My first thought was, "Is Google Web Toolkit prior art or infringement?" After a bit of looking around, it seems this patent was filed on September 5, 2006 while GWT 1.0 was released in May 2006. Sorry Morfik, but your patent is invalid. (Thank God, too. This patent appears to be overreaching and far too broad. It could prevent an entire industry from developing.)
All I can say is: where was your due diligence, Morfik? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to spend time and money on filing a patent that will be useless to you after it's granted. The best they could do is scare a few Open Source projects into submission. Anyone with a vested interest in the technology is going to do the due diligence that Morfik didn't, and take the matter to court.
The only "out" they have available is to show evidence that they disclosed the inner workings of their JST product prior to GWT being released. In which case they might have protection from the "one year to file" rule. Maybe. Or maybe they're just trying to carry out this threat in a laughably oversimplified fashion. (They're lawyers must be telling them it won't work?) Go figure.
For those who are unaware of what GWT is, it's basically a toolkit that takes Java programs and converts them down to Javascript. By coding Java to the GWT toolkit*, you gain all the benefits of the Java compiler and type checking without sacrificing the ability to deploy on browsers that do not have Java installed. I'd rather code in Javascript myself, but it has its place.:)
So you can pay more for the service that you should have had in the first place?
Uh, no? Jobs isn't stupid. As the summary says, these files are encoded at a much higher bitrate. So what you're really paying more for is higher quality files. Of course, you could get higher quality files on anti-DRM principles, but the result is still the same: You get twice the "standard" bitrate for about 30% more. You can decide for yourself if that's a deal or not.
** The Motorola RAZR V3i is available with iTunes in ONLY the following markets:
Australia, NZ, Indonesia, India, Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Vietnam, Turkey, South Africa, Rest of Africa, North Africa, Israel, Thailand, Middle East
You'll notice that the United States is not on that list.:)
You're looking at the wrong things. Look at the interface, not the tech. For example, the ability to navigate the voicemail on screen is a big selling point for me. I've been complaining for years that phones should be able to do that. Also, the iTunes interface is an upgrade to the iPod software. The Rokr (not the Razr) has a much poorer interface made by Motorola, and is the key reason why Apple decided to enter the market themselves rather than licensing out to existing cell companies.
Also, the iPhone has full movie-watching capabilities like the Video iPod, something that the Rokr lacks. And its sensors for tilting the phone and powering down the screen when not in use? Wonderful little usability touches that will help sell the device.
Too many analysts (and R&D departments, I'm afraid) fall into this trap of "superior technology == superior product". That simply isn't the case. Usability - i.e. how well the device performs it task - is worlds more important to your average consumer. Only the geeks care about the technology itself. Everyone else wants a device that does what they want it to as simply as possible. To them, THAT is superior. This is something that both Apple and Nintendo have figure out.:-)
A self-deforming input device that could form itself into buttons or whatever would be a neat solution to reconfiguring your input device. Too bad I have no idea of how that could be accomplished.
Place actuators behind a flexible display device. With a large enough array of them, you could describe nearly any raised shape.
The simplest form would be to assume that the buttons will conform to a set division of the screen space. e.g. 5x5 blocks that can be actuated up and down. A more complex form would look like those pin tables where you can push on the arrays of pins to outline your hand. This could easy give resolutions as high as 50x50 pins.
Putting aside for the moment that you shouldn't be dialing while driving, the solution is voice dial. I used to use it on my Nokia phone all the time. Unfortunately, Motorola can't do voice-rec worth a damn, so it's back to the address book for me.:(
The upshot is that the address book can play back the name of the person I've selected, so I don't need to look down.:)
The problem is that the stuff you're learning is just risk management. It doesn't tell you if there is a payoff at the end of the tunnel or not. Generally speaking, high risk can mean high reward. And that's what Apple is trying for. They're attempting to attack an underrepresented portion of the cell phone market by leveraging their existing brand value. If Apple is successful, they could end up in a Blue Ocean situation similar to the one that Nintendo recently achieved. Which would give them complete control over the new segment of the cell phone market, and also help erect high barriers of entry against competitors. (Apple has gained a reputation of being the only one who can do technology X "right", where technology X is whatever popular product they are producing at the moment. e.g. iPods, Macs, iTunes, etc.)
Please, for the love of all things holy. Do us all a favor and don't become one of those risk-adverse executives. That's what has produced mediocrity from so many companies for so many years. (Often resulting in their ultimate demise.) Part of being an executive is taking the risk. Risk management is about finding ways of stacking the cards in your favor, not avoiding the risk all together.:-/
They haven't made a product since the original mac 20 years ago. They just re-brand stuff from Taiwan and add a "cool factor" that some people pay a premium for.
Why, John! I didn't know you posted on Slashdot!
Suddenly it all makes sense. All the trolls, the bad arguments, the poor attempts at putting Apple down. It was you the whole time, wasn't it? Oh John, you're such a kidder!
Seriously, there's nothing to see here. Move along. Dvorak has known for decades that Apple users are protective of the Apple name and products. So he regularly goes about trying to get those users worked up. He even admits it here! Rather than giving him the satisfaction of getting you worked up again, why don't you try ignoring him for a change?
As far as straight-out-of-box conditions go, both Microsoft's Windows and Apple's OS X are ripe with remotely accessible vulnerabilities... The UNIX and Linux variants present a much more robust exterior to the outside.
The article also says:
By default, Apple OS X does not have its built-in servers enabled. For testing the standard binaries, [available services] were all enabled through the Preferences tool. After enabling the services, Nmap identified the freshly opened ports and Nessus found only a user enumeration vulnerability in the HTTP server.
Out of the box, OS X is highly secure. You make the active decision to risk remote exploits when you enable these services.
For OS X Server, they had this to say for it, "Out of the box":
During installation, Nmap fingerprinted the setup TCP/IP stack as OS X 10.3 or 10.4 and identified an open SSH port. Nessus did not identify any external vulnerabilities.
The lesson to be learned here is that an open connection is a potentially exploitable one. So don't open connections unless you're sure you want to do so. The second part of that lesson is if you're going to enable a remote port, make sure your security patches are up to date. "Out of the box" software is only secure for a short period of time.
KDE for X11 on Windows is currently compiled against Cygwin. I see no reason why it couldn't continue to be compiled against Cygwin. The only difference is that they'd compiled against Qt for Windows rather than Qt for X11. Voila! Instant replacement desktop*!
* Some registry assembly required. Batteries not included. KDE is a trademark of the KDE Team. No warranty of fitness is expressed or implied. Use at your own risk. KDE Team is not responsible for any increased productivity or machine responsiveness you may encounter. Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft. KDE is a wild ride, and should not be used by expecting mothers or those with an existing heart condition. One rider at a time, no exceptions.
Re:All of these frameworks are mostly overkill
on
GWT Java AJAX Programming
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That was NOT a simple example. That was a full-up demo with all the bells and whistles in place. You don't make your point by showing the bells and whistles! The message ends up getting lost in all the excess code.
Oh, and you do realize that setting window.status no longer works on many browsers? It is considered a security hazard.
...forms of nanoscale artwork is the art etched into microchips. It's more fun than most nanoscale art, because if you start pulling apart ICs and putting them under a powerful enough microscope, you can spot all kinds of artwork.
For those who are unfamiliar with it, I highly recommend the Molecular Expressions Silicon Zoo gallery of chip art:
I did not misunderstand your paragraph. I did, however, choose to ignore your insinuation of corruption.
(raises eyebrow)
You realize that you're effectively admitting that you setup a strawman just to knock it down?
Having said *all of that*, I still warrant that people will sell their skills for money.
Of course they will. The issue is that Russia is not in a position to host a new Silicon Valley, not that people won't do any work. Programmers will get hired, and programmers will earn their living. But the factors that allow for the incredible amount of output seen in SV will not exist for some time to come. (If ever?)
If Linux probes your hardware (monitor) and selects the incorrect settings, could that not potentially harm your screen?
Not really. Modern CRTs have protection circuitry built in to prevent someone from overdriving the monitor. All you see is an error message saying "Signal out of Range". Besides, most new computers ship with LCDs, which do not have electron guns to overdrive.
While it is true that Al Capone exploited many people, he did it illegally through coercion, intimidation, manipulation and violence.
Exactly. Now go back and read the paragraph you so obviously misunderstood.
Perhaps I should have written: "The standard practice of trading currency for tasks is a hallmark of capitalism. The difference is all about how much currency you recieve for the task that you perform."
Are we comparing the size of "techology cities", or the size of start-up-friendly cities?
Neither. We're talking about productivity. i.e. The actual output of the area. Replicating the technology output of Silicon Valley (which really encompasses the entire area, including Palo Alto and San Fransisco) is a difficult - if not impossible - feat.
If all we were looking for was size, then IBM would run the world.
Normally I'd agree with you. In this particular case, though, I think Putin is going to accidently squash it. He's building a brand new technology park to ensure the development of Russia's technology. Which means that no one is going to be running an independent operation out of there garage. (Nevermind that garages are exceptionally rare in Russia.) Thus there's no real opportunity for the inmates to run the asylum. It will be structure from the beginning, with clear goals in mind. The organic and self-organizing nature of Silicon Valley will fail to materialize.
As for enforcement of regulations, Russia is actually very good at it. When you piss off the wrong person or end up on a list of people needing "protection", that is. Russia is growing fast, but there are still plenty of people trying to make their money or gain power off of the backs of others.:-(
Look at the rankings of the world wide programming contests.
According to your link, we should be hiring the Polish. The Russians did better than the US's 4 out of 48, but they still didn't take any sort of lion's share at 8 out of 48. And in any case, TopCoder is not a useful metric of anything except for, perhaps, cowboy coding. Many of the key skills required to launch a successful technology business are not measured by simplisitic coding riddles.
On an offtopic note, I used to "cool" my computers in Minnesota by placing them next to the window during the winters, I'm certain you could cut down cooling costs in Siberia using similar strategies.
I hope you realize that Siberia is not a frozen wasteland. Siberia covers such an area (where you'll find many of the Chukcha tribes), but it also covers more temperate climates. Not to mention that these programmers wouldn't be a bunch of smart guys packed into a cold little shack. They'll probably be in a building not much different than those found here in America. Which means that they'll have the same cooling and heating problems as we do. (We have horribly cold Chicago winters, I can assure you that they help cool our servers very little.)
Surely, I reasoned, with the amount of time they took to set up that scam and avoid authorities, they could have gotten a job like I have and done something good for even more cash--but, that's my naïve American attitude for you.
The truth is that most of those who have the willpower to do something "good" for even more cash, also have the will to go where the dollars are. Which means that many of them immigrate to other countries rather than hang around in Russia. With Moscow's economy booming, that may eventually change. But for now, Russia has a difficult time holding on to their talent. That talent that they do hold onto may feel their talents underappreciated in the nascent Russian tech economy.
Among his points, there is one in particular that (I think) gets overlooked the most. His seventh point, "America Is Not Too Fussy" is really a key issue. Like it or not, many Amercian startups bend the rules to find the most expedient solution to getting into business. 95% of the time, this bending of the rules is harmless, and actually benefits society. However, many countries would simply enforce their regulations to the point where that startup would never exist. I find his point to be amazingly enlightening.
Take a gander at his article, then come back to the matter of the Siberian Silicon Valley. Does Siberia have the infrastructure? The desire? The willingness to bend the rules? The lack of a police state? Free and open immigration? Cross pollination of employees between companies?
I think you'll find that many of these items exist there, but many do not. Silicon Valley is Silicon Valley because it has all of those things in spades. Now if only it didn't cost a bloody fortune to live there.:-P
A cynic would say that the reason why the PS3 broke records is only because the competition couldn't make enough to sell. On the other hand, having enough supply to meet demand isn't exactly a bad thing either.
A cynic would also point out that the reason why the Wii didn't have as many units at launch was because the console was effectively launched in all markets simultaeously. Sony, on the other hand, waited until they had significantly more supply on hand. The market will decide which maneuver was the better one.
Nope. Green-vision systems work on light-amplification principles. Infrared is a different technology that's more useful in tracking than it is as generic night-vision.
I doubt it. It will help some if the colors are vibrant enough for the human eye to read more "cues" than were available with green-vision, but otherwise it still comes back to the matter of binocular vision. You need two sensors set apart from one another at the approximate distance of your eyes in order to replicate that ability. Otherwise, it's like strapping a television screen to your face and a camera to your head, and walking down the street. You can do it, but it's disorienting.
Oh hell, I've probably been on the FBI's watch list for years now. I'd love to see the file they have on me. "Hmm, interested in Nuclear Engineering, including weaponry; advocates the violent overthrow of the government in the situation that it were to become corrupt; speaks loudly against the group opinion in a very disruptive fashion; potentially dangerous knowledge of computer systems and security; etc., etc., etc."
If you're not pissing anyone off, you're not doing anything right. Let the FBI keep a file on me. As long as it's done without abridging my rights and gaining access to my private files, I don't particularly care. When it starts to stomp all over my rights, then someone is going to pay the piper. That payment is going start at Congress. I can only pray that it does not end in bloodshed. I've never fired a weapon in my life, but don't think I won't learn how if saving our country demands it.
Slashdot Mirror
My first thought was, "Is Google Web Toolkit prior art or infringement?" After a bit of looking around, it seems this patent was filed on September 5, 2006 while GWT 1.0 was released in May 2006. Sorry Morfik, but your patent is invalid. (Thank God, too. This patent appears to be overreaching and far too broad. It could prevent an entire industry from developing.)
:)
All I can say is: where was your due diligence, Morfik? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to spend time and money on filing a patent that will be useless to you after it's granted. The best they could do is scare a few Open Source projects into submission. Anyone with a vested interest in the technology is going to do the due diligence that Morfik didn't, and take the matter to court.
The only "out" they have available is to show evidence that they disclosed the inner workings of their JST product prior to GWT being released. In which case they might have protection from the "one year to file" rule. Maybe. Or maybe they're just trying to carry out this threat in a laughably oversimplified fashion. (They're lawyers must be telling them it won't work?) Go figure.
For those who are unaware of what GWT is, it's basically a toolkit that takes Java programs and converts them down to Javascript. By coding Java to the GWT toolkit*, you gain all the benefits of the Java compiler and type checking without sacrificing the ability to deploy on browsers that do not have Java installed. I'd rather code in Javascript myself, but it has its place.
Uh, no? Jobs isn't stupid. As the summary says, these files are encoded at a much higher bitrate. So what you're really paying more for is higher quality files. Of course, you could get higher quality files on anti-DRM principles, but the result is still the same: You get twice the "standard" bitrate for about 30% more. You can decide for yourself if that's a deal or not.
http://www.motorola.com/motoinfo/product/details.
You'll notice that the United States is not on that list.
You're looking at the wrong things. Look at the interface, not the tech. For example, the ability to navigate the voicemail on screen is a big selling point for me. I've been complaining for years that phones should be able to do that. Also, the iTunes interface is an upgrade to the iPod software. The Rokr (not the Razr) has a much poorer interface made by Motorola, and is the key reason why Apple decided to enter the market themselves rather than licensing out to existing cell companies.
:-)
Also, the iPhone has full movie-watching capabilities like the Video iPod, something that the Rokr lacks. And its sensors for tilting the phone and powering down the screen when not in use? Wonderful little usability touches that will help sell the device.
Too many analysts (and R&D departments, I'm afraid) fall into this trap of "superior technology == superior product". That simply isn't the case. Usability - i.e. how well the device performs it task - is worlds more important to your average consumer. Only the geeks care about the technology itself. Everyone else wants a device that does what they want it to as simply as possible. To them, THAT is superior. This is something that both Apple and Nintendo have figure out.
Place actuators behind a flexible display device. With a large enough array of them, you could describe nearly any raised shape.
The simplest form would be to assume that the buttons will conform to a set division of the screen space. e.g. 5x5 blocks that can be actuated up and down. A more complex form would look like those pin tables where you can push on the arrays of pins to outline your hand. This could easy give resolutions as high as 50x50 pins.
Putting aside for the moment that you shouldn't be dialing while driving, the solution is voice dial. I used to use it on my Nokia phone all the time. Unfortunately, Motorola can't do voice-rec worth a damn, so it's back to the address book for me. :(
:)
The upshot is that the address book can play back the name of the person I've selected, so I don't need to look down.
Better give back your MBA when you get it. :-P
:-/
The problem is that the stuff you're learning is just risk management. It doesn't tell you if there is a payoff at the end of the tunnel or not. Generally speaking, high risk can mean high reward. And that's what Apple is trying for. They're attempting to attack an underrepresented portion of the cell phone market by leveraging their existing brand value. If Apple is successful, they could end up in a Blue Ocean situation similar to the one that Nintendo recently achieved. Which would give them complete control over the new segment of the cell phone market, and also help erect high barriers of entry against competitors. (Apple has gained a reputation of being the only one who can do technology X "right", where technology X is whatever popular product they are producing at the moment. e.g. iPods, Macs, iTunes, etc.)
Please, for the love of all things holy. Do us all a favor and don't become one of those risk-adverse executives. That's what has produced mediocrity from so many companies for so many years. (Often resulting in their ultimate demise.) Part of being an executive is taking the risk. Risk management is about finding ways of stacking the cards in your favor, not avoiding the risk all together.
Why, John! I didn't know you posted on Slashdot!
Suddenly it all makes sense. All the trolls, the bad arguments, the poor attempts at putting Apple down. It was you the whole time, wasn't it? Oh John, you're such a kidder!
Seriously, there's nothing to see here. Move along. Dvorak has known for decades that Apple users are protective of the Apple name and products. So he regularly goes about trying to get those users worked up. He even admits it here! Rather than giving him the satisfaction of getting you worked up again, why don't you try ignoring him for a change?
The article also says:
Out of the box, OS X is highly secure. You make the active decision to risk remote exploits when you enable these services.
For OS X Server, they had this to say for it, "Out of the box":
The lesson to be learned here is that an open connection is a potentially exploitable one. So don't open connections unless you're sure you want to do so. The second part of that lesson is if you're going to enable a remote port, make sure your security patches are up to date. "Out of the box" software is only secure for a short period of time.
KDE for X11 on Windows is currently compiled against Cygwin. I see no reason why it couldn't continue to be compiled against Cygwin. The only difference is that they'd compiled against Qt for Windows rather than Qt for X11. Voila! Instant replacement desktop*!
* Some registry assembly required. Batteries not included. KDE is a trademark of the KDE Team. No warranty of fitness is expressed or implied. Use at your own risk. KDE Team is not responsible for any increased productivity or machine responsiveness you may encounter. Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft. KDE is a wild ride, and should not be used by expecting mothers or those with an existing heart condition. One rider at a time, no exceptions.
That was NOT a simple example. That was a full-up demo with all the bells and whistles in place. You don't make your point by showing the bells and whistles! The message ends up getting lost in all the excess code.
Oh, and you do realize that setting window.status no longer works on many browsers? It is considered a security hazard.
...forms of nanoscale artwork is the art etched into microchips. It's more fun than most nanoscale art, because if you start pulling apart ICs and putting them under a powerful enough microscope, you can spot all kinds of artwork.
For those who are unfamiliar with it, I highly recommend the Molecular Expressions Silicon Zoo gallery of chip art:
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/creatures/
(raises eyebrow)
You realize that you're effectively admitting that you setup a strawman just to knock it down?
Of course they will. The issue is that Russia is not in a position to host a new Silicon Valley, not that people won't do any work. Programmers will get hired, and programmers will earn their living. But the factors that allow for the incredible amount of output seen in SV will not exist for some time to come. (If ever?)
Not really. Modern CRTs have protection circuitry built in to prevent someone from overdriving the monitor. All you see is an error message saying "Signal out of Range". Besides, most new computers ship with LCDs, which do not have electron guns to overdrive.
Exactly. Now go back and read the paragraph you so obviously misunderstood.
Not in the slightest.
Neither. We're talking about productivity. i.e. The actual output of the area. Replicating the technology output of Silicon Valley (which really encompasses the entire area, including Palo Alto and San Fransisco) is a difficult - if not impossible - feat.
If all we were looking for was size, then IBM would run the world.
Only if you consider Al Capone the poster boy for capitalism.
Normally I'd agree with you. In this particular case, though, I think Putin is going to accidently squash it. He's building a brand new technology park to ensure the development of Russia's technology. Which means that no one is going to be running an independent operation out of there garage. (Nevermind that garages are exceptionally rare in Russia.) Thus there's no real opportunity for the inmates to run the asylum. It will be structure from the beginning, with clear goals in mind. The organic and self-organizing nature of Silicon Valley will fail to materialize.
:-(
As for enforcement of regulations, Russia is actually very good at it. When you piss off the wrong person or end up on a list of people needing "protection", that is. Russia is growing fast, but there are still plenty of people trying to make their money or gain power off of the backs of others.
According to your link, we should be hiring the Polish. The Russians did better than the US's 4 out of 48, but they still didn't take any sort of lion's share at 8 out of 48. And in any case, TopCoder is not a useful metric of anything except for, perhaps, cowboy coding. Many of the key skills required to launch a successful technology business are not measured by simplisitic coding riddles.
I hope you realize that Siberia is not a frozen wasteland. Siberia covers such an area (where you'll find many of the Chukcha tribes), but it also covers more temperate climates. Not to mention that these programmers wouldn't be a bunch of smart guys packed into a cold little shack. They'll probably be in a building not much different than those found here in America. Which means that they'll have the same cooling and heating problems as we do. (We have horribly cold Chicago winters, I can assure you that they help cool our servers very little.)
The truth is that most of those who have the willpower to do something "good" for even more cash, also have the will to go where the dollars are. Which means that many of them immigrate to other countries rather than hang around in Russia. With Moscow's economy booming, that may eventually change. But for now, Russia has a difficult time holding on to their talent. That talent that they do hold onto may feel their talents underappreciated in the nascent Russian tech economy.
To anyone who thinks that Silicon Valley is going to show up elsewhere in the world, I highly recommend reading the following essay by Paul Graham:
:-P
Why Startups Condense in America
Among his points, there is one in particular that (I think) gets overlooked the most. His seventh point, "America Is Not Too Fussy" is really a key issue. Like it or not, many Amercian startups bend the rules to find the most expedient solution to getting into business. 95% of the time, this bending of the rules is harmless, and actually benefits society. However, many countries would simply enforce their regulations to the point where that startup would never exist. I find his point to be amazingly enlightening.
Take a gander at his article, then come back to the matter of the Siberian Silicon Valley. Does Siberia have the infrastructure? The desire? The willingness to bend the rules? The lack of a police state? Free and open immigration? Cross pollination of employees between companies?
I think you'll find that many of these items exist there, but many do not. Silicon Valley is Silicon Valley because it has all of those things in spades. Now if only it didn't cost a bloody fortune to live there.
A cynic would also point out that the reason why the Wii didn't have as many units at launch was because the console was effectively launched in all markets simultaeously. Sony, on the other hand, waited until they had significantly more supply on hand. The market will decide which maneuver was the better one.
Nope. Green-vision systems work on light-amplification principles. Infrared is a different technology that's more useful in tracking than it is as generic night-vision.
I doubt it. It will help some if the colors are vibrant enough for the human eye to read more "cues" than were available with green-vision, but otherwise it still comes back to the matter of binocular vision. You need two sensors set apart from one another at the approximate distance of your eyes in order to replicate that ability. Otherwise, it's like strapping a television screen to your face and a camera to your head, and walking down the street. You can do it, but it's disorienting.
Oh hell, I've probably been on the FBI's watch list for years now. I'd love to see the file they have on me. "Hmm, interested in Nuclear Engineering, including weaponry; advocates the violent overthrow of the government in the situation that it were to become corrupt; speaks loudly against the group opinion in a very disruptive fashion; potentially dangerous knowledge of computer systems and security; etc., etc., etc."
If you're not pissing anyone off, you're not doing anything right. Let the FBI keep a file on me. As long as it's done without abridging my rights and gaining access to my private files, I don't particularly care. When it starts to stomp all over my rights, then someone is going to pay the piper. That payment is going start at Congress. I can only pray that it does not end in bloodshed. I've never fired a weapon in my life, but don't think I won't learn how if saving our country demands it.