Somehow the redirection got added there and files became corrupted. Since he's also specifically suing Delta Air Lines, it surely sounds like hacking took place.
And well, he was quite successful (like the article says in right the beginning)
Two years ago, the 30-year-old computer programmer became one of the first people to sell his product—a puzzle game called Trism—through Apple's App Store, a virtual marketplace where third-party software developers connect with customers wanting downloads for their iPhones. He pulled in $250,000 in just two months and quit his job writing code for ATMs. Demeter's success caught the eye of Apple's public-relations team, which profiled him in an inspirational video at Apple.com and gave him a shout out at its June 2009 World Wide Developers' Conference (WWDC). Media hailed the San Francisco resident an "App Store Millionaire" who would never have to work again—a happy financial reality that Demeter confirms. "Nine-to-five is no longer a concept for me," he tells NEWSWEEK.
Which seems quite successful for me. He then used the income to buy Palm stocks at low price and selling at high. He didn't specify how much he got out of it, but I guess it's enough to spend a few weekends partying in Las Vegas and New York.
I wonder whats the use for 3D laptop, and if this works better than the existing tech?
NVIDIA 3D Vision is great with some games, but laptops aren't usually used for that and you would probably want atleast 17" screen if you'd get it for gaming. So whats the use?
Exactly so. Americans dont seem to mind killing or abusing people as long as its not their own ones. USA is still the only country that has used nuclear weapons against other nation, and while on that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians.
IE is bad example because its not really meant for power users. In my opinion Opera (closed source, free to use) is way ahead of Firefox. But taking that aside, browsers are actually where open source can get income easily, because Google keeps supporting them to have Google as the default search engine. Both Opera and Firefox are funded the same way (granted, Opera also has income from developing their browser to mobile phones and Wii and various other platforms - just this weekend I was in a hotel and the tv suddenly 'rebooted' and it displayed Powered by Opera logo on startup)
He has a point (and doesn't even mention Microsoft anywhere).
Open source development is often plagued with the lack of focus. And of course its like that, because *most* of the developers and programmers don't get paid for it. When you do and when software is produced commercially, there's lots of focus on it because it will also bring in the money. That's why most closed source *is* better than open source alternatives. Photoshop vs GIMP, Adobe Premiere vs. ??, Visual Studio vs. dev-c++.... And dont even get me started on games.
That idea is also increasingly accepted by hard-headed business people: it's become self-evident that it's a better way.
Of course this doesn't apply everywhere, but with things like Qt (cross-platform application and UI framework) it makes sense that everyone benefits from it. It's large things with thousands of users that do benefit from it, but if you're doing business with the the same product you cant really open it up and except still to get revenue - unless you go for the support route, but it also only works to certain types of products.
"The Android browser offers most of the things people need. But I think today IE is still dominating the online world, a lot of websites are still optimised for IE"
This is probably just some intranet sites inside companies or schools. Chrome and other browsers should be just fine for all web browsing (though yeah, sometimes I do need to switch to IE for some site to work - but it's not often)
Interesting thing is that Android is also available for PC's. Can it be downloaded from somewhere?
3a. Is the string in front of ':' a known protocol name? Then you have protocol:host.
But thats the thing. If you just look for http/https/ftp/file and the most used ones, you're going to break the idea of URL's. Now your browser cant support any other kind of urls, be that irc: spotify: miranda-im: or thousand of other ones.
Because URL is not just for webpages - it's used for other protocols too. Just like you can click on a http link in other program, you can click other programs link in your browser. This can be irc:// mailto: spotify: and so on. And theres many instances where websites have such links to launch external application directly from it.
My examples showed that the standard:port option, which is optional, would have to be removed for it to work. Or it would had to be made mandatory, or the : changed to something else (which would make even less sense, since hostname:port is the standard way to show it).
http:example.com/path/to/file.txt With option to use alternative syntax like: http:[example.com:80]/path/to/file.txt or http:example.com@80/path/to/file.txt or http:example.com/80//path/to/file.txt
All of these examples are way more bad than just having the:// there (which is quite a standard in URI's too). And the @ would break username:password@ combo, so that would need changing too. And host:80 is the standard way to put hostname and port number together.
I don't understand how this got rated interesting when any decent parser can tokenise a given HTTP address without the protocol prefix. Where the prefix format matters is reliable URL detection in normal text, but even here http: would be as sufficient as mailto: (which doesn't need slashes). There is no technical reason, it could have saved us a lot of time explaining people web addresses.
Only way that kind of parser can detect its an http url then is to look at www.something.com. www prefix obviously isn't required, and many sites have different subdomains (like tech.slashdot.org - which wouldn't get parsed as http link).
Theres still a few problems though. For one, mouse is an incredibly precise input device - you can pretty easily move it along same pixel axis, or get it precisely to a specific pixel. It's hard to do that with your fingers because the area they touch is a large one, it's not easy to just move your finger by one pixel and your hand tend to shake a little bit too. If you look at the video, you see everything in the interface is quite big and even a few small windows take lots of place.
Other problem is that now your both hands lay on the wide touch area and you dont have a keyboard. If you put them side to side, you'll only have one hand on the touch area and dont get the full power of it. Moving hands between them all the time is inefficient. Typing on the touch area gives no feedback and again takes your hands of the "mouse".
It would also be quite impossible to play FPS or other kinds of games with this type of setup.
So no, I still dont see touch interfaces replacing the usual keyboard+mouse combo anytime soon. However, I would love to have this kind of system in my living room (either just for the tv, or the computer thats connected to tv screen). It's clumsy to have keyboard or mouse in living (at the moment I have MX Air -mouse, which is okayish), but this would be perfect for such job. Not for a desktop pc replacement though.
From technical point of view, *not* having the// could create problems more easily. For example if you include port number in the URL and browser or program tries to look at what protocol it is based on value before first :
http://tech.slashdot.org:80/story/09/10/14/1219215/Tim-Berners-Lee-Is-Sorry-About-the-Slashes http:tech.slashdot.org:80/story/09/10/14/1219215/Tim-Berners-Lee-Is-Sorry-About-the-Slashes Now if you dont write that http: in browser: tech.slashdot.org:80/story/09/10/14/1219215/Tim-Berners-Lee-Is-Sorry-About-the-Slashes
Now the browser would think the protocol is tech.slashdot.org and tries to pass it to a responsible program instead of loading it. This means you would now need to actually type in the http: which none of us do now. Or dropping general URI support from browsers and IM windows and any other programs (you know all those irc:// spotify: and so on URI's). Or then typing in the:80 would be mandatory.
But email was better suited to the way we used to use the Internet—logging off and on, checking our messages in bursts. Now, we are always connected, whether we are sitting at a desk or on a mobile phone. The always-on connection, in turn, has created a host of new ways to communicate that are much faster than email, and more fun.
Why wait for a response to an email when you get a quicker answer over instant messaging?
Because you don't always need some response within 15 secs, nor do you want to always be responding to some questions that take away your time and concentration. Even if you have your email client open all the time, you can leave writing a reply to it for later time.
If you know you need a quicker response, you send an IM or call my phone. Something in between and you send an SMS.
For that matter I dont want everyone to know everything about me, I dont want everyone to know I'm available or not, I dont want everyone to know all the other people I know, nor do I want everyone to know something that only certain people should know.There's also no way you'll get me to install facebook or twitter apps on my phone. If I'm not on computer, there's no need to contact me other way than calling me (and I dont even always keep my phone with me - if I'm busy with other stuff, I'll call you back on better time)
They have many more carrier deals than the iPhone has, and already more devices. Expect the tables to turn in 1-2 years. Apple will become the niche and Android will be everywhere.
iPhone and Android are in different kinds of market. iPhone's disadvantage *is not* that it only has one device on the market; it's an advantage for Apple, since it's the exact same phone for the whole platform, while in Android (and Symbian/Windows Mobile and so on) developers have to count all different kinds of devices and make separate apps for every phone. However, for Android it's also their advantage that they will have more models on the market.
They do not necessarily have to fight with each other. Both PC and Consoles have been for long in the same gaming market and both are still doing good. And iPhone and Android are even more far away from each other.
I do care about the openness of Phone, or so I always think. I love Windows Mobile (and my HTC has better interface than the usual WM one) because theres no restrictions on what apps you can install, like on iPhone and Symbian.
But then again, why? Yes it's great when you want to install certain app and theeres nothing in way of that (as long as theres such app available), but frankly I dont use the phone so much that I really care much. I might sometimes play around with some new fancy app I found, but then it goes back to what phones are made for - calling and sms (and having an easy memo to carry with you, take pictures and listen to music - which I could most likely do with iPhone too).
I can understand really good why "normal people" just dont care about such. They can easily get the apps from the store anyway.
It's not really a problem in PC, it can be assumed everyone has atleast keyboard and a mouse and if you're playing games, graphics card too. What it comes down to is if you have enough RAM, CPU and powerful enough graphics card and you can see the requirements from the package (or online).
Phones are different because of the actual hardware differences. Like you said, some phones might have (multi)touch or not, physical keyboard or just software keyboard, 3d acceleration, different types of physical keyboards, different resolutions and so on. Since iPhone is always the same kind, it's easier to develop to it.
However for Windows Mobile and Symbian game developers have usually released different versions for different devices. It might create more barrier for an indie developer to entry the market because they have to test their software on all the supported devices and make adjustments, but for studios it's not so much work. But then again, big studios port their games to all platforms; Symbian, WM, iPhone and Android.
Windows Key + F. Anywhere in the OS. It's been like this for years
Thats not the same thing, it's a search. The "search" box in start menu is like a combination command line and a search. It finds the programs really quickly, hence I dont ever go to the actual All Programs menu. If I need to type in some command, I type it there instead of opening cmd.exe
Slashdot Mirror
Somehow the redirection got added there and files became corrupted. Since he's also specifically suing Delta Air Lines, it surely sounds like hacking took place.
And well, he was quite successful (like the article says in right the beginning)
Two years ago, the 30-year-old computer programmer became one of the first people to sell his product—a puzzle game called Trism—through Apple's App Store, a virtual marketplace where third-party software developers connect with customers wanting downloads for their iPhones. He pulled in $250,000 in just two months and quit his job writing code for ATMs. Demeter's success caught the eye of Apple's public-relations team, which profiled him in an inspirational video at Apple.com and gave him a shout out at its June 2009 World Wide Developers' Conference (WWDC). Media hailed the San Francisco resident an "App Store Millionaire" who would never have to work again—a happy financial reality that Demeter confirms. "Nine-to-five is no longer a concept for me," he tells NEWSWEEK.
Which seems quite successful for me. He then used the income to buy Palm stocks at low price and selling at high. He didn't specify how much he got out of it, but I guess it's enough to spend a few weekends partying in Las Vegas and New York.
And the app is over two years old.
the few ways that do exist typically involve f'n over everyone else, and you ending up in jail at some point.
So who did Bill Gates fuck over?
(he has been arrested tho)
I wonder whats the use for 3D laptop, and if this works better than the existing tech?
NVIDIA 3D Vision is great with some games, but laptops aren't usually used for that and you would probably want atleast 17" screen if you'd get it for gaming. So whats the use?
Exactly so. Americans dont seem to mind killing or abusing people as long as its not their own ones. USA is still the only country that has used nuclear weapons against other nation, and while on that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians.
IE is bad example because its not really meant for power users. In my opinion Opera (closed source, free to use) is way ahead of Firefox. But taking that aside, browsers are actually where open source can get income easily, because Google keeps supporting them to have Google as the default search engine. Both Opera and Firefox are funded the same way (granted, Opera also has income from developing their browser to mobile phones and Wii and various other platforms - just this weekend I was in a hotel and the tv suddenly 'rebooted' and it displayed Powered by Opera logo on startup)
He has a point (and doesn't even mention Microsoft anywhere).
Open source development is often plagued with the lack of focus. And of course its like that, because *most* of the developers and programmers don't get paid for it. When you do and when software is produced commercially, there's lots of focus on it because it will also bring in the money. That's why most closed source *is* better than open source alternatives. Photoshop vs GIMP, Adobe Premiere vs. ??, Visual Studio vs. dev-c++.... And dont even get me started on games.
That idea is also increasingly accepted by hard-headed business people: it's become self-evident that it's a better way.
Of course this doesn't apply everywhere, but with things like Qt (cross-platform application and UI framework) it makes sense that everyone benefits from it. It's large things with thousands of users that do benefit from it, but if you're doing business with the the same product you cant really open it up and except still to get revenue - unless you go for the support route, but it also only works to certain types of products.
"The Android browser offers most of the things people need. But I think today IE is still dominating the online world, a lot of websites are still optimised for IE"
This is probably just some intranet sites inside companies or schools. Chrome and other browsers should be just fine for all web browsing (though yeah, sometimes I do need to switch to IE for some site to work - but it's not often)
Interesting thing is that Android is also available for PC's. Can it be downloaded from somewhere?
3a. Is the string in front of ':' a known protocol name? Then you have protocol:host.
But thats the thing. If you just look for http/https/ftp/file and the most used ones, you're going to break the idea of URL's. Now your browser cant support any other kind of urls, be that irc: spotify: miranda-im: or thousand of other ones.
Of course, but that would complicate things even more since hostname:port is standard way in every program.
Because URL is not just for webpages - it's used for other protocols too. Just like you can click on a http link in other program, you can click other programs link in your browser. This can be irc:// mailto: spotify: and so on. And theres many instances where websites have such links to launch external application directly from it.
My examples showed that the standard :port option, which is optional, would have to be removed for it to work. Or it would had to be made mandatory, or the : changed to something else (which would make even less sense, since hostname:port is the standard way to show it).
So use a different syntax, like
http:example.com/path/to/file.txt
With option to use alternative syntax like:
http:[example.com:80]/path/to/file.txt
or
http:example.com@80/path/to/file.txt
or
http:example.com/80//path/to/file.txt
All of these examples are way more bad than just having the :// there (which is quite a standard in URI's too). And the @ would break username:password@ combo, so that would need changing too. And host:80 is the standard way to put hostname and port number together.
I don't understand how this got rated interesting when any decent parser can tokenise a given HTTP address without the protocol prefix. Where the prefix format matters is reliable URL detection in normal text, but even here http: would be as sufficient as mailto: (which doesn't need slashes). There is no technical reason, it could have saved us a lot of time explaining people web addresses.
Only way that kind of parser can detect its an http url then is to look at www.something.com. www prefix obviously isn't required, and many sites have different subdomains (like tech.slashdot.org - which wouldn't get parsed as http link).
Theres still a few problems though. For one, mouse is an incredibly precise input device - you can pretty easily move it along same pixel axis, or get it precisely to a specific pixel. It's hard to do that with your fingers because the area they touch is a large one, it's not easy to just move your finger by one pixel and your hand tend to shake a little bit too. If you look at the video, you see everything in the interface is quite big and even a few small windows take lots of place.
Other problem is that now your both hands lay on the wide touch area and you dont have a keyboard. If you put them side to side, you'll only have one hand on the touch area and dont get the full power of it. Moving hands between them all the time is inefficient. Typing on the touch area gives no feedback and again takes your hands of the "mouse".
It would also be quite impossible to play FPS or other kinds of games with this type of setup.
So no, I still dont see touch interfaces replacing the usual keyboard+mouse combo anytime soon. However, I would love to have this kind of system in my living room (either just for the tv, or the computer thats connected to tv screen). It's clumsy to have keyboard or mouse in living (at the moment I have MX Air -mouse, which is okayish), but this would be perfect for such job. Not for a desktop pc replacement though.
On an interesting sidenote, if you type in url /. in Opera it goes to slashdot.
Except web-developers you insensitive clod!
If only. There's been countless of times the link goes to something like http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/14/1219215/www.google.com because he didn't write in that http:///
Atleast in here they never pronounce www. in tv or radio, they just say the website address like slashdot.org
From technical point of view, *not* having the // could create problems more easily. For example if you include port number in the URL and browser or program tries to look at what protocol it is based on value before first :
http://tech.slashdot.org:80/story/09/10/14/1219215/Tim-Berners-Lee-Is-Sorry-About-the-Slashes
http:tech.slashdot.org:80/story/09/10/14/1219215/Tim-Berners-Lee-Is-Sorry-About-the-Slashes
Now if you dont write that http: in browser:
tech.slashdot.org:80/story/09/10/14/1219215/Tim-Berners-Lee-Is-Sorry-About-the-Slashes
Now the browser would think the protocol is tech.slashdot.org and tries to pass it to a responsible program instead of loading it. This means you would now need to actually type in the http: which none of us do now. Or dropping general URI support from browsers and IM windows and any other programs (you know all those irc:// spotify: and so on URI's). Or then typing in the :80 would be mandatory.
That's all it comes down to.
But email was better suited to the way we used to use the Internet—logging off and on, checking our messages in bursts. Now, we are always connected, whether we are sitting at a desk or on a mobile phone. The always-on connection, in turn, has created a host of new ways to communicate that are much faster than email, and more fun.
Why wait for a response to an email when you get a quicker answer over instant messaging?
Because you don't always need some response within 15 secs, nor do you want to always be responding to some questions that take away your time and concentration. Even if you have your email client open all the time, you can leave writing a reply to it for later time.
If you know you need a quicker response, you send an IM or call my phone. Something in between and you send an SMS.
For that matter I dont want everyone to know everything about me, I dont want everyone to know I'm available or not, I dont want everyone to know all the other people I know, nor do I want everyone to know something that only certain people should know.There's also no way you'll get me to install facebook or twitter apps on my phone. If I'm not on computer, there's no need to contact me other way than calling me (and I dont even always keep my phone with me - if I'm busy with other stuff, I'll call you back on better time)
They have many more carrier deals than the iPhone has, and already more devices. Expect the tables to turn in 1-2 years. Apple will become the niche and Android will be everywhere.
iPhone and Android are in different kinds of market. iPhone's disadvantage *is not* that it only has one device on the market; it's an advantage for Apple, since it's the exact same phone for the whole platform, while in Android (and Symbian/Windows Mobile and so on) developers have to count all different kinds of devices and make separate apps for every phone. However, for Android it's also their advantage that they will have more models on the market.
They do not necessarily have to fight with each other. Both PC and Consoles have been for long in the same gaming market and both are still doing good. And iPhone and Android are even more far away from each other.
I do care about the openness of Phone, or so I always think. I love Windows Mobile (and my HTC has better interface than the usual WM one) because theres no restrictions on what apps you can install, like on iPhone and Symbian.
But then again, why? Yes it's great when you want to install certain app and theeres nothing in way of that (as long as theres such app available), but frankly I dont use the phone so much that I really care much. I might sometimes play around with some new fancy app I found, but then it goes back to what phones are made for - calling and sms (and having an easy memo to carry with you, take pictures and listen to music - which I could most likely do with iPhone too).
I can understand really good why "normal people" just dont care about such. They can easily get the apps from the store anyway.
It's not really a problem in PC, it can be assumed everyone has atleast keyboard and a mouse and if you're playing games, graphics card too. What it comes down to is if you have enough RAM, CPU and powerful enough graphics card and you can see the requirements from the package (or online).
Phones are different because of the actual hardware differences. Like you said, some phones might have (multi)touch or not, physical keyboard or just software keyboard, 3d acceleration, different types of physical keyboards, different resolutions and so on. Since iPhone is always the same kind, it's easier to develop to it.
However for Windows Mobile and Symbian game developers have usually released different versions for different devices. It might create more barrier for an indie developer to entry the market because they have to test their software on all the supported devices and make adjustments, but for studios it's not so much work. But then again, big studios port their games to all platforms; Symbian, WM, iPhone and Android.
But Java on Android.. meh.
Unskippable is also quite good; not so fast-paced, but theres some fun moments. One good one is Alone in the Dark
Windows Key + F. Anywhere in the OS. It's been like this for years
Thats not the same thing, it's a search. The "search" box in start menu is like a combination command line and a search. It finds the programs really quickly, hence I dont ever go to the actual All Programs menu. If I need to type in some command, I type it there instead of opening cmd.exe