This is not equivalent. find does a deep search, while globbing */*.jpg will yield all files ending in *.jpg in the first level subdirectories (and only those files and directories whose names don't begin with a dot, except when an obscure shell option is enabled).
Ahem. My apologies, couldn't resist local stereotyping:-) I live in suburban Helsinki near a train station, and not being particularly car-crazy, I consider the car a more burdensome way to commute: you can't read and the roads downtown are often congested. The occasional drunks in transport are mostly harmless. On the other hand, my workplace is across the street from the nearest metro station.
Moreover, that SIP UA (telepathy-rakia based on sofia-sip) does not work with ekiga.net from behind a NAT, due to broken ways in which the ekiga.net server(s) implement NAT traversal.
You're smoking something or you have never written any respectable amount of C++.
I have, that's how one learns to avoid it.
C++ just provides you the mechanism, it's up to you whether you abuse it or leverage it.
Yeah, right. The only useful things it provides are the member syntax and virtual methods. The rest is broken and misguided: encapsulation fail, ill-designed multiple inheritance, ludicrously complicated resolution of overloaded methods playing funny games with other language features, RTTI designed to be either slow or broken, lack of any dynamic introspection. It's very easy to misuse, and requires a lot of discipline to get right.
You should have just eaten it and use one language like Objective C that would have allowed for migration of existing code since it's still C but with a proper dynamic messaging system. I've made this point for years but the nits in GNOME community just don't fucking get it while investing tons of work into a deadend technology like C# for these purposes
The GNOME developers don't use C# as far as I'm concerned, unless you mean the Mono crowd which stands a little on the side.
Stupid question: if you're going to rewrite, how about rewriting in proven language rather than yet another experimental flight of fancy?
And what proven language would that be, honey? Surely not C++, for which hardly two compilers have been made to produce mutually compatible binaries, and which is damn hard to make bindings for any other programming environments out there?
Vala code produces APIs usable from C and anything else that can link to C code, and automatically generated introspection makes it easily usable from dynamic runtimes.
Some negative comments about Gnome are not at all baseless, for example the one I am about to make. Gnome is based on an outmoded hack of an attempt to build an OOP based GUI without the benefit of an object-oriented compiler. Instead is uses a collection of nasty hacks and conventions, which which I am deeply familiar because I once was deluded enough to think also that C is just as capable of writing object object oriented code as C++. It isn't.
It's capable of implementing a better object-oriented system than what C++ provides, without getting distracted to the broken ways the base language does what it claims to be OOP features. And as a previous response says, you don't even have to deal with the GObject boilerplate these days if you don't have a particular need to descend into C.
What you end up with is an unholy unmaintainable mess. Full of messy casts, and full of bugs, as Gnome has always been.
Funny, I haven't had bugs related to improper GObject usage for quite a while. You did not really get past writing your first bits of code using GObject and learning from this, did you?
And unable to express reasonable defaults for things in any powerful or consistent way, the result being that Gnome tends to have lousy defaults for just about everything.
Any specific examples, with clarification on what you consider to be "reasonable defaults expressed in a powerful and consistent way"?
you have a recipe for the nasty mess that Gnome has been from the get-go, and will be until somebody finally does something about it.
Like what, a corporate executive steps in and cancels the open community project?
You sound ridiculously like somebody who has an axe to grind and wants some retribution, but has no real ways to exact it. Sorry that GNOME developers don't meet your high demands with their work, provided for free or on someone else's money than yours.
Nokia have sold the commercial licensing & support unit. Licensing and customizing Qt for proprietary users/vendors was not exactly their core business anyway.
As part of Mr. Lee's good neighbor policy, all Rat Things are programmed never to break the sound barrier in a populated area. But Fido's in too much of a hurry to worry about the good neighbor policy.
Jack the sound barrier. Bring the noise.
And oh, yeah... it is also a very distinct conflict of interest when SEC stops him from selling all his MS Stock and buying NOK instead. It's like the rules tilted this particular crusade to a windmill.
This particular conspiracy theory can be put to rest now.
Re:In that case, MS has failed beyond belief
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 1
Why can't Nokia have say 500 people working on MeeGo in say MeeGo unit?
It can, and it does.
Why can't Nokia have a MeeGo line of phones? One release every year, support 2-3 generations at a time. See where the platform goes. It has been in the making since Nokia 770. FFS give it a chance in main stream. Keep the open source community that you've collected happy!
That's pretty much the plan as far as I can tell (which is, the end of this year:-)).
This idea fails at the fact that Symbian is actually a far superior embedded OS than anything MS has to offer, and that, uh, they've been making phones that do other things than "just make calls" for the past decade or so.
You are probably confusing it with S40, which is alive and well.
Re:In that case, MS has failed beyond belief
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 1
I can imagine this done in two ways:
Rip a hole in the Silverlight runtime and provide a parallel set of APIs that is Qt.
Compile Qt for CLR with some hack work, resulting in suboptimal performance.
None of these options strike me as wise, given the intent to push something on the market quickly, and to use the nascent ecosystem rather than fragmenting it.
Re:In that case, MS has failed beyond belief
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 1
Meego is just amazing how long they've been talking about it, and not delivered.
For about a year? Before, it was Maemo.
How long does it take to polish up a UI?
Before that, they could have polished up Maemo as a great (and differentiated) smartphone platform.
Just one big blunder after another, even having huge advantages (first mover, most phones sold, free maps, free music).
Yeah, it takes very long when their heads are up their asses. But in the end what matters is the result, not the time spent working on it.
Re:In that case, MS has failed beyond belief
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 1
1) Hence the idea to use QT as a common platform between Meego and Symbian, to buy more time without alienating Symbian developers (who wants to develop for a dead-end platform?)
Sorry, the idea was a dud. Not only it did not save Symbian, it also caused drag on Qt. Also, all the diffusion of effort inside Nokia resulted in MeeGo only barely getting mature enough now.
2) It's mature, solid, and still one of the best platforms for low-end mobiles which is going to still be dominant in the largest growing markets
Sorry, low-end mobiles dominant in the developing markets tend to run S40. Which is even more mature and solid, and it didn't have any of the high profile public failures like N97.
3) Odd, Samsung have added their nice twist to Android with their interface. Yet Microsoft ban Nokia from porting QT to their platform.
Where did you read that? Do you even understand what porting Qt (a C++ toolkit) to Windows Phone 7 (a managed application environment) would imply technology-wise?
Re:In that case, MS has failed beyond belief
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 1
The only Nokia 'service' I've read about that might survive is their mapping app. Nokia's a hardware company. They don't compete in services, never really did, and don't need to.
Thanks for your opinion, but people leading Nokia may see things a little differently. Ovi services combined managed to get a not entirely unimpressive number of users, despite their faults. They seem to need some creative will to work on Nokia's inherent strengths, and not try to play catch up with all the trains that have departed. No point in creating another Flickr or trying to win social networking users away from Facebook, indeed; even Google could not pull that off.
And who's to say that if Windows phones really take off, that won't be another race to the bottom? Unless Nokia gets an exclusive on Windows phone (and there are rumors to that effect), then Android is the better choice - if only because it's more successful upfront. Going Android now would not prevent taking up W7 later if that looks like a profitable choice.
So you suggest getting into an ongoing competition with diminishing margins and suffering another transition later if it turns out to be unwise, versus possible effects of the same nature in the future with WP7. I see you just wanted Nokia to take up Android, no matter what the rational considerations say. Sorry, but it looks like HTC and Samsung are going to provide the best hardware you can get for Android.
Umm, see, Google is a services company. For them the whole reason of Android's existence is to push their services with it. This is why Android is free. If Nokia starts putting their own services on it, they may run into, erm, lack of forthcoming support from the platform. Sure Google does no evil and so is above plain dirty tricks, but there are more ways to make it difficult.
Microsoft probably cares less which services Nokia will use, at least in the areas of overlap, as long as it sells more "boxes" and brings back software royalties. They may even benefit from Nokia Maps. For other things, I won't be weeping to see Nokia Music store go, for example. Did that really take off?
Have people really forgotten WHY Symbian came into existence?
Because it made sense for the resource-constrained "smartphones" of the day, whereas Windows CE with its scaled down desktop didn't so much?
Do they not know WHY no other phone makers WANTS to be a MS only shop?
Sorry to be the first one informing you, but Nokia is not going to be an MS only shop, either.
Re:In that case, MS has failed beyond belief
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Nokia could have done other things: (1)Push Meego. (2)Push Symbian. (3)Adopt Android. (4)Develop their own OS.
(1) Tried, it's not ready enough yet. (2) That platform is a zombie walking around asking for more brains... I mean, R&D budget millions to gobble. (3) Join the race to the bottom, compete in services with Google who happen to control your platform. Feel the fragmentation. (4) What? Create another R&D sinkhole, while MeeGo is still around? Just what Nokia needs now.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not equivalent. find does a deep search, while globbing */*.jpg will yield all files ending in *.jpg in the first level subdirectories (and only those files and directories whose names don't begin with a dot, except when an obscure shell option is enabled).
Bieber.
The GP means the BBC, which is sometimes called "the Beeb" in the UK. Or... do I get a "whoosh!"? :)
No I'm not, infact I live in Espoo...
Perkeleen jupit.
Ahem. My apologies, couldn't resist local stereotyping :-) I live in suburban Helsinki near a train station, and not being particularly car-crazy, I consider the car a more burdensome way to commute: you can't read and the roads downtown are often congested. The occasional drunks in transport are mostly harmless. On the other hand, my workplace is across the street from the nearest metro station.
You can't deny that paying hookers also stimulates the economy... if only a little bit.
"Vimpelcom throws money to Wind".
Moreover, that SIP UA (telepathy-rakia based on sofia-sip) does not work with ekiga.net from behind a NAT, due to broken ways in which the ekiga.net server(s) implement NAT traversal.
You're smoking something or you have never written any respectable amount of C++.
I have, that's how one learns to avoid it.
C++ just provides you the mechanism, it's up to you whether you abuse it or leverage it.
Yeah, right. The only useful things it provides are the member syntax and virtual methods. The rest is broken and misguided: encapsulation fail, ill-designed multiple inheritance, ludicrously complicated resolution of overloaded methods playing funny games with other language features, RTTI designed to be either slow or broken, lack of any dynamic introspection. It's very easy to misuse, and requires a lot of discipline to get right.
BTW, Vala allows integration of existing C (or C-linkable) code, as long as type information is provided for it.
That's bullshit, you look at the bug list and you see all sorts of pointer object mashing bugs.
I'm sure it would be easy to provide references. Have any?
Strong evidence of the ineffectual nature of GObject is how limited the OOP is in that system. Collection classes anybody ?
Yup.
You should have just eaten it and use one language like Objective C that would have allowed for migration of existing code since it's still C but with a proper dynamic messaging system. I've made this point for years but the nits in GNOME community just don't fucking get it while investing tons of work into a deadend technology like C# for these purposes
The GNOME developers don't use C# as far as I'm concerned, unless you mean the Mono crowd which stands a little on the side.
Stupid question: if you're going to rewrite, how about rewriting in proven language rather than yet another experimental flight of fancy?
And what proven language would that be, honey? Surely not C++, for which hardly two compilers have been made to produce mutually compatible binaries, and which is damn hard to make bindings for any other programming environments out there? Vala code produces APIs usable from C and anything else that can link to C code, and automatically generated introspection makes it easily usable from dynamic runtimes.
Some negative comments about Gnome are not at all baseless, for example the one I am about to make. Gnome is based on an outmoded hack of an attempt to build an OOP based GUI without the benefit of an object-oriented compiler. Instead is uses a collection of nasty hacks and conventions, which which I am deeply familiar because I once was deluded enough to think also that C is just as capable of writing object object oriented code as C++. It isn't.
It's capable of implementing a better object-oriented system than what C++ provides, without getting distracted to the broken ways the base language does what it claims to be OOP features. And as a previous response says, you don't even have to deal with the GObject boilerplate these days if you don't have a particular need to descend into C.
What you end up with is an unholy unmaintainable mess. Full of messy casts, and full of bugs, as Gnome has always been.
Funny, I haven't had bugs related to improper GObject usage for quite a while. You did not really get past writing your first bits of code using GObject and learning from this, did you?
And unable to express reasonable defaults for things in any powerful or consistent way, the result being that Gnome tends to have lousy defaults for just about everything.
Any specific examples, with clarification on what you consider to be "reasonable defaults expressed in a powerful and consistent way"?
you have a recipe for the nasty mess that Gnome has been from the get-go, and will be until somebody finally does something about it.
Like what, a corporate executive steps in and cancels the open community project? You sound ridiculously like somebody who has an axe to grind and wants some retribution, but has no real ways to exact it. Sorry that GNOME developers don't meet your high demands with their work, provided for free or on someone else's money than yours.
Nokia have sold the commercial licensing & support unit. Licensing and customizing Qt for proprietary users/vendors was not exactly their core business anyway.
As part of Mr. Lee's good neighbor policy, all Rat Things are programmed never to break the sound barrier in a populated area. But Fido's in too much of a hurry to worry about the good neighbor policy. Jack the sound barrier. Bring the noise.
Too late
And oh, yeah ... it is also a very distinct conflict of interest when SEC stops him from selling all his MS Stock and buying NOK instead. It's like the rules tilted this particular crusade to a windmill.
This particular conspiracy theory can be put to rest now.
Here's more clue distributed by Nokia's CTO.
Why can't Nokia have say 500 people working on MeeGo in say MeeGo unit?
It can, and it does.
Why can't Nokia have a MeeGo line of phones? One release every year, support 2-3 generations at a time. See where the platform goes. It has been in the making since Nokia 770. FFS give it a chance in main stream. Keep the open source community that you've collected happy!
That's pretty much the plan as far as I can tell (which is, the end of this year :-)).
This idea fails at the fact that Symbian is actually a far superior embedded OS than anything MS has to offer, and that, uh, they've been making phones that do other things than "just make calls" for the past decade or so.
You are probably confusing it with S40, which is alive and well.
None of these options strike me as wise, given the intent to push something on the market quickly, and to use the nascent ecosystem rather than fragmenting it.
Meego is just amazing how long they've been talking about it, and not delivered.
For about a year? Before, it was Maemo.
How long does it take to polish up a UI?
Before that, they could have polished up Maemo as a great (and differentiated) smartphone platform.
Just one big blunder after another, even having huge advantages (first mover, most phones sold, free maps, free music).
Yeah, it takes very long when their heads are up their asses. But in the end what matters is the result, not the time spent working on it.
1) Hence the idea to use QT as a common platform between Meego and Symbian, to buy more time without alienating Symbian developers (who wants to develop for a dead-end platform?)
Sorry, the idea was a dud. Not only it did not save Symbian, it also caused drag on Qt. Also, all the diffusion of effort inside Nokia resulted in MeeGo only barely getting mature enough now.
2) It's mature, solid, and still one of the best platforms for low-end mobiles which is going to still be dominant in the largest growing markets
Sorry, low-end mobiles dominant in the developing markets tend to run S40. Which is even more mature and solid, and it didn't have any of the high profile public failures like N97.
3) Odd, Samsung have added their nice twist to Android with their interface. Yet Microsoft ban Nokia from porting QT to their platform.
Where did you read that? Do you even understand what porting Qt (a C++ toolkit) to Windows Phone 7 (a managed application environment) would imply technology-wise?
The only Nokia 'service' I've read about that might survive is their mapping app. Nokia's a hardware company. They don't compete in services, never really did, and don't need to.
Thanks for your opinion, but people leading Nokia may see things a little differently.
Ovi services combined managed to get a not entirely unimpressive number of users, despite their faults. They seem to need some creative will to work on Nokia's inherent strengths, and not try to play catch up with all the trains that have departed. No point in creating another Flickr or trying to win social networking users away from Facebook, indeed; even Google could not pull that off.
And who's to say that if Windows phones really take off, that won't be another race to the bottom? Unless Nokia gets an exclusive on Windows phone (and there are rumors to that effect), then Android is the better choice - if only because it's more successful upfront. Going Android now would not prevent taking up W7 later if that looks like a profitable choice.
So you suggest getting into an ongoing competition with diminishing margins and suffering another transition later if it turns out to be unwise, versus possible effects of the same nature in the future with WP7. I see you just wanted Nokia to take up Android, no matter what the rational considerations say. Sorry, but it looks like HTC and Samsung are going to provide the best hardware you can get for Android.
Umm, see, Google is a services company. For them the whole reason of Android's existence is to push their services with it. This is why Android is free. If Nokia starts putting their own services on it, they may run into, erm, lack of forthcoming support from the platform. Sure Google does no evil and so is above plain dirty tricks, but there are more ways to make it difficult.
Microsoft probably cares less which services Nokia will use, at least in the areas of overlap, as long as it sells more "boxes" and brings back software royalties. They may even benefit from Nokia Maps. For other things, I won't be weeping to see Nokia Music store go, for example. Did that really take off?
Have people really forgotten WHY Symbian came into existence?
Because it made sense for the resource-constrained "smartphones" of the day, whereas Windows CE with its scaled down desktop didn't so much?
Do they not know WHY no other phone makers WANTS to be a MS only shop?
Sorry to be the first one informing you, but Nokia is not going to be an MS only shop, either.
Nokia could have done other things: (1)Push Meego. (2)Push Symbian. (3)Adopt Android. (4)Develop their own OS.
(1) Tried, it's not ready enough yet.
(2) That platform is a zombie walking around asking for more brains... I mean, R&D budget millions to gobble.
(3) Join the race to the bottom, compete in services with Google who happen to control your platform. Feel the fragmentation.
(4) What? Create another R&D sinkhole, while MeeGo is still around? Just what Nokia needs now.