These things happen which is why everybody will advise you to wait until the 10.7.1 release which is coming soon. Don't be an early adopter if you you can't stand the pain. For god's sake some of these people don't have sense enough to even have a backup.
Having been a Mac user since they were called Lisas, I recommend to everyone, that with OS X, unless you just MUST have something in a new version of OSX, then you should wait until about 10.x.4 before it is fairly safe to upgrade. Apple makes some pretty sweeping changes from one major release to another, and there simply ain't no change without pain.
Compared to the rest of the OSes, Apple has a pretty good track record on updates; but modern OSes are phenomenally complicated, and there is simply no way that any OS will launch a new version without a few problems, period.
You don't understand Apple - it's not about keeping last year's gear working, it's about getting you to upgrade hardware this year. Product churn is the name of the game, and anything that allows you to keep your older hardware working properly is simply not in Apple's best interests...
I got a notification two weeks ago that the problem was fixed, and updated drivers were released in the latest version of Snow Leopard (and Lion as well, I assume), but only if your hardware was manufactured after December 2010. They had the nerve to ask me to try it on new hardware to see if the problem is resolved.
So I spent all that time helping them, and they screwed me. This issue is a bigger problem than mine is, but I wouldn't expect anything but the very minimum possible to appease customers on anything but the absolute latest equipment.
Have you ever stopped to think that maybe they couldn't solve it on earlier revs. of the hardware? Keep in mind that we are now talking about the PREVIOUS version of iMacs. Did you buy AppleCare? If so, I'm pretty sure that Apple will make it good. If not, well, I'm not at all sure that any other computer company would give you a whole new machine at a year past the warranty period.
And is yet more proof that without Jobs at the reins the company is going to shit. They burnt the pros with FCPx, aka iMovie Pro, by yanking all previous versions off the shelves and refusing to sell it to those that need to expand their business and need features that iMovie pro doesn't have,
You have absolutely no clue at all, do you?
Just how long do you think the development cycle was for FCPX? Given that Jobs himself mentioned it in at least one Keynote, I would venture to say that he had some real input on its feature-set.
Second, You do realize, of course, that Apple responded to their pro users, and allowed companies with "site licenses" (can't remember the exact term Apple uses) to continue to purchases licenses for the previous version of FCP, thus completely eliminating the "What if we hire more people?" objection to FCPX.
they did it again with the "don't say the M word (malware) and whatever you do do NOT admit it or help the customers!" bullshit
Interesting that there hasn't been another word in the press or the street about the MacDefender or any other "malware". I agree that the "don't admit it" stuff was some middle-manager's dumbass mistake; but what really matters is that Apple got on it, and got on it promptly, and evidently, quite effectively, too...
ey are sending out OSes with total shit drivers
Gimme a break! HOW many drivers do you think OS X ships with? Can you name a SINGLE OS that hasn't shipped with a bad driver or two? I can't. Not one.
This should be proof to most that without Jobs sitting in his chair ready to lay the smackdown on the fuckups that the company is in serious trouble. Like him or hate him you have to give the man credit for always running a tight ship and cutting through the bullshit, and I have a feeling without the big man in charge shit is only gonna get worse.
I notice this is your latest tactic, hairyfeet. You damn Apple with faint praise of Jobs, and spread this FUD regarding "Apple slipping in the absence of Jobs." Fact is, every single thing that has recently shipped, or will ship in the next year or so, was done under the auspices of Steve Jobs. R&D cycles for this stuff are measured in calendar YEARS, not weeks or months. And Apple is a large enough corporation (and has been for quite some time) that Stevie doesn't have to stamp his approval on every little initiative, initial every memo, or plan every project on a day to day, or even month to month, basis.
He really should have set up a solid line of succession after the first health scare and been putting someone in the spotlight that shared his drive and vision for the company.
I guess you don't keep up on Apple news (and yet still feel compelled to comment on it).
Ever heard of Tim Cook? He is as close to Steve Jobs ver. 2.0 as it gets. And he has run the company TWICE now (and I think is actually doing so right now). So, SJ and Apple HAVE been grooming an heir-apparent for over two years now. As you (rightly) note, they are big shoes to fill; but Tim seems to be up to the challenge, and the public and the press seem content with Tim's abilities in that regard.
But, I sincerely thank you on behalf of Steve Jobs for wishing him better health and a long life. He can use all the positive energy the Multiverse can send his way, and that is in very short supply here on Slashdot...
It appears Oracle wants the community to fork the code, and even if they don't, I see it as almost inevitable. At that point, Oracle has dealt itself out.
Here's another example, in the case of MySQL: Apple officially removed MySQL from the OS X Lion Server build, in favor of Postgres SQL. And this is directly because they (Apple) are concerned with Oracle's policies.
I expect them to fully lock it down in the future, so that the file system just isn't exposed,
You realize, of course, that not only can you get to every directory from the Finder's "Go" menu; but in ANY Get/Put dialog, simply pressing Command+Shift+G will allow you to navigate to any directory, too, by simply entering the path to the folder . Try it sometime. Launch TextEdit. Choose File >> Open. When the Get File Dialog appears, press Command+Shift+G. In the small Dialog that pops up, type "/etc" (no quote). Bang! You're in/etc...
So, Apple already knows how to do this. They have been "hiding" certain directories from the Finder and Get/Put Dialogs for a long time. But, they also make it ridiculously simple to get past those (non)restrictions.
I would agree except we are talking about Apple. This is the same group that dropped Final Cut Pro and renamed iMovie Final Cut Pro and simply did a major upgrade and hoped no one would notice. Why I compare the two is Apple has a history of catering to the masses and ignoring the needs of the minority. If 90% are happy with an iOS platform they will drop the desktop environment like a hot potato.
You're totally wrong, influential sources inside Apple have already said that OSX and iOS will be converging, and it's only a matter of time. There's no reason it can't have multiple interfaces; hell, Apple has done that BEFORE with Classic Mac OS and the alternate launcher interface with the big stupid icons. Didn't last long, but that interface is now back on mobiles, with more eye candy.
What you are saying is contradicted by both Apple and reality.
It's called Simple Finder, and it never "left". It's part of the "Parental Controls" setting in OS X.
The old version of Amazon's agreement stated that developers would receive 20% of the original price when an app was given away for free. Then they changed it, and they didn't make it clear to developers. For many of them it was a nasty surprise. Unfortunately I can't find the original, but the new version is here https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/mobile-apps/devportal/pdf/Appstore_Distribution_Agreement.pdf with the added sentence "No Royalty is payable for Apps with a List Price of $0.00." in Section 2(a).
Right in the summary it says Amazon asks developers to give it away. If you accept that, well what's so surprising that they don't give you anything? That's what you agreed to, no?
And what is predatory about asking developers to participate in a promotion?
What would be saying if it was Apple that did this?
I'll probably get modded down for pointing it out, but it needs to be noticed that something rotten is going on in Slashdot's comments whenever Google or Android is the subject.
Or, as you pointed out later, in the opposite direction, whenever Apple is the subject.
However, it seems that the only thing we are in disagreement with here is your understanding of what I said.
Um, I didn't misunderstand anything. A Court can't LEGALLY issue an Order to allow a PRIVATE COMPANY to come into your business and "Audit" or "Sieze" SHIT.
Do you REALLY think that a Court could issue an Order to allow ME to "audit" or "sieze evidence" from YOUR BUSINESS???
Guess what? Neither can the Court issue an Order to allow the BSA to act like LAW ENFORCEMENT, in ANY CAPACITY WHATSOEVER.
If the Congress decided the PEOPLE wanted a "Software Police", it would pass a LAW to create such an entity, and would grant it certain "Police Powers". Until then, you can safely tell the BSA to go pound sand. Congress hasn't empowered them to execute a Search Warrant, and a Court sure as hell can't, either. Oh, and there is simply no such thing as a "Search Warrant" that would allow for SEIZURE of ANYTHING in a CIVIL case.
Remember, simply POSSESSING an "unauthorized copy" is NOT a violation of Copyright law. They have to prove DISTRIBUTION to someone else BY YOU. So "having a Federal Marshall along" is nothing more than a bullshit INTIMIDATION tactic. It's a CIVIL matter, NOT CRIMINAL! The Federal Marshall has ZERO power in that situation.
So, it is not my reading comprehension that needs work. It is your understanding of the difference between a Civil matter and a Criminal one.
Licenses may be non-transferable. Can you prove that you purchased the license, and not someone else? Can you prove that the license applies to that particular machine?
No, and YOU don't have to.
The burden of proof is on the SOFTWARE VENDOR (not you, and not the BSA!!!) to PROVE that your software is in violation. You do not have to "prove" anything. You're the Defendant (Respondent).
And as I said above, their pool of influence is actually quite small.
Well, this is sort of true. Courts can award them injunctions that warrant them the right to collect data from the premises as part of the discovery process. In this respect, they are still a private entity, but they have the backing of the court and generally a US marshal with them. Oh and they will be in possession of a court order at the same time.
First, they should have no authority to audit for any but their member companies (which are not that many).
Second, I would challenge any search they did. Make them get a warrant signed by an actual judge. Then complain about the Probable Cause all the way! They are NOT a Police Force. That's why they need a Federal Marshal along.
Third, I would challenge that they are not the Real Party In Interest. They lost nothing. If the actual company wants to sue you, fine; but the BSA is NOT properly a "Party". They are a meddling Interloper They are NOT "aggrieved". Get THEM kicked off the suit as having no Standing. They cannot receive a "settlement", because they suffered no damages. Therefore, they have failed to state a claim for which the Court can grant Relief (to them).
Apparently, a whole bunch of other nations don't feel that it "cuts out the little guy." They think it's basic fairness.
Well, they're wrong. Unless there is some limit on the amount of dilatory motions, and little-to-no Summary Judgment abilities, then the British Rule simply sucks. Unless you are the one with the infinite resources.
It's a wonderful idea in theory; but does it actually work in practice. Show me how it IS better; don't just opine that it SHOULD be better.
And I can't miss this opportunity to point out that THIS is a perfect example -- PERFECT -- of why everyone, liberal or conservative, should support loser-pay legislation. Or better yet, a rock-solid amendment to the US Constitution guaranteeing that "the party prevailing in any dispute, public or private, shall be entitled to reasonable compensation for expenses incurred."
Spoken like a person who has never had a claim against the State, or even a medium-sized company.
I'm an embedded dev. by trade; but I have to admit that I don't know diddly about how this sort of thing works. I just assumed that the firmware in the phone would have a routine that would generate the hash from user input, and the text to hash algorithm would use some "trapdoor" (non-reversible) math. That way, the only way to really get the data out would be to dump the data out of the flash directly (kinda hard when the flash is built into a SoC, and then decrypt it with the hash, and the firmware's decryption function. This limits the number of people who could decrypt your phone's data to a pretty small number.
Take your phone, run it over with a truck. Then set it (the phone, not the truck) on fire. Then throw the ashes in a glass block. Then launch the glass block into the sun.
And so you think that isn't susceptible to an extraterrestrial-in-the-middle attack?
Doesn't the iPhone suffer from pretty much the same problems as well? Moving to iPhone as the troll suggests solves nothing, and may even make the problem worse.
Nope. Encryption + Remote Wipe + Local Wipe on too many failed password attempts (see "Safe and Secure by Design" and "Ready for Business" on this page). Not even in the same universe as far as security goes...
Judging by the the amount of 7's and 3's (common in human generated "random" numbers), it was most likely generated by a human (possibly on the fly during filming)
I think they just told Brent to generate it on the spot, and then generated the "display" during Post, based on what he rattled-off.
Slashdot Mirror
These things happen which is why everybody will advise you to wait until the 10.7.1 release which is coming soon. Don't be an early adopter if you you can't stand the pain. For god's sake some of these people don't have sense enough to even have a backup.
Having been a Mac user since they were called Lisas, I recommend to everyone, that with OS X, unless you just MUST have something in a new version of OSX, then you should wait until about 10.x.4 before it is fairly safe to upgrade. Apple makes some pretty sweeping changes from one major release to another, and there simply ain't no change without pain.
Compared to the rest of the OSes, Apple has a pretty good track record on updates; but modern OSes are phenomenally complicated, and there is simply no way that any OS will launch a new version without a few problems, period.
You don't understand Apple - it's not about keeping last year's gear working, it's about getting you to upgrade hardware this year. Product churn is the name of the game, and anything that allows you to keep your older hardware working properly is simply not in Apple's best interests...
Then why did Apple fix the problem at all?
the latest iMacs don't support secondary monitors, do they?
They actually have TWO Thunderbolt ports, although only one of them supports DisplayPort, IIRC.
I got a notification two weeks ago that the problem was fixed, and updated drivers were released in the latest version of Snow Leopard (and Lion as well, I assume), but only if your hardware was manufactured after December 2010. They had the nerve to ask me to try it on new hardware to see if the problem is resolved.
So I spent all that time helping them, and they screwed me. This issue is a bigger problem than mine is, but I wouldn't expect anything but the very minimum possible to appease customers on anything but the absolute latest equipment.
Have you ever stopped to think that maybe they couldn't solve it on earlier revs. of the hardware? Keep in mind that we are now talking about the PREVIOUS version of iMacs. Did you buy AppleCare? If so, I'm pretty sure that Apple will make it good. If not, well, I'm not at all sure that any other computer company would give you a whole new machine at a year past the warranty period.
And is yet more proof that without Jobs at the reins the company is going to shit. They burnt the pros with FCPx, aka iMovie Pro, by yanking all previous versions off the shelves and refusing to sell it to those that need to expand their business and need features that iMovie pro doesn't have,
You have absolutely no clue at all, do you?
Just how long do you think the development cycle was for FCPX? Given that Jobs himself mentioned it in at least one Keynote, I would venture to say that he had some real input on its feature-set.
Second, You do realize, of course, that Apple responded to their pro users, and allowed companies with "site licenses" (can't remember the exact term Apple uses) to continue to purchases licenses for the previous version of FCP, thus completely eliminating the "What if we hire more people?" objection to FCPX.
they did it again with the "don't say the M word (malware) and whatever you do do NOT admit it or help the customers!" bullshit
Interesting that there hasn't been another word in the press or the street about the MacDefender or any other "malware". I agree that the "don't admit it" stuff was some middle-manager's dumbass mistake; but what really matters is that Apple got on it, and got on it promptly, and evidently, quite effectively, too...
ey are sending out OSes with total shit drivers
Gimme a break! HOW many drivers do you think OS X ships with? Can you name a SINGLE OS that hasn't shipped with a bad driver or two? I can't. Not one.
This should be proof to most that without Jobs sitting in his chair ready to lay the smackdown on the fuckups that the company is in serious trouble. Like him or hate him you have to give the man credit for always running a tight ship and cutting through the bullshit, and I have a feeling without the big man in charge shit is only gonna get worse.
I notice this is your latest tactic, hairyfeet. You damn Apple with faint praise of Jobs, and spread this FUD regarding "Apple slipping in the absence of Jobs." Fact is, every single thing that has recently shipped, or will ship in the next year or so, was done under the auspices of Steve Jobs. R&D cycles for this stuff are measured in calendar YEARS, not weeks or months. And Apple is a large enough corporation (and has been for quite some time) that Stevie doesn't have to stamp his approval on every little initiative, initial every memo, or plan every project on a day to day, or even month to month, basis.
He really should have set up a solid line of succession after the first health scare and been putting someone in the spotlight that shared his drive and vision for the company.
I guess you don't keep up on Apple news (and yet still feel compelled to comment on it).
Ever heard of Tim Cook? He is as close to Steve Jobs ver. 2.0 as it gets. And he has run the company TWICE now (and I think is actually doing so right now). So, SJ and Apple HAVE been grooming an heir-apparent for over two years now. As you (rightly) note, they are big shoes to fill; but Tim seems to be up to the challenge, and the public and the press seem content with Tim's abilities in that regard.
But, I sincerely thank you on behalf of Steve Jobs for wishing him better health and a long life. He can use all the positive energy the Multiverse can send his way, and that is in very short supply here on Slashdot...
It appears Oracle wants the community to fork the code, and even if they don't, I see it as almost inevitable. At that point, Oracle has dealt itself out.
Here's another example, in the case of MySQL: Apple officially removed MySQL from the OS X Lion Server build, in favor of Postgres SQL. And this is directly because they (Apple) are concerned with Oracle's policies.
And of course, Apple deprecated Java a long time ago.
how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
Probably as long as it takes them to fix it in Safari.
I expect them to fully lock it down in the future, so that the file system just isn't exposed,
You realize, of course, that not only can you get to every directory from the Finder's "Go" menu; but in ANY Get/Put dialog, simply pressing Command+Shift+G will allow you to navigate to any directory, too, by simply entering the path to the folder . Try it sometime. Launch TextEdit. Choose File >> Open. When the Get File Dialog appears, press Command+Shift+G. In the small Dialog that pops up, type "/etc" (no quote). Bang! You're in /etc...
So, Apple already knows how to do this. They have been "hiding" certain directories from the Finder and Get/Put Dialogs for a long time. But, they also make it ridiculously simple to get past those (non)restrictions.
I would agree except we are talking about Apple. This is the same group that dropped Final Cut Pro and renamed iMovie Final Cut Pro and simply did a major upgrade and hoped no one would notice. Why I compare the two is Apple has a history of catering to the masses and ignoring the needs of the minority. If 90% are happy with an iOS platform they will drop the desktop environment like a hot potato.
Yeah, Apple is sure dumbing down Lion.
You're totally wrong, influential sources inside Apple have already said that OSX and iOS will be converging, and it's only a matter of time. There's no reason it can't have multiple interfaces; hell, Apple has done that BEFORE with Classic Mac OS and the alternate launcher interface with the big stupid icons. Didn't last long, but that interface is now back on mobiles, with more eye candy.
What you are saying is contradicted by both Apple and reality.
It's called Simple Finder, and it never "left". It's part of the "Parental Controls" setting in OS X.
The old version of Amazon's agreement stated that developers would receive 20% of the original price when an app was given away for free. Then they changed it, and they didn't make it clear to developers. For many of them it was a nasty surprise. Unfortunately I can't find the original, but the new version is here https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/mobile-apps/devportal/pdf/Appstore_Distribution_Agreement.pdf with the added sentence "No Royalty is payable for Apps with a List Price of $0.00." in Section 2(a).
List price is not SALE price.
Right in the summary it says Amazon asks developers to give it away. If you accept that, well what's so surprising that they don't give you anything? That's what you agreed to, no?
And what is predatory about asking developers to participate in a promotion?
What would be saying if it was Apple that did this?
Moral of the story - read the contract?
I just don't know how Amazon could be so short-sighted.
Do they REALLY think that this is the way to compete against the 800lb. Gorilla that is the Apple App Store?
I'll probably get modded down for pointing it out, but it needs to be noticed that something rotten is going on in Slashdot's comments whenever Google or Android is the subject.
Or, as you pointed out later, in the opposite direction, whenever Apple is the subject.
If units sold means a better product then Britney Spears is one of the best musicians in the world.
Funny, that's exactly what Android users keep using as "proof" that Android phones are "better" because of a few quarters of higher sales numbers.
However, it seems that the only thing we are in disagreement with here is your understanding of what I said.
Um, I didn't misunderstand anything. A Court can't LEGALLY issue an Order to allow a PRIVATE COMPANY to come into your business and "Audit" or "Sieze" SHIT.
Do you REALLY think that a Court could issue an Order to allow ME to "audit" or "sieze evidence" from YOUR BUSINESS???
Guess what? Neither can the Court issue an Order to allow the BSA to act like LAW ENFORCEMENT, in ANY CAPACITY WHATSOEVER.
If the Congress decided the PEOPLE wanted a "Software Police", it would pass a LAW to create such an entity, and would grant it certain "Police Powers". Until then, you can safely tell the BSA to go pound sand. Congress hasn't empowered them to execute a Search Warrant, and a Court sure as hell can't, either. Oh, and there is simply no such thing as a "Search Warrant" that would allow for SEIZURE of ANYTHING in a CIVIL case.
Remember, simply POSSESSING an "unauthorized copy" is NOT a violation of Copyright law. They have to prove DISTRIBUTION to someone else BY YOU. So "having a Federal Marshall along" is nothing more than a bullshit INTIMIDATION tactic. It's a CIVIL matter, NOT CRIMINAL! The Federal Marshall has ZERO power in that situation.
So, it is not my reading comprehension that needs work. It is your understanding of the difference between a Civil matter and a Criminal one.
Licenses may be non-transferable. Can you prove that you purchased the license, and not someone else? Can you prove that the license applies to that particular machine?
No, and YOU don't have to.
The burden of proof is on the SOFTWARE VENDOR (not you, and not the BSA!!!) to PROVE that your software is in violation. You do not have to "prove" anything. You're the Defendant (Respondent).
And as I said above, their pool of influence is actually quite small.
Well, this is sort of true. Courts can award them injunctions that warrant them the right to collect data from the premises as part of the discovery process. In this respect, they are still a private entity, but they have the backing of the court and generally a US marshal with them. Oh and they will be in possession of a court order at the same time.
First, they should have no authority to audit for any but their member companies (which are not that many).
Second, I would challenge any search they did. Make them get a warrant signed by an actual judge. Then complain about the Probable Cause all the way! They are NOT a Police Force. That's why they need a Federal Marshal along.
Third, I would challenge that they are not the Real Party In Interest. They lost nothing. If the actual company wants to sue you, fine; but the BSA is NOT properly a "Party". They are a meddling Interloper They are NOT "aggrieved". Get THEM kicked off the suit as having no Standing. They cannot receive a "settlement", because they suffered no damages. Therefore, they have failed to state a claim for which the Court can grant Relief (to them).
Apparently, a whole bunch of other nations don't feel that it "cuts out the little guy." They think it's basic fairness.
Well, they're wrong. Unless there is some limit on the amount of dilatory motions, and little-to-no Summary Judgment abilities, then the British Rule simply sucks. Unless you are the one with the infinite resources.
It's a wonderful idea in theory; but does it actually work in practice. Show me how it IS better; don't just opine that it SHOULD be better.
And I can't miss this opportunity to point out that THIS is a perfect example -- PERFECT -- of why everyone, liberal or conservative, should support loser-pay legislation. Or better yet, a rock-solid amendment to the US Constitution guaranteeing that "the party prevailing in any dispute, public or private, shall be entitled to reasonable compensation for expenses incurred."
Spoken like a person who has never had a claim against the State, or even a medium-sized company.
No, the "American Rule" is about as equitable as it gets.
Ok, you got me!
I'm an embedded dev. by trade; but I have to admit that I don't know diddly about how this sort of thing works. I just assumed that the firmware in the phone would have a routine that would generate the hash from user input, and the text to hash algorithm would use some "trapdoor" (non-reversible) math. That way, the only way to really get the data out would be to dump the data out of the flash directly (kinda hard when the flash is built into a SoC, and then decrypt it with the hash, and the firmware's decryption function. This limits the number of people who could decrypt your phone's data to a pretty small number.
Take your phone, run it over with a truck. Then set it (the phone, not the truck) on fire. Then throw the ashes in a glass block. Then launch the glass block into the sun.
And so you think that isn't susceptible to an extraterrestrial-in-the-middle attack?
Doesn't the iPhone suffer from pretty much the same problems as well? Moving to iPhone as the troll suggests solves nothing, and may even make the problem worse.
Nope. Encryption + Remote Wipe + Local Wipe on too many failed password attempts (see "Safe and Secure by Design" and "Ready for Business" on this page). Not even in the same universe as far as security goes...
Judging by the the amount of 7's and 3's (common in human generated "random" numbers), it was most likely generated by a human (possibly on the fly during filming)
I think they just told Brent to generate it on the spot, and then generated the "display" during Post, based on what he rattled-off.
Where did you get that stupid idea from (that they are more secure)? You do understand that they have to store their passwords in plain-text aswell?
Why couldn't they just store a hash? -Doug