The "restore" discs do not contain any Apple code, rather they are a repackaging of all the OSX86 stuff. They allow you to install from the stock OS X DVD.
For those who don't like clocking links: " Wednesday, 02 July 2008 09:41 The update for Leopard 10.5.4 is available through Leopard's native Software Update utility for users who have run our 10.5.3 scripted installer or whose computers shipped with 10.5.3 Leopard. Just click the Apple on the top-left of the screen and select "Software Update" to run the built-in Software Update application."
Thank you very much for posting this. It's too far down the page to get much attention, but I appreciate reading it.
If the chemicals were, in fact, unmarked, this is a total non-issue. Furthermore, as the son of a chemist, I have absolutely no problem believing the chemicals were unmarked. When you work with something daily, you don't need a label to tell you what it is usually.
Yup. In an electrical fire, they aren't gonna traipse down to the basement looking for the breaker box or anything.
That's a situation we'd all want to walk into. Fire upstairs, chemicals on the couch and all over the floor on the way to the breaker box....
Let me put this a little more plainly for you. THERE WAS A FIRE. HE HAD FLAMMABLE CHEMICALS IN THE HOUSE. Should they have ignored the chemicals in that situation? Cuz if you think so, I hope you also think they should have let all his crap burn and not put the fire out, citing UNNECESSARY risk to the firefighters.
I know this won't be popular here...but storing hazardous/flammable/whatever chemicals ON THE FLOOR is not a lab. It's a hazard.
You want to run a chem lab in a neighborhood? You better notify your neighbors clearly - especially if there's a fire. You should probably also consider storing chemicals properly.
I halfway wish he had a bit of sodium in that basement Yeah, that could have been VERY interesting with all that water flowing down through the walls and ceilings.... At least they would have only been occupying his pile of rubble then.
But hey, his rights to house flammable (and possibly explosive) chemicals trumps everything else. DAMN POLICE STATE!!!
Public safety (in the firefighter sense) was there responding to a fire. They found flammable chemicals. They reported it as a hazard. IT then got removed because it was an ongoing hazard to the firefighters.
No warrant needed, unless you want the cops showing up with a warrant every time you have a fire. "Sorry, can't put out the fire. Warrant's not here. Hope you didn't want anything in there, fella."
Well, for starters, the "victims" in this are not the people who had the replies posted but the spouses who found out that their significant others wanted to whip a girl till she bled then fuck her bloody ass....
Second, allowing the (in your terms) "victim" to determine the right or wrongness doesn't take into account what their role in it was. Let's look at it from another scenario to make my point. Let's say that someone sends an email in to Company A in hopes of getting help without a support contract. Perhaps he forged the from address or made a free account to fool the casual level 1 tech into thinking he was from a company with a support contract. In the course of correspondence he finds out that those paying for a support contract get a login to a self-help type of site. Turns out, that same content is freely available to everyone else.
Our noble hero then publishes all such correspondence on a LiveJournal site, and it hits the news that the support contracts get you the same help and information as those with out. Company A gets very upset that a revenue stream is being destroyed and makes all sorts of threats to sue, etc.
By your logic, our user is in the wrong because the "victim" is upset. Nevermind that the public is served, by letting the victim's reaction determine how ETHICALLY correct something is serves only the victim.
Yes, that is a real situation. I hate Company A with a passion.
All the fans did was remove...well...all the SHARPNESS from the graphics. If I want to play a diablo game that looks like shit, I still have a trio 64 laying around somewhere that I will use. To play Diablo (original version).
Well, you had better hope your car is never subject to a recall, because you are going to be SORELY disappointed when they tell you to bring it in between 9 and 5. If they have a courtesy car, you might get one that is vastly different than yours. Otherwise, it's a rental they've arranged on the cheap. Might even have a CD player.
Sure, you can try to make waves, but what is your alternative? You think there's gonna be a lawsuit over this? "You see, Your Honor, they HAVE to stay in business because my music is important. If they go out of business, I'll have to get the music from somewhere else. And that 2 hours is very important to me. So no, them offering to pay to replace my songs WITH FILES SANS DRM isn't enough. I want $80 an hour while I buy the replacements."
I have an idea. Let's take the generic motherboards they use in, say, any of their machines, and put them in a little bit different case. Let's slap a Core2 Duo in it and a couple gigs of ram. Add a nice 250 or 300 GB hard drive and a real video card.
Sell it for $800 or so.
I'd buy that. I won't even think about buying a Mac as things stand now.
That is correct, but the Appeals Court's decision falls on Psystar's side. While this is by no means definitive in the case in question, it is a legal precedent at the federal level, and it relates directly to the matter at hand.
Which is likely why he didn't say "The GNU project is very nice and very idealistic, but has so far failed." He did say "The GNU project is very nice and very idealistic, but has so far failed to displace close source software."
You need to finish sentences, not stop when you see a partial implication that gets your knickers in a wad.
He calls anyone who just wants to USE a computer an apathetic imbecile, and you're the troll. I guess smug self-importance is something the/. crowd really clings to. Well, whatever helps them sleep at night, right?
Where are the "strict Constitutional interpretation" candidates asking us to go back to our original system of elections? No running mates. No parties. Just a bunch of candidates. Most votes gets to be president. Second most gets to be vice president.
Come on, Paul-supporters and others who want to take our Constitution as written. Where the hell are you?
Repeat after me. MYSPACE IS NOT GOING AFTER LORI DREW. THE US GOVERNMENT IS GOING AFTER LORI DREW.
If MySpace wants to sue her for violating TOS, I say go for it. If the US Government wants to start prosecuting every violation of every corporation's TOS...well, I hope I don't need to tell you why that is a bad idea.
No, the fact that there are 70+ pages of fanbois claiming the problem doesn't exist and it's all 360 kids trying to slander Sony makes it "rampant denial."
Slashdot Mirror
The "restore" discs do not contain any Apple code, rather they are a repackaging of all the OSX86 stuff. They allow you to install from the stock OS X DVD.
Since I can't mod you -1 (Uninformed), I'll just correct you: http://www.psystar.com/leopard_1054_business_as_usual.html
For those who don't like clocking links:
" Wednesday, 02 July 2008 09:41
The update for Leopard 10.5.4 is available through Leopard's native Software Update utility for users who have run our 10.5.3 scripted installer or whose computers shipped with 10.5.3 Leopard. Just click the Apple on the top-left of the screen and select "Software Update" to run the built-in Software Update application."
iPods. Loyalty, or locked-in by allegedly unwanted DRM?
Bad argument, sir.
As is your kneejerk reaction to believe the rantings of a man out to sell his conspiracy books.
Agree to disagree on this one, then?
Thank you very much for posting this. It's too far down the page to get much attention, but I appreciate reading it.
If the chemicals were, in fact, unmarked, this is a total non-issue. Furthermore, as the son of a chemist, I have absolutely no problem believing the chemicals were unmarked. When you work with something daily, you don't need a label to tell you what it is usually.
Yup. In an electrical fire, they aren't gonna traipse down to the basement looking for the breaker box or anything.
That's a situation we'd all want to walk into. Fire upstairs, chemicals on the couch and all over the floor on the way to the breaker box....
Let me put this a little more plainly for you. THERE WAS A FIRE. HE HAD FLAMMABLE CHEMICALS IN THE HOUSE. Should they have ignored the chemicals in that situation? Cuz if you think so, I hope you also think they should have let all his crap burn and not put the fire out, citing UNNECESSARY risk to the firefighters.
I know this won't be popular here...but storing hazardous/flammable/whatever chemicals ON THE FLOOR is not a lab. It's a hazard.
You want to run a chem lab in a neighborhood? You better notify your neighbors clearly - especially if there's a fire. You should probably also consider storing chemicals properly.
I halfway wish he had a bit of sodium in that basement Yeah, that could have been VERY interesting with all that water flowing down through the walls and ceilings.... At least they would have only been occupying his pile of rubble then.
But hey, his rights to house flammable (and possibly explosive) chemicals trumps everything else. DAMN POLICE STATE!!!
Public safety (in the firefighter sense) was there responding to a fire. They found flammable chemicals. They reported it as a hazard. IT then got removed because it was an ongoing hazard to the firefighters.
No warrant needed, unless you want the cops showing up with a warrant every time you have a fire. "Sorry, can't put out the fire. Warrant's not here. Hope you didn't want anything in there, fella."
Well, for starters, the "victims" in this are not the people who had the replies posted but the spouses who found out that their significant others wanted to whip a girl till she bled then fuck her bloody ass....
Second, allowing the (in your terms) "victim" to determine the right or wrongness doesn't take into account what their role in it was. Let's look at it from another scenario to make my point. Let's say that someone sends an email in to Company A in hopes of getting help without a support contract. Perhaps he forged the from address or made a free account to fool the casual level 1 tech into thinking he was from a company with a support contract. In the course of correspondence he finds out that those paying for a support contract get a login to a self-help type of site. Turns out, that same content is freely available to everyone else.
Our noble hero then publishes all such correspondence on a LiveJournal site, and it hits the news that the support contracts get you the same help and information as those with out. Company A gets very upset that a revenue stream is being destroyed and makes all sorts of threats to sue, etc.
By your logic, our user is in the wrong because the "victim" is upset. Nevermind that the public is served, by letting the victim's reaction determine how ETHICALLY correct something is serves only the victim.
Yes, that is a real situation. I hate Company A with a passion.
So right or wrong should be determined by who is laughing? That line of thought scares me.
All the fans did was remove...well...all the SHARPNESS from the graphics. If I want to play a diablo game that looks like shit, I still have a trio 64 laying around somewhere that I will use. To play Diablo (original version).
Yes, because if they are trying to restrict access to information they would have taken only 2 specific computers out of dozens. Absolutely BRILLIANT.
Insightful? Informative? Flamebait? Funny?
Ironic?
Well, you had better hope your car is never subject to a recall, because you are going to be SORELY disappointed when they tell you to bring it in between 9 and 5. If they have a courtesy car, you might get one that is vastly different than yours. Otherwise, it's a rental they've arranged on the cheap. Might even have a CD player.
Sure, you can try to make waves, but what is your alternative? You think there's gonna be a lawsuit over this? "You see, Your Honor, they HAVE to stay in business because my music is important. If they go out of business, I'll have to get the music from somewhere else. And that 2 hours is very important to me. So no, them offering to pay to replace my songs WITH FILES SANS DRM isn't enough. I want $80 an hour while I buy the replacements."
http://search.cpan.org/dist/RT-Integration-SVN/
Design a product? Are you serious?
I have an idea. Let's take the generic motherboards they use in, say, any of their machines, and put them in a little bit different case. Let's slap a Core2 Duo in it and a couple gigs of ram. Add a nice 250 or 300 GB hard drive and a real video card.
Sell it for $800 or so.
I'd buy that. I won't even think about buying a Mac as things stand now.
See Digidyne v. Data General and re-analyze, please.
That is correct, but the Appeals Court's decision falls on Psystar's side. While this is by no means definitive in the case in question, it is a legal precedent at the federal level, and it relates directly to the matter at hand.
Digidyne v. Data General. No requiring hardware to legally use software. It even involved a company which sold clones of Data General's. Precedent is on Psystar's side. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=473&invol=908&friend=nytimes
Which is likely why he didn't say "The GNU project is very nice and very idealistic, but has so far failed." He did say "The GNU project is very nice and very idealistic, but has so far failed to displace close source software."
You need to finish sentences, not stop when you see a partial implication that gets your knickers in a wad.
Troll mod. I love it.
He calls anyone who just wants to USE a computer an apathetic imbecile, and you're the troll. I guess smug self-importance is something the /. crowd really clings to. Well, whatever helps them sleep at night, right?
Where are the "strict Constitutional interpretation" candidates asking us to go back to our original system of elections? No running mates. No parties. Just a bunch of candidates. Most votes gets to be president. Second most gets to be vice president.
Come on, Paul-supporters and others who want to take our Constitution as written. Where the hell are you?
Ok, you are officially an idiot.
Repeat after me. MYSPACE IS NOT GOING AFTER LORI DREW. THE US GOVERNMENT IS GOING AFTER LORI DREW.
If MySpace wants to sue her for violating TOS, I say go for it. If the US Government wants to start prosecuting every violation of every corporation's TOS...well, I hope I don't need to tell you why that is a bad idea.
Either that or he could try blinking every now and then...
No, the fact that there are 70+ pages of fanbois claiming the problem doesn't exist and it's all 360 kids trying to slander Sony makes it "rampant denial."