Leigh looks over at fellow consultant Pete M., “if this is true, buddy, we’re going to be RICH! RICH beyond our wildest dreams…”
Fake Steve, in a recent story, referred to an article by Dev Corvin, which was breaking news about the forthcoming Windows 7 (which has moved its ship date up to 2009 as a result of the spectacular results Vista has demonstrated in the market…). Found amid the usual Windows blah-blah-blah, which I suffer through so you don’t have to, was this tasty quote:
Dev Corvin, thebetaguy.com :
Windows 7 takes a different approach to the componentization and backwards compatibility issues; in short, it doesn’t think about them at all. Windows 7 will be a from-the-ground-up packaging of the Windows codebase; partially source, but not binary compatible with previous versions of Windows.
Now I didn’t just take FSJ and this Dev guy’s word for it, I employed minimalist “journalistic” research and went ahead and Googled “Windows 7″ “Not Backwards Compatible”, which yeilded some 1.8 million hits.
This has me literally giddy with anticipation, see I am a consultant, which my mom thinks is code for being unemployed, and about 55% of my firm’s business world-wide is Microsoft-related. I have half a mind to switch practices from Strategy and Transformation to MS (though those practitioners do look hostilely at my Blackberry let alone my Macbook Pro).
In short, fixing all that broken .NET code out there in corporate America will be tantamount to the Y2K effort 10 years ago; a license to print money for consultants. From the bottom of my heart, Thank you Bill.
Now why should anybody who reads Cult of Mac care about this, other than some kind of surrogate pleasure to be gained from my anticipated financial success?
Because, friends, Microsoft’s lock on corporate IT has every everything to do with backwards compatibility. Should Redmond choose to proceed with this folly, our ranks (of Mac loyalists) are destined to swell such that I might have to consider something other than my MB Pro to make me cool and hip in the eyes of our college hires (as-if… might I suggest a really expensive (and thus exclusive) accessory, like a tablet. –ed)
Written by Leigh McMullen on April 6th, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on Fake Steve and Humor and News Coverage and Rumors and Software.
Hey, remember the late 1990s? It was a heady time of rap-rock records, resurgent sci-fi epics, and, most importantly, the photo mosaic, an art form where computer artists take hundreds of tiny images and make a vaguely unsettling and blurry bigger picture.
Now we can take a trip back courtesy of Charis Tevis, a graphic artist commissioned by Fortune for its recent cover story on the iCEO. The rad image (click through to see it in all its glory) basically builds Steve Jobs out of the full portfolio of Apple products.
He’s got a lot of others on his Flickr account, including another image of Steve and one of Barack Obama.
Charis Tevis via Gizmodo
Written by Pete Mortensen on March 27th, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on Fake Steve and Steve Jobs and graphic design.
My two favorite tech news sites — Gizmodo and Ars Technica — are hosting a pre-keynote party in San Francisco on Monday night (the 14th) at Harlot, 46 Minna Street. 8-11.30pm.
Giz editor Brian Lam is promising to buy everyone a beer, and there’s schwag (likely shite) for early birds. I’ll be there, and so apparently will Dan Lyons, aka Fake Steve.
Here’s a handy map to the bar.
UPDATE: I just discovered that the free schwag are copies of my books. Ooops.
Written by Leander Kahney on January 9th, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on Apple and Fake Steve and Macworld.
Fake Steve points us to a provocative Discover Magazine commentary by technology visionary Jaron Lanier, best known for putting the virtual reality bug in everybody’s ears at TED II way back in the ’80s. Lanier argues emphatically that open-source software doesn’t automatically yield creativity or innovation.
Twenty-five years later, that concern seems to have been justified. Open wisdom-of-crowds software movements have become influential, but they haven’t promoted the kind of radical creativity I love most in computer science. If anything, they’ve been hindrances. Some of the youngest, brightest minds have been trapped in a 1970s intellectual framework because they are hypnotized into accepting old software designs as if they were facts of nature. Linux is a superbly polished copy of an antique, shinier than the original, perhaps, but still defined by it.
I think he’s mostly right, although it’s worth noting that many of the works of art in software that he speaks of were built on the backs of open-source software. For example, the iPhone runs on the Mach Kernel, which is open-source, and then OS X BSD above that, all available in Darwin and featuring contributions from the open-dev community.
What Lanier speaks to instead is that different methods are suited best to different kinds of innovation. Vision-driven projects plotting new directions in interface design, radical improvements and others are best served in proprietary contexts. Under-the-hood improvements and refinement can be driven quite effectively through the work of open communities. This is something that Apple has demonstrated for a long time — it’s very hard to come up with the right questions to ask. It’s relatively easy to answer them once asked. Apple and other proprietary visionaries cited by Lanier are asking the right questions. The open-sourcers answer well-known questions that have bubbled up for years. It’s incremental improvement, but no less critical for the future of software and hardware development.
Written by Petemortensen on January 3rd, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on Fake Steve and Software.
The revamped Spaceship Earth ride at Disney’s Epcot Center has a special “Steve Jobs section,” according to the lifthill blog, which tracks news about rides and roller coasters, and was invited to a special preview.
But once at the Steve Jobs area, which is supposed to depict the birth of Apple computer in a garage, the lifthill blogger noticed that the lone figure in the garage looked a lot more like Wozniak than Jobs.
The figure is facing the wrong way, so it’s hard to tell, but it’s wearing the same shirt as Wozniak in a famous early photograph copied below, and has similar hair and beard. Conspriacy theorists note that Jobs is the single largest shareholder in Disney– but I can’t believe he cares that a section of Epcot bears his name or likeness (or not).
Anyway, there’s no second figure in sight, so one of them is slighted. And so too is the third Apple-founder, Ron Wayne, but no one cares about that.
But what is that thing the dummy Woz/Jobs is sitting in front of? It ain’t no Apple I or II — the first and only machines Woz created more or less single-handed. It looks like a big wooden Mac, but none of the Mac prototypes looked like that — they were much more finished.
Higher-res pictures at lifthill.
Via Boingboing.
\
Written by Leander Kahney on December 10th, 2007 with no comments.
Read more articles on Apple and Fake Steve and Steve Jobs and Woz.
« Older articles
No newer articles
