The RIAA does not have share-holders, it is an organization of record companies. They don't get a say on what Universal does, Universal gets a say on what the RIAA does. The RIAA may want MS to buy Universal but they don't have the power to make it happen.
Also I don't think that Vivendi really cares who gives them money for Universal, they are horribly in debt and just want to survive. Personally I think the best course of action would be for Universal to simply die (along with the rest of the music industry but I digress) MS doesn't need it for the reasons you mentioned above, apple doesn't need to lose that kind of money.
And finally while Apple has made some things open source what makes you think they would be any better than MS if they had 90% of the desktop? I personally don't want Windows to die, I just want it to lose marketshare to a point where it is forced to compete with both Linux and Apple and everyone will be better off in the end.
Clearly, you have an agenda - that is to prevent people from having sex outside of marriage.
First of all what is so wrong with that? People who wait for marriage to have sex tend to stay married and have fewer problems in their marriages. That's good for not only the man and woman who are married but for any children who come out of that. Those children will have both parents around to teach them good values and things like when to say not etc. etc. Nor do they have the same chances of suffering the well-documented emotional damage that comes from parents spliting up.
The whole STD/AIDS thing you people harp on so much is just a cover. Do you really expect to convince us that you really just want to save us from disease?
A scare tactic to what? What does a Christian have to gain from making your life miserable? Look it up my friend, condoms are around 80% affective in stopping AIDs and pregnancy (admittidly higher if people used them correctly) and then they aren't effective for stopping much else that is from a government study, not some wacko right-wing conservative research. Maybe you like Herpes but I certainly don't want it. Contrast to abstenence. If two people remain abstenant until marriage (and yes that is possible) they have 100% gurrentee of being completely free of sexually transmitted diseases and they can plan for pregnancy.
Why doesn't the truth speak for itself? The STD thing is a side issue - be honest. Admit that the main issue is that sex outside of marriage is a sin, and it doesn't matter what studies come up to prove or disprove that.
I do believe it is a sin and I have no motive to "prove" that because its a matter of faith and thus un-provable. The question is why is it a sin. Its frustrates me that so many people (including those people who believe in God etc. etc.) seem to think that $DEITY (from any religion) is just out to make sure humans have no fun whatsoever. Quite possibly (in my opinion) its to protect us from ourselves. Wheither you believe its a sin or not, sex outside of marriage:
Creates teenage pregnancy, which helps to feed poverty as most teenage moms don't get their educations.
Increases the number of abortions, which in turn has been shown to cause emotional and physical problems in women (wheither you believe that killing un-born children is murder or not, that's a can of worms for another day)
Increases stress on a future marriage which can lead to divorce to which leads to a whole host of other problems that I listed above, and continues the cycle.
Allows for a much higher chance of STDs which also bring on a lot of other problems.
All of these things can contribute to higher poverty, emotional distress, violence, all things that affect society as a whole.
So, you're trying to stop people from sinning. Isn't that God's job?
I think we are trying to build a better society that is free(er) from some of the problems I mentioned above. And for the record, its an individual's job to not sin. Not God's and not mine.
I mean, you can only present them with the truth and it is their free-will decision to make to accept or reject it.
Defenatly
Apparently, STDs are God's way of punishing the sinners, which is why condoms are not encouraged.
No STDs are a possibility when having sex, when one engages in sex outside of marriage, and has sex with different people, one greatly increases the likelyhood of catching such a disease. Condoms don't treat the whole problem, in fact they treat very little of it.
If one was careful, one could enjoy virtually unlimited sinfulness. The punishment is circumvented. Indeed, God is circumvented! I can see why you'd want to ban them. Apparently sheets of latex are an effective barrier against acts of God.
That makes no sense, though I'm sure so of the more conservative people in my camp believe it, which is very sad and for them I ap
Viewsonic makes pretty good CRTs as well. But personally I have been using AOC monitors for a while. Not too expensive and I've absolutely never had a problem with them. They are very clear and have great color.
Oh it was that way here too. And trust me people will turn off Javascript to get around that if they figure out how. Do your form validation on the server side where your customer can't mess with it.
Interesting? Everytime a Mozilla article pops up so does this comment. Redundant is more like it.
But I guess however I'm in a troll feeding mood. So lets examine a few facts:
A) Mozilla is 4 apps in one. Some people like this, some people don't. If you don't like it then use Phoenix or one of the other stand-alone browsers
B) For an app that is four apps in one, Mozilla has a relatively small foot-print. I've got several tabs open and the mail client right now and its only using 48 megs (mostly just idle in swap) that's on Linux.
C) IE (which I'm assuming you run) starts up faster than Moz, why? because IE starts up with windows so you actually run it all the time. Besides in Windows you can run mozilla in your sys-tray so that you get a fast start up just like IE.
D) I don't have turbo mode on (I don't even think its availiable in Linux) and still Moz starts up very fast on my 1 Ghz Athlon
And E) a little extra code to tell you where Javascript errors wouldn't really be creating much bloat even if there was bloat in the first place.
Mozilla does have a way to edit source, its call 'Composer' which is an HTML editor. View Source isn't for editing files, and the fact that MS decided to use the wonderful invention of Notepad for their view source has always annoyed me.
And on a side note as a web developer, Mozilla with its web development tools plus Vim is far easier to use and more powerful that DreamWeaver or anything else out there IMHO.
That's the problem right there: Javascript. The company I work for (small business so this is easier) before I came Javascript was "IT" and slowly I've shown how you can do cool stuff with stylesheets, and how clean pages without alot of stupid javascript effects go a long way to creating happy customers.
Convince them they don't need the JS, much less rely on it for pages to display or navigate properly and life will be much better.
no required braces, no embedded regexps, no magical, one-character variables, etc., etc.
Perl doesn't always require braces. I love embedded regexs and one character variables (though I know a lot of people don't).
Totally agree with you on anonymous subs, and the scoping.
I don't think it's difficult to be a competent PHP programmer--it's just like being a competent programmer.
I agree with you here to. The problem I see is since PHP has a function for everything you get people who just throw functions around without really learning how x feature could or should really be done. 90% of the PHP code I've ever seen uses include() to include some extra HTML like a header or footer, almost never to modularize code.
I don't disagree that PHP can have namespaces but they aren't there automatically, you have to create them. My beef about the namespace is that tons of the core functions ought to have their own built-in class that can be loaded optionally. Things like array_* and mysql_* bug me... why don't they have a class Array and a class Mysql if its supposed to be OO then lets be OO. Otherwise, especially for the array_* functions, drop the array part, we know it works on arrays, save us some typing!:)
Perl-like? It's C-like, if anything, which makes it easy for someone who has experience in C or Java to pick up.
Perl is C-like in a lot of ways too. More so than PHP. So I think its fair to say PHP is Perl like, some kind of hacked version of Perl though.
What's wrong with lots of built-in functions? They are hard to remember and they have names_that_are_entirely_too_long(). Both Python and Perl have ways to group functions together into proper namespaces, something that PHP really lacks. I don't care that their built in, I just want namespaces!
I've never come across a competent PHP developer who has said that.
Yes but there is an inherent lack of competent PHP developers, mainly because of books like this. Someone reads it and picks up it fairly easily without having to understand things like namespaces, proper security models, templating or anything else that would make code maintenence or reuse 10 times easier. Development is easy and fast until you start coding properly.
And finally about templating, PHP was designed to be embedded into HTML, an approach that is getting more and more backward. There are several attempts to hack templating into it but of all the one's I've tried they aren't near as powerful as templating in other languages. (not saying there aren't good ones, I've just yet to find them).
Same thing goes for the language. I wish people could be bothered to learn something far more powerful and better designed like Perl (mod_perl for websites) or Python.
PHP may be easy but try to do a data structure more complex than an associative array. And references ha! one only wishes they had references. Grrrrr.
Third article in the last couple of weeks about yet another PHP + MySQL book. They all seem to be for the newbie's too. How about representing some other languages, other databases and some advanced techniques.
Maybe I'm just bitter because of my extreme hatred for PHP.
Common misconception. Especially with Mac hardware. At one time yes, they were a pain and you couldn't really fix them, but I haven't seen a Mac in a long time that you couldn't get into at least somewhat. Even the iMacs have upgrade capability. And the G3 and G4 towers were 10 times easier to get into than the stupid Dells I had to work on back in college.
Its not so much a new product as it is breaking some of the bonds between different parts of the program so they can be separate applications.
I think its a great idea as long as I can upgrade to it without loosing my bookmarks, email, cookies, passwords etc.
Re:If Ars Technica is so concerned about usability
on
A Better Finder?
·
· Score: 1, Informative
BS. The black when your screen is on is created the same way the white is when its on. There is no 'natural color' for a CRT unless its off and you can't have portions of the screen off and portions on.
Good grief people, do some research. US could get plenty of oil from Iraq by simply lifting sanctions. In fact only about 20% of our oil now comes from the Middle East.
I'm not 100% certain of the government's motives in this area but it is not oil. But I will say that getting rid of Saadaam is a good thing, (just ask the people he's tortured and killed over the last 12 years) IN FACT the reason that Europe is so opposed is because they do get most of their oil from that area, and do not want their prices to go up. France was owed money and Russia had just signed a lucrative oil deal with them. Funny that they were the loudest in opposing the war. I wonder why that was.
Come on! I'm not taking a side in this war, I think the whole thing should have been avoided by getting rid of Sadaam in 91 but the knee jerk reactions are just stupid. BOTH sides of the argument are putting out uninformed propoganda and people on BOTH sides of the big pond are simply believing what their government tells them to.
I feel better now, moderators please mod me offtopic and the above as troll.
What exactly does the DMCA limit your right to do? Your right to rip CDs? Listen I think the DMCA is stupid too but I don't think it has anything to do with your "rights", either that or you and I have a very different view of what rights are.
My, how casually dismissive. PHP scales far better than Perl does. Go talk to the yahoos at Yahoo!
I personally don't care what the yahoos at Yahoo! think until they show me some benchmarks.
More accuratly their programming staff probably complained that "Perl is too hard" (I hear it from PHP developers all the time). Besides if I understand correctly Yahoo was using CGI (which may have been perl but could have been C or something else)
Scalability depends on a lot more than just the language, it (obviously) depends on hardware and then on how well the app is written. Perl and PHP both will slow a site to a grind if there is inefficient code. (same goes for security to all the people who blab on and on about PHP being inherently more secure)
Finally show me a benchmark! I've only ever seen one un-biased benchmark on this subject (and I can't find it now) and it shows Perl and PHP's scalability to be relatively the same.
What I can get to anyway through the slashdotting.
I managed to get to the namespace page, which I feel is one of the biggest problems, and it says nothing about namespace issues other than 'fixing the object model' and changing OP codes so you can add your own (what do OP codes have to do with it?).
And what does fixing the object model mean? Are they going to create a standard set of classes and move the core functions into them (one can only hope) or are they going to stick with the every_function_in_my_namespace model that drive competent programmers nuts!/rant
I would also love to see them embed regular expressions in the same way perl does. Nothing makes me more annoyed than preg_match() and preg_replace().
Now, I'm not sure if that's a faultof PHP itself, or that some of the "easier" features of PHP tend to attract less competent programmers and/or misconfigurations?
I think that's one of the big problems. People are moving to PHP in droves because its so "easy" and so "fast", which is really just marketing hype. It is easier to do small simple things, the "function_name_for_everything" model it follows is easy for HTML people to understand and get the hang of but try doing a large application and then try maintaining it a year later. Yeah right.
It is possible to program PHP modularly and correctly but it takes more time, things like the Pear DB module while good are poorly documented, other Pear modules aren't documented at all. The Pear people seem to worried about making sure your tab stops are a certain width than proper documentation. (BTW Pear can't light a candle to CPAN).
But what do I know, I'm probably bitter because I'm forced to use PHP at work.
Slashdot Mirror
The RIAA does not have share-holders, it is an organization of record companies. They don't get a say on what Universal does, Universal gets a say on what the RIAA does. The RIAA may want MS to buy Universal but they don't have the power to make it happen.
Also I don't think that Vivendi really cares who gives them money for Universal, they are horribly in debt and just want to survive. Personally I think the best course of action would be for Universal to simply die (along with the rest of the music industry but I digress) MS doesn't need it for the reasons you mentioned above, apple doesn't need to lose that kind of money.
And finally while Apple has made some things open source what makes you think they would be any better than MS if they had 90% of the desktop? I personally don't want Windows to die, I just want it to lose marketshare to a point where it is forced to compete with both Linux and Apple and everyone will be better off in the end.
I sent my reply to your email address above if that's not correct I'll post it here.
Figured email was better since the subject was now so far off-topic.
First of all what is so wrong with that? People who wait for marriage to have sex tend to stay married and have fewer problems in their marriages. That's good for not only the man and woman who are married but for any children who come out of that. Those children will have both parents around to teach them good values and things like when to say not etc. etc. Nor do they have the same chances of suffering the well-documented emotional damage that comes from parents spliting up.
The whole STD/AIDS thing you people harp on so much is just a cover. Do you really expect to convince us that you really just want to save us from disease?
A scare tactic to what? What does a Christian have to gain from making your life miserable? Look it up my friend, condoms are around 80% affective in stopping AIDs and pregnancy (admittidly higher if people used them correctly) and then they aren't effective for stopping much else that is from a government study, not some wacko right-wing conservative research. Maybe you like Herpes but I certainly don't want it. Contrast to abstenence. If two people remain abstenant until marriage (and yes that is possible) they have 100% gurrentee of being completely free of sexually transmitted diseases and they can plan for pregnancy.
Why doesn't the truth speak for itself? The STD thing is a side issue - be honest. Admit that the main issue is that sex outside of marriage is a sin, and it doesn't matter what studies come up to prove or disprove that.
I do believe it is a sin and I have no motive to "prove" that because its a matter of faith and thus un-provable. The question is why is it a sin. Its frustrates me that so many people (including those people who believe in God etc. etc.) seem to think that $DEITY (from any religion) is just out to make sure humans have no fun whatsoever. Quite possibly (in my opinion) its to protect us from ourselves. Wheither you believe its a sin or not, sex outside of marriage:
All of these things can contribute to higher poverty, emotional distress, violence, all things that affect society as a whole.
So, you're trying to stop people from sinning. Isn't that God's job?
I think we are trying to build a better society that is free(er) from some of the problems I mentioned above. And for the record, its an individual's job to not sin. Not God's and not mine.
I mean, you can only present them with the truth and it is their free-will decision to make to accept or reject it.
Defenatly
Apparently, STDs are God's way of punishing the sinners, which is why condoms are not encouraged.
No STDs are a possibility when having sex, when one engages in sex outside of marriage, and has sex with different people, one greatly increases the likelyhood of catching such a disease. Condoms don't treat the whole problem, in fact they treat very little of it.
If one was careful, one could enjoy virtually unlimited sinfulness. The punishment is circumvented. Indeed, God is circumvented! I can see why you'd want to ban them. Apparently sheets of latex are an effective barrier against acts of God.
That makes no sense, though I'm sure so of the more conservative people in my camp believe it, which is very sad and for them I ap
Viewsonic makes pretty good CRTs as well. But personally I have been using AOC monitors for a while. Not too expensive and I've absolutely never had a problem with them. They are very clear and have great color.
Oh it was that way here too. And trust me people will turn off Javascript to get around that if they figure out how. Do your form validation on the server side where your customer can't mess with it.
Interesting? Everytime a Mozilla article pops up so does this comment. Redundant is more like it.
But I guess however I'm in a troll feeding mood. So lets examine a few facts:
A) Mozilla is 4 apps in one. Some people like this, some people don't. If you don't like it then use Phoenix or one of the other stand-alone browsers
B) For an app that is four apps in one, Mozilla has a relatively small foot-print. I've got several tabs open and the mail client right now and its only using 48 megs (mostly just idle in swap) that's on Linux.
C) IE (which I'm assuming you run) starts up faster than Moz, why? because IE starts up with windows so you actually run it all the time. Besides in Windows you can run mozilla in your sys-tray so that you get a fast start up just like IE.
D) I don't have turbo mode on (I don't even think its availiable in Linux) and still Moz starts up very fast on my 1 Ghz Athlon
And E) a little extra code to tell you where Javascript errors wouldn't really be creating much bloat even if there was bloat in the first place.
Mozilla does have a way to edit source, its call 'Composer' which is an HTML editor. View Source isn't for editing files, and the fact that MS decided to use the wonderful invention of Notepad for their view source has always annoyed me.
And on a side note as a web developer, Mozilla with its web development tools plus Vim is far easier to use and more powerful that DreamWeaver or anything else out there IMHO.
That's the problem right there: Javascript. The company I work for (small business so this is easier) before I came Javascript was "IT" and slowly I've shown how you can do cool stuff with stylesheets, and how clean pages without alot of stupid javascript effects go a long way to creating happy customers.
Convince them they don't need the JS, much less rely on it for pages to display or navigate properly and life will be much better.
They can, and they should, but everyone who has gotten spam from him should counter-sue for taking their personal information as well.
no required braces, no embedded regexps, no magical, one-character variables, etc., etc.
:)
Perl doesn't always require braces. I love embedded regexs and one character variables (though I know a lot of people don't).
Totally agree with you on anonymous subs, and the scoping.
I don't think it's difficult to be a competent PHP programmer--it's just like being a competent programmer.
I agree with you here to. The problem I see is since PHP has a function for everything you get people who just throw functions around without really learning how x feature could or should really be done. 90% of the PHP code I've ever seen uses include() to include some extra HTML like a header or footer, almost never to modularize code.
I don't disagree that PHP can have namespaces but they aren't there automatically, you have to create them. My beef about the namespace is that tons of the core functions ought to have their own built-in class that can be loaded optionally. Things like array_* and mysql_* bug me... why don't they have a class Array and a class Mysql if its supposed to be OO then lets be OO. Otherwise, especially for the array_* functions, drop the array part, we know it works on arrays, save us some typing!
Perl-like? It's C-like, if anything, which makes it easy for someone who has experience in C or Java to pick up.
Perl is C-like in a lot of ways too. More so than PHP. So I think its fair to say PHP is Perl like, some kind of hacked version of Perl though.
What's wrong with lots of built-in functions?
They are hard to remember and they have names_that_are_entirely_too_long(). Both Python and Perl have ways to group functions together into proper namespaces, something that PHP really lacks. I don't care that their built in, I just want namespaces!
I've never come across a competent PHP developer who has said that.
Yes but there is an inherent lack of competent PHP developers, mainly because of books like this. Someone reads it and picks up it fairly easily without having to understand things like namespaces, proper security models, templating or anything else that would make code maintenence or reuse 10 times easier. Development is easy and fast until you start coding properly.
And finally about templating, PHP was designed to be embedded into HTML, an approach that is getting more and more backward. There are several attempts to hack templating into it but of all the one's I've tried they aren't near as powerful as templating in other languages. (not saying there aren't good ones, I've just yet to find them).
Same thing goes for the language. I wish people could be bothered to learn something far more powerful and better designed like Perl (mod_perl for websites) or Python.
PHP may be easy but try to do a data structure more complex than an associative array. And references ha! one only wishes they had references. Grrrrr.
Third article in the last couple of weeks about yet another PHP + MySQL book. They all seem to be for the newbie's too. How about representing some other languages, other databases and some advanced techniques.
Maybe I'm just bitter because of my extreme hatred for PHP.
Common misconception. Especially with Mac hardware. At one time yes, they were a pain and you couldn't really fix them, but I haven't seen a Mac in a long time that you couldn't get into at least somewhat. Even the iMacs have upgrade capability. And the G3 and G4 towers were 10 times easier to get into than the stupid Dells I had to work on back in college.
Its not so much a new product as it is breaking some of the bonds between different parts of the program so they can be separate applications.
I think its a great idea as long as I can upgrade to it without loosing my bookmarks, email, cookies, passwords etc.
BS. The black when your screen is on is created the same way the white is when its on. There is no 'natural color' for a CRT unless its off and you can't have portions of the screen off and portions on.
That would be awesome, I'd also like if files in my command shell were clickable or selectable and opened the correct application when clicked.
You mean you married someone that doesn't like LOTR??? That's grounds for divorce right there!
(/me has a wonderful wife that would kill me if I didn't take her to see it opening day)
Good grief people, do some research. US could get plenty of oil from Iraq by simply lifting sanctions. In fact only about 20% of our oil now comes from the Middle East.
I'm not 100% certain of the government's motives in this area but it is not oil. But I will say that getting rid of Saadaam is a good thing, (just ask the people he's tortured and killed over the last 12 years) IN FACT the reason that Europe is so opposed is because they do get most of their oil from that area, and do not want their prices to go up. France was owed money and Russia had just signed a lucrative oil deal with them. Funny that they were the loudest in opposing the war. I wonder why that was.
Come on! I'm not taking a side in this war, I think the whole thing should have been avoided by getting rid of Sadaam in 91 but the knee jerk reactions are just stupid. BOTH sides of the argument are putting out uninformed propoganda and people on BOTH sides of the big pond are simply believing what their government tells them to.
I feel better now, moderators please mod me offtopic and the above as troll.
What exactly does the DMCA limit your right to do? Your right to rip CDs? Listen I think the DMCA is stupid too but I don't think it has anything to do with your "rights", either that or you and I have a very different view of what rights are.
If PHP were so horrible, why is it the most popular module for Apache?
Because all those web "programmers" out there can't be bothered with some of the strictness of mod_perl?
It does of course it still sucks, its not near as powerful as Perl's DBI but its a start and its much better than stupid_function_names()
My, how casually dismissive. PHP scales far better than Perl does. Go talk to the yahoos at Yahoo!
I personally don't care what the yahoos at Yahoo! think until they show me some benchmarks.
More accuratly their programming staff probably complained that "Perl is too hard" (I hear it from PHP developers all the time). Besides if I understand correctly Yahoo was using CGI (which may have been perl but could have been C or something else)
Scalability depends on a lot more than just the language, it (obviously) depends on hardware and then on how well the app is written. Perl and PHP both will slow a site to a grind if there is inefficient code. (same goes for security to all the people who blab on and on about PHP being inherently more secure)
Finally show me a benchmark! I've only ever seen one un-biased benchmark on this subject (and I can't find it now) and it shows Perl and PHP's scalability to be relatively the same.
I'll second your post and take the flames with you:
LONG LIVE PERL!!!
What I can get to anyway through the slashdotting.
/rant
I managed to get to the namespace page, which I feel is one of the biggest problems, and it says nothing about namespace issues other than 'fixing the object model' and changing OP codes so you can add your own (what do OP codes have to do with it?).
And what does fixing the object model mean? Are they going to create a standard set of classes and move the core functions into them (one can only hope) or are they going to stick with the every_function_in_my_namespace model that drive competent programmers nuts!
I would also love to see them embed regular expressions in the same way perl does. Nothing makes me more annoyed than preg_match() and preg_replace().
Now, I'm not sure if that's a faultof PHP itself, or that some of the "easier" features of PHP tend to attract less competent programmers and/or misconfigurations?
I think that's one of the big problems. People are moving to PHP in droves because its so "easy" and so "fast", which is really just marketing hype. It is easier to do small simple things, the "function_name_for_everything" model it follows is easy for HTML people to understand and get the hang of but try doing a large application and then try maintaining it a year later. Yeah right.
It is possible to program PHP modularly and correctly but it takes more time, things like the Pear DB module while good are poorly documented, other Pear modules aren't documented at all. The Pear people seem to worried about making sure your tab stops are a certain width than proper documentation. (BTW Pear can't light a candle to CPAN).
But what do I know, I'm probably bitter because I'm forced to use PHP at work.