I've heard of the copper deposition method for creating graphene before - this isn't new. Is this just a pointless gimmicky way to get headlines? (In case we didn't realise that a structure made of carbon could be derived from carbon-based materials)
Consistency is a fair point, but playing favorites? Isn't this what anonymous marking codes/IDs are for? (Or at least, that's what happens in the majority of universities in the UK)
Comments/phrases like these completely fail to grasp that things like this are RELATIVE. What is 'resource constrained' today isn't what was seen as 'resource constrained' 20 years ago. Likewise, many young programmers _today_ (including myself) DID in fact learn to code in what would be seen as resource constrained environments compared to today's machines. I cut my teeth on an 8MB Win95 machine and later a 32MB machine. Sure, that amount of RAM to play with is an insane luxury if we're thinking back to early/earlier 90s or 80s. But compared to what we have now it IS resource constrained. And heck, even mobile devices have more than 32MB to play with these days.
20 years from now 2 or 4GB of RAM will look like 'resource constrained' environments, and all of us who are 20-year olds now will be thinking "Herp derp, this new generation won't understand the resource constrained 32MB days!". And then 20 years from that, their experience will help them operate in 'resource constrained environments' when several TB of RAM is the norm or something
TL;DR: This is all a stupid circular pattern where each generation seems inferior to the last but still has some useful knowledge relative to specs of modern machines
As per my comment title. My major issue with using.NET for any project is the fact the framework is massive, many people still don't actually have it (or a recent version of it) - but most importantly, there is no 'must have'.NET application that spurs people to install it themselves. MS didn't even use it for their own products
"Although mitigatinos such as ARB_robustness [...]"
Nice Microsoft, nice.
Whilst I believe that WebGL _could_ become a vector for attack, I think this is actually "We want to push DX not GL, let's stick to NIH by saying it's dangerous instead"
I read the article, but I don't really understand why this is 'taking on Apple'. Yeah, it's trying to undermine the app store via Facebook apps, but if that were a huge tactic against Apple, surely it would be working already? (Surely Facebook is accessible and usable with apps as-is without this 'Project Spartan'? In which case if HTML5 apps via Facebook were what people wanted, surely they would already have a big stake in the iOS audience?)
Apple didn't even mention it. At all. It isn't stated anywhere on Lion's feature page and has only been discovered by users testing preview versions. Nice try at a negative spin though.
In a lot of places this just isn't practical at all, mainly just because of power. I can't justify leaving my machine powered on 24/7 especially since I don't use it every day necessarily. Hence I actually turn it off each evening.
I've corrected what I meant to the original post, but I'd just like to point out that under some (non official) variants of ISO 3166, EU is a region code for Europe. It is not as rare as you seem to think it is
I love the way you say you live in the EU under some kind of crappy assumption I don't. I live in Europe too, and I'm aware that EUR is also the Euro. What I was saying is that it's not unheard of for people to (wrongly) refer to Europe as EU or EUR as a form of 'country code', even though it refers to the European Union or the currency.
My mistake here is that I skimmed over where the summary said 'member state' and missed it. Clearly the summary was referring to the actual EU and not the country code. So the summary writer is a moron. My mistake.
Even if that is the case, you're still being a pedant because if you RTFA EU or not EU has squat to do with the issue - the article never mentions European Union or laws against up-skirts at all. What the articles and summary presumably meant to say is that these countries share common conservative outlook on this kind of content or something (because if it was an EU directive then all member states would presumably be effected)
EU is the short code for EUrope in some cases (although normally it's EUR) but if you're going to be really pedantic, yeah, they're not in the EU: But they are in the European Economic Area (EEA) even though they're not a member. That's good enough
When I think of this kind of thing, I get the impression we're trying to solve the wrong problem. Would it make more sense to develop chips and systems that could be embedded _inside_ people? That way they could continuously monitor the person (somehow) and a 'tricorder' would simply extract data out of the systems inside the person
They got BSODs by 'overloading' GPUs. By doing what, continuous high-stress activity? In which case, surely they should be sufficiently ventilated etc. isn't that the real issue - surely it's not possible to kill GPUs by just making them a lot of work? Imagine if CPUs did that, we'd be pretty screwed by now
If they don't mean high-stress/high-throughput activities, what do they actually mean - overloading them with textures or something?
...Pfft, nah, I have no issue with Linux, but I couldn't help adding that in there..
The free / disruptive logic is critically flawed, because a huge majority of people don't even know what an OS is, let alone whether it's free or not. The only way you could spin this is if you said it's free for phone manufacturers - which is a fair point - if they don't have to pay for it, it's more likely they'll put it on their phone. That's an argument against MS - but not Apple. Apple is defined by their software/hardware mix being unique, so to spin it as 'it's not free so it'll lose' makes no sense (Apple doesn't give out their OS to anyone, free or paid)
Same as what they were doing against Apple. They accused Apple of using the wrong font size in their court documents (hence claiming they were invalid) rather than actually fighting the case. They really are at the pinnacle of the BSing
I think the ribbon is O-K. It's not fantastic (not the amazing revolution MS seems to think it is) but it's usable. I think it works OK in Office 07 at least. But... why in explorer? Explorer isn't complex enough to justify it. Office warranted it because it has oodles of menus and features. Explorer is comparatively simple though, which makes me think this is just overkill.
(here in the UK, at least)...is that actually, the ones who get sucked in by the finance sector easily are the ones who talk a good talk (and seem to do plenty of ass licking) but aren't any good at the technical skills.
I'm not just saying this because of sour grapes or anything like that - it does seem to be a trend that the jerks who everyone dislikes (or the jerks that are awful at working in a team) get picked up by financial firms. So to be honest, 'nothing of value was lost' springs to mind
The thing with courier is that, whilst I agree it was a great form factor, it didn't actually exist. It was all talk - no shippable product. So for all the flaws that may exist in Apple's vision of the tablet form factor (or the Android ones for that matter) at least they actually exist - they're real, they work and they are being sold today.
Courier looked as though it was years away from even being thought of as a real product, let alone being sold to people in the real world
MS are so risk averse that the likelihood of this UI showing up in Windows is as likely as them moving the Linux kernel.
They won't do anything drastic because they're in the pockets of their business customers: Who need everything pretty same-y to avoid retraining, software changes etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard of the copper deposition method for creating graphene before - this isn't new. Is this just a pointless gimmicky way to get headlines? (In case we didn't realise that a structure made of carbon could be derived from carbon-based materials)
Consistency is a fair point, but playing favorites? Isn't this what anonymous marking codes/IDs are for? (Or at least, that's what happens in the majority of universities in the UK)
Comments/phrases like these completely fail to grasp that things like this are RELATIVE. What is 'resource constrained' today isn't what was seen as 'resource constrained' 20 years ago. Likewise, many young programmers _today_ (including myself) DID in fact learn to code in what would be seen as resource constrained environments compared to today's machines. I cut my teeth on an 8MB Win95 machine and later a 32MB machine. Sure, that amount of RAM to play with is an insane luxury if we're thinking back to early/earlier 90s or 80s. But compared to what we have now it IS resource constrained. And heck, even mobile devices have more than 32MB to play with these days.
20 years from now 2 or 4GB of RAM will look like 'resource constrained' environments, and all of us who are 20-year olds now will be thinking "Herp derp, this new generation won't understand the resource constrained 32MB days!". And then 20 years from that, their experience will help them operate in 'resource constrained environments' when several TB of RAM is the norm or something
TL;DR: This is all a stupid circular pattern where each generation seems inferior to the last but still has some useful knowledge relative to specs of modern machines
As per my comment title. My major issue with using .NET for any project is the fact the framework is massive, many people still don't actually have it (or a recent version of it) - but most importantly, there is no 'must have' .NET application that spurs people to install it themselves. MS didn't even use it for their own products
"Although mitigatinos such as ARB_robustness [...]"
Nice Microsoft, nice.
Whilst I believe that WebGL _could_ become a vector for attack, I think this is actually "We want to push DX not GL, let's stick to NIH by saying it's dangerous instead"
I read the article, but I don't really understand why this is 'taking on Apple'. Yeah, it's trying to undermine the app store via Facebook apps, but if that were a huge tactic against Apple, surely it would be working already? (Surely Facebook is accessible and usable with apps as-is without this 'Project Spartan'? In which case if HTML5 apps via Facebook were what people wanted, surely they would already have a big stake in the iOS audience?)
Apple didn't even mention it. At all. It isn't stated anywhere on Lion's feature page and has only been discovered by users testing preview versions. Nice try at a negative spin though.
In a lot of places this just isn't practical at all, mainly just because of power. I can't justify leaving my machine powered on 24/7 especially since I don't use it every day necessarily. Hence I actually turn it off each evening.
I've corrected what I meant to the original post, but I'd just like to point out that under some (non official) variants of ISO 3166, EU is a region code for Europe. It is not as rare as you seem to think it is
I love the way you say you live in the EU under some kind of crappy assumption I don't. I live in Europe too, and I'm aware that EUR is also the Euro. What I was saying is that it's not unheard of for people to (wrongly) refer to Europe as EU or EUR as a form of 'country code', even though it refers to the European Union or the currency.
My mistake here is that I skimmed over where the summary said 'member state' and missed it. Clearly the summary was referring to the actual EU and not the country code. So the summary writer is a moron. My mistake.
Even if that is the case, you're still being a pedant because if you RTFA EU or not EU has squat to do with the issue - the article never mentions European Union or laws against up-skirts at all. What the articles and summary presumably meant to say is that these countries share common conservative outlook on this kind of content or something (because if it was an EU directive then all member states would presumably be effected)
EU is the short code for EUrope in some cases (although normally it's EUR) but if you're going to be really pedantic, yeah, they're not in the EU: But they are in the European Economic Area (EEA) even though they're not a member. That's good enough
It isn't an "ask slashdot" or news, and it isn't even useful information. Yeah, you can put old OSes in a virtual machine. So what?
"what you can expect in the newest kernel" and "points out a few bugs" are the same URL
When I think of this kind of thing, I get the impression we're trying to solve the wrong problem. Would it make more sense to develop chips and systems that could be embedded _inside_ people? That way they could continuously monitor the person (somehow) and a 'tricorder' would simply extract data out of the systems inside the person
'How the heck can they do this, given that Honeycomb is licensed under the Apache Software License v2?
Err, because no one is going to step up and stop them, that's how
They got BSODs by 'overloading' GPUs. By doing what, continuous high-stress activity? In which case, surely they should be sufficiently ventilated etc. isn't that the real issue - surely it's not possible to kill GPUs by just making them a lot of work? Imagine if CPUs did that, we'd be pretty screwed by now
If they don't mean high-stress/high-throughput activities, what do they actually mean - overloading them with textures or something?
...because if MS have are their usual selves, they'll be planning to duplicate the exact same scheme for Windows 8 and beyond
...Pfft, nah, I have no issue with Linux, but I couldn't help adding that in there..
The free / disruptive logic is critically flawed, because a huge majority of people don't even know what an OS is, let alone whether it's free or not. The only way you could spin this is if you said it's free for phone manufacturers - which is a fair point - if they don't have to pay for it, it's more likely they'll put it on their phone. That's an argument against MS - but not Apple. Apple is defined by their software/hardware mix being unique, so to spin it as 'it's not free so it'll lose' makes no sense (Apple doesn't give out their OS to anyone, free or paid)
Same as what they were doing against Apple. They accused Apple of using the wrong font size in their court documents (hence claiming they were invalid) rather than actually fighting the case. They really are at the pinnacle of the BSing
I think the ribbon is O-K. It's not fantastic (not the amazing revolution MS seems to think it is) but it's usable. I think it works OK in Office 07 at least. But... why in explorer? Explorer isn't complex enough to justify it. Office warranted it because it has oodles of menus and features. Explorer is comparatively simple though, which makes me think this is just overkill.
I think there is a world market for maybe five tablets.
(here in the UK, at least) ...is that actually, the ones who get sucked in by the finance sector easily are the ones who talk a good talk (and seem to do plenty of ass licking) but aren't any good at the technical skills.
I'm not just saying this because of sour grapes or anything like that - it does seem to be a trend that the jerks who everyone dislikes (or the jerks that are awful at working in a team) get picked up by financial firms. So to be honest, 'nothing of value was lost' springs to mind
The thing with courier is that, whilst I agree it was a great form factor, it didn't actually exist. It was all talk - no shippable product. So for all the flaws that may exist in Apple's vision of the tablet form factor (or the Android ones for that matter) at least they actually exist - they're real, they work and they are being sold today.
Courier looked as though it was years away from even being thought of as a real product, let alone being sold to people in the real world
A degree is not a job training course.
End of.
MS are so risk averse that the likelihood of this UI showing up in Windows is as likely as them moving the Linux kernel.
They won't do anything drastic because they're in the pockets of their business customers: Who need everything pretty same-y to avoid retraining, software changes etc.