calcvita
May 3, 03:46 AM
apple needs to do something about this whole uninstallation process. apps like appcleaner exist and they do exist for a very good reason. if i uninstall an app, i want it to completely be gone.
and what if you have a corrupted .plist file which causes the application to misbehave? by simply drag & drop the app into the trashcan leaves its associated files untouched and re-installing the app won't fix the problem.
on many troubleshooting guides a very common suggestion is to remove the preference file, located in the user (in most cases) library folder, but in lion this folder is hidden and if you ask me, this will confuse newbies even more. i'm sure there will be comments like "but i don't have a library folder" and so on.
and what if you have a corrupted .plist file which causes the application to misbehave? by simply drag & drop the app into the trashcan leaves its associated files untouched and re-installing the app won't fix the problem.
on many troubleshooting guides a very common suggestion is to remove the preference file, located in the user (in most cases) library folder, but in lion this folder is hidden and if you ask me, this will confuse newbies even more. i'm sure there will be comments like "but i don't have a library folder" and so on.
Yankee617
Apr 21, 12:41 PM
If someone breaks into my home and hacks into my Mac (using the OS X DVD to do a password reset), I have a lot more worries than whether they know how to find out what neighborhoods� cell towers I�ve used! Luckily, encrypting your iPhone backup is simple, automatic, and unbreakable; and has the added benefit that then your iPhone�s keychain gets included in the backup. (Otherwise it doesn�t, with good reason.)
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
So somebody sues you for (insert nefarious activity of your choice) and you deny it saying you were nowhere near Location-X at the time. Then, under rules of disclosure, they subpeona your iPhone/iPad/MBP/TC to obtain your data. The data shows you were at least in the vicinity of Location-X and so had the opportunity to perform (aforesaid nefarious activity). They win their case and you are required to pay $250K in damages, not to mention the $50K you already spent in legal fees. Did you do it? Maybe not... but it doesn't matter, they won and you lost.
I agree that the location data should be dumped... every few hours... so the files contain minimal information. Backups should exclude all this location data. I cannot imagine why any application needs to know my location from more than a few hours ago.
BTW> Is this location data collected on "Wi-Fi Only" iPads? I understand that such iPads do have/use location services, only its not as accurate.
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
So somebody sues you for (insert nefarious activity of your choice) and you deny it saying you were nowhere near Location-X at the time. Then, under rules of disclosure, they subpeona your iPhone/iPad/MBP/TC to obtain your data. The data shows you were at least in the vicinity of Location-X and so had the opportunity to perform (aforesaid nefarious activity). They win their case and you are required to pay $250K in damages, not to mention the $50K you already spent in legal fees. Did you do it? Maybe not... but it doesn't matter, they won and you lost.
I agree that the location data should be dumped... every few hours... so the files contain minimal information. Backups should exclude all this location data. I cannot imagine why any application needs to know my location from more than a few hours ago.
BTW> Is this location data collected on "Wi-Fi Only" iPads? I understand that such iPads do have/use location services, only its not as accurate.
freeny
Jan 1, 07:29 PM
Unless something not mentioned yet is unveiled this Macworld will be just an average event.
I used to be excited about a full screen iPod but the rumors have brought about so many disappointments pertaining to the release date that I don't care any more.
The phone is so over hyped that anything short of a miracle product will be a huge letdown.
iTV has already been announced before and its inclusion in in this MW has been practically promised by SJ himself. If its only a streaming device then for the predicted price it sounds nice but nothing Im going to run out and get. Throw in an encoder and tivo like function and I might grab one.
A Leopard release would be cool but we all know that aint happening.
Perhaps Ill be proven wrong.....
I used to be excited about a full screen iPod but the rumors have brought about so many disappointments pertaining to the release date that I don't care any more.
The phone is so over hyped that anything short of a miracle product will be a huge letdown.
iTV has already been announced before and its inclusion in in this MW has been practically promised by SJ himself. If its only a streaming device then for the predicted price it sounds nice but nothing Im going to run out and get. Throw in an encoder and tivo like function and I might grab one.
A Leopard release would be cool but we all know that aint happening.
Perhaps Ill be proven wrong.....
UnreaL
Sep 7, 03:07 PM
I have been a Mac user since 1986. I'm not a superuser or a gamer, but the one thing I have learned is to avoid models with too much built-in obsolescence (e.g. my old firewire-less, low-resolution clamshell iBook and the late-model CD-burner-less white iBook G3 that replaced it, not to mention the Powerbook 150 [agh!], Mac Classic [aaagggh!], etc.). Except for the lack of built-in DVD capability, the lampshade 700 MHZ G4 iMac has been a great investment.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
To me the move to intel has made Mac a viable option, especially given Bootcamp.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
To me the move to intel has made Mac a viable option, especially given Bootcamp.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 12:56 PM
I wish there were more affordable Diesels in the States. A Cruze might be a bit "too" affordable, but neither can I step up to a Mercedes. The BMW 330d is sweet, though. I have to rule out VWs based on a personal bias. What to do... :o
The VW diesels are very well-built cars. A friend bought an '09 Jetta TDI and he is satisfied with it. I checked out the BMW 335d at the Detroit Auto show a year ago or so, and while I like the car BMW only offers it as a sedan and the base price is a laughably expensive $44k. If you won't buy a VW and want a newish diesel, your only other vaguely affordable option is a used W210/W211 (1996-2009) Mercedes Benz E-Class diesel. Nice cars, but you'll have to find one and it will be used (and not particularly cheap).
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
Chrysler is particularly stupid in my opinion, because they should have put the Mercedes diesel engines from the Sprinter van (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Sprinter#North_America), which they were already selling here, into the Ram. The Sprinter came with four, five and six cylinder diesels that would fit into a variety of other vehicles, and would be particularly useful in trucks and SUVs. While weaker than the biggest V8s, they still offer a lot of torque for their size and much better fuel economy. Why, Chrysler? Why?
Mercedes sells the Sprinter here now, so the opportunity was lost for Chrysler.
The VW diesels are very well-built cars. A friend bought an '09 Jetta TDI and he is satisfied with it. I checked out the BMW 335d at the Detroit Auto show a year ago or so, and while I like the car BMW only offers it as a sedan and the base price is a laughably expensive $44k. If you won't buy a VW and want a newish diesel, your only other vaguely affordable option is a used W210/W211 (1996-2009) Mercedes Benz E-Class diesel. Nice cars, but you'll have to find one and it will be used (and not particularly cheap).
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
Chrysler is particularly stupid in my opinion, because they should have put the Mercedes diesel engines from the Sprinter van (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Sprinter#North_America), which they were already selling here, into the Ram. The Sprinter came with four, five and six cylinder diesels that would fit into a variety of other vehicles, and would be particularly useful in trucks and SUVs. While weaker than the biggest V8s, they still offer a lot of torque for their size and much better fuel economy. Why, Chrysler? Why?
Mercedes sells the Sprinter here now, so the opportunity was lost for Chrysler.
TMay
Apr 19, 10:56 AM
Please...Please...Please...provide a pro graphics card option (FirePro or Quadro)
Frisco
Sep 6, 09:41 PM
After following all this stuff today, I am really concerned about whateverthehell it is that will be announced next week. There seems to
be limited interest in movie downloads, when there are already good alternatives (netflix, the local video shop, etc.) There are definitely some
questions if that would/will even fly. I, for one, don't really care if I rent. I have a bunch of DVD movies, but rarely view them more than twice. So... even though an apple movie download service comes along, I really wonder how successful it will be. Which leads me to wonder... The Steve is not dumb. He is not going to order up a special meeting like this for something that may turn out to be nothing... Hell, it is apparently viewed by apple as much more important than the introduction of the 24" iMac, which is a heck of an interesting gadget. Do you think that there may be some REALLY BIG new technological/hardware gizmo being intro'd? Something that makes the movie store just a minor part of a larger picture. I keep thinking, Apple is a hardware company. Always has been. SHOW ME THE HARDWARE!
Agreed! On-Demand is the future for movies. It just needs more of a selection then it's perfect.
Downloading movies is of limited interest to most people. Just give up the Mac Media Center (iHome) and we'll all be happy campers come Tuesday!
be limited interest in movie downloads, when there are already good alternatives (netflix, the local video shop, etc.) There are definitely some
questions if that would/will even fly. I, for one, don't really care if I rent. I have a bunch of DVD movies, but rarely view them more than twice. So... even though an apple movie download service comes along, I really wonder how successful it will be. Which leads me to wonder... The Steve is not dumb. He is not going to order up a special meeting like this for something that may turn out to be nothing... Hell, it is apparently viewed by apple as much more important than the introduction of the 24" iMac, which is a heck of an interesting gadget. Do you think that there may be some REALLY BIG new technological/hardware gizmo being intro'd? Something that makes the movie store just a minor part of a larger picture. I keep thinking, Apple is a hardware company. Always has been. SHOW ME THE HARDWARE!
Agreed! On-Demand is the future for movies. It just needs more of a selection then it's perfect.
Downloading movies is of limited interest to most people. Just give up the Mac Media Center (iHome) and we'll all be happy campers come Tuesday!
Mydel
Jan 1, 06:56 PM
I'm not expecting too much but some update to MBP would be welcome. Like new magneting latches as MB has, and maybe better screen and graphic card.....everyone can dream...
appleguy123
Apr 12, 09:04 PM
[img]http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275779449.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661120&Signature=nuq9DTy9AX2iOGRh%2Fy1XWUXDzaA%3D[/mg]
well, in cast there was any doubt.
Yes!
well, in cast there was any doubt.
Yes!
skunk
Mar 21, 05:39 PM
Loyalists blow with the wind, and the prevailing wind happens to be from Vichy. .... sorry, Tripoli. :oI think that's the prevailing water.
celticpride678
Apr 3, 12:51 AM
??? My 25gb partition was clean and blank when I installed Lion DP 1 and I think that's the case for most others as well. I'm not sure where you heard that, if I'm understanding you correctly.
It worked for me too on DP1. On DP2, I had to install Snow Leopard first.
It worked for me too on DP1. On DP2, I had to install Snow Leopard first.
mc68k
Oct 5, 06:41 PM
hey, congrats to you for 6 million!!thanks! with those bigadv units i almost feel like im cheating!
polsons
Jan 11, 07:20 AM
As a fellow Australian imac_japan i'll support your enthusiasm, but as one who is old enough to have actually witnessed the history of Apple I think you are about to be enormously disappointed
If indeed a headless Mac does materialize, it will not be the first to have come from Apple. Apple have tried this concept many times before and all attempts have failed miserably. Maybe a dual G5 Cube for the price of an eMac might have some success, but a miserably under specified G4 (as is being claimed) is DEAD even before it hits the stores.
True the end may be near for Apple's hardware (5 or 10 years so to speak), but MacOS will be around for as long as computers continue to be manufactured. Even the most pessimistic analyst will concede that MacOS X and Apple's apps on x86 would see Microsoft as the world's second largest software developer. And who really cares about the hardware. The best PC hardware is every bit as good as Apple's hardware....it's just that the software stinks.
Let's be honest here. Do we really want Mac OS X to become MS Windows? Yes, Windows has thousands of apps not available on Mac, but most are developed by egotistical script kiddies with absolutely no idea of what they are doing, and then trying to pass it off as the greatest app ever written solely because they coded it. The best Windows apps always have been and probably always will be available on Mac. But they are long established mature apps developed by long established developers. If you can't afford them, then buy a PC and be content with using script kiddie crap.
And therein lies the unique and most appealing aspect of Apple hardware. MORONS can't afford it. As long as Apple keeps developing MacOS X and morons are forced to buy Windows PC's, I'll remain very happy with the current situation as it stands. No $499 headless Mac and no Mac in every home for me thank you. As far as I am concerned, the last thing I want to see is a user base swarming with dickheads. Windows has already reached that plateau, and sadly Linux is running not that far behind.
If indeed a headless Mac does materialize, it will not be the first to have come from Apple. Apple have tried this concept many times before and all attempts have failed miserably. Maybe a dual G5 Cube for the price of an eMac might have some success, but a miserably under specified G4 (as is being claimed) is DEAD even before it hits the stores.
True the end may be near for Apple's hardware (5 or 10 years so to speak), but MacOS will be around for as long as computers continue to be manufactured. Even the most pessimistic analyst will concede that MacOS X and Apple's apps on x86 would see Microsoft as the world's second largest software developer. And who really cares about the hardware. The best PC hardware is every bit as good as Apple's hardware....it's just that the software stinks.
Let's be honest here. Do we really want Mac OS X to become MS Windows? Yes, Windows has thousands of apps not available on Mac, but most are developed by egotistical script kiddies with absolutely no idea of what they are doing, and then trying to pass it off as the greatest app ever written solely because they coded it. The best Windows apps always have been and probably always will be available on Mac. But they are long established mature apps developed by long established developers. If you can't afford them, then buy a PC and be content with using script kiddie crap.
And therein lies the unique and most appealing aspect of Apple hardware. MORONS can't afford it. As long as Apple keeps developing MacOS X and morons are forced to buy Windows PC's, I'll remain very happy with the current situation as it stands. No $499 headless Mac and no Mac in every home for me thank you. As far as I am concerned, the last thing I want to see is a user base swarming with dickheads. Windows has already reached that plateau, and sadly Linux is running not that far behind.
Chaszmyr
Jul 18, 01:44 AM
Good news and bad news. Movies good, rental bad if not offered with sale. However, if rentals are cheap, I'd probably just as soon rent so i could buy the physical disc which would be much higher quality anyway.
Peterkro
Mar 23, 01:53 PM
Anti-Daffy sites attacked including:
http://feb17.info/
Back up now.:mad:
http://feb17.info/
Back up now.:mad:
timmillwood
Aug 25, 05:08 AM
If they bring out a core2duo mac mini it will be faster than my 18month old power mac.
cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook pro
cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook pro
SciFrog
Nov 19, 06:16 AM
5 here at home, although the mac pro must use as much power as the four other combined...
MagnusVonMagnum
Sep 14, 04:16 PM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
My personal opinion is that you and anyone else like you on here that thinks it's NOT a good idea for Consumer Reports to look out for the best interests of the CONSUMER instead of Apple's bottom line doesn't deserve the time of day, in my humble opinion. You seem to believe that Consumer Reports should simply be an automatic blessing to Apple's profits as if they were acting solely on advertising dollars (like a certain magazine called "Stereo Review" used to do all the time) and shouldn't inform their readers of potential problems. All I can say is THANK GOD that YOU don't work for them!!!! :p
Consumer reports gave a fair and HONEST report on the iPhone giving its highest score based on its merits but gave an honest reason WHY they could not recommend it and let the consumer decide for themselves if they want to take the risk. In short, they are doing their job properly.
So I'll reiterate AGAIN that I do not comprehend how someone like yourself could find fault with that line of reasoning other than to admit that you are a Steve Jobs drone. :rolleyes:
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
My personal opinion is that you and anyone else like you on here that thinks it's NOT a good idea for Consumer Reports to look out for the best interests of the CONSUMER instead of Apple's bottom line doesn't deserve the time of day, in my humble opinion. You seem to believe that Consumer Reports should simply be an automatic blessing to Apple's profits as if they were acting solely on advertising dollars (like a certain magazine called "Stereo Review" used to do all the time) and shouldn't inform their readers of potential problems. All I can say is THANK GOD that YOU don't work for them!!!! :p
Consumer reports gave a fair and HONEST report on the iPhone giving its highest score based on its merits but gave an honest reason WHY they could not recommend it and let the consumer decide for themselves if they want to take the risk. In short, they are doing their job properly.
So I'll reiterate AGAIN that I do not comprehend how someone like yourself could find fault with that line of reasoning other than to admit that you are a Steve Jobs drone. :rolleyes:
aiqw9182
Mar 25, 08:53 PM
You fail to understand the difference between "API" and "API-class" hardware.
I lol'd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
I lol'd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Evangelion
Jul 20, 11:36 AM
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
63dot
Jan 5, 12:31 AM
NICE!!! I use to have a '71 2002. Granted it had rotted rockers, faded paint and a leaking rear main seal. But the thing started on the coldest day of the year. I loved that car. I'll try to dig up pics.
That's the old BMW for you, tough as nails. I wish BMW, Volvo, and Mercedes still made cars like they used to but building cars that rugged and long lasting is terrible for the bottom line.
I see more '70s BMWs than '80s models out there and it's probably around then that they got smart and built in obsolescence. That being said, I loved the look of the '80s BMWs and at the time, and I thought they were making a huge step up from the 2002. Little did we know.
That's the old BMW for you, tough as nails. I wish BMW, Volvo, and Mercedes still made cars like they used to but building cars that rugged and long lasting is terrible for the bottom line.
I see more '70s BMWs than '80s models out there and it's probably around then that they got smart and built in obsolescence. That being said, I loved the look of the '80s BMWs and at the time, and I thought they were making a huge step up from the 2002. Little did we know.
Sbrocket
Jan 11, 04:55 PM
Interesting name, corroborates with the poster that came out earlier.
It also, obviously, fits with what's sure to be a very light product. Get it? Something in the air? Hah, I bet we can all tell who was the brainchild behind this...
It also, obviously, fits with what's sure to be a very light product. Get it? Something in the air? Hah, I bet we can all tell who was the brainchild behind this...
kultschar
Mar 26, 09:49 AM
I don't think the problem here is cost. Lots of people want an iPad, so this is like a fringe benefit. It's more about logistics. I don't think it makes sense to run two screens, and tether an iPad to the TV.
Heh, true, I use my iPhone as a Netflix player. Yet, I don't have to hold the iPhone to do it. I just set it up and enjoy the movie. An iPad is a nice tablet, but not a great controller.
I think a USB controller, going to the iPad 2 - that's connected to a TV - makes more sense. Then, it's like a real gaming console. Another possibility... the iPad 2 camera could be used for motion detection. Then, the gaming can be like the Wii or XBOX 360 Kinect.
My problem here is the cable � HDMI cables are usually short.
This is progress though.
I'm not bashing the iPad. I think it's cool. It's clearly the leader in the tablet market. Yet, I don't think this is the direction to go for gaming. I think the Apple TV makes more sense.
Apple TV � With a Camera � and that changes things.
FaceTime, Games, Apps on the TV.
But again, the controller is the problem. Apple is not leading here. It should set the standard, not let developers create Frankenstein gaming consoles. This isn't the Pipen. Apple has a strong opportunity to enter the game console space. I don't see a reason to delay.
Hmm - Apple TV with similar storage e.g. 32GB, 64GB, the ATV remote also acting as the gamepad (kinda like the wii control)
Games are compatible with both iPad and Apple TV (only buy once) and have the choice to play them on iPad or on ATV!!!
Sync from iTunes to put the games on both devices!
Now that would be cool - games are relatively cheap compared to consoles etc and they can also be used wit your iPhone and iPad (all Universal)
Heh, true, I use my iPhone as a Netflix player. Yet, I don't have to hold the iPhone to do it. I just set it up and enjoy the movie. An iPad is a nice tablet, but not a great controller.
I think a USB controller, going to the iPad 2 - that's connected to a TV - makes more sense. Then, it's like a real gaming console. Another possibility... the iPad 2 camera could be used for motion detection. Then, the gaming can be like the Wii or XBOX 360 Kinect.
My problem here is the cable � HDMI cables are usually short.
This is progress though.
I'm not bashing the iPad. I think it's cool. It's clearly the leader in the tablet market. Yet, I don't think this is the direction to go for gaming. I think the Apple TV makes more sense.
Apple TV � With a Camera � and that changes things.
FaceTime, Games, Apps on the TV.
But again, the controller is the problem. Apple is not leading here. It should set the standard, not let developers create Frankenstein gaming consoles. This isn't the Pipen. Apple has a strong opportunity to enter the game console space. I don't see a reason to delay.
Hmm - Apple TV with similar storage e.g. 32GB, 64GB, the ATV remote also acting as the gamepad (kinda like the wii control)
Games are compatible with both iPad and Apple TV (only buy once) and have the choice to play them on iPad or on ATV!!!
Sync from iTunes to put the games on both devices!
Now that would be cool - games are relatively cheap compared to consoles etc and they can also be used wit your iPhone and iPad (all Universal)
Frosticus
Apr 21, 05:20 AM
Performance and specifications determine whether or not it's a "Pro", not the people who use them. I'm not a professional race car driver, but my car has over 400hp. Does that mean that my car is not the high-performance sports car that the automotive world widely claims it to be?
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Agreed, the "Pro" bit is referring to it's spec relative to the standard MacBook.. not to the users.. :rolleyes:
BTW - has anyone else noticed the shipping times for the Mac Pros? 12-core and server are now 3-5 days in UK and US stores. Is this a slip also ahead of potential refresh? /optimism
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Agreed, the "Pro" bit is referring to it's spec relative to the standard MacBook.. not to the users.. :rolleyes:
BTW - has anyone else noticed the shipping times for the Mac Pros? 12-core and server are now 3-5 days in UK and US stores. Is this a slip also ahead of potential refresh? /optimism
No comments:
Post a Comment