I'm probably missing something, but why would the video game industry get special tax cuts? Is it because they can't sell enough games to cover the costs?
In that case, the video game industry should cut costs and make games people want to buy, yes?
Nintendo, for example, seems to be doing just fine. Maybe their strategy of expanding the market is the right way to do things, rather than expecting handouts from the government?
Nope, they had been discussing this for a long time. The death of one of the founders was just the last straw. Other organizations have picked up the things they were doing anyway.
That depends a bit on your resources, now doesn't it? Is it just a game you are working on as a hobby? Or are you expecting to commercialize it and make money? Do you expect a lot of users, or is it just something for your friends and acquaintances to play?
If you have the resources, you can always hire someone who might know more about it. If not, you could try relying on people's goodwill, and tell them upfront that "I need help with security".
Finally, didn't Google develop a system to test web application security? I'm pretty sure there was a story about it on Slashdot. There may be other solutions out there that will help you to at least plug the most obvious holes.
Apple set off the Armageddon by demanding special treatment, and asking for the same price as everyone else despite everyone else also cross-licensing patents. Apple wanted to keep its patents, and get the same price as everyone else. They were basically being asshats.
Nokia, however, decided that instead they were going to insist, as a condition of licensing the technologies necessary for implementing the GSM standard, that they be granted access to all of Apple's patents covering things like the iPhone.
If I am not mistaken, it was Apple which decided that cross-licensing wasn't for them, so unlike all other cell phone manufacturers, ever, Apple tried to have its cake and eat it too. The right thing to do would be to enter a patent cross-licensing agreement like every god damn other cellphone manufacturer.
Seems like its a better strategy nowadays, to sell dreams and lies, than to create actual value.
Nintendo's strategy with the Wii was to get the Wii Remote into people's hands and get them playing. Apparently millions of people tried it and found that it created value for them, so they bought it. How is putting the Wii Remote in people's hands and urging them to try it "selling dreams and lies"?
How is it a bad thing to focus on the mass-market instead of focusing on graphics abilities alone? The Wii and DS have been astounding successes, showing that the market doesn't really need superb graphics.
When you call Wii "uncompetitive", how do you combine that with the fact that it sells more than the "competitive" consoles combined?
I'm assuming that Skype plans on making money off of this somehow, so how are they doing that? Are they hoping for people to use Skype technologies everywhere, so that more people will start paying Skype for the commercial/paid offerings they have?
Nope, HTML5 really makes the whole situation worse too, because rather than being a forward thinking spec, it takes everything that's been done wrong over the years, and makes it part of the standard.
No, it will make the situation better. It takes the real web into account, and standardizes behaviors that are already in use out there. At the same time, the spec is much clearer and easier to implement correctly because it also specifies error handling and such. In other words, the opposite of your FUD.
Overally it means more ambiguity, more jumble in the spec
No, the spec has been written to be clear to implementors how they should implement it properly.
HTML5 just doesn't come across as a professionally written spec, you compare it to other specs out there and it looks like it's been slapped together by a bunch of kids with no real experience of large scale software development.
Ok, so Google, Apple, Mozilla and Opera have no real experience from large scale software development? Heh.
Once again, the problem isn't Twitter. The problem is that you aren't filtering the content. Just like the whole web isn't useful, but there are a lot of useful sites you can keep an eye on, not all Twitter accounts are useful, but if you stick to following the ones that are, the problem is solved.
You keep blaming Twitter for your own lack of understanding of how the whole goddamn internet works!
Does HTML5 do DRM? No? Then the chance of mainstream adoption, from sites like Hulu, is 0%.
The biggest video site on the web, YouTube, is adopting HTML5. I'm sure there's some way to do DRM by combining HTML5 video with various other things, but of course, you can always use proprietary plugins of some kind if you have very specific needs. Such as Flash.
As long as the devices supports 2 different codecs... oh wait, *nobody* is supporting 2 different codecs. Apple refuses to support Theora. Firefox and Opera are refusing to support X.264. Google also refuses to support Theora, but wait.. they are dicking around with a 3rd codec. And who the fuck knows when Internet Explorer will support any?
Mozilla, Opera and Google all support Theora and WebM. Apple pushes H264, which Google also supports.
I searched for "Open Technologies that allow HTML5 to replace Flash" but got zero hits.
HTML5 is just one of the open web standards that can be used to replace Flash.
I know why you can't name them. THEY ARE IMAGINARY.
Several have already been listed. Maybe you should read the discussion before you start raging.
Steve Jobs clearly thinks that whatever he is replacing Flash with is better. We may agree or disagree, but he makes his decisions based on what he thinks is right.
I just mentioned HTML5 as an example. HTML5 also contains the Canvas element. But the main use case for Flash is video, and HTML5 does that. If you want to learn about open standards, maybe you should pick up a book on the subject?
Several open standards are emerging as alternatives to Flash. HTML5 with native video in browsers, for example. JavaScript and SVG alone won't replace Flash, but there's more to open standards than those two.
Company line? I'm on a Windows computer, and my phone is an Android device from HTC. Talk about missing the target!
If it is about the tiny screens of phones then why is there no Flash on the iPad.
Fingers are still fat, even if the screen is bigger. I'm not saying I think Apple should be preventing Flash from being used on their products, but there is a point to make about user experience.
Slashdot Mirror
In that case, the video game industry should cut costs and make games people want to buy, yes?
Nintendo, for example, seems to be doing just fine. Maybe their strategy of expanding the market is the right way to do things, rather than expecting handouts from the government?
TPB still has a tracker, though.
And what would the point of that be? Try what? Do you even know what the group was trying to achieve?
Nope, they had been discussing this for a long time. The death of one of the founders was just the last straw. Other organizations have picked up the things they were doing anyway.
If you have the resources, you can always hire someone who might know more about it. If not, you could try relying on people's goodwill, and tell them upfront that "I need help with security".
Finally, didn't Google develop a system to test web application security? I'm pretty sure there was a story about it on Slashdot. There may be other solutions out there that will help you to at least plug the most obvious holes.
Apple set off the Armageddon by demanding special treatment, and asking for the same price as everyone else despite everyone else also cross-licensing patents. Apple wanted to keep its patents, and get the same price as everyone else. They were basically being asshats.
If I am not mistaken, it was Apple which decided that cross-licensing wasn't for them, so unlike all other cell phone manufacturers, ever, Apple tried to have its cake and eat it too. The right thing to do would be to enter a patent cross-licensing agreement like every god damn other cellphone manufacturer.
So how come Nintendo chose European Opera Software rather than Japanese Access to deliver a web browser for the Wii and DS?
Nintendo's strategy with the Wii was to get the Wii Remote into people's hands and get them playing. Apparently millions of people tried it and found that it created value for them, so they bought it. How is putting the Wii Remote in people's hands and urging them to try it "selling dreams and lies"?
How is it a bad thing to focus on the mass-market instead of focusing on graphics abilities alone? The Wii and DS have been astounding successes, showing that the market doesn't really need superb graphics.
When you call Wii "uncompetitive", how do you combine that with the fact that it sells more than the "competitive" consoles combined?
I'm assuming that Skype plans on making money off of this somehow, so how are they doing that? Are they hoping for people to use Skype technologies everywhere, so that more people will start paying Skype for the commercial/paid offerings they have?
Yes. The HTML5 spec is much clearer for those implementing it, and browser vendors are trying to be compatible with each other as well.
No, it will make the situation better. It takes the real web into account, and standardizes behaviors that are already in use out there. At the same time, the spec is much clearer and easier to implement correctly because it also specifies error handling and such. In other words, the opposite of your FUD.
No, the spec has been written to be clear to implementors how they should implement it properly.
Ok, so Google, Apple, Mozilla and Opera have no real experience from large scale software development? Heh.
Actually, that is one of the things that will improve massively.
The web as a whole has a bad SNR. Your comment shows that you do not understand how the internet works.
No, you read useless stuff, and then blame the medium rather than your own reading habits.
You keep blaming Twitter for your own lack of understanding of how the whole goddamn internet works!
...or you can use Twitter. It isn't Twitter's fault that you are only reading tweets from twats.
If it isn't better, the market will let him know. As he said during the D8 interview.
Apple makes money if customers like their products. A better experience means more sales, means more $$$$. Come on, this is basic stuff.
The biggest video site on the web, YouTube, is adopting HTML5. I'm sure there's some way to do DRM by combining HTML5 video with various other things, but of course, you can always use proprietary plugins of some kind if you have very specific needs. Such as Flash.
Mozilla, Opera and Google all support Theora and WebM. Apple pushes H264, which Google also supports.
HTML5 is just one of the open web standards that can be used to replace Flash.
Several have already been listed. Maybe you should read the discussion before you start raging.
Steve Jobs clearly thinks that whatever he is replacing Flash with is better. We may agree or disagree, but he makes his decisions based on what he thinks is right.
No, he's equating the ditching of technologies in the past with the ditching of another technology today. How is that a lie?
I just mentioned HTML5 as an example. HTML5 also contains the Canvas element. But the main use case for Flash is video, and HTML5 does that. If you want to learn about open standards, maybe you should pick up a book on the subject?
Several open standards are emerging as alternatives to Flash. HTML5 with native video in browsers, for example. JavaScript and SVG alone won't replace Flash, but there's more to open standards than those two.
Company line? I'm on a Windows computer, and my phone is an Android device from HTC. Talk about missing the target!
Fingers are still fat, even if the screen is bigger. I'm not saying I think Apple should be preventing Flash from being used on their products, but there is a point to make about user experience.