Before purchasing, I would wait until the end of July. According to this story, Apple is going to release some Windows software for managing the iPod. I have a feeling that this software is going to allow Windows users to work with the iPod like you can work with it on the Mac. (Flashing memory, restoring system, etc.) Of course, it will still be easier on a Mac.
I saw a story on Apple releasing some software for the iPod on Windows? I would be shocked if the software doesn't allow you to restore the system on your iPod. You only need to wait until the New York conference (a few weeks away).
Why does this kill the iMac? If you ripped out the G4 components and dropped in a P4, everyone on/. would be trying to get one and run Linux on it. If you attempt to think outside the box, you could connect some dots in an intresting pattern...
Apple leverages Intel or AMD for chip designs. How many end users care about internal processors. They just want fast. Port OS X (using the resources they got from NeXT) to this new hardware platform. Continue to package the computer in new and exciting ways with the Apple software. Is the iPod still the iMac killer then? Cheaper hardware, better user interface and faster chip speeds (even if it doesn't matter). br. Wait...what would you complain about then?
That it is. It's more likely that a native Flash MX plugin for Linux will appear that uses a lot of other open source libraries. Besides the development tools, where else would Macromedia make money?
Might be. I know when the took over the site, they kept the existing FreeBSD servers in place. Maybe it was just too difficult to move their stuff over so they left elements. I know they did switch a large section to Windows later...caused a nice service outage, but hey. Yo0u get what you pay for.
It is possible to put together software the same way, however you cannot always tune the software components to your specific purpose.
That would be your components lacking rohbustness and expandability. It's just like real life. My Honda has some stock parts that no matter what I try, I won't be able to tune them outside of the spec. Again, we need to train developers to think about these kinds of reuse and stop chasing the hot new technology.
If you're one of the unfourtant saps in the business world of programming. Look at some of the most common languages used for developing applications:
* C - since 1970s
* C++ - since 1980s
* Java - since 1992
* COBOL - since god knows when
These languages have become foundations to professional development because they don't change every two years. It's not like someone just inventing a new pseudo-scripting language and then trying to pass it off as the greatest thing in the world.
PS. I don't include VB as a professional language. Anytime the parser need to change to accomidate new libraries and technology, you're too damn close to the solution.
More programmers are not going to solve the problem. Under your theory, I could triple my staff and then my libraries would be great. It just doesn't work that way in real life. I always need to cope with diminishing returns.
Instead of hiring more average programmers, we should look for the small group that really understands what a good design is and understands how to use different methodologies to get the job done...of course, many more programmers wouldn't be programmers then.
The 'artists', the exploited posterchildren of all of this, are really powerless to have a say, and they are being tugged around in a battle that concerns their very nature, living and wellfare, in which they really have no voice.
This isn't really true. Recently, a fair number of artists have been speaking out on the current music distribution system. Plus, a lot of bands have been moving towards independent labels. Side One Dummy is a prime example of a record label that is listening to the consumers. In fact, they have releases a lot of MP3s to emusic.com. The established record companies should worry. These new, smaller labels are pleasing their customers and their clients.
I think the message isn't explained as well as it should be. Frameworks provide a necessary means to add functionality to an operating system. It's a Good Thing that Apple and other vendors can expand the functionality of the OS.
They don't want developers to make frameworks for their individual applications. Instead of putting your code in a framework for Quicken, look at other means of code reuse. Why? Then you don't have a framework that only one application can use. It's like adding a million DLLs to Windows for a single application. Will anyone else use the DLL code? If not, why introduce the complexity.
Also think about situations where people are moving in and out of areas with the same call. The total time to find a tower through the network would still be huge. Does the call just pause until it finds a new path through the network.
It's a great thought. I know that I've been cut off a number of times heading to Milwaukee from Chicago. Too many callers and not enough bandwith, but until we find better ways to discover paths through a complex graph data structure, I don't see this sort of technology working for much longer.
Unless my cell phone is now a P4, with a nice 54Mbps Wi-Fi connection....
Central control really isn't a problem execpt that it can lead to corrupt decisions that only have single sided benefits. By making everyone an equal, their is no single controller of DNS information or DNS policies in the world.
I'm not a DNS expert by any means, but why let a single orginization control the.com TDL? Why not allow a distributed database of.com TDLs through. Once an entry is out their, only the orginiating service can remove it. If it's taken, too bad. You should have been quicker to register the name. I thought that was the plan for some of these TDLs.
Once we work on that, why not look at allowing any number of TDLs? If you want to create your own TDL, you can do it. No need to play to the ICANN group or anyone else. But with the new TDL, comes the responsibility to make sure that you support and manage the TDL. No matter how many TDLs you add, people will still look to.com as the main TDL.
Where is the list of bug fixes? I've been reporting bugs for a month now and I wanted to see if they've been fixed. All I see is this small list of vauge "enhancements".
It's funny that in this day and age where the distributed technologies are ruining the music business that we still can't find a way to remove all central control from the DNS system. Am I really off base with this?
Kind nice that it comes as Microsoft wants to drop support for their old code. So, the game is to have your goverenment control ICANN. Then they declare HTTP and old protocol with many holes and bring in the MSTP (Microsoft Transport Protocol). And then they apply their non-GPL terms to the software. Please tell me it's a dream....
Tim O'Reilly actually commented on this same issue in his weblog. It's intresting to note that as a publisher he knows that the business of trying to stop book use like the RIAA is trying to stop MP3 use won't work. Take a look at O'Reilly and the network of information they setup. I'm sure no one is hurting over their and consumers still have the ability to buy, sell, loan, etc. books in their library.
I'll agree that sharing the library with many other languages is kind of a cool concept....for an academic study. I've worked at enough companies and sat in on the standards committees to know what's going to happen.
1) Sell management on.Net. Promise that the current skill set can be used to create web applications.
2) Form a standards committee to select one of the many languages for use in.Net. All new projects must be done in this language. Form a standard set of naming and structure guidelines.
3) Hire a series of hot shot college grads and f*ck the system programmers who want to use their langauges because they are gods and know best.
4) Develop the application with mixed languages for years.
5) Watch all of the hot shot programmers who brought in non-standard technology leave for the next best thing.
6) Hire teams of consultants to undo the mess known as your system because you don't have the resources to recruite people who know multiple langauges.
It's always funny to see Linux people act like they know a lot about other versions of Unix. Too bad emacs isn't included on the HP or Solaris boot CDs. What you going to use to edit that fstab file after you foobar it the first time? It's also not the time to learn about vi either.
I would disagree. Wrote a lot of daemons for insurance processing on HPUX (10.20 even). Wasn't so bad once you got around a few of the small HP differences. I wouldn't avoid it like the plague. Now AIX....there's one to avoid like the plague. It's not BSD-based and it's not AT"T based. It was the most frustrating platform in the world. Not only do you never know what options the commands use, but at times IBM created their own option listing.
Slashdot Mirror
Before purchasing, I would wait until the end of July. According to this story, Apple is going to release some Windows software for managing the iPod. I have a feeling that this software is going to allow Windows users to work with the iPod like you can work with it on the Mac. (Flashing memory, restoring system, etc.) Of course, it will still be easier on a Mac.
I saw a story on Apple releasing some software for the iPod on Windows? I would be shocked if the software doesn't allow you to restore the system on your iPod. You only need to wait until the New York conference (a few weeks away).
Well, that 's doesn't mean anything....does it? I did misunderstand the orginial post.
Why does this kill the iMac? If you ripped out the G4 components and dropped in a P4, everyone on /. would be trying to get one and run Linux on it. If you attempt to think outside the box, you could connect some dots in an intresting pattern...
Apple leverages Intel or AMD for chip designs. How many end users care about internal processors. They just want fast. Port OS X (using the resources they got from NeXT) to this new hardware platform. Continue to package the computer in new and exciting ways with the Apple software. Is the iPod still the iMac killer then? Cheaper hardware, better user interface and faster chip speeds (even if it doesn't matter).
br.
Wait...what would you complain about then?
That it is. It's more likely that a native Flash MX plugin for Linux will appear that uses a lot of other open source libraries. Besides the development tools, where else would Macromedia make money?
Might be. I know when the took over the site, they kept the existing FreeBSD servers in place. Maybe it was just too difficult to move their stuff over so they left elements. I know they did switch a large section to Windows later...caused a nice service outage, but hey. Yo0u get what you pay for.
Why don't you go over to NetCraft to find out?
It is possible to put together software the same way, however you cannot always tune the software components to your specific purpose.
That would be your components lacking rohbustness and expandability. It's just like real life. My Honda has some stock parts that no matter what I try, I won't be able to tune them outside of the spec. Again, we need to train developers to think about these kinds of reuse and stop chasing the hot new technology.
If you're one of the unfourtant saps in the business world of programming. Look at some of the most common languages used for developing applications:
* C - since 1970s
* C++ - since 1980s
* Java - since 1992
* COBOL - since god knows when
These languages have become foundations to professional development because they don't change every two years. It's not like someone just inventing a new pseudo-scripting language and then trying to pass it off as the greatest thing in the world.
PS. I don't include VB as a professional language. Anytime the parser need to change to accomidate new libraries and technology, you're too damn close to the solution.
More programmers are not going to solve the problem. Under your theory, I could triple my staff and then my libraries would be great. It just doesn't work that way in real life. I always need to cope with diminishing returns.
Instead of hiring more average programmers, we should look for the small group that really understands what a good design is and understands how to use different methodologies to get the job done...of course, many more programmers wouldn't be programmers then.
The 'artists', the exploited posterchildren of all of this, are really powerless to have a say, and they are being tugged around in a battle that concerns their very nature, living and wellfare, in which they really have no voice.
This isn't really true. Recently, a fair number of artists have been speaking out on the current music distribution system. Plus, a lot of bands have been moving towards independent labels. Side One Dummy is a prime example of a record label that is listening to the consumers. In fact, they have releases a lot of MP3s to emusic.com. The established record companies should worry. These new, smaller labels are pleasing their customers and their clients.
I think the message isn't explained as well as it should be. Frameworks provide a necessary means to add functionality to an operating system. It's a Good Thing that Apple and other vendors can expand the functionality of the OS.
They don't want developers to make frameworks for their individual applications. Instead of putting your code in a framework for Quicken, look at other means of code reuse. Why? Then you don't have a framework that only one application can use. It's like adding a million DLLs to Windows for a single application. Will anyone else use the DLL code? If not, why introduce the complexity.
Also think about situations where people are moving in and out of areas with the same call. The total time to find a tower through the network would still be huge. Does the call just pause until it finds a new path through the network.
It's a great thought. I know that I've been cut off a number of times heading to Milwaukee from Chicago. Too many callers and not enough bandwith, but until we find better ways to discover paths through a complex graph data structure, I don't see this sort of technology working for much longer.
Unless my cell phone is now a P4, with a nice 54Mbps Wi-Fi connection....
I thought that E-911 (or something like that) worked on the same principal, instead they needed to use four towers in some rural areas.
Doh! I wonder what TDL stands for...
Why is central control a problem?
.com TDL? Why not allow a distributed database of .com TDLs through. Once an entry is out their, only the orginiating service can remove it. If it's taken, too bad. You should have been quicker to register the name. I thought that was the plan for some of these TDLs.
.com as the main TDL.
Central control really isn't a problem execpt that it can lead to corrupt decisions that only have single sided benefits. By making everyone an equal, their is no single controller of DNS information or DNS policies in the world.
I'm not a DNS expert by any means, but why let a single orginization control the
Once we work on that, why not look at allowing any number of TDLs? If you want to create your own TDL, you can do it. No need to play to the ICANN group or anyone else. But with the new TDL, comes the responsibility to make sure that you support and manage the TDL. No matter how many TDLs you add, people will still look to
I've even used iTools with Mozilla 1.0 without a problem. Screw the IE thing.
Where is the list of bug fixes? I've been reporting bugs for a month now and I wanted to see if they've been fixed. All I see is this small list of vauge "enhancements".
It's funny that in this day and age where the distributed technologies are ruining the music business that we still can't find a way to remove all central control from the DNS system. Am I really off base with this?
Kind nice that it comes as Microsoft wants to drop support for their old code. So, the game is to have your goverenment control ICANN. Then they declare HTTP and old protocol with many holes and bring in the MSTP (Microsoft Transport Protocol). And then they apply their non-GPL terms to the software. Please tell me it's a dream....
Tim O'Reilly actually commented on this same issue in his weblog. It's intresting to note that as a publisher he knows that the business of trying to stop book use like the RIAA is trying to stop MP3 use won't work. Take a look at O'Reilly and the network of information they setup. I'm sure no one is hurting over their and consumers still have the ability to buy, sell, loan, etc. books in their library.
I'll agree that sharing the library with many other languages is kind of a cool concept....for an academic study. I've worked at enough companies and sat in on the standards committees to know what's going to happen.
.Net. Promise that the current skill set can be used to create web applications.
.Net. All new projects must be done in this language. Form a standard set of naming and structure guidelines.
1) Sell management on
2) Form a standards committee to select one of the many languages for use in
3) Hire a series of hot shot college grads and f*ck the system programmers who want to use their langauges because they are gods and know best.
4) Develop the application with mixed languages for years.
5) Watch all of the hot shot programmers who brought in non-standard technology leave for the next best thing.
6) Hire teams of consultants to undo the mess known as your system because you don't have the resources to recruite people who know multiple langauges.
You mean I can't just ship it after it compiles. Well, that changes everything.
Sincerely,
William Gates, III
emacs - edit a file
It's always funny to see Linux people act like they know a lot about other versions of Unix. Too bad emacs isn't included on the HP or Solaris boot CDs. What you going to use to edit that fstab file after you foobar it the first time? It's also not the time to learn about vi either.
I would disagree. Wrote a lot of daemons for insurance processing on HPUX (10.20 even). Wasn't so bad once you got around a few of the small HP differences. I wouldn't avoid it like the plague. Now AIX....there's one to avoid like the plague. It's not BSD-based and it's not AT"T based. It was the most frustrating platform in the world. Not only do you never know what options the commands use, but at times IBM created their own option listing.