Except HTML5 (as it is hyped by various browsers) isn't a standard that has any basis in reality. It's HTML5 plus some mishmash of other recent technologies, none of it consistently implemented. Simple example would be the video codec support but it extends to other things. Notice how every browser site has HTML5 demos and none of the damn things work properly in other allegedly HTML5 compliant browsers.
In addition, assuming tools did improve to the point that they could work around browser differences and reliably produce Flash like content, why do you assume it would be any more efficient than Flash was. Fill a page with a couple of animated "flash" like clips, and 10 open tabs and let's see what happens to your CPU then.
Actually they ruined it because one of those "security" features was a half assed kludge of it's most critical feature - email reading.
Requiring a user to bridge their phone to their tablet just to read email through a dumb proxy has to be one of the most monumentally stupid design decisions I've ever heard about. The cited reason of security makes little sense. If they wanted to secure email they could have encrypted it on the device and put a strong PIN / password / gesture protection over the top. It is far more likely their server and/or software was so baroque that porting it to the playbook proved more difficult than they thought.
Assuming they overcome these problems, perhaps they can salvage something from this mess. They still have a reputation as being enterprise friendly so assuming the PlayBook fixes its most egregious issues it may yet find itself being used in places that would run a mile from iPad or Android devices.
Well that sounds more like an artifact of your system than just Java by itself. I can typically run 2 eclipse instances and one complex RCP app (the one I'm currently developing) in 3.5GB 32-bit Windows before things start to chug.
It's clear from the photos that these stones are clearly visible (they're green with a light in a middle) so someone could choose to walk around them if they wished. Though anyone landing their foot on one is hardly going to care that their foot sunk a miniscule amount.
Implementing every damned activity and intent in Android would be a herculean task and even getting two activities residing in separate processes to correctly handover would be non trivial. Making a single dalvik instance run and execute against a subset of functionality is obviously a lot easier. It doesn't preclude Android support expanding, but I don't see it as an admission RIM bit off more than they could chew by promising support.
But it does raise a question of what the hell they're doing trying to be compatible with Android at all. If RIM supports Android apps, why should 3rd parties bother writing native apps at all? It's OS/2 vs Windows all over again. OS/2 2.1 and OS/2 Warp 3.0 allowed users to run Windows 3.x as a subsystem so what was the net result? Very few native apps and the slow death of the platform. You need an growing community of interested parties, not some blow-ins with little vested interest in the platform if it is to survive.
I think you would have to be working with massive datasets to experience garbage collection freezes on the client side. Modern VMs don't even freeze the world while they gc.
Java isn't slow. Like any runtime it has a startup cost. Once that's over with it works perfectly well for even large apps. Eclipse for example. Aside from that I doubt you'd even know what language an app was running in unless you went poking around in its directory, or the app gave itself away (e.g. by using metal theme).
A better idea would be for Mozilla to take the approach Google are following and interfere with the exploit making it unlikely anyone would be attached to a site long enough for it to matter. They should (working in tandem with other browser vendors) give notice that SSL & TLS 1.0 are deprecated, that the protocols will be active for 12 months and then disabled thereafter and require a user to manually reenable them. That might put some pressure on sites to actually upgrade.
In the meantime they can work with Oracle to produce a fix for the Java plugin.
Well it is lose-win if you don't actually want Amazon knowing your business. If it's optional then fine, if it's always on or kicks in when it feels like it or is even on by default then that sucks.
I have to question why anyone would boycott Apple and then purchase an equally restrictive device which locks them into a single store. Anyone who is interested in a tablet which allows them to choose where they buy content from should buy something else or wait for this thing to be cracked.
For example, I bought a groupon for 50% off a winery tour. The tour resulted in a purchase of a case of wine from the winery. While I'm sure not everyone on the tour bought that much wine, the groupon got the winery exactly what they wanted: Lots of people in the winery at an off-peak time that they could then up-sell to. For them the groupon worked very well.
I think everyone gets it just fine. Groupon will not survive on winery tours or the other Daily Deal service industry dregs (eyebrow waxes, fish pedicures etc.) which is what their site is reduced to once they've slashed and burned their way through other kinds of businesses.
The main problem with Groupon is the "deals" suck so badly for businesses that once they've burned through all good will in a region the only way to keep generating revenue is to expand into another. Hence Groupon has hyperinflated itself beyond the major US cities, into smaller cities, into Europe and beyond. It attracts local interest in its service for a while before the offers turn to shit. And when the deals turn to shit people lose interest in the service altogether. It's obviously all going to come crashing down at some point. I'll be surprised if Groupon lasts more than a year in its current form the way it's going.
The basics are the underwriters pay the company floating for the stock and then they try and sell the stock for what they can get. So it is obviously in the underwriter's interests to price the stock properly in the first place. The problem I see for the underwriters is everyone knows what a dog this company is so how do you price it. It appears most trading activity will be short selling - predicting the price will tank which seems like a reasonable guess. I expect the underwriters would not want to fund the floatation or would pay bargain basement prices and slap on a huge margin to cover their asses when the stock slumps or the offering is unfulfilled.
As for the value of IPO itself, it really depends on the company doesn't it. Look at Google's shares. They started at $100 and they went up to nearly at $750 at one point. Even in the middle of an economic slump they're still over $500.
B&N aren't committed to openness, they're just incompetent at security. Though perhaps if Amazon does spew out a locked down device it might behove B&N to produce a relatively vanilla Android 3.x device which does espouse openness, and also provides access to music & streaming from Google.
No, Amazon's competition is absolutely Apple. If it were just B&N they'd shove out an updated Kindle and be done with it. Instead it's obvious whatever tablet they put out will be designed to consume content from a range of Amazon services including books, music, video and apps. i.e. it's competing against Apple. And because Amazon is the go-to shopping site running up to christmas you can guarantee they're going to get a lot of eyeballs perusing & buying their device too.
I don't think it's unrealistic if Amazon expected to sell 10 million of these things this year alone.
1) And my point applies to any country where software patents are enforced. Sell a codec pack. Though I expect most Linux users have the nous to obtain a codec for free and virtually every other OS would ship with one in it, or one would be obtainable for nothing.
2) From the DivX website - "The DivX Plus® Codec Pack includes everything you need to play DivX® or MKV files in third-party applications, like Windows Media Player.". Or in a web browser assuming the browser bothered to use what was available to it.
3) The fact is that a browser could maintain a whitelist / blacklist of codecs and if any particular codec vendor wished to extricate themselves from a blacklist, or get onto the whitelist the browser vendor could provide a mechanism to do it. Heck, the browser could one step further and treat a video tag as a specialized NPAPI plugin that declares what containers & codecs it supported and implementing a particular scripting API and callback. Supply the VP8 plugin with the browser and then let the vendors implement additional video plugins in any way they saw fit.
The fact is that browser have chosen to artificially limit the usefulness of video tag and it sucks.
1. It's perfectly legal in most non US countries and not beyond the realms of possibility that commercial dists sell a codec pack for a few dollars.
2. DiVX amongst others offers a H264 codec for nothing. Perhaps if demand for a Linux codec were so great they'd even supply one of those.
3. There are very precise definitions of what H264 should do at various profiles and levels. If a particular codec didn't meet those requirements it could be blacklisted.
I have no objection to VP8 being the "default" codec but to artificially deny other codecs even when they're sitting right there in the OS is absurd. Especially H264 which is the defacto format for hardware devices and will continue to be regardless of VP8 or not.
As long as people are required to pay for the use of the codec, it can't be in Firefox or any other free browser without somebody infringing on the patent. Which is the problem.
Video shouldn't have to be in the browser. Every modern OS has a perfectly usable media framework for apps to use and in the vast majority of cases it already contains an H264 codec or permits one to be obtained.
Cygwin is basically user land tools. It doesn't help if you want to mount something like an NFS partition. I assume SUA also has hooks into Windows services for Unix clients. That said Cygwin is probably adequate for most things. Admins could also consider running a VM on Windows, or even install something like CoLinux.
I doubt telling people to "just use Linux" is a reasonable solution though. If it were that simple they wouldn't be bothering with SUA in the first place.
Yes actually I can "pretend" it's not a ponzi scam because it is not a ponzi scam. Every welfare program has to start somewhere, a point in time either where welfare does not exist one moment and does the next. Unless you start the program in a manner that denies everyone living prior to it from availing of its benefits, it is obviously going to pay out more than it takes in until the population as a whole from cradle to grave has paid into that program.
Fortunately governments are not so insane as to deny people access to welfare on that basis and it is most certainly irrelevant now given how long most welfare systems across the world have been in existence.
Full Tilt's IT operations were run from an Irish company called Pocket Kings. I got a few inquiries to see if I wanted to work there even for some roles that reported directly into the owner but it was too out of the way to consider. With the benefit of hindsight I'm pretty glad I didn't. Unfortunately 600 odd people in the operation do/did work there and now they're screwed. So it's not just players who are victims of this, the company is too.
If the owner was running a scam then he deserves to be caught. My own opinion is the finances would have been a lot more transparent if there wasn't a US ban on online gambling. If the ban wasn't there there would be no reason to set up fake florists and other companies worldwide to handle payment processing from US gamers. Of course they shouldn't have been trying to attract US players in the first place but I'm guessing the financial reward to do so plus the fact their operations were outside the US meant they thought they could get away with it.
It's a scam in the sense you can receive health care, social security and various other benefits from your participation and the money invested is used to pay for various government services. So yeah it's a huge scam isn't it? The US should be more like libertarian Somalia.
By that logic, he should be decking out staff with tablets costing half the price and he'll achieve the savings in 9 months. And the savings rack up since they're cheaper to replace when they're invariably stolen, broken, lost, worn out.
Of course iPads are The Thing to get and I'm sure MPs or civil servants want to be seen dead with a functionally equivalent, cheaper, more open tablet running a rival OS.
Slashdot Mirror
In addition, assuming tools did improve to the point that they could work around browser differences and reliably produce Flash like content, why do you assume it would be any more efficient than Flash was. Fill a page with a couple of animated "flash" like clips, and 10 open tabs and let's see what happens to your CPU then.
Requiring a user to bridge their phone to their tablet just to read email through a dumb proxy has to be one of the most monumentally stupid design decisions I've ever heard about. The cited reason of security makes little sense. If they wanted to secure email they could have encrypted it on the device and put a strong PIN / password / gesture protection over the top. It is far more likely their server and/or software was so baroque that porting it to the playbook proved more difficult than they thought.
Assuming they overcome these problems, perhaps they can salvage something from this mess. They still have a reputation as being enterprise friendly so assuming the PlayBook fixes its most egregious issues it may yet find itself being used in places that would run a mile from iPad or Android devices.
Well that sounds more like an artifact of your system than just Java by itself. I can typically run 2 eclipse instances and one complex RCP app (the one I'm currently developing) in 3.5GB 32-bit Windows before things start to chug.
It's clear from the photos that these stones are clearly visible (they're green with a light in a middle) so someone could choose to walk around them if they wished. Though anyone landing their foot on one is hardly going to care that their foot sunk a miniscule amount.
But it does raise a question of what the hell they're doing trying to be compatible with Android at all. If RIM supports Android apps, why should 3rd parties bother writing native apps at all? It's OS/2 vs Windows all over again. OS/2 2.1 and OS/2 Warp 3.0 allowed users to run Windows 3.x as a subsystem so what was the net result? Very few native apps and the slow death of the platform. You need an growing community of interested parties, not some blow-ins with little vested interest in the platform if it is to survive.
I think you would have to be working with massive datasets to experience garbage collection freezes on the client side. Modern VMs don't even freeze the world while they gc.
Java isn't slow. Like any runtime it has a startup cost. Once that's over with it works perfectly well for even large apps. Eclipse for example. Aside from that I doubt you'd even know what language an app was running in unless you went poking around in its directory, or the app gave itself away (e.g. by using metal theme).
In the meantime they can work with Oracle to produce a fix for the Java plugin.
Well it is lose-win if you don't actually want Amazon knowing your business. If it's optional then fine, if it's always on or kicks in when it feels like it or is even on by default then that sucks.
I have to question why anyone would boycott Apple and then purchase an equally restrictive device which locks them into a single store. Anyone who is interested in a tablet which allows them to choose where they buy content from should buy something else or wait for this thing to be cracked.
For example, I bought a groupon for 50% off a winery tour. The tour resulted in a purchase of a case of wine from the winery. While I'm sure not everyone on the tour bought that much wine, the groupon got the winery exactly what they wanted: Lots of people in the winery at an off-peak time that they could then up-sell to. For them the groupon worked very well.
I think everyone gets it just fine. Groupon will not survive on winery tours or the other Daily Deal service industry dregs (eyebrow waxes, fish pedicures etc.) which is what their site is reduced to once they've slashed and burned their way through other kinds of businesses.
The main problem with Groupon is the "deals" suck so badly for businesses that once they've burned through all good will in a region the only way to keep generating revenue is to expand into another. Hence Groupon has hyperinflated itself beyond the major US cities, into smaller cities, into Europe and beyond. It attracts local interest in its service for a while before the offers turn to shit. And when the deals turn to shit people lose interest in the service altogether. It's obviously all going to come crashing down at some point. I'll be surprised if Groupon lasts more than a year in its current form the way it's going.
As for the value of IPO itself, it really depends on the company doesn't it. Look at Google's shares. They started at $100 and they went up to nearly at $750 at one point. Even in the middle of an economic slump they're still over $500.
A 50% discount on their IPO stock.
B&N aren't committed to openness, they're just incompetent at security. Though perhaps if Amazon does spew out a locked down device it might behove B&N to produce a relatively vanilla Android 3.x device which does espouse openness, and also provides access to music & streaming from Google.
I don't think it's unrealistic if Amazon expected to sell 10 million of these things this year alone.
2) From the DivX website - "The DivX Plus® Codec Pack includes everything you need to play DivX® or MKV files in third-party applications, like Windows Media Player.". Or in a web browser assuming the browser bothered to use what was available to it.
3) The fact is that a browser could maintain a whitelist / blacklist of codecs and if any particular codec vendor wished to extricate themselves from a blacklist, or get onto the whitelist the browser vendor could provide a mechanism to do it. Heck, the browser could one step further and treat a video tag as a specialized NPAPI plugin that declares what containers & codecs it supported and implementing a particular scripting API and callback. Supply the VP8 plugin with the browser and then let the vendors implement additional video plugins in any way they saw fit.
The fact is that browser have chosen to artificially limit the usefulness of video tag and it sucks.
2. DiVX amongst others offers a H264 codec for nothing. Perhaps if demand for a Linux codec were so great they'd even supply one of those.
3. There are very precise definitions of what H264 should do at various profiles and levels. If a particular codec didn't meet those requirements it could be blacklisted.
I have no objection to VP8 being the "default" codec but to artificially deny other codecs even when they're sitting right there in the OS is absurd. Especially H264 which is the defacto format for hardware devices and will continue to be regardless of VP8 or not.
As long as people are required to pay for the use of the codec, it can't be in Firefox or any other free browser without somebody infringing on the patent. Which is the problem.
Video shouldn't have to be in the browser. Every modern OS has a perfectly usable media framework for apps to use and in the vast majority of cases it already contains an H264 codec or permits one to be obtained.
I doubt telling people to "just use Linux" is a reasonable solution though. If it were that simple they wouldn't be bothering with SUA in the first place.
Fortunately governments are not so insane as to deny people access to welfare on that basis and it is most certainly irrelevant now given how long most welfare systems across the world have been in existence.
If the owner was running a scam then he deserves to be caught. My own opinion is the finances would have been a lot more transparent if there wasn't a US ban on online gambling. If the ban wasn't there there would be no reason to set up fake florists and other companies worldwide to handle payment processing from US gamers. Of course they shouldn't have been trying to attract US players in the first place but I'm guessing the financial reward to do so plus the fact their operations were outside the US meant they thought they could get away with it.
It's a scam in the sense you can receive health care, social security and various other benefits from your participation and the money invested is used to pay for various government services. So yeah it's a huge scam isn't it? The US should be more like libertarian Somalia.
Of course iPads are The Thing to get and I'm sure MPs or civil servants want to be seen dead with a functionally equivalent, cheaper, more open tablet running a rival OS.
Yeah and forget about buying anything useful while your at it.