I don't think that the expo is primarily geared towards people who just play classic video games. It's a place where old fart video game programmers (like me, although I've never gone) can get together with their old friends and peers and reminisce about the "good old days" and "the crash".
IBM didn't have exclusive rights to MS-DOS because that's not the agreement they made with MS. There were no legal hurdles that prevented them gaining exclusivity had they wanted it. This history is well known but doesn't really change the fact that being able to buy MS-DOS generically was a key factor in the development of clones.
In addition while Lotus 1-2-3 was a very popular application, it wasn't solely responsible for the success of the PC. But again this isn't really relevant to our debate.
I don't think AMD had enough of a market share in that time-frame to influence Intel prices much. But the more important point is that popularity of PCs made a business case for AMD to compete with Intel and the openness of the PC (excluding the BIOS) along with the ability to aquire MSDOS instead of having to reverse-engineer it as well, made clones feasible a lot earlier than they would have otherwise.
386 systems were cheaper than 486 systems because the 486 was faster.
I don't know. Star Trek the Motion Picture was very long and very boring. Nemesis at least had some plot. The funny thing about STTMP is that they "fixed" it later by adding more scenes, thus making it even longer and even more boring.
Berman wasn't perfect but if Roddenberry had continued at the helm, STNG would have died in 2 or 3 seasons. It was mostly crap until "Yesterday's Enterprise".
I have no desire to get into a general US vs. EU argument. Besides, both governments' antitrust efforts are similiar in that they are driven by corporate interests rather than legitimate concern for the consumer. It's just that the US has already satisified most of the market losers and the EU is still working on it.
Yes, because government raids are the cornerstone of freedom and democracy.
Seriously, I think the EU should start charging companies like Real, Sun, etc for the service they provide in helping them to succeed in business without really trying.
My experience with small companies is that they don't actually give you what you paid for and it's almost impossible to return the computer when you discover what's missing. Large companies have a national reputation they have to protect, the small fry can just wait for the next sucker.
What? Everybody is going to be a CEO in the future? Most CEO's today have the big corner office. What does that have to do with the accomodations the worker bees have?
Rather than using a Linux kernel massaged into something suitable for a mobile platform, why not create a kernel and OS designed from the ground up to meet the needs of the mobile platform. I guess "linux" is becoming more of a brand name than a specific thing.
"If your company has a mechanic that can put the parts together, yes. Most companies think they've hired a Network Engineer (who obviously would have no issues integrating the listed components, and would laugh at you for suggesting he might). "
Wow, if integrating applications qualifies someone as a Network Engineer, most of us should be adding it to our resumes. I always thought it had something to do with being an expert in Network Protocols.
If you go back even farther you find that game programmers writing "to the bare metal" were doing so without threads and sometimes even without an OS, monitor, or interrupts. It was a challenge, but that ability really has little value today (as I'm painfully aware).
In any case, the number one issue in a multicore world isn't whether programmers can write the code properly, but rather whether the performance of typical applications can actually be improved when capable developers have a crack at it. Once feasibility has actually been demonstrated, we can work on training.
I stand corrected. I know there were a number of non-IE problems in ASP.NET 1.1 that were corrected in ASP.NET 2.0, but I wasn't aware of these issues. Seems like new features in ASP.NET aren't non-IE ready until future releases (just an observation, not a guarantee).
Still, it appears that MS isn't going out of its way to avoid supporting the other browsers.
the worst that would happen to MS is that they would be better protected against future antitrust cases. Web sites built using ASP.NET 2.0 work as well on Firefox as they do on IE, so it wouldn't impact the server side.
"And yes, it should be possible to write a Java implementation of a JPEG encoder and have it run as fast as the C implementation."
So if the intent wasn't to improve performance, what is your explanation for Sun using a C implementation? You think they don't believe in using Java code whenever possible?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think that the expo is primarily geared towards people who just play classic video games. It's a place where old fart video game programmers (like me, although I've never gone) can get together with their old friends and peers and reminisce about the "good old days" and "the crash".
For C++, it's like developing in 1990.
"Command-line processing is historically one of the most ignored areas in software development."
This is like saying that walking is historically one of the most ignored areas in human transportation.
IBM didn't have exclusive rights to MS-DOS because that's not the agreement they made with MS. There were no legal hurdles that prevented them gaining exclusivity had they wanted it. This history is well known but doesn't really change the fact that being able to buy MS-DOS generically was a key factor in the development of clones.
In addition while Lotus 1-2-3 was a very popular application, it wasn't solely responsible for the success of the PC. But again this isn't really relevant to our debate.
I don't think AMD had enough of a market share in that time-frame to influence Intel prices much. But the more important point is that popularity of PCs made a business case for AMD to compete with Intel and the openness of the PC (excluding the BIOS) along with the ability to aquire MSDOS instead of having to reverse-engineer it as well, made clones feasible a lot earlier than they would have otherwise.
386 systems were cheaper than 486 systems because the 486 was faster.
The problem with Wesley was Gene Roddenberry. You put children in any ST episode that Roddenberry writes, directs, or produces, it will suck.
I don't know. Star Trek the Motion Picture was very long and very boring. Nemesis at least had some plot. The funny thing about STTMP is that they "fixed" it later by adding more scenes, thus making it even longer and even more boring.
Berman wasn't perfect but if Roddenberry had continued at the helm, STNG would have died in 2 or 3 seasons. It was mostly crap until "Yesterday's Enterprise".
I have no desire to get into a general US vs. EU argument. Besides, both governments' antitrust efforts are similiar in that they are driven by corporate interests rather than legitimate concern for the consumer. It's just that the US has already satisified most of the market losers and the EU is still working on it.
I should have included Phoenix as well. As far as PCs 1990's pricing being comparable with Unix workstations, it didn't happen that way on my planet.
Yes, because government raids are the cornerstone of freedom and democracy.
Seriously, I think the EU should start charging companies like Real, Sun, etc for the service they provide in helping them to succeed in business without really trying.
because they were the companies that made a low-cost Linux-capable machine economically feasible.
My experience with small companies is that they don't actually give you what you paid for and it's almost impossible to return the computer when you discover what's missing. Large companies have a national reputation they have to protect, the small fry can just wait for the next sucker.
MS just discovered that POSIX wasn't as important to their customers as they had imagined.
MS makes most of money by selling software, not services etc.
It looks like there are still plenty of iPhones available on ebay, so I wouldn't read too much into the resale purchases.
What? Everybody is going to be a CEO in the future? Most CEO's today have the big corner office. What does that have to do with the accomodations the worker bees have?
the disadvantages of a telephone call and email. The hassle of entering text without the benefits of time-shifting.
Rather than using a Linux kernel massaged into something suitable for a mobile platform, why not create a kernel and OS designed from the ground up to meet the needs of the mobile platform. I guess "linux" is becoming more of a brand name than a specific thing.
"If your company has a mechanic that can put the parts together, yes. Most companies think they've hired a Network Engineer (who obviously would have no issues integrating the listed components, and would laugh at you for suggesting he might). "
Wow, if integrating applications qualifies someone as a Network Engineer, most of us should be adding it to our resumes. I always thought it had something to do with being an expert in Network Protocols.
OO.o and what version of MS Office are supposed to have less issues than Office 2003 and 2007?
If you go back even farther you find that game programmers writing "to the bare metal" were doing so without threads and sometimes even without an OS, monitor, or interrupts. It was a challenge, but that ability really has little value today (as I'm painfully aware).
In any case, the number one issue in a multicore world isn't whether programmers can write the code properly, but rather whether the performance of typical applications can actually be improved when capable developers have a crack at it. Once feasibility has actually been demonstrated, we can work on training.
I stand corrected. I know there were a number of non-IE problems in ASP.NET 1.1 that were corrected in ASP.NET 2.0, but I wasn't aware of these issues. Seems like new features in ASP.NET aren't non-IE ready until future releases (just an observation, not a guarantee).
Still, it appears that MS isn't going out of its way to avoid supporting the other browsers.
the worst that would happen to MS is that they would be better protected against future antitrust cases. Web sites built using ASP.NET 2.0 work as well on Firefox as they do on IE, so it wouldn't impact the server side.
"And yes, it should be possible to write a Java implementation of a JPEG encoder and have it run as fast as the C implementation."
So if the intent wasn't to improve performance, what is your explanation for Sun using a C implementation? You think they don't believe in using Java code whenever possible?