Since when are fees claimed by the protectionist interest organizations ("guilds") for private corporations called "taxes"? Do you have trouble reading? This is unbridled CAPITALISM, the entertainment industry are trying to become the new Robber Barons.
I have run into some recent FairPlay "holdouts" - ironically, a ringtone collection album. However, that is easily remedied by "export to AAC" in the menu then delete (or move elsewhere) the infected original.
"Free" as in ad-supported. But what happens if/when vendors or phone companies start making "de-Googled" Android builds? Apparently, Verizon's version of the Samsung Galaxy S uses Bing instead of Google, and fixing that is a bit convoluted (for a non-techie).
Yeah I noticed that in Mail; a PDF attachment wanted to let me open it in either iBooks or Stanza, both of which had apparently registered for that content type...
Hey, it even seems easy to do: "To declare support for file types, your application must include the CFBundleDocumentTypes key in its Info.plist file. The system gathers this information from your application and maintains a registry that other applications can access through a document interaction controller."
That's the other part, yes: As far as the store is concerned, it has bought a bunch of boxes, added a margin and sold them on, just as if they were (expensive) boxes of cereal. There are no EULAs involved with the transaction the store had with the distributor or manufacturer of those software boxes.
So at some point it is a copyrighted work being distributed, and you should be able to sell that copy which you bought much like you can sell a book you have read. Except the software vendor now claims the money you paid were for a license. in which case: Doesn't that reduce the value of the box on the shelf to $markup?
If you really think that there is an entitlement to success in business, perhaps you will want to push that it should become MANDATORY to buy software as well? I mean if I go into a store and look at a game cover and decide not to buy it that's a lost sale right there! I am bleeding the poor starving developer of their God-given right to profit!
ALL other industries deal with second-hand sales because they are perfectly legal within copyright law (you are after all not making more copies by selling yours). Why should software be exempt? Are the book, music and movie industries dead because of 100 years of second-hand sales?
I think they can hit you with illegal "sublicensing", licenses as such are not products.
What they really are trying to dodge is copyright law itself. AIUI, copyright is very clear that if you buy a copy of a copyrighted work you OWN that copy, and can do (nearly) whatever you want with it, including reselling it. You are not making more copies so you are not in violation of copyright. By claiming that the physical media is inconsequential to what you actually paid money for, they are trying to prevent you from exercising rights you would have under copyright law.
In summary: Someone should smack their heads around until they stop being jerks to their customers.
What, is the store going to print out the forty pages of legalese for you to read while standing in line too?
Anyway, that will never fly: As far as the store is concerned they have bought a BOXED GOOD they keep on a SHELF. To them, selling software is no different than selling a packet of rice. They pay a distributor, add a markup and sell a box.
Want to sell software as a license and not a good? Get it out of physical stores.
Plenty of file system access, but each app lives in its own closed little world in that regard: You cannot access another app's file system with some very specific exceptions.
The developer CAN distribute the app, but it is more convoluted: The "ad hoc" distribution profile can target up to 100 devices, and the developer needs to know the device id for all of those. In effect it is just practical inside a company or between friends. (For large companies there are other ways as well).
For an example of an OSS library for iOS, look at KissXML, which is a close-ish "API-port" of MacOS NSXML released under the Apache license if I remember correctly.
*sigh* You are stuck in the past. Yes, Java is compiled, but to keep focusing on the mostly unused processors is counter-productive. Currently the compiled Java code in most cases works as an intermediate form between source and native, like for CLR and other virtual machines.
Where is your documentation that Sun was more inspired by console emulation than other virtual machine science, well known at the time?
Also the is JIT and emulation, but there is no such thing as "JIT emulator" - that would be something that emulates a JIT... the JRE can be coerced into not using JIT and just interpret; for some tasks that has been shown not to impede execution speed in a significant manner since the JIT translation adds a small overhead.
Nonsense, games are more stable on consoles. I bought Fallout 3 for PS3 on sale since the PC version I bought on Steam consistently froze after a scant few minutes of play. Should I as an end consumer really need to dig into minutiae of Windows settings to try and tweak it enough for a game to run properly? I thought we had left the bad old days behind us.
Repeat after me: PCs for surfing and work, consoles for games.
What is this "JIT emulator" you hamper on about? JIT compilation turns code into native code much like GCC does, except at runtime, in a dynamic way so that it can change the native representation if runtime analysis shows that code flow indicates a different translation would be better. What do you feel is "emulated"? are Perl or Python bytecodes also "emulating" something?
(Are you seriously believing that Sun looked at console emulators? The idea of virtual machines is WAY older than that hobby. Think UCSD p-code that e.g. Microsoft has used, the WAM that was used for Prolog etc. Portability is a far more relevant reason for using a virtual machine than "emulation" of existing CPUs that console emulators focus on.)
One difference to ahead-of-time compilation like you most often use for C/C++ and others is the use of this intermediate representation as byte codes. They are instructions for a virtual stack-based machine, for which there is an implementation that can run (slower) if necessary (since JIT compilation was added later). When running, the generated native code can be better optimized for the actual processor's features instead of assumptions made by a C programmer's architecture settings and other compiler tunings.
And the "toy" comment was because those processors are not exactly going to dominate the market any time soon. After Hotspot and JRockit made JIT-ed code faster they mostly died.
That was a lot of "what ifs". Oracle going after Google over Android does not mean a slightest bit for me as a developer in desktop and enterprise Java since we use conforming implementations to run the code. So Oracle are not concerned because Google are not trying to "attack" enterprise or desktop Java which are where IBM et al operate.
Why should Google succeed with a Java alternative more than the existing alternatives (Microsoft's.Net, Ruby/Rails, etc.)? It will just be one more option, and the majority have selected Java or.Net - or both.
Running Java in a current VM: the bytecodes are translated into native code by Hotspot (or JRockit) and the native code is what is actually running. But unlike traditional "pre"-compilation the translation happens at runtime because that is when you have the necessary information about that particular computer, thus making it more likely the native code can be optimized.
"Sun hoped they could get everyone moved to their processor."
"Their" processor is the SPARC, the Java bytecode CPU was just a toy.
For a long-running Java program, 99% of the time is spent running native code (JIT compilation leads to native code in case you has misunderstood something.) Compile-ahead and Just-in-time are just different times that translation to native happens. Do you really think that JIT is a slow process?
Then write it in C and use "native" in Java to hook to it then. You sound like a C zombie walking around chanting" poooointers..." as if that is the be-all and end-all of language tools.
Java is intended for expressing higher-level problems than C is suited for. As soon as you start writing malloc() and free() calls you are not focusing on the customer's problem but focusing on the computer. But the computer should not be important.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when are fees claimed by the protectionist interest organizations ("guilds") for private corporations called "taxes"? Do you have trouble reading? This is unbridled CAPITALISM, the entertainment industry are trying to become the new Robber Barons.
I have run into some recent FairPlay "holdouts" - ironically, a ringtone collection album. However, that is easily remedied by "export to AAC" in the menu then delete (or move elsewhere) the infected original.
If they turn it off it will release all the ghosts! Didn't you see Ghostbusters?
"Free" as in ad-supported. But what happens if/when vendors or phone companies start making "de-Googled" Android builds? Apparently, Verizon's version of the Samsung Galaxy S uses Bing instead of Google, and fixing that is a bit convoluted (for a non-techie).
"Gartner abuses linear interpolation".
Someone should show them this.
But shouldn't the Google Streetmindscan cars have picked up any influence the field has?
Yeah I noticed that in Mail; a PDF attachment wanted to let me open it in either iBooks or Stanza, both of which had apparently registered for that content type...
Hey, it even seems easy to do: "To declare support for file types, your application must include the CFBundleDocumentTypes key in its Info.plist file. The system gathers this information from your application and maintains a registry that other applications can access through a document interaction controller."
Not for all software categories. Sorry Blender but you are not 3DSMax, and there are still things Photoshop does better than the Gimp.
That's the other part, yes: As far as the store is concerned, it has bought a bunch of boxes, added a margin and sold them on, just as if they were (expensive) boxes of cereal. There are no EULAs involved with the transaction the store had with the distributor or manufacturer of those software boxes.
So at some point it is a copyrighted work being distributed, and you should be able to sell that copy which you bought much like you can sell a book you have read. Except the software vendor now claims the money you paid were for a license. in which case: Doesn't that reduce the value of the box on the shelf to $markup?
If you really think that there is an entitlement to success in business, perhaps you will want to push that it should become MANDATORY to buy software as well? I mean if I go into a store and look at a game cover and decide not to buy it that's a lost sale right there! I am bleeding the poor starving developer of their God-given right to profit!
ALL other industries deal with second-hand sales because they are perfectly legal within copyright law (you are after all not making more copies by selling yours). Why should software be exempt? Are the book, music and movie industries dead because of 100 years of second-hand sales?
I think they can hit you with illegal "sublicensing", licenses as such are not products.
What they really are trying to dodge is copyright law itself. AIUI, copyright is very clear that if you buy a copy of a copyrighted work you OWN that copy, and can do (nearly) whatever you want with it, including reselling it. You are not making more copies so you are not in violation of copyright. By claiming that the physical media is inconsequential to what you actually paid money for, they are trying to prevent you from exercising rights you would have under copyright law.
In summary: Someone should smack their heads around until they stop being jerks to their customers.
The Church of Redmond, WA does.
What, is the store going to print out the forty pages of legalese for you to read while standing in line too?
Anyway, that will never fly: As far as the store is concerned they have bought a BOXED GOOD they keep on a SHELF. To them, selling software is no different than selling a packet of rice. They pay a distributor, add a markup and sell a box.
Want to sell software as a license and not a good? Get it out of physical stores.
Plenty of file system access, but each app lives in its own closed little world in that regard: You cannot access another app's file system with some very specific exceptions.
So what does the current C64 "looks like an emulator" app do? Have they re-implemented the games in Objective-C using CoreGraphics/CoreAnimation?
The developer CAN distribute the app, but it is more convoluted: The "ad hoc" distribution profile can target up to 100 devices, and the developer needs to know the device id for all of those. In effect it is just practical inside a company or between friends. (For large companies there are other ways as well).
For an example of an OSS library for iOS, look at KissXML, which is a close-ish "API-port" of MacOS NSXML released under the Apache license if I remember correctly.
*sigh* You are stuck in the past. Yes, Java is compiled, but to keep focusing on the mostly unused processors is counter-productive. Currently the compiled Java code in most cases works as an intermediate form between source and native, like for CLR and other virtual machines.
Where is your documentation that Sun was more inspired by console emulation than other virtual machine science, well known at the time?
Also the is JIT and emulation, but there is no such thing as "JIT emulator" - that would be something that emulates a JIT... the JRE can be coerced into not using JIT and just interpret; for some tasks that has been shown not to impede execution speed in a significant manner since the JIT translation adds a small overhead.
Nonsense, games are more stable on consoles. I bought Fallout 3 for PS3 on sale since the PC version I bought on Steam consistently froze after a scant few minutes of play. Should I as an end consumer really need to dig into minutiae of Windows settings to try and tweak it enough for a game to run properly? I thought we had left the bad old days behind us.
Repeat after me: PCs for surfing and work, consoles for games.
What is this "JIT emulator" you hamper on about? JIT compilation turns code into native code much like GCC does, except at runtime, in a dynamic way so that it can change the native representation if runtime analysis shows that code flow indicates a different translation would be better. What do you feel is "emulated"? are Perl or Python bytecodes also "emulating" something?
(Are you seriously believing that Sun looked at console emulators? The idea of virtual machines is WAY older than that hobby. Think UCSD p-code that e.g. Microsoft has used, the WAM that was used for Prolog etc. Portability is a far more relevant reason for using a virtual machine than "emulation" of existing CPUs that console emulators focus on.)
One difference to ahead-of-time compilation like you most often use for C/C++ and others is the use of this intermediate representation as byte codes. They are instructions for a virtual stack-based machine, for which there is an implementation that can run (slower) if necessary (since JIT compilation was added later). When running, the generated native code can be better optimized for the actual processor's features instead of assumptions made by a C programmer's architecture settings and other compiler tunings.
And the "toy" comment was because those processors are not exactly going to dominate the market any time soon. After Hotspot and JRockit made JIT-ed code faster they mostly died.
That was a lot of "what ifs". Oracle going after Google over Android does not mean a slightest bit for me as a developer in desktop and enterprise Java since we use conforming implementations to run the code. So Oracle are not concerned because Google are not trying to "attack" enterprise or desktop Java which are where IBM et al operate.
Why should Google succeed with a Java alternative more than the existing alternatives (Microsoft's .Net, Ruby/Rails, etc.)? It will just be one more option, and the majority have selected Java or .Net - or both.
Okay, I'm game. What's wrong with the platform?
Perhaps he prefers register-based VMs over stack-based ones and mistakenly thinks that has to be his religion?
Running Java in a current VM: the bytecodes are translated into native code by Hotspot (or JRockit) and the native code is what is actually running. But unlike traditional "pre"-compilation the translation happens at runtime because that is when you have the necessary information about that particular computer, thus making it more likely the native code can be optimized.
"Sun hoped they could get everyone moved to their processor."
"Their" processor is the SPARC, the Java bytecode CPU was just a toy.
For a long-running Java program, 99% of the time is spent running native code (JIT compilation leads to native code in case you has misunderstood something.) Compile-ahead and Just-in-time are just different times that translation to native happens. Do you really think that JIT is a slow process?
Then write it in C and use "native" in Java to hook to it then. You sound like a C zombie walking around chanting" poooointers..." as if that is the be-all and end-all of language tools.
Java is intended for expressing higher-level problems than C is suited for. As soon as you start writing malloc() and free() calls you are not focusing on the customer's problem but focusing on the computer. But the computer should not be important.
I patented posting. Aaaanndd... writing English. You are going down!