I suspect that the other half of the users tend not to use the web that much. They'll occasionally use it if an email tells them to click on a link, and they might look at an online news site, but they don't spend hours a day browsing.
While the web can be useful, from a marketing point of view, it has always really been just an initial incentive. People thought they wanted the web, but they kept their internet connection because they want email, IM, and Kazaa.
It looks very well polished. Why did you do an RPG type game though? The amount of game design needed for that sort of thing must have consumed a substatial part of the total project.
I've heard that story before. It surprises me. While an enigma will generate convincing random letters, and it makes sense to use one for that, it's surprising that he bothered setting up his machine to use the day's settings.
The thing is, I've always been quite a fan of the basic concepts behind Sci-fi series. I like a well thought out universe with its own social and political structure. Galactica, for all its cheesiness, did have this. I was annoyed with The Clone Wars for pretty much the same reason.
The other thing that annoys me is that there were a lot of good ideas. Personally, I quite liked the new raiders, and definitely felt that their being intelligent rather than piloted was a good idea. The humanoid cylons had promise. The whole cylon infiltration storyline was pretty good. There was just way too much that needed to be done properly.
That on its own was fine. It's is a perfectly good piece of story telling. The problem was, we also had a group of colonials left on the planet, and the Galactica fire crews having to be jettisonned into space. Each in itself had elements that were well done.
It wasn't all bad. It's a perfectly good storytelling device. The pleading from those left behind was good, and Baltar forgoing the chance to go with the rest of the refugees was a nice touch. It just felt like these issues happen too regularly.
Well, apart from the fact that a single original scene does not make the thing original, That was not an original scene. The concept of sacrifice for the greater good is a recurring theme in all forms of fiction, and in real life. Babylon 5 did that sort of thing more than once, only it didn't labour the point. Even Star Trek:TNG has toyed with the basic moral concept, or is the fact that they did this more people the key aspect?
Lets see - Every single character is a total stereotypes. We have a tough as nails, always in trouble ace pilot, a father and son who don't talk anymore, an acerbic commander who doesn't take stick from anyone, and a cowardly scientist who refuses to take responsibility for his actions (Did they get mixed up and think it was a Lost in Space revival?).
Then they take out the few bits that were remotely imaginative from the original series. Rather than having an ancient society with their own political structure, they have a carbon copy of the US political system. All the ancient Egyptian styling has been axed, and the Galactica is simply way too new. Galactica was 500 years old in the original series. It made it seem like it was worth caring about.
Finally, we have the actual script. It's not enough just to throw in random emotive scenes. Yes, they have to leave some people behind. Yes, it's a tragedy. But come-on; three times!?. Talk about rubbing it in. And even though we're meant to believe that it's such a disaster, people make these life or death decisions with hardly a flicker of anxiety.
Yes, but it is a truly inefficient battery tester. It's an exaggeration to say 2 minutes, but the drain isn't going to be a lot lower than a short circuit, and it's possible that the extra drain does cause enough extra sales to make it beneficial from more than just a marketing point of view.
That's true, but part of the reason that Open source doesn't go in for marketing is that that's not the point. It's software to solve a specific problem, and if it solves other people's problems, so much the better. Marketing will potentially help the end users become aware of the software, but it really doesn't do the software any good or harm if people know about it or not.
Commercial software on the other hand, is simply to make money for companies. This is not a bad thing; simply the way the market works. The fact that it solves a problem is simply a means to an end. Marketing is definitely essential here, since it increases sales.
Well, he could simply rename it Linuxdows, or the X-Lindow system, but even if he doesn't, the extra publicity still generates sales while the case is ongoing.
That depends. What do they call windows (i.e. the actual boxes with titlebars) in other countries? Do they translate the word "window" into their own language, or simply use the English word?
You do realise that most people see a computer differently from you, don't you? You - presumably - see it as a big dumb piece of electronics with software running on it. Other people don't. They just see it as a smart piece of electrnoics.
It doesn't occur to them that there's anything unusual about computer desktops all looking the same. Of course they do. It's what computers do. How else is it going to look? They don't know what an OS is. They don't really care. Asking them is like asking what software their DVD player is running.
The SkyOS team is accused of making the GNU tools for their system WITHOUT providing FSF with patches for compilation.
As far as I understand it, this is perfectly valid under the terms of the GPL. All you need to do is allow any recipient of the derived code to have the source. You don't have any obligation to provide it to the person you got it from.
Re:Language/tools are secondary
on
How C# Was Made
·
· Score: 1
Surely a string is a useful abstraction. Even C supports them to an extent. Any string in double quotes is a const char[].
The problem with my example is I mixed in pointers. This is one of the biggest problems with C - The need to use pointers to handle efficient allocation causes a lot of memory related errors. Even good programmers can make these mistakes, and memory is not something that all programmers should have to worry about.
I'm not saying C is a badly designed language. It is not. It does what it does very well. What I am saying is that a lot of the time it is the wrong language for the job.
Re:Language/tools are secondary
on
How C# Was Made
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It's a good point, but the language can make a difference. C has a lot of potential for error that a higher level language just doesn't have; the most obvious example being strings. In C, to concatenate 2 strings, you might type
Which could crash, or foul up data (or possibly do nothing) because you're writing over the end of a pointer. A high level language will have strings as a built in type. Concatinating them will simply create a new string. This sort of error is simply impossible to make happpen in a lot of high level languages.
A programming language is a lot more than just a tool. The language you choose will affect the end product quite substantially.
Re:"Co-opt Java"
on
How C# Was Made
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yeah, but Java existed because Sun wanted to have control, and was simply an attempted coup to sieze control from Microsoft. The Apple Mac existed because Apple wanted to control desktop computing.
Most companies want to dominate the market. The difference is that for the vast majority of them, market domination is a ludicrous concept.
It's popular to complain about MS because that's the company that causes endless problems repeatedly, and their monopoly on the desktop really isn't doing anyone any favours. As a result, people get the impression that anything MS does must be evil. Of course, if you look at it, you'll see that Sun (and Oracle, and probably a few others for that matter) are just as happy to play dirty tricks, and try to grab hold of a tasty monopoly of their own.
Personally, I see C# and Java as a good thing. MS doesn't have a monopoly on C compilers, and certainly doesn't have a monopoly on programming languages. Java, C#, and all the established languages, so the only way to make C# a success is to make it better. This is good for all of us. If it's good for MS as well, so be it.
Basic Tivo needs to dial-up. The internal programme guide is used to choose which programme to record, and allows you to set up wishlists and season passes. You can tell it to record based on time and channel, but it's fiddly to do.
Plus the ability to guess what you might like has come in useful for me in the past. Since I never watch Will and Grace, Tivo doesn't think I'm gay;)
What the hell are you talking about? In the DeCSS case (at least the 2600 one) nothing was 'pulled out of a hat' - the Judge was biased against 2600.
Well, there was strong, and quite convincing evidence that DeCSS did directly violate the anti-circumvention clauses of the DMCA, and a fairly convincing argument. Perhaps if IBM lose this horrible, you'll be blaming this on a biased judge as well.
IBM continues to pull out SCO's public statements, and use them to discredit SCO completely.
Which stiks of desperation on IBM's part. Anyway, right now, both sides are simply manouevering for the best position. SCO probably isn't doing as well as they'd like here.
Bullshit. If they have a case at all they'd move ahead with it. There wouldn't be any of this 'well, we didn't comply because we didn't have enough time, or any of the evidence. Pretty please can we see IBM's code now' bullshit.
Do you have privilaged knowledge about SCO's legal strategy? Are you sufficiently skilled in law to be able to determine whether this is "bullshit" as you put it?
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect that the other half of the users tend not to use the web that much. They'll occasionally use it if an email tells them to click on a link, and they might look at an online news site, but they don't spend hours a day browsing.
While the web can be useful, from a marketing point of view, it has always really been just an initial incentive. People thought they wanted the web, but they kept their internet connection because they want email, IM, and Kazaa.
It looks very well polished. Why did you do an RPG type game though? The amount of game design needed for that sort of thing must have consumed a substatial part of the total project.
I've heard that story before. It surprises me. While an enigma will generate convincing random letters, and it makes sense to use one for that, it's surprising that he bothered setting up his machine to use the day's settings.
The thing is, I've always been quite a fan of the basic concepts behind Sci-fi series. I like a well thought out universe with its own social and political structure. Galactica, for all its cheesiness, did have this. I was annoyed with The Clone Wars for pretty much the same reason.
The other thing that annoys me is that there were a lot of good ideas. Personally, I quite liked the new raiders, and definitely felt that their being intelligent rather than piloted was a good idea. The humanoid cylons had promise. The whole cylon infiltration storyline was pretty good. There was just way too much that needed to be done properly.
That on its own was fine. It's is a perfectly good piece of story telling. The problem was, we also had a group of colonials left on the planet, and the Galactica fire crews having to be jettisonned into space. Each in itself had elements that were well done.
It wasn't all bad. It's a perfectly good storytelling device. The pleading from those left behind was good, and Baltar forgoing the chance to go with the rest of the refugees was a nice touch. It just felt like these issues happen too regularly.
Well, apart from the fact that a single original scene does not make the thing original, That was not an original scene. The concept of sacrifice for the greater good is a recurring theme in all forms of fiction, and in real life. Babylon 5 did that sort of thing more than once, only it didn't labour the point. Even Star Trek:TNG has toyed with the basic moral concept, or is the fact that they did this more people the key aspect?
Lets see - Every single character is a total stereotypes. We have a tough as nails, always in trouble ace pilot, a father and son who don't talk anymore, an acerbic commander who doesn't take stick from anyone, and a cowardly scientist who refuses to take responsibility for his actions (Did they get mixed up and think it was a Lost in Space revival?).
Then they take out the few bits that were remotely imaginative from the original series. Rather than having an ancient society with their own political structure, they have a carbon copy of the US political system. All the ancient Egyptian styling has been axed, and the Galactica is simply way too new. Galactica was 500 years old in the original series. It made it seem like it was worth caring about.
Finally, we have the actual script. It's not enough just to throw in random emotive scenes. Yes, they have to leave some people behind. Yes, it's a tragedy. But come-on; three times!?. Talk about rubbing it in. And even though we're meant to believe that it's such a disaster, people make these life or death decisions with hardly a flicker of anxiety.
Yes, but it is a truly inefficient battery tester. It's an exaggeration to say 2 minutes, but the drain isn't going to be a lot lower than a short circuit, and it's possible that the extra drain does cause enough extra sales to make it beneficial from more than just a marketing point of view.
That's true, but part of the reason that Open source doesn't go in for marketing is that that's not the point. It's software to solve a specific problem, and if it solves other people's problems, so much the better. Marketing will potentially help the end users become aware of the software, but it really doesn't do the software any good or harm if people know about it or not.
Commercial software on the other hand, is simply to make money for companies. This is not a bad thing; simply the way the market works. The fact that it solves a problem is simply a means to an end. Marketing is definitely essential here, since it increases sales.
More to the point, what sort of idiot fiddles around with the registry when there's a perfectly good utility to do this in the form of TweakUI.
Depends on the wording of the patent. The title just gives an overview. The devil is in the detail.
Well, he could simply rename it Linuxdows, or the X-Lindow system, but even if he doesn't, the extra publicity still generates sales while the case is ongoing.
That depends. What do they call windows (i.e. the actual boxes with titlebars) in other countries? Do they translate the word "window" into their own language, or simply use the English word?
Michael Robertson is delighted to get his product's name splashed across newspapers.
Regardless of the merits of the case, even if the guy loses, he probably wins.
You do realise that most people see a computer differently from you, don't you? You - presumably - see it as a big dumb piece of electronics with software running on it. Other people don't. They just see it as a smart piece of electrnoics.
It doesn't occur to them that there's anything unusual about computer desktops all looking the same. Of course they do. It's what computers do. How else is it going to look? They don't know what an OS is. They don't really care. Asking them is like asking what software their DVD player is running.
Apparently the OS has accelerated openGl support. What cards does it support?
The SkyOS team is accused of making the GNU tools for their system WITHOUT providing FSF with patches for compilation.
As far as I understand it, this is perfectly valid under the terms of the GPL. All you need to do is allow any recipient of the derived code to have the source. You don't have any obligation to provide it to the person you got it from.
Surely a string is a useful abstraction. Even C supports them to an extent. Any string in double quotes is a const char[].
The problem with my example is I mixed in pointers. This is one of the biggest problems with C - The need to use pointers to handle efficient allocation causes a lot of memory related errors. Even good programmers can make these mistakes, and memory is not something that all programmers should have to worry about.
I'm not saying C is a badly designed language. It is not. It does what it does very well. What I am saying is that a lot of the time it is the wrong language for the job.
A programming language is a lot more than just a tool. The language you choose will affect the end product quite substantially.
Yeah, but Java existed because Sun wanted to have control, and was simply an attempted coup to sieze control from Microsoft. The Apple Mac existed because Apple wanted to control desktop computing.
Most companies want to dominate the market. The difference is that for the vast majority of them, market domination is a ludicrous concept.
It's popular to complain about MS because that's the company that causes endless problems repeatedly, and their monopoly on the desktop really isn't doing anyone any favours. As a result, people get the impression that anything MS does must be evil. Of course, if you look at it, you'll see that Sun (and Oracle, and probably a few others for that matter) are just as happy to play dirty tricks, and try to grab hold of a tasty monopoly of their own.
Personally, I see C# and Java as a good thing. MS doesn't have a monopoly on C compilers, and certainly doesn't have a monopoly on programming languages. Java, C#, and all the established languages, so the only way to make C# a success is to make it better. This is good for all of us. If it's good for MS as well, so be it.
I gather it's a lower frequency than satellite. I think this means fewer channels available.
Since only a handful of channels account for most viewing, 70 should be more than adeqaute. The portability should compensate for fewer channels.
He seems to be doing quite well at researching this. He is asking on a forum with lots of people who are knowledgable about all techy toys.
Basic Tivo needs to dial-up. The internal programme guide is used to choose which programme to record, and allows you to set up wishlists and season passes. You can tell it to record based on time and channel, but it's fiddly to do.
Plus the ability to guess what you might like has come in useful for me in the past. Since I never watch Will and Grace, Tivo doesn't think I'm gay;)
What the hell are you talking about? In the DeCSS case (at least the 2600 one) nothing was 'pulled out of a hat' - the Judge was biased against 2600.
Well, there was strong, and quite convincing evidence that DeCSS did directly violate the anti-circumvention clauses of the DMCA, and a fairly convincing argument. Perhaps if IBM lose this horrible, you'll be blaming this on a biased judge as well.
IBM continues to pull out SCO's public statements, and use them to discredit SCO completely.
Which stiks of desperation on IBM's part. Anyway, right now, both sides are simply manouevering for the best position. SCO probably isn't doing as well as they'd like here.
Bullshit. If they have a case at all they'd move ahead with it. There wouldn't be any of this 'well, we didn't comply because we didn't have enough time, or any of the evidence. Pretty please can we see IBM's code now' bullshit.
Do you have privilaged knowledge about SCO's legal strategy? Are you sufficiently skilled in law to be able to determine whether this is "bullshit" as you put it?