... and I'm still gainfully employed. What's more I have coworkers who are devs and in their 50s. Granted, I don't work in Silicon Valley or even the U.S. so maybe things are different here...
A New Hope was great but it suffered from some plot holes, plot pacing issues, some special effects rushes, and just a general lack of polish. Empire was a professional effort with proper production, budget, director, an better emphasis on acting and character development, better scripting, Yoda, and, last but not least: Lando.
It was dark and deep and delved into the truth nature of the Force. It brought out emotions that the first movie could not. It has more creative planets and better dialogue.
I don't understand how A New Hope could be considered better other than the fact that it introduced the Star Wars universe.
Well, even if Google loses, there's also the question of how far the fair use exemption goes if API's can be copyrighted. I doubt the courts will let somebody copyright Integer add(Integer first, Integer second), for instance.
I'm not saying I agree with Oracle (I don't), I'm just hopeful that cooler heads prevail and civilization isn't finished if the courts decide that APIs are copyrightable.
Red Hat has Ceylon. Mozilla has Rust. Google has Go and Dart. Apple has Swift. Typesafe has Scala. SpringSource has Groovy. Oracle has Java. Microsoft has C#. Etc, etc, etc.
Ceylon caught a lot of flack initially from some members of the Scala community (and I guess some Java people) for "doing unnecessary work", "not listening to the community" and "not complying with standards. Apple caught the same flack for Swift with the same nonsensical arguments. Go has similarly been criticized for being weird.
The fact of the matter is that each one of these companies has their own requirements, requirements that "standard" languages like Java and C++ don't meet.
Also, which each new language comes a potential set of new innovations for new or existing languages to build upon. With Ceylon it's union types and null variables handled by built-in Optional types. With go, it's interfaces that are not explicitly implemented. Etc, etc, etc.
What's worse is that the mother's maiden name question doesn't work:
1) If your mother divorced your father and took her maiden name. 2) If you're relatively young and your mother lives in Quebec, where women are now required to keep their maiden names.
I know you've gone on record supporting closures in Java and have apparently supported them for a very long time.
I apologize then for being unfamiliar with the history behind Java closures, as it is badly documented on the internet (or my Google-Fu is weak, I don't know which).
So why do you think Java didn't originally have closures, why weren't they added instead of anonymous inner classes in Java 1.1, and what were the other roadblocks to Sun adding closures in the past.
FIrst of all, non sequitur. My question was what makes Apple different from every other patent holder? You didn't answer that question.
Second of all, what makes Apple a "once-creative company" that "wants to be a twisted old"?
Is there a problem with Apple's business model? If so, please enlighten me, because for a company to be #1 in market cap, they must be doing something right?
Has Apple stopped creating new products? The iPad came out in 2010, so I'd say the answer is no.
Does Apple have a great, modern technology stack? Among other things, considering that they maintain their own open source C-compiler tools, and they have by far the best consumer desktop operating system, I'd say the answer is yes.
So how is Apple declining? Because you feel their attempts to assert software patents supposedly mask an insecurity about their ability to innovate? Please.
Blame the broken software patent system. Remember, Samsung, Motorola Mobility, Microsoft, etc, are also suing prolifically with mobile patent suits.
Apple (like the other companies mentioned above), is only acting in the interests of their shareholders. That's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.
Fix the software patent laws (or eliminate them altogether) and the problem goes away.
This is a company that makes consumer electronics and computers. It built and maintains two operating systems, including its own browsers, email clients, etc. It contributes to a number of open source projects, and maintains its own C compiler toolchain (which it also open sourced), an IDE. It also maintains a relationship with a certified team of developers, and maintains an ecosystem of online content, including music, movies, books, etc.
Oh yeah, and it also has retail stores, which have by far the best consumer experience of any electronics store.
Why would Apple alienate their professional customers, including developers? They're the ones who, along with graphic artists, movie editors, radiologists, etc, who pay top dollar for the most expensive Macs?
If developers can't install Apps like Eclipse, Mac Ports, various command-line tools, etc, then they'll switch platforms. Apple can't afford to lose those sales.
Besides, many game developers don't distribute on the Mac App Store, including EA and Blizzard (and Steam still runs separate from the App Store), not to mention Microsoft and Adobe. Just how can Apple afford to lose Office and Photoshop, among other high profile non-App Store apps?
Slashdot Mirror
... and I'm still gainfully employed. What's more I have coworkers who are devs and in their 50s. Granted, I don't work in Silicon Valley or even the U.S. so maybe things are different here...
A New Hope was great but it suffered from some plot holes, plot pacing issues, some special effects rushes, and just a general lack of polish. Empire was a professional effort with proper production, budget, director, an better emphasis on acting and character development, better scripting, Yoda, and, last but not least: Lando.
It was dark and deep and delved into the truth nature of the Force. It brought out emotions that the first movie could not. It has more creative planets and better dialogue.
I don't understand how A New Hope could be considered better other than the fact that it introduced the Star Wars universe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Well, even if Google loses, there's also the question of how far the fair use exemption goes if API's can be copyrighted. I doubt the courts will let somebody copyright Integer add(Integer first, Integer second), for instance.
I'm not saying I agree with Oracle (I don't), I'm just hopeful that cooler heads prevail and civilization isn't finished if the courts decide that APIs are copyrightable.
Right, because nobody can possibly come up with a new idea. They've all already been invented. Also, all of the languages I mentioned are open source.
I put Java as a "standard" because Oracle controls the language. I guess nobody owns C++ so it's more true in that case.
One important omission from my list: Facebook and Hack.
Red Hat has Ceylon. Mozilla has Rust. Google has Go and Dart. Apple has Swift. Typesafe has Scala. SpringSource has Groovy. Oracle has Java. Microsoft has C#. Etc, etc, etc.
Ceylon caught a lot of flack initially from some members of the Scala community (and I guess some Java people) for "doing unnecessary work", "not listening to the community" and "not complying with standards. Apple caught the same flack for Swift with the same nonsensical arguments. Go has similarly been criticized for being weird.
The fact of the matter is that each one of these companies has their own requirements, requirements that "standard" languages like Java and C++ don't meet.
Also, which each new language comes a potential set of new innovations for new or existing languages to build upon. With Ceylon it's union types and null variables handled by built-in Optional types. With go, it's interfaces that are not explicitly implemented. Etc, etc, etc.
Bottom line: This is a good thing.
... or blocked phone numbers.
Problem solved!
http://www.macosforge.org/
Have you ever used OS X?
And what does Apple "sound like"? Please enlighten us.
Aren't there shellshock patches available for the non-GPL 3'd versions of bash?
Because it runs on both the JVM and JS VM and is, for all intents and purposes, a dramatically improved version of Java.
http://ceylon-lang.org/
Slightly offtopic but Ceylon will run on top of the JavaScript runtime, so this an alternative to Dart.
What's worse is that the mother's maiden name question doesn't work:
1) If your mother divorced your father and took her maiden name.
2) If you're relatively young and your mother lives in Quebec, where women are now required to keep their maiden names.
My old password was automatically generated and not used on any other site, and I generated a new password also not used on any other site.
I know you've gone on record supporting closures in Java and have apparently supported them for a very long time.
I apologize then for being unfamiliar with the history behind Java closures, as it is badly documented on the internet (or my Google-Fu is weak, I don't know which).
So why do you think Java didn't originally have closures, why weren't they added instead of anonymous inner classes in Java 1.1, and what were the other roadblocks to Sun adding closures in the past.
FIrst of all, non sequitur. My question was what makes Apple different from every other patent holder? You didn't answer that question.
Second of all, what makes Apple a "once-creative company" that "wants to be a twisted old"?
Is there a problem with Apple's business model? If so, please enlighten me, because for a company to be #1 in market cap, they must be doing something right?
Has Apple stopped creating new products? The iPad came out in 2010, so I'd say the answer is no.
Does Apple have a great, modern technology stack? Among other things, considering that they maintain their own open source C-compiler tools, and they have by far the best consumer desktop operating system, I'd say the answer is yes.
So how is Apple declining? Because you feel their attempts to assert software patents supposedly mask an insecurity about their ability to innovate? Please.
Or they could, you know, innovate, like Microsoft did with the Surface and RIM did with Blackberry 10.
Samsung is a blatant copying machine.
Blame the broken software patent system. Remember, Samsung, Motorola Mobility, Microsoft, etc, are also suing prolifically with mobile patent suits.
Apple (like the other companies mentioned above), is only acting in the interests of their shareholders. That's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.
Fix the software patent laws (or eliminate them altogether) and the problem goes away.
Shouldn't have fed the trolls.
Ad hominem and non sequitur.
"A really shiny Best Buy?" You're kidding, right?
This is a company that makes consumer electronics and computers. It built and maintains two operating systems, including its own browsers, email clients, etc. It contributes to a number of open source projects, and maintains its own C compiler toolchain (which it also open sourced), an IDE. It also maintains a relationship with a certified team of developers, and maintains an ecosystem of online content, including music, movies, books, etc.
Oh yeah, and it also has retail stores, which have by far the best consumer experience of any electronics store.
I can't believe this got modded up +5.
Why would Apple alienate their professional customers, including developers? They're the ones who, along with graphic artists, movie editors, radiologists, etc, who pay top dollar for the most expensive Macs?
If developers can't install Apps like Eclipse, Mac Ports, various command-line tools, etc, then they'll switch platforms. Apple can't afford to lose those sales.
Besides, many game developers don't distribute on the Mac App Store, including EA and Blizzard (and Steam still runs separate from the App Store), not to mention Microsoft and Adobe. Just how can Apple afford to lose Office and Photoshop, among other high profile non-App Store apps?
It doesn't matter if there are more devices running Android because Apple is more profitable than any of them.
Also, Apple sells more iPhones than each of the Android licensees.
Comparing an operating system (Android) to a company (Apple) is really disingenuous.