I do. But there is no killer application on Linux requiring mono. Hence, most people don't even bother installing it. Unlike say, perl and python, which are must-have. Is there a popular desktop environment, web browser, or even text editor for Linux written in C#? I understand some kid probably wrote a text editor for fun, but I meant something actually used?
The Unity runtime is written in C/C++. This runtime is used in any build you create using the editor - for webplayers and plugins it is installed separate from your build, whereas it is included in it for stand-alones and other platforms such as iPhone and Wii.
The editor is built on the Unity runtime and additionally includes editor-specific C/C++ binaries.
Wrapped around the Unity core is a layer which allows for.net access to core functionality. This layer is used for user scripting and for most of the editor UI.
So most of the important code is C/C++. And nothing tells me that API it isn't being developed on Windows using Visual Studio. The main platform of these games is probably Windows, even though their very first game was developped for Mac OS X.
Of course. Just like you can use Swift for something else than developing for Apple products. Yet, they are not used outside mother's basements.
Could you name one major piece of software written in C# not specifically made to be executed on Windows? Without a visual studio project file in the source repository?
Which capabilities? Using a mobile's phone number as user ID? I agree it was innovative, but I don't think you can patent it.
I strongly disagree it was innovative. It was the worst idea of the messaging world, a huge step backward. I don't want to contact a phone number. I want to contact a person. I don't care if that person doesn't have a phone. I don't care that person switched to another SIM card. I don't care that person moved to another country. The ID shouldn't change as long as that person is the same. And that ID shouldn't belong to a telco. Also, why would I want to use my phone to write messages when I have a real keyboard on my PC? I'll use my phone only when I am far from my PC.
Whatsapp is so dumb that you can't even have two phones sharing the same whatsapp account. Connecting on whatsapp on a new phone will disconnect the old one.
It isn't education, as Some blue collar jobs requires more training and education then some white collar jobs.
While I agree you can have a job in an office (white collar) without any education (you can even be CEO), what are the examples of blue collar jobs requiring a college degree?
I'm still not understanding where you're coming from.
If Apple controls all of the system, Apple can make every feature easier to use.
They can also make it hard to use. What's your point? Are you saying the only way to make stuff easy to use is to be vendor locked-in as much as possible?
I don't sync between iPhone and Android. They have distinct uses. I assume there's a way, because somebody's got to have come up with one. There is no more reason for Apple to come up with a universal sync than Google.
You might no want to sync now. But if you were to change your iPhone for an Android, what would you do? That's right, it would be a PITA. At least Google can sync on phones from many manufacturers, often including Apple.
There's an obscure feature on the iPhone: it can be used to make phone calls and send and receive standard text messages. Facetime is no more than a video phone conversation. I'm sure I could find one that would work on other devices, but in most cases video important enough for me to worry about.
Surely people don't buy fancy $1000 iPhones just to make phone calls and send text messages. That would be pretty dumb, isn't it?
Should I complain that my Nintendo Switch and iPhone can't share a charging cable without special end?
Yes you should, if a standard cable could be used instead. The world is better even with a bad standard than a good proprietary cable/connector.
Who said that? [Apple can't improve the world by making their stuff easier to use.]
Well,
it's about their general philosophy of not working well with others. You don't make a better world this way.
upthread.
Apple makes their stuff much harder to use, unless you have only Apple devices and Apple friends.
They can make their stuff easy to use AND interopable with others. In fact, their stuff would be much easier to use if their ecosystem wasn't so locked-down. My point was that nobody here said Apple can't make their stuff easy to use.
Really? I have no problems with using an iPhone, and Android tablet, a Windows laptop, and a Linux desktop I need to fix (it lost track of a hard drive). I haven't seen any of my friends or family have problems with having iPhones and nothing else Apple.
How do you sync your mail, pictures, contacts and calendar between your Android tablet and iPhone? That's right, by not using Apple's services, avoiding iCloud as much as possible. Fortunately, you can install many Google apps on the iPhone. How do you communicate (message/video) to/from someone with an iPhone? By using an alternative to iMessage/Facetime, since iMessage/Facetime only runs on iPhones. When you only have an iPhone, you can get by, but you must be careful not to use any of Apple's service. Still, you'll have to carry a proprietary charging cable only for the iPhone.
Maybe it can't be managed, but it sure can be regulated, such as taxed. It might be hard to catch those who profit from bitcoin but do not report their gain, but it doesn't mean regulating it won't have any effect.
both cable and 4G (5G must be even better, isn't it) offer much better than 250 ms latency to web sites hosted on the same continent. Even cross-Atlantic is often less than 100 ms.
Air Play works with third-party products who paid the Apple tax.
Why do you think Apple would make the world better if they designed their watch to work well with other phones?
It's not only about their watch it's about their general philosophy of not working well with others. You don't make a better world this way.
Not wanting to buy Apple products is fine, but why do so many people insist on being critical?
There's a whole lot of things I'm simply not interested in, and I don't go around talking about them.
This is a discussion web site, if you don't like discussion, then please don't reply. Apple claims they want to make the world better. I think this is utter BS.
I don't want them to change anything. I just won't use their product. Their vendor lock-in goes far beyond apps not working on other OSes.
why would I use iMessage/Facetime when there are alternatives working on all platforms? why would I use the Apple Watch when it only works with an iPhone? Why would I use Air Play when it only works with Apple products?
In one way Apple simplifies my purchasing decision. I just avoid their products.
Let me predict the future again. Netflix will raise prices, and offer crappier content. This will happen as long as they win more market share. If they become a dominant player, they will be just as ugly as cable and satellite.
I agree about Dragon. But if I wanted to talk to my phone, I'd use the built-in (Google) implementation. Samsung probably has one too. If I wanted a third one, I surely wouldn't want it to be built-in to my keyboard.
I also stopped using swype because it has gone downwards. Not only because of Dragon, but because its auto correct got worse with time.
The 2% or so that comes with a credit card transaction is more of an issue.
Apple is going for it. 0.15% is the beginning. As long as more banks and users join Apple Pay, they'll be in a position to raise that fee. The bank will have two options (absorbing the hit isn't one): increase the fee from 2 to 3 or 4%, or reduce the rewards and benefits associated to credit cards.
The lack of choice is that the merchant isn't allowed by the credit card to charge more to users of credits cards (including Apple Pay). The lack of choice is also the bank isn't allowed by Apple to charge more to merchants when Apple Pay is used.
People potentially have the option to save 3% by paying cash and not using a credit card. People don't.
People don't have that option. Merchants are not allowed to charge more for using credit cards in many countries. So the option is to pay cash, or pay the exact same price using a credit card, plus earn rewards.
Do you see the merchants claiming they want more Apple Pay, and stop using other payment methods? No? Then it's probably because the merchants don't think it's worth it.
They start with 0.15%, but they will raise fees if they manage to get everyone on board with their payment system. Also, people had the option to save 0.15% by not using Apple Pay, nobody would be using it. Especially not for big purchases.
Slashdot Mirror
I do.
But there is no killer application on Linux requiring mono. Hence, most people don't even bother installing it.
Unlike say, perl and python, which are must-have.
Is there a popular desktop environment, web browser, or even text editor for Linux written in C#? I understand some kid probably wrote a text editor for fun, but I meant something actually used?
Nice try, but
The Unity runtime is written in C/C++. This runtime is used in any build you create using the editor - for webplayers and plugins it is installed separate from your build, whereas it is included in it for stand-alones and other platforms such as iPhone and Wii.
The editor is built on the Unity runtime and additionally includes editor-specific C/C++ binaries.
Wrapped around the Unity core is a layer which allows for .net access to core functionality. This layer is used for user scripting and for most of the editor UI.
So most of the important code is C/C++.
And nothing tells me that API it isn't being developed on Windows using Visual Studio.
The main platform of these games is probably Windows, even though their very first game was developped for Mac OS X.
Of course. Just like you can use Swift for something else than developing for Apple products.
Yet, they are not used outside mother's basements.
Could you name one major piece of software written in C# not specifically made to be executed on Windows? Without a visual studio project file in the source repository?
Which capabilities? Using a mobile's phone number as user ID? I agree it was innovative, but I don't think you can patent it.
I strongly disagree it was innovative. It was the worst idea of the messaging world, a huge step backward.
I don't want to contact a phone number. I want to contact a person. I don't care if that person doesn't have a phone. I don't care that person switched to another SIM card. I don't care that person moved to another country. The ID shouldn't change as long as that person is the same. And that ID shouldn't belong to a telco.
Also, why would I want to use my phone to write messages when I have a real keyboard on my PC? I'll use my phone only when I am far from my PC.
Whatsapp is so dumb that you can't even have two phones sharing the same whatsapp account. Connecting on whatsapp on a new phone will disconnect the old one.
It isn't education, as Some blue collar jobs requires more training and education then some white collar jobs.
While I agree you can have a job in an office (white collar) without any education (you can even be CEO), what are the examples of blue collar jobs requiring a college degree?
I'm still not understanding where you're coming from.
If Apple controls all of the system, Apple can make every feature easier to use.
They can also make it hard to use. What's your point? Are you saying the only way to make stuff easy to use is to be vendor locked-in as much as possible?
I don't sync between iPhone and Android. They have distinct uses. I assume there's a way, because somebody's got to have come up with one. There is no more reason for Apple to come up with a universal sync than Google.
You might no want to sync now. But if you were to change your iPhone for an Android, what would you do? That's right, it would be a PITA.
At least Google can sync on phones from many manufacturers, often including Apple.
There's an obscure feature on the iPhone: it can be used to make phone calls and send and receive standard text messages. Facetime is no more than a video phone conversation. I'm sure I could find one that would work on other devices, but in most cases video important enough for me to worry about.
Surely people don't buy fancy $1000 iPhones just to make phone calls and send text messages. That would be pretty dumb, isn't it?
Should I complain that my Nintendo Switch and iPhone can't share a charging cable without special end?
Yes you should, if a standard cable could be used instead.
The world is better even with a bad standard than a good proprietary cable/connector.
Well,
upthread.
They can make their stuff easy to use AND interopable with others. In fact, their stuff would be much easier to use if their ecosystem wasn't so locked-down.
My point was that nobody here said Apple can't make their stuff easy to use.
Really? I have no problems with using an iPhone, and Android tablet, a Windows laptop, and a Linux desktop I need to fix (it lost track of a hard drive). I haven't seen any of my friends or family have problems with having iPhones and nothing else Apple.
How do you sync your mail, pictures, contacts and calendar between your Android tablet and iPhone? That's right, by not using Apple's services, avoiding iCloud as much as possible. Fortunately, you can install many Google apps on the iPhone.
How do you communicate (message/video) to/from someone with an iPhone? By using an alternative to iMessage/Facetime, since iMessage/Facetime only runs on iPhones.
When you only have an iPhone, you can get by, but you must be careful not to use any of Apple's service. Still, you'll have to carry a proprietary charging cable only for the iPhone.
Maybe it can't be managed, but it sure can be regulated, such as taxed.
It might be hard to catch those who profit from bitcoin but do not report their gain, but it doesn't mean regulating it won't have any effect.
both cable and 4G (5G must be even better, isn't it) offer much better than 250 ms latency to web sites hosted on the same continent. Even cross-Atlantic is often less than 100 ms.
Good car analogy. Apple is like if you need special gas for you car. Special gas works only in Apple cars.
What I don't understand is why Apple can't improve the world by making their stuff easier to use
Who said that?
Apple makes their stuff much harder to use, unless you have only Apple devices and Apple friends.
Air Play works with third-party products who paid the Apple tax.
Why do you think Apple would make the world better if they designed their watch to work well with other phones?
It's not only about their watch it's about their general philosophy of not working well with others. You don't make a better world this way.
Not wanting to buy Apple products is fine, but why do so many people insist on being critical?
There's a whole lot of things I'm simply not interested in, and I don't go around talking about them.
This is a discussion web site, if you don't like discussion, then please don't reply. Apple claims they want to make the world better. I think this is utter BS.
I don't want them to change anything. I just won't use their product.
Their vendor lock-in goes far beyond apps not working on other OSes.
why would I use iMessage/Facetime when there are alternatives working on all platforms?
why would I use the Apple Watch when it only works with an iPhone?
Why would I use Air Play when it only works with Apple products?
In one way Apple simplifies my purchasing decision. I just avoid their products.
their value would probably drop by over 90% the day they announce they are going to give away iPhones for years...
Vendor lock-in. If they REALLY wanted to make a better world, they'd stop pushing vendor lock-in so hard.
If you read the conversation, we were talking about cash. You can't use cash online either.
Let me predict the future again. Netflix will raise prices, and offer crappier content. This will happen as long as they win more market share. If they become a dominant player, they will be just as ugly as cable and satellite.
The consumers. But there is an other option, far cheaper. Debit. It's the preferred option for merchants since it's quick and there is no 3% fee.
I agree about Dragon. But if I wanted to talk to my phone, I'd use the built-in (Google) implementation. Samsung probably has one too. If I wanted a third one, I surely wouldn't want it to be built-in to my keyboard.
I also stopped using swype because it has gone downwards. Not only because of Dragon, but because its auto correct got worse with time.
You're just speculating that Apple would raise their fees.
I am speculating that a corporation wants to make as much money as possible.
There's that "speculating" word again...
You clearly don't get sarcasm.
The 2% or so that comes with a credit card transaction is more of an issue.
Apple is going for it. 0.15% is the beginning. As long as more banks and users join Apple Pay, they'll be in a position to raise that fee.
The bank will have two options (absorbing the hit isn't one): increase the fee from 2 to 3 or 4%, or reduce the rewards and benefits associated to credit cards.
The lack of choice is that the merchant isn't allowed by the credit card to charge more to users of credits cards (including Apple Pay).
The lack of choice is also the bank isn't allowed by Apple to charge more to merchants when Apple Pay is used.
People potentially have the option to save 3% by paying cash and not using a credit card. People don't.
People don't have that option. Merchants are not allowed to charge more for using credit cards in many countries.
So the option is to pay cash, or pay the exact same price using a credit card, plus earn rewards.
You're just speculating that Apple would raise their fees.
I am speculating that a corporation wants to make as much money as possible.
And besides, NO ONE will EVER get EVERYONE on board with their payment system; so no worries there!
It doesn't matter. If gets to the scale of Visa or Mastercard, they will have won. Ever wondered why credit card companies charge 3% fee?
The fee is not charged to the Merchant nor the Customer. It is charged to the Bank.
Yeah, as I said, the bank will pass the fee, one way or another. You think they will just happily forfeit part of their profit?
And do you know what 0.15% of 1000 dollars is?
$1.50
So, I don't think anyone is too worried.
Then let the user choose. No need to force the merchants into not adding an extra fee for credit cards/Apple Pay. And see if it becomes popular.
Do you see the merchants claiming they want more Apple Pay, and stop using other payment methods? No? Then it's probably because the merchants don't think it's worth it.
They start with 0.15%, but they will raise fees if they manage to get everyone on board with their payment system.
Also, people had the option to save 0.15% by not using Apple Pay, nobody would be using it. Especially not for big purchases.