"Pshaw, google fanboy/stockholder. Google is the crook here. As a former journalist, I whole heartedly agree with ZDNet's message, and wish I had written it myself."
A former journalist with a lack of integrity. That doesn't mean every other journalist in the face of earth must be unrespectful of other people's privacy as well.
I wonder how much you'd agree if the info posted online was about someone who is close to you.
"That's perfect. It is a bad sign about Google's corporate culture that, as a search engine company with ad revenue, they don't think people should be able to find the information the search engine provides."
Google is offering us a very powerful tool which can of course be misused. ZDNet is full of jerks who think that just because something is possible, it is also in their right to take advantage of it.
To put things in perspective: imagine for a second that the info ZDNet posted online was about you. Would you still think it's ok?
"But seriously, just because you want to port something doesn't mean other people want to port it..."
People get interested in doing works when there's money involved. Advicing him to find a hobbyist to do it in exchange of game tokens is probably not what he is looking for.
What has changed is that Apple has come up with a mouse design that they can ship with Macs, providing single-button functionality for new users without confusing them with extra buttons, while offering multi-button functionality for power users.
I've lost track of the number of casual computer users I've known who were confused by multi-button mice. Some people never seem to get their minds around more than one button. Apple's insistence that all programs be not merely usable with one button but easy to use is a major factor in Apple's beginner-friendly reputation. It also is one thing that makes Apple's laptops more usable. As wonderful as multi-button function is for a mouse, it is a disaster for laptops, where Apple's use of keyboard modifiers is far more natural. Although I do hope they add that scroll button to their laptops.
It would've been enough to offer customers the chance to buy their computer with a single-button or a multi-button mouse. I've bought a lot of Macs over the years and have always refused to buy another mouse, as cheap as it may be, simply because I hate buying things twice. Macs are not exactly the cheaper PCs you can find, but you can't get to choose a multi-button mouse with them?
That's not enough to stop me from buying/using Macs... but it's not a bright choice either.
By the way, if consistence is Apple's objection to more than one button, then they should simply try and make the feature consistent through some guideline, like they do with everything else. Some people may not like right clicks and contextual menus when things can be found in normal menus and toolbars, but there are certain programs (for example 3D drawing apps) where having contextual menus can make you work much much faster.
Yes, but if you publicly say that you do not think that the GPL is legal, then that license obviously does not apply to you. If it does not apply to you, than you are in violation of the GPL if you are distributing (not using, distributing) the software.
People can say publicly whatever you want about the GPL and as long as they comply with it's terms, they would still be able to use it legally without anyone being able to stop that.
To be in violation of the terms of a license you have to, well... be in violation of the licence's terms.
No one can't revoke your right to use GPLed software as long as you comply with it's terms. And even then violating the terms of the GPL for a program doesn't mean you can't use other GPLed software.
The downside is that browsers don't give programmers full access to a computer's resources such as memory, process power and hard disk space. This is a bottleneck the engineer sees being removed in future, although he thinks the simplicity of the current Web browsing experience needs to be maintained.
Heh, go tell that to Microsoft with the new "broker" process in Explorer 7. One story below this one.
Removing this "limit" may be a great thing for web developers, but it's also the only thing that keeps us and our computers from being controlled by them.
"It's still all about you. It's not about making anyone else feel better, it's not about doing the right thing for its own sake, it's about you making yourself feel better."
Following your stupid logic anything that you do is all about yourself, so what difference does it make to help or not to help somebody else? Hell, by that logic everyone is be selfish no matter what...
If all you need to feel good about being a complete prick is to live by that philosophy then so be it. But I honestly think that if some act makes you feel good AND helps other people at the same time, then it has much more value than you give it credit for.
It's not like feeling good about hurting people and feeling good about helping them is the same thing. Not in a sane mind.
Heh, sorry about that. My point, however, was not an attempt to diminish stutterers. Simply to point out how often the exact same news item is duplicated here on slashdot. It kind of beats the odds doesn't it?
Or something. Look, if you want to use your media the way you want and not be locked into DRM, don't buy this. Also don't buy RIAA CDs or download from sources you think are too restrictive. If enough people do it, they'll have to change their DRM. If (as I suspect will happen) everybody else in the world is fine with the DRM, then they won't have to change and that will suck. But you don't have to use it, so it shouldn't matter to you."
The problem is that DRM is not always announced as being part of the product the way it should be. There's a lot of people that end up buying new hardware with similar features without even knowing it in the first place.
"You appear to be intolerant of any other opinion, which is a reasonable definition of bigot. This line in particular: At first I thought you were kidding. In any case all you need to figure out why OS X outshines XP is to use OS X. You've done little to change that impression."
Well apparently you are far more intollerant than I am. You can't take my oppinion as one and so you need to call me a "bigot", a "troll" and a "zealot". I'll let you have fun with the name calling thought... apparently it makes you feel you're right.
"No, it means that my opinion on Mac/Windows isn't important to my post. I'll speak my mind on the subject if you like. We can even add Linux to the melting pot."
You certainly felt like it was important enough to underline it in your last post.
"I didn't post an inflammatory comment as a fact. You did. That's why I said you came across as a bigot. My second sentence was conditional on the first being true, although it wasn't explicitly stated. On the other hand, I see no evidence that you actually read it."
To me it is a fact. If you disagree then so be it, but my post was not inflammatory in any way. I never diminished the person I was talking to like you are trying to do now. But when you are reading slashdot you may want to remember that all the comments section is, is a bunch of opinions.
Apparently you think that people needs to be politically correct to state their opinions. I think that respecting people is more important. We obviously disagree.
"Evidently I'm either feeding a troll or arguing with a zealot. I'll stop now, unless you actually want a discussion and not an argument."
If you want to stop then stop replying. If you want to keep complaining about me not sharing your personal beliefs then go on.
"Really? Do you have any examples of software designed for Windows XP not "just workin"
I was talking about Windows XP itself not "just working". The version of Windows I have right here at home, for example, requires that you install some 3rd party firewall before connecting it to the internet. If I connect it using it's own Firewall I end up with a virus installed in my box in less than 5 minutes (no kidding).
And that is just a simple example of what I mean. There was, for example, another problem where after a few months the registry would become corrupted and Windows would not start up. I can fix that with the updates, but that's another example of Win XP just "not working" out of the box.
"You may be right, you may be wrong, but you sound like a bigot. I read your post as "I'm just right, my opinion is better than yours", so even if you are right, you're still wrong."
It is obvious that we are talking about opinions here. I may as well say that you are a bigot too following your logic. After all you are stating that your particular opinion about me is the one that counts.
As for my reasons why I think XP is worse than OS X: I used XP for 3 years before OS X and I am not going back. My experience, which is the source of my opinions, was terrible when I was using XP. I am not the kind of person that enjoys having to reinstall an OS every few months, or clean it from viruses. But maybe that's just me. As for the GUI I found it to be a cheap copy of OS X's GUI. On top of that it is the same GUI that Windows has since the days of Win 95. No improvements, no nothing.
And the funniest part of this all is that reasons don't matter either, because anyone could just reply to this post saying that Win XP is incredibly good and that they never had to reinstall it.
Now, can I just say what my opinion is without having people call me a bigot or do I need a special badge for that? Or was your whole problem the fact that I did not write a single "IMO" in the last post?
"Note - no OS preference is mentioned in this post."
And what? Does that make you better? Does that mean that speaking up your mind is wrong?
This whole thread is meant to cause a flame war. After all it's basically a story saying that Windows sucks. If you don't want to read comments following a similar line of thought then you should probably just ignore this whole story.
"I'm sure you could, but as we've seen, you haven't really addressed the subject of the thread. You've offered no example of where Mac OS X outshines Windows with regards to the GUI.
You have however able demonstrated your lack of knowledge regarding both platforms.
I'll be merciful and leave you be now."
At first I thought you were kidding. In any case all you need to figure out why OS X outshines XP is to use OS X.
You can argue the whole day about the elegance of XP, it's ease of use, blah blah blah... the elegance, simplicity and ease of use of a Mac running OS X is something you can't get with Windows today.
Another thing that I like about Macs is that they just work. With Windows the best you can get is that it works if you know exactly how to use it.
"I think the cost of creation/production for movies/games is increasing due to a lack of real creativity in these industries (as well as the music industry). "
Not to mention that costs could be considerably lower if companies started joint ventures to develop open source engines for their games.
How many times are companies going to start from scratch creating FPS and RTS engines when they could just make the same engines evolve?
"Exactly. He got it right with "The cathedral and the bazaar", but everything he has said or written ever since was crap.
Why does Slashdot keep publishing his idiocies?"
I personally found that he has a very interesting point of view regarding the GPL. I am not saying that he is right in what he says, but discarding his position as "crap" simply because you disagree is wrong IMO.
I believe that what he is saying in his interview is that there will be always companies willing to contribute to open source projects even if they are not licensed under the GPL or similar "freedom ensuring" licenses.
Why? Because by publishing their core source codes they can get people to fix it, modify it and make it evolve for free. They can get their code debugged by other companies that share the same interests and so on.
I am not against the GPL, but isn't the freedom to keep part of your work to yourself an interesting feature of an alternative open source license? What's so bad about companies like Apple open sourcing their core OS but close sourcing their GUI?
I am not a grammar nazi. I never point out grammatical mistakes unless there's some particular reason to do so. Especially since I am no English expert, being my main tongue spanish.
However the reason why I personally believe that grammar is important is because it makes the text easier to read for the reader. This may sound like a trivial pro. But IMO it shows that you care about the reader as much as to present the information you are willing to share in the most clean and understandable way you were able to find. It's a matter of inviting people to read what you wrote, and it's a matter of making it clear for them what you were trying to say.
Of course, they may still understand you without all the whistles and details, but how much extra effort does it require to put them in place anyway?
"meanwhile, all of the grammar nazis are still hung up on my first sentence...because i didn't capitalize the first letter or use a period"
Well of course you can write in any way you want. You can also dress in any way you want.
However keep in mind that while that's your choice... it may be the choice of others (a boss, a colleague, etc) to refuse to read what you wrote. Not everyone enjoys getting a headache.
Slashdot Mirror
Google's reply: /mode #google +b *!*@*zdnet* /mode #google +b *!*@*cnet*
A former journalist with a lack of integrity. That doesn't mean every other journalist in the face of earth must be unrespectful of other people's privacy as well.
I wonder how much you'd agree if the info posted online was about someone who is close to you.
Google is offering us a very powerful tool which can of course be misused. ZDNet is full of jerks who think that just because something is possible, it is also in their right to take advantage of it.
To put things in perspective: imagine for a second that the info ZDNet posted online was about you. Would you still think it's ok?
People get interested in doing works when there's money involved. Advicing him to find a hobbyist to do it in exchange of game tokens is probably not what he is looking for.
It would've been enough to offer customers the chance to buy their computer with a single-button or a multi-button mouse. I've bought a lot of Macs over the years and have always refused to buy another mouse, as cheap as it may be, simply because I hate buying things twice. Macs are not exactly the cheaper PCs you can find, but you can't get to choose a multi-button mouse with them?
That's not enough to stop me from buying/using Macs... but it's not a bright choice either.
By the way, if consistence is Apple's objection to more than one button, then they should simply try and make the feature consistent through some guideline, like they do with everything else. Some people may not like right clicks and contextual menus when things can be found in normal menus and toolbars, but there are certain programs (for example 3D drawing apps) where having contextual menus can make you work much much faster.
People can say publicly whatever you want about the GPL and as long as they comply with it's terms, they would still be able to use it legally without anyone being able to stop that.
To be in violation of the terms of a license you have to, well... be in violation of the licence's terms.
No one can't revoke your right to use GPLed software as long as you comply with it's terms. And even then violating the terms of the GPL for a program doesn't mean you can't use other GPLed software.
Heh, go tell that to Microsoft with the new "broker" process in Explorer 7. One story below this one.
Removing this "limit" may be a great thing for web developers, but it's also the only thing that keeps us and our computers from being controlled by them.
Following your stupid logic anything that you do is all about yourself, so what difference does it make to help or not to help somebody else? Hell, by that logic everyone is be selfish no matter what...
If all you need to feel good about being a complete prick is to live by that philosophy then so be it. But I honestly think that if some act makes you feel good AND helps other people at the same time, then it has much more value than you give it credit for.
It's not like feeling good about hurting people and feeling good about helping them is the same thing. Not in a sane mind.
Tell them that it's immoral to develop close sourced programs.
Then tell them that if they use close sourced programs they become immoral too.
Then tell them that immoral people go to hell.
And if that doesn't work, turn off the light, light your face with a torch and repeat. It may help to change the tone of your voice accordingly.
Heh, sorry about that. My point, however, was not an attempt to diminish stutterers. Simply to point out how often the exact same news item is duplicated here on slashdot. It kind of beats the odds doesn't it?
Once again, sorry.
That or Timothy is a stutterer.
The problem is that DRM is not always announced as being part of the product the way it should be. There's a lot of people that end up buying new hardware with similar features without even knowing it in the first place.
DRM is sneaky.
Well apparently you are far more intollerant than I am. You can't take my oppinion as one and so you need to call me a "bigot", a "troll" and a "zealot". I'll let you have fun with the name calling thought... apparently it makes you feel you're right.
You certainly felt like it was important enough to underline it in your last post.
To me it is a fact. If you disagree then so be it, but my post was not inflammatory in any way. I never diminished the person I was talking to like you are trying to do now. But when you are reading slashdot you may want to remember that all the comments section is, is a bunch of opinions.
Apparently you think that people needs to be politically correct to state their opinions. I think that respecting people is more important. We obviously disagree.
If you want to stop then stop replying. If you want to keep complaining about me not sharing your personal beliefs then go on.
I was talking about Windows XP itself not "just working". The version of Windows I have right here at home, for example, requires that you install some 3rd party firewall before connecting it to the internet. If I connect it using it's own Firewall I end up with a virus installed in my box in less than 5 minutes (no kidding).
And that is just a simple example of what I mean. There was, for example, another problem where after a few months the registry would become corrupted and Windows would not start up. I can fix that with the updates, but that's another example of Win XP just "not working" out of the box.
It is obvious that we are talking about opinions here. I may as well say that you are a bigot too following your logic. After all you are stating that your particular opinion about me is the one that counts.
As for my reasons why I think XP is worse than OS X: I used XP for 3 years before OS X and I am not going back. My experience, which is the source of my opinions, was terrible when I was using XP. I am not the kind of person that enjoys having to reinstall an OS every few months, or clean it from viruses. But maybe that's just me. As for the GUI I found it to be a cheap copy of OS X's GUI. On top of that it is the same GUI that Windows has since the days of Win 95. No improvements, no nothing.
And the funniest part of this all is that reasons don't matter either, because anyone could just reply to this post saying that Win XP is incredibly good and that they never had to reinstall it.
Now, can I just say what my opinion is without having people call me a bigot or do I need a special badge for that? Or was your whole problem the fact that I did not write a single "IMO" in the last post?
And what? Does that make you better? Does that mean that speaking up your mind is wrong?
This whole thread is meant to cause a flame war. After all it's basically a story saying that Windows sucks. If you don't want to read comments following a similar line of thought then you should probably just ignore this whole story.
At first I thought you were kidding. In any case all you need to figure out why OS X outshines XP is to use OS X.
You can argue the whole day about the elegance of XP, it's ease of use, blah blah blah... the elegance, simplicity and ease of use of a Mac running OS X is something you can't get with Windows today.
Another thing that I like about Macs is that they just work. With Windows the best you can get is that it works if you know exactly how to use it.
Err, you didn't get my point. I am not saying the GPL is evil. Simply that it may be more likely that companies are going to embrace other licenses.
In any case I just wanted to say that I don't think that this guy is attacking the GPL as a bad thing.
Not to mention that costs could be considerably lower if companies started joint ventures to develop open source engines for their games.
How many times are companies going to start from scratch creating FPS and RTS engines when they could just make the same engines evolve?
I personally found that he has a very interesting point of view regarding the GPL. I am not saying that he is right in what he says, but discarding his position as "crap" simply because you disagree is wrong IMO.
I believe that what he is saying in his interview is that there will be always companies willing to contribute to open source projects even if they are not licensed under the GPL or similar "freedom ensuring" licenses.
Why? Because by publishing their core source codes they can get people to fix it, modify it and make it evolve for free. They can get their code debugged by other companies that share the same interests and so on.
I am not against the GPL, but isn't the freedom to keep part of your work to yourself an interesting feature of an alternative open source license? What's so bad about companies like Apple open sourcing their core OS but close sourcing their GUI?
Just my thoughts.
I am not a grammar nazi. I never point out grammatical mistakes unless there's some particular reason to do so. Especially since I am no English expert, being my main tongue spanish.
However the reason why I personally believe that grammar is important is because it makes the text easier to read for the reader. This may sound like a trivial pro. But IMO it shows that you care about the reader as much as to present the information you are willing to share in the most clean and understandable way you were able to find. It's a matter of inviting people to read what you wrote, and it's a matter of making it clear for them what you were trying to say.
Of course, they may still understand you without all the whistles and details, but how much extra effort does it require to put them in place anyway?
Just my 2 cents.
Well of course you can write in any way you want. You can also dress in any way you want.
However keep in mind that while that's your choice... it may be the choice of others (a boss, a colleague, etc) to refuse to read what you wrote. Not everyone enjoys getting a headache.
What...?
Less intelligent to whom? Do you think we'd be sitting here all day posting on slashdot if we had friends to try and look smarter to?
It's just you. Really.