Software developers are mainly concerned with creating software that works, and that works well.
...even if it may be impossible for the average person to figure out how to use it?
I remember "the good old days", when users were able to remember how to press F1 if they couldn't figure out from looking at the screen what they needed to do to make it go.
I guess too many video games have come out since then, with the usability paradigm of "no manual should be needed".
Interestingly enough, the google query I used to find that returned a ton of links on how to get "XP Mode" running in Windows 7. I would dare to say that usage of Windows XP might be even more prevalent than the statistics suggest.
Sorry, I don't follow you at all here. Driving yourself to the grocery store is wasted time too, but most of us do it anyway because we can't afford chauffeurs, we don't have cars that drive themselves, and we can't afford butlers and personal chefs to go buy our food for us and prepare it for us when we're ready.
So, now, rather than making a desktop GUI fit on a phone, they are trying to fit the phone GUI fit on the desktop. The results are exactly what you would expect. Most of the right-click functionality is gone. In Unity or Gnome3, if you right click on the menu bar across the top, nothing happens. Gone is the right click and "Run As" dialog. Gone is the right click and "add to bar". Basically, the right click has been removed from much of the GUI functionality. Gone are the nested menus. Instead of "gnome-foot"/"start-button"/"K" -> System -> Whatever-You-Want-To-Run, you now have something like this:
The funniest part of this kick-in-the-pants: these are the same guys who ridiculed MacOS back in the day for only having one button on their mouse.
Actually, I have Apple hardware (among others) but prefer Java for most development (since I do use Windows, Linux and OS X as I stated, and Java covers it all).
To save people the trouble of clicking the above link to developer.apple.com, I will quote the relevant text here:
"As of the release of Java for Mac OS X 10.6 Update 3, the Java runtime ported by Apple and that ships with Mac OS X is deprecated. Developers should not rely on the Apple-supplied Java runtime being present in future versions of Mac OS X."
Look at this picture. That was plastered on billboards all over in my town. Are you going to tell me they didn't make that look like an iPhone on purpose ? Nitpicking the individual claims is easy, look at the big picture.
Just because a picture is large doesn't mean it's worth more than a small one. Yes, it looks vaguely similar to an iPhone. It was packaged similarly to an iPhone. Out of curiosity, did you see the package before you purchased your last smartphone? Do you think anyone would be handed a Samsung device by a carrier's reps when they asked for an iPhone? To my eye, the main thing making that device look like an iPhone is the silver band around the outside - other than that, you might as well say that my Atrix looks as much like an iPhone as any other smartphone - they're all pretty much the same, nowadays.
I would very much like an individual to cite a piece of prior art and write of cogent argument why the claims of the issued patents are invalid. It is all too easy to fall prey to hindsight bias when dealing with patents that were filed over a decade ago.
... and this is why it is obvious that the patents are being granted for terms that are much longer than they should be. If non-experts in a particular art are arguing for the obviousness of a particular patent claim, then that claim has outlived its "uniqueness". More importantly, if experts in the art are afraid to create new things because they can't do anything without falling afoul of patent-based litigation, then the patents are stifling creativity, rather than promoting it.
I'm only half kidding here. Patent lawyers have replaced Personal Injury lawyers as the scum of the earth. The entire patent system needs to be re-vamped, legislation passed outlawing patent squatting and technology stifling. And a firing squad for the patent lawyers.
Be careful of what you wish for. Canadians wanted copyright reform and got C-11.
Sorry, I'm not understanding the relationship between "copyright reform" and "the Balanced Refugee Reform Act". It would appear that C-11 is related to immigration, not copyright reform?
The thing is, Microsoft by and large did destroy Java. Certainly it stopped Java from becoming the primary platform for new development during its heyday, which would have made the large majority of third party software platform independent and made Windows irrelevant.
It's a very productive business strategy, other than that whole illegality thing.
Uhm... Android is Java. Dalvik is a clean-room reverse-engineered Java interpreter.
I'm sorry, are you saying that the shape of an AC-to-DC adaptor is patentable? Seriously? It's a block on a cord. Ok, let's do a Google search for your Apple power brick... huh, looks like the majority of responses seem to be about a class-action lawsuit against Apple for selling a power brick that sparks and catches fire. Hmm. Aha! Here we are - Apple sued Media Solutions Holdings for duplicating the look of their power brick - but Media Solutions Holdings isn't Samsung, and that lawsuit was in 2009. Sorry, I'm not understanding where your fanboi-ish complaint about a power brick is coming from.
As for the claims of trademark infringement... Are you complaining about the size and shape of a smartphone? Literally every smartphone on the market can be described generically as "a brick about 1 cm thick, 7 cm wide, and around 12 cm long". Similarly, nearly all of them are either black, white, or silver. Most of the decent ones that don't break after 6 months of normal use have no moving parts, so they can all be described as having a screen and practically nothing else as the front face, as well.
Or did you want to complain about a generic set of icons?
One of the icons pictured as "infringing" is a picture of a white-ish telephone handset, on a green field. You know, like every cellphone in the world has on its face, to indicate the button to push to get the dialer? Yeah, that sounds like a big trademark infringement there. Better sue Nokia, Motorola, HTC, AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile while you're at it - they all use green pictures of telephone handsets to indicate which button to push to make a voice call, too. Come to think of it, so does Microsoft.
Another icon is a speech balloon, indicating (surprise) texting and/or chat. Again, this is on damn near every text-capable phone in the world.
The third icon in that series is a picture of a... what is that, a sunflower? So now a picture of a flower is an infringement? It's not the same flower, it's not the same picture angle, it's not the same amount of flower shown, and one of them has boxes superimposed over it. What, exactly, is infringing here? More to the point, what part of "picture of sunflower" is supposed to make me think "Apple iPhone"?
Moving right along to the fourth pair of pictures showing the "similarities" of these two devices, we have a settings icon. A representation of a gear, or gears. Show me an OS that doesn't use a gear like that. No, really. Win95 uses a gear picture very similar to that for MS-DOS applications. Quick, call Microsoft so they can get a piece of this sideshow!
The notepads pictured in the next pair of icons are similar, yes... but how many different icons can you think of that might indicate some sort of note-jotting application? The only other thing I can think of is a Post-It, and those are trademarked, too.
A bust of a person, in silhouette, to indicate a contact list. MySpace and FaceBook should be able to cut ahead in line for that one, and maybe they can sue Apple too, just for fun.
Gasp! The HORROR! They stole the idea of an using image of a compact disc with a musical note superimposed to indicate a music player application!... or maybe they just figured that it made sense, since a CD is the only way to purchase a physical copy of music any more.
Let's move on to the patent infringement, shall we?
"Patent #7,863,533 is an old-school hardware patent. Titled 'Cantilevered push button having multiple contacts and fulcrums', it covers the volume rocker on the iPhone 3G and 3GS"... and every other device for the past 10 years that has an audio output.
Ok, I'm done with this, it's starting to feel like I'm shooting children's candy in a barrel, or something.
That is why while I say software patents shouldn't be allowed in the first place often you are better off just paying the troll to STFU and go away.
"Once you pay the Danegeld, you are never rid of the Dane."
Makes me wonder why piracy isn't even more rampant than it is, with patents being ~18 years too long and copyrights being 70-100 years too long.
Mickey Mouse is 83, and won't be public domain for at least 15 more years (assuming Disney doesn't pull something else out of their sleeve). How long will be long enough for Disney to have profited from that particular piece of Intellectual Property? Is there a single person on the planet who hasn't been exposed to Mickey Mouse?
Happy Birthday (not the Beatles song, the one you learned as a child whenever it was noticed that someone breathed for another 365 days) has a copyright expiration date of 2016 in the EU, or 2030 in the US. In 2008, Warner collected about $5000 per day ($2 million for the year) in royalties for the song. This is (pardon the pun) patently ridiculous, as the melody was first published in 1918.
According to Cornell University, a sound recording first fixed to a medium prior to 1972, even if unpublished and/or uncopyrighted, will enter the public domain no earlier than 2067.
It's no wonder people feel justified in downloading music for free - no copyrights have expired since 1923, and we'll all be dead by the time anything published before we were born enters the public domain.
This post has a lot of details and documentation concerning copyright, including the fact that it's provided for in the United States Constitution (although the original terms weren't specified any further than "a limited time", and the specifics set down prior to 1790's legislation (14 years with a single 14-year extension) included non-extensible periods of 5 to 7 years).
I know, I know. Copyright isn't Patent. Unfortunately, they are both closely related, both way out of date, and both being ignored by most of the world as the dinosaurs they are. It has gotten to the point where I have just about given up on writing any software, because if it gets popular then I'll have to defend it in court against all the patent vultures who haven't done anything innovative in their company's lifetime.
Patents and copyright are stifling innovation, instead of encouraging it. This is the exact opposite of the stated goals of patent and copyright legislation.
It's time we put them to rest, and figured out a way to make innovation profitable, instead of turning it into a fear-inspiring uncertainty engine.
Some of this may be because their development tools are pretty awful (so many hoops and flags and settings to get something to compile - all because they are so Windows focussed).
Coming from an Apple supporter, that's hilarious. Apple's development process is notoriously complex, and then Apple can slam the lid on your project at their whim.
You owe me a keyboard; I had to grab a different one to post this because I sprayed coffee all over the one I was using.
Microsoft's DOC format has been around for roughly forever and the free suites STILL have trouble saving them properly?
Microsoft Office has issues opening/saving MS Office documents; for instance, try opening a Word97 document with Word2010.
You are obviously a Microsoft shill.
but it's the industry standard for a reason.
Yes; actually, many reasons. One of those reasons is that Microsoft gave it to schools for free, and paid them to teach "office productivity" courses using Microsoft software only. Another reason is that Microsoft threatened OEMs with an inability to legally acquire Microsoft software if they installed anything other than MS Windows and MS Office on pre-installed machines.
Do you live under a rock, or are you really that deluded by the FUD?
And before you go berserk calling me an anti-MSFT troll, you should know that I'm an MCP.
I can buy multiple DVDs for the price of an evening out with the wife
Either "an evening out with your wife" is extremely expensive, or we're not thinking of the same DVDs, or both. I was thinking of new-release DVDs, typically approximately $20 each.
Also, considering the likely cost of manufacturing a DVD, I must take offense at your "10% of the price is 10% of the profit".
How are those numbers obtained? Do they include debt? All debt? Even student loans?
I'm willing to bet there's some sort of disparity in there to skew the numbers a lot harder than they actually are - if nothing else, I would imagine that the majority of "one percenters" in America are white. Let's try a net-worth comparison of "people with a 5-digit household income" and see how the numbers look.
I don't mean to attack your figures, but I'm a white guy who gets to "eat out" twice a month (on payday) - and by "eat out", I mean "my wife and I spend $5 on the dollar menu of the local fast-food joint - together, not each". I couldn't tell you the last time I actually sat down in a restaurant. We're budgeted to the eyeballs, and still not making all our bills (screw the credit card companies, my credit rating doesn't keep the lights on, nor food on the table).
Sorry if I appear to be ranting, but this whole racism thing is really screwing me - I'm a white male with no children. There are governement grants for every gender/race combination except mine, and I'm supposed to feel privileged? I watch people buy steaks with food stamps because they have 6 children they can't afford to feed, while I eat a balanced diet (Ramen Noodles one night, store-brand Mac'n'Cheese the next), and I'm supposed to feel like the system is working?
The root cause of all of these issues is likely the law requiring companies to show their shareholders a profit. A CEO can not only be fired, but can be fined and jailed for not showing a profit.
Things have deteriorated to the point where not only can the execs not make mistakes that cost the company money, but they literally have to not make mistakes that reduce the profit margins.
Corporate entities are a legal fiction that is destroying our economy.
Slashdot Mirror
Software developers are mainly concerned with creating software that works, and that works well.
...even if it may be impossible for the average person to figure out how to use it?
I remember "the good old days", when users were able to remember how to press F1 if they couldn't figure out from looking at the screen what they needed to do to make it go.
I guess too many video games have come out since then, with the usability paradigm of "no manual should be needed".
You asked for a citation of "The majority are still using Windows XP.
Admittedly, the linked article is 8 months old, but here's your citation.
Interestingly enough, the google query I used to find that returned a ton of links on how to get "XP Mode" running in Windows 7. I would dare to say that usage of Windows XP might be even more prevalent than the statistics suggest.
People hate change.
End of story.
People also hate waking up in a house fire. Doesn't mean whatever is hated isn't a Bad Thing.
The only advantage Gnome3 has over Gnome2 is the dynamic number of workspaces.
As far as I can tell, every other "innovation" is just working really hard at turning my non-touchscreen 23" LCD display into a tablet.
Sorry, I don't follow you at all here. Driving yourself to the grocery store is wasted time too, but most of us do it anyway because we can't afford chauffeurs, we don't have cars that drive themselves, and we can't afford butlers and personal chefs to go buy our food for us and prepare it for us when we're ready.
2 words: pizza delivery :)
Im pretty sure Canonical gets no money no matter which hardware you buy, and that the Windows 8 GUI is LESS gpu intensive than 7's.
So no, not THIS.
On the other hand, changing absolutely everything about the interface should generate a metric ton of support calls, eh?
Last I checked, Canonical makes money on support, not software (or hardware, for that matter).
So, now, rather than making a desktop GUI fit on a phone, they are trying to fit the phone GUI fit on the desktop. The results are exactly what you would expect. Most of the right-click functionality is gone. In Unity or Gnome3, if you right click on the menu bar across the top, nothing happens. Gone is the right click and "Run As" dialog. Gone is the right click and "add to bar". Basically, the right click has been removed from much of the GUI functionality. Gone are the nested menus. Instead of "gnome-foot"/"start-button"/"K" -> System -> Whatever-You-Want-To-Run, you now have something like this:
The funniest part of this kick-in-the-pants: these are the same guys who ridiculed MacOS back in the day for only having one button on their mouse.
Gnome doesn't sell hardware, and they give away their SW for free.
Yes... but they sell support, don't they? Confuse the hell out of your user base, increase your support call queues.
The only people your Farmville crops are feeding are the employees at Zynga
... and apparently not all of those...
Have we forgotten a certain sysadmin so quickly?
In other, words, don't bother threatening to sue, yourself.
Have your lawyer do it.
Actually, I have Apple hardware (among others) but prefer Java for most development (since I do use Windows, Linux and OS X as I stated, and Java covers it all).
No, Java doesn't cover it all.
To save people the trouble of clicking the above link to developer.apple.com, I will quote the relevant text here:
"As of the release of Java for Mac OS X 10.6 Update 3, the Java runtime ported by Apple and that ships with Mac OS X is deprecated. Developers should not rely on the Apple-supplied Java runtime being present in future versions of Mac OS X."
So Java works everywhere... except maybe Apple.
Look at this picture. That was plastered on billboards all over in my town. Are you going to tell me they didn't make that look like an iPhone on purpose ? Nitpicking the individual claims is easy, look at the big picture.
Just because a picture is large doesn't mean it's worth more than a small one. Yes, it looks vaguely similar to an iPhone. It was packaged similarly to an iPhone. Out of curiosity, did you see the package before you purchased your last smartphone? Do you think anyone would be handed a Samsung device by a carrier's reps when they asked for an iPhone? To my eye, the main thing making that device look like an iPhone is the silver band around the outside - other than that, you might as well say that my Atrix looks as much like an iPhone as any other smartphone - they're all pretty much the same, nowadays.
I would very much like an individual to cite a piece of prior art and write of cogent argument why the claims of the issued patents are invalid. It is all too easy to fall prey to hindsight bias when dealing with patents that were filed over a decade ago.
... and this is why it is obvious that the patents are being granted for terms that are much longer than they should be. If non-experts in a particular art are arguing for the obviousness of a particular patent claim, then that claim has outlived its "uniqueness". More importantly, if experts in the art are afraid to create new things because they can't do anything without falling afoul of patent-based litigation, then the patents are stifling creativity, rather than promoting it.
I'm only half kidding here. Patent lawyers have replaced Personal Injury lawyers as the scum of the earth. The entire patent system needs to be re-vamped, legislation passed outlawing patent squatting and technology stifling. And a firing squad for the patent lawyers.
Be careful of what you wish for.
Canadians wanted copyright reform and got C-11.
Sorry, I'm not understanding the relationship between "copyright reform" and "the Balanced Refugee Reform Act". It would appear that C-11 is related to immigration, not copyright reform?
The thing is, Microsoft by and large did destroy Java. Certainly it stopped Java from becoming the primary platform for new development during its heyday, which would have made the large majority of third party software platform independent and made Windows irrelevant.
It's a very productive business strategy, other than that whole illegality thing.
Uhm... Android is Java. Dalvik is a clean-room reverse-engineered Java interpreter.
they even copied the power brick
I'm sorry, are you saying that the shape of an AC-to-DC adaptor is patentable? Seriously? It's a block on a cord. Ok, let's do a Google search for your Apple power brick... huh, looks like the majority of responses seem to be about a class-action lawsuit against Apple for selling a power brick that sparks and catches fire. Hmm. Aha! Here we are - Apple sued Media Solutions Holdings for duplicating the look of their power brick - but Media Solutions Holdings isn't Samsung, and that lawsuit was in 2009. Sorry, I'm not understanding where your fanboi-ish complaint about a power brick is coming from.
As for the claims of trademark infringement... Are you complaining about the size and shape of a smartphone? Literally every smartphone on the market can be described generically as "a brick about 1 cm thick, 7 cm wide, and around 12 cm long". Similarly, nearly all of them are either black, white, or silver. Most of the decent ones that don't break after 6 months of normal use have no moving parts, so they can all be described as having a screen and practically nothing else as the front face, as well.
Or did you want to complain about a generic set of icons?
One of the icons pictured as "infringing" is a picture of a white-ish telephone handset, on a green field. You know, like every cellphone in the world has on its face, to indicate the button to push to get the dialer? Yeah, that sounds like a big trademark infringement there. Better sue Nokia, Motorola, HTC, AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile while you're at it - they all use green pictures of telephone handsets to indicate which button to push to make a voice call, too. Come to think of it, so does Microsoft.
Another icon is a speech balloon, indicating (surprise) texting and/or chat. Again, this is on damn near every text-capable phone in the world.
The third icon in that series is a picture of a... what is that, a sunflower? So now a picture of a flower is an infringement? It's not the same flower, it's not the same picture angle, it's not the same amount of flower shown, and one of them has boxes superimposed over it. What, exactly, is infringing here? More to the point, what part of "picture of sunflower" is supposed to make me think "Apple iPhone"?
Moving right along to the fourth pair of pictures showing the "similarities" of these two devices, we have a settings icon. A representation of a gear, or gears. Show me an OS that doesn't use a gear like that. No, really. Win95 uses a gear picture very similar to that for MS-DOS applications. Quick, call Microsoft so they can get a piece of this sideshow!
The notepads pictured in the next pair of icons are similar, yes... but how many different icons can you think of that might indicate some sort of note-jotting application? The only other thing I can think of is a Post-It, and those are trademarked, too.
A bust of a person, in silhouette, to indicate a contact list. MySpace and FaceBook should be able to cut ahead in line for that one, and maybe they can sue Apple too, just for fun.
Gasp! The HORROR! They stole the idea of an using image of a compact disc with a musical note superimposed to indicate a music player application! ... or maybe they just figured that it made sense, since a CD is the only way to purchase a physical copy of music any more.
Let's move on to the patent infringement, shall we?
"Patent #7,863,533 is an old-school hardware patent. Titled 'Cantilevered push button having multiple contacts and fulcrums', it covers the volume rocker on the iPhone 3G and 3GS" ... and every other device for the past 10 years that has an audio output.
Ok, I'm done with this, it's starting to feel like I'm shooting children's candy in a barrel, or something.
That is why while I say software patents shouldn't be allowed in the first place often you are better off just paying the troll to STFU and go away.
"Once you pay the Danegeld, you are never rid of the Dane."
Makes me wonder why piracy isn't even more rampant than it is, with patents being ~18 years too long and copyrights being 70-100 years too long.
Mickey Mouse is 83 , and won't be public domain for at least 15 more years (assuming Disney doesn't pull something else out of their sleeve). How long will be long enough for Disney to have profited from that particular piece of Intellectual Property? Is there a single person on the planet who hasn't been exposed to Mickey Mouse?
Happy Birthday (not the Beatles song, the one you learned as a child whenever it was noticed that someone breathed for another 365 days) has a copyright expiration date of 2016 in the EU, or 2030 in the US. In 2008, Warner collected about $5000 per day ($2 million for the year) in royalties for the song. This is (pardon the pun) patently ridiculous, as the melody was first published in 1918.
According to Cornell University, a sound recording first fixed to a medium prior to 1972, even if unpublished and/or uncopyrighted, will enter the public domain no earlier than 2067.
It's no wonder people feel justified in downloading music for free - no copyrights have expired since 1923, and we'll all be dead by the time anything published before we were born enters the public domain.
This post has a lot of details and documentation concerning copyright, including the fact that it's provided for in the United States Constitution (although the original terms weren't specified any further than "a limited time", and the specifics set down prior to 1790's legislation (14 years with a single 14-year extension) included non-extensible periods of 5 to 7 years).
I know, I know. Copyright isn't Patent. Unfortunately, they are both closely related, both way out of date, and both being ignored by most of the world as the dinosaurs they are. It has gotten to the point where I have just about given up on writing any software, because if it gets popular then I'll have to defend it in court against all the patent vultures who haven't done anything innovative in their company's lifetime.
Patents and copyright are stifling innovation, instead of encouraging it. This is the exact opposite of the stated goals of patent and copyright legislation.
It's time we put them to rest, and figured out a way to make innovation profitable, instead of turning it into a fear-inspiring uncertainty engine.
Some of this may be because their development tools are pretty awful (so many hoops and flags and settings to get something to compile - all because they are so Windows focussed).
Coming from an Apple supporter, that's hilarious. Apple's development process is notoriously complex, and then Apple can slam the lid on your project at their whim.
You owe me a keyboard; I had to grab a different one to post this because I sprayed coffee all over the one I was using.
Macbook Pro
found your problem.
Microsoft makes more money from software written for Apple computers than Apple does - primarily because of the MS Office Suite.
Try again.
Microsoft's DOC format has been around for roughly forever and the free suites STILL have trouble saving them properly?
Microsoft Office has issues opening/saving MS Office documents; for instance, try opening a Word97 document with Word2010.
You are obviously a Microsoft shill.
but it's the industry standard for a reason.
Yes; actually, many reasons. One of those reasons is that Microsoft gave it to schools for free, and paid them to teach "office productivity" courses using Microsoft software only. Another reason is that Microsoft threatened OEMs with an inability to legally acquire Microsoft software if they installed anything other than MS Windows and MS Office on pre-installed machines.
Do you live under a rock, or are you really that deluded by the FUD?
And before you go berserk calling me an anti-MSFT troll, you should know that I'm an MCP.
I can buy multiple DVDs for the price of an evening out with the wife
Either "an evening out with your wife" is extremely expensive, or we're not thinking of the same DVDs, or both. I was thinking of new-release DVDs, typically approximately $20 each.
Also, considering the likely cost of manufacturing a DVD, I must take offense at your "10% of the price is 10% of the profit".
How are those numbers obtained?
Do they include debt?
All debt?
Even student loans?
I'm willing to bet there's some sort of disparity in there to skew the numbers a lot harder than they actually are - if nothing else, I would imagine that the majority of "one percenters" in America are white. Let's try a net-worth comparison of "people with a 5-digit household income" and see how the numbers look.
I don't mean to attack your figures, but I'm a white guy who gets to "eat out" twice a month (on payday) - and by "eat out", I mean "my wife and I spend $5 on the dollar menu of the local fast-food joint - together, not each". I couldn't tell you the last time I actually sat down in a restaurant. We're budgeted to the eyeballs, and still not making all our bills (screw the credit card companies, my credit rating doesn't keep the lights on, nor food on the table).
Sorry if I appear to be ranting, but this whole racism thing is really screwing me - I'm a white male with no children. There are governement grants for every gender/race combination except mine, and I'm supposed to feel privileged? I watch people buy steaks with food stamps because they have 6 children they can't afford to feed, while I eat a balanced diet (Ramen Noodles one night, store-brand Mac'n'Cheese the next), and I'm supposed to feel like the system is working?
Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
The root cause of all of these issues is likely the law requiring companies to show their shareholders a profit. A CEO can not only be fired, but can be fined and jailed for not showing a profit.
Things have deteriorated to the point where not only can the execs not make mistakes that cost the company money, but they literally have to not make mistakes that reduce the profit margins.
Corporate entities are a legal fiction that is destroying our economy.
An article saying exactly this.