USB was an obscure curiosity when Apple aggressively adopted it in the original Bondi blue iMac. I clearly remember watching the market for USB peripherals be completely driven by demand from iMac (and then other Apple model) owners at a time when PC users stayed away from the technology because it was incompatible with all their PS2, serial and parallel port peripherals. Often the place to find USB equipment was in the Apple section in stores.
And Win98's improved USB support certainly helped too.
No, most of the Windows crowd still clings to their PS/2 mice and keyboards. The only thing that moved most Windows users into the USB arena was the fact that the peripheral manufacturers started dropping Parallel and Serial ports from Printers and Scanners (although I do still miss my SCSI scanners!).
But face it, none of that would have happened without the popularity of the iMac, and Apple's POV.
Plug time machine disk 1 in, make backup, unplug disk 1, take off site, plug in disk 2, make backup, rinse repeat with however many redundant copies you want. You could additionally set up a tape drive however its probably cheaper and easier for a small office to buy a few large external portable hard drives and rotate them instead of a tape drive and multiple tapes.
That's what we started doing about 5 years ago (with a Windows Server setup, though) after a theft left us with the DLT tapes... but no drive to restore with. Fortunately, for some unknown reason, the theives left the server; so, we didn't lose anything other than what was on the (then un-backed-up) workstations.
Since we had continual problems with our HP DLT drive, we took the opportunity to "upgrade" our backup system. We took one Firewire 800 external drive and stashed it up above the suspended ceiling. That backup was the absolutely most up-to-date. Then, we had a group of more FW 800 externals that we rotated offsite weekly, that we treated as if they were backup tapes. Had a bitch of a time convincing the backup s/w to work like that (as I said, this was a Windows server, not Time Machine); but eventually we got it working, and it worked great.
BTW, the external drives were purchased with the $7k we got from the insurance co. to replace the DLT drive; so it really was a win-win situation.
Hold the control key down and use the 'scroll wheel' or two finger verticle slide on the track pad. Zooms the whole desktop regardless of apps, even works in things like VMware machines with games running on them.
so the original comment about no info on screen resolution is modded up 3 as an insightful crock and I am the first to point out its a crock and remain on -1 WTF?
Welcome to the wonderful world of slashdot-modding. Where "I like to lick butts" gets a +5 Insightful, and any mention in the least supportive of Apple gets you downmodded into infinity.
Interesting, it seems it is basically mini Display Port with PCI Express at 10Gb/s on top. I welcome that. Over copper for now, but I guess the 100Gb/s version expected in 2020 may utilise fibre.
And did you notice that it has really low latency and good time synchronisation, and was designed particularly with audio and video pros in mind?
Wow, like who didn't see that coming, and the death of the XServer, when the switch to Intel processors from PPC was announced?
For those who don't get it, enterprise bought the XServer because it had two bad boy (at the time) G5 processors with a 1Gz bus per processor instead of just one like Intel had. They mostly didn't care about OS X Server all that much.
Now of course Apple is now all Intel processors, so it negates the need to buy the higher priced XServer (why it was discontinued) and thus run OS X Server, thus it's now incorporated into OS X as a cost savings / hobbyist move.
I'm just wondering when the MacPro is going to be discontinued, what consumer needs 16 cores?
And you think that only "consumers" purchase the Mac Pro?
Sorry, the Mac Pro is named that for a reason; it isn't a "consumer" machine. It shows just what OS X can do with the right hardware behind it, and apparently it is news to you that there are (believe it or not!) computer users that are far above the typical "consumer" level.
That is why I believe you and I benefited from Gates and Jobs with their singular vision and ability to get everyone on the same page. With FOSS you have 50 million guys reinventing the wheel (how many text editors are they up to now, 200?) and everyone "scratching their own itch" instead of working together as a cohesive unit. This leads to lost time and wasted efforts (how many distros are they up to now,500+?) and just makes a mess in the marketplace, ala what Apple had under Sculley with the Performa line, or Gates having to keep both Win9X and WinNT until he could merge the OS lines.
But sadly without real leadership and cohesive unity what you get is 50 million little fiefdoms and a HELL of a lot of zealotry. Too many here are of the "ZOMG M$ ZOMG!!" that it feels more and more like Boycott Novell instead of a place where we discuss the merits/demerits of the TECH, and no matter how many times you point out the numbers don't lie and something needs to change to draw the users you just get labeled a "paid shill" (I wish, where is my check Ballmer?) or astrorufer for pointing out the emperor has his Willie swinging in the breeze. If it was gonna sell it would have done so by now which is why I support what Shuttleworth is trying to do. He may fail but at least he isn't just repackaging the same shit and expecting people to "do it the Linux way" which has been shown time and time again to be a giant "DO NOT WANT" as far as customers goes.
BTW since you are a Mac guy you might want to check this out for one day only Paragon are giving away their excellent Windows/Macs interoperability tools on GAOTD. I have picked up several Paragon tools because of trying them on GAOTD and they really are top notch. These will give you read/write access between Windows and OSX at near native speed either way. Pretty cool and you can't beat free!
You're preachin' to the choir here, man!
I've been singing the same song for about 7 years here on/, And my voice is getting hoarse as hell...
I guess it will never change here: And in fact, entropy seems to be making the entire/. experience degrade non-gracefully over time. Sad, really.
Anyway, thanks for the link, and I will check that stuff out!
I find it sickening, personally, that the parent's post has been downmodded,
Oh gosh, crocodile tears! Get a life, you obviously need one.
simply because bratty Linux zealots can't take the truth.
Actually, the brat and zealot here is you. Grow up please. Either that or you're a shill fraudulently misrepresenting yourself as a third party. "hairyfeet"'s post is deliberately trying to deceive the reader by misrepresenting paid installations (sales) as all installations. That's dishonest and typical of the alleycat ethics of the M$ marketing department. The world would be a better place if they grew a pair and stopped engaging in wholesale misrepresentation and fraud.
---
Paid marketers are the worst zealots.
Oh, how I wish I was paid for my opinions!
And, as hairyfeet predicted, and right on cue, he is accused of being a "shill".
Sorry that you arrested-development types can't handle the truth. Perhaps you oughta start listening, and watching, what everyone REALLY wants; instead of TELLING them why they are stupid for not wanting what YOU want.
Oh don't worry I expected it. if you look at my past comments they are always evenly split between insightful and troll/flamebait, with the nasty mods coming from zealots that stick their heads in the sand and refuse to accept the truth. instead of actual debate all you get is accusations of "shill" astroturfer, etc.
And I agree wholeheartedly that Apple fanboys ain't got shit on the RDF that surrounds FOSSies as I call them. I've found there is a BIG difference between a FOSS users and a FOSSie, but sadly it seems the FOSSies are winning control and the fact that any that dare to say anything other than "Gee Biff, isn't Linux perfect? It sure is Bill, and RMS's beard smells like roses!" gets modded down is just proof of that.
Man, dontcha know it!
If you want to see a victim of some serious punish-modding, you need look no further than my comment history. I went from Excellent Karma to Terrible Karma in one day's worth of battling the Linux Faithful
With my Username, you can guess that I am an Apple supporter; however, that doesn't change the fact that, in fifteen years, Linux really is, for all practical purposes (and the plural of anecdote is not data), no closer to being accepted on the desktop now than when Linus wrote his fateful email. A shame, really; but it is the constant, immature, backbiting and lack, of (horrors!) or-gan-i-za-tion, that will forever relegate Linux (and also, sadly, a zillion other wonderful F/OSS projects!) to the statistical detritus level that they now "enjoy". And considering the number of F/OSS projects that my favorite OS (OS X) incorporates, that is of more than just an academic concern.
As to your suggestions on how to "modernize" Linux, one of the fundamental design limitations keeping LInux from being ready for prime time is also one of its performance strengths, and so will never be changed: That is, the macrokernel architecture. That, and the F/OSS zealots insisting on the source code to every driver (guyz, there IS such a concept as a TRADE SECRET, ya know...), application, API, etc. But what they DON'T get is that Joe and Jane SUV-driver simply don' be' a-carin' 'bout no source code. They jus' wanna do what they wanna do, when they wanna do it. And Linux isn't there, either; let alone ready for the corporate desktop...
I find it sickening, personally, that the parent's post has been downmodded, simply because bratty Linux zealots can't take the truth. I have made the exact same points before myself, and now have the Bad Karma to show for it.
Ya know, Apple fans have NOTHING on Linux fans, as far as "Reality Distortion" goes. There is nobody as out-of-touch with the COMMON user than a LInux fan.
Except that prison numbers are vastly inflated - if our drug laws actually banned all recreational drugs, and not just the kind of drugs black people use, we'd see a large increase in white inmates.
You are talking about the United States, right?
If so, please point me at the recreational drug that is legal (alcohol doesn't count for the purposes of this question, and is moot because it is used in abundance by all races). Please. I want to go buy some, now!
No, the prison system is disproportionately black, partially because of some blacks' own doing, and partially because the Judicial system, and especially JURIES, are disproportionately WHITE. It is far easier for a Persecutor, er, Prosecutor to "demonize" and "dehumanize" a person of another race. Then, when the jury sees a defendant not as a person,but rather just as a "race", the jury feels no pangs of compassion, and most of the time, no interest in deeply examining the evidence against, said defendant. And the (predominantly white) Prosecutors use that tactic to up their "conviction rates", and thus their chances for reelection/career advancement, every single day.
BTW, I am caucasian; so this is not a case of making excuses for my own race. Nor is it making excuses for the failings of another race. The GGGGP actually had some salient points. However, his, er, "delivery" left something to be desired.
However, YOUR comments about the drug thing are just silly, Mr. "I'm afraid to own my own words" AC.
BTW, what ARE the "drugs black people use", as opposed to the "drugs white people use"?
One button mouse, almost destroying Apple, delaying the move to Intel because he wanted to use chips that were not used by "real" computer makers, Apple 3 firestarter meant business still cannot take them seriously.
Let's take these in order:
One button mouse: First off, remember, this was 1981-83, when these decisions were made. Nearly no one in the regular population (and even most computer "experts") even knows what a computer "mouse" is at that time. Jef Raskin wanted a multi-button (up to FIVE) mouse. SJ did not. And at the time, Xerox PARC (I think), or maybe it was M.I.T., had conducted "usability" studies that showed, hands down (or mouse-buttons-down) that a one-button mouse was far easier for MOST people to learn. So, the one-button mouse was decided upon on the LISA, and then adopted on the Mac. See this article for some mouse history. However, that was then. So, that's why, ever since MacOS 8.6 (1999) Macs have directly supported two button (and now more-button) mice, and MacOS has actually supported "contextual menus" with a Ctrl-Click since MacOS 8.0 (1997). This very informed article might clear up any misconceptions about the advisability (still!) of a one-button mouse, and the Mac's support of same. That's why Apple's OWN multi-button mice (I think up to 5 buttons are definable) still default to acting like a one-button mouse. Because, for MOST people, it IS the better choice. Even now. But, this is one tired meme. Stop it. You're embarrassing yourself. Oh, and BTW, according to the Wikipedia article cited above, Microsoft really didn't start supporting a second mouse button until the release of WIndows '95. So, considering that Apple added contextual menus only two years later, and full two-button support two years after that, Apple wasn't nearly as late to the "right-click" party as the haters make them out to be.
Now, shall we start naming the Apple "industry FIRSTS"??? Of course not; the list is far too long...
Almost Destroying Apple: Um, I think you have Jobs confused with Sculley, who nearly killed Apple by LICENSING MacOS to third parties (at the urging of BILL GATES!), and signing a technology agreement with Microsoft to allow them to basically steal Apple's superior GUI code (and even THEN, WIndows 95 SUUUCKED compared to MacOS). See here, and here. However, thanks for trying. And I don't think anyone who is not purely delusional would characterize Apple's performance since Jobs' return as anything other than "phenomenal".
Delaying the move to Intel: Hmmm, I wonder who's decision it was to keep an INTEL version of OS X (and all the core "iLife" apps, etc.) up-to-date from 1999 (going back to Rhapsody/NeXTStep/Mac OS X Server 1.0) to 2005 (when the move to Intel was announced). Jobs had been REPEATEDLY promised two things from IBM: The first one was a G5 CPU running at 3.0GHz "real soon now"; and the second was a low-power G5 to put in a laptop. But IBM let him down. Repeatedly. And so, after it was patently obvious that IBM wasn't coming through (because they were too busy chasing the Cell CPU), Jobs (along with the Board of Directors!) made a pretty painful decision to make a HUGE platform change. And, BTW, they pulled it off REALLY seamlessly, too. Oh, and if your definition of "real computer makers" is limited to only those who use X86 architecture, then you are, by definition calling Sun, IBM, SGi (when there was an SGi), DEC (when there was a DEC) and others NOT "real" computer makers. Now do you see how stupid your statement sounds? BTW, you do realize, of course, that the PowerPC architecture is the little brother of IBM's "Power" architecture, which of cour
But from a purely biological evolution standpoint, Darwin needed but not God, it's not natural at all. It's natural to reproduce and if you didn't know homosexual relations wouldn't lead to reproduction, I could see how you would think it's natural. But it's not. And yes, there are a lot of unnatural sexual acts out there that isn't limited to just homosexuality.
How's if Darwin had intended us to fly he would have evolved us wings? Yea.. something still doesn't sound quite right.
Well, at least sumdumass has a self-identifying username. Even his username is illiterate.
Capitalization jackassery aside, there are several possible explanations. You are making a whole bunch of UNREASONABLE simplifying assumptions about the situation. And actually, you do have to register with Google to publish in the Android Market Place, which is actually irrelevant because the malware from this story was distributed though a DIFFERENT *stomps foot* NON-GOOGLE app store.
And yet, the Androids count all the fly-by-night "App Stores" as an advantage for Android...
For one, you don't have to buy a Google computer or Android phone to do any sort of development for Android. So it's quite a bit simpler to do security work on Android.
I submit that you will, at some point, have to buy an Android phone (and maybe more than one!) to actually debug your App. Your comment regarding a "Google computer" is of course, a non-sequitur.
BTW, you don't necessarily have to buy an iOS device of any kind to do iOS development. You see, Apple provides (as part of the $99 Dev License) a (all together now) debugger and emulator. People actually can do iOS development without purchasing a single iOS device. Unless you are willing to violate Apple's licensing for OS X, you do have to scare up an Intel Mac. So what? They start at under $300 on eBay...
Plus, you don't have to worry about Apple's overly litigious nature, a nature which helps keep zero day vulnerabilities undisclosed and unfixed.
LOLwut???
Given the very, very closed iOS environment, it is likely much easier to keep malware hidden and undiscovered.
It's really hard to discover something that doesn't exist. And, if something doesn't exist, there is hardly a need to "hide" it.
Why would someone trying to publish malware in the iOS App Store have to use their real identity? I'm fairly sure any successful malware distributor can get some fake credentials past Apple. Why would someone attempting to publish malware in the iOS App Store have any sort of attachment to any specific account with Apple?
Um, because you have to? An Apple ID (Apple Account) is required to not only be a developer, but also to submit Apps to the App Store. Next uninformed comment?
So your malware is discovered, your app is removed, and your account is no longer valid. Move on to the next set of fake credentials you have.
Yeah, and how many times do you need to do that to actually turn a reasonable profit?
The Beetles once said that they were bigger than Jesus and they got excellent pre--- oh wait... Never mind... I always feel bad for jobs. I bet you anything he hates Apple and wants to leave that place but he's chained there like a dog.
Proving you simply don't know shit about SJ.
He's rich enough that he simply doesn't DO anything he doesn't want to do.
However, although you may very well be correct about the technical potential being there; why don't we keep seeing a monthly parade of the same sort of stories of ACTUAL, REAL-WORLD examples of THEORETICAL iOS vulnerabilities ACTUALLY being exploited to steal user data, like we do with Android?
Maybe something to do with the fact that the DEVS. must first REGISTER with Apple, before they can get their App. even CONSIDERED for inclusion in the iOS App Store. That process alone apparently is enough (I would wager even without Apple's code review process) to make crooks think twice about even TRYING to publish malware on the App Store.
Kind of the same reason why a bank robber (at least a sane one) would never attempt to rob at gunpoint, the bank at which he has an account.
I OWN my Apple products. I am free to do with them as I please. Prove otherwise.
The statements made around here regarding Apple and being "control freaks" are simply ridiculous.
I want to put rockbox on my 6th generation ipod but I can't because with the 6th generation Apple decided to hide the firmware so nobody can figure out where it's installed to replace it.
I have also not found any way to update the firmware from Linux, and even putting music on it in Linux had to be reverse engineered.
Just because you don't seem to understand that most embedded CONSUMER products are code-protected, doesn't make the product evil. You probably can't replace the core OS in your microwave, either. TFB. Does that make GE/Dawoo/Toshiba/Litton/Panasonic/Samsung, et al, evil, too? An iPod cannot really be equated to a general-purpose computer. One is a consumer gadget with one clearly-defined set of functions, the other is a much more complex, multi-purpose, system.
PLENTY of protocols have to be reverse-engineered. As an embedded developer, I've done my share of that myself. So what? Lazy much?
And also, there are also PLENTY of embedded products that only have "updaters" for a particular OS. As a Mac owner who likes to do embedded development, I suffered for years with programming/debugging tools that would only work on Windows, and have owned more than one device that I couldn't update the firmware for with my Mac. Happens. Doesn't make the company evil. It's just something to consider when making your PERSONAL purchasing decisions.
This AC is proof of the fact the Apple is primarily a Marketing company. It is what they do best and they do it so well, that people blindly believe they are the best at everything despite any actual evidence.
Doesn't matter what the quality is of what you make if the marketing is so good that everyone believes it is the best and they must have it. That is marketing, not product engineering.
Well, as the person who originally posted the AC comment, I will tell you that I am an embedded developer with 30 years of experience, and with dozens of actual, successful, for-sale products under my belt. One was even a Finalist in the 2009 Design News "Golden Mousetrap" Awards (I didn't name the contest!). So I know just a little bit about what makes a successful "technology-based" product from an ENGINEERING standpoint.
Which is why I like Apple products. Because I understand the difference between PRICE and VALUE.
I hate to post a reply to my own comment, but a MINUS 1 MOD??? WTF, OVER?!?
The Apple-hating mods are simply getting out of control here. That's just asinine.
And yes, Apple would most definitely try to implant the idea that it *could* replace your laptop.
I'm pretty sure that the Keynote ( this snippet gets right to the point, in fact) that SJ did to introduce the iPad explained that it wasn't intended as a laptop replacement. And besides, why, oh, why would Apple, who is clearly making pretty thin (for them!) margins on the iPad (evidence by the fact that no one has beaten them yet on price, especially considering their use of a large, expensive IPS panel (which everyone else seems to skimp on), and their mega-impressive battery life), want to cannibalize the sales of their much-more-profitable (both in percentage of profit and in profit-dollars-per-unit) laptops (notebooks)?
As an iPad owner, I'm sure you have noticed that you can view the iPad from pretty much any angle more than 10 degrees off the surface of the display, and that you get pretty stellar battery life, too. Is that "form", or "function"?
And how about the smooth-as-glass responsiveness of the GUI. I haven't heard ANYONE bragging about how ANY Android-based device has a "glass-smooth" GUI.
But, I guess that's just "form over function", too, since no one is bothered by a stuttery, touch-ignoring, tablet interface, like the typical Android device exhibits. Afterall, even a half-baked touch-based UI will EVENTUALLY get you there. Anything else is just "form", right?
So, do you really count those product DESIGN attributes as exhalting "form over function", or are you willing to admit that maybe, just maybe, there was a little bit of ENGINEERING (rather than marketing) involved?
FYI, here is a pretty unbiased review of the Galaxy Tab v. the iPad. And remember, the iPad is, by all rumors, just about ready to release an updated iPad.
Guess we're ready to see some more improvements in "form over function", then, too...
One of the best. But it only works for them because they are also a brilliant design company, a brilliant engineering company, and have a visionary at the top making the big corporate direction decisions.
Couldn't have said it better myself! In fact, that's kind of the point my original, AC, comment was trying to make. Thanks for making it more succinctly.
Um, not really... They do have their fans, but best software / hardware is a bit of a stretch.
What they *do* have, is *control*. They very tightly control both software / hardware, and who can do what with it.
That gives the illusion of better quality, but it really only is a facade.
Are you kidding?
No one tells me what I can and can't do with my Mac. If I want to piss in it while it's compiling software of my own design, that I give away to the Russian Mafia (for example), do you really think that I will see the Black Apple SUVs pull up outside to confiscate my hardware?
If I want to use my iPad as a serving-tray for dinner, do you really think that SJ will be on the phone, telling me to stop it or else?
If Apple was so bent on "control", don't you think they would have instituted a bootROM on iOS devices that disallowed "jailbreaking", like Motorola did, and is obviously planning to make even worse for Android? Do you really think that they haven't discussed that?
If Apple was so bent on "control", why did they BROWBEAT the record companies into REMOVING DRM from ALL iTunes music?
I OWN my Apple products. I am free to do with them as I please. Prove otherwise.
The statements made around here regarding Apple and being "control freaks" are simply ridiculous.
This AC is proof of the fact the Apple is primarily a Marketing company. It is what they do best and they do it so well, that people blindly believe they are the best at everything despite any actual evidence.
Doesn't matter what the quality is of what you make if the marketing is so good that everyone believes it is the best and they must have it. That is marketing, not product engineering.
Well, as the person who originally posted the AC comment, I will tell you that I am an embedded developer with 30 years of experience, and with dozens of actual, successful, for-sale products under my belt. One was even a Finalist in the 2009 Design News "Golden Mousetrap" Awards (I didn't name the contest!). So I know just a little bit about what makes a successful "technology-based" product from an ENGINEERING standpoint.
Which is why I like Apple products. Because I understand the difference between PRICE and VALUE.
Point me to non-Apple version of the 13" MacBook Air.
Well, there was that Dell thing (can't remember the name. Something vaguely Latin-sounding, IIRC). Remember, it was more expensive than the Air, had WORSE specs, and lasted about 2 months as a product.
Meanwhile, the Air is soon to be at its third generation...
Slashdot Mirror
USB was an obscure curiosity when Apple aggressively adopted it in the original Bondi blue iMac. I clearly remember watching the market for USB peripherals be completely driven by demand from iMac (and then other Apple model) owners at a time when PC users stayed away from the technology because it was incompatible with all their PS2, serial and parallel port peripherals. Often the place to find USB equipment was in the Apple section in stores.
And Win98's improved USB support certainly helped too.
No, most of the Windows crowd still clings to their PS/2 mice and keyboards. The only thing that moved most Windows users into the USB arena was the fact that the peripheral manufacturers started dropping Parallel and Serial ports from Printers and Scanners (although I do still miss my SCSI scanners!).
But face it, none of that would have happened without the popularity of the iMac, and Apple's POV.
Plug time machine disk 1 in, make backup, unplug disk 1, take off site, plug in disk 2, make backup, rinse repeat with however many redundant copies you want. You could additionally set up a tape drive however its probably cheaper and easier for a small office to buy a few large external portable hard drives and rotate them instead of a tape drive and multiple tapes.
That's what we started doing about 5 years ago (with a Windows Server setup, though) after a theft left us with the DLT tapes... but no drive to restore with. Fortunately, for some unknown reason, the theives left the server; so, we didn't lose anything other than what was on the (then un-backed-up) workstations.
Since we had continual problems with our HP DLT drive, we took the opportunity to "upgrade" our backup system. We took one Firewire 800 external drive and stashed it up above the suspended ceiling. That backup was the absolutely most up-to-date. Then, we had a group of more FW 800 externals that we rotated offsite weekly, that we treated as if they were backup tapes. Had a bitch of a time convincing the backup s/w to work like that (as I said, this was a Windows server, not Time Machine); but eventually we got it working, and it worked great.
BTW, the external drives were purchased with the $7k we got from the insurance co. to replace the DLT drive; so it really was a win-win situation.
Hold the control key down and use the 'scroll wheel' or two finger verticle slide on the track pad. Zooms the whole desktop regardless of apps, even works in things like VMware machines with games running on them.
Wow! Cool, thanks!
so the original comment about no info on screen resolution is modded up 3 as an insightful crock and I am the first to point out its a crock and remain on -1 WTF?
Welcome to the wonderful world of slashdot-modding. Where "I like to lick butts" gets a +5 Insightful, and any mention in the least supportive of Apple gets you downmodded into infinity.
Interesting, it seems it is basically mini Display Port with PCI Express at 10Gb/s on top. I welcome that. Over copper for now, but I guess the 100Gb/s version expected in 2020 may utilise fibre.
And did you notice that it has really low latency and good time synchronisation, and was designed particularly with audio and video pros in mind?
This will truly be a great FireWire replacement!
Wow, like who didn't see that coming, and the death of the XServer, when the switch to Intel processors from PPC was announced?
For those who don't get it, enterprise bought the XServer because it had two bad boy (at the time) G5 processors with a 1Gz bus per processor instead of just one like Intel had. They mostly didn't care about OS X Server all that much.
Now of course Apple is now all Intel processors, so it negates the need to buy the higher priced XServer (why it was discontinued) and thus run OS X Server, thus it's now incorporated into OS X as a cost savings / hobbyist move.
I'm just wondering when the MacPro is going to be discontinued, what consumer needs 16 cores?
And you think that only "consumers" purchase the Mac Pro?
Sorry, the Mac Pro is named that for a reason; it isn't a "consumer" machine. It shows just what OS X can do with the right hardware behind it, and apparently it is news to you that there are (believe it or not!) computer users that are far above the typical "consumer" level.
That is why I believe you and I benefited from Gates and Jobs with their singular vision and ability to get everyone on the same page. With FOSS you have 50 million guys reinventing the wheel (how many text editors are they up to now, 200?) and everyone "scratching their own itch" instead of working together as a cohesive unit. This leads to lost time and wasted efforts (how many distros are they up to now,500+?) and just makes a mess in the marketplace, ala what Apple had under Sculley with the Performa line, or Gates having to keep both Win9X and WinNT until he could merge the OS lines.
But sadly without real leadership and cohesive unity what you get is 50 million little fiefdoms and a HELL of a lot of zealotry. Too many here are of the "ZOMG M$ ZOMG!!" that it feels more and more like Boycott Novell instead of a place where we discuss the merits/demerits of the TECH, and no matter how many times you point out the numbers don't lie and something needs to change to draw the users you just get labeled a "paid shill" (I wish, where is my check Ballmer?) or astrorufer for pointing out the emperor has his Willie swinging in the breeze. If it was gonna sell it would have done so by now which is why I support what Shuttleworth is trying to do. He may fail but at least he isn't just repackaging the same shit and expecting people to "do it the Linux way" which has been shown time and time again to be a giant "DO NOT WANT" as far as customers goes.
BTW since you are a Mac guy you might want to check this out for one day only Paragon are giving away their excellent Windows/Macs interoperability tools on GAOTD. I have picked up several Paragon tools because of trying them on GAOTD and they really are top notch. These will give you read/write access between Windows and OSX at near native speed either way. Pretty cool and you can't beat free!
You're preachin' to the choir here, man!
/, And my voice is getting hoarse as hell...
/. experience degrade non-gracefully over time. Sad, really.
I've been singing the same song for about 7 years here on
I guess it will never change here: And in fact, entropy seems to be making the entire
Anyway, thanks for the link, and I will check that stuff out!
Because nothin' beats GOOD free software...
I find it sickening, personally, that the parent's post has been downmodded,
Oh gosh, crocodile tears! Get a life, you obviously need one.
simply because bratty Linux zealots can't take the truth.
Actually, the brat and zealot here is you. Grow up please. Either that or you're a shill fraudulently misrepresenting yourself as a third party. "hairyfeet"'s post is deliberately trying to deceive the reader by misrepresenting paid installations (sales) as all installations. That's dishonest and typical of the alleycat ethics of the M$ marketing department. The world would be a better place if they grew a pair and stopped engaging in wholesale misrepresentation and fraud.
---
Paid marketers are the worst zealots.
Oh, how I wish I was paid for my opinions!
And, as hairyfeet predicted, and right on cue, he is accused of being a "shill".
Sorry that you arrested-development types can't handle the truth. Perhaps you oughta start listening, and watching, what everyone REALLY wants; instead of TELLING them why they are stupid for not wanting what YOU want.
Oh don't worry I expected it. if you look at my past comments they are always evenly split between insightful and troll/flamebait, with the nasty mods coming from zealots that stick their heads in the sand and refuse to accept the truth. instead of actual debate all you get is accusations of "shill" astroturfer, etc.
And I agree wholeheartedly that Apple fanboys ain't got shit on the RDF that surrounds FOSSies as I call them. I've found there is a BIG difference between a FOSS users and a FOSSie, but sadly it seems the FOSSies are winning control and the fact that any that dare to say anything other than "Gee Biff, isn't Linux perfect? It sure is Bill, and RMS's beard smells like roses!" gets modded down is just proof of that.
Man, dontcha know it!
If you want to see a victim of some serious punish-modding, you need look no further than my comment history. I went from Excellent Karma to Terrible Karma in one day's worth of battling the Linux Faithful
With my Username, you can guess that I am an Apple supporter; however, that doesn't change the fact that, in fifteen years, Linux really is, for all practical purposes (and the plural of anecdote is not data), no closer to being accepted on the desktop now than when Linus wrote his fateful email. A shame, really; but it is the constant, immature, backbiting and lack, of (horrors!) or-gan-i-za-tion, that will forever relegate Linux (and also, sadly, a zillion other wonderful F/OSS projects!) to the statistical detritus level that they now "enjoy". And considering the number of F/OSS projects that my favorite OS (OS X) incorporates, that is of more than just an academic concern.
As to your suggestions on how to "modernize" Linux, one of the fundamental design limitations keeping LInux from being ready for prime time is also one of its performance strengths, and so will never be changed: That is, the macrokernel architecture. That, and the F/OSS zealots insisting on the source code to every driver (guyz, there IS such a concept as a TRADE SECRET, ya know...), application, API, etc. But what they DON'T get is that Joe and Jane SUV-driver simply don' be' a-carin' 'bout no source code. They jus' wanna do what they wanna do, when they wanna do it. And Linux isn't there, either; let alone ready for the corporate desktop...
No real progress. In over fifteen years. Why?
I find it sickening, personally, that the parent's post has been downmodded, simply because bratty Linux zealots can't take the truth. I have made the exact same points before myself, and now have the Bad Karma to show for it.
Ya know, Apple fans have NOTHING on Linux fans, as far as "Reality Distortion" goes. There is nobody as out-of-touch with the COMMON user than a LInux fan.
Except that prison numbers are vastly inflated - if our drug laws actually banned all recreational drugs, and not just the kind of drugs black people use, we'd see a large increase in white inmates.
You are talking about the United States, right?
If so, please point me at the recreational drug that is legal (alcohol doesn't count for the purposes of this question, and is moot because it is used in abundance by all races). Please. I want to go buy some, now!
No, the prison system is disproportionately black, partially because of some blacks' own doing, and partially because the Judicial system, and especially JURIES, are disproportionately WHITE. It is far easier for a Persecutor, er, Prosecutor to "demonize" and "dehumanize" a person of another race. Then, when the jury sees a defendant not as a person,but rather just as a "race", the jury feels no pangs of compassion, and most of the time, no interest in deeply examining the evidence against, said defendant. And the (predominantly white) Prosecutors use that tactic to up their "conviction rates", and thus their chances for reelection/career advancement, every single day.
BTW, I am caucasian; so this is not a case of making excuses for my own race. Nor is it making excuses for the failings of another race. The GGGGP actually had some salient points. However, his, er, "delivery" left something to be desired.
However, YOUR comments about the drug thing are just silly, Mr. "I'm afraid to own my own words" AC.
BTW, what ARE the "drugs black people use", as opposed to the "drugs white people use"?
One button mouse, almost destroying Apple, delaying the move to Intel because he wanted to use chips that were not used by "real" computer makers, Apple 3 firestarter meant business still cannot take them seriously.
Let's take these in order:
One button mouse: First off, remember, this was 1981-83, when these decisions were made. Nearly no one in the regular population (and even most computer "experts") even knows what a computer "mouse" is at that time. Jef Raskin wanted a multi-button (up to FIVE) mouse. SJ did not. And at the time, Xerox PARC (I think), or maybe it was M.I.T., had conducted "usability" studies that showed, hands down (or mouse-buttons-down) that a one-button mouse was far easier for MOST people to learn. So, the one-button mouse was decided upon on the LISA, and then adopted on the Mac. See this article for some mouse history. However, that was then. So, that's why, ever since MacOS 8.6 (1999) Macs have directly supported two button (and now more-button) mice, and MacOS has actually supported "contextual menus" with a Ctrl-Click since MacOS 8.0 (1997). This very informed article might clear up any misconceptions about the advisability (still!) of a one-button mouse, and the Mac's support of same. That's why Apple's OWN multi-button mice (I think up to 5 buttons are definable) still default to acting like a one-button mouse. Because, for MOST people, it IS the better choice. Even now. But, this is one tired meme. Stop it. You're embarrassing yourself. Oh, and BTW, according to the Wikipedia article cited above, Microsoft really didn't start supporting a second mouse button until the release of WIndows '95. So, considering that Apple added contextual menus only two years later, and full two-button support two years after that, Apple wasn't nearly as late to the "right-click" party as the haters make them out to be.
Now, shall we start naming the Apple "industry FIRSTS"??? Of course not; the list is far too long...
Almost Destroying Apple: Um, I think you have Jobs confused with Sculley, who nearly killed Apple by LICENSING MacOS to third parties (at the urging of BILL GATES!), and signing a technology agreement with Microsoft to allow them to basically steal Apple's superior GUI code (and even THEN, WIndows 95 SUUUCKED compared to MacOS). See here, and here. However, thanks for trying. And I don't think anyone who is not purely delusional would characterize Apple's performance since Jobs' return as anything other than "phenomenal".
Delaying the move to Intel: Hmmm, I wonder who's decision it was to keep an INTEL version of OS X (and all the core "iLife" apps, etc.) up-to-date from 1999 (going back to Rhapsody/NeXTStep/Mac OS X Server 1.0) to 2005 (when the move to Intel was announced). Jobs had been REPEATEDLY promised two things from IBM: The first one was a G5 CPU running at 3.0GHz "real soon now"; and the second was a low-power G5 to put in a laptop. But IBM let him down. Repeatedly. And so, after it was patently obvious that IBM wasn't coming through (because they were too busy chasing the Cell CPU), Jobs (along with the Board of Directors!) made a pretty painful decision to make a HUGE platform change. And, BTW, they pulled it off REALLY seamlessly, too. Oh, and if your definition of "real computer makers" is limited to only those who use X86 architecture, then you are, by definition calling Sun, IBM, SGi (when there was an SGi), DEC (when there was a DEC) and others NOT "real" computer makers. Now do you see how stupid your statement sounds? BTW, you do realize, of course, that the PowerPC architecture is the little brother of IBM's "Power" architecture, which of cour
Wow.. aren't you smart..
But from a purely biological evolution standpoint, Darwin needed but not God, it's not natural at all. It's natural to reproduce and if you didn't know homosexual relations wouldn't lead to reproduction, I could see how you would think it's natural. But it's not. And yes, there are a lot of unnatural sexual acts out there that isn't limited to just homosexuality.
How's if Darwin had intended us to fly he would have evolved us wings? Yea.. something still doesn't sound quite right.
Well, at least sumdumass has a self-identifying username. Even his username is illiterate.
Capitalization jackassery aside, there are several possible explanations. You are making a whole bunch of UNREASONABLE simplifying assumptions about the situation. And actually, you do have to register with Google to publish in the Android Market Place, which is actually irrelevant because the malware from this story was distributed though a DIFFERENT *stomps foot* NON-GOOGLE app store.
And yet, the Androids count all the fly-by-night "App Stores" as an advantage for Android...
For one, you don't have to buy a Google computer or Android phone to do any sort of development for Android. So it's quite a bit simpler to do security work on Android.
I submit that you will, at some point, have to buy an Android phone (and maybe more than one!) to actually debug your App. Your comment regarding a "Google computer" is of course, a non-sequitur.
BTW, you don't necessarily have to buy an iOS device of any kind to do iOS development. You see, Apple provides (as part of the $99 Dev License) a (all together now) debugger and emulator. People actually can do iOS development without purchasing a single iOS device. Unless you are willing to violate Apple's licensing for OS X, you do have to scare up an Intel Mac. So what? They start at under $300 on eBay...
Plus, you don't have to worry about Apple's overly litigious nature, a nature which helps keep zero day vulnerabilities undisclosed and unfixed.
LOLwut???
Given the very, very closed iOS environment, it is likely much easier to keep malware hidden and undiscovered.
It's really hard to discover something that doesn't exist. And, if something doesn't exist, there is hardly a need to "hide" it.
Why would someone trying to publish malware in the iOS App Store have to use their real identity? I'm fairly sure any successful malware distributor can get some fake credentials past Apple. Why would someone attempting to publish malware in the iOS App Store have any sort of attachment to any specific account with Apple?
Um, because you have to? An Apple ID (Apple Account) is required to not only be a developer, but also to submit Apps to the App Store. Next uninformed comment?
So your malware is discovered, your app is removed, and your account is no longer valid. Move on to the next set of fake credentials you have.
Yeah, and how many times do you need to do that to actually turn a reasonable profit?
The Beetles once said that they were bigger than Jesus and they got excellent pre--- oh wait... Never mind... I always feel bad for jobs. I bet you anything he hates Apple and wants to leave that place but he's chained there like a dog.
Proving you simply don't know shit about SJ.
He's rich enough that he simply doesn't DO anything he doesn't want to do.
Jealousy is unbecoming, ya know...
He's done enough damage to personal computing for one lifetime
Exactly what DAMAGE has SJ done to "personal computing"?
Seriously.
The iOS app store can have it's fair share of malware too. It's easy to hide snooping software behind a simple game for example. In fact, all apps can access the contacts list, recent youtube searches, email settings and even non-password field keystrokes. When developers submit apps they only submit the binary and not the source code so Apple's app approval monkeys basically only cover what they can see. This "walled garden" argument is stupid for this reason.
However, although you may very well be correct about the technical potential being there; why don't we keep seeing a monthly parade of the same sort of stories of ACTUAL, REAL-WORLD examples of THEORETICAL iOS vulnerabilities ACTUALLY being exploited to steal user data, like we do with Android?
Maybe something to do with the fact that the DEVS. must first REGISTER with Apple, before they can get their App. even CONSIDERED for inclusion in the iOS App Store. That process alone apparently is enough (I would wager even without Apple's code review process) to make crooks think twice about even TRYING to publish malware on the App Store.
Kind of the same reason why a bank robber (at least a sane one) would never attempt to rob at gunpoint, the bank at which he has an account.
I OWN my Apple products. I am free to do with them as I please. Prove otherwise. The statements made around here regarding Apple and being "control freaks" are simply ridiculous.
I want to put rockbox on my 6th generation ipod but I can't because with the 6th generation Apple decided to hide the firmware so nobody can figure out where it's installed to replace it.
I have also not found any way to update the firmware from Linux, and even putting music on it in Linux had to be reverse engineered.
Just because you don't seem to understand that most embedded CONSUMER products are code-protected, doesn't make the product evil. You probably can't replace the core OS in your microwave, either. TFB. Does that make GE/Dawoo/Toshiba/Litton/Panasonic/Samsung, et al, evil, too? An iPod cannot really be equated to a general-purpose computer. One is a consumer gadget with one clearly-defined set of functions, the other is a much more complex, multi-purpose, system.
PLENTY of protocols have to be reverse-engineered. As an embedded developer, I've done my share of that myself. So what? Lazy much?
And also, there are also PLENTY of embedded products that only have "updaters" for a particular OS. As a Mac owner who likes to do embedded development, I suffered for years with programming/debugging tools that would only work on Windows, and have owned more than one device that I couldn't update the firmware for with my Mac. Happens. Doesn't make the company evil. It's just something to consider when making your PERSONAL purchasing decisions.
This AC is proof of the fact the Apple is primarily a Marketing company. It is what they do best and they do it so well, that people blindly believe they are the best at everything despite any actual evidence.
Doesn't matter what the quality is of what you make if the marketing is so good that everyone believes it is the best and they must have it. That is marketing, not product engineering.
Well, as the person who originally posted the AC comment, I will tell you that I am an embedded developer with 30 years of experience, and with dozens of actual, successful, for-sale products under my belt. One was even a Finalist in the 2009 Design News "Golden Mousetrap" Awards (I didn't name the contest!). So I know just a little bit about what makes a successful "technology-based" product from an ENGINEERING standpoint.
Which is why I like Apple products. Because I understand the difference between PRICE and VALUE.
I hate to post a reply to my own comment, but a MINUS 1 MOD??? WTF, OVER?!?
The Apple-hating mods are simply getting out of control here. That's just asinine.
And yes, Apple would most definitely try to implant the idea that it *could* replace your laptop.
I'm pretty sure that the Keynote ( this snippet gets right to the point, in fact) that SJ did to introduce the iPad explained that it wasn't intended as a laptop replacement. And besides, why, oh, why would Apple, who is clearly making pretty thin (for them!) margins on the iPad (evidence by the fact that no one has beaten them yet on price, especially considering their use of a large, expensive IPS panel (which everyone else seems to skimp on), and their mega-impressive battery life), want to cannibalize the sales of their much-more-profitable (both in percentage of profit and in profit-dollars-per-unit) laptops (notebooks)?
As an iPad owner, I'm sure you have noticed that you can view the iPad from pretty much any angle more than 10 degrees off the surface of the display, and that you get pretty stellar battery life, too. Is that "form", or "function"?
And how about the smooth-as-glass responsiveness of the GUI. I haven't heard ANYONE bragging about how ANY Android-based device has a "glass-smooth" GUI.
But, I guess that's just "form over function", too, since no one is bothered by a stuttery, touch-ignoring, tablet interface, like the typical Android device exhibits. Afterall, even a half-baked touch-based UI will EVENTUALLY get you there. Anything else is just "form", right? So, do you really count those product DESIGN attributes as exhalting "form over function", or are you willing to admit that maybe, just maybe, there was a little bit of ENGINEERING (rather than marketing) involved?
FYI, here is a pretty unbiased review of the Galaxy Tab v. the iPad. And remember, the iPad is, by all rumors, just about ready to release an updated iPad.
Guess we're ready to see some more improvements in "form over function", then, too...
Karma has hoisted the publishing industry by their own petard, and they've gotten stuck with a hardware partner who is just like them.
Right. Because it was, afterall, the record companies, for example, who begged Apple to remove the DRM from iTunes music.
Oh, wait...
And BTW, it's actually "[...] hoist[ed] WITH their own petar[d]". If you're going to quote Shakespere, then at least get it right.
Apple is a wonderful marketing company.
One of the best. But it only works for them because they are also a brilliant design company, a brilliant engineering company, and have a visionary at the top making the big corporate direction decisions.
Couldn't have said it better myself! In fact, that's kind of the point my original, AC, comment was trying to make. Thanks for making it more succinctly.
Um, not really... They do have their fans, but best software / hardware is a bit of a stretch. What they *do* have, is *control*. They very tightly control both software / hardware, and who can do what with it. That gives the illusion of better quality, but it really only is a facade.
Are you kidding?
No one tells me what I can and can't do with my Mac. If I want to piss in it while it's compiling software of my own design, that I give away to the Russian Mafia (for example), do you really think that I will see the Black Apple SUVs pull up outside to confiscate my hardware?
If I want to use my iPad as a serving-tray for dinner, do you really think that SJ will be on the phone, telling me to stop it or else?
If Apple was so bent on "control", don't you think they would have instituted a bootROM on iOS devices that disallowed "jailbreaking", like Motorola did, and is obviously planning to make even worse for Android? Do you really think that they haven't discussed that?
If Apple was so bent on "control", why did they BROWBEAT the record companies into REMOVING DRM from ALL iTunes music?
I OWN my Apple products. I am free to do with them as I please. Prove otherwise.
The statements made around here regarding Apple and being "control freaks" are simply ridiculous.
This AC is proof of the fact the Apple is primarily a Marketing company. It is what they do best and they do it so well, that people blindly believe they are the best at everything despite any actual evidence.
Doesn't matter what the quality is of what you make if the marketing is so good that everyone believes it is the best and they must have it. That is marketing, not product engineering.
Well, as the person who originally posted the AC comment, I will tell you that I am an embedded developer with 30 years of experience, and with dozens of actual, successful, for-sale products under my belt. One was even a Finalist in the 2009 Design News "Golden Mousetrap" Awards (I didn't name the contest!). So I know just a little bit about what makes a successful "technology-based" product from an ENGINEERING standpoint.
Which is why I like Apple products. Because I understand the difference between PRICE and VALUE.
Point me to non-Apple version of the 13" MacBook Air.
Well, there was that Dell thing (can't remember the name. Something vaguely Latin-sounding, IIRC). Remember, it was more expensive than the Air, had WORSE specs, and lasted about 2 months as a product.
Meanwhile, the Air is soon to be at its third generation...