I already have hella powerful machinery and oceans of storage space at home... the hell do I need to clog up my bandwidth (and in my case, bandwidth allocation thanks to Sat. Internet) just so that Adobe can rent their software instead of buying it?
You don't. This is so people don't have to shell out for "hella powerful machinery" and "oceans of storage space" just to do these things. It's even better for companies because they don't need to maintain hardware and buy highend desktops and laptops. They have a subscription for the software (rather than re-purchasing annually) and a decent internet connection and then they can use that software on pretty much any system and aren't tied to the systems to which the software is licensed.
And I totally get that it might not be for you, it isn't for everybody. But it's more convenient for their biggest customers in the industry and even for the education industry. The main place it doesn't work is for the very occasional users, those that want to just use an old version because it works for them. In that case you should probably switch to something like The GIMP, sure it isn't as fully featured as the industry incumbents but for the very occasional users it should do just fine and if it lacks something you need you can build it yourself or pay somebody to do it for you, that's the open source way.
I'm one of those very occasional users that used a copy of CS2 so I don't have a subscription and I've transitioned to The GIMP for those times when Aperture (which is now discontinued) isn't enough.
But when you have dependencies on non-free services, a reliance on machine learning that requires big data or any kind of infrastructure that you can't easily replicate it means you aren't going to be doing the computing on your own computer. AGPL is good but often in the context of SaaS it isn't practical.
Does Google actually sell that data to 3rd parties? I can see how they monetize it by selling the opportunity for advertisers to target a specific demographic but that is a very different thing to actually selling the data that "Joe Bloggs searched XYZ at this time and sent this email to Jen Bloggs at this time".
Also, while being able to do some sort of programming is important in quite a few jobs, there are plenty of jobs where it isn't.
But as we have seen the list of jobs where it is important is growing, in some jobs where it previously wasn't used at all it is now commonplace.
Computer science should be made available as an elective, to expose students to programming and give them some idea as to what computers can and cannot do. I don't think it should be required.
Computers themselves are used in far more places now than ever before and coding gives a basic understanding of how they work, it's a very good way to get people familiar with computer use. Like I said, just because you learn it in school doesn't mean it is going to be applicable to everybody's life or job, coding is no different to those other things.
You were claiming that there's a significant difference between someone who can write gcode and someone who has to manipulate things manually, and I don't see it.
Well I don't think I was but I would say it is true, if you can automate it rather than having to do it manually there most certainly is a significant difference.
Milling is complicated, and even if you understand the gcode you won't necessarily understand what's going to happen inside the mill.
Nobody said you would.
Your list of jobs that may require programming isn't all that long
It's not all that comprehensive either. Do you actually have so little exposure that you think that list really is everything? Surely you're not going to pretend you're that ignorant now are you?
For someone who's going to be a physicist, I would recommend learning something about programming. For someone who's going to be a chef, I'd recommend skipping it in favor of something else.
There are a lot of things you learn in school that aren't applicable to every field of work. The point is coding is becoming a part of more and more jobs as time goes on - which is obvious if you've been paying attention - so saying "no no no we shouldn't expose people to coding in high school because they might choose a career where you don't need it" is pretty short-sighted.
That you create an analogy of "recipes" doesn't mean casual knowledge of cooking will mean people understand how to write gcode. But it's not even just that, if you're a mathematician, physicist, chemistry researcher, visual effects designer, CAD/CAM/CAE experts and even CAD designers these days you will be coding to some degree so learning the basic concepts early is most certainly advantageous.
Well, keep kidding yourself. Your "criticism" does not touch me, because none of it has any relation to reality.
Well actually it does. So the question is whether you don't know that this is what happens in the industry or whether - and this is perfectly valid - your definition of "coding" is more synonymous with software engineering than it is with writing code.
So are you saying you don't think people in mathematics, physics, chemistry, design, visual effects, etc... write code? Or that you don't consider their writing of code to be "coding"?
Nope, it's correct and your smallmindedness and foul mouth doesn't change that, sorry. If you had real experience in the industry you would know how correct that is, but your lame attempt a one-line rebuttal shows that you don't have that at all.
Next you will be claiming that authors are coding because they type text into a machine. Or that everybody is a surgeon because they can apply a band-aid.
No, I won't, nor did what I wrote imply that I would.
Some things are jobs for specialists that have the aptitude for it, because anybody else will never be any good at it. Coding is such a thing.
No, it isn't. Coding is just a process that is done by many different disciplines in science, engineering and mathematics to express and solve problems. Mathematicians, physicists, chemistry researchers, structural engineers, visual effects artists and even industrial designers these days use coding in their day-to-day work. That might be writing CFD simulation code in R for a physicist, mathematicians writing AMPL to solve complex problems, visual effects artists writing shaders to describe physical effects or even scripting in CAD design environments to produce requirements-driven designs.
Coding is applicable to more and more industries than ever these days. I don't know about code.org's methodology or who funds it or what conspiracy theories there might be about that but dismissing the importance of coding in education demonstrates a real ignorance of how coding is used in the real world. And no, not everybody is going to use it in every industry but that goes for most of the stuff taught in high schools.
I do mostly Linux embedded software and I like to develop directly on the remote targets that don't have a screen. In this context Visual Code Studio is unusable as virtually any graphic IDE.
Well yes, so that's a pretty massive caveat that you failed to mention. It's blindingly obvious that any graphical IDE is going to be totally unusable if you don't have a GUI.
What an uninformative way to completely dismiss anything, equally applicable to whatever it is you use. Firstly "totally unusable" is likely hyperbole and given that it is multiplatform (Windows, OS X, Linux - with deb and rpm packages) open source and also has an interface for extensions I'm wondering what exactly the problem is here. What is your use case in which it is "totally unusable"? Or is it just because it's made by Microsoft?
If I'm doing quick edits I most often use vi (was never an emacs fan) but I've found for more extensive editing VSCode is great, maybe you prefer something like Notepad++ (which is also open source) but it seems more a matter of preference than capability.
I don't know, bandwidth maybe? You only just learned what it is so I doubt you know enough about it to question them but they have a forum and list their contact information so you can go and ask them. Post back when you get a response.
Are you an idiot because you work for those idiots?
If I worked for them I would be able to answer the above, but I don't so I can't.
So, you have exactly pointed-out what Apple's dilemma was: They were damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.
No they weren't. They could leave it where it is, include an adapter or remove it with no compatibility at all (like they have done in the past), any of those is fine. I use bluetooth for headphones and car connections so I don't have a problem with any of those choices.
Oh, so courageous of them! Just so courageous, praise Apple.
Even if, hypothetically, the act of removing the 3.5mm headphone jack was actually considered "courageous" the fact remains that they didn't even do that. As multiple people have pointed out they are including it in the box and have a fully-supported path for it going forward. Exactly what is the act here that you think is courageous? Making it slightly more of a pain in the ass to use by moving it from built-in to accessible and supported via an extra accessory?
Not to mention the fact that CDM is exclusively for delivering non-free DRM content where Flash was a non-free software platform used to deliver both free and non-free content. It really only existed to compensate for the deficiencies of HTML, but with HTML5 we have pretty much everything Flash could do and more but as an added bonus it is compatmentalized so if you're opposed to non-free content and software then all you have to do is remove the CDM.
If the chair maker makes a chair that takes him 48 hours to make. He is going to sell it at a price worthy of the time he put into it. That is partially why you can spend $15.00 on a cheap injection molded plastic one or $1500 on a nice hand carved one.
And while a single one of the injection molded chairs would cost many thousands to make in terms of design, engineering, mold production, machine setup and materials the fact that this can be done once and then the cost amortized across the production of many thousands of chairs is what makes it viable.
Obviously people aren't willing to pay for a bunch of journalists to travel the world reporting the news to them exclusively so instead the cost of this is amortized by everybody who receives that news contributing a little bit to funding it. It's produced once and then sold multiple times because the price to gather it is too great to be viable to sell it just once.
Right, which is why I said "PC gaming", not "Windows 10 gaming".
BTW, my distaste and dislike for Win10 doesn't lessen your apparent love for it.
Love for it? What are you even talking about? Maybe you need to re-read what I wrote, it seems you are replying to something else. I'm asking why you "grew to hate it" given that in the context of gaming it is little more than a slightly different application launcher.
I wonder if they are tracking this. I think they need to be reminded of this - all three of them.
Tracking what? What are you even talking about? What "collusion"? Microsoft isn't backporting updates to support these new processors therefore Windows versions before Windows 10 will not work with them. How is this "collusion"? And who exactly are you suggesting is colluding and with who?
I'm wondering if this is where they employ the 'secure boot' where the OS needs an Intel/MS-signed key for the chipset to run it.
No, it isn't.
They and their criminally-colluding accomplices at MS can collectively set themselves on fire take a flying leap into a wood-chipper.
You seem to be really really confused about this. It's not that difficult to understand: Intel and AMD are releasing new CPUs, changes would require Microsoft to backport support for these CPUs to their older operating systems, they have said they will not do that. That's all. No idea where you're getting this idea that there is collusion, criminal or otherwise, nor who it might be that is colluding or what you think they are doing.
To give you some perspective. I use Win7 as my home/gaming OS and Linux as my work/dev OS. I went to Win10, tried it for a month, grew to hate it.
What do you mean "grew to hate it"? For a gamer it's as simple as turning it on and then loading up whatever game you want to play and it's the same in any version of Windows or better yet open up Steam. PC gaming isn't as complicated as it used to be and you don't have to dick around in the OS to optimize things on a daily basis.
I expect UEFI lock down will soon prevent Linux from being installed.
Except that this is controlled by the hardware manufacturers, like Dell, HP & Lenovo that ship systems with Linux distributions pre-installed. They can install whatever keys they want in the system, or - as they do now - just have a switch to turn it off or use the Microsoft system for signing a bootloader and using Microsoft's key.
Slashdot Mirror
I already have hella powerful machinery and oceans of storage space at home... the hell do I need to clog up my bandwidth (and in my case, bandwidth allocation thanks to Sat. Internet) just so that Adobe can rent their software instead of buying it?
You don't. This is so people don't have to shell out for "hella powerful machinery" and "oceans of storage space" just to do these things. It's even better for companies because they don't need to maintain hardware and buy highend desktops and laptops. They have a subscription for the software (rather than re-purchasing annually) and a decent internet connection and then they can use that software on pretty much any system and aren't tied to the systems to which the software is licensed.
And I totally get that it might not be for you, it isn't for everybody. But it's more convenient for their biggest customers in the industry and even for the education industry. The main place it doesn't work is for the very occasional users, those that want to just use an old version because it works for them. In that case you should probably switch to something like The GIMP, sure it isn't as fully featured as the industry incumbents but for the very occasional users it should do just fine and if it lacks something you need you can build it yourself or pay somebody to do it for you, that's the open source way.
I'm one of those very occasional users that used a copy of CS2 so I don't have a subscription and I've transitioned to The GIMP for those times when Aperture (which is now discontinued) isn't enough.
There is AGPL. It was made with SaaS in mind.
But when you have dependencies on non-free services, a reliance on machine learning that requires big data or any kind of infrastructure that you can't easily replicate it means you aren't going to be doing the computing on your own computer. AGPL is good but often in the context of SaaS it isn't practical.
Does Google actually sell that data to 3rd parties? I can see how they monetize it by selling the opportunity for advertisers to target a specific demographic but that is a very different thing to actually selling the data that "Joe Bloggs searched XYZ at this time and sent this email to Jen Bloggs at this time".
And HP. Why not vote with your wallet and support those that support you rather than giving money to both Lenovo and Microsoft.
Also, while being able to do some sort of programming is important in quite a few jobs, there are plenty of jobs where it isn't.
But as we have seen the list of jobs where it is important is growing, in some jobs where it previously wasn't used at all it is now commonplace.
Computer science should be made available as an elective, to expose students to programming and give them some idea as to what computers can and cannot do. I don't think it should be required.
Computers themselves are used in far more places now than ever before and coding gives a basic understanding of how they work, it's a very good way to get people familiar with computer use. Like I said, just because you learn it in school doesn't mean it is going to be applicable to everybody's life or job, coding is no different to those other things.
Precisely! There is System 76, that now offers a wide variety of choices. Go for those.
You can even get Dell Inspiron, Latitude and Precision laptops with Ubuntu pre-installed.
You were claiming that there's a significant difference between someone who can write gcode and someone who has to manipulate things manually, and I don't see it.
Well I don't think I was but I would say it is true, if you can automate it rather than having to do it manually there most certainly is a significant difference.
Milling is complicated, and even if you understand the gcode you won't necessarily understand what's going to happen inside the mill.
Nobody said you would.
Your list of jobs that may require programming isn't all that long
It's not all that comprehensive either. Do you actually have so little exposure that you think that list really is everything? Surely you're not going to pretend you're that ignorant now are you?
For someone who's going to be a physicist, I would recommend learning something about programming. For someone who's going to be a chef, I'd recommend skipping it in favor of something else.
There are a lot of things you learn in school that aren't applicable to every field of work. The point is coding is becoming a part of more and more jobs as time goes on - which is obvious if you've been paying attention - so saying "no no no we shouldn't expose people to coding in high school because they might choose a career where you don't need it" is pretty short-sighted.
That you create an analogy of "recipes" doesn't mean casual knowledge of cooking will mean people understand how to write gcode. But it's not even just that, if you're a mathematician, physicist, chemistry researcher, visual effects designer, CAD/CAM/CAE experts and even CAD designers these days you will be coding to some degree so learning the basic concepts early is most certainly advantageous.
But we aren't talking about C++ programming, just the most basic concepts of coding in general.
Well, keep kidding yourself. Your "criticism" does not touch me, because none of it has any relation to reality.
Well actually it does. So the question is whether you don't know that this is what happens in the industry or whether - and this is perfectly valid - your definition of "coding" is more synonymous with software engineering than it is with writing code.
So are you saying you don't think people in mathematics, physics, chemistry, design, visual effects, etc... write code? Or that you don't consider their writing of code to be "coding"?
That is bullshit.
Nope, it's correct and your smallmindedness and foul mouth doesn't change that, sorry. If you had real experience in the industry you would know how correct that is, but your lame attempt a one-line rebuttal shows that you don't have that at all.
Next you will be claiming that authors are coding because they type text into a machine. Or that everybody is a surgeon because they can apply a band-aid.
No, I won't, nor did what I wrote imply that I would.
Some things are jobs for specialists that have the aptitude for it, because anybody else will never be any good at it. Coding is such a thing.
No, it isn't. Coding is just a process that is done by many different disciplines in science, engineering and mathematics to express and solve problems. Mathematicians, physicists, chemistry researchers, structural engineers, visual effects artists and even industrial designers these days use coding in their day-to-day work. That might be writing CFD simulation code in R for a physicist, mathematicians writing AMPL to solve complex problems, visual effects artists writing shaders to describe physical effects or even scripting in CAD design environments to produce requirements-driven designs.
Coding is applicable to more and more industries than ever these days. I don't know about code.org's methodology or who funds it or what conspiracy theories there might be about that but dismissing the importance of coding in education demonstrates a real ignorance of how coding is used in the real world. And no, not everybody is going to use it in every industry but that goes for most of the stuff taught in high schools.
I do mostly Linux embedded software and I like to develop directly on the remote targets that don't have a screen. In this context Visual Code Studio is unusable as virtually any graphic IDE.
Well yes, so that's a pretty massive caveat that you failed to mention. It's blindingly obvious that any graphical IDE is going to be totally unusable if you don't have a GUI.
For you maybe. Totally unusable in my case.
What an uninformative way to completely dismiss anything, equally applicable to whatever it is you use. Firstly "totally unusable" is likely hyperbole and given that it is multiplatform (Windows, OS X, Linux - with deb and rpm packages) open source and also has an interface for extensions I'm wondering what exactly the problem is here. What is your use case in which it is "totally unusable"? Or is it just because it's made by Microsoft?
If I'm doing quick edits I most often use vi (was never an emacs fan) but I've found for more extensive editing VSCode is great, maybe you prefer something like Notepad++ (which is also open source) but it seems more a matter of preference than capability.
Why do the idiots at Occulus not use Bluetooth?
I don't know, bandwidth maybe? You only just learned what it is so I doubt you know enough about it to question them but they have a forum and list their contact information so you can go and ask them. Post back when you get a response.
Are you an idiot because you work for those idiots?
If I worked for them I would be able to answer the above, but I don't so I can't.
So, you have exactly pointed-out what Apple's dilemma was: They were damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.
No they weren't. They could leave it where it is, include an adapter or remove it with no compatibility at all (like they have done in the past), any of those is fine. I use bluetooth for headphones and car connections so I don't have a problem with any of those choices.
Oh, so courageous of them! Just so courageous, praise Apple.
Even if, hypothetically, the act of removing the 3.5mm headphone jack was actually considered "courageous" the fact remains that they didn't even do that. As multiple people have pointed out they are including it in the box and have a fully-supported path for it going forward. Exactly what is the act here that you think is courageous? Making it slightly more of a pain in the ass to use by moving it from built-in to accessible and supported via an extra accessory?
Not to mention the fact that CDM is exclusively for delivering non-free DRM content where Flash was a non-free software platform used to deliver both free and non-free content. It really only existed to compensate for the deficiencies of HTML, but with HTML5 we have pretty much everything Flash could do and more but as an added bonus it is compatmentalized so if you're opposed to non-free content and software then all you have to do is remove the CDM.
If the chair maker makes a chair that takes him 48 hours to make. He is going to sell it at a price worthy of the time he put into it. That is partially why you can spend $15.00 on a cheap injection molded plastic one or $1500 on a nice hand carved one.
And while a single one of the injection molded chairs would cost many thousands to make in terms of design, engineering, mold production, machine setup and materials the fact that this can be done once and then the cost amortized across the production of many thousands of chairs is what makes it viable.
Obviously people aren't willing to pay for a bunch of journalists to travel the world reporting the news to them exclusively so instead the cost of this is amortized by everybody who receives that news contributing a little bit to funding it. It's produced once and then sold multiple times because the price to gather it is too great to be viable to sell it just once.
You don't have to dick around with Win7 either.
Right, which is why I said "PC gaming", not "Windows 10 gaming".
BTW, my distaste and dislike for Win10 doesn't lessen your apparent love for it.
Love for it? What are you even talking about? Maybe you need to re-read what I wrote, it seems you are replying to something else. I'm asking why you "grew to hate it" given that in the context of gaming it is little more than a slightly different application launcher.
I wonder if they are tracking this. I think they need to be reminded of this - all three of them.
Tracking what? What are you even talking about? What "collusion"? Microsoft isn't backporting updates to support these new processors therefore Windows versions before Windows 10 will not work with them. How is this "collusion"? And who exactly are you suggesting is colluding and with who?
I'm wondering if this is where they employ the 'secure boot' where the OS needs an Intel/MS-signed key for the chipset to run it.
No, it isn't.
They and their criminally-colluding accomplices at MS can collectively set themselves on fire take a flying leap into a wood-chipper.
You seem to be really really confused about this. It's not that difficult to understand: Intel and AMD are releasing new CPUs, changes would require Microsoft to backport support for these CPUs to their older operating systems, they have said they will not do that. That's all. No idea where you're getting this idea that there is collusion, criminal or otherwise, nor who it might be that is colluding or what you think they are doing.
To give you some perspective. I use Win7 as my home/gaming OS and Linux as my work/dev OS. I went to Win10, tried it for a month, grew to hate it.
What do you mean "grew to hate it"? For a gamer it's as simple as turning it on and then loading up whatever game you want to play and it's the same in any version of Windows or better yet open up Steam. PC gaming isn't as complicated as it used to be and you don't have to dick around in the OS to optimize things on a daily basis.
That's not a great example, seeing as how Microsoft ultimately won that battle.
Yet we have Dell shipping Ubuntu laptops (XPS, Insprion and Precision) that they certainly weren't before.
I expect UEFI lock down will soon prevent Linux from being installed.
Except that this is controlled by the hardware manufacturers, like Dell, HP & Lenovo that ship systems with Linux distributions pre-installed. They can install whatever keys they want in the system, or - as they do now - just have a switch to turn it off or use the Microsoft system for signing a bootloader and using Microsoft's key.