When are companies going to start coming out with really refined and good code?
When customers stop paying for bad code. You said it yourself: companies are just trying to come out with the most features the quickest in order to try and make more money. And they'll keep doing that until people stop paying for it. Why should MS stop if its customers are happy, or at least happy enough to keep buying their software. Definitely by this point companies should be asking, "Why are we putting up with all this security crap from MS? We like the OS, but IIS has had too many security holes." And they should look elsewhere for internet server software.
But MS customers are not. Their sales go up while their number of flaws go up. And until people stop paying them for bad code, MS won't beef up the quality of their software.
The one thing that bothers me most is not the tracking itself (as scary as that is), but one particular sentence: "It saves lives by discouraging speeding."
How many more studies have to come out proving that speeding does not cost lives? Just a 10 mph increase in highway speed limit reduces fatalities 5 to 10%. Check out this one study in California. Most driving accidents are caused by lack of full attention to the road (18 to 21 year olds playing with the radio, mid-twenties talking to passenger), and of course drunk driving. If anyone would bother listening to the studies made we wouldn't have such low speed limits and fatality rates would drop.
And as an added bonus there wouldn't be so many cops whose only job is to ticket speeders!
(Can you tell I've gotten a few speeding tickets in my time?)
RIAA releases genetic mutation of cd-eating fungus to destroy music on CD-RWs. The RIAA has promoted the use of copy- and fungi-protection mechanisms on CDs to ensure their legal use. When fearful a city has any pirate CDs, the RIAA releases their anti-copi-fungi into the population.
In a related story, the FCC has released its own mutation of the cd-eating fungus to eat "inappropriate" words out of music. Rapper Eminem is complaining that fans can only buy his clear CDs.
FOX, CBS, and ABC are not monopolies. If you don't like what they have, you can change the channel. If you don't want to have Time Warner cable service in Manhattan, then you can have no cable. You basically have no television in Manhattan without Time Warner cable. It's a monopoly, so restricting advertising might make perfect sense to them, but it's abusively restrictive to others.
Pressure from the music industry fostering privacy tactics is a good thing compared to other pressures. By developing privacy technology now to prevent corporations from tracking us, we're also developing the means to prevent the government from doing the same thing. I'd much prefer the pressure from music and movies than government regulations.
The legal basis is the agreement under which you have to press the infamous "I Agree" button to get the details of the watermark to be cracked. Of course the professor could've gotten it from other sources, but if he pressed that button, he agreed not to publish anything.
I think you read it backwards... it can help acceptance of linux and increase the number of game developers for linux. If you have to fork out $2000 for a decent new computer, why not instead upgrade your PS2 for $200 to have a gaming computer you can develop on?
How about this: creating/enhancing organizations for open source developers to join. Not just online communities or expos, but not-for-profit outfit(s) specifically made to bring together free software/open source developers, able to provide these general contracts and legal backing. Meeting with a prospective employer, being a member of a well respected organization with some power can have a positive impact.
You'd show open source support and commitment while having legal backing you could never have as an individual. I think it would look and work better than expecting employers to adopt a generic contract from nowhere.
Just a thought on the subject... haven't really though it through.
As someone else commented, ASP is far from the most widely used dynamic content technology. I refuse to call it a technology since it consists of one dll which exposes objects written in C++ to perform as a layer to CGI. That's all it is, an object layer to CGI. ASP is not a language, while PHP, Perl, and Java are.
ASP in 2 years will have no relation to what it is now..NOT will make it a compile-on-first-run library. It'll first be a pseudo-compiled thing which its creator then plans to drop for something completely different. Unlike the other 3 languages discussed in the article, ASP has no support from its inventors or the community, one of which is always needed to keep it desirable for use.
Only unlikely for as long as the average user is happy. Joe User is content with the way things are, so why revolt? If enough users see what's happening as censorship, then I think we'd be more likely to see changes.
1) Not all experiments can be performed by unmanned satellites (see other post) 2) A mission to Mars powered by a plasma drive is planned to launch in 2023. The ship must refuel in space. If the ISS is still up then, it'll be used for refuelling. 3) It'll be the launching pad for other unmanned missions, eliminating some cost of building special purpose rockets for getting things out of orbit. 4) For any further exploration to occur, we must study the very long-term affects of near-zero gravity on humans. That means having something intended to remain in space longer than a shuttle.
I'm not saying the ISS is the best answer to these problems, but it's what NASA and others have chosen to go with. There are also corporations working on many independant projects that would otherwise have to be done on the ISS. So don't think NASA's the only set of Americans working on space projects.
RedHat's x86 Linux distro is compiled on an i386. This means meeting the lowest common denominator for the Intel architecture, just as Windows 95/98/NT is only compiled on a Pentium. Does RedHat plan on making multiple distros for higher Intel architectures? I would think this could make RedHat a more favorable option when choosing a distro, since compiling for higher architectures can mean improved efficiency.
Next bill to be considered in Texas: "Mandatory bullet-proof vests for all citizens residing in the state." When born, you're required by law to buy a vest. That's about how dumb this bill is.
Don't buy from software companies with such a discalaimer. Would you buy a car from a company that said that? Don't forget there are inherent warranties on products... car lemon laws, guaranteed returns on faulty items...
There was a long time when Oracle paid any customer who found a previously unknown bug in their software a $10,000 "reward". While developing software, I stumbled across an undocumented bug that our DBA then tracked down, and he was awarded the $10K. We need more software companies like that.
On a serious note, each time a commercial software product screws up, and costs a company money, that company should sue the product's maker for costs, assuming the product's maker didn't inform the customer of any issue. Quantify all of the times my workstation at work has to be rebooted, VB crashes, etc., as work-hours taken from my productive time. All of that, for all of the people at my company, adds up to many man-hours of work. Since it's all quantifiable, and much of it due to undocumented bugs, Microsoft should be sued, at least yearly, for this cost to my company, and every other company should do the same.
I don't get it. I thought DivX was dead-in-the-water (reworded from the subject line so as not to offend anyone). Wasn't the standard already not accepted by the public? Or was it just the implementation, pay-per-play?
You need to read more about the trials with these companies. Boies, the prosecutor, had to push most companies into helping his case. More are afraid to complain about M$ than not. The only reason Sun was willing to help was because they had no ties at all to M$. No one's crying to mommy. Boies had to push very hard to get anyone to talk.
Once the patent claim gets approved, meaning that the PTO believes it's non-obvious, how can others come in and then prove it is obvious? Is there a way to prove, other than evidence of prior art, that the patent claim is simply false and was wrongfully approved?
As soon as someone comes up with a way to make money from a polling system that the company has patented, then Microsoft will go after them. Microsoft is no better and no worse than any other huge public corporation. This isn't about Microsoft, or bashing those ruthless materialistic bastards. It's about creative freedom, or as they put it, "freedom to innovate," which they are in turn trying to prevent from others.
Well then break out the floppies that hold that BBS code and call your lawyer. Get in touch with the PTO and make a claim. I'm serious. It may not seem like much, but at least write the patent office and claim prior art. Please... Do it! For real!
This patent is a claim on a new method of polling, not polling itself. I don't understand how a physical polling system, in existance for many years and used by millions, can evolve into an electronic version, and a patent be allowed on the electronic version. How is online polling an invention? Is there a way to have a patent killed without proving prior work? Can a claim of "this is a dumb-ass patent" be made with that office so they will dissolve it? Can a patent be claimed invalid simply because it shouldn't exist and not because someone else thought of it first?
This is like claiming to patent the push-button telephone after the rotary's been in use. It can't be allowed.
Of course they only care about the companies that have had "tremendous commercial success." It's not like they raised this lawsuit years ago when Palm made its first product. Wait for success, then sue... now that's a good business model.
Slashdot Mirror
When are companies going to start coming out with really refined and good code?
When customers stop paying for bad code. You said it yourself: companies are just trying to come out with the most features the quickest in order to try and make more money. And they'll keep doing that until people stop paying for it. Why should MS stop if its customers are happy, or at least happy enough to keep buying their software. Definitely by this point companies should be asking, "Why are we putting up with all this security crap from MS? We like the OS, but IIS has had too many security holes." And they should look elsewhere for internet server software.
But MS customers are not. Their sales go up while their number of flaws go up. And until people stop paying them for bad code, MS won't beef up the quality of their software.
---
And here's more info with links about how raising speed limits doesn't make drivers drive faster, and most speeding deaths are due to drunk driving.
---
The one thing that bothers me most is not the tracking itself (as scary as that is), but one particular sentence: "It saves lives by discouraging speeding."
How many more studies have to come out proving that speeding does not cost lives? Just a 10 mph increase in highway speed limit reduces fatalities 5 to 10%. Check out this one study in California. Most driving accidents are caused by lack of full attention to the road (18 to 21 year olds playing with the radio, mid-twenties talking to passenger), and of course drunk driving. If anyone would bother listening to the studies made we wouldn't have such low speed limits and fatality rates would drop.
And as an added bonus there wouldn't be so many cops whose only job is to ticket speeders!
(Can you tell I've gotten a few speeding tickets in my time?)
---
RIAA releases genetic mutation of cd-eating fungus to destroy music on CD-RWs. The RIAA has promoted the use of copy- and fungi-protection mechanisms on CDs to ensure their legal use. When fearful a city has any pirate CDs, the RIAA releases their anti-copi-fungi into the population.
In a related story, the FCC has released its own mutation of the cd-eating fungus to eat "inappropriate" words out of music. Rapper Eminem is complaining that fans can only buy his clear CDs.
---
FOX, CBS, and ABC are not monopolies. If you don't like what they have, you can change the channel. If you don't want to have Time Warner cable service in Manhattan, then you can have no cable. You basically have no television in Manhattan without Time Warner cable. It's a monopoly, so restricting advertising might make perfect sense to them, but it's abusively restrictive to others.
---
Pressure from the music industry fostering privacy tactics is a good thing compared to other pressures. By developing privacy technology now to prevent corporations from tracking us, we're also developing the means to prevent the government from doing the same thing. I'd much prefer the pressure from music and movies than government regulations.
---
The legal basis is the agreement under which you have to press the infamous "I Agree" button to get the details of the watermark to be cracked. Of course the professor could've gotten it from other sources, but if he pressed that button, he agreed not to publish anything.
---
I think you read it backwards... it can help acceptance of linux and increase the number of game developers for linux. If you have to fork out $2000 for a decent new computer, why not instead upgrade your PS2 for $200 to have a gaming computer you can develop on?
---
How about this: creating/enhancing organizations for open source developers to join. Not just online communities or expos, but not-for-profit outfit(s) specifically made to bring together free software/open source developers, able to provide these general contracts and legal backing. Meeting with a prospective employer, being a member of a well respected organization with some power can have a positive impact.
You'd show open source support and commitment while having legal backing you could never have as an individual. I think it would look and work better than expecting employers to adopt a generic contract from nowhere.
Just a thought on the subject... haven't really though it through.
---
As someone else commented, ASP is far from the most widely used dynamic content technology. I refuse to call it a technology since it consists of one dll which exposes objects written in C++ to perform as a layer to CGI. That's all it is, an object layer to CGI. ASP is not a language, while PHP, Perl, and Java are.
.NOT will make it a compile-on-first-run library. It'll first be a pseudo-compiled thing which its creator then plans to drop for something completely different. Unlike the other 3 languages discussed in the article, ASP has no support from its inventors or the community, one of which is always needed to keep it desirable for use.
ASP in 2 years will have no relation to what it is now.
---
Only unlikely for as long as the average user is happy. Joe User is content with the way things are, so why revolt? If enough users see what's happening as censorship, then I think we'd be more likely to see changes.
---
1) Not all experiments can be performed by unmanned satellites (see other post)
2) A mission to Mars powered by a plasma drive is planned to launch in 2023. The ship must refuel in space. If the ISS is still up then, it'll be used for refuelling.
3) It'll be the launching pad for other unmanned missions, eliminating some cost of building special purpose rockets for getting things out of orbit.
4) For any further exploration to occur, we must study the very long-term affects of near-zero gravity on humans. That means having something intended to remain in space longer than a shuttle.
I'm not saying the ISS is the best answer to these problems, but it's what NASA and others have chosen to go with. There are also corporations working on many independant projects that would otherwise have to be done on the ISS. So don't think NASA's the only set of Americans working on space projects.
---
RedHat's x86 Linux distro is compiled on an i386. This means meeting the lowest common denominator for the Intel architecture, just as Windows 95/98/NT is only compiled on a Pentium. Does RedHat plan on making multiple distros for higher Intel architectures? I would think this could make RedHat a more favorable option when choosing a distro, since compiling for higher architectures can mean improved efficiency.
All of us in NY should buy ThinkGeek shirts with the DeCSS code on it and stand outside the courthouse for a silent protest.
Next bill to be considered in Texas: "Mandatory bullet-proof vests for all citizens residing in the state." When born, you're required by law to buy a vest. That's about how dumb this bill is.
Don't buy from software companies with such a discalaimer. Would you buy a car from a company that said that? Don't forget there are inherent warranties on products... car lemon laws, guaranteed returns on faulty items...
There was a long time when Oracle paid any customer who found a previously unknown bug in their software a $10,000 "reward". While developing software, I stumbled across an undocumented bug that our DBA then tracked down, and he was awarded the $10K. We need more software companies like that.
On a serious note, each time a commercial software product screws up, and costs a company money, that company should sue the product's maker for costs, assuming the product's maker didn't inform the customer of any issue. Quantify all of the times my workstation at work has to be rebooted, VB crashes, etc., as work-hours taken from my productive time. All of that, for all of the people at my company, adds up to many man-hours of work. Since it's all quantifiable, and much of it due to undocumented bugs, Microsoft should be sued, at least yearly, for this cost to my company, and every other company should do the same.
DiVX still languishes in relative obscurity. Therefore the MPAA doesn't see it as an enormous threat.
Isn't that what they thought about DVD/CSS? What's the difference? Won't the same thing that happened to CSS happen to DiVX?
I don't get it. I thought DivX was dead-in-the-water (reworded from the subject line so as not to offend anyone). Wasn't the standard already not accepted by the public? Or was it just the implementation, pay-per-play?
You need to read more about the trials with these companies. Boies, the prosecutor, had to push most companies into helping his case. More are afraid to complain about M$ than not. The only reason Sun was willing to help was because they had no ties at all to M$. No one's crying to mommy. Boies had to push very hard to get anyone to talk.
Once the patent claim gets approved, meaning that the PTO believes it's non-obvious, how can others come in and then prove it is obvious? Is there a way to prove, other than evidence of prior art, that the patent claim is simply false and was wrongfully approved?
As soon as someone comes up with a way to make money from a polling system that the company has patented, then Microsoft will go after them. Microsoft is no better and no worse than any other huge public corporation. This isn't about Microsoft, or bashing those ruthless materialistic bastards. It's about creative freedom, or as they put it, "freedom to innovate," which they are in turn trying to prevent from others.
Well then break out the floppies that hold that BBS code and call your lawyer. Get in touch with the PTO and make a claim. I'm serious. It may not seem like much, but at least write the patent office and claim prior art. Please... Do it! For real!
This patent is a claim on a new method of polling, not polling itself. I don't understand how a physical polling system, in existance for many years and used by millions, can evolve into an electronic version, and a patent be allowed on the electronic version. How is online polling an invention? Is there a way to have a patent killed without proving prior work? Can a claim of "this is a dumb-ass patent" be made with that office so they will dissolve it? Can a patent be claimed invalid simply because it shouldn't exist and not because someone else thought of it first?
This is like claiming to patent the push-button telephone after the rotary's been in use. It can't be allowed.
Of course they only care about the companies that have had "tremendous commercial success." It's not like they raised this lawsuit years ago when Palm made its first product. Wait for success, then sue... now that's a good business model.