or for personal research, like say looking up probable diseases you may have based on symptoms
I don't know about that. When you update your status message to say: "Robert hurts when he pees." Faceboogle will automatically provide the probable diseases in your news feed.
As were the computers at my high school. It made it difficult to do anything. Luckily the locks were easily circumvented. Eventually they just gave us a copy of the tools they used to lock the systems down so that we could officially unlock the workstations as needed.
OS X has virtually the same command line and it seems to be doing fairly well. 21% of the consumer market well. And consumers are even less apt to want the command line than business users.
Though, now that wheat prices have increased, expect more farm land to be devoted to wheat.
Considering that wheat was planted six months ago, it's a little late for that. And now that wheat prices have dropped, there won't be much incentive for an increase in spring wheat production.
So I guess we should still have some beer supplies coming out of America, the farmers are actually backing off corn production this year
Corn jumped over $1/bu. after the report was released. There's still time for those numbers to change, and I expect they will. It was only a week or so ago where corn wasn't worth enough to even consider growing it. Funny how much can change in a week.
There are much more efficient crops that could be used, corn being one of the absolute worst, but the wackos have decided to put everything into that one.
You seem to be ignoring what happens down on the farm. Corn is ideal because we already had the infrastructure in place to integrate corn-based ethanol plants into the supply chain with virtually no cost (money or energy).
Turning another crop, such as switchgrass, into a commodity is not an easy process and would waste a lot of energy in the process. Perhaps more energy than what would be gained from it having more energy potential.
Also, the new ethanol plants already support the crops you speak of, so I'm not sure we've put everything into one. There just isn't a realistic alternative to corn in the plant-based fuel sector, and there won't be for a while.
If you're selling Firefox manuals at $1.00 a piece, you would never get enough IE using customers to justify any kind of IE-specific development. Any good businessman will know their target audience well enough to know if the added expense is justified.
Wasting money on ensuring that your website works with an antiquated browser that only 25% of your potential customers use is stupid and unacceptable... unless the revenue generated by that 25% exceeds the cost of the additional development.
If everyone keeps patenting single features which can't stand alone as individual products, but depend on other (potentially patented) features, we end up in a situation where every company is in a mexican stance against each other.
What might you patent, outside of the software domain, where that isn't also problem?
I worked in C++ for months after working in Java for months and still didn't feel like I knew C++.
I'm not sure it's possible for anyone to know everything there is to know about C++.
But in this case Objective-C is C with objects and C++ is pretty much C with objects. If you know C++, you already know most of what you need to know. Although Obj-C is a dynamic language, it's really not a huge paradigm shift like you find moving between other languages.
It's the only way to keep technology moving forward. If you take the Microsoft approach of maintaining backwards compatibility with just about everything ever written, you end up with an operating system that hasn't seen any real improvement in a long, long time.
Discontinuing Carbon is a good thing. Carbon applications don't play very well with the rest of OS X and, as a user, that is frustrating. It sounds like Apple could have done a better job at making the fact known that it was going to be discontinued, but never discontinuing it would have been a bad thing for the future of OS X.
I'd be very cautious of any developer who knows C++ but can't pick up Objective-C at a moment's notice. Getting to know Cocoa will be the bigger challenge, but that would be true even if it were implemented in C++.
Of course. That's why were are developers. When job X needs to be done, the average person will just jump in and get it done. Where as we developers, being lazy, would rather tell the computer to do the job instead. Had we not been lazy, we would have just done the job manually like the average person, and the software would have never been written.
If you navigate away from your app, it's been closed, period.
Is this certain?
Unofficial applications can run in the background as long as the resources are not required for another application. If the resources are required, background applications will be killed. When they say they cannot run in the background, it may mean there are no guarantees that your application will always be able to stay running in the background.
But has anyone, relatively speaking, bought them? I know several people who have iPhones, and they aren't even for sale in this country! I don't know anyone who has an EEE PC.
Mounting S3 as a slow FUSE filesystem that you can put your database on?
They have SimpleDB, although it's still in limited beta by the looks of it. At present you can store your data anywhere. If you're using some kind of SQL server they don't scale all that well vertically anyway, so there's not much point in using them on a EC2 type setup, even if storage was persistent.
You own the shoes, but if your shoes have a logo of the company that made them, you are licensing the logo. Ditto for automobiles. The work contained within the book is licensed, however the paper itself is owned by you.
It's kind of like a driver's license. You have to pay for the card that you carry (at least you do in this jurisdiction), but if you break the rules, the law is free to take your ability to use it away.
You own the physical media on which the licensed work is distributed. You own a license to use the licensed work, assuming you don't break the terms of the agreement, such as running the software on non-Apple-labeled hardware in this case. You do not, however, own a copy of the software itself. For that, you would have to own the copyright on it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about that. When you update your status message to say: "Robert hurts when he pees." Faceboogle will automatically provide the probable diseases in your news feed.
As were the computers at my high school. It made it difficult to do anything. Luckily the locks were easily circumvented. Eventually they just gave us a copy of the tools they used to lock the systems down so that we could officially unlock the workstations as needed.
Agreed. However, I wasn't the one claiming that Linux adoption rates have been hindered because of the terminal.
OS X has virtually the same command line and it seems to be doing fairly well. 21% of the consumer market well. And consumers are even less apt to want the command line than business users.
Michael Geist seems like the logical person to play Bob Loblaw. He even has his own law blog.
Considering that wheat was planted six months ago, it's a little late for that. And now that wheat prices have dropped, there won't be much incentive for an increase in spring wheat production.
Less than $1.00? These guys are offering $3.91CAD/bu for 2008 crop.
Corn jumped over $1/bu. after the report was released. There's still time for those numbers to change, and I expect they will. It was only a week or so ago where corn wasn't worth enough to even consider growing it. Funny how much can change in a week.
You seem to be ignoring what happens down on the farm. Corn is ideal because we already had the infrastructure in place to integrate corn-based ethanol plants into the supply chain with virtually no cost (money or energy).
Turning another crop, such as switchgrass, into a commodity is not an easy process and would waste a lot of energy in the process. Perhaps more energy than what would be gained from it having more energy potential.
Also, the new ethanol plants already support the crops you speak of, so I'm not sure we've put everything into one. There just isn't a realistic alternative to corn in the plant-based fuel sector, and there won't be for a while.
If you're selling Firefox manuals at $1.00 a piece, you would never get enough IE using customers to justify any kind of IE-specific development. Any good businessman will know their target audience well enough to know if the added expense is justified.
;)
Remind me not to work for you.
Wasting money on ensuring that your website works with an antiquated browser that only 25% of your potential customers use is stupid and unacceptable... unless the revenue generated by that 25% exceeds the cost of the additional development.
I consider myself an introvert, but I much prefer face-to-face communication over IM and the phone.
What might you patent, outside of the software domain, where that isn't also problem?
Post a story about it on Slashdot?
Not enough to make pizza.com the first, second, or third result, when searching for "pizza".
I'm not sure it's possible for anyone to know everything there is to know about C++.
But in this case Objective-C is C with objects and C++ is pretty much C with objects. If you know C++, you already know most of what you need to know. Although Obj-C is a dynamic language, it's really not a huge paradigm shift like you find moving between other languages.
It's the only way to keep technology moving forward. If you take the Microsoft approach of maintaining backwards compatibility with just about everything ever written, you end up with an operating system that hasn't seen any real improvement in a long, long time.
Discontinuing Carbon is a good thing. Carbon applications don't play very well with the rest of OS X and, as a user, that is frustrating. It sounds like Apple could have done a better job at making the fact known that it was going to be discontinued, but never discontinuing it would have been a bad thing for the future of OS X.
I'd be very cautious of any developer who knows C++ but can't pick up Objective-C at a moment's notice. Getting to know Cocoa will be the bigger challenge, but that would be true even if it were implemented in C++.
Of course. That's why were are developers. When job X needs to be done, the average person will just jump in and get it done. Where as we developers, being lazy, would rather tell the computer to do the job instead. Had we not been lazy, we would have just done the job manually like the average person, and the software would have never been written.
If only our modern browsers supported client-side load balancing like they did in the good old days.
Is this certain?
Unofficial applications can run in the background as long as the resources are not required for another application. If the resources are required, background applications will be killed. When they say they cannot run in the background, it may mean there are no guarantees that your application will always be able to stay running in the background.
But has anyone, relatively speaking, bought them? I know several people who have iPhones, and they aren't even for sale in this country! I don't know anyone who has an EEE PC.
They have SimpleDB, although it's still in limited beta by the looks of it. At present you can store your data anywhere. If you're using some kind of SQL server they don't scale all that well vertically anyway, so there's not much point in using them on a EC2 type setup, even if storage was persistent.
You own the shoes, but if your shoes have a logo of the company that made them, you are licensing the logo. Ditto for automobiles. The work contained within the book is licensed, however the paper itself is owned by you.
It's kind of like a driver's license. You have to pay for the card that you carry (at least you do in this jurisdiction), but if you break the rules, the law is free to take your ability to use it away.
You own the physical media on which the licensed work is distributed. You own a license to use the licensed work, assuming you don't break the terms of the agreement, such as running the software on non-Apple-labeled hardware in this case. You do not, however, own a copy of the software itself. For that, you would have to own the copyright on it.