KnightWRX
Apr 15, 05:15 PM
OSX was not built on UNIX, it is Mach/XNU with a BSD subsystem, it is UNIX-like, much like linux.
OS X is Unix, it is not Unix-like much like Linux.
It is the real deal, Unix '03 certified and all. The BSD userland qualifies as genuine Unix and the kernel provides the entire required POSIX syscall interfaces to pass the certification tests :
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3581.htm
So yes, in a sense, OS X is built on top of Unix, NeXT's implementation of it which happens to use a Berkeley userland and a Carnegie made Mach kernel.
OS X is Unix, it is not Unix-like much like Linux.
It is the real deal, Unix '03 certified and all. The BSD userland qualifies as genuine Unix and the kernel provides the entire required POSIX syscall interfaces to pass the certification tests :
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3581.htm
So yes, in a sense, OS X is built on top of Unix, NeXT's implementation of it which happens to use a Berkeley userland and a Carnegie made Mach kernel.
lifeofart
Jul 12, 07:37 PM
Your definition of a "professional" app seems mighty arbitrary, even to the extent of excluding most applications that exist. Specialized databases that are designed for a specific industry wouldn't meet your definition. Computer-Aided-Machining (CAM) software (which is only useful in one industry) wouldn't meet your definition. I could go on, but I think you get my point.
No, I don't get your point. CAM software is used in a variety of industries. Auto companies, airline companies, boat industries, tools industries, machine shops, agricultural industries. But if the CAM software is a mature useful standard in those industries it is probably a very capable pro app. Like wise customized databases would not be a pro app in itself. The database program used is the pro app not the specific database.
So now you're adding another level of definition to what it takes to be a "professional" app? Some percentage of people have to know about it? And where do you draw the line? Gee, I guess this means that any start-up company trying to produce a new professional application is doomed because how can they ever reach this percentage upon the release so their product can be considered "professional"?
It is not another level of defiintion. Industry standard implies that most professionals use it, Doesn't it?
Yes, it is very very difficult for a startup company to produce a competitive pro app in a mature industry. It takes several years for a product to mature and recieve user feedback and multiple modifications before I would classify it as "Pro". That is why these are difficult markets to crack.
No, I don't get your point. CAM software is used in a variety of industries. Auto companies, airline companies, boat industries, tools industries, machine shops, agricultural industries. But if the CAM software is a mature useful standard in those industries it is probably a very capable pro app. Like wise customized databases would not be a pro app in itself. The database program used is the pro app not the specific database.
So now you're adding another level of definition to what it takes to be a "professional" app? Some percentage of people have to know about it? And where do you draw the line? Gee, I guess this means that any start-up company trying to produce a new professional application is doomed because how can they ever reach this percentage upon the release so their product can be considered "professional"?
It is not another level of defiintion. Industry standard implies that most professionals use it, Doesn't it?
Yes, it is very very difficult for a startup company to produce a competitive pro app in a mature industry. It takes several years for a product to mature and recieve user feedback and multiple modifications before I would classify it as "Pro". That is why these are difficult markets to crack.
coder12
Nov 13, 12:14 AM
I think that the article meant to say, "SkyFire's", not "SkyFires" in the middle paragraph :P
Just sayin' :)
Just sayin' :)
Anonymous Freak
Apr 28, 02:24 PM
Why are you equating "cross-dresser" and "pedophile"?
Also you do realize that gender roles and gender distinctions are purely socially constructed concepts that hold no real barring on reality.
Calling someone "creeeeepy" because they do not fit into your preconceived notion of gender is kind of ****ed up no?
The two were separate qualifiers. I wouldn't imagine that a male pedophile that ISN'T cross-dressing would try to walk into a womens' restroom. I was *NOT* meaning to imply that all cross-dressers are pedophiles.
To me, "transgender" means someone who identifies as the opposite of their birth gender the vast majority of the time. "Cross-dresser" means someone who primarily identifies as one gender, but occasionally dresses as the other gender. Yes, it is possible to have a transgender cross-dresser, someone who primarily identifies as the opposite of their birth gender, but occasionally dresses as their birth gender.
I have no problem with "regular" cross-dressers. But if they identify as their birth gender the majority of the time, they should use their birth gender-labeled restroom. If they identify as the opposite gender the majority of the time, even if they are still physically their birth gender, then I don't have a problem with them using their identified-as restroom.
And, yes, I fully agree that calling someone creepy because they do not fit into preconceived notions of gender is ********* up. People are people, regardless of outward appearances.
Also you do realize that gender roles and gender distinctions are purely socially constructed concepts that hold no real barring on reality.
Calling someone "creeeeepy" because they do not fit into your preconceived notion of gender is kind of ****ed up no?
The two were separate qualifiers. I wouldn't imagine that a male pedophile that ISN'T cross-dressing would try to walk into a womens' restroom. I was *NOT* meaning to imply that all cross-dressers are pedophiles.
To me, "transgender" means someone who identifies as the opposite of their birth gender the vast majority of the time. "Cross-dresser" means someone who primarily identifies as one gender, but occasionally dresses as the other gender. Yes, it is possible to have a transgender cross-dresser, someone who primarily identifies as the opposite of their birth gender, but occasionally dresses as their birth gender.
I have no problem with "regular" cross-dressers. But if they identify as their birth gender the majority of the time, they should use their birth gender-labeled restroom. If they identify as the opposite gender the majority of the time, even if they are still physically their birth gender, then I don't have a problem with them using their identified-as restroom.
And, yes, I fully agree that calling someone creepy because they do not fit into preconceived notions of gender is ********* up. People are people, regardless of outward appearances.
more...
TrollToddington
Apr 21, 01:49 PM
I mean, if you want to differentiate your higher end products from the lower end ones, you ADD features to the higher end one. You DON'T remove features that were once standard for years on the lower end machine.
I've seen this in Yamaha keyboards - once upon a time all keyboards had MIDI IN/OUT/THROU, later (ca 2004 onwards) Yamaha removed this pretty basic feature from their low and mid-end keyboards so that they could not be used as controllers. The customers had to end up buying pretty expensive equipment in order to use MIDI connections.
I've seen this in Yamaha keyboards - once upon a time all keyboards had MIDI IN/OUT/THROU, later (ca 2004 onwards) Yamaha removed this pretty basic feature from their low and mid-end keyboards so that they could not be used as controllers. The customers had to end up buying pretty expensive equipment in order to use MIDI connections.
savar
Oct 23, 11:23 AM
And here I was trying to buy a legal copy of Windows from MS, granted it wasn't the latest version (however XP had just come out, so 2000 wasn't that old) and MS was telling me to pirate the software.
That's hilarious. I was reading the other day that in addition to fighting piracy overseas, MS also uses the threat of software audit in the states to sell more licenses. They kind of say, "hey, we could come in and do an audit, or you can sign this $300 million, 5 year contract with us." A local government agency is taking option #2.
I guess they don't care about American, residential piracy.
That's hilarious. I was reading the other day that in addition to fighting piracy overseas, MS also uses the threat of software audit in the states to sell more licenses. They kind of say, "hey, we could come in and do an audit, or you can sign this $300 million, 5 year contract with us." A local government agency is taking option #2.
I guess they don't care about American, residential piracy.
more...
Evangelion
Jul 12, 09:23 AM
I'm not. What would I like to see from Apple? What would my ideal iPod be like? Let's explore the possibilities.
Bluetooth-headphones. This would kick ass. No more wires that get tangled up. And it CAN be done!
Large touch-screen. No separate controls, the controls would be right in the display (like in the image that was linked before in this thread).
And before you say "but there would be fingerprints on the screen! And it wouldn't provide any tactile feedback!". Ah, but how about that "no-touch" controls that have been rumored? I have no idea that is it really possible, but what if? You could simply hover you finger 1cm from the screen and use the controls. No fingerprints. As to the tactile feedback.... Tactile feedback is used that you know where the controls are without actually looking at the screen. "No-touch" UI does not have this, because you aren't actually touching anything. So how do we make this work? Well, what if you could just put your finger close to the screen ANYWHERE on the screen. If you do circlular motion (like in current iPod) the device would scroll, adjust volume, and do the other things you can do on the current iPod. If you move your finger straigh up, it would be equivaltnof clicking "menu". Straight down would be play/pause and so forth.
As to WLAN and the like.... What if the new iPod could be tied to iChat? You could VOIP to/from the iPod. just turn on the wireless, and browse to the "buddy list" menu on your iPod, and you are all set. Hell, the iPod could have a camera as well! if they can put video-cameras on phones, is there any reason why iPod couldn't have one?
if we assume that the "no-touch" UI is possible, then nothing I have listed is impossible. iPod with those specs would be YEARS ahead of any other device on the market! It would absolutely embarrass all the other devices.
I decided to quote myself here. I would like Apple to REALLY do something revolutionary for a change. iPod was nice. A big improvement over what was available at the time, sure, but not revolutionary. And while iPod has been improved over the years, the steps have been quite small. Larger storage, smaller size, less weight, color-screen, refinements... How about REALLY rocking our world for a change? Enough with these evolutionary steps, take a revolutionary step instead! You have the audience, you have the market, you have the brand. You CAN do it! If there's anyone who can do it, it's you.
Remember the "Think Different"? I would like Apple to do so. Instead of living the status quo, and making small improvements, make something different. Make iPod revolutionary. The groundwork has already been done. You just need to take that one step.
Bluetooth-headphones. This would kick ass. No more wires that get tangled up. And it CAN be done!
Large touch-screen. No separate controls, the controls would be right in the display (like in the image that was linked before in this thread).
And before you say "but there would be fingerprints on the screen! And it wouldn't provide any tactile feedback!". Ah, but how about that "no-touch" controls that have been rumored? I have no idea that is it really possible, but what if? You could simply hover you finger 1cm from the screen and use the controls. No fingerprints. As to the tactile feedback.... Tactile feedback is used that you know where the controls are without actually looking at the screen. "No-touch" UI does not have this, because you aren't actually touching anything. So how do we make this work? Well, what if you could just put your finger close to the screen ANYWHERE on the screen. If you do circlular motion (like in current iPod) the device would scroll, adjust volume, and do the other things you can do on the current iPod. If you move your finger straigh up, it would be equivaltnof clicking "menu". Straight down would be play/pause and so forth.
As to WLAN and the like.... What if the new iPod could be tied to iChat? You could VOIP to/from the iPod. just turn on the wireless, and browse to the "buddy list" menu on your iPod, and you are all set. Hell, the iPod could have a camera as well! if they can put video-cameras on phones, is there any reason why iPod couldn't have one?
if we assume that the "no-touch" UI is possible, then nothing I have listed is impossible. iPod with those specs would be YEARS ahead of any other device on the market! It would absolutely embarrass all the other devices.
I decided to quote myself here. I would like Apple to REALLY do something revolutionary for a change. iPod was nice. A big improvement over what was available at the time, sure, but not revolutionary. And while iPod has been improved over the years, the steps have been quite small. Larger storage, smaller size, less weight, color-screen, refinements... How about REALLY rocking our world for a change? Enough with these evolutionary steps, take a revolutionary step instead! You have the audience, you have the market, you have the brand. You CAN do it! If there's anyone who can do it, it's you.
Remember the "Think Different"? I would like Apple to do so. Instead of living the status quo, and making small improvements, make something different. Make iPod revolutionary. The groundwork has already been done. You just need to take that one step.
milo
Jul 31, 10:22 AM
I've seen the blue screen on XP. It's funny because I've been told by Windows users that it doesn't exist in XP, yet I witnessed it two weeks ago when a colleague of mine was trying to do something with Adobe Acrobat. The program just spazzed and the blue screen came up.
The reason you don't see it much is because the new default in XP is to just reboot the machine instead of sitting on that screen. It's still there.
The reason you don't see it much is because the new default in XP is to just reboot the machine instead of sitting on that screen. It's still there.
more...
calderone
Jan 30, 03:44 PM
I just ordered this bag
I was just looking at this one, it looks huge on the site. If you could, shoot a line back on what you think.
I was just looking at this one, it looks huge on the site. If you could, shoot a line back on what you think.
MacRumors
Oct 18, 04:24 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple released (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/oct/18results.html) preliminary fourth quarter 2006 financial results today. These results may be subject to significant adjustments.
Apple posted revenue of $4.84 billion with a net quarterly profit of $546 million, or $.62 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of $3.68 billion and net profit of $430 million, or $.50 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 29.2 percent, up from 28.1 percent in the year-ago quarter. International sales accounted for 40 percent of the quarter’s revenue.
1,610,000 Macs and 8,729,000 iPods were shipped this quarter representing a 30 percent growth in Macs and 35 percent growth in iPods over the year-ago quarter.
“This strong quarter caps an extraordinary year for Apple. Selling more than 39 million iPods and 5.3 million Macs while performing an incredibly complex architecture transition is something we are all very proud of,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “Looking forward, 2007 is likely to be one of the most exciting new product years in Apple’s history.”
“We are pleased to have finished the year with over $10 billion in cash and to have increased annual revenue by $11 billion in the last two years,” said Peter Oppenheimer, Apple’s CFO. “Looking ahead to the first fiscal quarter of we expect revenue of $6.0 to $6.2 billion and earnings per diluted share of $.70 to $.73.”
Apple released (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/oct/18results.html) preliminary fourth quarter 2006 financial results today. These results may be subject to significant adjustments.
Apple posted revenue of $4.84 billion with a net quarterly profit of $546 million, or $.62 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of $3.68 billion and net profit of $430 million, or $.50 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 29.2 percent, up from 28.1 percent in the year-ago quarter. International sales accounted for 40 percent of the quarter’s revenue.
1,610,000 Macs and 8,729,000 iPods were shipped this quarter representing a 30 percent growth in Macs and 35 percent growth in iPods over the year-ago quarter.
“This strong quarter caps an extraordinary year for Apple. Selling more than 39 million iPods and 5.3 million Macs while performing an incredibly complex architecture transition is something we are all very proud of,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “Looking forward, 2007 is likely to be one of the most exciting new product years in Apple’s history.”
“We are pleased to have finished the year with over $10 billion in cash and to have increased annual revenue by $11 billion in the last two years,” said Peter Oppenheimer, Apple’s CFO. “Looking ahead to the first fiscal quarter of we expect revenue of $6.0 to $6.2 billion and earnings per diluted share of $.70 to $.73.”
more...
MrMoore
Mar 31, 03:33 PM
To be fair, the brushed metal interface first debuted in 1999 with Quicktime 4.0. Compared to the horrendous user interfaces of the time period, that looks amazing. It is sad though that it took them until leopard to get rid of it...
It's not the brush metal that was bad. It was the Volume Dial on the left side to appear like a dial on a device. To change the volume was difficult.
It's not the brush metal that was bad. It was the Volume Dial on the left side to appear like a dial on a device. To change the volume was difficult.
br0adband
Nov 4, 07:28 AM
Whatever dude. 2Ghz\2GB RAM\256MB Video\160GB HD and there is NOTHING instantaneous about Parallels at all. It takes anywhere from 1-2 minutes to resume a session and another 2+ minutes to suspend it. This is with multiple images, several OS X installs, and I know how to tweak Windows with the best of them. Then there is the bug where it likes to freeze the entire system when you change locations. Not always but it�s a common enough thing that I have to stop the session to change locations or risk crashing my system.
If it's taking you two minutes to resume a session and two minutes plus to suspend it, on that machine you mentioned the specs of, something is frickin' wrong with that machine.
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
If it's taking you two minutes to resume a session and two minutes plus to suspend it, on that machine you mentioned the specs of, something is frickin' wrong with that machine.
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
more...
Unorthodox
Oct 24, 07:48 AM
What's taking santa rose so long?
millar876
Jul 28, 01:01 PM
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/1329/mzuneex3.th.jpg (http://img233.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mzuneex3.jpg)
"inovative" clunk wheel to navagate
ring of power from 360 shows persentage of bower left 10, 20, 30, and 40+ percent
touch sensative buttons
windows button to access exclusive content pre installed for people wuo buy the premium executive pro vista edition
plays only WMV & WMA for optimal video and audio quality
holds 20,000,000,000 songs (songs encoded at 32kbps mono WMA)
holds 2,000 hours of HQ WMV video (125kbps WMV10)
HD output upto 1080i (requires a PC with windows media center 2005 update rollout 2 and a graphics card capable of displaying HD resolutions)
Ultra high resolution 321x241 display (bigger than the iPod with video's)
ONLY $999.99 (for home lite - value pack with no headphones or software and in an unmarked brown box
*removing pointless and unsightly stickers voids any warrenty and relinquishes all rights should somthing go wrong with this product.
"inovative" clunk wheel to navagate
ring of power from 360 shows persentage of bower left 10, 20, 30, and 40+ percent
touch sensative buttons
windows button to access exclusive content pre installed for people wuo buy the premium executive pro vista edition
plays only WMV & WMA for optimal video and audio quality
holds 20,000,000,000 songs (songs encoded at 32kbps mono WMA)
holds 2,000 hours of HQ WMV video (125kbps WMV10)
HD output upto 1080i (requires a PC with windows media center 2005 update rollout 2 and a graphics card capable of displaying HD resolutions)
Ultra high resolution 321x241 display (bigger than the iPod with video's)
ONLY $999.99 (for home lite - value pack with no headphones or software and in an unmarked brown box
*removing pointless and unsightly stickers voids any warrenty and relinquishes all rights should somthing go wrong with this product.
more...
chrmjenkins
May 1, 09:15 PM
If ucfgrad isn't the wolf, I figure jav must be. I was undecided between the two, so not.voting was essentially the same as voting.
Full of Win
Apr 22, 05:01 PM
That looks hideous.
It was a mock up made based on a sketch given to them. It's not as if they had a CAD file to go from.
It was a mock up made based on a sketch given to them. It's not as if they had a CAD file to go from.
more...
Buschmaster
Apr 23, 06:29 PM
Is it possible that they would make a phone that would cover both AT&T's and T-Mobile's bands? AT&T could really combat the coverage problems they've had on the west coast with that, correct?
mikeschmeee
Apr 13, 12:06 PM
Sorry posted wrong picture! I will edit in a minute
alexf
Oct 18, 07:16 PM
Aaaand in 3 ... 2 ... 1:
REALITY CHECK.
This is why I posted my comment correcting your innaccurate assumption that "the iPod is still Apple's cash cow".
The funny part is that I was in no way "defending" the iPod, since I don't have one at the moment and was just as annoyed at Apple as everyone else that Macs were not centerstage... in '04 and '05.
We're rounding out '06 and that argument hasn't held water since last year.
It's been ALL about Mac in '06
He he... I told you this would get emotional! :)
And by the way, you may want to look up "cash cow" in the dictionary. It has nothing to do with a product representing the MAJORITY of a company's income.
REALITY CHECK.
This is why I posted my comment correcting your innaccurate assumption that "the iPod is still Apple's cash cow".
The funny part is that I was in no way "defending" the iPod, since I don't have one at the moment and was just as annoyed at Apple as everyone else that Macs were not centerstage... in '04 and '05.
We're rounding out '06 and that argument hasn't held water since last year.
It's been ALL about Mac in '06
He he... I told you this would get emotional! :)
And by the way, you may want to look up "cash cow" in the dictionary. It has nothing to do with a product representing the MAJORITY of a company's income.
ezekielrage_99
Jul 24, 11:49 PM
So, in conclusion - get the S530 instead!
http://www.logitech.com/lang/images/0/12135.jpg.
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/details/US/EN,CRID=2162,CONTENTID=11420
http://www.cancomuk.com/products/searchresults.lasso?code=58886
I got one of those a few weeks ago and it rocks, Apple keyboard and mouses just don't compete.
http://www.logitech.com/lang/images/0/12135.jpg.
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/details/US/EN,CRID=2162,CONTENTID=11420
http://www.cancomuk.com/products/searchresults.lasso?code=58886
I got one of those a few weeks ago and it rocks, Apple keyboard and mouses just don't compete.
Greatbape
Apr 22, 05:42 PM
Love how some people are calling a mock up down before these recent rumors ugly and calling apple out on it. If the rumors are true it won't look anything like this.
cmaier
Apr 11, 10:56 PM
+1 for TB "Target disk mode"! I am happy they kept FW800 on the newest MBPs though.
Anyone think TB will be eventually used for connecting things like cameras as well?
Canon will use it for DV.
Anyone think TB will be eventually used for connecting things like cameras as well?
Canon will use it for DV.
Paul Graham
Jan 31, 03:52 PM
Why have a Canon and a Nikon? Does that not mean you have to buy lenses for both?
Why not?
I have lenses for both, But I do have numerous adaptors that let me use my entire lens collection on all my cameras.
So I do save money in that sense.
Why do people have two or more computers, An xbox AND a ps3 etc etc etc.....
both cameras have their pros and cons, And I utilize both for their pros!
As I do with my film slr's.
Plus... I also collect cameras, Hense why i have more than one film cam.
Why not?
I have lenses for both, But I do have numerous adaptors that let me use my entire lens collection on all my cameras.
So I do save money in that sense.
Why do people have two or more computers, An xbox AND a ps3 etc etc etc.....
both cameras have their pros and cons, And I utilize both for their pros!
As I do with my film slr's.
Plus... I also collect cameras, Hense why i have more than one film cam.
BigMac79
Mar 31, 09:17 PM
That is truly ugly, it looks like an app from an earlier Ubuntu version.