Yeah, funny that how Netscape all of a sudden, after version 3, fell farther and farther behind MS. That was not long after MS cut Netscape's financial legs out from under it by giving away its browser, bundling it with every copy of Windows and forbidding OEMs from bundling Netscape.
The question isn't was IE better than Netscape after that point. Its would they have both been better still had MS not used its monopoly illegally?
But there are elements all through the CLR and >NET that are innovative. Windows Presentation Foundation (Avalon), Windows Communication Foundation (Indigo), are truely innovative.
So what exactly is innovative about them? All I've ever seen (as you said) are vague summaries that don't really sound all that innovative.
For your illustration to work, you have to assume the iPod only works with iTunes.
Maybe I missed something somewhere, but how is that different than providing drivers for any other piece of hardware? The last mouse I bought came with a bundled driver and other software, though it was completely unnecessary. You always bundle the hardware with the appropriate drivers unless you can be guaranteed that everyone who buys it will have appropriate drivers that will work as well or better (or at least work). To do otherwise means you're shipping a non-functional product.
Same applied to the $40/processor it costs Intel in production. Nobody seems to remember that may only be a small part of the total cost. In some cases more is spent on marketing than production.
I agree to a large degree, but IMO Congress gets much of the blame.
An example I've used before is the DVD player. AFAIK there's no law requiring DVD manufacturers to enforce the instructions that prevent me from fast-forwarding or skipping whatever I want on the DVD (FBI/Interpol warnings, previews...). So why do they do it when its obvious that's not what consumers want?
The only answer I have is that they do this is that they need a valid DCSS key to play the content if they don't want to run afoul of the DMCA. To get that, they have to sign a license from the MPAA saying they will enforce their restrictions on DVD playback.
And who do we have to blame for the DMCA?
Tivo and other companies are going to run into this next. They can't "decrypt" or even provide the MPAA covered material without a license from the MPAA, and that license now stipulates enforcment of MPAA limitations.
This does go much farther than any other type of copyright protection. If I buy a book or a painting, I can color on it if I want, change the content, resell it, display it anywhere anytime I want. Welcome to the digital age.
And I'm still trying to figure out how people think we're going to be able to detect a specific protein. Unless its a specific enzyme being made that can be quickly detected in a test tube, its worthless. And you wouldn't be able to have a unique one for each person.
A simple PCR reaction for the presence of the gene itself would be much simpler -no need to even have it capable of making protein, just a unique sequence of DNA with commone sequences at the ends for PCR primers.
I think they will continue going the way they're going.
Aren't we all looking forward to a Word program that finally does away with the document window and allows us to create files in their entirety with menu selections and toolbars -which will conveniently cover the entire screen? Then, based on your selections, Word 20 will write the document for you. Who needs auto-fill when you have auto-write!
Must be why this look "Under the Hood of Office 12" has nothing to do with what's under the hood (unless you count the brief mention of XML) and is all about the interface (the part that's actually not under the hood).
I'm kinda late with the reply, so you may never see this, but..
Airplanes are built to fly. Staying in the air doesn't take much energy.
I'm thinking the Sci-Fi flying cars that have been promised. The ones you can stop and hover, go straight up and down, etc. I agree conventional planes can be very fuel efficient, but they require maintaing significant forward speed at all times to keep aloft.
No more than if the engine dies on the freeway
Except if my engine dies on the freeway, I don't plunge 100 ft straight down for a crash landing. I'm still thinking about the kind of flying car I mentioned above, not a conventional craft that has wings and can glide down.
IMO the major problem is still that the bulk of the energy being used, regardless of the source, is going to be spent keeping the vehicle in the air instead of moving it towards its desitnation.
And watch out if your "engine" dies for whatever reason.
So when you get home, the news shows, sports hilights, etc. that you may want to watch have been downloaded to your computer, ready to go. Could be better than Tivo.
Or even Apple. I know many a Mac user breathe a sigh of relief when Panther was released and Jobs said they would slow the turnover rate to every 18 months or so instead of every year.
The question is, since Vista is such a major rewrite, did they design the OS from the core to be modular and easily upgradable? Did they put in the necessary layers of abstraction to make both hardware and software changes easy? That's one thing that's really payed off for Apple. Even though it didn't always make for the most efficient use of resources, the OS was designed to be modified.
Maybe you weren't into computing before WYSIWYG document creation was common. It used to be printers only understood ASCII. The only way to determine what your document would look like was to print it out. If you had bold or underline, that was included using tags, much like HTML. What you saw on your screen was the text including the tags (~raw HTML). There was no "Preview" button, you had to print it to find out what it would look like (and you thought forgetting a closing tag was bad in a/. post).
WYSISYG was a great step forward. You actually saw the formatted text on the screen and saw where the line and page breaks were going to be. What you saw on the screen was what you got when you printed.
Now step forward to today, and for some reason people seem to think WYSIWYG means What I See Is What Everyone Else Will See On Any Computer Or Printer. That's something completely different. Something formats like PDF were meant to fix. Problem is, they're still limited by the hardware. If someone creates a document with the assumption that the printer can print within 5 mm of the paper's edge, but your printer will only get within 10 mm, you're not going to get the same result. Its that simple, and there's nothing MS can do about it. Nothing Adobe can do about it. Its reality. Deal with it.
It used to be different, but HDD technology is now right at the edge of what physics allows.
Not saying you're wrong, but I think an important qualifier might be "the edge of what physics allows" at any significant rotational speed. I have to wonder if you're willing to spend 100s of hours scanning a single platter with specialized equipment if you couldn't still make out a bit more. I really don't know, just wondering.
There was an article about a year ago (can't find it now) saying essentially the same thing about Macs. Most places just have the tools to hack a Windows PC for files. First, the Mac won't run their tools, and then, even if they yank the drive and put it in another housing, its not formatted in a way their software can access.
Now, as said above, if you were a really big fish, they have ways, but its not a typical forensics op.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, funny that how Netscape all of a sudden, after version 3, fell farther and farther behind MS. That was not long after MS cut Netscape's financial legs out from under it by giving away its browser, bundling it with every copy of Windows and forbidding OEMs from bundling Netscape.
The question isn't was IE better than Netscape after that point. Its would they have both been better still had MS not used its monopoly illegally?
But there are elements all through the CLR and >NET that are innovative. Windows Presentation Foundation (Avalon), Windows Communication Foundation (Indigo), are truely innovative.
So what exactly is innovative about them? All I've ever seen (as you said) are vague summaries that don't really sound all that innovative.
Care to enlighten?
Based on the samples you quote, I'd have to say you're no longer in possesion of your faculties, so don't worry about it.
For your illustration to work, you have to assume the iPod only works with iTunes.
Maybe I missed something somewhere, but how is that different than providing drivers for any other piece of hardware? The last mouse I bought came with a bundled driver and other software, though it was completely unnecessary. You always bundle the hardware with the appropriate drivers unless you can be guaranteed that everyone who buys it will have appropriate drivers that will work as well or better (or at least work). To do otherwise means you're shipping a non-functional product.
Same applied to the $40/processor it costs Intel in production. Nobody seems to remember that may only be a small part of the total cost. In some cases more is spent on marketing than production.
I agree to a large degree, but IMO Congress gets much of the blame.
An example I've used before is the DVD player. AFAIK there's no law requiring DVD manufacturers to enforce the instructions that prevent me from fast-forwarding or skipping whatever I want on the DVD (FBI/Interpol warnings, previews...). So why do they do it when its obvious that's not what consumers want?
The only answer I have is that they do this is that they need a valid DCSS key to play the content if they don't want to run afoul of the DMCA. To get that, they have to sign a license from the MPAA saying they will enforce their restrictions on DVD playback.
And who do we have to blame for the DMCA?
Tivo and other companies are going to run into this next. They can't "decrypt" or even provide the MPAA covered material without a license from the MPAA, and that license now stipulates enforcment of MPAA limitations.
This does go much farther than any other type of copyright protection. If I buy a book or a painting, I can color on it if I want, change the content, resell it, display it anywhere anytime I want. Welcome to the digital age.
To be fair, you can play straight through, you don't have to use the shuffle feature.
Not that it actually makes navigation easy.
And I'm still trying to figure out how people think we're going to be able to detect a specific protein. Unless its a specific enzyme being made that can be quickly detected in a test tube, its worthless. And you wouldn't be able to have a unique one for each person.
A simple PCR reaction for the presence of the gene itself would be much simpler -no need to even have it capable of making protein, just a unique sequence of DNA with commone sequences at the ends for PCR primers.
And the shuffle doesn't play mp3? And podcasts? And audiobooks?
And AFAIK, you don't have to use iTunes to move tunes to the shuffle, but I'm extrapolating from the iPod so I could be wrong.
What did you expect when you clicked on bottom view. You didn't think it sounded a bit like a goatce link before you clicked?
I think they will continue going the way they're going.
Aren't we all looking forward to a Word program that finally does away with the document window and allows us to create files in their entirety with menu selections and toolbars -which will conveniently cover the entire screen? Then, based on your selections, Word 20 will write the document for you. Who needs auto-fill when you have auto-write!
Must be why this look "Under the Hood of Office 12" has nothing to do with what's under the hood (unless you count the brief mention of XML) and is all about the interface (the part that's actually not under the hood).
I'm kinda late with the reply, so you may never see this, but..
Airplanes are built to fly. Staying in the air doesn't take much energy.
I'm thinking the Sci-Fi flying cars that have been promised. The ones you can stop and hover, go straight up and down, etc. I agree conventional planes can be very fuel efficient, but they require maintaing significant forward speed at all times to keep aloft.
No more than if the engine dies on the freeway
Except if my engine dies on the freeway, I don't plunge 100 ft straight down for a crash landing. I'm still thinking about the kind of flying car I mentioned above, not a conventional craft that has wings and can glide down.
IMO the major problem is still that the bulk of the energy being used, regardless of the source, is going to be spent keeping the vehicle in the air instead of moving it towards its desitnation.
And watch out if your "engine" dies for whatever reason.
And many scavengers have evolved to handle "contaminated" food quite well.
So when you get home, the news shows, sports hilights, etc. that you may want to watch have been downloaded to your computer, ready to go. Could be better than Tivo.
Then, of course, it all syncs with your vPod.
Its not like nobody used the term "movie" before iMovie was released (ditto the rest of the iApps). Or used "windows" before Windows was released.
Its all in trademarking for a specific class of product.
For those of us who can't tell for sure...
Are you referring to Tiger or Vista?
Or even Apple. I know many a Mac user breathe a sigh of relief when Panther was released and Jobs said they would slow the turnover rate to every 18 months or so instead of every year.
The question is, since Vista is such a major rewrite, did they design the OS from the core to be modular and easily upgradable? Did they put in the necessary layers of abstraction to make both hardware and software changes easy? That's one thing that's really payed off for Apple. Even though it didn't always make for the most efficient use of resources, the OS was designed to be modified.
Thanks. Looks like "Don't be evil." is the official slogan/motto. Its just an informal one.
OK, so then what is their official slogan?
I see a mission statement, but not a slogan.
we are going to give people tools to let them organize the world's information
Question is, after you let me organize it all, will you allow me to access it and how much will it cost?
Maybe you weren't into computing before WYSIWYG document creation was common. It used to be printers only understood ASCII. The only way to determine what your document would look like was to print it out. If you had bold or underline, that was included using tags, much like HTML. What you saw on your screen was the text including the tags (~raw HTML). There was no "Preview" button, you had to print it to find out what it would look like (and you thought forgetting a closing tag was bad in a /. post).
WYSISYG was a great step forward. You actually saw the formatted text on the screen and saw where the line and page breaks were going to be. What you saw on the screen was what you got when you printed.
Now step forward to today, and for some reason people seem to think WYSIWYG means What I See Is What Everyone Else Will See On Any Computer Or Printer. That's something completely different. Something formats like PDF were meant to fix. Problem is, they're still limited by the hardware. If someone creates a document with the assumption that the printer can print within 5 mm of the paper's edge, but your printer will only get within 10 mm, you're not going to get the same result. Its that simple, and there's nothing MS can do about it. Nothing Adobe can do about it. Its reality. Deal with it.
It used to be different, but HDD technology is now right at the edge of what physics allows.
Not saying you're wrong, but I think an important qualifier might be "the edge of what physics allows" at any significant rotational speed. I have to wonder if you're willing to spend 100s of hours scanning a single platter with specialized equipment if you couldn't still make out a bit more. I really don't know, just wondering.
There was an article about a year ago (can't find it now) saying essentially the same thing about Macs. Most places just have the tools to hack a Windows PC for files. First, the Mac won't run their tools, and then, even if they yank the drive and put it in another housing, its not formatted in a way their software can access.
Now, as said above, if you were a really big fish, they have ways, but its not a typical forensics op.