I know lots of independent developers, artists, writers and musicians. Most of them are earning much less than the average wage from their creativity.
I suspect that few of the people that post on here about the freedoms of open source, and that copyright shouldn't exist have ever created anything of their own. They just want to be assured they can consume stuff for no cost.
Interestingly though you posted to the "Android Ice Cream Sandwich SDK Released" story several times, not one of them was to condemn Google for not releasing the source yet. Yet here, you're posting about it over and over again.
Their decision to open source it in the first place, presumably. Open sources are a bunch of ungrateful bastards that don't one free lunch to extend to a lifetime of free lunches.
( Heck, the open source pariahs even check their facts before whining about people that used to give them free lunches. Growl isn't going closed source any more than Android Ice Cream Sandwich is. In both cases, impatient open source freeloaders can't wait, and create malicious rumours about those providing the free lunches.
Clarkson and the Top-Gear team are the ones that do the lying. Have you never seen the show? If you think they're giving accurate appraisals, particularly of vehicle types they have distain for, they you're very gullible.
I've worked in many jobs over the years, mostly private sector, some public sector. In my experience the private sector is far less efficient than the public sector. Your misconception is common and comes from confusing efficiency with making a profit.
The private sector's objective is to make a profit, and they'll tend to limit themselves to those activities that can make a profit. The public sector deals with those things that still need doing regardless of whether there's money to me made.
Yes, it's British slang. If somewhere has been "turned-over", it means it's been robbed. The etymology is obvious I think.
Re:Nice distro but they messed up the desktop
on
Ubuntu Turns 7
·
· Score: 1
What wrong with looking like KDE
KDE was a copy of the Windows UI from the start. Here's a picture from v1.x. Circa 1996. The colour scheme, the embossed look, the task-bar (moved from bottom to top of screen), the start menu, the window furniture, the per window menus, the isometric icon style etc. etc. All straight out of Windows 95.
So if I decide to make an oven that has a ventilation system in it, and in my manual, I mention that it has three buttons that say "On", "Off", and "Restart". That's breaking someone's copyright because they, in the past, decided to make an oven at some point in the past, with a manual that mentioned the ventilation system had "On", "Off", and "Restart" buttons?
Nope. Neither would using the same 3 words of the text of a novel wouldn't break someone's copyright. So why would you expect it to?
But lists certainly are copyrightable, just as much as novels are. For example tide tables are just lists of tides of when high and low tides are predicted to appear at a certain place. Nothing but lists of times. In the UK, they are published by the admiralty, a government department. But if you want to use them yourself in a newspaper or an app say, you have to pay for a license. They most certainly are copyright. http://www.ukho.gov.uk/PRODUCTSANDSERVICES/SERVICES/Pages/TidalPrediction.aspx
I didn't present myself as someone qualified to analyze the situation.
No, but you presented your uninformed opinion as if it were fact. The information I'm not an "English citizen and I'm not particular interested in EU copyright law." belonged in your first post, not now after you were caught out spouting nonsense about a law in a country you don't know about.
Even "IANAL but" or "IMHO" would have made your original post reasonable, but presenting it as it was makes you look like a pretentious ass.
Re:Nice distro but they messed up the desktop
on
Ubuntu Turns 7
·
· Score: 1
Coincidentally 90% is approximately the proportion of the general public that think desktop GUIs ought to look like Windows...
Re:Nice distro but they messed up the desktop
on
Ubuntu Turns 7
·
· Score: 1
I'd not heard about Unity, but your comment that it wasn't Windows enough for you made me look into it. To me being less like Windows is a big selling point.
For me it looks really nice. Linux copying OS X for a change rather than copying Windows. For the first time in years, a Linux UI that I actually fancy trying.
Ballmer simply doesn't get it. The people are clamoring for an open phone that can do anything
Generally speaking Ballmer is an idiot. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day. He's more right that you, that's for sure. "People" haven't got a clue what an "open" phone is. The reason Android is doing well is because people can get a "smartphone" for "free".
Now they can get an iPhone for "free"* too, we'll see if that changes.
(* They're still shipping iPhone 3GS, and it's "free" with a 2 year contract, just like cheap Androids are.)
Where's the irony? Remember the VCRs that no ordinary people could work out how to set the timer. The cheaper, the more obscure and confusing the operation. The higher the intelligence needed to work out how to do it.
Hard to use is a typical quality of cheap, not expensive.
The application is a virtual desktop for multiple document windows. And that means just one menu, near the top of the screen in the common case of maximising. One menu for several document windows, rather then one menu per Window. A halfway house towards the Mac way. Microsoft shipped their apps like this for years, and encouraged other Windows developers to do so too.
As to "cutsey icons", I think that says more about your misconceptions than anything about OS X. Here's a typical screen show showing Apple's iWork office suite in action. The only "cutsey" icons are app icons. The in app icons are work-a-day. http://macamour.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/iworklove.png For sure Apple apps have pretty app icons. But that's hardly a negative.
And that's one reason why Android has more free apps than iOS
It's undoubtably true that Android is more popular amongst shovelling out free software, and amongst those who won't pay for apps.
But for professional developers wanting to target phones an tablets, iOS is where it's at. Android might be considered for a later port, but not for primary development.
Then perhaps I should charge the difference between the cheapest PC and the cheapest Mac. For example, compare a $1000 MacBook to an (admittedly heavier) $400 laptop running Windows. That's still $600 for a Mac.
Hey if you're scratching around to save money, the MacMini is the cheapest Mac. $599.
But really, if you're choosing your development platform based on what's cheapest, then you're destined for a pitiful life.
If you're monetarily challenged, you're better off making a good app, and selling it on the more profitable platform, covering your costs and making a profit.
On iOS, that's an overhead of $250 per year: $100 per year for the iOS Developer Program and an estimated $600 for a new Mac every few years
You do of course also have to replace a PC every few years if that's your development platform.
Let's stick with like for like. The overhead is $99 per year for an iOS developer to get on the App Store. For Android it's $25 per year to get on the Google Android Market. And/or $99 per year to get on the Amazon store.
Test devices are more expensive for iOS, but you won't need to buy as many.
RIM has no restrictions on how YOU sell your apps. You can put the files (.cod and.alx) on any webserver in the world and let people download & install your app. Unlike Apple, blackberry applications have never been a closed shop.
A one stop shop results in more app sales.
Now, the one best thing Apple did was to get your billing information FIRST so that Apple can bill your mobile account for apps.
They don't bill it to a mobile account. Apple get a credit card number and charge apps, songs, movies, whatever to that.
Slashdot Mirror
I know lots of independent developers, artists, writers and musicians. Most of them are earning much less than the average wage from their creativity.
I suspect that few of the people that post on here about the freedoms of open source, and that copyright shouldn't exist have ever created anything of their own. They just want to be assured they can consume stuff for no cost.
Interestingly though you posted to the "Android Ice Cream Sandwich SDK Released" story several times, not one of them was to condemn Google for not releasing the source yet. Yet here, you're posting about it over and over again.
You really are an incredibly two-faced arsehole.
Their decision to open source it in the first place, presumably. Open sources are a bunch of ungrateful bastards that don't one free lunch to extend to a lifetime of free lunches.
( Heck, the open source pariahs even check their facts before whining about people that used to give them free lunches. Growl isn't going closed source any more than Android Ice Cream Sandwich is. In both cases, impatient open source freeloaders can't wait, and create malicious rumours about those providing the free lunches.
http://growl.info/documentation/faq-new.php#1.3source )
And when you point out all that's bad about open source, you're talking about the GPL.
Clarkson and the Top-Gear team are the ones that do the lying. Have you never seen the show? If you think they're giving accurate appraisals, particularly of vehicle types they have distain for, they you're very gullible.
I've worked in many jobs over the years, mostly private sector, some public sector. In my experience the private sector is far less efficient than the public sector. Your misconception is common and comes from confusing efficiency with making a profit.
The private sector's objective is to make a profit, and they'll tend to limit themselves to those activities that can make a profit. The public sector deals with those things that still need doing regardless of whether there's money to me made.
Yes, it's British slang. If somewhere has been "turned-over", it means it's been robbed. The etymology is obvious I think.
What wrong with looking like KDE
KDE was a copy of the Windows UI from the start. Here's a picture from v1.x. Circa 1996. The colour scheme, the embossed look, the task-bar (moved from bottom to top of screen), the start menu, the window furniture, the per window menus, the isometric icon style etc. etc. All straight out of Windows 95.
http://www.kde.org/screenshots/images/large/matthiase1.jpg
Rings a bell. Perhaps they did. But given that they started selling the software, they'd have hit that at their 3rd customer if not before.
So if I decide to make an oven that has a ventilation system in it, and in my manual, I mention that it has three buttons that say "On", "Off", and "Restart". That's breaking someone's copyright because they, in the past, decided to make an oven at some point in the past, with a manual that mentioned the ventilation system had "On", "Off", and "Restart" buttons?
Nope. Neither would using the same 3 words of the text of a novel wouldn't break someone's copyright. So why would you expect it to?
But lists certainly are copyrightable, just as much as novels are. For example tide tables are just lists of tides of when high and low tides are predicted to appear at a certain place. Nothing but lists of times. In the UK, they are published by the admiralty, a government department. But if you want to use them yourself in a newspaper or an app say, you have to pay for a license. They most certainly are copyright.
http://www.ukho.gov.uk/PRODUCTSANDSERVICES/SERVICES/Pages/TidalPrediction.aspx
I didn't present myself as someone qualified to analyze the situation.
No, but you presented your uninformed opinion as if it were fact. The information I'm not an "English citizen and I'm not particular interested in EU copyright law." belonged in your first post, not now after you were caught out spouting nonsense about a law in a country you don't know about.
Even "IANAL but" or "IMHO" would have made your original post reasonable, but presenting it as it was makes you look like a pretentious ass.
Coincidentally 90% is approximately the proportion of the general public that think desktop GUIs ought to look like Windows...
I'd not heard about Unity, but your comment that it wasn't Windows enough for you made me look into it. To me being less like Windows is a big selling point.
For me it looks really nice. Linux copying OS X for a change rather than copying Windows. For the first time in years, a Linux UI that I actually fancy trying.
Apple Turnover
Banana Bread.
"Turnover" being another name for rip-off.
It beats posts where the only argument is a playground insult.
To me that's a showstopper fail for a phone design. Anyone should be able to pick up any phone that's ringing and be able to answer it.
Are you saying there isn't a button with a phone handset in a raised position, and the colour green? Physical or on screen?
If there is, the what's the problem?
Ballmer simply doesn't get it. The people are clamoring for an open phone that can do anything
Generally speaking Ballmer is an idiot. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day. He's more right that you, that's for sure. "People" haven't got a clue what an "open" phone is. The reason Android is doing well is because people can get a "smartphone" for "free".
Now they can get an iPhone for "free"* too, we'll see if that changes.
(* They're still shipping iPhone 3GS, and it's "free" with a 2 year contract, just like cheap Androids are.)
Don't see Microsoft competing with either.
Where's the irony? Remember the VCRs that no ordinary people could work out how to set the timer. The cheaper, the more obscure and confusing the operation. The higher the intelligence needed to work out how to do it.
Hard to use is a typical quality of cheap, not expensive.
This is MDI: http://learn.uparea.tk/mfcfundamentals/lessons/images/MDI1.gif
Ot continued all the way to Vista: http://www.syncfusion.com/content/en-US/products/feature/user-interface-edition/windows-forms/grid/img/windows-forms-grid-MDI.jpg
Is it still ongoing? I don't know.
The application is a virtual desktop for multiple document windows. And that means just one menu, near the top of the screen in the common case of maximising. One menu for several document windows, rather then one menu per Window. A halfway house towards the Mac way. Microsoft shipped their apps like this for years, and encouraged other Windows developers to do so too.
As to "cutsey icons", I think that says more about your misconceptions than anything about OS X. Here's a typical screen show showing Apple's iWork office suite in action. The only "cutsey" icons are app icons. The in app icons are work-a-day.
http://macamour.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/iworklove.png
For sure Apple apps have pretty app icons. But that's hardly a negative.
And that's one reason why Android has more free apps than iOS
It's undoubtably true that Android is more popular amongst shovelling out free software, and amongst those who won't pay for apps.
But for professional developers wanting to target phones an tablets, iOS is where it's at. Android might be considered for a later port, but not for primary development.
Neither are Linux PCs, but a Linux PC is a lot cheaper than a Mac.
They are also a lot worse than a Mac. You tend to get what you pay for.
Then perhaps I should charge the difference between the cheapest PC and the cheapest Mac. For example, compare a $1000 MacBook to an (admittedly heavier) $400 laptop running Windows. That's still $600 for a Mac.
Hey if you're scratching around to save money, the MacMini is the cheapest Mac. $599.
But really, if you're choosing your development platform based on what's cheapest, then you're destined for a pitiful life.
If you're monetarily challenged, you're better off making a good app, and selling it on the more profitable platform, covering your costs and making a profit.
On iOS, that's an overhead of $250 per year: $100 per year for the iOS Developer Program and an estimated $600 for a new Mac every few years
You do of course also have to replace a PC every few years if that's your development platform.
Let's stick with like for like. The overhead is $99 per year for an iOS developer to get on the App Store.
For Android it's $25 per year to get on the Google Android Market. And/or $99 per year to get on the Amazon store.
Test devices are more expensive for iOS, but you won't need to buy as many.
RIM has no restrictions on how YOU sell your apps. You can put the files (.cod and .alx) on any webserver in the world and let people download & install your app.
Unlike Apple, blackberry applications have never been a closed shop.
A one stop shop results in more app sales.
Now, the one best thing Apple did was to get your billing information FIRST so that Apple can bill your mobile account for apps.
They don't bill it to a mobile account. Apple get a credit card number and charge apps, songs, movies, whatever to that.
Apple pays 70%.
Suppose RIM were ultra generous and paid 100%.
So long as I sell 43% more on the Apple platform, I'm still making more money.
Put it another way, I'd have to sell 70% of my iPhone sales on the RIM before I made as much.
Ain't going to happen.