Considering that all iMacs are glossy (the reason why I won't buy one, went instead with MacPro), and most MacBooks are glossy, I wonder how much glare is going in the shiny new all glass Apple stores???
I think it might be a conspiracy. I freaking hate glossy screens, I hate the glossy screen on my old macbook, and its the reason why I opted for a MacPro instead of an iMac. The glossy screen picks up any stray reflection, is really really distracting. I use the MacPro with a Lenovo L220x 22" PVA screen, and its one of the best screens I've ever seen. I really like how "soothing" matte screens are.
Really sucks when the matte screen on the MacBookPro is freaking $130 more then the lame ass glossy screen.
So, yeh, I think it might be a conspiracy on Apple's part to make their "consumer" line really sucky in some way just to drive people who care up the the "pro" line. I love Macs, but Apple does tend to piss me off these tactics.
What's the point of TI going to such measures to lock down the calculator? How does people running their own programs hurt TI? TI does not sell apps do they? Look at one of the big selling points of devices like the iPhone: the ability to buy and/or develop your own software for it, the choice of thousands of third party apps make the iPhone and other similar devices very appealing.
So, what does TI have to gain by locking down the calculator???
BTW, I used to be a big calculator use, both HP and TI, but now I've found a very nice and far more capable replacement: a nice netbook, running Ubuntu with Mathematica!
Or, "we'll have to nuke them from orbit, its the only way to be sure"
Seriously, how is this thing still alive? Who or what keeps funding them? How the hell can they still be paying the layers after what is it now, 8 some odd years of loss after loss after loss. Do they have a single paying customer left??
It is strictly their word (slimebag lawyers) that they saw these IP address download a file. How can this hold up in any court??
Please, someone tell me how this can hold up in court.
I want to be able to access the computer that I OWN in the CAR THAT I OWN to be able to modify it, reprogram the fuel maps, so forth. Its hard enough right now to be able to access modern engine control systems, just what I need, a bunch of chicken little, fscking "security experts" claiming that cars are "insecure", raising all kinds of alarm, then the car makers react, start putting all kinds of deliberate DRM on the computer systems, and it becomes absolutely fscking impossible to modify your own car.
If I want to modify the computer on MY CAR, THAT IS MY RIGHT, NOT A SECURITY ISSUE!!!!!
There are countless open source H.264 encoders and decoders available for Linux.
H.264 may be patented in the US (for now), but is most certainly IS OPEN SOURCE!!!
The US and possibly Europe (could be wrong) are the only places where the patent is even valid.
I APLAUD Shuttleworth for making the lives of his users more enjoyable without having to go out and track down codecs. I for one am more than happy to pay the small cost to license these as long as I can watch video without trouble.
The problem is the flash RUNTIME, not the language itself, but rather, how its called. The problem is with the timers. Basically, if you wrote something similar in C, if you were not allowed to have a main(){...), but instead, you would write little functions, and registered them with the runtime, and tell the runtime how frequently they should be called. The language does not have control over the app. the flash runtime does. So, even if they compiled craptionscript to native code, it still needs to be called by the flash runtime, no way around it.
As it is, they've banned any similar tool. If I write a FORTH-to-C translator, it will be affected, too. Do you mind FORTH?
Actually, I think FORTH is a great language, as I said, I think Apple went to far in banning EVERYTHING other than C*/JS. From what I've heard though, I don't think they will 'enforce' this policy on many things other than flash, i.e. I heard that Unity3D apps will be fine.
All CS5 does is build an executable with the whole flash interpreter statically linked in. Any flash apps build with CS5 would have been just as bad as flash apps displayed in WebKit, because the flash runtime IS AN ABSOLUTE STINKING PILE OF CRAP on any platform other then Windows.
Before I got flashblock, any site I would visit with flash adds would instantly send my processors to about %60, and the fans would start spinning (X3100 MacBook). The situation is even worse in Linux. Would you expect the flash runtime to be any better on the iPhone????
This is the exact same crap that Semantec pulled in the 90's with their 'java compiler', they advertised a java dev tool that I paid about 150$ for that claimed to produce native executables. Well, technically it did, they produced an giant executable, with the entire java interpreter statically linked in, and your code statically linked in, so at runtime it would just interpret your code using the linked in interpreter.
Same freaking thing that CS5 does.
All Apple it trying to do is limit the number of crap applications. If there are all of a sudden all kinds of apps built on flash, battery life drops to minutes, then people will be pissed and most likely blame apple, when its flash's fault.
And their probably is no way to even write a runtime for flash that will not drain battery, because flash is all timer based. The runtime needs to allocate all kinds of timers that are firing at a very fast rate, so there would be NO POSSIBLE WAY to suspend the app in a multitasking env.
I do think Apple went a bit too far, I think they should have allowed apps written in Python/Ruby or some other decent lang, but absolutely ban flash.
And BTW, what is more cross platform then C/C++ and Javascript???
Note, even if they somehow figured out a way to compile CraptionScript to native code, the fundamental problem is the TIMER/EVENT based programming model of flash, where the runtime creates a timer that fires every millisecond to tiger the animations and craptionscript events. CPU usage was not one of the design goals of flash, the fundamental design goal of it was to make obnoxious animations trivial by point and click development tools. Hogging CPU resources was fine I suppose on desktop machines with unlimited power resources, but its a no-go on devices with limited battery capacity.
Maybe this will force the auto manufacturers to finally start selling some decent cars in this county like they sell in the rest of the world!
Ford and GM sell freaking awesome cars in UK and Europe, and I can't figure out why they dump the crap here. In Europe, Ford sells the Modeo (same as US Ford 500) with a 330 Ft Lb 2.2 turbo diesel, thats about as much torque as a v8 mustang, AND it gets about 50 MPG!!!!!
I have a VW Jetta TDI, and I love it, it gets better milage than a prius at highway speeds, is much simpler, and is actually a total blast to drive, the low end torque is awesome, and it feels fast. I test drove a prius, and basically it felt like a sponge, a soft mushy SLOW sponge.
I'd love to see some competition for the Jetta TDI from the likes of Ford and GM, I really would have preferred buying Ford, but all they sell in the US is junk compared to their UK offerings.
A renderfarm is really nothing more then a bunch of slave processors, each one rendering a separate frame. There is basically NO internode communication. A supercomputer on the other hand has extensive internode communication, which is why the switching fabric is so fundamentally important.
So do not confuse a farm (web farm, or render farm) with a supercomputer.
I really was hoping that Sun Fortress would become something for scientific computing, but its tied to Java, so its dead before it even started. While Java may be common in web servers, it is typically not even installed on clusters. So, until something betters comes along, I guess I'll just stick with Fortran2003, F2Py, and Python.
C# does have them, and the syntax is nice. I haven't touched Windows (thankfully) in about 5 years, but the last time I tried them in c#, the performance was surprisingly bad compared to jagged arrays. One would think that the compiler could do some optimization because it is be definition a contiguous block of memory. I've not tried mono, so no idea how their performance is.
I said REAL multi-dimensional arrays.
Stack allocated multi-dim arrays do not have the same memory layout as dynamically allocated ones, and are for the most part useless, i.e. you are limited by your stack size, so try allocating a 100,000 * 100,000 array on the stack.
Go looks nice, but it still does not have real multi-dimensional arrays. This is the key issue that keeps me using Fortran.
WTF don't any C derived languages have real multi-dimensional arrays? Yes, I know you can fake it with array of pointers to pointers, i.e. foo[i][j], but the problem is even if you allocate a contiguous block, and have your pointer array index into it, it still requires at least two memory accesses to access an element, which absolutely kills performance. And I just freaking hate doing foo[i * ROWS + j], its nasty and error prone. So, why has Fortran had multi-dimensional arrays since freaking 1960, and still no C derived languages have it.
BTW, native complex number vector operations would be nice.
If they are happy with IE6, that means THEY DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO CHANGE, EVER...
They do not care about your new app! they just want their old apps forever. I used to work at a company that still had to support Windows 3.1 in 2005!!!
Yes, travel agencies would not give up Windows 3.1, and you know what, no matter what we developed for them, they did not want it, no mater how much better it was. The problem was that anything new is different, and therein lies the rub.
This is the reason why most users use Windows in general, they don't want to learn anything different.
So, if they still want their ancient versions of IE, chances are that they will not be very interested in you shiny new app!, and you should not waste your time trying to develop something for them.
F# really is a nice language, but the last time I looked, the licensing is REALLY SCARY. Its under some sort of Microsoft shared source type license which essentially states that you can not use F# is any type commercial environment, unless you are using Windows. So, you are allowed to look at, and write programs, but you could not distribute them.
Has this improved any? I really would like to used F# on Linux, but I will not go anywhere near something with licensing like this?
Slashdot Mirror
Considering that all iMacs are glossy (the reason why I won't buy one, went instead with MacPro), and most MacBooks are glossy, I wonder how much glare is going in the shiny new all glass Apple stores???
I'm a Mac (note I Mac, NOT Apple) fan, and I truly detest glossy screens, its the thing I hate the most about my old macbook.
I think it might be a conspiracy. I freaking hate glossy screens, I hate the glossy screen on my old macbook, and its the reason why I opted for a MacPro instead of an iMac. The glossy screen picks up any stray reflection, is really really distracting. I use the MacPro with a Lenovo L220x 22" PVA screen, and its one of the best screens I've ever seen. I really like how "soothing" matte screens are.
Really sucks when the matte screen on the MacBookPro is freaking $130 more then the lame ass glossy screen.
So, yeh, I think it might be a conspiracy on Apple's part to make their "consumer" line really sucky in some way just to drive people who care up the the "pro" line. I love Macs, but Apple does tend to piss me off these tactics.
What's the point of TI going to such measures to lock down the calculator? How does people running their own programs hurt TI? TI does not sell apps do they? Look at one of the big selling points of devices like the iPhone: the ability to buy and/or develop your own software for it, the choice of thousands of third party apps make the iPhone and other similar devices very appealing.
So, what does TI have to gain by locking down the calculator???
BTW, I used to be a big calculator use, both HP and TI, but now I've found a very nice and far more capable replacement: a nice netbook, running Ubuntu with Mathematica!
Wonder if they will have Mac/Linux versions?
I will not be forced to install Windows just to play a game.
Or, "we'll have to nuke them from orbit, its the only way to be sure"
Seriously, how is this thing still alive? Who or what keeps funding them? How the hell can they still be paying the layers after what is it now, 8 some odd years of loss after loss after loss. Do they have a single paying customer left??
So, how they hell is it still alive?
This was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
So, who can they go after? Can they go after someone in California, Texas????
Exactly!
It is strictly their word (slimebag lawyers) that they saw these IP address download a file. How can this hold up in any court??
Please, someone tell me how this can hold up in court.
It seems like their "evidence" is pretty weak, just basically their word that they saw your IP address download a file.
From what I read, I get the impression that the users they are targeting are residents of Washington DC. Can anyone confirm this.
I want to be able to access the computer that I OWN in the CAR THAT I OWN to be able to modify it, reprogram the fuel maps, so forth. Its hard enough right now to be able to access modern engine control systems, just what I need, a bunch of chicken little, fscking "security experts" claiming that cars are "insecure", raising all kinds of alarm, then the car makers react, start putting all kinds of deliberate DRM on the computer systems, and it becomes absolutely fscking impossible to modify your own car.
If I want to modify the computer on MY CAR, THAT IS MY RIGHT, NOT A SECURITY ISSUE!!!!!
H.264 may be patented in the US (for now), but is most certainly IS OPEN SOURCE!!!
The US and possibly Europe (could be wrong) are the only places where the patent is even valid.
I APLAUD Shuttleworth for making the lives of his users more enjoyable without having to go out and track down codecs. I for one am more than happy to pay the small cost to license these as long as I can watch video without trouble.
The problem is the flash RUNTIME, not the language itself, but rather, how its called. The problem is with the timers. Basically, if you wrote something similar in C, if you were not allowed to have a main(){...), but instead, you would write little functions, and registered them with the runtime, and tell the runtime how frequently they should be called. The language does not have control over the app. the flash runtime does. So, even if they compiled craptionscript to native code, it still needs to be called by the flash runtime, no way around it.
As it is, they've banned any similar tool. If I write a FORTH-to-C translator, it will be affected, too. Do you mind FORTH?
Actually, I think FORTH is a great language, as I said, I think Apple went to far in banning EVERYTHING other than C*/JS. From what I've heard though, I don't think they will 'enforce' this policy on many things other than flash, i.e. I heard that Unity3D apps will be fine.
Objective C++ is a strict superset of C/C++, so any library / code that exists in C/C++ can be included directly.
You can compile C++ as Objective C++, same idea as compiling C with a C++ compiler.
Before I got flashblock, any site I would visit with flash adds would instantly send my processors to about %60, and the fans would start spinning (X3100 MacBook). The situation is even worse in Linux. Would you expect the flash runtime to be any better on the iPhone????
This is the exact same crap that Semantec pulled in the 90's with their 'java compiler', they advertised a java dev tool that I paid about 150$ for that claimed to produce native executables. Well, technically it did, they produced an giant executable, with the entire java interpreter statically linked in, and your code statically linked in, so at runtime it would just interpret your code using the linked in interpreter.
Same freaking thing that CS5 does.
All Apple it trying to do is limit the number of crap applications. If there are all of a sudden all kinds of apps built on flash, battery life drops to minutes, then people will be pissed and most likely blame apple, when its flash's fault.
And their probably is no way to even write a runtime for flash that will not drain battery, because flash is all timer based. The runtime needs to allocate all kinds of timers that are firing at a very fast rate, so there would be NO POSSIBLE WAY to suspend the app in a multitasking env.
I do think Apple went a bit too far, I think they should have allowed apps written in Python/Ruby or some other decent lang, but absolutely ban flash.
And BTW, what is more cross platform then C/C++ and Javascript???
Note, even if they somehow figured out a way to compile CraptionScript to native code, the fundamental problem is the TIMER /EVENT based programming model of flash, where the runtime creates a timer that fires every millisecond to tiger the animations and craptionscript events. CPU usage was not one of the design goals of flash, the fundamental design goal of it was to make obnoxious animations trivial by point and click development tools. Hogging CPU resources was fine I suppose on desktop machines with unlimited power resources, but its a no-go on devices with limited battery capacity.
Maybe this will force the auto manufacturers to finally start selling some decent cars in this county like they sell in the rest of the world!
Ford and GM sell freaking awesome cars in UK and Europe, and I can't figure out why they dump the crap here. In Europe, Ford sells the Modeo (same as US Ford 500) with a 330 Ft Lb 2.2 turbo diesel, thats about as much torque as a v8 mustang, AND it gets about 50 MPG!!!!!
I have a VW Jetta TDI, and I love it, it gets better milage than a prius at highway speeds, is much simpler, and is actually a total blast to drive, the low end torque is awesome, and it feels fast. I test drove a prius, and basically it felt like a sponge, a soft mushy SLOW sponge.
I'd love to see some competition for the Jetta TDI from the likes of Ford and GM, I really would have preferred buying Ford, but all they sell in the US is junk compared to their UK offerings.
A renderfarm is really nothing more then a bunch of slave processors, each one rendering a separate frame. There is basically NO internode communication. A supercomputer on the other hand has extensive internode communication, which is why the switching fabric is so fundamentally important. So do not confuse a farm (web farm, or render farm) with a supercomputer.
Really !?!,
Are you aware of any documentation on this? All I could find was the usual pre C99 multi dim docs.
I really was hoping that Sun Fortress would become something for scientific computing, but its tied to Java, so its dead before it even started. While Java may be common in web servers, it is typically not even installed on clusters. So, until something betters comes along, I guess I'll just stick with Fortran2003, F2Py, and Python.
C# does have them, and the syntax is nice. I haven't touched Windows (thankfully) in about 5 years, but the last time I tried them in c#, the performance was surprisingly bad compared to jagged arrays. One would think that the compiler could do some optimization because it is be definition a contiguous block of memory. I've not tried mono, so no idea how their performance is.
I said REAL multi-dimensional arrays.
Stack allocated multi-dim arrays do not have the same memory layout as dynamically allocated ones, and are for the most part useless, i.e. you are limited by your stack size, so try allocating a 100,000 * 100,000 array on the stack.
Go looks nice, but it still does not have real multi-dimensional arrays. This is the key issue that keeps me using Fortran.
WTF don't any C derived languages have real multi-dimensional arrays? Yes, I know you can fake it with array of pointers to pointers, i.e. foo[i][j], but the problem is even if you allocate a contiguous block, and have your pointer array index into it, it still requires at least two memory accesses to access an element, which absolutely kills performance. And I just freaking hate doing foo[i * ROWS + j], its nasty and error prone. So, why has Fortran had multi-dimensional arrays since freaking 1960, and still no C derived languages have it.
BTW, native complex number vector operations would be nice.
If they are happy with IE6, that means THEY DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO CHANGE, EVER...
They do not care about your new app! they just want their old apps forever. I used to work at a company that still had to support Windows 3.1 in 2005!!! Yes, travel agencies would not give up Windows 3.1, and you know what, no matter what we developed for them, they did not want it, no mater how much better it was. The problem was that anything new is different, and therein lies the rub.
This is the reason why most users use Windows in general, they don't want to learn anything different.
So, if they still want their ancient versions of IE, chances are that they will not be very interested in you shiny new app!, and you should not waste your time trying to develop something for them.
Has this improved any? I really would like to used F# on Linux, but I will not go anywhere near something with licensing like this?