no way, I didn't spend that much. I build my 16k RAM board myself and the 4116 didn't cost that much I think (at that time I didn't even have that sort of money, so it couldn't cost that much). btw: still having that thing plugged in until this very day and I'm still amazed that it works well after all these years.
I use Labview for 10 years now and still use it most of the time for my Test & Measurement activities. Other times I use C in combination with Labview. I consider Labview a higher programming language with some advantages but never a replacement for a lower level language (C). The resizing part is a minor issue if you design your software before implementing it. Regarding the claimed development savings your partially right. The extra libs from NI save some work, but the actual programming doesn't save much. I think that implementing software doesn't take as much time as designing it and the design phase is independant of the implementation language. Therefor total design time is hardly affected by the chosen language unless you design on the fly (design while you type code), which is a bad thing in my opinion anyways. I have to admit that this way of programming is very tempting with Labview, but I reject that way of work.
Well, those companies that have chosen to use MS in the past should already have that risk evaluated. They either have put money aside to get things repaired or have money aside to migrate to another platform. Either case, if they didn't see that risk they should probably fire the IT staff because it was somehow their choice to go with MS.
How good people cooperate ! They can't even get something standardized. It's amazing that this always fails even though we have such a good management within our multinationals (sarcasm overdose).
Record stores do suffer from this as they buy records from the record companies. When they don't sell them, a lot of the cost are their costs and not the record company. Those costs need to be covered and therefore records are already more expensive as they should be. Record companies often promote records and give information to the record stores that they should stock these albums (therefor influencing the charts already, but that's a whole different point). This business is sick from the top down and needs a new face. Record stores have been giving this feedback to the record companies for a long time (I do mean already 10 years ago and I do have prove for that as we too did own a record store) but the record companies never paid attention to it. Now it's up to the record companies to change the business or suffer because the current business model isn't fit for use anymore. They have been too lame to change their business model and that's an indication of mismanagement.
You must have tried last time some years ago I guess. Media players like mplayer,xine or vlc are well capable of playing files. I never use windows and only rely on those apps and they always work for me.
It's just not better because it runs those formats to everyone. I never use the formats that you mention, besides DVD,VCD and avi and I can tell you that xine beats mplayer at playing DVD.
Anyways, xine also runs these formats, so your point of "Rules them all" seems not really true. In fact most of these formats are supported by ffmpeg which is used by both mplayer and xine.
VLC also is worth mentioning as it also has a windows port. Within the xine project there's also work done on a windows port, but status is not clear to me as it seems a little low priority.
Correct. I have been using both mplayer and xine for a few years now but hardly use mplayer. I guess that's mainly a matter of choice though.
For those not knowing xine : http://xine.sf.net
Some work on a win32 port has been done also, but I'm not sure of the status. To most developers this has very low priority as not many use windows I think. The xine developers usually welcome any help, so if there are volunteers go ahead !
That means that they have done developments based on Linux over the past few years but not put it into market yet. Perhaps now they think it's mature enough to do this to replace their existing products. I would considder this is to be quite a big step and it's quite remarkable that so many companies share this idea. It takes quite an effort to get so many big companies in line and therefore may be part of some long term strategy.
Most of these companies are making consumer electronics and their core business is selling devices, not software. Software has always been a cost factor that they are trying to reduce. If that succeeds with the help from the open source community I would be surpriced if these companies didn't provide at least some parts as open source although it may be not in the interest of the company. Perhaps when providing open source would bring these companies some benefit (not only in form of money but also product support from the open source community) these companies would be willing to provide sources. Also open source is a little strange in this case as you're looking at software development for hardware that is in development. The open source community can only access the hardware when it's already on the market so it doesn't make much sense to provide cvs access to sources in development stage for example although this could be an interesting development:-)
They never did create a copy protection. It is nothing more than a playing protection as it only encrypts data.
It's your choice not to buy the DVD and wait for the special edition. In the meantime you can grab a copy from the net untill the final version has arrived:-) I do agree that as a customer you feel really bad when three months later after you bought a DVD, a special edition appears. This does discourage to buy a DVD at first edition.
true, but just in case you "copy" a DVD, it doesn't matter much wether you leave the copy encrypted as well. You can still decrypt it when playing the disc.
If this patent is not about size, than probably every computer infringes this patent. Even though you can debate about wether this patent should have been granted, I think the law made a mistake here.
Re:speaking of network blackouts
on
Network Blackout
·
· Score: 2, Funny
oh man, you gotta let us know how the sushi worked out !!!
It's the personell department, the people who hire you who care about degree. The colleges you're working with care about your knowledge and less about your degree (if it help, it helps but not more than that). I guess in the end someone who's good at his/her job will always find his/her way to an interesting, well paying job.
now, why would.exe not be allowed ? The only reason for that is becasue Microsoft did a bad job in protecting their platform. As a developer I like distributing the exe to my users. Now I have to to zip them to get through these stupid 'security' measures. Well, lets be clear : this is no measure at all.
When an author doesn't like his work to be copied, his work is protected by the copyright law. When an author wants his work to be copied and even extended by others he will use GPL in order to not be limited by the copyright law. If GPL can't exist because of the copyright law, that means the copyright law limits the author in publishing his work. Do you really think the copyright law should limit an author's freedom of choice ?
It's going to be a nice learning experience for you to get kicked around by some IBM lawyers.
If MS doesn't open the source, they can say whatever they like. It's up to the users to believe or not believe them as proof doesn't exist. A crash can be caused because MS's update causes existing things not to be API compatible any more or MS's documentation is not up-to-date causing the third party not to be able to write good software. Both would be MS to blame even though DrWatson (whatever) tells the third party software isn't good.
Slashdot Mirror
no way, I didn't spend that much.
I build my 16k RAM board myself and the 4116 didn't cost that much I think (at that time I didn't even have that sort of money, so it couldn't cost that much).
btw: still having that thing plugged in until this very day and I'm still amazed that it works well after all these years.
I use Labview for 10 years now and still use it most of the time for my Test & Measurement activities. Other times I use C in combination with Labview.
I consider Labview a higher programming language with some advantages but never a replacement for a lower level language (C).
The resizing part is a minor issue if you design your software before implementing it.
Regarding the claimed development savings your partially right. The extra libs from NI save some work, but the actual programming doesn't save much. I think that implementing software doesn't take as much time as designing it and the design phase is independant of the implementation language. Therefor total design time is hardly affected by the chosen language unless you design on the fly (design while you type code), which is a bad thing in my opinion anyways. I have to admit that this way of programming is very tempting with Labview, but I reject that way of work.
Well, those companies that have chosen to use MS in the past should already have that risk evaluated. They either have put money aside to get things repaired or have money aside to migrate to another platform.
Either case, if they didn't see that risk they should probably fire the IT staff because it was somehow their choice to go with MS.
How good people cooperate !
They can't even get something standardized. It's amazing that this always fails even though we have such a good management within our multinationals (sarcasm overdose).
There's enough water in beer, so I guess I'll be fine.
Record stores do suffer from this as they buy records from the record companies. When they don't sell them, a lot of the cost are their costs and not the record company. Those costs need to be covered and therefore records are already more expensive as they should be.
Record companies often promote records and give information to the record stores that they should stock these albums (therefor influencing the charts already, but that's a whole different point).
This business is sick from the top down and needs a new face. Record stores have been giving this feedback to the record companies for a long time (I do mean already 10 years ago and I do have prove for that as we too did own a record store) but the record companies never paid attention to it.
Now it's up to the record companies to change the business or suffer because the current business model isn't fit for use anymore.
They have been too lame to change their business model and that's an indication of mismanagement.
Why are the apps for windows more expensive ?
Seems not very portable to me if you need to catch a flight.
I would love to see thos efaces at the check-in counter.
You must have tried last time some years ago I guess.
Media players like mplayer,xine or vlc are well capable of playing files.
I never use windows and only rely on those apps and they always work for me.
It's just not better because it runs those formats to everyone.
I never use the formats that you mention, besides DVD,VCD and avi and I can tell you that xine beats mplayer at playing DVD.
Anyways, xine also runs these formats, so your point of "Rules them all" seems not really true.
In fact most of these formats are supported by ffmpeg which is used by both mplayer and xine.
VLC also is worth mentioning as it also has a windows port. Within the xine project there's also work done on a windows port, but status is not clear to me as it seems a little low priority.
Correct.
I have been using both mplayer and xine for a few years now but hardly use mplayer.
I guess that's mainly a matter of choice though.
For those not knowing xine : http://xine.sf.net
Some work on a win32 port has been done also, but I'm not sure of the status. To most developers this has very low priority as not many use windows I think. The xine developers usually welcome any help, so if there are volunteers go ahead !
That means that they have done developments based on Linux over the past few years but not put it into market yet. Perhaps now they think it's mature enough to do this to replace their existing products.
I would considder this is to be quite a big step and it's quite remarkable that so many companies share this idea. It takes quite an effort to get so many big companies in line and therefore may be part of some long term strategy.
Most of these companies are making consumer electronics and their core business is selling devices, not software. :-)
Software has always been a cost factor that they are trying to reduce. If that succeeds with the help from the open source community I would be surpriced if these companies didn't provide at least some parts as open source although it may be not in the interest of the company.
Perhaps when providing open source would bring these companies some benefit (not only in form of money but also product support from the open source community) these companies would be willing to provide sources.
Also open source is a little strange in this case as you're looking at software development for hardware that is in development. The open source community can only access the hardware when it's already on the market so it doesn't make much sense to provide cvs access to sources in development stage for example although this could be an interesting development
They never did create a copy protection.
:-)
It is nothing more than a playing protection as it only encrypts data.
It's your choice not to buy the DVD and wait for the special edition. In the meantime you can grab a copy from the net untill the final version has arrived
I do agree that as a customer you feel really bad when three months later after you bought a DVD, a special edition appears. This does discourage to buy a DVD at first edition.
you're in some kind of trouble now.
This number was patented I believe.
true, but just in case you "copy" a DVD, it doesn't matter much wether you leave the copy encrypted as well. You can still decrypt it when playing the disc.
Because I don't agree to the EULA.
If this patent is not about size, than probably every computer infringes this patent.
Even though you can debate about wether this patent should have been granted, I think the law made a mistake here.
oh man, you gotta let us know how the sushi worked out !!!
Ah, I'd love to see the whole net getting /.d for a whole week. I guess that would be the most relaxing week of the past few years.
Well, I guess paranoid americans can think of any stupid reason to satisfy their needs.....
It's the personell department, the people who hire you who care about degree.
The colleges you're working with care about your knowledge and less about your degree (if it help, it helps but not more than that).
I guess in the end someone who's good at his/her job will always find his/her way to an interesting, well paying job.
now, why would .exe not be allowed ?
The only reason for that is becasue Microsoft did a bad job in protecting their platform.
As a developer I like distributing the exe to my users. Now I have to to zip them to get through these stupid 'security' measures.
Well, lets be clear : this is no measure at all.
When an author doesn't like his work to be copied, his work is protected by the copyright law.
When an author wants his work to be copied and even extended by others he will use GPL in order to not be limited by the copyright law.
If GPL can't exist because of the copyright law, that means the copyright law limits the author in publishing his work.
Do you really think the copyright law should limit an author's freedom of choice ?
It's going to be a nice learning experience for you to get kicked around by some IBM lawyers.
If MS doesn't open the source, they can say whatever they like. It's up to the users to believe or not believe them as proof doesn't exist.
A crash can be caused because MS's update causes existing things not to be API compatible any more or MS's documentation is not up-to-date causing the third party not to be able to write good software.
Both would be MS to blame even though DrWatson (whatever) tells the third party software isn't good.