I don't know about any other phones, but my 5510 had the facility that I could press '1' and it would enter the #1, but if I held down '1' it would call the speed dial entry for #1.
Clearly this fits into the "limited resource environment", the "hardware button" and everything else. If this isn't a very, very specific example of prior art that is meant to be covered by this patent then I'm screwed if I know what else could be.
Yes Virginia, the patent office is staffed by morons.
In Australia (or Victoria at least) it's 87%, and it's done by manipulation of the payoff tables. So, a Royal Flush pays 500-1 when in fact the odds are much higher. (For video poker type machines)
The industry is heavily regulated and government monitored. I had a friend who built the hardware and software for some of the systems, and they have hard-core maths people working for them.
Very funny story though, there was a machine that was in one of the suburbs that had a very high frequency of migrants (Vietnamese) that was consistently paying out above the 87%. The company was suspicious they were doing something illegal causing the machine to pay out when it shouldn't.
Turns out the guys playing the machine were statistics professors (from Vietnam) that had analysed the payoff tables and found a weakness in the payoff and under certain "unusual" circumstances (like breaking 3 of a kind and throwing away 2 Kings to go for Royal Flush) the payoff could be increased. The maths guys at the company were somewhat embarassed as they had to change the tables to account for this.
I've used a Nokia 7650. I never wanted one until I got to play with it for a weekend. I write Java applications for mobile phones and I needed one to test an app, and I wasn't interested in the camera at all.
I was hooked, it was so much fun. Took photos of everything that moved (and didn't). The photo quality was *great*. 640x480x4096 colours. Perfect for "web-ready" images.
Now, you and I can use a digital camera, connect to a computer and email it to somebody.
But guess what, most people don't have the skills or equipment to do it. I expect these things will sell like hotcakes once the price drops to the "mass consumer" level.
While I'm not as vehement as some of the other posters, I thought I'd reply, though I don't normally reply to ACs.
My words were chosen quite carefully. When I said "aren't always _just_ about you".
Sure, you can view any form of sharing/charity as selfish because "you" get something out of it, and that's certainly the truth. People do feel good about it.
However, the hair-splitting part is, "what's the motivation". I believe if your motivation is to help/share/assist others primarily, then that's sharing/charity.
If your motivation is "I'll feel good/get something out of this by sharing" then that's selfish.
Of course, people are welcome to disagree with my POV after all, this is a pretty personal issue.
Well, I was just pissed at the "it doesn't work for me therefore it doesn't work anywhere" attitude.
I wasn't the one basing my arguments on a fallacious assumption. You then turn around and claim that because it doesn't work in your environment then the whole idea is dumb. Well, the whole idea may be dumb, but that's not the reason.
I agree 100% that it doesn't work for you. And guess what, the USA isn't the whole world, and there are plenty of Europeans and Asians using handsets that are user programmable.
As for the USA, the Motorola i85s is an end-user programmable phone, (and i think there are a few other Motorola phones like the i90c).
If you can't program them, that's a problem with the vendor of the phone, and the service provider, not with the underlying handset.
The Nokia 7650, the Nokia 7210, the Nokia 6310 and just about every other Java based mobile phone that I've used are all end-user programmable and not only that provide application suites to download the applications without doing OTA.
You are confusing the phone capabilities with network capabilites.
Yell at your moronic telco, not at the phone companies.
I've used a Motorola i85s here in Australia as a Java "JVM" despite it not being able to be connected to the mobile network due to incompatibilities and lack of a SIM card. I've used a Siemens, an N7650, 6310 and 7210 all downloading applications via OTA and Infrared.
Clearly you need to do some research before your particular rant, as you are quite wrong.
IMR Worldwide was called Sofres IMR (and a bunch of other names I can't remember) and has changed their name to RedSheriff.
The software used to be called WebMeasure, and now to maintain corporate branding it's "RedMeasure"
This stuff has been around for just ages. I was part of the company that wrote this software for them originally. It has been around since 1997/98 however it's just started to be used by more people
It's nothing more than a slightly sophisticated cookie, and if you don't trust my word for it, download it and decompile it.
I just looked at the Beebs source code from their home page and it's exactly the same as it was back then.
Anyway, here's the source code. Check for yourself. (Thanks to DJ's decompiler) It's doing nothing more than sending the duration of the time on a particular page.
For the non-appleted amongst us, start() occurs when the page is loaded, stop() occurs when the page is left.
Grrrrr, frigging lameness filter stopped me from posting the source. Anyway, get it from
here.
It's a Java applet that's like a cgi traced image. It's used for user tracking. It's not any more sinister than WebTrends or any of the other post-processing tools.
Caveat: I worked for the company that wrote the first version of this software that was used by Red Sheriff.
I've seen it. I've played it. It's awesome. I was talking at a Nokia Developer Day (about Java in mobile phones), and was talking to another developer about choosing the appropriate games and applications to write to put on the phones. I actually said, "It's not like you'll want to play Quake on a phone", and they showed me the Doom port. It's pretty sweet, but using the little joystick thingy didn't make for a greatly easy gaming experience.
When will people read the friggin articles first. Oh, I forgot, this is/. with people having a reading age of about 10, and a concentration span in the nanoseconds.
When I saw it, I nearly had a heart attack, I write freely available Java crypto BouncyCastle.org
and thought of the horrible problems that we're going to have keeping SAf off the site.
I spent the 2 seconds actually reading the paragraph at the SAf Gov Site and it says:
All Cryptography Providers providing services or products in South Africa are required
to register their services or products with the register maintained by the
Department of Communications.
It's not click and forward, or "f" and forward or even ".forward" and forward.
From the patent link
A method of automatically resending an electronic message originally sent to a receiving user at a first address that is now invalid to a second address for the receiving user, wherein the second address has been registered with a forwarding address server
It's very specifically related to dealing with bouncing mail and having a registry set up for when the bounce occurs stuff can happen to get the mail to the right place.
Of course, I see a huge gaping security hole in this if I register the bounce address as mine.
Yet another case of great editor review of stories.
What's with the inflammatory headlines ? Clearly the person submitting the story didn't even read the article.
Re:The next distributed project
on
LinuXbox Boots
·
· Score: 2
Actually, the interesting thing here is that there are known attacks on RSA when you have large amounts of encrypted text.
Therefore, the more games that Microsoft create and sign, the greater the chance that a key can be found. RSA, depending on the mode that it's used in, may be quite susceptible to a non-brute force, known text attack.
In the article, we have this comment, Michael Speck, of ARIA's anti-piracy investigations unit, said: "Any request or application that is made of the industry is not just point-blank rejected. This is very much a case of watch this space.
"There are many legitimate uses for CD burners. However, experience has shown illegitimate uses as well."
So, when music sales are down, it's because of those damn pirates, but when we can get somebody to pay us, regardless of our principles, then it's a legitimate use.
At the risk of sounding like a grumpy old bastard. Microsoft has given *nothing* back to the world that allowed it to exist. It has taken advantage of interoperability standards created by many, many people over time and in some cases subverted them.
It has shown that it has leveraged it's monopolistic status in the operating system arena into other areas, so therefore the remedy must be appropriate.
Forcing Microsoft to open it's file and protocol formats is *an appropriate* remedy. It prevents Microsoft from leveraging monopolistic power in those areas.
As for the rest of your incoherent rambling, well, it's not worth dignifying with an answer. Maybe when you get above 14 you'll realise that there's more to the world than your petty little view.
I wouldn't say that it's a modularised version of Windows. I dunno if that's what I implied in my original message, but that wasn't the intention.
The X-Box is more than just DirectX API's. It has a microkernel for memory management, general OS functions like disk, controller input/output.
I'm sorry that I can't give more details.
I think there's a big difference between what people are saying here, what the states are saying, and what's feasible.
The states want to see a modular version of Windows where it is modular in the application sense. So, you can install your own browser, CD burning software, audio player software etc, etc without the Microsoft equivalents "always winning". Microsoft have argued that _this_ is not possible because IE is such an integral part of the OS.
There are people here arguing that all parts should be modular and using that as a straw-man argument that it's not possible, not feasible, or in your case not going to be compatible. Which, I agree with. Mostly because of what is said in another article by in this thread group.
However, it's funny that other OS's have managed to do this without any problems whatsoever. I can run *nix with or without X, I can choose whatever style or version (generally) of application that runs on my machine. Hell, I've even got a firewall running a bastardised kernel, with different RPM's and updates from all sorts of versions. Shit, it's barely recogniseable as it's original form,(a RH5.2 install) yet it works day in, day out filtering packets.
As I said previously, I don't care about this side of the MS case. This is about Real, Netscape, etc getting their pound of flesh. It doesn't really help the consumer in the long run. IMHNSO that is.
Microsoft claims that to remove components from their current OSes and make it modular is infeasible. (agreed).
However, they have produced WinXP Embedded, supposedly based on WinXP, supposedly modular. Also, you could look at their X-Box as another example. I have good friends who are X-Box developers, and they love it, because the API's are *identical* between Windows and the X-Box, so they can test their code on a PC (within reason) before putting it onto the X-Box. Clearly, there are modular versions of "Windows" that Microsoft has chosen to create for it's own purpose. The states just want that purpose to be "for everybody".
Now, either Microsoft is lying to the court, or lying in their marketing. You choose.
PS: I don't give a flying duck about this BTW, the only remedy I want to see from Microsoft is to be forced to publish every single file-format (Word) and protocol (Exchange) that they use, and keep those documents up to date.
Erm, the point is that Microsoft have been whining about how you can't make a modular version of Windows.
The states have countered with "but you have this Windows XP Embedded Thingy which claims to be modular"
It's not that the states want Microsoft to ship XP Embedded on a PC, it's that they want to prove that a modular version of Windows is possible.
Microsoft has conveniently already developed something to make their case for them, which is why they've been fighting vigorously to keep it out of the court.
In legal terms, it's called "hoisted on your own petard". IANAL.
The revised JSPA will govern the execution of JSRs which are created after it has gone into effect, which is probably several months away. When that occurs, all new JSRs (led by Sun or others) will be governed by an agreement that satisfies Apache's requirements.
Again in the interests of meeting the spirit of the requirements, Sun will modify the specification licenses of all the JSRs currently in progress to reflect Apache's requirements as met in the new draft JSPA. And we reaffirm a previous statement that we would work over time to change the licenses of previously completed JSRs to comply with the new JSPA draft. We specifically commit to doing such changes at a minimum for:
If you go and read the Sun Wireless sites, then you will understand what's going on.
The reason there has been a delay is that there is two configurations for J2ME. The MIDP (Mobile information device profile) is destined for the mobile phone/pager market. This has been implemented first, for reasons that I suspect have to do with the power of the phone manufacturers compared to the handset manufacturers, and because the phones have build in networking compared with the Palms which for the vast majority don't.
The MIDP doesn't work well on a Palm because the display capabilities are aimed at a mobile phone which is less sophisticated, as compared to a Palm.
However, the good news is that the PDAP (pda profile) has now reached the stage for community review which will mean that a fully fledged profile for use on PDA devices is now available.
Basically, there's been fragmentation (between KVM, MIDP and PDAP) for development on the Palm, and until now there hasn't been a coherent strategy for companies to follow.
I expect there will be a massive increase in development on these platforms with the support that is now available, and the direction of the profiles.
If you want to see what can be done, and a presentation that I gave about J2ME, then have a look at : my J2ME page
If you want to contact me directly, I can provide further information in this area.
I've always felt that programmers are most like artisans & craftsmen. Where you have to build something that has aethetic appeal, but also must be functional and adhere to various scientific principles to make it work.
Programming is definitely a crossover between art and science, and the best programmers that I've come across also have a very strong artistic streak in some area.
Having said that, it's also reinforced by observing the best practices for teaching and learning programming skills. All the current literature (and my own personal observations) are leaning towards "XP style/mentoring" approaches, which are very similar to the "apprentice/master" relationships in artisan/craft teaching.
Just my general ramblings.....
(Oh, for the record, I'm a professional who also produces BSD-license open source code)
You make good points for an entire organisation, but what about software development teams in a company ?
I am currently stuck using Windows 2k, I have cygwin, wincvs, litestep to make my life more livable, just so I can run Exchange/Outlook.
That's right. The corporate standard mail is what is generally stopping developers from shifting, and that's where the killer is. I'm eagerly awaiting Lindows and Ximians Exchange Connector, and whoever can get it working first and best will get my money.
Imagine the cost saving on having developers all using Lindows just from the uptime and availability aspects alone.
Caveat: I'm assuming Lindows will be as reliable as *nix, not as Windows.
P.S.: Here is another example. Don't call yourself a geek. It carries the
connotation that you have difficulty communicating with others, and avoid
communicating by immersing yourself in technical things. After seeing your
website, I very much doubt that is true.
But maybe that's the difference between you and I. I'm proud to be a geek/nerd, and I'm proud to call myself that. A lot of my friends are also the same. As you mentioned, maybe we don't fit the geek/nerd stereotype, but if enough of us that don't fit the stereotype call ourselves by that name, maybe perception will change.
You're just parroting the generally accepted line for what a geek/nerd is. I'm working to change that. In reality, there are more geeks/nerds like me, than there are as you describe, so why shouldn't perception get changed ?
I'm also obviously less concerned about what other people think about me and the things that I do. Obviously what my wife says is law, but that's just natural;-)
We've managed to change the perception in our wider circle of friends that being a geek/nerd is a "good thing".
Maybe my communication skills aren't as bad as you thought, eh ?
PS: If you want to keep up this communication, please just send email, I'm sure I don't need to bore anybody else with my mindless banter.
Funny that Sun, the UK Times, Informix and others don't seems to think so. Funny how Sun gave us
a signing certificate for our provider. Maybe companies that actually know what they are doing can look at what's being done. Funny how Sun list us on their webpages as a JCE implementor. They don't seem too concerned about the whole thing.
At the end of the day we don't give a shit. We're doing this for us. If it turns out that other people want to use it, then bully for them.
We (authors of BouncyCastle) have already gone
through this with somebody who mailed us directly, who's boss didn't want to use it because the name was funny. We said, "OK, that's up to you". In the end, they ended up using it because it's the best available (Maybe I'm a touch biased, but as far as features go, it's comprehensive, and as far as price goes, it can't be beat, and as far a licenses go, it's the most attractive. (It's not GPL)
If you care about "acceptance" and "how it looks to others", then you're not doing it for the right reason. I've had at least a dozen people ask me to commercialise what we've done.
And "Linux" is a serious name exactly how ?
PS: No, I'm not a professional communicator,
I'm a professional geek. But it's pretty funny how if you do a job well, that communicates all by itself.
Slashdot Mirror
I call "Prior art".
I don't know about any other phones, but my 5510 had the facility that I could press '1' and it would enter the #1, but if I held down '1' it would call the speed dial entry for #1.
Clearly this fits into the "limited resource environment", the "hardware button" and everything else. If this isn't a very, very specific example of prior art that is meant to be covered by this patent then I'm screwed if I know what else could be.
Yes Virginia, the patent office is staffed by morons.
In Australia (or Victoria at least) it's 87%, and it's done by manipulation of the payoff tables. So, a Royal Flush pays 500-1 when in fact the odds are much higher. (For video poker type machines)
The industry is heavily regulated and government monitored. I had a friend who built the hardware and software for some of the systems, and they have hard-core maths people working for them.
Very funny story though, there was a machine that was in one of the suburbs that had a very high frequency of migrants (Vietnamese) that was consistently paying out above the 87%. The company was suspicious they were doing something illegal causing the machine to pay out when it shouldn't.
Turns out the guys playing the machine were statistics professors (from Vietnam) that had analysed the payoff tables and found a weakness in the payoff and under certain "unusual" circumstances (like breaking 3 of a kind and throwing away 2 Kings to go for Royal Flush) the payoff could be increased.
The maths guys at the company were somewhat embarassed as they had to change the tables to account for this.
I've used a Nokia 7650. I never wanted one until I got to play with it for a weekend. I write Java applications for mobile phones and I needed one to test an app, and I wasn't interested in the camera at all.
I was hooked, it was so much fun. Took photos of everything that moved (and didn't). The photo quality was *great*. 640x480x4096 colours. Perfect for "web-ready" images.
Now, you and I can use a digital camera, connect to a computer and email it to somebody.
But guess what, most people don't have the skills or equipment to do it. I expect these things will sell like hotcakes once the price drops to the "mass consumer" level.
While I'm not as vehement as some of the other posters, I thought I'd reply, though I don't normally reply to ACs.
My words were chosen quite carefully. When I said "aren't always _just_ about you".
Sure, you can view any form of sharing/charity as selfish because "you" get something out of it, and that's certainly the truth. People do feel good about it.
However, the hair-splitting part is, "what's the motivation". I believe if your motivation is to help/share/assist others primarily, then that's sharing/charity.
If your motivation is "I'll feel good/get something out of this by sharing" then that's selfish.
Of course, people are welcome to disagree with my POV after all, this is a pretty personal issue.
It's funny, you can spend time posting stuff on /. but can't find time to assist an Open Source project.
You could help with documentation, you could help with testing, you could help in their community assisting others.
That's what sharing is all about, making choices that aren't always just about you.
Who's going to teach your kids that ?
Well, I was just pissed at the "it doesn't work for me therefore it doesn't work anywhere" attitude.
I wasn't the one basing my arguments on a fallacious assumption. You then turn around and claim that because it doesn't work in your environment then the whole idea is dumb. Well, the whole idea may be dumb, but that's not the reason.
I agree 100% that it doesn't work for you. And guess what, the USA isn't the whole world, and there are plenty of Europeans and Asians using handsets that are user programmable.
As for the USA, the Motorola i85s is an end-user programmable phone, (and i think there are a few other Motorola phones like the i90c).
If you can't program them, that's a problem with the vendor of the phone, and the service provider, not with the underlying handset.
Cheers,
-- jon
The Nokia 7650, the Nokia 7210, the Nokia 6310 and just about every other Java based mobile phone that I've used are all end-user programmable and not only that provide application suites to download the applications without doing OTA.
You are confusing the phone capabilities with network capabilites.
Yell at your moronic telco, not at the phone companies.
I've used a Motorola i85s here in Australia as a Java "JVM" despite it not being able to be connected to the mobile network due to incompatibilities and lack of a SIM card. I've used a Siemens, an N7650, 6310 and 7210 all downloading applications via OTA and Infrared.
Clearly you need to do some research before your particular rant, as you are quite wrong.
The software used to be called WebMeasure, and now to maintain corporate branding it's "RedMeasure"
This stuff has been around for just ages. I was part of the company that wrote this software for them originally. It has been around since 1997/98 however it's just started to be used by more people It's nothing more than a slightly sophisticated cookie, and if you don't trust my word for it, download it and decompile it.
I just looked at the Beebs source code from their home page and it's exactly the same as it was back then.
Anyway, here's the source code. Check for yourself. (Thanks to DJ's decompiler) It's doing nothing more than sending the duration of the time on a particular page.
For the non-appleted amongst us, start() occurs when the page is loaded, stop() occurs when the page is left.
Grrrrr, frigging lameness filter stopped me from posting the source. Anyway, get it from here.
They're not.
It's a Java applet that's like a cgi traced image. It's used for user tracking. It's not any more sinister than WebTrends or any of the other post-processing tools.
Caveat: I worked for the company that wrote the first version of this software that was used by Red Sheriff.
I've seen it. I've played it. It's awesome.
I was talking at a Nokia Developer Day (about Java in mobile phones), and was talking to another developer about choosing the appropriate games and applications to write to put on the phones.
I actually said, "It's not like you'll want to play Quake on a phone", and they showed me the Doom port.
It's pretty sweet, but using the little joystick thingy didn't make for a greatly easy gaming experience.
When I saw it, I nearly had a heart attack, I write freely available Java crypto BouncyCastle.org and thought of the horrible problems that we're going to have keeping SAf off the site.
I spent the 2 seconds actually reading the paragraph at the SAf Gov Site and it says:
All Cryptography Providers providing services or products in South Africa are required to register their services or products with the register maintained by the Department of Communications.
Note, the wording is in.
From the patent link A method of automatically resending an electronic message originally sent to a receiving user at a first address that is now invalid to a second address for the receiving user, wherein the second address has been registered with a forwarding address server
It's very specifically related to dealing with bouncing mail and having a registry set up for when the bounce occurs stuff can happen to get the mail to the right place.
Of course, I see a huge gaping security hole in this if I register the bounce address as mine.
Yet another case of great editor review of stories. What's with the inflammatory headlines ? Clearly the person submitting the story didn't even read the article.
Actually, the interesting thing here is that there are known attacks on RSA when you have large amounts of encrypted text.
Therefore, the more games that Microsoft create and sign, the greater the chance that a key can be found.
RSA, depending on the mode that it's used in, may be quite susceptible to a non-brute force, known text attack.
In the article, we have this comment,
Michael Speck, of ARIA's anti-piracy investigations unit, said: "Any request or application that is made of the industry is not just point-blank rejected. This is very much a case of watch this space.
"There are many legitimate uses for CD burners. However, experience has shown illegitimate uses as well."
So, when music sales are down, it's because of those damn pirates, but when we can get somebody to pay us, regardless of our principles, then it's a legitimate use.
Yeah, riiight...
At the risk of sounding like a grumpy old bastard. Microsoft has given *nothing* back to the world that allowed it to exist. It has taken advantage of interoperability standards created by many, many people over time and in some cases subverted them.
It has shown that it has leveraged it's monopolistic status in the operating system arena into other areas, so therefore the remedy must be appropriate.
Forcing Microsoft to open it's file and protocol formats is *an appropriate* remedy. It prevents Microsoft from leveraging monopolistic power in those areas.
As for the rest of your incoherent rambling, well, it's not worth dignifying with an answer. Maybe when you get above 14 you'll realise that there's more to the world than your petty little view.
Cheers,
-- jon
I wouldn't say that it's a modularised version of Windows. I dunno if that's what I implied in my original message, but that wasn't the intention.
The X-Box is more than just DirectX API's. It has a microkernel for memory management, general OS functions like disk, controller input/output.
I'm sorry that I can't give more details.
I think there's a big difference between what people are saying here, what the states are saying, and what's feasible.
The states want to see a modular version of Windows where it is modular in the application sense. So, you can install your own browser, CD burning software, audio player software etc, etc without the Microsoft equivalents "always winning".
Microsoft have argued that _this_ is not possible because IE is such an integral part of the OS.
There are people here arguing that all parts should be modular and using that as a straw-man argument that it's not possible, not feasible, or in your case not going to be compatible. Which, I agree with. Mostly because of what is said in another article by in this thread group.
However, it's funny that other OS's have managed to do this without any problems whatsoever. I can run *nix with or without X, I can choose whatever style or version (generally) of application that runs on my machine. Hell, I've even got a firewall running a bastardised kernel, with different RPM's and updates from all sorts of versions. Shit, it's barely recogniseable as it's original form,(a RH5.2 install) yet it works day in, day out filtering packets.
As I said previously, I don't care about this side of the MS case. This is about Real, Netscape, etc getting their pound of flesh. It doesn't really help the consumer in the long run. IMHNSO that is.
Cheers,
-- jon
At this point, IANAL.
Microsoft claims that to remove components from their current OSes and make it modular is infeasible. (agreed).
However, they have produced WinXP Embedded, supposedly based on WinXP, supposedly modular.
Also, you could look at their X-Box as another example. I have good friends who are X-Box developers, and they love it, because the API's are *identical* between Windows and the X-Box, so they can test their code on a PC (within reason) before putting it onto the X-Box. Clearly, there are modular versions of "Windows" that Microsoft has chosen to create for it's own purpose. The states just want that purpose to be "for everybody".
Now, either Microsoft is lying to the court, or lying in their marketing. You choose.
PS: I don't give a flying duck about this BTW, the only remedy I want to see from Microsoft is to be forced to publish every single file-format (Word) and protocol (Exchange) that they use, and keep those documents up to date.
Erm, the point is that Microsoft have been whining about how you can't make a modular version of Windows.
The states have countered with "but you have this Windows XP Embedded Thingy which claims to be modular"
It's not that the states want Microsoft to ship XP Embedded on a PC, it's that they want to prove that a modular version of Windows is possible.
Microsoft has conveniently already developed something to make their case for them, which is why they've been fighting vigorously to keep it out of the court.
In legal terms, it's called "hoisted on your own petard". IANAL.
Enjoy,
-- jon
He did, the first modern implementation on Unix that became the base of what is known as Emacs in the modern era.
Here's a timeline: (Jamie Zawinski) Timeline
Enjoy !
The revised JSPA will govern the execution of JSRs which are created after it has gone into effect, which is probably several months away. When that occurs, all new JSRs (led by Sun or others) will be governed by an agreement that satisfies Apache's requirements.
Again in the interests of meeting the spirit of the requirements, Sun will modify the specification licenses of all the JSRs currently in progress to reflect Apache's requirements as met in the new draft JSPA. And we reaffirm a previous statement that we would work over time to change the licenses of previously completed JSRs to comply with the new JSPA draft. We specifically commit to doing such changes at a minimum for:
JSR 31 (JAXB), JSRs 52, 53, 152, 154 (JSPs/Servlets), JSR 63 (JAXP), JSR 67 (JAXM), JSR 93 (JAXR), JSR 101 (JAXRPC), JSR 127 (Java Server Faces), JSR 172 (J2ME Web Services)
From my reading, they are committing to make it happen retrospectively for the above JSRs (as a minimum) and it will be in place for future JSRs.
Of course, this is providing that this new wording is passed by the committee for JSP-99.
I suppose it will be back to beating up Sun for not putting Java under the GPL ;-)
If you go and read the Sun Wireless sites, then you will understand what's going on.
The reason there has been a delay is that there is two configurations for J2ME. The MIDP (Mobile information device profile) is destined for the mobile phone/pager market. This has been implemented first, for reasons that I suspect have to do with the power of the phone manufacturers compared to the handset manufacturers, and because the phones have build in networking compared with the Palms which for the vast majority don't.
The MIDP doesn't work well on a Palm because the display capabilities are aimed at a mobile phone which is less sophisticated, as compared to a Palm.
However, the good news is that the PDAP (pda profile) has now reached the stage for community review which will mean that a fully fledged profile for use on PDA devices is now available.
Basically, there's been fragmentation (between KVM, MIDP and PDAP) for development on the Palm, and until now there hasn't been a coherent strategy for companies to follow.
I expect there will be a massive increase in development on these platforms with the support that is now available, and the direction of the profiles.
If you want to see what can be done, and a presentation that I gave about J2ME, then have a look at : my J2ME page
If you want to contact me directly, I can provide further information in this area.
I've always felt that programmers are most like artisans & craftsmen. Where you have to build something that has aethetic appeal, but also must be functional and adhere to various scientific principles to make it work.
Programming is definitely a crossover between art and science, and the best programmers that I've come across also have a very strong artistic streak in some area.
Having said that, it's also reinforced by observing the best practices for teaching and learning programming skills. All the current literature (and my own personal observations) are leaning towards "XP style/mentoring" approaches, which are very similar to the "apprentice/master" relationships in artisan/craft teaching.
Just my general ramblings.....
(Oh, for the record, I'm a professional who also produces BSD-license open source code)
You make good points for an entire organisation, but what about software development teams in a company ?
I am currently stuck using Windows 2k, I have cygwin, wincvs, litestep to make my life more livable, just so I can run Exchange/Outlook.
That's right. The corporate standard mail is what is generally stopping developers from shifting, and that's where the killer is. I'm eagerly awaiting Lindows and Ximians Exchange Connector, and whoever can get it working first and best will get my money.
Imagine the cost saving on having developers all using Lindows just from the uptime and availability aspects alone.
Caveat: I'm assuming Lindows will be as reliable as *nix, not as Windows.
But maybe that's the difference between you and I. I'm proud to be a geek/nerd, and I'm proud to call myself that. A lot of my friends are also the same. As you mentioned, maybe we don't fit the geek/nerd stereotype, but if enough of us that don't fit the stereotype call ourselves by that name, maybe perception will change.
You're just parroting the generally accepted line for what a geek/nerd is. I'm working to change that. In reality, there are more geeks/nerds like me, than there are as you describe, so why shouldn't perception get changed ?
I'm also obviously less concerned about what other people think about me and the things that I do. Obviously what my wife says is law, but that's just natural ;-)
We've managed to change the perception in our wider circle of friends that being a geek/nerd is a "good thing".
Maybe my communication skills aren't as bad as you thought, eh ?
PS: If you want to keep up this communication, please just send email, I'm sure I don't need to bore anybody else with my mindless banter.
At the end of the day we don't give a shit. We're doing this for us. If it turns out that other people want to use it, then bully for them.
We (authors of BouncyCastle) have already gone through this with somebody who mailed us directly, who's boss didn't want to use it because the name was funny. We said, "OK, that's up to you". In the end, they ended up using it because it's the best available (Maybe I'm a touch biased, but as far as features go, it's comprehensive, and as far as price goes, it can't be beat, and as far a licenses go, it's the most attractive. (It's not GPL)
If you care about "acceptance" and "how it looks to others", then you're not doing it for the right reason. I've had at least a dozen people ask me to commercialise what we've done.
And "Linux" is a serious name exactly how ?
PS: No, I'm not a professional communicator, I'm a professional geek. But it's pretty funny how if you do a job well, that communicates all by itself.