Hmm, it seems to me that "there were scientist crying about global COOLING!" pretty much could fit the scenario of being written about in magazines or newspapers - just the sorts of places I remember seeing those articles. Where did you THINK he heard about it? Scientists running down the street tearing their hair out?
Your poor nitpicking does not rise to the level of sufficient argument to disprove anything he or I have noted. You can say what you will, but I DO remember such articles, and at times, the media sounded almost shrill in tone about it. Typical media sensationalism, just as I noted in my previous post. You cannot disprove either his memories or mine.
And, by the way, since I don't have access to 60 Minutes' video library, I can't say for sure, but they've done so many reports on so many subjects, I wouldn't be surprised if they *had* done one on just this subject...
"It is occasionally asserted..." - because people like the quoted poster remembers such articles. I remember them too. Neither the other poster nor I am asserting that the "scientific community" necessarily *believed* anything, merely that we remember being told by the popular press that such speculation was being made by members of that community. That is one reason why the general public was so skeptical at first about global warming - we'd already heard the scientists speculate about cooling, for Pete's sake. We all know how the press can take an idea that is somehow new or different or sensational and run with a story just to sell papers. (...and how other media can jump on that bandwagon!)
We also know how scientists can also take advantage of that and try to use such publicity to garner additional funds for favored programs. Neither means that there is any consensus in that community on the ideas or theories being publicized, but the public can get the wrong idea about that very easily. Thus the "assertions" Wikipedia mentions pop up as people remember those articles.
All very reasonable sounding, but nothing you say negates my point, which is that his keynotes are closely choreographed, which is a matter of public interviews and articles published about him in the past. So, no, I don't think the Beatles' music or artwork at the keynotes was accidental at all, but was a closely planned disclosure.
...and if they are reasonably computer literate, they would have read the restrictions and conditions before buying. There are so many places one reads about the Apple DRM, I'm surprised anybody doesn't know about it. They certainly don't hide it.
Simple doesn't mean free of restrictions, but they are certainly free to use their music, otherwise obtained, in iTunes and on their iPods... the ITS isn't a requirement to use either one.
But with 2 billion songs downloaded, it's hard to call it unpopular!
Actually, Apple will let you restore (redownload) purchased music if you can prove (through invoices) the prior purchase, in case of a disk disaster. I've read of an occasional user that happened to in the past. But you've gotta have the invoices. So save them to a CD as proof!
I doubt that. Nothing that Steve Jobs does in his keynotes is by accident. It is all tightly scripted and choreographed, practiced over and over in the weeks prior to the actual keynote. That is done largely to ensure that he doesn't slip and give away something by accident, as well as to ensure a really great show. That is why there is so much speculation about the Beatles on iTunes. You don't think he's going to take the chance of accidentally exposing really personal stuff in front of thousands of people? Ha! I don't think so.
Sure he could have ripped the Cd's, but the artwork, which he specifically noted how beautiful it was, comes only from the iTunes store, even if you get the album from a CD. Unless you scan the artwork yourself, and somehow, I don't see a CEO of a major tech company scanning in his artwork from an old album cover...
That reply was unnecessarily harsh. The other poster's statement that everybody with a Mac knows... etc., may have been overblown and rather stupid, but your reply just puts you into the same category that he was in. If you don't like the Mac community, then stay away, but I have found in my many years of being a big Mac fan and user that MOST Mac users are quite eager to be helpful, and are more than willing to assist a newbie in finding information and apps they need.
His points about the relative availability of software on the Mac vs. Windows is spot on. I am a desktop support tech, and have been for ten years, before that, I was in purchasing. I can tell you from experience that 75 - 80% of Windows software is crap - you can't say that about software in the Mac community. There, even most of the share or free ware is good stuff. I have never had any problems finding software for my Mac for some task I needed to do, and I use Windows at work just as much as Macs at home.
Didn't suggest it would. Just made the statement, based upon the progress medical science has made in recent years. You make some very good points, many of which, as you say, are being investigated worldwide. Assuming they get answered, we may yet get silicone memory, or maybe it'll be made of something else - or we'll just learn in the process how to use our own natural memory better.
Nothing I said suggested that such an exchange would "automatically" solve anything. I would assume we wouldn't attempt such an implantation without such solutions in the first place, dontcha think?
What you are suggesting is that someday, humans will become what sci-fi authors have for years called 'cyborgs', or a human/electronic melding. As a matter of fact, that has been happening for years on a purely mechanical basis.
The FDA has a skeleton that they use as a teaching tool. This guy has every conceivable implantable device attached, and looks quite cyborg-like!
Recent books I've read have even suggested the idea that we may someday have a flash-type memory implanted that will give us instant recall of data, much like Star Trek's Data could command.
Isaac Asimov, I think, had a book that postulated the granting of citizenship rights to a genetically engineered chimpanzee. I don't remember the name off hand. The court room scene where the elements of self-awareness and intelligence are examined are impressive, and quite funny at times!
And if we don't kill them off first, elephants and dolphins may someday be proven to have sufficient intelligence to be granted protection as the first non-human intelligent species to be recognized.
Once they get the camera pixel patent into production, and the entire screen surface is the camera lens, that won't work! (unless you just don't wanna watch TV!)
Keds were a brand of tennis shoe, big in the 1950's and sixties. They were characterized by a blue tag at the back of the shoe, just above the heel. I assume the pink-laced part refers to pink shoe laces...
A SONG isn't limited as to the number of times it can be copied. It is the PLAY LIST that is limited. Change one song in that play list and you start the counter over.
And you forget the ability to burn the songs to CD then re-rip them back as mp3, so they will transfer just fine....and, of course, it'll play all your songs ripped from your own CDs just fine, too! (Which Joe Sixpack is more likely to own than downloaded stuff)
That restaurant in that famous MacDonalds coffee case - the reason they lost isn't because of the popular derisive impression. They lost because the plaintiff proved that the management had been dinged by the local food authorities for exceeding the allowed temperature of their coffee for at least three weeks previous to the incident in question. Other patrons had been burned and complained, but none as bad as the woman that sued. They deserved to lose!
OS preference is just that - subjective. I've used the Mac OS since 1987, and I don't see the "hideous and impossible" issues you seem to. I've also used Ubuntu (I have it on my PowerMac at home) and it seems fine - but I don't like spending as much time on it as I seem to need to to get some things to work. That's a personal preference, just like yours.
I'm not being pretentious, I've got increasingly higher and higher sales figures for Apple for years on my side, and recent increases for market share, too. That doesn't make it any kind of standard, but it's got an increasing installed base, and more and more Windows users are making the switch.
Besides, I'm not the one throwing stones, here. I'm trying to make a case logically, with some proof on my side. I'm not calling the other one names. (By the way, that attempt at a straw man - nobody's ignoring sales figures - is just what exposes your bias. At least I've openly admitted mine, and aren't resorting to calling you names to make my case.)
Sorry, not bullshit. It is a real problem with many people. But the software thing is, I agree, more of an issue with others.
If you have an issue with the emulators, talk to the emulator manufacturers. It is not the responsibility of the OS manufacturer to provide such, only if they feel a need to produce such software. It is, however, a niche that others have successfully filled. Ever heard of Parallels Desktop? They are doing quite well. And it's software is easy to use, easy to setup, and is pretty well configured to provide most functionality.
As I said, don't like it? Find another emulator. It's not Apple's, nor Microsoft's, nor the OSS community's fault that customers won't upgrade.
We're NOT talking about non geeks here. Most folks, when addressing this issue, are talking about corporations or small companies that use older apps, many times specialty written stuff. I've worked for Gov't agencies that have used such things, and the excuses for not upgrading are usually bullshit, and are related to not being willing to spend the money to keep up. Eventually, they are forced to anyway, and have to spend much more when they do than if they had provided a reasonable upgrade path in the first place. So I've not much sympathy for them.
Then you lose the advantages of that community. If you buy the software, then be prepared to limit yourself to the OS it'll run on, as well as the hardware that'll support it. If you are willing to do that, then you've got no problem.
As noted above, if you really need to upgrade, then be prepared to use emulators. For a lot of folks, that'll work just fine. and no, they usually don't 'obsolete' programs at 'random' points in time. Anybody that keeps up with what Apple is doing usually has some idea of where things are going. Developers that paid any attention at all knew that when OS X came out, that the time left on Classic apps was limited, yet, it was over four years before they officially dumped OS 9. Anybody that got 'surprised' by that one was asleep at the switch!
For a company that is on the edge and ready for new things, three years is plenty of time. Of course, that depends on the industry, I know that's not universal. So if it works for you, then go for it. If not, then stay behind.
Eventually, technology will get so far ahead of you, it'll cost you a mint to catch up, what ever you do. It's up to you to decide where and when you want to spend your money.
I'm not sure what you think that means regarding the issue of how Apple sells their OS.
As has been written before, Apple is in the business of selling an experience. Yes, primarily, that is hardware, but it is more than that.
At the insistence of Steve Jobs, Apple goes to great lengths to ensure that what you buy with a Mac is more then just a piece of hardware with an OS installed. It is an experience that can't be duplicated by any other OS - because nobody else makes the whole widget.
If they gave up that control, it would no longer be what it is today.
Microsoft got where they are today by leveraging illegal monopolistic tactics, not through innovation or development or anything creative.
Emulations are an excellent reason why OS manufacturers should drop legacy apps on a timely and scheduled basis. Let the latest and greatest OS run all the new stuff, so those of us that like to run at the cutting edge can do so.
Those that insist on not (or can't) changing their business model or processes can use an emulator to run their older stuff. Eventually, you will have to change anyway, because technology changes to the point that the old stuff just won't work, and doesn't make any sense any more. So why not establish a regular program of technology updating that can gradually move you into a newer technology? It doesn't have to be top grade or dollar. But you can't get there if you don't try.
Apple is NOT going to release for all x86 platforms.
They are a hardware company.
Their OS is produced in support of that hardware, which is where they make their money. They will never use Microsoft's business strategies to increase their market share - they don't need to. It is increasing nicely on it's own right now!
That being said, I agree with the rest of your post.
"Standard", Merriam-Webster: "4 : something set up and established by authority as a rule for the measure of quantity, weight, extent, value, or quality".
No, I'd not say that Windows is by any measure a "standard". It may be commonly used, perhaps, but it is NOT a standard. Not by any authority I recognize, anyway.
The Mac OS is not an aberration, either. It is used daily by many people, and companies, and is a very commonly used OS in graphics arts, the sciences, and education. It's use is increasing, as evidenced by a steady increase in sales and marketing figures.
Linux is also seeing an increase in use, and interest, especially overseas. Wasn't it Munich, Germany that just "standardized" on Linux? By dumping Windows?
Go ahead and give your own personal reasons for using Windows, that's fine, I cannot argue with your reasoning - your reasons are your own and you are entitled to them. But leave off the argumentative and insulting pejoratives, they do not add to your credibility. Instead, they diminish it by exposing your bias.
Especially when you offer no evidence as to why you call the Mac OS an aberration.
Well, what Mac are you running? What version of OS X?
If you are running an Intel Mac, of course not. Apple made no bones about the fact that they were cutting off support for Classic apps.
That said, however, if you have old documents, such as say, MacWrite files? If you have a version of Appleworks (that works with OS X), for instance, you should still be able to open many of those older files. It still runs under Rosetta. I have stuff dating back to the late 80's and early 90's I still can refer to if needed that way.
I also have some old Excel files dating back to the early versions of Excel for the Mac that NeoOffice opens quite nicely.
There ARE ways, if you look. You may not be able to use the original app, but the files may still be accessible.
Again, THAT having been said, I support Apple's preferences for eventually cutting off support. Look what unlimited support for legacy apps has done to Windows. It's a mess. Who knows how much of that old legacy crap is involved in the security vulnerabilities that keep cropping up? Who wants to take that chance?
Apple gives their community lots of time before that support gets cut off, usually two to three years. They encourage their developers to update and upgrade their software. They do everything but hold your hand to help move that along. If some customers won't cooperate, that's not their problem. Apple's machines last long enough that customers can (and often do) buy older machines to run older versions of the OS to maintain some measure of legacy apps along with newer (but not newest) OS versions. That helps.
But in the long run, maintaining that legacy support indefinitely just hurts the community more than it helps.
Slashdot Mirror
So I guess you dispute the memories of the Holocaust survivors, too?
Were you there to tell us we were wrong?
Hmm, it seems to me that "there were scientist crying about global COOLING!" pretty much could fit the scenario of being written about in magazines or newspapers - just the sorts of places I remember seeing those articles. Where did you THINK he heard about it? Scientists running down the street tearing their hair out?
Your poor nitpicking does not rise to the level of sufficient argument to disprove anything he or I have noted. You can say what you will, but I DO remember such articles, and at times, the media sounded almost shrill in tone about it. Typical media sensationalism, just as I noted in my previous post. You cannot disprove either his memories or mine.
And, by the way, since I don't have access to 60 Minutes' video library, I can't say for sure, but they've done so many reports on so many subjects, I wouldn't be surprised if they *had* done one on just this subject...
Yep, we will! (By the way, I didn't mean to imply that Jobs doesn't like the Beatles.)
"It is occasionally asserted..." - because people like the quoted poster remembers such articles. I remember them too. Neither the other poster nor I am asserting that the "scientific community" necessarily *believed* anything, merely that we remember being told by the popular press that such speculation was being made by members of that community. That is one reason why the general public was so skeptical at first about global warming - we'd already heard the scientists speculate about cooling, for Pete's sake. We all know how the press can take an idea that is somehow new or different or sensational and run with a story just to sell papers. (...and how other media can jump on that bandwagon!)
We also know how scientists can also take advantage of that and try to use such publicity to garner additional funds for favored programs. Neither means that there is any consensus in that community on the ideas or theories being publicized, but the public can get the wrong idea about that very easily. Thus the "assertions" Wikipedia mentions pop up as people remember those articles.
Doesn't mean anybody is making anything up.
All very reasonable sounding, but nothing you say negates my point, which is that his keynotes are closely choreographed, which is a matter of public interviews and articles published about him in the past. So, no, I don't think the Beatles' music or artwork at the keynotes was accidental at all, but was a closely planned disclosure.
...and if they are reasonably computer literate, they would have read the restrictions and conditions before buying. There are so many places one reads about the Apple DRM, I'm surprised anybody doesn't know about it. They certainly don't hide it.
Simple doesn't mean free of restrictions, but they are certainly free to use their music, otherwise obtained, in iTunes and on their iPods... the ITS isn't a requirement to use either one.
But with 2 billion songs downloaded, it's hard to call it unpopular!
Actually, Apple will let you restore (redownload) purchased music if you can prove (through invoices) the prior purchase, in case of a disk disaster. I've read of an occasional user that happened to in the past. But you've gotta have the invoices. So save them to a CD as proof!
I doubt that. Nothing that Steve Jobs does in his keynotes is by accident. It is all tightly scripted and choreographed, practiced over and over in the weeks prior to the actual keynote. That is done largely to ensure that he doesn't slip and give away something by accident, as well as to ensure a really great show. That is why there is so much speculation about the Beatles on iTunes. You don't think he's going to take the chance of accidentally exposing really personal stuff in front of thousands of people? Ha! I don't think so.
Sure he could have ripped the Cd's, but the artwork, which he specifically noted how beautiful it was, comes only from the iTunes store, even if you get the album from a CD. Unless you scan the artwork yourself, and somehow, I don't see a CEO of a major tech company scanning in his artwork from an old album cover...
That reply was unnecessarily harsh. The other poster's statement that everybody with a Mac knows... etc., may have been overblown and rather stupid, but your reply just puts you into the same category that he was in. If you don't like the Mac community, then stay away, but I have found in my many years of being a big Mac fan and user that MOST Mac users are quite eager to be helpful, and are more than willing to assist a newbie in finding information and apps they need.
His points about the relative availability of software on the Mac vs. Windows is spot on. I am a desktop support tech, and have been for ten years, before that, I was in purchasing. I can tell you from experience that 75 - 80% of Windows software is crap - you can't say that about software in the Mac community. There, even most of the share or free ware is good stuff. I have never had any problems finding software for my Mac for some task I needed to do, and I use Windows at work just as much as Macs at home.
By the way, what is "stingly"??
Didn't suggest it would. Just made the statement, based upon the progress medical science has made in recent years. You make some very good points, many of which, as you say, are being investigated worldwide. Assuming they get answered, we may yet get silicone memory, or maybe it'll be made of something else - or we'll just learn in the process how to use our own natural memory better.
Nothing I said suggested that such an exchange would "automatically" solve anything. I would assume we wouldn't attempt such an implantation without such solutions in the first place, dontcha think?
Could be, I don't remember. It was a great story, tho, and the chimp's name WAS Jerry, I think...
What you are suggesting is that someday, humans will become what sci-fi authors have for years called 'cyborgs', or a human/electronic melding. As a matter of fact, that has been happening for years on a purely mechanical basis.
The FDA has a skeleton that they use as a teaching tool. This guy has every conceivable implantable device attached, and looks quite cyborg-like!
Recent books I've read have even suggested the idea that we may someday have a flash-type memory implanted that will give us instant recall of data, much like Star Trek's Data could command.
Isaac Asimov, I think, had a book that postulated the granting of citizenship rights to a genetically engineered chimpanzee. I don't remember the name off hand. The court room scene where the elements of self-awareness and intelligence are examined are impressive, and quite funny at times!
And if we don't kill them off first, elephants and dolphins may someday be proven to have sufficient intelligence to be granted protection as the first non-human intelligent species to be recognized.
So why not robots?
Once they get the camera pixel patent into production, and the entire screen surface is the camera lens, that won't work! (unless you just don't wanna watch TV!)
Keds were a brand of tennis shoe, big in the 1950's and sixties. They were characterized by a blue tag at the back of the shoe, just above the heel. I assume the pink-laced part refers to pink shoe laces...
Or:
"Arbeit macht frei!"
A SONG isn't limited as to the number of times it can be copied. It is the PLAY LIST that is limited. Change one song in that play list and you start the counter over.
...and, of course, it'll play all your songs ripped from your own CDs just fine, too! (Which Joe Sixpack is more likely to own than downloaded stuff)
And you forget the ability to burn the songs to CD then re-rip them back as mp3, so they will transfer just fine.
I especially agree about the coffee...
That restaurant in that famous MacDonalds coffee case - the reason they lost isn't because of the popular derisive impression. They lost because the plaintiff proved that the management had been dinged by the local food authorities for exceeding the allowed temperature of their coffee for at least three weeks previous to the incident in question. Other patrons had been burned and complained, but none as bad as the woman that sued. They deserved to lose!
Then we'll have to agree to disagree.
OS preference is just that - subjective. I've used the Mac OS since 1987, and I don't see the "hideous and impossible" issues you seem to. I've also used Ubuntu (I have it on my PowerMac at home) and it seems fine - but I don't like spending as much time on it as I seem to need to to get some things to work. That's a personal preference, just like yours.
I'm not being pretentious, I've got increasingly higher and higher sales figures for Apple for years on my side, and recent increases for market share, too. That doesn't make it any kind of standard, but it's got an increasing installed base, and more and more Windows users are making the switch.
Besides, I'm not the one throwing stones, here. I'm trying to make a case logically, with some proof on my side. I'm not calling the other one names. (By the way, that attempt at a straw man - nobody's ignoring sales figures - is just what exposes your bias. At least I've openly admitted mine, and aren't resorting to calling you names to make my case.)
Sorry, not bullshit. It is a real problem with many people. But the software thing is, I agree, more of an issue with others.
If you have an issue with the emulators, talk to the emulator manufacturers. It is not the responsibility of the OS manufacturer to provide such, only if they feel a need to produce such software. It is, however, a niche that others have successfully filled. Ever heard of Parallels Desktop? They are doing quite well. And it's software is easy to use, easy to setup, and is pretty well configured to provide most functionality.
As I said, don't like it? Find another emulator. It's not Apple's, nor Microsoft's, nor the OSS community's fault that customers won't upgrade.
We're NOT talking about non geeks here. Most folks, when addressing this issue, are talking about corporations or small companies that use older apps, many times specialty written stuff. I've worked for Gov't agencies that have used such things, and the excuses for not upgrading are usually bullshit, and are related to not being willing to spend the money to keep up. Eventually, they are forced to anyway, and have to spend much more when they do than if they had provided a reasonable upgrade path in the first place. So I've not much sympathy for them.
Then you lose the advantages of that community. If you buy the software, then be prepared to limit yourself to the OS it'll run on, as well as the hardware that'll support it. If you are willing to do that, then you've got no problem.
As noted above, if you really need to upgrade, then be prepared to use emulators. For a lot of folks, that'll work just fine. and no, they usually don't 'obsolete' programs at 'random' points in time. Anybody that keeps up with what Apple is doing usually has some idea of where things are going. Developers that paid any attention at all knew that when OS X came out, that the time left on Classic apps was limited, yet, it was over four years before they officially dumped OS 9. Anybody that got 'surprised' by that one was asleep at the switch!
For a company that is on the edge and ready for new things, three years is plenty of time. Of course, that depends on the industry, I know that's not universal. So if it works for you, then go for it. If not, then stay behind.
Eventually, technology will get so far ahead of you, it'll cost you a mint to catch up, what ever you do. It's up to you to decide where and when you want to spend your money.
I'm not sure what you think that means regarding the issue of how Apple sells their OS.
As has been written before, Apple is in the business of selling an experience. Yes, primarily, that is hardware, but it is more than that.
At the insistence of Steve Jobs, Apple goes to great lengths to ensure that what you buy with a Mac is more then just a piece of hardware with an OS installed. It is an experience that can't be duplicated by any other OS - because nobody else makes the whole widget.
If they gave up that control, it would no longer be what it is today.
Microsoft got where they are today by leveraging illegal monopolistic tactics, not through innovation or development or anything creative.
Thank you!
Emulations are an excellent reason why OS manufacturers should drop legacy apps on a timely and scheduled basis. Let the latest and greatest OS run all the new stuff, so those of us that like to run at the cutting edge can do so.
Those that insist on not (or can't) changing their business model or processes can use an emulator to run their older stuff. Eventually, you will have to change anyway, because technology changes to the point that the old stuff just won't work, and doesn't make any sense any more. So why not establish a regular program of technology updating that can gradually move you into a newer technology? It doesn't have to be top grade or dollar. But you can't get there if you don't try.
FUD.
Apple is NOT going to release for all x86 platforms.
They are a hardware company.
Their OS is produced in support of that hardware, which is where they make their money. They will never use Microsoft's business strategies to increase their market share - they don't need to. It is increasing nicely on it's own right now!
That being said, I agree with the rest of your post.
Hmmm,
"Standard", Merriam-Webster: "4 : something set up and established by authority as a rule for the measure of quantity, weight, extent, value, or quality".
No, I'd not say that Windows is by any measure a "standard". It may be commonly used, perhaps, but it is NOT a standard. Not by any authority I recognize, anyway.
The Mac OS is not an aberration, either. It is used daily by many people, and companies, and is a very commonly used OS in graphics arts, the sciences, and education. It's use is increasing, as evidenced by a steady increase in sales and marketing figures.
Linux is also seeing an increase in use, and interest, especially overseas. Wasn't it Munich, Germany that just "standardized" on Linux? By dumping Windows?
Go ahead and give your own personal reasons for using Windows, that's fine, I cannot argue with your reasoning - your reasons are your own and you are entitled to them. But leave off the argumentative and insulting pejoratives, they do not add to your credibility. Instead, they diminish it by exposing your bias.
Especially when you offer no evidence as to why you call the Mac OS an aberration.
Well, what Mac are you running? What version of OS X?
If you are running an Intel Mac, of course not. Apple made no bones about the fact that they were cutting off support for Classic apps.
That said, however, if you have old documents, such as say, MacWrite files? If you have a version of Appleworks (that works with OS X), for instance, you should still be able to open many of those older files. It still runs under Rosetta. I have stuff dating back to the late 80's and early 90's I still can refer to if needed that way.
I also have some old Excel files dating back to the early versions of Excel for the Mac that NeoOffice opens quite nicely.
There ARE ways, if you look. You may not be able to use the original app, but the files may still be accessible.
Again, THAT having been said, I support Apple's preferences for eventually cutting off support. Look what unlimited support for legacy apps has done to Windows. It's a mess. Who knows how much of that old legacy crap is involved in the security vulnerabilities that keep cropping up? Who wants to take that chance?
Apple gives their community lots of time before that support gets cut off, usually two to three years. They encourage their developers to update and upgrade their software. They do everything but hold your hand to help move that along. If some customers won't cooperate, that's not their problem. Apple's machines last long enough that customers can (and often do) buy older machines to run older versions of the OS to maintain some measure of legacy apps along with newer (but not newest) OS versions. That helps.
But in the long run, maintaining that legacy support indefinitely just hurts the community more than it helps.