? I think their UIs have been fantastic. (They had a reputation for being addicting; they must have done something right.) Simple enough for an aging executive to use, yet with enough shortcuts and extras to keep the power-users satisfied. The suite of gestures and the overall experience on the PlayBook is both highly intuitive, powerful, and innovative.
As for network issues, I don't buy it. The recent outage was the worst in the companies history, and it lasted less than three days (less that a day for most places affected users.). Even then, most users were not affected in any way. Additionally, RIM didn't drop a single message, all was delivered. (Their up-time is fantastic; the electricity in your house is actually more likely to go out that bb services. The same goes for your ISP. If something is out, chances are it's not your bb.)
The meme's "bad ui" and "poor infrastructure" have never been true. Of course, both of those memes are pretty new (I'd put them around 2009 and late 2011 respectively). Still, once a meme's like these gets started, it's hard to stop.
When did webpages start averaging nearly a megabyte? That's insane! Something has gone horribly wrong!
I have an article from 2010 which claims 320kb -- and I thought that was a bit much. Did we really make a jump that large in just a few years? Has the web become that inefficient?
Voice recognition isn't really as do-able on the device
I really don't buy this. I had a reasonable voice recognition program on my 66mhz IBM Aptiva running Windows 3.1 (8mb of ram, it was awesome at the time.) It required training, but that didn't take more than 20 or 30 minutes, iirc.
The only reason I can see to run voice recognition online instead of off is to avoid the training phase. I'm really surprised that we don't see more offline voice recognition software; even older handsets should be more than capable!
The looking for information isn't enough. The combination of that and the expression of intent in a letter is.
The seeking of information shouldn't enter into it at all! Neither should the possession or even the further distribution of that information. That's the very basis of freedom of expression!
I encourage you to read the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (217 A III) , and the related 2011 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (A/HRC/17/27).
Further, the supposed "expression of intent" in this case clearly wasn't. Merely saying that you're psychologically and financially prepared for holy war, should you be called is hardly what I'd call intent to commit a crime! As I asserted earlier, this attitude among religious people isn't uncommon.
If I made a post on a Christian message board asking if people were ready to go to war to defend their faith should they be called, should everyone who replied in the affirmative be arrested?
So the summary is a bit misleading - it wasn't just the bomb making recipes. It was that, and the letter, and information on killing techniques, and anti-interrogation techniques, and price lists for arms, and information about survival stuff.
It's still just information. It's terrifying to think that merely being in possession of the wrong combination of information could be considered a crime.
As for the list you've provided, I imagine that there are a number of survivalists with shelves full of information about all of those topics -- and a collection of equipment to go along with it! That doesn't make them a criminal.
Are you being purposefully contrary? I hope so. I find it difficult to believe that you're just a fan of tyranny.
By the time you've collected hard o find information and declared in a letter to someone you're prepared for it, you should be assumed to be well beyond the temptation phase.
You know as well as I do that information isn't exactly hard to come by these days. A quick google search will turn up countless bomb-making pages complete with step-by-step instructions.
As for the letter, this makes people uncomfortable, but only because it's a follower of some *other* religion that's prepared for war. Ask the average right-wing Christian church-goer in the US if they're prepared to go to war to defend their faith and you'll be met with an indignant "of course" (how dare you question their commitment!).
If you actually believe that justice was done, I challenge you to reflect on your reasoning and tell me if you genuinely believe the evidence is sufficient to believe that there was a possibility of real harm. I suspect that you'll find that you only feel that the detective and the judge have done right by society because the "criminal" in question was Muslim.
Again, the claim was that xcode has always been free. This is, as I and many others have already demonstrated, a false claim. Xcode has not always been free.
Why is this such a contentious issue? How much of your identity is dependent on xcode having always been free? I'm sorry that I've caused you and a few others here so much emotional distress, but facts are facts.
It is a general purpose ebook authoring program. That was the point.
Oh, and the "highly specialized output" is just ePub (possibly with a few proprietary bits to break some compatibility with other tools.) I don't see how this is different than a program like PowerPoint, another general purpose tool.
How on earth could this program be considered anything but general purpose? I honestly can't understand how you came to this bizarre conclusion.
Yes, it did. You could download one of many apps and have email just like every other tablet. You could optionally tether it to a blackberry and get proper corporate email (unlike every other tablet, which couldn't even hope to do that). Bridge offered you better security anyway. If an employee loses a tablet, all your data is safe -- unlike every other tablet.
Sorry, you're judging email on the PlayBook by a totally different standard than you are other tablets. The PlayBook, from DAY ONE, could do email just as wel as every other tablet on the market. It could also do email better, thanks to Bridge.
the GPL is viral by force. When you get something GPL, the output WILL be GPL. It's required.
That's not even a little bit true.
I can write a book using any number of GPL licensed programs and use the work however I like, sell it, give it away, or release it into the public domain. I can compile a program using gcc and release my program under whatever license I feel appropriate.
Apple's form of viral only works by choice (people buying the products, using the authoring tools).
Even if what you said about GPL licensed tools was true (which it quite clearly is not!) wouldn't the same thing apply to those tools? Is RMS standing behind you with a gun, forcing you to use gcc?
when they do go off into proprietary land, they don't take the "embrace extend extinguish" approach we all grew to hate when Microsoft was doing it. E.g., in this case, they seem to have made a proprietary eBook format which only they support, and it is derived in some ways from open technologies like HTML5, BUT... they're calling it their own thing, not pretending it's compatible with an open standard in any way at all, AND they still support the main open standard format used for ebooks (ePub).
I seem to remember an early version of Microsoft Word that would happily open WordPerfect 6 documents. They were playing nice, just like Apple. Sure, in that case they seem to have made their own proprietary format, but they called it their own thing, not pretending it's compatible with a defacto standard like WPD in any way at all, AND they still supported the defacto standard used for word processing (WPD)
they don't take the "embrace extend extinguish" approach we all grew to hate when Microsoft was doing it.
They've only Embraced ePub and added their own proprietary Extensions. Surely, they want this open format to succeed.
You want your education to be based on older inferior technology, just to spite Apple? Insane.
What? iBooks are just ePub files. They're far from superior to anything we have already -- they ARE what we have already, though without the free and open standards part.
While electronic textbooks are a bit insane to begin with (and in many ways inferior to printed books), why make that worse by locking yourself to a single vendor for hardware, software, and the books? Who in their right mind would want that?
This has nothing to do with spite. It's just common sense.
No and no. Nowhere is Apple describing it as general purpose document creation application, or anything that could be construed to mean it's general purpose.
LOL, and when you walk into a head-shop, nowhere will they describe how their products can be used to smoke pot or anything that could be construed to mean their products are intended for that purpose.
Just because Apple doesn't say it's a general purpose application doesn't magically stop it from being a general purpose application.
Would Microsoft Word stop being a general purpose tool if Microsoft renamed it "Thesis+" and said it was just for writing that one kind of document? Of course not!
No. It has the wrong file extension and the wrong mime-type to be seen as epub by any other app.
You can't be serious. "It's not an epub! The file extention is totally wrong!"
It's okay to *not* defend Apple here. Embrace and Extend isn't exactly the nicest tactic. Rest assured, they will survive without your valiant defense here on Slashdot.
XCode is perfectly free to download, and always has been.
Nonsense!
This is from the Wikipedia entry for Xcode. It's the best I'm willing to do this late in the evening.
Apple released the final code for Xcode 4.0 on March 9, 2011. The software was made available for free to all registered members of the $99 per year Mac Developer program and the $99 per year iOS Developer program. It was also sold for $4.99 to non-members on the Mac App Store (no longer available). As of July 20, 2011 (the day of Mac OS X Lion's release), Xcode 4.1 was made available for free to all users on Mac OS X Lion on the Mac App Store. On August 29, 2011, Xcode 4.1 was made available for Mac OS X Snow Leopard for members of the paid Mac or iOS developer programs. On October 12, 2011, Xcode 4.2 was released concurrently with the release of iOS 5.0, it included many more and improved features like storyboarding and automatic correction.
Slashdot Mirror
? I think their UIs have been fantastic. (They had a reputation for being addicting; they must have done something right.) Simple enough for an aging executive to use, yet with enough shortcuts and extras to keep the power-users satisfied. The suite of gestures and the overall experience on the PlayBook is both highly intuitive, powerful, and innovative.
As for network issues, I don't buy it. The recent outage was the worst in the companies history, and it lasted less than three days (less that a day for most places affected users.). Even then, most users were not affected in any way. Additionally, RIM didn't drop a single message, all was delivered. (Their up-time is fantastic; the electricity in your house is actually more likely to go out that bb services. The same goes for your ISP. If something is out, chances are it's not your bb.)
The meme's "bad ui" and "poor infrastructure" have never been true. Of course, both of those memes are pretty new (I'd put them around 2009 and late 2011 respectively). Still, once a meme's like these gets started, it's hard to stop.
When did webpages start averaging nearly a megabyte? That's insane! Something has gone horribly wrong!
I have an article from 2010 which claims 320kb -- and I thought that was a bit much. Did we really make a jump that large in just a few years? Has the web become that inefficient?
We need to reverse this trend.
Voice recognition isn't really as do-able on the device
I really don't buy this. I had a reasonable voice recognition program on my 66mhz IBM Aptiva running Windows 3.1 (8mb of ram, it was awesome at the time.) It required training, but that didn't take more than 20 or 30 minutes, iirc.
The only reason I can see to run voice recognition online instead of off is to avoid the training phase. I'm really surprised that we don't see more offline voice recognition software; even older handsets should be more than capable!
They've been first with a lot of clever technology. They're still leading the competition in a number of areas, both old and new.
The looking for information isn't enough. The combination of that and the expression of intent in a letter is.
The seeking of information shouldn't enter into it at all! Neither should the possession or even the further distribution of that information. That's the very basis of freedom of expression!
I encourage you to read the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (217 A III) , and the related 2011 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (A/HRC/17/27).
Further, the supposed "expression of intent" in this case clearly wasn't. Merely saying that you're psychologically and financially prepared for holy war, should you be called is hardly what I'd call intent to commit a crime! As I asserted earlier, this attitude among religious people isn't uncommon.
If I made a post on a Christian message board asking if people were ready to go to war to defend their faith should they be called, should everyone who replied in the affirmative be arrested?
The point, of course, is that he should have got zero years instead of two.
So the summary is a bit misleading - it wasn't just the bomb making recipes. It was that, and the letter, and information on killing techniques, and anti-interrogation techniques, and price lists for arms, and information about survival stuff.
It's still just information. It's terrifying to think that merely being in possession of the wrong combination of information could be considered a crime.
As for the list you've provided, I imagine that there are a number of survivalists with shelves full of information about all of those topics -- and a collection of equipment to go along with it! That doesn't make them a criminal.
Seriously?
Are you being purposefully contrary? I hope so. I find it difficult to believe that you're just a fan of tyranny.
By the time you've collected hard o find information and declared in a letter to someone you're prepared for it, you should be assumed to be well beyond the temptation phase.
You know as well as I do that information isn't exactly hard to come by these days. A quick google search will turn up countless bomb-making pages complete with step-by-step instructions.
As for the letter, this makes people uncomfortable, but only because it's a follower of some *other* religion that's prepared for war. Ask the average right-wing Christian church-goer in the US if they're prepared to go to war to defend their faith and you'll be met with an indignant "of course" (how dare you question their commitment!).
If you actually believe that justice was done, I challenge you to reflect on your reasoning and tell me if you genuinely believe the evidence is sufficient to believe that there was a possibility of real harm. I suspect that you'll find that you only feel that the detective and the judge have done right by society because the "criminal" in question was Muslim.
Google doesn't F'ing think for you dude!
It won't read for you either.
Again, the claim was that xcode has always been free. This is, as I and many others have already demonstrated, a false claim. Xcode has not always been free.
Why is this such a contentious issue? How much of your identity is dependent on xcode having always been free? I'm sorry that I've caused you and a few others here so much emotional distress, but facts are facts.
Sorry, what was I wrong about? As far as I can tell, I'm still in the right.
On tenses, yes, I use the present tense when it's appropriate. I've used the past tense when it was appropriate.
Would you have preferred that I had written everything in the past tense, even at the expense of readability? I think I'd have lost my mind!
I repeat XCode is free. The statement you made: "Cost of Xcode if you were running 10.6 instead of 10.7? $4.99" is wrong.
Actually, it's 100% correct. I emphasized a key word for you, hope that helps.
Why is this so important to you?
It is a general purpose ebook authoring program. That was the point.
Oh, and the "highly specialized output" is just ePub (possibly with a few proprietary bits to break some compatibility with other tools.) I don't see how this is different than a program like PowerPoint, another general purpose tool.
How on earth could this program be considered anything but general purpose? I honestly can't understand how you came to this bizarre conclusion.
I'm not confused by anything. The claim was that Xcode was always free. That claim is false.
Get over it.
Why quote wikipedia? It was handy.
You are wrong! (stop quoting Wikipedia and do your own research.
Sigh, do I really need to do a google search for you?
Xcode 4 available to all on Apple's Mac App Store for $4.99
Hacker News | Xcode now costs US$ 4.99
What Changes with XCode 4 Not Being Free Anymore?
Do you need more? I've got a ton of results.
No they don't. There are plenty of Mac developers that don't own a PC.
They make up an incredibly tiny portion of the market. Developers with access only to a Mac are a rounding error.
Cost of Xcode if you were running 10.6 instead of 10.7? $4.99
Yes, it did. You could download one of many apps and have email just like every other tablet. You could optionally tether it to a blackberry and get proper corporate email (unlike every other tablet, which couldn't even hope to do that). Bridge offered you better security anyway. If an employee loses a tablet, all your data is safe -- unlike every other tablet.
Sorry, you're judging email on the PlayBook by a totally different standard than you are other tablets. The PlayBook, from DAY ONE, could do email just as wel as every other tablet on the market. It could also do email better, thanks to Bridge.
You're spreading nonsense.
The Playbook has had email since day one. You're spreading total nonsense
Just think, Austin is the sanest part of Texas...
I actually used to have a five-digit user number before I fucked up my password recall and had to get something six times larger.
A thirty-digit user number?
Multiplication. How does it work?
the GPL is viral by force. When you get something GPL, the output WILL be GPL. It's required.
That's not even a little bit true.
I can write a book using any number of GPL licensed programs and use the work however I like, sell it, give it away, or release it into the public domain. I can compile a program using gcc and release my program under whatever license I feel appropriate.
Apple's form of viral only works by choice (people buying the products, using the authoring tools).
Even if what you said about GPL licensed tools was true (which it quite clearly is not!) wouldn't the same thing apply to those tools? Is RMS standing behind you with a gun, forcing you to use gcc?
when they do go off into proprietary land, they don't take the "embrace extend extinguish" approach we all grew to hate when Microsoft was doing it. E.g., in this case, they seem to have made a proprietary eBook format which only they support, and it is derived in some ways from open technologies like HTML5, BUT... they're calling it their own thing, not pretending it's compatible with an open standard in any way at all, AND they still support the main open standard format used for ebooks (ePub).
I seem to remember an early version of Microsoft Word that would happily open WordPerfect 6 documents. They were playing nice, just like Apple. Sure, in that case they seem to have made their own proprietary format, but they called it their own thing, not pretending it's compatible with a defacto standard like WPD in any way at all, AND they still supported the defacto standard used for word processing (WPD)
they don't take the "embrace extend extinguish" approach we all grew to hate when Microsoft was doing it.
They've only Embraced ePub and added their own proprietary Extensions. Surely, they want this open format to succeed.
The non-iBooks version will be missing the interactivity.
Why? Did they break HTML5 on every other competing platform?
You want your education to be based on older inferior technology, just to spite Apple? Insane.
What? iBooks are just ePub files. They're far from superior to anything we have already -- they ARE what we have already, though without the free and open standards part.
While electronic textbooks are a bit insane to begin with (and in many ways inferior to printed books), why make that worse by locking yourself to a single vendor for hardware, software, and the books? Who in their right mind would want that?
This has nothing to do with spite. It's just common sense.
No and no. Nowhere is Apple describing it as general purpose document creation application, or anything that could be construed to mean it's general purpose.
LOL, and when you walk into a head-shop, nowhere will they describe how their products can be used to smoke pot or anything that could be construed to mean their products are intended for that purpose.
Just because Apple doesn't say it's a general purpose application doesn't magically stop it from being a general purpose application.
Would Microsoft Word stop being a general purpose tool if Microsoft renamed it "Thesis+" and said it was just for writing that one kind of document? Of course not!
No. It has the wrong file extension and the wrong mime-type to be seen as epub by any other app.
You can't be serious. "It's not an epub! The file extention is totally wrong!"
It's okay to *not* defend Apple here. Embrace and Extend isn't exactly the nicest tactic. Rest assured, they will survive without your valiant defense here on Slashdot.
XCode is perfectly free to download, and always has been.
Nonsense!
This is from the Wikipedia entry for Xcode. It's the best I'm willing to do this late in the evening.
Apple released the final code for Xcode 4.0 on March 9, 2011. The software was made available for free to all registered members of the $99 per year Mac Developer program and the $99 per year iOS Developer program. It was also sold for $4.99 to non-members on the Mac App Store (no longer available). As of July 20, 2011 (the day of Mac OS X Lion's release), Xcode 4.1 was made available for free to all users on Mac OS X Lion on the Mac App Store. On August 29, 2011, Xcode 4.1 was made available for Mac OS X Snow Leopard for members of the paid Mac or iOS developer programs. On October 12, 2011, Xcode 4.2 was released concurrently with the release of iOS 5.0, it included many more and improved features like storyboarding and automatic correction.