xPismo
Oct 28, 04:22 PM
Didn't the Open Darwin project get shut down a few months back already? I don't like the concept of Apple loosing its open kernel due to someone reading between the lines on what is legal and what is right. Thats sad.
Even when you talk to these people they eventually get around to saying that everything "digital" should be free. I assume they don't really work for a living and think that welfare should be universal and include them de novo, probably play/sing " The Internationale" at sunrise and bedtime and have never paid taxes or at least intend not to.
I would NEVER hire anyone like this since they obviously have NO problem with stealing others' hard work.
Gah, that is a wild generalisation of many distinct groups which have nothing in common. Can we please differentiate from OpenSource and Cracked Software? You are giving the most interesting component of modern software a bad name. :mad:
Hello guys,I found some more info about open source 10.4.8 kernel. :D <snip> Check it out...
Best thing about that link is the youTube "and Boom!" video of SJ. :cool:
Even when you talk to these people they eventually get around to saying that everything "digital" should be free. I assume they don't really work for a living and think that welfare should be universal and include them de novo, probably play/sing " The Internationale" at sunrise and bedtime and have never paid taxes or at least intend not to.
I would NEVER hire anyone like this since they obviously have NO problem with stealing others' hard work.
Gah, that is a wild generalisation of many distinct groups which have nothing in common. Can we please differentiate from OpenSource and Cracked Software? You are giving the most interesting component of modern software a bad name. :mad:
Hello guys,I found some more info about open source 10.4.8 kernel. :D <snip> Check it out...
Best thing about that link is the youTube "and Boom!" video of SJ. :cool:
Yamcha
Apr 30, 07:50 PM
I've been using OSX Lion for a day, so far its pretty great, except I don't understand why Apple didn't add an option for a mouse shortcut for Launchpad =/, it would make things so much easier..
ChrisA
Sep 26, 11:42 AM
In a perfect world it would figure out your specs and use what it can.
Then it is pretty much a perfect world.
The guts of the Image Units are written in a subset of OpenGL Shading Langage and run on either the GPU or CPU as is appropriate for the hardware. But I don't know the gradularity. I think it is on a per Image Unit basis. So (say) "Gamma Adjust" might run on the GPU while "Perspective Transform" might run on a CPU. Where it runs is different dependiig on what hardware you have. Tiger's Core Image has about 100 Image Units and there is a way for programmers to add more. It is reasonable to asume that Aprture adds some of it's own.
This stuff is explained in some detail at http://developer.apple.com/
Then it is pretty much a perfect world.
The guts of the Image Units are written in a subset of OpenGL Shading Langage and run on either the GPU or CPU as is appropriate for the hardware. But I don't know the gradularity. I think it is on a per Image Unit basis. So (say) "Gamma Adjust" might run on the GPU while "Perspective Transform" might run on a CPU. Where it runs is different dependiig on what hardware you have. Tiger's Core Image has about 100 Image Units and there is a way for programmers to add more. It is reasonable to asume that Aprture adds some of it's own.
This stuff is explained in some detail at http://developer.apple.com/
sunfast
Oct 3, 06:15 PM
And for me it comes full circle....
I couldn't believe it today when I checked my profile that I've been a member here for nearly a year. But it makes sense - Jobsie keynoting MWSF 2006 was front page news when I joined.
Here's to another great MacWorld :)
I couldn't believe it today when I checked my profile that I've been a member here for nearly a year. But it makes sense - Jobsie keynoting MWSF 2006 was front page news when I joined.
Here's to another great MacWorld :)
GadgetAddict
Apr 29, 01:55 PM
What stage will this be stable enough to use as your main OS? :apple:
When it is publicly released.
When it is publicly released.
wirelessmacuser
Dec 16, 05:22 PM
4G is a myth
V CAST Media Manager is Verizon's version of Apples walled garden of content sales and control. They are not compatible.
This ought to be interesting. It was a deal breaker the first time Apple pitched the iPhone to Verizon, perhaps this time they've caved, so they could join Apple and hope some of the hype & success slides their way.
This is going to be one interesting movie.... :)
V CAST Media Manager is Verizon's version of Apples walled garden of content sales and control. They are not compatible.
This ought to be interesting. It was a deal breaker the first time Apple pitched the iPhone to Verizon, perhaps this time they've caved, so they could join Apple and hope some of the hype & success slides their way.
This is going to be one interesting movie.... :)
KnightWRX
Apr 29, 05:24 PM
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x.
NT 4 and Windows 95/98 don't use the same kernel at all. They might share the GUI sub-system (actually, it's called the Win32 sub-system, which is probably what Windows Team blog is referring when referring to API versions, since Win32 is the Windows API) (and yes, I know the 64 bit version is called Win64, just like the 16 bit version was called Win16), but they do not share the same architecture/kernel at all, which Smitty inferred. So no, Smitty wasn't right at all, is use of the word kernel was wrong and confusing.
Anyway, the only way it makes sense again is Windows NT releases. I doubt the Windows Team Blog are in on marketing meetings. ;)
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x.
NT 4 and Windows 95/98 don't use the same kernel at all. They might share the GUI sub-system (actually, it's called the Win32 sub-system, which is probably what Windows Team blog is referring when referring to API versions, since Win32 is the Windows API) (and yes, I know the 64 bit version is called Win64, just like the 16 bit version was called Win16), but they do not share the same architecture/kernel at all, which Smitty inferred. So no, Smitty wasn't right at all, is use of the word kernel was wrong and confusing.
Anyway, the only way it makes sense again is Windows NT releases. I doubt the Windows Team Blog are in on marketing meetings. ;)
likemyorbs
Apr 15, 03:16 PM
It bothers me a little when gay suffrage is pitted against something like slavery. Just not the same, IMO.
Gay suffrage? Wow i never knew gays were denied the right to vote! :eek:
Gay suffrage? Wow i never knew gays were denied the right to vote! :eek:
iMeowbot
Oct 28, 06:59 PM
Interesting. So does Apple just put their stuff up under ASPL and let the FreeBSD commiters sift through it?
Yeah. This is the same situation that caused some strife between the WebKit and KHTML projects, although in the BSD world it's not such a hot button issue.
Okay. Everyone's got their own morals, but if a few people are putting OS X on their PCs, I don't see it as a huge issue. Given how complicated it is it's not really a *problem*. But if a rich company like Apple takes a free thing and makes money off of it and only gives some of it back to the community that created it and gave it away, that seems less moral (this is my opinion) regardless of what the legal documents say.
Thing is, the BSD community as a whole want the proprietary option open. They avoid taking code from places like the Linux kernel in order to keep GPL terms from coming into play; GPL stuff is segregated into separate packages. Apple aren't getting away with some technicality, the ability to keep source closed is one of the touted features of BSD.
Yeah. This is the same situation that caused some strife between the WebKit and KHTML projects, although in the BSD world it's not such a hot button issue.
Okay. Everyone's got their own morals, but if a few people are putting OS X on their PCs, I don't see it as a huge issue. Given how complicated it is it's not really a *problem*. But if a rich company like Apple takes a free thing and makes money off of it and only gives some of it back to the community that created it and gave it away, that seems less moral (this is my opinion) regardless of what the legal documents say.
Thing is, the BSD community as a whole want the proprietary option open. They avoid taking code from places like the Linux kernel in order to keep GPL terms from coming into play; GPL stuff is segregated into separate packages. Apple aren't getting away with some technicality, the ability to keep source closed is one of the touted features of BSD.
*LTD*
Apr 22, 09:01 AM
Seriously you hate it when MS fans get their hopes up :rolleyes: Given your blind fanboyism, I doubt very much you have much empathy for anything related to MS.
Comparing Apple's achievements favourably to the late and flat-footed competition doesn't make me biased. It makes me accurate. Being enthusiastic about it, however, does make me biased. But that's like being biased toward chocolate. A good thing is a good thing, any way you slice it.
If you don't like reading pro-Apple posts, then you can put me on ignore or hang out on Neowin. Now if you're looking for "blind", you'll most certainly find plenty of that there, plus copious doses of delusion. If you're lucky, they might even give out "there's always next year" and "rounding error" t-shirts and mousepads. :D
Comparing Apple's achievements favourably to the late and flat-footed competition doesn't make me biased. It makes me accurate. Being enthusiastic about it, however, does make me biased. But that's like being biased toward chocolate. A good thing is a good thing, any way you slice it.
If you don't like reading pro-Apple posts, then you can put me on ignore or hang out on Neowin. Now if you're looking for "blind", you'll most certainly find plenty of that there, plus copious doses of delusion. If you're lucky, they might even give out "there's always next year" and "rounding error" t-shirts and mousepads. :D
killuminati
Sep 8, 09:52 AM
So Saunders then what you're saying is that to believe in god you can't swear? He's not sending mixed messages because his songs aren't saying ******* god.
And just so you know, compared to any other big rappers right now, Kanye doesn't swear at all. He has the cleanest lyrics of any of the current big rappers because he isn't gangsta rap.
And just so you know, compared to any other big rappers right now, Kanye doesn't swear at all. He has the cleanest lyrics of any of the current big rappers because he isn't gangsta rap.
l3lack J4ck
Nov 25, 01:51 AM
i know this isnt about the black friday news but...does apple honor tax free businesses? my dad owns a tax free business so if i brought him w/ me and he had a paper htat signified he was tax free...would i get the educational and tax free?
PowerGamerX
Mar 24, 08:38 PM
Happy birthday OS X.
Although, OS X was never really that good until 10.3. 10.4 was pretty good too. Leopard and Snow Leopard are fantastic though.
Although, OS X was never really that good until 10.3. 10.4 was pretty good too. Leopard and Snow Leopard are fantastic though.
usher
Apr 15, 08:33 PM
i just wondering why apple never consider about something unusual...:apple::o
wigga69uk
Sep 12, 08:29 AM
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/win.html
bottom left of page
bottom left of page
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
Nekbeth
Apr 25, 05:37 PM
Because I have a button that receives the action "cancelTime" in IB. I wonder if I need to add something to userInfo parameter in the cancelTime method. Please correct me if I'm missing something.
EDIT:
UPdate !!,
This ag reminds me of of a
lake griffin tea bag dunk. Shoulder Camera Bags and Sling; Shoulder Camera Bags and Sling. Chundles. Sep 12, 08:16 AM
EDIT:
UPdate !!,
BJNY
Jan 14, 12:37 PM
My computers dedicated for pro digital photography don't require more than ~5GB for the OS and apps, so that would leave 25GB for RAW data. 64SSD would certainly give more breathing room since most sessions are 20GB to 50GB.
samcraig
May 2, 12:28 PM
Well I find it funny that people are actually defending something Apple admitted to being a bug. Intentional or not - Location Services was supposed to be user selectable.
That's no conspiracy theory. It's a simple concept that doesn't need Apple to educate anyone on. Even toddlers grasp the concept of on and off.
I also, personally, don't like being talked down to by Jobs/Apple whenever they have a press conference. The whole angle of "oh.. it's our fault for not educating the consumer" is PR crap and deflection.
"It Just Works".... unless it's the location services switch. Whoops ;)
That's no conspiracy theory. It's a simple concept that doesn't need Apple to educate anyone on. Even toddlers grasp the concept of on and off.
I also, personally, don't like being talked down to by Jobs/Apple whenever they have a press conference. The whole angle of "oh.. it's our fault for not educating the consumer" is PR crap and deflection.
"It Just Works".... unless it's the location services switch. Whoops ;)
iansilv
Apr 15, 01:39 PM
LOL at the perspective on the text in the 3rd photo. :D
FAKE.
Oh- yeah- you're right. I see that now- yeah I agree it's fake. I still like it though.
FAKE.
Oh- yeah- you're right. I see that now- yeah I agree it's fake. I still like it though.
GadgetAddict
Apr 29, 01:55 PM
What stage will this be stable enough to use as your main OS? :apple:
When it is publicly released.
When it is publicly released.
bigbro1096
Apr 25, 06:11 PM
Well, I have kept $200 in my savings account since Christmas and that's pretty much a feat in it's self. Anyways, I really need the iPhone 4S/5 to be released at WWDC and be some nice updates otherwise I'm going to be upset. I've had every iPhone since the 3G and each was released at WWDC so I don't know why they'll start now.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 11:43 AM
400 pre-splits shares?
My God, man. That's some profit!! :cool:
I believe that translates roughly into a 1,900% return on investment.
I could tell, my broker thought I was certifiable when I put in the buy orders. BTW, he didn't have a computer at home in those days. Now he's got an iMac. ;)
My God, man. That's some profit!! :cool:
I believe that translates roughly into a 1,900% return on investment.
I could tell, my broker thought I was certifiable when I put in the buy orders. BTW, he didn't have a computer at home in those days. Now he's got an iMac. ;)
starflyer
Mar 28, 03:32 PM
What exactly is a 'hater'? Someone that disagrees with the company line? Someone with a dissenting opinion?
He didn't say everyone who cries foul is a hater.
He didn't say everyone who cries foul is a hater.
No comments:
Post a Comment