"It's been a dream of science fiction writers everywhere"
Not really. Unless by "dream" you mean "surreal nightmare." (Or, to be fair, unless by "science fiction writers everywhere" you mean "some science fiction writers in some places.")
Not being a scientist, I've always found Kim Stanley Robinson a bit, um, stupifyingly dull. Doesn't anyone remember Ray Bradbury's Martian Chronicles? The man had a healthy respect for / terror of these ideas.
This *must* be one of the next battle lines in the so-called search wars.
I remember the first time I saw google - I was blown away: "Wow. These results are exactly the web pages I was looking for!" But that's no longer the case when you search in google. They've really fallen behind in being able to separate out (or, as they say, "search for") the pages I want from the junk.
I hope google will win this war, but maybe microsoft chucking some money at the problem will help light a fire under google to get this fixed before someone else does it better. If searching at google no longer brings me relevant results better than any other source, I'm gonna start looking for somewhere else to search. Just like I did when I switched to google from yahoo back in the twentieth century.
Of course it doesn't get in the way. Because there isn't anything that can be done that hasn't been anticipated.
I would disagree with that assessment. In fact, the genius of the OS is that all the options are there, and unlike windows, anyway, they aren't jumping out at you, nor are they lurking in a popup labeled "Advanced..." behind a tab labeled "Options"
No, even the command line tools, like modifying default system options using
The logical and elegant organization of all these command-line customization tools rivals anything on *nix or definitely windows.
And in terms of usability, it is better to hide these options from Grandma, and keep her interface simple, while allowing advanced users command-line access.
First of all, this is a good idea. A Good Thing. Or, more accurately, A Good Start.
Tango, at first glance, does seem to be oriented toward visual style.
A Good thing. Now, in addition to visual goodies, I hope we will keep in mind when people say something is User-Friendly, or Easy To Use, they are not only talking about Pretty.
They are talking about Usability, which means user-friendly naming conventions, and user-centered use-cases that make it seem like the software is offering you, the user, just the very options you needed just at that moment.
Sometimes, I think some in the OSS community forget what it is that makes Mac OS X, for example, so popular with its devout users. It's not that Mac people love red blue and yellow jello-balls and silver gradients. It's that for the most part, Mac OS has engineered our interactions with the system so that the OS works for us and never the other way around.
Being Pretty, in this case, is just icing on the great usability cake. A Good Thing, but not enough by itself.
"Is Microsoft trying to compete with open source projects like PXES or ThinStation?"
No. Microsoft never heard of PXES or ThinStation. They are absolutely desperate to deploy the.net framework more widely, so people will actually start to develop for it. They fear people will never deliberately download and try to install it on their older boxes without something like this.
Be interesting to see how this works out for them. I won't lose sleep over it.
Putting these incredibly powerful tools in the hands of more and more people is definitely A Good Thing.
But in the end, Good Storytelling is more important than stellar visuals. People will sit through claymation if the script is great, with high stakes, believable characters, conflict and a sense of humor.
Rescheduling, unto itself, doesn't necessarily mean the title sucks.
But pushing a movie back from early summer (yes, in Hollywood April is early summer) to september is a bad sign that the studio has no confidence in the film.
September is when they schedule "throwaway" titles that aren't expected to be profitable
And yet, in the end, the developers' attitude and story inspired the heck out of me. Yes, one guy, working alone, with the right idea, at the right time, can make it big.
Don't blame big government for your fears. Just come up with something brilliant and take the plunge. And see what happens.
The average consumer won't go looking for that article, and they know it.
Correct. Skip the direct article link and go straight to slate (ouch!) by typing www.slate.com into your web browser.
Even looking for it, it took me a while to find the headline. Finally I did. It says: "Webhead: Mozilla vs. the Explorer Monster," and it's accompanied by a picture of a plastic godzilla toy. Who the heck is gonna click on that?
Re:Scalability and Maintainability go hand in hand
on
On PHP and Scaling
·
· Score: 1
I manage a large, complex "digital asset distribution system" (marketingspeak for permissions-controlled data, content and downloadable files) for a well known entertainment company. All php, and it's incredibly maintainable.
That's because we try to be smart about our application design. Separate tiers for data, logic, presentation. Object oriented programming in PHP has come a long way. If you don't know anything about it, perhaps you should give it a shot.
Php has grown: the tools are there to do smart design.
It all depends on good programmers in the end. Just like everything else.
The change doesn't apply to "online music" in the modern sense (digital files) -- it applies to buying cd's online and having them shipped to you. This is a new distinction most people haven't figured out yet. So to answer your question...
Since when does microsoft implement changes without an actual lawsuit?
When they decide "the market" is moving in a different direction -- in this case away from cd's and toward DRM'ed digital files. A new market which they are making a real (if belated) effort to monopolize.
This "agreement to stop hijacking music online" is just a publicity stunt which costs them nothing strategically. Browser wars are over. And CD's are, in their estimation, becoming yesterday's technology. The battle moves on to a new front, and MS moves on for fresh blood.
"Sorry, your browser is not compatible with this feature!"
@%**! MSnbc
Click on the "Interactive feature" if you don't know what I mean,
then curse microsoft,
then go straight to http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov to see the images without paying the microsoft tax.
I vowed a long time ago to stop clicking on msnbc links.... sucker that I am to keep coming back for more...
Slashdot Mirror
"It's been a dream of science fiction writers everywhere"
Not really. Unless by "dream" you mean "surreal nightmare." (Or, to be fair, unless by "science fiction writers everywhere" you mean "some science fiction writers in some places.")
Not being a scientist, I've always found Kim Stanley Robinson a bit, um, stupifyingly dull. Doesn't anyone remember Ray Bradbury's Martian Chronicles? The man had a healthy respect for / terror of these ideas.
Star Wars. That would solve a lot of problems once and for all.
Oh, wait, did you say it was just a hundred mil?
Nevermind. A man's gotta dream.
This *must* be one of the next battle lines in the so-called search wars.
I remember the first time I saw google - I was blown away: "Wow. These results are exactly the web pages I was looking for!" But that's no longer the case when you search in google. They've really fallen behind in being able to separate out (or, as they say, "search for") the pages I want from the junk.
I hope google will win this war, but maybe microsoft chucking some money at the problem will help light a fire under google to get this fixed before someone else does it better. If searching at google no longer brings me relevant results better than any other source, I'm gonna start looking for somewhere else to search. Just like I did when I switched to google from yahoo back in the twentieth century.
Dude, get with it.
Saying "web 2.0" is so last year that even criticizing people who say "web 2.0" is totally last year. Sheesh, try and keep up...
I would disagree with that assessment. In fact, the genius of the OS is that all the options are there, and unlike windows, anyway, they aren't jumping out at you, nor are they lurking in a popup labeled "Advanced..." behind a tab labeled "Options"
No, even the command line tools, like modifying default system options using
etc.
The logical and elegant organization of all these command-line customization tools rivals anything on *nix or definitely windows.
And in terms of usability, it is better to hide these options from Grandma, and keep her interface simple, while allowing advanced users command-line access.
First of all, this is a good idea. A Good Thing. Or, more accurately, A Good Start.
Tango, at first glance, does seem to be oriented toward visual style.
A Good thing. Now, in addition to visual goodies, I hope we will keep in mind when people say something is User-Friendly, or Easy To Use, they are not only talking about Pretty.
They are talking about Usability, which means user-friendly naming conventions, and user-centered use-cases that make it seem like the software is offering you, the user, just the very options you needed just at that moment.
Sometimes, I think some in the OSS community forget what it is that makes Mac OS X, for example, so popular with its devout users. It's not that Mac people love red blue and yellow jello-balls and silver gradients. It's that for the most part, Mac OS has engineered our interactions with the system so that the OS works for us and never the other way around.
Being Pretty, in this case, is just icing on the great usability cake. A Good Thing, but not enough by itself.
Yes, this makes complete sense, because, you see, 87% of all statistics are made up.
"Is Microsoft trying to compete with open source projects like PXES or ThinStation?"
.net framework more widely, so people will actually start to develop for it. They fear people will never deliberately download and try to install it on their older boxes without something like this.
No. Microsoft never heard of PXES or ThinStation. They are absolutely desperate to deploy the
Be interesting to see how this works out for them. I won't lose sleep over it.
Haven't these people ever seen a movie?
They've "pushed you into management?"
Bummer. Maybe you should have tried sucking more consistently at your job.
Phone calls? What are phone calls?
I use email and IM.
Putting these incredibly powerful tools in the hands of more and more people is definitely A Good Thing.
But in the end, Good Storytelling is more important than stellar visuals. People will sit through claymation if the script is great, with high stakes, believable characters, conflict and a sense of humor.
Lucas????? Are you listening????
Actually nongeeks have absolutely no idea what a browser is.
They just think they're looking at "the internet."
In windows or something. The way Microsoft wanted it in the first place.
Rescheduling, unto itself, doesn't necessarily mean the title sucks.
But pushing a movie back from early summer (yes, in Hollywood April is early summer) to september is a bad sign that the studio has no confidence in the film.
September is when they schedule "throwaway" titles that aren't expected to be profitable
And hideously expensive, but you never have to change them.
Actually, the expense is to cover their bandwidth costs, now that they've promoted themselves here.
Just a few days ago Slashdot posted a link to the saga of mp3 player Audion, by a small 2-man development shop. In the end, the program died, but the developers' story is really very inspiring.
Thrill to their tale of almost being bought out by AOL in 1999. Weep at their account of being told offf by Steve jobs at Macworld, as he developed a new program (itunes) that would eventually devour our heroes.
And yet, in the end, the developers' attitude and story inspired the heck out of me. Yes, one guy, working alone, with the right idea, at the right time, can make it big.
Don't blame big government for your fears. Just come up with something brilliant and take the plunge. And see what happens.
And then, soon, the only cockroaches who survive will be those who can tell the difference between a robot and a real roach.
In other words, the smart ones.
Great idea, guys.
Aren't they afraid of inadvertently creating a breed of musically-savvy Superplants?
How do you choose?
The average consumer won't go looking for that article, and they know it.
Correct. Skip the direct article link and go straight to slate (ouch!) by typing www.slate.com into your web browser.
Even looking for it, it took me a while to find the headline. Finally I did. It says: "Webhead: Mozilla vs. the Explorer Monster," and it's accompanied by a picture of a plastic godzilla toy. Who the heck is gonna click on that?
I manage a large, complex "digital asset distribution system" (marketingspeak for permissions-controlled data, content and downloadable files) for a well known entertainment company. All php, and it's incredibly maintainable.
That's because we try to be smart about our application design. Separate tiers for data, logic, presentation. Object oriented programming in PHP has come a long way. If you don't know anything about it, perhaps you should give it a shot.
Php has grown: the tools are there to do smart design.
It all depends on good programmers in the end. Just like everything else.
The change doesn't apply to "online music" in the modern sense (digital files) -- it applies to buying cd's online and having them shipped to you. This is a new distinction most people haven't figured out yet. So to answer your question...
Since when does microsoft implement changes without an actual lawsuit?
When they decide "the market" is moving in a different direction -- in this case away from cd's and toward DRM'ed digital files. A new market which they are making a real (if belated) effort to monopolize.
This "agreement to stop hijacking music online" is just a publicity stunt which costs them nothing strategically. Browser wars are over. And CD's are, in their estimation, becoming yesterday's technology. The battle moves on to a new front, and MS moves on for fresh blood.
"Sorry, your browser is not compatible with this feature!"
@%**! MSnbc
Click on the "Interactive feature" if you don't know what I mean,
then curse microsoft,
then go straight to http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov to see the images without paying the microsoft tax. I vowed a long time ago to stop clicking on msnbc links.... sucker that I am to keep coming back for more...
If you think you can find something better out there for free, use that instead.
If you don't, you can (a) buy apple's software, or you can (b) write some yourself and give it away!
What's the gripe? They owe you nothing.
This is obviously some definition of the word "launches" with which I was not previously familiar.
(The microsoft definition I suppose.)