Well excuse me Mr. light skinned. Notice how I put the question mark at the end, ie - I didn't know your age. How the am I supposed to know all that information you posted above from your initial one-liner statement? What am I the great shish-ka-bob? I seriously don't remember MS being seen as evil in the early days. Maybe I hung out with the wrong crowd, those ne'er do wells over in PC-ville.
Also, can we please lay off the "poor apple" bullshit? It wasn't Microsoft that killed the mac the first time around, pummeling apples sales. No, it was because they were way the fuck overpriced and they didn't have any value in the market. PCs could do it cheaper, point blank.
Oh, and I like the "denying that, you support it". A Nice black and white statement. Complete bullshit. But nice.
That was a great argument and I see exactly what you are saying. I do see innovation being introduced in Linux and that makes me happy. I do see Linux surpassing Windows one day, but on that day Microsoft will proclaim Linux the greatest thing ever and reverse course. They are pretty slick. BUT eventually all things come to an end, especially undeserved positions of power. It's one thing to dominate a market on merit, it's another to dominate a market using a monopoly and strong arm tactics. Those tactics are coming back to bite MS in the ass these days.
I can see the writing on the wall, Windows is not the juggernaut it used to be. I just wanted to explain why windows developers do what we do. Many on here see us as either weak developers using VB to funk up a pathetic office app or simply industry shills. But we have motivations like every other man and woman.
When was Microsoft NOT "Evil Satan"? I'd go so far as to say that Xerox, IBM and Apple would disagree with you on many levels.
Doubt it. Apple remembers when IBM was the "evil satan" and Microsoft was the small shop that sold DOS. Microsoft was a piss ant company then. But I guess that's before your time? Basically if you were born in the 70s you remember that IBM was the giant monolith along with DEC/Sperry Univac and Microsoft was the fresh face on the block.
As for Xerox, well APPLE stole from them, not MS. So at least get your stories straight..
Replace company names today, rinse, wash, and repeat.
There will always be a hated company. MS just happens to be the current flavor. Probably because they are the status quo. The other companies you mention are no more ethical in anyway whatsoever. They'd kill their proverbial grandmother if it meant a nickel raise on the stock ticker.
Sure but that same rarity that makes the FORTRAN programmer wages higher also limits his/her opportunities. He doesn't see the same job opportunities as the.Net programmer. If that's acceptable then so be it, but it's something to weigh in a decision regarding the technology path you choose.
I think people choose the path of least resistance usually, if they grow up in a linux/unix shop then they get used to it and Windows scares them. And of course vice versa. Then after 5-10 years in they realize that being a programmer means being able to program ALL computers and understanding ALL language/environment paradigms (or at least as many as possible). This is where the true big bucks come in. When you can jump from C++ on Linux to C# on Windows to FORTRAN on a mainframe, thats where the real money is. The problem solver, not the technology specialist.
If you don't understand that I have a fairly comprehensive explanation for you to download.
Yes but there is a difference between a technology causing harm to the industry and causing harm to you personally. For instance if I'm a developer working on Windows I won't be causing myself any harm. In fact I'd probably be helping myself.
A lot of "us" windows developers have been programming on it since before it became the "EVIL SATAN" often portrayed here on slashdot and make an excellent living at it. Can I program on Linux? Sure, I do so all the time at home, programming embedded devices and robots and I've released open source software under GPL license. Maybe one day I'll be able to work on them full time. But right now I work on the "Ford" of the industry. It's not unwise and it's not unethical. It's just reality. We deal with the reality of the industry, and that reality is that Windows dominates the market so it makes economic sense to use it.
I don't align my personal feelings with a technology, it's not wise.
No doubt. When I was younger I used to not believe this, thinking the influence was minor and I was adult enough to maintain my own identity. I listened to violent music, watched violent TV/movies constantly, and shocker.. I ended up doing violent things, spending more time then I would care to elaborate on in jail.
Obviously this violence that I created wasn't just because of video games or music or TV. But to say it didn't play a part would be naive. Art imitates life imitates art. The simple fact is, when you surround yourself with violent images you become desensitized. Combine this with a teenage brain who's brain patterns mimick a crazy person and you get some really out of touch people.
I'm not saying rid the world of violent images. I'm saying KIDS, wake the fuck up and realize that your mind isn't some island fortress and things around you really do influence you in both positive and negative ways. It's up to you to decide what to let in and what to discard.
I don't think it's a plan of evil intent. More like:
1. write software 2. sell to users who actually spend money on software 3. profit
Seriously, if you ran a for profit software company and wanted to keep your job, wouldn't you strive to create profit? Giving away software in this particular case would not help their profits in any way whatsoever. So is this really a surprise? It's not an "evil thing", just the reality of the system. When giving away software becomes profitable I'm sure they'll lock that down. Until that freezing day in hell we wont see much Linux support from MS.
yes, thats what it means to me to. So how is using a new feature, generics, backwards compatible? That was my original question.
I got the answer below though - you can compile using a new compiler that supports generics and then run them using an older VM because the bytecode is compatible.
It's just a confusing statement in the review. I wish Java freaks wouldn't jump the gun anytime a person questioned the language. Relax, you still have a job.
Uhm, can someone explain to me how NEW features of a language can be backwards compatible?
Can I create generics in Java 1.1? If not then how exactly is their generics implementation backwards compatible? Call me crazy but I'm a bit skeptical. I just don't see how this can be done in ANY language. Just because you can run multiple versions of the runtime on the same machine doesn't mean that your new code is backwards compatible.
Question: how do you fly a blimp in wind? Answer: you don't.
Blimps are slow and fragile and take up a lot of space just to carry a small payload.
What they need is something that is durable that can enter a structure and look around, this thing would do nicely because it's blades are enclosed and it's relatively simple mechanics compared to a helicopter (although this is changing on small R/C helicopters with counter rotating blades and built in IMUs for stability).
Although I favor small government and less involvement I'd like to play the devil's advocate here.
The entire system of monetary exchange in the US depends on the US free market, which is guaranteed (as much as it can be) by the US administration, it's real world resources such as gold and platinum, and the strong arm of control via police/military. One could argue that without this system your virtual trade would be impossible. Now if you base the ENTIRE transaction on virtual goods, such as linden dollars, then I can see why it would have no say whatsoever.
What it comes down to, as uncivilized as it sounds, is that might equals right in this world. You don't pay the "King's" taxes in any country that demands it and you will find yourself in jail or worse. Not right, just reality.
I'm convinced the problem is not a matter of money (they could make more money by running more trains- every time I've been on the train, it's been PACKED- one time, they had people sitting on their luggage in the aisles), but dated thinking with regards to how trains are dispatched/controlled/routed.
I'd probably agree, I've been on commuter trains coming out of DC at 80mph only to be slowed to a crawl behind a freight train.
In Japan the freight trains run at night and all commuter trains during the day. That's one possible option for speeding up commuter and passenger traffic. Another might be separate railways designed for high-speed travel. The point is new thinking needs to take place.
They can start at making sure it can actually make a phone call. Seems most phones fall flat these days when it comes to anything related to actually communicating via voice. I can text, I can send pictures, I can send videos, I can get videos, I can get music, I can get interweb, I can get.. anything but a reliable fucking phone call!
You don't get 300,000 miles of use out of a hummer.
Tell that to the US Army. I was driving hummers in 92 in the Army and I'm pretty sure that although some are new, a lot are not. The Army won't throw away a lollipop stick if they think they can get just one more lick!
During the trials of the hummer it was driven by the DoD over 600k miles. With proper maintanence the hummer can last to 300k. But most people treat their vehicles like shit, hence they won't get the same lifetime mileage.
Hummer never impressed me, it was slow and built like a huge hunk of beef. Good for the US army, but hardly an everyday driver.
Since when does manufacturing cost/cost over life equal friendly to the environment?
Uh, ever since manufacturing took energy to produce? Where does that energy come from? If you live in the world I live in most likely it came from a Non-green source such as a coal fueled power-plant.
Also, maintenence means replacing materials, those materials are made in plants that use said energy.
It's the really big picture we need to accept, that all of these energy uses are related and we can only improve our situation by using less energy per person and using more renewable sources. Having everyone drive a Prius doesn't solve the problem.
Ubuntu is Debian without all those useful packages. I've tried Ubuntu, then realized it's just a slimmed down Debian and everything useful was missing. I'll stick with Debian.
I think the real advantage the Ubuntu distro spotlighted was the "marketing" aspect, convincing people that it was the friendliest distro around with shiny happy naked people using it. I mean hell, it's gotta be good if you can't even wait to put your clothes on before using it.
This is probably true of all college students studying computer science or similiar. They lack the understanding of the industry and what will be expected of them. Talent is great, but it's worthless if it can't be managed in a team environment. Sure you can wear shorts and black shirts, staggering in at 10:30, BUT ONLY if you get your shit done on time and done right. Programming is not about 14 hour grind sessions. Schedule management, resource management, and communication are imo the three most important things in development.
Developers by nature are pretty independent folks, so it's a constant struggle. I myself have damaged my career with my flippant attitude and disregard for authority, so I say to all the young up and comers - learn the discipline and save yourself some hassle.
I'm not sure if the latest version of Google Earth can display moving maps, I have yet to see that, but you can get.kmz files with overlays of weather data pretty easily for the US and EU. Just search for.kmz files using intellicast data for your local area or something similiar. There are so many there's no point in me posting a link, I have doppler from intellicast and IR cloud data coming in from NOAA in google earth myself, comes in handy. Being new to my area I find myself in google earth quite a lot.
Seems like a good idea, but it also seems like it would give the device manufacturers an out. "I'm sorry, but we don't officially support the linux operating system". This way they get drivers written for them for free, and don't need to provide any tech support for the device to those users who purchase it for linux. Anyone else see this happening?
As opposed to the current situation where device manufacturers say "I m sorry but we don't officially support linux" and offer no drivers whatsoever?
I'll take the unsupported drivers for 1000 alex.. and your mother is a whore trebbeck!
Only computing can relieve the 110% workload you talk about. If the pilot can remove some of his attention from keeping the craft airborne and concentrate instead on fighting this will be an advantage. I doubt many pilots would rather concentrate on airspeed, angle of attack, wingload, applied power AND fight all at the same time. More likely they'd rather put the aircraft into a position to kill the opponent using any means necessary using as much concentration as possible.
Besides, today's fighter planes wouldnt even fly without computing, this is just an evolution of the same idea. Eventually they will remove the human weakness all together inside the craft. Of course then the human weakness will be in the software, you can't entirely remove human mistakes, just try to remove them within reason.
Being a pilot myself and also a person interested in UAVs I feel conflicted. I realize that computing can remove a lot of danger, but I like the hands on feel of flying a small airplane. It's my little boat in the sky.
Oh it may still trigger it if the weight is high enough, it contains enough metal, etc. It depends on the mine itself. My real point was that if a tank can't handle the blast then a robot probably won't fair too well either. It all depends on circumstances. I just don't think it would be cost effective to try and defeat mines with this robot.
No. Simple fact is a lot of those mines in the DMZ were designed to stop tracked vehicles, not foot soldiers, although I'm sure a foot soldier would fare much worse against one if somehow triggered. There is a big difference between a small anti-personnel mine and an anti-tank mine (Hey uncle sam, you can't say I never learned anything in the Army!).
But that being said this robot is designed to patrol a known area where the users know the locations of the mines, because they planted them. The robot is created to take men out of harms way and serve as an ever watchful eye. If an attack comes this is not the last defense, only the first.
Slashdot Mirror
Supporting Microsoft is supporting illegal, anticompetitive behavior, period, the end.
Yup! And doing heroin support terrorism..
Well excuse me Mr. light skinned. Notice how I put the question mark at the end, ie - I didn't know your age. How the am I supposed to know all that information you posted above from your initial one-liner statement? What am I the great shish-ka-bob? I seriously don't remember MS being seen as evil in the early days. Maybe I hung out with the wrong crowd, those ne'er do wells over in PC-ville.
Also, can we please lay off the "poor apple" bullshit? It wasn't Microsoft that killed the mac the first time around, pummeling apples sales. No, it was because they were way the fuck overpriced and they didn't have any value in the market. PCs could do it cheaper, point blank.
Oh, and I like the "denying that, you support it". A Nice black and white statement. Complete bullshit. But nice.
That was a great argument and I see exactly what you are saying. I do see innovation being introduced in Linux and that makes me happy. I do see Linux surpassing Windows one day, but on that day Microsoft will proclaim Linux the greatest thing ever and reverse course. They are pretty slick. BUT eventually all things come to an end, especially undeserved positions of power. It's one thing to dominate a market on merit, it's another to dominate a market using a monopoly and strong arm tactics. Those tactics are coming back to bite MS in the ass these days.
I can see the writing on the wall, Windows is not the juggernaut it used to be. I just wanted to explain why windows developers do what we do. Many on here see us as either weak developers using VB to funk up a pathetic office app or simply industry shills. But we have motivations like every other man and woman.
When was Microsoft NOT "Evil Satan"? I'd go so far as to say that Xerox, IBM and Apple would disagree with you on many levels.
Doubt it. Apple remembers when IBM was the "evil satan" and Microsoft was the small shop that sold DOS. Microsoft was a piss ant company then. But I guess that's before your time? Basically if you were born in the 70s you remember that IBM was the giant monolith along with DEC/Sperry Univac and Microsoft was the fresh face on the block.
As for Xerox, well APPLE stole from them, not MS. So at least get your stories straight..
Replace company names today, rinse, wash, and repeat.
There will always be a hated company. MS just happens to be the current flavor. Probably because they are the status quo. The other companies you mention are no more ethical in anyway whatsoever. They'd kill their proverbial grandmother if it meant a nickel raise on the stock ticker.
Actually the Swiss Franc still exists.
Also, just curious - why should someone's stupidity "seriously concern" me?
Sure but that same rarity that makes the FORTRAN programmer wages higher also limits his/her opportunities. He doesn't see the same job opportunities as the .Net programmer. If that's acceptable then so be it, but it's something to weigh in a decision regarding the technology path you choose.
I think people choose the path of least resistance usually, if they grow up in a linux/unix shop then they get used to it and Windows scares them. And of course vice versa. Then after 5-10 years in they realize that being a programmer means being able to program ALL computers and understanding ALL language/environment paradigms (or at least as many as possible). This is where the true big bucks come in. When you can jump from C++ on Linux to C# on Windows to FORTRAN on a mainframe, thats where the real money is. The problem solver, not the technology specialist.
If you don't understand that I have a fairly comprehensive explanation for you to download.
Yes but there is a difference between a technology causing harm to the industry and causing harm to you personally. For instance if I'm a developer working on Windows I won't be causing myself any harm. In fact I'd probably be helping myself.
A lot of "us" windows developers have been programming on it since before it became the "EVIL SATAN" often portrayed here on slashdot and make an excellent living at it. Can I program on Linux? Sure, I do so all the time at home, programming embedded devices and robots and I've released open source software under GPL license. Maybe one day I'll be able to work on them full time. But right now I work on the "Ford" of the industry. It's not unwise and it's not unethical. It's just reality. We deal with the reality of the industry, and that reality is that Windows dominates the market so it makes economic sense to use it.
I don't align my personal feelings with a technology, it's not wise.
No doubt. When I was younger I used to not believe this, thinking the influence was minor and I was adult enough to maintain my own identity. I listened to violent music, watched violent TV/movies constantly, and shocker.. I ended up doing violent things, spending more time then I would care to elaborate on in jail.
Obviously this violence that I created wasn't just because of video games or music or TV. But to say it didn't play a part would be naive. Art imitates life imitates art. The simple fact is, when you surround yourself with violent images you become desensitized. Combine this with a teenage brain who's brain patterns mimick a crazy person and you get some really out of touch people.
I'm not saying rid the world of violent images. I'm saying KIDS, wake the fuck up and realize that your mind isn't some island fortress and things around you really do influence you in both positive and negative ways. It's up to you to decide what to let in and what to discard.
I don't think it's a plan of evil intent. More like:
1. write software
2. sell to users who actually spend money on software
3. profit
Seriously, if you ran a for profit software company and wanted to keep your job, wouldn't you strive to create profit? Giving away software in this particular case would not help their profits in any way whatsoever. So is this really a surprise? It's not an "evil thing", just the reality of the system. When giving away software becomes profitable I'm sure they'll lock that down. Until that freezing day in hell we wont see much Linux support from MS.
yes, thats what it means to me to. So how is using a new feature, generics, backwards compatible? That was my original question.
I got the answer below though - you can compile using a new compiler that supports generics and then run them using an older VM because the bytecode is compatible.
It's just a confusing statement in the review. I wish Java freaks wouldn't jump the gun anytime a person questioned the language. Relax, you still have a job.
Uhm, can someone explain to me how NEW features of a language can be backwards compatible?
Can I create generics in Java 1.1? If not then how exactly is their generics implementation backwards compatible? Call me crazy but I'm a bit skeptical. I just don't see how this can be done in ANY language. Just because you can run multiple versions of the runtime on the same machine doesn't mean that your new code is backwards compatible.
Question: how do you fly a blimp in wind?
Answer: you don't.
Blimps are slow and fragile and take up a lot of space just to carry a small payload.
What they need is something that is durable that can enter a structure and look around, this thing would do nicely because it's blades are enclosed and it's relatively simple mechanics compared to a helicopter (although this is changing on small R/C helicopters with counter rotating blades and built in IMUs for stability).
Although I favor small government and less involvement I'd like to play the devil's advocate here.
The entire system of monetary exchange in the US depends on the US free market, which is guaranteed (as much as it can be) by the US administration, it's real world resources such as gold and platinum, and the strong arm of control via police/military. One could argue that without this system your virtual trade would be impossible. Now if you base the ENTIRE transaction on virtual goods, such as linden dollars, then I can see why it would have no say whatsoever.
What it comes down to, as uncivilized as it sounds, is that might equals right in this world. You don't pay the "King's" taxes in any country that demands it and you will find yourself in jail or worse. Not right, just reality.
I'm convinced the problem is not a matter of money (they could make more money by running more trains- every time I've been on the train, it's been PACKED- one time, they had people sitting on their luggage in the aisles), but dated thinking with regards to how trains are dispatched/controlled/routed.
I'd probably agree, I've been on commuter trains coming out of DC at 80mph only to be slowed to a crawl behind a freight train.
In Japan the freight trains run at night and all commuter trains during the day. That's one possible option for speeding up commuter and passenger traffic. Another might be separate railways designed for high-speed travel. The point is new thinking needs to take place.
They can start at making sure it can actually make a phone call. Seems most phones fall flat these days when it comes to anything related to actually communicating via voice. I can text, I can send pictures, I can send videos, I can get videos, I can get music, I can get interweb, I can get.. anything but a reliable fucking phone call!
You don't get 300,000 miles of use out of a hummer.
Tell that to the US Army. I was driving hummers in 92 in the Army and I'm pretty sure that although some are new, a lot are not. The Army won't throw away a lollipop stick if they think they can get just one more lick!
During the trials of the hummer it was driven by the DoD over 600k miles. With proper maintanence the hummer can last to 300k. But most people treat their vehicles like shit, hence they won't get the same lifetime mileage.
Hummer never impressed me, it was slow and built like a huge hunk of beef. Good for the US army, but hardly an everyday driver.
Since when does manufacturing cost/cost over life equal friendly to the environment?
Uh, ever since manufacturing took energy to produce? Where does that energy come from? If you live in the world I live in most likely it came from a Non-green source such as a coal fueled power-plant.
Also, maintenence means replacing materials, those materials are made in plants that use said energy.
It's the really big picture we need to accept, that all of these energy uses are related and we can only improve our situation by using less energy per person and using more renewable sources. Having everyone drive a Prius doesn't solve the problem.
Ubuntu is Debian without all those useful packages. I've tried Ubuntu, then realized it's just a slimmed down Debian and everything useful was missing. I'll stick with Debian.
I think the real advantage the Ubuntu distro spotlighted was the "marketing" aspect, convincing people that it was the friendliest distro around with shiny happy naked people using it. I mean hell, it's gotta be good if you can't even wait to put your clothes on before using it.
This is probably true of all college students studying computer science or similiar. They lack the understanding of the industry and what will be expected of them. Talent is great, but it's worthless if it can't be managed in a team environment. Sure you can wear shorts and black shirts, staggering in at 10:30, BUT ONLY if you get your shit done on time and done right. Programming is not about 14 hour grind sessions. Schedule management, resource management, and communication are imo the three most important things in development.
Developers by nature are pretty independent folks, so it's a constant struggle. I myself have damaged my career with my flippant attitude and disregard for authority, so I say to all the young up and comers - learn the discipline and save yourself some hassle.
I'm not sure if the latest version of Google Earth can display moving maps, I have yet to see that, but you can get .kmz files with overlays of weather data pretty easily for the US and EU. Just search for .kmz files using intellicast data for your local area or something similiar. There are so many there's no point in me posting a link, I have doppler from intellicast and IR cloud data coming in from NOAA in google earth myself, comes in handy. Being new to my area I find myself in google earth quite a lot.
How often do you see someone towing their boat trailer uphill, really, not in a commercial?
;)
Uh, everytime they pull the boat out of the water it's up hill. Otherwise they'd be under water
Seems like a good idea, but it also seems like it would give the device manufacturers an out. "I'm sorry, but we don't officially support the linux operating system". This way they get drivers written for them for free, and don't need to provide any tech support for the device to those users who purchase it for linux. Anyone else see this happening?
As opposed to the current situation where device manufacturers say "I
m sorry but we don't officially support linux" and offer no drivers whatsoever?
I'll take the unsupported drivers for 1000 alex.. and your mother is a whore trebbeck!
Only computing can relieve the 110% workload you talk about. If the pilot can remove some of his attention from keeping the craft airborne and concentrate instead on fighting this will be an advantage. I doubt many pilots would rather concentrate on airspeed, angle of attack, wingload, applied power AND fight all at the same time. More likely they'd rather put the aircraft into a position to kill the opponent using any means necessary using as much concentration as possible.
Besides, today's fighter planes wouldnt even fly without computing, this is just an evolution of the same idea. Eventually they will remove the human weakness all together inside the craft. Of course then the human weakness will be in the software, you can't entirely remove human mistakes, just try to remove them within reason.
Being a pilot myself and also a person interested in UAVs I feel conflicted. I realize that computing can remove a lot of danger, but I like the hands on feel of flying a small airplane. It's my little boat in the sky.
Oh it may still trigger it if the weight is high enough, it contains enough metal, etc. It depends on the mine itself. My real point was that if a tank can't handle the blast then a robot probably won't fair too well either. It all depends on circumstances. I just don't think it would be cost effective to try and defeat mines with this robot.
No. Simple fact is a lot of those mines in the DMZ were designed to stop tracked vehicles, not foot soldiers, although I'm sure a foot soldier would fare much worse against one if somehow triggered. There is a big difference between a small anti-personnel mine and an anti-tank mine (Hey uncle sam, you can't say I never learned anything in the Army!).
But that being said this robot is designed to patrol a known area where the users know the locations of the mines, because they planted them. The robot is created to take men out of harms way and serve as an ever watchful eye. If an attack comes this is not the last defense, only the first.