Did I read that part right to mean that they can link the advert screen to nearby sensors (like in lecture halls for different subjects) so they can link that subject to YOU? (Even if its to your DEVICE, that's still possible to link that device to YOU, isn't it?)
I don't want anybody monitoring me and my movements, travels, or anything I don't specifically give them. To think that they could do this just from monitoring my Bluetooth devices is almost enough to get me to swear off of radio-linked devices forever...
Well, mostly her kids are under school age - seldom does she have after schoolers. But it doesn't seem to matter, this issue with not knowing how to play affects kids at all ages. (We live in Maryland, by the way.)
Sometimes I don't take the time to do the dictionary thing. Does the spelling really seem that important to you?
Are you really that anal? Grow up, this isn't grade school, bub. I can see why you post as an AC... at least I have the courage to back up MY opinions with my own identity.
I won't get into games. I didn't see games being a major issue in the article, nor in the major thrust of this topic.
But as I said, CrossOver will allow most Windows software to work under OS X, WITHOUT WINDOWS. so probably more than you think. And since the new mac Pro's come with newer pumped up graphics cards, I'll bet that's better than you think, too.
A recovery CD is included with all computers you buy from Apple. Don't be disingenuous - of course you PAY for it, just like you're paying for the computer. Don't make stupid arguments.
See the History Channel next Sunday, there's a show on about the history of the Apartment building, and the roots go back to Rome under the Emperors. I think kids have been playing in urban environments a lot longer than since the 1800s!
First, while the experience of the games may be similar to traditional play, sitting on the couch in front of the 32" monitor and the Xbox won't trim the fat!
Second, what makes you think Mom's don't know about the "kinds of...violence" - doncha think they were maybe kids once? Maybe they get freaked BECAUSE they know about the violence?
My wife is in child care, and has been for over 28 years. You'd be amazed by the number of kids today that come through our center that really have NO imagination, and haven't learned to play by themselves. They expect the *adults* to intertain *them*! Some of them are really pathetic, and they are the kids of upper middle class parents, usually both working professionals.
Play is learning about being a human. It takes training - lots of interactive play - for kids to actually learn how to intertain themselves. Kids don't raise themselves, and that's what's happening when kids sit in front of these electronic devices. Parents are substituting the electronics for real parenting, so no real values are being taught.
And where, pray tell, is Apple bundling anti-spy or virus-ware in with OS X? Unless you are talking about their making the OS more secure in the first place...
"Hey, Apple doesn't have any viruses, but MS Windows has over 100,000! Let's file suit against Apple, we want a level playing field here!" from the EU anti-trust folks...
"Many people just accept that many cheeper devices dont' work on Linux or Mac, they need to accept that for Windows too."
No, I don't accept that there are lots of cheaper devices that don't work on my Mac. I've never bought anything since 2000 when OS X came out that didn't work with it. Takes a tech support call or two sometimes, but they DO work. I have heard that about Linux, tho., altho not from personal experience.
"Lots of companies don't provide a CD any more - just a separate partition"
Apple provides recovery CDs. Without requiring keys. 'nuff said.
"Larger software choice, more available support,"
Virtually ALL major software makers provide Mac versions of their software, and more and more are getting on board. With third party solutions such as CrossOver that'll allow the use of Windows software in OS X WITHOUT Windows, that argument is dead. Support for Apple is getting better all the time, and Apple is repeatedly rated as top of the field in customer satisfaction with tech support.
The Mac OS is not so different or complex as to require extensive training. I can take your average joe or jane, and have them productive in half an hour, if they're knowedgeable about the basic job to begin with. People are much more capable in general, certainly in the business world, and not all users are clueless dorks.
I agree with the statement about idiot-proofing an OS, tho. Make a better OS, they'll make a better idiot, every time. But with a *nix based OS, like Linux or OS X, even admins don't run root, and most tasks don't really require it. It's about time Windows got on board with that one!
I don't think Microsoft is going to die. A company that sells that much software and provides that much service to as many enterprise customers as they do won't go fast or easily.
But it will transform. Look at where the industry is going. Apps are existing more and more on the web, and in the Enterprise, that means in a protected IntrAnet environment. That also means platform independant. (Potentially, anyway) Security is getting more attention, by ALL platforms.
Technology in general doesn't stay the same. The IT world, in particular, is emblematic of this axiom. Microsoft, in order to stay in business long term, will have to change with it, and so will their products. They may be a monopoly (but not as smart as the author thinks they are), but neither are they stupid. In five or ten years, the OS will look different, and so will the IT world. So will Microsoft, or they'll slowly fade away into insignificance.
Some of the above comments, and the article, are right - Microsoft's experience in developing Vista will change the way large software packages are developed - certainly at Microsoft, and likely at other companies, too. Doesn't mean that large Sw packages won't exist, but they'll be developed differently. In turn, that will affect how they'll look, as will the changing demands of the marketplace.
Stay in tune, the next ten years will be a fun ride!
Interesting idea. Folks get pretty upset to hear it said, but if Microsoft did that, they'd be so far behind Apple that even their own fans would have to agree. I'm an Apple fan, but I don't think Vista is *quite* as far behind Leopard as Apple's hype would have you believe. Almost, but not quite.
It came out last year shortly after Jobs announced the Intel move that Apple has had an Intel version of OS X running since development began on X. So that's why Apple could port their OS to Intel in less than a half a year - they'd been developing alongside the PowerPC version all along! (So now who's the smartest software company? Parallel development, who'd a thunk it?)
It has taken Apple, what? - four to six years to get OS X into what most users would agree is a truly useable, stable condition?...and that was starting with Darwin and NeXt as a basis for the new OS.
And NOW you want Microsoft to start developing a new OS based upon BSD? I think you WANT Microsoft to fail...
Steve's on the Disney Board! This isn't a real surprise, give the stories about Hollywood's unhappiness over Apple's insistance on a single price for all movies, according to recent stories all over the Mac press.
Let Disney show 'em it works, then they'll fall all over themselves to join in, just like the music folks did...
It won't be sold without compensation. When a governmental entity in the US sells a property under a tax foreclosure, the amount of the sale after the government gets it's share goes to the registered lienholders , then to the owner. So if your home posseses enough equity above the mortgage value, and the equity is enough to pay for the delinquent taxes, theoretically, you could walk away with a few bucks, if you didn't have to pay a lawyer, too.
This principal is covered under the Bill of Rights (I forget which one) which forbids the taking of property without just compensation.
What I can't understand is how the sale could be judged as valid, if the people selling the house were not the owners, however they may have misrepresented themselves. A fraudulent document (notarized POA) would be enough to invalidate the sale in any *US* court. After all, only the real owner should have the power to actually sell the property.
For what it's worth, I really quite agree with you. For the typical home user, ease of use is the only thing that works; that's why Apple has designed their new Time Machine the way they have. I wish it was out now - I'd buy 10.5 just for that - and I will. To not have to even think about doing it is great - since OS X came out, backups have been something you have to think about - none of the apps now in existance can do a backup while your Mac is sleeping or your account is logged off. And I rarely leave my Mac with an account logged on unattended. Since my current living arrangements require me to have my G4 tower in my bedroom, and my current Mac is the one known widely as the Windtunnel - you get my drift. So having my Mac do the backup while I work at other stuff quietly in the background - sounds really attractive!
I guess my point was, and I got bogged down into the archive vs backup thing, you've got to think about your own situation. What is the purpose and use of your data? How long is it good for? How long do I need my backups to last? The answers to these questions will determine what backup scheme you will need, and whether you need an archive as well as a backup. (and in extreme cases, do you need a backup archive?)
Personally, I prefer the HDD as a backup medium of choice, and that is at least 50% because of ease of use. Capacity is most of the rest. I cannot take the time to sit and wait for my backup program to burn a dvd backup in order to switch a clean dvd into the drive. My superdrive is one of the older 4x drives - that takes forever. I want one I don't have to think about - unless I take the time once a month to verify the integrity of the backup - which I do. I got burned earlier this year when I found out that my backup - from over two years of regular backups - hadn't been backing up a critical 50% of my data! Fortunately, 80% of that was my music, nicely preserved on my iPod. Third party software got that back, so I lost only the most recent stuff. But that taught me to check the backups! So once a month I do.
I know on the new MacBooks, that the startup sound is muteable with the keyboard mute key, even during startup. Plus, it is written into pram, because if I press the mute key, use the computer, then restart it, it stays muted unless I press the speaker-up key.
Works pretty well for those must-be-quiet situations or places!
(On Mac desktops, the startup sound is not muteable, at least not as of the G4s. I don't have a G5, so I can't speak for that.)
Taking into account the above poster's point about cheap media...
How many home users have the need for a backup older than, say, 1 year? Two at the outside? (Assuming that their backup is done properly, safely, regularly, and is verified to restore...)
Now if I have informatiuon that I need to *archive*, then we're talking about a horse of a different color. An archive isn't necessarily a backup, and the criteria for the media used should be different.
Archived data is data that I don't use every day, and needn't be necessarily "at the moment" available. It does need to be easily found (indexed), but the media needs to be of a long term surviveable type, whereas a backup(at least for home users) can afford to be of less longevity, but safely protected from such things as electrical artifacts, fire, theft, natural disasters, etc., yet easily available for restoration purposes.
Archived data is my only copy (unless it's business critical, so I have a backup archive - but we're talking about *home* users) since I don't need it taking up space on my primary storage devices. Backup assumes that I have a copy in primary storage.
Most home users don't necessarily have the $$$ for multiple HDD, so they don't want/need to clutter up their home directory, on a limited space HDD, with stuff they'll only look at every few years or so, if ever.
Of course, most home users don't have enough junk stored to really *need* an archive, either... but since an archive is a different animal from a backup, I thought I'd throw that out and see who salutes... (or doesn't!)
I suppose this guy thinks he "won" the discussion, huh?
I've not answered because I thought he wasn't worth the time, but I had a bit of time to kill, so wasting it on him won't hurt anything actually valuable.
Sir Troll;
In case you didn't notice,/. provides a forum for both the dissemination of news and the discussion of it. As is always the case in such forums, there is room for plenty of differing views, even for such as yourself. You have a right to air your views, but as is obvious by your hiding behind your "troll" account, you are aware that your technique of throwing them at someone as if they are slings and arrows and then personally insulting them is not something that the site owners or most moderators encourage or condone. It is, in fact, as you are aware, quite rude and juvenile.
In fact, what you may not know, or care about, is that a vast majority of/.ers see through your subterfuge and consider you an idiot, and will accordingly ignore your opinions as worthless. You do your side of any argument no favors.
I think your chair to keyboard interface is busted.
"MY point was that what these guys/gals did was on purpose, not by accident, and so where they got the copy doesn't matter. So, like I said, where they got the copy really doesn't matter, they had it, that's it."
That was my original point. Where did I 'backtrack"? Your point is NOT validated.
You're the one that insists on continuing this argument, even when I prove my point, as I did here. So a personal attack is the only answer you have?
"You keep using different words that all mean "had to." You are still just as fundamentally wrong as you were the first time. Apple does not probably feel that way, they absolutely do not feel that way. You seem to be mixing up the "defend it or lose it" requirements of trademark law with employment law. As I have already illustrated, it does not work that way."
Look, you have your opinion, I have mine. I offered my opinion of why I think Apple acted the way they did, which is a rational argument for their actions. I didn't say that that IS why they did it, cause not being privy to that, I can't know. You weren't either, so you can't know what Apple ABSOLUTELY feels, either, now can you? (and, yes, it CAN work that way.)
RTFA, the fired employee admits that they violated the terms of his/her NDA and the company ethics policy. I didn't make that part up. So your argument for this not being a violation is false and just another excuse to continue arguing.
I did not use the word "important", you did. My remark is to illustrate the difference between one type of position and another. That difference, for the purposes of this discussion, is not one of importance, but of purpose and utility to Apple's mission. That is always something that will be taken into account whenever misconduct is considered by management. A mall employee will never be granted pre-release access to a core OS update or re-write, because of the kind of job they have. A core OS developer will, so his access may be high enough to make a difference in how a case like this is approached.
Like I said, Apple has always been hard-ass about even the possibility of leaks about unreleased products, so this case does not surprise me. You may feel that they have over-stepped the bounds of common decency, or whatever standard you are applying. That's your right. I didn't state that it was right or wrong, but I happen to think that, from the point of view Apple takes, they did what they had to do to maintain internal security.
Obviously, Apple really does think so - they did fire them, didn't they?
I got this the hard earned way, through a divorce lawyer. He recommended such a clause, I don't remember why, just now. Something about if the future -ex went to court and objected to something, that a ruling on a separation contract could sometimes void the entire thing and we'd be back in negotiations again. Not a desireable outcome after spending enough money on the lawyer to buy my own computer lab!
Fortunately, we got back together (after spending enough between us to fund TWO computer labs!) but I've seen and heard of that clause being used in lots of other types of agreements.
And, lest my above comments about computer labs mislead, paying that kind of money for a lawyer can sometimes save you a lot more than that PLUS agravation and heartburn. It still hurts, tho.
You do it humerously, but the issue is real, and is something people in many organizations really do have to deal with. The military is a good example.
And I am sure people have been fired for failing to get it right:
Dude A: "...and that new *insert secret here* is just cool! It'll really change the world!"
Dude B (NOT allowed access to secret alluded to by A): "Wow, I didn't know we were doing that! Cool!"
Dude A's boss (overhearing conversation): "Dude A, didn't you know Dude B isn't in our workgroup? Report to Security NOW, you're fired for violating your NDA! Your private stuff will be sent to you by Fedex." "Dude B, report to Mind Control for mindwipe immediately!" "Security!"
You were the one that brought up the issue of picking it up off the sidewalk. MY point was that what these guys/gals did was on purpose, not by accident, and so where they got the copy doesn't matter. So, like I said, where they got the copy really doesn't matter, they had it, that's it.
I am not changing the topic, you are. My point was that they signed a non-negotiable NDA. so it was something they should have known was there, and what the consequences were. So there's no reason to bitch when they get canned.
My point in the next issue you raise is that, for legal reasons, Apple probably felt that they did have to use the harshest form of consequence spelled out in the NDA, for the legal reasons I mentioned. Sorry my language wasn't as precise as you may have liked, but these kinds of things can make people feel that they really do have to do something, even if there are other things they really could do. What I should have done was added the phrase "for legal reasons" they had to. My opinion, you are entitled to yours.
Yes, I am sure that Apple still wants people like you say, but these folks are sales associates hired to staff a mall store. They are not creative professionals hired to help produce the company's flagship products, and as such are not granted access to those products pre-release. This is undoubtedly meant as an object lesson to others in those stores: "Do NOT try this either, or you'll get the boot, too."
There are times to be lenient,and there are times to show you mean business. When it comes to internal leaks, Apple has ALWAYS been hard-ass. Don't expect them to change now.
Be careful with that, while IANAL, I do know that often contracts contain severance clauses which specify that if a clause is struck down as unenforceable through future court action or mutual agreement, the other parts of the contract are still enforceable.
So don't depend on that, as always, 1 - read the contract entirely - 2 - if you have any questions, ASK a lawyer (one that YOU pay for his/her advice).
If they picked it up off the sidewalk and then loaded it on a computer, then it would be the same. However, picking something off the sidewalk is a far cry from willingly downloading it from the internet or where ever they got it.
I disagree with the second point you make. An NDA is not negotiable unless you are a star talent, and there's no way these kids were star talents. If ya want the job ya sign the NDA. there's no dickering over the terms. I've had jobs where NDA's were required, and there was no opportunity to negotiate. You either signed or left the building.
And yes, they can feel that there is ample reason to fire over an NDA violation. I didn't say they HAD too, but there is reason to lean towards that if they feel justification. Obviously, they did, and I'll bet other Apple employees will agree.
Slashdot Mirror
Did I read that part right to mean that they can link the advert screen to nearby sensors (like in lecture halls for different subjects) so they can link that subject to YOU? (Even if its to your DEVICE, that's still possible to link that device to YOU, isn't it?)
I don't want anybody monitoring me and my movements, travels, or anything I don't specifically give them. To think that they could do this just from monitoring my Bluetooth devices is almost enough to get me to swear off of radio-linked devices forever...
Well, mostly her kids are under school age - seldom does she have after schoolers. But it doesn't seem to matter, this issue with not knowing how to play affects kids at all ages. (We live in Maryland, by the way.)
Sometimes I don't take the time to do the dictionary thing. Does the spelling really seem that important to you?
Are you really that anal? Grow up, this isn't grade school, bub. I can see why you post as an AC... at least I have the courage to back up MY opinions with my own identity.
I won't get into games. I didn't see games being a major issue in the article, nor in the major thrust of this topic.
But as I said, CrossOver will allow most Windows software to work under OS X, WITHOUT WINDOWS. so probably more than you think. And since the new mac Pro's come with newer pumped up graphics cards, I'll bet that's better than you think, too.
A recovery CD is included with all computers you buy from Apple. Don't be disingenuous - of course you PAY for it, just like you're paying for the computer. Don't make stupid arguments.
Agreed, it is doubtful.
See the History Channel next Sunday, there's a show on about the history of the Apartment building, and the roots go back to Rome under the Emperors. I think kids have been playing in urban environments a lot longer than since the 1800s!
First, while the experience of the games may be similar to traditional play, sitting on the couch in front of the 32" monitor and the Xbox won't trim the fat!
...violence" - doncha think they were maybe kids once? Maybe they get freaked BECAUSE they know about the violence?
Second, what makes you think Mom's don't know about the "kinds of
My wife is in child care, and has been for over 28 years. You'd be amazed by the number of kids today that come through our center that really have NO imagination, and haven't learned to play by themselves. They expect the *adults* to intertain *them*! Some of them are really pathetic, and they are the kids of upper middle class parents, usually both working professionals.
Play is learning about being a human. It takes training - lots of interactive play - for kids to actually learn how to intertain themselves. Kids don't raise themselves, and that's what's happening when kids sit in front of these electronic devices. Parents are substituting the electronics for real parenting, so no real values are being taught.
Certainly not the values of their parents.
And where, pray tell, is Apple bundling anti-spy or virus-ware in with OS X? Unless you are talking about their making the OS more secure in the first place...
"Hey, Apple doesn't have any viruses, but MS Windows has over 100,000! Let's file suit against Apple, we want a level playing field here!" from the EU anti-trust folks...
"Many people just accept that many cheeper devices dont' work on Linux or Mac, they need to accept that for Windows too."
No, I don't accept that there are lots of cheaper devices that don't work on my Mac. I've never bought anything since 2000 when OS X came out that didn't work with it. Takes a tech support call or two sometimes, but they DO work. I have heard that about Linux, tho., altho not from personal experience.
"Lots of companies don't provide a CD any more - just a separate partition"
Apple provides recovery CDs. Without requiring keys. 'nuff said.
"Larger software choice, more available support,"
Virtually ALL major software makers provide Mac versions of their software, and more and more are getting on board. With third party solutions such as CrossOver that'll allow the use of Windows software in OS X WITHOUT Windows, that argument is dead. Support for Apple is getting better all the time, and Apple is repeatedly rated as top of the field in customer satisfaction with tech support.
The Mac OS is not so different or complex as to require extensive training. I can take your average joe or jane, and have them productive in half an hour, if they're knowedgeable about the basic job to begin with. People are much more capable in general, certainly in the business world, and not all users are clueless dorks.
I agree with the statement about idiot-proofing an OS, tho. Make a better OS, they'll make a better idiot, every time. But with a *nix based OS, like Linux or OS X, even admins don't run root, and most tasks don't really require it. It's about time Windows got on board with that one!
I don't think Microsoft is going to die. A company that sells that much software and provides that much service to as many enterprise customers as they do won't go fast or easily.
But it will transform. Look at where the industry is going. Apps are existing more and more on the web, and in the Enterprise, that means in a protected IntrAnet environment. That also means platform independant. (Potentially, anyway) Security is getting more attention, by ALL platforms.
Technology in general doesn't stay the same. The IT world, in particular, is emblematic of this axiom. Microsoft, in order to stay in business long term, will have to change with it, and so will their products. They may be a monopoly (but not as smart as the author thinks they are), but neither are they stupid. In five or ten years, the OS will look different, and so will the IT world. So will Microsoft, or they'll slowly fade away into insignificance.
Some of the above comments, and the article, are right - Microsoft's experience in developing Vista will change the way large software packages are developed - certainly at Microsoft, and likely at other companies, too. Doesn't mean that large Sw packages won't exist, but they'll be developed differently. In turn, that will affect how they'll look, as will the changing demands of the marketplace.
Stay in tune, the next ten years will be a fun ride!
Interesting idea. Folks get pretty upset to hear it said, but if Microsoft did that, they'd be so far behind Apple that even their own fans would have to agree. I'm an Apple fan, but I don't think Vista is *quite* as far behind Leopard as Apple's hype would have you believe. Almost, but not quite.
...and that was starting with Darwin and NeXt as a basis for the new OS.
It came out last year shortly after Jobs announced the Intel move that Apple has had an Intel version of OS X running since development began on X. So that's why Apple could port their OS to Intel in less than a half a year - they'd been developing alongside the PowerPC version all along! (So now who's the smartest software company? Parallel development, who'd a thunk it?)
It has taken Apple, what? - four to six years to get OS X into what most users would agree is a truly useable, stable condition?
And NOW you want Microsoft to start developing a new OS based upon BSD? I think you WANT Microsoft to fail...
Steve's on the Disney Board! This isn't a real surprise, give the stories about Hollywood's unhappiness over Apple's insistance on a single price for all movies, according to recent stories all over the Mac press.
Let Disney show 'em it works, then they'll fall all over themselves to join in, just like the music folks did...
It won't be sold without compensation. When a governmental entity in the US sells a property under a tax foreclosure, the amount of the sale after the government gets it's share goes to the registered lienholders , then to the owner. So if your home posseses enough equity above the mortgage value, and the equity is enough to pay for the delinquent taxes, theoretically, you could walk away with a few bucks, if you didn't have to pay a lawyer, too.
This principal is covered under the Bill of Rights (I forget which one) which forbids the taking of property without just compensation.
What I can't understand is how the sale could be judged as valid, if the people selling the house were not the owners, however they may have misrepresented themselves. A fraudulent document (notarized POA) would be enough to invalidate the sale in any *US* court. After all, only the real owner should have the power to actually sell the property.
For what it's worth, I really quite agree with you. For the typical home user, ease of use is the only thing that works; that's why Apple has designed their new Time Machine the way they have. I wish it was out now - I'd buy 10.5 just for that - and I will. To not have to even think about doing it is great - since OS X came out, backups have been something you have to think about - none of the apps now in existance can do a backup while your Mac is sleeping or your account is logged off. And I rarely leave my Mac with an account logged on unattended. Since my current living arrangements require me to have my G4 tower in my bedroom, and my current Mac is the one known widely as the Windtunnel - you get my drift. So having my Mac do the backup while I work at other stuff quietly in the background - sounds really attractive!
I guess my point was, and I got bogged down into the archive vs backup thing, you've got to think about your own situation. What is the purpose and use of your data? How long is it good for? How long do I need my backups to last? The answers to these questions will determine what backup scheme you will need, and whether you need an archive as well as a backup. (and in extreme cases, do you need a backup archive?)
Personally, I prefer the HDD as a backup medium of choice, and that is at least 50% because of ease of use. Capacity is most of the rest. I cannot take the time to sit and wait for my backup program to burn a dvd backup in order to switch a clean dvd into the drive. My superdrive is one of the older 4x drives - that takes forever. I want one I don't have to think about - unless I take the time once a month to verify the integrity of the backup - which I do. I got burned earlier this year when I found out that my backup - from over two years of regular backups - hadn't been backing up a critical 50% of my data! Fortunately, 80% of that was my music, nicely preserved on my iPod. Third party software got that back, so I lost only the most recent stuff. But that taught me to check the backups! So once a month I do.
I know on the new MacBooks, that the startup sound is muteable with the keyboard mute key, even during startup. Plus, it is written into pram, because if I press the mute key, use the computer, then restart it, it stays muted unless I press the speaker-up key.
Works pretty well for those must-be-quiet situations or places!
(On Mac desktops, the startup sound is not muteable, at least not as of the G4s. I don't have a G5, so I can't speak for that.)
and in Dec, 2099:
"2.4 * 10^13 TB should be enough for anyone!"
Taking into account the above poster's point about cheap media...
How many home users have the need for a backup older than, say, 1 year? Two at the outside? (Assuming that their backup is done properly, safely, regularly, and is verified to restore...)
Now if I have informatiuon that I need to *archive*, then we're talking about a horse of a different color. An archive isn't necessarily a backup, and the criteria for the media used should be different.
Archived data is data that I don't use every day, and needn't be necessarily "at the moment" available. It does need to be easily found (indexed), but the media needs to be of a long term surviveable type, whereas a backup(at least for home users) can afford to be of less longevity, but safely protected from such things as electrical artifacts, fire, theft, natural disasters, etc., yet easily available for restoration purposes.
Archived data is my only copy (unless it's business critical, so I have a backup archive - but we're talking about *home* users) since I don't need it taking up space on my primary storage devices. Backup assumes that I have a copy in primary storage.
Most home users don't necessarily have the $$$ for multiple HDD, so they don't want/need to clutter up their home directory, on a limited space HDD, with stuff they'll only look at every few years or so, if ever.
Of course, most home users don't have enough junk stored to really *need* an archive, either... but since an archive is a different animal from a backup, I thought I'd throw that out and see who salutes... (or doesn't!)
Aw, darn! Ok, I'll have my people call your people for an opening, in, say, December?
I suppose this guy thinks he "won" the discussion, huh?
/. provides a forum for both the dissemination of news and the discussion of it. As is always the case in such forums, there is room for plenty of differing views, even for such as yourself. You have a right to air your views, but as is obvious by your hiding behind your "troll" account, you are aware that your technique of throwing them at someone as if they are slings and arrows and then personally insulting them is not something that the site owners or most moderators encourage or condone. It is, in fact, as you are aware, quite rude and juvenile.
/.ers see through your subterfuge and consider you an idiot, and will accordingly ignore your opinions as worthless. You do your side of any argument no favors.
I've not answered because I thought he wasn't worth the time, but I had a bit of time to kill, so wasting it on him won't hurt anything actually valuable.
Sir Troll;
In case you didn't notice,
In fact, what you may not know, or care about, is that a vast majority of
I think your chair to keyboard interface is busted.
Good analogy! I like that, can I use it sometime?
"MY point was that what these guys/gals did was on purpose, not by accident, and so where they got the copy doesn't matter. So, like I said, where they got the copy really doesn't matter, they had it, that's it."
That was my original point. Where did I 'backtrack"? Your point is NOT validated.
You're the one that insists on continuing this argument, even when I prove my point, as I did here. So a personal attack is the only answer you have?
"You keep using different words that all mean "had to." You are still just as fundamentally wrong as you were the first time. Apple does not probably feel that way, they absolutely do not feel that way. You seem to be mixing up the "defend it or lose it" requirements of trademark law with employment law. As I have already illustrated, it does not work that way."
Look, you have your opinion, I have mine. I offered my opinion of why I think Apple acted the way they did, which is a rational argument for their actions. I didn't say that that IS why they did it, cause not being privy to that, I can't know. You weren't either, so you can't know what Apple ABSOLUTELY feels, either, now can you? (and, yes, it CAN work that way.)
RTFA, the fired employee admits that they violated the terms of his/her NDA and the company ethics policy. I didn't make that part up. So your argument for this not being a violation is false and just another excuse to continue arguing.
I did not use the word "important", you did. My remark is to illustrate the difference between one type of position and another. That difference, for the purposes of this discussion, is not one of importance, but of purpose and utility to Apple's mission. That is always something that will be taken into account whenever misconduct is considered by management. A mall employee will never be granted pre-release access to a core OS update or re-write, because of the kind of job they have. A core OS developer will, so his access may be high enough to make a difference in how a case like this is approached.
Like I said, Apple has always been hard-ass about even the possibility of leaks about unreleased products, so this case does not surprise me. You may feel that they have over-stepped the bounds of common decency, or whatever standard you are applying. That's your right. I didn't state that it was right or wrong, but I happen to think that, from the point of view Apple takes, they did what they had to do to maintain internal security.
Obviously, Apple really does think so - they did fire them, didn't they?
You're welcome.
I got this the hard earned way, through a divorce lawyer. He recommended such a clause, I don't remember why, just now. Something about if the future -ex went to court and objected to something, that a ruling on a separation contract could sometimes void the entire thing and we'd be back in negotiations again. Not a desireable outcome after spending enough money on the lawyer to buy my own computer lab!
Fortunately, we got back together (after spending enough between us to fund TWO computer labs!) but I've seen and heard of that clause being used in lots of other types of agreements.
And, lest my above comments about computer labs mislead, paying that kind of money for a lawyer can sometimes save you a lot more than that PLUS agravation and heartburn. It still hurts, tho.
You do it humerously, but the issue is real, and is something people in many organizations really do have to deal with. The military is a good example.
And I am sure people have been fired for failing to get it right:
Dude A: "...and that new *insert secret here* is just cool! It'll really change the world!"
Dude B (NOT allowed access to secret alluded to by A): "Wow, I didn't know we were doing that! Cool!"
Dude A's boss (overhearing conversation): "Dude A, didn't you know Dude B isn't in our workgroup? Report to Security NOW, you're fired for violating your NDA! Your private stuff will be sent to you by Fedex." "Dude B, report to Mind Control for mindwipe immediately!" "Security!"
You were the one that brought up the issue of picking it up off the sidewalk. MY point was that what these guys/gals did was on purpose, not by accident, and so where they got the copy doesn't matter. So, like I said, where they got the copy really doesn't matter, they had it, that's it.
I am not changing the topic, you are. My point was that they signed a non-negotiable NDA. so it was something they should have known was there, and what the consequences were. So there's no reason to bitch when they get canned.
My point in the next issue you raise is that, for legal reasons, Apple probably felt that they did have to use the harshest form of consequence spelled out in the NDA, for the legal reasons I mentioned. Sorry my language wasn't as precise as you may have liked, but these kinds of things can make people feel that they really do have to do something, even if there are other things they really could do. What I should have done was added the phrase "for legal reasons" they had to. My opinion, you are entitled to yours.
Yes, I am sure that Apple still wants people like you say, but these folks are sales associates hired to staff a mall store. They are not creative professionals hired to help produce the company's flagship products, and as such are not granted access to those products pre-release. This is undoubtedly meant as an object lesson to others in those stores: "Do NOT try this either, or you'll get the boot, too."
There are times to be lenient,and there are times to show you mean business. When it comes to internal leaks, Apple has ALWAYS been hard-ass. Don't expect them to change now.
Be careful with that, while IANAL, I do know that often contracts contain severance clauses which specify that if a clause is struck down as unenforceable through future court action or mutual agreement, the other parts of the contract are still enforceable.
So don't depend on that, as always, 1 - read the contract entirely - 2 - if you have any questions, ASK a lawyer (one that YOU pay for his/her advice).
If they picked it up off the sidewalk and then loaded it on a computer, then it would be the same. However, picking something off the sidewalk is a far cry from willingly downloading it from the internet or where ever they got it.
I disagree with the second point you make. An NDA is not negotiable unless you are a star talent, and there's no way these kids were star talents. If ya want the job ya sign the NDA. there's no dickering over the terms. I've had jobs where NDA's were required, and there was no opportunity to negotiate. You either signed or left the building.
And yes, they can feel that there is ample reason to fire over an NDA violation. I didn't say they HAD too, but there is reason to lean towards that if they feel justification. Obviously, they did, and I'll bet other Apple employees will agree.