Unless the developers know how to code securely, they are just going to step on their own ...k
I think the point is, the iPhone will be at risk to these attacks *regardless* since there is internet access. Forcing developers to use the internet to develop apps just prevents adding another layer of risk. I'm not saying I like this, but I think that is the way they are thinking.
"[It's] not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain." + ZFS mysteriously not in the WWDC build = one pissed off Steve Jobs and one sad Sun
It's clear now. I'll never understand Steve...considering this isn't a consumer feature per se. What does he care if Schmidt jumped the gun?
Steve, you sack of shit, give us ZFS.
Eric, why'd you have to open your big mouth?
Huh? What?. Nobody uses Java anymore?. I just realized this is what Jobs said, not the poster. Ok, Jobs, calm down. You sound stupid.
I hope that ZFS is coming in 10.6. By the time it ships consumers will have terabyte hard drives.
Apple is showing it doesn't understand markets outside NA by restricting the iPhone to long term contracts with a single carrier. Europeans expect the freedom to swap SIM cards and carriers.
This is extremely disheartening and unfortunately we're going to have to pull our plans for Leopard for our plans for the storage needs. We had hoped to use Leopard Server in place of Solaris so that we'd have a unified server and storage arrangement, but this is sadly going to be shelved as I'm sure many will also be shelving this aspiration. <sigh>
You probably already caught this after you sent it, but it was Jonathan Schwartz from Sun who spilled the beans, not Eric Schmidt from Google.
Yes Schartz...my bad. I get mixed up sometimes since Eric Schmidt worked for Sun before Google. And obviously because they share the same first 3 last name letters.
"[It's] not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It?s this big heavyweight ball and chain." + ZFS mysteriously not in the WWDC build = one pissed off Steve Jobs and one sad Sun
It's clear now. I'll never understand Steve...considering this isn't a consumer feature per se. What does he care if Schmidt jumped the gun?
Steve, you sack of shit, give us ZFS.
Eric, why'd you have to open your big mouth?
There is no possible way steve jobs had ZFS pulled from the WWDC leopard Preview dvds 5 days prior to the event. These were sent to the presses weeks ago. Sure I wouldn't put it passed steve to have 3000 dvds reprinted cause someone opened their mouth about something, but 5 days before the event? no way.
Jobs also confirmed that iPhone won't support Java. "[It's] not worth building in," he said. "Nobody uses Java anymore. It?s this big heavyweight ball and chain."
Nobody uses the iPhone anymore. No local apps, requires the Internet to do everything through Safari. There are cheaper phones with a web browser plus real development capabilities. It?s this big heavyweight ball and chain.
Man, this might be a deal breaker for me. I'm really looking for a full web browser for my next phone. It's down to 8525 and the iPhone right now. This might have just put the 8525 on top.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly
If id doesnt have flash, im might just go and kill someone!!!
Can everyone please STFU over the whole ZFS thing? Yeah it would be nice to have, but lets all face it, Apple needs to sell Macs to more consumers and not businesses to grow market share (businesses being terribly slow in updating their hardware/software). Leopard is still going to be a great operating system w/o ZFS, and thats all most people will care about. The whole non-sense of Jobs pulling ZFS out of Leopard is just that. My bet is that Schwartz either has no clue what he's talking about, or Apple had toyed with the idea of using ZFS but didn't want to make any radical changes to disrupt the launch date.
As for iPhone in Europe, I have a feeling that its not Apple but the potential carriers that want the contract clause. No major carrier is going to risk having thousands of people buy the phone with out a deep discount on the price, only to see them walk off and use it with another carrier. In fact, that scenario would only help Apple's bottom line by selling more units.
You must be a student or a kid without a job. Since when did businesses stop updating their hardware. They might go a few rounds with old software, but IME, most get fairly new hardware quite often. I guess if the jobs requires the latest, they it's a must to update.
Quote:
Originally Posted by floccus
Can everyone please STFU over the whole ZFS thing? Yeah it would be nice to have, but lets all face it, Apple needs to sell Macs to more consumers and not businesses to grow market share (businesses being terribly slow in updating their hardware/software). Leopard is still going to be a great operating system w/o ZFS, and thats all most people will care about. The whole non-sense of Jobs pulling ZFS out of Leopard is just that. My bet is that Schwartz either has no clue what he's talking about, or Apple had toyed with the idea of using ZFS but didn't want to make any radical changes to disrupt the launch date.
As for iPhone in Europe, I have a feeling that its not Apple but the potential carriers that want the contract clause. No major carrier is going to risk having thousands of people buy the phone with out a deep discount on the price, only to see them walk off and use it with another carrier. In fact, that scenario would only help Apple's bottom line by selling more units.
I hope that ZFS is coming in 10.6. By the time it ships consumers will have terabyte hard drives.
Apple is showing it doesn't understand markets outside NA by restricting the iPhone to long term contracts with a single carrier. Europeans expect the freedom to swap SIM cards and carriers.
When Apple went from HFS -> HFS+ it was from 8.0 -> 8.1. It could be possible that Apple slips this in 10.5.1 (I know it's an incremental build vs a rev), but Apple can update whatever they want when they do updates. Who knows, maybe they can slip it in before launch?
I honestly don't care, HFS+ has been VERY good to me since 8.1... I'm happy with it. I know ZFS has it's benefits but HFS+ is tried and true on the Mac system as a format.
Tiger works just fine. There are still folks on Panther. If I get a new macbook for my dad I guess it will come with Leopard but if Leopard ships without zfs I'll push back plans for a mac based home entertainment system because there's no way I'm ripping terrabytes of info to anything less than a raid-z and I don't want to hassle with or pay for a h/w raid.
Can everyone please STFU over the whole ZFS thing? Yeah it would be nice to have, but lets all face it, Apple needs to sell Macs to more consumers and not businesses to grow market share (businesses being terribly slow in updating their hardware/software). Leopard is still going to be a great operating system w/o ZFS, and thats all most people will care about. The whole non-sense of Jobs pulling ZFS out of Leopard is just that. My bet is that Schwartz either has no clue what he's talking about, or Apple had toyed with the idea of using ZFS but didn't want to make any radical changes to disrupt the launch date.
As for iPhone in Europe, I have a feeling that its not Apple but the potential carriers that want the contract clause. No major carrier is going to risk having thousands of people buy the phone with out a deep discount on the price, only to see them walk off and use it with another carrier. In fact, that scenario would only help Apple's bottom line by selling more units.
Now common floccus, lets hold our breath a little longer. For all interested, check out the zfs discussion threads over on the open solaris mailing lists:
I'm not going to give up ZFS on Mac OS X until the very last trumpet sounds for Leopard and even then it may come in a dot update. It's too critical for "Dekstop" users to simply ignore once they understand what they're getting out of it. PLUS, do you have any idea as to how much trouble this will save Apple in customer technical support, hard drive replacements and so forth? This will take a huge ball and chain off of Apple in that regard and its associated expenses (who knows if they've caught that vision...).
I think my biggest complaint about ZFS right now is there won't be any repair utilities on os x right away. With HFS+ I haven't had too many issues since it came out, maybe 4-5. A few days ago I did a random fsck on my drive and it was hosed, fsck wouldn't fix it. I knew Disk Utility and fsck are cousins but I tried booting off the cd and trying it anyways... same thing, wouldn't repair the catalog. So I tried Disk Warrior, didn't work. Finally I tried Drive Genius, worked PERFECTLY. Took 7 repair attempts but it got it. Long story short, it will take time before these utilities are tried and true for repair attempts. And yes I back up my stuff nightly, but it's installing all the apps / unix stuff that takes forever and I want to avoid.
I'd guess that since it's been obvious that Apple has been at work on zfs that it's still coming. Journaled HFS didn't just show up, woo crowds, and become the default OS. It came in over time. The same will likely occur with zfs.
I think my biggest complaint about ZFS right now is there won't be any repair utilities on os x right away. With HFS+ I haven't had too many issues since it came out, maybe 4-5. A few days ago I did a random fsck on my drive and it was hosed, fsck wouldn't fix it. I knew Disk Utility and fsck are cousins but I tried booting off the cd and trying it anyways... same thing, wouldn't repair the catalog. So I tried Disk Warrior, didn't work. Finally I tried Drive Genius, worked PERFECTLY. Took 7 repair attempts but it got it. Long story short, it will take time before these utilities are tried and true for repair attempts. And yes I back up my stuff nightly, but it's installing all the apps / unix stuff that takes forever and I want to avoid.
The point of ZFS is no fscking and, if you're willing to take the size hit for mirroring or raid-z, self healing.
I think my biggest complaint about ZFS right now is there won't be any repair utilities on os x right away. With HFS+ I haven't had too many issues since it came out, maybe 4-5. A few days ago I did a random fsck on my drive and it was hosed, fsck wouldn't fix it. I knew Disk Utility and fsck are cousins but I tried booting off the cd and trying it anyways... same thing, wouldn't repair the catalog. So I tried Disk Warrior, didn't work. Finally I tried Drive Genius, worked PERFECTLY. Took 7 repair attempts but it got it. Long story short, it will take time before these utilities are tried and true for repair attempts. And yes I back up my stuff nightly, but it's installing all the apps / unix stuff that takes forever and I want to avoid.
Well emig647, the point of ZFS is that you will never again need any disk utilities. Perhaps a defrag tool, but that may be unlikely and I'm sure that the excellent blokes at iDefrag will have us covered if that need is real.
Truly, I'm a network admin and adore ZFS on Solaris. It is out of this world and has put my mind at ease for data loss. I never have to worry again with raidz. HOWEVER, even for single drive machines its quite nice as you have a few SUPER handy functions that benefit the most humble home user:
First, ZFS will tell you when you have data corruption and need to replace your drive even if SMART is not working as it checksums your data. It will tell you if data is corrupted and what file/piece is corrupt so that you don't have to wonder.
Second, it has ditto blocks. These actually can keep more than one copy of your data on a single drive! This can also be handy, especially if you have a certain set of data that is particularly important.
Third, ZFS has a "send" function for backup that trumps anything else you've seen:
I think my biggest complaint about ZFS right now is there won't be any repair utilities on os x right away. With HFS+ I haven't had too many issues since it came out, maybe 4-5. A few days ago I did a random fsck on my drive and it was hosed, fsck wouldn't fix it. I knew Disk Utility and fsck are cousins but I tried booting off the cd and trying it anyways... same thing, wouldn't repair the catalog. So I tried Disk Warrior, didn't work. Finally I tried Drive Genius, worked PERFECTLY. Took 7 repair attempts but it got it. Long story short, it will take time before these utilities are tried and true for repair attempts. And yes I back up my stuff nightly, but it's installing all the apps / unix stuff that takes forever and I want to avoid.
That's one reason why I don't rush out and buy a new OS right away. I wait until, at least, DiskWarrior is updated. Not that it is perfect either, but I don't find that Disk Utility is competent enough. I've had too many instances when it can't repair the disk, and even says to use a third party utility!
Comments
See below:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/200...lications.html
http://searchwebservices.techtarget....209682,00.html
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/13986
http://www.horwith.com/index.cfm/200...ity-discovered
http://www.cbronline.com/article_new...9-8D89DD0E6606
Unless the developers know how to code securely, they are just going to step on their own ...k
I am not sure why Steve made that statement about using Ajax and being safe.
See below:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/200...lications.html
http://searchwebservices.techtarget....209682,00.html
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/13986
http://www.horwith.com/index.cfm/200...ity-discovered
http://www.cbronline.com/article_new...9-8D89DD0E6606
Unless the developers know how to code securely, they are just going to step on their own ...k
I think the point is, the iPhone will be at risk to these attacks *regardless* since there is internet access. Forcing developers to use the internet to develop apps just prevents adding another layer of risk. I'm not saying I like this, but I think that is the way they are thinking.
"[It's] not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain." + ZFS mysteriously not in the WWDC build = one pissed off Steve Jobs and one sad Sun
It's clear now. I'll never understand Steve...considering this isn't a consumer feature per se. What does he care if Schmidt jumped the gun?
Steve, you sack of shit, give us ZFS.
Eric, why'd you have to open your big mouth?
Huh? What?. Nobody uses Java anymore?. I just realized this is what Jobs said, not the poster. Ok, Jobs, calm down. You sound stupid.
Apple is showing it doesn't understand markets outside NA by restricting the iPhone to long term contracts with a single carrier. Europeans expect the freedom to swap SIM cards and carriers.
You probably already caught this after you sent it, but it was Jonathan Schwartz from Sun who spilled the beans, not Eric Schmidt from Google.
Yes Schartz...my bad. I get mixed up sometimes since Eric Schmidt worked for Sun before Google. And obviously because they share the same first 3 last name letters.
"[It's] not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It?s this big heavyweight ball and chain." + ZFS mysteriously not in the WWDC build = one pissed off Steve Jobs and one sad Sun
It's clear now. I'll never understand Steve...considering this isn't a consumer feature per se. What does he care if Schmidt jumped the gun?
Steve, you sack of shit, give us ZFS.
Eric, why'd you have to open your big mouth?
There is no possible way steve jobs had ZFS pulled from the WWDC leopard Preview dvds 5 days prior to the event. These were sent to the presses weeks ago. Sure I wouldn't put it passed steve to have 3000 dvds reprinted cause someone opened their mouth about something, but 5 days before the event? no way.
Jobs also confirmed that iPhone won't support Java. "[It's] not worth building in," he said. "Nobody uses Java anymore. It?s this big heavyweight ball and chain."
Nobody uses the iPhone anymore. No local apps, requires the Internet to do everything through Safari. There are cheaper phones with a web browser plus real development capabilities. It?s this big heavyweight ball and chain.
If id doesnt have flash, im might just go and kill someone!!!
As for iPhone in Europe, I have a feeling that its not Apple but the potential carriers that want the contract clause. No major carrier is going to risk having thousands of people buy the phone with out a deep discount on the price, only to see them walk off and use it with another carrier. In fact, that scenario would only help Apple's bottom line by selling more units.
Can everyone please STFU over the whole ZFS thing? Yeah it would be nice to have, but lets all face it, Apple needs to sell Macs to more consumers and not businesses to grow market share (businesses being terribly slow in updating their hardware/software). Leopard is still going to be a great operating system w/o ZFS, and thats all most people will care about. The whole non-sense of Jobs pulling ZFS out of Leopard is just that. My bet is that Schwartz either has no clue what he's talking about, or Apple had toyed with the idea of using ZFS but didn't want to make any radical changes to disrupt the launch date.
As for iPhone in Europe, I have a feeling that its not Apple but the potential carriers that want the contract clause. No major carrier is going to risk having thousands of people buy the phone with out a deep discount on the price, only to see them walk off and use it with another carrier. In fact, that scenario would only help Apple's bottom line by selling more units.
I hope that ZFS is coming in 10.6. By the time it ships consumers will have terabyte hard drives.
Apple is showing it doesn't understand markets outside NA by restricting the iPhone to long term contracts with a single carrier. Europeans expect the freedom to swap SIM cards and carriers.
When Apple went from HFS -> HFS+ it was from 8.0 -> 8.1. It could be possible that Apple slips this in 10.5.1 (I know it's an incremental build vs a rev), but Apple can update whatever they want when they do updates. Who knows, maybe they can slip it in before launch?
I honestly don't care, HFS+ has been VERY good to me since 8.1... I'm happy with it. I know ZFS has it's benefits but HFS+ is tried and true on the Mac system as a format.
And the alternative you have in mind is---?
Tiger works just fine. There are still folks on Panther. If I get a new macbook for my dad I guess it will come with Leopard but if Leopard ships without zfs I'll push back plans for a mac based home entertainment system because there's no way I'm ripping terrabytes of info to anything less than a raid-z and I don't want to hassle with or pay for a h/w raid.
Can everyone please STFU over the whole ZFS thing? Yeah it would be nice to have, but lets all face it, Apple needs to sell Macs to more consumers and not businesses to grow market share (businesses being terribly slow in updating their hardware/software). Leopard is still going to be a great operating system w/o ZFS, and thats all most people will care about. The whole non-sense of Jobs pulling ZFS out of Leopard is just that. My bet is that Schwartz either has no clue what he's talking about, or Apple had toyed with the idea of using ZFS but didn't want to make any radical changes to disrupt the launch date.
As for iPhone in Europe, I have a feeling that its not Apple but the potential carriers that want the contract clause. No major carrier is going to risk having thousands of people buy the phone with out a deep discount on the price, only to see them walk off and use it with another carrier. In fact, that scenario would only help Apple's bottom line by selling more units.
Now common floccus, lets hold our breath a little longer. For all interested, check out the zfs discussion threads over on the open solaris mailing lists:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermai...ne/028733.html
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermai...ne/028730.html
I'm not going to give up ZFS on Mac OS X until the very last trumpet sounds for Leopard and even then it may come in a dot update. It's too critical for "Dekstop" users to simply ignore once they understand what they're getting out of it. PLUS, do you have any idea as to how much trouble this will save Apple in customer technical support, hard drive replacements and so forth? This will take a huge ball and chain off of Apple in that regard and its associated expenses (who knows if they've caught that vision...).
I think my biggest complaint about ZFS right now is there won't be any repair utilities on os x right away. With HFS+ I haven't had too many issues since it came out, maybe 4-5. A few days ago I did a random fsck on my drive and it was hosed, fsck wouldn't fix it. I knew Disk Utility and fsck are cousins but I tried booting off the cd and trying it anyways... same thing, wouldn't repair the catalog. So I tried Disk Warrior, didn't work. Finally I tried Drive Genius, worked PERFECTLY. Took 7 repair attempts but it got it. Long story short, it will take time before these utilities are tried and true for repair attempts. And yes I back up my stuff nightly, but it's installing all the apps / unix stuff that takes forever and I want to avoid.
The point of ZFS is no fscking and, if you're willing to take the size hit for mirroring or raid-z, self healing.
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/commun...faq/#whynofsck
Vinea
I think my biggest complaint about ZFS right now is there won't be any repair utilities on os x right away. With HFS+ I haven't had too many issues since it came out, maybe 4-5. A few days ago I did a random fsck on my drive and it was hosed, fsck wouldn't fix it. I knew Disk Utility and fsck are cousins but I tried booting off the cd and trying it anyways... same thing, wouldn't repair the catalog. So I tried Disk Warrior, didn't work. Finally I tried Drive Genius, worked PERFECTLY. Took 7 repair attempts but it got it. Long story short, it will take time before these utilities are tried and true for repair attempts. And yes I back up my stuff nightly, but it's installing all the apps / unix stuff that takes forever and I want to avoid.
Well emig647, the point of ZFS is that you will never again need any disk utilities. Perhaps a defrag tool, but that may be unlikely and I'm sure that the excellent blokes at iDefrag will have us covered if that need is real.
Truly, I'm a network admin and adore ZFS on Solaris. It is out of this world and has put my mind at ease for data loss. I never have to worry again with raidz. HOWEVER, even for single drive machines its quite nice as you have a few SUPER handy functions that benefit the most humble home user:
First, ZFS will tell you when you have data corruption and need to replace your drive even if SMART is not working as it checksums your data. It will tell you if data is corrupted and what file/piece is corrupt so that you don't have to wonder.
Second, it has ditto blocks. These actually can keep more than one copy of your data on a single drive! This can also be handy, especially if you have a certain set of data that is particularly important.
Third, ZFS has a "send" function for backup that trumps anything else you've seen:
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819...7ht6qsc?a=view
Take a look around! It is a wonderful world in which to live if you've got ZFS in place.
I think my biggest complaint about ZFS right now is there won't be any repair utilities on os x right away. With HFS+ I haven't had too many issues since it came out, maybe 4-5. A few days ago I did a random fsck on my drive and it was hosed, fsck wouldn't fix it. I knew Disk Utility and fsck are cousins but I tried booting off the cd and trying it anyways... same thing, wouldn't repair the catalog. So I tried Disk Warrior, didn't work. Finally I tried Drive Genius, worked PERFECTLY. Took 7 repair attempts but it got it. Long story short, it will take time before these utilities are tried and true for repair attempts. And yes I back up my stuff nightly, but it's installing all the apps / unix stuff that takes forever and I want to avoid.
That's one reason why I don't rush out and buy a new OS right away. I wait until, at least, DiskWarrior is updated. Not that it is perfect either, but I don't find that Disk Utility is competent enough. I've had too many instances when it can't repair the disk, and even says to use a third party utility!