From Wikipedia:

Does this not bear a resemblance to what is going on today?

Let us re-visit the 4th amendment:

Well how about this, I know this will be earth shattering to some, but the new Mac Pro might not be perfect for every application.

Personally, if I had to do some high-end computing, I would probably buy a rack of high-end PCs with linux on them.

I don't think I would bother trying to build the ultimate performance machine into a desktop. This computer Apple is selling is not intended to be the ultimate server or number cruncher. It's designed for high-end desktop publishing, audio and video editing. That's all.

If we're really switching to LEDs, why bother with these PWM-ish schemes anyway? Just use a transistor (collector) to drive the LED with a variable amount of current. This has got to be cleaner in terms of RFI, no possibility of flicker, etc.

Of course, this would not work equally well for every LED, some tuning woud be necessary... And probably a lot less efficient (but better power factor).

So then what, use encryption anyway and don't identify?

As much as I hate to say it, if you don't cause any problems or interference, you'll never even be noticed.

Ships in international waters do this all the time, sometimes with a license, mostly without.

By "some parts" you mean adding nice PCI expansion cards? Ram? Hard disk?

I think you can do all that with the new cylinder Mac. The cards will be external thunderbolt peripherals, but it's the same idea. Hard disk, even if it's not replaceable, with all that external bandwidth, you can probably find a port to stick one on. Ram is probably upgradable.

As for the CPU, if it's soldered down, all the better. Makes the machine smaller and simpler to engineer and probably more reliable. If you really think it's so important to get the next 10% higher clock speed CPU (of the same pin-compatible series), then this machine isn't for you -- go buy some blue LEDs at radioshack and a fan and put them in your PC, and then head over to egghead.com and waste your cash on a ever-so-slightly faster CPU.

You're comparing number of cores and ram. There are so many other factors.

But...

My advice to you is to go buy the machine with the most cores and most ram and be happy with it, since this new model is clearly identical to the previous model. You can also go join the so-called MHz war if you wish.

Folks,

I just read ten posts above about lack of upgradability.

Who cares!?

It's not a big deal. The days of upgrading your pc every few years are over. Two years after buying this machine, Apple will release a newer version. The newer version will be so much better (faster bus, etc), that the older one will be left in the dust and on ebay for $499.

Things have been headed this way for a long while now. Why upgrade when it's only a little more to get a new machine with the best and latest/greatest hardware inside? This argument didn't hold as much weight in the past when the computer ecosystem moved slower. These days though, we move faster.

I like upgrading because it's an interest of mine to spend/waste my time getting things as fast and cool as possible, but honestly, this is more for fun than anything. If my professional life depended on a few more GB/s, I would drop down the money and upgrade at every chance I have.

Max out the ram and other options when you buy it, and make the most of it until there's a new model.

I can relate. My username here comes from wanting to show that there are other open source alternatives to GNU.

But yes, I got fed up with Windows in the 3.11 days. I switched to Mac and Linux (and Solaris, Irix, and eventually BSD). These systems worked for me, they did what I told them to, and if they didn't, I had the time to figure it out and make it work. Eventually I became a mac user on the desktop and a debian linux fan on the server. I sort of wrote "desktop linux" off as a sort of neat but too experimental aspect of linux long ago.

These days, it's really quite amazing how much can be done with almost any mainstream platform (except maybe Windows 8, boy, that's a strange one). Computers no longer crash on a daily basis, windows has networking and multi-user support, etc.

So I do find the line is a lot grayer than it once was.

However...

At my new job, I was issued a PC with Windows 7. I have to tell you, I was impressed with how far Windows has gotten since Windows 3.11, Windows 98, etc. The thing actually was stable. I could plug in USB devices and not face the blue screen of death. I felt the UI was a bit dated, but I was willing to accept that for stability.

And this went on for a few weeks until I had a need to write a program. I mean, this was a simple program, but I felt so much resistance from the Windows platform itself towards my getting this done. Fiddled with Microsoft's compiler/IDE/VisualXYZ/MSDN/whatever it is, got fed up with the minutia. I tried Cygwin... Not really integrated enough, too different from the built-in system.

Got fed up with it, downloaded a debian linux net install cd. Haven't rebooted since. Desktop linux has also come a long way since the days of editing XF86Config and trying to get OpenGL running. The system practically caters towards developers. It's awesome. So many programs, compilers, editors, environments... And all the tools I was used to.

So yes, I agree, Windows is not the awfulness it was back in the day (except perhaps this make the desktop the tablet and make the tablet the desktop Windows 8 crap that I tried for five minutes at a computer store).

But I don't need it, I can do better.

The device is called a "firewall" and is set up by an "IT Professional"

You tell the IT guys when (or if) you want that company to be able to connect in remotely. That's it.

This is unreal...

I'll respond to this based on my most recent desktop linux box.

This is a Dell with two Nvidia graphics cards. The cards are not exactly the same, one is a '4500' model and the other is a '5000'. Or something. I run Debian -- almost always do these days -- and yeah, lots of things worked out of the box. Printing, Networking, hard disk label problems (/etc/fstab stuff), and definitely graphics -- these all had to be manually adjusted. Graphics still have issues, multi-head with two different nvidia cards is hard.

And then there's this, since I'm on 64 bit, apparently, there are some funny GTK bugs that slip up every now and then. Printer dialogue boxes come up empty. People's flesh on youtube videos is blue.... I could go on.

Please don't misunderstand me, I am a linux admin on the server side through and through (+15 years unix experience, nearly all flavors). But on the desktop side of things, I'm all Mac or, occasionally now, Debian Linux. I don't mind the occasional bug in the linux desktop experience, and I even enjoy tracking them down and fixing them. But I think there are many users that wouldn't.

Most recent install was ubuntu 12.04 on a server.

Well yeah. It's a server install. There are no high-end graphics cards, OpenGL issues, sound cards, etc etc. Linux totally rules the server world and I will never even ask for a GUI tool for a server install. Give me vi and a VT220 and it's over.

All I'm saying, is that for me, "desktop linux" installs have been similar to what I am used to on the server end of things. Not a problem for me, but definitely a stopping point for some folks.

Your laptop experience is nice -- I haven't had one go that well. Thinkpads are popular hardware with linux desktop folks though, so I would say you got as close to "supported" as can be.

No no no.

I've been using Linux for a long time. Editing config files is a must for everyone.

Unless:
1) You own a computer with an exactly perfectly supported hardware configuration (unlikely)
2) You never wish to install your own/non-package-managed programs
3) The default network configuration is perfect (and the NetworkManager/control panel hasn't screwed it up already)
4) There are no bugs in your distro to work around
5) Gnome never poops on your configuration files

This just never happens. Every time I do a "desktop linux" install, I try, really hard, to not edit configuration files. It ALWAYS comes up.

I don't hate it, but let's not be delusional. The linux gui tools are not perfect. End of story.

If you were to ask my opinion on a solution:
1) Big distros need to get together and spend a lot of time on configuration management and configuration tools.
2) Store all config in a locally run light SQL server. The access is a local XML socket. This makes it really easy to design all sorts of neat tools to manipulate the machine's configuration.

Yes that's idealistic and would take years to work out.

Do they have plastic bullets?

Sure, they would be hard to detect. Just askin'.

Also, metal detectors don't only detect solid blocks of metal. They can faintly see all sorts of objects.

So here's the deal... some people will no-doubt be screaming that a background check should be required before buying a 3D printer. And we can of course extend the argument and say background checks should be required before going to the hardware store. Etc etc.

At some point, people are going to re-look at the argument that it is people with bad judgement and/or negligence that cause gun violence and gun accidents. The arguments against guns that center on availability of equipment are valid, but there are no practical solutions.

What, take guns away from citizens? Make them harder to buy? These arguments vanish when you realize that the people committing crimes don't follow the rules, and that this country is filled with guns already in private hands. Not to mention the constitution allows for gun ownership. It just won't work.

Ok, so fast-forward to 2013 where you can 'print' your own guns or just go to the hardware store and build one the old-fashioned way.

The only practical way to protect against gun violence and gun negligence is through education. It is through learning about morals, causes and consequences, and gun safety.

Siting in front of a video game all day that awards points for kills is not going to work.

Oh, and I am not saying this is something the government can simply thrust upon people -- this will take decades of careful work from parents and educators alike. There aren't any "turn-key" solutions to gun violence and gun negligence. But the long road is worth the trip.