Screw partisanship

It’s a strange day when the Supreme Court Justice I most agree with is Clarence Thomas, but he nailed it in his dissent in the medical marijuana decision issued yesterday. The case isn’t so much about medical marijuana as it is about the degree to which the Constitution limits the power of the federal government. The Supreme Court voted 6-3 for no limits. Hopefully a subsequent court will reverse that decision down the road. (Special spinelessness points to Justice Scalia, who is only a strict constructionist when he feels like it.) ...

June 8, 2005

The DRM theory

I’ve read speculation in a number of places that the real reason that Apple is moving to Intel is that Intel chips will soon have DRM baked in that enables media companies to bind songs, movies, or software to a particular CPU. The theory is that Hollywood is demanding that Apple provide this sort of DRM before they will license certain content to Apple. Ed Felten believes that the DRM reason is improbable. ...

June 7, 2005

Eclipse takeover continues

It looks like the Eclipse world takeover is continuing. Now Macromedia has announced that their next Flash development tool will be built on the Eclipse platform. I still think that the number one reason Eclipse has been so successful is that it looks pretty on computers running Windows.

June 7, 2005

Strategery

ZDNet blogger Paul Murphy says that Apple should have started buying CPUs from Sun instead of Intel if they were making a transition, to which I say, put down the crack pipe. The fundamental problem with Apple staying on the PowerPC platform was that Apple makes the only personal computers that use that chip. So IBM is working on building PowerPCs for servers, and consoles, and probably other things that don’t really help out Apple all that much, along with CPUs for Macs. We see how that worked out. And IBM’s primary business isn’t even making chips. Compare that to Intel, who lives and dies by providing ever improving CPUs for personal computers. Then add in AMD, who Apple can always turn to down the road if Intel falters, once the x86 transition is complete. If Intel and AMD fail to continue to deliver increasing performance, the entire PC hardware industry falls flat on its face, and they go out of business. Sun isn’t even in the business of making CPUs for personal computers – what bet seems smarter to you? Update: I think the most valid concern about Apple’s future is the one discussing Osbourization – that the promise of new hardware to come will kill hardware sales today. I have a feeling that Apple saw Powerbook sales falling off anyway due to the ongoing lack of newer, better models. Lots of people were waiting for the next generation Powerbook, and it sounds like there wasn’t any next generation Powerbook in the pipeline due to the lack of a better CPU for them. That’s probably one of the big things that forced Apple to act. Secondly, Classic applications (those written for Mac OS 8 and 9) aren’t going to run on x86 Macs at all. That’s going to maintain a market of some size for PowerPC based hardware for some time to come. ...

June 7, 2005

Apple and Intel, sitting in a tree

The speculation on Apple and Intel will be over soon, but I wanted to comment on one of the big questions I’ve seen floating around this weekend, “Why not AMD?” Here’s one example of what I’m talking about. I think that money is one factor people are leaving out of the argument, which generally centers around AMD’s current superiority and pace of innovation. Intel could win this fight simply by cutting Apple an incredible deal on parts. I’ve found that it’s almost impossible to think about any business decision without at least considering the money side of the equation, and it’s one most people seem to be ignoring. Update: Apple is moving to Intel as it turns out. Steve Jobs reported that every release of Mac OS X has been built on both PowerPC and x86, and that developers will need to migrate to XCode 2.1. Another update: I’m not surprised (or disappointed) to read that while Apple computers will have Intel processors, Apple has no plans to let you run their operating system on non-Apple computers. ...

June 6, 2005

Apple and Intel

Tim Bray posted an interesting anecdote in reference to the rumors that Apple will announce that it’s migrating to x86 on Monday. Such a migration seems like a natural move to me. Living on PowerPC has kept the Mac behind the Windows platform in terms of bang for the buck forever.

June 4, 2005

The end of the honeymoon

As I’ve mentioned here before, I am a huge fan of the Spring Framework, a big chunk of Java code that makes it easier to build applications. Spring’s main feature is enabling you to manage dependencies among components in your application using something called dependency injection. It also provides an MVC framework for building web apps (and interfaces to make it easier to use lots of other common frameworks). Anyway, until this week, my relationship with Spring has been nothing but good. Then I ran into an obscure problem that’s turning out to be a bear to fix (or work around). In some ways, Spring is a little bit like Ruby on Rails, in that it makes some assumptions about how things ought to work so that the developer doesn’t have to deal with those issues explicitly. For example, Spring turns Hibernate’s checked exceptions into runtime exceptions. (The Hibernate developers agreed, and made the change themselves in Hibernate 3.0.) Anyway, to make a long story short, Spring is too smart for its own good when binding values from an HTTP request to a Java bean. If the property of the bean is a string array, and the incoming parameter is a single value, then Spring helpfully treats the incoming string as a comma-delimited list. So, if you have a list of values come in (as if from a checkbox group), like “red” and “blue,” the resulting array has those two values in it. If two values like “Boston, MA,” and “Providence, RI” are submitted, then they are copied into the array as is. But if one value is submitted, “Tempe, AZ,” then Spring turns it into an array of two values, “Tempe” and “AZ.” The problem is that I can’t turn it off, even though I’ve been trying to figure out how all week. I’ve posted on the boards, read the code, stepped through it with a debugger, and still, no dice. The honeymoon is over. ...

June 4, 2005

Playing by different rules

Richard Dawkins has a good op-ed explaining how creationists use science against itself. In life, the thing I find most discouraging is the tendency of people to use the openness and honesty of others to their own political or personal advantage. I don’t read any weblogs written by people who take this approach in debate. If you can’t engage honestly, I’m not interested.

June 3, 2005

Time to start shorting domain names

I remember about 10 years ago, when I was about to leave a job, that I wanted a new long term email address. I settled on a mailbox at well.com. Back then, having a well.com address meant that you were at least somewhat cool. That’s how I saw it anyway. Shortly thereafter, I registered rc3.org, because it’s short and because rc3.com was taken, and moved all my email to that domain. And I thought that making sure your mail got delivered to a prestige domain was a dead idea – that nearly everyone would just have their own domain name down the road. The explosion of weblogs confirmed that for me – who would want their weblog to be in a directory off of a domain name they didn’t own, or even under someone else’s domain name with your own host name. Anyway, I think that the need for everyone to have their own domain name never really arrived, and that indeed, things are moving in the opposite direction. I have no problem telling people my address at gmail.com, and if I were starting a weblog today, having it reside under typepad.com or blogs.com would be perfectly fine with me. There are plenty of high traffic web sites that live at blogspot.com and livejournal.com. I think that the improvement of search engines plays a big part here. I could easily tell someone “just Google me” rather than go to “rc3.org” and it would be just as easy to find me. Anyway, I think that the ownership of your own domain name is just not the big deal it once perhaps was. That said, I’ll keep mine. ...

June 2, 2005

Influences

In writing up the book thing yesterday, the toughest question was about which books mean a lot to me. I kept trying to think of a book that I could point to that led to my being so interested in computers. There wasn’t any book that did it, though. Rather, it was computers themselves. I remember the computers we had in school, mostly really old TRS-80s like this Model III. I was not only obsessed with using computers, I was obsessed with misusing computers. Our lab of TRS-80s was on a primitive LAN, and the main goal of my friends and I was to gain unauthorized access to something. We were never very successful, mainly because our methods were primitive. If there is one thing that fueled my obsession with computers, it was the movie Wargames, which I was completely obsessed with. It was after watching that movie that I became obsessed with having a modem and my own phone line (my parents never let me have either) and calling BBSes. I had to satisfy myself with customizing BBS software (cnet for Commodore 64, which was the thing back in the day) in case I ever did get to run my own BBS. Anyway, I look back on that time and realize that having a career centered around Web applications was almost inevitable. ...

June 2, 2005