They're just making the desktop launch on demand, which is what they need to do to run on tablets. Your comment about news feeds and advertisements doesn't seem to actually be based on anything.
You're making a big deal out of something trivial and, in my opinion, dumping a bunch of links for karma. You've always been able to change the shell in Windows. Some computer vendors even shipped their own shells for Windows 3.1, replacing Program Manager.
Windows 8 simply doesn't load the resources for the desktop process if you don't use it, which is logical since this is intended to run on tablets.
Nerds want nerd playgrounds and try to convince themselves that it's what everyone else wants too. Look at the summary: "Smartphone vendors seem to have gotten the message: users want to control the software on their phones."
Uh, they do? Majority just wants to install Angry Birds and a few other things and never think about software again. Android has marketshare because it's a free iOS clone for carriers to slap onto cheap, weak devices that barely qualify as smartphones, not because users are enticed by "openness." The big, beefy Android smartphones are a niche, and the iPhone is still the #1 selling smartphone, so there's just a lot of misleading going on when it comes to what people want.
His comment is about organizations, such as Linux distros, using open source code and not contributing back their changes to take advantage of the collective maintenance of open source code. That's why he uses the phrase "upstream project" in the summary and calls it a good business decision in TFA.
The context of the statement was (intentionally) left out of the headline and summary. This isn't about end-users. Zemlin is talking about the financial incentive for contributing back to projects whose code a business or other organization is using. In other words, if your business tries to do things on its own, such as maintaining its own kernel, it's making an idiotic business decision because it's not benefiting from collective maintenance and improvement.
Here is the relevant section in the article:
Zemlin, who spoke with Network World editors at the recent LinuxCon event, used to preach that contributing back was important on moral grounds, as the "right thing to do." But now he says, "It doesn't matter. I don't care if anyone contributes back." Sooner or later, he believes contributing will become an obvious business decision. It's "not the right thing to do because of some moral issue or because we say you should do it. It's because you are an idiot if you don't. You're an idiot because the whole reason you're using open source is to collectively share in development and collectively maintain the software. Let me tell you, maintaining your own version of Linux ain't cheap, and it ain't easy," he says.
He points out that Red Hat is one of the largest contributors to the kernel and also one of the most successful Linux distros. "So if some aren't giving back as much as others today, I just think it will naturally happen over time. It always is in their business interest to do so," Zemlin says.
Trying to portray PirateBay as a legitimate software listing or server offload service is hilarious. It's a piracy site--its main function is as a piracy site, and the majority of its users are using it to pirate so they don't have to pay the creators of the material for their work. That's the "whole point of going to TPB," not browsing the popular downloads section to look for legitimate, unknown software to download (that would be a nice way to get your computer infected).
On climate change: "It's an exact science! Everyone agrees on the conclusions, and anyone who disagrees is just a 'denier.'" On wrong hurricane predictions: "Geez, people assume we can predict everything. Weather prediction ain't an exact science."
The post above was brought to you by a bitter, stubborn neckbeard who works on computer systems for sewage treatment plants. Seriously. Look at his bio. He even abbreviates Unix as 'nix for no reason and refers to PCs as "boxes."
It's absolutely a better interface, but because it's from Microsoft, you're going to see a lot of anecdotes and trolling about how horrible it is, many of them from users on desktops that look like this. Tech nerds tend to not handle change well.
My favorite part about this new ribbon is that Copy and Paste are prominently placed in the upper left. Copy-and-paste is something non-technical users have trouble with for some reason, and telling them to right-click is a recipe for confusion, so I'm happy to see the commands so visible there.
Can you explain why everyone should worry about Facebook and Microsoft yet not worry about Google? Why shouldn't they worry about Google? Why are you defending a multi-billion dollar global megacorp and telling people to only be concerned about its competitors?
I find posts like yours amusing. Google has received near-constant stream of positive coverage on Slashdot and other sites for years, yet a few recent articles pointing out legitimate criticism is suddenly a "concerted effort to spew paranoia." You call other people nuts, but you should think about how your own post is coming off. There has been Google of criticism for as long as they've existed (I remember when Google's tracking cookie was a big deal), so it's not even a new thing, but because of so many high-profile projects going on at once, Google is getting more coverage, good and bad.
Hell, there are folks right here ranting that Google's evil because they don't give away their core software - only millions of lines of other very useful stuff, but hey, evil is evil. And that kind of rant is nuts.
Nobody has said they're evil for not open sourcing the search engine. The point of bringing it up is to get people to realize that Google takes advantage of the positive feelings associated with "openness" by professing to be advocates of the philosophy, yet when it comes to their core business, they don't actually do what they claim to believe in. In other words, they're not a benevolent group of engineers trying to make the world better. They're a data-mining megacorp with a good PR department. There's nothing wrong with that on its own, but Google has gotten a pass on a lot of things from tech communities because of its use of Linux and open source and its competition with Microsoft and, now, Apple.
Again, I just find it quite funny that some people are so used to positive coverage of Google as the norm that a recent string of, to be quite honest, pretty tame criticism simply must be a conspiracy. I guess Slashdot editors are in on it too since they're accepting the submissions. Oh, and world governments who are investigating Google. Hell, maybe even Google's in on it since they recently paid $500 million to the feds.
Or maybe they're not perfect and are as worthy of receiving criticism as anyone else.
Microsoft had to keep making Office for Mac, in addition to purchasing non-voting Apple shares, as part of a settlement over stolen Quicktime code. Why they continue to make Office for Mac today is perhaps because it's profitable for the division that makes or that it helps stave off future antitrust problems.
Slashdot Mirror
They're just making the desktop launch on demand, which is what they need to do to run on tablets. Your comment about news feeds and advertisements doesn't seem to actually be based on anything.
You're making a big deal out of something trivial and, in my opinion, dumping a bunch of links for karma. You've always been able to change the shell in Windows. Some computer vendors even shipped their own shells for Windows 3.1, replacing Program Manager.
Windows 8 simply doesn't load the resources for the desktop process if you don't use it, which is logical since this is intended to run on tablets.
Some of us aren't superstitious about numbers, thanks.
Nerds want nerd playgrounds and try to convince themselves that it's what everyone else wants too. Look at the summary: "Smartphone vendors seem to have gotten the message: users want to control the software on their phones."
Uh, they do? Majority just wants to install Angry Birds and a few other things and never think about software again. Android has marketshare because it's a free iOS clone for carriers to slap onto cheap, weak devices that barely qualify as smartphones, not because users are enticed by "openness." The big, beefy Android smartphones are a niche, and the iPhone is still the #1 selling smartphone, so there's just a lot of misleading going on when it comes to what people want.
Assange has been clear in the past that no secret is safe. He has previously released personal information.
Yeah, nobody uses those!
His comment is about organizations, such as Linux distros, using open source code and not contributing back their changes to take advantage of the collective maintenance of open source code. That's why he uses the phrase "upstream project" in the summary and calls it a good business decision in TFA.
The context of the statement was (intentionally) left out of the headline and summary. This isn't about end-users. Zemlin is talking about the financial incentive for contributing back to projects whose code a business or other organization is using. In other words, if your business tries to do things on its own, such as maintaining its own kernel, it's making an idiotic business decision because it's not benefiting from collective maintenance and improvement.
Here is the relevant section in the article:
Looks like someone forgot to check the little box marked "Post Anonymously."
Trying to portray PirateBay as a legitimate software listing or server offload service is hilarious. It's a piracy site--its main function is as a piracy site, and the majority of its users are using it to pirate so they don't have to pay the creators of the material for their work. That's the "whole point of going to TPB," not browsing the popular downloads section to look for legitimate, unknown software to download (that would be a nice way to get your computer infected).
My favorite part is describing PirateBay as "possibly the best-known BitTorrent tracking service in existence." It's the best-known piracy site.
On climate change: "It's an exact science! Everyone agrees on the conclusions, and anyone who disagrees is just a 'denier.'"
On wrong hurricane predictions: "Geez, people assume we can predict everything. Weather prediction ain't an exact science."
Pulling percentages out of thin air in order to sound scientific isn't a convincing argument on either side.
The post above was brought to you by a bitter, stubborn neckbeard who works on computer systems for sewage treatment plants. Seriously. Look at his bio. He even abbreviates Unix as 'nix for no reason and refers to PCs as "boxes."
It's absolutely a better interface, but because it's from Microsoft, you're going to see a lot of anecdotes and trolling about how horrible it is, many of them from users on desktops that look like this. Tech nerds tend to not handle change well.
My favorite part about this new ribbon is that Copy and Paste are prominently placed in the upper left. Copy-and-paste is something non-technical users have trouble with for some reason, and telling them to right-click is a recipe for confusion, so I'm happy to see the commands so visible there.
On Slashdot, "FUD" is the term you use when you can't refute the argument and simply want to dismiss it.
Can you explain why everyone should worry about Facebook and Microsoft yet not worry about Google? Why shouldn't they worry about Google? Why are you defending a multi-billion dollar global megacorp and telling people to only be concerned about its competitors?
Signed,
Anonymous Coward
Altavasta, Infoseek, and a few others were pretty good, actually.
Infoseek was pretty good, actually. The big thing about Google was more about its minimalist, ad-free search results.
Criticism of Google, dammit.
I find posts like yours amusing. Google has received near-constant stream of positive coverage on Slashdot and other sites for years, yet a few recent articles pointing out legitimate criticism is suddenly a "concerted effort to spew paranoia." You call other people nuts, but you should think about how your own post is coming off. There has been Google of criticism for as long as they've existed (I remember when Google's tracking cookie was a big deal), so it's not even a new thing, but because of so many high-profile projects going on at once, Google is getting more coverage, good and bad.
Nobody has said they're evil for not open sourcing the search engine. The point of bringing it up is to get people to realize that Google takes advantage of the positive feelings associated with "openness" by professing to be advocates of the philosophy, yet when it comes to their core business, they don't actually do what they claim to believe in. In other words, they're not a benevolent group of engineers trying to make the world better. They're a data-mining megacorp with a good PR department. There's nothing wrong with that on its own, but Google has gotten a pass on a lot of things from tech communities because of its use of Linux and open source and its competition with Microsoft and, now, Apple.
Again, I just find it quite funny that some people are so used to positive coverage of Google as the norm that a recent string of, to be quite honest, pretty tame criticism simply must be a conspiracy. I guess Slashdot editors are in on it too since they're accepting the submissions. Oh, and world governments who are investigating Google. Hell, maybe even Google's in on it since they recently paid $500 million to the feds.
Or maybe they're not perfect and are as worthy of receiving criticism as anyone else.
Microsoft had to keep making Office for Mac, in addition to purchasing non-voting Apple shares, as part of a settlement over stolen Quicktime code. Why they continue to make Office for Mac today is perhaps because it's profitable for the division that makes or that it helps stave off future antitrust problems.
"I choose to believe the words of the global megacorp over the personal experiences of users."
Uh, Slashdot is almost always pro-Google and has been that way for over a decade.