Edited by jayhawk11 is the Governor of NJ at 10/31/09 6:25 PM
jayhawk11 is the Governor of NJ was starred
jayhawk11 is the Governor of NJ was unstarred
@Sir Gibler: It is quite annoying, just imagine how much faster iTunes would run in 64-bit. That is, until Apple loads it down with even more crap most people don't use. #windows7
Both the windows and OSX versions of iTunes run a LOT of debug foiling code that has to actively run in the background. It also keeps a lot of checks in place that run alongside these. The purpose of this is to keep people from reverse engineering a lot of what iTunes does and leads to slowdown on both systems.
I've ported code between Windows and OSX both ways many times. It's not exactly a complicated proposition. iTunes is slow because Apple is doing things that make it slow. #windows7
@Thee Sea: Alright well thanks for that I wasn't aware of it.
My biggest annoyance with iTunes in windows is all the bloat it installs (extra services and quicktime). I have installed it without all that stuff and it is a bit better but still slow, but I don't have much to complain about the OS X version. #windows7
On a more serious note, I wonder how laptop design will have to change to accommodate such wonderful procs. I would prefer my laptop to remain intact and not burning any parts of my body. Maybe I'm just paranoid.
@My Secret Identity: The memory controller, among other things, has been moved on die. So, while the CPUs have a higher dissipation, there are fewer hot spots on the mobos.
Well, I needed one in time for school, anyways, since the last one died a heat-fry-y death, so I guess I can't feel too bad. I hope you and I will remain friend forever, Lenovo.
I'm not so sure that this is literally illegal. Yes, an Apple lawyer would say that. And it is entirely possible/likely that the operation could be shut down using said lawyers. But there's a difference between violating the EULA/terms of use and operating illegally. There's no certainty to your statement until there is a court case.
Matter of fact, it might be easier to prove that Giz has just defamed this kid's company.
Hmm, this brings up a good point. If I sell my laptop do I have to uninstall everything, since otherwise I'm selling someone else's IP? Meaning that if I want to sell it I need to completely reformat the harddrive and have no OS installed on it first?
@MarcusMaximus: If you can provide licenses for all the software, there's no reason to have to sell it with no OS on it. Unlike what the software companies would like you to believe, you can transfer your licenses to another person. Doctrine of First Sale is a bitch.
It really isn't that cut and dry.
In a more recent case involving software EULA's and first-sale rights Davidson & Associates v. Internet Gateway Inc (2004)[1], the first sale reasoning of the Softman court was challenged, with the court ruling "The first sale doctrine is only triggered by an actual sale. Accordingly, a copyright owner does not forfeit his right of distribution by entering into a licensing agreement." However, the point was moot as the court found the plaintiff's EULA, which prohibited resale, was binding on the defendants because "The defendants .. expressly consented to the terms of the EULA and Terms of Use by clicking 'I Agree' and 'Agree.'"
Can someone explain to me the reasoning for apple not allowing OS X installs on non-apple devices? Couldn't they sell a ton more software? Do they just think it will canabalize hardware sales? Is it a customer service issue, with callers complaining about functionality on their non-apple hardware? What's the big deal exactly?
I'm sure plenty of people would still spring for the apple hardware even if they could put OS X on another machine legally. It is possible, and quite easy, to do it illegally now, so why do they think this will hurt them so much?
10/31/09
10/31/09
.. #windows7
10/31/09
10/31/09
Which pisses me off even more.
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
Both the windows and OSX versions of iTunes run a LOT of debug foiling code that has to actively run in the background. It also keeps a lot of checks in place that run alongside these. The purpose of this is to keep people from reverse engineering a lot of what iTunes does and leads to slowdown on both systems.
I've ported code between Windows and OSX both ways many times. It's not exactly a complicated proposition. iTunes is slow because Apple is doing things that make it slow. #windows7
10/31/09
My biggest annoyance with iTunes in windows is all the bloat it installs (extra services and quicktime). I have installed it without all that stuff and it is a bit better but still slow, but I don't have much to complain about the OS X version. #windows7
09/15/09
What's it called again? The Zume?... Nooo...
Oh RIGHT! The ZuneHD!
Speaking of which... review coming soon? Maybe?
09/15/09
08/27/09
Sounds like a new trend...
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
Learn to read, moran.
08/27/09
08/27/09
I'm disappointed that MSI went with a tray-loading optical drive in this unit. A slot-loading design would be much more appropriate.
08/27/09
(Nuts to you Cinema Display people)
08/27/09
08/26/09
On a more serious note, I wonder how laptop design will have to change to accommodate such wonderful procs. I would prefer my laptop to remain intact and not burning any parts of my body. Maybe I'm just paranoid.
08/26/09
08/26/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
Well, I needed one in time for school, anyways, since the last one died a heat-fry-y death, so I guess I can't feel too bad. I hope you and I will remain friend forever, Lenovo.
08/25/09
Matter of fact, it might be easier to prove that Giz has just defamed this kid's company.
08/25/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
It really isn't that cut and dry.
In a more recent case involving software EULA's and first-sale rights Davidson & Associates v. Internet Gateway Inc (2004)[1], the first sale reasoning of the Softman court was challenged, with the court ruling "The first sale doctrine is only triggered by an actual sale. Accordingly, a copyright owner does not forfeit his right of distribution by entering into a licensing agreement." However, the point was moot as the court found the plaintiff's EULA, which prohibited resale, was binding on the defendants because "The defendants .. expressly consented to the terms of the EULA and Terms of Use by clicking 'I Agree' and 'Agree.'"
[en.wikipedia.org]
08/25/09
I'm sure plenty of people would still spring for the apple hardware even if they could put OS X on another machine legally. It is possible, and quite easy, to do it illegally now, so why do they think this will hurt them so much?
08/25/09