Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Apple Doesn't Design For Yesterday

Anubis IV Re:if you think products are consumer driven. (358 comments)

The Chevrolet Suburban was quite possibly the first SUV, and do you know how they built it way back in the 1930s when it first came out? With a "stationwagon body on a truck frame", just like what you're describing. It was built that way for reasons entirely unrelated to what you're describing here.

The reasons SUVs became popular in the '90s and 2000s is because the big three American manufacturers were, for various reasons, no longer competitive with the Asian manufacturers in the small cars market. Because the margins were either negligible or negative for small cars, they decided to refocus their efforts elsewhere, and SUVs made a good deal of sense, since their margins there were significantly higher.

Also, you're rewriting history a bit. Sociologists actually study the whole SUV phenomenon, since Americans largely didn't want big cars before SUVs became popular. A huge amount of marketing went into convincing people that these bigger cars were more protective than the smaller Asian cars, gave you a better view of the road, and were generally just safer to drive, leading to a massive change in the public's perception of large cars. It may be hard to remember now, but when SUVs were first getting pushed on consumers in the '90s, they were perceived for quite awhile as being utterly ridiculous. It took a few years (and the realization that they were a "cooler" alternative to the minivan) before they were widely accepted or even viewed as being desirable.

yesterday
top

Apple Doesn't Design For Yesterday

Anubis IV Re:Helvetica pre-dates the space program (358 comments)

Quick self-correction: I was bothered by my own lack of specificity regarding the use of Helvetica and its variants in iOS, so I just looked it up and found out I was slightly off. Helvetica was used in iOS 1-3, Helvetica Neue was used in 4-6, and Helvetica Neue Ultra Light has been used since iOS 7. I apologize for the incorrect statements earlier.

yesterday
top

Apple Doesn't Design For Yesterday

Anubis IV Re:Helvetica pre-dates the space program (358 comments)

Both Apple and Microsoft have been using ripoffs of Helvetica for decades as their default font. [...]

All this announcement means is that Apple has finally decided to pay whomever has the copyright on Helvetica for the rights to use it as their default system font.

You managed to pack a lot of factual inaccuracy into such a small package.

Geneva—the font you linked—was never used as Mac OS' default font, was not a rip-off of Helvetica (though it originally shared the same classification as Helvetica), and never had its metrics in common with Helvetica (unlike Arial, which does). The Geneva Wikipedia article linked to a great PDF file as source material on the subject, and you should definitely take some time to read through it, since it's a fascinating read. But, to make a long story short, the differences back then were still apparent enough that even a layperson could have easily told the two apart. Suggesting the one was a rip-off of the other is patently untrue.

With the introduction of TrueType to Macs in 1991, Helvetica itself was licensed for inclusion on all Macs, so Geneva's design was moved away from what little resemblance it did have to Helvetica such that it could fill a different void. During that entire time (all the way through '97, in fact), the actual typeface used by the Mac OS was Chicago, not Geneva, though the two do share the same creator (who also designed many of the iconic Apple icons from the early days). That's about all they share though, since they look nothing alike.

Moreover, your assertion that Apple only just now licensed the rights to use it for a system font are also wrong, since Helvetica was used as iOS' system font at least as far back iOS 2 or iOS 3 (possibly from the very beginning, though I haven't managed to verify that), before being switched to Helvetica Neue with iOS 7. Apple's move to bring Helvetica Neue to OS X now seems to be in line with maintaining a consistent design across their platforms, and has nothing to do with only just now securing the rights to the fonts after having ripped them off for decades, as you claimed.

Frankly, I find it absurd that you're seriously trying to assert that a company with over $100B in the bank and a strong presence in the design industry has been too stingy to pay for the rights to Helvetica this entire time.

yesterday
top

Despite Patent Settlement, Apple Pulls Bose Merchandise From Its Stores

Anubis IV Re:Tit for tat (312 comments)

I imagine Beats/Apple isn't too happy with Bose's shenanigans regarding telling NFL players they can't wear their Beats headphones until 90 minutes after the end of the game.

This.

I just wish they'd compete on audio fidelity instead of who can be more petty, since that's one thing that both of those brands are sorely lacking.

2 days ago
top

Apple's Next Hit Could Be a Microsoft Surface Pro Clone

Anubis IV Re:"Perfectly timed"? (247 comments)

Yup. I like Apple, but even I consider "perfectly timed" to be a case of revisionist history.

The rest of the summary falls apart under scrutiny too. Microsoft can do the Surface Pro 3 because it has a common OS across both platforms. Apple does not. In fact, despite some recent iOS-ification of OS X moves, Apple has always publicly stated that they think the two should remain separate, and with Yosemite they've made it ABUNDANTLY clear to anyone paying attention that they really do view them as two separate classes of devices intended for two entirely different sets of tasks and that each class should have an OS that fits it. Yosemite is one giant, "Now that we've finally decided we're not turning OS X into iOS, we need to give OS X users more control and then make the two OSes work well with each other" step.

In looking through the features that it shares with iOS (e.g. iCloud, Extensions, flat UI appearance, etc.), the one trend I keep seeing repeated is that Yosemite was allowed to diverge from iOS in a number of ways that make it more powerful (e.g. able to directly manipulate files in iCloud Drive, more varied types of Extensions allowed, more ability to customize the UI's appearance now than anytime in recent history), rather than being constrained to only do as much as iOS, which had been the somewhat worrying trend of the last few years. And then they've added methods for helping the two OSes to hand off work between each other or pass files back and forth more easily, allowing users to work on whichever system they feel best fits the task they're working on.

If Apple wanted to unify their devices on one OS in the very near future, Yosemite is pretty much the exact opposite of the OS you'd release.

2 days ago
top

Apple Announces iPad Air 2, iPad mini 3, OS X Yosemite and More

Anubis IV Re:Touch ID for $100?? (352 comments)

Touch ID is only worth $25. The other $75 is a surcharge on all iPad mini 3 users for demanding that gold be added as one of the color options.

4 days ago
top

Anonabox Accused of Lying About Its Product Being Open-Source On Kickstarter

Anubis IV Re:I posted a question (72 comments)

Someone else put together a handy picture highlighting a number of the errors present in just the description of the product:

https://twitter.com/Sc00bzT/st...

Some of them seem to be worth a laugh.

4 days ago
top

Pentagon Reportedly Hushed Up Chemical Weapons Finds In Iraq

Anubis IV Re:So confused (376 comments)

Back in 2004 or 2005, I recall some friends whose son was over in Iraq saying that their son had told them he had been with a team that discovered Iraqi chemical weapons and that he saw them with his own eyes. His parents insisted that it was just a matter of time before it hit the news in a big way.

And then nothing.

I don't know what to think at this point. I guess it's a sad state we're in, since I can honestly say that neither the notion that we used them as a pretext for war, nor the notion that we covered up their presence in order to save face for some other reason, strike me as being particularly fanciful.

5 days ago
top

Fighting the Culture of 'Worse Is Better'

Anubis IV Re:I can answer these, as I was there. (240 comments)

10.5 ran on Intel. Making Classic run, but only if you were using PPC hardware, was not an option, due to the large amount of kernel and interface changes necessary to support Intel.

Back up for a moment though, and you're recall that 10.4 supported Intel, which I believe would mean that those changes had already been made, wouldn't it? The way you guys avoided having to do a rewrite of Classic was by maintaining separate builds for PPC and Intel Macs during Tiger's run, with the PPC builds featuring Classic support and the Intel builds lacking it. Couldn't that pattern have been carried forward into 10.5, given that PPC hardware was not long for the world anyway? Instead, Apple merged the builds in 10.5 (which only lasted for that one version), which necessitated dropping Classic for the reasons you said.

This would have not only caused new PPC sales to cannibalize Intel sales, it would have also stretched out the support timeline for the PPC another 2 years.

All in all it would have sucked, a lot, from many perspectives.

Absolutely no disagreement from me. While I've been quibbling about the technical stuff, I was doing so to point towards the idea that Apple's primary motivation for dropping Classic support was because it made good business sense, and that any other considerations were secondary. I actually think they made the right decision, and that they did so for exactly the reasons you outlined (even if I was a little put off at the time that I never got the nice 10.5 features on my old PowerBook :P).

5 days ago
top

Fighting the Culture of 'Worse Is Better'

Anubis IV Re:I can answer these, as I was there. (240 comments)

If Intel support for Classic was the issue, then why not ditch Classic after 10.5, instead of 10.4? After all, PowerPCs were still supported for 10.5, so Classic could have been kept around without needing to port it to Intel. Post-10.5, PowerPCs were no longer supported, so Classic support could have been dropped at the same time. As it was, I ended up keeping a Hi-Res PowerBook G4 around running 10.4 for years, just so I could play a few of my old games that hadn't been ported to OS X, rather than being able to bump it up to 10.5.

No comment on Rosetta, since I simply enjoyed learning something new and don't disagree with you.

about a week ago
top

Fighting the Culture of 'Worse Is Better'

Anubis IV Re:Easy to say when not dealing with customers (240 comments)

Near as I can tell, you've pointed out an additional difference between Microsoft and Apple, rather than addressing or contradicting anything I was discussing.

Basically, while Apple does indeed slap developers for misusing APIs, as you stated, it also frequently deprecates features and APIs that are working as intended while their customers are still using software that's dependent on those features and APIs, which is what I was pointing out. Both Classic and Rosetta were working as intended and were being used properly by the developers who suddenly discovered that their apps simply no longer worked, which is quite a bit different than the scenarios you're discussing.

I don't know why you started off with "No" as if to contradict me, when the entirety of your post is wholly unrelated to what I was talking about, and something with which I actually agree.

about a week ago
top

Fighting the Culture of 'Worse Is Better'

Anubis IV Re:Easy to say when not dealing with customers (240 comments)

When a customer calls up and says, "Hey, how come this new version of Windows doesn't work with any of my old Windows software?" you can't just tell them "Because our programmers thought it was better to get a fresh start."

"Hey, how come this new version of Mac OS doesn't work with any of my old Mac OS 9 software?", said Mac users in response to Classic support being dropped with the release of Mac OS X 10.5.

"Hey, how come this new version of OS X doesn't work with any of my old PowerPC software?", said Mac users in response to Rosetta being dropped with the release of OS X 10.7.

Both of those are from just the last 7 years, and I wouldn't be surprised if we could rattle off more, both for OS X and iOS. The fact is, you can tell your customers that a fresh start was necessary, but only if it's part of your business. "Windows everywhere" isn't just a marketing phrase: it's their ideology. And if you can't keep it compatible, you can't have it everywhere. That's why Microsoft can't ditch the old as easily (and why Windows 8 was so exciting, even though it ended up being a dud, more or less). Some companies are built around ditching the old when there's something better, and their customers are much more willing to tolerate these sorts of changes since they generally knew what they were getting in for. Some companies are built around compatibility and stability, and their customers are much less willing to accept changes that break things.

about a week ago
top

Apple To Face $350 Million Trial Over iPod DRM

Anubis IV Re:Old issue (135 comments)

While I agree with you, I'll point out the obvious as a counterpoint: locking someone into a format, in this case, also locks them into a specific piece of hardware. More or less, lockin wasn't their goal, which is why they allowed open formats as well, but there's no denying that it would have been a nice benefit coming out of the DRM being forced on them by the publishers.

about a week ago
top

The Correct Response To Photo Hack Victim-Blamers

Anubis IV Re:Read below to see what Bennett has to say. (622 comments)

They were kind enough to put that "Read below to see what Bennett has to say" phrase before the fold, so at least I knew what I was getting into when I clicked the link in my RSS feed. I'm glad they're finally putting a warning label on his posts, since I'm tired of being ambushed by the "Bennett bait-and-switch", when we discover that there's an article where there's supposed to be a summary.

The appeal of Slashdot is its comments. Let Slashdot do what it does best: provide a quick summary, leave room for people to express their own thoughts, and provide a link to the article for people interested in reading more. Hosting the entirety of Bennett's post here subverts the comments by sucking all of the air out of the room and ensuring that whatever issue he's discussing will be ignored in favor of complaining about his post being here, as should be evident from every long-form Bennett post in the last few months.

If his goal is to communicate to us, then he really needs to consider his audience and rethink the methods he's employing. Maybe try speaking to us in the format we come here for?

about a week ago
top

Ebola Vaccine Trials Forcing Tough Choices

Anubis IV Re: Purely academical interest (178 comments)

So very true (to both of your posts).

Anyway, the gist of my original post was to simply point out reasons why we needed to conduct properly controlled experiments. As you're getting at, and as I very much so agree, theory doesn't always work out in practice how we expect, hence why it's important to put our theories to the test. Unfortunately, I overstated some ideas in my attempt to convey my point.

Which is all to say, thank you for taking the time to question me on my overstatements, since that's exactly the sort of correction I welcome.

about a week ago
top

Ebola Vaccine Trials Forcing Tough Choices

Anubis IV Re:Purely academical interest (178 comments)

Oh, I have no answers to those questions, since this isn't my field, just something I've read about. It seems that your thesis has also been supported by the fact that one of the nurses for the original patient has now been confirmed to have contracted Ebola as well.

about a week ago
top

Mining Kickstarter Data Reveals How To Match Crowdfunding Projects To Investors

Anubis IV Re:goodbye Kickstarter (20 comments)

These are independent researchers, not Kickstarter itself, and as the summary says, they'd be spamming you via Twitter. The simple fix is to remove your Twitter handle from your Kickstarter profile, that way they don't have a way to engage in an activity with you that they'd verbalize by using marketing speak buzzwords.

about a week ago
top

FBI Says It Will Hire No One Who Lies About Illegal Downloading

Anubis IV Re:My personal experience (576 comments)

If you're suggesting that they would have picked up on some physiological false positive response on my part, I seriously doubt it, given that there were plenty of other questions that they were able to rephrase to the point where I was able to answer them without a shadow of doubt, and they repeat the questions over and over again in order to try and deal with any random outliers.

If you're suggesting that they would produce a "false positive" in response to anyone my age answering that question, that seems like a baseless assumption predicated on a preconceived notion. Moreover, wouldn't they have done that with drugs too? Yet I told them—truthfully—that I have never had any illicit drugs (well, technically, I got them to add a caveat on that one too, since I've had prescription drugs without a prescription, but it was only ever for valid medicinal use, such as the time some med student friends tossed me a few prescription-strength antihistamines when I discovered, upon breaking out in hives while at their house, that I was apparently allergic to their cats).

about a week ago

Submissions

Anubis IV hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

Anubis IV has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?