program mostly on Windows systems, and still like Windows for some things, but it's safe to say I am getting fanatical about Apple.
The more you start using some of their stuff, the more you like it and want to use more of their stuff. Introducing Mac OS X that can run on a regular PC may be the taste that can push Apple of the edge.
You know, you get geeks using Mac OS X, like me, and next thing you know, your whole family is running it. This is what happened to me. Everyone now comes to me for advice on what to buy, and I tell them a Mac, every time. Mac mini if they want to save money, or a macbook, imac, or powermac if they can afford it.
You want to know what's stupid? Lorie Fowlke wants to limit access to fake guns, while leaving open full access to real guns! (I think George Carlin had a joke about this.)
FWIW, I am in favor of having access to both real and virtual guns. I just like to point out the lunacy of elected officials.
Also, her page says elsewhere about "Family," "I will do all I can to pass and support legislation that protects the traditional family from government encroachment. I will fight for what is right against any government agency that uses its power inappropriately or illegally to interfere with the rights of the family."
Like the rights to parent our children without government interference?
However, what I am going to say is that when I went to high school in early to late 80's the idea of gun violence did not cross our mind.
1. You didn't have 24 hour cable news to broadcast these events. 2. You didn't have the web, global news websites, and blogging.
These two things makes it (a) seem like their is more violence than before, because it is covered more than it was before, and (b) perhaps give way to copycat violence.
As has been said a million times over -- humans have been violent since the beginning. We only recently got video games. Give me a break.
If I can afford a tivo, I surely can afford better food than that... Offer me a coupon for a free Mercedes, and you might get my attention.
Commercials ruin the whole TV experience for me. I watched Firefly from DVDs I borrowed from a friend
Let me get this straight.
You're mister "I'm above a free burger, I can afford a TiVo..." yet you're borrowing a DVD from a friend and it's on your "to-buy list."
Give me a break.
On top of that, most people that have DVRs nowadays are those that rent them for $5 a month from their cable provider. A free box o'chicken is worth the hassle.
Ummm, the navigation isn't threatening to sue, it is adding a disclosure to prevent the company that created the device from being sued. After all, that is the only reason they put the goddamn disclaimer in the device to begin with!
By your argument not having a yellow light should be safer yet.
How did you come to that conclusion? A yellow light gives oncoming traffic a warning, to slow down and prepare to stop if they can safely do so before the light turns red. Then the red is on for a brief period in both directions, then the other side turns green.
Experiment has proven that this is false.
Not that I was arguing this idea, but please show me these findings so I can study the details.
Most people try to avoid running a yellow light.
Since when?
Those who intentionally run a yellow light deserve to get a ticket,
Why, it's not usually against the law to run a yellow light, it's against the law to run a red light.
when you shorten the yellow light, you are gambling on people having shorter reaction times
No, I'm not. If you would re-read my original reply, I specifically stated, "Assuming the green light is still delayed the same amount of time..."
Here are two scenarios:
SCENARIO (A)
1. North/South lights are green. East/West lights are red. 2. N/S lights turn yellow for 2 seconds, then red for 2 seconds. 3. E/W lights turn green.
SCENARIO (B)
1. N/S lights are green. E/W lights are red. 2. N/S lights turn yellow for 1 second, then red for 3 seconds. 3. E/W lights turn green.
What I stated was, if DC is going from a scenario A to a scenario B, they are not risking safety at all, and in fact could be increasing safety, as there is more of a buffer between when people are supposed to be stopped and when the other side can go (3 seconds vs. 2 seconds).
If you can explain how this is not as safe or safer, or have some legitimate studies to prove it, please present them.
One of the biggest offenders I can think of is them passing legislation to make yellow lights shorter so more people are likely to run through red lights, thus increasing ticket revenue. Nothing quite like putting your citizens' lives at stake by making them run through more red lights just so you can have some more money to play with.
Assuming the green light is still delayed the same amount of time, and just the yellow light is on for a briefer period, this actually INCREASES safety, by discouraging people from running a yellow/red light, once people become accustomed to the shorter yellow light. The side effect you mentioned is true, more revenue for the city, unless people wise up.
Is there a difference between this and the service that I'm just not seeing?
Yeah. You're eliminating the middle man that's currently forwarding your email to gmail.com. Gmail's mail servers are listed as the MX for your domain, and all email destined for you@xyz.com is sent directly to your gmail account. Now you're only having to worry about one point of failure (Gmail) rather than two.
I have two problems with this decision. First, while I won't argue that there is an absolute right to anonymity, I have yet to hear an argument for the proposition that checking ID makes flying safer.
(a) It allows us to try and identify people on watch lists. (b) It allows us to make it much more difficult for one person to pick up the ticket, and another person to use the ticket to get past security, where they are no longer checking to see if you're on the watch list. Imagine someone with a clean record buys the ticket, then gives it to a terrorist they're working with, who then boards the plane. (a) requires (b), and together they provide one measure of safety.
The 9/11 terrorists had valid ID.
Yeah, a lot's changed since then, especially our watch list systems. They also let the 9/11 terrorists on board with box cutters. We don't do that anymore either.
The SEC investigates fraud which victimizes shareholders. This is fraud against consumers, a much less important group.
While I see you scored points with the anti-capitalists at home on slashdot, the fact is consumers also have a bureacratic oversight commission in the FTC.
How is the parent post 'offtopic'? The editor made a reference to Windows and when it might get running on the intel macs, so why is a question asking about another OS running on the macs offtopic?
You can't move it up the screen, that just punishes your hardcore readers.
I really don't even think it needs to come to the main page completely anyway... it will be obvious that a sectional story must be interesting if it gets a lot of comments.
By law and common sense that makes it beer in the US.
What law is that? In California, for example, any "beer" over 3.99% alcohol cannot be referred to as beer, and must be referred to as malt liquor, lager, etc. Sake is 15-17% alcohol, and I seriously doubt any BATF regulations would permit calling it a beer in the USA.
Similarly, vodka is usually made from grain, does that make it a beer as well?
Sake is likely referred to as a rice wine, because the alcohol content is similar to wine, and it's not carbonated.
The point is that cross-site scripting leaks information (or worse) from a trusted site to a non-trusted site. Of course it doesn't "work" through URL pings. Duh. But it is the same class of security problem, genius.
Not really. What's to stop Site A from using Site B as a redirecter for all of it's URLs? It conveys the same exact information as your ping example. Should firefox display an alert whenever someone links to a site off of their domain?
If you click on the Answers link on that page for the Optimus keyboard, it says:
It's in the initial stage of production.
We hope it will be released in 2006.
It will cost less than a good mobile phone.
It will be real.
It will be OS-independent (at least it's going to be able to work in some default state with any OS).
It will support any language or layout.
Moscow is the capital of Russia.
Each key could be programmed to produce any sequence.
It will be an open-source keyboard, SDK will be available.
Some day it will be split (and made "ergonomic").
It will most likely use the OLED technology (e-paper is sooo slow).
Our studio is located two blocks from the Kremlin.
It will feature a key-saver.
Keys could be animated when needed.
It has a numeric keypad because we love it.
There's no snow in Moscow in summer.
It will be available worldwide (why not?)
OEM is possible (why not?)
f you really want to bitch about nothing then here's a far better one: Firefox has cookies enabled by default and sets your homepage to one of theirs on first run - THEY COULD BE SPYING ON EVERYTHING YOU EVAR DO ON TEH INTERPOWER COMPUTERWEB!
I know you're being semi-facetious, but what exactly can they do with a cookie that contains, at most, information you already gave them by browsing their website?
Slashdot Mirror
You have to start somewhere. As you said, the mac-native game market is small... because the mac market is small. Getting people to buy Macs since they can also run Windows on it -- with the hopes that they'll start getting sucked into and liking Mac OS -- means the mac market share grows, and with it, the desire to play games there from more people.
Linux is shaping up to be better and better at being user friendly and desktop quality. Apple will have to compete with that. Are you high, man?
I agree that right now it's mostly total PC geeks and not Apple's target market.
But that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of geeks out there that would buy an official version of Mac OS X that "just works."
There is an upside and a downside for Apple. Downside is it's harder to make OS X such a great experience when it's going on hardware they didn't build.
The upside, aside from any profit made from the sales, is that if they do a good enough job on it, you may be able to lure that person into buying an Apple computer the next time they need an upgrade.
My transition has been like this:
- Age 8 to 17, hardcore PC user and mac "hater"
- Age 18 to 23, hardcore PC user and ambivalent mac spectator
- Age 24-26, PC user and occasional Mac user (to help friends and family)
- Age 26-28, iPod owner several times over, and fan of Mac OS X technology (still PC user)
- Age 29, PowerMac G5 and Mac Mini user, and an Apple sticker on the back of my car.
THEY'VE WON.
I still program mostly on Windows systems, and still like Windows for some things, but it's safe to say I am getting fanatical about Apple.
The more you start using some of their stuff, the more you like it and want to use more of their stuff. Introducing Mac OS X that can run on a regular PC may be the taste that can push Apple of the edge.
You know, you get geeks using Mac OS X, like me, and next thing you know, your whole family is running it. This is what happened to me. Everyone now comes to me for advice on what to buy, and I tell them a Mac, every time. Mac mini if they want to save money, or a macbook, imac, or powermac if they can afford it.
You're criticizing Americans for not thinking on a site built by Americans to post things for you to think about. Oh the irony...
You want to know what's stupid? Lorie Fowlke wants to limit access to fake guns, while leaving open full access to real guns! (I think George Carlin had a joke about this.)
FWIW, I am in favor of having access to both real and virtual guns. I just like to point out the lunacy of elected officials.
Also, her page says elsewhere about "Family," "I will do all I can to pass and support legislation that protects the traditional family from government encroachment. I will fight for what is right against any government agency that uses its power inappropriately or illegally to interfere with the rights of the family."
Like the rights to parent our children without government interference?
Give me a fucking break.
However, what I am going to say is that when I went to high school in early to late 80's the idea of gun violence did not cross our mind.
1. You didn't have 24 hour cable news to broadcast these events.
2. You didn't have the web, global news websites, and blogging.
These two things makes it (a) seem like their is more violence than before, because it is covered more than it was before, and (b) perhaps give way to copycat violence.
As has been said a million times over -- humans have been violent since the beginning. We only recently got video games. Give me a break.
If I can afford a tivo, I surely can afford better food than that... Offer me a coupon for a free Mercedes, and you might get my attention.
Commercials ruin the whole TV experience for me. I watched Firefly from DVDs I borrowed from a friend
Let me get this straight.
You're mister "I'm above a free burger, I can afford a TiVo..." yet you're borrowing a DVD from a friend and it's on your "to-buy list."
Give me a break.
On top of that, most people that have DVRs nowadays are those that rent them for $5 a month from their cable provider. A free box o'chicken is worth the hassle.
Ummm, the navigation isn't threatening to sue, it is adding a disclosure to prevent the company that created the device from being sued. After all, that is the only reason they put the goddamn disclaimer in the device to begin with!
By your argument not having a yellow light should be safer yet.
How did you come to that conclusion? A yellow light gives oncoming traffic a warning, to slow down and prepare to stop if they can safely do so before the light turns red. Then the red is on for a brief period in both directions, then the other side turns green.
Experiment has proven that this is false.
Not that I was arguing this idea, but please show me these findings so I can study the details.
Most people try to avoid running a yellow light.
Since when?
Those who intentionally run a yellow light deserve to get a ticket,
Why, it's not usually against the law to run a yellow light, it's against the law to run a red light.
when you shorten the yellow light, you are gambling on people having shorter reaction times
No, I'm not. If you would re-read my original reply, I specifically stated, "Assuming the green light is still delayed the same amount of time..."
Here are two scenarios:
SCENARIO (A)
1. North/South lights are green. East/West lights are red.
2. N/S lights turn yellow for 2 seconds, then red for 2 seconds.
3. E/W lights turn green.
SCENARIO (B)
1. N/S lights are green. E/W lights are red.
2. N/S lights turn yellow for 1 second, then red for 3 seconds.
3. E/W lights turn green.
What I stated was, if DC is going from a scenario A to a scenario B, they are not risking safety at all, and in fact could be increasing safety, as there is more of a buffer between when people are supposed to be stopped and when the other side can go (3 seconds vs. 2 seconds).
If you can explain how this is not as safe or safer, or have some legitimate studies to prove it, please present them.
One of the biggest offenders I can think of is them passing legislation to make yellow lights shorter so more people are likely to run through red lights, thus increasing ticket revenue. Nothing quite like putting your citizens' lives at stake by making them run through more red lights just so you can have some more money to play with.
Assuming the green light is still delayed the same amount of time, and just the yellow light is on for a briefer period, this actually INCREASES safety, by discouraging people from running a yellow/red light, once people become accustomed to the shorter yellow light. The side effect you mentioned is true, more revenue for the city, unless people wise up.
Is there a difference between this and the service that I'm just not seeing?
Yeah. You're eliminating the middle man that's currently forwarding your email to gmail.com. Gmail's mail servers are listed as the MX for your domain, and all email destined for you@xyz.com is sent directly to your gmail account. Now you're only having to worry about one point of failure (Gmail) rather than two.
But wireless HDTV... Crap. Couldn't they at least wait until I've graduated?
You're really gonna shit your pants when you figure out what the acronym "OTA" stands for.
I am just wondering why you wouldn't give the fish a fighting chance and use whiskey colored WATER?
Nothing about the particular definition I supplied suggests that it has to be a human (or even a pigeon) posting the information.
You also did not define "blogging" you defined "logging." As in logging in some data.
Blogging is essentially logging to the web, with the idea that others will read and respond to your items.
Logging is just recording information, which is what these birds will do.
I have two problems with this decision. First, while I won't argue that there is an absolute right to anonymity, I have yet to hear an argument for the proposition that checking ID makes flying safer.
(a) It allows us to try and identify people on watch lists.
(b) It allows us to make it much more difficult for one person to pick up the ticket, and another person to use the ticket to get past security, where they are no longer checking to see if you're on the watch list. Imagine someone with a clean record buys the ticket, then gives it to a terrorist they're working with, who then boards the plane. (a) requires (b), and together they provide one measure of safety.
The 9/11 terrorists had valid ID.
Yeah, a lot's changed since then, especially our watch list systems. They also let the 9/11 terrorists on board with box cutters. We don't do that anymore either.
The SEC investigates fraud which victimizes shareholders. This is fraud against consumers, a much less important group.
While I see you scored points with the anti-capitalists at home on slashdot, the fact is consumers also have a bureacratic oversight commission in the FTC.
How is the parent post 'offtopic'? The editor made a reference to Windows and when it might get running on the intel macs, so why is a question asking about another OS running on the macs offtopic?
I dont have a 0f freezer.
Most home refrigerator freezers keep their temperatures around 0F.
You can't move it up the screen, that just punishes your hardcore readers.
I really don't even think it needs to come to the main page completely anyway... it will be obvious that a sectional story must be interesting if it gets a lot of comments.
By law and common sense that makes it beer in the US.
What law is that? In California, for example, any "beer" over 3.99% alcohol cannot be referred to as beer, and must be referred to as malt liquor, lager, etc. Sake is 15-17% alcohol, and I seriously doubt any BATF regulations would permit calling it a beer in the USA.
Similarly, vodka is usually made from grain, does that make it a beer as well?
Sake is likely referred to as a rice wine, because the alcohol content is similar to wine, and it's not carbonated.
Yes, maybe, but consider this: "Why does number 2 work for???"
I agree... why would anyone need to bring a private clock on a subway?
That would be immediately suspicious.
The point is that cross-site scripting leaks information (or worse) from a trusted site to a non-trusted site. Of course it doesn't "work" through URL pings. Duh. But it is the same class of security problem, genius.
Not really. What's to stop Site A from using Site B as a redirecter for all of it's URLs? It conveys the same exact information as your ping example. Should firefox display an alert whenever someone links to a site off of their domain?
If you click on the Answers link on that page for the Optimus keyboard, it says: It's in the initial stage of production. We hope it will be released in 2006. It will cost less than a good mobile phone. It will be real. It will be OS-independent (at least it's going to be able to work in some default state with any OS). It will support any language or layout. Moscow is the capital of Russia. Each key could be programmed to produce any sequence. It will be an open-source keyboard, SDK will be available. Some day it will be split (and made "ergonomic"). It will most likely use the OLED technology (e-paper is sooo slow). Our studio is located two blocks from the Kremlin. It will feature a key-saver. Keys could be animated when needed. It has a numeric keypad because we love it. There's no snow in Moscow in summer. It will be available worldwide (why not?) OEM is possible (why not?)
f you really want to bitch about nothing then here's a far better one: Firefox has cookies enabled by default and sets your homepage to one of theirs on first run - THEY COULD BE SPYING ON EVERYTHING YOU EVAR DO ON TEH INTERPOWER COMPUTERWEB! I know you're being semi-facetious, but what exactly can they do with a cookie that contains, at most, information you already gave them by browsing their website?