There is, however, a huge difference, in terms of development costs, between reasonably reliable and 100% mathematically proven reliable. The latter would result in a PVR no normal person could afford, with little real benefit.
Sounds exactly like how some food products are sold from the farm in Canada, and some other countries. You produce the product and then a marketing board gets to decide how much you can sell it for.
The system has its pros and cons, but, whether you like it or not, being government mandated, you do not have much choice in the matter. At least Amazon is not the only marketer of software and you do have a choice to use their services.
I guess my point is that those updates do not make the older device any less useful. Your iPhone 1 can still do everything it did in 2007 and that will continue to be true until the hardware no longer functions.
That's not to say that the new features are not desirable, but nothing has been taken away.
"Adult" is another one of those hysterical terms. I was a child once. I knew what I wanted, and I would tell you if it was not what I wanted. Looking at kids today, they are no different. Just try feeding a food item that is disliked by a child and see how they react.
What is with the fascination with child molestation? Sexual abuse is a serious crime, but sexual abuse of a child is no more serious than sexual abuse of an adult.
Keep in mind that the original iPad does not stop working when a new one hits the store shelves. I am still using my iPhone 3G. It still does everything it did the day I purchased it. The release of the 3GS and 4 did not mean it needed to go straight to the landfill. It has lots of useful life left.
Are you talking about Javascript? Javascript is very much "web 1.0". Pretty much anything that happens in a web browser is "web 1.0". However, modern web browsers do have capabilities to consume some "web 2.0" services which is where the confusion often comes in.
"Web 2.0" content can be interpreted in any language you want. Write a highly optimized application in C, if you wish. There is nothing stopping you. That is the whole point of "web 2.0". You can do anything with the data, not just look at it in a web browser.
Sites serving data, as opposed to content, to the public over HTTP was a fundamental shift. We can debate the name, but "Web 2.0" was a change in the way the web was used. A name of some sort is warranted.
People continue to use IE because liability from Microsoft is not a concern to them. Those who are concerned are not using IE. The free market works just fine here.
I am not sure I follow. If Windows 7 does not meet your requirements, you can hire another vendor to develop an operating system that does. It is going to cost you a lot more, but that is the whole idea behind a free market.
Accepting a refund is different than assuming liability for a mistake in the product. I am not against refunds on software. Though I do realize it is a difficult problem to solve in the world of piracy.
The added costs would go to people like insurance companies who would assume more risk on behalf of the vendor for errors in the software. A lot of open source software projects would come to an end, because who wants to be liable for errors in the work they provide for free? Let the market decide. If liability is important, people will pay for it.
That would only serve to drive the cost of software up. Is it not best to allow the free market to work? Those who want the guarantees can pay for it, while those who are willing to take the risk can use the software for less, perhaps even free.
I am certain that if you passed the appropriate amount of money in Microsoft's direction, they would be more than happy to accept liability for IE. Personally, I do not want to pay for that level of service.
It is actually a pretty complicated problem, finding the IP address of the nearest host based on a domain name, solved in a fairly elegant way.
The only problem here is that you are being passed the address near Google instead of your ISP, which means that you miss out on the benefits of finding a host nearby that is only a few hops away.
Ha! My snowmobile has one of those backup beepers from the factory. The thing only weights like 500-600 lbs wet. and the view out the rear is completely unobstructed. If I actually managed to hit, let alone hurt, someone while backing up I have much bigger problems.
isnt that the point, already ? people are pitting rails as a programming language.
I don't know anyone who considers Rails to be a programming language.
contender, and future leader. just like how it happened with a lot of other things. all it needs is people using more and more. rest of the hardware and infrastructure will follow
There is nothing holding back PHP in message queuing. Why didn't Twitter choose PHP instead of Scala? Surely the popularity of PHP would have made the move even easier?
that is the thing youre missing.
What am I missing? Ruby is not a framework, it is a language. It will not burden you any more than PHP, Python, C, C++, Java, Erlang, etc. will. Every language comes with pros and cons. Twitter says, even after the Scala move, that Ruby is wonderful for web-related tasks.
It is no surprise that you can implement a message queue in PHP. Unlike Rails, PHP is a programming language. Implementing a message queue in Rails would be akin to implementing a message queue in CodeIgniter or CakePHP. Though, comically, the links in your Google search:
talks about using MySQL as the message queue
talks about RabbitMQ, written in Erlang
talks about beanstalkd, written in Ruby
talks about beanstalkd, written in Ruby
is unrelated to network message queuing
talks about JMS, written in Java
talks about Amazon SQS; language unknown, but probably not PHP
talks about using MSMQ (Microsoft Message Queue); language unknown, but probably not PHP
is unrelated to network message queuing
talks about using ActiveMQ, written in Java
To be fair, #3 and #7 do also talk about Dropr, which is written in PHP. However, I believe it does show that PHP is not a very strong contender in the message queue arena.
According to Twitter, they dropped Starling, their Ruby (not Rails) message queue, because they found edge cases to be too difficult to code around. The Scala language provided features to make those tasks easier, thus improving productivity and the service as a whole. Kudos to Twitter for looking for the best language for the job, not just sticking with what they know.
twitter is doing what it can do with rails, with scala instead. so, they are actually transplanting.
How so? Twitter is using Scala to power their message queue. Rails was never designed for message queue applications, and not even Twitter used Rails in that context. Ever. Rails is a web application framework and Twitter continues to use it in that context, as they have always done.
your approach is missing logic in regard to integration realities. "top to bottom" is an impossibility in which an app needs to go outside the web for doing anything.
Where do you draw the line? If we are only talking about the technology that generates the content, Twitter is a Rails app through and through. Absolutely no Scala, or any other language, is involved there.
You said earlier that Twitter is no longer a Rails app because they added Scala middleware. Yet, some of the sites you mentioned also use middleware written in other languages. Why do they get to keep the created-in-PHP status but not Twitter?
I guess I just do not understand where you are going with this discussion as it relates to PHP. If Twitter was written in PHP they would probably have still used Scala behind the scenes, just as Facebook uses Java, C++, and Python behind their PHP code. The truth is that virtually every computer language can generate HTML without trouble, even at massive scale.
iOS also supports installation of apps without going through the store. As of iOS 4, you can even install said apps by clicking a link in the web browser. Granted, Android does a much better job at installing software through third-party channels.
Slashdot Mirror
There is, however, a huge difference, in terms of development costs, between reasonably reliable and 100% mathematically proven reliable. The latter would result in a PVR no normal person could afford, with little real benefit.
Sounds exactly like how some food products are sold from the farm in Canada, and some other countries. You produce the product and then a marketing board gets to decide how much you can sell it for.
The system has its pros and cons, but, whether you like it or not, being government mandated, you do not have much choice in the matter. At least Amazon is not the only marketer of software and you do have a choice to use their services.
Tell that to Napster.
Hotspot apparently works on Rogers right now.
I, unfortunately, am unable to verify the claims. But this screenshot looks pretty legit: http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/5767/photojan1251329pm.jpg
From what I gather it is a carrier enable-able feature. If AT&T does not support it, it is due to their call, not Apple's.
I guess my point is that those updates do not make the older device any less useful. Your iPhone 1 can still do everything it did in 2007 and that will continue to be true until the hardware no longer functions.
That's not to say that the new features are not desirable, but nothing has been taken away.
Unless the hardware fails, how much support do you really need? The device will still function just as well as it did on the last day you had support.
"Adult" is another one of those hysterical terms. I was a child once. I knew what I wanted, and I would tell you if it was not what I wanted. Looking at kids today, they are no different. Just try feeding a food item that is disliked by a child and see how they react.
What is with the fascination with child molestation? Sexual abuse is a serious crime, but sexual abuse of a child is no more serious than sexual abuse of an adult.
What is a reasonable upgrade timeframe?
Keep in mind that the original iPad does not stop working when a new one hits the store shelves. I am still using my iPhone 3G. It still does everything it did the day I purchased it. The release of the 3GS and 4 did not mean it needed to go straight to the landfill. It has lots of useful life left.
They also said that the iPhone 4 was ugly and that Apple would never release something that looked like that.
Are you talking about Javascript? Javascript is very much "web 1.0". Pretty much anything that happens in a web browser is "web 1.0". However, modern web browsers do have capabilities to consume some "web 2.0" services which is where the confusion often comes in.
"Web 2.0" content can be interpreted in any language you want. Write a highly optimized application in C, if you wish. There is nothing stopping you. That is the whole point of "web 2.0". You can do anything with the data, not just look at it in a web browser.
Yes, I agree the names are stupid.
Sites serving data, as opposed to content, to the public over HTTP was a fundamental shift. We can debate the name, but "Web 2.0" was a change in the way the web was used. A name of some sort is warranted.
Web 1.0: Content is formatted for human consumption
Web 2.0: Content is formatted for machine consumption
- HTML, JPEG, PNG, GIF, PDF, etc. served over HTTP is Web 1.0.
- XML, JSON, RSS, ATOM, etc. served over HTTP is Web 2.0.
People continue to use IE because liability from Microsoft is not a concern to them. Those who are concerned are not using IE. The free market works just fine here.
I am not sure I follow. If Windows 7 does not meet your requirements, you can hire another vendor to develop an operating system that does. It is going to cost you a lot more, but that is the whole idea behind a free market.
Accepting a refund is different than assuming liability for a mistake in the product. I am not against refunds on software. Though I do realize it is a difficult problem to solve in the world of piracy.
The added costs would go to people like insurance companies who would assume more risk on behalf of the vendor for errors in the software. A lot of open source software projects would come to an end, because who wants to be liable for errors in the work they provide for free? Let the market decide. If liability is important, people will pay for it.
That would only serve to drive the cost of software up. Is it not best to allow the free market to work? Those who want the guarantees can pay for it, while those who are willing to take the risk can use the software for less, perhaps even free.
I am certain that if you passed the appropriate amount of money in Microsoft's direction, they would be more than happy to accept liability for IE. Personally, I do not want to pay for that level of service.
It is actually a pretty complicated problem, finding the IP address of the nearest host based on a domain name, solved in a fairly elegant way.
The only problem here is that you are being passed the address near Google instead of your ISP, which means that you miss out on the benefits of finding a host nearby that is only a few hops away.
Ha! My snowmobile has one of those backup beepers from the factory. The thing only weights like 500-600 lbs wet. and the view out the rear is completely unobstructed. If I actually managed to hit, let alone hurt, someone while backing up I have much bigger problems.
I don't know anyone who considers Rails to be a programming language.
There is nothing holding back PHP in message queuing. Why didn't Twitter choose PHP instead of Scala? Surely the popularity of PHP would have made the move even easier?
What am I missing? Ruby is not a framework, it is a language. It will not burden you any more than PHP, Python, C, C++, Java, Erlang, etc. will. Every language comes with pros and cons. Twitter says, even after the Scala move, that Ruby is wonderful for web-related tasks.
It is no surprise that you can implement a message queue in PHP. Unlike Rails, PHP is a programming language. Implementing a message queue in Rails would be akin to implementing a message queue in CodeIgniter or CakePHP. Though, comically, the links in your Google search:
To be fair, #3 and #7 do also talk about Dropr, which is written in PHP. However, I believe it does show that PHP is not a very strong contender in the message queue arena.
According to Twitter, they dropped Starling, their Ruby (not Rails) message queue, because they found edge cases to be too difficult to code around. The Scala language provided features to make those tasks easier, thus improving productivity and the service as a whole. Kudos to Twitter for looking for the best language for the job, not just sticking with what they know.
How so? Twitter is using Scala to power their message queue. Rails was never designed for message queue applications, and not even Twitter used Rails in that context. Ever. Rails is a web application framework and Twitter continues to use it in that context, as they have always done.
Where do you draw the line? If we are only talking about the technology that generates the content, Twitter is a Rails app through and through. Absolutely no Scala, or any other language, is involved there.
You said earlier that Twitter is no longer a Rails app because they added Scala middleware. Yet, some of the sites you mentioned also use middleware written in other languages. Why do they get to keep the created-in-PHP status but not Twitter?
I guess I just do not understand where you are going with this discussion as it relates to PHP. If Twitter was written in PHP they would probably have still used Scala behind the scenes, just as Facebook uses Java, C++, and Python behind their PHP code. The truth is that virtually every computer language can generate HTML without trouble, even at massive scale.
iOS also supports installation of apps without going through the store. As of iOS 4, you can even install said apps by clicking a link in the web browser. Granted, Android does a much better job at installing software through third-party channels.