>Miguel De Icaza needs to be cut out of his position of authority. His track record in recent years, his Microsoft affiliation, his blaming the desktop on Linus recently, has shredded any credibility he had to lead Linux desktop development
This is one of the problems with the Linux community. The cargo cult irrational hate and zealotry and bigotry.
Miguel has not been associated with Gnome in over 5 years now. You ignorance is surpassed only by your hate of people who actually know much much more than you.
Also, much of the community effort seems to be in wasted providing workarounds, and writing long bash scripts to address gaps in functionality. I bet much more effort is spent on writing those forum replies and scripts rather than what would be involved in actually fixing the issue or functionality gap.
And then we have people pointing out the issues with the scripts and trying to fix them. So in the end you have very poorly discoverable forum posts with workarounds that may or may not work for your configuration.
I guess this is because projects do not welcome contributors, and actively drive them away even if they want to contribute("Works for me!".
This is one of the problems with the community. Most of the folks have used Windows only about 10 years ago and refuse to keep up with what's happening in the real world except to make condescending comments on the carefully picked anti-MS stories with bullshit summaries, leading to a knowledge gap of the real meat.
Do you know there are differences between '(Announced' and 'Released') and (final SDK and beta SDK) right? You're comparing apples to oranges.
>LOL at your insinuation that Microsoft's code is more open then Googles tho. That was gold.
Only in the aspect of pre-release software. Microsoft generally has beta versions available to ALL OEMs(see Windows and Windows Phone). Google plays favorites with OEMs and picks only one blessed OEM to make Nexus(Samsung last year) to get the beta code. Once the Nexus is out, Google only then releases the new version of everyone, and the rest of the OEMs are left scrambling to port their changes and update their old phones. Why do you think it takes so long for the OEMs to release Android OS updates for their handsets?
Were you able to download ICS or JB beta SDKs? So why are you comparing that to WP's beta SDK?
>The day Gingerbread/ICS/JB was announced I could develop for it - ok maybe there was a day or two while it was uploaded - but none of this "oh sorry, only a few developers are allowed to work on JB"
I know this is Slashdot's bash MS article of the hour but citation please?
We're talking about a pre-release version. Was there a prerelease version/SDK of ICS distributed to OEMs or public outside of Google/Samsung? Even Windows beta versions are released to the public, unlike Google's completely closed development of Android(source code is thrown over a wall at release time, unlike Linux, Firefox etc.)..
>Nokia had increasing sales! Including increasing sales of "smartphones"!!
Everyone with half a brain cell knew Symbian was not sustainable. Apple and Android were just taking their time in Asia and Europe.
>Nokia had a huge cash mountain (> 5Billion Dollars!!)
That doesn't mean anything really, without data on debt, assets, bonds etc.
>If you had just taken Nokia's spare money, put it into a separate company and started building a mobile phone based on Android, recruiting people from scratch, you would have had a very good chance of getting into a major position in the market.
>Symbian sales only started going down after the "Eliop Effect" made everyone think they were a dead end
Symbian had to be dropped like a hot potato to save the company. The Nokia execs working on Symbian did everything they can to kill Meego/Maemo for their personal benefit thus making Nokia suffer hugely even before Elop was hired.
If it's possible to install Mac OS X on the Surface, I may buy one.
Aside from the fact that you'd be waiting for the x86 version(which was suggested to be launching 90 days after the RT version being discussed in the FA), what good will that do because OS X does not support touch?\
Well, of course you should be able to use it as a more portable Macbook Air, but I guess that's it. Using it as a tablet might be an exercise in frustration.
I was talking about how the interview didn't talk about Apple and the iPad at all, only about ARM based devices running Windows 8. The same with the Firefox rant about browser choice on Windows RT.
If Microsoft got what it demands, that ARM devices that runs Win 8 be permanently locked, then the only option that I have, as a consumer, is to NOT BUY THAT DEVICE
No point of supporting dictatorial regime, be it political dictatorial, or hardware dictatorial
The elephant in the discussion is the iPad, an ARM based device with a locked bootloade. No one wants to talk about making it illegal, only Windows RT tablets must be outlawed, Apple is free to do whatever they want. Say you bought an iPad on Slashdot, automatically get +5 for not choosing a PC with Windows. But guess what? Apple bans Firefox from the iPad while you can even install Linux on a PC.
And if the Windows RT device is made by Microsoft themselves, they are free to lock it down howerver they like, just as Apple does with its iPads. But since when does Microsoft get to lock down at the hardware level what software can or can't run on devices created by companies they don't, e.g., Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.?
How does the difference help the user? In fact it hurts hardware choice because it encourages companies to make their own hardware instead of an OS that supports multiple OEMs. Such companies won't be able to subsidize hardware based on software or media purchases like the Kindle Fire or Nook can. Nightmare scenario, Apple and MS each take 50% of the market and lock everything else out, pointing to the other as a proof that they're not a monopoly.
If you're talking about the lock, you're talking about Microsoft ARM devices, not desktop devices. Microsoft has no monopoly there, and is FAR behind Apple in that market.
Under antitrust law, it's illegal to leverage your monopoly in one field (desktop operating systems) to gain market share in another field (tablets and smartphone OSes).
So if you buy a PC, you get a free Windows RT tablet forcibly bundled with it and no way to uncouple them?
WebOS also promised that you can write apps in HTML/JS and look at what happened to the Touchpad when it took on the iPad.
Developers flock to the platforms with most users, ease of development is only a small factor because the alternatives like iOS, Android and WP have reasonable dev environments. If the market was owned by Blackberry, he would have a point, since it's just TERRIBLE for development.
1) They're either selling the hardware at cost or taking a loss at $99. Big console manufacturers make it back on $60 games. It will be really tough to make it off 30% of 99c games.
2) Storage, 8 GB(minus OS space) is really low, and you don't want to be downloading from the cloud all the time. XBox gets away with a 4GB model because it has a DVD drive. Throw in a SD card slot atleast or a cheap SSD.
3) Hardware: The hardware seems woefully inadequate. Tegra 3 is okay for now but in 2013 when they actually launch? Also, it's not a good thing to upgrade hardware even every year because that will fragment the games, so that hardware at launch is a very important baseline.
4) And the last big thing: PATENTS. The big players and patent trolls will be all over this company by the time it even sees minimal success. With the controller looking very similar to the existing ones, expect a huge patent attack.
Anyway, nice to see an underdog coming up in the console games, but it's hard to understand why Google can't make something like this. They already have Google TV and they release something like the Nexus Q at $299?
Wow, I liked your post, was happy it was modded up(would've done it myself if I had mod points) and I actually wrote the quoted line not to counter your point. The "You" in that line meant all of us in general, maybe even me included.
The problem is not with the right to free speech, but the whole "corporations are people" line and that thus they derive the inalienable rights enshrined in the constitution for humans.
Guess what? The founders did not intend those rights for corporations. "Groups of people" are just that, "Groups of people", not a human. You want to grant free speech rights to corporations because you think that's a good and proper thing? Fine, do that with an act of Congress, not by twisting definitions which have a proper meaning.
It is the equivalent of trying to give Medicare to money by defining them as people. You want to do that? Fine, pass a law, but mucking around with the definition itself is definitely not the intent of the law
Slashdot Mirror
>Miguel De Icaza needs to be cut out of his position of authority. His track record in recent years, his Microsoft affiliation, his blaming the desktop on Linus recently, has shredded any credibility he had to lead Linux desktop development
This is one of the problems with the Linux community. The cargo cult irrational hate and zealotry and bigotry.
Miguel has not been associated with Gnome in over 5 years now. You ignorance is surpassed only by your hate of people who actually know much much more than you.
Also, much of the community effort seems to be in wasted providing workarounds, and writing long bash scripts to address gaps in functionality. I bet much more effort is spent on writing those forum replies and scripts rather than what would be involved in actually fixing the issue or functionality gap.
Linux forums are FULL of posts like this:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=11926504
http://kyleabaker.com/2010/07/11/how-to-fix-your-ubuntu-boot-screen/
And then we have people pointing out the issues with the scripts and trying to fix them. So in the end you have very poorly discoverable forum posts with workarounds that may or may not work for your configuration.
I guess this is because projects do not welcome contributors, and actively drive them away even if they want to contribute("Works for me!".
So you want to copy Microsoft instead?
http://www.winsupersite.com/content/content/143721/radial.jpg;pv1db3ffa28531898a
This is one of the problems with the community. Most of the folks have used Windows only about 10 years ago and refuse to keep up with what's happening in the real world except to make condescending comments on the carefully picked anti-MS stories with bullshit summaries, leading to a knowledge gap of the real meat.
But the big attraction of LInux is that it's free. Once you add support costs, it's going to lose that edge.
Do you know there are differences between '(Announced' and 'Released') and (final SDK and beta SDK) right? You're comparing apples to oranges.
>LOL at your insinuation that Microsoft's code is more open then Googles tho. That was gold.
Only in the aspect of pre-release software. Microsoft generally has beta versions available to ALL OEMs(see Windows and Windows Phone). Google plays favorites with OEMs and picks only one blessed OEM to make Nexus(Samsung last year) to get the beta code. Once the Nexus is out, Google only then releases the new version of everyone, and the rest of the OEMs are left scrambling to port their changes and update their old phones. Why do you think it takes so long for the OEMs to release Android OS updates for their handsets?
Were you able to download ICS or JB beta SDKs? So why are you comparing that to WP's beta SDK?
>The day Gingerbread/ICS/JB was announced I could develop for it - ok maybe there was a day or two while it was uploaded - but none of this "oh sorry, only a few developers are allowed to work on JB"
I know this is Slashdot's bash MS article of the hour but citation please?
We're talking about a pre-release version. Was there a prerelease version/SDK of ICS distributed to OEMs or public outside of Google/Samsung? Even Windows beta versions are released to the public, unlike Google's completely closed development of Android(source code is thrown over a wall at release time, unlike Linux, Firefox etc.)..
http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/news/item/14960_100000_apps_published_to_Windo.php
Like that. The comments section for this article is full of of ignorant blowtard haters that fail at reading comprehension.
That's an exceedingly lame attempt at a joke.
>Nokia was profitable!
True, like RIM was profitable last quarter.
>Nokia had increasing sales! Including increasing sales of "smartphones"!!
Everyone with half a brain cell knew Symbian was not sustainable. Apple and Android were just taking their time in Asia and Europe.
>Nokia had a huge cash mountain (> 5Billion Dollars!!)
That doesn't mean anything really, without data on debt, assets, bonds etc.
>If you had just taken Nokia's spare money, put it into a separate company and started building a mobile phone based on Android, recruiting people from scratch, you would have had a very good chance of getting into a major position in the market.
You mean like HTC that's suffering horribly now?
http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/09/htc-criticism-2012-apple-samsung-competition/
http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/07/htc-q3-2012-earnings-guidance-market-cap/
>Symbian sales only started going down after the "Eliop Effect" made everyone think they were a dead end
Symbian had to be dropped like a hot potato to save the company. The Nokia execs working on Symbian did everything they can to kill Meego/Maemo for their personal benefit thus making Nokia suffer hugely even before Elop was hired.
- credit to phands on IV for pointing this out.
What's IV?
Lotus wont run!
Nor much of anything else for that matter.
Make that Lotus Notes and here's $39.99 !
If it's possible to install Mac OS X on the Surface, I may buy one.
Aside from the fact that you'd be waiting for the x86 version(which was suggested to be launching 90 days after the RT version being discussed in the FA), what good will that do because OS X does not support touch?\
Well, of course you should be able to use it as a more portable Macbook Air, but I guess that's it. Using it as a tablet might be an exercise in frustration.
I was talking about how the interview didn't talk about Apple and the iPad at all, only about ARM based devices running Windows 8. The same with the Firefox rant about browser choice on Windows RT.
If Microsoft got what it demands, that ARM devices that runs Win 8 be permanently locked, then the only option that I have, as a consumer, is to NOT BUY THAT DEVICE
No point of supporting dictatorial regime, be it political dictatorial, or hardware dictatorial
The elephant in the discussion is the iPad, an ARM based device with a locked bootloade. No one wants to talk about making it illegal, only Windows RT tablets must be outlawed, Apple is free to do whatever they want. Say you bought an iPad on Slashdot, automatically get +5 for not choosing a PC with Windows. But guess what? Apple bans Firefox from the iPad while you can even install Linux on a PC.
And if the Windows RT device is made by Microsoft themselves, they are free to lock it down howerver they like, just as Apple does with its iPads. But since when does Microsoft get to lock down at the hardware level what software can or can't run on devices created by companies they don't, e.g., Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.?
How does the difference help the user? In fact it hurts hardware choice because it encourages companies to make their own hardware instead of an OS that supports multiple OEMs. Such companies won't be able to subsidize hardware based on software or media purchases like the Kindle Fire or Nook can. Nightmare scenario, Apple and MS each take 50% of the market and lock everything else out, pointing to the other as a proof that they're not a monopoly.
Those aren't locked either. Install iPhone Linux or iDroid. Apple doesn't care if you load another OS on their hardware, they get paid either way.
Then why does the iDroid wiki page say it's waiting for a boot exploit for the iPhone 4S and the newer iPads? The bootloader is obviously locked.
http://www.idroidproject.org/wiki/Status
>they get paid either way.
They lose on app store and iTunes purchases.
If you're talking about the lock, you're talking about Microsoft ARM devices, not desktop devices. Microsoft has no monopoly there, and is FAR behind Apple in that market.
Under antitrust law, it's illegal to leverage your monopoly in one field (desktop operating systems) to gain market share in another field (tablets and smartphone OSes).
So if you buy a PC, you get a free Windows RT tablet forcibly bundled with it and no way to uncouple them?
WebOS also promised that you can write apps in HTML/JS and look at what happened to the Touchpad when it took on the iPad.
Developers flock to the platforms with most users, ease of development is only a small factor because the alternatives like iOS, Android and WP have reasonable dev environments. If the market was owned by Blackberry, he would have a point, since it's just TERRIBLE for development.
Flatline in an EKG means zero electrical activity.
Flatline in a sales graph would mean zero sales, not just sales being steady.
>after all the wisdom of crowds is never wrong
Really? Or was that sarcasm?
Here are the problems I foresee:
1) They're either selling the hardware at cost or taking a loss at $99. Big console manufacturers make it back on $60 games. It will be really tough to make it off 30% of 99c games.
2) Storage, 8 GB(minus OS space) is really low, and you don't want to be downloading from the cloud all the time. XBox gets away with a 4GB model because it has a DVD drive. Throw in a SD card slot atleast or a cheap SSD.
3) Hardware: The hardware seems woefully inadequate. Tegra 3 is okay for now but in 2013 when they actually launch? Also, it's not a good thing to upgrade hardware even every year because that will fragment the games, so that hardware at launch is a very important baseline.
4) And the last big thing: PATENTS. The big players and patent trolls will be all over this company by the time it even sees minimal success. With the controller looking very similar to the existing ones, expect a huge patent attack.
Anyway, nice to see an underdog coming up in the console games, but it's hard to understand why Google can't make something like this. They already have Google TV and they release something like the Nexus Q at $299?
When are the malware writers going to support BSD?
> notice it a lot on anything that praises open source or even tangentially like this Android running device
What? That's just your confirmation bias. For example, this story is actually super critical of the Nexus Q.
So according to your own logic, maybe it's the pro-open source crowd doing this to bury articles like this? :)
...but years ago there was a tethering app disguised as a flashlight app so it's been possible for a long time.
A tethering app is malware... but only according to Apple.
For their users, it's an extremely useful piece of software.
Wow, I liked your post, was happy it was modded up(would've done it myself if I had mod points) and I actually wrote the quoted line not to counter your point. The "You" in that line meant all of us in general, maybe even me included.
The problem is not with the right to free speech, but the whole "corporations are people" line and that thus they derive the inalienable rights enshrined in the constitution for humans.
Guess what? The founders did not intend those rights for corporations. "Groups of people" are just that, "Groups of people", not a human. You want to grant free speech rights to corporations because you think that's a good and proper thing? Fine, do that with an act of Congress, not by twisting definitions which have a proper meaning.
It is the equivalent of trying to give Medicare to money by defining them as people. You want to do that? Fine, pass a law, but mucking around with the definition itself is definitely not the intent of the law
Yes, but what good reason will most developers have to uncheck the ARM box and drive down their sales?
This relates to the OP's point about apps.