How many people really jump up and down at the idea of not owning software. I don't see anything in this that will ever make me not want to own my apps outright.
It could be because you appear to have no real idea of what this idea of "not owning software" is all about.
Do I rent some movies? Sure. Do I own some movies? Sure. Why do you do both? Why not buy all the movies you like to watch?
Hmm, what's that, you say some movies you only want to see one time? You don't wish to pay $20 - $30 and own the movie forever? You'd rather pay a small, one-time fee and watch it only once or twice?
Are you starting to see the parallels with renting movies and renting software?
The idea as I understand it is to leave the gui at home and move all of the processing onto the servers.
Well, no not ALL the processing. As I understand it, this type of technology wants some of the processing on your end -- such as the handling of user events, typing, clicking buttons, and what have you, but the data storage and processing to be done on the server end.
A typical example is a word processor. I write maybe three documents a year. I'd rather pay a small fee each time I create a document, rather than $50 for the whole word processor, which I may never use more than once before upgrading to the next version of Office.
It also maintains flexibility. Use Word from any of your desktops, at home, at work, etc. Download it when you want it. (Kind of like Pay-Per-View, to keep the movie watching analogy.)
And if you don't like renting applications, don't. Buy them instead. If there is a market of people who would rather own the software, believe me, there will be someone there to supply the demand, even if Microsoft doesn't (and they will).
The really processor intensive things like encoding and image editing aren't going to really benefit from this.
You're thinking about this all wrong... these people don't want to sell you the use of their server resources for number crunching. They want to rent you lightweight software that can be built with web technology (DHTML, XML, Java, etc), where the programs are stored on the server, and possibly even your data. The idea that the server is going to be doing most of the work is just wrong.
This is just a plan to get us to get people hooked before they realize the newest Word isn't really any better than the last.
That makes no sense. Either people are going to pay to rent Word (pay-per-use), or they aren't. If you don't use Word, then you don't pay for it, therefore what do you care if it's better than the last version?
Even if linux does this I won't use it
Well you've got that choice as a consumer, but it seems kind of close-minded to make that decision before you have all the facts, let alone a trial of it...
A bug in the caching mechanism used "UNIVERSAL::isa()" that affected base.pm has been fixed. The bug has existed since the 5.005 releases, but wasn't tickled by base.pm in those releases.
In other words, ALL YOUR BASE.PM BELONGED TO ISA().
Since the U.S. government is always interested in adding back doors to encryption technology that the public uses, I'm assuming they'll be working with the PGP folks to add a similar backdoor to their Linux systems? I mean, that's only fair, right?
BTW: I used to work for disney. I once went to the underground cafeteria in the magic kingdom in orlando and saw the funniest thing I've ever seen in my life: Snow White sitting on her boyfriend's lap smoking a cigarette.
Wow, you've found a dozen exceptions to the rule. You left out the links to the thousands or hundreds of thousands of windows applications that use all the standards, and are intuitive because of this. Even when you run these applications under XP, they will look like Windows XP applications.
There's a big difference between the KDE/Gnome type battles, and in the Windows world where you get some renegade applications that use their own interface.
...and hold my bitching at Microsoft regarding Bluetooth, until there's atleast an x86 motherboard out there with a Bluetooth transceiver built into it!
Slashdot runs basically no Be articles until there are doomsday predictions.
1. Be has been out of the desktop market for a year now. They are focused on BeIA and the emerging IA market. (And no, iOpener, Audrey, et. al. are not REAL IA's -- show me a broadband, wireless internet device, and I'll show you an IA.)
2. The Excite article is based on their SEC filing. They could have written the article a year ago, because that's about the time Be said they'd run out of money at the end of Q2 2001. However, they always fail to leave out the very large "UNLESS..." clause, which points out they're only going to run out of money unless they get funding. Be will get funding. Hell, if Qubit can get funding two months ago for an IA device, Be can get funding for a kick ass IA OS.
3. Sony has been working with Be for one year on a key part of their (Sony's) IA venture. They had to know Be's situation, there's no way in hell they'd bank on BeIA without knowing Be is going to last.
4. Gassee has kept Be alive on virtually NO PROFIT for eleven years. Do you honestly think he's going to let Be die now that they are standing on the brink of a vast ocean of a market? And you PC chauvinists who can't see the possibilities for IA's are no different than the IBM execs who couldn't see the PC market right in front of their noses, before they made the "deal with the devils at a little known company called Microsoft. You know, back when "computer" was synonymous with "mainframe."
Yes, sadly Be is on the brink of death. Funny thing is, they've been there for eleven years. And they've survived. Come back to me in a year, and we'll see where they stand then.
I had a funny experience. I went to the website and downloaded and ran the patch but it gave me a message saying I did not need to install this update and exited. Anyone else have this happen?
I believe that Hamlet's strife is that he saw the merits in both possibilities, and so an accurate representation would necessitate him evaluating both 2b and !2b before reaching a conclusion.
In other words, it would evaluate to false no matter what, since he doesn't yet know the answer to either question when he asks them.
Didn't know you were imparting something to "get."
Nor do you know much about TiVo, do you?
Yes, I know quite a bit about TiVo.
You cannot build your own video library with TiVo
Nor would I want to build a private video library, just like I no longer tape movies. If I want to watch it, I'll order it PPV, rent it, or buy it on DVD. Or catch it on one of the 30 movie channels I get.
unless you first output the signal in analog format (read: you lose quality).
Well, as long as you're talking about losing video quality, it's already being lost in most digital (non-HDTV) broadcasts, such as Time Warner digital cable, and the things TiVo (and any digital recorder) save to disk with MPEG compression.
Your viewing habits are public knowledge, or at least purchasable for the right price, etc. etc.
I'm not a privacy nut. As long as they don't give out my personal information (which they explicitly state they do not give out), I couldn't care less. Name one bad thing that might come out of TiVo sharing viewing habits that are not tied to me personally. I can't think of even one.
If you want to be a serf
Serf? Forced to do manual labor for little or no pay? Hmmm?
forced to submit to the whims and limitations the Copyright Cartels choose to impose upon you, with your viewing habits recorded and made available to marketing enterprises with their own, not your, interests at heart, be my guest.
I believe you've gone a little over the top on this one. TiVo makes it easy to control what I watch, and when. It lets me skip all those nasty commercials quite easily. Pause live TV, etc.
If instead you wish to retain your rights to fair use
Didn't realize I was giving those up?
record and archive the programs and movies you wish
I can do this with TiVo.
under your own terms (and with better quality)
Under my own terms? Such as "don't delete this item"? I can do that. Better quality? Big whoop. It'll be moot in a year or two anyway, as I have my digital VCR (TiVo or someone else) with HDTV support.
may I suggest thinking outside of the box just a little
The difference between me and you is I don't want to rebuild the wheel. TiVo and their friends have cool products that are much easier to use than anything I could build, or anything I've seen built by your average hacker.
Slashdot Mirror
The reply of Mr. Templeton shows the sense of humor only the RHF editor can have...
... "priceless."
Another way of describing his response is
How many people really jump up and down at the idea of not owning software. I don't see anything in this that will ever make me not want to own my apps outright.
... these people don't want to sell you the use of their server resources for number crunching. They want to rent you lightweight software that can be built with web technology (DHTML, XML, Java, etc), where the programs are stored on the server, and possibly even your data. The idea that the server is going to be doing most of the work is just wrong.
It could be because you appear to have no real idea of what this idea of "not owning software" is all about.
Do I rent some movies? Sure. Do I own some movies? Sure. Why do you do both? Why not buy all the movies you like to watch?
Hmm, what's that, you say some movies you only want to see one time? You don't wish to pay $20 - $30 and own the movie forever? You'd rather pay a small, one-time fee and watch it only once or twice?
Are you starting to see the parallels with renting movies and renting software?
The idea as I understand it is to leave the gui at home and move all of the processing onto the servers.
Well, no not ALL the processing. As I understand it, this type of technology wants some of the processing on your end -- such as the handling of user events, typing, clicking buttons, and what have you, but the data storage and processing to be done on the server end.
A typical example is a word processor. I write maybe three documents a year. I'd rather pay a small fee each time I create a document, rather than $50 for the whole word processor, which I may never use more than once before upgrading to the next version of Office.
It also maintains flexibility. Use Word from any of your desktops, at home, at work, etc. Download it when you want it. (Kind of like Pay-Per-View, to keep the movie watching analogy.)
And if you don't like renting applications, don't. Buy them instead. If there is a market of people who would rather own the software, believe me, there will be someone there to supply the demand, even if Microsoft doesn't (and they will).
The really processor intensive things like encoding and image editing aren't going to really benefit from this.
You're thinking about this all wrong
This is just a plan to get us to get people hooked before they realize the newest Word isn't really any better than the last.
That makes no sense. Either people are going to pay to rent Word (pay-per-use), or they aren't. If you don't use Word, then you don't pay for it, therefore what do you care if it's better than the last version?
Even if linux does this I won't use it
Well you've got that choice as a consumer, but it seems kind of close-minded to make that decision before you have all the facts, let alone a trial of it...
-thomas
Apparantly you people are smart, but not clever enough to detect BLATANT SARCASM!
Sorry, I won't try it again.
In other words, ALL YOUR BASE.PM BELONGED TO ISA().
But it's fixed now.
Why are regular expressions called that? Regular in what way?
"Regular" - formed, built, arranged, or ordered according to some established rule, law, principle, or type.
"Expression" - a mathematical or logical symbol or a meaningful combination of symbols.
Put them together, and it's fairly straight-forward terminology that comes from computer science.
(I remember first studying them, outside of Perl, in my Discrete Structures CS class.)
Since the U.S. government is always interested in adding back doors to encryption technology that the public uses, I'm assuming they'll be working with the PGP folks to add a similar backdoor to their Linux systems? I mean, that's only fair, right?
This decision most certainly isn't a coup for the common man. It's just an opportunity to get a discount on your next purchase of Windows.
;)
And even that won't matter much, since they'll just raise the price of Windows.
"Yeah, the speed of light sucks."
-- John Carmack, Wired 4.08, p. 189
Uhhh... Ok, if that were the next logical question, the answer might be God(2), and God(3), and so on.
Next time, skip the course in mathematics, and take a course in pure logic instead... might be better off.
your "+2 Insightful" question is revealed as the typical, tired, pseudophilosophic
Ummm, it wasn't +2 Insightful, it was just +2. That's because my karma's at 50. So sorry!
How complex do things have to get before "God did it" becomes the best explanation?
How exactly is that an explanation? Because the next logical question is, What created God?
BTW: I used to work for disney. I once went to the underground cafeteria in the magic kingdom in orlando and saw the funniest thing I've ever seen in my life: Snow White sitting on her boyfriend's lap smoking a cigarette.
Are you sure you weren't at Pleasure Island?
Wow, you've found a dozen exceptions to the rule. You left out the links to the thousands or hundreds of thousands of windows applications that use all the standards, and are intuitive because of this. Even when you run these applications under XP, they will look like Windows XP applications.
There's a big difference between the KDE/Gnome type battles, and in the Windows world where you get some renegade applications that use their own interface.
...and hold my bitching at Microsoft regarding Bluetooth, until there's atleast an x86 motherboard out there with a Bluetooth transceiver built into it!
Everything in life, down to the basic elements of Earth, Wind, Fire and Water are regulated by goverments both local and national.
But what about Ether?
Slashdot runs basically no Be articles until there are doomsday predictions.
1. Be has been out of the desktop market for a year now. They are focused on BeIA and the emerging IA market. (And no, iOpener, Audrey, et. al. are not REAL IA's -- show me a broadband, wireless internet device, and I'll show you an IA.)
2. The Excite article is based on their SEC filing. They could have written the article a year ago, because that's about the time Be said they'd run out of money at the end of Q2 2001. However, they always fail to leave out the very large "UNLESS..." clause, which points out they're only going to run out of money unless they get funding. Be will get funding. Hell, if Qubit can get funding two months ago for an IA device, Be can get funding for a kick ass IA OS.
3. Sony has been working with Be for one year on a key part of their (Sony's) IA venture. They had to know Be's situation, there's no way in hell they'd bank on BeIA without knowing Be is going to last.
4. Gassee has kept Be alive on virtually NO PROFIT for eleven years. Do you honestly think he's going to let Be die now that they are standing on the brink of a vast ocean of a market? And you PC chauvinists who can't see the possibilities for IA's are no different than the IBM execs who couldn't see the PC market right in front of their noses, before they made the "deal with the devils at a little known company called Microsoft. You know, back when "computer" was synonymous with "mainframe."
Yes, sadly Be is on the brink of death. Funny thing is, they've been there for eleven years. And they've survived. Come back to me in a year, and we'll see where they stand then.
-thomas
Maybe people can post links to some of the prettier pictures for those of us (cough, cough) who live in light-polluted cities.
Sounds like you live in an air-polluted city as well.
I had a funny experience. I went to the website and downloaded and ran the patch but it gave me a message saying I did not need to install this update and exited. Anyone else have this happen?
Are you sure you weren't at micr0s0ft.com?
No April Fools.. that was my guess at first as well.
Yeah, well it wasn't my first guess, seeing as how it's March 30th.
I believe that Hamlet's strife is that he saw the merits in both possibilities, and so an accurate representation would necessitate him evaluating both 2b and !2b before reaching a conclusion.
In other words, it would evaluate to false no matter what, since he doesn't yet know the answer to either question when he asks them.
That's deep, man!
That should be
2b || !2b
(well, for programmers at least)
Not for Perl programmers.
(Dare I say it? I dare, I dare...)
When tough times and bankruptcies take out the little guys, you can always count on monopolies to see you through!
Sad, ain't it?
Drat. You ruined my joke. HR1984. 1984. Get it?
I'm assuming I'm not only supermodel here, right?
You can assuming you're not only English major, right, too?
Specifically, what law requires you to keep logs?
I don't recall the exact name of the law, but I believe the bill in congress was HR1984.
You really don't get it, do you?
Didn't know you were imparting something to "get."
Nor do you know much about TiVo, do you?
Yes, I know quite a bit about TiVo.
You cannot build your own video library with TiVo
Nor would I want to build a private video library, just like I no longer tape movies. If I want to watch it, I'll order it PPV, rent it, or buy it on DVD. Or catch it on one of the 30 movie channels I get.
unless you first output the signal in analog format (read: you lose quality).
Well, as long as you're talking about losing video quality, it's already being lost in most digital (non-HDTV) broadcasts, such as Time Warner digital cable, and the things TiVo (and any digital recorder) save to disk with MPEG compression.
Your viewing habits are public knowledge, or at least purchasable for the right price, etc. etc.
I'm not a privacy nut. As long as they don't give out my personal information (which they explicitly state they do not give out), I couldn't care less. Name one bad thing that might come out of TiVo sharing viewing habits that are not tied to me personally. I can't think of even one.
If you want to be a serf
Serf? Forced to do manual labor for little or no pay? Hmmm?
forced to submit to the whims and limitations the Copyright Cartels choose to impose upon you, with your viewing habits recorded and made available to marketing enterprises with their own, not your, interests at heart, be my guest.
I believe you've gone a little over the top on this one. TiVo makes it easy to control what I watch, and when. It lets me skip all those nasty commercials quite easily. Pause live TV, etc.
If instead you wish to retain your rights to fair use
Didn't realize I was giving those up?
record and archive the programs and movies you wish
I can do this with TiVo.
under your own terms (and with better quality)
Under my own terms? Such as "don't delete this item"? I can do that. Better quality? Big whoop. It'll be moot in a year or two anyway, as I have my digital VCR (TiVo or someone else) with HDTV support.
may I suggest thinking outside of the box just a little
The difference between me and you is I don't want to rebuild the wheel. TiVo and their friends have cool products that are much easier to use than anything I could build, or anything I've seen built by your average hacker.