The Bloomberg API is not that great. It is like writing code to match a DDE interface. I have written code against the Bloomberg API and while it sounds nice that Bloomberg is open sourcing it, it is useless.
I can understand why Bloomberg created the API that they did. The problem has to do with being flexible and not knowing what the underlying data is. Remember Bloomberg grabs data about equities, bonds, commodities, etc. And they all have their data idiosyncracises.
I think the real problem with Bloomberg is that they are being shutout of the market. I last used them a year ago and frankly they were not much better than twitter. The advantage with Twitter is that it is free, whereas Bloomberg costs about 1900 USD per month. The only place where Bloomberg still has an advantage is its data warehouse. I have yet to find a data warehouse that is as extensive as theirs...
Here is my case. I switched from Windows to Linux. I also own an iPad, and iPhone, and I own an Android phone and Honeycomb tablet. The Android stuff is crap. It really is. The iPhone and iPad are much much better.
But back to the story. So I switched to Linux on the desktop. I needed a new notebook, and thus looked around for the best deal. It ended up being a MacBook Air since the Windows counterparts were nearly the same in price I wanted an OSX for its Unix. I don't regret any of my purchases. I even like OSX...
BUT... This is the big BUT... OSX has some real issues...
Trackpad: With Lion what a piece of kaka! I mean come on I am doing finger contortions trying to get things straight. I keep getting told, "once you get the hang of this it is so smooth and silky.." Really? I actually think a mouse, and in particular a Mighty Mouse is pretty good!!!!
User rename: I don't want Joe Smith... My username is joesmith... Whenever I flip into root mode using sudo the dialog box keeps coming up with my real name instead of my logged in name. Sorry, but that will not work!
File Explorer: Oh you have got to be kidding me on Finder as being the best way to navigate a hard disk! I often need to do some exploring, and the likes. Wow it is such a royal pain in the arse! And don't even get me going on copy, paste, cut...
Widget desktop: I by accident click on one widget once too often. So I thought to delete a widget from the desktop you select it and hit delete. Oh wait NO DELETE KEY! Ok, right click? Oh wait using the trackpad! Well I plugged in my mouse hoping for a delete, and learned there is no way to delete a widget. The solution, and I am not kidding here is to unselect the widget from the list, which deletes all, and then single click it to add a new one again. ROTFL! Come on Apple!
I am not dissing Apple and thinking it is crap. I rather like my OSX air. It is a nice piece of hardware and software. Truly is! But what gets me right now are the fan boys that every feature Apple produces no matter how good or bad is some great inspiration on productivity! I say bull crap! Some things are crap and the sooner we start talking about the sooner I can get back to work!
There is a change taking over. I have been living for 16 years in Zurich and this was the warmest winter yet. The mountains have plenty of snow, but in the valley it is just nuts. We are supposed to get some cold in the next week, but this winter has been completely out of whack. The fact that you are getting plenty of snow is actually correct. Having lived in Canada for 18 years snow = warm temperatures = changing fronts where cold meets warm...
And if the programmer setup the rest interface they would need a few days to figure out what they need. Then they would write the code needing about two weeks. Of course as they write the code they realize it is quite a bit more complicated that it appeared. There were quite a few fringe cases that the code could not deal with. Thus they need another 4 weeks to nail down all of those fringe cases. Then once they finally test it, they need a server and the admin to install all of the stuff. FINALLY three months later the web service is done, everything is converted in seconds and the secretary looks at the programmer and says, "you know I could have done that in a few hours..."
Yes programers believe they can do that in seconds. BUT can they code exactly what is necessary in less time than a human needs to do something? And lets do an ROI... Secretary costs X, programmer costs 2X+X for incidentals like getting a server etc. Thus if secretary can copy content in database can programmer write and deploy code in Total / 2 * (2X + X). I am putting the 2 in because if the programmer = secretary then what is the point? Thus there must be some profit.
I will give the short answer... NO... Simpler, but painful to watch, to let the secretaries do the copy and paste.
Instead of teaching programming, like you say maybe teach about problem solving? Oh wait that is called being logical! Oh wait maybe that can be called logic and is, I don't know, part of the MATH curriculum! I don't think learning how to program, for everybody, is a good idea. Here are my issues with it:
1) What language? Unless you decide to keep up in programming languages whatever you learn is going to be completely and uterly useless.
2) What paradigm? Once you have decided on a programming language are you going to teach via an IDE? Text editor? How about file system communications? Database? Complications, complications, complications...
I help my niece with her math and my biggest beef today is that you have history, or philosphy folks teaching math. You can teach math and science in two ways. The first and this is what I fear is happening all too much is to teach via remembering the formulas and solutions. This achieves nothing and leads the problems in computer science and science we have today. The second approach and this is more difficult since it requires an innat understanding of math and science is to teach it in the abstract. I teach math to my niece in the abstract and she GETS it (when she pays attention). I try to get her to understand why the formula she just learned is actually created and what purpose it serves. I get her problem solving skills involved! Oh wait is that not what you try to do with programming?
Wow you sound like an old European! I remember that in the past America used to be the land where people would just pick up and move from one place to another. Granted it was in the US, but now that the Americans might have to get out of their comfort zone and all hell breaks out. Sorry, but American's have become too laid back, too much resting on their laurels!
Let me clarify my point... Let me put it in the context from my world which is trading:
If I only had the computers like Goldman Sachs I could make money like Goldman Sachs. With cloud computing I am now able with a couple of good traders to make money like Goldman Sachs.
The fallacy of the argument is that Goldman Sachs needs the computers to make money. The reality is that Goldman Sachs needs the traders not the computers. For Goldman Sachs the computers could be hamsters running in a wheel, as the important key are the traders.
Thus by him saying that now with cloud computing he is on equal plane with Pixar is completely missing the point that it has never been about tech. It has been about how story writers use tech! Thus cloud computing will neither enable or disable you. Anybody can create a Pixar type story given enough computing time. Remember Pixar needs to pump out a movie in a year. Who is to say that you cannot create a short story in a year using plain vanilla computers.
My case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOgYOD5S8gk This guy was a sensation because what mattered is that he had good enough animation with an incredibly good story. Or how about the numa numa guy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmtzQCSh6xk It does not get any cheaper and simpler than that! Yet this guy has 18 million views and featured on South Park. And while I am on this thread, how much real computing power is needed for South Park?
Understand my point? Understand why the GP is incorrect?
Wow hiding behind anonymous, but spoken like somebody who like me has gone through it. I learned by the market. I thought, "hey I am a geek and can write algos thus I should be able to make money regardless..." HA right... The tech is secondary!
Really? You can do everything that say a studio can do? I am going to sound very cynical, but this is a typical techy answer to why they are not as popular as Pixar or Disney.
1) So you want to purchase computing time? To get something like Pixar you are going to digging deep into your pockets. Not just a little deep, but very deep. I am giving a talk at a developer conference on the merits and usability of the Amazon cloud. Granted it is an enabler, not going to debate that. But to say that it will put you on equal computing power as Pixar is a little navie.
2) Yes Pixar and Disney have oodles of techy's all running around using the computer. Lest it be known that Pixar and Disney employ's a whole bunch of writers, producers, musicians, and so on. The reason why CGI is so cool and neat is because the people (read actors, writers, producers) are professionals and they know how to BUILD a STORY! I have seen short movies done with Blender and let me tell you while it looks good, for the most part the movies are pure and utter rubbish!
I am not saying it can't be done, I am saying that just because you have the cloud does not mean you actually have a movie worthy to be compared to Pixar or Disney.
I am going to say this bluntly since it is late, probably not going to be read by anybody... Oh what you write is POS! Yes a big huge heaping POS!
You say that people will building plagues and releasing them to humans and all of the sudden all of mankind will be wiped out. You watch too much Hollywood! I actually read up on this topic and guess what it should have already happened.
Plagues cannot and will not wipe us out because of the way we humans work. One of the deadliest of all plagues is the Ebola virus. Oddly though that it never has managed to wipe out mankind, no? There is no cure to Ebola, no help, extremely contagious once you get it you might as well say goodnight. You hope that you manage to survive.
So here is the question why have we managed to survive? What is it? The answer is that the more dangerous the virus the lesser of a worry it is to humans. This is because very dangerous virus burn themselves out before they manage to spread themselves. Want to know what the deadliest virus is? And it is not man-made... Drum roll.... AIDs, HIV! It is the perfect virus because it does not kill its host right away. It takes years even decades before people start dying. This allows the virus to be spread from one host to another and allows the virus to unfold itself.
And look at how successful Aids/HIV has been? It is essentially all around the world and literally killing millions of people. While it has dropped from the main stream media, it is still a problem and will remain a problem.
But hey you can't make a dangerous and deadly movie about the Aids virus because well that would be like watching paint dry! No we rather talk about the virus that spreads like wildfire and kills all of us off!
"The aviation giant Boeing admitted today that it was aware of weaknesses in its 737 jets, but it never expected a 15-year-old Southwest Airlines jet to crack open in mid-flight. "
So why is this an issue with Airbus? One you said union, but I wonder if there is not some Boeing prodding going on here!!!
Really? Ok tell that to the database, operating system, and IDE vendors? You don't see much competition and don't see much improved margins in that.
Oracle makes money not by selling databases, but selling services around their databases. IBM makes their money not by selling the software, but the services around their product. It is only Microsoft that is stupid and keeps thinking they keep on selling software.
I am saying it is devastating the software development and sell model because there is no money in that market anymore. You have to use software to sell something else. It is a means to greater profits. Not saying it is good, nor bad. Just saying as it is.
Remember I sit here on a Linux box, using Mono as my development environment to write algo code to make money in the stock market. I am not complaining here!!! But there is no way in HECK that I would decide to create trading software and sell it.
Ok so you have this open source project that is REALLY popular, woopee... I need to eat, live and sleep. If you look at those making money with Open Source I stand by my point it is a winner take all model. There are only a few who can actually make a living with Open Source.
Why are you introducing governments? I am talking about software? Open Source does not really offer any competition at all. I remember attending a very good session by a lawyer at an O'Reilly conference. He talked from the perspective of competition and took away the open source part. In that perspective there was as much of a monopoly in the individual markets as if it were a binary only world. However we don't view it as such because most of these products are open source and hence we don't see them as threatening.
We used to have Sybase, but not much of that company exists today. Then we had Silicon Graphics, and not much of that company exists today. Then we had Borland that went away with all of its products. How about Eudora? The list goes on...
Now you might say, "but oh oh these companies had bad business models". Not so quick. In a software industry there is always room for a certain number of players. The problem with open source is that it cuts down the number of competitors to winner takes all. So in the database arena we have a couple of big players, and the open source players. There are no more smaller binary only software vendors. Take a look at IDE's. Same thing there. Remember Eclipse USED to be a for pay product, and then it was open sourced.
Dude, I started out in the IT industry as a profession in 92 after my engineering degree. I have been active in the software industry since the Commodore Pet. Until 2000 there was what I would call a vibrant shareware, second tier software industry. Sure you had the big players, but there were plenty of little players around. Now no more.
I actually would agree with you that companies partially drove to Open Source to save costs. It was because software developers cost too much, which is pointing out the obvious. BUT it does not detract from my point that you can't make money like you used to as a software developer. The days of becoming another Bill Gates are gone. Remember that the Facebook guy is not selling software. This is MY ENTIRE point... He is making money not by selling software, but using software to sell something else. This is a very important distinction...
I am not cherry picking the highest salary of 2000 as the dotcom bubble bursting. Remember that at the time there was a life outside of silicon valley. And I would argue that in silicon valley you made peanuts because you received stock grants. It was outside the valley where you made real cash. I remember I used to be able to charge 150 USD per hour, and I had friends that were Oracle large database consultants that were pulling in about 400 to 500 K in CASH... Now you would be lucky if you can pull in about 100K.
I never implied that Open Source caused the bubble crash! I said that with the rise of Open Source which started after the bubble crash wages and the software industry changed fundamentally. I am not saying it is good, nor bad. IT IS what IT IS.
The freemium model is a sucky model. It does not mean that freemium can't work for some. Just like how OpenSource works for some, eg Redhat, but on the whole Open Source is devastating the software development and sell model. Compare the revs of those companies that only sell software and those companies that sell or enhance or what have you with open source. The difference in monies is monumental! I am not complaining here, I am saying it as it is.
I remember nearly a decade ago I was at SD hosting a BOF on the impact of Open Source. We danced for hours around the issue and it was a very good BOF. At the end I summed it up and we all agreed, the software developer will not make the same amount of money as they had until the 2000 crash. I stand by the statement and it was true. Since 2000 the wages of the software industry as a developer have been driven down due to Open Source, and due to out sourcing.
Again not saying that nobody can make money. It is just that Software has become a winner take all model. Where a few make good decent money, but most struggle to make any money. I instead use Open Source to solve other problems. Makes things good for me though, but I am not creating base infrastructure software like I did in the 90's. It is what it is, and freemium is the same thing...
it is not useful in the least. he gives an example of turning off a monitor and being able to access it in a few clicks. the problem with that is that the user needs to know that they want or need to turn off the monitor.
Not to say that I am overly impressed with the Chinese approach, but to say that they are really bad is saying his shirt is much dirtier. The problem is that in the US most social media is censored quite a bit! And that I find sad... BTW google eg facebook censorship.
I trade the market and this was always a question for me, can the Chinese be innovative. And here we have it, they can be innovative. Not that I thought they couldn't. I was just wondering WHEN.
Here is the problem that the US faces, less so in Europe. WTF does America do anymore? I mean really?
But here is what I think we will disagree with. The current market is not about that. It is about being able to sell an experience. I just read an article that said specs are dead. The Kindle Fire is doing well regardless of the specs. The Kindle Fire is about being able to cater to a set of people to deliver a specific experience at a cheap price. NONE, I repeat NONE of the Android makers are doing that.
Nice come back... Yeah I bought an Acer Iconia tablet as I read my reviews, and compared it to the Asus Transformer. It seemed ok as a decision. BTW these upgrade problems and such are not the exclusivity of Acer. It is the same with Asus, Motorola, etc. It is a fundamental problem in the Android market.
I agree with you that I might have done something stupid. Or maybe Macs are a problem. However, and this is my issue, what if it is a Mac or network, it is only Android that suffers. Thus IMO it becomes an Android issue since it is ruining my experience.
As somebody who has both a HoneyComb tablet/Samsung 7" tablet and an iPad (original and 2) I have to say I am really really disappointed with Android. Android has four flaws:
1) Hardware update support SUCKS! I have both a Sony Ericsson Xperia phone, and Acer Iconia Tablet. When I bought the phone it was essentially out of date because Sony said to get the new Android OS you need to buy the more expensive phone. HAD I known that I would not have bought the phone. However Sony did a 180 and said, "ok ok ok we will get you an update." When the original update was released it too Switzerland 7 months to get it. The exact same thing happened with my Acer Iconia. Acer kept hemming and hawing on their 3.1 update and being in Switzerland I was essentially at the tail end of the release. I had Acer Germany unlock the code for me to get my update. This just effen sucks! The Android vendors don't get updates! They just think it is an opportunity for you to buy the latest and greatest piece of hardware NOT!
2) The apps are lacking on Android. Two apps come to mind; Aligator water, and Wetter.com. Put the iPad and Android tablet edition side by side and what you see is that the iPad or iOS app is so much better. Why is that? When I run my Android apps they are slower, and jerkier (yes this has been discussed due to the software architecture choices made). Frankly I don't shive a git! I want a smooth flowing tablet and if Apple found the ideal way so be it, it is the right approach.
3) Hardware software compatibility. I have so many little tweaks and twiddles with the Android system that it just tires me out. Take for example setting up the wireless networking. On my iOS I can use DHCP and everything works. For some odd and strange reason with Android the network connections drop, come back, drop, come back, and drop and come back. They do this for about 5 minutes until they just stay connected. If I put in a network address all is good. Of course you could argue, "wait your network does something funny." Well my answer is that my laptops (windows, linux, and OSX) work just fine, as does my iPhone, and iPad. Thus while maybe it is network issue, I consider it an Android issue since the other devices are ok.
4) The hardware is sub-standard by most, not all vendors in comparison to Apple. Most of the Android hardware sucks. I have a Samsung tablet and it is not bad. Good quality. The Acer is ok, but things like battery life just suck. Overall for the amount of money I pay I am disappointed.
Overall I have to say I am completely disappointed with Android (had high hopes) as I feel Google is doing piss poor job of ensuring a certain amount of quality and usability. Android might sell more devices, but unless Android really changes its stripes it will always be a cheap-skates paradise...
I just switched my home network (I trade for a living) to Linux and OSX. It was rough doing the switch since, as the Munich people found out, the details can be frustrating. I had to rewrite some apps in Java as the Mono code could not handle some functionality. But once that development was done, Linux/OSX work like a charm.
I use OSX for my notebook as I have not found a better notebook with Linux on it. For the desktop machines hands down Linux. But I would also add this ease of use where things just work happened in the last year. I have been using Linux since Yggardsil in 95, but completely usable only the last year. Maybe it FINALLY is the year of Linux;)
BTW why did I switch to Linux and OSX? Cost! With the new Metro interface and the move away from.NET ( yes yes C# still exists, yada, yada, but it is not the same API! and hence still problematic) I would have to cough up around 5500 USD, and that was just too much. Solution, get Linux, get some Ubuntu One cloudspace, and buy Apple notebooks, still saved money...
it will not work worth a damm! because yet again americans think this is a technology problem. what do i offer as proof? read the recent right wing case in germany. these criminals lived ten years off the grid and murdered 8 people in cold blood without so much as a clue. they did it because they borrowed one id after another. but hey why let facts get in the way of an awesome computer program that is as useful as a paperweight.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean like SATs? No say it ain't so...
It is not that useful PERIOD...
The Bloomberg API is not that great. It is like writing code to match a DDE interface. I have written code against the Bloomberg API and while it sounds nice that Bloomberg is open sourcing it, it is useless.
I can understand why Bloomberg created the API that they did. The problem has to do with being flexible and not knowing what the underlying data is. Remember Bloomberg grabs data about equities, bonds, commodities, etc. And they all have their data idiosyncracises.
I think the real problem with Bloomberg is that they are being shutout of the market. I last used them a year ago and frankly they were not much better than twitter. The advantage with Twitter is that it is free, whereas Bloomberg costs about 1900 USD per month. The only place where Bloomberg still has an advantage is its data warehouse. I have yet to find a data warehouse that is as extensive as theirs...
Here is my case. I switched from Windows to Linux. I also own an iPad, and iPhone, and I own an Android phone and Honeycomb tablet. The Android stuff is crap. It really is. The iPhone and iPad are much much better.
But back to the story. So I switched to Linux on the desktop. I needed a new notebook, and thus looked around for the best deal. It ended up being a MacBook Air since the Windows counterparts were nearly the same in price I wanted an OSX for its Unix. I don't regret any of my purchases. I even like OSX...
BUT... This is the big BUT... OSX has some real issues...
Trackpad: With Lion what a piece of kaka! I mean come on I am doing finger contortions trying to get things straight. I keep getting told, "once you get the hang of this it is so smooth and silky.." Really? I actually think a mouse, and in particular a Mighty Mouse is pretty good!!!!
User rename: I don't want Joe Smith... My username is joesmith... Whenever I flip into root mode using sudo the dialog box keeps coming up with my real name instead of my logged in name. Sorry, but that will not work!
File Explorer: Oh you have got to be kidding me on Finder as being the best way to navigate a hard disk! I often need to do some exploring, and the likes. Wow it is such a royal pain in the arse! And don't even get me going on copy, paste, cut...
Widget desktop: I by accident click on one widget once too often. So I thought to delete a widget from the desktop you select it and hit delete. Oh wait NO DELETE KEY! Ok, right click? Oh wait using the trackpad! Well I plugged in my mouse hoping for a delete, and learned there is no way to delete a widget. The solution, and I am not kidding here is to unselect the widget from the list, which deletes all, and then single click it to add a new one again. ROTFL! Come on Apple!
I am not dissing Apple and thinking it is crap. I rather like my OSX air. It is a nice piece of hardware and software. Truly is! But what gets me right now are the fan boys that every feature Apple produces no matter how good or bad is some great inspiration on productivity! I say bull crap! Some things are crap and the sooner we start talking about the sooner I can get back to work!
There is a change taking over. I have been living for 16 years in Zurich and this was the warmest winter yet. The mountains have plenty of snow, but in the valley it is just nuts. We are supposed to get some cold in the next week, but this winter has been completely out of whack. The fact that you are getting plenty of snow is actually correct. Having lived in Canada for 18 years snow = warm temperatures = changing fronts where cold meets warm...
And if the programmer setup the rest interface they would need a few days to figure out what they need. Then they would write the code needing about two weeks. Of course as they write the code they realize it is quite a bit more complicated that it appeared. There were quite a few fringe cases that the code could not deal with. Thus they need another 4 weeks to nail down all of those fringe cases. Then once they finally test it, they need a server and the admin to install all of the stuff. FINALLY three months later the web service is done, everything is converted in seconds and the secretary looks at the programmer and says, "you know I could have done that in a few hours..."
Yes programers believe they can do that in seconds. BUT can they code exactly what is necessary in less time than a human needs to do something? And lets do an ROI... Secretary costs X, programmer costs 2X+X for incidentals like getting a server etc. Thus if secretary can copy content in database can programmer write and deploy code in Total / 2 * (2X + X). I am putting the 2 in because if the programmer = secretary then what is the point? Thus there must be some profit.
I will give the short answer... NO... Simpler, but painful to watch, to let the secretaries do the copy and paste.
Instead of teaching programming, like you say maybe teach about problem solving? Oh wait that is called being logical! Oh wait maybe that can be called logic and is, I don't know, part of the MATH curriculum! I don't think learning how to program, for everybody, is a good idea. Here are my issues with it:
1) What language? Unless you decide to keep up in programming languages whatever you learn is going to be completely and uterly useless.
2) What paradigm? Once you have decided on a programming language are you going to teach via an IDE? Text editor? How about file system communications? Database? Complications, complications, complications...
I help my niece with her math and my biggest beef today is that you have history, or philosphy folks teaching math. You can teach math and science in two ways. The first and this is what I fear is happening all too much is to teach via remembering the formulas and solutions. This achieves nothing and leads the problems in computer science and science we have today. The second approach and this is more difficult since it requires an innat understanding of math and science is to teach it in the abstract. I teach math to my niece in the abstract and she GETS it (when she pays attention). I try to get her to understand why the formula she just learned is actually created and what purpose it serves. I get her problem solving skills involved! Oh wait is that not what you try to do with programming?
Wow you sound like an old European! I remember that in the past America used to be the land where people would just pick up and move from one place to another. Granted it was in the US, but now that the Americans might have to get out of their comfort zone and all hell breaks out. Sorry, but American's have become too laid back, too much resting on their laurels!
Let me clarify my point... Let me put it in the context from my world which is trading:
If I only had the computers like Goldman Sachs I could make money like Goldman Sachs. With cloud computing I am now able with a couple of good traders to make money like Goldman Sachs.
The fallacy of the argument is that Goldman Sachs needs the computers to make money. The reality is that Goldman Sachs needs the traders not the computers. For Goldman Sachs the computers could be hamsters running in a wheel, as the important key are the traders.
Thus by him saying that now with cloud computing he is on equal plane with Pixar is completely missing the point that it has never been about tech. It has been about how story writers use tech! Thus cloud computing will neither enable or disable you. Anybody can create a Pixar type story given enough computing time. Remember Pixar needs to pump out a movie in a year. Who is to say that you cannot create a short story in a year using plain vanilla computers.
My case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOgYOD5S8gk This guy was a sensation because what mattered is that he had good enough animation with an incredibly good story. Or how about the numa numa guy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmtzQCSh6xk It does not get any cheaper and simpler than that! Yet this guy has 18 million views and featured on South Park. And while I am on this thread, how much real computing power is needed for South Park?
Understand my point? Understand why the GP is incorrect?
Wow hiding behind anonymous, but spoken like somebody who like me has gone through it. I learned by the market. I thought, "hey I am a geek and can write algos thus I should be able to make money regardless..." HA right... The tech is secondary!
Really? You can do everything that say a studio can do? I am going to sound very cynical, but this is a typical techy answer to why they are not as popular as Pixar or Disney.
1) So you want to purchase computing time? To get something like Pixar you are going to digging deep into your pockets. Not just a little deep, but very deep. I am giving a talk at a developer conference on the merits and usability of the Amazon cloud. Granted it is an enabler, not going to debate that. But to say that it will put you on equal computing power as Pixar is a little navie.
2) Yes Pixar and Disney have oodles of techy's all running around using the computer. Lest it be known that Pixar and Disney employ's a whole bunch of writers, producers, musicians, and so on. The reason why CGI is so cool and neat is because the people (read actors, writers, producers) are professionals and they know how to BUILD a STORY! I have seen short movies done with Blender and let me tell you while it looks good, for the most part the movies are pure and utter rubbish!
I am not saying it can't be done, I am saying that just because you have the cloud does not mean you actually have a movie worthy to be compared to Pixar or Disney.
I am going to say this bluntly since it is late, probably not going to be read by anybody... Oh what you write is POS! Yes a big huge heaping POS!
You say that people will building plagues and releasing them to humans and all of the sudden all of mankind will be wiped out. You watch too much Hollywood! I actually read up on this topic and guess what it should have already happened.
Plagues cannot and will not wipe us out because of the way we humans work. One of the deadliest of all plagues is the Ebola virus. Oddly though that it never has managed to wipe out mankind, no? There is no cure to Ebola, no help, extremely contagious once you get it you might as well say goodnight. You hope that you manage to survive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_disease
So here is the question why have we managed to survive? What is it? The answer is that the more dangerous the virus the lesser of a worry it is to humans. This is because very dangerous virus burn themselves out before they manage to spread themselves. Want to know what the deadliest virus is? And it is not man-made... Drum roll.... AIDs, HIV! It is the perfect virus because it does not kill its host right away. It takes years even decades before people start dying. This allows the virus to be spread from one host to another and allows the virus to unfold itself.
And look at how successful Aids/HIV has been? It is essentially all around the world and literally killing millions of people. While it has dropped from the main stream media, it is still a problem and will remain a problem.
But hey you can't make a dangerous and deadly movie about the Aids virus because well that would be like watching paint dry! No we rather talk about the virus that spreads like wildfire and kills all of us off!
Get real dude...
Shhh.... Boeing does not do this....
http://abcnews.go.com/US/southwest-airlines-boeing-knew-737-flaw-expect-problem/story?id=13300089#.TwomuU8gifg
"The aviation giant Boeing admitted today that it was aware of weaknesses in its 737 jets, but it never expected a 15-year-old Southwest Airlines jet to crack open in mid-flight. "
So why is this an issue with Airbus? One you said union, but I wonder if there is not some Boeing prodding going on here!!!
Really? Ok tell that to the database, operating system, and IDE vendors? You don't see much competition and don't see much improved margins in that.
Oracle makes money not by selling databases, but selling services around their databases. IBM makes their money not by selling the software, but the services around their product. It is only Microsoft that is stupid and keeps thinking they keep on selling software.
I am saying it is devastating the software development and sell model because there is no money in that market anymore. You have to use software to sell something else. It is a means to greater profits. Not saying it is good, nor bad. Just saying as it is.
Remember I sit here on a Linux box, using Mono as my development environment to write algo code to make money in the stock market. I am not complaining here!!! But there is no way in HECK that I would decide to create trading software and sell it.
Ok so you have this open source project that is REALLY popular, woopee... I need to eat, live and sleep. If you look at those making money with Open Source I stand by my point it is a winner take all model. There are only a few who can actually make a living with Open Source.
Why are you introducing governments? I am talking about software? Open Source does not really offer any competition at all. I remember attending a very good session by a lawyer at an O'Reilly conference. He talked from the perspective of competition and took away the open source part. In that perspective there was as much of a monopoly in the individual markets as if it were a binary only world. However we don't view it as such because most of these products are open source and hence we don't see them as threatening.
Ok I will play ball...
We used to have Sybase, but not much of that company exists today. Then we had Silicon Graphics, and not much of that company exists today. Then we had Borland that went away with all of its products. How about Eudora? The list goes on...
Now you might say, "but oh oh these companies had bad business models". Not so quick. In a software industry there is always room for a certain number of players. The problem with open source is that it cuts down the number of competitors to winner takes all. So in the database arena we have a couple of big players, and the open source players. There are no more smaller binary only software vendors. Take a look at IDE's. Same thing there. Remember Eclipse USED to be a for pay product, and then it was open sourced.
Dude, I started out in the IT industry as a profession in 92 after my engineering degree. I have been active in the software industry since the Commodore Pet. Until 2000 there was what I would call a vibrant shareware, second tier software industry. Sure you had the big players, but there were plenty of little players around. Now no more.
I actually would agree with you that companies partially drove to Open Source to save costs. It was because software developers cost too much, which is pointing out the obvious. BUT it does not detract from my point that you can't make money like you used to as a software developer. The days of becoming another Bill Gates are gone. Remember that the Facebook guy is not selling software. This is MY ENTIRE point... He is making money not by selling software, but using software to sell something else. This is a very important distinction...
I am not cherry picking the highest salary of 2000 as the dotcom bubble bursting. Remember that at the time there was a life outside of silicon valley. And I would argue that in silicon valley you made peanuts because you received stock grants. It was outside the valley where you made real cash. I remember I used to be able to charge 150 USD per hour, and I had friends that were Oracle large database consultants that were pulling in about 400 to 500 K in CASH... Now you would be lucky if you can pull in about 100K.
I never implied that Open Source caused the bubble crash! I said that with the rise of Open Source which started after the bubble crash wages and the software industry changed fundamentally. I am not saying it is good, nor bad. IT IS what IT IS.
Come on get real here...
The freemium model is a sucky model. It does not mean that freemium can't work for some. Just like how OpenSource works for some, eg Redhat, but on the whole Open Source is devastating the software development and sell model. Compare the revs of those companies that only sell software and those companies that sell or enhance or what have you with open source. The difference in monies is monumental! I am not complaining here, I am saying it as it is.
I remember nearly a decade ago I was at SD hosting a BOF on the impact of Open Source. We danced for hours around the issue and it was a very good BOF. At the end I summed it up and we all agreed, the software developer will not make the same amount of money as they had until the 2000 crash. I stand by the statement and it was true. Since 2000 the wages of the software industry as a developer have been driven down due to Open Source, and due to out sourcing.
Again not saying that nobody can make money. It is just that Software has become a winner take all model. Where a few make good decent money, but most struggle to make any money. I instead use Open Source to solve other problems. Makes things good for me though, but I am not creating base infrastructure software like I did in the 90's. It is what it is, and freemium is the same thing...
it is not useful in the least. he gives an example of turning off a monitor and being able to access it in a few clicks. the problem with that is that the user needs to know that they want or need to turn off the monitor.
Not to say that I am overly impressed with the Chinese approach, but to say that they are really bad is saying his shirt is much dirtier. The problem is that in the US most social media is censored quite a bit! And that I find sad... BTW google eg facebook censorship.
I trade the market and this was always a question for me, can the Chinese be innovative. And here we have it, they can be innovative. Not that I thought they couldn't. I was just wondering WHEN.
Here is the problem that the US faces, less so in Europe. WTF does America do anymore? I mean really?
But here is what I think we will disagree with. The current market is not about that. It is about being able to sell an experience. I just read an article that said specs are dead. The Kindle Fire is doing well regardless of the specs. The Kindle Fire is about being able to cater to a set of people to deliver a specific experience at a cheap price. NONE, I repeat NONE of the Android makers are doing that.
Nice come back... Yeah I bought an Acer Iconia tablet as I read my reviews, and compared it to the Asus Transformer. It seemed ok as a decision. BTW these upgrade problems and such are not the exclusivity of Acer. It is the same with Asus, Motorola, etc. It is a fundamental problem in the Android market.
I agree with you that I might have done something stupid. Or maybe Macs are a problem. However, and this is my issue, what if it is a Mac or network, it is only Android that suffers. Thus IMO it becomes an Android issue since it is ruining my experience.
As somebody who has both a HoneyComb tablet/Samsung 7" tablet and an iPad (original and 2) I have to say I am really really disappointed with Android. Android has four flaws:
1) Hardware update support SUCKS! I have both a Sony Ericsson Xperia phone, and Acer Iconia Tablet. When I bought the phone it was essentially out of date because Sony said to get the new Android OS you need to buy the more expensive phone. HAD I known that I would not have bought the phone. However Sony did a 180 and said, "ok ok ok we will get you an update." When the original update was released it too Switzerland 7 months to get it. The exact same thing happened with my Acer Iconia. Acer kept hemming and hawing on their 3.1 update and being in Switzerland I was essentially at the tail end of the release. I had Acer Germany unlock the code for me to get my update. This just effen sucks! The Android vendors don't get updates! They just think it is an opportunity for you to buy the latest and greatest piece of hardware NOT!
2) The apps are lacking on Android. Two apps come to mind; Aligator water, and Wetter.com. Put the iPad and Android tablet edition side by side and what you see is that the iPad or iOS app is so much better. Why is that? When I run my Android apps they are slower, and jerkier (yes this has been discussed due to the software architecture choices made). Frankly I don't shive a git! I want a smooth flowing tablet and if Apple found the ideal way so be it, it is the right approach.
3) Hardware software compatibility. I have so many little tweaks and twiddles with the Android system that it just tires me out. Take for example setting up the wireless networking. On my iOS I can use DHCP and everything works. For some odd and strange reason with Android the network connections drop, come back, drop, come back, and drop and come back. They do this for about 5 minutes until they just stay connected. If I put in a network address all is good. Of course you could argue, "wait your network does something funny." Well my answer is that my laptops (windows, linux, and OSX) work just fine, as does my iPhone, and iPad. Thus while maybe it is network issue, I consider it an Android issue since the other devices are ok.
4) The hardware is sub-standard by most, not all vendors in comparison to Apple. Most of the Android hardware sucks. I have a Samsung tablet and it is not bad. Good quality. The Acer is ok, but things like battery life just suck. Overall for the amount of money I pay I am disappointed.
Overall I have to say I am completely disappointed with Android (had high hopes) as I feel Google is doing piss poor job of ensuring a certain amount of quality and usability. Android might sell more devices, but unless Android really changes its stripes it will always be a cheap-skates paradise...
No...
I just switched my home network (I trade for a living) to Linux and OSX. It was rough doing the switch since, as the Munich people found out, the details can be frustrating. I had to rewrite some apps in Java as the Mono code could not handle some functionality. But once that development was done, Linux/OSX work like a charm.
I use OSX for my notebook as I have not found a better notebook with Linux on it. For the desktop machines hands down Linux. But I would also add this ease of use where things just work happened in the last year. I have been using Linux since Yggardsil in 95, but completely usable only the last year. Maybe it FINALLY is the year of Linux ;)
BTW why did I switch to Linux and OSX? Cost! With the new Metro interface and the move away from .NET ( yes yes C# still exists, yada, yada, but it is not the same API! and hence still problematic) I would have to cough up around 5500 USD, and that was just too much. Solution, get Linux, get some Ubuntu One cloudspace, and buy Apple notebooks, still saved money...
it will not work worth a damm! because yet again americans think this is a technology problem. what do i offer as proof? read the recent right wing case in germany. these criminals lived ten years off the grid and murdered 8 people in cold blood without so much as a clue. they did it because they borrowed one id after another. but hey why let facts get in the way of an awesome computer program that is as useful as a paperweight.