> "[N]eedlessly running up legal costs" certainly does happen, and is certainly an abuse of the system,
And it applies here, too, but certainly it was Righthaven who started it, and therefore are the prime cause for needlessly running up costs. They can call of the law suit, but they cannot walk out on the bill. That's like me skipping desert and then not paying for dinner...
> ASLR and DEP, two features that Windows actually gets right (and does ASLR better than Linux, I might add.) If you turn it on for all applications and then whitelist the ones that fail then you can gain a pretty sharp increase in security.
While this is true, it does require the user to download development/experimental software, research by experiment which programs are compatible with it, and then edit the configuration accordingly. You cannot expect that from the average user or even the average administrator. So for all practical purposes, Windows (certainly once you install applications) resembles a sieve more than a bucket...
> Anyone agreeing emphatically with the sentiment and delivery of TFA... needs to think about EQ.
Absolutely - the problem is not the technology or the geek skills - it is communication. Once you communicate clearly, you can avoid most if not all of these issues.
> It's not impossible to remove an infection. It IS impossible to be sure you have removed ALL infections.
Which is exactly the problem. Some people want to do the job well, and there is no way of knowing whether you did or not.
And most people competent with computers have very little experience with malware infections, so they are indeed out of their comfort zone. I think it is perfectly fine to say so, maybe make a quick attempt at rescuing the situation (quick unfortunately means no full backup), and leave it at that.
> Samsung is only buying 2-3 million at a time. he who buys 5 times the parts you are is going to get a better price.
I think you are overestimating economies of scale. 10 parts are cheaper than 2, but once you are the millions, you are pretty much limited by the marginal production cost.
The real gains are on the know how side: design, OS, software, apps. Those costs are a lot easier to recover by selling 10 million than 2 million.
Most Archos tables use resistive touch screens. That is oldschool technology without multitouch, and you have a really press your fingers on it to get registered. It is not in the same league as the iPad, and I think it is way overpriced.
How does the social graph api show friend that I have on another network? I don't think it does...
And does it allow me to see my facebook friends on another network? Maybe, but I am sure there are strings attached.
Interoperability has to be the goal. Just like email works between different provides (you may not remember the time when some email systems were a walled garden, eventually linked by clumsy gateways...), so should social networks.
> 2) Facebook doesn't really actually care about providing an effective and reliable platform for developers.
That would explain my observation - which is that all facebook apps suck. Some may be marginally useful, but require way too much data access. Others are just plain silly or annoying.
I think once we have a half decent local app platform, maybe with a social or cloud interface, facebook apps are going to be history.
> Alternatively, all the pitiful "also ran" social networks like Tuenti, Hi5, Orkut, etc. could gang up on facebook by adopting some common shared data model.
And open social network, that would be nice. Use well defined protocols and interfaces, and you could see the same aggregated streams in facebook, in buzz or in orkut. Facebook is never going to join that, though:-).
> Until they get some solid dates attached to those flights, this kind of thing remains in the realm of wishful thinking. But I wish them all the best.
Indeed, there are three flaws with this offer:
- This is not a reservation, it is an investment. If the technology and the business works, you will be rewarded with a space flight (and the real investors will get real money.) - It does not fly to outer space, not even close. It just flies pretty high and you get to feel some 0g. Big deal. - 0g isn't nearly as much fun with your seat belt on.
So I hate to say it, but the budget option does not seem to deliver value for money.
> Noobs are OK for some stuff but there's no way for any school to train them for what everyone in the real world is looking for
I think people straight out of school are incredibly useful. They are up to date with latest technology, usually highly motivated and eager to learn (read: not set in their ways yet). But they need a bit of hand holding and explaining at times, after all they don't have the experience. And they may need a bit longer at times, because they don't have the routine yet. But as long as you take that into account, they can do some amazing stuff!
> If there's one thing the Mozilla org sucks at, it's.0 releases.
That's true. Firefox 1.0 was only good because it was finally there. 2.0 was a mitigated disaster. 3.0 wasn't half bad, to be honest. 4.0 is certainly long awaited, but I am sure it will underwhelm as usual.
> Considering that Firefox 4 was supposed to be released in November 2010
It was August 2010. And recently reaffirmed plans to release Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 in 2011. To an outsider like me that looks like an idiot is in charge (or a committee, which is effectively the same thing...).
> 1. CD's have not got appreciably cheaper despite manufacturing costs having become so.
Manufacturing costs have always been small. The CD itself used to cost a dollar or two, and now it is maybe 25c. Music recording has gotten slightly cheaper, but not by much.
> 2. Online stores that sell individual tracks have got more expensive (and the media companies enforce their region cartels to stop shopping around for tracks).
That seems to be mostly a function of the age of the online store. The established players have gotten more expensive, that's for sure. But you can still pocket a bargain.
> 3. CD's keep on getting remastered and the sound quality gets butchered because the record companies seem to think I like their idiotic loudness war [wikipedia.org]. I return CD's like this.
Yes, that is a terrible crime against music. Why the music industry wants to kill music is beyond me. This alone would be enough reason for the business to die.
> 6. I have more important things to spend my money on.
Bingo - the world has change, and we are used to "multimedia". Music can be a part of it, but it rarely runs the show.
> 8. If your "artists" need to strip to their g-strings in videos and concerts to sell stuff, you should have figured by now your business is totally screwed.
See above - the world is changing. People want the full multimedia experience:-)
> 9. Not one song I can recall from mid-1990's onwards can ever become a classic, they are just cr@p. Record companies have done this suicide without outside help.
I hate saying this, but there is some truth to it. We have preciously few artists who make good honest music. Maybe it takes more than one person now, maybe it takes a good writer, a good composer, and a good stage personality. But at least you should be honest about it.
> Nokia wasn't going to to play the crappy network game, and basically gave up on the north american carriers as worthless, incompetent, and not worth dealing with.
Well, they got two out of three there:-). But US customers still pay one of the highest phone bills in the world, and that is a market you cannot ignore.
And option two clearly takes longer than what they did. It would require to port Qt to Android first, and then port the whole thing to their upcoming phones. The one step strategy of using Windows phone is obviously better. The only alternative would be to ship Android 2.3 as it is, and that is hardly a unique selling point any more.
So as much as I hate the decision, I think it was management-logical. It may well be wrong, certainly if the history of Microsoft on the mobile market is any indication. But Nokia has not been great for years, so I am sure we can do without them. I read that ZTE wants to move into the premium market now...:-)
> No one with a brain would work for a company that dicks them around with "tests" like that.
I used to think this myself. But a lot of companies do it, and some of them quite purposefully. My response would be to get quite hostile in the interview, but that may not be the clever thing to do.
Instead you should ask yourself what would do to the company over the long run. The effect may be less than you think (a lot of people are very desperate to get a job!). Anyway, you should make a rational decision about it. It may be a good reason to decline the offer, but you should sleep over it.
> And Launchpad has devolved into a real cesspool. I still have open bugs from many releases ago that get a "Hello! There's a new Ubuntu out! Please see if your issue was fixed!" every 6 months. Triagers seem unfamiliar with basic terminology and will keep closing bugs until you go away, even if they demonstrate that they don't understand the reported issue.
I have to agree here. Ubuntu is a nice system, but the way they treat bug reports is terrible. Now bug reports are always tricky, with every system or company. You have to get past the first line of droids before anything happens, but you have to be nice enough towards the developers, too. Sometimes you are asked to jump through useless hoops. But at the end of the day bugs are usually looked at by somebody.
Not so at Ubuntu: you jump through all the useless hoops for nothing. At least most of the time. And they never get documented either.
> I have the distinct feeling that because Ubuntu is viewed as a distro 'for the masses'
It is: it works out of the box, does most useful things without installing loads of additional software, and it is nice to look at.
But that does not have to be a bad thing. I could run Debian, but what do I get apart from a big pain setting up everything? The smug smile on my face saying that I still have what it takes? Sorry, but I think I have matured past that stage.
Ubuntu is pragmatic. So is Windows, or Mac. They are all mainstream. You may not like it, but mainstream is where most people are, and it makes perfect sense.
Slashdot Mirror
> "[N]eedlessly running up legal costs" certainly does happen, and is certainly an abuse of the system,
And it applies here, too, but certainly it was Righthaven who started it, and therefore are the prime cause for needlessly running up costs. They can call of the law suit, but they cannot walk out on the bill. That's like me skipping desert and then not paying for dinner...
> ASLR and DEP, two features that Windows actually gets right (and does ASLR better than Linux, I might add.) If you turn it on for all applications and then whitelist the ones that fail then you can gain a pretty sharp increase in security.
While this is true, it does require the user to download development/experimental software, research by experiment which programs are compatible with it, and then edit the configuration accordingly. You cannot expect that from the average user or even the average administrator. So for all practical purposes, Windows (certainly once you install applications) resembles a sieve more than a bucket...
> Anyone agreeing emphatically with the sentiment and delivery of TFA... needs to think about EQ.
Absolutely - the problem is not the technology or the geek skills - it is communication. Once you communicate clearly, you can avoid most if not all of these issues.
Did you make a backup? :-)
> It's not impossible to remove an infection. It IS impossible to be sure you have removed ALL infections.
Which is exactly the problem. Some people want to do the job well, and there is no way of knowing whether you did or not.
And most people competent with computers have very little experience with malware infections, so they are indeed out of their comfort zone. I think it is perfectly fine to say so, maybe make a quick attempt at rescuing the situation (quick unfortunately means no full backup), and leave it at that.
"Can you look at my PC?"
"Sure, I have a few minutes to spare" ... "Hm, this is completely busted. Do you have a backup?"
"No"
"Well then there is not much I can do for you, sorry."
> Samsung is only buying 2-3 million at a time. he who buys 5 times the parts you are is going to get a better price.
I think you are overestimating economies of scale. 10 parts are cheaper than 2, but once you are the millions, you are pretty much limited by the marginal production cost.
The real gains are on the know how side: design, OS, software, apps. Those costs are a lot easier to recover by selling 10 million than 2 million.
Most Archos tables use resistive touch screens. That is oldschool technology without multitouch, and you have a really press your fingers on it to get registered. It is not in the same league as the iPad, and I think it is way overpriced.
> It's a good thing they are called "Human Rights", not "Adult Rights" then, isn't it?
Yeah - I was going to say they may not be adults, but they are certainly humans... well, usually that is.
Isn't it funny that Firefox has better Windows support than Internet Explorer 9? :-)
That being said, the upgrade to Windows 7 is certainly worth it, not just for the better browser.
> Shady ad companies for products on a shady portal.
You forgot "shady" in there :-).
How does the social graph api show friend that I have on another network? I don't think it does...
And does it allow me to see my facebook friends on another network? Maybe, but I am sure there are strings attached.
Interoperability has to be the goal. Just like email works between different provides (you may not remember the time when some email systems were a walled garden, eventually linked by clumsy gateways...), so should social networks.
> 2) Facebook doesn't really actually care about providing an effective and reliable platform for developers.
That would explain my observation - which is that all facebook apps suck. Some may be marginally useful, but require way too much data access. Others are just plain silly or annoying.
I think once we have a half decent local app platform, maybe with a social or cloud interface, facebook apps are going to be history.
> Alternatively, all the pitiful "also ran" social networks like Tuenti, Hi5, Orkut, etc. could gang up on facebook by adopting some common shared data model.
And open social network, that would be nice. Use well defined protocols and interfaces, and you could see the same aggregated streams in facebook, in buzz or in orkut. Facebook is never going to join that, though :-).
> Until they get some solid dates attached to those flights, this kind of thing remains in the realm of wishful thinking. But I wish them all the best.
Indeed, there are three flaws with this offer:
- This is not a reservation, it is an investment. If the technology and the business works, you will be rewarded with a space flight (and the real investors will get real money.)
- It does not fly to outer space, not even close. It just flies pretty high and you get to feel some 0g. Big deal.
- 0g isn't nearly as much fun with your seat belt on.
So I hate to say it, but the budget option does not seem to deliver value for money.
> Noobs are OK for some stuff but there's no way for any school to train them for what everyone in the real world is looking for
I think people straight out of school are incredibly useful. They are up to date with latest technology, usually highly motivated and eager to learn (read: not set in their ways yet). But they need a bit of hand holding and explaining at times, after all they don't have the experience. And they may need a bit longer at times, because they don't have the routine yet. But as long as you take that into account, they can do some amazing stuff!
> If there's one thing the Mozilla org sucks at, it's .0 releases.
That's true. Firefox 1.0 was only good because it was finally there. 2.0 was a mitigated disaster. 3.0 wasn't half bad, to be honest. 4.0 is certainly long awaited, but I am sure it will underwhelm as usual.
> Considering that Firefox 4 was supposed to be released in November 2010
It was August 2010. And recently reaffirmed plans to release Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 in 2011. To an outsider like me that looks like an idiot is in charge (or a committee, which is effectively the same thing...).
> 1. CD's have not got appreciably cheaper despite manufacturing costs having become so.
Manufacturing costs have always been small. The CD itself used to cost a dollar or two, and now it is maybe 25c. Music recording has gotten slightly cheaper, but not by much.
> 2. Online stores that sell individual tracks have got more expensive (and the media companies enforce their region cartels to stop shopping around for tracks).
That seems to be mostly a function of the age of the online store. The established players have gotten more expensive, that's for sure. But you can still pocket a bargain.
> 3. CD's keep on getting remastered and the sound quality gets butchered because the record companies seem to think I like their idiotic loudness war [wikipedia.org]. I return CD's like this.
Yes, that is a terrible crime against music. Why the music industry wants to kill music is beyond me. This alone would be enough reason for the business to die.
> 6. I have more important things to spend my money on.
Bingo - the world has change, and we are used to "multimedia". Music can be a part of it, but it rarely runs the show.
> 8. If your "artists" need to strip to their g-strings in videos and concerts to sell stuff, you should have figured by now your business is totally screwed.
See above - the world is changing. People want the full multimedia experience :-)
> 9. Not one song I can recall from mid-1990's onwards can ever become a classic, they are just cr@p. Record companies have done this suicide without outside help.
I hate saying this, but there is some truth to it. We have preciously few artists who make good honest music. Maybe it takes more than one person now, maybe it takes a good writer, a good composer, and a good stage personality. But at least you should be honest about it.
They fixed one memory leak. I wouldn't be so sure it is the only one, and certainly not the last one. But it is a step in the right direction.
> Nokia wasn't going to to play the crappy network game, and basically gave up on the north american carriers as worthless, incompetent, and not worth dealing with.
Well, they got two out of three there :-). But US customers still pay one of the highest phone bills in the world, and that is a market you cannot ignore.
And option two clearly takes longer than what they did. It would require to port Qt to Android first, and then port the whole thing to their upcoming phones. The one step strategy of using Windows phone is obviously better. The only alternative would be to ship Android 2.3 as it is, and that is hardly a unique selling point any more.
So as much as I hate the decision, I think it was management-logical. It may well be wrong, certainly if the history of Microsoft on the mobile market is any indication. But Nokia has not been great for years, so I am sure we can do without them. I read that ZTE wants to move into the premium market now... :-)
> No one with a brain would work for a company that dicks them around with "tests" like that.
I used to think this myself. But a lot of companies do it, and some of them quite purposefully. My response would be to get quite hostile in the interview, but that may not be the clever thing to do.
Instead you should ask yourself what would do to the company over the long run. The effect may be less than you think (a lot of people are very desperate to get a job!). Anyway, you should make a rational decision about it. It may be a good reason to decline the offer, but you should sleep over it.
> And Launchpad has devolved into a real cesspool. I still have open bugs from many releases ago that get a "Hello! There's a new Ubuntu out! Please see if your issue was fixed!" every 6 months. Triagers seem unfamiliar with basic terminology and will keep closing bugs until you go away, even if they demonstrate that they don't understand the reported issue.
I have to agree here. Ubuntu is a nice system, but the way they treat bug reports is terrible. Now bug reports are always tricky, with every system or company. You have to get past the first line of droids before anything happens, but you have to be nice enough towards the developers, too. Sometimes you are asked to jump through useless hoops. But at the end of the day bugs are usually looked at by somebody.
Not so at Ubuntu: you jump through all the useless hoops for nothing. At least most of the time. And they never get documented either.
> I have the distinct feeling that because Ubuntu is viewed as a distro 'for the masses'
It is: it works out of the box, does most useful things without installing loads of additional software, and it is nice to look at.
But that does not have to be a bad thing. I could run Debian, but what do I get apart from a big pain setting up everything? The smug smile on my face saying that I still have what it takes? Sorry, but I think I have matured past that stage.
Ubuntu is pragmatic. So is Windows, or Mac. They are all mainstream. You may not like it, but mainstream is where most people are, and it makes perfect sense.