Your boss is the apotheosis of dumb and lazy if he thinks IE has 'fancy frills'. Perhaps he also thinks MS invented the internet? You may as well produce a Win32 binary and require the user to download it. If you did develop for other browsers, you'd find that all the time is spent working around bugs in Internet Explorer.
Your boss is an idiot, and if you want to be able to get a job anywhere else, perhaps you should leave now before you forget what web development means.
Everyone knows that ipods have a life span of anywhere between 6 months and 2 years before either being dropped, over used, or just used (anyone remember the battery issue?)
I beg to differ. I have a 1G iPod bought around 5 years ago which still works fine, though it's been dropped innumerable times, the battery doesn't charge so well now as it only lasts an hour or so (after 5 years of use) but it works fine. I could replace the battery (doesn't look hard), but haven't bothered because I got a 4G a couple of years ago (to get more space) and use that mostly now instead. Battery life is as new. Same goes for all the other people I know who have iPods - none have stopped working, save one which took a dip in some water. So much for your 'everyone knows' lifespan of between 6 months and 2 years.
Though we'll have to wait till it comes out, the new Zune sounds very much like they've moved on to copying the Nano, which is great, but doesn't really address the fact they're 2 years behind all their competitors. They need to stop, take stock, and address the faults and short-comings of Zune - both software and player, instead of playing catch-up. Portable video doesn't really it to me, right now it's just another bullet point on the feature list (cost, storage, screen size all need to be addressed). By the time MS produce something worth buying with the Zune, Apple will be selling internet connected devices by the million instead, and even more people will be using iTunes to sync up everything on their computer with those devices, leaving the Zune as a copycat product in a shrinking market.
There are so many things they could have added - address book, camera support for image import, clock, calendar, data entry, internet, real content sharing via wifi (other than music), real ebook support etc etc. This hack for reading text on a Zune sums things up really :
Given the platform they already had with Pocket PC, why they even bothered producing something entirely different for the Zune astounds me. The convergence with PocketPC devices is only a few years away, and yet they throw out all the ground-work they have in-house and start again with a device that's so limited it's painful. If Pocket PC (or whatever they call it now) needs improved to handle playing music, improve it! The whole thing stinks of a directive from on-high to combat the iPod, which resulted in a quick buy-in and rebranding of an existing player then a rushed launch. V2 is more of the same.
The "grid" doesn't work that way, and it most definitely doesn't have "storage cells".
Actually, it does, in the form of hydro projects, which can easily (and sometimes do) pump water back up to their reservoir from valleys to store energy on days where demand is weak. Look up 'pumped storage'.
There are many ways to store energy, mostly not very efficient, but then neither is transporting it around on wires. They could direct it to hydro projects, use it to convert water to hydrogen for storage (or sale if we end up using hydrogen powered cars), sell it to industries who didn't mind running machines at night, or just sell it to another part of the world where it's dark and people are using more. There is a 3-4 hour time difference across the US, and the same in Europe; plenty of scope for reselling - which is already becoming prevalent in Europe.
I suspect though that this sort of thing wouldn't really be a problem, as although the grid would in effect be operating as a giant battery, in practice they'd be able to redistribute power amongst all the different people using it at different times and in different places, providing price incentives to encourage use at off-peak times, and would never see the need for massive storage facilities. Excess power could just be thrown away in a system where you have practically unlimited supply.
I think it's a combination of two things:... insert random walk through insecurities of Blakey Rat...Either way, it strikes me as an extremely immature thing to be doing. Thus the 'waaah.'
This has nothing to do with your ignorant interpretation of EU motivations, the war in Iraq, Bush, or the fact that Apple is an American company. It's a move to try to introduce a free market in music in the EU, and as such we should all be applauding it. Has happened in various other industries, and it's an ongoing thing. Most of the big record companies are based in Europe, and they're the ones really being targeted by this. Apple has nothing to lose and everything to gain if this goes through, and consumers likewise will benefit.
Apple will probably be happy that this is being pushed, because they only stand to gain by being allowed to sell music without price fixing. If they could just lose the different licensing schemes for each single country they'd probably be ecstatic. I'm sure if they could they'd have one universal store that everyone could buy from, with prices pegged off exchange rates - unfortunately that day is not yet here.
You're (perhaps willfully) ignoring of the amount of time and effort that goes into producing music. Bands sometimes spend a couple of years producing an album, and there are probably 20 or so people involved during that time doing production,post-production, marketing etc etc. Many albums don't sell that well, so for those albums the record company makes a loss. A loss that they have to make up on other songs. The distribution medium has always been a smaller part of the price.
So though the artists may get screwed over (if you choose your record company wisely, that's not the case), all that does cost money, and the record company probably could *not* sell at anything like 50c a song and make a profit. Just because some survey says that people want pay 50c per track, you think they should sell it at that. If the survey had asked people which they wanted to pay per song
10c 20c 50c 99c
What do you think most people would pick?
If you don't want to pay what they're charging, make your own music, find alternative artists (see magnatune or many others) or go see live acts. Just don't make up silly justifications for stealing/copyright infringement/whatever you want to call it this week. It's amoral.
Hopefully artists with the big labels will realise gradually what a bad deal they're getting and sign up with places like magnatune or cdbaby, where they get a good cut of the price paid by the listener. They would then have to front up their own production costs, but nowadays those can be kept lower than traditional studios. If you don't like the deal proposed by iTS there are other alternatives, why not choose one where the people whose work you appreciate actually get paid? You may be pleased to hear that at magnatune you can choose how much you pay and what format you download in (note I have just shopped there, I'm in no way affiliated).
Fjan11 writes "Steve Jobs just announced that starting next month on you can buy higher quality 256
Try next month. I suspect the fact that they're labelled 'Premium' and cost 30 cents more is going to be a big clue about which are non DRM tracks. Probably they'll put a big label on them and it'll be very easy to see which is which.
Why would anyone possibly agree to be bound by any and all future conditions?
Why would people do FOSS at all? Who knows?
Yet again you studiously avoid answering the question in a meaningful way. Care to explain the misunderstanding you feel took place?
Why do his opinions about the community involve presumption?
He didn't speak *about* the community, he spoke for it when he said we. That is presumption. It's a nebulous term used to try to include people who are not at all aligned with the GPL inside the 'free software' church. There is no consensus of opinion on many of these issues, and as such I think it's a misleading and weasely term. Not every license in the same, and nor should they be, as they reflect differences of opinion on the best way to release copyrighted works.
MIT and BSD licenses have problems of their own, namely that they allow anyone to add into their forks additional restrictive clauses that make them incompatible with anything else - even with free redistribution at all.
This is only a problem if you don't want people to do that. Many people are happy for their work to be used for *any* purpose, and that's why they choose BSD/MIT. This isn't some unforeseen problem, it's a positive decision. It's only a problem for those who believe that all software must remain free forever.
And the biggest problem with multiple copyleft licenses is that it undermines software freedom. If you can't mix code from one free software project in another, then how are they both "free"? Critics of the FSF countered that this was all the GPLs fault, because, erm, it's copyleft and the others are n... well, erm, the problem is copyleft, and the GPL invented that, and nobody else wante... oh wait, well, er, RMS is a dirty smelly hippy! Yeah!
Are you seriously suggesting that all objections to the GPL are groundless and that all other licenses are somehow undermining 'software freedom' (What does that mean exactly?), because they aren't part of the one true way? Personally I'd release under MIT/BSD over GPL, because it is truly free of any restrictions, but still copyright the author, so it can be used by the world for any purpose as the author intended. Just because the GPL doesn't allow that doesn't mean it's not something people want to do.
A fair case could be made for the GPL being unfree in that it excludes all other licenses. Akin to monotheism's insistence that you shall not worship other gods.
Whereupon Torvalds threw a fit, because he'd fucked up. Seriously fucked up. Early on in Linux development, he settled on the GPLv2, but didn't like one commonly included licensing mechanism, the ability to use future versions of the GPL. By itself, that's fine, trusting a third party to always put out fair licenses is a massive mistake, but where Torvalds screwed up was in not replacing it. He just took it out. It's like seeing: i = int_add_function(i, 1); in some code, and deciding that it sucks, and it's hideous, and it's really going to have side effects and stuff that are unpredictable, and God knows why someone would put it in, and deciding to remove the damned line instead of replacing it with "i++;"
Your analogy assumes he disagreed with the implementation, but not the intent (if indeed it makes any sense at all?). In fact he disagreed with the intent, and therefore removed the clause.
As to the clause in question "or any other version" - this is a contentious clause, I'm not surprised he took it out. Why would anyone possibly agree to be bound by any and all future conditions that they haven't even seen; you may as well say "or any other license the maintainer chooses in the future". I doubt that clause is even legally binding. On a project with multiple contributors who retain copyright, you'll always have to go back to them to ask about changes - similar to a change of terms and conditions from your bank; they have to notify you in writing of changes. If anything the only mistake Linus made was not to set up a foundation and assign copyright to that - an understandable oversight when starting out, and one which they may start to slowly remedy.
Meanwhile, the rest of the free software (and open source) communities look on with amazement and sadness. Looks like there's less chance than ever of us settling on common hard-copyleft and soft-copyleft licenses for software we feel should be copylefted. Instead it's more likely that GPLv3 will just add to the mess of licenses that aren't compatible with other licenses.
Who are 'the free software community' and why do you presume to speak for them?
People will vote with their feet- if GPLv3 is truly the one pure license as you seem to believe, they'll choose it. I personally don't see any problem with a proliferation of licenses - the bad ones will be weeded out by natural selection. If you don't like using the Linux kernel and truly think the maintainer is an egomaniac, go start your own instead of gratuitously insulting the man who maintains it. Perhaps you could contribute to and use HURD instead?
Ignorance madam, sheer ignorance
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 1
Hi there,
I'm a...No need to learn a new, proprietary tool that only runs on one OS and has less functionality.
Thanks for your uninform(ed | ative), rant. Unfortunately you don't seem to know what you're talking about, or care to know. Why is it a cocoa textwidget? Do you think it uses the cocoa text view? (I think you'll find the answer is no). Really I have no idea what you mean by 'all out scripting interface' - perhaps you mean it's extensible? There's no requirement to write scripts to use it.
If you're incapable of learning to use a new text editor (it's a text editor for goodness sake, not a jet engine), you're really not in the author's target market anyway, so stick with jedit and be happy; no need to slag things off when you've obviously spent 5 seconds evaluating them and dismissed them out of hand. No idea what you mean by 'proprietary editor scripting language'? Had to hit all the Slashdot buzzwords I guess? There's no requirement to learn any scripting language, though you might find doing so helps you become a better developer, and yes, you can extend TextMate to do wonderful things by using your choice of scripting language to do so.
PS, It's by no means the first of its kind on OS X, BBEdit, Emacs etc had a lot of these features a long time ago, it's just quite a nice editor and easy to use, what's your problem with that?
Re:Been demoing it myself. compare to BBEDIT
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 1
1) How come in python the class and function roll-ups often don't work right if I have a muli-line doc string after class/function definition?
Don't use python so can't comment on this specifically, but it's all done with regexps, if you don't like the way it does things or it trips up on your particular style of code, it's easy to change. I have noticed the roll-ups aren't always correct on all languages, which I think is to do with the difficulty of parsing all the different combinations of possible indent/comment/functions etc, and sometimes it just doesn't work too well. Most of the time though, I don't see problems with this. Don't use it a huge amount anyway, as I tend to just skip about by typing : Cmd-Shift-T, the first few letters of a function, and then return, which will jump to a function. There's something similar for files.
3) is there any way to have some visual indicator of where column 80 is?
Yep, in the prefs.
4) how can I see the tab columns. If I turn on show invisibles this looks like crap. What I want is some grey vertical bars showing me where the tab stops are so I can match up things indented at the same level with my eye.
uhm, never had this problem, things are obviously lined up or not, perhaps it's more important in python. I don't *think* there's a way to do this. That said, there are plenty of ways to realign/reformat various types of code in the Bundles; you shouldn't have to do this stuff by hand. It auto-indents for you as you type anyway, which works pretty well.
5) is there a nice way to visually diff two documents?
Bundles > Diff Seriously, look through the Bundles folders (+ their source, which is available in Bundles > Edit) for an idea of the things you can do - almost everything you want to do has already been set up by someone else. If it doesn't do something just now, you can write a bit of script to make it do it for you, either on its own or by calling an already available command line tool. Sometimes it might seem that options are hidden away but once you're familiar with the bundles, it's really not - there's only so much it can simplify things for you - at some point you have to read through the docs : )
Re:Been demoing it myself. compare to BBEDIT
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I agree about the bloat in the bundles menu, but you can just remove the bundles you're not likely to use, giving you a much shorter menu. If you're new to the app it's worth working your way through all of the bundles that interest you just to see what each command does.
A couple of things I have not yet figured out how to do in Textmate yet that I really am jonesing for are Line numbering, and the ability to mark a set of lines and change them to comment lines in a language aware fashion.
To add line numbers : Bundles > Text > Add line numbers to selection
To comment the selection (in language of choice) Bundles > Source > Comment Selection ( Cmd-/ )
Or to get comments you can opt-click to select a column to the left of your text and then type// (for C for example) to comment out an area. I guess the command is easier, though I don't often use it.
You should give TextMate a go for longer, as there may be more things you're missing about it. I use it to avoid xCode mostly, but it works well as a project manager for all sorts of text files, including HTML and config files. I wouldn't go back to something without the snippets and macros nowadays. That said BBedit is a good editor, so why not use that if you've already bought it! If you came to upgrading though I'd reconsider TextMate at that stage.
Personally as a guy who has on average 6 - 10 consoles open at any one time, Mac OS X isnt flexible enough to be the ultimate OS. You just cant get the necessary power from it when you need it.
Please define 'power' and how OS X falls short.
PS I wouldn't call OS X the 'ultimate' OS either, but you seem to be dismissing a hand-waving argument with another one about power-users.
The correct answer is not to support coups and tin-potdictators[1] all over the world. The atrocities of Saddam are irrelevant to the US/UK invasion of Iraq, it's all about control over the region, and nothing to do with the people of Iraq. If you believe in the war for moral reasons, you've been sold down the river.
The correct answer was and is to leave Iraq alone, not to sell the weapons for a genocidal war with Iran, not support the dictator in power, and not invade when things went pear-shaped and he had delusions of grandeur then leave without disturbing him, not to blow hot and cold with rebel groups in his country, and not to invade and depose him then disband the organs of state without planning for the aftermath.
They were widely criticized for this "cheese eating surrender monkey" approach.
I guess we won't hear so much of this stale joke when the US finally retreat from Iraq; won't seem so funny then. I suppose it provides a small amount of comfort to think of others as somehow inherently weak and cowardly, particularly in times of insecurity.
Hell, TextMate isn't even close to being on par with TextPad, on Windows.
I'm curious, why do you say this? Have you used it for more than 5 minutes? Did you look in the bundles menu? TextMate is also way more than a text editor, that's why people like it. I'd say the same about BBedit (way more than a text editor), though that isn't developed as actively as TextMate has been the last few years.
I distinctly heard on 15 year old speakers just how crappy iTunes music is compared to store bought. Up to that point, I was thinking of ripping the remaining couple hundred CDs (not yet converted) and chucking them....but now I'm reconsidering.
What does the quality of music on iTMS have to do with ripping your own CDs?
PS There aren't enough people dropping 10k on speakers to stop iTMS selling low-quality music, it's probably 1% of the audiophile market, and 0.0001% of the music-buying market. You seem to equate iTMS with 'online music' here - there are plenty of online stores who offer better quality, some even offer FLAC and let you choose how much you pay. Quality is not really an issue now for most people, and long term it will be a simple matter to increase the quality (iTMS has already done it once for videos), probably to well beyond the quality you get from CDs.
Some day all media will be consumed and sold this way (including TV); let's just hope they drop trying to impose DRM along the way, as that's the only downside to digital distribution of media, and the only reason I don't use the iTMS yet.
What Wikipedia really needs is a third group; those who have no moderator powers, but stand in oversight of moderators/admins, observe their actions, are NOT their friends, and are ready to strip them of power for doing something wrong.
This is an old problem - Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who would guard your guards and ensure they were metamoderating properly? As the grandparent suggested, the best overseer is the reading public themselves - if all actions are public and easily searchable, and this leads to accountability, that's a good brake against anti-social admins. However all systems can be subverted, as we've seen in this case ; the culture all comes down to the people with power - if they're trustworthy, the people they give power to will be and the site will be. If they're not, well...
and all this other stuff is because OOXML has to be able to store every piece of data that the word *.doc file format stores.
And if you believe that, and believe it's a good idea to further lock yourself in to the products of a user-hostile company, MS has several other bridges to sell you. There's never been a better time to move away from binary, ephemeral, inscrutable formats for our documents. Word can't even open these memory dump docs consistently across versions/platforms.
The fact that MS either hasn't grasped this (highly unlikely, given the level of people they have working there), or actually chooses to lock in its customers with OOXML, tells me, as a customer, all I need to know.
Realistically, for home use, AND for most users (myself included) there WASN'T anything before Windows anyway
Funny how we rewrite history in our heads. There were many choices in the early OS market - Gem, Amiga, Acorn, Geos, Mac OS, Commodore, then later BeOS, OS 2. At the time Macs first came out no personal computer was priced for the casual user, so that's neither here nor there. By 1992 when Windows 3.0 came out there were many choices, however you're telling yourself there was only one 'realistic' choice, perhaps because that's the one you chose. DOS and Windows were never dominant because they were the best (there's a reason it was called QDOS, and hardly anyone used Windows before version 3), but because they were bundled.
Shame that market was strangled at birth by predatory business practices wasn't it? We're only just now recovering from the years of stagnation in the OS market that followed.
It really kills you that somebody who saw his presentation now believes him doesn't it. Don't take it so personally, he did sound like a hoax in many ways
No, I think the grandparent just found your 'evidence' unconvincing, to say the least, and yes, Maynor does sound like a hoax, because he talks a lot about evidence and then doesn't present any.
Also, the register is a fairly reputable new source, just fyi.
The Register is in no sense reliable, it's a great example of sensationalist tabloid journalism, but it's about as reliable as a Slashdot article if you're looking for facts.
Webkit is also available on Nokia phones. However, I wasn't talking about the websites being tested in Safari (I guess that would be nice) but tested in several browsers (Firefox, Opera, IE on Windows at a minimum), and validated. If you're a serious development shop, swift doesn't work, and you can't bring yourself to get a Mac for testing, there's always
There really is no excuse for not testing on multiple browsers nowadays. You should get a mac anyway to play around with though if you do web development, you might even like it, and you could then use TextMate.
Oh, and there are plenty of pages which validate yet give Safari/Firefox nightmares.
Please give us some examples. I've never seen one and I'd be interested to see it. The javascript implementation in Safari wasn't great in the early iterations, but it's now very good with web pages which aren't broken.
Validation is like making sure that your code doesn't generate warnings - it's something that you should do, but it doesn't ensure that your app isn't a buggy piece of crap.
Yes, it's no guarantee things will work; conversely if you don't validate/fix warnings you *can* be sure your page/app will be a buggy piece of crap.
It's easy to blame the developers. At the end of the day, you might even be right to do so. But, at the end of the day, developers (like myself) far too often have garbage legacy code and far too little time to be concerned about Safari. Most of the "Professionals" I know: Use tables for layout Use inline CSS Write code that doesn't validate
Your definition of professional doesn't jibe with mine. Most amateurs I know can do better than that nowadays.
You don't understand how difficult it can be to refactor crappy HTML until you've had to work on a page made with Dreamweaver 3.x. 10 levels of nested tables, nonsencially named styles, and bizzare indentation are just the start.
I do indeed, because I've worked with code from early Dreamweaver. The best way I've found is to rewrite the templates again by hand and regenerate the site if necessary using a proper tool which doesn't produce garbage markup. For huge static sites you can get the content out of the web pages with xsalt or other tools after tidying the HTML. If that sounds like a lot of work it's not really, you only have to do it once, then your life is 100 times easier every time you look at that site.
You know what? Sometimes things still break in Safari.
Agreed, but I'd have a lot more sympathy with these sites if they'd actually done the groundwork and validated. They don't even have to test in Safari. It's quite possible the problems are in the javascript anyway, but it's really difficult to know on pages with that many errors, so the first step is to remove the errors. Regardless of whether your clients care about other browsers, you should, because your clients will care in 2 years when their site won't work on all the new web phones/internet devices which come out (many of which will use Opera and Webkit), and they'll blame you for it, and it is also good discipline which will teach you to avoid dangerous habits and about the many limitations/bugs certain popular browsers.
Tell me, have you ever produced something for public consumption, if so, what?
You seem to equate things being easy to copy with it being right to copy them; is your morality really dictated by what you can get away with?
While I agree that DRM is a waste of everyone's time and ultimately harmful, I like to think that most people would do the right thing and pay the authors/artists for their work, even if it's just a modest sum, and not distribute works to the whole world without their permission, violating the terms they've signed over the content on. Then I meet amoral freeloaders like yourself and realise that's not realistic.
Slashdot Mirror
Your boss is the apotheosis of dumb and lazy if he thinks IE has 'fancy frills'. Perhaps he also thinks MS invented the internet? You may as well produce a Win32 binary and require the user to download it. If you did develop for other browsers, you'd find that all the time is spent working around bugs in Internet Explorer.
Your boss is an idiot, and if you want to be able to get a job anywhere else, perhaps you should leave now before you forget what web development means.
I beg to differ. I have a 1G iPod bought around 5 years ago which still works fine, though it's been dropped innumerable times, the battery doesn't charge so well now as it only lasts an hour or so (after 5 years of use) but it works fine. I could replace the battery (doesn't look hard), but haven't bothered because I got a 4G a couple of years ago (to get more space) and use that mostly now instead. Battery life is as new. Same goes for all the other people I know who have iPods - none have stopped working, save one which took a dip in some water. So much for your 'everyone knows' lifespan of between 6 months and 2 years.
Though we'll have to wait till it comes out, the new Zune sounds very much like they've moved on to copying the Nano, which is great, but doesn't really address the fact they're 2 years behind all their competitors. They need to stop, take stock, and address the faults and short-comings of Zune - both software and player, instead of playing catch-up. Portable video doesn't really it to me, right now it's just another bullet point on the feature list (cost, storage, screen size all need to be addressed). By the time MS produce something worth buying with the Zune, Apple will be selling internet connected devices by the million instead, and even more people will be using iTunes to sync up everything on their computer with those devices, leaving the Zune as a copycat product in a shrinking market.
There are so many things they could have added - address book, camera support for image import, clock, calendar, data entry, internet, real content sharing via wifi (other than music), real ebook support etc etc. This hack for reading text on a Zune sums things up really :
http://lifehacker.com/software/zune/read-a-book-o
Given the platform they already had with Pocket PC, why they even bothered producing something entirely different for the Zune astounds me. The convergence with PocketPC devices is only a few years away, and yet they throw out all the ground-work they have in-house and start again with a device that's so limited it's painful. If Pocket PC (or whatever they call it now) needs improved to handle playing music, improve it! The whole thing stinks of a directive from on-high to combat the iPod, which resulted in a quick buy-in and rebranding of an existing player then a rushed launch. V2 is more of the same.
Actually, it does, in the form of hydro projects, which can easily (and sometimes do) pump water back up to their reservoir from valleys to store energy on days where demand is weak. Look up 'pumped storage'.
There are many ways to store energy, mostly not very efficient, but then neither is transporting it around on wires. They could direct it to hydro projects, use it to convert water to hydrogen for storage (or sale if we end up using hydrogen powered cars), sell it to industries who didn't mind running machines at night, or just sell it to another part of the world where it's dark and people are using more. There is a 3-4 hour time difference across the US, and the same in Europe; plenty of scope for reselling - which is already becoming prevalent in Europe.
I suspect though that this sort of thing wouldn't really be a problem, as although the grid would in effect be operating as a giant battery, in practice they'd be able to redistribute power amongst all the different people using it at different times and in different places, providing price incentives to encourage use at off-peak times, and would never see the need for massive storage facilities. Excess power could just be thrown away in a system where you have practically unlimited supply.
This has nothing to do with your ignorant interpretation of EU motivations, the war in Iraq, Bush, or the fact that Apple is an American company. It's a move to try to introduce a free market in music in the EU, and as such we should all be applauding it. Has happened in various other industries, and it's an ongoing thing. Most of the big record companies are based in Europe, and they're the ones really being targeted by this. Apple has nothing to lose and everything to gain if this goes through, and consumers likewise will benefit.
Apple will probably be happy that this is being pushed, because they only stand to gain by being allowed to sell music without price fixing. If they could just lose the different licensing schemes for each single country they'd probably be ecstatic. I'm sure if they could they'd have one universal store that everyone could buy from, with prices pegged off exchange rates - unfortunately that day is not yet here.
You're (perhaps willfully) ignoring of the amount of time and effort that goes into producing music. Bands sometimes spend a couple of years producing an album, and there are probably 20 or so people involved during that time doing production,post-production, marketing etc etc. Many albums don't sell that well, so for those albums the record company makes a loss. A loss that they have to make up on other songs. The distribution medium has always been a smaller part of the price.
So though the artists may get screwed over (if you choose your record company wisely, that's not the case), all that does cost money, and the record company probably could *not* sell at anything like 50c a song and make a profit. Just because some survey says that people want pay 50c per track, you think they should sell it at that. If the survey had asked people which they wanted to pay per song
10c
20c
50c
99c
What do you think most people would pick?
If you don't want to pay what they're charging, make your own music, find alternative artists (see magnatune or many others) or go see live acts. Just don't make up silly justifications for stealing/copyright infringement/whatever you want to call it this week. It's amoral.
Hopefully artists with the big labels will realise gradually what a bad deal they're getting and sign up with places like magnatune or cdbaby, where they get a good cut of the price paid by the listener. They would then have to front up their own production costs, but nowadays those can be kept lower than traditional studios. If you don't like the deal proposed by iTS there are other alternatives, why not choose one where the people whose work you appreciate actually get paid? You may be pleased to hear that at magnatune you can choose how much you pay and what format you download in (note I have just shopped there, I'm in no way affiliated).
I searched all the posts for "irreparable harm" and screaming, and only came up with your post.
Why did you use quotes for something you just made up?
Try next month. I suspect the fact that they're labelled 'Premium' and cost 30 cents more is going to be a big clue about which are non DRM tracks. Probably they'll put a big label on them and it'll be very easy to see which is which.
Thanks for your oh-so-enlightening answers.
Yet again you studiously avoid answering the question in a meaningful way. Care to explain the misunderstanding you feel took place?
He didn't speak *about* the community, he spoke for it when he said we. That is presumption. It's a nebulous term used to try to include people who are not at all aligned with the GPL inside the 'free software' church. There is no consensus of opinion on many of these issues, and as such I think it's a misleading and weasely term. Not every license in the same, and nor should they be, as they reflect differences of opinion on the best way to release copyrighted works.
This is only a problem if you don't want people to do that. Many people are happy for their work to be used for *any* purpose, and that's why they choose BSD/MIT. This isn't some unforeseen problem, it's a positive decision. It's only a problem for those who believe that all software must remain free forever.
Are you seriously suggesting that all objections to the GPL are groundless and that all other licenses are somehow undermining 'software freedom' (What does that mean exactly?), because they aren't part of the one true way? Personally I'd release under MIT/BSD over GPL, because it is truly free of any restrictions, but still copyright the author, so it can be used by the world for any purpose as the author intended. Just because the GPL doesn't allow that doesn't mean it's not something people want to do.
A fair case could be made for the GPL being unfree in that it excludes all other licenses. Akin to monotheism's insistence that you shall not worship other gods.
Your analogy assumes he disagreed with the implementation, but not the intent (if indeed it makes any sense at all?). In fact he disagreed with the intent, and therefore removed the clause.
As to the clause in question "or any other version" - this is a contentious clause, I'm not surprised he took it out. Why would anyone possibly agree to be bound by any and all future conditions that they haven't even seen; you may as well say "or any other license the maintainer chooses in the future". I doubt that clause is even legally binding. On a project with multiple contributors who retain copyright, you'll always have to go back to them to ask about changes - similar to a change of terms and conditions from your bank; they have to notify you in writing of changes. If anything the only mistake Linus made was not to set up a foundation and assign copyright to that - an understandable oversight when starting out, and one which they may start to slowly remedy.
Who are 'the free software community' and why do you presume to speak for them?
People will vote with their feet- if GPLv3 is truly the one pure license as you seem to believe, they'll choose it. I personally don't see any problem with a proliferation of licenses - the bad ones will be weeded out by natural selection. If you don't like using the Linux kernel and truly think the maintainer is an egomaniac, go start your own instead of gratuitously insulting the man who maintains it. Perhaps you could contribute to and use HURD instead?
Thanks for your uninform(ed | ative), rant. Unfortunately you don't seem to know what you're talking about, or care to know. Why is it a cocoa textwidget? Do you think it uses the cocoa text view? (I think you'll find the answer is no). Really I have no idea what you mean by 'all out scripting interface' - perhaps you mean it's extensible? There's no requirement to write scripts to use it.
If you're incapable of learning to use a new text editor (it's a text editor for goodness sake, not a jet engine), you're really not in the author's target market anyway, so stick with jedit and be happy; no need to slag things off when you've obviously spent 5 seconds evaluating them and dismissed them out of hand. No idea what you mean by 'proprietary editor scripting language'? Had to hit all the Slashdot buzzwords I guess? There's no requirement to learn any scripting language, though you might find doing so helps you become a better developer, and yes, you can extend TextMate to do wonderful things by using your choice of scripting language to do so.
PS, It's by no means the first of its kind on OS X, BBEdit, Emacs etc had a lot of these features a long time ago, it's just quite a nice editor and easy to use, what's your problem with that?
Don't use python so can't comment on this specifically, but it's all done with regexps, if you don't like the way it does things or it trips up on your particular style of code, it's easy to change. I have noticed the roll-ups aren't always correct on all languages, which I think is to do with the difficulty of parsing all the different combinations of possible indent/comment/functions etc, and sometimes it just doesn't work too well. Most of the time though, I don't see problems with this. Don't use it a huge amount anyway, as I tend to just skip about by typing :
Cmd-Shift-T, the first few letters of a function, and then return, which will jump to a function. There's something similar for files.
Yep, in the prefs.
uhm, never had this problem, things are obviously lined up or not, perhaps it's more important in python. I don't *think* there's a way to do this. That said, there are plenty of ways to realign/reformat various types of code in the Bundles; you shouldn't have to do this stuff by hand. It auto-indents for you as you type anyway, which works pretty well.
Bundles > Diff
Seriously, look through the Bundles folders (+ their source, which is available in Bundles > Edit) for an idea of the things you can do - almost everything you want to do has already been set up by someone else. If it doesn't do something just now, you can write a bit of script to make it do it for you, either on its own or by calling an already available command line tool. Sometimes it might seem that options are hidden away but once you're familiar with the bundles, it's really not - there's only so much it can simplify things for you - at some point you have to read through the docs : )
To add line numbers :
Bundles > Text > Add line numbers to selection
To comment the selection (in language of choice)
Bundles > Source > Comment Selection ( Cmd-/ )
Or to get comments you can opt-click to select a column to the left of your text and then type
You should give TextMate a go for longer, as there may be more things you're missing about it. I use it to avoid xCode mostly, but it works well as a project manager for all sorts of text files, including HTML and config files. I wouldn't go back to something without the snippets and macros nowadays. That said BBedit is a good editor, so why not use that if you've already bought it! If you came to upgrading though I'd reconsider TextMate at that stage.
Please define 'power' and how OS X falls short.
PS I wouldn't call OS X the 'ultimate' OS either, but you seem to be dismissing a hand-waving argument with another one about power-users.
oh I wonder, what was the US doing before they attacked Iraq?
The correct answer is not to support coups and tin-pot dictators[1] all over the world. The atrocities of Saddam are irrelevant to the US/UK invasion of Iraq, it's all about control over the region, and nothing to do with the people of Iraq. If you believe in the war for moral reasons, you've been sold down the river.
The correct answer was and is to leave Iraq alone, not to sell the weapons for a genocidal war with Iran, not support the dictator in power, and not invade when things went pear-shaped and he had delusions of grandeur then leave without disturbing him, not to blow hot and cold with rebel groups in his country, and not to invade and depose him then disband the organs of state without planning for the aftermath.
I guess we won't hear so much of this stale joke when the US finally retreat from Iraq; won't seem so funny then. I suppose it provides a small amount of comfort to think of others as somehow inherently weak and cowardly, particularly in times of insecurity.
I'm curious, why do you say this? Have you used it for more than 5 minutes? Did you look in the bundles menu? TextMate is also way more than a text editor, that's why people like it. I'd say the same about BBedit (way more than a text editor), though that isn't developed as actively as TextMate has been the last few years.
What does the quality of music on iTMS have to do with ripping your own CDs?
PS There aren't enough people dropping 10k on speakers to stop iTMS selling low-quality music, it's probably 1% of the audiophile market, and 0.0001% of the music-buying market. You seem to equate iTMS with 'online music' here - there are plenty of online stores who offer better quality, some even offer FLAC and let you choose how much you pay. Quality is not really an issue now for most people, and long term it will be a simple matter to increase the quality (iTMS has already done it once for videos), probably to well beyond the quality you get from CDs.
Some day all media will be consumed and sold this way (including TV); let's just hope they drop trying to impose DRM along the way, as that's the only downside to digital distribution of media, and the only reason I don't use the iTMS yet.
This is an old problem - Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who would guard your guards and ensure they were metamoderating properly? As the grandparent suggested, the best overseer is the reading public themselves - if all actions are public and easily searchable, and this leads to accountability, that's a good brake against anti-social admins. However all systems can be subverted, as we've seen in this case ; the culture all comes down to the people with power - if they're trustworthy, the people they give power to will be and the site will be. If they're not, well...
And if you believe that, and believe it's a good idea to further lock yourself in to the products of a user-hostile company, MS has several other bridges to sell you. There's never been a better time to move away from binary, ephemeral, inscrutable formats for our documents. Word can't even open these memory dump docs consistently across versions/platforms.
The fact that MS either hasn't grasped this (highly unlikely, given the level of people they have working there), or actually chooses to lock in its customers with OOXML, tells me, as a customer, all I need to know.
Funny how we rewrite history in our heads. There were many choices in the early OS market - Gem, Amiga, Acorn, Geos, Mac OS, Commodore, then later BeOS, OS 2. At the time Macs first came out no personal computer was priced for the casual user, so that's neither here nor there. By 1992 when Windows 3.0 came out there were many choices, however you're telling yourself there was only one 'realistic' choice, perhaps because that's the one you chose. DOS and Windows were never dominant because they were the best (there's a reason it was called QDOS, and hardly anyone used Windows before version 3), but because they were bundled.
Shame that market was strangled at birth by predatory business practices wasn't it? We're only just now recovering from the years of stagnation in the OS market that followed.
No, I think the grandparent just found your 'evidence' unconvincing, to say the least, and yes, Maynor does sound like a hoax, because he talks a lot about evidence and then doesn't present any.
The Register is in no sense reliable, it's a great example of sensationalist tabloid journalism, but it's about as reliable as a Slashdot article if you're looking for facts.
I think you can, try
http://try.swift.ws/
Webkit is also available on Nokia phones. However, I wasn't talking about the websites being tested in Safari (I guess that would be nice) but tested in several browsers (Firefox, Opera, IE on Windows at a minimum), and validated. If you're a serious development shop, swift doesn't work, and you can't bring yourself to get a Mac for testing, there's always
http://www.browsersnapshot.com/
There really is no excuse for not testing on multiple browsers nowadays. You should get a mac anyway to play around with though if you do web development, you might even like it, and you could then use TextMate.
Please give us some examples. I've never seen one and I'd be interested to see it. The javascript implementation in Safari wasn't great in the early iterations, but it's now very good with web pages which aren't broken.
Yes, it's no guarantee things will work; conversely if you don't validate/fix warnings you *can* be sure your page/app will be a buggy piece of crap.
Your definition of professional doesn't jibe with mine. Most amateurs I know can do better than that nowadays.
I do indeed, because I've worked with code from early Dreamweaver. The best way I've found is to rewrite the templates again by hand and regenerate the site if necessary using a proper tool which doesn't produce garbage markup. For huge static sites you can get the content out of the web pages with xsalt or other tools after tidying the HTML. If that sounds like a lot of work it's not really, you only have to do it once, then your life is 100 times easier every time you look at that site.
Agreed, but I'd have a lot more sympathy with these sites if they'd actually done the groundwork and validated. They don't even have to test in Safari. It's quite possible the problems are in the javascript anyway, but it's really difficult to know on pages with that many errors, so the first step is to remove the errors. Regardless of whether your clients care about other browsers, you should, because your clients will care in 2 years when their site won't work on all the new web phones/internet devices which come out (many of which will use Opera and Webkit), and they'll blame you for it, and it is also good discipline which will teach you to avoid dangerous habits and about the many limitations/bugs certain popular browsers.
He's talking about committing suicide, hence EOF - if he decides not to be.
http://kbb.com/ - Failed validation, 67 errors
http://www.az501st.com/ - Failed validation, 207 errors
You're blaming the wrong people; try complaining to the people who made the broken websites and didn't test or at least validate them.
Tell me, have you ever produced something for public consumption, if so, what?
You seem to equate things being easy to copy with it being right to copy them; is your morality really dictated by what you can get away with?
While I agree that DRM is a waste of everyone's time and ultimately harmful, I like to think that most people would do the right thing and pay the authors/artists for their work, even if it's just a modest sum, and not distribute works to the whole world without their permission, violating the terms they've signed over the content on. Then I meet amoral freeloaders like yourself and realise that's not realistic.