Objective-C++ allows you to mix C++ and Objective-C, and standard C code will always work since Objective-C is C with a Smalltalk messaging runtime implemented on it. The iPhone APIs are mostly Objective-C with C reserved for the lower-level technologies.
Developers will use what their customers use, and their customers use iPhones and iPads, which don't support Flash. Many major sites have already announced their HTML5 support, so I don't see why this guy is claiming developers are going to remain loyal when they're already moving over to HTML5.
Once again, Slashdotters rush to the defense of their beloved company, Google, to defend it from actions that they would crucify other companies for, like Microsoft. As Google continues to be proselytized as an open source company, their primary business--search and advertising--is as closed source as Windows. And as Facebook gets criticized for its privacy missteps, all Google has to do when it collects data about websites people are visiting on their wifi networks is say, "Oops! We weren't using it for anything, promise," and Slashdotters will genuflect and forgive.
I'll use Google without being logged in or allowing them to store a cookie. I won't use Gmail, which indexes all my email. That guy whose personal opinion you're dismissing is CEO Eric Schmidt.
Again, I don't know what Microsoft has to do with this or why they justify Google's lack of concern for user privacy. It's bizarre that you keep bringing them up, as if they justify Google's actions.
Name one action Google has taken as a company that demonstrates I should trust them less than the available alternatives for major search engines.
And once again, you completely ignore the Google Buzz controversy and Google Australia's admission of cooperation with the U.S. government.
It's bizarre how you keep going back to Microsoft and Yahoo, as if I ever expressed any support for them. I never even mentioned them.
This debate is about you claiming Google is some bastion of privacy, even when the CEO is flat-out telling you not to expect any privacy and that they're beholden to the Patriot Act. Privacy International gave Google a ranking of "Hostile to Privacy" in 2007.
Notice that you completely ignored the Google Buzz controversy I mentioned. Notice that you completely ignored that Eric Schmidt said they are compelled to share data with the government and the subsequent confirmation from Google Australia. You ignore all the indexing Google does of your private data solely for their advertising platform.
I don't know if you have a vested interest in Google (many employees astroturf around here), but it's obvious you don't care at all about privacy, despite your claims to the contrary. As before, I expect you to ignore Schmidt's statements and Google's recent privacy blunders.
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines - including Google - do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."
Your'e overthinking it it. The obvious reason is that quality developers and artists expect to be paid for their work. There's no incentive for someone with a lot of talent to slave away on some boring but necessary part of an open source project for no reward when Blizzard will happily pay you to model those Stormwind streetlamps or program the boring bag interface code. Even Linux development is funded by large corporations whose business depends on Linux. Once again, capitalism reigns.
You don't know what you're talking about. Google has given the U.S. government access to Gmail.
It's interesting that you don't offer any response to their CEO's statement on privacy. Here's Schmidt's full statement:
If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines - including Google - do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities.
Note that it directly refutes your claim that Google fights hard to avoid giving data to the government. The CEO himself is telling you that your data could be given to the government.
Keep on defending Google if you want. They're more than happy to index the private data of loyal customers like you. They've already shown that privacy is not a real concern for them.
Did you not read my post? Eric Schmidt, one of the CEOs, doesn't believe in privacy of information and feels that if you want privacy, you've done something wrong that you're trying to hide.
You don't know who's handing what to whom. Why do you think they index your data? It's for their targeted ad platform. Which, like their search engine, is as closed source as Windows.
Google has a history of fighting to protect your private data.
What the hell? No, they don't. They have a history of fighting to index all of your private data for their advertising platform, and CEO Eric Schmidt said people who want privacy have something to hide.
HTML5 will always lag behind native applications in performance and features, and MS and Apple will be sure this is the case in their implementations, so the web platform will be no real threat to Windows, Mac OS X, iPhone/iPad OS, Windows Mobile, etc.
Apple can't make sure its HTML 5 implementation "lags behind native applications in performance and features" because WebKit is open source. Also, for a company you claim is threatened by the web, they sure show it in a strange way with frameworks like SproutCore.
IOW, both Apple and Microsoft are big supporters of HTML5 over Flash because they know that you'll never get native app performance and features using HTML5, so HTML5 is no threat to their platforms. OTOH, Adobe has no such vested interest in Microsoft's or Apple's OS platforms, so it is distinctly possible that you might end up with native performance and features with Flash.
Let me get this straight. Somehow, Flash is going to give native performance and features despite being cross-platform and Adobe having no vested interest in Microsoft's or Apple's platforms? Yet HTML5, an open standard, is going to lag behind? This is completely backwards.
Flash sucks on the Mac. It crashes, it spins up the fans, and it drains battery life. Meanwhile, watching HTML5 video on YouTube is fast and quiet. Blame Adobe for making Flash suck so hard that Apple abandoned support of it.
Are you a Flash developer? I only ask because every time I see someone actually arguing in favor of Flash over HTML5, they turn out to be Flash developers who are just looking out for themselves. Your post is pretty silly.
Exactly, and the software/iPhone is not only proprietary, but actually restricted too. It's even worse than just proprietary software.
Don't be ridiculous. Steve Jobs is talking about why Flash isn't installed for their browser, and it's because they prefer the open standards of the web. Safari supports HTML5.
You do realize that the GPL is a copyright license, right? Copyright law is fine. Slashdot is mostly full of pirates who have invented justifications so they don't feel guilty. The moment it's mentioned that people are ripping others off, someone immediately bashes the RIAA, copyright law, "greedy" corporations, etc. Someone else is always portrayed as the bad guy so that the pirate no longer feels like one.
33 cases of porn surfing in an organization with over 3000 employees. There are people surfing porn right now in every company and government organization in the world.
What happened is that news editors have decided on a narrative, and narrative is this--people in charge of the economy surfed porn while the economy collapsed! The economy part was artificially attached to the situation by the editors. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other, but the angle, or bias, of the story is that these employees were uncaring and somehow contributed to the collapse. However, by not outright saying that, the writers of the stories can deflect criticism by claiming they never actually stated that conclusion.
Stupidest non-story I've seen in a while, and it's getting exposure everywhere. In 2010, we still have entertainment-based news that is more about ratings and page views than accuracy or information. You'd think the internet would have made us more informed and aware of ridiculous assertions, but it's only made stupid gossip and artificial narratives even more powerful than before.
What kind of "marketing ploy" is this supposed to be? If Apple wanted to leak specs, they'd do one of their usual controlled leaks by phone to a newspaper and tell them the specs. What point is there in leaking an ugly engineering prototype, complete with prototype case for easier fabrication (e.g., the hard edges on the sides)?
This isn't a marketing gimmick. Seeing people post this reactionary response to Slashdot and get instant +5s really shows how lame and predictable this readership has gotten over the years.
So, I subscribe to Slashdot's RSS feed, and here are the articles:
Hidden Cores On Phenom CPUs Can Be Unlocked Study Finds Fast-Food Logos Make You Impatient Gizmodo Blows Whistle On 4G iPhone Loser What Will the Browser Look LIke In Five Years? History Repeats Itself, Mac & the iPad BitTorrent CEO On Net Neutrality Amazon Fights For Privacy of Customer Records The Nuts and Bolts of PlayStation 3D Quantum Cyrptography Now Fast Enough For Video An Early Look At Next-Gen Shooter Bodycount IE8's XSS Filter Exposes Sites To XSS Attacks Source Code To Google Authentication System Stolen What Is the Future of Firewalls? Adding Some Spice To *nix Shell Scripts SEC Proposes Wall Street Transparency Via Python Roger Ebert On Why Video Games Can Never Be Art Fatal Flaw Discovered In Invisibility Cloaks Network Solutions Sites Hacked Again EU Piracy Estimates -- Just How Inaccurate? Why Computer Science Students Cheat US House Passes Ban On Caller ID Spoofing Palm WebOS Hacked Via SMS Messages George Washington Racks Up 220 Years of Late Fees At Library Why Aren't SSD Prices Going Down? Cows On Treadmills Produce Clean Power For Farms This Is Apple's Next iPhone
A whopping three Apple articles out of the last 26, and two are from a developing story about a lost iPhone prototype. You people claiming Slashdot is full of Apple articles are full of shit. If you don't like Apple stories, use that thing on the right side of the window called a scrollbar and scroll past them.
Oh my god, would people stop posting the retarded claim that Apple purposely did this. When Apple does controlled leaks, they do it by phone, not even email. There was even an article describing what they do.
This isn't a marketing gimmick. This is real. This engineer may even lose his job.
Slashdot Mirror
Objective-C++ allows you to mix C++ and Objective-C, and standard C code will always work since Objective-C is C with a Smalltalk messaging runtime implemented on it. The iPhone APIs are mostly Objective-C with C reserved for the lower-level technologies.
Developers will use what their customers use, and their customers use iPhones and iPads, which don't support Flash. Many major sites have already announced their HTML5 support, so I don't see why this guy is claiming developers are going to remain loyal when they're already moving over to HTML5.
So sarcastic, it makes my teeth itch.
Yes, it does.
The "does not mean what you think it means" meme is ridiculously tired at this point, by the way.
Shouldn't the biggest internet company in the world know how to configure its network analyzer?
Once again, Slashdotters rush to the defense of their beloved company, Google, to defend it from actions that they would crucify other companies for, like Microsoft. As Google continues to be proselytized as an open source company, their primary business--search and advertising--is as closed source as Windows. And as Facebook gets criticized for its privacy missteps, all Google has to do when it collects data about websites people are visiting on their wifi networks is say, "Oops! We weren't using it for anything, promise," and Slashdotters will genuflect and forgive.
I'll use Google without being logged in or allowing them to store a cookie. I won't use Gmail, which indexes all my email. That guy whose personal opinion you're dismissing is CEO Eric Schmidt.
Again, I don't know what Microsoft has to do with this or why they justify Google's lack of concern for user privacy. It's bizarre that you keep bringing them up, as if they justify Google's actions.
And once again, you completely ignore the Google Buzz controversy and Google Australia's admission of cooperation with the U.S. government.
I didn't take anything "out of context." Eric Schmidt doesn't believe you should care about your privacy.
Just like the other guy, you for some reason mention Microsoft and Yahoo, as if I ever supported them either.
It's bizarre how you keep going back to Microsoft and Yahoo, as if I ever expressed any support for them. I never even mentioned them.
This debate is about you claiming Google is some bastion of privacy, even when the CEO is flat-out telling you not to expect any privacy and that they're beholden to the Patriot Act. Privacy International gave Google a ranking of "Hostile to Privacy" in 2007.
Notice that you completely ignored the Google Buzz controversy I mentioned. Notice that you completely ignored that Eric Schmidt said they are compelled to share data with the government and the subsequent confirmation from Google Australia. You ignore all the indexing Google does of your private data solely for their advertising platform.
I don't know if you have a vested interest in Google (many employees astroturf around here), but it's obvious you don't care at all about privacy, despite your claims to the contrary. As before, I expect you to ignore Schmidt's statements and Google's recent privacy blunders.
I'll quote Eric Schmidt again since you have yet to address it:
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines - including Google - do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."
Your'e overthinking it it. The obvious reason is that quality developers and artists expect to be paid for their work. There's no incentive for someone with a lot of talent to slave away on some boring but necessary part of an open source project for no reward when Blizzard will happily pay you to model those Stormwind streetlamps or program the boring bag interface code. Even Linux development is funded by large corporations whose business depends on Linux. Once again, capitalism reigns.
Not for long.
Yet it's getting replaced by Clang, which is superior in practically every single way.
You don't know what you're talking about. Google has given the U.S. government access to Gmail.
It's interesting that you don't offer any response to their CEO's statement on privacy. Here's Schmidt's full statement:
Note that it directly refutes your claim that Google fights hard to avoid giving data to the government. The CEO himself is telling you that your data could be given to the government.
Keep on defending Google if you want. They're more than happy to index the private data of loyal customers like you. They've already shown that privacy is not a real concern for them.
Did you not read my post? Eric Schmidt, one of the CEOs, doesn't believe in privacy of information and feels that if you want privacy, you've done something wrong that you're trying to hide.
You don't know who's handing what to whom. Why do you think they index your data? It's for their targeted ad platform. Which, like their search engine, is as closed source as Windows.
What the hell? No, they don't. They have a history of fighting to index all of your private data for their advertising platform, and CEO Eric Schmidt said people who want privacy have something to hide.
I feel like the RTS genre has moved beyond the heavy micro of Starcraft thanks to games like Company of Heroes. Korea will love the game, though.
That's odd, since there have been articles of accounts by people who met him that he was actually a really nice guy to them.
Apple can't make sure its HTML 5 implementation "lags behind native applications in performance and features" because WebKit is open source. Also, for a company you claim is threatened by the web, they sure show it in a strange way with frameworks like SproutCore.
Let me get this straight. Somehow, Flash is going to give native performance and features despite being cross-platform and Adobe having no vested interest in Microsoft's or Apple's platforms? Yet HTML5, an open standard, is going to lag behind? This is completely backwards.
Flash sucks on the Mac. It crashes, it spins up the fans, and it drains battery life. Meanwhile, watching HTML5 video on YouTube is fast and quiet. Blame Adobe for making Flash suck so hard that Apple abandoned support of it.
Are you a Flash developer? I only ask because every time I see someone actually arguing in favor of Flash over HTML5, they turn out to be Flash developers who are just looking out for themselves. Your post is pretty silly.
Don't be ridiculous. Steve Jobs is talking about why Flash isn't installed for their browser, and it's because they prefer the open standards of the web. Safari supports HTML5.
You do realize that the GPL is a copyright license, right? Copyright law is fine. Slashdot is mostly full of pirates who have invented justifications so they don't feel guilty. The moment it's mentioned that people are ripping others off, someone immediately bashes the RIAA, copyright law, "greedy" corporations, etc. Someone else is always portrayed as the bad guy so that the pirate no longer feels like one.
33 cases of porn surfing in an organization with over 3000 employees. There are people surfing porn right now in every company and government organization in the world.
What happened is that news editors have decided on a narrative, and narrative is this--people in charge of the economy surfed porn while the economy collapsed! The economy part was artificially attached to the situation by the editors. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other, but the angle, or bias, of the story is that these employees were uncaring and somehow contributed to the collapse. However, by not outright saying that, the writers of the stories can deflect criticism by claiming they never actually stated that conclusion.
Stupidest non-story I've seen in a while, and it's getting exposure everywhere. In 2010, we still have entertainment-based news that is more about ratings and page views than accuracy or information. You'd think the internet would have made us more informed and aware of ridiculous assertions, but it's only made stupid gossip and artificial narratives even more powerful than before.
You've convinced me. 33 cases of people surfing porn in an organization with over 3000 employees is what collapsed the economy. Instant +5!
What kind of "marketing ploy" is this supposed to be? If Apple wanted to leak specs, they'd do one of their usual controlled leaks by phone to a newspaper and tell them the specs. What point is there in leaking an ugly engineering prototype, complete with prototype case for easier fabrication (e.g., the hard edges on the sides)?
This isn't a marketing gimmick. Seeing people post this reactionary response to Slashdot and get instant +5s really shows how lame and predictable this readership has gotten over the years.
So, I subscribe to Slashdot's RSS feed, and here are the articles:
A whopping three Apple articles out of the last 26, and two are from a developing story about a lost iPhone prototype. You people claiming Slashdot is full of Apple articles are full of shit. If you don't like Apple stories, use that thing on the right side of the window called a scrollbar and scroll past them.
P.S. Nice sockpuppeting in your own thread, AC.
Oh my god, would people stop posting the retarded claim that Apple purposely did this. When Apple does controlled leaks, they do it by phone, not even email. There was even an article describing what they do.
This isn't a marketing gimmick. This is real. This engineer may even lose his job.