I suspect the author is worried that some hard-core gamers would think his game lame if it allowed hints. The question is whether those guys outnumber more causal folks. If not, and the goal is to maximize sales, he should put the hint in.
"The most important part of any UNIX-derived shell langauge is not its syntax or power but the fact it lets you construct large ad-hoc applications out of a toolbox of tens of thousands of pieces."
What's the advantage supposed to be? Constructing a "large ad-hoc application" doesn't sound like a great idea to me.
At this point in time, if MS created the best OS "ever put on computers" they'd lose market share a lot faster. Compatibility with current and legacy Windows applications is what differentiates them from others in the marketplace.
If someday Linux or another OS takes a significant bite out of Windows market share, you might see a new non-legacy OS from MS, but not yet.
"IBM is growing a library of micro-code for the Power-Cell Architecture that allows a single image chip-set (one computer many parts) to execute multiple instruction sets, enabling multiple operating systems, running concurrently."
Xerox was doing this in the 80's. Some of their high-end printers downloaded micro-code to Mesa processors from the main disk at boot time.
"If it gets too powerful, or too feature full, who's to say if MS doesn't retract their promise and claim that Mono is infringing on their patents, suing whatever company might have worked on said products?"
MS patents are going to be general (as all patents with "business goodness" are). In other words, MS isn't going to limit any patent description in such a way that only.NET implementations would be in violation. If mono violates a MS patent it's very likely that Java and many other projects will violate it too. The mere fact that Mono is an attempt to implement a sub-set of.NET doesn't mean it has any greater risk than other projects.
In any case, I seriously doubt that MS has any desire to start a patent war anyway. Between the DOJ and IBM, it wouldn't be a winning strategy.
"True enough. But OEMs buy Windows. It is the most expensive part in low end units."
The real question is what percentage of the total net cost does Windows represent to OEMs and to what degree does it increase the possibility of a sale.
It's interesting that you mention a "BSD Desktop". I think it's just as likely that some company will build a BSD-based OS that doesn't require buying an Apple and have it do just as well or better than Linux on the desktop.
"If Windows was fully open sourced, I'd bet we'd have a fully working Wine within months."
It shouldn't take that long: 1) Wine developers change the boot screen to say Wine instead of Windows. 2) User downloads this new "Wine". 3) Reboots into Windows (er, Wine)
"When you are talking about a 100% proprietary stack you are talking about a massive development cost burden."
The cost of developing Windows as an F/OSS product might be even higher. Given backward compatibility issues that Linux doesn't face (or doesn't care about) it would be much harder to coordinate development of Windows.
What if the external developers decided that compatibility with MS Office wasn't important? It's different for Linux: what Linux application does Linus depend on to work on new versions of Linux in order to keep him employed? Nothing.
Windows 7 could fail miserably but there's no guarantee that such a failure will help Linux. Perhaps it could finally be the year of Apple on the Desktop!
This book could become a collector's item
on
FBML Essentials
·
· Score: 1
when the whole social networking thing crashes and burns because it can't really make money.
Well, I see that about 90% of want ads for software developers require a CS or Engineering degree and significant experience in a laundry list of buzzwords. I see that as a significant barrier to entry for "clueless hacks".
People in software development are the only ones I can think of who promote the idea that they should be paid less (e.g. this story) and that most of their colleagues suck (e.g. thedailywtf).
Actually I've been married twice but I haven't been stupid enough to do anything non-platonic with another women (not that I've had any offers anyway).
Slashdot Mirror
What sort of "heavy sh*t" are business users going to do on a laptop?
I totally agree.
I suspect the author is worried that some hard-core gamers would think his game lame if it allowed hints. The question is whether those guys outnumber more causal folks. If not, and the goal is to maximize sales, he should put the hint in.
So you're a business traveler?
Sure, because when you think of customers who want Windows and Linux on one machine, business travelers are the first group that comes to mind.
I can see the value of shell scripts for small or possibly medium size ad-hoc applications but not for large ones.
"The most important part of any UNIX-derived shell langauge is not its syntax or power but the fact it lets you construct large ad-hoc applications out of a toolbox of tens of thousands of pieces."
What's the advantage supposed to be? Constructing a "large ad-hoc application" doesn't sound like a great idea to me.
It's nice to see Mozilla following the same successful strategy as Sun and AOL.
Yes, monopolies have always been a good environment to perform research in.
At this point in time, if MS created the best OS "ever put on computers" they'd lose market share a lot faster. Compatibility with current and legacy Windows applications is what differentiates them from others in the marketplace.
If someday Linux or another OS takes a significant bite out of Windows market share, you might see a new non-legacy OS from MS, but not yet.
Open source is potentially verifiable by outside sources while closed source is potentially verifiable only by inside sources.
Most open source and closed source applications have not actually been verified, however.
"IBM is growing a library of micro-code for the Power-Cell Architecture that allows a single image chip-set (one computer many parts) to execute multiple instruction sets, enabling multiple operating systems, running concurrently."
Xerox was doing this in the 80's. Some of their high-end printers downloaded micro-code to Mesa processors from the main disk at boot time.
"If it gets too powerful, or too feature full, who's to say if MS doesn't retract their promise and claim that Mono is infringing on their patents, suing whatever company might have worked on said products?"
MS patents are going to be general (as all patents with "business goodness" are). In other words, MS isn't going to limit any patent description in such a way that only .NET implementations would be in violation. If mono violates a MS patent it's very likely that Java and many other projects will violate it too. The mere fact that Mono is an attempt to implement a sub-set of .NET doesn't mean it has any greater risk than other projects.
In any case, I seriously doubt that MS has any desire to start a patent war anyway. Between the DOJ and IBM, it wouldn't be a winning strategy.
"..why you see sites like thedailywtf springing up"
I think it's really more about a "fraternity" mindset that has invaded the profession of late. Building one's ego up by tearing other people down.
"True enough. But OEMs buy Windows. It is the most expensive part in low end units."
The real question is what percentage of the total net cost does Windows represent to OEMs and to what degree does it increase the possibility of a sale.
I don't know about the other VMs, but I'm sure it won't be Wine.
It's interesting that you mention a "BSD Desktop". I think it's just as likely that some company will build a BSD-based OS that doesn't require buying an Apple and have it do just as well or better than Linux on the desktop.
"If Windows was fully open sourced, I'd bet we'd have a fully working Wine within months."
It shouldn't take that long:
1) Wine developers change the boot screen to say Wine instead of Windows.
2) User downloads this new "Wine".
3) Reboots into Windows (er, Wine)
"When you are talking about a 100% proprietary stack you are talking about a massive development cost burden."
The cost of developing Windows as an F/OSS product might be even higher. Given backward compatibility issues that Linux doesn't face (or doesn't care about) it would be much harder to coordinate development of Windows.
What if the external developers decided that compatibility with MS Office wasn't important? It's different for Linux: what Linux application does Linus depend on to work on new versions of Linux in order to keep him employed? Nothing.
Given the fact that Linux is based on a 30 year-old OS it's not exactly the poster boy for innovation either.
Windows 7 could fail miserably but there's no guarantee that such a failure will help Linux. Perhaps it could finally be the year of Apple on the Desktop!
when the whole social networking thing crashes and burns because it can't really make money.
Well, I see that about 90% of want ads for software developers require a CS or Engineering degree and significant experience in a laundry list of buzzwords. I see that as a significant barrier to entry for "clueless hacks".
People in software development are the only ones I can think of who promote the idea that they should be paid less (e.g. this story) and that most of their colleagues suck (e.g. thedailywtf).
Actually I've been married twice but I haven't been stupid enough to do anything non-platonic with another women (not that I've had any offers anyway).
None that I'm aware of. Why are you asking?