For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
So basically, if MS holds patents on the code they are contributing, my reading of the GPL says they can't contribute it (or can't enforce said patents).
(yay for a toolbar i can turn into a proper Dock:D)
This is probably a difference in philosophy between the Mac and Windows people, but I never particularly liked the Mac dock. I always thought that the application-switching capabilities of it were next to useless. I do like the Windows 7 task bar, which surprises me for that reason. First, it feels like the dock done much more right -- it's window-centric instead of application-centric, which is why I don't like the OS X dock. (I realize that OS X has all sorts of other spiffy window management stuff like Expose; I haven't used Macs enough to have a good feel for how I like it. Suffice to say that the dock isn't for switching between programs, or if it is it does a crappy job of it. And the Windows 7 taskbar doesn't have the same deficiencies, so it keeps its ability to pretty efficiently manage windows.)
Second is the better window grouping mechanism. I didn't like this in XP and would always turn it right off, but it works better in Win7. The Window previews you get when the mouse is over a taskbar entry are pretty spiffy, and usually work well. They are a good substitute for the dumb idea that was XP's grouping mechanism. (I'd still turn this off on a desktop with large monitor, but I've been working more on a laptop with a very small screen, so having a wide and double-height taskbar isn't a viable option.)
It's also what we get for using an OS that lets applications mess with things like your boot sector to implement DRM (I'm looking at you, Adobe)...
Don't go blaming the OS for what programs do. There's no way the OS can figure out that you're messing with the boot sector to implement DRM vs. some other reason, so the only way for it to prevent an app from messing with the boot sector to implement DRM is to prevent it from messing with the boot sector at all.
I defy you to find an OS that prevents this; Linux certainly doesn't, or you'd have a much more interesting time running fdisk or Grub.
While there is a little bit of truth to this (having money and the ability to cross the country at a moment's notice helps your chances), it's mostly false. The organizations that manage organ transplants have some pretty strict standards about that sort of thing and do audits to look for preferential treatment. It basically boils down to "you can't buy your way to the front of the list".
But while you can't get yourself at the front of the list, what you CAN do is get yourself on multiple lists. Transplant lists are managed regionally, and so if you'd be able to make it to, say, Tennessee in time for your transplant (this is where money and a private jet come in handy), then you can go to Tennessee, get evaluated, and get yourself on the list for that region. And that is how you can game the system if you've got money and are Steve Jobs. But you still won't get yourself at the front of that list.
I wonder why they included a link to IE 8 in the banner?
Short answers:
1. Because they don't want to help people accusing MS of abusing a monopoly more
2. People who are still using IE6 are probably more likely to upgrade if they see a banner for IE8 (and really, what matters is it's a banner with the "IE" logo) then on for a bunch of strange software.
Why not Opera or Safari instead?
Opera would have been a good one to include, but donkey crap is a better piece of software than Safari on Windows. At least when you clean up the mess it leaves it doesn't come back on its own.
My favorite thing is when Flash grabs the sound card and refuses to give it up, and because of the craptastic setup I'm working on right now, I don't get sound again until I log out and back in.
Word 2000's 'track changes' feature is notably better than the on in '97, and PowerPoint introduced a presenter view in 2003 (even if it was sort of crappy at the time). The former is "nice to have", but the latter is almost a "must-have" feature for software of that nature.
(And OpenOffice still has neither, though there is an extension that gives Impress an okay presenter view.)
the cpu is quick enough for os/x, 2gb is enough for os/x
Great! So you know the workloads that I'll put on it?
How will that 9400M handle today's games?
you can add drives with firewire.
And then have a couple more power bricks and some more cables around.
By point of contrast, my current computer is over 22 months old now -- almost 2 years. For about twice the cost of the cheapest Mac Mini now, I have:
A much better processor (quad core instead of dual core and better single-thread performance: 2.4 gHz vs 2.0)
Twice as much RAM (2 GB vs 1 GB; Newegg sells 4 GB of RAM for the cost of the upgrade from 1 to 2 GB that Apple charges)
An actual video card that almost certainly beats the pants off of the Mini's integrated graphics. (For an unfair test, but still the best I could find, I have an 8800 GTS with 320 MB. In an Anandtech test the 8800 GT with 256 MB of RAM (both a worse GPU and less memory) has 38.4 fps in Crysis at 1600x1200. In another test, the 9400M managed just 30.1 fps at 1024x768. So my 2-year-old GPU manages almost 2 1/2 times as many pixels as the GPU in Apple's only non-super-expensive, non-iMac desktop offering, and I still manage a higher frame rate. Now, the unfairness. In addition to being uncontrolled in the sense of doing different tests, Anandtech doesn't seem to say what else they had in the test rig for the latter tests.)
Lots of expandability
The ability to build the system myself (may be a benefit or drawback for you; I enjoy it)
The ability to carry forward a couple components to my next system to reduce the cost (I expect to do this with the case ($130) and perhaps the power supply ($110))
I don't want to dismiss the mini for some people, but I'm not one of those people. I'd be willing to pay to run OS X... but not that much.
Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft?
From my personal standpoint: when they make a computer that I'll actually buy. A couple other people in this thread have said a couple similar things, though my standpoint is slightly different.
In terms of desktops:
- iMacs have the big problem that the monitor is built in. The computer monitor is almost the only component of a system that it usually makes sense to inherit from one computer to the next, and the iMac makes this impossible. I'm seriously considering buying a $1400 monitor (the Dell 3008WFP) and will at least get a good one (definitely no TN panel) and will be pretty pissed if I can't use it at least through my next computer. When you replace an iMac, good luck inheriting the display. (The smallest iMac has a 20" monitor, and the cheapest 20" monitor on Newegg is over $100. The 24" seems to be an IPS panel, so too bad if you wanted to get a cheaper TN one and save a bit of money.)
- Mac Pros are very nice machines, and actually pretty reasonably-priced for a prebuild computer of its specs. If I were in the market for something in that range, I would consider the Mac Pro. But the cheapest configuration of a Mac Pro is $2500... that's way out of my price range. I have no need for a Xeon processor; a simple Core 2 would be fine.
- Mac Minis are easily the most attractive of the bunch, but they are not expandable (I have 3 hard drives in my current computer), even maxed out the specs aren't great, and it's still fairly expensive (the computer I built a year ago had better specs and cost about the same).
Now, if I were to buy a laptop, the story changes. The Macbook Pros are, I think, on par costwise with good Windows machines (like Thinkpads), and I would seriously consider buying one. Now, that said... my current laptop (from "work") is actually a tablet PC, and I really like the tablet aspects, and I'd also be very tempted to buy one of those. But guess how many tablets you'd find in the Apple store?
Swing is also cross platform whereas Windows APIs are tied to Windows.
This is a big drawback; I have no problem acknowledging that. It'll be a very legitimate deal-breaker for some people. (I also acknowledge that some people have patent concerns about Mono; I tend to be a little less receptive of that concern, even though it will be valid sometimes.)
I'm sort of talking from a "what does the API look like from the programmer's standpoint" view; in my mind, Windows Forms easily wins against Swing. I'm sure some of that is a matter of preference.
I don't know how some of the alternative windowing toolkits, like GTK#, look. As largely a Windows person myself, one big benefit of using Windows Forms over either is that it uses native windows controls; Swing's are less than optimal, and GTK pretty much sucks on Windows. For most things I'd write for fun, I'd rather use either a more platform-neutral toolkit (but still one that uses native controls) like Qt or make Linux a "second class citizen" using Mono's WinForms implementation then I would use something that's crappy on Windows.
C# is VB with C syntax. VB is Microsoft's bastardized version of Java.
JDK 1.0: Jan 1996 VB 1.0: May 1991
VB was at 4.0 by the time Java was released.
If by "VB" you mean VB.Net, I would say it's the reverse: C# is Microsoft's "bastardized version" of Java (though mostly better IMO), and VB.Net is C# with VB syntax.
Actually, GUI programming in Java via Swing is really quite nice.
That's... a matter of debate. Admittedly only having a very cursory knowledge of what happened in Java 6 and none of what's due in 7, I'd take Windows Forms any day of the week.
Swing is better than programming in C using the Windows API directly... and that's about as much as I'll grant.
Qt is quite spiffy though. There are some weird integration things with C++ and the STL, and you have to deal with the uglies of C++, but Qt is a damn nice library.
Slashdot Mirror
Even the GPL v.2 has this to say about patents:
For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
So basically, if MS holds patents on the code they are contributing, my reading of the GPL says they can't contribute it (or can't enforce said patents).
...should require the hard drive equivalent of sudo to even read it.
So what's the equivalent? The only thing I can think of are things along a button on the physical drive. Possible, but a bit unweildy, no?
(It certainly can't just display something particular on screen; that could easily be faked.)
(yay for a toolbar i can turn into a proper Dock :D)
This is probably a difference in philosophy between the Mac and Windows people, but I never particularly liked the Mac dock. I always thought that the application-switching capabilities of it were next to useless. I do like the Windows 7 task bar, which surprises me for that reason. First, it feels like the dock done much more right -- it's window-centric instead of application-centric, which is why I don't like the OS X dock. (I realize that OS X has all sorts of other spiffy window management stuff like Expose; I haven't used Macs enough to have a good feel for how I like it. Suffice to say that the dock isn't for switching between programs, or if it is it does a crappy job of it. And the Windows 7 taskbar doesn't have the same deficiencies, so it keeps its ability to pretty efficiently manage windows.)
Second is the better window grouping mechanism. I didn't like this in XP and would always turn it right off, but it works better in Win7. The Window previews you get when the mouse is over a taskbar entry are pretty spiffy, and usually work well. They are a good substitute for the dumb idea that was XP's grouping mechanism. (I'd still turn this off on a desktop with large monitor, but I've been working more on a laptop with a very small screen, so having a wide and double-height taskbar isn't a viable option.)
It's also what we get for using an OS that lets applications mess with things like your boot sector to implement DRM (I'm looking at you, Adobe)...
Don't go blaming the OS for what programs do. There's no way the OS can figure out that you're messing with the boot sector to implement DRM vs. some other reason, so the only way for it to prevent an app from messing with the boot sector to implement DRM is to prevent it from messing with the boot sector at all.
I defy you to find an OS that prevents this; Linux certainly doesn't, or you'd have a much more interesting time running fdisk or Grub.
Holy shit you Apple fan boys are fucking crazy.
I've been called an MS shill a couple times before, but I think this is the first time I've been called an Apple fanboy...
-1, Flamebait
While there is a little bit of truth to this (having money and the ability to cross the country at a moment's notice helps your chances), it's mostly false. The organizations that manage organ transplants have some pretty strict standards about that sort of thing and do audits to look for preferential treatment. It basically boils down to "you can't buy your way to the front of the list".
But while you can't get yourself at the front of the list, what you CAN do is get yourself on multiple lists. Transplant lists are managed regionally, and so if you'd be able to make it to, say, Tennessee in time for your transplant (this is where money and a private jet come in handy), then you can go to Tennessee, get evaluated, and get yourself on the list for that region. And that is how you can game the system if you've got money and are Steve Jobs. But you still won't get yourself at the front of that list.
It's possible that the 150K are lines they wrote or something like that, and they used an existing engine?
(I'm just talking out of my ass here)
1300 servers, processing 40 million transactions a day... ...we see over 100,000,000 transactions a day. So we have about 400 times the performance...
Take your pick of the following criticisms:
1. Good job comparing peak performance vs average performance
2. I think you might need to learn to multiply
When your landlord accepts your lease signature by Twitter, get back to me.
I wonder why they included a link to IE 8 in the banner?
Short answers:
1. Because they don't want to help people accusing MS of abusing a monopoly more
2. People who are still using IE6 are probably more likely to upgrade if they see a banner for IE8 (and really, what matters is it's a banner with the "IE" logo) then on for a bunch of strange software.
Why not Opera or Safari instead?
Opera would have been a good one to include, but donkey crap is a better piece of software than Safari on Windows. At least when you clean up the mess it leaves it doesn't come back on its own.
My favorite thing is when Flash grabs the sound card and refuses to give it up, and because of the craptastic setup I'm working on right now, I don't get sound again until I log out and back in.
It is possible... 1 redundant, several underrated mods.
Moderators, you know what to do!
All the features you need...
Word 2000's 'track changes' feature is notably better than the on in '97, and PowerPoint introduced a presenter view in 2003 (even if it was sort of crappy at the time). The former is "nice to have", but the latter is almost a "must-have" feature for software of that nature.
(And OpenOffice still has neither, though there is an extension that gives Impress an okay presenter view.)
I agree. I don't know anyone that anyone that likes the new ribbon interface.
Let me paraphrase your post and the one you replied to.
Your parent: "I really like the ribbon now."
You: "I agree. I really dislike the ribbon."
Did I get that right?
Yeah, but you'd immediately have to metamoderate your moderation down, so it works out in the end.
the cpu is quick enough for os/x, 2gb is enough for os/x
Great! So you know the workloads that I'll put on it?
How will that 9400M handle today's games?
you can add drives with firewire.
And then have a couple more power bricks and some more cables around.
By point of contrast, my current computer is over 22 months old now -- almost 2 years. For about twice the cost of the cheapest Mac Mini now, I have:
I don't want to dismiss the mini for some people, but I'm not one of those people. I'd be willing to pay to run OS X... but not that much.
Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft?
From my personal standpoint: when they make a computer that I'll actually buy. A couple other people in this thread have said a couple similar things, though my standpoint is slightly different.
In terms of desktops:
- iMacs have the big problem that the monitor is built in. The computer monitor is almost the only component of a system that it usually makes sense to inherit from one computer to the next, and the iMac makes this impossible. I'm seriously considering buying a $1400 monitor (the Dell 3008WFP) and will at least get a good one (definitely no TN panel) and will be pretty pissed if I can't use it at least through my next computer. When you replace an iMac, good luck inheriting the display. (The smallest iMac has a 20" monitor, and the cheapest 20" monitor on Newegg is over $100. The 24" seems to be an IPS panel, so too bad if you wanted to get a cheaper TN one and save a bit of money.)
- Mac Pros are very nice machines, and actually pretty reasonably-priced for a prebuild computer of its specs. If I were in the market for something in that range, I would consider the Mac Pro. But the cheapest configuration of a Mac Pro is $2500... that's way out of my price range. I have no need for a Xeon processor; a simple Core 2 would be fine.
- Mac Minis are easily the most attractive of the bunch, but they are not expandable (I have 3 hard drives in my current computer), even maxed out the specs aren't great, and it's still fairly expensive (the computer I built a year ago had better specs and cost about the same).
Now, if I were to buy a laptop, the story changes. The Macbook Pros are, I think, on par costwise with good Windows machines (like Thinkpads), and I would seriously consider buying one. Now, that said... my current laptop (from "work") is actually a tablet PC, and I really like the tablet aspects, and I'd also be very tempted to buy one of those. But guess how many tablets you'd find in the Apple store?
Clearly Linux people don't actually have any arguments against Windows, or they wouldn't resort to ad hominem attacks like that.
(Yes, I'm being sarcastic. I think. Sometimes I wonder myself.)
The model M has one virtue: beating the owner to death after going insane from listening to the damn thing all day.
I have no idea how SWT's API looks, so I can't comment on that. I do tend to like the results though.
Swing is also cross platform whereas Windows APIs are tied to Windows.
This is a big drawback; I have no problem acknowledging that. It'll be a very legitimate deal-breaker for some people. (I also acknowledge that some people have patent concerns about Mono; I tend to be a little less receptive of that concern, even though it will be valid sometimes.)
I'm sort of talking from a "what does the API look like from the programmer's standpoint" view; in my mind, Windows Forms easily wins against Swing. I'm sure some of that is a matter of preference.
I don't know how some of the alternative windowing toolkits, like GTK#, look. As largely a Windows person myself, one big benefit of using Windows Forms over either is that it uses native windows controls; Swing's are less than optimal, and GTK pretty much sucks on Windows. For most things I'd write for fun, I'd rather use either a more platform-neutral toolkit (but still one that uses native controls) like Qt or make Linux a "second class citizen" using Mono's WinForms implementation then I would use something that's crappy on Windows.
C# is VB with C syntax. VB is Microsoft's bastardized version of Java.
JDK 1.0: Jan 1996
VB 1.0: May 1991
VB was at 4.0 by the time Java was released.
If by "VB" you mean VB.Net, I would say it's the reverse: C# is Microsoft's "bastardized version" of Java (though mostly better IMO), and VB.Net is C# with VB syntax.
Actually, GUI programming in Java via Swing is really quite nice.
That's... a matter of debate. Admittedly only having a very cursory knowledge of what happened in Java 6 and none of what's due in 7, I'd take Windows Forms any day of the week.
Swing is better than programming in C using the Windows API directly... and that's about as much as I'll grant.
Qt is quite spiffy though. There are some weird integration things with C++ and the STL, and you have to deal with the uglies of C++, but Qt is a damn nice library.
...an informative result.
That's a little egg on my face; a previous clipboard entry that hung around. This is where that link should have gone.
Can Visual Studio do "extract to local variable" and "extract to method"?
Maybe a Google search for... I dunno... "Visual Studio extract method" would produce an informative result.