MajesticTreeFrog

You, sir, are being silly. Windows is not for multimedia. Macs have always been, and continue to be, the multimedia champs. Outside of games, they are easily better than windows. The only reason they are weak at games is because they just don't have as many due to marketshare. "Most people" are not gamers. In the real world, computers are used primarily for work, sorry to burst your bubble. The reason why windows dominates is through illegal business practices on the part of MS (convicted), and because Apple was HORRIBLY HORRIBLY mismanaged for about 10years (the 90s). Once they brought Jobs back, who actually knew what he was doing..well...you see how things have changed.

The reason WinFS isn't coming out is because its way too hard. They have to not only completely redo the file system and make it all run on a database (which is hard, slow, and sorta weird), but also re-write, test, re-write again, re-test, etc all the small filesystem tools that are part of the OS. Thats a lot. And if there is a bug in there, anywhere, say hello to fried files. Fried files do NOT make your user base happy. To make matters worse, if they want legacy support, they have to do this while still allowing programs (and thats a lot of stuff for windows) to talk to the filesystem as if it were the old version without any work on the program authors. Otherwise, upgrading to longhorn would mean basically re-buying your system. This would be VERY bad for MS- most people stay on windows primarily because they are so committed to it with software purchases. Put them in a position where they have to re-buy everything anyway and they might as well go with a Mac and not have to deal with all the BS. And of course, even if they do all this, is it worth the work? I have tiger, spotlight works fantastically and is very usefull. But its not worth all that. A good find function is easier, many many times over, than what MS would have to do. So, why was apple able to pull it off? Because they had most of the pieces already in place. Windows filesystems are a joke. They are ANCIENT and antiquated by any reasonable way of looking at things. They still require people to do things like DEFRAGMENT. Pfft. So early 90s, if that. Mac OS FS, on the other hand, has none of these issues. All files are able to be moved while all programs being able to find them no matter where they are (through means of unique, non-name, identifiers). Its journaled, keeping it from breaking easily. It allows meta-data. Etc, etc. Microsoft, in never innovating, updating, or anything else with regards to their FS, now has to catch up all at once. But their stagnation has built up a legacy code base that makes this EVEN HARDER. And now, they have figured that out. Good luck MS, you will need it.

Sorry Tungsten, but iWork, as neat as it is, is NOT the best for word processing. Not even close. pages is more a cheap hybrid processor/desktop publishing soft. Version 2 of pages may fix its flaws. These days, STILL, sadly, the best WP soft for mac is Microsoft office. Which, given the huge variety and competition on Mac for word processors, is saying something. In fact, the latest word for mac is better than the latest word for windows. By a good bit even. As for best browser, its not safari. Safari 2 is fast as hell, but has compatibility issues with a LOT of websites. It also lacks the awesome plugins of firefox and mozilla. So, FF is still king until camino can get in gear.But, until you go to professional tools, iLife is indeed the best you are gonna do for media software, especially for only like, 50 bucks.

Yeah, If you can afford it when you get your own, get a gig of ram. It doesn't make it nearly so much of a deal, but Tiger likes RAM. Also, it means you can really abuse the awesome task-switching ability of OS X.

Man...I want a lightsaber too. I think the biggest issue with building them is not the laser, or the plasma, or any other such part of the beam: its the power. Power storage and batteries have hard to improve physical constraints. The power draw for something like a lightsaber would be tremendous. Putting enough power for the thing into a small and light hilt is....well...less believable than the blade. Which sucks, cause like I said...I want a lightsaber too.Not to mention how long an ipod or something would go if you had those type of batteries to power it...heh heh.

Actually, about the misinterpret thing, you are proving my point. Simplistic maxims like: "don't kill" are bad. Also, Its not misinterpretation per-say thats the problem. Its misinterpretations that lead to problems that are bad. Scripture also isn't read line by line in a vacuum, the overall scripture has to be clear. So, "don't kill" is hard to interpret, but the overall maxim is pretty clear: terminal violence is bad. When exactly and to whom, hard to tell, but the idea stays clear. That is, until your scripture describes a victorious war against unbelievers. So, clearly don't kill doesn't apply to them, or scripture wouldn't be so happy about mass carnage against them.....This is why I said answering certain types of questions is dangerous, and talking about certain things is dangerous: it leads to these types of ****ups. On another note, I didn't mean to come off saying that religion only tells us how to live our lives, in fact I agree with you. But giving your life meaning, and figuring out what thaht meaning is or would look like, is hard. Thus, religion should give us tools, practical how to live/do/see tools that allow us to create meaning. Otherwise it is just so much dogma.

I wrote a piece on this topic, which I mentioned in a different thread. http://majesticfrog.livejournal.com/2485.html?nojs=1 I am interested in what you think about what I say in the essay, as well as what you think religion is about.

I have tried Tiger. Its good. It has a slightly different color theme, and the different new features are all good and work as advertised. I think it uses more ram than Panther tho.

Those thinking about the tiger upgrade, there is a very nice review on http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ also reviews a bunch of other nice mac stuffOh, my favorite app is Quicksilver. You want it. Bad. Another is Growl. Its hard to describe, read the review on macmod.

I saw a story on the news today: Apparently the US government sterilized 'undesireables' without their knowledge as part of a Eugenics program. For all those who believe that this sort of thing could never happen in the US-It already has.

Well, thats a long answer. I wrote up the beginning on my LJ. http://majesticfrog.livejournal.com/ There is a lot more though, but that is a good start. I am interested in comments.

Here is what I want in a HD player:SlimEasy to use Good battery life (18 hours ish)useable as a HD on Mac and PC (not hard)able to play MP3, FLAC and Ogg Vorbis (AAC would be nice as well. Flac may be interchanged for any other Lossless codec).min of 6gb space, better 10 or moreCheap. (<300 bucks)excellent real sound quality. Not faked equalizer hacks, but actually good D2A conversion.So far, nobody has done this. The ipod is pretty close. However, iAudio now seems to be getting closer to this ideal. I will watch their products carefully.

A review of tiger should be up tomorrow an macmod. Its is supposed to be pretty thorough. Even better, its for those of us still on the fence about upgrading.

Actually, it has a lot more features than a PC in its same price range, if you count the included software(which you should since you are paying for it). As for software compatibility, it is just fine. All the major content creation apps like photoshop and flash run fine. The latest version of office (easily the most important app for most people) is considered by reviewers to be better than its PC counterpart. The only thing you miss are the random small apps that exist in the millions for PC. That is, until you find their counterparts in the mac world. It only seems like they don't have the software because you aren't used to looking for it. As for being considered the 'stronger' system, from a useability and security standpoint, they are--by leaps and bounds. Too late for what? Having a system that works well and doesn't give you ****?

I think it might be wise of him to be more liberal. At the same time, he is a very experienced man. I do not get the feeling that his conservative views are reactionary or even extreme. I disagree with his views on gay couples and sexual topics in general, but at the same time catholics are free to leave the church, protest (and maybe be heard), or just ignore him on those topics. Really, his views on these topics can be whatever, so long as he continually reminds his flock to practice tolerance and compassion, even for those they disagree with.

Why don't you believe in your God??? Ok, if they are athiest/agnostic they don't have a god. You mean to say, why don't you believe in the gods others keep talking about. As for agreeing with its principles and current direction, this doesn't really make much sense. I will assume you mean to ask, "do we like the path we are on?" And since neither has belief in the sense you are implying, I will assume the third question was a copy/paste error. As for myself, I would qualify as an athiest. More specifically, while I think there is no god, I also think that if there were, we wouldn't really understand it. In fact, we wouldn't understand it to the point that there might as well not be one. Beyond that, I am buddhist. I was not raised this way, but instead found it on my own. I came upon buddhist philosophy almost as an accident, found it interesting, and began studying. After a few years of on and off hobbyist studying, I felt I knew enough to have some clue what I was dealing with. In addition, I was impressed and moved by the philosophy and understanding expressed in the tradition. Still, while I am a member of a religion, I do not consider myself religious. There has long been a debate about whether or not buddhism is a philosophy or a religion. In truth, its both, but for me it is a particularly practical philosophy.

Neither. Oh well.

My favorite has always been fans! http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ was good, and SERIOUS of all things (nearer the end). It was increadibly well written as well.

Well, I use Ad-aware, Spybot, and MS anti-spyware. They all see things the others don't. Since there is no harm in running them all, this is what I suggest.

There aren't just less viruses, there are none so far for OSX. There were a handfull for the old Mac OS series. 10.4 unfortunately has some security holes involving dashboard widgets. Nothing huge (like root access), but definitely the ability to be very annofing. Hopefully it will be patched soon. Still, there has yet to be anything other than proof of concept code for doing this. (yay!) On the other hand, Apple should have realized this would be a problem. This was a definite screw up.

Its all about INTELLIGENT gun control. Rifles and such are fine. Heavy assault weapons you just do not want lying around for anyone other than the military. Handguns are harder. There are advantages and disadvantages, and they change over time. This is why comparisons with Europe are hard. They haven't had guns like us for a very long time, if ever. They also have a different culture around violence and a different legal system. Implementing the same laws as they have will not necessarily have the same effect. That said, I think taking the more powerful handguns off the market is a good idea. Light pistols work just fine for self defense, and modern medical tech is VERY good at saving and restoring people who get prompt attention from those wounds.

It depends on how you look at it.The ipod shuffle is cheap based on capacity, especially when you take into account sound quality and size.For those that are about to link to cheaper same-storage players, realize that they usually have not-so-hot sound quality.

I doubt that if the new pope was ever REALLY a nazi (by which I mean he believed the Nazi propaganda instead of talking the talk to not get killed) that he would have been elected pope.That said, he may be the pope, but he is still a man. His words should be listened to, because he has probably accumulated a lot of wisdom no matter what his political stripe. But listening is different than doing. Like all things said by all people: make a thorough investigation, then decide. Then be willing to be wrong anyway, just like everyone at some point.

Actually, you CAN install windows on a mac. You can use Virtual PC by Microsoft, or Guest PC by Lismore systems. I have used Guest PC and while it is slow it will get the job done for compatability testing. Still, it runs like a 300mhz comp on my 1.33ghz ibook. So, be warned.Linux is pretty easy actually. You can install a version of yellowdog (a mac specific linux distro) or you can grab the PPC version of debian.

This is true but also somewhat misleading. The iPod can play AAC files(both unprotected ones and ones you download from iTunes), MP3s, Apple Lossless(a codec that has no loss of quality unlike any other non-lossless codec such as WMV, Ogg, AAC, MP3, etc), and Audible which is used for audio books. As for the question of whether or not a file from an iPod will play on other players, it depends. Few other players support AAC, but they all support MP3(except for some sony players). An mp3 from an ipod will play on anything. Other players support WMV, but they aren't any better since your WMV files will refuse to play on any other player than yours (because of DRM on the file). This means that the file format is rather irrelevant because unless your file is mp3, ogg, unprotected AAC, or FLAC (another lossless codec) format it is not transferable to other players anyway. Songs bought on itunes can be put on other devices, but only a limited number. The best bet is to rip your files from CDs into some lossless codec. A lossless codec can be turned into any other type of file without excess quality loss. This way, you can move files about, though it will take a bit of work on your part. Sadly, you can't currently get a player that supports all file types