Someone further into the loop may correct me, but it's my understanding that Apple couldn't get the license to do Display PostScript. They're not having good business relations with Adobe these days.
allowing people to communicate freely without some of the awkwardness or judgment based on physical appearances may allow people to "connect" with others and exchange ideas more freely.
Or it may render people even less capable of communicating freely when physical appearance is a factor in the communication. It's a double edged sword. These things allow people to hole up in a cave and not deal with anybody else at all except in ways that they explicitly define and have control over. That's a hermit-like existence.
Well, you're talking ancient history now, but yes, there was a company called Orange Computers, and Apple did use their legal muscle to drive them out of business back in the 80's.
What do you suppose will happen when the App Store is expanded to the Mac?
You mean, what do I suppose will happen when it becomes necessary to buy all applications for the Mac from a single Apple-controlled and centralized portal?
20 years ago you had no viable GUI-driven PC except the Mac.
Twenty years ago Apple was busy leveraging their legal muscle to prevent the viable non-Apple GUI-driven PCs from succeeding. Don't kid yourself. They lawyered away that problem, it wasn't a move of technical finesse.
Huh? Apple simply adopted the BSD userland whole-cloth. They didn't prettify it or change it. They had a shitpile single-tasking MacOS and when they finally gave up on writing a new one of their own (after spending countless millions of dollars trying,) they adopted one of the Freenixes instead and began piling their Shiney Stuff on top of it.
iWorks is just essentially an updated replacement for Claris Works. Though there are people here probably not old enough to have even heard of it, apparently.
Apple has had a 'works' type suite for light-duty word processing and spreadsheet use as long as Microsoft has.
The best anecdote that line brings to my mind is about someone who brings his son to a brothel for his coming-of-age, and the son ends up giving head to the bouncer.
Maybe they should continue to run a usenet service, but strip binary attachments and limit message length to, say, what a text body that any reasonable human could read in 45 minutes.
I have not shopped at Wal-Mart in 10+ years, they are the main reason you go into any rural area you see blighted towns.
Actually, the small town that I live (near) in has a Wal-Mart and it might appear that the town is 'blighted' by it. However, they moved to a new building not too long ago, and the former Wal-Mart location is now a thriving flea market. And I'm sorry, but the tradtional 'small town merchants' rolled up the sidewalk at 6PM. Wal-Mart is 24 hours. That's liberating, if you're a geek or live any kind of a non-traditional lifestyle at all. It's actually possible now to live way out in the country and not suffer from Main Street fascism as in the past.
Just because Wal-Mart drove the old-line small-time merchants under doesn't mean they destroyed the entire market for everything. Many of those small-time merchants were charging extortionate marked-up prices because they had a captive small-town customer base to screw.
If there's copper in the local lines already, bringing a second pair in is a lot cheaper than stringing all new fibre on the whole local area. It's just another pair from the pole to the house.
The dude (Ebert, or whatever his real name is) is just playing king-on-a-hill. A hundred years ago, movies weren't considered art. At all. Neither was photography.
The crap he shills has gotten recognition as 'art' and he's just protecting it's turf.
Actually the frightening thing is that anybody would think that large numbers of other people would recognize an image of genitals as being theirs. Face recognition it isn't. Yet. Ahem.
You see, that's part of the problem. The people appeared to bey were having fun. Nobody was posing. Nobody seemed like they were working at seeming 'cool.' And I didn't see a single sequence where white headphone leads were swinging around in the air. It seemed a lot like a conspiracy against fashion. And that isn't 'cool' at all.
Phone manufacturers: the iPhone is doing just fine without a physical keyboard. It does't have to be the only one.
Why the nervous rant? You aren't worried that your concern might not be heard, are you? The idea that people might WANT a physical keyboard might be reflected in the market?
I know, I know. Your sort of vigilance kept that pesky second button off the mouse.
The only link you provided that isn't a shrill and biased advocacy website is the BBC one, so it's the only one I bothered to reference. And I find no reference to reinforce your assertions.
Slashdot Mirror
For one thing, the story here is billed as kind of a 'breaking news' 'new findings' kind of thing.
But the summary makes it clear it's a rehash, a dredging up of every bad thing the anti-nuke site it is hosted on could dig up, going back to 1963.
Someone further into the loop may correct me, but it's my understanding that Apple couldn't get the license to do Display PostScript. They're not having good business relations with Adobe these days.
Continue to rage againt the machine brah. Cut your internet btw, there is no way your ISP has clean hands.
You don't seem to understand that we can wisely and selective decide how and where and with whom we associate.
So you fly off the handle and start mocking people who act in such a way.
allowing people to communicate freely without some of the awkwardness or judgment based on physical appearances may allow people to "connect" with others and exchange ideas more freely.
Or it may render people even less capable of communicating freely when physical appearance is a factor in the communication. It's a double edged sword. These things allow people to hole up in a cave and not deal with anybody else at all except in ways that they explicitly define and have control over. That's a hermit-like existence.
Well, you're talking ancient history now, but yes, there was a company called Orange Computers, and Apple did use their legal muscle to drive them out of business back in the 80's.
I think he was referring to an enumeration of the number of browsers out there, not how many actual users those browsers have.
So you partially called him on it.
What do you suppose will happen when the App Store is expanded to the Mac?
You mean, what do I suppose will happen when it becomes necessary to buy all applications for the Mac from a single Apple-controlled and centralized portal?
The Mac will die. It's as simple as that.
People don't want that kind of lock-down.
20 years ago you had no viable GUI-driven PC except the Mac.
Twenty years ago Apple was busy leveraging their legal muscle to prevent the viable non-Apple GUI-driven PCs from succeeding. Don't kid yourself. They lawyered away that problem, it wasn't a move of technical finesse.
like they did with BSD
Huh? Apple simply adopted the BSD userland whole-cloth. They didn't prettify it or change it. They had a shitpile single-tasking MacOS and when they finally gave up on writing a new one of their own (after spending countless millions of dollars trying,) they adopted one of the Freenixes instead and began piling their Shiney Stuff on top of it.
Apple's market has expanded beyond creatives, so it's not as strong a tie as it used to be,
I think what you meant to say is that Apple lost their 'lock' on the mindshare of 'creatives.' The Adobe-heads run Windows now.
I'm not saying it's a good thing for us, but it's a really bad thing for Apple.
Their core market now is in consumer electronics.
That's as close to 'selling sugar water to kids' as you can get. Steve Jobs is the new Sculley.
iWorks is just essentially an updated replacement for Claris Works. Though there are people here probably not old enough to have even heard of it, apparently.
Apple has had a 'works' type suite for light-duty word processing and spreadsheet use as long as Microsoft has.
The best anecdote that line brings to my mind is about someone who brings his son to a brothel for his coming-of-age, and the son ends up giving head to the bouncer.
fidonet
Maybe they should continue to run a usenet service, but strip binary attachments and limit message length to, say, what a text body that any reasonable human could read in 45 minutes.
I have not shopped at Wal-Mart in 10+ years, they are the main reason you go into any rural area you see blighted towns.
Actually, the small town that I live (near) in has a Wal-Mart and it might appear that the town is 'blighted' by it. However, they moved to a new building not too long ago, and the former Wal-Mart location is now a thriving flea market. And I'm sorry, but the tradtional 'small town merchants' rolled up the sidewalk at 6PM. Wal-Mart is 24 hours. That's liberating, if you're a geek or live any kind of a non-traditional lifestyle at all. It's actually possible now to live way out in the country and not suffer from Main Street fascism as in the past.
Just because Wal-Mart drove the old-line small-time merchants under doesn't mean they destroyed the entire market for everything. Many of those small-time merchants were charging extortionate marked-up prices because they had a captive small-town customer base to screw.
You could always just ditch television. It's really a 20th century thing anyway. I mean 'broadcasting'??
If there's copper in the local lines already, bringing a second pair in is a lot cheaper than stringing all new fibre on the whole local area. It's just another pair from the pole to the house.
Pinball games are closer to art then pc / video games.
And their target audience have art, in the form of acne, on their faces.
But the game itself is a set of rules nothing more,
Yes. And a trip to the Grand Canyon is just a set of turns and stops. No different whatsoever than a trip to WalMart to buy some milk and eggs.
I hope you note my intent of sarcasm, but I do worry about it.
The dude (Ebert, or whatever his real name is) is just playing king-on-a-hill. A hundred years ago, movies weren't considered art. At all. Neither was photography.
The crap he shills has gotten recognition as 'art' and he's just protecting it's turf.
Actually the frightening thing is that anybody would think that large numbers of other people would recognize an image of genitals as being theirs. Face recognition it isn't. Yet. Ahem.
You see, that's part of the problem. The people appeared to bey were having fun. Nobody was posing. Nobody seemed like they were working at seeming 'cool.' And I didn't see a single sequence where white headphone leads were swinging around in the air. It seemed a lot like a conspiracy against fashion. And that isn't 'cool' at all.
Phone manufacturers: the iPhone is doing just fine without a physical keyboard. It does't have to be the only one.
Why the nervous rant? You aren't worried that your concern might not be heard, are you? The idea that people might WANT a physical keyboard might be reflected in the market?
I know, I know. Your sort of vigilance kept that pesky second button off the mouse.
Oh. That's right. It didn't.
The only link you provided that isn't a shrill and biased advocacy website is the BBC one, so it's the only one I bothered to reference. And I find no reference to reinforce your assertions.
So please take your big lies elsewhere.
The bitch in the ditch outside the Crawford Ranch has a satellite uplink?
I thought she'd gone home by now.