I think you got that backwards. If it were up to me, manual transmission would be the only transmission available because it promotes paying attention to driving instead of doing other stuff. Automatic transmission cause so many problems, least of which is enabling someone to "multitask" in the car when they should be driving.
No, they didn't. The death of SL is all speculation. MS has never officially said they're dropping it, although everybody thinks they will given their new pro-HTML5 direction.
It's similar to other product images in any other industry. It's costly to take a different photo every time just to show a different color or pattern. You see it all the time in tech and cars. Hover over the red car and it's just the same car painted red on the computer.
Is Ericsson preventing Sony from making decent phones? Is Ericsson the reason why SE phones are so shitty? Looking at Sony's other offerings, I suspect Sony has itself to blame for SE losing out to Nokia, Samsung and Apple. Sony has a long and inglorious history of making proprietary crap. Consumers don't want your slow buggy custom Android crap. HTC, Samsung and Motorola have all gotten a chance to become Google partners via Nexus and Xoom, except for Sony.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was actually talking about the proliferation of.NET contracts in the govt. After moving to DC from Seattle, I was surprised to see how prevalent.NET was in govt job listings. The problem with the.NET community is that it has too many overpaid and unqualified MCSE paper engineers, and for the govt to base its IT infrastructure on such tech is a big waste of money. The govt would do better to go open source.
I agree, although Google is nowhere near as bad as Microsoft where everything must contain at least four words (the longer the better) and include "Windows" branding in it somehow.
I have a BS in biochemistry and the gp is correct. If I didn't already have work experience doing web development, I would've been fucked when I graduated with my biochemistry degree. A PhD in biochemistry only leads to a job at a university--and universities aren't hiring. Most PhDs are woefully underqualified for private sector jobs that require a PhD because they lack real world work experience. All your l33t lab skillz can be done by computers or interns, so all you have left is a piece of paper that says you're smart.
As someone with a girlfriend who has a degree in one of those "professor making" programs, I couldn't agree more. It's a ponzi scheme. Professors are eager to recruit more students to their program because more students equals more funding.
Slashdot likes to paint this as an organisation in love with everything MS. I'm more pragmatic and see it an organisation maintaining the status quo. Everyone already knows how to use Office, documents are already produced in Office formats, etc. It would cost them a non-trivial amount of time and money (read: a lot) to move to an open source system just to satisfy some religious debate about open v closed source products. Even if they convert to ODF internally, they still have to go through the hassle of converting everything to Office formats anyway when it comes time to share files externally. The Office formats are the lingua franca of information exchange. Everyone has to support that. Even MS has to keep supporting.doc along side.docx.
Of course, the other side to that argument is that it is relative small short term cost for huge long term savings. Office is expensive and it costs a lot to maintain the status quo.
Ok, I understand the whole "living document" reason, but as developers, we're gonna need at the very least a snapshot of HTML from time to time. We need milestones/pseudo-versions. Otherwise, we're going back to the wild west days of IE4 and Netscape where the internet was a broken mess of incompatible websites each targeting a specific browser, instead of a common version of HTML.
Thanks for nothing, W3C. I guess HTML "5" become too much of a hot topic.
What geeks tend to forget is that there are more consumers than content creators. There will always be a need for a traditional PC (aka: work), but for most people, tablets will be their main (non-work) computer in the future. The netbook trend exploited the fact that all regular people really want to do is get on the internet, check email/Facebook and maybe edit some Word docs.
The same thing occurred in gaming. Everyone likes to play video games, even girls, but not everyone is a hardcore gamer playing FPS and WOW. The casual gaming market didn't come out of thin air. It was always there, but the industry was too busy selling to l33t gamers and frat boys.
You must have never used a tablet for any serious amount of time...
If the bezel on the iPad was any smaller, it would border on useless due to inadvertent touches. The wide bezels gives you an area to actually grab/hold the tablet. Otherwise, you're touching the touch screen and all hell breaks loose. It's not always feasible to cradle or rest the tablet on a surface. (E.g., reading in bed)
While a narrower bezel would look "cooler", it has no basis in reality. Some concepts remain concepts for a reason.
The outcry is not in the financials or loss of revenue. Whether it's one logo at $1000, or 10 logos at $100 each, there's tons of money to be made in the design industry if you're talented. Young talented up-and-comers with less experience will always be cheaper to employ. There will always be overpaid hacks with an over-abundant feeling of self worth. The same is true in any industry.
That's not the issue. The problem designers have is that crowd-sourcing devalues their trade/skill. Design isn't easy. They went to school just like any other profession, but this is not about entitlement. It's about recognition. Design isn't just making something "pretty". It gives the impression that anyone can spend 30 minutes in Photoshop or Illustrator and come up with a good logo. Nevermind the fact that a logo is only one *small* part of a complete identity system. I've seen this crowdsourcing services. They're crap. You get what you pay for, but that's not me being bitter. (I'd be doing the same thing if I was them)
Any kid can pirate a copy of Photoshop and call themselves a designer, just like any kid can pirate a copy of Visual Studio and call themselves a developer. What makes these amateurs different from the professionals? What's the value in paying a programmer $90,000+ a year for the same service?
It has already happened! That's what Apple's iAd and AdMob's new ad platforms aim to do: replace annoying Flash banner ads with annoying HTML5 banner ads.
Exactly. People who champion HTML 5 video don't really understand the difference between FLV and h.264... FLV is just a container and can support h.264. Facebook has had h.264 video since the iPhone 3G came out.
I know it's a difficult concept for socially awkward nerds to understand, but people don't like know-it-all jerks. In the real world, where things aren't black and white or one and zero, it doesn't matter what the law says. It's one of those unspoken rules of social engagement that Terry Childs unfortunately never learned that lesson. It's why charismatic people are able to bend the rules.
What are you talking about? Paparazzi sell info/photos to the newspapers for money all the time. It's not weird for someone to do the same thing with tech news. If it was me that found this phone, Gizmodo would be one of the first people I contacted and yes, I'd be asking for money. Gizmodo also offered money for an iPad prototype before it was announced.
The bar wouldn't have a chance to hold onto it if someone else found it first.
Or did he just read some reviews about how difficult it was?
The game isn't difficult as so much as it is sadistic. No pausing at all, not even when checking inventory. On screen elements that totally block 80% of your screen during battle—effectively making you a sitting duck until it goes away. Remember, no pausing during all this. WTF?! No real story or purpose, so only the masochists will continue to play through if only to prove to themselves that they can beat it. The lack of plot elements mean you really have to rely on the PSN feature of the game whereby players on PSN leave you clues about what to do next. You can kill any NPC, including ones critical to the game such as the girl that levels up your character. It's just a poorly designed game. The whole time I was playing, I was like, "Seriously? WTF?"
However, despite all of its flaws, all the reviewers are right about the game having a strong sense of achievement. There were a lot of comparisons made to the old cartridge days when the only way to beat a game was all the way through in one go. Or where you had to collect more 1-ups to prevent death. Demon's Souls is kind of like that. No save points and if you die, you start back at the beginning of the current level and lose all your unspent money/souls.
Dying in modern games isn't as big of a deal as it used to be. You often start off right where you died with all your items and full stats. A lot of games nowadays have auto-regen health so you just wait it out and you're good as new. Demon's Souls makes player really adverse to death.
And lastly, casual doesn't mean easy or unfulfilling. A game doesn't have to be "difficult" to be challenging. For example, my favourite game is and always will be Tetris. Easy to learn, but challenging to get really good at. I can spend hours trying play the perfect game, get the highest score or see how fast I can play, etc.
I wonder how much of this is due to lack of app discoverability? The Android Marketplace website is pretty much useless, and who wants to use their phone for shopping? I know the techies might love that you can download Android apps off the web and install them on memory cards, but the rest of society doesn't think this way. They want an Android version of iTunes to sync their phone with music, video, photos and apps. That's why the App Store for the iPhone works. That's also why Napster was so popular, despite the availability of free MP3s elsewhere like IRC and newsgroups.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you got that backwards. If it were up to me, manual transmission would be the only transmission available because it promotes paying attention to driving instead of doing other stuff. Automatic transmission cause so many problems, least of which is enabling someone to "multitask" in the car when they should be driving.
Three years? More like 8 years. Don't forget which president started TSA.
No, they didn't. The death of SL is all speculation. MS has never officially said they're dropping it, although everybody thinks they will given their new pro-HTML5 direction.
It's similar to other product images in any other industry. It's costly to take a different photo every time just to show a different color or pattern. You see it all the time in tech and cars. Hover over the red car and it's just the same car painted red on the computer.
Don't forgot Sonic Hedgehog (SHH), an important protein used in development.
Speak for yourself. My congressman votes my way. The problem is that I don't vote for the other 434 representatives...
Is Ericsson preventing Sony from making decent phones? Is Ericsson the reason why SE phones are so shitty? Looking at Sony's other offerings, I suspect Sony has itself to blame for SE losing out to Nokia, Samsung and Apple. Sony has a long and inglorious history of making proprietary crap. Consumers don't want your slow buggy custom Android crap. HTC, Samsung and Motorola have all gotten a chance to become Google partners via Nexus and Xoom, except for Sony.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was actually talking about the proliferation of .NET contracts in the govt. After moving to DC from Seattle, I was surprised to see how prevalent .NET was in govt job listings. The problem with the .NET community is that it has too many overpaid and unqualified MCSE paper engineers, and for the govt to base its IT infrastructure on such tech is a big waste of money. The govt would do better to go open source.
On Macs, iCloud will make sense because it's baked in. On PCs running Windows, anything Dell does will feel like bloatware. Dell is not Apple.
I agree, although Google is nowhere near as bad as Microsoft where everything must contain at least four words (the longer the better) and include "Windows" branding in it somehow.
I have a BS in biochemistry and the gp is correct. If I didn't already have work experience doing web development, I would've been fucked when I graduated with my biochemistry degree. A PhD in biochemistry only leads to a job at a university--and universities aren't hiring. Most PhDs are woefully underqualified for private sector jobs that require a PhD because they lack real world work experience. All your l33t lab skillz can be done by computers or interns, so all you have left is a piece of paper that says you're smart.
As someone with a girlfriend who has a degree in one of those "professor making" programs, I couldn't agree more. It's a ponzi scheme. Professors are eager to recruit more students to their program because more students equals more funding.
I wish I had points to vote this up.
Slashdot likes to paint this as an organisation in love with everything MS. I'm more pragmatic and see it an organisation maintaining the status quo. Everyone already knows how to use Office, documents are already produced in Office formats, etc. It would cost them a non-trivial amount of time and money (read: a lot) to move to an open source system just to satisfy some religious debate about open v closed source products. Even if they convert to ODF internally, they still have to go through the hassle of converting everything to Office formats anyway when it comes time to share files externally. The Office formats are the lingua franca of information exchange. Everyone has to support that. Even MS has to keep supporting .doc along side .docx.
Of course, the other side to that argument is that it is relative small short term cost for huge long term savings. Office is expensive and it costs a lot to maintain the status quo.
Ok, I understand the whole "living document" reason, but as developers, we're gonna need at the very least a snapshot of HTML from time to time. We need milestones/pseudo-versions. Otherwise, we're going back to the wild west days of IE4 and Netscape where the internet was a broken mess of incompatible websites each targeting a specific browser, instead of a common version of HTML.
Thanks for nothing, W3C. I guess HTML "5" become too much of a hot topic.
What geeks tend to forget is that there are more consumers than content creators. There will always be a need for a traditional PC (aka: work), but for most people, tablets will be their main (non-work) computer in the future. The netbook trend exploited the fact that all regular people really want to do is get on the internet, check email/Facebook and maybe edit some Word docs.
The same thing occurred in gaming. Everyone likes to play video games, even girls, but not everyone is a hardcore gamer playing FPS and WOW. The casual gaming market didn't come out of thin air. It was always there, but the industry was too busy selling to l33t gamers and frat boys.
You must have never used a tablet for any serious amount of time...
If the bezel on the iPad was any smaller, it would border on useless due to inadvertent touches. The wide bezels gives you an area to actually grab/hold the tablet. Otherwise, you're touching the touch screen and all hell breaks loose. It's not always feasible to cradle or rest the tablet on a surface. (E.g., reading in bed)
While a narrower bezel would look "cooler", it has no basis in reality. Some concepts remain concepts for a reason.
The outcry is not in the financials or loss of revenue. Whether it's one logo at $1000, or 10 logos at $100 each, there's tons of money to be made in the design industry if you're talented. Young talented up-and-comers with less experience will always be cheaper to employ. There will always be overpaid hacks with an over-abundant feeling of self worth. The same is true in any industry.
That's not the issue. The problem designers have is that crowd-sourcing devalues their trade/skill. Design isn't easy. They went to school just like any other profession, but this is not about entitlement. It's about recognition. Design isn't just making something "pretty". It gives the impression that anyone can spend 30 minutes in Photoshop or Illustrator and come up with a good logo. Nevermind the fact that a logo is only one *small* part of a complete identity system. I've seen this crowdsourcing services. They're crap. You get what you pay for, but that's not me being bitter. (I'd be doing the same thing if I was them)
Any kid can pirate a copy of Photoshop and call themselves a designer, just like any kid can pirate a copy of Visual Studio and call themselves a developer. What makes these amateurs different from the professionals? What's the value in paying a programmer $90,000+ a year for the same service?
It has already happened! That's what Apple's iAd and AdMob's new ad platforms aim to do: replace annoying Flash banner ads with annoying HTML5 banner ads.
Exactly. People who champion HTML 5 video don't really understand the difference between FLV and h.264... FLV is just a container and can support h.264. Facebook has had h.264 video since the iPhone 3G came out.
I know it's a difficult concept for socially awkward nerds to understand, but people don't like know-it-all jerks. In the real world, where things aren't black and white or one and zero, it doesn't matter what the law says. It's one of those unspoken rules of social engagement that Terry Childs unfortunately never learned that lesson. It's why charismatic people are able to bend the rules.
That doesn't mean I agree with the verdict.
What are you talking about? Paparazzi sell info/photos to the newspapers for money all the time. It's not weird for someone to do the same thing with tech news. If it was me that found this phone, Gizmodo would be one of the first people I contacted and yes, I'd be asking for money. Gizmodo also offered money for an iPad prototype before it was announced.
The bar wouldn't have a chance to hold onto it if someone else found it first.
Why do people insist on trolling as AC? Afraid to tarnish your karma because you know how stupid your comment is?
Or did he just read some reviews about how difficult it was?
The game isn't difficult as so much as it is sadistic. No pausing at all, not even when checking inventory. On screen elements that totally block 80% of your screen during battle—effectively making you a sitting duck until it goes away. Remember, no pausing during all this. WTF?! No real story or purpose, so only the masochists will continue to play through if only to prove to themselves that they can beat it. The lack of plot elements mean you really have to rely on the PSN feature of the game whereby players on PSN leave you clues about what to do next. You can kill any NPC, including ones critical to the game such as the girl that levels up your character. It's just a poorly designed game. The whole time I was playing, I was like, "Seriously? WTF?"
However, despite all of its flaws, all the reviewers are right about the game having a strong sense of achievement. There were a lot of comparisons made to the old cartridge days when the only way to beat a game was all the way through in one go. Or where you had to collect more 1-ups to prevent death. Demon's Souls is kind of like that. No save points and if you die, you start back at the beginning of the current level and lose all your unspent money/souls.
Dying in modern games isn't as big of a deal as it used to be. You often start off right where you died with all your items and full stats. A lot of games nowadays have auto-regen health so you just wait it out and you're good as new. Demon's Souls makes player really adverse to death.
And lastly, casual doesn't mean easy or unfulfilling. A game doesn't have to be "difficult" to be challenging. For example, my favourite game is and always will be Tetris. Easy to learn, but challenging to get really good at. I can spend hours trying play the perfect game, get the highest score or see how fast I can play, etc.
Verizon hates choice, that's why they passed up on the original iPhone. For them, it's their network, their phone.
I wonder how much of this is due to lack of app discoverability? The Android Marketplace website is pretty much useless, and who wants to use their phone for shopping? I know the techies might love that you can download Android apps off the web and install them on memory cards, but the rest of society doesn't think this way. They want an Android version of iTunes to sync their phone with music, video, photos and apps. That's why the App Store for the iPhone works. That's also why Napster was so popular, despite the availability of free MP3s elsewhere like IRC and newsgroups.