I think it would be much better to work on creating new low-refresh rate devices of higher quality or creating a very-high refresh rate device that uses little power. I doubt that different usage patterns are going to significantly affect the usability of these devices.
In any case, it's not clear if Linux (or any OS) is really a good platform for performing this type of research.
Hey, I don't claim to understand it all, but read this also from wikipedia:
"The Standard Model of particle physics contains 12 flavors of elementary fermions, plus their corresponding antiparticles, as well as elementary bosons that mediate the forces and the still undiscovered Higgs boson. However, the Standard Model is widely considered to be a provisional theory rather than a truly fundamental one, since it is fundamentally incompatible with Einstein's general relativity."
Does such a complex model really provide useful insights into reality that go beyond a mere mathematical description? That's not even counting the fact that it's incompatible with general relativity.
Particle Physics has become really wacky in recent years. Every time a current theory doesn't quite add up another particle is "created". Personally I believe that you could create a theory based on Pokemon and it would make as much sense as current theories (As always, you must choose the right Pokemon).
While I don't disagree in general with your post, I think the loss of monopoly or near monopoly status for companies like Xerox, IBM, and AT&T was more significant than a Wall Street driven short-term focus.
That would make sense if a particular version of IE could only run on Windows XP, and later versions of IE weren't backward-compatible.
In any case, the issue is rewriting legacy apps for non-IE browsers, not future IE browsers.
A lot of companies have wasted a lot of money trying to conform to a speculative future only to find out that the future wasn't what they thought it was going to be.
Sometimes it's more cost effective to let the future pay for itself in the future.
A good software app is always impressive but good software has been written for many years without community effort. I hope we don't reach a point where developers think they can't stand on their own two feet.
"Laziness of IT staff" can often be described as "Saving the company money". Why should they spend time and money rewriting intranet apps that work fine just so they can get rid of IE. What's the business case for that?
The problem for MS is that a lot of content depends on IE's legacy behavior. Standards compliance is primarily a developer's issue in particular for developers that don't use IE for browsing or even run Windows (except for testing). The later you introduce a browser the easier it is to be compliant because you don't have any legacy users to piss off.
You're right and it's worth remembering that some bugs will cause incorrect behavior on a cycle that is so long that our Sun will go nova before it shows up.
The main value of the technology is it's transparency. While it might be slightly more convenient to use it for something like a document repository, it's not much better than zip files for that application. Even for that application, it's doubtful that corporations are saving much money by using compressed disks.
In the US you cannot accurately say "Microsoft has committed crimes" unless they have been convicted in a criminal court. Innocent until proven guilty is still the law of the land.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it would be much better to work on creating new low-refresh rate devices of higher quality or creating a very-high refresh rate device that uses little power. I doubt that different usage patterns are going to significantly affect the usability of these devices.
In any case, it's not clear if Linux (or any OS) is really a good platform for performing this type of research.
A better web browser than what you already can get on other platforms?
So we should start spending our limited research dollars investigating how to install full Linux on devices that weren't meant to support it?
How exactly does that further the state of the art?
So the purpose of running a regular operating system on a Kindle is to give you a base on which to start customizing the device, right?
So ... What is the purpose of customizing the device?
To the same degree that electronic circuit design isn't engineering.
When an Agile project fails, it's either because you're not following the rules or you're following the rules too closely.
You can't "Think Different" unless you convert adverbs into adjectives!
Hey, I don't claim to understand it all, but read this also from wikipedia:
"The Standard Model of particle physics contains 12 flavors of elementary fermions, plus their corresponding antiparticles, as well as elementary bosons that mediate the forces and the still undiscovered Higgs boson. However, the Standard Model is widely considered to be a provisional theory rather than a truly fundamental one, since it is fundamentally incompatible with Einstein's general relativity."
Does such a complex model really provide useful insights into reality that go beyond a mere mathematical description? That's not even counting the fact that it's incompatible with general relativity.
Particle Physics has become really wacky in recent years. Every time a current theory doesn't quite add up another particle is "created". Personally I believe that you could create a theory based on Pokemon and it would make as much sense as current theories (As always, you must choose the right Pokemon).
Now mod me offtopic.
Give up your mobile phone and Internet access for a month or two and you might change your opinion.
While I don't disagree in general with your post, I think the loss of monopoly or near monopoly status for companies like Xerox, IBM, and AT&T was more significant than a Wall Street driven short-term focus.
If that's what the customer wants to buy, no problem.
I didn't realize that fanless overheating and acrylic cracks were industry standards.
Sure, because once you write a Windows app you're forbidden by law to write one for another platform.
That would make sense if a particular version of IE could only run on Windows XP, and later versions of IE weren't backward-compatible.
In any case, the issue is rewriting legacy apps for non-IE browsers, not future IE browsers.
A lot of companies have wasted a lot of money trying to conform to a speculative future only to find out that the future wasn't what they thought it was going to be.
Sometimes it's more cost effective to let the future pay for itself in the future.
I'm ready to free my system, but it hasn't asked yet.
A good software app is always impressive but good software has been written for many years without community effort. I hope we don't reach a point where developers think they can't stand on their own two feet.
"Laziness of IT staff" can often be described as "Saving the company money". Why should they spend time and money rewriting intranet apps that work fine just so they can get rid of IE. What's the business case for that?
The problem for MS is that a lot of content depends on IE's legacy behavior. Standards compliance is primarily a developer's issue in particular for developers that don't use IE for browsing or even run Windows (except for testing). The later you introduce a browser the easier it is to be compliant because you don't have any legacy users to piss off.
"You seem to be laboring under the idea that using speech recognition software would not occur to these people"
You seem to be laboring under the idea that speech recognition software really works.
"Research in the sciences usually requires a Ph.D level education."
Is that a bureaucratic requirement or a practical one?
You're right and it's worth remembering that some bugs will cause incorrect behavior on a cycle that is so long that our Sun will go nova before it shows up.
The main value of the technology is it's transparency. While it might be slightly more convenient to use it for something like a document repository, it's not much better than zip files for that application. Even for that application, it's doubtful that corporations are saving much money by using compressed disks.
In the US you cannot accurately say "Microsoft has committed crimes" unless they have been convicted in a criminal court. Innocent until proven guilty is still the law of the land.
How about "re-corrected poster"?