That's not the same page. Google is looking at the User-Agent and delivering an appropriate page depending on whether it is a phone or a desktop accessing the site, which is exactly what the developers are complaining that Vodafone is preventing them from doing unless they are 'whitelisted' by Vodafone (currently free of charge, but how long will that last?).
That 6% are actually using GPLv3 already is not an indication of failure, but a pretty big success, and suprisingly high. That 40% will never touch GPLv3 is not suprising, because how many of them are BSD zealots rather than GPL zealots anyway.
They mostly seem to be Apache zealots, judging by who won the OSS popularity contest that was part of the same survey.
This is news because Vodafone is not a third party service that the user specifically seeks out, like Google mobile and Opera mini. Vodafone is a network operator, and their customers get this by default without asking for it. Fro the majority of websites, which do not care about mobile users, this is a good thing, but some developers prefer to convert their pages to mobile versions themselves, and Vodafone is taking control over mobile presentation out of the hands of these content owners. IANAL, but it seems there could be some potential for copyright infringement claims here if Vodafone continues their current stance of "we know better than the content providers".
"The battery on the htc tytn sucks,... using wifi on it for 20 minutes drains 30-40 percent of the phone already! the phone's absolutely amazing but the battery life is it's downfall."
IOW, battery life under 3G would appear to be a "bit" of an issue...
I have a TyTN, and the comment you quote above correctly points out that the Wifi, not the 3G, is what drains the battery quickly. I have push email going with a permanent HSDPA connection, and the phone goes for days between charges if I leave the wireless disconnected and don't switch the screen backlight on too often.
Furthermore, I won't buy arguments that cameras deter crime generally because criminals don't know where cameras are, so they simply stop committing crimes all around. Criminals, though they risk injury and imprisonment in their chosen profession, really aren't stupid. They are clever like a fox -- they find 'safe' areas to prowl and pick 'marks' to target. If they know a camera is in the area, they will avoid it. If you ever doubt that criminals are clever and crafty, overhear a conversation amongst drug dealers and buyers. They know the ins and outs of reasonable search, suspicion, evidence, punishment, and mandatory sentencing.
When a friend asked the police to check the cameras after theft of his motorbike, he was palmed off with "it'll be a waste of time, it'll just show us a bunch of kids in hoods". This shows two things 1) that the police aren't using the cameras to solve most crime, and 2) the criminals are concealing their faces so it doesn't matter if they're caught on camera or not.
the premium you're paying for an iPhone plan is getting you unlimited data
Only its not. Its getting you "unlimited" data, which you'll use up if you view 1400 webpages in a day, according to the announcements at launch. Who knows how many "webpages" constantly polling for mail in background is going to use, but judging by the $25,000 bills that some US users have ended up with after roaming, its probably quite a few.
But it wouldn't hurt to have had a credit card that you paid off to zero every month.
I have one of those, Experian has no knowledge of it, so it doesn't help one bit. Some banks only share details of defaults with credit agencies, at least in the UK.
To prevent imitation of fingerprints by malware, the scheme should be based on digital signatures rather than a simple fingerprint. Users can either choose to trust the developer's signature, in which case they get upgrades without any problem, or they can sign the binaries themselves if they want to limit the approval to a particular version. To cater to both open source and commercial software, such a scheme would have to accept GPG signatures as well as signatures from Verisign issued keys.
The downfall of PGP/GPG was when someone masquerading as Mickey Mouse got their key signed by one of the Linux kernel developers. This put Mickey 2 degrees of separation away from Linus, and a lot of other trusted members of the community (Zimmerman himself was not far removed), and cast doubt on the whole web of trust model vs the centralised certification authority of S/MIME and SSL. Perhaps if PGP had a way to revoke key signatures, it could have kept its reputation, but now it is mostly only useful within a closed community, or where specific keys are listed as trusted for a specific purpose (such as signing code releases).
Or they know that the company is only declaring bankrupcy to delay the court cases, and they fear being implicated if the bankrupcy court finds that SCO has fraudulently declared itself bankrupt to avoid a ruling on how much it owes Novell.
In the UK a couple of weeks ago, with analog switchoff a couple of months away in some parts of the country, Tesco started selling set-top boxes for £10 - thats around $20. So get talking to some Chinese manufacturers, I'm sure they can do the same for the US market (different encodings on both the analog and digital ends, but still it shouldn't be in the same ballpark).
they mention that software is required by the FCC to be end-user replaceable in devices such as software driven radios.
I'm pretty sure that the above statement was missing a not there somewhere, otherwise it isn't really making the point that the BSD folks think it is, and the wireless card vendors are being dishonest about the reasons for their binary blobs.
That mitigates things slightly, but the carriers' (its not just AT&T, nor just US carriers) data roaming charges, and methods of rounding data usage up to their benefit, are still unjustified by the economic reality of providing the service, and overdue for a legal challenge from either consumers or a government body responsible for regulating the industry. Unfortunately the scope of the EU's action against carriers abuse of roaming charges has so far been limited to voice calls and within the EU only.
If you look at most mobile phone contracts, they specify that you incur data charges per "session" (without specifying what that is), and in fixed increments. In my case, the increments are 10k in country at £2.50/Mb, and 100k roaming at £9.99/Mb. So if you're doing something like polling an email account, then even at 1k, each poll is costing something like £1 per poll. His best bet is to issue a legal challenge on the basis that his mail usage represents a single session, and AT&T should be charging based on the total aggregate of data used, not the number of polls. Also, he may have a case that the charges are unreasonable for merely taking a phone with him overseas, especially if he bought the phone from AT&T themselves, as they should have configured the phones to not use data without explicit user confirmation while roaming.
The user here is an idiot and deserves what he gets.
Really? So you think that $4800 is perfectly reasonable for taking your phone abroad for a month with the default settings as supplied by the phone company, and not actually using it at all?
Having to change XML config files buried in archives
That would be a problem with a specific application's packaging, nothing to do with the language that was used to code it.
ClassLoader problems because two apps need to use the same (or different versions of the same) library.
J2EE specifies application specific library directories, which is how you should be deploying them. If you are deploying your libraries into a shared directory and modifying the classpath, then it is you that is at fault, not Java.
Stupid hassles when versions upgrade which serve no real purpose (moving classes from java.what.ever to javax.what.ever).
What version upgrade moved something from java.what.ever to javax.what.ever? I've seen packages move from com.third-party.what.ever to javax.what.ever when they were accepted as a standard library, but never something incompatibly moving within the java/javax namespace.
If it's original work, can't the copyright holder decide to close the source?
Sure, but they'd have to stop using sourceforge to promote their closed source project. And it appears that most of the application is not their original work, but OpenSSL and VNC, the later being GPL means they must provide the source when requested - whether they modified it or not.
I used to redirect time.windows.com to my own ntp server to get better accuracy on my Windows machines without reconfiguring them all, but recently I changed to using iptables to intercept all NTP packets that weren't to/from my NTP server.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not the same page. Google is looking at the User-Agent and delivering an appropriate page depending on whether it is a phone or a desktop accessing the site, which is exactly what the developers are complaining that Vodafone is preventing them from doing unless they are 'whitelisted' by Vodafone (currently free of charge, but how long will that last?).
They mostly seem to be Apache zealots, judging by who won the OSS popularity contest that was part of the same survey.
Of course it is modified. What point is there in having a "transcoding proxy" in the way, if it is not modifying the content that is passing through?
I'd have thought that the fix would be the same as the 1900 leap year bug - codify it in the standard for OOXML.
This is news because Vodafone is not a third party service that the user specifically seeks out, like Google mobile and Opera mini. Vodafone is a network operator, and their customers get this by default without asking for it. Fro the majority of websites, which do not care about mobile users, this is a good thing, but some developers prefer to convert their pages to mobile versions themselves, and Vodafone is taking control over mobile presentation out of the hands of these content owners. IANAL, but it seems there could be some potential for copyright infringement claims here if Vodafone continues their current stance of "we know better than the content providers".
I have a TyTN, and the comment you quote above correctly points out that the Wifi, not the 3G, is what drains the battery quickly. I have push email going with a permanent HSDPA connection, and the phone goes for days between charges if I leave the wireless disconnected and don't switch the screen backlight on too often.
In this case, they're both subsidiaries. Its a long stretch to hold Virgin Mobile America responsible for any part of this.
When a friend asked the police to check the cameras after theft of his motorbike, he was palmed off with "it'll be a waste of time, it'll just show us a bunch of kids in hoods". This shows two things 1) that the police aren't using the cameras to solve most crime, and 2) the criminals are concealing their faces so it doesn't matter if they're caught on camera or not.
Only its not. Its getting you "unlimited" data, which you'll use up if you view 1400 webpages in a day, according to the announcements at launch. Who knows how many "webpages" constantly polling for mail in background is going to use, but judging by the $25,000 bills that some US users have ended up with after roaming, its probably quite a few.
I have one of those, Experian has no knowledge of it, so it doesn't help one bit. Some banks only share details of defaults with credit agencies, at least in the UK.
Long term, he'll have had more money available to him, as he hasn't been paying interest on his expenditure.
To prevent imitation of fingerprints by malware, the scheme should be based on digital signatures rather than a simple fingerprint. Users can either choose to trust the developer's signature, in which case they get upgrades without any problem, or they can sign the binaries themselves if they want to limit the approval to a particular version. To cater to both open source and commercial software, such a scheme would have to accept GPG signatures as well as signatures from Verisign issued keys.
The downfall of PGP/GPG was when someone masquerading as Mickey Mouse got their key signed by one of the Linux kernel developers. This put Mickey 2 degrees of separation away from Linus, and a lot of other trusted members of the community (Zimmerman himself was not far removed), and cast doubt on the whole web of trust model vs the centralised certification authority of S/MIME and SSL. Perhaps if PGP had a way to revoke key signatures, it could have kept its reputation, but now it is mostly only useful within a closed community, or where specific keys are listed as trusted for a specific purpose (such as signing code releases).
Or they know that the company is only declaring bankrupcy to delay the court cases, and they fear being implicated if the bankrupcy court finds that SCO has fraudulently declared itself bankrupt to avoid a ruling on how much it owes Novell.
Yeah right. Next you'll try and tell me that Al Gore didn't invent that intertubes thing.
Yes, DVB-T (for Terrestrial).
In the UK a couple of weeks ago, with analog switchoff a couple of months away in some parts of the country, Tesco started selling set-top boxes for £10 - thats around $20. So get talking to some Chinese manufacturers, I'm sure they can do the same for the US market (different encodings on both the analog and digital ends, but still it shouldn't be in the same ballpark).
I'm pretty sure the GP means UMTS and HSDPA, not GSM which predates CDMA.
I'm pretty sure that the above statement was missing a not there somewhere, otherwise it isn't really making the point that the BSD folks think it is, and the wireless card vendors are being dishonest about the reasons for their binary blobs.
That mitigates things slightly, but the carriers' (its not just AT&T, nor just US carriers) data roaming charges, and methods of rounding data usage up to their benefit, are still unjustified by the economic reality of providing the service, and overdue for a legal challenge from either consumers or a government body responsible for regulating the industry. Unfortunately the scope of the EU's action against carriers abuse of roaming charges has so far been limited to voice calls and within the EU only.
If you look at most mobile phone contracts, they specify that you incur data charges per "session" (without specifying what that is), and in fixed increments. In my case, the increments are 10k in country at £2.50/Mb, and 100k roaming at £9.99/Mb. So if you're doing something like polling an email account, then even at 1k, each poll is costing something like £1 per poll. His best bet is to issue a legal challenge on the basis that his mail usage represents a single session, and AT&T should be charging based on the total aggregate of data used, not the number of polls. Also, he may have a case that the charges are unreasonable for merely taking a phone with him overseas, especially if he bought the phone from AT&T themselves, as they should have configured the phones to not use data without explicit user confirmation while roaming.
Really? So you think that $4800 is perfectly reasonable for taking your phone abroad for a month with the default settings as supplied by the phone company, and not actually using it at all?
That would be a problem with a specific application's packaging, nothing to do with the language that was used to code it.
J2EE specifies application specific library directories, which is how you should be deploying them. If you are deploying your libraries into a shared directory and modifying the classpath, then it is you that is at fault, not Java.
What version upgrade moved something from java.what.ever to javax.what.ever? I've seen packages move from com.third-party.what.ever to javax.what.ever when they were accepted as a standard library, but never something incompatibly moving within the java/javax namespace.
Sure, but they'd have to stop using sourceforge to promote their closed source project. And it appears that most of the application is not their original work, but OpenSSL and VNC, the later being GPL means they must provide the source when requested - whether they modified it or not.
I used to redirect time.windows.com to my own ntp server to get better accuracy on my Windows machines without reconfiguring them all, but recently I changed to using iptables to intercept all NTP packets that weren't to/from my NTP server.