You make it sound like Google doesn't care about making money, of course they do. In this case they are supporting there own product (which is not only inferior in amny ways, but more signifcantly lacks the wide spread hardware support of H.264) so they can not pay for supporting H.264, a better well supported standard which, while not free, is free to users and reasonable for media developers.
If it was really about "openess" then Google should have dumped Flash at the same time.
I was at Google I/O this year and my immediate reaction to Google TV is that this is just a way for Google to make ad revenue instead of the (or at very least in addition to) the Networks. Google does a lot of cool stuff, but in the end everything they do, they do to generate Ad revenue, and TV ad revenue eclipses Web revenue by quite a bit so Google want's in.
This patent isn't about jailbreaking, it's about disabling a stolen devices. The point is to detect usage trends or biometrics of the intended user and if the device detects anomalies it can act upon them by locating, disabling or other things to protect the data and possible recover the device.
Allegedly Apple is also working on something like this so rather then logging in every time another user users a device.
"I understand full well that the iPad is only a fraction of what it could be if it had been produced by a company other than Apple"
Om yea okay, because all of those other companies are putting out all those other so much better tablets running those better OS's. </sarcasm >
Apple might not be the darling of geekdom anymore (something I don't think they every really aspired to), but the fact is, no other company would have produced anything close to the iPad, and as of today no other company has. To say that some other company and OS could have done this so much better is just simply ignoring reality and replacing it with some pseudo dogmatic wishful thinking.
1st - Apple doesn't have a Monopoly on anything (not even iPhone/iPad applications since you can create some pretty significantly cool apps using HTML5 and WebKit JS system hooks and just through up a web page). 2nd - It could be much easier to argue the Flash has a Monopoly on RIA than Apple has on anything. 3rd - Comparing consumer electronic devices to computers is not a valid comparison.
Here's where Adobe looses: 1. They are only suing Apple, not every other CES device that doesn't support Flash (Where's the suit against Nintendo who have even more restrictive development requirements? What about Sony?) So the question is raised, why is Adobe only targeting Apple? This is something Adobe doesn't want to answer. 2. As stated Apple is nowhere near a monopoly... there is tons of competition (Blackberry has a higher market share already. Android is growing fastest, WinMo 7 is on it's way, eventually Nokia (the #1 mobile phone company BTW will need to do something)... not even close. 3. Apple could easily state it has a legal obligation to it's shareholders *not* to support Flash since that would cede control of it's own product to a third party, while at the same time creating an impediment to future innovations (and this is a very strong argument and in itself is likely enough to stop and legal action in its tracks).
Oh here's the kicker... Apple doesn't need to sign it's own agreement, and can selectively enforce it with 3rd parties, so it's possible this is clearly defensive and Apple has 3.3.1 to protect itself so when Apple upgrades the iPhone OS and all the Flash (other interpretive frameworks) generated stuff breaks Apple can just point and say "hey... their fault, not only does there crap suck, but they violated their agreement with us, can't sue us we're covered, not only that but now we have to sue the developer so we can refund all our consumers that bought their crappy app that no longer works since they didn't follow our rules"
I'd like to know what browser and what computer he was using. In other words: what bias if any?
...because every time something microsoft/apple is better than apple/microsoft there must either be some bias or fanboisim, because everyone knows that microsoft/apple is always best at everything.
Hardware acceleration (and dedicated hardware in general) is much more efficient (and for manufacturers, much less expensive) then general purpose processing. So while your computer may have a processor that can handle this, many smaller consumer devices don't... additionally, for portable content you need energy efficiency... how long would you computer processor run on a cell phone battery?
Also... hardware acceleration isn't just for play back. It's also for video creation/production. Many pro video systems take raw video and encode it to h.264 on the fly in real time (For SD/HD streaming and well as broadcast distribution). And then there's other studio productions where hardware acceleration allows working with real time effects... etc.
The reality is that playback is a very small part of the puzzle... If you want to push Ogg-Theroa as a standard then you need the product creators to use this, and... there is no compelling reason to do so.
I support much Open-Source software (both with my time & contributions and direct financial support)... that said, in the real world you pick the best solution for the problem, and in this case Ogg-Theroa is not it. And this is no disrespect to the development of this... this is hard stuff to do and it's really incredible that Ogg-Theora is where it is today, unfortunately it falls short of h.264. Also... pushing an inferior standard down the throats of a web viewing public, isn't going to win the open source model any friends.
I'm so sick of that argument... "Well just wait... Ogg-Theora will get so much better in the future"... Guess what... h.264 also exist in the that timeline and encoders will improve, hardware acceleration will improve, and by the time OT is where h.264 is today (and it has a long way to go with higher bit rate content), there will be even more reasons to use h.264.
First of all this is a beta product that isn't shipping on anything and while it's trendy to think beta software is fully functional (Thanks Google) with Apple, beta generally means, "really this isn't finished, there's still stuff that's messed up here." (In fact this would apply to most Apple.00 products as well, which is fine since historically.1 or.01 is rolls a few weeks after the initial release.) In other words, stuff like this is to be expected.
Second, Safari has for the longest time provided this very nifty "Private Browsing" which will eliminate all of these issues.
Finally, if you dig in the preferences you can turn a bunch of this stuff off if it bothers you so much. Still feed the fire of Mac hate... whatever.
...or if you have some strange issues with Microsoft, or don't have access to a native version of Word, Open Office will work. Word is actually quite good at this sort of stuff, plus this will give you the most flexibility in the long run (at least as far as publishers go). The exception is if you are self publishing or handling copy edit/tech edit/ and layout yourself. See the problem with other tools is that you will find that most production people (including copy/development/ and many tech editors) are trained to use Word, and using something else will a create huge workflow issues and may require some sacrifices in the production process, resulting in an overall negative effect on both the timeliness, editorial effectiveness, and cost of producing your book.
Now many publishers are at least considering the use of docbook or a similar XML type format (since often most books end up in XML for easy output to various print and online mediums), but for now it's just not an ideal format either since the tools haven't evolved to be that useable for many editors.
See the thing is, I assume you want a well trained copy editor and such, and many copy editors, are good at language, not technology, so they just don't work well with LyTeX or XML or whatever.
Now again... if you are self publishing, do whatever you want. Otherwise if you don't use Word (or something Word compatible) you will be limiting your publishing options significantly.
(BTW unless you are self publishing, InDesign is a terrible option... it's a layout program not a writing tool, and many publishers still use Quark, or some other layout tools.)
Try Python, PHP, Ruby, Erlang, Bash, Lisp or any other really-high level language. You'll be pleasantly surprised and maybe you will also see why people dislike Java. There are three languages that can run on the client: Java, JavaScript, and ActionScript. Everything else either must be downloaded and installed before running or requires the delay of a round-trip to the server after each action that the user takes. That comment is just silly. Everything must be downloaded and installed (Java, a Capable Web Browser.... etc.) and when executing a application and either you need to download everything from the server to begin with or you will need to make "round-trips." Round trips using things such as AJAX are usually more efficient when dealing with large chunks of data because you only need to download the specific data you are after. Furthermore server side applications allow a developer to concentrate and scale the necessary processing power where on has some control over it. There is a place for client side development, but if we are talking web based applications they should be as light as possible. Also when dealing with clients you have to make lots of assumptions, deal with unending security issues and compromises and still fail on a number of platforms. Either way Java fails... this was the promise of Java at it inception (oh the bouncing heads!)... today if you want to step outside JavaScript for web enabled rich clients you are better served with Flash/Flex over Java.
Did anyone actually explore these? It's fun to poke fun of the EULA, but most people who toss around the vulnerability stuff probably don't understand it. The spoofing issue is silly in that if the "trusted" site is really trusted, then they likely wouldn't insert javascript to open an exploitative frame in a window with their address. (BTW... the originators code is mess, in fact his example of this alleged flaw doesn't work.)
The other "vulnerability" throws an exception, as it should, rather then allow an exploitation of Windows inability to deal with long filenames gracefully. Again... Safari could handle the exception more gracefully, but there is no vulnerability here.
Nothing to see here... so let's make fun of the EULA
I've really enjoyed reading lot's of the ignorant comments people are making about the Indy 500, so in short let me explain why this is, not only important from a sporting perspective but also from and environmental and technical perspective as well.
1. The Indianapolis is the biggest annual sporting event. Period. More people attend, and more people watch on TV worldwide then any other event. If you wanted to get the message about linux out there, this would be the place to do it.
2. This year all Indy cars run on Ethanol 85. While this isn't solar, it's far better then the traditional Gas of the past (hell I believe NASCAR is just now *thinking* about phasing out leaded gas).
3. The engineering involved in these cars is amazing, not only as far as engine development (Honda had relatively little time to develop these engines to run on Ethanol 85, and have done so admirably). Also, the engines themselves are interesting in that they are normally aspirated (i.e. no Turbo, so SuperCharger just incredibly engineered 8Cyl Engines That can drive none stop at high speeds for ling distances. FWIW Honda wasn't picked to be the only engine supplier for indy cars, they got that way through attrition. The last year there were multiple engine manufacturers Honda so blew away Chevy that it just didn't make sense for them to continue.
4. Engineering! Since the engines these days are identical (as are the tires) there is a great deal of parity initially, however engineers get to figure out best race packages using aerodynamics, gear boxes, Tire Pressure etc, and on top of that figure in fuel mileage (which should be interesting since as mentioned, the fuel is different this year) tire wear, etc.
5. Of course given all that, the Drivers and Pit Crews make the difference. Of all the drivers (33) my guess would be that only about half of them have the mental toughness and backing human element to actually have a realistic chance of winning (and of that only a handful would have good vegas odds).
6. Then of course there's a shred of luck and the unexpected that always makes this totally unpredictable. Weather, Freak accidents, mechanical issues, human error, just being in the wrong place at the wrong time, all can have a hugh effect on the outcome.
7. Finally... Indy Car racing is by far the most competitive racing series out there today. Lot's of passing, and lot's of skill (a minor mistake in an indy car, and you are in the wall with your car breaking away into pieces).
8. Technological advancement. The Indy Car Series (and the IMS (Indianapolis Motor Speedway)) Have been at the forefront of many automotive advances. The Ethanol thing is one recent, but the technologies devised for driver safety have not only been adopted by almost every other racing series, but have also been instrumental in the development of safety features for all cars built today.
I saw the ad for this on HBO and was pretty psyched, but it didn't seem like it was getting promoted heavily, not enough to get enough people really concerned (as they should be). But like great things in this wonderfully Karmic universe, Diebold starts fussing and inadvertently calls mass attention to something that normally would have slipped under the lemmings radar.
The real beauty of it, is that this was a story that the mainstream wasn't touching for whatever reason (hell maybe they are really the ones in control of the voting machines), but now that Diebold is making a fuss.. now that's News! Whoo hoo... boy howdy, get 'er done... whatever... life is funny.
Obviously you forgot the entire Centris and Performa lines.
Well, the G3 Performas were perhaps the biggest lemons in Apple's history, but other then that they were all fairly solid machines, though by no means the top performers, Centris's too were quite nice though they were missing the dedicated FP Processor that the Quarda's had (And Quadra's were BTW fast and fairly bullet proof computers)
You probably also forgot how hard it is to upgrade memory in the stupid iMac.
You mean remove a screw, pop out the protective cover, and insert RAM?
You probably never knew about the B&W G3 ATA problem, where most UDMA devices will experience data loss during periods of high CPU load. On a 300 MHz G3, that's every moment.
This point I'll give you
You've clearly either forgotten or never knew that the SCSI bus on the IIfx was nonstandard and required a wonky terminator to work correctly.
All SCSI requires termination, this isn't an apple thing. Apple did use that strange 25 pin SCSI connection which quickly became standard, not that it mattered much since other then high end workstations and servers, nobody else used SCSI because they were too cheap.
Meanwhile lately I've been using a Dell Dimension D600 (with a sony battery! I'm afraid! But then, apple uses sony batteries too) running Ubuntu and every bit of hardware on it is perfection. I even got the stupid winmodem to work although it wasn't detected out of the box like every other bit of hardware in my system. (The wacom tablet wasn't autodetected either, but it's RS232, not USB - it's one of those old "Digitizer II" units.)
lol... hardware perfection you say, and yet half the hardware wasn't recognized, and you battery may explode at any moment. Ummm ok. Seriously though a high percentage of Dell's are just fine computers, the difference is that while some people are satisfied with "it works" other demand that it "works well".
I'm not saying that Dell is better than Apple, just that your broad generalizations are either ignorant or revisionist. Besides, Apple sends their designs off to Foxconn to be built, you might as well buy something from ASUS - they also use Foxconn.
Did Apple design the ASUS stuff? you seem to be confusing manufacturing with design, not the same thing.
Ummm yea and when he zumajack's the girl it's only good for 3 plays. That's like taking your date to White Castle, leaving in the middle of the night and not calling her again.... smooth.
Disney would buy Sony (with some part being sold off to Apple)
MS would have nothing to gain by buying Sony except to just put them out of business. Even though MS is getting more aggressive in competing directly in the Hardware business, buying Sony would freak out the Dell's and HP's of the world (And honestly the anti-trust gov't types would have to be smoking something real good to let this one get through... essentially MS would likely have to sell off the hardware stuff, leaving just the media, which while interesting to MS would turn away the other media people and make MS's media/DRM play more difficult for them).
Disney on the other hand would be a perfect fit. They would add the media to their portfolio (give them more theme park ride possibilities even) The PS3 is great since Disney like to publish Games... They could hire the right game developers and go all Nintendo on everyone (in stead of Mario though, think Mickey). Of course this would benefit Apple indirectly since well their interests are currently tied together pretty strongly (iTunes now gets Sony movies, and has more leverage in future iTunes Music negotiations), yet still Apple maintains the guise of neutrality. The computer hardware would likely get sold off (Sony Laptops are quite cool). The software could get sold off too (maybe to Apple, Combining Acid IP with Garageband, Vegas with iMovie, FCP, maybe creating a PC version of iMovie and GarageBand?). The Camera business, Chip making, and all that could continue under the Sony name or get sold off as well, heck the peripheral stuff would also mesh well with Apple (except the Walkman but again the IP could be valuable).
Of course Steve Jobs could make this happen without too much problem making a win-win for both of his companies.
Quick lesson... open iTunes, go to the preferences, click the advanced icon and then the importing tab. Look in the "Import Using" drop down menu a gee... a lossless format that will work on you iPod! Ok it may not be "open" I suppose you really just want FLAC. Whatever. Oh... and FWIW *all* digital music is compressed.
So my question is: if Apple thinks Ruby on Rails is such hot shit, why doesn't they just upgrade their version to 1.8.4 via Software Update?
Because it's probably not fully tested to work with Tiger. The only system updates you get with Software Update and bug fixes and security fixes. Occasionally you'll get something else which works behind the scenes with an updated iApp as well (there have been minor CoreImage and other framework pieces updated this way).
This is just good sense, it's stability vs. cutting edge. Also it can be a very bad thing to update the system incrementally (Ask Microsoft who have been bitten by this many times... often updating one thing can have unexpected results on others.
Also, for a developers interested in using Rails, updating Ruby is fairly trivial. I would also add that often even if Apple includes the latest version of something you may want to compile it yourself anyway (Apache, PHP. MySQL are good examples of things that people will often *upgrade* right out of the box).
I'm no expert at Mac or Linux, but last time I checked, if you unplug the IDE (whatever generation of drive data ribbon cable its at now) ribbon cable from your drive while it still has power to it, it kinda does a little thing called turning every platter on the drive into a coaster
good thing iMacs use SATA rather then IDE then isn't it.
Damn dude, that bullet just went off in your head!
Apple didn't remove anything, or do anything sinister as you suggest. Apple used the latest BIOS technology available, rather then the dinosaur archaic BIOS's used in Win/Tel computers today. Why not bitch about the fact that they have no 8" floppy drive either so now you can't even play you vintage TRS80 games on it.... I'm mean HOW DARE APPLE... not letting you run you TRS 80 Applications.
Now we will see Nemo 2, Nemo 3 (dvd only release) and a Nemo tv series, with each one getting a little crappier. Same for all other Pixar films.
Disney already could have done that as part of the existing distribution agreement with Pixar. If you pay attention that's pretty close to what Disney did with Toy Story all the way down to the Saturday morning Buzz Lightyear cartoon series (and yes they are currently making a Toy Story 3 which will probably be a straight to DVD release).
If anything one could hope that Steve Jobs could bash a little restraint in this cycle. Whatever one may say about him, he tends to frown upon mediocrity.
Slashdot Mirror
You make it sound like Google doesn't care about making money, of course they do. In this case they are supporting there own product (which is not only inferior in amny ways, but more signifcantly lacks the wide spread hardware support of H.264) so they can not pay for supporting H.264, a better well supported standard which, while not free, is free to users and reasonable for media developers.
If it was really about "openess" then Google should have dumped Flash at the same time.
I was at Google I/O this year and my immediate reaction to Google TV is that this is just a way for Google to make ad revenue instead of the (or at very least in addition to) the Networks. Google does a lot of cool stuff, but in the end everything they do, they do to generate Ad revenue, and TV ad revenue eclipses Web revenue by quite a bit so Google want's in.
This patent isn't about jailbreaking, it's about disabling a stolen devices. The point is to detect usage trends or biometrics of the intended user and if the device detects anomalies it can act upon them by locating, disabling or other things to protect the data and possible recover the device.
Allegedly Apple is also working on something like this so rather then logging in every time another user users a device.
"I understand full well that the iPad is only a fraction of what it could be if it had been produced by a company other than Apple"
Om yea okay, because all of those other companies are putting out all those other so much better tablets running those better OS's. < /sarcasm >
Apple might not be the darling of geekdom anymore (something I don't think they every really aspired to), but the fact is, no other company would have produced anything close to the iPad, and as of today no other company has. To say that some other company and OS could have done this so much better is just simply ignoring reality and replacing it with some pseudo dogmatic wishful thinking.
1st - Apple doesn't have a Monopoly on anything (not even iPhone/iPad applications since you can create some pretty significantly cool apps using HTML5 and WebKit JS system hooks and just through up a web page).
2nd - It could be much easier to argue the Flash has a Monopoly on RIA than Apple has on anything.
3rd - Comparing consumer electronic devices to computers is not a valid comparison.
Here's where Adobe looses:
1. They are only suing Apple, not every other CES device that doesn't support Flash (Where's the suit against Nintendo who have even more restrictive development requirements? What about Sony?) So the question is raised, why is Adobe only targeting Apple? This is something Adobe doesn't want to answer.
2. As stated Apple is nowhere near a monopoly... there is tons of competition (Blackberry has a higher market share already. Android is growing fastest, WinMo 7 is on it's way, eventually Nokia (the #1 mobile phone company BTW will need to do something)... not even close.
3. Apple could easily state it has a legal obligation to it's shareholders *not* to support Flash since that would cede control of it's own product to a third party, while at the same time creating an impediment to future innovations (and this is a very strong argument and in itself is likely enough to stop and legal action in its tracks).
Oh here's the kicker... Apple doesn't need to sign it's own agreement, and can selectively enforce it with 3rd parties, so it's possible this is clearly defensive and Apple has 3.3.1 to protect itself so when Apple upgrades the iPhone OS and all the Flash (other interpretive frameworks) generated stuff breaks Apple can just point and say "hey... their fault, not only does there crap suck, but they violated their agreement with us, can't sue us we're covered, not only that but now we have to sue the developer so we can refund all our consumers that bought their crappy app that no longer works since they didn't follow our rules"
I'd like to know what browser and what computer he was using. In other words: what bias if any?
...because every time something microsoft/apple is better than apple/microsoft there must either be some bias or fanboisim, because everyone knows that microsoft/apple is always best at everything.
Hardware acceleration (and dedicated hardware in general) is much more efficient (and for manufacturers, much less expensive) then general purpose processing. So while your computer may have a processor that can handle this, many smaller consumer devices don't... additionally, for portable content you need energy efficiency... how long would you computer processor run on a cell phone battery? Also... hardware acceleration isn't just for play back. It's also for video creation/production. Many pro video systems take raw video and encode it to h.264 on the fly in real time (For SD/HD streaming and well as broadcast distribution). And then there's other studio productions where hardware acceleration allows working with real time effects... etc. The reality is that playback is a very small part of the puzzle... If you want to push Ogg-Theroa as a standard then you need the product creators to use this, and... there is no compelling reason to do so. I support much Open-Source software (both with my time & contributions and direct financial support)... that said, in the real world you pick the best solution for the problem, and in this case Ogg-Theroa is not it. And this is no disrespect to the development of this... this is hard stuff to do and it's really incredible that Ogg-Theora is where it is today, unfortunately it falls short of h.264. Also... pushing an inferior standard down the throats of a web viewing public, isn't going to win the open source model any friends.
I'm so sick of that argument... "Well just wait... Ogg-Theora will get so much better in the future"... Guess what... h.264 also exist in the that timeline and encoders will improve, hardware acceleration will improve, and by the time OT is where h.264 is today (and it has a long way to go with higher bit rate content), there will be even more reasons to use h.264.
First of all this is a beta product that isn't shipping on anything and while it's trendy to think beta software is fully functional (Thanks Google) with Apple, beta generally means, "really this isn't finished, there's still stuff that's messed up here." (In fact this would apply to most Apple .00 products as well, which is fine since historically .1 or .01 is rolls a few weeks after the initial release.) In other words, stuff like this is to be expected.
Second, Safari has for the longest time provided this very nifty "Private Browsing" which will eliminate all of these issues.
Finally, if you dig in the preferences you can turn a bunch of this stuff off if it bothers you so much. Still feed the fire of Mac hate... whatever.
Use Word...
...or if you have some strange issues with Microsoft, or don't have access to a native version of Word, Open Office will work. Word is actually quite good at this sort of stuff, plus this will give you the most flexibility in the long run (at least as far as publishers go). The exception is if you are self publishing or handling copy edit/tech edit/ and layout yourself. See the problem with other tools is that you will find that most production people (including copy/development/ and many tech editors) are trained to use Word, and using something else will a create huge workflow issues and may require some sacrifices in the production process, resulting in an overall negative effect on both the timeliness, editorial effectiveness, and cost of producing your book.
Now many publishers are at least considering the use of docbook or a similar XML type format (since often most books end up in XML for easy output to various print and online mediums), but for now it's just not an ideal format either since the tools haven't evolved to be that useable for many editors. See the thing is, I assume you want a well trained copy editor and such, and many copy editors, are good at language, not technology, so they just don't work well with LyTeX or XML or whatever.
Now again... if you are self publishing, do whatever you want. Otherwise if you don't use Word (or something Word compatible) you will be limiting your publishing options significantly. (BTW unless you are self publishing, InDesign is a terrible option... it's a layout program not a writing tool, and many publishers still use Quark, or some other layout tools.)
While Herman Miller gets the press (and looks cool) The SteelCase Leap chairs are quite cozy and incredibly well built.
Did anyone actually explore these? It's fun to poke fun of the EULA, but most people who toss around the vulnerability stuff probably don't understand it. The spoofing issue is silly in that if the "trusted" site is really trusted, then they likely wouldn't insert javascript to open an exploitative frame in a window with their address. (BTW... the originators code is mess, in fact his example of this alleged flaw doesn't work.)
The other "vulnerability" throws an exception, as it should, rather then allow an exploitation of Windows inability to deal with long filenames gracefully. Again... Safari could handle the exception more gracefully, but there is no vulnerability here.
Nothing to see here... so let's make fun of the EULA
1. The Indianapolis is the biggest annual sporting event. Period. More people attend, and more people watch on TV worldwide then any other event. If you wanted to get the message about linux out there, this would be the place to do it.
2. This year all Indy cars run on Ethanol 85. While this isn't solar, it's far better then the traditional Gas of the past (hell I believe NASCAR is just now *thinking* about phasing out leaded gas).
3. The engineering involved in these cars is amazing, not only as far as engine development (Honda had relatively little time to develop these engines to run on Ethanol 85, and have done so admirably). Also, the engines themselves are interesting in that they are normally aspirated (i.e. no Turbo, so SuperCharger just incredibly engineered 8Cyl Engines That can drive none stop at high speeds for ling distances. FWIW Honda wasn't picked to be the only engine supplier for indy cars, they got that way through attrition. The last year there were multiple engine manufacturers Honda so blew away Chevy that it just didn't make sense for them to continue.
4. Engineering! Since the engines these days are identical (as are the tires) there is a great deal of parity initially, however engineers get to figure out best race packages using aerodynamics, gear boxes, Tire Pressure etc, and on top of that figure in fuel mileage (which should be interesting since as mentioned, the fuel is different this year) tire wear, etc.
5. Of course given all that, the Drivers and Pit Crews make the difference. Of all the drivers (33) my guess would be that only about half of them have the mental toughness and backing human element to actually have a realistic chance of winning (and of that only a handful would have good vegas odds).
6. Then of course there's a shred of luck and the unexpected that always makes this totally unpredictable. Weather, Freak accidents, mechanical issues, human error, just being in the wrong place at the wrong time, all can have a hugh effect on the outcome.
7. Finally... Indy Car racing is by far the most competitive racing series out there today. Lot's of passing, and lot's of skill (a minor mistake in an indy car, and you are in the wall with your car breaking away into pieces).
8. Technological advancement. The Indy Car Series (and the IMS (Indianapolis Motor Speedway)) Have been at the forefront of many automotive advances. The Ethanol thing is one recent, but the technologies devised for driver safety have not only been adopted by almost every other racing series, but have also been instrumental in the development of safety features for all cars built today.
I saw the ad for this on HBO and was pretty psyched, but it didn't seem like it was getting promoted heavily, not enough to get enough people really concerned (as they should be). But like great things in this wonderfully Karmic universe, Diebold starts fussing and inadvertently calls mass attention to something that normally would have slipped under the lemmings radar.
The real beauty of it, is that this was a story that the mainstream wasn't touching for whatever reason (hell maybe they are really the ones in control of the voting machines), but now that Diebold is making a fuss.. now that's News! Whoo hoo... boy howdy, get 'er done... whatever... life is funny.
Well, the G3 Performas were perhaps the biggest lemons in Apple's history, but other then that they were all fairly solid machines, though by no means the top performers, Centris's too were quite nice though they were missing the dedicated FP Processor that the Quarda's had (And Quadra's were BTW fast and fairly bullet proof computers)
You mean remove a screw, pop out the protective cover, and insert RAM?
This point I'll give you
All SCSI requires termination, this isn't an apple thing. Apple did use that strange 25 pin SCSI connection which quickly became standard, not that it mattered much since other then high end workstations and servers, nobody else used SCSI because they were too cheap.
lol... hardware perfection you say, and yet half the hardware wasn't recognized, and you battery may explode at any moment. Ummm ok. Seriously though a high percentage of Dell's are just fine computers, the difference is that while some people are satisfied with "it works" other demand that it "works well".
Did Apple design the ASUS stuff? you seem to be confusing manufacturing with design, not the same thing.
Ummm yea and when he zumajack's the girl it's only good for 3 plays. That's like taking your date to White Castle, leaving in the middle of the night and not calling her again.... smooth.
Disney would buy Sony (with some part being sold off to Apple) MS would have nothing to gain by buying Sony except to just put them out of business. Even though MS is getting more aggressive in competing directly in the Hardware business, buying Sony would freak out the Dell's and HP's of the world (And honestly the anti-trust gov't types would have to be smoking something real good to let this one get through... essentially MS would likely have to sell off the hardware stuff, leaving just the media, which while interesting to MS would turn away the other media people and make MS's media/DRM play more difficult for them). Disney on the other hand would be a perfect fit. They would add the media to their portfolio (give them more theme park ride possibilities even) The PS3 is great since Disney like to publish Games... They could hire the right game developers and go all Nintendo on everyone (in stead of Mario though, think Mickey). Of course this would benefit Apple indirectly since well their interests are currently tied together pretty strongly (iTunes now gets Sony movies, and has more leverage in future iTunes Music negotiations), yet still Apple maintains the guise of neutrality. The computer hardware would likely get sold off (Sony Laptops are quite cool). The software could get sold off too (maybe to Apple, Combining Acid IP with Garageband, Vegas with iMovie, FCP, maybe creating a PC version of iMovie and GarageBand?). The Camera business, Chip making, and all that could continue under the Sony name or get sold off as well, heck the peripheral stuff would also mesh well with Apple (except the Walkman but again the IP could be valuable). Of course Steve Jobs could make this happen without too much problem making a win-win for both of his companies.
Ummm... yea, and nobody uses macs in Japan?!
Quick lesson... open iTunes, go to the preferences, click the advanced icon and then the importing tab. Look in the "Import Using" drop down menu a gee... a lossless format that will work on you iPod! Ok it may not be "open" I suppose you really just want FLAC. Whatever. Oh... and FWIW *all* digital music is compressed.
Because it's probably not fully tested to work with Tiger. The only system updates you get with Software Update and bug fixes and security fixes. Occasionally you'll get something else which works behind the scenes with an updated iApp as well (there have been minor CoreImage and other framework pieces updated this way).
This is just good sense, it's stability vs. cutting edge. Also it can be a very bad thing to update the system incrementally (Ask Microsoft who have been bitten by this many times... often updating one thing can have unexpected results on others.
Also, for a developers interested in using Rails, updating Ruby is fairly trivial. I would also add that often even if Apple includes the latest version of something you may want to compile it yourself anyway (Apache, PHP. MySQL are good examples of things that people will often *upgrade* right out of the box).
That is just not true at all.
good thing iMacs use SATA rather then IDE then isn't it.
Damn dude, that bullet just went off in your head!
Apple didn't remove anything, or do anything sinister as you suggest. Apple used the latest BIOS technology available, rather then the dinosaur archaic BIOS's used in Win/Tel computers today. Why not bitch about the fact that they have no 8" floppy drive either so now you can't even play you vintage TRS80 games on it.... I'm mean HOW DARE APPLE... not letting you run you TRS 80 Applications.
Disney already could have done that as part of the existing distribution agreement with Pixar. If you pay attention that's pretty close to what Disney did with Toy Story all the way down to the Saturday morning Buzz Lightyear cartoon series (and yes they are currently making a Toy Story 3 which will probably be a straight to DVD release).
If anything one could hope that Steve Jobs could bash a little restraint in this cycle. Whatever one may say about him, he tends to frown upon mediocrity.