As a former worker on that industry, I can tell you that there's too few applications that can't be built faster and cheaper on a good KVM than on native code.
I used to run Java games on a Siemens S55, and it work well.
One of the main problems with Java ME is the lack of interest, from the mobile industry, to invest money on something that will cause beneficts to their competitors too. They prefer to loose two users to give one to the competition.
Another one are the Operators. They are alergic to anything that gives freedom to theis costumers.
On the time I used to work for Siemens Mobile (RIP), I heard a history about why in hell the JME of S55 series can't access the InfraRed device (as the S45, that I still use nowadays, has a IR API for the Java).
The answer?
The Operatos demanded that Siemens throw out the IR API, as they do not want S55 users to intercomunicate without paying something for them (by buying GSM services). If the Siemens didn't complied, it would loose a major incoming as the Operators were the bigger buyers at the time.
The problem is not the technology. It's the industry.
Cars needs tires, wheels, transmission and brakes that are useless while flying, yet they still are there eroding the Lift with wheight and poor aerodynamics (while flying).
On the other hand, Flying crafts needs wings, proppellers (or a turbine) and other devices that are useless when the vehicle are running on a road, yet eroding cost/effectiveness because the weight and poor aerodynamics (while runnming on ground).
Not to mention the main problem with flying vehicles: they DO HAVE AS MUCH MECHANICALS PROBLEMS as ground vehicles. The more you use a vehicle, bigger is the possibility that it will fail while you're using it. And a flying vehicle with problems can't just park on the emergency lane...
You can't have the best of both worlds, only the worst.
You have a very good point, but unfortunatelly it's not applicable all the time.
Not everyone is thrustworthy all the time, you must take point on private affairs - where the best technical issue is not always the best solution. Yes, Microsoft is not the only one...
As much as I agree with you in theory, I still thinks a pragmatic approach is still needed: hit the "bad guys" where it hurts most, their pockets.
Organizations can't be better than the people inside them.
We have a very serious ethics problem here at Brazil: some people thinks it's ok to break bad laws instead to fight against then.
In the same time, our goverment takes advantage from that making really nasty (but profittable) laws to harvest every cent from the brazilians that don't want (or can't) break the law.
To gain an edge (or to protect itself from others taking the edge), some managers choose to break the law in the name of theis jobs - blatantly ignoring the fact that some day that mistake can be charged.
They take their chances on the short run, as all they have to loose is their jobs - what they already are loosing anyway, as their employers can't earn a good money paying every tax and duty.
This is bad. Cisco is going to loose a lot of money for this, making my country looking as a not so good place to make business. This can lead to Cisco changing its investment strategy - endangering a lot of local jobs.
On the other hand, this is great news. By forcing EVERY honest entrepeneur to pay every duty, tax and bills, the pressure for a better, more honest and efficient goverment will raise.
Only by loosing incoming we can force a goverment to work for us, The People, and not for their own pockets.
But there's a price: our jobs. I'm so sorry that my people prefer to loose their jobs than to learn to vote on the right people.
How can they be attacking Open Source projects on one hand, and seeking not only to use open source methods, but even to use the OSI Approved Open Source trademark?
It's not that odd.
Microsoft is taking some providences to stand the day when its main product, MS Office, will loose the safe market share that Windows provides. It's for no other reason that Microsoft is making some good investments on robotics, health care, medical researchs, etc.
In this paradigm, where the added value cames from hardware or services, it's good to use (and abuse) Open Source products - the Linux being spread on mobile and embedded products tell us exactly that.
If the worst cames to happen, Microsoft has built an way out.
This kind of abuse happens because it's profittable to someone. Make it so expensive to abuse that no one will think in abusing the system anymore. At least, for profit...
Some societies ask a good money to admission for a reason. This is one of them.
It's not you that makes your code "OSS atractive", but it's the OSS people that decides what's atractive.
If anyone finds your code useful, he will be grateful to you and can even make some contribution - the ones that he finds interesting, not you.
No one writes good code all the time: it's the usefullness of the code that matters in OSS. However, if you aren't proud of your work chances are that nobody else will be proud of using it.
It's the thin client revisited. A very good, yet old, idea.
HTML, CSS, POP3/SMTP/IMAP, JavaScript and, in some special cases, JRE and Flash it's all the vast majority of the people really need. Damit, it's almost 90% of my home computing usage in work days, and I'm a T.I. professional.
United States is well known for allowing a rich entity to sue common people to bankruptcy. Not that this does'nt happens around here, anyway... 8-(
If you give M$ a good excuse to sue you, doesn't matter who is right in the end: you will end up this with your life ruined.
The rule of thumb is : do that you want, but don't tell other people about it. Or at least don't tell who your are.
Microsoft have the money to make hundreds of "security patches" to XBox over the time.
One can say Microsoft is screwing up things, but the fact is that Microsoft can had made the choice to spend a big amount of money on many little patches that will made life a hell for the people that wants to earn money from the hacks (hey! the mod chips must be manufactured, huh?) instead to spend a big amount of money on a single big patch that will be hacked anyway.
You can "secure" things by making it too much expensive to hack it by the common man.
This guys must face it: CDs are overpriced, people are underpriced. Just it.
I buy CDs since 10 years ago. I have now about 180 albuns, 140 of them was bought on the first 6 years.
Why this?
Because I just can't sustain a buy rate I was able to sustain on the first 6 years! My "purchasing power" is falling down since 5 years ago, but the prices of the CDs had been remained steady.
Oh, had I mentioned that now I am married and with child? People grows up.
It's just plain math. I can't buy what I do not afford.
Integrating the language and the OS kills portability, robustness, and security.
You can't be more wrong.
There's no relation between Integreation and the issues you enumerated. What kills portability, robustness and security is bad design.
I think there's no integration between C/C++ and Windows, and I don't see portability, robustness and security here neither.
As a example, I want to mention Oberon.
Portability? You got it. All you need to recode is the compiler code generator and some system especific modules. All the rest is automatic.
Robustnes??? Almost the same from Ada or Modula-3 (but I think the language is a little minimalist).
Security? ZERO. Oberon was conceived to be used on a Single, trusted, User enviroment, there's no protections between processes. This is a flaw on DESIGN, the language integration plays no role on this.
Why they (PC games makers) should spend money to buy the right to spend more money to port games (that already sells well) to a format where they have to spend yet more money (royalties) to earn some one?
Nobody in your family has ever been a victim of a crime, right?
I will reply to you with another question:
When you was a child, did you ever got your lunch stealed by someone in school?
What do you did? Applied to the Mayor for a law to ban the lunch time?
It's a silly question, but think about... Because some people are victims, all the others must be suspects? Doesn't make sense just hunt the criminals and leave innocent people alone?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with the ugly interface, but just it.
As a former worker on that industry, I can tell you that there's too few applications that can't be built faster and cheaper on a good KVM than on native code.
I used to run Java games on a Siemens S55, and it work well.
One of the main problems with Java ME is the lack of interest, from the mobile industry, to invest money on something that will cause beneficts to their competitors too. They prefer to loose two users to give one to the competition.
Another one are the Operators. They are alergic to anything that gives freedom to theis costumers.
On the time I used to work for Siemens Mobile (RIP), I heard a history about why in hell the JME of S55 series can't access the InfraRed device (as the S45, that I still use nowadays, has a IR API for the Java).
The answer?
The Operatos demanded that Siemens throw out the IR API, as they do not want S55 users to intercomunicate without paying something for them (by buying GSM services). If the Siemens didn't complied, it would loose a major incoming as the Operators were the bigger buyers at the time.
The problem is not the technology. It's the industry.
The problem with flying cars is... WEIGHT.
Cars needs tires, wheels, transmission and brakes that are useless while flying, yet they still are there eroding the Lift with wheight and poor aerodynamics (while flying).
On the other hand, Flying crafts needs wings, proppellers (or a turbine) and other devices that are useless when the vehicle are running on a road, yet eroding cost/effectiveness because the weight and poor aerodynamics (while runnming on ground).
Not to mention the main problem with flying vehicles: they DO HAVE AS MUCH MECHANICALS PROBLEMS as ground vehicles. The more you use a vehicle, bigger is the possibility that it will fail while you're using it. And a flying vehicle with problems can't just park on the emergency lane...
You can't have the best of both worlds, only the worst.
You have a very good point, but unfortunatelly it's not applicable all the time.
Not everyone is thrustworthy all the time, you must take point on private affairs - where the best technical issue is not always the best solution. Yes, Microsoft is not the only one...
As much as I agree with you in theory, I still thinks a pragmatic approach is still needed: hit the "bad guys" where it hurts most, their pockets.
"Some people thinks it's ok to break bad laws for profit, instead of fighting for good laws being made".
Organizations can't be better than the people inside them.
We have a very serious ethics problem here at Brazil: some people thinks it's ok to break bad laws instead to fight against then.
In the same time, our goverment takes advantage from that making really nasty (but profittable) laws to harvest every cent from the brazilians that don't want (or can't) break the law.
To gain an edge (or to protect itself from others taking the edge), some managers choose to break the law in the name of theis jobs - blatantly ignoring the fact that some day that mistake can be charged.
They take their chances on the short run, as all they have to loose is their jobs - what they already are loosing anyway, as their employers can't earn a good money paying every tax and duty.
This is bad. Cisco is going to loose a lot of money for this, making my country looking as a not so good place to make business. This can lead to Cisco changing its investment strategy - endangering a lot of local jobs.
On the other hand, this is great news. By forcing EVERY honest entrepeneur to pay every duty, tax and bills, the pressure for a better, more honest and efficient goverment will raise.
Only by loosing incoming we can force a goverment to work for us, The People, and not for their own pockets.
But there's a price: our jobs. I'm so sorry that my people prefer to loose their jobs than to learn to vote on the right people.
It's not that odd.
Microsoft is taking some providences to stand the day when its main product, MS Office, will loose the safe market share that Windows provides. It's for no other reason that Microsoft is making some good investments on robotics, health care, medical researchs, etc.
In this paradigm, where the added value cames from hardware or services, it's good to use (and abuse) Open Source products - the Linux being spread on mobile and embedded products tell us exactly that.
If the worst cames to happen, Microsoft has built an way out.
Of course.
But since every paid enlister will have just one shot, the price will be very high.
The point is not to prevent Microsoft to spend its money (it's impossible, as you pointed out). It's to prevent Microsoft to get a good profit on it.
It's not enough.
This kind of abuse happens because it's profittable to someone. Make it so expensive to abuse that no one will think in abusing the system anymore. At least, for profit...
Some societies ask a good money to admission for a reason. This is one of them.
It's not you that makes your code "OSS atractive", but it's the OSS people that decides what's atractive. If anyone finds your code useful, he will be grateful to you and can even make some contribution - the ones that he finds interesting, not you. No one writes good code all the time: it's the usefullness of the code that matters in OSS. However, if you aren't proud of your work chances are that nobody else will be proud of using it.
It's the thin client revisited. A very good, yet old, idea.
HTML, CSS, POP3/SMTP/IMAP, JavaScript and, in some special cases, JRE and Flash it's all the vast majority of the people really need. Damit, it's almost 90% of my home computing usage in work days, and I'm a T.I. professional.
I hope they manage to make it work this time.
United States is well known for allowing a rich entity to sue common people to bankruptcy. Not that this does'nt happens around here, anyway... 8-(
If you give M$ a good excuse to sue you, doesn't matter who is right in the end: you will end up this with your life ruined. The rule of thumb is : do that you want, but don't tell other people about it. Or at least don't tell who your are.
I made some nice things with LISP, but more than a time I lost my parentheses with the patience...
huh... I mean...
I lost my patience with the parentheses... 8-)
Microsoft have the money to make hundreds of "security patches" to XBox over the time. One can say Microsoft is screwing up things, but the fact is that Microsoft can had made the choice to spend a big amount of money on many little patches that will made life a hell for the people that wants to earn money from the hacks (hey! the mod chips must be manufactured, huh?) instead to spend a big amount of money on a single big patch that will be hacked anyway. You can "secure" things by making it too much expensive to hack it by the common man.
Nope.
But I'm pretty sure Green Lantern will answer us.
8-)
I buy CDs since 10 years ago. I have now about 180 albuns, 140 of them was bought on the first 6 years.
Why this?
Because I just can't sustain a buy rate I was able to sustain on the first 6 years! My "purchasing power" is falling down since 5 years ago, but the prices of the CDs had been remained steady.
Oh, had I mentioned that now I am married and with child? People grows up.
It's just plain math. I can't buy what I do not afford.
Jokes apart, I agree with you. It's old ideas being reimplemented in new ways.
Not a bad thing anyway.
There's no relation between Integreation and the issues you enumerated. What kills portability, robustness and security is bad design.
I think there's no integration between C/C++ and Windows, and I don't see portability, robustness and security here neither.
As a example, I want to mention Oberon.
Portability? You got it. All you need to recode is the compiler code generator and some system especific modules. All the rest is automatic.
Robustnes??? Almost the same from Ada or Modula-3 (but I think the language is a little minimalist).
Security? ZERO. Oberon was conceived to be used on a Single, trusted, User enviroment, there's no protections between processes. This is a flaw on DESIGN, the language integration plays no role on this.
If you don't mind lost oportunities by a poor marketing, go for it.
I'm a programmer, and I did marketing to promote a nice idea I had. So I KNOW marketing enough to delegate it to who really knows what he is doing.
Money you don't earn is so bad as Money you lost.
You need a marketing/sales partner who can do this task without driving you to the bankruptcy.
Do you would hire a marketeer to program something? So why a programmer can do marketing?
Think about it.
Even worst, I brought it on the middle of the Amazon's Rain Forest.
This is a great OLD idea. Still great, but less old.
Why they (PC games makers) should spend money to buy the right to spend more money to port games (that already sells well) to a format where they have to spend yet more money (royalties) to earn some one?
Why not Peltier Coolers?