Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?
on
GNOME 3.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
If you need a user-defined window manager there are lots of other DEs out there since you probably won't use GNOME3 anyway. It's a design decision, and not a bad one when you consider where GNOME is trying to go. Mutter isn't awesome or Compiz, but it does what it needs to do well.
On that note, Mutter is the *first* compositing WM I've seen that didn't cause video tearing on nVidia. I've been jacking with Compiz/nvidia-settings for years and I still see tearing, and KWin is only a little better. Mutter got this in one go.
All in all, GNOME3 works well for me. I find myself slapping the Windows/Super key in Win7 all the time to switch between open windows. I'd personally like to see them dump the hard requirement for Evolution, and it's such a shame that there's no polished Ubuntu derivative with it (I find myself typing aptitude search ____ on Fedora all the time, and yumex doesn't hold a candle to Synaptic let alone Ubuntu Software Centre).
Interesting point: before one of the developers had an, ah, disagreement about App Store policies and had the app pulled, you could get VLC for iOS. I still have it and works very well, despite surviving a few major iOS updates.
They didnt give away BES keys They cant. They allowed a tap into BIS provided there was a BIS server inthat country. BES keys arent even in RIM's possession; its in the hands of the company with the BES server. Which, if its in the same nation as the thuggish government, works out the same.
Laziridks walked out because he has probably had to explain tbis a million times tojournalistswhicantbebothred to do research. Laziridis does have leadership and PR issues, I will grant you that.a
If you've used a PlayBook, you'll note that the real problem isnt that you need a BB to do email, its that even if you have a BB phone, the PlayBook (specifically the bridge function to the phone) is slow and glitchy. Its faster to just use the phone because at least then you get autocorrect, the ability view attachments in under half an hour, and decent inteface speed.
The impression i got with the PlayBook is that, unlike apple, where you can tell that Jobs et al take a serious interest in the development of products and do get their hands dirty, I doubt Messrs Laziridis and Balsillie used the device at all.
Just a point: if you use BES, you have the keys, not RIM and not the government. BIS is a crapshoot, but no worse than what many people do with non-BB devices.
I'm not sure sure about that. A lot of popular politics---in any nation---really comes down to Red Team vs Blue Team.
If the teflon-hair'ed captain of the Red Team says deficits are okay, then they're okay. If someone on the Red Team says that the fuzzy-headed captain of the Blue Team is running deficits, and deficits are bad, than that's correct, too. You see this over and over again, on both sides, and the worst part is that too many people swallow it, hook, line and sinker.
Oh, retroactively they'll justify it by saying that teflon-hair wasn't a real Red Team member or suchlike, or that people have on the whole become more amenable to the Red Team, and thusly what was Red back then is now the new Blue and the new Red is so incredibly Red it's practically invisible, but the point isn't so much the issue as it is nation-state-level tribalism.
How much money gets kicked back by entire countries buying/selling carbon credits in accordance to the Kyoto accord goes to fund climate research? Billions or Trillions? Just wondering...
Probably about two orders of magnitude less than what the petroleum industry pushes, if not more. Just wondering....
Seriously, carbon credits are big money? Have you seen what Exxon pulls in per year? How about the government of Saudi Arabia? Do you have any idea how much money is spent extracting, marketing and securing oil resources across the globe? It makes green schemes look like a rounding error.
First a hacker exposed a major scientist fully admitting the numbers were fudged to show global warming models working
No, what was happening was that the data was being normalized. That's normal practice, not that peop What the scandal was about was stolen emails (release just before the Copenhagen conference; gee, what a koinkydink?) where some scientists said bad things about another scientist who wrote a piss-poor paper.
the other big blow was a NASA 10 year report showing log-wave radiation (heat) was escaping Earth much faster than the global warming model provides
It didn't show a) that heat was escaping and thusly the globe was cooling---global temperatures were still increasing and b) it didn't really change the models much anyway.
This, of course, didn't slow the anti-science cherrypicking brigade (I won't call thhem skeptics; skeptics engage in meaningful debate, not courtroom histrionics) from making a big deal about both and completely ignoring the petroleum industry's vested interests, and that of governments and other companies all over the world, in the status quo
Hey, and you could call those levels something like "circles" or "groups" to help you organize them. I bet someone looking to build a competitor to FaceBook would be interested in the idea.
On a serious note, stuff like this is largely why LinkedIn exists, and there's no reason you couldn't use LinkedIn for academic relationships. Of course, this would mean recognizing that LinkedIn isn't cool, but we all knew that already.
Because, like it or not, social network technologies are important tools and it's in the interests of both students and teachers to understand and work with them, rather than pretend they don't exist and that schooling should continue exactly as it had in the 1950s. Even if (when) the technology changes, it's still a good idea to integrate and embrace it so that students and educators have some perspective on it and see how it evolves.
We already have professional ethics and regulations that cover what's appropriate/permissable/legal in these situations. Banning it is just knee-jerk "Gotta do sumfin" political showboating, and they're right to try and strike down the ban.
Region B has no incentive to control its costs becuase short falls come from region A.
You're thinking like an American tax planner: penny-wise and pound (dollar?) foolish because you're spending more trying to figure out how to precisely make it fair than if you just made blanket policy.
In most nations, the central authority (sometimes state/province, sometimes federal, often both) doles out funds as needed using a known and documented process (eg, region B needs roads this year, etc, whereas A might need a hospital ten years from now) and/or uses transfers and/or equalization payments. Yes, this ends up being redistributive, but so what? Redistribution is at least effective, whereas redundant administration just wastes time and money.
Local tax gathering is just plain nuts. It makes some sense for property taxation, but for sales or income the inefficiency ends up wiping out anything saved through fairness.
Then those people should be pushing for a downsizing of Congress and the Senate, not the administrative parts of government that actually get work done.
As it stands right now, you're electing people on the idea that they won't meddle or pander to local interests, except that, when push comes to shove, people want their representatives to meddle when it's something they feel is valuable. This gets you the worst of all worlds: representatives who are too quick to gut programs that are holistically good, but ensure their own local pork. It also gets you systems that are compromised by design.
Recall the famous picture of the Tea Partier holding up a "Keep your government hands off my Medicare" sign.
The problem I have with e-ink is the distracting negative flash as the screen resets to the new page. Or when scrolling... or when doing anything, really. Very annoying indeed
Some eReaders will only do this once ever n page transitions; I think, on a Kobo, it's once every six to clean up artifacts. It would be nice if it were configurable because it is annoying.
A colleague of mine calls this Government Cheese Syndrome. To whit: the US would never do something like, eg, France or Switzerland and regulate the production of cheese to ensure quality and regional branding. That would be socialism and Interfering With The Free Market. On the other hand, they have to have something to sell to fill in a spot on the food pyramid and the dairy boards have a strong lobby, so they legislate a lowest-common-denominator product.
And this is why Europe has Gruyère, Emmental or Jarlsberg, and the US has American Government Cheese.
Sales tax gathering is my personal favourite. Other countries have a flat VAT; the US has a balkanized mess of city, county and state taxes, all with their own administrative boards, all of which American businesses have to deal with. Objectively the US sales tax system is insane---it costs more to run and returns less---but a Federal VAT would go over like a lead balloon because somehow it's worse to have a hundred thousand curtain-twitchers and pencil pushers at every level of government than just one central group.
And watch how the employee's union makes huge contributions to Obama's reelection campaign....
Considering that Obama has shown himself ready to cave to just about anything the Republicans want, any union executive with any brains would be better to push for a Democratic primary and a candidate that isn't either a) a coward, or b) a corporate shill (thank you, Ralph Nader, you were dead on right when you called him a metaphorical Uncle Tom) and/or c) a class traitor.
This would be the case were Canada's postal service not working reasonably well, despite Canada being as problematic in terms of population distribution.
The difference is that the Canadian postal service is allowed to run more or less autonomously, whereas the USPS is subject to constant congressional meddling. It's the American paradox: decry government involvement and authority in general, but allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times.
If you want a universal postal service you have two choices: give 'em a monopoly to make up for the universal service requirement, or just accept that they won't be profitable and that you are going to have to put money in and get a service out.
This is a good point. It also explains why health care, tax gathering and education---especially, but not solely, in the United States---are similarly expensive clusterfucks.
Either fund and administrate them adequately, or don't bother at all. Half-assing it for ideological and/or penny-pinching reasons results in the worst of both worlds.
That's because the media likes to pretend to be objective. What this means is that they'll either say something nice, or something bad, and then in the same article offer a contradictory---if way-out-in-left-field---opinion. No one likes to look biased, even when they are, so they'll write fluff that looks vaguely professional
This is how some of the most incredulous ideas get airplay ("Doctor says vaccines don't cause autism. Of course, some disagree" and suchlike). A discussion of Ms. Fiorina would comment that she was the head of a successful (in that it didn't hit the iceberg on her watch) major technology company worth $x billion dollars. It might, at worst, say that some disagreed with her leadership. No one is going to go out on a limb and say that she's largely responsible for HP's position as an also-ran behind Dell, Apple and IBM.
A company has to be in serious, indefensible trouble (or ripe for a few bucks from short-selling) if they knives are really going to come out. Which should make you think a bit about, eg, Research In Motion.
Their main technology isn't built on Linux. ESX (not ESXi) has a Linux personality that can be used to administer the host, but it's not a Linux kernel-based like Xen or KVM.
That said, you can use vCLI instead of the vSphere Client, but the GUI really is quicker for many one-off tasks.
On Linux you can do this to view the ESXi guest's console, so you might be able to on the Mac as well. What you can't do is edit the VM, for which you need vSphere Client.
The money scientists have "gobbled up" amounts to a rounding error on the balance sheets of the petrochemical industry. So, yeah, if we use the "follow the money" reputational test the scientists still come up looking better.
You know, they said the same thing about the various sacred cows of prior generations of kids, that they were more expensive and more frivolous than what came before. Every generation says the one or two after it is "much worse" than the one prior. Moral decay is always right around the corner**, and the golden age was whatever was happening when you were 18-24, regardless of whether or not that was 1930, 1950, 1970 or 1990.
Do you sense a theme, here?
The point is that people are people and really don't change all that much generation to generation. You'll always have a certain amount of shallowness, consumerism, base social urges and so forth, but the proportion doesn't really change that much, and what certainly doesn't change is "Get Off My Lawn"-ism, as you note but don't really accept.
What's happening is that each generation goes through a phase of a) (mostly) growing up and realizing that actions have consequences, and b) realizing that it isn't their world anymore, and that there's all these young people around. For sound biological reasons (certain brain development doesn't finish until after puberty) you don't figure this out until you're 25, and it doesn't sink in until you're older than that.
** even though crime is down, pollution less of a problem, information easier to access and the powerful held as much, if not more, to account than ever before. Funny, how if we're at the precipice before the pit, that objectively things aren't too bad.
The top dog in the US market would have been RIM, not Windows Mobile and certainly not Nokia.
WM was the top dog among people who didn't want to spend effort developing real mobile applications (to the extent that you could do that on, say, BlackBerry OS or Symbian) and just shovelled Microsoft development tools and old code at handhelds because it was cheap and easy. In that sense, it owned certain vertical markets (warehousing, point of sale, courier) where it was used to run client applications. Web apps (and the iPhone app ecosystem) absolutely killed Windows Mobile.
It made sense back when there was a reason to use SQL Server CE and/or.NET CF. Now we don't just shovel VB apps onto phones any more.
This is a little similar to RIM, which owned corporate messaging back when data was hideously expensive and Exchange push sucked (or didn't exist). ActiveSync is almost as good now, and data is so cheap it doesn't matter as much. The difference is that RIM devices still hold a (slight) edge in manageability, whereas WM and Symbian are completely pointless next to iOS and Android.
Yes, it works. Never mind the filesystem, you'd use a real hypervisor on real hardware with real operating systems designed for real virtualization, with real drivers that all work really, really well.
There's a big, big difference between, say, Xen, ESX or Hyper-V running your enterprise apps, and, say, getting Leisure Suit Larry running on Bochs. It's really, really nice to be able to move a running Linux guest with a few hundred users over to another server without a hiccup.
Heck, even at the workstation level it all works very well. I'm sure that crazy old DOS stuff that bangs quirks of a vintage AdLib won't work, but modern operating systems handle virtualization well. Heck, they're designed for it nowadays.
Yes, you can do this sort of thing on a "proper" OS and with applications that can be safely jailed and that support clustering, but sometimes, in the real world where apps and operating systems and people suck, it's easier, quicker and cheaper to use VMware or whatever.
The important stuff (MCX) has been enhanced such that client management---which is where the effort is---is easy, fast and comprehensive. The less important stuff is hidden from small shops who would just muck it up, and at the enterprise is usually provided elsewhere (ie, they'll already have an AD domain, Exchange or suchlike, FTP and web servers, file servers etc, etc). Basically, they deprecated stuff most people don't use, or have better solutions for.
About the only real pain is losing enterprise print services, but even that's not too huge a loss considering that, again, there's better tools out there that enterprises are already using, and small shops wouldn't go anywhere near those features.
It would be nice if Apple provided better hardware and/or allowed you to deploy MacOS X Server VMs for things like MCX or ARD. That, more than any of the author's other complaints, is what keeps OS X out of the enterprise. Other nice touches would be SSO on iOS and some way to extend Time Machine services to non-Apple Filers, or if Home Sync/Mobile Users is somehow no longer a festering pile of suck (which, to be fair, is the case on Windows and UNIX when you get to the gigabytes of files stage and are sync'ing profiles)
Slashdot Mirror
If you need a user-defined window manager there are lots of other DEs out there since you probably won't use GNOME3 anyway. It's a design decision, and not a bad one when you consider where GNOME is trying to go. Mutter isn't awesome or Compiz, but it does what it needs to do well.
On that note, Mutter is the *first* compositing WM I've seen that didn't cause video tearing on nVidia. I've been jacking with Compiz/nvidia-settings for years and I still see tearing, and KWin is only a little better. Mutter got this in one go.
All in all, GNOME3 works well for me. I find myself slapping the Windows/Super key in Win7 all the time to switch between open windows. I'd personally like to see them dump the hard requirement for Evolution, and it's such a shame that there's no polished Ubuntu derivative with it (I find myself typing aptitude search ____ on Fedora all the time, and yumex doesn't hold a candle to Synaptic let alone Ubuntu Software Centre).
Interesting point: before one of the developers had an, ah, disagreement about App Store policies and had the app pulled, you could get VLC for iOS. I still have it and works very well, despite surviving a few major iOS updates.
I was very surprised to not see it on Android.
They didnt give away BES keys They cant. They allowed a tap into BIS provided there was a BIS server inthat country. BES keys arent even in RIM's possession; its in the hands of the company with the BES server. Which, if its in the same nation as the thuggish government, works out the same.
Laziridks walked out because he has probably had to explain tbis a million times tojournalistswhicantbebothred to do research. Laziridis does have leadership and PR issues, I will grant you that.a
If you've used a PlayBook, you'll note that the real problem isnt that you need a BB to do email, its that even if you have a BB phone, the PlayBook (specifically the bridge function to the phone) is slow and glitchy. Its faster to just use the phone because at least then you get autocorrect, the ability view attachments in under half an hour, and decent inteface speed.
The impression i got with the PlayBook is that, unlike apple, where you can tell that Jobs et al take a serious interest in the development of products and do get their hands dirty, I doubt Messrs Laziridis and Balsillie used the device at all.
Just a point: if you use BES, you have the keys, not RIM and not the government. BIS is a crapshoot, but no worse than what many people do with non-BB devices.
But RIM did handle the whole thing terribly.
I'm not sure sure about that. A lot of popular politics---in any nation---really comes down to Red Team vs Blue Team.
If the teflon-hair'ed captain of the Red Team says deficits are okay, then they're okay. If someone on the Red Team says that the fuzzy-headed captain of the Blue Team is running deficits, and deficits are bad, than that's correct, too. You see this over and over again, on both sides, and the worst part is that too many people swallow it, hook, line and sinker.
Oh, retroactively they'll justify it by saying that teflon-hair wasn't a real Red Team member or suchlike, or that people have on the whole become more amenable to the Red Team, and thusly what was Red back then is now the new Blue and the new Red is so incredibly Red it's practically invisible, but the point isn't so much the issue as it is nation-state-level tribalism.
How much money gets kicked back by entire countries buying/selling carbon credits in accordance to the Kyoto accord goes to fund climate research? Billions or Trillions? Just wondering...
Probably about two orders of magnitude less than what the petroleum industry pushes, if not more. Just wondering....
Seriously, carbon credits are big money? Have you seen what Exxon pulls in per year? How about the government of Saudi Arabia? Do you have any idea how much money is spent extracting, marketing and securing oil resources across the globe? It makes green schemes look like a rounding error.
First a hacker exposed a major scientist fully admitting the numbers were fudged to show global warming models working
No, what was happening was that the data was being normalized. That's normal practice, not that peop What the scandal was about was stolen emails (release just before the Copenhagen conference; gee, what a koinkydink?) where some scientists said bad things about another scientist who wrote a piss-poor paper.
the other big blow was a NASA 10 year report showing log-wave radiation (heat) was escaping Earth much faster than the global warming model provides
It didn't show a) that heat was escaping and thusly the globe was cooling---global temperatures were still increasing and b) it didn't really change the models much anyway.
This, of course, didn't slow the anti-science cherrypicking brigade (I won't call thhem skeptics; skeptics engage in meaningful debate, not courtroom histrionics) from making a big deal about both and completely ignoring the petroleum industry's vested interests, and that of governments and other companies all over the world, in the status quo
Hey, and you could call those levels something like "circles" or "groups" to help you organize them. I bet someone looking to build a competitor to FaceBook would be interested in the idea.
On a serious note, stuff like this is largely why LinkedIn exists, and there's no reason you couldn't use LinkedIn for academic relationships. Of course, this would mean recognizing that LinkedIn isn't cool, but we all knew that already.
Because, like it or not, social network technologies are important tools and it's in the interests of both students and teachers to understand and work with them, rather than pretend they don't exist and that schooling should continue exactly as it had in the 1950s. Even if (when) the technology changes, it's still a good idea to integrate and embrace it so that students and educators have some perspective on it and see how it evolves.
We already have professional ethics and regulations that cover what's appropriate/permissable/legal in these situations. Banning it is just knee-jerk "Gotta do sumfin" political showboating, and they're right to try and strike down the ban.
You're thinking like an American tax planner: penny-wise and pound (dollar?) foolish because you're spending more trying to figure out how to precisely make it fair than if you just made blanket policy.
In most nations, the central authority (sometimes state/province, sometimes federal, often both) doles out funds as needed using a known and documented process (eg, region B needs roads this year, etc, whereas A might need a hospital ten years from now) and/or uses transfers and/or equalization payments. Yes, this ends up being redistributive, but so what? Redistribution is at least effective, whereas redundant administration just wastes time and money.
Local tax gathering is just plain nuts. It makes some sense for property taxation, but for sales or income the inefficiency ends up wiping out anything saved through fairness.
Then those people should be pushing for a downsizing of Congress and the Senate, not the administrative parts of government that actually get work done.
As it stands right now, you're electing people on the idea that they won't meddle or pander to local interests, except that, when push comes to shove, people want their representatives to meddle when it's something they feel is valuable. This gets you the worst of all worlds: representatives who are too quick to gut programs that are holistically good, but ensure their own local pork. It also gets you systems that are compromised by design.
Recall the famous picture of the Tea Partier holding up a "Keep your government hands off my Medicare" sign.
Some eReaders will only do this once ever n page transitions; I think, on a Kobo, it's once every six to clean up artifacts. It would be nice if it were configurable because it is annoying.
A colleague of mine calls this Government Cheese Syndrome. To whit: the US would never do something like, eg, France or Switzerland and regulate the production of cheese to ensure quality and regional branding. That would be socialism and Interfering With The Free Market. On the other hand, they have to have something to sell to fill in a spot on the food pyramid and the dairy boards have a strong lobby, so they legislate a lowest-common-denominator product.
And this is why Europe has Gruyère, Emmental or Jarlsberg, and the US has American Government Cheese.
Sales tax gathering is my personal favourite. Other countries have a flat VAT; the US has a balkanized mess of city, county and state taxes, all with their own administrative boards, all of which American businesses have to deal with. Objectively the US sales tax system is insane---it costs more to run and returns less---but a Federal VAT would go over like a lead balloon because somehow it's worse to have a hundred thousand curtain-twitchers and pencil pushers at every level of government than just one central group.
Considering that Obama has shown himself ready to cave to just about anything the Republicans want, any union executive with any brains would be better to push for a Democratic primary and a candidate that isn't either a) a coward, or b) a corporate shill (thank you, Ralph Nader, you were dead on right when you called him a metaphorical Uncle Tom) and/or c) a class traitor.
This would be the case were Canada's postal service not working reasonably well, despite Canada being as problematic in terms of population distribution.
The difference is that the Canadian postal service is allowed to run more or less autonomously, whereas the USPS is subject to constant congressional meddling. It's the American paradox: decry government involvement and authority in general, but allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times.
This is a good point. It also explains why health care, tax gathering and education---especially, but not solely, in the United States---are similarly expensive clusterfucks.
Either fund and administrate them adequately, or don't bother at all. Half-assing it for ideological and/or penny-pinching reasons results in the worst of both worlds.
That's because the media likes to pretend to be objective. What this means is that they'll either say something nice, or something bad, and then in the same article offer a contradictory---if way-out-in-left-field---opinion. No one likes to look biased, even when they are, so they'll write fluff that looks vaguely professional
This is how some of the most incredulous ideas get airplay ("Doctor says vaccines don't cause autism. Of course, some disagree" and suchlike). A discussion of Ms. Fiorina would comment that she was the head of a successful (in that it didn't hit the iceberg on her watch) major technology company worth $x billion dollars. It might, at worst, say that some disagreed with her leadership. No one is going to go out on a limb and say that she's largely responsible for HP's position as an also-ran behind Dell, Apple and IBM.
A company has to be in serious, indefensible trouble (or ripe for a few bucks from short-selling) if they knives are really going to come out. Which should make you think a bit about, eg, Research In Motion.
Their main technology isn't built on Linux. ESX (not ESXi) has a Linux personality that can be used to administer the host, but it's not a Linux kernel-based like Xen or KVM.
That said, you can use vCLI instead of the vSphere Client, but the GUI really is quicker for many one-off tasks.
On Linux you can do this to view the ESXi guest's console, so you might be able to on the Mac as well. What you can't do is edit the VM, for which you need vSphere Client.
The money scientists have "gobbled up" amounts to a rounding error on the balance sheets of the petrochemical industry. So, yeah, if we use the "follow the money" reputational test the scientists still come up looking better.
You know, they said the same thing about the various sacred cows of prior generations of kids, that they were more expensive and more frivolous than what came before. Every generation says the one or two after it is "much worse" than the one prior. Moral decay is always right around the corner**, and the golden age was whatever was happening when you were 18-24, regardless of whether or not that was 1930, 1950, 1970 or 1990.
Do you sense a theme, here?
The point is that people are people and really don't change all that much generation to generation. You'll always have a certain amount of shallowness, consumerism, base social urges and so forth, but the proportion doesn't really change that much, and what certainly doesn't change is "Get Off My Lawn"-ism, as you note but don't really accept.
What's happening is that each generation goes through a phase of a) (mostly) growing up and realizing that actions have consequences, and b) realizing that it isn't their world anymore, and that there's all these young people around. For sound biological reasons (certain brain development doesn't finish until after puberty) you don't figure this out until you're 25, and it doesn't sink in until you're older than that.
** even though crime is down, pollution less of a problem, information easier to access and the powerful held as much, if not more, to account than ever before. Funny, how if we're at the precipice before the pit, that objectively things aren't too bad.
The top dog in the US market would have been RIM, not Windows Mobile and certainly not Nokia.
WM was the top dog among people who didn't want to spend effort developing real mobile applications (to the extent that you could do that on, say, BlackBerry OS or Symbian) and just shovelled Microsoft development tools and old code at handhelds because it was cheap and easy. In that sense, it owned certain vertical markets (warehousing, point of sale, courier) where it was used to run client applications. Web apps (and the iPhone app ecosystem) absolutely killed Windows Mobile.
It made sense back when there was a reason to use SQL Server CE and/or .NET CF. Now we don't just shovel VB apps onto phones any more.
This is a little similar to RIM, which owned corporate messaging back when data was hideously expensive and Exchange push sucked (or didn't exist). ActiveSync is almost as good now, and data is so cheap it doesn't matter as much. The difference is that RIM devices still hold a (slight) edge in manageability, whereas WM and Symbian are completely pointless next to iOS and Android.
Yes, it works. Never mind the filesystem, you'd use a real hypervisor on real hardware with real operating systems designed for real virtualization, with real drivers that all work really, really well.
There's a big, big difference between, say, Xen, ESX or Hyper-V running your enterprise apps, and, say, getting Leisure Suit Larry running on Bochs. It's really, really nice to be able to move a running Linux guest with a few hundred users over to another server without a hiccup.
Heck, even at the workstation level it all works very well. I'm sure that crazy old DOS stuff that bangs quirks of a vintage AdLib won't work, but modern operating systems handle virtualization well. Heck, they're designed for it nowadays.
Yes, you can do this sort of thing on a "proper" OS and with applications that can be safely jailed and that support clustering, but sometimes, in the real world where apps and operating systems and people suck, it's easier, quicker and cheaper to use VMware or whatever.
He's a Keynesian! BURN HIM!
This isn't really that bad.
The important stuff (MCX) has been enhanced such that client management---which is where the effort is---is easy, fast and comprehensive. The less important stuff is hidden from small shops who would just muck it up, and at the enterprise is usually provided elsewhere (ie, they'll already have an AD domain, Exchange or suchlike, FTP and web servers, file servers etc, etc). Basically, they deprecated stuff most people don't use, or have better solutions for.
About the only real pain is losing enterprise print services, but even that's not too huge a loss considering that, again, there's better tools out there that enterprises are already using, and small shops wouldn't go anywhere near those features.
It would be nice if Apple provided better hardware and/or allowed you to deploy MacOS X Server VMs for things like MCX or ARD. That, more than any of the author's other complaints, is what keeps OS X out of the enterprise. Other nice touches would be SSO on iOS and some way to extend Time Machine services to non-Apple Filers, or if Home Sync/Mobile Users is somehow no longer a festering pile of suck (which, to be fair, is the case on Windows and UNIX when you get to the gigabytes of files stage and are sync'ing profiles)