Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Firefox OS on this? (Score 1) 91

Perhaps someone one day will have the brilliant idea to put left/right cursor keys on the virtual keyboard so you can go back and correct part of a URL.

The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus have "cursor keys" (for left and right movement in a Text Field) on the "Landscape Mode" Keyboard Layout. The "key caps" look like "" but they are cursor keys.

Comment Re:Is it the year of the Linux desktop yet? (Score 1) 110

I don't think it is fair to claim that hardware has 8 years of support when you have to apply third-party hacks to get the newer versions of OS X to work. Isn't that pretty much the definition of unsupported?

I don't know. If we were talking about Linux, I think that you'd be arguing the other direction.

But I admit I see your point.

Sure, you can make it work, but Apple won't help you get it to work, they even go and deliberately make it harder to accomplish than it needs to be.

I agree with the first clause of your sentence; but why do you say that Apple has deliberately made it harder to accomplish than it needs to be? Just because they decided to change/delete a Framework or an API, that does NOT imply that Apple did so in order to "deliberately make it harder to accomplish". It's the "deliberately" part that I take exception to; software changes, OSes change. Almost zero percent of the time is that done to DELIBERATELY orphan/inconvenience someone who purchased a piece of expensive hardware like a Mac Pro. For one reason, in Apple's case, Mac Pro sales are SO minimal compared with their other models, that it simply wouldn't be worth the bad publicity to DELIBERATELY try and force the owners of same into a "forced upgrade".

Stop trying to ascribe ridiculous "motives" to stuff like this. It makes you look foolish.

Comment Re:Most people don't defend against creeping abuse (Score 1) 573

Explain. I am not an Apple user, so I didn't know that iPods stopped working unless you pay a subscription.

That has never been true.

Perhaps now is the time for Apple to offer Mac OS for sale to people using non-Mac PCs. They could make a killing with all of the users wanting to move away from Windows.

Except for the fact that their entire business model for OS X and Macintosh is based on HARDWARE sales. They tried licensing clones, and it damn-near bankrupted them.So, in order to make that work, they would have to charge a coupla-hundred dollars for OS X, AND resort to the draconian licensing schemes like Microsoft does with WIndows.

Comment Re:MS Wants to Own Your Machine for Good (Score 1) 573

Have you actually tried using a Mac productively?

Yep. For nearly 4 DECADES, clear back to 1984. And even for stuff like Embedded Development, CAD, PCB Design, etc.

Can't say that it has always been easy to find acceptable tools, or that I never had to resort to Windows-based tools; but it is FAR from impossible, or even difficult, really.

And it gets easier with each passing year or two...

Comment Re: gwx_control_panel (Score 1) 573

Apple didn't break compatibility with their old systems, in fact developed special tools to ease the transition between two completely different architectures!

Wow go google MacOSX Lion issues? :-) Adobe suite earlier than 4 no longer functions. Windows 10 is alot more compatible with older software than Apple by a longshot.

Lion was DEFINITELY a "transitional" version of OS X. Not making excuses; but everyone has more, and less, "backward-compatible" versions of the OSes. Lion had a Lion's share of compatibility issues, for sure; but they eventually got most, if not all, worked-out.

At least Apple has the cajones to actually try to move their OS forward, rather than simply making the spaghetti more and more entangled, like Microsoft does.

And it is interesting that you hold out Windows as being a shining example of Backwards Compatibility. When I used to have "Mac vs Windows" discussions with my (then very pro-Windows) boss, one of the things that he actually complained about with Windows was the fact that he had to re-purchase/upgrade several expensive software packages every time (or nearly every time) there was a new version of Windows. How does that square with your claim of "superior backward compatibility"?

Comment Re: And when are they going to allow 7 Enterprise (Score 1) 573

It's copyright infringement to run OS X in any of those VM products unless you're running the VM product on a Mac

Actually, that isn't exactly true. There is ONE version (and, AFAIK, ONLY one version) of OS X that you can legally run under a VM. Snow Leopard Server 10.6.8, which, if you know what to ask for, is actually STILL available as a DVD from Apple for US$20.

Apple is now selling Snow Leopard Server for $19.99 + sales tax & shipping costs at 1.800.MYAPPLE (1.800.692.7753) - Apple Part Number: MC588Z/A (telephone orders only).

You will probably have to do a little "convincing" to the Order Drone that this is still available; but as of a few months ago, at least, it still was.

Comment Re: Next year (Score 1) 122

Swift is not a good example of an innovative language. Apple just wants something that is different enough to assist developer lock-in. That's what they used to love about Obj-C: it was resistent to being ported, thanks to its incredibly weird method-calling syntax.

Right. That's why they Open Sourced Swift. Lock in, that's it.

Comment Re: Next year (Score 1) 122

I agree re figuring this basic stuff out before v1. Actually I wish Apple would save us all the hassle of sharing their experience of "learning how to make a programming language". Buy MS already and take C#, a mature and generally well-regarded language. C# 1 was usable and they didn't make weird fundamental changes constantly afterwards as Apple is with Swift. Making programming languages is kind of a well understood domain, but Swift smells like hipsters fresh out of uni to me, learning from their mistakes as they go.

There's a simple solution: Don't use Swift, or STFU.

And how many full-blown programming languages have you written?

Comment Re: Weird (Score 1) 67

You do understand that this is how software use to be, right?

The company in question puts their software on their own website and "rubber stamps" their own updates.

Even the most stringent QA will miss things... users behave and use it differently quite frequently.

Yeah, I understand that is how software used to be... When a loaf of bread was fifty cents (U.S.), cars all had carbeurators, and lot of TVs still had vacuum tubes (other than the CRT).

Oh, and before everyone and his dog wasn't trying to steal your personal info off your smartphone through the internet; because smartphones didn't exist, the "internet" was still called DARPAnet, and China was still an agrarian society...

Times change. Sometimes that means old habits have to, too.

For example, Microsoft was slow to learn that the world wasn't one big, happy, computing family, and they (well, mostly their users) suffered for decades because of it.

But by the time Android came around (especially considering it is the idiot-bastard-son of Linux, which is the idiot-bastard-knockoff of Unix) there was simply NO excuse to not have a more "hardened" approach to software distribution, like iOS does.

Call it a Walled Garden or whatever, the proof is in the pudding...

Comment Re: Brought it on themselves (Score 1) 67

They have not changed their policy. They have always allowed html / JavaScript content to be loaded. The hooks for JavaScript to access native functions is directly enabled in official APIs and has been used in Phonegap and the like for years. None of this is new. It may always have been possible to hide unused JS hooks in an app and remotely update JavaScript to use them. But this development methodology has been specifically endorsed for YEARS by Apple. What they don't allow is arbitrary code to be loaded i.e. users loading new code. Users can run their own code if they write it or copy / paste it. See the Pythonista app and its history. Apps generally have to point internally to the external JS code to load. Though that could point to additional code to load. Apple can and has shut it down if it gets too close to being 1) too close to an alternative App Store or 2) a source of abuse of policy or security by the developer.

So this is a vestige of the pre App Store days? Interesting!

Comment Re:Brought it on themselves (Score 1) 67

I hope that Apple changes the iOS App Store approval process to look for this insanely-dangerous BACKDOOR, and make the inclusion of that cause for instant REJECTION of the App.

I'm curious when exactly they changed their policy in the first place. Apple used to reject any application that tried to do anything like this.

I would bet they haven't changed their policy. This is either a b.s. Story, or something that has slipped past Apple (until now).

Slashdot Top Deals

Getting the job done is no excuse for not following the rules. Corollary: Following the rules will not get the job done.