They've tolerated a small amount of Microsoft branding
Small? Microsoft gets the most important part of it: the customer's eyes all day long.
if Microsoft rocks that boat too much, then Redmond better have a big plan to make up for what is basically the foundation on which the whole company is built.
Microsoft knows the OEMs can't do anything. They can't drop Windows due to the fact that MS is still dominant in everything but tablets and handsets and Microsoft is fully aware of this, which is why they aren't hesitating to do Surface.
Technically Metro is native. But doing things like JIT, which is required for non-shitty Javascript performance, is prohibited for all but Microsoft programs. And this applies to all Metro applications on both x86 and ARM.
I'm betting then also give in and let 3rd parties port Win32 applications.
The moment this happens we'll know that Microsoft has failed and not even they can escape the black hole that is their own legacy.
It'll work on Windows 8. Microsoft will, like they did with IE, give themselves the ultimate advantage of promoting their services via their OS by building it in.
The big deal is that they can pay the Indian post-high school worker a pittance compared to what they'd have to pay the US post-high school worker.
That's why Mrs. Rometty spent the better part of the last 10 years moving over 100K IBM jobs out of the US and to India. I'm sure she'd move everyone but the executives over if she could find a way to do so and still claim all the benefits of being "US based."
These are neodymium magnets that stick together quite strongly. If two are swallowed they run the risk of coming within close proximity to each other while passing through separate parts of the intestines and clamping them together. Only way to remove them at that point is surgery.
That's not to say the other things you mentioned don't run a risk of getting stuck, or that these will get stuck. By being rare earth magnets they set themselves up for causing problems in the twisty path of our lower digestive tract.
Or more likely a case of ridiculous ineptness on behalf of the developer and incompetence on Apple's behalf. It is possible, despite protestations to the contrary.
But don't get pissed off when my software somehow hinders your ability to do whatever you want with it.
If you want to cripple your product in some way, then so be it. I'll tolerate it if the software fulfills the purpose for which I acquired it. But arguing that my property (that being the computer I own upon which your software runs) should distrust me and serve your purposes? That's an offensive level of arrogance.
You bought it. You own it. Don't get mad because I control it.
I'd be a little more accepting of this argument if shit like this wasn't buried in thick, long legalese that most of their customers couldn't understand without hiring a lawyer. Some equity in the "negotiation" would make this a bit more tolerable, but the control freaks want to have their cake and eat it too.
The TFA is not arguing against open source, he's arguing against open platforms.
He conflates the two. Whether it's deliberate or out of ignorance, I can't tell.
He seems to have a problem with the fact that Android, for example, lets people sideload apps from outside the app store, which to him means that they can rip an app from one phone and install it on another without paying him.
That's precisely his problem. He wants users to be trapped similarly to how they are on iOS, where nothing runs without Apple's approval. He wants the platform to serve his interests first and foremost, with the user constrained to a narrow envelope.
So, yes, he is a jerk. He thinks that his right to make money following a particular business model overrides my right to own a device where I retain full control. I sincerely wish him to go out of business.
An understatement. But yes, basically all of this. Sadly, he'll probably dismiss all of the discussion on Slashdot with a "stupid neckbeards" like he does in his article.
He's dismissive of "nerds" because he sees himself as a minority he is not a part of, and a group that should be both dismissed and attacked. His stance is offensive and, frankly, we're all better off that he's just a developer posting on a blog and not a lobbyist or politician who could truly damage our rights and freedoms.
I've met more than one developer who's had his application pirated by the basement kids and/or the Russians, Chinese or Indians. Years of work and investment down the drain in an instant.
Really? I'm finding it hard to believe.
Instead of $15000 a copy for the engineering application, revenue drops to zero almost overnight as folks overseas bit torrent the cracked version and its attendant viruses.
Yeah, right.
So, the argument goes, you charged too much. Well, if you weren't such a moron, you'd realize that all markets have a finite size. If your market pool worldwide is 1000 specialized engineering organizations in foreign countries, you have to charge a certain amount to make it worth your while. You can't go down to $10. What's the point?
Then logically Autodesk, Dassault systems, etc. should all be out of business. Oh wait...
So yes, to have a viable business, you have to lock it down.
No, you have to cover your own ass. You don't go around demanding that I become your prisoner for your profit's sake.
Companies and individuals usually pay up, once they have no choice.
Indeed, people will do many things when given no choice. But your profits are not justification for taking capability and freedom to do as I wish out of my hands.
If you want a platform to be commercially viable for third-party software developers, you have to lock it down.
Fuck you, control freak asshole. If you want to sell your products then you need to provide a compelling case to your customers. Otherwise, you need to accept that your shit will be pirated and you need to figure out if what you are selling covers your cost. And if you're feeling real insecure, figure out your own security system.
But don't go saying that I need to be treated like the enemy by my own property. My property is mine and will do as I say. You are welcome to have your software on my property, but it isn't going to bow to your demands and fulfill your wishes.
Mat Gemmell is an authoritarian asshole who hates that people are free to do with on their Android devices. I bet he hates PCs with a burning fury and would prefer I have no freedom whatsoever. I bet he's pissed that I can choose not to buy his software. Fuck him.
I note she didn't seem to offer any alternative explanation.
She doesn't have to. It's only been ~1 year since the incident and it relates to the release of iodine, which not only decays extremely rapidly but was counteracted quickly with the distribution of iodine tablets. Not only that, thyroid exams aren't exactly common anywhere. I imagine you'd see interesting things if you did similar examinations in random locations around the US.
Virtually all the children living near Chernobyl had to have their thyroids removed.
Which was an event to which there is no real comparison.
Fukushima put lots of iodine in the surrounding area.
Mostly into the seawater.
Apparently we underestimated the speed with which these cysts develop.
And yet again you make an evidence-less claim that these cysts are a direct result of the events at Fukushima. Unless you have evidence of such please STFU. Otherwise, let's see what happens in ~5 years and see if what does happen rises above the background.
Or we can panick like idiots (or, like AmiMoJo, but I repeat myself) and jump to unproductive conclusions and do things that may very well not need doing.
this does raise the question of how anime can be fansubbed at all if the episodes can't be recorded and shared with the "outside world.
No it doesn't. That question has been answered for ages: fansubs are copyright violations, period, and only exist because it wasn't worth the time or effort to pursue those doing it. Once upon a time fansubbers had respect for the studios in Japan and the US and would stop doing releases once it was licensed, then the warez kiddies came in and took over.
People hating on Firefox tend to ignore that, unlike Chrome, the UI is customizable. I'm running nightly and it doesn't look all that different from Firefox 3.6, and aside from them playing with the locations of some buttons (always reversible) it hasn't changed much, and rarely in ways that weren't reversible.
We are however planning on creating a development version of the phone for open source community, those interested in Linux and open systems and for partners.
I guess the point is to split the market? There's just not enough information and too much he can't reveal, and possibly undecided, to make any concrete statements.
Carrier manhandling (never trust those bastards) and getting snapped up by HP were the biggest contributors to their fall.
Nokia, RIM
Unrepentant managerial incompetence. Hell, Nokia had a winner in the N9 but their internal practices kept it from seeing the light of day early enough to actually be of use.
the only ones that have succeeded now have complete ecosystems built around their devices.
But the presence of those "ecosystems" does not preclude competitors. Nor do they mean that no one else should try. This is probably the worst argument I've seen, if anything it gives even more reason to hate ecosystems as they seem more adept at inhibiting competition and user choice than anything else.
I believe that the chances of Firefox OS succeeding are really slim.
Depends on the market they go into. Success doesn't mean that they drastically displace iOS or Android, only that sales of devices running the platform are profitable. Profitability means that there's opportunity to grow.
On top of that, if you focus on regions using GSM that don't have their handset choices constrained by the regional carriers you have a far better chance than in backwards markets like the US.
No, that's not stupid. That follows from his stance on all software. You know he is going to say that. It'd behoove people who disagree with him to counter his points rather than resort to the ad-hominems they usually follow with.
I mean, he is out there on the fringe, where rational thought breaks down into fantasy
He practices what he preaches. I don't agree with him fully, but there are few espousing ideals that can claim the same.
you also have a lot of people in power who are at the other extreme and also living in a kind of fantasy bubble.... heavily subsidized by corporate players of course to ensure they see things the "right" way.
It's funny that people attack RMS, and fail to acknowledge that the powers-that-be are pushing in, and succeeding in getting to, the polar opposite of his stance. My guess is they just feel the need to attack someone.
Slashdot Mirror
Small? Microsoft gets the most important part of it: the customer's eyes all day long.
Microsoft knows the OEMs can't do anything. They can't drop Windows due to the fact that MS is still dominant in everything but tablets and handsets and Microsoft is fully aware of this, which is why they aren't hesitating to do Surface.
Technically Metro is native. But doing things like JIT, which is required for non-shitty Javascript performance, is prohibited for all but Microsoft programs. And this applies to all Metro applications on both x86 and ARM.
The moment this happens we'll know that Microsoft has failed and not even they can escape the black hole that is their own legacy.
I know, it's not there and never ever will be. It can't happen because only Microsoft can exist.
Shows how awesome anti-competitive monopolies and lock-in are, right?
Nothing like leveraging your monopoly to destroy competitors and further lock-in, right?
All part of the forced, unilateral shift to locked down, lowest-common-denominator "consumption" devices.
Dalvik != Java. The bytecode isn't compatible with the built in accelerator, and this was deliberate.
Saying "why reinvent the whell" in the context of Android is redundant. Android is the wheel, reinvented.
It'll work on Windows 8. Microsoft will, like they did with IE, give themselves the ultimate advantage of promoting their services via their OS by building it in.
The big deal is that they can pay the Indian post-high school worker a pittance compared to what they'd have to pay the US post-high school worker.
That's why Mrs. Rometty spent the better part of the last 10 years moving over 100K IBM jobs out of the US and to India. I'm sure she'd move everyone but the executives over if she could find a way to do so and still claim all the benefits of being "US based."
These are neodymium magnets that stick together quite strongly. If two are swallowed they run the risk of coming within close proximity to each other while passing through separate parts of the intestines and clamping them together. Only way to remove them at that point is surgery.
That's not to say the other things you mentioned don't run a risk of getting stuck, or that these will get stuck. By being rare earth magnets they set themselves up for causing problems in the twisty path of our lower digestive tract.
Or more likely a case of ridiculous ineptness on behalf of the developer and incompetence on Apple's behalf. It is possible, despite protestations to the contrary.
I'm not sure I follow what you mean by this.
If you want to cripple your product in some way, then so be it. I'll tolerate it if the software fulfills the purpose for which I acquired it. But arguing that my property (that being the computer I own upon which your software runs) should distrust me and serve your purposes? That's an offensive level of arrogance.
I'd be a little more accepting of this argument if shit like this wasn't buried in thick, long legalese that most of their customers couldn't understand without hiring a lawyer. Some equity in the "negotiation" would make this a bit more tolerable, but the control freaks want to have their cake and eat it too.
He conflates the two. Whether it's deliberate or out of ignorance, I can't tell.
That's precisely his problem. He wants users to be trapped similarly to how they are on iOS, where nothing runs without Apple's approval. He wants the platform to serve his interests first and foremost, with the user constrained to a narrow envelope.
An understatement. But yes, basically all of this. Sadly, he'll probably dismiss all of the discussion on Slashdot with a "stupid neckbeards" like he does in his article.
He's dismissive of "nerds" because he sees himself as a minority he is not a part of, and a group that should be both dismissed and attacked. His stance is offensive and, frankly, we're all better off that he's just a developer posting on a blog and not a lobbyist or politician who could truly damage our rights and freedoms.
Instead, he's just an asshole with a blog.
Really? I'm finding it hard to believe.
Yeah, right.
Then logically Autodesk, Dassault systems, etc. should all be out of business. Oh wait...
No, you have to cover your own ass. You don't go around demanding that I become your prisoner for your profit's sake.
Indeed, people will do many things when given no choice. But your profits are not justification for taking capability and freedom to do as I wish out of my hands.
Fuck you, control freak asshole. If you want to sell your products then you need to provide a compelling case to your customers. Otherwise, you need to accept that your shit will be pirated and you need to figure out if what you are selling covers your cost. And if you're feeling real insecure, figure out your own security system.
But don't go saying that I need to be treated like the enemy by my own property. My property is mine and will do as I say. You are welcome to have your software on my property, but it isn't going to bow to your demands and fulfill your wishes.
Mat Gemmell is an authoritarian asshole who hates that people are free to do with on their Android devices. I bet he hates PCs with a burning fury and would prefer I have no freedom whatsoever. I bet he's pissed that I can choose not to buy his software. Fuck him.
She doesn't have to. It's only been ~1 year since the incident and it relates to the release of iodine, which not only decays extremely rapidly but was counteracted quickly with the distribution of iodine tablets. Not only that, thyroid exams aren't exactly common anywhere. I imagine you'd see interesting things if you did similar examinations in random locations around the US.
Which was an event to which there is no real comparison.
Mostly into the seawater.
And yet again you make an evidence-less claim that these cysts are a direct result of the events at Fukushima. Unless you have evidence of such please STFU. Otherwise, let's see what happens in ~5 years and see if what does happen rises above the background.
Or we can panick like idiots (or, like AmiMoJo, but I repeat myself) and jump to unproductive conclusions and do things that may very well not need doing.
No it doesn't. That question has been answered for ages: fansubs are copyright violations, period, and only exist because it wasn't worth the time or effort to pursue those doing it. Once upon a time fansubbers had respect for the studios in Japan and the US and would stop doing releases once it was licensed, then the warez kiddies came in and took over.
People hating on Firefox tend to ignore that, unlike Chrome, the UI is customizable. I'm running nightly and it doesn't look all that different from Firefox 3.6, and aside from them playing with the locations of some buttons (always reversible) it hasn't changed much, and rarely in ways that weren't reversible.
You're pretty "anti-everything-but-apple" so it's hard to see the humor in your posts.
I guess the point is to split the market? There's just not enough information and too much he can't reveal, and possibly undecided, to make any concrete statements.
I would like to know how you aren't a troll. Seriously.
No, I think he's just stating the obvious answer to a dumb question.
Carrier manhandling (never trust those bastards) and getting snapped up by HP were the biggest contributors to their fall.
Unrepentant managerial incompetence. Hell, Nokia had a winner in the N9 but their internal practices kept it from seeing the light of day early enough to actually be of use.
But the presence of those "ecosystems" does not preclude competitors. Nor do they mean that no one else should try. This is probably the worst argument I've seen, if anything it gives even more reason to hate ecosystems as they seem more adept at inhibiting competition and user choice than anything else.
Depends on the market they go into. Success doesn't mean that they drastically displace iOS or Android, only that sales of devices running the platform are profitable. Profitability means that there's opportunity to grow.
On top of that, if you focus on regions using GSM that don't have their handset choices constrained by the regional carriers you have a far better chance than in backwards markets like the US.
No, that's not stupid. That follows from his stance on all software. You know he is going to say that. It'd behoove people who disagree with him to counter his points rather than resort to the ad-hominems they usually follow with.
He practices what he preaches. I don't agree with him fully, but there are few espousing ideals that can claim the same.
It's funny that people attack RMS, and fail to acknowledge that the powers-that-be are pushing in, and succeeding in getting to, the polar opposite of his stance. My guess is they just feel the need to attack someone.