Might the noun/verb approach represent a starting point in a heuristic analysis that gets you someplace useful?
My admittedly brief experience has been that getting people (users/managers) to overcome the static friction within their minds is the supreme challenge; these implementation details are relatively benign.
All we really need is some standard way of setting icons and menus, and doing drag/drop.
This isn't conceptually dissimilar to what I said, yet I got beat with the double troll stick. Amusing.
I'll amend one of my life priciples to read:
'Never argue with a fool, a woman, a drunkard, and Slashdot Orthodoxy'.
...you appreciate the way the rivals live in a house so divided against itself.
Hopefully in a couple of years all of the GUI ideas shall have shaken themselves out,
so that there is a de facto standard windowing environment
over which everyone is in equal disagreement.
I would expect similar arguments from Redmond.
Clearly, Trolltech is a serious group of coders; perhaps they could do their own high speed, low drag STL implementation.
Increase usage of Standard C++ STL objects throughout. I am as interested in learning YANSI (Yet Another Novel String Implementation) as I am in learning C#.
Where the STL falls short, go to Boost.
Borland, if you're listening, please make your VCL/CLX libraries work more easily with STL. Still waiting for C++ Builder on Linux, BTW.
The theme of this post is that platform- and vendor-specific implementations are a PITA.
Chip giant Intel has reaffirmed its support for Linux on numerous occasions, but that support is far from obvious in the company's product line. The Jan '02 Linux Journal (sorry, no link, their server must be TU) has an article by a couple of Intel types (Chen Chen and David Griego) who've a NIC (called iNIC) running a TCP/IPv4 stack on embedded Linux.
Nothing on the Intel site, but you hope it's more than vaporware. Your Beo--------------(stabbed)
The effective sales life of a version of commercial software is now one year. The time required to get redress for grievance via lawsuit is around four years. Four years is more than enough time for a commercial software company to crash, die, crumble to dust, and blow away so that there is absolutely nothing left of it. Even if the software company wins its case against Microsoft, it's a Pyrrhic victory because the company will have lost where it counts most, in the marketplace.
The key to making the Final Judgment work to the short window dictated by the commercial-software market cycle is that the TC and Microsoft's Judgement Compliance Officer can solve a problem informally, rather than the complaining party and Microsoft taking years to build and litigate a case. It costs everyone less money, too.
Taking your word for it on life/litigation cycle time.
I suppose the one year life cycle is for potential competitors.
'Doze, itself, is converging on that, but a buggy release won't derail Redmond.
In the second quoted paragraph, though, you appear to believe that short-term cost savings can moderate Redmond's behavior.
Pockets don't get much deeper than Mr. Softy's.
Is the final tab of the whole DOJ fracas into nine figures yet?
Listening to Bill Gates on fair competition is like listening to Bill Clinton on marital fidelity.
The single wire solution might well be based on IEEE-1394, but I'm guessing that most receivers don't support this. Sweet will be the day when all home electronics gadgets support at least one common, high speed pipe, wireless or otherwise.
Then real remote controller reduction can begin.
I read the article, too.
While there is always room to grouse that the article is mere sensationalism, the issue is an important one that touches on a host of issues, as you point out.
Prediction: in fifty years, when the human genome is thoroughly decompiled and analyzed,
we'll see that hereditary factors favor a fairly standard normal distribution of behavioral traits, from brains to beauty.
Alas, for the alternative lifestyles crowd, I doubt that there will be much basis other than free will for non-heterosexual arrangements.
Not that I care, and we'll see what the research reveals, alright?.
Maybe for the Aspergers/autistic crowd,
not to mention the Down's/Alzheimers/(insert malady here) folks,
we might well screen future generations and filter out the negative inputs.
This possibility is distinct from the "breeding a super-race" viewpoint;
wouldn't advocate that, though someone will abuse the potential.
Also, a girl I once dated had a brother with Down's.
Their family viewed this as 'the gift of eternal innocence'.
Now, such a view isn't attainable by everyone,
but it hints at the point that viewing 'special' people as somehow,
vaguely, wrong is...shortsighted.
Regret the humor of my spelling of XBox was lost on you.
Additionally, please follow included link to a place where your apparent regard for MS practices can do Mr. Softy the most good.
A groovy day to ya. 8^)
Furthermore, through Ozzy Ozbourne logic(1), the writers could probably be sued if anyone could take something from the game and perform a real-world exploit.
(1)Fictional mention of doing something stupid as a sue-able event, ref "Suicide Solution".
...XBOX, because the hardware manufacturer can decide what to put in it (so long as they are not a monopoly--IBM got nailed for not allowing third party software, back in the day). But MS is not allowed to do something that would prevent OEM's from installing a different OS.
Maybe I should start a new/. account called ParanoiaTroll, but I think that this is EXACTLY what MS is about with the EcchsBox.
What a sweet trojan, this Internet appliance disguised as a console. You get the market built, you come out with great games, then a keyboard, and start offering MSN to EcchsBox owners. Mix in some broadband, and away you go!
Since there's no real potential for those to ever make a profit again...
Or, the basic ideas could form the basis for someone else's product.
Now, with what Rumor Control says about the MS Shared Source license, Redmond might trot out
some old code, let people look at it, then pursue exploratory lawsuits in a death-by-litigation
scheme against all competitors having shallower pockets.
Ultimately, discussions such as this underscore the need to use Open Source software.
Actually, my experience with MS technical support
hasn't been too bad, generally.
Which doesn't exactly cover over the multitude of
other corporate sins present, but, hey, aren't
balanced and reasoned arguments the hallmark of/.?
Where did you get those groovy, rose-colored glasses?
S-Mart. Because I shop smart!
...but the existing win95/98/me users who can't/won't upgrade will stay where they are rather than switching to linux.
And who is your spectacle vendor, your Anonymousness?
The 'product activation' feature causes a lot of whining on slashdot, but it's not an issue for new computers, and re-activation is only necessary if you change your motherboard -- something most home users don't do.
These statements are both true. An additional argument
in your favor is that the hardware requirements
to run Omnivorous Bloatware are increasingly affordable.
The question for history to answer, then, is:
do the sheep ever rebel against the sheerer?
In the short term, I feel that Windows XP will spur a short upgrading frenzy. New versions of Windows will continue this trend. The computer will continue to absorb home theater devices into itself as monitors get larger and speakers get better, and VHS tapes go the way of cassettes. Broadband Internet access will spur telecommuting and real-time videoconferencing, each carrying its own requirements. Overall, I don't see any major revolutions in the future, but instead a series of logical steps leading to a future that is not so much different from the world we live in today.
Time will tell if XP spurs anything but Linux market share.
A possible revolution could occur if a standard (Bluetooth?) could somehow reduce the controller population now threatening to bury coffee tables across the planet...
I was too colloquial: '...counter-battery fire in response...' != 'comparison'.
The rest of your reply answers the question, though: Sun is not just producing a product as a direct attempt to blunt the market impact of C#/.Net.
Though who's to say what the long-term strategic thinking in the mind of McNealy might be?
The gist of '...abstract[ing] away all of the complicated stuff...' seems that it's a cleaner design/implementation. Other p2p protocols might be wrapped in classes for JXTA. The value added would then be some Grand Unified P2P Theory Application (GUPTA)!?!
Point taken. Summing any major piece of software in a single sentence is unlikely to be fair.
The underlying question I have remains: given the smorgasboard of existing protocols, how does this new effort simplify effort, or add capability? Or is it just counter-battery fire in response to C#?
I have a lot of respect for Joy's technical acumen. Perhaps someone else can do something deeper than this press release.
What is it, specifically, besides (insert file-sharing utility here) with enhanced security?
I recall the Wired article about Jini, but a 'Doze beater it was not. Should we expect anything different from this equally-cooled-named product?
Notwithstanding trading MP3 files and gaming, is anyone using peer-to-peer applications?
Furthermore, as the XBox runs under a Mr. Softy OS, featuring DirectX, game vendors target the desktop and console markets with a single code base.
Slap a keyboard on this thing, and Mr. Softy has done what all of the Internet appliance people could not; put a cheap email computer in every house.
As usual, regardless of your opinion of the technical merits of any Mr. Softy's products, he sure knows how to go after a market.
The icing on the cake is that Mr. Softy has no sunk costs in the manufacturing of XBoxen; it's all outsourced, as detailed in the aforelinked Wired article.
Smart, smart, smart. But can you get one at S-Mart?
Slashdot Mirror
Might the noun/verb approach represent a starting point in a heuristic analysis that gets you someplace useful?
My admittedly brief experience has been that getting people (users/managers) to overcome the static friction within their minds is the supreme challenge; these implementation details are relatively benign.
The irony.
All we really need is some standard way of setting icons and menus, and doing drag/drop.
This isn't conceptually dissimilar to what I said, yet I got beat with the double troll stick. Amusing.
I'll amend one of my life priciples to read:
'Never argue with a fool, a woman, a drunkard, and Slashdot Orthodoxy'.
-1 Offtopic
...you appreciate the way the rivals live in a house so divided against itself.
Hopefully in a couple of years all of the GUI ideas shall have shaken themselves out,
so that there is a de facto standard windowing environment
over which everyone is in equal disagreement.
I would expect similar arguments from Redmond.
Clearly, Trolltech is a serious group of coders; perhaps they could do their own high speed, low drag STL implementation.
If Lindows can afford the suits ( law- and leech-in-a- ) then litigation might help them buy mindshare.
Clearly, Trolltech will do as they wish.
Consider the possibility that marketshare would grow if porting were simplified by greater use of standard components.
Haven't done any benchmarks, so I'll bow to your opinion on efficiency. Today's redundancy could be tomorrow's requirement, though.
Increase usage of Standard C++ STL objects throughout. I am as interested in learning YANSI (Yet Another Novel String Implementation) as I am in learning C#.
Where the STL falls short, go to Boost.
Borland, if you're listening, please make your VCL/CLX libraries work more easily with STL. Still waiting for C++ Builder on Linux, BTW.
The theme of this post is that platform- and vendor-specific implementations are a PITA.
Chip giant Intel has reaffirmed its support for Linux on numerous occasions, but that support is far from obvious in the company's product line.
The Jan '02 Linux Journal (sorry, no link, their server must be TU) has an article by a couple of Intel types (Chen Chen and David Griego) who've a NIC (called iNIC) running a TCP/IPv4 stack on embedded Linux.
Nothing on the Intel site, but you hope it's more than vaporware. Your Beo--------------(stabbed)
Linux is only free if your time is worthless!
and your post has value?
The effective sales life of a version of commercial software is now one year. The time required to get redress for grievance via lawsuit is around four years. Four years is more than enough time for a commercial software company to crash, die, crumble to dust, and blow away so that there is absolutely nothing left of it. Even if the software company wins its case against Microsoft, it's a Pyrrhic victory because the company will have lost where it counts most, in the marketplace.
The key to making the Final Judgment work to the short window dictated by the commercial-software market cycle is that the TC and Microsoft's Judgement Compliance Officer can solve a problem informally, rather than the complaining party and Microsoft taking years to build and litigate a case. It costs everyone less money, too.
Taking your word for it on life/litigation cycle time.
I suppose the one year life cycle is for potential competitors.
'Doze, itself, is converging on that, but a buggy release won't derail Redmond.
In the second quoted paragraph, though, you appear to believe that short-term cost savings can moderate Redmond's behavior.
Pockets don't get much deeper than Mr. Softy's.
Is the final tab of the whole DOJ fracas into nine figures yet?
Listening to Bill Gates on fair competition is like listening to Bill Clinton on marital fidelity.
The single wire solution might well be based on IEEE-1394, but I'm guessing that most receivers don't support this.
Sweet will be the day when all home electronics gadgets support at least one common, high speed pipe, wireless or otherwise.
Then real remote controller reduction can begin.
I read the article, too.
While there is always room to grouse that the article is mere sensationalism, the issue is an important one that touches on a host of issues, as you point out.
Prediction: in fifty years, when the human genome is thoroughly decompiled and analyzed,
we'll see that hereditary factors favor a fairly standard normal distribution of behavioral traits, from brains to beauty.
Alas, for the alternative lifestyles crowd, I doubt that there will be much basis other than free will for non-heterosexual arrangements.
Not that I care, and we'll see what the research reveals, alright?.
Maybe for the Aspergers/autistic crowd,
not to mention the Down's/Alzheimers/(insert malady here) folks,
we might well screen future generations and filter out the negative inputs.
This possibility is distinct from the "breeding a super-race" viewpoint;
wouldn't advocate that, though someone will abuse the potential.
Also, a girl I once dated had a brother with Down's.
Their family viewed this as 'the gift of eternal innocence'.
Now, such a view isn't attainable by everyone,
but it hints at the point that viewing 'special' people as somehow,
vaguely, wrong is...shortsighted.
Regret the humor of my spelling of XBox was lost on you.
Additionally, please follow included link to a place where your apparent regard for MS practices can do Mr. Softy the most good.
A groovy day to ya. 8^)
Furthermore, through Ozzy Ozbourne logic(1), the writers could probably be sued if anyone could take something from the game and perform a real-world exploit.
(1)Fictional mention of doing something stupid as a sue-able event, ref "Suicide Solution".
...XBOX, because the hardware manufacturer can decide what to put in it (so long as they are not a monopoly--IBM got nailed for not allowing third party software, back in the day). But MS is not allowed to do something that would prevent OEM's from installing a different OS.
/. account called ParanoiaTroll, but I think that this is EXACTLY what MS is about with the EcchsBox.
Maybe I should start a new
What a sweet trojan, this Internet appliance disguised as a console. You get the market built, you come out with great games, then a keyboard, and start offering MSN to EcchsBox owners. Mix in some broadband, and away you go!
Since there's no real potential for those to ever make a profit again...
Or, the basic ideas could form the basis for someone else's product.
Now, with what Rumor Control says about the MS Shared Source license, Redmond might trot out
some old code, let people look at it, then pursue exploratory lawsuits in a death-by-litigation
scheme against all competitors having shallower pockets.
Ultimately, discussions such as this underscore the need to use Open Source software.
You offer the technical argument, not the business one.
Actually, my experience with MS technical support /.?
hasn't been too bad, generally.
Which doesn't exactly cover over the multitude of
other corporate sins present, but, hey, aren't
balanced and reasoned arguments the hallmark of
Where did you get those groovy, rose-colored glasses?
...but the existing win95/98/me users who can't/won't upgrade will stay where they are rather than switching to linux.
S-Mart. Because I shop smart!
And who is your spectacle vendor, your Anonymousness?
The 'product activation' feature causes a lot of whining on slashdot, but it's not an issue for new computers, and re-activation is only necessary if you change your motherboard -- something most home users don't do.
These statements are both true. An additional argument
in your favor is that the hardware requirements
to run Omnivorous Bloatware are increasingly affordable.
The question for history to answer, then, is:
do the sheep ever rebel against the sheerer?
In the short term, I feel that Windows XP will spur a short upgrading frenzy. New versions of Windows will continue this trend. The computer will continue to absorb home theater devices into itself as monitors get larger and speakers get better, and VHS tapes go the way of cassettes. Broadband Internet access will spur telecommuting and real-time videoconferencing, each carrying its own requirements. Overall, I don't see any major revolutions in the future, but instead a series of logical steps leading to a future that is not so much different from the world we live in today.
Time will tell if XP spurs anything but Linux market share.
A possible revolution could occur if a standard (Bluetooth?) could somehow reduce the controller population now threatening to bury coffee tables across the planet...
I was too colloquial: '...counter-battery fire in response...' != 'comparison'.
The rest of your reply answers the question, though: Sun is not just producing a product as a direct attempt to blunt the market impact of C#/.Net.
Though who's to say what the long-term strategic thinking in the mind of McNealy might be?
The gist of '...abstract[ing] away all of the complicated stuff...' seems that it's a cleaner design/implementation. Other p2p protocols might be wrapped in classes for JXTA. The value added would then be some Grand Unified P2P Theory Application (GUPTA)!?!
That's a very poor way of characterizing it.
Point taken. Summing any major piece of software in a single sentence is unlikely to be fair.
The underlying question I have remains: given the smorgasboard of existing protocols, how does this new effort simplify effort, or add capability? Or is it just counter-battery fire in response to C#?
I have a lot of respect for Joy's technical acumen. Perhaps someone else can do something deeper than this press release.
What is it, specifically, besides (insert file-sharing utility here) with enhanced security?
I recall the Wired article about Jini, but a 'Doze beater it was not. Should we expect anything different from this equally-cooled-named product?
Notwithstanding trading MP3 files and gaming, is anyone using peer-to-peer applications?
Can you explain to me exactly how a movie ... is supposed to help the public have a greater understanding of robotics and artificial intelligence?
The general idea of stories is to instruct and entertain.
Here, we see a specific application where the goal is to prey on public Luddism, changing it into money lining the producer's wallet.
As with the bulk of Holleywood product, enjoy the entertainment if you can, barf like a champ if you cannot.
Furthermore, as the XBox runs under a Mr. Softy OS, featuring DirectX, game vendors target the desktop and console markets with a single code base.
Slap a keyboard on this thing, and Mr. Softy has done what all of the Internet appliance people could not; put a cheap email computer in every house.
As usual, regardless of your opinion of the technical merits of any Mr. Softy's products, he sure knows how to go after a market.
The icing on the cake is that Mr. Softy has no sunk costs in the manufacturing of XBoxen; it's all outsourced, as detailed in the aforelinked Wired article.
Smart, smart, smart. But can you get one at S-Mart?