It really isn't. Although market share is always nice, the real reason Google made Chrome becomes obvious when you look at the javascript benchmarks compared to all of the other browsers. It blows them out of the water.
Google wants to be able to do as much as possible from the browser so that it can create increasingly complex web applications that attract viewers to whom they can advertise. To do this, it needs lightning-fast javascript abilities. This is the reason Chrome is open source: to give this javascript interpreter away for free.
Microsoft applies for patents primarily to defend itself should it become the victim of a frivolous lawsuit. MS isn't a patent hawk, they make nearly all their money from selling software, but they are a constant target of patent lawsuits.
Until the patent system is fixed, these defensive patents are completely acceptable.
The "stupid debate over base10/base2 gi(bi|ga)bytes or whatever" is exactly the point. As you imply with that statement, the differences between a base 10 and a base 2 computation of hard drive space are not significant, and so the payout to consumers shouldn't be significant either.
Nintendo tried this almost 20 years ago and it was just as terrible an idea then.
Squeezing finger combinations and gesturing simply isn't intuitive enough to be an effective interface to a computer. And even if you were to somehow master the clunky interface, I think cell phones have taught us that while it is possible to multi-task, the decrease in quality makes it no longer worth it. In a combat setting, this idea is just silly.
There is absolutely NO REASON to teach our children physics...
A) Realize that no matter how many sample problems they work through, kids will still find problems that they have not seen before
B) Realize many young scientists will rebel and say nothing can travel faster than light or that mass and energy are the same thing
C) Realize that teaching students about inertial frameworks will just make them think they know how to solve problems that involve non-inertial frameworks
D) And lastly, realize that this opens up an avenue for propaganda by CERN and the *AAS to try to squash discovery by spreading FUD about how fundamental discoveries require trillion dollar colliders!!
Sure it seems like a good idea, but remember the government gave us the ATOM BOMB and most likely doesn't know anything about what the laws of nature are really like.
In my experience, it is confusing C++ pointer/memory allocation rules that primarily drive students away from the language and toward Java/C# in the first place (or, God forbid, away from programming entirely).
While Java is a little heavy on object semantics, these allows for the quick implementation of interesting and powerful applications. The very small jump required to go from command line to the GUI in Java compared to the MFC/WPF/Whatever else silliness with C++ is enough to keep students interested.
Memory allocation instruction has its place, but that place is quickly diminishing. An introduction class on programming should be fun and empowering rather than needlessly tedious, and I think Java accomplishes this well.
In modern dollars, the Apollo program cost about $135 Billion in 2006 dollars. A mission to mars would be much more expensive and there simply isn't that kind of equity in the private sphere for something with such minimal profit potential.
Slashdot Mirror
It really isn't. Although market share is always nice, the real reason Google made Chrome becomes obvious when you look at the javascript benchmarks compared to all of the other browsers. It blows them out of the water. Google wants to be able to do as much as possible from the browser so that it can create increasingly complex web applications that attract viewers to whom they can advertise. To do this, it needs lightning-fast javascript abilities. This is the reason Chrome is open source: to give this javascript interpreter away for free.
Microsoft applies for patents primarily to defend itself should it become the victim of a frivolous lawsuit. MS isn't a patent hawk, they make nearly all their money from selling software, but they are a constant target of patent lawsuits. Until the patent system is fixed, these defensive patents are completely acceptable.
The "stupid debate over base10/base2 gi(bi|ga)bytes or whatever" is exactly the point. As you imply with that statement, the differences between a base 10 and a base 2 computation of hard drive space are not significant, and so the payout to consumers shouldn't be significant either.
Nintendo tried this almost 20 years ago and it was just as terrible an idea then.
Squeezing finger combinations and gesturing simply isn't intuitive enough to be an effective interface to a computer. And even if you were to somehow master the clunky interface, I think cell phones have taught us that while it is possible to multi-task, the decrease in quality makes it no longer worth it. In a combat setting, this idea is just silly.
There is absolutely NO REASON to teach our children physics... A) Realize that no matter how many sample problems they work through, kids will still find problems that they have not seen before B) Realize many young scientists will rebel and say nothing can travel faster than light or that mass and energy are the same thing C) Realize that teaching students about inertial frameworks will just make them think they know how to solve problems that involve non-inertial frameworks D) And lastly, realize that this opens up an avenue for propaganda by CERN and the *AAS to try to squash discovery by spreading FUD about how fundamental discoveries require trillion dollar colliders!! Sure it seems like a good idea, but remember the government gave us the ATOM BOMB and most likely doesn't know anything about what the laws of nature are really like.
In my experience, it is confusing C++ pointer/memory allocation rules that primarily drive students away from the language and toward Java/C# in the first place (or, God forbid, away from programming entirely). While Java is a little heavy on object semantics, these allows for the quick implementation of interesting and powerful applications. The very small jump required to go from command line to the GUI in Java compared to the MFC/WPF/Whatever else silliness with C++ is enough to keep students interested. Memory allocation instruction has its place, but that place is quickly diminishing. An introduction class on programming should be fun and empowering rather than needlessly tedious, and I think Java accomplishes this well.
In modern dollars, the Apollo program cost about $135 Billion in 2006 dollars. A mission to mars would be much more expensive and there simply isn't that kind of equity in the private sphere for something with such minimal profit potential.