I strongly believe Word peaked with Word 4.2 on the Mac - System 6, 1Mb RAM. There are those who would argue 5.1a on the Mac because it included envelope printing, but it was much, much slower and needed more like 2 or 4Mb.

Then they unified the version numbers across the platforms and moved to this pcode stuff in v6. This was so bad and so slow on the Mac that they actually issued an apology for it. Things have gone downhill since then, and v6 was released 1994.

You haven't? How about this evidence, or this evidence, or perhaps this evidence, or...

You get the idea. The article doesn't say anything about a court order one way or the other, so we simply don't know the state there. Given previous track record, it's likely the request was made legally if Apple complied with it.

You''ve added the word 'more' here and that wasn't in the original statement. The original statement is 100% correct. It would also be correct for Java, Javascript , C#...but it's still correctly used here.

That other things are also bad is no reason to not try to look at and change your own situation.

If I could paraphrase slightly - "other than the primary use case, there are no use cases". What you describe is exactly the use case - people running full desktop environments or closed-off deployment environments on top of a VMware frame.

A migration for many organisations would be huge to organise and costly since big bang-style would be out of the question. Lots of migrations that kick off let's say today wouldn't have concluded within 3-5 years. Would not shock me if longer exists as well.

In what way is it locked? It's a Unix box with a pretty front end, it doesn't restrict software installed and you can swap out anything.

iOS - yes, and I can't really think of a good use of an iPad for me. But the Mac is an open machine.

It's legal proceedings. He should have made his calls to Mumbo Jumbo. Abra Kadabra is purely for client presentation calls.

The point isn't to use it. The point is to stop you using the actually open source competitor. They're trying to get you concentrated on using nvidia kit until you're bored of AI, not on some general purpose kit until you're bored of AI. That's it - this isn't quite 'embrace, extend, extinguish' it's more 'announce, divert, extinguish'.

Less alliterative, but still true.

Yes - Apple have testified that they do not link data from the applications together. The 3rd party ones do link the data together. Hence the law suit.
br I'm neither the defence nor the prosecution so I don't have internal Apple evidence. The case has gone through before though, hence my title of "oh no not again". The solution had been agreed by the competition regulators, this is the 3rd parties opening it all up again.

Been following this one out of morbid curiosity for a few months. The reason the Apple ones don't show the same prompts as the third-party ones is they don't do the tracking as those third-parties. If they do, they ask for the same permission. Apple don't want to prompt for permission to do something they're not doing (at least in that app).

Personally I hope all the ad tracking of both sides just dies in a fire, but it does seem completely reasonable not to be forced to prompt to get permission for something you're not actually doing or going to do.

I knew someone who worked at Psygnosis (later Studio Liverpool, later dead...), and got to play early cuts of Ridge Racer and Wipeout. It was clear at the time that this was a step above anything else that was out and it was going to be a huge success.

I also remember hating the name when it first appeared as well - PSX was the pre-launch name, and it seems to have stuck around in people's consciousness since as well.

The real-life initialLuddites were protesting working conditions and quality, not the machines per se. They threatened to destroy the machines because of low pay and poor quality output when they were made to operate them. That movement changed, and did eventually look more like a full on "destroy the machines" movement, true.

It's a pet hobby-horse of mine - the origins of the movement are far more nuanced, and directly applicable in fact, than the dismissive way we use the word today.

And the home computer wars started before the console ways. British playgrounds in the 1980s were full of ZX Spectrum vs BBC Micro, and later vs Commodore 64. Throw in the Amstrads, Dragon32, Oric Atmos and I even knew someone with a New Brain and you've got yourself a party.

So then - all these AI generated adverts and film sections...we're saying those can't be copyrighted? I can just take them and do what I want? Sounds too good to be true so I'm assuming I'm missing a restriction somewhere.

Deterministic Siri, or any voice assistant, is useful. AI wibbly thing may or may not be depending on the task.

For me Siri has been a way to send and read messages, to control smart devices in the house (bulbs, sockets etc.), play music in the car, navigate and set alarms/timers. Within the last couple of years it also became a way to run shortcuts and control my car. All of these are deterministic tasks - I'm completely happy learning set phrases that make them work, and I truly hope they don't drop this level of certainty in favour of AI 'deduction' all the time. They need to improve it certainly, but at its heart these commands remain deterministic.


The freestyle AI wibbly bit I don't dismiss, but am much more cautious about. I was researching solar panels and had a quite long and 'detailed' conversation with an AI assistant about them, quite informative. But you always have to remember that what it's doing is reading out other people's articles and search results, then paraphrasing them to sound conversational. In itself it doesn't know, and if you treat the information accordingly then it's good to get rough to medium level impressions. If had to sacrifice one for the other though - I'd pick improving the deterministic side every time.

Sorry - mistake. Have driven an EV since 2018, in the interests of accuracy. It was a 2014 EV that I bought second hand in 2018.