They're small enough to fit in a the pocket of a pair of cargo pants, and cheap enough not to worry about breaking. You can probably just burn dvds at netcafes, but you could also pick up a usb dvd burner if you really want.
Professionalism can essentially be boiled down to the art of dealing with stupid people. Stallman simply refuses to do so, and so it's quite fair to label him as unprofessional.
Here in the real world, what stupid people say is far from meaningless. It has real and direct effect on what happens. Would you really argue that George Bush's opinions over the last 8 years have had no effect? When you join us in the grown up world, you'll have to deal with people like that, and have their decision impact you.
Smart people make reasonable allowances for judgments about appearance. We aren't talking about the colour of his skin or a birthmark, we're talking about decisions he's made about how he presents himself. If he isn't capable of basic hygiene, why should we assume he's capable of other common sense things?
He's right about some things, and I'll judge those things on their own merit and not on the person presenting them, but on the whole he's a nutter. I don't want to be associated with Pan worshiping or nasal sex because I work with Linux or other open technologies. *I* can look past those things, but part of professionalism is recognizing that there are a lot of stupid people in influential positions who can't or won't.
In a desktop, you really only have to worry about fitting in the box. In a laptop, you have to carefully manage a lot less space, and make sure heat generating components are properly ventilated.
I think there may have been a few Dell laptops with a specialized video adaptor, but otherwise they're all part of the motherboard.
There's always a trend toward monopoly. That's what happened with Microsoft, and now there's no real market for desktop operating systems, browsers, or word processors. Unless we have some sort of referee system to break up monopolies as they formed, capitalism is doomed.
Fortunately, we've been able to do that pretty much everywhere but technology.
Someone who learns Java as a first language is going to have a fair bit of difficulty moving on to other languages. There will be a lot of bad habits and faulty assumptions to unlearn. It's a perfectly valid tool for an experienced programmer, but it's terribly damaging to a novice.
I doubt very much you're research project will involve designing an entire OS from the ground up. In most cases, you'll just be whipping something together to prove a point. Java is fairly good for that.
Bare metal programming is usually a bad idea in AI research. Simulated environments are almost always a better option. If they're not, there's no reason you can't write a library for hardware control and provide bindings for whatever language.
Java isn't just an incremental improvement, and C isn't some dusty old tool no one uses anymore. Both are in active, parallel, use for different purposes. Programmers need to be able to do both.
If you're trying to build things relevant to industry, Java isn't really a good choice unless you need to do it as fast as possible, and support multiple platforms without any additional work. Colleges need to teach their students the flexibility they'll need in the real world.
Universities, on the other hand, could just as well be using a chalk board. If you're just doing research, you simply need to prove your point. It doesn't have to be particularity efficient. Java is a good choice for this because it's easy to use, and extremely forgiving of programmer error.
A good programmer has the flexibility to use the right tool for the right job. Java has it's place, and it does overlap somewhat with other languages.
Most absolute statements are bullshit. Java can be a suitable replacement for C or C++ in almost all cases. That doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job.
I've you're looking to put something together quickly, to run on lots of platforms with minimal resource requirements, Java is just fine. It's not ideal for all cases, but it's a tool that should be in almost all programmers toolboxes. That said, someone who learns Pascal, then C, then C++ will be able to pick Java up with ease. Someone who learns Java first will have to unlearn a lot of bad habits before they learn anything else.
RAD tools in general are terrible as a teaching tool. Real programmers need to skin their knees on things like pointers, memory management, and even just basic input without library assistance.
Further, the best introductory languages are those that have no practical purpose, so that the student is encouraged to move on to something else as they gain confidence. This helps them gain the flexibility to easily pick up other languages. If they learn Java, there's an inclination to stay there and stop learning.
I agree that there's nothing wrong with Trolltech's business model in general. The problem is their pricing, which even they are so ashamed of they no longer advertise.
There's no room for the little guy in their scheme. You're either 100% on board and drinking their koolaid, or you're locked out.
Adobe Flex was $500 (last I looked, $250), the mid range Visual Studio is about $500, and significantly less for volume licenses. Both come with fairly high class IDE's as well.
QT is a fringe library, even on its primary platform, doesn't include an IDE worth using, costs significantly more, and has onerous licensing terms. No one else makes you register your developers.
The end result is that it's nigh impossible to use QT in a commercial setting. How are you going to explain all these ludicrous restrictions to your boss?
As a user, I want a wide variety of software on the platforms I use. Pure GPL platforms preclude almost all commercial development, and BSD platforms don't stay free (hello, OS X).
A balanced approach with LGPL libraries and GPL platforms allows the best of both worlds.
KDE is unfortunately out of reach for most commercial developers. Trolltech has taken their pricing off their website, but IIRC it was over $1000 per year, per developer, per platform. It's a nice library, but it's not *that* nice.
Gnome uses the LGPL where appropriate to allow commercial development on it's platform.
Ecodiscs work in DVD drives. Apple's drives (I don't give a shit what Chinese sweatshop manufactures them) do not read ecodiscs. Therefore, Apple's drives are not DVD drives.
Slashdot Mirror
They're small enough to fit in a the pocket of a pair of cargo pants, and cheap enough not to worry about breaking. You can probably just burn dvds at netcafes, but you could also pick up a usb dvd burner if you really want.
Professionalism can essentially be boiled down to the art of dealing with stupid people. Stallman simply refuses to do so, and so it's quite fair to label him as unprofessional.
Here in the real world, what stupid people say is far from meaningless. It has real and direct effect on what happens. Would you really argue that George Bush's opinions over the last 8 years have had no effect? When you join us in the grown up world, you'll have to deal with people like that, and have their decision impact you.
Smart people make reasonable allowances for judgments about appearance. We aren't talking about the colour of his skin or a birthmark, we're talking about decisions he's made about how he presents himself. If he isn't capable of basic hygiene, why should we assume he's capable of other common sense things?
He's right about some things, and I'll judge those things on their own merit and not on the person presenting them, but on the whole he's a nutter. I don't want to be associated with Pan worshiping or nasal sex because I work with Linux or other open technologies. *I* can look past those things, but part of professionalism is recognizing that there are a lot of stupid people in influential positions who can't or won't.
In a desktop, you really only have to worry about fitting in the box. In a laptop, you have to carefully manage a lot less space, and make sure heat generating components are properly ventilated.
I think there may have been a few Dell laptops with a specialized video adaptor, but otherwise they're all part of the motherboard.
But how much foresight do you really expect from something like this?
Write their own implementation of FairPlay.
Unless he's assigned the copyright to them, they have absolutely no say in the matter.
There's always a trend toward monopoly. That's what happened with Microsoft, and now there's no real market for desktop operating systems, browsers, or word processors. Unless we have some sort of referee system to break up monopolies as they formed, capitalism is doomed.
Fortunately, we've been able to do that pretty much everywhere but technology.
There are always exceptions. Have you looked at the Android platform? It's very nice and could fulfil that promise.
Someone who learns Java as a first language is going to have a fair bit of difficulty moving on to other languages. There will be a lot of bad habits and faulty assumptions to unlearn. It's a perfectly valid tool for an experienced programmer, but it's terribly damaging to a novice.
I doubt very much you're research project will involve designing an entire OS from the ground up. In most cases, you'll just be whipping something together to prove a point. Java is fairly good for that.
Bare metal programming is usually a bad idea in AI research. Simulated environments are almost always a better option. If they're not, there's no reason you can't write a library for hardware control and provide bindings for whatever language.
But, fortunately for you, the teaching methods managed to work anyway. Obviously, you managed to learn Java and C#.
The point of education is to teach you to learn on your own, not to develop any specific skill set. It sounds like it was successfully.
Had your situation been reversed, it almost certainly wouldn't be. (Or at least you would have had far more difficulty adjusting to the real world.)
Java isn't just an incremental improvement, and C isn't some dusty old tool no one uses anymore. Both are in active, parallel, use for different purposes. Programmers need to be able to do both.
If you're trying to build things relevant to industry, Java isn't really a good choice unless you need to do it as fast as possible, and support multiple platforms without any additional work. Colleges need to teach their students the flexibility they'll need in the real world.
Universities, on the other hand, could just as well be using a chalk board. If you're just doing research, you simply need to prove your point. It doesn't have to be particularity efficient. Java is a good choice for this because it's easy to use, and extremely forgiving of programmer error.
A good programmer has the flexibility to use the right tool for the right job. Java has it's place, and it does overlap somewhat with other languages.
Most absolute statements are bullshit. Java can be a suitable replacement for C or C++ in almost all cases. That doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job.
But it is a *terrible* teaching language.
I've you're looking to put something together quickly, to run on lots of platforms with minimal resource requirements, Java is just fine. It's not ideal for all cases, but it's a tool that should be in almost all programmers toolboxes. That said, someone who learns Pascal, then C, then C++ will be able to pick Java up with ease. Someone who learns Java first will have to unlearn a lot of bad habits before they learn anything else.
RAD tools in general are terrible as a teaching tool. Real programmers need to skin their knees on things like pointers, memory management, and even just basic input without library assistance.
Further, the best introductory languages are those that have no practical purpose, so that the student is encouraged to move on to something else as they gain confidence. This helps them gain the flexibility to easily pick up other languages. If they learn Java, there's an inclination to stay there and stop learning.
They knew too much.
I agree that there's nothing wrong with Trolltech's business model in general. The problem is their pricing, which even they are so ashamed of they no longer advertise.
There's no room for the little guy in their scheme. You're either 100% on board and drinking their koolaid, or you're locked out.
Adobe Flex was $500 (last I looked, $250), the mid range Visual Studio is about $500, and significantly less for volume licenses. Both come with fairly high class IDE's as well.
QT is a fringe library, even on its primary platform, doesn't include an IDE worth using, costs significantly more, and has onerous licensing terms. No one else makes you register your developers.
The end result is that it's nigh impossible to use QT in a commercial setting. How are you going to explain all these ludicrous restrictions to your boss?
It's a competition. If the participants were all completely equal, the outcome would be entirely random. Why not just roll dice?
As a user, I want a wide variety of software on the platforms I use. Pure GPL platforms preclude almost all commercial development, and BSD platforms don't stay free (hello, OS X).
A balanced approach with LGPL libraries and GPL platforms allows the best of both worlds.
The LGPL allows you to *link* code into commercial products. You still have to release the LGPL'd code, and anything you've added to it.
KDE is unfortunately out of reach for most commercial developers. Trolltech has taken their pricing off their website, but IIRC it was over $1000 per year, per developer, per platform. It's a nice library, but it's not *that* nice.
Gnome uses the LGPL where appropriate to allow commercial development on it's platform.
As they do not support the DVD format. If they did, the ecodiscs would work.
Ecodiscs work in DVD drives. Apple's drives (I don't give a shit what Chinese sweatshop manufactures them) do not read ecodiscs. Therefore, Apple's drives are not DVD drives.
I looked, they call it a "Combo Drive (DVD-RW, CD-RW)". It's not a DVD-RW, and probably not a CD-RW either.