iTunes does not have to use the centralised registry - every application can create its own independent registry hive containing just its data within the users Application Data folder. Hell, iTunes could even use pLists if it damn well chose.
So no, the architecture of Windows is not to blame at all here for iTunes, its all Apple all the way.
I think you need to take another look at IE9s local storage implementation at least... or have you actually looked at any of your points at all? The test mentioned in the summary is whats incomplete, it doesnt infer that IE isn't implementing them also (hint: IE9 covers some of those things already, and local storage has been implemented since IE8 to some extent).
Would you rather we have seen what abomination Netscape could have come up with if they were successful in continuing development on from Navigator 4, or have people really forgotten the cluster fuck that was the NN4 'series'?
The US has essentially failed in tracking down that group, despite all of its prowess and available power. What makes you think the Taliban could have done better?
Its a revamp of the supposed open source business model - instead of making *one* product* (the software), you are now expected to make *two* products (the software and the support plan) and give one of those away. Its been suggested for software, music (give the music away, charge for extras such as music videos, interviews etc), games (give the game away, make it back on merchandising) and now hes suggested it for this. Why this makes more sense than just charging for the single product is beyond me (charging in this sense being the ad-supported model that shows are currently using).
The bit that stuck in my craw was when Cavil went off on his monologue about how humanity needed to be punished for what they did to his ancestors (the chrome cylons created in the colonies) but only a few episodes previously he had taken great delight in subjugating the Raiders and the new Centurions - how did the original cylons like this? Plot hole?
I watched BSG religiously (and bitched like fuck after the final episode) but I never watched Caprica - I didn't want to have to watch another series just to have some small parts of the back story filled in, and Caprica didn't interest me as an independent series either.
Plus the BSG writers pretty much blew it for me when they discussed in a podcast during season 2 or 3 that they had no idea that the 'final five' thing was going to become what it did, they just realised that viewers had latched on to it as a mystery and then decided to run with it - the final five were all chosen much later on as well, just before they were revealed, so again the concept that the writers 'had a plan' was blown for me early on.
It sounds like you have a site license, which of course licenses the... site. The amount of money the license costs is based on the total number of potential devices on the site at the start of the annual license term, as you are licensing them all.
You can always just to go an Open or Select volume license and buy licensing for specific devices.
I don't see MS being evil or anything in your case, you just have a specific license which does exactly what it is sold to do - license everything.
The Linux foundation doesn't develop a Linux JVM.
Microsoft's JVM was awful and incompatible.
Both those platforms are still widely used for Java development and deployment, in spite of depending on a third-party JVM.
I distinctly remember Microsofts JVM being faster and more stable than the alternatives (Suns own port), but had Windows only extensions which meant if you wrote for it your app wasnt portable elsewhere - to say it was awful is a bit of a lie, but you are right on the incompatible side.
If aircraft were airtight, then they would retain sea level atmospheric pressure regardless of their altitude. They do not - as someone else notes, they have compressors running off the engines to pressurize the cabin.
It depends on when the aircraft was built as to whether it has DU as its weights or not, some 747s do and some do not. The radioactivity picked up from high altitude flying is negligible in terms of future use of the material, its never going to be emitting enough radiation to be an issue.
This annoys me a little about Linux migrations, people say how much more it costs based on the fact that they already know Windows, then compare that to the time taken to not only implement but also learn the Linux equivalent.
People do that because its the real life situation and *should* be considered - its not like the migration is happening from a blank slate to one or the other, its going from one to the other and thus the advantage of pre-existing experience in the familiar should be considered.
AFAIK, if you get with MS and get with their licensing program, you have to buy an MS OS for every computer you install, and the OS agreement with MS says you can upgrade (or downgrade) it whenever you want. You still have to buy the OS from your PC manufacturer. That way when MS come out with Win7, you don't have to buy new licenses for everyone, all you have to do is buy a MS OS.
Only if you buy a site license from MS and don't buy bare systems from whatever hardware supplier you are dealing with - if you go with one of the Open or Select Volume Licensing programs (including the subscription plans - I recently bought an Open Subscription for 70 Office 2007 seats, never once was I required to license the other 80 seats in the business, and yes I made sure of that) MS only require you to buy as many as you need, not every system in the business is required to be covered, and again its up to you to buy bare systems.
Thats how a site license works - its a license for the site, regardless of whether its got an OS on it already...
I've recently researched this for my company, and if you're buying individual MS Office licenses (or windows cals + exchange cals + sharepoint cals), you're crazy. Get with MS, they have a yearly agreement you make with them. Once a year, you count how many employees you have, you write MS a big check, and you're done with it. You could hire 1000 new employees, and you can install whatever you want, no charge. They could work for 3 months, you could fire them, and you don't pay for them. Only after the 1 year agreement is over, you have to sign a new contract, and pay the fees again. It's cheaper and easier to maintain then keeping track of them one at a time. You also get free upgrades whenever a new version comes out, so it's simple on that front. It also has some accounting advantages (Is a one-year license a capital expense? Will you save money by it not being a capital expense? Consult your local accounting department/tax advisor, you might save 20% or so. It's also fewer things for accounting to keep track of.)
Thats the Open Subscription licensing plan, and for some it works better than others.
Microsoft also has the Technet, Volume Licensing and MSDN forums, which are well staffed with MS reps who give very very good answers reasonably quickly - you don't get access to these forums unless you have paid for one of the aforementioned programs.
Sideline them... how, exactly? Seriously, this time last year Oracle didn't have an office suite and now they have a fully featured, fully developed office suite with full copyright assignment. How often does that really happen? How many fully developed office suites are there in the world, especially ones where you can buy the fully copyright to?
Oracle haven't been sidelined at all, they've barely started.
That analogy is one of the worst possible ones you could have used. When I build a sky scraper, I use established engineering methods, tools, materials and so forth to produce my end result. I use steel that someone else discovered how to forge and manufacture, I use bricks that someone else discovered how to make load bearing, I use hammers and screwdrivers that don't fall apart after a thousand uses - all someone elses work. And you know what? At the end of the project no one dares to tell me that the sky scraper that sits there is not *mine*, so why the fuck is software deserving of any different?
Sun owned the trademark before, it didn't hinder development then. From what I can see, the LibreOffice movement is a fork by *some* of the OpenOffice.org developers (note the some...) and the Open Document Foundation, its not a rebranding at all, but rather an attempt to wrest control from one entity and place it with another.
Slashdot Mirror
iTunes does not have to use the centralised registry - every application can create its own independent registry hive containing just its data within the users Application Data folder. Hell, iTunes could even use pLists if it damn well chose.
So no, the architecture of Windows is not to blame at all here for iTunes, its all Apple all the way.
I think you need to take another look at IE9s local storage implementation at least... or have you actually looked at any of your points at all? The test mentioned in the summary is whats incomplete, it doesnt infer that IE isn't implementing them also (hint: IE9 covers some of those things already, and local storage has been implemented since IE8 to some extent).
Has it got to be strong, got to be fast and got to be fresh from the fight?
Would you rather we have seen what abomination Netscape could have come up with if they were successful in continuing development on from Navigator 4, or have people really forgotten the cluster fuck that was the NN4 'series'?
Ie8 implemented Localstorage but not SQL Storage.
The US has essentially failed in tracking down that group, despite all of its prowess and available power. What makes you think the Taliban could have done better?
Its a revamp of the supposed open source business model - instead of making *one* product* (the software), you are now expected to make *two* products (the software and the support plan) and give one of those away. Its been suggested for software, music (give the music away, charge for extras such as music videos, interviews etc), games (give the game away, make it back on merchandising) and now hes suggested it for this. Why this makes more sense than just charging for the single product is beyond me (charging in this sense being the ad-supported model that shows are currently using).
Hi, sorry no, can't remember which one it was now, but it was one of the Ron Moore ones that went with the episodes.
The bit that stuck in my craw was when Cavil went off on his monologue about how humanity needed to be punished for what they did to his ancestors (the chrome cylons created in the colonies) but only a few episodes previously he had taken great delight in subjugating the Raiders and the new Centurions - how did the original cylons like this? Plot hole?
I watched BSG religiously (and bitched like fuck after the final episode) but I never watched Caprica - I didn't want to have to watch another series just to have some small parts of the back story filled in, and Caprica didn't interest me as an independent series either.
Plus the BSG writers pretty much blew it for me when they discussed in a podcast during season 2 or 3 that they had no idea that the 'final five' thing was going to become what it did, they just realised that viewers had latched on to it as a mystery and then decided to run with it - the final five were all chosen much later on as well, just before they were revealed, so again the concept that the writers 'had a plan' was blown for me early on.
It sounds like you have a site license, which of course licenses the ... site. The amount of money the license costs is based on the total number of potential devices on the site at the start of the annual license term, as you are licensing them all.
You can always just to go an Open or Select volume license and buy licensing for specific devices.
I don't see MS being evil or anything in your case, you just have a specific license which does exactly what it is sold to do - license everything.
The Linux foundation doesn't develop a Linux JVM. Microsoft's JVM was awful and incompatible.
Both those platforms are still widely used for Java development and deployment, in spite of depending on a third-party JVM.
I distinctly remember Microsofts JVM being faster and more stable than the alternatives (Suns own port), but had Windows only extensions which meant if you wrote for it your app wasnt portable elsewhere - to say it was awful is a bit of a lie, but you are right on the incompatible side.
If aircraft were airtight, then they would retain sea level atmospheric pressure regardless of their altitude. They do not - as someone else notes, they have compressors running off the engines to pressurize the cabin.
It depends on when the aircraft was built as to whether it has DU as its weights or not, some 747s do and some do not. The radioactivity picked up from high altitude flying is negligible in terms of future use of the material, its never going to be emitting enough radiation to be an issue.
If you sunk it in a lake, it would rapidly fill up with water - aircraft are *not* air tight...
He's not redefining anything - he's actually using a different argument. There is more than one argument in the world...
Clean room implementations defeat copyright, not patents...
I take it you went down the road of 'screw appearances' :)
Sun was dying the long slow death of large costs against small revenue streams - why shouldn't Oracle try and cut the losses where they can?
This annoys me a little about Linux migrations, people say how much more it costs based on the fact that they already know Windows, then compare that to the time taken to not only implement but also learn the Linux equivalent.
People do that because its the real life situation and *should* be considered - its not like the migration is happening from a blank slate to one or the other, its going from one to the other and thus the advantage of pre-existing experience in the familiar should be considered.
AFAIK, if you get with MS and get with their licensing program, you have to buy an MS OS for every computer you install, and the OS agreement with MS says you can upgrade (or downgrade) it whenever you want. You still have to buy the OS from your PC manufacturer. That way when MS come out with Win7, you don't have to buy new licenses for everyone, all you have to do is buy a MS OS.
Only if you buy a site license from MS and don't buy bare systems from whatever hardware supplier you are dealing with - if you go with one of the Open or Select Volume Licensing programs (including the subscription plans - I recently bought an Open Subscription for 70 Office 2007 seats, never once was I required to license the other 80 seats in the business, and yes I made sure of that) MS only require you to buy as many as you need, not every system in the business is required to be covered, and again its up to you to buy bare systems.
Thats how a site license works - its a license for the site, regardless of whether its got an OS on it already...
I've recently researched this for my company, and if you're buying individual MS Office licenses (or windows cals + exchange cals + sharepoint cals), you're crazy. Get with MS, they have a yearly agreement you make with them. Once a year, you count how many employees you have, you write MS a big check, and you're done with it. You could hire 1000 new employees, and you can install whatever you want, no charge. They could work for 3 months, you could fire them, and you don't pay for them. Only after the 1 year agreement is over, you have to sign a new contract, and pay the fees again. It's cheaper and easier to maintain then keeping track of them one at a time. You also get free upgrades whenever a new version comes out, so it's simple on that front. It also has some accounting advantages (Is a one-year license a capital expense? Will you save money by it not being a capital expense? Consult your local accounting department/tax advisor, you might save 20% or so. It's also fewer things for accounting to keep track of.)
Thats the Open Subscription licensing plan, and for some it works better than others.
Microsoft also has the Technet, Volume Licensing and MSDN forums, which are well staffed with MS reps who give very very good answers reasonably quickly - you don't get access to these forums unless you have paid for one of the aforementioned programs.
Sideline them ... how, exactly? Seriously, this time last year Oracle didn't have an office suite and now they have a fully featured, fully developed office suite with full copyright assignment. How often does that really happen? How many fully developed office suites are there in the world, especially ones where you can buy the fully copyright to?
Oracle haven't been sidelined at all, they've barely started.
That analogy is one of the worst possible ones you could have used. When I build a sky scraper, I use established engineering methods, tools, materials and so forth to produce my end result. I use steel that someone else discovered how to forge and manufacture, I use bricks that someone else discovered how to make load bearing, I use hammers and screwdrivers that don't fall apart after a thousand uses - all someone elses work. And you know what? At the end of the project no one dares to tell me that the sky scraper that sits there is not *mine*, so why the fuck is software deserving of any different?
Sun owned the trademark before, it didn't hinder development then. From what I can see, the LibreOffice movement is a fork by *some* of the OpenOffice.org developers (note the some...) and the Open Document Foundation, its not a rebranding at all, but rather an attempt to wrest control from one entity and place it with another.