I bought a N900 to use on Rogers a week and a half ago... Of course, I'd prefer having 3G, but I have wifi the majority of places I spend a lot of time, and the EDGE access is Ok for emergency web browsing when I don't have wifi...
Of course, I was coming from a openmoko freerunner that only did GPRS, not even EDGE, so EDGE seems pretty speedy...
But no way in hell can AutoDesk deny interoperability with their file formats. The precedents for interoperability as a protected activity are legion, spanning decades.
I agree completely - but AutoDesk isn't denying interoperability. They are denying other companies the right to masquerade as AutoDesk.
My understanding is that the dwg files produced by the ODA often cause AutoCad to crash, which makes the AutoCad user call AutoDesk and report a bug. They got fed up with this, and added a mechanism to generate a warning dialog saying effectively "Hey, this isn't a real autocad file - it might crash". ODA didn't like this, so they added a mechanism to make their dwg files look like they were created with AutoCad, and *that* is what AutoDesk is sueing about.
My understanding is that AutoDesk has no problem with people reading or writing dwg files, but they will not accept other people writing dwg file that pretend they were written by AutoCad.
Thanks to Autodesks stranglehold on DWG, nobody else produces reasonably priced DWG markup tools any more. And that leaves us stuck using old, buggy, unsupported software, purely because it's the most up to date package produced by Autodesk that still runs on our network and can markup these files.
Well, I don't know what you consider to be reasonably priced, but the company I work for produces AutoVue, a pretty solid tool that can view dwg (and several hundred other formats), and has some pretty powerful markup capabilities. There's a free demo available if you want to check it out... Our website is http://www.cimmetry.com/
I saw a talk presented by the scientific computation group at the University of Waterloo about 5 years ago on the advantages of implementing a fluid flow solver in C++ vs. FORTRAN.
The conclusion was that you lost a tiny bit of performance (about 3%) but your code maintainability went *way* up. The example presented was a simple 2D navier-stokes solver, and adding a new element type to the C++ version took a few hours of effort, but adding a new element type to the FORTRAN version took a couple of days.
on their webpage they say that they are now doing all of their scientific computation work in C++
Slashdot Mirror
I bought a N900 to use on Rogers a week and a half ago... Of course, I'd prefer having 3G, but I have wifi the majority of places I spend a lot of time, and the EDGE access is Ok for emergency web browsing when I don't have wifi...
Of course, I was coming from a openmoko freerunner that only did GPRS, not even EDGE, so EDGE seems pretty speedy...
YMMV
Well - in my case I went from gettinng a couple of these a day to getting over 500 a week in the last month.
If my case is anywhere near typical, that could explain why it's getting a lot of attention now...
I agree completely - but AutoDesk isn't denying interoperability. They are denying other companies the right to masquerade as AutoDesk.
My understanding is that the dwg files produced by the ODA often cause AutoCad to crash, which makes the AutoCad user call AutoDesk and report a bug. They got fed up with this, and added a mechanism to generate a warning dialog saying effectively "Hey, this isn't a real autocad file - it might crash". ODA didn't like this, so they added a mechanism to make their dwg files look like they were created with AutoCad, and *that* is what AutoDesk is sueing about.
My understanding is that AutoDesk has no problem with people reading or writing dwg files, but they will not accept other people writing dwg file that pretend they were written by AutoCad.
I don't think it's that unreasonable, really...
Well, I don't know what you consider to be reasonably priced, but the company I work for produces AutoVue, a pretty solid tool that can view dwg (and several hundred other formats), and has some pretty powerful markup capabilities. There's a free demo available if you want to check it out... Our website is http://www.cimmetry.com/
I saw a talk presented by the scientific computation group at the University of Waterloo about 5 years ago on the advantages of implementing a fluid flow solver in C++ vs. FORTRAN.
The conclusion was that you lost a tiny bit of performance (about 3%) but your code maintainability went *way* up. The example presented was a simple 2D navier-stokes solver, and adding a new element type to the C++ version took a few hours of effort, but adding a new element type to the FORTRAN version took a couple of days.
on their webpage they say that they are now doing all of their scientific computation work in C++