It LOOKS like a wrist-slap to me. They have to allow "middleware" and have to disclose "Communications protocols and APIs", except where it would affect 3rd-party IP or "security".
I think it is an attempt to provide some kind of flexibility but "restrain" them, but the Judge is obviously forgetting history: Microsoft is the Harry Houdini of legal agreements, they can wriggle out of anything.
Our fathers and grandfathers sent men to the moon wearing friggin TIES. Ever see those shots of NASA, back in the Apollo program? Buzzcut, tie, cigarette, each and every one of them. And these were engineers! Sending people to the moon!
Like our work is any more complex or important. Oh, no, catsbyweb.com needs a new MySQL repliation server. Wearing a tie would "impair my creativity". Woe, is me.
But playing devil's advocate: I'm taking a management class (I'll be so happy when this semester is over...) right now, and it is pretty obvious from the text and lecture that management has been out to end any vestige of "dot com culture" since it started. Their "embracing" of the whole new culture thing was just a nice side-effect of the system being flush with money.
Farscape is still cancelled, but some people are trying to save it, and the jury is still out. It's a dead man (show) walkin' but it's not over till the switch is thrown.
>why do they have to trash those that have 1-5% market share?
Because a 2% loss of marketshare can amount of millions of dollars of lost revenue. Remember that Microsoft is in the worst place to be: it is #1 and cannot afford to lose ground. A loss of 2-3% on the desktop to Apple, with a similar loss on the server side to Linux, would go a LONG way to showing that perhaps the IT world can exist without Bill.
Cupertino, CA - Apple Computer (AAPL) is expected to buy a record number of the new "PowerPC 970" CPU, but in a suprise move, isn't expected to actually do anything with them.
"We're doing great with the iPod, the warehouse is totally empty," said Apple VP Phil "All your Jaguar" Schiller. "Steve thought it would look more lived-in if we had some big boxes of stuff in there."
Steve Jobs was hard at work developing a new way to mispronounce the name of the new CPU and was unavailable for comment.
This article chronicles some of Apple's challenges.
But on the topic. So Apple has 3 choices: 1. Wait for Motorola to get their act together. All the code optimization in the world won't make OS X as fast as it could be. Jaguar, for example, made my B&W G3 REALLY responsive compared to 10.1.5. But it occured to me, that's probably the last speed boost from software. You can only go so far. 2. Get the new IBM chip working. Hey, fine, it'll probably work. But it'll take a year or more to get it ported, documented, and in production. It won't be cheap, most likely. It will most likely be fast and powerful, but Apple walks a fine line WRT price. 3. Get Intel working. Hey, fine. Port OpenFirmware to an Intel-type mobo, then ship a computer that runs NONE of the software outside of the core OS. Wait for developers to buy one of these new machines to recompile their packages. This is where proprietary software bites you on the ass - you can't just wander between architectures with your source tarball and hope for the best. Oh, and of course, Classic won't work, and you're going to be stuck with whatever devices are already "cross platform". YOu can't just pick up a device from CompUSA and expect it to work.
The only plus I see to OSX/x86 is that the possibility for cheaper hardware might mean more people picking up an OS X box, and maybe some more drivers will be written. I'd buy one in a second, except... the majority of stuff in my Dock probably wouldn't be "ported" in the first year. So if it's under a grand, say, what good does it do me? No MacSQL, no EV Nova, no Remote Desktop... I need that stuff.
For the record, I own a Palm (505) and love it dearly.
>Care to back that up? Sounds like marketing-speak to me.
Essentially, you're right. Many, many articles, reviews, and commentary in the popular press say that. UNfortunately, the press tends to influence the general public.
Funny, but... the point is that, faced with competition from Pocket PC and WinCE, Palm OS is considered "old" and "outdated" and "lacking in functionality". I was under the impression that they were going to change things. (Another poster claims OS6 will be the one that breaks the API).
every shot of OS5 looks just like every other Palm OS since... well since the beginning. Didn't Palm buy Be? Weren't they going to do something new with their OS?
> So what is Apple's plan for all this horsepower? Are you kidding? I guess you haven't used OSX. Just THINK of all the new minimization effects we'll get! Imagine playing a dozen minimized Quicktime movies, all at once, with no dropped frames! Imagine Chimera loading quickly!
It's 4:10pm EST as I write this.. there's not much Wednesday left. When will we get to see these new machines?
It's only early afternoon in SF but late afternoon seems weird for a product demo or press release. Apple, for example, seems to always have the keynote in the morning.
I worked for the company that initially developed the device used in Florida. Our company did the UI, for creating ballots, and the reporting system.
Ready to laugh? Target platform was a C++ CGI running on Windows 95 with Personal Web Server, using SQL Anywhere and Crystal Reports.
I wish I could write a full article about it, but it would make a lot of people angry.
And by the way: open code has NOTHING to do with making electronic voting. It's not a code issue. It's not a hardware issue, either. Retirees and people who can't master the 'Start' button run elections. Paper ballots fit their mindset. I know this. I travelled all over the country setting up the system. Most of the places didn't even have networks. And why should they? It was 1998 and they were still running Windows 3.1, or sometimes just DOS (Wordperfect was popular in several precincts).
You want successful electronic voting? Then don't let your grandmother run the voting machines.
Are there any good pointers to what Copland/NuKernel would have looked like, had it reached final form? Was it System (whatever) + protected memory, or did it have other newer features?
>By switching to OS X, Apple threw out 15 years of hard work, just to release an OS with an inferior UI on an inferior kernel.
Yes, a kernel that rarely crashes is indeed inferior. Likewise, a kernel that allows developers to build applications based on standards is a poor choice.
The idea is that certain words didn't get picked up right by the "translator microbes" so Crichton hears the "native" word, rather than the translation. Or something like that. It was just a way to give flavor.
I hope they're working on making their backend as good as their ad campaign, because all I hear all day is radio spots for Covad, and every time I turn on the TV I see one.
The first thing I thought was, 'They're gone again if all they do is buy ads'. Here's hoping they'll successfully manage themselves this time around; I doubt there will be a 3rd chance.
You'd have to have a custom BIOS, or you'd lose the "startup disk" functionality. After all, you can boot any number of OS images off any number of disks with Apple hardware. Losing startup disk would be a pain - how to run multiple versions of the OS?
The graphics card issue isn't a big deal. You'll probably have to choose from one of several "approved" GeForce and ATI cards; big deal. Isn't that more or less what Windows power users do these days?
Likewise the rest of the story - Firewire, USB, etc - is no big deal. The average/.'er screams about the "closed" hardware but lately it's more and more PC-like.
Apple would likely lose all-in-one boxes. Most x86 laptops I encounter these days run hot. Crusoe, anyone?
Otherwise, really... the high-ups want Classic gone ASAP, and the important parts of Carbon run on Darwin, right? Cocoa used to run on x86.
I just can't see it happening, though. More of a bargaining chip than anything else.
The way this works is, you mandate formats, not applications.
So you say, "all forms must be in PDF, all email via normal RFC822 mail (MIME allowed), documents in some-or-other format".
Who decides just what constitutes the "openness" of a format?
It just sounds like the right feature list will "win", and you'll have to explain to the PHB (the gov't PHB, worst kind) that Microsoft's XML isn't open, and Exchange isn't the same as sendmail + Cyrus IMAPD.
Slashdot Mirror
It LOOKS like a wrist-slap to me. They have to allow "middleware" and have to disclose "Communications protocols and APIs", except where it would affect 3rd-party IP or "security".
I think it is an attempt to provide some kind of flexibility but "restrain" them, but the Judge is obviously forgetting history: Microsoft is the Harry Houdini of legal agreements, they can wriggle out of anything.
I have the same laptop, and couldn't get it to recognize my PCMCIA. What are you using?
Our fathers and grandfathers sent men to the moon wearing friggin TIES. Ever see those shots of NASA, back in the Apollo program? Buzzcut, tie, cigarette, each and every one of them. And these were engineers! Sending people to the moon!
Like our work is any more complex or important. Oh, no, catsbyweb.com needs a new MySQL repliation server. Wearing a tie would "impair my creativity". Woe, is me.
But playing devil's advocate: I'm taking a management class (I'll be so happy when this semester is over...) right now, and it is pretty obvious from the text and lecture that management has been out to end any vestige of "dot com culture" since it started. Their "embracing" of the whole new culture thing was just a nice side-effect of the system being flush with money.
Farscape is still cancelled, but some people are trying to save it, and the jury is still out. It's a dead man (show) walkin' but it's not over till the switch is thrown.
We had it, but it didn't sell well, so Apple discontinued it.
Read World Tech talks about the 970 in depth... I wonder how the addition of 64-bit arch AND the 32-bit compat mode will affect things.
Like the Itanium, with its poor backwards compat performance? Or will it be speedy?
>why do they have to trash those that have 1-5% market share?
Because a 2% loss of marketshare can amount of millions of dollars of lost revenue. Remember that Microsoft is in the worst place to be: it is #1 and cannot afford to lose ground. A loss of 2-3% on the desktop to Apple, with a similar loss on the server side to Linux, would go a LONG way to showing that perhaps the IT world can exist without Bill.
While they certainly may be lying, every switcher with an internet presence denies recieving a single dollar from Apple (although they did get lunch).
Cupertino, CA - Apple Computer (AAPL) is expected to buy a record number of the new "PowerPC 970" CPU, but in a suprise move, isn't expected to actually do anything with them.
"We're doing great with the iPod, the warehouse is totally empty," said Apple VP Phil "All your Jaguar" Schiller. "Steve thought it would look more lived-in if we had some big boxes of stuff in there."
Steve Jobs was hard at work developing a new way to mispronounce the name of the new CPU and was unavailable for comment.
I'm having this problem, too, but it isn't related to playlists... It just crashes. I thought perhaps I just had a bum iPod, or perhaps a bad HD.
This article chronicles some of Apple's challenges.
But on the topic. So Apple has 3 choices:
1. Wait for Motorola to get their act together. All the code optimization in the world won't make OS X as fast as it could be. Jaguar, for example, made my B&W G3 REALLY responsive compared to 10.1.5. But it occured to me, that's probably the last speed boost from software. You can only go so far.
2. Get the new IBM chip working. Hey, fine, it'll probably work. But it'll take a year or more to get it ported, documented, and in production. It won't be cheap, most likely. It will most likely be fast and powerful, but Apple walks a fine line WRT price.
3. Get Intel working. Hey, fine. Port OpenFirmware to an Intel-type mobo, then ship a computer that runs NONE of the software outside of the core OS. Wait for developers to buy one of these new machines to recompile their packages. This is where proprietary software bites you on the ass - you can't just wander between architectures with your source tarball and hope for the best. Oh, and of course, Classic won't work, and you're going to be stuck with whatever devices are already "cross platform". YOu can't just pick up a device from CompUSA and expect it to work.
The only plus I see to OSX/x86 is that the possibility for cheaper hardware might mean more people picking up an OS X box, and maybe some more drivers will be written. I'd buy one in a second, except... the majority of stuff in my Dock probably wouldn't be "ported" in the first year. So if it's under a grand, say, what good does it do me? No MacSQL, no EV Nova, no Remote Desktop... I need that stuff.
For the record, I own a Palm (505) and love it dearly.
>Care to back that up? Sounds like marketing-speak to me.
Essentially, you're right. Many, many articles, reviews, and commentary in the popular press say that. UNfortunately, the press tends to influence the general public.
Funny, but... the point is that, faced with competition from Pocket PC and WinCE, Palm OS is considered "old" and "outdated" and "lacking in functionality". I was under the impression that they were going to change things. (Another poster claims OS6 will be the one that breaks the API).
every shot of OS5 looks just like every other Palm OS since... well since the beginning. Didn't Palm buy Be? Weren't they going to do something new with their OS?
> So what is Apple's plan for all this horsepower?
Are you kidding? I guess you haven't used OSX. Just THINK of all the new minimization effects we'll get! Imagine playing a dozen minimized Quicktime movies, all at once, with no dropped frames! Imagine Chimera loading quickly!
It's 4:10pm EST as I write this.. there's not much Wednesday left. When will we get to see these new machines?
It's only early afternoon in SF but late afternoon seems weird for a product demo or press release. Apple, for example, seems to always have the keynote in the morning.
I worked for the company that initially developed the device used in Florida. Our company did the UI, for creating ballots, and the reporting system.
Ready to laugh? Target platform was a C++ CGI running on Windows 95 with Personal Web Server, using SQL Anywhere and Crystal Reports.
I wish I could write a full article about it, but it would make a lot of people angry.
And by the way: open code has NOTHING to do with making electronic voting. It's not a code issue. It's not a hardware issue, either. Retirees and people who can't master the 'Start' button run elections. Paper ballots fit their mindset. I know this. I travelled all over the country setting up the system. Most of the places didn't even have networks. And why should they? It was 1998 and they were still running Windows 3.1, or sometimes just DOS (Wordperfect was popular in several precincts).
You want successful electronic voting? Then don't let your grandmother run the voting machines.
Are there any good pointers to what Copland/NuKernel would have looked like, had it reached final form? Was it System (whatever) + protected memory, or did it have other newer features?
>By switching to OS X, Apple threw out 15 years of hard work, just to release an OS with an inferior UI on an inferior kernel.
Yes, a kernel that rarely crashes is indeed inferior. Likewise, a kernel that allows developers to build applications based on standards is a poor choice.
Good artists imitate, great artists steal.
But what about the cast and crew? Isn't it bad to screw with the talent like that?
I don't buy it. I think it's just SciFi doesn't want to spend so much on what is only now a moderate performer.
it's like "fucking".
The idea is that certain words didn't get picked up right by the "translator microbes" so Crichton hears the "native" word, rather than the translation. Or something like that. It was just a way to give flavor.
I hope they're working on making their backend as good as their ad campaign, because all I hear all day is radio spots for Covad, and every time I turn on the TV I see one.
The first thing I thought was, 'They're gone again if all they do is buy ads'. Here's hoping they'll successfully manage themselves this time around; I doubt there will be a 3rd chance.
You'd have to have a custom BIOS, or you'd lose the "startup disk" functionality. After all, you can boot any number of OS images off any number of disks with Apple hardware. Losing startup disk would be a pain - how to run multiple versions of the OS?
/.'er screams about the "closed" hardware but lately it's more and more PC-like.
The graphics card issue isn't a big deal. You'll probably have to choose from one of several "approved" GeForce and ATI cards; big deal. Isn't that more or less what Windows power users do these days?
Likewise the rest of the story - Firewire, USB, etc - is no big deal. The average
Apple would likely lose all-in-one boxes. Most x86 laptops I encounter these days run hot. Crusoe, anyone?
Otherwise, really... the high-ups want Classic gone ASAP, and the important parts of Carbon run on Darwin, right? Cocoa used to run on x86.
I just can't see it happening, though. More of a bargaining chip than anything else.
The way this works is, you mandate formats, not applications.
So you say, "all forms must be in PDF, all email via normal RFC822 mail (MIME allowed), documents in some-or-other format".
Who decides just what constitutes the "openness" of a format?
It just sounds like the right feature list will "win", and you'll have to explain to the PHB (the gov't PHB, worst kind) that Microsoft's XML isn't open, and Exchange isn't the same as sendmail + Cyrus IMAPD.
Unless I'm reading it wrong.