How about JIRA? Used by Enterprises all over the place. You can get it OnDemand from Atlassian for $10 (which is actually just a donation to Room to Read). Check out http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/overview
The problem is that you can't actually patent an algorithm, there are laws that prevent that; but that does stop sleazy lawyers from working around that problem, and what that gives us is overly broad patents. If we let people patent algorithms, we might actually be better off.
This would be very unfortunate for Ubuntu which plans to increase their user base immensely or any new operating system attempting to make a splash in the market. I suspect the reason for this is that it is the easy way. Linux and Unix don't require this to run securely, yet are still secure.
That's a good question. I believe that once you've bought the hardware, it should be yours and you can do what you want with it. You may void warranties, but there should not benaything stopping people from sharing information about jailbreaking a system, nor should it be illegal to do so. It should remain illegal to copy and sell games, but I'm a developer, who would like to play with some nice hardware.
Ontario, Quebec and Alberta actually have legislation that prevents such a clause, which renders Section 15 invalid. This is mentioned in an article about a BC consumer filing a lawsuit against Telus, see this. I haven't tried to track down the actual legislation that prevents these clauses, but CBC tends to be fairly reliable.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.
The problem is not that Microsoft is coming out with something that you can "program" with on your phone. The problem is that you can't really program with it, and the slashdotters have realized this. When you have a "language" that is so efficient that you can create an application in four lines of code, you're giving something up.
What are you giving up?
Likely, you're giving up the ability to actually make something. It seems that TouchStudio will allow you to do the things that the phone already does, but in different ways. But what if you want to do something that the phone can not do. How are you going to do that? And that's where the problem lies.
The problem here is that if you can write a full application in four lines, what are you giving up for that amount of efficiency. You're giving up the ability to really write an application. For doing simple tasks that the phone already does, just in a different way, this would be fine, but for writing an application that actually does something unique, you're likely giving that up.
The best apps on iPhone are written in Objective C, the best apps are written using the Android SDK (which is Java like), the best apps for the iPhone are still likely to be written in.Net. If Windows intends to allow people to sell these applications in their "market," the market will be flooded by sub-par applications, and although they'll be quickly able to claim that they have the same number of apps as the iPhone, the difference in the apps will come down to the types of graphics people used in them.
Bravo, he gets no sympathy from me either. If he took the original Tetris idea and did something interesting with it, then sure, I'd be on his side. But simply making a clone of something, for the purposes of commercial gain, that's lazy and sad.
At the same time, problems can be raised by promoting some of these people to the top of the company. Although they may know the processes, they may not have a fundamental understanding of how to structure and manage a company. This is the problem with the company that I am at. We have so many organizational flaws that our profits never seem to rise, while at the same time, our CEO's bonuses do.
We had an opportunity a couple months to get a new CEO, ours had been fired because of issues within the company. This was a great opportunity to get fresh eyes that could help re-arrange the company and increase profits; however, this did not happen. Instead, the COO was promoted into the CEO position, and since then he has announced that nothing is going to change, we just need to "focus." The problem here is that the net-change is zero. The COO was involved in all those decisions that lead to organizational flaws. The only benefit the company did get, was that he removed the COO position because it wasn't needed. In other words, he admits that for the past five years, he wasn't needed!
I completely agree. In fact, this is one of our main reasons for getting rid of Adobe LiveCycle at our company. When we had a critical issue, we called the support (which has been outsourced to India), we spent hours, upon hours, for days upon days, on the phone with them and were not able to reach a conclusion. The Adobe LiveCycle product happens to run on a Java Web Server, in our case, JBoss. We called their support (which is not out-sourced, hooray!) and they were able to narrow down the problem with LiveCycle within one hour.
Therefor: Adobe = Bad, and we will not be buying any of their non-media based applications in the future (Photoshop is still the best image editor I've used)
JBoss = Good, and if they had full support for Java EE 6 we'd be using them for in-house replacement to LiveCycle
Although very crudely worded, "Anonymous Coward" is right. H.264 is created to make money. By Google removing support for H.264, it pushes for an actual open standard. If Chrome and Mozilla had support for H.264, and IE only supported H.264, then everyone would have to pay the licensing fee.
If however, Google and Mozilla remove support for H.264 and only support open codecs, Microsoft will be forced to adopt open standards as well, rather than slamming Google for "imposing a language on the world," as they've tried to do many times in the past.
This is a step for openness on the server side. Although it looks like it's removing options, it is actually forcing options by forcing Microsoft to play nicely.
Seriously, you didn't know Google was scrapping your G-Mail account. If you really are a privacy zealot, you'd think that you'd read up on the services that you're using. Google has been clear since day one that it was doing that.
The major problem that I see with this is that the d-pad could potentially slip out of d-pad, or disc mode during gameplay if you're sliding your fingers on it. Slide your finger in a quarter-circle... are you now in disc mode when you were in d-pad mode? I see this actually causing issues and being a worse solution than the previosu d-pad.
Do you understand the point of the VM? The VM is there so that you don't have to recompile for every different chipset and operating systems used by the phone manufacturers. This is becoming less and less important as phones seem to be merging into the same OS's anyways, namely iOs and Android, but there are still phones running on proprietary Operating Systems developed by Motorola and the like. The Java VM was a way to develop once and run across all phones. This does not hold true anymore, since Android runs Davlik, and not Java ME, and iOS doesn't support Java at all.
Also, Java has many more advantages than just a garbage collector. It has a vibrant library community, amazing build tools and an evolving compiler, which with the release of JDK 7 will allow for Polyglot programming.
But, in the end, this may be all for not, since with this action, Oracle has deemed that Java is not as open as it once was...
Slashdot Mirror
How about JIRA? Used by Enterprises all over the place. You can get it OnDemand from Atlassian for $10 (which is actually just a donation to Room to Read). Check out http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/overview
I meant doesn't stop... I should really proof-read a bit better before I post
The problem is that you can't actually patent an algorithm, there are laws that prevent that; but that does stop sleazy lawyers from working around that problem, and what that gives us is overly broad patents. If we let people patent algorithms, we might actually be better off.
I agree... it really is just an image search anyways, it's just much looser in its algorithm
Does this not bug anyone else? Third and a half? Well... if I do some simple math... a third and a half... is.... a half
1/3 = 2/6
1/2 of 2/6 = 1/6
1/6 + 2/6 = 3/6
3/6 = 1/2
"the biggest advantage we have over Android is that you don't need to be a computer scientist to use a Windows Phone."
This is quite true, because you'd have to be an idiot to use a Windows Phone! I kid, I haven't try the new phones so I don't really know.
This would be very unfortunate for Ubuntu which plans to increase their user base immensely or any new operating system attempting to make a splash in the market. I suspect the reason for this is that it is the easy way. Linux and Unix don't require this to run securely, yet are still secure.
That's a good question. I believe that once you've bought the hardware, it should be yours and you can do what you want with it. You may void warranties, but there should not benaything stopping people from sharing information about jailbreaking a system, nor should it be illegal to do so. It should remain illegal to copy and sell games, but I'm a developer, who would like to play with some nice hardware.
Actually, I am wrong, I missed that it does say the class action waiver as well
The terms say that you can opt out of the arbitration binding, not the class-action lawsuit section.
Ontario, Quebec and Alberta actually have legislation that prevents such a clause, which renders Section 15 invalid. This is mentioned in an article about a BC consumer filing a lawsuit against Telus, see this. I haven't tried to track down the actual legislation that prevents these clauses, but CBC tends to be fairly reliable.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.
I'm replying to this in hopes to get it to stand out more. The real solutions here aren't easy to find. I already did this for ntop as well.
I'm replying to this in hopes to get it to stand out more. The real solutions here aren't easy to find.
That's good. If I had moderation points, you'd be getting them
The problem is not that Microsoft is coming out with something that you can "program" with on your phone. The problem is that you can't really program with it, and the slashdotters have realized this. When you have a "language" that is so efficient that you can create an application in four lines of code, you're giving something up.
What are you giving up?
Likely, you're giving up the ability to actually make something. It seems that TouchStudio will allow you to do the things that the phone already does, but in different ways. But what if you want to do something that the phone can not do. How are you going to do that? And that's where the problem lies.
The problem here is that if you can write a full application in four lines, what are you giving up for that amount of efficiency. You're giving up the ability to really write an application. For doing simple tasks that the phone already does, just in a different way, this would be fine, but for writing an application that actually does something unique, you're likely giving that up. The best apps on iPhone are written in Objective C, the best apps are written using the Android SDK (which is Java like), the best apps for the iPhone are still likely to be written in .Net. If Windows intends to allow people to sell these applications in their "market," the market will be flooded by sub-par applications, and although they'll be quickly able to claim that they have the same number of apps as the iPhone, the difference in the apps will come down to the types of graphics people used in them.
That is the most accurate comment yet
Bravo, he gets no sympathy from me either. If he took the original Tetris idea and did something interesting with it, then sure, I'd be on his side. But simply making a clone of something, for the purposes of commercial gain, that's lazy and sad.
At the same time, problems can be raised by promoting some of these people to the top of the company. Although they may know the processes, they may not have a fundamental understanding of how to structure and manage a company. This is the problem with the company that I am at. We have so many organizational flaws that our profits never seem to rise, while at the same time, our CEO's bonuses do.
We had an opportunity a couple months to get a new CEO, ours had been fired because of issues within the company. This was a great opportunity to get fresh eyes that could help re-arrange the company and increase profits; however, this did not happen. Instead, the COO was promoted into the CEO position, and since then he has announced that nothing is going to change, we just need to "focus." The problem here is that the net-change is zero. The COO was involved in all those decisions that lead to organizational flaws. The only benefit the company did get, was that he removed the COO position because it wasn't needed. In other words, he admits that for the past five years, he wasn't needed!
I completely agree. In fact, this is one of our main reasons for getting rid of Adobe LiveCycle at our company. When we had a critical issue, we called the support (which has been outsourced to India), we spent hours, upon hours, for days upon days, on the phone with them and were not able to reach a conclusion. The Adobe LiveCycle product happens to run on a Java Web Server, in our case, JBoss. We called their support (which is not out-sourced, hooray!) and they were able to narrow down the problem with LiveCycle within one hour.
Therefor: Adobe = Bad, and we will not be buying any of their non-media based applications in the future (Photoshop is still the best image editor I've used) JBoss = Good, and if they had full support for Java EE 6 we'd be using them for in-house replacement to LiveCycle
Although very crudely worded, "Anonymous Coward" is right. H.264 is created to make money. By Google removing support for H.264, it pushes for an actual open standard. If Chrome and Mozilla had support for H.264, and IE only supported H.264, then everyone would have to pay the licensing fee.
If however, Google and Mozilla remove support for H.264 and only support open codecs, Microsoft will be forced to adopt open standards as well, rather than slamming Google for "imposing a language on the world," as they've tried to do many times in the past.
This is a step for openness on the server side. Although it looks like it's removing options, it is actually forcing options by forcing Microsoft to play nicely.
Seriously, you didn't know Google was scrapping your G-Mail account. If you really are a privacy zealot, you'd think that you'd read up on the services that you're using. Google has been clear since day one that it was doing that.
The major problem that I see with this is that the d-pad could potentially slip out of d-pad, or disc mode during gameplay if you're sliding your fingers on it. Slide your finger in a quarter-circle... are you now in disc mode when you were in d-pad mode? I see this actually causing issues and being a worse solution than the previosu d-pad.
James Gosling is the man who is ultimately responsible for creating Java from the beginning. He was the inventor of Java, the VM and Compiler.
Do you understand the point of the VM? The VM is there so that you don't have to recompile for every different chipset and operating systems used by the phone manufacturers. This is becoming less and less important as phones seem to be merging into the same OS's anyways, namely iOs and Android, but there are still phones running on proprietary Operating Systems developed by Motorola and the like. The Java VM was a way to develop once and run across all phones. This does not hold true anymore, since Android runs Davlik, and not Java ME, and iOS doesn't support Java at all.
Also, Java has many more advantages than just a garbage collector. It has a vibrant library community, amazing build tools and an evolving compiler, which with the release of JDK 7 will allow for Polyglot programming.
But, in the end, this may be all for not, since with this action, Oracle has deemed that Java is not as open as it once was...