While a developer can be a user, not all users are developers. Availability of the code means squat to someone who does not know how to write code.
That's ridiculous. If you have the code, you can *hire* someone to fix the thing, ten years after the original supplier went bankrupt or whatever.
I need the plans for my house, even if I'm not licensed to fix the bathroom -- I need them in case I hire someone to do improvements here.
Most every place I've been paid to work with software, the ones with budgetary responsibility have *not* been able to code themselves out of a wet paper bag. They've been readily able to get something fixed, if the source is available -- if needed by hiring someone to do it.
No, what you suggest is ridiculous. If the software is "free" to begin with, why would I want to spend a lot of money to hire something that nobody is going to bother to maintain? That would be throwing good money after bad. You are better off looking for an alternative and choosing a product in the first place that has adequate export facilities for your data should you decide to migrate to another system later.
You appear to be ignorant of how much software development costs to suggest that someone "hire" a programmer to maintain an abandoned product.
How about this: imagine a text editor released under both GPL and BSD.
Developer A takes the GPL version, extends it, makes it nicer, etc. but the new file format isn't fully compatible with the original.
Developer B takes the BSD version, extends it, makes it nicer, etc. but the new file format isn't fully compatible with the original.
Which version is the USER better off with, if they need to extract their data in a format they can take somewhere else? The one where the source code changes are available, or the one where they aren't?
Neither? While a developer can be a user, not all users are developers. Availability of the code means squat to someone who does not know how to write code. That is the problem with the GNU people. They assume that everyone is an interested third party capable of understanding and modifying code.
I know of LLVM, but haven't used it, and it really seems like very few hardcore Linux/OSS devs have a clue about it. Is there really a clear advantage, or is it just an excuse to write a new compiler to solve a problem that doesn't exist?
For now, I'm quite happy with GCC, but could be convinced otherwise with a compelling argument.
The clear advantage is illustrated by fast turtle. Here http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3237175&cid=41911001 where you can validate that a binary was created with a specific set of code using the MD5 sum of your binary against the master MD5 or to validate that a third party distributor is releasing the same binary as the official one. You cannot do that with GCC.
You misspelled "apple land" there. Microsoft handily includes a microSD port with its tablets.
You seem too used to the fact that in apple tablets and phones, whatever memory you buy the device with, you're stuck with. This is not the case here.
*WHOOSH*
Reading comprehension is fundamental. The GP was talking about how Microsoft likes to cram the same OS onto multiple form factors. In the case of Windows 8 and Windows RT, they decided that desktop users should use an OS that is a cross between a tablet OS and windows instead of having a separate tablet OS which just uses some of the core functionality of windows and a separate desktop/laptop OS.
Frankly, ipad comparison is hilarious. Surface has the industry standard microSD port. Just put in another 32 gigs. Costs something around 30€ at the moment.
With ipad, you're SOL.
You can only use that space on the SD card for data. You cannot use it to store apps.
Most developers consider themselves to be professionals and are often compensated with a combination of base salary and a bonus structure. They also tend to have a good benefits package from their employer.
Also, please do not lump developers into "IT workers" which could include helpdesk/call centre workers, technical support or sys admins. None of those people write code as the main part of their job.
Personally I'm ok with JPL sacking someone who believes in intelligent design because of their belief. Acceptance of an empirical verification mechanism seems central to the job. I'm also fine with a chaplain being sacked because he's an atheist.
Would you care to enlighten us as to what evolution has to do with being in a engineering position? Abiogenesis requires a leap of faith but again, it has nothing to do with engineering. This is why Europe is laughing at America. You have an "all or noting" "with us or against us" attitude. You can accept a number of scientific theories and yet question others and still be a qualified chemist or engineer in any other country than the US apparently. What you are asking people to do is think of the current understanding of science as if it were unquestionable dogma.
That is scary.
Believe it or not but there are chemists, MDs and engineers who live and work in Europe who either question evolution or believe in intelligent design. Some of those scientists came to those conclusions during the course of their work/study. As long as they continue to do their work in an efficient and competent manner, their colleagues see no problem with it. That is because Europe is far more enlightened and not afraid of people having different points of view.
Americans just cannot seem to tolerate dissent of any kind even in academia.
Give me a break. Not only is iPhone and iFone spelled differently but in spanish, iPhone would be iPone. Ruling that they are similar phonetically in any language is ridiculous let alone using English as the language to make a case for trademark infringement in Mexico.
For the look and feel suit but not the one for stolen source code from Quicktime which ended up in Video for Windows. The latter resulted in an out of court settlement where MSFT bought non-voting shares in Apple, made undisclosed payments rumored to be around a billion in the end and a commitment to continue developing MS Office and Internet Explorer for the mac for 5 years. The MS Office commitment was renewed voluntarily by Microsoft a number of times since then.
You cannot join a domain with Windows RT devices like the Surface RT. You are confusing the Surface RT with the Surface Pro. The latter will cost as much as a Macbook air if not more.
Pay attention to the update at the bottom of the story.
No, they issued a denial because the Czech office released information that it was not authorized to release. I don't think anyone thinks that the Czech office was pulling something out of their arse. Office for iOS and Android are real projects in development at Microsoft as contingency plans incase Windows RT falls flat on its face.
Because Windows will never have developer support./s
Windows RT only allows third party developers to write "Metro" apps that access the WinRT API. WinRT is the API for Metro apps on both Windows RT and Windows 8.
Whenever you hear the new Microsoft Surface mentioned, say, "Oh, is that the one that's Linux-based?"
Well, at least when you say that with Apple's stuff, there is at least a kernel of truth to it.
Yeah, no. Linux is a kernel. OS X and iOS both have a XNU hybrid kernel which is a cross between the Mach microkernel and BSD. I does not have any Linux kernel code in it.
Quite the opposite. With a keyboard and touchpad, there's no reason why you cannot create documents on the RT. That's the entire point actually- it's an iPad form factor most of the time but if you need to do real work the real tools are there.
Right, and you can do the same with an iPad and a keyboard cover coupled with Pages or some other app.
Every device whose primary interface is graphical will be "essentially useless" to a blind person. Fucking duh! It's not just the iPhone, it's every touchscreen device made.
You are right, the iPhone and other devices are completely useless to a
blind person.
It's higher res than the previous iPads, which plenty of people use as e-readers. I doubt that's going to be a problem. It also has an extremely low-reflectivity screen, which results in better contrast and a clearer image when viewed with ambient light than you get from the iPad.
No it isn't really. it is 16:9 instead of 4:3 but the effective resolution for content other than video is about the same. most books fit into a 4:3 ratio.
Are you seriously comparing a brand new OS to a relatively minor update? Why don't you compare the OSX upgrade to a service pack from Microsoft? The extent of the updates are comparable, but in Microsoft's case it's free. And Apple has charged a good deal more for upgrades in the past, most of which I'd also consider minimal.
Frankly I'm surprised MS is only charging $70.
Are you serious? A service pack is a bundling up of driver updates and patches. The equivalent of the service pack in OS X would be the 10.x.x packages which are free. The "version" stays at 10.x with each release because each release retains a high level of binary and code compatibility and for marketing purposes. In some cases, third party drivers (ktext) have to be recompiled in order to work while in others some rewriting has to happen. The kernel increased by a full version number with each 10.x release and new APIs were also added with each release.
When was the last time the Win32 API was updated? Certainly not with service packs. BTW. The.NET framework does not really count since you can download that separately and the API that is hooks into has not really changed much since Windows XP.
Amazon has been licensing their http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click to various companies like Apple. I guess Bezos just wants to use other people's patents for free but expects everyone to pay to use their patents.
Right, you post to a page telling you to avoid the word consumer. That shows the bias of the GNU people. The problem is that the GNU group seems to be confused between the word "user" and developer. While a developer can also be a user, most "consumers" are exclusively users. Because of this, you should not expect a typical end user to care about the code availability, care about what license the code is available under or anything else that you seem to think of as important. To an average end user, what matters is "price", functionality, usability and availability/stability. They really don't give a rats arse about FOSS ideals and goals. If they see some developer get whiny and force someone to remove an app from say, the Apple app store, then those users will hate that whiny person and simply search for an alternative even if it is a paid app.
I'm sorry to bring you a dose of reality. If you want people to use your apps, consider a free license like the MIT or BSD license or alternatively sell it under a commercial license. If you have multiple contributors then you can setup an equitable way of sharing the proceeds of the sale of the licenses after covering any common overhead incurred for setting up shop.
All men are born evil eh? K. Sorry I do not share your beliefs in original sin. All men have ability to make choices, some choose to do evil often. Stop trying to put this off on your mythical sky bitch.
I guess you have never seen a toddler before? They can be both laughing and giggling but they can be bitchy, cruel and selfish. They are born that way. We are born with a selfish nature.
Well that is kind of sad then isn't it? You should have the freedom to say things that other people would find offensive. Political speech could be offensive to other people for example.
I might consider leaving Canada in the future if things get worse. I don't want to continue supporting a system which does not value individual rights and freedoms with my tax dollars. If I am supposed to tolerate artists like the "piss christ" one then I should be free to say things that might offend other people as well.
Please investigate a little bit further. These people might have been non-believers but they used the same tricks as religion does. Miracles, a local deity (or representative), Dogma and Force (albeit much more physical opposed to the more enlightened religions of today)
How are you any different? You are quoting dogma and painting all faiths with the same brush even when some acts committed by Muslims are considered a "sin" by Jesus and his followers. It is a "sin" to go around killing people. It is a sin to lie. It is a sin to commit suicide. Jesus stopped the stoning of a prostitute but not because he wanted her to continue with her existing lifestyle but rather to give her a second chance for a better way to live.
What you are asking society to do is to redefine those rules...
Marriage is a legal contract, it is defined by the government. So yes. people are asking that the government definition be changed. Just like any other law can be changed. These rules have been changed before, mixed race marriages are now legal.
I think you are bit confused. Marriage recognized by the government. It is entered into by two people and then recognized by the government. When the United States, Canada, England, France etc... formed as modern nation states there were "married" people living in those regions and the nation states recognized the validity of those marriage based on societal norms and customs. Society, not the government defined not only marriage but government itself. You seem to have forgotten that government exists at the whim of the people. Perhaps that is why Americans have given up so much of their liberty. They think that they serve the government rather than the government serving them. Governments would not exist if not for marriages creating lines of succession, inheritance and the concept of a "family". Without marriage, humanity would still be living in loosely grouped hunter gatherer hunting parties. Even tribes required marriage to establish a ruling dynasty.
Slashdot Mirror
While a developer can be a user, not all users are developers. Availability of the code means squat to someone who does not know how to write code.
That's ridiculous. If you have the code, you can *hire* someone to fix the thing, ten years after the original supplier went bankrupt or whatever.
I need the plans for my house, even if I'm not licensed to fix the bathroom -- I need them in case I hire someone to do improvements here.
Most every place I've been paid to work with software, the ones with budgetary responsibility have *not* been able to code themselves out of a wet paper bag. They've been readily able to get something fixed, if the source is available -- if needed by hiring someone to do it.
No, what you suggest is ridiculous. If the software is "free" to begin with, why would I want to spend a lot of money to hire something that nobody is going to bother to maintain? That would be throwing good money after bad. You are better off looking for an alternative and choosing a product in the first place that has adequate export facilities for your data should you decide to migrate to another system later.
You appear to be ignorant of how much software development costs to suggest that someone "hire" a programmer to maintain an abandoned product.
How about this: imagine a text editor released under both GPL and BSD.
Developer A takes the GPL version, extends it, makes it nicer, etc. but the new file format isn't fully compatible with the original. Developer B takes the BSD version, extends it, makes it nicer, etc. but the new file format isn't fully compatible with the original.
Which version is the USER better off with, if they need to extract their data in a format they can take somewhere else? The one where the source code changes are available, or the one where they aren't?
Neither? While a developer can be a user, not all users are developers. Availability of the code means squat to someone who does not know how to write code. That is the problem with the GNU people. They assume that everyone is an interested third party capable of understanding and modifying code.
I know of LLVM, but haven't used it, and it really seems like very few hardcore Linux/OSS devs have a clue about it. Is there really a clear advantage, or is it just an excuse to write a new compiler to solve a problem that doesn't exist?
For now, I'm quite happy with GCC, but could be convinced otherwise with a compelling argument.
The clear advantage is illustrated by fast turtle. Here http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3237175&cid=41911001 where you can validate that a binary was created with a specific set of code using the MD5 sum of your binary against the master MD5 or to validate that a third party distributor is releasing the same binary as the official one. You cannot do that with GCC.
You misspelled "apple land" there. Microsoft handily includes a microSD port with its tablets. You seem too used to the fact that in apple tablets and phones, whatever memory you buy the device with, you're stuck with. This is not the case here.
*WHOOSH* Reading comprehension is fundamental. The GP was talking about how Microsoft likes to cram the same OS onto multiple form factors. In the case of Windows 8 and Windows RT, they decided that desktop users should use an OS that is a cross between a tablet OS and windows instead of having a separate tablet OS which just uses some of the core functionality of windows and a separate desktop/laptop OS.
Frankly, ipad comparison is hilarious. Surface has the industry standard microSD port. Just put in another 32 gigs. Costs something around 30€ at the moment.
With ipad, you're SOL.
You can only use that space on the SD card for data. You cannot use it to store apps.
Also, please do not lump developers into "IT workers" which could include helpdesk/call centre workers, technical support or sys admins. None of those people write code as the main part of their job.
Personally I'm ok with JPL sacking someone who believes in intelligent design because of their belief. Acceptance of an empirical verification mechanism seems central to the job. I'm also fine with a chaplain being sacked because he's an atheist.
Would you care to enlighten us as to what evolution has to do with being in a engineering position? Abiogenesis requires a leap of faith but again, it has nothing to do with engineering. This is why Europe is laughing at America. You have an "all or noting" "with us or against us" attitude. You can accept a number of scientific theories and yet question others and still be a qualified chemist or engineer in any other country than the US apparently. What you are asking people to do is think of the current understanding of science as if it were unquestionable dogma.
That is scary.
Believe it or not but there are chemists, MDs and engineers who live and work in Europe who either question evolution or believe in intelligent design. Some of those scientists came to those conclusions during the course of their work/study. As long as they continue to do their work in an efficient and competent manner, their colleagues see no problem with it. That is because Europe is far more enlightened and not afraid of people having different points of view.
Americans just cannot seem to tolerate dissent of any kind even in academia.
Nokia is the company that closed a digital store and revoked the access to all purchases to their customers. Death is an appropriate fate for them.
Microsoft did the same thing when they shut down the "playsforsure" platform.
Give me a break. Not only is iPhone and iFone spelled differently but in spanish, iPhone would be iPone. Ruling that they are similar phonetically in any language is ridiculous let alone using English as the language to make a case for trademark infringement in Mexico.
Who made them king? This seems to be a bit of an overreach of their "powers".
And lost :)
For the look and feel suit but not the one for stolen source code from Quicktime which ended up in Video for Windows. The latter resulted in an out of court settlement where MSFT bought non-voting shares in Apple, made undisclosed payments rumored to be around a billion in the end and a commitment to continue developing MS Office and Internet Explorer for the mac for 5 years. The MS Office commitment was renewed voluntarily by Microsoft a number of times since then.
You cannot join a domain with Windows RT devices like the Surface RT. You are confusing the Surface RT with the Surface Pro. The latter will cost as much as a Macbook air if not more.
No, No they did not. MS headquarters baiscally said their Czech office was smoking crack.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/10/3483076/office-for-ipad-ios-android-2013
Pay attention to the update at the bottom of the story.
No, they issued a denial because the Czech office released information that it was not authorized to release. I don't think anyone thinks that the Czech office was pulling something out of their arse. Office for iOS and Android are real projects in development at Microsoft as contingency plans incase Windows RT falls flat on its face.
Because Windows will never have developer support. /s
Windows RT only allows third party developers to write "Metro" apps that access the WinRT API. WinRT is the API for Metro apps on both Windows RT and Windows 8.
Whenever you hear the new Microsoft Surface mentioned, say, "Oh, is that the one that's Linux-based?"
Well, at least when you say that with Apple's stuff, there is at least a kernel of truth to it.
Yeah, no. Linux is a kernel. OS X and iOS both have a XNU hybrid kernel which is a cross between the Mach microkernel and BSD. I does not have any Linux kernel code in it.
Quite the opposite. With a keyboard and touchpad, there's no reason why you cannot create documents on the RT. That's the entire point actually- it's an iPad form factor most of the time but if you need to do real work the real tools are there.
Right, and you can do the same with an iPad and a keyboard cover coupled with Pages or some other app.
Every device whose primary interface is graphical will be "essentially useless" to a blind person. Fucking duh! It's not just the iPhone, it's every touchscreen device made.
You are right, the iPhone and other devices are completely useless to a blind person.
It's higher res than the previous iPads, which plenty of people use as e-readers. I doubt that's going to be a problem. It also has an extremely low-reflectivity screen, which results in better contrast and a clearer image when viewed with ambient light than you get from the iPad.
No it isn't really. it is 16:9 instead of 4:3 but the effective resolution for content other than video is about the same. most books fit into a 4:3 ratio.
Are you seriously comparing a brand new OS to a relatively minor update? Why don't you compare the OSX upgrade to a service pack from Microsoft? The extent of the updates are comparable, but in Microsoft's case it's free. And Apple has charged a good deal more for upgrades in the past, most of which I'd also consider minimal.
Frankly I'm surprised MS is only charging $70.
Are you serious? A service pack is a bundling up of driver updates and patches. The equivalent of the service pack in OS X would be the 10.x.x packages which are free. The "version" stays at 10.x with each release because each release retains a high level of binary and code compatibility and for marketing purposes. In some cases, third party drivers (ktext) have to be recompiled in order to work while in others some rewriting has to happen. The kernel increased by a full version number with each 10.x release and new APIs were also added with each release.
When was the last time the Win32 API was updated? Certainly not with service packs. BTW. The .NET framework does not really count since you can download that separately and the API that is hooks into has not really changed much since Windows XP.
Amazon has been licensing their http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click to various companies like Apple. I guess Bezos just wants to use other people's patents for free but expects everyone to pay to use their patents.
Right, you post to a page telling you to avoid the word consumer. That shows the bias of the GNU people. The problem is that the GNU group seems to be confused between the word "user" and developer. While a developer can also be a user, most "consumers" are exclusively users. Because of this, you should not expect a typical end user to care about the code availability, care about what license the code is available under or anything else that you seem to think of as important. To an average end user, what matters is "price", functionality, usability and availability/stability. They really don't give a rats arse about FOSS ideals and goals. If they see some developer get whiny and force someone to remove an app from say, the Apple app store, then those users will hate that whiny person and simply search for an alternative even if it is a paid app.
I'm sorry to bring you a dose of reality. If you want people to use your apps, consider a free license like the MIT or BSD license or alternatively sell it under a commercial license. If you have multiple contributors then you can setup an equitable way of sharing the proceeds of the sale of the licenses after covering any common overhead incurred for setting up shop.
All men are born evil eh? K. Sorry I do not share your beliefs in original sin. All men have ability to make choices, some choose to do evil often. Stop trying to put this off on your mythical sky bitch.
I guess you have never seen a toddler before? They can be both laughing and giggling but they can be bitchy, cruel and selfish. They are born that way. We are born with a selfish nature.
Well that is kind of sad then isn't it? You should have the freedom to say things that other people would find offensive. Political speech could be offensive to other people for example.
I might consider leaving Canada in the future if things get worse. I don't want to continue supporting a system which does not value individual rights and freedoms with my tax dollars. If I am supposed to tolerate artists like the "piss christ" one then I should be free to say things that might offend other people as well.
Please investigate a little bit further. These people might have been non-believers but they used the same tricks as religion does. Miracles, a local deity (or representative), Dogma and Force (albeit much more physical opposed to the more enlightened religions of today)
How are you any different? You are quoting dogma and painting all faiths with the same brush even when some acts committed by Muslims are considered a "sin" by Jesus and his followers. It is a "sin" to go around killing people. It is a sin to lie. It is a sin to commit suicide. Jesus stopped the stoning of a prostitute but not because he wanted her to continue with her existing lifestyle but rather to give her a second chance for a better way to live.
What you are asking society to do is to redefine those rules...
Marriage is a legal contract, it is defined by the government. So yes. people are asking that the government definition be changed. Just like any other law can be changed. These rules have been changed before, mixed race marriages are now legal.
I think you are bit confused. Marriage recognized by the government. It is entered into by two people and then recognized by the government. When the United States, Canada, England, France etc... formed as modern nation states there were "married" people living in those regions and the nation states recognized the validity of those marriage based on societal norms and customs. Society, not the government defined not only marriage but government itself. You seem to have forgotten that government exists at the whim of the people. Perhaps that is why Americans have given up so much of their liberty. They think that they serve the government rather than the government serving them. Governments would not exist if not for marriages creating lines of succession, inheritance and the concept of a "family". Without marriage, humanity would still be living in loosely grouped hunter gatherer hunting parties. Even tribes required marriage to establish a ruling dynasty.