Remember X11 was designed for low latency networks (LANs). It is great there. No one had interest in graphics over WANs (which mostly didn't exist) when X11 came out. But you are absolutely right, remote display is often quite bad on X11 over distance. Also the fact it doesn't have a security subsystem is a huge problem with actually using it for remote display.
X11 has been around 30 years. It has tons of legacy code and a huge range of functionalities. However its primary use cases are not the ones most popular today so people are often having to drive square pegs in round holes it to do what they want. Wayland is a modern display system for Unixes which is similar to what Windows and OSX use. It can run X11 on top (just like they can) but overtime it will allow people to write applications (or more particularly GUIs) easily with the kind of video performance one gets with Windows or OSX. There is some controversy regarding Wayland because like any reprioritization some stuff is getting worse so as to make other stuff better.
The sales change has been off a few percentage points. While there is a lot of noise the public isn't nearly as negative as/. is about Windows 8. Mostly they are negative at PCs in general and Windows 8 hasn't changed that. I think part of the problem is that Microsoft didn't make it touch mandatory.
As for the rest. I suspect you'll either need to change your opinion or be forced more and more niche. OSX might be good for a while on this, but I suspect by 2022 they will be touch and you'll be on Linux running on touch with an external mouse.
Yes. There are that many. Just between 2006 and 2012 you are looking at about $16b in revenue growth. Microsoft has been very clear that SQLServer has been the main large bright spot for years. They would be in a lot more trouble with OS revenues down if server revenues weren't up.
As for fileservers slipping from their grasp. I'd imagine that SharePoint is likely bigger than every other alternative combined so I'm not sure what you mean.
You aren't even making sense. I didn't say young people were useless I said they were pessimistic and conservative. I didn't blame the young for the "poor interface design" for Windows 8 and Gnome3 but for their failure to embrace change and their demand to stay on old fashioned 90s style hardware.
I understand what you meant, I own a surface 1. Those types of devices should be the norm for Windows 8. That's the intention. Their marketshare is increasing rapidly if Microsoft holds the line.
Just remember to incorperate the UI toggle, so that when the device is undocked, it always presents Metro. While it's docked, it should always display the Win7 desktop. Now that actually makes sense.
That already exists. If you dock into a full screen monitor you get metro on the touchscreen and desktop on the large display.
If MS is saying that laptops are nothing more than tablets with keyboards, then companies better start selling more tablet convertable devices.
That's the direction they are pushing OEMs and customers. I think they aren't pushing aggressively enough and dragging their feet just like they did with Vista and Aero / graphics cards. But yes that's the direction.
Microsoft's laptop is wacom + touch. The big defining feature of Windows vs. iPad is capacitive & resistive touchscreen That quite literally is the standard. Windows 8 isn't about iPads.
As for touch. The question is about laptops, should laptops support touch. If they support touch then the desktops mostly have to follow them. If they don't support touch then nothing changes about desktops. Microsoft has decided that laptops should be tablets with keyboards capable of running desktop applications. That is the norm is Windows computers are tablets+ not desktops-.
Maybe try turning down the emotion. As far as trickle down technology it most certainly did work and continues to work. Take a look at virtually every part in your modern laptop it trickled down from more expensive laptops. The ideas for those parts came from more expensive systems. Why do think you have graphics cards at all, they trickled down.
Are you insinuating that I need to be using USB 3.0, Bluetooth, Blue-ray, etc?
Yes. You work in the tech industry. You should be adopting new technology. You mention being homeless which puts you in a different category. Obviously other things come first but that has nothing to do with norm for technology.
If you're going to bitch about someone not upgrading their systems, bitch about the thousands of companies who have hundreds of computers running insecure versions of Windows XP and who, no matter who comes along to offer them a cost-effective solution, refuse to do anything about it.
No, touch doesn't work fine for laptops. We have so many of them because of the fact they're being forced on the end-user by both MS and the various OEMs.
You are just asserting they don't work fine. As for being forced. How do you think mice became standard or VGA graphics or the move away from 4:3 to 16:9. As for Cintiq that is an example of what I mean a small mirror with pen input. That's exactly the sort of thing that works well for a workstation setup.
As for your comment about needing it. You can't design GUIs to support keyboard and mouse without touch and touch effectively. You have to choose. It is one or the other or you have to build 2 GUIs. By having non touch hardware the application base doesn't shift. You aren't free to add it.
The sound has to be clicking at a minimum of 0.05ms and generally is more like.02ms. The eye is filling in the picture and the sound needs to be synchronized with the position of the lips as it is filled in. So for example if a character starts speaking and the frame on the screen has his lips closed that's going to be noticeable. If the lips are varying their positions in line with the sound then the brain will accept the illusion.
Of course touch works fine for laptops. We had already have laptop touch. As for desktop / workstation you use a tablet that mimics the screen. This is what artists have been doing for 15 years Or you can have the touch GUI run on the touchscreen while the legacy GUI runs on the big screen, what Windows 8 does today if you plug a touch laptop into a monitor.
No one is arguing that a triple monitor configuration should have people "reaching for the screen". I'm not saying remove mouse support what I am saying is touch mandatory. Applications that need a mouse should be supported the same way that applications that need a scanner or a printer or even an EKG attached are supported. Creative professionals mostly already use specialized input hardware nothing changes for them. Gamers can use whatever input hardware is appropriate for their games from joysticks to gaming mice.
As for enterprise they won't leave. They will just replace their mainstream desktops with something appropriate. The cost of the software migration far exceeds the cost of the hardware replacement.
Did you catch that "minimizing the need for ever-more-expensive-and-powerful hardware". Why is that such a good thing? Why is it good that you are using an 8-year old system? That's a philosophy of poverty, the virtues of learning to make due. That's exactly what I'm talking about.
Certainly there was a desire to push features down from expensive hardware to inexpensive hardware but there never was a desire to see the best a system could be crippled by scarcity. Sure we had $200 Commodore for people who just needed a system but we had $3500 PCs that were much more feature rich. Sure we had $3500 PCs but we also had $50,000 workstations for people who needed better features. Sure we have $50,000 workstations but we had $8m supercomputers for people who needed more.
The idea that you should be targeting an 8 year old laptop with a OS does not strike me as a sign of success. There are all kinds of exciting hardware innovations that aren't part of the 8 year old laptop. And frankly there would be far more if customers hadn't been trained in a world where OS and the applications target the lowest common denominator. Imagine a world where after 3 years the applications can't even run on your old system and you have to replace it to get new applications. That's the hardware world of PCs during the late 80s to late 90s. 8 years is the time between Windows 2.0 and Windows 95.
What does that have to do with pessimism? And what couldn't the older generation solve that got foisted on you?
As for old codgers being bad programming, sure. Coding is a younger man's activity. Short term memory, quick creativity play a huge role. People should naturally move on from that to supervisors, analysts, project managers, line managers or architects. There experience and wisdom play a greater role.
Because it allows people to use a small collection of applications, not just a small collection of data. It preserves the engines that manipulate the data across devices and eliminates the complex synchronization of data issues that come from having to update multiple platforms and multiple families of applications. It is possible that in the end that advantage isn't worth it and people would rather have multiple related engines for their data; the Apple model. It is possible that people would rather have a fully server based experience and move back towards thinner clients; the Android model. If those models turn out to work better than Microsoft loses.
What definitely doesn't work is offering just a desktop / conventional laptop product. People have been cutting their spending on those for close to two decades and the numbers have been falling since 2008. There is no reason for Microsoft to chase that market down the drain if they can avoid it.
My feeling is Windows 8 shouldn't have run without either a touchscreen or a touch tablet. I'd hope they not repeat that mistake with Windows 9. The direction should be touch support mandatory. Keyboard and mouse only systems need to be a thing of the past.
Because for most years the interests of the existing business and the interests of the tablet switch were in conflict. Balmer focused heavily on Microsoft's move into expanding their expensive enterprise server products. That was his huge success. During that time however they got disrupted. Disruptive innovation ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... ) can happen to any incumbent. Microsoft was particularly aware of the threat and the reason they reacted as aggressively as they did in 2012-3 is because they are aware of the threat. Far better to fail now than in 2017 when Android / iOS might be much more ready to replace them entirely.
I think it has a lot to do with when you came up. When I came up with computers in the 1980s and 1990s we had hard problems and solved them. It was a world of rapidly growing IT spending, with IT taking on more and more tasks. After Y2K the technology sector began to get very conservative, the focus was on cost cutting and reliability. Far more like the world of the late 70s and early 80s in Mainframe and Minis that the PCs had replaced. What's exciting now is that mobile devices have brought back that enthusiasm for change and excitement again. They haven't caught up with desktops but at least they are creating a generation of developers who are used to a market that grows and expands rather than stays put at minimal cost.
I watch the threads on any kinds of change whether it be ubiquitous computing (Windows 8), IPv6 (networking), Wayland, the new hardware designs... and there is a pervasive pessimism among younger IT, a terrible can't do attitude.
Back in the 1990s when Linux was coming up we had sorta GUIs die: FVWM, AfterStep, SawFish, AMI-wm, Openlook (olwm), blackbox... Systems grow change and die leaving behind better ones. What's terrible is that the new generation wants stagnation. Either Gnome 3 succeeds or it doesn't. But regardless of what happens the work on Gnome advances the ecosystem.
Microsoft was talking about the shift away from desktops towards tablets in 1999. What happened in 1999-2008 was that sales were still solid and no one wanted to endanger the core product by making the radical shifts needed for a dual purpose system. You can agree or disagree with Microsoft but let's not pretend that tablets were not something Bill Gates was focused on heavily as the next step of the GUI from pretty much the time the Windows 95 GUI got the kinds out.
If you are going to argue for a serious counter proposal you may want to get an account.
Regardless the battle between typed and untyped languages on the web was lost during the CGI days when Perl replaced C. Too much of the data coming in is untyped. http://happstack.com/docs/cras...
As for Saupper reading the manual you don't seem to be considering the problem domain at all just creating an alternative strongly typed language with some different features than C++ or Java.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember X11 was designed for low latency networks (LANs). It is great there. No one had interest in graphics over WANs (which mostly didn't exist) when X11 came out. But you are absolutely right, remote display is often quite bad on X11 over distance. Also the fact it doesn't have a security subsystem is a huge problem with actually using it for remote display.
Here are 30k foot views.
X11 has been around 30 years. It has tons of legacy code and a huge range of functionalities. However its primary use cases are not the ones most popular today so people are often having to drive square pegs in round holes it to do what they want. Wayland is a modern display system for Unixes which is similar to what Windows and OSX use. It can run X11 on top (just like they can) but overtime it will allow people to write applications (or more particularly GUIs) easily with the kind of video performance one gets with Windows or OSX. There is some controversy regarding Wayland because like any reprioritization some stuff is getting worse so as to make other stuff better.
In what possible sense can the world of the 80s and 90s computer industry be called a dismal failure as contrasted with say the stagnation of the 00s?
The sales change has been off a few percentage points. While there is a lot of noise the public isn't nearly as negative as /. is about Windows 8. Mostly they are negative at PCs in general and Windows 8 hasn't changed that. I think part of the problem is that Microsoft didn't make it touch mandatory.
As for the rest. I suspect you'll either need to change your opinion or be forced more and more niche. OSX might be good for a while on this, but I suspect by 2022 they will be touch and you'll be on Linux running on touch with an external mouse.
Yes. There are that many. Just between 2006 and 2012 you are looking at about $16b in revenue growth. Microsoft has been very clear that SQLServer has been the main large bright spot for years. They would be in a lot more trouble with OS revenues down if server revenues weren't up.
As for fileservers slipping from their grasp. I'd imagine that SharePoint is likely bigger than every other alternative combined so I'm not sure what you mean.
You aren't even making sense. I didn't say young people were useless I said they were pessimistic and conservative. I didn't blame the young for the "poor interface design" for Windows 8 and Gnome3 but for their failure to embrace change and their demand to stay on old fashioned 90s style hardware.
I understand what you meant, I own a surface 1. Those types of devices should be the norm for Windows 8. That's the intention. Their marketshare is increasing rapidly if Microsoft holds the line.
That already exists. If you dock into a full screen monitor you get metro on the touchscreen and desktop on the large display.
That's the direction they are pushing OEMs and customers. I think they aren't pushing aggressively enough and dragging their feet just like they did with Vista and Aero / graphics cards. But yes that's the direction.
Microsoft's laptop is wacom + touch. The big defining feature of Windows vs. iPad is capacitive & resistive touchscreen That quite literally is the standard. Windows 8 isn't about iPads.
As for touch. The question is about laptops, should laptops support touch. If they support touch then the desktops mostly have to follow them. If they don't support touch then nothing changes about desktops. Microsoft has decided that laptops should be tablets with keyboards capable of running desktop applications. That is the norm is Windows computers are tablets+ not desktops-.
@phmadore
Maybe try turning down the emotion. As far as trickle down technology it most certainly did work and continues to work. Take a look at virtually every part in your modern laptop it trickled down from more expensive laptops. The ideas for those parts came from more expensive systems. Why do think you have graphics cards at all, they trickled down.
Yes. You work in the tech industry. You should be adopting new technology. You mention being homeless which puts you in a different category. Obviously other things come first but that has nothing to do with norm for technology.
I do that too.
You are just asserting they don't work fine. As for being forced. How do you think mice became standard or VGA graphics or the move away from 4:3 to 16:9. As for Cintiq that is an example of what I mean a small mirror with pen input. That's exactly the sort of thing that works well for a workstation setup.
As for your comment about needing it. You can't design GUIs to support keyboard and mouse without touch and touch effectively. You have to choose. It is one or the other or you have to build 2 GUIs. By having non touch hardware the application base doesn't shift. You aren't free to add it.
The sound has to be clicking at a minimum of 0.05ms and generally is more like .02ms. The eye is filling in the picture and the sound needs to be synchronized with the position of the lips as it is filled in. So for example if a character starts speaking and the frame on the screen has his lips closed that's going to be noticeable. If the lips are varying their positions in line with the sound then the brain will accept the illusion.
Of course touch works fine for laptops. We had already have laptop touch. As for desktop / workstation you use a tablet that mimics the screen. This is what artists have been doing for 15 years Or you can have the touch GUI run on the touchscreen while the legacy GUI runs on the big screen, what Windows 8 does today if you plug a touch laptop into a monitor.
No one is arguing that a triple monitor configuration should have people "reaching for the screen". I'm not saying remove mouse support what I am saying is touch mandatory. Applications that need a mouse should be supported the same way that applications that need a scanner or a printer or even an EKG attached are supported. Creative professionals mostly already use specialized input hardware nothing changes for them. Gamers can use whatever input hardware is appropriate for their games from joysticks to gaming mice.
As for enterprise they won't leave. They will just replace their mainstream desktops with something appropriate. The cost of the software migration far exceeds the cost of the hardware replacement.
Did you catch that "minimizing the need for ever-more-expensive-and-powerful hardware". Why is that such a good thing? Why is it good that you are using an 8-year old system? That's a philosophy of poverty, the virtues of learning to make due. That's exactly what I'm talking about.
Certainly there was a desire to push features down from expensive hardware to inexpensive hardware but there never was a desire to see the best a system could be crippled by scarcity. Sure we had $200 Commodore for people who just needed a system but we had $3500 PCs that were much more feature rich. Sure we had $3500 PCs but we also had $50,000 workstations for people who needed better features. Sure we have $50,000 workstations but we had $8m supercomputers for people who needed more.
The idea that you should be targeting an 8 year old laptop with a OS does not strike me as a sign of success. There are all kinds of exciting hardware innovations that aren't part of the 8 year old laptop. And frankly there would be far more if customers hadn't been trained in a world where OS and the applications target the lowest common denominator. Imagine a world where after 3 years the applications can't even run on your old system and you have to replace it to get new applications. That's the hardware world of PCs during the late 80s to late 90s. 8 years is the time between Windows 2.0 and Windows 95.
What does that have to do with pessimism? And what couldn't the older generation solve that got foisted on you?
As for old codgers being bad programming, sure. Coding is a younger man's activity. Short term memory, quick creativity play a huge role. People should naturally move on from that to supervisors, analysts, project managers, line managers or architects. There experience and wisdom play a greater role.
Because it allows people to use a small collection of applications, not just a small collection of data. It preserves the engines that manipulate the data across devices and eliminates the complex synchronization of data issues that come from having to update multiple platforms and multiple families of applications. It is possible that in the end that advantage isn't worth it and people would rather have multiple related engines for their data; the Apple model. It is possible that people would rather have a fully server based experience and move back towards thinner clients; the Android model. If those models turn out to work better than Microsoft loses.
What definitely doesn't work is offering just a desktop / conventional laptop product. People have been cutting their spending on those for close to two decades and the numbers have been falling since 2008. There is no reason for Microsoft to chase that market down the drain if they can avoid it.
My feeling is Windows 8 shouldn't have run without either a touchscreen or a touch tablet. I'd hope they not repeat that mistake with Windows 9. The direction should be touch support mandatory. Keyboard and mouse only systems need to be a thing of the past.
Because for most years the interests of the existing business and the interests of the tablet switch were in conflict. Balmer focused heavily on Microsoft's move into expanding their expensive enterprise server products. That was his huge success. During that time however they got disrupted. Disruptive innovation ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... ) can happen to any incumbent. Microsoft was particularly aware of the threat and the reason they reacted as aggressively as they did in 2012-3 is because they are aware of the threat. Far better to fail now than in 2017 when Android / iOS might be much more ready to replace them entirely.
I think it has a lot to do with when you came up. When I came up with computers in the 1980s and 1990s we had hard problems and solved them. It was a world of rapidly growing IT spending, with IT taking on more and more tasks. After Y2K the technology sector began to get very conservative, the focus was on cost cutting and reliability. Far more like the world of the late 70s and early 80s in Mainframe and Minis that the PCs had replaced. What's exciting now is that mobile devices have brought back that enthusiasm for change and excitement again. They haven't caught up with desktops but at least they are creating a generation of developers who are used to a market that grows and expands rather than stays put at minimal cost.
I watch the threads on any kinds of change whether it be ubiquitous computing (Windows 8), IPv6 (networking), Wayland, the new hardware designs... and there is a pervasive pessimism among younger IT, a terrible can't do attitude.
Back in the 1990s when Linux was coming up we had sorta GUIs die: FVWM, AfterStep, SawFish, AMI-wm, Openlook (olwm), blackbox... Systems grow change and die leaving behind better ones. What's terrible is that the new generation wants stagnation. Either Gnome 3 succeeds or it doesn't. But regardless of what happens the work on Gnome advances the ecosystem.
Microsoft was talking about the shift away from desktops towards tablets in 1999. What happened in 1999-2008 was that sales were still solid and no one wanted to endanger the core product by making the radical shifts needed for a dual purpose system. You can agree or disagree with Microsoft but let's not pretend that tablets were not something Bill Gates was focused on heavily as the next step of the GUI from pretty much the time the Windows 95 GUI got the kinds out.
Where are you getting those numbers from? For example in lip-sinking 2.9ms errors are routinely detected even with distracting visuals.
Microsoft labs is the best source for this. Here is a quick video where they introduce the concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
That's a good story. I've had similar experiences. For example someone who was creating extensions to .pdf to essentially reinvent PostScript.
Ruby Is Smalltalk Minus Minus
If you are going to argue for a serious counter proposal you may want to get an account.
Regardless the battle between typed and untyped languages on the web was lost during the CGI days when Perl replaced C. Too much of the data coming in is untyped. http://happstack.com/docs/cras...
As for Saupper reading the manual you don't seem to be considering the problem domain at all just creating an alternative strongly typed language with some different features than C++ or Java.