Well they are if you are a small company who is trying to make any sort of profit. There are a lot of small companies out there. More then most think, and realize.
Because lately is is your lowest common denominator that you need to check for compatibility with. If it is as good as Microsoft says then that means the bar is raised, You can dump IE 6 and Put IE 7 and 8 on a functional approval set and IE 9 for full functional. Having worked on the Beta 9 I can tell you is is now much better in terms of following the standard. I wouldn't use it as my default browser but at least when I write code for it I am spending less time trying to make the quintet of IE, FireFox, Opera, Safari and Chrome to work the same way. I know a lot of people hate Microsoft for either good reasons or just some psuto-religious/political beliefs and giggle and joy every time they screw up, thinking that some how this will cause the catastrophic end of Microsoft. However real life if Microsoft make a better more secure product the better everyone is. IE 9 is a step in a good direction, Sure it is closed source but at least it is following the Open Standards much better then any previous version.
It really doesn't matter who you go with. A big name like BoA starts to do something where at the time is getting customerers shortly other banks will do the same just to stay competitive. Competition isn't always good, especially when the biggest competitor plays underhanded.
In general if they sell that you get unlimited and you don't. It is the companies faul. I had a friend that interned years back and he mentioned that the sales people out right lied about everything. Even stating that they didn't need a line of site where at the time you did.
You dont like the company then you stop paying them and get a competing service. If you don't like the government then you will need to convince a lot of people that it is bad.
For some reason, Apple has decided not to invest this effort. There could be some good reasons. 1. Competition in terms of speed. Safari is competing against Chrome in terms of speed. A sandbox could take off those mili-seconds off their benchmarks. 2. OS Integration. Unlike Chrome or Firefox Safari is more tightly integrated with the OS. Just blindly adding a sandbox can break a lot of sub systems. 3. 3rd party software. It is unknown the full effect this can have on other
Any other of valid reasons.
I myself have a lot of experience working on legacy systems or code that I didn't make. And often enough a lot of those things that seems like an easy fix to make it better really isn't that easy. Heck I have seen some "Modern".NET apps that takes 15 minutes to load up a simple form. So changing the UI around makes it a full day task.
It really is a cycle go back generations now. Lets go with the Pong System (A Console system that played one game) As well a few other Custom game consoles Then the Apple and Atari (I am going to classify the Atari as a computer is it was marketed as such) where the Personal computer was used to play games the advantage was multiple games. Then the Nintendo console (Cheaper then a full computer and played multiple games) 386 and VGA PCs (256 colors, fast computer... Wolfinstien 3d, Doom, then added CDROM etc...) Play Station (CD games but cheaper then a computer and worked on a TV (with lower resolution that allowed less processing and more effects on less hardware) Networked PC w. 3d Cards, new expandable graphics and you can play online with your friends XBox 360/PS3/Wii Networked with new controls Now we are going back to PC
PCs offer expandability and usually are the first to get the next greatest thing, however they start pricey then it drops. So during the Pricey periods that is when the Consoles are in charge. After a while the Consoles get out of date and the new cool tech is now at a good price point so the PCs come back. Then some new stuff comes and it is too expensive to upgrade yet so the console gets back with it middle ground tech which is better then your PC at a low price point and you go back.
I agree they are only worth posting when there is a significant win one either side. Right now it looks like IE9 has a slight lead in some areas over Firefox. Which means nothing. Other then IE has gotten the Most Improved Award. Just as long as we have competing browsers that have a fair market share (EI, FireFox, Chrome and Safari) I am happy once either side gets a good win (Like IE 5-6 did) then that is where the trouble gets in where the winner separates from the standard and forces its own standards. And the others are trying to play catch up to support as many of the winners standards as well as trying to follow the prescribed ones. Thus creating problems again. Right now I think we are in a new golden age of browsers where it really doesn't matter which one you use anymore and you can choose a browser based on features and performance in particular areas vs. needing to render particular pages.
Hence why Europe erupts into utter chaos when ever there is a adjustment to their budgets. Oddly enough pay for education really helps keep the population in checked. While it is not fair but it does create a situation where there are smart blue collar workers who cant afford schooling really helping keep the US working, and keeping a sustainable number of intellectuals. Too many intellectuals creates to many problems as there are too many people thinking and not enough doing. As well if our blue collar workforce doesn't have a good percentage of smart people noting will really get done. Life isn't fair. Some people get a golden spoon other will need to work hard every day of their life. They key is to make sure that people with the Golden Spoon isn't guaranteed to keep it as well the person from the most humble beginnings have the ability to get out of their situation if they so choose and work to get out of it. But for the individual life isn't fair.
The problem is that good and evil poorly describes almost anything. Even a shade of gray over simplifies it. The bigger a company the components that go on. A lot of choices are made some better then others, some really good others just wrong. I have worked at a Lot of different companies and none of them are thinking how to screw-over their customers.
Well this theory, if proven would be able to give engineers knowledge on more basic rules, and limitations that they can factor into their designs. Just as electricity was discovered it took a fair amount of time for it to be useful for anything, it took the discovery linking magnetism and electricity before anything of use could be invented. Other then that it was used for well just zapping people, and some cool sideshow effects, as most Electrical energy was generated via static electricity, and chemical, which was done on a low enough scale to be useful.
Do you mean going public? Going corporate just means (in very very vague terms) you have some additional tax rights and if you go under under legal means you are not having to personally front the bill. Basicilly making it safer for someone to take the risk and start a their own business. The LLC is being more used then the Corp now as it is cheaper. But going corporate doesn't make you evil. But once you go public then you have shareholders that you need to keep happy and they are looking at the bottom line only.
Even though they are scientists they are still human... They fall to the same problems that the rest of us mortals do.
1. When given too much power or we have a big enough voice we feel superior. 2. When there is a group willing to give you a big check expecting some results you find them those results. 3. When you are challenged your impulse is to Fight or Flight. 4. When everyone else treats you as much smarter then they are you begin to believed it.
We just recently stopped supporting IE6 in our products. A lot of the IE6 compatibility features are still there, we are just not checking new features in our products with IE6 (and a lot of them will still work with IE6 just not confirmed). Last year IE6 testing was limited to making sure the product functionally worked however the niceties such as UI effects were not supported. We test with IE9 Beta. And leaving IE7-8 to be functional, due to its crappy support of CSS.
I am willing to bet if we switched Windows 7 and Microsoft with Android and Google respectively that we would get a slew of comments like (well bugs happen in early versions, this is just for a small number of people....) Please I implore you don't let your hate for Microsoft effect your overall judgement. We are supposed to be geeks who think scientifically not just jump to rash judgement based on our feelings.
As spoken by someone who made a lot of money back in the 90s replacing Year(2) functions with Year(4). There were actually a lot of Y2K bugs unresolved for years after then. But most of them were non-issues even the ones companies spend millions of dollars to fix were really non-issues as well. There were probably only a few systems that were truly critical with the Y2K bug... The rest (like the expiration of food products) just gave some funny but still readable answers (expires 2/21/111).
But it was a great marketing ploy that helped fuel the.COM Boom in the 90's If you are going to spend millions to recode your software you might as well get it recoded to work on the New stuff we have now that is connected to the internet. Now that you have internet access you might as well put up a web site, and give access to your employees for "Research" and "Business communication". Where the people will get addicted to using the internet for other means thus spreading. Coming to a climax in 2001. As the infrastructure had been upgraded, and companies really didn't want to spend as much in IT. Then dipping until around 2003 then people started to do their normal incremental upgrades again.
Basically it is an argument for someone not to jump on to the newest fad in technology even though they really want too. Vs. Stating normal stuff like, I don't think I will need the product, or if I bought it I will play with it for a couple days then put it on the shelf and never use it again.
I don't own an iPad and I wont buy myself one any time soon. Why... because I don't think I will need the product, and if I bought it I will play with it for a couple days then put it on the shelf and never use it again.
It is not that I think badly of the product or the people who use it.
Because this is a bad Slashdot summary and if you RTFA you will see it more to a ban of the GPL vs. Open Source Software. Oddly enough there are a lot of Fans of Open Source who still dislike GPL. and GPL is only a subset of all Open Source Software.
The GPL is more of a Leftist where the license is supposed to be a tool to push an ideal Vs. Other which are designed to protect the authors prevent them from being sued or just to make sure if there code is popular that they still get credit for it.
I just had to reject some 3rd party tools because it was GPL. Because by using it would force us to make our program GPL, and oddly enough we want to get paychecks and our business model is creating new software and selling it. (The software is designed that consulting services and other GNU business models will not work). We would much rather pay for a closed source company for such features so we can still maintain control of our code set.
"scary" movies that settles for LOUD noises and SUDDENLY APPEARING characters or objects and other piss ass cop-outs in place of real horror. So we can get an R Rating by adding more Fake Blood and some Gross effects, and throw in some nudity that will make it a real horror?
Real horror movies are more emotional then just showing stuff. I think the movie could be altered for PG-13 with some clever editing.
Slashdot Mirror
Well they are if you are a small company who is trying to make any sort of profit. There are a lot of small companies out there. More then most think, and realize.
Because lately is is your lowest common denominator that you need to check for compatibility with. If it is as good as Microsoft says then that means the bar is raised, You can dump IE 6 and Put IE 7 and 8 on a functional approval set and IE 9 for full functional. Having worked on the Beta 9 I can tell you is is now much better in terms of following the standard. I wouldn't use it as my default browser but at least when I write code for it I am spending less time trying to make the quintet of IE, FireFox, Opera, Safari and Chrome to work the same way. I know a lot of people hate Microsoft for either good reasons or just some psuto-religious/political beliefs and giggle and joy every time they screw up, thinking that some how this will cause the catastrophic end of Microsoft. However real life if Microsoft make a better more secure product the better everyone is. IE 9 is a step in a good direction, Sure it is closed source but at least it is following the Open Standards much better then any previous version.
Pi are not Square Pi are round. Cake are square.
It really doesn't matter who you go with. A big name like BoA starts to do something where at the time is getting customerers shortly other banks will do the same just to stay competitive. Competition isn't always good, especially when the biggest competitor plays underhanded.
In general if they sell that you get unlimited and you don't. It is the companies faul. I had a friend that interned years back and he mentioned that the sales people out right lied about everything. Even stating that they didn't need a line of site where at the time you did.
You dont like the company then you stop paying them and get a competing service. If you don't like the government then you will need to convince a lot of people that it is bad.
For some reason, Apple has decided not to invest this effort.
There could be some good reasons.
1. Competition in terms of speed. Safari is competing against Chrome in terms of speed. A sandbox could take off those mili-seconds off their benchmarks.
2. OS Integration. Unlike Chrome or Firefox Safari is more tightly integrated with the OS. Just blindly adding a sandbox can break a lot of sub systems.
3. 3rd party software. It is unknown the full effect this can have on other
Any other of valid reasons.
I myself have a lot of experience working on legacy systems or code that I didn't make. And often enough a lot of those things that seems like an easy fix to make it better really isn't that easy. Heck I have seen some "Modern" .NET apps that takes 15 minutes to load up a simple form. So changing the UI around makes it a full day task.
It really is a cycle go back generations now.
Lets go with the Pong System (A Console system that played one game) As well a few other Custom game consoles
Then the Apple and Atari (I am going to classify the Atari as a computer is it was marketed as such) where the Personal computer was used to play games the advantage was multiple games.
Then the Nintendo console (Cheaper then a full computer and played multiple games)
386 and VGA PCs (256 colors, fast computer... Wolfinstien 3d, Doom, then added CDROM etc...)
Play Station (CD games but cheaper then a computer and worked on a TV (with lower resolution that allowed less processing and more effects on less hardware)
Networked PC w. 3d Cards, new expandable graphics and you can play online with your friends
XBox 360/PS3/Wii Networked with new controls
Now we are going back to PC
PCs offer expandability and usually are the first to get the next greatest thing, however they start pricey then it drops. So during the Pricey periods that is when the Consoles are in charge. After a while the Consoles get out of date and the new cool tech is now at a good price point so the PCs come back. Then some new stuff comes and it is too expensive to upgrade yet so the console gets back with it middle ground tech which is better then your PC at a low price point and you go back.
You mean... But I'm the KDE user you insensitive clod!
I agree they are only worth posting when there is a significant win one either side. Right now it looks like IE9 has a slight lead in some areas over Firefox. Which means nothing. Other then IE has gotten the Most Improved Award. Just as long as we have competing browsers that have a fair market share (EI, FireFox, Chrome and Safari) I am happy once either side gets a good win (Like IE 5-6 did) then that is where the trouble gets in where the winner separates from the standard and forces its own standards. And the others are trying to play catch up to support as many of the winners standards as well as trying to follow the prescribed ones. Thus creating problems again. Right now I think we are in a new golden age of browsers where it really doesn't matter which one you use anymore and you can choose a browser based on features and performance in particular areas vs. needing to render particular pages.
Hence why Europe erupts into utter chaos when ever there is a adjustment to their budgets. Oddly enough pay for education really helps keep the population in checked. While it is not fair but it does create a situation where there are smart blue collar workers who cant afford schooling really helping keep the US working, and keeping a sustainable number of intellectuals. Too many intellectuals creates to many problems as there are too many people thinking and not enough doing. As well if our blue collar workforce doesn't have a good percentage of smart people noting will really get done.
Life isn't fair. Some people get a golden spoon other will need to work hard every day of their life. They key is to make sure that people with the Golden Spoon isn't guaranteed to keep it as well the person from the most humble beginnings have the ability to get out of their situation if they so choose and work to get out of it. But for the individual life isn't fair.
The problem is that good and evil poorly describes almost anything. Even a shade of gray over simplifies it. The bigger a company the components that go on. A lot of choices are made some better then others, some really good others just wrong. I have worked at a Lot of different companies and none of them are thinking how to screw-over their customers.
A platform where most major applications and hardware works on.
Well this theory, if proven would be able to give engineers knowledge on more basic rules, and limitations that they can factor into their designs. Just as electricity was discovered it took a fair amount of time for it to be useful for anything, it took the discovery linking magnetism and electricity before anything of use could be invented. Other then that it was used for well just zapping people, and some cool sideshow effects, as most Electrical energy was generated via static electricity, and chemical, which was done on a low enough scale to be useful.
If Microsoft turned it off... The corporations and governments would find the budget. That should be the penalty for using ActiveX anyways.
Do you mean going public? Going corporate just means (in very very vague terms) you have some additional tax rights and if you go under under legal means you are not having to personally front the bill. Basicilly making it safer for someone to take the risk and start a their own business. The LLC is being more used then the Corp now as it is cheaper. But going corporate doesn't make you evil. But once you go public then you have shareholders that you need to keep happy and they are looking at the bottom line only.
Even though they are scientists they are still human... They fall to the same problems that the rest of us mortals do.
1. When given too much power or we have a big enough voice we feel superior.
2. When there is a group willing to give you a big check expecting some results you find them those results.
3. When you are challenged your impulse is to Fight or Flight.
4. When everyone else treats you as much smarter then they are you begin to believed it.
We just recently stopped supporting IE6 in our products. A lot of the IE6 compatibility features are still there, we are just not checking new features in our products with IE6 (and a lot of them will still work with IE6 just not confirmed). Last year IE6 testing was limited to making sure the product functionally worked however the niceties such as UI effects were not supported. We test with IE9 Beta. And leaving IE7-8 to be functional, due to its crappy support of CSS.
Well if Netscape won... You would still be writting non-standard stuff... Remember Layers vs. IE Css.
If you are going to show how the Rich people in charge are corrupt... You shouldn't do that while selling your own wares.
I am willing to bet if we switched Windows 7 and Microsoft with Android and Google respectively that we would get a slew of comments like (well bugs happen in early versions, this is just for a small number of people....) Please I implore you don't let your hate for Microsoft effect your overall judgement. We are supposed to be geeks who think scientifically not just jump to rash judgement based on our feelings.
As spoken by someone who made a lot of money back in the 90s replacing Year(2) functions with Year(4). There were actually a lot of Y2K bugs unresolved for years after then. But most of them were non-issues even the ones companies spend millions of dollars to fix were really non-issues as well. There were probably only a few systems that were truly critical with the Y2K bug... The rest (like the expiration of food products) just gave some funny but still readable answers (expires 2/21/111).
But it was a great marketing ploy that helped fuel the .COM Boom in the 90's If you are going to spend millions to recode your software you might as well get it recoded to work on the New stuff we have now that is connected to the internet. Now that you have internet access you might as well put up a web site, and give access to your employees for "Research" and "Business communication". Where the people will get addicted to using the internet for other means thus spreading. Coming to a climax in 2001. As the infrastructure had been upgraded, and companies really didn't want to spend as much in IT. Then dipping until around 2003 then people started to do their normal incremental upgrades again.
Basically it is an argument for someone not to jump on to the newest fad in technology even though they really want too.
Vs. Stating normal stuff like, I don't think I will need the product, or if I bought it I will play with it for a couple days then put it on the shelf and never use it again.
I don't own an iPad and I wont buy myself one any time soon. Why... because I don't think I will need the product, and if I bought it I will play with it for a couple days then put it on the shelf and never use it again.
It is not that I think badly of the product or the people who use it.
Because this is a bad Slashdot summary and if you RTFA you will see it more to a ban of the GPL vs. Open Source Software. Oddly enough there are a lot of Fans of Open Source who still dislike GPL. and GPL is only a subset of all Open Source Software.
The GPL is more of a Leftist where the license is supposed to be a tool to push an ideal Vs. Other which are designed to protect the authors prevent them from being sued or just to make sure if there code is popular that they still get credit for it.
I just had to reject some 3rd party tools because it was GPL. Because by using it would force us to make our program GPL, and oddly enough we want to get paychecks and our business model is creating new software and selling it. (The software is designed that consulting services and other GNU business models will not work). We would much rather pay for a closed source company for such features so we can still maintain control of our code set.
"scary" movies that settles for LOUD noises and SUDDENLY APPEARING characters or objects and other piss ass cop-outs in place of real horror.
So we can get an R Rating by adding more Fake Blood and some Gross effects, and throw in some nudity that will make it a real horror?
Real horror movies are more emotional then just showing stuff. I think the movie could be altered for PG-13 with some clever editing.