Calling on memories of Red Hat alienating their desktop user base to focus on their corporate customers and making money
Damn those companies trying to make a profit. If we were all just willing to work for free, live in tents, not have children, and give up the whole eating thing this wouldn't be a problem. I don't think its fair to blast Redhat for trying to build a company (which takes money) and be successful.
Currently the JVM development and release cycle seems pretty controlled. Every 16 months there is a major release with 1 or 2 updates between there. And the feature set placed into those releases is also controlled, not just "Lets see how much we can throw in." I'm worried that if the JVM is open sourced java would start acting like an "open source project" with a wide feature scope and numerous and quick releases that will make it difficult to keep customers up-to-date. I can certainly see advantages on both sides. I think the main thing is if Sun wants to continue to devote resources to it.
I've really enjoyed NPR for a long time on the radio and I've really started to use their podcasting feature. I can't speak for others but I would be willing to pay a flat yearly rate, around the amount of a minimum donation, to have access to that feature. I wouldn't blame them for charging for that service.
The only issue I could see arising is that the podcasts are hosted by the national NPR, but people usually donate to their local NPR stations. I would think they would have to figure out how to trickle the money made from podcasting to the local stations.
I'm not a windows fan but I have to admit that people are always slamming them because they seem to put business before security and quality. Seems like they may be catching on.
The security contest also allowed people to have local access via SSH, so that had a lot to do with the crack."
Thats like giving someone the keys to your house and seeing if they can steal something.
Rather than spending time trying to make something that will one-up the Apple Podcast technology, Yahoo will use existing technology to make money. As long as there are no legal hurdles that seems like a good idea.
I'm not sure a language forcing security is a good thing. It seems to me writing secure systems is really the responsibility of the development team. Especially since different situations call for different security levels and methodologies.
I wonder why he doesn't just extend subversion or the svk extension and add the functionality he wants. After reading up on it, subversion is almost there, just missing a few key features that he really wants.
I've never understood the argument that open-sourcing java will convince people to choose it over.NET? Why would someone choose.Net over java because java is not open source?
I wonder if MS gets this patent, could they argue that any language that contains the != operator is infringing? I mean when comparing two pointers, the != operator returns whether the two variables point to the same location in memory.
I agree except that his fault isn't that he pirated software, he gave away something that wasn't his and he broke several legal agreements I'm sure he had with Apple. It was a very stupid move on his part and I'm sure he will pay legally and professionally. Would you ever hire someone with that on his record?
I wonder if someone could argue that he is liable for any deaths or sustained injuries caused because people could not get through to the 911 service while these attacks were going on?
Debian is neat and all, but why replace OSX if you already have it? I mean if you don't have a mac, then by all means put debian or some other Linux distro on your box. But if you have a mac, why not go with OSX panther, and soon Tiger?
I'm not a fan of Microsoft products and ideals, but I don't think I'll see the company go under in my life unless some sort of scandal comes out (and even then). The amount of cash they have in the bank gives them a great buffer to mess up a few times and not even loose wind.
"Software Engineers should not have learned things by themselves."
I use to work with someone like you. When a new problem would come through the door that required a new technology he would stomp his feet and refuse to solve it until the manager sent them to some expensive training. Thought he was a big shot because he had a master's degree. Refused to take the extra step and research something on his own. To be honest, he was useless.
When I look for an engineer, I'm looking for a problem solver, a "go-to person", no matter what.
ITunes places music you buy in your iTunes Library folder. This is so it can keep track of music you have and music you have bought. It even sorts and stores the music in folders based on Artist and album and names the music files with the song name. There is nothing stopping the user from going into that folder and placing the song files onto their device of choice. Also, iTunes stores the index of your library in an xml file. Which means it would be easy to create an application that could read an iTunes index and import the library (and people have).
I disagree. You have to look at it this way, many movies (including several above) are cinematic forms of pre-written novels. Not only that, but they are a screen writer's interpretation of a novel. Since its almost impossible to make a movie exactly as a book, most of these remakes are different interpretations of the original book, not re-filming of the same movie scripts.
The 1971 film was David Seltzer's interpretation, now we get to see Tim Burton's.
I've been reading open sources vs closed source arguments for a long time now. I guess my question would be why does it just have to be one or the other? In business school they teach students many different business models because different markets call for different models.
Microsoft has a model that works for their market (that is if the measure for a good model is not the quality of software but the about of sales and market ownership). The JBoss Group also seems to be doing well in their market so they have also found a model that works.
Slashdot Mirror
Calling on memories of Red Hat alienating their desktop user base to focus on their corporate customers and making money Damn those companies trying to make a profit. If we were all just willing to work for free, live in tents, not have children, and give up the whole eating thing this wouldn't be a problem. I don't think its fair to blast Redhat for trying to build a company (which takes money) and be successful.
Currently the JVM development and release cycle seems pretty controlled. Every 16 months there is a major release with 1 or 2 updates between there. And the feature set placed into those releases is also controlled, not just "Lets see how much we can throw in." I'm worried that if the JVM is open sourced java would start acting like an "open source project" with a wide feature scope and numerous and quick releases that will make it difficult to keep customers up-to-date. I can certainly see advantages on both sides. I think the main thing is if Sun wants to continue to devote resources to it.
I've really enjoyed NPR for a long time on the radio and I've really started to use their podcasting feature. I can't speak for others but I would be willing to pay a flat yearly rate, around the amount of a minimum donation, to have access to that feature. I wouldn't blame them for charging for that service. The only issue I could see arising is that the podcasts are hosted by the national NPR, but people usually donate to their local NPR stations. I would think they would have to figure out how to trickle the money made from podcasting to the local stations.
I'm not a windows fan but I have to admit that people are always slamming them because they seem to put business before security and quality. Seems like they may be catching on.
The security contest also allowed people to have local access via SSH, so that had a lot to do with the crack." Thats like giving someone the keys to your house and seeing if they can steal something.
Who doesn't love spending money looking for broken crap? Its like the ebay of space.
Rather than spending time trying to make something that will one-up the Apple Podcast technology, Yahoo will use existing technology to make money. As long as there are no legal hurdles that seems like a good idea.
I'm not sure a language forcing security is a good thing. It seems to me writing secure systems is really the responsibility of the development team. Especially since different situations call for different security levels and methodologies.
IIS Hacked, No way. Now thats breaking news.
I wonder why he doesn't just extend subversion or the svk extension and add the functionality he wants. After reading up on it, subversion is almost there, just missing a few key features that he really wants.
" use of computers to generate proofs"
Won't work for all cases. Can anyone say the halting problem? (forgive me if I'm wrong, its been a while since computation theory).
This gets my vote as best one of the day.
I've never understood the argument that open-sourcing java will convince people to choose it over .NET? Why would someone choose .Net over java because java is not open source?
I wonder if MS gets this patent, could they argue that any language that contains the != operator is infringing? I mean when comparing two pointers, the != operator returns whether the two variables point to the same location in memory.
I agree except that his fault isn't that he pirated software, he gave away something that wasn't his and he broke several legal agreements I'm sure he had with Apple. It was a very stupid move on his part and I'm sure he will pay legally and professionally. Would you ever hire someone with that on his record?
I wonder if someone could argue that he is liable for any deaths or sustained injuries caused because people could not get through to the 911 service while these attacks were going on?
Debian is neat and all, but why replace OSX if you already have it? I mean if you don't have a mac, then by all means put debian or some other Linux distro on your box. But if you have a mac, why not go with OSX panther, and soon Tiger?
I'm not a fan of Microsoft products and ideals, but I don't think I'll see the company go under in my life unless some sort of scandal comes out (and even then). The amount of cash they have in the bank gives them a great buffer to mess up a few times and not even loose wind.
"Software Engineers should not have learned things by themselves."
I use to work with someone like you. When a new problem would come through the door that required a new technology he would stomp his feet and refuse to solve it until the manager sent them to some expensive training. Thought he was a big shot because he had a master's degree. Refused to take the extra step and research something on his own. To be honest, he was useless.
When I look for an engineer, I'm looking for a problem solver, a "go-to person", no matter what.
ITunes places music you buy in your iTunes Library folder. This is so it can keep track of music you have and music you have bought. It even sorts and stores the music in folders based on Artist and album and names the music files with the song name. There is nothing stopping the user from going into that folder and placing the song files onto their device of choice. Also, iTunes stores the index of your library in an xml file. Which means it would be easy to create an application that could read an iTunes index and import the library (and people have).
I disagree. You have to look at it this way, many movies (including several above) are cinematic forms of pre-written novels. Not only that, but they are a screen writer's interpretation of a novel. Since its almost impossible to make a movie exactly as a book, most of these remakes are different interpretations of the original book, not re-filming of the same movie scripts.
The 1971 film was David Seltzer's interpretation, now we get to see Tim Burton's.
Sure Redhat, Windows and Sun are big player. But what about Apple or SUSE Linux? I think there are still a few more fighters in the ring.
I've been reading open sources vs closed source arguments for a long time now. I guess my question would be why does it just have to be one or the other? In business school they teach students many different business models because different markets call for different models.
Microsoft has a model that works for their market (that is if the measure for a good model is not the quality of software but the about of sales and market ownership). The JBoss Group also seems to be doing well in their market so they have also found a model that works.
Why can't we just all get along??
obviously the person who marked this "Troll" has never seen Austin Powers. Dude, Take a joke
Next there will be sharks with lazers.