Although I consider OOXML to be an abomination, at this point Microsoft could be seen as trying to introduce competition. This seems to be more directly related to stacking "no" votes.
They can drive me there, but they can't make me get out of the car. I'll stick with Mac OS X and Kubuntu for my day-to-day needs, and XP and its more reasonable license agreement for the stuff I need to do in Windows.
Even then, feature set is not how you figure out R&D costs. Uniqueness is. It can cost just as much to rule out including a feature as to code and include it.
I did not say 2-3 times higher. I said higher. I don't expect you to actually say anything relevant or interesting, but not misquoting me would be an excellent step.
(PS: I'm not an iPhone user. Not interested in getting one, ever, unless it's through work for developing software on one. I use my phone to make calls.)
Given the time the product spent in development and the features it has, yes, I'd expect the iPhone's R&D budget was quite a bit higher. It would be completely insane to think otherwise.
And I don't mean someone's analysis of the parts. I mean actual proof that there's no cost in the design, and price-per-unit is the only cost, and that Apple's acknowledged that the parts come to $200.
The future of Linux as a environment -- either desktop or server -- is out of the hands of the kernel developers and has been for some time. They can make things slightly better, or make things worse (which means we'll stay with an older version), but...
In all seriousness, how many here think that changes in the kernel are really going to be the big news for "the future of Linux" for the next decade? The revolution is going to happen elsewhere.
Linus is an interesting guy, but as long as he's focused on git and the kernel he's not going to be the guy who takes us somewhere new.
Oh, certainly. I think VS is the best tool for Windows development, precisely because it's made by Microsoft. I honestly wouldn't use anything else. I hate the UI and a lot of the features, but there's little argument that it gets the job done in a way that only the OS developer could probably pull off.
Apple's Xcode is similar on the Mac. There's a few things I like more than Visual Studio, and a few things that I like less. Overall, I think it's just about the same, with maybe a slight edge on design (which you'd expect when comparing an Apple product to a Microsoft one). It isn't as strong as it should be, though.
And yes, I see the same potential in RHDS. I know it's going to be well integrated. I just wish it was also good interface design, if you follow me.:)
And all of them have their strengths as IDEs, but it bothers me that they're all so weak. It shouldn't be hard to build an IDE that doesn't suck. I don't know what it says that programmers can't design good UIs for programmer tools.
In theory, it should be possible to integrate Visual Studio with nearly anything. In practice, though, it's another one of those things that always seems to suck. Having never tried to write a plugin for it, I can't tell you if it is due to the complexity and/or flakiness of Visual Studio or just incompetence on the plugin developers. I suspect it's mostly Microsoft's fault...
Meh. I can't even think of a good IDE right now. I like a lot of the way Xcode works, but not all of it. Still, I thought Eclipse as a more-weak-than-average entry overall.
Sure!
Palm development environment is constructed with Eclipse. In a word, it sucks. But that isn't fair to sucking. I have never, ever seen a less capable development environment. Sure, the compilers suck - that isn't really Eclipse's fault, though. That's a plugin, right? The debugger also sucks. Oh, but that's a plugin too, right? The editor sucks, too. I think that's actually built in functionality, but I could be wrong.
Qt's Eclipse-based tools? Also suck harshly. Symbian's? Suck harshly. Eclipse's own C Development Kit? Sucks harshly.
Go ahead - I'm waiting. Tell me an Eclipsed-based product I can download that doesn't suck. I've just named at least three that you can download, one that's even included in the initial download.
I didn't like the syntax highlighting, either. It worked great for my code, but seemed to completely fail to parse system headers. Maybe they've fixed that by now, though.
(Hardly flamebait. An opinion outside what the majority thinks, apparently, but still not intentional flamebait. Go ahead and look through my history. I'll wait here.)
Eclipse is truly, truly terrible. It is hopelessly slow and buggy, and lacking in such basic features as to be useless. I'm absolutely shocked anyone could tolerate it, let alone call it "a breath of fresh air."
Open source is nice, but software needs to be judged on its own merits, rather than just the merits of its license. If the best defense you can come up with for software is that it's open source, you have completely failed to defend it.
Promising and Eclipse in the same sentence? Say it isn't so!
I have seen many companies try to build development environments out of Eclipse, but I've yet to see one that doesn't suck so hard that it makes developers scream for mercy.
To be fair, it could just be the plugins. Maybe it is actually possible to extend Eclipse into something that doesn't suck. I just haven't seen it happen yet.
Yeah, everyone knows that patching security holes is an instant process. What other explanation could there possibly be? The public found out about the bugs, and the vendor waved a magic wand, and presto-changeo, they were fixed.
Okay, now let's be real here.
That the patch appeared almost immediately after is the surest sign that the vendor was already working on them. It probably also indicates the vendor wasn't confident that they were finished, and rushed them to get them out after only a couple days of public disclosure.
Microsoft is in a position to handpick the best unit of all their prototypes to deliver to the FCC for testing. They choose to send in the malfunctioning one.
The only way this makes sense is if the horribly malfunctioning unit they sent in was the best they had. Maybe the others caused rashes on your hands as soon as you opened the box.
I don't know. That Microsoft's picked prototype did exactly what broadcasters feared, but is quickly explained with "oops, it malfunctioned!" seems to prove the broadcasters' point with a double underline.
Forbes: Hi, we're looking for a comment on a story we're about to run.
SCO: I am the janitor.
Forbes: Can you get someone to call us back with a comment?
SCO: Okay, but for who?
Forbes: Well, who else is there?
SCO: Uh... they want to take the phone system now. Bye!
Hmm. I don't really know. I know it was on a daughtercard at one point, but I'm not sure that was still true of the latest model. There's been a couple updates to the Mini since any of the wireless was optional. I guess we'll have to see.
Slashdot Mirror
No, but OpenDoc is already approved. Nobody's trying to block OpenDoc's approval (mind you, only because it's too late).
Although I consider OOXML to be an abomination, at this point Microsoft could be seen as trying to introduce competition. This seems to be more directly related to stacking "no" votes.
They can drive me there, but they can't make me get out of the car. I'll stick with Mac OS X and Kubuntu for my day-to-day needs, and XP and its more reasonable license agreement for the stuff I need to do in Windows.
I've had a couple relatives go this way. Definitely something I wouldn't wish on anyone. This needs to become a practical treatment.
Even then, feature set is not how you figure out R&D costs. Uniqueness is. It can cost just as much to rule out including a feature as to code and include it.
I did not say 2-3 times higher. I said higher. I don't expect you to actually say anything relevant or interesting, but not misquoting me would be an excellent step.
(PS: I'm not an iPhone user. Not interested in getting one, ever, unless it's through work for developing software on one. I use my phone to make calls.)
Given the time the product spent in development and the features it has, yes, I'd expect the iPhone's R&D budget was quite a bit higher. It would be completely insane to think otherwise.
Proof?
And I don't mean someone's analysis of the parts. I mean actual proof that there's no cost in the design, and price-per-unit is the only cost, and that Apple's acknowledged that the parts come to $200.
Otherwise, you're speculating.
His problem is he's a Ubuntu user? I'm sure he more concerned with having to spend the five months in home confinement.
No, wait. He's a nerd. He probably won't even notice that he's locked in the house.
The future of Linux as a environment -- either desktop or server -- is out of the hands of the kernel developers and has been for some time. They can make things slightly better, or make things worse (which means we'll stay with an older version), but...
In all seriousness, how many here think that changes in the kernel are really going to be the big news for "the future of Linux" for the next decade? The revolution is going to happen elsewhere.
Linus is an interesting guy, but as long as he's focused on git and the kernel he's not going to be the guy who takes us somewhere new.
Oh, certainly. I think VS is the best tool for Windows development, precisely because it's made by Microsoft. I honestly wouldn't use anything else. I hate the UI and a lot of the features, but there's little argument that it gets the job done in a way that only the OS developer could probably pull off.
:)
Apple's Xcode is similar on the Mac. There's a few things I like more than Visual Studio, and a few things that I like less. Overall, I think it's just about the same, with maybe a slight edge on design (which you'd expect when comparing an Apple product to a Microsoft one). It isn't as strong as it should be, though.
And yes, I see the same potential in RHDS. I know it's going to be well integrated. I just wish it was also good interface design, if you follow me.
And all of them have their strengths as IDEs, but it bothers me that they're all so weak. It shouldn't be hard to build an IDE that doesn't suck. I don't know what it says that programmers can't design good UIs for programmer tools.
In theory, it should be possible to integrate Visual Studio with nearly anything. In practice, though, it's another one of those things that always seems to suck. Having never tried to write a plugin for it, I can't tell you if it is due to the complexity and/or flakiness of Visual Studio or just incompetence on the plugin developers. I suspect it's mostly Microsoft's fault...
Meh. I can't even think of a good IDE right now. I like a lot of the way Xcode works, but not all of it. Still, I thought Eclipse as a more-weak-than-average entry overall.
Actually, it really was that Mac centric. It was just that Claris had some awesome Mac->Win32 porting tools.
One last thing: If the only IDE you can compare Eclipse to is VIsual Studio, you've led a sad, sad life. No wonder Eclipse seems almost decent.
Sure! Palm development environment is constructed with Eclipse. In a word, it sucks. But that isn't fair to sucking. I have never, ever seen a less capable development environment. Sure, the compilers suck - that isn't really Eclipse's fault, though. That's a plugin, right? The debugger also sucks. Oh, but that's a plugin too, right? The editor sucks, too. I think that's actually built in functionality, but I could be wrong. Qt's Eclipse-based tools? Also suck harshly. Symbian's? Suck harshly. Eclipse's own C Development Kit? Sucks harshly. Go ahead - I'm waiting. Tell me an Eclipsed-based product I can download that doesn't suck. I've just named at least three that you can download, one that's even included in the initial download.
I didn't like the syntax highlighting, either. It worked great for my code, but seemed to completely fail to parse system headers. Maybe they've fixed that by now, though.
(Hardly flamebait. An opinion outside what the majority thinks, apparently, but still not intentional flamebait. Go ahead and look through my history. I'll wait here.)
Eclipse is truly, truly terrible. It is hopelessly slow and buggy, and lacking in such basic features as to be useless. I'm absolutely shocked anyone could tolerate it, let alone call it "a breath of fresh air."
Open source is nice, but software needs to be judged on its own merits, rather than just the merits of its license. If the best defense you can come up with for software is that it's open source, you have completely failed to defend it.
Promising and Eclipse in the same sentence? Say it isn't so!
I have seen many companies try to build development environments out of Eclipse, but I've yet to see one that doesn't suck so hard that it makes developers scream for mercy.
To be fair, it could just be the plugins. Maybe it is actually possible to extend Eclipse into something that doesn't suck. I just haven't seen it happen yet.
"Coincidence? Probably not considering..."
Yeah, everyone knows that patching security holes is an instant process. What other explanation could there possibly be? The public found out about the bugs, and the vendor waved a magic wand, and presto-changeo, they were fixed.
Okay, now let's be real here.
That the patch appeared almost immediately after is the surest sign that the vendor was already working on them. It probably also indicates the vendor wasn't confident that they were finished, and rushed them to get them out after only a couple days of public disclosure.
So enjoy your half-baked patch.
I wonder if they've structured themselves that they can simply close whatever small working unit owes the fees.
Microsoft is in a position to handpick the best unit of all their prototypes to deliver to the FCC for testing. They choose to send in the malfunctioning one.
The only way this makes sense is if the horribly malfunctioning unit they sent in was the best they had. Maybe the others caused rashes on your hands as soon as you opened the box.
I don't know. That Microsoft's picked prototype did exactly what broadcasters feared, but is quickly explained with "oops, it malfunctioned!" seems to prove the broadcasters' point with a double underline.
The actual conversation:
Forbes: Hi, we're looking for a comment on a story we're about to run.
SCO: I am the janitor.
Forbes: Can you get someone to call us back with a comment?
SCO: Okay, but for who?
Forbes: Well, who else is there?
SCO: Uh... they want to take the phone system now. Bye!
Thanks for the info. :)
Hmm. I don't really know. I know it was on a daughtercard at one point, but I'm not sure that was still true of the latest model. There's been a couple updates to the Mini since any of the wireless was optional. I guess we'll have to see.