My brother and his wife (who's Japanese) are moving back to the states from Tokyo. He was asking just the other day what kind of pipe I have. I told him it's a 1.5/384. He wasn't impressed as they were looking to upgrade they're 25mb to 100mb before they decided to move. Er, welcome home...
We are truely seeing what happens when big media get's in bed with the FCC. While I believe that we will see higher speeds (Speakeasy is offering 6mb/768mb connections in some areas as well as DSL w/out a phone line - which I have), they will be nothing compared to some otehr countries. And I'm the first to agree this is dampening innovation. The pipe is now becoming a necessity in some areas, but don't expect the current administration to see that any time soon.
Take this example. I'm actually developing a video conferencing app for a company. While some players like Apple, M$, and even Yahoo (altho, their offering isn't much to talk about) their own vconf apps (Apple's, obviously, being the best), they all have high bandwidth demands. Apple's Tiger nextegn Mpeg 4 codec promises to lower these requirements, but for all pratical purposes, that isn't the reality now.
So for me, working on a new technology with a limited budget, I'm screwed. Unless I wanna fork out big bucks for a hige pipe, my 'innovation' is kinda dead in the water. And even if I did have a big connection, our business clients might not either. All because of artifical costs that the big providers complain about.
Another issue. In San Francisco, as well as other cities, you have to go thru quite a few hoops - STILL - to get a connection up. The latest was with my Speakeasy Onelink service - which is basically a data-only circuit that doesn't require phone service from SBC. However, it still requires SBC to come out; as part of this requirement I waited all day only to find my line 'tagged' by SBC some time in the past few days. I then called the Speakeasy guys, who said that SBC isn't required to notify anyone during this step. Great. Now Speakeasy/Covad has to wait for SBC to notify them that they've finished. So far that hasn't happend. Gee. In other words, this whole process, after years of availibility, is still crap. Still inefficient. Still a joke.
While I use Speakeasy exclusively - as a developer - since they're one of the only independent providers left - this whole process is still crap. The Bell's still have no intention of letting go of any control of the copper that we, the government, basically game them in the 40's/50's/60's. So while all these corporate interests still hold the keys, we'll be given little slices while other countries in the world will be given the whole pie thusly, enabling their little guys to 'innovate' a hell of a lot faster than ours. Of course, our adminstration and biz climate here is pretty stacked against the little guy, so no new news there.
The order of the buttons. I think the GNOME guys were correct in 'mimicing' the Mac button layout. I think their quest to change that portion back is a mistake.
Otoh, yes, GNOME is bloated and getting rid of the registry concept is a good one. Spatial Nautilus sux as well. Yuk.
Anyone who's got an inkling of historical perspective will and do realize that we're at a pretty fucked up point in history and god help us if there's another 4 years of the Bush regime.
For real man, you are dead on: the real enemies of America are in the White House right now. Fuckin eh!
Think about this: when Apple attempted to license its OS, it sales were immediately cannibalized by its licensees.
Yes, but Apple is not licensing the iPod or its OS. They're licensing only part of a file format that was invented by someone else - Dolby.
So this is totally different. Real will not start making iPods, but, the Creative Zen will play the same stuff as an iPod. Hmmm, a standard...
While I buy stuff off iTMS, I either playfair it or burn to cd and re-rip as I know MP3 will still be around and decoders will exist for a long time on any platform I decide to use. Not sure about AAC. However, if AAC was ever as widely accepted as MP3, then it would be a different issue.
While I also dislike Real, I think it's pretty, erm, stupid to say that they're no one. Chances are when you go to some streaming media site, there are two formats: Real & M$. Sure, they're spyware bitches, but if you think that all these sites that use their servers to stream stuff are gonna just disappear, think again. I'm reminded of, for instance, Car Talk (great show) that dumped Real cuz they are a bunch of clods in favor of M$ streaming server. They later added Real back in cuz Real begged them to. Maybe, this is a turnaround for Real as they know that the monopoly is ready to give them a ass kickin.
I tend to believe, somewhat, that Real actually does have a 60% market share in streaming, and yes, as usual, the Mac/iTMS has some single digit number. And as much as I love my Mac and iTunes, I'd have to agree with Rob that Apple should license Fairplay to Real. It's not like you'll have people in droves leaving iTMS for Rhapsody - not by a long shot.
No, what's really at stake is the branding and marketing <shudders> messages here. And they are this: Apple and the iPod might be great, but with them you have limited choices. And this is totally true if you're not thinking of buying an iPod - which, some, er, small percentage of people are. Yes, the iPod is the most popular mp3/music player out there and because, yes, it kicks ass. But, I think Jobs should put his ego in his pocket and think about this a little more.
If Apple licensed FairPlay to Real, what would it gain? Three things:
1. Another licensee, which would equal some sort of more money. Who knows how much, but some is better than none.
2. Another avenue for music sales. And we really have to be honest with this one cuz as many people have said before, iPods are what really drive the sales here (as we just saw in their latest financials) and not iTMS. So, if someone using Rhapsody could also have the option of using it with the iPod, then, hmmm, that sells more iPods.
3. Water for the fire. M$'s arguments that choice is being limited would be reduced as not only would the iPod work with iTMS on Win/Mac, but also with Rhapsody, and Real, having some significant marketshare would represent another choice and would further propel AAC as the music standard.
Apple would not have to do anything else for Real. Sure, maybe Glaser is looking for anything to grab onto in the downhill slide. But Apple should learn from its historical mistakes and commoditize AAC just as M$ has the OS. At some point, it's all about the file formats (can we say Office?) and not about the delivery. Sure, iPods will still play a big deal cuz they're just great gadgets, but at some point, someone is gonna make something just as good or better and if it's not Apple and they're tied to something that doesn't become a standard, then once again, they might have a great product, but be marginalized in the end.
This might be ok for some people, but seriously, after a while, one kinda does get tired using the best product but somehow feeling second rate.
I do the exact same thing - cept it goes to a cd-rw. Yeah, it's a little inconvenient, but in the end, I'm willing to accept the Apple DRM as long as there's a way around it.
Look, there are much worse schemes out there and while I am a Linux and Mac user and not necessairly a zealot for either, I'm still ok with dealing with their service, the product, and the terms. It's a good deal for the price and the experience.
However, if it was not for ability to burn this off to a cd, I might shy away from iTMS all together.
I have no idea - and I've worked on some C# stuff in the past - why anyone outside the m$ world would consider C#. I 100% agree with the parent - it's a ticking timebomb waiting to explode. I think the fact that, for example, IBM is not using C# and doing very well is quite telling. Don't expect them to (ever?) use it anytime soon. In fact, who besides Novell is really investing anything in C#?
Exactly, the same people invested in VB. I rest my case.
In my view, the good doctor is only part right. Sure, maybe for those who don't want to, don't have the time to, or just plain aren't interested in choice, sure, no choice is great. One operating system, one people - yah that's fine for them.
However, for myself, I've stuck with the Unices because I'm interested in them. And in fact, you can make a much bigger argument for this whole thing when you look back any any significant discovery or invention in history. Some people struggle out of ideology to make things and others accidentally cause things to happen out of sheer curosity.
It's fine for the doc to have an opinion on this. And he very well can because we live in a society (somewhat) tolerant of many views and ideas. You take these away, and society will just die - there will be no point.
I mean, this was part of what the whole Matrix was about - control and choice. Some don't mind being controlled - fine, no problem. But don't take away choice for everyone, including those that might actually use it. Otherwise, your back to just a few (who probably themselves won't even care at all at some point) making decisions which, many historical lessons show, is usually a bad thing.
Not just Windows.Forms tho. Try ASP.NET and a slew of other packages that will deal with enterprise workload. Take a gander at this article and you'll see that they don't even have a full MVC model for web apps. And there are many industry proven patterns that haven't been implemented in M$ articles/turotials/docs because of their philosophical differences - but that's another story.
Look, the point is this: yes, some core C# packages, some of the cil and clr have been submitted and accepted by ecma. However, what still get's me is how short sighted almost everyone is on this issue. It's Microsoft for christs sake! They've left a bloody trail thru the landscape for the last decade and a half! They're still being sued by states and the likes of the EU. So why does the ecma stuff even matter?.Net is a knee jerk response to Java and J2EE. Period. And why is this? Because Java built something that could have been better (frankly, just the Java desktop is the weak spot). And what is M$ doing? Playing catchup - especially on the server. The enterprise Java market is a huge market. And it's a trusted market. M$ wants to own that market, just like everything else. So why would they license their copied technology to anyone and anything else that is not of their liking, making, and control? Exactly.
I personally, after even contributing to the dotGnu project, see no reason to implement.Net anything on Linux. A non-Windows implementation will never be totally compatible and run outside Windows like a Java app can. M$ will make sure this never happens. Icaza and the guys should have spent their time working on Blackdown or something from a vendor that at least still believes in Unix/Linux. But by choosing the path they've taken, they basically allowed for two scenerios.
1. Complete shutdown, at some point, by M$ 2. Huge licensing fees for Novell and possible disaster porportional to ActiveDirectory and NDS.
No, there is no reason to OS Java. None at all. If a distro has a problem distributing it, big f-ing deal, find something else to complain about where it will make a difference, like SMB. If someone really wants a JRE or, a developer wants a JDK, then nothing is stopping them - cept maybe no Internet connection - from downloading it. So, the whole distro thing doesn't hold any water in my book. I've never not been able to d/l a particular JDK and in fact, I have the source to the whole JVM and class libraries for reference. Yes, source, for free..
So Sun has done a very good thing to M$ by, like the poster said, taking them to task on polluting, yet another, language or app. And yes, C++ has much complexity and fragmentation, so Java and the JSR are fine by me.
Plus don't forget, Java's biggest strength is on the server. By simply not including a JDK in a distro for server developers is a moot point. A JDK can take from start of download to java -version a whole 5-10 minutes, tops! I don't see how that's a problem.
So can we drop this whole thing now? We should be worried much more about.Net/C#/Mono infecting Linux than Java not being distributed with it.
I'm not convinced the patents thing is really valid. If Microsoft have patents on their class libs I think it massively unlikely Sun don't have patents on theirs.
Sun is also a hardware company and not strictly an OS/apps company. Plus, Sun is not as f-ed up as M$ when it comes to wanting to own every piece of technology they come in contact with. (Also, see last paragraph in this post.)
I think Havoc is off base with the XAML comments. XAML will only be usable with the arrival of Longhorn which is in, what, 2008 now?...I certainly cannot see XAML taking over HTML anytime this century, there's simply too much investment in HTML..
Never underestimate an M$ technology. And I keep thinking of how many projects I've worked on where they code to IE and its standards complaint HTML that does not render in anything else. If you think that HTML is in the clear for now and the near future, you're mistaken. I think it's even a struggle now to keep people from just coding to IE. In the business world, where 99% of all the desktops run Windoze, any HTML project will probably only code to IE. For them, there's no reason not to.
I think Havoc is dead on the money with this one. XAML is a threat to HTML and it's needs to be watched and one-upped by the free/open community out there - he's bringing up the right arguments. If not, then there will be little reason for people to even use HTML at all. And like I said, if there's no reason for people to develop to an HTML standard, then there will be no reason to develop to HTML at all.
As for Mono; I also agree with Havoc here in that free alternative technologies should be developed outside M$ and not with it. Until M$ want's to be a regular member of the technology community and not the sole owner of everything, then they can't be trusted. And this is not just a rant but an opinion based on their historical behavior. While, again, I think the Mono and dotGnu guys are doing a good job, I think their efforts are misplaced. Maybe at a minimum, provide a c# compiler like gcj. But all this Winforms and the like and doing Linux client apps in c# is going to be more of a problem than a solution.
As far as using Java to do app? Hey, at least Sun has an interest in seeing Linux succeed; read: Sun will, like IBM, make more money on Linux at some point than Solaris. M$, on the other hand with their current business model, sees NO benefits from Linux succeeding. So, again, I agree with Havoc.
(EJBs)...typically requires 5 to 7 supporting files to deploy. Most development tools (IDEs) generate these automatically, but each in its own proprietary way.
By open sourcing this, it will make it worse. The EJB spec states bare minimum. It's up the the vendors on how to implement most of it. This it not an issue OSing Java will fix.
I dunno, there are a lot of reasons why I don't think making Java any more open, read: diluted, will help. But it's getting late, so...
The music's only awful if you make it that way. I've downloaded/bought some decent stuff off iTunes so far. Much better deal than going into some mega-cd store...
You can. In fact, I've peeked into the source quite a few times to make sure I knew how certain things were working. It's called the Sun Community Source Licensing (SCSL) (site appears down as of posting this).
Don't remember if it has the VM internals or not, but I have looked at the c++ code for primitives as well as fundamental Java objects. So, it's there and good to download.
Yah, honestly, I don't know how OS'ing Java would help.
While the JCP isn't as loose as developing the Linux kernel and other OS projects, it still has contributions from the major industry players - who have a vested interest to see Java go forward, not back - as well as small companies and individuals.
Proclaiming everything OS isn't necessairly the prize at the end of the day. If you look at M$'s efforts to ECMAize.NET and C#, it still doesn't hold off the threat of patent infingement for Mono and dotGnu. M$ can claim it's an open standard, but if the threat of litigation hangs over ones head, then it's probable safe to reason that developing a compatible version might not be a good thing to do.
I love Free and Open Source software. In fact, I make a decent living working on projects that use it. And most, if not all, of my projects use Java as well. Personally, I don't think something like Java will gain any benefits from following the route ESR proposes. By setting the Java source code free will fragment it more than ever. And for an industry that needs to hold off M$ as much as possible, I think this would be a bad move.
As someone who contributed a little code to gotGnu, I kinda started thinking, what's the point? What is the point of running.Net on a non-M$ OS?
I can see one value, which is it allows those 'stuck' (I don't really believe in that concept, but whatever) on Windows to migrate off it. But in the same line of thought there's also this huge issue which is M$ and they way it trys with all the power of the universe to prevent that. Whether it be licensing tricks or slashed pricing, or plain 'ol FUD - in the end, they'll do whatever's possible to keep people locked in.
And honestly, I have to raise an eyebrow to anything M$. I mean, C# is a specific jab at Java. Java wasn't built to wrestle control away from M$ C++ and their dev tools. So something that is made to ward off something else that, in my book, is a pretty good thing for Internet developers, is pretty sketchy. Not saying Java is the king or anything, but the underlying reason for C# is: we (M$) can't control Java, so screw you, we'll copy and extend, build the concept of a VM (CLR) into our OS, and then woo all those productive;) Java developers over to a real platform.
Lastly, any Open Source/Free versions of.Net are playing with fire. If Mono or dotGnu were wildly successful, then M$, owning all the patents, copyrights, and trademarks, would pull the legal card and shut them down or just plain not interoperate with them - yes, I know portions of.Net are part of ECMA. However, this isn't the days of the 80's or 90's where you could reasonably get away with this stuff and everything under the electronic sun wasn't patented. Nowadays the control and nastiness in the business software world is unparalleled - just look at that guy that patented the concept of 'web stores' for example. So, while my hat is off to all the people who have really busted their ass on Mono and dotGnu, I ultimately feel that it will be a lesson in frustration and disappointment.
And also, for me, there's just something filthy about the M$ development universe. I find their tools are kludgy, bloated, and too foofy. And I don't like having to install five thousand libraries and integrated-this or integrated-that, plus an update here and an update there - I'm not a fan of everything integrated into the OS. Granted, Net Beans can have a huge footprint and I didn't say that it is a great app (don't care for IDEs either), but there's just a something about M$ tools that I just don't and never have liked - this naturally extends all the way through their whole stack. So seeing a HelloWorld VB app running on Linux kinda makes me shutter and just kinda think why? I'm sure the natural answer for some will be - because. Meh..
This will happen because the open source model, which lets anyone modify source code and sell or distribute the results, virtually guarantees that someone, somewhere, will insert malicious code into the source.
Of course you can get the source code and modify it. However, 99.9% of the time you cannot commit it back to the tree without first getting to know the guys running the project. And what usually comes first is submitting patches to the project via a project member (uaully a high-level member since some level of oversight and accountability is needed).
Once that 'trial period' has passed, then a coder can usually check into the repository head. However, I don't see any major difference in that respect to someone working at [insert super software company here] and someone coming in and being a good person for a bit and then adding back doors to code.
The author assumes that as soon as you get the repository login set up on yr machine, then you're just able to start fucking things up. This is highly unlikely and since that, in my view, is the most fundamental piece of team programming, I find his argument to be dead right there.
As for distributing the results, that is also flawed but not by logic, but by market forces. Even if someone got a hold of the entire RedHat repository or Evolution for that matter, I don't think people would be using that product for a few reasons. 1. Lacks credibility. Forks have enough time gaining intrest from the project they forked off. So why would someone want to fork something just to insert back doors and take over the world. Seems like an awful waste of time and effort. And just because you fork it, doesn't mean they'll come. 2. Even if a 'malware' fork happened, it wouldn't stay afloat long. It would probably take less than a day for someone to figure out something was going down and to spread the word. Again, the OS community is the key here. You wouldn't see this happen behind closed doors.
This guy lives in the fairytale land of spooks and secrets and bad guys around every corner. While I'm sure there's plenty of falling outs of people in various projects and groups, it's highly unlikely that any of these scenerios the author plays out will ever come true. In any ecosystem, only the strong will survive. And I just can't seem some 'malware' being released and taking over everything. In fact, all the worst case infections and money losers to date have all happened in the ActiveX/DevX/.NET/M$ propreitary, closed door, secret world. Of course this guy has this opinion. He exists in a world where everone is paranoid and everything not yours is evil or doomed to failure or ripe for punishing.
I'm kinda waiting for the G5 Powebooks. I currently have a 1Ghz TiBook with a Gig of ram and a 5200rpm drive that I dropped in it. My memory speed is at 133mhz and I have noticed a difference on my Mom's iMac (ddr 333) and my friends 17" Albook (ddr 333). Haven't test Java on the latter machines tho.
However, I've been using my Tibook (and my previous 500Mhz) for years and I've been very pleased with the Java performance. I do see some issues with some Swing apps bein kinda weird, but all in all, Java integrates into the env quite well.
I'd say, for server development, it's great. I currently run Tomcat 5, Postgres 7, and JDK 1.4.2. My Tomcat instance takes about 15000ms to startup (which includes caching of some small tables). It's also nice to have all the Unix tools so I can admin my Linux boxes. I've hooked up jikes for Ant builds and Tomcat JSP compilation and that seems to give it a boost as well.
All in all, I'll prob stay with Powerbooks as my main dev laptop as I researched for quite a while and nothing comes close to them. I don't think you'd be in a bad spot to buy a 15" (1.25ghz) or 17" Albook. While I am waiting for the G5's to come out, one poster did mention that they might have issues, so a second revision of that might be the way to go. And that can be a year or more away..
Personally, I think Apple machines are very well engineered as of late. I'm on my second TiBook, got my parents an iMac & my sister a G4 iBook for xmas. They love 'em. The old pc my parents had got a little hd upgrade and is relegated to the garage where my dad can smoke and write. And that's where the pc should stay.
That said, I've owned a plethora of x86 machines for almost 10 years now and they've seen probably every Linux distro imaginable. My current servers all run Linux still. My two x86 laptops - Linux. However, my Tibook has no wireless issues due to Broadcom or whoever else's drivers not being released. And, the media on my Tibook works like a champ.
I do miss my quick and faithful WindowMaker desktop, but I can live with Aqua. At least with Mac, you still have BSD. With windoze sans Cygwin, I feel trapped. Matter of fact, even with Cygwin I feel trapped. *shrug* And believe me, I'm the guy that goes into the office and wants to start chucking the M$ based 'netwerk' in favor of *nx and open standards stuff, so I don't feel like I'm one of the Mac 'zealots'.
I think Apple has done some good stuff for the OS community, a hell of a lot more than M$ probably ever will. And they can do this because they are mostly a hardware company. I'll keep buying Macs and I'll keep putting together Linux boxes. As long as I'm not funneling money into M$ or Dell, then I can live with that.
This is a good point. I was talking to my friend the other day who does a lot of heavy consulting for the govt. biotech industry and I asked him something similar: If we've lost past manufaturing jobs to China, automotive jobs to Japan, and now, a lot of programming/IT jobs to India, what is the U.S. to do for now and the future to keep our 'edge' and people employed?
His response (shortened): We need to focus in invention, innovation, and entertainment. The first two make sense. But entertainment wasn't really one of my first choices. However, after thinking about how huge the entertainment industry is - think of the various bills brought before congress in the recent years regarding DRM, etc... - and the sports industry as well, it makes sense.
Unix is more elegant, but the fact that it grew up together with the Internet as a networked OS. This was not an afterthought. Neither was multiple users and security. When you work with something long enough, it becomes second nature and solid and secure. How did Windows start out? Single user. No Internet. No concept of services/daemons. You machine was its own little island. It was all about the single user GUI in the office to do one task.
And anyway, if XP is so secure, why are they scrapping it for a complete new rewrite - again? It's because it can't be fixed and it has more security leaks than a seive. Microsoft has tried and tried to reshape the Internet into what they want it to be and, thank god, it's failing. And in a way so stupendous that now those that get sacked regularly gotta go off and complain about it. Well boo hoo to them. I've never experienced a virus or worm on OS X or Linux/Unix and I don't suppose I will be anytime soon. There's a reason for that and m$ still doesn't get it.
Have you ever taken a pre 80's car into get it repaired?? It's either off to some guy named Lou who's got a permanent 5 o'clock and tortures all newcomers with the butt crack from hell or Jethro with his hound always sniffin in everyone's crotch as soon as they approach.
Nah, Win98 was nuthin great anyway, so it deserves to die. I'm like what one of the other guys said in another post: time to get a Mac.
Hey, more power to ya if that's what works. However, I stream music all day as well, except it's from my own servers. And when I'm not with net connection, then I need to take various said songs w/me via my iPod or cd. I don't think I'd ever buy into the sub model just cuz I like owning and I want it the way I want it. So much so that I burn my iTunes songs on cdr's and rip them back in. And actually, I listen to a lot of electronic stuff, specifically drum and bass, which is really all streamed for free via various internet radios - commercial free. So, yah, I dunno, I guess different strokes for diff folks.
As far as Netflix goes, well, as a software developer, I have dumped them into the 'no more' bin along with Amazon due to their ridiculous patents. They have a good service, but I don't think it's patentable. Meh..
Not the same at all. Specifically for the fact that it's meant as a 'social Walkman' and, as we all know, Walkman's are portable. iTunes is not and, no, a 12" Powerbook is not the portable I'm talking about. The iPod is portable, but lacks Wi-Fi and the varying operating system features TunA requires. This is meant strictly for palm computers, of which, a version of iTunes does not (will never?) exist.
I just submitted this story a few hours ago. Rejected once again..
Slashdot Mirror
My brother and his wife (who's Japanese) are moving back to the states from Tokyo. He was asking just the other day what kind of pipe I have. I told him it's a 1.5/384. He wasn't impressed as they were looking to upgrade they're 25mb to 100mb before they decided to move. Er, welcome home...
We are truely seeing what happens when big media get's in bed with the FCC. While I believe that we will see higher speeds (Speakeasy is offering 6mb/768mb connections in some areas as well as DSL w/out a phone line - which I have), they will be nothing compared to some otehr countries. And I'm the first to agree this is dampening innovation. The pipe is now becoming a necessity in some areas, but don't expect the current administration to see that any time soon.
Take this example. I'm actually developing a video conferencing app for a company. While some players like Apple, M$, and even Yahoo (altho, their offering isn't much to talk about) their own vconf apps (Apple's, obviously, being the best), they all have high bandwidth demands. Apple's Tiger nextegn Mpeg 4 codec promises to lower these requirements, but for all pratical purposes, that isn't the reality now.
So for me, working on a new technology with a limited budget, I'm screwed. Unless I wanna fork out big bucks for a hige pipe, my 'innovation' is kinda dead in the water. And even if I did have a big connection, our business clients might not either. All because of artifical costs that the big providers complain about.
Another issue. In San Francisco, as well as other cities, you have to go thru quite a few hoops - STILL - to get a connection up. The latest was with my Speakeasy Onelink service - which is basically a data-only circuit that doesn't require phone service from SBC. However, it still requires SBC to come out; as part of this requirement I waited all day only to find my line 'tagged' by SBC some time in the past few days. I then called the Speakeasy guys, who said that SBC isn't required to notify anyone during this step. Great. Now Speakeasy/Covad has to wait for SBC to notify them that they've finished. So far that hasn't happend. Gee. In other words, this whole process, after years of availibility, is still crap. Still inefficient. Still a joke.
While I use Speakeasy exclusively - as a developer - since they're one of the only independent providers left - this whole process is still crap. The Bell's still have no intention of letting go of any control of the copper that we, the government, basically game them in the 40's/50's/60's. So while all these corporate interests still hold the keys, we'll be given little slices while other countries in the world will be given the whole pie thusly, enabling their little guys to 'innovate' a hell of a lot faster than ours. Of course, our adminstration and biz climate here is pretty stacked against the little guy, so no new news there.
Argh, this whole thing pisses me off..
The order of the buttons. I think the GNOME guys were correct in 'mimicing' the Mac button layout. I think their quest to change that portion back is a mistake.
Otoh, yes, GNOME is bloated and getting rid of the registry concept is a good one. Spatial Nautilus sux as well. Yuk.
Yah, where the shit did that sig come from?
Anyone who's got an inkling of historical perspective will and do realize that we're at a pretty fucked up point in history and god help us if there's another 4 years of the Bush regime.
For real man, you are dead on: the real enemies of America are in the White House right now. Fuckin eh!
Think about this: when Apple attempted to license its OS, it sales were immediately cannibalized by its licensees.
Yes, but Apple is not licensing the iPod or its OS. They're licensing only part of a file format that was invented by someone else - Dolby.
So this is totally different. Real will not start making iPods, but, the Creative Zen will play the same stuff as an iPod. Hmmm, a standard...
While I buy stuff off iTMS, I either playfair it or burn to cd and re-rip as I know MP3 will still be around and decoders will exist for a long time on any platform I decide to use. Not sure about AAC. However, if AAC was ever as widely accepted as MP3, then it would be a different issue.
It's all about the file formats.
While I also dislike Real, I think it's pretty, erm, stupid to say that they're no one. Chances are when you go to some streaming media site, there are two formats: Real & M$. Sure, they're spyware bitches, but if you think that all these sites that use their servers to stream stuff are gonna just disappear, think again. I'm reminded of, for instance, Car Talk (great show) that dumped Real cuz they are a bunch of clods in favor of M$ streaming server. They later added Real back in cuz Real begged them to. Maybe, this is a turnaround for Real as they know that the monopoly is ready to give them a ass kickin.
I tend to believe, somewhat, that Real actually does have a 60% market share in streaming, and yes, as usual, the Mac/iTMS has some single digit number. And as much as I love my Mac and iTunes, I'd have to agree with Rob that Apple should license Fairplay to Real. It's not like you'll have people in droves leaving iTMS for Rhapsody - not by a long shot.
No, what's really at stake is the branding and marketing <shudders> messages here. And they are this: Apple and the iPod might be great, but with them you have limited choices. And this is totally true if you're not thinking of buying an iPod - which, some, er, small percentage of people are. Yes, the iPod is the most popular mp3/music player out there and because, yes, it kicks ass. But, I think Jobs should put his ego in his pocket and think about this a little more.
If Apple licensed FairPlay to Real, what would it gain? Three things:
1. Another licensee, which would equal some sort of more money. Who knows how much, but some is better than none.
2. Another avenue for music sales. And we really have to be honest with this one cuz as many people have said before, iPods are what really drive the sales here (as we just saw in their latest financials) and not iTMS. So, if someone using Rhapsody could also have the option of using it with the iPod, then, hmmm, that sells more iPods.
3. Water for the fire. M$'s arguments that choice is being limited would be reduced as not only would the iPod work with iTMS on Win/Mac, but also with Rhapsody, and Real, having some significant marketshare would represent another choice and would further propel AAC as the music standard.
Apple would not have to do anything else for Real. Sure, maybe Glaser is looking for anything to grab onto in the downhill slide. But Apple should learn from its historical mistakes and commoditize AAC just as M$ has the OS. At some point, it's all about the file formats (can we say Office?) and not about the delivery. Sure, iPods will still play a big deal cuz they're just great gadgets, but at some point, someone is gonna make something just as good or better and if it's not Apple and they're tied to something that doesn't become a standard, then once again, they might have a great product, but be marginalized in the end.
This might be ok for some people, but seriously, after a while, one kinda does get tired using the best product but somehow feeling second rate.
I do the exact same thing - cept it goes to a cd-rw. Yeah, it's a little inconvenient, but in the end, I'm willing to accept the Apple DRM as long as there's a way around it.
Look, there are much worse schemes out there and while I am a Linux and Mac user and not necessairly a zealot for either, I'm still ok with dealing with their service, the product, and the terms. It's a good deal for the price and the experience.
However, if it was not for ability to burn this off to a cd, I might shy away from iTMS all together.
For real.
I have no idea - and I've worked on some C# stuff in the past - why anyone outside the m$ world would consider C#. I 100% agree with the parent - it's a ticking timebomb waiting to explode. I think the fact that, for example, IBM is not using C# and doing very well is quite telling. Don't expect them to (ever?) use it anytime soon. In fact, who besides Novell is really investing anything in C#?
Exactly, the same people invested in VB. I rest my case.
Well I got 4 rubbermaid things full of spare parts!
Plus, NO TV, NO phone (yes DSL tho), 6 speakers, 2 turntables & MANY microphones!
Where it's at!
In my view, the good doctor is only part right. Sure, maybe for those who don't want to, don't have the time to, or just plain aren't interested in choice, sure, no choice is great. One operating system, one people - yah that's fine for them.
However, for myself, I've stuck with the Unices because I'm interested in them. And in fact, you can make a much bigger argument for this whole thing when you look back any any significant discovery or invention in history. Some people struggle out of ideology to make things and others accidentally cause things to happen out of sheer curosity.
It's fine for the doc to have an opinion on this. And he very well can because we live in a society (somewhat) tolerant of many views and ideas. You take these away, and society will just die - there will be no point.
I mean, this was part of what the whole Matrix was about - control and choice. Some don't mind being controlled - fine, no problem. But don't take away choice for everyone, including those that might actually use it. Otherwise, your back to just a few (who probably themselves won't even care at all at some point) making decisions which, many historical lessons show, is usually a bad thing.
Choice. Good.
No choice. Bad.
Not just Windows.Forms tho. Try ASP.NET and a slew of other packages that will deal with enterprise workload. Take a gander at this article and you'll see that they don't even have a full MVC model for web apps. And there are many industry proven patterns that haven't been implemented in M$ articles/turotials/docs because of their philosophical differences - but that's another story.
.Net is a knee jerk response to Java and J2EE. Period. And why is this? Because Java built something that could have been better (frankly, just the Java desktop is the weak spot). And what is M$ doing? Playing catchup - especially on the server. The enterprise Java market is a huge market. And it's a trusted market. M$ wants to own that market, just like everything else. So why would they license their copied technology to anyone and anything else that is not of their liking, making, and control? Exactly.
.Net anything on Linux. A non-Windows implementation will never be totally compatible and run outside Windows like a Java app can. M$ will make sure this never happens. Icaza and the guys should have spent their time working on Blackdown or something from a vendor that at least still believes in Unix/Linux. But by choosing the path they've taken, they basically allowed for two scenerios.
Look, the point is this: yes, some core C# packages, some of the cil and clr have been submitted and accepted by ecma. However, what still get's me is how short sighted almost everyone is on this issue. It's Microsoft for christs sake! They've left a bloody trail thru the landscape for the last decade and a half! They're still being sued by states and the likes of the EU. So why does the ecma stuff even matter?
I personally, after even contributing to the dotGnu project, see no reason to implement
1. Complete shutdown, at some point, by M$
2. Huge licensing fees for Novell and possible disaster porportional to ActiveDirectory and NDS.
So there you have it.
Yes, Microsoft Java. Exactly.
.Net/C#/Mono infecting Linux than Java not being distributed with it.
No, there is no reason to OS Java. None at all. If a distro has a problem distributing it, big f-ing deal, find something else to complain about where it will make a difference, like SMB.
If someone really wants a JRE or, a developer wants a JDK, then nothing is stopping them - cept maybe no Internet connection - from downloading it. So, the whole distro thing doesn't hold any water in my book. I've never not been able to d/l a particular JDK and in fact, I have the source to the whole JVM and class libraries for reference. Yes, source, for free..
So Sun has done a very good thing to M$ by, like the poster said, taking them to task on polluting, yet another, language or app. And yes, C++ has much complexity and fragmentation, so Java and the JSR are fine by me.
Plus don't forget, Java's biggest strength is on the server. By simply not including a JDK in a distro for server developers is a moot point. A JDK can take from start of download to java -version a whole 5-10 minutes, tops! I don't see how that's a problem.
So can we drop this whole thing now? We should be worried much more about
I'm not convinced the patents thing is really valid. If Microsoft have patents on their class libs I think it massively unlikely Sun don't have patents on theirs.
...I certainly cannot see XAML taking over HTML anytime this century, there's simply too much investment in HTML..
Sun is also a hardware company and not strictly an OS/apps company. Plus, Sun is not as f-ed up as M$ when it comes to wanting to own every piece of technology they come in contact with. (Also, see last paragraph in this post.)
I think Havoc is off base with the XAML comments. XAML will only be usable with the arrival of Longhorn which is in, what, 2008 now?
Never underestimate an M$ technology. And I keep thinking of how many projects I've worked on where they code to IE and its standards complaint HTML that does not render in anything else. If you think that HTML is in the clear for now and the near future, you're mistaken. I think it's even a struggle now to keep people from just coding to IE. In the business world, where 99% of all the desktops run Windoze, any HTML project will probably only code to IE. For them, there's no reason not to.
I think Havoc is dead on the money with this one. XAML is a threat to HTML and it's needs to be watched and one-upped by the free/open community out there - he's bringing up the right arguments. If not, then there will be little reason for people to even use HTML at all. And like I said, if there's no reason for people to develop to an HTML standard, then there will be no reason to develop to HTML at all.
As for Mono; I also agree with Havoc here in that free alternative technologies should be developed outside M$ and not with it. Until M$ want's to be a regular member of the technology community and not the sole owner of everything, then they can't be trusted. And this is not just a rant but an opinion based on their historical behavior.
While, again, I think the Mono and dotGnu guys are doing a good job, I think their efforts are misplaced. Maybe at a minimum, provide a c# compiler like gcj. But all this Winforms and the like and doing Linux client apps in c# is going to be more of a problem than a solution.
As far as using Java to do app? Hey, at least Sun has an interest in seeing Linux succeed; read: Sun will, like IBM, make more money on Linux at some point than Solaris. M$, on the other hand with their current business model, sees NO benefits from Linux succeeding. So, again, I agree with Havoc.
(EJBs)...typically requires 5 to 7 supporting files to deploy. Most development tools (IDEs) generate these automatically, but each in its own proprietary way.
By open sourcing this, it will make it worse. The EJB spec states bare minimum. It's up the the vendors on how to implement most of it. This it not an issue OSing Java will fix.
I dunno, there are a lot of reasons why I don't think making Java any more open, read: diluted, will help. But it's getting late, so...
The music's only awful if you make it that way. I've downloaded/bought some decent stuff off iTunes so far. Much better deal than going into some mega-cd store...
You can. In fact, I've peeked into the source quite a few times to make sure I knew how certain things were working. It's called the Sun Community Source Licensing (SCSL) (site appears down as of posting this).
Don't remember if it has the VM internals or not, but I have looked at the c++ code for primitives as well as fundamental Java objects. So, it's there and good to download.
Yah, honestly, I don't know how OS'ing Java would help.
.NET and C#, it still doesn't hold off the threat of patent infingement for Mono and dotGnu. M$ can claim it's an open standard, but if the threat of litigation hangs over ones head, then it's probable safe to reason that developing a compatible version might not be a good thing to do.
While the JCP isn't as loose as developing the Linux kernel and other OS projects, it still has contributions from the major industry players - who have a vested interest to see Java go forward, not back - as well as small companies and individuals.
Proclaiming everything OS isn't necessairly the prize at the end of the day. If you look at M$'s efforts to ECMAize
I love Free and Open Source software. In fact, I make a decent living working on projects that use it. And most, if not all, of my projects use Java as well. Personally, I don't think something like Java will gain any benefits from following the route ESR proposes. By setting the Java source code free will fragment it more than ever. And for an industry that needs to hold off M$ as much as possible, I think this would be a bad move.
As someone who contributed a little code to gotGnu, I kinda started thinking, what's the point? What is the point of running .Net on a non-M$ OS?
;) Java developers over to a real platform.
.Net are playing with fire. If Mono or dotGnu were wildly successful, then M$, owning all the patents, copyrights, and trademarks, would pull the legal card and shut them down or just plain not interoperate with them - yes, I know portions of .Net are part of ECMA. However, this isn't the days of the 80's or 90's where you could reasonably get away with this stuff and everything under the electronic sun wasn't patented. Nowadays the control and nastiness in the business software world is unparalleled - just look at that guy that patented the concept of 'web stores' for example. So, while my hat is off to all the people who have really busted their ass on Mono and dotGnu, I ultimately feel that it will be a lesson in frustration and disappointment.
I can see one value, which is it allows those 'stuck' (I don't really believe in that concept, but whatever) on Windows to migrate off it. But in the same line of thought there's also this huge issue which is M$ and they way it trys with all the power of the universe to prevent that. Whether it be licensing tricks or slashed pricing, or plain 'ol FUD - in the end, they'll do whatever's possible to keep people locked in.
And honestly, I have to raise an eyebrow to anything M$. I mean, C# is a specific jab at Java. Java wasn't built to wrestle control away from M$ C++ and their dev tools. So something that is made to ward off something else that, in my book, is a pretty good thing for Internet developers, is pretty sketchy. Not saying Java is the king or anything, but the underlying reason for C# is: we (M$) can't control Java, so screw you, we'll copy and extend, build the concept of a VM (CLR) into our OS, and then woo all those productive
Lastly, any Open Source/Free versions of
And also, for me, there's just something filthy about the M$ development universe. I find their tools are kludgy, bloated, and too foofy. And I don't like having to install five thousand libraries and integrated-this or integrated-that, plus an update here and an update there - I'm not a fan of everything integrated into the OS. Granted, Net Beans can have a huge footprint and I didn't say that it is a great app (don't care for IDEs either), but there's just a something about M$ tools that I just don't and never have liked - this naturally extends all the way through their whole stack. So seeing a HelloWorld VB app running on Linux kinda makes me shutter and just kinda think why? I'm sure the natural answer for some will be - because. Meh..
This will happen because the open source model, which lets anyone modify source code and sell or distribute the results, virtually guarantees that someone, somewhere, will insert malicious code into the source.
Of course you can get the source code and modify it. However, 99.9% of the time you cannot commit it back to the tree without first getting to know the guys running the project. And what usually comes first is submitting patches to the project via a project member (uaully a high-level member since some level of oversight and accountability is needed).
Once that 'trial period' has passed, then a coder can usually check into the repository head. However, I don't see any major difference in that respect to someone working at [insert super software company here] and someone coming in and being a good person for a bit and then adding back doors to code.
The author assumes that as soon as you get the repository login set up on yr machine, then you're just able to start fucking things up. This is highly unlikely and since that, in my view, is the most fundamental piece of team programming, I find his argument to be dead right there.
As for distributing the results, that is also flawed but not by logic, but by market forces. Even if someone got a hold of the entire RedHat repository or Evolution for that matter, I don't think people would be using that product for a few reasons.
1. Lacks credibility. Forks have enough time gaining intrest from the project they forked off. So why would someone want to fork something just to insert back doors and take over the world. Seems like an awful waste of time and effort. And just because you fork it, doesn't mean they'll come.
2. Even if a 'malware' fork happened, it wouldn't stay afloat long. It would probably take less than a day for someone to figure out something was going down and to spread the word. Again, the OS community is the key here. You wouldn't see this happen behind closed doors.
This guy lives in the fairytale land of spooks and secrets and bad guys around every corner. While I'm sure there's plenty of falling outs of people in various projects and groups, it's highly unlikely that any of these scenerios the author plays out will ever come true. In any ecosystem, only the strong will survive. And I just can't seem some 'malware' being released and taking over everything. In fact, all the worst case infections and money losers to date have all happened in the ActiveX/DevX/.NET/M$ propreitary, closed door, secret world. Of course this guy has this opinion. He exists in a world where everone is paranoid and everything not yours is evil or doomed to failure or ripe for punishing.
Free your mind..
I'm kinda waiting for the G5 Powebooks. I currently have a 1Ghz TiBook with a Gig of ram and a 5200rpm drive that I dropped in it. My memory speed is at 133mhz and I have noticed a difference on my Mom's iMac (ddr 333) and my friends 17" Albook (ddr 333). Haven't test Java on the latter machines tho.
However, I've been using my Tibook (and my previous 500Mhz) for years and I've been very pleased with the Java performance. I do see some issues with some Swing apps bein kinda weird, but all in all, Java integrates into the env quite well.
I'd say, for server development, it's great. I currently run Tomcat 5, Postgres 7, and JDK 1.4.2. My Tomcat instance takes about 15000ms to startup (which includes caching of some small tables). It's also nice to have all the Unix tools so I can admin my Linux boxes. I've hooked up jikes for Ant builds and Tomcat JSP compilation and that seems to give it a boost as well.
All in all, I'll prob stay with Powerbooks as my main dev laptop as I researched for quite a while and nothing comes close to them. I don't think you'd be in a bad spot to buy a 15" (1.25ghz) or 17" Albook. While I am waiting for the G5's to come out, one poster did mention that they might have issues, so a second revision of that might be the way to go. And that can be a year or more away..
Personally, I think Apple machines are very well engineered as of late. I'm on my second TiBook, got my parents an iMac & my sister a G4 iBook for xmas. They love 'em. The old pc my parents had got a little hd upgrade and is relegated to the garage where my dad can smoke and write. And that's where the pc should stay.
That said, I've owned a plethora of x86 machines for almost 10 years now and they've seen probably every Linux distro imaginable. My current servers all run Linux still. My two x86 laptops - Linux. However, my Tibook has no wireless issues due to Broadcom or whoever else's drivers not being released. And, the media on my Tibook works like a champ.
I do miss my quick and faithful WindowMaker desktop, but I can live with Aqua. At least with Mac, you still have BSD. With windoze sans Cygwin, I feel trapped. Matter of fact, even with Cygwin I feel trapped. *shrug* And believe me, I'm the guy that goes into the office and wants to start chucking the M$ based 'netwerk' in favor of *nx and open standards stuff, so I don't feel like I'm one of the Mac 'zealots'.
I think Apple has done some good stuff for the OS community, a hell of a lot more than M$ probably ever will. And they can do this because they are mostly a hardware company. I'll keep buying Macs and I'll keep putting together Linux boxes. As long as I'm not funneling money into M$ or Dell, then I can live with that.
This is a good point. I was talking to my friend the other day who does a lot of heavy consulting for the govt. biotech industry and I asked him something similar: If we've lost past manufaturing jobs to China, automotive jobs to Japan, and now, a lot of programming/IT jobs to India, what is the U.S. to do for now and the future to keep our 'edge' and people employed?
His response (shortened): We need to focus in invention, innovation, and entertainment. The first two make sense. But entertainment wasn't really one of my first choices. However, after thinking about how huge the entertainment industry is - think of the various bills brought before congress in the recent years regarding DRM, etc... - and the sports industry as well, it makes sense.
Unix is more elegant, but the fact that it grew up together with the Internet as a networked OS. This was not an afterthought. Neither was multiple users and security. When you work with something long enough, it becomes second nature and solid and secure. How did Windows start out? Single user. No Internet. No concept of services/daemons. You machine was its own little island. It was all about the single user GUI in the office to do one task.
And anyway, if XP is so secure, why are they scrapping it for a complete new rewrite - again? It's because it can't be fixed and it has more security leaks than a seive. Microsoft has tried and tried to reshape the Internet into what they want it to be and, thank god, it's failing. And in a way so stupendous that now those that get sacked regularly gotta go off and complain about it. Well boo hoo to them. I've never experienced a virus or worm on OS X or Linux/Unix and I don't suppose I will be anytime soon. There's a reason for that and m$ still doesn't get it.
Have you ever taken a pre 80's car into get it repaired?? It's either off to some guy named Lou who's got a permanent 5 o'clock and tortures all newcomers with the butt crack from hell or Jethro with his hound always sniffin in everyone's crotch as soon as they approach.
Nah, Win98 was nuthin great anyway, so it deserves to die. I'm like what one of the other guys said in another post: time to get a Mac.
Hey, more power to ya if that's what works. However, I stream music all day as well, except it's from my own servers. And when I'm not with net connection, then I need to take various said songs w/me via my iPod or cd. I don't think I'd ever buy into the sub model just cuz I like owning and I want it the way I want it. So much so that I burn my iTunes songs on cdr's and rip them back in. And actually, I listen to a lot of electronic stuff, specifically drum and bass, which is really all streamed for free via various internet radios - commercial free. So, yah, I dunno, I guess different strokes for diff folks.
As far as Netflix goes, well, as a software developer, I have dumped them into the 'no more' bin along with Amazon due to their ridiculous patents. They have a good service, but I don't think it's patentable. Meh..
Not the same at all. Specifically for the fact that it's meant as a 'social Walkman' and, as we all know, Walkman's are portable. iTunes is not and, no, a 12" Powerbook is not the portable I'm talking about. The iPod is portable, but lacks Wi-Fi and the varying operating system features TunA requires. This is meant strictly for palm computers, of which, a version of iTunes does not (will never?) exist.
I just submitted this story a few hours ago. Rejected once again..